The Rev. Frederick Schmidt, an Episcopal priest and theology professor at Southern Methodist University, said that only the Archbishop of Canterbury can decide who is a part of the Anglican Communion.
“This would be a little bit like a group of people outside the 50 states of the United States claiming suddenly to be a part of the United States of America,” he said.
Schmidt also questioned the long-term viability of the denomination.
“The question becomes .”‚.”‚. Can you actually build a church around a negative?” he said.
David Holmes, a religion professor at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Va., said he believes that the 100,000-strong denomination can survive.
He noted that one group joining the new denomination first split from the Episcopal Church in the 1870s.
“The point is that if a group that broke off .”‚.”‚. lasted over 140 years, this is a much larger group that has more substance in terms of membership and prestige,” he said.
Hmm, I believe Schmidt would take the opposite tack if the ABC un-recognizes the ECUSA/TEC/GCC/EO-PAC. Let us wait and see, shall we (Gamaliel paraphrased for today).
Who is Schmidt, I question his long-term viability? :
‘only the Archbishop of Canterbury can decide who is a part of the Anglican Communion.’
Is there still an Archbishop of Canterbury?
‘Can you actually build a church around a negative?’
No, of course not, but who is trying that? Our church is built on the Solid Rock — the most positive and dynamic force in the universe. Yes, even the creator of the universe.
There is no building around a negative. This is as positive as it gets: Christ, the Way, the Truth and the Life, him crucified, raised, ascended and on the right hand of the Father in the eternal Kingdom. On earth, in the Church, his Body, we live a reflection of that Truth, not a contradiction, empowered by the Holy Spirit. It’s about teaching the Faith. Very positive. Very viable. And most welcome!
Columcil and CnaAnglican, the negative is the response to the developments in the Episcopal Church. I think the claims that the Episcopal Church is apostate and that it doesn’t follow the same positives you cite is vastly overstated. I think it is without question that the new developments are a response to objections in the actions of the Episcopal church. In that sense, I think that the new denomination/province/whatever it is is going to have a diffficult time shaking off the perception that is it built around a negative.
Fr. Schmidt teaches at the Perkins School (the seminary) at Southern Methodist University.
#4. Dallas,
I agree with your understanding that not all Episcopal people are apostate. Even though I am a member of a CANA church, I worship in an Episcopal church in Florida all winter long. The people are wonderful Christians and are as orthodox toward the scriptures as are our folks in Virginia.
Both churches are built on positives. Our church in Virginia is growing at about three times the rate of the one in Florida.
I think the problem of negativism lies squarely in the TEC leadership, starting with the bishop of DioVA and going right on up. They are negative about the positive power of Jesus to change people. They are negative about the power of the scripture. They are negative about leaving our building in the hands of the 75% of the congregation that are presenting a positive gospel to our community.
If you visit the small Episcopal churches far from the centers of power, such as the one in Florida, they either tell you they are unfaimiliar with what is happening to their national church, or they wish to remain aloof from it and go about their business of positive action at the local level.
I know at our CANA church, and I know from our bishops Bena, and Minns that there will be no attention given to fighting negative perceptions. We are simply to busy preaching a positive gospel.
I pray special blessings for you, our Episcopal friends in Florida, and all in TEC who still are busy preaching that positive gospel. — Stan