By Robin G. Jordan
The Anglican Church in North America loudly proclaims its theological diversity but that diversity does not represent genuine diverseness. ACNA tolerance of diversity certainly does not include radical liberalism. It especially does not extend to traditional conservative evangelicalism. It embraces only those groups that are willing to accept or accommodate the partisan ecclesiology and theology of the ACNA constitution and canons. This boils downs to not openly rejecting unreformed Catholic doctrine, order, piety, and practice, and at least going along with them if not regarding them with favor, It is a lop-sided tolerance at best, skewed to treat unreformed Catholicism with partiality.
From the perspective of the Roman Catholic hierarchy an unreformed Catholic Anglican Church would be more amenable to embracing the authority of the Pope. Witting or otherwise, a new Oxford movement would be a useful partner inside the Anglican Church. With the help of such a partners papacy and papalism might be restored in the Anglican Church and the ecclesia Anglicana returned to the bosom of Mother Church.
Heritage Anglicans, those who conscientiously seek to uphold and maintain the Protestant, Reformed, and evangelical character of the Anglican Church, should not be surprised if a leader of Forward in Faith North America (FIFNA), an organization that is committed to promoting the spread of traditional Anglo-Catholicism in North America should call for a new Oxford movement. The Oxford movement established a beachhead for unreformed Catholicism in the Anglican Church. The hope of those calling for a new Oxford movement is that through the influence of that movement unreformed Catholicism will capture more ground in the Anglican Church especially in North America, carving out a larger territory for itself.
.jpg)
In favoring unreformed Catholicism the constitution and canons of the ACNA plays into the hands of those calling for a new Oxford movement, both Roman Catholic and Anglo-Catholic. This should not surprise heritage Anglicans either. Anglo-Catholics and those open to unreformed Catholicism compiled these two documents under the leadership of an Anglo-Catholic bishop who now is the Archbishop of the ACNA. Anglo-Catholics on the Common Cause Leadership Council and the ACNA Provincial Council have worked hard to prevent any change in these documents that might affect their partial treatment of unreformed Catholicism. They blocked an attempt at the Bedford Provincial Council meeting to amend the language of the fundamental declarations to make them neutral, not aligned with any particular school of thought. Any change in the wording and emphases of the fundamental declarations might have made room for conservative evangelicals in the ACNA without forcing them to compromise their beliefs. Their presence would have complicated matters for Anglo-Catholics as they could be expected to press for a central place for the Anglican formularies in the teaching and life of the ACNA and for other changes in the ACNA and to resist Anglo-Catholic efforts to move the ACNA further in an unreformed Catholic direction.
The existing language of the fundamental declarations not only denies positions of leadership in the ACNA to the more conservative of the evangelicals but it keeps them out of the ACNA altogether. It particularly stops them from uniting with more moderate evangelicals in the ACNA and forming conservative evangelical sub-provincial jurisdictions and judicatories in the ACNA and thereby becoming an obstacle to Anglo-Catholic aspirations. As long as conservative evangelicals have scruples and tender consciences Anglo-Catholics can count upon the fundamental declarations to serve a prophylactic to traditional conservative evangelicalism in the ACNA. Anglo-Catholics pushed conservative evangelicals out of the Protestant Episcopal Church. They have no plans to welcome them to the Anglican Church in North America.
While many in the ACNA reacted with alarm to the decision of the Anglican Mission to remain a part of the Anglican Church of Rwanda and to accept the role of a ministry partner with the ACNA rather than that of a constituent part of the ACNA, traditionalist Anglo-Catholic leaders saw this turn of events as an opportunity to further the cause of unreformed Catholicism in the ACNA. While the Anglican Mission is often mistakenly seen as evangelical and low church, it is in actuality Convergentist as can be seen from even a quick perusal of the Summer 2010 Edition of its quarterly magazine Wave. Convergentism blends together Catholic, evangelical, and Pentecostal piety and practice and does not press doctrine. The Anglican Mission has its own Anglo-Catholic wing, which exercises a degree of influence in the Anglican Mission disproportionate to its size. The Anglican Mission’s canonical charter and the canons of the Rwandan Church under which it operates reflect the influence of the Roman Catholic Code of Canon Law in doctrine, language, norms, and principles. The Anglican Mission has in turn greatly influenced the constitution and canons of the ACNA. The Anglo-Catholic wing in the Anglican Mission is not only responsible for the policy of US Anglican Mission against the ordination of women priests but also greatly influenced the two service books that the Anglican Mission has produced in the past five years. In the most recent service book—An Anglican Prayer Book (2008), the translation of the traditional American, English, and Canada rites into contemporary language was used to introduce other changes into these rites, moving them in a more unreformed Catholic direction. The Anglican Mission’s decision to remain a part of the Rwandan Church removed a potential rival to the leadership of more traditionalist Anglo-Catholic leaders in the ACNA. The Anglican Mission exercised considerable influence in the ACNA due to its financial support and size. Traditionalist Anglo-Catholic leaders no longer must reckon with the Anglican Mission’s influence.
At the same time traditionalist Anglo-Catholic leaders see a very real possibility that the Anglican Mission’s own Anglo-Catholic wing may eventually move that body in a more unreformed Catholic direction. Even though the Anglican Mission’s Solemn Declaration of Principles affirms the Anglican formularies and adopts them as the Anglican Mission’s standards of faith and worship, it contains provisions recognizing and tolerating Anglo-Catholic and Pentecostal practices and piety. In the production of its two service books it ignored the requirement of the Solemn Declaration of Principles that all alternative rites and forms used in the Anglican Mission must conform to the doctrine of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. From what I gather, although the clergy of the Anglican Mission meet annually to reaffirm their commitment to the Solemn Declaration of Principles, few of them in practice adhere to the doctrine of the Anglican formularies.
For conservative evangelicals Bishop Ackerman’s call for a new Oxford Movement signals the beginning of a time of greater intolerance to traditional conservative evangelicalism in the ACNA. Conservative evangelicals who became involved in the ACNA at the Common Cause Partnership stage with the hope that they could work within the new body to restore the Anglican formularies to a central place in its teaching and life have a deep furrow to plough in very rocky soil—with a wooden plough share and no horses, mules, or oxen to pull the plow. They face a formidable task. It brings to mind the old proverbial saying, “It is ill sitting at Rome and striving with the Pope.” How much they can accomplish in such a climate remains to be seen.
Those congregations and clergy in the ACNA, which are committed to upholding and maintaining the Protestant, Reformed, and evangelical character of Anglicanism, need to join with like minded clergy and congregations in the Anglican Mission to form a united front against any resurgence of unreformed Catholicism in both bodies. They need to ally themselves with conservative evangelicals outside of these bodies in and outside of North America. Conservative evangelicals in Australia, Ireland, South Africa, South America, and the United Kingdom need to open their eyes to what is happening in the ACNA and not be so unqualified in their support of that body. Rather they need to extend their support to their fellow conservative evangelicals in North America, in and outside of the ACNA and the Anglican Mission. What is needed in the Anglican Church is not a new Oxford movement but a heritage Anglican movement grounded in the teaching of the Bible and the Reformation and committed to the preservation and propagation of confessional Anglicanism. It is time to blow the trumpet through the land, to sound the clarion to warn evangelicals of the coming sword and to summon them to fight for what they believe
5 comments:
Well. Well. Duh. So to have true Anglicanism we must wear a Chausalbe (sp) and if you do not you are not Anglican. That is the current line. What has happened? YOu are correct again. The low church people are getting the spiritual shaft. Did this not happen in 1874?
David,
Bishop George David Cummins founded the Reformed Episcopal Church in 1873. A staunch Evangelical of Reformed doctrine, Cummins opposed the influences of Ritualism and the Anglo-Catholic Oxford movement. Earlier in 1873 Bishop Cummins was criticized for receiving communion with ministers outside the Protestant Episcopal Church, and resigned his position. The REC adopted its first Prayer Book in 1874. Until that time it used the 1785 Proposed American Prayer Book.
I am still looking for a copy of the 1874 REC Prayer Book. I had begun posting the services of the 1874 Prayer Book on the Internet but the young man who was xeroxing the services for me from the copy of the 1874 REC Prayer Book in the library of a nearby university stopped doing so and I had to discontinue the project. He was a university student and had a lot on his plate. Since that time I have obtained a copy of the 1956 Free Church of England Prayer Book which was influenced by the 1874 REC Prayer Book. I would like to obtain a copy of the 1874, compare the two, and finish the project. I have transliterated the 1956 FCE Prayer Book into modern English and revised it, adding two new services and making some other changes. I also drafted an edition of this revision for use in North America.
FIFNA has never concealed that its aim was to make the ACNA more Catholic in dcotrine, order, and practice than it presently is. A new Oxford Movement would help it achieve this aim. It is disengenuous for Bishop Ackerman to associate the Oxford Movement with the Caroline Divines. The Oxford Movement was openly sympathetic to the Church of Rome, the Council of Trent and Romanism while the Caroline Divines had decidely anti-Roman bent. FIFNA is clearly Romanist.
The issue is more than ritualism. The theological pluralists in the ACNA may have no problem with proclaiming more than one gospel.The Bible,however, tells us that there is only one true gospel and all who preach a different gospel are accursed. In all its doctrinal provisions the Thirty-Nine Articles articulate that gospel as James Packer and Roger Beckwith draw to our attention in The Thirty-Nine Articles: Their Place and Use Today. John Newman reinterpreted the Articles in a Rome-ward direction. His approach to the Articles was fanciful and ahistorical. He argued that Catholics do not have to give any attention to the Articles' historical context or the intent of their authors in their interpretation of the Articles. Anglo-Catholics have either taken this position or rejected the Articles altogether since that time.
"Bishop George David Cummins founded the Reformed Episcopal Church in 1873".
Jesus Christ established the ecumenical church, I feel safer in his church thank you. I have a soft spot for the reforms. It is just sad that the desire to rule has overcome the desire to maintain the faith once and for all delivered. I am not a fan of ACNA but they are better off without AMIA, hopefully the talks with the Orthodox will help them become orthodox Anglicans. I can not support any notion of orthodox Anglicans having to convert to Christianity as Rome would have it as well as some of my own brethren. To this day I still think Rome is the problem not the solution, I don't understand why my Greek brothers are so excited to get into bed with a church that still believes in the Treasury of Merit.
Robin,
Go to www.alibris.com. Type in THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER, REFORMED EPISCOPAL CHURCH. I don't want to get my hopes up too much, but it does appear at long last as if someone (Alibris) has reprinted the original, first edition of 1874 BCP. Most indicative is that they indicate the publisher was Thomas Moore, Philadelphia: the actual publisher of the 1874 BCP. Hopefully it is not the REC's original, small volume reprint of the 1785 BCP. Alibris indicates it is an OCR reprint, and is selling it for $35.00. I'm waiting for a copy.
You may recall I briefly assisted you with researching the early REC/BCP editions.? If I can be of more consistent help to you now than I was last time please let me know. In the meantime I'll gladly let you borrow my 1874, 3rd edition, published in 1896, if that will be of assistance.
John Haney
I am a floating refugee from TEC and have contributed to GAFCON but have the same suspicions that ACNA will be a catholic clone of TEC sooner than you think. I think this all started with the stance of the Diocese of Pittsburgh when it was still in TEC and which also was akin to that of Trinity School for Ministry-- a smorgasbord ritual is not consistent with the Anglican theology of the 39 Articles. Can anybody recall Akerman on Anglican TV doing skullcap doffings at the Communion Table as though he were a cardinal!!!! My theory is that the American church got jinxed from its Deist influential beginnings when they ditched the Athanasian Creed and even dickered with the Apostles' Creed. I can see Ben Franklin’s ghost nodding.
I am reluctant to sign on with REC because it has capitulated its Protestant churchmanship for catholic tendencies. Check out Bishop Riches' own diocesan church website where their prayer book is listed as 1928 (even after REC produced its own revised PB 2003 ) and presbyters are listed as Father so and so. Cummins must be shaking his head in glory. I think the REC modified their 1963 BCP (a real chop job if ever there was one) to accommodate their ACA partners and to absorb 1928 devotees. Politics, politics, politics.
My ideal churchmanship in the Protestant mode is that of Sydney. Here in the NY area there is one Sydney-licensed John Mason who has an "Anglican" church plant going but is under no bishop. Haven’t been to his church yet. The more the episcopal shenanigans keep developing , the more I see the value of Presbyterianism-- if only they had BCP 1662!
Post a Comment