Alternative ‘Anglican’ Church in England

Anglican Mission in England

This organisation has a new website. Some extracts will give readers the flavour:

What is AMiE?

The Anglican Mission in England (AMiE) is a mission society that seeks to promote gospel growth in areas covered by the Church of England (principally in England, but also in other parts of Europe) by supporting Anglican churches and individuals both within and outside present Church of England structures.

AMiE came into being as a result of GAFCON and is one of a number of agencies that relates to GAFCON through the FCA(Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans) UK and Ireland. You can read more about the history of AMiE by clicking here.

A variety of Anglican churches are part of AMiE. Some churches are outside the structures of the Church of England. Others remain within the denomination but are experiencing tensions, whilst others have joined to support them.

AMiE is a registered charity (number 1158679) and has an Executive Committee. Andy Lines is the General Secretary of AMiE and Justin Mote is Chair of the Executive Committee. AMiE, alongside Reform and Church Society, co-sponsor the annual ReNew conference. The AMiE Executive Committee shares the ReNew vision of pioneering, establishing and securing a nation of healthy local Anglican churches.

Continue reading “Anglican Mission in England”

(Thanks to ‘Thinking Anglicans’ for this breaking news) 

______________________________________________________________

It had to happen! At long last, AMiE (Anglican Mission in England) – a faux Church of England look-alike, but without having either the authority, or eirenic Gospel flavour, of the actual, legally established, “Church of England’ – has proclaimed its first public ‘Mission Statement’.

How did this anomaly come about ? one might ask. Well, it is purely the fledgling child of an organisation in the Global South which is pleased to call itself  ‘GAFCON’ – a name deriving from its first conference in the Continent of Africa – consisting of disaffected Anglicans from around the world, who believe there is no place in the Church for ‘Same-Sex Relationships’. Their opposition is based on a Sola-Scriptura understanding of gender and sexuality which, though introduced by the first Anglican missionaries to Africa and other Anglican Mission countries, has since been acknowledged by Western nations as being in serious conflict with any modern understanding of the issues.

At the 1998 Lambeth Conference, certain African Bishops, among other conservative Anglican bishops, were determined that there should be no place for homosexuals in the Christian Church, and were partly responsible for the Conference, under the guidance of Archbishop George Carey, issuing guidelines for the disciplining of Provincial Churches in the Anglican Communion that were moving towards the acceptance of Gay clergy as ministers to their congregations.

After the Ordination of an American Bishop (+Gene Robinson) by the Episcopal Church in the U.S., GAFCON was brought into being to protest against the admission of Gay people into ministry in any province of the Anglican Communion and, as a direct result, GAFCON decided to plant clandestine churches into other provinces – a process which contravened the Lambeth moratorium. 

The first of these faux ‘Anglican’ churches (under the supervision of GAFCON primates) were planted in Canada and the United States – despite the fact that they were seen to contravene the agreed protocol at the Lambeth Conference against inter-provincial piracy – or ‘border-crossing’, and to be competing with the existing local Church.

Much later, under the provenance of the Archbishop of Kenya (a GAFCON Primate) the border-crossing was introduced into England, under the name ‘Anglican Mission in England’. Despite having appropriated the word ‘Anglican’ in the title, this schismatic church has not yet been censured by the Church of England, which has, so far, taken no legal, or even disciplinary, action against a body purporting to be ‘Anglican’, yet seeking converts from its own (C. of E.) congregations.

Until the Church of England takes action against this cuckoo in its nest, local members may become confused about  AMiE’s territorial jurisdiction, and its authority to act in the name, and under the guise of being a constituent part of the world-wide Anglican Communion.

One cannot help wondering whether the reason this anomaly is still allowed to exist, may be because of the reluctance on the part of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to be seen to act against the wishes of the conservative GAFCON Primates.

Whatever action may be taken – or not taken – on this issue, it is a concern primarily for the Church of England to address for themselves. However, the non-GAFCON provinces of the Anglican Communion might need to take care that their own borders are secure, against the depredations of GAFCON influences that seek to diminish the outreach of the Gospel to ALL people – irrespective of race, tribe, nation, class or sexual-orientation or gender.

Father Ron Smith, Christchurch, New Zealand

Advertisements

About kiwianglo

Retired Anglican priest, living in Christchurch, New Zealand. Ardent supporter of LGBT Community, and blogger on 'Thinking Anglicans UK' site. Theology: liberal, Anglo-Catholic & traditional. regarding each person as a unique expression of Christ, and therefore lovable.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Alternative ‘Anglican’ Church in England

  1. Peter Carrell says:

    Hi Ron
    I think you comments are misguided when you talk of the CofE ‘taking action’ against AMiA.
    1. They have never taken action against other versions of Anglican churches in England (e.g. the Free Church of England). Why start now? How many churches should they take action against?
    2. If you wish the CofE to take action then you should consider whether AMiA would exist if the CofE had taken action (e.g. by more clearly distancing itself from TEC or by issuing a clarion call against same sex marriage). I presume that is action you would not wish the CofE to have taken. In which case, the question remains, why should the CofE take one set of actions and not another? Who decides? By what authority would the CofE do one thing and not another. Given the diversity of the CofE I would be most surprised if it thought it would remain united if it did take action against AMiA.
    3. ‘Anglican’ is not a trademark.
    4. Does not the liberal tolerance of the liberal wing of the CofE require it to live and let live?

    • kiwianglo says:

      “4. Does not the liberal tolerance of the liberal wing of the CofE require it to live and let live?” – Dr. Peter Carrell –

      Peter, If I were able to think, rationally, that AMiE were not seeking to undermine the Church of England – in the same way that other GAFCON marauding implants have done in the USA and Canada, as a rejection of those Anglican Provincial Churches – then I would not be advocating the outlawing of such acts of piracy around the anglican Communion. AMiE’s action is not liberating in any way – except for those who wish to rebel against their provincial churches and, at the same time.seek to exclude a certain class of sinner from flourishing in the Church. Christ came to save sinners – not to exclude them from God’s gracious mercy and forgiveness.

  2. Peter Carrell says:

    Hi Ron
    You make many judgments in your response above! “Undermine”: who has determined that that has happened? My reading of the situation in North America is that ACNA has gone one way and TEC has gone another way. Neither is undermining the other; each is seeking to be the best church they can be in the eyes of God. (And, yes, each may be guilty of too zealously pursuing some property entanglements to the detriment of people’s time and church bank balances- but I do not see the litigation process as “undermining”).
    Or, to take another word “rebel”: who has determined who is rebelling? Has any court or tribunal decided this? It is at least arguable that many who remain in the CofE are ‘rebelling’ by teaching against the formal/official teaching of the CofE regarding marriage. But generally speaking I understand those who identify with AMiA not to be rebelling but to be ordering their ecclesiological allegiances so that they sit with an authority they are comfortable with rather than one they wish to rebel against.
    Where I have some sympathy for your language is over the word “piracy”: there is some argument to be had that when a bishop from one jurisdiction crosses over to minister (without invitation) in another jurisdiction then a form of ecclesiastical piracy may be taking place. But if this is so, then the CofE’s problems are not about rebels in its midst but pirates at its borders. That requires a different response, involving the external politics of the Anglican Communion not the internal politics of the CofE.

  3. kiwianglo says:

    So, Peter; am I to take it that you are perfectly sanguine about the piratical actions of the GAFCON Primates in those Provinces of the Church with which they will no longer sit at the Table of the Lord? This does not sound like the eirenic practice of ‘Live, and Let Live’ that you are advocating. It is a blatant disregard for the conscientious spirituality of the provincial churches that GAFCON is certainly seeking to outlaw from the Anglican Communion. It is the opposite of Eucharistic Hospitality – that I consider to be at the heart of our Anglican Communion ethos.

    • Peter Carrell says:

      Hi Ron
      I am not quite sure how saying that I have some sympathy with your use of ‘piracy’ equates to me being ‘perfectly sanguine about the piratical actions …’
      I would not say that I am sanguine at all about such actions as they go to the heart of what it means to be a global Communion and thus considerable reflection is needed as to what global Anglicanism means when jurisdictions are crossed.

  4. kiwianglo says:

    Dear Peter, as I grow older. I feel more of a centrality with the larger bodies of Christians than I do with the concept of a Covenanted Anglicanism. It may be God’s will that the original concept of the Church gathered around the local Bishop becomes more important than global federalism.

    My first loyalty is to Christ, then to my Bishop, and then to my Provincial Anglican Church. BUT, I have the feeling sometimes that I have more in common with my Roman Catholic friends than I do with some Anglicans, excepting, of course, those who wish to be in communion with me.

    At tonight’s Eucharist at St. Michael’s, I was very much aware of the Church as believers around the Sacrament of Christ’s Body and Blood. “We are One Bread, One body, for we all partake of the One Bread”. From this empowering we go out to preach the Good News of God’s love for all the world (even those with whom we disagree).. God be praised!

  5. Peter Carrell says:

    Indeed!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s