An Email Circulating Among AMiA Clergy

from Stand Firm by Matt Kennedy 

Here's an interesting email that has been circulating among some AMiA clergy:

What follows below is from the ___. It is his informed opinion regarding the affiliation and credentials of our churches and clergy respectively.

1. Our orders are held in Rwanda. All of us are clergy of PEAR, not of AMiA. The AMiA is an ecclesial structure established through the primatial vicar to carry out the mandates and mission of the primate. It is not our ordaining body nor our place of canonical residence.

2. No churches exist canonically within the AMiA. Our churches are ecclesially seated in Rwanda.

3. In fact, unless we opt out of Rwanda into the AMiA, we are no longer a part of the AMiA.

4. No bishop who resigned from the Church of Rwanda has canonical authority over us. They certainly can dismantle the structural system of the AMiA, but canonically, they have no authority over us or our churches. We are seated in the church of Rwanda.

5. Therefore those who have left the church of Rwanda by resignation are the one who have departed ecclesially. They are, in terms of Anglican structures, floating without a home. They actually have no churches: the churches do not reside with the bishop but in the province. Unless a church opts OUT of Rwanda it is in Rwanda. It cannot be in the AMiA (as a missionary society) without opting out of Rwanda.

6. Therefore, churches that join the AMiA as a missionary society depart from the Anglican structure of Rwanda. Unless the AMiA somehow finds itself seated within a recognized province, it is no longer ecclesiastically Anglican.

7. It is up to ++Rwaje to create forms and systems for the effective oversight of the churches in the US. All (formerly AMiA?) churches are technically under his oversight until they opt out.

8. Point: we are safe under the oversight of Rwanda. It is not whether or not we consider ourselves to be, or they consider us to be. We are seated in Rwanda. We don’t have to do anything.

There is obviously discontent within at least some quarters of the AMiA. I certainly understand not wanting to be left without provincial cover and not wanting to participate in what seems to be a schism but is the information included in this email accurate? I don't understand AMiA polity very well. Is it true that parishes are independently bound to Rwanda without regard to the decisions of their bishops? I would think that is a very important question to answer definitively.