But another, growing problem lies in the fact that “fundamental Christian beliefs and practices are sometimes changed within communities by so-called ‘prophetic actions’ that are based” on a reading of Christianity “not always consonant” with that found in the Bible and in Christian tradition.
While the pope did not offer specific examples, he has in the past questioned Christian communities that have decided to ordain women to the priesthood and episcopacy or to bless homosexual unions and ordain openly gay men and women.
The pope’s concerns obviously extend to the Anglican Communion and its troubled relations with the U.S. Episcopal Church and some dioceses in Canada.
The Anglican Communion is attempting to find ways to strengthen its structures for ensuring that one national member does not take actions that make other members of the communion uncomfortable. At times, bishops have been named to oversee pastoral care of members who do not go along with the changes.
Pope Benedict said it was unfortunate that some church communities have given up “the attempt to act as a unified body, choosing instead to function according to the idea of ‘local options.'”
I have to agree with ENS that this is a specific statement about TEC. To my knowledge no other major denomination is claiming prophetic action. And I think that the Pope is 100% correct in saying that it is not in line with Scripture or Tradition. Trying to “spin” this from the TEC side is silly.
Sometimes the Bishop of Rome is spot-on. That being said, the Dalai Lama says some profoundly correct things, too. Maybe some guru on some mountain can speak some truth now and then, as well.
Those who are out getting their swimsuits for the Tiber crossing would do well to get an early 20th century copy of Fortescue’s “Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described”, and a contemporary copy of Dearmer’s “Parson’s Handbook”. Read them in parallel.
Over the centuries, the Romans have put layer upon layer of stucco over the basic teaching of the Judeochristian Scriptures. One impenetrable layer is that of hierarchical clericalism. A closely related one is that of papal authority. And the liturgy – may God have mercy.
The one that I just can’t believe is that of the Roman Bishop Leo in 1896. Let’s not forget that.
http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_le13ac.htm
“…We pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void.”
Utter Roman balderdash! None of his business! Who was HE and his predecessors to say such things? Papas? Our father?
Let’s put the swimsuits back in the drawer, folks. Anglicanism is strong and full of spiritual vitality. The devil would have us believe that we are weak, and a dying breed. God, working through laity, bishops, priests, and deacons, can repair the tear in the fabric – and strengthen us. If we ask him to.
Go back to today’s Gospel, John 14:1-14. Jesus has been with us all this time. We don’t need someone to intercede for us. Anglicans (and the Protestants) have a direct line to the Father. The Romans, it would seem, are told that they have to call the operator first.
Non draco sit mihi dux. Vade retro satana!
#1 – Some are suggesting that the remark about “prophetic action” was directed toward Catholic dissidents as much as any protestants. That said… if the shoe fits, wear it. 🙂
Ralph writes with great passion: “Anglicanism is strong and full of spiritual vitality. The devil would have us believe that we are weak, and a dying breed. God, working through laity, bishops, priests, and deacons, can repair the tear in the fabric – and strengthen us. If we ask him to.”
I reply with even greater skepticism: If there is strength and spiritual vitality in the Anglicanism, it has nothing to do with what so many Anglicans claim is their strength: a hierarchy with no authority, a communion with no creed, a “local option” with no attention paid to the historic faith and life of the church, a church which is more club than church with no outcasts save those who take the Gospel of Christ seriously. Anglicanism is “weak and a dying breed” and if there is an Anglicanism worth considering in the future, it will need a radical change, so radical it will bear little resemblance to what we know now. I love so much of what I thought was Anglicanism – having discovered that even that was, by virture of the inaction and teachings of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Primates and Commissions, nothing but smoke and mirrors, I cannot share Ralph’s passion. And I’ve grown weary with whistling in the dark.
[blockquote]Anglicanism is strong and full of spiritual vitality. [/blockquote]
He is correct. It is full of vitality in Nigeria, Uganda, etc.
In the U.S., it is the fastest declining denomination, truly having lost its salt. Its presiding bishop is doing her best to make an “ian church” (Christian church with out Christ). If you have any doubts about this, read her “Easter” message.
In Canada, it is careening towards total irrelevancy.
The present crisis does show some of our weaknesses. There should have been a mechanism for silencing Bp. Pike, and that method should have been applied to the next generations of heretics. But, we want to be nice and listen to others’ views. There should be a way for the discernment process to identify self-avowed, practicing, and unrepentant sinners – and send them away (until they reach metanoia), rather than considering their weaknesses an attribute. In fact, there are quite a few warts on Anglicanism, aren’t there?
We can focus on those warts to the point of despair, disillusionment, and abandonment. Uncle Screwtape would be quite proud of his nephew.
Or, we can stay in the fold and use what we’ve learned, with God’s help, to bring about transformation. Of course, sheep don’t lead revolutions. But, through Christ we are no longer sheep. Read the Gospel lesson. Heck, read all of John. The answers are there.
No, I do not agree with the actions of the PB, the 815 leadership, or many of the bishops. In fact, I’ve had a comment at this site deleted because it made references to an historical era that’s not politically correct to reference. So be it. However, the agenda at 815 is so diabolical that it only has a chance of success if those who disagree with it are silenced. There are doing what the Episcopal church would not do with Bp. Pike. Even then, since it is not of Christ, it will ultimately wither away.
But I reiterate that Anglicanism is strong. If it were to vanish, leaving a dichotomous choice between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, we would simply have to reinvent it. Perhaps that’s God’s will in all of this, though I don’t think so. I’ve previously said that I simply think that God has sent Satan (and/or the devil) to test us, just has God has done throughout the ages. God even sent the devil to test Jesus of Nazareth, who IS God.
An old spiritual starts, “O here comes Satan – better run and hide.” That’s what I’m seeing. People are running away from Satan as fast as they can. Some to Rome, perhaps some to Constantinople, and some to Africa. But Satan will follow them everywhere they go until they finally stand up to him, get in his face, and send him away – JUST LIKE JESUS DID. (Sorry to shout. I’ll calm down, now.) Did Jesus run from the devil? No!
Yes, friends, Anglicanism is strong and full of spiritual vitality. The devil would make us think otherwise. But the challenge is not from Anglicanism. It is coming from within us.
The PB and her minions are at a crossroads in their spiritual lives. I pray that they will make decisions and take actions that will restore them to the path that leads to union with God. I offer the same prayer for all of the rest of us.
I’m sorry, #6, but I am just gobsmacked, flumgusticated, discombobulated by your cheery optimism!
Is it as well grounded in reality as your well-thought-out critiques of those sad, misguided Orthodox and Catholics?
(Barman, I’ll have whatever that fellow is drinking.)
So far, Anglicanisms’ strength is running away from what it will not follow. This is, of course, well to do. This is however not sufficient. It has not showed the necessary strength to put itself together, centered on a common core of belief. This positive act will be required if it is to avoid the slow demise from fragmentation. This positive act is the common core, and ,I might add, that we must require a firm leader who will assert that these core principles will be affirmed and be maintained day in and day out, regardless of contemporary fashions and novelties. Larry
Those who run from adversity simply take it with them.
Optimism? We put ourselves in God’s hands, and don’t let the crisis distract us from what’s important. Is that the same as an ostrich burying its head in the sand? Maybe so. Maybe I’m the one who’s “gobsmacked, flumgusticated, and discombobulated.” (I love “flumgusticated”.)
I don’t know what God’s will is in all of this, any more than anyone else. But, I don’t hear a call to convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, or to Come Home to Rome.
I do believe that Anglicanism will survive despite the solid efforts of some to destroy it. When you look at all the stuff that’s happened to the Roman church over the centuries, and reflect on the fact that it has survived, then this present crisis in Anglicanism really isn’t all that big – though it certainly seems so to those of us who are living in the midst of the crisis.
Yes, the PB and her minions are a walking disaster, leaving a trail of chaos in their wake. And, maybe she wants to become some sort of Episcopalian Popess. And the ABp of Canterbury has shown himself to be a rather better theologian than leader. But, we aren’t a hierarchal church. So, they are utterly irrelevant to this lowly parishioner. There’s more, much more, to a Church than its earthly leadership. Standing together, we can stop this.
Furthermore, it’s quite possible that Christ’s work in them is not over. Time will tell on that. If the PB and the others don’t convert to Christianity, and want to go down in history as having destroyed TEC, then maybe we will let that happen. Or, maybe not.