More thoughts on Unity

It was a bit of a blow to have to miss the conference in British Columbia, especially as I know that my presence would have done something to dilute the impression of outsiders that Continuing Anglicanism is an Anglo-Catholic business. My usual rochet, black chimere, tippet and bands is enough to do that on their own! Unfortunately, some last minute problems required my presence in my home parish and I could not head up north.

However, the mere fact the conference happened marks just how far we have come in recent years. I can remember a time not so many years past that finding representatives, never mind senior bishops, of the ACC, APCK, ACA, and other other jurisdictions would have been considered evidence of the imminent arrival of the parousia! I suspect that is because the Conference was primarily abut affirming our common inheritance as orthodox Anglicans.

Though we have come a long way, I think we should remember that there is still a far longer jouney to undertake before we achieve unity. Although ACC, APCK, and ACA have a lot in common due to the fact they all lean to the Catholic side of Anglicanism, where does the relatively Low Church and protestant tradition that UECNA represents fit in?

Well, I suspect the first surprise is that we actually do fit in. We have intercommunion with ACC and APCK, and relations between the UECNA and the other two bodies are generally cordial, even warm. I think there now seems to be a greater preparedness to tolerate the various minor differences of tradition, outlook, and method of operation between the UECNA and the other two bodies. I hope, and believe, that a similar respect and tolerance exists on their part.

The one thing that I would say would be extremely foolish right now would be any sort of rush to unity. As a wise man once observed "quarrels about trifles, especially between friends, are always the most bitter." Those words would make a suitable epitaph for some of our worst mistakes in the Continuum! Instead of any great rush to unity there needs to be a gradual process of getting to know and understand the other fellow. Our worst problems are always caused by our failure to understand the other chap's point of view. The only way in which to bring reconciliation is by understanding - not confrontation. The one thing that has helped improve the atmosphere in the Continuum in recent years has been a greater realisation that the Anglo-Catholic or the Low Churchman next door may actually have a point and not be "disloyal" or certifiably insane. My own tradition, the rather sober and restrained, even constrained, tradition of Anglo-Irish High Churchmanship, with its tight forcus on doctrine and disike of eaborate ceremonial, finds its place at the table in spite of my own former doubts that such an obvious "foreigner" would be welcome in the American Continuing scene.

I also believe that we need to lay a renewed emphasis on our common Anglicanism rather than on Churchmanship distinctives. The strength of the old church was that we had everyone - Virginia Churchmen, Broad Churchmen and Anglo-Catholics co-existing on the basis of the Book of Common Prayer, and a common acknowledgement of indebtedness to the Bible and the Early Fathers and Councils of the Church. To this was added an appreciation of the positive benefits of the English Reformation in the form of sloughing off the worst excesses of mediaevalism, and a vernacular liturgy of incomparable power and beauty. The future of Continuing Anglican unity will lay in an ever deeper appreciation of our common heritage and faith, and a growing preparedness to live and let live over the details.

I suspect we are entering a stage in our development where some sort of federative process is needed in which the various jurisdictions retain their integity and their traditions, but work together for the common good. For those of us who occupy minority positions within the U.S. Continuum, that may often require us to step out in faith, and it will require of the majority a great preparedness to tolerate those of us who are a little singular in our interpretation of our common tradition. However, the thing that is needed above everything else is regular communication between the hierarchies of the various Churches. I hope the opportunity for the principle bishops to talk to one another was taken at the Victoria, BC, meeting, for it is only by building personal relationships, and a certain amount of cross-jurisdictional collegiality, that the essential work of unity can be taken forwards.