Myth #2: The Apostolic Constitution is going to be sabotaged by the local Bishops, not always supportive of the present Pope’s reforming policies. Archbishop Hepworth is deluded in thinking that any specific norms to apply the Constitution to the TAC are forthcoming.

I am not a specialist in canon law, though I studied the subject as one of the standard undergraduate theological disciplines at Fribourg University. One thing our professor was particularly insistent upon was the notion of the salvation of souls being the supreme law, and all canon law is interpreted for this purpose. The law is interpreted in function of the Legislator’s intention, and more leniently than its literal sense.

The matter I am most interested in considering is the relationship between the Personal Ordinariate and the Church. The following article of the Apostolic Constitution informs us that the Ordinariate is subject to the dicasteries of the Holy See, especially the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and not local Bishops’ Conferences.

II. The Personal Ordinariate is governed according to the norms of universal law and the present Apostolic Constitution and is subject to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the other Dicasteries of the Roman Curia in accordance with their competencies. It is also governed by the Complementary Norms as well as any other specific Norms given for each Ordinariate.

Speculation has been offered about precedents for what Pope Benedict XVI has formulated. As far as I can see, this is a completely new invention to fulfil a precise pastoral need, that of intra-mural and extra-mural Anglicans having made a request to Rome asking to be received corporately without asking for any particular canonical model, and professing the doctrines contained in the Catechism. The nearest equivalent in history would be the Apostolic Vicariate subject to Propaganda Fidei as was the case for England until the establishment of the Roman Catholic hierarchy by Pius IX in 1850. It would certainly be interesting to study the canonical aspects of Apostolic Vicariates in England before 1850 and some mission situations to this day.

Usually, particular Churches and equivalent ecclesiastical structures (e.g. Prelatures, Exarchates, Vicariates, Prefectures, and Missions) are subject to the Congregation for Bishops, the Congregation for the Evangelization of the Peoples (formerly Propaganda Fidei) and the Congregation for the Eastern Churches. Particular Churches are not usually subject to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. For the Pope to have decided this, he had to have a very good reason. I could suggest any number of good reasons, but I'm not the Pope!

An English Monsignor has recently implied that Anglicans under the Ordinate(s) in England would be very much under the control of the English hierarchy and under an obligation to integrate fully into the diocesan parishes under their jurisdiction. If this were so, there would be no question of Personal Ordinariates or need for them. Also such control claimed by diocesan bishops goes entirely against the plain words of the Pope’s Apostolic Constitution. Certainly, diocesan bishops do not like anything that escapes their control, and we should not forget that there were many examples in the nineteenth century, and other times, of bishops declaring war against mitred abbots of monasteries inside their territory! This happened in the early nineteenth century in France between the Bishop of Le Mans and Dom Guéranger, Abbot of Solesmes who had received his crozier and mitre in Rome with approval from Pius IX. Dom Guéranger had to close down his community for a while! There are also many other examples. I am sure the objection of many bishops in the 1970's to the traditionalists of Archbishop Lefebvre was that someone was trespassing on their "property". Bishops do not "own" their dioceses; they serve them.

The closest equivalent currently existing of this Personal Ordinariate is the Personal Apostolic Administration of São João Maria Vianney in Campos, Brazil, as well as the many Military Ordinariates in various countries. Among the Oriental Catholic Churches, the Syro-Malabar Catholic Archdiocese of Kottayam a purely personal Archdiocese whose jurisdiction is parallel to the rest of the Syro-Malabar Catholic hierarchy. These are just a few examples of bishops of different jurisdictions exercising their authority in the same place or territory.

In the quote I gave above, there is an extremely important element. It is also governed by the Complementary Norms as well as any other specific Norms given for each Ordinariate. Some have said that the TAC is deluded in thinking that any further norms were forthcoming in addition to the Apostolic Constitution and the Complementary Norms. The Pope here is being very clear in affirming that three elements would govern each Ordinariate: the Apostolic Constitution, the Complementary Norms and specific norms for the individual Ordinariate. For example, in England, nothing would prevent the possibility of two Ordinariates, each with their specific norms: one for the present Forward in Faith clergy and laity, and the other for what is presently the Traditional Anglican Church. This would seem to be most appropriate, even though the two are in communion and friendship. For example Forward in Faith in England is not going to have the same liturgical position as the TAC, since priests of the former as a rule use the modern Roman rite and do not require any liturgical concessions from Rome.

The presence of these clear words in the Apostolic Constitution make it plain that the Archbishops and Bishops are not wrong or deluded in waiting for further specifications from Rome in order to apply the Apostolic Constitution and the Complementary Norms to the specific situation of the TAC. During a phone conversation with Archbishop Hepworth a few days ago, he explained to me that there were many loopholes in the presently available documents, and that this was deliberate – in order to allow for the specific norms and any necessary and justified dispensations to be issued to each Ordinariate according to the particular situation.

Specific norms will be issued to our Archbishop and those to be appointed as Ordinaries, and substantial parts (I hope and pray they would comprise the whole) of the TAC will become a number of local Personal Ordinariates in the coming year.

Our waiting will not be in vain.