Sunday, November 29, 2015

What's In a Name?

Well, folks, I'm back. The world has become so crazy that I feel compelled to write again. In 3 years I have abandoned some things, though, and I thought you should hear about it.

I have largely stopped using the phrase "Independent Sacramental Movement." This term was largely popularized by my friend Bishop John Plummer. I have long felt it was useful but, to be honest, I have come to a point where I feel it is too inclusive. Is there such a thing? Yes, Virginia, there is...! 

I have largely come to realize that such a large tent creates chaos. I personally believe that for there to be validity of sacraments there must be something equivalent to the scholastic phrases of matter, form, and intent. To intend is to "intend to do what the church does." But, for many people this is not clear. If they are Baptists disguised as Catholics, as noted in a previous post, are they "intending" to create sacrificing priests? Or, if esoterically inclined, are they intending to create sacrificing priests who adhere to the Nicene Creed and the tradition of the Church? These are, I believe, important questions.

There is a bit of discomfort for me with the term "Independent Catholic" as well. After all, our groups were among the first to acknowledge that the divisions of Christianity were largely created by politics rather than faith. Therefore we have often offered the sacraments to various members of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. We are never truly independent because we are united with each other by a common Baptism and a common faith.

Then there's Old Catholic. My own jurisdiction uses a derivative of this term because we believe in the premise and ideals of the So-Called Jansenist Church of Holland. But, it also causes a hell of a problem. I've had so many people who are "in the know" ask me if I am a SSPX-type priest in the past. Still others are wary of our liturgies because they are concerned they are only in Latin (not that there's anything wrong with that!)

I think I've settled on Autocephalous Catholic. Or maybe Self-Ruling Catholic. Calling myself Catholic but Not Roman sets up a relationship where I define everything I do in relation to Rome. And we have seen how well that works for Continuing Anglicanism! But Autocephalous Catholic insinuates that we control our own destiny. That we are Catholic but not controlled by a foreign patriarch or power. This is, to me, how the Church was envisioned. 

Now I just have to pass out dictionaries so people I meet can look up "Autocephalous."

Sunday, October 7, 2012

Mental Illness in the ISM

This is, perhaps, a bit more of a serious post than my lighthearted usual posts. It deals with the topic of mental illness. I have been fortunate to have many friends in the psychiatric profession and done significant personal research into this issue. Clergy with mental illness are nothing new. There are numerous examples, in the past, of clergy who have suffered some type of infirmity. For example, modern psychiatric professionals regard Pope Pius IX to have possibly suffered from extreme narcissism or bipolar mania (grandiosity). An example of this is his ring, displayed at the right, which he had set with a cameo image of himself in diamonds.

There were also various saints who, while often displaying holiness of life, had what we now identify as a mental illness. In fact, there can often be a fine line between mental illness and holiness. One man's hallucination is another's vision! This is precisely why it is so important to test the spirit as directed in the Gospel of John ("Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God..".)

Mental illness among clergy is now being addressed. With 500,000 clergy persons in the United States alone (between Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish clergy) it is statistically impossible not to have a segment who are mentally ill. Some are able to receive appropriate treatment, while others are asked to leave. This does not have to manifest itself so visibly as sexual misconduct--it can be inappropriate displays of anger, inability to feel empathy, delusions, paranoia, phantom illness, etc.

The ISM is complicated because we do not have a unilateral system for psychological testing. I cannot beg and implore jurisdictions enough to REQUIRE PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING. It can be relatively inexpensive and is absolutely essential to not opening up the jurisdiction the ordaining bishop to lawsuits. It must complement a criminal background check.

I have believed and continued to believe in the goodness of sincere, good people who have been prevented ordination in other churches finding somewhere to minister in the ISM. Because I may not agree with their candidacy does not mean that they cannot share God's love with others. However, there are some people who either cannot be ordained because it is dangerous to the general public or who need treatment from medicine or therapy to manage their illness before they are able to minister. Unfortunately, so much stigma surrounds mental illness that they may not be comfortable being honest about their issues.

People of faith and clergy should be vigilant about issues of mental illness. There are certain warning signs that are evident. Studies have pointed to the hypothesis that gay men and women may be more susceptible to borderline personality disorder. This can be apparent in intense personal relationships, addictions, frequent created illnesses, abandonment fears, etc. Men in general may be more susceptible to antisocial personality disorder and may display a lack of remorse, aggressiveness, deception, etc. Narcissism and other personality disorders may present themselves as well.

The more we can be open about the issue of mental illness the better we can understand clergy we know or who may seek ordination. Again, it is not a shameful issue but one which presents in every profession, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Baptists in Disguise and Apostolic Succession...

There is a new movement among Southern Baptists in my area. They graduate from the local seminary or bible college and start a "community church." These community churches usually have names like "Faith" or "Sojourn" or "Gateway" or "Grace" or some other generic name. However, when you read their statement of faith it is distinctly Baptist. Well, Baptist of the hellfire and brimstone type. Young couples come to the churches hoping for a type of open environment where they can learn their faith in this post-Christian world. Often times, they sink into a type of fundamentalism.

The ISM has a similar problem. Yes, I will call it a problem. It is the new influx of seemingly evangelical ministers who claim apostolic succession. These individuals wear the clothes and were ordained by bishops in the apostolic succession, but they have no concept of sacramental theology. This begs the question--why would they want apostolic succession of they do not believe that they are participating in a sacrifice on an altar? Or, sometimes they do believe in some type of sacramental theology but then dually emphasize the Bible and its superiority over tradition.

I believe there is a parallel with the Reformed Episcopal Church. Bishop George Cummins, the founder, stated very clearly that "I act as a Bishop, not claiming a jure divino right, or to be in any Apostolic Succession..." According to traditional Catholic theology (as mentioned previously) there must be an intention to "do what the church does." If you do not intend to ordain a sacrificing priest, do you do what the church does? That is not for me to say. But, it is pertinent given the large influx of evangelicals into the ISM.

Don't get me wrong. I think the ISM is a big tent, and I realize that the Anglican tradition (in particular) has always had a low church camp. But, really, what is the point of advertising one's self as a "bible believing Christian" who celebrates "the Lord's Supper" and claiming apostolic succession? We believe that the apostolic succession is intrinsically linked to the apostolic tradition, a fact elaborated on quite eloquently by one young Joseph Ratzinger. Without the apostolic faith the apostolic succession is problematic.

I have no problem with Pentecostal preachers wearing Catholic garb. If that's your thing, live it up! Well, at least wear them correctly please. But, it's shaky ground then they claim to have apostolic succession without holding the sacramental deposit of faith that is dependent on that succession. Biblical literalism is, after all, only about a century old.

"We are not to credit these men, nor go out from the first and the ecclesiastical tradition; nor to believe otherwise than as the churches of God have by succession transmitted to us." Origen, Commentary on Matthew (post A.D. 244).


Sunday, September 9, 2012

A Homily About Listening

One of the readings today, depending on which lectionary you use, has the miracle of Jesus healing the deaf, mute man. This is regarded by female theologians as the greatest miracle of Jesus. He made a man listen! Still, out of the 37ish miracles that were documented in the New Testament this one was chosen. I think it is because listening was as difficult then as it is now. We live in a world where we are told not to listen to each other. We aren't supposed to listen to those that are politically different, especially during this election season, because "they're crazy." Other religions, too, are labeled as having no inherent value. We strive more than ever to reduce people to one common denominator. You're conservative, liberal, gay, straight, black, white, etc. The many complexities that make up you and your essence are not honored. You are just put into a box from which you can never escape. This, of course, makes it much easier to not listen to each other. This is a shame.

Similarly, while listening to each other we need to listen to God. We have a wonderful example from the Blessed Virgin Mary, whose birthday was celebrated yesterday. Mary was likely a girl in her early teenage years who wanted nothing more than to live with her bethrothed, Joseph, until the end of her life. Instead, she answered the Archangel Gabriel with the words "Let it be to me according to thy word." This simple action took her to many dark places. She saw her son, the only son she had ever known murdered as a common criminal. His friends and disciples were similarly murdered. She lived in excruciating emotional agony. Yet, she listened to God's will for her life. She listened.

The two cannot be mutually exclusive. Sometimes we hear each other and it is hearing the very voice of God acting through us. Who better than our sisters or brothers to let us know that we need to change our ways. Sometimes God tells us that we must reach out to each other. Regardless of how it happens, the take home message today is that we must listen. It can't be a half-hearted listening, but it must be fully aware and sincere. We don't have to agree with the message, but we are duty bound to listen to the story. To care about the speaker regardless of their background or differences. Perhaps in this we will hear the very voice of God.

Friday, August 31, 2012

Judge Not...

There are a lot of people that are down on the ISM, including within the movement itself. Sure, we have our crazies. But, we have the directive that the Church is a "hospital for sinners." There is no perfect church because, by definition, they are filled with imperfect people. However, this obviously does not give anyone the right to misuse their authority in any way. Unfortunately, this will never be completely avoidable. However, the one difference is that it happens on a much smaller scale in the ISM than in mainstream churches.

For instance, if I were a Roman Catholic leader, I could not live with the fact that I was complicit in the abuse of children. Yet, for some reason the ISM is derided as flaky, dangerous, spiritually hurtful if people should find our churches. Similarly, an Orthodox jurisdiction recently had a bishop placed on leave for allegations of impropriety. This same jurisdiction has investigated two primates, had a primate resign, is investigating a bishop on molestation charges, removed another bishop, had a priest accused of rape, another priest accused of financial improprieties.... well, you get the idea. Soon, they won't have any bishops left!

This is not gloating. The fact that there have been people hurt by religion is awful. Yet, it stands as a testament that when the ISM is accused of all those negative things and being "not real," is the alternative so much better? Instead of talking about how horrible we are as a movement, we must make a move to more positive discussions. When questioned about perceived negatives, we have an obligation to highlight the wonderful aspects of our tradition. This includes how much more true we are to the model of the early church, how we offer ordination opportunities to qualified individuals who would not have an opportunity elsewhere, how we permit greater access to the sacraments, etc.

Each tradition offers the opportunity to participate in the life giving sacraments of the church. This is, obviously, preferable to the empty fundamentalism that is becoming a fad in America.

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Two Men and a Sewing Machine Do Not A Religious Order Make...

Religious orders have a colorful history in the ISM. Many characters of the movement have not done much to help this perception. The joke is that whatever habit a man or woman looks best in will be the religious order of choice. I don't think that is necessarily fair, as there are many instances of wonderful orders.

Don't get me wrong--there is a lot of humor in ISM religious orders. This is especially true when Roman orders are recreated in the ISM that were founded on principles like a vow of obedience to the Pope, propagation of the Roman Catholic faith, etc. We also must be careful not to use a very specific name when not Roman Catholic, lest the Romans think that we are infringing on their rights. It is perfectly ok to claim the charism of a saint but have a different name. Obviously with ecumenical Benedictines, Franciscans, etc. this is moot for those groups.

But, there are many sincere people who want to devote themselves to following he lifestyle and charism of a certain saintly prophet. Or, they want to devote themselves totally to a calling. These can be very powerful instruments in the ISM. Where we are sometimes subject to domineering prelates, religious orders provide a breath of fresh air. They are inherently much more organic than formalized church structures. They also afford the opportunity for individuals to have a greater source of community.

In many ways, I think that religious orders could be the wave of the future on the ISM. That is, even if they are not defined as religious orders in themselves. Generation Y and beyond are increasingly very anti-institutional in their faith journey. A religious order could offer a modicum of structure while still being non-threatening enough to the neophytes. They would cross jurisdictional boundaries and allow individuals to worship in their own community of choice while belonging to an "alternative" group.

I think the ISM has a challenge towards greater unity of religious orders. It seems impractical to join all religious orders of a same tradition, i.e. Franciscan, across jurisdictions and theologies. However, greater unity can certainly be achieved. Perhaps orders can form a collaborative agreement to support each other on their journey. Or, maybe commit to a common place for their respective yearly chapters but use down time to mingle together. This would provide a wonderful opportunity for fellowship.

I also think jurisdictions which contain religious orders can challenge their members to greater formation. This isn't a formal process necessarily, but it could be an introspective way to conform to the charism of a certain tradition.

Maybe the group realized that they need to encourage more study of their founder. It is somewhat unfair to claim a certain character and then pray/act/etc nothing like that tradition. Perhaps an order then becomes "in the spirit of St. Brumhilde," or whomever they choose. Maybe they realize they don't like him or her at all! Or, if a new order, they realize that they need a mission statement and some common purpose. Or, perhaps I am putting on my non-profit director hat!

I think, too, that we have to be careful not to mock start up orders. St. Benedict was once the only Benedictine, and similarly with St. Francis before Lord Bernard. If the individual is bearing good fruit, God will give them brothers and/or sisters. If they just want to wear a habit, at least we can encourage them to get to know the founder. Maybe they will be more devoted than most.

Monday, July 30, 2012

Validity: When the Holy Spirit Stays Home...

I recently re-discovered a quote from one of my favorite liturgists and authors, Adrian Fortescue. The quote is from his book "The Greek Fathers": "People who are not theologians never seem to understand how little intention is wanted for a sacrament (the point applies equally to minister and subject). The "implicit intention of doing what Christ instituted" means so vague and small a thing that one can hardly help having it -- unless one deliberately excludes it. At the time when every one was talking about Anglican orders numbers of Catholics confused intention with faith. Faith is not wanted. It is heresy to say that it is (this was the error of St Cyprian and Firmilian against which Pope Stephen I 254-257 protested). A man may have utterly wrong, heretical, and blasphemous views about a sacrament and yet confer or receive it quite validly."

This is important, because validity is the sacred cow of the ISM. Without valid apostolic succession, the sacraments offered by a priest are invalid. I have been quite scrupulous about sacraments in the past, and continue to be so to a large degree. My theological education, which is patently Western, has always maintained that matter, form, and intent are essential to the valid confection of a sacrament. Matter is the touching of the head with the hands (or hand for diaconate), form is the wording within the preface (in the Western rite) indicating what is being done, and intent is to do what the church intends. That is it. This is relatively simple and reasonably difficult to "mess up."

Now, this post is not intended to get into the murky world of what is the correct form. Traditionalists have been arguing this since the Pontifical of Paul VI appeared and, specifically, if the form for the consecration of bishops truly confers ordination in comparison to the traditional form. For the sake of this post we will generically assume that any form indicating what is taking place will suffice, whatever your view happens to be on this subject.

The issue of this blog post is when other requirements are attached that are historically inaccurate and unnecessary. For instance, it has been repeated ad nauseam that Utrecht requires that a bishop be elected for a specific church. It is unnecessary, although desirable to some, that the clergy and laity be involved in the election of bishops. To require such would invalidate the episcopate of the Roman Catholic and some Orthodox churches. Furthermore, the Church has a long tradition of missionary bishops (St. Boniface!) who are consecrated for no particular population (but with the expectation of the conversion of a populace), bishops of monasteries, administrative bishops who have no direct charge, etc. Depending on your view, this may or may not be desirable. The point, however, is that oikonomia allows for the continuation of the apostolic succession. Holy Mother Utrecht herself derives her orders from a so-called "titular bishop."

Now, because individuals are validly consecrated without a charge does not mean that it is not desirable. No one bishop "owns" the apostolic succession, as the apostolic tradition of the church is complementary to the tactile succession. That is, to do what the church intends. Being consecrated for a specific church creates a larger sense of accountability as well. When St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote "Where the bishop is, there is the church," it was not carte blanche for every egomaniacal sociopath bishop to justify their authority.

Will things aways be done according to the most desirable practice? No. Will people still be healed, the Most Blessed Sacrament be celebrated, the Good News still be preached, and grace be conferred? Yes. Even a scrupulous person like the humble writer can believe that message!

This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.