The Reorganization of the Anglican Church in North America: A Proposal

By Robin G. Jordan

The Anglican Church of Australia was formed from a group of independent dioceses, each having its own connection to the Church of England and each representing a different school of churchmanship. This presented a variety of challenges for the drafters of the constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia. It resulted in several unique features that might also have been used in the organization of the Anglican Church in North America. They are features that still might be used in its reorganization.

During the days of the Common Cause Partnership the situation in the United States and Canada was not unlike that in Australia at the time the constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia was drafted. Anglicans who had broken away from the Episcopal Church in the United States and the Anglican Church in Canada in the twenty-first century were concentrated in a small number of church networks. These networks were non-geographical. Each network was under the oversight of a province outside of North America, the exception being the Reformed Episcopal Church. Each network had its own bishops.

The Anglicans in each network fell into two categories on a number of issues. In regards to historic Anglicanism and its formularies these two categories consisted of those who wished to remain faithful to historic Anglicanism and its formularies and those who wished to move the Anglican Church in an unreformed Catholic direction, a direction that would move it closer to Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.

In regards to the ordination of women, the two categories consisted of those who opposed women’s ordination and those who supported it. In regards to the Holy Scriptures they consisted of those who viewed Scripture as being perspicuous and essentially self-interpreting and those who gave great weight to church tradition in its interpretation.

In regard to the sacraments the two categories consisted of those who recognized only two sacraments ordained by God--Baptism and the Lord’s Supper--and those who subscribed to the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic sacramental system. In regards to apostolic succession they consisted of those who understand apostolic succession as maintaining continuity with the teaching of the apostles and those who understand apostolic succession as preserving an unbroken succession of ordinations going back to the apostles.

I think that you get the picture. The Anglicans in each network were divided on a range of issues.

An idea that was enjoying currency at that time was the concept of affinity networks. An affinity network is a network of clergy and congregations that share a common theological outlook.

In his book, From Geography to Affinity: How Congregations Can Learn From One Another, the late Lyle Schaller promoted affinity networks as a possible solution to the divisions that had formed in a number of mainline denominations over a variety of issues. He thought that the formation of these networks might enable Christians with disparate views to remain in the same national denomination.

The proposed constitution for the Anglican Church in North America initially appeared to embrace this idea but it soon became evident that the drafters of that document had a limited understanding of the nature of affinity networks. When they referred to networks based upon affinity, they were referring to networks based upon past association, not shared theological outlook.

To my mind the organization of the Anglican Church in North America into convocations, networks of clergy and congregations based upon shared theological outlook, would be a solution to the friction that is bound to arise when an ecclesiastical organization is composed of clergy and congregations who have disparate views on a number of issues and different visions of that organization. It would not be a perfect solution but it would be better than one group entrenching itself and marginalizing the other groups as happened in the Episcopal Church (and is happening in the ACNA.)

These convocations would be a non-geographical version of the provinces into which the Anglican Church of Australia is divided. They in turn would be organized into smaller networks of clergy and congregations, based upon geographic proximity.

A determining factor would be the size of the convocation. A small convocation might be organized as a single diocese.

A Central Synod would be the governing body of the province. Like the Anglican Church of Australia's General Synod, the Central Synod would elect a Standing Committee that would carry on the work of the Central Synod between sessions. The Central Synod would determine the powers and responsibilities of its Standing Committee.

Under the provisions of the constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia the canonicity of the election or appointment of a bishop is not confirmed at the national level but at the provincial level. There is more than one method of confirmation.

In some instances the chancellor of the diocese may confirm that the new bishop’s election or appointment conformed to the national and diocesan canons. The chancellor certifies that the new bishop meets the age, ordination, and other requirements for the office of bishop in the Anglican Church of Australia and the diocese.

The Australian dioceses have considerable leeway in how they may choose a new bishop. The most common methods are election by the diocesan synod, election by a board of electors elected by the diocesan synod, and appointment by a special committee comprised of the bishops of the province and clergy and lay representatives of its dioceses. In the latter case the diocesan synod must approve the appointment.

If a diocese is unable to choose a new bishop by its usual method, it may delegate the appointment of a bishop for the diocese to the province without prejudice to its right to choose a future bishop by its usual method. As in the case where a special committee chooses the new bishop for a diocese, the appointment must be approved by the diocesan synod. The diocese may also withdraw its delegation of the appointment of a bishop for the diocese to the province.

Both these methods of confirming the canonicity of a bishop’s election or appointment and electing or appointing a bishop would work equally well in non-geographic convocations as they do in geographic provinces. They would eliminate the possibility of the ACNA’s College of Bishops confirming the election of bishops or appointing bishops on the basis that they do not represent a perceived or real threat to the hegemony of the faction that has the most influence in the College of Bishops.

The constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia lays out a number of important principles in Chapter II:

This Church, being derived from the Church of England, retains and approves the doctrine and principles of the Church of England embodied in the Book of Common Prayer together with the Form and Manner of Making Ordaining and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests and Deacons and in the Articles of Religion sometimes called the Thirty-nine Articles but has plenary authority at its own discretion to make statements as to the faith, ritual, ceremonial ,or discipline of this Church and to order its forms of worship and rules of discipline and to alter or revise such statements, forms and rules, provided that all such statements, forms, rules or alteration or revision thereof are consistent with the Fundamental Declarations contained herein and are made as prescribed by this Constitution. Provided, and it is hereby further declared, that the above-named Book of Common Prayer, together with the Thirty-nine Articles, be regarded as the authorised standard of worship and doctrine in this Church, and no alteration in or permitted variations from the services or Articles therein contained shall contravene any principle of doctrine or worship laid down in such standard.

Under these provisions the Anglican Church of Australia has adopted two books of alternative services that may be used to supplement the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, which is the province's official prayer book. They are An Australian Prayer Book (1978) and A Prayer Book for Australia (1995).

Chapter II also permits a bishop of a diocese to authorize deviations from the existing order of service.

Provided further that until other order be taken by canon made in accordance with this Constitution, a bishop of a diocese may, at his discretion, permit such deviations from the existing order of service, not contravening any principle of doctrine or worship as aforesaid, as shall be submitted to him by the incumbent and churchwardens of a parish.

Provided also that no such request shall be preferred to the bishop of a diocese until the incumbent and a majority of the parishioners present and voting at a meeting of parishioners, duly convened for the purpose, shall signify assent to such proposed deviations. Such meeting shall be duly convened by writing, placed in a prominent position at each entrance to the church and by announcement at the morning and evening services, or at the service if only one, at least two Sundays before such meeting, stating the time and place of such meeting, and giving full particulars of the nature of the proposed deviation.

The provisions of this section have been expanded by the Australian Prayer Book Canon 1977 and the Prayer Book for Australia Canon 1995 and applied to An Australian Prayer Book and A Prayer Book for Australia.

Under these expanded provisions the Diocese of Sydney has produced two service book of its own, Sunday Services and Common Prayer: Resources for Gospel-Shaped Gatherings.

The constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia also has provisions which limit the type of canon that is binding upon a diocese without its consent. Canons that do not fall into this category do not affect a diocese unless it consents to the canon.

A diocese that consents to a canon may withdraw its consent at a future date. It may consent again to the canon without prejudice to its withdrawal of consent later on.

In this regard dioceses of the Anglican Church of Australia have far greater autonomy than the dioceses of the Episcopal Church and a number of other Anglican province.

The constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia shows that there is more than one way to organize an Anglican province. It also shows that an Anglican province can be organized to curb dogmatists intent on forcing their churchmanship on the whole province.

To my mind the way that the Anglican Church in North America is presently organized resembles too closely the organization of the Roman Catholic Church and the Communist Party of the former Soviet Union. I have studied the Roman Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law and the organizational structure of the Soviet Communist Party and I am familiar with their governing principles. They are both a pyramid with several levels.

The tip of the pyramid is composed of the church or party’s top echelon—the highest ranking bishops or party leaders—who make the major decisions. These decisions are then passed down to the lower levels for their automatic approval.

The Anglican Church in North America functions in pretty much the same way. Whatever faction dominates the top echelon determines the direction of the province.

Implicit in the present organization of the Anglican Church in North America is the notion that only church’s top echelon is guided by the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit. The Thirty-Nine Articles in its recognition of the fallibility of General Councils rejects this notion (Article XXI).

The Homily on the Coming Down of the Holy Ghost for Whitsunday rejects the notion that the pope has a special gift of the Holy Spirit and by extension that any bishop has such a gift. It affirms that the gift of the Holy Spirit is given to all who have a vital faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

While the English Reformers retained the episcopate, the form of church government that they adopted was modeled upon that of Zurich and the other Swiss City States (with the exception of Geneva). It is a model that gave the laity, represented by the magistrate in the Swiss City States and Queen and Parliament in England, a sizeable voice in the affairs of the church.

When the United States became independent from England, the newly-formed Protestant Episcopal Church adopted the convention-system as a replacement for the King, Parliament, and the colonial legislatures. The notion that the bishop was the sole authority in the diocese and was a law unto himself did not gain ground in the Protestant Episcopal Church until the mid-nineteenth century and then only in those dioceses strongly influenced by the Catholic revival.

In its particular form of church government as in the doctrine of its catechism and its proposed Book of Common Prayer the Anglican Church in North America gives every sign of having abandoned the Anglican Way. The Provincial Assembly, the body with the largest representation of laity in it, has no real voice in the church’s affairs.

The reorganization of the Anglican Church in North America along the lines that I have suggested would put its feet firmly upon the Anglican Way. It would also make room for a variety of opinions in the ACNA.

It would give the different schools of thought represented in the Anglican Church in North America time to decide whether they really want to stay together in one ecclesiastical organization or go their separate ways. It would give them time to weigh the pros and cons of continued cooperation.

More importantly it would give all the “kids” at the birthday party the same number of cookies. It would not lead to a mad scramble which results in some kids grabbing more cookies than they can eat and other kids getting none at all .

No one needs to fear that he will not get his share. Everyone is treated alike and has a good time at the party.

It is the difference between a theology of scarcity, a theology of works, and a theology of plenty, a theology of grace. Our God is a generous God. If we are to be imitators of God, as Paul urged the Ephesians, we must be generous too.

Also See:
The Anglican Church in North America: What Went Wrong