Neil, as has been said on this site many times, the churches you cite place biblical truth above historic church order.  Given the litigious nature of pecusa (including the use of canon law within pecusa) it doesn’t surprise me that a vestry would choose to meet secretly with a bishop outside pecusa.  You obviously see it as dishonorable; perhaps the church sees it as self-protective.  Good order with heretics is a dubious distinction at best.

Both Neil and Tony S. have valid points.  Although my inclination is that TEC parishes probably should stay in TEC if at all possible (but differentiate to the max and ensure that only a strict minimum, if any, funds go to any non-CP dioceses or to the National Church, etc.), if I was in a parish that was considering departure, I would probably opt to keep my TEC bishop out of the loop, for the reasons Tony S. mentions - i.e., TEC’s hyper litigiousness.  The one exception would be Mark Lawrence in South Carolina who has made it abundantly clear that he will not be cowed by the PB and where he has state law fully behind him.  Note that this would not only be protective of the parish, but also of the TEC bishop (so that he wouldn’t be keel-hauled or threatened by the PB for not carrying out her scorched earth policy).  However, I would regard such an event as seriously grievous.  However, as I said, my inclination would be that, absent extenuating circumstances, I would oppose taking a parish out of TEC.  Much better to use a TEC parish as a launching pad for a new ACNA plant.

I am in fully agreement with Neil’s points as regards ACNA church governance, and it is for this reason that I would NOT recommend that the Global South primates grant full recognition to the ACNA as the ACNA as the North American Anglican Province.  Rather, I would rather that the GS primates state that they are fully in communion with the ACNA bishops and parishes, but then call for the ACNA as a whole, no exceptions to become a missionary jurisdiction under the oversight and protection of the GS primates (preferably formally under Rowan Williams delegated to the GS primates).  I think that the ACNA and its clergy and parishes need to learn what it means to be under authority (just as TEC needs to learn this lesson).  There is no room for personal egos, turf wars, and each our own little organization in the Church.  The GS primates could then work to create a long-term plan in which ACNA dioceses work with CP dioceses to ensure the long-term healthy survival of an orderly, united and catholic North American Anglicanism.

In short, if one looks at TEC as being infected with a cancer of “I’ll do it my way” disease, then I would suggest that these same cancer cells still infect the ACNA.  If North American Anglicanism is to be fully reformed, this cancer needs to be cut out completely.

Re: Tony (post #16) -

There is no such thing as Biblical truth without Biblical ethics.  The back-stabbing, back-biting modus operandi of the “Global South” churches undermines any and every claim that they have to being “Biblical.”  “Good order with heretics” is a matter of Christian long-suffering; betrayal and deceit in the name of Scripture is pure hypocrisy.

Benjamin Guyer,
When I read your tirade in my email notification it did not attribute an author. I thought it was Michale Russell. Sorry Michael.

I thought the same Dale.

Benjamin Guyer - 18 April 2010 09:35 AM

Re: Tony (post #16) -

There is no such thing as Biblical truth without Biblical ethics.  The back-stabbing, back-biting modus operandi of the “Global South” churches undermines any and every claim that they have to being “Biblical.”  “Good order with heretics” is a matter of Christian long-suffering; betrayal and deceit in the name of Scripture is pure hypocrisy.

Benjamin - I am appalled.  Your judgement on the Global South leadership amazes me.  They have responded strongly but gracefully to egregious behaviour on the part of TEC.  They have rescued and given succour as greatly needed by the persecuted in the US and Canada.  By an large they are handing over the control to ACNA as a proof that their motives were not unethical but a temporary umbrella of safety.  They oppose heresy and those who persecute in the name of the Church with a strong and robust Biblical argument.  I thank God for them, imperfect as they are.  Without them TEC would have been allowed to behave even more rampantly in their litigious prosecution of any who dissent.  I believe that we in the US and those in the Global South have been long suffering and forbearing to a fault as we had hoped for the ABC to discipline TEC, and sharply for its abominable behaviour in tearing the fabric of the Communion.  We do not and should not be tolerant of heretics, not even allowing them in our homes (See John’s epistles as well as Paul’s admonitions.  Jesus has terrible things to say to those who lead astray His children with false teaching.  Can anyone do less to the heretics of TEC, whose lies and double speak are now public.
Again - I am appalled.

Dear Tony Seel+,

I want biblical truth and historic biblical order. Both-and, not either-or. The timing of the defections was simply wrong. I won’t cite you the troubled priests that were received by AMiA, ostensibly because they were being persecuted by TEC, but in reality because they were less than honorable in their dealings. I probably have more friends now in ACNA than in TEC, and there are many fine and honorable and godly men and women for who I have great affection and respect. But the means of their leaving and the division they have sown will, I believe, come back to haunt the movement as a whole.

I agree fully with James Wirrell’s post that both TEC and ACNA are infected with the cancer of “I’ll do it my way.”