Some of us say many things about the generosity of Rome by announcing and publishing the Apostolic Constitution, coming to the help of Anglican groups – the TAC, groups and individuals still in the Anglican Communion and former Anglican converts who hung on as best they could for years and want to recover their Anglican patrimony. We are indeed grateful to the Holy Father for his generous pastoral outreach.
But there is something missing. Pastoral generosity is not all. Throughout the centuries, the Church only does what is necessary for her own mission and prestige in the world. There’s nothing wrong with that. We go to work to earn money to finance our family and personal lives. We might get some job satisfaction, but we are basically doing it for ourselves. So is Rome. But this is not selfish on the part of the Pope. He is not doing it for personal gain, but for the sake of the Church's mission to glorify God and to sanctify / save mankind. What I mean is this act is not something condescending or done in a way calculated to fail. It is part of the Church's desire that all may be one as willed by Christ.
My previous article on the ‘mechanics’ of the Ordinariate brought out a consideration in the comments – the oldest one in the book for Catholic apologists. Will we be really and sincerely becoming Catholics, or are we going to be bringing Protestant baggage and trouble? If some are to be believed, it is impossible for us to be Catholics without being thoroughly brainwashed. It doesn’t suffice to accept the doctrines contained in the catechism (of which we have at least a reasonable knowledge, at least of the Compendium). It doesn’t suffice to accept the authority of the Pope and the authorities he will appoint to sanctify, teach and govern us. We have to be processed, broken down, made to be totally compliant. It is something irrational, but something that is present in all institutional religions. If you become Orthodox, you have to call yourself Vladimir or Alexis and grow a beard, and that’s not enough. It is said to be very difficult to convert to Judaism. Catholicism is supposed to be open to all, and it is – but there is always that minority that would close the doors and the windows, and may the stuffiness reign for evermore.
Without knowing the Holy Father’s mind, I have the distinct impression he saw the requests from Anglican and former Anglican groups as an opportunity. The then Fr Joseph Ratzinger also saw Vatican II as an opportunity to break down some of the clericalist stuffiness in the Roman Curia and the Church at large. The post-Tridentine era is over, and it is time for the Church to find a more balanced way forward. Certainly, there was the progressive and liberal backlash, and it is still there. The solution is not to go back to the 1950’s or the nineteenth century, but to forge a hermeneutic of continuity between old and new.
Pope Benedict XVI certainly sees enormous potential in the Anglican way, even though he is certainly aware of its theological and human weaknesses, its tendency to place expediency over truth. Perhaps he sees more in Anglican patrimony than we discern ourselves. We are being called to prosper and then share our patrimony with the rest of the Church. Do you realise, readers, that if Catholics want a traditional liturgy, they have to have it in Latin (except perhaps the readings)? Some Catholics prefer Latin, but most would like the liturgy in their own language, but not the desacralised liturgy they find in most parishes. They will discover that Anglican Catholicism will allow them to have both the traditional liturgy with its sacredness and understand what is said or sung without having to follow it in a little book. That is just an example. It is about the reform of the reform.
Maybe to some Anglicans, an Ordinariate would be like a wartime air raid shelter to avoid female bishops and the gays. But I am convinced that clergy and faithful in the Ordinariates would quickly discover the hundreds and thousands of other Catholics who have similar aspirations to be done with the stuffiness of the control freaks, so that they too can be liberated and allowed the sense of the sacred.
Perhaps some Anglicans would do better to go the old way. That will be for each person to decide, as many will be attracted to a ‘Roman’ culture or the relaxed and chatty atmosphere of the local parish. Fair enough. I believe in religious freedom and a choice in these matters. I think this is very much the kind of idea our German Pope seems to have in his Christian humanism and his nature as a loving father, just as he must have been with his university students.
There is also the consideration that the Church must find new ways to minister and survive. Parochial and diocesan Catholicism is almost over in many places. Churches are closing and people have voted with their feet. One of two things: Christianity is exposed as a myth and should be abandoned or the Church does not represent Christianity. That is the judgement of secular society, and we do well to ask ourselves why. Some Christians are now talking about cells and networks, perhaps a new way of conceiving the diocese and the parish. Could the Ordinariate be an experiment in a new way of doing Church?
Anglicanorum Coetibus is all about thinking outside the box and being innovative for the future of the Church.
Why is the cause of the Society of St Pius X with Rome not more advanced?
This is another question that supports my theory of the Pope seeing in us an opportunity. I remember Archbishop Hepworth saying to me in 2007 that the TAC would be sorted out long before the traditionalists. How could that be? The Pope had just issued Summorum Pontificum, and in January 2009 he lifted the excommunications from the SSPX Bishops. At that time, there were a few rumours in the Australian Catholic press about the TAC becoming a Personal Prelature, but it was no more than hype and hot air. The leaden cloak of silence returned, and Cardinal Kasper and his English secretary gloated over the baseless gossip.
How come the SSPX bishops and divines are still in dialogue - and words are becoming deeds for Anglicans? How is it that we 'Protestant rebels' are given preferential treatment to those who are the most conservative and conforming Catholics? Interestingly enough, I am not a Freemason or an Illuminatus, nor is anyone I know in the TAC! My grandfather was a Mason and a highly respected man in the north Yorkshire town of Pickering. As a former wartime Army officer and prisoner of war, a successful businessman and a Magistrate, he was awarded the OBE in the 1970's and opened the new Whitby road bridge. I never even saw his apron as a child!
There may be any number of reasons, and things need to be made clearer for the many Catholics attached to the extraordinary form who are in communion with Rome and have been for many years.
My conjecture is simply that traditionalist Catholics, especially the hard-line of the Society of St Pius X, have nothing new or ‘out-of-the-box’ to offer. They are not at this time an opportunity for something fresh and new. They simply wish to turn back the clock to the 8th October 1958, the day before Pius XII died.
There are some colourful conspiracy theory sites like this one and this one (especially the Daily Commentaries of "The Fathers") about Anglicans being involved in a plot since the days of Lord Halifax and that Eminence grise Cardinal Rompolla to invalidate the Sacraments of the Catholic Church. All that certainly may have us rolling on the floor laughing – unless we get to the thought behind it. For centuries, Catholics have been conditioned to defend the citadel, especially since the Reformation and the French Revolution.
Now if the Church can recover Tradition whilst keeping stuffiness and control freakery at arms length….. Pigs might fly, or the Holy Father might actually pull this one off.
Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!
Pffffff…. these are anti-Rome stupid stuff… we, normal Spanish Catholics, are very happy to welcome home our dear Anglocatholic friends… The Pope is going to England as a ancient and wise father welcoming his family and, some weeks later, he will come to Barcelona and Santiago: old wounds are going to be healed. Please, feel welcome in our (your) family, the Catholic Church, which will be about 1.500 million-strong by 2020. A big family indeed!!
Dear Fr. Anthony, I hope that some of us do whatever we do for the Glory of God, no? And given the "prestige in the world" that our dear Holy Father is reaping right now, his purposes as the Pope of Christian Unity are being attacked right and left by the world because they are from God.
Blessings and thanks for always interesting and sometimes very entertaining posts.
Deborah
You have a good point there, and the suffering of the Holy Father faced with these horrible accusations and calumnies will certainly draw us closer to him.
Indeed, we do what we do for God, and this was something lacking in my contrast between the gift given to the outstretched suppliant hand and the opportunity the Church seeks in order to do this very work of God.
In some respects the delivery of the AC could be considered simply as the Pope is doing his job i.e. being a source of unity for Christians.
I remember seeing the amazon.com reviews for Jesus of Nazareth (looking forward to vol. 2 soon!) and the first review – 5 stars – titled 'A Protestant's Skewed View' mentioned that the Pope by his very existence acts as a polarising agent. Yet I couldn't help but see the opposite and how the Pope – in his divinely appointed role – actually keeps the church together in all its diversity and crises, and the AC is yet another example of him simply fulfilling his role to bring and keep Christians together.
The CCC says it beautifully (1428): "Christ's call to conversion continues to resound in the lives of Christians. This second conversion is an uninterrupted task for the whole Church who, "clasping sinners to her bosom, [is] at once holy and always in need of purification, [and] follows constantly the path of penance and renewal.” This endeavor of conversion is not just a human work. It is the movement of a "contrite heart," drawn and moved by grace to respond to the merciful love of God who loved us first."
We Anglo-Catholics are responding to God's love by in humility seeking unity with the Catholic Church. The Pope is responding in love by gratuitously providing a liberal means of achieving this desire. We are together responding to God’s love by seeking to serve and obey.
What disturbs me is that there are those who speak as if our (those who will convert) humility and love are feigned and disingenuous; that we need a period of discernment (isn't 450 years long enough?). Perhaps it is hard to respond to such people gently because our conversation is on different levels. We Anglican Catholics have lived in what is essentially an hermitage for some time and coming out from it into the broader world of Christian communion is going to take some getting used to, some conversion, for us all. What I think we don't need now or later are "many masters," no matter how well intentioned they may think they are being. If we ask for help, then please help; if we don't, then please cease not to pray for us.
"Do you realise, readers, that if Catholics want a traditional liturgy, they have to have it in Latin (except perhaps the readings)?"
I think you just did the job of offending extraordinary form (because Latin is portrayed as something weird) as well as ordinary form (because their liturgy supposedly isn't traditional) catholics in one single sentence. I don't say you intended this; I just think that is how it came out (for me, at least, with English as a second language).
Seriously: I am excited about AC, and think it's great in every way (as far as my knowledge of it goes) and also totally in compliance with the hermeneutics of continuity of the present pope, in the ecumenical field. However, I can't see how some of your language is very helpful in this situation.
In an earlier answer you wrote, for example:
"How many cradle Catholics know the difference between a Sacrament and the back end of a bus?"
I think with this kind of language you might alienate people who are fundamentally "on your side", on these issues.
You also at one place wrote:
"You’ve probably guessed. I feel somewhat “pissed off” today, and I wrote my article to try to get some positive reactions – and get my (and other people’s) thinking a little straighter."
Regardless of how you feel, people will take you on your words in what you write.
I really don't want to come down on you too hard on this; I think you (and everybody else at the Anglo-Catholic) are doing a wonderful job! However, these were some spontaneous thoughts coming up while reading, for whatever it's worth.
Golly you people have no sense of humour whatsoever. I say what I find. I'm not interested in living in wonderland. Offending the extraordinary form? Poppycock. I merely said what is true, otherwise millions of people would be herding to the traditional Mass. They're not. It's as simple as that.
If you bother to read other things I've written, you will see I have always defended traditionalists (except the hard-liners and the cranks).
Christ also came out with some raw language in the Gospels. Many priests have to in order to shock people out of their certitudes. If we have to pander to babies here, it's too bad. I'm not interested.
Fr Chadwick,
Yes, this is an opportunity, but I don't see it as a selfish move at all.
The command of Jesus that Christians be one is not optional, and I believe that the Holy Father is deeply aware of and grieved by these divisions.
Oh, and Father, you must stop bothering yourself with these traditionalists blogs. For my own growth in charity, I will not look at them anymore. As someone who works for the Bishops Conference in DC, I see more than enough crazy people….
I will be in Paris around Easter, and then am going to Turin to see the exposed Shroud. Do you live in Paris, Father?
-Matt
I hardly ever look at those crazy sites myself, but I know they are there, representing very few people, but illustrating a tendency that was mainstream only 150 years ago. That is sobering!
We could see about meeting up in Paris. Why not? It's just a couple of hours from my home in Normandy. You might want to come to my home and chapel on Easter Day – Sarum Use in Latin. Can you read Gregorian chant? Otherwise I can celebrate in English if you prefer.
I will be in Paris from the 31st thru the 5th. Although I have been to Paris as a tourist a number of times, I have never really gone as a pilgrim. My intention is to visit Rue de Bac, St Denis, St Etienne-du-Mont, St Eugene/Ste Cecile, and also the Cluny Museum. I have already been to the other large well-known churches. Have you ever been to Vespers at St Germain-des-Pres with the Fraternité de Jérusalem? It's a taste of heaven.
I have been to Normandy, but am not sure I would be willing to go during this trip. In any case, let me know if you might be up for meeting.
As a convert myself from Evangelical Protestantism, I've noticed the same "stuffiness" in some (very small) Catholic circles. I detest anachronism and agree wholeheartedly with the observation that some just want to take the Church back to 1958.
I cannot wait for the finalization of the Ordinariate and the treasure that our once separated brethren in the Anglican tradition will be bringing with them across the Tiber. I pray that one day I live near an Ordinariate parish…
I don't normally go to bat for the SSPX, but it is important to remember that the society is composed of many different outlooks. Yes, some of them would like what you describe, but I would say the majority of its members and associated laity simply want to see an end to the the hermeneutic of rupture post-Vatican II. Figuring out what is was validly taught at the council and what was simply created out of whole cloth by those who supported the rupture is going to take time and that dialogue, let us pray, return the Church to a place of balance as the council is viewed through the hermeneutic of continuity.
As for traditional (I would define this as those who follow the Magisterium of the Church and all that it teaches us) Catholics in general who have remained in the Church, the flowering of vocations as young men and women flock to the religious life is like a fresh breeze in springtime.
Yes, there are some good and kind priests in the SSPX, and I pray they will be fully regularised by Rome and made into some kind of Ordinariate or whatever Rome is considering for them. Unfortunately, their bishops seem to want to be right about everything.
I defend traditional Catholics and their aspiration, but in a situation of diversity with other liturgical usages in the Church. We should tolerate and welcome them, but it cuts both ways. Bishop Fellay has, incredibly, spoken favourably about the Apostolic Constitution. Some of their priests have been rabid about it all, and I would love to see those priests punished by where they sinned – and made to celebrate the Novus Ordo.
Yes, they have a lot of vocations, and the Holy Father himself has written (when writing to the Bishops to justify having lifted the excommunications from the SSPX bishops) that this should not be discounted, but rather that this be seen as a gift to the Church.
We give and take. They should too, and they might get somewhere.
"I would say the majority of its members and associated laity simply want to see an end to the the hermeneutic of rupture post-Vatican II"
The hermeneutic of continuity also deals with more than just the language of the liturgy. If SSPX really wants to see an end to the hermeneutic of rupture then the more important principal is to end the schism.
Brian:
A glib reply would be that the SSPX believes that Lex orandi, lex credendi . Experts on the SSPX would explain that though the Tridentine Mass is the visible point around which so many rally, the society and those who identify with it are as concerned about the apparent dogmatic/doctrinal changes that took place during Vatican II and after. The SSPX's discussions with the pontifical commission and CDF are meant to clarify just what the council taught, aside from the spin (to use a political term) put on it by so many radicals.
Father,
I doubt that we Anglicans will do much to bring a 'protestant influence' to Rome. In truth, most Roman Catholics in the English-speaking world are a good part 'protestant'. I grew up in the Church of Pius XII and recall my devout and very Catholic grandmother and mother speaking of attending church as 'going to hear Mass'; not to participate in the sacrifice and celebration of the Sacrament. Their concept was a thoroughly 'protestant' ethic.
Unity is not a process of surrender but one of contribution and conciliation. I suspect that the Holy Father is looking forward to our 'protestant contribution'.
I note with great joy that the Anglican Use parishes in the USA are growing by leaps and bounds. There are converts but most of the increase in those congregations comes from Romans who have discovered the beauty of a decent English liturgy.
Why the traddies have not made much advancement? Answer: The nature of their separation was much willed by their leaders and was doctrinal and in this way, the schismatic mentality became more entrenched. The Anglican schism was political at the start and the the Reformation had to be imposed. The Catholic ethos was never fully extirpated.
Jim,
Is it really true that AU parishes are growing by leaps and bounds? The AU has been around in the US almost 20 years and there were just 6 or so AU parishes created in all that time. Concentrated in Texas. I don't see it as having been especially successful or broadly based.
Since the AC there is new focus on this and I believe 2 or so additional parish groups are forming.
Again, I don't see leaps and bounds growth if you look at the 20 year history of the Use.
Dave, I think Jim is speaking of the parishes themselves, not the number of parishes. I know the other A.U. parishes are growing, and ours in San Antonio certainly continues to do so. You can have a look here: http://www.atonementonline.com, and there are links to the other parishes.
Dave,
Father Phillips hit it on the head. I was speaking of the size of the congregations. Even our local parish, housing both an AU and traditional Roman congregation has seen a shift from one Mass to the other.
I could write at some length about the S.S.P.X but need to keep things short today. At the moment, the hope is simply that Rome will make public what her appropriate dicasteries have already admitted privately and in a legally non-authoritative way: that Society Masses do indeed fulfil the Sunday obligation. It is a big step to go from that fact to a public and legally-authoritative admission of it, and that, I think, is the best hope for the immediate future.
As for complete reconciliation, indications are that it is years away.
P.K.T.P.
I think the Pope has been pretty clear about what Rome will get out of it. It will enrich the liturgy of the Catholic Church, it will bring Rome closer to Jesus's prayer that they Christians all be one, and it will (like the Tridentine Mass) help heal the hermetical breach that Novo Ordo was not supposed to result in.
His attitude also betrays another motive…by making the church friendlier to conservative liturgists, he's displacing liberals within the Catholic Church such as the ones that are upset at the "reform of the reform" of Vatican II, since they see Vatican II as not going far enough.
I will not belabor the point as we seem to be coming from two different directions when it comes to looking at the 'traditional' mind frame.
I will correct you though in that my last paragraph was describing groups such as the FSSP and others that were formed by priests who were never in any irregular status and remained faithful to Rome.
I should have been clearer. I did mean the SSPX.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica_en.html
Read the whole letter, which is incredibly moving and shows the tenderness of the man we have as our Pope. I quote the relevant part: