Content provided in partnership with

Spiritual Context of the Windsor Report, The

Anglican Theological Review, Fall 2005 by Charleston, Steven

<< Page 1 Continued from page 1. Previous | Next

Historically, of course, we have done everything we can to find loopholes to this process. Through the centuries, we have worked hard at subverting it. We have created infallible hierarchies, confessional constitutions, and charismatic leaders that claim to be the arbiters of sacred truth. Frustrated by the inefficient and egalitarian process of Jesus, we have sought to design our own systems for determining who gets to be the greatest.

On the other hand, some of our strategies have been efforts to stay within the spirit of the process with Jesus, even if we have had to make some adaptations. The conciliar process is a good example. Confronted with disagreement, we have called councils of the church and worked to find consensus. The Windsor Report emerges from this kind of historic compromise.

Most Popular Articles in Reference: The importance of understanding organizational culture; Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students; What factors attract foreign direct investment?; Libraries Need Relationship Marketing - mutual interest marketing concept, ...; How to set performance goals: employee reviews are more than annual critiques; More »

But in what ways does it express servanthood?

If we seek to process the Windsor Report in this context, then we have to take the risk of asking how it serves those with whom we disagree. Our focus shifts from "How does this document satisfy me?" to "How does it satisfy them?" Making that transition is enormously difficult.

The distinction between lords and servants is often acculturated as the difference between winners and losers. Even in our more benign processes-the church council models that strive for consensus-we subvert servanthood with the politics of winning. On the surface, the function of a church convention or Primates' Meeting is to resolve disputes through group process, but behind the scenes the jockeying for position can be intense. Instinctively, the effort is to win.

Suspending this instinct requires a commitment to servanthood that takes us to a different conceptual place. In the process Jesus embodies there are neither winners nor losers. There are only servants. Consequently, success is not measured by who is on top and who is on bottom, but rather by how well everyone remains together. The servanthood process is not intended to resolve tension, but to maintain tension. Community equilibrium does not depend on resolution, but on reconciliation.

The Context of Forgiveness

The process of reconciliation carried on by the Windsor Report began when a very emotional man wondered how he could coexist with people who made him angry. The man was Peter and the people were his brothers and sisters in discipleship. He asked Jesus about the limits of reconciliation. How long did he have to tolerate the others before he could be justified in walking away from them? Jesus answered his question and in so doing set in motion a process that continues to this day.

The reconciliation sought by the Windsor Report is the process of forgiveness. While each one of us may wish that we could establish limits to our responsibility for remaining in community, the process Jesus creates denies us that option. Abandoning one another is not a choice. However much we may want to draw a line in the sand and say that the others have crossed over it and stepped beyond the pale, the infinite process of God's forgiveness erases that line. It leaves us standing in a continuum of forgiveness with one another that can never end.

Spiritual Context of the Windsor Report, The

Anglican Theological Review, Fall 2005 by Charleston, Steven

Find Research Guides for:

Find Featured Titles for: Reference

Most Popular Articles in Reference

Most Popular Publications in Reference