AMiA Embraces Heterodoxy

Whenever a new edition of the Wave reaches my mailbox, I cringe anew with whatever froth from the bottom of the seething ocean of “relevant” evangelicalism will wash up on the AMiA shore. Usually, I almost blog about it, but then think better of it and stop myself. But I can’t this time, I just can’t. And, as a disclaimer, I am an AMiA parishioner and couldn’t be happier about it. But our local churches are a small pocket of sanity and theological depth in a denomination full of pirates.

This month’s Wave trumpets (as always) the forthcoming Winter Conference. Who is coming this year? How about notable Third Wave weirdo Jack Deere, a blast from the Counterfeit Revival past? Is AMiA trying to become the Vineyard? I don’t need to delve into all of his past, but here are some of the troubling facts. Are there not any Anglican scholars that we can get to come to an Anglican conference? Are we so desperate that we have to bring in retreads from the Toronto Blessing  and “emergent” folks – seven years after that fad reached its peak? Don’t we have any church planters who might be called on to talk about how Anglican church planting can work in an urban setting? We really need Jack Deere to talk to us about “ministering in the power of the Spirit”?

Okay, now I have that off my chest. Let me just cool down and…wait! What? Another speaker is the Rev. Cynthia Brust, “Associate Pastor of a new church plant in Mission Viejo, California”! What the Moses? Mrs. Brust is the wife the Rev. Canon Ellis E. Brust and is the Director of Communications for “theAM.” She is probably a great lady, but here we go with warmed over Episcopalianism. Here’s a stick in the eye of all who believe in what the Bible says about ordaining women and what the Church has held for, well forever. But wait, there’s more:

Page 9 talks about the Northwest and tells us: “Other developments include adding Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) priest Kristen Yates of the Anglican Diocese of New England to his (the Rev Aaaron Burt’s) staff in October.” And page 11 has a picture of “Bishop Todd Hunter and the Rev. Aaron Burt ordain(ing) the Rev. Jennifer Roach – the first Anglican Mission clergy to be ordained in the Pacific Northwest.” Wow. What a great first for theAM.

While none of this is surprising, the volume and prominence of the embrace of women’s ordination is totally disheartening and heterodox. I saw this coming with Todd Hunter last year, see here. So theAM is going down the wrong road, WAY down the wrong road, and it is at the behest of Bishops like Hunter and Murphy. I am not a Puritan, and the answer is certainly not in hiving off into “purer” denominations. But the time is really here for orthodox folks to join some kind of diocese or whatever else they want to call it, and to take a firm stand against this foolishness.

18 thoughts on “AMiA Embraces Heterodoxy”

    1. Agreed. I think we need a GAFCON-wide coalition against WO that seeks to eradicate it within our lifetime. It can be done, look at the LCMS.

  1. “Does it seem likely that all of the liberal churches who no longer
    believe the Bible have suddenly gotten the interpretation of the Bible
    regarding men’s and women’s roles exactly right, and that the most con-
    servative churches who hold strongly to biblical inerrancy have gotten
    it exactly wrong? And does it seem likely that as soon as a denomina­-
    tion begins to abandon belief in inerrancy it suddenly discovers new skill
    and accuracy in interpreting the Bible on the roles of men and women
    so that it finally arrives at the correct answer?”

    Evangelical Feminism by Wayne Grudem, page 30

  2. “In the sphere of religion, as in other spheres, the things about which men are agreed are apt to be the things that are least worth holding; the really important
    things are the things about which men will fight.”

    Christianity and Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen, page 2

    1. “But the existence of debate within the Church tells us far more about the muddiness of our hearts than it does about the obscurity of any text. Those Christians who do see what these passages say will frequently be sucked into a tactical debate because they foolishly believe that their opponents have accepted the authority of the text. But this is not the case at all. Evangelical feminists have not accepted the (patriarchal) authority of the text; they are simply at that early stage of subversion where open defiance would be counterproductive of their purposes.”
      – Doug Wilson

      1. Agreed.

        “Francis Schaeffer warned years ago that the first generation of Christians who lead the church astray doctrinally change only one key point in their doctrinal position and change noth­ing else, so it can seem for a time that the change is not too harmful. But their followers and disciples in the next generation will take the logic of
        their arguments much further and will advocate much more extensive
        kinds of error. I think that is happening in a regular, predictable way in
        evangelical feminism, and I have sought to document that in this book.”

        Evangelical Feminism by Wayne Grudem, page 20

  3. Hi. Your blog post got forwarded to my inbox, since I’m an Anglican in the Seattle area. I kept looking for a way to private message you, but I couldn’t find any profile/contact info. Anyway, just wanted to suggest that you take a look at Anglicans Ablaze. I think Robin Jordan sets a pretty good example of how to critique the current Anglican movements without being demeaning, or snarky, or, honestly, just plain discouraging. This post took some of the wind out of my sails, and, brother, that’s the opposite of what I need in this corner of the country. I’m sure you’re a good guy, and I’m a hearty fan of the DC churches you’re associated with (and I even resonate with several of your points), so please don’t hear me attacking *you*. I am, however, suggesting that your *post* does little to help anyone and plenty to dishearten some of the people who are laboring alongside you for the sake of the gospel. I’m not suggesting you remove it, because, hey, that’s just part of life in the blogosphere; but remember, people read this stuff and are affected by it. At least one of your brothers’ hearts sunk to hear your tone. Here’s hoping you hear this in the voice in which I intend it! Peace to you.

    1. I’m not going to argue about tone or style. I’m not sure which of my points you resonate with, but if it’s about ordaining women, then I’d suggest that you and all AMiA Anglicans stop doing it. It is not adiaphora to the gospel. The liberal mainline’s rapid decline was due in large part to an attempt to be ‘relevant’ to the culture of the time, hence, the jettisoning of ‘foolish’ beliefs like inerrancy, miracles, the Virgin birth and the Trinity (see Bishop Pike). If Anglicans are going to play this same game of relevance and seeker sensitivity by ordaining women, then just watch the same results occur: theological drift, no church discipline and failure.

      If you think this post is discouraging, imagine how Anglicans feel when they see what they thought was a movement of restoration and faithful orthodoxy now looking an awful lot like 1970’s Anglicanism restored. Rather than returning to the Bible, the Church Fathers and Anglican divines like Hooker, Jewel, Cranmer and Donne we are getting warmed over liberal theology, which has nothing to do with 1,960 years of Church history.

      Do a little research on how women’s ordination was smuggled into the Episcopal Church. It was done as a renegade act that directly violated every belief of the Church, and it was the template for later homosexual ordinations:,9171,945727,00.html,9171,915646,00.html

      If you want to be part of a liturgical church that ordains women, join the ELCA, the PCUSA, TEC or the United Methodists. If this is the road that AMiA is going down, it will only lead to further splits, people defecting to Rome or Eastern Orthodoxy, and an increasingly weakened Church.

      1. I am straying a bit off subject here, but I was just reading “The Doctrine of the Christian Life” by John Frame. He maintains that nothing is “adiaphora” (literally “things indifferent”) to God. He makes his case on pages 168-170 and I would agree with him.

      2. John Frame, is grand! With his mentor Van Til (See John Frame’s book: Cornelius Van Til, An Analysis of His Thought, P&R), both are must read Reformed theologians. See, btw, P&R’s nice book: Speaking The Truth In Love, The Theology of John Frame, edited by John Hughes, etc.

      3. “Smuggled” is a good word, I lived and labored thru much of this time, but sadly many have just gone willingly down this road; and believing & following Holy Scripture? be gone for them! There is only one word and reality here, but “apostasy”!

      4. “Tone and style” were the only things I was addressing in my comment. But you dismissed them in your first sentence. My heart sinks a bit further. I’ll leave your blog be, at this point. Grace and peace to you, brother.

  4. I’ve heard similar dispirited reactions from several folks within AMiA. It’s a real mess at the top. I try to ignore it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.