An Immodest (and Impossible) Proposal for Fixing the Episcopal Church

Exactly like the early Methodists.

 

I agree, but if there are no clergy to be had, this does not stop the movement. Retired clergy are probably the best bet.

 

I'm just saying at some point it will be necessary, not that it's a top priority. We can always train our own over time. Clergy will come if there are people. Also, I'm concerned because I do intend to seek ordination at some point in the future myself, so it is a personal concern of mine.

 

i think a lay movement is the best method.

 

Yes, that's the fundamental strategy. Lay people coming and revitalizing the Church from the bottom up.

 

so how would the chapel network work? Groups of likeminded conservative episcopalians meeting for prayer? What else?

 

An independent chapel could hold daily prayer services, Sunday services of Morning Prayer (Litany - or not) and Ante-Communion. A designated "preacher" could read sermons or authorized homilies or preach his own sermons (if properly trained -- this could also be authorized by the bishop or not). It could really be identical to a parish church in all functions except sacramental.

 

An ideal way to perhaps do this would be to grow such an independent chapel to around an ASA of 65 or so (which is a "standard" Episcopal size) and then petition the bishop to be admitted as a mission church. The lay preacher of this chapel could apply for ordination in the diocese and serve as vicar and rector subsequently. Trust me, if there is money and ASA in one of these things, even the most liberal bishop will listen.

 

Every generation complains that The World is Going to Hell in a Handbasket™. Our generation is no more entitled to say so than any other. I see no more "succumbing to error" and "losing witness" than I suspect those of previous generations would have seen. Some things in our society and our church are better than before. When I was a child there was legal segregation in the states of the old Confederacy. Now, that has been done away with, I hope never to return. Our present Book of Common Prayer, that of 1979, is theologically and liturgically richer than the previous one, that of 1928, though I remain fond of the latter since it was the Book of my childhood, and the former, for all its virtues, has some clunky parts. Not everything gets better; not everything gets worse.

Since I am an Episcopalian, I have many complaints, and am dead-certain that Everything Would Be Better if I were Running Things.™ But I'm not Running Things any more than any other layman with no connections. And the church hasn't collapsed.

 

I'm not saying things are universally worse. I'm not saying we're the first generation of the Church that has experienced error. Clearly, as Anglicans, we know our Church was formed during struggle with Rome over doctrinal issues that are arguably as fundamental as the ones we are arguing over today.

Also, some of the issues the liberals have brought up have forced orthodox Christians to address issues that were previously not very well examined. I don't think we'll be able to dismiss the struggles that homosexuals have anymore, for instance. That doesn't mean we must capitulate our long-standing doctrines and succumb to the modernist worldview.

However, some of us believe that the Holy Scriptures are the supreme rule of faith and practice, and that it makes certain demands of us that the present leadership of The Episcopal Church seems bent on opposing. Many of us believe that these errors strike at the very core of what it means to be a Christian. To be honest, I do not believe that the progressive and liberal leadership of TEC and I practice the same religion. Whatever else I might say about the errors of past leadership of The Episcopal Church, I do believe that, generally speaking, we practice(d) the same religion. As someone with High Church sympathies, however, I believe that we should stay in the Church for as long as they let us practice our religion, and testify for the Truths found in Scripture.

 

Much food for thought here. What do we need to know about excommunication, and the likelihood of it being done upon the laity these days?

 

I would doubt a layman would be excommunicated for merely advocating conservative opinions, barring unreasonable behavior in support of them. I'm sure a majority of TEC parishes still have conservative laymen in them. I mean, 45% of the American public still believes homosexuality is a sin, so it's reasonable to assume that TEC still has plenty of laymen in it with that opinion, just cast out of leadership opportunities and generally not a part of liberal parish's life. The problem is becoming a member if your views are discovered, and then getting into a leadership post once you are.

 

Excommunication is hardly not practiced in TEC (considering it is a matter of church discipline). Clergy would need to worry about Title IV disciplinary action, usually resulting in deposition. The best bet is retired clergy or an independent clergyman who could petition to join the diocese at a later date.

 

It sounds like you're saying it is practiced. Is it really common for conservative laymen to be excommunicated merely for expressing orthodox opinions? I'm assuming a person who disturbs the peace in so doing would be, but that's another issue.

I do assume it would be much harder to be or become a clergymen if you're an orthodox person, especially in the most progressive dioceses. Especially if you're active in opposition to the progressive and liberal agendas.

In both cases, this is something that would have to be below the radar. It would be entirely imprudent for a group of laymen to show up at a liberal parish and start making a fuss.

 

I'm saying that it is not practiced. I've never heard of anyone, clergy or laity, being excommunicated from the Protestant Episcopal Church.

I don't know if it is more difficult to or not, really. I've often heard people say this but it is usually the folks who leave who say this so I really don't trust their judgement.

It really needs to be extra-parochial. These folks can register at their local parish church, to receive communion, but the majority of their religious practice would take place extra-parochially.

 

Sorry, I was confused by the word "not" thrown in there.

I could imagine that it might require an unusual dosing of patience to deal with heterodox clergy on a regular basis, especially if you're an outspoken conservative. As the Scriptures already teach us with respect to presbyters and deacons, the leaders of the movement would have to show the fruits of the Holy Spirit to a very high degree.

 

That is encouraging. Why have no such extra-parochial chapels been started? How do we account for REC's inexplicable schism in the balmy, comparatively, days of the nineteenth century?

 

It certainly is encouraging. I don't know why there aren't orthodox chapels setup, myself. I would guess because things were too heated back when there was still a very large conservative element in TEC for people to calmly think of solutions. Also, there was less motivation because there was almost always a conservative TEC parish nearby, and you might have even lived in one of the really conservative dioceses where most of the parishes were relatively orthodox. Now, in my area there are only a couple of conservative parishes and they all have women as senior clergy (something I'd prefer to avoid).

As far the REC, that schism was small and based on the fact that the PECUSA was heading in a decidedly Anglo-Catholic direction. The REC was incredibly low church in orientation and only with an influx of liturgical high church Presbyterians has it changed considerably towards a more High Church perspective. Things are different now in both denominations, and one good thing the liberalism of TEC gives conservatives is the opportunity to reexamine what it means to be an orthodox Anglican going forward and maybe even recover much of the Elizabethan Settlement theology that has been lost since over the past couple of centuries.

 

Some of you guys should try and start independent chapels. It really needs to be tested and tried out to work out the kinks.

 

I'm really thinking about it. Obviously, there are personal matters to take into consideration, and I'm not sure if there's much demand for it where I am. I'm in Northern Virginia, where the vast majority of the Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic parishes left and haven't looked back. The nearest seemingly orthodox parishes that do not have female presbyters are in Maryland, and they seem smaller and older.

Also, in some of my research, I've looked into how other mainline orthodox have organized themselves. For instance, the Presbyterians have the Presbyterian Lay Committee which publishes the Layman. For Episcopalians, there is (was seems more appropriate) the American Anglican Council, but they now seem more focused on supporting the ACNA. The amount of activity seems minimal even on that front. Is there any strong present groups committed to reforming TEC, committed to strengthening her orthodox witness, and committed to not being schismatic save in the (unstated) event that the unorthodox prohibit us from practicing our religion? I think we need a more regular resource hub more committed to staying within TEC and strengthening her if this is to gain steam.

These are all just ideas I have bouncing around my head here, and most of them seem more like pipe dreams than effective plans of action, but I really do feel like something can, or at least should, be tried.