Thanks, as always for speaking up. Your story, and the stories of others like yours, needs to be heard more often within the movement, not only by our own people, but also by those looking in from the outside. Thank you for sharing part of it here.

Second, +Alexis, you must come visit us in Philadelphia sometime soon! It is the best way to see about what Lyngine is talking.

Third, I was recently asked if I would ever “return to Rome.” My response was an immediate “no, I have grown in a different way.” My being IC/OC was not a protest against Rome, or a quick means to ordination because Rome has denied me. They never really denied me anything. My journey into OC/IC Catholicism was and is part of a vocation God begins in us all at birth. The spirituality of IC/OC fits with WHO God is calling me to be, HOW God is calling me to live, and thus enabling me to DO what I believe God is calling me to do. OC/IC fits my vision of a smaller, less autocratic, earlier communal model of Church that worked for several centuries. It brings me joy, not because of what it is NOT, but because of what it is that allows me to be who I am and do what I feel called to do.

Sacramental Christians are not the only ones to have Bishops, Archbishops, etc. There are many examples among our Protestant brethren. They are titles only and for that they are descriptive generally of role and responsibility. Of course they been badly misused by OC/IC churches in that anyone who has the inkling can have the title.

Titles, vestments etc are of little use if thay fail to lift up the people of God and for that to happen the OC/IC Churches have to have people of God in their pews, something very few have. A reason for us all to close down? I don’t think so, but certainly a reason to make us ask what it is that the “lost sheep” are looking for. I doubt that it is pale imitations of what they have already experienced.

Pax
+Ron

We do this in a number of ways – both as outright lies (misrepresenting our numbers) and in more “subtle” means for example how many OC/IC bishops have created and employ Roman Catholic heraldry for themselves? How many OC/IC clergy insist on dressing, and being addressed by Roman and Anglican titles that have absolutely no bearing on how we live our faith on the ground (at one point here in the UK there was a group making “cardinals”!)? How many synods in the movement “establish pseudo-seminaries handing out meaningless “degrees” so that their clergy (namely bishops) can have lots of letters after their names? These are just a few examples that immediately come to mind.

These things make us all look ridiculous, they are an embarrassment, and disrespect not only our brothers and sisters in other sacramental traditions, but also – and more importantly, our own tradition. But this is not the worst part of it as far as I can see – rather this deception, conscious, and unconscious (for some of it is just that – people not thinking about what it is they are doing, and merely employing inherited imagery and constructs without critically assessing how they fit within an OC/IC context) is a contradiction of the very teaching we all claim to practice. Jesus said let your yes mean yes and your no mean no (Mt. 5.37), so why do so many of our brothers and sisters in the movement feel it is necessary to misrepresent the number of members of their community? Jesus points to the religious leaders of his day and says that their works are performed to be “seen”, their dress is to make them look pious and holy, they like to be seen being addressed with grand titles, and given the seat of honour at assemblies (Mt. 23.5-7); why then do so many of our bishops, and clergy draw up mediaeval heraldry (comically employing Roman Catholic and Anglican symbolism), make sure that there are lots of posed “formal” pictures of them in full ecclesiastical drag, and have more incomprehensible letters after their name than those of us who have actually earned them? The issue is simple – they seek the approval of men rather than of God (1Thes. 2.4-6).

But, its not that simple – as this thread has already been exploring – and we owe it to ourselves to ask the tough questions of how we got here, and how do we collectively get ourselves out of this hole. If we don’t begin the process of taking action, we will be (at least in part) responsible for condeming those who come after us repeating the mistakes of the past 90 years, over the course of the next 90 years.

+Shirilau has not had a real congregation under his omiphor since around 2002. He has never pastored a church and his jurisdiction has basically been idle since that time. Perhaps Olsen is referring to the Ecumenical Catholic Communion (+Hickman)? They certaionly have numbers like this but they are not to be confused with +Shirilau.

The problem is of course that there are probably 500+ OC/IC Bishops in North America alone (shake a tree and a few more may drop), many of whom call themselves Ecumenical Catholics. OK, maybe I exagerate just a tad, but we all know I am speaking the basic truth. The OC/IC Moement continues to be a shambles, and at times a sham, and will contine to be so as long as we have religious delusionals in the world.

As to being single issue – I think most miss the point. Whether they be single issue or not, the last thing the world needs is a continuation of the failed examples of Church or Christianity that Rome, Canterbury et al have given us. It is not a matter of church polity, it is a matter of theology.

So much to speak about, so little time Perhaps I will continue another day

Blessings
+Ron
Sydney Australia
http://www.eccaustralia.org

Yes, I think you’re absolutely right – that insecurity is an impediment to our developing a distinctive identity. Only two years ago I saw it happening within my own community and it is very destructive; especially when you have “members” from competing “home churches” who want to be sure that their home church’s agenda is integrated into our OC/IC community. My own response is less than diplomatic – “Bullocks to that! We’re indie, not X – we do not copy others, it’s disingenuous, and shows an enormous disrespect to other communities.”

Your no apologies, no nonsense approach is great – I’m the same way, though some former members in my community were not so comfortable, and would apologise, make excuses, or worse, make things up to “cover” – it forced me into an awkward position of having to find diplomatic ways of both correcting the record; and reminding our own that we do not mislead or apologise for who and what we are – it is against everything Jesus taught us to do so.

I’m constantly re-examining things to make sure that we’re not apologising, or misleading anyone. It’s a good exercise – it makes me sit and think about who we are, what we believe, and what we are doing.

Your point about integrating positive expressions of OC/IC living and history into things like homilies is a good one. I’ve not often heard this in action. Though, I can say that here – in this space – I’ve tried to do just that, focussing solely on our people, and not jumping all over the ecclesiastical board.

I think part of the key here – and it sounds like you are already doing this in your community – is to talk positively and creatively about who we are, and what we are doing – looking forward rather than over our shoulder. I think a corollary to that though is that individual OC/IC communities engage with one another – share ideas, and collaborate on, for example, collecting a reader (as you suggested the other day), or supporting a charity (as I’ve suggested a few times in the past) or . . . . (suggest something here). Mutual friendship, collaboration, encouragement these will dispel insecurity, isolation, and the urge to walk in the shadow of another tradition.

You’ve raised another really good point – and that is using liturgy . . . . as a weapon, a means of protest. I’d like to sit with that for a bit, and give it its own post.

As always, thanks for posting. I’m hoping that some of the other regulars will join in on this one too.

Finally, in homilies and other settings, some preaching on relevant OC/IC history or along the lines of “As an OC/IC parish, we….(something positive here about being OC/IC and what that is like lived out)” also go a long way.

“I’ve often wondered though – how much of this insecurity fed by reaction against X is actually an impedement to our communities developing to their full potential. How much of it really turns people off, turns them away from the community.”—It’s more than just turning people away. It’s also an impediment to really forming a distinct community if the majority of members are very attached to the former tradition in this very negative way. Yes, it does turn newcomers away too…very unfortunate.

Good question at the end there. Yes, I definitely restrict mention of other sacramental denominations in conversations where there is a negative agenda. Being raised RC though, it’s helpful for me to talk about other sacramental denominations just to learn about them and their traditions–but that’s just comparative information–no negative spin. I *visit* non-OC/IC churches and other jurisdictions churches—not as a replacement for my own worship, but again, only to learn about what other folk do. But I also make it clear during introductions that I’m a *visitor* and OC/IC.

Ah, one more thing, we never, ever, ever apologize for who or what we are–never–most especially to new visitors looking for a parish or to friends of the parish from other denominations. And we don’t change what we do or how we act towards one another to conform to visitors expectations. We’re welcoming, but we stay true to our core and never make excuses for it. What you see is what you get–no apologies about our size, the location we’re worshiping in, how we train clergy, what we do or don’t do, our liturgy, our level with formality with each other, etc. We also never say that we are affiliated with this or that larger organization and therefore, “legitimate” because we’re part of a numerically larger group—it’s irrelevant and really just another way of apologizing for who one is. It’s a bit of a take-no-prisoners approach, but I think one of the strengths of our particular community is this absolutely unapologetic way of being OC/IC. It’s been a journey getting there and we’ve had to re-examine our brochures, website, etc to reflect this (and I’m sure we’ve missed something somewhere) so it’s not necessarily an automatic thing and something communities grow into as they begin to define their own identity and gifts.