Dear [name],My wife and I haven't received ours yet, although we expect to get one, which means that these letters will have gone out to at least nine people. In our case, since we're in the process of becoming Catholics, it's not important. But there are several comments to make here.I am advised that Bishop Stephen D. Strawn, Episcopal Visitor to the Diocese of the West ("DOW") in the Anglican Church in America ("ACA"), has determined and informed you that as and from June 17, 2012, you ceased to be and are no longer a communicant in good standing in the Church, but have as of that date been removed as a communicant within the ACA, the DOW and all of its constituent parishes, specifically including St. Mary of the Angels Anglican Church ("St. Mary's"), by virtue and as a result of your having abandoned comunion, from and including the aforesaid June 17, 2012 date, as stated and set forth in Bishop Strawn's letter to you.
This letter is to inform you that consistent with your abandonment of communion and the determination thereof by Bishop Strawn in accord with the Rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer, the Constitution and Canons of the ACA and the DOW, and the Bylaws of St. Mary's, effective as and from June 17, 2012 you have ceased to be a Comunicant of the Parish of St. Mary's, a communicant in good standing or a member thereof, and your name has been removed and stricken from its Parish Register.
Sincerely,
The Very Rev. Canon Anthony J. Morello, Ph.D.
Rector and Priest in Charge
St. Mary of the Angels Anglican
First, excommunication is an unusual and serious matter. (It doesn't send you to hell, but it does have a fire-and-brimstone connotation.) In my 30 years as an active Episcopalian, I heard of only one in any of the parishes I attended. Since I was peripherally involved in the situation, I know a little about it: the clergy began to suspect that a man who'd been hanging around some of the social events was basically a con artist out to snare wealthy widows (it was an Episcopal parish in a good part of town, after all).
This would, of course, have been part of their pastoral responsibility to protect their flock from marauding wolves. Since I'd gotten to know the suspected con artist at some of these social functions, the clergy pulled me aside for a serious talk and asked for my considered evaluation of what the guy was there for. At the conclusion of the meeting, the two clergy decided to take some unspecified action to tell the guy he wouldn't be welcome around the place in the future -- in fact, I'm not sure if they formally "excommunicated" him; they may just have told him to get lost, which probably had the same effect.
I've also heard of a single threat of excommunication: I knew a rector who'd served at a parish in Mississippi during the Civil Rights period. The decision was made to integrate the Episcopal parishes in that diocese. Some members of this rector's parish objected: the rector simply replied that if they didn't go along, they'd be excommunicated. I assume the bishop had planned this response in advance. But these are examples I've seen in Anglicanism of excommunication: you're either a crook or you're definitely not with the program.
A clerical observer has pointed out that the reason Morello cites for the excommunication of seven-plus members of the parish is "abandonment of communion". However, "abandonment of communion" applies canonically only to clergy; i.e., if a priest goes rogue and joins the Scientologists, he can be deposed on that basis. This is one of the canonical charges that were applied to David Moyer during the lengthy process of removing him from Good Shepherd Rosemont Episcopal, for instance: he'd become a bishop in the ACA. That's abandonment of communion, involving clergy.
A Protestant lay person, on the other hand, is in a different situation. If I'm a Presbyterian and decide to try out the Methodist congregation down the street, there's no penalty. Especially if the ACA authorities lock St Mary of the Angels and parishioners have no choice but to attend a church service elsewhere on Sundays, the parishioners are doing nothing wrong, canonically, legally, or morally. The canons and the parish bylaws do say that to be a member in good standing, you have to go to communion at the parish twice a year, at Christmas and Easter, but none of those who've been excommunicated have omitted that so far in 2012. In fact, by barring members from communion during Christmas 2012, they're forcing them to give up their membership eligibility, which is a different matter.
My own estimate of the seven people I know to have been excommunicated is that they were solid, regular parishioners who had no particular agenda other than to attend mass, volunteer as appropriate, pay their pledges, and eventually to go into the Ordinariate. None was a diehard Kelley supporter; several of the seven (though not all) were on the same elected vestry that took Msgr Steenson's recommendation to place Fr Kelley on an extended sabbatical that would effectively have been a severance package. All, however, supported the entry of St Mary's into the Ordinariate (as did 80% of all parishioners).
It's pretty plain that the intent of these excommunications is to secure a compliant majority at the next parish meeting for whatever Strawn and Morello have in mind. In any real denomination, I can't imagine a bishop sustaining these excommunications, but as we're seeing, the ACA simply isn't a real denomination.
UPDATE: An eighth parishioner reports that he received an excommunication letter as of December 10.
