FIFNA PRESIDENT REAFFIRMS 'CATHOLIC ORDER' TO ECUSA FAITHFUL

FIFNA PRESIDENT REAFFIRMS 'CATHOLIC ORDER' TO ECUSA FAITHFUL Calls for a new North American Anglican Province

BEDFORD, TX (6/24/2003)--The President of The Episcopal Church's largest traditionalist organization says that "we have no faith of our own, but only that which is Biblical, Evangelical, Catholic and Apostolic - the revealed religion of historic Christianity."

Addressing delegates to the Forward in Faith 16th Annual Assembly in St. Vincent's Cathedral, the Rev. Dr. David L. Moyer said that because of the growing apostasy of the ECUSA, many are now moving (some kicking and screaming) towards the historic faith as it is found in "sacred Scripture and sacred tradition."

"We have come to the point (I believe), and the Global South leaders have been the clearest about this, to state that the new morality being advanced, celebrated, and codified by the revisionists is a salvation issue. Portions of the Church are leading people to hell."

Moyer took a swipe at the ordination of women to the priesthood, saying that women's ordination was also a salvation issue in light of our Lord's teaching in St. John's gospel Chapter 6.

"Forward in Faith has consistently said there is no assurance of sacramental validity when women (who have been purportedly ordained) administer the sacraments of the Church Catholic of which we believe the Anglican Communion is a branch."

"I know this sounds harsh and rigid to many, but the Church has no authority to do what she has done, and the consequences are theologically very serious and, I would say, of an eternal proportion."

Citing Archbishop John Hepworth, leader of the Traditional Anglican Communion, Moyer said that while sanctioning homosexual practice is heretical, women's ordination is schismatic, because it destroys the ability of the Church to bring salvation to the human race.

Moyer said he rejoiced that "our position has been affirmed by our allies in North America who don't believe this, but who now respect our position and know that it is held by the majority of Christians in all places."

Moyer pointed to the recent document published by Bishop John Rodgers a leader in the Anglican Mission in America.

Moyer praised the establishment of the Anglican Communion Network, and sad he was proud that FIFNA was among the six national Convocations.

"I will work for this Convocation to be a gathering spot for those Catholic Anglicans within and outside the official Anglican Communion."

The Network has stated that "we will be known for our commitment to evangelical faith and catholic order." The basis of the "catholic order" commitment is the existence of the FIFNA Convocation and three Network Diocese that uphold the Church's historic position for an all male episcopate and priesthood.

Moyer called on the other Network bishops to welcome bishops into their diocese who maintain this historic catholic position so that FIFNA priests and parishes can freely honor FIFNA's Communion guidelines, and also to encourage such priests to affiliate with the FIFNA Convocation.

Moyer praised the six North American Anglican entities that is making common cause for the gospel of Jesus Christ, and said four of the six entities are solidly committed to the historic position for Holy Orders.

The traditionalist priest said he rejoiced in the fact that the American Anglican Council had come to the point that FIFNA did in 1997 that ECUSA is irreformable and that New Province of North American Anglicanism should be pursued.

"I rejoice in the study done by the AMIA that affirms the Church's historic teaching for the episcopate and priesthood, but said the issue of the diaconate needs "further study."

Moyer praised closer ties w between FIFNA and the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), the Anglican Province in America and the Reformed Episcopal Church.

Moyer observed that a sign of the growing realignment was the recent joint plan of the TAC and FIFAustralia to see Fr. David Chislett of the Anglican Church in Australia be consecrated a suffragan bishop in Archbishop John Hepworth and that FIFNA nominees for election as bishops be consecrated as well.

Moyer blasted "diversity" and "inclusivity" notions promulgated by The Episcopal Church saying, "When Christ comes again at the end of history, he will not marry a harem."

Moyer said that his hope for Anglican Catholics was for reunion with the Holy See and with orthodoxy. "I respectfully remind all of our SSC bishops and priests that our Society is historically committed to this reunion. ARCIC's 1999 "Gift of Authority" is to be our guide and goal."

Moyer said that his hope for Anglican Catholics was for reunion with the Holy See and with orthodoxy.

Welcome Home!

A Brief Description and History

Our Lady of the Atonement Church is a Roman Catholic parish of the Archdiocese of San Antonio, and is the first of several “personal parishes” erected in the United States for the Anglican Use Liturgy. This parish has no affiliation with the so-called “Continuing Anglican Movement,” nor with any branch of the Episcopal or Anglican churches. Rather, its members, many of whom are converts from the Episcopal Church, have been granted permission to retain some elements of the Anglican liturgical heritage while being fully Roman Catholic. Throughout the world the Catholic Church has numerous liturgical rites all under the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and the Church has always taught that there can be legitimate diversity in unity. While the liturgy used at Our Lady of the Atonement Parish is not a separate Rite, it is the only approved variation of the Latin Rite in the United States.

The creation of the “Anglican Use” parishes stemmed from the statement made by Pope John Paul II in 1980, as a result of a proposal from the bishops of this country to develop terms under which former Episcopal clergymen and other members of the Episcopal Church could be admitted to full communion in the Catholic Church while still retaining some elements of their liturgy, tradition and devotional life. On August 15, 1983, a small group of converts from the Episcopal Church was received into the Roman Catholic Church by the Most Reverend Patrick F. Flores, Archbishop of San Antonio, in the Cathedral of San Fernando. At the same ceremony, the Reverend Christopher G. Phillips, also a convert to the fulness of the Catholic Faith, was ordained by the Archbishop to be their pastor. These eighteen people were the founding members of Our Lady of the Atonement Parish. For the first time in the history of the Western Church a group of Protestants was welcomed into the bosom of Holy Mother Church with a Pastoral Provision which includes the right to seek the establishment of Personal Parishes under the authority of diocesan bishops, a unique liturgical use, particular devotional practices, and a married clergy on a limited basis.

FULL TEXT

This whole issue is one that leaves a lot of us who are across the aisle from the Anglo-Catholics with contradictory feelings. On the one had (and despite the fact that some parts of our theology undoubtedly annoy them at least as much as some parts of their theology annoy us) if most or all of the A-C folks do cross the Tiber many of us believe that Anglicanism will be the poorer because of it. [to say nothing of the fact that those of us Charismatics who tend toward a more High Church approach to the liturgy wont have the "nose bleed high church" A-C's to hide behind.]

On the other hand, as has been pointed out here and elsewhere, it would appear (at least from the outside) that theologically Rome would appear to be a better 'fit' than Anglicanism, at least for the very conservative A-C parishes. Of course those who do cross the Tiber will then find themselves having to deal with the RC heretics (though Heaven knows, they've gotten a lot of practice dealing with ours); but the overall effect of the A-C move to RC would be to add conservative Catholic parishes to dioceses which may be in need of just such bolstering.

tough call, either way.

On the one had (and despite the fact that some parts of our theology undoubtedly annoy them at least as much as some parts of their theology annoy us) if most or all of the A-C folks do cross the Tiber many of us believe that Anglicanism will be the poorer because of it.

Excuse my continued ignorance; I still do not understand the difference between "you" and "them", other than they are more conservative, while you are 'charismatic', whatever that means.

The term 'charismatic', to a catholic implies someone who shouts "Allelulia" or "Praise the Lord", speaks in tongues, does 'hands on' healings, etc. Vatican II saw the birth of the 'charismatic' movement in the Catholic Church. It enjoyed some success for a few years, then dropped off the radar screen.

"High Church" has no equivalent meaning, at least for me. What is that?

On the other hand, as has been pointed out here and elsewhere, it would appear (at least from the outside) that theologically Rome would appear to be a better 'fit' than Anglicanism, at least for the very conservative A-C parishes.

Theologically ... a better "fit?" Perhaps I am misunderstanding something here; "yes" I am definitely misunderstanding what you are saying. Christ died, was resurrected and will come again. Where is the 'fit' in that?

Christ said: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52). His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56). Notice that Jesus made no attempt to soften what he said, no attempt to correct "misunderstandings," for there were none. Our Lord’s listeners understood him perfectly well. They no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically. If they had, if they mistook what he said, why no correction?

Of course those who do cross the Tiber will then find themselves having to deal with the RC heretics (though Heaven knows, they've gotten a lot of practice dealing with ours); but the overall effect of the A-C move to RC would be to add conservative Catholic parishes to dioceses which may be in need of just such bolstering.

That is a judgement call on your part!

Christ said to Peter: "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 16:19). In ancient times, keys were the hallmark of authority. A walled city might have one great gate; and that gate had one great lock, worked by one great key. To be given the key to the city—an honor that exists even today, though its import is lost—meant to be given free access to and authority over the city. The city to which Peter was given the keys was the heavenly city itself. This symbolism for authority is used elsewhere in the Bible (Is. 22:22, Rev. 1:18).

Note that Christ did not speak to the disciples in Greek. He spoke Aramaic, the common language of Palestine at that time. In that language the word for rock is kepha, which is what Jesus called him in everyday speech (note that in John 1:42 he was told, "You will be called Cephas"). What Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 was: "You are Kepha, and upon this kepha I will build my Church."

"And the gates of hell shall not prevail!"

Yes, the Roman Catholic Church has heterodox bishops but, ultimately, throughout the history of the Roman Catholic Church, despite some truly bad popes, never once was church doctrine modified or changed.

What is holding you back?

Okay - I guess the 'us and them' cast of that last post would have been confusing to someone outside of Anglicanism. Let me try to explain.

Even leaving the heretics totally out of the picture for the moment, Anglicanism isn't really one theology as much as it is a spectrum of theologies. On the one end of the spectrum you have the ultraconservative Anglo-Catholic folks such as Fr. Moyer and FIFNA. On the other end of the spectrum you have ultra-calvinist Anglicans who, theologically, are about half a step away from some of the Calvinists here on Free Republic. Most of us fall somewhere in between, but all are (or are being driven by the heretics to become) increasingly theologically conservative. What's not obvious from this is that there is a largely unbridgable gap between the the High Church end of the Protestant part of the Anglican spectrum [generally referred to as 'Evangelical' though it in fact includes everyone who is not Anglo-Catholic] and the Low Church 'don't sweat the small stuff' side of the Anglo-Catholic part of the spectrum. Two competing theologies, if you will.

Overgeneralized differences between those of us on the Evangelical side and those who are on the Anglo-Catholic side include (but are not limited to) the following:
[to compare this to the Anglo-Catholic side just think of them as similar to conservative Roman Catholics, only without a pope, and with a few interesting interpretations of things like the Council of Trent, or papal infallibility].

Anyway, for those of us on the Evangelical side [and I'm including all Charismatics in this *except* those who are openly Charismatic Anglo-Catholics] our theology:
1. Refuses to accept the sacrifice of the Mass and any form of sacerdotal priesthood. [Our priests are sacramental and do NOT represent Christ either in the Mass or elsewhere]
2. Denies the existance of purgatory in it's entirity.
3. Denies the efficacy of any direct invocation of, or appeals for intercession by the saints.
4. Denies the immaculate conception of, any unique heavenly influence of, perpetual viriginity of, and bodily assumption into Heaven of, Mary the mother of Jesus. [We understand Mary, as the 'Theotokos' to be honored as a model of obedience and service to God, as well as a model of a good mother, and obviously Jesus being both true God and true Man loved His mom, but we don't go much of anywhere beyond that]
5. Are all over the map on the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Those of us (including many Charismatics) who hold to a high view of the sacraments tend to see the Real Presence manifested by the Holy Spirit in a miraculous change to the bread and wine as a response to the Eucharistic prayers, but this is by means held universally - many low church Evangelicals tend to be queasy about saying exactly how and where the Real Presence is made manifest in the Eucharist and in some ways appear close to the Methodist theology of a 'spiritual change of the elements'.
6. While one must always be careful not to be disrespectful of the consecrated elements, we do not hold to any special effectiveness of any sort which might be associated with displaying, praying in the presence of, or otherwise carrying around a piece of consecrated bread. [i.e. no benediction or adoration of the blessed sacrament, etc.] Christ is present and hears our prayers without such things, and those sorts of activities would appear to encourage idolatry.

...and I could go on. The bottom line is that those of us who aren't Anglo-Catholic are Protestants, and as such cannot possibly make the leap across the Tiber.

Now for the reason that I listed Charismatics as a third category. The fundamental basis of Charismatic theology is that *all* of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit which were present in New Testament times are still present today. Most Charismatic Anglicans tend to be primarily Evangelical in their theology. We also, for various reasons tend to make both some Anglo-Catholics and some Evangelicals queasy, so out of politeness, more than anything else, we tend to self-identify as Charismatics first, and Evangelicals second. Please don't get the wrong idea here: most Charismatic Anglicans are still *very* Anglican - no swinging from the chandeliers or rolling in the aisles here! None the less, because of the discomfort level induced by our theology on some other portions of Anglicanism, we also tend to be careful to avoid the appearance of implying that our theology is identical to non-Charismatic Evangelical or Anglo-Catholic theology.

Now obviously all of the above hardly constitutes a definitive answer to your questions, but hopefully it provides a window into the differing perspectives of the various major Christian portions of Anglicanism. Oh, and the next time you get to thinking how tough it is to hold Roman Catholicism on track and on all four wheels, just stop and imagine what it's like for us!

Now obviously all of the above hardly constitutes a definitive answer to your questions, but hopefully it provides a window into the differing perspectives of the various major Christian portions of Anglicanism.

Thank you! I had no idea that the Anglican Church spanned such a spectrum. In the Catholic Church, all beliefs come from the Bible and are expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Have you ever read it? If not, why not? If not, would you ever consider reading it? The fundamentals of our faith are so clearly spelled out in that one book with everything sourced back to the Bible.

Perhaps I am too simple a person. I have never challenged the church on anything because it so clearly spelled out. What is there to misunderstand?

On the one end of the spectrum you have the ultraconservative Anglo-Catholic folks such as Fr. Moyer and FIFNA. On the other end of the spectrum you have ultra-calvinist Anglicans who, theologically, are about half a step away from some of the Calvinists here on Free Republic.

That is quite a broad spectrum of differences! While it may appear that way to outsiders, it just isn't the case within the Catholic Church. With 2 churches and 22 different liturgies, WE profess ONE faith! Those who are in disagreement are labeled schismatic. Oftentimes, the greatest disagreement amongst the catholics in this forum, stems from what constitutes an appropriate liturgy. (with 22 recognized liturgies, including the Anglican-Use Rite, our differences can easily be accomodated), unless one takes it to the next level and refuses to recognize the pope. At that point, they are indeed schismatic and no longer in union with the Holy Father.

The bottom line is that those of us who aren't Anglo-Catholic are Protestants, and as such cannot possibly make the leap across the Tiber.

How regrettable! I suppose that limits your options. At this point, what is left for you other than to accept what your own church has ordained or align yourselves to some other protestant denomination.

For what it is worth, might I suggest that you at the very least, tune in to EWTN on Monday nights at 8pm to watch Marcus Grodi's "live" program 'The Journey Home'. It affords an opportunity to listen to others, like you, who have traversed this wilderness. Some of Grodi's guests have tackled this situation in the most extraordinary ways. It is not uncommon to hear someone discuss how adverse they were to the RC Church. One of his guests talked about how he had used scripture to lure catholics out of the church.

Marcus also has his own web site with a forum where anyone, like yourself, can post questions and discuss these differences with other protestants. I'm not suggesting that this is a definitive answer but it would be informative for you to meet up with others in the same situation.

"The Journey Home" is transmitted live via satellite and cable on the EWTN channel, Monday evenings at 8pm. It is a call-in program or you can email the guest. Check your local cable listings for station and time.

Marcus Grodi's web site is:

Coming Home Network

The CHNetwork is committed to assisting and standing beside all inquirers, serving as a friend and an advocate.

You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by simply asking. In the meantime, I will keep you in my prayers. We live in very difficult times. There are no simple answers but many doors are open to those who are willing to enter them. God bless you on your own journey.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.