Principles of Principled Irregular Action

It may be that some contemporary conservative evangelical (Anglicans) have written on this. If so, please point me to it.

But it seems to me that ideally it would be good to be really clear about the principles of principled irregular action before we acted.

Ecclesiastical

It seems to me that “the gospel dictates” that I should have a curate or plant a church in X street are not obviously good principles for irregular action. In the club of the Church of England those things might not be your decision and you are free to press for the rules of the club to be changed or to leave the club if you think the gospel dictates it. Disagreeing with your bishop on tactics does not mean you should act irregularly in an Episcopal church, even if you want to see a kind of reduced episcopasy in which the local church is acknowledged to be the centre of the action. A non-Anglican church could be planted. Perhaps an un-ordained person could be employed.

My bishop is a false teacher promoting homosexuality and therefore I need some alternative Episcopal ministry (in this club) would seem to me a far stronger case for irregular action.

Civil

Say for example, that the local council had refused you permission to hold an open air service on the sea-front on a Saturday afternoon in July, this would not seem to me to require civil disobedience. Of course, we must obey God not men and we must preach the gospel whether the local authority likes it or not, but we are not commanded to hold services on the seafront on Saturday afternoon. It would seem to me to be a mistake to go to prison over this one.

Resources

John Calvin and Samuel Rutherford on tyranicide might provide some resources. Their kind of programme might be: (1) plea (2) flight (3) fight. Fights should only be started by lesser authorities, not by private individuals.

Further political analogies might help. For example, presumably we expect diocesan bishops to behave more like constitutional monarchs rather than absolute rulers. Some of us may even live in a constitutional monarchy in a law abiding way if we’d rather have a republic.