Ship of Fools: St Michael's Cathedral Basilica, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
The Mystery Worshipper
Shipmate
Ship of Fools: St Michael's Cathedral Basilica, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Personal Ordinariate anniversary celebrated with great solemnity, good wine – and droopy jeans!
Read the full Mystery Worshipper report here
Comments
I am proud to say that the clergyman who offered this splendid toast to the Ordinariate's two Ladies is my brother-in-law.
That struck me too.
That might be what some of us RCs think (not me, I hasten to add,) but it is bad form to say it out loud.
There are a number of Anglicans who see ecumenism realized in their now relationship of full communion with other parts of the Catholic Church.
If there is a problem, it is that not all Anglicans see things like this.
From the Catholic side it is important to say that the Church teaches that there is only one church in the sense that all baptised Christians are members of it,even although many are not in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.
Again I have to point out that not all Catholics are' Roman 'Catholics and the Catholic church is keen to point out that there are many rites apart from the Roman rite which are indeed in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.
And many that aren't.
BTW, I wish the RCC wouldn't refer to itself as 'The Universal Church'. A quick glance at Wikipedia seems to indicate that, although the RCC is the largest Christian denomination, a roughly equal number of Christians belong to the Orthodox churches together with the Anglican, Lutheran, and other (mostly Protestant) churches.
But you,Bishop's Finger, are equally part of the Universal Church, even although history, culture and now probably also conviction have separated you from that larger body.
In the UK I think this is probably most true of my (spikey) end of the Anglican spectrum, from whence the Ordinariate membership derived. It also depends on local relationships between churches. Lower down the candle there is a lot more cross-communion with non-conformists, as the main groupings of theses are more MOTR than some of their US counterparts.
There is also a definite ANGLO-Catholic streak in the UK: the announcement of the Ordinariate was followed within a few days by the creation of the Society of St Wilfred and St Hilda (known as The Society) for those who wanted to stay Anglican.
Basically, an ordinariate is a division within the RCC similar to a diocese but not necessarily headed by a bishop. The "Personal Ordinariate" was created by Pope Benedict XVI to enable Anglicans to "swim the Tiber" (i.e., become members of the RCC) while preserving many of the elements of Anglican liturgy and tradition.
Everyone has their reasons.
If it is the second one, then one could say that certain prayers and patterns of prayer become familiar, comforting and meaningful to people. For some Anglicans the possibility to preserve some of these prayers and liturgical practices have made it easier for them to become Catholics. I think that this is the case for many Christians of varying stripes who value highly what they have experienced over the years.
If Urganda's question refers to the first part as to why they might want to become Catholic at all,there are two main lines of thought about the 'Church, amongst Christians.One is that the church is the local body of Christians which decides its patterns of belief and only concerns itself very vaguely with other Christians. the second is a group of Christians who value communion with a wider Church. The Church of England,like many others is a broad church,but embracing more the idea of communion between the members wherever they may be found. In spite of some local difficulties it is generally expected that all the members will be in communion with each other under the care of their local bishop. If that can be the case for England is it not also possible that some members of the Church of England would value full communion with the wider Catholic church and where they feel it possible enter into full communion with that wider body ?
Similarly within that wider body, generally known as the Catholic Church, there will be many people who do not agree with all the teachings of the Church. Most of these people will either simply cease to practice or in some cases take the opportunity, if presented to them, to join another body which may be more congenial to their own viewpoint.
To me, none of these things is silly.
Cough, cough..... women priests among a raft of other conservative attitudes. Which is why some members of the RCC are less than keen on this development.
I am wrestling with a broader point: why do religions unite and split and re-unite? Perhaps this grouping and regrouping isn't really a religious activity but a sort of rear-guard action, as though we need something to occupy the mind while the basic activity of religion takes place somewhere else?
I wouldn't underestimate the role of oversized egos and bloody-mindedness.
I think reformers generally started by trying to reform the institution they were in before finding it an impossible task. But some people seem to find themselves drawn to setting up shop on their own and then proclaiming themselves Archpatriarch of infinity and beyond.
As with the various ecclesial communities which came into being at the time of the Reformation there is constant 'reformation' and a 'return to the sources' which is followed by more 'reformation' To my mind this is nothing unusual in religious life.
While the ecclesial community generally known as the Catholic Church has many such reform movements followed by return to sources followed by reformation followed by return to sources,the sheer size of the organisation,at times the brutal control,but also one must say the firm belief of many in the divinely inspired unifying role of the pope helps to keep the show on the road and convince a good number of people both inside and outside of the Catholic church that the 'barque of Peter' is a monolithic organisation which sails along like the city of Paris with the motto ;fluctuat nec mergitur.
But surely (on to the secondary stuff) the C of E did not exist before the reformation?
Eamonn Duffy's splendid book The Stripping Of The Altars gives a good insight into what 'church' was like in this country between about 1480-1530.
Re the Ordinariate, my impression is that it is of little account in England, at least, with some groups, and priests, who left the C of E being swiftly absorbed into the mainstream RCC. In any case, many of those groups came from Anglican parishes which were using the Roman rite for Mass, so what distinctive Anglican practices did they contribute? Married priests, and also the ability/willingness to sing decent hymns - as mentioned in the MW Report (see what I did there?)
Some ,but certainly not all of those, who think like that will like to strive for ever closer relations with the Catholic Church.
On the other hand the members of the Catholic Church in communion with Rome will say, as you suggest perhaps 'No, the CofE ,in reforming itself, cut off ties with the 'parent' body and struck out on its own, no longer as part of the Catholic Church.
In both of these bodies, CofE and RC there are many people who try to stress what is common to both and leave the rest to God.
Every religious community is a mix of those who appreciate the strength which comes from the past and tradition as well as those who live in the spirit of the new and dynamic message which they believe they have to share with as many people as possible. The Catholic Church has both of these groups contained within it, as well as many others.
My fear about the Ordinariate is that they may assume that the Catholic Church contains only those who value the past and tradition. As Alan 29 has just said not all Catholics are like that and the Second Vatican Council gave life and impetus to those who wish to find other ways.
It's not,of course, only the RC church which values the past and tradition. Urganda tells us how lucky 'we' are (members of the CofE) to have the Prayer Book and the King James'Bible. These are indeed worthy literary gems, but I am not sure (I really don't know !) if all Anglican are happy to use them all the time.
Others may use BCP +/- KJV for some services - at Our Place, Sunday Matins is straight 1662 + KJV, but a said service only (with just 2 or 3 present).
Yes, @Forthview, I do indeed appreciate that (as @Alan29 also says), the RCC is by no means monolithic, or monochrome in its use of liturgy. This is proved by the number of different MW Reports from RC churches!
I found Eamon Duffy's book in a streetside free library box last September and, although I had read it before when it first came out, will be going through it again. It is an excellent read and pops many balloons.
The CoE anglo-papalist approach using the NO is pretty rare in the rest of the world. The ACC had a much stronger liturgical discipline than the CoE, so it never got traction here.
Most Canadian ordinariate parishes were Dearmerites who left the ACoC in the 1970s and 1980s to form the Anglican Catholic Church-- WO and the move to the Book of Alternative Services were major motors for the movement. The Canadian deanery of the Ordinariate (11 communities-- I think about half are parishes) was formed from the parts of the ACCC which were on board for the move-- about half were not, on the Augustinian principle of chastity, but not right away.
So for most of the Canadian deanery, they just tweaked their prayers a bit and carried on, this time with a more serious structure, and less isolated from the rest of the world. From my contacts, some were disconcerted that they were no longer their own little fishpond, but others have quite embraced it, and I know some of the Ottawa Ordinariate types are volunteering with the Shepherds of Good Hope (work with the homeless) and another with post-prison ministry. Rather too many are doing right-wing social politics in the Conervative party, but that's my opinion-- the dreadful Premier of Alberta transferred to the Ordinariate from the Latins..... my comments are available upon application (and a dram or two of a decent single malt).
Don't you love acronyms?
NO = Non-Obligatory
ACC = Accredited Conference of Christians
ACoC = Amalgamated Concerned Conformists
WO = Wigged Oblates
ACCC = Association of Constantly Complaining Crackpots
NOT!
CoE=Church of England, NO=Novus Ordo, ACC=Anglican Church of Canada, WO=Women's Ordination, but admittedly many used OWP (Ordination of Women to the Priesthood) which is more precise, ACCC=Anglican Catholic Church of Canada, although Amanda's version is not without injustice...