Here's an article, written by a very happy and excited Fr. Andrew Bartus after the May 1st vote at St. Mary of the Angels, from his blog "Anglican Patrimony."
This was a momentous day for our parish to say the least. A friend of mine who was here in LA back then, said that he has waited for thirty-six years for this! He wrote this, now famous article, some years ago. Others have noted similarly. After nearly a year of discerning about this issue, the vote was cast – everyone placed their ballots upon the altar to bring solemnity to the seriousness and the holiness of this issue, as well as to bring to mind what our bishops did in Portsmouth back in 2007 to start this whole process.
The reality of the vote passing is still sinking in for me. I have been in battle mode since coming here (and even before while in seminary): against rogue bishops, against misinformation, against theological and moral novelties, against needless strife and disunity, etc., etc., etc. Now I can look postively towards a future where we stand for something rather than against something. Now St. Mary's can look forward to a future where our identity is sure, our foundation is upon the rock of Peter, we are in full unity with our Catholic brothers and sisters, and our faith won't be changed on us or watered down. We can look forward to a future where we can move worship in safety and full communion, and help, in our own little way, in the mission of the Catholic Church in a manner that's positive and not merely reactionary.
I remember when I first met Fr. Phillips in person and he told me that he barely remembers the days when he was having to fight and simply preserve things against the forces of "progress" because now he is involved with being constructive: growing his parish, evanglism, outreach, helping the cause of the Ordinariate, his church school, etc. I long for the day when I too can look back on these days as a distant memory and concentrate my energy and efforts on constructive projects rather than simply defensive measures.
Now, as of May 1, 2011, I see the light at the end of the tunnel: for myself and my family, as well as for St Mary of the Angels as a whole! Gone are the days of bickering over fundamentals of the faith and here come the days of joy! Did this really happen? Is this a dream? It hasn't really started sinking in yet. Thirty-six years and finally…
Here is a glimpse of our church immediately after the vote was passed:
And there's more news! Here's an article about the Church of St. Michael the Archangel, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania. Under the leadership of Fr. David Ousley, they will be entering the U. S. Ordinariate as soon as it is erected. Thanks be to God!
No related posts.
St. Mary's has been a part of me for many years and I also am very joyful that the vote is in. I believe that your parish will be growing very soon. I recall when I was a member, we had seminarians from St. John's come every Christmas and fully partake in the Mass.
One by one more parishes are joining us on the road to the Ordinariate. I am looking forward to again participate fully in the liturgy at St. Mary's.
I am now nearly always the voice of doom on this blog. Before you get too excited have you:
1. Explained to your people that Roman Canon Law will be imposed on them retrospectively and in particular on the subject of marriage .
2. That there is no guarantee that the priests will be re-ordained
3. That they will be expected to surrender their assets and property to the Ordinariate.
These are just a few of the obstacles that were encountered in Scotland. If these are addressed before you take the step into the Ordinariate it will be less painful for your people. Len Black failed to explain this to the group in Inverness . It may be that he just didnt realise that this is how the Ordinariate would operate. If the Scottish experince is anything to go by you can expect to end up with a group that is less than 1/2 the size of the group that you start out with .
I don't perceive your comment to be the harbinger of "doom and gloom," merely exasperatingly unoriginal.
What planet are you on writing:
"…3. That they will be expected to surrender their assets and property to the Ordinariate…"
SWR
"…3. That they will be expected to surrender their assets and property to the Ordinariate…"
I have not heard that they will, but if they will — so what? Or do you think it's legitimate to enter the Catholic Church, as though it were yet one of many "denominations" or Continuing Anglican "jurisdictions," with metaphorical fingers "crossed behind one's back," as though to say, if we don't find it to our liking we can take out assets and leave? No one (or group) with such an attitude ought to be admitted to the Catholic Church at all.
J.M.J.
The plain fact of the matter is that for a parish to be admitted to the Ordinariate it is not necessary to own property.
If they currently lease space, there is no reason to conclude they may not continue to do so.
It will be a matter for each Ordinariate to decide. It is not decided in advance by the Holy See.
SWR
"Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof…Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it."
It would seem that the "voice of doom" is really more the "voice of Chicken Little."
If it is fair to extrapolate the very limited Scottish experience, it is just as fair to extrapolate the 30-year-long San Antonio experience: what started as a group of eighteen is now a group of nearly three thousand. Such statements don't prove much, nor does the use of such words as "impose," "guarantee," and "surrender" leave much room for God to do His work.
We concur with Fr. Bartus and the good people at St. Mary's. We have expressed the same joy at Christ our Saviour Anglican Church in Denison, Texas. After 46 of my 48 years in the Priesthood, I no longer have to fight the forces of Liberation Theology, but with our Pastor, Fr. Fogle, I and the congregation can now have something positive to extend to our community. My dossier is almost completed and will be forwarded to Cardinal Wuerl this week. "O Lord of all, with us abide, in this our joyful Eastertide; from every weapon death can wield, thine own redeemed for ever shield? Amen. (Hymn 98)
I'm surprised at the "voice of doom" points that Fr. Crosbie listed. The first two are well known, and Fr. Bartus certainly knew them; if he didn't tell his people, as they discerned this move and prepared for the vote, he was guilty of dissembling and I don't think that is the case.
Of course, the first point, that the members of the ordinariate will be subject to Canon Law is about much more than marriage law. But that marriage law was the same in the Episcopal Church until the days of "anything goes" arrived; how could it be otherwise? It was our Lord who said that to divorce a spouse and marry another was to commit adultery; the canons reflect that. They were not the product of some malicious canonist trying to tie heavy burdens.
As for how property will be handled, the fact is, we don't know exactly how property will be handled, because that will depend on the particular norms and canons enacted for each personal ordinariate, which will have to comply with national and provincial secular laws. That is the reason those were not included in the Apostolic Consitution and general norms from 2009.
In fact, if the ordinariate in the US follows what the Vatican has been urging on the US Bishops for more than 100 years (often having a deaf ear turned to it), each parish will be individually incorporated, with a board of 5 trustees, one of whom will be the ordinary and another of whom will be the chancellor (or the chancellor's equivalent in the ordinariate), and a third will be the pastor. The other two will be parishioners, perhaps the equivalent of a rector and people's warden.
Although it is probably not the general law, my Catholic parish property is owned by a family, it is over 100 years old and reverts back to the family if for some reason there is no priest assigned to it.
Furthermore, there is no difference in the Anglican Communion regarding property. We see this in the US, where dioceses are suing for every church property when a parish decided to breakaway and start a Continuing Anglican church. In England Anglicans are walking away from their property. Which is more important, ones soul or one's material goods?
I have no idea how the property issues are in these groups of Anglicans, whether they are set up where members vote and decide to join another group of Anglicans or the Catholic Church, who then owns the property, I assume the majority of voters.
This is not a Catholic issue at all.
Thank you all for your support and prayers, even our voice of doom!
Yes, points 1 & 2 I have repeatedly talked to our people about. They knew what they were getting into. Point 3 is yet to be determined, but there's no reason why the building and assets of the local corporation cannot be maintained independently/locally but with oversight from the Ordinary.
I've tried my best to be above board about everything from the start, so that no surprises were sprung on anyone, and to help people's consciences become as informed as possible to make a vote based on reality with nothing hidden. I think that was accomplished here.
But thank you for bringing up these concerns.
God bless you all and thank you for your prayers and support for us!
Congratulations Father Bartus. The work of the Holy Spirit and the many prayer have and will bear much fruit. God bless you as a light to the City of Los Angeles.
In the article from the Philadelphia archdiocesan newspaper regarding the parish of St. Michael the Archangel, there is the following paragraph:
Most important to the laity, the Anglican Ordinariate can adhere to most of their traditions, including at St. Michael the Archangel, use of the 1928 edition of the Book of Common Prayer and the Hymnal of 1940.
As a former lay member of that parish, I know for a fact that the parish uses the American Missal for Masses. Would Fr. Phillips comment on the likelihood that any of these, The BCP 1928, the Hymnal 1940, or the American Missal will be allowed within the American Ordinariate? Thank you.
Obviously, the 1928 BCP, the 1940 hymnal, and the American Missal would not be able to be taken in toto into the Ordinariate. However, great amounts of them will be. In fact, those of us in the Pastoral Provision have used hymns from the 1940 hymnal, and large portions of what is found in the BCP/Missal for the whole time of our existence.
Surely, the Church is the people of God, not the building, and so there is no need to worry about who owns what set of bricks and mortar. I am quite convinced that Fr Phillips congregation is growing all the time not because they covet the building, but, because they Love our Lord Jesus Christ and that God comes without question, first in their daily lives.
It is nice to have a building to worship in, but it is the 'dark one' who enters our lives when we place the building above God.
Fr Bartus, I am confident knows this, and would with his congregation give up the wonderful St Mary of the Angels, if it meant putting the bricks and mortar before God. May God continue to grow your church within the hearts of your people, so that they may reach out to others who need to hear the Gospel Message.
Your joy is infectious Fr Bartus, we can all feel that joy – thank you.