Last year the Church of the Resurrection in suburban West Chicago closed its doors and put its building up for sale. The Episcopal congregation had suffered membership losses 14 years earlier when some conservative members left to start their own church, also called the Church of the Resurrection, in nearby Glen Ellyn. The new congregation later aligned itself with the Anglican Mission in the Americas (AMIA), which is connected to the Anglican Church in Rwanda.
The new Church of the Resurrection later experienced its own split, with some members leaving to launch the Church of the Great Shepherd””also affiliated with AMIA””in Wheaton. The Church of the Great Shepherd eventually closed its doors, but not before a 2004 split led to the formation of the Church of the Savior back in West Chicago. During this time the ranks of St. Mark’s, an Episcopal congregation in Glen Ellyn, had been swelling””until the Episcopal Church consecrated an openly gay bishop in 2003, whereupon many St. Mark’s members left to form All Souls, still another AMIA church, in Wheaton. Meanwhile, another split at the original Church of the Resurrection in West Chicago, which had experienced renewed growth, led to the creation of the Church of the Resurrection Anglican, a church which is overseen by the archbishop of Uganda. So now there are two Resurrection churches in the area, both formed in exodus from the original””now defunct””Church of the Resurrection, and both affiliated with African Anglican bodies, not with the Episcopal Church in the United States, sometimes abbreviated as TEC.
Got all that?
Even for Anglicans in the vicinity it takes a long memory or a flow chart to keep straight all the Episcopal-Anglican divisions and acronyms that have developed in the well-heeled suburbs of DuPage County, just west of Chicago.
For those of you who are print subscribers, this article is in the May 20, 2008 edition, beginning on page 22. Why the article makes the bizarre error of saying the Presiding Bishop is a geologist I will never know–her doctorate is in oceanography.
[i]George Koch, pastor of Church of the Resurrection Anglican, views this history more simply: “Divorce breeds divorce.” Bishop Persell, viewing the scene from the perspective of the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago, draws an even stronger conclusion: “If you’re formed in opposition and negativity, you’re bound to keep on splitting—there’s always need for more purity, and you don’t live with ambiguity very well, so you end up in a church of one.” [/i]
I’ve commented on this matter before in various threads, I’m sure. But this is a big concern of mine… I was initially optimistic that such a “divorce following divorce upon divorce” scenario could be avoided in the current instance because of the POSITIVE vision of Anglican realignment that was initially outlined at Plano and Plano East, etc., and with the formation of the Network. But as new jurisdictions have multiplied and as new taxonomies (Com-Con; Fed-Con) etc. emerge, it is hard to believe that unity will triumph. Yes, there’s much I am excited about still in what’s happening, re: Common Cause, etc. But still I find the divisions deeply worrying and troubling too. I pray GAFCON will be an important step to unity and recapturing a POSITIVE vision of what we’re working towards.
Unity requires the opposite of human fleshly qualities. Unity requires the Ephesians 5:21 and James 5:16 kind of submission, accountability, honesty, transparency, authenticity, humility, sacrifice of pride, individual and corporate dedication to the redemptive cause of Jesus Christ. Most of all, it requires the ‘one thing necessary’ foundation of the Church before doctrine, liturgy and pastoring can be rightly done. These components are: Revelation that Jesus is Lord, the Bride’s First Love Devotion to the Bridegroom, humble submission to God, to His Word and Body, the continual filling ‘be-being filled’ with the Holy Spirit…without these, the Church goes off its foundation and becomes an arena where conflicts politics, power, ambition, control or theologies make it fragile and dangerous in a very short time.
PS – the natural mind is at enmity with God. Jack Sparrow wrote a very good comment @ Stand Firm re this problem here:
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/12517/
Terry Fullam also believed the Church of God requires a different kind of polity than the political democratic kind that we have seen at work (rather, not working) in TEC.
It’s the same problem the Continuing Churches faced in 1976. I’ve always wondered why, at that time, the departing clergy didn’t simply follow scriptural precedent and just draw lots for their first bishops. Then the initiative would have been solely that of the Holy Spirit.
Read Douglas Bess (DIVIDED WE STAND: A HISTORY OF THE CONTINUING ANGLICAN MOVEMENT. Riverside, CA: Tractarian Press, 2002) if you want a reminder of what we could face down the road if we’re not very careful.
[url=http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com]Catholic and Reformed[/url]
If His Church is ever to be One as our Lord prayed, it will require sufficient humility and saying the magic unifying words, ‘I could be wrong – what does and has the Word and the Spirit always said to the Church in this matter? Anything more or less creates disunity. Am I willing to submit to and live within that? Is Christ my first love – above my own heart and flesh? Is Jerusalem, the Holy City my first prayer? (Psalm 122, Psalm 137, Psalm 73:25-26)
For those concerned, and rightly, about further division, here’s something worth noting, I think: yesterday All Souls’ Anglican — one of the churches Jason (who’s a friend of mine) wrote about in his article — held a Confirmation service for nine young people, including my son. The bishop presiding over the service was Donald Harvey, retired bishop of Newfoundland and now Moderator of the Anglican Network in Canada; he came with the blessing of our own bishop, Sandy Greene. Also with +Sandy’s blessing, Bishop Frank Lyons of Bolivia has preached and celebrated for us on several occasions (his son attends our church). We participated last year in the Midwest Anglican Awakening meting during which Archbishop Akinola preached and celebrated. We have cooperated in ministry not only with local AMiA churches but also George Koch’s church (one of two local Churches of the Resurrection), which is under Ugandan authority. And J. I. Packer preaches for us three or four times a year. So I think you can see how, in the life of this one ordinary parish, various reasserting Anglican bodies are working together harmoniously, evidently eager not just for common cause but also for common ministry. This doesn’t mean that there won’t be conflicts down the line, but such a high degree of cooperation, cheerfully crossing institutional lines, bodes well for the future, I think.
Alan Jacobs (#7), All Souls looks like a parish I can relate to. Sometimes I think we view unity too much as an end and not as a means. There is such a thing as unity of purpose. So maybe we might see Jesus’ prayer for his disciples to be one as he and the Father are one not so much as a prayer for institutional unity but more as a prayer that they be one in purpose as he and the Father are one in purpose. And as the Father sent Jesus so Jesus sends us united around the Missio Dei which must always be upermost in our thoughts.
[blockquote] Elizabeth Sausele, who was an associate pastor at All Souls, said that what prompted her to leave the Episcopal Church was that she didn’t believe that “the faith once delivered to the apostles was being guarded by the House of Bishops. For a bishop of the church to say that Jesus didn’t bodily rise from the dead and that the atonement is child abuse . . .” For her the lack of theological oversight was obvious.
Bishop Persell, however, downplays Spong’s importance in this family feud: “He’s one bishop among hundreds in the U.S., retired, with no vote in the House of Bishops or the convention.” He added, “And most of what he says makes sense.”
[/blockquote]
It would be hard to find a better illustration of the HOB’s “lack of theological oversight” than Persell’s admission that Spong “makes sense”. Reappraising insouciance concerning Spong’s views damages TEC even more than Spong himself did.
Yes, Charming Billy. The amusing part to me is to watch the progressives attempt on one hand to “downplay” Spong in the public eye because they know good and well that his statements are devastating to them in the global context, yet at the same time try to push his beliefs — which most of them heartily believe anyway but just aren’t stupid enough right now to “say it out loud” — through diocesan events and invitations to him to speak and teach.
Jesus said to the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well, “The time is coming and now is when those who worship the Father will worship Him in spirit and in truth.” My understanding of the Holy Catholic Church is just that: it includes all those who worship the Father in spirit and in truth, whatever their denominational tag, and excludes all those who do not worship the Father in spirit and in truth, whatever their denominational tag. The visible church, whatever its denominational tag, is a human institution and is therefore subject to error. I don’t fret over “division” because the Great Shepherd knows His own and His own know Him. He alone is able to separate the sheep from the goats. Meanwhile, we have the responsibility to note whether there is a “goat” or a “wolf” within the fold dressed in sheep’s clothing and trying to pass as a sheep. The behavior is different, by thier fruits we will know them…or at least highly suspect them and keep our distance.
The author of this article has made it appear that there have been more splits than it fact have happened. Planting new churches is not splitting up.
Fourteen years ago, long before the present controversies, but well along on TEC’s path to heresy, a group left Resurrection and later became affiliated with AMIA. That group later planted Church of the Great Shepherd in Wheaton. From Great Shepherd, which is still meeting another AMIA mission, Church of the Savior, was started in West Chicago.
Fouteen years later,Resurrection closed its doors when the remaining orthodox began a Ugandan Church.
TEC’s St. Mark’s, a separate church entirely and located in another town, lost a great many of its members after the Robinson affair and they formed All Souls another AMIA mission.
In summary then, we have two TEC churches, one closed and one greatly reduced in size, and 4 AMIA and one Ugandan church growing and spreading the Gospel in the greater Chicago area. Not bad news at all.
So what you’re saying, Bill McGovern, is that this is a case of church multiplication, not division. In reading the article, I wondered if that were in fact the case and Byasee had somehow missed it.
Actually, Great Shepherd wasn’t planted by Rez; it was started as a result of some serious disagreements about church governance. Great Shepherd was at first independent, but eventually joined AMiA, by which point most of the tension had eased. Byassee may not have crossed every single T and dotted every single I, but he’s a very fair-minded and skilled journalist — as well as a solidly orthodox Methodist minister — and did a fine job with this very complex story.
Thanks, Alan Jacobs, for clarifying. I was fairly confident that the journalist got it right. And it goes along with a theory of mine that Anglicanism is one of those branches of Christianity that has to have a unifying center other than doctrine or confession. I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be “doctrine or confession” but that those things will not hold Anglicanism together. There has to be another center that holds.
Now that I’ve slammed the TEC side with my Spong comment, I have to say that I think this comment a most unfortunate one: “Beasley puts a positive spin on the closure. For a church dedicated to mission, “It’s no defeat to spend yourself out of existence.”
I wonder if non-TEC leaders can possibly understand just how much they sound like TEC leaders when they talk that way. The tone and point of that statement is eerily similar to a KJS or other TEC bishop.
The appropriate thing to say when a failure is pointed out is “yes, that was a failure — we’re not sure why it happened, but it certainly is disconcerting.”
Even TEC leaders could say such things and get away with it, when their parishes decline or fail. We might all say “we know why it happened” but they could at the least acknowledge the failure.
Actually, there are a number of other reasserting Anglican parishes in Chicago. There are parishes under the Diocese of Bolivia in Evanston and Elburn (the latter is the parish where I am a member).
I was with representatives (both clergy and lay) of most of the parishes referenced in this article (and others not mentioned) just last Thursday evening. There is both a desire for and an effort to develop a coordinated way forward as a diocese under a single orthodox Anglican bishop.
I agree that Anglicanism is being Balkanized. I agree that is an unfortunate thing. I pray that this process is but a temporary precursor to Christ gathering the faithful into one Church body.
The article cited is troubling. The article is troubling because it tells only a portion of the story. It tells a story to make one point – “All these divisions look badâ€. The article doesn’t tell portions of the story which explain the situations – it merely holds them to ridicule. The article characterizes some situations in ways which are questionable – at best.
This story is far more complicated than the article presents in its one-note bias. Parts of the story are encouraging and uplifting. Parts are not. The story reflects life, and a lot of folks trying to walk in faith in an Anglican tradition beset by Episcopal heresy, apostasy, and a lack of coordinated orthodox leadership. If orthodox leaders fail to provide coordinated leadership, the flock will depart in various directions.
I have just returned to Virginia after spending a considerable time with my two children who both attend the large Church of the Resurrection (AMiA) that meets at GlenBard West High School in Glen Ellyn. I went to Wheaton College and to Yale Div. School with my friend William Beaseley+. I’ve been following the complex story of these various orthodox Anglican congregations for years, and I think there are indeed some sobering lessons to be learned.
But this article doesn’t do justice to the sheer vitality and dynamism of the new Anglican churches in the western suburbs around Wheaton. For instance, the large “Rez” (as it is affectionately known) averages over 700 in ASA (average Sunday attendance) during the school year, when large numbers of Wheaton College students attend (and faculty too). They just conducted a major capital fund drive and raised over $2 million in pledges to buy a 21 acre plot of land in nearby Winfield. Architectural plans for the new worship center envision a very large church, with seating for about 1,500 people. And the leaders at Rez, including the rector, Stewart Ruch+, are talking about starting numerous daughter churches at the same time that they are seeking to build their first building. The place is overflowing with life and zeal.
I was there during Holy Week. There were over 500 people there for Maundy Thursday, over 600 for Good Friday, and over 1,000 packed the high school auditorium for the four-hour long Easter Vigil. The Good Friday offering they took up to help Archbishop Ben Kwashi of Jos, Nigeria expand the campus of the new Anglican seminary in Jos raised $40,000, despite the fact that the church was in the middle of an ambitious building campaign.
And the joint service mentioned in the article that took place last August when ++Peter Akinola visited Wheaton almost packed the large Edman Chapel on the college campus. Almost 2,000 people came, not the modest figure of half that number cited by the author.
That isn’t to say that there haven’t been and aren’t problems. None of these new Anglican churches is perfect, as their leaders would readily admit. There have been growing pains, and some regrettable divisions. But the Wheaton area does represent one of the bright spots, one of the most promising areas where the New Anglicanism is flourishing. And I can testify that I’ve talked to Fr. Beaseley in person within the last month, and he is devoting a lot of time to trying to help all the new Anglican churches under foreign jurisdictions to work together and eventually unite.
Yes, just as the original Protestant Reformation of the 16th century spawned many divisions, it is highly likely that the New Reformation of the 21st century will do so as well. But that doesn’t invalidate either Reformation, at least not in my opinion.
David Handy+
[blockquote]Bishop Persell, however, downplays Spong’s importance in this family feud: “He’s one bishop among hundreds in the U.S., retired, with no vote in the House of Bishops or the convention.†He added, “And most of what he says makes sense.†[/blockquote]
I [i]wince[/i] to see Bp. Persell say such a thing. It certainly makes the job of responsible theological education (in the liberal/progressive constituency) a lot harder when the church’s bishops hold up Bp. Spong as an example of sense-making. This is not “reason” as I understand the term.
David+, you might be interested to know that William Beasley served in the altar party at the Confirmation service yesterday, and his whole family attended. That was a nice touch also.
To add into Alan’s comments about how “common cause” All Souls’ has become, on May 9th our deacon, Paul, was ordained by Bp. Lyons to the priesthood, so, when you look at our bulletin you’ll see both the insignia of AMiA and that of Bolivia.
There is also an increasing amount of cooperation among the growing constellation of Resurrection parishes. My husband and I are members of “big Rez” and we have also done a considerable amount of teaching and membership training for Church of the Savior, West Chicago, and the newest Rez “daughter”, Light of Christ in Kenosha. Savior and Rez have also done several midweek services together and their priest frequently celebrates at Rez’s Tuesday am eucharist. Light of Christ, Kenosha, also had a joint service and fellowship luncheon a few months ago with the new Nigerian CANA parish in Milwaukee. Alan Jacobs from All Souls did a series of teachings on C. S. Lewis for Rez last fall and All Souls now hosts Rez’s quarterly men’s retreat in their newly purchased facility. Both All Souls and Resurrection (Uganda) have joined with “big Rez” for joint youth activities and retreats.
Kendall the answer to how I made that mistake, which I’ve felt sick over for weeks, is that one checks things one’s unsure about and doesn’t when one is sure. It slipped by half a dozen of us, and it was stupid on my part. It happens, and it’s not ok, you’re right.
My great hope in writing this piece was that AMIA would find itself fairly represented. Hopefully the comments of Beasley, noted by AKMA here, and the criticisms of Schori I report go a long way to showing this is not “one note bias.” Most coverage of AMIA in the liberal religious press has simply charged ya’ll with bigotry and homophobia. I offer criticisms from the mouths of AMIA priests and members themselves. If you find them profligators of “one note bias” I suggest you take it up with them.
Sigh. I meant Persell, not Beasley.
Jason,
This is a complex story, as Scott Purdy also notes above : “The story reflects life, and a lot of folks trying to walk in faith in an Anglican tradition beset by Episcopal heresy, apostasy, and a lack of coordinated orthodox leadership. ”
It was interesting to me to get the take of someone who’s reporting from the outside and earnestly trying to report the story. I’d be interested in reading all of what you wrote, as I understand it was cut down.
Part of the reason for the complexity, which I think you did a pretty good job of reflecting, is that it’s been going on for years and there is a lot of emotion involved, and that’s hard to contain in a magazine article. We seem to be in a battle over a name and some property on the face of it, however the underlying issue, for all involved I believe, is who do we say Jesus is. We’re all battling, in our various ways, an entrenched hierarchy, some of whom are saying that He isn’t divine, some of whom are saying that we can agree to disagree and all of whom are, by actions if not by their words, saying that it’s all relative. They are unwilling to defend the faith and are willing to work and walk alongside those who are actively denying the faith. From what I can tell, this is happening in every denomination.
It would be an interesting thing to do a series on these type of churches following up on this article. How they came to be on an individual basis, where they’re at and where they’re going, particularly across denominational lines from those denominations who’ve been going through this – Presbyterian, ELCA Luteran, Methodist and Anglican.
Thanks Ann. I’ve been amazed anew lately at the level of vitriol on the web. Perhaps I shouldn’t be, as you say ya’ll have a dog in this fight, and I don’t. Each of these congregations certainly deserves in-depth attention that one can’t give even in a longish article like this one. I had a lot more about the distinct character of each, including of worship at Rez and how it differs from All Souls, some stuff about a conservative TEC congregation that’s stayed, and it all came out in editing. I’ve gathered also what is said above, that of late there’s been much more concord between these congregations after significant animosity previously. But those details, crucial as they are to those living in this place and these issues, aren’t necessarily of interest to someone far removed from it, either geographically or in terms of ecclesial tradition. It’s not great, I’d love to have the 10,000 words or so that Garrett Keizer got in Harpers, but we just don’t do pieces that long.
Jason (#25),
I’m glad you chose to drop in here and defend or explain yourself as the author. Despite my comment #17 above, which might seem critical of the incompleteness of your piece, I actually agree with Dr. Alan Jacobs that you did a good job summing up a VERY complex and confusing story. And I give you credit for recognizing that this was a story that’s newsworthy and deserves notice and careful attention by many people who aren’t Episcopalians or Anglicans. I sincerely hope your article in the Christian Century draws attention to what has happened and continues to happen in the Wheaton area among us conservative Anglicans. I’ll just point out to everyone that SF has now devoted a thread to your article too.
P.S. I do know how to spell my friend William Beasley’s name. I was just careless and hasty above.
David Handy+
As one who has been a member of Church of the Resurrection (1 & 2), Great Shepherd, and now All Souls, I have lived through the majority of what Jason Byassee wrote about and I have to simply disagree about the fairness and accuracy of this piece. For one, Church of the Great Shepherd did not permanently close its doors in 2007. After the resignation in late August 2007 of the Rector who followed in the footsteps of Great Shepherd’s charismatic founding pastor Rev. Lyle Dorsett, the church did stop meeting for a period of ten weeks. During this period remaining members of the church met together to ponder just why things had gone so terribly wrong with Dorsett’s replacement, reconciled with each other over their differences, reached out in repentance to those who had left, and prayed for the church’s healing. Sunday morning worship resumed in Dec. 2007 and the church has recently called a new Rector. All of this has taken place with the full blessing of AMIA, AMIA’s Bishop Sandy Greene, and the AMIA local network leader, Rev. William Beasley. Such positive news of reconciliation, such as experienced by Great Shepherd, is unfortunately largely missed by Byassee in his overall account of “Anglican angst†in Wheaton. And despite what he says above, this positive news is not simply “of late” but has been in the workings for the better part of nine years.
I am afraid (and others may disagree) that the article leaves one with the impression that we Anglicans in DuPage County are still a disjointed and splintered group, with even more church splits possible on the horizon over even “juicer†disagreements such as women’s ordination. The article’s narrative only seems to confirm Bishop Persell’s assessment: “If you’re formed in opposition and negativity, you’re bound to keep on splitting—there’s always need for more purity.†The truth of the matter is that the rank apostasy in TEC in the Chicago diocese bred the confusion that ensued when congregations felt it necessary to leave TEC before orthodox apostolic leadership was in place to properly shepherd the new congregations and bring oversight and balance to their leadership. Persell is shifting attention away from TEC’s abandonment of the orthodox faith. Although I do not believe it was the intent of the author, it deeply saddens me that the readers of the Christian Century are being given more fodder to support views such as Persell’s that “breakaway Episcopalians†are schismatic, inconsistent, and unloving folks. For instance, in the re-hashing of the split between Great Shepherd and Resurrection the article is airing dirty laundry from over a decade ago, very old news, just now being reported in the Christian Century of all places. But what is missing from the account is the reconciliation that took place between William Beasley and Lyle Dorsett in early 1999, just eighteen months after their parting, the profound healing service between Great Shepherd and Resurrection in 2003, which I will never forget, and still serves for me as a rich testimony of how God can heal wounds and divisions. Byassee, or his editors, also failed to include the formation in 2004 (four years ago, again, not a recent development) of an AMIA network specifically aimed to bring the AMIA churches in the area back together to form partnerships rather than competing with each other for members. As a result the churches represented in the flow chart as “Anglican splits†are in fact often meeting and worshiping together, sharing Holy Week services, and rather than competing for who is the most pure church, cooperating together in ministries in both the church and community. The real news is the cooperation and unity that has been growing for years, not months, among all these so called “split†churches, as many of you have attested on this blog in recent days. The story about Anglicans in DuPage County, in my mind then, would be more properly entitled “Anglicans uniting†rather than “Anglican angst.†Yes, there are formidable obstacles when a reformation is in process, and history has shown us it can get messy, but the situation in DuPage County, far from casting dispersions on such an effort, is actually testimony that despite such obstacles, God can overcome human weakness and pride and build a unified Church that will ultimately glorify him. We have hard work ahead of us, but I would hope readers from around the country might be more interested in our past and present progress, rather than just our past failings.
Jason Byassee,
My apologies for not responding sooner, but I have been out of country and out of touch for several days.
My biggest quarrel is your characterization as “splits†certain changes which were not splits.
“Split†is an attention-grabbing, riveting word, laden with negative connotations.
Several people have written me since May 14th (I presume the May 20th issue of The Christian Century became available then) quoting your article and using it to bolster their argument that the “splits†in Anglicanism are disingenuous (or otherwise self-centered and indefensible). While you are certainly not to blame for others’ use of your article to bolster their prejudices, it is noteworthy that the quote invariably used in that manner is your paragraph which recites a litany of “splitsâ€. I do believe that in this paragraph (quoted by Kendall+ and other as the exemplar of your thesis) the term “split†constitutes a repeated single note, sometimes inappropriately and incorrectly struck, and without exception ill explained in the balance of your article. Unfortunately, the riveting rhetorical style of this one paragraph captures attention to the point of almost eclipsing the detail you add in the rest of your article.
I posit the different changes you characterize as “splits†were motivated more by a desire to faithfully submit to Jesus Christ than a desire to “split†from someone or something. This perspective of submission instead of split is reinforced by the record of efforts of cooperation between the AMiA, CANA, and Bolivian parishes in the region. Applying that perspective, the choice of the charged characterization “split†(particularly when inappropriately charged as in the expansion driven plant of Church of the Savior) appears bias driven.
I did not intend you pain, and apologize for any inflicted.
Mary you’re right about Great Shepherd reopening. It was closed when I wrote this. I confess to cynicism when an organization’s website says they’re shutting down for a period of discernment, or whatever. Apparently Great Shepherd is open, but some of its leaders attend other churches, and another batch of former Great Shepherd folks was already meeting separately.
In response to these criticisms, I’ve been told by others that I make the ‘parting of ways’ (to use a less loaded term) between these congregations entirely more genial than they actually were on the ground. Mary b calls me biased because I do not sufficiently praise these churches. Purdy because I provide fodder on blogs elsewhere by rhetoric that shows how convoluted things have been. Media simply works differently than you’re letting on. We’re not supposed to hand out medals. We’re supposed to tell a true story. Hopefully I’ve done that to some degree here, despite mistakes.
The two larger questions I’m interested in but leave unasked in the piece are these: when a church splits aren’t both sides impoverished? TEC is left with Robinson Schori and friends, you guys go off with your own bishops and theologians and concerns, and each becomes a one-hit wonder. Witness the current chaos in the PCA, which cares about doctrine, and diminished concern in anything but identity politics in the PC-USA. Those folks needed each other.
My other larger concern is a question with an implied criticism: is church schism really worse than the moral qualms you all have with TEC?
Jason (#29),
I don’t fault you for highlighting the church splits the way you did in your article, as a reporter you call them as you see them. But I do think Mary (#27) and Dr. Jacobs (#7) have provided objective evidence that your presentation was somewhat one-sided. And your last comment seems to indicate one reason why. That is, you seem to display an underlying assumption that schism is worse than heresy.
Yes, it’s undeniably true that when churches break up, there is an inevitable diminishing and impoverishment that takes place on all sides. But regrettably, such ecclesial divorces are often in fact a blessing in disguise. Often the result is that the division leads to two or more thriving forms of Christianity in a place where before there was only one. As long as there is no rancor or lasting animosity, that is.
In the end, we are left dealing with the familiar perennial problem of dealing with old wineskins in the Church. Time after time in church history, renewal movements have sprung up seeking to revitalize and purify the church. Some have been able to work for change from within, others have been forced out or felt called out, or simply walked away in disgust. Generally, the more radical, sweeping, and rapid the changes being called for, the more likely that the proposed reforms will be bitterly and strongly resisted and openly opposed. Gradual, incremental, evolutionary change always fares better than swift, drastic, revolutionary change. That’s entirely normal, natural, and predictable.
But that does NOT mean that radical, revolutionary change is therefore always to be avoided. At least I don’t think so.
Jason, I understand you’re a Methodist. Surely, the history of the Methodist movement illustrates this rather well. Essentially, John and Charles Wesley and the revolutionary movement they led were forced out of the C of E. And in America, Francis Asbury made no pretense of trying to work within the Anglican system and to adopt a “church within a church” strategy. And the results paid off enormously and vindicated him. Yet, eventually, the Methodist movement itself developed its own set of old, rigid wineskins. The Nazarene and “Wesleyan” churches spun off and went their own way. But Protestantism in inherently unable to resist such breakups, without undermining the justification for the original Reformation in the first place.
Surely there are numerous factors and judgments in play in analyzing a complex situation like the rise of the AMiA churches in Chicago’s western suburbs. You are fully entitled to your opinion, and I think you did a credible job as a reporter. I would have written the article quite differently. But I wasn’t the one chosen to write this piece, you were.
FWIW, at some point I hope someone will do a book-length study of what has happened in the Wheaton area among orthodox Anglicans. Unfortunately, that will expose some fine Christian leaders to intense scrutiny and show some of their flaws, including my friend Fr. William Beasley. But especially it would tarnish the public image of the well-known author Leanne Payne, a much-revered lay woman with a powerful healing ministry whose personal weaknesses and control issues played a very large part in the troubles and growing pains experienced by these fledgling new Anglican churches. Or at least, so I’ve heard from several friends and family members. But it would also show the grace of God powerfully working through clay jars, such as all of us are.
In conclusion, once again I commend you for reognizing that there is a story worth telling here, and one that is of much more than local interest. Perhaps you can do a follow up piece at some point, and then you might take note that there have been strong centripetal forces at work in this messy but inspiring story, as well as the perhaps more obvious centrifugal ones that you focused on here. Personally, I’d look forward to such a follow up story from you.
David Handy+
Thanks David, this is helpful, and I think we agree, I’m arguing out of an assumption that schism is a worse thing. I take that from St. Augustine, who’s my lens for everything. And it’s not a Protestant-friendly lens, and it may be contradictory for me as a Methodist to hold it. I think you’ve put your finger on that quite well.
You also put your finger on something else that’s frustrating for me in hearing the criticism of this piece. I could have gone far far more negative than I did, and gone after individuals, as several sources wanted me to do. But these are people trying to be faithful, and whose success in the gospel I pray for.
Final word from me on this–I found this batch of AMIA folks quite refreshing in two ways, one they were circumspect and confessional about their missteps (again the criticisms of AMIA I render in the piece come from AMIA people themselves, I didn’t cook them up, my conclusion aside), and Beasley’s lovely line that “we’re in mission not in court” was clearly meant as a veiled criticism against churches in lawsuits. Now, AMIA churches in DuPage had property of far less value than what’s being disputed in Virginia, and they’ve a lot shorter historical claim to what land they had. but they played by the rules–if you leave TEC leave the keys at the door, and that’s fully to their credit.
Mr. Byassee,
Medals from media are both unexpected and unwanted. My cynicism is such that were one offered I would anticipate a simultaneous knifing. I am sorry if I gave the impression of being a media naif.
I believe you told “a true story” “to some degree”. I also find your bias clarified and affirmed in your response above.
In your “larger concern” query you chose an interesting characterization of both things you balance – “church schism” vs. “moral qualms”. Which side of the balance has the more loaded term? Why might that be?
A different perspective might be expressed as seeking the relative value of “adhering to biblical values” vs. “participating in heretical innovations and blessing sin.”
I too have a bias. It does not appear whe share the same.
“We’re not supposed to hand out medals. We’re supposed to tell a true story. Hopefully I’ve done that to some degree here, despite mistakes.”
Doesn’t a “true story” include important plot lines and tell the ending? My misgivings are not so much that you are biased (I did not use that word) or that you don’t praise folks enough, but that for whatever reason, very important aspects of the story have just gone missing. Its like a Gospel story which elaborates in great detail upon the crucifixion, but fails to mention the Resurrection. Yes, in the case of Church of the Great Shepherd and Church of the Resurrection, let’s not re-spin history and try to portray a very messy church split ten years ago as a “church plant.” But on the other hand, why is the reconciliation which began in 1999 just not worth mentioning? It appears to be because the full story doesn’t fit your main thesis: “schism breeds schism.” As a journalist, I would hope you would anticipate the perlocutionary effect of your writing, the ways in which the shape of your “true story” will affect your readers, and to take at least some responsibility for how that happens. Your last question is telling, because I think in some ways you tried to answer it with the way you reported the facts in your article. All that said, I did appreciate the ways in which you quite aptly revealed the foibles and inconsistent thinking on the part of those in TEC. And I will grant you the benefit of the doubt that your editors also had a lot to do with the way the final article was shaped.
Since you’re done lecturing me I want to make one thing clear: I don’t blame my editing colleagues for anything, I understand we have to work within space strictures and some things must come out, and don’t want to hide behind that for anything that shouldn’t have been left out.
Jason (#31),
Thanks. I’ll make this by final response to you. If you’re an admirer of St. Augustine (and I’d agree that he is the most interesting and influential of the Church Fathers, though not without his own flaws), I’d remind you that the greatest of the Latin Fathers combined two sides that have been fatefully separated since the Reformation. That is, the travails of the 16th century pitted the Anti-Pelagian side of Augustine (represented by the Protestants) against the Anti-Donatist side of Augustine (represented by the Catholics). One of the marks of Augustine’s greatness is precisely that he managed to combine the two, even if he didn’t integrate them fully. Alas, the western church has put asunder what he joined together.
But personally, I find the many leaders of TEC trying to lay claim to the mantle of Augustine’s anti-Donatist side disingenuous. Augustine hated both schism and heresy. And all I can say is that my reading of Augustine leaves me totally convinced that he would be absolutely appalled and repulsed by the rampant heresy now so prevalent in western Anglicanism (and all the “mainline” denominations). We can speculate endlessly about whose side Augustine would take if he were alive today. That is, would he be a Roman Catholic or some kind of orthodox Lutheran or Anglican or Presbyterian? That’s debatable, and plausible arguments might be made for all the above options.
But I myself am totally confident that Augustine would SHUN as abhorrent, intolerable, and despicable the liberalism now dominant in TEC, or the UMC for that matter.
But I freely recognize that you exercized restraint and tried to be fair and impartial in this informative piece. You didn’t write an op-ed piece as if you were doing an editorial column. You tried to be a responsible reporter, and I commend you for that. But I do think this fascinating and complex story deserves a follow up.
David Handy+
Jason (in response to #34)
Yup, I’m done lecturing and I’m sorry that’s how I came across. My husband and kids hate it when I lecture them too. I will admit that my bias is that I love these crazy Anglicans in DuPage County Illinois and am amazed at how far we have come in learning how important unity is. I’m excited to be a part of a local movement that is learning to work together for the furtherance of the Gospel and yet appreciate diversity within the parameters of our creedal faith. So I’m a bit of a she-bear defending her family and I did not mean to question your integrity as a reporter, only point out the ways I felt the story was incomplete. I appreciate that you did not go after the character of any of the people you named (and didn’t name) and yes, you did exercise restraint. Best of all, you raised an essential question through this article and the dialogue on this blog-in light of the high value Scripture places on unity-when does schism become absolutely necessary?
Mary B
As I’ve said to my friend Jason and others, I don’t accept the common distinction between heresy and schism, which assumes that they are two completely different things. Heresy, especially when it becomes institutionalized, is schism. So, as I see it, the question is not “Do I prefer heresy or schism?” but rather “What is the proper Christian response to schismatic theology and practice?”
That said, I still think that Jason had an incredibly difficult job to do — 3000 words is scarcely adequate to the subject — and did it well.
Here we are reminded of the necessity to pray for healing of old wounds, forgiveness and unity, beginning with the healing to the Great Schism.
In the early 90s served as the asst. rector at St. Mark’s in Glen Ellyn, one of the churches that fed the exodus out of pecusa. I recognize a former member of St. Mark’s in the comments above. Possibly she could fill in some details, or someone else can who is also still in the area. The conservative congregation that remains (#25) is unfortunanately not St. Mark’s, GE. That parish was mixed and after a rector left to plant an AMIA church in SC the parish lost its conservative footing as I understand. I am guessing that the conservative congregation that remains in pecusa is St. Mark’s in Geneva that was once led by Fr. Rick Lobbs, more recently the dean of the Cathedral in Orlando.
Thanks for reminding us of the necessity of prayer, Alice. What saddens me is that we had to wait until comment #38 for someone to mention it! That being said, at least we were in double digits; we might have had to wait until triple-digit comments for it to be mentioned on other blogs. 🙂