There’s a report from the recent Patriarch’s Council meeting online here. All the way at the bottom of the report under “Military Chaplins” (sic), is this very interesting resolution about the CEC working with the Anglican Church in North America about military chaplains working together and mutual recognition of holy orders (male clergy only).
This looks like an interesting step forward for the CEC.
—-
The Council was distressed that the Military Chaplains had to experience the disruption and stress of the changes brought
about by Abp Woodall resignation. The Council renewed their support for the ministry of the ICCEC’s chaplains and
passed the following resolution in support of efforts to help better enable the military chaplains in their service with other
denominations in the military:
Whereas the Charismatic Episcopal Church of North America and the Anglican Church in North America share much of a common
heritage, and
Whereas mutual recognition and support would be of great blessing and benefit to both our communions.
Be it resolved that the ICCEC authorize our Patriarch to continue discussions with the Archbishop of the Anglican Church in North
America with specific intent of mutual recognition of holy orders between our two communions, said recognition to be limited to male
members of the clergy only.
Be it further resolved, that the ICCEC is authorized to commence discussions with his counterpart in the Anglican Church in North
America to ascertain how our two communions might support one another in ministering to the members of the US armed forces and,
Be it further resolved, that the bishops of the Charismatic ICCEC encourage mutual fellowship and ministry between the clergy and
congregations of our communions, as we seek to advance God’s Kingdom upon the earth.
This statement serves only to allow open communications between the two denominations, and in no way reflects a denominational merger.
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 26, 2011 at 4:08 pm
anon4cec
To me, this sounds like the unpopular wallflower deciding to ask the captain of the football team to the prom. Really, they have so much in common!
February 27, 2011 at 12:57 am
cechealing
Great point, anon!
February 27, 2011 at 6:14 pm
papaz
I think that “anon4cec” makes a good point as well.
I find this interesting on a number of levels.
Item: The CEC has, since its inception, gone out of its way to deny any link to Anglicanism (in spite, of course, of the 1979 BCP, etc.). It is interesting that after nearly 20 years of such denial, the CEC is claiming to share “much of a common heritage.”
Item: With the exception of the Chaplain corps (and possibly a few strong congregations) the CEC remains a desperately dysfunctional organization. How would “mutual recognition and support” benefit the ACNA? I see benefit only for the CEC, and a significant liability for the ACNA.
Item: There are quite a few former CEC clergy in the ACNA and Forward in Faith. For the life of me, I can’t imagine those individuals being interested in any discussion involving the CEC in any context whatsoever.
Item: The ACNA is comprised of bishops and priests with actual educations, involving actual degrees from actual institutions. Outside the Chaplain corps, how many clergy still in the CEC can make the same claim? In my first-hand experience, the clergy with formal education (read, anything other than St. Michael’s Seminary) were the first ones hounded out. (I know that there are exceptions, and I respect that.) What benefit would the ACNA receive by granting mutual recognition to a group of clergy, many of which are half-trained and dubiously ordained/consecrated?
My strong suspicion is that this is damage control, and that the hierarchy of the CEC is terrified at the prospect of losing its Chaplain corps — and the tithes generated by those faithful men.
Time will tell, and I certainly don’t speak for the ACNA — but I would be shocked — absolutely shocked — if the ACNA would choose to have anything at all to do with the CEC.
March 3, 2011 at 3:16 pm
padresteve
While I agree that the the ACNA has little to gain from an agreement with he CEC I don’t necessarily agree that this is a damage control move to keep the tithes. The fact is that the CEC is going to continue to lose chaplains over the next few years and none are in the pipeline. Most of our chaplains came from other denominations and only a couple were CEC to begin with. The Chaplans will leave because of retirement (a number are approaching this point) others because they or their families no longer want to suffer through extended combat deployments. Others because they really want to be Anglican and will find their way to a conservative Anglican church of some kind. Many just want adult leadership after 15 years of dealing with Doug Woodall. As far as the tithes the CEC never saw but a tenth of those anyway because they were simply Woodall’s salary. I think that part of this actually is to allow those chaplains that desire to work with the ACNA to do so without taking a chance on not having a new endorsement request rejected by trying to go to ACNA now. DOD is very suspicious of mass moves of chaplains to particular denominations now and has been cracking down on this activity. I assume that some will leave the CEC when they leave the military because they will want to be in a place of priestly ministry without having to do the church-in-a-box mission. Most of the guys I know that serve are pretty tired and are willing to serve but don’t want the hassle of the mission parish thing.
Just my thoughts. Peace, Steve+