In reflecting on all that has transpired since leaving the Episcopal Church the Rev. David Miller, rector of the parish, wrote the following:
“This press release finds the St. John’s church family preparing to enter a whole new stage of our life together. We stand ready to leave the familiar and historic surroundings of the building at 5th and C, a building that has been the church home to my family since our arrival in Petaluma in 1998; and a building that has been home to many of our members for much, much longer. Many memories and emotions arise as we say goodbye.â€
Fr. Miller continues, “However, as difficult as leaving is, two summary statements stand out as defining of the spirit in which we move to our new quarters. First is the recognition that this is not about the property but about the Gospel and the Word of God that we have been charged to uphold and defend. We did not leave the Episcopal Church to keep the property; we left to keep the Faith.
Second is the affirmation that the church is not the building; the church is the people. We are blessed to have a spirit of unity as we move forward.†St. John’s Anglican takes the occasion of this press release to say a heart felt thank you to the many people of Petaluma who have prayed for and encouraged us in so many amazing ways throughout this process.
St. John’s Anglican Church is pleased to announce that beginning Sunday, July 5, 2009, we will be holding Sunday services at 8:30am and 10:30am at the Petaluma Community Center at Lucchesi Park. We welcome any from the community who do not now have a church home or would like to support us on this occasion, to come and worship with us.
New worship location: St. John’s Anglican Church. Meeting at: Petaluma Community Center (Lucchesi Park)
320 N. McDowell Blvd.
Petaluma, CA 94954
(707) 283-1111Service times: 8:30 a.m. (traditional) and 10:30 a.m. (contemporary)
Administrative office and mailing address: 55 Maria Dr., Ste. 837, Petaluma, CA 94954
Another story in the hundreds of stories that are happening in the wreckage of the ECUSA’s decision to ordain a gay bishop and the defense of that decision among some to the point of forcing men like J.I. Packer out of the church for conscience sake.
I said J.I. Packer. Chew on that.
So here is one more formerly ECUSA church, walking away from the property controlled by the denomination, walking into some community center, and starting over with what amounts to a reconstituted, re-invented church.
It’s happening all over the United States and Canada. Bishops Jefferts Schori and Robinson have accomplished one thing with their insistence that God was responsible for Gene Robinson’s ordination as bishop: hundreds of congregations that were safely going through the motions in their beautiful facilities are now out, loose, blown by the Spirit into a new adventures they would have never experienced otherwise.
A new Anglican denomination has appeared this week: The Anglican Church of North America. It’s fledgling membership is drawn from churches and bishops who have, literally, been on the run for a safe place to be a Biblically serious Anglican since the Robinson ordination and the resulting pushback from conservative Anglicans around the world, especially in Africa.
The Anglican Church in North America unites some 100,000 Anglicans in 700 parishes into a single church. Jurisdictions which have joined together to form the 28 dioceses and dioceses-in-formation of the Anglican Church in North America are: the dioceses of Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, Quincy and San Joaquin; the Anglican Mission in the Americas; the Convocation of Anglicans in North America; the Anglican Network in Canada; the Anglican Coalition in Canada; the Reformed Episcopal Church; and the missionary initiatives of Kenya, Uganda, and South America’s Southern Cone. Additionally, the American Anglican Council and Forward in Faith North America are founding organizations.
With the birth of the ACNA, a safe haven with a missionary, evangelistic, orthodox heart has finally appeared for thousands of Anglicans who have been homeless in their own version of the evangelical wasteland.
Most of us can’t imagine what it would be like to convince a large portion of a congregation, especially older members, to walk away from the building. But is there anything more potentially Jesus-shaping for American Christians than exactly that?
I’m excited for these “new” Anglicans. I pray and hope that they experience a surprising, mighty move of the Holy Spirit. There are millions of evangelicals who would be far better off in a healthy Anglican church than in the evangelical wilderness they are slogging through right now. With their future before them, and now finally able to be guided by the Bible without a battle over the clearest of God’s many clear commands- sexual purity and marital fidelity- these churches should grow, plant more churches, renew Protestantism and have an influence many of us thought was long over for Anglicans in North America. Post-evangelicals such as myself are full of hope for our brothers and sisters. What a great week!
God bless all the new Anglicans, and especially Bishop Duncan and the new ACNA. And especially today, St. John’s Anglican in Petaluma, Ca.
______________
NOTE to regular IM readers. If you are an IM regular who wants to support this site now and into the future, consider doing so with the PayPal button on the sidebar.
The Internet Monk Archives 
Please take the following comment from whence it comes and accept my word of faith, that I have thought and prayed much over it. I am not an Evangelical and do not wish to rant, but am unable to let this pass without trying to represent a point of view that is in the minority here but nonethess sincerely held, in the hope that I’m not alone.
1. As a South African Anglican, I am in full communion with TEC, and our (liberal) Province has close and loving links with TEC. I am personally not comfortable to hear my own faith-description “Anglican” used to identify a group whose recent behaviour contradicts the things our Church has always stood for: tolerance of different viewpoints, focus on Word and sacrament together, respect for science and for scholarship, preaching and teaching through love in action, orderly conduct, and above all refusing to make “windows into men’s souls” – never mind their bedrooms.
2. As a South African, I have ideas about wastelands and wilderness lands. We have a great deal of such country here, it’s called the Karoo. It appears bleak and dry, though many people are instantly drawn to its wide open spaces, rolling hills and big skies. It’s a country where you can think big, and yet at the same time know your own small place. Those that love the Karoo and those that live there, experience the abundance of its life: the great waters that move under the ground, the vibrant birds and insects, the sweet aromatic fodder which flavours the most delicious lamb in the world, the glorious flower carpets that appear overnight after a rain. Those driving through by contrast, only notice the biomass diversity of the Karoo, by the copious amount that gets cleaned off their windscreens. What do they know of the place, that never took the time to find out? Nothing, and less than nothing.
By analogy, some correspondents here might consider themselves informed on TEC or Anglican spirituality, and entitled to dismiss leaders such as V. Gene Robinson, without having read a single word he’s written or preached, let alone engaging with him directly (he is a very accessible, approachable person and not a bogeyman).
3. Bishop Gene IS inspiring to many; and he was not “appointed”. He was freely elected, in terms of canon law, by his own people of New Hampshire who love and reverence him. +Gene has a warm, respectful relationship with his ex-wife, who supports him fully along with his daughters. They know, from living experience, the agony of trying to be straight when you are gay, the mistakes you can make, the roads less travelled you have to find. (Few churches have tried to address these issues with any honesty or practical common sense). I can’t say more without straying into territory prohibited by iMonk, so let’s leave it at that, but it’s nauseating to hear Christians talking as if they’re protective of +Gene’s ex-wife and family, without any personal knowledge of what they’ve been through, never mind what they still have to go through every time he has to wear a bullet-proof vest.
4. If church growth is the name of the game (not that I think it is), then we’re all in trouble. People are dumping religion, if not spirituality, in ever increasing numbers. Meanwhile researchers say that church conflict drives people away. They hear about our sexuality squabbles, our battles over women’s ordination and all the rest of our wearisome arguments, and it’s a big “no, thanks very much, got things to do”. Meanwhile, the planet burns; millions die of hunger, recession is at the door and war is not far behind. And here are the “Anglicans”, like Nietzche’s mosquito, fully centred in their own little flying universe. Is this the Church of the New Testament, that witnessed so passionately to the Gospel and changed the world through the love and grace of God?
5. Liberal, gay-affirming, open minded, creedal and ‘via media’ Churches can also grow, and some Episcopalian churches are doing very nicely. Vibrancy, sense of purpose, commitment to social justice, involvement of children and youth, inclusivity across race or ethnic groups, variety in worship styles, being effective with technology, relationship building, sensitive handling of Liturgy, a good balance of gender and age groups, and working respectfully together are important factors. Intelligent, clear and relevant teaching is a factor, “Bible bashing” is not required. Moreover, uniting against a common enemy (the least demanding form of human bond) has never been a foundation for the adventure we call Church, and never will be. When will we ever learn to put God’s priorities first and leave the rest to Him?
Here’s a fact: People listen to +Gene. When he says “Be not afraid” (a favourite saying), people stretch inside, making room for themselves, for each other, to become more. They grow, and the church grows with them. Robert Duncan, now…maybe it’s not his fault but he sports a Senator McCarthy look. That closed, sour face IS the message, and some of his cohorts have that same look. They’re the ones not to be afraid of, because they’re all so afraid themselves.
Meanwhile, the rest of us, Anglicans and Episcopalians who have been ditched, can gladly take Shakespeare’s advice: Serve God, love each other, and mend.
LikeLike
I grew up in St. John’s Episcopal Church in Petaluma. When I went back a few months ago, to the building housing the Anglican congregation, I found the same people I’d grown up with, believing the same things, worshipping in the same way. The church was full, with all the people I remembered and with new people who were happy to meet me and welcome me back. The Episcopal congregation meeting offsite was made up of a very few original congregants, and a few more new folks bent on reforming the church.
The Anglican church that walked away from the property this week is the same church that has been worshiping there for 30 years. The group that walked in is made up of a few folks who have accomplished what they wanted to do; walk into a Bible believing congregation and either change them or chase them out.
God bless Fr. David Miller and his vestry and his congregation for placing the worth of the Scripture and truth over the worth of a building. Unlike others I cannot wish the Episcopal group well, since their actions were malicious and purposeful and they intentionally dispossessed a body of believers for their steadfast and unchanging profession of faith. I would not have wished them well in that endeavor, I do not wish them well as an example to others on how to lead a church astray. I do not wish them ill, but I cannot pray for their success when their success means the subversion of the Gospel. Instead I pray for their redemption, the removal of the deception under which they live (which, I suppose in opposition to my words, IS wishing them well.)
LikeLike
On the “not a Protestant” thing: there are certainly other groups that many would call “Protestant” (i.e. non-Roman, non-Orthodox Christians) that resist that label. Quakers are the ones who come immediately to my mind. The claim in that case is that they were not founded to “protest” anything, but as a fresh movement of the Spirit. It’s a bit unusual to see a larger, more mainstream church react that way, though.
Of course there are also denominations (in the common parlance) who resist being called “denominations”. 😉
These aren’t completely trivial points, of course, because they do say something about the group’s concept of the Church. But they certainly can seem so, and IMHO people do sometimes get too wrought up about them.
LikeLike
…Packer made no efforts to stay in the Anglican Church over the past few years.
I want to be sure everyone gets to see this sentence. It’s one of a kind.
Yeah, that’s pretty rich. Packer just sat on his hands the last 10 years or so and made “no efforts” to work within the existing structure. *rolls eyes*
LikeLike
Fr. Ernesto:
“…then the Primates of the Southern Cone, Nigeria, Singapore, Rwanda, Kenya, etc., etc. are schismatics?”
No, but they are arguably acting outside of their geographic competencies. The Orthodox have a similar issue in the USA, where the principle of one bishop for a given area has long been honored in the breach.
Or we might compare the situation to the Church of Macedonia, which the Church of Bulgaria says ought to be part of itself. These two entities are out of communion with one another, yet are both Orthodox.
“And, does that make Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in America a sinner because he has withdrawn recognition of The Episcopal Church and labeled it as a heretical body and transferred it to the new province?”
Whether he is a sinner or not I cannot say, but I would be very surprised to find any Orthodox hierarch acknowledging some church outside of Orthodoxy as forming part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In Orthodox eyes, all others are heterodox. If his relations are cozier with one Episcopal faction than another, this should be understood as a kind of interfaith diplomacy, not as intercommunion. His Grace is probably aware that a number of conservative Episcopalians would consider joining Orthodoxy.
LikeLike
Adhunt wrote (25 Jun 2009 at 10:18 pm):
Keep in mind that thought Packer left, Wright stayed. Two powerful Evangelicals. Who’s right and who’s wrong? Perhaps you can enlighten me as it seems you understand the issue intimately
****
Well, whatever you think about the rights and wrongs of JI Packer’s decision (and I’m
not going to comment on that here), I would humbly suggest that you are wrong to draw a comparison here between Wright in the Church of England and Packer and in the Anglican Church of Canada for the simple reason that the C of E is not the ACC (or indeed that the Diocese of New Westminster is not the rest of the ACC). In other words, Packer in Canada and Wright in England are responding to two very different local contexts and you can only judge a decision to “stay” or “leave” in relation to the provincial church (or diocese thereof). “The Anglican Communion” doesn’t exist in a vacuum but necessarily exists in relation to its local parts. Packer’s decision to “leave” and Wright’s decision “to stay” are not just decisions to “leave” or “stay” in “the Anglican Communion” but rather are decisions to “leave” or “stay” in their respective local Anglican churches (the ACC and the C of E). They are two fundamentally different decisions. As a communicant member of the Church of England I can tell you that the thought of leaving the C of E has never crossed my mind for the simple reason that the C of E has not (yet?) done anything that would make me question whether I should stay or leave; but the hypothetical situation of what would I do if I were in TEC or ACC certainly has for the simple reason that TEC and ACC *have* done things which would make me ask these questions.
LikeLike
Hmm, Scott, then the Primates of the Southern Cone, Nigeria, Singapore, Rwanda, Kenya, etc., etc. are schismatics? Remember they are consecrating bishops, receiving congregations, and, now, recognizing a new province.
And, does that make Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in America a sinner because he has withdrawn recognition of The Episcopal Church and labeled it as a heretical body and transferred it to the new province?
Both ECUSA and many of the progressives have indeed made the argument that any separation is equivalent to the sin of schism. But, if you look at both Scripture and Church history, separation is not always schism. It depends on the circumstances.
LikeLike
>…Packer made no efforts to stay in the Anglican Church over the past few years.
I want to be sure everyone gets to see this sentence. It’s one of a kind.
LikeLike
Just for the record, as someone with direct experience in the matter, J.I. Packer and ACNA are indeed schismatics. Packer made no efforts to stay in the Anglican Church over the past few years. He met in secret with schismatics from the U.S. and Canada, and he advised them how they might rationalize their sin of schism. He endorsed the schism and did nothing to encourage reconciliation. He was the spiritual godfather to the schism in BC and Washington state. We are all sinners in this affair, but Packer’s sins are greater than most.
LikeLike
Their old name in the USA used to be the “Protestant Episcopal Church.”
LikeLike
Re: I’m wondering if, in general, Anglicans think of themselves as Protestants. Anyone? (Cindy)
As an ordained pastor in the Church of England, I think most English Anglicans do not use the term “Protestant” of themselves and it never appears in our foundational Book of Common Prayer. The ethos of the C of E is a middle way between Catholicism and Protestantism, between Rome and Geneva. This is the classic position of Anglicanism and it is essentially reformed rather than protestant. I think, referring to iMonk, that Henry VIII would agree but I would not want to take him as our best role model.
LikeLike
A couple of comments. The ACNA has not separated itself from the Anglican Communion given the number of primates present at their initial meeting, primates who approved and promised to support. What they will not get is an invitation to the Lambeth meetings. And, perhaps, there may either be two communions or the Archbishop of Canterbury will be forced to accept dual provinces in the USA. No one knows for sure.
David Virtue is a nice guy. But, uhm, he sometimes mixes his conservative theology with his conservative politics. And, he tends to use language that sometimes sounds almost like the National Enquirer.
LikeLike
http://theophiliacs.com/2009/06/26/an-apology-and-clarification/
LikeLike
Catholic is not the opposite of protestant, it is the opposite of sectarian.
LikeLike
Honestly, I don’t know that the ACNA’s main concern is whether or not Canterbury accepts them. They would like that and will certainly work to make it happen if at all possible. But when it comes down to brass tacks, it’s nonessential.
LikeLike
Ross,
Thanks for the link. Very good info, interestingly enough it seems that the Calvinism/Arminiasm/Pelagism debate vis a vis Evangelical Reformed verses Anglo-Catholic exist in Anglicanism too.
Geez:)
LikeLike
Ironically, many of the groups that now comprise the ACNA had previously found creative ways to both stay true to their beliefs and to remain in the Anglican communion. Now, they’ve essentially separated themselves from the Anglican communion with, I suppose, dreams of later acceptance at the next Lambeth Conference in 9 years? or 19 years? Can one still be called Anglican if they’re not in the Anglican Communion? Hmmm…. I wonder whether ACNA really thought this through.
LikeLike
iMonk,
I just got a chance to get back and read more comments since yesterday. Please accept my apology for any heightened rhetoric and I am appreciative of the things you have to say on this issue, they do prompt me to see my own blindspots.
peace.
LikeLike
“I have limited time, if I wanted to read one person right now who is representative of this new Anglicanism who should it be?â€
http://www.virtueonline.org
I’ve been told that is a decent source of news. With a slant. And I’ve been told that he’s considered a bit full of himself at times. 🙂
(Please delete the prevoius post with the missing link.)
LikeLike
And when I’m talking about “similar threads of thought”, I’m talking about such divergent views about issues like homosexuality and what others would consider “orthodoxy” in Biblical exegesis and preaching.
LikeLike
This post gives me cause for concern given that there are similar threads of thought running through the Anglican Church of Australia (ACoA). And I am one person wrestling with moving out of my current church congregation (and thus denomination, Chinese Methodist Church in Australia). And being received into ACoA with a view towards going through formation for ordination (instead of contemplating ordination in my current Methodist denomination).
One of the current pastors at my church (a former ACoA priest) cannot understand why I would go there given his view of how many “unbiblical” principles there are in it. It causes me great grief to see this happening over in the States with TEC and ACNA and I hope and pray like heck that ACoA never ends up in the same state as TEC is in currently. Notwithstanding that I wish there was something like ACNA here in Australia (I’m pretty sure that I could find my spiritual home as an Evangelical Anglo-Catholic in an ACNA parish were I in the US).
I’m wishing both TEC and ACNA well, but I sure as heck wish that the current TEC leadership would really examine what their actions have gotten themselves into. Both internally (amongst TEC itself) and externally (with the broader Anglican Communion). Needless to say that I am glad that I’m not in the Abp. of Canterbury’s shoes atm…
Pax
LikeLike
adhunt: My fault as well. I respect you, and I didn’t mean to imply you were the great apologist for all things wrong.The ECUSAs treatment of faithful older folks frustrates me. My fault for being too emo about this.
LikeLike
I was hearing rumors about the ANCA forming and was wondering how long it would be before Imonk brought it up. I am really curious why the Arch Bishop of Canterbury has not officially recognized them yet, or if he even plans to, but I certainly hope he does. While I am certainly against division in the church, I believe that personal divisions are the kind that are hurtful and wrong, and organizational divisions may actually just be helpful. When it comes to doctrine, why can’t we just agree to disagree? Two incompatible doctrines should naturally result most peaceably in two separate organizational groups. No need for bloodshed. Reformation should come peacefully.
I was shocked when I heard Driscoll announce that they had fired Packer (isn’t that like the SBC firing Rick Warren?), but the ANCA does seem to be a hopeful sign for mainline Christianity. I wish them the best, and who knows, may find myself among them someday.
LikeLike
I simply meant that whether one communion or the other is growing or shrinking, has no logical connection with whether (for example) homosexuality is right or wrong. It is entirely conceivable that a thriving new denomination (or even a new religion) could be founded on a mistake, or a lie. Conversely (Wesley’s policy notwithstanding), a small or shrinking confession need not be dismissed as unworthy. The Quakers were never very numerous, and no group did more to end slavery.
Personally, I wish both Episcopal factions well, and hope that everyone can find the kind of church they want. As I said, I support the split–as much for the sake of those who stay as those who go. I see no special charism to be gained from having them all under the same hierarchy, though the Archbishop of Canterbury no doubt feels differently.
LikeLike
“I have limited time, if I wanted to read one person right now who is representative of this new Anglicanism who should it be?”
I’ve been told that is a decent source of news. With a slant. And I’ve been told that he’s considered a bit full of himself at times. 🙂
LikeLike
By the way here is a TEC site dedicated to planting churches
http://plantingcentral.typepad.com/bench/
LikeLike
I think this has been one of those grand miscommunications that happen on the internet. In no small part due to me.
I like and admire you, I like the Anglican Communion, including TEC, and I like that ACNA preaches the Gospel, and I like Jesus.
I bow out
LikeLike
I was going to say that, but wanted something more specific to what he said, but NTW is the most influential voice.
LikeLike
This is a very sad time. The Windsor Report, the efforts of the CE to hold the whole thing together for the sake of gospel, the CE’s palpable frustration with the TEC, all of it is on record. But there are forces that can easily overmaster an Archbishop who, unlike the Pope, has no teeth. You can plead all you want, but if the TEC is committed to celebrating the practice of homosexuality, what are those who are faithful to scripture supposed to do? Devout, missional Christians in the CE are in mourning I’m sure for yet another painful splintering of Christ’s body.
Ironically, I would answer Austin by saying read NT Wright. I think he represents the very best in Anglicanism.
LikeLike
Sorry, one final thing.
“Wright stayed”
Wright was a bishop in ECUSA? Fascinating.
LikeLike
adhunt: This is going downhill because there is no purpose to this conversation. You want to make sure I’m outed as ignorant on the blog (not a hard job) and I can’t stop responding to you, which is completely pointless of me.
-Thanks for not talking about Anglicanism in Africa. Since I frequently say denominations are perfect, I don’t want to be disappointed. Close call. And thanks for not upsetting my worldview. I’m quite fragile.
-Is there a reason you have “will end” in quotes? If you are referring to Austin’s question to me, I confess I have no idea what’s going to happen. They may ordain another Gene Robinson tomorrow.
-If you believe the ACNA needed to stay, and I think they are blessed to go, why are we talking about this. Make your point to the reader, because the ACNA wasn’t my idea. I’m applauding them. And news flash- I’m not the first one to say the TEC gave little reason for thousands of them to stay. Why do you care what I think? Is some diocese waiting to hear from me before bolting?
-Wright didn’t leave? What? Did someone serve Wright papers telling him he deserted his ministry? How did I miss that? What does Wright have to do with this? What does anyone who stays have to do with this? Do you think I’m telling all Anglicans to leave? I’m not. Let me quote a comment at the top of this thread: “Lots of respect to those of you who have good reasons to stay…”
-We have a lot in common. You corrected me on a factual matter- I presume- and I apologized. That’s enough. This comment thread has not been improved by this discussion. You’ve done a good job lobbying for the current TEC/EC. Good for you. Now we’re done.
ms
LikeLike
imonk,
What’s wonderful is how you read things into what I’m saying thereby deflecting what I am actually getting at.
– As if it needs saying. For the most part, the power and energy in the Anglican world is in the Global South. This includes great portions of Africa. These church’s put the Gospel at the forefront of their mission and message and I am in total agreement with this. Of course there is still sin and error even in Africa. But lets not talk about this, it upsets your worldview.
– I think that TEC has failed to put the Gospel at the heart of its proclamation and at least a part of its decline is because of this. We need to have the life, death and Resurrection of Jesus at the core of our life as we revive evangelism, especially amongst immigrants and youth.
– Inasmuch as the ACNA is only a couple days old, it is impossible to see how this all “will end.” I never fuss too much when the Gospel is preached and as long as they do that I am with them wholeheartedly.
– Yes, I do think their “leaving” shows a failure to take the Gospel seriously. The ACNA, if it sticks around, will one day be in need of reformation, and it can happen by division or persistent protest.
– Keep in mind that thought Packer left, Wright stayed. Two powerful Evangelicals. Who’s right and who’s wrong? Perhaps you can enlighten me as it seems you understand the issue intimately
LikeLike
Really aren’t many “new Anglicans” writing. They are just real Anglicans, not liberal Anglicans. They are reading what a lot of reformed, evangelicals read.
But I’d look at Kallini, the Archbishop of Rwanda
The Jenson brothers in Australia or anything from Matthias Media. I’m really blank.
LikeLike
Of course quality is not quantity, but when we kid ourselves that quantity is not a factor in the movement Jesus started then we are deluding ourselves. John Wesley (speaking of Anglicans) would dismiss ministers who had stagnant numbers. Why? Because God does not intend to have a church that sits still. There always has been, and will be, a part of the church that is alive and awake to what the Holy Spirit is doing. And, I apologize for being frank, but TEC shows me little to convince me that it is awake to the work of the Holy Spirit.
LikeLike
Imonk,and others who might know,
I have limited time, if I wanted to read one person right now who is representative of this new Anglicanism who should it be?
LikeLike
A “great movement?” No.
Growth? Yes.
New congregations? Yes.
A missional approach to Anglicanism? Yes
A revived clergy that would make J.C. Ryle proud? Yes.
LikeLike
IMonk,
Do you forsee (total conjecture on your part I know) a great movement of Christians to a revived conservative Anglicanism?
LikeLike
adhunt:
You must be talking to someone else. I haven’t said anything about the size of anyone’s church.
If you are convinced that the TEC and the CE are doing great, the ACNA is schismatic and violating true Anglican unity, and African Anglicanism is a passing fad to soon be corrected by the lively theologians of the CE, I certainly have nothing to contribute to your view of the church.
ms
LikeLike
That is not even to mention that The Church of England is one of the most lively and influential theological churches in the world right now.
Williams, Wright, Thiselton, Milbank, Ward, Pickstock
and McGrath are but a few names.
LikeLike
iMonk,
For one who loves Anglicanism (so you say), it is resolutely frustrating to read you paint with such broad strokes.
There are Anglican churches in Africa that are “liberal” and in point of fact the Church of England has launched a missional and evangelistic campaign that has drastically enlivened the Church. Take a good look at “Fresh Expressions of Church” sometime.
If America, or Africa for that matter, were as secular as England and other parts of Europe you can be sure the stats would be similar. As a matter of fact isn’t it you who always point out that the SBC is shrinking greatly?
Didn’t you just do posts on a major study that showed that the Mainline is not losing nearly as many as you thought? So it’s not just ‘gay bishops’ that make Churches shrink.
And in 100 years, when the revival in Africa has passed (as all revivals do) then are we going to scold them too?
LikeLike
Werther:
Your observation being basically the assertion that you can’t draw any conclusions from observable evidence, then can we say anything about a church?
I’m a bit puzzled as to what this means other than Ryan’s assertion might not be absolutely true. For example, African Anglicanism could be sick, while the Church of England be vibrant and missional. Yes?
ms
LikeLike
Ryan, it is entirely possible for a church to grow, and be wrong. Or shrink, and be right. Quantity is not quality.
LikeLike
Most commenters are missing the point entirely. How many churches are the ECUSA planting? When was the last time there was palpable energy in the ECUSA about evangelism and the Great Commission? How many ECUSA pews are empty every Sunday? I’m sure there are some anecdotal answers to these rhetoricals, but the fact is that the ECUSA has been and is on the verge of death. God is moving, and I think will continue to move through, the AMIA (and others in the ACNA now) because those churches have captured the imagination of young people, and have relit fire in many clergy.
LikeLike
Werther,
This is the first news source that popped up, it had been a while since I read the actual text and I couldn’t find it again.
http://tinyurl.com/d2oaxs
LikeLike
adhunt:
I mention Dr. Packer simply to say this: We may have a hundred sincere people posting how conservatives should stick with the ECUSA/ACC, but Dr. Packer HAS stuck with them. He HAS stayed and stayed and stayed. No one can imagine a person more willing to be tolerant. And unless you are going to enlighten me with something I’ve missed in his many interviews on this, all his patience gained nothing.
I think that when a man of Dr. Packer’s stature says “No more,” the case for serious error is pretty much made. I’ll take Packer over any number of defenders of the Presiding Bishop or Gene Robinson.
peace
ms
LikeLike
Michael,
It would be a terrifying thing for me to pass judgement on the honorable Dr. Packer. I think that for most of his life, despite some very strong conservative streaks with which I disagree (and most of his Reformed doctrines), he consistently reminded non-Anglican evangelicals of the need for moderate’ness and a deeper appreciation for Tradition that goes back past 500 years. At only 26 I could not find it in me to say such a thing as “he was wrong.”
What I can say is this. Now that he has left, is he now exempt from seeking Christian reconciliation with those from whom he is now estranged? And if he is not, then what has been gained by his actions? The search for a perfect and pure church is practically idolotry, and if he forgot his Reformed understanding of how much sin penetrates us, then how can TEC and the Canadian church be expected to remain exempt from sin?
Hooker’s catholic ecclesiology is after all tolerant because of his Reformed understanding of sin.
LikeLike
adhunt:
(a) What modification to the creed did Forrester make?
(b) My mistake. Sorry.
LikeLike
adhunt:
Completely serious question:
Do you believe that J.I. Packer did the wrong thing?
ms
LikeLike
Werther,
For convenience sake I was speaking “evangelical’ese”
It was Kevin Forrester’s modifying of the Creed that caused the most problems. I am aware of this.
And by saying “nicene-affirming homosexuals” I was trying to point out exactly what you seem to be saying. That is, practicing homosexuals need not be “liberals” and are just as Christian as the lot of us.
But by all means, jump to conclusions.
LikeLike
We in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America are careening toward the same cliff, including in our own congregation. Big difference is that there already exists a conservative alternative (Missouri Synod), so the split will be asymmetric, with only a small group bolting. Ironically, ELCA jumped on board this Titanic several years ago with a concordat that essentially made our clergy subservient to those in TEC. ICEBERG!
LikeLike
adhunt:
‘I would also point to the many liberal diocese’ who rejected to episcopal nomination of Kevin Thew Forrester, a “buddhist/christian.‒
Fr. Forrester describes himself as a Christian who practices Zen meditation–not as a “Buddhist / Christian.” Rightly or wrongly, a number of people practice Zen meditation without thereby considering themselves to be Buddhist. (I am aware of a roshi who is also a Catholic religious, who pursues his Zen practice under orders.) The situation with yoga is perhaps similar. Whatever one makes of Fr. Forrester, these nuances strike me as important, since his nomination is at risk of getting caught up in a liberal / conservative battle that has nothing to do with him.
‘I have deep sympathies for ACNA, as I do for Nicene-affirming homosexuals.’
I was unaware that the Nicene Creed addressed homosexuality.
LikeLike
Yes–that was kind of the point.
LikeLike
“The people followed the teachings in the Bible (Evangel) rather than the dictates of the Pope.”
Interesting assumption that there’s a difference
LikeLike
Wow… this is huge. I tell ya, if this had happened six months ago, I’d take up my local Anglican church’s offer to help them start a Contemporary service. One of the reasons I hadn’t joined ’em is that I didn’t want to be a part of the various splintering that had been a part of the Anglican Renewal movement in this part of the country (my parents’ Anglican church must’ve consdered half a dozen organizations before deciding to wait-and-see). At any rate, right now I’m helping some friends/co-workers start a fellowship on the poor side of our town, so I’ll just have to be happy for my Anglican brothers and worship with them occasionally.
LikeLike
Not at all. I don’t preclude the “wasteland” phrase as I think it to be broadly accurate. I’m not trying to be rude or anything. I have deep sympathies for ACNA, as I do for Nicene-affirming homosexuals.
kyrie eleison!
LikeLike
I’ll take your word for it and stand corrected adhunt.
My apologies for the word “apostate” and the incorrect statement of the response of the ECUSA to the larger Anglican Communion.
I do not apologize for the word “wasteland,” as it is on the banner here and is used in a way that is accurate from the standpoint of many who feel they have no home.
LikeLike
Numerically speaking there are still more orthodox Anglicans within TEC than without. Even noted leaders in ACNA have said so.
imonk,
To say that the leaders of TEC “could care less” about the Anglican Communion is simply uninformed. As recently as a month ago, TEC, in the Anglican Consultitive Council agreed to affirm the moratoria of the Windsor Report. If you don’t know what these are then I question your ability to speak on the matter. You scorn unity “for truth” as do most in congregational ecclesiologies. That is just not how we role. Read Hooker, and get back to us.
kenny,
Mentioning the “muslim/christian” priest is a great example of how we are actually orthodox. She was given a period of repentance, which she did not take advantage of, and now she is inhibited. I would also point to the many liberal diocese’ who rejected to episcopal nomination of Kevin Thew Forrester, a “buddhist/christian.”
Any ecclesiology that can make no room for sin or error is pie-in-the-sky ecclesiology.
LikeLike
Man! I can’t type!!
LikeLike
I bow out of the discussion if I am violating moderation rules but I still take back nothing I have said.
LikeLike
Gene Robinson left his wife and children for his male lover, was “married” in a civil ceremony to him. Yes, he is divorced. The Episcopal/Anglican Communion used to call itself the via media between Protestants and Catholics. Now, it has become the via media between Christianity and the secular culture. TEC also has a lesbian, pro-abortion “bishop” as rector of the General Semanary of TEC. I say pro-abortion because she called abortion a sacrament. References available.
ACA has their own problems with traditionalists vs evangelicals. There is also the TAC, FIFA (I think that’s what it’s called) and some others. So, Imonk, I believe that the new adventure is actually further splintering without doctrinal or communal loyalty, without authority. Really sad. Makes the Tiber much easier to swim, AnneG in NC
LikeLike
iMonk,
I was basing my understanding of wilderness on your use of the word wasteland, and honestly wilderness was the word I had much less trouble with. I appreciate your definition of it.
I also want to make it clear that I am not trying to condone the actions of the liberals in the process as being the right way to do things and the conservatives as having been those in the wrong.
I believe there are two issues going on. One is the issue of homosexuality and ordination/marriage itself and the other is one of communion. The decision to ordain Robinson was a horribly damaging move and is one which I certainly found to be way out of order. Whatever debate that was going on in the church was escalated in ways that have resulted in those churches leaving under hostile terms. They may have still left, without that event happening, but I recognize that there could have been a much more caring debate had Robinson not been ordained as he had. My comments about the church failing to be the church was meant to be inclusive of all sides involved and not a potshot at the right.
My comments still stand on the labels of apostate and wasteland though.
There are many things in the actions of Episcopal Churches that I have participated in that leave me with no doubt that Christ is alive there as well and that it still bears fruit for the Kingdom.
The Gospel is most definitely preached in my congregation as I am sure it is in yours. For this reason I object to the charge of Apostasy for the church as a whole. I would find it much more understandable if the charge had been heresy on that issue. I guess (even if I don’t believe it has) if the Episcopal Church has been unfaithful to Christ, there is hope in the fact that Christ will not be unfaithful to it.
I mentioned I feel God calling me into this Church in a pretty substantial way, and I do not honestly know the ultimate reasons for that, but I do trust it has some purpose. The Church is a mess, there are tons of reasons for me not to want to. And yet here I am. I am not oblivious to the challenges, but they will be what they are.
There is not much more I feel I can say on the issue at this point, but I will publicly state that this site is one I know for having civil debates. It has been my intention to keep within those bounds, especially as I am a rare commenter on most blogs. Despite whatever frustrations I may have over this issue, I do and will continue to find the work you do here as important to my own faith. Heck, if there is anyone that has made me more sympathetic to Mark Driscoll it has been you.
I am sure my initial reactions were more intense than they will be after some more thought and reflection.
Peace
LikeLike
“I’m excited for these “new†Anglicans. I pray and hope that they experience a surprising, mighty move of the Holy Spirit. There are millions of evangelicals who would be far better off in a healthy Anglican church than in the evangelical wilderness they are slogging through right now. With their future before them, and now finally able to be guided by the Bible without a battle over the clearest of God’s many clear commands- sexual purity and marital fidelity”
This is what caught my attention. Two “Anglicans” right there in the same paragraph. If you Google “divorced bishop” the majority of responses are “divorced, gay bishop”. Is this piling on? At least one other Bishop has been divorced. The Church of Wales got one in 2004. Are Anglicans refusing to recognize the CoW? I stand by my belief that divorce and homosexuality are treated differently and that the later is a more attractive target because it is someoneelse’s sin.
LikeLike
I’m a young rural SBC pastor from an Indie Fundie youth. I am the last candidate anyone would expect of moving to Anglicanism. But I have been studying Anglicanism for several years and have fallen in love with many things about it.
I knew the local ECUSA church was liberal but I went a few times when the service times allowed b/c I loved the liturgy etc.
One day the associate Priest ruined it for me when he told me how inspiring Bishop Robinson was to him.
I still meet with a local “break away group” at times.
I’m excited about the rejuvenation of the SBC and the Anglican communion in America. I think though that of the two Anglicanism with it’s wider network, and in my opinion better structure to ensure fidelity (anyone really can hang out a shingle and be a baptist church) has the greater chance of making an impact in the future.
I”m very much praying about whether I should move to Anglicanism. Obviously the infant baptism is a sticker for me, but I’m about ready to accept that for other trade offs.
LikeLike
My bad: Bishop Robinson IS divorced! Well, that settles it. I divorced bishop. It must be a first.
LikeLike
Scott- Please reread. That was an issue in the PCUSA. A change in the constitution to remove it as a requirement for pastors. I said PCUSA twice and never implied that it was an issue in the ECUSA.
I’m not going to post comments that say we’re being hypocritcal to mention homosexuality (who ordained Gene R again? Who runs all over America saying it’s God’s new idea?) without mentioning all other sins.
[Removed- I was apparently in error, according to one commenter. I’ll accept his expertise.]
LikeLike
Marital fidelity?
If this is germane to the current troubles within the Anglican communion, I have missed something big. Is Bishop Robinson DIVORCED, too, or are we just saddling gays with all our societal ills? I know a woman whose father refused a position as deacon at a Baptist church because he had married a divorced woman – didn’t repudiate the marriage, though. By and large Christians, Episcopalian and otherwise give hardly a thought to an issue on which Jesus was as explicit as he ever was.
LikeLike
“Wilderness” is not a term you get to fill in your own meaning for on this website. Sorry.
1) Look at the banner. The “Evangelical Wilderness” is the homelessness many of us feel in our own evangelical tradition. If I’m using it about myself- looking for a JSS in the EW- then give me a break on using it elsewhere.
2) If you’re not in the wilderness, don’t be so sure that no one else is either. You might be surprised.
3) The ECUSA in Ky locked out members of many churches who were upset over Gene Robinson. Our daughter worshiped this week with Anglicans who left the ECUSA in Corbin Ky over liberalism andf Robinson. There are these 80 year olds meeting in a store front without a priest! Packer was sent packing!
I spent 12 years in a PCUSA supply pastorate and made it to quite a few presbytery meetings dominated by liberals. I know this rhetoric very well. “We’re just trying to get along, and the mean conservatives want to split. Schism is the worst thing. How dare they? Now, as to Bishop Robinson…..” I heard conservative Presbys called Nazis in their own Presbytery meeting over opposition to the change in the PCCUSA constitution that insisted on chastity and fidelity on ministerial marriage. This “put the shoe on the other guy’s foot and be shocked” dance has been the standard approach of liberals to the concerns of conservatives in all kinds of mainline churches.
That’s the wilderness: when you become the enemy in your own church by refusing to approve what your conscience won’t allow you to ever approve.
4) It’s also a Biblical phrase. Between slavery and the promised land is the wilderness. Sometimes it is a place of blessing, other times it is discipline, other times it is training. But God has a purpose for it. With declining numbers and a strategy that tells traditionalists to support progressive decisions or be the schismatics blamed for division, I think several denominations will see a long wilderness experience. Hopefully it’s not the place where one generation has to pass away and another one, a more faithful one, be raised up.
LikeLike
Richie, I think you’re taking iMonk’s statements so far as to make them mutually exclusive when he intended no such thing. I too have respect for those who valiantly try to remain in the ECUSA and hold to orthodox Christianity there. I also feel the ECUSA is basically apostate at the root now. So it saddens me that there are faithful believers there who have to fight against their own denomination and leadership to remain so. Essentially it means not that I don’t view these folks as Christians. I just view their situation as a losing battle. The ECUSA has cast its lot with the changing whims of culture over Scripture and centuries of Christian belief and tradition and I just don’t see them turning back. These faithful believers will eventually run into the same dilemma that the ACNA members already have confronted and seen the handwriting on the proverbial wall.
So yes, as a denomination and leadership structure, the ECUSA is a wasteland. It’s a wasteland with a few outposts of diehards trying to call them back to repentance and orthodoxy. Of course, God can perform miracles and bring things back around. But I don’t think it appears to be what’s going to happen in this case.
LikeLike
In answer to Cindy’s question as to whether it is correct to refer to Anglicans as Protestants (and I myself am an Anglican) the short answer is “yes”. But in reality it is considerably more complicated than simply answering “yes” because of several factors, four of which are (1) the claimed continuity between the pre-Reformational and post-Reformational Church of England (and working out exactly what that means), (2) some important differences between the English Reformation and the Reformation on the Continent, (3) a broader array of churchmanship than in most other churches (whether Protesstant or not) and (4) the recent revival by a minority of Anglicans of practices and theological views abandoned at the time of the Reformation (and here I primarily have in mind the Oxford Movement) which has caused many within and without the Anglican fold to question the “Protestant” nature of Anglicanism.
Until the Oxford Movement, and arguably for a long time after that there would have been no doubt that Anglicanism in its various forms (whether high church, low church or broad church) was “Protestant”. England was a “Protestant” kingdom with a “reformed” church (if in doubt read the 1662 Book of Common Prayer — or an earlier version such as 1552 or 1559 — and the 39 Articles of the Church of England and tell me how they are not “Protestant”). But Anglicanism doesn’t just claim to be “reformed”. It also claims to be “catholic” — it is “reformed catholicism”. Different Anglicans interpret that differently, with some putting more emphasis on “reformed” and others putting more emphasis on “catholic”, but it is undeniably both. To my mind Anglicanism at its best is exactly what “Protestantism” can and should be: not some narrow sect but the ancient catholic church reformed — and continually reforming itself — according to the word of God. Yes there are things in which Anglicanism differs from other Protestant movements. But Anglicanism doesn’t thereby cease to be “Protestant”.
Anglicanism today is a strange beast and you will find that churchmanship varies considerably. And on average, Anglicanism in the United States tends to be higher in churchmanship than in many other parts of the world.
LikeLike
I have to say that in general I don’t like the idea of church’s splitting and new denominations forming, I totally understand and agree with this. This isn’t about the proper way to baptize or what kind of hymns they’re going to sing, but it’s about maintaining the historic teachings of the Christian faith.
This isn’t just about gay bishops. Just recently I’ve read 2 stories from the Anglican church — one of a priest who claimed both Christianity and Islam as her religion and the other of a bishop (I believe) who subscribed to Zen Buddhism. To the credit of the Anglican church, I believe they were both dis-ordained (is that a word?), but I suspect there are many on the liberal side of the church who had no problems with this.
LikeLike
I will certainly grant you that that is and should be an important and central part of the debate.
Again I do not fault those who have left for making that choice, as I currently do find myself in more agreement with them on that issue than not. I do however have trouble with labeling the church as a wasteland, as I think that does not give the respect due to those who are staying in the church whether they are people we agree with on the issue or not. But it would seem you don’t really consider the ECUSA a place where Christians can be found anymore, so I guess that it is a wasteland.
When you say you have lots of respect for those who stay, but just before that call the church an apostate church. I see that no, you don’t really respect those who stay, at least not as Christians. You are saying they have abandoned Christ.
I am curious as to how you reconcile that respect with the charge?
LikeLike
Richie: With all due respect, your defense of what so many find to be indefensible is exactly the rhetoric that has convinced so many that they must find another home. It’s not about the love of neighbor, but about whether the scriptures or human beings are allowed to define “love,” “God” and any other matter.
LikeLike
This dispatch and your post on the SBC have been the best things I’ve read on the two gatherings this week. This Presbyterian is very encouraged by the results of both.
LikeLike
I am a young, ‘orthodox,’ and restless member of TEC. I too pray for the ACNA to flourish. But I simply cannot imagine how much better off we would be if they had stayed.
LikeLike
I’m sorry you feel a need to counsel people to run away from the Anglican church, Brian. While I can’t speak for the entire communion, I’m deeply grateful for the little Anglican church that has become home to me and my family over the past year, and I’m coming to appreciate the strengths of Anglicanism. Three things come to mind in particular: the liturgy, the high regard for the eucharist, and the fact that it is indeed a ‘Broad Church’.
With the deepest respect to my brothers and sisters who feel compelled to leave, I for one am glad(although a little surprised) to have been drawn back in to the Anglican fold this year.
LikeLike
I have to say that I found this post more troubling than helpful.
Up front I will say that while I cannot say I agree with the ECUSA on the actions taken with respect to homosexuality and bishops(granted, I have been terribly conflicted on the issue personally), I nonetheless have felt God calling me into membership and most likely to seek ordination within the church.
So, I am not troubled by your position on that issue, but with the ease with which you dismiss the denomination as an evangelical wilderness, or even worse- a wasteland. I find that is the kind of rhetoric that leads us to easily dismiss faithful people who choose to stay with the church despite grave misgivings over certain directions it has taken. And honestly, even the people who have come down completely in favor of the ordination of gay bishops can still (at least for my money)be people who are faithfully seeking Christ in the issue. surely there are extremes on both sides, but I do not doubt the their intent to be seeking God’s will in the matter.
I don’t think that any schism is something to be extremely excited about or to celebrate. God will surely bless this new group of churches, and I pray that they will find new life. I do not fault them for the tough decisions they had to make. I just feel that our first response aught to be one of mourning, not celebration as it is a tangible reminder of the failure of the Church to be Church with itself when we are unable to reconcile ourselves to one another in Christ.
And one final point- I am not convinced that the clearest of all God’s clear commands is found in sexuality or marriage. Instead I would say that it is in loving the Lord our God and our Neighbors. There are numerous examples on both side of this schism that can be pointed at to show a deficiency in at least the second half of that statement.
Well I have rambled on here enough. I hope my words come across in the spirit of kindness I hope they have, but I know in disagreements that is not always the case.
LikeLike
I’ve been curious about the Anglican tradition, but was always apprehensive about visiting an Episcopal church because that just isn’t an assembly I can trust. I’ve counseled friends who were moving and were interested in Episcopal congregations to run away as fast as they could in the other direction, even if those congregations were themselves orthodox. With the establishment of the ACNA, I know now there are safe havens of Anglicans that can be visited and trusted to uphold the faith, to whom I may direct people who are interested in that tradition, and should I ever have need to relocate, are available as options for a new church home.
LikeLike
It seems my comment came across differently than I intended. I’m sorry about that. I agree that the ACNA people are faithful. I just think it’s sad that it’s come to this, and hope for something good to be born of these labor pains.
LikeLike
I have been and continue to be deeply saddened watching this split in the Anglican/Episcopal church in America. I am an outsider (raised Catholic, currently Methodist), but it is still terrible to see denominations, church congregations, and families torn apart.
I would like to throw in a word of caution with some of the people reading/ writing/ commenting here. While I am sure it is unintentional, some of the writing comes across as antagonistic. While I am sure many of us do not agree with some of the actions by churches, Jesus calls us to love, not judge. And we must be very careful to condemn others, especially those who profess Jesus, even if we disagree with some of their teachings. Paul tells us that we should confront those whom we think have gone astray, confront again, and if all else fails, walk away. Not condemn, not call out in papers, the press, etc. Not stand on the street corner and scream to all passers-by that someone has done something wrong. But walk away.
And might I add, pray that all involved will be led by God’s will toward the establishment of God’s kingdom here on earth.
May God bless all who read this, especially those who are currently in pain and anguish over the destruction of a great institution in the Americas.
LikeLike
For what it’s worth, I found the wallyjo40’s interview with DAVID SHORT to be VERY helpful, and a clarifying recap of the major issues. Mr.Short has “Pastor” written all over him. What a blessing.
Greg R.
LikeLike
The thought of the Spirit fully and visibly acting through the Anglican Church to take back territory from the enemy, and bring thousands of NEW converts into the Kingdom is a thrilling thought. If it takes shedding a few buildings to do it, it’s a good trade off. Thanks for the picture.
Ditto: awesome vision and picture, and from what I’ve seen of churches in my area (Kansas City) going thru this, the “diaspora” effects you describe are real. Exciting stuff. Great post. GOD rules.
Greg R
LikeLike
As someone who’s watching a congregation I was once involved with split right now, in a situation where both those remaining in the Episcopal church and those moving to the new ACNA body are thoroughly orthodox Christians, the main things in my near field of vision at the moment are the wreckage of formerly flourishing ministry programs, the loss of friendships, the polarization caused even within marriages…. I know that each side feels they must obey the Lord Jesus in the call they are sure they hear from him, and I pray for many years of fruitful life for both groups, as well as for new opportunities for witness to Christ by ACNA overall — but I agree with Susan, the pain is unbelievable.
LikeLike
…”hundreds of congregations that were safely going through the motions in their beautiful facilities are now out, loose, blown by the Spirit into a new adventures they would have never experienced otherwise.”
Well said and true. I cannot count the number of times I’ve prayed for God’s will in my life while subconsciously adding a full list of “except for’s”: no full time service, no missionary career, nowhere dangerous, folks like me, no relocation, nothing too expensive, higher-paying only, etc.
Given my individual resistance to change when I don’t have absolute control, I can only look on in wonder when these new congregations are able to step out into the unknown like this. Godspeed.
Normally it takes an influx of “them” around a church to get it to relocate:)
LikeLike
Our church left ECUSA a year and a half ago. Some folks stayed at the old church, but the large majority of us left and formed Christ the King Anglican Church. We’re now in the AMiA.
It was a painful leaving on our part, and painful for brothers and sisters who stayed. Sometimes there are no easy or fast solutions.
LikeLike
I think the formation of the ACNA is not really seen as a “split” from within the ACNA walls. My point of reference is AMIA, but the churches I have been apart of chose not to embrace “homosexual bishops bad” mentality, even if we all believe that, but embraced the missional identity. Archbishop Kolini had a heart for the millions of ‘unchurched’ in America, and believed that the homeless Episcopalians were a great hope for a church planting movement. And that is the exciting thing about the ACNA, not that it’s “conservative” or “orthodox,” but that it has a fresh chance to be what God called the church to be.
LikeLike
“… the church is not the building; the church is the people.”
Even though most of Christianity believes this theologically, I think there’s still quite a bit of confusion on the matter when it comes to the heart. Five years ago, my church family decided to get out from under the financial burden of our facility, sold it to another congregation, and moved into our homes (or wherever else we choose to gather). Still, I can remember how hard it was. There were just so many memories attached to that building, and we were just so accustomed to identifying ourselves and our worship with that facility. And, heck, so many of us had spent so many hours working on the thing that it had become like a physical symbol of our Christian labor and service. All that, and we were only in that stupid building for 11 years — so I can only imagine what the people at St. John’s are feeling and experiencing.
Still, I highly commend them for their moral stand and their determination to continue to exist as a church family. And I hope God blesses their new journey and adventure — one in which I suspect they’ll discover a new and stronger sense of identity as an ekklesia.
LikeLike
I’m glad that they are splitting–the differences between the two camps strike me as irreconcilable–but wish they could have handled the divorce better. For example, a more equitable division of assets (such as church buildings) would have been a classy move on the part of ECUSA.
Some Episcopalians see their church as having existed in England since ancient times. The split with Rome did not take away any of this history, they say. (The expression “Roman Catholicism” was coined by Anglicans, who saw themselves as equally deserving of the “catholic” designation.)
Others identify more with the Protestant Reformation. (After the split with Rome, the church did make theological and liturgical changes as well as political ones, but balked at some of the more “radical” suggestions then on offer.)
Still others could be described as culturally Anglican, but not terribly comfortable with the religion itself. Finally there are pockets of charismatic Anglicans and other experimental groups. Until recently, the various wings seemed content to live and let live–a very Anglican way of thinking. But the prayerbook issue, women priests, and homosexuality have proved to be “hot button” issues capable of dividing churches.
LikeLike
I have absolutetly NO axe to grind here — catholic, protestant, not protestant or evangelical. What delighted me about this post, Michael, is where about 2/3 down the article, you threw in the most amazing wonderful twist that I had not considered. YHWH is using this disaster to breathe life into part of his body that has been dangerously ill. If I read you right, you are suggesting that this whole fiasco, and the divestiture of property that it created will unleash Anglicanism in the U.S., forcing our Anglican brothers and sister to cut down some of the idols that have held them back for so many years.
The thought of the Spirit fully and visibly acting through the Anglican Church to take back territory from the enemy, and bring thousands of NEW converts into the Kingdom is a thrilling thought. If it takes shedding a few buildings to do it, it’s a good trade off. Thanks for the picture.
LikeLike
FiF is in odd company.
LikeLike
Our home church (Christ Church, Plano, TX) went
through something similar to St. John church
about 3 years ago (http://tinyurl.com/lr9hp3).
We decided to pay the Episcopal diocese $1.2
million for our buildings and leave the US
Episcopal Church for reasons similar to those
which motivated St. John church.
As an aside, I just got home from the
investiture service for the new archbishop
(William Duncan) http://tinyurl.com/nyald2.
Really impressive.
LikeLike
I think people confuse the word catholic with Roman Catholic. The word catholic (small c) means universal. As in Universal Church of Jesus Christ. So we are all catholics.
I was taught protestant starts with pro which means we are for something. Although nowadays some times I have a hard time figuring out what we are all for.
The Church that started after the reformation ( Lutheran, nowadays in the USA) was called evangelical (still is in at least parts of Germany). The people followed the teachings in the Bible (Evangel) rather than the dictates of the Pope.
I was Baptized in the Episcopal Church and it was the Church of my Father’s family. It is upsetting to see what this wonderful tradition has been through in the recent past. God bless you all on all sides of the issue.
LikeLike
I believe this could best be described as “Tragic Hope”
LikeLike
“I never heard the “not Protestant†thing before. Odd. Not evangelical in the American sense maybe, but Protestant?”
Many people who don’t know much about the Anglican history think of them as RC’s with a long running argument with the Bishop of Rome.
And in my somewhat limited interaction with an AMiA congregation the pastor said he considered his theology more Reformed than anything else.
LikeLike
Anglo-Catholics are probably the most reluctant to call themselves Protestant, while Evangelical Anglicans are more accepting of the label. The Anglican tradition came from the Protestant Reformation, but it was deliberately forged as a middle ground (via media as they say) between the Roman Catholic Church and the Continental Protestantism that was forming. Some people look at that history and figure, well they’re part of the Reformation so they must be Protestant. Others look at that history and say, well they deliberately tried to walk between the Roman Catholics and the early Protestants so they must be something else. I tend to go with “Mostly Protestant” because I like to confound. 🙂
I’m still part of the ACC, but I’m very excited about the ACNA. I see it as a move to greater unity as the ACNA is gathering up a lot splinters and sticking them under one roof. Also, the ACNA will likely enjoy better relationships with other orthodox denominations and churches. I look forward to seeing them get to work in a way North American Anglicans haven’t done much of in a while.
LikeLike
Great. I have an Anglo-Catholic argument in less than 10 comments 🙂
LikeLike
I think what he is trying to say is that Anglicism doesn’t stem from the Reformation started by Luther and company. So in some respects, I suppose Anglicanism isn’t “Protestant.” Regardless, NT Wright is the MAN! and Protestant in his theology methinks.
LikeLike
Here’s an article by J.I. Packer on this very topic:
http://www.goodshepherdaoc.org/ProtestantOrCatholic.html
LikeLike
I never heard the “not Protestant” thing before. Odd. Not evangelical in the American sense maybe, but Protestant?
LikeLike
Hello, iMonk! I love your site and read it all the time. I’m an Episcopalian, not an angry one, I hope, but it’s interesting reading about our troubles from this vantage point, from the outside looking in, I suppose. What you are writing is not how it appears from the inside–not that my vantage point is right and yours is wrong. It’s good to know how this is perceived elsewhere.
I do pray that God will bless St. John’s, both Anglican and Episcopal, in Petaluma, and the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church in North America. I believe God is big enough to bless them all. And to hold us all to account as well.
Regarding the prior commenter’s question: The Episcopal Church used to be known more formally as The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. So, yes, we think of ourselves as Protestants. Sort of. In that we aren’t Catholic. Though we are small-c catholic. But I’m not surprised to hear people have corrected you. Anglicanism is a very strange beast indeed.
LikeLike
For this discussion, they are Protestants. See Henry VIII for details.
[MOD: My use of the word apostate here was uncalled for and intemperate. My apologies to those who may have been offended. You have some and so do we, but that’s a different thing.]
Lots of respect to those of you who have good reasons to stay, but what we see of the ECUSA bishops from here in Ky is bad. Very bad.
LikeLike
I used to think our church was foolish for not letting the denomination (UCC and now also CCCC, because of issues much like the ones facing US Anglicans) own our property, but now I’m glad to see it in the hands of the congregation.
It grieves me when churches split, even when I understand the reason on a deep level. I look at the church and weep, because we’re so divided. May God heal their wounds and empower them to preach his Gospel.
As a sidebar — how correct it is to refer to Anglicans as ‘Protestants’? I get it (and use it myself — just did, above) in the not-Roman-Catholic; not Orthodox sense of the word), but I’ve seen Anglicans correct others over the term. I’m wondering if, in general, Anglicans think of themselves as Protestants. Anyone?
LikeLike
MODERATOR NOTE: If you are an angry ECUSAer who wants to bash these folks for leaving, call them homophobes, etc., this is not going to be your thread. Save your time.
LikeLike