Over the past several days, I had numerous conversations with an ISM priest and bishop from a moderate jurisdiction living out the Old Catholic tradition. These conversations prompted me to think more about the ISM movement. I do not claim to speak for the movement; these are my thoughts prompted by these conversations.
First, how honest and transparent are we in the ISM movement? So many of our jurisdiction websites portray grand churches not affiliated with our jurisdiction. We make claims that our sacraments are seen as valid – but that applies to only a few communities such as the Polish National Church. Our tiny jurisdictions have patriarchs, archbishops, monsignors, and so on. Does any of this add any value? I fear that it makes us a mockery; we are accused of playing church. What does it matter if I have the title of patriarch of the West and Archbishop of the Americas if my cathedra is a porcelain throne in my bathroom and I am doing nothing to spread the Gospel? I have known a few people in the movement who simply introduce themselves by their first name or as father and who only later I discover are bishops. Why? They have a sense of their purpose. They see themselves as a spiritual father and do not need to have a fancy title. I am not saying we need to drop titles but contextualize them. These individuals had their good deeds shine before them and that is greater than any title. We work for a heavenly crown, not a fancy earthly title, mitre, or crozier.
Second, I want to follow-up on what I said in my last blog post. In my post, I wrote: “I would love for our jurisdictions to work together to promote vocations. We may have people who are good vocation candidates but who have different theologies than our jurisdictions can accommodate.” Amid a conversation, I was given a different point to consider which is location. We might have applicants in an area that our jurisdiction has no presence. Could we work with a similar jurisdiction with closer clergy and formation programs? Would we be willing to sacrifice a candidate who would be a good fit, but the geography would not make sense? Our jurisdictions need to work together and support each other.
Now I am going into more controversial thoughts that I fear will make it sound like I am judging so many in the movement. I hope you can hear why I am saying what I am saying. A lot of our jurisdictions are dysfunctional. We have clergy that are ill-prepared and sought ordination for self-aggrandizing reasons. We have some clergy who lack formation; even the holiest and those full of good intentions cannot overcome inadequacies of spiritual, human, pastoral, and intellectual formation. Our jurisdictions are full of larger than life personalities who easily become dictators and disregard canons at will. The result of control, personalities, and lack of formation lead to frequent splits in the movement. Which leads to…
Jurisdiction hopping. I am not saying that it should never be done as there are clear abuses that must be stopped. I left the Roman Catholic priesthood because of leadership abuses I witnessed. Sometimes leaving a church or jurisdiction is the only way to move forward. As the same time, I see clergy who frequently move from jurisdiction to the next. There are legitimate reasons for why this sometimes must be done, but there are also reasons that are not legitimate.
Which leads to the problem of the continual creation of new jurisdictions. De we really need another jurisdiction? What does your new potential jurisdiction bring that the other thousand jurisdictions lack? Is this to deny the creation of new jurisdictions? No, but I think that should be a last resort and done with specific reasons. How will your new jurisdiction with one or two clergy and a few lay people live out the Gospel so differently that it cannot be part of another jurisdiction? I would rather see fewer but stronger jurisdictions.
This leads me to a point in the conversation I had regarding how we would prefer seeing fewer but more vibrant jurisdictions. Maybe there are a couple of strong jurisdictions in each of the following categories: ultra-liberal, moderate-liberal, moderate, moderate conservative, and ultra-conservative. With that being said, there will always be the lone ranger who wants to be the patriarch of the porcelain throne. I consider these as peripheral to the greater movement that has a genuine purpose of worshipping God and evangelizing others. So before people create new jurisdictions, I think we need to find ways to incorporate ourselves into other jurisdictions. Creating a new jurisdiction should not be the default mentality.
Under what conditions should a new jurisdiction be created? Again, I do not want to police the movement so I am sure there are more reasons than I can express. I think a jurisdiction could be created when there is a legitimate pastoral need that will not fit into any jurisdiction. I think of how some of these current jurisdictions met the needs of underserved people for reasons of race, ethnicity, gender, or sexuality. A jurisdiction could be created to meet the needs of people suffering from illness (I think back to the marginalization of people suffering from AIDS and how a jurisdiction could have advocated and provided much needed spiritual assistance). I wish we had fewer but more vibrant jurisdictions. I think of the big C Catholic Church which has room for Dominicans and Franciscans and Benedictines and Jesuits and Carmelites, and so the list of religious communities goes on. Each church (diocese and sui juris church) maintains bonds of communion with one another yet provides flexibility for each to live out their charism. Our jurisdictions could reflect a greater openness of allowing ministries to operate with great flexibility but still agreeing to certain essential truths.
Moreover, why create a new jurisdiction with just yourself, a hand full of laity, and maybe another clergy person? What is the likelihood that the jurisdiction will continue to exist beyond your lifetime? If there is a legitimate pastoral need, I think there needs to be a minimum number of people for a jurisdiction to start both clergy and laity. What that looks like will be contextual. Simply starting a jurisdiction as a sole bishop and your dog does not pass muster. I am just a priest-presbyter but I at least I have three dogs and four birds in my congregation, and I am not even trying to create a jurisdiction! That last line was supposed to be funny. My point is that simply starting a jurisdiction by yourself or with a handful of people should not be the default position. It may be necessary for a number of reasons, but it should not be the norm. And if we are creating a new jurisdiction, we need people with strong formation backgrounds to provide professionalism and credibility.
We in the ISM need to create a positive image for ourselves. Some of the larger than life personalities have made the movement a joke. We are seen as a group of wandering clergy with no real purpose and add nothing of value. No one really cares if we livestream a liturgy from the 1702 mass of kingly dominion (this is made up to show the utter absurdity of some elements of the movement) if we are not doing real work. We are called to live out the beatitudes and engage in spiritual and corporal works of mercy. That is not to say that mass should not be livestreamed as that can provide a valuable work of evangelization, spiritual formation and outreach ministry to the homebound. Many people do not know about the ISM movement and what little that people do see is often a parody and joke. Maybe we are the new fools for Christ given the way the movement is lived by so many.
Finally, I think there is a deep hunger for Old Catholicism and the ISM movement even if it is not understood or known by many. We are our own worst enemies and get in the way of the message we want to share. This website receives just under 200 views a month. It shows me that people are looking for something they are not finding in their own churches or faith communities or jurisdictions. People are spiritually hungry; we can take fragments, bless, break and give to fill our brothers and sisters.
As much as I seem disappointed by so much in the ISM movement, I see so much potential. I want us to improve our jurisdictions and do the work of ministry. Some of us are chaplains, some are involved in social justice ministry and while others are involved in parish ministry. There are countless forms of ministry. Each of us has our own calling as to how we can live out the Gospel but we must be faithful to the call we received and live out our faith.
Comments