Posts tagged Benedict XVI

Salt + Light on Cardinal Levada’s Talk

The blog of Canada’s Salt + Light Catholic Media Foundation has the following excerpt from Cardinal Levada’s address, “Five Hundred Years After St. John Fisher: Benedict’s Ecumenical Initiatives to Anglicans”:

Visible union with the Catholic Church does not mean absorption into a monolith, with the absorbed body being lost to the greater whole, the way a teaspoon of sugar would be lost if dissolved in a gallon of coffee. Rather, visible union with the Catholic Church can be compared to an orchestral ensemble. Some instruments can play all the notes, like a piano. There is no note that a piano has that a violin or a harp or a flute or a tuba does not have. But when all these instruments play the notes that the piano has, the notes are enriched and enhanced. The result is symphonic, full communion. One can perhaps say that the ecumenical movement wishes to move from cacophony to symphony, with all playing the same notes of doctrinal clarity, the same euphonic chords of sanctifying activity, observing the rhythm of Christian conduct in charity, and filling the world with the beautiful and inviting sound of the Word of God. While the other instruments may tune themselves according to the piano, when playing in concert there is no mistaking them for the piano. It is God’s will that those to whom the Word of God is addressed, the world, that is, should hear one pleasing melody made splendid by the contributions of many different instruments.

Sign the Petition of Support for Papal Visit

Fr. John Henley, SSC, writes to ask that The Anglo-Catholic advertise a petition in support of the Holy Father’s September visit to the United Kingdom.  Please note that the petition is open to UK citizens only.

According to the web site of the National Secular Society, in just three weeks, over 22,000 people have signed the organization’s “Make the Pope Pay” petition.  The demonic forces of the Culture of Death have now launched a new web site called “Protest the Pope” on which they denounce Pope Benedict XVI for supposed intolerance and other crimes.  They’re promoting a new petition that already has over 5,000 supposed signatures.

If you are in the UK, please take a moment to sign this petition in support of the Holy Father’s upcoming Apostolic Journey to England and Scotland and show the secularists, homosexual activists, proponents of abortion and euthanasia, and other enemies of Holy Church that there is overwhelming support for the Pope in the country!

Invigorating Words from the Holy Father

I was reading an address given by His Holiness to the 23rd World Youth Day held in Sydney, Australia in July of 2008.  In this address our Pope is speaking broadly concerning the world at large, but I could not help but to contextualize his remarks to our present quest for unity.  When he speaks of relativism I could not but think of the “catholicity” claimed by those who seek to maintain the status quo of separation, or the gross misunderstanding that by virtue of claiming the title Christian there exists a “spiritual unity” as opposed to the objective unity demanded by our Savior and His Apostles.  However, it is the Pope’s emphasis on the Divine that struck a chord for me, particularly in light of the temptation to focus on the temporal nature of the process toward our goal of the establishment of the Personal Ordinariates for Anglicans, i.e. its seemingly protracted progress, the mixed signals concerning the process, the varying human dynamic, etc.  I pray that these abbreviated remarks by the Successor of Peter may be a source of strength.

You are already aware that our Christian witness is offered to a world which in many ways is fragile.  The unity of God’s creation is weakened by wounds which run particularly deep…  Indeed, society today is being fragmented by a way of thinking that is inherently short-sighted, because it disregards the full horizon of truth–the truth about God and about us.  By its nature, relativism fails to see the whole picture.  It ignores the very principles which enable us to live and flourish in unity, order, and harmony.

What is our response…?  Unity and reconciliation cannot be achieved through our efforts alone.  God has made us for one another and only in God and His Church can we find the unity that we seek.  Yet in the face of imperfections and disappointments–both individual and institutional–we are sometimes tempted to construct artificially a “perfect” community.  That temptation is not new.  The history of the Church includes many examples of attempts to bypass or override human weaknesses or failures in order to create a perfect unity, a spiritual utopia.

Such attempts to construct unity in fact undermine it!  To separate the Holy Spirit from Christ present in the Church’s institutional structure would compromise the unity of the Christian community, which is precisely the Spirit’s gift!  It would betray the nature of the Church as the living temple of the Holy Spirit.  It is the Spirit, in fact, who guides the Church in the way of all truth and unifies her in communion and the works of ministry.  Unfortunately the temptation to “go it alone” persists.  Some today portray their local community as somehow separate from the so-called institutional Church, by speaking of the former as flexible and open to the Spirit and the latter as rigid and devoid of the Spirit.

Unity is the essence of the Church; it is a gift we must recognize and cherish.  Tonight, let us pray for resolve to nurture unity: contribute to it!  resist any temptation to walk away!  For it is precisely the comprehensiveness, the vast vision, of our faith–solid yet open, consistent yet dynamic, true yet constantly growing in insight–that we can offer the world…  Who satisfies that essential human yearning to be one, to be immersed in communion, to be built up, to be led to truth?  The Holy Spirit!  This is the Spirit’s role: to bring Christ’s work to fulfillment.  Enriched with the Spirit’s gifts, you will have the power to move beyond the piece-meal, the hollow utopia, the fleeting, to offer the consistency and certainty of Christian witness!

My dear…friends, receive the Holy Spirit in order to be the Church.  Being the Church means being all united as one body which receives its vital force from the Risen Jesus.  This gift is greater than our hearts, for it flows forth from the inner life of the Blessed Trinity.  It will enable you to live united to one another, to live in communion.  Therefore…take up within you the power of Jesus’ life.  Let Him enter into your hearts.  Let yourselves be molded by the Holy Spirit.

A Dangerous and Deleterious State

On Saturday, Pope Benedict XVI addressed the Pontifical Academy for Life whose members gathered in Rome for a general assembly on the topic of bioethics and natural law.

History has shown us how dangerous and deleterious a state can be that proceeds to legislate on questions that touch the person and society while pretending itself to be the source and principle of ethics. Without universal principles that permit a common denominator for the whole of humanity the danger of a relativistic drift at the legislative level is not at all something should be underestimated (cf. “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” no. 1959). The natural moral law, strong in its universal character, allows us to avert such a danger and above all offers to the legislator the guarantee for an authentic respect of both the person and the entire created order. It is the catalyzing source of consensus among persons of different cultures and religions and allows them to transcend their differences since it affirms the existence of an order impressed in nature by the Creator and recognized as an instance of true rational ethical judgment to pursue good and avoid evil. The natural moral law “belongs to the great heritage of human wisdom. Revelation, with its light, has contributed to further purifying and developing it” (John Paul II, Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, February 6, 2004).

Here is the relevant citation from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

1959 The natural law, the Creator’s very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature.

Me in My Small Corner

Our judgements are inevitably egocentric.  Global events, historic breakthroughs, momentous sweeps of history, are judged by how they impact us and ours.

Not all that long ago I was invited by a small Brit congregation of ours to talk about hopes for reconciliation with Rome.  One lady said, “I don’t approve of Catholics.  When I’m visiting my granddaughter I go to her church but they won’t allow me to receive holy communion.”  I was able to answer, “But if this thing goes through, you will be able to, and when she visits you she can communicate alongside you at this altar rail.  No names no pack drill, but there is a loving couple.  The husband communicates here and the wife goes to the Roman church.  If this thing goes through they’ll no longer be divided. What’s more, if your rector slips on black ice and breaks both knee caps the Roman priest could step in and take your service to help out. Alternatively, if the Roman priest breaks his knee caps your rector could step in to help them. What’s more, if you are holidaying in Scotland or Wales you won’t find a single solitary Traditional Anglican parish in either country, but you’d be welcome at Catholic altars – anywhere in the world for that matter.  Perhaps RC bishops may give, rent or sell us a few of their churches, allow our smaller groups the permanent use of side chapels in their larger buildings”.  I couldn’t add – because the event had not yet happened – that recently in the USA when a small community of Anglican nuns had been received into the Roman church, not even waiting for the “thing” to go through, some Roman clergy had started learning how to celebrate the [Anglican Use] for the benefit of the sisters.

“In that case”, said the lady, “I’m all for unity.  I don’t know whose bright new idea this is, but I support it”.  I protested that the idea was not new, “You know that in 1950-something Archbishop Fisher went to meet the Pope; that in 1960-something Archbishop Ramsey did ditto; that they set up a dialogue called Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission, ARCIC for short, which sent for two dozen years or so; that this dialogue produced a series of agreed statements about doctrine.  Perhaps you studied these statements in your own parish or together with your Catholic neighbours.  You know that in 1980-something Pope John Paul II went to meet Archbishop Runcie in Canterbury cathedral; that Prince Charles was present.  You know that the Prince once attended the Pope’s private chapel but could not receive.  You know that every Archbishop since Ramsey had been to meet the Pope.”  No, said the lady, she didn’t read the papers much, listen to the news much, she had no idea about any of this.  Besides, the papers tended to garble religious news.  (What a mercy she had not so as heard of the blogosphere where dwells the father of lies, the spirit of malevolence).  All the lady knew was that when she was a little girl her mother wouldn’t let her play with the Catholic neighbours because Catholics were not quite nice.

When I myself imagine how this Roman thing might impact others, I am delighted for some of them. I think of a couple on the Prairies who live hundreds of miles from the nearest ACCC parish. Yes, they travel when they can but given the winters and the distance, this is not all that often.  Yes, they are ecumenically minded and help as much as they can in local Lutheran, Orthodox and Roman parishes, but now they’ll be able to receive in the last of these.  The new situation may do little to disturb the even tenor of our well established parishes but it may be of great benefit to smaller groups and individuals, to say nothing of travellers at home and abroad. But even well established parishes may be glad of, say, extra musical help on special occasions, of a pulpit exchange now and then, of joint charitable work, perhaps for Pro Life.

My regret is that this Roman thing was not a possibility thirty years ago.  (Even then I was involved in optimistic dialogue: Pope John Paul II preached at Prayer Book Evensong in my former cathedral.)  We had in Matabeleland a saintly country parson whom we thought of as our George Herbert.  He was a late vocation.  He had been a farmer and a high school teacher.  English lit was his thing.  His father had been a missionary bishop in Mozambique and in South Africa.  John’s wife was an equally devout RC.  We thought of them as an ecumenical movement all on their own. She kept open the house in the rectory, did the altar guild, played the organ, cleaned the church, attended all of our services.  John did handyman jobs in her church, worked for their fête, attended as many of their services as he could.  How delighted every RC and Anglican in that Valley would have been to see John and Jo kneeling side by side at the communion rail, to have had the RC priest at our altar, to have had John at their altar.

As for mission in Matabeleland, why did we and Romans have to be rivals when engaged in primary evangelism?  There was little Sindebele literature for either of us.  We were both in need of prayers and hymns, of music, of schools, of clinics, of rural churches, of catechists and clergy.  We faced the same droughts, poverty, civil war.  Did we have to duplicate everything?

As for me in my small corner, I am ecstatic: what I’ve been praying for since my teens.  I rejoice in being Anglican and in all the gifts God has lavished upon our own tradition, but now I can be in communion with the Bishop of Rome as well. (I’m writing this on the day we remember C. S. Lewis.)  The Australian theologian, Mrs Tracey Rowland, has written Ratzinger’s Faith.  In the chapter on ecumenism she reports, “He stated that Catholics cannot demand that all other churches be disbanded and their members individually be incorporated into the Catholic church.  He hoped the hour would come when churches entering into unity would remain in existence as churches, with only those modifications which unity necessarily requires”.  I am delighted that he thinks of the church as a communion of people in Christ rather than an administrative institution, though even antinomian I who see Galatians as the best text book on canon law, recognize that any large body of people need agreed “rules of the road” for freedom and safety of movement.

Like his three immediate predecessors in thinking globally, one of whom said the church has two lungs, East and West, and that these lungs should breathe in harmony, Pope Benedict recognizes that rapprochement between Orthodoxy and the Western church is the most urgent ecumenical goal. Mrs Rowland quotes him, “Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of the primacy than was formulated and was lived in the first millennium … the West would recognize the East as orthodox and legitimate in the form she has always had.” A sense of realism about the fissiparous and unstable nature of Continuing Anglicanism, and about the fissiparous nature of Orthodoxy, discourages us from thinking that the tiny Traditional Anglican Communion on its own can heal the breach between East and West, apart from “the great Latin Church of the West”, as the Lambeth conference of 1920 called the RC church. Increasingly warm relations between Pope Benedict and at least the Russian Orthodox are hopeful.

I rejoice that two brethren of the CR [Community of the Resurrection], Bishop Charles Gore and Bishop Walter Frere, participated in the Malines Conversations, unity talks between Anglicans and RC’s held in Belgium in the years 1921-1925.  The most recent book about these Conversations is ‘A Brother Knocking at the Door’ by Bernard Barlow. Chevetonge is a monastery in Belgium founded by a Pope to pray for unity between East and West. Some of the monks observe the Rule of St Basil and use the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom. Other monks observe the Rule of St Benedict and use the RC liturgy.  The first Abbot was Dom Lambert Beauduin who also took an interest in Anglicanism.  He gave us the lapidary sentence, “An Anglican church absorbed by Rome and an Anglican church separated from Rome are equally inadmissible”.  He gave us the proverb ‘United but not absorbed’.  But even Malines was not a novelty.  Bernard and Margaret Pawley have written Rome and Canterbury Through Four Centuries, an historical account of off and on dialogue down the years.  Canon Pawley of St Paul’s cathedral in London was the Anglican church’s first resident ambassador to the Vatican and Director of the Anglican Centre in Rome. Even to this day large numbers of Anglicans and Romans do not know that there is an official operating out of such a Centre.  In TAC’s current relations with Rome we are nothing if not traditionally Anglican.

The whole Christian church faces increasingly dark years.  Islam, the decline and fall of the West, the rising economic and military might of China.  I am inevitably egocentric but even I should try to think globally.  The church is not only personal, it is also universal, catholic, according to the whole, kata holos, as our Canadian Prayer Book puts it, “Let us pray for Christ’s Holy Catholic Church”, or as the South African Prayer Book puts it, “Let us pray for the whole state of Christ’s Church”.

+Robert Mercer, CR

Apologia for Christianity

One of my favourite quotes from Pope Benedict XVI is in The Ratzinger Report, published in 1985, pp. 129-30:

The only really effective apologia for Christianity comes down to two arguments, namely, the saints the Church has produced and the art which has grown in her womb. Better witness is borne to the Lord by the splendour of holiness and art . . . than by the clever excuses which apologetics has come up with to justify the dark sides which, sadly, are so frequent in the Church’s human history.

A couple of months ago, I sent a few articles to The Anglo-Catholic about the liturgy. I have been somewhat dismayed to find discussions on liturgy bogged down in discussions on how liturgical texts express this or that doctrine. I found some strings of comments on the epiclesis quite boring! I wrote the posting to invite discussion from a strictly liturgical and historical point of view – and much of it swung to apologetics and the usual single-issues.

I would love to see us moving away from “armchair apologetics” and to the contemplation of God through liturgy and beauty. Has anyone read any of Dom Odo Casel’s works? The most well-known has been translated into English under the title The Mystery of Christian Worship. Dom Casel was a German Benedictine monk and died in 1848 as he bore the triple candle on Holy Saturday to the chant of Lumen Christi. He wrote some of the most beautiful theology of the liturgy I have ever read along with Fr Alexander Schmemann.

Has anyone reading The Anglo-Catholic been converted through the beauty of the liturgy, and can you relate your experience?

Complete Fidelity to the Church’s Magisterium

On Friday, the Holy Father addressed the bishops of Scotland at the conclusion of their ad limina visit.  In a terms reminiscent of his address to the bishops of England and Wales just four days before, Pope Benedict XVI exhorted the Scottish bishops to insist upon complete faithfulness to the teaching office of the Church.

If the Church’s teaching is compromised, even slightly, in one such area, then it becomes hard to defend the fullness of Catholic doctrine in an integral manner. Pastors of the Church, therefore, must continually call the faithful to complete fidelity to the Church’s Magisterium, while at the same time upholding and defending the Church’s right to live freely in society according to her beliefs.

Read the entire address below.

More >

What Man Needs Most Cannot Be Guaranteed to Him by Law

The Holy Father’s Message for Lent 2010 offers reflections on the theme of justice, using as a starting point the affirmation of St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans, “The justice of God has been manifested through faith in Jesus Christ. (cf. Rm 3, 21-22)”

First of all, I want to consider the meaning of the term “justice,” which in common usage implies “to render to every man his due,” according to the famous expression of Ulpian, a Roman jurist of the third century. In reality, however, this classical definition does not specify what “due” is to be rendered to each person. What man needs most cannot be guaranteed to him by law. In order to live life to the full, something more intimate is necessary that can be granted only as a gift: we could say that man lives by that love which only God can communicate since He created the human person in His image and likeness. Material goods are certainly useful and required – indeed Jesus Himself was concerned to heal the sick, feed the crowds that followed Him and surely condemns the indifference that even today forces hundreds of millions into death through lack of food, water and medicine – yet “distributive” justice does not render to the human being the totality of his “due.” Just as man needs bread, so does man have even more need of God. Saint Augustine notes: if “justice is that virtue which gives every one his due … where, then, is the justice of man, when he deserts the true God?” (De civitate Dei, XIX, 21).

The Gospel shows us the Christ, the Justice of God.

What then is the justice of Christ? Above all, it is the justice that comes from grace, where it is not man who makes amends, heals himself and others. The fact that “expiation” flows from the “blood” of Christ signifies that it is not man’s sacrifices that free him from the weight of his faults, but the loving act of God who opens Himself in the extreme, even to the point of bearing in Himself the “curse” due to man so as to give in return the “blessing” due to God (cf. Gal 3, 13-14).

Read the entire message below.

More >

Fr. Z on Archbishop Hepworth Interview and Papal Address to Bishops

Of course, most of you have already dropped by Father Z’s What Does the Prayer Really Say? blog once or twice.  But just in case you missed these posts, here are links and excerpts.  First on Archbishop Hepworth (his bolds and comments in red):

“The ball is in our court. We asked for this and this is what we got. This is becoming Anglican Catholics, not Roman Catholics,” Archbishop Hep­worth said, speaking from Australia.  [Anglican Catholics, not Roman Catholics.]

-snip-

“So our way of doing theology is there, as is our way of discipline. Our group will have the right to elect our bishops. We asked the CDF for elec­tion by council. They laughed at us at first, but we got it. [!] We are also working with a commission with Forward in Faith to produce our lit­urgy. [They will have to make some adaptations.] We signed the Catechism as ‘the most complete and authentic expres­sion and application of the Catholic faith in this moment of time’.

“We did that to put our commit­ment beyond dispute, but we did not have to agree to Apostolicae Curae [which declares Anglican orders ab­solutely null and utterly void], be­cause that is not in the Cate­chism.”  [!]

A consultation was taking place on “reordination in the TAC con­text”. “We separated from the Angli­can Church. Some left because of sacramental and doctrinal issues, and have got lost. We chose to take up ARCIC [the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commis­sion], and we have got what we wanted. People who said we could not are having to eat humble pie, and I am sinfully enjoying that.”

The Archbishop said that he was issuing TAC’s original 2007 petition to the CDF at the same time as his pastoral letter.

In his letter, he writes: “Re-ordination is an issue because the Church requires absolute certainty in the matter of future sacramental life. I have been told that the TAC should understand this because we ourselves moved beyond the Angli-­can Communion in order to ensure the validity of sacramental life. Rome is now seeking the same assurance.”  [Reasonable.  Entirely]

The Apostolic Constitution “speaks of Anglicans entering into full communion with the Catholic Church. There at the outset are the three critical factors: Anglicans, full com­munion and Catholic Church.”

Cool, eh?  Now here is Father Z on the Holy Father’s most excellent exhortation to the bishops of England and Wales. Some excerpts (with his bolds and remarks in red):

Ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue assume great importance in England and Wales, given the varied demographic profile of the population. As well as encouraging you in your important work in these areas, I would ask you to be generous in implementing the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, so as to assist those groups of Anglicans who wish to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church. [And they are traditional Anglicans.] I am convinced that, if given a warm and open-hearted welcome, such groups will be a blessing for the entire Church.

Of course, we here at The Anglo-Catholic love what Pope Benedict XVI said, not only about us, but also about the importance of speaking the truth in the public square and not watering down the Church’s message.

However this salient portion (with Father Z’s bolds and comments) is causing an uproar in the mainstream British media:

Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed. [Here goes…] I urge you as Pastors to ensure that the Church’s moral teaching be always presented in its entirety and convincingly defended. Fidelity to the Gospel in no way restricts the freedom of others – on the contrary, it serves their freedom by offering them the truth. Continue to insist upon your right to participate in national debate through respectful dialogue with other elements in society. In doing so, you are not only maintaining long-standing British traditions of freedom of expression and honest exchange of opinion, but you are actually giving voice to the convictions of many people who lack the means to express them: when so many of the population claim to be Christian, how could anyone dispute the Gospel’s right to be heard?  [Note the connection between the clear teaching of faith and the need to have an impact in the public square?  The connecting term is our Catholic identity.  If we don’t have a strong identity, we have nothing of interest to offer in the public square.  This is what I have been hammering at for years regarding Pope Benedict’s plan,"Marshall Plan", for the Church.  He is trying to rebuild, revitalize our devastated Catholic identity.]

Don’t you love  it when there’s a lot of red on Father Z’s blog?

Here’s an example of how this is playing in the U.K., though, and the Holy Father’s remarks have fanned up the ire of the secularist fundies (aka the useful idiots of the Western Civilisation’s attempted suicide).  Ruth Gledhill of The Times has the following on her blog (my bolds and comments in red):

The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster today attempted to defuse a row that threatens to overshadow the Pope’s forthcoming visit to Britain by claiming that Benedict XVI was merely giving voice to what many people felt when he attacked this country’s record of promoting equal rights for gays. [!!!!!  Gag me.  No, Ruth, he is saying that promoting equal rights for gays should not then mean that suddenly Catholics or any other group's religious freedom becomes a casualty of one-size-fits all politically-correct orthodoxies that crush everyone else's freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of conscience.]

Surprise at the Pope’s remarks was today giving way in Britain to more determined opposition to his views, with the National Secular Society vowing to set up a Protest the Pope campaign to hold demonstrations during Benedict’s visit. [I'm sure the pope is quivering in his boots]

Ruth is such a nice person.  But such a liberal Anglican.  Thus, I wonder if she has any insight into how the liberal orthodoxy is itself  fundamentalist position that squelches true pluralism and freedom of thought and action.   Why cannot there be space for a robust Catholic position and practice in the public square and in their own hospitals, adoption agencies and so on AND a recognition of the rights of gays and lesbians to robustly defend their position and create their own adoption agencies, etc. without forcing their sexual dogma on the rest of society?

Alas, when the radical jihadists come knocking, the secular fundies will cave and resort to appeasement and gays will be thrown under the bus. As the prophetic and humorous Mark Steyn wrote in Macleans Magazine last year:

Yet the shifting hierarchies of multiculturalism are not too hard to discern: in Britain, an educational establishment gung-ho about forcing the kindergartners of evangelical Christians to be taught the joys of same-sex marriage crumbled in nothing flat when Muslim parents in Bristol objected. If it’s a choice between Heather Has Two Mommies or Heather Has Four Mommies And A Big Bearded Daddy Who Wants To Marry Her Off To A Cousin Back In Pakistan, bet on the latter. Any gay couple or blind man with a Seeing Eye dog who takes on a Muslim bed-and-breakfast proprietor will get short shrift from the “human rights” commission. The OHRC is currently champing at the bit to force gay altar servers on Ontario Catholics. At the local mosque, no imam need worry about such state encroachments on religion.

The “human rights” bureaucracy has had a grand run sticking it to Christians and other unfashionable groups. The internal contradictions of the rainbow coalition will prove harder to negotiate.

In other words, the secular fundies so vocally defending the rights of gays to trump the rights of Christians of various stripes will be the first to cave when real persecution begins.  And by the way, it’s already happening in cities like Amsterdam and Malmo and elsewhere and only courageous folks like Bruce Bawer speak up about it.

There is only the sounds of crickets chirping in the mainstream media about physical assaults on gays simply for being out on the streets.

It will be only the Catholics, the Evangelical Christians and the Jews who will stand up for the rights of gays and lesbians to live free from the real persecution that is already happening but getting roundly ignored.

Interestingly,  it is a gay Jewish friend here in Ottawa who is one of the few who bothers to report on persecution of Christians around the world.  We may agree to disagree about same-sex marriage and a host of other things, but he would defend my right to disagree with him and vice versa.  What ever happened to that kind of pluralism and willingness to share the public square?

Pope Benedict XVI to the English Bishops

The source is Vatican Radio. My emphasis below:

* * *

Dear Brother Bishops,

I welcome all of you on your ad Limina visit to Rome, where you have come to venerate the tombs of the Apostles Peter and Paul. I thank you for the kind words that Archbishop Vincent Nichols has addressed to me on your behalf, and I offer you my warmest good wishes and prayers for yourselves and all the faithful of England and Wales entrusted to your pastoral care. Your visit to Rome strengthens the bonds of communion between the Catholic community in your country and the Apostolic See, a communion that sustained your people’s faith for centuries, and today provides fresh energies for renewal and evangelisation. Even amid the pressures of a secular age, there are many signs of living faith and devotion among the Catholics of England and Wales. I am thinking, for example, of the enthusiasm generated by the visit of the relics of Saint Thérèse, the interest aroused by the prospect of Cardinal Newman’s beatification, and the eagerness of young people to take part in pilgrimages and World Youth Days. On the occasion of my forthcoming Apostolic Visit to Great Britain, I shall be able to witness that faith for myself and, as Successor of Peter, to strengthen and confirm it. During the months of preparation that lie ahead, be sure to encourage the Catholics of England and Wales in their devotion, and assure them that the Pope constantly remembers them in his prayers and holds them in his heart.

Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed. I urge you as Pastors to ensure that the Church’s moral teaching be always presented in its entirety and convincingly defended. Fidelity to the Gospel in no way restricts the freedom of others – on the contrary, it serves their freedom by offering them the truth. Continue to insist upon your right to participate in national debate through respectful dialogue with other elements in society. In doing so, you are not only maintaining long-standing British traditions of freedom of expression and honest exchange of opinion, but you are actually giving voice to the convictions of many people who lack the means to express them: when so many of the population claim to be Christian, how could anyone dispute the Gospel’s right to be heard?

If the full saving message of Christ is to be presented effectively and convincingly to the world, the Catholic community in your country needs to speak with a united voice. This requires not only you, the Bishops, but also priests, teachers, catechists, writers – in short all who are engaged in the task of communicating the Gospel – to be attentive to the promptings of the Spirit, who guides the whole Church into the truth, gathers her into unity and inspires her with missionary zeal.

Make it your concern, then, to draw on the considerable gifts of the lay faithful in England and Wales and see that they are equipped to hand on the faith to new generations comprehensively, accurately, and with a keen awareness that in so doing they are playing their part in the Church’s mission. In a social milieu that encourages the expression of a variety of opinions on every question that arises, it is important to recognize dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate. It is the truth revealed through Scripture and Tradition and articulated by the Church’s Magisterium that sets us free. Cardinal Newman realized this, and he left us an outstanding example of faithfulness to revealed truth by following that “kindly light” wherever it led him, even at considerable personal cost. Great writers and communicators of his stature and integrity are needed in the Church today, and it is my hope that devotion to him will inspire many to follow in his footsteps.

Much attention has rightly been given to Newman’s scholarship and to his extensive writings, but it is important to remember that he saw himself first and foremost as a priest. In this Annus Sacerdotalis, I urge you to hold up to your priests his example of dedication to prayer, pastoral sensitivity towards the needs of his flock, and passion for preaching the Gospel. You yourselves should set a similar example. Be close to your priests, and rekindle their sense of the enormous privilege and joy of standing among the people of God as alter Christus. In Newman’s words, “Christ’s priests have no priesthood but His … what they do, He does; when they baptize, He is baptizing; when they bless, He is blessing” (Parochial and Plain Sermons, VI 242). Indeed, since the priest plays an irreplaceable role in the life of the Church, spare no effort in encouraging priestly vocations and emphasizing to the faithful the true meaning and necessity of the priesthood. Encourage the lay faithful to express their appreciation of the priests who serve them, and to recognize the difficulties they sometimes face on account of their declining numbers and increasing pressures. The support and understanding of the faithful is particularly necessary when parishes have to be merged or Mass times adjusted. Help them to avoid any temptation to view the clergy as mere functionaries but rather to rejoice in the gift of priestly ministry, a gift that can never be taken for granted.

Ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue assume great importance in England and Wales, given the varied demographic profile of the population. As well as encouraging you in your important work in these areas, I would ask you to be generous in implementing the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, so as to assist those groups of Anglicans who wish to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church. I am convinced that, if given a warm and open-hearted welcome, such groups will be a blessing for the entire Church.

With these thoughts, I commend your apostolic ministry to the intercession of Saint David, Saint George and all the saints and martyrs of England and Wales. May Our Lady of Walsingham guide and protect you always. To all of you, and to the priests, religious and lay faithful of your country, I cordially impart my Apostolic Blessing as a pledge of peace and joy in the Lord Jesus Christ.

From the Vatican, 1 February 2010

Diplomatic Niceties

It is not my intention here to labour certain points made over the last couple of days, but I need to address a serious concern. This is a question of diplomacy and decency with the authorities with which we have asked to be in communion. All along, we have known who the Pope is, who is the Prefect of the CDF, who is Bishop of which Diocese, and so forth.

I have partly gone into this is my Pastorally and Progressively post. There is another thing to consider, the fact that we are not traditionalists or sympathisers with the work of the late Archbishop Lefebvre. We know the Society of Saint Pius X has its own ongoing dialogue with the Holy See, and I wish them well. We have certain things in common when it comes to specifically religious and doctrinal questions, but we come from different origins and have little in common in political or ideological terms.

We in the TAC and other Anglican groups recognise that Rome has been exceedingly generous to us so far, and we have no reason for fear. It would certainly be bad manners for us to demand this and that, especially when we have no no reason to believe that our desires will be denied. It would certainly be most inappropriate for us to make public denunciations or accusations of Vatican officials, above all on account of matters unconnected with the matter in hand. The matter in hand is Anglicanorum Coetibus and what is being done to make us formal and canonical members of the Catholic Church to which we already belong by desire and in spirit.

I made a point elsewhere that denouncing the liturgy of Paul VI as invalid or heretical (I’m not saying that anyone here has done so) would be a deal-breaker. Such excessive judgements would close down any relationship between those in authority and those of us who are petitioners. However, making a good study of the modern Roman liturgy, and showing up its weak points in liturgical and symbolic terms is rendering a service to the Church. The latter has been the approach of the present Pope in his many writings and interviews, and of other distinguished scholars like the late Monsignor Klaus Gamber.

It does not behove us to condemn the ordinary form of the Roman rite or any part of it, or refuse to use this rite if pastoral circumstances should warrant it. The Apostolic Constitution says:

III. Without excluding liturgical celebrations according to the Roman Rite, the Ordinariate has the faculty to celebrate the Holy Eucharist and the other Sacraments, the Liturgy of the Hours and other liturgical celebrations according to the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See, so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.

The provision allowing the use of the Roman Rite serves a purpose. For example, other than the BDW which is presently available only in the USA only, there exists no approved Anglican liturgy. Many of our priests would like to be able to help out in local parishes. Most importantly, most Anglo-Catholics in the UK already use the modern Roman Rite. This is not a question of Rome trying to push the Ordinary Form on Anglicans, or engage in some kind of “bait and switch” operation.

I do not believe that, if we use either form or both forms of the Roman rite, we would forfeit our privilege of using the specific Anglican liturgy that is intended to be allowed for us. We can, for pastoral needs, use the highly faulty liturgical rite promulgated by Paul VI and criticise it at the same time, with courtesy and intellectual rigour.

One of the finest examples of a book giving this kind of criticism is Monsignor Klaus Gamber’s The Reform of the Roman Liturgy: Its Problems and Background. It exposes the extent of discontinuity in the post-conciliar reform, but in a way that enabled Cardinal Ratzinger to write a preface to this book and recommend it. Gamber’s approach is totally different from that of the traditionalists. For example, he readily accepted the idea of introducing the vernacular and some of the simplifications of the 1965 revision of the Roman missal.

As we read from Dom Alcuin Reid’s review of Gamber’s book:

It is Gamber’s brave but loyal ‘critical traditionalism’ that gives such importance to his writing. His theses are well documented, and his research is impressive. One hopes more of his writings will be made available in translation.

After reading Gamber (and also Bugnini) it is difficult if not impossible to maintain an uncritical acceptance of the new liturgy, even when it is celebrated devoutly and with the right intention. When we recall the doctrinal importance of the liturgy (lex orandi, lex credendi), we realise that the question of how we worship is central to our faith. What then is to be done?

What we need today … [are] bishops like those who in the fourth century courageously fought against Arianism when almost the whole of Christendom had succumbed to the heresy. We need saints today who can unite those whose faith has remained firm so that we might fight error and rouse the weak and vacillating from their apathy,” writes Gamber. A tall order, certainly, but not beyond the possibilities of Divine Providence.

I think that it is in this spirit that we can go forward towards Rome with our eyes open, but with faith and veneration in our pilgrimage. We are not blind or deceived, but loyal, courteous and critical. One does not exclude the other.

Pastorally and Progressively

It is tempting to look at the situation in the Catholic Church, and wonder why plans for improving the abysmal post-conciliar liturgical situation seem to be going so slowly. In Rome, the Holy Father has given the example, and we learn that many of the urban churches have followed the lead. Some are using the old liturgy, others celebrate Mass on the old altars or still others have the “Benedictine” symmetrical arrangement of candlesticks on the altar with a central crucifix facing the celebrant.

People are naturally conservative about liturgical matters, and not only when it is a matter of the old Latin Roman liturgy or our Anglican Prayer Books. I have seen people who have the same reflex with the Novus Ordo, which has been used in nearly all Catholic parish churches for forty years. Some people even call the new rite the “traditional rite”. Incredible as it may seem, this is the reality. This means that every Catholic below the age of 50 years grew up with the Bugnini / Paul VI rite. They have not known anything else.

This conservatism sometimes extends even to the horribly banal ICEL “lame duck” translations that are about to be changed for better ones. Many people still want to respond to The Lord be with you with And also with you. We would be tempted to say that those people need to see a psychiatrist, but they are not mentally ill – simply conservative.

Now, I am sure Pope Benedict XVI would love to begin a radical programme of liturgical reform in the direction of a restoration. Get rid of the “chopping block” altars facing the people. Burn the polyester chasuble-albs and trash all the books with the goofy songs people have been singing since the 1970’s? Will that teach people to sing Gregorian chant, to love Latin, to go back to the 1950’s? No it won’t. It will leave nothing but a vacuum. This is why the pastoral way is slow and progressive.

For those who want to go quicker, Summorum Pontificum of 2007 removed all the legal or pseudo-legal restrictions from the “extraordinary” use of the Roman rite, and the 1962 Missal is used in an increasing number of churches of the Latin rite. This is wonderful and much to be encouraged. But, only a minority of Catholics is interested.

So, for the incoming Anglicans from the three main groups I have mentioned (TAC, Forward in Faith, Anglican Use Catholics), I don’t see Rome making sudden changes and radical demands, any more than for ordinary Catholics in the parishes. The “odd man out” group in question is the TAC, because FiF for the most part uses the modern Roman rite and the AU uses the Book of Divine Worship formally approved by Rome in 1980. Rome has two options: bringing the TAC into line with the Novus Ordo and the Anglican Use, which some fear could lead to a broken deal, and the other option is either approving a new book and officially promulgating it up front, or simply allowing the present status quo for a length of time.

Certainly, in time, Rome would like a uniform liturgy for the Anglican-Catholic Ordinariates. Some will be asking for the 1928 American Prayer Book, others the 1921 British Anglican Missal, the 1912 English Missal, the American Anglican Missal, the Use of Sarum in the Pearson or Warren translations, the Scottish Prayer Book and many others. Whichever it will be, of a combination thereof, no believer of any rite is going to react well to abrupt change.  How is a BCP congregation going to react when they’re told they have to ditch the Prayer Book for some new-fangled missal? It will be just like Latin rite Catholics accustomed to a happy-clappy get-together around the table with the girl altar servers tripping over the microphone wires. Progress can only be made slowly, by example and not by constraint.

We should, in The Anglo-Catholic, continue this dialogue in the hope of influencing the process in favour of the old Anglican Missal (which can incorporate just about all the variations of Anglo-Catholic worship). It looks unlikely that a uniform rite will be imposed up front, or even published by mid 2010, about the time the first Ordinariates may be canonically erected. A definitive Missal would take several years of work, and I would expect the Congregation of Divine Worship to ask several of us Anglicans to consult with them and not do all the work themselves.

Frankly, I don’t see why we can’t have liturgical diversity. It is already the de facto situation of parishes in the Latin Rite, where priests do what they want (perhaps less so now than in the brutalist 1970’s). Some say diversity confuses the faithful, but are the faithful little babies or children, unable to vote with their feet? Is diversity un-Catholic? There are many rites in the Catholic Church, oriental and western, and a certain diversity in the Latin rite. Many local rites were unfortunately swept away in the nineteenth century under the influence of Dom Guéranger and Ultramontanism. Some survived, even in France.

I really do find it ironic that some Catholic traditionalists [I’m not pointing a finger at PKTP because it is not his attitude] (their comments on other blogs) seem to want the old iron-rigid uniformity. I would be tempted to say – OK. You can have uniformity – the Novus Ordo. You asked for it!

Will Rome tolerate liturgical diversity in the Ordinariates formed from TAC groups? Speculation is usually presumptuous, but going by the pastoral attitudes already shown by the Holy See in regard to other disciplinary issues, this could be likely for a time, the time it takes to codify an official Anglican-Catholic rite. After all, Catholics using the 1928 American Prayer Book can hardly cause more scandal – less so – than some ways of celebrating the modern Roman rite?

Blogging Ministry

I find it very interesting to see that the Holy Father is encouraging priests to blog. The Catholic Herald last November published an article by Fr John Zuhlsdorf, one of the most well-known priest bloggers. It is a ministry of communication and teaching.

In 2002, Pope John Paul II saw the challenge and potential of the Internet. In the right hands, this medium of communication is a tool of evangelisation and education. Unlike printed books and newspapers, it is only limited by the number of people using connected computers.

The TAC too has discovered the incredible power of internet communication. True, we have had websites for years, but we haven’t really learned to use them. Some years ago, a priest friend said to me that a web site has to be constantly on the move, being added to, tended like a garden. How true! The blog makes this dynamism possible.

The multimedia computer makes learning easier and more fun for young people. It is a wonderful way to teach catechism, through using images and videos in association with the traditional teaching on the Creeds.

It has been over this past year that Pope Benedict XVI has become really aware of the implications of the Internet and the blogosphere. I could see computing and blogging as a new discipline in priestly training. What a good idea!

The Internet and the blogosphere have their risks of bringing out the worst of human nature, like people driving cars on the road. The interaction of persons is incomplete and our perception can become distorted. It is certainly easier to kill a man from a great distance with a rifle than close to with a knife! There are nasty and dangerous people we call trolls, the knuckleheads with whom no rational argument is possible. The downside is there.

Only now am I beginning to learn how to handle a blog debate in a thread of comments, dealing with real people, but whose personalities I cannot feel. It’s a hard job.

Just yesterday, the Holy Father called on priests to make “astute use” of internet technology. He urged us to be less notable for our media savvy than our priestly heart. This is truly a new era of the Church’s mission. The internet with its ease of use, but with its mortal dangers due to human sin, calls on us to deepen our spirituality and life of prayer. The Pope asks us to “give a soul to the fabric of communications that makes up the Web“.

Blogging brings us into contact with people far and wide, people we would never have met by any other means. We come into contact with devout people, non-believers, people of all cultures and philosophies of life. I would hate my ministry to be limited to this “infernal machine”, but it certainly has brought a new meaning to my own priestly ministry right here on The Anglo-Catholic and on my own site.

Traditionalist Anglicans Prepare Response to Holy See

Source

By Anna Arco

22 January 2010

The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) are to give the Vatican their answer to the new Anglican provision.

Archbishop John Hepworth, the primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion, a group of Anglican churches which have broken away from the mainstream Anglican Communion, said the bishops would come together at Easter to formulate a response to the Pope’s decree Anglicanorum coetibus.

The Anglican provision allows groups of Anglicans who consider themselves Catholic to enter into full communion with Rome while maintaining aspects of their heritage and identity. The document provides a new canonical provision called a Personal Ordinariate which most resembles the structure of military dioceses.

In 2007 the leaders of the TAC signed a petition to the Holy See asking for “corporate reunion with the Holy See” as well as “a communal and ecclesial way of being Anglican Catholics in communion with the Holy See, at once treasuring the full expression of Catholic faith and treasuring our tradition within which we have come to this moment”.

According to Archbishop Hepworth, the bishops and vicar generals have each received a letter from Cardinal William Levada, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, saying that the recent decree constituted “the definitive response of the Holy See” not only to the TAC’s original request but also to “but also to the many others of a similar nature which have been submitted over the last years”.

Archbishop Hepworth said the letter from Cardinal Levada would allow the bishops belonging to TAC to move towards making a decision about taking up the Pope’s offer of Personal Ordinariates. He said that he would produce a commentary on the decree for the TAC in the coming week and would release the full text of the original petition made by the members of the group in 2007.

Emphasising that the process of discernment “concerns the primary command of Jesus to His Church”, he said the process could not be hurried.

But he also made it clear that a delay in making a “implementing the fullness of communion” that the traditionalist Anglicans had sought “would be in serious defiance of the will of Jesus for his Church”. He outlined the steps the college of bishops and the traditionalist communion as a whole would have to take towards making a decision. TAC, he said, was already in talks with liaison bishops of bishops’ conferences around the world.

Archbishop Hepworth plans to meet with TAC members in Japan, Central America, the United States, Canada, Australia New Zealand and the Torres Strait in the coming weeks. Regional meetings of bishop, clergy and people are being organised to discuss Anglicanorum Coetibus.

After the meeting of the full college of bishops at Easter, they will make a formal response to the Holy See, which will be followed by canonical steps in the churches belonging to TAC.

The news came days after Pope Benedict XVI said the desire of the groups of Anglicans wishing to be in full communion with Rome revealed the ultimate aim of the ecumenical movement which was “the full and visible communion of the disciples the Lord”.

Pope Benedict was speaking to the members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and thanked them for their work in “the full integration of groups and individuals of former Anglican faithful into the life of the Catholic Church, in accordance with the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus”.

He said: “The faithful adherence of these groups to the truth received from Christ and presented in the Magisterium of the Church is in no way contrary to the ecumenical movement… rather, it reveals the ultimate aim thereof, which is the realisation of the full and visible communion of the disciples of the Lord.”

The Catholic Herald on Benedict XVI and Christian Unity

The Catholic Herald has this excellent editorial on Pope Benedict XVI as the “Pope of Christian Unity.”

When Jesus prayed that his followers may be one, He was praying for the unity of the Church whose leadership he entrusted to St Peter and his successors. He was not prophesying that this unity would be achieved by a particular model of ecumenism. In the 20th century, the Church mapped out a route towards unity which focused on ever closer links with other Christian communities, such as the Anglican Communion; the aim was to achieve a corporate reunion. Thus, the purpose of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, so far as the Church was concerned, was an agreement in which the Archbishop of Canterbury would once again become bishop of a historic see of the Church that Anglicans describe as “Roman Catholic”. Unfortunately, participants on both sides of ARCIC glossed over the fact that doctrines of transubstantiation and infallibility are unchangeable: one can do no more than tinker with the language in which they are defined.

Indeed, both sides implied that they could offer what were, in fact, impossible concessions. Many, if not most, Anglicans are Protestants: their objections to Catholic teaching on the Eucharist and papal primacy are fundamental. ARCIC established some genuine common ground between the two bodies; but some of the convergence was illusory. And this was the case even before Anglicans took irreversible decisions to ordain women priests and (in many provinces) women bishops, too.

As a result of these latter developments, a tremendous gloom settled over the Church’s official ecumenists. It has taken Pope Benedict XVI to show us that ecumenical dialogue can achieve the long-awaited goal of corporate reunion by another route. Let us take the example of the Society of St Pius X. Those of its members who accept the Magisterium can be welcomed back corporately into full communion; as a prelude to this, the Holy Father took the necessary but controversial step of lifting episcopal excommunications (though no one, including the Pontiff, would claim that the Vatican executed this manoeuvre skilfully).

The forthcoming group reception of former Anglicans is in some ways less controversial. Ever since the 1990s, the Holy Father has been convinced that orthodox Anglicans can be corporately received into the Church after detaching themselves from official bodies that have opted for the Protestant innovation of women’s ordination. This detachment need not be a source of long-term damage to Anglican-Catholic relations; from the Anglican point of view, it recognises an already existing ecclesial reality. For Catholics, however, it is more than that. As the Pope emphasised in his address to the CDF last week, his Apostolic Constitution is that rarest of developments: an ecumenical gesture that increases the visible unity and the liturgical riches of the Church. Those Anglicans who accept the papal offer will be doing a wonderful thing – not just for themselves, but for us, too.

Certainly the departure of the Anglican Communion from Catholic Faith and Apostolic Order is an ecclesial reality.  And it is one with which many Anglicans — especially in the Church of England — are presently attempting to come to terms.  But with the publication of Anglicanorum Coetibus, there is a much greater ecclesial reality for all Anglicans to consider — and it is now the only reality that matters.  Regardless of what the Church of England ultimately decides on the issue of women bishops, whether provision is made for independent episcopal oversight for Anglo-Catholics in the Established Church, or whether the Continuing Church is yet a viable option for the transmission of the Faith, the Holy Father is calling us home — in our communities and bringing with us all that is good and true in our venerable Anglican Patrimony.  Can there be any justification for remaining Anglican apart from communion with the Apostolic See?

Certain Appellations

Pope Benedict XV (reigned September 3, 1914 – January 22, 1922) wrote in his encyclical letter Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum §24, (November 1, 1914):

It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as “profane novelties of words,” out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanasian Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself.

The question often arises, what will we ultimately call those Anglicans who enter the Catholic Church under the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus — and does it even matter?

The Apostolic Constitution itself provides no clue to the answer to the first question, and while the Complementary Norms refer repeatedly to “former Anglican” bishops or ministers, there is no suggestion that the term “Anglican” need be abandoned altogether.  Indeed, inasmuch as the whole point of Anglicanorum Coetibus (Can you imagine an apostolic constitution called “Groups of Protestants”?  No, neither can I!) is to preserve within the larger Church a distinctively Anglican patrimony as “a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared,” it seems very unlikely that the use of the term would be anything other than encouraged.

Archbishop Hepworth has repeatedly assured our folks that we would be welcomed into the Church as “Anglican Catholics” (as distinct from “Roman Catholics”).  He addressed the subject in his talk at the recent Forward in Faith UK National Assembly.

There will be an Anglican leader who relates to the Holy See on behalf of the Anglican Catholics.  Thus establishing a body that is Anglican Catholic as distinct from Roman Catholic, Ukrainian Catholic, Maronite Catholic, or whatever.  It’s not a rite but it looks awfully like one…

And William Cardinal Levada signalled the CDF’s acceptance of the term in his formal response to the bishops of the TAC in quoting the text of the original Petition (the October 2007 “Portsmouth Letter”).

…a communal and ecclesial way of being Anglican Catholics in communion with the Holy See, at once treasuring the full expression of catholic faith and treasuring our tradition within which we have come to this moment.

It seems fairly clear that, at least in some contexts, we will employ the term “Anglican Catholic” to distinguish ourselves from other “varieties” of Catholic.  But why will we do this?  And, as Pope Benedict XV observed, will this not “give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics” (and especially our own people)?

Though the personal ordinariates will not constitute a ritual church sui juris (the context in which one most frequently sees an “hyphen Catholic” appellative), their peculiar circumstances will, all the more, require such a qualifying term.  The personal ordinariates will essentially form a “church within a church” and we intend to (and the Holy Father desires that we) be “united but not absorbed”.  Members of the personal ordinariates will be legally Latin Rite Catholics, subject to the Bishop of Rome as their Patriarch, and bound by the (Roman Catholic) Code of Canon Law.  But the personal ordinariates will be called to safeguard and foster our distinctive Anglican patrimony, a patrimony we must be able to name and to describe.  Further, the failure to make a distinction between Anglican Catholics and “ordinary” Roman Catholics may actually give rise to even greater confusion.  While particular disciplines of the personal ordinariates will have the approval of the Holy See, they will in some cases be derogations from the rule of canon law.  Certainly Roman Catholics should not conclude that the Pope desires to bring an end to the universal norm of clerical celibacy, for example.

And it should go without saying that our folks are attached to the name “Anglican” — as well they ought to be!  It is who we are.  And, much to the chagrin of progressives and ultra-traditionalists alike, the Holy Father has welcomed us into the fullness of communion of the Catholic Church as Anglicans.

But we would do well to heed the words of Benedict XV.  The Catholic Faith “must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected.”  Our Anglican distinctiveness might color how we approach certain theological questions but ultimately we must be obedient to the Magisterium of the Church.  The appellation “Anglican Catholic” must not “give rise to great trouble and confusion” amongst our own people, being viewed as license to deviate from the doctrine of the Catholic Church.  Those aspects of our past that do not accord with the Catholic Faith are not part of that Anglican Patrimony the Church desires to be maintained.

Ecclesiastical Sundries

The press was blowing up an atmosphere of crisis, before the visit, and the media were very much disappointed that there was no crisis afterwards.

Our proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus will be much more credible and effective the more that we are united in his love, as true brothers,” the Pontiff affirmed. “Thus, I invite parishes, religious communities, ecclesial movements and associations to pray unceasingly, in a special way during Eucharistic Celebrations, for the complete unity of Christians.

Of course we must pray for him as “Our Pope” – we don’t have any other. +Edwin

  1. I saw only two altars with (the formerly ubiquitous) two candles on one end with a bunch of flowers at the other.
  2. More altars than not have some form of the ‘Benedictine Arrangement’, meaning that there was a crucifix centrally placed on the altar, with candles arranged to either side. Sometimes there were two candles, sometimes fork handles (as at St John Lateran), occasionally six.
  3. Almost all churches were open for prayer, and there were usually people praying inside. This is entirely new: I am used to a lot of Roman churches being firmly locked. I got inside all sorts of buildings I had never seen before.
  4. ‘Tat Alley’ (aka Via dei Cestari), a street of ecclesiastical suppliers near the Pantheon, now has all sorts of traditional vestments and impedimenta on sale. The time was when you could only buy these things from the charmingly obsequious staff of Gammarelli’s (‘Splenditatis Vendor‘) or the grumpy assistants (no, assistants is not the word; they do not assist, but glare) at Serpone. Arte Sacra was the only place you could buy reliquaries, now they are on sale everywhere. The proprietor said to a colleague that the sixties and seventies nearly put him out of business, but that now trade was very good indeed. Another fellow priest remarked that if people are prepared to pay money for things, it is valuable evidence that they really are prepared to buy into what these things stand for. Even the iconically-Seventies Slabbinck shop had one or two things that looked nice.
  5. Cassocks are still rare on the streets, but I saw many more (male) religious habits than heretofore.
  6. I am told that on Saturday mornings early one may see the Traditional Mass being celebrated at many altars in St Peter’s Basilica.

The Cañizares Interview

I quote from the introduction to the text:

This interview is certainly of great importance and interest liturgically. It is also very important doctrinally because of the Cardinal’s insistence on Summorum Pontificum’s importance for reading and interpreting the Second Vatican Council with a ‘hermeneutic of continuity.’

http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2010/01/canizares-interview-part-i.html

Something great is happening in Rome. It is nothing short of a miracle!

For mine eyes have seen : thy salvation,
Which thou hast prepared : before the face of all people.

The Pope Spoke on His Invitation to Anglicans Today

The Associated Press is reporting the following from Vatican City today, complete with the usual inaccuracies one might expect from a non-religious news source:

VATICAN CITY — Pope Benedict XVI defended his decision to invite disaffected Anglicans to join the Catholic Church en masse, saying Friday it was the “ultimate aim” of ecumenism.

Benedict told members of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that the invitation wasn’t an attack on the church’s reunification efforts with other Christians but was rather designed to help them by bringing about “full and visible communion.”

-snip-

“Achieving the common witness to faith of all Christians is a priority of the Church at all times,” Benedict said Friday. “In this spirit, I trust in the commitment of the (congregation) so that the doctrinal problems that remain with the Society of St. Pius X … can be overcome.”

Here’s the same story but from Vatican Radio.  An excerpt:

(15 Jan 10 – RV) The Church’s teaching is open to all who seek truth, believers and non-believers: this was Pope Benedict XVI’s message Friday as he met with participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The Pope touched on the contribution that the Christian faith can offer in the field of bioethics and he reiterated that the first commitment of St Peter’s Successor is to preserve the unity of the faithful.

He said the Successor of St Peter is “the primary keeper and defender” of faith. However, he said the Pope and the Church want to contribute to the formation of the consciences of every individual, not only of believers. The Pope recalled that his ministry is primarily at the service of unity and that the Bishop of Rome is called to obey the faith, “so Christ’s truth continues to shine for all men”.

Hence the hope “that outstanding doctrinal issues that remain to be resolved for the fraternity of St. Pius X to achieve full communion with the Church” will be overcome. The Holy Father also welcomed the Dicastery’s commitment in favour of “the full integration” of groups and individual Anglican faithful into the Catholic Church.

On this point he stressed that: “The faithful adherence of these groups to the truth received from Christ and proposed by the Magisterium of the Church is not in any way contrary to the ecumenical movement, rather it shows its ultimate goal, which is to achieve full and visible communion of the disciples of the Lord” .

Contrast and compare the two versions. It makes me wonder whether some of the secular journalists have an automatic word-generator for some of their stories–the constant repeating of the terms “disaffected Anglicans” or the need to mention “the Holocaust-denying” Williamson.  Thus we seldom get much that is real news, just a rehash of politically-correct and usually inaccurate history ad nauseum.

Thank God for the blogosphere.

YouTube Preview Image

Why the Personal Ordinariates Will Not Depend on English Diocesan Bishops

Fr Ray Blake, Roman Catholic parish priest in Brighton, England, has recently been in Rome. He wrote about England the Black Hole. This is what he heard from Curial officials in the Vatican.

Living in one of the Casa de Clero in Rome, even for short time, means that despite one’s best efforts one hears gossip.

I was a little surprised that three or four Curial officials implied or said outright dealing with the English hierarchy was incredibly difficult, much more difficult than most of the worlds heirarchies.

One conversation contained the following rant… “We write gentle letters, they ignore them”. “We insist more strongly, they acknowledge receipt of the letter but we hear nothing more”. “We press for the resolution of a matter, they respond by saying they will be brought it to the attention of the relevant Bishop’s Conference or Diocesan Committee.”  “We ask 6 months, a year later, if the matter has been dealt with, invariable the response is, “not yet”, it goes on and on”.

“England and Wales” , someone else said, “is the black hole”.

“Does the Pope know that?” I asked.

I got wry smile, “As Prefect, he spent 20 years waiting for England and Wales to respond to him, suffering the same frustration as the rest of us, maybe now he is Pope, finally…., but then he is only Pope”.

We can understand Anglican priests being cautious, but I think we can trust the Ordinariates. The Holy Father will protect us.