Posted on 04/12/2006 9:20:30 PM PDT by sionnsar
From Midwest Conservative:
When ECUSA apostatizes again this June, I don’t think the Network needs to make a formal break right then and there. Since there won’t be a final Anglican settlement until 2008 anyway, a precipitous split might weaken the Network’s position, both legally and with the rest of the Communion.
But while a de jure split doesn’t need to happen right away, a de facto one does. The Network needs to start acting like it is a separate entity and this measure is a good start. And with the support of conservative Anglicans around the world, orthodox Anglicans may just be able to present Dr. Williams with a fait accompli at Lambeth.
Christopher Johnson (and many Network bishops) might be right about how not acting until 2008 would be best in respect to the global Anglican Communion, but for the average orthodox parishioner, this is horrible. I really hope I am wrong about how the lack of action in 2006 by the Network will only cause the continual stream of orthodox Anglicans to increase, but that certainly doesn’t seem to be the case: it will only increase. Yes, Episcopalians, and Anglicans in general, seem to embrace the ideals of congregationalism (the mentality that says, “As long as my parish is okay, I don’t care what happens on the national level.”). But even that doesn’t stop people from continuing to stream out. People know better. A failure by the Network to act this summer will only cause that stream to grow larger, so that Anglicanism will get smaller and smaller in North America. The orthodox realize that most of ECUSA is officially at odds with Christ and cannot wait any longer to separate from this institution. Maybe it might be best in respect to the Anglican Communion to wait until after Lambeth 2008 to separate from the rest of ECUSA, but can we morally afford it? If waiting until 2008 keeps us in better standing with the Anglican Communion, I really wonder about the Anglican Communion! With the recent innovations (e.g., women to the episcopate) in the Church of England, I really wonder how long the orthodox can remain in communion with her? Orthodox Anglicanism needs to reunite together, with Rome and with Constantinople, and leave the innovations of the new revisionist Anglicanism.
My Predictions:
The liberal Protestant groups will align with each other. The orthodox Catholic groups will align with each other. Meanwhile, the conservative Protestants will continue to fight and splinter, and the liberal Catholics will continue to get pressure from the top. The details of how this will all come about are only known to God, but I’d bet my lunch that Pope Benedict XVI has got some ideas.
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. "Meanwhile, the conservative Protestants will continue to fight and splinter,"
Not a charitable contribution.
But as a conservative protestant, I'll concede the truth of the statement.
Unfortunately true. I can look around the Atlanta metro area and see what has happened to the various orthodox/conservative Episcopalian parishes. They haven't united at all -- several have become independent non-aligned churches who answer to no bishop, others have placed themselves under different bishops from various parts of the Third World (Chile, Nigeria, Asia). Each parish is going its own separate way -- and if they're talking to the Network, I'm not hearing about it. The AAC isn't doing much here either.
It's a complete splintering rather than uniting to form a "new" Anglican body.
The article is absolutely correct that many of us are crossing the Tiber (or the Bosporus). I get calls from my old parish wanting to visit our new Catholic parish . . . and if the conservative Protestants don't get their act together, that trickle will become a flood.
'Yes, Episcopalians, and Anglicans in general, seem to embrace the ideals of congregationalism (the mentality that says, “As long as my parish is okay, I don’t care what happens on the national level.”). But even that doesn’t stop people from continuing to stream out.'
Most lay Episcopalians do not embrace the concept of 'congregationalism' for theological reasons. The problem is that they cannot take off all the time to go to all these conferences, retreats, diocesan, national, and international meetings. These national and international structures and alliances seem remote. Lay people can identify with world-wide Anglicanism, or with some ‘network’ or ‘council’ till they are blue in the face, but if the local parish does not offer anything that is even remotely satisfying, or if the local parish priest is lazy, incompetent, or in-your-face constantly with his or her revisionistic views, they begin to fall away, one-by-one, family by family. The geographical location of a suitable alternative then becomes a top priority. If you live in a huge metropolitan area, driving for over an hour is just not acceptable (or affordable, given gasoline prices.
Our former rector was (and is) very confrontational and in-your-face (funny how these supposed apostles of "tolerance" are absolutely intolerant of any disagreement with their view of what constitutes tolerance . . . )
"Another consideration besides gasoline is the restrictions that distance puts on a family's participation in parish life."
Exactly. If you care enough about all this to make a change in the first place you're not going to be just a Sunday participant. Mid-week services, educational programs, and other lay organizations all meet during the week.
I guess my main point was that people not be too critical of the orthodox and traditional Episcopalians. It takes time to figure out where you can realistically go, what is going to be workable for you and your family. The "all politics is local" saying is really more applicable to religion than it is to politics. For the majority of people, these "distance" and "local" factors are the main factors in decision-making.
Of course GC 2003 was just the final nail in the coffin so to speak. We had been uneasy about remaining in our parish and ECUSA for some time, and I had been thinking in a Catholic direction for years, because we were always very "high church." What happened after GC 2003 was that we went actively searching for a new church home.
We sadly had to rule out the only orthodox high-church parish remaining in Atlanta -- too far away, too small, under siege from the bishop, a retiring long-time rector, and with a median congregation age of something like 65 it offered nothing for our children. We visited several other churches but settled on our current parish as The One. Had an interesting "leading" in answer to prayer in the parking lot, too . . .
A bonus is that it's half the distance from our house that our old parish was.
AMiA churches too, need to be encouraged to be more in touch with and cooperative with Network ECUSA churches--and to avoid more turf battle conflicts. Alienation from faithful, orthodox Episcopalians is NOT a good thing.
If ever there was a time for REAL dialog (not the fake time-buying kind of liberal(apostate) with conservative stuff...) was needed between ALL kinds of orthodox/conservative/non-revisionist (and even {GASP} evangelical) including also Anglo-Catholic Anglicans, NOW is the time. The minor stuff is over and we must unify for there are much bigger fish to fry.....
**I’d bet my lunch that Pope Benedict XVI has got some ideas.**
Me too!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.