Is the Episcopal Church Anglican?

I have been pondering a comment made by the Rev. Dr. Matthew Olver, the new executive director and publisher of the Living Church Foundation. He mentioned on The Living Church Podcast a concept that he learned from a theologian called “recognizability.” This means, for example, that a new prayer book should be recognizable by past Anglicans as part of their tradition. Would it have an Anglican liturgical “feel” and would it be expressive of Anglican theology? Would its liturgical forms connect with the rich heritage of Cranmer’s great work and the historic 1662 prayer book of the English Church? I think the concept is critically important for the continuity of our worldwide communion, and the Episcopal Church’s place in it.

This struck a chord in me when I remembered reviewing the new prayer book of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). My reflection after my reading much of it was simply, “Well, this is Anglican for sure.” As a longtime ordained priest, I can attest to the “recognizability” of the 1979 prayer book, It did have some important innovations, but I think it passed this test. For example, both the ordination services and the marriage rite were consistent with past prayer books. The Rite I Eucharist is a natural America extension of the 1928 prayer book. As a “Prayer Book Catholic” (think Archbishop Ramsey), I wholeheartedly embraced the rubric on the Eucharist being the principal worship on Sundays, as Cranmer had originally hoped it would be used.

Why is this important? Those involved in their desired revision of the 1979 prayer book (if we even have a prayer book instead of online resources) are very avant-garde in wanting to make language, gender, and theological changes. The development of experimental services so far has departed from a more traditional approach. All this raises the question that I have been struggling with for about 10 years now: Is the Episcopal Church still Anglican?

I know that many of our clergy, if they get this far in this article, will dismiss this question with the often-repeated belief that the Episcopal Church, along with Canada and New Zealand, are on the cutting edge of the Communion on many issues, innovative liturgies being just one. Many of our leaders believe that eventually the other provinces of Anglicanism will come around to our positions in both liturgy and theology. However, given the current state of our worldwide community, this is highly questionable. After all, TEC is less than 3 percent of worldwide Anglicanism, and all the provinces trying such innovations are in decline, while most African and Asian provinces are growing. Many of the provinces much larger than TEC have already voiced their serious objections to many of our innovations.

The question underlying the issue that I am raising is this: What makes a community Anglican? The simple answer is a historic connection to Canterbury and the 1662 prayer book. However, there is also a complex of theological connections ranging from the 39 Articles to how Anglicans have contributed to important aspects of the development of doctrine. Recognizability also extends to both theology and doctrine.

I was trying to underscore this point when, in the Christmas season, I was preaching on the incarnation. I made this observation: “Since the Reformation, the Anglican Church has been on the forefront of the development of this doctrine. It may be our most significant theological contribution to the wider Church.” Placing the doctrine of the incarnation alongside that of the cross and resurrection has prevented Anglicans and others from the kind of triumphalism we often find expressed from churches whose roots are strongly embedded in Calvinism and American evangelicalism, in which heaven becomes the principal point to everything, including pastoral practice, or life in this world. Anglicans rightfully understand that the incarnation of the Word of God has more application then merely getting Jesus to the cross.

What I can highlight is the recognizability of this development in the doctrine of the incarnation to such outstanding past Anglican leaders as John Donne and many others since. Anglicanism has also contributed to the ecumenical development of the doctrine of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This has a strong Anglican thread also.

I think the Episcopal Church is now in danger of departing from such Anglican roots and thus from a major part of our historic identity. I would further suggest that many theological progressives do not even care if we remain Anglican. As one leader said to me recently, “Almost none of our laity care if we are part of the Anglican Communion.” Many of our current leaders, including many in the House of Bishops, seem more concerned that we become the voice of progressivism, both in politics as well as theology.

Perhaps you remember the short-lived television series The Book of Daniel? I remember the large number of Episcopal voices who praised this public expression of progressive Christianity. Forget the troubling affluence of the cleric in the show, or his lack of any moral compass; the show was frankly pathetic. The question is, are we going on the path the program took when it was quickly cancelled? Our continued decline seems to imply we are. We seem to want to present a version of Christianity that even secular progressives find irrelevant.

Let me give my answer to the question of our Anglican legitimacy. I think there are still many Episcopalians who are serious about our Anglican history and identity. We know that we are today a worldwide community rooted in the DNA of our historic identity. I also think that TEC is at a critical moment in which we could lose that identity, while embracing one that has no future, as our current numbers show. I think the road to healthy growth and mission, along with solidarity with our worldwide community, lies in recapturing that Anglican identity.

A critical part of our identity that has emerged out of history is our toleration for a wider understanding of true Christian identity. Unlike many denominational traditions, Anglicanism learned to create a wide space for differing forms and thoughts. Both the Evangelical awakening and the Oxford movement initially found strong resistance from “the Established Church.” However, these movements were eventually incorporated into the English Church. Then the evangelical Church Missionary Society and the Anglo-Catholic Society for the Propagation of Christian Knowledge took strong leadership in the spread of the faith to other peoples. Anglicans learned through a troubled and conflictual religious past, even a civil war, that religious passions can easily turn to conflict and even hatred of other Christians.

I like to express this with a map metaphor. Unlike many traditions and denominations, we Anglicans see Christianity as an entire country and not an individual city such as Geneva or Augsburg or London. We understand that each of these identities contributes to the whole. In short, Anglicanism created what many call a big tent, but what I like to call “the whole Christian map.” This is why Anglicanism today remains a force for Christian unity.

In the late 1980s, Forward Movement published a pamphlet that described this for the Episcopal Church. It listed six different groups of Episcopalians that lived inside this big tent. While broad church members were such a group, described as often liberal, the term progressive was not used. It also described English traditionalists, who loved the language of the old prayer book. That group, which was large at the time of the pamphlet’s publication, is today almost completely gone.

By personal example, I went to seminary as an Anglo-Catholic from Dallas. Then I was strongly influenced by liberal Episcopal professors, especially in their support of civil rights. Then, after a vocational crisis, I rediscovered my priesthood thanks to the charismatic movement. Yet I never felt that these changes meant that I needed to leave TEC, because there was a place and fellowship for all these views. In the beginning of the charismatic movement, we had Broad Church members, Anglo-Catholics, evangelicals, and liberal Episcopalians.

After the polarizing votes at a General Convention in the early 2000s, especially regarding human sexuality, TEC’s big tent fractured. Progressives not only “won” but invited those who disagreed with the decisions to leave. One of their most often repeated phrases was that “Schism is worse than heresy.” God forbid that this should ever be a choice. Sadly, many who were rooted in different parts of this big tent did leave. Today there is little doubt that those who lead our community show a lack of tolerance for even those of us who disagreed but stayed. After these decisions, little to no attempt was made to create a safe place for those of us who in good conscience could not accept these innovations. Then followed the election of our first female presiding bishop. She made it clear that dissenting voices had no important place in our decision-making. Now TEC looks more like Berkeley, California, on the map of Christianity than a tolerant community desiring to hold the unity of the faith.

Of course, TEC remains organizationally a part of the Anglican Communion, but each year that passes leaves us less connected to our DNA and most of the rest of the Communion. What can and should we do? I think that I know where we can start.

First, we should admit that there are other Anglican voices in America that have laid claim to this historic identity, and we should make every effort to extend a hand of fellowship to them. Bishop Ruth Woodliff-Stanley has been a model for this in South Carolina, meeting with ACNA Chip Edgar to resolve areas of dispute over church buildings without taking further legal actions against one another.

Next, I would recommend that we become more thoughtful about our continued efforts to become more acceptable to our growingly secular culture. After all, trying to make ourselves acceptable to our culture has not given us enough momentum and members to demonstrate viability. While there are in TEC wonderful examples of leaders of local communities who are building parishes and ministries, most of these make every effort to present Christianity and community rooted in our historic identity. These local healthy and growing parishes give me hope for the future of TEC. A new set of innovative liturgies and perhaps the elimination of a single prayer book do not.

I think the key to a more vibrant, healthy, and growing Church lies in rediscovering our heritage and its tremendous value. Anglicanism is an expression of the faith that has many significant contributions to make to the Christian mission. It is also an expression of the faith that allows us to reach across many divisions of the wider church to demonstrate that “they will know we are Christians by our love,” not by our divisions.

So, is the Episcopal Church Anglican? Yes, but maybe not for much longer. I am convinced that if TEC loses this vital connection, we will fail our special calling.

The Very Rev. Kevin Martin is the retired dean of St. Matthew’s Cathedral in Dallas and is the author of books and articles for Church leadership. His regular blog, Kevin on Congregations, aims at helping leaders create healthy and vibrant congregations.