Washington Times: New Anglican Church poses dilemma

The Anglican Church in North America will be formally founded next week, challenging the legitimacy of the U.S. Episcopal Church and posing a dilemma for the worldwide Anglican Communion over who represents Anglicanism in the United States and Canada.

When 232 delegates to the ACNA convention at St. Vincent’s Cathedral in Bedford, Texas, approve the organization’s constitution and canons on Monday, Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan will become archbishop for this “emerging” 39th province of the communion, consisting of several groupings that have left the Episcopal Church over issues related to sexuality and biblical authority.

A ceremony celebrating Bishop Duncan’s installation is set for June 24 at Christ Church in the Dallas suburb of Plano, the ACNA’s largest parish, with more than 2,000 members. Also among the ACNA’s members are 11 Northern Virginia parishes, including the historic The Falls Church and Truro parishes, which left the Episcopal Church to found the Convocation of Anglicans in North America.

Read it all.


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, --Proposed Formation of a new North American Province, ACNA Inaugural Assembly June 2009, Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), Common Cause Partnership

15 comments on “Washington Times: New Anglican Church poses dilemma

  1. Chris says:

    Episcopal Church spokeswoman Neva Rae Fox said the denomination was “aware” of the gathering and officials were concerned that one of its active bishops, Peter Beckwith of the Springfield, Ill., diocese, may be participating.

    ECUSA claims specific authority over how its Bishops spend their time? Do their control freakish ways know no bounds? Apparently not…

  2. Ann McCarthy says:

    I thought this was a nicely balanced article. I wish she’d pointed out that the provinces that are recognizing the ACNA are the largest in the AC, but you can’t have everything 😉

  3. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    I think the ACNA is going to have a tough go of it in terms of getting any sort of recognition from any of the Instruments of Unity and official hierarchy in the Anglican Communion. Without Canterbury’s endorsement, I think the ACNA is going to come off looking like a wannabe province too often.

  4. RalphM says:

    “The road to salvation does not go through Canterbury!”

  5. pendennis88 says:

    #3 – the term used by the Archbishop of Canterbury (though he probably now regrets it) is “province in formation”. You may be right about the “Instruments of Unity” [sic], but the fact that will be recognized by the Archbishops representing more than half of the world’s Anglicans makes those Instruments look more like the “Instruments of Rank Colonialism”. Which hardly looks like a long-term winning position. (And, of course, after the shameless debacle of the last ACC meeting, not to mention its rejection of Uganda, all of those instruments are effectively broken anyway. Those provinces which are in communion with each other operate outside them.)

  6. pendennis88 says:

    I forgot to say I thought this was a fair article by Ms Duinn as well.

  7. Ed McNeill says:

    Recognition by the Instruments of Unity may come more quickly after GC2009. I think many of the Primates are waiting for TEC to step away from the table before inviting a new province to the table.

  8. Paul Nelson says:

    [blockquote]I think the ACNA is going to have a tough go of it in terms of getting any sort of recognition from any of the Instruments of Unity and official hierarchy in the Anglican Communion. Without Canterbury’s endorsement, I think the ACNA is going to come off looking like a wannabe province too often.[/blockquote]

    The ACNA will be successful if it is able to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ, uphold the historic faith and continue in the apostle’s teaching. The same goes for the instruments of communion and TEC. Right now, I would have to say that ACNA is leading the way. Anglicans have come to a point where many of them do not agree on what unites us. Some no longer teach a historic understanding of baptism. Some no longer teach Jesus death as the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the world.
    However, these are not the real problem with our unity. It is people that believe unity can be maintained with false teachers that do the most damage. We know the lessons of Matthew 12 – “every city or house divided against itself shall not stand” and “He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.”

  9. David Hein says:

    No. 7: Interesting point; could be.

    My favorite part was “the archbishop instructed the Pittsburgh bishop to submit an application.”

    Stop by the Registrar’s Office, pick up the blue form, and fill it out in triplicate, with the proper signatures, attaching a check for application fee.

    Seriously, is there a regular application process for gaining approval of a new province? And what are the criteria, if any, for approval? Are endorsements necessary? Rebuttal testimony solicited?

  10. art says:

    Triune faithfulness across time is one of the ways Robert Jenson depicts God’s eternity. In which light, the church who reflects such a form of faithfulness has nothing to fear from the future. For again (to cite RWJ): “[Israel’s] God is not salvific because he defends against the future but because he poses it.” Just so, Isa 8:9-15 comes forcibly to mind … May the Angel of the Lord be ever our vanguard to his Promised Land (Heb 12:18ff).

  11. The young fogey says:

    When you get down to it, it’s another ‘Middle America’s had enough’ church story like the founding of the PCA.

    It probably won’t end up Anglican: the bigger, richer Episcopal Church will help see to that.

    But being Anglican means your bishop is invited to Lambeth and gets to meet the Queen every 10 years, from Dr Jensen to Dr Schori, and both sides commune all baptised Christians so…

    So what?

    [url=http://sergesblog.blogspot.com/]High-church libertarian curmudgeon[/url]

  12. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    I have come to the view that, although he was not the proximate cause, by undermining the credibility of his own office along with that of each and every one of the other instruments of communion, Dr Williams made the creation of ACNA, as with GAFCON before it, inevitable.

    Who knows, perhaps God is working through the fickle, the faithless and the feckless?

    Whatever, we are where we are, and I wish ACNA well, and like other faithful Anglicans they remain part of our Communion as far as we are concerned. Dr Williams and his office? Well I wonder how much of it he will leave behind.

  13. Daniel Lozier says:

    The Prayer Book & Common Liturgy Task Force, for the Common Cause Partners, has a monumental duty before them in authoring a new book for common use. I pray they God’s anointing upon them as they seek to develop a beautiful flowing liturgy that reflects the best of 1662 with sound theology, a format that makes good sense, and one that appeals to today’s people.

  14. New Reformation Advocate says:

    I thought the most interesting feature of Julia Duin’s typically well done article was the line about the leaders of TEC being “concerned” that +Peter Beckwith might attend and lend implicit support and legitimacy to the new ACNA. Hmmm. Concerned, are they?? Sounds more like worried, or angry, or both to me.

    A very revealing detail, and sadly predictable. Of course, if the PB was right and “All is well” and this whole thing is just a few bigoted extremists who don’t amount to anything, then there’d be no reason for the palpable fear and anger reflected in a statement like that from a spokesman at 815, would there?

    Personally, I’m thrilled about the imminent launch of the ACNA. The New Reformation is here, and just starting to pick up steam. I firmly believe that the best days for orthodox Anglicanism in North America are yet to come. The outcome of this revolutionary FCA movement is uncertain, but what an exciting adventure it’s going to be!

    David Handy+

  15. art says:

    David Handy+ : “… there’d be no reason for the palpable fear and anger reflected in a statement like that from a spokesman at 815, would there?”

    Precisely [i]why[/i] Isa 8:9ff is so vital – ref #10 above. And thereafter, whose future is being “posed” by whom and unto what end?! Well may some “fear” in these days … So; to ask, of what/whom are we “afraid”, is no idle matter …

    Those who fear the Lord have no need to fear Him. Those who do not fear the Lord have every need to fear Him.