Anglican Church in North America Divides up Continent for Evangelism and 1,000 Church Plants

[firstmode]

Interesting article:

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
July 1, 2010

The Anglican Church in North America is dividing up the continent (US and Canada) in a bold attempt to present the true face of Anglicanism against what they see as a morally and spiritually bankrupt Episcopal Church.

They are doing so by creating new dioceses across North America in key urban areas with a plan to plant 1,000 new churches with a clear gospel mandate over the next five years.

The plan is the brainchild of (ACNA) Archbishop Robert Duncan who is also the Bishop of Pittsburgh. At a recent meeting of the Provincial Council of the Anglican Church in North America in Amesbury, Massachusetts, they unanimously recognized the Anglican Diocese of the South and the Diocese of the Great Lakes.

 

[firstmode]

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/images/drag_gospel.jpg

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Interesting article:

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
July 1, 2010

The Anglican Church in North America is dividing up the continent (US and Canada) in a bold attempt to present the true face of Anglicanism against what they see as a morally and spiritually bankrupt Episcopal Church.

They are doing so by creating new dioceses across North America in key urban areas with a plan to plant 1,000 new churches with a clear gospel mandate over the next five years.

The plan is the brainchild of (ACNA) Archbishop Robert Duncan who is also the Bishop of Pittsburgh. At a recent meeting of the Provincial Council of the Anglican Church in North America in Amesbury, Massachusetts, they unanimously recognized the Anglican Diocese of the South and the Diocese of the Great Lakes.

Before you know it, you’ll be back in the British Empire!

Just kidding.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Interesting article:

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
July 1, 2010

The Anglican Church in North America is dividing up the continent (US and Canada) in a bold attempt to present the true face of Anglicanism against what they see as a** morally and spiritually bankrupt Episcopal Church**.

Zing.

So does this mean there will now be Anglican Churches in North America? Or were there already Anglican Churches here? I was under the impression that the Anglican Church in America was the Episcopalian Church. Will these new Churches be referred to as something else? It will get confusing fast if they call them Episcopal.

God bless

 

[Rightlydivide]

Zing.

So does this mean there will now be Anglican Churches in North America? Or were there already Anglican Churches here? I was under the impression that the Anglican Church in America was the Episcopalian Church. Will these new Churches be referred to as something else? It will get confusing fast if they call them Episcopal.

God bless

There are mostly small Anglican churches all over North America. Of course they have about 8 to 10 very small denominations although I wonder if many of them are now part of the Anglican Church in North America. I do not know. They will assuredly NOT call them Episcopal.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

There are mostly small Anglican churches all over North America. Of course they have about 8 to 10 very small denominations although I wonder if many of them are now part of the Anglican Church in North America. I do not know. They will assuredly NOT call them Episcopal.

I understand that a lot of it is not the Anglican Church’s fault but I think this name confusion will hinder their new Evangelism endeavor. Hopefully they can still reach people with Christ despite it.

God bless

 

[Contarini]

Zing.

So does this mean there will now be Anglican Churches in North America? Or were there already Anglican Churches here? I was under the impression that the Anglican Church in America was the Episcopalian Church. Will these new Churches be referred to as something else? It will get confusing fast if they call them Episcopal.

The Episcopal Church has been, and more or less still is, the American branch of the Anglican Communion, yes. However, the Communion is finally moving to relegate us to a “consultative” status owing to the persistence of our leaders in consecrating as bishops persons living in same-sex relationships (i.e., we did it once in 2003, and after a lot of controversy and many warnings we did it again this year). That won’t mean that we aren’t Anglicans, of course, but it does put a question-mark over our claim to be the official, mainstream Anglican presence in the United States. (Note: the Anglican Church of Canada is in more or less the same boat.)

In 1979, traditional Episcopalians left the Episcopal church to form what they originally intended to call the “Anglican Church in North America.” These folks claimed (and still claim) to be “Continuing Anglicans,” in continuity with what we had been before we changed the Prayer Book and started ordaining women. Unfortunately, this original “ACNA” broke up into a lot of different jurisdictions. (Talk to the poster “GKC” for more information on all of this.)

Since the consecration of +Gene Robinson in 2003, a number of Episcopal (and Canadian Anglican) parishes and even a few whole dioceses have been distancing themselves from the Episcopal Church and aligning themselves with more conservative parts of the Anglican Communion, particularly in Africa. In the past couple years, a broad coalition of conservative groups has come together as a new denomination under the name “Anglican Church in North America.” That’s what the OP refers to. The ACNA would love to be recognized as the North American branch of the Anglican Communion, but if that happens it’s going to be a long way down the road, I think.

There’s a lot of confusion about this. Many people ask me “are you Anglican or Episcopalian,” which is the wrong way to put the question. There are now three broad groups of Anglicans on this continent: the Episcopal Church, the ACNA, and the “Continuing Anglicans.” (There are groups that don’t fall into any of these categories neatly.)

My own diocese is a “Communion partner” diocese–that is to say, the bishop has made it clear that he stands with the Anglican Communion, but he does not want to leave the Episcopal Church.

Edwin

 

[4Squarebaby]

I understand that a lot of it is not the Anglican Church’s fault but I think this name confusion will hinder their new Evangelism endeavor. Hopefully they can still reach people with Christ despite it.

God bless

How so? It should help draw in disaffected Episcopals who don’t want to join another mainline denomination and for those without a preexisting denominational preference the name does not matter much at all. In the end they would draw those looking for that style of church. Only a few would hold the ethnic designator of “Anglo” or any other ethnic designator against a planted church, but they are likely looking for their own ethnic or intentionally multi-ethnic church in the first place.

 

[GKC]

The Episcopal Church has been, and more or less still is, the American branch of the Anglican Communion, yes. However, the Communion is finally moving to relegate us to a “consultative” status owing to the persistence of our leaders in consecrating as bishops persons living in same-sex relationships (i.e., we did it once in 2003, and after a lot of controversy and many warnings we did it again this year). That won’t mean that we aren’t Anglicans, of course, but it does put a question-mark over our claim to be the official, mainstream Anglican presence in the United States. (Note: the Anglican Church of Canada is in more or less the same boat.)

In 1979, traditional Episcopalians left the Episcopal church to form what they originally intended to call the “Anglican Church in North America.” These folks claimed (and still claim) to be “Continuing Anglicans,” in continuity with what we had been before we changed the Prayer Book and started ordaining women. Unfortunately, this original “ACNA” broke up into a lot of different jurisdictions. (Talk to the poster “GKC” for more information on all of this.)

Since the consecration of +Gene Robinson in 2003, a number of Episcopal (and Canadian Anglican) parishes and even a few whole dioceses have been distancing themselves from the Episcopal Church and aligning themselves with more conservative parts of the Anglican Communion, particularly in Africa. In the past couple years, a broad coalition of conservative groups has come together as a new denomination under the name “Anglican Church in North America.” That’s what the OP refers to. The ACNA would love to be recognized as the North American branch of the Anglican Communion, but if that happens it’s going to be a long way down the road, I think.

There’s a lot of confusion about this. Many people ask me “are you Anglican or Episcopalian,” which is the wrong way to put the question. There are now three broad groups of Anglicans on this continent: the Episcopal Church, the ACNA, and the “Continuing Anglicans.” (There are groups that don’t fall into any of these categories neatly.)

My own diocese is a “Communion partner” diocese–that is to say, the bishop has made it clear that he stands with the Anglican Communion, but he does not want to leave the Episcopal Church.

Edwin

Contarini tells it like it is.

GKC

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

How so? It should help draw in disaffected Episcopals who don’t want to join another mainline denomination and for those without a preexisting denominational preference the name does not matter much at all. In the end they would draw those looking for that style of church. Only a few would hold the ethnic designator of “Anglo” or any other ethnic designator against a planted church, but they are likely looking for their own ethnic or intentionally multi-ethnic church in the first place.

I was specifically referring to those who needed to be “reached with Christ”. I don’t agree with Episcopalians and some issues but I certainly don’t deny that they are Christians.

I guess this brings up a different discussion; who is this new Evangelism aimed at? Unbelievers or frustrated Episcopalians?

God bless you

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

. There are now three broad groups of Anglicans on this continent: the Episcopal Church, the ACNA, and the “Continuing Anglicans.” (There are groups that don’t fall into any of these categories neatly.)

Where do our lovable Anglo-Catholics such as GKC fall in here Edwin? I have been studying Anglo-Catholicism for some time now. I am fascinated by it. BTW thanks for the informative post.

God bless

 

[GKC]

Where do our lovable Anglo-Catholics such as GKC fall in here Edwin? I have been studying Anglo-Catholicism for some time now. I am fascinated by it. BTW thanks for the informative post.

God bless

I’m an Anglo-Catholic who lives in the fractured (and mostly Anglo-Catholic) world of Continuing Anglicans. Anglo-Catholics are found all over the place.

GKC, Anglicanus-Catholicus, lovable

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

I’m an Anglo-Catholic who lives in the fractured (and mostly Anglo-Catholic) world of Continuing Anglicans. Anglo-Catholics are found all over the place.

GKC, lovable

Thanks GKC. I was wondering if the Anglo-Catholics were among the believers that Edwin said, " don’t fall into any of these categories neatly". They are (Anglo-Catholics), in a way, to Anglicanism what Anglicanism is to Christianity; they just don’t fall into “categories” neatly

What are your thoughts on this new Evangelism effort by the Anglican Church?

God bless

 

[GKC]

Thanks GKC. I was wondering if the Anglo-Catholics were among the believers that Edwin said, " don’t fall into any of these categories neatly". They are (Anglo-Catholics), in a way, to Anglicanism what Anglicanism is to Christianity; they just don’t fall into “categories” neatly

What are your thoughts on this new Evangelism effort by the Anglican Church?

God bless

I would let Edwin speak here, but I suspect that he was not thinking of Anglo-Catholics in that phrase. Anglo-Catholics are a part of the spectrum of Anglican thought and belief, not a form of organized jurisdiction (though you will find a high percentage of Continuing Anglicans who are Anglo-Catholic). They are everywhere.

Overall, I wish the new ACNA success. But I fear it has institutionalized a contradiction at its heart that bodes ill for it, long term: the acceptance, so far, of ordaining women. Hence, it is not for me.

The best one could say for the ACNA is that it could become what the Episcopal Church was, circa 1950. The worse you can say is that it is, in fact, about what the Episcopal Church was, circa 1976.

GKC

 

[Contarini]

Thanks GKC. I was wondering if the Anglo-Catholics were among the believers that Edwin said, " don’t fall into any of these categories neatly". They are (Anglo-Catholics), in a way, to Anglicanism what Anglicanism is to Christianity;

No, I was thinking of groups such as the Reformed Episcopal Church, the Anglican Orthodox Church, and the Charismatic Episcopal Church. The former two predate Continuing Anglicanism, but the REC has made some efforts to attach itself to the more low-church end of the Continuing Spectrum. The CEC, which is not a break-off group from Episcopalianism but a new denomination formed by liturgical charismatics, more or less fell apart a few years ago and at least some former CEC parishes are now part of the ACNA.

Anglo-Catholicism is a theological/liturgical tradition, not an ecclesiastical organization. You can find Anglo-Catholics in all three groupings. The most hardline can be found among the Continuers, and that’s the wing of Anglicanism within which Anglo-Catholicism is the most powerful (though there are low-church Continuers as well). There are Anglo-Catholics in the ACNA, but the ACNA seems to be dominated by evangelical Anglicans. And there are a lot of self-proclaimed Anglo-Catholics in the Episcopal Church, although many of them nowadays are “Affirming Catholics”–that is to say, they come from the Anglo-Catholic tradition but take more liberal positions on social issues than traditional Anglo-Catholics would accept. My own diocese is historically Anglo-Catholic but has become much more evangelical in recent years, so I’m told.

Edwin

 

[CARV]

No, I was thinking of groups such as the Reformed Episcopal Church, the Anglican Orthodox Church, and the Charismatic Episcopal Church. The former two predate Continuing Anglicanism, but the REC has made some efforts to attach itself to the more low-church end of the Continuing Spectrum. The CEC, which is not a break-off group from Episcopalianism but a new denomination formed by liturgical charismatics, more or less fell apart a few years ago and at least some former CEC parishes are now part of the ACNA.

Anglo-Catholicism is a theological/liturgical tradition, not an ecclesiastical organization. You can find Anglo-Catholics in all three groupings. The most hardline can be found among the Continuers, and that’s the wing of Anglicanism within which Anglo-Catholicism is the most powerful (though there are low-church Continuers as well). There are Anglo-Catholics in the ACNA, but the ACNA seems to be dominated by evangelical Anglicans. And there are a lot of self-proclaimed Anglo-Catholics in the Episcopal Church, although many of them nowadays are “Affirming Catholics”–that is to say, they come from the Anglo-Catholic tradition but take more liberal positions on social issues than traditional Anglo-Catholics would accept. My own diocese is historically Anglo-Catholic but has become much more evangelical in recent years, so I’m told.

Edwin

The Reformed Episcopal Church is now part of the ACNA. Interesting really. They broke off from the Episcopal Church because they were too High Church and too catholic. Now they are willing to yoke up with catholics. Can’t imagine it’ll be long before the ACNA breaks up. Uniting under the banner of disliking modernism isn’t likely to keep catholics and evangelicals unified for long. But I guess that’s why most of the Anglo-catholics are steering clear of this body anyway. So it looks like we’ll have three overall flavors of Anglicanism in the states. High Church (loosely confederated Continnuers), Low Church (ACNA), and broad Church (TEC). I wonder if this is a preview of things to come for worldwide Anglicanism.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Semantically-speaking both Episcopalians and ACNA Anglicans are all Anglicans, however, most folks just use Episcopalian and Anglican as categories to differentiate the two streams of Anglicanism in the United States. To put it bluntly, the Anglicans I know have no desire whatsoever to be associated with the Episcopal Church. They not only find the theology and beliefs appauling on so many levels but they also want to make an identity for themselves. To ask someone if they’re Anglican or Episcopalian would make sense to me despite the obvious fact that both belong to the worldwide larger Anglican body. After that initial question most Anglicans follow through and say, “I’m a continuing Anglican” or “I’m an REC Anglican with ACNA” and all the acronyms follow suit.

Anglicanism is such a wide, messy, motley tapestry of varieties of Anglican thinking now that elaboration and aconyms are inevitable in any discussion!

There’s a lot of confusion about this. Many people ask me “are you Anglican or Episcopalian,” which is the wrong way to put the question. There are now three broad groups of Anglicans on this continent: the Episcopal Church, the ACNA, and the “Continuing Anglicans.” (There are groups that don’t fall into any of these categories neatly.)

 

[Contarini]

The Reformed Episcopal Church is now part of the ACNA.

OK–I think I remember reading that now, but I had forgotten. Hard to keep track. . . .

Interesting really. They broke off from the Episcopal Church because they were too High Church and too catholic. Now they are willing to yoke up with catholics.

The ACNA seems to be predominantly evangelical, though.

Can’t imagine it’ll be long before the ACNA breaks up. Uniting under the banner of disliking modernism isn’t likely to keep catholics and evangelicals unified for long. But I guess that’s why most of the Anglo-catholics are steering clear of this body anyway. So it looks like we’ll have three overall flavors of Anglicanism in the states. High Church (loosely confederated Continnuers), Low Church (ACNA), and broad Church (TEC). I wonder if this is a preview of things to come for worldwide Anglicanism.

Maybe. If it is, then as far as I’m concerned Anglicanism is a failure.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Semantically-speaking both Episcopalians and ACNA Anglicans are all Anglicans, however, most folks just use Episcopalian and Anglican as categories to differentiate the two streams of Anglicanism in the United States.

Yes, I know that non-Episcopal Anglicans like to do this. But this is a form of semantic imperialism.

To put it bluntly, the Anglicans I know have no desire whatsoever to be associated with the Episcopal Church.

I know. But it is unjust of them to appropriate the term “Anglican” exclusively.

Edwin

 

[rr1213]

No, I was thinking of groups such as the Reformed Episcopal Church, the Anglican Orthodox Church, and the Charismatic Episcopal Church.

I think that REC associated itself as a component member of the ACNA (although it still retains its own jurisdictional existence as well…which, btw, will turn out to be one of the biggest challenges that ACNA will face, i.e., pre-existing jurisdictional bodies which will prevent a truly unified structure and which will facilitate future disassociations when problems arise).

Edit: Oh, I see that my point about REC has already been made. That’s what I get for posting before reading the remainder of the thread. Sorry.