Tag: Ecumenism

Christian Witness, , ,

A Lutheran perspective on Ecumanism

From Pretty Good Lutherans: A weighty, heady moment in time

Next week, Lutherans, Catholics and Methodists are gathering in a Chicago church famous for its Irish roots.

They’re marking the tenth anniversary of a joint declaration on the theological doctrine of justification. To celebrate the occasion, church dignitaries are gathering Oct. 1 for an evening of prayer in Old St. Patrick’s Church…

Also see the comments where the writers reflect on the continued obstacles that stand in the way of unity. Surprisingly, as of my last reading, no one has mentioned the role or the scope of the Pope. This looks like a great blog for news on all things ELCA.

More on current events in the ELCA from Beliefnet in Lutheran Dissidents Mull a Separate Future.

PNCC, , ,

Library resources

From Martina, a Reference Librarian at the Albright Memorial Library in Scranton, PA who writes at Notes from a Reference Libarian: New Titles in the Local History Collection

Many of you may not know, but we have a nice collection of resources on the Polish National Catholic Church. These are local and non local resources about the origins and other information about the Polish National Catholic Church. If you are unfamiliar with this church here is a link that explains the history.

As I said we have two new books both on the Polish National Catholic Church. The first book is

  • Journeying Together in Christ: The Report of the Polish National Catholic-Roman Catholic Dialogue
  • Journeying Together in Christ: The Journey Continues.

These are available in the Local History Collection at the Scranton Public Library. You are unable to check out these resources, but you may look at them in the library.

Christian Witness, ,

Patriarch Kirill cuts through modernist gibberish

From ROCOR United: Church should be modern, but not adapt to times – Patriarch Kirill.

NIZHNY NOVGOROD, September 11 (RIA Novosti) – The Church should be modern but must not be reformed to fall in line with the “transient tastes of the time,” the head of the Russian Orthodox Church said Friday.

“The Church retains the apostolic faith that the apostles accepted from the Lord himself,” Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia told an audience of several thousand young people in the Volga town of Sarov who gathered in an indoors sports venue.

He said the Church should “go forward” but avoid being reformed “to please modern tendencies,” while simultaneously remaining attentive and considerate toward people’s “demands and problems, toward their joys and sorrows.”

The patriarch slammed tendencies in some branches of Christianity, which allow ordaining women as priests or blessing homosexual marriages.

“People should realize that falling away from faith under whatever pretexts is sinful and dangerous for man himself,” Kirill said.

Exactly, eliminating the noise to get to the truth… maintaining the Apostolic faith is a gift and it does speak to our times. That speaking is the gift of love (i.e., charity) which transcends all time and you don’t need to change Scripture or Tradition to get there.

Thanks to the Young Fogey for the link to this.

PNCC,

Days gone by, the PNCC and the PECUSA

There are several interesting documents at Project Canterbury related to the PNCC. Among them is Intercommunion between the Episcopal Church and the Polish National Catholic Church: A Survey of its Development by the Reverend Warren C. Platt. The document gives a rather thorough and very well researched look into the history of PNCC-PECUSA relations.

Currently the Rev. Platt is a non-stipendiary priest serving at the Episcopal Church of The Transfiguration in NYC (The Little Church Around the Corner). The Church of the Transfiguration and St Mary’s the Virgin are the two remaining churches of the Oxford Movement in NYC. Rev. Platt was an active participant in many of the PNCC’s annual history conferences.

Perspective,

Oh yeah, and about that…

From NCR: Is Catholic-Orthodox Unity in Sight?

The Catholic Archbishop of Moscow has given a remarkably upbeat assessment of relations with the Orthodox Church, saying unity between Catholics and Orthodox could be achieved —within a few months.—

In an interview today in Italy’s Corriere della Sera newspaper, Archbishop Paolo Pezzi said the miracle of reunification —is possible, indeed it has never been so close.— The archbishop added that Catholic-Orthodox reunification, the end of the historic schism that has divided them for a millennium, and spiritual communion between the two churches —could happen soon, within a few months.—

…Now the path to rapprochement is at its peak, and the third millennium of the Church could begin as a sign of unity.— He said there were —no formal obstacles— but that —everything depends on a real desire for communion.—

On the part of the Catholic Church, he added, —the desire is very much alive.—

Archbishop Pezzi, 49, whose proper title is Metropolitan Archbishop of the Mother of God Archdiocese in Moscow, said that now there are —no real obstacles— on the path towards full communion and reunification. On issues of modernity, Catholics and Orthodox Christians feel the same way, he said: —Nothing separates us on bioethics, the family, and the protection of life.—

Also on matters of doctrine, the two churches are essentially in agreement. —There remains the question of papal primacy,— Archbishop Pezzi acknowledged, —and this will be a concern at the next meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Commission. But to me, it doesn’t seem impossible to reach an agreement.—…

This is the sort of well meaning ecumenical drivel that just wastes time. Of course the Archbishop doesn’t see a problem because he’s only looking at one side of whole issue, his own. Unless the Roman Church has decided to change the pronouncements of Vatican I on the scope and role of the pope, let’s say in the next few months, it isn’t happening. It doesn’t seem impossible to reach an agreement? I’d like some of the vodka he’s drinking.

Certainly there is common causes on social and political fronts, but at a core level one Church must prevail if counter claims to being The One True Church are to be resolved. Commonality on social and political issues cannot be used to whitewash or nullify major disagreements on the identity of the Church, the Church’s doctrines and so forth…

From my perspective the Archbishop needs to think long and hard about the things that separate the Churches and cease the publicly available wishful thinking. We all hope and pray — but this isn’t it. It will take very real and very painstaking work and in the end someone will have to say they were wrong.

Perspective, PNCC, ,

Possibilities, not so much

From the Catholic Answers Forum: Anglican Church in America (TAC) and the Polish National Catholic Church

I wonder with all of the struggle of the TAC/ACA to move towards union with Rome (and the constant expectation of an announcement…over and over), why they do not look towards forming an alliance with the Polish National Catholic Church?

The PNCC has valid orders (according to Rome) and has limited intercommunion. They are seen in a way similar to the Eastern Orthodox in that in extraordinary circumstances the PNCC and Catholics can receive sacraments from one another.

This makes sense until you scratch the surface a little.

Those in the TAC/ACA who long for Rome are really singleminded in that regard. They see no possible alternative, and if they did, they would have been there already. They are actually willing to give up their Episcopal Orders, their former Roman priests who had married, and anyone else in an “unclear” situation, casting them under the bus so to speak; sort of Machiavellian, which is ironic.

Others, who will quit the Church when it joins with Rome, are really Protestants. They like Catholic externals but don’t really believe in the infallibility of the ChurchIt’s one thing to believe that the person of the Bishop of Rome is not infallible, quite another to believe the Church is not infallible.. Not believing in the infallibility of the Church makes these folks a bad fit in any Catholic Church whether it be Oriental, Orthodox, Roman, or PNCC. They are headed for some far corner of the Anglican movement where they can maintain their ‘I’m smarter than the Church’ attitude.

I also think that marriages for the sake of convenience are a bad idea. Why partner with someone if they’re constantly looking over their shoulder for what they perceive to be a more handsome/beautiful/whatever prospect. Could the TAC/ACA accept the Declaration of Scranton in clear conscience? Could they be PNCC? I highly doubt it.

Speaking with Rome doesn’t mean you are at the place ACA/TAC perceived themselves to be, signing copies of the Catechism and FedEx’ing them off to Rome and praying for Newman to descend upon you. I’m sure there’s a few in the PNCC who long for unity with Rome just as there are those like myself who long for unity with Orthodoxy. But no matter. In the bigger picture we’re just PNCC and most of us are happy to work in that part of God’s field. To waste our time waiting, or courting for the purpose of courting, would be an affront to the gifts God has granted us and the work He has asked us to do.

Christian Witness, , , , , , ,

The theological economist

The Bishop of Rome issued his encyclical Caritas in veritate (Charity in Truth) on the subject of Christian teaching on economics. The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, S.J. comments on it in the Washington Post. A few excerpts here:

“Profit is useful if it serves as a means towards an end,” he writes in Caritas in veritate (Charity in Truth), but “once profit becomes the exclusive goal, if it is produced by improper means and without the common good as its ultimate end, it risks destroying wealth and creating poverty.”

He decries that “Corruption and illegality are unfortunately evident in the conduct of the economic and political class in rich countries…as well as in poor ones.” He also says that “Financiers must rediscover the genuinely ethical foundation of their activity, so as not to abuse the sophisticated instruments which can serve to betray the interests of savers.”

…Benedict disappointedly acknowledges that “The world’s wealth is growing in absolute terms, but inequalities are on the increase” [italics in text].

“The dignity of the individual and the demands of justice require,” he affirms, “that economic choices do not cause disparities in wealth to increase in an excessive and morally unacceptable manner, and that we continue to prioritize the goal of access to steady employment for everyone.”

In his encyclical, Benedict calls for charity guided by truth. “Charity demands justice: recognition and respect for the legitimate rights of individuals and peoples,” he says. “Justice must be applied to every phase of economic activity, because this is always concerned with man and his needs,” he writes. “Locating resources, financing, production, consumption and all the other phases in the economic cycle inevitably have moral implications. Thus every economic decision has a moral consequence.”

The encyclical notes the globalization that has taken place since Paul’s encyclical was issued over 40 years ago. Alas, “as society becomes ever more globalized, it makes us neighbors but does not make us brothers.” True “development of peoples depends, above all, on a recognition that the human race is a single family working together in true communion, not simply a group of subjects who happen to live side by side.” The goal of such development is “rescuing peoples, first and foremost, from hunger, deprivation, endemic diseases and illiteracy.”

Sounding like a union organizer, Benedict argues that “Lowering the level of protection accorded to the rights of workers, or abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution in order to increase the country’s international competitiveness, hinder the achievement of lasting development.”

Rather the goal should be decent employment for everyone, which “means work that expresses the essential dignity of every man and woman in the context of their particular society: work that is freely chosen, effectively associating workers, both men and women, with the development of their community; work that enables the worker to be respected and free from any form of discrimination; work that makes it possible for families to meet their needs and provide schooling for their children, without the children themselves being forced into labor; work that permits the workers to organize themselves freely, and to make their voices heard; work that leaves enough room for rediscovering one’s roots at a personal, familial and spiritual level; work that guarantees those who have retired a decent standard of living.”

While Benedict acknowledges the role of the market, he emphasizes that “the social doctrine of the Church has unceasingly highlighted the importance of distributive justice and social justice for the market economy.” He unflinchingly supports the “redistribution of wealth” when he talks about the role of government. “Grave imbalances are produced,” he writes, “when economic action, conceived merely as an engine for wealth creation, is detached from political action, conceived as a means for pursuing justice through redistribution.”

Although Benedict’s emphasis in the encyclical is on the theological foundations of Catholic social teaching, amid the dense prose there are indications, as shown above, that he is to the left of almost every politician in America. What politician would casually refer to “redistribution of wealth” or talk of international governing bodies to regulate the economy? Who would call for increasing the percentage of GDP devoted to foreign aid? Who would call for the adoption of “new life-styles ‘in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments'”?

Benedict believes that if people understood God’s love for every single human person and his divine plan for us, then believers would recognize their duty “to unite their efforts with those of all men and women of good will, with the followers of other religions and with non-believers, so that this world of ours may effectively correspond to the divine plan: living as a family under the Creator’s watchful eye.”

I say Amen! amen! It will be interesting to watch as Roman Catholic and other Christian business people and political leaders dance their way around this, or more likely choose to ignore it. The reaction will be much the same as that of Roman Catholics and other Christians who ignored, countermanded, or attempted to out theologize and teach John Paul II on the Iraq war.

Christian Witness, Perspective, PNCC, , , ,

The ecumenical Dutch Touch that leads to unity

Fr. Robert Hart of the Continuum Blog has an interesting article on the “Dutch Touch” and Anglican Orders. In The Dutch Touch: A study in irrelevance he says:

Frankly, Saepius Officio, written in 1897 by the Archbishops of England (Canterbury and York) said everything that needed to be said in defense of our Orders, and the best summary anywhere is that of Bicknell.

As for the subject of the Infusion itself, it is a relic of an innocent age of ecumenical hope, that innocence and hope that would suffer destruction for the official Anglican Communion in 1976. If the Infusion may help someday between orthodox Anglicans of the Continuum and Rome or, restart some ecumenical relations with the Polish National Catholic Church, then maybe it will not have been a big wasted effort after all.

Until such a time, who cares?

Two observations: First, I think that ecumenical contact between orthodox Anglicans and the PNCC would be a fine thing. We offer the Declaration of Scranton as a point of unity between national churches, and as a structural building block in accord with the National Church philosophy expounded by Bishop Hodur.

The interesting thing about the word continuum is that it means a connection that surpasses the here and now. At core it is a continuation of a Church’s traditions, practices, and character (of course only important if they are Catholic in character and in fact). I have said before, including to local clergy of the TAC, swimming the Tiber will eventually lead to the dissolution of everything that you are. Simply put, the weight of the Roman Church will subsume the TAC and any other Continuum Church that joins it, just as Anglican Use parishes will disappear within two generations.

I also think that there is another issue that gets lost in the whole swimming the Tiber spirit within the TAC, “Is that what your people really want? Just as among clergy some will say yes, but I believe that a majority will see what I see, that ‘who they are’ will slip away.

My second observation, and I congratulate Fr. Hart for making the point, is “who cares.” That is really the point if your Church believes itself to be Catholic. Like the Orthodox Churches we need to place less emphasis on what Rome thinks of us and more on what we think of ourselves (and no emphasis on what some over-the-top on-line R.C. pundits and detractors think of us). The full body of Catholic Churches are, in their varied external manifestations (those whose ecclesiology, polity, and praxis are Catholic), the totality of the Church, which is truly universal.