Is the Archbishop of York a “Proper Anglican”?
With Archbishops like these, who needs enemies? The “Continuing” sectarians claim that those of us who go over to Rome have no right to call ourselves “Anglicans” and now the Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, says that we won’t be “proper Catholics” either! The Archbishop made the following remarks to BBC Northern Ireland presenter William Crawley.
Archbishop Sentamu: “If people genuinely realise that they want to be Roman Catholic, they should convert properly, and go through catechesis and be made proper Catholics. This kind of creation [the Apostolic Constitution] — well, all I can say is, we wish them every blessing and may the Lord encourage them. But as far as I am concerned, if I was really, genuinely wanting to convert, I wouldn’t go into an Ordinariate. I would actually go into catechesis and become a truly converted Roman Catholic and be accepted.”
William Crawley: “So those Anglicans who take advantage of the Apostolic Constitution, you’re saying, would not be ‘proper Catholics’?”
Archbishop Sentamu: “Well, I mean, I’d be very surprised –”
William Crawley: “What would they be if they are not ‘proper Catholics’?”
Archbishop Sentamu: “They would be what they are: an Ordinariate of the Vatican.”
William Crawley: “Anglican Émigrés?”
Archbishop Sentamu: “(Laughter) Well, if I was a Roman Catholic bishop and I had this group within my diocese being looked after by an Ordinariate whose reference was back to the Vatican, I’d have to ask a number of questions.”
As to the method of “conversion,” Dr. Sentamu is welcome to his opinion, I suppose. Any Anglican desirous of becoming Roman Catholic may go to the nearest Catholic Church, demean himself (Ed. Please see comments #5 and #20 below) by participating in RCIA (which is properly for non-baptized persons even though Christians — including Anglicans — are routinely subjected to it), and be assimilated into the mainstream Novus Ordo culture; he may cease to be Anglican. Thankfully, the Holy Father has recognized the beauty that subsists in the Anglican tradition, and he has provided a means for us to remain truly Anglican whilst being in full communion with the Holy See. The Vicar of Christ desires us to be Anglicans and Catholics. And despite Dr. Sentamu’s provocative statements to the contrary, Anglican Catholics of the personal ordinariates, in union with the Successor of St. Peter and sharing a common faith with the rest of the Church, will be every bit as Catholic as the Pope himself — and for the Archbishop of York to suggest otherwise is truly offensive. Indeed, protected in their faithful Anglican enclaves under the patronage of the Holy Father himself, I suspect that those same Anglican Catholics will stand a good chance of being more genuinely Catholic than many of their brethren who are subject to the corrupting, demoralizing influences of faithless, modernist bishops and priests in the regular dioceses!
The Anglo-Catholic calls upon Dr. Sentamu to apologize for these insensitive, ignorant, and grossly erroneous remarks immediately!
about 1 month ago
“The “Continuing” sectarians claim that those of us who go over to Rome have no right to call ourselves “Anglicans” and now the Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, says that we won’t be “proper Catholics” either!”
Very well said, Christian. When your opponents contradict each other, you know you’re on the right track! People are blinded by the brilliance of the work of the Holy Spirit!!
about 1 month ago
‘I suspect that those same Anglican Catholics will stand a good chance of being more genuinely Catholic than many of their brethren who are subject to the corrupting, demoralizing influences of faithless, modernist bishops and priests in the regular dioceses!’
I am a cradle Roman Catholic and I have lived through the changes of Vatican II and today I am a daily mass goer and receive Holy Communion each time. I in no way feel the our mass is inferior to other rites in the church. Nor do I feel our holy priests and good bishops take second class either.
I too have been earnestly waiting for you Anglicans to join us at the foot of the same altar. The sacrifice of the mass is the same in all Catholic rites. Good Catholic priests stand in for Christ at the altar.
I’m no theologian and I can’t hold a candle to a lot of what you guys are talking about but we are all Christian Catholics, some in communion with Rome and others soon to be. Please remember people like me listen in to what’s going on to keep informed. I have feelings too. I know mass rubrics may change again, but please go slow. Catholic means universal and that umbrella is getting pretty big. We are all part of the universal church and as in most large families there is a lot of jostling for position but we can take it.
God bless all your work in this endeavour. Ken Patterson
about 1 month ago
As I responded to Charles below, I simply said that for an Anglican to be assimilated into the prevailing RC culture (“the mainstream Novus Ordo culture”) is to cease to be distinctly Anglican. I respect the ordinary Roman Rite and did not mean to cast aspersions on it.
It is not a matter of superiority but legitimate identity. Dr. Sentamu seems to have suggested that the only appropriate way to be “Catholic” is to blend in with the prevailing RC culture, to give up our Anglican distinctiveness. Anglican Catholics disagree. We want to remain Anglican in communion with the Holy See. It’s not that we look down upon “ordinary” RCs; we simply desire to remain in the tradition that has nourished our fathers for many generations.
about 1 month ago
I am a great fan of this site, and of the whole Anglicanorum Coetibus project, but I find the unnecessary sneering at “RCIA” and “Novus Ordo” tout court evidenced here rather offputting. RCIA is a well intentioned program for teaching non-Catholics the Catholic faith that can be done well or done poorly. Too often it is done poorly, reflective of the rather lax approach to catechesis in general in the decades following Vatican II. When I went through RCIA in the early ’90s, I certainly read a lot of catechetical materials on my own and did not rely solely on what was taught in RCIA, as I wanted to go more in depth than the doctrinal presentation given. I believe that in the catechetical area, however, as in the liturgical realm, there has been slow and steady progress in recent years to reclaim Vatican II in the context of hermeneutic of continuity. Criticism of how RCIA and how the ordinary form of the liturgy is often carried out is fine, but this sneering dismissal of RCIA and the ordinary form of their very own nature, just seems rather ungracious. I think that the new Anglican Catholics in the Ordinariates can help to restore sound catechesis and sound liturgics in the broader Roman rite, so please make your criticism and witness constructive and not simply arrogantly dismissive.
about 1 month ago
Charles,
Firstly, there was no sneering at the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite in my post. I simply said that for an Anglican to be assimilated into the prevailing RC culture (“the mainstream Novus Ordo culture”) is to cease to be distinctly Anglican. I respect the ordinary Roman Rite and did not mean to cast aspersions on it.
And, no doubt, there are many fine RCIA programs. But again, I think you have misunderstood. I was simply pointing out the fact that RCIA was properly envisioned as a restoration of the Catechumenate. It is expressly intended for the reception of non-Christians — those who have yet to be baptized. However well-conducted, it is simply not appropriate for the reception of any Anglican Christian who is knowledgeable in his faith. To subject a Catholic Anglican to a reception process intended for those with no religion — or Mohammedans, Jews, and pagans is demeaning. RCIA in its intended application is perfectly appropriate and, no doubt, great strides have been made in many places to ensure a sound catechesis.
about 1 month ago
As one who plans to avail himself of the Holy Father’s generous offer I say to those who question my motives, “Come, let us sit and converse as fellow Christians”, and to those who would criticize me, “I would rather you just said a prayer for me as I embark on such a journey”.
about 1 month ago
Our Moderator states, “I suspect that those same Anglican Catholics will stand a good chance of being more genuinely Catholic than many of their brethren who are subject to the corrupting, demoralizing influences of faithless, modernist bishops and priests in the regular dioceses!” Please, let us remember that these bishops are soon to be our fellow Catholics and we are, as far as the Holy Father is concerned, to work and minister side by side as with all fellow Catholics. An Anglican-Catholic ghetto I wish not be part of. If I have misunderstood then I apologize.
about 1 month ago
Certainly there are many orthodox priests and bishops laboring in the vineyard — but there are rotten ones too — and we mustn’t deceive ourselves. The simple fact of the matter is that, in the USA, the current Pastoral Provision has been much less successful than might have been hoped for because of the ignorance, indifference, and often the real hostility of RC bishops. And in many dioceses, a succession of modernist, “spirit of Vatican II” bishops has seriously undermined the Faith.
You are correct. We must avoid sectarianism and the formation of an “Anglo-Catholic ghetto”; we must participate in the life of the larger Church and collaborate with all Catholics. Indeed, our fidelity to Catholic doctrine and obedience to the Holy Father and the Magisterium can serve as an example to those whose faith has been undermined by modernism and liberalism. But I don’t believe that it’s uncharitable to point out that most of our folks, God willing, will come to Rome faithfully adhering to the teaching of the Church while many cradle Catholics have a cafeteria mentality and believe it their right to dissent from the Magisterium.
about 1 month ago
His Grace of York gives the impression that Anglicans began only in the 16th century. What about those Anglicans for almost 1500 years before the 16th century who acknowledged the Bishop of Rome as their spiritual head? Were they not Anglican and Catholic? I should imagine that it is not so much His Grace’s ignorance but his attempt to allow liberal Anglican correctness to triumph over historical accuracy.
Dr. T.D. Greenhaw
about 1 month ago
I must join those who found your phrase “demean himself by participating in RCIA” unfair.
I graciously accept your clarifications, however RCIA’s original purpose is only a small part of the story. The reality is that in parishes that cannot have separate programs for each type of person coming into communion with Rome, RCIA has become a general framework to make sure everyone knows the basics. Exception for certain Anglicans should be made on a case by case basis, just as exceptions can even be made for Hindus is their personal situation and history of study warrants it. But real RCIA programs (regardless of what RCIA was originally for) often work with people with different levels of knowledge and different degrees of closeness to the Church.
When I began RCIA some years ago, I knew much more than the vast majority of Catholics. I had read well beyond the Catechism, and certainly don’t think I needed RCIA from a doctrinal point of view. But I *certainly* don’t think I was “demeaned” by asking to go through RCIA!
Besides, I learned a great, great deal and was fortunate to find holy and faithful examples of how to live as a Catholic Christian.
about 1 month ago
Did someone tell http://badvestments.blogspot.com about the Archbishop’s attire in this photo?
about 1 month ago
Is that polyester by any chance?
about 1 month ago
The troubles facing the TEC have washed over the pond over to England! TEC is in knots defining what really makes a Christian. Now the CoE has to deal with defining who “proper” Christians really are. Dr Sentamu’s comments have to be read beyond the “proper Catholic” tab. As Catholics, we are obliged to live the Christian vocation to its fullest and seek the Lord’s grace for us to meet this obligation. Let’s pray for Rowan Cantuar too that he does not lose sight of what the Christian vocation is all about.
The Episcopal Church reminds all that when an Episcopalian goes Catholic and affirms the Catholic faith, they say that Catholics go Episcopalian for a variety of reasons and they highlight the Catholic non-acceptance of artificial contraception for instance or for sticking with the celibacy vow for priests (remember the Fr Cutie affair and TEC Bishop Frade’s tactless remarks?)
So what is a proper Episcopalian/Anglican? Does a proper Episcopalian have to support and affirm as central to belief
1) Abortion and contraception
2) Female priests
3) Gay marriage
4) married clergy
5) and of course the MDG ??????
about 1 month ago
The Archbishop of York is clueless, isn’t he. That’s like telling Byzantine Catholics that if you want to be “Catholic”, you should just become Roman Catholic. He really doesn’t get it does he. He cannot fathom the term Anglican Catholics, or Catholic Anglicans. Well get used to it!. Anglicanism is now “ALSO” an expression of Western Catholicism. Like the Roman, Ambrosian, etc. He can join us and be united, like it was ecclesiastically, before the Reformation, or go on with his dying liberal congregation.
There is now no problem being an Anglican Catholic, using the Book of Common Prayer, and being in communion with the See of Rome.
about 1 month ago
The Archbishop of York also needs to remind himself, that his very title and See of York was created by Catholics in communion with Rome and the building he walks into (York Minster) was also built by “Proper Catholics”. So what is he doing there in the first place.!?.
about 1 month ago
Dear Mr. Campbell,
Thank you for your explanation. I certainly don’t disagree with your criticisms of the Archbishop of York, as the whole point of AC is to allow those attached to the Anglican Patrimony to enjoy and use parts of such that are not inconsistent with Catholic teaching, while being in full, visible communion with the successor of Peter. Of course ordinariate members would be as fully Catholic as as any Eastern rite Catholic in communion with the Pope. I guess I just objected to the rather dismissive tone used for the ordinary Latin rite as a whole that I read into what you said and which I have sometimes seen expressed elsewhere in this blog. There are plenty of problems with the Latin rite, particularly the sad state of the liturgy in many places. However, use of dismissive words like “Novus Ordo culture” can make it sound like the entire ordinary form Latin rite is being dismissed. This is to paint with far too broad a brush, and it sounds suspiciously like the criticisms and dismissal often voiced by SSPX members of the “Conciliar Church”, as if Vatican II founded a whole new Church. There are in the ordinary Latin rite many orthodox faithful, and even some orthodox bishops, and I believe that under the steady hands of JPII and Benedict XVI, the general trend in the Latin rite is in a positive direction. It may not be as fast as one might wish, but there is, I believe, a “Marshall Plan” as Father Z says, to reinvigorate and shore up orthodoxy in the Church. Anglicanorum Coetibus is part of that effort. Therefore I hope that while you may be justly criticizing elements of modernism and liberalism that still undermine the faith in parts of the Latin rite, you might also reach out and work constructively with those elements of the ordinary Latin rite that are working for orthodoxy.
As for RCIA, practically speaking there has to be a place for individuals coming from separated ecclesiastical communities, even if baptized, to learn the fullness of Catholic truth before their confirmation. Whether they get that in many RCIA programs is another question. Those entering the ordinariates may be a special case, since they may already be catechized using the CCC, and therefore it may be that the mere profession of faith would be enough. I don’t really know what groups like TAC or FIF UK have been doing in terms of catechesis of their own people, although given the assent to the CCC by the TAC bishops, I assume catechesis is based on that solid document. Presumably on an ongoing basis the ordinariates themselves would be conducting catechesis based on the CCC both for those baptised as infants in the ordinariates, and those non-Catholics who join the ordinariates and are baptized or confirmed therein.
about 1 month ago
I agree with you entirely. I am sorry that my post was misunderstood and I will endeavor to be more sensitive, not using terminology that paints with too broad a brush!
about 1 month ago
I must simply say that I was very disappointed in the remarks made about the RCIA program and the Roman Catholic clergy by the moderator. Having entered the Roman Catholic Church as an Anglican, a number of years ago, I found the remarks to be uncharitable and, perhaps even damaging as people, like me, ponder joining the Ordinariate or staying put. I am glad that you came to the recognition that your post was a little insensitive.
about 1 month ago
Again, I am sorry for the confusion, as I did not mean to suggest that RCIA (employed properly) was demeaning — nor am I unmindful of the fact that Anglicans may have had positive experiences in RCIA. The point that I was making — and which I stand behind — is that the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults is meant for non-Christians (hence the name) and the blanket requirement in many parishes for all inquirers — especially Catholic Anglicans — to submit to this program is insensitive and an abuse. In the case of most “converts” from Anglicanism, where catechesis is required, there are other more appropriate ways to accomplish this goal which are respectful of those being received.
about 1 month ago
The furore seems to surround my use of the word “demean” to describe the submission of Catholic Anglicans to RCIA. In the original context, which I hope my RC commenters will respect, Dr. Sentamu was suggesting that the only way to be a “proper Catholic” was to convert individually. In light of Anglicanorum Coetibus, which recognizes the validity of our aspiration for corporation reunion, such a course of action would be a repudiation of our very identity and a tradition which has been recognized by the Holy Father as “a precious gift.” To acquiesce to the notion that this is the only way to be a real Catholic is to demean oneself. Please read my remarks in this context.
about 1 month ago
RCIA is a fine program for those who are unfamiliar with Christianity as it is traditionally practiced. However, the Rite of Dismissal (participation in which is required of all candidates in many RCIA programs) is inappropriate for baptized Christians who have lived their lives as faithful, practicing Christians. This rite is intended for catachumens and not for practicing Christians, and I withdrew from an RCIA program on account of it. I admit to having been shocked when I first heard that it was required of all candidates. Here is what I had understood to be the requirements for practicing Christians:
The U.S. Conference of Bishops states, “Those baptized persons who have lived as Christians and need only instruction in the Catholic tradition and a degree of probation within the Catholic community should not be asked to undergo a full program parallel to the catechumenate” (NSC 31). For this reason, they should not share in the same, full RCIA programs that catechumens do.
The timing of their reception into the Church also is different. The U.S. Conference of Bishops states, “It is preferable that reception into full communion not take place at the Easter Vigil lest there be any confusion of such baptized Christians with the candidates for baptism, possible misunderstanding of or even reflection upon the sacrament of baptism celebrated in another church or ecclesial community . . . ” (NSC 33).
Rather than being received on Easter Vigil, “[t]he reception of candidates into the communion of the Catholic Church should ordinarily take place at the Sunday Eucharist of the parish community, in such a way that it is understood that they are indeed Christian believers who have already shared in the sacramental life of the Church and are now welcomed into the Catholic Eucharistic community . . .” (NSC 32).
about 1 month ago
I have just received a link to a new article by Damian Thomason:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100025345/the-popes-offer-to-anglicans-the-moving-testimony-of-an-anglo-catholic-priest/
If we follow the logic, we have no right to exist. Archbishop Sentamu on one side, Cardinal Kasper on the other, both pouring cold water. They would do us all a favour if they would go and take a cold shower themselves!
Again, the Pope is trumping all this stuff, and we can go straight forward. But we are going to be persecuted by Anglican and Catholic liberals, radical traditionalists, sedevacantists (open and crypto), “classical” Anglican sectarians and perhaps then our own when sanity goes out of the window.
And all those idiocies are merely playing into the hands of the secular humanists and atheists.
about 1 month ago
Fr., I think that sometimes, when we are faced by opposition from all sides, it can be useful to remind ourselves that the principalities and powers against which we contend are diabolic in their origin. And the adversary has many useful idiots working for him in the very places where he least should have.
Perhaps the amount of criticism coming from all sides is a sign that this is indeed a work of the Holy Ghost.
about 1 month ago
John @ 21: I doubt that putting confirmation candidates into the same program as RCIA catechumens is for the purpose of saying that such are not Christians, but rather for reasons of administrative convenience of having one rather than two catechetical programs in most parishes. I have to admit I never really focussed on the issue of the RCIA name before. Catholic teaching is clear that separated brethren with Trinitarian baptisms are Christians. On the other hand, the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth and confirmation is a sacrament of initiation, so I guess catechesis for confirmation candidates could in some sense still be considered Christian initiation. Having had the issue raised, I think it would probably be a good idea to have a separate designation, perhaps “Catechesis for Full Communion” (CFC), even if parishes would for convenience have both RCIA and “CFC” candidates attend the same catechetical sessions. I note that the document you cite doesn’t say that confirmation candidates can’t be taught with RCIA candidates, just that the former should not be subjected to the entire RCIA program. I’m not sure I would agree with your second document’s recommendation, as I think it is rather powerful to enter into full communion on the Easter Vigil, and I am not sure that those that do would necessarily view that timing as a slight or insult to the graces they might have received in the prior journey as a Christian.
about 1 month ago
Thanks for your response Charles. The US Council of Catholic Bishops makes a clear distinction between baptized Christians who wish to come into full communion with the Church (candidates) and those who have never been baptized (catechumens). Nothing prevents candidates and catechumens from attending the same classes, and I think it’s a probably good thing for both groups.
The Rite of Dismissal is intended only for catechumens, who are conspicuously dismissed from church after completion of the Liturgy of the Word during Lenten masses. On the other hand, the USCCB website describes the process of candidates coming into full communion this way:
“Coming into full communion with the Catholic Church describes the process for entrance into the Catholic Church for men and women who are baptized Christians but not Roman Catholics. These individuals make a profession of faith but are not baptized again. To prepare for this reception, the people, who are called “candidates,” usually participate in a program to help them understand and experience the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church. Some preparation may be with catechumens preparing for baptism, but the preparation for candidates is different since they have already been baptized and committed to Jesus Christ, and many have also been active members of other Christian communities.”
It’s funny how subtle and obscure points can be perceived differently by different people, and not necessarily as slights or insults, but as important issues nonetheless. To me, dismissal from a mass during Lent is practically unthinkable, and quite literally alienating. For that reason I withdrew from the RCIA program immediately, explaining my concerns in a factual and courteous way. Somehow I’ve always known that the path to Rome would open up to me, just not when and under what circumstances. Now I have an answer.
One of the exciting things about the Anglicanorum Coetibus is its generosity. It promises to make the Catholic Church much more approachable to those of us who seek communion with Rome as baptized, faithful, and long-practicing Anglicans. I believe that patience and courtesy and no small amount of good humor among all concerned parties are going to make this long-overdue reunion of faithful Christians happy and successful.
about 1 month ago
Onward, Christian Soldiers.
about 1 month ago
We left our local Anglican Church and started attending our local Catholic Church and were immediately accepted by the priest and parishioners. With in the last 4 months I have been accepted into the Knights of Columbus and have been accepted as a committee chairman for community work that the K of C does. I have not been asked by the priest or bishop to go to any RCIA classes, but I do believe that we should become familiar with the parts of the Mass we are not accustomed too. I would like to have a local Anglo-Catholic Church in our area but I do not think that will happen. We are very happy at our new home, thanks be to God.