Thursday, July 05, 2007

Love from Our Critics

Some light and love from a persistent critic:
ROCOR has quite uncatholically failed to offer a pastoral provision for married Anglican Bishops seeking reunion, thereby raising inessential Orthodoxy canons to the level of dogma (that which is essential for communio in sacris.)

...your blogger maintains his position that Western Rite Orthodoxy (WRO), is simply not a viable option for traditional Anglicans seeking the authentic Orthodoxy and Catholicity of the Ancient (not Medieval) Church. Traditional Anglicans seeking Ancient Catholicity in their own cultural idiom simply will not find it in the philetism-plagued, ghetto Orthodoxy of today. (Grammar and spelling in original - BJ.)
This blogger also believes "a third approach, not yet offered by Orthodoxy or Anglicanism, is needed for any usable and edifying Orthodox-Catholic English Use." His message seems to be there's not much one can do to further one's spiritual life but read our critic's blog and await further instructions. One wonders if he's given wider consideration to the spiritual perils of remaining out of communion with Christ's Body, the Orthodox Church? Is the devotion to Christ and the catholic ecclesia He founded or to a certain, self-selected form of prayer? Does he believe the Church would give its children a serpent for a fish and a stone for bread?

For the record, ROCOR, along with every other canonical Orthodox jurisdiction, allows married bishops to be priests. The ancient Western Orthodox tradition demanded priestly celibacy earlier than the East began selecting bishops primarily from the monastic life. It's hardly out of the question to ask those who join the Orthodox Church to abide by Her (long-standing) canons. Bp. Robert Waggener gave up his episcopal status to join the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate. Likewise, Antioch did not receive the founders of the Evangelical Orthodox Church as bishops. Such a demand wouldn't be too onerous, if one's goal was unity with Christ's Body, the Church, rather than an authoritative and magisterial position within same. Ultimately, we must come to Christ empty-handed in a spirit of humility.

And ghetto is totally in. Word.

Labels: ,


Blogger Unknown said...

Not to be overly harsh but at the same time, not to pull punches..."Death" unfortunately like so many exiled anglocatholics, fails to realize the essential protestantism of the position of decreeing for oneself what is and what is not sufficiently catholic in one's own judgment to merit one's worship. Like a spinster, isolation continues and list of conditions for ending it increase.
But by this measure, love is not increased.

One supposes that in truth a movement toward restored catholicity which was begun by some lights in disobedience to its very bishops is unconditioned for obedience. And in Anglican circles, contemporary chastisement towards liberal protestant conformity has resulted in the sort of "done me wrong" attitude among anglocatholics that in reaction conditions allegiance to another Church on imposing its earlier rejected disobedience on the new candidates for allegiance.

To this, thanks, but no thanks. Catholicity of this sort is less authentic and more protestant than it pretends. It is form over substance.

5:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't hide your light under a bushel. That's my criticism of contemporary Orthodoxy in the New World.

Fr. Bradley Nassiff has recently and more artfully captured my frustration with Orthodoxy's preoccupation with it human traditions, thereby by hiding the ball (Holy Tradition) so to speak from its own people and others. Indeed, how many Orthodox have ever heard or read or know the beautiful prefecatory prayer in the Anaphora (Canon) of St. Basil the Great, which is perhaps the best summation of the Gospel ever penned or preached!!!!!!

In the great parable, the Father ran to meet the prodigal son and did not make it difficult for him to return home. But contemporary Orthodoxy today seems hell-bent on playing the sullen older brother by requiring the humiliation the prodigals (or, worse, the sons of the prodigals) before allowing them back in the fold -- such as the Anglican Bishop forced to revert to priest for no sound canonical or theological reason whatsoever but in mindless adherence to the later-day traditions of men.

Does the REAL Church require the progeny of prodigals to under go cultural and/or ecclesiastical humiliation before receiving them? I say NO, but Orthodoxy, or its human representatives in North American seem to say YES by essentially offering only Slavic, Byzantine, or Counter-Reformation (is the later even remotely Orthodox???) ways of being Orthodox.

So one begins to wonder whether contemporary North American Orthodox is part of the Church at all, but rather a wolf in sheeps' clothing.

7:47 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home