Deacon’s Blog

From Foreign Policy: The List: The Catholic Church’s Biggest Reversals.

In “Think Again: Catholic Church,” John L. Allen Jr. writes, “Catholics who have been around the block know that whenever someone in authority begins a sentence with, ‘As the church has always taught …,’ some long-standing idea or practice is about to be turned on its head.” Herewith, five of the biggest such reversals of doctrine in the church’s history.

The author goes on to describe changes in Roman Catholic ‘teaching’ on usury, slavery, the various changes brought about as a result of Vatican II, capital punishment, and limbo.

I have seen plenty of apologist websites that walk through the development of doctrine argument to ‘prove’ that the very teachings Mr. Allen mentions haven’t really changed. Mr. Allen’s book should further those arguments well into the future.

As Bishop Hodur pointed out in his reflections, especially as summarized in the Apocalypse of the Twentieth Century, the Roman Church’s ties to civil governance and power politics heavily influenced its teaching on these and similar issues. The Roman Church’s influence was not exercised in developing spiritual doctrine, but in expanding its political and temporal power at the cost of man’s spiritual well being. The changes Mr. Allen mentions are not changes in God’s understanding, but in man’s self understanding as defined by the political/economic landscape of the times.

The ultimate dissolution of the Roman Church’s political/temporal power occurred in the mid 1800’s. That dissolution resulted in pronouncements on infallibility and other solemnly proclaimed doctrines that remain an obstacle to Church unity to this day; an unfortunate reactionary move.

As time has moved on, the Roman Church has focused its understanding of self — away from political/temporal power — to proclaiming the power of the Gospel. Let us hope that the obstacles that continue to prevent unity, the political leftovers, and the false developments so influenced by power politics, fall away¹.

In speaking of the Church and national and social affairs Bishop Hodur wrote:

As is evident from this brief sketch, Christ gave adequate instructions to His followers regarding their behavior amidst these most important currents of human life. They should not try to stop them or oppose them, but they should move with them, refining them and directing them into channels which will lead to the uplift, prosperity and redemption of humanity. The church must not be the instrument of the aristocracy, of the wealthy, or of any particular faction in politics or society. Instead, it should bless and support any human endeavor and righteous work which is directed towards the betterment and enrichment of mankind, towards the creation of a more equitable social and political structure, and towards the triumph of peace, truth, beauty and light - in other words, the triumph of God - within the human soul. — Most Rev. Franciszek Hodur, Our Way of Life, Chapter VI, On Social and National Affairs.

A call to Christian witness in society, properly focused on bearing core faith before the world. Can the Church and its faith change the world? We in the PNCC would answer with a resounding yes.

Christian Witness, PNCC, Political Church, Ecumenism, Theology

A guest post from Bob Lotich on Church Marketing Sucks: Why I’ve Run From Churches

Let me start by saying that I have been planted in my current church for over 10 years. I deeply believe in the value of staying in the church that God plants you in rather than just leaving as soon as you get offended. That said, I have lived in a few different cities and have visited quite a few churches in each one when trying to find out where to land. I have seen some wonderful things and I have seen some things that made me want to run for the doors. These are the things that caused me to run for the door…

In the Catholic view people may not run from the Church, but from parishes that exhibit the sorts of behaviors he outlines. That said, people run from the Church as well, when its leaders collectively act counter to the Faith.

I think Mr. Lotich conveys an overall message of faithful Christian witness — in our communal life, in our interactions, and in our witness to each other and the world. Reflecting on his message and rooting out the traits that can close off a parish, or the Church itself, are a discipline that is in keeping with the Great Commission (Matt 28:18-20):

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Christian Witness, PNCC, Perspective Church, Ministry

The Young Fogey blogged this item concerning a hate filled article by Dr. PZ Myers of the University of Minnesota - Morris.

Dr. Myers is of the opinion that the Holy Eucharist is something to be desecrated. In fact he urges people to desecrate the Eucharist and further states that he will gladly do so himself if someone were to bring him a consecrated host (itself an act of desecration). Dr. Myers makes these assertions in his blog post: It’s a frackin’ cracker.

For my part I would like to alert Dr. Myers to the fact that we, the people of the Holy Church, consider ourselves to be members of the Body of Christ. St. Paul states in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 (RSV):

For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free — and all were made to drink of one Spirit.
For the body does not consist of one member but of many.
If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body.
And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body.
If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?
But as it is, God arranged the organs in the body, each one of them, as he chose.
If all were a single organ, where would the body be?
As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.
The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.”
On the contrary, the parts of the body which seem to be weaker are indispensable,
and those parts of the body which we think less honorable we invest with the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty,
which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior part,
that there may be no discord in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.

Logically, if Dr. Myers would like to desecrate the Body of Christ, he should be perfectly willing to desecrate any member of the Body. Members of the Church should hold no more value for him than what he claims is mere bread.

Since I am ordained member of the Body I have a particular role of witness in the Body of Christ, and since in Dr. Myers way of thinking I am just a “frackin’ cracker” too, I would like to personally invite him to meet me (he’ll have to come here as I have no ability to travel to Minnesota).

At our meeting Dr. Myers can take the opportunity to desecrate me as he would the Holy Eucharist. I won’t fight back. He can feel free to film the whole thing. He can even bring friends if he wishes. When he is done he can put me under his microscope and prove that my flesh is merely human flesh - no observable scientific difference. Dr. Myers?

Jesus, my God, I adore Thee in the Sacrament of Thy love.

Divine Redeemer, Who in Thy infinite goodness hast been pleased to leave us Thy precious body and blood in the Blessed Eucharist, we adore Thee with the most profound respect, and return Thee our most humble thanks for all the favors Thou hast bestowed upon us, especially for the institution of the Most Holy Sacrament. As Thou are the source of every blessing , we entreat Thee to pour down Thy benediction this day upon us and upon our relatives, friends, and benefactors; upon the Holy Church, our bishops, priests, and deacons; and upon all those for whom we offer our prayers. Let Thy blessings go forth far and wide. Let it be felt in the souls of the afflicted who cannot come to receive it at Thy feet. Let the weak and tempted feel its power wherever they may be. Let poor sinners feel its influence, arousing them to come to Thee. Grant to me O Lord and to all the members of Your Holy Church, a strong personal love of Thee, a lively horror of sin, a higher esteem of grace, great zeal for Thy honor and glory, for our own sanctification, and for the salvation of souls. Amen.

My Lord and my God!

Blessed and praised every moment be the most holy and divine Sacrament.

Christian Witness Church, Diaconate, Peace, Prayer, Sacraments

The Young Fogey links to several articles describing recent secret meetings between Church of England prelates and the Vatican. See Several Church of England bishops in secret talks with Vatican.

As commentor JohnT points out, in relation to Damian Thompson’s blog entry on this issue:

Cardinal Hume pointed out to Anglicans who were on the point of converting in the early 1990s that ‘Catholic doctrine is not an a la carte menu’ - and this is still true.
Nor is conversion a matter of ‘accommodation’.

Which is my thought exactly. This type of action requires a wholesale reordering of all that these prelates say, do, and believe (if it is indeed a true conversion rather than a lifeboat option).

What must they give up to come to Rome? What might they gain? Where might they find shelter?

The things they must give up are rather lengthy, but let’s focus on a few:

• Their status as Bishops (and their entire ordained life). Look at the Anglican Use (a terminal proposition) in the United States. Any clergy member coming over has to start over in new orders. There are no direct conversions “in Orders.”
• Their position as insiders. While they are part of the CofE they are on the inside for better or worse. In the R.C. world they will be oddities and outsiders, with their wives and children, their traditional stylings, and everything else that is part and parcel of who they are. The world’s Bishop’s Conferences will treat them like the fairly odd arms-length cousins you hope you only have to see at weddings and funerals.
• The 39 Articles et. al.
• As noted regarding the Anglican Use, their “traditions” such as the BCP and everything else Anglican, are terminal. Once they and their fellow converts die off there will be no more Anglican Use as no married men will be ordained nor will the BCP and Anglican Use be taught to up-and-coming celibate priests (except as a historical anecdote).

Still in all, I imagine that the issue of shelter is the real key. Is Rome the best shelter for these Bishops and their people? What other options might they have?

Certainly they cannot look to the Old Catholics of Europe (Utrecht v. 2.0). They are on the same track as the balance of liberal European/American Anglicanism. No port in the storm there. They could look to Orthodoxy who might accept them economically, conditioned on their acceptance of Orthodox Catholic faith and doctrine. The Russian Church or Antioch would be their best bet with Western Rite offerings. In any event I would imagine that the bishops could only come in as priests in an Orthodox solution. Then there is the PNCC ? Anyone for a read of the Declaration of Scranton and a trip across the Susquehanna?

In large measure, because of the long term relationship between Anglicans and the PNCC (back in the day when 99.9% of the faith was held in common), they would find a true Catholic home in the PNCC, and one where Anglo-Catholics and the PNCC share much more in common than the Bishops, their priests and people would find elsewhere. Why not study our history and our common faith.

Of course the choices are not easy regardless of the path because conversion is a full-on process. You may take a choice because you are fleeing a fire, but eventually you have to own up to the truth of your conversion. Bishops have a higher duty here because of their Order and their knowledge. Do you truly accept and believe the thing you purport to accept and believe in your conversion. I can say this much as a convert to the PNCC, if the conversion is true you gain access to the uninterrupted faith of the Catholic Church and its Traditions. What you give up counts very little if that is the Lord’s calling.

All conjecturing aside, I hope and pray that these Bishops, their priests, and their congregants find a home in the Catholic Faith. Whether Roman, Orthodox, or PNCC, confidence in faith and the commonly held doctrines of the first thousand years is a great joy. As Jesus told us in this weekend’s Gospel: “For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matt. 11:30).

We pray Thee, O God, not that Thou should help us carry out our own plans, but that we may be used in serving Thine: not for man’s victory over man, but for the triumph of Thy righteousness and Thy Kingdom. Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. — From A Book of Devotions and Prayers according to the use of the Polish National Catholic Church.

Christian Witness, Current Events, PNCC, Perspective Anglicanism, Church, Prayer

As posted at Rorate Caeli in Cardinal Etchegaray: The issue of the ordination of married men “may come about” and linked to by the Young Fogey - by the way, his comment on the posting is knowledgeable, balanced, and respectful.

It is unfortunate that so many, who claim some kind of knowledge of the Church, reduce these discussions to mindless ranting based on the perception of a race (in this case the French), a particular clergyman, or their deeply held conviction that unless everything stays as is (the man made disciplines of the Church) the world and Church will fall apart.

That argument has proven false by the mere fact that the Orthodox, the PNCC, and so many other Catholic as well as Protestant Churches can support a priest/minister and his family, not extravagantly, but modestly, and in keeping with the norms of the local community.

As the Young Fogey pointed out, no one goes into the ministry expecting to be rich (success “Gospel” evangelicals and princely priests not withstanding) or to live luxuriously. They are there to minister, to bring God’s grace through sacramental and pastoral action.

Neither the Holy Priesthood nor the Church will disintegrate if the local priest marries.

If you truly think that, you have lost faith in the promises of Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Church, or you never believed in that in the first place.

Oh, and on the Bishop of Rome solemnly confirming something, great for his diocese, but within the Roman Catholic understanding, did it rise to the level of an ex-cathedera statement proclaimed infallibly? I bet that a lot of folks would argue that it didn’t, and that only those wishing to see it as such see it that way.

PNCC, Perspective Church, Vocations

The American Papist blog is carrying a post on Fr. Francis Mary Stone & EWTN as well as periodic updates on the “situation.”

The Young Fogey pointed to that article as well as to his comment on it, which is reasonable and balanced.

It appears that Fr. Francis, the key host of EWTN’s Life on the Rock TV program has taken a leave of absence which is quickly morphing into a permanent leave of absence.

On a recent show a letter from Fr. Francis was read:

Dear Family,

Regretfully, I have a message that does not come without significant pain to both you and me. I have to tell you in all honesty and truth, that I have been personally involved with helping a widow and her struggling family. Over the course of time, the mother and I have grown very close. As a result, I am compelled to take some time off to prayerfully and honestly discern my future.

I am truly sorry of the impact this may have on so many. I am not unaware of the gravity and magnitude of the situation, yet after much wise counsel, it is really something that I must deal with now for the good of all.

With that said, it is best that I deal with it away from EWTN. Therefore, I have asked for and graciously been granted some extended time to prayerfully discern my vocation.

To those who are part of the EWTN family locally, and others throughout the world, especially all those who have supported me so faithfully in my priestly vocation and ministry here on Life on the Rock, I sincerely apologize. I ask for your prayers and understanding during this time that is so very difficult, but yet so very necessary.

Please lift me up in your humble prayers to Jesus through Mary, our Mother, in Grace and Mercy.

Fr Francis Mary, MFVA

As my regular readers know, the clergy of the Polish National Catholic Church are allowed to marry. They would also note that I have long stated that the vow of celibacy is an imposed discipline which is unworkable from a grace or discipline perspective. You cannot demand such gifts from the Holy Spirit, only encourage and support those with that gift while not foisting it upon others.

The American Papist blog immediately gets into requesting prayers for Fr. Francis, as well as a discussion of the “grave situation.” They remind us that all men are sinful (agreed), that [Roman] Catholics should not be scandalized (do not agree), and how this is a teaching opportunity.

Now I freely admit that the Roman Church has its own discipline. I do respect that. While I respect it, that does not imply that I or my Church agree with it. We think there is a better way.

I offer the following from my perspective:

I am saddened to see the rare mention of prayers for the woman and her family at the American Papist website.

They note that the subsitute anchor at Life on the Rock went on to say in reference to Fr. Francis’ situation:

“evil and sin do not have the last word - there’s always hope”

Of course that is par for the course. She is the sinful Eve leading good Father Francis astray. Not said outwardly, but implied by words like scandal, grave, temptation, and by Fr. Francis’ apology itself.

If I were the woman involved, that sort of apologizing would lead to a long cold silence. She is relegated to second class status, and is marked as a cause for apology and shame, even evil, the cause of sin.

That said, those sorts of reactions are trained in, gut instinct for Father Francis and others. Not exactly psychologically healthy when you are in that situation.

The grace of celibacy should be self perpetuating and not a cause for internal conflict. Here you see internal conflict — painful, and cause for an expression of regret which will later lead to more regret.

In a certain way this speaks to the fall of the many, which is often a fall well out of the limelight. Is the Roman Church’s clergy imbued with the grace of celibacy or are far to many left without the gift, left harmed by a discipline imposed by men?

As I noted, [Roman] Catholics may have good reason to be scandalized. Not so much by Fr. Francis’ decisions but firstly because EWTN has expunged Fr. Francis from its website.

He, and whatever good he did in his ministry, have been relegated to non-existence. If anything was learned from other recent scandals, covering-up is to be avoided. Were all his homilies, the programs he hosted graceless blather?

Secondly, on the issue of covering-up. Fr. Francis was somehow “helping” this woman (counseling?, spiritual guidance?, I can’t imagine financial support). That sort of relationship demands a duty, and might imply that the woman and her family were vulnerable, perhaps even taken advantage of.

Love can happen in stressful situations - but care must be used to ensure that the love is real, and not driven by need. As such, the helper must be careful. This goes back to the prayer issue - perhaps she and her family are more “in need.”

If I were to offer a prayer (and I do), I would ask that the Lord keep watch over Fr. Francis, the widow, and her family. That He protect them and that He allow them to heal and discern His will.

I wish them well and hope that they can see past the immediate to the long term. There is joy in a loving relationship between a man and a woman, if that is what they are called to. They should know that it is a special grace from God that is open to all who are called to it.

PNCC, Perspective Church, Vocations

Had a few interesting conversations recently with brother clergy.

The main topic was the PNCC - RC dialog and a few of the questions rising out of the recent Motu Proprio and the and the other more recent statements from Rome concerning the Roman Catholic Church’s understanding of itself.

As I pointed out at the time of both, I agree with the Motu Proprio in that it reconnects the Roman Church to its liturgical tradition, the riches the PNCC never lost. I also agree with others who saw the Roman Church’s statement on its self definition as exactly that. The Roman Church, as with the Orthodox, believe that they are the one and only true Church. The Roman Church said so - which is not surprising.

The two interesting things I took away from those conversations were that fellow clergy saw the Motu as a break in the Church’s teaching on the role of the Bishop as the overseer of the liturgical life in his diocese and the fact that this restatement of the Roman Church’s self understanding was difficult for some.

As to the Motu, in an address to the Institut Supérieur de Liturgie of the Institut Catholique de Paris Cardinal Francis Arinze stated:

Obviously ecclesial communion has to mean “communion” with the diocesan bishop and between bishops and the Pope. In the diocese, the bishop is the first steward of the mysteries of Christ. He is the moderator, promoter and guardian of the entire liturgical life of the diocesan Church (cf. “Christus Dominus,” No. 15; Code of Canon Law, Canon 387; “Redemptionis Sacramentum,” No. 19). The bishop directs the administration of the sacraments and especially of the holy Eucharist. When he concelebrates in his cathedral church with his priests, with the assistance of deacons and minor assistants, and with the participation of the holy people of God, “the Church reveals herself most clearly” (”Sacrosanctum Concilium,” No. 41).

The Motu’s delegation of authority of parish priests breaks the bond between the priest and the diocesan bishop, and would seem to negate the role of bishop as “first steward”.

While the Motu has a worthy purpose, this end run may be a vexing problem in Catholic ecumenical circles. It strengthens the role of the Bishop of Rome as the actual bishop of every diocese; the full, immediate, and universal jurisdiction issue.

Prime Bishop Emeritus of the Polish National Catholic Church, the Most Rev. John Swantek wrote extensivly on this issue in the most recent edition of God’s Field (God’s Field, Vol. 85, No. 22, October 30, 2007). Therin he quoted Canon II of the First Council of Constantinople:

Diocesan bishops are not to intrude in churches beyond their own boundaries nor are they to confuse the churches… Unless invited bishops are not to go outside their diocese to perform an ordination or any other ecclesiastical business.

Now, I imagine that an argument could be made stating that diocesan bishops are so out of control, and universally so, that the Bishop of Rome had to act. Yet that begs the question of the Roman Church’s own discipline.

There are all types of approaches that could be used, but what it seems to have come down to is a choice between correcting those who have wandered far afield, or taking direct control from everyone.

An interesting discussion.

As to the Roman Church’s self understanding, what I found most heartening was an affirmation of our own self understanding - that the PNCC fully believes that we have it right.

For someone who has not been a lifelong PNCC member that affirmation of our conviction was something I had longed to hear - and I have. Something that does not negate our brotherhood with all who proclaim the name of Jesus Christ as Lord, and something that does not diminish our commitment to dialog, nor our prayer for unity.

PNCC Church, Ecumenism, Liturgy

From the USCCB website: Vatican Documents Focus Of Recent Roman Catholic, Polish National Church Dialogue

The fall Roman Catholic – Polish National Catholic Dialogue in Buffalo, September 25-26, focused on recent Vatican documents on the Mass in Latin and the way the Catholic Church views other church groups.

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Buffalo hosted the meeting, which was presided over by Bishop Edward U. Kmiec of Buffalo and Bishop Anthony Mikovsky of the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) Central Diocese.

Part of the session centered on old business, including a discussion of the relations between Catholic and PNCC military chaplains, the possibility of further incremental steps towards unity, and a proposal regarding Canadian participation in the dialogue. The bulk of the meeting was devoted to two recent Vatican documents.

Bishop Kmiec offered a summary of Summorum Pontificum, the “motu proprio” Pope Benedict XVI issued in July regarding the use of the Roman liturgy prior to the 1970 reform, and reflected on its implications for the life of the Church.

Msgr. John Strynkowski presented “Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine of the Church,” the document of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that was released in August. The second document in particular provided an occasion for an in-depth discussion of the way our churches view one another.

The meeting concluded with a presentation by Father Robert Nemkovich Jr. on the new PNCC Missal. There was also a discussion of the status of former Roman Catholic laity and clergy who belong to the PNCC, a question to be revisited at the next meeting. Sessions of the dialogue in 2008 are slated for May 19-20 in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and November 6-7 in Baltimore…

The USCCB now features a webpage with links to PNCC-RC dialog documents as well as citations.

One little mistake, Bishop Mikovsky is the Rt. Rev. Dr. Anthony Mikovsky not the Most Rev. Anthony Mikovsky. Most Reverend is the title proper to the Prime Bishop of the Polish National Catholic Church.

Christian Witness, PNCC Church, Ecumenism

A friend and occasional correspondent referred the following article to me and asked that I include it in my blog.

From the National Catholic Reporter: Global South underrepresented in college of cardinals

In naming 23 new cardinals on Wednesday, Pope Benedict XVI chose to acknowledge one bit of demographic reality, but largely ignored a much bigger one.

Americans have noted, and rightly so, that the nomination of Archbishop Daniel DiNardo in Houston accurately reflects a shift in Catholic population in the United States away from the East Coast, towards the South and Southwest. From a global point of view, however, the new crop of cardinals is remarkably unrepresentative of where Catholics are today.

To understand that, it’s essential to recall that Catholicism experienced a demographic revolution in the 20th century. In 1900, there were 266 million Catholics in the world, 200 million of whom lived in Europe and North America. Just a century later, there were 1.1 billion Catholics, only 380 million of whom were in Europe and North America, with 720 million in Latin America, Africa and Asia. The global South accounted for 25 percent of the Catholic population a century ago; today it’s 67 percent and climbing.

You wouldn’t know that, however, from looking at Benedict’s appointments. Focusing just on the 18 new cardinal-electors, meaning those under 80 with the right to vote for the next pope, ten are Europeans and two are from the United States. (Three of the five over-80 cardinals named by Benedict XVI are likewise Europeans. Had Bishop Ignacy Ludwik Jez of Poland lived to receive the honor, it would have been four of six.) After these new cardinals join the church’s most exclusive club in a Nov. 24 consistory, 60 of 121 electors will be European. Adding the cardinals from the United States and Canada, the total for the global North rises to 76 electors out of 121, meaning 63 percent.

To put this into a sound bite, two-thirds of the cardinals come from the global North, while two-thirds of the Catholic people live in the South.

Such disparities do not go unnoticed. The pope’s announcement was made at roughly 11:30 a.m. Rome time, and within a half-hour I had an e-mail from La Tercera, a newspaper in Santiago, Chile, asking for a reaction to the following question: “Two-thirds of the nominees are from Western Europe or the U.S. Why?”

Why indeed? At least three reasons suggest themselves…

This didn’t jump out at me, so thanks for the referral.

I think that the author covered the issues well, and that this was an interesting analysis.

This does bring up an interesting aside in relation to the current crisis in the Anglican Communion.

As we know, the global South is leading the charge for a traditional understanding of Christianity within the Anglican Communion¹. I would think that that fact is not lost on the Bishop of Rome. At the same time, the South presents its own set of problems, from Liberation Theology to challenges to celibacy, problems with overdone efforts at inculturation, and occasional failings in confronting and opposing evil.

I would wonder how many of those lessons and issues played into the mix of choices.

For more on issues confronting the Roman Catholic Church in Africa check out Christianity in Africa South of the Sahara, Roman Catholic Christianity, The Church in Africa since Vatican II from African Christianity, A History of the Christian Church in Africa.

Perspective Africa, Church, Global South, Roman Catholic

The Episcopal Bishop of Albany, NY issued a statement calling for unity amid the discord in the Episcopal Church.

Bishop Love is trying to hold together a diocese commonly known as a conservative. Today’s story from the Albany Times Union explains his thinking.

I found two things “interesting” in the article.

You can read the full thing at Bishop wants unity amid discord: Leader of Albany Episcopalians affirms opposition to same-sex unions and ordaining gay clergy

The interesting bits:

[Bishop William Love] also criticized the Episcopal Church for “creating a new class of victims — the traditional orthodox believers.

“If there is to be a turnaround in the Church, there must be a viable place for the conservative orthodox voice,” he wrote.

One of the keys to reasonableness is having something that everyone can agree on - like a creedal statement. Unfortunately, and sadly, the response to Bishop Love’s statement shows that key elements that are foundational for that sort of oneness do not exist.

Locally, one lay leader in the Albany diocese has a much different worry: that there is no place for the substantial progressive voice.

Marya Dodd describes herself as probably the only progressive on the Diocesan Council, an oversight panel. She says many people won’t donate money to the Albany diocese because they feel disenfranchised. She praised Love for “making a real effort to communicate with us” in the new letter but said that wasn’t enough.

“He’s not publicly recognizing the fact that there are a lot of different segments of the Episcopal Church represented in Albany,” she said. “This is not a diocese that has one vision, or one approach to the faith.¹”

I think that it would be hard to find a parish, much less a Church, that did not have a variety of voices and opinions in it. It is funny what people believe, as made up in their own minds. However, in a Church, there are touchstones, markers as it were of unity. The Creed, sacraments, the definition and understanding of God, adherence to the totality of the faith, that is Scripture and Tradition. The folks who run the faith side of the house tend to preach that common understanding.

All of those are the check points. If the membership cannot agree on those key elements, or if they have to redefine them to suit their own purposes, they are not Church, just a bunch of folks who like to get together. But why²?

Even certain social clubs have a more defined set of beliefs or norms upon which their members agree.

Visions are fine, but if disconnected from the things which have defined the Church (of which you are a member) at least be honest enough to define your own “faith community.” Then again, isn’t that what seems to be happening.

Perspective Albany, Church, Episcopal Church, unity