GAFCON is over, the communion is still intact, everyone has something to say. So why not throw my two cents into the giant Coin-Star Machine that is the Anglican blogsphere.
The Final Statement Can be found Here
The significant meat of the statement is found in “The Jerusalem Declaration.” By and large it resembles your run of the mill catechism , something that most people should be able to agree with. I did have some concerns though. Many, myself included, have the stance that Anglicanism is the third branch on the tree of apostolic faith, with Catholicism and Orthodoxy. A few passages in the statement lead me to believe that those in the New American Province may not be as dear to that idea as we are.
The first was around article three which reads:
3. We uphold the four Ecumenical Councils and the three historic Creeds as expressing the rule of faith of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
I’m just curious as to why the first four councils. There were Seven before the East-West Schism (after that they took a very administrative nature). I would like to know why the leaders of GAFCON rejected the repudiation of Monosphysitism (5th Council), the affirmation of Christs dual wills (human and divine – 6th council), and the veneration of icons (7th council). These are major decisions in the life and history of the unified church. We should be affirming them as part of our common heritage.
My second concern is found in article four which reads (emphasis my own):
4. We uphold the Thirty-nine Articles as containing the true doctrine of the Church agreeing with God’s Word and as authoritative for Anglicans today.
I want to know what “authoritative” is defined as and how it would be manifest. I am more “Anglo-Catholic” than I am “Calvinist Evangelical”, and as such I have certain qualms with the following articles.
XXV. Of the Sacraments…
There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.
Those five commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures; but yet have not the like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God.
I uphold that all seven Sacraments are divinely instituted and are useful in spiritual formation, and would say that by limiting God to Two Sacraments is limiting his power.
XXVIII. Of the Lord’s Supper…
Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.
The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith.
The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was not by Christ’s ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.
Many Anglicans do belive that the Eucharist is indeed the body and blood of Christ -in a manor that may or may not be transubstantiation, we can not know how- and should be honoured as such. After all, we pray in the BCP that the Holy Spirit would make it as such.
I understand that they have been formative in Anglican development, and have been enforced (if at all) with varying amounts of leniency over time. I have no doubt that Anglo-Catholics and High-Church-Anglicans would be welcome in the New American Province, but Im not sure how the leadership would react to such deacons, priests, and bishops. Would they permit such beliefs, or crack the whip to enforce the Calvinism.
Likewise I wonder how these views will effect our Eccumenical Relations. Granted this is currently just a faction of the church, and every church has them, but if this becomes the prevailing statement of modern Anglicanism, how will this effect our relations with the Catholics and Orthodox. Many of us yearn for communion with our ancient brethren, something that we have been growing towards more and more in the past century. I would hate to have this statement destroy our chances at that, and inhibiting our place as an ancient church in the process.
+Alex Resurgent
