By Robin G. Jordan
The changes to the constitution and code of canons of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) envisioned in the following proposals would “broaden” the provisions of these two documents. They would remove a number of major obstacles to the membership of conservative evangelical Anglicans and conservative evangelical Anglican congregations; the formation of conservative evangelical Anglican dioceses, the ordination and licensing of conservative evangelical Anglican clergy; the teaching of the doctrine, ecclesiology, and liturgical usages of the English Reformers and classical evangelical Anglicanism; and the nomination, election, and consecration of conservative evangelical Anglican bishops in the ACNA. They would also eliminate serious barriers to the participation in the ACNA of orthodox Anglicans who value the North American Anglican heritage of synodical forms of church government at the diocesan and provincial levels, the diocesan synod’s election of the bishops of the diocese, and the general synod’s election of the primate of the province; who see no justifiable reason for the ACNA’s abandonment of centuries of hard-won lay involvement in diocesan and provincial governance and the episcopal and archiepiscopal nomination and election process; and who greatly feel the loss of this involvement.
The Fundamental Declarations. The Fundamental Declarations would omit the decidedly partisan doctrinal position that “a godly historical episcopate is an integral part of the apostolic faith and practice…,” a position over which Anglicans have historically been divided. They would commit the ACNA to the preservation of the orders of bishop, presbyter, and deacon, a position on which Anglicans are in agreement.
Holy Orders. The following provisions adapted from the canons of the Church of England would replace Title III, Canon 1, Section 1:
“The Anglican Church in North America holds and teaches that from the apostles’ time there have been these orders in Christ’s Church: bishops, priests, and deacons; and no man shall be accounted or taken to be a lawful bishop, priest, or deacon in this Church, or suffered to execute any of the said offices, except he be called, tried, examined, and admitted thereunto according to an authorized ordinal of this Church or has had consecration or ordination in some Church whose orders are recognized and accepted by this Church.”
Bishops. The following provisions adapted from the canons of the Church of England would replace Title III, Canon 8, Section 2:
“Every bishop is the chief pastor of all that are within his diocese, as well laity as clergy, and their father in God; it appertains to his office to teach and to uphold sound and wholesome doctrine, and to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange opinions; and, himself an example of righteous and godly living, it is his duty to set forward and maintain quietness, love, and peace among all people.”
The constitution would require that the bishops of a judicatory (diocese, cluster, or network) should be elected by one of the following methods, all of which preserve the ancient custom of a diocese choosing its own bishop:
1. By the representative governing body of the judicatory by whatever name it is designated (e.g., Conference, Convention, Council, House of Delegates, Synod, etc.). A description of two local adaptations of this method of election, that of the Anglican Church of the Province of the Southern Cone of America and the Reformed Episcopal Church are found in my previous article, “The Episcopate in the Anglican Church in North America,” which is on the Internet at: http://anglicansablaze.blogspot.com/2009/03/episcopate-in-anglican-church-in-north.html
What follows are several additional examples of local adaptations of that method. They are taken from my research notes for that article. The first example is a description of how the Archbishop of Sidney, a diocese and metropolitan see of the Anglican Church of Australia, is elected. It comes from the Archbishop of Sydney Appointment Ordinance 1982:
As soon as possible after the date a vacancy occurs in the see of Sydney, the standing committee passes a resolution that the vacancy should be filled. The person who on the occurrence of a vacancy in the see of Sydney is entitled to exercising the powers vested in the archbishop summons the members of the synod to a meeting for the purpose of filling the vacancy. Any two or more members of the Synod may in advance of this meeting nominate a candidate for the archbishop of the see. To be regarded as a nominee for archbishop of the see a candidate must have one or more nominations signed by at least 20 members of the Synod, have been notified in writing, and has agreed to be a nominee for archbishop of the see. A list of nominations must be sent to all the members of the synod within ten days of the meeting of the synod for the purpose of filling the vacancy. This list of nominations must contain the names of the nominees in alphabetic order with the names of all the members of Synod who have nominated each nominee. At the meeting of the Synod after the nominations have been formally proposed and seconded each member of the Synod is given an opportunity to speak for and against each nomination. A motion is then put on each nominee in respect whether his name should be placed on a select list. A vote on each motion is taken simultaneously by a secret ballot in each order of the members of the synod present, the lay members of the synod voting first. If a majority of either order of the members of the Synod present and voting vote in favour of the motion in respect of a nominee, the name of that nominee is placed on the select list. After the select list is compiled, each nominee whose name appears on the select list is formally proposed and seconded. The members of the Synod are given an opportunity to speak for and against each nomination. A motion is then put on each nominee on each nominee in respect whether his name should be put on final list. A vote on each motion is taken simultaneously by a secret ballot in each order of the members of the Synod present, the lay members of the Synod voting first. If a majority of either order of the members of the Synod present and voting vote in favour of the motion in respect of a nominee, the name of that nominee is placed on the final list. A series of votes are then taken to reduce the name of nominees on the final list with the nominees in excess of a specific number determined by the canon delineating the election procedure receiving the lowest number of votes after the votes of both orders of the members of the synod being excluded after each vote. The same canon provides for preferential voting when the final list is reduced to two or three. When the final list is reduced to one, a motion is put to the synod that the nominee remain on the final list should be invited to be the archbishop of the see. A vote on the motion by show of hands is then taken in each order of the members of the Synod present, the lay members of the Synod voting first. If a majority of both orders of the members of the Synod then present and voting vote in favour of the motion, the nominee is declared duly elected to the office of Archbishop of Sydney.
The next step is confirmation of the election under the provisions of the Provincial Synod Ordinance for the Confirmation of Bishops’ Elections (N.S.W.) Assenting Ordinance 1965. If the election of the nominee is not confirmed and certified under the provisions of that Ordinance, the election is null and void and the procedure must be repeated as if the see had become vacant at the time that the election became null and void.
The second example describes how the Bishop of Willochra, a diocese of the Anglican Church of Australia, is elected. It comes from the Regulation Two of the Diocese of Willochra, adopted in 1994.
When the see becomes vacant, or three months before the date of the retirement of the bishop, the administrator calls together the bishopric nomination committee which is required to nominate not less than three and not more than four persons to a special session of the diocesan synod to be called within three months of the vacancy of the see for the purpose of electing a bishop. The bishopric nomination committee consists of the administrator of the diocese together with five clerical and five lay members of the diocesan synod who are elected at the first session of each diocesan synod. There is also be elected three clergy and three lay persons as reserves in the event of any member of the committee being unavailable to serve. Any clergy member whose name is considered for nomination as bishop ceases to be a member of the committee. In the event of the administrator being nominated, the committee elects one of its members to chair the committee. The administrator circularizes all members of the diocesan synod inviting them to make submissions to the nomination committee. A name is not included for nomination to the diocesan synod unless a majority of the clergy and a majority of the lay members agree to the nomination. The nomination committee presents to the diocesan synod a statement about each nominee.
The administrator must cause a call of the diocesan synod to be made within three calendar months of the vacancy of the see for the purpose of electing a bishop. During the deliberations of the Election Synod only members and officers are allowed to be present except by special leave of the Synod. Members are prohibited at all times from disclosing any information concerning the proceedings of the Election Synod or the names of the candidates or the details of any ballot. The Synod by a vote of the majority of members present may at any stage in the proceedings under this regulation resolve itself into a committee of the whole and report back to Synod or may from time to time adjourn to a time to be fixed. When the Synod has assembled the administrator announces that a vacancy of the see has occurred. The administrator states the cause of the vacancy and explains the procedure to be followed in filling the vacancy, namely: that Synod is to receive the names submitted to it by the Nomination Committee together with not more than one name submitted by the House of Clergy and not more than one name submitted by the House of Laity. The administrator then informs members of Synod of the nominations being submitted to the Synod by the Nomination Committee. Each House of Synod then meets separately. The House of Clergy is chaired by the administrator and the House of Laity by a lay member of the Synod appointed by the administrator. The business of each House meeting separately is to consider the question "Do we wish to add the name of one person to the list of nominees?" If a majority in either House agree on the name of a person to be added then that name is added to the list of nominees. When both the House of Clergy and the House of Laity have completed the business before them the administrator shall call the Synod together again. The Synod then resolves itself into a committee of the whole for the purpose of discussing the candidature of those who have been nominated. After the discussion Synod resumes and each name is be balloted for individually by the House of Clergy and the House of Laity voting by orders. Every name which fails to obtain one third of the vote of each order is removed from the list. The names remaining on the list are then balloted for each voter recording a vote for one person only. The candidate obtaining two-thirds of the votes of each order is the bishop elect.
If after three ballots as in the preceding paragraph no candidate receives the requisite majority and if one of the candidates has obtained a majority of votes in each house and if the Synod decide in the affirmative it is permissible to move that such candidate be elected Bishop. If this motion is carried by a two thirds majority in each house voting by secret ballot then that person is the bishop elect. If no such motion is agreed to or if no candidate receives the requisite majority then the Synod is adjourned until such time as the Nomination Committee has prepared a further set of nominations for Synod.
If the person elected in accordance with this procedure declines to accept the see the Synod proceeds again under the Regulation.
If the Synod fails on two successive occasions to elect a Bishop it is competent for the Synod either absolutely or subject to any conditions it may think fit to impose to delegate its power and authority to elect a bishop to the primate, conjointly with some other bishops of the dioceses of the Anglican Church of Australia to be named by the Synod. If no such election of a bishop as provided for by the provisions of the Regulation or no appointment of a bishop under any delegated power and authority referred to above is made within a period of twelve months from the date of the vacancy of the see then the appointment of a bishop for this occasion passes to the primate conjointly with the bishops of the dioceses of the Anglican Church of Australia and is made by them.
The administrator reports to the metropolitan the result of any election or appointment in order to obtain the confirmation required by the constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia or by any canon of the General Synod that may at that time be in force and binding on the diocese.
The election or appointment having been made and confirmed the person elected or appointed is, if not already consecrated, consecrated as provided in the canons of General Synod. In every case the bishop must take the oath of canonical obedience to the metropolitan and must make a declaration to be subject to the constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia and the canons and determinations of the General Synod at that time in force and binding on the diocese and the constitution and regulations of the Synod. Any bishop elected must either before consecration or if already consecrated before exercising any episcopal function in the Diocese sign and subscribe to the following declaration:
I, A.B., Bishop elect of the Diocese of Willochra do promise that I will maintain and teach the doctrine and discipline of the Anglican Church of Australia and I consent to be bound by all the Constitution and Regulations of Synod now or hereafter in force and I hereby undertake immediately to resign the said Bishopric and all rights and emoluments appertaining thereto if sentence requiring such resignation shall at any time be passed upon me after due examination had by the Tribunal acknowledged by the said Synod for the trial of a Bishop in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of the Anglican Church of Australia. Given under my hand this.......................day of......................19...
2. By an Electoral College that may consist of all or part of the representative governing body of the judicatory. This example of a local adaptation of Electoral College method of the election of a bishop comes from the constitution and canons of the Anglican Church of Aotearoa, New Zealand, and Polynesia.
Under the provisions of the constitution and canons of the Anglican Church of Aotearoa, New Zealand, and Polynesia the basic procedure for providing a diocesan bishop is that the primate convenes and presides over an electoral college or appoints a commissary to do so. The Electoral College consists of any bishop licensed for and exercising episcopal ministry within that diocese and those persons entitled to clergy votes and lay votes in the diocesan representative governing body or diocesan synod of the diocese concerned. The Electoral College by a majority of clergy votes and a majority of lay votes nominates (elects) a candidate to become the bishop. The primate submits the nomination to each of the bishops in full-time active episcopal ministry in the province and each such bishop informs the primate in writing whether or not that bishop has reason to disapprove the nomination on the ground of doctrine, or of character and manner of life, or of health, or of physical inability to undertake the episcopal ministry for which the nomination has been made. If all the bishops to whom the nomination is submitted inform the primate that they do not disapprove, the primate then proceeds to submit the nomination for the sanction of the General Synod.
If any bishop informs the primate in writing of disapproval, the bishops then consult either by meeting or other means. The bishops may decide by a majority of the bishops that the nomination should be submitted for the sanction of the General Synod or that the Electoral College should reconsider its nomination. If the bishops decide that the Electoral College should reconsider its nomination, they prepare in writing a statement of the reasons for their decision. The primate reconvenes, or instructs his commissary to reconvene, the Electoral College in order that it may reconsider its nomination. The statement prepared by the bishops is laid before the Electoral College, and the College then proceeds as if no nomination had been made. The candidate previously nominated is eligible for nomination, and if that candidate is nominated the primate must submit the nomination for the sanction (confirmation) of the General Synod together with the statement prepared by the bishops and any memorial prepared by or with the authority of the Electoral College. If some other candidate is nominated, the nomination is submitted to the bishops of the province as the previous nomination was.
When the primate submits a nomination for the sanction of the General Synod, he submits it to the General Synod, if in session, or otherwise to every voting member of the General Synod. If the General Synod, if in session, or the members of the General Synod, when not in session, sanction (confirm) the nomination, the primate takes the necessary steps for giving effect to the nomination once the nominee has declared in writing both assent to the Constitution and adherence and submission to the authority of the General Synod and has accepted the nomination.
If a nomination is not sanctioned, or if the nominee does not accept the nomination, that fact is communicated to the commissary presiding over the Electoral College that made the nomination and to the vicar-general (or equivalent) of the diocese concerned. After consultation with the legal counselor or chancellor and standing committee of the diocese, the commissary reconvenes the Electoral College for the purpose of making another nomination, or delegating the nomination. The constitution permits the delegation of the nomination to “a person or persons.” Any candidate previously nominated is eligible for nomination unless such previous nomination has not been sanctioned by the General Synod (or by its members when not in session).
In the case of the nomination of the first bishop in a new diocese the Electoral College consists of the clergy licensed to any parish or any other ecclesiastical office within the boundaries of the new diocese, and not less than one lay representative for each parish or ministry or mission unit within the same boundaries elected in such manner as the primate or the commissary appointed by the primate directs.
An Electoral College sitting for the purpose of nominating a bishop to exercise an episcopal ministry within a diocese other than as diocesan bishop consist of the diocesan bishop and any other persons licensed for and exercising episcopal ministry within that diocese and the clerical and lay members of the standing committee of that diocese (by whatever name that standing committee is called) and such other persons being members of the diocesan representative governing body or diocesan synod as that body has previously chosen or determined from time to time.
3. By a Board of Electors elected by the representative governing body of the judicatory. The Board of Electors method of election of a bishop is a variation of the Electoral College method of election. The following description of a local adaptation of this method comes from the Wangaratta Bishopric Act 1904-1997. Wangaratta is a diocese of the Anglican Church of Australia.
In the first session of every diocesan synod a six clergy duly licensed within the diocese and six laypersons being laypersons eligible to be members of the diocesan synod are chosen by ballot by the members of the diocesan synod to be a Board of Electors for the purpose of electing in the event of a vacancy in the see of the diocese the bishop of the diocese. Casual vacancies in the Board are filled in the same manner in the next session of the diocesan synod but if a voidance of the see occurs before the next session of the diocesan synod the remaining members of the Board may fill the vacancy. When the administrator of the diocese receives notification from the bishop of his intention to resign or retire, he may convene the Board. The administrator is the person appointed under the provisions of the Act to administer the diocese the affairs of the diocese during a vacancy in the see of the diocese. The Board does not proceed to the election of a bishop until the see becomes vacant. When a vacancy in the see has occurred, the administrator must convene the Board of Electors if he has not already done so and the Board must with all convenient speed proceed to the election of a bishop of the diocese and on such election having been made must report the result of the election to the administrator.
When an election has been made if effect cannot be given to the election the administrator notifies the Board of Electors and upon being so notified the Board proceeds as in the case of an original election and so on "toties quoties" until a bishop has been elected and installed. The members of the Board have power to decide as to all matters connected with the election but no election is valid unless a majority of the clergy and a majority of the lay members of the Board certify in writing to the administrator their assent to the election. In case of a vacancy in the see if any Board of Electors for a period of twelve months fails to elect a bishop and to notify the election to the administrator the Board is "ipso facto" dissolved and a new Board of Electors is constituted in following manner: The administrator with all convenient speed for the purpose of electing another Board of Electors calls a meeting (of which at least one month's notice specifying the objects of the meeting is given) of the persons who at the time of that failure were members of an existing diocesan synod or who if no diocesan synod is then in existence have been members of the last preceding diocesan synod at the time of its dissolution and the administrator is the president of this meeting the business of which is conducted according to the standing orders of the diocesan synod so far as they may be applicable. The administrator in the notice calling the meeting fixes a day for proceeding to the election of a new Board of Electors which election takes place in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the persons elected take the place of the last preceding Board and have and exercise all the powers conferred upon that Board.
Upon an election having been made the administrator takes the necessary steps for giving effect to the election in accordance with the rules for the confirmation and consecration of bishops made by the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Australia and adopted by the diocesan synod.
The code of canons would be amended to conform to the changes in the constitution. The constitution would require that the primate of the ACNA should be elected by the Provincial General Synod, by a Board of Electors elected by the Provincial General Synod, or an Electoral College consisting of the bishops of the ACNA and clergy and lay electors from each ACNA judicatory. Descriptions of local adaptations of all three methods are found in my previous article, “The Episcopate in the Anglican Church in North America,” which is on the Internet at: http://anglicansablaze.blogspot.com/2009/03/episcopate-in-anglican-church-in-north.html
The procedure for the election of the primate would be delineated in the canons.
These methods of episcopal and primatial election give non-episcopal clergy and laity a substantial role in the election process and preserve basic elements of the synodical form of church government.
Judicatories. For those who may be unfamiliar with the term “judicatory,” it refers to the basic organizational unit of a denomination such as a diocese, conference, or association consisting of a group of churches. No ACNA judicatory would have exclusive jurisdiction over any geographic region of the United States or Canada. Other judicatories would be free to organize within such a region on the basis of territory or theological affinity (that is, shared doctrinal positions on key theological and ecclesiological issues).
The code of canons would clearly delineate the affiliation procedures by which groups of churches are recognized as judicatories of the ACNA. There would be two procedures. The first procedure would be for groups of churches that are already incorporated, have established an organizational structure, have adopted bylaws for the government of their members and the management of their affairs, and meet all the canonical requirements for minimum number of clergy and congregations, and minimum number of members or average weekly attendance. These groups of churches would be required only to make a formal application, submit any necessary documentation, and agree to accede to the constitution and canons of the ACNA in order to be recognized as an autonomous ACNA judicatory. With their recognition the office of bishop of the judicatory would be automatically created and the judicatory would then elect its bishop, using one of three procedures that I have described.
The second procedure would be for groups of churches that are not incorporated, have not established an organizational structure or adopted bylaws, or meet all the canonical requirements for minimum number of clergy and congregations and minimum number of members or average weekly attendance. These groups of churches could apply for recognition as ACNA judicatories in formation. With the approval of their application the office of auxiliary bishop would be created. This auxiliary bishop would be appointed by the archbishop of the ACNA with the approval of the Provincial Executive Council and would oversee a specific group of churches. His role would be similar to that of a missionary bishop except unlike a missionary bishop he would not be responsible for a specific territory. If the specific group of churches was organized on the basis of theological affinity or theological affinity and territory, the auxiliary bishop appointed would be required to be a member of the same theological affinity group as the churches. If the specific group of churches were organized on the basis of territory, the canons would require that the auxiliary bishop be carefully matched with the group of churches that he is overseeing. If a judicatory in formation did, after a reasonable period of time, not met with all the canonical requirements for minimum number of clergy and congregations and minimum number of members or average weekly attendance and a study of local conditions and other factors affecting the growth of the judicatory in formation suggested that it would not be able to meet these requirements if the period of formation was extended, the requirements could be waived and the judicatory in formation recognized as a autonomous judicatory, in which case it would elect its own bishop.
Applicants for recognition as an autonomous judicatory or judicatory in formation and judicatories in formation would have the right to appeal any decisions of the Provincial Executive Council affecting them to the Provincial General Synod. The Provincial General Synod would also have power to recognize a group of churches as an autonomous judicatory or judicatory in formation on its own initiation as well as to overrule the decisions of the Provincial Executive Council.
The constitution would require the establishment of a representative governing body for each judicatory of the ACNA. This body by whatever name it is designated would consist of the bishops and licensed clergy of the diocese and elected lay members from each congregation of the diocese and would elect a standing committee from its clerical and lay members to serve as its executive body.
The Provincial General Synod. The constitution would establish as the governing body of the ACNA a Provincial General Synod consisting of a House of Bishops, a House of Clergy, and a House of Laity. The House of Bishops would consist of all the bishops of the ACNA. The House of Clergy would consist of clergy delegates elected by each autonomous judicatory and each judicatory in formation. The House of Laity would consist of lay delegates elected by each autonomous judicatory and each judicatory in formation. The House of Laity would have twice as many members as the combined membership of the House of Bishops and the House of Clergy. When the Provincial General Synod was in session, all three houses would sit together and vote together except where otherwise provided in the canons. All three houses would elect their own officers except that the primate would be the president of the House of Bishops by the virtue of his office.
The Provisional General Synod would have power to make canons and regulations for the ACNA, to amend the constitution of the ACNA, to adopt the budget of the ACNA, to elect the members and officers of the Provincial Executive Council and give directives to that body, to appoint committees, boards, and commissions, to conduct hearings and inquiries, to summon witnesses and to require testimony, to censure, suspend, and remove members and officers of the Provincial Executive Council and other officials of the ACNA,
The Provincial Executive Council. The Provincial Executive Council would be elected by the Provincial General Synod and would be accountable to the Provincial General Synod. The Provincial Executive Council would act as the executive body of the Provincial General Synod and would carryout the work of the Provincial General Synod and the Province between sessions of the Provincial General Synod, subject to the constitution and canons of the ACNA and the regulations and directives of the Provisional General Synod. The Provincial Executive Council would exercise such powers and perform such functions as provided by the constitution or determined by the Provincial General Synod by canon.
Ratification of Constitutional Amendments and Canons. For constitutional amendments member judicatories would send a proposed change to the Provincial Executive Council which would circulate the proposal within the judicatories not less than 90 days before the next meeting of the Provincial General Synod. If the proposed change were adopted by a two-thirds vote of the Provincial General Synod, the proposal would be sent to the governing body of each judicatory for its approval. The governing bodies of the judicatories would send written notice of their approval to the Archbishop who would then inform them of the results. If approved unanimously by the member judicatories, the approved proposed amendment would be put into force. For canons the proposed canon would also be circulated within the judicatories not less than 90 days before the next meeting of the Provincial General Synod. If the proposed canon were adopted by at least a two-thirds vote of the Provincial General Synod, it would be submitted to each member judicatory for approval. Each member judicatory would send its decision in writing to the Archbishop who would inform the same of the results and, if approved by two-thirds vote of the member judicatories, it would take effect immediately. If the proposed canon is not approved, the judicatory or judicatories that submitted the proposed canon would be free to submit it again at the next Provincial General Synod.
In a future article I hope to examine the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans' Theological Committee's Commentary on the Jerusalem Declaration which is due for release this spring and compare its clarification of the meaning of that theological statement with the doctrine formerly stated and otherwise expressed in the constitution and code of canons of the Anglican Church in North America.
Robin -
ReplyDeleteThank you for your tremendous efforts to bring visibility to these very important issues.