In a typical diocese, not only would [clergy] be geographically relatively close, the majority would have been raised in local parishes, attended local schools and seminaries, served in local parishes. Should a new bishop wish to know more about the clergy handed on to him, supposing he himself was not local, he would have many people to go to. In any event, he would assume that they shared many aspects of their formation in common with his own. Bp Lopes, in the other hand, must deal with men previously in TEC, TAC, REC, CEC, assorted non-Anglican denominations, military chaplaincy, formed everywhere from Nashotah House to Yale Divinity School to Reformed Theological Seminary, men who did not previously know one another, men who have changed denomination at least once and in some instances two or three times, men who may have been seriously at odds with previous authority figures, and some men who are not currently working in any area connected with the OCSP. I would say that he must be contemplating a challenging task. If I were Bp Lopes I would be looking ahead to forming a very different clergy cohort.I think there's an added factor of what might be called hyper-careerism in the younger members of the current clergy cohort. It isn't hard to see the motivation for recent Episcopal seminary graduates to try to find a more favorable job market than TEC, which has long had a massive surplus of all clergy candidates but in more recent decades has been more likely to privilege women and gay male candidates. The voluminous public remarks of Fr Bartus bemoaning this situation, which I've often linked here, should give observers pause. The Catholic priesthood, whether or not in an Ordinariate, is not just a clone of the prestigious, well-paid, and undemanding billets that are so much sought after in TEC.
Bp Lopes should keep this in mind -- the need to recruit celibate candidates after the first generation should change the incentives and provide a clear contrast for the exiting talent pool.
