Saddleback Pastor Offers Spiritual Refuge for Displaced Anglicans

virtueonline ^ | January 12, 2009 | David Virtue

[hiho hiho]

By David W. Virtue www.virtueonline.org 1/12/2009

In September 2008, Saddleback pastor and author Dr. Rick Warren wrote to VOL with a proposition. He would make his church available to any Anglican parish wanting to flee the Episcopal Church because of its non-biblical stand on faith and morals.

VOL was delighted to accept the challenge and wrote to Bishop John Guernsey of the Anglican Province of Uganda who oversees some 51 parishes in the U.S. and told him about the offer.

Bishop Guernsey wrote back saying he would notify a number of churches that might someday be in need of Saddleback's help.

This past week, St. James, Newport Beach, CA, followed up with Warren directly. The Rev. Richard Crocker, newly installed pastor of St. James, is a former Episcopal priest who transferred his ecclesiastical allegiance to the Nigerian Anglican Church (CANA) under Bishop Martyn Minns while he was the associate rector at Truro Church in Truro, Virginia.

Since his arrival in Newport Beach, he has been deep in litigation with the diocese following the sudden departure of the Rev. Praveen Bunyan who was forced to resign from the parish over allegations of "inappropriate conduct" toward a female parishioner. Crocker said the congregation has no immediate plans to move out of its Newport Beach facility and will continue litigating for the property.

When he became the pastor of St. James, Crocker transferred his ecclesiastical allegiance to the Ugandan branch of North American Anglicanism and came under Bishop John Guernsey.

Warren has been extremely supportive of orthodox Anglicans since having come into touch with them through his AIDS work in Rwanda.

In a letter last week to Tim Morgan of Christianity Today, he wrote: "... [The Episcopal Church has] already considered me an adversary after partnering on projects with Kolini, Orumbi, and Nzimbi, and writing the TIME bio on Akinola.

"But since last summer... I've been on Gene Robinson and other's attack list for my position on gay marriage. .... [Our] brothers and sisters here at St. James in Newport Beach lost their California State Supreme Court case to keep their property.

"We stand in solidarity with them, and with all orthodox, evangelical Anglicans. I offer the campus of Saddleback Church to any Anglican congregation who need a place to meet, or if you want to plant a new congregation in south Orange County."

While St. James parish is not giving up its court case and is planning on further legal action through the Superior Court of California, Dr. Warren has repeated his offer to VOL that he welcomes church planters to his campus to plant churches.

Warren has thrown his full support behind the emerging North American Anglican province (ACNA).

Pastor Warren's strong support of the Proposition 8 campaign to overturn the California Supreme Court decision permitting gay marriage was met with bitter antagonism from lesbian Episcopal priest Susan Russell. He has been blasted by New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson for his lack of homosexual "inclusion". Robinson says Warren "does not worship the same Jesus I worship."

The Episcopal Bishop of Washington, Bishop John Chane has written saying he was "profoundly disappointed" that Pastor Warren was chosen to give the invocation at the Presidential Inauguration of Barack Obama.

In November 2005, Warren spoke to some 2,000 Episcopalians at a "Hope and a Future" Conference in Pittsburgh, organized by Bishop Robert Duncan. He called for Episcopal leaders to return to their biblical and doctrinal roots, but said Anglican priests should be prepared to forfeit their properties rather than stay in an apostate denomination..

[q_an_a]

As a member of the very conservtive Ft.Worth branch of the Anglican church, and who has VISITED Saddleback Chruch, I can tell you that while the main church is no place I would want to practice my faith, but they have so many places for a variety of worship services that smells and bells are very possible.

[AnAmericanMother]

It's the same old problem of "high" versus "low".

High church Piskies are "more Roman than Rome" and have no doctrinal problems with the Catholics, other than the supremacy of the Pope and the validity of Anglican Orders (and, as my husband said to our new rector, "We can deal.")

Evangelical or "low" Anglicans will have more of a problem because there are distinct theological differences as well as the ritual/vestment/smells & bells questions . . . .

[hiho hiho]

“High church Piskies are “more Roman than Rome” and have no doctrinal problems with the Catholics, other than the supremacy of the Pope and the validity of Anglican Orders”

AND, the crappy music!

[AnAmericanMother]

1. Crappy music ain't doctrinal -- although come to think of it some of those awful St. Loueey Jebby and OCP 'hymns' have some theological issues . . .

2. Our parish doesn't have crappy music, except for an occasional tacky hymn we throw at the old hippies to keep them quiet. Chant, Renaissance polyphony, Anglican anthems of the 16th and 19th cent mostly, and enough good modern music to keep us entertained.

Last night at choir practice we rehearsed Wood's "O Thou the Central Orb", a Christopher Tye anthem whose name escapes me, Britten's "O Come Let Us Sing", the anonymous "Rejoice in the Lord Alway" and that's just the English stuff! I told our choirmaster we really appreciated not having to leave the worthwhile stuff behind.

[MEGoody]

Is Rick Warren like a Wiccan now or what?

Uh. . .what?

[MEGoody]

Wouldn’t most Anglicans prefer to migrate to a Catholic Church since the Catholic Church is the closest to their liturgy?

Maybe I missed something, but the article sounded to me like Warren was offering the use of the building, since it appears those Anglican congregations that break with the liberal 'head' will lose their church building.

[bobjam]

Is it possible for one to be Anglican and Roman Catholic at the same time?

[kalee]

I think Warren was offering a place for displaced Anglican congregations to worship. The church spaces they offer would be a good fit for the happy clappy type Anglicans.

As a high church Anglican, I would not find their church (auditoriums) very conducive to worship.

[AnAmericanMother]

Is it possible for one to be Anglican and Roman Catholic at the same time?

Well, yes and no . . . depending on where you're standing.

The Anglicans (at least the "high" ones) have always maintained that they have just as valid Apostolic Succession as the Roman Rite Catholics. The Catholic Church disagrees . . . hence the Bull Apostolicae Curae.

Reader's Digest Condensed Version: when Edward VI was king, his radical Protestant advisers changed the words of the consecration of bishops (removing references to the sacraments and the Holy Ghost and also the intention to supernaturally ordain) and by 1662 when they changed them back, a century had passed and the succession was extinct.

Canterbury and York fired back with the response Saepius Officio, which basically is "Is Not Either!" Their position was that Anglican Orders, having originally stemmed from the Catholic Church, remained valid despite the change in wording.

And there the matter stood for almost a hundred years, with the Anglicans maintaining they were Catholic (if not Roman) and the Catholic Church saying, 'uh uh'. Some Anglicans maintain that their Apostolic succession actually stems from the ancient Celtic Church, but that's just wishful thinking, because there are no records of ordination.

There was talk in the 60s and 70s of revisiting Apostolicae Curae, presumably with the idea of coming up with some sort of conditional ordination . . . but the antics regarding ordination of women and homosexuals, etc. put the quietus to that.

[AnAmericanMother]

A lot of us High Churchers were Catholic all along, we just didn't fully recognize it until events in the Episcopal Church got us off the dime.

200 or so years of family tradition is a hard thing to shake.

[Celtman]

High church Piskies are "more Roman than Rome" and have no doctrinal problems with the Catholics, other than the supremacy of the Pope and the validity of Anglican Orders (and, as my husband said to our new rector, "We can deal.")

Have High Church Anglicans backslid to acceptance of the papal doctrine of the mass as a repeated propitiatory sacrifice?

[bobjam]

The Archbishops of Canterbury and York, responding to Apostolicae Curae in Saepis Officio, pointed out that the standard used to invalidate Anglican Orders would also invalidate Roman Orders as the early medieval ordination rights did not include the language Rome was looking for. Basically it was a “So are you” response.

That issue aside, my question comes down to this: in order to be Roman Catholic, one must profess belief in and acceptance of, among other things, Purgatory, Immaculate Conception, Papal Infallibility, Clerical Celibacy and Roman practices regarding the elevation of the Host and the adoration & invocation of Saints, Images and Relics. Anglican beliefs flat out reject Purgatory, the “Romish doctrines concerning images and relics” and any other doctrine that cannot be proved by the plain words of Scripture. My question therefore is, how does the “Anglo-Catholic” pick and choose between Roman doctrine and discipline and Anglican doctrine and discipline?

[AnAmericanMother]

You have to understand the nature of the Anglican church. It wasn't really founded as a church -- it was founded as a political solution. Catholics and Protestants had been merrily burning one another for years, depending on who had control over the matches at any given time, and Elizabeth was at her wits' end. She devised the Established Church so that you could be ALMOST a Catholic, or ALMOST a Dissenter, and avoid the heavy hand of government. So Anglicans have parishes that are 'more Roman than Rome' and others that are as spare and stern as a Wee Free meeting house.

The XXXIX are also in some ways a political compromise. Affirmation of the XXXIX was required for a lot of things (for example to matriculate at one of the Universities) but the two extreme ends of the Church simply blinked at them or explained them away. (Some things in there, like XVI and XXXIX, were just as difficult for certain Dissenters and Puritans to swallow as XXII and XXVIII for the Catholic wing).

So, the technical language of the XXXIX may reject quite a number of doctrines on both ends of the scale, but in practice a "high" parish is essentially Catholic if not ultra-Catholic (see, e.g., "Smoky Mary's" in NYC) and a "low" parish is plain white-bread Bible Protestant.

The first time I took my raised-Methodist husband to the somewhat notorious Our Saviour Virginia-Highlands, it was Easter Sunday and the long-time rector Fr. Pettway (may he rest in peace) preached on Purgatory. Which confused my husband somewhat.

But, of course, C.S. Lewis believed in Purgatory and the Real Presence. There's a lot of wiggle room in the Anglican Church and always has been.

P.S. . . . celibacy isn't a doctrine, it's a discipline. And I never in 47 years saw an Episcopal Church where the Host wasn't elevated at the Consecration.

[AnAmericanMother]

That's the protestant view of the Catholic Mass.

For us, the Mass stands outside of Time. It's the same sacrifice, re-presented in an unbloody fashion, as Christ Himself instituted (or pre-presented) at the Last Supper.

And High Anglicans believe just that.

[gogeo]

Good on him...much more than I expected of him.

[altura]

Well, sorry if the graciously offered space is not to your liking, but I consider this a friendly gesture to provide space for congregations that lose their church facilities.

It would probably be temporary and certainly better than the local coffee house where I understand some of the Fort Worth people are meeting. (those that didn’t go with Bishop Iker)