John Broadhurst, the Bishop of Fulham and Chairman of Forward in Faith International, has issued the following statement regarding media reports of his recent visit, with fellow PEVs, Bishop Andrew Burnham (Ebbsfleet) and Bishop Keith Newton (Richborough), to meet with Vatican officials about the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus and its implementation in the UK and elsewhere.
I feel as your Chairman that I should say something about the reported trip to Rome. As you all know, I am interested in the Ordinariate. I had the opportunity to accompany Bishop Andrew and Bishop Keith to the Vatican to discover what was intended. As Chairman of Forward in Faith International it was important that I was present, as FIF Australia is totally committed to it. Also many members in America and here are actively interested. I can say nothing more about the visit.
However, I am embarrassed by the leak to the press that we had visited the Holy See. All of us have expressed an interest in the Ordinariate and so it is obviously necessary to understand exactly what is intended and how the Ordinariate will be implemented. We were certainly neither negotiating nor plotting. The leak came as a real surprise to me as it happened whilst I was abroad. As we had not informed others of our visit, who leaked it – and why – is a very serious question. It risks damage to the Church of England, and to Catholic Anglicans in particular, as well as to the forthcoming visit to the UK of the Holy Father. It also has serious ecumenical implications. To say it was malicious would seem to fit the facts.
I have a deep love for the Church of England and its Anglo-Catholic tradition in particular. The question of how it is to continue is a serious one. Though the signs in General Synod do not look good, many still hope for proper provision in line with previously made promises. Our visit must not be allowed to colour these discussions.
Others believe the Pope's offer gives a very real chance that much that is valuable in our tradition can be preserved. All need to try, carefully and prayerfully, to read the signs of the times.
+John Fulham
Is it just me, or does he seem to be suggesting that a source within the Catholic Church leaked the news of the PEVs' visit to the press? Shortly after posting his thoughts on the leak on Saturday, Damian Thompson posted the following update.
[Update: A leading Anglo-Catholic source contacts me this morning naming several English Catholic bishops whom he thinks were in Rome for this summit. He confirms that "very few people on our side" (ie, the C of E) knew it was happening.]
Make no mistake about it: the Apostolic Constitution has powerful opponents in the Roman Curia, adversaries who are not above manipulating the situation in the press for their own advantage. And if Damian Thompson's source is correct — that there were several English Catholic bishops present for the discussion — it does not at all seem unreasonable (based on past experiences alone) to suspect that one of them may have leaked the news.
Related posts:
Can someone explain to me *why* the leak is embarrassing or why every single conversation that the good bishop has needs to have a full public exclosure and full public approval any decision or action is even attempted?
The good bishop shouldn't be embarrassed, it's the press that should be embarrassed. A sly use of language can make the most innocent actions look like the work of the understudy of Satan. The right language can make you feel ashamed of being moral and more accepting of immorality.
One can only echo the thoughts of Mr. Wang, inasmuch as his Grace has absolutely no reason for embarrasment. I think is was a recent post by Fr. "Z" (of the WDTPRS blog) wherein he referred to no less than the New York Times as "hell's bible". A quite fair assessment of the vast majority of the media these days. We must continue to refer back to the initial remarks of JP II when he quoted "Be not afraid!" A difficult thing in the current climate, but required none-the-less.
Of greater concern, Christian, is your comment about "powerful adversaries in the Curia". Other than loss of…..clout???…..what's to fear???
No doubt the motivations on the part of those prelates working to undermine the Apostolic Constitution are many and varied, though I suspect that, yes, the loss of control (whether perceived or actual) figures high among them. Many bishops resent the "special" extraterritorial status of the proposed ordinariates and their "streamlined" administration relative to the existing dioceses and episcopal conferences. In England especially, one has to consider the very complex relationship and history between the Catholic Church and Anglicanism. Some of the professional ecumenists see the Holy Father's provision as detrimental to continued dialogue with the Church of England and the Anglican Communion. Still others — convinced modernists — seem genuinely fearful of the influx of groups perceived as "traditionalist" and who cling to a theology and praxis they'd just as soon consign to the trash heap.
Rather than one of the bishops being the source I think it likely that it was an underling, probably a layperson on his staff. A Roman Catholic diocesan bishop cant just disapear for a couple of days without folks at the chancery knowing, at least in general terms, whats up.