I agree that anyone interested in the history and polity of the Church should be aware of this dissertation, submitted in 1959. However, one also needs to be aware of the detailed analysis of the flaws in it, as set out in Appendix B of [url=http://anglicancommunioninstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/is_the_episcopal_church_hierdoc.pdf]Mark McCall’s paper[/url] published by the Anglican Communion Institute.
(The link is to a .pdf download of the paper; Appendix B begins on page 71 of the document.)
That was quite the read. (especially for Mother’s Day!)
This dissertation is arguing that TEC is a decentralized, unitary government with a weak chief executive. Given the number of references to obvious features of TEC structure one might be able to conclude that the author went beyond the obvious to what lies behind. Yet, one might also be able to say that the author ignored the obvious in search of the obscure. (Read the conclusions to see both of these effects in telescopic form.)
If this dissertation is a true depiction of TEC polity, then it could also be fair to say that the seeds for destruction of the Anglican Communion were sown before the Communion was formed.
My own take was how tenuous the connection between TEC structure and the rest of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church has been from the beginning. If General Convention is the ultimate authority, deciding matters of both faith and practice, for TEC, then it is not hard to see how that connection could be broken legislatively without a thought to theology. Legislation, then, would have the trump card over theology.
The author seems to downplay the role of the House of Bishops. He notes the expectation that Bishops represent the unbroken apostolic tradition of the Church, but notes that TEC bishops are responsible to the General Convention and national church which approves them. Thus, bishops are not necessarily expected to uphold the apostolic teaching and practice, but rather the decisions concerning faith and practice of the General Convention.
I am not a scholar in these issues. This is my first read through the dissertation. I am hoping that I missed something that would offer more hope to all of us who are experiencing the pain of this current crisis in both TEC and the Anglican Communion.
I agree that anyone interested in the history and polity of the Church should be aware of this dissertation, submitted in 1959. However, one also needs to be aware of the detailed analysis of the flaws in it, as set out in Appendix B of [url=http://anglicancommunioninstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/is_the_episcopal_church_hierdoc.pdf]Mark McCall’s paper[/url] published by the Anglican Communion Institute.
(The link is to a .pdf download of the paper; Appendix B begins on page 71 of the document.)
That was quite the read. (especially for Mother’s Day!)
This dissertation is arguing that TEC is a decentralized, unitary government with a weak chief executive. Given the number of references to obvious features of TEC structure one might be able to conclude that the author went beyond the obvious to what lies behind. Yet, one might also be able to say that the author ignored the obvious in search of the obscure. (Read the conclusions to see both of these effects in telescopic form.)
If this dissertation is a true depiction of TEC polity, then it could also be fair to say that the seeds for destruction of the Anglican Communion were sown before the Communion was formed.
My own take was how tenuous the connection between TEC structure and the rest of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church has been from the beginning. If General Convention is the ultimate authority, deciding matters of both faith and practice, for TEC, then it is not hard to see how that connection could be broken legislatively without a thought to theology. Legislation, then, would have the trump card over theology.
The author seems to downplay the role of the House of Bishops. He notes the expectation that Bishops represent the unbroken apostolic tradition of the Church, but notes that TEC bishops are responsible to the General Convention and national church which approves them. Thus, bishops are not necessarily expected to uphold the apostolic teaching and practice, but rather the decisions concerning faith and practice of the General Convention.
I am not a scholar in these issues. This is my first read through the dissertation. I am hoping that I missed something that would offer more hope to all of us who are experiencing the pain of this current crisis in both TEC and the Anglican Communion.
MarkS,
Your next stop should be Mark McCall’s paper, as linked by Chancellor in comment #1. You will find it extremely helpful.