Why North America Needs a Second Alternative Anglican Province

By Robin G. Jordan

A careful examination of the Anglican Church in North America’s formularies—its constitution, canons, rites and services, and catechism—reveals the systematic exclusion of the Anglican Reformed beliefs and liturgical practices from these formularies.

The Anglican Church in North America in its formularies does not extend to the Anglican Reformed clergy and congregations the freedom to practice and propagate their faith that it extends to Anglo-Catholic and philo-Orthodox clergy and congregations.

The constitution and canons of the Anglican Church in North America do not offer Anglican Reformed clergy, ordination candidates, dioceses, networks, and congregations any protection from theological discrimination.

The canons contain provisions that would enable Anglo-Catholic and philo-Orthodox bishops to deny licenses to Anglican Reformed clergy and ordination to Anglican Reformed ordination candidates. They also contain provisions that would enable these bishops to inhibit, prosecute, try, and depose Anglican Reformed clergy who, while faithful to the teaching of the Bible and the doctrine of the Anglican confessional formularies, do not conform to the doctrine of the jurisdiction’s formularies.

Under the provisions of the canons the Provincial Council is free to deny recognition to Anglican Reformed dioceses and networks on the basis of their theological outlook and Anglo-Catholic and philo-Orthodox dioceses and networks are free to deny recognition to Anglican Reformed congregations for the same reason.

Add to this picture the College of Bishops ’ low regard for constitutionalism and the rule of law, its repeated violation of the constitution and canons, its arrogation of powers that the constitution and canons do not give the College or recognize as being inherent in that body, its usurpation of the role of the Provincial Council in a number of key areas, the control that the College exercises over who may become a bishop, the limited role given to the laity in the governance of the jurisdiction, a set of disciplinary canons lacking basic safeguards, and a host of other problems, and one is led to the inescapable conclusion that if the Anglican Church in North America does not reform itself, North America will need a second alternative Anglican province to the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada, an alternative jurisdiction to the Anglican Church in North America!!

Since the Anglican Church in North America has little incentive to reform itself, having received the recognition that it covets from the GAFCON Primates, the time has come to make plans for the formation of such a province—a jurisdiction that in practice fully accepts the Scriptures as its canon or functioning rule of faith and life and the Anglican confessional formularies as its doctrinal and worship standard and in which bishops are chosen by the judicatory that they are to serve, are “like everyone else… subject to constitutional definition of authority and limitation of power,” share authority with synods at the provincial and judicatorial levels and are accountable to these synods.

The establishment of the new province would be a test of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans’ resolve to stand with Anglicans excluded by their province or diocese. The leaders of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans’ have so far ignored the plight of Anglican Reformed clergy and congregations in North America. This is surprising since Anglican Reformed clergy and congregations are on the basis of their faithfulness to the teaching of the Scriptures and the doctrine of the Anglican confessional formularies the real confessing Anglicans in North America.

One is prompted to ask why FCA leaders support an organization like the Anglican Church in North America that has adopted a policy of not making room in its formularies for the beliefs and liturgical practices of genuine confessing Anglicans. Their motives are unclear.

To those who might object to the establishment of a second alternative Anglican province on the grounds that it would cause unnecessary hostility between the different groups forming the ACNA and needless fragmentation, it must pointed out that the Anglo-Catholic – philo-Orthodox element in the Anglican Church in North America has already set the ACNA on that path. It is quite evident by now that this element is seeking to impose a single identity upon the Anglican Church in North America, an identity that is unreformed Catholic, not reformed Anglican. This element dominates the Provincial Council, the Executive Committee, the various task forces, and the College of Bishops. The formularies that the Anglican Church in North America has produced to date make no room for Anglican Reformed beliefs, much less liturgical practices. Reflected in the actions of the ACNA’s first Archbishop and its College of Bishops and the Provincial Council and dioceses’ acquiescence to these actions is a Roman Catholic-Eastern Orthodox view of the Church, an authoritarian view in which bishops have broad discretionary powers and negligible accountability.

To date this element has seen no organized opposition, has received encouragement from the GAFCON Primates’ recognition of the Anglican Church in North America, and has exploited and benefited from a willingness to accommodate it for the sake maintaining peace in the ACNA and a united front against the Episcopal Church. Those who are accommodating this element are paying a very high price for the illusion of harmony and unity in the ACNA—their own theological identity and ultimately the teaching of the Scriptures—the faith once delivered to the saints. They are tolerating if not accepting a form of church governance that has no basis in the Scriptures. Christ is the only real authority in his Church. He has not delegated his authority to a select few. Rather Christ works his will through all believers—clergy and laity alike.

Anglo-Catholic-philo-Orthodox element in the Anglican Church in North America has no cause to complain if clergy and congregations in the ACNA committed to the teaching of the Scriptures and the doctrine of the Anglican confessional formularies decide to go their separate way. It has not made room for them in the ACNA. It has put its ideas and itself first. It has demanded that this segment of the ACNA accommodate its views but has displayed extreme reluctance to accommodate the views of other groups. It should not be surprised if other groups tire of its self-aggrandizement. Not everyone shares Bishop Jack Iker’s vision of a province in which Anglo-Catholicism is promoted, privileged, and pandered to.

As for clergy and congregations in the Anglican Church in North America committed to the teaching of the Scriptures and the doctrine of the Anglican confessional formularies, each new formulary that the ACNA has produced has diminished their capacity to maintain a Protestant identity, much less a Reformed identity in the ACNA. The provisions of the constitution and canons permitting dioceses, networks, and congregations to leave have not proven an effective deterrent against Anglo-Catholic – philo-Orthodox efforts to impose a single identity upon the ACNA. As a school of Anglican thought these clergy and congregations enjoy no official recognition or standing in the ACNA. They remain a part of the ACNA only on sufferance. If they wish to flourish, their best option is to launch a second alternative province.  They have no real future in the ACNA.