Two interesting blog posts regarding “Continuing Anglicanism”
I came across two interesting blog posts on whether the Affirmation of St. Louis should be considered as what would amount to a “formulary” by the ACNA. The first of these is by Archbishop Peter Robinson of the UECNA in his post Barking Up the Wrong Tree? and the second is by “The Embryo Parson” in his post The Plot Thickens. If you have time, both of these posts are worth reading and Abp. Robinson is very much correct when he writes:
Firstly, whilst I would agree with the idea that the ACNA take a look at the Affirmation of St Louis, I would suggest that they do so with a critical eye, and reject those parts of it which are contrary to traditional Anglicanism. The seven sacraments, and the seven Ecumenical Councils, whilst widely referred to as teaching tools in traditional Anglicanism were never accorded official status. The Articles require that dogma have Biblical warrant creating a hierarchy of authority which subordinates the Councils to Scripture. More mischieveous than those provisions is the call in the Affirmation that all older Anglican formularies be interpreted, not in accordance with the Ecumenical Councils, but with the Affirmation itself. This has always stuck in my craw because it strikes me as just as revisionist as the party line from ‘Miss Kitty Cat House’ (aka “815”) condemning Bishop Mark Lawrence of South Carolina for schism when in fact he is faithful maintaining the doctrine, discipline and worship of the post-’79 Episcopal Church! Taken with the clause in the Affirmation allowing liturgies ‘containing the BCP’ (you ain’t foolin’ me; you mean the Missals) these clauses constitute an assisted suicide programme for all forms of orthodox Anglicanism except Anglo-Catholicism. Therefore, if classical Anglicanism is to survive and flourish, and a united Continuum is to emerge, we need to eschew the Affirmation of St Louis at least in part.
To me, the Affirmation of St. Louis possibly could play a role, but not as a primary formulary. It seems to me that it has to be subordinate to the Articles and the Prayer Book, not the other way around. Anything else will not be truly Anglican and runs a very real risk of turning into something else closer to a form of “Old Catholicism.” But please read the two blogs I have linked.