From various sources, information has been pouring in about the recent arrangement made by the Holy See for the new “Personal Ordinariates”. In this article I will try to piece together a few principal points of interest.
This was not an initiative of the Holy See but of over 50 Anglican Bishops, of whom about half are still in the Anglican Communion, and about half have seceded in recent years. There was no specific negotiation with the Traditional Anglican Communion.
The Holy See was concerned that the approaches of Anglican Bishops could not, in all charity, simply be dismissed, as some would have preferred. To reiterate the point, the Holy See did not initiate this process but responded generously to appeals from those who wanted to come into communion, rather than simply insisting that each individual should be received individually.
The Holy See has been working for years on this matter and has always been in favour of generous provision, in accordance with the historic attitude of the Holy See to include those whose traditions are not necessarily entirely Roman. In 1993 (after the ordination of women was approved in the Church of England), it was local Catholic Bishops who opposed any arrangements for corporate reunion, however, the radical liberal agenda at work in the Anglican Communion has so changed the landscape in the intervening period that even the most liberal of Catholic Bishops are no longer a priori opposed to such a corporate provision.
The process leading to the new Apostolic Constitution has been an extraordinarily complex, in-depth study, involving widespread consultation, and including communications with sitting Bishops of the Anglican Communion who were in favour of some such arrangement. The Holy See could not simply refuse to talk to such parties clamouring for full canonical union with the Catholic Church. Naturally the process of consultation involved the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity, whose Secretary (Bishop Brian Farrell) is a Consultor of the CDF, and whose President (Cardinal Kasper) is one of the 15 Cardinal Members of the CDF. Some elements within the Pontifical Council were obviously not too happy with the whole notion of corporate reunion, however, in the end they were outvoted.
The arrangement of “Personal Ordinariates” is canonically a new arrangement. It is not the same as a Personal Prelature which canonically only concerns clerics. As was mentioned in the Note from the CDF, a “Personal Ordinariate” is something like the arrangement for the Military, that is, it is like a non-territorial diocese. It includes lay people but they also have a relationship with the local Bishop. The Personal Ordinary has potestas vicaria (vicarious power) which is dependent on the Holy See. However there is also cumulative jurisdiction, in that those in the Personal Ordinariate are subject both to their personal Ordinary and to the local Bishop. Therefore the Personal Ordinariates must necessarily co-operate with the local Bishops. Thus the arrangement is different from the Uniate Churches in that the Personal Ordiariates are canonically within the Western Rite.
For many of the Anglicans who have petitioned for an arrangement whereby they can come into full communion, the primary issue is not the ordination of women or of gays but that of authority. For the Church to function properly in accordance with the will of Christ, there must ultimately be a primatial see with real universal jurisdiction. The arrangements offered by the Holy See are courageous and to be welcomed. They show yet again the determination of Pope Benedict XVI to promote unity within the Church without insisting on uniformity of rites or customs. The Holy See’s provision of the new arrangements is a historic landmark for genuine Christian Unity as envisaged by Vatican II understood genuinely as in continuity with the tradition of the Church.
15 comments:
This is a very generous response of the Holy Father. Those if us who came home in 1993 may regret that our bishops didn't encourage such suggestions then but in any case welcome those many Anglicans who now wish to embrace Peter.
15 years ago, as Vicar of a Church in Stoke-on-Trent, I was received into the Catholic Church and was ordained to the priesthood 3 years later.
At that time I and my congregation were well aware of the 'pastoral provision' which existed in the US for former episcopalians, and considered an application for corporate reunion. I discussed the matter with the then Archbishop of Birmingham, Maurice Couve de Murville, who gave some positive encouragement and asked me to consult with the people and find out the numbers interested and condier some of the essential practical matters.
Despite earlier meetings, when the congregation had voted unanimously to leave the Church of England should the ordination of women proceeed, when it came to it the laity were far less keen to make the jump than the clergy, and the idea ran into the ground.
Essentially there were two obstacles which made the corporate option impossible: (1) we did not want to be part of any 'anglican use' distinct from other catholics, and (2) there was no prospect of taking our buildings with us. There were other difficulties, such as the position of those who were divorced and remarried, or who lived incompatible lifestyles and so who could not, or would not, accept catholicism. The high number of anglo-catholics who embrace the liturgical and (particular) dogmatic aspects of the faith but not its moral teaching is not insignificant.
The situation has definitely moved on, but not so that - in England at least - this extension of the pastoral provision removes the old difficulties in any way. For us, it was never the attitude of the Church which was the problem, and now it seems one kind of generosity is simply and happily being formalised into another. I accept that the situation may be quite different in the US where an 'anglican usage' may have attractions and where property rights may be more favourable, but I can see very little reason why this provision would have much appeal in England, except for that very tiny number of communities who are already separated as 'continuing' anglicans.
I'm not against these arrangements - they are a welcome tidying up and extension of a piecemeal provision to the wider church. Canonicially they are interesting and may be applied in other areas. But in England at least it would be rash to think they will have anything other than a minimal impact.
A very balanced opinion Fr. The Holy See simply had to respond--souls were at stake! Now at least they can come back without the scare of being mistreated.
Lets keep praying!
Yaqoob
One has to love the Holy Father! He has been critical in the past of how the ‘Ecumenical Movement’ has developed over the past 40 years. Truth must not be watered-down to mere hand-holding and pious platitudes. Fine to celebrate what we share in common, but we cannot gloss over the doctrinal differences that continue to divide us. And if the ‘stars’ of the ecumenical movement cannot get it right, well we have a Pope who will…
It is no surprise that many conscientious Anglicans long for a definitive authority that holds to the Truth regardless of the ‘signs of the times’. Contraception, homosexuality, women-priests, etc. – all have seen the shifting sands of the Anglican Communion bow to the World, the Flesh and the Devil. Only the Catholic Church stands firm - as She should - founded on the Rock that is Peter.
It is time to come home, people. We want you and - like the Holy Father – we want your salvation!
Thanks for a very informative post, Father. I've linked to it in a discussion on the Ship of Fools bulletin board here:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=013662&p=3#000141
Many thanks, Mother.
Fr Peter: Was it only the ordination of women that made you "make the jump"? Would you have remained an Anglican otherwise?
Fr. Tim,
Just on Fr. Peter's point, I wonder if the forthcoming Apostolic Constitution foresees the creation of a new Catholic body whose task, essentially, would be to negotiate the independence of the ordinariates from Anglicanism, dealing with buildings, pensions and the financial side of things.
That would be an interesting change of role for ARCIC, wouldn't it?
Let us pray that the FSSPX is given a similar ordinariate very soon.
Deo Gratias!
"It is not the same as a Personal Prelature which canonically only concerns clerics" - that might be the impression from just looking at canon 294 of the Code of Canon Law, but in view of canon 296, plus the specific provisions of the Apostolic Constitution "Ut Sit" by which the only Personal Prelature to date, Opus Dei, was established, and the Statutes of the Prelature as given by Pope John Paul II, it is quite clear that the lay members are fully incorporated into the Prelature. Canonically, Personal Prelatures and Military Ordinariates seem to fall in the same genre: it remains to be seen whether Personal Ordinariates do also.
Thanks, Fr. Peter, for your experiences. I've been wondering why people were talking as if we'd have a flood of converts, and the fabulous old churches we lost 500 years ago would be given back. Better to have realistic expectations. I'm very glad for this new provision, whatever its impact will be.
Fr Paul - many thanks indeed for your interesting and informative correction. I will highlight this in a separate post.
These clergy, of whom I know many well, are not bringing anyone with them: their parishes are largely in areas with long, or even not so long, folk memories of the tensions caused by Irish immigration.
I have known people become Methodists because the local Anglo-Catholic church closed and they didn't want to go to the next pit village, where the Anglican church was no Lower.
Their buildings are often no older than ours, being in places that only sprang up in the nineteenth century.
The provision for the Personal Ordinary to be an ex-Anglican makes this a one-generation arrangement by definition.
And what, exactly, are the distinguishing marks that they will be permitted to retain? What? And why?
Father, would you be happy for me to put your article along with a link to the blog in this week's newsletter?
Yes, Father, by all means. Thank you.
BTW - there is a general permission: cf. the Creative Commons Licence.
Post a Comment