Ship of Fools: Approved Seminaries by Diocese

Thread: Approved Seminaries by Diocese Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=023124

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

I've been reading forever but this is my first post, so please move/delete/forgive as is called for.

I want to go to Nashotah House. I am from Southern California and would likely want to serve in the Episcopal Church, Los Angeles Diocese. Does anyone know if the Bishop has approved any of his ordinands to go to Nashotah House? Are there any priests currently serving in Los Angeles that are Nashotah house grads? I'd appreciate any information.

Preemptively in response to what I think may be questions of me:
1. I am not in formal discernment
2. I am not an Episcopalian, yet
3. My parents live in Southern California, and while I'm happy to go anywhere to serve now, I anticipate needing to be near to them within a decade
4. I am somewhat familiar with the Anglican landscape/realingment, and I'm specifically inquiring about TEC because for various reasons I'd like to understand better what the likelihood of it working out in TEC is
5. I am somewhat familiar with the discernment/ordination process in TEC, which is in part why I'm askin this question here.

Thanks in advance for any info. I suppose if necessary it would be interesting to know which dioceses/bishops approve or disapprove of which seminaries.

-Kevin

Posted by Nunc Dimittis (# 848) on :

Kevin, I think the first thing you need to explore is Anglicanism/Episcopalianism.

It is highly unlikely that you would be accepted without first a) being confirmed or received as an Episcopalian, and b) going through a thorough discernment process.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

I've heard of lots of things, but never of a non-Anglican being accepted by a bishop as a postulant, or even being considered as one. The question you ask is perhaps step 17. In any case, the diocese provides a guide-- the choice of seminary does not seem to be a burning question.

TEC's clergy directory will tell you if there are Nashotah grads in LA, and what the diocese' attitude might be. As well, there are other TEC dioceses in southern California.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Thanks Nunc Dimittis. I'm pretty sure I'm on my way in, I don't think there's any way they would move me through the process if I wasn't Episcopalian, my question was just if LA allows anyone to go to Nashotah House.

Thanks Agustine, I've reviewed the guide, but I appreciate the link.

Cheers.
Kevin

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

What Nunc and Augustine said.

As to your actual question, while I don't know for sure, I'd be shocked beyond belief if Bishop Bruno allowed his seminarians to attend Nashotah House. Even if you find some Nashotah grads in the directory, don't assume the current bishop allows seminarians to attend Nashotah or even allows recent Nashotah grads in the diocese. The politics of TEC has changed in the last 20 years. Nashotah has changed. I know bishops who attended Nashotah House who wouldn't allow their postulates to go there. I know conservative bishops who don't have Nashotah House on their list.

A few questions...

Why are you thinking about TEC?

Why Nashotah House?

What church do you currently attend?

Do you have an undergraduate degree?

[ 04. June 2012, 14:55: Message edited by: Beeswax Altar ]

Posted by jlav12 (# 17148) on :

What's wrong with Nashotah House? It's an approved, Episcopal seminary, right?

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

The Episcopal Church believes the discernment happens in community. It is not something one does alone, as a purely cerebral decision. The first step, therefore, is to become an Episcopalian and participate in the life of a single parish for at least a year. The year minimum is not a mere hoop to jump through- there is a heavy emphasis on discerning from a proper place in one's spiritual life, and it may take longer to really have your voice in the community.

You do have to be warned that the discernment process is very long in the Episcopal Church, and there is very little financial support given even if you are admitted into the process. You have to get a master's degree, and many seminarians graduate with a significant amount of debt.

It also must be said that the "process" is extremely long. It could take a couple years to be admitted into the process, and it takes a minimum of 6 years after that before one is ordained to the priesthood. That is only a minimum, it is not AT ALL uncommon for people to be barred from moving forward in the process after years of work.

Nashotah house is technically an approved Episcopal Seminary, but its party line preaches against the Episcopal Church, and it has tried to break from the Church in living memory. Many dioceses refuse to let their seminarians go there.

It must be noted that your choice of seminary is determined by your bishop. He or she would of course take your choice into consideration, but ultimately it's up to him.

I am not trying to discourage you, but know what you are getting in to.

[ 04. June 2012, 15:10: Message edited by: Zach82 ]

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

What's wrong with Nashotah House? Nothing and everything is wrong with Nashotah House. Depends on who you ask.

TEC doesn't have a list of approved seminaries. Nashotah House is a seminary loosely affiliated with TEC. Each diocesan bishop can choose which seminaries are acceptable and which aren't. The bishop doesn't have to put all of the episcopal seminaries on the list. Many bishops who don't allow their postulates to attend certain episcopal seminaries will allow them to attend seminaries in no way affiliated with TEC.

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

Kevin, before you could even think of being admitted into seminary you'd not only have to become a member of TEC (does one have to be confirmed? I'm ELCA, so I'm not sure what y'all do), but you'd have to go through a fairly lengthy discernment period. A friend of mine who was considering the priesthood in her 30's after a career elsewhere was advised to go through EFM, Education For Ministry, the sort of baseline course for lay ministers within TEC -- and she was a cradle Episcopalian.

I'm also assuming that, as in the ELCA, before you can be accepted into seminary you'll have to go through psychological testing, done at your own expense.

I'm wondering why you want to be an Episcopal priest when you are not an Episcopalian. Have you been attending services at an Episcopal church? Have you gone to TEC's website and researched the requirements for the priesthood? Have you talked to priests/hung out with them? Have you undergone any sort of "spiritual gifts" inventory? Do you have a spiritual director?

I'm not trying to rain on your parade; just noting that, in traditional/mainline church bodies you can't just say, "I want to be a priest/pastor," and enroll in a seminary on your own...getting to that point is the culmination of a long, involved process. And it is long and involved because the church body wants you to be as sure as it can of your vocation and your competency before you all start investing time and money in the process...because even then it's still not a given that you'll meet your candidacy requirements; you will be evaluated all through your seminary years, and if your professors and mentors discern an ongoing problem -- emotional or academic or theological -- that would seriously impact your ability to perform the duties of a pastor, you won't be able to be ordained. So all of this testing and evaluating and discernment is meant to clarify both your competency and your commitment, for all concerned, as soon as possible.

I'd also gently suggest that if your desire to be a priest is less grounded in wanting to serve God's people in a pastoral-care way and more about trying to learn more about God/the Bible/Christian theology, you're far better off simply being a thoughtful layperson who takes advantage of programs like EFM to enhance your biblical literacy, theological knowledge and practical skill set for being an active member of a parish. If during that process you still feel a call to the pastorate or to a career as a theologian, then it's given you a healthy head start. And if you enjoy some parts of leading worship and/or small groups and/or assisting the priest with various other tasks, and are good at them, but aren't sure about the whole package, EFM is a stepping-stone to doing that. The priest at the church you attend, if you're attending an Episcopal church, can tell you about EFM.

Seminary isn't for "seekers"; it's for people whose desire to become "a called and ordained servant of the Word" has been vetted through the church.

[ 04. June 2012, 15:15: Message edited by: LutheranChik ]

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

Confirmation is a requirement. TEC accepts Lutheran and Roman Catholic confirmation so if Kevin is either he would only need to be received. That said, most diocese will require the same preparation for reception as they do for confirmation.

Psychological testing is mandatory. Some diocese pay for it. Some diocese pay half. Some diocese pay nothing. Usually, the aspirant's parish will pay for a portion of the testing.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

I go to a church in the LA diocese. We have had several priests and several ordinands work at our church during Bishop Bruno's time as bishop and from what I recall they have all gone to Church Divinity School of the Pacific (Berkeley, CA), Seminary of the Southwest (Austin, TX), Seabury Western Theological Seminary (Chicago, IL), and Virginia Theological Seminary (Alexandria, VA). If Nashotah House is very reactionary to recent developments in TEC, it's doubtful it would be Bishop Bruno's choice for his ordinands. I mean we have two women suffragans and one of them is a happily partnered lesbian. Not exactly old school.

Posted by justlooking (# 12079) on :

AFAIK in the CofE bishops can ordain people who have not gone through the usual process. In the 70's and 80's some bishops had a policy of bringing in the Charismatic influence through people whose roots were outside the CofE, often in the House-Church network. With varying results.

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

Within a church body's seminary system, different seminaries will have a different "flavor"; for instance, in the ELCA, PLTS in Berkeley has a sort of NoCal reputation as a relatively liberal place that fosters experimental ideas in ministry (they're the ones, for instance, who coordinate the ELCA's no-residency MDiv program for nontraditional students in underserved areas)...LSTC in Chicago is an intellectual, big-city seminary...Trinity in Columbus is a down-to-earth Midwestern incubator for down-to-earth parish pastors...and so on.

Does school bias come into play on a diocesan (or in our case, synodical) level? Not sure. I'd think a thoughtful and savvy bishop would want a healthy mix of pastoral candidates to serve a variety of calls within his/her jurisdiction. But if one diocese/synod tended to be "off the chart" in one direction or the other I can see a bishop leaning in the opposite direction having reservations about pastors with that academic pedigree.

[ 04. June 2012, 15:54: Message edited by: LutheranChik ]

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :

Being a Nashotah House graduate can be "the mark of the beast" depending on the diocese. Most parishes in my Missionary District would not take someone from Nashotah as the prevailent churchmanship is MOTR-Low.

PD

[ 04. June 2012, 16:11: Message edited by: PD ]

Posted by ToujoursDan (# 10578) on :

quote:
Does school bias come into play on a diocesan (or in our case, synodical) level? Not sure. I'd think a thoughtful and savvy bishop would want a healthy mix of pastoral candidates to serve a variety of calls within his/her jurisdiction. But if one diocese/synod tended to be "off the chart" in one direction or the other I can see a bishop leaning in the opposite direction having reservations about pastors with that academic pedigree.

Things are a bit more polarized in the TEC at the moment. IIRC Nashotah still frowns on women's ordination and gay people are firmly in the closet. I don't believe women are allowed to consecrate at services there (correct me if I'm wrong).

It's probably the choice for more conservative high church dioceses (Quincy, Ft. Worth, San Joaquin before they bolted, perhaps Eau Claire and Albany) but off the map for a liturgically MOTR and moderately liberal diocese like Los Angeles.

[ 04. June 2012, 16:37: Message edited by: ToujoursDan ]

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

Theoretically, women can celebrate at Nashotah but to my knowledge, one never has. There are a few diocese that still send people to Nashotah such as Fond du Lac, Eau Claire, Springfield, Rio Grande, Dallas, Western Louisiana, Louisiana, Central Florida, Southwestern Florida, South Carolina, and Albany. Might be a few more, I don't know. None of those places are close to Southern California unless you think New Mexico is close to Southern California.

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
... more about trying to learn more about God/the Bible/Christian theology...

Dunno about American but over here if someone wanted to learn about theology they could go to a normal university as an undergraduate and study theology. Quite separate deal from a theological college or Bible college that trains people for church ministry. Loads of people study theology with no intention of ever being ordained. Some of them aren't even believers (though most probably are) If they later went on to seek ordination a theology degree would usually be taken into account towards some of the academic requirements, though it wouldn't shorten the process of discernment or guarantee that they got recommended.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ken:

quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
... more about trying to learn more about God/the Bible/Christian theology...
Dunno about American but over here if someone wanted to learn about theology they could go to a normal university as an undergraduate and study theology. Quite separate deal from a theological college or Bible college that trains people for church ministry. Loads of people study theology with no intention of ever being ordained. Some of them aren't even believers (though most probably are) If they later went on to seek ordination a theology degree would usually be taken into account towards some of the academic requirements, though it wouldn't shorten the process of discernment or guarantee that they got recommended.

Lots of private universities offer undergraduate degrees in theology. State-funded universities might offer a "religious studies" program, but that will approach the subject from a purely secular perspective like historical or anthropological.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

If the Ye Oldde Thyme College atmosphere is what attracts you to Nashotah, Sewanee keeps up appearances as well. Undergraduates wear ties to class, and the faculty frequently wear their academic gowns when lecturing.

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

And both are in the middle of nowhere. Sewanee has better financial aid. However, if Anglo-Catholicism is what you like about Nashotah, stay far away from Sewanee.

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

quote:
Dunno about American but over here if someone wanted to learn about theology they could go to a normal university as an undergraduate and study theology.

Exactly. And some of those students will continue on the academic track while others might find their calling and go on to seek a seminary education.

And just as it's a mistake to think of a seminary education as a vehicle for "finding God," it's a mistake to think of a secular university's religious studies department as a catechetical agent for a belief system. When I was at my university most of the religious ed professors were practitioners of the faith they taught about -- a couple of them also happened to be ordained clergy -- but they took care to avoid sectarian bias in their lectures. And I remember, with every class, having at least three or four students drop out after the first two weeks when they discovered that the course was not going to be an echo chamber for their own version of Christianity...like the Evo guy in my Christian ethics class who was so appalled to find out that we would be exploring a continuum of Christian thought on any number of moral issues instead of providing "the right answer" that he called our professor's faith into question as he righteously flounced out the door. Our prof, who happened to be a Baptist minister as well as a theologian, took it in stride.

[ 04. June 2012, 18:18: Message edited by: LutheranChik ]

Posted by ToujoursDan (# 10578) on :

My roommate went through the process in Los Angeles and was sent to Nashotah by his bishop. He lasted through one rural Wisconsin winter and requested a transfer to General. But this was in the early 1970s and the school (and the church) were quite different.

You'll probably find a few priests in SoCA who are Nashotah grads, but they are likely to be older. I don't think they can give you much insight into what it is like now.

Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on :

I am aware of at least one seminarian who was approved by Bishop Bruno to attend Nashotah House. It should also be noted that Bishop Bruno, a graduate of VTS, was himself something of a curiosity in the Diocese of LA, which traditionally had required its seminarians to attend General. At the funeral of a GTS graduate, I heard Bishop Bruno refer to himself, disparagingly, as a graduate of the "Virginia Bible School."

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

While as a layman, I can barely envision being a bishop, I would be loth to blacklist any Episcopal seminary, although I might look extra carefully at graduates of some to be sure that they do not typify the mold or stereotype. The excellent rector for whom I work now comes from Nashotah, even though the parish is liberal on social issues.

His predecessor was loyal to Seabury-Western as representing, in his opinion, the same virtues without the faults.

Among the detractors of Nashotah, strangely enough, was +William Brady, Bishop of Fond du Lac in the 1960s. It always seemed to me in my youth that the diocese was full of young Nashotah grads, but was told by someone who knew that the bishop was no friend of the place.

If I were to prepare for the priesthood, Nashotah would be one of my first choices, although I would have to disagree with at least one characteristic position. It is an Anglo-Catholic, liturgical place with the mission of preparing men for parish ministry in particular, and with the conviction that doing so is not just a matter of academic training, but of formation. It seems to me that you could do much worse.

[ 04. June 2012, 19:15: Message edited by: Alogon ]

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

I must say, if I were American and a member of TEC, I would, if felt called to the ministry, agree with Alogon and attempt to go to Nashotah House, despite the climate of Wisconsin.

From what I understand of the place there is a strong emphasis on an ordinand's spiritual formation, which, if done properly and in sympathy with the person concerned's temperament, seems the right way to go.

What would lead me to enquire further about the place before committing (if approved) would be the possibility the place might embody a sort of dated 1950s Anglo-Catholicism which I have experienced here. It was, I believe, sadly prevalent throughout the Communion.

From what I know of the place, it had strong connections with the late, saintly Archbishop Ramsey, who taught there in retirement. He was certainly not, in my opinion, dated in any way and not a "cliché 1950s Anglo-Catholic". This would encourage me.

A similar reason for encouragement is the strong links the House has with Orthodoxy.

If you're interested in Nashotah, KevinL, it might be worth your while investigating both Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Christianity is far wider than Anglicanism.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

On Saturday a young woman was ordained deacon at my church. I was convener of her discernment committee before the vestry recommended her to the bishop.

The procedure is that the person who wants to become a priest must go through a discernment process with a lay committee, as well as convincing the parish priest that they have a call. After the discernment committee makes its recommendation, then the vestry votes on whether the person should be recommended to the bishop.

In the committee meetings we asked her when and how she became convinced that she should become a priest. I don't remember her answers; what became very clear was that this was something that she had thought and prayed about deeply. We also asked her how she thought she could manage dealing with the various difficult situations and unreasonable people that all clergy encounter occasionally. Again, the point was not her answer, but that she was aware that such situations do arise

We were careful to keep the meetings as relaxed and friendly as possible. We had no hesitation in recommending her.

Here is the list of questions which we had to answer in our report.

What is this person's understanding of the ministry to which they are aspiring?

How do you see this person growing in the Christian faith?

Describe the current ministries of this person.

What is this person's capacity to learn?

What is the status of this person's emotional health?

Describe this person's capacity for leadership.

In what ways can you envision this person as a deacon or priest? as your deacon or priest?

Recommendation

The bishop of our diocese allows his candidates to attend any Episcopal seminary except Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Massachusetts and Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry in Ambridge , Pennsylvania

Moo

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

Your bishop seems very Catholic in the seminaries he allows his ordinands to attend, Moo.

Does he have reasons for the two exceptions?

Americans are indeed fortunate, as are Brits. In the Anglican Archdiocese of Brisbane there is but one choice: St Francis Theological College in Brisbane.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Your bishop seems very Catholic in the seminaries he allows his ordinands to attend, Moo.

Does he have reasons for the two exceptions?

I think he sees Episcopal Divinity School as too liberal and Trinity as too conservative.

Moo

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

Sir P:

quote:
I must say, if I were American and a member of TEC, I would, if felt called to the ministry, agree with Alogon and attempt to go to Nashotah House, despite the climate of Wisconsin.

Sure, since you've got a Y chromosome. Otherwise you might get tired of sitting in the back of the bus as well as tired of the weather.

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :

EDS is a weird one. It is a merger of ETS and Philly Divinity both of which were somewhat liberal Low Church schools, which had begun as Evangelical Episcopalian seminaries. However, when the two schools it was like someone used a multiplied rather than added and it went off-the-chart liberal.

VTS is much more liberal than it used to be and is now about where the old Philly Divinity was theologically - Liberalish with a tribal memory of Evangelicalism.

PD

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

Another line of thinking: What happens if one attends seminary first, perhaps with the intent of a professorship, and thereafter realizes that his true vocation is that of the priesthood? While I can see some enforced continuing education, I highly doubt that a second M.Div. would be required. I know someone non-ordained with an M.Div., so I know it's possible.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
Another line of thinking: What happens if one attends seminary first, perhaps with the intent of a professorship, and thereafter realizes that his true vocation is that of the priesthood? While I can see some enforced continuing education, I highly doubt that a second M.Div. would be required. I know someone non-ordained with an M.Div., so I know it's possible.

I was on a discernment committee in New Hampshire that dealt with two women who had attended divinity school before the ordination of women was permitted. One of them had actually taught in a seminary

The job of our committee was to help them discern whether they had a vocation. After we decided they did, the bishop required them to fill a few gaps in their education.

Moo

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
Another line of thinking: What happens if one attends seminary first, perhaps with the intent of a professorship, and thereafter realizes that his true vocation is that of the priesthood? While I can see some enforced continuing education, I highly doubt that a second M.Div. would be required. I know someone non-ordained with an M.Div., so I know it's possible.

Attending seminary before discernment is strongly discouraged in many dioceses, but if one has an M.Div. from a non-Episcopal seminary one is usually required to take an Anglican Certificate from an Episcopal seminary, which takes a year.

Most dioceses will not shorten the process for those who already have an MDiv, and fill up the rest of the time with extra field education.

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Moo:

quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Your bishop seems very Catholic in the seminaries he allows his ordinands to attend, Moo.

Does he have reasons for the two exceptions?
I think he sees Episcopal Divinity School as too liberal and Trinity as too conservative.

Moo

You are correct.

quote:
originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Sure, since you've got a Y chromosome. Otherwise you might get tired of sitting in the back of the bus as well as tired of the weather.

Unless the culture of Nashotah changed dramatically in the past 5 years, I wouldn't recommend a woman attend Nashotah under any circumstances. Comparing the plight of women at Nashotah to African-American students during the early days of integration is not an exageration. Last I heard, half the faculty didn't believe in the ordination of women and some of the students were just plain cruel to female classmates.

quote:
originally posted by MartinL:
Another line of thinking: What happens if one attends seminary first, perhaps with the intent of a professorship, and thereafter realizes that his true vocation is that of the priesthood? While I can see some enforced continuing education, I highly doubt that a second M.Div. would be required. I know someone non-ordained with an M.Div., so I know it's possible.

You would get an MA if you wanted to be a professor but not get ordained. What if you enrolled in seminary as an MA/MTS student and then switched to the M.Div program? This is known as the backdoor into the process. Bishops frown on it. Even if accepted while in seminary, you won't be ordained the same time as everybody else.

What if you get an MA in theology and then want to be ordained? Most bishops won't make you get an M.Div. You still would have to attend seminary to fill all the educational gaps especially pastoral theology plus do field ed and CPE.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Thank you all for your thoughtful and helpful responses, especially Lyda Rose, who I think understood specifically what I was asking. In response to all the questions:

I feel a strong connection with Nashotah House; their emphasis on the formation of the student is a good fit, as is the conservative theological perspective. When I visited, it felt right. Yes, going to school in an approximation of Hogwarts sounds fun, but is secondary.

I have a BA in Rhetoric and Religious Studies, and a JD. I've been in a process of personal discernment and am currently looking for a spiritual director.

I do not have a problem with initiating formal discernment during or after seminary, but that would not be ideal. I want to to be a priest because I feel that a priest is what God would have me be. Seminary is not the question/problem for me, I feel that I have good clarity on that; discerning vocation and the formal process is the difficulty. I do not want to back-door into the process if it can be helped, but I also don't want to place myself in a position that will make the process unnecessarily difficult.

I am in the unique position of not being under episcopal authority right now (because I'm currently in a non-denominational community, but that relationship is soon to end), and I am aware of the . . . "preferences" that particular bishops have for particular seminaries, hence my original question.

I am a celibate gay man, with what I would describe as a conservative Open Evangelical (I know I'm mixing countries here) theology but am appreciative of the Anglo-Catholic perspective, and I have a AC aesthetic. Yes, I know there are fundamental incompatibilities between and evangelical and a catholic ecclesiology.

I'm feeling out TEC because it is, still, a big-ish tent, though increasingly less so. I know ACNA is an option too, as are some of the other Anglican bodies. I guess the reason I asked the question was to get more information to help make that decision.

I recognize that since none of you know me, it sounds like I'm either an idealistic ingenue (whatever the male version of that is) who hasn't yet done his homework, or that I'm trying to cherry pick jurisdictions to fulfill some selfish and ill considered personal ordination fantasy. It is my sincere prayer that neither of those would be the case.

Thank you all again for taking the time to respond so thoughtfully and thoroughly, I do really appreciate it.

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by KevinL:
...what I would describe as a conservative Open Evangelical (I know I'm mixing countries here) theology but am appreciative of the Anglo-Catholic perspective, and I have a AC aesthetic. Yes, I know there are fundamental incompatibilities between and evangelical and a catholic ecclesiology.

Yep, sounds like an Episcopalian to me!

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Martin, I was just about to add, I have a sacramental theology that I think approaches the catholic view.

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

The sooner you find a parish and get involved the better. At this point, no episcopal bishop will give the time of day to somebody not completely committed to TEC. Don't even mention you considered the ACNA. Pretend you don't know it exists.

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Don't even mention you considered the ACNA. Pretend you don't know it exists.

It may not be the best idea to play up the catholic tendencies with the LA bishop, either.

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

Plenty of Anglo-Catholics in Los Angeles

Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on :

Bishop Bruno has been extremely respectful of the Anglo-Catholic parishes in his diocese. When one of them, a small parish with financial and other problems, needed a new interim priest, the diocese made a point of selecting a male priest with impeccable Anglo-Catholic credentials. Even though Bishop Bruno fully supports women in the clergy (and serves with two female suffragan bishops), he respected that parish's wish to continue to have only male clergy. Similarly, there was no interference when St. Thomas the Apostle in West Hollywood moved its altar to the wall and elevated its already somewhat spiky liturgy with the rectorship of Fr. Ian Davies. Bishop Bruno also has not interfered with Blessed Sacrament parish in Placentia, which he allowed to have alternative episcopal oversight and appointed its Anglo-Catholic rector as an honorary cathedral canon.

Please do not assume anything about Bishop Bruno without knowledge of the man.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

LA Dave, thanks for the info about Bishop Bruno, I have wondered how the Anglo-Catholic parishes have related to the diocese.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Beeswax Altar, don't you think that if I'm honest in my discernment process it'll end up coming out anyway (that I gave equal consideration to ACNA)? What I am trying to avoid, and perhaps it is wrong of me to do this, is getting involved in a TEC parish (everything around me that is staying in TEC is MOTR liberal), beginning discernment with them, and, Lord willing, having my call attested to by the community, only to then have my bishop (Bruno or Bruce, if Bruno retires) prohibit me from going to Nashotah. I understand that is the point of being under authority, but I have the opportunity now of choosing whose authority to be under. Is this analysis wrong-headed of me?

Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on :

Kevin, while I am not qualified to advise you in your calling, I would echo those who suggest becoming involved in one of the parishes in the Diocese. Three Anglo-Catholic parishes come to mind, but there may be others: Blessed Sacrament in Placentia (which is under episcopal oversight of Bishop Little of Northern Indiana, and has a companion ACNA parish, so I don't know how that would work), St. Thomas the Apostle in Hollywood or St. Nicholas in Encino.

Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Unless the culture of Nashotah changed dramatically in the past 5 years, I wouldn't recommend a woman attend Nashotah under any circumstances. Comparing the plight of women at Nashotah to African-American students during the early days of integration is not an exageration. Last I heard, half the faculty didn't believe in the ordination of women and some of the students were just plain cruel to female classmates.

Interesting. Last year at a conference I talked with a young woman who's at Nashotah House. She loves the place and insisted that she was always made to feel welcome. She firmly pooh-poohed any Nashotah stereotypes. But I recognize that one person's experience does not make a trend, and I would tend to defer to Beeswax Altar's information, since he's much closer to the action than I.

Two other things about Nashotah, Admittedly, these are in the category of "things I have heard," although I wouldn't pass them along if I didn't have confidence in the sources. One is that the anti-woman pressure comes not from the current faculty but from the trustees. Second, with regards to women presiding at the Eucharist, I have been told that in order to preside, one must be a full professor at the seminary. And the female faculty? None of them full professors. How convenient. [Roll Eyes]

One final bit: My Diocesan Bishop is a Nashotah graduate, and he is a lovely individual, a superb liturgist, is very progressive, and a fine Bishop. I don't know that he's sent anyone there, however.

[ 05. June 2012, 05:04: Message edited by: Mamacita ]

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

Becoming an Episcopalian is not a hoop to jump through on your way to becoming a priest. I would look askance at ANY bishop that would accept into postulancy a candidate who treated membership in the Episcopal Church in such a manner. Join the Episcopal Church if, and only if, you believe it was founded by Christ and preaches the Gospel of Christ. If you believed that, then you would come to the Episcopal Church whether it would ordain you or not.

Second, discernment really is how you make the decision, not a formality you enter after you have made your decision. Again, it is only when you are a member of the Episcopal Church that it will be possible to make this decision.

If you want to go to Nashotah, then there is nothing stopping you from going. One can do lots of things with an M.Div. besides the priesthood.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

When I visited, within the last 12 months, I did not sense any disparity in the treatment, official or unofficial, of the female seminarians. The seating in the quire was mixed by gender (and churchmanship), and there was equal participation in class discussion and attention given. While I there for a visitor's weekend, I didn't get the sense that anything was being "put on" for us, since most of the seminarians were busy doing what I believe seminarians do. I sensed a deep respect for the differences in piety and theology of the members of the community, and it worked (didn't seem like there was an artificial stifling of "controversial" issues, on the contrary, I think they were discussed with greater civility than I've experienced elsewhere). One example of this is that the Angelus is recited silently (by those who do), out of respect for those whose piety does not include devotion to Mary. I spoke with one seminarian who is evangelical, and he says he just uses the time to thank Jesus for the day. That type of mutual accommodation and respect is why TEC is attractive to me.

I see in my mind's eye the retort being "They pray the Angelus?!?"

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Thanks Zach82; I think hearing input from everyone on this board has been really helpful. I agree with you about not treating membership in TEC and the parish based discernment process as mere formalities, my questions really, are about bishops and dioceses, not TEC v. ACNA.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

I hope I am not sounding antagonistic. I am speaking from personal experience here- discernment is a very hard, and your motivations and attitudes WILL come out during the process.

You really have to love the Episcopal Church to discernment right. You have to love it as a real community of which you are part, and in which you have a stake. Until you feel that you have a stake in the Church, then it remains a mere abstraction to you and it isn't really your community.

Posted by Wilfried (# 12277) on :

It took me a while to hack out this post, so the thread got ahead of me, but I'll post it anyway.

Having recently sat on a couple of parish level discernment committees, I'm going to pipe up and say I echo those about who've said you're getting way ahead of yourself, and you're really putting the horse in front of the cart. Just the way you asked the question would have raised flags for us, and a short time in the Episcopal Church (anything less than years), or the appearance of having joined the Episcopal Church for the purpose of ordination, never mind with an eye to a particular seminary, would have been met with suspicion. I'm not sure you'd get the priest to form a discernment committee if that were the case.

Even at the lowly parish level, we'd ask you over the course of months endless intimate questions about your personal and spiritual life. We'd ask about your Anglo-Catholicism, what it means and how you live it out. We'd ask about your Evangelical background, and how you moved from Evo to AC, or how you integrated the two. We most certainly ask why you joined TEC, and why you feel called to ordained ministry in this church. All this and more at the lowly parish level, even before you're passed on to formal discernment in the far less gentle hands of the diocese. I don't see how you can answer these questions for yourself, let alone convince a committee or the diocese, unless you've lived, served, and worshiped in the Episcopal Church for a good long time.

But you not even sure about joining the Episcopal Church! That's what you need to discern, never mind priesthood, never mind where you go to seminary.

And there's no back door. In our diocese at least, starting seminary without the bishop's say so is regarded with deep suspicion, and counts as a strike against you, precisely because it's seen as an attempt to get through a back door. Yes, the bishop can tell you where you can go to seminary, and you'd better be ready to live with it, and until you get to that point it's least of your worries. Of course people have hopes and aspirations about seminary, but you're call had better be bigger than that, or it isn't a call, and your parish committee, or diocese and bishop will see that. There's a reason the process is long and arduous.

I'm sorry if I sound judgemental, but I was in a position to sit in judgement of a couple of people sitting on a lowly lay parish committee, and this is a response to how your question sounds. At this point, "How can I get into the seminary of my choice?" is precisely the wrong question to ask.

So if you think God is calling you to TEC, why don't you join a parish wherever you are (you don't even need to be formally received until your sure), and live your life for a while. If you still feel called to serve the Episcopal Church in ordained ministry, you can start to figure out how to pursue it.

And to end an overly long post, I know a bit of the story of a women in our parish. She started off Roman Catholic, but she felt a call to priesthood, so she joined the Episcopal Church. After a number of years, she went through discernment in her parish, who told her essentially that she needed to get out more, she needed wider and deeper experience in the Episcopal Church, and they didn't sponsor her. She came to our parish, and after more years, went through another parish discernment, was sponsored, made it through the diocese, and went to seminary. Just to add a wrinkle, after finishing seminary and all was said and done, she decided not to get ordained, after a decade and more in the process; an awful lot can happen.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Thanks Wilfried for your insight. I don't think you sound unreasonably judgmental, I think my situation would raise the same flags and questions that you have put forward.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Thanks Wilfried for your insights. I don't think you sound unreasonably judgmental at all; if I were reviewing someone in my situation I think I would have the same red flags and questions.

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

quote:
Originally posted by KevinL
I do not have a problem with initiating formal discernment during or after seminary, but that would not be ideal.

Before you go to seminary there is a set process you need to go through. First, you tell your parish priest you think you are called. Obviously, in order to do this you must have a parish priest. The priest will appoint a discernment committee consisting entirely of laity. The discernment committee meets with the candidate over a period of months and makes a recommendation to the vestry. If the recommendation is favorable the vestry recommends the candidate. Without the recommendation of the vestry and priest, no bishop will consider the application.

The point of the parish recommendation is that these people have had some opportunity to interact with you. They know you in a way that an interviewer cannot know you.

This is the normal process, and I don't think you can bypass it.

Moo

Posted by the long ranger (# 17109) on :

Sorry to sound stupid here, but why would you want to go for ordination in a religious set-up of which you were not a part?

I don't understand why anyone would want to do such a thing.

Posted by Ahleal V (# 8404) on :

To throw a spanner into the works, if it's an Anglo-Catholic formation you're after, and possibly outside the remit of the standard seminaries of TEC, then you wouldn't be the first to investigate going to St Stephen's House, Oxford or the College of the Ressurection, Mirfield.

You'd probably have to do (at least) a top-up year in an episcopal seminary, but degrees in England are shorter than in the US, and for all I know, it may even be cheaper!

AV

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
Bishop Bruno has been extremely respectful of the Anglo-Catholic parishes in his diocese. When one of them, a small parish with financial and other problems, needed a new interim priest, the diocese made a point of selecting a male priest with impeccable Anglo-Catholic credentials. Even though Bishop Bruno fully supports women in the clergy (and serves with two female suffragan bishops), he respected that parish's wish to continue to have only male clergy. Similarly, there was no interference when St. Thomas the Apostle in West Hollywood moved its altar to the wall and elevated its already somewhat spiky liturgy with the rectorship of Fr. Ian Davies. Bishop Bruno also has not interfered with Blessed Sacrament parish in Placentia, which he allowed to have alternative episcopal oversight and appointed its Anglo-Catholic rector as an honorary cathedral canon.

Please do not assume anything about Bishop Bruno without knowledge of the man.

I actually do have some connections in such matters. It is one thing to support Anglo-Catholic churches (something that most bishops do), but it is another altogether for most modern bishops to approve Nashotah-aspirants for seminary training on the basis of their Anglo-Catholic zeal. There has even been an Anglo-Catholic bishop or two of Chicago who has adamantly not sent ordinands to Nashotah House. I may not know Bishop Bruno personally, but from what I hear it would behoove KevinL to steer away from too much Anglo-Catholic zeal, or perhaps any bishop will desire he attend a contrary seminary to mitigate it a bit!

Posted by Jenn. (# 5239) on :

I would suggest that while you might be currently able to choose which church you would like to be part of, once you are ordained you are there for life. As a result, I would suggest that it is very important to have experience of the church before going forward for ordination. There is no point in choosing a bishop who will allow you to go to a seminary of your choice if the church you will end up serving is one you cannot live with.

You are very much putting the cart before the horse. Find a church and settle there. Find out where you want to live out your faith. Then, and only then, will you know what the priesthood is (because the way different churches approach priesthood is different) and where you can best be formed for it.

Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on :

Martin: Bishop Bruno has not only agreed to the sending of seminarians to Nashotah House but also to Trinity. If there is one thing that I admire most about Jon Bruno, it is that he is very "catholic" in his approach to the preferences of his people. I have never heard any account of his discriminating against any particular seminary, though I would not be surprised if a postulant were counseled to attend a seminary like General or Pacific or Claremont, where many other Diocese of LA priests were educated, if no reason than to increase the likelihood of a finding a job. There is no question that many parishes might shy away from hiring a curate from Nashotah, but that is an artifact of the Episcowars, not of Bishop Bruno's prejudices.

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

To be frank, KevinL, if you go to a seminary and qualify MDiv without going through what is, all said and done, the TEC's "job selection process", thereby gaining the resultant sponsorship, you may well end up without that job.

Speaking from the TEC's point of view, I think they'd see you as attempting to bypass certain essential steps.

Put aside any notion of God calling you: you are applying for a job with an organisation whose regional branch heads usually have a clear idea of what sort of (preferably) young man or woman they want in their stores.

I've never, thankfully, put myself forward for ordination. How the Divine Hand works in the process, having "benefited" from exposure to some of the "selections", I remain sceptical. But I think you have, because you have no choice, to chance it.

Thanks Moo and Beeswax Altar.

I can see your point, Lyda*Rose, and take it. Would be hard at Nashotah if you were XX. There must be, to put it mildly, a certain creative tension between the place and TEC. I think it's the development of genuine personal holiness, or the attempt to do so, which impresses me about it. Many other seminaries seem very dry, intellectual and formal.

BTW, as far as genuine personal holiness goes, as evinced by real insight, Lyda*Rose, I'd have to give you very high marks, even though, like myself, you are a layperson and do not, like myself (as far as I know) possess any formal theological qualifications.

That is another problem I see with many potential ordinands in the Anglican Communion: the concept the priesthood is "an officer's job" and that, once they have graduated from the appropriate "spiritual West Point or Annapolis", they are there to lead. To me that's the wrong concept of spiritual leadership and quite contrary to Christ's teaching.

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

I admire Nashotah House's commitment to forming seminarians in a monastic liturgical environment, which is probably easier in a rural lakeside setting than midtown Big City. Or is it? Could some TEC seminaries do with a strong liturgical component?

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

Nashotah isn't the only seminary with a strong liturgical component. General is known to have a strong liturgical component. Even Sewanee has a strong liturgical component albeit of a Low to MOTR form.

Posted by KevinL (# 12481) on :

Thanks Sir Pellinore for the practical perspective and the bit of encouragement.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

Sir Pellinore (ret'd):

quote:
BTW, as far as genuine personal holiness goes, as evinced by real insight, Lyda*Rose, I'd have to give you very high marks, even though, like myself, you are a layperson and do not, like myself (as far as I know) possess any formal theological qualifications.

Thank you.

I took a look at the Nashotah House site and I think I could see what you find attractive about it. I grew up in a church that was much more AC than the one where I am now. Much as I love my current church, a lot of the tenets I cherish most are the more Catholic ones. I pray that women's experiences at the House are among the reported good ones. In fact, if Nashotah House lives well with the tension of opinion, that could be a source of strength for an ordinand.

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

I suspect, Oblatus, the House is not so much trying to form seminarians in "a monastic liturgical environment" (there is quite a presence of women and children around btw) but, like Cuddesdon (near Oxford), to bring out the inherent holiness in all of them (which we all possess and need nurturing in btw) through liturgy and its development into a genuine 24/7 spirituality. Hence I think the strong informal links with Orthodoxy might help.

It is interesting, isn't it, Lyda*Rose, what initially sets us of on our search for "that quiet interior place"? Reflective liturgy, silence and genuine prayer - which I suspect is something you remember from your earlier AC days with great joy - is something which never leaves you.

I hope that, at places like Nashotah, they do realise women are just as capable of genuine holiness as men. It would be a tragedy otherwise.

KevinL: sounds like, if you really feel that way, you should "give it a go". Please do find an Anglican church where they recognise that everyone is different and "shaping" people does not mean submitting them all to a "spiritual sausage machine". I think you already have senses of "who" and "where" you are. A church, or seminary, needs to work with the grain, rather than against it.

Posted by Amazing Grace (# 95) on :

quote:
Originally posted by KevinL:
I do not have a problem with initiating formal discernment during or after seminary, but that would not be ideal.

At least as far as TEC is concerned, not doing formal discernment would result in not being ordained, so you might wish to reconsider that.

A number of people have noted that in TEC, discernment happens in community. I will note that *ministry* happens in community.

If you want to start out in community with a more AC-leaning place, the names of parishes have been helpfully provided (by people who live a ways from LA [Biased]

). Learn the ropes, get to know people. They will be your support system when The Process throws you a curve ball. Because it will.

This isn't like the business world, where you could be the hot-shot executive hired in from the "outside". Everyone essentially starts at the equivalent of the mailroom and works up to the other jobs.

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
...

A number of people have noted that in TEC, discernment happens in community. I will note that *ministry* happens in community.

...

The official Anglican discernment process does, indeed, start in one's local parish community and work its way through to the diocesan selection board.

Some parish communities are excellent; others wet and some morbidly ill and co-dependent. A wise choice, guided by genuinely wise counsel and using one's inbuilt spiritual antenna would be essential.

I try to think of it as "priesthood" rather than "ministry", the latter being somewhat woffly IMO and connoting active social outreach, which is part, but not the whole of priesthood.

A priest is, I believe, essentially someone set apart, not in a hierarchic sense, to bring, in whatever measure he or she is capable, the reality of the living Christ into people's lives. Quite a challenge.

The best priests, like the Orthodox St John of Kronstadt, who actually wrote on the subject of his priesthood, are those who do exactly this. His spiritual goodness was evidenced in his very practical proactive material intervention in the lives of so many in and out of his discrete church community. Without a graced spiritual life he would've been a mere chatterbox.

I suspect KevinL has been struck by an insight into a deep and graced spiritual life he was privileged to observe. This is often the start for many people. Of course there are the practicalities he must needs go through, but, one hopes, if he is genuinely called and develops himself spiritually with appropriate assistance, the selection panel might, with God's guidance, chose him.

He sounds like he could be the sort of person the Anglican Communion desperately needs. I wish him all the best on the sometimes challenging road ahead. He's probably had more than enough good advice and merits our prayers and best wishes, rather than further discussion, which can tend to hinder and discourage rather than assist him to at least try out for it.

God bless KevinL. Go for it!

Posted by Amazing Grace (# 95) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):

quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:

A number of people have noted that in TEC, discernment happens in community. I will note that *ministry* happens in community.
The official Anglican discernment process does, indeed, start in one's local parish community and work its way through to the diocesan selection board.

Some parish communities are excellent; others wet and some morbidly ill and co-dependent. A wise choice, guided by genuinely wise counsel and using one's inbuilt spiritual antenna would be essential.

I try to think of it as "priesthood" rather than "ministry", the latter being somewhat woffly IMO and connoting active social outreach, which is part, but not the whole of priesthood.

I agree with you that the term "ministry" is a bit woffly, but it's a lot more than "active social outreach" and, in its broad spectrum, not limited to the ordained.

There's always a community aspect to it, even if the individual is working independently, because it is to meet one or more of the community's (gathered or wider) needs.

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

I take your point, Amazing Grace.

My concern with a concept of "general ministry" by everyone in a parish, which is, in theory, a thoroughly good thing, is that people need to be clear as to where their talents and abilities lie and stick to where they are genuinely of use. Many times they are not and thus create the most enormous mess which someone else needs to fix. Sadly, many clerics do not understand that they need to get involved and do this when it reaches a certain stage.

"Pastoral care" by some people can be a form of co-dependence which is sub-Christian in my view. It is very hard sometimes to realise that you need to hold back and not attempt to "save" someone because they are in the process of learning to fly with their own wings. I'm not sure about Anglican churches in the Bay Area, but, where I live in Brisbane, Australia, many churches and many churchgoers seem to be well and truly down the co-dependency pathway.

I do think there are certain areas in Anglican church life where the priest needs to be the leader for a number of reasons.

Posted by Amazing Grace (# 95) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
I do think there are certain areas in Anglican church life where the priest needs to be the leader for a number of reasons.

No disagreement there. But this seems to have wandered far afield from the discernment process in TEC and why community is important in it [Biased]

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0