Anglicanism in America

'It's a tragedy for the Church' - Archbishop Venables

2008-03-01T08:37:00.001-08:00

http://acl.asn.au/a-tragedy-for-the-church/
February 28, 2008

Archbishop of the Southern Cone, Gregory Venables was interviewed on CBC Radio in Canada earlier this week.

It's very very sad that it should come to this, it's a tragedy for the church, for the church in Canada and for the church throughout the world - but it shows how serious the division is. We are grateful for this transcript of the interview (the audio is available here in RealAudio format). Questions are from CBC's The Current presenter Anna Maria Tremonti -

Also joining us was The Most Reverend Gregory James Venables, Presiding Bishop of the Province of the Southern Cone. He's also the Bishop of Argentina and the leader of the parishes that have split with the Anglican Church of Canada. Archbishop Gregory James Venables spoke to us from Buenos Aires.

What is your response to the recent votes here in Canada, what do you think of these decisions?

It's very, very, sad that it should come to this, it's a tragedy for the church, for the church in Canada and for the church throughout the world - but it shows how serious the division is. This has never happened before. It has happened significantly with very large groups in the United States in recent years and recently with a whole diocese moving - and now it's happening in Canada. It shows how serious this division is and how strong the convictions are which are pulling the church apart.

In your view is this solely about the Canadian churches stand on homosexuality? Does it go beyond that?

No. This is about two versions of Christianity which are in a strong state of difference. You've got the original biblical Christianity which the church, the Christian church throughout the world has held to over the past two thousand years and then you've got this new liberal post-modern Christianity which has evolved especially in the western world over the last 100 years or so. It's like two ships that have gradually pulled apart and can longer really sail together and the trouble is it's pulling the church apart as it does that.

And how did you personally, in Argentina, get involved with the Canadian congregations?

We've got good links with folk in Canada, we are all a part of the Americas. Also I had been a part of the Primates' debate on this for a long time now and therefore I'd been in contact with Canadians who'd been in touch with us and discussed things with us and asked our advice and that's what has led to this situation - that in the end they came to us and said, "Look we are going to have to break away from something we can no longer walk with - will you please give us somewhere to live while this thing works itself out?" and we talked about it with other Primates - there were a number of provinces that were prepared to make an offer to receive these congregations and in the end the decision was to come down to us.

And in practical terms what does that mean to take on these Canadian parishioners?

It means basically that these people cannot say that they agree with their local Church, with the national Church where they are, but they want to remain within the Anglican church and - since they can't remain within the Anglican Church if they leave the Canadian Church and don't go anywhere else - they are coming to us for shelter until the situation is resolved. We hope it will be a temporary thing and that something more practical and able to be worked out locally will come out of this in the long term. As it stands there are two bishops who will be looking after these congregations, two retired Canadian bishops who will be doing the practical work for us but the overall coverage will be under the Province of the Southern Cone which includes the six countries you mentioned.

And along with the issue of faith when it comes to the running of a church there are legal and financial considerations how do those shake down with these changes?

Well I suppose the most difficult thing will be where the clergy go in terms of stipend, pensions and medical coverage and all that which implies an enormous sacrifice, which shows again how serious this is and how strong the convictions are. But also the tragedy is going to be over buildings - who actually owns the buildings. Because although buildings are secondary in our faith, the church is the temple - we are the temple and God lives in His people - but even so buildings are very very precious to us and they mean a lot, especially locally where families have lived for a long time in one locality so that is going to be probably the hardest thing of all. And what's been happening in the states is tragic because there are multi-million (dollar) court cases going on at this moment in which even members of vestries are being taken to court for 'abandoning the communion' as they say.

I can hear the regret in your voice.

Yeah. Oh yeah. It's heartbreaking. It's heartbreaking. It's tragic because the church is meant to be a demonstration of love - and one of the things that really breaks us up is that there seems to be so little love in this. I said at a Primates' meeting a while back that in a marriage, generally, in spite of difficulties you keep going because you want to, because you love each other and in spite of the fact you face terrible problems sometimes you want to stay together and that's what keeps you going. But there seems to be little love and little desire to remain together and that is the tragic revelation of this situation.

And yet we're talking about a tug of war over a view of Christianity.

Over two versions, one which is the ancient historic version and one which has grown up more recently but unfortunately you would have thought there would be enough in common to hold it together.

And do you think there is, you think there is a chance of doing that?

We thought that for a long time, we met together as Primates over and over again and every time we said, "Please don't go on with this, hold back, let's talk about this, let's find a way" - but even on one situation when we had a meeting in Brazil, with all the Primates and we put out a letter and said, "Please don't do this", within 48 hours a Canadian diocese had gone ahead with moving on same sex blessings which took our breath away, we hadn't even sent the letter out more than 48 hours I think it was. The other tragedy is, having been in this situation for so long and having taken part in it there's been very little real dialogue. There's been long silences but there hasn't been real dialogue and that is a tragedy. If Christianity is what it should be then we should be able to sit down and work it out in spite of differences and that is part of the sadness too.

Okay, well I understand there is a conference for the end of April in BC by the Anglican Network of Canada that is the group of more traditional or so-called essential Anglicans. You're going to that conference, what do you hope that will achieve?

I hope to be there. I hope it will give us a chance to clarify even more how this thing is going to work out and to affirm the position that people are taking so that there's a security within this and simply to be able to pray together and to say okay we've taken a step, how can we know be the sort of church that God wants us to be in a world that really needs to find some hope. And if the world is the creation of God what can we do to help the world find its place within that world vision.

END

----------------

Blog has moved

2008-02-09T11:19:00.000-08:00

After twenty or so posts I noticed a discrepancy in the address: http://angicanamerican.blogspot.com/

I can spell better than that, so I have reposted all the entries here to AiA at: http://anglicanamerican.blogspot.com/

All future entries will be posted at the new and improved address.

New wave of US defections

2008-02-02T12:25:00.000-08:00

CoE Newspaper 2.01.08 p 5:

A new wave of parish defections has washed across the Episcopal Church with congregations in Tennessee, Pittsburgh and Central Florida quitting the national church in protest to its leftward drift.

The response to American church secessions however, has differed from past battles with a premium being placed on an amicable parting of the ways.

The new wave of defections has also come from “Windsor Dioceses”—dioceses whose leaders have been opposed to the innovation in doctrine and discipline made in recent years by the national church’s leadership.

While united in their opposition to the actions of the last two General Conventions, conservatives have been divided on what tactical programme to purse. With the breakaway groups now soliciting defections from conservative dioceses, traditionalist leaders within the Episcopal Church are concerned that turf battles over the remaining conservatives may weaken the remaining Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic witness within the Episcopal Church.

In the Diocese of Tennessee the bulk of Trinity Church in Winchester on Jan 6 quit the diocese for CANA, while the rector and members of Holy Cross in Murfreesboro announced that day they had joined the Church of Uganda.

Bishop John Bauerschmidt lamented the secessions, saying they were unnecessary as “Tennessee has on several occasions committed itself to the recommendations of the Windsor Report.” He noted that he was “committed to the Camp Allen principles of compliance with the recommendations of the Windsor Report” articulated by Archbishop Rowan Williams in his Advent letter.

The Bishop of Central Florida, the Rt. Rev. John W. Howe told his diocesan convention on Jan 25 that eight congregations, including the diocese’s second and fourth largest parishes, were withdrawing from the Episcopal Church.

Bishop Howe told The Church of England Newspaper the last three months had been the most difficult of his life, and the negotiations had left him exhausted. However “we have done something that has not been accomplished anywhere else. We are on the best of terms with all those leaving. And we are committed to rebuilding where there have been losses.”

In his Convention address Bishop Howe stated he understood there were some who for reasons of conscience had to withdraw. “I understand that. I don’t agree, but I don’t believe we should punish them. We shouldn’t sue them. We shouldn’t depose the clergy. Our brokenness is a tragedy. The litigation that is going on in so many places is a travesty,” he said.

“And although some seem to be trying to do so, I don’t think you can hold a Church together by taking everybody you disagree with to court,” he said.

CANA Grows Pulling in Archbishops and Bishops to Priestly Ranks

2008-02-01T11:17:00.000-08:00

Leader Confident in Virginia Lawsuits. "We are moving forward"

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
1/29/2008

The leader of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a Nigerian church plant of orthodox Anglicanism in the US says his church is growing with some 60 parishes (20 more in the pipeline), 120 plus clergy, and some 8,000 in attendance all in two years, making it one of the fastest growing body of orthodox Anglicans in North America. In an interview with the Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns at the Anglican Mission in the Americas Winter Conference in Dallas, David W. Virtue talked with Bishop Minns about the present state of Anglicanism in North America and CANA.

VIRTUEONLINE: Where is CANA at today?

MINNS: We are going forward and growing, adding churches, adding clergy and planting new congregations. We have 60 churches with several coming out of the Continuing Church movement, led by several archbishops and bishops from the Continuing movement. They have laid down their episcopal office to serve as priests in CANA.

VIRTUEONLINE: Are you simply monochrome or is there some diversity in your ranks?

MINNS: The episcopate and clergy is a blessed reflection of the diversity of the American populace, with significant numbers of immigrants and minorities. We are committed to modeling for American Anglicans the possibility of respecting both integrities regarding the ordionation of women within one ecclesial body.

VIRTUEONLINE: What are the distinctives of CANA?

MINNS: We are an indigenous ecclesiastical structure with representative leadership by member clergy and laity. One distinctive is that we see ourselves establishing the necessary structures for a growing church in North America along with our friends in the Common Cause Partnership.

VIRTUEONLINE: How do you differ from say the Anglican Mission in the Americas?

MINNS: It is a difference of approach, not theology or mission. We are equally committed to planting new congregations, but we are also structuring ourselves as a church fully in communion with the Province of Nigeria and the worldwide Anglican Communion.

VIRTUEONLINE: You are a church then, rather than a mission?

MINNS: We are committed to mission, but I am happy to embrace the word "church". I think the connection through Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola is seen as being positive. Those who come to us see he has taken a strong stand for the gospel. The Nigerian Church, indeed nearly all the African Anglican provinces, will not compromise in their core understanding of the gospel.

VIRTUEONLINE: So you wanted, from the beginning, to connect with an orthodox province in the Global South?

MINNS: Yes. Our desire was and is to connect with a larger structure.

VIRTUEONLINE: How long have you known Archbishop Akinola?

MINNS: We met briefly in '98 and started working closely together in the beginning of 2003.

VIRTUEONLINE: Are you pleased with what is happening in North American Anglicanism now?

MINNS: I am grieved by the brokenness of the Episcopal Church and the intransigence of the leadership in matters of faith and morals, but in the middle of this I see wonderful changes, lives are being transformed, people are offering themselves for ordination.

VIRTUEONLINE: Do you have standards for ministry comparable to the more well established educational channels and vehicles of education in Anglicanism? How well do you look after your clergy?

MINNS: All our clergy are properly educated. We have some flexibility in terms of context, but all clergy must have, at a minimum, a Bachelor's Degree or equivalent in theology. We will insist on more theological training, if necessary. We are also able to offer a comprehensive national healthcare, retirement, and insurance plan for clergy and congregational employees.

VIRTUEONLINE: In the Virginia situation, where some 12 parishes are being sued for their properties by the diocese and The Episcopal Church, the recent intervention by the Virginia Attorney General seemed to tip the scales in your favor. How do you read this?

MINNS: We are very grateful that he did intervene, and that he made it clear that the law is constitutional and that it applies to our situation.

VIRTUEONLINE: What do you hope for an outcome?

MINNS: I am hopeful, but I am still realistic. It is a complex legal case in all kinds of areas. We anticipate many appeals on a very costly, and frankly, an unnecessary journey. We had begun a process of amicable separation that could have been a model for the rest of the church, but those in power at 815 were not willing to let it happen. I am impressed by the thoroughness of the judge and his grasp of the complexities of the situation.

VIRTUEONLINE: What has happened with the lawsuits against vestries?

MINNS: My understanding is that the lawsuits have been put in abeyance and that the Episcopal Church is not proceeding with them.

VIRTUEONLINE: How are your people coping emotionally with what is going on regarding the lawsuits and their ability to minister in the midst of all this? MINNS: It is one of the hardest things going on, but they are handling it remarkably well. Some of the churches have experienced some division over this. We have lost people, but we are also planting new churches in Virginia. Our larger churches are seeing congregational growth. It is a very serious situation, but people are handling it pretty well. VIRTUEONLINE: What about the cost financially?

MINNS: There is an incredible cost financially. Our money is coming from individual parishes, churches and individuals and parishioners versus a line of credit and selling properties, which the Diocese of Virginia is doing. There is a big difference here; our people are fighting this battle. We have a lot of lawyers, some are working pro bono or giving time sacrificially, but our costs are comparable with the diocese. I think the national Church is spending a significant amount but less than the diocese.

VIRTUEONLINE: You are here in Dallas at the Anglican Mission in the Americas Winter Conference. Are you comfortable here?

MINNS: I am very comfortable and delighted to be here to see a healthy and growing Anglican mission. I am seeing lots of old friends. I have the vision of a united orthodox province that is stronger than ever. I was invited to come here and I accepted that invitation. It is important to see and experience encouragement and practical instruction going on. END ------------------------------

Editor's Note: St. Andrew's Anglican Church in Vestal is the CANA parish in Central NY.

The Global Anglican Communion and the Anglican Orthodoxy

2008-02-01T08:57:00.000-08:00

The Rev. Prof. Stephen Noll
Vice Chancellor, Uganda Christian University
Mukono, Uganda

It is a daunting task to be asked to define orthodoxy.[1] Such a task has occupied the minds of great theologians and councils throughout Christian history, and I consider myself hardly up to the task. However, in looking to the future of Global Anglicanism, it is necessary to put one’s hand to the plough and begin a furrow.

The need to define or describe Anglican orthodoxy today has an urgency about it, because of the actions of the Episcopal Church (TEC) and other Provinces of the Communion in blessing homosexuality against the clear teaching of Scripture, the historic Church and the Resolution of the Lambeth Conference 1998. Although this issue has dominated discussions, it is clear that it is symptomatic of a larger abandonment of biblical teaching and authority on fundamental matters of the faith. The fact that Bishop John Spong, a man who has denied virtually every article of the Christian faith, continues a bishop in good standing in TEC, while orthodox bishops are threatened with deposition for their witness speaks for itself.
Global Anglican Orthodoxy: A Blueprint

I have chosen to adapt an essay I wrote in 2006 titled “The Global Anglican Communion: A Blueprint.”[2] This essay sought to outline the essential elements necessary to an orthodox Anglican Communion Covenant which would serve both to correct the errors present in the Communion and to guide the Communion into the future.

The blueprint follows the framework of the Lambeth Quadrilateral. This formulary emerged from the General Convention of the Episcopal Church meeting in Chicago in 1886 and was intended as an ecumenical statement among the many American denominations and was adopted by the young Lambeth Conference in 1888 as an expression of what we now call Anglicanism.[3] In my view, it can continue to inform a worldwide fellowship of Anglicans and at the same time offer an ecumenical platform from which to seek unity with other Christian churches. Although the Quadrilateral is not a sufficient statement of Christian doctrine, it does contain the theological DNA which can guide us in articulating our ecclesial identity, along with the Articles of Religion and the Book of Common Prayer. Together these formularies offer a kind of “branding” for Anglican bodies in their various social contexts.

Finally, let me suggest for strategic and tactical reasons that a statement of Anglican orthodoxy keep in close touch with the idea of a Covenant. Strategically the idea of a Covenant is a good one. The Quadrilateral itself was a kind of preamble to Anglican orthodoxy for the emerging Communion. Going back even further, one might suggest that the Articles of Religion were part of an Anglican Covenant before there was a Communion, as Thomas Cranmer intended the Articles to form the basis for an ecumenical consensus among the churches of the Reformation.[4]

The idea of an Anglican Covenant is also relevant in the present political context of the Communion. Those attending the Global Anglican Future Conference should maintain ties with those orthodox leaders who are working on the Communion Covenant. It seems unlikely that a final Covenant from Canterbury, filtered now through the Anglican Consultative Council, will be sufficiently crisp to deal with the present crisis. However, the opportunity may arise herafter to negotiate an ecumenical Anglican Covenant that will serve as a means of warding off heresy and will chart the future of orthodox Anglicanism.
The Role of Scripture in the Church

The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, as the revealed Word of God (CLQ), containing all things necessary to salvation,” and as being the rule and standard of faith.

It hardly needs repeating that the foremost objection of the Global South churches to the homosexual agenda is the fact that it is “contrary to Scripture” (Lambeth 1.10) and that this spurning of the Bible as “God’s Word written” has infected the entire structure of authority within the most “progressive” churches of the Anglican Communion. Recovering Anglican orthodoxy must therefore include a restoration of Scripture to its rightful place of authority. I propose the following classic traits of Scripture as benchmarks of a restored biblical orthodoxy.

The Primacy of Scripture. Lambeth 1998 passed Resolutions affirming the primacy, or the primary authority, of Scripture in matters relating to Christian faith and life.[5] Primacy is not a call for bare submission to a sacred text, as in Islam, but includes several closely associated principles.

* The Word as medium of the Gospel. The Reformation began with a dynamic sense of the recovery of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as a verbal revelation, originating in God Himself as the Word (John 1:1-18). Hence the primary medium of communication is “preaching the Gospel” (Romans 10:14).
* The self-authenticating character of Scripture. Although the Bible is an accommodated form of God’s revelation, God “lisping” to us (as Calvin put it), it is self-authenticating and cannot be “proved” by human science or Church edict.
* Scripture as a means of grace. The Word of God presented in Scripture convicts and evokes faith in hearers. The same Spirit that guided the authors testifies in the heart of readers.[6]

The Unity of Scripture. The Reformation also declared that, despite the differences within and between the Testaments, a fundamental consistency undergirds the various books of the Bible.

* Mystery and unity. As God’s triune nature is a transcendent mystery made known in the fullness of time (1 John 1:1-4), so biblical unity can include paradox and progressive development, without causing confusion in its overall message.
* Hermeneutical center. The center of the Bible is the Gospel of Christ himself. A biblical theology must be evangelical, acknowledging the role of the Old Testament as preparation and of the New Testament as fulfillment, avoiding Old Testament-based legalism or New Testament-based libertinism.
* Harmony of Scripture texts. The principle of “Scripture interpreting Scripture” is found in Cranmer’s Collect which urges ordinary Christians to “mark” i.e., compare, various passages in the Bible. As for the Church, it may not “so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another” (Article XX).

The Clarity of Scripture. The clarity of Scripture was the basis on which the Reformers insisted on a vernacular Bible that could be read and understood by the simplest “ploughboy.”

* Simplicity of Scripture. The Reformers recovered the “plain sense” (sensus literalis) of the Bible.[7] Simplicity is not anti-intellectual. In fact, it is an invitation to study original languages and historical and social context.
* External and internal clarity. Scripture is transparent, not a secret Gnostic document. External clarity is the way Scripture conveys the Word publicly to all who would come with a seeking heart. Because of the hardness of the human heart, internal clarity is required through the grace of the Holy Spirit. One must “have ears to hear.”
* Exposition. “How can I understand unless I have an interpreter?” (Acts 8:31). Bible reading must be accompanied by expository preaching and teaching. Even mature Christians move “from the truth to the whole truth” through regular Bible study.[8]

The Sufficiency of Scripture. The idea of the “sufficiency” of Scripture asserts both its unique efficacy and its limited focus.

* The End of Scripture – salvation. Sufficiency looks to the end or telos of Scripture, which is salvation in Christ alone (John 20:31). Any Church which is ashamed of this salvation cannot be using Scripture rightly.
* Appropriation by faith. Just as the Spirit gives inward clarity, so the means by which salvation is grasped is faith alone. Only then does reason interpret Scripture and works of love apply it.
* Trustworthiness of Scripture. Unlike human councils (Article XIX), Scripture cannot err in the sense that it is an infallible guide to salvation and a holy life. In this it diverges both from liberal caricatures and fundamentalist simplifications of fallibility and inerrancy.

In addition to an exposition of the nature of biblical authority, the Global Anglican Communion will need to grapple with the interpretation of Scripture. Again, we should draw on the resources of the Reformation, in its goal of recovering the “plain and canonical” sense of God’s Word, which is accessible for preaching, teaching and mission. At the same time, the contemporary crisis has raised issues of philosophical hermeneutics which must be addressed. The recent work of Kevin Vanhoozer, for instance, opens an avenue for developing a faithful mode of understanding Scripture as “God’s communicative action.”[9]

Finally, global Anglicanism needs to revisit the so-called Anglican tripod of Scripture, Tradition and Reason. While a tripod of three equal legs is an historical fiction and a theological Trojan horse, there is need for a reaffirmation and redefinition of the consonance of Scripture, tradition and reason, as articulated so pithily by Richard Hooker:

Be it in matter of one kind or of the other, what Scripture doth plainly deliver, to that the first place both of credit and obedience is due; the next whereunto is whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason; after these the voice of the Church succeedeth. (Laws V.8.2)[10]

A renewed study, and in places critique, of Richard Hooker is called for in finding a way forward.
The Church’s Historic Formularies

The Apostles’ Creed, as the Baptismal Symbol (LQ); and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement of the Christian faith.

“The voice of the Church,” as Hooker put it, has always been important for an Anglican Christianity that sees itself as part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church upholding “the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3).[11] Reformation Anglicans tended to look to particular classic periods as sources of authority, such as the first five centuries and four Councils. At the same time, they adopted confessional statements that addressed the new insights of Scripture study and the pressing needs of the day.

The present crisis in Anglicanism provides the opportunity to recover a modest and ecumenical confessionalism that takes into account the Great Tradition of Christian theology and adapts and applies its truths to the contemporary situation. Our Anglican heritage affords us rich resources in the Thirty-Nine Articles and Book of Common Prayer. At the same time, new challenges to orthodoxy have arisen requiring precise analysis and redefinition, such as the nature of marriage and human sexuality, the rise of modern science and technology and the place of other religions in God’s economy of salvation. I speak of modest confessionalism in the sense of a confession that guides without closing off legitimate dialogue and testing from Scripture, and ecumenical confessionalism as presenting an opportunity for the historic churches of West and East to seek together the mind of God as they face off against militant secularism on one flank and militant Islam on the other.

In his recent book How Africa Shaped the Christian Mind,” Prof. Thomas Oden argues that Africa – and he means ancient Alexandria down to present-day sub-Saharan Africa – provides both the best rationale of “right remembering” of the apostles’ teaching but also the best examples of martyrdom, “where ordinary believers were unwilling to release their Scriptures to governing authorities who might debase them.”[12]
The Church’s Mission and Sacraments

The two Sacraments – Baptism and the Supper of the Lord - ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s words of Institution and of the elements ordained by Him.

A review and reform of Anglican doctrine should not omit the nature and role of sacraments. Sacramental theology has to some extent divided orthodox Anglicans, e.g., Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics, and one may wonder whether a renewed debate or a papering over of these differences will lead to new life. Undoubtedly renewed discussion of the nature and efficacy of the sacraments is called for among those who agree on biblical essentials.

As a small contribution to such a discussion, I would propose that sacraments should be understood within a theology of mission. The Reformation in general and the Church of England in particular seem to have been deficient in articulating a proper theology of mission. For all their virtues, the Articles of Religion have no single reference to Christ’s Great Commission to evangelize the nations.[13] Likewise, Articles neglected the Person and work of the Holy Spirit, and the Established Church often marginalized or expelled movements of “enthusiasm.” Indeed, much of the work of mission societies has been accomplished in spite of rather than with the full support of the mother Church.

In the context of state churches, the sacraments have often been regarded as rights and rites of national identity. This was not true in the apostolic church, nor does it work today (e.g., what does it mean that the Church of England claims 26 million members?). So I propose we take a dynamic approach to the Gospel sacraments, an approach which I believe is found in the Pentecostal teaching of the apostles (Acts 2:38-47). From this preaching I think we can identify the following marks of the missionary church:[14]

* The Church preaches the Gospel to its own children and to those who are far off - to the churched and unchurched, to the youth of the next generation and to those whom we today call “unreached peoples.”
* It calls people urgently to be saved from the idols of the present age in expectation of the imminent return of Christ.
* Baptism is a response to preaching, and it signs and seals individuals as members of the Body of Christ.
* It expects believers individually and the whole Church corporately to be filled with the Holy Spirit.
* It expects and experiences healing and miracles in its midst.
* It is growing in numbers, often with remarkable leaps forward.
* It is devoted to apostolic doctrine, koinonia, worship and Eucharist.
* It is committed to radical sharing of goods and hospitality.
* It respects authority (the temple) but circumscribes that authority in view of the ascension and reign of Christ.

If the Anglican Communion can orient itself to our Lord’s Great Commission to make disciples of all nations, perhaps it can also reorient its sacramental heritage to convey the eschatological presence of Christ with his Church.[15] Another gap in Anglican theology and practice – not unconnected with its lack of missionary zeal, I suspect – is the conviction that Jesus Christ will return, suddenly and imminently, to judge the living and the dead.[16] As eschatological signs, the sacraments should be seen as incandescent badges of Christian identity: incandescent both in the sense of aglow with the Spirit but also as antagonistic to the world. Global Anglican orthodoxy will need to look not only for faithful administration of Gospel sacraments but for signs of the Spirit and power that accompany it (Mark 16:15-18).[17]
Anglican Ecclesiology

The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of God into the Unity of His Church.

The present crisis in the Anglican Communion has revealed a constitutional weakness in its doctrine of the Church, its ecclesiology. In response to a blatant attack on the apostolic faith, the worldwide Body and its “Instruments of Unity” have proved unable to enforce straightforward discipline of heretical members. This failure has led many to conclude that Anglicanism is fundamentally flawed, and they have departed for other bodies.

We must start by admitting that global Anglican polity has leaned far too heavily on the benevolent patriarchy of the Established Church and the British Empire. The idea that a rapidly expanding body of Global South churches must be governed from a historic See dominated by a secular Government and a compromised mother church is, to be blunt, a dangerous exercise of nostalgia.

Does this mean that the historic episcopate is itself obsolete. I do not think so. Anglicans can rightly uphold episcopal governance and the value of the historic continuity of its ministry, even as they uphold the priesthood of all believers. For all the failures of bishops, we cannot blame the office; indeed we can argue that a rightly ordered episcopacy has provided stability and faithfulness over the centuries and is often emulated by free-church leaders. The second clause of the Quadrilateral – “locally adapted” – qualifies a rigid view of prelacy and specifically relates it to global mission, “the varying needs of nations and peoples called” into the Church. As an example of the latter, one thinks of the Church of Nigeria’s strategy of sending missionary bishops into under-evangelized portions of its own dioceses, or even of another jurisdiction.[18]

The primary role of a bishop is that of a willing and apt pastor-teacher (Ephesians 4:11; 1 Peter 5:2; 2 Timothy 2:24). Bishops are to be stewards (Titus 1:7), which means they bear the final accountability for the state of the Church. To be sure, episcopal authority is not the same as episcopal totalitarianism – an attitude which many Global South churches need to address. The “household of God” which the bishop oversees (1 Timothy 3:4-5) is a “mixed regime” with subsidiary units – congregations, parishes, dioceses and officers, clergy and lay – which must be represented in its governing structures.

We must rethink the role of bishops and polity at the Communion level. Just as national politics and international politics operate on different levels, so also it is right that national churches have autonomy within an overarching framework an international covenant. Much of the work of the church should be “locally adapted,” although we should acknowledge that the electronic communications revolution has brought these local contexts much closer together than heretofore.

This pattern of episcopal governance can function at the level of worldwide Anglicanism. This will involve reform, though not total rejection, of the current Instruments of Unity, including the following elements:

* A synod of bishops should meet regularly (decennially) and have authority to address matters of doctrine, discipline and mission.
* An executive body of Primates should be authorized to carry out the will of the synod in between meetings.
* A presiding Primate should serve as a focus of unity. Canterbury or another historic see could function as a locus of unity as well. However, such a Primate should be elected by the synod of bishops.
* A secretariat should assist these Instruments, with accountability to all. The current Anglican Consultative Council and Anglican Communion Office have failed to function in this way.

In one sense, this polity is not far removed from the “Instruments of Unity” that have evolved of late in the historic Anglican Communion. The likeness may be deceptive: a diseased body may look like a healthy body, at least in the earlier stages of the illness. I am saying that the fault is not with the outward form of the Anglican Communion but with the doctrinal deviation from its apostolic and Reformation origins. Orthodoxy by its very nature must identify and renounce heresy and discipline false teachers, as a last resort, expel them.[19] If the Canterbury-based Anglican Communion continues to tolerate heresy in its midst and welcome false teachers to its councils, then the day will come when an orthodox assembly must break communion with Canterbury and set up alternative structures. Since the trend-lines seem to doom the current Communion to endless compromise or worse, the sooner the shadow structures begin take form the better.

Finally, the global Anglican Communion will need to evaluate the role of the churches in relation to the secular realm. This is classic problem of political theology. Traditional patterns, such as the Established churches are obsolete. At the same time, new models proposed by liberation theology have proved ineffective. I think the political theology of Oliver O’Donovan, while not spelling out specific solutions, offers a framework for developing a theology of church and state under the Lordship of the ascended Christ.[20]
The Spirit and Future of Anglican Orthodoxy

Like any blueprint, the above-mentioned elements of Anglican orthodoxy merely define the principles and structure of a reformed Anglican orthodoxy. Without the structure, it is unlikely that the life of the Communion will long endure. But at the same time, without the Spirit speaking to and working through the churches and their members, such a blueprint will be an empty vessel.

It is not for me to try to capture the wind of the Spirit in a bottle. But I would suggest that Anglican orthodoxy should be:

* Bold in proclamation and clever in apologetics
* Visionary in mission outreach
* Prayerful in all things
* Ecumenical in openness to brothers and sisters in Christ
* Vigilant in guarding the faith and awaiting the return of the Lord

I have attempted to sketch a blueprint of a Global Anglican orthodoxy that will embody the best elements of our tradition and mobilize Anglicans to take the Gospel to the ends of the earth. I believe that if the Global South churches and their allies will take bold action at this time, we shall see a new reformation in the Anglican tradition, one which reflects the movement of the Spirit of God in our day. If these churches, like the Church of Smyrna (Revelation 2:8-11), remain faithful, Christ will give abundant life. Jesus Christ is Lord and His kingdom reigns over all. The gates of hell will not prevail against His Church, which is His Body. Once we lift up our eyes from our own troubles and look at the worldwide scene, we shall realize that the Gospel is not in retreat but is beckoning to the uttermost corners of the globe. As Anglicans we have a stake in the global mission of Christ, and we have something to offer it from the riches of our heritage and our worldwide fellowship of churches.

Brothers and sisters, remember Lot’s wife. The present order is passing away. Behold the Global Anglican Communion is coming.

28 January 2008
NOTES

[1] There is even need to justify the “orthodoxy” as the chief term of reference in this case. Clearly Anglican orthodoxy is to be differentiated from Eastern Orthodoxy. It has been chosen as being broad enough to include various groups of Anglicans – Evangelical, Anglo-Catholic and Charismatic – who agree on the essentials of the faith. At the same time “orthodoxy” recalls the position of those in the patristic period who identified and contended against its opposite, heresy.

[2] The best available version (written and oral) of this address can be found at www.mereanglicanism.com/presentations.htm.

[3] The versions of the “Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral (CLQ) and the text approved by Lambeth (LQ) are slightly different.

[4] Cranmer’s design for the Church of England included reformed Articles, Common Prayer and Canons. See Diarmaid MacCulloch, Thomas Cranmer: A Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996) pages 500-513.

[5] In Resolution III.1, the Conference “reaffirms the primary authority of the Scriptures, according to their testimony and supported by our own historic formularies.” In Resolution III.5, “The Authority of the Holy Scriptures,” it likewise “affirms that our creator God, transcendent as well as immanent, communicates with us authoritatively through the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; and in agreement with the Lambeth Quadrilateral, and in solidarity with the Lambeth Conference of 1888, affirms that these Holy Scriptures contain ‘all things necessary to salvation’ and are for us the ‘rule and ultimate standard’ of faith and practice.”

[6] In Uganda, the first Christian converts were called “readers” as the Bible was the first text to become authoritative in an otherwise oral culture.

[7] The meaning of “literal sense” has been revived in contemporary hermeneutics. I defended its use before the House of Bishops in 1992. See “Reading the Bible as the Word of God,” in The Bible’s Authority for Today’s Church, ed. Frederick H. Borsch (Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity Press International: 1993) pages 133-167.

[8] This phrase is borrowed from Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985) pages 50-51. It suggests that the biblical writers were capable of conveying a plain sense which leads the reader into a deeper consideration of its meaning without overturning its surface meaning.

[9] See esp. Is There Meaning in This Text? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), and First Theology: God, Scripture and Hermeneutics (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2002) which lay the groundwork for his dogmatic work, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005). See my review, “Post Conservatives and Post-Liberals: Reflections on Kevin Vanhoozer’s The Drama of Doctrine,” at www.stephenswitness.com.

[10] Note that Hooker’s “credit and obedience” includes both theological dogmas but also what the Articles call the “Commandments called moral.” The idea that one could affirm the Creeds while disobeying the Commandments is foreign to classic Anglicanism.

[11] Note that the oneness of the Church is based on the “once-for-allness” (hapax) of the apostolic tradition entrusted to it.

[12] How Africa Shaped the Christian Mind: Rediscovering the African Seedbed of Western Christianity (Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2007) page 128. In this quotation, Oden is thinking of North Africans like Cyprian, but one cannot help but remember the Uganda martyrs as well.

[13] Granted, Article XVIII states that “Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ whereby men must be saved.” Still, the context of the Article seems to suggest doctrinal contention rather than missionary impulse.

[14] Curiously, the “Covenant for Communion in Mission” also has nine bullets. Only one of these, the sharing of goods, appears in both lists. The missio dei theology of this document emphasizes the “love, justice and joy which Jesus inaugurated” rather than His salvation from sin and death, as appears primary in Peter’s sermon.

[15] O’Donovan, On Thirty-Nine Articles: A Conversation with Tudor Christianity (Leicester: Paternoster Press, 1986), page 126.

[16] Note the omission of Cranmer’s articles on eschatology (#39-42).

[17] Even if the longer ending of Mark is not original, it indicates the linking of sacraments with mission in the early church.

[18] It is ironic that as Lambeth 2008 addresses “bishops in mission,” the one Province that has most successfully equipped bishops for mission will be absent. However, it is likely that Nigeria’s experience of missionary bishops would not be heeded any more than its lessons in the Decade of Evangelism.

[19] Note in this regard that the current crisis does not involve Bishop Gene Robinson so much as those in TEC who elected, confirmed and ordained him, knowing that his life was openly homosexual.

[20] O’Donovan, The Desire of the Nations: Rediscovering the Roots of Political Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).

DALLAS: Consecrations of Three Bishops to AMiA Challenge Diocesan

2008-01-29T10:16:00.000-08:00

"We need more missionaries", says AMIA Leader

By David W. Virtue
HYPERLINK "http://www.virtueonline.org/" \nwww.virtueonline.org
1/27/2008

With more than 1,500 orthodox Anglicans watching, three Anglican Mission
in the Americas (AMiA) priests were consecrated by a cross section of
the Anglican Communion's bishops during an emotional three-hour worship
service in a ballroom of the Adam's Mark Hotel in Dallas.

The Rt. Rev. Terrell Glenn Jr. of Pawley's Island, SC; the Rt. Rev. John
Miller III of Melbourne, Fla.; and the Rt. Rev. Philip Jones from Little
Rock, Arkansas were consecrated using a service drawn from the new Book
of Common Prayer (1662 revised) and modern praise and worship music. The
service concluded the three-day winter conference of the Anglican
mission that brought together a bevy of evangelical motivational
speakers.

Present at the consecration were two sitting African Archbishops,
Emmanuel Kolini of Rwanda and the Most Revd Justice Ofei Akrofi of West
Africa. Two retired Southeast Asian Archbishops were on hand including
the Most Rev. Moses Tay and the Most Rev. Yong Ping Chung. A Canadian
bishop, the Rt. Rev. Donald Harvey, under the authority of the Province
of the Southern Cone and 18 other Anglican bishops from the US, England,
Africa and the entire House of Bishops of the Province of Rwanda
participated. A number of Common Cause bishops participated from nine
jurisdictions including Nigeria, Uganda and Kenya as well as two bishops
from the Reformed Episcopal Church. Two retired Episcopal bishops, the
Rt. Rev. C. FitzSimons Allison and the Rt. Rev. Alex Dickson also
participated in the consecration as did the Bishop of Pittsburgh, the
Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan.

The conference itself drew clergy and lay people from across the United
States, Canada, Rwanda, West Africa, Southeast Asia and the UK. The
Rwandan Church's House of Bishops ratified the choice of the three new
bishops last year to accommodate the growing numbers of new converts and
establishing of new churches on this side of the Atlantic by AMiA.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has been critical of such diocesan
incursions and has spoken out directly against them.

Rowan Williams went public with a letter to Canadian Archbishop Fred
Hiltz in condemning the incursion into Canada by the Archbishop of the
Southern Cone, but he also made it clear that he was powerless to stop
conservative Canadian and U.S. congregations upset with their national
churches' positions on homosexuality from leaving and affiliating with
orthodox branches in Latin America and Africa.

It was a frank admission by Archbishop as to the limits of his power,
even though he is opposed to cross-border ecclesiastical moves.

"I have no canonical authority to prevent these things, but I would
simply repeat what was said in my advent letter (in December), to the
effect that I cannot support or sanction such actions," Williams wrote
the Canadian archbishop.

Mrs. Katharine Jefferts Schori, U.S. Presiding Bishop, has inhibited one
retired bishop, 87-year old William Cox, for ordaining and confirming in
Kansas and later confirming in Oklahoma, but he has since fled to the
Province of the Southern Cone for spiritual and ecclesiastical safety.

During his sermon, the Rt. Rev. Chuck Murphy, Bishop and AMiA Chairman,
said there was an urgent need for more missionary bishops as a Second
Reformation has begun and that bodes well for his church's efforts to
reach 130 million unchurched Americans.

"We need more missionary bishops to step into the next level of growth.
The critical factor, the God given vision of this remarkable vision,
comes from the Rwandan House of Bishops and their willingness to stand
up and be a part of us from the beginning. They broke with convention in
the early days and pioneered a way forward in mission unheard of
Anglican circles," said Murphy.

"These past 10 years have been challenging. The criticisms have been
voiced and questions about the legitimacy of our existence, but with
their God given vision they have stood up and stood apart. It could not
have happened without them."

Addressing the conferees, many of whom were formerly members of The
Episcopal Church, Murphy challenged them saying, "The world wants to
know of your witness, your boldness and pioneering vision. All you need
is a God given vision, a way forward in witness to the power of God who
moves with great authority in the world and North America."

Citing a book he had recently read on the changing face of Anglicanism,
Murphy said the AMIA was a profoundly influential movement in the
Anglican Communion, pushing the boundaries in a new vigorous way.

"God promises to give us vision, again, again and again. Where there is
no vision the people perish," he said citing Proverbs 29:18. Picking up
the thread of Joel 2:28 Murphy cried out, "I will pour out my spirit
upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your
old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions"

Murphy said the mission of AMIA was "unique" and offered a compelling
picture of a preferred future that "motivates to work, pray, and
forgive...it is a vision but then it unfolds...godly visions will flow
from the word of God.

"We must ask, is it in conformity with Scripture? Godly visions will
speak to peoples needs. We must get outside of our comfort zones. Godly
visions will ultimately unite as more and more people see and understand
what AMIA is about. Today's consecrations are yet another step in this
unfolding vision."

Murphy said the AMIA had a basis for action. "We see it, we say it and
we seize it. We cannot drift or lie in harbor. This is the challenge of
the church in this age. The trigger for this action is the call, and
that call we sense is from God.

It is also a pneumatic vision - the movement of the Holy Spirit to give
us the desire to send forth laborers into the harvest. You have got to
have an opportunity. The answer was yes. This "yes" required that
action. The good news is that God promises us the power. It fell on the
judges of the Old Testament, again at Pentecost, then St. Paul and
Timothy...it came with the Spirit of power."

Murphy acknowledged both the challenges and temptations. "There is the
challenge to burn out. Do anything you want but not everything you want.
We need margins, time for family. We should expect attacks from The Evil
One and cited the areas of sex, money and power. Satan can trip people
up in the area of relationships and attacks us in the area of self
esteem. We are made in the image of God Satan is not, but we should
never give up."

The Anglican Mission in the Americas encompasses the United States and
Canada with missions in Mexico and Bogota. Since it began in 2000, the
mission has added an average of one church every three weeks. The AMiA
now has seven missionary bishops serving more than 133 parishes with 62
more in the pipeline.

Editor's Note: The AMiA parish in central NY is St. Andrew's Anglican Church in Syracuse.

Church brands draw members

2008-01-15T15:14:00.000-08:00

From the tennessean.com:

Faiths market themselves by taking on names that define their beliefs, message

By BOB SMIETANA • Staff Writer • January 15, 2008

On Sunday morning, just past the signs for Red Roof Inn and Go USA Fun Park on Armory Drive in Murfreesboro, and in the shadow of a billboard for Verizon Wireless, 110 people met to celebrate the first worship service of Faith Anglican Fellowship.

A temporary banner, with the church's name, stood in front of Integrity House, where worshippers gathered after leaving behind their former home, Holy Cross Church.

Inside, the Rev. Frederick Richardson, Faith Anglican's rector, spoke of the mixed blessings of "new beginnings."

Frustrated that the Episcopal Church's battles over doctrine and sex were turning off newcomers, the former members of Holy Cross decided, in essence, to switch brands. No longer Episcopalians, they were now Anglicans, allied with more conservative believers in Uganda.

Once reserved for consumer products like Coca Cola or Doritos, branding has become increasingly important in the God business. Churches, old and new, are using branding to define their theology, attract newcomers and get their message out.

"There is sadness for what we left behind, for who we left behind," Richardson said. But "God will be faithful," he added.

For Faith Anglican, the brand switch went deeper than a name change, Richardson said.

"It gives us a new identity," Richardson said. "The Anglican Church does not have the baggage that the Episcopal Church has at this time. It speaks of a deeper tradition and a more biblically grounded faith."

Church member John Sorrell of Woodbury, said he was worried about "the spiritual drift" of their former denomination.

"Episcopal has come to mean something other than orthodox Christianity," he said. With the new name, added Gary Warden, the church's senior warden, "people will know exactly what to expect when they come here."

For a group of members at Trinity Episcopal in Winchester, a tipping point came in 2006, when Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Shori was asked by Time if "belief in Jesus is the only way to get to heaven?" She replied, "We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box."

"That's not the faith that I received," said the Rev. Bill Midgett, who had been rector of Trinity Episcopal since 2001. On Jan. 6, Midgett, the church staff and most members voted to leave the Episcopal Church. They formed Christ the King Anglican Church.

"It may sound like a lot of religious-speak," Midgett said, "but for us, it is central to who we are in believing the gospel.''

Branding needn't be slick

Maurilio Amorim, who runs a church-branding firm in Brentwood, says branding is a biblical activity. He points to the parable in Luke 14:16-23, about a man who threw a banquet. When none of the guests showed up, the man sent his servant to invite outsiders in.

So Amorim helps churches creates Web sites, direct mail and other forms of branding to attract newcomers. "Branding and marketing is evangelism," he said. "I don't know what the difference is. You are compelling people, you are giving people a reason to come visit you."

Amorim says that some churches mistakenly believe that branding means a slick marketing campaign. "I hate for people to waste a lot of billboard and direct mail and newspaper advertising that says nothing," he says. Church messages like "Come because we are great" or "We're friendly" don't work, he said. Instead of trying to be slick, he said, a church should find what it does well and promote that.

For Crosspoint Community Church in west Nashville, branding was crucial when the congregation moved to a new building. The church, which started meeting five years ago in a public school, now rents about two thirds of the campus of Park Avenue Baptist Church.

But with its linoleum floors and mauve carpet, the building screamed out "1970s Baptist church."

"And that," said senior pastor Pete Wilson, "is not who we are."

While Park Avenue bills itself as a "traditional church family," Crosspoint services are more rock concert than hymns and prayers.

So, Wilson and Crosspoint leaders set out to brand the building as their own. They replaced carpet, set up video screens and theater lighting in the sanctuary, and transformed the concrete block children's area into something out of Gilligan's Island.

Wilson said he realized the power of branding while watching Supersize Me, Morgan Spurlock's documentary about McDonald's. During the film, Spurlock showed children a series of pictures of famous people like Jesus and George Washington and asked the kids to identify them. "These kids didn't know who any of these people were," Wilson said. "But Ronald McDonald … boom, every one of the kids knew exactly who it was."

And for a new church, he added, brands like McDonald's are the competition.

"We are not competing against other churches," said Jenni Carton, the church's executive director. "We are competing for all the other things that are vying for your attention every day."

CANA Welcomes Ten U.S. Churches

2008-01-08T12:30:00.000-08:00

HERNDON, Va. (January 7, 2008) – The Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) has welcomed ten new congregations into its membership. The Rt. Rev. Francis R. Lyons, the Bishop of Bolivia, commended these U.S. Anglican congregations and their clergy to the oversight of CANA Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns.

“We are thrilled to have the opportunity to work with these churches that have been blessed by the leadership in Bolivia and will continue to be blessed by the Holy Spirit. CANA is eager to welcome them on their Christ-centered and faithful mission to serve God and to honor the worldwide Anglican Communion,” said Bishop Minns.

Originally under the ecclesiastical leadership of the Church of Bolivia, the ten U.S. congregations were given CANA oversight “with a profound desire to promote unity in Jesus Christ which issues from his reconciling work on the Cross and an abiding trust in the power of God’s Word written, and with a genuine commitment to support the emerging ecclesiastical structure of faithful Anglicans in North America,” said the Rt. Rev. Francis R. Lyons of Bolivia in a letter to Bishop Minns.

The newest CANA congregations are St. Luke’s Anglican Church, Fairlawn, OH, Church of the Holy Spirit (Anglican), Akron, OH, Anglican Church of the Good Samaritan (Fairhill), Cleveland, OH, St. Barnabas Anglican Church, Bay Village, OH, St. Anne in the Fields, Madison, OH, Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Milan, OH, Christ the King Anglican Church, Columbiana, OH, Christ Our King Anglican Church, Lexington, MI, St. Michael the Archangel Anglican Church, Indianapolis, IN, and The Shepherd Church, Evansville, IN.

Bishop Allison on Anglicanism

2008-01-04T18:34:00.000-08:00

The Rt. Rev. C. FitzSimons Allison, the former bishop of South Carolina, and former professor at three Episcopal seminaries:

"The apparently willful reluctance to face the issue of faith as the indispensable ground for Anglican unity is finally broken. The fatal flaw of the Windsor Report was substituting the breaking of "bonds of affection" for the reality of broken bonds of faith. 'Instruments of unity' have their integrity only so far as they represent the Anglican faith."

The evangelical bishop. who holds a doctorate in theology from Oxford University, said that "to object to this much needed opportunity on the grounds of its lacking precedents is fatuous. Necessity must always be allowed to trump precedence. There were no precedents for bishops in the United States after the American Revolution. There were no precedents for Seabury's consecration. Both Archbishops of York and Canterbury opposed Seabury's going to Scotland and the latter objected to Seabury's inclusion in Claggett's consecration (an objection that Bishop White ignored). There were no English precedents for missionary bishops in the 19th century. The integrity of the present Archbishop of Canterbury's role as an instrument of unity depends on his faithfulness not to the alleged 'bonds of affection' or to the genealogy of his precedents but to his adherence to the Anglican faith. The integrity of Anglicanism cannot hang merely on the thread of appointments by the prime minister of a state that is itself in an accelerating secular departure from its Anglican roots.

"To put individuals or ad hoc groups in the now inevitable position of making theological judgments on their own regarding submission to or acquiescing in what may seem to be unfaithful or apostate leadership is, in the long run, chaos. To have reputable theologians representing much, if not most, of world wide Anglicanism draw up some simple guidelines around the essentials of the Anglican faith (something the Archbishop of Canterbury has declared Lambeth will not do) and present them as a confessional movement within the Anglican Communion (not a departure from it) would be of utmost reassurance and essential to any effective unity in Anglicanism. It could be a creative contribution to the Lambeth Conference giving them something the Conference could use or amend leading to a wider and more enduring unity."

The scholarly bishop concluded with this, "Our historic unity has been founded on the faith expressed in the Prayer Book and official formularies and faithfulness to the vows to guard them. But gradually that foundation has been replaced by who gets invited to Lambeth and by exhortations not to break bonds of affection. I thank God for those leaders who have committed themselves to this endeavor to under gird our Communion with the faith that gave it birth."

From VirtueOnline

You are not alone

2008-01-03T06:50:00.000-08:00

31 bishop's stand with Bishop Schofield and Diocese of San Joaquin

Dear Bishop John-David,

We, Episcopal colleagues from across the Anglican Communion and across the world, write to salute you on the courageous decision of the Diocesan Convention of San Joaquin to take leave of The Episcopal Church and to align with the Province of the Southern Cone. We know that decision was to a large extent the result of your tenacity and faithful leadership, and for that we give thanks to God. It has been said that you are isolated and alone. We want you and the world to know that in this decision for the faith once delivered to the saints, we stand with you and beside you. May Christ abundantly bless you and your diocese with all the gifts of the Spirit and with joy in believing.

Yours in Christ,

The Rt. Rev. Jack L. Iker, Bishop of Fort Worth

and:

The Most Rev. Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney
The Rt. Rev. Matthias Medadues-Badohu, Bishop of Ho
The Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester
The Rt. Rev. Gerard Mpango, Bishop of Western Tanganyika
The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh
The Rt. Rev. Ross Davies, Bishop of The Murray
The Rt. Rev. Keith L Ackerman, Bishop of Quincy
The Rt. Rev. Peter Beckwith, Bishop of Springfield
The Rt. Rev. A. Ewin Ratteray, Bishop of Bermuda
The Rt. Rev. Michael Hough, Bishop of Ballarat
The Rt. Rev. John Broadhurst, Bishop of Fulham
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Jarrett, Bishop of Beverley
The Rt. Rev. John Goddard, Bishop of Burnley
The Rt. Rev. Keith Newton, Bishop of Richborough
The Rt. Rev. Robert Forsyth, Bishop of South Sydney
The Rt. Rev. Andrew Burnham, Bishop of Ebbsfleet
The Rt. Rev. Lindsay Urwin, Bishop of Horsham
The Rt. Rev. Wallace Benn, Bishop of Lewes
The Rt. Rev. Henry Scriven, Assistant Bishop, Diocese of Pittsburgh
The Rt. Rev. Bill Atwood, Province of Kenya
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns, Convocation of Anglicans in North America
The Rt. Rev. David Anderson, Convocation of Anglicans in North America
The Rt. Rev. John Gaisford, lately Bishop of Beverley
The Rt. Rev. Edward MacBurney, lately Bishop of Quincy
The Rt. Rev. Roger Jupp, lately Bishop of Popondota
The Rt. Rev. David Silk, lately Bishop of Ballarat
The Rt. Rev. Nöel Jones, lately Bishop of Sodor and Man
The Rt. Rev. Edwin Barnes, lately Bishop of Richborough
The Rt. Rev. William Wantland, lately Bishop of Eau Claire
The Rt. Rev. Donald Parsons, lately Bishop of Quincy

[Diocese of San Joaquin website]

Bishop Iker reports:
Bishop Jackson Biggers (Northern Malawi retired) and Bishop John Guernsey (Province of Uganda) have asked that their names be added to the list.

+JLI

January 3, 9:52 am

CT: Leaving A Church Behind

2008-01-02T10:31:00.000-08:00

Leaving A Church Behind
Congregation Prepares For A New Beginning
By KATIE MELONE | Courant Staff Writer
December 31, 2007

WATERTOWN - - It was the last Sunday service at Christ Church. Unable to go
"further in a church that continued in a false gospel," the entire
congregation, including the rector and church leaders, will sever ties with
the national Episcopal Church and reform under a new name: New Hope Anglican
Church.

One of the "Connecticut six," the half-dozen churches in the state diocese
that disagree with national leadership on departure of scripture, including
the appointment of a gay bishop, the congregation will trade its historic
building on the town green for a free community room at the Thomaston
Savings Bank around the corner.

The Sunday service will be held at the bank, starting Jan. 6, until they
find or build another house of worship.
"We need to celebrate today, but we need to recognize there is a dying," the
Rev. Allyn Benedict said in his final homily at the church. Reading off an
overhead projector, church members sang hymns enthusiastically, clapping and
raising hands in acknowledging their faith. They hugged one another, wishing
peace.

The church was founded under the Church of England in 1764. In 2003,
Benedict and several other Connecticut rectors clashed with Connecticut
Bishop Andrew D. Smith, who supported the naming of V. Gene Robinson as New
Hampshire's bishop. Robinson is gay. Benedict and Christ Church leaders also
feel the national church is rejecting scriptural authority and traditions of
the church.

In cutting affiliation with the national leaders, the congregation has
agreed to give up its church buildings and property, estimated to be worth
$7 million, and its name, "Christ Church Parish." The congregation also
ended its participation with the other Connecticut churches in a protracted
legal battle against national leadership over church real estate, deciding
that "it's not worth living under this oppression just for the property,"
said Paul LePine, the senior warden. Four of the "Connecticut six" have also
ended their connection to the national church, LePine said.

"It's a tragedy when relationships fail," LePine said. "There's a relief of
being free of that dysfunctional relationship we've been in for many years."

LePine's daughter, Rachel, 15, commented that while leaving is the right
thing to do, "it is sad."

"That's kind of why we named it New Hope," she said.

"We're just moving on to where we're supposed to be," said Chris Varian, who
was married at the church and has been a member for three years. "It's a
transition. It's a lot of history and a lot of memories. It's bittersweet."

ADV Files Brief in Case to Prevent Church Property Seizure

2007-12-28T14:54:00.000-08:00

Source: Anglican District of Virginia Press Release (Via E-Mail)

Date: December 21, 2007

Anglican District of Virginia Churches Remain Confident
ADV Files Brief in Case to Prevent Church Property Seizure

FAIRFAX, Va. (December 21, 2007) – The 11 Anglican District of Virginia (ADV) churches filed a brief in the Fairfax County Circuit Court regarding the Multi-Circuit Property Litigation. The brief explains the validity of the Virginia Division Statute (Va. Code § 57-9) in determining that the Virginia congregations are entitled to keep their church property due to the division within The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia, and the Anglican Communion. (Case No. CL-2007-0248724)

“As our brief today explains, the evidence at the trial strongly demonstrated that our congregations have satisfied each of the core requirements of this law. There has been a ‘division’ in The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia (“Diocese”), and the worldwide Anglican Communion, and our congregations have joined a ‘branch’ of the divided body created as a result of that division,” said Jim Oakes, Vice-Chairman of the Anglican District of Virginia.

“This division occurred as a result of The Episcopal Church and the Diocese separating themselves from the historic Christian faith by deciding to reinterpret Scripture on a number of different issues. Although the reasons for the division involve important issues of biblical truth, the existence and effects of the division are plain and evident for all to see, without regard to religion.

“The evidence also showed that this law was applied no less than 29 times to recognize the legal rights of congregations to keep their property. Over the years, the Virginia General Assembly has made various amendments to the Virginia Code as it relates to religious organizations, but it has not seen fit to narrow or repeal the Division Statute. The General Assembly continues to believe that when congregations separate from a denomination, the neutral and objective principle of majority rule should govern ownership of property. In addition, The Episcopal Church admitted in its complaint that it does not hold title to any of these eleven churches, and that the churches' own trustees hold title for the benefit of the congregations.

“As the Global South Primates said in 2004, The Episcopal Church has ‘willfully torn the fabric of the communion at its deepest level and as a consequence openly cut themselves adrift.’ We are sorry that The Episcopal Church has moved away from the historic teachings of the church, but we should not be forced to go with them,” said Oakes.

The Anglican District of Virginia (www.anglicandistrictofvirginia.org) is an association of Anglican congregations in Virginia. Its members are in full communion with constituent members of the Anglican Communion through its affiliation with the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a missionary branch of the Church of Nigeria and other Anglican Archbishops. ADV members are a part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, a community of 77 million people. ADV is dedicated to fulfilling Christ’s Great Commission to make disciples while actively serving in three main capacities: International Ministries, Evangelism, and Strengthening Families and Community. ADV is currently comprised of 21 member congregations.

Date: 12/23/2007

Canada: Bishops Meet with Clergy to Discuss Separate Structure

2007-12-28T14:52:00.000-08:00

Source: Anglican Journal

Date: December 22, 2007

Bishops meet with clergy to discuss network

Since the Anglican Network in Canada held a conference in late November to announce a new church structure for parishes conservative on the subject of homosexuality, several bishops have called clergy in for clarification of their intentions, but no priests have been disciplined.

Three dioceses – Ottawa, Montreal and Hamilton, Ont.-based Niagara – last fall voted to permit church blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, moves that some Anglicans oppose.

At the conference, held Nov. 22-23, leaders of the network announced that the Anglican church in South America, called the Province of the Southern Cone, would accept as members parishes that wish to leave the Anglican Church of Canada. The network moderator, Bishop Don Harvey, announced that Canon Charles Masters had been named archdeacon of the network and Rev. George Sinclair prolocutor.

Bishop Ralph Spence of Niagara, in whose diocese the Burlington, Ont. conference was held, said he met with Mr. Masters to ask “how could he hold that position and be rector of St. George’s, Lowville?”

Mr. Masters explained that, despite the announcement, he had not accepted the position. Although both Bishop Spence and Mr. Masters had legal counsel at the meeting, “in the end, we asked the lawyers to leave the room and had the conversation,” Bishop Spence said.

Subsequently, however, a U.S. group called Common Cause, which is bringing conservative Anglican/Episcopalian groups under one umbrella, at a meeting Dec.17-18 in Orlando, Fla., announced that Mr. Masters had been named general secretary of its leadership council. Bishop Spence said he intended to have another meeting with Mr. Masters in the new year.

Bishop Spence also said he and his successor, Bishop Michael Bird, met separately with a half dozen clergy who had been present at the network conference in Burlington. “We told them their ministry was highly valued. They have a prophetic voice. It may not be the majority, but it is an opinion we respect and we want them to be part of the family.”

One priest who was at the meeting, Canon Mark McDermott, said it was “a very friendly talk.” The bishops are “well aware of our conservative stance. He just wanted to make sure that nothing untoward was going to happen and called us (to the meeting) to assure us that he valued our ministry. It was a very good pastoral response on (Bishop Spence’s) part.” He declined to comment on moves parishes in Niagara might take, saying the group assured the bishops “that within the next 90 days, we were not about to do anything.”

In Ottawa, Bishop John Chapman met with Mr. Sinclair, who also told his bishop that he had not accepted the position with the network. “There was no discipline. At this point, technically, there is nothing to discipline,” said Bishop Chapman.

Mr. Sinclair’s church, St. Alban the Martyr, is listed as a member of the network, but as of late December, no active Canadian Anglican church had voted to secede and join the Province of the Southern Cone. (Two churches with former connections to the Anglican Church of Canada decided to join the South American province.)

The diocese of Ottawa’s position is that its churches cannot leave, said Bishop Chapman. “Individuals can elect to go to another church, but parishes are part of the diocese of Ottawa. Vestries are not allowed to consider (seceding) as a corporate body,” he said. If a vestry were to pass such a motion, “it would be ruled out of order,” he added. “St. Alban’s will always be part of the diocese of Ottawa,” he said.

In Montreal, Bishop Barry Clarke said there has been no discipline of priests, but several parishes have enquired about alternate episcopal oversight should he acquiesce with synod’s decision on same-sex blessings. “I plan in the new year to meet with them,” he said. As far as the blessings decision, “I am not under any pressure to go either way at the moment,” he said.

Date: 12/23/2007

Global Anglicans Face Test of Strength

2007-12-28T12:41:00.000-08:00

From ChristianityToday.com:

December 26, 2007 9:26AM

Top conservatives plan "Anglican Future" event in Jerusalem six weeks before Lambeth.

Tim Morgan

This morning, Dec. 26, conservative Anglicans announced they will gather in Jerusalem (see press statement below) about 6 weeks before the historic Lambeth conference in the UK. Lambeth will start in mid-July and end in early August 2008.

Many conservative bishops will boycott Lambeth due to the fallout over The Episcopal Church's actions supportive of GLBT clergy and couples, TEC's rejection of global accountability, and its re-interpretation of core scriptural teachings.

TEC's ambiguous response to the Windsor Report and its refusals to follow the guidance of Anglican primates meeting in Tanzania in early 2007 to end gay ordinations, same-sex blessings, and property litigation against conservative parishes have undermined Anglican unity worldwide.

The 2003 consecration of a homosexual Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire has been the flashpoint.

In recent weeks, there has been speculation about whether Anglican conservatives will put together a rival Lambeth-like event. Many conservative Anglican bishops expect to opt out of the once-per-decade-event in Canterbury, but had hopes of gathering for a global consultation.

Conservative firebrand David Virtue of Virtue Online observed back in June 07:

The concept of a parallel Lambeth Conference was first raised by the Most Rev. Peter Akinola, Archbishop and Primate of Nigeria, as well as head of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA)....

In mid-December, Virtue noted:

Now the idea has again emerged with a news report out of London, by Jonathan Petre of the Telegraph, that Conservative Anglican leaders are secretly planning a meeting next summer for the hundreds of bishops expected to defy the Archbishop of Canterbury by boycotting the Lambeth Conference.

The unprecedented event will be widely seen as an "alternative Lambeth", further damaging Dr. Rowan Williams's hopes of averting a formal schism over homosexuals, wrote Petre.

Aides of the Archbishop said that any such gathering, which is due to be held just before the official conference, would be perceived as a symbol of division and would send out a "negative" message. Indeed, it would.

These events in June, July, and August pose a three-fold test as I see it:

1. It will test the strength and coherence of an emerging conservative majority within global Anglicanism.

2. It will test the resolve of the Anglican left-wing's agenda to steer the global church toward affirmation of homosexuality as normative human sexual expression.

3. It will test the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury in its ability to provide a viable way forward for a deeply divided church.

Here's the edited version of the press release:

GLOBAL ANGLICAN FUTURE CONFERENCE IN HOLY LAND

ANNOUNCED BY ORTHODOX PRIMATES

The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church’s faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.

At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network), Bishop

Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.

Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”

The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders "to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ”. Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON.

The GAFCON website is www.gafcon.org.

Canon Chris Sugden added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land .”

Frequently asked Questions

1. Who is sponsoring the Conference?
The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) is being called by those who took part in the Nairobi Consultation:

Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Archbishop Peter Jensen (Sydney) Archbishop Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria). Bishop Don Harvey (Canada) and Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) who also represented Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone). Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network and Common Cause USA.), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England), Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England)
Bishop Michael Nazir Ali (Rochester, England) and Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted and also form part of the Leadership Team.

These bishops and their colleagues represent over 30 million Anglicans out of the 55 million active Anglicans. ( Nigeria 18m , Uganda 8m Kenya 2.5m Rwanda 1 m Tanzania 1.3 m plus Southern Cone, US, Sydney, England). The notional total of the Communion is 77m. The active membership is nearer 55 m, since of the 26m notional members in CofE 3.7m attend at Christmas Services)

2. Whom do you expect to come?
We will be inviting bishops and their wives, senior clergy, church planters, and lay people including the next generation of young leaders. We aim to make it a Global Anglican Conference with its eye on the future and future leadership.

3. Is this a Global South Initiative?
Not quite. Many of the Primates at the Nairobi Consultation are in the Global South, but it also included Anglican leaders from parts of the world beyond the geographic Global South.

4. Why a pilgrimage?
We are looking to the future of the Global Anglican Communion, which is itself a pilgrimage.

Those who want to hold on to the Biblical and Historical faith need to come together to renew their faith and develop a fresh vision for our common mission. The way we have chosen to do this is to undertake a pilgrimage to a land whose heritage we all share, the land where Jesus Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven and sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out. We believe this will strengthen us for the difficult days ahead.

The conference will outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years for orthodox Anglicans. It is important therefore to reconnect with our roots in the biblical story.

5. Is not Israel/Palestine a controversial venue?
Israel/Palestine has been a place of conflict for decades. That should not keep us from making pilgrimage to a land that is our common heritage. We want to bring fellowship and bear testimony to the Christian communities in Israel/Palestine. Those of us from Africa are no strangers to the pressure that Christian communities are put under from other religious groups and communities.

6. Why call it in June?
The pilgrimage is to strengthen bishops at a crucial time in the life of the Anglican Communion. Many bishops will not be able to accept the invitation to the Lambeth Conference as their consciences will not allow it. Some will attend both gatherings. The purpose of the consultation is to strengthen them all spiritually.

7. Is it not really an alternative to the Lambeth Conference?
No. It is not at the same time or in the same region as the Lambeth Conference. So there will be some who will attend both conferences and thus be able to consult with the Archbishop of Canterbury and others there.

As Archbishop Gregory Venables has said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”

GAFCON is a call to vision and action for mission based firmly on the “faith once delivered to the saints” and revealed in Scripture, to reform the church and transform persons, communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. African Bishops had this focus at their Lagos 2004 conference. The Episcopal church’s agenda has recently overshadowed it. We now need to develop this gospel agenda for all like-minded in the communion.

It is to outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years and how to begin to respond to them.

It is a pilgrimage to the places of the Biblical story to renew our faith and commitment. It is to envision the Global Anglican Future.

The Lambeth Conference has a different agenda.

8. Is this all over a gay bishop?
No. GAFCON is about churches being grouped by what they have in common. We're for growth, we're for being passionate about the truth. We want to look to the future. That's what the conference is about - Global Anglican Future.

9. Aren't you splitting the church?
No. Communion depends on having something in common. Churches in the Global South are growing. They're passionate about the truth and their faith. We are building on this strength.

As the Anglican Communion develops, some of the old bonds are loosening, and some new bonds are being formed. That's a good thing. These bonds involve churches which are growing, and which have something distinctive to say to the world. GAFCON is enthusiastic about mission. Its focus is the future.

Books & Culture: RUMORS OF GLORY

2007-12-27T12:56:00.000-08:00

The Conscience of an Anglican
A man under authority.
by Alan Jacobs | posted 12/24/07

For some time now, people have been asking me why I haven't written anything on the current—or, depending on your point of view, everlasting—crisis in the Anglican world. After all, I have been an Anglican for nearly twenty-five years, virtually all of my adult life; indeed, my experiences in other denominations, before I discovered Anglicanism, were so brief and tentative that I don't even know how to be a Christian except as an Anglican. Nor do I wish to be a Christian in any other way. Surely I have some opinions on the mess the Anglican Communion is now in, on how it got this way, and how it might get out again?

Well, yes, I do have such opinions. But they are worthless. All such opinions amount to little more than the assignation of blame for past events and predictions of the future—the latter usually involving punishments to come for those blamed for the past—and neither of those activities interests me. There was a time when they did, but I have long since learned how futile such pursuits are, and (more important) how powerfully they distract from the core practices of the Christian life. This is the primary reason why, after too long a season scanning the Anglican blogs daily, I now check just one of them, and once a week, at most. This abstinence has calmed my spirit and removed, I think permanently, my taste for such things.

Moreover, I remind myself that the churches of the Anglican world are governed by bishops, and I am not a bishop. One of the chief reasons I have held firm to Anglicanism over the years is that I believe that the threefold order of ministry—bishop, priest, and deacon—is the model taught by the apostles, the governance particularly approved by God. In this model I, as a layman—even though I am also a member of the priesthood of all believers—have a highly circumscribed role. If my pastor asks me to teach, I teach; otherwise I shut up. In the unlikely (and unwelcome) event of a bishop of the Church asking for my thoughts I would share them; otherwise I keep them to myself, at least in public. The decisions that will shape the future of the Anglican Communion will be made by bishops, not by laypeople, nor even by priests; if I care about that Communion—and I do—I had best be praying for those bishops, and not repeating the error of Job in darkening counsel by words without knowledge.

Like the Roman centurion, then, I am a man under authority, and also like him, I have some responsibilities of my own. Chief among them is to raise my son Wesley in the faith of the Gospel. Around four years ago now I left the Episcopal Church because—thanks to various changes in our parish's life that followed the consecration of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire—I knew that if we stayed my son would be taught doctrines which I do not hold, and, just as important, would not be taught doctrines which I hold and believe it important for all Christians to hold. People who encouraged me to stay reminded me that, as (relatively) theologically knowledgeable persons, my wife and I could correct any sins of omission or commission when we got home. But the idea that the family holds the full responsibility for forming children in the faith, with the church being nothing more than a place of worship, is one of the ideas that I don't want to teach my son. Another one is this: that bishops can ignore or repudiate significant portions of the doctrine and discipline of the Church—something the Bishop of Chicago did on a regular basis—and still be thought of as legitimate pastoral overseers for their people.

In leaving the Episcopal Church, then, I believe that I acted according to what Cardinal Newman long ago called "the supreme authority of Conscience … the aboriginal Vicar of Christ." For Newman, conscience is anything but "private judgment": it is, rather, the testing of one's own private judgments, and sometimes those of others, against Scripture and against the long testimony of the whole church of Christ. And if we test those judgments so, and invoke our consciences, we enter perilous territory: as Newman reminds us, the fourth Lateran Council (1215) affirmed that Quidquid fit contra conscientiam, ædificat ad gehennam—Whatever is done in opposition to conscience is conducive to damnation.

But there is no coercing the consciences of others, especially in what Rusty Reno has called "the ruins of the church." One acts according to conscience, but it takes a certain rashness to commend one's own precise course to others. My dear friend Charles Marsh published a book this year called Wayward Christian Soldiers, and while I disagree with much that he argues in it, one chapter of the book has has often come back to my mind in an especially powerful way. Its title is "Learning to be Quiet in a Noisy Nation (and in a Nation of Noisy Believers)." The historical moment Charles invokes, and encourages all Christians to consider, is that of the German church in the Nazi era. I am not, let me hasten to say, casting anyone in the role of Nazi or Nazi sympathizer; the point of comparison between Lutheranism in 1930s Germany and Anglicanism in North America today is simply that both churches are broken, ruined; both present their adherents (clergy and laypeople) with potent challenges to faithfulness. And in the midst of such challenges—so said Dietrich Bonhoeffer, consistently, from the time of the Nazi accession in 1933 to his execution in the spring of 1945—almost the first requirement of the Christian is, simply, silence. "The time of words is over," he said; sometimes words have to be forgone in order to save time and energy and focus for what is more essential than words: "prayer and righteous action."

Not because I am taking a general vow of silence, but for other reasons, I am now concluding this online column. Its title, as you can see, is "Rumors of Glory," from a Bruce Cockburn song I particularly admire. Those of us living in the ruins of Anglicanism might be especially inclined to say that we have nothing more to go on than rumors, a handful of slightly hopeful whispers fading into imperceptibility. This could be deeply worrisome for those, like me, who see in Anglicanism a beautiful and compelling vision, a church that draws together the Catholic and the Reformed strands of the Christian life and thereby brings both of them to their fullest realization. I do not enjoy the thought that the Anglican experiment may be over, since, as I have said, I don't know how to be a Christian any other way; but I do not believe that that experiment is over; in fact, I have hope—I hear certain rumors—that it may be only beginning.

But even if that experiment is drawing to a close, I am not worried—a little sad, maybe, but not worried. I could learn to be a Christian some other way, if I had to, because, after all, there is one Lord, one faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all. Plus, I'm thinking about Christmas, which, among other things, teaches us that all those rumors are true: the Lord of All came once, in meekness and humility, in the form of a servant. And he will come again—but next time in glory.

Alan Jacobs teaches English at Wheaton College in Illinois; his history of Original Sin will be published in Spring 2008 by HarperOne. His Tumblelog is here.

Time Magazine Top Ten Religion Stories of 2007

2007-12-27T06:34:00.000-08:00

#5. The Episcopal Church At Odds Over Gays

The U.S. Episcopal Church and its parent, the Anglican Communion, continue disintegrating over the issue of gay Christians. Beyond the human cost of this slow-motion implosion — sparked by the Episcopal Church's decision to consecrate an openly gay bishop in 2003 and to accept same-sex unions — the nasty split has already hatched custody battles over church property: Courts are generally being asked to determine whether the conservative parishes seceding from Episcopalianism over the gay issue can take their buildings with them — or whether they belong to the Episcopal diocese. On a global scale, the battle is among the 79 million members of the Communion, who, in a recent count, appear to be almost equally divided over whether to continue to accept U.S. Episcopalians into the international Communion. Equally divided, that is, if you're talking strictly about proportions of the Communion's 38 provinces. By another measure, a majority of believers are on the conservative side, and a majority of the money is on the liberal side. A mess.

From Archbishop Peter Jensen of Australia

2007-12-27T06:27:00.001-08:00

Anglicanism in America is concerned with the growing realignment of Anglicanism in North America. The conference that Abp. Jensen speaks about below is part of this realignment. ed.

A Global Anglican Future Conference is planned for June 2008. The aim of the Conference is to discuss the future of mission and relationships within the churches of Anglican Communion. Those who wish to retain biblical standards especially in the area of sexual ethics have spent much time and effort in negotiations on these issues in the last five years. They want to move on together with the gospel of Christ’s Lordship, a gospel which challenges us and changes lives. Israel is planned as a venue because it symbolises the biblical roots of our faith as Anglicans. I want those in the fellowship of our Diocese to know what this is about and why I am involved.

In 1998, the Lambeth Conference made it clear that the leaders of the overwhelming majority of Anglicans world-wide maintained the biblical view of sexual ethics – that sexual relationships are reserved for marriage between a man and a woman. Five years later, however, actions were taken in Anglican Churches both in Canada and the United States of America which officially transgressed these boundaries in defiance of the Bible’s authority.

There was an immediate adverse result for those who wanted to maintain orthodoxy within these churches. They courageously protested against these actions, and as far as possible withdrew their fellowship from those who they perceived had broken God’s law. In doing so, they wished the world to know that they remained as genuine Anglicans. They had made no change in their basic beliefs and they understood themselves still to be in fellowship with the mainstream of the Anglican Church elsewhere in the world.

The American actions also impacted churches all around the world. In particular the churches of the Global South had to own the name ‘Anglican’ while living in societies where the actions of the Americans was condemned by all, especially Muslims. The action of some North Americans severely hurt the witness of these churches. It also hindered the good effect that membership of the Anglican Communion has for those who live in a situation where Christians are in a minority.

Since 2003, patient attempts have been made to call the offending North Americans back to biblical standards. Many American Anglicans are now more aware of the distress which their actions have caused others, and regret this impact. At the same time, however, others have condemned attempts by Global South Bishops to provide ministry for the orthodox Christians who still wish to be Anglican, but cannot continue to do so in the fellowship of the American churches. Individuals, parishes and even dioceses have left the original church, becoming associated with other dioceses in other parts of the world, and with new bishops being appointed from overseas to care for the disaffected.

Such has been the fall-out that it is now clear that we will never go back to being the Communion which we once were. There has been a permanent change. We live in a new world. Some American Anglicans are as committed to their new sexual ethics as to the gospel itself, and they intend to act as missionaries for this faith, wishing to persuade the rest of us. The problems posed by the American church are not going to remain in North America. This means that the rest of the Anglican world must be vigilant to guard the teaching and interpretation of scripture. Bound up in this are other issues such as Anglican identity, fellowship, theological education and mission. How are we going to help each other remain true to the authority of God’s word? How are we going to help each other to preach the gospel of God’s transforming power and grace? These matters require urgent attention.

The next Lambeth Conference has been summoned for July-August 2008. The Archbishop of Canterbury is responsible for the guest list, and he has invited all except for the Bishop of New Hampshire on the one hand and some of the new bishops appointed to care for the dissidents on the other. Thus, for example the Bishop of New Westminster has been invited although his actions have caused the Reverend David Short and his congregation (which includes Dr Jim Packer) to withdraw as far as they can from the Diocese. An invitation to share the Conference under these circumstances has posed a real difficulty for many of us.

Several African Provinces have indicated that they will not be attending Lambeth, because to do so would be to acquiesce with the North American actions. They are not ending the Anglican Communion, or even dividing it. They are simply indicating that the nature of the Communion has now been altered by what has occurred. They see that since the American actions were taken in direct defiance of the previous Lambeth Conference, the Americans have irreparably damaged the standing of the Conference itself. They asked without success for the Conference to be postponed. They do not think that this Conference is what is needed now. To attend would be to overlook the importance of the issues at stake.

The Anglican Future Conference is not designed to take the place of Lambeth. Some people may well choose to go to both. Its aim is to draw Biblical Anglican Christians together for urgent consultation. It is not a consultation which can take place at Lambeth, because Lambeth has a different agenda and far wider guest list. Unlike Lambeth, the Future Conference is not for Bishops alone – the invitations will go to clergy and lay people also. But it is a meeting which accepts the current reality of a Communion in disarray over fundamental issues of the gospel and biblical authority. It therefore seeks to plan for a future in which Anglican Christians world-wide will increasingly be pressured to depart from the biblical norms of behaviour and belief. It gives an opportunity for many to draw together to strengthen each other over the issue of biblical authority and interpretation and gospel mission.

I am supporting this Conference and am part of the planning team for it. I am hoping that we will also see Sydney laypersons and clergy in attendance with our bishops. We must look to the future, and network with Anglican Christians from around the globe who share our fundamental trust in the authority of God’s word. We have much to learn from them and they can benefit from our fellowship also. I hope that you will pray for the Conference and support our decision to attend.

GLOBAL ANGLICAN FUTURE CONFERENCE IN HOLY LAND ANNOUNCED BY ORTHODOX PRIMATES

2007-12-26T10:06:00.000-08:00

Orthodox Primates with other leading bishops from across the globe are to invite fellow Bishops, senior clergy and laity from every province of the Anglican Communion to a unique eight-day event, to be known as the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) 2008.

The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church’s faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit,and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.

At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network ), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.

Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”

The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders "to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ”. Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON. The GAFCON website is www.gafcon.org.

Canon Chris Sugden added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land .”

Theological Statement of the Common Cause Partnership

2007-12-20T13:59:00.001-08:00

Theological Statement

We believe and confess Jesus Christ to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no one comes to the Father but by Him. Therefore, the Common Cause Partnership identifies the following seven elements as characteristic of the Anglican Way, and essential for membership:

1. We confess the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments to be the inspired Word of God, containing all things necessary for salvation, and to be the final authority and unchangeable standard for Christian faith and life.
2. We confess Baptism and the Supper of the Lord to be Sacraments ordained by Christ Himself in the Gospel, and thus to be ministered with unfailing use of His words of institution and of the elements ordained by Him.
3. We confess the godly historic Episcopate as an inherent part of the apostolic faith and practice, and therefore as integral to the fullness and unity of the Body of Christ.
4. We confess as proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture the historic faith of the undivided church as declared in the three Catholic Creeds: the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian.
5. Concerning the seven Councils of the undivided Church, we affirm the teaching of the first four Councils and the Christological clarifications of the fifth, sixth and seventh Councils, in so far as they are agreeable to the Holy Scriptures.
6. We receive The Book of Common Prayer as set forth by the Church of England in 1662, together with the Ordinal attached to the same, as a standard for Anglican doctrine and discipline, and, with the Books which preceded it, as the standard for the Anglican tradition of worship.
7. We receive the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of 1562, taken in their literal and grammatical sense, as expressing the Anglican response to certain doctrinal issues controverted at that time, and as expressing the fundamental principles of authentic Anglican belief.

In all these things, the Common Cause Partnership is determined by the help of God to hold and maintain as the Anglican Way has received them the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ.

"The Anglican Communion," Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher wrote, "has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning." It may licitly teach as necessary for salvation nothing but what is read in the Holy Scriptures as God's Word written or may be proved thereby. It therefore embraces and affirms such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the Scriptures, and thus to be counted apostolic. The Church has no authority to innovate: it is obliged continually, and particularly in times of renewal or reformation, to return to "the faith once delivered to the saints."

To be an Anglican, then, is not to embrace a distinct version of Christianity, but a distinct way of being a "Mere Christian," at the same time evangelical, apostolic, catholic, reformed, and Spirit-filled.

The Mission Statement of the Common Cause Partnership

2007-12-20T13:58:00.001-08:00

Our Mission

We intend by God's grace:

* to partner together in a renewed missionary effort in North America and beyond, driven by our passion for Jesus and His Gospel.
* to ensure an orthodox Anglican Province in North America that remains connected to a faithful global Communion.
* to create a unity in the essentials of our Anglican faith that respects our varied styles and expressions.
* to build trusting relationships marked by effective coordination, collaboration, and communication.

Timeline and Issues for the Common Cause Partnership

2007-12-20T13:54:00.000-08:00

Timeline

1. College of Bishops organized: September, 2007
2. Theological Statement and Articles ratified by all Partners
3. CCP Leadership Council 1 (Article 4): week of December 3 or January 6
1. Organizing meeting
2. Leadership elected
3. Communications office created (Article 6)
4. Committees named:
1. Executive (Article 4)
2. Admissions (Article 5)
3. Mission (Article 7)
4. Education (Article 8)
5. Additional task forces created:
1. Prayer Book task force
2. Episcopate task force
3. Budget adopted
4. Province by province visitation and appeal for recognition of the "separate ecclesiastical structure in North America"
5. CCP Leadership Council 2: Advent, 2008
1. Reports and adoption of work from committees and task forces
6. Constitutional convention for an Anglican union held at the earliest possible date agreeable to all the Partners

Issues for the Lead Bishops' Roundtable

Within the stated timeline, we intend to address the following items:

* How we can best exercise our episcopate in common.
* A Rule of Life for bishops.
* The ways and means of a mutual review of candidates for bishop before consecration.
* Common worship.
* Stating and maintaining a common Anglican ethos.
* How we will live together with bishops and congregations and dioceses that do ordain women and others that do not ordain women, affirming that we will not violate anyone's conscience on this matter.
* The relation of clergy and congregations to bishops. Will our dioceses be rigidly fixed or flexible, allowing for affinity-based arrangements?
* The shape and nature of our common episcopal oversight. Will it be conciliar as it was in the early church and as it is maintained in some parts of the Orthodox churches and as it is reflected in some aspects of the Anglican Communion? Will it follow a more hierarchical model? Or will it be modeled after the Western institutional structures, such as the federation model, with which we have been familiar in The Episcopal Church?
* Exploring ways to form a leadership "pipeline" from congregational life onward that will lead candidates to offer themselves for ministry, including ordination, in an expanding, mission-minded Church.
* Exploring resources for the bishops' care for clergy and their families, including burned-out clergy and clergy families in trouble.
* Exploring with the seminaries of the Church how they can best serve us and how we can support them in our new mission context.
* Exploring a Common Cause electronic newsletter, with the intention of incorporating the various newsletters of the Partnership members.
* Exploring the standards, spiritual and moral, of ordained and lay leaders.
* Consistent with resolutions of Lambeth Conference, seeking to draw continuing churches, not members of the Common Cause Partnership, into fellowship.
* Opening ecumenical dialogues.

Common Cause Partners build for new Anglican future

2007-12-19T13:29:00.000-08:00

The first meeting of the Common Cause Leadership Council created the structure necessary for building a federation of orthodox Anglicans in North America. Three delegates from each of the ten Common Cause partners gathered in Orlando, Florida December 17-18. The Council unanimously elected Bishop Bob Duncan as Moderator. Delegates also elected Canon Charlie Masters of Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC) as General Secretary and Mrs. Patience Oruh of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) as Treasurer. The Leadership Council recognized the ratification of a statement of theology and formed the committees called for by the Common Cause articles of confederation adopted in September 2007. A communiqué from the Common Cause Leadership Council can be found below.

Communiqué

We, the gathered bishops, priests and lay representatives of the Anglican bodies federated in Common Cause held the first annual meeting as the newly formed Common Cause Leadership Council of the Common Cause Partnership on December 18th, 2007, in Orlando, Florida.

We created the structure called for in the Articles of Federation now adopted by nine of our partners. We elected officers of the Federation and formed an executive committee, as well as other committees and task forces. We have also begun work to harmonize and strengthen our common call to Christian education and mission. We expect these committees and task forces to begin work early in the New Year. We are beginning to explore the expanding possibilities for ecumenical contact with fellow Christians in North America and around the world.

Our actions today dramatically reversed the fragmentation and separation of the past. We stand committed to the "faith once delivered to the saints" as expressed in our now ratified theological statement. The Common Cause Partnership is united in faith with the vast majority of members of the worldwide Anglican Communion. We are especially grateful for the support and recognition given to us by the provinces of the Global South that have encouraged us to come together in common cause for the Gospel. We are particularly thankful for the presence with us of Archbishop Yong Ping Chung, the recently retired primate of the Province of Southeast Asia and one of the earliest supporters of the rebirth of orthodox Anglicanism in North America, representing the Anglican Coalition in Canada.

Each Common Cause Partner will continue to live out its unique role, maintaining its distinctive ministry and character, noting the provision of the Articles of Federation that "the autonomy of the individual Jurisdictions and Ministries, and their constituent bodies, is in no way restricted or superseded by membership." In the months and years ahead we anticipate a growing number of joint mission initiatives that will strengthen our witness as united and faithful Anglicans in North America. "So in Christ, we who are many, form one body..." (Rom. 12:5). To God be the Glory.

The Bishop of Central Florida Writes his Clergy

2007-12-17T08:58:00.000-08:00

My Dearly Beloved Brothers and Sisters,

Most of this letter was written two weeks ago, but I did not believe it was timely to send it. I think that the Protocol has now been adopted by the Diocesan Board it may be right to do so.

Not a single one of you has asked the question: "Bishop, why are you allowing these rectors who want to 'disaffiliate' the space to pursue their objectives? They are clearly in the process of abandoning the communion of this Church. Why are you not moving against them by inhibition and deposition?"

Here is my answer to the unspoken question: I am deeply sympathetic to any who believe that the current leadership of The Episcopal Church has greatly compromised the "doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this Church has received them." And I am extremely reluctant to discipline those who, for conscience sake, are finding they MUST "disaffiliate."

I believe that many of our clergy and lay leaders have attempted to be completely loyal to our received heritage, and have tried to reform a Church that is in many ways errant. And they have finally concluded that such reformation is not going to be successful. They want to "protect" the members of The Episcopal Church entrusted to them from any further spiritual incursions against them.

I am not convinced we have come to a point of no return. But I understand why they may believe we have done so. I believe it is still possible to be a faithful parish, or a faithful diocese, within The Episcopal Church. And I am still eager to hear what the Archbishop of Canterbury has to say about all of this.

Some of our people have expected and hoped that I would attempt to "lead the Diocese out of The Episcopal Church." (They are, frankly, deeply disappointed in me!)

I do not believe that is possible, though I recognize that some of our Bishops are attempting to do precisely that. I do not think they will be successful. They can leave, and they can take any number of clergy and laity with them. They can affiliate with some foreign jurisdiction such as the Southern Cone.

But there will be a remnant who will NOT want to leave, and that remnant will constitute the continuing Diocese of Pittsburgh, San Joaquin, Fort Worth, etc.

I expect that millions of dollars will be spent in lawsuits that will ultimately fail as far as those who wish to leave are concerned. And I cannot be part of that.

Nor can I be part of litigation against those who, for conscience sake, believe they must leave The Episcopal Church. These are faithful brothers and sisters who only want to remain true to what we have always been: orthodox Anglican Catholic Christians.

We have spent two months (four meetings, approximately twelve hours) attempting to craft a Protocol (a page and a half) which is finally in place - to deal with those who wish to "disaffiliate." This Protocol does not spell out the whole process. It merely brings to the threshold of being able to deal with those congregations. I want to state again my gratitude for the prayers of so many, and my particular gratitude for the members of the Board, the Standing Committee, the Special Task Force, and especially our Chancellors. We could not pay them for the time they have invested on our behalf!

The Protocol does not guarantee success. If the leaders of some congregations offer unreasonable proposals, and we cannot possibly accept them, and if I and the Board offer counter proposals that these leaders cannot accept...there is no guarantee whatsoever that somebody may not do something that the other side will find litigious. I believe that nobody wants to go there. But we may not be able to avoid it.

The Church of the New Covenant attempted to transfer title to a separate non-profit 501 (c)(3) corporation, and forced our hand four years ago. We had to file suit, and we did so. Something like that could occur again. I pray it does not.

On one level, I think the honorable thing those who wish to "disaffiliate" would be to simply walk away.That is what happened at St. John's, Melbourne, and Shepherd of the Hills, Lecanto. And it appears that is what is about to happen at St. Edward's, Mount Dora.

But, on another level, I believe that there is a validity to the argument of some who wish to 'disaffiliate" that it is they who have been faithful, while the national leadership of The Episcopal Church has increasingly abandoned the very heritage we have all sworn to protect.

So, I want to try to work with these brothers and sisters if it is at all possible. (It may not be.) We have received proposals from three of these congregations so far. In all honesty, I do not think any of the three are realistic. But now that the Protocol is in place, we can begin to discuss these proposals.

Each church's situation is unique, and each will have to be dealt with on its own merits. My life, since October 18, has been totally consumed with all of this, and I can tell you there is not a shred of joy in any of it. (Ernie [Bennett]'s, too.)

I will attempt to keep you apprised of where we are as this process unfolds.

My warmest regards in our Lord,

(And yes, you may post off the list so long as you post the whole thing.)--

(The Right Rev.) John W. Howe is Bishop of Central Florida

Common Cause Partnership News

2007-12-11T13:31:00.000-08:00

Dear Network,

The next major milestone in the development of Common Cause is next week, when the Common Cause Leadership Council gathers in Orlando, Florida on December 18 for its inaugural meeting. The Council comprises the head bishop, a clergy representative, and a lay representative from each Partner. This body represents Common Cause in all its fullness, and has the authority to do the work of the Partnership.

This is the organizing meeting of Common Cause, at which the assembly will elect its first officers and establish its initial committees and task forces. As such, December 18, 2007 will mark the formal beginning of a "separate ecclesiastical structure" in North America. Following this meeting, Common Cause will be in a place to seek official recognition from the Primates of our Communion.

We at the Network are pleased to have been given the Kingdom assignment of building unity among the Common Cause Partners. Thank you for sharing with us in this task, and please pray for our work next week.

Yours in Christ,

The Rev. Canon Daryl Fenton
Chief Operating Officer
Anglican Communion Network

Common Cause Partnership

2007-12-11T13:29:00.000-08:00

The Common Cause Partnership, founded in June 2004, represents an unprecedented alliance of several churches and ministries in the Anglican tradition. The groups represent or provide pastoral oversight for more than 200,000 Christians in the Anglican tradition.

These are the ministries and churches that have banded together to form the Common Cause Partnership:

Covenant Declaration of the Common Cause Partners

We intend by God's grace:

to partner together in a renewed missionary effort in North America and beyond, driven by our passion for Jesus and His Gospel.
to ensure an orthodox Anglican Province in North America that remains connected to a faithful global Communion.
to create a unity in the essentials of our Anglican faith that respects our varied styles and expressions.
to build trusting relationships marked by effective coordination, collaboration, and communication.

Theological Statement of the Common Cause Partners

We believe and confess Jesus Christ to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no one comes to the Father but by Him. Therefore, the Common Cause Partnership identifies the following seven elements as characteristic of the Anglican Way, and essential for membership:

We confess the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments to be the inspired Word of God, containing all things necessary for salvation, and to be the final authority and unchangeable standard for Christian faith and life.
We confess Baptism and the Supper of the Lord to be Sacraments ordained by Christ Himself in the Gospel, and thus to be ministered with unfailing use of His words of institution and of the elements ordained by Him.
We confess the godly historic Episcopate as an inherent part of the apostolic faith and practice, and therefore as integral to the fullness and unity of the Body of Christ.
We confess as proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture the historic faith of the undivided church as declared in the three Catholic Creeds: the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian.
Concerning the seven Councils of the undivided Church, we affirm the teaching of the first four Councils and the Christological clarifications of the fifth, sixth and seventh Councils, in so far as they are agreeable to the Holy Scriptures.
We receive The Book of Common Prayer as set forth by the Church of England in 1662, together with the Ordinal attached to the same, as a standard for Anglican doctrine and discipline, and, with the Books which preceded it, as the standard for the Anglican tradition of worship.
We receive the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of 1562, taken in their literal and grammatical sense, as expressing the Anglican response to certain doctrinal issues controverted at that time, and as expressing the fundamental principles of authentic Anglican belief.

In all these things, the Common Cause Partnership is determined by the help of God to hold and maintain as the Anglican Way has received them the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ.

“The Anglican Communion,” Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher wrote, “has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning.” It may licitly teach as necessary for salvation nothing but what is read in the Holy Scriptures as God's Word written or may be proved thereby. It therefore embraces and affirms such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the Scriptures, and thus to be counted apostolic. The Church has no authority to innovate: it is obliged continually, and particularly in times of renewal or reformation, to return to “the faith once delivered to the saints.”

To be an Anglican, then, is not to embrace a distinct version of Christianity, but a distinct way of being a “Mere Christian,” at the same time evangelical, apostolic, catholic, reformed, and Spirit-filled.

Proposed August 18, 2006.

Historic Anglican Communion Consecrations

2007-12-11T13:27:00.000-08:00

On Sunday, 9 December 2007, the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) held the consecration of four new suffragan bishops in the USA: Roger Ames, David Anderson, Amos Fagbamiye, and Nathan Kanu. These four will join Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns and Suffragan Bishop David Bena in leading CANA.

Source: CANA website

It's D-I-V-O-R-C-E for the Anglicans

2007-12-03T13:49:00.000-08:00

The liberals and the conservatives have come to a parting of the ways; all that's left is the division of property

Vancouver Sun

Published: Monday, December 03, 2007

Vancouver's Bishop Michael Ingham has finally admitted that the Anglican Church is in crisis.

Previously, as thriving parishes left one by one -- St. Simon's, Emmanuel, St. Martin's, Christ the Redeemer -- he tried to shrug off each departure as a sort of "extreme decline in attendance."

Now, with many displaced Canadian parishes reassembling under two other Canadian bishops, Ingham is calling it a "schism" -- the religious equivalent of a divorce.*

It is a tacit admission that the two groups -- call them "liberals" and "conservatives" -- are peers, just like opponents in a divorce.

For most of the global Anglican community, they are peers and more. An archbishop from South America has accepted the Canadian bishops and parishes under his authority, and statements from huge "provinces" of bishops suggest that most Anglicans are inclined to treat the conservatives, rather than the old establishment, as the real Canadian Anglican Church.

To put the divorce in context, it is important to realize that the Anglican Church has been an awkward marriage of liberal and conservative streams from its very beginning.

The conservative stream was established when Bishop Thomas Cranmer assembled the Anglican Book of Common Prayer using ancient Latin liturgies and English monastic traditions. He infused Anglicanism with a profound biblical spirituality that remains at the heart of conservative practice. The liberal stream was there at the beginning as well, as Henry VIII used his new English church to sidestep Roman Catholic moral standards that threatened to cramp his lifestyle.

After centuries of rather tense coexistence, serious trouble developed in the last half-century. North American liberal Anglicans proved to be adept at church politics, gained control of the church hierarchy, and promoted a steady stream of theological innovations that assaulted the core beliefs of the conservatives.

Bishop Ingham, for example, has suggested that we should "stop thinking of ourselves as created beings" and stop thinking of Easter as "something understandable." Perhaps not coincidentally, Anglican membership has declined steadily in North America.

In contrast, the dominantly conservative "Global South" Anglican churches have been growing explosively. More than two-thirds of all Anglicans now come from Africa, Asia or South America. And they are now tasked with mediating the divorce of the North American church.

Can we assign blame in this ecclesiastical divorce? Was one of the parties "unfaithful" (pun unavoidable)? Liberal Anglican spokesman Neale Adams summarizes the liberal vision as: "a big-tent church . . . open to a wide variety of theologies, and we think that's good." To my ear, this is a bit like the cheating husband saying, "Ours is an open relationship, embracing a wide variety of extra-marital affairs."

The liberals seem to be genuinely astonished that anyone would have a problem with this -- saying, in effect, "You can teach that Jesus rose from the dead, if you like, but don't hassle us if we teach that he didn't."

(It reminds me of when I checked into a Halifax inn a decade ago and asked for a non-smoking room. The desk clerk stubbed out her cigarette with a puzzled look and said, "Sir, you are not required to smoke in any of our rooms." She couldn't comprehend why I would want a room with less choice.)

In vain the wife hauls out the marriage vows, the Bible and the Prayer Book, which clearly specify that the relationship is to be monogamous. "Oh," the husband replies, "forget that old stuff and be hip and cool like me."

The bane of abusive husbands is the community of faithful neighbours who offer shelter and encouragement to the battered wives. Without them, the wives would have no chance for healthy independence. Similarly, liberal leaders reserve their angriest words for the faithful worldwide Anglican leaders who shelter and encourage the conservative Canadian churches.

Rest assured that the conservatives will never forget how the global community supported us when we needed it most.

There are two stages in a divorce. Last week was the end of the first stage -- the end of attempts at reconciliation and an acceptance of the brokenness. Lots of pain all around. A sort of corporate depression.

Now begins the second stage: The division of the assets. Ingham has made it clear that he prefers the old 1950s-style divorce, where all church property reverts to the liberals.

It doesn't matter that the properties were bought, paid for, and lovingly maintained by the congregations of each church, whether liberal or conservative. Ingham aspires to be the 1950s husband, turning the wife out with nothing but the clothes on her back, holding up the deed to the house and saying, "See, it's in my name. Right here."

Modern society, of course, understands that husband and wife, as peers, both have property rights regardless of the name on the deed.

So let's be civil about this. This divorce (or "schism" as Ingham calls it) is a reality.

Anglican liberals need to be more liberal: They need to accept the conservatives as peers rather than vassals or chattel, and negotiate a reasonable division of assets.

This is the 21st century, for goodness' sake.

Michael Davenport was born, baptized, and raised in the Anglican Church, the son of an Anglican priest. He is a trustee of one of the Anglican churches now under the umbrella of the Province of the Southern Cone.