Possibilities for the Episcopal Church
At the General Convention of the Episcopal Church there was discussion about changing the name of the Church and that it no longer be referred to as the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA). The convention organizers dragged out sixteen flags and stated that the Episcopal Church (TEC) is represented in all those countries. Very multi-national don’t you think?
TEC has elected a woman as its Presiding Bishop and it looks like they will not comply with the Windsor Report, putting them at odds with most of the rest of Anglicanism.
Ecumenically, TEC has decided, at its convention, to undertake Eucharistic sharing with the United Methodist Church. They already have such an arrangement with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and based on the Bonn Agreement with all the Churches of the Utrecht Union. At the convention TEC will be signing an updated “Concordat of Full Communion.” with the Iglesia Filipina Independiente (Aglipayan).
In my estimation the stage is set for TEC to break from the Anglican Communion. They have created a sort of union of the left and liberal. They have also set the stage to become the money and the power behind a ‘new’ union (see we’re doing a new thing).
I find it very interesting that Bishop Joris Vercammen, the Old Catholic Archbishop of Utrecht, presided at the convention’s June 19 Eucharist, ostensibly in recognition of the 75th anniversary of the Bonn Agreement. Utrecht has already substantially adopted the ‘ordination’ of women and is well on the way to blessings of same sex unions.
In October 2005 when Utrecht met with the Abp. of Canterbury (caution PDF Document) there was much discussion on the issue of overlapping jurisdictions. There are Anglican Bishops in locales under the jurisdiction of a Utrecht Bishop. Since Utrecht and the Anglican Church are in full communion there should only be one Bishop per jurisdiction.
Utrecht used a made up, far less serious excuse to eject the PNCC from the Union (not that the PNCC wanted to remain in union with Utrecht based on Utrecht’s liberal positions).
Could TEC become the new ‘Rome for the liberals’? Could Utrecht align with the TEC? Could Utrecht disavow their relationship with Anglicanism in general and join with TEC, the IFI (who have been in on and off discussions with Utrecht for years), the ELCA and the UMC in a sort of liberal, anything goes movement?
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Each of the parties to that kind of Union would be a dying entity. Each is defective in its beliefs and practices. It would be no more than a set of bodies where the ‘I’ll believe what I want’ crowd can hang out (all the while providing a good income and nice living conditions for its clergy).
I thank God everyday for leading me out of the mess that is ECUSA, TEC, etc and bringing me to the true spritiuality that is the PNCC. It is truly sad to see all of those major denominations heading in the direction they are.
But ecclesiologically the PNCC makes no sense – all of your substantial theology (except a couple of revisions), saints and devotions come from another church. Now if you were honest about that and didn’t claim to be in schism on principle (formally rejecting the Pope) but only because of circumstances then I’d understand. But this ‘independence’ seems a pose.
(If you’re so independent why did you copy the Novus Ordo? The Orthodox didn’t.)
Readers of my blog know what I think will happen.
Without state coercion the Elizabethan settlement doesn’t work and the four Anglicanisms – Catholic, Central, Low and Broad – will naturally fly apart.
I admire Rowan Williams’ integrity – he’s liberal but putting that aside to try to do what he thinks is his job, serving the Global South as well as the liberal North.
TEC does seem to be getting ready to leave/be kicked out of the Anglican Communion, flipping off that Communion as they go by affirmative-action electing Katharine Jeffert Schorie as presiding bishop, and is now posing as a world church unto itself (of course it’s really only the US and little American missionary plants).
It will eventually merge with the other white upper-middle-class liberal Protestant churches, disappearing as a distinct group (they never were big in America, only influential because of social class), and continue to shrink as that class becomes less and less interested in religion.
Utrecht is nothing but a Middle European version of that, a rump sect.
As for ‘Rome of the liberals’, it won’t happen though TEC may fancy itself that. Most RCs who quit are honest and go completely secular – they don’t become Episcopalians and keep playing church (and besides they don’t belong there culturally – externally conservative high culture gives them hives).
I only meant ‘Rome of the liberals’ as a reference to a central point of ‘unity’ for the liberals. Something the U.S. centered nature of the effort can support through sheer economic power. I did not mean to imply that it would be a home for disaffected Roman Catholics. You are right – they wouldn’t fit in.
The post is really my conjecture as to what could happen. As TEC forms these intercommunion relationships (and by the way may end up offering the Eucharist even to the non-baptized), I think they set the stage for a kind of union. The way others, such as the IFI and Utrecht, are jumping on-board is indicative of their weakness and their need for a leader they can follow (since it isn’t Jesus anymore).
i would have no problem with the ELCA, UMC, TEC, UCC, UU, joining forces to become a mega liberal church. Let them do it! Let them find how quickly all the meaning in their lives is lost because they no longer know or understand who they are worshiping! Let them worship Father, Mother, moon, star, cat, dog, etc. It will only help to strenghten the unity amongst the orthodox churches.
Deacon,
Did you happen to catch the sermon given by the new PB of ECUSA. She spoke of Mother Jesus several times! Interesting stuff. You can read it all at Anglican Mainstream.