The special provision for those ”˜originally belonging to the Anglican Communion’ (as they will be termed) was announced with not much notice to either the Archbishop of Canterbury or to the Archbishop of Westminster. This doesn’t mean it is intended to ”˜poach’ priest and people from the Church of England or the other Anglican Churches. While there are questions about its ecumenical communication, it was a known fact that both former Anglicans ”“ such as members of the Traditional Anglican Communion ”“ and those still belonging to Churches of the Anglican Communion have asked the Vatican to consider some group recognition as some way of retaining an Anglican identity in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. The Vatican has responded to their requests. What does the Apostolic Constitution, about to be finalised, entail? What is a Personal Ordinariate for former Anglicans? What is clear is that it won’t be all such individuals or groups have been looking for. It is not a diocese or Anglican Rite Church in communion with Rome.
A Personal Ordinariate is a pastoral provision in juridical form which will allow some continuing Anglican heritage to be expressed. But it is what it says on the box, it is ”˜personal’ that is to say for a network of individuals and groups rather than the norm of a territorial diocese. The Note issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith makes this quite clear in saying that the structure of a Personal Ordinariate ”˜will be similar in some ways to that of Military Ordinariates’, that is to say the distinct jurisdiction of military chaplains. The model is that of a society. But this will not be entirely separate from the Roman Catholic territorial dioceses, and there has to be consultation with the local Roman Catholic bishops before they can be established. How many Anglicans, priest and laity, will want to avail themselves of this provision remains to be seen.
We do indeed have to wait until the Apostolic Constitution has been published before we can know what it says.
But I think that Bishop Hill is being too Panglossian here in his assumptions.
Some Roman Catholic institutions do, indeed, bypass the local hierarchy of bishops. For example, the Oratorians, who have a well established presence in London, are not subject to the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Westminster. They are answerable to their own Order in Rome. Since the whole point of the new proposal seems to be to assure new joiners of their own ordinariate, why should it be assumed that the ordinary will be subject to another local bishop? That would be a contradiction in terms.
Bishops Hill finds it “very significant” that the annoucement was made by the Archbishops of Canterbury and Westminster together. Why? The decision they were announcing was not theirs. The Archbishop of Canterbury did not approve it and press reports suggest that the English Roman Catholic hierarchy did not approve it either. Surely that is much more significant?
Bishop Hill says that implementation “will not by-pass the Roman Catholic Bishops. Nor will such implementation be without continuing consultation with the Church of England through the Archbishop of Canterbury.” Well, that remains to be seen. There is every reason to suppose that both these statements may prove to be incorrect.
Bishop Hill says that “The timing of this announcement – in terms of our debates on the ordination of women to the episcopate – may be unfortunate but it was not deliberate.” Again, that may or may not be true. However, Bishop Hill gives no basis for supposing it is true, and he is not really in a position to say. On the face of it, the timing is so “unfortunate” as to appear deliberate. There can surely be little doubt that the imminent prospect of women bishops being placed in charge of Anglo Catholics in England is, indeed, part of the reason for the decision and for its timing.
#1 I agree.
Re: #1,
I think it is deliberate, and in part so timed as to come before the annual meeting (today and tomorrow) of Forward-in-Faith/UK, the salience of whose situation with regard to both the substance and the timing of the recent Vatican initiative is at least as important as that of the TAC.