Conversation - What Anglicanism Offers The Modern World

Please pardon our interruptions! We had a power outage during the recording.

Substack article: Why I'm Anglican and Orthodox by Dr. Ryan Partovi

Email us: episcopalianpodcast@gmail.com

Thanks for listening!

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:38

Welcome to the Episcopalian thoughtful conversations about theology, church history, and the life of the church today within the Anglican communion. I'm Ann Jambour, and this podcast in this podcast we explore the beauty, truth, and depth of the Anglican tradition, its liturgy, theology, and wisdom for following Christ in the modern world. Some episodes will be conversations, others will be reflections or homilies, but all of them are rooted in a love for the historic, orthodox, and Catholic faith as it has been expressed in Anglicanism. Today I'm joined by my friend, Dr. Ryan Partovi, as we begin a conversation about Anglican identity, church authority, and the future of the Episcopal Church. Good morning. How are you today, Ryan?

SPEAKER_01 1:31

Yeah, how are you? I'm doing well.

SPEAKER_00 1:34

You and I have had so many fascinating conversations about theology and church history. And we finally decided to record some of our conversations on podcasts. And we hit on that a little bit in our first episode that's available on YouTube. But before we jump into some of those big ideas, I'd love to start with um a simple question. So how did you how did you first become interested in Anglican theology and church history?

SPEAKER_01 2:07

Oh well, you know, I'm I was a history major in college. Um and I, you know, I grew up in the Episcopal Church from my mom. My mom is I think a third or yeah, third generation Episcopalian, so I'm a fourth generation. Um and we would go to church only a few times a year. So to me it was kind of a special occasion and it was a special event. And I remember being in like second and third and fourth grade as I was learning how to read, like kind of looking at the the Book of Common Prayer, you know, trying to follow along with the order of the mass and also to um learn more about what it, you know, what was in the back and you know, the catechism and that kind of stuff. And um, you know, what are these creeds? Why do we have three different ones? You know, just like very curious. I was always curious as a child. So um, and then I think in history, you know, learning about European history, learning about sort of the the version we learn in in history, which is this very sort of caricaturized version of like, oh, you know, Henry VIII wanted a divorce and and basically decided to start his own church because the Pope wouldn't give him one, which is, you know, now I know kind of a ludicrous framing, but I would say that um, yeah, I learned that. And then I also, when I went to college, I had not been confirmed yet. So I was baptized when I was nine, which is kind of rare. Most most uh most people are that are baptized in our church are either baptized as infants or as adults. But I was in kind of an interesting situation where um my parents, for whatever reason, chose to baptize me when all of the siblings had been born. So all three of us were baptized on the same day. So my sister was a baby, my brother was probably four or five, and I was nine. My brother must have been five. Um, so I remember my baptism, which is, again, you know, not super typical for a child to remember their baptism. Um, but it was something that was very meaningful to me at the time. And I also had my first communion officially that same day. And um then um then I went off to college. And when I was at college at Emory, I met a guy who was who'd also grown up in the Episcopal Church, also had never been confirmed. And uh the main reason why I hadn't gotten confirmed is because we moved from the Diocese of Texas to the Diocese of Fort Worth. And my mom was not super keen on the Diocese of Fort Worth because uh we had actually gone um to basically, I know we weren't, we said we weren't going to talk about locations, but who knows where we are now is all I will say. At the time, uh we were at the Diocese of Fort Worth, and the Diocese of Fort Worth Fort Worth was not uh ordaining women, and so because of that, um we didn't attend Episcopal Church for a little while, and then uh I ended up going off to college, and then at college I met this gentleman who had had also not been confirmed, and we said, you know, we really should do that, and we were gonna do it together, but then I ended up transferring colleges. So I came home, and at the time uh I said, you know, mom, I really would like to get confirmed. Um, and I had studied, I had studied, uh, I had taken a class on Christianity from the Reformation to the present. I'd taken a class on medieval heresies, I'd, you know, inside of my history degree, right? I had taken a class on uh veiling in the Muslim world and Islam, and you know, so I had explored, I had I had taken three classes on Chinese history, thought, and culture. Um, so I had explored Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, uh, both versions of Islam, pretty much every form of Christianity you could imagine at this point, you know, in for anywhere from Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism all the way to like, you know, holiness and Pentecostal churches. So at this point, I kind of felt like, all right, no, I really do want to be Episcopalian, right? Like this is like this is my thing. Uh, because I've been taking classes in college about all these different other religions and topics and areas of the world and learning about the history and understanding and really kind of it led me to really actually want to be confirmed because I was like, no, this is really what I believe. Uh, I think this is the the closest approximation, not like I am 100% orthodox on every topic, right? I mean, as as your dad once said, I'm a heretic in some ways, you know. I'm like, yeah, I identify with that topic. You know, I'm a heretic in some ways too. And a heretic, for those who don't know, I'm the way I'm using that term is in the is in the very literal definition of the word, which is somebody who has a it's a view that is outside of the the majority, right? So the majority view is the orthodox view. This is this is a more modern way to frame this, but it's like if the orthodox view is what the majority holds, and the heretical view is what a minority holds. So I'm in the minority, certainly, on some topics. And uh at the same time, uh the beautiful thing about the Anglican communion and the Episcopal Church in particular in the United States as the expression of the Anglican communion, is that we get to kind of use our reason along with scripture and tradition to work things out and be in the minority. And because it's a big tent and everyone is welcome, then you know, it it's sort of on on issues that are not necessary for salvation, you can sort of agree to disagree. And and that's um so that's why I chose it ultimately and chose to get confirmed as an adult um and ended up finding a local parish at the time. And uh we we tried three or four of them. And the one that really we we walked in and we were like, this is it, you know, this is the place. And the priest at the time there, um uh he had passed away recently, Father Christopher Um Cantrell. Um, and uh he and I had many a hearty debate, because of course he was opposed to women's ordination, and I was in favor of it, uh growing having grown up in the Diocese of Texas and feeling like that was just a normal thing, uh, and having a mother who was a big advocate for it. And I remember his big argument was that because men, because women required, uh, because basically humans required sperm, and sperm were the deciding factor in whether men were women, men were men and women were women. And so because men had the ability to reproduce and have an X chromosome and or a Y chromosome and contribute those, because we encapsulate both genders as men, then therefore, therefore, both sexes rather, uh, then then we are the only ones who can be priests, whereas women who only have X chromosomes cannot be priests because they only have X chromosomes. So that was that was his big argument, which, you know, I think um might have been persuasive if what I thought, what what I believed was we have in common with uh Jesus was our um, you know, the XY chromosomes, but you know, to me it's it's simply the condition of being human, the humanity. And my comment to him, and I think also to anyone, uh, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, who believe that the person who is who is offering the Mass is offering it um on behalf of the church, the bride of Christ, you know, why could a woman, priest, uh, not represent the bride in that sacrifice? Why could uh a priest not represent, you know, Mary, the mother of God, the holiest woman ever to exist, right? Why could uh a priest not represent Mary Magdalene, you know, the apostle to the apostles, right? I mean, it just it's just uh if if if you're gonna have that sort of representational element to it of a representative of the bride, why could the that not be a woman? It just doesn't make sense to me. So anyway, we could, I'm sure we could have many more conversations on women's ordination, but I think that um that was a big factor for me. And I think ultimately um um Anglican theology to me be is is is part of the journey of figuring out which church makes the most sense taking the totality of the evidence. And uh I'm always my inclination is always to try to get at the truth in any in any arena of life. Like that's I actually had this realization this morning as I was driving my son home from school. I'm like, you know, uh really what my life is for is like discerning the what is the truth and actually sharing that with other people, which is part of the reason why we have this podcast, right? Um so hopefully that brings it back to your initial question. Uh, because I believe that ultimately the Anglican view of Christianity, uh lens of Christianity is the most true and um or the closest to the truth. You know, it's it's hard to know exactly when we've we're right over the target, but you know, you sort of, as the saying goes, you get a lot of flack when you're over the target. But I think that um I think that there's there's a lot of sense for me very clearly that that's it it has the best encapsulation, it takes the best of you know, Orthodox Catholic belief, the best aspects of the Reformation and historical Protestantism, and basically puts it all under a huge umbrella that enables all to be welcome and find a place. And I don't think you're really going to find that anywhere else. It's a very unique combination of things. So I'm sure we'll talk more about it, you know, over the months and years to come.

SPEAKER_00 12:29

Absolutely. Go ahead.

SPEAKER_01 12:31

Did that answer your question?

SPEAKER_00 12:32

Yeah, I mean, well, how how did you get interested in that in the theology and all of that? I mean, that's such a rich um background that you have and so personal. Um you know, we're using the term Anglican, and we so just we described that really in depth in our last podcast. So um we are Episcopalians in the Anglican communion, and so you know, we're not like members of ACNA, the Anglican Church in North America or anything like that. We're we are in the Anglican communion, and that's Anglicanism is a branch of Christianity. So I don't want to get too in the weeds with all of that, but um just wanted to point people to the last podcast if they have questions about why we're saying Anglican so much. Um one of the things I appreciate about Anglicanism is that it holds together the beauty, theology, history, and a pastoral life in a very unique way. And I think you hit on that really well in what you just described in your journey. Um you actually that brings me to this vision statement that you wrote. You wrote a really thoughtful vision. Well, one of the things that um I appreciate about Anglicanism is the way it holds together beauty, theology, history, and um pastoral life in a very unique way. And you encapsulated a lot of that in what you just described. You wrote a really thoughtful vision and mission statement for the podcast. Do you want to walk us through what you're trying to capture there?

SPEAKER_01 14:34

Um, why don't you uh you know why don't you tell me what what part of it uh or maybe you read read through it, start with the vision, maybe, and then absolutely.

SPEAKER_00 14:47

Um so the vision statement to draw people to Jesus Christ through the beauty, truth, and depth of traditional Anglican worship. So why begin with beauty?

SPEAKER_01 15:02

Oh, well, I think that that's one of the areas that we really shine. I think that, you know, one of the things that's interesting because um my wife Maddie and I have conversations a lot, and she's like, you know, you know, you don't need all of that stuff in the church, right? All of the icons and the the brass and the you know the the decorations that we have. Um and I'm like, yeah, maybe we don't need it technically in the sense that it's not required, but it helps me feel closer to God. And to me, when the place where I'm worshiping is beauty, is beautiful, where the worship itself is beautiful and reverent and holy, then it's easier for me to connect with what we're doing when we're there, which is worshiping God. And so that's the role that beauty plays for me, and why I think it can be really important. Um, you know, I know that there's some people who are like, you know, I'm I'm fine in like, you know, four wooden, four wooden white walls, and and I'm happy with that, right? Um and look, I think if that's if you're happy there, then you there certainly are there are some very low church Anglican churches that are like that. I mean, you know, that are more, frankly, more Methodist and they're leaning or more, you know. Um, I mean, there was one church in Houston that I I went, I won't name which one it was, but my wife and I what we walked in and we were like, is this a Baptist church or is this an Episcopal church, right? So there's a huge variety, is what I would say. Now, why I'm drawn particularly to the traditional, you know, Anglo-Catholic worship is because of that beauty. And I think the importance of that for me is that when I see, and even outside of church, when I look outside, and I have the windows open right now over here, which is why I'm getting all this light. But uh, when I look outside and I look at the beauty of creation, I also see God there, right? And so to me, it's like if I'm not going to be outside amongst the trees and the flowers and the bushes and the um, you know, grass and the flowers and and all of the beauty of nature, or up on the mountains, or watching a river flow by, then I want to be in an environment that is as beautiful as God's creation, or at least tries to get close, right?

SPEAKER_00 17:41

Does that make sense? Yeah, some of what you're describing is just like aesthetic preferences, and um, and all of that's fine, you know. Like you said, there's just a spectrum of what people choose to do and how they choose to create a building for their worship. Um I agree with you in terms of the traditional Anglican um worship style, that beauty, the the you know, yeah, a lot of people would argue that we don't need all that stuff, right? But part of going to church and having a sacred space is that it's holy, and holy just means that it's set set aside, right? It's set apart for something special. And all of those things help you to remember that this is a special place for a special purpose, and it's not um you know, it's the architecture, it's the liturgy, um, the music that style of worship really shapes belief. And um, you know, for many people, the first encounter with Anglicanism isn't um you know, it's not like argumentative in the sense that maybe some, you know Protestant evangelical churches are, you know, kind of arguing their point.

SPEAKER_01 19:16

Beating someone over the head with a with a Bible, right?

SPEAKER_00 19:18

It's really it's walking into a beautiful liturgy that's set aside um for something very special. So uh I I love that you put that as part of the vision statement. Uh at first glance, using the word beauty sounds sort of strange and aesthetic, but really it's more um it is more spiritual. Um so I really I appreciate that so much.

SPEAKER_01 19:49

And use the phrase, um use the phrase hold on, one more thing about beauty before you move on to the next phrase.

SPEAKER_00 19:58

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 19:59

Um, you know, one of the things I think is beautiful about the Anglican communion is we have such such space for variety in the way we worship. And so a lot of people don't know this, but like the Methodist movement started inside the Anglican Communion, and in fact, the Methodists in England stayed part of the Anglican church. And so there are churches in you know, England that are Anglican churches that are Methodist in the way that they approach worship and their and their architecture and everything, the simplicity of the architecture, and that is part of the beautiful variety of the Anglican Communion, big tint. You know, it's actually an interesting historical note about how the Methodists split off into a different church in the United States, uh, which we can get into some other time.

SPEAKER_00 20:51

Yeah, that is yeah, good point. That's part of the history that's so interesting. Um, but the second part of the vision statement phrase is uh you know to to renew the Episcopal Church by reintroducing people to the historic, Orthodox, and Catholic faith in its Anglican expression. Now that's Catholic, little see Catholic. Um but those three words, historic, orthodox, and Catholic, they carry a lot of meaning. And so what do they signal to you? Um why were they important words? You know, let's talk about historic.

SPEAKER_01 21:39

Yeah, well, when I say um when I say historic Catholic Orthodox, what I'm referring to is um taking, yeah, and it makes sense to take those a little bit one at a time, but what I'm talking about is the Anglican church is the continuation of for the English-speaking world, right? Um, and so really um the English-speaking world is started in England, but now has spread throughout the globe. And so, really, what you see in the history of the church in England is that it started, uh, Christianity arrived shortly after the resurrection when Joseph of Arimathea brought Christianity. To the shores of what we now call Glastonbury. And there's a lot of local traditions in Glastonbury around the arrival of Joseph of Arithium, but we don't need to get into all that now. We can again in a future episode if people are interested. Where should they email us again if they're interested in other topics?

SPEAKER_00 22:52

Yeah, Episcopalian Podcast spelled out as one word, Episcopalianpodcast at gmail.com.

SPEAKER_01 22:59

Okay, great. Episcopalianpodcast at gmail.com. Um, so really from the very beginning, you have Christianity in um in England. You have bishops represented at the very earliest synods in France that had come from England to visit the, and this was in like the very early parts of the fourth century, once Christianity was no longer proscribed. In other words, once it was no longer illegal in the Roman Empire, uh, they started having these synods that had these big meetings where they kind of were trying to work out some of the theological differences. From the very earliest days, you have representatives from the English church there at those synods. Um, and what I would just say is also from the very beginning, you see this, the sort of tripartite leadership, bishop, priest, deacon, also represented in the English church. Uh, the the first liturgies were actually Celtic liturgies, which were, you know, in the the uh not in Latin, but in the old Celtic language of the of the British Isles. And it wasn't until the seventh century that you see basically this ironic scenario where you have Roman uh bishop kind of sent as a missionary, Saint Augustine, who can who was sent to different Saint Augustine and the Saint Augustine who wrote City of God, and you know, the not the patristic father Saint Augustine, but basically the Saint Augustine that kind of brought the Roman church and the Roman liturgy to um to England. And then there was a whole sort of battle that went on. I mean, uh not a physical battle, but sort of an argument and a debate over the course of the ensuing century about are we going to stick to the Celtic liturgy and the Celtic way of doing things that we've used for you know the last 600 years, or are we going to adopt the Roman liturgy? And ultimately the side that wanted to adopt the Roman liturgy won out, largely because um the there was a desire on behalf of the kings at the time to kind of be more closely affiliated with some of the more continental European powers that used that same Roman liturgy. So they wanted to be seen as being part of the same church and playing ball and that kind of thing. But still, the the the king of England was seen as the the head of the church until the um lay investiture controversy, uh, which was the famous uh debate or or disagreement between uh Henry II, I want to say, and uh Thomas Beckett, uh who was his buddy that he made the Archbishop of Canterbury, not realizing that that was going to be a big mistake, uh, because then Thomas Beckett basically was a big advocate for the power and authority of the church and ultimately appealed to Rome uh in that controversy, and then Rome stepped in, and then you see the English church um basically submitting itself to Rome for a period of about three to four hundred years, it's somewhere in that range. And then uh in the time of Henry VIII, in which he he decided to um, because of sort of succession issues, wanted to have a male heir, uh, appeal to the the pope to say, Hey, I'd like an annulment. Uh the Pope said no, because of, again, political considerations. His wife at the time was the sister of the most powerful Holy Roman Emperor since Charlemagne. A lot of people don't know that, but it's it's the facts. Um, so the Pope was kind of playing it smart. He was like, Ah, who's this little English king, right? I can't I can't piss off Charles Charles V. Um, and um so then what you end up with is uh a scenario where he the Henry basically asked the Archbishop of Canterbury at the time, uh Thomas Cranmer, hey, would you just go ahead and give me the annulment anyway? Thomas Cranmer says, Yes, I'll do it. And um the Pope excommunicates both of them, and basically by doing that, the entire Church of England, and as a result, you have the you know involuntary schism. You know, we didn't, we as Anglicans didn't want to leave the the communion with Rome. That was the choice of Rome, basically not willing to grant the annulment as requested or to honor the annulment once it had been uh and been granted by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Um and look, for people who don't understand why the the grounds for the annulment were made, basically the the grounds for the annulment were that this is uh woman, the woman he married, Catherine of Aragon, had been married to his older brother who died. And according to canon law, at the time, you weren't supposed to marry your brother's wife. You know, that was that was forbidden. Well, the pope had given a special dispensation to allow that to happen, you know, in the first place. And basically the argument was, well, the Pope really shouldn't have done that because it was against canon law, but the Pope made a special exception. So, but if he was going to make a special exception, why wouldn't he then also grant an annulment when the time came? Well, because he didn't want to piss off Charles V. So, you know, it's a lot of politics that were involved in there, and people don't understand that. It really wasn't uh some big ecclesiastical disagreement. So the church under Henry VIII remained the same, you know, holy Catholic, apostolic, uh, you know, Orthodox in theology. I'm saying small o orthodox, which is to say basically um, you know, the same faith carried over from the patristic fathers and the you know the first seven ecumenical councils and the um you know three can the three creeds, which a lot of people know the Nicene Creed, um from the Council of Nicaea, but we also have the Apostles' Creed and the Creed of St. Athanasius, which are all in the back of your book of common prayer. Uh, if you don't have one, get one, uh, because it's a it's a good thing to have on hand at home. Yeah.

unknown 29:38

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 29:39

But yeah, does that answer why history? You know, it's it's a very short, I've given you a short summary of the history of uh, and I didn't get into the more recent history. Um, you know, you do have ultimately under the Elizabethan era, you have a compromise that is really the founder of the modern, modern uh Anglican church is Elizabeth I, as basically the one who authored the Elizabethan compromise, which was a compromise between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants of their time, her time, basically saying, well, we're going to maintain this Catholic faith, but we're going to basically stay independent from Rome and um, you know, ultimately have our own express our own sovereignty just like we had for the first you know 12 centuries of the church.

SPEAKER_00 30:29

Right. So historic in a nutshell is being rooted in the early church and Orthodox. Um you've described that in your initial um discussion, what orthodox means and uh being faithful to the creeds. So you hit on that. And then Catholic. Let's talk about Catholic because that word gets confused a little time a lot of time because there's little C Catholic and there's big C Catholic. So um Catholic just with the little C just simply means that we're connected to the universal church. Is there anything else that you wanted to um talk about in terms of what that word means to you or why you chose it for the vision statement?

SPEAKER_01 31:16

Yeah, I mean, I think that um the well, first of all, one more thing I wanted to say about Orthodox. For those who've not um seen the Substack I put on there um and I'm actually trying to pull it up so I get the exact uh name right, but it's hard for me to find it because it's not showing up on Google yet. It's a pretty new Substack. So we created a Substack. Um could you help remind me what the um oh if I look under my subscriptions, I'll be able to find it that way. Uh but my internet's not a good idea.

SPEAKER_00 31:53

Yeah, I'll find the title for the sub of your Substack article. It's um Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 31:58

Tell me that. And and and that way I can, you know, people can we can link it in the show notes and people can can look at that if they're more interested.

SPEAKER_00 32:07

Yeah, absolutely.

SPEAKER_01 32:09

Why why I see that that you know being Anglican is being orthodox in the English construction of what is orthodoxy.

SPEAKER_00 32:19

Yeah, the title of your Substack article, and it's a great article, by the way. It's why I'm Anglican and Orthodox. Because Anglicanism is English Orthodoxy. And it's an excellent, excellent article, and really goes into some of the history and um it's a really good attempt to spell out why this is an important concept. Um there's a concept now that's pretty popular. Well, I say pretty popular, we're not talking about like you know, massive popularity. But a lot of people are talking about this concept of inclusive orthodoxy inside of the Episcopal Church. And um I think that's a great concept, but I think that part of what your article really helps to describe is is some of that what we might call inclusive orthodoxy.

SPEAKER_01 33:19

Um what is the what is the orthodox part? Yeah, what is the orthodox part of that uh inclusive works of it? And I'm a big fan of inclusive orthodoxy, as you know. In fact, my next my next substack, which I'm almost finished with, is looking at um the more the inclusive side of that, which is uh is which I want to talk a little bit about at the end of our podcast today. But but um yeah, so I would encourage people to check out that uh that podcast, that that substack why I'm Anglican and Orthodox, because Anglicanism is English Orthodoxy. And um I um but yeah, getting into the Catholic side of that, which I think is um Orthodox, which is it's it's really kind of and I think this is reflected by the fact that we are as as a communion, as Anglican Communion, we are in communion with the old Catholic Church. So though for those who don't know what the old Catholic Church is, the old Catholic Church are bishops, priests, deacons who felt that the conclusions of Vatican I and Vatican II around overreach. They believed, which is what we believe, which is what the patristic fathers believed and the early church believed and practiced, which is that synods, which is just sitting together in a community of coming to a consensus about about the issue, is the only way that you're gonna approach and truly infallible, but it's sort of the the closest, um, and that really we shouldn't be using this term infallible anyway, because look, we're humans, right? Um and and ultimately only God is infallible. So I think that uh by definition, so I would say that for me, really, if you think about if you love everything about the Catholic Church, but you feel that some of the excesses of the papacy, either historically, which I'm not gonna get into a history lesson on that, uh, but definitely check it out, or some of the more recent claims made by the papacy about infallibility, are um, you know, excessive or not in not in alignment with historical Christianity, um uh then frankly, we may be the church for you, right? And I think also if you look at one of the some of the things that were going on even back during the Reformation, um then, you know, with around the selling of indulgences and that kind of thing, where basically the the Pope was saying, uh, here, come give me a donation for St. Peter's, and then I'll say, Well, your you know, your sins are absolved and you're saved because you've paid me this money. Um, that was one of the sort of hot, hot button topics of the time, but it's also um, you know, that that's continuing. I don't know whether people realize plenary indulgences are still being sold by the Vatican. Um, the other thing I would say, I mean, Council of Trent really dug in its heels. I mean, if you if you read about it, it's like we we basically we're not doing anything wrong, we're doing everything the right way, there's nothing to reform, there's nothing to change. And so if you believe that the Roman Catholic Church of the Middle Ages is still correct, then you should, you know, maybe be a Roman Catholic. But uh, if you believe that any of that stuff was probably not the best way, then maybe consider becoming Episcopalian Anglican. Um, and and what I would just say, uh, you know, on another level, looking at the structure of the church, uh, and I'm I and I'm pointing out the differences for a reason, by the way. So I'll get to that in a minute. But if you look at the structure of the church, you know, the Roman Catholic Church is very hierarchical, very top-down. Um, you know, bishops get assigned, priests get assigned. Um, you know, if you don't want to be there, too bad, you don't have a choice. It's like it's all very much a top-down um assignment of clergy and and really of the whole structure and and discipline of the church. Um the way that the Anglican communion has has been constituted, uh, certainly more recently, and certainly in the Episcopal Church, even more so, is really a reflection of our national polity. In the United States, that's that's a democracy, right? Representative democracy. And so, you know, our church is very much a ground-up church. We have um individual parishes, elect vestries, the vestries send representatives to the diocesan convention, the diocesan convention elects the bishops, the they also send representatives to the national convention, the national convention meets, and those representatives all get together and along with the bishops decide the future direction of the church. So it's a very grassroots, bottom-up approach to understanding the way Christianity should operate while still maintaining that sacred apostolic succession of bishop, priest, deacon, and putting that primacy of saying, well, the house of bishops does get a veto. You know, if if the people say one thing, but then all the house of bishops get together and they all say, eh, you know, we're not sure about that, then guess what? We have to wait, we have to see, you know, we have to give it some more time. So, and I think that that's really both honoring the will of the people and the consensus of the understanding of of Christ and of God that that emerges over time, but also that historical, traditional, apostolic authority that is descends from the apostles through the bishops. Um what else? So I think really those are the two main differences, just in terms of infallibility of the Pope and the special role. Look, and and we are happy to acknowledge the the sort of first among equals, uh, you know, primum interparis is the Latin of the Bishop of Rome. That's not a problem. It's really more the idea that because of his status as the first among equals, he should therefore have you know sort of super numer supernumerary powers of being able to say, well, things are infallible and and everybody has to do what I say, um, where we kind of draw the line. And you know, that and and the hierarchy, those are really the two differences.

SPEAKER_00 40:33

Yeah, there's a great article.

SPEAKER_01 40:35

Um beyond that, you can find the same level. I mean, watching go ahead. I want to hear what you have to say.

SPEAKER_00 40:43

Sorry, yeah, maybe maybe you cut out a little bit there for a second. I'm not sure. Anyway, there's a great article in um The Living Church that came out just last month. It's by oh gosh, the article. Mark Flavier. And he talked about Anglican constitutionalism and how the Anglican Church was really formed by and especially an Episcopal Church, formed the Constitution and vice versa. And so that these two things are are not they they're not just separate, right? Like we we have to understand that constitutionalism um in the church is is is a corporate aspect, right, that's helped stabilize us. So anyway, I love I love what you were bringing up there in terms of what what that means in terms of um Catholic the Universal Church. What do you think if someone's unfamiliar with the Episcopal Church or with um Anglicanism, why do you think that the tradition matters today? And you know, how is it relevant today? How would you answer that?

SPEAKER_01 42:16

Yeah, well, actually, I had one more thing to say about the Catholicity of the church. Uh, unfortunately, my connection was a little unstable, but I'm gonna tie it into answering your question. Okay, great.

SPEAKER_02 42:27

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 42:27

Because it it's very much tied together. So basically, the um I've been watching a lot of videos of um Roman Catholics lately who have been attending ordinariate parishes, which are parishes that use the Anglican liturgy. Um, and they're talking about how great it is and how much they love it, and how much it's they like it so much more than the Novus Ordo because it's so much more reverent and it reminds them of the traditional Latin Mass. And it's like, well, yeah, and I don't know if you know this, but the traditional Latin Mass is getting like a huge surgence of interest and support online right now. Um, and there's kind of like a little war going on internally within the Roman Catholic Church about how much are we going to allow the traditional Latin Mass to be done versus requiring everyone to do the Novus Orda, which is the new order of the Mass that is that that came out of Vatican II, which totally restructured the flow of the Mass, um, uses modern contemporary language. It's it's most similar for Episcopalians as like a right to, but like probably Eucharistic prayer, I want to say A or B. It's much more contemporary than the traditional Anglican worship, which is more either right to Eucharistic prayer D, which actually comes from, I believe it's the Alexandrian Mass, which is actually like an Orthodox Mass, um, or the Rite One Mass, of course, which is the which is an English translation of the Latin Mass, the traditional Latin Mass, the Tridentine Mass. Um, and that's uh that's by my personal preference, and that's what they use in the ordinariate parishes predominantly. And um, so it's really funny to see all of these Roman Catholics go to see the Mass that we attend every week and say, gee, I wish that we had this more readily available. This is the Mass we should be using. You know, this is like as if the traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo had a baby, and it was like, and it's like, yeah, well, why do you think we love it? So it's funny to see that essentially there's this recognition, a deep soul recognition amongst Roman Catholics, even, that the nature of our Mass is a very holy, reverent, uh, powerful experience that is deeply rooted in the tradition of the church, as that English translation of the uh traditional Latin Mass, which it is. Um, and um I think that um really when I think about the traditions of the church, that's where I think about the Catholicity of the church, of like pulling forward all the things that are great about Rome, all the things that worked about the one holy Catholic and Apostolic faith, and that do work about it and continue to work about it, which are the things that have always been there. You know, St. Vincent of Loran always comes to mind. It's like the things that the church has always been doing at all times and in all places. And so if you look at the order of the Mass and you look at the way that we have continued to bring that forward into the English language, I think it's by far the most beautiful expression uh of the Mass in the English language that I've ever experienced. And uh, for those who are looking for a holy, reverent um but English language experience, um, you know, that may be a little more inclusive of, say, women, for example, uh, I would encourage them to come check it out.

SPEAKER_00 46:02

Yeah. One thing that strikes me about Anglicanism and the Episcopal Church is that it doesn't try to reinvent Christianity every generation. You know, it really stewards something that's been handed down, which is really important to me. The tradition piece is very important to me. Um, you know, the liturgy really we consider the liturgy the most important aspect of Christian formation. Um I think people, young people today are looking for tradition. They're looking for people who are willing to stand up for something that they believe in. Um they're drawn to uh the sacramental worldview that we have in the Episcopal Church. Um there's a lot of intellectual humility inside of our tradition, also, which is to say that we just we don't know everything, right? And so um that is I think why it is so relevant today. Um so as we as we think about Anglican tradition historically, one of the things that fascinates me is the is how authority has been structured in the church. So, you know, Anglicanism historically has had a very interesting balance between bishops, clergy, vestries, and the parish. And you touched on that just a little bit in what you were just describing. So can you describe now what that traditional balance looked like maybe in the past and and maybe even how it's changed?

SPEAKER_01 48:04

Yeah, so one of the core principles, and believe it or not, this actually comes from the Roman Catholic Church, although I would say it's probably the Roman Catholic Church has experienced a lot of the same phenomenon that I'm about to describe about the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion in general in the last couple hundred years, again, since Vatican I, I think it's interesting how we sort of all impact each other in a way. Um, but what what we've seen is historically is that uh basically in in each diocese, oh the power's back on. That's great. Um, in each diocese, the bishop is essentially uh historically is a is a king in his own diocese. Um and what that means is that there's a lot of local control of how things are done. And then also you have the principle of subsidiarity, which is this idea that it's devolution of power, it's the idea that as much as possible be decided on the parish level. So one parish may like to do things one way, and then in a parish, you know, down the street like to do another something different, and that's totally okay. As long as they're both still staying within the bounds of the historic faith, right? Um local parish level, that can be decided on a diocesan level, and then only be left to the the national church, right? And that historically has always been how the Episcopal Church has operated, the Anglican communion in general has operated, and and then really only the things that absolutely must be be resolved on the universal sort of international front get resolved on that level. But that's really very few things. Uh, and it's it's really, I would say, the the core elements of the faith, which I think we broadly agree upon from again this first seven ecumenical councils, the three creeds, the patristic fathers, um the solo orthodox faith, right?

SPEAKER_00 50:38

Hang on, hold on to your thought for just a second because you're um oh you are cutting out a little bit. Hold on just a second.

SPEAKER_01 50:50

So, you know, historically there has been this acknowledgement that we're going to have most of the power at the bottom, and then less power and less power and less power as we reach to the top. And that's you know, it's called subsidiarity, which as a principle means it's a devolution of power from the top to the bottom. It's like you try to devolve as much power as possible as low as possible on the totem pole. So the total the the the power should look kind of like a pyramid, right? It's kind of how you think about it. Now, um, how has that changed? I think that what has happened in recent years, and I see it, I don't know exactly when it started in the in the Episcopal Church, but I see it it's worse for sure in the Episcopal Church than it is, say, in the Church of England. Because in the Church of England, it's still pretty much each bishop is a king in his own diocese, his or her own diocese. And so, you know, that has actually prevented a lot of the schism schismatic elements of that we've experienced in this country, uh, there, uh, they really haven't had as much of a problem with that as we've had. Um, not that we've had a huge problem with it, but it's been an issue for sure, uh, and certainly in certain parts of the country more than others. But I would say that um, you know, I think that because the national church in particular has really codified a lot of canons and constitutions that is really make certain demands and requirements of bishops, yeah, that certain bishops may find it more difficult to operate as bishops in the Episcopal Church versus in, say, the Church of England or other Anglican provinces, especially if they are outside of the middle 65% of thought on any particular topic, whether that be you know women's ordination, LGBT, LGBT inclusion, same-sex marriage, etc. Um and so I think that in a way that is the reason why that's problematic is because it is it can result in more schism.

SPEAKER_02 53:23

Yes.

SPEAKER_01 53:23

And so uh the reason why I'm in favor of subsidiarity as a phenomenon is hey, if you have a really conservative part of the country, it's reasonable to think you might have a church that's more conservative in that part of the country, and that's fine, let them be conservative. And if we have disagreements, let's get together and work them out. And if people disagree, then sometimes we just are gonna have to agree to disagree for now and let time tell us the answer, right? Just like in the Arius versus Athanasius. You know, given time, the church figured out that even though he was in this tiny minority at one point where he was the only bishop of uh supposedly who who uh uh professed orthodox theology, eventually he convinced the whole rest of the world that he was right. So if you truly believe you're right, you have an obligation to stick around and you know, basically convince your peers that you are right. And um the only time schism to me is justifiable is when it's involuntary. And I think that um what's his name? Redeemed, is it Redeemed Zoomer? That he's got a really great article or um video on voluntary versus involuntary schism. And I think to me that is such an important distinction because you know, when you're basically kicked out of a church, then it's reasonable to say, okay, fine, I'll have to start my own church now, right? But if you're if you're allowed to come and allowed to take communion and allowed to participate, um, you know, professing the views that you profess, um, then you have an obligation to stick it out and and disagree with and and verbally and you know, show up and continue to profess what you believe. And you know, the bishops of ACNA, which are the bishops that schismed most recently from the Episcopal Church, um, over again, you know, women's ordination, same-sex issues. Um they were somewhat allowed at the table, you know, they were still invited to come to to um uh the general convention, the house of bishops, and only when they basically said we're leaving, you know, uh were they then inhibited, which is to say prevented from practicing from acting. Uh-oh, what happened?

SPEAKER_00 55:55

Well, we had um we are having a little bit of technical issues today, I think, because of our weather here, hopefully. But um, we're still going. So we're talking about the bishops uh most recently schismed in the Episcopal Church that they were um yeah, yeah, they were.

SPEAKER_01 56:18

Basically, they they were still welcome up until the point they said we're leaving, at which point, okay, now we have to inhibit you so that we can protect the church. But it's like they they didn't have to leave, right? If they just said we're not gonna leave, we're staying, but this is what we believe. And we're like Athanasius against the world, right? They would still have been welcome, and they are still, you know, as far as I'm concerned, maybe not those particular bishops, but a lot of people who left and without being inhibited, they just left because they wanted to leave, are welcome to come back, you know, and I think that there's certainly an opportunity for a negotiated settlement that would allow people to have considerable local control and um, you know, uh to maintain a conservative voice. You know, for me, as a traditional liberal, I feel that everybody's voice is is not only to be tolerated, but actually necessary. That was something I also learned from your dad, that ultimately, you know, one of the big mistakes we make is thinking, well, you know, we can have a church without any conservative voices or without any, you know, somebody who's radical one way or radical the other way. And I think that that's a that's a fallacy. You know, the church has always been a unifying force that unifies people of different uh beliefs. You know, the the the main thing, I didn't talk about this earlier, but I gotta bring it up. I may have mentioned it in the other episode, but the main thing that had me feel most certain and most at home about being in the Episcopal Church was it's the program for college students. When you're in college, you're you're you're at your school. There's usually, and if it's a big enough school, there's a canterbury, and that's where college students for Episcopalian get together and socialize and do things and you know, worship together and have Bible studies and that kind of thing. It's basically like a church, but just for the students. Um, and when I was at University of Texas, um, and I was part of the Canterbury there, you know, I remember this very one night where we had a very contentious debate uh about was Jesus a communist or a capitalist, right? And it was like we were at each other's throats. And the room was divided 50-50. I mean, it was a it was a great night. And then afterwards, we all came back to the table, we all enjoyed some spaghetti and you know, meatballs or whatever with each other and continued the conversation. And then we all come back together on Sunday and worship together, right? Right. And it's like this is to me a model of how humans have to interact. This is to me the kingdom of God on earth, right? It's like people who can agree and then who can disagree vehemently, you know, like in their core fiber of their being, and yet at the end of the day, agree to disagree and worship the same Lord who we all have, right? And that to me is what it means to be Episcopalian at its fundamental level is that willingness to have that big tint and accept people. And you know, when I every time I see a Episcopal church and I see that all are welcome sign, uh I smile, you know, because it's true. The fact of the matter is that all are welcome. Now, does that mean we're gonna change what we do to make you happy? Probably not, maybe, but probably not, right? If you convince us, if you make a compelling enough argument, we'll consider it. You're open. But it does mean that all are welcome to come and learn and grow in their relationship with Christ in communion with us and in community with us, yeah, and discover why we do what we do. That's what I would invite anybody, anybody who was coming and wants to try and learn about the Episcopal Church, come to a newcomer's class, come to uh, you know, what some places is called uh catechism class, what some places is called and the why underneath the praxis, you know, what it is word and see if it makes sense to you and you wanna continue to do that.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:42

Yeah. Come and see. I love that.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:46

What do you think, Ann? All right, we're back on Wi-Fi. We should be good to go now.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:54

Awesome. Yeah, what something that I think um, you know, I don't want to sound accusatory, but you mentioned the schism piece and and the role that bishops played in that a little bit. And I really frankly feel like bishops have had way too much um authority in the Episcopal Church to actually drive us through this schism that we've had recently. It's really unfortunate. And um, you know, I feel like the role of a bishop is just to be a shepherd to the shepherds, right? And not to not to exercise all this crazy um personal animus that they have about any get one given issue. And so what do I think? I think that you are absolutely right that the the canons in the Episcopal Church give so much authority. If you actually read the canons, they give so much authority to um the parish and to local leadership, to the vestry. And you know, bishops really should be more overseers in a shepherding sense rather than just administrators. Um what do you think about apostolic oversight um and the role of maybe the theological role of a bishop in the church in terms of apostolic oversight or unity or or teaching?

SPEAKER_01 1:03:23

So you really ask two questions there. One is about whether bishops have too much power, and the second one is about what is the true role of the bishop. And the first I'm gonna answer kind of both of them together. So the first part of the question I would say at the end of the day, bishops have power from two directions, right? Bishops have power from God passed down through the accession, but also have the power we give them, right? And so what do I mean by that? I mean, so I'm gonna sound like a conservative here for a second, which is kind of ironic given our dynamic, but um I'm in that I'm gonna advocate for something called personal responsibility, which is something that conservatives like to talk about a lot. But I would just in those dioceses who represent the the parishes, well, first of all, who are part of the parish collecting the responding to propositions for this proposal of like, hey from the search joined the Southern Cone in Argentina or wherever the heck it is, right? Um and what was the last thing you heard?

SPEAKER_00 1:05:14

Um the acne group going down and joining the Southern Cone.

SPEAKER_01 1:05:22

Right. So when when the bishop when Bishop Iker first put that forward, it had to be approved twice by the diocesan convention, which is made up of to some degree the the priests in the diocese, but also the laity that's been that have been elected and that have come from their their respective parishes to represent the the people of the diocese. So on one hand, is the bishop to blame for putting forward a schismatic proposition? Absolutely. Right. Uh I would argue from the first time he did that, he could have been inhibited by by the the national church. On the other hand, are we the parishioners, we the people, to blame for following a schismatic bishop, you know, off the edge of a cliff like Lemmings? Absolutely, right? The fact of the matter is, is that if every single parishioner had said, no, we're going to stay part of the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, we're going to stay part of the traditional faith, we're going to honor our relationship to the Episcopal Church that our parents and grandparents and ancestors have had up to time and Memorial all the way back to England, uh then guess what? Bishop couldn't have would not have gotten his way, and maybe he would have left and started his own church or done some other thing, but the diocese would have stayed intact and would have stayed loyal, and the Episcopal Church would have sent a new diocese to replace our new bishop to replace that um temporarily while we then elected a new bishop. And it's so is it the bishop's fault? Yes, to some degree, but is it also the people's fault? I think just as much. And I think that we have to be careful when it comes, and Jesus warns us about this, you know, le following uh false prophets, following, you know, leaders who are going to cry his name, but then when when actually it comes to how they live their life and you know the the way that they're uh approaching the church are not doing it in the way he told us to do. He makes it very clear that unity of his believers is of utmost concern, right? It is of foremost concern. And all of the early church fathers and you know, the apostles, the patristics, they all agreed unity first and foremost. In fact, they had a rule. The rule was you go into a community, if there's already a church there, you don't plan a new church there, you go somewhere else, plant a church somewhere else, right? And that was like an un, you know, Rudeem Zumer. Again, I keep quoting him. He has a new video just where he's been talking about that. But this was like an unspoken, understood, you know, rule that this is how you do things, and yet uh what we've seen since the Protestant Reformation, and and it's really interesting because people don't always understand that with the Protestant Reformation, what you had was you had like whole national churches that got excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church that then said, Okay, well, now we're gonna have the Church of England or the Dutch Reform Church or the Church of Sweden or the Church of the United States. Right? When a bishop is trying to destroy the unity of the church, which is something that everyone, from the patristics to the apostles, all put at primacy. They said that unity is the most important thing, and we were talking about um, yeah, I remember now, we were talking about the fact that there was this unwritten rule that you basically have one church per unit of land, essentially, per jurisdiction.

SPEAKER_00 1:09:49

Right, the jurisdiction.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:50

You don't overlap on each other, and that just is totally collapsed in the last couple hundred years, yeah. But um I think that ultimately when you when you follow somebody who's headed out the door to go start their own denomination, you're you're moving in the direction of every man is his own church. Yeah, and the problem with that is that you end up with every man is his own church at the end of that road, right? It's sort of like, and so these are the diametric opposed um sort of concepts, right? Either you have an infallible pope where everything flows from him, right? Yes, and all truth flows from the pope on one end of the spectrum, and then on the other end of the spectrum, you have every man as his own church. And you know, the truth is often in the what uh Ford, uh what was his name? Henry Ford, I think is his name. No, not Henry Ford, Howard Ford, anyway, whatever. He called the excluded middle, right? Uh, and the excluded middle is basically this, you know, the middle 65% of reality that nobody wants to discuss because all the juice is on the extremes.

SPEAKER_00 1:11:03

Exactly.

SPEAKER_01 1:11:04

And the excluded middle is really what you find in the Episcopal Church, specifically in the Anglican communion more broadly, where we have, you know, we have this uh historic apostolic succession. We have bishops, priests, and deacons who can trace their lineage all the way back to the apostles. And we have this ground-up democracy that is basically forms the other half of the leadership of our church. And so we have the best of both worlds. Now, when either of those two becomes too powerful, you run into problems, and I think that's what we saw with the schism is you had a schismatic bishop that basically people gave too much credit to and too much uh obeisance to, and ultimately, you know, followed out the door as he contravened the explicit instructions of the apostles and church fathers. Um which brings me to the answering there your second question, which was what about the tradition and um specifically what is a bishop really supposed to do? What is the bishop's job historically? And the way I see it, and you can feel free to disagree because you have a different perspective on this, but the way I see it is fundamentally the bishop's job is actually to take care of his priests, right? To nurture their spiritual development, to make sure that they are on the straight and narrow, in other words, that they're not preaching something that's just totally wack-adoo and totally, you know, blasphemy or you know, because there has been cases of that, or just, you know, like extreme heresy, which is to say heresy against one of the fundamental doctrines of the faith, right? So if basically you have a priest that's preaching, oh, the resurrection didn't happen, right? That's a priest that needs to be, you know, disciplined, we'll we'll put it mildly and say disciplined, right? And so the bishop's job is to take care of his priests, nourish his priests, fundamentally, um, to deal with conflicts between priests and their vestries or priests and their parishioners if there's something that comes up or cases of abuse, that kind of thing. Um, but fundamentally, you know, or conflict between clergy, right? That if there's if that there's that's certainly the bishop's purview. Uh, but that's and then obviously to serve as one of the the the members of the house of bishops uh when it comes to deciding um any kind of direction of the church moving forward, um that's how I see the role of the bishop. But uh you tell me what you see that's same or different from that.

SPEAKER_00 1:13:42

Yeah, no, I absolutely agree. Um, and like I said, sort of in the preamble to the question that I asked, is that I uh 100% that that bishops over the last probably 50 years in the Episcopal Church have been given too much authority um in the way they can operate and and operate even outside kind of extra canonically or outside of the constitution and canons of the Episcopal Church by having their own personal policies for their diocese. And um, you know, and so we saw a lot of that during the big 2007-2008 schism here in the Episcopal Church. Um a lot of unfaithfulness. And then the poor, the poor, you're talking about the people who followed these bishops. Unfortunately, I think a lot of people just they're not paying a lot of attention, you know?

SPEAKER_01 1:14:53

And I think I think that's the big issue, actually, Ann. And I and I want to push back on one thing you said, which is I don't think it's necessarily because again, you know, historically the bishop was a king in his own diocese, and that has worked really well for thousands of years. The problem isn't that the bishop has too much power, the problem is is that he's two things that I see. Number one, people have become um too sort of dependent on the idea that the the bishop is always gonna do the right thing or have their best interests at heart, which obviously sometimes is not the case. And so that's why we have you know, we have a national church to to discipline those bishops. So to me, as a faithful Episcopalian, the moment that bishop of Fort Worth, Jack Iker, was inhibited, okay, he's no longer my bishop. Who, you know, who's the who's the new bishop? Okay, we have an acting person, and then we're gonna, you know, and and to me, that just is like if you're paying attention, that's how you think about it. And that's what I think you said is that a lot of people were not paying attention, and I think there's probably a lot of truth to that. And then the fact of the matter is there are some people who were paying attention, but just frankly agreed politically or you know, on women's ordination or LGBT issues with Jack Iker, and they said, Well, we're gonna follow him because I agree with him without thinking about the long-term ramifications of like, wait, what am I doing here? You know, I'm leaving the church that I've been in my whole life, or that is the church of my ancestors. And is this really what we should be doing, or should we be, you know, staying in and fighting it out if we truly believe that this is the truth, right?

SPEAKER_00 1:16:38

Yeah, I think um we need to absolutely address that in an upcoming episode, maybe just that topic alone, because this idea of having a Venn diagram where you have your political ideology and then Christianity, and where where do those intersect? Um and this you know, idea that a political ideology uh in the culture should be something that causes um schism or a lack of unity in the church. So I think we need to more on the dive into that more. Um, but I don't think you were quite finished with your thought. I'm sorry, I think I talked over you a little bit.

SPEAKER_01 1:17:25

No, no, you're fine. I mean, I was just thinking about the fact that essentially the bishop is it's not so much as I see it anyway, that the bishop is too powerful. Um, it's that two things are going on. The first thing is what I I described just a minute ago, which is that you know, people aren't paying attention. And while you do have some bishops who are going off the range, and and they're not putting, and I think it, you know, what happened with that schism is it became about loyalty to the Episcopal Church versus loyalty to our bishop. And that's not even the conversation. The conversation is it should be about unity or schism, right? And that's the fundamental question. And as Christians, the answer to that question is always unity, you know, it's an easy easy answer, right? Right. So that's the first part. And the second part I see with regard to the episcopacy and and and how it is playing out in modern days, I think you're getting too much of bishops focusing on things that they really don't need to be focused on. Yes, right. So I think that on one hand, you have people not paying enough attention to when bishops go off the range, and I think bishops kind of over-trying to micromanage and get involved, and we can have probably a whole other podcast talking about this topic, but I think it's like bishops trying to like overly micromanage what's going on in their parish and overly filter out what the parish's desire is for their rector, and and you know, overly try to kind of shift. And I think this is kind of one of the most underrecognized issues right now in the church that we could probably devote a whole episode to, but it's basically this idea that that the that the episcopacy is thinks that in some bishops believe that they're there to kind of reform the church and and and move it in a particular direction and they have a particular agenda for that for that direction. Yes, not not just in terms of like growth or expansion or we want to spread the word of Jesus, but more like a particular political agenda. And therefore, I'm gonna filter out candidates that I think, you know, if if if a parish puts up candidates for rector that I I think maybe are not aligned with me enough on some of these political issues, I'm not gonna even let them, you know, be heard of. And they have this office, and you're gonna have to tell me the name of it, but it's like the office that evaluates candidates for rectors. What's the name of that one? Diocesan.

SPEAKER_00 1:19:57

It's the um transition office.

SPEAKER_01 1:20:00

I'm not sure if you're so this there's a canon for transitions, the canons for transitions, and so the bishop basically appoints this person as like, hey, you know, we want people that are sort of agree with us on things rather than it should just be that the rec the that the rector search, for example, is like the vestry basically gets to contact whoever they want, that it doesn't have to go through this intermediate filter of like going through this diocesan office of transitions, which then can discreetly reach out to people to see if they're interested. And then maybe they're gonna say that they reached out to people, but they didn't because there's but we don't know because there's no transparency about any of it. So there's the the lack of transparency, I think, is an issue. And I think that um, and that it can kind of look like episcopal overreach, but it's hard to say is it truly episcopal overreach, or is it just a lack of transparency? And maybe everything they're doing is on the up and up, but we just don't know. And I think that there's this desire to keep things secret so that we don't step on anyone's toes. But I say, hey, come step on my toes. Like I don't care, let's let's let it all hang out because that's the only way again, we're gonna get at the truth, and the truth is what I care about fundamentally. Yeah, you know, and I mean, because that's Jesus, and that's why we're here.

SPEAKER_00 1:21:16

Yeah, you I mean, you opened up a whole maybe three or four different podcasts worth of um topics that we could dive into right there. Okay. Um I'll say that um, you know, obviously we've had a a minority of people leave the Episcopal Church and because of political disagreement. And a lot of people inside the Episcopal Church still are discouraged about the direction of the Episcopal Church right now.

SPEAKER_01 1:21:47

Um well, yeah, a lot of the people that you know you uh of your mindset were more conservative. Look, it's 40% of the church right now. It used to be 50% of the church, but then we lost 10%, right? So we lost the most conservative 10%. It used to be 50-50, now it's 60-40, but still we still have an Episcopal Church way more conservatives. I mean, something like four to five times as many conservatives at least as Acna has in their total population, right? So how much sense did it make for them to leave? Like anyway.

SPEAKER_00 1:22:25

Yeah. One word that you used um kind of to wrap all this up, because I want to I don't want to end this in kind of a in a discouraging on a discouraging note. So one of the things that you talked about in the mission statement that you wrote was this term renewal. Um what does that mean to renew the Episcopal Church? And how does that mean, because that's gonna have to start at the local level in faithful communities who honor their traditions, right? So, what does that look like to you? What would you say to those folks?

SPEAKER_01 1:23:03

Yeah, I mean, to me, and this is again probably a whole series of podcasts about episcopal renewal and what that looks like. To me, as somebody from the inclusive orthodox camp, I would say that renewal looks like um a return to orthodoxy and orthopraxy, uh, while we still maintain that thing that is beautiful and unique about us as Episcopal Orthodox uh Anglican Christians, which is that we have female priests, that we have full inclusion of LGBT in the life of the church, that we have uh, you know, recognition of same-sex unions and same-sex marriages. To me, that is it it truly makes us distinct. If you look for any other church that is Catholic or Orthodox, uh that that shares those inclusive values, you're not gonna find it. Okay, it doesn't exist. Okay. And so we have a very unique combination, and I think that's worth preserving, but I think the the important part about preserving that as I see it is a return to the the Orthodox faith as it was handed down from the apostles of Christ crucified and resurrected, you know, for us and for our salvation, that has been handed down through the last, you know, two millennia. And I think we now we need to get back to that. And you know, I we're not gonna have time today to talk about it, but just to give you a quick uh, you know, 30-second, I went to do an interesting dive because I wanted to see like what people always talk about theological liberalism and theological conservatism. And to me, I was really interested in like, could you make a conservative, theologically conservative, like honoring the authority of scripture argument for inclusive being inclusive in the church, you know? Um and I think I have a pretty good one, but what I'm gonna say is that it actually led me into a whole rabbit hole, which we'll get into in our next episode, about what is what is the authority of scripture, and like what is that, like what is the role of scripture in our faith as Episcopalian Anglicans? And how is it different from other denominations either you know, and how is it different from scholars who just read the Bible like as if it's a history book, right? So so and and really how does scriptural the authority of scripture, how does that impact our faith and our the practice of our faith and the direction that we're gonna head as a church in the years and decades and centuries to come? Because I think it's an important question that we've sort of still haven't resolved as a as a community. And maybe we don't need to fully resolve it, but I think we need to come to a greater understanding of how the apostles viewed it, how the patristic fathers viewed it, how the early church viewed it. And I think that can help inform our view of scripture. And I think if we if we can kind of go back to their view of scripture, um and still hold on to all of the beautiful uh what did uh Cardinal Henry Newman call it, uh, evolution that the church has gone through uh in the ensuing centuries, and not say, well, if it's anything that's happened since you know the fourth century, we're gonna throw it out. No. But not throw out anything from that time either, right? It's like we'll take that as the strong foundation and build on it. And things that build on it, you know, one of the things I love reading is books by priests and bishops and monks. And I mean, to me, those are some of the greatest modern witness of God. You know, I think about God, I love to use the mug analogy, right? It's like if you're looking at God from like this one particular angle, you're gonna see mostly handle, but then if you look at God from over here, there's no no handle and not really anything on it. You look over here, you see this graphic here. So it's like, well, hold on. I mean, there's there's all these different ways that we can look at God and discover God, and and there have that has to be an ongoing process.

SPEAKER_02 1:27:38

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:38

And I think that we have to leave room for that, but also understand authority of scripture. So that's a whole nother conversation, which I I'm desperate to have. Uh, but we'll have to save it for another episode because I know you're out of time.

SPEAKER_00 1:27:51

Ryan, thank you so much for the conversation. I'm really looking forward to continuing these discussions and thanks to everyone listening. We hope these conversations help people rediscover the beauty and depth of the Anglican tradition.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:07

Amen.