The Archbishop of Canterbury’s desire for “good disagreement” amongst Christians, and particularly those of the Anglican Communion, provides Christopher Landau with a timely project. Returning to Richard Hays’s influential book, The Moral Vision of the New Testament (1996), Landau identifies some deficiencies: the exclusion of thorny texts, a reluctance to engage with extra-canonical material, the absence of the weight of tradition, and the lack of probative reason. These, he argues, derail the forging of a contemporary Christian ethics that may facilitate greater unity.

By incorporating texts that Hays, in his “synthetic task,” had jettisoned, Landau demonstrates how conflict was managed amongst dissenting Christians. Attentive to the modes and manners of speech, Landau’s proposed “theology of disagreement” contains four injunctions: to speak graciously, if with “salty” words; to submit one’s speech to the inspiration of the Spirit; to endeavour to live in harmony with one another, and to nurture the fruit of the Spirit. These are augmented by an appeal to incorporate the present context and experience, and an examination of the limited reconciliatory power of the “Peace” during the Eucharistic Liturgy.

The arguments are elegantly expressed and not unpersuasive, and they invite the reader to deliberate deeply upon his hopeful sketch of disagreeing Christianly. In the cause of furthering this endeavour, perhaps two concerns may be raised. First, evidence of the Spirit’s presence, and the distinction between God’s interest and one’s own, often may be somewhat difficult to discern and detect. No doubt, both those who declined to exercise “Gracious Restraint,” and also the Anglican Primates who requested it in 2009, would appeal to the Spirit’s promptings. Second, the Eucharistic Peace may well be less directly concerned with reconciliation or an expression of it, than more focused upon affirming that, in spite of the differences that do exist and will continue to exist after the liturgy has concluded, the “peace” that is exchanged is not one’s own. Those gathered in the ecclesial assembly exchange Christ’s peace. They profess their common loyalty to the Person of Christ.

The liturgical pre-Covid-19 hugs and social scrums during lengthy “Peace” Jamborees (particularly in African Anglican contexts) do not attempt to reconcile opposed parties or elide difference, but demonstrate an acceptance of it. Those present—those exchanging the peace of Christ— commit themselves to pursue what makes for peace” (Rom. 14: 19) in the awareness that, although a united and loving Christian community is the aim, ultimate unity is not gifted to Christ’s Church during her earthly pilgrimage.

Frank England, University of Cape Town