It was my joy and privilege on Saturday, Aug. 22, to share in the consecration of the Rt. Rev. William H. Ilgenfritz, the first new bishop for the Anglican Church in North America. Archbishop Robert W. Duncan was the chief consecrator, and the other co-consecrators were Bishop Keith Ackerman, Bishop Edward MacBurney, and Bishop William Wantland, who also preached at the service. Thirteen bishops participated in the apostolic laying on of hands in the historic ceremony. Bishop Ilgenfritz continues to serve as Rector of St. Mary’s Anglican Church in Charleroi, Pa., in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. The service took place at the local Roman Catholic parish a few blocks away, called Mary, Mother of the Church. The new bishop previously served here in the Diocese of Fort Worth as Rector of St. John’s Church in Brownwood from 1990 to 1994.
It is important to recognize that this first consecration was of a Forward in Faith Bishop and that it creates a new diocese for FIF congregations across the country. This new Missionary Diocese of All Saints begins with about 13 congregations and is charged with planting new churches for traditional anglo-catholics in the United States and Canada. Bishop Ilgenfritz continues to serve as Vice-president of Forward in Faith, North America.
This consecration fulfills the vision of the Episcopal Synod of America, formed in 1989 here in Fort Worth, to create a non-geographic diocese or province for congregations upholding the faith and practice of the historic catholic church, including the tradition of an all-male priesthood. It secures a continuing line of apostolic succession for traditional anglo-catholics, which is no longer possible in The Episcopal Church in the United States.
Please continue to pray for Bishop Ilgenfritz and this new missionary diocese.
The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
Aug. 25, 2009
Charleroi has had an interesting postwar history, ever since Bishop Austin Pardue unleashed “Father Joe” Wittkofski – a priestly convert from Rome whom he had brought with him from Buffalo – to offer a catholic witness to the unchurched but cultural Roman Catholics of the Mon Valley. If I remember correctly, Wittkofski even experimented with broadcast services on the radio, something one might not have expected from an Anglo Catholic. Bishop Ilgenfritz is heir to a colorful legacy.
That said, the consecration of yet another bishop fills me with dismay. Yes I know people have been stressing the “missionary bishop” model from Nigeria and aggressive church planting strategies, but we’re still talking about bishops with responsibility for fewer than 4,000 souls. It would be nice to think that people could be patient and face the Third World reality that episcopal visitations will be infrequent, at least for a while. I don’t entirely buy the notion that this is just a case of newly ambitious presbyters seeking the purple, but from the outside looking in I can imagine how someone might plausibly think so.
[i] Slightly edited by elf to eliminate link to another blog. [/i]
… so they thought there weren’t enough bishops in ACNA already?
And it looks to me as if the ACNA polity is going to be one of dioceses based on spiritual rather than geographic jurisdiction, thus fulfilling Rowan Williams’s dread of a multiplicity of Anglican churches in the same place. So you could have, for example, REC, FiF and AMIA parishes in the same city. And what about the various Kenyan, Nigerian, Bolivian outshoots: will they merge into geographical dioceses, or not? I wish ACNA well, I really do: but this sounds to me like a recipe for mish-mash.
I share some of Jeremy’s concerns. But +Bill is a very solid guy and has had a rich ministry in Charleroi. I pray his expanded ministry will be a blessing in the FiF group and beyond.
Bruce Robison
So the American Anglo-Catholics haven’t found their way out of theological chaos; they’ve only signed onto re-created 1988 Episcopalianism with a flying bishop.
I’ve run across Wittkofski’s name before. It seems he was too liberal for Rome but more conservative than what the Episcopalians became. To which one can say with some justification ‘you wanted an open-minded church and by George you got one’, more than he bargained for.
Also the thought of an ex-RC priest trying to turn Monongahela Valley Catholics into Episcopalians, even relatively old-fashioned ones, doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies.
Maybe Pittsburgh will now be known (not for steel) but for the growing number of ACNA Bishops that reside there! Three in the Pittsburgh Diocese of ACNA and now one in the FiF Diocese of ACNA!
I believe that Bishop Ackerman was Rector of that same church from 1976 to 1989, and grew up in it.
Fr. Wittkofski must have been an interesting character. He wrote up his “conversion story” in a book of essays entitled something like *Canterbury Pilgrims* or *They Became Anglicans* around 1962. In it, he writes how he learned, as an Oblate (OMI) missionary in China, that the Catholic Church was working against the interests of the US Gov’t, so he left and became, in the end, an Episcopalian. Someone who grew up in that church and served as an altar boy there once told me that “Fr. Joe” joined the John Birch Society in the 1960s, and that JBS publications appeared from time to time on the pamphlet rack. Who could imagine such a thing today?
One of the things that I find distressing about ACNA is the chronic miterosis that seems indemic to Continuing Anglicanism. I also don’t like the “hive mind” that seems to be forming where Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics are working to segment themselves not only into parishes, but also into dioceses. When there is a united church where Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics work together in the same parishes and dioceses and where the bishop to paishoner coefficient (BPC) (let alone the clergy to parishoner coefficient) is lower than TEC, then they will have something to look at.
YBIC,
Phil snyder
Yes, [i]vagante[/i] purple fever.
[blockquote]When there is a united church where Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics work together in the same parishes and dioceses…[/blockquote]
Then they wouldn’t really be Evangelicals or Anglo-Catholics; you’re talking about irreconcilable versions of Christianity. Also are there really American [i]Evangelical[/i] Anglicans in the English sense?
I haven’t taken this news with the same negativity that other commentors seem to have. The GAFCON movement and by association the ACNA have been criticized for leaning too much toward the Evangelical at the expense of Anglo-Catholics (reaffirming a pre-Oxford Movement interpretation of the 39 articles, the failure to recognize ALL Ecumenical Councils of the undivided Church, and of course WO.) This consecration shows that the ACNA is willing to take action to give Anglo-Catholics a secure home for their beliefs along with a missionary zeal to create new Anglo-Catholic parishes.
Rather than this being a case of “miterology”, this first consecration of an AC bishop by the newly created ACNA structure seems to be a clear signal that Anglo-Catholics are welcome in the Anglican Church of North America.
I also don’t find the presence of REC, AMIA and FIF parishes all in one city to be necessarily a bad thing. They are a testament to the fact that each group has different beliefs and that those beliefs are respected. This is far better than to wallpaper over real differences that Evangelical, Anglo-Catholic, Prayer Book Anglicans etc. have. In this case dioceses founded based on spirituality rather than geography (along with deep collegiality and respect for their fellow brothers and sister in Christ that have differnet views) makes complete sense.
# 7, 8 “When there is a united church…”
And isn’t that the basic problem? As hinted above, Evangelical is to Catholic as Liberal / Reappraising is to Conservative / Reasserting.
Both TEC and ACNA are denominations attempting to unite competing [i]religions.[/i] The only difference is the list of names on the roster of competitors.
Talk about depressing!
9: As I was saying: this – a flying bishop – isn’t Catholic ecclesiology but as Damian Thompson (RC) says a Wendy house for living within a Protestant church, the only difference being the Protestants are now more conservative.
10: Exactly!
[blockquote]Talk about depressing![/blockquote]
Indeed! It seems the only time the commenters aren’t criticizing TEC is when they’re criticizing those trying to counter TEC. What’s the point, anymore? Why not just quit the silly game, admit it’s a lost cause, and fold the tent?
#9 billqs, I agree with you. I think it’s time we got past this negtivity and concentrate on being Christ’s Church. He gave us a mission, and that mission is to “build My Church,” and not to undermine it by carping about differences of opinion. Let’s get on with it, shall we?
12, My thoughts exactly.
Anglicanism is often compared to Orthodoxy, and I have to note that my city has three Orthodox parishes: 1 Greek, 1 OCA, and 1 Antiochene/Western Rite. Each has a different bishop. If you want down to it, the Catholic diocese includes one or two Eastern Rite parishes, technically part of the Latin Rite diocese, but with their Eparchies that have bishops.
So all of this is not completely out in ecclesiological left field. If, unlike previous movements, the leadership of the ACNA can practice true mutual submission and charity, it could work. There are real and substantial differences that in time must be resolved. There are also historical and cultural differences just as thorny, in their own way. Minds opened (in the legitimate way) and hearts united in love can be a powerful means for the Spirit of God to rescue Anglicanism in the U.S.
It takes hard work, prayer, perseverance and a good sense of humor to build anything new.
It takes only a moment to cast aspersions.
In other words, when we see things in ACNA that give us cause for concern, we should just accept that our well-intentioned leaders will always get things right and say nothing? Forgive me gentlemen, but isn’t it precisely the attitude that brought TEC to its present predicament?
There are things in ACNA that I consider positive – missional outlook, adult formation – and other things that I find less so. As Bruce notes above, Bishop Ilgenfriz is an excellent pastor, but Bishop Iker would be an effective overseer for an Anglo Catholic judicatory.
Bishop Ackerman has once again put his neck in a noose for the faith once delivered. I can’t imagine his participation as a consecrator has gone unnoticed at 815.
The point of the exercise (the formation of a FiF diocese), which seems to have been missed by quite a number of posters, is to provide a place for the Anglo Catholics who are being forced out of TEC. Each TEC Anglo Catholic priest who retires means more Anglo Catholics in need of a parish- in case you had not noticed, Anglo Catholicism is now a canonical violation within TEC, soon there will be no new Anglo Catholic ordinands, and no more Anglo Catholic bishops to ordain them. So, one after another, the Anglo Catholic parishes in TEC will cease to be Anglo Catholic. And believe it or not, for some of us, that means we need to find a place to go.
I don’t understand the negativity. As things have been in recent history in TEC, we have had different parishes in the same town/city based on churchmanship and theology! The first example that comes to mind is in the city of Ft. Worth, there is everything from the very Evangelical St. Andrew’s to extremely Anglo Catholic St. Timothy’s, and everything in-between. These have coexisted and even worked together in the same deanery even, but are miles apart in both theology and churchmanship! Very successful…no problem. Why is this new situation any different? I think some are just trying to find anything possible wrong with the ACNA!
BINGO, Henry!!
Unfortunately, I sense the negativity is mainly coming from those who have chosen to remain in TEC and who are looking for justification for their position. This consecration was badly needed by the Anglo-Catholic minority spread out across the country who aren’t really a good fit with CANA, AMiA, or REC. If APA had been a part of ACNA, there would have been an obvious place for them, but without APA there’s no other good fit — unless they’re in one of the three geographical dioceses in ACNA that have Anglo-Catholic bishops.
Well my diocesan/national pledge goes to ACNA (at least for now) and I consider Archbishop Duncan my diocesan. I wonder what the other marks of ACNA membership are considered to be.
#19 I think some are just trying to find anything possible wrong with the ACNA!
On my part, not at all. I am simply standing on the principle rather than the emotion. Emotionally, I desperately want ACNA to succeed. However, with a good deal of grief, I recognize that the ACNA is founded on the same weak foundation as its parent TEC. The ACNA has tried to admit all the same basic principles as TEC but with promises that these same principles will lead to a different outcome this time.
I’m just thinking, “Good luck with that.”
I would vigorously disagree that the Anglo-Catholic and Evangelical split is akin to the reasserter/reappraiser divide– that is to say, I do not at all see them as separate religions. Not that the differences are necessarily trivial or limited to rite, but that doesn’t make them separate religions.
No matter how hard we try, and no matter what we do, someone somewhere is going to be dissatisfied. Have we tried hard enough? I don’t know! Have we done the right thing? I don’t know! And what’s more, I don’t think anyone does.
RE: “Unfortunately, I sense the negativity is mainly coming from those who have chosen to remain in TEC and who are looking for justification for their position.”
Well — actually — I recognize some names here who have left Anglicanism altogether if I’m not mistaken. So I expect you are articulating an idea that is somewhat self-serving, which is not a surprise.
I personally need no further “justification for my position” . . . what ACNA does and has done over the past year or so has nicely demonstrated my original thesis and confirmed my stance. But that doesn’t mean that what ACNA does isn’t really nice for those whose values and theology are shared by ACNA.
I’ve always been happy that folks had some place to go who needed to leave TEC — and for some, that’s ACNA. That’s a good thing. The entity will necessarily have and develop along the trajectory of its leaders values and theology. That’s understandable.
It appears that rather than looking for justification, some who went to ACNA need to urgently and loudly decry people who point out issues that they were either unaware of or chose to ignore in their headlong flight. ; > )
No, I simply think that we’ll see ACNA fulfilling its values and expressing its theology. And those who don’t share those values or theology — whether inside ACNA and considering departure, or inside TEC, or inside Rome, or wherever — will often feel constrained to point those realities out, just as much as those who don’t share the values or theology of the rulers of TEC will often feel constrained to point those realities out.
#18: “Anglo Catholicism is now a canonical violation within TEC, …”
Could you explain what you mean?
Thanks.
#19: I believe that some folk are concerned that to compromise by being part of an organization that permits WO is both to offend against Catholic theology & tradition, and to replicate the old patterns of TEC’s vaunted “inclusiveness”…the velvet glove and iron fist routine.
However, since ACNA does not pretend nor is it canonically established to be “the church” as TEC pretended and established, I am not worried that ACNA will be a retread of TEC.
It is possible to be haunted by ghosts, rather than to be “forewarned to be forearmed”, when it comes to this situation.
Although still a member at a TEC parish, I feel very much like an outsider, and would probably liken myself to a hospice care-giver, caring for parishioners in a sick and dying institution. Were I to do a church plant or seek ordination, it would be under the ACNA. So I would describe myself as being very friendly towards the ACNA.
Having said that, I think that it is very appropriate and indeed very wise, for us to voice our concerns about those aspects of the ACNA that are troubling. And there is a LOT about the ACNA that I find troubling. TEC had a lot of problems and issues that went beyond the orthodoxy of its doctrine and discipline. To try to sweep all that under the orthodox carpet seems to be foolish and short-sighted to me.
My concerns with the ACNA have to do with (1) the fact that the ACNA remains a coalition of independent groups as opposed to a unified, catholic Province; (2) the astonishing number of ACNA bishops; and (3) the criteria being used for deciding who will be made new bishops. These concerns relate directly to the long-term health, vitality and viability of the ACNA and so they are germane and relevant. Questions should not be ignored because they are too difficult to address or because they may rub ego’s the wrong way.
I thought that Ackerman had resigned from the true See of Quincy and was still a bishop in TEC – an assisting bishop to Beckwith in Springfield. Hopefully he has a bucket of water handy when Schori comes for him.
18 and 27: Elementary. WO is now compulsory in TEC: no more Anglo-Catholicism.
jamesw, this consecration is the fruit of positions taken by FiF (North America) for decades, and is not a sudden or recent idea.
Also, it seems to me that Bishop Iker has enough on his hands with trying to steer his existing diocese through the lawsuit and the stress of the situation.
The positive view is that in years to come as ACNA matures the numbers of bishops and affiliations will decline, and something more like a traditionally-organized province will emerge. The current situation is an attempt to reverse forty years of centrifugal disintegration.
I was present at +Bill’s consecration last Saturday. It was a glorious day for him, his family, his parish of St Mary’s, the Diocese of Pittsburgh, FIF/NA and ACNA. All of the majesty of the Anglican Way was evident in the worship — Rite I, and the great hymns of the church played on the organ and song with great gusto by choir and congregation. Thirteen Bishops took part including two from the REC (Their PB) and one AMIA. About thirty deacons and priests processed including four women priests. +Bill invited all clergy of the Diocese of Pittsburgh to vest and process regardless of gender — a big concession by FIF/NA. The chief consecrator Abp Duncan ordains women and the three presenters Bps Guernsey, Atwood and Murdoch do as well. What I thought was amazing is that this is in itself is testimony that within ACNA the vast majority of us, above all else, are trying very very hard to make this new work succeed. Alrhough there are extremists among us on both ends, rabidly “hot prots” and proto-papalists who could out Roman the Romans, the rest of us respect and care for each other regardless of churchmanship differences.
#33–You have it exactly right, Fr. Wilson! It truly was a glorious day, and a very long time in coming!!!
All of these negative comments remind me of the Israelites turning on Moses as they were fleeing Egypt into the wilderness. Something like this: “I wish for the good old days when we had beautiful church buildings and were part of a real province! Yeah, we were oppressed by the Presiding Bishop but at least we had dioceses with geographical boundaries!”
Come on people! But your trust in the Lord as he leads us to the Promised Land! I agree that ACNA is messy but everyone is trying their best to work it out all out. And just as the Lord didn’t give up on the Israelites, despite their complaining, He’s not giving up on us.
Actually – this is a good thing for the growth of the ACNA. Curently only certain areas have Geographic dioceses. I may be wrong but only AMiA and REC seem to have a national geographic overlay. Some areas were like Northern Florida were already working together. By having the FiF (I think it is called All Saints Diocese) Diocese there is now a Bishop that a Catholic oriented Parish could join in an area were there is currently no ACNA Geographic Diocese and a body to help with church planting. This could be the vehicle for APA, DHC, or Continuing parishes wishing to join the ACNA as well as departing TEC Anglo-Catholic parishes. My guess is that there are more Anglo-Catholics in REC (many APA parishes joined) and AMiA than one would think as people needed a vehicle to depart TEC. I think that parish list indicates that there are FiF affliated parishes in most of the other bodies. The acid test will be whether at some point there will be a blending. The Main obstacle to that may be AMiA, CANA, REC because those seem to be taking on the appearances of churches within a Church as opposed to merely Dioceses. REC is of course understandable as it is a century old – AMiA also predates the time in which an alternative province was likely to be formed. CANA seems a little perplexing. The other missionary efforts appear to be fading.
RE: “All of these negative comments remind me of the Israelites turning on Moses as they were fleeing Egypt into the wilderness.”
flaanglican, I’m confused. Early in the thread someone said that the negative comments were all about people still in TEC complaining and pointing out flaws. You seem to be saying that the negative comments are from folks who left TEC and are now in ACNA.
Between the two comments, it seems to be the thesis that — whether in or out of ACNA — nobody’s supposed to say anything “negative” or “divisive.”
And where have we heard that refrain before?
A healthy organization is one that encourages constructive criticism and questioning of the leadership. It should be very clear to ACNA Anglicans by now that there are a lot of well-meaning, thoughtful, conservative Anglicans that have serious questions and reservations about the ACNA – these are not just complainers or TEC liberals-in-disguise.