The Anglican Church in North America—an Indulgence in Creative Anachronism?

By Robin G. Jordan

While the Anglican Church in North America has separated from the Episcopal Church over the radical liberalism of that denomination, the ACNA is nonetheless an extension of the Episcopal Church. If you read alternative histories fiction, the ACNA might be described as an attempt at the introduction of the Episcopal Church from an alternative time line into the same time line as the Episcopal Church.

In this Episcopal Church from an alternative time line the official doctrine of the Church is closer to that of the Roman Catholic Church as is its form of governance. Its service of Holy Communion is also closer to that of the Roman Mass—a contemporary English translation of the Holy Communion service from 1928 Book of Common Prayer following the recommended structure of the 1958 Lambeth Conference’s Sub-Committee on the Book of Common Prayer and incorporating liturgical material and rubrics from The Anglican Missal. The resulting denomination, however, from the perspective of the Anglican formularies, is not any more Anglican than the Episcopal Church in this time line.

A similar quip might be directed at the folks in the Anglican Church in North America as the one directed at the Society for Creative Anachronism. They are devoted to the recreation of the Episcopal Church as it ought to have been. They are selectively recreating its ecclesiastical cultural, choosing elements of that culture that interest and attract them and adding elements from other ecclesiastical cultures that likewise interest and attract them.

One might also quip that they are not genuinely trying to be Jesus’ church on mission but playing church. Being with Jesus on mission does not require dressing up in colorful, elaborate costumes and engaging in all kinds of pageantry, ritual, and ceremony. Rather it entails following Jesus’ example, rubbing shoulders with all kinds of people from all walks of life, and taking a serious interest in them and their spiritual well-being. Playing church is the easier path but it is not a path that we should be taking when the salvation of souls is at stake.

Jesus calls us not only to join him on mission but also to be a servant church. A church whose clergy are caparisoned in the finery of the Medieval Catholic Church and prostrating themselves before a damask-covered altar is not a servant church. It is something else altogether. It is not a church that gives serious thought to what Jesus said to the rich young man, “Go, sell your possessions, and follow me.”

The plainness of the Elizabethan parish church and the restraint and simplicity of their worship is traceable not only to the Protestantism of the English Reformers but also the influence of the Medieval Catholic monastic orders to which a number of them had belonged. These monastic orders were known for the austerity of their places of worship and the unfussiness of their worship. They did take with full seriousness what Jesus said to the rich young man.

The ornaments and practices that the nineteenth century Ritualists introduced into the Church of England and the Episcopal Church went well beyond the modest “reforms” that the Caroline High Churchmen made in the seventeenth century. They were entirely out of character with historic Anglicanism. In a number of instances they were foreign to the pre-Reformation English Church.

The Episcopal Church from another time line, which the Anglican Church in North America is trying to introduce into this time line is a daughter church of a Church of England that did not undergo a reformation in the sixteenth century. The only changes that it made were to break with Rome, abandon Latin for the vernacular, and give greater prominence to Scripture in its liturgy. It is the church of Erasmus, not the church of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley. It is also a Church of England that evolved along similar lines to the Roman Catholic Church from the sixteenth century on and adopted similar innovations in doctrine and worship.

An Episcopal Church from an alternative time line is not the only church from an alternative time line that the folks in the Anglican Church in North America are trying to introduce. They are also attempting to introduce the undivided church of the early period of the High Middle Age from a time line in which the Great Schism did not occur in the eleventh century. Here again they are devoted to recreating what ought to have been and not what was. They are selective in what they are recreating. Some of the elements that they are adding come from their own imaginations.

Those who are not satisfied at playing one kind of church have another kind of church at which they can play. Both churches they are trying to recreate are fictional, imaginary. They ignore what God said through the prophet Amos, “I hate, I despise your feasts, and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies.” The colorful, elaborate costumes and the ritual, the ceremonial and the pageantry, what J. C. Ryle called “sensuous Christian worship,” which they love, do not please God.

Jesus himself cites this passage from Amos on a number of occasions. He told those who gathered to hear him that what God wants from them is that they should show to others the same loving kindness that God shows to them. This is what is pleasing to God.

Whatever money God’s people may have left over from meeting their basic needs should be used to spread the gospel and help others. It should not be spent on lavish vestments for priests and altars and expensive furnishings for church buildings. These ornaments do not honor God any more than our festivals and solemn Eucharists. They are not what God wants from us.

This may be disappointing to those who set great store in such things. But the Bible is very clear about what is pleasing to God. They may find clergy who tell them what they want to hear. However, the Bible is very clear about that too.

We can become so wrapped up in the observance of the special days and seasons of the church year that we lose sight of their real purpose—to edify the church and focus its attention on the salvation story—how God’s story and our story intersect.

As the apostle Paul reminded the church at Corinth, our sharing of the Lord’s Supper retells an important part of the salvation story: we proclaim Jesus’ death on the cross for our sins.

We honor God in our telling of the salvation story as God is the central actor in that story. But the ornaments, the rituals, and the ceremonies that have come to surround its telling do not honor God whatever we may think of them. Rather they breed superstition and error. They obscure or hide the salvation story and tell a story of their own. It is a story that does not come from God but from our own imaginations. It is a story that requires us only to furnish the ornaments, to repeat the rituals and ceremonies, and to do nothing else.

The salvation story, on the other hand, conveys an entirely different message. Having heard that story, we are invited to act on what we have heard. We are invited to believe. Having believed, we are obligated to share the story with others so that they may believe.

The Anglican Church in North America’s indulgence in creative anachronism may be delighting medievalists and medieval reenactment fans. But it is not bringing the message of the salvation story to those who need to hear it the most. If the Anglican Church in North America has a serious commitment to the Great Commission, it needs to set aside this pastime and focus upon spreading the gospel and making disciples above all else.

Local congregations need to ask themselves some tough questions. Do the ornaments, rituals, and ceremonies of the Medieval Catholic Church serve the Great Commission in their particular context? Is the purchase of vestments, pastoral staffs, mitres, pectoral crosses, and episcopal rings the most cost-effective use of their resources in the service of the Great Commission. Are such ornaments, which are an ostentatious medieval display of status and rank designed to draw attention to the wearer, something that should be worn by the servant leaders of a twenty-first century church? How might they make better use of their resources to reach the lost?

Each local congregation will be required to give an accounting to Jesus someday for the decisions that it makes. This includes deciding to blindly follow tradition when it clearly should take a different path.