Heresy's New Missionary

From the AP via T-19:

MANCHESTER -- Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson said he led a confidential retreat a few years ago for gay Roman Catholic priests...

...I had said to them, 'It's too dangerous for you to come out as gay to your superiors, but I believe that if you work for the ordination of women in your church, you will go a long way toward opening the door for the acceptance of gay priests," Robinson said.

Not content with the destruction he has wrought within his own denomination and the wider Anglican Communion it would appear that VGR has now decided to branch out to the Roman Catholics. This is so outrageous and offensive I really don't even know where to begin. It is one thing for a high ranking member of the clergy to stand up in the clear light of day and express deep disagreements with the theology and discipline of another religious confession. It is an altogether different thing to attend clandestine meetings with clergy from that confession and encourage them to work to subvert their church's doctrine and discipline. This is just way over the top. At the very least, I hope that a strongly worded letter is sent by Rome to Ms. Schori (the Presiding Bishopess of The Episcopal Church) protesting this intrusion by one of their "bishops" into the affairs of another church.

Is the Episcopal Church a Truly Catholic Church?

Fr Kimel (aka the Pontificator) asks and answers the question.

In the early 70s the large majority of catholic Episcopalians firmly opposed the ordination of women to the presbyterate and episcopate, believing that it was contrary to the will of Christ and the ecumenical tradition of the Church. When the 1976 General Convention decided to permit the ordination of women to the priesthood, most Anglo-Catholics decided to remain within the Episcopal Church and to fight for a reversal of church policy. What happened? The older generation retired or died. The younger generation, including the present writer, eventually got with the national church program. Seminaries and bishops carefully weeded out the opponents of women’s ordination from the prospective ordinand pool. Thirty-five years later we find that a new orthodoxy has been successfully imposed and the opponents of women’s ordination marginalized. Twenty years ago one might have been forgiven for thinking that it was still possible to reverse this situation, but surely no one can persuasively argue this any longer. Something very similar is now happening on the question of the moral legitimacy of same-sex unions. The goodness of same-sex unions is now widely affirmed in the Episcopal Church. New ordinands are expected to support this policy and the doctrine underlying it. Perhaps freedom to oppose this policy is still allowed in some dioceses (presumably Texas); but the number of such dioceses declines each year. Within a decade or two Episcopal priests will no longer be permitted to teach the catholic understanding of Holy Matrimony nor to declare the immorality of same-sex unions. In the inclusive Church, even tolerance has its limits. The recent history of the Episcopal Church demonstrates the harsh truth of Neuhaus’s Law: “Wherever orthodoxy is optional, it sooner or later will be proscribed.”

This essay is must reading. I strongly recommend it in its entirety.

Hat tip to T-19

Meanwhile in a different church in England...

In stark contrast to the announcement from the Roman Catholic Cardinal in Westminster Cathedral immediately preceding a Pontifical High Mass (see the previous post) there was another service being conducted in a different church in Great Britain...

There were bridesmaids and best men, an exchange of vows and rings, and a showering of rose-petal confetti. Only the bride was missing.

For this was Britain's first gay "wedding", held in one of the Church of England's oldest and most attractive churches.

St Bartholomew the Great at West Smithfield, in the City of London, dates from the 12th century but it can have seen few more historic events than this.

Greeted with a fanfare of trumpets, the Rev Peter Cowell and the Rev Dr David Lord celebrated their civil union with the kind of pomp and pageantry reserved for royal weddings. The couple walked up the aisle to Mendelssohn's march from A Midsummer Night's Dream dressed in morning suits, with their bridesmaids and best men following behind.

A robed choir sang in Latin as incense was burned on the high altar.

The service was rooted in the most traditional style, from the music to the liturgy, which was based on the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. The Rev Martin Dudley addressed the congregation: "Dearly beloved, we are gathered together here in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation, to join together these men in a holy covenant of love and fidelity."

Read the rest here.

I think this could be called a tale of two churches. One is in the process of reclaiming something it seems to have just realized that it misplaced. The other is abandoning its patrimony with a speed that is to be frank, unseemly. Is there any wonder that there are more Roman Catholics in Britain today than Anglicans?

Enough of this 'New Age' church

From a Letter to the Editor of the Modesto Bee:

My ancestors were Church of England people from the colonial times. My maternal grandparents were married by a minister who later became head of the American Episcopal Church. I was baptized in an Episcopal cathedral in 1922. The writer of "One-sided reporting in Episcopal split" (Dec. 20, Letters) has not lived long enough to see what I have seen. She admires a ghost.

The parent Episcopal Church today has metamorphosed into a weird concoction of Catholic ceremonials and New Age thinking. People like the writer put the institution first, I suppose, because she loves the ceremonials, which are (or were) beautiful.

I do not put the institution first. Scripture is ignored when convenient. The motivating spirit of the organization is desire: whatever the extreme wing of the church wants is duly approved by the bishops and their purblind leader, all in the name of "love." Jesus is often seen as just another prophet, and Christianity only one road to salvation.

If that is the "mission" of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America, everyone who belonged to it more than 30 years ago was sadly misled.

J.W. SMURR

Turlock

Hat tip to Kendall at T-19

Minding My Own Business

A recent comment left on my post about the secession of the diocese of San Joaquin from the Episcopal Church (TEC) I think is deserving of a front page reply.

simonmatt1100 said...

Mind your own business and get out of the affairs of The Episcopal Church.

SM,
The wonderful thing about blogs is that they are the perfect extension of the First Amendment. Your comment is duly noted. However, I have relatives who are still affiliated with TEC including my four year old Goddaughter for whom I hold a certain level of spiritual responsibility. Additionally my Godfather who was Episcopalian for decades before swimming the Bosporus represents a tie of sorts.

With the above in mind I respectfully note that it is my prerogative to blog on any subject which interests me, and the current crisis in TEC interests me. Not merely for the familial reasons mentioned but also because the roots of the heresy in TEC lie in the post modern theological relativism which I believe constitutes the greatest danger to Christianity in centuries.

If you disagree with me, my blog has an open comments policy. Anyone is permitted to comment (even critically) provided that their comments are on topic and civil (no Ad Hominum attacks etc. please). Feel free to defend the liturgical unitarianism now rampant in TEC if you so desire. If you wish to attack me or those who disagree with TEC and don't want to suffer the slings and arrows of open debate I suggest starting your own blog and restricting or banning comments as many of the so called reapraiser blogs do. However, the one approach which I think you will find unproductive is attempting to impose any form of censorship on other people's blogs.

ICXC NIKA
Ad Orientem

San Joaquin Secedes (Official)

Breaking News: The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin has voted to formally sever its ties with The Episcopal Church. Since this is the second reading of the amendments to its constitution, I believe the secession is effective immediately. Bravo and well done to its bishop and clergy for taking this heroic and historic stand.

Quote of the day...

...I do ask that Anglicans recognize when they have changed Anglican doctrine, and my argument runs thus

Major Premise: Changing the doctrine on the ordination of women is a departure from “biblically faithful, traditional Anglicanism.” Call it what you will, but the decision to ordain women was an innovation and a departure from the received teaching of Anglicanism on the Sacrament of Orders.

Minor Premise: Changing the doctrine on the marriage of homosexual persons is a departure from “biblically faithful, traditional Anglicanism.” Call it what you will, but the decision to marry homosexual persons is an innovation and a departure from the received teaching of Anglicanism on the Sacrament of Marriage.

Conclusion: Those Anglicans who accept the ordination of women have no standing to reject the marriage of homosexual persons.

Both decisions are radical innovations in Christian doctrine, totally rejected as unbiblical and untraditional by the vast majority of Christians of every time and place (including almost all Anglicans until this generation), and those who accept the first change cannot give a coherent argument from Scripture or Tradition for rejecting the second change. Either doctrine can be changed by majority vote of the General Convention, or it cannot. The doctrine on the ordination of women was changed by majority vote, and even the party of resistance in TEC (represented by Nashotah and Trinity) accepts the legitimacy of that change; on what basis, then, is a change on homosexual marriage by majority vote rejected by those who accepted the first change?

The only possible answer is, We approved of the first change, but we don’t approve of the second change. And that is simply the Will to Power, not an argument about the proper role of authority in the Church. To provide an adequate rejection of homosexual marriage (which I believe must be done by faithful Christians), it is also necessary to admit that the ordination of women was an illegitimate innovation in the life of the Church. And that’s not a Catholic argument; that’s just the operation of right reason and ruthless honesty.

-Fr Jay Scott Newman (Roman Catholic)

From a wide ranging discussion at T-19.

An Anglican Bishop Writes About The Epsicopal Church

Bp. Harold Miller of the Diocese of Down & Dromore (Church of Ireland) has written a piece on the theological and liturgical trends in the American branch of the Anglican Communion. I very rarely post Protestant writings, but this is just so dead on that it needs to be read by anyone who is seeking to understand the current crisis confronting our brothers and sisters in The Episcopal Church (TEC). I am not going to post excerpts. But I strongly encourage everyone to read his post.

Via Kendall Harmon.

Some thoughts on losing a war...

One of the few programs on television I watch religiously is on the Sci Fi channel. It’s called Battlestar Galactica. This is a remake of the campy late 1970’s series of the same name. But while the older series was a cross between space opera and silly comedy the new series is incredibly gritty, well written and blessed with superb acting. It is also dark. When I say dark, I mean midnight black. The motto of this program could be “remember it’s always darkest just before it gets even more hopeless.” Most television programs tend to end on a happy note. If that’s what you’re looking for DO NOT watch this program. Allow me a small example from the pilot miniseries.

(WARNING!!! PLOT SPOILER AHEAD FOR THOSE WHO MAY WANT TO GO OUT AND RENT THE DVD)

The pilot is set in an unknown time and corner of the universe with humans living on twelve planets in a solar system called “The Colonies.” A long time ago we are told in the written prologue, they made a race of machines called Cylons to serve them. But the machines rebelled and there was a war that eventually ended in a draw. The Cylons left and had not been heard from in a generation. Meanwhile The Colonies are seen as an advanced society that is relatively democratic, peaceful and prosperous. Then the Cylons came back.

In the space of roughly 24 hours in their time (about 3 1/2 hrs on DVD) the twelve colonies are annihilated. I mean gone, as in wiped out. Genocide is an often overused term. This program shows what a real genocide might look like. The home worlds are obliterated in a massive surprise attack with nuclear weapons raining down on cities. The Colonial Fleet is also destroyed except for a lone ship called the Galactica, a sort of space age aircraft carrier/battleship.

The Galactica survives the initial massacre by a stroke of luck and retreats to the far corner of the solar system to rearm. While there a handful of civilian space ships arrive lead by the erstwhile Secretary of Education, now President of The Colonies, Laura Roselyn with perhaps 50,000 survivors left from a civilization of probably tens of billions of people.

There she meets the commanding officer of the Galactica, Bill Adama who quickly makes it clear he has only one interest. He wants to get back into the fight as quickly as possible. A stunned President Rosalyn asks him if he is serious. To which Adama replies with his own question. “What do you suggest we do? Run?” And that’s when Rosalyn gives the money quote that is at the heart of my post.

“Yes. We run. I respectfully suggest it’s the only sane thing to do. We leave and we don’t come back. I am not sure if you realize this, but the war is over. And we lost.”

(SPOILER OVER… SAFE TO RESUME READING)

There are today in the Episcopal Church (TEC) 110 dioceses and a significant number of retired bishops. Of those perhaps a dozen are at least somewhat orthodox (small “o”). Five are in open resistance to their own church, with one (San Joaquin) contemplating secession from TEC. The rest are to varying degree heretics or even apostates. The number of orthodox Christians left in TEC is not known but it’s unlikely that they comprise more than 10% of the clergy in most dioceses. There are exceptions to be sure. But in the big picture they are an extreme and dwindling minority in a denomination which has elected an apostate as its presiding bishop. How many times have we all heard of the few clergy and laymen who courageously soldier on against all odds, dreaming of a restoration?

My question is at what point does one step back and say the cause is lost? The few bishops who have not become formal heretics in TEC must at some point retire or die. Do you think the people running the show will tolerate many more Bishop Schofields? They came very close to taking steps to remove him as Bp of San Joaquin, and may yet do so. How long can one remain in communion with heretical or apostate bishops knowing them to be such? Even if your own bishop is one of the few, he (and by extension you) is in communion with heretics. Leaving is painful. But fighting for a cause that is lost can be more painful. It can warp one’s faith and allow bitterness and anger to intrude itself into the soul. Better to accept this defeat and focus on where to go for spiritual nourishment. For the Protestant minded there is no shortage of denominations available. Pick one.

For the catholic minded, that is to say those seeking The Church and not a denomination there are logically two choices, Orthodoxy or Rome. But wherever you go one thing needs to be said plainly though with love and empathy for the pain of this fact. Staying in TEC is no longer a moral option for an orthodox Christian. There is no longer any reasonable hope of reversing the fortunes of this fight. To believe otherwise is to be willfully blind to the truth. “The war is over. And we lost.”

Matthew 10: 14-15
14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.