Activism Change

U.S. Anglicans

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Greetings, Paul – Insofar as the AMiA professes to remain part of the current Anglican Communion, then I don’t think that one argue that the organization represents the formation of another continuing church – but the establishment of an organization for Anglicans in limbo.  I look upon the AMiA as representative of a growing number of disaffected Angicans – many of whom would be better off in one of the established continuing churches. Long-time ties are difficult to break, however, and I expect that those who are part of the AMiA are just reluctant to cut their ties with Canterbury. I have noticed, however, that the leadership of the AMiA appears to be strongly evangelical.  Many – probably most – of the continuing churches are more traditionally Anglo-Catholic and less evangelical than the AMiA. As for the Reformed Episcopal Church – I’ll have to admit that I don’t know much about it, except that it appears to be too far on the Protestant side of Anglianism for my comfort.  What do you know about the REC?

Bruce, I visited with them for about a year. They were once strongly Evangelical, but under the leadership of Bishops Riches, Sutton, Finch and Grote, are moving in a strongly catholic direction. Their seminary in Philadelphia is all but defunct due to waning interest, and the extremely low (Calvinistic) North-East Churches exist mainly on endowments. The seminary in Shreveport (Cranmer Theological House) is almost entirely bankrolled by a retired ECUSA priest who pretty much micro-manages much of the ethos of the "new and improved" REC. There is nothing now anything distinctly "reformed" or "evangelical" or "low" about this denomination. Despite very strong language in their constitutions preventing them from going in an Anglo-Catholic direction, that’s the direction they are headed. They are now indistinguishable from many of the other high-church continuing church initiatives (they just entered into fellowship with the APA, a very high Church province. This would have been unthinkable 50 years ago.). My guess is that they are positing themselves to catch as many rotten fruit that continues to fall out of the withering tree of ECUSA. r, paul

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was also amased to find two Epsicopal churches in tiny Alpine (pop ca 10,000) one of which was EMC. Do you know much about EMC, I kind of think they tend to the Protestant side because I met one of the members and had a brief conversation, (she was a very angry person)This woman claimed they never used incense and did got "go overboard on the ‘ritualistic’ things". My parish, St. Francis (Austin, Texas), is affiliated with the EMC. WE tend to be more on the Catholic side of the faith in terms of churchmanship, etc. Ritual is VERY important in this parish, so I am sure that the lady you met in Alpine would feel very uncomfortable attending mass with us.  (The holy water font by the door would likely elicit an immediate conniption fit.) Having lived in west Texas a good many years, I’ll wager that the lady you spoke with grew up in a low-church tradition – or in what has been called "Morning Prayer country" in Texas.  Typically, many of the parishes in west Texas are/were low-church, tending very strongly to the more

protestant side Do you remeber Bishop Quarterman? He actually forbade the use of Tabernacles/aumbrys, and Mass vestments in the entire diocese. This was before my time, but I have had vivid descriptions given me bu several Clerics in NW Texas. Where in West Texas did you live? I am currently in Odessa. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of Anglicanism.  Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans.  I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups,  available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

Do you remeber Bishop Quarterman? He actually forbade the use of Tabernacles/aumbrys, and Mass vestments in the entire diocese. This was before my time, but I have had vivid descriptions given me bu several Clerics in NW Texas.

No – Quarterman doesn’t sound familiar.  I assume he’s gone now? Where in West Texas did you live? I am currently in Odessa.

I lived in Midland for five years (1981 – 1986).  My career as a consultant (hydrogeologist) has taken me back many, many, many times for a good many months.  My in-laws live in Midland.  Next time I’m back for the weekend, I’ll look forward to attending mass at St. Paul’s Anglican Church (Midland). St. Paul’s is affiliated with the Anglican Church in America. Regards – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of Anglicanism.  Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans.  I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups,  available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was also amased to find two Epsicopal churches in tiny Alpine (pop ca 10,000) one of which was EMC. Do you know much about EMC, I kind of think they tend to the Protestant side because I met one of the members and had a brief conversation, (she was a very angry person)This woman claimed they never used incense and did got "go overboard on the ‘ritualistic’ things". My parish, St. Francis (Austin, Texas), is affiliated with the EMC. WE tend to be more on the Catholic side of the faith in terms of churchmanship, etc. Ritual is VERY important in this parish, so I am sure that the lady you met in Alpine would feel very uncomfortable attending mass with us.  (The holy water font by the door would likely elicit an immediate conniption fit.) Having lived in west Texas a good many years, I’ll wager that the lady you spoke with grew up in a low-church tradition – or in what has been called "Morning Prayer country" in Texas.  Typically, many of the parishes in west Texas are/were low-church,

This is probably true, in a general way. The churches I have attended in Big Spring (St Mary the Virgin with icons, statuary, an Our Lady of Walsingham shrine) Midland, (both) Odessa,(both) Snyder,(now closed after an unfortunate experiment with the Lutherans) Lubbock,(St Christophers), and El Paso (St. Albans), were definetely not low.  But when visiting other cities, I do tend to seek out the highest church in town. What really amazes me is how conservatism has united both the "spikes" and the morning prayer, (no priest, just a minister) traditions.  tending very strongly to the more protestant side – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of Anglicanism.  Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans.  I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups,  available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

What does AMiA stand for? All my search engine came up with is medically related. Joseph – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S.  Hmm…) Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Bruce; Hal, We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Even though they started with a pretty low view of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S.  Hmm…) Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church.

There are parrishes of the EMC in Ft. Davis and Alpine Texas. I discovered this during a recent week-end vacation. I was also amased to find two Epsicopal churches in tiny Alpine (pop ca 10,000) one of which was EMC. Do you know much about EMC, I kind of think they tend to the Protestant side because I met one of the members and had a brief conversation, (she was a very angry person)This woman claimed they never used incense and did got "go overboard on the ‘ritualistic’ things". – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups,  available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

"AMiA" = Anglican Mission in America. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What does AMiA stand for? All my search engine came up with is medically related. Joseph I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S.  Hmm…) Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Bruce; Hal, We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Even though they started with a pretty low view of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

I was also amased to find two Epsicopal churches in tiny Alpine (pop ca 10,000) one of which was EMC. Do you know much about EMC, I kind of think they tend to the Protestant side because I met one of the members and had a brief conversation, (she was a very angry person)This woman claimed they never used incense and did got "go overboard on the ‘ritualistic’ things".

My parish, St. Francis (Austin, Texas), is affiliated with the EMC.  WE tend to be more on the Catholic side of the faith in terms of churchmanship, etc. Ritual is VERY important in this parish, so I am sure that the lady you met in Alpine would feel very uncomfortable attending mass with us.  (The holy water font by the door would likely elicit an immediate conniption fit.) Having lived in west Texas a good many years, I’ll wager that the lady you spoke with grew up in a low-church tradition – or in what has been called "Morning Prayer country" in Texas.  Typically, many of the parishes in west Texas are/were low-church, tending very strongly to the more protestant side of Anglicanism.  Catholicism – and anything thing smacks of Catholicism – is highly suspect among a good many west Texans.  I’m sure that I would be as uncomfortable in her parish as she would in mine. Regards – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups,  available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S.  Hmm…)

Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city. Regards – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups,  available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I’ve been away. Regards, Hal

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S.  Hmm…) Hal, There are several "continuing Anglican Churches" in the United States. Among them are: 1) The Anglican Province of Christ the King; 2) The Anglican Church in America; 3) The Anglican-Catholic Church; 4) The Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite); and 5) The Episcopal Missionary Church. All are "authentically" Anglican – having maintained Apostolic succession in the manner required of all provinces of the Anglican Communion, but none are in communion with the ECUSA or with Canterbury.  I left the ECUSA last year – after General Convention.  I thought of returning to the Catholic Church, but I was fortunate to find a very traditional and rapidly growing Anglo-Catholic parish (St. Francis Episcopal Church) affiliated with the Episcopal Missionary Church in Austin, Texas.  It is far more Anglican in churchmanship and substance than the ECUSA parishes in the city.

Bruce; Hal, We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too. Even though they started with a pretty low view of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

We probably ought now to add AMiA to that list (the two Bishops who were consecrated in Singaore recently). Also I think that the Reformed Episcopal Church goes on the list too.

Greetings, Paul – Insofar as the AMiA professes to remain part of the current Anglican Communion, then I don’t think that one argue that the organization represents the formation of another continuing church – but the establishment of an organization for Anglicans in limbo.  I look upon the AMiA as representative of a growing number of disaffected Angicans – many of whom would be better off in one of the established continuing churches. Long-time ties are difficult to break, however, and I expect that those who are part of the AMiA are just reluctant to cut their ties with Canterbury. I have noticed, however, that the leadership of the AMiA appears to be strongly evangelical.  Many – probably most – of the continuing churches are more traditionally Anglo-Catholic and less evangelical than the AMiA. As for the Reformed Episcopal Church – I’ll have to admit that I don’t know much about it, except that it appears to be too far on the Protestant side of Anglianism for my comfort.  What do you know about the REC? Regards  Even though they started with a pretty low view – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of the Episcopate, their orders were then not disputed by their Anglo Catholic antagonists within PECUSA – and as a matter of public record, their initial intention to become a sort of ecumenical umbrella for protestantism never materialized, so their orders were never compromised for such a project (similar to what ECUSA has done in its own recent ecumenical initiative by suspending the ordinal). r, paul

Response:

I believe there are several schismatic groups that have moved away from the Episcopal Church to style themselves as Anglicans. (This is an interesting concept since the Episcopal Church is, or started as, the Anglican Church in the U.S.  Hmm…) Am I correct that the primary reason for the formation of the new Anglicanism(s) was the desire to stay with the 1928 prayer book (a commendable goal, I might venture) and can I assume that the Apostolic succession has been properly continued? Are any of the new-Anglican congregations recognized by the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, or by anybody, and on what theological basis are any of them not recognized? And, are any learned publications, regarding these groups,  available on the market? I must appear singularly uninformed. I

Filed under: Social Activism

Related Posts

• Let's hear it for our children
• What does "love one another" mean?
• "Family Values" -- Clinton Continues to Miss Opportunity
• RATM using their publicity to its fullest potential
• Christian Metal is an oxymoron.
• Non-Catholic curious about Latin Liturgy
• ---> Dance sXe? <---
• Happy Earth Day!
• Noam Chomsky on NATO Expansion
• The worth of my voice