I have just come across an article in the British Church Times, which gives a priest’s reflections on Anglicanorum Coetibus – You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone. I suppose the implication is the usual one, a bait-and-switch operation to deceive Anglicans into becoming conforming Roman Catholic clones. However, the man’s reflections are of interest in an indirect way. Instead of the opinions of “rival” continuing Anglicans, we are looking at a kind of “bland” churchmanship with very little doctrinal or spiritual conviction.
The big question is that of Anglican patrimony. I have already expressed my idea of the survival of medieval and pre-Reformation English Catholicism. For others, it is the Protestant vision of the “pure” Church that knows nothing of organic development or history. For this fellow, it is something else.
The obvious question to ask is about the liturgy. Prayer Book or Roman Missal? The former is problematic for a Catholic-minded priest and the latter is not Anglican. The Book of Divine Worship (until now available only in the USA) is, admit it, an artificial rite, but one that does convey characteristics of Anglican worship.
The author of this article says that the “Constitution also maintains the express requirement for unconditional fresh ordination for those who are to serve as clergy in the Ordinariate, along with an absolute bar on the ordination of married men as bishops (although, after ordination to the priesthood, those who are currently Anglican bishops may be permitted to serve as priests, as Ordinaries, and to retain their episcopal insignia and be treated as retired bishops)”. The question of absolute ordination is not mentioned in the official documents, but only by the commentary of a Jesuit canonist and university professor.
Other aspect of Anglican patrimony are said to include “pension entitlements, housing, stipends, etc.” That may be the case for career clerics in the Church of England, but not for continuing Anglican clergy and many of the brave priests serving missions in the Third World. We come to questions of ministry – “What kind of ministry will former Anglican clergy exercise once the process of reception, retraining, and ordination has taken place? The very pastoral and evangelistic ministry that they will leave behind in the Church of England is surely the most significant of all aspects of their Anglican patrimony, and it remains to be seen how this can be continued by the Ordinariate”. I think, on the contrary, that ministry is likely to be much more pastoral in the Ordinariates. In England, the first job is going to be at the same level as ordinary people and no longer high-and-mighty clerics. If we want churches and chapels, and don’t have lots of money to buy large buildings, then we are going to have to roll up our own sleeves, learn to use tools and materials and do the work ourselves. I have always found that lay people always respect a priest they see working with his hands! Pastoral ministry, did you say? I have never heard of a Catholic priest (at least in the old days) who was not on the heroic side with sick visiting, catechising looking out fallen souls in the most miserable conditions. I always had the impression that Catholic priests were pastoral.
The Church of England, certainly has an outstanding architectural and cultural heritage, but so has the Catholic Church in France, Germany, Italy and every country on this earth. The Catholic Church also has the Bible and the Creeds. “Clergy and congregations work hard to maintain and improve their church buildings and churchyards”. That is true, and Catholic parishes are now as neglected as they were in the eighteenth century – when they were crumbling away from neglect. However, I have seen priests work most conscientiously, and that’s the way we were trained in seminary! Again, we are coming to the realisation that our Anglican patrimony is nothing other than Catholic patrimony. We all have our churches and graveyards.
Now he says it – “it seems likely that the number of lay people taking part in the new Ordinariate will be very modest, and that there will be very few congregations prepared to leave en bloc for the new Ordinariate with their Anglican priest, not least because this will necessitate leaving behind a greatly loved place of worship”. That might well be true in some cases, but not in the case of the TAC. Our churches are rented or improvised in old buildings – and in most cases, we will be continuing to worship in them or be allowed the use of Catholic parish churches or chaplaincy chapels in hospitals, schools, etc. We have everything to gain, now that our Bishops have written confirmation that the Apostolic Constitution concerns primarily the Traditional Anglican Communion.
There is one thing this good priest seems to be alluding to – inclusivity. This is a politically-loaded word that can be understood as meaning pastoral outreach, or the liberal agenda. Is it implied that Catholic priests only look after Catholics, when he often does charitable and humanitarian work with suffering people who are not Catholics? The real issue is divorce and remarried people and the question of Communion being given to people who are not formally Catholics.
Now, the question of sacramental marriage is one that touches on divinely instituted law, the indissolubility of marriage. These are difficult and painful questions that I would prefer to see resolved case by case as with many other difficulties people face. This following observation is poignant: “Within the Church of England’s parish churches there are many people who have responded to this openness and generosity of ministry, drawn gently to consider more deeply their need for faith and to find it in a Church that does not immediately ask hard questions or require formal membership as a precondition of receiving its ministry”. There is much to be said for Don’t ask, don’t tell. The Catholic Church has a reputation of exaggerated legalism that acts as a bar to the ministry of mercy and the will never to deprive anyone of hope. I think the Holy Father is going to surprise us with his pastoral generosity and pastoral outreach. As they stand, the new laws look as if they are taking away what they gave with the other hand, a kind of cruel joke.
The Church does not play cruel jokes, and what has been announced has a pastoral goal within the bounds of reality and human weakness. We priests are constantly called to be faithful to the Church’s teaching, but at the same time to exercise mercy and express God’s love. No one is beyond forgiveness and inclusion if he or she wishes to live according to the will of God and make progress in forsaking sin and turpitude. This is the pastoral ministry of discernment and helping souls to assimilate God’s grace on the uphill struggle towards the Light.
Becoming Catholics demands sacrifice on the part of us all, selling everything to buy the precious pearl. Many people practice artificial contraception and feel they cannot accept Humanae Vitae and more recent documents on moral issues. Choices have to be made. I would not exactly consider artificial contraception a part of Anglican patrimony! Are Anglicans all that averse to going to confession? This Sacrament is practiced in many Anglican parishes, and people will go and confess their sins freely and without any pressure being applied on them from priests.
“Anglicanorum Coetibus is not the Uniate-style solution for which many had hoped — a Church with its own jurisdiction and its own rite, capable of maintaining the very identity that enriches our Christian faith as Anglicans”. This is true, but what prevents that from happening in the future once the Ordinariates prove their stability and worthiness to continue into the future? For many of us, it will not be a hard decision, and we are not being asked to leave anything behind that is not sinful or unorthodox. Unknown future? The future is unknown for us all, and this is where faith comes in.
Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!
When I first read the title, I thought the article would be about the C of E losing its Anglo-Catholics. Different perspectives, I suppose.
I think you have a point there. The "middle-of-the-road" without the Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals is going to be a sweet, sickly goo of simpering – - – nothingness.
It has only to knuckle up to secularism and Islam. Good luck to them!
As long as we don't lose sight that Satan is working as hard as he can to keep people from accepting the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution, this type of article should not surprise us, nor be a cause of discouragement.
Indeed, a certain blog that prides themselves on how terribly "mere" Anglican or "classical" Anglican they are is putting lots of energy into this effort. Satan uses the tools at hand. As Archbishop Sheen said, evil has no capital of its own, it is only spoiled goodness. Satan does not hesitate to use highly motivated Christians to cause division within the Body of Christ, and to feed that sins of Pride and doubt.
It was interesting to see their principal spewer of vitriol comment that he was concerned in seeing the Continuing Church's numbers diminished by those taking advantage of the Holy Father's Offer.
I think that is one of the most honest and truthful comments I have see him make.
It is about numbers, and getting the greatest number of people in the place best for their souls.
I have made no bones about it from the outset, that when asked why I did not simply go off alone and become a RC some time ago, I have two answers:
(1) I received a crystal clear answer in prayer to stay the course.
(2) I recognized that patiently following the process, and establishing the personal Ordinariates to be established, will allow the greatest number of souls to be led into full communion with the Holy Father.
No one, including Father "I am too a Catholic" and "I know what TRUE Anglicansim is" misses the point that a greater number of souls will end up in full Communion with the Holy Father in the Ordinariates, than had individuals gone this way alone.
Sean W. Reed
E-mail widely circulated by Dr. William Tighe:
I am astonished by this article:
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=85866
and especially by these paragraphs (17-19):
Within the Church of England’s parish churches there are many people who have responded to this openness and generosity of ministry, drawn gently to consider more deeply their need for faith and to find it in a Church that does not immediately ask hard questions or require formal membership as a precondition of receiving its ministry.
There are considerable numbers who have been divorced and later married again, who would not be eligible to receive holy communion in other churches, including those who have become Anglicans for this very reason, having found themselves excommunicated in their own church community.
Equally, there can be very few who would accept the requirements of Humanae Vitae concerning birth control, or who would consent to private confession as a compulsory requirement of membership.
The author, who is both learned and well-informed, seems to think that there can be "uniate" churches that can be in communion with Rome while rejecting what Rome maintains to be binding and "irreformable" expressions of the Church's moral and doctrinal teaching, and the consequent "bindings" (not to receive communion while in a state of objective adultery; not to practice contraception; to confess and seek absolution). There are a few Eastern/Byzantine Catholics of the "we-are-Orthodox-in-communion-with-Rome" sort who seem to think that they can reject, e.gg., Florence, Trent or Vatican I, and sometimes present their case with great persistence and cleverness, but I think that they are few in number and ignored by Rome in the same spirit that an elephant might ignore a gnat.
Anglicanorum Coetibus will not only have no attraction for these sort of "Cafeteria Christians," but it is not intended for them. I think that the late Eric Mascall would scorn such "cafeterianism," even if it seems to bear some sway in Fort Worth.
I do not know this Fr. Stephen Trott, but his support of the liberal agenda is certainly disappointing and revealing. It would appear that in "Newchristianity" the Sacraments are a right and not a gift from God. Sin is good and virtue is bad. "War is peace"? This is truly an Orwellian concept of the world and human reason! We should have "intercommunion" and the doctrine of the Faith is up for grabs, people should be allowed to contracept and continue obliviously their "lifestyle" at everyone's else's expense, we should have "open communion" including giving the Sacraments to the unbaptised – and the institution is clearly "owned" by the "club", "Magic Circle" – call it as you want.
It is obvious to me that the Apostolic Constitution is not made for these attitudes. It was obviously made for the TAC and similar Anglicans in Forward in Faith and elsewhere who really want to be Catholics. It is NOT made for those who feel they are being "poached". The latter can just stay where they are and leave us alone to follow the call of God and the Church.
I think you will find your man (Trott) here:
http://strott.users.btopenworld.com
If it is him, he is deeply attached to the Anglican establishment.
The comments on this blog reveal a serious lack of comprehension of the Catholic movement in the Church of England, for which the article was written. It describes attitudes here as they are, rather than as wishful thinking would like them to be.
Anglicanorum Coetibus does seem to be designed principally for the Church of England, rather than TAC. Cardinal Kasper has said so. The announcement was made in England, with the Archbishop of Canterbury on the platform, not representatives of TAC.
AC needs to be appraised realistically. Will it be viable in England? I note the very subdued expectations on this blog about its reception by Anglicans in N America.
If you are right, then the Pope is truly poaching – and that makes nonsense of his assurance to +Rowan that ecumenism would continue.
Are you suggesting the Pope is lying?
By the way, the Pope and Cardinal Levada trump Cardinal Kasper. Do you have an ace?
We know differently.
Fr. Trott,
On the contrary, I believe that we're all very familiar with the "affirming" comprehensiveness of your so-called 'Catholic movement'. Obviously Anglicanorum Coetibus is not meant to appeal to those who would presume to appropriate the Catholic moniker while thumbing their noses at Catholic doctrine.
In what ways does Anglicanorum Coetibus seem to be designed principally for the Church of England? Your own article and this comment seem to argue that the Apostolic Constitution, when appraised realistically, is hardly viable in England as it asks sacrifices that few are willing to make. Oh yes… I forgot… Cardinal Kasper has said so.
What Cardinal Kasper will not tell you — and he can not as he was deliberately excluded from the process at every step — is that the AC was indeed drafted to meet the specific needs of the Traditional Anglican Communion and was a direct response to the appeal of the TAC bishops in their October 2007 'Portsmouth Letter'. When the representatives of FiF UK met with Cardinal Schonborn in Vienna in January of 2009, the outlines of the AC, then already substantially drafted, were revealed to them. It was shortly after this meeting that FiF UK made clear to Rome their interest in being a part of what the Holy See had already prepared for the TAC. The London press conference of October 20, 2009 was simply an ecumenical courtesy.
I believe the AC to be quite viable in England. Indeed, I would anticipate the number of congregations that will ultimately enter the ordinariate to be two — or even three times — the number suggested by the Catholic bishops' conference! As for North America, it is well known that the AC will initially appeal most to the TAC — the ACA in the USA and the ACCC in Canada — to which is was primarily directed.
Well, Christian, you are evidently a very considerable expert on what happens in England!
The London press conference went a long way towards damaging the prospects of success for AC in this country. More of a disaster than a "courtesy" – since none was shown.
Congregations don't leave the Church of England. They did not in 1993 when women were ordained, and there is no impetus for change provided by the announcement of AC. That is the principal problem for AC here in England.
It might be different for TAC congregations, which I believe add up to a maximum of 18 in England. Is this the number you have in mind?
Well, Fr Trott, as Bishop Broadhurst said, the frog-boiling pots are going to be heated up. There are going to be women bishops in the Church of England. It's inevitable. All Church-of-England Anglicans are going to be obliged to accept their authority.
So, either Rome – following +Rowan's advice – will finish up doing the same thing and yet other things. In which case, it's "good night".
Otherwise, there's more sense to the Apostolic Constitution than you think. I think it's the latter, so the Pope isn't going to do something he knows will fail!
I'm just simply reasoning – unless it's the post-modern thing to stop thinking.
There is nothing inevitable about the legislation going through General Synod at the moment. It is already delayed, and when the draft is finally presented, it has to obtain a 2/3 majority in each House. Many things can and will happen in the next five years.
Well, then, you should be quite comfortable and you won't need Rome, as the Church of England might decide to turn around and stage a New Oxford Movement. Stranger things happen at sea! We will have to see what is more likely, the Church of England turning around and adopting something like the ACNA, GAFCON or Continuing position in the face of TEC and Ms. Schori, or the Ordinariates being successfully established from intra-mural and extra-mural Anglicans who couldn't care less about buildings, pensions or status.
One of these two possibilities will certainly fly in the face of conventional wisdom. That I can guarantee!
Good luck!