From Katie Sherrod at Desert's Child via Elizabeth Kaeton at Telling Secrets.
Is Bishop Jack Iker attempting to move the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth to the Roman Catholic Church? Four Episcopal priests from the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, named below, made a presentation to Roman Catholic Bishop Kevin W. Vann, of Fort Worth, earlier this year. Below is a summary of the presentation. Katie Sherrod has the full text at her blog.
EIGHT CRUCIAL FINDINGS
1. We believe the See of Peter is essential not optional - Fr. Stainbrook
2. We believe a magisterium is needed desperately - Fr. Crary
3. We believe the Catholic Faith is true - Fr. Stainbrook
4. We believe the Anglican Communion shares the fatal flaws of TEC- Fr. Tobola
5. We believe our polity is in error-Fr. Crary
6. We believe we are not the only ones in our diocese - Canon Hough
7. We believe Pope Benedict XVI understands our plight - Fr. Tobola
8. We believe there is a charism which Anglican ethos has to offer to the Universal Church-Fr. Stainbrook
....
PROPOSAL
We request that the Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth provide the guidance necessary so that we might "make a proposal" that would lead our Diocese into full communion with the See of Peter.
We believe this guidance is necessary for the following reasons:
1. We cannot adequately prepare such a proposal without input from those to whom the proposal is to be made.
2. Such guidance would help us through the complicated aspects of this proposal.
3. With this guidance, the Holy Spirit could affect more quickly the healing of this portion of the broken Body of Christ.
Should you consent, we gladly offer ourselves for this important work and stand ready to work with those you might designate.
-------------------------
A Presentation to
The Most Reverend Keven W. Vann
Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth
Given by
Members of the Clergy of
The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth
Below is the statement by Bishop Iker on the presentation by the four Episcopal priests to Bishop Vann.
A STATEMENT BY BISHOP IKER
ON ROMAN CATHOLIC DIALOGUES
I am aware of a meeting that four priests of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth have had with Bishop Kevin Vann of the Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth on June 16, 2008. After a year of studying various agreed statements that have come out of ecumenical dialogues between Anglicans and Roman Catholics on the national and international level, these clergy expressed an interest in having a dialogue on the local level and asked my permission to make an appointment to talk with Bishop Vann. The stated goal of these official Anglican/Roman Catholic dialogues (which have been going on for over 40 years) has been full, visible unity between the two communions.
The priests who participated in this meeting with Bishop Vann have my trust and pastoral support. However, in their written and verbal reports, they have spoken only on their own behalf and out of their own concerns and perspective. They have not claimed to act or speak, nor have they been authorized to do so, either on behalf of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth or on my own behalf as their Bishop.
Their discussion with Bishop Vann has no bearing upon matters coming before our Diocesan Convention in November, where a second vote will be taken on constitutional changes concerning our relationship with the General Convention of the Episcopal Church. There is no proposal under consideration, either publicly or privately, for the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth to become part of the Roman Catholic Church. Our only plan of action remains as it has been for the past year, as affirmed by our Diocesan Convention in November 2007. The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth intends to realign with an orthodox Province as a constituent member of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
By God’s grace, we will continue to work and pray for the unity of the one holy catholic and apostolic church.
The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
August 12, 2008
What am I missing? The priests have Bp. Iker's "trust and pastoral support", BUT they speak "only on their own behalf and out of their own concerns and perspective." Hmmm. I'm confused. Is this about having a foot in Rome's door to have a place to go, just in case the realignment with "an orthodox Province as a constituent member of the worldwide Anglican Communion" doesn't work out?
If the four priests want to become members of the RCC, then I wish them Godspeed. If Episcopal church members want to affiliate with Rome, then I wish them the very same Godspeed. Bishop Iker, if you desire to be part of the RCC, then go with God.
Beyond that, what is this maneuvering about? I wonder if they know what they themselves are about, or is it that they don't want to say what they are about?
Here is the article in today's issue of the Dallas Morning News. Do I detect a bit of wanting to have their cake and eat it, too?
The document states that the overwhelming majority of Episcopal clergy in the Fort Worth diocese favor pursuing an "active plan" to bring the diocese into full communion with the Catholic Church.
While declining to specify what that might mean, Mr. Crary said it likely would not mean "absorption" by the Catholic Church.
Mr. Crary should think again. Does he truly believe that his group will be in communion with the Roman Catholic Church and not be absorbed by the RCC? In my ever so humble opinion, Fr. Crary is not thinking; he's fantasizing.
Katie Sherrod has a picture of the Brooklyn bridge at the head of her post. I wonder why.
Well, in my not so humble opinion, it wouldn't surprise me at all if +Iker et al. think they are so grand as to be able to be "in communion with the See of Peter" while remaining...errr...not Episcopalian...not Anglican...uh..."holier than thou?" Trying to have their cake and eat it, too, is one of the first principles of these "guys" and their minions. I think it's called "arrogance", but I say that in a purely objective-descriptive sort of way so as to avoid the appearance of being judgmental.
ReplyDeleteHumbly,
:-)
Scott, just so you're humble and descriptive, we could allow that it's not judgmental.
ReplyDeleteLook, I spent 60 years in the RCC. Pope Benedict is arrogating to the Vatican ever more authority and control. Do those folks truly think they will not be absorbed? That they will remain something of a separate entity unto themselves? That's not the way Rome operates. Rome, not Bp. Iker, will set the terms.
Plus, will Rome want to be caught in the middle of our Episcopalian-Anglican dispute?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePoop! Let's try again. Bishop Iker will allow some priests to swim the Tiber, but he won't as his orders won't be accepted in Rome. He'll swim to Argentina first. I hope he speaks español!
ReplyDeletegrandmere,
ReplyDeleteIt is my observation over time that, when Rome "opens windows", it is only to lure a few through those windows and to close them again behind the new arrivals. Yes, of course, you are correct. Rome (and especially *this* Rome) will be more than happy to "welcome home" those who come to them thinking they can have their cake and eat it, too. It's an old story. Rome inserts herself into the business of other Churches ('though they no longer regard us as a "Church") when it is convenient for Rome. And, oh man, did they ever see an opening in this current mess.
Sorry, Padre. I didn't mean to rattle you so by posting while you were on the wrong computer. I think you're right. Bp. Iker wants to be a bishop, and he will never be a bishop in the RCC. Bishop of what? That is the question.
ReplyDeleteUgh ... such an unsavory mating ritual.
ReplyDelete(I've resurfaced if only for a bit. Closing on the new house took place yesterday)
Good about the house, Mike.
ReplyDeleteAbout the other thing one could almost say that they deserve each other, but I would never say that.
I don't know why Iker has to learn Español, Padre Mickey. His new bishop is a Brit. And I seriously doubt he would consider the RCs. No power there. Not even the lightest influence. Hard on the ego.
ReplyDeletePiskie, they're frantically trying to work out a way that they can all still be bishops, with a preference for being bishop of something. Of what see is John-David Schofield bishop?
ReplyDeleteComo e' bella ce' la luna brille e' strette
ReplyDeletestrette como e' tutta bella a passeggiare
Sotto il cielo di Roma
Don't know what the country's coming to
But in Rome do as the Romans do
With you
on an evening in Roma
Sott'er celo de Roma
On an evening in Roma
Malcolm, our boy Dino has the word, doesn't he? It works for me. I hope it works for them.
ReplyDeleteObviously "church" here means buildings, not just souls. Does the RCC want to get into that legal fight with TEC? Do they really want a squabble over who gets the children, and who gets the house?
ReplyDeleteI'm asking, actually. No idea myself, but such an "arrangement" would not be without challenges, I should think.
Iker has already distanced himself from this one.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fwepiscopal.org/news/statement081208.html
You can be sure this man won't be heading anywhere he can't still call himself "Bishop" Rome ain't one of those places - he's married.
Did you see how he got himself center-stage in the Lambeth group photograph? Immediately left of primatial cross, third row:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3071/2703199803_c6b0c9f878_b.jpg
Lapinbizarre,
ReplyDeleteBishop Iker was positioned there in the group photo by Jim Rosenthal. He did not "get" himself there, he was placed there by the composers of the picture.
I take it from the speed of your response that I cannot be the first person to have related Iker's position in the photograph to his ego, Fr. Cantrell. Clarification appreciated.
ReplyDeleteGreat to see that you have such a catholic readership, Mimi. Who could have guessed? Seriously. Jim Rosenthal next? That would certainly clear things up beyond doubt.
Rmj, I do not believe that the RCC is interested in getting involved in property disputes with TEC. However, that's only my opinion. They're still hurting financially from the child abuse settlements.
ReplyDeleteLapin, your first link is to the letter from Bp. Iker that I quoted in the post, love.
I welcome all readers.
As Lord Chesterfield said of a Society lady, rumored to have given birth, out-of-wedlock, to twins, "I make a point never to believe more than half of what I am told".
ReplyDeleteHey I'm Catholic and welcome... aren't I?
ReplyDeleteOn to the heart of the matter - in communion with the RCC? Um, trying to have it all ways?
Lapin, which half?
ReplyDeleteFran love, your welcome status is settled. You're an honorary Episcopalian. You attended a Eucharist in an Episcopal church at which a woman presided. That's the official initiation ceremony.
Mimi,
ReplyDeleteYou have MADE IT.
If Fr. Cantrell of the Ft. Worth Magisterium is onto your humble, little Louisiana blog, you are the next thing to a genius, or at least close to the infamy of Titus1/9 and the rest of those holy folk at the truly,actually, Anglo-Christian web sites.
I'll bet you'll see a lots of new visitors as a result.
Mazel Tov!
John, Fr Cantrell? Should I know him? Truly, before all the turmoil in TEC and the AC, I hardly even paid attention to my own diocese. The affairs of my little church parish were quite enough for me. Suddenly, I find there's a great big Episcopal and Anglican world out there, and not everyone gets along with everyone else. Quel malheur! I'm still catching up.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I think Fr Cantrell was after Lapin, and not me.