Orthodox Anglicans create new communion renouncing ties to archbishop of Canterbury

[RamiC]

I am not the only one who has noticed the small matter of Article VI and the Bible.

"This is a new dimension to GAFCON's general beef with the Communion as a body in Communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. The key words are "declare" and "reordered" and "one foundation". The Bible has never been the one foundation of the reformed Church of England and its subsequent growth and development into the Anglican Communion. The lack of reference to liturgy is striking. Can one be Anglican in any meaningful sense of that word if there is no reference to the role of authorised liturgies in the life of the Anglican church? "
Anglican Communion(s) both with strong convictions

Plus this, which finds the "one true Anglicans" thing, er, not very Anglican...

"Toronto University academic and co-author of The Anglican Communion at the Crossroads Professor Christopher Brittain said the statement did not align with Anglican ecclesiological tradition. “It’s not the Anglican way to have one archbishop make declarations about what other archbishops are going to do. This is a very strange thing,” Professor Brittain said."

and for those interested in the significance of Anglicans being somewhere between Catholic and Protestant, it also says

"Professor Lee said it was important to remember what was worth fighting for.
“The whole basis of the Church of England for Elizabeth the First was a church in which the Puritans and the Catholics could live side by side. And that’s what we’ve got to fight for."
GAFCON announcement ‘not the Anglican way’

 

[PloverWing]

No there is not freedom of worship, there are "no prayer" zones and any quoting of scripture that questions women bishops, abortion, and gay marriage falls under hate speech. Go to a Muslim area to share the gospel and you will be lynched by a mob or arrested by the police for disturbing the peace.

Some of this sounds like drawing the difficult distinction between practicing one's own faith and harassing other people. If the "no prayer" zones are near women's health clinics, then maybe it's prayer, but maybe it's harassing women who've come to see the doctor. Similarly with sharing the gospel in Muslim areas -- you want to talk to them about your faith, and they want to be left alone, and the government has to figure out how to protect both of you.

But outside of situations like that: Are you saying that, say, the posts you've made here on CF opposing women bishops and abortion and gay marriage would be classified as hate speech and get you arrested if you returned to the UK? Is that really how UK law works?

In practice GAFCON might be a way to keep some historic buildings as actual places of worship rather than places for a Sunday morning Wokefest

I'm guessing that by "Sunday morning Wokefest", you mean a worship service conducted according to the Book of Common Prayer, or something similar like Common Worship, with hymns and Scripture readings, but also welcoming gay couples and female clergy and maybe talking about our responsibility to care for the poor. Is that what you mean? If so, I'll note that such a place is, in fact, an actual place of worship, albeit one with which you disagree theologically.


Some of the rest of your points, like the UK's relationship with other nations or its policy towards Gaza, are more political than theological. I think of those government choices as being separate from religious choices, though perhaps influenced by ethical beliefs. I'm sympathetic if you're trying to argue that there shouldn't be an established church. If you're trying to go the other way, and say that the church should be more fully connected to the government than it is, then that's different from my American preferences, but it's not up to me.

Are you currently attending an Anglican parish now? (I know there are a few of them on the Continent.) Is it GAFCON-affiliated, or affiliated with the Anglican Communion, or something else? Are you able to worship there and read Scripture and so forth?

 

[mindlight]

Some of this sounds like drawing the difficult distinction between practicing one's own faith and harassing other people. If the "no prayer" zones are near women's health clinics, then maybe it's prayer, but maybe it's harassing women who've come to see the doctor. Similarly with sharing the gospel in Muslim areas -- you want to talk to them about your faith, and they want to be left alone, and the government has to figure out how to protect both of you.

But outside of situations like that: Are you saying that, say, the posts you've made here on CF opposing women bishops and abortion and gay marriage would be classified as hate speech and get you arrested if you returned to the UK? Is that really how UK law works?



I'm guessing that by "Sunday morning Wokefest", you mean a worship service conducted according to the Book of Common Prayer, or something similar like Common Worship, with hymns and Scripture readings, but also welcoming gay couples and female clergy and maybe talking about our responsibility to care for the poor. Is that what you mean? If so, I'll note that such a place is, in fact, an actual place of worship, albeit one with which you disagree theologically.


Some of the rest of your points, like the UK's relationship with other nations or its policy towards Gaza, are more political than theological. I think of those government choices as being separate from religious choices, though perhaps influenced by ethical beliefs. I'm sympathetic if you're trying to argue that there shouldn't be an established church. If you're trying to go the other way, and say that the church should be more fully connected to the government than it is, then that's different from my American preferences, but it's not up to me.

Are you currently attending an Anglican parish now? (I know there are a few of them on the Continent.) Is it GAFCON-affiliated, or affiliated with the Anglican Communion, or something else? Are you able to worship there and read Scripture and so forth?

Sharing the gospel is not harassment it's the good news that gets people saved. Though as in the gospels and Acts not every one wants to hear it and 11 out of the 12 apostles were martyred.. This is the kind of persecuted state that British culture is moving towards. I would say the same if I were living in the UK and use the courts to argue freedom of religion and religious expression. The creation of no go areas for Christian prayer and witness is a problem as are Islam only ghettos. Like dye in water, unChristian commitments like women bishops, abortion and same sex marriage blessings discolor the whole character of an Anglican service even though they may still practice a form of godliness.

GAFCON is a broad 'scripture first' umbrella that does not exclude liturgy when it is biblically supportable as is most Anglican liturgy and usage of creeds

Ideally we could go back to a Christian monarch in a Christian culture with a state church that preaches the gospel and reaches out to people in false religions and worldviews without persecuting them for their errors. Government Gaza policy is driven by an alliance of Muslims and antisemitic Corbyn style atheists in the Labour Party and is an example of the foolishness of worldly humanism. Revival is a key factor, but this might require more radical changes, all in God's good time.

 

[RamiC]

Some of this sounds like drawing the difficult distinction between practicing one's own faith and harassing other people. If the "no prayer" zones are near women's health clinics, then maybe it's prayer, but maybe it's harassing women who've come to see the doctor.

There is a problem with conflicting opinions such as this - UK drops street preacher’s hate speech charges after saying parts of Bible ‘no longer appropriate’ .

Also this...New law risks imposing unlimited fines for silent prayer near abortion clinics | CARE .

I am politically a liberal, and I have found some of these incidents a bit of a worry. I wish to live in a country with freedom of world view, because "Do to others as you would have them do to you." Luke 6-31 NIV, but if you bare in mind that there are very few fundamentalist Christians in the UK, and in Parliament, there are 66 members of the all party Christians group https://www.christiansinparliament.org.uk/about/, out 650 elected seats, we really do not have majority dominance to take for granted.

Similarly with sharing the gospel in Muslim areas -- you want to talk to them about your faith, and they want to be left alone, and the government has to figure out how to protect both of you.

Yes to this.

But outside of situations like that: Are you saying that, say, the posts you've made here on CF opposing women bishops and abortion and gay marriage would be classified as hate speech and get you arrested if you returned to the UK? Is that really how UK law works?

The police have been known to be over-enthusiastic with the application of certain laws intended to allow us to live and let live, but some of this is because we have not figured out how to set things up so we can do that, and some Christians might be finding life as a minority less comfortable than it was when we were not one.


I do wish that our churches were full again, and that is because I see suffering out there because so many people are oblivious to the truth of the gospel, but getting increasingly suspicious of those not like ourselves, and allowing the media or internet to stir up even more hostility probably is not the best way to improve things, imho.

 

[hedrick]

So what is the practical implication of this? The document demands that Anglicans break communion with the CoE. How many are likely to do so? I assume a couple of bishops making a declaration doesn't actually make that happen, without further actions.

 

[PloverWing]

Here's the latest I have, from the Episcopal News Service, posted October 23: Little evidence so far that Anglican leaders plan to join GAFCON in leaving Anglican Communion

According to this article:

A week later, one lingering question is how many – if any – Anglican primates and their provinces plan to follow through with GAFCON’s call to leave the Anglican Communion. The statement outlining that plan was signed by one person, Rwanda Archbishop Laurent Mbanda, who serves as chair of GAFCON’s primate council.

Of the GAFCON council’s other 12 members, eight represent provinces that are recognized as members of the existing Anglican Communion. One, the Church of Nigeria, shared the text of the letter online without additional comment. Episcopal News Service could find no evidence of any statements from the other seven provinces supporting the new GAFCON plan for disengagement outlined by Mbanda.

All efforts to reach leaders of those provinces were met with silence, except for one: The Province of the Anglican Church of Congo is still part of the Anglican Communion, one of its top bishops told ENS.

“The call to disengage from the Anglican Communion needs to be made collegially through debate,” Archbishop Zacharie Masimango Katanda, who served as Congo’s primate from 2016 to 2022, said by email in response to an ENS inquiry. “The Church of Congo will not follow that call and remains a full member of the Anglican Communion, and also a member of the Global South.”

So, for the moment, it looks like the statement calling for an exodus is the opinion of Archbishop Mbanda alone. A decision like this is not one to be made in a split second, so I assume conversations are happening within the leadership of the various national churches. If so, I appreciate that slowness and thoughtfulness.

 

[seeking.IAM]

So what is the practical implication of this? The document demands that Anglicans break communion with the CoE. How many are likely to do so?

Although regrettable I reckon, it holds no meaning for me. Godspeed to them as they be on their way. But, of course, I am one of those heretical Episcopalians, so there is that.

 

[RamiC]

So what is the practical implication of this? The document demands that Anglicans break communion with the CoE. How many are likely to do so? I assume a couple of bishops making a declaration doesn't actually make that happen, without further actions.

Only 8 provinces of the original Anglican Communion are also in GAFCON. There are 42 in total, and the rest of us are not going anywhere, because GAFCON do not tell us what to do, nor do they decide if we are Anglican or not.

The highest ranking Bishop in each of those 8 provinces would have to re-write their own founding documents, exclude all commitments and loyalty to the Archbishop of Canturbury and the original AC. This action would have to be in accordance with their own regional systems of decision making as well, so some might require a Synod meeting to decide, or have to leave their national church and join GAFCON as a region.

There is nothing whatsoever to make them do it, they either choose to or they do not.

"Of the GAFCON council’s other 12 members, eight represent provinces that are recognized as members of the existing Anglican Communion. One, the Church of Nigeria, shared the text of the letter online without additional comment. Episcopal News Service could find no evidence of any statements from the other seven provinces supporting the new GAFCON plan for disengagement outlined by Mbanda.

All efforts to reach leaders of those provinces were met with silence, except for one: The Province of the Anglican Church of Congo is still part of the Anglican Communion, one of its top bishops told ENS.

“The call to disengage from the Anglican Communion needs to be made collegially through debate,” Archbishop Zacharie Masimango Katanda, who served as Congo’s primate from 2016 to 2022, said by email in response to an ENS inquiry. “The Church of Congo will not follow that call and remains a full member of the Anglican Communion, and also a member of the Global South.”" Little evidence so far that Anglican leaders plan to join GAFCON in leaving Anglican Communion

 

[RamiC]

There is a Priest from the Church of Nigeria, who clearly does not want them to follow the GAFCON call to leave.

This part may help those who are confused about how we work as a church, because this - "The Anglican way has never been about uniformity, but unity in diversity. Canterbury is not Rome; we are a Communion of autonomous provinces, bound not by coercion but by communion — a fellowship of grace and shared heritage."

"It is no secret that GAFCON and the Church of England hold different convictions. Yet, name-calling and demonization do not advance the Gospel; they wound the Body of Christ. St James warns, “The tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things… with it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God.” (James 3:5, 9). Let us, therefore, discipline our tongues and sanctify our speech.

In truth, the Church of England rarely comments publicly on GAFCON; they maintain their lane with grace and respect. It would be a powerful witness if GAFCON did the same — focusing not on condemnation, but on Christ’s Great Commission. Let us compete, not in insults, but in faithfulness to Jesus.

Brothers and sisters, this is not the time to tear down but to build up; not the time to curse but to bless; not the time to divide, but to remind the world that Jesus is Lord, and in Him all things hold together (Colossians 1:17)."

The Revd Preb Dr Amatu Christian-Iwuagwu
Vicar, St Mark and St Stephen Bush Hill Park

An Open Letter on GAFCON’s Response to the Appointment of the Archbishop of Canterbury Designate, +Sarah Mullally