Trying to understand the Continuing churches

Once ACNA shapes up, as she has admirably done over the last some years, I do believe it will become much more of a compelling place even for anglo catholics many of whom already are at home within ACNA

 

I worry that the Church which in some way I understand to be the life boat, should need life boats, and that those lifeboats themselves should need life boats, and those lifeboats themselves should need lifeboats . . .

There is a sense in which that tends to move towards more and more fracture which is not the intent or the purpose, but rather antithetical to it.

At the same time I share some of these concerns, as I am intensely aware that the institution determined to be corporate and bureaucratic increasing feels like a place of employment rather than a safe lodging for the pilgrim.

 

Maybe you could help me out on this? I have never heard of a denomination that went from progressive to traditionalist. Do you know of any such examples? I have heard of many PCA folks about how depressed they are fighting the same battles they thought had been left behind in bodies like the PCUSA. It seems that once the progressives are allowed to infect the bureaucracies and leadership of a denomination, that denomination can effectively be written off forever. The hope that some have for the TEC is that it will collapse to such an extent that traditionalists can come back in and resurrect it from the grave. Have there been any examples of such a thing occurring to a liberal denomination?

 

Probably not. I do know that Thomas Arnold, Headmaster of Rugby, wrote in around 1832 'the church as it now stands, no human power can save'. Each of us needs to be true to the light that we have received, and we, each of us, need to be sure that we do not treat the Church (this tatty old maiden aunt we love to call mother) as a political reality.

without discussion there is only ideological totalitarianism

 

I know that this is an older post, but I just wanted to add a little bit of balance to this thread. Now, I am not dismissing any of the claims that some have made regarding congregations that are not racially diverse and may even lean heavily lean toward right-wing extremism. However, I just want to make sure that anyone reading this thread does not get the mistaken impression that Continuing Anglicanism is just a bunch of racist right-wingers (not that anyone necessary said or implied this).

I, like probably most of you, can only base my experiences on a very small sample size, so take my experiences with this in mind. I have visited a total of three Continuing Anglican parishes (ACC, APA, and HCC-AR) and all three have been extremely welcoming, racially diverse, and not politically extremist one way or the other. My own jurisdiction (HCC-AR) is led by a bishop who was born in India and the church has bishops in India and South America. My own parish is a growing community representative of diverse ethnicities, cultures, and age ranges. In fact, this past Sunday, about twelve people were received into the church (including two young families). That being said, we are a very tiny jurisdiction and I pray earnestly for greater unity across the Anglican continuum.

I agree that the splintering of Continuing Anglicanism is a scandal, yet like others have mentioned, there is reason to hope for the future. The bishop of the HCC-AR (a very solidly Anglican Catholic jurisdiction) has participated in ordinations across Continuing Anglican lines (including the REC and UECNA), even though these bodies trend toward, at least historically, a lower churchmanship and a more protestant-leaning theology.

Perhaps, rather than viewing strengthening ties with Old Catholics and the Polish National Catholic Church with suspicion, we should be grateful for greater Christian unity? I have no doubt about the validity of male Anglican orders, but is the involvement of an Old Catholic or PNCC bishop in Anglican ordination really a big deal? I'm not overly concerned about what Rome thinks of our orders, but if greater unity could be achieved with the involvement of independent Catholic bishops, why not? Furthermore, what is wrong with strengthening our ties with the Old Catholics and the PNCC? Is this not what our Lord and Savior would want for his church?

Furthermore, in my experience, Anglican Catholics are entirely Anglican (perhaps with the exception of so-called "Anglo-Papalists"). If you define English or Celtic Christianity as only truly existing in the British isles in the era of the English Reformation, then I guess you could rule out Anglo-Catholics being truly Anglican. However, it you believe that English Catholicism (or Celtic Christianity) existed in the British isles before being dominated by the Roman papacy and Latin Rite Catholicism, then perhaps Anglo-Catholics are quite Anglican. I may not completely agree with my protestant-leaning Anglican brethren on every issue, but there is much more that unites us than divides us and I have never thought of them as being less Anglican.

If the original poster still frequents these forums, I hope this information helps.