A Church of England vicar has defected to the Catholic church in an emotional speech to his Torquay flock yesterday.
Father David Lashbrooke…, who has been attached to the Parish Church of St Marychurch for almost nine years, fought back tears as he broke the news to his congregation. He is one of hundreds of Anglican priests who have left the Church of England in recent months. Many have opposed developments including women bishops, gay clergy and same-sex blessings.
Father Lashbrooke said he had wrestled with the changes brought to the Church of England and his decision to leave was ‘God’s calling’.
This isn’t God’s calling. Its moral cowardice. What don’t you understand about “stay and fight for what is right?” There is too much of this, running to the protective skirts of RC’ism, crying and wringing one’s hands all the while. Well, good riddance, for my part. Great rule: Don’t fight, run. Larry
It’s hard to know how to respond to you, Larry. I, as an Episcopal priest who left several years ago, could just as easily argue that *staying* isn’t God’s calling. That it’s moral cowardice (or simple weakness), and that staying to fight is useless. I have about as much basis for saying those things as you have.
Why would you blame someone, after the Titanic has sunk, for climbing into a lifeboat?
I agree. If the vicar now believes in RC doctrine and dogma he should definitely convert. It would be wrong of him not to.
To clarify, I do not see it as cowardice at all. It would be cowardly to believe RC doctrine and dogma and *not* convert.
Thank you, Sarah. As much as we may not agree on all things theological, I appreciate the respect you grant to those with whom you disagree. It’s a generous and charitable witness to the faith.
No, he is RUNNING AWAY from something, not toward something. All the difference in the world. This isn’t at all like the Titanic sinking. This is good deal more like being bullied at school and running, crying, to Teacher because fighting at school is forbidden and he he can hide behind a claim that he does not want to be disobedient. This is spinelessness, not obedience. This won’t stop the bullies, and it never has. And, make no mistake, we re being bullied by the thugs of Correctitude. No wonder they win all the battles.
If you were in Libya, Chris, what would you do? Run to Italy or stay and fight? He who respectfully disagrees and runs away, lives to fight another day, yes? Buit this didn’t carry the day in Egypt, it won’t in Libya, but it appears that it will in England. Larry
RE: “No, he is RUNNING AWAY from something, not toward something.”
Not if he believes RC doctrine and dogma he isn’t. He is running right towards what he believes.
[blockquote]No, he is RUNNING AWAY from something, not toward something.[/blockquote]
Possibly.. but how’s your mind reading powers? Mine aren’t so good. I guess you could be charitable or not when it comes to this.. although FWIW, I DO understand why you’d feel anger, betrayal, etc. All I can do is pray that those that ARE coming into the Catholic Church do so because they actually BELIEVE what the Catholic Church teaches, not just because they can’t deal with the mess in the AC anymore. Otherwise, they’re going to find their reasons for coming into the Church aren’t enough to keep them there long and they’ll likely move on once more to something else (Continuum, Orthodoxy, LCMS, free-church Evangelical etc etc)
Even if he is running away, so what? I say, if he quit believing in Anglicanism, then he should run even faster, because it would be pure insanity to stay and fight to save a system he doesn’t believe in.
If I am doing the right thing, and a giant brick wall appears in my way, instead of banging my head against the brick wall trying to change things, I think I’d just rather hang out in places without brick walls.
Your ability to read people’s minds and hearts, Larry, is nothing short of divine. Congratulations.
#1–I don’t know if you have actually been caught in the organized religion meat grinder. But at some point it is no longer fighting–staying and “fighting” becomes tantamount to a death wish. And I am only a disagreeable lay person; I can’t imagine how it must be to be a preist living under the ecclesiastical whim of a revisionist/heretic bisphop. Maybe Fr. Lashbrooke should volunteer to be burned at the stake?
I really appreciate your recognition of my divinity Anglicanum. I know it is so, but I cannot convince my wife for some reason. I am practicing with water to wine but i don’t seem to have the trick yet.
But the mind reading thing, see the above; “Many have opposed developments including women bishops, gay clergy and same-sex blessings. Father Lashbrooke said he had wrestled with the changes brought to the Church of England and his decision to leave was ‘God’s calling’.” It is not exactly witchcraft reading Lashbrooke’s mind in this case, is it? In fact, this is all rather obvious. He is running away from changes he does not like. Is this not clear to you? Larry
No, it is not clear to me. Charges of moral cowardice and running away are simply uncharitable.
Thank you Anglicanum.
Sarah makes a good point, but I would nuance it slightly. The Catholic convert doesn’t so much believe in the the doctrines and dogma of the Catholic Church as he/she believes in the Catholic Church. Part of that conversion process is the removal of obstacles to belief in doctrines and dogmas, but the positive belief is born in a submission to the authority of the Church.
#15 Phil Swain
[blockquote]The Catholic convert doesn’t so much believe in the the doctrines and dogma of the Catholic Church as he/she believes in the Catholic Church. Part of that conversion process is the removal of obstacles to belief in doctrines and dogmas, but the positive belief is born in a submission to the authority of the Church.[/blockquote]
I would have thought that belief in and submission to Christ would be much more healthy.
What does charitability have to do with the price of cheese? I say that his mind is clear here as the entry makes it clear. There is no mind reading involved. He is running away from changes he does not approve of, and he is unwilling to stay and fight them because they are BAD changes and, as a priest, like a captain, he has vowed to go down with the ship – so to speak. o I ask you then: If you were in Libya, would you stay and duke it out or run to where it is safe? For Libya, everything hangs on how the people answer. If you are not willing to go to the wall for your country, why should you go to the wall for your church? Larry
You win. Happy Lent.
RE: “The Catholic convert doesn’t so much believe in the the doctrines and dogma of the Catholic Church as he/she believes in the Catholic Church. Part of that conversion process is the removal of obstacles to belief in doctrines and dogmas, but the positive belief is born in a submission to the authority of the Church.”
Well — that’s certainly the way some RCs would put it. ; > )
But “believing in the Catholic Church” is actually simply a part of accepting the claims — the doctrine and dogma of the RC church — that Rome makes about itself. The convert to Rome thus makes a first [and presumably last] private judgement about the truth of Rome’s claims about itself, and having come to that conclusion, in integrity, converts to Rome.
I recognize that some would like to assert differently.
But the larger point is that once an individual comes to the conclusion that the claims that Rome makes about its identity and intrinsic nature are true, then one MUST convert to Roman Catholicism. One can, in summary, “do no other.”
Of course, one *might* suspect that in reality those Anglicans who are asserting that they now accept as the truth the claims that Rome makes about itself are actually simply fooling themselves and are merely interested in escaping from an uncomfortable place. But I think one can only come to that conclusion if such converts *return* from Rome and re-enter TEC or other Anglican entities — as several rather high-profile converts have done recently.
Then — and I think only then — can one say “why look — they were running FROM discomfort but with little knowledge of what they were running towards.”
I find it simply breathtaking that one could take such an action with so little knowledge or seeming theological competence. But obviously . . . that’s happening at least on occasion.
Again — I don’t think that most converting to Rome are engaging in that kind of decision. Which is why I think Larry Morse is mistaken in large part when he claims that converts to Rome from Anglicanism are actually simply fleeing in cowardice.
Pageantmaster, when we submit to Jesus Christ how do we know that this Jesus isn’t just another substitute for ourselves? In your church one person says Jesus says so and so and another person says the opposite. How do you give your soul away to this Jesus Christ. As Romano Guardini said, “For whenever a person wants to deal only with God then he says ‘God’ but means himself. There must be an objective authority which can draw out my answer from self-assertion’s every refuge and hide-out. The question of holding on or letting go is decided ultimately not before God, but before the Church.”
Sarah, I think these folks are going through a conversion process and conversion(submission) and private judgement are not the same things. Conversion is more like being judged and accepted rather than doing the judging. In our private judgements we always retain some reservation. In submitting to Jesus Christ through his Church we relinquish private judgement. In any case thank-you for you charity towards these converts.
RE: “I think these folks are going through a conversion process and conversion(submission) and private judgement are not the same things.”
I agree. The two are different — but private judgement must come with or prior to conversion [depending on your ordo salutis] — which would be one of the foundational differences between some of the apologists for Rome and Protestants. It is also, incidentally, one of the many devastating foundational disjunctions and rich ironies in those apologies.
RE: “In our private judgements we always retain some reservation.”
Not a reservation of action — perhaps a reservation of *philosophic certainty* which is an entirely different thing.
RE: “In submitting to Jesus Christ through his Church we relinquish private judgement.”
Very true, but prior to the submission comes — inevitably and entirely inconsistently — a private judgement assessing the truth of the Church’s claims. No person submits to something that he judges to be intrinsically false and delusional.
But then — that is why I am what I am, and you are what you are.
RE: “In any case thank-you for you charity towards these converts.”
You’re welcome.
Phil Swain wrote:
[blockquote] Pageantmaster, when we submit to Jesus Christ how do we know that this Jesus isn’t just another substitute for ourselves? In your church one person says Jesus says so and so and another person says the opposite. How do you give your soul away to this Jesus Christ. [/blockquote]
Exactly the same argument applies to “the church” – those who say they are submitting to it may well just be submitting to a substitute for themselves. This sort of argument goes nowhere.
[blockquote] “There must be an objective authority which can draw out my answer from self-assertion’s every refuge and hide-out.” [/blockquote]
I agree. The scriptures and the Holy Spirit are objective. “The church” is not.
[blockquote] “The question of holding on or letting go is decided ultimately not before God, but before the Church.†[/blockquote]
Hmmm, would you like to rephrase this? Why would anyone set off “God” against “the church”?
I agree with Sarah – if someone is convinced that Roman Catholic claims are true, then the only reasonable action is to convert to Roman Catholicism. Nor should they have to wait for an ordinariate – just walk down the road to the nearest RC parish.
But don’t you see, Michael, the Ordinariate is so PUBLIC! Walking down the road is so….so… unimportant, so invisible. That’s not what these people want. They want to be seen! Big time.
Remember what today’s gospel says about people who fast in a big and public way. Will they get their reward? And those who bail out before the largest possible audience on Ash Wednesday. Will they get their reward? Larry
Larry,
Thanks for your comments. Obviously, I can’t comment on the motives of any of the people involved. I don’t know them.
However, I am an avowed protestant and my concern is for orthodoxy in the CofE. I don’t think the publicity in cases like this hurts, because it highlights how the liberals in CofE are driving people out, whether they go to the ordinariate or somewhere else.
I do wish there had been similar publicity for the much greater numbers who have left CofE for protestant churches in recent years, due to the liberalism of the leadership. But that is not this vicar’s fault. If his “defection” (as the press call it) helps to highlight the bad leadership of Rowan Williams and other liberal bishops in CofE, then I think its a good thing.