It was sad to read the public comments of the Episcopal Bishop of Washington denying the importance, or need for the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus from the dead, going so far as to imply this teaching was “outlandish. ” More on that in a moment, but first some background.
Some time ago I brought a former Episcopalian into the Catholic Church who, after the Rite of Reception gave a great sigh of relief and said, “I know the Catholic Church is not without problems, but at least I know the Bishops actually hold the Christian faith. It is such a relief to be in the harbor of truth.”
I remember at the time wondering with him if that wasn’t a bit of an exaggeration of how bad things were in the Episcopalian denomination (this was about 1990). But he showed me a scrapbook of article after article of dozens of Episcopal “Bishops” denying quite publicly the divinity of Christ, the Virgin birth, the miracles of Jesus, that there was any inherent conflict between Christianity and Unitarianism, etc., not to mention a plethora aberrant moral stances.
I don’t know if my comment on that page will survive moderation, but since he has caught some flack for going after Episcopalians I submitted the following,
[blockquote]As a cradle to tomb Episcopalian who has been outspoken about the heresy rampant in the denomination, I am not offended at all by this excellent analysis of Bishop Budde’s message. I remain hesitant to cross denominational lines at times, but in the presence of such blatant false teaching, the alarm must be sounded, if for anything but to protect your own flock from following the same path when it pops up, as it and all heresies will.[/blockquote]
Axios!
Msgr. Pope is a priest of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. His archbishop is a constant source of scandal by failing to rebuke Catholic politicians who support abortion and same-sex marriage. Which to say, this RC boy thinks this priest should tend to his own knitting and let the Episcopalians tend to theirs.
I honestly don’t know who Mgr Charles Pope is, but I can only imagine his day job involves drumming up customers for the Anglican Ordinariate, mainly by touting the virtues of the Catholic Church and trumpeting TEC’s failures. His writing seems so prideful and self-congratulatory he’s either ignorant of the real scandals of his own church or spitefully exaggerating the folly of ours.
Frankly, I’m sick and tired of Roman Catholics who continue — even at this late hour when they are mired in endless scandals of their own — taking such obvious gloating, gleeful pleasure in the very public idiocy of another Episcopal “deep thinker.”
Any invidious comparison between our churches, tending to imply that TEC has a monopoly on scandal or stupidity or perversity or general bone-headedness, is grossly ill-informed: take a quick sec, dear Roman Catholic friends, and Google Marcial Maciel or Mgr Meth or John Corapi or Bernard Law or Eugene Clark or …
jhp
I think you are comparing apples and oranges. No one, certainly not Msgr Pope, is denying that the RCC (or any other church for that matter) has its share of scandals and often horrible human failings. What he is addressing is not vice or sin, but institutional apostasy.
Regardless of Msgr. Pope’s intentions, and how they may be magically seen by others, or the state of his Church, he has spoken the truth about ECUSA.
I see nothing wrong about telling the truth.
I don’t think his statements are going to have any impact upon ECUSA, but one never knows…the light may come on for some who are still in the dark.
Fair enough, Ad Orientem, but doesn’t it prove my point if one exaggerates the importance of a marginal figure, by saying her dubious Easter blogging constitutes nothing less than “institutional apostasy.” I doubt she’ll have the intellectual honesty to answer the challenges that have been offered against her views; so people will shrug and look past her.
[blockquote] “Fair enough, Ad Orientem, but doesn’t it prove my point if one exaggerates the importance of a marginal figure…” [/blockquote]
Ms Budde is not “a marginal figure”. She is a “bishop” in TEC. Not only that, but all the other bishops of TEC are behind her – few if any will criticise her blatant heresy, especially now that the courageous +Lawrence has left with his diocese of South Carolina.
Mr Pope also points out (correctly) that apostates like John Spong are still welcomed with open arms in TEC.
[blockquote] “I doubt she’ll have the intellectual honesty to answer the challenges that have been offered against her views; so people will shrug and look past her.” [/blockquote]
That sort of thinking is why TEC is in the mess that it is in – No, people don’t “shrug and look past her”, rather they look right at her and say “That is what her Church is all about”. Then they give up and leave that Church, and warn their friends about it.
Any church which cannot discipline apostate clergy is doomed to irrelevance.
So, Luke (#6), Charles Pope ran out of truths to tell about his own church and now he’s truth-telling about ours. How fearless … why, bless his little heart.
I don’t know what your reference to “magical thinking” means, but I assure you, there’s more magical thinking in a Roman holy hour than Anglicans dream of in a decade.
I’m under no illusions about my own church, if that’s what you mean. It’s a field in which I labor, filled with wheat and tares until the coming of my Lord. In the meantime, folly and scandal is not something I’m focused on, when I count so many simple people of great and deep faith around me.
So God bless. See you at the finish line.