Thursday, December 22, 2011

SOUTHERN CONE ADOPTS ANGLICAN COVENANT - WHERE IS ACNA?

Mark Harris at Preludium puts 1 + 1 together and has a question. The Anglican Communion Office announced that the Province of the Southern Cone adopted the Anglican Covenant. Surprise, surprise!

The news release at the ACO website states:
In response to these novel practices the Southern Cone had held churches in North America under its wing for some time while the Anglican Church of North America (ACNA) was formed. However, the Province has not maintained jurisdiction over any local churches there for over a year. As a result, all so called ‘border crossings’ by any provincial members ceased (as of October, 2010) even though the Southern Cone still remains in impaired communion with US and Canadian Provinces. It is hoped that the Covenant can now provide Communion stability.
Mark Harris further:
In ACNA land the Archbishop, himself a deposed bishop in The Episcopal Church was given residence in the PSC... that was in September 2008.

The Living Church stated, "Immediately after his deposition from the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church, Bishop Duncan was welcomed into the House of Bishops of the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone, according to Presiding Bishop Gregory Venables." But those days are over.
Mark is moved to ask:
If Duncan is not in the PSC, where is he?
A very good question. Apparently, that ACNA was no longer under the jurisdiction of the Southern Cone for over a year was a rather well-kept secret until now. Is no one expected to note that ACNA is now free-floating? Unless, of course, there is more that we don't know, and another province is holding the ACNA 'fledgling Province' under its wing.

From Archbishop Robert Duncan of ACNA:
Recent events within the Anglican Mission in the Americas have challenged us all. This letter is a brief report to you all about those events and about our efforts to find a path forward. The present reality is brokenness. The vision, however, that governs our fledgling Province remains unchanged: a Biblical, missionary and united Anglicanism in North America.
So. Brokenness. One thing leads to another. If you read on, you will see that some sort of negotiations will take place between the AMiA bishops who departed from the Church of Rwanda and ACNA which will include discussion of the complication of ACNA's relstionships with the bishops, clergy, and congregations who remain under the jurisdiction of the Church in Rwanda.
The resignation of nine Anglican Mission bishops, including the Bishop Chairman, from the House of Bishops of Rwanda, changed relationships with Rwanda, with fellow bishops and with the Anglican Church in North America. The resigned bishops lost their status in our College of Bishops as a result of their resignation from Rwanda. The Anglican Mission also lost its status as a Ministry Partner, since that status had been predicated on AMiA’s relationship with Rwanda. In addition, confusion and hurt has been created in Rwanda and in North America, and there is much serious work ahead of us.
Are you still with me? I'm not certain that I am still with me. My brain is much smaller than Mark's. The story gets more and more complicated with unexpected (at least to me) twists and turns. I am greatly indebted to Mark Harris and his brilliant thought processes as he made the connections for his post, and I hope I have not done him a disservice by my shameless picking of his brain for my post.

My question: Will this fledgling fly?

10 comments:

  1. The situation is now very much like that of the splinter groups of twenty years who had bishops who were not part of any member church of the Communion. The only real differences are that the ACNA is larger than any of the earlier groups and has been given some recognition by a few member churches. And there are still a number of separate groups claiming some sort of Anglican identity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Daniel, at least some of the recently formed splinter groups think, or once thought, that it was important to be under the jurisdiction of a province in the Anglican Communion. Perhaps that idea is falling by the wayside.

    Of course, any group can call itself Anglican. There are a goodly number of splinter groups who call themselves Catholic.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That a reactionary, Low-country South Carolina group is unwilling to conform to the governance of an African province, is less than astonishing, the only surprise being that they signed on to such an agreement in the first place. Necessity can make for strange bedfellows.

    wv "trist"

    ReplyDelete
  4. Who would ever have expected...? ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just to clarify, the ACNA as a whole has never been under the jurisdiction of the Southern Cone. The four dioceses whose convention delegates voted to withdraw from TEC (Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, Quincy, and San Joaquin) did, in fact, place themselves under the jurisdiction of the Southern Cone on a "temporary and emergency basis." However, other churches in the ACNA were originally under the jurisdiction of other AC provinces, such as Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, and Rwanda (whose relationship with the AMiA is in a state of flux right now). After the ACNA was formed, many of its constituent churches have continued to maintain their ties to their original provinces. These ties would not be affected by any change in relationship between the Southern Cone and the North American churches under its jurisdiction.

    It's also my understanding (although I could certainly be mistaken) that even though parishes and dioceses in the US are no longer under the Southern Cone's jurisdiction, those clergy members for whom having at least a tenuous connection with Canterbury is important are still able to claim dual canonical residency in the ACNA and in the Southern Cone.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Paul Powers, it's about as clear as mud, but not due to a faulty explanation on your part. What a byzantine system of arrangements! And that motley crew wishes to become THE American province in the Anglican Communion? I want to see their explanation of who they are to whichever group of people decides on accepting new churches into the communion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh dear, the switchboard is going crazy...which of the multitudes of clergy who operate under licenses from the Southern Cone are still poaching/preaching on TEC properties? May we have a headcount on who´s who and what´s what? Who is the caller at this very square dance? Jack Iker, Frank Lyons or the ABC? Where oh where has the lost Southern Cone diocese of Racife in Brazil gone?

    So many tricky men, so little time to switch partners...next up the CANA Virginia Reel/real?

    ReplyDelete
  8. May we have a headcount on who´s who and what´s what?

    Len, enter the bizarro world, where explanations are neither necessary, nor even possible.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Adding the ACNA to the Anglican Communion would require approval from the Standing Commitee of the AC and of 2/3 of the primates. The votes aren't there. It will be a long time, if ever, before they will be.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Paul, thanks for the added information. I think I knew at one time which groups would need to approve, if not the actual voting requirements, but I'd forgotten.

    So then, the fledgling is likely to remain a fledgling for quite a long time.

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous commenters, please sign a name, any name, to distinguish one anonymous commenter from another. Thank you.