This past Saturday, Bishop Edwin Barnes, the first Bishop of Richborough and former Provincial Episcopal Visitor, spoke at S. Francis of Assisi Church in Bournemouth, Dorset on the subject of Anglicanorum Coetibus. Here is the audio of his talk, kindly provided by Colin Geatrell, editor of the parish magazine.
-
Recent Comments
Latin Text of Anglicanorum Coetibus Since the apostolic constitution was composed in English - the first such document to be written ...
The Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary The history of the various feasts is fascinating, and a specific time-line is, at best, sketchy. ...
The Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary Actually the celebration of Mary's Conception is the older feast. The Eastern Church celebrated ...
Becoming Catholic J.M.J. Noel - We made a specific request to the Holy See. The Holy Father responded with a...
Thank You Glad to hear about your decision to enter the Catholic Church! As a life-long Catholic, and a re...
-
Our Lady of Walsingham
St. Thomas Becket
St. Thomas More
St. John Fisher
I greatly enjoyed listening to the talk give by Bishop Edwin Barnes in Bournemouth on the subject of Anglicanorum Coetibus. He sees it all clearly, despite – as he tells us – not being particularly specialised in Roman canon law and ecclesiastical institutions.
The comparison between the Personal Ordinariate and the Provisional Episcopal Vistors (PEV) in the Church of England is brilliant insofar as Pope Benedict XVI might have studied how things work in England. There is also the situation of the TAC dioceses and missions to which Bishop Barnes made no allusion. Both the Personal Ordinariate and the jurisdictions of PEVs in the Anglican Church are designed to protect designated groups from unsympathetic and ideologically-motivated diocesan bishops. The nearest equivalent in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church is the Personal Apostolic Administration of Campos, Brazil, founded by Pope John Paul II for a large community of clergy and laity attached to the extraordinary form of the Roman rite.
Bishop Barnes praised the flexibility of the Personal Ordinariate idea, contrasting its character as a stable Episcopal jurisdiction comparable to a diocese to the barely tolerated PEVs in the Church of England.
Regarding liturgical issues, the Bishop outlined the fact that Anglican liturgical and para-liturgical traditions would be retained, but that the Eucharistic rite would not exclude the Roman Rite. Most Forward in Faith clergy in England use the modern Roman rite, and this possibility is obviously foreseen in the Papal legislation. One can be an Anglican-Catholic and use the Roman rite. It did not seem to be understood that this rite comes in two “forms” – “extraordinary” and “ordinary”, and would give a juridical basis for the English Missal, which is essentially the “extraordinary” Roman rite in English. No allusion was made to the ancient Use of Sarum, as the question does not seem to have been raised in England.
The Book of Common Prayer has a very weak standing among the English clergy, but Bishop Barnes recognised that the Americans were more insistent on this matter, attached as they are to the old favourite prayers and classical English idiom. Regarding the liturgy, I can see those coming from Forward in Faith using the modern Roman rite, but those in the TAC would certainly prefer a revised (based more on the Anglican Missal than the modern Roman rite) Anglican Use favoured by the American Anglican Use parishes. A certain amount of liturgical diversity is envisaged, and this shows the Holy Father’s profound and sympathetic understanding of the Anglican situation.
There will be canonical and practical difficulties to iron out, and implementing the Apostolic Constitution may take several years. Clergy and lay folk will come as they are ready. The Bishop avoided any hard-and-fast conclusions as how things will work out is still unpredictable.
Well said, Bishop, and thank you.
As I understand it, the current Book of Divine Worship has two alternate eucharistic services, i.e., one closer to the 1928 US BCP and one closer to the 1979 US BCP. Perhaps it could be reworked so that there could be some more alternatives based on the Anglican liturgical patrimony, i.e., one rite closer to traditional prayer book language (whether Cranmer's, or the Scottish prayerbook or 1928 US), one closer to the English or Anglican Missal, one following the Sarum use, and perhaps a modern language 1979 BCP if necessary (although since the Ordinariate parishes can also use the 1971 Roman Rite, I'm not sure a modern language service would be necessary for a revised BDW). The worldwide Ordinaries once appointed could set up a commission to revise the BDW that would set out alternative services from the Anglican liturgical patrimony, for approval of the Ordinaries and the Congregation for Divine Worship.
It's true that there is little enthusiasm for traditional rites (B.C.P. and English Missal) amongst most of the English Anglo-Catholic clergy, but many of the older laity have never really been reconciled to the new rites.
Ironically there is growing interest in traditional rites (including the Extraordinary Form in Latin) amongst the younger generation (both clergy and lay).
Whilst finding the bishop's talk most interesting and encouraging, I thought he was patronizing to "Prayer Book Catholics". There is sense among Catholics in the C of E equivalent to "the science is settled" of believers in man-made global warming: there is nothing left to say about the English liturgy, and you are a bore if you mention it; we are all happy with the novus ordo, etc. (How anybody can put up with it is a mystery to me.)
The Welsh Jacobite is right to mention the laity "that never have spoken yet". There is deep affection for the BCP tradition aning those who show no signs of leaving the C of E, and as it continues to fall to pieces there will now be provision for people who would never feel at home with what happens in almost all of the Catholic parishes in the C of E.
As for the BDW – what would be the need for it? There are the existing Roman rites, various Anglican versions of the Missal, and some suitable versions of the BCP – particularly the 1929 Scottish book. Minor adjustments can be made by tinkering, as has always been done – wouldn't that be part of the "patrimony"?
One reason for the lack of regard for the Prayer Book Catholic tradition is the hard fact that (however much one might wish it were not so) in practice it has not been a bulwark against liberalism. There are of course exceptions, but in general it is the Romanising parishes that have stood fast.
One can think of whole English dioceses that only twenty years ago were solidly P.B.C. and are now a desert of liberalism (mingled with the worst sort of sub-evangelical worship). Indeed this has been the fate of an entire province – the Church in Wales.
It would take a whole article to explore the reasons, but alas 'tis so.
In the existing Anglican Use communities there is a distinct and widespread preference for the Elizabethan (Rite 1) liturgies.
A generally accepted quip about the BDW is that it contains two Rites: Rite 1 and Wrong 1.
How anyone can love Cranmer, when you understand his undergirding theology is a mystery to me. Bishop Elliot addressing FIF in Australia, rightly observes he can not go uncorrected.
Remember this is the man who robbed the English and Welsh people of the Holy sacrifice of the Mass, prayers for the dead and to the Saints and the sacraments of Holy order and unction.
Just listened to Bishop Barnes' talk…….
I can't agree that Cranmer merely translated the Mass into English. He in fact ripped its very heart out and ordered the destruction of 17,000 altars in England, Wales and Ireland.
Note that the Vatican will only allow a revised Anglican use, with all the Cranmerian error expunged.
If churches are shared ( which I doubt it ) ..vicarages certainly will not. With no compensation offered this time, I think there will be very few takers. The catholic Church in England has no cash tpo pay stipends to support married priests and the average Anglo-catholic congergations are small with mainly retired people.
I believe the ordinariate will attract considerably less than a tenth of one per cent of Englsih Anglican communicants ..and even less in Scotalnd, Wales and Ireland
To undergo unconditional ordiantion, believing that you are already ordained is a sacrilege.