Losing one's ground balancing the middle
David Roseberry, writing a sort of hagiography of the ACNA, said of the Episcopal Church:
Doctrinal convictions long held by Christians across the centuries were being treated as grounds for discipline or dismissal. In such moments, there is no middle ground; to stand faithful means to stand apart.
The thing is, those such as the Diocese of Fort Worth, since it is in impaired communion with the rest of the ACNA, would say that Holy Orders is that same always-held (catholic) doctrine, wherein much of the rest of the ACNA would discipline or dismiss one for holding to these opinions.
Or on the other side, if it really is those who are on the side of an egalitarian view of Holy Orders who are liberating the church from a patriarchal culture.
Compromise between these two cannot, should not hold. Temporary alliance works, but it is not sustainable for it to continue. There is no middle ground, just two incompatible practices, and yet people are told to let it go, that the ACNA is some kind of exemplar of unity. Baldly, this sounds hypocritical, as the reasoning sounds like what Communion Partner bishops said of the Episcopal church: we can all work together., even though there are two contradictory convictions.
For the sake of the laity in the validity of sacraments, for the sake of those traditionalist male clergy unable to work in half the province, or those ordained women who are unable to serve in the other half, continued compromise will not increase the health of the organization. Resentment and disillusionment will only increase while issues are downplayed and concerned clergy, congregations, and laity are told to keep quiet and compromise.
This is part of what seems an ex-Episcopal approach — not the exvangelical Canterbury trail, or Continuum — to play up the June 6, 2003 moment of the Episcopal church as the reference point wherein all should compromise.
While I understand the need to not have reasonless despondency over the instution, some of the optimism, not unlike American Anglican Council updates, seem a saccharine building up, playing down these issues that are very real, and very frustrating on the ground.
Roseberry also states
This phrasing is problematic in terms of what is ahead in the ACNA. While Broad Church is not, to me, a pejorative, “balance” being the Anglican charism is, in the ACNA, specifically positioned to spin "Dual Integrity" not as a 2009 lamentable necessity, but as, somehow, a good thing to be celebrated. It is not, unless those who hold the sacramental traditional position are to be phased out. Knowing that the ACNA provincial initiatives are beginning to put forward dual integrity as a unique charism of the denomination, rather than something, as originally proffered, that would be resolved eventually, this sort of article is especially problematic, unless one is looking to be TEC before June 2003.