Category: Anglican issues

Two Reflections on the First of the Christ Church Quiet Days,
Fall 2025: re Classical Anglicanism
Fr. David Curry

I: The Ordinal

At our first Quiet Day on October 25th at Christ Church, the Rev’d Dr. Ross Hebb reminded us of things which we have to “unlearn” in considering the history of the English Church such as thinking in terms of ‘denominations’. I reminded us that classical Anglicanism is robustly non-sectarian. The whole emphasis of understanding is on the idea of being “an integral portion of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church,” as articulated in the Solemn Declaration 1893 and as further elucidated in Fr. Crouse’s paper ‘The Essence of Anglicanism’.

It is worth noting how this emphasis is expressed in the 1962 Canadian Book of Common Prayer, and especially with respect to ordination. The phrase “The Anglican Church of Canada” appears nowhere in the public liturgies of the Offices and Communion and other sundry services. It appears in the Preface to the Ordinal (BCP, p. 637), but only once in the oath of obedience of bishops to the Metropolitan (BCP, p. 661). It does not appear in the ordination oaths for Deacons and Priests. Even with respect to Bishops, it is there only in the context of subordination: the profession and promise of the bishop elect “to hold and maintain the Doctrine, Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded in his holy Word, and as the Anglican Church of Canada hath received and set forth the same” (BCP, p. 661, my italics). This reflects the same sensibility as the Solemn Declaration where there is also no mention of the Anglican Church of Canada; only “the Church of England in the Dominion of Canada” (BCP, p, viii) and again emphasizing what has been received and the setting forth of the same by way of the Book of Common Prayer.

The point for the postulants is simply this. Those who are ordained are ordained as deacons, priests, and bishops in “Christ’s Church”(BCP, p. 637),“the Church of Christ” (BCP, p. 662), or “the Church of God,” (BCP, p. 643, p. 655, p. 666) of which “the Anglican Church of Canada” or “the Church of England in Canada” understands itself to be an integral or whole portion through the magisterium of the classical Book(s) of Common Prayer. This is a necessary and important subordination without which one moves in a sectarian direction.

The Ordinal in the BAS is, for the most part, conservative, or, at least, can be read in that way, but in the ordination rites themselves there is a tendency to collapse “the Church of God” or “Christ’s Church” to “the Anglican Church of Canada”; in short, to the institution itself. For instance, in the BCP Ordination of Bishops, the profession and promise “to hold and maintain the Doctrine, Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ” is defined unambiguously “as the Lord hath commanded in his holy Word, and as the Anglican Church of Canada hath received and set forth the same” (BCP, p. 661, my italics). By way of contrast, in the BAS, the ordination of bishops, priests, deacons requires the solemn “promise to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Anglican Church of Canada” (BAS, p. 635, p. 645, p. 654). The Preface in the BAS may act as a corrective to this tendency and, of course, in principle, the BAS is subject to the Book of Common Prayer; it is not an equal or substitute authority. Thus BAS ordination rites are strictly speaking to be understood in terms of the doctrine of the Prayer Book and the Ordinal which is included in it (Cdn. BCP.)

(more…)

Print this entry

The Essence of Anglicanism

A Transcription of a Lecture delivered October 3. 2002 at Regent College, Vancouver, by Dr. Robert Crouse (For a pdf version of this lecture, click here.)

It is a great honour to be the first lecturer in this proposed lecture series, and I thank the sponsors for the opportunity. And I cannot resist complimenting Regent College on the production of ordinands. It holds promise for a speedy reformation of the Anglican Church of Canada.

The Anglican Communion, the fellowship of Anglican Churches throughout the world, exists by virtue of a voluntary allegiance to a common tradition of Christian faith and worship. Faithfulness to that tradition, and that alone, constitutes the definition of Anglicanism, and that tradition is its principle of cohesion. It has, after all, no racial unity. People of Anglo Saxon origin who once dominated its membership are now a small proportion of it. It is not a linguistic unity. Its liturgies have been translated into many languages and most of the world’s Anglicans nowadays are not English speakers. It is not even really an organizational unity, not really. The Archbishop of Canterbury has a primacy of honour and the Lambeth Conferences bring together Bishops for consultation from all over the world. But no Primate, no Conference, no Council has any legislative authority over the Anglican Communion. So the Communion adheres only by faithfulness to a common tradition, and if that faithfulness falters it moves toward disintegration. No one can legislate for the Anglican Communion. Insofar as its member churches fail in their allegiance to the common tradition the communion disintegrates. And that, I think, is the nature of the current crisis in global Anglicanism.

Signs of disintegration are, as you well know, manifold. The Primates at their meeting in ler Portugal several years ago deplored the fact that repudiations of the resolutions of the Lambeth Conference have come, as they said, to threaten the unity of the Communion in a profound way. And they strongly urged those repudiating Lambeth “to weigh the effects of their actions and to listen to the expressions of pain, anger, and perplexity from other parts of the Communion.” Another sign of the times was, of course, the consecration of bishops to be missionaries to the Episcopal Church in the United States. And, of course, we have all become familiar with the phenomenon of separated or Continuing Anglican Churches in our own country and elsewhere and we have learned to live, somehow, with the condition of what is somewhat euphemistically called “impaired communion,” a condition brought about by unilateral decisions on the part of some Provinces of our Communion.

But these and other disquieting phenomena are merely symptoms of a malaise which threatens the continued existence of the Anglican way. The fundamental issue, I would insist, is faithfulness to a tradition of Christian faith and worship. But just what is that common tradition, and what precisely are its elements? What is the essence of Anglicanism?

(more…)

Print this entry

Celebrating an Outstanding Scholar: Robert Darwin Crouse (1930-2011)

The sermons, lectures, and writings of Robert Darwin Crouse have influenced generations of students and clergy world wide. Clear and concise, scholarly yet pastoral, they address many of the current confusions of a post-secular and post-Christian world by way of connecting the contemporary world to its Christian origins and principles. A remarkable scholar with a poetic soul and gift of expression, his writings speak across the ages and generations with clarity and charity. His sermons are the pastoral distillation of decades of careful reading of ancient, biblical, patristic, medieval, and modern writings with a deep appreciation for the power of the arts to draw us into an engagement with Christian spirituality. They address the waste land of modernity without leaving us in the waste land and without defaulting to a romantic longing for some imagined golden age. Perhaps no collection of sermons captures better the character and concerns of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries by bringing the perennial wisdom of Christ before the thoughtful reader. The sermons are a refreshment and a source of spiritual renewal for many a community of souls and for all times. For those of us who had the privilege of being his student and spending time at his place in Crousetown, these sermons are like being once again in his presence and hearing his voice, partaking of his hospitality and generosity of mind.

Dr. Crouse was the most outstanding scholar ever to come out of the School (1944-1947) and College. A theologian and Anglican priest, a musician, poet and preacher, he had a remarkable career as a scholar of Medieval Philosophy and as a beloved teacher at King’s College in the Foundation Year Programme and at the Dalhousie Classics Department in Halifax. He taught at Trinity College, Toronto, and at Bishop’s University, Sherbrooke, Quebec (where Guy Payne first met him). He also taught at the Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum in Rome where he lectured for many years as a visiting Professor of Patristics. He was a graduate of King’s College and Dalhousie University, of Trinity College, and of Harvard.

A number of the faculty and the board of the School have also had the privilege of being taught by Fr. Crouse. He baptized, for instance, Christian and Zachary Lakes, the twins of Kevin and Penny Lakes, at the School Chapel. He was one of my mentors. As Trevor Hughes, former Chairman of the Board, remarked, Robert had the nicest way of telling you that you were wrong. I think this is captured in his response to students’ comments on whatever subjects were before us: “You might say that,” he would say, meaning “I wouldn’t,” which (by interpretation) suggested that it was foolish or at least mistaken.

Sunday, January 14th, and Monday, January 15th, mark the book launch in Halifax of two books by the Rev’d Dr. Robert D. Crouse, a book of sermons and a meditation on the theme of pilgrimage, the beginning of a publication project that we hope will include many of his scholarly writings. The first two volumes are available through Amazon: Images of Pilgrimage: Paradise and Wilderness in Christian Spirituality and The Soul’s Pilgrimage Volume 1: From Advent to Pentecost.

(more…)

Print this entry

‘Nothing has changed’
A statement about same-sex marriages in the light of the decision of the General Synod and Archbishop Ron Cutler’s response

It is incumbent upon me, for what it is worth, to say something about the recent decisions of the Anglican Church of Canada with respect to the question about same-sex marriages. Simply put, nothing has really changed. The Anglican Church of Canada remains caught in the confusions and the contradictions of contemporary culture about the politics of identity. Yet the General Synod, meeting in Vancouver, ultimately voted against equating same-sex marriage with the Christian doctrine of marriage articulated most clearly in the Book of Common Prayer. The result of a long and drawn out process of discussion, this was the result, whether or not one agrees with it, or, for that matter, whether or not one agrees with the assumption that national and diocesan churches have anyauthority to determine on such matters of doctrine, in this case, moral doctrine.

Councils “may err and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God,” as our Articles remind us (Art. XXI), and so Councils will err though sometimes, too, they may be right. There is also the question about which councils and upon what issues. Archbishop Ron Cutler of the Diocese of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island notes that this issue can be revisited within the institutional structures of the Anglican Church of Canada. Everything, it seems, is endlessly ‘provisional’ especially when one is in pursuit of a predetermined end which only then becomes, mirabile dictu,definitive. Thus, despite the decision of the General Synod, he has declared that Diocesan local option takes precedence against it. Same-sex marriages will be allowed where desired in the Diocese of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. At the same time, we are told, no parish or priest will be forced to marry same-sex couples. Nor can they be. And so the division continues and endlessly so.

We live with the confusions and complexities of our age about identity, about what it means to be a self. What matters are the assumptions underlying such decisions. Marriage, according to the Archbishop, and in this he simply reflects the assumptions of the culture, is fundamentally about ‘committed relationships’. If that is so, then there can be no discussion, no debate. And while commitment is an important concept, the question is, commitment to what? After all, one can be in a ‘committed relationship’ with any number of things, including oneself, and to any number of social constructs of whatever sort. While we would all want to agree about the importance of commitment, the classical understanding of Christian marriage is not simply or even primarily about commitment beyond a commitment to the character and nature of marriage; in short, to what it is. We cannot be of one mind if we cannot say what something is; in this case what marriage is. At issue are the principles which govern our understanding about the meaning of our humanity as found within the doctrines of creation and redemption in which marriage is located as oneof the ways of living out the Christian faith.

Nothing has changed inasmuch as the institutional church remains caught in the controversies of identity in our contemporary culture. And nothing has changed with respect to my own contributions to the debate theologically. “The sad tragedy of the Anglican Churches” continues to be “the inability … to distinguish between two different things: marriage and the blessings of friends.” I continue to be committed to upholding the principles of Christian Faith doctrinally and morally as they have been received by the Anglican Churches insofar as they lay claim to be and are an integral part of the Catholic and Universal church regardless of the statements of Synods and Bishops. We live in a divided church but prayerfully and, I hope, charitably with respect to these divisions.

Rev’d David Curry
July 18th, 2019

Print this entry

Given the reference to the Solemn Declaration of 1893 in this morning’s homily, it seems appropriate to post Fr. David Curry’s paper “The Solemn Declaration: The Net of Memory”, which was published years ago in the Machray Review by the Prayer Book Society of Canada.

Click here to download “The Solemn Declaration: The Net of Memory” (in pdf format) or click here to read it online.

Print this entry

Dear Parishioners,

I want to offer some thoughts about the serious questions that belong to “end-of-life” issues. This has to do with dying and death and how we face such things from a Christian perspective, especially in the light of legislation about what is now called “medical assistance in dying” – M.a.i.d.

In 2016, I was asked to serve on a Diocesan Task Force to provide theological reflection on what was then called Physician Assisted Suicide. That term was then in the process of being changed to Physician Assisted Dying, reflecting the unease about the term suicide. Now the terminology has changed to Medical Assistance in Dying. These changes in terminology contribute, I think, to a certain ethical unease and confusion about our current situation, particularly after the passage of Bill C-14 legislating “the right to die.”

What is legal is not necessarily ethical and there are many, many questions about the so-called “right to die.”

While serving on the Task Force, I was asked to present some reflections on the documents produced by the National Church: first, a document called Care in Dying produced in 1998; the second, a draft of a subsequent document about Physician Assisted Dying produced in 2016, I believe. After the first paper, I was asked to prepare an article for the Diocesan Times about the classical and traditional theological understanding of dying and death that would appear alongside other points-of-view, which I did. But nothing happened and the Task Force seemed to fall into abeyance. I did send on the second paper to the National Church but never received any response.

On Saturday, May 26th, I served on a panel along with an ethicist, a gerontologist, and the Diocesan Hospital Chaplain, discussing M.a.i.d before a number of editors of Anglican Church papers in Canadian dioceses. In the light of that experience, I want to share with you these theological reflections that deal with the notion of autonomy, intentionality and causation, some of which also came up in the panel discussion. There is, for instance, an important difference between palliative care and M.a.i.d. The difference lies in intentionality, the intention to end a life via M.a.i.d and the desire to ease the dying via palliative care. The increasing medicalisation of death and dying means that people need to have some understanding of these processes and, more importantly, the principles that seem to inform them.

In this past year, I have focused on the rich tradition of consolation literature which is related to the theology of redemptive suffering which I think is central to Christian witness. The documents which I offer simply provide you with a way to think about these things and to be aware of the concerns. In many ways, the ideas of choice and control drive the current provisions and present certain challenges to pastoral care in dying. As priest and pastor, it is my obligation to try to provide pastoral care even in the difficult situations that are not consistent with Christian teaching. But it is equally important to provide some teaching. That is the point of making these things available to you. You may find the article to be the most accessible of the three.

As time permits, I may be able to provide you with some more materials and further reflections on these important questions. I hasten to add that thinking about death and dying is not about being morbid; it is part and parcel of the Christian understanding.

In Christ,

Fr. David Curry

Links to Fr. Curry’s writings referenced above (pdf format):

1. “As dying, we live: Some Reflections on Care In Dying”
2. “Some Theological Reflections on the Draft 2016 Document of the National Task Force of the Anglican Church of Canada on Physician Assisted Dying”
3. Proposed Article for Diocesan Times: “As Dying, We Live”
4. The three papers compiled into a single file.

Print this entry