Dandelions

By Robin G. Jordan

Dandelions have no roars.
They don’t scratch and they don’t snore.
Dandelions have no feet.
They don’t hunt and they don’t eat.

Wild flowers, yellow weeds,
God will give us what we need,
Wild flowers, yellow weeds.
God will give us what we need.

Western Kentucky has a profusion of wildflowers. They bloom in the spring, summer, fall, and late winter. Dandelions bloom even in the midst of winter. Unless one is a botanist or has made a hobby of identifying wildflowers, one needs a field guide to identify them. I have a collection of such field guides on my bookshelves. For a number of years I photographed wildflowers as a hobby.

As long as the Anglican Church in North America claims to be “authentically Anglican” and the GAFCON Primates recognize the ACNA as “authentically Anglican,” its unwillingness to make room for a group of conservative Anglicans who hold to the beliefs and practices of authentic historic Anglicanism will be an issue. If the ACNA withdraw that claim and the GAFCON Primates withdrew their recognition, it would no longer be an issue. Only if the ACNA welcomes this particular group of Anglicans and removes the barriers to their involvement in that ecclesial body is it entitled to make this claim and to receive this recognition.

Whether this particular group of Anglicans would want to be a part of the ACNA under the circumstances is irrelevant. An ecclesial body that claims to be “authentically Anglican” but does not make room for this particular group of Anglicans is not “authentically Anglican.” It is something else. It is missing vital genes from its DNA. It may have Anglo-Catholic genes, liberal genes, and charismatic genes. But if it is lacking these genes, it is lacking an important set of genes that make it “authentically Anglican.”

These genes must not only be present but they must be actively functioning. They must be doing what such genes normally do in an ecclesial body that is “authentically Anglican.” They cannot be something that resembles these genes. They must be really them.

In western Kentucky grows two plants that look like each other. One is the false dandelion; the other is the dandelion. Botanists and a few locals can tell them apart. Most folks cannot. They are, despite their similar appearance, botanically and genetically different plants.

The truth is that an ecclesial body does not need Anglo-Catholic, liberal, or charismatic genes to be classifiable as “authentically Anglican.” But it does need this particular set of genes. They are its “Anglican” genes. Without them, it is not “authentically Anglican.”

What makes Anglicanism distinct is this set of genes. The Anglo-Catholic, liberal, and charismatic genes are the result of later hybridization. The “Anglican” genes are not something that an ecclesial body can discard and claim to be “authentically Anglican,” as the Anglican Church in North America has.

Why then did the GAFCON Primates recognize the ACNA to be “authentically Anglican?” The answer is very simple—expediency. Their recognition of the ACNA as “authentically Anglican” was political.

For someone to call a false dandelion a dandelion for his own purposes, however, does not make a false dandelion a dandelion. They are still two different plants.

As long as the Anglican Church in North America admits Anglicans who hold to the beliefs and practices of authentic historic Anglicanism only on its own terms—at the expense of their convictions—it will be pretending to be Anglican. Even though people may accept the ACNA as Anglican, their acceptance will not change anything. A false dandelion is a false dandelion.

There is nothing to prevent the Anglican Church in North America from revising its Fundamental Declarations and the doctrinal provisions of its canons to make that ecclesial body more comprehensive. Its failure to revise them points to two possible conclusions. The first is that the ACNA is unwilling to admit to having adopted flawed governing documents. Hubris—pride—keeps it from doing so. The second is that its exclusion of Anglicans who hold to the beliefs and practices of authentic historic Anglicanism is deliberate, in which case its leaders needs to come clean and make a public admission of this policy.

My suspicion is that the latter may be the case. The ACNA leaders prefer to wait out any controversy until it goes away. It may not have even come to their attention. If it has, they have sized up this particular group of Anglicans as small, disorganized, divided, and without support in and outside of North America and therefore not a group about which they need to trouble themselves, which may explain why they excluded the group in the first place. Responding to the controversy also would focus attention on it.

Whatever the reason for Anglican Church in North America’s failure to revise its governing documents to make that ecclesial body more comprehensive, it deprives the Anglican province wannabe of the critical genes in its DNA to be “authentically Anglican.” Like the false dandelion, it may bear a resemblance to the real thing but that resemble does not make it the real thing. As long as it excludes Anglicans who hold to the beliefs and practices of authentic historic Anglicanism, the genuineness of its Anglican identity will always be in doubt. The recognition of the GAFCON Primates and even the recognition of the Archbishop of Canterbury cannot make up for the missing vital genes in its DNA. A false dandelion is a false dandelion.