Securing a Future for Biblical Anglicanism in the ACNA: The Options

By Robin G. Jordan

The unreformed Catholic bias of the formularies of the Anglican Church in North America is indisputable. Catholic Revivalist thinking exercises substantial influence upon the College of Bishops, the Provincial Council, and the key task forces of the ACNA. It is evident in every ACNA formulary from the Fundamental Declarations to the so-called “ancient” form of the Holy Communion and the Daily Office Lectionary. The ACNA formularies do not give the same standing to any school of thought that they give to Catholic Revivalism and its unreformed teaching and practices. Indeed historic Anglicanism, “the faith of the Church expressed in the Holy Bible, the Anglican Formularies, and the Jerusalem Declaration” and its liturgical usages have no official standing in the ACNA.

What can be done to correct this inequitable situation in the Anglican Church in North America? What can be done to make the province more comprehensive of biblical Anglicanism?

One option is to completely overhaul the formularies of the Anglican Church in North America. As they did in the Common Cause Partnership days of the ACNA the Catholic Revivalist members of the College of Bishops, the Provincial Council, and the key task forces are likely to oppose any changes that make the ACNA genuinely comprehensive. This would require their loosening of their grip upon the levers of power in the ACNA and their relinquishing of their dream of a province that is unreformed Catholic in doctrine, order, and practice. The way that the ACNA is structured proposals for changes in the ACNA formularies can be initiated by only a small circle of ACNA leaders. The circle has strong Catholic Revivalist leanings and is not likely to initiate such proposals. What proposals that it might initiate are likely to be toothless and cosmetic.

A second option is to bypass the legislative process and to take independent steps to establish a second province within the Anglican Church in North America that upholds and maintains in its formularies “the faith of the Church expressed in the Holy Bible, the Anglican Formularies, and the Jerusalem Declaration”.  This second province would enfold elements of the ACNA committed to the historic Anglican faith and accepting the Anglican Formularies as their standard of doctrine and worship.

The second province would essentially be a province within a province. It would be fully autonomous, cooperating with original province of the Anglican Church of North America on matters on which there was common agreement but otherwise independent of that province. It would have its own constitution with its own fundamental declarations and ruling principles. It would also have its own set of canons.

The second province would not be geographically-based. It would have congregations and missional communities and networks of congregations and missional communities throughout North America (Alaska, Canada, Cuba, Guam, Hawaii, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and the contiguous United States) as does the original province of the Anglican Church in North America. 

The second province would have a general synod or its equivalent that would be the supreme governing authority of the province and would speak and act on the behalf of the whole province. The general synod would consist of a single chamber composed of delegates from the dioceses and missionary dioceses forming the province. The delegates of each judicatory would consist of representatives of the bishops and other clergy of each judicatory and representatives of the laity of each judicatory. They would be elected in accordance with the canons. The number of delegates of each judicatory to the general synod would be determined by the synod from time to time.

There would be an executive committee, designated as the general synod standing committee, which would be appointed by the general synod and which would act on its behalf between its meetings.

The second province would have a moderator who would be the presiding bishop of the province. The moderator would be elected by the general synod from among the bishops of the province. The duties and responsibilities of the moderator would be delineated in the canons.

The bishops of the dioceses of the province would be elected by their respective judicatories in the manner prescribed in the regulations of the judicatory. The bishops of missionary dioceses would be elected by the general synod. In the event a diocese was unable to elect a bishop after repeated attempts or failed to elect a bishop within a specified time period after the office became vacant, the office would be filled by the general synod, or by the general synod standing committee, subject to the confirmation of the general synod.

The second province would have its own procedure for the recognition of dioceses and missionary dioceses.

The second province would have its own prayer book, ordinal, and catechism.

The formation of such a province is the best way to secure a future for biblical Anglicanism in North America short of establishing a second alternative North American Anglican province.