Deacon’s Blog

If you are planning a wedding there are certain cautions you should take as a member of the PNCC. If your intended is a member of the R.C. Church, and you plan to marry in the PNCC, your intended may face difficulties with their pastor or bishop.

The core problem is that the R.C. Church requires that your intended obtain a “dispensation from canonical form“¹ from their bishop. If they do not, your marriage will not be recognized by the R.C. Church. Note that if your intended does not do so, the Roman Church may consider you to be “living in sin.”

For years, the dialog between the PNCC and RC Churches has tried to resolve this issue (as well as the ability of PNCC members to stand as godparents in the RC Church). The PNCC has repeatedly requested that the Roman Church do away with this requirement. The main difference between the Apostolic Churches is that the sacrament in both the PNCC and Orthodox Churches² are based on one sacramental theology while that theology differs in the Roman Church. In the PNCC and Orthodox Churches the priest is the minister of the sacrament. In the Roman Church the couple is said to be the minister of the sacrament.

Also of note, if you plan to marry in the R.C. Church, some priests therein may deny the Eucharist to your intended and their family. You do need to cover this issue with them in advance. If they insist that they cannot give your intended’s parents or family communion, grab the nearest pew missal and point to the section in the back regarding admittance to the Eucharist. If that doesn’t help — well that priest (or deacon) isn’t following the rules, so you may want to seek marriage in your PNCC parish.

Both of these problems are roadblocks placed in the way of PNCC members who attempt to practice and hold true to their faith. It has also been noted that some R.C. pastors and bishops have made the process of obtaining a dispensation extremely cumbersome for those intending to marry a member of the PNCC. Of course this is an attempt to coerce members of the PNCC.

While we may not like something, we should respect the theology of the R.C. Church³. We do expect them to respect ours in turn. So it comes down to politics and certain Roman bishops and priests who wish to “drive the point home” in opposition to the Roman Church’s own teaching on admission to Eucharist and avoidance of coercion.

So, take note and plan ahead. Talk to your intended’s pastor and attempt to obtain the “paperwork.” If you are marrying in his parish do cover the issue of Eucharistic reception because there have been well noted cases of grandma getting up to go to communion and being told to go away. That’s not the sort of sadness you need on your wedding day.

Christian Witness, PNCC, Perspective Church, Ecumenism, Sacraments, Theology

As is my oft stated policy, I do not respond in forums.

Catholic Answers has yet another conversation on the PNCC (under non-Catholic religions — which is incorrect — the Orthodox and PNCC are completely Catholic). This conversation focuses on whether the PNCC and various Anglican splinter groups should join forces. The one point no one seems to get is that this is pretty much impossible unless the Anglican splinter groups de-protestantize (un-protestantize, something like that anyway).

The PNCC has had influxes of former Anglicans/Episcopalians (particularly clergy) over the years. In most cases it really hasn’t worked out. Those who came generally wanted their liturgy and traditions with all the Protestant muck attached, including an inability to recognize Church as infallible; weeding out personal judgment. They thought their salvation lay in being themselves, but under a valid Bishop. They were not willing to be PNCC, which is Catholic internally and externally. Of course that was a bad fit when faced with a congregation that is PNCC.

As a convert to the PNCC I know. We all start from our own point of reference, our knowledge and experience. Over time though, you have to be willing to shed some of it and re-frame some of it. If you don’t, if you just want to be who you are, but in a different Church for the sake of convenience, you are doing yourself a spiritual disservice.

The PNCC is not R.C. and is not Anglican. Over time the PNCC has matured into what it is – a Church whose externals look westward while its theology looks eastward. If you want to come, to join, to be Catholic, please do so — you are welcome. It is a joyous place to be once you get past the point of convert cognitive dissonance.

PNCC, Perspective Anglicanism, catholicism, converts, Liturgy, My life, Theology

Several things I have heard recently have caused me to reflect more on what it means to be within the Holy Church. Recent news of the Roman-former Anglicans provision for unity touches on the issue. That said, I see two aspects to being within the Church:

Union within the Church and under the Church’s Bishops:

I recently read a post by the Rev. Canon Chandler Holder Jones at Philorthodox in Notes on Holy Orders wherein he says:

Most Continuing Churches follow the historically Augustinian-Western approach to this subject. I should deem the practice of some other Continuing Churches, the Polish National Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy to be Cyprianic in origin.

The whole issue of orders and belonging was covered extremely well, some time ago, in a post on the Cyprianic understanding of Holy Orders at Ad Orientem in Once a Priest , Always a Priest? (Thanks to the Young Fogey for the link to this). I recommend those interested in the theological difference between the Cyprianic and Augustinian understandings of Holy Orders read it.

To have Orders and to be a deacon, priest, or bishop requires that you be within the Church. Simply said, we have to be agnostic about what occurs outside the Church. Certainly we could use the cudgel of “without grace” for those outside the Church, as some online pundits do, but it is really an unnecessary exercise. All we can know for sure is that those within the Church, who have unity with its structure and Bishops, most particularly its priests, are only able to do what they say they are doing while they are in the Church under their Bishop. We are within the Church as long as we are grafted onto the Church — part of Her. If we are deposed and outside we might as well be cave men, satanists, or witch doctors — what we say is void of meaning and affect apart from the Church. Same words and actions as mimicry — no affect.

In the PNCC the issue arises from time to time in those who were formally of the clergy and who have been formally deposed. The case of Mr. Tomasz Rybka, a former priest in Poland is a case-in-point as are folks like Robert Mary Clement of the American Catholic Church or Ramzi Musallam of the Arabic Catholic Church (I won’t link to them, Google if you wish, the same vagante type stuff you see everywhere) and a few others. In the end all we can say is that whatever those outside the Church do, say, or suspect they do — regardless of the ritual used — is of no account.

The first aspect of being within the Church is an outward sign of unity, being part of the Church under the authority of its Bishops. That is a sure guarantee of the Holy Spirit’s outpouring for our lives and the life of the Church.

Unity of belief:

This one is touchier because it requires intellectual and spiritual honesty. You can pull-off of a total lack of belief in what the Church says and believes without any outward sign you are doing so. You can lie to yourself, to your wife, children, Bishop, and to God. To be within the Church however requires that you bring yourself into unity with what the Church believes; that you square your beliefs with the Church’s requirements¹.

For those raised in the PNCC this is really no problem. They have had consistent and constant teaching in what the Church believes. That becomes part of them. Lifelong PNCC members have been catechized in accord with the beliefs of the Church. They don’t trip over things like the Pope (most don’t give the issue a second thought), the creed (proceeds from the Father), unheard of dogmas (Immaculate Conception, Assumption, Papal Infallibility), original sin, an understanding of Orders, scholasticism, phony homiletic constructs (every homily has to tie to the Eucharist, to a pro-life message, etc.), how the sacraments are “counted,” heaven, hell, the intermediate state, the Church’s infallibility (not one man’s), or differing Solemnities.

Former Roman Catholics, I am among them, had to trip and fall over these things. Getting there is not an overnight process and it definitely requires a conscious effort at stripping out belief systems pounded into our heads in R.C. schools, confraternity classes, and most particularly Roman seminary. It isn’t easy and takes time, but unless one is focused on being a member of, priest or deacon in, the PNCC you cheat yourself and all the members of the Church. More than that, I believe that you put yourself outside the Church in being less than faithful to It.

The PNCC welcomes everyone with open arms and speaks ill of no one who finds they must follow Jesus in another way, but if you wish to stay — if you wish to be honest with yourself and the Holy Church – with the Holy Spirit — you must purpose yourself to learn about, believe, and profess what the Church professes.

It is a huge fallacy to compare the PNCC to the Roman Church and to say: ‘We are the same except…” I used to do that. I don’t anymore. Former R.C. members of the Church carry in a lifetime of learned beliefs and in many ways they do not match with the PNCC. Can a person transition? Absolutely! I’ve done it and I’ve seen wonderful former Roman Catholics, including priests, who have committed to the honesty that change requires.

For those considering the PNCC, know that through the process of learning, which takes time and patience, you find the beauty and joy lifelong PNCC members know. You can bring yourself into unity of belief. PNCC members are open to teaching you about the PNCC’s beliefs, its prayers, its Solemnities, and Our way of life.

Bringing it together:

What is necessary is honesty on entering the Church. Honestly know that we are not Roman nor a subset of anyone else. Know that we ascribe to no dogmas² invented in the past few hundred years. Know that we have our own way of life which you can be a part of. Honestly know that to be within the Church requires outward unity with your Bishop and inward honesty in believing and professing what THIS Church believes and professes.

PNCC, Perspective Church, My life, Sacraments, Theology

To mark the occasion an interesting blog type website called Calvin 500.

Of course we know the issues here, reform was necessary, but it became more than reform. Reform without infallibility in faith, doctrine, and morals becomes just another human invention, subject to change and whim. The pitfalls of fashioning a religion where everyone decides for themselves on matters of faith, doctrine, and morals plagues us to this day, and even the Reformed Church in America is struggling with changing belief patterns enlightened by current fashion.

I am not saying is that each person cannot decide for themselves. Indeed, each person must make their own decision for, against or indifferent to Christ’s Gospel. Rather I posit that when a person does decide for Christ, when they are regenerated, their regenerated lives can best be fulfilled in a path with clearly defined guideposts, guideposts only the infallible Catholic Church can adequately provide.

Christian Witness, Perspective Calvin, Church, Theology

From BreakingNews: Supreme Court ruling loosens Catholic diocese hold on priest sex abuse papers

The first kind are those that make themselves greater than the Church, substituting private judgment and corporate fear for faithful duty consistent with Scripture and Tradition.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday against a Roman Catholic diocese in Connecticut, saying that thousands of documents generated by lawsuits against six priests for alleged sexual abuse cannot remain sealed.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Tuesday denied the Bridgeport diocese’s request to continue a stay on the release of the papers until the full court decides whether to review the case.

Ralph Johnson III, a lawyer for the diocese, said church officials were considering whether to ask all nine justices to rule on the request.

The diocese said on its Web site Tuesday afternoon that it was disappointed with Ginsburg’s decision and that it “intends to proceed with its announced determination to ask the full U.S. Supreme Court to review the important constitutional issues that this case presents.”

Jonathan Albano, attorney for three newspapers who requested the documents, said the ruling compels the diocese to release the documents, but he acknowledged the church could ask the full court to reconsider Ginsburg’s decision.

“At the end of the day, the diocese will be able to say they were heard before every court that was available to them,” Albano said.

…

The Connecticut high court also rejected the claim by church officials that the documents were subject to constitutional privileges, including religious privileges under the First Amendment…

From The Deacons Bench: Dissident (Fr.) Roy Bourgeois: ‘I will not be silenced.’

The second kind — those who see their private judgment and assessment as some sort of revelation when it is no more than mimicry of the the world’s message.

The controversial priest who participated in a woman’s ordination ceremony last year is back in the news again — and continuing to stir the pot:

“A prominent priest whose support for women’s ordination has him in trouble with the Catholic Church ratcheted up his confrontation with the hierarchy yesterday, calling the church’s refusal to ordain women a “scandal’’ and “spiritual violence.’’

“I will not be silenced on this issue,’’ said the priest, the Rev. Roy Bourgeois, to about 100 people in Weston at an event hosted by the congregation of Jean Marchant, a former staffer for the Archdiocese of Boston who claims she was ordained as a priest in an unsanctioned ceremony four years ago.

“The Catholic Church views Marchant and Bourgeois as having been automatically excommunicated for participating in unsanctioned ordination ceremonies.

“Yesterday Bourgeois said he remained unclear about his status because he has had no formal communication from his order, the Maryknoll Fathers, or from the Vatican, which last fall told him he would face excommunication if he did not recant.

“If they choose to kick me out of the church because I believe that men and women are equal, so be it,’’ Bourgeois said. “I will never be at peace being in any organization that would exclude others…

What’s funny in this case is the Rev. Bourgeois’ name – bourgeois which describes his attitude more than anything. As the Young Fogey might say, the class that touts SWPL (stuff white people love) – knowing better than the Church based on private judgment and believing that everyone must absolutely believe what you believe or they are evil, of course all in the name of “human” justice.

The Rev. Bourgeois is completely wrong of course, and women’s ordination is non-Catholic and a non-issue. It has nothing to do with equality or exclusion, but rather people of his class and background touting their personal assessment of what equality and exclusion mean — and then forcing others to eat that assessment.

Funny how all the Churches that eat and enjoy Rev. Bourgeois’ assessment are about as non-inclusive as they come. If you don’t buy what they sell you are out — you are just the ignorant proletariat. Further their congregations and parishes are dying at a fast rate (see here or read Exodus: Why Americans Are Fleeing Liberal Churches for Conservative Christianity) while truly Catholic Churches (Roman Catholic, Orthodox) are bringing the remnant in.

People who know know that Catholic Churches are all about inclusivity – all are welcome to come and pray. All are ministered to. All have a role consistent with Scripture and Tradition within those Churches.

The voice of the Holy Spirit is not asking that we grasp at straws for an answer, but that we show our faithfulness to what has been handed on to us. Not enough men in the seminary? We need to challenge them, be dynamic examples as men motivated by deep faith, love, and service. It’s hard work to put aside the tiredness, the monotony that can creep in to our all too human lives, but we can do it — truth, work, and struggle and we will be victorious. The solution isn’t in Rev. Bourgeois’ head or in our heads. It isn’t in society. It is in faithfulness.

Christian Witness, PNCC, Perspective Bishop Hodur, Church, Culture, Ministry, Theology, Tradition, Vocations

The Bishop of Rome issued his encyclical Caritas in veritate (Charity in Truth) on the subject of Christian teaching on economics. The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, S.J. comments on it in the Washington Post. A few excerpts here:

“Profit is useful if it serves as a means towards an end,” he writes in Caritas in veritate (Charity in Truth), but “once profit becomes the exclusive goal, if it is produced by improper means and without the common good as its ultimate end, it risks destroying wealth and creating poverty.”

He decries that “Corruption and illegality are unfortunately evident in the conduct of the economic and political class in rich countries…as well as in poor ones.” He also says that “Financiers must rediscover the genuinely ethical foundation of their activity, so as not to abuse the sophisticated instruments which can serve to betray the interests of savers.”

…Benedict disappointedly acknowledges that “The world’s wealth is growing in absolute terms, but inequalities are on the increase” [italics in text].

“The dignity of the individual and the demands of justice require,” he affirms, “that economic choices do not cause disparities in wealth to increase in an excessive and morally unacceptable manner, and that we continue to prioritize the goal of access to steady employment for everyone.”

In his encyclical, Benedict calls for charity guided by truth. “Charity demands justice: recognition and respect for the legitimate rights of individuals and peoples,” he says. “Justice must be applied to every phase of economic activity, because this is always concerned with man and his needs,” he writes. “Locating resources, financing, production, consumption and all the other phases in the economic cycle inevitably have moral implications. Thus every economic decision has a moral consequence.”

The encyclical notes the globalization that has taken place since Paul’s encyclical was issued over 40 years ago. Alas, “as society becomes ever more globalized, it makes us neighbors but does not make us brothers.” True “development of peoples depends, above all, on a recognition that the human race is a single family working together in true communion, not simply a group of subjects who happen to live side by side.” The goal of such development is “rescuing peoples, first and foremost, from hunger, deprivation, endemic diseases and illiteracy.”

Sounding like a union organizer, Benedict argues that “Lowering the level of protection accorded to the rights of workers, or abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution in order to increase the country’s international competitiveness, hinder the achievement of lasting development.”

Rather the goal should be decent employment for everyone, which “means work that expresses the essential dignity of every man and woman in the context of their particular society: work that is freely chosen, effectively associating workers, both men and women, with the development of their community; work that enables the worker to be respected and free from any form of discrimination; work that makes it possible for families to meet their needs and provide schooling for their children, without the children themselves being forced into labor; work that permits the workers to organize themselves freely, and to make their voices heard; work that leaves enough room for rediscovering one’s roots at a personal, familial and spiritual level; work that guarantees those who have retired a decent standard of living.”

…

While Benedict acknowledges the role of the market, he emphasizes that “the social doctrine of the Church has unceasingly highlighted the importance of distributive justice and social justice for the market economy.” He unflinchingly supports the “redistribution of wealth” when he talks about the role of government. “Grave imbalances are produced,” he writes, “when economic action, conceived merely as an engine for wealth creation, is detached from political action, conceived as a means for pursuing justice through redistribution.”

Although Benedict’s emphasis in the encyclical is on the theological foundations of Catholic social teaching, amid the dense prose there are indications, as shown above, that he is to the left of almost every politician in America. What politician would casually refer to “redistribution of wealth” or talk of international governing bodies to regulate the economy? Who would call for increasing the percentage of GDP devoted to foreign aid? Who would call for the adoption of “new life-styles ‘in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments’”?

Benedict believes that if people understood God’s love for every single human person and his divine plan for us, then believers would recognize their duty “to unite their efforts with those of all men and women of good will, with the followers of other religions and with non-believers, so that this world of ours may effectively correspond to the divine plan: living as a family under the Creator’s watchful eye.”

I say Amen! amen! It will be interesting to watch as Roman Catholic and other Christian business people and political leaders dance their way around this, or more likely choose to ignore it. The reaction will be much the same as that of Roman Catholics and other Christians who ignored, countermanded, or attempted to out theologize and teach John Paul II on the Iraq war.

Christian Witness Charity, Church, Culture, Economics, Ecumenism, freedom, Labor, Theology

From the New Moment New Ideas Company, a TV commercial for the Government of the Republic of Macedonia, Ministry of Education and Science, part of a series of commercials aimed at promoting education.

Christian Witness, Media Philosophy, Theology, YouTube

From the Kennebec Journal: Celibate priests: boon or bane?

I won’t go on to quote from the article. It’s the usual set of arguments and some of the typical confusion between man-made laws like celibacy and other teachings that people would like to change even though they are immutable. I cite the article only because it contains a reference to the PNCC.

Personally, I think that the media would be just as disenchanted with the Catholic teaching of the PNCC as they are with the Roman Church’s teachings on secular culture’s hot-button issues.

If a writer were to set aside those big red arguments and develop some sort of columnar list of agreed points and differences I think they would be able to develop a compelling piece on Churches’ varied approaches to the human condition and Their understanding of God’s relationship to mankind. Of course it would take time and a lot of research. Anyone out there?

Christian Witness, Media, PNCC Church, freedom, Theology, Vocations

Ben Myers from Faith and Theology has a great reflection on John Updike’s writing and its theology in John Updike, 1932-2009: a glance at his theology.

John Guzlowski re-posted his reflection, When Beloved Writers Die as a tribute to Updike.

Both of these are great reads and I recommend them.

Current Events Literature, Theology

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