00:00:00.000 - 00:00:28.640

And integrity, and he has brought that with all its force, I have to say, to the House of Bishops and certainly to the House of Bishops in New South Wales, and we've had some good interaction as a consequence at both the conceptual and ethylogical level. And when he presented a paper to the New South Wales Bishops Conference, I was so excited

00:00:28.640 - 00:00:48.600

by the concepts that were presented that I said to him, "Would you be prepared to come out to Newcastle and present it to the College of Priests and Purgey here?" And he, for moments, weakness while having a cup of tea, I think, with George piled by his side, could not refuse.

00:00:48.600 - 00:01:13.360

And so he is in our midst, and I'm very grateful to the Archbishop who had a very early start from Sydney and needs to get back for another meeting this afternoon and evening. The Archbishop, of course, comes with a BD from London, a doctor of philosophy from Oxford and I think has been able to engage the church in a very helpful way.

00:01:13.360 - 00:01:32.160

I was concerned that when the subject of this church conference was made known to some of our number from both sides of the spectrum of theological divide, I did receive letters and I noticed that they're not here, who said to me, "This is not a matter for debate or discussion.

00:01:32.160 - 00:01:53.240

This has already been sorted out forever and a day and we don't need to actually engage with each other in that respect." And for me, that was a bit of a sadness because I think we need to meet at those boundaries as Tim very rightly pointed out, and we need to engage with each other across that spectrum.

00:01:53.240 - 00:02:15.680

And I could think of no other person better, I think, to help us in this particular engagement than Dr. Andrew McGowan, whom I'll introduce to you a bit later. But Archbishop, it's great honor to have you in our midst. Welcome and we look forward to what you have to say to us.

00:02:15.680 - 00:02:37.640

Thank you Phil Connid, words of welcome Bishop Roger. Can I say that one of the many, but one of the delights of having become Archbishop of Sydney is the fellowship with the rest of the province and not least, if I may say so, in his presence, with your own bishop.

00:02:37.640 - 00:02:58.200

And he knows I think that I admire him very much and the way in which we do relate one more and other. Sometimes this reign surprised you, he speaks with a frankness and a candor, which is always helpful, and we have enjoyed some good times together.

00:02:58.200 - 00:03:20.240

But I've said this before, and I keep saying it, he was responsible for the consecration service in Sydney, when I was consecrated and enthroned, if that's the right word. And the way in which he took that service is still spoken of in Sydney. He just, it won't surprise you, he just took it magnificently.

00:03:20.240 - 00:03:37.520

And as I move around the different diocese and have to take services in the different cathedrals, I know how difficult it is to make sure you're doing it all right. In fact, I know for a fact, I do many things wrong when I go to Canberra Goldman or Bathurst and so forth.

00:03:37.520 - 00:03:57.480

But the bishop that day really just, the service was perfect. So thank you very much, sir, for your kind invitation to be here today. And I'm hoping that our time together will be a happy and profitable one for all. I have much to learn and I'll be happy to learn it.

00:03:57.480 - 00:04:16.720

My administration of the Holy Communion. Now first of all I'm going to speak about the genesis of lay administration, then the pastoral, what we see as the pastoral need for this, and then some theological reflections. You've been given some extracts, I'm sorry, they were in such small print, but it was

00:04:16.720 - 00:04:32.920

that, or do it over several pages. Now a preliminary note on terminology, it won't worry me at all to hear the words lay Presidency today, but we have decided to use the words lay administration. So forgive me, I'm going to be using those words, but we're talking about the same thing.

00:04:32.920 - 00:04:52.800

The discussion began with the word President, but we felt that that was a little bit question begging and arguably a non-Englican word. And so the Synod of the Diasis of Sydney approved the word administration, lay administration as being a word that reflected better to our mind, the Book of Common Prayer.

00:04:52.800 - 00:05:07.120

The Synod of the Diasis in 1999 approved lay administration under careful conditions and controls. You will all know, of course, that Archbishop Goodchew didn't sign it into existence as a law.

00:05:07.120 - 00:05:30.360

But I want to stress that no one is suggesting a free for all, and no one is suggesting unseemly behavior in connection with the Eucharist. The lay persons who may be involved in lay administration will be chosen by agreement in the parish and the diocese with the Archbishop involved with the same care that we would

00:05:30.360 - 00:05:48.000

choose those who preach. They would come from the respected lay leadership of the parish involved, and the administration would not, I think, be the norm in the parish church. So let's assume the best and assume that lay administration would be conducted with great

00:05:48.000 - 00:06:06.280

decorum and proper reverence. The clear desire of the Synod of the Diasis of Sydney for lay administration provokes puzzlement, dismay, and rejection in various parts of the Anglican Communion. Last September I had the privilege of giving Bible studies that are forward in faith conference.

00:06:06.280 - 00:06:25.920

Don't ask me how I got there. I wasn't sure myself, but they wanted to know about lay administration, and they gave me about two hours of fairly searching remarks on the subject. I was left in no doubt about the opinion of those folks about that subject.

00:06:25.920 - 00:06:46.480

Sometimes it is seen as a sort of payback. You've got women's ordination, we're going to have lay administration. Let me say that there is no truth in that whatsoever. Sometimes it's regarded as a thoroughly unanglican thing, a sort of betrayal of anglican theology

00:06:46.480 - 00:07:05.280

of sacraments and ministry. Frequently it's used as further evidence if further evidence is needed, that Sydney is extremist, fundamentalist, and totally like any Anglicans anywhere else in the world. Sometimes with a bit more sympathy, the question is asked, well why is it needed?

00:07:05.280 - 00:07:25.920

You've got to imagine perhaps a rural need for this, but why in an urban city, in an urban setting where there are hundreds of priests available for eucharistic ministry. Let me state from the outset that the design of a lay administration of the dasis of Sydney does not rise from any motive to payback.

00:07:25.920 - 00:07:43.000

I believe the real genesis of this idea lies with developments in our thinking and experience over many years in the areas of the doctrine of the church, the ministry, and the sacraments. Discussions on this issue in Sydney have been going on for at least 34 years, possibly before that.

00:07:43.000 - 00:08:04.200

And I understand the subject was first raised in the Senate of 1970, so there's a fair degree of pressure cooker going on here, we've been talking about it for a long time. And not any of that, the discussions are not simply a Sydney phenomenon. On the contrary, for example, it's a matter discussed frequently amongst English particularly

00:08:04.200 - 00:08:24.800

evangelicals but others as well, and indeed diaconal administration was introduced into Armadale Diasis by Bishop Chiswell and discontinued. And I understand, in fact I have good reason to understand that it is practiced in the way of diaconal administration in at least one African province and also elsewhere in the

00:08:24.800 - 00:08:39.200

world. So it's not a Sydney phenomenon. Let me put that to rest now. As far as the introduction of women to the priesthood, the only relevance is this, as I can

00:08:39.200 - 00:08:53.840

see it. If you're going to argue against lay administration, it's now difficult to rely on any argument from long tradition. I can't say well, it's never been our tradition because it was never our tradition to ordain

00:08:53.840 - 00:09:08.280

women either. And also it's hard to argue against it on the grounds of the ecumenical disaster it would cause because the same argument could have been used and was used against the ordination of women to the priesthood.

00:09:08.280 - 00:09:18.040

Now I don't want to get into that issue today. You know my views on that subject, I'm sure. I'm glad to see women priest here today. I honor you.

00:09:18.040 - 00:09:32.240

I honor your ministries. And if I have the privilege of being in your church, I will certainly love to receive ministry from you. This is not a sort of matter of agenda war or something like that.

00:09:32.240 - 00:09:44.160

On the piece of paper I've given you, at the back of the piece of paper there are some sort of discussion questions. And I just want to make sure that you understand one of them. Number five, can you see it there?

00:09:44.160 - 00:10:03.040

Why are women priest able to administer but not lay people if both developments break strong tradition and create ecumenical difficulties? Please do not hear me reading that in the following way. Why are women priest able to, this is not an agenda along those lines, sisters and brothers,

00:10:03.040 - 00:10:16.120

okay? But it's a question. If we've had that development, why should we not have the other development or are the arguments, since the arguments for one, we're not weighty enough, will then can they apply

00:10:16.120 - 00:10:21.040

to the other? That's a question to ask. It's a question for discussion. It's not meant to be.

00:10:21.040 - 00:10:35.040

Let me assure you, in any way, a hidden agenda of having a go at people or something like that. No way. In Sydney however, consideration started with, of lay administration, started with the

00:10:35.040 - 00:10:53.960

ecclesiology and with sacramental theology and they've remained theologically driven. Far from it signally, the unimportant of the sacraments, it is an indication of their importance. We make no apology that our concerns are theological, indeed, it's central to our argument.

00:10:53.960 - 00:11:14.740

We see lay administration as being a thoroughly, defensible development of what we understand to be the church doctrines on these matters and not a radical break from them. In particular, we appeal to key strands of the teaching of the English Reformation. From one point of view, this development is required to draw out the true significance

00:11:14.740 - 00:11:32.040

of that theology in a modern context, thus we claim not to be breaking with Anglicanism as I'll explain a little later. Now I'm going to turn to the pastoral need for lay administration. We'll get to the extracts in due course too.

00:11:32.040 - 00:11:57.400

It is also true that this development is passively important and it will become more so in the future, particularly in the light of the mission which the Darsars of Sydney has committed itself to, which is a strongly evangelistic mission. The modern urban parish consists of an average of 80 to 100 adults with one ordained minister.

00:11:57.400 - 00:12:21.280

There is usually some other small churches nearby, but overall this small urban church is set in the context of thousands of non-Christians and nominal Christians, which state the obvious the day of the nominal Anglican presence as long since passed, particularly in a place like Sydney.

00:12:21.280 - 00:12:42.440

There will be multiple schools in which he or she has a ministry to conduct or supervise. There are likely to be hospitals, nursing homes and many elderly and frail people, and with the baby boomers coming through the system, we are going to have an extraordinary number and living for a long time.

00:12:42.440 - 00:12:59.120

We're going to have an extraordinary number of elderly people in the community, many of whom will be staying in their own homes and needing ministry in their own homes. That's a factor of life. In fact, that sort of baby boomer to my mind represents an immense evangelistic and pastoral

00:12:59.120 - 00:13:16.480

opportunity. At last, the baby boomers are going to be thinking hard about certain issues. It's true that ministry is generally available to those who are mobile and in charge of their own circumstances in Sydney.

00:13:16.480 - 00:13:39.760

The many others ministry, which does not in some sense come to them, is as remote as though they were living in rural isolation. More than that, a ministry which does not reach out in some concrete way will never involve the many citizens, many citizens, for whom a church building is an immense psychological

00:13:39.760 - 00:14:01.040

barrier to finding Christian fellowship. We meet Christian people, confessing Christian people for whom the church building is not something that they can easily enter, for various reasons. It is simply beyond the capacity of one clergy person to exercise an abrasive pastoral ministry

00:14:01.040 - 00:14:14.240

in that setting. Now, it's sometimes suggested that while lay administration may be needed in rural areas, it's hardly an issue in the urban setting. The number of clergy available for Eucharistic ministry is large, and even if an incumbent

00:14:14.240 - 00:14:39.720

is incapacitated or on leave, provision for Eucharistic ministry can be made from elsewhere. I would respond that is a thoroughly outdated view of urban reality. The number of clergy per head of population is less than in some rural areas. We are certainly going to have the development of the North West sector in Sydney where

00:14:39.720 - 00:15:02.920

there's going to be 300,000 people, and so far we have, I think, one church there. That's a city the size of Canberra. We're going to have to find, I don't know how many churches, how many clergy and Christian workers is going to be an immense effort to minister to that number of people, 300 the city

00:15:02.920 - 00:15:24.680

the size of Canberra, that's the reality of part of our mission. The loss of the sense of parish and the size of the city requires an extension of ministry far beyond the ability of one incumbent to handle. Not only that, if we expect the incumbent to be fully involved in the evangelistic mission,

00:15:24.680 - 00:15:49.040

and if the mission takes place with the evolution of many groups outside the actual church building, which is our hope for the future, because we're not going to be able to pay to build all those church buildings, please remember, we are dealing with a new world in which the normal Sunday morning communion celebration is almost irrelevant to much of the Anglican

00:15:49.040 - 00:16:09.560

church life that we is going on and we hope will go on more and more. Let me exemplify this by referring to ministry to the sick, for example, as the population ages such a ministry is going to become more burdensome rather than less, nursing homes and hospitals will need Christian ministry, likewise the many aged persons living in their

00:16:09.560 - 00:16:29.600

own homes will need to be looked after, and is beyond the bounds of possibility and of wisdom that the incumbent of a parish of say 100 people could fulfill this sacramental ministry to the number of people who are going to legitimately expect it. It is clear that lay people are going to be heavily involved to the ministry to the sick.

00:16:29.600 - 00:16:51.600

Indeed, I think that many of you here would say this is precisely where sacramental reservation in order to provide extended communion is so helpful. I think that is your answer to the problem I've just given to you. As we all know, in the face of this reality, there's been a key revolution in the modern

00:16:51.600 - 00:17:00.760

Church to do with the multiplication of ministry through lay people. That's true in all dioceses. I'm sure it's true in this one. I know it is.

00:17:00.760 - 00:17:18.440

In our churches, we have encouraged lay people to offer spiritual and public leadership at every level. It is seen as essential, theologically and pastorally, that lay people do take a large measure of responsibility for what occurs in their church, including the ministry of the Word.

00:17:18.440 - 00:17:37.600

I'm now able to go back in my memory almost 60 years of church life, and the church I grew up in, and the church, as it now exists, are very, very different animals precisely in this area. Our Rector used to do everything, and he certainly wouldn't ask people to read the lesson in

00:17:37.600 - 00:17:51.920

church even, for example, or anything as radical as that. This is a sort of congregational leadership. None of it diminishes the role of the incumbent. It extends and supports the role of the incumbent.

00:17:51.920 - 00:18:11.240

The modern incumbent has to be far, far better at their job than the old fashioned one did. These developments have been welcomed by most Anglicans, as theologically more akin to the doctrine of the church as we understand it. They have succeeded in revolutionising the experience of church for most people.

00:18:11.240 - 00:18:26.080

The fellowship of the local church has been immeasurably strengthened. I don't think we ought to go back to the old days, and lay people have taken spiritual not just temporal responsibility for the life of the parish. It's mainly the laity who teach scripture in schools.

00:18:26.080 - 00:18:39.560

It's often the laity who visit the sick and disabled. Lay people have again rightly taken the task of ministering the Word of God in pastoral situations. They bring the gospel by Word and by deed into the lives of those who never appear in

00:18:39.560 - 00:18:55.560

the local church on a Sunday. In our diocese, we have accepted the challenge of those outside by encouraging the development of small congregations, meeting in homes, institutions, opportunity shops, campuses, wherever people gather.

00:18:55.560 - 00:19:18.680

It's not going to take the place of the parish church, but they're going to be a necessary adjunct to the work of the parish church, if we are actually going to reach the people amongst whom we are set. As our urban mission develops, we want to maintain durability and flexibility, durability

00:19:18.680 - 00:19:38.720

and flexibility. Our priests, as I'm sure yours are, carefully selected and highly trained. We want to retain that level for priests' incumbents. In fact, it is absolutely essential that we do if we're going to have the multiplication

00:19:38.720 - 00:19:50.680

of things that we hope to see occur. On the other hand, we need flexibility. We need to have clergy who are not going to have the same training and whose responsibilities will be commensurately less.

00:19:50.680 - 00:20:04.160

We are experiencing a major shift in our part of the world from parish to congregation. It's not about happening with you, but our parish churches are really nowadays not made up of people to go to church twice or three. Twice is a very rare in our part of the world.

00:20:04.160 - 00:20:26.200

We have now three congregations using the same building. It's a different ethos, which has begun to develop and with the same incumbent. For example, we may have an ethnic or an indigenous congregation looked after by a pastor. It is often impossible for the pastor of such a congregation to receive the training that

00:20:26.200 - 00:20:50.760

we would require of a priest, nor do we want to suggest that the person be given a sort of portability of orders so that the person may be fit to minister in a range of congregations, for him to be a priest with all the possibilities and apparent indelibility is inappropriate through training and so forth and so on.

00:20:50.760 - 00:21:14.200

For us to deprive the congregation, the indigenous or ethnic congregation of the ministry of the sacraments, however, except through a visitor is inappropriate. We need what you may call a local priesthood for such circumstance. I don't know how many ethnic congregations we have in Sydney, but there must be 50 of

00:21:14.200 - 00:21:38.320

them, I should think, very different congregations, different needs, different, as you can imagine, they're not your conventional, Anglican congregations, but they belong to us. How are we going to meet their sacramental needs? We need a local priesthood, but since in Anglican polity a priest cannot be merely local,

00:21:38.320 - 00:21:59.160

we need lay and diagonal administration under the license of the bishop. In short, the job description of ministry is undergoing change, just as our buildings and our music and our litigies changing, almost beyond recognition. We all agree that an important part of the provision of ministry involves Holy Communion.

00:21:59.160 - 00:22:18.840

With the decline in numbers in ministry and the rural population, there are various innovative attempts to provide sacramental ministry in the circumstances of rural Australia. But physical distance is not the only distance that people experience when it comes to relating to the local church.

00:22:18.840 - 00:22:35.280

Remoteness is an urban problem, as well as a rural problem. Amongst many Anglicans, the difficulty of supplying Holy Communion without a priest is met by extended communion. As well, in remote rural communities, we have developed local priests.

00:22:35.280 - 00:22:50.640

They're as even, so I'm told, on the internet, so who believes it? The development of Holy Communion services without consecrated bread and wine. In other places, Anglicans are being encouraged to have sacramental fellowship in non-apiscopal churches.

00:22:50.640 - 00:23:10.520

These are all responses to the problems before us. The difficulty is that, for theological reasons, explain below, extended communion and local priests are not possible for evangelicals who wish to be consistent with their reformation sacramental theology.

00:23:10.520 - 00:23:36.320

So I accept and can quite see the sensible nature of the extended communion answer. But it can't be my answer for theological reasons, which I'll explain to you in a moment. The mission that we're engaged in requires a substantial multiplication of ministries, leading we hope to a multiplication of congregations.

00:23:36.320 - 00:24:00.560

The incumbent is going to provide a fundamental and indispensable role in all this, but ministry will have to go far beyond the work that that person could be expected to do in person. We want to develop mature congregations in which leadership does not develop upon one person alone, although there will always be a person who has chief responsibility.

00:24:00.560 - 00:24:26.040

That person will preside over the whole work by appropriate delegation. Lay administration is an evangelical way of meeting one of the problems of mission as we experience them in our largely urban setting. If you were an Anglicatholic, for example, that's fine, but the Anglicatholic way is not

00:24:26.040 - 00:24:38.520

open to us. We are not Anglicatholics. We are aiming to develop a theologically shaped, pastorally responsible method of achieving a sacramental life for our people.

00:24:38.520 - 00:24:54.240

The proposed legislation will safeguard the rights of the clergy and the congregations to totally reject this development. It will require the license of the Archbishop. It will be open to both men and women, and it will demand of those license to level of

00:24:54.240 - 00:25:09.480

Christian maturity and understanding at least commensurate to what is required for the preaching of the Word. Our understanding is that there exists at the moment no legal barrier to lay people administering Holy Communion except on church trust property.

00:25:09.480 - 00:25:31.080

If we delay too long, people are saying things like, "Oh, we've been talking about this for 30 years, and in a sense that's true." If we delay too long, it may be difficult to license and order this practice. The unsatisfactory result will be that a priest will be required for the Lord's supper, simply

00:25:31.080 - 00:25:39.280

because of the nature of the building, and if it were else, it would be happening. That's not a threat, by the way. I'm not saying, "We threaten this. We'll do it anyway."

00:25:39.280 - 00:26:02.920

I'm just saying, "One can see the possibility of developing, and I would rather be in there early, licensate, and make sure that it's done appropriately, rather than simply allow it to develop." Let me, I'll just pause to illustrate this point, a perfectly upright and sound Christian

00:26:02.920 - 00:26:14.880

brother in his 60s, spoke to me the other day about a ministry he was having in a nursing home. The nursing home is not a church nursing home. He does so in relationship with his local parish, which I would have thought was one of our

00:26:14.880 - 00:26:31.600

more conservative local parishes. The local clergy person is not able to visit the nursing home, except once every six weeks, seven weeks. This man is there two or three days a week, and he visits assiduously and very welcomed

00:26:31.600 - 00:26:51.520

there in the nursing home. There's a fair bit of dementia in the home as well. Only without my knowledge, permission or goodwill, he has begun using the prayer book and taking Holy Communion there.

00:26:51.520 - 00:27:06.560

Now, he told me this, bold as brass. It's not church trust property, as a matter of fact, there's nothing I can do to stopping legally. But I'll tell you what, dear brothers and sisters, I didn't quite feel like stopping him.

00:27:06.560 - 00:27:27.400

He said you should have seen the looks on the people's faces as they go again over the old, familiar prayer book and receive communion. Now, I'm just mentioning this story to you to help you to illustrate the way in which this thing may come.

00:27:27.400 - 00:27:55.720

I would rather it come in an ordered way, but for the reason why it may come in our situation. Let me move on to theological reflection on lay administration. And these are any reflections, this is not a full-scale attempt to explain it all. Now as we all know, I think, there are different sacramental theologies in contemporary Anglicanism.

00:27:55.720 - 00:28:11.160

That's a truism, if there was one. And these different sacramental theologies express themselves in different ways of conducting the Eucharist. From time to time, I'm asked to conduct the Eucharist at the Bishop's conference.

00:28:11.160 - 00:28:26.600

And I do so in quite a different way, from the way I notice, for example, Bishop Silk. That's it. So take one example. I believe there's a video of Bishop Silk conducting the Eucharist for training purposes.

00:28:26.600 - 00:28:47.720

Now I gently take the candles off the table and I dress in a different way and my gestures are different and so forth. I hope that I conduct the Eucharist in a deeply reverent way. For frankly, I love what I call the Lord's Supper, what you make all the Eucharist or have

00:28:47.720 - 00:29:13.600

whatever name we call it. I love it and I have the most profound, I mean, when I'm dying in hospital, I trust that I will have the Lord's Supper as a great blessing from God. So don't read this in any way as an attack on the Eucharist or anything like that.

00:29:13.600 - 00:29:32.800

But my way of experiencing the Lord's Supper is very, very clearly different from the way that many other Anglicans do. Anyway, I was mentioning Bishop Roger at our service and the way in which he was able to bridge that divide was what was so marvelous for us.

00:29:32.800 - 00:29:52.960

And I've had to take a couple of services recently and graft and there was, I don't know if I should tell you this, but it's a picture of me behind the altar, which I call the table, with incense rising up all around me. For as I can say, I look like something from a spooky movie, peering down through always

00:29:52.960 - 00:30:07.600

a half blind as it is anyhow. So we know there are different ways of doing things. The clearest distinction and the reason for these differences between the more reformed and the more Catholic empices, if you don't like the word, I'm not quite sure what words

00:30:07.600 - 00:30:24.560

to use, these are not intended to be intended to sort of be tub thumping. It would be naive to suggest that these do not represent significant and even competing theological commitments. What is sometimes forgotten is that a number of the practices and ornaments to be found

00:30:24.560 - 00:30:40.680

in contemporary Anglican churches were illegal when they were first introduced in the 19th century. Some people having grown up with them just to assume it's like the royal family. As they say, many of the things that the royal family does that is, they're all 19th century

00:30:40.680 - 00:30:57.440

inventions that look as though they're a thousand years old. Well even the architecture of our churches changed dramatically mid-19th century as you can see from some of the churches in Sydney. And certainly when these innovations occurred they were regarded as, here's that word,

00:30:57.440 - 00:31:15.880

an Anglican. Catholic innovation has now become very establishment, if I may say so. But there has also always existed, reformed and evangelical traditions. This may now seem very strange if you're not used to it, as vice versa.

00:31:15.880 - 00:31:34.240

And for the historically uninformed, the evangelical way of doing things may seem innovative. But at heart it goes back beyond the 19th century. It's commonly suggested that the development of lay administration of the Holy Communion is contrary to the very being of Anglicanism.

00:31:34.240 - 00:31:50.360

Certainly would have to be regained that non-priestly administration would be quite contrary to some expressions of Anglicanism that could not possibly be contemplated. But the assertion that it is contrary to the ethos of the Anglican church really speaks for one side of the church only.

00:31:50.360 - 00:32:11.920

It suggests that one particular view of priesthood and of communion and one only is the essence of our Eucharistic theology. Without going into the question of whether there is only one valid opinion, it is empirically true at least that two views have been evaded in the church at least to for a very long time.

00:32:11.920 - 00:32:29.440

According to one such view, and I thoroughly admit this, lay administration is impossible. According to the other view, it is possible, although opinions differ as to whether it's advisable. From my point of view, the second opinion is a genuine and legitimate development of the

00:32:29.440 - 00:32:45.720

theology of the Book of Common Prayer and the Articles. Admittedly, that depends on your reading of Anglican history, of course. The magisterial biography of Kran, by McCulloch, although Kate saw great arts bishop thus, and we got to extract, I think we have, look at this.

00:32:45.720 - 00:33:07.200

Standing as he did, and this is McCulloch's, in his concluding chapter, standing as he did in the developed, performed tradition of Europe in the 1550s, Kran's conception of the middle way, all via media, in religion, was quite different from later Anglicanism in the 19th century, when the word Anglicanism first came into common use, of course.

00:33:07.200 - 00:33:27.600

John Henry Newman said of the middle way, before his departure to the Church of Rome, that a number of distinct notions are included in the notion of Protestantism, and as to all the, is our church has taken a via media between Protestantism and popery. Kran, though would violently have rejected such a notion, how could one have a middle

00:33:27.600 - 00:33:48.840

way between truth and antichrist, the middle ground which he sought was the same as beauties, an agreement between Vittenberg and Zurich, which would have provided a unified vision of Christian doctrine against the counterfeit, being refurbished at the Council of Trent. For him Catholicism was to be found in the old scattered churches of the Reformation,

00:33:48.840 - 00:34:13.440

and it was his aim to show forth their unity, to prove their Catholicity. My reading of the 16th century is that the Kran, and those around him, you had your choice in the 16th century, they weren't Lutheran in their Eucharistic theology, or at least not by the end, they were reformed in their Eucharistic theology.

00:34:13.440 - 00:34:34.440

And the question was, the via media, via media between Luther and Swingley. Now as far as the Eucharist is concerned, he identifies as McCulloch, identifies the mature Kran, though, with a variety of reformed theology, which he labels symbolic parallelism. He quotes the Archbishop, and I think that's it there as well.

00:34:34.440 - 00:34:51.480

And although Christ be not corporally in the bread and wine, or corporally in the bread and wine, yet Christ used not so many words in the mystery of his holy supper without effectual signification. For he is effectually present and effectually work up, not in the bread and wine, but in

00:34:51.480 - 00:35:07.240

the godly receivers of them. To whom he giveeth his own flesh spiritually to feed upon, and his own blood to quench their great inward thirst. In Kran's thought, the word of God is that which gives the sacrament its power and substance,

00:35:07.240 - 00:35:21.400

and this in turn shapes the ordinal. Word and sacrament long indesolubably together, and that is why it is reserved to the priest who is the preacher. Indeed, the priest who is ordained to be the priest, who is ordained to be the pastor

00:35:21.400 - 00:35:33.720

of the congregation, the one responsible for the cure of souls. I'm saying do you agree with this, or even do you agree with this reading of Kran's? I'm saying that it is. And McCulloch is not an evangelical.

00:35:33.720 - 00:35:47.480

I'm saying this is a reading of Kran's. And I think I persuasive one. The question of who administer holy communion is therefore, in this reading, one of order, and a quotation again from Kran's.

00:35:47.480 - 00:36:03.560

As in the prince's house, the officers and ministers prepare the table, and yet other as well as they eat the meat and drink the drink. So the priests and ministers prepare the Lord's supper, read the gospel, and rehearse Christ's words.

00:36:03.560 - 00:36:21.040

But all the people say there to are men. All remember Christ's death, all give thanks to God, all repent and offer themselves in the ablation to Christ, all take him as their Lord and Savior, and spiritually feed upon him and entoken thereofly eat the bread and drink the wine in his mystical supper.

00:36:21.040 - 00:36:34.160

Holy communion is not a priestly act of such, but an ecclesial one. This is the significance of the absence of any direction about who has to celebrate the Lord's supper in the New Testament. The Eucharist is an activity of the whole congregation.

00:36:34.160 - 00:36:47.440

The Lord Himself is the focus as He was in the last supper. We focus on the priest, Kramner, on the congregation. We focus on the elements, Kramner on the eating and drinking. We think of Christ coming to us.

00:36:47.440 - 00:37:03.800

Kramner thinks yes of that, but he also thinks of us going to Christ in the lifting up of our hearts. Remember, he thinks of Christ in his body in heaven. Our understanding of the Book of Common Prayer ordained, all that is our, I mean my, is

00:37:03.800 - 00:37:20.440

that it grants recognition and authority to those who are ordained priest by the bishop to exercise a pastoral, as opposed to assess a total, ministry of word and sacrament in a community setting. That is to say, the role of the incumbent of the cure of souls is the end to which the

00:37:20.440 - 00:37:37.720

service points, although priesthood may be exercised as an assistant, and it may be exercised across, of course, across parish or diocesan boundaries, priest in one place, priest in another place. This also reflects the first hundreds of years of Christian leadership, where ordination

00:37:37.720 - 00:37:58.320

was not thought of as a priestly mediating ministry, as it later was, in more medieval times, arising from an ontological change, but a ministry arising from the community. Now, I think I've given you another quotation there from Edward Gilbert's. We may therefore conclude that a situation, I'm not sure if I have given you this one.

00:37:58.320 - 00:38:13.100

We may therefore conclude that a situation in which a community was unable to celebrate the Eucharist, because there was no bishop or priesthood or priesthood, was unthinkable in the early church. On the basis of the right of the community to the Eucharist, the leader of the community

00:38:13.100 - 00:38:27.920

also had the right to lead the Eucharist. If there was no leader, it chose a suitable candidate from its own ranks. In other words, priesthood must be understood in connection with the Christian community, which is being served.

00:38:27.920 - 00:38:43.520

Now, the fact is, there's no decisive biblical text to settle this matter. This is in contrast to the matter, say, of the ordination of women, where there was at least one text, I would say, more, which did speak directly to the issue. Now, it may have been misunderstood, I'm not arguing that case.

00:38:43.520 - 00:38:58.280

I'm saying, at least there was some Bible in that matter. There's none at all in the matter of a non-directly at all, in the matter of lay administration or lay presidency. The unwillingness of the church down through the ages to ordain women rested upon a reading

00:38:58.280 - 00:39:09.120

of the Bible. In Hookah, for example. The same cannot be said about the administration of the Lord Sapa. In terms of the 39 articles of religion, therefore, the question of who should administer

00:39:09.120 - 00:39:32.680

the Sapa must fall into a tradition, into the category of a tradition. To be accorded great respect, we're not repugnant to the Word of God, and yet able to be changed by lawful authority provided that nothing be ordained against the Word of God. Not to understand what is edifying here depends therefore on biblical and theological principles

00:39:32.680 - 00:39:53.960

rather than an explicit Word in the New Testament. There is an indesoluble connection between the Word of God and the sacraments, indicated by the necessity of the sermon in the service of Holy Communion. It is not Anglican, I'm now arguing my case, it is not Anglican to equate Word and sacrament.

00:39:53.960 - 00:40:10.120

And non-preaching communion, I know many Anglicans do, and it's Anglican in that set. So I'm saying, if you went back to the Reformation theology, a non-preaching communion service is a contradiction in terms, where the taking of bread and wine is removed from the context of the preaching of God's Word.

00:40:10.120 - 00:40:30.380

It is the Word of God which warrants the sacrament and explains it. The communal eating of bread and wine is the outward invisible sign of an invisible grace, namely the grace of God towards us in Christ and at work in our lives. The emphasis of the Book of Common Prayer dwells on the Lord's Supper as a spiritual union

00:40:30.380 - 00:40:51.360

with Christ and the faithful remembrance of what Christ has done on our behalf. What is required of those who come to the Supper of course is that they examine themselves, have repentance and a lively faith in God's mercy and charity with all men. Unsurprisingly, in the ordination service published in the Book of Common Prayer, emphasizes

00:40:51.360 - 00:41:13.440

the priestly role of preaching and living the Word of God. Now, less you imagine what you've heard in brief outline is somehow wildly eccentric what else would you expect from Sydney. Let me refer to the theological statement of the English House of Bishops which was called

00:41:13.440 - 00:41:36.320

Eucharistic Presidency. In fact, I'll get it out of my bag so you know it exists. From an archbishop in Africa, I just chose to make sure you know this. I'll tell you who it was. It was an archbishop guitarry giving special permission to the Reverend Pauline McCann being a deacon to celebrate holy communion in his cathedral

00:41:36.320 - 00:42:00.720

whenever she wanted to. So I just mentioned that because I want you to know this is not a Sydney issue. There's the letter, I've got lots of copies of it. Here's the book Eucharistic Presidency. This book was written as a theological statement by the House of Bishops so it's got a lot of authority I take it and it's written to critique

00:42:00.720 - 00:42:27.600

the idea of lay presidency. It is, as you can see, relatively lengthy for such an idea and it's an examination of the whole thing and it comes out negative. 1997. However, let me quote from it and you'll find some of it in the text in front of you. The statement says, "Behind this layer conviction to be found in the mainline reformers about the intimate connection between word and

00:42:27.600 - 00:42:49.040

sacrament. Ministers are ordained to the Ministry of Word and Sacrament and both convey the evangelical promises of grace. The sacraments must not be allowed to take on a life of their own for they are subordinate to the proclamation and reception of the Word. The case which the mainstream reformers made for restricting the Ministry of the Sacrament to appointed ministers

00:42:49.040 - 00:43:18.400

rests ultimately on their understanding of the indissolubility of Word and Sacrament and the dependence of the Sacrament on the Word. The Ministry of the Word is made available and applied to the life of the church only through authorised ministers," that is to say preaching ministers, "so it should be with the sacraments." As far as the English reformation was concerned,

00:43:18.400 - 00:43:40.800

the report says, further quote, "We find the same heavy stress on the Ministry of the Word in relation to ordination in line with the continental reformers. The pre-reformation serum right, the candidate for priesthood was handed the chalice and/or pattern as symbols of priestly office with the words "receive the power to sacrifice to God." Whereas in the 1552 English ordinal,

00:43:40.800 - 00:44:06.480

the Bible alone is given accompanied by the work words "take our authority to preach the Word of God and to minister the holy sacraments in the congregation." When this book reaches the end of the argument, you imagine me reading and panting to see where it was all going to finish up. This is what it says. The parody of Word and Sacrament, by the way, that's very funny because

00:44:06.480 - 00:44:40.640

earlier on, they said they're not parody, but anyhow, we won't go into that. Would appear to weigh heavily in favour of some form of lay presidency. Do you see why? You see, since we now have lay preaching, lay preaching without lay administration cuts the indesoluble bond between Word and Sacrament. That's the essence of case. And the document, long last, recognises that at the end,

00:44:40.640 - 00:45:02.800

did you get to the end? Did you read all that? My claim is to lay by two hours. So you've got a close to it. Well, this was the important bit. In its communist form, the argument runs like this. If, as is now the case, a non-ordained person can be licensed or authorized to preach, then the same should apply to presiding at the Eucharist. The non-ordained are allowed to preach

00:45:02.800 - 00:45:24.880

without all the training and gifts necessary for full-time pastoral oversight of a congregation. Moreover, to refuse lay presidency, but to allow lay preaching is effectively to exalt the Sacrament above the Word, which, as we have seen, has no justification. Now, that's setting out the case. Now, they give a one-paragraph answer,

00:45:24.880 - 00:45:44.880

which is, to me, terribly frustrating. They've got all these pages in here about all sorts of things, but when it comes to the actual case, we get two paragraphs. And this is the answer. This is the answer you're wondering if they wish to give why lay presidency cannot be the case. It is undoubtedly true that, especially since the evolution of the Office of the Reader,

00:45:44.880 - 00:46:05.280

there has been a persistent tendency to allow the Ministry of the Word and Sacrament to be separated, with a consequent danger that the Ministry of the Sacrament will not be undergirded by proper training. Well, that's one of the dangers. This is a matter which undoubtedly needs addressing. However, we need to be careful about drawing parallels to hastily between the Ministry of the

00:46:05.280 - 00:46:26.720

Word and the Sacrament. It needs to be recalled that teaching authority belongs properly to the ordained priest presbyter as part of his or her ordination to the Ministry of Word and Sacrament. This may be delegated to a lay preacher who has received appropriate preparation and training, and I don't understand the next bit of the sentence.

00:46:26.720 - 00:46:53.520

But responsibility for or oversight of the proclamation of the Gospels still belongs to the Your Dane Minister of the Congration. When I read that, I looked for the next paragraph. There was no next paragraph. Maybe it's just me, but to my mind, that doesn't actually address the question which has been asked.

00:46:55.440 - 00:47:24.960

If preaching on which the Sacrament rests can be delegated to a layperson, why would the Sacrament not be possibly delegated to a layperson? Now, you may be able to see how this answers, and perhaps Dr McKayne will explain how that answers the question he doesn't have to. Of course, it's not his answer, but I'm not alone. Let me tell you

00:47:24.960 - 00:47:42.640

and saying, "Oops, where's the next paragraph? It didn't seem to make sense." It is precisely at this point that the report fails, and it's a crucial moment. If responsibility for the oversight of the proclamation of the Gospels still belongs to the Your Dane Minister of the Congregation despite lay preaching, and I believe it does,

00:47:42.640 - 00:48:08.880

why isn't that also serve the Administration of the Sacraments? To me, it is as if the author of the statement could see the logic of the position he was attacking and gave up the attempt. It shows that theology I have enunciated here, however, has the report itself shows that the theology I have enunciated has a secure footing in Anglican Eucharistic theology.

00:48:08.880 - 00:48:32.320

You don't have to agree with it. I don't have to say it's the only way of reading it. I'm saying it is a quite persuasive and possible way of reading your Anglican Eucharistic theology, and it shows why developments in ministry and especially developments in lay preaching raise the question of lay administration. Now, I'm going to skip over the next bits here because I think

00:48:32.320 - 00:48:59.360

I've made the main point I want to make, and I notice that time is against me, and I've had more than I should have had, and let me come to the end and also to the sort of questions I've raised for us here. The possibility of lay preaching at the time of the reformation was not unknown, however, it was by no means normal and wasn't connected to the congregational life as priesthood was.

00:48:59.360 - 00:49:23.600

As we all know, the church in the 21st century orders its life in many ways which are different from the church prior to the 20th century. One of the most remarkable and universal developments is the growth in lay ministry. It takes many forms but includes the awesome responsibility of preaching. It's awesome responsibility. Usually the preaching has been

00:49:23.600 - 00:49:48.480

restricted to those who are tested and trained and rightly so, and usually accompanied by the license of the bishop. The reservation of administering the sacraments to priests alone suggests very powerfully that the sacrament is prior to the Word, which, as I've said, I don't think is Anglican. We've seen that there are Anglican reasons for thinking the sacrament is

00:49:48.480 - 00:50:14.080

dependent on the Word. Certainly, the virtual horror felt by many Anglicans of the thought that people other than priests may administer the Holy Communion is strange in the absence of similar horror at the idea that lay people may preach the Word of God to summarize. And I think you've got this summary here. One scripture is silent on the question of who may administer the Lord's

00:50:14.080 - 00:50:38.640

supper. I take it from my point of view, therefore it's a matter of order. Two, the reformers retain the link between the administration and priesthood in order to safeguard the priority of the Word on which the sacrament rests. Three, the priestly role is above all that of pastor and of the congregation and cannot be handed over to someone else. Four, delegation of the various

00:50:38.640 - 00:51:01.760

elements of the role is possible and given developments in ecclesiology desirable. Five, the retention of the administration of the Lord's Supper is the only element which cannot be delegated detaches Word from sacrament and confuses the congregation about the nature of the sacrament and the priestly role. So I have these questions and there will be time for discussion

00:51:01.760 - 00:51:27.840

later and it may be these may or may not be helpful. Please don't regard these questions as sharp, well they are sharp in a way, but they're not nasty. You have to put it like that, not intended to be. Why is lay preaching acceptable but lay administration of the Lord's Supper unacceptable? What does that say about preaching and ordination? Two, why is lay reading of large parts of the

00:51:27.840 - 00:51:53.680

Eucharistic liturgy acceptable? But lay reading of the Absolution and the prayer of consecration unacceptable? In other words, if the Lord's Supper is the whole thing, why do we take bits out of it? And you may remember the book of common prayer for example says of the prayer of humble access, it will be said by the priest alone, but we don't take any notice of that.

00:51:53.680 - 00:52:21.680

Three, why are local priests acceptable? This is the developments occurred around the world, but lay administration of the Lord's Supper unacceptable. Are they not both significant developments from the book of common prayer? The lay priest option is one that suits a Catholic theology. I accept that. But I am not a Catholic. My theology runs in a different direction.

00:52:21.680 - 00:52:52.640

And I wonder if we need to recognize that possibility. Four, why are, so I would say lay priests, local priests are not book of common prayer. They've been allowed to develop why not this? Four, why are assistant priests and visiting priests able to administer, but not local lay leaders? Do not the latter more readily symbolise the leadership of the community? If there is no priest present,

00:52:52.640 - 00:53:23.440

they elect a priest, so to speak. Now five, please notice the tone of voice here, there's not tack-on-ladied priests. Why are women priests able to administer, but not lay people? Do both developments not also break, come across strong tradition and create ecumenical difficulties? I haven't quite got the same wording as you folk have. Some of these, sorry, thanks.

00:53:23.440 - 00:53:51.200

Change some of the wording. Six, why is the reservation of the sacrament an extended communion acceptable, but lay administration not acceptable? Are they not both significant developments in the book of common prayer? Other practices once illegal, but are now accepted. And they became accepted because people simply broke the law, frankly. Well, if that happened,

00:53:51.200 - 00:54:14.400

why could this not happen? That's what I want to know. We are asking more of others than we've asked ourselves. Seven, why are priests acceptable to the minister of the Lord's suffer, but are credit lay people and not? What is there precisely about the priest, which renders his or her administration acceptable and the lay person's not? Now, it depends on your view of priests who

00:54:14.400 - 00:54:35.440

are admittedly. The view of priests who are in this document, I don't think is an ontological way. And I'm not sure how widely that is held in contemporary church. And then eight, if the pastoral ministry of the priest can be delegated, even to the extent of lay preaching and baptism of the congregation, why should the Eucharist be exempt? Delegation is not equivalent to negation.

00:54:37.120 - 00:55:01.760

You don't give up the responsibility for the whole, by delegating all sorts of parts of the whole. Now, Chairman, for giving, I've gone on 15 minutes above my water time. On the other hand, I did start slightly later. So I do apologize with that caveat. Thank you very much.