In preparation for the meeting I asked The American Anglican Council to prepare the attached report on the continuing situation of The Episcopal Church to enable people in the wider Communion to have a fuller perspective of the circumstances in North America. I shared it with my colleagues in the Global South but did not release it more widely in the hope that we would receive assurances from the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and the Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada that they were willing to exercise genuine restraint towards those Anglicans in North America unwilling to embrace their several innovations.
Sadly that did not prove to be the case. Instead we were treated to presentations that sought to trivialize the situation and the consequences for those whose only offence is their determination to hold on doggedly and truthfully to the faith once delivered to the saints. In addition I have learned that even as we met together in Alexandria actions were taken that were in direct contradiction to the season of deeper communion and gracious restraint to which we all expressed agreement. For example, in the days leading up to our meeting, the Diocese of Virginia declared the “inherent integrity and blessedness” of same sex unions and initiated a process to provide for their “blessing”. While we were meeting, The Diocese of Toronto also announced that it will start same sex blessings within a year and The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia filed further costly legal action appealing the court’s decision in twenty cases favouring nine Virginia congregations. These and many further actions are documented within the report.
Please read it all and the attachments in the pdf links underneath the letter.
Our sides PR is getting better. Well said. The inside strategy might work in the AC.
As an example, traditionalist elements with heavy African support (the part of the United Methodist Church that is growing) the were able to beat back the GLBT efforts at their last convention. Based upon current trend lines the left within the United Methodist Church is losing ground.
I don’t think this is inside stratagy. I think that the Global South Primates are saying that there are two Churches in the AC, the AC is never going to discipline or do anything about it, so they are going to ignore the AC and chart their own course. They will remain in communion with the ABC, but they will be out of communion with the North American provences.
That’s great, but I think the time for this was at Alexandria. Right about the time the back-slapping language praising ECUSA’s restraint was roughed out, ++Akinola should have put this in Schori’s face and asked that the communique deal with reality. Now, the only thing this letter and its accompanying report will see is the inside of a trash can somewhere in Lambeth Palace.
re #1 [Chips]
The UMC has slid further down the slippery slope. The Africans are getting carved off as their own General Conference which will leave the U.S. contingent free to do whatever they please. The Book of Discipline will only apply to each General Conference. And don’t forget the upcoming change to the UMC Constitution (which trumps the Book of Discipline) which explicitly states the inclusivity of everybody. Further, did it escape your notice that the latest General Convention elected the Council of Bishops endorsed slate of liberal candidates to the Judicial Council?
For further evidence just look at the latest “rogue” ordination of partnered, lesbian priestesses by two retired UMC bishops. There has been no outrage, and no discipline forthcoming from the UMC Council of Bishops, even though this is a chargeable offense under the Book of Discipline.
But Phil that’s ok. I think what they are doing is politely walking out of the AC. They know that the AC is disfunctional and is not going to change. They know that the AC and the ABC will not act. In the past they have beat their head against that brick wall. What I think they are going to do is act and proceed as if the AC does not exist.
I have a thought. Perhaps we are seeing an application of the Gamaliel principle. “If this program or this work is merely human, it will fall apart, but if it is of God, there is nothing you can do about it” (Acts 5.38-39 from The Message). If TEC had practiced this from the start with those congregations and individuals desiring to depart, the landscape would be different, I think. ++Akinola and others may be showing the other Primates how to behave biblically. They will remain firmly resolved in pursuing the goals of GAFCON, and not formally separate from the AC. Nor will they be party to the actions of KJS and GC, or folks clearly associated with them. They will recognize ACNA in a way that is, frankly, probably more meaningful than any recognition that might come through Canterbury or the ACC. Yet they will also recognize the decline of the AC as a Western-dominated communion, and simply trust that they will outlast the heterodoxy.
Just a thought.
Fr. Darin Lovelace+
St. Paul’s, Durant, Iowa
This is a genuine question; and I write that first, to attempt to forestall any misunderstanding.
What is Archbishop Akinola’s relationship to the AAC such that he can request them to prepare a Report on his behalf?
Fr. Darin, I think that is exactly what they are going to do. After all they represent well over half of the AC in numbers.
Akinola acting as the mouthpiece for the AAC isn’t doing the puritan cause any favors. It’s already a problem (see “the Chapman memo”) that there is a perception that the American puritans are simply using the Africans to gain political leverage against the liberals.
I’m always amused when the term “puritan” is used as a pejorative.
I presume its meant to conjure up emotive images of stern steeple hatted killjoys, and discourage a reasonable discussion of the issues.
Quite frankly, I’d be proud to be called a puritan. Yay Richard Baxter!
I don’t consider the Chapman memo to be a problem. Taking the optimistic view of the Alexandria results (which I don’t), its vision may yet be realized. We should be so lucky.
#6. Fr. Darin, I think you are right on target.
I do actually consider the term “puritan” to be a pejorative. C. Wingate though has the history wrong – the Puritans who were Calvanists founded their own colony in New England away from the Anglican Virginia Colony (originally it was supposed to be closer but they missed). They killed Charles I in a bloody civil war in the 1660’s in England. As ever southerner knows – they are “________ Yankees.” The American Civil War being a rerun of the English Civl War.
The Puritans are today predominately godless leftists. I cannot think that the average ACNA member is 1) a calvanist or 2) a member of the looney left.
Sorry to hear that about the UMC – but just think of all the future UMC refugees the ACNA can shelter down the road. 🙂
Hi Chips
If you wan’t a great read about the trial of Charles I, try “The Tyrannicide Brief”, by Geoffrey Robertson who is by profession a human rights lawyer. I realise that this is completely off the topic of the thread, but Charles I was tried by a Parliamentary Court on war crimes charges. You may consider the trial rigged and his acts of war against his own people merely the manifestation of the divine right of Kings (as he did), but you will need to remember that many of his opponents would also have been horrified to hear themselves described as “puritans”!
You have got to love Bishop Wantland’s closing in his letter to Dr. Schori.
“I would request a response, indicating whether you lack a basic understanding of the English language, or choose to engage in illegal activities. There is no other possible rational interpretation of your actions.”
I wonder if he got a response?
yah i was surprised by c. wingates comment, seeing as how the puritans arrived after the jamestowne anglicans and were trying to get away from the established church of england. i always thought they turned into baptists but i don’t know their history that well…but again i understand how one can get confused;heck growing up i always thought pilgrims settled the country and that we only had a puritan heritage. i guess it is because no one wants to publicize that we were happy as a brit colony for over 150 years. i am not a cradle anglican and i didn’t pay that much attention to history in my younger days.
Hey Chips, I’m one of those UMC refugees. Lots of folks in the UMC will be looking for a new home in a few years. ACNA congregations will be a good fit for many
I second the motion on “The Tyrannicide Brief.†Good reading.
On page 38 the AAC report lists 312 congregations have split/withdrawn from TEC. This list does not include new Anglican lay initiated congregations, such as my congregation, that were formed by individuals who could no longer remain in TEC. I assume that CCP has the data on such congregations. It may be useful to include their number in future reports.
i always thought they turned into baptists
No, they turned into the United Church of Christ. I think you can even trace the Unitarians back to the Puritans and Mary Baker Eddy was raised a Congregationalist. In terms of theology, you can, I think, link the Puritans to conservative Presbyterians, but I can’t remember the specific historical lineage.
The history of the Baptist faith is complicated, and probably does include a link back to the Puritans. As complicated as their history is the range of theologies you will find among the various Baptist groups. My great-grandfather – John and Calvin were his given names – was a Primitive Baptist preacher, and we have my great-great grandmother’s Baptist Church “letter” that’s flat out Puritan. The larger Baptist groups stress free will, to be exercised in a personal decision for Christ.
Finally, my Church History professor described the Puritans has a happy and joyful people, full of love for the things of life. They were not teetotalers, and, I’ve heard, had lots of kids. 🙂
#3, Phil, right on! I think our side got suckered again by the talk about a mediator, etc. All we got was another delay, until another meeting. I wish ++Akinola had stuck this up their noses, to use a more gentile term, gross as it may be.
desertpadre
I guess that should be “genteel”. Sorry ’bout that!
desertpadre
#7 – Bp. David Anderson, CEO of the AAC, is a Bishop in CANA, which is a missionary outreach of the Province of Nigeria.
I seem to have pushed more buttons than I intended, though I suppose I should have expected a lot of irrelevant pedantry. I think the analogy runs closer than other people see it, but anyway, either everyone has already signed on to the Chapman memo and accepted the liberal accusations of power struggle, or a lot of people got distracted and missed the point. The thing is, if the liberal understanding of what the memos represent is accurate, then KJS et al are making the right (that is, strategically appropriate) response: they are defending church resources in the face of people who specifically want to reduce ECUSA’s influence by taking away those resources.
RE: ” . . . to reduce ECUSA’s influence . . . ”
The good news is that ECUSA is reducing its own influence by declining membership and ASA.
We don’t have to worry about ECUSA’s declining influence — it’s just happening, thank God.
I would urge everyone to take the time to read the full reports linked in +Akinola’s letter. It may be especially illuminating to those who believe that an inside strategy (in TEC) is still viable.
I find it interesting that the critics here seem intent on shooting the messenger rather than addressing the message.
I believe St. Paul said something about “biting and devouring” one another.