At least one Church of England bishop will defect to Rome soon after the Lambeth Conference, I gather from Anglo-Catholic sources. And there could be more to follow.
I can’t tell you much more than that at the moment, because the negotiations with Rome are so sensitive – and the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales, who distrust Anglican traditionalists, are quite capable of throwing a spanner in the works.
This link isn’t working for me.
Well, it worked for me. But you didn’t miss a whole lot, venbede. The article isn’t very long, and doesn’t really give any hard facts, just hints of what MAY happen.
David Handy+
This makes me boil!
As a former RC, I wonder if those who “defect” fully know the implications. I guess they can’t until they actually live in the culture but I hope they talk to a whole lot of honest, candid people at every level before doing the deed. Some things they will find:
1. RC bishops are quite removed from the people. Cradle Episcopalians were amused by how shocked I was that the bishop visited our parish a few times per year and actually socialized with parishioners. When I was RC, the bishop came every other year to confirm (the other years the pastor was given the authority to confirm in his stead) and, outside of the receiving line, did not socialize with the people. My mother was one of the church women who helped cook a fancy meal for the bishop and his entourage, which they ate privately.
2. Authority and obedience look good on paper but reality shows that RC parishes, priests, and laity in the West still do what they want while paying lip service.
3. Rome can send you where it will, no matter how ill-suited or unwanted the assignment. There also remains some degree of resentment/mistrust when non-RC clerics are brought in, wives and kids included.
4. Rome has its share of problems with sexual issues, as we all know. Defectors may be surprised at the percentage of homosexual RC clergy and by the lip service paid to celibacy. The RC parish in which I grew up has seen many priests caught in affairs or leave to marry. The priests who baptised me, taught me at the RC school and buried my parents have all left to marry. Most Catholics, myself included, don’t blame them in the least. Heh, my sainted mother once hosted a baby shower for the wife of a priest who left.
5. The RC liturgy has lost its grandeur and reverence. I know the pope is trying like mad to correct that but it’s difficult to enforce from Rome. The Novus Ordo must be a difficult transition for former Anglicans to make. One thing Christendom DOES acknowledge is that Anglicans do beautiful liturgy.
Well, Godspeed to those reportedly leaving, if they do. I sure hope they spend some time in deep discernment.
teatime, can you honestly say that coming to the confusion of Anglicanism is better? And regarding liturgy, there is a huge number of bad liturgies going on in TEC by no means supporting your argument. The other things you spoke of I accept as true for you but I have experiences that are different. I do believe your third point has the greatest strength. There is a kind of slavery, we might say, “fool for Christ” expectation of Roman priests having to work so long. But honestly, I consider most of them heroic in their sacrafice. As for marriage, there is always that calling available before ordination. I don’t see an advantage to married priesthood. In fact, there is more scandal than with celebacy in my opinion. As for priests that don’t live their vow? Shame.
If you want a church of “better” fellowship or “better” Christians, whatever that means, the Catholic Church is not the place to go. The issue is truth and authority. If one believes that the Catholic Church holds the authority that she claims to have, then it is to the Catholic Church one should go, no matter whether (worst case scenario) the bishop is a jerk and a boob, the pastor is a tyrant, the liturgy is a shambles, and/or the assistant priest is shamelessly getting the altar boys drunk and diddling them without any intervention.
#5 — Yes, I can honestly say it’s better. Sure, I cringe at all of our Anglican “dirty laundry” being aired in public but at least it’s honest and out there. Rome has even bigger problems than we do but, except for extraordinary circumstances, it’s all buried. We have access to our bishops and clergy that RCs can only dream about. The fact that we can come to a blog like this and actually have dialogue with priests, canons, and bishops would be unthinkable for Catholics.
As one who was in RC parishes and dioceses that suffered bad and corrupt pastors and bishops, I know how awful it can be to have truly abusive priests/bishops appointed. Rome won’t listen or, if it does listen, does nothing. When a good pastor retires or moves on, the parish holds its collective breath wondering what sort the bishop will assign.
As for liturgy, I lived and worshipped in four different RC dioceses before I was received into the AC, and I saw extraordinary things on a regular basis. At one RC parish, there was a praise band with — I kid you not — an Elvis impersonator and they sang Elvis’ gospel hits with some odd original compositions weekly. Can you imagine a Christmas Eve service where, in lieu of a sermon, dudes impersonating the X-men showed up with all sorts of sound effects and accoutrements? Or a sermon about “cleavage,” in which the monsignor entertains the crowd talking about how he is very distracted by the breasts of women who hold positions of authority, such as police officers, in his daily life and how he can’t help but stare down women’s blouses as he’s giving communion. (This was reported and the bishop’s own secretary was in the congregation that day — the monsignor was given A PROMOTION!)
There’s a big reason why some of us aren’t in quite the distress others are about doings in our church. Alas, we’ve seen much worse and we’ve seen the abuses protected or ignored by the Vicar of Christ.
The Novus Ordo can be done beautifully. If you have cable, check out the Mass on EWTN. Sadly, Mass can range from absolutely beautiful to just barely acceptable. Regardless, all of the Masses I have attended have been reverent: maybe I have just been lucky. I am sure that there are exceptions. But the trend is going in the right direction. I attended a Mass for the ordination of priests at St. James Cathedral in Seattle a few weeks ago. It was absolutely wonderful with exquisite music. Benedict XVI’s influence is making an impact … even in the most unlikely places!
Also, the priests who have been ordained in the last 8 years (when I began attending the RC with the idea of converting) are very, very orthodox.
I have to say that I am always bemused by the idea that Catholics are oppressed by a demand of obedience (commitment?) and authority from the Catholic hierarchy. Obviously, if I did not believe the tenets of the RC, I would not be here. (And Catholics are great believers in free will.) If anything, most Catholics (Mass-attending Catholics … not people who were born into a Catholic home and claim Catholicism as a matter of culture) would like to see more authority and obedience … not less. The hierarchy is stretched thin and moves very slowly and carefully.
The RC will never be perfect … never was, never will be. A one of my favorite priest said to me … there was never a Golden Age of the Roman Catholic Church; it has always been a struggle.
And no one that I know takes any joy from the struggles in the Anglican Communion … not do I know of an effort to recruit Episcopalians to our Church. No Catholic I know wants to see orthodox Christians being marginalized by their own Churches nor do we want to see any Church walk away from Christian beliefs.
But those who have explored the beliefs of the Catholic Church and who can honestly say that they also believe … those people are most welcome.
#4 I may a new and naive Roman Cathoic (former Episcopalian), but I see the bishop quite often; he seems to be an humble fellow and is certainly a well-respected presence in a largely Protestant community. Mass is not marked by innovations such as you describe, nor is my overworked and accessible priest much given to anything other than reverence and humility during the Eucharist.
teatime, I know there are abuses. But let me tell you, I also know personally of the coverups in the “good old boy” and now “good old girl” system of the TEC and the AC in England. There is no monopoly on bad behavior coverup. I’ve had to carry the burden of knowing some of the “secrets” and it’s more than disappointing and disillusioning. That includes bishops who, in my experience, love to be seen and heard more than communicating truth and using authority wisely, what authority can be claimed. The liturgies you speak of are the worst of the application of Vatican II. The worst. But I’ve seen just as many goofy Eucharists in the TEC. And many simply pedestrian ones that couldn’t inspire a soul through the door. I have to agree with Violent Papist that it is truth and authority that we’re after. I no longer believe the Anglican Communion has truth and authority as a Communion. And it is not acceptable to aspire to holiness in TEC. Holiness of life in Christ is not politically correct. I have been made fun of more than I can tell you when talking about holy living. You can have what we’ve become! I’ll take the Church with truth and authority with it’s many warts that, I agree, are there and have been. I will hope, however, not to be a part of any discredit.
We shouldn’t be losing anybody. It would be a tragedy if through backpeddling on our promises our bishops have managed to import the chaos of some of another tiny province in the Communion. One can only hope that Synod on 4th July gives the bishops a big raspberry for their perfidy
Let me share one other thing that I think will be appreciated by all.
During of the homily of the Ordination Mass, Archbishop Brunett said to the just-ordained priests, “Priests must be men of prayer; you must be men of prayer. If that is not the case, you will not be much use to us.” He continued to stress the foundation of what it meant to be a good priest. It was very direct.
I have found that the priests are accessible. They are however very busy. But if I need to make an appointment for reconciliation because I could not come in at the scheduled time, I have never had the smallest difficulty. I ‘ve met the Archbishop on a number of occasions and have had dinner with both Auxiliary Bishops when they were visiting the parish on a number of times. (I am just a regular parishioner in a big and very active parish; I am not even on the parish council.)
The other thing to know is that Deacons are becoming more a part of parish life, and that adds another dimension. Again, my parish had been exceedingly fortunate. The Deacon and his wife are very important to our parish.
Everyone’s experience is different.
I’m a convert from TEC to Rome, and I’ll confess to some disconserting moments. I’ve heard horrid music, bland and pointless sermons, fought my way through RCIA with a deacon who was a Protestant and didn’t know it, have yet to have actually met my parish priest, and don’t know a soul in my parish. In my limited experience, Catholics suck at fellowship, many of them have been badly taught, and they really can get confused about some of the nuances of Church teaching.
Nevertheless, when I sit down and read the Catechism, or watch a homily of the Holy Father on EWTN, or talk to a priest in confession, then I know that I’m in the right place. What is the Truth and who teaches it? That’s the question that all (potential) converts should be asking.
his is fascinating- are we talking about keeping our congregations and buildings but receving Roman patronage….such an offer would have me salivating! Or are we to all go on mass to Rome….one option I guess. This is frustrating in its brevity…and could of course be thoroughly unreliable.
Well you could all go off to Rome RPP on Mass [Tridentine presumably] or even en masse but it would be a pity because we need priests like you. Damian Thompson is acidic but quite often has his finger on the pulse, as the editor of the Catholic Herald, in quite a tight-lipped church.
No there may well be something in this. While the US has had umpteen bishops a year heading off here, there and everywhere including Rome, this would send shock waves through us. In a year where we have had Shariagate and completely misreported complaints about the ABC on the main BBC evening news, to have a CofE bishop go off anywhere including Rome would get top headlines here and confirm the secular view of the CofE as troubled, ineffectual and in inexorable decline.
Our capacity for shooting ourselves in the foot, undermining all the good efforts that are going on on the ground, is incredible. We are walking into this one with our eyes open. All completely unnecessary – Stupidity reigns!
No. 10 – You don’t really mean that preposterous statement “to aspire to holiness in TEC is not acceptable”, do you?
Pageantmaster, I will be praying during the English Synod that they will draw back from what they are about to do. When the result of the action is the shattering of the Church, one must be very, very sure that it is essential to the Gospel. This is not the case here. Promises made should be kept.
#17 Amen, Katherine.
I wonder Katherine…. Oone part of me says yes let us hope they find some sense- the other part feels that this decision is just the tip of the iceburg…and if the church really is hell bent on reinventing itself to fit a secular agenda I would almost rather say to them…what you are going to do- do quickly.
I am 34 yrs old and have a family to consider. I desperately love my church and congregation and still try to hold onto the notion of an orthodox, Catholic and apostolic faith. But if the C of E is now deciding it wants to be truly liberal and congregational…if they do not want a Catholic wing – then please just let me know – so I do not waste years of my life in a silly, inward looking, drawn out, futile cause. It gets very irksome knowing you are hated by many and deemed unworthy of preferment simply for holding onto the faith as has always been hitherto taught. I am dealt with as though a trouble maker for not rolling over and saluting the modern mantra. In the end it makes you very tired….so please C of E — choose. Do we retain a three fold order and a Catholic understanding or not? But stop dithering and fudging for all of our sakes. For once BE HONEST- and state clearly what you are and wish to be. Tell us. Then I will know where I stand as an orthodox Catholic Christian.
No – not acceptable. We are not going to be dictated to by those who wish to be liberal or congregational, and if our instruments are not prepared to keep their promises and make proper legal provision, including preferment, then it is quite likely that the decision will be taken out of their hands.
We may know more when we know the result of Gafcon.
#19, I have heard and seen your feelings so often in TEC priests. It is agonizing. My impression, though, is that the CofE has a lot more conservatives of either the evangelical or catholic type than TEC has had, so you have a better chance of pulling back from the brink. Your national church provided the PEV option, which the American church refused to even consider.
There have been already at least four C of E bishops since the 1990s who became Catholic- Graham Leonard, Richard Rutt, Conrad Meyer, and Arthur Klyberg. Is Klyberg still alive?
#22 has it right. If this unnamed bishop goes over to Rome, he won’t be a bishop. He probably won’t even be a clergyman; he will most likely be re-ordained. For example, Graham Leonard, former Bishop of London, converted to Rome and became an ordinary priest. It was many years before he was promoted to his present level of Monsignor. A married convert may serve as a RC priest, but is not allowed to serve a parish. Typically, if he needs a job, he serves as a hospital chaplain or similar. Or if he is of a certain age, he may just be retired or semi-retired. This is a personal journey; not an institutional switchover. And there will certainly be no Church of England property going with him. The Roman Catholic Church doesn’t do CANA type “we want a new manager” transitions, any more than the Church of England does. The Catholic conception of hierarchy is top down: you don’t get to sack your bishop or your denomination and substitute another one, which would be bottom up congregationalist.
Now, who is the bishop in question? Most lilkely one of the “flying” bishops who ministers to Anglo Catholic congregations who cannot accept women priests or bishops who ordain women priests. I can’t think of a diocesan bishop who would be likely to jump at this stage. Can anyone else?
Here are details of the four CofE converts named by #22
Graham Leonard. b. 1921. m. 1943. Priest (CofE) 1948. Bishop 1964. Retired (as bishop of London) 1991. Knighted 1991 (KCVO). Conditional ordination as RC priest 1994. Prelate of Honour to the Pope (Monsignor) 2000.
Richard Rutt. b. 1925. m. 1969. priest (CofE) 1952. Bishop 1966. Retired (as bishop of Leicester) 1990. Ordained RC priest 1995. Hon Canon (Plymouth RC Cathedral) since 2001.
Conrad Meyer. b. 1922. m. 1960. priest (CofE) 1949. Bishop 1979. Retired (as Suffragan Bishop of Dorchester) 1987. Ordained RC priest 1995. Hon Canon (Plymouth RC Cathedral) since 2001.
Charles John Klyberg. b. 1931. unmarried. priest (CofE) circa 1960. Bishop Suffragan of Fulham 1985, retired 1996. Ordained RC priest 1996. Prelate of Honour (Monsignor) 2000.
Isn’t a cathartic moment like this in the CoE better than being left wondering what’s going to happen? It’s like removing a band-aid: quick, painful sting. But at least we’ll know where everyone stands, and belongs. That’s why I think this latest bishop is leaving the Church of the Lollygagging and swam the Tiber.
#23 wrote:
[blockquote]A married convert may serve as a RC priest, but is not allowed to serve a parish. Typically, if he needs a job, he serves as a hospital chaplain or similar. Or if he is of a certain age, he may just be retired or semi-retired. This is a personal journey; not an institutional switchover. And there will certainly be no Church of England property going with him.[/blockquote]
Certainly, in England no property could follow a converting clergyman and his congregation…the property is owned by the state, not the Church.
There are many CofE priest-converts to the RCC serving in parishes. From an article in [a href=”http://www.anglicanuse.org/AngEmbers.htm”][i]Anglican Embers[/i][/a], December 2007 issue:
[blockquote](some)…insisted that, in fact, married men should not be allowed to be Parish Priests. But all the other things were enshrined and were sent to Rome for endorsement. And I know, coming back on the train with Cardinal Hume, and discussing with him (with a little wink in his eye), he said, “We’ll get around the Parish Priest thing within days,†he said. And so it is. That restriction still applies, but if you want to and you are married you can be the administrator of a parish. And they are and doing very well. And there are many married priests who in fact are administrators.[/blockquote]
from “Conversion and Enrichment”, Fr. Peter Geldard
Finally, while the conversions to the RCC in England after 1992 were individual, that could be different should a similar event occur following the next General Synod. Here in the USA there are some institutional conversions, and this model may be widened for countries other than the US.
The ownership of much of the property of the CoE is rather a grey area, legally. The state certainly does not behave like the owner, except in Royal Peculiars, where the sovereign has clear rights. Unsuspecting property purchasers often find upkeep of churches, or parts thereof, devolves to them. Oxbridge colleges and aristocrats have untested legal rights over many parishes. The parson’s freehold still keeps the dioceses’ sticky fingers away from the benefice. The atrocious land management of the Church over more than a century has led to huge areas of agticultural land simply disappearing from the books and being appropriated by farmers and other landowners through squatters’ rights. It may very well be wise for the CoE, which is vastly over-propertied and fairly over-staffed, to let congregations go with their old and expensive buildings, especially in urban areas where there are many alternatives. Certainly better than wasting cash on legal fees.
There have been break-offs in the past. Vide the ‘Free Church of England’ which broke off in the 19thC, a small denomination with a lot of bishops as far as I can see. No idea what if anything happened with property. Perhaps property would be an issue in any dissestablishment of the CofE.
Yes, rob K, # 16, I do mean that “preposterous statement.”
well property is a funny one. I think some parishes would have a very good case. Mine has laways and only ever been Catholic to its core. It was given to the prish not the diocese (as the deeds testify) it has been paid for and maintained by the parish not the Diocese. Furthermore it is in a Guild of All Souls living – meaning its patrons would be with us. …hard to see what defense the C of E would have- especailly if THEIR actions were what exluded us.