+Florenza et.al. Bolt APCK for ACA
I guess everyone saw this coming. The thirst for unity in the continuum is real, hence all of the "cooperatives" taking place recently (FACA, ACC with UEC, etc.). The trouble with much of this stuff, from my perspective anyway, is that it's all 30 years too late.
posted by J. Gordon Anderson at 9:30 AM
30 Comments:
COuld someone please supply me with some figures in terms of size and membership and ASA?
I am wondering if the ACC is now larger than APCK, and how those compare to UEC and TAC and other continuing bodies.
I am not a continuer myself (right now) but I find the whole movement interesting and in some ways attractive.
By "ASA" do you mean "ACA"?
I don't know what the statistics are of the other churches. The APA (my jurisdiction) has something like 70, and then some missions and pre-missions. I thought I read in that article that the ACC has around 90. Who knows?
In any case, we are all embarrassingly small. I guess that shows where our priorities have been over the years. (I point the finger at myself in that statement too, BTW)
The ACC has at least 160, and more being formed almost daily in Africa. Also many new missions and parishes are starting in India.
The APCK has approximately 40 - 50 after this latest departure. I believe the UECNA has round 40 parishes/missions.
I have no idea how many parishes ACA/TAC has. Perhaps someone from there can enlighten us with actual figures.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
Father Gordon,
ASA stands for Average Sunday Attendance. That is a better indicator than "Membership". ECUSA/TEC claims 2.2 million and the Church of England claim over 20 Million. When you go to ASA the TEC is around 800,000 and England is in the low millions (if that anymore).
It is very interesting to me that now a number of churches formerly in the APCK which has often been seen as the highest of the continuers is now connected through the ACA with FACA and thus to the Reformed Episcopal Church (which used to be thought of as the lowest of the low!!).
As a personal note, the MD/Northern Virginia REC/APA churches are having a joint Holy Communion this Sunday (7/29) at Mount Calvary APA in Lothian.
This post has been removed by the author.
The Anglican Church in America (ACA) has approximately 90 parishes and Missions in the US. However the ACA also includes the Missionary Diocese of Central America and Mexico (and Puerto Rico) but I don’t know how many parishes and missions we have there. And the ACA is the American Province of the global Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC). The TAC has parishes and clergy in something like 43 countries around the world, is on every continent except Antarctica, and has something like 500,000 members globally. The TAC is by far the largest Continuing Anglican Church body in the world.
As a priest in the ACA/TAC I constantly pray for unity among orthodox members of the Catholic Church of which Continuing Anglicans are a part. And I pray especially for unity among Continuing Anglicans. Our division is a sin that must be reconciled, and it must be reconciled now. Most, if not all, fellow clergy I speak with (including our Bishops) completely agree with this, as do virtually all of the laity in our churches.
I welcome +Bp. Florenza and his clergy and their laity into the ACA/TAC and I pray for them, and for ALL Churches in the continuum. I’m sure their decision was not an easy or quick one, but one they felt absolutely necessary. May the Lord bless these men and women, and may He bless and guise us all in these tumultuous and often times difficult times in the Church.
Pax!
Michael +
Fr. Michael P. Sclafani, SSM
Saint Margaret of Scotland Anglican Church
85 Pleasant Street - PO Box 1555
Conway, New Hampshire 03818
Rector@ConwayAnglicans.org
www.ConwayAnglicans.org
(603) 662-5576 church
(603) 848-8188 cell
(603) 746-2714 home
Saint Michael, the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into Hell Satan and the other evil spirits who prowl about the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.
I was remiss in not including those APCK parishes and missions that just joined that ACA in the above figures. When we add them to the total, the ACA now has over 100 parishes and missions here in the USA. The TAC is growing daily.
There has been a lot of dicussion lately about the re-alignment of the continuum into various groups, with the main criticism of the TAC - and APA, I guess (from the ACC, et al), being that they retains ties with Forward in Faith.
Isn't a bigger concern, at least potentially, the ongoing discussions (albeit in very early stages) that the TAC is having with the Vatican. Even if nothing comes of this for years, or ever, wouldn't that be a much more significant part of the TAC's ecumenical views than some link with FiF?
That's what I would think, but so far, at least over at "The Continuum", that issue has not come up.
Michael,
Why would the TAC discussions with Rome be "a bigger concern"? What's the concern about?
The concern is that Rome is not only no different than TEC, but was actually, many think, the model that the revisionists in TEC used in 1976-77.
Though women's ordination was not part of the change, in the 1960s, the Roman Catholic Church made major changes to the faith, doctrine, and practice of the church, in a further departure from the faith of the undivided catholic church that what it already had previously done.
Though women's ordination was not one of the changes, the concept is the same.
Both the RCC and TEC, on a vote, changed the faith, doctrine, and practice of the church away from the historic faith. We, as faithful catholics, have no right to vote on and change doctrine.
The true catholic faith is the same yesterday, today and forever.
To break with ECUSA/TEC, and then try to be in communion with Rome, is ironic to say the least - ie. breaking from one because they changed the faith, doctrine and practice only to unite with another that does and continues to do the same thing.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
As I understand it, the TAC would like to have some sort of uniate status within the Roman church.
I wasn't thinking about what Brian suggested, but more along the lines of the traditional Anglican gripes with Rome (e.g. papal jurisdiction; papal infallibility, Marian dogmas, etc.).
Father Anderson:
I'm glad you brought the other concerns up as well. There was good reason for the English Reformation. Let us never forget that.
I'm a "prayerbook Anglican Catholic", but I don't wish us to ever have connection to the RCC.
Brian McKee, nO,C.G.S.
I was in the ACA for a couple of years, and there are some godly and excellent leaders in the US. That being said, the talk of uniate status within the Roman Church raised a great deal of concern for many (myself included)--it was never clear what was being attempted. Was it uniate status as with the Eastern Rite and Rome? Was it recognition of catholicity, as with the Polish National Catholic Church? Too often those who asked the questions were told to quiet down, or just trust the bishops. I think if there is conversation with Rome on the part of TAC/ACA, it needs to be clear and transparent. I have no problem with some form of mutual recognition, but the formation of an Anglican Uniate group is something I find troubling. In any case, Rome already has that with the Anglican Use parishes. From what I've heard, Anglicans seeking some form of uniate body have been told to go through the Anglican Use process.
This post has been removed by the author.
an anglican cleric - It is my understanding through many conversations with fellow clergy and bishops in the ACA, that the hope is as you described "for mutual recognition of catholicity, as with the Polish National Catholic Church." We are not seeking to become Roman Catholics but to be recognized by the See of Rome as a full and equal part of the Catholic Church. Mutual recognition of the validity of orders and sacraments. If the "quest" were to be absorbed by, or to simply become Roman Catholics who celebrate using Anglican liturgy, then I would share your concerns, but that's not at all the case.
ohio anglican - your post seem to imply that since the 1960s the Roman Church has ceased to be a part of the Catholic Church. And you seem to further imply that the errors in the medieval Roman Church that caused the Anglican Church to separate from Rome still exist today. While I agree that Rome has issues, I have to disagree with the idea that they are no longer a part of the Catholic Church and that they are stuck in the middle ages.
The TAC prayer for the type of unity with other Catholic Churches I described is one that virtually all clergy and laity I have spoken to on this issue are in full agreement. However, the reality is that this type of unity is a very long way away, if it ever is realized at all.
I so wish that orthodox Catholics would spend more time discussing why we should be united, and less time trying to debate reasons why we should remain divided. It is for these reasons that I am very excited about FACA and other efforts to this end.
Pax!
MPS+
This post has been removed by the author.
Fr. Michael:
While there are "bad apples" in all professions, including the clergy, a "bad apple" is generally thrown away so as not to cause the rest of the apples in the barrel to go bad.
In the RCC, this is not what happened. Pedophile priests were molesting children for 40 years (at least, maybe longer), and instead of getting rid of those pedphile priests, the bishops (wolves in sheep's clothing) were purposely moving the pedophile's around to enable and allow them to molest even more children.
I can't imagine why the TAC would want any connection at all to the organization that purposely condoned and enabled child molestation. But since it does, one should really question why, I would think.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
In the case of these bishops and cardinals who protected and enabled the peodphile priests, they were not deforcked. In fact, one of them was moved to a luxurious villa in Rome, for his protection from U.S. authorities, and given a promotion. Indeed, he was prominently around at John Paul II's funeral.
TEC certainly fell into apostasy with women's ordination and the consecration of Vicki Gene Robinson. But the results of TEC's apostasy doesn't even come close to the evil that was done to innocent children in the RCC. In the Bible, we are taught to "be ye seperate" rom evil and sin.
Would seriously want a communion with Rome where the sharing of clergy might happen?
Furthermore, why would anyone need the recognition of the Bishop of Rome? He is nothing but a Bishop, no different than any other from a truly Anglican viewpoint. Those who accept him as "Pope", need to become a Roman priest, if Rome would take them. Such attitudes of desiring the Bishop of Rome's recognition are not traditional Anglicanism and have no place in traditional Anglicanism.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
Brian - I am on my way out the door to drive to my parish to prepare for Mass (100 miles away until we can move closer next month). I don't have time right now to really give a meaningful response to your post but will offer a few brief thoughts.
I WILL say before I head out the door, that EVERY church, every single one, has had issues and every church has sinned, some very great and some not so great, but every one has.
For example were the murderous sins of the church of Mary or the murderous sins of the church of Elizabeth any more or less horrific than the more recent horrific scandals within the RCC?
Sin is sin, is it not? The horrific acts committed by the church against her children are horrific acts regardless of the age of the victim or the period in time they take or took place.
That doesn't make any one churches sins acceptable but if Catholic Christias were to only associate with churches that are free from sin (and always have been free from sin) none of us would have a church to worship in and as a matter of fact none of us would be worthy of worshipping our Lord in the first place since we all are stained by sin.
My earlier comments regarding the TAC and our desire to foster much closer ties with other portions of the church Catholic (the RCC included) speak to just that. Working towards unity and mutual recognition (a unity perviously described) with other members of the Catholic church of which Rome is the largest single body. And in that particular body the Pope speaks for that church with a single voice. Their polity is different from our so in this case the Bishop of Rome is the one to give that recognition for his church. In the case of say E.O. churches it would also be individual bishops that recognition would come by, only several differnt bishops instead of just one. Now please don't misinterpret my comment to think that I agree with or could accept papal infallibility, I can not and do not and will not.
What church or churches in your opinion make up the Holy Catholic Church? It sounds as if you are implying that only the churches in the continuum do, and only a tinly portion of that tiny group at that.
I'm sorry if this post sounds choppy but I HAVE to get out the door. Happy Sonday!
PAX!
MPS+
This post has been removed by the author.
This post has been removed by the author.
Remember, Christ said "be ye seperate from sin". The Ecumenical people always want to ignore this teaching of Christ. That is taught over and over again in the sciptures. Christ's prayer that they may all be one is only there once. I suspect that the frequency of that teaching strongly indicates which is most important.
Christ also taught us to comfort the sick, and to try to help and heal those who are hurting. As I said, I see much more protecting of bank accounts by the hierarchy of the RCC than comforting, healing, or helping their victims.
There again, this is not to say that some wonderful, truly Christian priests aren't trying to help victims. Many are. But it is not those dedicated, truly devout priests that TAC would be having an agreement with, but rather the whole hierarchial structure. The structure is still concerned with protecting bank accounts.
Frankly, I don't need the Bishop of Rome to tell me that Anglican Catholic sacraments are valid. I don't need to Bishop of Rome to tell me that we are practicing the faith of the one, holy, apostolic, undivided catholic church of the first thousand years. On all these matters, true catholic Anglicans know that we have valid sacraments and what faith we are practicing.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
This post has been removed by the author.
There are plenty of sins in the past on both sides: Anglican and RCC. However, 400+ year old sins really don't matter in this discussion.
The here and now matters: 1. apostasy of the Lambeth Communion; 2. ongoing problems of the pedophile priest molestation and abuse of children.
There here and now must be dealt with, not the long past.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
The ACC/APCK/UECNA have endured constant "darts" being thrown at us lately with accusations that we are guilty of sin not wanting to jump into "union" with anybody and everybody.
I submit that it is not sin to not enter into a union if it is obvious that a jurisdiction is in communion with, or an ecumenical partner with a jurisdiction that is practicing apostasy or unrepentent sin. Indeed, it is entirely scriptural not to enter into such a union.
If someone refuses to enter into union with another jurisdiction out of sinful pride, and an attitude that we are better than you - obvious snobbery, then it would be sin.
The ACC/APCK/UECNA are not guilty of sin in being careful about entering into quick "unity proposals". It is obvious that some who pushing the unity, and throwing the "darts", are ecumenical partners with those who practice and teach apostasy.
Indeed, the ACC/APCK/UECNA are following Christ's teachings to "be ye seperate."
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
ohio anglican - "Frankly, I don't need the Bishop of Rome to tell me that Anglican Catholic sacraments are valid. I don't need to Bishop of Rome to tell me that we are practicing the faith of the one, holy, apostolic, undivided catholic church of the first thousand years. On all these matters, true catholic Anglicans know that we have valid sacraments and what faith we are practicing."
I completely agree. But that's not the subject of this conversation.
ohio anglican - "I submit that it is not sin to not enter into a union if it is obvious that a jurisdiction is in communion with, or an ecumenical partner with a jurisdiction that is practicing apostasy or unrepentent sin. Indeed, it is entirely scriptural not to enter into such a union."
Am I to take your comments to imply that you believe faithful Anglican jurisdictions such as the ACA/TAC, the former APCK Diocese of the East, the APA, and the DHC (just to name a few) fall into the category you outline above?
ohio anglican - "It is obvious that some who pushing the unity, and throwing the "darts", are ecumenical partners with those who practice and teach apostasy."
You sound very angry, and your statements come across (at least to me) as quite self righteous. This has repeatedly been my experience when communicating with ACC clergy (all the way up to ++Abp. Haverland). I find this position to be most unfortunate. I don't know what jurisdition you are a part of, but it sounds as if you believe that the only jurisdictions in Christendom who can and should be considered Catholic are the ACC/APCK/UECNA.
I've heard this rhetoric over and over again, and I simply don't get it.
My posts were not to incite an argument. My post was simply replying to your question regarding the number of parishes the ACA/TAC has. I'm not sure I understand the anger.
Pax!
MPS+
I'm definately not angry. I was simply replying to your statements concerning why you felt it necessary to seek union of some sort with Rome, and why I feel it is definately not a good idea.
Just because I have a difference of opinion, doesn't mean I'm angry at all. You certainly don't know me very well at all if you assume that I'm angry either.
That's what freedom is all about: being able to have differences of opinion without being angry. I'm simply speaking of for the rights/opiniona of the ACC/APCK/UECNA that have been badly maligned on the blogosphere as of late.
As a faithful member of the ACC, I for one, am not going to ignore it and say nothing when the ACC is attacked anymore. I've kept my silence too long, and, frankly, am ashamed as a member of the ACC that I didn't start speaking up in the ACC's defense sooner.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
Brian,
It was my mistake for misinterpreting your 'tone'. Thank you for clarifying. I agree that it is a wonderful thing to be able to discuss different opinions in such a forum. However you speak of the ACC/APCK/UECNA being attacked, as if my replies to your question regarding the number of parishes in the ACA/TAC and what our quest for greater unity with Rome and others looks like, as if I were attacking the ACC/APCK/UECNA. Nothing could be further from the truth. Having said that I will reiterate that my experience with speaking with clergy of the ACC on the subject of unity (in any form), has consistently met with a holier than thou (the ACC being holier than the ACA) attitude that I find very divisive, angry, and nonproductive. This attitude seems confined to the clergy, not to the laity. I don’t at all understand it, and I find it to be very sad and unfortunate. Few things could please me more than for all faithful members of the Continuum to come together and act as brothers in Christ, rather than the Hatfield’s and McCoy’s.
Pax!
MPS+
Fr. MIchael:
If the clergy of the ACC seem defensive, it may be because they are aware of what is constantly being said on the blogosphere and elsewhere. It is only human nature to begin to get defensive when you feel you are "under attack."
The ACC has said that it wants unity with any who are not in ecumenical partnerships/communion with the Lambeth Communion. I for one would not want to see the ACC, having stood firm for the catholic faith for 30 years now, suddenly undo that truly faithful catholic witness for hasty unity with those who are in communion with what we seperated outselves from 30 years ago.
I don't believe that attitude is elitist, snobbish, or anything of the sort. It is simply being honest and straight forward about what the ACC feels. The kindest gift we humans can give each other is honesty.
Those who do not wish to unite with the ACC on those terms certainly don't have to do so. The ACC does not look down on those who do not wish to join on those terms, it is their choice to make.
Nowhere did the ACC say that unity STOPPED with the ACC/UECNA/APCK. Rather it said that it makes sense for unity to START with the ACC/UECNA/APCK. It does make sense. Two of these three jurisdictions were formed immediately from the Chambers Consecrations, and one later formed from the ACC over churchmanship issues that no longer matter (wonderful forgiveness has taken over on both sides). These are the three continuing churches from entirely common roots.
Others have evolved later. The ACC did not say they weren't valid, simply that they evolved later. I don't see that as unkind or harsh either, simply speaking with honesty.
It seems that when the ACC speaks as honestly as it can, others want to assume it is being elitist. The clergy and people of the ACC are starting to feel that we are the victims of constant attack.
I too hope for the day, whether unity occurs or not, that all Anglican groups will give each other the wonderful gift of speaking honestly. I, too, hope that all Anglican groups will give one another due courtesy even if they don't wish to unite for whatever reasons.
Brian McKee, nO/C.G.S.
Post a Comment
<< Home