There’s a lot of confusion in the ACNA world. This is known. But what is not as well known is that a lot of the confusion could be resolved by simply reading the various written documents which we say are authoritative. One of them, expressly named by the ACNA constitution, is the 2008 GAFCON Statement and Jerusalem Declaration. The ACNA Constitution puts it this way:

We are grateful for the encouragement of Primates of the worldwide Anglican Communion who gathered at Jerusalem in June 2008 and called on us to establish a new Province in North America. We affirm the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) Statement and Jerusalem Declaration issued 29 June 2008.

Here we see an awareness that the ACNA itself is a sort of outworking of that 2008 conference. Prior to that, it was not clear what sort of jurisdictional authority and integrity the various groups who would become the ACNA had. Some may still have been unclear about how they should regard The Episcopal Church. GAFCON answered those questions. Its major statement from that meeting is directed to those very questions. And then the formation of the ACNA was one practical application of those ideas and convictions.

What’s important about the GAFCON Jerusalem Statement and Declaration?

The Jerusalem Statement is the longer document. The Jerusalem Declaration is included within that statement. The statement provides some context and intent for what follows.

In the Statement, we read: “The Global Anglican Future Conference emerged in response to a crisis within the Anglican Communion, a crisis involving three undeniable facts concerning world Anglicanism.”

It then goes on to explain those three facts. 1) “the acceptance and promotion within the provinces of the Anglican Communion of a different ‘gospel’ (cf. Galatians 1:6-8) which is contrary to the apostolic gospel,” 2) “the declaration by provincial bodies in the Global South that they are out of communion with bishops and churches that promote this false gospel,” and 3) “the manifest failure of the Communion Instruments to exercise discipline in the face of overt heterodoxy.”

So there you have it. Back in 2008 the case was made that there were churches promoting a false gospel, that the orthodox churches were “out of communion” with them, and that the traditional instruments of the Anglican Communion had failed to maintain discipline and order.

Who are these heterodox bodies? GAFCON was willing to name names: “The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada, in proclaiming this false gospel, have consistently defied the 1998 Lambeth statement of biblical moral principle (Resolution 1.10).”

The Jerusalem Declaration, which follows the opening remarks, adds this point of action: “We reject the authority of those churches and leaders who have denied the orthodox faith in word or deed. We pray for them and call on them to repent and return to the Lord.”

It is because The Episcopal Church has “denied the orthodox faith in word or deed” that their authority is rejected. And it is because their authority is rejected that a new ecclesiastical corporation can be formed for the continuing orthodox Anglicans to use in order to reassert faithful Anglicanism in North America.

That is the reason for the existence of the ACNA. The ACNA would not, could not, exist if this was not the case.

And so, yes, to the degree which anyone in the ACNA says that The Episcopal Church is an orthodox church body with which we share communion, they are contradicting the legitimacy of the ACNA itself. This cannot be true without the ACNA being schismatic. But the ACNA does not believe that to be true. And the churches of GAFCON do not believe that to be true. They have made this clear since the very beginning. If ACNA members, and especially clergy, are unsure about all of this, then they should re-read the basics.