Vatican Regret at Anglican Vote to Ordain Female Bishops

And this is one of the tragic fruits of what the CofE is preparing to do.

Could their House of Bishops overturn the General Synod vote?

Ecumenism in the Anglican Communion is effectively dead. The only remaining churches that are available for union are the mainline protestant churches. And they have their own problems right now. Just how much of the hierarchy’s language about inclusion, reconciliation and ecumenism was sincere and how much was empty?

The Episcopal Church: We blink at reality more than fifteen times a minute.

It’s hard to believe that the Anglican Communion - as expressed by TEC and the CofE - is anything more than air.

Don’t be silly, mousestalker, the Unitarians are becoming a perfect match as the revisionist reshape the face of Anglicanism.

#5, Jackie Bruchi. D’oh! Of course, Jackie you are absolutely correct.

The Episcopal Church: Where vox populi is always received as Vox Dei.

As I said yesterday ARCIC (the Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission) is now dead.  So much for unity.

Blessings,  M

Hard bitter fruits borne of hard bitter hearts.
RIP COE
Intercessor

[3] The pattern that seems to be forming is for these churches periodically to adopt some theological innovation that knowingly expels some percentage of the church. 

The in-between times are reserved for the church to (a) pronounce how inclusive and welcoming it is and should be; (b) bemoan the divisions between churches; (c) announce how open it is to ecumenical relations with churches that cannot accept its past innovations; and (d) figure out what the next divisive innovation is to be.

TEC and CofE are currently mainline Protestant churches.  They are simply moving out of the mainstream.

“This decision will have consequences on the future of dialogue,”
As FiF said yesterday the Church of England will understand that actions always have consequences.

The CoE just didn’t expect them to start less than 24 hours after the vote. The scene from the movie ‘Alfie’
where he is watching his son being
christened with another man’s name
because he hadn’t manned up when his girlfriend told him she was pregnant flashed thru my head.

#9-
(as my daughter would say) You are so correct. The “victory celebrations” last night included the call to start working for the “inclusion of gays” as the next step in moving the CoE into the 21st century.  A in the US- first they pare off the Anglo Catholics (at the cost of 40% of the church in the US), next will come the orthodox Evangelicals- a bigger piece in England than the US, I suspect.  Then will come any “broad churchmen” left who actually hold to Scripture.  The only upside, as you are alluding to, is that the plan currently being followed leads to demographic self destruction- on its current trajectory, TEC could cease to function in 20 years outside of Trinity Wall Street and a few high church unitarian cathedrals in California and a couple big cities.  From the current look of things, the CoE may cease to function before Lambeth, although I am sure they will continue to put on a good show.

mousestalker #3, re: “Ecumenism in the Anglican Communion is effectively dead.”  I think you’re being a bit pessimistic.  We’ll have plenty of opportunities to jointly buy toilet paper at Sam’s Club, or share Oprah Book Club recommendations.  The possibilities to cooperate are simply endless!

Just how much of the hierarchy’s language about inclusion, reconciliation and ecumenism was sincere and how much was empty?

‘Inclusion’ isn’t about including people.  It’s about including ‘authenticities.’ 

The purpose of Liberal religion is to quest for the Authentic Self.  The end goal is not to find God, but to find you. Any path to any legitimate endstate will suffice so long as the end state is ‘authentic’ because God is well-pleased when we ‘discover our true selves.’ It is this collection of ‘authenticities’ - self-identified authentic states of man - that liberals wish to establish. Implicit is the assumption that man is basically good.  The preceding cannot be true if the authentic self is dead in sin.

And this is why liberal religion has so much trouble with orthodox Christianity.  It denies that the purpose of religion is to ‘find self.’ It denies that any ‘authentic endstate’ is pleasing to God.  It asserts that the authentic state of man is defined by sin, and wrath, and judgment.  It asserts that Holiness and not authenticity is pleasing to God.  It asserts binding eternal truths that deny the right of man to glory in man’s authentic self.  That is what they call ‘exclusion.’

They will never include us.  We are what they are trying to eradicate.

carl

Great comment, carl.  I think you’re exactly right.

Jumpin’ J! Clarity. Nice job, Carl.

# 14 Carl…Huzzah!  Great comment.  The world view of secular psychology is that man is basically and that we can fix ourselves.  I have accepted that man is basically fallen and that we can’t fix ourselves.  We can, however be redeemed.

With all the talk of “walking together” or “walking apart”, I’m saddened to see actions taken that move us farther from Rome and Constantinople, not to mention significant swatches of the World Lutheran Federation in the GS.  We are now walking apart from the great majority of the church.  I would feel much better about WO if I didn’t sense it is being pushed as a secular agenda and if there were some openness among the leaders in the RCC and Eastern churches that it were a genuine act of the Holy Spirit.
While it’s personally a second order issue to me that I am fairly neutral/undecided about, I would gladly defer to tradition/consensus to build unity between our bodies.

Bravo and Bloody Brilliant Carl! Spot on!

I say let the consequences begin! The time for weeping is over and we Anglo-Catholics need to get ourselves going and keeping our eyes on Jesus and our feet on His path. We have work to do and it won’t get done sittin’ around weeping over what used to be and is no more. I get a real sense that God is allowing this to happen to get us Anglo-Catholics to move from complacency to the actual place he wants us and yoked to heresy is not the place He wants us to be. Heresy is not interested in evangelism or preaching the transforming Good News of Jesus Christ to comform to His image but they only are interested in growing into themselves and feeling good about who they want to transform themselves into. Sounds alot like satans world to me. So we need to get to work and move towards Christ.

Carl Rocks!

I would feel much better about WO if I didn’t sense it is being pushed as a secular agenda and if there were some openness among the leaders in the RCC and Eastern churches that it were a genuine act of the Holy Spirit.

It wouldn’t hurt if more of the women concerned talked more about God and Christ and less about their rights and careers. :-(

What sort of discernment do priests, male or female, go through in the U.S. now?

If the “discernment” is that you are not with the agenda, YOU will notbe discerned for candidacy to the ministry.  The Diocese of Missouri is committed to the non-ordination of those opposed to women’s ordination, for instance.  I generally had no problem with it, enculturated as I was, until Church History I and II brought me up against the realities of the innovative character of the ordination of women.  Kaeton+, +Harris, and PB Schori have certainly made me reconsider my enculturation. 

So the process of reception has been concluded by fiat in DioMO and CoE.  We all know about the Bonnie Anderson “boundary crossing hit squads” promised in Texas and elsewhere.  The CoE has bought the agenda and will observe niceties to objectors until the hold is consolidated.  Then they will consult the above mentioned persons on proper methods of ridding themselves of “dissidents”, “trads”, and “reactionaries”.
Good thing that Rome and Constantinople can see clearly what CoE means by “reunion”: all your are us.

What sort of discernment do priests, male or female, go through in the U.S. now?

In this dioceses, and some others where “mutual ministry” is taking hold, essentially, you hold up your hand at a parish meeting.  If the diocesan discernment committee thinks you are “inclusive” enough, you get a “group study” course- essentially readings in liberal theology, and are then ordained.

To emphasize the point, in one parish that had 21 people in it a couple Sundays ago, there are 4 priests and 3 deacons.  2 of the deacons are on the vestry.  All volunteer.  A seminary trained priest comes around from th diocese every few months to make sure no one has slipped too far off the path and turned orthodox.  Recently, there have been complaints raised at the diocesan level against some local parishes that still print in their bulletins that communion is a sacrament reserved for the baptized.

My husband is a glazier who does custom mirror walls.  Sounds like he should start putting bids in on the Church of Me, which Carl describes so well.

Carl, that was absolutely brilliant.

Thanks for the info, dwstroudmd and tjmcmahon. I had wondered because an acquaintance of mine was encouraged by a priest in a neighboring community to become an Episcopal priest. I am not sure she was even Episcopalian at the time - if she was, that was a very recent development. Her going to a church at all would have been a recent development. She was hastened immediately to Yale, where she dropped out after one semester, quickly deciding it was not for her - which I doubt surprised anyone who knows her. She’s a lovely, interesting, insightful person, fun to be around - but has never had any real interest in the Christian faith. Her spiritual interests have tended toward crystals and reincarnation. (I don’t mean to be snarky - I like her.) But I have wondered how often this story has been repeated, with a different outcome.

# 24 tjmcmahon.  Interesting to know this about your diocese.  I am very familiar with the ordination process in a western state and determining someone’s “inclusive” status as a benchmark for candidacy is surely not part of it.  The discernment process, in the aspirants own parish…usually 6 months, is an important part.  The support of the local rector, psychological and medical testing seminary work and the GOE’s.  WO and one’s agreement with it is no litmus test.  Agreement with the ordination of practicing homosexuals is no litmus test.  In fact, to my knowledge, these hot-button issues were never asked of the 6 ordinands I knew and knew quite well.  For most of candidates 4-6 years were spent in the process, no rubber stamp.

#27, I have a Episcopalian friend who was very interested in New Age spirituality, and she was “called” to become a priest.
She did not own a Bible. 
But she did have a pack of Tarot cards.
She wasn’t sure if she should follow the “call,”; However, she was at sort of a crossroads in her career, so the call became stronger.

Oh, did I mention that she was bisexual?

Emily, many of us would add, “and look at the great results this stringent process has wrought.”

#229 HeartAFire,
She may have asked her ouji board if she should proceed forward in the “call”!

EmilyH, how long ago were those ordinands in the discernment process? I can tell you that my friend didn’t go through any six months discernment in “her own” parish (a parish she sometimes visits - she doesn’t live in the community). No psychological testing. Nothing but, “You’d be a great priest, we can get you into Yale.”

M—
The ARCIC has not met since 2004.  It has been effectively dead for four years.

# 32.  To answer your question:  Two were ordained in 2006, 3 in 2007 and one last spring.

Reaction from Moscow is on Anglican Mainstream

An <a >artist’s conception</a> of the next CoE Bishop’s Conference.

#35—AndrewA, Thanks!

This decision is of course painful in the inter-Christian dialogue, as it is further alienating the Anglican community from the Apostolic tradition,” Priest Igor Vyzhanov, secretary of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations, said in an interview with Interfax-Religion on Tuesday.
...
“The decision was predictable because the tendency of total liberalization unfortunately dominates in many Christian Churches, including the Anglican community,” he said.

In the late 19th - early 20th century the Orthodox saw the Anglican Church as “the nearest amongst the western Christian Churches,” he said. “A very serious dialogue was underway with it in a hope that good relations between the Orthodox and Anglicans would have good prospects,” Father Igor said.

These statements piece my heart ...

In my home diocese, I know of at least one case in which a conservative man was refused in the discernment process.  I am not privy to the details so can’t swear that it was his beliefs which did it—but he had been told that he could not go to TSM or Nashotah.  He was sponsored by a conservative parish.  I am happy to hear that in EmilyH’s diocese these litmus tests are not applied.  Anecdotal evidence says that this is unusual in today’s TEC.

It would be nice if the Orthodox Patriachs and the Pope would release a joint statement on the matter.  Not much chance of that, but it would be nice.  The entire Pentarch speaking with one voice.

Dr. Stroud, tjm, EmilyH, and Katherine.

As one who was initiated into the ‘mutual ministry’ concept in a western diocese; who stated at the initial discernment interview with the bishop that I saw my self as an evangelical Anglo-catholic, and who went through the entire process…three years…right up until the Wednesday before a Saturday ordination, then told that I was not suited for the Episcopal Organization in——-———-, and denied any recourse other than to reapply , but only for the permanent diaconate.

That was three years ago, I left, was ordained deacon then priest, and now serve an extended mission into three states (and, no, I don’t ask the Episcopal bishops if I may enter their territories!)

Congregations are small, buildings non-existant, and no pay…but then I am in my 69th year now, and homesteading a sustainable Anglican community in the scenic _____ _____ of _____ ______, and God is GOOD!  Our mission/retreat complex is named “Ruah”, for we feel the breath of God every day.

—Cradle high church Episcopalian

“I would feel much better about WO if I didn’t sense it is being pushed as a secular agenda and if there were some openness among the leaders in the RCC and Eastern churches that it were a genuine act of the Holy Spirit.”

You want them to lie???

I forgot to mention a couple of other “hoops” for these ordinands.  6 months to a year as deacons.  For many, this was full time job.  And 12 weeks of Clinical Pastoral Education, 40 hours/week.  Most of those I knew went heavily into debt, 2nd mortgaged their homes, or cashed in their pensions.  At any point of this process, they could be rejected.  For many, CPE is particularly hard.  In some ways, it calls forth the same kind of rigorous self-examination as “formation” in religious orders.  Think maybe a 90 day Ignatian retreat or the first year in Al-Anon or AA.  For those who would lead, it is an exercise in humility.

Chip @ 40.  If that were the case, your C.O.M is gravely at fault.  When you say you went through “the process”, what exactly do you mean?

Re [40]:
If “them” means the aggressive proponents of WO…

If “them” means Rome + the Patriarchs, what I meant was this:

I can listen to both sides of the biblical debate and see how people who love Holy Scripture will come down on different sides.  (Of course, this supposes that the discussion happens in a vacuum sheltered from tradition, Tradition, and present secular political agendas).

If I understand correctly, priestly celibacy is “a tradition” or “discipline” in the RCC.  The Vatican could theoretically start allowing married priests in the Roman rite (aside from eastern rite or dispensations for Anglican converts), just like the Eastern churches do.  *If* they viewed WO as “discipline” rather than “Tradition”, we would be in a very different situation.  I don’t know about the East, but Pope John Paul II ended this discussion in the RCC.

Emily H, I am glad to hear that the discernment process is still a rigorous one where you are. That is something that is changing drastically, I think. Certainly, it has here.

Emily #40 – it seems you’re defending the rigor of the ordination process in ECUSA.  But isn’t this against all evidence, and not just the anecdotes some have related here?  Let’s face it, if a person, ahem, sexually active outside of marriage or candidate that rejected God’s Trinitarian revelation in favor of “Mother, Rock, Womb” or the like got ordained, that would also indicate a C.O.M. “gravely at fault.”  You’re not denying we have truckloads of those, are you?

“The Catholic position on the issue was clearly expressed by Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II. Such a decision signifies a breaking away from the apostolic tradition maintained by all of the Churches since the first millennium, and therefore is a further obstacle for the reconciliation between the Catholic Church and the Church of England.”

Indeed, the Roman Catholic position has been clear for some time, far clearer, as Romans, Anglicans and most other ecumenical observers know, than has the Anglican position been.  What is an agreement with an amorphous subset of Anglicans when all parties know it is only an indeterminate subset and not the Anglican Communion it may purport to be?  The vote by the CoE has at least interjected some clarity and integrity into Anglican negotiations with Rome.  I am saddened by Rome’s mistreatment in this regard and draw hope from its example and efforts to stay in dialogue despite such ill treatment in the past.  I also understand and have some sympathy for its sadness because the clarity does not favor it’s own position.  With some anguish have I observed its forced-choice preference for an indeterminate subset rather than the clearer Protestant position the CoE has now articulated, and I hope in time Rome may acknowledge and derive some benefit from the increased honesty that should be possible in their ecumenical dialogues, whether ARCIC, LARC or informal talks and joint efforts.

Furthermore, the CoE decision represents a “breaking away from the apostolic tradition” only for those who do not believe that the apostolic tradition may be passed from one community to another, through teaching as much as anything else.

“It wouldn’t hurt if more of the women concerned talked more about God and Christ and less about their rights and careers.

What sort of discernment do priests, male or female, go through in the U.S. now?”
oscewicee [#21]

I agree with your first remark, oscewicee.  As you know, however, TEC’s poor choices for priests and bishops, merely by sheer numbers, is more evident among men and therefore not restricted to women.  At the same time, I know many fine female (as well as male) clerics who would make great bishops, were their church to recognize its need for them.

“In this dioceses, and some others where “mutual ministry” is taking hold, essentially, you hold up your hand at a parish meeting.”

tjmacmahon [#23]

That is basically my understanding as well, tjmacmahon.  I understand it is a favorite method of ordaining priests of the PB who used it frequently in the Diocese of Nevada.  Not surprisingly, it is now being used in rural areas to ordain homosexuals through surreptitious means.  Things may have gotten too hot in urban areas where people are beginning to catch on.  It is in rural areas where it is claimed to be needed because dwindling rural churches cannot afford seminary trained priests.  So they adjust their standards and methods of selecting priests rather than admit something more basic needs examination and change, while increasing the numbers of practicing homosexual priests as well.

On the other hand, the more traditional methods of selecting priests have been thoroughly corrupted in many dioceses where orthodox Christians are black balled and driven out.

“# 24 tjmcmahon. Interesting to know this about your diocese. I am very familiar with the ordination process in a western state and determining someone’s “inclusive” status as a benchmark for candidacy is surely not part of it. The discernment process, in the aspirants own parish…usually 6 months, is an important part. The support of the local rector, psychological and medical testing seminary work and the GOE’s. WO and one’s agreement with it is no litmus test. Agreement with the ordination of practicing homosexuals is no litmus test. In fact, to my knowledge, these hot-button issues were never asked of the 6 ordinands I knew and knew quite well. For most of candidates 4-6 years were spent in the process, no rubber stamp.

EmilyH [#28]”

Whether EmilyH’s claims are true in the diocese she has in mind, others may decide.  Much like the corrupt exercise of canon law, however, the process for selecting priests in many dioceses is also thoroughly subverted and corrupted.  It matters not whether various litmus tests are acknowledged or unacknowledged, official or unofficial, formal or informal, the proof of their controlling influence, aside from the eye witness accounts of many, is in the distinct lack of diversity of those the process spits out.

Phil, I was actually hoping to hear from Chip. But,  I am not asserting or denying anything about anybody.  I have no extensive knowledge of the ordination process outside of the western diocese I mentioned.  I do not know for example, if people coming out of Pittsburgh have had C.P.E., something I think is crucial or whether or not they took the G.O.Es etc.  but I can say I have NEVER heard anyone refer to “Mother Rock Womb” and I lived in Berkeley for a stretch where one might expect the weirdest kinds of religious expression.  I have known people who were sexually active outside of marriage…gays and straights.  I have also known others who had divorced and re-married but of the ordinands mentioned above, only one was still single and the rest were on their one and only marriage.

My information comes from a Diocesan discernment conference held in June, 2007 - and, if I recall correctly - from the lips of the bishop.  He also stated that he liked his candidates to at least be Trinitarian…and, that regardless of parish or diocesan COM, until you felt his hands lift from your head and heard the Veni Creator, you could be dis-barred from the ordination process by his decision alone.  My notebook is at home but I’ll be glad to check the exact date since I tend toward the excessive note taking compulsive side of things… .

From the link to The Vatican Council.

The Cardinal has been invited once again to express the Catholic position at the next Lambeth Conference at the end of July”.

Carl,
May I use your comments on the pursuit of the ‘Authentic Self’ in a homily?  Seriously, would you mind?

“... and therefore is a further obstacle for the reconciliation between the Catholic Church <sic> and the Church of England.”

All good news, IMO.  Who cares?  We’re better off on our own.

#49 dmwstroudmd.  On being barred from ordination by the bishop, even at the last minute.  In the diocese of which I spoke, that was certainly true.  He could simply refuse to ordain.  But, if he exercised his “veto”, so to speak, he would need very good reasons. A candidate could and probably would complain to the COM.  The exercise of episcopal arbitrariness or caprice, then, was possible but not really politically viable.

EmilyH, I merely repeat what I was told along with the other interested persons in attendance (around 50 or so).  Perhaps the Bishop merely meant to reinforce that there were multiple layers of decision makers and his was one of many voices.  But the plain sense of what he said was that he held ultimate arbitrary decision making authority in the matter.

I have no problem with that, actually.  If one is to submit to the 84 step process in this Diocese, one must cast bread upon the waters.  If one is to be under authority, one must be under authority. 

However, you seem to imply that in your Diocese if the COM approves, so will the Bishop.  How quaint! ...and naive!  But it is charming of the Ordinary to allow you to think that way.  Helps to pacify the lesser arbiters of process and direct attention from episcopal faults, I suppose.  Or does your Diocese have some sort of superCOM with the equivalent powers of the Executive Committee that doesn’t require diocesan or Diocesan approval?

“The exercise of episcopal arbitrariness or caprice, then, was possible but not really politically viable.”
I am impressed.  I can think of certain diocese that need a leash like that for their bishop.  Could you tell us where to get one?

“Who cares?  We’re better off on our own.” .....Ruach

Better off on our own?  This is the type of misunderstanding that happens when one is not taught the Historic Faith and the meaning of being a part of a worldwide communion and NOT a denomination.

Frankly, I’m good with the idea that Rome finds the actions of the CofE as a problem.  While the RCC is welcome to do as it pleases, I’ve no interest in many of their practices (celibate clergy, just to name one).  Given the differences between the religions, I believe that reconciliation was always a pipe dream.

Personally, I was a bit disappointed when the Pope began to encourage much more widespread use of the Latin Mass.  Seems to me, had the RCC really been serious about reconciliation, they would not have done this.  Cuts both ways, folks!

Interesting that those interested in reconciliation must jump your hoops, Meself.  Or do you find that distate for Latin in school (idf you are of a certain age, that is) predominates.
Latin is a dead language
As dead as it can be
First it killed the Romans
Now its killing me
resounds from high school classes in the late 1960s. 
Or is it that they really require actual beliefs?

“Given the differences between the religions, I believe that reconciliation was always a pipe dream.”......Meself

More misunderstanding.  We don’t and never have had our own “religion”.  We are Christians that are part of what we say in the creeds…the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.

The scriptural injunction comes from the Gospel of John; that we all may be one as the Father and Son are one.  Why do you think we pray for church unity?  We all need to return to an Inquirers class for a refresher, but make sure you have a good and faithful priest that teaches it.

“I’ve no interest in many of their practices (celibate clergy, just to name one).”

It appears to me that TEC doesn’t have a problem with celibate clergy, TEC has a problem with celibacy, period.

I’m good with the Tridentine Mass, meself. It’s their church after all. Further, if there are those for whom the Mass in Latin helps to bring them closer to God, then that is what matters. The form of the liturgy is to a certain degree irrelevant so long as the theology expressed in the liturgy is correct (Golly, did that sound Protestant or what?). The importance of liturgy is to effectively communicate what is going on to the congregation. So it really does not matter what language the Mass is in, as long as it edifies the listeners. The actual order of certain prayers are largely irrelevant as well, as long as it doesn’t lead to misunderstanding or false belief. Similarly, a heterodox hymn, however pretty, really has no place in our worship.

Having written all that, the advantage the older forms have over the newer ones is that they are tested by time. We know that they do not introduce false dogma to anyone. Some of the more experimental liturgies are definitely heterodox. More to the point, they rarely edify, but rather palliate our desire for innovation for novelties sake.

My church went to the heretics and all I got was a lousy t-shirt

While the RCC is welcome to do as it pleases, I’ve no interest in many of their practices (celibate clergy, just to name one). 
...
Personally, I was a bit disappointed when the Pope began to encourage much more widespread use of the Latin Mass.  Seems to me, had the RCC really been serious about reconciliation, they would not have done this.  Cuts both ways, folks!

I agree that we (the Anglican Communion) are not the only ones moving away from the center in some ways.  However, I actually don’t see either of these two issues as show-stoppers.

A large-scale reunion of Rome & Anglicans would probably be more a declaration of intercommunion, recognition of orders, etc, that followed a finding of substantial agreement on theological issues separating us.  Presumably, with Rome, we would retain the option for married priests (like in eastern Rite or EO churches) and retain our liturgy.  We would just be in communion with Rome. 

The show-stoppers are theological—we reject dogmas like the immaculate conception, and those Anglo-Catholics that affirm them typically view them as not essential for full communion with other bodies.  And then there’s papal infallibility.  Despite many of our bishops making Pope Benedict *seem* infallible, we’re not ready to go any beyond affording him honor and deference.  It DOES cut both ways—these issues came about after the Reformation.  They have moved beyond the positions we held in common at the time of the divide, so it’s not enough just to agree that practical reforms have been made and that we have come to a mutual understanding on justification.

Pilgrim said, “It appears to me that TEC doesn’t have a problem with celibate clergy, TEC has a problem with celibacy, period.”

No, I think the problem is actually with chastity.  That is, living chastely as God intended no matter what one’s state in life.

I see that as the bigger obstacle than WO or papal infallibility or Marian devotion - but that’s looking from the RCC side of the Tiber.