[Bishop Geralyn] Wolf found Redding to be “a woman of utmost integrity and their conversations over the past two years have been open, honest and respectful,” according to a press release from the Diocese of Rhode Island.
“However, Bishop Wolf believes that a priest of the Church cannot be both a Christian and a Muslim….”
…to others, Redding is an example of what they see as a church that has strayed too far from its doctrinal and historical center.
The Rev. Kendall Harmon, the canon theologian with the Diocese of South Carolina who also runs the traditionalist blog TitusOneNine, said Redding should be commended, on one level, for having the integrity to be upfront about what she believes.
But what’s at stake is central to the church, he said. “To be a Christian is to be a Trinitarian and worship Jesus. If we’re not clear on that, we have nothing to offer in our witness.”
Update: Applause to Jim Naughton for understanding the seriousness of what is at stake here.
I don’t mean this as a negative comment on Bishop Wolf, but it has to be observed that a convert to Islam gets extended deadlines out to two years before being defrocked, but the clergy of The Falls Church, who are seeking to guard the Faith, get six months and not a day longer. This more than anything shines a light on the theologically unmoored power-grabbers in 815.
Mrs Redding was properly ousted after a fair and reasonable process. If Fr Thew Forrester receives the necessary consents from the bishops and standing committees and is raised to the episcopate it will be difficult to see the events as other than application of a glaring double standard.
How was this a hard decision for Bp Wolf?
Well, Rob Roy, one assumes that Bishop Wolf is not really lik, say, Bishop Jefferts Schori in temperament. Bishop Wolf does not relish deposing elderly clergy with sick relatives, elderly clergy with recently dead relatives, bishops who move to England, bishops who might break the canons at some point, etc, etc, etc.
I would guess that Bishop Wolf, you know . . . takes the canons and her duty seriously, enough to wield the axe with some modicum of care and prayer and concern, and not swinging away with wild abandon and carelessness.
It *is* actually a serious thing to [i]eliminate[/i] a clergyperson or bishop, contrary to the behavior of certain bishops.
Robroy, I think the issues were pretty cut and dried. I suspect the difficulty referred to relates to the emotional aspects of having to take such a step. It’s like terminating an employee; it may be justified and required, but it’s almost always difficult.
[i] Excessive sarcasm deleted by elf. [/i]
Thank you, Sarah, your response is, typically, right on the money. After a shaky start, +Wolf has been, at least from my admittedly limited perspective, a very fair minded bishop for RI. Perhaps because she was shown grace in her ministry, she is willing to show grace to others. Not only is it biblical, but we, by our comments, seem to often wish it were the practice of others in this all too often graceless church. I may be an optimist, but I have to believe that others who have been in such a lather to destroy careers will eventually learn the notion of, “depose hurriedly, repent in leisure.”
I can’t believe I’m writing this because it’s so patently obvious, but it seems to me that if you can’t claim to be both a Christian and Muslim to serve as a Priest in Rhode Island, then surely you can’t claim to be both a Christian and Buddhist to serve as a Bishop in Michigan!
Don’t miss the comments at Naughton’s site. They aren’t from priests, it appears, but they demonstrate nicely just how befogged some laypeople are in their understanding of the faith, and of the nature of truth itself.
“Difficult call?” Surely this needs elaboration. “Patient and careful manner,” maybe. But one man’s patience is another man’s timorous vacillation.
Why did it take so long to defrock her? It has been a that she was not a Christian when she practice the Muslim faith.
Canon Harmon wrote: [i]I commend Bishop Wolf for making a difficult but correct call and for doing it in a patient and careful manner.[/i]
Indeed, in every respect. And a very pastoral response from our host, too.
flaanglican in #8: Well, there are differences. Buddhism, esp. schools like Zen Buddhism, are not necessarily “religions” per se. They’re really more meditative practices and ways of looking at the world which aren’t necessarily incompatible with Christian beliefs. Islam is a whole ‘nuther kettle of fish in that regard.
I’ll rephrase myself. Also note, there’s only “sarcasm” if there’s flesh there to tear. My point, and it seems to be made in a vacuume, is that if you stop being a “Priest” then you go back to being a layman. This means you are “still” seen as fully in-communion person, a Christian and not something else, like a Muslim.
A genuine pastoral response to Ann Redding would be “Ann, out of concern for you we can no longer receive you to holy communion. That implies complete commitment to Jesus Christ as your Lord God and Savior. Until you repent of apostasy to Islam, you cannot be treated as a layman in the Church. Any church. I have sent a letter to this effect to the local Lutheran authorities, and I hope they will honor our discipline. Again, this is not punitive, but an act of love for you. We want the best for you, and right now in a state of disbelief, communion is not spiritual food, but harmful. That is what the sorrowful state of excommunication means and it only with great sadness and concern that it becomes necessary”.
Dream on.
The only flesh being torn is self tearing and devouring of Anglicans *by* Anglicans, not by me.