I appreciate your recent article in which you took note of one opportunity for Anglicans to work together in the Diocese of Quincy in Illinois. As a missionary movement, The Anglican Mission (The AM) often finds itself establishing missions in ACNA and orthodox ECUSA diocesan lands. It is important in these formative times that Anglicans make every effort to build stronger cross-jurisdictional relationships, and share with one another our local strategies especially when we are working geographically side-by-side.
Our church planter in Peoria was about to be ordained deacon, so I contacted +Alberto Morales and invited him to participate with me in the ordination. The Bishop graciously accepted my invitation and in-turn invited two other bishops who were in the area. One Orthodox, and one from the COE.
Quincy’s Fr. Shawn Dubet offered his parish with the bishop’s approval as the ordination venue. It was a splendid service and an enormous blessing to be with these brothers in Christ. The service was every bit as beautiful as you described it. The Bishop celebrated and we joined hands as the Deacon was ordained. Fr. Dubet especially has been a blessing to our new planter, going so far as to offer him a place to meet as he gets underway.
One of my favorite moments that evening was when +Morales took me aside before the service had begun and told me that I was welcome in his diocese any time…he then handed me a flat package…As I opened it he said “And when you come, you may where this”. It was a beautiful mitre.
Now, I know that you asked for a comment, not a critique of your recent article with which I do have some solidarity...but the suggestion an AM bishop is holding back a person from service solely for being ECUSA seems highly speculative and inconsistent with AM practice or history, and that concerns me. I have dozens of former ECUSA priests working with me, and frankly, most of The AM bishops are former ECUSA priests themselves. I’ll tell you straight up…I have never heard of a person being held back from leadership for being with ECUSA if they were willing to be received into the The AM.
It concerns me that one parishioner’s opinion would be the sole basis for an implication that a whole movement or one of its bishops is ECUSAphobic. Speculation like this can be harmful to our best efforts to bring unity.
There are many other good signs of relationships being strengthened among Anglicans. We're church-planting together. We’re planting a new mission in Ohio with ACNA right now, and have planted 3 previously in partnership with CANA and Bolivia; sharing ordinations, and cross jurisdictional efforts like Anglican 1000 are all good signs.
And of course, I'm happy that God allowed Albert and me to share a John 17 moment. John 17:12 Father, keep those you have given me in the truth of your name, so that they may be one like us.
Doc Loomis
Missionary Bishop
Anglican Mission in the Americas
Related reading: Growing Consensus that WO Must Be Addressed; Modernist-Traditionalist Divide in Anglicanism
.jpg)
17 comments:
On the "further cooperation between AMiA and ACNA" front, Bishop Loomis was a featured speaker at a recent conference on mission at St. Vincent's Cathedral sponsored by Bishop Iker of Fort Worth. Bishop Loomis was also our preacher at Sunday morning mass the following Sunday and was very warmly received by our Anglo-Catholic congregants in dioFW. From where I sit there is plenty of promise for great interaction in the future. And I certainly hope Bishop Loomis comes back to visit soon!
R.W. Foster+
St. Vincent's Cathedral
Diocese of Ft Worth, ACNA
Why should there be any "cooperation," let alone "further cooperation," between those who repudiate WO and those who accept and practice it?
And, while on that very issue, where does Bishop loomis stand on WO?
Bishop Loomis will have to speak for himself on that. It may be that his thoughts are not fully formed because the Protestant wing of Anglicanism doesn't appear to be concerned that women priests are contradictory to the Bible that it claims as its authority.
Alice and Bill,
Since the photos at St. Barnabas' website show Doc Loomis laying hands on their pastor, Susan Zakamarko, at her "ordination", his position on WO seems pretty clear.
This is one of the frustrations I've had with AMiA and why I had to leave - though the original AMiA still does not pretend to ordain woman, several of her bishops do support the practice and participate in such ceremonies elsewhere under the larger Anglican Mission umbrella.
Anglicanism is torn by narcissism and anarchy. It is evident that some value Tradition and others are working very hard to destroy it; to redefine or reinvent the Faith according to what pleases them. I'm reminded of something that Fr. Alvin Kimel wrote: "I recall having lunch... with a female Episcopal rector down the road from me, Jane Dixon (yes, the very same Dixon who became the fascistic Suffragan Bishop of Washington). I asked her, What would God have had to do in the past to convince you that he really was opposed to the ordination of women? She had no answer. I realized then that the hermeneutics that led to the ’76 decision was a hermeneutics that would always allow the Church to unbind itself from the dogmas and traditions of the Church, whenever it wanted to be so unbound." From here: http://pontifications.wordpress.com/female-priesthood/
The total disregard for tradition and order among some Anglicans is summarized by this statement following the Dublin meeting: "Those meeting in Dublin staked no claim to continuity with the past, ignoring the will of the most authoritative of the Instruments of Communion—the Lambeth Conference of Bishops.
For all these reasons, the group of Primates who met in Dublin cannot be recognized as acting in accord with the accepted Communion understanding of the Primates’ Meeting as an Instrument of Communion. This Instrument thus joins the others as now being dysfunctional and lacking in communion credibility."
Read more here: http://www.globalsouthanglican.org/index.php/blog/comments/dublin_post_mortem_aci
Dear Kamilla.
The pic on the StB's website homepage is me welcoming Susan Zakamarko as a Lay Pastor in the ACiC. I did not ordain Susan (in fact , wasn't even a bishop in the ordination pics folio, though I was there... Nor..have I ordained any other woman to the presbyterate.
Perhaps read the text accompanying the picture to get the full story sister K...
Hope that clarifies my position for you Kamilla.
Doc,
The caption under the picture in which you and others are laying hands on Zakamarko says, "Susan Zakamarko ordained". But then, that picture is one the "news" page, not the home page.
Seems perfectly clear to me.
Kamilla
Just to clarify,
I was unclear in my earlier response and implied you were then a bishop when you particiapted in Zakamarko's "ordination" service. I know you were not and I am sorry I wasn't clear on that point. I believe your title at the time was Canon Missioner. If I am not mistaken, however, your own ordination as Bishop occured within the year. And, although I know that since you were not a bishop at the time you could not have ordained Zakamarko, by participating to the extent of laying on hands during the ordination you were affirming your support of such an act.
To repeat, on the news page of St. Barnabas, you are shown laying hands on Zakamarko and the caption on the picture reads, "Susan Zakamarko ordained".
Next, on another page of St. Barnabas' website I find the following, "Ordination Service, April 19, celebrated by Bishop Alexis Bilindabagabo, and then Canon Missioners Barclay Mayo (ACiC) and Doc Loomis (AMiA)."
Last, you are listed as Bishop of the HONA network which is a mixed network including churches here in the States as well as both St. Barnabas in Ontario where Zakamarko is listed as rector and St. Barnabas of Bradford Anglican mission where Donna Purvis is listed as lay pastor.
Is that the full story, Doc?
Well no Kamilla, it is not at all the “story”. I know exactly where I was standing and praying when Susan was ordained as well as where I stand on this issue. Though I was in attendance, by direct order of the Archbishop, I did not lay hands on Susan during her ordination to the presbyterate (which disappointed some). As a further point, our HONA Network leader was also in attendance but did not lay hands on Susan either. Only the Canadians and Africans participated in the LOOH.
As to my presence: My Rwandan Archbishop ordains women to the presb. and has asked us to make accommodation for the same in Canada. That's what we do...we are under authority. As a friend I attended the service… Again, Rwanda ordains women Kamilla. If you are having an issue with what the AMiA does, you have an issue with Rwanda and the larger AC, not just me…so let’s resist the temptation to implicate an AMiA bishop attending his friend’s ordination. We share the same position on WO. There is nothing more I feel compelled to say about it.
Finally, a correction to your last observation: Susan's congregation fellowships with our Network based on their geography (her leadership is in Vancouver BC and she is quite alone in ON) but they do not reside with us canonically. She is a priest in the ACiC, not the US AMiA. She is not under my jurisdiction but that of +Silas Ng of the ACiC.
Hope this is helpful
Doc, we do not have the same position on women's "ordination". But then, my former AMiA rector could never understand that either. AMiA leadership must, of necessity, hold that it is a matter of adiaphora. While those of us (myself included) who stand with the church historic and universal hold to the dominical practice and repudiate it as a metaphysically impossible act.
As to the picture and caption and listing on HONA's website - all I can say is that such obfuscation has been de rigueur for AMiA since they flexed their position on women's "ordination" to accommodate the new structure. I and others have contacted the leadership for clarification on how one determines if a church is AMiA or ACiA to no avail.
Sorry you had to break your Lenten fast to attend to this blog. I hope you have a great day and lead someone to our Lord through the work of the Holy Spirit.
I know Bishop Loomis to be a man of integrity. I don't think he is trying to hide anything.
As I commented earlier, he and other bishops are caught in the middle of a conflict over WO and the sooner that question is resolved, the better for them.
Doc,
I am sorry, most deeply sorry to have lied about the extent of your participation. I did so on the basis of information from someone who I believed knew you and your views. If I had not received this information, I may never have learned of the events at St. Barnabas. Please forgive me.
Kamilla
Thanks Kamilla. Forgotten.
Blessings in all,
Doc
In case anybody is wondering, the above exchange is why I'm confident that God will lead the bishops of AC-NA into all truth on the matter.
May it be so!
Post a Comment