Canadian Friends of the Ordinariate
Mar 11th
I have set up a Canadian Friends of the Ordinariate site with a link to a Yahoo! Groups listserv for anyone interested in joining or supporting a personal ordinariate in Canada. The listserv is brand new but I hope it will be a good place for those who want to ask questions privately.
www.friendsoftheordinariate.ca is the domain name.
A Few Thoughts, A Week Later
Mar 11th
Other than a few random comments, lately I’ve been pretty quiet on the blog. It’s not for lack of interest – more like a lack of hours in the day. This week started the students’ Lenten confessions, and I’ve managed to hear about seventy-five confessions over the past few days, with lots more to come. I have a rare free evening, so I thought I’d cobble together a brief posting, just to keep my hand in.
It’s been a week since the bishops’ meeting in Orlando, and I’ve had some time to think about what took place there. First, I have to say how gracious the bishops were in their welcome to me. I arrived as an outsider, but it didn’t take long for that feeling to dissipate. I had no doubt I was with brothers in Christ. I have to say, I thoroughly enjoyed the few days we had together. Worshipping in the lovely Cathedral of the Incarnation was a treat. It’s such a gracious community, and the hospitality typified what is surely part of our patrimony.
For me, the best fruit produced by the meeting was the unanimous request from the bishops for the implementation of Anglicanorum coetibus. This was an authentic expression of collegiality, especially since a few of the bishops have sincere questions about it. We were all clear in our understanding that the unanimous request didn’t commit anyone to unanimous action, but the genuine charity exhibited by everyone agreeing to join in the request, I found to be quite magnificent.
A very clear press release was issued – and, of course, the media rode off as though on wild horses, and got much of it wrong. But that can be repaired. In fact, there will be an opportunity to clarify things in a more careful way tomorrow evening at 8:00 p.m. (Eastern), when I’ll be Raymond Arroyo’s guest on EWTN’s The World Over. It’s always a risk to speak in such a public forum, but Raymond is an insightful interviewer, and has a genuine understanding of the consequential nature of this historic decision by the Holy Father.
I have to admit, I’m eager for the establishment of an Ordinariate if only to be able to nurture the fraternal spirit I encountered in Orlando! Is that selfish of me?
Light on Clerical Celibacy
Mar 11th
I have a document that probably sheds a considerable amount of light onto why the authorities of the Church are retaining celibacy as a rule and allowing generous dispensations from this discipline at the same time. I am sure most of our readers are aware that not all Catholics are orthodox or traditionally-minded. Many have exactly the same agenda as the Anglican churches we once belonged to and had to leave for reasons of conscience.
I found a statement on the website of the European Federation of Catholic Married Priests commenting on the Apostolic Constitution, and was quite flabbergasted on reading it. The document in question is a pdf, and can be downloaded from here. Rather than praise what might seem to be the thin end of the wedge towards abolishing celibacy, the attitude is sneering, as we will see from the quotes. It’s unfair! – they protest.
Before going on with the appropriate quotes, the uppermost idea in my mind is that celibacy can be compared with the issue of Latin in the liturgy at the Council of Trent. Making of celibacy a dogma or something irreformable would be the biggest blunder the Church could ever make, but that does not mean the flood-gates should be opened at this time. The implications go so far, that a general relaxation of celibacy is simply not opportune. It is a question of a whole conception of the priesthood, as the quotes will illustrate. Many lay apologists make the cardinal error of nominalism – singling out issues and failing to see the big picture or the connection between everything.
The European Federation of Catholic Married Priests made a statement about the Apostolic Constitution and commented on the proposal to dispense from celibacy generously. They firstly manifest their appreciation of the idea of there being a choice between marriage and celibacy, and that this would contribute to a healthy diversity of vocations in the Church. So far, so good.
Here comes the big tamale:
(…) it is difficult to see how this decision by Rome can ever be justified as there is not a shred of supporting ecclesiology to sustain it — that is unless it is also accompanied by the offer of re-admission to ministry of those catholic priests who have married and who wish to resume ministry. More than 100,000 married catholic priests have been prevented from exercising their ministry. Our view is that to consider these latter as traitors while at the same time believing it is alright to encourage a group of married Anglican priests to break their allegiance to the Anglican Communion is hypocritical. When the situations are compared there is clearly a danger that this will give rise to great confusion within our communities.
It is such an arbitrary and difficult to understand decision – unless, of course, we take for granted the fundamentalist and conservative views which are at the core of this group of married priests for whom the Catholic Church is throwing open its doors. They are against the ordination of women and the possibility of homosexuals being priests in the Anglican Communion, both of which were agreed as acceptable by a majority vote of that communion. However, the Vatican seems to have decided that the type of priest in which it places its trust is not one that is aligned with Gospel openness nor capable of reading the signs that the Holy Spirit is at work.
It seems to us that this gesture damages ecumenism because it fails to take account of the many years of dialogue in order to pursue a return to Catholicism. Rather than bearing in mind the progress made during Vatican II and in the ARCIC discussions on the eucharist, ministries, and authority in The Church, the Vatican is dishonestly recruiting by allowing Christians to get around a decision of their own Church. By doing this it increases division in a Church that is already having so much difficulty trying to sort out disputes touching in particular on important issues of morality.
This is quite mind-blowing stuff, considering that those liberals would like to impose their own “type” of priest as normative and compulsory for all. Their argument is that if it is good for dissident Anglicans, it is also good for all those Latin American base communities and their Congregationalist ecclesiology to have their own! Little Jonny has to have four sweets, and little Cynthia has to have four sweets. If there’s any squabbling, all eight sweets will go right back into the bag and into the kitchen cupboard. Then it’s fair for all!
Now, we have come to the crux of the matter. Is accepting Anglicans into the communion of the Church a matter of just another dose of inculturation to make the bitter pill of the Gospel relevant and meaningful, or is it a question of the revival of Catholic orthodoxy? Well, we’ll have to give it to these liberals: they hit the nail on the head. They’re dead right.
It is a question of a conception of the priesthood. The flood-gates are not being opened because it would be further secularisation in the Church. For the liberals, the ordination of married men (and the marriage of priests) is an issue that cannot be separated from the cause for the ordination of women and same-sex pseudo-marital unions.
That is the reason. About a year ago, I discovered this organisation in France and contacted one of the priest members. My wife was keenly interested in the idea of contacting married (laicised) priests and perhaps learning a thing or two. We entered into correspondence, and invited this priest and his wife to dinner at our home. And very pleasant they were too. However, we soon began to understand the issues. The priest in question is in his late 70’s and was involved in the worker priest movement in the 1950’s. Those men, fundamentally, had concluded that Christianity had run its course and that the only power in the world that could implement the radical ideals of the Gospel was Marxist Communism.
They become “committed”, meaning that they were acquired to the cause of the Revolution and the class conflict between workers and the factory owners and bourgeoisie, etc. This priest’s charming wife had been a religious sister, and they were married in about 1968. We spoke about non-controversial things like children, non-religious interests like sailing or fishing, but we understood that we had nothing in common in religious terms. I was marked by the fact, according to this laicised priest, that the vast majority of married former Catholic priests are so secularised that they have forgotten every last vestige of their vocations. None says Mass (fortunately, not only because they were no longer serving as priests under a Bishop, but also because they had celebrated in lay clothes on the kitchen table when they were in good standing). A good proportion no longer attend Mass or have any identifiable belief. They would not be asking to return to the priesthood as they have gone so far away from orthodox Catholicism.
The day this vital distinction will be made, and it is understood that married Anglican priests moving towards the Ordinariates and the married laicised men described above have nothing in common, it will be possible to help people understand what superficially looks to the average journalist like hypocrisy.
The issue, in short, is not whether or not we priests have wives – but whether or not we are Catholic in our doctrine, spirituality and understanding of the Catholic Priesthood.
Realignment of Anglican Groups
Mar 11th
There is some legitimate speculation going on here and there about what will happen to any parishes or individuals who might be inclined to exercise their liberty of conscience and go off at a tangent, whilst the majority of the TAC forms the material for Ordinariates in communion with Rome. The question needs to be addressed.
Archbishop Hepworth wrote in his Pastoral Letter On the Gathering of Anglicans the following:
What of those who are not yet ready to make this decision?
I have been discussing this question with national groups of our bishops and with some of those whom Catholic Bishops Conferences have appointed to liaise with us. There is no time limit on the acceptance of this Constitution. It is designed to have a lifetime of centuries. Some people are ready and anxious to move now; others are seeking more time for prayer and reflection. Others are confused by the surge of public argument about the Constitution. We are committed to the pastoral care of all our people, those who will quickly move into full communion and those who are not yet ready. We are already discussing the structures for this. The Traditional Anglican Communion will not disappear, but will endure for the same purpose that it was created to fulfil, and which is so clearly described in the text of our petition.
I am unable to say what will be decided in practical terms. However, it would seem to be a temporary provision for those requiring more time to make a decision, grapple with the more difficult aspects of Catholic teaching and perhaps also to make some crucial personal decisions.
For those who have made up their minds, negatively, it would seem that they have a choice of becoming Orthodox or seeking a new settlement, either a new schism or an agreement with one of the continuing Anglican Churches. Continuing Anglican clerics and lay people are painfully aware of the suffering brought by fragmentation and internal strife, above all when these problems are the doings of rival bishops and jurisdictional problems.
We must respect those who reject the Catholic Church for reasons of informed conscience, invincible ignorance, or prejudice, but we will certainly be watching to see whether those groups of Anglicans prove capable of solving their own problems. It is too early to say whether we will be seeing new episcopal consecrations or efforts to reunite and realign under existing bishops and stable jurisdictional structures. This will be a test of whether such ‘lifeboats’ can be taken seriously and seen as viable.
Perhaps these small jurisdictions look different in America than in Europe. We English are generally very cynical about minority churches and the old phenomenon of episcopi vagantes. It would seem to me that this jaded phenomenon has run its course, and that the thing to do is to align with mainstream Catholicism or pursue another avenue in life. At the same time, we do not have the right to sneer at those who have found themselves in that situation because there was no room at the inn, and they often carried their Christian faith with heroism and great courage. Their intention was to work for the unity of the Church, and not to deceive the faithful for questionable ends.
Perhaps, in the future, if the Continuum that decides to remain independent begins to demonstrate unity and ecclesiastical discipline, an ecumenical dialogue could be envisaged, in the same way that the ARCIC dialogues with the Anglican Communion have not been abandoned. This may not happen for some time yet, as certain blogs show signs of aroused emotions and wounded human pride.
One of the most positive signs we should look for of good will would be the small number of bishops compared with the numbers of priests and lay people in the parishes and missions. They seem themselves to recognise this problem. It is always possible for bishops who are not needed for episcopal ministry to shelve their episcopal status and serve their Church as simple priests, as signs of humility and realism, thus inspiring confidence and trust among priests and lay folk.
Instead of engaging in polemics against Rome or the TAC Hierarchy, it would be good to see the “others” begin to organise their independent church bodies and demonstrating their hard work, stability and unity over a number of years, showing that what they offer the world is able to withstand the test of time.
Let them take up the challenge.
Virtual Tour of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre
Mar 11th
The web site 360tr.com has produced an awesome virtual tour of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. As we approach Holy Week and Good Friday, perhaps the glorious images of this venerable church, which contains both the tomb in which the body of Our Lord lain before the Resurrection and the Mount of Calvary itself, will prove an aid to meditation.
In 325/326, Constantine the Great ordered that a temple of Aphrodite raised by the emperor Hadrian over the site of Our Lord’s Crucifixion and Burial (presumably in his reconstruction of Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina) be demolished and that a basilica be built on the site. His mother, the Empress Helena, was present at the construction of the church on the site, and involved herself in the excavations and construction. According to tradition, Helena rediscovered the True Cross and a rock-hewn tomb that exhibited “clear and visible proof” that it was the tomb of Jesus.
The Constantinian basilica was destroyed on October 18, 1009, under Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah. In wide ranging negotiations between the Fatimids and the Byzantine Empire in 1027-8, an agreement was reached whereby the new Caliph Ali az-Zahir (Al-Hakim’s son) agreed to allow the rebuilding and redecoration of the Church. The rebuilding was finally completed — at great expense — by Emperor Constantine IX Monomachos and Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople in 1048.
The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is maintained under a status quo made permanent in 1852. The primary custodians are the Eastern Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic, and Roman Catholic Churches, with the Greek Orthodox Church having the largest share. In the 19th century, the Coptic Orthodox, the Ethiopian Orthodox and the Syriac Orthodox acquired lesser responsibilities, which include shrines and other structures within and around the building. Times and places of worship for each community are strictly regulated in common areas.
Part III of Archbishop Hepworth’s Interview with LifeSiteNews.com
Mar 10th
Here’s an excerpt. There’s more from Patrick Craine’s interview here.
“Homosexual sexuality played out in a same-sex relationship is, in fact, totally destructive of the heart of Christian teaching because it’s destructive of God as Creator, it’s destructive of God as Teacher, and it’s destructive of God as Redeemer,” he said.
“There is no space in Christianity for brute force condemnation, hate, and all that,” he continued. But, he said, “there is space within Christianity for absolutely, clearly teaching what Christ teaches. And if there’s one thing the New Testament and the Old Testament are clear on, it’s homosexuality.”
The archbishop spoke with LSN on Friday in Halifax, Nova Scotia before he addressed the local TAC parish, St. Aidan’s, about the Vatican’s recent offer to Anglicans for reunion with Rome. He began a worldwide tour over four weeks ago in order to encourage members of the TAC to accept the offer.
Archbishop Hepworth praised the treatment of homosexuality in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is primarily dealt with in paragraphs 2357-2359. “The Catechism of the Catholic Church is absolutely perfect,” he said. “It teaches what the Church teaches, and it then goes on to teach us a pastoral approach.”
The Church has always taught that homosexuals “are blessed in other ways, are in fulfillment in other ways,” the Archbishop said. “We’ve got to be game to teach that. … There are compensations that God gives for [disorder].”
“We just need to be much much more positive. If we simply condemn [homosexuality], we won’t win, and we’re not winning,” he continued. “But we’ve also been very reticent to teach exactly how God is present within marriage. In fact, most couples think God has little to do with marriage.”
“I think we need to teach more deeply about that,” he added.
The archbishop described the union of husband and wife as “God’s pathway for the world, in which the Creative God is closest to us.” True marriage, he said, is “a relationship open to creation, open to love, which is the love of God, which is the Spirit. This, in fact, is where God has chosen to dwell – within the family.”
He praised the pope for allowing Anglicans who reunite with the Church to continue ordaining married men because, he said, this “means there’s a family at the heart of the parish, in all its frailty.”
Should Homilies Be Eight Minutes Max?
Mar 10th
I have never timed one of the homilies in our little Anglican Catholic Cathedral but on Sunday mornings they are a lot longer than eight minutes. But the secretary-general of the Synod of Bishops has said homilies should be less than that. Here’s an excerpt from a Catholic News Service story by Carol Glatz (my bolds):
Priests and deacons should also avoid reading straight from a text and instead work from notes so that they can have eye contact with the people in the pews, said Archbishop Nikola Eterovic, secretary-general of the Synod of Bishops.
In a new book titled, “The Word of God,” the archbishop highlighted some tips that came out of the 2008 Synod of Bishops on the Bible. The Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, reproduced a few passages from the book in its March 10 edition.
-snip-
Among the guidelines’ many helpful suggestions, he said, is that “the homily in general should not go over eight, minutes — the average amount of time for a listener to concentrate.”
A preacher would do well to find inspiration from not just the Bible, but from the newspaper, too, so that the homily can address the current concerns facing the world or the local community, he said.
Well, I recorded Cardinal Levada’s excellent homily March 8 at Notre Dame Cathedral Basilica and it clocked in at 12 minutes 15 seconds. Thankfully, he did not include any advice from the newspaper while he beautifully integrated the texts from the Old and New Testament that spoke directly to the youth from Catholic Christian Outreach, encouraging their evangelism.
There are people who can hold you riveted for hours, though.
I think that most people do not read a text well and it is better if they know their material so well that they can deliver it from notes. But that is no excuse for sloppiness or ers or ums. And I think that in some ways it is a lot harder to write shorter than longer.
What do you think? What does the Anglican patrimony have to contribute to the wider Church in the way of sound preaching? Is this one area where we have been touched by the Reformation in a good way?
The Vocations of Marriage and Celibacy
Mar 10th
A few days ago, The Anchoress posted a link and excerpt of an article by Fr. Dwight Logenecker about how contraception has exacerbated the vocations crisis. I have been pondering it ever since, and, in light of the discussion below about priestly celibacy, I’m posting a chunk here that might be relevant:
Before the sexual revolution, a young Catholic boy or girl experienced a family context in which being a husband or wife, father or mother, would have demanded a natural kind of self sacrifice.
In most families, the man would have worked hard to support a wife and many children, and the woman would have given her life in bringing up a large family. Both the man and woman were expected to lay down their lives in a vocation of self-sacrifice, and the Catholic young man or woman would have accepted this vocation within marriage as the norm.
It was within this context of self-sacrificial family life that a young man or woman’s vocation to the priesthood or religious life would have been formed. The young person therefore did not question the demand for a life of self-sacrifice; it was assumed that this was the foundation of a good life. The question, then, was which manner of sacrifice is best for the individual: Dying to self through marriage and family, or dying to self through a religious vocation?
Now, because of artificial contraception, the whole underlying assumptions and expectations about marriage have shifted. Marriage is no longer a way to give all, but a way to have it all. Therefore, when a young person today considers a religious vocation, they are not choosing between different paths of self-sacrifice; they are choosing between a life that seems to have it all and a life that seems to have nothing. They must choose between a home in the suburbs, 2.5 nice children, and a double income or total self denial. The choice is between a familiar form of hedonism or an inexplicable form of heroism.
Finally, a contraceptive culture is inherently sterile. When the marriage act is open to life and is creative, it shows that self-giving is the way of life and fruitfulness. This re-echoes in the search for religious vocation for a young person. If they have seen within marriage that self-giving obedience to the Church and personal sacrifice bring forth abundant fruit and new life, then they will understand implicitly that the religious vocation — with its own set of sacrifices — is also, implicitly, a life of fruitfulness and joy.
I think Fr. Dwight is onto something here.
Chastity is tough, whether inside a marriage or outside. And marriage and raising children is the fastest way to learning in bold relief all about your selfish, impatient, unloving and deeply-rooted character flaws. If you don’t come into marriage and parenthood with a gift of self-sacrifice, you learn it the hard way through painful experience or you wreak havoc on your loved ones. A celibate priest who pops in to do several masses at various parishes and never has to relate that closely to the unlovely in his many pastoral charges may never have to confront his own selfishness and lack of love in the way a father might. Though of course, God finds ways to make us all confront ourselves, doesn’t He?
There are some interesting comments responding to Fr. Dwight’s article. One points out that contraception is not the only social factor in the major shifts in our culture, so is the automobile. And I might add another is the rise of the modern welfare state and the high taxes that are needed to support a huge infrastructure of government workers who do not produce anything in the economy. When I was growing up the milkman down the street could afford to own a big enough home to house his six children and support his stay-at-home wife. Now only two professional incomes plus an inheritance could afford to buy that same home in a Boston suburb today. Also, our values were different. We did not expect to have a television and computer in every room or multiple bathrooms.
Too many people have a romantic view of marriage (and of children — found among many single women who decide to have one on their own) and look at it as a way of solving their problems or completing them.
We are not going to turn back the clock, though we may find that the coming collapse of the welfare state will challenge all of us. Those who have big families today have a tough go. They often can’t do it without financial help from the grandparents, or scholarships from wealthy benefactors.
Theologian Says Married Priests Will Always Be Exceptional
Mar 10th
Zenit is carrying an interview with Fr. Laurent Touze, spiritual theology professor at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, who spoke at a two-day conference held last week entitled, “Priestly Celibacy: Theology and Life,” and sponsored by the Congregation for the Clergy as an event for the Year for Priests.
The interview is especially interesting inasmuch as the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus and its Complementary Norms clearly foresee not only the reception of married Anglican bishops, priests, and deacons coming into full communion with the Catholic Church, but also the possibility of the promotion of married men (from within the personal ordinariates) as candidates for Holy Orders in the future (AC VI. § 2; CN 6. § 1.); far from the Church becoming more permissive of non-celibate clergy, Fr. Touze suggests that an ever-deepening understanding of priestly celibacy portends just the opposite. Most astonishingly, Fr. Touze claims that priestly celibacy ranks somewhere between a discipline and a dogma, intimating that what was once considered disciplinary could one day be regarded as revealed truth. According to Fr. Touze, the practice of a married parish clergy in the Eastern Churches is a corruption based on a manipulation of texts, is contrary to Holy Tradition, and is permitted only by way of exception to the universal norm.
ZENIT: Is celibacy a dogma of faith or a discipline?
Father Touze: Neither one nor the other. It isn’t a dogma of faith because we see married priests in the Church today such as, for example, some [priests] of the Eastern Catholic Church. Not all but some admit married priests. Or as has been reminded recently in the Holy Father’s motu propio “Anglicanorum coetibus,” published last Nov. 4: Among the ex-Anglicans who want to return to communion with the Catholic Church, there will be married priests admitted.
ZENIT: With this measure, do you think that one day, celibacy might become voluntary also for priests of the Latin rite?
Father Touze: No, because the Church is understanding more and more the relation between priesthood, episcopate and celibacy. It is something that could be likened to the revelation of a dogma, though it isn’t so at this time; one tends increasingly to understand that a practice must be promoted among all priests and also among Eastern Catholic priests which is truly similar to the one lived in the first centuries.
ZENIT: But in the first centuries there were many married priests, including the Apostles?
Father Touze: Studies have convincingly shown that this must be questioned: Celibacy of all clerics wasn’t lived, but from the moment of inclusion in the priestly order these men had to live continence with the permission of their wives, because this was a commitment of the couple.
ZENIT: Why, then, are exceptions made?
Father Touze: Historically because there has been a manipulation of texts and I believe a bad translation that the Eastern Church, which has separated from Rome and has recognized that what they had declared contrary to tradition, could be accepted. In this connection there truly are some exceptions. The Church discovered that she had the possibility of admitting exceptions but that these should be understood as such. Respectably, as the Second Vatican Council stressed, there are very holy married priests in the Eastern Catholic Churches who have contributed much to the history of the Church and to the faith in times of persecution, but they are truly exceptions and must be understood as such.
ZENIT: However, these exceptions are not made with bishops. Does episcopal celibacy have a special meaning?
Father Touze: Undoubtedly. It is very different, both theologically as well as historically. What’s more, with the constitution “Lumen Gentium,” Vatican II defined that the episcopate is the fullness of the sacrament of Holy Orders. It is necessary to discover the specificity of the episcopate and, hence, episcopal celibacy. And it can be demonstrated with the fact that for the celibacy or continence of a bishop an exception has never been made.
This is something studied by the Church on which the Roman pontificate has had to reflect more recently in contemporary history on two occasions: after the French Revolution, where some bishops, or better, former bishops, asked to marry.
This has been studied and it has been said that it is impossible, that this had never been done, that at stake was the dogmatic issue. Or still recently with the ordination of married men and married bishops that were effected in former Czechoslovakia by imposition or with the pressure of the Communist Party in power. There also the Church affirmed on the fact that the bishop must always be celibate or if he had married before his ordination because he would have to live continence from the moment of his episcopal ordination.
[Translation by ZENIT]
What do you think about Fr. Touze’s thinking and what ramifications might it have for the life of the personal ordinariates in the future?
+Hepworth on Witholding Communion from Pro-Abortion Politicians
Mar 9th
In Part II of the LifeSiteNews.com interview with Archbishop Hepworth, the TAC Primate addresses the issue of barring pro-abortion politicians from Holy Communion.
“Anybody publicly espousing an anti-life stand against the clear teaching of the Church and the commandments would be immediately removed from any office, and certainly would be told they can’t receive Communion,” he explained.
Archbishop Hepworth further notes the challenges faced by Catholic bishops in maintaining the Church’s discipline in the public sphere.
“Since Vatican II, the Church has been squeamish about its ability to discipline its laity,” he continued. “This has been a moment at which the Church has tried to rediscover collegiality, the role of the laity, the ministry of the laity, and it causes some mental conflict to then have to say to somebody, quite publicly, ‘you’ve abandoned the teaching of the Church and you are now being disciplined.’”
The Archbishop opined that it was the fear of a public rupture, where priests may side with the layperson being admonished, that has caused many Catholic bishops to hesitate in applying discipline to notorious dissenters from the Church’s teaching. Interestingly, he suggests that the greater historic role for laity found the Anglican tradition may make it easier for Anglican bishops to admonish the erring faithful.
But Anglicans are more accustomed to “disciplining their laity,” he opined, “because we’re more used to lay roles.”
Archbishop Hepworth Interviewed on Life Issues
Mar 9th
HALIFAX, Nova Scotia, March 8, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Life issues are “at the heart” of Christianity, said Archbishop John Hepworth, Primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), in an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) on Friday.
“If we get the life issues right, then we get the Incarnation right, the nature of God right, the nature of Christian worship right,” he explained. “This is actually an entrance issue, not a side moral issue. It’s the issue on which Christianity actually defines itself against the others.”
LSN spoke with Archbishop Hepworth in Halifax, the capital of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia, where he made an overnight stop to address the local TAC parish, St. Aidan’s. The Australian native came to Halifax as part of a worldwide tour that he began four weeks ago to encourage TAC communities to accept the Vatican’s offer to Anglicans, issued in October, to reunite with the Roman Catholic Church.
Hepworth told LSN that the TAC’s commitment to life is “total.” “It’s one of our founding premises,” he said.
He continued by explaining that the TAC is “absolutely stark and clear on where we stand” on life issues because of the environment they have left in the worldwide Anglican Communion. The Communion, he says, has come “to an extremely liberal position where many provinces are totally shaky on abortion, if not regarding it as compulsory. It is shocking the extent to which they’ve slipped – contraception, marriage, all the life issues are denied.”
But he also explained that the TAC has needed to be clear on life issues as part of its efforts for unity with the Catholic Church. “Our position is not to fight the Catholic Church, it’s to fully absorb its teachings,” he said.
In both his interview with LSN and his homily to the parishioners of St. Aidan’s, Hepworth spoke out against the practice of embryonic stem cell research, comparing it with cannibalism. “Killing embryos in order to harvest stem cells to make drugs is simply our form of cannibalism, and it’s just as wrong as cannibalism,” he told LSN.
He described the experience of a tribe in New Guinea, which can still remember when war canoes would come down the river and take a young person to eat for strength before a battle, a practice which only ended in the 1960s.
Using stem cell drugs derived from killed human beings in order to wave off disease is no different in the human attitude,” he said. “Same temptations everywhere, we just think our temptations are more civilized.”
* * *
There’s more. And this is only part one! The joys.
Counting Our Blessings
Mar 9th
If God is for us, who can be against us?
I must do some writing for Catholic papers today on last night’s excellent Catholic Christian Outreach event where Cardinal Levada spoke, so I must be brief. I posted some pictures from yesterday over at my blog, which I have been neglecting of late. I also put up a link to the article I wrote about the Cardinal’s talk on Anglicanorum Coetibus as edited and published by the Catholic News Service in the United States. So please head on over to take a look, but if you want to make comments, come back here.
Here are a couple of other things to call your attention to. Ottawa Archbishop Terrence Prendergast, who is an indefatigable blogger, wrote the following, giving the Traditional Anglican Communion and our Ottawa suffragan bishop a nice mention. Archbishop Prendergast has been most kind and generous to us, even though our cathedral is a humble place and our congregation, in Roman Catholic terms, miniscule.
He writes:
CCO FUNDRAISER FEATURES CARDINAL LEVADA AS SPEAKER
After speaking at the Consecration of the new seminary for the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), who are present in our archdiocese at St. Clement’s Parish, Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has come to assist with the evangelizing work of Catholic Christian Outreach (www.cco.ca) headquartered at the Diocesan Centre (and on whose board I am pleased to serve).
Last evening he spoke at the St. John Fisher Dinner to benefit CCO at Queen’s University on Anglicanorum coetibus, the Holy See’s proposal of a Personal Ordinariate (a type of diocese on a larger scale, somewhat akin to military ordinariates) in response to the request by bishops of the Traditional Anglican Church around the world (Bishop Carl Reid heads up a diocese in our city).
The Canadian bishops, I believe, will greet the Ordinariate with generosity. But Damian Thompson seems to think the opposite will happen in England. He writes:
Reading Australian Bishop Peter Elliott’s magnificent exposition of the Ordinariate plan, I thought (as did many of you): why don’t we hear similarly imaginative responses from the Bishops of England and Wales? Here are two of my fears. Do you share them?
1. The English and Welsh bishops fundamentally don’t like the Ordinariate scheme, so will come up with the least they can get away with.
Someone told me the other day that the TAC has its detractors in Rome, people who say it exists only on paper. Yet this individual said that they keep meeting members of the TAC who are vibrant and alive. “Yes, we are small,” I admitted. “But the Ordinariates will be like mustard seeds.” I added that when the graces begin to flow through our being part of the Church Catholic, those seeds will sprout and the Ordinariates will flourish. This individual agreed. I know we also have friends in the Vatican, including someone special who lives inside the Apostolic Palace.
Yet we can be tempted sometimes to get a little chippy and defensive because of the negative things that have been said about us over the years. Even in my short time — ten years — as a TAC member, I have seen some elements of the Anglican Communion treat us as the off-scouring of the earth, evil schismatics and cultists who deserve to gnash our teeth in outer darkness until we come back to Canterbury suitably chastened, our tail between our legs, begging for mercy. Alas, there have been some Catholic bishops who have built warm friendships with Canterbury bishops who have come to share the view that we are insignificant, highly annoying and do not deserve to be welcomed anywhere, least of all as members of the Catholic Church.
But I exhort us to be generous now. Let us shine with the love of Jesus Christ, confident that, through the Holy Father, God has opened up a way for us to come home. Last week I attended a lecture on ARCIC talks by Saskatoon Bishop-elect Donald Bolen, who worked for several years in the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity in charge of relations with Anglicans and Methodists.
Over the years, he had developed warm relationships with his Anglican ecumenical partners and they clearly love him and he them. But upon meeting him for the first time, I realized this about him. He loves. Period. This is a man who loves everyone because Jesus Christ is alive and he knows it. There is nothing wobbly about his faith. He knows what he believes. But out of that faith, he is generous and kind and welcoming to everyone and consequently everyone trusts him.
He was as warm and kind and welcoming to TAC Bishop Carl Reid, who also attended the event.
Can’t we all be like that? We can afford to be generous now. And that generosity of spirit is what will win people to us. There is no need to be defensive or chippy or snarky (I remind myself!) because God will open up a way for us. We can rest in Him.
The picture shows Bishop-elect Bolen, who will be installed on March 25, the Feast of the Annunciation, as Bishop of Saskatoon.
Our Lady’s Dowry
Mar 9th
I get quite emotional when someone talks to me about England. Just show me some pictures of medieval churches with their relics of pre-Reformation religion, the Malvern Hills, Sherwood Forest, my native Lake District or the City of York, and countless other favourite places – and play me something that had been composed by Vaughan Williams before the horrors of the Great War destroyed his faith and wounded his soul! I then inevitably have to wrench myself back to reality by realising that the pastoral English reverie is really the long dive towards Orwellian darkness with New Labour and the politically correct brigade.
It appears that the latest thing is an electronic detector in your household trash bin so that you pay as you throw away. England is possibly the most policed country in the world, other than perhaps North Korea and China. Am I like a Russian in 1917, condemned to take an increasingly greater distance from my native land, or might we really be at the beginning of that new spring?
A Cardinal for Canterbury? This is the title of an article here. Someone seems to be wildly hyping and having romantic notions. But that is not in the character of the streetwise and pragmatic Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Archbishop Emeritus of Westminster. Does he really think that England is going to be as Catholic as, say, Poland in the nineteenth century or the countries of the Hapsburg Empire in the really old days?
We can lament that the Reformation ruined England, as the 1789 Revolution ruined France to the core. But, will the English people and political institutions really forgo secularism and return to Catholic Christendom? Perhaps this is not the idea for some in the Magic Circle.
We are still getting a good dose of ‘London fog‘ when we hear of the Apostolic Constitution associated with the old ecumenism, as if everything was going beautifully in the Church of England (no one is reminding us of the inconvenient facts of women’s “ordinations” and same-sex “marriages”), and the Queen was about to bring the whole of England into communion with Rome. It isn’t happening like that! These myths were exploded as Anglicanorum Coetibus came into existence without interference from Cardinal Kasper. I really am surprised to read this stuff still coming from conservative Catholic sources.
It does not suffice to go on with secularised “religion” and kid people that it is moving into communion with Rome. The former Archbishop of Westminster said:
So, the English Church is a Church united and strong. It is out there in the areopagus, the market place of our diminished secular society which is looking for meaning and hope. This English Church would speak to the nation of true belief, of the dignity of the human person from the beginning of life to its natural end.
Uh? Sorry, I need a new pair of glasses and a hearing aid, or he does! The Cardinal dreams of
… this Church as one that would speak for life, the poor and all those without a voice. It would be one that defends the family and that “would continue to respect and dialogue with those who differ from us, people of other faiths, people with no faith, the agnostics and atheists. The English Church would be a strong voice, witnessing to all that is good and true. It would be a Church, sustained not only by Scripture, tradition and reason favoured by the Anglican Church but, crucially, by Scripture, tradition, reason and teaching authority. It would encapsulate that authority in teaching the truth and the beauty of the Christian faith.”
These are strong words indeed, but from a source I wouldn’t trust further than I could throw him! We have already read reams about an English Catholic Church that was doing everything to stick its heels in, promote the liberal Tablet line and keep ignoring “inconvenient” directives from Rome when it came to cleaning up the town.
Nice try, Your Eminence, but you will have to do better to convince this sceptical Englishman.
Isolated Groups of Anglicans
Mar 9th
Most of the Anglican groups, in the Anglican Communion or the TAC, live in countries where their bishops have territorial dioceses. It would certainly be assumed that one or more Ordinariates would be established in those countries more or less corresponding with the formerly Anglican jurisdictions concerned.
There are some very small groups of Anglicans living in countries where there is no such jurisdiction that would provide the ‘material’ for an Ordinariate. In the TAC, there are certainly some communities that are far too insignificant. For example, other than my chaplaincy on the European Continent, there is a tiny community in Japan. There is a small community in New Zealand under the able leadership of Canon Ian Woodman. Unfortunately, one of their priests seems to have aligned with another Anglican body. There must be others dotted around the world.
In the Traditional Anglican Communion, there is a canonical entity called the Patrimony of the Primate, allowing priests to be under the Primate’s jurisdiction without residing in his territorial jurisdiction (Anglican Catholic Church of Australia). This is my own canonical title within the TAC. It would be interesting to see whether such a concept can continue to exist under the Ordinariates.
In the 1970’s and 80’s, there were Catholic priests in Rome who made it their business to help more traditionally-minded seminarians to find a canonical jurisdiction in which they could be ordained. They found that bishops in places like southern Italy and Eastern Europe were less weighed down by diocesan bureaucracy and were inclined to incardinate clerics without requiring them to reside in their dioceses. The seminarians then did their studies in Rome, were ordained and returned to their own countries as priests. It was then a relatively simple matter for one of these priests to go to the local diocesan bishop, show his papers and obtain permission for ministry in that jurisdiction. The diocesan bishop has no need to consult his Council for such a simple thing, as he would if it were a question of incardinating that priest.
This was a canonical anomaly that was tolerated for a time, since canon law was observed and there were no breaches of discipline. Eventually, it became necessary and possible to establish permanent institutes and societies for these priests to give them a canonical framework and a more normal priestly life. The same principle holds when it comes to pastoral ministries: they obtain permission from the local diocesan bishop. Some diocesan bishops are mean and stingy, and others are generous to the point of allowing a personal parish in application of Summorum Pontificum.
The Ordinariates will be different, as they will enjoy the canonical status described by the Pope in Anglicanorum Coetibus. Perhaps for an isolated cleric or a group that is too insignificant to be considered for being made into an Ordinariate, it will be possible to belong to an Ordinariate in another country. With such canonical status recognised in the Church, it may be possible to collaborate in some way with the local Catholic diocesan bishop, or at least obtain permission to minister to the faithful.
I was tempted to call this article Crumbs from the Master’s Table!
How many TAC folk are in this kind of situation? Have you any ideas about how these things can be organised?
Unofficial Text of Cardinal Levada’s Address
Mar 8th
The Salt + Light blog has an unofficial transcription of the talk (“Five Hundred Years After St. John Fisher: Benedict’s Ecumenical Initiatives to Anglicans”) which Cardinal Levada delivered on Saturday evening at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario. Here are some excerpts. My emphases.
The recent Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus, establishing—I don’t need to translate this, I suppose, it won’t come out so well in translation: “groups of Anglicans”—establishing personal ordinariates for groups of Anglicans seeking full communion with the Catholic Church, was not created in a vacuum. For many Anglicans, the possibility opened by this initiative has seemed to be a logical development of the official dialogues between the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church during the 45 year period since the end of the Second Vatican Council. Any discussion of Pope Benedict’s initiatives regarding Anglicans might therefore begin with a glance at this important history.
Cardinal Levada presents the Apostolic Constitution as the natural outgrowth of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) dialogue, of which he proceeds to provide a general outline. He recounts the several stages of the ARCIC process, set against the backdrop of the collapse of Catholic Faith and Apostolic Order in the Anglican Communion, of which women’s ordination and the homosexual movement are perhaps the most notable symptoms.
For Catholic Anglicans, he hits the nail squarely on the head.
The fundamental issue here, as many have noted, is the question of authority. This may be briefly summed up in the following two points. Does the revelation of God in Jesus Christ and in Scripture intend to let us know God’s will in a way that requires our obedience (for example, the imitation of Christ, the Ten Commandments)? And secondly, has God, in Christ, left His Church, founded on the Apostles, an authority by which it can assure that can know the correct meaning of the revelation, amidst sometimes varying human interpretations (for example, the sensus fidei, the ecumenical councils, the Magisterium of the Pope and bishops)?
The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion have found the expression of the Church’s Magisterium in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “the most complete and authentic expression and application of the catholic faith in this moment of time” (as they put it in their original petition for corporate reunion).
Pope John Paul’s Apostolic Constitution Fidei depositum promulgating the Catechism, points out that, “It is meant to support ecumenical efforts that are moved by the holy desire for the unity of all Christians, showing carefully the content and wondrous harmony of the catholic faith.”
As we met with Anglican consultants in the preparation of Anglicanorum coetibus, these bishops and theologians themselves proposed the Catechism of the Catholic Church as the norm of faith for the corporate groups of Anglicans who might avail themselves this new instrument for full corporate union with the Catholic Church. Thus, I would also characterize the Catechism as an ecumenical initiative of Pope Benedict XVI and of his predecessor.
As Cardinal Levada notes, far from the Catholic Church imposing the Catechism on incoming Anglicans, it was the Anglican inquirers themselves, chief among them the bishops of the TAC, that suggested the text as a doctrinal standard for any future reunion. In Anglicanorum Coetibus, the Holy See is simply echoing the words of the Portsmouth Letter of the TAC College of Bishops.
Turning to the Anglican Communion, we can see the many elements that impel toward full unity: regard for the unifying role of the episcopate, an esteem for the sacramental life, a similar sense of catholicity as a mark of the Church, and a vibrant missionary impulse, to name but a few. These are by no means absent from the Catholic Church, but the particular manner in which they are found in Anglicanism adds to the Catholic understanding of a common gift. These considerations help us appreciate the Catholic Church’s insistence that there is no opposition between ecumenical action and the preparation of people for full reception into Catholic communion.
I like this! As Anglicanorum Coetibus itself states, the “liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion [soon to reside] within the Catholic Church” are “a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.” The particular gift of the Anglican tradition will serve to enhance the common gift of revealed truth already subsisting in the Catholic Church– but imperfectly or incompletely expressed so long as brethren are separated from the One Fold.
Indeed, the first ecumenical action logically leads to the second: reception into full communion. Unitatis Redintegratio, that is, the decree on ecumenism, asserts that almost all people long for the one visible church of God, that truly Universal Church whose mission is to convert the whole world to the Gospel so that the world may be saved to the glory of God.
The Apostolic Constitution is the consummation of the Anglican-Roman Catholic conversation. The end of genuine ecumenical dialogue is reincorporation into the fullness of communion with the Successor of St. Peter and the bishops in communion with him.
This is the first time that the Catholic Church has reached out in response to men and women of Western Christianity who desire full communion and accorded them not just a place among many, but a distinctive place. This is not surprising. Twenty-eight years ago, the great historian of ecumenism, Fr. Yves Congar, wrote that if we take seriously that the Holy Spirit has been working among our fellow Christians, we have to take seriously the ways they express their beliefs. When their particular expression of faith adds harmony to ours, and ours add harmony to theirs, the logical step is to pass from talking longingly about unity to living in unity, a unity whose essence is revealed in harmonious diversity. The unity Christ desires is visible; it is not elusive or even unreachable. Likewise, the totality that Christ desires is visible. These assertions lie behind the famous teachings of Lumen gentium that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, but it is equally true to say that the unity Christ desires for His Church can always be added to, just as there is room for another instrument in the orchestra. The totality that Christ desires does exist in terms of the elements of sanctification and truth that the Church possesses, but the sharing of those elements, then the manner of celebrating them, is still far from complete. We sometimes do not know the value of what we possess and we need the spirit-filled insights of others to recognize the treasures we have.
While taking care to disabuse his audience of too strict a comparison between the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Anglican personal ordinariates (which are situated firmly in the tradition and law of the Latin Rite), Cardinal Levada makes it clear that the new structures are revolutionary in the life of the Catholic Church. The personal ordinariates facilitate the reunion of Anglican groups which will retain their distinctive gifts and corporate identity, sharing the elements of sanctification and truth in ways that will strengthen the witness of the Church in the world.
The Times They Are A-Changin’
Mar 8th
I see from my American calendar that you are entering daylight saving time. That brings you one hour nearer to us in England. But only for a couple of weeks. Then we shall move on to British Summer Time (BST). Now in the States you are used to changing watches frequently as you move East to West or vice-versa across your great land. England is much narrower (in this, at least) and we are able to maintain the same time throughout the country; and have done ever since the railways came and abolished local time. Bristol used to be ten minutes later than London, until Isambard Kingdom Brunel came and spoiled all the fun. The French, of course, with their refusal to accept anything English, advance their clocks by an hour; though the greater part of their land mass is West, not East, of Greenwich.. And how they hate the very idea of Greenwich Mean Time! Oddly, the Spanish do the same – I suspect because they think they are so grown up by eating late at night; when in reality it is more like six o’clock (by the sun) than their supposed 8pm. The Portuguese, being England’s oldest ally, keep their clocks in step with ours.
But in reality all of us fool ourselves. We suppose that by moving our clocks forward an hour we give ourselves more daylight. In reality, we do not change anything; we simply kid ourselves into rising an hour earlier. If we really wanted to enjoy all the daylight there is, we would get up with the sun and go to bed with it – though that might create problems for those North of the Arctic Circle.
No man, by taking thought, can add an inch to his stature; or, come to that, a day to his span of life. And no one, by messing about with the clocks, can add any daylight to what we are given by the rotation of the earth on its axis. We so want to fool ourselves. I have written another piece in my own blog ‘Ancient Richborough’ expounding similar ideas about weights and measures.
The trouble is, we are all dissatisfied with what we have. What a blessing it is to be able to get up on a summer’s morning and enjoy the daylight before anyone else is about. Soon it willl be the Spring Equinox, and not long after that, Easter. Now that IS something to look forward to!
Salt + Light on Cardinal Levada’s Talk
Mar 8th
The blog of Canada’s Salt + Light Catholic Media Foundation has the following excerpt from Cardinal Levada’s address, “Five Hundred Years After St. John Fisher: Benedict’s Ecumenical Initiatives to Anglicans”:
Visible union with the Catholic Church does not mean absorption into a monolith, with the absorbed body being lost to the greater whole, the way a teaspoon of sugar would be lost if dissolved in a gallon of coffee. Rather, visible union with the Catholic Church can be compared to an orchestral ensemble. Some instruments can play all the notes, like a piano. There is no note that a piano has that a violin or a harp or a flute or a tuba does not have. But when all these instruments play the notes that the piano has, the notes are enriched and enhanced. The result is symphonic, full communion. One can perhaps say that the ecumenical movement wishes to move from cacophony to symphony, with all playing the same notes of doctrinal clarity, the same euphonic chords of sanctifying activity, observing the rhythm of Christian conduct in charity, and filling the world with the beautiful and inviting sound of the Word of God. While the other instruments may tune themselves according to the piano, when playing in concert there is no mistaking them for the piano. It is God’s will that those to whom the Word of God is addressed, the world, that is, should hear one pleasing melody made splendid by the contributions of many different instruments.
Ottawa Citizen Reports on Cardinal Levada’s Kingston Talk
Mar 8th
My colleague at the Ottawa Citizen, Jennifer Green, has a report in today’s paper on Cardinal William Levada’s talk in Kingston, Ontario Saturday night, March 6.
I will be writing a longer version for Catholic papers that I hope to file about midday today. Here’s an excerpt of Jenny’s piece, with my bolds. I think she did a pretty good job of encapsulating some of the key points, though I have some minor quibbles (see below).
William Cardinal Levada, prefect the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, told a dinner of about 300 in Kingston that “union with the Catholic Church is the goal of ecumenism (at least), we phrase it that way.”
“Yet the very process of moving towards union works a change in churches …”
The Catholic Church is enriched when another group adds its means of worship, although he hastened to add it would not be any “essential elements of sanctification or truth.” Those were already provided to the Church by Christ.
“Visible union with the Catholic Church does not mean absorption to the greater whole, as a teaspoon of sugar would be lost in a gallon of coffee.”
Instead, he compared it to an orchestra with “… all instruments tuned to the piano, … all playing same notes of doctrinal clarity … the beautiful and inviting sound of the world of God.”
The issue has become pertinent after Pope Benedict XVI made overtures to traditional Anglicans, particularly in Britain, who cannot agree with recent moves to ordain female bishops and accommodate gay clergy and “marriages” or unions of gay congregants.
In October, Levada announced that new rules would allow disaffected Anglicans to convert by parish or even by diocese. They would have their own governance within the Roman church, meaning they could keep traditions such as their liturgy.
Rome said it wasn’t “poaching” Anglicans, just responding to requests from traditionalist bishops.
Just as I don’t like the word “disaffected” as the adjective to describe us, I’m not crazy about “traditionalist” either. “Traditional” is better and more accurate. The “ist” smacks of ideology, as if our being traditional is some kind of fetish, or form of legalism, a focus on the externals of rites and rubrics without regard to the content of the Catholic faith. We are capital “T” Traditional in that we believe in Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition as our authority. And interestingly, the bishops in the U.K. are not “traditionalist” in the sense of being Prayer Book traddies, while we in Canada can be accused of that.
Cardinal Levada did not (as I recall) mention the TAC in his talk. I’ll correct this if I discover in going over my notes this morning. Were gay blessings on the horizon in the early 1990s, shortly after the TAC came together, and the first informal talk with Rome took place? I don’t think so.
Our desire for unity has always been a positive desire, one of obedience to Christ’s command and prayer that we be one in Him.
One picture shows Cardinal Levada greeting Traditional Anglican Primate Archbishop John Hepworth for the first time at the gathering. The group shot shows the crowd at the Catholic Christian Outreach fundraiser. Jenny Green is in the bottom right corner, wearing the blue/green dress. The empty seat next to her is mine. For more pictures of the event, go here.
TAC Bishop Brutally Robbed in South Africa
Mar 8th
I think most of us have missed the news item on The Messenger.
Bishop Michael Gill, Diocesan Bishop of TAC’s Anglican Church in Southern Africa (Traditional Rite), consecrated by Archbishop Hepworth in Portsmouth in October 2007, has been, with his family, victim of a violent robbery. It frequently happens down there, and priests are often murdered for no more than a small amount of money.
We should pray for Bishop Gill and his family, and perhaps find ways to help in some modest way as our Lenten almsgiving. I’m sure this would be possible through diocesan bishops of the ACA and other parts of the TAC — or through the International Anglican Fellowship.
Embolism
Mar 8th
Oh dear! Embolism? That sounds like a very serious condition requiring immediate medical care. Actually, it is a prayer of the Mass.
I would like to examine another part of the Mass that needs attention for the purposes of a revised authorised Anglican liturgy in the Catholic Church. This is the beginning of what is often called the Communion rite following the Canon of the Mass.
There has been some variation as to the place of the Our Father at Mass, but that was settled fairly rapidly. There is evidence to suggest that Gregory the Great moved it from after the Communion to its present place in the Roman rite. Its place in the Eastern Rite is always just before the elevation and fraction. In all rites then it comes at the end of the Eucharistic prayer. The embolism is an expansion of its last clause, praying the Lord to deliver us indeed from all manner of evil.
Its form in the older Roman form and the Use of Sarum is thus:
Deliver us, O Lord, we beseech thee, from all evils, past, present, and to come: and at the intercession of the blessed ever Virgin Mary, Mother of God, with thy blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and with Andrew, and all the Saints, graciously grant us peace in all our days: that by the help of thine availing mercy we may ever both be free from sin and safe from all distress. Through the same Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end. R. Amen.
The Byzantine Liturgy, imitated by the modern Roman rite, ends this prayer by another ending – “For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory”. This ending is often added to the Lord’s Prayer in the Anglican tradition, but with the Embolism entirely omitted.
The modern Roman rite (new ICEL translation) gives this abbreviated form:
Deliver us, Lord, we pray, from every evil, graciously grant peace in our days, that, sustained by the help of your mercy, we may be always free from sin and safe from all distress, as we await the blessed hope, the coming of our Saviour, Jesus Christ. R. For the kingdom, the power and the glory are yours now and for ever.
The old Roman rite and most uses thereof have the Fraction during the doxology of the Embolism. The modern Roman rite does not. Instead the order is radically altered to incorporate the Pax before the Fraction. Only after the Fraction and Commixture is the Agnus Dei said:
Taught by the Saviour’s command and formed by the word of God, we have the courage to say: Our Father …
Deliver us, Lord, we pray, from every evil, graciously grant peace in our days, that, sustained by the help of your mercy, we may be always free from sin and safe from all distress, as we await the blessed hope, the coming of our Saviour, Jesus Christ.
R. For the kingdom, the power and the glory are yours now and for ever.
Lord Jesus Christ, who said to your Apostles, Peace I leave you, my peace I give you, look not on our sins, but on the faith of your Church, and be pleased to grant her peace and unity in accordance with your will. Amen.
The peace of the Lord be with you always. R. And with your spirit.
Let us offer each other the sign of peace.
Fraction.
May this mingling of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ bring eternal life to us who receive it.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us.
Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, grant us peace.
The present Anglican Use Mass is even more terse:
And now, as our Saviour Christ hath taught us, we are bold to say,
People and Celebrant
Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy Name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen.
The celebrant breaks the consecrated Bread and puts the third part of the Host into the chalice saying:
May this mingling of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ bring eternal life to us who receive it.
A period of silence is kept. Then shall be sung or said.
[Alleluia.] Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us; Therefore let us keep the feast. [Alleluia.]
In Lent, Alleluia is omitted, and may be omitted at other times except during Easter Season.
The following anthem may be sung or said here:
O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us.
O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us.
O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, grant us thy peace.
Our Lord at the Last Supper took bread and broke it, and so it follows that the consecrated bread is broken in all liturgies. The Gallican and Eastern rites have always been much more elaborate.
The Commixture is intrinsically associated with the Fraction, and this is the dropping of a part of the Host into the chalice containing the Precious Blood. The ancient Roman rite (Ordines Romani I, II, III, etc.) was highly complex, and present practice is but a remnant. At the end of the Embolism, the archdeacon held the chalice before the Pope and he put into it the Sancta. The Sancta were a particle consecrated at a former Mass and reserved till now: the Pope had saluted it at the beginning of Mass. He made three signs of the cross over the chalice and put the Sancta into it at the words: Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum. This rite illustrates the continuity of the Sacrifice between one celebration of the Mass and the next, for in the absolute, there is only one Mass, that of Christ.
The Pope then took a loaf (yes, it was leavened bread at the time, or large unleavened breads like Jewish families use for the Seder), broke off a part, left it on the altar and went to his throne. It was only at the moment of the Pope’s Communion that he would make the three signs of the cross with the small piece of consecrated bread over the chalice held by the archdeacon, saying: Fiat commixtio et consecratio corporis et sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi accipientibus nobis in vitam aeternam. Amen. Pax tecum. R. Et cum spiritu tuo. and put it into the chalice. He communicated under the species of wine. There were thus two distinct commixtures, first of the Sancta at the Pax, secondly of the newly consecrated species at the Communion. By the eleventh century, the rite of the Sancta disappeared, leaving the second commixture, as we have it now. This is seen in Ordo Romanus XIV.
It would seem that the distinction between the Sancta and the Fermentum come from this. The latter is the Blessed Sacrament sent by the Pope to all the churches of Rome to emphasise the communion of the Church. The order of this rite in the Roman rite and the slight variations thereof in northern European local uses thus come from a long evolution and simplification of the rite. The Sancta is certainly the origin of our practice of reserving the Blessed Sacrament in a tabernacle or a hanging pyx. It emphasises the unity between yesterday’s Mass and today’s.
I would very much like to see the Embolism and Fraction / Commixture rite restored in the Anglican Use to the Sarum model:
Let us pray. As our Saviour Christ hath commanded and taught us, we are bold to say :
Our Father, which art in heaven, hallowed be thy Name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, in earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen.Deliver us, O Lord, we beseech thee, from all evils, past, present, and to come : and at the intercession of the blessed ever Virgin Mary, Mother of God, with thy blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and with Andrew, and all the Saints, graciously grant us peace in all our days : that by the help of thine availing mercy we may ever both be free from sin and safe from all distress. Through the same Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end. R. Amen.
The peace + of the + Lord be + always with you.
R. And with thy spirit.O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us.
O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us.
O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, grant us thy peace.May this holy + mingling of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ be unto me, and to all who receive it, salvation of spirit and body, and a wholesome preparation for eternal life, through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
