The Catholic Herald has printed a statement by Archbishop Nichols (of Westminster) on the ordination of 3 former Anglican bishops to the Catholic priesthood and the creation of the Ordinariate. Amongst traditonal bloggers there has been a buzz of excitement about the anticipated influx of more traditional “Anglo-Catholics” into the church. I am not quite so sure I share their optimism just yet.
When I lived in west London I sang at Our Lady of Victories and at the Dominican Abbey in Hampstead. A few hundred yards up the road is a Victorian Pugin masterpiece of a church which was in the Anglo-Catholic movement. I got to know a couple of people there and every so often on a Sunday evening would pop my head in for the chance to sing a bit of chant. Having seen an Anglo-Catholic parish in action I have my doubts about the extent to which there will either be mass conversion or easy integration, and here is why.
The church had 2 clergy, one retired and one a non-stipediary (for those unfamiliar with this concept, the CofE has a number of NS clergy who, like our Permanent Deacons, have secular professions and exercise their ministry on a part-time basis). The retired vicar would say a Tridentine Rite mass according to the 1962MR in a side chapel, often only attended by one or two people in the morning. The other vicar would say the main “mass” in the evening. This would be according to the Catholic Novus Ordo, but with a few additions, such as a rota of servers dressing up in Dalmatics and acting as sub-deacons which would not be permissable according to the GIRM. The NS vicar was, during the week, a psycho-therapist who charged a few hundred pounds an hour for his services, and this allowed him to leave London on a Thursday night to catch a Eurostar to his weekend chataux in France, returning late Sunday afternoon to say “mass” to a congregation of about 20-30. I have to wonder how the ordinariate would contend with non-stipendiary preists and whether this practice would be allowed to continue, and certainly whether those priests would be allowed to fit their ministry around their work and private life to this extent? I also wonder whether this particular non-stipendiary would be tempted to remain in the CofE to be able to afford that lifestyle? I can only speculate, but it would be an act of enormous generosity to give it up.
Then you have to look at the congregation. A significant proprortion were in fact baptised and confirmed Roman Catholics who had defected to a high AC parish of the CofE for what I would term “lifestyle” reasons, mostly because of their sexuality or marital status making full communion in the RC church incompatible. They would go through the most incredible intellectual gymnastics to explain how, while they thought that the clergy of the mainstream CofE did not have valid orders that the AC wing of the CofE somhow did, that the mass was “real” and that they weren’t just kidding themselves that they were wasting an hour of their lives each week in a pantomime where people played clerical dress-up and make-believe. Would they, if the entire parish went over, normalise their positions with the Catholic Church, and would the parish, if in the Ordinariate, uphold Church teaching and require their normalisation before allowing them to receive communion? I can see difficulties in this regard because if the clergy truely believed in Catholic moral teaching then they would decline to give communion to congregants that they knew were Catholic but who could not receive communion in a Catholic parish and chose to attend their parish as a sort of “compromise”. One member of the parish was ordained by the Old Catholic Church of Utrecht but for reasons I didn’t fully understand was not incardinated to that church. He was allowed to say a private mass in the church if he wanted to, but was not allowed to exercise any form of public ministry. Rather than say mass he chose instead to attend the parish and serve their masses dressed as a sub-deacon. I understand that there exists the argument that as parishes in the CofE they cannot refuse to give communion to anyone who presents themselves, but I wonder how they would deal with that if the issue were put to the vote in the Parochial Church Council and it elected to convert? Also, those defectors from the Catholic Church would have a say in the matter of conversion if it went to the vote, which leads me to the next issue…
The PCC. The Parochial Church Council is a powerful beast in the CofE. It appoints the 2 Churchwardens that take custody of the church building and parish assets when there is no incumbent vicar. The PCC has the power of veto on clerical appointments making, in some parishes, the Bishops nomination almost like a terna is to the Pope, a purely advisory position. The PCC can set the tenure of the clergy (some clergy are appointed by the PCC for the entrity of their ministry, known as a “freehold” of the parish, others for a fixed term after which they must re-apply). The PCC governs just about everything in parish life making the relationship between vicar and congregation more of an employer/service provider one rather than pastor/flock. Would the members of the PCC who exercise such influence over the parish be prepapred to cede it to the priest in the new Ordinariate?
Then you have the semblent remainder of the parish. Many see themselves purely and simply as Anglican protestants. They are able to put up with high churchmanship and faux “popery” as an alternative to the Evangelicals, but they crave the mainstream CofE at heart. They would no more go over to that “Pope of Rome” than to drink coffee instead of tea at 4pm. They cling to the CofE structures as their totum and the form of worship is of lesser importance. Would they swim the Tiber?
In reality, I expect that the Anglo-Catholic wing of the CofE will face many difficulties, and I suspect that this particular London parish was perhaps a little extreme in its “diversity”, but possibly not so far removed from the realities of many other AC parishes. The fact is many of their congregation wanted to be catholic without actually being Catholic, and I expect many of them will remain put.
As a convert from Anglicanism, I have a few thoughts in response to this. First, as a preface, I'll say that I have no idea how many anglo-catholics will actually convert. That being said, I wonder about your decision to use a single parish to stand for the entire anglo-catholic movement. I think you are almost certainly right that this parish will not take advantage of the ordinariate, but I'm not sure how much more you can conclude from that. Second, based on your description of the parishioners, it seems that you've chosen an "affirming catholic" parish as your test sample. If that's the case, then they certainly won't convert. I think it's important to remember that, just as Anglicans come in high-church, low-church, or broad-church varieties, (or more recently, anglo-catholic, evangelical, and liberal varieties) there are a variety of styles of anglo-catholics. Some prefer traditional liturgy, but have very liberal views on faith and morals otherwise – these are commonly called "affirming catholics." I've even heard the current Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, sometimes described as an "affirming catholic." Other anglo-catholics claim to accept all that the Catholic church teaches, but they've been waiting and hoping for something like the ordinariate. And there's a wide range in between. At any rate, you're not going to see conversions from the "affirming catholic" camp. Again, I'm not saying whether the ordinariate will bring in many conversions or few, but I'm very doubtful how much you can conclude based on the parish you visited, given how you've described it.
Just a couple of quibbles. Being self-employed, the psychotherapist priest would be able to continue to enjoy his lifestyle even in the (unlikely) event of his entering the Ordinariate, as he is not financially dependent on the Church. He could even then say Mass at a church near his pile in France!
Churchwardens (I am one) are not elected by the PCC but by the parish as a whole.
I shall forbear to comment on the horrors of Deanery Synods, as we will be well shot of synodical government when we join the Ordinariate. Laus Deo!
Nothing new there Keith. The CoE is a collection of parties that don't so much abut as overlap and blend. In consequence there will be many high-church priests and people who will wish to remain Anglican, and that will include those "affirming" Catholics whose views and practice don't really match those of the Church. Equally, there will be a small but not insignificant number who are happy to take up the Holy Father's offer in full appreciation of what it means: they'll be Catholics, with all that entails. St. Barnabas in Tunbridge Wells is a case in point. The parish priest and (I gather) about two thirds of the congregation are set to join the Ordinariat, while the rest are content to remain Anglican.
The thing is that entry to the Ordinariat for priests and laity will be a point of commitment and conversion, rather than a switch to a more amenable parish. I fully expect that the Anglo-Catholics who understand and welcome this will make their own particular and orthodox mark on the life of the Church.
There is some wiggle-room for the "tunicles" proper to sub-deacons in the Novus Ordo. The GIRM refers to "other lawfully approved vesture". Properly "Instituted" Acolytes (a silly term which gives one visions of some poor seminarian kidnapped by men in white packing him off in a straight jacket to a mental facility as depicted in "One Flew Over the Kokoo's Nest)assume the responsibilities of the sub-deacon since it's abeyance, and could be reasonably argued they are entitled to vest in the "tunic" (one bar on the tunic rather than two bars on the claves and panels which make it a "dalmatic" according to tradition). But granted, not an arugment I'd have with unfriendlies or a "sand and banner liturgy committee!"
Many see themselves purely and simply as Anglican protestants. They are able to put up with high churchmanship and faux "popery" as an alternative to the Evangelicals, but they crave the mainstream CofE at heart. They would no more go over to that "Pope of Rome" than to drink coffee instead of tea at 4pm.
————————————————-
Mr. Fraser, how right you are. My own Anglican side of the family was all over the landscape in terms of dogma, liturgy, piety, and praxis.
The term "cafeteria" or "smorgasbord" Catholic can be raised to the 10th power in Anglicanism, as you well know.
The delights of mixing and matching creeds and liturgies with abandon may originated in the CofE. These shopping expeditions are surely alive and well in Rome now. As many Anglo Catholics who swim the Tiber will be discovering for themselves.
Unlike the Cof E, in the Episcopal Church here in the USA and the offshoots from it (Anglican Orthodox, Evangelical Anglican etc.), two-thirds of the "Anglicans" in most parishes, appear to be cradle Methodists, Presbyterians, and Baptists. Many of the clergy are themselves from this churches and are now arrayed in Anglican drag. I have to smile as I hear these entertainers feign British reserve while speaking from the pulpit. Where do they get those accents? It isn't the BBC, but it could be from watching too many reruns of "Upstairs, Downstairs".
In any event, they have mixed feelings about the smells and bells issues,ranging from unabashed opposition to lights, chasuables, and incense to the more Roman than Rome types who delight in Sarum-like grandeur. They gravitate to the Anglican Church for other reasons too as well. To enjoy the Sunday Canterbury Club meetings and the decided clubbiness so typical of many parish halls.
My cousin was a vestryman. Their meetings were often described in such terms one would think they had spent an evening at White's or the Carlton Club.
Former dissenters and not a few RCs wouldn't dream of leaving an atmosphere where they can immerse themselves in the status associated with a British established Church. With magnificent gothic or Wren-style churches, and a liturgy which smacks of a Chapel Royal and the pageantry that goes with it. That stuff is very hard to give up for a life with the CCD, bingo, the St.Patrick's Day card party, and guitar liturgies within the rood screen.
As for the cradle Roman Catholics who've embraced Anglicanism, they are so alienated from Pope Benedict's vision of the Church and the moral pronouncements of his predecessors, most of them wouldn't even contemplate taking advantage of the Ordinariate to re-join their former faith. The one's I've met haven't the slightest interest. These are truly Rome's lost sheep.
I also fear, Anglo Catholics in the future could be extremely disapointed if Pope Benedict's successor decides to severely "latinize" the Ordinariate. Rome has a long, and I'd say an ugly history of intolerance towards any liturgical tradition or form of piety that isn't Roman (witness the experience of many Oriental and Eastern Catholic rites). There are some in the Roman dicasteries or the College of Cardinals today who wouldn't think twice about abolishing anything that smacked of "protestantism", "that heretic Cranmer" or "English". No matter how precious and enduring it is for Anglicans, and no matter how beautiful and uplifting it is for Roman Catholics as well.
The pope's Ordinariate will open the doors ever so gradually. It may be painfully slow getting off the ground and it may take decades before the Ordinariate can be viewed as the success so many are predicting it will be in the short-term.
Here in the U.S. most Anglican parishes still have a good two-thirds of their parish made up of cradle Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists and Roman Catholics. Despite misgivings about the smells and bells issues, they were attracted to the Chapel Royal pageantry, the beautiful churches, the English clubby atmosphere, or country club style of parish and vestry meetings, and would never dream of missing Canterbury Club activities. They won't want to exchange those for St.Patrick's Day card parties, CCD get-togethers, and Knights of Columbus beer busts.
Yes, there may be great love for Anglican liturgy and spirituality–and it is very genuine for many–but there are those in Rome who still harbor a very strong resentment towards that "heretic Cranmer" and any liturgy or patrimony perceived as a threat to Roman dominance of the liturgical arts. I fear in the later years, after Pope Benedict's time, there may be serious efforts to "latinize" the Ordinariate. That would be a great tragedy, but such short-sightedness and stupidity are not foreign to the halls of the Vatican dicasteries.
Will: They parish is (or at least was) AC and not "affirming". Their view was that the structures were CofE and the ArcBp of Canterbury was the leading authority of the church, but they also recognised the spiritual leadership of the Pope in his encyclicals. As I said in ths post, there are some extremes as you will find in any parish, but I would suspect for the congregation at least, that many AC parishes would mirror this one broadly speaking.
Anon no 2: you have obviously never been to the Brompton Oratory then, which has most of the recusant members of London's clubland. One off shoot is that if the parish of St Middle-of-the-road had a Anglican Use where the guitars and praise music were banished then the regular parishoners might gravitate towards it instead.
Of course another thought is would the former anglican, now co-located in a parish (the CofE is unlikely to relinquish any of its churches to the Ordinariate, even if they were offered a reasonable price for them) have to form part of the normal clerical rota or would he minister only to his own sub-congregation?
Mr Fraser,
My comments, which were civil,and indeed true if not deemed intelligent, have been removed. Nevertheless, your innacuracies remain
Kindly tell me why?
frswillis@hotmail.com
@WF: I'm afraid I can't answer that question as I don't have moderation powers on the combox. I am only able to post to the blog, and even then, I am subject to editorial decisions.
In terms of the post itself, I am speaking anecdotally from my own experiences of an Anglo-Catholic parish. If any inaccuracies exist it will be in my descriptions of how the PCC operates and the role of a churchwarden. I am happy to be corrected on these, and even edit the comments accordingly and note that on the post itself.
Whatever actually unfolds, your comments are unfair. You are quite obviously describing the former priest in charge of S.John's Holland Rd (the NSM Ppsychotherapist with the French property.) Either you are writing in ignorance OR mischievously. St John's is in West London (Shepherds Bush and miles away from the Dominican Priory but closer to OLV) and is the masterpiece of James Brooks, not Pugin. You have either heard gossip and put 2 and 2 together to make 7, or this is malicious -and the Catholic Blogosphere can do without both. You give no credence to this blog with this post.
You may well be right that S. John's will not provide the Ordinariate with any followers, but it is a far from typical Anglo Catholic Parish, and things have moved of from the previous arrangements to which you allude.
As a former Anglican priest,now a Catholic Priest, who accompanied the largest group of Anglicans into Full Communion in the 1990's (over 150) I am happy to report that 6 priests have been ordained from that group and a seminarian is currently in formation. Many of those laity have taken up ministries in the congregations which are now their home.
OK, it was not the Ordinariate – but a little more grace and a few more facts please.And let this thing unfold in it's own time before you rush to narrow judgements.
3 corrections:
1. Churchwardens are elected by all those who live in the parish (including RCs and methodists).
2. The PCC appoint 2 reps only who do have a power of veto.
3. Freehold will no longer exist for new appointments after 31/1/11 – all posts will be under 'Common Tenure.
One general comment – I think you are describing a very abnormal parish.
I guess the reception prodigal sons receive irritates the hell out of their siblings.
There are so many errors in this post that it is hard to know where to start. Previous commentators have picked up some of them; others include the fact that in most clerical vacancies today the living is "suspended" which gives the Bishop rights over appointment which, in the end, neither Churchwardens nor PCCs can gainsay. As for 'non-stipendiary' priests, they are actually written into the Anglicanorum Coetibus documents as a probable solution to funding in many places.
Most particularly, though, the Holy Father's provision is for "groups" of Anglicans. Many of us have been used to travelling many miles to worship in churches where the faith has not been compromised. There are gatherings of groups all over England just now, sometimes only three or four from anyone parish, but bound together in fellowship as we prepare to be received in the Catholic Church.
Keith Fraser's opinions, based it seems on only one London church, are not only inaccurate, but also profoundly unhelpful. He is right, though, many who have called themselves "Anglo-Catholics" will be smoked out by the Pope's offer, The 'catholics' who remain in the Church of England will, eventually, be a tiny rump of people unable or unwilling to make the leap of faith which is so welcome to many of us.
Anonymous is correct.
I myself will only accept the ordinariate if it is "high church" encourages plainchant and uses the english missal and the sarum or tridentine versions of divine office.
The post reformation Evensong and Matins which do not encourage the recitation of 150 psalms per week (as all orthodox ancient catholic christians did) are too limited and full of tinkering with post reformation novelties.
The great irony is that many of the bishops who would eliminate these should elimate the protestant influences and qualities that already exist in their own "novus ordo"..what a big mess..really they are both hatched from the same egg of heresy and secular humanism.