An Anglo-Catholic Responsio

Delivered by the Right Reverend Chandler Holder Jones, Bishop Suffragan of the Diocese of the Eastern United States of the Anglican Province of America, at a recent conference on Anglicanism held at Beeson Divinity School.  Pretty much says it all and for some of us forces the question, "how long halt ye between two opinions"?

______________________________________________________________

By The Rt. Rev. Chandler Holder Jones SSC

September 30, 2018

To begin, one must say, contrary to certain assumptions, Anglican Catholicism did not arise in a vacuum; in point of fact, so-called 'High Church' or better yet, First Millennium Undivided Church Faith, Anglicanism possesses a direct and unbroken continuity throughout the history of the English Church, from centuries before the Reformation, through the Henrician, Edwardine, Elizabethan, and Stuart periods, following along with the Caroline Divines, Laudians, and Non-Jurors, to the Tractarians and Ritualists, up to today. It must be strenuously emphasised that no other claimant to Anglicanism's authenticity can demonstrate such a historical continuum. Other movements in Anglicanism have a definite beginning, de novo, at the Reformation and later points in English history. Far from being a novelty, what we today call Anglo-Catholicism is a golden thread that runs through the history and heart of the Ecclesia Anglicana. It is that to which Anglicanism, in its Prayer Book and consensus patricum tradition, has always tended. It simply is, in short, the Church - in her givenness, her inherited theological and liturgical patrimony.

Anglicanism, in all of its complexity, should not be permitted to be deconstructed into a mere 'system of thought and theology.' Rather, it is a way of life that is ordered specifically by Anglican worship, Anglican doctrine, and Anglican life. To reduce Anglican worship, doctrine, and life to the cerebral questions of thought, or theology as an intellectual enterprise, is to reduce Christianity herself to a set of propositional beliefs. Separating worship, doctrine, and life from one another distorts the essence of the Church and her divinely-revealed Deposit of Faith. The aforementioned elements belong inextricably together in one mystery. Anglo Catholicism's dogmatic and systematic theology is a mystical theology, a theology which, at its heart, lies in her liturgy and sacramental life.

Anglo-Catholics believe absolutely in propositional truth, but Anglicanism cannot be reduced to a set of propositions that once affirmed, makes one a Christian. The ancient Church, which Anglo-Catholicism emulates, had no conception of separating statements of truth from life and worship.

The Church is not a sociological entity, but the Mystical Body of Christ endowed with a supernatural reality, a supernatural society of souls effused with divine grace. The Presbyterian Church may be Calvinistic, the Lutheran Church may be Lutheran, but the Anglican Church is not Cranmerian. At her best, she professes a consentient and conciliar, creedal faith, not a confessional one, in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic constitution of Church and life.

In tracking the development of what would become known as Anglo-Catholicism, it is crucial in our study to note the influence and theological integrity of the Caroline Divines of the seventeenth century. No body of teachers or theologians has informed Anglicanism more. The Carolines shaped and fashioned the Tractarians, who were themselves no starry-eyed medievalists, but romanticists, men of earth and Altar, who envisioned a renewed life for the Church based on the Incarnation and the sacramental principle. Dr Edward Pusey developed a fifty-volume Library of the Fathers based on the Caroline Divines; the patristic resource ment, engendered by the Carolines, was and is at the centre of the ongoing Tractarian project.

Anglo-Catholics desire, not the revival of political fortunes, but the Church's self-understanding as a divine society, with a divine reality ushered into and divinising the material world. As a result of rediscovering Christian faith as an embodied, homonised, divinely conveyed gift to human beings, Anglo-Catholicism seeks to engage the secular culture in the most direct way possible, by serving the poorest of the poor. The restoration of monasticism was a concomitant development of this ministry to the suffering, the outcast, and the underprivileged. Anglo-Catholicism spawned a radical rebirth of theological and spiritual formation, of missionary work and zeal, and of Christian culture and civilisation throughout the world - in art, architecture, music, academic scholarship, and the Religious Life - because at its core pulses the Word made Flesh, the Incarnation of God the Word. Anglo-Catholicism is not so much eccentric as it is ecstatic, reaching beyond itself towards Christ in Himself and in His creation. Anglo-Catholicism is not Mere Christianity; it is More Christianity.

In the Incarnation, the form confers the substance. The Church subsists in and is forged by the sacraments, which extend and apply the Incarnation. Creation, redemption, and glorification are in their essence sacramental, the transformation of the material by the spiritual. Grace perfects nature. Supernature builds on nature. The Church is the Great Sacrament of Christ. So long as Continuing Anglican Churches exist, Anglo-Catholicism must be understood as a living reality, neither a failure nor a relic of the past.

It is indeed true that Anglicanism has never claimed to be the one true Church. Anglo Catholicism does not claim that either. But, importantly, Anglo-Catholics see themselves today as the via media between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, not between Rome and Geneva. For the Anglican Catholic, the via media is not a compromise between Catholicism and protestantism, but the central mainstream tradition of the Undivided Church shared by the Churches of East and West, what all First Millennium Christians believed and what Rome and Constantinople still possess in common today, the consensus fidelium of Apostolic Tradition. To paraphrase John Henry Newman's original meaning of the term, the via media signifies that the Anglican Church lies in-between puritanism and popery. The Anglican Church, in its received teaching and structural constitution, is neither puritan nor papalist.

Anglo-Catholic ecclesiology, believing as it does in the 'branch fact,' affirms that the Holy Catholic Church on earth is divided by human history into separate jurisdictions which may or may not be in full communion with each other, and often are separated sacramentally from one another, although all the branches, holding in common the Apostolic Succession of the Faith of the Ecumenical Councils and Creeds, the Apostolic Succession of the Sacrament of Holy Orders and the threefold Ministry male in character, and the Apostolic Succession of holiness and sanctity of life, are fully and truly parts of the One Catholic Church because they are sacramentally, dogmatically, and eschatologically one with Our Lord and the Communion of Saints

Regarding the assertion that John Henry Newman and subsequent Anglo-Catholics misunderstand the teaching of Martin Luther and of the Reformation itself, the Anglo-Catholic would most readily respond with the insights of Dr Eric Lionel Mascall. Reviewing the writing of Father Louis Bouyer, Dr Mascall submits: 'In all its positive affirmations -- the gratuitous character of salvation, the sovereignty of God, the role of faith in justification, and the supremacy of Scripture -- the Reformation was simply recalling Western Christendom to basic principles of the Catholic religion which had become obscured or ignored. 'It should be quite evident,' he writes, 'that the principles of Protestantism in their positive sense -- that most consonant with the spirit of the Reformation -- are not only valid and acceptable, but must be held to be true and necessary in virtue of Catholic tradition itself, in virtue of what makes up the authority of the Church both today and of all time.' Why, then, the reader inevitably asks, were the Protestant Reformers expelled from the communion of the Church? Bouyer's answer is simple: it is that, side by side with the positive principles which he has so enthusiastically extolled, there were in the Reformers' teaching certain negative elements, which first of all turned the Protestant system against Catholicism and then, in the next generation, turned Protestantism itself against its own scholastic system. The most devastating example of these is provided by the way in which Luther, the farther he advanced in his conflict with other theologians and finally with Rome itself, identified his proclamation of sola gratia with the particular theory known as extrinsic justification, according to which 'the grace of God envelops us in a cloak, but this leaves us exactly as we were.'' (The Recovery of Unity, Chapter 4 section iv. Protestantism -- a Critical Analysis pages 86-93).

Finally, the tangible situation of the Anglican world in the twenty-first century presents not one, but at least three, Anglicanisms. Is it not true that from the beginning there have been multiple religious expressions within the Church of England and in its overseas expansions? Is it not true that the sixteenth century attempted, with the Articles of Religion and Act of Uniformity, to incorporate different views - from Catholicism through different strands of protestantism - within a national Church, but to the complete satisfaction of none? Is it not true that Anglicanism is first attempted to be defined by the seventeenth century Caroline Divines, but that the patristic theology they espoused was not universally accepted? Is it not true that the eighteenth century saw the birth of liberal or latitudinarian Anglicanism? Is it not true that from the nineteenth century through the present day, there are three different expressions that each equally claim to be called Anglicanism?

These are, (1) the First Millennium Consensus, or Anglo-Catholicism, now mostly found in Continuing Churches, (2) Liberalism, now found in the Lambeth Canterbury Communion, and (3) Evangelicalism, mostly found in those bodies adhering to GAFCON. The Elizabethan Settlement has for all practical purposes collapsed and has ceased to exist, if it ever factually existed in the first place.

"Gentlemen, Prepare to Defend Yourselves!"

The Future of Christianity in America.

So, Christians who hope to preserve their values had better be prepared to fight. “In politics, as in life generally, the most important thing by far is Will,” I wrote in last week’s column. Unfortunately for the future of their religion, many Christians are lacking in Will. We saw this last week, when the young men of Covington Catholic High School were thrown under the bus by various Christian journalists, public intellectuals, and the Covington Diocese. As Henry David Thoreau wrote, “O for a man who is a man, and…has a bone in his back which you cannot pass your hand through!”

Yet Will is not all that is needed. It is primarily manipulation, the more unscrupulous the better, that decides power struggles in this world. Christians, then, may wish to pray for a little sympathy from the devil.

Continuing Anglicanism Before Continuing Anglicanism Was Cool

So happy to be serving here.  

S.M. Hutchens on the Dithering ACNA

Dr. Hutchens is a senior editor of Touchstone.

"The question is whether this church will have women presbyters or not. The answer is Yes or No: tertium non datur. Here we have enthusiastic but murky bishopspeak and other forms of religious talk, much of which claims that what is going on among indecisive bishops on one hand and partisans of women's ordination on the other is being carried out under the direction of the Holy Spirit. This is either true or it is blasphemy. Just how long are the more orthodox members of the ACNA going to tolerate bishops whose job is to decide which path to take but either cannot or will not?"

ACNA

"Here on the coast of the Old Dominion there's only one ACNA parish that even pretends to use a liturgy. Kneelers? What are those? They all have those chairs with the little book basket underneath. Hymnals, ha ha ha - how antiquated. Morning Prayer? What's that? It sounds like something that limits the movement of the Spirit. They are mostly thoroughly Protestant in an American Evangelical or even Pentecostal way. And I've been on the inside." - Fr. Shannon Ramey

The ACNA and the Historic Priesthood

From Alice Linsley, writing at Virtue Online:

This has been a difficult article to write due to the strength of my conviction that women's ordination to the sacred order of priests is a dangerous innovation that will continue to cause division in the Anglican Church in North America.

I have been speaking and writing on this subject for over 15 years, mainly from the perspective of Biblical Anthropology, but also from personal experience as a former priest in the Episcopal Church. I have no illusion that what I say will change the minds of those who hold their positions with equally firm conviction. . . .

I am not hopeful that a catholic resolution on the question of women priests can be achieved in the ACNA. Anglicans appears to relish theological ambiguity and our bishops do not insist on uniformity of doctrine and practice when it comes to nonessentials. That the all-male priesthood touches the heart of the Messianic Faith that we call "Christianity" does not sway the supporters of women's ordination. Nor do they appear to be disturbed by the tension this innovation creates in ecumenical relations with bodies that uphold catholic orders.

Anglicans claim Scripture as our central authority, yet supporters of women's ordination obfuscate the fact that not a single woman priest is found in the Bible. Many are proud of the "reformed" nature of the Anglican Way, yet they are unwilling to reform to the received Tradition of the all-male priesthood. They do not recognize the truth of Father Louis Tarsitano's words: "The priesthood of Christ, and that representative priesthood rooted in Christ's priesthood is changeless. To change it is to change the New Testament itself". . . .

The bishops should not be overly hard on themselves. They inherited this conflicted condition and they are saddled with it. Though most ACNA bishops do not favor women's ordination, female priests is now the cultural norm in the ACNA. Given what I have learned from anthropology about cultural change, I doubt the ACNA can reform to the biblical norm.

The preservation of a fragile ACNA coalition is more important than the boundary stones set up by our holy ancestors (Proverbs 22:28). Those markers enable us to discern and avoid errant paths.

The Anglican Church in North America has been permanently corrupted by the adoption of a practice from TEC. The polity of the ACNA is such that no leader has the authority to correct this. In effect, the ACNA has a crisis of authority.

A fellow who goes by the name "ReebHerb" posted this comment to the Virtue Online article:

ACNA's promise was to approach all issues under the authority of prayer and scripture. Their own working paper concluded no basis for ordained women from scripture. This was vetoed immediately by the likes of Hobby, Hunter, and Mrs. Duncan going off the rails chastising those who questioned her husband. So we now know that only prayer is encouraged until the desired outcome is achieved.

What is ACNA? As the wise man said, it is TEC 15 minutes before Gene Robinson. Go for it. Did you notice the move from priest to pastor? What is the new term for bishop? Shepherd? Anyway, I couldn't figure out what these women wanted. I think one was asking the HOB to study Holy Scripture so they would know what they were superseding. Lay people have always been able to preach. TEC has LEM (Lay Eucharistic Minister) who can distribute already consecrated elements. Anyone can do baptisms like nurses often do for babies that don't look like they will make it. Church shaman (that sounds male)? The only meaningful Bible study I've been in was led by a Canadian Chinese woman in small group.

These women used the exact same language and talking points we heard in TEC from the 1970s on. Please ignore the fact that far fewer women attend TEC churches now than before although the general population has bloomed. Well the die is cast. ACNA should not waste time and open the doors to female bishops. The dream of supplanting TEC is over. They are TEC.

Indeed they are, and the time for ACNA traditionalists has now come to fish or cut bait.

The ACNA, Still Dithering

College of Bishops Communiqué January 2019.

Ongoing Conversation on Holy Orders
The Bishops’ Working Group on Holy Orders, co-chaired by Bishop Clark Lowenfield and Bishop Jim Hobby, facilitated the next step of our conversations regarding holy orders and the ministry of men and women. When we met previously in Victoria, Canada (September 2017) to discuss this topic we acknowledged that “we have not effectively discipled and equipped all Christians, male and especially female, lay and ordained, to fulfill their callings and ministries in the work of God’s kingdom. We repent of this and commit to work earnestly toward a far greater release of the whole Church to her God-given mission.”  In light of this reality, we thought a good place to start was to listen. There were powerful presentations by a number of women about their experience and observations about ministry from their perspective. The presentations were very well received and are linked here.

Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon on Orthodoxy

Fr. Reardon is an Orthodox scholar and priest in the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of America.  He has been an outspoken critic of the Orthodox anti-Western parochialism exhibited by many Orthodox Christians:

What almost always passes for ‘Orthodox theology’ among English-speaking Orthodox these days is actually just a branch of the larger Orthodox picture. Indeed, it tends sometimes to be rather sectarian.

The Orthodox Church is an ancient castle, as it were, of which only two or three rooms have been much in use since about 1920. These two or three rooms were furnished by the Russian émigrés in Paris between the two World Wars. This furniture is heavily neo-Palamite and anti-Scholastic. It relies heavily on the Cappadocians, Maximus, and Gregory Palamas (who are good folks, or course). Anything that does not fit comfortably into that model is dismissed as “Western” and even non-Orthodox.

Consequently, one will look in vain in that theology for any significant contribution from the Alexandrians, chiefly Cyril, and that major Antiochian, Chrysostom. When these are quoted, it is usually some incidental point on which they can afford to be quoted.

Now I submit that any ‘Orthodox’ theology that has so little use for the two major figures from Antioch and Alexandria is giving something less than the whole picture.

Likewise, this popular neo-Palamite brand of Orthodoxy, though it quotes Damascene when it is convenient, never really engages Damascene’’s manifestly ‘Scholastic’ approach to theology.

Much less does it have any use for the other early Scholastic theologians, such as Theodore the Studite and Euthymus Zygabenus. There is no recognition that Scholasticism was born in the East, not the West, and that only the rise of the Turk kept it from flourishing in the East.

There is also no explicit recognition that the defining pattern of Orthodox Christology was formulated in the West before Chalcedon. Pope Leo’’s distinctions are already very clear in Augustine decades before Chalcedon. Yet, Orthodox treatises on the history of Christology regularly ignore Augustine.

Augustine tends to be classified as a ‘Scholastic,’ which he most certainly was not.

But Western and Scholastic are bad words with these folks.In fact, however, Augustine and the Scholastics represent only other rooms in the larger castle.

For this reason I urge you, as you can, to read in the Orthodox sources that tend to get skipped in what currently passes for ‘Orthodoxy.’ For my part, I believe the Russian émigré theology from Paris, which seems profoundly reactionary and anti-Western, is an inadequate instrument for the evangelization of this country and the world. I say this while gladly recognizing my own debt to Russian émigré theology.

The Neuroscience of Traditional Architecture

Fascinating.

Why Ancient Liturgy Matters

Before I watched this video, I was only vaguely aware of who Brian Holdsworth is, but color me impressed now. I like the fact that in this excellent talk on why liturgy is so important, the Roman Catholic Holdsworth relates the story about the conversion of Kievan Rus (Orthodox) with background music by an Anglican choir singing Gregorio Allegri's "Miserere".

ACNA and AMiA please take note:

Samuel Seabury's Miter

H/T Bishop Chandler Holder Jones, Bishop Suffragan of the Diocese of the Eastern United States of the Anglican Province of America.

14th November 1784, the Bestowal of the American Episcopate: ALMIGHTY God, who by thy Son Jesus Christ didst give to thy holy Apostles many excellent gifts, and didst charge them to feed thy flock; Give grace, we beseech thee, to all Bishops, the Pastors of thy Church, that they may diligently preach thy Word, and duly administer the godly Discipline thereof; and grant to the people, that they may obediently follow the same; that all may receive the crown of everlasting glory; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

My Anglican friends and brother clergy: don't allow ANYONE from the ranks of the Roman Catholic Church or the Eastern Orthodox Church to get away with the assertion that Anglican orders aren't valid. The scholars among them know otherwise.

One other note:  Seabury's consecration by bishops of the Scottish Episcopal Church came with the mandate that the new American Book of Common Prayer would include in the Service of Holy Communion the Prayer of Consecration and Epiclesis from the Scottish Book of Common Prayer, an inheritance of the good and faithful Catholic work of the English Non-Jurors.  That is why the 1928 American Book of Common Prayer is superior to the 1662 English book, its status as an official formulary of the Church of England notwithstanding.

Fr. Jonathan Munn Responds to a Critic of the Anglican Catholic Church

First, read the post and the exchange in the combox here.  A fellow from ACNA identifiying himself as someone who left the Anglican Catholic Church wrote the following comment there:

I understand you are trying to promote where you are as a church, but these posts are getting a little old. Last week you lumped the whole ACNA into comments based on comments of the Ohio governor. I was a member of the ACC (Anglican Catholic Church). All I experienced were a bunch of people who wanted to do things the same way they had been for 50 years. Or turn the church into a version of the RCC. Very little about how to reach new people for Christ. Just more of the same. As far as the crowd moving on - look in the mirror.

Tonight Fr. Jonathan Munn, Priest in Charge of the Provisional Mission of St Anselm & St Odile, Sheffield, Anglican Catholic Church, Diocese of the United Kingdom, posted this in reply:

“Loyal to a church that has passed away”

These were the words of the DDO to whom I was sent when exploring my vocation to the priesthood in the CofE. These words with which my vocation was rejected have stuck with me. I wanted to be ordained, but I always knew that wanting to be ordained was not enough and so I resigned myself to wanting something I couldn’t have and stuck it out. When the CofE and I parted company I joined the ACC, and I joined it not because I wanted to be ordained, but because I believed in the principles on which the ACC stands. I was quite content in being the clumsy server in my new parish, however my vocation was discerned and here I am bearing a large burden with a little confraternity of priests.

I mention this because I came across this little comment on Fr Little’s blog

I was a member of the ACC. All I experienced were a bunch of people who wanted to do things the same way they had been for 50 years. Or turn the church into a version of the RCC. Very little about how to reach new people for Christ. Just more of the same.

What do I hear in this comment? I hear something very similar to the now-retired DDO that convinced me that the CofE priesthood wasn’t for me – and for whose decision I am deeply grateful. He was about getting new people into the Church.

Of course, I am not belittling the need for outreach and evangelism but my problem lies with what we are inviting people into. This is the mistake that the CofE has made: it has become trendy like a dad dressing like a teenager in order to deepen the relationship with his children only to find out that he has pushed them away by embarrassing them. Of course, the Church should invite people to discover their salvation, but that salvation needs to be lived not just read about in the pages of Holy Scripture.

I have to sympathise with this commentator. I wouldn’t want to be part of a bunch of people who wanted to do things the same way they had been for 50 years. I find myself part of a bunch of people who want to do things the same way that they have been done in England since time immemorial. This is because we are part of a timeless Church: our worship needs to reach out across Time as well as Space. We need to be authentic to our roots that encompass our Scripture and the Tradition that interpret it. The only thing we can present is a Faith that is two thousand years old.

If the worship of the ACC looks superficially like that of the RCC then that is to be expected. We are hewn out of the same rock. Indeed, the CofE has a common heritage with the RCC, and we in the ACC have a common heritage with the CofE. Fr Little’s commentator seems to be one of those Protestants who believe Rome can do no good without realising that he has Rome to thank for the fact that he believes at all, especially if he is of a predominantly Western heritage. Somehow, I doubt that he is of an Eastern Orthodox persuasion given his predisposition to the “new”. That’s his choice and may God enrich him within it!

However, he has left a church that regards fashion with a distinct suspicion and rightly so. The evidence is quite damning in that Churches that have gone with the new in pursuit of new Christians have reported a marked decline at a rate faster than many more conservative churches.

As for ACNA, well, I believe it to be well intentioned. However, we’ve been there before and know that we need to get ourselves in line with orthodox doctrine – something that ACNA has yet to do. Fr Little and I belong to churches that have fought all this fight before and know where we stand. This is why both our jurisdictions are stable and, in fact growing. The reason is that we seek to present the World with the Faith once delivered to the Saints. That will necessarily look old fashioned and liturgically high because we see in our liturgy the necessity of excellence in order to bring to God whatever worship we believe that we are doing. That seems less like passing away and more like still being here!

The commentator left us because he refused to see this which means that either his parish weren’t doing things correctly with God at the centre of the Liturgy, or that God has drawn him to see things differently in which case we would like to see how he demonstrates that from Scripture, Tradition and Reason, or he is mistaken in his understanding. Whatever is correct, it is appropriate for us to pray that he – and we – may always be guided into the ways of God’s truth. One thing we do know, God does not contradict Himself, something that certain ecclesial bodies seem to have forgotten!

Word

"The last generation tried to appeal to boomers by watering down the faith. This generation is creating hipster Anglicanism to appeal to a crowd who will move on... to the next shining thing. When we will just proclaim the faith that was once and for all delivered to the saints and quit pandering to the newest generation?" - The Revd Ramond Frederick Kasch

For Newbies: How to Pray the Daily Office

http://www.christ-church-anglican.org/uploads/6/6/0/3/6603354/how_to_pray_the_daily_office_part_3.pdf

Yes, We Are Sacrificing Priests, Not Elders With Prayer Books

From John Lovering Campbell Dart:

"Consider first the Ordination of priests. It is called the "Form and Matter of Ordering of Priests." It is ordered that there be a sermon "declaring the duty and office of such as come to be admitted Priests; how necessary that Order is in the Church of Christ and also how the people ought to esteem them in their office." Then according to immemorial custom, "the Archdeacon shall present to the Bishop (sitting in his chair near to the Holy Table) all them that shall receive the Order of Priesthood." These terms "Priest" and "Priesthood" are the only ones which the Church of England uses to indicate the second order of the ministry. They have a very important bearing on the matter under discussion. The Ordinal has never been officially translated into Latin, but the Prayer Book has. Whenever the word Priest occurs in the English book it is always translated as "sacerdos." For example, in the rubric before the recital of the Commandments there is the direction "Then shall the Priest rehearse"--"tunc recitabit Sacerdos;" "after the collects the Priest shall read the Epistle"--"Post hac collectas, Sacerdos;" in the Visitation to the Sick "the Priest entering"--"ingrediens Sacerdos." The point of this is that there is another term, which it would have been possible to use, the word Presbyter. If there is any difference in meaning then "sacerdos is a somewhat stronger word. In classical Latin it meant "one who sacrifices." Presbyter, or Elder, is the New Testament term, and does not necessarily carry with it any sacrificial connotation. But "sacerdos" is inextricably mixed up with sacrificial ideas. Rome in the Form which, as we shall see presently, is now declared to be the essential Form, is content to use "presbyter." But the Church of England always uses the term "priest" or "sacerdos" whenever the second order of ministry is indicated. In the ordination service of Elizabeth, including rubrics, the term occurs twelve times. In 1662 still another was inserted. It is clear then that men being ordained are raised to a "sacerdotal" rank and dignity."

Aslan Is Not a Tame Lion: The Serious Mistake of Casual Worship

The latest from Ponder Anew.

One of the things I find most disturbing about contemporary Christian worship is that we go about it like the Divine is completely familiar and pedestrian. And in many cases, this is by design. The leaders of the seeker movement have been screaming for years that worship should be a come-as-you-are jam session built around the pop preferences and entertainment appetites of the surrounding community. I even have a colleague here on Patheos Evangelical who explicitly states that church should be a fun time for the whole family. The buildings look more like modern movie theaters, the faux-liturgy an extemporaneous and ad hoc list of assurances that God can fit nicely into your life, and the overarching sensibility one of customer service.

Because that’s what most mega-churches and mega-church Mini-Mes are, frankly. Corporations achieving varying levels of success by peddling fun experiences that are more entertaining than any others within commuting distance. Worship is the ultimate fun experience at these places, the musicians and speakers the headliners in a quasi-holy bait-and-switch scheme that secures your butts in their padded, stadium-style seats by promising you the best Jesus that money can buy.

But that’s simply not worship.

Kasich: No Surprises Here

John Kasich.

"Renowned Theologian and Minister John Kasich commands sinners to turn from their wicked desire to protect Americans and follow the law."

Bishop Gafton on the Sectarians' Need of the English Catholic Church

First, as to the sectarians. We must recognize that all duly baptized are united to Christ, and extend our love to all Christians by whatever name they call themselves. Their spiritual ancestors in England went out from the Mother Church, and they have inherited the results of the schism. The devout among them have found Christ and feel assured of their acceptance in Him. In their walk with the Lord they have found Him precious to their souls. So rich is the Gospel as they possess it, that it is difficult for them to realize there is a fuller spiritual life vouchsafed through participation of the sacraments of the Catholic Church. They do not see this spiritual result in the many worldly and indifferent churchmen, and so conclude that it is not to be found in the Church. God in His dear love is, however, drawing souls desirous of a closer union with Himself into the fuller embrace of those sacramental gifts which the Church alone can give." - The Rt. Rev. Charles Chapman Grafton

Why I Didn't Convert to Eastern Orthodoxy

From a man now studying for the Anglican priesthood at Nashotah House.

RIP, Vatican II Catholicism (1962-2018)

I have to say that this searing article penned by a traditional Roman Catholic just.says.it.all.  Excerpts:

But, as many writers have pointed out, this pontificate has been, in spite of all the evils, a tremendous gift of Divine Providence to us. Yes, we can truly say this. For Francis has brought to a clarity past any reasonable (or unreasonable) doubt, one might even say has amplified to fever pitch, the utter bankruptcy of “Vatican II Catholicism,” with its lightweight liturgy; its unserious opposition to the world, the flesh, and the devil; and its continual compromise with the reigning forces of liberalism. . . .

Earlier I spoke of “unserious opposition to the world, the flesh, and the devil.” This is the mark of postconciliar Catholicism. Oppose the world? No, we have to dialogue with it, understand it, sympathize with it, come to terms with it, make common cause with it, recycle its garbage and adopt its slogans. Out went all the ancient prayers of the Mass that spoke of spiritual warfare, the deceits of the evil one, the need for ascetical violence against our fallen nature. Everything was smoothed over in recognition of the goodness of everything and everyone (if only they knew it).

Heavy-duty exorcisms were stripped out of the baptismal rite, where they had been since apostolic times, because of the revealed truth that mankind after the Fall is under Satan’s princedom and the citizens of heaven have to be torn away from his influence. Days of fasting and abstinence were canceled out left and right; instead of renewing ancient tradition (as the talking heads claimed), it was ignored or shrugged off as superstitious. The only direction was downhill: dispensing, simplifying, abbreviating, abolishing. . .

For a long time, I thought John Paul II and Benedict XVI were fighting the good fight against this revolutionary reinterpretation of Christianity, but after a few high-profile interreligious meetings, osculations of the Koran, book-length interviews with dialectical answers to every question, and other such indicators, I lost my enthusiasm for them as pastors, whatever I might have admired in their philosophical or theological writings (which, however you slice it, are not the primary job of a pope). It was a shock to the system to realize that these popes, though undoubtedly well intentioned, were swimming in a lake of Kool-Aid rather than the ocean of Tradition – the only difference being that they were strong enough to keep swimming and occasionally cry out to heaven for help, instead of drowning and sinking to the bottom like a millstone with a cardinal tied around its neck. . . .

The alternative is equally clear: the complex but internally consistent religion taught by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church; savored by monks and mystics; authoritatively proclaimed by the great councils; unanimously codified in hundreds of catechisms; and, above all, luminously, exultantly embodied in the great liturgical rites of East and West, the common heritage of all orthodox Christians who worship the thrice-holy Trinity in an unbroken tradition. (Bolded emphasis mine.)

This, this is Catholicism. Nothing else. Do not look for it where it cannot be found. Do not strain or break your neck trying to find a way to look at the novelties as if they were tradition, for it cannot be done. Do not strain the gnats while swallowing the camels. Hearken again to the one true Faith that missionized the globe in the Old Evangelization. . . .

Yes, the alternative is clear:

The Continuing Anglican Communion is small, and we are belittled by our neighbors and enemies who have imbibed the metrics of McDonald’s to determine the work of the Holy Spirit. We are small, but we are growing as an international communion that maintains the medium and message we have been tasked with safeguarding. Our smaller size frees us of the crushing institutional weight which hamstrings the radical conservation our world desperately needs. Further, our catholic bishops are doctrinally and sacramentally linked with the twelve chosen by Christ, and we are the blessed recipients of a reformation spirit that focuses our piety in Word and Sacrament. I am a priest in the Anglican Catholic Church, and I am happy to report that traditional Anglicans are coalescing to stand firm on the Catholic Christian foundation that survived the fall of Rome, the Black Death, and two world wars. Four of the largest continuing jurisdictions are now in full communion and are preparing for organic unity within the next two years. Churches are banding together to build schools and form alternative communities to protect and promote the next generation of saints.

At this exciting time, I ask my fellow Christian brothers to consider joining us in the fight. I do not care where you come from; I do not care if we were enemies in the past. First, traditional Anglicans, evangelical and anglo-catholic alike, must band together to stand firm against our common enemy. To my evangelical Anglican brethren, you will find that there are “high churchmen” in the Continuum, but these are men who care scrupulously about serving as a living link back to the apostles; men who believe that rules matter. Are you not better off with a brother who prefers Tract 90 and the first prayerbook of Edward VI than you are with a Montanist or progressive moved by the spirit of the age? Why not band together with reformed catholic Christians who truly value the Word? To my anglo-catholic brothers, the progressive Christians in Canterbury and Rome (and other American Anglican bodies) are simply waiting for you to die off so they can build one more temple dedicated to suburban Christianity-lite. Why stay with people who have such disdain for what you hold dear? Why not band together with catholic Christians who truly value the Eucharist?

Beyond traditional Anglicans, here in the Continuing Anglican Communion, there is a home for all Christians who want a church devoted to saying, “Enough, we will stand against the tide—especially if it kills us.” A church attempting to recapture the comprehensive catholicity of the first 1500 years of the faith. To my Evangelical brethren, I say here is place in which a reformed catholic is protected, where he knows the rules will be cherished and followed. To my Roman Catholic brethren, unhitch yourself from the papal experiment before it is too late. To all, rather than spending your time trying to evangelize the members of your elder boards and presbyteries and bishops’ conferences, why not join a church that is outward focused because it knows what it believes and why? Why not trust in a tradition that has actually survived the worst the world can throw at it? I realize this call is asking clergy and their families to make financial sacrifices, and I know some among the laity will be forced to lose prestige and the comfort of the crowd, but for those who are called to this path of righteousness—this way of the cross—please contact me, and let us continue the fight together.  (Bolded emphasis mine.)