Anglican Samizdat

March 9, 2010

Rowan Williams turning evangelism into “destinies converging” and other twaddle

Filed under: Rowan Williams — David Jenkins @ 1:18 pm
Tags: ,

Rowan Williams continues to astound:

The Archbishop of Canterbury has condemned evangelist “bullies” who attempt to convert people of other faiths to Christianity.

Dr Rowan Williams said it was right to be suspicious of proselytism that involves “bullying, insensitive approaches” to other faiths.

In a speech at Guildford cathedral, Dr Williams criticised those who believed they had all the answers and treated non-Christians as if their traditions of reflection and imagination were of no interest to anyone. “God save us form that kind of approach,” he said.

But he added: “God save us also from the nervousness about our own conviction that doesn’t allow us to say we speak about Jesus because we believe he matters, we believe he matters, because we believe that in him human beings find their peace, their destinies converge, and their dignities are fully honoured.”

In his address, titled “The Finality of Christ in a Pluralist World”, Dr Williams addressed difficulties modern Christians have with Biblical texts which suggest that Christianity is the only path to salvation.

Dr Williams admitted that in the past four decades, the problems around the classical interpretation of these texts had become more prominent.

He asked: “What about all those people who never had a chance of hearing about Jesus?”

He also asked about the generations before Jesus and the many cultures untouched by Christianity.

“Can we believe in a just God, who in effect punishes people, for not being in the right place at the right time?”

He raised a political objection to the claim that Christ is the final truth about God and the Universe, suggesting it had helped justify “wicked” things such as crusading and colonialism.

“What could we possibly mean by saying that a truth expressed in the Middle East 2,000 years ago was truth applicable to everybody, everywhere?” he asked.

Belief in the uniqueness or finality of Christ, in the way it has usually been understood, is something that “sits very badly indeed, not just with a plural society – whatever that means – but with a society that regards itself as liberal or democratic”.

In the Gospels, Jesus said: “No one comes to the father, except through me.”

Dr Williams said that in this context: “The father cannot be shown as an object in the sky, something abstract, something you can point to.” Instead, God should be understood in the first or second person, walking with Jesus towards the cross and resurrection.”

The Archbishop’s speech was an attempt to reconcile the claims of the Bible about Jesus and Christianity with the multi-faith societies in which Christians around the world must live.

The Gospels and the rest of the New Testament urge believers to spread the “good news” or evangelise, but the need for good relations with other faiths in the secular world militates against proselytism.

Dr Williams said: “When we sit along side the Jew, the Buddhist, the Muslim, Hindu, when we sit alongside them, we expect to see in their humanity something that challenges and enlarges us.”

The Archbishop quoted the Koran: “And God did not elect to make everybody the same. God has made us to learn in dialogue.”

On the question of whether Christians could legitimately believe that people of other faiths could be saved, Dr Williams said believers were too reluctant to leave this to God to sort out.

“We have often a vague feeling that God hasn’t read the proper books,” he said. “I’m very content to let God be the judge of how far anyone outside the visible family of faith is related to Jesus or has turned towards the father.”

According to Rowan:

  • Jesus is not the only way to the Father in the sense that Christians have understood him to be for the last couple of millennia.
  • The problem of what happens to those who have never heard the Gospel has suddenly become so prominent that all previous explanations are inadequate.
  • Christians should not evangelise aggressively for fear of hurting people’s feelings.
  • Getting on harmoniously with other faiths is more important than sharing the Good News (whatever that is).
  • The fact that evil has been done in Christ’s name means he can’t be the final revelation of God to mankind; and the meaning of the universe cannot be found in him.

To paraphrase C. S. Lewis, if Jesus is who he claims to be, he is of ultimate importance; if he isn’t, he is of no importance at all. The one thing he cannot be is what Rowan is determined to make him: moderately important.

Next month, Rowan will give a lecture on why the Western Anglican Church is disappearing.



  1. Will someone please explain to me why Williams was ever elected to the position of ABC, and why he has not been removed.

    This guy would only be a big embarrasment, if it weren’t for the fact the every time he opens his mouth he does far more harm than good.

    To say that Bible passages “suggest that Christianity is the only path to salvation” is simply wrong. The Bible specifically and deliberately states that Christianity IS THE ONLY PATH to salvation. If people of other groups are insulted by this, than that is too bad for them. Better they be told the truth and encouraged to become Christians than to let them continue on without Jesus and without God.

    Comment by AMPisAnglican — March 9, 2010 @ 2:17 pm

  2. David, before I link to this, were you serious about the upcoming lecture next month?

    Comment by Stuart — March 9, 2010 @ 2:28 pm

  3. Stuart, no that’s just my strange sense of humour.

    Comment by David — March 9, 2010 @ 3:02 pm

  4. Thought so…takes one to know one…..

    Comment by Stuart — March 9, 2010 @ 4:17 pm

  5. Might I suggest that His Reverence have a read of the British Website “What Is The Gospel?”

    URL is

    The uniqeness of Jesus is well summarised in this short video on another site:

    Comment by jesushealstoday99 — March 9, 2010 @ 4:20 pm

  6. For #1 – Bishops and Archbishops in England are not elected. Two names are ‘nominated’ – the PM selects one – it goes to the Queen who says “Yes” – and there you have it. I could be wrong on the overall format, I am certainly lacking in detail. But the big thing is it is not an election process.
    Why hasn’t he been removed? I think it’s a bit like impeaching a President of the U.S. – rather a difficult process. Of course, he could have been placed there by God (there are a few scriptures that would back up God’s putting in leaders). Perhaps God wanted a revival in the Western Anglican church. Alleluia! (Sorry – it’s Lent).

    Comment by Margo — March 9, 2010 @ 9:30 pm

  7. The PM in question was Tony Blair. Do you want Gordon Brown to select the next Archbishop? No wait for the election to be over and Cameron can chose Elton John and everyone will be happy.

    Comment by obituary — March 10, 2010 @ 7:32 am

  8. Sounds like we Anglicans need a serious overhaul of how we select our earthly spiritual leader.

    Obviously leaving it in the hands of politicians is not a good idea.
    Niether is a popular vote by clergy and laity. This is like having the students and teachers elect the school principal.

    Perhaps something similar to the Roman Catholic method is a viable alternative. No longer would the ABC be the “first among equals”. Instead we could have an Agnlican Global Primate, with sufficient authority to discipline wayward Provinces and thier Bishops.

    Comment by AMPisAnglican — March 10, 2010 @ 11:43 am

  9. I’d like to see our “leaders” engage in conversation (debate) with the apostle Paul.

    Comment by Grant Bigg — March 11, 2010 @ 11:00 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: