The ACNA: Two Visions in Conflict

By Robin G. Jordan

In his most recent article, “So to the next stage,” self-identified “Catholic Anglican” Warren Tanghe, a former Secretary and Vice-President of FIFNA and the resident chaplain of the All Saints Sisters of the Poor in Cantonsville, Maryland, identifies what he believes are “fault lines” in the Anglican Church in North America. What particularly interested this writer was Tanghe’s statements about the ACNA Fundamental Declarations, as well as a number of his other comments and observations.

Tanghe stated that he has gone on record as claiming that the things the seven points of Common Cause Partnership Theological Statement affirm are the things on which the Tractarians “built their affirmation of the Church of England's catholicity - with some improvements,” having himself helped to draft that statement. These seven points with one alteration form Article I of the ACNA Constitution and comprise the ACNA Fundamental Declarations, its definition of the Anglican orthodoxy.

In an earlier article, "Birth of a province,” Tanghe stated that the CCP Theological Statement “was initially crafted to leave intact the understanding of the Anglican formularies” on which the Tractarians” based their assertion of the C of E's catholicity.” With these statements Tanghe provides support for the contention of this writer and others that the Fundamental Declarations adopt a partisan doctrinal position on a number of the key issues to which they relate.

In both articles Tanghe mourns the removal of Geoffrey Fisher’s “clear affirmation of the Catholic faith and constitution of the Church.” Tanghe identifies this development, which he attributes to “the more protestant constituencies” in the ACNA, with the emergence of a pattern in the ACNA like that Aidan Nichol, Roman Catholic priest and author, has observed in the Anglican Communion and about which he has written in The Panther and the Hind: A Theological History of Anglicanism (1992):

“Its absence…seems to signal that ACNA is falling into the pattern Aidan Nichols has so ably observed in the Anglican family over the last two centuries: a single institution holding together two, three or even four different understandings of the Gospel ('streams'), with their differences increasing over time.”

He seems oblivious of the repeated claim by Archbishop Robert Duncan and other ACNA leaders that the ACNA, unlike the TEC, is “truly evangelical, truly catholic, and truly Pentecostal,” a claim that, while it is highly debatable, is the vision of the new church that the ACNA leadership has promoted and many ACNA members and clergy have embraced. In this vision the province of which the ACNA is an early stage would enfold the three major theological outlooks—Catholic, charismatic, and evangelical, united in the common tasks of spreading the good news of Jesus Christ and expanding the Kingdom of God.

This points to a major fault line within the ACNA. Tanghe and others like him have a different vision of the ACNA, a vision in which the new province is decidedly Catholic in faith and order. This vision is surprisingly reflected to a large extent in the doctrinal provisions of the ACNA Constitution and Canons. With the ratification of these two foundational documents the vision of the ACNA as a comprehensive Anglican church was hijacked. Those who espouse this vision have yet to wake up to the realization that the future they envision for the church has been replaced with another vision.

Tanghe draws attention to what he describes as a “tension” within the ACNA about what it means to be Anglican. He then attributes to this tension the calls to modify the Fundamental Declarations to bring them in line with the vision of the ACNA as a comprehensive Anglican church, focusing upon the third Fundamental Declaration on the episcopate. The controversy surrounding this declaration is, however, only the presenting difficulty—the tip of the iceberg. An underlying problem is the failure of the ACNA Provincial Council to adopt Fundamental Declarations, indeed a whole constitution and set of canons, which embody genuine principled comprehensiveness.

Tanghe trundles out a favorite Catholic bugaboo. The ACNA is “fragile.” Any modification of any part of the Fundamental Declarations would cause the ACNA to “unravel.” Catholic members of the Provincial Council raised the same bugaboo when the question of modifying the wording of the third Fundamental Declaration was brought up at the June Council meeting. Although the Fundamental Declarations may not go far enough for some Catholics, they do favor and mandate a Catholic doctrinal position on the Councils of the undivided Church, the historic episcopate, and the Anglican formularies. Tanghe himself acknowledges their doctrinal partisanship.

Behind the warning that changing the Fundamental Declarations might precipitate a fracture in the ACNA is a veiled threat: Alter the declarations and Catholics will reconsider their participation in the ACNA. Whether or not it is intended as a threat, it has that affect. With it Catholics in the ACNA make its other members hostage to their priorities for the ACNA. This kind of manipulation is not a good foundation for a partnership.

Having presented tension over Anglican identity as a problem, Tanghe goes onto identify what he believes is a major factor aggravating this problem:

“The rapid growth of some of ACNA's constituent bodies has exacerbated this problem, for they have ordained people with a heart for the Gospel but little knowledge or experience of the Anglican Way to lead or plant new parishes. A substantial number of these are convinced Calvinists, formed in Calvinist seminaries, and understand the Anglican Way accordingly. As a result, there are questions about the Anglican identity of many of certain constituent bodies' parishes, both as a matter of theology, and, as one 'continuing' prelate noted, with regard to what occurs at divine service on Sunday morning.”

The factor that Tanghe identifies as making this tension more severe is traditional evangelical Anglicanism with its Biblical and Reformed theology! It does not matter in Tanghe’s opinion whether God is using those who stand in the evangelical and Reformed tradition of Anglicanism to reach the lost with the gospel of grace. They hold to and teach the wrong kind of Anglicanism. Indeed Tanghe suggests that it is not authentic Anglicanism at all.

Tanghe is not alone in his antipathy toward classical Anglican evangelicalism. A barely concealed distaste and in some cases an open aversion toward evangelicals and other non-Catholics is evidenced in Catholic circles in the ACNA. These attitudes exacerbate tension over Anglican identity.

In his earlier article Tanghe claimed that the ACNA, as it presently is, is not orthodox. It permits the ordination of women, “and its statements suggest a Protestant bias.” Tanghe equates Catholicism with orthodoxy, which may explain his own decision to become a Roman Catholic.

Tanghe identifies “the dominant ‘stream’ in the ACNA” as evangelical. He raises the question of whether evangelicalism will establish itself as “the dominant ‘stream' within a coherent identity clearly rooted in and affirming in its fullness 'the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church'.” Or will it establish itself as “the ACNA's predominant identity, with Catholics as a… tolerated minority outside its mainstream?”

Tanghe clearly favors a church in which Catholicism is dominant and which has a strong Catholic identity. In his perspective a province that is not Catholic in faith and order would not be orthodox.

Tanghe suggests that for Catholics the ACNA may be only a temporary home:

“ACNA may be a welcome refuge for Catholics who cannot remain in TEC or have been pushed out of it. It may offer them, for the time being, the only safe place available which is connected with the Communion? But will it prove a true and permanent home for those of our integrity, or only a stopping-point on the way elsewhere?”

For Tanghe himself the ACNA is just a stopping-point on the way to Rome.

Tanghe’s article is very revealing into the views of Catholics in the ACNA. While his views may not be representative of all Catholics in the ACNA, they do represent those of a group of Catholic members of the ACNA who are quite vocal on the Internet. They draw attention to the different vision of the ACNA that this group espouses from the one that the ACNA leadership promotes.

How did elements of this particular vision then become incorporated into the ACNA Constitution and Canons? An analysis of the make-up of the Common Cause/Anglican Communion Network, the Common Cause Governance Task Force, and the other bodies involved in the drafting of these two fundamental documents, how their members were chosen, how they conducted their work, and who exercised the most influence in each body and what dynamics were operative in and outside the meetings of these bodies would be revealing. Catholics have in the past 175 odd years demonstrated a tendency to gravitate to those bodies in which they can most influence the doctrine, governance, and worship of a province while evangelicals have been inclined to devote their energies to the local church and gospel ministry. Catholics may have comprised a minority in the province but have through these bodies exercised an influence disproportionate to their numbers.

Few of the evangelical leaders in the ACNA are theological heavyweights. A number of ACNA members and clergy who identify themselves as “evangelicals” sit rather loosely to the doctrines and practices that historically have distinguished traditional evangelical Anglicanism. Language was incorporated into the documents from the constitutions and canons of other Anglican entities, which are unabashedly Catholic in their doctrine or reveal the influence of Catholic doctrine. The Catholic advocacy organization, Forward in Faith North America, is committed to the establishment of an orthodox province in North America, that is, to a province that is Catholic in faith and order. On the other hand, evangelicals and other non-Catholics have no formal organization that advocates for genuine principled comprehensiveness in the ACNA, much less a more evangelical or more charismatic church.

Tanghe maintains what is remarkable about the ACNA is the degree to which the issues that divide the disparate elements forming the ACNA have been resolved. He attributes the resolution of these issues to what he describes as “a will to find a way forward together at crucial moments…” and the existence of this will to God. Yet he claims that continued success in resolving such issues rest not with God but with the constituent members of the ACNA. If God is indeed at work, God cannot accomplish anything further if they do not keep this attitude.

He goes on to assert that the will to find a way forward together will persist only if the constituent parts of the ACNA are given time “to grow together into a consistent whole.” He then reiterates an assertion of Archbishop Duncan.

“ACNA's focus on local mission in obedience to the Great Commission, each part supporting each other part at the local level in the common work of sharing the Gospel, Archbishop Duncan asserts, is thus also the best means by which that body can develop the coherence necessary to address the issues which divide it.”

Does Tanghe really believe Duncan’s assertion? He has earlier in the article claimed that the different “streams” in the ACNA have different “Gospels.” How can Catholics and evangelicals support each other in the common work of sharing the Gospel if they do not agree on something as basic as what the Gospel entails? Catholics have a different understanding of justification, sanctification, and the place of good works and sacraments in the economy of salvation than do evangelicals. Catholics and evangelicals have different approaches to the Bible. Catholics in and outside of the ACNA, including Tanghe himself, do not regard evangelicals as orthodox.

Moreover Tanghe is leaving the ACNA for the Church of Rome.

What is lacking in the ACNA are an overarching common vision to which all members and clergy of the ACNA are committed and a constitution and set of canons that embodies this vision. Without such a vision and foundational documents and a common gospel to share the ACNA cannot hope to establish any kind of cohesiveness. A church that is Catholic in faith and order is not a vision that is likely to capture the imagination and gain the support of evangelicals in the ACNA.

However, a church that is principled in its comprehensiveness--in which there was clear agreement on essentials and tolerance of different views on secondary issues--what comprehensiveness meant at the time of the Reformation—would be a vision to which most evangelicals would be ready to commit themselves wholeheartedly (and to which many evangelicals are already committed.) The proposals laid out on The Heritage Anglican Network for the revision of the ACNA Constitution and Canons, including a new Fundamental Declarations article in the Constitution, would create foundational documents embodying this vision. As for a common gospel the Anglican formularies—the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of 1571 and the Book of Common Prayer of 1662–contain what Anglicans have historically understood to be the Gospel set forth in the New Testament.