A Two Province Proposal for ACNA

Unlikely but possible. Perhaps needed.

First, thanks for your patience and prayers during my big road trip — almost 5000 miles. During the one post I managed during it, I noted I was experiencing a lot of God’s providence. I experienced more providence during the rest of the trip along with being blown away by God’s creation, particularly in southern Utah.

An earlier highlight was the time at the Forward in Faith Assembly and the Anglican Way Institute in Dallas. Thanks again to readers who greeted me; you are a great encouragement. I also was encouraged by my conversations with several bishops. (No, I am not a big shot. ACNA bishops are very approachable.) This post is in part a response to them as I was surprised to find that at least two are already thinking along lines similar in parts to below and one asked my thoughts on renewal in ACNA (the Anglican Church in North America).

Last year, I posted on the need for the reorganization of ACNA. But as that was a time of tumult, I thought it not the time for a proposal.

But now that ACNA is slightly calmer and after seeing that at least a few bishops are already thinking about reorganization, I think it time to make a proposal, and not a modest one.

When ACNA was formed, it was freely confessed that we were flying an airplane while building it, a high flying endeavor indeed! And one I vociferously supported, so I am not casting blame lest I blame myself.

And the new plane flew well for a time. But through the years, the structural weaknesses became more evident. “Dual integrities” especially was not working out as well as many hoped and I expected. Yes, I of all people was very optimistic at the beginning, perhaps naively so.

I think that now (and I freely confess my thinking may be mistaken) bishops and other clergy are drifting into two camps. One camp says we agreed to build the plane this way, and, by God, we are going to keep flying it this way. The other says the original formation was not intended to be permanent, and it cannot be permanent lest our plane’s malfunctions continue to become more and more dangerous to the health of souls and our church.

Since a bishop asked my thoughts on renewal, I will briefly set forth how flying the airplane as is without restructuring harms renewal in ACNA.

As many readers know, the main issue of contention about ACNA is now structured is women’s ordination. (Non-geographical affinity dioceses are another issue, but I do not find that as problematic as some do.) The contention over WO has gotten worse…

And the resulting public fights have harmed our witness as disunity usually does. In addition, a lot of energy goes into these and related conflicts (such as that cancelled Safe Church forum) instead of into efforts that assist renewal. Further, there is a revival in interest in traditional forms of the Faith, particularly from young men.

But ACNA is missing out on some of that (But not all. There is a notable increase in young men at many traditional ACNA parishes, including mine.) because many of these same young men write off churches that ordain women. ACNA’s current structure, in which proponents and opponents of WO are thrown together in a church salad, is a hinderance to participating fully in the current Gen Z traditionalist revival.

What makes matters worse is that the provincial offices of ACNA have not remained neutral between the two integrities. It very much supports women’s ordination through provincial initiatives such as NextGen and the Women’s Leadership Network. Us traditionalists can oppose WO until we are blue in the face, but being in such a church harms our credibility with many others who oppose WO. (Which is also a hindrance to ecumenical efforts.)

And it is an open question whether a bishop who opposes WO can be elected by the College of Bishops to be Archbishop. Personally, I suspect that was a major factor in how we got Steve Woods as Archbishop. But then I am a suspicious man.

The issues that hinder unity and renewal are more than just women’s ordination. But even these other issues often correlate with WO. For example, “social justice” excesses and errors tend to come from dioceses that ordain women. These other issues are among the reasons it is becoming unworkable to keep going along to get along when it comes to women’s ordination.

Well, that is quite enough preamble. On to my proposal. Most of us do not want an outright split in ACNA. And deciding one way or the other on WO throughout ACNA is not going to happen while most of us are alive.

So I propose ACNA divide into two provinces. It not only can be done; the Church of England has been a two province church for centuries, the provinces being York and Canterbury. Granted, an ACNA two province reorganization would be different as the two provinces would markedly differ in churchmanship.

One province — let’s call it Province W for now — would retain the current ACNA policy on women’s ordination: allowed for the priesthood but not for the order of bishops. The other, Province N, would not allow women priests.

The new ACNA umbrella over the two provinces would have powers much more limited than now. ACNA would be something of a federation of two churches. And — this is important — ACNA offices would be allowed to do only those things both provinces agree on. So ACNA would have to be neutral on WO. Some provincial initiatives like the Women’s Leadership Network would be abolished or devolved to the appropriate province. Most “social justice” efforts would also be off limits for the new ACNA umbrella, anti-abortion advocacy excepted. In short, if something is controversial among us, it would belong to the two provinces, not to the ACNA umbrella.

It would be also necessary for future Archbishops of ACNA to refrain from ordaining women while they are Archbishop. It might be good for them to be ratified by both provinces as well.

One complicated question would be will Province N allow women deacons? Those opposing women priests in ACNA differ on women deacons. But I think that if women priests were proscribed in the Province N canons and if N dioceses continue to be where the question of women deacons is decided, then even dogged opponents of women in Holy Orders could live with that. Back when the late Bishop Iker announced impaired communion with bishops who ordained women priests, he, an exact man, said back in 2017:

I informed the College of Bishops that I will no longer give consent to the election of any bishop who intends to ordain female priests, nor will I attend the consecration of any such bishop-elect in the future. I have notified the Archbishop of my resignation from all the committees to which I had been assigned to signify that it is no longer possible to have “business as usual” in the College of Bishops due to the refusal of those who are in favor of women priests to at least adopt a moratorium on this divisive practice, for the sake of unity. Bishops who continue to ordain women priests in spite of the received tradition are signs of disunity and division.

Note he repeatedly cited the problem of ordaining women priests, not women deacons. That even though he, like most Anglo-Catholics, saw Holy Orders as one sacrament.

On the other hand, when dioceses decide which province to join, it could be that very few dioceses that ordain women deacons would join Province N, in which case it might not be such a difficult decision.

Now I do not expect a two province solution or any such restructuring to occur. There is always a tendency to keep to the status quo, and key bishops seem content for women’s ordination in ACNA to take fifty years to resolve. One or two bishops have said as much to me.

But the status quo will not hold for another fifty years. I doubt it will hold for another five. Do you want parishes and dioceses to leave? Do you want faithful people to leave (as I came close to doing earlier this year) or to avoid ACNA in the first place? Then keep to the status quo, and that is what you will get.

A Two Province reorganization is a better way. I know this post is getting long, but allow me to give another important reason why. There is an old saying: “Good fences make good neighbors.” Agreed upon boundaries help people to get along. Amicable distance does, too. Say a good friend likes to play drums while smoking. He would remain a friend if he did so in his house two blocks away. If he played drums and smoked in my house when he knew I did not like that, the friendship would be sorely tried.

If ACNA comes to a Two Province reorganization, I am convinced we will get along better than our current unhappy structure. Does the other province ordain women and often push the latest version of “social justice”? I and many in my Province N would not like that. But that is their province, not mine. And ACNA under my proposal would not take sides on WO or other contentious issues. So with God’s help we get along well enough to avoid fighting and to work together on more important areas of agreement.

Yes, mine is not a perfect solution. Difficulties of communion between bishops who ordain women and those who won’t will remain. But it would be a marked improvement. And I know of nothing better. If readers or the Holy Spirit have a better solution, feel free to post in the comments.

And do pray for ACNA. The General Council of the Reformed Episcopal Church, part of ACNA, begins today. ACNA Provincial Council meets next week with the College of Bishops and Provincial Assembly also convening in the coming weeks. Pray for their safety in traveling, for their worship, and for their decisions and conversations.