Tag Archives: General Synod

Ordinary Time?

Posted on by
30

Monday of the fifth week of Ordinary Time (memorial of St Paul Miki and his companions, Martyrs), that is to say February 6th 2012, is the fiftieth 60th anniversary of the death of King George VI. It is therefore also the 50th 60th anniversary of the Queen's Accession. But because February is a pretty grim month, the celebrations will be held over until the summer. Making February that much more grim this year is the Westminster Session of the General Synod of the Church of England, also scheduled to begin on Monday 6th. This promises to be four days of anything but Ordinary Time.

synod Ordinary Time?

A draft Agenda has now been published on the official C of E website. For anyone who cares for the Church of England, and especially for its Anglo-Catholic rump, it would make a good calendar for four days of prayer. The first day (or rather half-day, beginning after lunch) is as usual just official business to be got out of the way, though perhaps the Loyal Address will be more worthwhile than usual, bearing in mind the date. Perhaps prayer will be said for the repose of the soul of His Late Majesty.

The real matter of the Synod starts on Tuesday 7th. From 2.30pm there is to be a presentation of the Draft Code of Practice regarding Women to the Episcopate, with questions following. That exercise in squaring the circle, making it clear that women who are ordained as bishops really are bishops with all the authority of their office –  yet somehow allowing those who do not accept them as bishops to continue to live as though they did not exist — promises to be a fascinating time of prestidigitation. It will be an exceptionally worrying time for our brothers and sisters who want to be able still to say with integrity that "the Church of England is part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church".

The next day looks like being especially lively. On Tuesday there will have been just two and a half hours for the subject but on Wednesday there will be a much longer time for debate: Except for the few minutes of a report on Standing Orders and a brief time for evening prayer the Synod will debate Women in the Episcopate from 2.30pm until 7pm. During this they will consider a diocesan motion from Manchester and another, much less friendly to Anglo-Catholics, from Southwark.

On Thursday morning, once further additional eucharistic prayers have been considered, 'Women in the Episcopate' will reach its final drafting stage before becoming law. That is unless in some way (perhaps by a failure to obtain a two-thirds majority in each House) the whole thing is put off for another five years.

It is sad to be bringing all this to your attention just as everyone is so excited at the establishment of the American Ordinariate. For us in England, though, it is of great importance. One way or another, it will affect how the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham develops over the next few years. Either it will speed its growth (as I pray it will) or it will provide yet one more line in the sand for the survivors of the Anglo-Catholic Movement to hide behind. They will be waiting once more as many of us have done in the past for something to turn up. So, friends, pray for the Synod, and especially for those who are trying to retain in the C of E a few shreds of its catholic past.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

Funny Old Animal

Posted on by
Jillian 013 1024x576 Funny Old Animal

Christchurch Priory Misericord

It is a funny old animal, the General Synod.  Entirely unrepresentative of those in the pews (have you ever checked how many of the 'House of Laity' are in church employment? or how many of the clergy are not there by election? and as for the bishops!), it is capable of being swayed by mass emotion.  Last session the two Archbishops put their heads on the block; and had them severed at one blow.  The new Synod seems to want to make amends, so when there was a cry to rally to the Archbishop they did just that in an overwhelming vote of support.  This is how it was reported:

One of the most rousing speeches came from Mark Russell, who sits on the archbishops' council.  He told the synod: "The Archbishop of Canterbury has the most impossible job in the history of the world.  It is a lonely task.  I have never heard Rowan Williams ask for our support in the way he has.  If we say no, we're not backing our archbishop when he asked for our help."

The last time the Archbishop appealed for support from the Synod, he was defeated.  That time in July, of course, it was 'traditionalists' he wanted to help; though as we know the amendment he and John Sentamu proposed was so weak as to be practically useless.  Now it is the Covenant he is wanting to succeed, though again traditionalists (mostly in the 'third' world) think it is too little and too late.  Still, if it puts some brakes on the USA and Canada, it might have done some good.  Probably it will not.  Those parts of the church are adept at getting round whatever others in the Communion  ask of them — for instance, they abstain from authorising same-sex  blessings, while turning blind eyes to those who celebrate unauthorised liturgies for them.

On both sides people have been counting votes to see whether, for instance, there might be a two-thirds majority for women bishops.  Such efforts are futile.  We have been there before (notoriously in 1992).  People are swayed by emotion at the last minute.  All we can be reasonably sure of is that the consecration of women to the episcopate will succeed, and any provision for those opposed will be insignificant.  But why bother with such things now?  Too little, too late.  Good of ++Rowan to say, "Of course it is a matter of real sorrow that some have already decided that they cannot in conscience continue this discussion within the Church of England. They remain in our prayers."  Just as he will remain in ours, poor man.  But "continuing the discussion" supposes that anything we say might make the slightest difference.  It would not.  We have said all we have to say, summed up in "A Code of Practice Will Not Do," and no one in Synod has listened.  Now it is a great relief to have burnt our boats, cast our dice — or whatever other metaphor grabs you.  Carry on rearranging the music stands on the titanic steamship Synod; we are for the lifeboats.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

Bishop David Silk

Posted on by
27

Walsingham 049 172x300 Bishop David SilkHe is perhaps less well known States-side than the other Church of England bishops who have announced their resignation before joining the Ordinariate, but David Silk deserves to be well-known, as a hero of the faith.  During the debate in the 1990s on Women's Ordination, no bishop would speak in General Synod for those opposed to the novelty.  Indeed only Bishop Noel Jones of Sodor and Man declared that he was with us.  It was therefore left to David Silk, at that time Archdeacon of Leicester, to head us up in the debate.  He was well respected across the board in Synod, having been elected by the Clergy as their Proctor.  For many years he had been a doughty fighter in Synod, and he was a great choice to lead us into battle.  He did so brilliantly and bravely; but, as has been so often the case in Synod debates, traditionalists won the argument but lost the vote.  In this rather unflattering photograph he is at the National Pilgrimage to Walsingham earlier this year.

In 1994, the year that the Church of England began to ordain women, David set out at the age of 58 for an entirely new ministry — Bishop of Ballarat, in Australia.  Ballarat is a former mining town, in the centre of a large but sparsely populated diocese, where the sheep outnumber the people.  Mind you, most of those sheep are Anglicans.  He was there for nine years, and in 2003 returned to England where for a year he settled back into parish ministry as Priest-in-Charge of a little group of parishes in Chichester Diocese.  Now his son Richard is ministering as a Parish Priest in Oz.

Eventually David and his lovely wife Joyce retired to the outskirts of Torquay, on the South Coast.  He was commissioned as an honorary Assistant Bishop in Exeter Diocese, where for the past six years he has been a tower of strength to many beleaguered traditionalists.  During his time in the West Country, he has been chairman of the Glastonbury Pilgrimage, a role he only handed over earlier this year.  On David's resigning, the Bishop of Exeter, Michael Langrish, said, "All Christians are on a journey of faith which can take each one of us in a variety of different, and sometimes surprising, directions."  We pray that before long Bishop Michael might also find his way in that same surprising direction.

It was a great delight to me and my wife, and to many others, when David and Joyce decided that there was no future for them in the Church of England and that they would make common cause with the Southern PEVs and seek to join the Ordinariate.  As they say, there is life in the old dog yet.  With his abiding love for the Church of England, Bishop David is a living piece of Patrimony to be shared with the wider Church.  What is more, he gives the lie to those who insist that all those joining the Ordinariate are dyed-in-the wool Papalists, for David is very much in the Tractarian mould.  Indeed, many of us (including, I would guess, Bishop John of Fulham and I) are steeped in the Prayer Book and used it or its variants consistently until relatively recently.  As a Bishop, you simply use the rite of the parish you are visiting.  When eventually (some time in the New Year) the priests and parishes joining the Ordinariate are free to declare themselves, those who are so certain they they will all be Roman Missal enthusiasts might be in for a surprise.  In the last year I have celebrated BCP eucharists more often than those taken from the Roman Missal; so the Book of Divine Worship (or our version of it) will be no great hardship.  May it be soon!

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

Pastoral Letter from the Bishop of Richborough

Posted on by
6

bishopkeith Pastoral Letter from the Bishop of RichboroughI imagine most of you will already know that I have resigned as Bishop of Richborough as from 31st December and will not be conducting any public episcopal services between now and then. I will, in due course, be received into full communion with the Catholic Church and join the Ordinariate when one is erected in England, which I hope will happen early next year. This has been a very difficult decision and has not been taken without much thought and prayer over the last year. For more than 8 years I have enjoyed being Bishop of Richborough; I have particularly valued the many visits to parishes for confirmations and other occasions. I am more grateful than I can say for the warmth, friendship and support I have experienced from so many priests and faithful lay people. I did not deserve it but I thank God for all I have received from you.

I am sure it will be said that I am leaving because of the issue of the ordination of women to the episcopate. While it is true that this has been an important factor in my thinking it is not the most significant factor. The publication of the Apostolic Constitution, Anglicanorum Coetibus, just one year ago, came as a surprise and has completely changed the landscape for Anglo Catholics. Since the inception of the ARCIC process, set up by Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Michael Ramsey in the 1960s, most of us have longed and prayed for corporate union with the Catholic Church; union which in our own time has seemed less likely because of the new difficulties concerning the ordination of women and other doctrinal and moral issues affecting the Anglican Communion.

Although we must still pray for sacramental and ecclesial unity between our Churches that now seems a much more distant hope. The creation of Personal Ordinariates within the Catholic Church provides an opportunity for visible unity between Anglicans and the Catholic Church now, while still being able to retain what is best in our own tradition which will enrich the Universal Church. This is a hope which has been expressed many times by Forward in Faith and many others within the catholic tradition of the Church of England.  So I hope you will understand that I am not taking this step in faith for negative reasons about problems in the Church of England but for positive reasons in response to our Lord’s prayer the night before he died the 'they may all be one.'

Some of you, of course, will be thinking that I am leaving just at the time when episcopal leadership for our parishes is vital. I have great sympathy with this view but there are a number of ways of understanding leadership. Some may think the leader should stay to the bitter end like the captain of a sinking ship, but the example in scripture is that of the shepherd and every instructed Christian knows the eastern shepherd leads from the front rather than following the flock from behind. This is what I hope I am doing. I am leading the way and I hope and pray that many of you will follow me in the months and the years ahead.

However, I know many of you will wish to remain in the Church of England if that is at all possible and for some they will do so whatever provision General Synod eventually adopts. For those I could not continue to be your bishop with any integrity. My pilgrimage is now leading me in a different direction and I can no longer provide the episcopal leadership you need and deserve. You need a new Bishop of Richborough who has the same vision as you have and one for whom a solution in the Church of England is a priority. My priority is union with the Universal Church.

For those whom I have let down and disappointed, I ask your forgiveness. I am only to well ware of my own failings and inadequacies but I have tried, though often failed, to be a loving and faithful bishop for you. I hope you will continue to pray for Gill and me as we take this significant step in our own Christian pilgrimage, as we will continue to pray for all of you.

May God bless you now and always,

Yours in our Blessed Lord,

+ Keith
Bishop of Richborough

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

+Fulham Interview

Posted on by
6

Edward Stourton [E.S.] interviewed John Broadhurst on the ‘Sunday’ programme on BBC Radio 4.  Thanks to Fr Aquilina for directing me to this.  I thought it might be helpful to transcribe it for our readers: I find it easier to read such things than listen to them.

Assembly10 007 226x300 +Fulham Interview

Bishop John Broadhurst

E.S. The Bishop of Fulham, the Rt Rev'd John Broadhurst, is resigning and says he is preparing to be a member of the Ordinariate, the body the Pope has created to give a home to disaffected Anglicans. He is the first Church of England bishop to take such a significant step, and in this his first interview since that announcement, he told me why he is doing it now.

The Church of England has been  committed to unity with the Roman Catholic Church for thirty odd years and there was one time when I was a young priest when I thought that was really quite possible.  What has happened recently is that the Church of England seems to have been distancing itself by its decisions; so we’ve got the whole thing in the Anglican Communion about gay marriage and in England women priests and women bishops and recently we’ve had the Pope’s very generous offer in Anglicanorum Coetibus (which is hard to pronounce but easy to understand) which is really saying to Anglicans like me, "there is a home for you if you want it".

I don’t think with any integrity I can turn my back on that offer which really is what my ministry has been all about for the last 30 odd yrs.

E.S. Even though on the specific issue of women bishops which seems to be the issue that has brought things to a head for you, the battle isn’t over and there seems to be, if you listen to some people, a reasonable chance from your perspective that the decision will go your way — for a while at least.

No it can’t go  ….  I said in 1994 you can’t with any integrity have women priests and not have women bishops.  Whatever women are, they are not inferior to men.  Therefore if they are to enter the ministry they should have been made bishops in the beginning.  We’ve always asked for living room for those who dissent from it.  But that living room was going to have an ecumenical dimension anyway.  So the best hope for people in the C of E is another ten years of battle, well there’s not much fun in that is there?

E.S. You have said some pretty tough things about the way the matter of women bishops has been conducted.  You have talked about the Church of England being fascist, vindictive.  Or at least that’s what the newspaper have reported you saying.  What did you mean by that?

Many people on the other side have said to me they were appalled at the debate in  General Synod last time round, particularly in the House of Clergy, interestingly.  If you remember the Archbishops of Canterbury and York appealed for provision for us — it was rejected.  I mean, my language is robust, it always has been, but actually its very intemperate to say to people like me who have been in the church for virtually all our lives, to say, "no place for you, goodbye".  And then they’ll say "we’re making provision for  them" … but that provision is not the provision we’ve ever said we wanted.

Rather sad though to leave an institution that you’ve served for so long, accusing it of being vicious and fascist.

I didn’t accuse the institution of being vicious and fascist.  I accused the House of Clergy in the General Synod.  You know the Archbishop of Canterbury must have been terribly frustrated to have had his modest provision for people like me just kicked into touch.

E.S. You’ve presumably talked to him about this?

I haven’t because I am not his suffragan; I have talked to the Bishop of London about it.

E.S. …who said what?

Who said, “Yes, you must do what your conscience tells you”.

The people I have dealt with, I deal with nationally, are gentle, pastoral and caring.  That isn’t the atmosphere — I have been on the General Synod for 25 years.  I know what it’s like — and I’ve witnessed it deteriorating in the last 15 yrs.

E.S. What in practical terms happens to you now?  You resign from the position of being the Bishop of Fulham.  And then, what?  You’ll be ordained a priest in the Catholic Church?  Is that the plan?

That’s up to them; not up to me.  All I can say is it’s my intent to resign at the end of the year, and I hope (and my words are very careful: I intend and I hope…) … I hope to enter the Ordinariate.

E.S. Just to be clear what that could mean: you presumably couldn’t be a bishop in Roman Catholic Orders because you’re married?

No, no.

E.S. …but you’d hope to be a priest?

Yes, I’d hope to be a priest; but in the end, if I had to be a layman, that’s not the end.  One of the things about the debate on women bishops — the ministry is not a career: it’s actually a vocation.  So you do what the Church requires of you, not what you require of the Church.

E.S. And how many people would you — we are the beginning of the process — how many would you expect in the long term as this unfolds to follow your footsteps?

They’re not following my footsteps, they are following the Pope’s offer.  To be honest with you, I think initially it will be quite small.  I know other priests and indeed bishops who intend to take this offer.  It will be small initially because for many priests, if you’ve got a wife and family and you’re living in a home, it’s very hard to walk away from that in a rather insecure situation — but I’ve received many emails from lay people saying "how do we enter this?"  You can’t join something that doesn’t exist.  So until the Ordinariate is up and running nobody can say how many are going to join it.

E.S. And just to be clear, you are absolutely sure in your own mind that you’re taking the right step; you’ve taken a long time to reach the decision, but you’re no doubts about it?

Absolutely sure. And I think you can’t go back if you publicly state where you are; that’s what you’ve have to do, and I’ll do it with hope.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

Do the Ordinariates & SSWSH Need One Another?

Posted on by
35

Despite the rhetoric being bandied about in this rather unreal period before the Ordinariates are set up, and as the situation in the Church of England itself becomes ever more confused, when persuasion and recruitment are never far from the top of the agenda and everyone is concerned to justify their own personal reactions to the Anglo-Catholic endgame, could it be that SSWSH and the Ordinariates, far from being warring rivals for the remnant of those in the tradition of the Oxford Movement, may turn out to be complementary and even part of the same journey of faith?

Much of course will depend upon the attitude of SSWSH's episcopal leadership. Will they attempt to rubbish or even downplay the structures which will be set up as a result of Anglicanorum Coetibus, or will they (as I hope) keep their powder dry and their options open? They must have been given food for thought by the recently restated opinion of the Archbishop of Canterbury, presumably speaking as the leading spokesman of the Anglican Communion as a whole, that women's ordination is a 'second order' issue. From the addresses and interviews he has given in recent months, the worrying truth seems to be that even Dr Williams himself has no visceral understanding (sympathy is another matter, few question that) of those for whom the whole concept of "second order" issues makes very little sense, particularly when applied to matters which have a bearing on the nature of communion and the validity of the sacraments. Purely on an empirical level, if women's ordination really is a second order issue for the Anglican establishment (although their attempts to relegate it to the status of 'adiaphora' have run into an ecumenical brick wall) why then has it become such a test of loyalty and even qualification for office in our church? Given that, the question needs to be asked how much real generosity could ever have been expected and how much leeway will the embryonic Society of Saint Wilfrid and Saint Hilda be given now by the C of E establishment, when the very premise for the Society's existence is so profoundly misunderstood even by those of our opponents we thought did, to an extent, understand us? Because without that leeway, the SSWSH bishops will have to resort to illegality and defiance (how much appetite there will be at this late stage for that is anyone's guess — not much, is mine) and ultimately will be forced out of the Church of England altogether.

Again, Reform and the Catholic Group should be extremely wary of placing too much confidence in knife-edged votes in General Synod. As in England in 1991, we experienced the same degree of over-confidence in Wales in 1996, and the most surprising people either changed their minds, abstained or absented themselves for all kinds of reasons, genuine, confused or self-serving.

On the other hand, SSWSH could very well, if it is regarded by its leaders and members as a kind of halfway house for those who realize they will in time have to leave the familiar shores of the C of E to swim either the Tiber or the Bosphorus, help to keep alive precisely those liturgical, theological and pastoral traditions which the Ordinariates hope to repatriate within the Catholic Church, and which are rapidly being ditched by the western Anglican mainstream.

For the Ordinariates themselves, hoping to grow steadily, the presence of a well-disposed Anglo-Catholicism, even on a C of E life support system, could in all kinds of ways be more advantageous than one which has been suddenly put to death. Even if I am being consciously over-optimistic and resolutely non-confrontational in saying all this, such an situation can only have the shelf-life only of one generation of clergy. Votes in synods will see to that, given that Anglicanism has now been revealed in the words of one blog as "a fallible denomination whose essentials are up for votes." Some might think that in itself is reason enough for considering leaving.

Surely the task in which we all believe is the defense and the setting free of the Catholic tradition within Anglicanism, the attempt if not to save Anglicanism from itself (it's now too late for that) then at least the setting up of an authentic, orthodox and evangelistically effective alternative to the present doctrinal and ethical chaos. (Many of us would wish to add that in order to achieve this, union with the Successor of Peter is essential, not optional.) So, then, we should be single-mindedly serious in pursuing that strategy and not allow ourselves to be distracted and divided from one another by the short term political tactics necessary for even temporary survival in the quasi-parliamentary governing structures of contemporary Anglicanism. Whichever side of the Tiber we find ourselves in a year or so, we will still have more in common than that which separates us, the battles are essentially the same, and our divisions more about time scale than anything more theologically substantial.

As for the prospect of a joint C of E / CBEW committee in order to better facilitate the setting up of the Ordinariates, the critics are right. It's an excellent idea if it could be concerned with the transfer of property and resources and with resolving any disputes arising from that. Failing that, some offers of "help," however well-intentioned, are best declined.

Some animals lose their essential nature if they are domesticated.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

By Many or by Few

Posted on by
3
Assembly10 006 1024x576 By Many or by Few

Catholic Group in Synod's Leader

Great excitement in the Wifred & Hilda bunch (the soft-centre Anglo-Catholics), and Reform (the hardline Evangelicals). Between them these two strange bedfellows can derail the consecration of women bishops; that at least is according to a press release from the Christian News Release Service UK, reported and commented on by Damian Thompson in his Telegraph blog. Here is what is claimed:

"Subject: Women Bishops in the CofE now to be BLOCKED after latest General Synod Election

MEDIA INFORMATION ON GENERAL SYNOD ELECTION

Following the Election of the new General Synod of the Church of England, Evangelical and Catholic Groups on Synod have now swapped lists of candidates.  The results show that 66 Clergy (32.10%) and 77 laity (35.46%) will vote against the current Women Bishop legislation unless it is amended to give those who for conscious/scriptural reasons, cannot accept WBs.  Only 34% is needed to block this when it returns from the dioceses. For the first time, it can and will be blocked by both fully ELECTED houses. In the clergy only a further 1.81% is needed, and that’s just ONE person. There are 21 new evangelicals on this new synod, and one out of a possible 58 undecided is a given!  The Bishop of Fulham’s departure to Rome, announced on Friday, was therefore a little too early and the Catholic Group on General Synod have distanced themselves from his position and will be staying within the CofE."

Well, we have been here before, notoriously in the General Synod on 11.xi.92. On that day we were to be saved by our clear 1/3rd in the House of Laity. And if they did not prevent the Ordination of Women as Priests, then the House of Bishops would. In fact, a couple of women (who had been elected because they were opposed to women's ordination) abstained and the Bishops, who thought they would leave it to the laity, caved in; hence women's ordination went ahead. Incidentally, one of those women who changed her mind has since been 'ordained' as a priest – and her priest husband is now a Roman Catholic.

It would only require one or two of the laity or clergy to be indisposed when the vote happens – a funeral, a heavy cold, something compelling of that sort – and all the prognostications could once more prove wrong. But in any case, should the doctrine of the Church be determined in such a way? Far from being 'too early', the Bishop of Fulham's promise could not have come at a better time.

Some of us have spent half our lives seeing the Church of England descend into chaos. The question is not primarily one of women's ordination; it is about Authority. The Church of God is not ours to alter at will, its future depending on whether a third of the elected members of a Synod is ready to stand firm. We already have women as priests, and no doubt we shall have them as bishops before very long. Then, whatever 'safeguards' can be squeezed out of a reluctant Synod, it will not alter the fact that the Church of England can no longer claim continuity with the Church founded by Our Lord.

And what are those safeguards likely to be? Reform and SSWSH have very different requirements. For SSWSH (as the Bishop of Burnley reminded the FiF Assembly last week) "a Code of Practice Will Not Do". For Reform, it is all about Headship; and provided their parishes do not have to accept the ministry of women bishops, it will not matter greatly to them who joined in the laying on of hands when their Vicar was ordained. He is a man, that is enough. For them, a Code of Practice (even without Jurisdiction) probably will do. There may be concessions made next time round – perhaps in a Synod in 2012 – but those concessions cannot satisfy Catholics in the Church of England.

I originally ended this with some pretty harsh comments about those who remain undecided; and that resulted in a couple of helpful rebukes (see comments on my Ancient Richborough blog); so I have deleted that, and would simply say that we must go on trying to find the right way ahead for us, for now – but don't be too easily deceived into thinking there will be a rescue package from the C of E similar to the Act of Synod. Sooner or later, women are going to be admitted to the Episcopate; and sooner or later we shall all have to decide if a church which determines doctrine by majorities in Synod can honestly claim to be part of the "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" which we have always said it was. Meanwhile all of us should be praying for discernment, our own and others'.

Remember, "nothing restrains the LORD from saving by many or by few.” I Sam. xiv 6

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

When 'Tis Done, Then 'Twere Well It Were Done Quickly

Posted on by
12
Assembly10 001 1024x576 When Tis Done, Then Twere Well It Were Done Quickly

Emmanuel Centre

Odd, isn't it, that Forward in Faith is compelled to worship in a building belonging to a defunct sect, the Irvingites, and to hold its Assembly in a former Christian Science building, now the home of a group of Evangelical Chinese?  Yet that is how it was these last few days, meeting in the "Emmanuel Centre" in Westminster and celebrating the Eucharist in the Catholic Apostolic Church of Christ the King in Gordon Square.  Perhaps this is how it will always be for us in future, having to beg, borrow or rent buildings from  others.  You might also find it odd that my text — the title at the top of this piece — is not from Holy Writ but from the Scottish Play of Wm Shakespeare.  We performed it at school, and I was Duncan and Noises Off.  Duncan does not last long, so giving me the opportunity for my second role.  I made a great owl.  In the play Lady M is determined to do away with Duncan at the earliest possible moment.  Would that the Church of England were equally expeditious and kind where Anglo-Catholics are concerned.  Instead, it engages in a drawn-out death by a thousand cuts, gradually letting us realise that there is no place for us any longer.

A good Judge too 186x300 When Tis Done, Then Twere Well It Were Done QuicklyThe Assembly occurred just as a sizeable number of us have realised that "the game is up".  The Reverend Judge James Patrick outlined the sort of route which may be available to anyone entering the Ordinariate — it sounded remarkably quick, his draft; something set up soon after Christmas, a short time of preparation, then a joyful Easter and Pentecost.  For those of us who are seriously considering this option it seems incredible that anyone should still think there is anything left to play for.  Yet there are honourable men and women who plainly do think this.  For their sake, we heard the other day about the launch of a new Society, under the patronage of those two incorrigible Romanisers Saints Wifrid and Hilda.

Well, today we heard about this Society (SSWSH as it has become known) once again.  Some of us were looking forward to being able to ask questions of the sponsors of the Society Model.  There is a string of distinguished bishops who have lent their names to this, indeed the Bishop of  Plymouth came all the way to London a fortnight ago to tell a Sacred Synod what was being done.  There was no debate at that time, no room for questions.  But that was all right, for on the agenda for today we saw the name of that same Bishop, and also that of the Bishop of Beverley, the North's own Flying Bishop.  In the event, neither of them found it possible to be present.  Instead it was left to the Bishop of Burnley and Fr David Houlding to do their best to "reflect on developments following the Sacred Synods".  Now I have a great affection for Bishop John Goddard.  His father was Vicar of St Nicolas' Guildford when I was in the next-door parish, and he was my confessor for a time, so I knew Bishop John when he was nobbut a lad.  He did his best with a brief to tell us why things are different up North.  He told us that in the Synod elections there had been some gains by lay catholics especially.  There was no great enthusiasm for the Ordinariate and it had been left to Bishop John himself to put the case for it at that northern Synod.  Now it could be that the two things are not unrelated.  If you have to have as spokesman someone who is not keen on it, small wonder that the laity are seeking to get help from the Synod.  In the South, the PEVs have consistently helped us to understand and appreciate what the Holy Father is offering.  The North has not had, it seems, any similar explanation or  help.

I worked for nearly a decade in the Northern Province.  I believe that priests and people there deserve better than having to rely on a bishop who does not support the Ordinariate telling them about it.  Instead, they are being offered SS Hilda and Wilfrid.  It must be said that Bishop John Goddard did his best with us; but he had to admit that unless the Society could achieve Jurisdiction for reliable bishops, it would have failed.  Well, I was on the General Synod back in the 1980's [representing the Diocese of York, as it happens] and we got nowhere.  Bishop  John's wife pleaded with us today, tearfully, to give it once last chance.  She was elected to General Synod not many years after me, and she has been a doughty fighter for the catholic cause.  And of course we will try to give Synod a chance, those of us who are left.  But no-one should expect us, who have been in the battle for thirty years and more, to put the offer from Pope Benedict on the back burner while we draw one more line in the sand and give Synod one more chance.

After the Bishop of Burnley, Fr David Houlding was given an opportunity to gild the Hilda.  "In July we failed" he told us.  "It was about jurisdiction and alas it is not to be".  So why does he persist in clinging to the wreckage of the General Synod?  The Society Model was floated in the Revision Committee, the details all worked out by Fr Houlding, and it was turned down flat.  Now Fr David finds merit in having  it rejected by a committee but not put to the vote in General Synod.  He believes it may yet succeed second time round where all else has failed.  But again, he says "it will be useless unless it has jurisdiction", and asks "Will the House of Bishops recognise such a grouping?"  Well, I am ready to bet my zuchetta against a burst balloon that it will not.  Still Fr David persisted, and laid out five requirements of the Society.  Mission, our Catholic Identity being honoured, the ARCIC vision, a guaranteed sacramental life and being seen as a Gift to the Church of England.  In speaking of the guaranteed sacramental life (you can hear the whole of his and other contributions on the Forward in Faith website) he asked "Will those bishops be prepared to break the rules?  We must ask that question now at the beginning".  I wish that question could have been put to the galaxy of SSWSH bishops — Plymouth, Beverley, Horsham, Chichester and the rest.  Unfortunately, there was a question which preceded this: where were they?  None of them but Burnley had found time to come to the Assembly.  They are men who claim to be leaders in the catholic movement.  So where were they when we needed them today?  Indeed where have they ever been?  John Broadhurst, John Richards, Michael Houghton and other PEVs have had to bear the brunt of it, with only sniping from some who reckon themselves catholic bishops.  What is different now?  I hope SSWSH will flourish and achieve what has never been achieved up to now, the things which Fr Houlding listed … but I am not holding my breath.  And even Fr David seems to think it will be short-lived — about up to his date for retirement, I would guess.

Assembly10 012 168x300 When Tis Done, Then Twere Well It Were Done Quickly

Fr Geoffrey Kirk

The Assembly ended with tributes being paid to Fr Geoffrey Kirk, without whom many of us would not have survived these past acrimonious years.  His learning, his wit, his friendship and good humour have sustained us.  John Broadhurst spoke of him with great affection, a presentation was made to him, and if you listen to nothing else from the podcast, do listen to Fr Geoffrey's words of farewell.  He has seen it, and told it, as it is.  We shall still need him, although he has retired as Secretary, to continue to prick the pompous nonsense of any of us when we are tempted to rely on the promises of  the Church of England.

Finally, an unashamed plug: 'Sea Without a Shore', the life and ministry of Michael Houghton, one-time bishop of Ebbsfleet is now out, available from the Additional Curates' Society for £15.99; their website is at:

http://www.additionalcurates.co.uk/

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush…

Posted on by
50
Dame Mary Tanner 1024x768 Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush…

In the Gloom of the Emmanuel Centre

So today a visit to London, for the 'Sacred Synod' called by a number of those who call themselves catholic-minded bishops in the Church of England.  The clergy turned out in great numbers — very impressive.  I hope they were not all as disappointed as I was.  It began well enough, with the two southern PEVs, Ebbsfleet and Richborough, telling us the present state of play, and how it was likely the Ordinariate would begin in England early in the New Year.  The Bishop of Ebbsfleet, in particular, made it clear that as suffragans of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the PEVs could not proselytise for the Ordinariate.  If, however, anyone wanted to contact them and ask what they should do, then of course they would help them.  Then John, Bishop of Fulham, spoke in similar terms, telling us how his own family were pressing him to speed things up because they wanted a secure catholic home for their children and grandchildren.

Jonathan Baker (left, below) spelled out very clearly just where we were in the synodical process; and told us that for all the efforts of the Catholic Group, we had lost.  Anyone who thought the situation could be redeemed was living in cloud-cuckoo land.

Horsham among the Lions 1024x768 Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush…Then we began to hear from some of the cuckoos.  Do they nest especially in Sussex? — for all of them seemed to have connections with Chichester, bishops and former archdeacons of that diocese almost to a man.  The Bishop of Horsham (second from left, above, with the bishops of Fulham, Richborough and Ebbsfleet beyond him on the right) floated the notion of a "Society Model": I do not think he was talking about those high class hookers who, I am told, hang around Mayfair.  No, this Society was to gather up all the Anglican Catholics who, for whatever reason, would not join the Ordinariate (at least not at once) and give them a fig leaf of respectablity.

The trouble is we have been round this buoy already.  Fr David Houlding, Master General of SSC, had worked at the Synod's request on producing just such a model; and clause by clause it had been voted down in the Synod.  So why does anyone think it has a chance now?

Houlding in Pensive Mode 135x300 Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush…

The Master General of SSC

It would need one of two things: either the support of the Synod (you must be joking!) or Anglican bishops of a catholic temper who were prepared to break the law.  Now who could these be?  The only ones with any guts will have left for the Ordinariate.  Why do we suppose the others would change the habit of a lifetime and dare defy the House of Bishops or the General Synod?  No, the whole idea of this "Society" is dead before it begins.  Not so much a Society — more a Cuckoo Club.

Some who spoke pleaded with us not to be judgmental with  one another.  We must treat everyone as acting from honourable motives.  Oddly, I was reading some of Newman's "Apologia" on the train to London.  When he began to write the Tracts, many of his former friends turned against him.  One of these liberals (that is what Newman calls them) produced a pamphlet saying that for instance Trinitarian Doctrine was simply a matter of opinion: Newman, on being sent a copy, wrote "you will forgive me, if I take the opportunity it affords of expressing to you my very sincere and deep regret that it has been published…  I lament that by its appearance the first step has been taken towards interrupting that peace and mutual good understanding which has prevailed so long in this place" (he was speaking  of Oxford).  Earlier he wrote, "My feeling was something like that of a man, who is obliged in a court of justice to bear witness against a friend".  When a northern dignitary wrote accusing him of  "wishing to re-estabish the blood and torture of the Inquisition" he responded, "The heresiarch should meet with no mercy: he assumes the office of the Tempter; …to spare him is a false and dangerous pity.  It is to endanger the souls of thousands, and it is uncharitable toward himself".

Of course there will be priests, and people, unable to join the Ordinariate from day one.  It should not be a pleasant situation, for that would extend it interminably.  It is no kindness to them to give them a comfort blanket, a little cosy club to make them feel "well, if Bishop X and Fr Y don't feel it necessary to go over, neither shall I".

We had Dame Mary Tanner, the doyenne of the ecumenical movement in England, saying "we are in a time of discernment".  "The ordination of women, if it proves to be wrong, will be reversed".  She must have been roosting too long with the cuckoos, too; IN THEORY, as we should know, the Church of England has said we are in a time of reception.  But the Synod no longer believe this, or it would have made space for us.  It is sure what it has done is right, and will go ahead to consecrate lady bishops over any number of our dead bodies.  Poor Mary, I weep for her, I really do, she has borne the heat and burden, and it is all coming to nothing.  No good her saying, "It is not for the Church of England to decide; it is not even for the Anglican Communion to decide: it is for the whole Church".  But the overwhelming part of the Church, Eastern and Western, has spoken, and we in England and the USA have thumbed our nose and just ploughed on.   She still pins her hopes on Son of ARCIC, and says how Benedict is supporting it.  Really?  What of lasting value has ARCIC ever achieved — just an expensive and time-wasting talking shop.

Wallace Benn 175x300 Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush…

Wallace in the Lions' Den

Then the Bishop of Lewes, Wallace Benn, a leader among Conservative Evangelicals, asked us to bury the hatchet (leave yesterday's battles at least until the day after tomorrow) and join forces with his supporters in the Society (of St Luther and St Calvin?).

It was sad, too, to see Fr Houlding trying to defend something — another attempt at the Society Model — when he knows in his heart it will fail.  He has been there, done that, has it branded on him, not just printed on a T-shirt.  It did not work then, and it will not be allowed to work.

They have chosen the title of "The Society of St Wilfred and St Hilda" for their brave new invention.  How odd.  Wilfred was the firebrand who determined to bring the old-style Northern British into line; and with the support of Abbess Hilda he succeeded.  Perhaps that is the secret message which the Bishop of Beverley and his colleagues wish us to hear and to follow; for sooner or later, they will have to follow it themselves, or lose whatever credibility they still possess.

It was a very strange and expensive day.  A priest friend summed it up in an email he sent me on his return home.  "Like you, …  I was rather irritated that what was billed as a "Synod" proved, in part, to be launching pad from what seems to me to be an ill-devised scheme for a Society model with little hope of success — it can't possibly secure jurisdiction, and I doubt that any episcopal leadership in it will dare to be illegal.  People, as ever, just seem to be ever drawing lines in the sand and redefining the non-negotiables.  But I'll endeavour to persuade the PCC that it was worth the £53.40 round trip."  Hope he succeeds.  For me, it was in the end worth it because so many younger priests were coming up to me and expressing similar exasperation with the cuckoo tendency, and saying they were more determined than ever to join the Ordinariate.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

A Superior Bunfight

Posted on by
5

Since 'bunfight' caused some interest, you might like to see another such event; this time in Birmingham (my third visit this year).  The Parish is St Cuthbert's, and in Castle Vale they were celebrating their Patronal Festival on Saturday.

IMG 0542 1024x768 A Superior Bunfight

Fr James at the Bunfight

Sept 4 marks  St Cuthbert's translation; his mortal remains got moved about a good deal when Lindisfarne was threatened by the Danes, but they ended up in a great shrine in Durham Cathedral.  The Estate which comprises the parish of Castle Vale, built on the site of a World War II Royal Air Force station, was begun in the 1960s.  The church dates from the '70s, the Vicarage is more recent still since the local authority wanted to exchange the site of the former house for the present smaller site next to the Church.  They built flats where the former Vicarage had been.

IMG 0545 150x150 A Superior Bunfight

Oddly modern Vicarage

The result is a very chic house with some very strange angles.  Nothing is quite square, and there are stairs and steps  everywhere.  But as ever Fr James and Phaea his wife made us wonderfully welcome.  We met them when Fr James was Vicar of St John 's Watford.  Now he is in an equally multi-cultural area, but he seems to fit it exceptionally well.

IMG 0544 1024x768 A Superior Bunfight

Phaea among the folks

Several of the congregation spoke to me after the celebrations about the Ordinariate, so I am glad I said something about it in my sermon.  I shall append it here in case you're interested.  If not, just enjoy the pictures.

He rejoices more over the one sheep…

You will know that Cuthbert, your patron, had a very different career set out for him at the start.  He was to have been a shepherd; but the Lord had other ideas.  His shepherding was carried out on the hills above Melrose, which is now in Scotland but was then part of Northumbria; and the priory of Melrose was the place which called him, and where eventually he became a monk.  Not at once, though; before joining the religious life he was a soldier.  It is likely that this was in the army of the Christian king of Northumbria, fighting against the pagan Penda, king of Mercia.  The treasure hoard which made the news recently, discovered not so far from here in the West Midlands, possibly was a battle-prize from one of those wars.  Certainly there was a gold processional cross, bent out of shape, in that hoard.

Now St Paul, when he was trying to spread the Gospel, said “I have become all things to all men, so that by all means I may win some".  If you were looking for a Patron Saint who fulfilled that description, you could not do better than Cuthbert.  A Shepherd and a soldier; a monk and a bishop.  Oh, and a conservationist — more about that in a minute.  Most people could find something to admire in Cuthbert, and something about him to inspire and encourage them — which is partly what a patron saint is for.  The people who knew him, though, were not attracted by any of these incidental things.

What won people over to Cuthbert was his sheer goodness, and the gentleness with which he led his monks and the priests and people of his diocese.  It was not only people with whom he was gentle; when he was living in his cell in the Farne islands, he ordered that special protection should be given to the iconic birds of that place, the eider ducks.  As a result they became knows as Cuthbert ducks; or in the shorthand on the Northeast, Cuddy Ducks.  So you could say Cuthbert might also serve as patron of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.

Now in those days, the Seventh Century, that is, there were some very contentious issues in the Church.  Does that sound familiar?  Cuthbert’s tradition was Celtic, the form of Christianity which came from the earliest missionaries from Rome.  Local customs had grown up over the years, and in particular the Celtic church used a different method for dating Easter from the Roman church.  Around the year 600 the Pope, Gregory, decided to send Augustine on a mission to convert, or reconvert, the English.  Where the Celtic church was strong, in the North and West, there was resistance to these new Roman ideas, as they were thought.

At this time, Cuthbert was ruling the new foundation in Ripon.  Many of the monks of Ripon, though, wanted to follow the Roman rite, so Cuthbert and those who had originally come with him from Melrose returned North.

On the death of the old Prior, Cuthbert took over as head of that monastery of Melrose.   He did not stay there long.  Just three years later, in 664, there was perhaps the greatest Church Synod ever held in England — certainly  far greater than any of those argumentative tin-pot little talking shops which call themselves meetings of the General Synod of the Church of England.  At Whitby, it was the entire Christian Church in England seeking to find a way of living together peaceably — and unlike the General  Synod, they succeeded.

The Venerable Bede wrote about all this at length in his History of the English Church and People — England’s first ever history book.  In the end, it was the King who settled the matter.  Whose tradition is the Celtic Church following?  St John, came the answer.  And whose the Roman Church?  St Peter.  Then, said the King, because Peter was given authority over the other disciples, it is Peter’s rule we must choose.  Thus the whole Church in England followed the traditions of Rome.  So it remained for nine more centuries; until another king decided that he, not the successor of Peter, should be supreme head of the Church of England.  So Henry VIII began the breach with Rome and the English Reformation.

Cuthbert, seeking above all the peace of the church, decided he must abide by the decision of the Whitby Synod.  So he was sent to Lindisfarne to help them come to terms in that monastery with the Roman tradition.  So Cuthbert is more than we have even said up to now, shepherd, soldier, monk and bishop.  He is above all a peace-maker.  We need the inspiration, and the humble leadership, of Cuthbert today.  He sought above all the unity and peace of the Church.  Many are thinking in the Church of England just now that the offer from the Pope is giving us all those things which were causes of offence to us five centuries ago in the time of the Reformation.  We wanted the prayers of the Church to be in a language we understood, not in Latin.  That we shall have in the Ordinariate.  We wanted our priests to be able to be married; and so it will be, by an exceptional dispensation, in the Ordinariate.  Almost all the reasons (or perhaps excuses) for our church splitting from our original foundation have been answered.

There have been people asking who should be the patron saint of the Ordinariate; some have argued for John Henry Newman, that great convert from Anglicanism.  Some have thought St Alban might be a good choice.  Whoever is decided as the right person, I hope that somewhere in the list of those we acclaim as our fathers in the faith there will be the name of Cuthbert.

At the Reformation, Henry VIII ordered the destruction of all the saints’ shrines in England.  When his commissioners set about the shrine of Cuthbert, in Durham Cathedral, they found his body still intact after nine centuries.  What should they do, they asked?  Bury the saint's body in the place where the shrine stood; demolish the shrine, but do not scatter Cuthbert’s bones.

So whereas in Winchester the tomb chests of many English kings were broken and the bones thrown out, including even the famous King Canute, Cuthbert remains where he was.  The Victorians exhumed him out of curiosity, and took some of the grave goods, his stole, his pectoral cross, his chalice, and placed them on display in the Cathedral.  But still Holy Cuthbert’s earthly remains are there, and there they are honoured and treasured.

More important than caring for his mortal remains is for us to treasure and honour his memory.  I said earlier that it was his example which is important; but better still, we can ask his prayers.  As patron of this Church we have a special claim on him; may his pleading lead us to peace, and a unity in the church such as we can scarcely imagine.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!