Ben Johnson of Western Orthodoxy offered up a prayer on behalf of the PNCC Synod which concluded today. To read the whole post visit: A General Convention Prayer.

Along with the prayer he offered a few observations and criticisms ending with a statement that the PNCC is in a —deathspin— and that it will —end with a whimper of bewilderment, isolation, and indifference.— I would like to address those points.

I have three general comments.

My first general comment relates to statements made as a result of observations. Such statements can be completely false, partially false, absolutely true, or any range in-between. What Mr. Johnson stated falls all along that continuum. I think a little bit of research and a few questions to members of the PNCC would have avoided certain inaccuracies.

My second general comment relates to criticism and its purpose. Prior to the Synod I openly asked for prayers. Any endeavor involving humans certainly is helped by prayer – and needs prayer. As the Synod prayers I posted stated:

We do not know what we should pray for,
nor how we should pray,
but Scripture tells us that
the Spirit Himself asks for us.

We’re not very good at asking because we see only dimly, but God accepts our prayers in relation to our need and sincerity. That said, why the tie-in between prayer and criticism?

My third comment relates to researching the PNCC. The PNCC bookstore has a plethora of books which would aid in serious research on the history of the PNCC, many written by academics doing independent research. I urge people looking to do a serious analysis of the history, faith, and beliefs of the PNCC to contact the PNCC Bookstore (570-346-9131). Our parish website has a list of a few (very few) of the items available.

I would highly recommend The Polish National Catholic Church: Minutes of the First Eleven General Synods 1904-1963 by Grotnik and Polish National Catholic Church of America: Minutes of the Supreme Council 1904-1969 also by Grotnik, as a starting point. The PNCC has a long history of debate on every issue, and as a Church founded upon democratic ideals, democratic debate was (and is) a big part of every decision.

A lot of what is said about the PNCC is something someone learned from somewhere, or from someone they knew who was once a PNCC member, or had a debate with a PNCC clergyman, or … These types of things are conjecture at best and are often offered up unsupported. It ends up like a game of telephone where the last person in line ends up with a message quite different from the original.

I offered some comments in Mr. Johnson’s com-box on his site, but it looks like my fumbled typing may have deleted them before they were sent. I’ll try to recap them here.

Theologically, the PNCC (as envisioned by Bp. Franciszek Hodur) was intended to present a non-Roman catholicism. Founded near the turn of the 20th century, the new denomination rejected the idea of “original guilt,” expunged the Filioque from the Nicene Creed, prayed in a language “understanded of the people,”

All true.

…and allowed priests to marry.

After the Synod of 1921.

The PNCC also retained the traditional Roman Mass and another liturgy of Bp. Hodur’s editing, which I’m told reflected the old Mass.

Mr. Johnson asked for a copy of The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass —“ Compiled by Bishop Francis Hodur. It is available in the pew missal in most PNCC parishes and from the bookstore which just released an updated copy of the pew missal ($3 which includes shipping and handling). It does reflect the ‘old’ Mass but with added scriptural references that enhance the text. It’s quite beautiful. We do it in our parish on the Solemnity of the Institution of the PNCC.

Other changes were not so in keeping with tradition: many believed in universal salvation

Never a Church belief.

…general confession largely replaced private confession among adults

True. Bishop Hodur delivered a treatise on this issue at the Synod of 1921

once-vernacular “Polish became the new Holy Latin”

I think the PNCC faced the same struggles the Orthodox faced in deciding whether to go English as their generational members aged and their children mastered English. Is Old Church Slavonic = Holy Latin? Both beautiful yes, both traditional, as is Polish (my perspective). The Holy Mass in the English language was approved at the X General Synod in 1958. A binding Synodal resolution stated in part:

—It shall be lawful for a parish to celebrate one entire Mass on Sunday in the English language, provided, that the parish shall first adopt a resolution setting forth the need for such a service, which resolution shall be adopted by two-thirds (2/3) vote of the active members of the parish present at the meeting when such a resolution is to be acted upon and shall receive the approval of the Prime Bishop of the PNCC…

Mr. Johnson goes on to say:

…they early replaced the altar with a table; and bishops were allowed to marry.

True, but I wouldn’t say ‘table’. Some parishes have them, some don’t.

Not so many years ago, the PNCC (then the only genuine “Old Catholic” body in North America**) became a partner to the Orthodox-Old Catholic theological dialogue. From these discussions, a remarkably hopeful document would be crafted: The Road to Unity (still available from the PNCC, at last I knew, for $5). The rapprochement envisioned by Dr. J.J. Overbeck a century earlier seemed imminent. Discussions also began between the PNCC and the Western Rite, which in time fizzled. The PNCC adopted a number of reservations to the Orthodox-Old Catholic dialogue, though none appeared insurmountable.

However, the PNCC also remained in dialogue with the Papacy, ascribing to those talks a higher priority. …whatever the truth, the PNCC has ultimately reunited with neither church and indeed, because of the European churches’ growing modernism, broke communion with the Union of Utrecht.

I think I said it better in my original response but, dialog has nothing to do with priority. In my estimation dialog is about prayer first and foremost. It is the fervent prayer of all catholic Churches to be reunited, and it is our duty to engage in dialog.

Dialog is only effective when it is founded upon respect. That’s the first bridge.

Will Rome treat all PNCC clergy with respect as to their orders (including former R.C. priests)? They have, at least on one occasion, re-ordained a PNCC ordained priest who went over to the R.C. Church (and without checking his background with the PNCC). Will they continually deny the Eucharist to PNCC members regardless of what’s written in the back of their missals?

That’s the mundane stuff that requires dialog and good faith from all. If you can’t get beyond respect then how do you address bringing about a change in Rome’s view on universal Papal jurisdiction? We pray, but I think not while I’m alive.

Under Bp. Hodur’s most recent successors, former Romans almost to a man, the church increasingly reflects the Roman take on everything, including the development and increasing use of its “Contemporary Mass,” modeled closely on the Novus Ordo.

Um, I live there and I think not. I think there is a range of views among the clergy in minor things, but we’ll never have to have a reform of the reform because we never lost the concept of sacredness. All the foolishness of the N.O. (for all vs. many, not genuflecting during the Creed, the effective loss of the Introit and other antiphons, etc., etc.) never entered into the PNCC in The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass —“ Contemporary.

I grew up in a rather traditional R.C. parish where I thought the Mass (N.O. style) was celebrated with great pomp and solemnity. Not even close to the PNCC. The PNCC doesn’t need pomp to cover for a lack of the sacred.

As I understand it, Western Rite Orthodoxy is home to those attached to the Tridentine Rite or Anglican Rite I. How do you speak to those whose only frame of reference is N.O. or Rite II?

I think the PNCC is rightly proud of its liturgies and the coordination between the needs of the people and their right to a dignified, sacred, Holy Mass.

As to the Bishops, being former Romans has no bearing. Unless you have plumbed their hearts your statement falls upon itself. Are Western Rite priests (Romans or Episcopalians to borrow a phrase ‘almost to a man’) unfaithful to the home they have found. It’s a fallacious argument.

And I’m told in terms of numbers, it is dying from attrition: former members no longer sensing any difference between itself and the PNCC [sic] (and expressly invited by the front of the RCC missalette) simply go Roman; if they move, they often go with their pastor’s approval, though Rome seems not to reciprocate.

I’m told in terms of numbers the [pick one: Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican…] Church is dying…

I think every Church can find parishes that are dying from younger members gripped by the same immoral malaise that grips secular society, locations in dying coal and steel towns (demographics), and indifferentism as to faith and teaching. You can be R.C., Orthodox, Protestant, or even Jewish and run across the same phenomena.

I wouldn’t say the PNCC is immune from that. At the same time we keep small parishes open —“ because we are a democratic Church whose members make those decisions —“ and those decisions are honored. Some parishes combine —“ without the same screaming you hear from R.C. Church members, because again, the PNCC is democratic, parishes decide for themselves in union with the Church. Those parishes become re-energized and grow. Population booms in the South and West result in calls for new PNCC parishes rather consistently. I could go on, but it’s a mix, and the PNCC is definitely not dying as a Church.

And yes, Rome does not reciprocate, but few Roman Catholics care. They come to us when their few remaining parishes turn into mega-parishes, when they become frustrated by a lack of the sacred, when their clergy scare them, etc. Their not caring relates to poor catechesis and the pervasive liberalism that (probably) existed where they grew-up.

The recent reception of a former Roman priest in Toledo, Ohio, has apparently strained relations with the U.S. Roman Catholic church.

To the best of my knowledge the PNCC has not accepted a R.C. Priest from the Toledo R.C. Diocese.

There is a dynamic group of former R.C. parishioners who left the Roman Church after going through the closing of three parishes in a row. They were shifted from one parish to the next and in short order each closed. They are now being served by a PNCC priest from Hamtramck, Michigan, at their request. Bishop Blair of the R.C. diocese is allegedly deeply aggrieved at this but…so what. That’s why an emphasis on respect is necessary. Those people came in faith knocking. The PNCC will not leave them in the dark, Bishop Blair notwithstanding.

However, it seems tragic for a church that once blazed a courageous path toward becoming a Western expression of the Orthodox faith to end with a whimper of bewilderment, isolation, and indifference.

May God so bless these good Christian people with bishops who will gently lead them to the fulness of the Truth so ardently sought after by Bp. Hodur and embrace the unity of the Orthodox faith.

That’s the key to my difference with Mr. Johnson. He may see the PNCC as something to be absorbed into Orthodoxy. Rome sees us as something that can be absorbed into, well Rome. We see ourselves as the PNCC, certainly praying for and longing for unity, all the while focused on unity in essentials – not absorption. BTW – I like the Russian take on this from 1935 (see Achieving Orthodoxy).

I think the PNCC is alive and vital, and carries the message of Jesus Christ, a message that is orthodox, catholic, and democratic (small ‘o’, ‘c’, and ‘d’) —“ go ahead make OCD jokes… and yes I am a little.

In the footnotes Mr. Johnson states:

The Anglican Church in America also enjoys a cozy relationship with (and part of its “line of apostolic succession” from) the PNCC; that one, however, results in mutual referrals.

Not at all. To wit a binding Synodal resolution from the XV General Synod, 1978:

TERMINATION OF INTERCOMMUNION
The XV General Synod of the Polish National Catholic Church by majority vote 312 to 106 ratified the position of its Prime Bishop and adopted a resolution stating that the Polish National Catholic Church regretfully acknowledges and confirms the fact that by their unilateral action, the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America and the Anglican Church of Canada have effectively terminated sacramental intercommunion with the Polish National Catholic Church.

If Mr. Johnson means the actual Anglican Church in America body, yet another spin-off from somewhere, continuing Anglican, High Church, who knows, I’d never heard of them until I was researching this.