The Anglican Re-Alignment--the Article

(We field many questions about the Anglican Communion. These questions come both from those who have a long history with the topic and those with no church background at all. This article is aimed at providing some basic information on the current state of our global family.)

In the period of optimism following the Second World War, the Bishop of London, J.W.C. Wand, edited a volume on the state of the Anglican Communion. It paints a picture of a world-wide church of 34 million adherents that seemed increasingly diverse in its national and ethnic expression. But it is easy to read between the lines—that the Anglican Communion was still largely dominated by those in the West who shaped the global Church through their formidable influence.

Today the landscape is vastly different. The subsequent decades have witnessed tremendous growth in parts of the Anglican Communion and a rise in influence of the non-western regions of the church. Today the Communion numbers over 75 million and is experiencing a major re-alignment that is bringing the rapidly expanding regions—Africa, Asia and Latin America—into a prominence that will shape the church for many years to come. Understanding this shift is vital to appreciating what God is doing in the world and in our own setting.

At one point, reportedly, the sun never set on the British Empire. If that’s true, then it was never sunset in the Anglican Communion, either, for their stories are necessarily linked. Wherever England established itself around the globe a local Church of England was planted. These churches, over time, took root and grew, slowly taking on regional characteristics and qualities, until today there are 38 separate member church bodies that comprise the Anglican Communion. And while they still look to Canterbury as a kind of older sibling, they are autonomous, and exercise independence while recognizing the importance of mutual relationship and accountability.

Over the last thirty years, especially, the part of the Anglican Communion in the developing world—Africa, Asia and Latin America, referred to as the Global South—has been expanding exponentially through mission and evangelism. Many new churches are being planted and additional leaders are increasing the ranks of parish clergy and bishops. It is not unusual, for instance, for a confirmation service in Africa to include hundreds of those being confirmed into the faith at one time, in one local setting. Christianity, in general, is rapidly expanding in these regions, as we have learned from Philip Jenkins (The Next Christendom). Jenkins makes the strong case that the center of gravity for Christianity is shifting to the Global South, “Christianity is going to continue to be the world's most numerous religion, at least until the end of the twenty-first century. Christianity is growing most quickly in the areas that are probably going to be the great centers of population, if not centers of power, in the new century. So if we're looking for the religion that is going to affect the largest number of lives in the twenty-first century, it is almost certainly going to be Christianity, which gets me to another issue: why people in the West can't see that.” By 2050, Jenkins’ numbers suggest that the face of Christianity will be that of an African woman. In sad contrast, the churches in the West—U.S., Canada, England, etc.—have seen a precipitous decline in membership as they have abandoned biblical principles of belief and behaviour, leadership and mission. The Episcopal Church USA, for example, has relinquished over a third of its membership over the last three decades, and there are now more Muslims gathering for prayer in England than those who regularly worship in the established Church.

This significant shift was signaled at the Lambeth Conference in 1998 that gathered together all the bishops of the Anglican Communion. Largely through the ascendant influence of the global south bishops, a clear call was issued for biblical authority and fidelity. The final statement, while it touched on issues such as human sexuality, was at its heart a plea for the Communion to affirm the vital and authoritative role of the scriptures—a hallmark of historic Anglicanism. Bishops from the West, desiring to be seen as sensitive to their impoverished and oppressed brethren from the Global South, acquiesced. However, upon their return home, many of them, captivated by revisionist theologies and embarrassed by the evangelical zeal and fervor of their brethren, labeled the statement ‘non-binding’.

This divide has continued and increased, culminating last fall in the Episcopal Church USA’s (ECUSA) installment, in New Hampshire, of the first openly gay bishop in the history of the church, and the adoption of the Diocese of New Westminster’s (Canada) official policy to bless same-sex unions. These actions have led to a crisis within the Communion, and are fueling the engine of a major re-alignment, one that will be shaped increasingly by the leaders of the Global South.

Following Gene Robinson’s consecration in New Hampshire ten Anglican provinces, representing a majority of all Anglicans worldwide, declared a state of impaired or broken communion with ECUSA. In another move, an alliance of five Anglican Primates, or top leaders, offered a temporary safe haven for those in Canada who could not accept the unprecedented innovations in the Diocese of New Westminster. In these and other actions the Global South, generally, has begun to flex its muscles in support of historic orthodoxy on the global stage of the Anglican Church. And there is surely more to come.

At last month’s meeting in Nairobi, the Council of Anglican Provinces in Africa (CAPA), with additional southern leaders such as Yong Ping Chung of South East Asia, declared they would no longer tolerate the West’s repudiation of biblical and orthodox Christian faith. Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola, head of the Communion’s largest province of 17.5 million members, has warned the Episcopal Church, in particular. “They are trying to redefine Christianity and rewrite Scripture, and we have no right to do that. The historic faith of the church is what we stand by, and there is no going back."

These developments have certainly gained the attention of the media. Online journalist David Virtue has more than a full-time job keeping up with the ever-changing landscape of global Anglicanism. He claims we are in a unique moment, “Yes, a re-alignment is taking place and it is scaring the Anglican Communion Office in London, and no one knows for sure where Rowan Williams (Archbishop of Canterbury) will land….. We are headed for some sort of schism though it is vague what that will look like. Two communions are possible, but other compromises could include a type of federation.” Another journalist in touch with the international scene is George Conger, who free-lances for the Church of England Newspaper and other publications. Conger also senses the importance of this new day, “What is driving it is the power of the Holy Spirit reforming and renewing his church. The spirit is acting through organizations and individuals who are stepping out from the pack and standing firm for the foundational teachings of Scripture. But in a carnal sense ... fear is also driving the re-alignment. The establishment can no longer pretend that all is well.”

While many are fearful of schism, the role of the Global South in standing for truth and fidelity is a hopeful sign for the Anglican Communion. The energy and vitality of leaders from Africa, Asia and South America can help to shape a global reformation of the Christian faith that can revitalize and strengthen the church in the west. Groups such as the Anglican Mission in America, as direct expressions of the Global South, have fixed their energies on mission and evangelism, hallmarks of non-western Anglicans.

“We value our connection to the Anglican family. There is great strength in our leaders in Rwanda and South East Asia, and they have cleared the way for us to focus on the heart of the gospel—of reaching people with the good news of Jesus Christ,” reflects the Rt. Rev. Charles Murphy, Chairman of the AMiA. “As this re-alignment unfolds, our call is to be focused on the mission, while being rooted in our historic family of Anglicanism. It’s an option that, thanks to the Global South’s leadership, is available once again.”

Well-written description of the schism in the ECUSA, in the Anglican Communion.

Thanks for letting me know about this. It will help to explain to non-Episcopalians what we are currently going through.

Thanks.

Good Monday morning....an excellent article, worthy of a thougthful read....Two questions, if I might..

First, are the terms "impaired" and/or "broken" communion interchangeable?, or does one signify a greater degree or separation..

Second..withi ECUSA, what are the provisions for removing a presiding bishop?..seems to me that there are several dioceses where the PB is out of touch with the majority of the members....maybe the way to attack this is not to leave ECUSA, but to throw the bums out..

First - "impaired" is less catastrophic than "broken", implying a merely damaged relationship. Many of the orthodox have continued to use this term, possibly with a hope of some sort of reconciliation. My personal take is that this is whistling past the graveyard. Unless the orthodox are willing to give up their beliefs, there will be no reconciliation.

Second - since ECUSA is a "top down" organization, there is no provision for removing a bish other than an ecclesiastical trial. And THAT has been a paper tiger ever since "bishop" Spong was NOT removed for what amounted to atheism.

If the orthodox made a strategic error, it was to allow the revisionist/heretics to get control of the administration of the church. But I'm not sure they could have done anything about it.

Thanks muchly for the info...re "removing" a bishop..would there be any procedure or precedent for the majority of parishes to issue the equivalent of a religious "vote of no confidence" in the bishop? IOW, shame him into leaving?

That might work if the liberal apostates HAD any shame, but they're just typical of the breed. The money and property is far more important to them than any issue of Faith.

A couple of additional points, if I might:

1. The heretics control the majority of ecusa dioceses. Because of this, there is no way to remove frank the heretic, since his fellow heretics all love him.

2. As far as ecclesiastical trials go, I expect to see the heretics initiate such proceedings against the conservative bishops, once frank & co realize that only the conservative bishops are recognized by the rest of the Anglican Communion. The only reason there have been no such trials so far has been due to the fact that in doing so the heretics would be acknowledging what is already occurring...and that's the last thing they want to do.

I was talking about the possibility of removing a particular bishop..not FRank... There are some veru liberal dioceses, but I believe ( let me rephrase..FEEL) thta there are a number of dioceses where the bishop is way outof touch with the vast majority of the parishoners...the poor sould who have "aquiesced" over the years as the church moved farther left..but now, they're energized and they see what's happening..I think it's possible.. In VA, the bishop who's at war with his two or three largest churches..I don't think the majority of the diocese would approve what he doing, and threatening to do...

a bishop has to be tried by a court of other bishops - guess who gets to appoint the members of the court? (hint: it is NOT the diocese). Oh and a 'vote of no confidence' would have no binding force, but IMNSHO would probably result in the bishop removing the priests and firing the vestries.

what I meant was that it would result in the heretical bishops removing the rectors and firing the vestries of the conservative parishes who organized the vote of no confidence. It would be a bad thing from the perspective that it would result in that many fewer orthodox Anglican parishes remaining in ecusa, since you and I both know that such actions would result in the parishioners walking out as well. It's not time for that yet.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.