A “way forward framework” for the Lutheran Church in Australia New Zealand (LCANZ) to “operate as on”to operate as one church with two different practices of ordination” has been proposed as a response to a decades-long debate over Women’s Ordination. Motions to ordain women have consistently failed to gain the two-thirds majority at five General Synods despite majorities in favour.
But a February 2023 General Synod called for a proposal to be discussed by the LCANZ General Pastors Conference for the Convention of General Synod 2024
The new proposal would change LCANZ’s teaching of male-only ordination. “The Framework acknowledges the different theological positions on the gender (male and female) of pastors in the Church but considers them non-divisive of church fellowship, enabling LCANZ to remain as one church.”
A second aspect would provide “a pastoral-theological place in the LCANZ (‘Conference’), whose members uphold male-only ordination while also enabling the ordination of both men and women in the
LCANZ and the calling of female pastors by congregations that choose to do so.”
The Lutherans will change their “theses of agreement,” removing number Vi:11, which restricts women from being called into “public ministry.” However, a proposed statement will include the following: “Congregations and Individual members may continue to uphold the interpretation of the Scriptures in TA VI:11, which provides for the practice of calling only men to serve as pastors.”
Is the Framework merely a compromise? the FAQ section of the Framework website asks. The answer reflects the both/and nature of the proposal: “The Framework is not a matter of compromise but of finding a way forward for Lutheran Christians to continue to serve together as one church in New Zealand and Australia. The debate over the ordination of women and men in the LCANZ has continued for several decades without resolution. The previous General Synod proposals have taken an ‘all or nothing’ approach: either the whole of the LCANZ decides that congregations may call women as pastors, or the whole LCANZ decides to disallow congregations from calling women as pastors. This Framework is different. It acknowledges that there are significant proportions of the LCANZ who have different understandings of what the Scriptures say regarding ordination. General Synod in 2023 requested General Church Board and College of Bishops to propose a way to resolve the issue by taking a different approach to any taken previously.”
The proposal also includes the establishment of “a pastoral-theological place (‘Conference’) for members to uphold male-only ordination, while enabling the ordination of men and women in the LCANZ and the calling of female pastors by congregations that choose to do so.”
The Conference will have limited authority. The details make it clear it is not a calling body; in the LCANZ, congregations call pastors and own their own property.
The proposal says that an LCANZ bishop will “provide theological and pastoral oversight and support for the Conference,” but congregations remain under the oversight of the district’s bishop In the church of England, a similar provision for conservatives provides for ‘flying bishops” but the LCANZ, unlike the CofE, does not provide for any guarantee that a bishop who does not ordain women will always be available.
This is not an academic possibility. The CofE example shows that when women pastors are appointed, they, not unreasonably, wish a bishop (in an episcopal system) to be someone who believes in their ministry. No complementarian bishop has been appointed to a diocesan post in the CoE recently. It is not unlikely that episcopal provision for the conference will become an issue in the LCANZ.
Similar to the CofE, the proposal states that “Conference members adhere to the changed public teaching of the LCANZ on the ordination of men and women,” which means they accept women pastors in other congregations.
The conference idea is similar to one proposed when the NZ Anglicans adopted same-sex blessings. If the conference is to be effective, it likely has to meet. This imposes on these Lutherans travel to their normal General Synods (church parliaments) plus whatever events the Conference puts on.
The conference is required to operate “under the governance of the General Church Board,” which will provide the Conference with a budget but will not be able to charge membership fees. In addition to not being a calling body, the conference “will not hold property, incur liabilities or employ staff.” Oddly the proposal also states “the Churchwide Office will provide the Conference with support services, including payroll and financial reporting.”
There is clearly a desire to make sure forming the Conference does not lead to a split in the LCANZ. The FAQ section on the proposal website asks “How do we mitigate the risk of the conference becoming a second synod or a pseudo synod, a breakaway district or even a new church?”
“A district is fundamentally different from a conference because a district is a separate legal entity that holds assets, whereas a conference does not. Moreover, there are substantial financial and legal matters associated with a standalone church or breakaway district. There are also operational challenges to being a standalone district or church, such as compliance and governance. Under the Framework these matters would be managed by the LCANZ through relationship between the Conference and the Church, and the status of the Conference as an unincorporated entity.”
The future of the Conference will be dependent on what is anticipated to be a pro-women’s ordination majority. This could be a stumbling block for the proposal. On the other hand, supporters of the change could point to this declaration in the proposal: “Pastoral sensitivity and respect are to be used in churchwide or district worship gatherings where both male and female\ pastors are present, in order to provide for the consciences of all the people of the Church and to do all things in love and in good order.”