Wikipedia

Talk:Anglican Church in North America/Archive 2

< Talk:Anglican Church in North America
Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Updated website

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The long awaited updates to the ACNA's website have arrived. Ltwin (talk) 06:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Out of place subsection?

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The subsection "Canons and constitutions", reproduced below, seemed out of place in the "Beliefs" section, especially considering that just after it is the "Structure" section. It is only a one sentence quote from a Religious Intelligence article, "New US Province is formed". Should the information this contains form part of a new subsection of "Beliefs", perhaps called "Practices" or something similar? Or should there be a section on "Social views" or something similar, as much of this information is views on women and abortion? Or will it hurt the article if this just stays out? Any thoughts?

"The Book of Common Prayer and the Articles of Religion served as the theological bases for the canons, which were designed to permit structural flexibility while assuring confessional unity as expressed in questions of Faith and order. The new province permits women priests, but not bishops --- but allows dioceses to opt out of women clergy, vests the ownership of parish property with the congregation and churchwardens, requires a clergyman wishing to remarry after a divorce to seek a licence from his bishop, and adopted a strong stance against abortion on demand."[1]

Ltwin (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Since it's about canons, I'd put it under the discussion of Structure. Chonak (talk) 02:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
And, since you ask, it is somewhat redundant with material in the article. --Chonak (talk) 02:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference relintell was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Anglican Relief and Development Fund

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Is the Anglican Relief and Development Fund the relief agency of the ACNA or just an affiliate? Ltwin (talk) 09:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

FYI: notability question for religious-order article

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article Franciscan Missionaries of Divine Compassion is linked from the "Structure" section of this article. While FMDC is a praiseworthy project, I believe it is not notable enough for a WP article, so I intend to propose its deletion shortly. Discussion is at Talk:Franciscan Missionaries of Divine Compassion. --Chonak (talk) 03:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

With the ACNA's website updated, many of the sources which were from that site no longer exist. If anyone could possibly locate substitutes for these sources it would improve the articles verifiability. Specifically, references 1, 10, 11, 14, 16, 32, 38. Ltwin (talk) 04:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

remain within the Anglican family

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I understand the wording of the resolution is strange and ambiguous at best. But by acknowledging they desire to "remain within the Anglican family" doesn't that acknowledge they are "within the Anglican family"? Alternatively they could have said "desire to join with the Anglican family"? That's just a question. All the politics and so forth is quite bizarre.Sweetmoose6 (talk) 03:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Basically, it's fudge. The General Synod did not go too far to anger TEC and ACOC, and it gave "affirmation" to ACNA's "desire" to be in the "Anglican family", which makes ACNA happy but really doesn't offer it anything substantial. This is nowhere near an insitutional communion. Anyway, what exactly does "Anglican family" mean anyway? It certainly doesn't mean the Communion, as the original motion "had asked Synod to express the desire to 'be in communion' with ACNA, but was deemed by some Synod members to be too strong." (See the Christian Today article) Ltwin (talk) 04:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
With respect to this section, I have changed the wording of the sentence "Earlier, the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury said it would take years for the ACNA to gain official recognition from the rest of the Communion" to "The office of the Archbishop of Canterbury has said it will take ..." The verb tense of the previous wording implied a tension between the motion and the Archbishop's statement that isn't really there. Recognition of a province is a decision taken by the Anglican Communion (through the Anglican Consultative Council) rather than the Church of England, and the two are not coterminous. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 11:08, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually, as I understand it, recognition of a new province must be by all the instruments of communion, not just the Anglican Consultative Council. However, you are right. No matter what the CofE Synod voted for it does not have Communion wide authority. Ltwin (talk)

Updated logo image

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Replaced the File:Acnalogolarge.jpg with File:ACNA logo.gif found on the ACNA website. The images are essentially the same: a globe and a shield; however, the current image is the version most used by the ACNA. Ltwin (talk) 00:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

The logo currently in the article doesn't even have the same look as the logo shown on the ACNA's website. I haven't seen this version of the logo on anything official. Ltwin (talk) 02:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I respect the fact that Sweetmoose6 prefers the previous logo; however, this is not about our preference. The ACNA's webiste and even its Constitution and Canons make use of this version of the logo. I have found one without the name of the organization. I hope we can all live with this. Ltwin (talk) 02:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Mission partner status?

Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Bo. I saw this edit you made to the ACNA article, but it's missing context. You mention "mission partner status" without explaining what "mission partner status" is and why it needs to be mentioned in the article. You may know what this means, but most Wikipedia readers will not. Please add some context. Ltwin (talk) 05:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

It means, among other things that their Bishops won't be part of the college of Bishops, (they'll avoid the 'dual citizenship issue, by remaining under Rwanda, not ++Duncan). Should I add a paragraph in 'structure' to cover 'Mission Partners' to explain it, or try to work in the 'explanation' in line with the addition? User:Bo (talk) 13:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Hmm. That's tough. IMO, it would depend on how much information about mission partners there are. If there's alot (Are there more institutions that have mission partner status with ACNA or is AMiA the only one?) it may need to be given more attention in the structure section. Don't the CandC's mention mission partners? I think it did but I'm not sure. This is interesting to me. Where did you get this info? Does this mean that AMiA will not be a "diocese, cluster, or network" of ACNA? We may need to talk about it in the structure section, but I think for now just mentioning it at the addition will be fine. Ltwin (talk) 00:16, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Sourced from Episcopal Life, Virtue Online and Stand Firm, a communique from AMiA Bishop and a 'letter' from ++Duncan. Yes, it means that'll not be a 'diocese, cluster, or network' (they hold a 'nine diocese count' in the college of Bishops at present). Yes the C&C mentions them (Mission Partners). The other 'mission partners' at present as I understand it are Seminaries that aren't ACNA only (Nashota House and VTS, I think). User:Bo (talk) 03:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
So if I understand you, the nine dioceses currently of AMiA will not be represented in the College of Bishops and this takes effect in June. How do you think the AMiA's holding out of full membership will effect ACNA? The Episcopal Life, Virtue Online and StandFirm articles should be online. Do you know the specific links to those pages? We'll need sources. Is the AMiA communique and letter from Duncan online by chance? Thanks again for the info.Ltwin (talk) 03:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
The 'nine count' is via a 'network' rather than as nine dioceses (I think), and the status of the bishops at the Boston meeting is apparently that they'll be in the college until their change of relationship is approved by the college.
Episcopal life spins as 'the beginning of the death' of ACNA (of course), SF takes it as 'the Rwandan Connection' is firm (No questions about being in the communion as a Bishop in the HoB of Rwanda), and Rwanda the 'friends on the same journey' is probably a 'good thing', Virtue had just the 'news' bit when I was there. The only one I book marked was Stand Firm (unlike the other two, SF seems to have a wide range of opinions represented). I haven't seen Duncan's letter except in 'excerpts' by the 'spin masters' at Episcopal life... http://www.standfirminfaith.com/?/sf/page/26099 User:Bo (talk) 03:58, 21 May 2010
Nothing on the ACNA's site right now, but the AMiA's site has the Communiqué. I suppose we should go ahead at write about mission partners in the structure section. Later, like after the AMiA's status officially changes, we'll need to explain this in the history section. But that'll probably need to wait until this actually takes affect. Also, the AMiA's page will need updating. Ltwin (talk) 04:31, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Status of AMiA

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Aren't we being a little hasty removing AMiA from the list of jurisdictions. From my understanding its status has not changed yet. They've only announced that it will. Ltwin (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Admission at the Anglican Communion

Latest comment: 13 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion

One of the main objectives of the Anglican Church in North America could be seen as their admission at the Anglican Communion since they are more in tune with the mainstream Church of England and the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams then the Episcopal Church of the United States. Since they are already affiliated to several member Churches of the Anglican Communion, who most likely would support their admission and the exclusion of the Episcopal Church of the United States, who has been criticized several times by Rowan Williams for their admission of non-celibate gay clergy and support for abortion, what is the current situation about their eventual joining of the Anglican Communion? That is a important part of the article that should be developed, including Rowan Williams view of this question. I myself never was an Anglican but this is an important topic that should be part of the article.85.240.21.202 (talk) 23:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

It is important. If you read the section of the article named Relations with other churches, you will find it addresses this issue. While I am not an expert, it seems that there is a real possibility that the Communion will not survive intact from these controversies. One sign is that the GAFCON primates have decided to boycott the upcoming meeting of the Communion's primates in Ireland. The assertion that the ACNA is closer to the Church of England's position would need a reliable source. Ltwin (talk) 02:16, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

This is the official stance of the Church of England on abortion. It is openly pro-life and similar to the stance taken by the Catholic Church, but it admits abortion in some extreme cases: [1] Rowan Williams is also openly pro-life, like it can be seen by the Wikipedia article about his Moral theology: "it is impossible to view abortion as anything other than the deliberate termination of a human life." [2]85.240.21.202 (talk) 14:31, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

  • The subject of CofE/ACNA relations was addressed in the Church of England Synod in February 2010: a member moved that the Synod express the C of E's desire to be in communion with ACNA. After some debate, the motion was not approved as proposed, but was modified to refer the issue to the authorities of the C of E and the Anglican Communion, with the request that the Archbishops report further in 2011. Source: Church Times. -- Chonak (talk) 23:44, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

The question of the admission of the Anglican Church in North America will depend greatly on their eventual expansion in the United States and capacity of attraction of many American Episcopalians who still are more in agreement with the mainstream Church of England then with the Episcopal Church of USA. It is rather possible that in a near future the Anglican Church of North America, created just in 2009, will become a more theologically conservative alternative to the so-called liberal existing church, but it is still too soon to predict that. We also can't minimize the life questions, because, even if the blessing of same-sex unions is enough controversial, many of those who support it are openly pro-life.85.240.85.104 (talk) 19:22, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hard-line Anglicans already expressed openly their view that the Anglican Church in North America should be admited at the Anglican Communion because of the Episcopal Church USA total departure from Anglicanism on the issue of homosexuality, non-celibate gay clergy and episcopate. Anglican Mainstream issued a statement on May 15 2010 following the second consecration of a non-celibate gay bishop by the ECUSA where they see as inevitable the exclusion of the non-orthodox church and the admission of the Anglican Church in North America: "In her letter to the Primates, the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church (TEC) Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, confirmed that the consecration of the openly gay Mary Glasspool is not a random event but comes from the settled mind of her church. Sadly, this shows that TEC has now explicitly decided to walk apart from most of the rest of the Communion./ Since that decision by TEC has to be respected, it should result in three consequences. First, TEC withdrawing, or being excluded from the Anglican Communion's representative bodies. Second, a way must be found to enable those orthodox Anglicans who remain within TEC to continue in fellowship with the Churches of the worldwide Communion. Third, the Anglican Church of North America (ACNA) should now be recognized an authentic Anglican Church within the Communion. [3] It's rather unlikely that the ECUSA will revert his stance on homosexual clergy so it has been suggested that they would have a different status at the Anglican Communion while mantaining some kind of "associate membership" as it was proposed by Rowan Williams in 2006: "Dr Williams is proposing a two-track Anglican Communion, with orthodox churches being accorded full, "constituent" membership and the rebel, pro-gay liberals being consigned to "associate" membership." [4] Arguably this proposal is unlikely to gain the support of the most orthodox Anglicans who would be more open to the "full unity" that could be achieved with the Methodist Church of Great Britain, since they are on agreement on the issue of same-sex relationships, like the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches too.Mistico (talk) 19:12, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Article in the Modesto (California) Bee November 20, 2010

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

ED--This is the only article I have seen that addresses the issue of the gospel as part of the reason for the split and does NOT just excuse it all away as a bunch of conservatives who are against gays in the church.

Saturday, Nov. 20, 2010 Breakaway Anglican diocese wins appeal By Sue Nowicki

Bee staff writer Sue Nowicki can be reached at snowicki@modbee.com or 578-2012.

-- 67.181.21.18 (talk) 01:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC) Richard Clausen <richardclausen@earthlink.net>

I've removed the text of the article because 1) it clutters the talk page and 2) it is likely a copyright violation (see Wikipedia:Copyright violations) and 3) the entire article can be found here at the The Modesto Bee's website. Ltwin (talk) 02:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Number of Congregations

Latest comment: 13 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

I corrected the number of congregations from the ACNA official site. If there are reliable sources that provide if their membership has raisen they are welcomed.82.154.84.14 (talk) 01:43, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I reverted these edits. I have no problem with updating the ACNA numbers, however, I'm noticing two problems with using the numbers listed on the church finder page:
1) These numbers are constantly changing. Just last Friday the number stood at 670 and the article was changed to reflect that. Now the church finder has added two more churches bringing the number listed on the church finder page to 672 and the article has just now been changed once again to reflect these apparently real time church formations. Is anyone else seeing the problem I am? Every time a single church is added to the ACNA church finder this article is going to have to be updated to comply with the source that is cited—the ACNA church finder.
2) There is no date cited so unless the reader has observed the ACNA church finder page for a long period of time there is no way to know how recent or old these numbers are.
I would suggest we stick to ACNA press releases or any future statistical reports than real time fluctuating numbers listed on the church finder. Ltwin (talk) 03:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
In the spirit of compromise, I've added approximations of 670 congregations in the introduction and the infobox. In the "Statistics" section, I've restored the June 2010 numbers because despite what one editor wrote in their edit summary, those numbers were indeed sourced. Ltwin (talk) 03:38, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I have to agree with the changes you made. Thanks for cleaning up the article statistics.85.240.20.69 (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
This seems a poor compromise - there is no evidence that ACNA is motivated or inclined to issue press releases on how many churches it has, so based on this policy the number will never change. The current number on this page is one year out of date and quite low. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdavenport (talk • contribs) 16:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
What are you talking about? If you actually read the introduction of the article and the infobox and then visit the ACNA's church locator on its website, you will see the number of congregations is up to date. Ltwin (talk) 17:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Move to Create a New Diocese

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

According to the Anglican Church in North America official website "Mid-Atlantic Anglicans Vote to Move Forward with Becoming a New Anglican Church Diocese"[5]. The new diocese will be called Anglican Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic with Rev. John Guernsey as their first bishop. The news dates just from 21 May so we will have to wait for new developments soon, so it can be added to the entry.Mistico (talk) 22:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

There will also need to be updates to the Anglican District of Virginia article which is the body requesting diocesan status. Ltwin (talk) 23:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Revert to lead section membership statistics edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I reverted this edit by Subdeacon. While it is clear that only 680 or so congregations are actual ACNA churches and the rest are affiliated with "ministry partners," it isn't clear that the "some 100,000" Christians claimed as part of ACNA is inflated based on inclusion of ministry partners. The sources don't say that ministry partners are included in the 100 thousand figure; they say that ACNA "represents more than 100,000 Christians in North America." I'm not sure if that implies ministry partners or not. If this becomes contentious, it may be better just to leave the 100 thousand figure out of the lead and mention the ambiguous numbers within the body of the article. In fact, another reason for my revert is that the lead section is not the place to delve into the minutia of membership data. It would be better placed within the body of the article. Ltwin (talk) 01:02, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Misleading Numbers?

Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I updated the number of congregations to the current 987, according to the official website of the Anglican Church in North America.Mistico (talk) 02:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

And I'm sad to say, since I respect the ACNA, that those numbers are misleading. It appears that they now include both ACNA churches and the churches belonging to "ministry partners" all together on their website, which is disingenuous. See that in October numbers in the article were c. 680. Now in November the numbers jump to 987 based on the ACNA's church finder page.
The picture becomes more clear when you consider the memo released on October 24 on StandFirm by Brad Root, ACNA's chief operating officer (The blog post, ACNA Releases a Memo Summarizing Parochial Report Data, and the actual report, 2010 Anglican Church in America Statistics). The report makes clear that there are:
  • Churches in ACNA dioceses 659
  • Churches in ACNA Ministry Partner Organizations 293
  • Total ACNA Churches 952
So, there are at least 293 churches which are not apart of ACNA (but are instead "Ministry Partner" congregations) which at present are being counted as ACNA congregations. These numbers are misleading. However, since the report is not "official" but is only found on a blog I see no remedy except to note in the infobox that numbers include congregations that are not members of ACNA. Ltwin (talk) 11:08, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I think you might be right but when I saw the new numbers I had the impression that the Ministry Partner congregations had somehow being granted full membership status in the ACNA. However I didn't find any evidence that this really happened in the ACNA official website, so I think you are probably right. I still think that the recent merging of both congregation numbers might have happened by some special reason.Mistico (talk) 16:36, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I emailed the ACNA and they recognized what I already suspected, the given number of 987, showed both the full membership and the ministry partner congregations. Meanwhile, the currently given numbers show both 694 congregations and 297 ministry partner congregations, so we can move back to the previous form.Mistico (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Number of Dioceses

Latest comment: 11 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

There is a small question regarding the number of dioceses of the ACNA. Their official webiste lists 22, including the recently created Diocese of the Carolinas. However, the Convocation of Anglicans in North America launched recently a new diocese, the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity, which does not appears in the official website list but is listed in the Wikipedia article about them. My question is if the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity is a full membership diocese of the ACNA or it is directly subordinated to the CANA. I am inclined to believe that both the CANA and the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity are dioceses of the ACNA, but I am not absolutely sure about it. The inauguration of the new diocese is also featured in the official website of the ACNA, despite not appearing yet in their listing: [6]. I tend to believe it's simply a omission, that they will correct soon.Mistico (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

My understanding is that the MDT is to be a dual diocesan jurisdiction of both Church of Nigeria and of ACNA, much as CANA is a dual network jurisdiction of the two provinces. I would not go by ACNA's website, which is often notoriously slow to be updated. If, however, in a few months it does not list the MDT, I would support removing it from the list of ACNA dioceses.--Denysmonroe81 (talk) 13:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I think that the CANA will no longer be counted as a diocese but as a dual network, while the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity will take his place as a diocese of the ACNA. I am not absolutely sure about it, so I will have to email the ACNA to clarify it better. I understand what you mean about their website, because they currently list 22 dioceses, including the CANA, while the number given above is still 21.Mistico (talk) 23:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

From the article I quoted from the ACNA official website I think it seems rather obvious that both the CANA and the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity are to be counted as full members dioceses of the ACNA: "The Missionary Diocese of the Trinity is a mission outreach of the Church of Nigeria and grew out of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a diocese of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA)." [7] I really think that is a fact because previously the Anglican Diocese of the Great Lakes also developed from the CANA. There is also a third diocese in formation from them, the Diocese of the West [8]. That will be a missionary diocese in the same way as the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity, with the Rt. Rev. Felix Orji as first bishop. The information at the Anglican Network in Canada website that the ACNA is composed by 23 dioceses and 3 dioceses in formation is then accurate.Mistico (talk) 02:17, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

This is the source I used, from the ANiC official website, that states that the ACNA has 23 dioceses and 3 dioceses in formation: [9]. There will be certainly new developments in the near future, considering that the ACNA is still a growing church.Mistico (talk) 17:49, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Mistico & Co.: A new report from CANA's Martyn Minns explains the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity better. Minns retired in April and CANA is in the process of splitting into four diocesan jurisdictions: the Missionary Diocese of the Trinity (Central US under Bishop Amos), Missionary Diocese of CANA West (under Felix Orji), Missionary Diocese of CANA East (under Julian Dobbs) and a jurisdiction for military chaplains (under Derek Jones). See here: http://canaconvocation.org/file_download/108/Bishop%E2%80%99s+Pastoral+Call+to+CANA+Council+2013.pdf--Denysmonroe81 (talk) 22:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I suppose that PEARUSA, which isn't a diocese but a missionary district, purpose will be the same for the near future, to originate new dioceses. There's also the news that a new diocese in formation will be approved this year at ACNA House of Bishops meeting in June, the Anglican Diocese of the Upper Midwest [10]. The birth of this new diocese in formation hasn't been reported yet at ACNA official webiste.Mistico (talk) 15:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Relations with Episcopal Church

Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

In the "Relations with Other Churches" section, in the "Anglican" subsection, there is virtually no discussion of ACNA's relationship with ECUSA. ECUSA, of course, being the official province of the Anglican Communion within the USA. This strikes me as problematic. The section comes across (to me, anyway), as either 1) an argument for why ACNA should replace ECUSA as the American province of the Anglican Communion, or 2) a summary of evidence that such a replacement is imminent. Surely something more needs to be added? Dunncon13 (talk) 22:27, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't see the section as arguing for either options 1 or 2 in Dunncon's comment above. I think its just pointing out areas where the ACNA has clear relationships with other Anglican churches, whether that be in full communion with or less definitive associations like the Church of England's General Synod affirming the ACNA's desire to remain in "the Anglican family."
The Episcopal Church is not mentioned in this section because to my knowledge neither the ACNA or TEC are seeking to establish relations with each other. In cases such as the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans and provinces such as Nigeria, Uganda and Sudan, the ACNA clearly has relationships with these Anglican churches and associations. In the case of the Church of England, the ACNA has clearly made overtures to its leadership that it wants to remain connected to it, and often the Church of England has responded positively, but never definitely, to these requests.
I mean, I suppose we could talk about all the litigation going on between the two churches. That's pretty much the only "relationship" I see between the two churches. Ltwin (talk) 00:09, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't suggest adding information about the various lawsuits. There are plenty of other places on Wikipedia that talk about all of that, and as far as I know, the ACNA itself is not directly involved.
I'll look at the section again - maybe it's OK as is. I just want to make sure it doesn't sound like ACNA is on the verge of becoming the new American province of the Anglican Communion unless there is clear evidence of that.
I wouldn't say there's no "relationship" between ACNA and TEC. I would instead say that there clearly IS a relationship which is characterized by hostility, rivalry, and suspicion. Not an agreement, but a definite relationship. Dunncon13 (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
"I wouldn't suggest adding information about the various lawsuits. There are plenty of other places on Wikipedia that talk about all of that"
I respectfully disagree. The subject of the article is the ACNA. Any lawsuits filed for or against them falls under that subject. In fact, that is precisely the information I came here looking for. Granted, it can have it's own article, but a brief description is definitely warranted. Further...
"I wouldn't say there's no "relationship" between ACNA and TEC. I would instead say that there clearly IS a relationship which is characterized by hostility, rivalry, and suspicion."
... what you say here is entirely ridiculous. That screams of bias and that clearly does not belong in any article at Wikipedia whatsoever. The job of Wikipedia is to provide information, the reader is the one to conclude what they will. Why is it so many have forgotten the rules of writing, like you? You obviously have an overly personal and strong opinion in all of this and so you should excuse yourself from tampering with the article. MagnoliaSouth (talk) 18:23, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Well now, that's a little harsh, don't you think? It seems to me that ACNA and TEC have a great deal of hostility, rivalry, and suspicion. I don't know why you think my saying so is "ridiculous." Do you think ACNA and TEC are all love and harmony with each other? If so, I would suggest you haven't been paying much attention. It's a divorce, or a series of divorces, and at times things have been ugly. There have been lawsuits, fights over church buildings, and accusations of schism and heresy. In any event, I expressed my opinion on the talk page, not in the article. I have tried to make my edits to this article (and others) as unbiased and neutral as possible. If you think I've done a poor job of that, you are welcome to make further edits, or discuss on the relevant talk page. But I would appreciate a more civil tone. Thanks. Dunncon13 (talk) 18:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Membership numbers

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I already emailed the Anglican Church in North America asking if they can provide more recent statistics concerning their current membership, since the given numbers are from their official report of 2010 and all indicates that their membership is now larger. If someone knows more recent accurate statistics concerning the ACNA membership I would appreciate if they were provided.Mistico (talk) 00:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

ACNA and TAC/Continuing

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Is ACNA generally a "continuing Anglican" movement? If not, is it only the question of women's ordination that separates them? is there a Wiki article that gives an overview of all the various Anglican movements of the past 50 years? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

ACNA isn't a Continuing Anglican church. Continuing Anglican churches are usually Anglo-Catholic and appeared in opposition mostly to women ordination, started in the United States in 1977. ACNA, like the entry shows, is considered a province-in-formation of the Anglican Communion as an alternative church body to TEC and ACoC. ACNA has both Anglo-Catholic and Evangelical tendencies, and their dioceses have the right to ordain or not women. Generally speaking, with the exception of the Anglican Province of America, Continuing Anglican churches aren't interested in having any sort of relationship with ACNA, because of their theological differences, starting by women ordination. There is an article on the Continuing Anglican movement, if you want to know it better and understand how it differs from ACNA.Mistico (talk) 21:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I would only add to Mistico's statement by clarifying that ACNA and some Anglican Communion provinces consider it to be a province in formation. Other Anglican Communion provinces think it has not status in the Communion whatsoever.
ACNA is not part of the "Continuum." Rather, ACNA is part of what is called "Anglican realignment". The founders of ACNA did not simply withdraw from the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. Rather, they claimed to be withdrawing from unorthodox Anglican provinces in North America and coming under the oversight of other provinces in the Anglican Communion. For example, the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone and the Anglican Province of Rwanda all officially incorporated former parishes and dioceses of TEC and ACofC within their provincial boundaries. Therefore, this was not simply a matter of disaffected members leaving one church to start their own. This was disaffected Anglicans in North America claiming that they were justified in seeking "alternative primatial oversight" within the Anglican Communion, and, more importantly, actual Anglican Primates agreed with them and gave them such alternative oversight.
The ACNA is essentially seeking to replace TEC and ACofC as the recognized Anglican Province for the US and Canada. They continue to have support from the same Global South Provinces that gave them alternative oversight to begin with. The Anglican "Continuum" never had this kind of support and recognition within the Anglican Communion. Ltwin (talk) 06:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Readability and other issues.

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Writers must remember that readers who come to this page looking for information may have no idea what an Anglican Church is, much less what a church even is! You cannot assume what the reader does and does not know. I'm not saying it needs to be completely dumbed down, but it does need to be organized with fluid thoughts and it needs explanations of some terms. Sure, you can link to them but then the reader, trying to understand may end up 10 links deep never able to the article in frustration. I can understand that. Been there, done it.

In particular I think that the following needs to be addressed:

  • The history needs to include a brief history of the church in general. I'm not Episcopalian nor Anglican (I'm Methodist), so I'm uncertain but my understanding of their church history seems to go like this Church of England split from Roman Catholic during reformation, CoE members came to America and the Episcopal Church was established. The ACNA split from the Episcopal due to doctrinal differences. There seems to be no mention of its descent from Catholicism. Yes, it would matter in order for the reader to understand where its doctrine originated.
  • "The ACNA is in full communion with three member churches in the Anglican Communion:" As far as I can tell (maybe I missed it) there is no description of what a communion with other churches means. That phrase or something like it is repeated over and over and over again. For that to work, it really needs to be explained before use. To add to that, the phrase is overly repeated. Perhaps fresh eyes can figure out where it does and does not belong to clean it up a bit.
  • Regarding "Relations with other churches" I believe lawsuits filed for and against either church are absolutely within the scope of the article, but not down to the words itself. Just a brief explanation of what the lawsuits signify. To suppress the subject is an attempt at bias. Looking at it from a reader's POV, and again, assuming that the reader is unfamiliar with the material, this is a very important detail in the understanding of the establishment of the church. As an example, one doesn't write an article on the Reformation and leave out how people were burned for their beliefs. It is a fact, despite how any of us feel. It is part of the subject and like it or not, it belongs there.
  • "The Anglican Church in North America is affiliated with the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans. The ACNA is not a member of the Anglican Communion and is considered as an alternative church body to the Episcopal Church in the United States and the Anglican Church of Canada." Here is a prime example of improper writing. Says who? I'm not doubting it mind you, but this needs to be explained. Who says that the ACNA is considered an alternative church body? The Arch Bishop of Canterbury? The Episcopalians? The way it is written, it sounds like the writer's opinion.

Again, I would be happy to write all of this except that I'm very unfamiliar with the subject. Many of you are quite knowledgeable in the area and it is for this reason that I make these suggestions. I don't want to write something that is incorrect, factually. I think it's an excellent article, but it does need to be edited a bit. MagnoliaSouth (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Excellent points, Magnolisouth. Insider jargon is a perennial problem for articles on (and mostly written by members of) relatively self-preoccupied churches, especially those that stress their bishops and their traditions. The need for a fresh, outsider eye on these kinds of articles is extremely helpful to make the articles as accessible as possible. And what is Wikipedia about, if not to make information accessible to everyone? Cheers, --Wikibojopayne (talk) 01:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Recognition as an Anglican Communion province by the Global South and the FCA

Latest comment: 10 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

I added these important recognitions at the entry, since they are important. They were made at Archbishop Foley Beach investiture by seven Anglican Primates and the official statement is now available at the Anglican Church in North America, the Global South and the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans websites.Mistico (talk) 01:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to edit them out right now, but why, exactly, are they important? Anglican Communion membership is determinable objectively by the instruments of communion. ACNA is not in the Anglican Communion. Why does the article need to include statements from the "Global South" claiming that ACNA is part of the Anglican Communion, when those statements are factually incorrect? If we're going to include such statements, shouldn't we at least note in the article that the statements are wrong? Dunncon13 (talk) 17:18, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Paragraph 3 of the lede clearly states that the official instruments of unity do not recognize ACNA. Nonetheless, the primates' comments are worth mentioning IMO because they show a lack of unity about who gets to decide who is within the Anglican Communion. In other words, it shows that high-ranking leaders within the Anglican Communion are assuming for themselves the authority to say who is and who is not in that communion, and thus implicitly questioning the very legitimacy of the current power structure of the communion; and I think that's rather important not only for ACNA, but for the Anglican Communion as a whole.--Wikibojopayne (talk) 02:33, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
I agree with you. The question is that despite the fact that Canterbury and the official Anglican Communion, according to their instruments of communion, don't recognize the Anglican Church in North America as a province, the Anglican Communion is facing a "de facto" schism and the greatest internal divisions of their History, because there are several provinces, like those at Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans and many of the Global South who broke communion with the Episcopal Church of the United States and the Anglican Church of Canada, and now fully recognize the Anglican Church in North America as a province in their own right. This is not a forum to debate the situation and divisions of the Anglican Communion but it can be considered that there is a "de facto" schism concerning the communion between all their 38 provinces, which is now broken.Mistico (talk) 04:07, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
It seems to me that description of the conflict over what AC membership means, and of possible incipient schism, belongs on the Anglican Communion page and the Anglican realignment page. Some mention of the conflict on this page is probably appropriate too. But I don't think we need an exhaustive list of every time another Anglican issues another statement "recognizing" ACNA as within the Communion. To me, that gives the overall tone of the article too strong of a suggestion that ACNA is or might be or should be an actual part of the Anglican Communion. I really don't think that's an accurate portrayal. I don't think it's clear to the reader how controversial this "redefining" of AC membership is. To be fairer, I think that every time the article talks about some person saying "ACNA is in the Communion" it should also say that there is disagreement about what it means to be "in the Communion." Because when all those folks say ACNA is "in the Communion," they are using some definition of being "in" that differs from the traditional definition. It needs to be clear that the people at Foley Beach's investiture were NOT trying to say that ACNA is in communion with Canterbury. Or if they WERE trying to say that, they were wrong. So what exactly do they mean when they say ACNA is "in"? Dunncon13 (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
However, the material added to the article was wrong anyway. Foley Beach was recognized as an archbishop in the Anglican Communion, but it doesn't follow that the ACNA was recognized. I think the declaration was that "The Anglican Church in North America is Anglican and its primate is an archbishop of the Anglican Communion". That seems carefully worded to avoid saying the ACNA is part of the AC. StAnselm (talk) 23:56, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

The official statement of the Global South Primates says: "Mercy, grace, and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. We, the undersigned primates, were honored to participate in the joyful investiture of the Most Rev. Dr. Foley Beach as Archbishop and Primate of the Anglican Church in North America, and to receive him as a fellow Primate of the Anglican Communion./ Though our contexts vary in our different parts of the globe, the heart of our calling is to share the transforming love of God through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We celebrate that the Anglican Church in North America shares in that same mission and purpose. We and our Provinces will continue to share in Gospel work together, and pledge our continued partnership with the Anglican Church in North America to pursue the work of Christ." [11] It is implied that they recognize ACNA as a Anglican Communion church member, since it wouldnt make any sense just to recognize the Archbishop of ACNA while not recognizing the church, and ACNA has been present at the Global South Encounter in 2010 and at GAFCON II in 2013.Mistico (talk) 02:09, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it is implied; it is not explicit - as it was, for example, with the Diocese of North West Australia's statement. StAnselm (talk) 02:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Ecumenical relationships

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The recent ACNA College of Bishops / Provincial Council, that took place in Vancouver, Canada, 22-26 June 2015, issued the following "Ecumenical Relations Task Force Report" that addressed the ecumenical relationships in which ACNA has been involved: [12]. I will use his most important information to improve that part of the entry.Mistico (talk) 02:06, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Anglican Church in North America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Missionary district in Cuba

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This is mentioned in the opening paragraph. Can we please have a source for this? I don't see it mentioned anywhere else in the article. I've searched the ACNA's website and didn't find anything about ACNA starting a work in that country. In addition, the ACNA's church finder doesn't list any churches in Cuba. Ltwin (talk) 20:20, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

The Missionary District of Cuba is a part of the REC Diocese of Western Canada and Alaska, and it was launched in 2003. It was started before the inception of ACNA, by the REC. Its probably not listed yet in the ACNA's church finder because several of their churches are still on formation. But it sure does exists, you can check it out here: [13]Mistico (talk) 16:28, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Anglican Church in North America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Dioceses

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

It's quite possible that I'm just blind, but regarding your recent edit, Ltwin, where in that document does it say that there are 30 dioceses? Graham (talk) 01:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

@Graham11: The citation is for the membership statistics. The 30 dioceses is cited elsewhere in the article, in particular, the sub-section titled "Dioceses". Please see MOS:LEADCITE, which states:

Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. Leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, and information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source . . .

There is no need to cite 30 dioceses in the lead, unless you are challenging that there are in fact 30 dioceses?Ltwin (talk) 02:00, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Darn, I hadn't thought about MOS:LEADCITE. I figured it had to be something obvious I was missing. Thanks for the prompt response, Ltwin! Cheers, Graham (talk) 02:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Anglican Church in North America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:31, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Anglican Church in North America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:29, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anglican_Church_in_North_America/Archive_2&oldid=1228752072"