There has been an outbreak of “I don’t like it” amongst Australian Anglican clergy.
The origination of this outbreak is a letter from the Australian Anglican Primate in respect a consecration of a Bishop. I’ll not bore you with the details other than to surmise that the Primate held tight to the communion of a global link – and thus tacitly supported of a most dreadful departing from the Word. As a rejoinder, some Australian Anglican clergy would have the Primate tell the union where to go. Indeed, two Archbishops – one from the Anglican Diocese of Sydney and one from Anglican Diocese of Tasmania - themselves wrote letters that did not show the same regard the Primate’s had to the global union link.
The response amongst some clergy is to change their “like” of the Primate. For example:
I am a most humble pewsitter. I read the Bible as it speaks at length of God’s love. I am to love my neighbour. The definition of neighbour is broad so my love for people most also be broad. Paul dedicates a whole chapter in his letter to Corinthians to the subject concluding with the statement:
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
Now, if Paul calls for love in all circumstances why do clergy come to think that they can change their like of one of their contemporaries. Why are they departing from “like” rather than departing from “love”?
An impersonator of an Australian politician - a politician known for saying "I don't like it"
I don’t get it! Clergy who should be imitating Christ (1 Cor 11:1) in love, yet they seem to be acting glibly like judges on The Voice. I think distance and control are a problem. For many clergy the Primate will serve as little more than a figurehead. Without the same top-down hierarchy that the Catholic Church has, Anglican clergy probably feel no direct control of the Primate’s decisions. The Primate should nonetheless be firmly within the clergy’s prayers.
It is through love of the Primate that clergy will change the Primate’s views.