Like many octogenarian clergymen, John Fitch (ordained back in 1947) has written a potted account of his theological opinions and his personal take on Anglican history. Unfortunately, like other amateur manuscripts it should have remained in the family archives, or photocopied for a small circle of friends, rather than broadcast to the world as a published monograph.
The title is misleading, because there is hardly any discussion of churchmanship, except in the first and last chapters. Fitch suggests that Anglican churchmanship should be plotted on two axes — Evangelical/Catholic and Conservative/Liberal — which is nothing new, of course. He optimistically proclaims that this concept is ‘an invaluable peacemaking tool within the Anglican Communion’, which may also help ‘in breaking the current ecumenical deadlock’ and even in bringing together the three great Abrahamic faiths (p. 8)! He appeals for a return to ‘old fashioned Central Churchmanship’, understood as scoring a bull’s-eye on his ‘ecclesiometer’ by embracing all four Anglican emphases simultaneously (p. 36). He points to Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher as the ideal of the type, not a model likely to attract many in the younger generations, and claims that Jesus Christ himself was ‘the archetypal Broad Churchman’ (p. 85). Yet Fitch’s discussion of churchmanship barely goes beyond what we might expect from an undergraduate essay. There is no analysis, no engagement with recent literature and no serious wrestling with the question.
The bulk of the book contains Fitch’s personal reflections on the recent history of the Church of England and the current Anglican crisis. But we have heard this narrative too many times from better authors and there is nothing new here. The text is filled with long excurses and far too many synopses of other people’s writings — from Tom Wright, Richard Hooker, Marcus Braybrooke, Issues in Human Sexuality and Handley Moule, among others. CAPITAL LETTERS and exclamation marks proliferate, and the manuscript must have been troublesome for his editors!!!! However, Fitch is not afraid to enter the theological fray. We learn that Archbishop Rowan Williams is ‘a hopeless communicator’ (p. 92), that Pope John Paul II’s version of Christianity was ‘such a sad distortion of the real thing’, and that Pope Benedict is a ‘baneful influence’ (pp. 208–209). Fitch also comes down hard upon evangelical views of Scripture. He thinks it is obvious that if Jesus actually said the things recorded in John’s Gospel he would be ‘a crazy megalomaniac’ (p. 59) and that extended passages of the Bible ‘tell us nothing true about God’ (p. 41).
This is also a self-indulgent book. Again and again Fitch admits to his ‘somewhat rambling style’ and begs the reader’s patience with his ‘laborious’ creation (pp. 13, 145). Frequently he proclaims, ‘This long chapter, you may be glad to know, is nearing its end. It has been a bit heavy going …’ (p. 133); ‘This chapter is far too long I know …’ (p. 194); ‘Don’t hesitate to skip it if you’ve already had enough …’ (p. 215); ‘At the risk of being a bore …’ (p. 226). But these apologies wear thin before long. We persevered all the way to the end, where Fitch speaks of ‘my sorely tried readers’ (p. 265), and unfortunately he is right. Anglican Eirenicon may win a select readership among the author’s family and friends but others should avoid it.
