Anyone have opinions about the AMiA? I have just recently been accepted into their Associate Membership called the Fellowship of St. Aidan and St. Columba. I am excited about it, as being an "independent Catholic" bishop can be isolating at times. I grew up Southern Baptist and have a varied denominational background, including being confirmed in TEC in the late 80's. I love Anglicanism; my beliefs have much in common with this branch of Christendom. I look forward to getting to know all of you better.
I'll reply for now by giving some links: http://www.independentsacramentalmovement.org/ http://www.concentric.net/~Cosmas/indcathjuris.htm http://www.independentmovement.us/index.php?title=Independent_Movement_Database https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Catholic_churches Continuing Anglicanism is considered by many to be a part of the independent catholic movement, but many also do not consider this to be the case.
From that website, As a Nicene Christian, I am very troubled by this inclusion of Gnostic heretics into any communion. Is this the full fruit of ecumenism?
These groups are not representative of the movement; they are on the fringe. Of course one could say the fringe is right in the midst of TEC.
You can find just about anything you want in ACNA. It is an undisciplined hodgepodge of liturgies, theologies and traditions, all of which claim to be authentically Anglican, or as they might hope... more authentic than TEC. The problem however is not that they are pluriform but rather that they think it is their greatest virtue. In any case, being a gnostic is no disqualification.
I like the ACNA okay, but there is no church anywhere near me. The AMiA church that I'm looking to attend is 80 miles; that's a very long way to drive, but the nearest ACNA church is considerably farther. Also, the ACNA believes this, and I don't: "We confess the godly historic Episcopate as an inherent part of the apostolic faith and practice, and therefore as integral to the fullness and unity of the Body of Christ."
I went to an AMiA church Sunday, about a 90-minute drive. It was a very moving worship service, and I found the people to be loving, welcoming, genuine, and down-to-earth. I plan to return, hopefully on a regular basis.
This AMIA? http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2012/09/pawleys-island-sc-amias-chuck-murphy.html As far as I can see, what is left of AMIA is a vary small group of churches, some with no pastors. They are schismatics who have schismed more than once. As I understand, the African primates have washed their hands of AMIA, although they still will cooperate on social issues. Their "archbishop" is just one of the 7 Anglican bishops in South Carolina.
Nice unbiased post there. Considering the TEC apostasy, who is the schismatic? Robert Duncan of the ACNA has been unfair in his statements about AMiA. The AMiA has for more than a decade planted churches and stood for orthodox Anglicanism.
Of course not. But Mr. Barton was talking about the ACNA, not AMiA. What he said, though, is not true of either group. I don't understand the hostility toward these Communions which are trying to stand for orthodoxy.
For the record, I did NOT say that ACNA or AMIA were Gnostic. I was referring to the website that someone linked, which placed Gnosticism as a branch of Christianity, which of course it is not. My main complaint with ACNA is that it is pluriform in theology; it doesn't know or care what the singular Truth is so long as it is preached with enthusiasm and sincerity. However, as far as Gnosticm goes, it is a fact that having priestesses and out-of-body religious experiences are associated. ACNA makes quite a point of not opposing women's ordination and promoting charismaticism. One can draw one's own conclusions.
Well I do believe that statement, the Apostolic Succession goes back all the way to St.Paul and St.Peter
I am not a supporter of ACNA, nor do I support the fact that GAFCON asked ACNA to form and become an Anglican province in the Americas. However, I would not call ACNA just another "Communion". ACNA has formed with the express purpose of supplanting TEC in the US. The primates representing 1/2 - 2/3 of the Anglican Communion supports ACNA. Yes, I, and others, do have a problem with idea of dozens of Anglican "communions" forming. Eventually either TEC or ACNA will become irrelevant. Alternatively, the Anglican Communion will become all but irrelevant. HOWEVER, I will note that there is huge difference between a hundreds of individual "communions" and a worldwide Anglican Communion, whichever of TEC or ACNA is eventually part of the Communion. Now, I do acknowledge that I live in country where almost 1/2 of the people go to Church regularly, much more in my part of the country. The "theological" struggles within churches reflect our personal social and political biases. We must all understand that this does not mean that either side is a "better" Christian. As you have noted we have powerful brothers and sisters in Pentecostal and Methodist churches; I would add Presbyterian and Lutheran. If we accept those on the other side of the political spectrum as brothers and sisters in Christ, we can get about the business of witnessing to the lost, and serving the disadvantaged. ["Celtic1, post: 7394, member: 1090"] I don't understand the hostility toward these Communions which are trying to stand for orthodoxy.[/quote]
Yes, it does seem this is one of their goals--after my six-month trial with ACNA. I became frustrated at the negative comments toward TEC made from the pulpit. I also became frustrated at the lack of organization, lack of resources, and clergy who were poorly trained in Anglicanism. I returned to TEC.