Ember Saturday of Pentecost in Holy Rood, Oxford

The southern part of Oxford is part of Portsmouth Diocese, since the Thames is the diocesan boundary: as it was in the Middle Ages. So just outside Birmingham Archdiocese, at the modern church of Holy Rood in the Abingdon Road, Fr Daniel Lloyd, Parish Priest and member of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham, celebrated the Ember Saturday of Lent. This Mass was sponsored by the Latin Mass Society and accompanied by the Schola Abelis, Oxford's dedicated Chant schola (the Oxford Gregorian Chant Society).



I'm not going to claim that this is the style of church I would choose above all others if I was allowed to choose... no one would believe me anyway. But as a matter of fact this church was built for the Traditional Mass, and the first Masses here were celebrated facing East, as it was last Saturday. Today the EF is celebrated every Friday at 12:30pm, and it is also the place in Oxford to find the Ordinariate Use.

Anglicanism as a car crash

An interesting post from the Anglo-Catholic blog: those coming over to Rome through the Ordinariate are like the survivors of a car crash.

It reminds me of Cardinal Newman's quotation of psalm 124, in a letter to a newspaper after it had been suggested that he might go back to the Church of England: laquaeus contritus est: my soul is like a bird escaped from the fowler's trap: the snare is broken, and I am escaped.

I saw this oddly apposite sign on the door of an Anglican church in a neighbouring village, a medieval church with some marvellous medieval wall paintings which had been painted over for centuries and are now uncovered. I can never understand how Anglicans can view the glories of Medieval Catholicism in their own churches and feel comfortable with Anglicanism.

Escape, little birds, while you can! And don't let anyone else in.

Welcome to the Oxford Ordinariate group!

Members of the Oxford Ordinariate group were received into the Church yesterday (Wednesday of Holy Week). Please pray for them!

Te Deum laudamus!

Anglican convert-bishops made Monsignori

From the Catholic Herald:

The Pope has honoured three former Anglican bishops, the first members of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham, with the title of monsignor.

Fr Keith Newton, the leader of the Ordinariate who has most of the functions of a bishop, and Fr John Broadhurst, the former Bishop of Fulham, have been granted the papal award of Apostolic Pronotary, the highest ecclesial title for non-bishops. Fr Andrew Burnham, the former Bishop of Ebbsfleet, has been granted the papal award of Prelate of Honour, and is therefore also a monsignor.

Congratulations, Monsignori!

Welcome to the Catholic Church

Further to my post about the Ordinariate ordinations, there was much speculation about the setting up of the Ordinariate itself, a legislative act of the Holy Father. So I was keeping an eye on the blog of the Vatican Information Service, which reports these things. It wasn't announced until the day itself, but here it is, and here is the post recording the appointment of the first Ordinary. I was rather struck by the blog entry which records this. The Holy Father was having a busy day, and the post is called simply 'Other Pontifical Acts'.

He created a new diocese in Sierra Leone, dividing the diocese of Freetown and Bo into two, and appointed the first Bishop of Bo.

He appointed a bishop in Italy, to diocese of Aversa, following the retirement of the old one.

He appointed an auxiliary bishop in Zambia.

He appointed a new head of the Pontifical Acadamy of Sciences. This actually got some attention from the wider world, since Werner Arber is the first non-Catholic to hold the post.

And he appointed Fr Keith Newton as Ordinary of the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham.

I don't know what it is like being an Anglican, but I am often struck as a Catholic by the universality of the Church, both in time and in space. There is no age, since Pentecost, when there wasn't a Pope, bishops, priests, the Mass, Catholic scholars and saints: and of course sinners and persecutors too. And while the particularities of history determine the strength of the Church in different locations, it is truly Catholic - Ecumenical - Universal. This is not just something for Catholics to feel smug about, as if they worked for the World's Biggest Corporation or something, but it is actually a sign that this institution is Christ's Church, One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic. The picture at the top is Vermeer's expression of this idea, his 'Allegory of the Catholic Faith': the Church bestrides the globe.

Three Anglican Bishops being received into the Catholic Church TODAY!

The Te Deum (Solemn Tone, with some faux-bourdon), h-t Gloria TV

This is not exactly a surprise, but the news appears to have come out only over the last few hours, and even so unofficially. According to a number of bloggers, who seem to be pretty sure of themselves, the three (corrected) bishops who recently announced their intention to be reconciled with the Catholic Church (or 'defect to Rome', as the quaint Anglican phrase has it), will be received at the 12.30 Mass in Westminster Cathedral this very day, 1st January.

They are Andrew Burnham (Ebbsfleet), Keith Newton (Richborough), and John Broadhurst (Fulham).

Sources here and here.

Some sources say in addition that the three Anglican nuns recently tossed out of their community in Walsingham for saying they wanted to join the Ordinariate, will also be reconciled to the Church.

This is wonderful news. Clearly the Anglican Ordinariate is going to make a flying start - much more so than most people imagined when it was first announced.

Please say a prayer for this initiative of the Holy Father.

Te Deum Laudamus!

Here's Andrew Burnham at the launch of his book 'Heaven and Earth in Little Space' at Pusey House in Oxford not long ago; he's talking to Fr Aidan Nichols OP, who contributed a forword to the book.

Five Anglican Bishops resign to become Catholic

From 'Friends of the Ordinariate'. The last rumours I heard was that there might be three bishops eventually becoming Catholic; things have moved on!

Congratulations to them all.

------------

LIKE MANY in the catholic tradition of Anglicanism, we have followed the dialogue between Anglicans and Catholics, the ARCIC process, with prayer and longing. We have been dismayed, over the last thirty years, to see Anglicans and Catholics move further apart on some of the issues of the day, and particularly we have been distressed by developments in Faith and Order in Anglicanism which we believe to be incompatible with the historic vocation of Anglicanism and the tradition of the Church for nearly two thousand years.

The Apostolic Constitution, Anglicanorum cœtibus, given in Rome on 4th November 2009, was a response to Anglicans seeking unity with the Holy See. With the Ordinariates, canonical structures are being established through which we will bring our own experience of Christian discipleship into full communion with the Catholic Church throughout the world and throughout the ages. This is both a generous response to various approaches to the Holy See for help and a bold, new ecumenical instrument in the search for the unity of Christians, the unity for which Christ himself prayed before his Passion and Death. It is a unity, we believe, which is possible only in eucharistic communion with the successor of St Peter.

As bishops, we have even-handedly cared for those who have shared our understanding and those who have taken a different view. We have now reached the point, however, where we must formally declare our position and invite others who share it to join us on our journey. We shall be ceasing, therefore, from public episcopal ministry forthwith, resigning from our pastoral responsibilities in the Church of England with effect from 31st December 2010, and seeking to join an Ordinariate once one is created.

We remain very grateful for all that the Church of England has meant for us and given to us all these years and we hope to maintain close and warm relationships, praying and working together for the coming of God’s Kingdom.

We are deeply appreciative of the support we have received at this difficult time from a whole variety of people: archbishops and bishops, clergy and laity, Anglican and Catholics, those who agree with our views and those who passionately disagree, those who have encouraged us in this step and those who have urged us not to take this step.

The Right Revd Andrew Burnham

The Right Revd Keith Newton

The Right Revd John Broadhurst

The Right Revd Edwin Barnes

The Right Revd David Silk

Robert Macneil

Administrator
www.friendsoftheordinariate.com

Anglicanorum Coetibus: why Gerald Warner is wrong

Gerald Warner has posted, following the Anglican Synod vote which effectively puts an end to any face-saving deal for Anglo-Catholics who might remain in the Church of England, criticising Pope Benedict's offer to these Anglo-Catholics in Anglicanorum Coetibus, that they may if they wish enter the Catholic Church as a group, and retain some elements of group identity, such as some parts of the Anglican liturgical tradition.

His objections are scatter-gun, but they are all wrong-headed. Here's one:

If the Anglican liturgy is “a precious gift nourishing the faith”, why did the restored Catholic Church burn its author Cranmer as an apostate and heretic?

Sorry, Gerald, Cranmer was executed for heresy, not for his prose style; nor did he compose the great bulk of what is used in the (Vatican approved) 'Anglican Use': he simply translated it from the Latin of the Catholic Sarum Use. The Psalms, as translated by Cranmer, and as sung in Anglican churches, can surely be described as 'nourishing the faith': to deny this would be absurd.

If some adaptation of the Anglican liturgy is envisaged, to formulate a valid Mass, that, along with the old and new translations of the Novus Ordo, will mean three English versions coexisting.

Too late, Gerald, it happened years ago, it's called the Anglican Use. It is unlikely to be used much in England, because Anglo-Catholics here aren't Book of Common Prayer enthusiasts for the most part. But why do you imagine that the the old and new translations of the Novus Ordo will co-exist? The new is intended to supplant the old. And why would it be such a disaster if there were more than one liturgical usage in English? There are already five Usages employing Latin in England and Wales alone. (1962 Roman, 1970 Roman, Trad. Dominican, reformed Carthusian, Trad. Premonstratensian.) Why assume this is a bad thing?

Why does it take escalating extravagances perpetrated by successive General Synods to drive them into the papal flock? That is not the spirit in which John Henry Newman unconditionally converted.

Why not read Newman's Apologia, Gerald, and see how the 'escalating extravagances' of the mid 19th Century drove the great man into the Papal flock? The rise of theological liberalism, the Anglo-Catholic reaction, the Anglican bishops' condemnation, the Jerusalem bishopric. If you think Newman became a Catholic out of a vacuum you could not be more mistaken. He became a Catholic when all Anglican avenues appeared blocked. The Holy Ghost made use of these things to open Newman's mind to the Catholic truth, and you can see this process again and again in the conversion stories of Anglicans from the great era Newman initiated up to the 1950s.

Let me say this loud and clear: there is no shame in recognising the truth as a result of historical contingencies. How could there possibly be? The idea is totally preposterous. This is how human nature works. People need time and experience to work things out.

The notion that formal adherence to objective truth can be made conditional upon being allowed to retain the cultural expression of schismatic practices defies the spirit of conversion.

Really, Gerald? Would you say the same about the Lutherans who were allowed to retain (for a time) the reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds, and vernacular hymnody, in the 16th Century? Would you say the same about the liturgy and artistic traditions of the Uniate Churches reconciled in the 17th Century? Would you say the same about the concessions to the honouring of ancestors, and the use of Mandarin as a liturgical language, made to Chinese Catholics in the early modern period (concessions which, thanks to some bone-headed opposition and the collapse of the Chinese empire, never developed fully)? Would you say the same about the Christianising of pagan festivals and customs in the conversion of the barbarian tribes in the early Middle Ages? Would you say the same of the concessions offered to the SSPX?

Or would you say rather (and as I have blogged before): where there are matters where the faith is not at stake, such that making concessions can ease the path of great masses of people to enter into the fullness of the truth, not to make such concessions would be a failure of charity. The Church is ultimately about the salvation of souls: our customs are to be preserved for that purpose, and for that purpose alone. As a matter of fact our customs are not in the smallest way to be imperilled by allowing these elements of Anglican patrimony to be used by the envisaged communities, so what possible reason would we have to impose our customs on them?

The Holy Father has an acute sense of what the Church is for - the salvation of souls - and the historic opportunity which the recent events present. It may be tempting to gloat at the difficulties those misguided Anglicans are having, and to demand the maximally humiliating terms for their conversion, but this is not the spirit of the great missionaries - of St Cajetan, St Boniface, St Francis de Salles, St Francis Xavier. Indeed, it is not a Christian spirit at all.

Andrew Burnham, 'Flying Bishop', at the Newman Society

Last night Andrew Burnham, Bishop of Ebbsfleet, addressed a packed meeting of the Newman Society on the subject of Anglicanorum Coetibus. I was there. (Picture: Bishop Burnham is introduced by the President of Newman Society, Hubert MacGreevy. Behind him are pictures of the Virgin and Child and John Henry Newman. The talk took place in the Catholic Chaplaincy.)

Andrew Burnham is the Anglican Bishop of Ebbsfleet and one of the 'flying bishops' who has been ministering to Anglicans who can't accept the ordination of women since these ordinations were authorised in England in 1994. He and his fellow 'flying bishops' administer a third of the country each, looking after any parishes who sign up for this.

I don't intend to give a summary of his talk but here are a few of the things he said.

--------------------------

First of all, the Apostolic Constitution on the Anglicans was a response to discussions he had with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and also with Cardinal Kaspar of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Chrisian Unity about two years before it was published. It is also a response to discussions between Rome and the Traditional Anglican Communion, and no doubt other groups and individuals, but in no sense is the English 'Forward in Faith' / 'flying bishop' set-up a side issue for the Apostolic Constitution.

When he was first ordained in the Anglican church the 'Anglo-Papalist' position was to recognise the Pope and work to re-unite Anglicanism with him. This was not such an extravagent view since the ARCIC talks seemed to be heading in this direction, but eventually the issue of the ordination of women pulled Anglicanism the other way. When he was made a 'flying bishop' he did so on the understanding that he would be continuing this stalled ecumenical project.

Since 1994 he has worked to create a sense of community among the very idiosyncratic and geographically scattered Anglo-Catholic parishes under his care. A good deal of progress has been made, making it much more likely that a good proportion of them will be able to come over to full communion with Rome as a body. His ideal would naturally be that they all came over, but this is clearly not going to happen.

He was very interesting on the subject of how the typical Anglo-Catholic parish is similar to, and different from, a Catholic one. Anglo-Catholic parishes tend not to have medieval buildings; they are the successors of the High Anglicans who built churches for the unchurched poor in the growing cities of the 19th Century. Their liturgy tends to be the 1970 Missal in English, distinguished outwardly from that of a Catholic parish mainly by the hymns. But they do have a different attitude to church-going: whereas a Catholic, at least a serious-minded one, will go to great lengths to get to some Mass or other on a Sunday if things disrupt his usual routine, an Anglo-Catholic who can't make the usual 9.30 service won't bother going to something else instead. They are very attached to their physical church, and lack the sense of 'Sunday obligation'. The attachment to the church, as has often been pointed out, will be a sticking point for many in joining an Ordinariate.

He was cautious not to make any promises about what he or anyone else would do, and when, but is was clear enough that he is going to join the Ordinariate and will be bringing others with him. Nothing will happen until the Anglican Synod debate on provision for Anglo-Catholics when women are ordained to the episcopate: he said he didn't want to go down in history as the man who scuppered the chances of a good deal for Anglo-Catholics staying in the Anglican Communion.

On the Ordinariate itself, he said that what happened after 1994 was that Anglican clergy who wanted to 'swim the Tiber' and become Catholic priests received three years' training before ordination. This created the problem that by the time they were back in circulation the Anglican laity who might have gone with them had dispersed. The key issue with the Ordinariate is to make possible the continuity of the communities and pastors so that whole groups will be able to come accross together.

--------------------------------

Bishop Burnham spoke with great fluency and charm, in a witty and self-deprecating way, and without notes. His talk was less than an hour long and there are many issues which he didn't settle, but it gave the audience many important insights into the situation.

As I have written before (and here), the conversion of groups of Anglicans is a matter of great interest to Traditionally-minded Catholics, for a number of reasons, not all of which may seem obvious.

First, the Anglican converts we have seen since 1994 and, come to that, since 1558, have been a huge boon to the Church, in terms of their talents and zeal; many convert clergy have come to the Latin Mass Society's Priest Training Conferences.

Second, the existence of an Ordinariate with a certain Anglican spirit and its own hierarchy is itself exciting. I do not accept the argument often made by Anglicans that 'if England is to be Christian again, it will only be in the uniquely English way represented by Anglicanism': Edmund Campion, Richard Challoner, and Pugin are quite English enough, to my mind. Nevertheless, the Ordinariate will clearly remove psychological obstacles to conversion for many Anglicans, and that is a good thing.

Third, it will create a degree of legimate diversity in the English Catholic Church which will be healthy. Fr Aidan Nichols OP argued forcefully at the LMS Priest Training Conference at London Colney last Summer that we need to recover a sense of legitimate diversity. In the past the Catholic Church was far more characterised by a diversity of Missals and also by jurisdictional complexity than it is today. The monolithic Post-Vatican II uniformity of the Church has in many ways been stifling.

Whether or not they make use of the 'Anglican Use' based on the Book of Common Prayer, parishes in the Ordinariate will have far fewer qualms about allowing the Traditional Mass. And they will also serve as a model of jurisdictional diversity, of a very similar kind to that proposed for Traditional Catholics in the context of the reconciliation of the SSPX.

So we await developments with interest!

More on the Anglican Ordinariate

There has been a great deal of discussion about the Holy Father's offer to (former) Anglicans and I have already drawn the obvious parallels with the offer he is likely to make to Traditionalists, should the present talks (which started on Monday) with the SSPX prove successful (and quite likely, even if they do not).

Many Catholics find the situation of 'High' Anglicans baffling, and this has found its way into a lot of online discussion. They would do well to read the extensive autobiographical literature on conversion, by former Anglican clergy: J.H. Newman's 'Apologia', and his novel 'Loss and Gain'; R.H. Benson's 'Confessions of a Convert'; Ronald Knox's 'Spiritual Aeneid', Hugh Ross Williamson's 'The Walled Garden'. (Ross Williamson was a founder of the Latin Mass Society.) Part of my own interest in these books stems from my grandfather, Edward Rich (a friend of Ross Williamson), being one of the wave of converts in the 1950s (he wrote it up in 'Seeking the City').

One of the things which characterises these books is the sheer difficulty of the move to Rome. The intellectual and emotional effort required by these intelligent and sincere men was immense. The books start with childhood because, in retrospect, that is when the process started, and it took years and years of soul searching, reading, talking, thinking and praying. Newman remarks in the Apologia that he could not have come over earlier without risking regret: as it was, he was ready and he never regretted his conversion.

How was it that Newman's great intellect was occupied, and pretty continuously occupied, by related questions for so many years, when the answer to his problem seems so obvious? And let me mention, to Anglican readers, as a matter of sociological fact, that the Anglican Communion does not impress Catholics: it seems to have not a leg to stand on, historically or theologically.

The answer is that, whatever its defects, Anglicanism had been the spiritual home of these people, and leaving home is difficult. That is not just an emotional truth; it effects the intellect as well. Intellectually, one has to start from where one is: the education one gets, the premises one accepts, one's intellectual preferences, formed by all sorts of influences. These men were not marginal Anglicans; more than one of them was a convert to Anglicanism, and they all played an important part in Anglican debates over many years. They were Anglicans to the core, but eventually they demonstrated the important fact that wherever you start you can reach the truth if you pursue it with enough vigour and courage for long enough.

There is a fascinating insight in Mgr Benson's book, in which he says that when he looked back at Anglicanism after conversion he couldn't see what had kept him there. It was, he said, like the man in the fairy tale who was entertained in the magnificent fairy palace, and when he left he looked back at it and all he could see was the bare hillside.

Things look completely different when you look at them with different assumptions. And this is not just a philosophical fact, it involves the theological truth encapsulated by St Anselm: Credo ut intelligam: I believe that I may understand. In a way which it is - for obvious reasons - hard to express, it is necessary to believe certain things before one can really understand them. One can understand enough, of course, to make the statement of faith, but not all of the implications, not all of the reality of the thing, will be visible until the proposition becomes part of one's living faith.

Another puzzling factor is the matter of the 'trigger' moment, when some particular issue seems to trigger conversions. Many Anglicans were ridiculed for converting 'because of' women priests. My grandfather, for that matter, converted in the context of the union with the Church of South India; Newman in the context of the Jerusalem Bishopric: these are pretty obscure events you may think. But clearly what happened in each case is that a particular event or issue made things finally clear. In fact what most, perhaps all, of the trigger issues did was to make it clear that Anglicanism was not part of the Universal Church, and could not be finessed into it either. This is a lesson which it seems must be learnt afresh by each generation: perhaps you have to struggle with an issue like that, and lose, to appreciate fully that most Anglicans have no interest in conforming to Catholic and Apostolic positions.

Catholics must be patient with the Anglicans; we must pray for them and extend them whatever help we can. If their path can be eased by unusual arrangements and concessions, where these are compatible with the Faith and the good of the Church they should - as the Holy Father teaches us - be made. English Catholicism is unusual, I think in fact unique, in the Europe after Trent for being constantly refreshed by large numbers of important conversions. This is as much part of Catholic life and culture here as is the more 'tribal' Catholicism of Lancashire and the Irish community, or that of the Recusant English gentry and their chapels. Personally, I value each kind of Catholicism, as representing different ways to triumph over the attempt to impose an alien creed on this country in the 16th Century. The Older Sons should not begrudge the fatted calf being made ready for the Prodigal.

Photos: Newman, Knox, Benson, Pope Benedict.

Pope offers a canonical structure for Anglicans

It was announced today that a canonical structure will be made available for Anglicans wishing to enter full communion with Rome while retaining aspects of their spiritual and liturgical traditions. The announcement draws a parallel with military ordinariates, in which a group of people - members of the armed forces of a particular country - who are scattered in different places are placed under their own bishop. Another obvious parallel would be the way that Eastern Rite Catholics are looked after by their own bishops even when they live in the West. The new structure is called a 'Personal Ordinariate'. Ordinaries will normally come from among the converts themselves, who if married could not be bishops, but could still have the jurisdiction envisaged here.

This is huge news, and you can read about it all over the blogosphere; all the official documents are on Rorate Caeli.

Traditionalists should welcome this for several reasons.

First, it emphasises the imperative felt by the Holy Father to make pastoral provision for people who are seeking union with him but find obstacles in things which are non-essential to the Faith. Where by making the kind of concessions envisaged here hundreds of thousands of good-hearted people can enter the Church, these concessions should be made: that is the message of the Holy Father, very much in accordance with his remarks about avoiding schisms in the first place which he made in the letter accompanying the Motu Proprio.

Traditionalists have already been the beneficiaries of this attitude of the Pope's, which is truly pastoral. And we have reason to hope that further benefits will derive from it in the future.

Second, it emphasises the true pluralism of the Church: a pluralism of liturgy and spirituality. While so often characterised as a 'free for all', the Church since the Council in some ways has seen a remarkable diminution of this pluralism, which had been in decline since the Counter Reformation. But this is the kind of pluralism of which it was said in the Middle Ages 'Diversa, non adversa': diversity without adversity.

The Traditional Mass or usus antiquior is an example of this pluralism also.

Third, the kind of structure the Holy Father envisages is innovative, though as indicated not entirely without precedent. It represents the culmination of a lot of hard work and hard thinking by the Pope and his advisors. The way it has been presented, as an initiative of the Pope in response to the desires and needs of others which he has clearly understood deeply, is also indicative of the personal political capital he is prepared to spend on this. In fact it is staggering.

I am not sure whether to be less staggered or more in that he did something very similar with the Motu Proprio. This pontificate appears to moving up a gear!

The structure is exactly the kind of thing which for years has been discussed and rumoured about in relation to the SSPX and traditionalists in general. This will serve both as an indication of seriousness and a possible working model for reconciliation as the discussions with the SSPX draw on.

I have never been so optimistic about the propects for the reconciliation with the SSPX. Right now, however, I am happy for the Anglo-Catholics who will benefit from the Holy Father's extraordinary generosity and courage. I pray that they will be able to respond to it with the same characteristics.
Viva Papa!