Interesting comments from a once-Anglican bishop, now Catholic priest of Santa Fe:
I don’t have any interest at all in the extraordinary rite or in any move of retrenchment against the Second Vatican Council. Vatican II is the reason I was able to become a Catholic.
I am extremely happy with the church as I find it.
The experience with doll practice for baptism is interesting. More details, please. Do you suppose any dolls are sat in the font and immersed? Do some seminarians play at being parents and godparents for their classmates?
9 March 2009 at 8:04 pm
Is there a missing link here? And a misplaced paragraph about “baby doll baptisms?”
9 March 2009 at 9:14 pm
Link fixed; thanks for the notice.
10 March 2009 at 12:15 am
It’s shame they denigrated his learning and experience by making him attend a seminary for years with a bunch of young students, despite his decades of ministry. It’s not as though an Anglican bishop is ignorant. He should have been teaching those classes. But good for him for being humble about it.
As for the doll, we also have one in our diaconate formation program. This is the doll of a thousand names, having been baptized by hundreds of deacon candidates over the decades. If I recall correctly, it’s a Cabbage Patch Kid, so all real babies look beautiful to us after that!
10 March 2009 at 8:43 am
Eric, I thought the same thing, but according to the dates in the article, I think he only studied there a year at most. To be honest, I would love for my bishop to send me to Rome for a year’s study. Especially if I could get that apartment this priest shared with his wife. I think my spouse would enjoy Rome.