1. On forfeiting our ecclesial vocation
The church of Jesus Christ is in danger of forfeiting, if it has not already forfeited, its messianic vocation. And that goes for Anglicans as well. This is more than a technical issue or obscure theological matter. The consequences for the loss of the messianic character of vocation; our fundamental calling and our justification being a church at all, is profound. This loss infects the whole of what we do as the Body of Christ; who we are as the Body of Christ; and how we respond to what is done to us. It impacts on the kind of leadership we have and suffer in the church; it has an impact on what we value when it comes to appointments etc. It impacts on how we read the signs of the times or fail to. It fundamentally impacts on how we experience messianic time and act as responsible agents for the coming kingdom.
2. The times we are in
What are the times we are currently in? How well do we grasp our time? When Jesus is asked for a sign from heaven and he replies in part that the leaders are unable to interpret the signs of the times, I think the accent is on ‘kairos’ time (‘kairon’); the particularity of the time people are a part of. And as the Gospels unfold and the letters of the New Testament indicate, the time we are in has a double reference: to ‘chronos’ lineal time; and ‘kairos’ or messianic time. To take hold of ‘kairos’ time; to seize or grasp ‘kairos’ time is not another time but a contracted and/or abridged ‘chronos’. Something that occurs in ‘chronos’ time but not of that time but through it. Messianic time is not another time but the ‘chronos’ secular time with a slight adjustment, a meagre difference – which is everything. ‘Kairos’ points to the messianic interruption/eruption. If ‘chronos’ time is the beginning of the cosmos till its end, then messianic ‘kairos’ time is ‘the time that remains to the end’. It is like ‘sprung time’; coiled and in tension, like a cat readying itself to pounce. It is the messianic presence in the ‘here and now’ time. The eternal time that begins in the now time according to the Gospel of John. ‘Kairos’ time is to be differentiated from ‘chronos’ (lineal time) and is not coterminous with ‘eschatological time’ (though more needs to be said about how these two relate). Generally, eschatological time, at least in popular use, is associated with the end of time associated and the apocalypse.
3. The already and the not yet
To live in messianic time is to live with this double co-ordinate; the already and the not yet. And to live in this time is to live not at the end of time but in the time that remains until the end; ‘the time that time takes to come to an end;’ ‘the time we take to bring to an end’. Such time is not the lineal chronological time; nor the instant of the end of time, nor a segment out of ‘chronos’ time but what might be called ‘operational time’. Messianic time is the time that presses within chronological time working and transforming ordinary ‘chronos’ time from within; it is the time that is left to us; time in which we take hold and achieve all that is available in ‘chronos’ time.
4. Delay of the Parousia
So, what’s the problem? The problem has to do with the overwhelming influence of the so-called delay of the Parousia; the time of the coming of Christ at the end of time, or thereabouts! The church has fallen prey to the temptation, to live as if there was a chronological delay of the parousia; like a train being delayed. When the church lives under the shadow of a delay or deferment which seems to stretch into a future that is essentially unreachable, what happens? The Church loses the messianic experience of time that defines it and its reason for being a church at all. The time of the messiah cannot designate a chronological period or duration but instead must represent nothing less than a qualitative change in how time is experienced.
5. Living in messianic time
The church lives in 'messianic time': the now time, the already of the presence of the Messiah that includes within it the time stretching towards the end. This is parousia time which is not delayed or deferred time but instead a quality of being in time that operates as an interruption or more accurately a permanent potential eruption that seizes hold of ordinary ‘chronos’ time. It is time that generates a holy disturbance, disconnection within the present moment; a time that offers the chance to grasp the significance and meaning of the time we inhabit. Such a time resonates with the character of the church; the ecclesia of God is the called-out ones; those who have heard a messianic call; have been somehow grasped in time by the presence of the One who comes.
6. Pilgrims and sojourners
Strange as it probably is for us this messianic claim is entailed in the simple word: ‘paroikia’. In 1 Peter 1:17 the writer defines the experience of time proper to the Church as ‘ho chronos te paroikias’ meaning ‘parochial time’. Which might come as a surprise in so far it reminds us that ‘parish’ initially meant ‘the sojourn of a foreigner’. Parish occupies not simply a space on turf, a place to dwell; but more significantly parish is an active movement, a sojourn, to be a parish is to inhabit a particular time, messianic time. The Greek is ‘paroikousa’; its precise meaning, to sojourn, designates the manner in which foreigners and those in exile dwell. It indicates how Christians are to live in the world; and how they are called to experience time in messianic mode. Importantly the sojourn does not refer to a fixed term or period of time. To date the sojourn has been almost two millennia! But the messianic experience has endured.
7. A church shackled to ‘chronos’ time
The church is the only institution whose vocation it is to live in two times at once. This is why it is a pilgrim people; on a journey in time in the time that remains before the end of time. When the tension is dissolved the first thing that occurs is that the ultimate recedes from view; banished from ecclesial consciousness. In any case the end of time is construed as an infinite and unreachable period in the future. The second thing that occurs is that the church focusses its attention on the penultimate, the now time and the foreseeable future time, in short on lineal time. For the church the penultimate becomes the all-encompassing reality.
Given we have no idea when the end shall be and in truth it is forever being pushed further and further into an unknown future an overriding anxiety consumes the church of God. We must under all circumstances secure the longevity of the institution. We must secure life in the penultimate. And the associated anxiety is implied in the question: ‘Can we indeed secure the future of the church?’ And this anxiety goes deeper still. When the orientation of the church is so skewed towards securing its long-term survival, we feel the pressure of legitimating the institutional form of the ecclesia. We cease being a sojourning church; we cease being foreigners of another country and abode. We cease being pilgrims. The drive is to secure the home we are in. If you like we forfeit the tension between being dwellers and seekers.
Now this condition of the church is chronic. For example, when we recognise the parlous state of the church; the increasing marginalisation of the church from the life of secular society; the apparent irrelevance of such a church; the dwindling numbers and the knowledge that unless we do something radical in a generation we will have even more empty places of worship. Even when all these jolts to the ecclesial system are taken on board. What do we do? Because we remain shackled to ‘chronos’ time; now time; because we remain driven to shore up and secure the institution, we only see one option. That is, restructure. Our energies are poured into reworking, restructuring and mobilising the troops. And we can make quite a good fist of it. And in many places, it seems like we’re turning the titanic around. We create a narrative of mission and growth and refocus especially on the unchurched; and create new and apparently vibrant and enthusiastic modes of being the church. Our focus shifts towards strategies for growth, planning and pragmatic policies, technique, etc. But does it make a difference if we have no way of understanding the time that we’re in. Indeed, restructuring and mobilising this mortal life is more often simply exhausting. So, what shall we do? How shall we proceed?
8. Being a messianic church
Recovering messianic time; recovering an ecclesial vocation that is attuned with a messianic consciousness, being the messianic church in unchartered waters, this is the task in order to be a church for pilgrims. What does this mean? First it requires a serious reorientation of our thinking and acting. When every moment might be the occasion for the messiah to enter; when ‘chronos’ time is also a moment for ‘kairos’ time; a time in which we can learn to discern the signs of the kingdom, to bear witness to the hand of God in the time that remains, then we live differently. The important things are those things associated with making preparations for the messiah; readiness to make adjustments in response to the unforeseen, or catastrophic, a premium is placed on watchfulness, preparedness, patient endurance, constancy of purpose, not easily distracted, firm yet unsure, open to an unknown future.
A church for pilgrims lives expectantly but not for an influx of new converts and income lines to match to build better facilities; It simply lives with a certain poised expectancy that the God of the church who accompanies the Body as a fellow pilgrim and by the way it’s only true and legitimate head, is ever coming to meet us in the now time, not the hereafter time. Such a church is far more reticent about its certainties; far more open to insights and wisdom from beyond its bounded spaces; always waiting for surprising manifestations of the God who comes.
9. Leadership in the time that remains
What kind of leadership is required? This is much more difficult to answer than we might think. My observation and experience convince me that for the most part those in leadership roles in the church are relatively impotent to make significant structural change or attend to those things that enable others to patiently and creatively endure and grow in spiritual maturity. The gravity of what I have just said is not lost on me. To a significant extent those exercising ministries within the structures of diocesan life are so deeply enmeshed in the immediate tasks and challenges of ordinary ‘chronos’ time that the very thought of acting outside the established frames cannot be countenanced let alone pursued. Responding to the impress of ‘kairos’ time is beyond their brief or impractical or impossible given the constraints under which they are operating.
The Coming One is always coming in any and every ‘chronos’ moment. And judging by the actions of leaders the implied response is along the lines; ‘all well and good but while we wait, we have matters to attend to …. money, property, difficult people and parishes, legal and ethical matters regarding reparations etc’. And all such are both important and more often quite overwhelming. It is entirely understandable that leaders might feel impotent to make a difference; to effect changes that deepen the spiritual life of the people they lead or act on behalf of.
There appears to me to be a sort of group cowardice to address the really serious and underlying spiritual and theological matters that concern the well-being of the Body of Christ. So, what do we need from our leaders? Radical honesty, capacity for self-reflection, shared brokenness, preparedness, watchfulness, wise ignorance, patient endurance, courage beyond cowardness. Such things belong to leadership of the Body of Christ in the time that remains. Who will teach us?
This is an edited version of an address given by the Right Reverend Dr Stephen Pickard for Victorian Anglicans Together on 30 August 2025 and in the Diocese of Adelaide on Tuesday 14 October, 2025. Dr Pickard is adjunct professor at Charles Sturt University, Canberra, and Chair of the National Comprehensive Anglicanism Network. The address draws upon the work of the Italian Philosopher Giorgio Agamben. A full text with references will be published in the near future.
