Episcopalian bishop in Los Angeles not only apologizes to Hindus for Anglican attempt to convert them in the past but he allows them to take the Eucharist!?

You really need to read this article…it’s just mind-boggling? Just when the Episcopal Church seems so “out there” that it can’t possibly get any weirder or more bizarre, it outdoes itself with this one!! Read it, it’s short…

virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=11268

I can’t get over how the guy then engages in pseudo-Hindu worship at the service?! I also got a chuckle out of the part where Jefforts-Schiori, the “presiding bishop,” said that Muslims are no longer to be converted…??? What is the point of being in this church at all??

I guess the great commision of Christ to “go forth and baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” doesn’t apply to Muslims and Hindus? :shrug::rolleyes:

And this surprises you…why?

GKC

Come on now, where did I say I was surprised? It’s just mind-boggling how they can outdo the already nutty, outlandish, un-Christian antics they’ve committed in the past…nothing they do really surprises me. It’s like being surprised by a Joe Biden gaff lol…

Ah, yes. But this is a denomination that believes (in at least some of its branches) that a person, even a “priest” can actually **be **both Muslim and Christian.

seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003751274_redding17m.html

(it’s an older news link, I know, but I don’t think she was ever corrected for this position)

As these things become more and more common, I suspect the Church will see an influx of more conservative Protestants.

Well for me reading this it just makes me feel better everyday that I belong to the true church that will never waver!

I feel better.

GKC

Talk about over the top! This is just plain sacrilege. :mad:

Yes, she was defrocked by her bishop (it was a little complicated because she was residing in another diocese, but canonically was still under the authority of the bishop of Rhode Island, who disciplined her).

I find it interesting that people on this forum repeatedly call attention to the story while ignoring the fact that she was in fact disciplined. I recognize that you honestly didn’t know, but you clearly didn’t try very hard to find out. Conservative Catholics have an obsession with debunking Anglicanism, because our existence confuses your overly neat picture of the world.

Edwin

I knew it. And the lady who did it is not, in herself, one of the worst offenders in TEC, as regards orthodoxy. But she shouldn’t bein a position to defrock anyone.

GKC

conservative Anglican

Oh, you just HAD to go there… :stuck_out_tongue:

Instigator! :smiley:

and I was all ready to respond to Edwin’s bait here:

Conservative Catholics have an obsession with debunking Anglicanism, because our existence confuses your overly neat picture of the world.

But now I think I’ll grab some popcorn instead.

Edwin and I are old acquaintances, with (I think) mutual respect, and varying opinions.

I’m not sure if he is a Gene Wolfe reader, though. That’s Wolfe, with an “e”.

GKC

I am sorry. I did try to find a more recent story on the woman before posting. Thanks for the more current link. Since you seem to be closer to this (and since I am evidently bad at research ;)) I have a question that maybe you can answer. The article you linked seems to lean toward a position that her being both Christian and Muslim might be ok, but that it wasn’t appropriate for Ms. Redding to serve as an Epicopal priest with those kind of mixed religious ties. Is that accurate or just the journalist’s own spin?

Oh, I know, I was just poking fun at the possible beginning of another game of WoW (that’s Women’s Ordination Wars, not the OTHER, more commonly known WoW)…

There’s no Eucharist (body and blood of Jesus) in protestantism, they could get only bread and wine, because of no priesthood. We also shouldn’t use the word “church” when we mean protestants, and it doesn’t matter they call themselves a church.

Anyway, it’s weird but I’m not surprised, protestants are famous for ridiculous ideas

It’s not so much a question of what is OK, but of how much discipline should be applied to laity. Anglicans, even relatively conservative ones, tend to take very seriously the idea of the “Church as hospital.” And unlike Catholics, we tend to apply this to doctrine as well as to morality. In other words, if someone is seeking the truth and willing to open themselves to the Gospel, we are unlikely to turn them away even if they have some heretical views. I’m sure that some conservative priests would deny someone communion if they openly and obstinately denied the Divinity of Christ. I have heard of priests denying people communion for adultery, and my current priest once denied someone communion for refusing to be reconciled with a brother in Christ. But the heresy would have to be very public and decided, and the priest would have to have some real guts.

Most of us think that clergy and particularly bishops should be held to a higher standard. Liberals don’t like this and claim that it creates an unhealthy double (or triple) standard, but I don’t think that’s true. We all have the same goal, but clergy are supposed to be an example.

Let me clarify one thing: from my perspective, when someone claims to belong to two religions we have to look carefully at what that means in the specific case. This is not about turf wars. There is no one thing called “religion” of which different religions are mutually exclusive examples. Different “religions” claim to do different things. Any religion has some areas where it overlaps with others. For instance, Fr. Robert Kennedy is both a Jesuit priest and a Zen master. I don’t think he’s the only one, but he’s the first example that came up in a Google search. You may disapprove of this, but as far as I know he has not been excommunicated (opening myself up to refutation here the same way you did with regard to Ann Redding!), even though your Communion has much stricter discipline than ours. Thomas Merton, a very respected Catholic spiritual writer (though, again, I know he’s controversial in many circles), talked about wanting to be as good a Buddhist as he could. I’m not claiming that this is necessarily OK–I think that careful discernment is needed–but clearly there are intelligent folks who see no contradiction there. It has to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

In the case of Ann Redding (given that I accept women’s ordination and also believe in the indelible character of Holy Orders, I’m not sure what is the best way to refer to her now that she has been forbidden to exercise her priestly functions), it’s clear that she denies the divinity of Christ. That is the reason why it was right to defrock her. If someone were to claim to be both a Christian and a Muslim and profess all the truths of the Nicene Creed, I would say that the mere apparent contradiction of the dual profession would not be enough to justify disciplinary action on the Christian side. It would be up to the Muslims to decide whether such a person was really a Muslim by their standards! I think I know what the answer would be.

In other words, when someone makes such a claim of dual allegiance we have to look at what the person actually does and professes, and whether those specific beliefs and actions are contrary to the Christian Faith. In +Redding’s case, they clearly were. In +Thew Forrester’s case, I think they also were. In +Robert Kennedy’s case, I don’t know because I don’t know his theology. In Merton’s case, I am fairly confident that they were not, although admittedly I may not fully understand Merton’s later ideas in his “Buddhist” phase.

Edwin

Merton, though, never officially took refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha, so his statement about him wanting to be the best “Buddhist” he could be, referred to the Buddhist principles of practicing wisdom and compassion. Father Kennedy practices Zen, and (if I’m not mistaken) Kennedy’s Zen teacher did not require that Kennedy take refuge in the Triple Gem, either. Many Japanese Zen teachers do not require taking refuge before giving some sort of acknowledgment (such as being recognized as a Zen “master”) to their Zen students.

The Ann Redding case is more complicated, because she was encouraged to take shahada by a practicing Muslima. Redding does go to the mosque (I don’t know how regularly, though) and so far has not experienced any problems from Muslims. Denying the divinity of Christ, as Redding has apparently done, is a polyvalent denial, with many potential meanings and objectives. From her perspective, Christ was a prophet; and if believing that makes Redding into a better “Christian”, many would give her the space to exist as an Episcopalian. I agree, though, that clergy should be held to a certain, “higher”, standard, liberal shenanigans notwithstanding.

There is at least one prominent Catholic theologian who has taken refuge in the Triple Gem, while still remaining an active and believing Catholic. He shall remain nameless for now.:smiley:

And that was my point: we have to be careful in judging what it means for someone to claim some kind of allegiance to more than one religion. You are right that obviously when a religion has formal procedures for conversion (as most of the major religions do), going through such a rite is very different from a more informal declaration that one wants to practice elements of another religion.

Father Kennedy practices Zen, and (if I’m not mistaken) Kennedy’s Zen teacher did not require that Kennedy take refuge in the Triple Gem, either. Many Japanese Zen teachers do not require taking refuge before giving some sort of acknowledgment (such as being recognized as a Zen “master”) to their Zen students.

The Ann Redding case is more complicated, because she was encouraged to take shahada by a practicing Muslima. Redding does go to the mosque (I don’t know how regularly, though) and so far has not experienced any problems from Muslims. Denying the divinity of Christ, as Redding has apparently done, is a polyvalent denial, with many potential meanings and objectives. From her perspective, Christ was a prophet; and if believing that makes Redding into a better “Christian”, many would give her the space to exist as an Episcopalian.

Yes, many would. But if there is one thing basic to Anglicanism, it’s the Nicene Creed. From my perspective it’s fine to function as an Anglican while having doubts about the Creed. But if you reject it outright, and do so publicly, then you certainly shouldn’t be a clergy person, and I would support a priest or bishop who chose to refuse communion in such a case (while recognizing that a gentler pastoral approach might be appropriate).

There is at least one prominent Catholic theologian who has taken refuge in the Triple Gem, while still remaining an active and believing Catholic. He shall remain nameless for now.:smiley:

Paul Knitter?

Again, I’d want to understand better just what taking refuge entailed. I look at what such a person denies on the Christian side. Prof. Knitter’s Christology does not appear to me to be orthodox, but I don’t claim to be deeply familiar with his theology, nor of course do I have any ecclesiastical authority to discipline him (or anyone else)!

Edwin

Is his first initial “P”?

GKC

Yep.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.