A potpourri post with papal pivot.
Ordinariate growth?
I can’t pretend to fully comprehend the details etc. of the Roman Catholic Personal Ordinariate for disaffected Anglicans. My understanding is that if you grow up in it, and want to be a priest, you must be celibate. “Anglican Patrimony” apparently means Elizabethan language but doesn’t mean married priests and bishops, or synodical governance.
There’s a grandfather clause for those married Anglican priests and bishops who join – they can be RC priests and if bishops previously, they can dress up as bishops and use episcopal titles even though RCs know they aren’t really.
And RCs couldn’t join the Ordinariate. Until now. Pope Francis has changed the rules. If you have been baptised but not confirmed or received communion, you can now join the Ordinariate.
Anglicans and the new Missal translation
Romaphile Anglicans have regularly plagiarised from the Roman Missal. Phrases and responses from the previous English translation are found licitly and illicitly inserted into Anglican rites. What I have not yet encountered is phrases and responses from the new 2011 English Missal translation used in Anglican Eucharists. Have you?
Roman Catholics and the new Missal translation
Dissatisfaction with the 2011 English Roman Missal translation continues. Some communities, as I predicted, only ever say the Apostles Creed (a novelty), not having the stomach for the new translation of the Nicene one. Sunday’s collect obviously raised some eyebrows or more:
O God, who in the abasement of your Son have raised up a fallen world, fill your faithful with holy joy, for on those you have rescued from slavery to sin you bestow eternal gladness. Through…
New Missal latest revision
Pope Francis has announced that Joseph is to be added to Eucharistic Prayers II, III, and IV. Am I the only one who has noticed: We are all now very familiar with the lengthy process of consultation that now follows to show the collegiality of the bishops. English-speaking bishops internationally will consult and come up with an agreed appropriate translation into English. Each individual Conference of Bishops will then apply to the Vatican to approve and confirm the new text in English. There is no question of adding a sticky note, or writing in the sacred English-translation printed tomes of the Roman Missal. Nor can there be the risk taken that a priest will forget to add Joseph into the Eucharistic Prayer, thereby attempting to consecrate illicitly. All the recently-printed-and-purchased English-language Missals will have to be collected and destroyed reverently (as happened already in New Zealand when the bishops were unhappy that they didn’t lie open flat enough on the altar). And the revised Missal printed and purchased.
Stepping down off the priestly pedestal
Fr. Bert Thelen, SJ decided to leave ordained Jesuit ministry and return to the lay state, the priesthood of the faithful bestowed on him by my Baptism nearly 80 years ago. He has served as parish priest, provincial staff member, and provincial during his 45 years of service. He writes:
…As Jesus commanded so succinctly, “Don’t Lord it over anyone … serve one another in love.” As an institution, the Church is not even close to that idea; its leadership works through domination, control, and punishment. So, following my call to serve this One World requires me to stop benefiting from the privilege, security, and prestige ordination has given me. I am doing this primarily out of the necessity and consequence of my new call, but, secondarily, as a protest against the social injustices and sinful exclusions perpetrated by a patriarchal church that refuses to consider ordination for women and marriage for same- sex couples…
In other news
You will now be able to get an indulgence by following twitter.
Pope Francis waives need for two miracles for canonisation.
Interesting changes coming out of Rome.
I was recently pointed to some clarification about the twitter thing, which you can find here:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/17/sorry-you-cant-get-out-of-hell-by-retweeting-the-pope/
The Bishop of London certainly thought there would be some in his diocese who would wish to adopt the new texts, and included his opinion on the idea in a pastoral letter (http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/005244.html). Whether anyone has disregarded the expressed opinion, I know not, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
The problem having a book that won’t lie flat on the ambo or altar led me to use the Catholic Weekday Missal instead of the unofficial Common Worship Daily Eucharistic Lectionary (which latter needs to be held open). It has led to some readers using “The Word of the Lord” rather than “This is the Word of the Lord”. As it’s convenient, I have ended up using the other propers (collect, offertory prayer and post-communion). If I haven’t read each prayer a few times over before mass, they can be quite awkward to read at sight. I would happily switch to a good CofE missal if one existed. I suppose one does, the 1662 BCP has all the texts in one volume, with altar editions that will lie flat. That’s patrimony for you!
Bosco, when issues such as these arise I am always mindful of the Pauline call for us to be “one in Christ Jesus” which links to the Johannine discourse that “we be one as [Jesus] and the Father are one” and more specifically “they who are for me are not against me.” In the end it is lamentable.
ARCIC in the Elucidation on Ministry in 1979 stated: In answer to the questions concerning the significance of the Agreed Statements for the mutual recognition of ministry, the Commission has affirmed that a consensus has been reached that places the questions in a new context (cf. para. 17). It believes that our agreement on the essentials of eucharistic faith with regard to the sacramental presence of Christ and the sacrificial dimension of the eucharist, and on the nature and purpose of priesthood, ordination, and apostolic succession, is the new context in which the questions should now be discussed. This calls for a reappraisal of the verdict on Anglican Orders in Apostolicae Curae (1896).
Mutual recognition presupposes acceptance of the apostolicity of each other’s ministry. The Commission believes that its agreements have demonstrated a consensus in faith on eucharist and ministry which has brought closer the possibility of such acceptance. It hopes that its own conviction will be shared by members of both our communions; but mutual recognition can only be achieved by the decision of our authorities. It has been our mandate to offer to them the basis upon which they may make this decision.
(Paragraph 17 of the 1973 document read: We are fully aware of the issues raised by the judgement of the Roman Catholic Church on Anglican Orders. The development of the thinking in our two Communions regarding the nature of the Church and of the Ordained Ministry, as represented in our Statement, has, we consider, put these issues in a new context. Agreement on the nature of ministry is prior to the consideration of the mutual recognition of ministries. What we have to say represents the consensus of the Commission on essential matters where it considers that doctrine admits no divergence. It will be clear that we have not yet broached the wide-ranging problems of authority which may arise in any discussion of ministry, nor the question of primacy. We are aware that present understanding of such matters remains an obstacle to the reconciliation of our churches in the one Communion we desire, and the Commission is now turning to the examination of the issues involved. Nevertheless we consider that our consensus, on questions where agreement is indispensable for unity, offers a positive contribution to the reconciliation of our churches and of their ministries.)
There is a chorus to a hymn that “so leave your boats behind, leave them on familiar shores, set our hearts upon the deep, follow you again my Lord.” Somehow we are still paddling in the shallows …
The Church of England , as opposed to other parts of the communion, has for a long time been rather loose in its discipline with regard to the liturgical canons. I can think if a number of parishes (notwithstanding the Bishop of London) who are using not just phrases, but the new missal in its entirety. I can even think of one that has used the extraordinary (latin) rite. At the same time I could think of some where the swiss reformers might feel at home. So the CofE appears to be stretching its boundaries even further.
That is fascinating, Harvey. Yes, many years ago in the CofE I came across the Latin Mass translated into Elizabethan English with the priest facing east and a silent canon! Which are the parishes using the 2011 translation? It would be useful to look at their websites. Blessings.
My local Jesuit parish in Hawthorn, Melbourne now only uses the Apostles Creed. Like you, I could see this coming as a result of the new translation.
On a historical note, one of my relatives David Fleming OFM was part of the commission that dealt with the validity of Anglican orders. His brother Paul settled in Christchurch – hence my connection.
No sure how to feel about his involvement.
P.S. How does it work Glyn Cardy moving to a Presbyterian parish? Is he subject to any sanctions from the Anglican Church? Do the Presbyterians accept his Anglican ordination?
Far from there being any “sanctions” for Glyn, Martin, he will continue to hold a Permission to Officiate (Anglican equivalent to RC faculties) from the Bishop of Auckland. I am not fluent enough in the Presbyterian process of accepting a new Minister. Blessings.
‘“Anglican Patrimony” apparently means Elizabethan language but doesn’t mean married priests and bishops, or synodical governance.’
You’re certainly right about no married bishops (which is of course also the discipline in the Orthodox East).
About no future married priests, that’s not entirely clear. I’m aware of at least one married Ordinariate seminarian who has not received Anglican ordination previously. The Apostolic Constitution allows for dispensation from celibacy (which is the pope’s prerogative) on a case by case basis: it remains to be seen whether this option will be much exercised in the future.
The feelings of compulsorily celibate Latin Rite clergy must be considered. This was an issue in the US in the nineteenth century, when Ukrainian Catholic immigrants (in full communion with Rome) brought with them their married clergy. The local Latin Rite bishops forced them to decide between sending their wives home or abandoning their ministry. It was felt that the two disciplines could not coexist within the same geographical territory. Even when their permission to ordain married clergy was established, Ukrainian Catholic bishops in North America routinely refrained from doing so for much of the twentieth century. That has changed in recent years as the Catholic Church (not least for ecumenical reasons, but also because of increased historical understanding) has encouraged the Ukrainians to rediscover more of their “Eastern Patrimony”. That may happen with the Ordinariates too, though perhaps not in our lifetimes.
True, synodical governance will not continue as we have known it in recent decades. In truth, the members of the Ordinariates don’t want it anyway. Nevertheless, there are some interesting democratizing moves in the Apostolic Constitution. The ordinary is assisted by a Governing Council, at least half of whom are elected by the presbyterate of the Ordinariate the others serving ex officio), which he must consult on various issues (especially financial). When an ordinary retires, this Governing Council will submit the “terna” of names to the pope from which his replacement will be chosen. That is a right not currently enjoyed by any Latin Rite diocese or national conference of Catholic bishops: episcopal terna are currently devised by the local papal nuncio.
I have had private conversations with members of the Vatican’s “Anglicanae traditiones” commission (reporting to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments), which has been charged with creating new approved liturgies for the Ordinariates. From what I can tell, this has involved intensive study of both the BCP tradition and subsequent Anglican liturgical revisions. I am assured that wherever possible traditional Anglican liturgical structures and approaches have been preserved. So it’s a little more than “Elizabethan language” (though that has also been largely retained).
What remains to be seen is how much else of “Anglican Patrimony” will find a home. There are some encouraging signs there: the Customary of Our Lady of Walsingham includes non-scriptural readings by post-Reformation Anglican authors.-=0plk0p-=0
Bosco, thanks for answering my question which I could of worded better. “Sanctions” makes my question more loaded than I intended. I am pleased that he remains in good standing with his bishop. I also think that Glyn’s press over here, in Oz, is shall we say not presenting the full picture.
I can’t see what all the fuss about the “new” translation of the Nicene Creed is all about, as it seems closer to the previous version in some ways.
I, too, have seen Ordinariate priests celebrating the 62 Mass. For the life of me I can’t figure out why.