Tag Archive for 'roman catholics'

What age communion?

Put up your hand if you believe that children should not be fed until they can at least articulate the five food groups.

Put up your hand if you fully understand the Eucharist.

Put up your hand if you understand x% of all there is to be understood about the Eucharist, and at the current rate of learning you will know all there is to be known about the Eucharist in y years.

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, has just called for the possibility of Roman Catholic children to receive communion prior to the age of seven. He was reflecting on the teachings of St Pius X. “With this decree … he taught the entire Church the meaning, the opportunity, the value and the centrality of Holy Communion for the life of all of the baptized, including children,” wrote the cardinal prefect of St. Pius X. First communion, as the beginning of our “walk together with Jesus” should not be put off.

Pius X pointed out that the ancient tradition of the Church was to give babies Communion immediately after their baptism. The practice died out in the West. Eastern Rite Catholics, of course, in full communion with Rome, receive communion from their baptism. Then the children are catechized from a very early age in what it is they have received.

“This practice of preventing the faithful from receiving, on the plea of safeguarding the august sacrament, has been the cause of many evils. It happened that children in their innocence were forced away from the embrace of Christ and deprived of the food of their interior life,” Pope Pius wrote.

New Zealand Roman Catholics, surprisingly, have an inconsistent variety of approaches. Most make their first communion aged 8 or 9. It normally requires first Confession, and Confirmation prior to receiving communion. But Christchurch Diocese and Palmerston North Diocese do not follow this practice, and have confirmation after first communion.

Canon lawyer Msgr Brendan Daly (in the newspaper NZ Catholic) explains that canon law requires children to be carefully prepared for first communion so that they understand what the mystery of Christ means and can receive with faith and devotion.

The issue, of course, with that approach is that what is sauce for the Eucharistic goose is sauce for Baptismal gander. If you demand “that they understand what the mystery of Christ means and can receive with faith and devotion”, then the Baptist position of requiring understanding and at least the “age of reason” to be baptized is a logical consequence, is it not?

Furthermore, why does the rationale not apply to Eastern Catholics whom the Vatican allows to receive from Baptism?

New Zealand Anglicans, and other provinces, have, in the renewal of liturgy, returned to the historic Christian practice of the Eucharist for all the baptised. Eucharist completes the sacrament of initiation, and is the repeatable part of the sacrament of initiation.

white is right

As is not unusual, I have again had email questions about the NZ Anglican lectionary choice of the colour Red as the liturgical colour from after Ascension Day up to and including the Day of Pentecost, and hence including what the lectionary terms the “7th Sunday of Easter”.

Firstly let me reinforce what the lectionary itself says, page 4: “The colours suggested for each day… are not mandatory but reflect common practice in most parishes.” Hence, before proceeding, please complete – which colour was used in your community last Sunday?


The lectionary is stating it is not prescriptive but rather descriptive of the use in “most parishes.” Some issues arise in the correspondence I have received in multi-center parishes, where the travelling priest appears to have to go with a whole wardrobe. Remember, the NZ lectionary regularly provides several, even all four options.

Until 2002, the 7th Sunday of Easter has been white. Suddenly without explanation, the 2003 lectionary changed the 7th Sunday of Easter to red. Ascension Day has remained white. From Friday after Ascension Day to the Day of Pentecost has become red. Can someone please explain why? What caused this change to happen in “most parishes” that the lectionary is now reflecting? [If another feast falls within those days, the colour of that feast may be chosen].

It seems to me that the colour for Easter is white, gold, or “best”, and, hence, the colour for the 7th Sunday of Easter is white, gold, or “best”. Certainly all Roman Catholics wore white – so that’s “most parishes” in New Zealand, and disproportionately “most parishes” in the world :-)

The danger in this kind of discussion is to degenerate into liturgical rubrical fundamentalism, or accusations of such, on the one hand. The danger on the other, is the complete abandonment of any common prayer. With the diminishing of unity through common prayer comes the search for other ways to find, create, retain, enforce unity.

I understand that the General Synod Eucharist on Thursday May 13 celebrated not Ascension Day but Ihaia Te Ahu. Ascension Day is a Principal Feast of our church. General Synod makes all episcopal units debate and vote and agree to “Ascension Day…should not be displaced by any other celebration.” Again, the issue is not so much enforcing rules for rules’ sake, but how can we move forward creatively and constructively and unitedly in our life and worship together?

Fascinatingly, on May 13 Roman Catholics also did not celebration Ascension Day! They celebrated Our Lady of Fatima. Now there’s another option…

If you are on Facebook there’s no better time to attend “Easter is 50 days”

Immaculate Conception

billboard

The last NZ Catholic reports the Advertising Standards Complaints Board not upholding complaints about the offensiveness of the Christmas billboard of St Matthew’s in the City.

I do not want to discuss the billboard here – there are plenty of other sites to do that. Nor the Easter billboard, which some regard as even more offensive. I want to look at a phrase in St Matthew’s statement to the Board:

We recognize that there are Christians who believe Mary was forever a virgin and immaculately conceived [emphasis mine]. We do not. These are legitimate theological differences within the Christian community. If differences of strongly held beliefs are to be relegated to being offensive by those who disagree, then free speech on any topic will be suppressed.

The point is that Mary’s immaculate conception has absolutely nothing to do with the billboard. The statement appears to be based on a misconception about what the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception actually is about, a confusion shared by a good number of Anglicans and protestants, and probably a surprising number of Roman Catholics.

The Immaculate Conception of Mary is NOT her Virginal conception of Jesus. The Immaculate Conception of Mary is about her conception in her mother’s womb. It is the belief that although the rest of us are conceived with Original Sin, God preserved Mary from this – she was conceived without Original Sin. Furthermore it is not a biological statement, as Mary’s virginal conception of Jesus entails. Mary’s immaculate conception does not imply her parents didn’t conceive her through sexual intercourse – unless, of course, you hold to sexual intercourse by a married couple being somehow sinful and that sin being somehow passed on to any resulting conception.

The belief in the Immaculate Conception of Mary goes with a belief that she was sinless her whole life. This, again, has no relationship with St Matthew’s billboard, unless, again, you regard sexual intercourse by a married couple to be sinful – a position that the Roman Catholic Church would certainly not endorse.

Justin Martyr and Irenaeus regarded Mary as the “new Eve”. The feast of Mary’s conception (December 8 ) traces to at least the seventh century. Bernard, Albert, Bonaventure, and Aquinas were either against it or very hesitant. Generally Franciscans were for it and Dominicans against it. The history turned in the fifteenth century from when it began to gain strong grounds. In 1854 it was defined as a dogma.

Anglicans celebrate two conceptions: that of Christ (March 25) and that of Mary (December 8 ). Here is the Church of England collect for the feast of The Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary:

Almighty and everlasting God,
who stooped to raise fallen humanity
through the child-bearing of blessed Mary:
grant that we, who have seen your glory
revealed in our human nature
and your love made perfect in our weakness,
may daily be renewed in your image
and conformed to the pattern of your Son
Jesus Christ our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.

Palm Sunday; Passion Sunday – Catholics and Anglicans share prayer

Episcopalians/Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and others read the same readings today (Palm Sunday) . They also pray slightly varying translations of a prayer that has been in constant use on this day since at least the Gelasian Sacramentary (628-715CE):

Omnipotens sempiterne deus qui humano generi ad imitandum humilitatis exemplum salvatorem nostrum carnem sumere et crucem subire fecisti concede propitius ut et patientiae ipsius habere documenta et resurrectionis consortia mereatu.

This is prayed in English as:

Almighty, ever-living God, you have given the human race Jesus Christ our Saviour as a model of humility. He fulfilled your will by becoming man and giving his life on the cross. Help us to bear witness to you by following his example of suffering, and make us worthy to share in his resurrection….

Roman Catholic (ICEL)

Almighty and everliving God,
in your tender love for the human race
you sent your Son our Savior Jesus Christ
to take upon him our nature,
and to suffer death upon the cross,
giving us the example of his great humility:
Mercifully grant that we may walk in the way of his suffering,
and also share in his resurrection;
through Jesus Christ our Lord,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

BCP (USA/TEC)

Almighty and everlasting God,
who in your tender love towards the human race
sent your Son our Saviour Jesus Christ
to take upon him our flesh
and to suffer death upon the cross:
grant that we may follow the example of his patience and humility,
and also be made partakers of his resurrection;
through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.

Common Worship (CofE)

Further introduction and commentary is provided at this Palm Sunday reflection.

predictable worship?

The Episcopal Church’s Executive Council has been looking at statistics of declining attendance. Peter Carrell and Episcopal Cafe are two places drawing attention to the report. My first degree is in Mathematics – my first comment is take the greatest of care in interpreting statistics, it is not for nothing that we speak of “Lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Secondly, from a missional perspective, there is a particular mindset that comes with focusing on church-centred statistics. We generally gather no statistics of the number of people we serve or care for. Certainly it is beneficial to have more people within the Christian community in order to help those outside it – but there is not necessarily a direct correlation between numbers in the worshipping community and numbers of people being cared for outside worship.

Mary Frances Schjonberg reports:

The Episcopal Church’s Executive Council heard here Feb. 21 that church membership and Sunday attendance continued to decline in 2008, but also heard a call for the church to promote knowledge of the characteristics of growing congregations.

During his statistic-laden hour-long report, Kirk Hadaway, the church’s program officer for congregational research, told the council that congregations grow when they are in growing communities; have a clear mission and purpose; follow up with visitors; have strong leadership; and are involved in outreach and evangelism.

Congregations decline, he said, when their membership is older and predominantly female; are in conflict, particularly over leadership and where worship is “rote, predictable and uninspiring.”

Those who put a particular spin on TEC’s declining numbers need to take note that “the most recent trend of declining membership began in 2000 and 2001, “long before the actions of General Convention 2003.”

I already see the response suggesting that women should stay home in order to help the church to grow! My own (clearly limited) personal experience is that when I visit a community the quality of attention paid to music, to the sermon, to welcoming, to the worship including the environment can often all be easily improved and doing so would be a significant step towards having visitors desire to return. Whatever draws someone to visit a worshipping community – that need has to be met. Hence, worship cannot be too tightly themed or we will exclude visitors. Sermons need to address our emotions, our minds, and have a point we are able to put into practice in our concrete, everyday lives. The regular congregation needs encouragement and possibly formation how to welcome newcomers and visitors and make them feel comfortable, welcomed, and with their desire to return nurtured. All this is not difficult. It is just too often not done, thought about, talked about.

My hackles were raised at blaming worship that is “rote, predictable and uninspiring.” The other side of seeing worship as “rote” is seeing it as “by heart”. Worship “by heart” has been the Judaeo-Christian tradition for at least 3,000 years. I would like to see the peer-reviewed statistical evidence that there is a correlation between “rote, predictable” worship and causality of decline. I have participated in plenty of “rote, predictable” worship, from Taize, through great cathedrals, to China, and the heart of Zaire, where there is clearly no correlation to declining numbers. The danger of linking “uninspiring” to “rote and predictable” is it feeds a prejudice that in order to grow numerically in our “new context” we need to abandon the liturgical tradition of Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism, Orthodoxy, etc. Nothing, IMO, is further from the truth. In this context it is worth noting the recent announcement that the proportion of Roman Catholics worldwide has increased. IMO we need training and formation as leaders and communities to celebrate worship that is “by heart, common worship, and inspiring.”

It interests me that Peter Carrell suggests complaints that “TEC’s declining stats may, at times, be hidden from sight.” This from a province that has for nearly two decades collected no statistics provincially, and where decline is often in the most surprising places (eg. the self-described “Evangelical” diocese of Nelson). In a province which clearly suffers from the idolatory of incessant novelty (”We used ashes last year, what can we do differently for Ash Wednesday this year?”), about as far from “rote and predictable” worship as any Anglican province is able to get, it would certainly be fascinating if it could be demonstrated that we have the formula for numerical growth! I suspect, however, that we would find similar, if not more alarming decline in the NZ province highlighting my contention that there is no statistical link to liturgical worship but that the causes need to be sought elsewhere.

per saltum ordination

Direct ordination or not?

Priesthood is normally understood as church-facing/Christian-community-facing leadership. Priests gather and lead the Christian community gathering (breathing in).

Priests in the Church are called to build up Christ’s congregation,
to strengthen the baptised…
to be pastors…
to declare forgiveness through Jesus Christ,
to baptise,
to preside at the Eucharist,
to administer Christ’s holy sacraments.
NZ Anglican ordinal, Prayer Book pg 901

Deacons, on the other hand, are ordained to world-facing, sacrificial leadership. They lead the Christian community dispersed in service in the world (breathing out).

Deacons in the Church of God serve in the name of Christ,
and so remind the whole Church
that serving others is essential to all ministry.
NZ Anglican ordinal, Prayer Book pg 891

Currently, to be ordained a priest (church-facing leadership) you have to be ordained a deacon first (world-facing leadership). This is termed “sequential ordination”. If God is calling you to church-facing leadership rather than world-facing leadership – tough! So most people perceive deacons as apprentice priests. And those God calls to the diaconate (and not to priesthood) are regularly seen as people who haven’t made the grade and are stuck in their apprenticeship.

In the Latin Rite of Roman Catholicism (the majority of Roman Catholics), “permanent deacons” can marry (prior to ordination) and then regularly do priest-like ministry (church-facing, rather than world-facing) because of a shortage of celibate priests. [Other Roman Catholic rites allow for married priests and have a stronger tradition of a clearly differentiated diaconate]

(Unfortunately) I have regularly seen people who once said strongly they were called to the diaconate, after a period decide they were called to priesthood after all. I can only quickly think of one person, I know personally, called to the diaconate who has stayed a deacon.

[I am not in this post going to bring bishops into the discussion. There is an ongoing dispute about the nature of bishops:
Are bishops priests to whom we have delegated the authority to ordain (the position of St Jerome)?
Or are priests delegates of the bishop in the local congregation (so that when the bishop is present the priest ought not to function in that ministry - the position of Theodore of Mopsuestia)?]

As I wrote above, currently to become a priest one must be a deacon first. A different approach, “direct ordination” or “per saltum ordination” (literally “by a leap”) is the understanding that you be ordained directly to the order to which God calls you. If you are to be a deacon, you are ordained a deacon (the current practice); if you are to be a priest, you would be ordained a priest (not a deacon first). Some scholars argue that in the early church all ordinations were per saltum (see Hallenbeck ed. Orders of Ministry). St Ambrose’s direct ordination to the episcopate is probably the most celebrated story.

There seems a surprising amount of emotional energy invested in maintaining the status quo. We have probably all met bishops proudly (sic!) proclaiming “I am still a deacon!” Episcopal Cafe has presented two interesting posts about the emotional dimension against per saltum ordination (part 1; part 2).There is also a discussion about this in the discussion area of Sarah Dylan Breuer’s facebook page. Some theologians hold that per saltum ordinations would be invalid. What is your position? And in the comments area – why?

There will be a sequel to this post in the near future.

blessing or communion?

layingonhandsPrior to the 1970s, NZ Anglicans had to be confirmed in order to be allowed to receive communion. Then in the 70s and 80s General Synod allowed those baptised who had been “Admitted to Communion” to receive communion. This followed the then RC model of “First Communion”. In 1990 General Synod restored the tradition of communion for all the baptised, whatever their age, whatever their denomination. Confirmation moved from a puberty rite, to an adult confirmation of faith in the presence of the community and our bishop. Roman Catholics, meanwhile, moved in the opposite direction age-wise, now offering confirmation as a completion of baptism and requiring it for communion (where Anglicans were prior to 1970). Roman Catholics also require that one be a Roman Catholic in good standing (eg. not divorced/remarried) and have made one’s “first communion” in order to receive communion at their Mass.

All this means that in a variety of circumstances there will be some going forward for communion, whilst others present in the congregation are not welcomed to receive. In many places these are invited to come forward for a “blessing”.

There are different forms and traditions within Christianity about “blessings” – and generally a weak theological reflection on this IMO. Bishops and priests regularly bless in different forms. Roman Catholic deacons bless. Anglican deacons do in some provinces (eg. marriages, baptismal water). NZ Anglicanism appears to not have reflected much on this (do any deacons bless the baptismal water in NZ? – I know of none that bless marriages here).

I am aware of abuses: I have seen clergy administer lollies (sweets) to children as “the body of Christ”! I have heard a child back in the pew say, “Mummy, mummy, I don’t want to go up there and get my head measured again”!

I have seen blessings (”replacing communion”) done with far more reverence, take longer, and with greater intensity than receiving communion – giving greater weight to blessing than communion. Similarly, I’m sure we’ve all seen a blessing at the end of the Eucharist (optional in the NZ Anglican rite) done so dramatically as to “compete” with communion [remembering that this concluding blessing grew historically as receiving communion diminished].

Roman Catholic lay people cannot formally bless in a liturgy. At the Eucharist when distributing communion, the priest is the “ordinary minister” and lay people are “extraordinary ministers”. This means often when there are large groups not receiving communion but seeking a blessing at a Roman Catholic Mass, the priest, the ordinary minister of communion, is giving the blessings, while the extraordinary minister is administering communion.

Some, of course, hold to the position that if something is not mentioned in the rubrics or appropriate documents, then it is forbidden – there being no mention of blessing as an option at communion time, they argue, it should not be offered.

Increasingly there are health issues around communion. Do we lay hands on people’s heads and then with the same hand administer bread – sometimes on people’s tongues?

Pastorally, do we refuse communion to any who come forward that we know are not welcome to receive in our tradition?

This reflection can be extended to blessings in the home: of meals, places, people, our children. Protestants often do not use the sign of the cross having lost touch with their Reformation heritage.

What are your own reflections as you read the above post? What are your own practices and practices in your community and why?

Journey to Epiphany

reyes001

At Epiphany Anglicans (Episcopalians) and Roman Catholics pray variations of the following collect/opening prayer:

O God,
by the leading of a star
you manifested your only Son to the Peoples of the earth:
Lead us, who know you now by faith,
to your presence, where we may see your glory face to face;
through Jesus Christ our Lord,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.
Amen.

IMO attempts at dating the “star” miss the story’s point that it moved in a quite un-astronomical way to indicate the birthplace precisely. Those readers here interested in exploring at least one theory might go here.

Personally, I am more interested in allowing the story to fully impact me, rather than get too heated about historical details (interesting though they be) that will not impact and transform my life. So as we leave the Year of Our Lord 2009 for AD 2010, I pray all visitors here God’s richest blessing, and leave you with the strong poem Journey of the Magi by T. S. Eliot .

A cold coming we had of it,
Just the worst time of the year
For a journey, and such a journey:
The ways deep and the weather sharp,
The very dead of winter.’
And the camels galled, sore-footed, refractory,
Lying down in the melting snow.
There were times we regretted
The summer palaces on slopes, the terraces
,
And the silken girls bringing sherbet.
Then the camel men cursing and grumbling
And running away, and wanting their liquor and women,
And the night-fires going out, and the lack of shelters,
And the cities hostile and the towns unfriendly
And the villages dirty and charging high prices:
A hard time we had of it.
At the end we preferred to travel all night,
Sleeping in snatches,
With the voices in our ears, saying
That this was all folly.

Then at dawn we came down to a temperate valley,
Wet, below the snow line, smelling of vegetation;
With a running stream and a water-mill beating the darkness,
And three trees on the low sky,
And an old white horse galloped away in the meadow.
Then we came to a tavern with vine-leaves over the lintel,
Six hands at an open door dicing for pieces of silver,
And feet kicking the empty wine-skins.
But there was no information, and so we continued
And arrived at evening, not a moment too soon
Finding the place; it was (you may say) satisfactory.

All this was a long time ago, I remember,
And I would do it again, but set down
This set down
This: were we led all that way for
Birth or Death? There was a Birth, certainly,
We had evidence and no doubt. I had seen birth and death,
But had thought they were different; this Birth was
Hard and bitter agony for us, like Death, our death.
We returned to our places, these Kingdoms,
But no longer at ease here, in the old dispensation,
With an alien people clutching their gods.
I should be glad of another death.

Christ the King

cristorey_03

Episcopalians (Anglicans) and Roman Catholics are again praying a similar prayer on the Feast of Christ the King – The Reign of Christ, the last Sunday of the Western Church’s year, November 22. Episcopalians will pray:

Almighty and everlasting God,
whose will it is to restore all things in your well-beloved Son,
the King of kings and Lord of lords:
Mercifully grant that the peoples of the earth, divided and enslaved by sin,
may be freed and brought together under his most gracious rule;
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

This is Howard Galley’s translation of the pre-Vatican II Roman Missal collect for the feast of Christ the King:

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui in dilecto Filio tuo, universorum Rege, omnia instaurare voluisti: Concede propitius, ut cunctae familiae Gentium, peccati vulnere disgregatae, eius suavissimo subdantur imperio; qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus, per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen.

After Vatican II, the Roman Catholic Church moved the feast day and altered the double purpose clauses:

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus,
qui in dilecto Filio tuo, universorum Rege,
omnia instaurare voluisti,
concede propitius,
ut tota creatura, a servitute liberata,
tuae maiestati deserviat ac te sine fine collaudet.

ICEL (1973) translates this as:

Almighty and merciful God,
you break the power of evil and make all things new
in your Son Jesus Christ, the King of the universe.
May all in heaven and earth
acclaim your glory

and never cease to praise you.

Let us widen the circle that prays this prayer together on Sunday beyond Catholics and Anglicans.

Kiwi Anglicans have another collect assigned to the feast of Christ the King but since they are allowed to vary the collect from the one suggested,  I encourage them to join the majority of Christians praying the above this coming Sunday, even if it is in the NZPB version:

Let us pray (in silence) [that the reign of Christ may live in our hearts and come to our world]

pause

Almighty and eternal God,
you have made of one blood all the nations of the earth
and will that they live together
in peace and harmony;
so order the course of this world
that all peoples may be brought together
under Christ’s most gentle rule;

through Jesus Christ our Lord
who is alive with with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God now and for ever.
Amen.

NZPB p. 637b

Commentary on the collect

Ordinary Anglicans?

[Update - this post was written prior to the apostolic constitution's publication. After reading this post, you can go to the post written after its publication]

I have been promising a third post on Pope Benedict XVI’s Anglican Ordinariates.
First post
Second post

Anglican Ordinariates

Those who have been putting a positive spin on the pope’s announcement of his way for groups of “Anglicans” to join the Roman Catholic Church highlight that this can only have happened building on the ecumenical dialogue of the past few decades. It is clear that the announcement highlights some strong similarities between Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism. It is unlikely, for example, that this announcement will soon be followed by Benedict creating Salvation Army Ordinariates or even Baptist Ordinariates. That having been said, it is well to be reminded that the presence of Eastern Rites in union with Rome are more a stumbling block rather than encouraging of ecumenical relations between Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Similarly, generally people have seen Benedict’s announcement as not forwarding ecumenism between Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism. Certainly the way that Cardinal Levada so very late informed the Archbishop of Canterbury of developments has been seen as a betrayal of trust, and many wonder why Rowan Williams involved himself in the announcement at all after that as it had absolutely no involvement by him prior to that. The absence of Cardinal Walter Kasper (President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity) in all the media announcements spoke loudly. It is little wonder that there are rumours of his impending replacement. The process has also highlighted significant differences in approaches to governance. Some who have hitherto abhorred the infuriatingly, tediously slow, painstaking but open governance processes of Anglicanism have cause to rethink in seeing the alternative closed-door process followed by fait accompli announcements.

There has been a lot of confusion around the announcement. Roman Catholics are stressing that this announcement is in response to requests from Anglicans. A primary driver is said to be the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC). For those who are unclear, let’s just clarify: Anglican means being in communion with the See of Canterbury, just as Roman Catholic means being in communion with the See of Rome. TAC is an independent body. It is not Anglican. If TAC joins the Roman Catholic Church there is no change to the situation within the Anglican Communion. TAC is also sometimes described as composed of “former Anglicans.” That may be true for many, but certainly not all of them. TAC also has many former Roman Catholics and in fact its primate, The Most Reverend John Hepworth, is a former Roman Catholic priest.

The rumours that the Vatican will allow the Traditional Anglican Communion tradition of divorce and remarriage and not need to follow Humanae Vitae are false. Roman Catholicism does not do cafeteria catholicism – especially not under Benedict XVI. Cradle Catholics might pick and choose what they will follow or believe, but if you join up – you accept the whole package. Including practising, preaching, and teaching the Vatican’s approach to contraception.

John Hepworth was a Roman Catholic priest who left that priesthood and got married. He joined the Anglican Church of Australia as a priest. Then he joined the Anglican Catholic Church in Australia and became a bishop. He has divorced his first wife and remarried. He has three children. He is now primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion. This is clearly the sort of group that gets heated about women in ministry (about which Jesus said nothing) and committed gay relationships (about which Jesus said nothing) but has no issues with divorce and remarriage (about which Jesus did teach). Far from being accepted as a priest (let alone an Ordinary – the technical term for a leader of an Ordinariate) in an Anglican Ordinariate, John Hepworth, as a divorced and remarried man, may find he is forbidden from receiving communion as a returning member of the Roman Catholic Church (this may be a sacrifice he is willing to make in his acceptance, once again, that this is the true faith – though how he understands the Vatican’s attitude to his marriages no interviewer appears to have thought of asking him). Alternatively the Vatican might not recognise either of his marriages and Hepworth may be left to decide between his priesthood and his family with three children. Many of his followers follow the logic that committed same-sex relationships are a threat to marriage, but I suspect that most of those would regard this as a bridge too far (Tiber or no Tiber) from someone who laments this as “a time when the family is under great stress.

Anglican extra-Ordinariates?

Regularly, estimates of the numbers who will join the RC Church are around half a million. TAC claims over 400,000 (it is a little hard to work out where these are, there are about 61 members in NZ with no buildings, there are several hundred in the UK – these have just accepted Benedict’s invitation). Some commentators note the string of Benedict’s poorly advised announcements, comments, and decisions and, with differing intensity, add the creation of Anglican Ordinariates to this list. We will have to wait and see if there is actually any weight behind the predictions and the effect that such an influx of conservative Christians (including clergy) will have on the increasingly liberal Roman Catholic communities especially in England and USA.

Predictions that at least a thousand priests would leave the Church of England over the ordination of women actually resulted in 480 taking up the financial offer involved. 80 of those later returned to the Church of England (I don’t know how many of those had the integrity to return their generous financial leaving gift). This time there will be no financial sweetener to leave. Many commentators are just assuming that stunning (neo-)gothic buildings are the property of their congregations and will go where the congregation goes. Yeah Right!

What about Roman Catholic priests who left priestly ministry to get married, have remained faithful to their marriage, and members of the Roman Catholic Church, have always wanted to be able to continue functioning as priests but have accepted their position within Roman Catholicism? Tough. There are over one hundred thousand of such priests not allowed to exercise their vocation and priesthood. Clearly they should have thought ahead, become Anglicans, then joined TAC – that might give them a chance now.

What about the difference in income between Roman Catholic priests and Anglican priests? Don’t go there. Nor to the difference in giving traditions between Anglican and Roman Catholic parishioners. (Remember Episcopalians are expected to tithe). Cheap labour has never been brought up as a reason for compulsory celibacy.

What about the camp culture in some Anglo-Catholicism? The RC Church teaches that homosexual tendencies are objectively disordered. On November 29, 2005, the Congregation for Catholic Education which oversees seminary formation affirmed, “the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies, or support the so-called gay culture.” (no more jokes in the vestry – sorry sacristy – about the quality of the lace). As to transitory adolescence-like homosexual problems: “such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.” Furthermore, his spiritual director and confessor are duty-bound to dissuade him in conscience from proceeding toward ordination. The Vatican has made very clear – the ruling against ordaining men with any homosexual tendencies applies in all contexts. That includes Anglican Ordinariates. “Single” Anglican priests may well think twice before crossing this bridge let alone burning it.

Ordinary Anglicans?

A lot of Roman Catholic commentators appear to have little understanding that much of African Anglicanism is as anti-RC as it is anti-women in ministry/committed same sex relationships. These commentators think that those Africans unhappy with the Anglican Communion will naturally tend to take up Benedict’s offer. Nigerian Anglicans, one of the larger provinces, may have removed communion with the See of Canterbury from their Constitution, but I can assure you, you will not be hearing Hail Marys from their churches. These are part of the GAFCON movement which will be far more deeply affected by the unethical investment policies of the Sydney Anglican Diocese which financially underpins it and recently lost $160 million, than by the pope’s announcement. Remember Sydney requires its Anglican clergy to sign they will not follow such popish practices as wearing a chasuble or adding water to the wine.

Every Anglican priest who joins the RC Church will have to accept Apostolicae Curae that his priesthood was “absolutely null and utterly void.”
He will have to accept that the deep reverence that he, as an Anglo-Catholic priest brought to his liturgical celebrations was play acting with fancy clothes on. He was deluded, and should he wish to function as a real priest, he will need to be ordained twice again.

For many Anglican priests and faithful joining an Anglican Ordinariate, this will be their first regular encounter with Anglican liturgy. These have been proudly and principally using the Roman Rite all their lives. Once in an Anglican Ordinariate, however, they abandon Anglican breadth, flexibility, and allowance for eccentricities. Anglican Ordinariates will follow Anglican liturgy slightly adapted. For ordinary Anglicans, this may be the final irony.

comments policy

After reading this post, you can go to the post written after its publication

Anglican Rite?

It is worth adding some further reflections to the Vatican’s recent announcement of Anglican Personal Ordinariates. You may wish to read my post the end of the Anglican Communion first.

Firstly I want to highlight that, in my opinion, denominational boundaries are far far less significant than previously. Increasingly, it appears to me, denominational boundaries are no longer the primary “partitioning”. If one visualises denominational boundaries, for example, as vertical lines, then it seems to me that the horizontal lines are far more significant – where people receive support and encouragement from “evangelical”, or justice-focused, or environmentally-conscious, or contemplative, or liturgical – etc. And one finds those perspectives, with which one resonates, across denominations. The internet, of course, fits in with this “cafeteria style” spirituality.

Let us also not forget that, to most people on this planet, discussions about different denominations are as esoteric as debates about different perforation gauges on postage stamps. And we need to remember that these are people to whom we are called to bring the good news, and the way we live and model our unity and disunity will affect our ability to bring that good news.

Many have highlighted that some people genuinely will benefit from moving denominations. They will flourish, they will grow in holiness and be better suited in their new context to further God’s reign of love. We need to wish them Godspeed and encourage them. But there will be others who will essentially be as little suited in their new denomination as they were in their old – because of temperament or an inability to live within any constraints, be they Anglican on the one hand, or Roman Catholic on the other. [To be fair, those who encourage people to move denominations, with the understanding that some people suit one rather than another, tend to be of an Anglican perspective. To Roman Catholics, Anglicanism formally cannot even be categorised as a "church" but rather is referred to as an Ecclesial community]

Also let us not forget that the Anglican tradition has always been open to receiving members of the Roman Catholic denomination. In our own New Zealand Anglican binding liturgical formularies there is the allowance for communities to celebrate the whole Roman Catholic English (ICEL) Novus Ordo Mass as it is without alteration. The only concrete personal experience I have had since the Vatican announcement last week has been of a Roman Catholic priest seeking information on how to become a priest serving within Anglicanism (Note: Anglicans accept the validity of Roman Catholic orders and all other sacraments).

Ecclesiology

Anglican ecclesiology is essentially identical to Eastern Orthodox and Old Catholic ecclesiology in seeing the local Church centered on the bishop as “the catholic Church”, the full manifestation of the Body of Christ. This Episcopal or “Eucharistic Ecclesiology” (as it is often now termed) stands in contrast to Roman Catholic ecclesiology in which the local Church is a “particular Church” manifesting the universal, worldwide Church. In this Roman Catholic ecclesiology, such a local Church can only be considered “catholic” if it is a member, part, or portion of the universal Church, ie. in communion with Rome. Whereas the former approach sees each bishop as successor of Peter (where the bishop is there the catholic church is – Ignatius of Antioch et. al.), the latter has a universal bishop for the universal Church. It will be very interesting to see the document “The Role of the Bishop of Rome in the Communion of the Church in the First Millennium” when it is finally produced. (Please let me know when it does come out where one can find it online). One co-president of the commission, Metropolitan Ioannis Zizioulas of Pergamum, is well known for his exposition of “Eucharistic Ecclesiology.” The other, Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, was notable by his absence in the multiple press-conferences last week.

Many Roman Catholics are totally unaware that the Catholic Church has a great number of different rites (see here and here). In many of these rites priests are married. Since the 1980s there has been an “Anglican Use” within the Roman Rite. The pope granted some former Anglican and Episcopal clergy and their parishes the faculty of celebrating the sacramental rites according to slightly-altered Anglican forms. The new Apostolic Constitution, as I said, extends Anglican Use in an analogous way similar to what the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum” did for the Latin Mass.

Within the Catholic Church anyone may attend any Catholic Church of any rite and receive the sacraments. It is no different than attending a different parish church in the same town. If you commit to a rite you can be married and ordained in that rite as a Catholic priest (if they have married priests). You would be “incardinated” in that rite. Eg. a Latin Catholic can join an Eastern rite, marry and be ordained. (Thanks for confirmation of this paragraph from Dr. William Ditewig).

The Vatican announcement came at the time the Church of England General Synod was working through issues about women bishops. It also came during the month-long meeting of Roman Catholic African bishops in Rome. Some Africans are seeking a relaxation of the Vatican’s celibacy rules. This is a no-go area for the current pope. While Anglican Use, with its non-celibate priests, is well-known in some countries, the African bishops were unaware of it. Its extension by the Apostolic Constitution caught them by surprise. Some suggest there was much muttering in the Vatican’s grand corridors. Others say that muttering is not only happening there.

It is my intention to continue this reflection in the future.

More on marriage and ordination

part 3 of this reflection is here

Comments policy

marriage and ordination

Does the order matter?

In the Roman Catholic Church and in the Eastern Orthodox Church you can only get married before ordination. Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox can not get married after ordination. If the wife of a married Roman Catholic deacon dies, he cannot marry again. If the wife of an Anglican priest, re-ordained as a Roman Catholic priest, dies – he cannot marry again.

I have been involved in some discussions about this. The contention is that there is no evidence in the Tradition of marriage after ordination. None! There is, according to that position, not a single example of marriage after ordination until the Reformation. I find this an astonishing and fascinating claim. I would be fascinated if any reader could come up with a refutation. Or, of course, references to this being correct.

When I ask – what is the theology around this? What reflection do you have about this? What is the point of this? Why is it any different to be married before or after ordination? I get little more than, “Do they require post hoc justification? Is Sacred Tradition not enough?” Well I cannot quickly think of anything within Sacred Tradition that is not followed by some reflection, interpretation, theology, or explanation. Does anyone have such a reflection in this case – what is the difference between marriage before and marriage after ordination?

For reference I have been pointed to Celibacy in the Early Church: The Beginnings of Obligatory Continence for Clerics in East and West and Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy and am grateful to have been pointed to the Google preview. But (other than the preview section) I do not yet have these two books and would take some time to obtain them and then absorb them. Meanwhile – please share your wisdom.

Please also tell me if there is an ongoing tradition of abstaining from sexual relations 24 hours prior to presiding at the Eucharist. (And one has also mentioned a tradition of abstaining after presiding – but no indication for how long).

And don’t tell me that as in the case of baptism, confirmation, eucharist – marriage and ordination are in that order because they are so alphabetically LOL

October 25 Catholics & Anglicans share prayer

With Roman Catholic-Anglican relations currently so newsworthy, it is particularly appropriate to note that this Sunday and next week Roman Catholics and Episcopalians (Anglicans) again pray the same prayer. Catholics will pray:

Almighty and ever-living God,
strengthen our faith, hope, and love.
May we do with loving hearts what you ask of us and come to share the life you promise.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Anglicans will pray:

Almighty and everlasting God,
increase in us the gifts of faith, hope, and charity;
and, that we may obtain what you promise,
make us love what you command;
through Jesus Christ our Lord,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.
Amen.

Both are translations of:

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, da nobis fidei, spei, et caritatis augmentum:
et ut mereamur assequi quod promittis, fac nos amare quod praecipis.

The reflection on this week’s collect/opening prayer is found here.

Not all Anglicans and not all Roman Catholics will be praying this prayer, certainly. But at this time I would encourage more to – and for others to join in.

Let us widen the circle that prays this prayer together this coming weekend and week.

October 11 Catholics & Anglicans share prayer

Once again, Sunday October 11 and the week following, Anglicans (Episcopalians) and Roman Catholics are praying the same collect/opening prayer in the Eucharist and in Daily Prayer.

The Latin original is:
Tua nos, Domine, quaesumus, gratia semper et praeveniat et sequatur, ac bonis operibus jugitur praestet esse intentos.

Anglicans pray this as:
Lord, we pray
that your grace may always precede and follow us,
that we may continually be given to good works;
through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you
and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever.
Amen.

Roman Catholics pray this as:
Lord,
our help and guide,
make your love the foundation of our lives.
May our love for you express itself
in our eagerness to do good for others.

You can read more about this prayer here.

That Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and others share the same lectionary is well documented. That, from time to time, Anglicans and Roman Catholics pray the same collect on the same day was explicable with the shared pre-Vatican II liturgies, but has, other than on this site as far as I am aware, not been noted or explained.

Let us widen the circle that prays this prayer together this coming weekend and week.

October 4 Catholics & Anglicans share prayer

a600From last Sunday and during this week Catholics and Anglicans (Episcopalians) are praying the same collect/opening prayer. That happens again this coming Sunday and week, and the next, and then again a fortnight later! The Anglican version of the prayer is:

Almighty and everlasting God,
you are always more ready to hear than we to pray,
and to give more than we either desire or deserve:
Pour upon us the abundance of your mercy,
forgiving us those things of which our conscience is afraid,
and giving us those good things for which we are not worthy to ask,
except through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ our Savior;
who lives and reigns with you and the
Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

The Roman Catholic version of the same prayer is:

Father,
your love for us surpasses all our hopes and desires.
Forgive our failings,
keep us in your peace
and lead us in the way of salvation.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.
Amen.

Further comment on this prayer can be found by clicking here.

Let us widen the circle that prays this prayer together this coming weekend and week.

Click here to see the collect some others are using.