A response to the Bishop of Sherborne on the ACNA debate
Hat tip Titusonenine
Clifford Swartz writes:
Submitted to the Fulcrum site, but I think these folks are probably busy with Synod business, as it seems to be delayed in posting:
Dear Graham,
I read with interest your interview with the Church of England Newspaper. For your consideration and that of Fulcrum readers, especially Synod members:
1. The Church of England is in communion with those churches as determined by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York (see Canons, p 208). The resolution before the Synod is therefore appropriate, while the amended resolution is not. The resolution states the desire to be in communion, which would leave it to the Archbishops to decide. The amended resolution asks the Archbishops to report to Synod, which is inappropriate given the decision making process.
2. The Church of England is in communion with member churches of the Anglican Communion, but also with other categories of churches, such as Extra-Provincial Dioceses (eg, Bermuda), United Churches incorporating former Anglican churches (eg, South India), Churches signing the Porvoo Declaration, and Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht. The resolution before the Synod thus does not imply membership in the Anglican Communion, but an affirmation of common theology. Synod members might ask if they share the same theology as the Anglican Church of North America, which affirms the doctrinal basis of the Church of England (Articles of Religion, BCP and Ordinal), noting that the Episcopal Church views these as historical documents with no authority in matters of doctrine.
3. The Church of England is in communion with Churches which have overlapping jurisdictions with both Church of England and Episcopal Church dioceses (for instance, in Germany, there are parishes of the Church of England, of the Convocation of the Episcopal Churches in Europe, and the Old Catholics). Also, some Extra-Provincial churches are under the authority of other metropolitans, such as the Episcopal Church of Cuba, whose Metropolitan authority consists of the Archbishop of Canada, of the West Indies and the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church. Special circumstances of Gospel need helped pave a way for special consideration of being in communion. The Gospel need of Anglican ministers in Canada and the States should result in positive encouragement rather than a “we will wait and see if you survive” posture.
4. Your stance is that the Covenant is the only path to follow. I suggest that wisdom and prudence may dictate that a parallel course should be followed, that of encouraging the ministry of Anglicans with whom Synod members share the same theology. As the Episcopal Church weakens and hemorrhages members, while the ACNA grows through proclamation of the Gospel, can we not envisage a day when the member province of the Anglican Communion (TEC) and the extra-provincial member church (ACNA) become a united church? This would seem to be Paul’s hope in Romans 9-11, that those who reject the truth that is their heritage would be jealous because of the Gospel growth of the new upstarts. This has at least as much biblical warrant as a course which does little to encourage the ministry of the Gospel but merely indicates the circumstanceswhen one church will be bid farewell by the others.
5. I note that your only statement about the beliefs of the dominant majority in the Episcopal Church is that they are unAnglican (as regards sexuality). The Episcopal Church stated that these matters do not touch on core doctrine (in the trial of Bishop Richter), and it moves forward with the decisions of General Convention in continued disobedience to scripture and the pleas of the Anglican Communion. I am ignorant of what hints among the Episcopal Church bishops and the Presiding Bishop indicate they will begin to turn from their stated course of action. Or on what basis you predict the Primates will not welcome the Presiding Bishop into their midst beyond 2011. The track record is this: at Lambeth/Primates’ Meetings/ACC, declare fidelity to the Communion, then at General Convention and in practice, do the exact opposite.
Graham and Synod members, will you please consider that the ACNA is not asking anyone to turn their backs on those who have chosen to remain in the Episcopal Church. In fact, here in my own context in Manhattan, I initiated fellowship opportunities for Episcopal and Anglican clergy, and we have jointly sponsored a ministry conference attended by Episcopal and Anglican clergy. The Episcopal clergy find diocesan events so alienating and dispiriting that these prove to be a balm to them. We support them in their witness, will you not support us in ours?
In Christ’s service,
Clifford Swartz
ordained in York Diocese, serving in the USA
(http://www.christchurchnyc.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
