Support the Café
Search our site

Why ACNA is not yet our “ecumenical partner.”

Why ACNA is not yet our “ecumenical partner.”

Archbishop Justin Welby once described the Anglican Church in North America, which began as a new denomination by breaking away from the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church in Canada, as outside of the Anglican Communion. Instead he used the the phrase “ecumenical partner” to describe their relationship to the Anglican Communion.

All well and good, except that Welby used the “ecumenical partner” in the broadest possible terms and not in the technical way that describes how two denominations have specifically agreed to share ministry in one form or another. Bruce Myer’s describes how this works. While it is clear that ACNA would dearly love formal recognition from Canterbury, they are probably not ready to partner with the ACC and the Episcopal Church.

The Anglican Church of Canada has a number of ecumenical partners. One, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, has become a full communion partner with which we enjoy a full and mutual recognition of ministry and sacraments. With others, like the Roman Catholic Church and the United Church of Canada, we’re still on that journey—an admittedly longer one.

To be an ecumenical partner means to repent of our divisions and to understand them as a scandalous contradiction of the will of Christ. It means to fervently desire reconciliation with the churches from which we are separated, and to manifest this desire in prayer, dialogue and action.

To be an ecumenical partner also means recognizing that the other with whom you are seeking to reconcile demonstrates signs of the Holy Spirit at work, even if you are in disagreement about some significant issues.

It’s far from clear that ACNA yet manifests these qualities of an ecumenical partner. Its repentance is, according to its constitution, limited to “things done and left undone that have contributed to or tolerated the rise of false teaching” in the Anglican churches from which it has chosen to walk apart. It’s still in a legal fight over property with two dioceses in the United States. It seeks recognition as a new North American province of the Anglican Communion without desiring reconciliation with those already existing.

The pain of this separation is very fresh, and a personal reality for many people. Time may not heal all wounds, but the history of the ecumenical movement tells us that it’s often a necessary ingredient in reconciliation among churches.

It took Anglicans and Methodists 150 years before they could recognize their mutual heritage and discuss reunion. It took Roman Catholics and Lutherans 500 years to acknowledge they shared a common understanding of justification. It took Eastern and Oriental Orthodox theologians 1,500 years to see their consensus about the natures of Christ got lost in translation.

In each case it was distance from the polemics and politics (not to mention excommunications, anathemas and persecutions) of the original division that allowed the separated churches to see their differences in a new, more dispassionate light. So it shouldn’t surprise us if reconciliation between the Anglican Church in North America and the Anglican Church of Canada seems unthinkable less than a decade after our separation. But such reconciliation is possible—and imperative. It may just take some time.

And humility. Repentance walks both sides of the street. For any kind of reconciliation to begin, both the Anglican Church of Canada and the Anglican Church in North America will need to acknowledge that we have both in our own ways contributed to the creation and perpetuation of this sad division, one that compromises the credibility of our witness to the gospel and our fulfilment of God’s mission.

Posted by Andrew Gerns.

Dislike (0)
0 0 vote
Article Rating
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

2 Comments
Newest
Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Russell

Hello once again,
I tend to agree with Fr. Tim and may be progressive in behaviors but find more kindred spirit with the NCANA having attended one of its congregations in Falls Church, VA when living there in the 1990s. Today I attend a somewhat liberal ELCA church with my wife in Michigan. I also have become interested in Jewish roots of Christianity and am influenced by those who observe in some fashion or other the feasts recorded in Leviticus chapter 23. Reconciliation takes time as do relationships in total. I suppose iron sharpens iron, and my reasons for attending church now are quite different from that earlier time. I will say as did the hymn writer, God moves in mysterious ways, His wonders to perform. He plants His footsteps on the sea and rides upon the storm."
David Russell
Author of Winds of Change, Crossbooks 2012
Anthology submission, Dangerous Days Book 4 by Heather Schuldt 2014

Like (0)
Dislike (0)
Tim Sean Youmans

I'm progressive-ish. I say it that way because I'm always little flummoxed by the arrogance of many a liberal friends. I say to my fierce liberal friends in the Episcopal Church, "in order to be diverse, one must have some actual diversity. The kind that is awkward and difficult." Granted, it slows things down institutionally, and that can be frustrating, so I'm sympathetic. But our traditional siblings are, for the most part, coming from a narrative that was/is ours too. We both agree the church does evolve, where we disagree is on the what and degree. I'm not dismissing the real divides, just saying there has to be some kind of language we could find to recognize our shared narrative. If it stays at such a thing, then so be it. But they are partly us, we are partly them. It cannot be ignored. I was intrigued with ++Rowan's "track" idea. But understandably, he got tired of trying to convince folks that the discussion was worth-while. That's ++Justin's work now. And though I can see where it shouldn't be priority number one on our (TEC's) list of things to do, it should continue to be ours also.

Fr. Tim Sean+
Diocese of Oklahoma

Like (0)
Dislike (0)
Facebooktwitterrss
Support the Café
Past Posts
2020_001

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café