top of page

AS EYE SEE IT: "One must not choose to split one's Church..."



By the Rev. Dr. Orley Swartzentruber


The Response of Bishop FitzSimons Alison to the argument of Ephraim Radner's lecture in Charleston raises a very central point, and deserves to receive all the attention he and Radner give it. I am grateful that this debate arises between the two men, who have great respect for each other, and whom I personally admire.


With the background of a former Mennonite minister, nourished on a heavy diet of Anabaptist history, in which divisions upon divisions are an outstanding feature, I come with a strong conviction hammered out among some of us younger ones who took it upon ourselves to discuss at some length the issue of the "legitimate break."


We came then to the conclusion that a break in church fellowship is only legitimate when it is forced upon you: one must not choose to split one's church. The Anabaptists chose otherwise, with disastrous consequences. To take but one clear example from the Reformation, Luther never asked to create a Protestant church. He asked for reforms in the Catholic church (the issue was Indulgences) and he was excommunicated for it. He proceeded from there, in a word, to do the next best thing available to him.


Not to dwell on other people's history, however, I note that bishop Alison raises the same central question when he says, "Philip Turner, one of [Radner's] colleagues, makes it clear what is his hope: If the Primates and Rowan Williams are prepared to exercise some discipline on the American Episcopal Church and the Diocese of New Westminster in Canada, then we will continue to have an Anglican Communion"


But Bishop Alison asks, "And if not?"


I submit that on this question hinges a great difference – a moral difference – as to how we ought to act. "If we are given a choice, then Bishop Allison's vision is probably correct..." If we are given no choice, then Ephraim Radner's vision is probably correct. If we have other choices, as for example the choice Turner contemplates, then I believe our duty is to remain within, and continue to work for reform as we are doing. In any case, I submit that as there is no case for a just "pre-emptive war," so there is none, in matters ecclesiastical, for pre-emptive schism.


The Rev. Dr. A, Orley Swartzentruber Rector, All Saints', Princeton, NJ. (Retired)

Recent Posts

See All
A RESPONSE TO MARK HARRIS - BY ERNESTO M. OBREGON

In his recent article to The Witness, Fr. Harris presents us a post-modern justification for the actions of the General Convention of ECUSA in 03. For despite his analysis of Anglican history, he show

 
 
 

Comments


ABOUT US

In 1995 he formed VIRTUEONLINE an Episcopal/Anglican Online News Service for orthodox Anglicans worldwide reaching nearly 4 million readers in 204 countries.

CONTACT

570 Twin Lakes Rd.,
P.O. Box 111
Shohola, PA 18458

virtuedavid20@gmail.com

SUBSCRIBE FOR EMAILS

Thanks for submitting!

©2024 by Virtue Online.
Designed & development by Experyans

  • Facebook
bottom of page