In the early 70s the large majority of catholic Episcopalians firmly opposed the ordination of women to the presbyterate and episcopate, believing that it was contrary to the will of Christ and the ecumenical tradition of the Church. When the 1976 General Convention decided to permit the ordination of women to the priesthood, most Anglo-Catholics decided to remain within the Episcopal Church and to fight for a reversal of church policy. What happened? The older generation retired or died. The younger generation, including the present writer, eventually got with the national church program. Seminaries and bishops carefully weeded out the opponents of women’s ordination from the prospective ordinand pool. Thirty-five years later we find that a new orthodoxy has been successfully imposed and the opponents of women’s ordination marginalized. Twenty years ago one might have been forgiven for thinking that it was still possible to reverse this situation, but surely no one can persuasively argue this any longer. Something very similar is now happening on the question of the moral legitimacy of same-sex unions. The goodness of same-sex unions is now widely affirmed in the Episcopal Church. New ordinands are expected to support this policy and the doctrine underlying it. Perhaps freedom to oppose this policy is still allowed in some dioceses (presumably Texas); but the number of such dioceses declines each year. Within a decade or two Episcopal priests will no longer be permitted to teach the catholic understanding of Holy Matrimony nor to declare the immorality of same-sex unions. In the inclusive Church, even tolerance has its limits. The recent history of the Episcopal Church demonstrates the harsh truth of Neuhaus’s Law: “Wherever orthodoxy is optional, it sooner or later will be proscribed.”

Yet Fr Dunlap is committed to remaining within the Episcopal Church. I know many faithful believers who are likewise committed to remaining in the Episcopal Church. I certainly do not criticize Fr Dunlap for doing so, though I find his assessment of the state of the Episcopal Church to be deeply flawed. The Episcopal Church, Dunlap insists, remains a catholic Church, despite false teaching and practice. Hence he does not need “a reason or strategy” to stay in the Episcopal Church. Really? Is the catholicity of the Episcopal Church so apparent, so manifest, so self-evident, so primordial that it needs neither defense nor apology? What would the Episcopal Church need to do to move itself over into the category of heretical or schismatic Church? In Dunlap’s judgment, the decision to ordain women to the presbyterate and episcopate does not represent a church-dividing departure from catholic order, despite the contrary judgments of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. He notes that he made his peace with the innovation some time ago. But what about the popular embrace of the pan-sexual morality? What about the ritual blessing of same-sex unions? What about the Episcopal Church’s consistent refusal to assert the evil of abortion? What about denials by many Episcopal preachers that the salvation of humanity is accomplished through Christ and Christ alone? What about the refusal to discipline bishops and priests who deny the divinity of Jesus Christ and his bodily resurrection? Are the historic episcopate, communion with the see of Canterbury, and liturgical use of the Nicene Creed really sufficient to secure the catholic identity of the Episcopal Church?

Read it all and if interested follow the discussion here.

Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal • Episcopal Church (TEC) • TEC Conflicts

1. Adam 12 wrote: Besides the Apostolic Succession the Church Catholic has seven sacraments. In most TEC circles each of these has been re-defined, with the BCP wording given new meaning. Marriage becomes a union between two persons (or perhaps more as things develop). Baptism becomes respecting the dignity of all people and therefore allowing anyone access to the highest offices of the church regardless of sexual character. Ordination has been re-defined to include women and especially those indulging in sex outside of traditional marriage. Reconciliation means laying down scruples about the LGTB lifestyle the way white southerners reconciled with blacks during the Civil Rights movement. Unction has separated any sense of sickness and death being related to sin. Confirmation has been made redundant since Baptism is complete entry into the church and a public profession of Christ by a baptised infant is therefore not necessary. Confession has been changed because many former sins are no longer sins but things to be celebrated and affirmed. Communion has been defined as a celebration of radical inclusion at a sinners’ meal with Jesus where he invites all in without requirement of transformation. I would suggest that those adhering to all these views are Catholics in name only if regard is to be given to scripture, tradition, the Church’s deposit of faith, Apostolic teaching and a plain reading of the Bible. July 31, 7:38 am | [comment link]

2. DaveW wrote: To answer the question posed in the headline: No, the Episcopal church is truly Protestant. July 31, 9:16 am | [comment link]

3. Athanasius Returns wrote: Isn’t the question, “Is TEC (as it is now evolving) truly a church”? July 31, 9:42 am | [comment link]

4. Jeffersonian wrote: The goodness of same-sex unions is now widely affirmed in the Episcopal Church. New ordinands are expected to support this policy and the doctrine underlying it. Perhaps freedom to oppose this policy is still allowed in some dioceses (presumably Texas); but the number of such dioceses declines each year. Within a decade or two Episcopal priests will no longer be permitted to teach the catholic understanding of Holy Matrimony nor to declare the immorality of same-sex unions. Exactly so.  The bellweather was +Lawrence, who barely squeaked by his consecration vote.  He will be the last.  Replacements will toe the Schori/Bruno line or they will not be considered. Get out now, reasserters. July 31, 9:57 am | [comment link]

5. Baruch wrote: #2 DaveW If so the Nicene Creed should be excluded form the service. July 31, 3:22 pm | [comment link]

6. DaveW wrote: #5 Baruch, In a sense the Nicene Creed has been excluded from the service.  Many, many—not all of course—but many Episcopalians mouth the words of the Nicene Creed without truly believing what it says.  Gene Robinson is the poster boy for this kind of thing.  He says that as he is saying the words, he thinks in his mind that they mean something else.  Lovely.  Warms the heart, doesn’t it?  I personally find it astonishing that some people are willing to get out of bed on Sunday morning, get dressed up, drive how ever far it is to their church and then stand up and say they believe in a set of Christian tenets of faith when in fact they know they do NOT believe in those things. Next will be the actual, physical removal of the Nicene Creed from the next revision of the BCP.  Don’t think so?  Watch. July 31, 4:13 pm | [comment link]

7. Baruch wrote: If GAFCON doesn’t move, I’m going to the Orthodox, they still believe the creed. You know both the Russian and Greek Orthodox warned Lambeth; however, only Rome gets much media attention. July 31, 4:36 pm | [comment link]

8. Ad Orientem wrote: Re # 7 Baruch, The Russian Church actually suspended all dialogue with TEC after VGR.  Forget communion.  They are not even talking with TEC. ICXC NIKA John July 31, 9:07 pm | [comment link]

9. Lutheran-MS wrote: The Episcopal Church is at best a gnostic church. August 1, 12:05 am | [comment link]

10. Nikolaus wrote: I’ve given up on Anglicanism as well and am worshipping in an Orthodox parish. August 8, 12:45 pm | [comment link]

Registered members must log in to comment.