Anglican province already showing some possible cracks in the foundation

[gurneyhalleck1]

Anglicans in the new North American Province ACNA who are “conservatives” are already duking it out about women priests. Bob Duncan, the new Archbishop, is already trying to do damage control on the female ordination allowances.

Duncan said: “For those who believe the ordination of women to be a grave error, and for those who believe it scripturally justifiable . . . we should be in mission together until God sorts us out…it’s not perfect, but it’s enough…”

Can you imagine if the bishops had said back during the Nicene times, “let’s just agree to be Arian or against Arianism for now. It’s no big deal. The important thing is we all love Jesus!” oh man!

Another part of a recent Christianity Today article talks about their views on women’s ordination:

[Religion journalist George] Conger explained the ecclesiastical distinction between allowing female bishops and allowing female priests. “In the Anglican understanding, a bishop is a bishop of the whole catholic church, meaning that person should be acceptable in all places that the catholic church is,” Conger told CT. “[The ACNA] can live with women being at the local level of priest, because a woman priest in New York doesn’t do anything to the people in Fort Worth, Texas, who think it’s contrary to Scripture.”

It’s amazing to me why they’re forming a new province if they don’t feel that each diocese has some affinity, relationship, importance to the others? This view is bizarre to me. Why have a province and common cause if one diocese is doing something repugnantly heretical in the eyes of another? How is that catholic with a small “c?”

What do you all think of this? I think it’s absolutely absurd; so often I get frustrated by the Catholic Church in so many ways. I really get fed up with bureaucracy, the extensive canon law, and I sometimes disagree with individual teachings. I also get frustrated with leadership in some areas. But when I read this, looking back as a former Anglican highly sympathetic to the conservatives left in that denomination, it’s mind-numbing!

Here’s the article for anyone interested blog.christianitytoday.com/women/2009/07/womens_ordination_a_crack_in_t.html

Archbishop Duncan ended the interview saying: “Our adversary, the Devil, is interested in what is happening here,” Duncan told last week’s crowd. “A reformed Anglican Church in North America is one of the enemy’s greatest concerns. He will try to draw us into old ways and old fights. It is essential that we stand together."

Isn’t female ordination a serious enough heresy to warrant a fight? I’d just like to hear everyone’s thoughts on this…

 

[GKC]

Anglicans in the new North American Province ACNA who are “conservatives” are already duking it out about women priests. Bob Duncan, the new Archbishop, is already trying to do damage control on the female ordination allowances.

Duncan said: “For those who believe the ordination of women to be a grave error, and for those who believe it scripturally justifiable . . . we should be in mission together until God sorts us out…it’s not perfect, but it’s enough…”

Can you imagine if the bishops had said back during the Nicene times, “let’s just agree to be Arian or against Arianism for now. It’s no big deal. The important thing is we all love Jesus!” oh man!

Another part of a recent Christianity Today article talks about their views on women’s ordination:

[Religion journalist George] Conger explained the ecclesiastical distinction between allowing female bishops and allowing female priests. “In the Anglican understanding, a bishop is a bishop of the whole catholic church, meaning that person should be acceptable in all places that the catholic church is,” Conger told CT. “[The ACNA] can live with women being at the local level of priest, because a woman priest in New York doesn’t do anything to the people in Fort Worth, Texas, who think it’s contrary to Scripture.”

It’s amazing to me why they’re forming a new province if they don’t feel that each diocese has some affinity, relationship, importance to the others? This view is bizarre to me. Why have a province and common cause if one diocese is doing something repugnantly heretical in the eyes of another? How is that catholic with a small “c?”

What do you all think of this? I think it’s absolutely absurd; so often I get frustrated by the Catholic Church in so many ways. I really get fed up with bureaucracy, the extensive canon law, and I sometimes disagree with individual teachings. I also get frustrated with leadership in some areas. But when I read this, looking back as a former Anglican highly sympathetic to the conservatives left in that denomination, it’s mind-numbing!

Here’s the article for anyone interested blog.christianitytoday.com/women/2009/07/womens_ordination_a_crack_in_t.html

Archbishop Duncan ended the interview saying: “Our adversary, the Devil, is interested in what is happening here,” Duncan told last week’s crowd. “A reformed Anglican Church in North America is one of the enemy’s greatest concerns. He will try to draw us into old ways and old fights. It is essential that we stand together."

Isn’t female ordination a serious enough heresy to warrant a fight? I’d just like to hear everyone’s thoughts on this…

What are my thoughts on this.

Lemme see…

About as before, I’d say.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

What are my thoughts on this.

Lemme see…

About as before, I’d say.

GKC

Well, heck, GKC, I know your thoughts! You know mine! We’re dittoes on this. lol…I just find it interesting the way the ACNA views each diocese as an island to another and don’t see any heresy in the situation? Also, in light of that AMIA report that came out a few years ago, to me, anyone who was for women’s ordination then would’ve changed their minds and would be more enlightened about it by now. At this point, what is there left to learn about the issue that Duncan thinks would change minds and enable God to “sort out” this problem? The sweeping things under the rug “for now” seems so TEC! They’re looking more like TEC each day…sad.

I suppose I was looking more at reaction to the article. I found it fascinating.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Anglicans in the new North American Province ACNA who are “conservatives” are already duking it out about women priests. Bob Duncan, the new Archbishop, is already trying to do damage control on the female ordination allowances.

Duncan said: “For those who believe the ordination of women to be a grave error, and for those who believe it scripturally justifiable . . . we should be in mission together until God sorts us out…it’s not perfect, but it’s enough…”

Can you imagine if the bishops had said back during the Nicene times, “let’s just agree to be Arian or against Arianism for now. It’s no big deal. The important thing is we all love Jesus!” oh man!

Another part of a recent Christianity Today article talks about their views on women’s ordination:

[Religion journalist George] Conger explained the ecclesiastical distinction between allowing female bishops and allowing female priests. “In the Anglican understanding, a bishop is a bishop of the whole catholic church, meaning that person should be acceptable in all places that the catholic church is,” Conger told CT. “[The ACNA] can live with women being at the local level of priest, because a woman priest in New York doesn’t do anything to the people in Fort Worth, Texas, who think it’s contrary to Scripture.”

It’s amazing to me why they’re forming a new province if they don’t feel that each diocese has some affinity, relationship, importance to the others? This view is bizarre to me. Why have a province and common cause if one diocese is doing something repugnantly heretical in the eyes of another? How is that catholic with a small “c?”

What do you all think of this? I think it’s absolutely absurd; so often I get frustrated by the Catholic Church in so many ways. I really get fed up with bureaucracy, the extensive canon law, and I sometimes disagree with individual teachings. I also get frustrated with leadership in some areas. But when I read this, looking back as a former Anglican highly sympathetic to the conservatives left in that denomination, it’s mind-numbing!

Here’s the article for anyone interested blog.christianitytoday.com/women/2009/07/womens_ordination_a_crack_in_t.html

Archbishop Duncan ended the interview saying: “Our adversary, the Devil, is interested in what is happening here,” Duncan told last week’s crowd. “A reformed Anglican Church in North America is one of the enemy’s greatest concerns. He will try to draw us into old ways and old fights. It is essential that we stand together."

Isn’t female ordination a serious enough heresy to warrant a fight? I’d just like to hear everyone’s thoughts on this…

i say, we should not be concerned with them but look at ourselves that these things may not happen to us. for we know attempts have been made and still is to have women priests in the CC and these have not give up. they probably will continue to do so. i heard of priests who are Catholics also campaign for gay marriage. brothers lets look the CC own problems and hold on together to keep the Faith True to our Lord. Let the work of our Lord be done. if this is the only way to draw others into the True Faith then so be it. Lets bless the Lord our God.

Blessings.

 

[GKC]

Well, heck, GKC, I know your thoughts! You know mine! We’re dittoes on this. lol…I just find it interesting the way the ACNA views each diocese as an island to another and don’t see any heresy in the situation? Also, in light of that AMIA report that came out a few years ago, to me, anyone who was for women’s ordination then would’ve changed their minds and would be more enlightened about it by now. At this point, what is there left to learn about the issue that Duncan thinks would change minds and enable God to “sort out” this problem? The sweeping things under the rug “for now” seems so TEC! They’re looking more like TEC each day…sad.

I suppose I was looking more at reaction to the article. I found it fascinating.

+Duncan is essentially proposing “discernment”, as did TEC and the CoE, originally. It was particularly complicated in the CoE, with various methods to “protect” the orthodox Anglicans, with Flying Bishops for those parishes unable to accept the idea, and a few other things. All of which was steamrollered when the discernment process led to females in miters and no way for the traditionalists to opt out.

I see the ACNA as something like the TEC, circa 2000 or so, reborn, and something like a mutual aid society, to get better group rates on health insurance for the clergy, and similar things. I wonder how the politics played out, to put +Duncan in the driver’s seat, instead of +Iker, so long the face of traditional Anglicanism.

Ah, well.

GKCD

 

[Dale_M]

Worldwide, only 10 of the 38 provinces in the Anglican Communion do not ordain women to be priests… And according to the article mentioned in the first post, even some of the conservative provinces in Africa (“Kenya, Uganda, and, most recently, Ghana”) do as well.

I’m not Episcopalian, so maybe my views aren’t too important, but it seems that female ordination is happening and will continue to increase. For example, I saw a news article which indicated the Church of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) ordained its first Anglican priest in 2006. Rather than trying to roll back the tide, perhaps it is a wise that this fledgling organization focus on survival.

Holding the status quo seems the smart thing for ACNA to do.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

+Duncan is essentially proposing “discernment”, as did TEC and the CoE, originally. It was particularly complicated in the CoE, with various methods to “protect” the orthodox Anglicans, with Flying Bishops for those parishes unable to accept the idea, and a few other things. All of which was steamrollered when the discernment process led to females in miters and no way for the traditionalists to opt out.

I see the ACNA as something like the TEC, circa 2000 or so, reborn, and something like a mutual aid society, to get better group rates on health insurance for the clergy, and similar things. I wonder how the politics played out, to put +Duncan in the driver’s seat, instead of +Iker, so long the face of traditional Anglicanism.

Ah, well.

GKCD

Maybe this sounds naive, but I really haven’t thought much about the group benefits side of things!? You’re right. I remember my former rector at St. Paul’s years ago (when they were still Episcopalians, sigh) saying that he was really scared for the diocese to threaten to leave the TEC because of his retirement and benefits package, etc.

I’ve focused so much on the ‘right vs. wrong’ side of this that I’ve neglected to remember this is a livelihood for some of these guys.

Why do you think Duncan got the limelight when Iker, as you said, HAS been so pro-active and brave as well as more vocal over the years? Also Iker is more like a bishop a la Schofield, doesn’t ordain women and is very traditional. I would’ve hoped Iker or Schofield would’ve gotten the nod. Schofield was far more the maverick and brave warrior in all this than Duncan. Schofield was the FIRST to take an entire diocese out of the mouth of hell. And Schofield is more orthodox than Duncan as well as a better speaker by far. He’s a brilliant man.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Chesterton once noted that disagreement with the status quo is not a sufficient reason for change. One must have an objective that one is changing to. As an example he notes a group of people want to change the street light so they tear the old one down. Then they discover that there is no consensus on what they want to replace it with. As a result, only the one person who wanted to get rid of the light is happy.

This is important in RCIA. The subject should not be fleeing their old beliefs, but building upon them to reach a deeper truth.

 

[GKC]

Maybe this sounds naive, but I really haven’t thought much about the group benefits side of things!? You’re right. I remember my former rector at St. Paul’s years ago (when they were still Episcopalians, sigh) saying that he was really scared for the diocese to threaten to leave the TEC because of his retirement and benefits package, etc.

I’ve focused so much on the ‘right vs. wrong’ side of this that I’ve neglected to remember this is a livelihood for some of these guys.

Why do you think Duncan got the limelight when Iker, as you said, HAS been so pro-active and brave as well as more vocal over the years? Also Iker is more like a bishop a la Schofield, doesn’t ordain women and is very traditional. I would’ve hoped Iker or Schofield would’ve gotten the nod. Schofield was far more the maverick and brave warrior in all this than Duncan. Schofield was the FIRST to take an entire diocese out of the mouth of hell. And Schofield is more orthodox than Duncan as well as a better speaker by far. He’s a brilliant man.

I can’t say, but perhaps it had to do with the public battle he had with the gracious Katherine, giving him the mantle of leadership.

As to the admin side of the new grouping, see this. I had reached my conclusion before I read it. That’s my bishop writing.

virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=10750

GKC

 

[GKC]

Chesterton once noted that disagreement with the status quo is not a sufficient reason for change. One must have an objective that one is changing to. As an example he notes a group of people want to change the street light so they tear the old one down. Then they discover that there is no consensus on what they want to replace it with. As a result, only the one person who wanted to get rid of the light is happy.

This is important in RCIA. The subject should not be fleeing their old beliefs, but building upon them to reach a deeper truth.

HERETICS, ch. I.

GKC

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Can you imagine if the bishops had said back during the Nicene times, “let’s just agree to be Arian or against Arianism for now. It’s no big deal. The important thing is we all love Jesus!” oh man!

The problem with many churches today is that they wish to sacrifice orthodoxy and sound doctrine for superfluous peace.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

HERETICS, ch. I.

GKC

Thanks - Joe

 

[GKC]

Thanks - Joe

You are very welcome.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

This video (about 10-15 minutes long) from Schofield uploaded on July 4th sounds so hopeful and Schofield makes the ACNA sound like a real breath of fresh air. He’s the kind of bishop who is a joy to listen to and makes all things seem possible. He was such a joy to hear when I was an Anglican. I always could hardly wait until he made an appearance at our parish. The guy’s a gem.

sanjoaquinsoundings.blogspot.com/

I’ll tell you what, if he ever did become a Catholic and a bishop in the RCC, I’d drive to be in his diocese! LOL.