84 Groups of Anglicans on the Map and a Viable U.S. Ordinariate by Anglican Standards

Ordinariate Google Map 11 02 12 300x192 84 Groups of Anglicans on the Map and a Viable U.S. Ordinariate by Anglican Standards

The Emerging Anglican Catholic Ordinariates Google Map as of February 12, 2011

It has been two weeks since we visited the Ordinariate Google Map and, as usual, the pins have kept coming.  As of this morning, the count by country is:

Canada:                  30

United States:      36

United Kingdom  18

TOTAL                     84

More groups seem to be on the way in the three countries we have on the board and Australia is yet to come.

Most of you know that I am usually reluctant to speculate, but I thought a quick look at some statistics might be reassuring to those who worry about what the future might hold.

Let’s take a look at what these numbers might mean in the United States.

Let’s assume that the 36 groups currently on the map in the U.S. would enter a newly erected American Ordinariate with an average Sunday attendance (ASA) of 2500, which I think would be an incredibly conservative estimate.

This number assumes that:

  • no new groups form,
  • no more existing groups vote to enter,
  • the current groups do not grow,
  • Anglicans who have already entered the full communion of the Catholic Church show no interest in the Ordinariates, and
  • no cradle Catholics attend Ordinariate services on a regular basis.

All of these assumptions would run contrary to our experience thus far.

Given these Malthusian parameters, here's what an ASA of 2500 would look like in comparison with The Episcopal Church:

  • The average parish attendance would be 69, three larger than the 2009 Episcopal Church parochial ASA of 66.  (67% of Episcopal parishes had an ASA of 100 or fewer in 2009.  Only 5% had an ASA of 300 or more.)
  • The average Sunday attendance of the American Ordinariate would be approximately 15% larger than that of the combined ASA of the three Episcopal Dioceses of North Dakota, Northern Michigan, and Western Kansas.
  • It would be 25% larger than the combined ASA of the two old Biretta Belt dioceses of Eau Claire and the portion of the Diocese of Quincy that remained in the Episcopal Church.
  • The Ordinariate ASA would be more than one-third larger than the TEC Dioceses of Montana, Eastern Oregon, and San Joaquin.
  • The American Ordinariate would be one-quarter larger than the Dioceses of Northwestern Pennsylvania, the Utah, Idaho, and Alaska
  • It would be at least ten percent larger than the Dioceses of Springfield, Spokane, Northwest Texas, Nevada, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Fond du Lac.
  • It would be slightly larger than the TEC Dioceses of Pittsburgh and Northern Indiana.

In all, this would make an American Ordinariate—in a worst case scenario—larger than 21 of the domestic dioceses of The Episcopal Church.

If an American Ordinariate were to launch with an ASA of 3,000, it would be approximately the same size as the Dioceses of Iowa, Lexington, Eastern Michigan, Easton, Vermont, Nebraska, and Hawaii.

If an American Ordinariate were to grow to an ASA of 5000, it would be either larger than or roughly the same size as 59 of the domestic dioceses of The Episcopal Church.

These are still very small numbers in Catholic terms, but, in Anglican terms, I would say that an American Ordinariate looks quite credible.

(For those who want to look at the raw numbers, TEC's 2008 and 2009 ASA data are available here.)

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog,
and also his professional web site (he's an IT consultant) Three Fish Consulting, LLC!

About Br. Stephen Treat, O.Cist

Br. Stephen Treat, O.Cist. is a monk of the Cistercian Abbey of Our Lady of Spring Bank. Like many others, his path led from an evangelical childhood in the South to Anglicanism and into the Roman Catholic Church. Our Lady of Spring Bank is a small Abbey of the Order of Cistercians, generally known as the Common Cistercians, located on 600 acres near La Crosse, Wisconsin.

66 thoughts on “84 Groups of Anglicans on the Map and a Viable U.S. Ordinariate by Anglican Standards

  1. It is interesting how the US groups on the map are pretty much clustered in three distinct regions: East Coast, West Coast, and Middle America.

    I wonder if the first US Ordinary will have "suffragan ordinaries," who could later become Ordinaries should it make sense to erect multiple Ordinariates in the US.

    1. I believe a deanery system will operate in the Ordinariates. In time if a particular deanery became large enough it may be elevated to a separate Ordinariate, though that would require amending the terms of AC with regards to there being one Ordinariate per Episcopal conference.

      I certainly see it happening where an Ordinariate initially covers more than one Episcopal conference, for example a Japanese deanery of the Australian Ordinariate eventually becoming large enough to form a separate Ordinariate.

      1. Good point about a deanery system.

        Actually, the AC would not need amendment:

        "§2 Within the territory of a particular Conference of Bishops, one or more Ordinariates may be erected as needed."

      2. Conchúr,

        You wrote: I believe a deanery system will operate in the Ordinariates.

        The apostolic constitution Anglicanorum coetibus does permit an ordinariate to erect territorial deaneries, but does not require it to do so. Note, however, that deaneries of an ordinariate must be territorial.

        The status of deans of territorial deaneries is less clear. Their role seems to be similar to that of auxilliary bishops of a diocese, but Anglicanorum coetibus does not give that status to them. OTOH, particular complementary norms for an ordinariate that will have deaneries could make appropriate provision.

        You wrote: In time if a particular deanery became large enough it may be elevated to a separate Ordinariate…

        Yes, that's certainly a possibility. As Justin pointed out in his earlier reply, the present apostolic constitution already permits this.

        And when this happens (it undoubtedly will happen sooner or later), it seems likely that the Vatican will designate one of the ordinariates in the territory of a conference of bishops as an "archordinariate" that would function as a metropolitan see for all the ordinariates in the territory.

        You wrote: I certainly see it happening where an Ordinariate initially covers more than one Episcopal conference, for example a Japanese deanery of the Australian Ordinariate eventually becoming large enough to form a separate Ordinariate.

        Anglicanorum coetibus explicitly requires each ordinariate to be within the territory of an episcopal conference, so establishment of an ordinariate that crosses the boundaries of an episcopal conference would require either a change in the current law or a derogation from the current law. Neither is impossible, but either would create additional administrative complications for both the affected ordinariate(s) and the Vatican. The erection of small ordinariates for places like Scotland and Japan probably would be the better option.

        Norm.

        1. The erection of small ordinariates for places like Scotland and Japan probably would be the better option.

          Without doubt that is the preferable option and I hope it proves to be the case. I was merely using a hypothetical scenario.

    2. Justin,

      You wrote: It is interesting how the US groups on the map are pretty much clustered in three distinct regions: East Coast, West Coast, and Middle America.

      Yes, and there's a similar clustering in Canada — an eastern cluster in the Maritime Provinces, a central cluster in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and a western cluster in the provines of British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. The question is whether these clusters will become geographical deaneries within an ordinariate or separate ordinariates.

      You wrote: I wonder if the first US Ordinary will have "suffragan ordinaries," who could later become Ordinaries should it make sense to erect multiple Ordinariates in the US.

      First, let's make sure that we're speaking the same language. The Anglican use of the term "suffragan" not to be the same as the Catholic use. In the Catholic Church, a "suffragan diocese" is a diocese that is part of a group of dioceses called a metropolitan province, the see of which is not the metropolitan see, and a "suffrogan bishop" is the diocesan bishop of a suffrogan diocese. In Anglican use, the term "suffragan bishop" seems to refer to a bishop who assists a(n arch)diocean bishop with the administration of his (arch)diocese — which is called an "auxilliary bishop" in the Catholic Church. In the ordinariates, I suspect that the Catholic terminology will apply. The sees of all of the archdioceses in the United States except the Military Archdiocese of the United States are metropolitan sees, so the archbishops are also metropolitans. The arrangement in Canada is similar. The role of a metropolitan bishop is mostly symbolic in the Roman Rite, but he does convene and chair provincial councils and meetings of the bishops of the province and appoint the members of metropolitan (appellate) tribunals. When the pope appoints a new bishop for a suffragan diocese, the metropolitan normally is the principal consecrator for his episcopal ordination and the person who oversees his installation as bishop.

      To illustrate how this works, there are two metropolitan provinces in the six states of New England. The Province of Boston encompasses the Archdiocese of Boston and the suffragan dioceses of Springfield in Massachusetts, Worcester, Fall River, Burlington in Vermont, Manchester, and Portland in Maine — that is, the states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut. The Province of Hartford encompasses the Archdiocese of Hartford and the suffragan dioceses of Stamford, Norwich, and Providence — that is, the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island. Several of these dioceses have auxilliary bishops to assist the diocean bishop.

      Now, the Codex Juris Canonici allows a diocesan bishop to delegate authority in a general way by appointment of vicars general and, in a diocese, episcopal vicars, and auxilliary bishops always hold one title or the other. An ordinary certainly can appoint vicars general for his ordinariate, too. The title of "episcopal vicar" seems less fitting if the ordinary is not a bishop, but the deans of territorial deaneries envisioned in Anglicanorum coetibus seem to have a similar role. Also, the use of the title of "dean" seems more consistent with Anglican practice.

      In keeping with Catholic practice, it seems most likely that the term "suffragan ordinary" will arise whenever the Vatican erects a second ordinariate in the territory of a conference of bishops. It seems reasonable to expect that the Vatican would designate one of the ordinariates as an "archordinariate" that would function in the manner of a metropolitan see for all of the ordinariates, and that the other ordinariates would thus become "suffragan ordinariates." The term "suffragan ordinary" would then refer to an ordinary of a "suffragan ordinariate" rather than to somebody who assists an ordinary within his own ordinariate.

      Norm.

      1. On the matter of territory, we now have the answer for this. An ordinariate is confined to the territory of an episcopal conference. However, subjects (i.e. real persons, both clerical and lay) of an ordinariate may live outside that territory. So there can be a group of Anglican-Catholics living in Japan who belong to the Australian structrue, for instance. Should the group in Japan become large enough, it might become a separate ordinariate.

        What is the difference? Once included by Rome, the Japanese members may expand their reach in the dioceses where they existed from the time of their incorporation. To expand to new sees in Japan, they need the permission of the respective local bishops. In contrast, within Australia, the p.o. need only inform the local Latin bishop that he is expanding into his diocese.

        The members (including clerics) of the TAC churches in Central America and in Puerto Rico will likely become members of the American ordinariate; those in Scotland, of the Ordinariate which covers the episcopal conference of England and Wales. There are other examples for Southern Africa and TACers in Pakistan could be members of an Indian Ordinariate.

        I see no possibility of 'archordinariates' or metropolitan provinces of ordinariates. This would violate Roman canonical precedent and these ordinariates do have canonical cousins, especially in the Armenian Catholic Church and in the Church Universal (for mixed rites and for military personnel). A p.o. should be thought of as a structure which is cumulative with that of the local Latin diocese, even though, in terms of goverance, it is really independent of the local bishops. Each p.o. is directly subject to the Holy See, and I expect that to continue. So there can be no metropolitans and suffragans. A rough comparision is to that of exempt dioceses and exempt archdioceses. These do not belong on any ecclesiastical province but are directly subject to the Holy Apostolic See.

        P.K.T.P.

        1. Peter,

          You wrote: On the matter of territory, we now have the answer for this. An ordinariate is confined to the territory of an episcopal conference.

          Ah, not quite. The apostolic constitution stipulates that each ordinariate must be within the territory of an episcopal conference. It does NOT require an ordinariate to encompass the entire territory of an episcopal conference, nor does it limit the territory of an episcopal conference to just one ordinariate. Thus, it's entirely possible to divide the territory of an episcopal conference geographically into two or more ordinariates, though the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith might elect not to do so initially.

          You wrote: However, subjects (i.e. real persons, both clerical and lay) of an ordinariate may live outside that territory.

          I'm not so sure about that. Members of an ordinariate certainly may travel outside its territory, but I think that they will cease to be members of the ordinariate if they cease to have domicile or at least quasi-domicile therein. Note, however, that one canonically forfeits domicile only by (1) leaving a place with the intent not to return or (2) establishing domicile in another place.

          So there can be a group of Anglican-Catholics living in Japan who belong to the Australian structrue, for instance.

          I really don't foresee that. Canonically, however, the Vatican has sometimes appointed the same person as the bishop of two dioceses concurrently — a situation called "two dioceses joined in the person of the bishop." Given such a precedent, I don't see why there can't be "two ordinariates joined in the person of the ordinary" in the same way.

          The fundamental problem here is that each ordinariate is subject to the conference of bishops for its territory. It would be very awkward for one ordinariate to be subject two two conferences of bishops. It would be more expedient to have two canonical entities (ordinariates) with the same person in charge of both.

          You wrote: I see no possibility of 'archordinariates' or metropolitan provinces of ordinariates. This would violate Roman canonical precedent and these ordinariates do have canonical cousins, especially in the Armenian Catholic Church and in the Church Universal (for mixed rites and for military personnel).

          That's not accurate.

          >> The Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh is the metropolitan see for Ruethenian Catholics in the United States. Its suffragan sees are the Eparchy of Passaic, the Eparchy of Parma, and the Holy Protection of Mary Eparchy of Phoenix (formerly the Eparchy of Van Nuys).

          >> The Ukrainian Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia is the metropolitan see for Ukrainian Catholics in the United States. Its suffragan sees are the Eparchy of Stamford, the Eparchy of St. Nicholas of Chicago, the Eparchy of St. Joseph of Parma.

          In a nation with two or more ordinariates, assigning one the role of a metropolitan see certainly would facilitate mutual collaboration in matters of common interest by clearly defining the relationship among the ordinaries.

          You wrote: A rough comparision is to that of exempt dioceses and exempt archdioceses. These do not belong on any ecclesiastical province but are directly subject to the Holy Apostolic See.

          The Vatican actually has been moving to elimiate exempt dioceses. In the United States, the Military Archdiocese is now the only diocese of Roman Rite that is not part of a metropolitan province.

          Norm.

          1. Norm:

            Sorry but my initial point stands: in terms of territory, an ordinariate is confined to the territory of one episcopal conference; however, persons living outside that territory can be members of the structure.

            I never suggested for one instant that thre could not be more than one ordinariate in the area of one episcopal conference. In fact, I have consistently written the opposite in the case of of the Torres Strait group, for instance. But there would not be geographical division. You could have two or more ordinariates existing in he entire territory of one episcopal conference.

            P.K.T.P.

          2. Norm goes on to mention the case of double appointment. He is right on that point but it in no way applies here because these smaller groups of Anglicans are too few to have their own ordinariates, or, at least, that seems to be the line being taken by Cardinal Wuerl (not that I agree with it).

            Norm is referring to a rare case such as the one in which Bishop Papamanolis is both the Bishop of Syros & Milos (one diocese) and also, seconarily, the Bishop of Santorini. Yes, this can happen.

            I don't see how Norm's references to the Eastern sui juris churches have any applicability here. They are not parallel cases. Each Eastern church is equal in law to the Latin Church, whereas the personal ordinariates are part of the Latin Church. However, how things are done WITHIN a sui juris church (e.g. Latin Church and Armenian Church) can be applicable. The Armenian Ordinariates, which are the closest cousin to the new personal ordinariates, are never parts of ecclesiastical provinces. Each of them is directly subect to the Armenian Patriarch and each covers one country: Greece, Romania and the Ukraine.

            The recent post here regarding Scotland proves that my points are dead on. I do know a bit about Latin Church law, much as does Mr. Cavanaugh of this list.

            I apologise for referring to you as Norm but I don't know your surname. I was not trying to be rude on that.

            Peter Karl T. Perkins

  2. I believe, however correct me if I am wrong, that Our Lady of the Atonement has close to 2000 members. I am not sure about Our Lady of Walsingham, it might have over 300 members. If so then we should have over 2500 by quite a lot.

    It would be wonderful if the parishes would grow to even 150 per parish.

    I have talked to at least two Anglican churches who aren't coming in and one has only 20 members and has been in existence for over 20 years.

    Thank you for all your work and time to inform us of the situation in the US, it is greatly appreciated.

    1. Because irrespective of what you or others may personally consider in the use of Average Sunday Attendance figures it is a most effective and accepted method of gauging the success or failure of congregations of any denomination..
      I know that there are those out there within the blogosphere who with tongues in cheek are wishing for the failure of this movement. Let me share this with each of those individuals now; “It will not come to pass” It has the blessing of the Holy Father and is guided by the Holy Spirit.

      It is the start of answering the call to heal Christ’s Church on Earth.

      Nuff said!

    2. Relatedly/tangentially, a rough attempt at a census of continuing Anglicans in the US, based on the ASA's that one can find on Wikipedia for the different groups mentioned on Wikipedia, yields a total population estimate of about 30,000. If we assume that people go to church twice a month, you could double that to 60,000. Either way, an interesting exercise to attempt.

  3. I think that Br. Stephen's post might be in response to some of the blogs who keep stating that the Ordinariate is so small and imply that there is little interest. Also it is uplifting for those of us who are joining the Ordinariate to know that we are not alone in this journey.

  4. I would agree that 2500 is a conservative number, because I don't think all those who are interested are represented on the map for various reasons. After all, the map only contains intact parishes, and not individuals who may be in areas without an Anglican parish. Also, there are groups of interested folks who may only be meeting in homes to pray together that are not represented.

    That said, I am confident that when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is ready, they will erect an ordinariate in the U.S. regardless of proposed population numbers.

    +Ed

    1. That is good point. For example, I know for a fact that there is a group of people (clergy included) in the Sacramento area of California that are committed to joining the Ordinariate once it is established, even if the majorities at each of the area's parishes want simply to "continue Continuing."

    2. My husband and I were wondering just last night how many people are required to be considered a "group." We are Anglican Use Catholics, but live 160 miles from our home parish, so we're all by ourselves out in Northeast Texas. We haven't been able to attend Mass at our parish for over a year, so we must attend the closest N.O. It would be wonderful to find others in our neck of the woods who might be interested in getting together.

        1. Gina -

          I'm way, way out in NE Texas – half way between Texarkana and Longview. Denison is only 130 miles away, but still too far… :(

  5. [COMMENT FROM "LINA BANDA" DELETED]

    Lina,

    You weep like the Magdalene then become stoic like Seneca, but whatever the topic, you find a way to be discouraging.

    I really do have to give you credit. You did a convincing job sounding like one more unhappy stereotype and I never paid much attention to the pattern of your comments before the last few days, but then again, you are something of a professional.

    Now run along and don't come back.

    1. There are other blogs where negativity is the norm. I find that the Anglo Catholic is the most positive website and most informative.

      I agree with Fr. Hall that many (Continuing Anglicans) want us to fail. Instead of focusing on ones who are headed for the Ordinariate, it might be wise for them to focus on themselves and uniting as one, instead of the many many different groups.

      At least we are united and soon will have over a billion brothers and sisters in Christ.

  6. Does size really matter in the Catholic Church? I THINK NOT! Look up the total figures of the various Eastern Rite Churches in Communion with the Bishop of Rome. The Syriac, Chaldeans, Ethiopians, these smaller bodies all have representation and some type of hierarchy in this country (U.S.A.). Yes, it looks small but small can be better for growing a solid family in the greater church. The Byzantine Ruthenians, Byzantine Ukrainians, Byzantine Melkites and the Maronites all have small congregations compared to Latin Rite parishes. These people know one another, help one another and pray for one another by name; not like a lot of LR parishes who don't even see the same people week after week and have no way to grow a family oriented church.
    Just don't worry about numbers, the LORD'S vinyard is ripening will grow more fruit.

    1. Very well said Matthew.

      I made the same point here, and included some numbers for the purposes of comparison: http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2010/11/on-littleness-and-liturgy-meditation-on.html

      "The Annuario of Eastern Churches states that as of 2010, the Albanian Byzantine Catholic Church had 3845 members, 9 parishes, and 1 bishop. The Greek Byzantine Catholic Church had 2525 members, 4 parishes, and 1 bishop. The Bulgarian Catholic Church, 10,000 members, 21 parishes, 1 bishop. These are sui juris churches; there are also other Eastern communities without a hierarchy that are even smaller. Georgian Byzantine-Rite Catholics number perhaps only 500."

  7. A few observations seem warranted:

    First, TEC has been "fudging" their numbers for years. My family of four left in 2006 for the Catholic Church and yet are still counted as members of our old TEC church (our anniversary and all of our birthdays are still published in the monthly newsletter, which we also still receive). Many people who left our once thriving church, ASA of around 1,000, are also counted on the roster. Unfortunately, many of these once fine places of worship are now struggling. We should not gloat, because this just means the enemy is winning. However, it may mean within the next few years that some real estate may be up for sale. I think starting a building acquisition fund might be in order:)

    Second, on a more positive note, Br. Stephen's numbers are definitely VERY conservative. If you add up the ASA of all the Anglican Use parishes and the numbers he has already mentioned, you would probably have and Ordinariate ASA (USA) on the low end of 5,000 and on the high end of 10,000. Time will tell, but the naysayers are merely a few flies on the proverbial rump of the elephant!

    Finally, remember that everything negative said about the Ordinariate from all of the naysayers has not come to pass. Not one iota, not one jot, zip, nada, nothing!!! I'm not much of a dancer, but I just might do a little jig in the street and scream at the top of my lungs, "rejoice and be glad!!!"

    Keep the faith and don't give the naysayers and inch.

    Blessings,

    Clark

  8. From my RC perspective:

    The question of relative size should not be of concern – didn't our Lord begin His public ministry with a handful of men? How many (later thriving) monastic orders began with even less than a dozen? In pagan times, how many tribes (that later coalesced into nations) were converted to the Faith starting with the work of just one, or two, missionaries? Also, from a different angle, when taking account of recent trends, small numbers are becoming somewhat of a norm in some parts of Christianity:

    http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/02/christian-number-crunching

    The main question should be the quality of individual faith. Here, those who will enter the Ordinariates in the first wave, have shown inspiring hope and fortitude while swimming against this strengthening vortex of Christian fragmentation – here, by the way, is a living jewel of your patrimony. Even spleen venting by naysayers is an opposite testament of sorts, that small numbers are irrelevant when compared to the quality of faith – if small numbers necessarily meant failure, then why expand all this negative energy on them?

    I believe the Ordinariates are a work of our Lord, Who often seems to like tentative beginnings.

  9. With respect to ASA at Our Lady of Walsingham, as noted in this week's bulletin, attendance at the three Sunday Masses last week was 488, which if memory serves is a pretty much average number (one might say 475 for conservatism's sake). We are experiencing a slow but steady accretion of parishioners and regular visitors. This weekend we celebrate the 7th anniversary of the dedication of our new church building, and the ordination of John D. Denson, our second permanent deacon, today. Deo gratias.

    1. I might also just add that while the Ordinariate parishes might start out small by Roman standards, if OLOW is any guide (and I think O.L. Atonement's experience has been the same), once the word gets out that an Anglican Ordinariate church is operating in the territory of a particular diocese, Catholics of other than Anglican background will start coming by for Mass, and a number will be captured by the beauty of the liturgy, and also the family feeling of a typical Anglican parish, and so will become regulars. Thus I would expect numbers, and, of course, collections, to start increasing almost immediately.

      1. I think Woody Jones is on to something.

        Be of good cheer. I know once the Ordinariate is up and running, Latin Rite Catholics following some good catechesis will overcome their trepidation that they're attending a Protestant service. They'll start flocking to the parishes to be set up. I have friends already talking about joining if a parish is established.

        Word will spread quickly as Anglican Ordinariate parishes spread. From my reading of some very traditional Catholic websites, the all Latin or bust types are becoming very unsettled at the growing talk of the Ordinariate's popularity and increased interest among more tradition- minded Catholics searching for a beautiful and dignified eucharistic liturgy and offices. They're expressing a fear, often resorting to hysterical attacks on the Cranmerian liturgical legacy. Believing that the thrust or impetus towards the establishment of a one-size fits all Latin Mass, ( coming from those searching for beauty and dignity within the Roman rite) will begin to dissipate as these Latin rite Catholics leave for Anglican Ordinariate parishes.

        1. The AC and norms are quite clear that cradle catholic will not be allowed to join the Ordinariate, and therefore be in competition with the local diocesan bishop. That may prove to be a problem, as these groups are set up differently than the AU parishes.

          Article 5

          §1. The lay faithful originally of the Anglican tradition who wish to belong to the Ordinariate, after having made their Profession of Faith and received the Sacraments of Initiation, with due regard for Canon 845, are to be entered in the apposite register of the Ordinariate. Those baptized previously as Catholics outside the Ordinariate are not ordinarily eligible for membership, unless they are members of a family belonging to the Ordinariate.

          1. Fr. Phillips could probably clarify this, from what I know the Anglican Use parishes were also for Anglicans, not for Latin Rite Catholics.

            However as we can see there appear to be more Latin Rite Catholics registered in his parish than former Anglicans. I think that once the Ordinariates are established Catholics will find a way to register at the parishes.

            I don't belong to a territoral parish and neither do about 90% of the members. From my viewpoint this norm will become more flexible in time.

            1. I am far from being an expert in canon law (actually, any law at all), but if I remember correctly, Trent made it a rule that every Roman Catholic belongs to a parish. If you are not member of a Personal Parish (in a legal sense, not just the place where you attend mass), you are automatically a member of the territorial parish you are living in. But I am sure someone more erudite (Norm?) can explain this…

            2. Victor,

              You wrote: If you are not member of a Personal Parish (in a legal sense, not just the place where you attend mass), you are automatically a member of the territorial parish you are living in. But I am sure someone more erudite (Norm?) can explain this…

              Yes, that's absolutely correct. I posted the relevant canons from the Codex Juris Canonici earlier today in the discussion under the more recent article on canonical curiosities, so I won't repeat them here.

              Norm.

          2. Yes, I realize the restriction on joining the Ordinariate for cradle Latin rite Catholics. I was referring to their attending Mass regularly at AU parishes and even joining the parish. I believe that is already the case at the AU parishes in Texas.

            In one of the Texas parishes, I believe they already make up the vast majority of the parishioners. This trend will indeed continue once the Ordinariate is set up.

        2. Aging Papist:

          You wrote:

          "From my reading of some very traditional Catholic websites, the all Latin or bust types are becoming very unsettled at the growing talk of the Ordinariate's popularity and increased interest among more tradition- minded Catholics…"

          I'm a traditionalist Catholic, and I've never come across such sentiments regarding the Ordinariates – actually, quite the opposite.

          How about some links to these "hysterical" and "very traditional Catholic websites"?

          1. I have to agree, Mark. From what I've read of Aging Papist previous posts, he has an axe to grind against Latin Rite Catholics.
            I have only read good things on Catholic blogs, being a cradle Catholic myself. In fact, the only whinging I've read from Catholics is the slow response from bishops towards AC.

  10. Canada is doing well in these numbers: 30 communites versus 36 but Canada has only one-tenth the population of America (although the numbers of Anglicans in the two countries are much closer than that).

    I am wondering what per centage of the 30 Canadian communities are from the TAC here. Also, what per centage of the American communities from the TAC?

    P.K.T.P.

    1. Peter,

      You asked: I am wondering what per centage of the 30 Canadian communities are from the TAC here.

      It appears that 28 of the 30 pins in Canada on the map are from the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC). The ordinariate for Canada will be substantially the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada (ACCC), which is the Canadian province of the TAC.

      You asked: Also, what per centage of the American communities from the TAC?

      About half of the pins in the United States on the map are "Anglican Use, Roman Rite" and about half are TAC. There are about two or three pins for other current affiliations.

      That said, it's likely that many non-Catholic congregations won't announce their decisions until the Vatican erects the respective ordinariates to preserve their status within their current denominations.

      Norm.

      1. Dear Norm:

        I am surprised at the A.U. numbers. I thought that they had only about eight parishes. Of course, there can be future/coming parishes and other communties too. I realise that.

        But of the incomers–those not already in communion with the See of Rome–it would seem that most applicants to date in America are also from the TAC.

        Of course, I think that this will change once the Ordinariates are up and running. For instance, many Latin 'conservatives' might attend Mass regularly at the Ordinariate parishes, even if they cannot be subjects of the p.o. Then there are former Anglicans in the Latin Church who converted in the past. There will also be present continuers and Canterburians who enter the ordinariates over time.

        This is all very exciting and I'm ecstatic about it. Here in Victoria, B.C., Canada, my Traditional Latin Mass community now has close ties with the incoming TAC. I can see them having Mass in our church and us having Mass in their cathedral. I also know that many in both jurisdictions will attend Mass in one another's churches.

        In closing, I'd say that there are many Latin Catholics who would rather attend Mass in English but who find the N.O.M. to be too informal, at least in their dioceses or parishes (not that it need be so). Some of those sorts will no doubt become regulars in the Ordinariates. There are also Latin Mass supporters who cannot find a nearby Latin Mass and who would gladly attend at an Ordinariate Mass, whether it be in Latin or sacral English.

        P.K.T.P.

        1. Peter,

          You wrote: I am surprised at the A.U. numbers. I thought that they had only about eight parishes. Of course, there can be future/coming parishes and other communties too. I realise that.

          A couple months ago, I counted a dozen established parishes or quasi-parishes for the Anglican Use in the United States, but there are more in various stages of forming (meaning that they have some sort of organization, but do not have canonical status). Several of the communities in the "forming" process already have "pins" in the map, though.

          You wrote: But of the incomers–those not already in communion with the See of Rome–it would seem that most applicants to date in America are also from the TAC.

          Yes, that's correct. You can count the others on one hand without using all of the fingers.

          Then there are former Anglicans in the Latin Church who converted in the past.

          Many former Anglicans who entered the full communion of the Catholic Church (our bishops have asked that we NOT refer to such individuals as "converts") in the past will join the ordinariates, once the ordinariates come into existence.

          You wrote: In closing, I'd say that there are many Latin Catholics who would rather attend Mass in English but who find the N.O.M. to be too informal, at least in their dioceses or parishes (not that it need be so). Some of those sorts will no doubt become regulars in the Ordinariates. There are also Latin Mass supporters who cannot find a nearby Latin Mass and who would gladly attend at an Ordinariate Mass, whether it be in Latin or sacral English.

          I once invited an avid supporter of the Tridentine liturgy to a retreat over the paschal triduum at a Benedictine monastery. It was truly an eye-opening experience for her. For the first time in her life, she saw the current form of the Roman Rite celebrated well. It totally changed her view of the current form of the Roman Rite.

          But if your point is that many parishes could — and should — do a lot better, I agree.

          Norm.

        2. I agree with your thoughts on synergy between TLM and the Ordinariate. In Toronto, the FSSP abandoned Toronto since they didn't get enough membership to be given a stable parish. There are plans for a Toronto Ordinariate, but unless it gets enough numbers, it might face the same problems. If the Toronto Ordinariate worked with the FSSP, there would be more than enough membership for a stable parish in a good location.

          1. Anil,

            You wrote: I agree with your thoughts on synergy between TLM and the Ordinariate. In Toronto, the FSSP abandoned Toronto since they didn't get enough membership to be given a stable parish. There are plans for a Toronto Ordinariate, but unless it gets enough numbers, it might face the same problems. If the Toronto Ordinariate worked with the FSSP, there would be more than enough membership for a stable parish in a good location.

            To be clear, there are not, and never were, any plans for a "Toronto ordinariate." The Archbishop of Toronto is the Vatican's delegate for the erection of a Canadian ordinariate. The current map shows thirty parishes and missions that have expressed interest, so that's clearly enough for the Canadian ordinariate to get started.

            The so-called Fraternal Society of St. Pius X (FSSP) was canonically suppressed due to heresies in its teaching, and subsequently fell into schism when Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre illicitly ordained four presbyters of the FSSP as bishops for the FSSP. Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of the four bishops as a gesture of good will, but the SSPX remains in a state of schism due to its doctrinal errors. Pope John Paul II erected the pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei to facilitate the reconciliation of persons affiliated with the SSPX and, toward that end, to make the celebration of mass according to the Tridentine form of the Roman Rite more accessible to those who wish it. Pope Benedict XVI reorganized the pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei and made it part of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith because the primary obstacles to the restoration of the SSPX to the full communion of the Catholic Church are doctrinal. As of today, the SSPX remains in a state of schism and heresy so well informed Catholic traditionalists do not go to its masses.

            Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI also have asked all bishops throughout the world to grant permission for the celebration of the Tridentine form of the Roman liturgy very generously, and most dioceses now have make the Tridentine form of the mass readily available for those who prefer it. The pontifical commission Ecclesia Dei is available to assist any diocese that requires assistance to offer the Tridentine form of the liturgy for those who wish it. In my experience, though, dioceses that celebrate the current form of the mass properly — and yes, there are a few — have very little demand for the Tridentine form.

            Norm.

            1. Norm,

              With all due respect, the FSSP is not the same as SSPX. The FSSP is Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Petri, The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. It was founded in July of 1988 and is completely faithful to the Magisterium. Just recently, Bishop Bruskewitz ordained 6 seminarians to minor orders at Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary in Denton, Nebraska. The FSSP is completely faithful to the Church and to confuse this organization with the SSPX is very unfortunate.

  11. Hot on the heels of Fr Deacon Edwin's ordination, it transpires that two priests and one deacon in the Church of England have announced their resignation, and their intention to enter the fullness of the Catholic Church through the Ordinariate. I understand that they will be leading a sizeable portion of their congregations with them.

    They are:
    Fr Ed Tomlinson (St Barnabas, Tunbridge Wells)
    (http://www.tunbridgewells-ordinariate.com/blog/)
    Fr Ivan Aquilina and Fr Deacon James Bradley (St John the Baptist, Sevenoaks)
    (http://sevenoaks.blogspot.com/)

    I'm sure that everyone who reads The Anglo-Catholic will wish to congratulate them and assure them of continued prayers – both for those who have begun the journey and for those who, for whatever reason, have not.

    As we are getting close to Ash Wednesday when, as I understand it, the groups in England and Wales who intend to form the vanguard of the Ordinariate Caravan are set to formally declare themselves, I think we may well see a flurry of resignations of this nature over the next few weeks.

    1. I, for one, am very happy for Fr Tomlinson. The bile and aggressivesness he has received from Anglicans, some quite senior, on his blog was rather shocking and disappointing.

  12. In this era of telecommunications, I question whether and to what extent multiple ordinariates within the USA, or even deaneries, will be necessary. Look at how quickly and effectively communication occurs in this little corner of the blogiverse. And consider how much work we have all gotten done in recent months and years by teleconferencing rather than traveling.

    Can an Ordinary effectively lead a "diocese" that is thousands of miles wide? Why not?

    1. Cost of airfare would be the biggest impediment, I would think. Once you get bigger than a few hours' drive, travel expense would become the biggest line item in the budget.

    2. Ralph,

      You wrote: In this era of telecommunications, I question whether and to what extent multiple ordinariates within the USA, or even deaneries, will be necessary. Look at how quickly and effectively communication occurs in this little corner of the blogiverse. And consider how much work we have all gotten done in recent months and years by teleconferencing rather than traveling.

      Can an Ordinary effectively lead a "diocese" that is thousands of miles wide? Why not?

      There are certain functions that will require the physical presence of the ordinary or his delegate — parish visitations, confirmations, ordinations, installations of pastors, etc. While modern airlines certainly make it possible to travel large distances and thus to govern a geographically dispersed ordinariate, there are also practical limits as to how much time one ordinary realistically can spend travelling for such functions and still have enough time in his office to fulfill his administrative responsibilities.

      Realistically, I think that some sort of geographical subdivision will be necessary for the ordinariates in the United States and in Canada. The question is whether that subdivision will be into deaneries or into separate ordinariates.

      Norm.

  13. In Toronto momentum is growing and the March 24 – 26 conference at Queen of Apostles Retreat Centre near Toronto Pearson Int. Airport will gather people from across the country and the USA from the AU, Anglican Church of Canada and the TAC and possibly the Ordinariate of OLW in the UK.

    The conference will be a historic and organizationally crucial gathering with Fr. Phillips joining Archbishop Collins, the host. The same week both Cardinal Wuerl and Fr. Aidan Nichols are to be in Toronto. Fr Nichols, a godfather of the Ordinariate, author, theologican and international Dominican scholar recognized for his work on Balthazar and a consultant to the Holy Father is to address the Ordinariate conference along with Fr. Phillips and others.

    Following the conference a Toronto Ordinariate study group will be announced and will meet weekly beginning in April in a Toronto Catholic Parish (details in a few weeks).

    There's another pin for the map Brother Stephen and a pin that will represent in a few years hundreds DV, in the city which once was largely Anglican and still has the largest concentration of those of Anglican heritage in the country.

    1. I'd like to see an Ordinariate parish emerge for downtown Toronto. There are TAC supporters there but no parish for them at present.

      P.K.T.P.

  14. Gay is right. I know in the case of OLOW and believe, in the case of OLA, that the majority, indeed perhaps great majority, of parishioners are not of Anglican background (as a former Methodist I claim Patrimony through that schism from the Anglican mainstream). I know that a similar situation applies in some if not many of the Byzantine Catholic parishes. One aggregates oneself to the parish, eventually going onto the parish rolls, and for all practical purposes that is that. I understand the canonical limitations but would argue that they are essentially meaningless if not downright harmful in this time of severe testing (one could use harsher words) for the Church.

    1. At Our Lady of the Atonement, having been established almost 30 years ago, a good number have been baptized at the parish and spent their entire lives there. It wouldn't seem as though in the case of two young adults that have grown up in the parish that one be allowed to join the ordinariate because their parents came from an Anglican background while the other one not be allowed to join because their parents were cradle Catholics.

      1. Depending on when the parents starting attending the parish, the children who grew up in the parish might have been baptized there also, no? Is it forbidden for cradle Catholic parents to baptize their children into another Latin rite parish (which the ordinariate parishes will be)?

        1. Craig,

          You asked: Is it forbidden for cradle Catholic parents to baptize their children into another Latin rite parish (which the ordinariate parishes will be)?

          Practices on this can vary widely from diocese to diocese. The Codex Juris Canonici states it both the canonical pastor's prerogative and the canonical pastor's responsibility to baptize infants of Catholic parents who request it, but many bishops now grant broad faculties to baptize to all presbyters of their dioceses. Also, few pastors would refuse (1) to delegate another presbyter or deacon in good standing who knows the family to perform a baptism or (2) to allow a baptism to take place in another Catholic parish church if the diocesan bishop has not granted such faculties.

          Norm.

    2. Woody,

      Gay is right. I know in the case of OLOW and believe, in the case of OLA, that the majority, indeed perhaps great majority, of parishioners are not of Anglican background (as a former Methodist I claim Patrimony through that schism from the Anglican mainstream). I know that a similar situation applies in some if not many of the Byzantine Catholic parishes. One aggregates oneself to the parish, eventually going onto the parish rolls, and for all practical purposes that is that. I understand the canonical limitations but would argue that they are essentially meaningless if not downright harmful in this time of severe testing (one could use harsher words) for the Church.

      Just to clarify, those received into the full communion of the Catholic Church by a parish of the ordinariate can enroll as members of the ordinariate. There's no requirement that such individuals come from the Anglican tradition.

      JTOL, the parishes of the ordinariates might also appeal to some Lutherans….

      Norm.

    3. Woody,

      You wrote: I understand the canonical limitations but would argue that they are essentially meaningless if not downright harmful in this time of severe testing (one could use harsher words) for the Church.

      When there's good collaboration among pastors, the canonical restrictions are not an issue.

      Backing up a step, the Codex Juris Canonici provides for delegation of authority in the following manner.

      >> A person who posesses ordinary authority may grant both general delegations and specific delegations.

      >> A person who posesses a general delegation may grant only specific subdelegations.

      >> A person who posesses either a specific delegation or a specific subdelegation may not further subdelegate.

      Here, "general delegation" means that one may act routinely without further permission while "specific delegation" means that one may act for a named individual or on a specific occasion. General delegations are usually in writing, but specific delegations may be either written or oral.

      The "ordinary" of a "particular church" (that is, a diocesan bishop or an ordinary of an ordinariate) has ordinary authority over all sacramental ministry. They customarily grant general delegations for normal sacramental ministry associated with their respective offices to all of the clergy of their particular church. This general delegation allows the pastors of parishes to subdelegate as it becomes expedient to do so.

      So, how does this work in practice?

      Consider the case of a child whose family does not belong to the ordinariate, but is receiving sacramental preparation at a parish of the ordinariate and wishes to receive the sacrament(s) with his or her classmates. Typically the pastor of the ordinariate's parish would simply call the pastor of the territorial parish to which the family belongs and explains the circumstance, whereupon the pastor of the territorial parish usually would delegate authority to admit the child to the sacraments. It's really that easy. I know that many pastors of decades ago protected their feifdoms, but most pastors now would refuse such subdelegations only if they were aware of some canonical impediment to the intended actions.

      Norm.

  15. Your statistics are clearly showing an interest in the Ordinariate world wide. However in the UK it is much bigger than is being suggested. There are Ordinariates cropping up all over the country. You are merely reporting web sites attached to the Ordinariate Portal (18).

    In todays postings you mention Derbyshire and in previous postings you have reported that in the RC Diocese of Brentwood, 300 people and 6 parishes are moving to the Ordibariate. None of these are included in your numbers. I am sure this is happening globally. Not everyone has web sites.

    This is not just an interest. This a seismic shift.

  16. I know we like to compare to the TEC, but there is another Anglican group in the States and Canada that is the 800 pound gorilla. The ACNA. TEC is a dying organization where burials outnumber baptisms. Seems the same for the CoE.

    If we must compare ourselves to an Anglican jurisdiction in North America, I believe it should be the ACNA. There is restlessness in that group and I know of priests who are interested in the Ordinariate. If certain theological issues are not resolved, I do not see many looking to the Continuing groups, but to a growing and thriving Ordinariate.

    1. Fr. Mark,

      You wrote: I know we like to compare to the TEC, but there is another Anglican group in the States and Canada that is the 800 pound gorilla. The ACNA. TEC is a dying organization where burials outnumber baptisms. Seems the same for the CoE.

      If we must compare ourselves to an Anglican jurisdiction in North America, I believe it should be the ACNA. There is restlessness in that group and I know of priests who are interested in the Ordinariate. If certain theological issues are not resolved, I do not see many looking to the Continuing groups, but to a growing and thriving Ordinariate.

      The real "elephant in the room" is the Global Anglican Futures Conference (GAFCON) and its member provinces, who have been very instrumental in the establishment of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). The provinces of GAFCON, mostly African, are generally conservative. Although they have accepted women clergy within the Anglican Communion, if not in their own provinces, they most assuredly are not tolerating either episcopal ordination of obviously unsuitable candidates or blessings of "same sex" unions. Two recent actions here in the States — the recent ordination of an obviously unsuitable individual as a bishop in California and the fact that the Episcopal Bishop of Massachusetts officiated and blessed the "marriage" of two women — in defiance of the primates' request for a moratorium on such actions probably were the last straw for the Anglican Communion as it now exists. If the Anglican Communion does not expel The Episcopal Church (TEC) and possibly also the Anglican Church of Canada (ACA) from its ranks, the provinces of GAFCON undoubtedly will leave the Anglican Communion and ACNA will go with them.

      There's no doubt that a GAFCON separated from the Anglican Communion could provide the critical mass to erect ordinariates in many places, and that ACNA would be a major addition to the ordinariate(s) in the United States. OTOH, there's no guarantee that GAFCON and ACNA won't form a new "continuing Anglican" body instead.

      That said, there's no guarantee that the Anglican Communion won't expel TEC and the ACA and recognize ACNA as the new province of the Anglican Communion for North America. The recent actions of TEC were as much a poke in the eye to all of the Anglican primates who had asked for a moratorium on the unauthorized practices as they were to GAFCON, so it's likely that the rest of the primates have "had-it-up-to-here" with the TEC and ACA antics. There's also the reality that GAFCON represents a much larger slice of the Anglican Communion than ACA and TEC combined.

      And no, I don't expect either ACA or TEC to join the respective ordinariate, at least as a body….

      Norm.

  17. I'm curious about whether the Anglican Ordinariate might ever be open to those who entered full communion from other denominations? From what I understand, this will be the case in the future for protestants who enter through an Ordinariate (say a Presbyterian who decides to become Catholic several years hence), as well as for former Anglicans/Episcopals who are currently Roman Catholic. But might there be an option for non-Anglicans who became (Roman) Catholic before the Ordinariate was formed to join the Ordinariate as well? I speak as a convert who would have LOVED to be a part of the Ordinariate, had that been an option 12 years ago.

    Genevieve

Leave a Reply