10/10/2008

The "Anglican Church" is not Anglican

In the process of rooting around trying to find out some other information, I happened upon a journal called, "The North American Anglican: The Orthodox Journal for Anglicans in North America." This journal's web presence is hosted on David Virtue's website.

On the sidebar there is this list of "Conservative Anglican Denominations." Of interest is that among these are the member churches of the Common Cause Partnership. Those are followed by "*"
. Some are part of the CCP by way of being part of the Federation of Anglican Churches in America. These are followed by "**". The rest are part of neither. None of these "denominations" are recognized as churches in the Anglican Communion by the Church of England / Archbishop of Canterbury. Interestingly, at least AMiA and CANA are not "denominations" anyway, being proto-dioceses of the Church of Rwanda and the Church of Nigeria.

According to BabyBlue, the Common Cause Partnership leadership is meeting this week to go forward on the matter of forming a new Province of North America. David Virtue is already beginning to talk of "Archbishop Duncan" as the head of this new Church for North America.

One of the results of all this will be a North American Province of something, but not of the Anglican Communion. The
North American Anglican makes it clear - "The Anglican Church was not founded upon Canterbury. The Anglican Church was founded upon the Scriptures, the ancient Creeds, the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, and the historic Book of Common Prayer (BCP). And at a time when the Episcopal church has become apostate, and portions of the worldwide Anglican communion have fractured, millions of faithful Anglicans have expressed a desire to return to the orthodox doctrines contained in these classic formulations of biblical Christianity." Once again we see the 39 Articles becoming a defining element of Anglicanism and the Archbishop of Canterbury not. Union becomes adherence, not fellowship.

The notion that there is an "Anglican Church" is a massively confusing one. There is no such thing, save in England where one could join the Venerable Bede and indeed the Roman Catholic Church and talk of the Ecclesia Anglicana meaning the Church in England or the Anglican Church. But however that got translated, the point is the "Anglican Church" was the CofE. All other churches using the term "Anglican" in them distinguished themselves by being the Anglican Church of X.

The new North American Province (Anglican) will perhaps be a subset of something called "the Anglican Church." This is what the GAFCON crowd is really up to - the establishment of a world-wide church called "The Anglican Church."

This will certainly give Romans someone to talk to that is like themselves. It will be a world wide patriarchy, and Lord knows it will have a sufficiently strong theological base. Of course it will be profoundly opposed to anything like the Papists or Romish beliefs concerning inerrantcy of the Church, purgatory, pardons, worshipping and adoration of images and reliques, invocation of Saints, transubstantiation, marriage of clergy, and, BTW, the validity of Anglican orders . The 39 Articles say so. While Rome could talk to the Anglican Church, being a church rather than a fellowship of churches, why should it. What was bothersome about the Church of England now becomes bothersome across the board.

Bishop Venables, noted mostly for his willingness for a moment to swamp his small Province with white English speaking bishops and clergy who have no interest in the Province of the Southern Cone except as a way station, is the Patron of the Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas. He is, of course, also the Primate of record for now three bishops deposed by other Provinces of the Anglican Communion, with the prospect of possibly two more in the offing. Bishop Venables is about trashing the Anglican Communion and doing so with gusto. I wonder how he feels about yet another world wide Patriarchy? One day that Patriarchy may reach down and strongly suggest he either obey or be replaced. But of course he doesn't have to worry about that, by the time the Anglican Church is formed he, Archbishop Akinola and Archbishop Kolini will be retired. Someone else will have to clean up the mess.




32 comments:

  1. the old term was "continuing anglican churches." i used to explain that to people by saying, "by continuing, they mean schismatic; by anglican, they mean having nothing to do with the archbishop of canterbury."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oy vey. By their line of reasoning I could open the "Anglican Bar and Grill" and have it be just as "Anglican" as they are. Far more harmless, too...

    ReplyDelete
  3. I got into a headed discussion at a family dinner a couple of years ago when my uncle told me with great pride that he and my aunt (my dad's sister) had "come back to the Episcopal Church."

    I said, "Oh, which one?" (I know most of the churches in their diocese).

    "Well," he said, "it's actually an Anglican church. We have this great Rwandan bishop who comes to visit every 18 months or so. It's just so nice since we don't allow gays to be members."

    Ignoring the last sentence for a moment and feeling my wife, mother, sister and father shooting daggers at me, I said, "So, what prayer book do you use?"

    "We use the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. That's the American prayer book, you know." (No, crap, genius.)

    "Interesting," I said. "It just seems that since the American church isn't good enough for your kind, you should be using the Rwandan prayer book."

    The evening went down hill from there.

    My point is this: If you want to align with another province, though illegal, then get your own BCP. And DON'T call yourself "Episcopal" or "Anglican."

    ReplyDelete
  4. It looks like the right wing Anglo Catholics are out in the cold again. They appear to have nowhere to go but alone or to Rome.

    The only thing keeping Bishop Iker from swimming the Tiber is that he would become Mr. Iker.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting collection of churches: I think it good that they come together.

    As far as I can tell none of them ordain women to the priesthood.

    Why does Pittsburgh want to join them?

    ReplyDelete
  6. RE cleaning up the mess after an upcoming retirement: doesn't that sound an awful lot like our current political environment?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Anglican Church was founded upon the Scriptures, the ancient Creeds, the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, and the historic Book of Common Prayer (BCP).

    If there is such a thing as a unitary "Anglican Church," then surely it predates these things. Or are the Articles and the 1662 BCP supposed to have descended from Heaven, along with the KJV?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hey, kirkepiscatoid, would you open that Anglican Bar and Grill here in Norwalk, Connecticut? Then I could be the priest who holds services there on Sundays. It would be a dream come true. would ya, could ya, huh, please? (And I am only half joking, seriously!)

    ReplyDelete
  9. This is an attempt to unite several smaller splinter groups into one larger splinter group. Can "LOL" mean "lots of luck"?

    ReplyDelete
  10. "The North American Anglican makes it clear..."

    By golly, if we can't stop the schismatics from using the term "Anglican" at all, perhaps you have stumbled upon something, Mark.

    Whatever the "Global South" claims, aren't Akinola and Venebles and Orombi really North-American-Anglicans, at the root?

    That's where the $$$$$$ comes from, that's where the ideology comes from (and w/ Minns' busy keyboard, often that's where the words come from).

    The Anglican Communion will continue on being the blessedly messy fellowship it is.

    The North-American-Anglican Church will be All (No Gays!) Dogma, All the Time (well, until the explosive egos involved---see re the above names, plus "Archbishop Duncan"?---fracture the thing from there)

    Lord have mercy!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Bob of Fremont11/10/08 9:01 AM

    You guys are still fixated on this stuff?

    Why don't you just move on, do your MDG ministry and do what we are doing in the "continuing" Anglican Church - Mission.

    We pray for you each and every Sunday, we have friends on the other side of the divide and are even finding ways of working with them on projects together.

    So relax, enjoy your church and just look at it like a big car wreck and move on. "Nothing to look at here."

    Except for an occassional venture here to see what is happening on the other side of the divide, we have moved on. We pray you can do that as well.

    Peace.

    Bob of Fremont

    ReplyDelete
  12. So now we will have four African primates, one renegade Australian archbishop, one gold digging South American primate, one South Asian retired primate and an indigenous 'archbishop' all claiming to be the real top dog in Canada and the US.

    Were the holy people to get all of the Episcopal church, there are only about 2.5 million of us. And at this point, they look to have most of what they will get. But in fact, they wont get more than a few thousand more. If and it wont, the entire diocese of Quincy went that way, that is 4,000 Anglo Catholics as Bp. Akerman has seen ASA drop a by a third during his (self confessed brilliant) tenure. They are NOT gonna be happy in 39 article orthodox land!

    Fort Worth may split, but likely in will also fracture. Not everyone is in the hate TEC modality, in spite of his best efforts.

    After that who knows? If Springfield follows, there will be fractures within fractures. The congregations in Champain Urbana have a population of university liberals. I suspect as the church prevails in various courts, loyalty may increase ;-) in other diocese.

    Over all, I do not see the income to make all of these guys comfortable. And as a group, they seem to like comfort.

    AMiA sort of ordains women (deacon only) Pittsburgh ordains homophobic women, Uganda ordains women, the rest are too holy to let girls talk or anything. Schisms within schisms looks to me to be their future.

    Anglican tolerance wont work for them, they have to be Calvinists in robes. Too bad.

    FWIW
    jimB

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Except for an occassional venture here to see what is happening on the other side of the divide, we have moved on..."

    Patently untrue, as a look at sites like SFiF will show. For that matter, Bob, you yourself don't seem to be able to keep away.

    ReplyDelete
  14. jimB said: "..Pittsburgh ordains homophobic women.."

    Jim not sure where you get your information, but none of the women I know (from either of the Pittsburgh Dioceses, (SC or TEC) who have been ordained here are homophobic.

    Such false sterotypes are not helpful.

    That being said the women priests and deacons in EDPSC are in a precarious position (by their choice). Pittsburgh Diocese will be "odd man out" in the new Amercan Province and will find itself, once again, out of step with the majority of their Province!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Well, Iker could become Russian or Greek or Serb or Romanian....
    But, as you pointed out, he's (and all Anglican/Episcopal clergy) are still only 'Mr.' (or 'Ms./Mrs./Miss').

    ReplyDelete
  16. Why not take a look at Anglicans Online website list of Anglican Churches 'not in communion with Canterbury' it's at: http://anglicansonline.org/communion/nic.html

    It's the graveyard where all continuing movements headed by purists seem to end up.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well, Iker could become Russian or Greek or Serb or Romanian....
    But, as you pointed out, he's (and all Anglican/Episcopal clergy) are still only 'Mr.' (or 'Ms./Mrs./Miss').


    +Iker could become an ordained priest in an Eastern Orthodox Church, but unfortunately for him he would be ineligible to be a bishop (only bachelors or widowers need apply). I think that's a deal-breaker.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Jim, the TEC hasn't seen 2.5 million in greater than 10 years. Domestic membership is at 2.15 million. The denomination is losing the equivalent of about 6 parishes per week.

    Paul is upset that AMiA churches are using the '79 prayerbook, but he should be happy to know that they have just come out with a new prayerbook that is is the "experimental" stage. I believe that it was written by the Prayerbook society and is much closer to the '28.

    One of the exciting things about the realignment is that it appears to have the power to bring together some of the diaspora. I think that Anglo-Catholics will find a much more friendly home than under KJS. I also think it is probably true that Rowan Williams won't recognize the new province, but it is probably true that he won't not recognize either. I am eager to find out who will be at the primates meetings. I don't see the GS primates ever sitting down with KJS again. RW got them to do it at DeS, but then she did the "I was only a messenger" business after verbally signaling her assent to the entire meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Bishop Venables, noted mostly for his willingness for a moment to swamp his small Province with white English speaking bishops and clergy who have no interest in the Province of the Southern Cone except as a way station, is the Patron of the Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas."

    And this is what bothers me so much. What about la gente local? I feel as though the locals are being used (and ignored).

    ReplyDelete
  20. "And this is what bothers me so much. What about la gente local? I feel as though the locals are being used (and ignored)."

    The same is true for Africa.

    Just wait until American imperial reach (aka "security interests") runs into the wall of offended Nigerian or Rwandan nationalism, and then see how fast the CANA or AMIA congregations want to sever ties to their Archbishops. I don't expect those marriages of convenience will last very long.

    After all, the Africans themselves remember that it was those very liberals that they now so despise who worked hardest for an end to the apartheid regimes in South Africa and Zimbabwe (the former Rhodesia). Meanwhile, their new found conservative brethren were praying for the "besieged" Afrikaaners.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Just as an aside, ANY of us who are ordained are still only Mr. (or the appropriate gender reference) because Rev. or Rt. Rev. are not titles, but adjectives. They are descriptive and so the appropriate rendering is THE Rev. or THE Rt. Rev., etc.

    ReplyDelete
  22. David,

    Which are you telling me, that the former bishop of Pittsburgh ordered liberal women, or that neither he nor his ordinands were homophobic?


    FWIW
    jimB

    ReplyDelete
  23. I'm curious about this, jimB, as well.

    none of the women I know (from either of the Pittsburgh Dioceses, (SC or TEC) who have been ordained here are homophobic. Such false sterotypes are not helpful.

    Who's stereotyping, David? To have left TEC for the schismatics---whether SoCone, AMIA, CANA, or the Ugandan/Kenyan-Whatnot---is to be homophobic. Period.

    Unlike their (so-called) "Global South" titular primates, the U.S. schismatics live in a culture, where it's less and less socially-acceptable (Praise Christ!) to be seen as homophobic. That doesn't make it any less true, however.

    Bob of Fremont, for example, has moved on: moved onto WHAT???

    To homophobia, encouraged from his pulpit.

    To sin.

    If you schismatics are going to come here to Preludium, I'm going to call a spade a spade, and a sin a sin.

    Homophobes, in the Name of Jesus Christ, REPENT!

    Merciful Christ, lead us ALL into greater conformity to your Holy Will. Amen.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "If you schismatics are going to come here to Preludium, I'm going to call a spade a spade, and a sin a sin."

    Preach it JCF!

    Nobody is fooled by these It's-not-about-the-gays arguments except yourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  25. JimB asked: "Which are you telling me, that the former bishop of Pittsburgh ordered liberal women, or that neither he nor his ordinands were homophobic?"

    There are women priests/deacons ordained by the former Bishop of Pittsburgh (TEC) on both sides of the issue of realignment.

    Also I do not think that because one is in favor of realignment that it indicates the person is homophobic.

    That is what I am saying.

    ReplyDelete
  26. To have left TEC for the schismatics---whether SoCone, AMIA, CANA, or the Ugandan/Kenyan-Whatnot---is to be homophobic. Period.

    I think that's putting too fine a point on it. Loyalty, even ecclesiastical loyalty, is a complex thing. At the time of the Civil War there were people who thought that succession was a terrible mistake but who, when their own state seceded, supported it. Perhaps something like this has happened with some of the schismatics.

    For that matter, maybe they buy the theological arguments involved. Maybe they aren't homophobic, but believe, as it were, that God is (by our standards).

    Just I don't think that all Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox, even those who support their Church's teaching on sexuality - even those who left ECUSA to get to wherever they are - are homophobes, I don't think all the schismatics are, either.

    ReplyDelete
  27. jcf said:"...To have left TEC for the schismatics---whether SoCone, AMIA, CANA, or the Ugandan/Kenyan-Whatnot---is to be homophobic. Period"

    Interesting statement: I guess you can have your opinion, but it seems to me that leaving TEC does not equate with being "homophobic"

    ReplyDelete
  28. David,

    I thank you. Interesting.

    FWIW
    jimB

    ReplyDelete
  29. :: adopts his best, baseball park vendor voice ::

    Program! Getcha program! Can't tell one continuing Anglican sect from another without ya program!

    ReplyDelete
  30. it seems to me that leaving TEC does not equate with being "homophobic"

    And that's NOT what I said, David L.

    When you leave out the qualifier ("for the schismatics---whether SoCone, AMIA, CANA, or the Ugandan/Kenyan-Whatnot"), you completely change the meaning. [Those who are fed up w/ TEC's pace on the journey towards Gospel justice---e.g., leaving for the MCC or UCC---aren't homophobic, obviously!]

    ReplyDelete
  31. This is Joseph Gleason, editor of The North American Anglican journal.

    I find it hilarious that anyone would dare to call Common Cause "schismatic". Ha!

    Regardless of your pet innovative theology, just think for a moment:

    1) For centuries, did the historic Anglican Church ordain women?

    2) For centuries, did the historic Anglican Church ordain homosexuals?

    Even the most liberal person has to admit the answer is obviously "no" on both counts.

    Therefore, who is being schismatic, TEC, or Common Cause?

    You folks want to claim Thomas Cranmer as your spiritual grandfather. Yet he would have been the first to excommunicate Schori and the rest of TEC. Were Cranmer alive today, he himself would be a prime candidate for archbishop.

    But I suppose Thomas Cranmer is not Anglican enough for you?

    ReplyDelete

OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with comment moderation but with some cautions and one rule:
Cautions: Calling people fools, idiots, etc, will be reason to bounce your comment. Keeping in mind that in the struggles it is difficult enough to try to respect opponents, we should at least try.
Rule: PLEASE DO NOT SIGN OFF AS ANONYMOUS: BEGIN OR END THE MESSAGE WITH A NAME - ANY NAME. ANONYMOUS commentary will be cut.