Benedict’s “Breathtaking” Move . . . Personal Ordinariates Now Available For Anglicans

The Wanderer Press.com ^ | Top Stories for Thursday, October 29th, 2009 | PAUL LIKOUDIS

[GonzoII]

Top Stories for Thursday, October 29th, 2009:

The monastery of St. Thaddeus, according to tradition, was built by the Apostle St. Jude Thad­deus, “ the brother of the Lord” and the first missionary of the Armenians in 66 A. D. It is located in present- day Iran. According to the fifth- century Armenian chronicler Movses Khorenatsi, he is also buried here. If so, then this church is equal in rank with the Roman basilicas of Peter and Paul, the tomb in Compostela of the Apostle James, and the Madras cathedral of the Apostle Thomas, only much less known. It was rebuilt in 1324 after an earthquake, and because of its black and white stones local people call it with a half Azeri, half Persian name Q­ara K­elisa, Black Church. The monastery was added to the UNESCO World Heritage list of important religious and cul­tural sites in June 2008.

Benedict’s “Breathtaking” Move . . . Personal Ordinariates Now Available For Anglicans

By PAUL LIKOUDIS

With a new apostolic constitu­tion, Pope Benedict XVI is giving Anglicans worldwide a personal ordinariate to facilitate their enter­ing “ full communion” with the Roman Catholic Church.

The consensus among British observers was that the Pope’s gam­bit portends the end of the Angli­can Church, “ by law established” under Henry VIII. For Catholics, especially Catholics in the United States, the move can be interpret­ed as another boost for those who favor a more traditional and rever­ent liturgy.

“A vigorous Anglican Rite with­in the broader Roman Communion would have the salutary effect of demonstrating, by comparison, how our own celebrations of the Holy Mass have been sadly deval­ued by the deliberate banishment of beauty, mystery, and reverence, and, above all, the substitution of unforgivably mundane and banal translations,” a Wanderer reader from Washington told this report­er.

“ When I attend even ‘ middle­brow’ Episcopalian services with my paternal cousins, I am always struck by how much more rever­ent and beautiful they are than some run- of- the- mill Roman Masses one sees everywhere,” he added.

“This is astonishing news,” wrote British Catholic journalist Damian Thompson for his religion blog at

The London Telegraph when the news broke on October 20.

“ Pope Benedict XVI has creat­ed an entirely new Church struc­ture for disaffected Anglicans that will allow them to worship togeth­er — using elements of Anglican liturgy — under the pastoral super­vision of their own specially ap­pointed bishop or senior priest.

“The Pope is now offering Angli­cans worldwide ‘corporate reunion’ on terms that will delight Anglo­Catholics. In theory, they can have their own married priests, parishes, and bishops — and they will be free of liturgical interference by liberal Catholic bishops who are unsympa­thetic to their conservative stance,” wrote Thompson.

Thompson, who is also the edi­tor of The Catholic Herald, the ma­jor Catholic weekly in the United Kingdom, further explained the sig­nificance of this dramatic develop­ment: “The Vatican would not use the phrase, but this is very close to the setting up of a ‘ Church within a Church.’ Yet that is not as unusual as it might seem: Eastern Rite Cath­olics have their own liturgy and church structures, and in America a small number of ex-Anglicans use service books that borrow from the

Book of Common Prayer.

“Anglicans will have to request their own ‘personal ordinariate,’ to use the Vatican’s clunky term. How might that play out in England? This is just a guess, but the most pro-Roman C of E bishop, the Rt. Rev. Andrew Burnham, bishop of Ebbsfleet, could submit a request to Rome. He would be ordained a Catholic priest, and might himself be made ‘ordinary’ (bishop in all but name) of ex- Anglican clergy and lay people who have been re­ceived into the Catholic Church to­gether.

“ This unprecedented canonical structure will affect different coun­tries and dioceses in different ways. But we are not talking about the creation of an ‘Anglican Rite’ Cath­olic Church. Although some parish­es will want to use the Anglican-us­age liturgy, in England many ex­Anglican congregations will be only too happy to avail themselves of the new English translation of the Roman Rite, to be introduced next year.

“ This is a decision of supreme boldness and generosity by Pope Benedict XVI, comparable to his liberation of the Traditional Latin Mass. The implications of this an­nouncement will take a long time to sink in, but I suspect that this will be a day of rejoicing for conserva­tive Anglo-Catholics and their Ro­man Catholic friends all over the world.”

The Telegraph’s religion report­er, Andrew Brown, reporting just af­ter a joint press conference an­nouncing the Holy Father’s decision held by Anglican Archbishop Row­an Williams and Catholic Archbish­op Vincent Nichols of Westminster, surmised that the Pope’s act implies “The End of the Anglican Commun­ion.”

“When it comes to elegant funer­als, no one can beat the Vatican,” he wrote. “ Look at the phrases with which it buried all hopes of reunion, or even significant negotiations, with the Anglican Communion, by announcing that it would now wel­come whole groups of Anglicans, with their own bishops, liturgies, and even — if they must have them — wives, to become Roman Cath­olic priests. . . .

“One of the things that this de­velopment means is that the Roman Catholic Church is no longer even pretending to take seriously the ex­istence of the Anglican Communion as a coherent body.

“ Instead there are various sec­tions of ‘the Anglican tradition’ (not ‘church’ or ‘communion’), some of which are still properly Christian and so able to become Roman Cath­olic. . . .

“[T]oday’s announcement is the endgame in the Church of England’s long struggle against women priests. The Anglo- Catholic opponents have at last been offered a church without them, where they may keep their own organization. That’s all they ever really wanted.

“It is simply not true to say, as Williams apparently did at his joint press conference with Archbishop Vincent Nichols, that there is ‘noth­ing new’ in today’s announcement, and that it should not be seen as a commentary on the Anglican Com­munion by Rome or as something which will have a negative effect on the Anglican Communion world­wide. . . .

“[ W] hat else is in the story?” wondered Brown. “Who will leave? “ The top estimate would be about 2,000 priests out of 14,000, with as many of their congregations as they can persuade to come with them. I doubt it will be even half that many; but for anyone who is going to leave at the prospect of women bishops, the next six months will be decisive. Forward in Faith, the group which contains most of the Anglo-Catholic oppo­nents of women, put out two press releases in quick succession. One, by the movement’s real leaders, was simply jubilant. The other, by the two ‘flying bishops’ who will, pre­sumably, head up the exodus, ad­vised restraint until a big announce­ment in February.”

The choice of venue for the an­nouncement of the new apostolic constitution — the Catholic arch­bishop’s headquarters at Eccleston Square, rather than the Anglican’s Lambeth Palace — was significant, reported the Guardian’s Riazat Butt.

“In Eccleston Square, the admin-i­strative headquarters of the Catho­lic Church of England and Wales, the Anglican archbishop of Canter­bury and the Catholic archbishop of Westminster sat side by side on the top table in a show of unity, but the choice of location reflected the shift in power,” reported Butt.

“Both men played down any sug­gestion of tension brought on by the decision, but the unease became apparent in the question and answer session that followed. The archbish­op of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, informed journalists that he only heard about the apostolic constitu­tion ‘a couple of weeks ago’ and that there was no input from or con­sultation with Lambeth Palace. His face reddened as he spoke and, at one point, the archbishop of West­minster, Vincent Nichols, answered questions relating to Williams’ lead­ership and authority.

“Williams said: ‘I do not think this constitution will be seen as in any sense a commentary on Angli­can problems offered by the Vati­can. It is a response to this range of requests and inquiries from a very broad variety of people, either An­glican or of Anglican heritage. In that sense it has no negative impact on the relations of the communion as a whole to the Roman Catholic Church as a whole. It is not an act of aggression, it is not a statement of no confidence. It is business as usual.’ “Benedict’s chief theological ad­viser, the William [Cardinal] Leva­da, who heads one of the most im­portant Vatican departments, said the decree had been drawn up ‘to respond to the numerous requests that have been submitted to the Holy See by groups of Anglican cler­ics and believers from various parts of the world who wish to enter into full and visible communion’ with Rome.

“He said that, under the new ar­rangements, Anglican communities that joined the Catholic Church would be able to keep their own lit­urgy while remaining outside the existing dioceses. Their pastoral care would be entrusted instead to their own senior prelates, who would not necessarily become Catholic bishops. This is a way around the problem that in the Cath­olic Church, as in the Orthodox churches, married men are not al­lowed to become bishops.”

“Vatican Moves to Poach Tradi­tional Anglicans,” announced the

Times of London in a headline over a report by its religion editor Ruth Gledhill and Vatican correspondent Richard Owen.

“ The Roman Catholic Church today moved to poach thousands of traditional Anglicans who are dis­mayed by growing acceptance of gays and women priests and bish­ops,” they wrote October 20.

“ The Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams admitted that he had been caught out after Pope Bene­dict XVI announced a new ‘apostol­ic constitution’ to provide a legal framework for the many thousands of Anglicans and former Anglicans who wish ‘to enter into full visible com­munion with the Roman Catholic Church’. . . .

“Traditionalists, including up to six Church of England bishops, had visited and pleaded with Rome to provide some sort of structure inside the Catholic Church for their wing of the Church of England because of liberal moves toward women bish­ops and gay ordinations.”

A Significant Date

Wanderer contributor Scott Rich­ert commented on the significance of the date, October 20, that the ap­ostolic constitution was announced in his column for the About. com Guide to Catholicism, and Pope Benedict’s penchant for linking im­portant acts with important feast days.

The Holy See’s announcement came on the Feast of St. Paul of the Cross, the Italian founder of the Passionists who devoted his life to the conversion of England.

“Though St. Paul spent his life in Italy,” Richert wrote, “ The Cath­olic Encyclopedia notes that ‘for fifty years he prayed for the con­version of England, and left the de­votion as a legacy to his [spiritual] sons.” Almost 65 years after his death, the Passionists were first in­troduced into England, and The Catholic Encyclopedia declares that ‘ They came in the spirit of Apostles without gold or silver, without scrip or staff or shoes or two coats,’ yet they ‘soon revived without commotion several Cath­olic customs and practices which had died out since the Reforma­tion. They were the first to adopt strict community life, to wear their habit in public, to give missions and retreats to the people, and to hold public religious proces­sions’.

. . . “All of this may simply be a co­incidence. But considering Pope Benedict’s sensitivity to the sym­bolism of dates, I don’t think so. In any case, on this historic day, we can join St. Paul of the Cross in praying for the conversion of En­gland.”

---

  On St. Bernard Of Clairvaux

  VATICAN CITY ( Z­ENIT) – The Pope spoke of St. Ber­nard of Clairvaux in his general audience of October 21, and discussed how “ faith is above all a personal and intimate encounter with Jesus.”
  Today I would like to speak about St. Bernard of Cla ...

---

The Wanderer has been providing its readers with news and commentary from
an orthodox Catholic perspective for over 135 years. From vital issues
affecting the Catholic Church to the political events which threaten
our Catholic faith. The Wanderer is at the forefront every week
with its timely coverage and its cutting edge editorials.

All Contents Copyright © 2009 The Wanderer Press
Powered by Tecnavia Press Inc.

[GonzoII]

[GonzoII]

Check out this Monastery pic K, its not on the “forbidden list2 ;0)

[Kolokotronis]

Great picture, G. I have +Jude’s icon before me right now!

[livius]

“ Instead there are various sec­tions of ‘the Anglican tradition’ (not ‘church’ or ‘communion’), some of which are still properly Christian and so able to become Roman Catholic. . .

I thought that was a delicate way of handling it.

[GonzoII]

“ Instead there are various sec­tions of ‘the Anglican tradition’ (not ‘church’ or ‘communion’), some of which are still properly Christian and so able to become Roman Catholic. . .

"I thought that was a delicate way of handling it."

It was. Boy, I'd never make it in the "public arena", but I'm glad there people who can. ;0)

[Salman]

Just making sure I understand — This means that Anglicans who go Roman Catholic do not have to be baptized again?

[GonzoII]

"Just making sure I understand — This means that Anglicans who go Roman Catholic do not have to be baptized again?"

That's right, nor does anyone who has been legitimately baptized.

[Kolokotronis]

Does the Latin Church recognize Anglican marriages? I am assuming no.

[yetidog]

Previously baptised converts to Roman Catholicism whatever their Protestant roots do not have to be re-baptised as a matter of full communion and membership in the Catholic Church. Generally, instructions (or RCIA) are, however. I am a converted Episcoplaian whom the Church even permitted particpation in Eucharist previous to my confirmaton, given a non-availability of my own church. There are generous exceptions in the Catholic Church at present and conversion (as an Episcopalian) in the instant case is essentially a litergical recognition, not some avenue for mass conversion of Anglicans, whatever their individual beliefs. At least that is the way I read it and have experienced it.

[GonzoII]

"Does the Latin Church recognize Anglican marriages? I am assuming no."

I need some help on that one.

[B Knotts]

Marriages are presumed valid. I think that’s because the ministers of the marriage sacrament are actually the spouses.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

[Kolokotronis]

“Marriages are presumed valid. I think that’s because the ministers of the marriage sacrament are actually the spouses.”

Interesting. I’ve heard that the Latin Church has a fundamentally different understanding of Marriage from what we believe. Orthodoxy only recognizes Roman Catholic, Oriental Orthodox, Coptic and Monophysite marriages and that is because the Mystery is conducted by a validly ordained priest.

[Cicero]

I was an Anglican convert to Catholicism. Since I had been baptized as a baby, I had a “conditional baptism.” It was not really needed, but was just to make sure. Now probably that won’t be done unless people are uncertain about their baptism.

Baptism, as a sacrament, is normally administered by a priest, but it can in an emergency be done by anyone. All that is necessary are the words, “I baptize thee n. in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” the matter—preferably but not necessarily sanctified water—and the intention—i.e., to baptize.

As already said, the sacrament of marriage is administered by the couple in question, with their exchange of vows. The priest “presides” and takes note of the marriage, which must be witnessed and entered into the records. But again in an emergency any couple can marry, using the proper words and a ring. An Episcopal marriage would be considered valid since basically the same words are used for the vow.

[Campion]

I’ve heard that the Latin Church has a fundamentally different understanding of Marriage from what we believe. Orthodoxy only recognizes Roman Catholic, Oriental Orthodox, Coptic and Monophysite marriages and that is because the Mystery is conducted by a validly ordained priest.

It isn't a "fundamentally different understanding of marriage" but a somewhat different understanding of the mechanics of actually administering the sacrament.

The western POV is that the bride and groom administer the sacrament to each other. The minister is technically a witness; in extremis Catholics can marry without a clergyman present (but they would need to repeat their vows if/when one became available).

Because of this, Protestant marriages are generally recognized as valid (because Protestant baptisms are generally recognized as valid).

(All the usual gotchas concerning divorce and remarriage still apply. A further exception: unless he has a dispensation, a Catholic is required for validity to obey "the Catholic form of marriage," so a Protestant wedding involving a Catholic who had not left the church would be invalid.)

[Kolokotronis]

“The western POV is that the bride and groom administer the sacrament to each other.”

I never knew that. Is this where the vows and the “contract” theory of marriage come in?

[Campion]

The vows are the "form" of the sacrament. (Just as, in baptism, the words "N., I baptize you in the Name ..." are the "form" of the sacrament.)

Don't know exactly what you mean by the "contract theory of marriage", so I can't comment on that.