Okay people, let's try again.

This thread will open on Sunday, giving us all time to take a "time-out".

I have been fielding many, many e-mails and PMs about the Randy Sly discussion, and it is apparent to me that there is a strong depth of feeling on this subject. I have taken the action of removing the entire conversation. Why? Not because the subject is controversial; not because the subject is not worthy of discussion; but rather because the conversation had moved out of the realm of discussing someone's actions -- which is fair game, and into the realm of discussing someone's motives -- which is far more problematic.

Let's stick to actions, and leave motives to God.

I try to be as even-handed as I can when moderating this forum. I have many, many other responsibilities, and sometimes am not in a position to make an instant editorial decision. Please understand, and extend patience to me when a controversy erupts. :rolleyes: Please also note that the person whose post you have just complained to me about, may have also just complained about yours! Yes, this HAS happened -- and recently! :rolleyes:

Some of you may wonder why I jump into some controversies, yet avoid others. The reasons are many. Sometimes, I feel unqualified to speak to a certain issue. On other occasions, I feel that my personal bias may be too strong toward a certain person/issue/subject. But on some other occasions, I may have information in confidence that I just cannot share. The amount of e-mail and the number of phone calls I receive is massive, and much of what I know -- firsthand and NOT hearsay -- I cannot publically comment upon.

Once again: a person's actions are "fair game". Only God can judge the motives.

So with these caveats, we'll re-open this conversation on Sunday. If I have offended anyone through my actions or lack thereof, please accept my apology.

God bless us all!

We are open for business!

Looks like the "Home to Rome Gang" is ahead of their time:
Churches back plan to unite under Pope

Very, VERY interesting! I shall be watching this story with some interest.

Good Morning all,

Some people seem to still getting there feelings hurt by what others have said. I for one am not intentionally trying to hurt anyone.... I for one have been openly processing and I am sorry if others are being offended by my openly sharing my thoughts and concerns. I WILL NOT STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WE WERE ALL DUPED and I for one wasn't paying attention to my signals and speaking up over the past few years. Now I am and I reaaly think it is a shame some people can't except such openess and thinking out louad and taking things to personally. I am not attacking anyone. I have been out for almost 7 months now and I am sharing my thoughts as I have been processing and Thanks Be to God for Mike to start this new forum for any of us to really speak up our minds here. Bless You My Brother for such openess and being such a wonderful friend though my own processing.

I hope those whom are still being "Offended" by what I share can eventually move on. All us have been processing and looking back on our years in the CEC. My question that I ask myself is Why didn't I hear and see the signals - Red Flags going up..... I guess when you finally get out of Dyfunctional group you look back and ask yourself why wasn't I more aware of what was going on around me.

Again many thanks to Mike for opening this space up for us.... :D

Lord Have Mercy on us all and I hope everyone can honestly take a look within themselves ask the same question I am asking myself.. Yes there are some very hard questions to ponder. I am glad for this bridge that led me Home to Rome.

47 Days and Counting Thanks be to God

P.S. The Healing Process can difficult, hard and messy.

Blessing Tony ^_^

Thanks Tony, for the affirmation. The Forum he is referencing is found here: http://z6.invisionfree.com/On_Our_Way_Home...php?showtopic=3
It is not meant as competition, but rather another place of venting, healing and moving on.

I quote from that "other forum"
I do want this to be a place of continued processing and healing--even when it gets messy. I was once a social worker. I learned early on that my first appointments meeting with persons who had been involved in dysfunctional (alcoholic, sexual abuse, religious abuse,...) systems were very messy. A lot of emotion. A lot of anger. It gets better! Part of the process that I helped people with was acknowledging what you wrote--anger at oneself or not speaking up when they saw the red flags. Then the anger at others who perpetrated the dysfunction. Then those who perpetuate the dysfunction. We are not all at the same place in this process. Those who have left, cannot always acknowledge what part they played, etc. This required self confrontation and healing (acknowledgement that I was not only a victim, but a part of the system) (this of course, is not true of children, they are never any part but victim) , and then confrontation of those who were a part of or remain a part of the dysfunctional system. As you acknowledge and heal , you are strengthened to confront the abuser and the abusive system. This is the process many are still in, here.

I left the direct influence of the CEC over 7 years ago. My first confession to my Catholic priest was my "turned inward" anger for not seeing the red flags, for not speaking up, etc. That has been followed up throughout several years of meeting with my confessor as I processed the other aspects of my anger noted above.

For the past several years, I largely ignored the problems within the CEC and hoped they had gotten better. I had very little direct knowledge until the Ancient Future Forum popped up. Then, I realized I have an obligation to those still caught-up in the system. I am at the point now, that I want to SHOUT from the roof tops: "Get out of the dysfunctional system"! Some will heed, some will not. To those who are already out, but not fully cognizant of the role they played, Lord Have Mercy. They will see it and they will need our experience and help to process that.

Tony,

You make an excellent point here -- and it is one which I have heard from many, in many parts of the CEC. But it is true -- you don't see the dysfunction until you're out of it -- and then you ask yourself "Why? Why?? WHY??? did it take so long?" And for each person, the process; the "timeline" is different.

Blessings,

I truly do not mean to stir up a hornet's nest once again, but I have heard from some folks at Cathedral Church of the Intercessor in NY that Bates is wearing the purple of an ABP now.

Does anyone know if he has actually been made an ABP?

-Or-

Does he simply play one in the NE?

Inquiring minds want to know!

I realize this will seem a bit uncharitable, but aren't all the CEC bishops playing the part? I suppose this goes back to what Tony and Mike are talking about. These men were not tried or tested by any competent authority. They were promoted by a communion that hadn't even reached its adolescence. The communion as a whole is a renegade group, having broken (contrary to its propaganda) from every other organized denomination of Christianity, and having found it all wanting, started their own. As has been repeatedly pointed out on this forum, the original orders were lacking, and there is reason to believe it was known to be so by the leaders involved. In light of all that has happened the great majority of men who were bishops have disqualified themselves time without number. So what does being a real archbishop in the CEC mean?

Absolutely nothing!!!

Now, at the risk of offending some who were indeed good shepherds, my comments are not intended to impugn the character of all, but merely to say that there really wasn't much of a system to evaluate these men. Fortunately, by God's grace, some very good men were in those positions. But we are all here rehashing our stories because in too many cases they were not.

In the words of my beloved children:
"wow, just wow".

1)What does the "Most" in "Most Reverend" mean to you?
2)Your sources have not been around that long at Intercessor.
3) The Bishop(no "Arch")in ECUSA that confirmed me many many many many moons ago wore a purple shirt, I swear, it was purple, but maybe he had an "archbishop" complex and needed that in"fuschion" of power that comes from the color. Oh, wait,
ALL of the bishops, suffragans and auxilliary(NO ARCHES, I SWEAR!!) wore PURPLE!!
MAYBE THEY ALL HAD "ARCHBISHOP" COMPLEXES!!

When the last triennial convetion of TEC (ECUSA) was held it was held here in my fair city... I noticed clerical shirts every color of the rainbow when I happened to be passing by their meeting place at a time they must have been breaking... Black clerics were definately not as common.

I always thought it was a way of perhaps standing out that one was NOT Roman... but I don't know that there is a whole meaning to the colors otherwise.

I do know that in Roman diocese some bishops have allowed Perm deacons to wear clerical shirts but have requested that they wear grey and not black.

Clerics in the Indian Churches tend to wear very brightly colord cassocks - many f the bishopw wearing rose.

When it comes to personal episcopal regalia, my personal favorite is Mar Dinkha IV of the Assyrian Church of the East. I like his style - some "sultan chic" meets Archbishop of Canterbury with a touch of Roman Cardinal. It just works for me! All HE is missing is HH Benidict's Prada slippers...

Honestly, my association with any Bishop in any Anglican/Catholic communion has been the purple shirt. Even the bishops in some of the "Church of God in Christ" denominations wear the purple shirt. (I could be wrong on the name of the sect, please forgive me) So, my "inquiring mind" is having a hard time wrapping itself around the issue of the color of Bishop Bates' shirt.

Given the current state of TEC, I'm not surprised there was a "rainbow" of colors!!
(oops, my bad, Mea culpa, Mea culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa).

Anyone heard any news from the HOB meeting last week? Then again, sometimes no news is good news.

This was the only news available online with pics:
http://stmichaels.livejournal.com/1307.html

From the livejournal page:
Date: 2007-02-18 22:10
Subject: House of Bishops 2007, Blessing of the Chrism
Security: Public

On Wednesday night during the Spring 2007 American House of Bishops of the Charismatic Episcopal Church, our bishops gathered together to consecrate the Holy Chrism (holy oil for baptisms and ordinations) and to bless another chrism of oil for healing, both of which will be distributed throughout all the dioceses in the United States. During that service, the Most Rev. Michael Davidson (Provincial Bishop of the Central Province) delivered a word to St. Michael’s Pro-Cathedral (San Clemente, CA) that is not only applicable to all of the CEC, but also to Christians throughout the world.


Using Jeremiah 15:18-21 as the text for his message, Bp. Davidson first addressed the clergy and parishioners of St. Michael’s Church, and the CEC in general, about how we should respond after the tumultuous and painful events that have transpired over the past several months within the CEC.


After going through extremely difficult times, we often become vulnerable to the temptation to believe that God has abandoned us. It is easy for a spirit of pessimism to overtake us, and to become suspicious of those around us. Furthermore, constant introspection about “who we are” will only bring double-mindedness and anxiety that can drive us away from what God has called us to do. Rather, we must believe that God is saying, “You’re OK. I love you. You are in My exact and perfect will. Quit worrying and get on with My commission to you to build My Kingdom.”

In the words of Erwin Raphael McManus, author of The Barbarian Way, we must become a church of barbarians, a church that unleashes unrestrained faith in a world that has lost hope and is bent on self-hatred. McManus goes on to say that “barbarians love to live and live to love…barbarians see the invisible and hear the inaudible because their souls are alive to God.”

Unfortunately, too many denominations, churches, and Christians seek the opposite of the barbarian way by becoming civilized. This is the worst thing that can happen to a church because it requires its “adherents” to give up passion for their First Love. Civilized churches disdain the blood, sweat, and grime that results from the adventure of following our Lord into the wilderness, and prefer the clean and pressed linen of respectability. McManus spells this out clearly: “We need to stop trying to be what everyone else wants us to be, and stop worrying about what everyone else thinks.”

Furthermore, a church that becomes embittered by its circumstances and suspicious of others is one that builds up walls and becomes divided. Subsequently, rules and protocol take the place of love, faith, and hope. Such churches eventually destroy themselves or are left neutralized and ineffective in transmitting the Gospel: God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting men’s sins against them.

Instead, we, the Charismatic Episcopal Church, must again fall in love with Christ as the chief of the barbarians, a chief whose unceasing love draws all men and women of goodwill into a wild tribe that is “insolent enough to crash the gates of hell.” With the Lion of the Tribe of Judah leading the way, we must move together in unity as a pride of lions that stands against the religious spirit that seeks to bring mankind into bondage by forcing men to become “civilized.”

For the Charismatic Episcopal Church, “Our spiritual legacy is that we belong to the barbarian tribe."

:blink:

Oh My....... :o :unsure: :blink:

and very very scary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :blink:

Wellll Kelly! I wondered where you had been! So good of you to drop in for this occasion!

Just waiting for someone to take a swipe at Bates to come back out swinging eh??

For a bishop that was so emphatic about NOT wanting to be a bishop;
for a bishop that continually talks about how the bishopric was nearly forced on him;
for a bishop that says how much of a burden it is to be bishop over a wide area until the public listing is announced in clerguy retreats and he cannot conceal his glee at his domain;
for a bishp who continually talkerd about how he was a deacon first (and in the beging of my relationship with him he indeed appeared that way to me)...-

...he certainly has an unusual way of suddenly (yes suddenly Kelly...and if you truly are at the Cathedral you have to admit it too) changing from his typical black shirt (that he always used to wear) and gold pectoral cross to the "Purple of Royalty."

Matter of fact, I remember him specifically bragging about NOT wearing the purple and not wanting to be recognized in airports and such. How quaint.

How gullible must be those that listen to him now.
+++++++++++
Well, doesn't that mean anything to YOU Kelly? It certainly does to me. And in his professional Psychologist world it means something too.

AND my sources have probably been around a lot longer than you have and have known Bates for considerably longer. If you have known him as long, you would have to admit the "change of late".

Feeling important now is he?

By the way, we aren't talking about ECUSA here.

Good to have you back though! Keep up the good work!

(Yes, I think he has several complexes besides the one that comes from the color of his shirt.)

A great deal was made of the color of the clerics in CEC. Color denoted rank.

Bates always wore black as a bishop until recently. Something changed. My question was "what changed?"

Perhaps Kelly was so caught up in her bliss that she didn't notice the change of color when it occurred.

Hey, it happens!

Loose Canon,

Thanks for the info and link. The more I read, the more Bp. Painter's letter about cultic influence in the CEC comes to mind.

So now they're quoting McManus, who's made some interesting quotes such as "The greatest enemy to the movement of Jesus Christ is Christianity." Is the next step going to be the CEC declaring themselves a "Barbarian Church" that is not part of Christianity? The mere fact the "word of knowledge" to the whole church quotes this guy demonstrates how spiritually rudderless the CEC is.

BTW, the "barbarian" reference is interesting to say the least. I suspect that "barbarianism" in the context of being brutal and self-serving had already entered the minds of many who have crossed the CEC hierarchy.

Indeed they are Patrick.

My point over the past several months (including this about the change of Bates Shirt clor) is to point out the hypocracy of the CEC clergy to those still trapped in the Cult of Personality that is the CEC.

Some of course will never see past the purple haze caused by the koolaid.

Ahh, we must fervantly pray for them!

Pax.

JPJ

I agree, Tony.

The sickness continues. The inmates are running the asylum. And the people in the pews are the ones who are suffering.

Oh My.......

and very very scary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Next I suppose they will be quoting watchman nee! :o :o If memory serves me some have said (in a old thread) that some CEC parishes recommend his writings

Watchman Nee? Yes he is the Patron Saint to Bp. Kessler as far as Church Government goes. He can not recommend him highly enough.

Post removed by author.

McManus says, "Nothing is more dangerous to a revolution than winning. When a revolution wins, it must face the prospect of becoming an institution. No better example of this exists than when Constantine began mandating national baptisms. Christianity changed from a movement to an institution, from a global revolution to a world religion. You could now become a Christian without ever having met Jesus Christ personally. This was a bad thing-like keeping the shell and tossing the egg."

Comment: Isn't a revolution all about winning? Why revolt if you do not plan on winning? That is an utterly stupid statement. He then asserts that institutes are wrong. Institutes are established customs and it is no great wonder why a Baptist like McManus would be saying this. Finally, his idea of one becoming a Christian without receiving the Holy Spirit aka meeting Jesus personally is true if you think that an "altar call" makes you a Christian. Hmmm...

He continues, "The irony in this is that the force of Christianity first changed the Roman world and then relinquished its power in the name of accommodation. It’s easy to see the difference between Christianity as a religion and Christianity as a revolution when we look back to the days of Constantine and the Dark Ages that followed. It’s more difficult to see that difference in our contemporary environment because we are standing in the middle of it. Our great awakenings were born through men and women who could see that the church had lost her way. They led the church back to the third day: from death to resurrection. They called God’s people out of the apathetic to the passionate."

Comment: I smell "Gene Edwards"! Did Constantine mandate national baptisms? If you start off with a faulty premise you will end up with a false conclusion. He then praises Luther and Calvin for "resurrecting" the Church. This is classic Protestant horse manure. Additionally, was Christianity intended to be a revolution? Ironically, in Scripture religion is praised whereas revolution is condemned. (See St James on this, understanding that religion is a part of Christianity and not the thing itself.) His rhetoric of anti-institutionalism, anti-religion revolution and bridal mysticism are the new Evangelical selling points akin to that of Rick Warren and Joel Osteen. It is more about style over substance and delivery over content anyway for them. Therefore, I find it of little surprise that Davidson would give a "word" quoting McManus.

Erwin McManus also says, “When we focus on church structure, we kill the movement, we need more disorganization, more chaos.”

...and blue-rimmed glasses to show the world we are hip...B)

The only thing worse than organized religion is disorganized religion. Surely the CEC should know better by now.

"Barbarian" is a really interesting way for describing what the CEC is all about. It's even more interesting that it's coming as a word of encouragement from Bp. Davidson. These comments jogged my memory of something I read here several weeks ago and I had to go back and find it -- something that was given surprisingly little attention: the series of questions that Fred George wrote to Bp. Davidson and that he posted here on February 3rd. Does anyone else remember these?

6) I heard that when one of your clergy left, you allowed your wife to preform a pagan death curse on him and his family. This is troubling. Why was this done when the CEC (and you) claim to be Christian?

7) Why do you let your dancer run your services? Are you aware that many of their moves and actions are actually pagan and satanic styles of worship? I had to stop coming to church with you because of it. It is so far from Christian. Why are you so blind, or have they black mailed you?

Pagan death curses and satanic liturgical dance. I know that the issue of liturgical dancing is a church-by-church decision, but pagan death curses? Performed by Bp. Davidson's wife?!? Sounds pretty barbarian to me.

Actually, while Bp. Davidson's message was probably meant to convey a need to embrace a passionate faith, what it probably ended up conveying to folks in the CEC was blatant permission to continue on with excesses and libertinism already running rampant, especially in parishes like St. Michael's.

Also, since Bp. Kessler is so fond of Nee, I wonder how much of Nee's work gets incorporated into the lectures or reading lists for St. Michael's Seminary?

TLFS

P.S. Barbarians were pagans who killed innumerable Christians.

Was this particular article posted already? I've been away. Of course, it isn't news to the forum.


Former Charismatic Episcopal archbishop joins Roman Catholic Church
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=8671


Richmond, Feb 19, 2007 / 11:18 am (CNA).- A former archbishop of the Charismatic Episcopal Church (CEC), Randolph Sly, has been received into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, along with his wife, Sandra.

Sly was a founder of the CEC in 1992. He recently shared how their decision to join the Roman Catholic Church came from an extended time of discernment. They were welcomed into the Church in November 2006 at St. Benedict Parish in Richmond. They currently reside in northern Virginia in Potomac Falls and are members of Our Lady of Hope Parish.

“We were at a point last summer, personally and ecclesiastically in the CEC, where I felt a change was coming,” he said in a statement released over the Christian Newswire. “Sandy and I had found ourselves moving deeper into catholic Christianity …. More recently, the draw toward full communion in the Roman Catholic Church had grown greater and became a very strong call in the six months prior to our conversion.”

Prior to his time with the CEC, Sly was an important voice of the “Convergence Movement”, which worked to draw together the evangelical, charismatic, and liturgical/sacramental streams of the church.

He has been in active pastoral ministry for more than 30 years, first with the Wesleyan (Methodist) Church and then with the Charismatic Episcopal Church, where he last served as archbishop of the eastern province.

Currently, Sly is president of Common Good, a movement dedicated to the Church’s social teachings. A published author and communications specialist, he is working on several book and media projects.

I remember them. And I was a priest -- and Canon Theologian -- at the time. Davidson was suspicious of me from Day One.

I was not present for the "death curse" but I heard the story from multiple sources.

I will say -- as one who has celebrated Mass at the Cathedral -- that the influence of the liturgical dancers at the Cathedral is, in my opinion, troublesome at BEST. I had to say the prayers of consecration -- while the lead "dancer" -- DRESSED IN EUCHARISTIC VESTMENTS -- was "dancing" in front of the Altar. When I coordinated the Central Province Convocation in Wisconsin, I had many, MANY fights with the "liturgical dancers" who wanted to control the ENTIRE worship -- and it was SICK -- and I confronted Davidson about it.

On one occasion at Davidson's cathedral, I left in the middle of the "liturgy" literally pleading the Blood of Jesus, because of the occultic influences. The priest who left with me, also having left the CEC, was raised, as an Hispanic, in an syncranistic tradition (with occult influences) -- and had similar feelings. I have heard/experienced similar statements from others.

In my opinion, you're being very generous!!!!!!! :) :) :)

I would be very interested in knowing the answer to a couple of questions:

1) Why, if Sly is living and worshiping in the Diocese of Arlington, was he received in the Diocese of Richmond?

2) Why, if Sly had been dealing with these issues for months (at least 6, according to his statements) did he feel the need to deliberately wreck the entire CEC/Catholic dialogue on his way out?

3) Why, if Sly had been dealing with these issues for months, was he still acting as an "Archbishop" 24 hours before he was received?

4) Why is it, when the other 7 bishops who have left the CEC, have tried to take into consideration their clergy and laity -- Sly has abandoned all?

I'm not saying this as a "newcomer to the situation". I have known Sly since 1992; and I have been aware of the CHAOS -- yes, CHAOS -- that has been left in his wake.

I rejoice that he and his wife have embraced the Catholic faith.

I still mistrust him -- as one who has personal, first-hand, experience for almost 15 years. A true "conversion" would include amendment of life -- and repentance of past wrong-doing.

Roses are red

Violets are blue

I smell something fishy

And it ain't lobster stew! :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Well I do not know the man. I do not know his heart. But to play angel's advocate, Israel Zolli Chief Rabbi of Rome and convert to the Catholic Church in 1946 conducted rabbinical duties up until the day he announced his decision to convert.

I don't know much but I certainly know I CANNOT answer your questions.

This Pollyanna is ALWAYS hoping for the best.

I always hope that IS lobster bisque (not stew, yech!) I smell. I just love bisque.

The CEC leadership claims to be barbarians.

Clarity finally seems to be coming to his sick and dysfunctional family.

-Jim+

This message goes right along with the motto allegedly inscribed on Davidson ring: "Lock and Load". Though I have not seen it personally, I have certainly heard him use the phrase on many occasions. Each time, I shudder and shake my head.

I would be interested in the answers to these as also Tony's question about informing the parish.

I have taken the liberty of forwarding these questions to Dcn. Keith Fournier, founder of Common Good and to Randy Sly for comment. I will let you know what I hear.

Commence holding of breath! ;)

I will say out loud and in bold all caps


THE CEC IS A CULT AND AN OCCULT

David Z,
This is just how I understand it. Of course, you are an insider.

Why was I received into the Church at Randolph AFB under the Military Archdiocese of America when the Archdiocese of San Antonio was right here? It is circumstances and opportunity. Besides do you think anyone really cared? If I knew a bishop in Timbuktu would consider my past experience and education and grant me favor and a waiver, I'd be headed east.

How did he wreck the dialogue?

Did the meeting in PA with Pastoral Provision liaison Fr. Stetson last June let the CEC know that intercommunion was off the table and absorption as a communion was impossible knowing that many had been Catholic prior to their CEC involvement, such as Bishop Lipka (laicized Roman Catholic priest) and Bishop Zampino (cradle Catholic)? This is a serious question and not at all rhetorical.

Sometime after 1997, Bps Zampino and Sly were commissioned by the CEC HOB to seek intercommunion, not full absorption, with the Catholic Church.

Concerning absorption, the married bishops would have to become priests. Were any of them willing to "throw the ring into the fire"? (It appears only Sly has been willing)

Concerning intercommunion, did Adler later rebuff any desire for intercommunion after a promising meeting of Zampino in Rome with officials? I was told he did. Of course, why would he want to join the Roman Catholic Church when he was just as much a Patriarch as the Patriarch of Rome, in his own eyes? (Besides, he gets to be married, own great personal wealth due to heave tithes, sing contemporary praise songs with liturgical dancers, speak in tongues for 12 hours a day and meet Jesus face to face at San Clemente's in Rome.)

What was the status of the CEC and Rome last May?

Did Bishops Zampino and Sly want to spearhead a move for CEC priests/churches to enter the Catholic Church or form a separate denomination/ communion if Adler didn't resign or if the Catholic Church would not consider absorption? Did Sly and Zampino have the same agenda?

Concerning absorption, did the June meeting in PA have anything to do with Sly realizing that absorption of whole churches/ communities into the Catholic Church was impossible knowing Zampino's Catholic rearing and others like him who would have to surrender priesthood altogether? This is, in addition, to other issues such as annulments. Sly realized he could become a married priest if the bishop will allow it but Zampino could not under any circumstances? Did Sly then realize that a new communion/ denomination were really a perpetuation of Protestantism on top of apparent rebellion against Adler and the HOB? Is this what he repented of in Marrieta, GA once Adler got wind of it from a clergy in his archdiocese and confronted Sly? Was Sly's repentance more toward God for the whole Protestant perpetuation rather than a schism against the CEC?

Concerning the desire to spearhead a move to create a new denomination, Sly isn't the one doing this. Howbeit, I am an outsider looking in.

http://thenewliturgicalmovement.blogspot.c...ference_10.html

"Father Philips (my priest) stood up in the back and inquired about the possibility of non-Canterbury Anglicans (the CEC sort) going through the same canonical process that the clergy and parishes of the Episcopal Church had in joining up under the Pastoral Provision. It’s important to note here that there were quite a few clergy of the Continuing Anglican movement in the audience. Stetson was optimistic, though he said it was Rome, not Bill Stetson, who made these decisions. He said, just ask. You have to do the asking if anything is going to happen."

The CEC asked and got their answer, IMHO. The answer, "CEC bishops, go back to black. Take off the purple and wear the black. 'Throw the ring into the fire'. If you, as a clergy, were already Catholic, do like Fr. Jim Pinto and lay it at the Cross. CEC folks, quit practicing contraception and if you were divorced and remarried, repent!"

Never leave a job until you have another one lined up.

How has he done this? By becoming Catholic he is saying to the archdiocese, "Follow me, as I follow Christ! In the meantime send your tithes where you wish." (It was a bold and smooth move) B)

Ken, from this quote

and this one taken from Mike's board

That Sly will possibly become a priest.

Why is this now just coming to light?

Moderator's Note:

Greetings, all, and a blessed Ash Wednesday to all of you.

After mutually conferring, David B. and I have agreed that the CEC discussion has served its purpose. All CEC threads will be closed. If the CEC happens to come up in another discussion, that is fine -- but there will be no more threads exclusively devoted to the CEC.

Blessings,