ACNA bishops vote for the status quo on women's orders [AnglicanInk]

My impression has been an opposite one... the way I see it, unity had been the big winner here. While a difference of doctrine remains for the time being among the current bishops, and they've stated this openly in the final outcome, it has not led to a schism and warring factions of Anglicans trying to ruin each other, or with people starting competing churches out there, like it has happened with nearly every other Christian branch out there.

 

I guess I would say give it time- I don't see unity, I see polarization of positions that didn't get resolved. It seems that all of things I read about the Anglican church are "agree to disagree" name of the game until it finally comes to a head. Whatever the reading of the situation, I don't find that it gives me much confidence in current church bodies out there. It is bewildering for a new person to navigate all of the ins and outs of these disagreements.

I've been to a few continuing Anglican churches and they are pretty much as described here on the board- moribund and declining. I have much hope for the ACNA, so when I see potential fractures it starts to look like the last line of defense for Anglican churches is vanishing from the horizon. Just looking at the homepage for TEC shows that they are far more invested in leftist social justice movements than being a church. In fact, if I didn't know anything about church, the Bible, Christianity or Jesus, I would assume it was a secular group. I really hope the ACNA doesn't fracture over these same issues that broke apart the TEC. These positions have become so pervasive it is hard to even recognize the danger they present in creating discord.

 

The only way it could seem that is if we didn't know those fractures existed and now suddenly they exist and it seems gloomy, but they were there all this time, which is why in the early days of 2008 when these fractured people (bishops) came together many, including from the Continuing Movement, were extremely skeptical that this thing could work out. It seemed like another Continuing Church that fell out of TEC.

But fast-forward to 2018 and they have more people/members than all Continuing Churches put together have accumulated since the 1970s; the whole United States is covered, there are half a dozen seminaries and/or Anglican Track programs; there are ties and bonds with all major Anglican bodies around the world. There is a front-row seat in the continuing battle for the Anglican Communion, so much so that they're now even sending out their own missionary bishops to re-take the United Kingdom back to the Gospel. They not only have a solidifying code of canon laws and constitutions that's beginning to encompass many aspects of ecclesiastical life, but beginning to make doctrinal proclamations about things going on in the American Culture. Archbishop Beach has signed the Nashville Statement, and I can imagine that they will make even further inroads into American public culture from now on, chastizing the sinful, extolling the saintly. The issue of Women's Ordination is the last major fracture left, and while I don't minimize its colossal weight and future (it is an all-important issue), I want to emphasize what ACNA is otherwise, as a whole.

Right, that's precisely why things have gone down they have. This issue is so important and polarizing that they could have easily broken up over this... now granted the orthodox bishops outnumber the liberals by a large margin so the fractured bishops would be just a handful, but it's the principle, the House of Bishops decided to go with unity and put this issue on another moratorium. This isn't "yet another" issue on the moratorium like in the TEC days, this is the only issue on moratorium. Everything else we are clear and strong on.

The new Prayer Book is getting solidified (and the classical Prayer Books are 100% allowed). The Marriage Taskforce is working on ecclesiastical guidelines for the social doctrines of the Church. The Catechism is being readied. While no one is happy with the WO moratorium, it would be even worse if we fractioured into 2 or 3 or even 4 splinters. It is one, it will continue to function as one, we will continue to missionize America and England and other parts of the world in conjunction with the rest of the Anglican Communion, and when our internal strength is made greater this issue will be revsited once more (because no one is happy with keeping it forever).

 

Shocking.

Said no one.

 

I know others stated similar things, but here is my say on this.
I do not understand how people want to change the faith to allow women priests? They say it to keep up with the times, or some other line. I have never seen anything good come from women priests. The faith is still fading, the churches are getting more liberal and the ones led by women are going down the liberal road the fastest. I just see no gain going against traditions and scripture.
I have little hope that the big christian groups will change there ways. I go to a small parish, that is part of a small organization in a ultra liberal part of the country. If my parish went away I would have no where else to go. It is sad but, that the world I live in today. Thinking the ACNA would do the write thing and become the standard bearer of Christian Orhodoxy was a pipe dream, I think a lot of people wanted to happen. I knew this was going nowhere and laughing at there "findings"

 

Where did you find info on the Anglican Chaplaincy ordaining women?

 

http://anglicanchaplains.org/wp/

It doesn't hurt to live in a fleet concentration area with an Air Force Base up the street from my house. The chaplaincy is confusing though because they have a lot of "commissioned lay ministers" as well as clergy. I'm not sure if there current bishop has actively ordained any but he accepts those who come his way, which is no better in my book.

 

I'm not Anglican, so I don't really have a dog in this fight. That being said, I really cannot understand how people can reject what Scripture and Tradition say (or don't say) about this subject. Do they genuinely believe female ordination is okay? Or do they "know" that it's not and don't care? I would say that both parties exist within my own Church.

 

Since I'm in the REC I'll shed some light on this issue. Bishop Hicks recently held a very good REC Convocation on this whole issue, where he explained why things were done the way they were done, the plans to move forward, and the incredible concessions made to the orthodox party by the liberals (pro-WO) which will be a foundation for future developments.

In passing he also shed some light on Bishop Lebhar. According to his report, Neil Lebhar does not ordain women. Not only to the priesthood but even to the diaconate.

At minute 58:
Question: "Do you see a moratorium on women's ordination happening until this issue is resolved?"
Bishop Hicks: "Some bishops have done voluntary moratoriums... Bishop Lebhar in Florida said to me: I don't see any prohibition against ordaining women, but, I'm not going to do it; to the presbyterate or the diaconate, until the Church gives me further direction on this. So he voluntarily stopped, because he's enough of a churchman to see that connection. Some bishops who didn't ordain priests but did ordain deacons went on a moratorium of ordaining deacons as well."
http://www.rec-nema.org/?p=5516

For the latter I imagine he might have in mind Bishop Kevin Allen, Diocese of Cascadia although that's just a guess on my part.

 

Ok, I hear what Bishop Hicks is saying.

Now go to Bishop Lebhar Diocese webpage and open the Ordination process that is current in his diocese.

Women can be ordained, per the Discernment for Ordination Process. The word Aspirant is used throughout the document. Canon Mark DiCristina is in charge of the ordination process.

From page 13 of the document
If the Aspirant is a woman, the Bishop asks
that the PDT members be open to the ordination of
women as this is not the arena for her to have
to address or defend that issue.

Something does not add up. Bishop Lebher tells Bishop Hicks he will not ordain women. But his Ordination process allows women. No where in this 25 page document does Bishop Lebher say or inform anyone he will not ordain a woman. In fact reading the document, one see the Diocese ie Bishop, is very comfortable ordaining women. The only caution given in the 25 page document is to those who hold to the Scriptures. They are told they can not bring WO up, can not question, etc.

No where does Bishop Lebher tell women seeking ordination, nor the Rectors examining Aspirant's that he has put a hold on WO.

I also am in the REC and live in Bishop Lebher Diocese. I have seen women claiming to be priest at the altar in his diocese. One of his parishes has a Methodist woman as a priest. Yeah go figure that. I actually saw what she thought passes for a liturgy. I refused to stand around the altar holding hands saying something she call an eucharistic prayer.

Go to the list of clergy. Look at the pictures. 20% of them are women. St Michael in Andalusia Alabama is looking for a priest. They have a women Aspirant. I spoke with the Senior Warden interested in the position of Rector. My scriptural position on WO was a no go for this parish.

I now assist Continuing Church parishes in the area.

I love our REC Bishops, but they are too trusting. My old parish, Church of the Resurrection in Shalimar, Bishop Morse approved a WO supporting Deacon. I objected, but I was only the Curate and the Rector was agreeable to the Deacon. I had to work with him when the Rector left under a cloud.
This Deacon did not hold to the Canons of the Church. My mistake was going to Rome. Bishop Morse approved a recent TEC priest, who also supported WO, to replace me. Long story short, these two clergy lied about my Bishop and misrepresented him and the REC to the parish. They brought in a female deacon, wife of the male deacon. Jumped ship to Bishop Lebher. I know many of the former parish went to Rome or to protestant churches. I received far too many phone calls from members of this parish crying about what these clergy were doing. This was a parish that left the TEC with nothing and built a parish. And it was taken away by the same type of people they left 30 years ago.

I grieve everyday for what happened to that parish. I do not trust anyone who supports WO. I do not find them trust worthy. And if Bishop Lebher is telling one of our bishops he has stopped ordaining women, he has not told his Diocese. I hate to say this, the Diocese Web site tells us WO is ongoing. Bishop Lehber tells Bishop Hicks he has stopped WO. Both can not be correct. Bishop Lehber is not being truthful with either his diocese or Bishop Hicks. Since 20% of his diocese is female clergy and he has female aspirants working on ordination and no where on his official sites does he mention any hold on WO.....listen I use to be a fraud investigator. With the evidence out there, some one is being lied too.

If you have any factual evidence to the contrary, official Diocese communications etc from Bishop Lehber. An alternative website where he documents what he is telling Bishop Hick. Please direct me to it. I would eagerly like to read Bishop Lehber change of heart and see where Fr. Mark DiCristina has created a new ordination process sans women. Since Bishop Lehber has told Bishop Hicks he has stopped. Show me the evidence.

Blessings

Fr. Mark

 

• We agree that there is insufficient scriptural warrant to accept women’s ordination to the priesthood as standard practice throughout the Province.
• However, we continue to acknowledge that individual dioceses have constitutional authority to ordain women to the priesthood.

I was going to comment, but this says everything. Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy.