jQuery Slider

You are here

Chinks in the Archbishop of Canterbury's Armor

Chinks in the Archbishop of Canterbury's Armor
Justin Welby says he doubted God's existence after Paris attacks

COMMENTARY

By Mordechai Ben-Gurion
Special to VIRTUEONLINE
www.virtueonline.org
November 22, 2015

Today is the Feast of Christ the King! Today is also the day when the Archbishop of Canterbury will declare his doubt in God! Why? Because of the terror attacks on Paris. The Feast of Christ the King is the climax of the liturgical year! This is the day on which I get goose bumps singing 'All Hail the Power of Jesus' Name'! This is the feast that tips me over into Advent when I am reminded that 'he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him' (Rev 1:7). This is also the Second Reading in the Revised Common Lectionary for today's glorious feast. It dovetails superbly with the Old Testament reading from the book of Daniel. Daniel is announcing the coming of the indestructible kingdom of God in the face of totalitarian empires that tyrannize the world.

Like the Greek poet Hesiod, Daniel used the imagery of four metals--gold, silver, bronze and iron--to talk about the four kingdoms that have gone before. Unlike Hesiod, Daniel is not taken in by the glitter of gold. A kingdom of gold or silver is no better than a kingdom of bronze or iron. They will rust and rot, decay and die. Like the Roman historian Aemelius Sura, Daniel sees four great kingdoms that have gone before. Unlike Sura, Daniel sees a very different fifth kingdom as the climax of history. It is not the kingdom of Rome, but the kingdom of God.

We celebrate the Feast of Christ the King because we believe that in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is Daniel's Son of Man, the kingdom of God has come. But there is profound cognitive dissonance, for if Christ is King why is there still injustice, hunger, war, and evil? Why are terrorists able to strike in Paris with such impunity? For that matter why have Islamic terrorists been slaughtering Christians and people of other religions all over the Islamic world?

The German New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman uses an analogy from World War II to illustrate this dissonance. Cullman speaks of the period between D-Day and VE-Day. D-Day was when the Allies landed at Normandy. D-Day decided the outcome of the war. Once the Allies won the battle of D-day, there was little doubt that they would have the final victory. But between D-Day and VE-Day--between Normandy and final victory--there'd be many months of suffering and struggle as the Allied armies, little by little, pushed back the Nazi forces.

The coming of Jesus as Messiah is God's D-Day. Jesus won the decisive battle and inaugurated the kingdom of God. But God's VE-Day isn't yet here. Though the enemy has been decisively defeated, pockets of resistance remain; there are still battles to be fought. As people who have seen God's salvation, we are living in the period between D-Day and VE-day. We are witnessing bestial empires of evil kick and scream about furiously seeking to resist God's victory over them. We are witnessing creation groaning in labour pains in expectation of its new birth and final redemption.

We struggle with a theological and existential cognitive dissonance but we do not lose faith or doubt the existence of God as the ABC has so feebly whimpered to the media on the Feast of Christ the King. Asked if these attacks had caused him to doubt where God was, he said: 'Oh gosh, yes,' and admitted it put a 'chink in his armour'. Why does an incident like this put a chink in the Archbishop's armour? Justin Welby is brimming over with management speak (like most bishops of his ilk) but has very little ability to robustly engage with theology or scripture. It was different when Bishops N T Wright and Michael Nazir-Ali were in the House of Bishops. But two of the best-qualified and literate bishops in the House of Bishops resigned. One went back to academia; the other is serving the persecuted church.

Justin Welby said: 'Saturday morning, I was out and as I was walking I was praying and saying: "God, why -- why is this happening? "Where are you in all this?" And then engaging and talking to God. "Yes, I doubt." Justin Welby belongs to a generation of preachers (if you can call them that) who believe that a sermon is a 'sharing of your personal experiences' and 'feelings' rather than a meaty exposition of biblical texts. This postmodern generation of preachers believe that what energises congregations is a therapeutic 'fireside chat' rather than a declamatory pronouncement of biblical truth. They would cringe at Martin Luther King's 'I have a dream' speech.

It is encouraging to see a significant number of online respondents respond so confidently to the ABC for his hand-wringing lack of faith so publicly displayed on the Feast of Christ the King. But the online congregation has told us what truly energises them! The critical response of so many lay commentators--quite a few of them Christians--is revealing. In themselves, the responses, apart from the usual hugely entertaining invasion of digital nutcases, are worthy of a study.

First, they attack the ABC's real 'chink in the armour'--Justin Welby has a profoundly Eurocentric, middle-class Anglican, Etonian view of the world. He endeavours to establish his Global South credentials by reiterating at every opportunity his links to Nigeria and his attempts at so-called 'conflict resolution' in Africa (he never tells us what results his efforts produced). So why wasn't his faith in God shaken by the genocide in the Democratic Republic of Congo which since 1996 has claimed as many as 5.4 million African lives? Is Justin's God in the business of protecting only French-speaking Europeans living in the civilized city of Paris, who are enjoying a concert at which the Eagles of Death Metal are performing the song 'Kiss the Devil' when Islamic terrorists come bursting in with automatic rifles blazing? One could hardly call the lyrics of the heavy metal group a 'celebration of life' as Justin puts it!

An online comment from Croydon in London puts it well: 'And when Boko Haram have been slaughtering tens of thousands over the last 6-7 years his faith was unshaken-hmmmmm!' Jennifer Mac writes: 'Wish someone would sack this bloke, doubts God and he's meant to represent Christians? Get him sacked asap, if he wanted to have doubt about something he could simply look back in history at the millions lost in war around the world in the last 100 years but, oh no, he questions his faith after Paris??' (sic)

And what about the thousands of Christians who are daily crucified by ISIS in the Middle East? Don't they count? Doesn't God fail to protect them--they who are his blood-bought children? Interestingly, 84 bishops could sign a petition trying to twist the British Prime Minister David Cameron's arm asking him to admit (Muslim) refugees and asylum seekers, but I don't recall a group of bishops petitioning the PM to protect Christians facing persecution and death.

But the good Archbishop's reasoning is based on touch-feely emotions and personal experience, not scripture or theology. "And, in my family's case, that is added to because my wife and I lived in Paris for five years. It was one of the happiest places we have lived and to think of a place of such celebration of life seeing such suffering is utterly heart-breaking." That sums it up! In other words, because I lived in Paris, the capital of culture, and I am so influenced by the Enlightenment (as well as postmodernism--I know that's a bit of a contradiction but you can be a confused child of both if you are a Westerner in your late fifties) I don't expect to see violence here but I expect to see the Western world get better and better; and because my wife and I lived here we expect God wouldn't allow such horror and terror. Since my wife and I never lived in the darkest recesses of Africa but ventured there only to help out our poor benighted brethren (Justin still carries the white man's burden) it does not shake my faith in God if there is genocide in Africa.

Second, what about free will--the freewill God gives to both spiritual beings and human beings? In the book of Daniel the 'Prince of Persia' opposes and delays Daniel's prayer for 21 days. There is a surprising scholarly consensus that this figure is the demonic force that rules and controls the kingdom of Persia. An opposing demonic angel waylays God's angel for three weeks. The breakthrough comes only when the archangel Michael intervenes. Michael continues his battle with the demon 'Prince of Persia.' God's angel then tells Daniel that he has to go back to fight against the demon-prince of Persia, and when he gets him out of the way, the demon-prince of Greece will arrive (Dan 10: 20-21).

The Church of England has no room for the devil after having kicked him out of the revised baptismal liturgy. Woolly theology and spiritual warfare can hardly co-exist! The devil seems to play no role in the rise of Islamic terrorism at least in the fluffy bunny thinking of the postmodern Church of England. Again, it is no surprise that a biblically illiterate House of Bishops have not kept up their scholarly reading and discovered how the devil has made an astonishing comeback in the world of academia. 'Antiradical' from Stratford upon Avon in England may not know how to use the apostrophe, but he knows his demonology better than the Archbishop. Here's what he writes: 'What an idiot get out of the church you faithless twat! It's the devils work not Gods.' (sic)

A comment from Shrewsbury reminds Justin that 'God does not prevent bad things from happening, this is a fallen world and we each have free will.' Phill writes, 'I believe in God and also in the free will He allows us to believe or not, but I do not believe that He is a safety net, to step in every-time some tragedy happens. Humankind must take responsibility for its own actions, as far as Mr Welby is concerned he is in the wrong job, and does those of faith no service at all.'

Third, the Archbishop reveals how limited he is when it comes to ethics and the issue of 'Just War'. He is clearly unfamiliar with more recent thinking that rebuts a certain brand of pacifism as the 'virus of wishful thinking' in a world that is engulfed by Islamic terrorism and Islamic extremism. But he warns against a 'knee-jerk military response, saying: "Two injustices do not make justice."' Knee-jerk response? You must be joking? Western leaders and politicians have done nothing but pontificate and create the space for ISIS to get stronger and stronger. The West has been sleeping like Rip van Winkle and needs to wake up! Knee-jerk response indeed!

'Two injustices do not make justice,' says Justin. Good sound byte; bad ethical reasoning. The Archbishop should read the recent book 'In Defence of War' by Nigel Biggar, Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology at the University of Oxford. Biggar admits that he is 'a realist... about the fact of intractable human vice on the international stage.' Echoing the words of St Paul, he argues: 'If all are somewhat culpable, some might still be more culpable than others. And while it is beyond human competence to pronounce any human being to be ultimately irredeemable, it is presently the case that some people cannot be talked out of grace wrongdoing and that they must therefore be forced out of it.'

Fourth, one would expect the Archbishop to have had a more nuanced view of Islam (and hermeneutics). He is, after all, someone who read theology at some stage in his life, at least to qualify for ordination. Of course, Anglican training colleges in the UK do not have courses on Islam or Major World Religions. Their time is taken up by more important courses like Safeguarding and Child Protection. According to Justin, 'the way Islamic State terrorists had distorted their faith to the extent they believe they are glorifying their God.' So which version of Islam is the correct one, Justin? Would you offer courses in Islamic hermeneutics to Muslims who have distorted their faith? After all, you've been telling Anglicans you believe in 'truth is plural' and that Anglicans who believe in diametrically opposite interpretations of biblical texts on sexuality should learn to co-exist. So why don't you say the same to Muslims who believe in diametrically opposite interpretations of texts from the Koran and Hadith on violence? And introduce ISIS to Indaba?

The Islamic scholar, Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, offers a more nuanced understanding of the hermeneutical issues at work. "There are different interpretations of Islam, including a peaceful and peaceable Islam where many Muslims do not want to kill or reject the use of violence. But there are other interpretations of Islam which use violence as a means to an end. Unfortunately both interpretations are valid," he says in a superb interview with David Virtue. http://tinyurl.com/ogshtat

Let me end with a few words of encouragement to Archbishop Justin. 'Dear Justin, don't lose heart. Be confident about your faith when you speak to the press. Never let it be said of you, as Stephen Mason from Accrington, has written, 'Sadly for Justin, his armour was always akin to the Kings (sic) new clothes!' You speak for the worldwide Anglican Communion (which may soon become defunct). Remember, there has been a cosmic battle on the cross. The Son of Man has won the battle. The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdom of our God and of his Messiah. God has become king. God's kingdom is here. God's kingdom will come! I wish you a blessed Feast of Christ the King and a holy Advent! Maranatha!

END

Subscribe
Get a bi-weekly summary of Anglican news from around the world.
comments powered by Disqus
Trinity School for Ministry
Go To Top