From here; this more fully fleshes out the material in the second link in the post about Nigeria below.
(Herndon, VA) — The House of Bishops of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion) met in Osogbo, Osun State, Nigeria, on the 12th day of September 2007. They received a report from the Rt. Rev’d Martyn Minns, Missionary Bishop of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a missionary initiative of the Church of Nigeria in the USA. Acknowledging the significant growth of CANA that is taking place in the USA, the House of Bishops considered a request for additional bishops to further the work of CANA and the extension of God’s Kingdom.
After the meeting, the Primate, the Most Rev’d Peter J. Akinola, announced the election of four suffragan bishops and appointed them to serve in the USA. The bishops-elect are the Rev’d Canon Roger Ames (Akron, OH), the Rev’d Canon David Anderson (Atlanta, GA), the Ven. Amos Fagbamiye (Indianapolis, IN), and the Rev’d Canon Nathan Kanu (Oklahoma City, OK). The consecrations will take place in the USA before the end of 2007, at a date and place yet to be determined. These four bishops-elect will join Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns and Suffragan Bishop David Bena in providing an indigenous ecclesiastical structure for faithful Anglicans in this country.
CANA currently consists of approximately 60 congregations and 80 clergy in 20 states. About a quarter of the congregations are primarily expatriate Nigerians. CANA was established in 2005 to provide a means by which Anglicans living in the USA, who were alienated by the actions and decisions of The Episcopal Church, could continue to live out their faith without compromising their core convictions. CANA is part of the Common Cause partnership that includes representatives of more than 250 Anglican congregations that are connected to the rest of the Anglican Communion, a worldwide fellowship of some 70 million, through various pastoral and missionary initiatives.
Update: A Living Church article regarding this matter is here.
This is wonderful news. The realignment continues to gain momentum.
A CANA priest
I would just like to point out that I was chastised by the elfs for being “cynical” when I said that Canon Anderson was trying to become a Bishop!
This is what happens when ypu have a regime that rewards loyalty with promotion.
While I’m generally supportive of CANA, is it not getting a bit top heavy with Bishops?
Well, Chris, perhaps they’re preparing for their own Millenial Moment, September 30. When The Episcopal Church will still be a part of the Anglican Communion. Suggestion: Don’t buy purple-silk-futures!
If the Episcopal Church is still part of the Anglican Communion after September 30th, the Anglican Communion will be a small, mostly-western, pseudo-spiritual debating society since it’s most vibrant provinces and dioceses will have left it.
I’m sorry, but am I the only person that thinks this is crazy? Why in the world do 60 congregations need six bishops? (I think I have those numbers right.) It all just seems absurd. Do they really think that they will add that many parishes at the end of this month? There are so many options right now like Kenya and Rwanda and Bolivia…
Abu Daoud,
Those 60 congregations had a really hard time with thier last bishops. When they ran into a major disagreement they stopped paying assesments, stopped participating in the diocese, refused the bishops visits, and eventually voted to remove themselves. In order to keep them in line I would think a 1:10 or better ratio will be needed. I’m sure CANA doesn’t want the same problem to repeat itself.
If you all saw Bishop Bena’s calendar for this Fall (which I saw when trying to find a weekend to have a Bishop with us Colorado Springs) you would know two things:
1. CANA is a busy operation with huge demands on its Bishops. Just in doing the back log of confirmations of those waiting for a Christ following Bishop is a huge task–not to mention working with all the parishes and clergy seeking safe haven and Godly leadership….
2. There are more than just the couple of people KJS thinks that are leaving the TEC–and to be ready with an appropriate number of Bishops is to be like the wise man who built his house on a rock–that’s scripture for people who don’t recognize it…
Of course this assumes the Colorado grand jury does not have other plans.
Am I the only one wondering if the whole point is to be sure CANA has the majority in any putative ‘jurisdiction?’
FWIW
jimB
Perhaps because of their experience in Africa they know how quickly an evangelical expression of orthodox Anglicanism can spread the Gospel. They’re staffing for growth. I like it.
Md Brian
This is almost fun to watch, but deadly serious.
NOW we are in full border crossing. One province over to another. Up to now we were witnessng compassionate and emergency ministry to the few, the proud, …
Now we’ve got full blown mission going on.
Given what we know now about mission as a function of church planting, TECusa can’t claim to have not known better, i.e. they should seen this coming.
Without implying any argument of complimentarity to A.C. issues, I observe that now the contemporary TEC House of Bishops will be given the gift of a wrinkle in time (that was to honor Ms L’Engle) wherein they will be able to observe what would have been the same actions and atmosphere of their predecessors, the House of Bishops in the middle third of the 1800’s, who, without diocesan structures in place nor waiting for them, elected and consecrated apostles in the model of Paul, John, Peter, Andrew, James, Thomas, Barnabas, etc., with all the attending ecclesiastical authority necessary. Gifted in greater and lesser ways, these Episcopalian apostolic missionaries then proclaimed, received, implemented, and imparted, establishing and building up the Body of Christ where in many cases there was no Christian presence before them.
In hindsight, to truly follow the biblical witness, the then-House of Bishops should have sent out more, and sent them out two-by-two.
And now an application. Given what the House of Bishops was able to accomplish back then beyond established diocesan borders, it really is not too far-fetched to conceive an episcopal ministry in the style of a “primatial vicar”, authorized and sent forth from the House of Bishops, a Missionary Bishop to the very people desperately in need of such an apostle. Let the House of Bishops call for nominations from the very people who would choose to be a part of this missionary action, declare it non-geographical, let the House elect and consecrate from the nominees, and send “them” forth.
It’s a little unorthodox, but only in our contemporary context; it’s a little messy, but no where near as messy and expensive as it will otherwise become.
RGEaton
While this does seem top heavy to me, it is really a different structure. We are used to a CEO bishop who sits in a diocesan office and administers a diocese. Each of the CANA bishops I’ve read about (with the possible exception of +Bena) are still Rectors of their congregations. Thus, these bishops are more bishops in the 2nd and 3rd century mode where they are responsible for a congregation and the “plants” from that congregation. (At least this is what I see). I rather like the model. As CANA parishes increase (assuming that they will), I trust that we will see more and more Rector/Bishops and church planting and church growth and evangelism will be the primary skills of a bishop (in addition to being able to articulate and defend the faith).
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
[blockquote] Why in the world do 60 congregations need six bishops? [/blockquote]
Abu Daoud, part of the answer to your question can be found in the updated link to the Living Church article above:
[blockquote] Fr. Ames said there are currently about 50 former Episcopal congregations affiliated with the Diocese of Bolivia. These are in the process of being transferred to CANA by mutual agreement of Bishop Minns and the Rt. Rev. Frank Lyons, Bishop of Bolivia. [/blockquote]
That makes 110 churches, for starters. I have been wondering also about the churches (I don’t know the number) under the care of +Venables of the Southern Cone. Perhaps his also are being transferred to CANA or one of the other African-sponsored groups.
Well, now David Anderson can stop calling himself “Canon” (a title bestowed upon him by a bishop he rejected when he left TEC, but kept on using) and soon call himself “Bishop.” Hard not to be cynical, isn’t it, Brian.
Some time ago I made a smart remark about a new bishop a week. Now the number is climbing. The purple shirt maker is going to have to hire another tailor.
As metaphore, view the orthodox/traditionalist Anglicans within and those having just left ECUSA as ‘insurgents.’
An insurgency requires core cadre who are willing and able to carry forth plans to achieve their insurgent goals. It is these insurgent leaders who will organize, systematize and spiritually lead their followers.
In addition, the disaffected members of ECUSA who are seeking to remain “…true to the Faith once given,” but who are scattered throughout the diocesan and parish interstices of ECUSA need a shining light, that is a beacon, to follow. That is where the ‘core cadre’ of the new bishops will come into play.
An individual Episcopalian in his/her parish might be confused and intimidated by the revisisionist/progressive onslaught upon the belief structures of the Church Catholic, but when there appears to him/her a ‘path to orthodoxy’ lead by a cadre bishop, then many of those Episcopalians will seize upon and follow the leadership of such an orthodox bishop.
So these new CANA appointments and consecrecrations represent nothing more than the growth of the infrastructure required to firmly establish, spiritually lead and episcopally govern a new Anglican province in the United States.
Bob wrote:
[blockquote]Hard not to be cynical, isn’t it, Brian.[/blockquote]
Why is that, Bob? Hard to accept the fruit of TEC? You apparently support the brave new world that TEC is forging. If true, then be ready to acknowledge and accept the consequences of doing so.
#14 This is the most important element of this story. Many have questioned whether the new bishops could unite the various efforts, or whether each of the efforts was a power play for a purple shirt or a grab for American money. This is a clear signal that there is at least some coalescing of the new structure moving in the direction of a unified effort.
My first response was the “top-heavy” response, but I think I am error, fortunately. This bishop-model is the old one, and one that I entirely approve of, the parish-bound bishop, if I may put it that way. Is this really the way it is going to work? It is correct and beneficial for a priest to be a parish priest first and a bishop second. The heart of any church is in the parish and its shepherd. We all know that.
But the incursion of Africa is astounding, and I cannot begin to see the end of the ramifications. No one can miss the irony. And I wonder, what pressure, what compelling effects will this incursion have on Canterbury, for clearly, he is looking at being superseded. I have ofen thought that he might just begin to side with TEC as a means of maintaining his “supremacy.” Do you think this possible? Larry
Hi All,
A fre remarks here. Even if the top-heavy explanation is successful I still think that six bishops for 60 parishes is WAY too much. When I think of a successful model of a bishop, I think of the Roman Catholics, where one bishop has, say, a few hundred parishes under his authority.
Of course, if the Nigerians want to return to a more Patristic pattern, I have no problem with that. But wouldn’t it be nice to let everyone know? And may I also point out that if they are not bishops based on geographical jurisdictions, that they are neither bishops according to the Patristic model, nor the Catholic model, nor the Anglican model.
But yes, the Holy Spirit is doing a new thing.
Haven’t I heard that before?
And before you accuse me of being a liberal, I want to let you know I am a missionary to Arab Muslims and I have discipled and evangelized Muslim believers in Jesus. I hold doggedly to the traditional understanding of the Trinity and Incarnation.
But I still think the Nigerians are making some very poor moves here (though I think that the bishop being the pastor of the cathedral congregation is very nice).
Um… folks… we are [b]entirely[/b] missing the African model of bishop-making. If I recall Archbishop Akinola’s explanation, the way bishopping happens in Nigeria is: the primate and his advisers decide where God is calling them to plant new churches. They then consecrate bishops and send them out to those places to plant new churches. These are not purple-shirted overseers. These are church planters. Expect to see new CANA congregations springing up like sunflowers within a few months.
Fr. Ames said there are currently about 50 former Episcopal congregations affiliated with the Diocese of Bolivia. These are in the process of being transferred to CANA by mutual agreement of Bishop Minns and the Rt. Rev. Frank Lyons, Bishop of Bolivia.
Aw, man. No more Bolivian imperialism.
Seriously, Bishop Lyons has been a great help to distressed congregations. Now he proves he was indeed in it to help the orthodox, not to build a personal empire. Kudos to him!
I guess these men will remain Bishops in any new US Province. So much for Bishops being elected by their flock!
Eugene,
Yes, and what great news that might be! Certainly the way TEC has gone about it has proven a recipe toward chaos and decline!
Md Brian
Abajo con el imperialismo Boliviano y Africano! I just couldn’t resist.
I would add in my diocese we were discouraged from planting churches in the late 1980s early 1990s — so we built larger facilities to support the growth — facilities TEC claims are theirs. The larger point is, what kind of church discourages church planting?
MBIC, Phil Snyder, #13, writes:
[blockquote] Each of the CANA bishops I’ve read about (with the possible exception of +Bena) are still Rectors of their congregations.[/blockquote]
Actually, Martyn Minns is no longer Rector at Truro — but he may be working longer days than he did when he was there. And, it should be noted, that he had actually intended on retiring as rector and had indicated he had hoped to slow down. I believe +Bena had also intended to retire and “slow down.”
Personally, I like very flat organizations, so I have similar concerns as others have expressed. Still, when I look at those being named Bishops and compare them to those whom TEC has called to be bishops over the last 20 years, there is no comparison. Many/most of these newbies should have been called and probably would’ve but for the strong biases of the Episcopal establishment.
The headline on the Church of Nigeria website report is ‘2 Archbishops Changed, 5 Re-elected’.
http://www.anglican-nig.org/main.php?k_j=12&d=104&p_t=index.php
Josiah Idowu-Fearon, currently Archbishop of Kaduna, was one of the two who were changed. He was a member of the Lambeth Commission, which produced The Windsor Report, and recently, on 26 July 2007, had been installed as a ‘Six Preacher of Canterbury Cathedral’:
For news of his installation as a Six Preacher at Canterbury Cathedral, see:
http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/articles/43/00/acns4303.cfm
For news of an Anglican Communion conference he hosted at Kaduna ‘Faith and Citizenship in Christian-Muslim contexts’ in February 2007, see:
http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/articles/42/25/acns4246.cfm
Dear Friends, It looks like CANA is not planning for 60 parishes. Not even 600. I would suggest that these new bishops will need to be joined by others, soon. If Jesus is lifted up for the world to see, He has a way of drawing people! Yes, this is a wonderful and exciting time in CANA.
Newbie Anglican writes:
[blockquote] Seriously, Bishop Lyons has been a great help to distressed congregations. Now he proves he was indeed in it to help the orthodox, not to build a personal empire. Kudos to him! [/blockquote]
Kudos indeed. He surely has been a blessing to our congregation. As +Frank has gone about the Lord’s business, the hallmarks of his ministry have been humility and joy. There has been relatively little press coverage of his role in this realignment, and I believe he prefers it that way. I had no idea he has 50 congregations under his care. Praise God!
I’ll apologize in advance if this seems critical or incendiary – my purpose is not to criticize others. For comparison, I thought it would be interesting to do a series of Google searches on some of the leaders in the AC and TEC:
“‘Frank Lyons’ Bolivia” — 1,790 hits
“‘Martyn Minns’ Virginia” — 22,500 hits
“Akinola Nigeria†– 160,000 hits
“’Gene Robinson’ New Hampshire” — 183,000 hits
Using this as a rough measure, +Frank is waaay down the list on media recognition, and now he is turning over his flocks as he has always said he would. Those in the blogosphere who attributed megalomaniacal motives to him owe him an apology.
Eugene:
Since when have Missionary Bishops been elected by their flock?
I don’t believe St. Augustine of Canterbury was elected by his flock–
For that matter, I don’t believe any of the Missionary Bishops from CMS and SPCK to Africa were elected by their flocks–
CanaAnglican:
Yes, isn’t it funny to see the old wineskins in action! “What do they need more bishops for?”
It’s the old “Everyone who should be an Episcopalian already is one” model of church growth…
West Coast (21),
Hey, read mine in 12.
Eugene (23),
Hey, read former TEC precedent as I stated it in 12.
James (30),
Yeah!
31. James, you are spot on. CANA has an urgent sense of evangelism, and a half dozen bishops will never be able to cover all of North America. TEC is still unaware of the reason for the change that is underway. Somebody has moved their cheese and I for one do not think it was CANA, as it got moved before CANA was formed.
Hint: To see who moved it look in the Bible, rather than court briefs. It’s probably the one place TEC has not looked.
#33, you make sense regarding the competition of conservative megachurches. But, unchurched folks are not the only ones that will flock to CANA (et al). Once it gets going, and is in many more places, you will see Episcopalians join them. The problem so many Episcopalians have right now is that they have no where else to go. If “Anglican” churches begin to be formed near them, they will have a place to go, and TEC doesn’t realize that yet, though the consecration of these bishops is giving TEC a pretty good idea that something is afoot, I suspect. Also, the “Anglican” churches will be in just as good a postion to pick up “reformed” Roman Catholics, which has been a mainstay of TEC for many years now. The future looks interesting. Wish I was younger and could be around for more of it, just out of curiousity as to how long it actually takes TEC to crash.
TPain (33)
To answer your rhetorical question, Yes, I do.
But it really is a moot point (sorry Moot). I don’t think you know or could define adequately what is the “average American evangelical Christian.”
That is as unfortunate a pigeon hole as trying to identify “Fundamentalists” or even the “Christian Right”, or for that matter “Liberals.”
Your point about evangelization and Episcopalians is observed by many, but that is not the point on the ground right now. The reason so many TEC congregations flocked to Bolivia, a diocese of the Southern Cone, is primarily the same reason other congregations “flocked” to what is now CANA, or Uganda, or Kenya, or Rwanda, and that is protection of the faithful. Bolivia is an appealing option to some of those congregations because the bishop is from the USA and can easily relate, because many of them have had prior companion diocese relationships either with Bolivia or other hispanic Anglican dioceses, and because the English-speaking Primate has aligned himself with the Global South alliance and so it is a safe place as an Anglican Province. But these are temporary measures; converts will not see the Bolivian flag flying in the nave replacing the USA flag. These congregations under Bp Lyons’ care will not be evangelizing Bolivians in Bolivia, but people in the USA. Your Bin Laden comparison just doesn’t hold water, and I wonder why you would even suggest such an evil parallel.
As to your last paragraph, beginning with the prayer that we soon be “past all this”, I could be reading into it too much, but it sounds to me as if you are saying to certain current Episcopalians, in summary, “If you are not a “progressive Christian”, go away, leave ‘us’ alone. We need our space.” Would that be right?
RGEaton
I lost the referece, but whoever above used the analogy of “insurgents” to describe the dissidents has got it spot on. That is exactly what they are waging against TEC, a war of insurgency.
Bob from Boone,
Although it may have started as a war of insurgency (which was hopeless from the start) I think it is now a war of secession – and it appears to be gaining ground!