Ave Atque Vale, Rowan Williams

It’s Sunday, and time for our religious news. Never mind that I tend to get Rowan Williams mixed up with the guy who plays Blackadder on the BBC. Rowan Williams is actually the Archbishop of Canterbury, spiritual leader of the Church of England. At least for now. Williams has announced that he will be stepping down at the end of this year. Rumor hath it that he might be replaced by a Christian (snark off).

For ten years, Williams has presided over the disintegration of the Anglican Communion, and has played a large part in its disarray. By his own self-description, he is a “hairy lefty.” He has made statements from the high pulpit which call into question the divinity of Jesus Christ. Now that’s just fine for atheists, agnostics, members of other religions, and even some theologians. But it is a strange thing indeed for the leader of a church which is founded on that very concept of Christ’s divinity and oneness with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

Williams is known for his obtuse and secular-sounding sermons and homilies. That comes in large part from his interest more in history, economics and the works of Dostoevsky than in theology and church doctrine. Regardless of how one feels about his views on doctrine and dogma, it is impossible to deny that he has been both divisive and self-contradictory as a leader.

In America, the Episcopalian Church (directly derived from the Church of England) is deeply split over the issue of homosexuality and particularly homosexual priesthood. A successful leader would have worked hard to heal those divisions. But much like a certain resident of the White House, Williams is unable to take a clear stand and lead his people with a clear policy. He has recently denied a bishopric to Jeffrey John, a prominent gay priest, which stirred up the liberal wing of the church. But previously, as Archbishop of Wales, he ordained multiple gay men to the priesthood, which stirred up the traditionalist wing.

The same division is spread throughout the entire northern hemisphere’s Anglican Communion. On the other hand, in Africa and South America, where the Anglican faith is growing by leaps and bounds, the traditionalists have all but officially broken from the church in England on ordination of homosexual priests as well as female priests. Williams has waffled on the ordination of women as priests and bishops in almost as confusing a fashion as he has with gay priests. In fact, Williams has indicated that his final battle with ordination of women and elevation to bishoprics was a determining factor in his stepping down.

Williams’s friendly relationship with the Catholic Pope has produced another unexpected result. Those Anglicans who have a serious problem with the concept of gay and female priesthood have now shared Communion (the Holy Eucharist in both denominations) with Catholics and many have decided simply to go the whole way and convert to the Church of Rome. Once again, it has something to do with Williams’s lack of clarity on doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Church both share the ancient doctrinal belief that at Communion, the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ (a belief not shared by other Protestant Communions).

Williams has refused to be publicly committed to the pure Catholic or Protestant view, thereby creating more confusion. As a scholar, Williams might have made the problem a matter of church policy, but instead used the ambiguity of the English language translation of the meaning of transubstantiation to avoid taking a stand at all. Historically, one must remember that this has been an ongoing debate within the Anglican community for centuries. The “low church” Anglicans followed the teachings of Luther which denied the actual conversion of the elements of the Communion into the physical body and blood of Christ and instead stated that the conversion was mystical rather than physical. That group’s most famous and influential advocate was John Wesley who finally broke with the Church of England to form the Methodist Communion.

Aside from those who have converted to Catholicism during William’s tenure as Archbishop of Canterbury, there are those who have broken with the English Communion and joined the African bishops who espouse the more traditional Anglican views. Others, particularly in America, have formed their own group loosely calling themselves the Anglican Catholic Church.

The most recent blow to the prestige of the Archbishopric of Canterbury came with Williams’s confusing and somewhat ignorant advocacy of Islamic Sharia law in settling certain otherwise civil matters. He missed the fact that the high courts of England had already determined that in purely civil disputes which did not impose religious rules, Sharia law could be applied if it did not conflict with the existing civil statutes. Thus, in a divorce, Sharia law could be used to determine which mosque the Muslim children of a divorce should attend, but not how the custody of the children or the division of property is determined. Williams failed to understand or advocate the difference.

Overall, William’s success or failure as a theologian is entirely a matter of the consciences of his supporters and his detractors. But as a leader, it is hard to say that his tenure has been much more than a failure. As recently as last week, Williams met again with the Pope and Catholic leaders to ask Anglicans and Catholics to work and pray for unity, something he has failed to do very well within his own Church.

Williams is stepping down to become the master of Magdalene College at Cambridge. Perhaps while he is there, he will discover with clarity what the college’s namesake herself discovered.