I agree with it.
To be sure, I care very much that the visible body be rent asunder yet again. I care very much that the ongoing Anglican Communion be both unified on essentials of the Catholic faith and also tolerant on non-essentials. Moreover, I rankle at the assertion made by some on the Left-wing of the Communion that The Episcopal Church should focus on being a 'small protestant denomination' (as Marilyn McCord Adams has said) with a niche for social-theological-progressivism. I still see The Episcopal Church as being called to being comprehensive and inclusive of the traditional array of Anglican identities (catholic, protestant, broad, liberal, etc.)
Nonetheless, I am totally unfazed in my own location by the presence of some half-dozen non-Episcopal churches which identify as Anglican. Indeed, I'm friends with clergy and laity in several of them. One parish is Anglican Mission in America, another is affiliated with Common Cause, another dating to an older continuing Anglican body.
On this blog I have certainly said some hard words against the leaders of the global schism. But, I'm as resigned to a new future as they are, and I'm more than willing to move on and not worry about it too much. Indeed, on the ground, despite a few hiccups in the early days, we are finding that Raleigh's Episcopal and various Anglican congregations have plenty of room and plenty of souls to go around. The work is plenty and the laborers are few. Our parish has grown more in the past five years than the previous five. And with supposedly more 'competition.' Again, if our congregations preach the Gospel, say our prayers, worship the Lord, include all into God's saving embrace, and are active in discipleship and mission - we've got nothing to fear.
Clearly the separation is coming, and yes there will be other Anglican entities around. Whether or not they are in the Anglican Communion may or may not matter.
I believe that we need to drop the fight, settle the property disputes where they may be settled, stop wasting funds on lawyers, and put the proceeds and savings directly into the five marks of mission. Instead of lawsuits, let's proclaim the Good News of the Kingdom, teach, baptise and nurture new believers, respond to human need in loving service, transform unjust structures in society, and safeguard God's green earth.
3 comments:
As a lawyer I fully support the idea of settling real estate disputes, rather than litigating them, wherever possible (although I take issue with the remark about "wasting funds on lawyers": money paid to lawyers is never "wasted"!).
As for the two provinces solution, that may be where we're headed, and if we are, I'm sure that vibrant parishes like St. Michael's will still flourish. I do worry though about how such an eventuality will affect our many struggling parishes. They already must compete against other denominations, as well as against the attractions of the secular world; how will they manage if they must also compete against other Anglican churches that are equally recognized as members of the Anglican Communion?
I'm still trying to get my mind around the idea of two Provinces, equally recognized as members of the Anglican Communion, but not in communion with each other (which is what I assume the new arrangement would look like). If it were two Provinces that, while perhaps not working together all the time, recognized each other as Church - then fine, I could perhaps support that. But if it's two Provinces ignoring each other as they live side by side - well, that doesn't seem like a healthy development at all.
I should have added that I don't believe both will be part of the A.C. Rather, I suspect there will be two communions altogether.
Post a Comment