CANTERBURY ANGLICANISM, GAFCON ANGLICANISM,
AND
SCRANTON ANGLICANISM
The Reverend Canon Robert Bader
September 24, 2018
In light of the upcoming dialogue between
the Anglican Joint Synods jurisdictions and the Union of Scranton (Polish
National Catholic Church and Nordic Catholic Church), as well as any future
dialogue with other Anglicans, I offer this brief memo on our current situation
and how we might present ourselves to others in ecumenical dialogue.
It is my contention that there are
essentially three types of Anglicanism in the world today. I have chosen, for
the purposes of this memo, to describe them as Canterbury Anglicanism, GAFCON Anglicanism,
and Scranton Anglicanism. As a priest in what we call the Continuing Anglican
movement, it may seem strange that I have not used that title to describe any
of the types of Anglicanism. But this omission is a deliberate choice to
provoke thought.
What I am calling Canterbury Anglicanism
needs little explanation. It is the prevailing ideology in the Church of
England, the Episcopal Church, other First World Anglican provinces, and some
Third World Anglican provinces. Two of its most glaring innovations are the
admission of women to Holy Orders and the blessing of same-sex unions. Many of
its adherents maintain aspects of Evangelicalism or Catholicism, with the
glaring exceptions noted. But it is fundamentally open to revisionism on any issue
of faith and morals. I would contend that this form of Anglicanism is an heir
of the Latitudinarian tradition in Anglican history and can truthfully be
called “Continuing Anglicanism” or at least “continuing a long held position
within Anglicanism.”
GAFCON Anglicanism is the ideology
associated with the Global Anglican Future Conference, the 2008 meeting of
bishops from mostly Third World Anglican provinces, which was instrumental in
the creation of the currently named Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). Its
adherents oppose current innovations in sexual morality. And many of its
adherents oppose the ordination of women, although many do not. The GAFCON movement
considers itself to be obedient to Holy Scripture and the 39 Articles of
Religion. It does not consider itself to be bound by catholic consent, whether
found in the first millennium consensus or in the current teaching of the major
branches of the Eastern and Western churches. While most adherents of GAFCON Anglicanism
are found in evangelical Anglican provinces (including ACNA), there are also
adherents of this ideology in more liberal provinces of the Anglican Communion
and even within the Continuing Church jurisdictions. I would contend that this
form of Anglicanism is an heir of the Evangelical tradition in Anglican history
and can truthfully be called “Continuing Anglicanism” or at least “continuing a
long held position within Anglicanism.”
Scranton Anglicanism is the neologism I
have chosen to employ for what might also be called St. Louis Anglicanism. It
is the ideology set forth in the Declaration of Scranton and the Affirmation of
St Louis, both of which require us to maintain the faith and practice of the
undivided Church. Beyond that, Scranton or St. Louis Anglicanism is what N.P.
Williams described in Northern Catholicism: “Catholicism which is
neither Roman nor Byzantine; which is non-Papal, but at the same time
specifically Western in its outlook and temper.” Adherents of this ideology can
be found in provinces that have embraced Canterbury or GAFCON Anglicanism, but
it is the defining ideology only of the Union of Scranton and of those Anglican
jurisdictions that have adopted the Affirmation. I have contended that
Canterbury and GAFCON Anglicanism are heirs respectively of the Latitudinarian
and Evangelical traditions in Anglican history. Scranton or St Louis Anglicanism
is an heir of the Anglo-Catholic tradition in Anglican history. All three types
of Anglicanism can truthfully be called “Continuing Anglicanism” or at least
“continuing a long held position within Anglicanism.” It is just that one type
is committed to the faith and practice of the undivided Church and the other
two are not. It is also true that prior
to the upheavals of the 1970s all three types of Anglicanism existed within the
same structures. What they all had in common, through God’s providence, was valid
Holy Orders and thus valid Sacraments, despite their profound differences in
faith and practice. Because of the ordination of women, this is no longer
universally true in the Anglican Communion or in the ACNA. In that sense, we
alone are Continuing Anglicans.
What is the future of ecumenism for what I
have called Scranton or St Louis Anglicanism? I would suggest the following:
1.
Entrance
of the Anglican Joint Synods jurisdictions into the Union of Scranton and
encouragement of like-minded Anglicans to do the same. This will continue the previous relationship
between Anglicans and the PNCC before the upheavals of the 1970s. It will
provide wider access to sacramental life for members of our respective churches
and enable us to make a greater witness beyond ourselves.
2.
Work
for unity between the Eastern Orthodox Churches and the enlarged Union of
Scranton. Progress in ecumenical dialogue had been made between the Eastern
Orthodox and the PNCC (when the latter were members of the Union of Utrecht),
and this could be built upon.
3.
Recognition
of the historic primacy of the Bishop of Rome as primus inter pares, set forth in the Declaration of Scranton. Nothing should realistically be expected to come
of this recognition, but it is of ecclesiological importance to be maintained
nonetheless. While this is not found in the Affirmation of St. Louis, it is
certainly part of the Anglo-Catholic tradition.
4.
Maintain
friendly relations with GAFCON Anglicans, witnessing to the first millennium
consensus and learning from them in areas where they are ministering more
effectively. Three of the Anglican Joint Synods jurisdictions are currently in
such a relationship with GAFCON Anglicans through our membership in the
Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas.
