By John C. Dyer, UK Correspondent
Spare a prayer for the authorities of St. Paul's. Protestors invoke the church's duty to the poor, coupling the duty with their choice of method. The authorities understand the duty but also understand that the duty does not necessarily settle the question of the appropriateness of the underlying methodology of the protestors. Maybe as important, they face the spectre of a “split” church, that nightmare of all church administrators. Every side of the debate pulls. Every side of the debate will be unforgiving of the church for failing to follow their side's programme. In the broad sense of the term, a political no win situation. As of 31 Oct, three of St. Paul's clerics have resigned.
Behind the political no win is a more serious crisis of conscience. The underlying dilemma is how the church's actions, as much as their words, reflect on St. Paul's discharge of the church's religious standards. (Photo left of St. Paul's Cathedral and Millenium Bridge from Tate Modern by PHKushlis, August 2010).
The applicable standards are clear. * They are set out at Matthew 7:21, Isaiah 1:11-17, and Matthew 25:34-45. The last passage sets out the only inflexible “acid test” of the professed follower of Jesus purportedly expressed by Jesus himself. As a lawyer it is striking to me how similar the format of these standards is to that of a contract, a feature consistent with Biblical standards. The second standard demonstrates the continuity between the so-called “first covenant” and “second.” Notice the striking similarity in emphasis. The first passage reemphasizes just how inflexible these standards are and settles (for those who will take it in) the old debate between justification based on faith and justification based on works. It is a distinction without a difference.
When St. Paul's confronts the underlying issues the protestors protest, as opposed to the method the protestors have chosen, there is no real room for debate. But the officials do not want to be leveraged into supporting the method. As importantly, siding with the protestors against the interests of the government, many members of the congregation and the responsible lay boards, invites a split church, a disaster for the survival of the institution.
The resignation of Dean Knowles appears to have cleared the way for the Bishop of London, Bishop Chartres, to stand the church down from the pending eviction action and into dialogue. City of London followed suit as Archbishop Williams, speaking for the entire Church of England, closed ranks behind Bishop Cartres' actions.
Their quagmire brings back bad memories. My father, great uncle, 2 of my great uncle's sons, a first cousin, at least one other 2d cousin were ordained ministers. My uncle and grandfather were lay preachers. I was a lay preacher. In fact, I have documented a train of such ancestors back to 1329 and maybe before. But I have not felt their dilemmas like I feel those of the clerics at St. Paul's and felt those of my more immediate family.
The conflict between these baseline and inflexible standards of righteousness, on the one hand, and the impact of a “stand” on the minister and his family is as traumatic as it is inevitable. I know it is the reason my great uncle and two of his sons left the ministry. I suspect it is the reason I did not follow in my father's footsteps. It is no less serious because it ordinarily goes on mostly behind closed doors without the general public knowing. The clerics at St. Paul's face a special kind of torment.
But the standards are clear and as unyielding as the inevitability of such a conflict and the polarization it produces. As the clerics know, it doesn't matter how many words they honey and marshal. G*d knows. And there is the rub. The choice is between faith, because faith means consistent and dependable behaviour not words, and career and comfort of oneself and one's family.
I have my own view as to whether Giles Fraser or Fraser Dyer or Graham Knowles, now all resigned, had the better of the argument. No doubt you have your own. No doubt you know mine simply from how I have structured the standards. But the purpose of this little “Homily” is not a message about the politics but a message about the nature and human cost for each of the players in the tragedy.