Today as we rejoice in the Communion of the Saints of God, we might do well also to consider what Bishop Peter Elliott, Australian delegate for Anglicanorum Coetibus has to say in The Messenger about Communion, and our options as Catholic Anglicans.
Bishop Peter Elliott celebrates Mass in the Extraordinary Form.
…it is a matter of some urgency to clarify the options that confront traditional Anglo-Catholics at this time. At first sight there seem to be four options: 1. Rome, via the Ordinariate or by personal reconciliation; 2. Eastern Orthodoxy; 3. the Continuing Anglicans; and, 4. remaining in communion with Canterbury.
However these options fall into two groups. If you take either of the first two options, you are entering communion with traditional apostolic Churches which understand the Church in terms of communion. In the second two options you are either joining some form of independent association of continuing Anglicans or you are choosing to remain part of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
The key word is “communion”. On that we can all agree. Across the four options, in varying degrees, this is a shared understanding of what it means to be a member of the Church. But communion as a visible reality depends on bishops.
He turns his searchlight on the option of hanging on at all costs; the option being encouraged, it seems, by the Society of SS Hilda and Wilfrid:
An ecclesiology of communion also throws light on the last option, that is, when some Anglo-Catholics choose, even reluctantly, to remain in communion with Canterbury, “come what may” as they say. Note that I only refer to convinced traditional Anglo-Catholics. I do not include those Anglicans who, in conscience, do not hold to the necessity of apostolic order as taught by the Tractarians and their successors, that is, that bishops are of the esse of the Church.
Hard questions can be asked. Could it be said that Anglo-Catholics who choose “to remain” have embraced congregationalism? Do they contradict their own Tractarian insistence on “our apostolic descent”? Are they now saying that the Church is a collection of local congregations of those who maintain Catholic doctrine and sacramental practices? In this perspective, each parish becomes a Church in itself. But how can that be? What would St Paul, St Ignatius of Antioch and all the Fathers of East and West, say about this?
The vicar and parishioners can dig in and hold on, but others may ask whether they are in “the trenches” — or just down a bunker? They can ignore the bishop and persistently regard their parish as a Church in itself, but whether they like it or not, official Anglicanism carefully maintains the forms of apostolic order. Inevitably the day will come when empirical reality conquers. The vicar will retire or die and. because this is pretend congregationalism, the parishioners know that they have no authority to provide a successor. Then the bishop they pretended did not exist, will act. He or she will send them a vicar not of their choosing or even close their church. Do not these sad projections expose the unreality of the fourth option –when chosen by traditional Anglo-Catholics?
I would encourage you to read Bishop Peter's entire piece: but here is how he speaks towards the end of it about the practical steps needed for those considering the Ordinariate:
The steps towards establishing Ordinariates in the United Kingdom, the US, Canada and Australia are well under way. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has recently approved programs of preparation for the laity and formation for the clergy who intend to be reconciled through the Ordinariate. Here the key resource is the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Clergy will also need to familiarise themselves with the magisterial sources for systematic and moral theology and the Code of Canon Law. The “magisterium at your finger tips” may be found in an excellent series of paperback volumes, Precis of Official Catholic Teaching, obtainable from the United States. These handy books take us into the living teaching voice of the Popes and Councils. I also recommend the new United States Catholic Catechism for Adults.
To establish the Ordinariates, two stages are envisaged next year: 1. the reconciliation and ordination of clergy who have applied for Orders in the Ordinariate and been accepted, then 2. at a later date, the first reconciliations of the lay faithful. The clergy will therefore be in place to welcome and minister to former Anglicans in a community that maintains the familiar Anglican patrimony of worship, spirituality, scholarship and pastoral care. We saw how that patrimony has enriched English Catholicism during the magnificent papal visit to Scotland and England, particularly during the beatification of Blessed John Henry Newman.
More concrete details will appear soon. I believe the model will be set by what proceeds in the United Kingdom in terms of a clear time line built around the two stages. However, at present it is important to keep informed, for example through circles such as the Friends of the Ordinariate.
Read the entire essay at The Messenger.
Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!
This is one of the most substantive statements we have seen on the time line and details of the way forward. What Bishop Elliott outlines sounds both pastoral and practical and hopefully will do much to reassure all of us that things are indeed moving along.
Good post… so why are Anglo-Catholics still part of the Church of England if they began ordaining women back in the 1970's?
As I understand it, those who are trying to remain in the Church of England (via SSWSH) are attempting a last ditch stand to obtain the essential legislative protection which is necessary to keep an orthodox catholic presence in the Church. It will probably fail (in which case there will be no place for us in the C of E). It is the very last attempt to save the soul of the C of E, before it goes the way of TEC. I believe it should be tried.
Mike, the Church of England did not begin ordaining women to the priesthood in the 1970s. (That did happen in the Episcopal Church of the US then.) The General Synod of the CofE voted in 1992 to allow the ordination of women to the priesthood, but also authorized the Provincial Episcopal Visitors (i.e., "Flying Bishops") who would maintain a catholic sacramental system for those parishes which requested this. Nevertheless, over 600 priests left the CofE and became Catholic over the years since 1992, along with many thousands of laity.
The 2010 General Synod votes not only authorized ordination of women to the episcopate in the CofE, but also would end the PEV system.
There have been several posts both on this blog and elsewhere that discuss the situation of Anglo-Catholics. It makes for interesting reading. You should look it up.
I'm a little confused / concerned about the fact that the ordinations of clergy will take place, and then, "at a later date", the reconciliation of the lay faithful. How much time will pass between one and the other? Who will minister to the laity while their priests are in full communion with the Catholic Church but not with their own congregations? It seems like it would invite an opportunity for Anglicans not yet in full communion with Rome to begin receiving communion from their reconciled priests. Either that or it would invite an opportunity for them to feel "shut out" and perhaps become disheartened, lose hope, and look elsewhere.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I fear that if priests are accepted too much apart from their congregations it will create rifts. The thing that's supposed to be nice about this Ordinariate proposal is that the "groups of Anglicans" all come together, and even though I understand the ordinations will have to take place separately, I hope the momentum from the ordinations leads directly into the reconciliation of the lay faithful.
Based on how Anglican Use parishes are established in the USA, it seems likely that only a few weeks will separate the first stage from the second. During this time, the reconciled clergy would continue to minister to their parishioners, but without administering sacraments (other than possibly marriages and baptisms) until the second stage is reached.
Remember, there is no necessity to receive the Sacrament at each and every Mass: the general reception of Communion by all and sundry each and every Sunday is very much a mid- to late-20th century development, largely as a result of both the encouragement of frequent communion by Pope St Pius X, and the slackening to nothing of the ancient rules of the Eucharistic fast.
To spend a few weeks assisting at Mass offered by one's priest, newly ordained a Catholic priest, and then to be formally received by him into the fulness of Catholic Communion, would seem a fitting mode of reception for incoming Anglicans. To wait on the Lord in eager expectation, while readying oneself and being more intensely instructed in preparation, would be an excellent spiritual discipline and a veritable exercise in devotion.
And what about those former Anglicans already in the Catholic Church- when can they be officially enrolled in the Anglican Ordinariates? Are they the third wave or can they join the second wave with the laity.
Officially, all they would need would be to have their names added into the parish records – unofficially, just turn up for Mass!
(And as a non-ex-Anglican who can't be "officially" a member of an Ordinariate, but who seeks godly worship, I will be "unofficially" turning up for Mass at the local Ordinariate parish myself.)
In being united to the Roman Church, will Anglo Catholics have to take an oath of loyalty to the Pope? No cradle born Roman Catholic does when he is baptized. In the Orthodox Church you are simply chrismated–no loyalty oaths to any patriarch or the local bishop.
I've never heard of so strange an idea as "taking an oath of loyalty to the Pope" – it has no part in any rite of reception into full communion; the idea is risible. As I recall, one recites the Creed, adding words to the effect that "I believe and profess all that the Catholic Church believes and teaches to be inspired by God." The administration of confirmation and reception of communion complete this public rite; beforehand, confession is made in private.
"In being united to the Roman Church, will Anglo Catholics have to take an oath of loyalty to the Pope?"
No. Believe it or not, it is generally assumed that when a person makes a profession of the Catholic faith in the context of being united to the Church of God, they do so without nefarious intentions of being disloyal to any member of the Church – not least the Pope.
If it would help you personally, however, I am sure it can be arranged for you to take an oath of loyalty to the Pope. I imagine he would be very flattered by it.
I have already written to Archbishop Wuerl and asked to be received with my family into the Ordinariate and received a received a response that he would keep me informed.
My children were received Anglican Use many years ago. I have no concerns that former Anglicans/Episcopalians will be denied entry into the Ordinariate. There are Latin Rite Catholics who were never Anglicans who are registered members of some of the Anglican Use parishes.
I have, as yet, recieved no information regarding the ordinariate system in England from 'Friends of the Ordinariate'. I attend a church in which the priest and (unless there are people who are keeping quiet) the rest of the congregation appear to have no interest in the ordinariate/the prospet of women bishops. I am, therefore, very much out of touch with any developments. I feel as though things must be happening but I am not at all sure how I can find out what's going on! Is there a website that can keep me informed?
I believe that those Anglican clergy who are leading the charge (by which I mean bishops Fulham and, I assume, Ebbsfleet and Richborough) need to step out and offer pastoral care to those of us who feel lost, as I do!
Have you tried contacting any of the Bishops you mention? I suggest it could be helpful – to them and to you. +E