Monday, October 26, 2009

Anglican reunion...

And gay double talk...
From one:
"I also wanted to make a brief mention about those on both sides of the “political” spectrum who have tried to make this about “gay bishops” and “gay marriage.” The Pope did not erect the new structures for those who simply want to flee from a more progressive church discipline about gay people and their place in the Church. Most of those who will take advantage of the plan will not be those in the Anglican Communion whose feathers are constantly ruffled over gay people. That contingent is largely composed of evangelical Anglicans who would have absolutely no desire to become Catholic in any way, as their liturgies tend to be, at best, of the “prayer book” variety only (Book of Common Prayer), and who also tend to embrace Calvinistic theology. Anglican Catholics are usually not bothered nearly as much by human sexuality as they are adament about authentic worship, Eucharistic theology, and traditional disciplines and church order (eg., female priests and bishops)." - Ad Dominum
To another:
"Let history record this theological scandal for what it is. Touted by Rome as a step forward in ecumenical relations with a cousin communion, it is in fact the joining of two camps united in their rejection of women and queer people as unworthy of religious leadership." - Source
Photo: Gay American Episcopalian Bishop Gene Robinson... he likes high church too.


  1. Pope Benedict's declaration sure has these people ruffled, doesn't it? Great! He's shining a light into their darkness, and they don't like it.

  2. michael r.8:42 AM

    And the plot thickens....

    I think it would be useful to try to understand what the Church's position on Anglican ordination is. The other day, even Fr. Z. asked for clarification on the issue. Did he not understand this, or was he just attempting to gage opinion & the expectations of his readers? The responses were interesting, as has been the discussion in your own post below on Fr. D. L. I'm sorry I kind of went off in another direction in the comments thread, but the discussion reveals that a lot of people don't understand that the unalterable position of the Catholic Church is that these ordained men were not properly ordained. They were no more ordained priests than I was, as a child of five or six, when a boyfriend or girlfriend(!) laid their hands on me, as we played "church". They may have believed that they had an authentic vocation to service to the Anglican Church founded by King Henry VIII (and rejecting Vatican Council I, and the dogmas of Papal Infallibility and the Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, etc). They didn't. If they come into the Catholic Church, they come in as fresh as any other man of Roman background, though more likely with more seminary education and training; perhaps a higher track to ordination. They have to be examined case by case. (That is not arrogance, btw; it is just the way it really is, according to the Church.) Many Anglican priests are going to reject the overture because it requires that they reject the validity of their original ordination and service. See the response of the Bishop of Chichester, who has been misrepresented as ready to come into the Roman Catholic Church. He states that he "would not be willing to deny the priesthood I have excercised hitherto."

    October 25, 2009

    "An article has been published today in the Sunday Telegraph asserting that I have announced that I am about to become a Roman Catholic.

    This is not the case.

    The report appears to come from a misunderstanding of an answer I gave to questions from the floor at the recent ‘Forward in Faith’ assembly, at which I spoke.

    A questioner had asked about the Papal condemnation of Anglican Orders. I responded by speaking about the subtlety of the position. I referred to the moment when it seemed as if the issue of how the Roman Catholic Church sees Anglican orders might be reopened but how the ordination of women to the priesthood and other developments have now made that impossible.

    In the light of that I stated that in the event of union with the Roman Catholic Church I would be willing to receive re-ordination into the Roman Catholic priesthood but that I would not be willing to deny the priesthood I have exercised hitherto.

    This is clearly a contentious and complex issue and one where it is easy to misunderstand the nuances of the debate. I think I made my position clear in my address at the Forward in Faith assembly. The text is available below and a podcast may be found on the Forward in Faith website."

    + John Cicestr

  3. I just love that little man! He even endorsed my new blog.


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.