why our parish is staying: the diversified parish

I explained in this post why my husband and I are leaving the Episcopal Church (TEC). It’s pretty straight-forward: TEC is heretical and we’re not, and there’s another Anglican home for Americans now.

Where it gets weird is the reason that the rest of our orthodox parish isn’t leaving with us. Our parish has come up with a novel plan, and I have to be honest, when I first heard about it, I didn’t believe it. But before I tell you about the novel plan, let me give you some background.

Our parish is a pretty unique one, in being full of both young and old, and full of life. About thirty years ago, it split in half over women’s ordination (I think – I wasn’t around, so I’m going by what I remember being told). Our parish is made up of the people who stayed. Then, ten years ago, there was an influx of young people from the local Christian university. My husband and I were some of the first of them. This greatly increased the size of the parish, especially when many of us young folk (as young people do) got married and started having kids. (Lots of toddlers and babies at our church; it’s great.)

We’re also one of the few (the only?) orthodox parishes in our diocese. Our bishop tolerates us, but won’t ordain our candidates for the priesthood (with one exception).

It’s also a parish with a lot going on – a very strong music ministry, lots of devotional groups, a book group, an artists’ group, food outreaches, etc. And people are amazing about helping their fellow parishioners when there’s a need. Our family’s seen it ourselves when we had our long hospital experience last year – so many people visited and brought meals or helped watch the kids. I’ve seen other people here help each other with housing, with food, and with many other things. That’s the very healthy side of our parish, and if everyone seems to put a lot of value in that sense of community, I can see why. It is valuable.

So, when the point came when a big group of people (at least thirty or forty of us) realized that something had to be done in response to TEC’s heresy, the problem was that there was a strong feeling that whatever the response was, we had to make sure that we didn’t break up the parish.

You can see the problem already, right? If not breaking up the parish is The Most Important Thing, then our response to TEC’s heresy is going to be dictated not by theology but, in a real way, by sentiment.

I have to stop myself here, because I want to make sure this is understood: even though I think that valuing community over theology is a wrong ordering (church community exists because of theology, and not the other way around), I want to make it clear that the community that’s being held up here really is a good one. I don’t agree with the mistake they’re making, but I understand it. As someone who knows she’s losing that community, I really understand it. As Chesterton said, the way to love anything is to realize that it may be lost. In that way, I think I understand the value of our community more than anyone who’s getting to stay. I’m already in mourning.

I guess what I’m saying is that our parish’s novel plan came into existence because of something real, community, even if that something real isn’t the most important real thing.

So, what is the plan? The plan my parish is currently going with is called “a diversified parish”. The plan is to have those called to stay Episcopal stay Episcopal, those called to be Anglican (i.e., join ACNA), join ACNA, and those called to become Catholic become Roman Catholic. So far, not so weird, right? We should all go where the Lord calls us.

Here’s the weird part: the plan is to have everyone go affiliate with his planned denomination/church branch, but then stay right in our TEC parish and all worship together.

So the Roman Catholics? Will be attending mass at a church where they can’t take communion. The ACNA Anglicans? Will be under a TEC bishop. The Episcopalians? Well, actually, for them, nothing changes.

It’s been said that this is a plan that will appease everyone’s conscience, because those who can’t stay in TEC won’t technically be in TEC. In reality, their names will not be on any TEC parish roll, but they will be worshipping in a TEC church, tithing to a TEC church and under the spiritual authority of a TEC bishop. Which, I think, is still being in TEC. So, we’re being offered a church that won’t be our church except that we’ll be using it like it was our church – and what was the point of “leaving” again?

It’s even harder for the Roman Catholics, because they can’t even lawfully take communion at our church.

I understand that this “diversified parish” plan comes out of the desire not to lose even one person from our parish. Again, it’s a laudable desire. But it becomes less laudable when its elevated out of its proper place.

The problem is that it ignores fundamental theological differences. I hope and trust that someday, when Jesus comes back, the divisions between us all will disappear. But today, I am being dishonest if I say I think the Pope is the spiritual head of the church on Earth. My Roman Catholic friends are being dishonest if they say they assent to the 39 Articles. Sure, either I’m wrong or they are (or maybe both). But in the meantime, it behooves each of us to act in accordance with our best reasoning, trusting that God gave us our minds in order to use them. In the end, we will each give an account of how we used them, and how honestly.

I think that this “diversified parish” makes us all act out a lie: it makes us all act like we agree with each other when we don’t. I’d rather they be the best Roman Catholics they can be while I am the best Anglican I can be, because this would be honest Christianity on both our parts. Furthermore, how can we ever really discuss our differences and come to agreement unless we’re honest about what the differences are?

(I would note that my friends who disagree with me would point out that there isn't any confusion in this unity, because no one is pretending that the Roman Catholics aren't Roman Catholic, or that the Anglicans aren't Anglican, etc. And, again, I agree that no one is lying about it in their words - they're being very above-board and honest about the plan. Again, I'm referring to a sort of self-deception about whether the plan actually does what they say it does, not any kind of active lack of honesty.)

I’m very afraid that this “diversified parish” is making my parish just as disastrously inclusive as the rest of TEC.

As someone called to leave TEC, this plan does not “satisfy my conscience”. As long as my parish is in TEC, and I am part of my parish, I am part of TEC. Calling myself an ACNA member while attending a TEC parish is living a lie, no matter how comforting the lie is. How can I have my heart in one place and my body (and money) in another without being fundamentally divided?

Again, I do not say that the members of my parish who are endorsing this plan are purposeful liars. I know them. They are being above-board with their plan; in fact, my understanding is that there is an article coming out about the “diversified parish” within the month in a major media outlet. (Actually, that’s why I’m blogging about it now; I refrained before because I hoped that the plan might change.) I don’t think there’s any deliberate deception about what the plan is; I just think that the plan itself is a sort of self-deception. It’s telling ourselves this wonderful thing: “There is no difference between being R. Catholic or Anglican or Episcopalian – not one great enough to keep us from all existing together in one parish”, in hopes that if we say it often enough, it will become true.

I think that saying it doesn’t make it so. In many ways, I hope I’m wrong, because I love my parish, and I don’t want it to self-destruct. I still hope (hope, hope, hope) that my parish will find its way clear to leave TEC, and to leave it all together. I hope their glorious dream – of holding this good community together – is indeed possible.

But I think there is a problem in saying, “TEC isn’t right. ACNA isn’t right. Only we are right.” I think the question to ask is, “why us? Why us hundred or two hundred people, out of the entire Anglican world? Why do we think we are the only ones who have The Solution?”

So. That’s the weird reason that we’re one of the few people out of our orthodox parish who are leaving TEC. Because everyone else thinks they can leave and stay at the same time. Again, I hope they’re right. But I think they’re wrong.

And I know it’s not over yet. I still have hope that we can all leave together, the Lord willing. But right now, it’s really, really weird.

peace of Christ to you,
Jessica Snell

p.s. I should also add that there's a group of people in my parish who are planning on leaving, but are trying to leave more slowly, in order to make a way for more people to follow them. Adam and I are planning on leaving at the end of the summer both in order to participate in a local church plant and because when we felt called to leave, we felt called to leave this year. I hope great good things for my friends who are trying a slower method - they may well have the right of it, and we'll be at our parish through the end of the summer, so who knows? Maybe we'll get to help them.