AskThePriest.org

Father Matthew Presents - The Shields of the Apostles

Every apostles has their own shield symbol. Which is which? This video is an introduction to the meaning of the shields of the apostles presented by an Episcopal priest, the Rev. Matthew Moretz and his friend, Jehosephat. This video also discusses the needlepoint kneelers and their use in worship at Christ's Church in Rye, New York. This is part of the "Father Matthew Presents" series of videos, presenting the treasures of Christianity one video at a time. www.fathermatthewpresents.com

A trustworthy avenue for Haitian relief is "Episcopal Relief and Development" www.er-d.org

Father Matthew is a priest at Christ's Church in Rye, New York. www.ccrye.org

To support this ministry, the new DVD "Father Matthew Presents: Volume Two" is available for purchase here:
https://www.createspace.com/275556

New Podcast Item - Rebuilding A Cathedral of Compassion

New Podcast Item

A sermon by the Rev. David Simmons. The Episcopal Church of today is not the church of power and influence it was a generation ago. This is a natural consequence of the Church beginning to see the Gospel as something that requires us to take positions on issues of human rights. We are still in the process of rebuilding who we are. (And yes, I am aware that I get the date of MLK's visit to the National Cathedral wrong - I'm preaching without notes.)

The podcast item can be found here.

The podcasting feed can be found on the sidebar or at: http://podcast.askthepriest.org and is listed in the iTunes, Odeo and podcast.net directories.

More information & podcasting software can be found at http://www.ipodder.org

The Episcopal Church's Response to the Haitian Disaster

Roman Revisions Revealed

This morning, the Vatican Released the text of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, which provides for disaffected Anglicans entering into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

The document appears to clear up some questions and leave a few loose ends to be answered. For my commentary on who, where and why this was issued, see my post here. Let's look at some of the questions and how they appear to be answered. A caveat - I'm no expert on Roman canon law, so there could be some nuances I am not catching.

1. Whose authority will these churches be under?
This is a little more Vatican-centered than I had initially understood. It appears that while the national conferences of bishops is consulted, that the authority to establish them lies with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The ordinary (bishop) is chosen by the Pope and answers directly to him. Therefore, the national conferences appear to have very little to do with the regular governance of the ordinariate. Therefore, this looks a little more like Opus Dei than military chaplaincies. I can't imagine this will be very popular with sitting diocesan bishops.

2. Can their priests be married?
The ordinary is to ordain only celibate men to the priesthood. I don't know the references to other documents, but I assume they affirm that bishops must be celibate as well. Married Anglican ministers can be accepted as candidates to Holy Orders on a case-by-case basis. So no, this church within a church will not would not appear to have the ability to raise up and ordain married seminarians, although the Complimentary Norms are a little unclear.

Upon reading the Complimentary Norms for the Apostolic Constitution, it appears that married Anglican bishops are to be re-ordained as priests. They can then be appointed as the ordinary, although not ordained as a bishop. The quasi-bishop then has jurisdictional authority and is seated as a retired bishop in the college of bishops, but does not have the sacramental authority of a bishop (i.e. to ordain).

3. Will Anglican Priests have to be re-ordained?
Yes. This has absolutely no effect on Apostolicae Curae.

4. Can churches in the Ordinariate use the Book of Common Prayer?
Still unclear. The constitution says that

"the Ordinariate has the faculty to celebrate the Holy Eucharist and the other Sacraments, the Liturgy of the Hours and other liturgical celebrations according to the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See, so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared."

"Which have been approved by the Holy See" is the operative phrase here. In the history of Anglican-Use parishes in America, this has meant the Book of Divine Worship, which has elements of the 1928 and 1979 BCP with altered eucharistic language to reflect RC Dogma. Whether the pope will authorize a BCP wholesale without revision has yet to be seen, but seems unlikely.

5. Will members of the Ordinariate have to accept the doctrines of Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception?
Yes. "The Catechism of the Catholic Church is the authoritative expression of the Catholic faith professed by members of the Ordinariate."

From what I can tell, the only difference between this and the Anglican-Use provisions that have been in effect in America since 1980 is at the level of the diocese and bishop. Otherwise, they are just expanding this provision world-wide.

So those who go to Rome will have to be re-ordained, submit to absolute papal authority, accept all Roman Dogma (even the novel ones of the last 200 years), cannot raise up married men to the priesthood, and will most likely have to use a modified version of the Book of Common Prayer. One has to ask the question, What are the "Treasures of the Anglican Tradition" that the Pope seeks to retain within these ordinariates? Evensong? Is that it?

David+

Technorati Tags: Anglican, Christianity, ecclesiology, Episcopal, Religion, roman catholic, vatican

Unity is a Fond Thing

A Reprint from Nick Knisely's Entangled States:

Soon after General Convention I wrote a piece for the Episcopal Café where I argued that the defining characteristic of the Episcopal Church (and other Anglican churches) was are decision that learning to pray with one another was more important than confessional purity and committing to shared understandings of key theological points.

Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch makes the same point, but in a much more careful and scholarly way in a new book on the History of Christianity: The first three thousand years. There's a BBC series of the same title that he's just finished filming and which I expect will be shown here in the states sometime later this year or earlier next.

From an article about the new book and the series in the Church Times, written William Whyte:

"[…] Rather than revealing a clear, unified, and coherent Christianity, this is an account of the many different Churches and creeds that the Christian faith inspired. Professor MacCulloch’s account of Christianity shows it as a debate from the beginning: a constant argument between Greek thought and Jewish ideas, between hierarchy and equality, order and inspiration. Indeed, for him, ‘the history of Christianity is a history of division.’

This is not, however, a problem for Professor MacCulloch — much less something to be mourned. He rejects what he calls a ‘neurotic obsession with unity’ in favour of a celebration of diversity: a history that reveals the ways in which the Church has changed and accommodated itself to historical circumstance.

Small wonder, then, that Professor MacCulloch is so dismissive of those who have tried to enforce unity, and especially doctrinal uniformity. ‘Confessional purity’, he argues, ‘is always a chimera.’ Take, for example, the Council of Chalcedon — the critical meeting of 451 which defined the two natures of Christ. This was, he argues, ‘a catastrophe, a disaster’. As he points out, fully two-thirds of the Church refused to sign up to it, and the ensuing battles ensured that the unity it was in tended to enforce was never — and could never be — achieved.

IT IS for that reason, too, that he is so keen to celebrate the Church of England — at least as it evolved from the 18th century onwards. ‘Born of an almost risible historical accident’, Anglicanism can never claim to be a confessional Church: it is a compromise between different theological positions."

Read the full article here.

Technorati Tags: Anglican, Christianity, Episcopal, history, orthodoxy, Religion, MacCulloch, church history

Videos from Trinity Cathedral

These videos are about a year old, but if you have not seen them, they are amazing. They are produced by Trinity Episcopal Cathedral in Phoenix, and they illustrate points of theology in a very interesting way.

Why am I an Episcopalian?

Why am I an Episcopalian? It’s a question that most of us are asked at one time or another, in small groups within the church if not by truly puzzled friends and acquaintances who have never heard of us or only know us through sensational news stories. Some of us were born into the Episcopal Church, but at a training I conducted a couple of years ago, only two out of fifty in the room were “Cradle Episcopalians.” Most of us came to the church at one time or another for various reasons. Sometimes we marry into the church, sometimes friends invite us. I’ve even known several people who “read” their way into the church by checking books and web sites and finding us as the combination of traits they were looking for.

The better question is, ‘Why do I remain an Episcopalian?” At one time, American Christians were very “Brand Loyal.” If you moved from one town to another, you found the church of the denomination you grew up in and looked no further. These days, for better or worse, Americans take a more consumerist approach to religion and are willing to cross denominational lines in order to find a church that fits their needs and temperament. While part of this can be decried as individualism, it also points to the success of the Ecumenical movement. Most American Christians believe that members of other denominations are really Christian - a change from a hundred years ago. So most see the choice as one between competing franchises of the same religion. For better or for worse, this is the context we preach the Gospel in.

So why am I an Episcopalian? The answer is, that my stepfather got the organist job at the local Episcopal Church and I switched from being a Methodist to being an Episcopalian. But why am I still an Episcopalian, despite the politics, faults and foibles of our denomination?

A large portion of the reason for me is because our denomination historically refuses to play the cultural games others have been drawn into. The Episcopal Church is drastically worship-centered. This goes all the way back to the “Elizabethan Compromise” in the Church of England in which unity in worship was considered more important than conformity in belief. This idea was codified in the “Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral” (BCP 876) which set out the basics of a generous, creedal orthodoxy which could be affirmed by a wide variety of Christians of good faith.

As I became a member of the church, I noticed how diverse it was. We had Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, Anglo-Catholics and liturgical Protestants. We had people of color in a culture where Sunday was still the most segregated day of the week. Any conversation in the parish hall that touched on religion was bound to bring up differences. In fact, if one had only come to the coffee hour, one might conclude that this was some sort of interdenominational gathering. But on Sunday mornings, we worshipped together as a family. While I could look at other churches in our town and pin exactly where the members of that church would live and how they would vote, our Episcopal church could not be so categorized. Five hundred years after the Elizabethan Compromise, our church still found its unity in the community-building mystery of worship, rather than in politics or intellectual assent to set principles. It was that vision of the Episcopal Church that I fell in love with - Christ-centered, faithful in worship, diverse in belief, and tolerant of difference. In a culture that tended to force churches to take set identities, we steadfastly refused and instead centered ourself on worship of the living God.

There have always been forces in American politics that have sought to move the Episcopal Church, which is amazingly influential for its size, towards one extreme or the other, and it is no different today. A growing frustration of mine has been that we have increasingly accepted a legislative model of decision-making. This reinforces the idea for people on the extremes that the point is to prepare for diocesan and general conventions as do-or-die events that determine the future of the church by majority rule. While this can produce results, they are results that cannot be said to issue from the teachings of Jesus and Paul that we should strive for unity and harmony. A side effect of this type of decision-making is that it allows outside forces to manipulate us through influence and money in an attempt to turn us from being a church to being a political action committee, which is more palatable to the culture.

We cannot blame the American political culture - this is how it works. We can only blame ourselves if we allow our traditional Anglican values of comprehensiveness and toleration to be compromised in favor of partisanship and “purity”, of whatever ideological flavor. When we say, “The Episcopal Church Welcomes You,” I believe we mean it. You are welcome to worship with us without precondition. If you are baptized, you are welcome to take communion with us without precondition. While we continue to struggle with issues of authority and human sexuality, we must never forget that such issues are not the center of what we do as a church. The traditional center of the Episcopal Church is decently-ordered worship of the Triune God in a community of one faith but diverse belief. This is the church I first fell in love with, and the church that will, I believe, weather current storms as well.

David+

New Podcast Item

New Podcast Item

Former three-term senator Danforth, who is also an Episcopal Priest, talks about "Faith, Evangelicals and Politics" on NPR's "Tell Me More."

The podcasting feed can be found on the sidebar or at: http://podcast.askthepriest.org and is listed in the iTunes, Odeo and podcast.net directories.

More information & podcasting software can be found at http://www.ipodder.org

"It's never been this bad before!"

I've written an opinion piece that draws heavily on the history of the Ritualistic Controversy within the Episcopal Church. Since it is opinion about current events, I have posted it on my personal blog, Ayia Illuvatar.

Father Matthew Presents: Biblical Inerrancy

A presentation on Biblical Inerrancy by Episcopal priest, Matthew Moretz. The piece deals with the problems that come with believing that the Scriptures are infallible in every way. Biblical inerrancy can be an obstacle to Christian faith, and a kind of idolatry if one isn't careful. As suggested in the video, something doesn't have to be infinitely perfect for God to speak through it. This is an installment of the "Father Matthew Presents" series, now in stunning HD. Father Matthew is a priest at Christ's Church (Episcopal) in Rye, New York.

For further information:
AskThePriest - The Heresy of Literalism AskThePriest - Literalism: The Heresy of the 20th Century Wikipedia - Biblical Literalism Wikipedia - Biblical Inerrancy