|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: One Million more reasons to join the Ordinariate.
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
So the story as I understand it is; a while ago Mgr Keith Newton (ex flying bishop, now head of the Ordinariate) asked the trustees of the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament if they would make a grant to his new group. The said Confraternity (devoted to...............the Blessed Sacrament) then did several things (I am not sure in what order). It took legal advice, It changed its rules to allow Roman Catholic Members, most of its trustees (5 out of 6?) joined the Ordinariate.
Having done all that the trustees then gave £1,000,000 to the Ordinariate. Leaving £850,000 in the Charity. My understanding is that by far the majority of its members remain Anglican and they were not written to about this action by their trustees. The blogosphere seems to indicate a legal challenge but what say you all?
Appropriate use of funds in line with the constitution? A bit of pillaging on the way out? A deeply cynical move that will haunt ecumenical relations for the life of the Ordinariate and beyond?
Me, I say give them the £850,000 as well, in a Luke 6.29 theme. But even on a good day with a following wind of charitable thought I still think this is some weak assed, half baked, numb nuts thinking which will blow the “2nd wave” out of the water. Pretty shameful in my opinion.
All the best, Pyx_e
Catholic Herald Story
CBS web page
Random old geezers blog
CBS Charity Comms page
[ 02. December 2011, 09:17: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Shadowhund
Shipmate
# 9175
|
Posted
I am not an expert at British charities law, but I fail to see how changing the rules to allow Roman Catholics and then giving the Ordinariate seed money could possibly be illegal. It is an act of extraordinary generosity, IMO. The encouraging thing about it is that it has the potential to keep the the ties that used to bind old friends together intact insofar as possible.
I believe the American Society of King Charles the Martyr now admits Catholics as members and there was, until Cardinal Law asked that it be shut down, a Roman Catholic province of the SSC. It used to be that Catholic converts from Anglicanism and the Anglo Catholics ceased being on speaking terms, but that is less the case now. This is another indicator of the reality.
Unfortunately, Paul W. seems to have a history of s-stirring, and perhaps is pursuing his own personal agenda by objecting. (In fact, I assumed that he had joined the Catholic Church long ago, but evidently he decided to stay for his own reasons.) Was he the priest who paraded around General Synod with a coffin proclaiming the death of the C of E, or was that Francis Bown?
--------------------
"Had the Dean's daughter worn a bra that afternoon, Norman Shotover might never have found out about the Church of England; still less about how to fly"
A.N. Wilson
Posts: 3788 | From: Your Disquieted Conscience | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
It's only one step further from the Anglo-Catholic societies that won't give grant support to women priests (ACS is one of them) - or indeed from the way in which SSC became open to only a part of the presbyterate upon the first presbyteral ordinations of women.
Once the line of comprehensiveness is crossed (only open to those who fit our criteria) than something distinctively Anglican has been lost. Where is the line between a 'ginger group' and a closed party?
As far as I can see, CBS has not been a great deal more than a closed society for a while. The bankrolling of the Ordinariate is probably reprehensible but it is not surprising.
The interesting thing is that those joining the Ordinariate seem to believe they are maintaining the Catholic priesthood in the Anglican tradition (to quote the CBS's constitution). It would be very interesting to see how the 'Anglican patrimony' of Anglicanorum Coetibus can be interpreted to fit a phrase which until very recently was used to mean (even remotely) communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury.
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AberVicar:
It's only one step further from the Anglo-Catholic societies that won't give grant support to women priests (ACS is one of them)
The GSS's 'Candidates for ordination Fund' is another. Its advert invites members to apply and nowhere says that this is limited to males - but it is.
However, the GSS view of the ordinariate is to view people as traitors if they join - that is not the official wording but you don't have to read much between the lines of various letters from the warden. It has kicked out members whop have joined the ordinariate, unlike the CBS.
[ 07. July 2011, 19:58: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
Yes the GSS now think the CBS are splitters.
ROMANES EUNT DOMUS, Pyx_e.
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
It may be legal but given the circumstances it seems all wrong.
A donation towards buying some eucharistic vessels for some ordinariate congos might have been a nice gesture. To pass over the majority of the funds given that you are heading that way yourself is way too much.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
Something may be legal but that doesn't make it morally right.
This just feels too much like a dirty stitch up.
The open and honest thing to do would have been to write to all the members and say "this is the proposal, do you give your consent?" Then, if the majority said yes, there wouldn't have been a problem.
But as things stand now, it looks decidedly dodgy and as a result gives the average outsider a rather poor impression of the Ordinariate, at a time when they really need to be looking clean and "winsome".
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
I think some of the Catholic Societies have form in this regard... the Society of Mary signed their membership up to Forward in Faith without their permission to the ire of some Affirming [ex] members I knew.
I'd be more interested to know what the Roman Catholic hierarchy think of their members being invited to join an organisation devoted to worshiping a Protestant Sacrament of dubious validity? Hardly going to win the Ratzinger Prize for Catholic Orthodoxy is it?
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
If the officers and trustees who have joined the Ordinariate have done so as active clergy -or clergy on Ordinariate pension, they have basically written their own paychecks. Even if the donation is juggled so that the account in which the Ordinariate dropped the funds is not the very same account that pays these particular clergy, taking the heat off the Ordinariate having to dig up funds to play the rest of the clergy is merely stealing from Peter to pay Paul.
Perhaps it's legal, but it's tacky, tacky, tacky. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
... merely stealing from Peter to pay Paul.
The other way round, nu? ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Now that you put it that way... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
As far as my disposition on the matter goes, discussion of this misappropriation of the CBS's assets is more suited to Hell.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
I thought the Catholic priesthood was all about a calling to poverty, chastity and obedience.
Is that the difference from the ordinary Catholic priesthood and the Ordinariate one?
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
I thought the Catholic priesthood was all about a calling to poverty, chastity and obedience.
Is that the difference from the ordinary Catholic priesthood and the Ordinariate one?
Only religious (clerical and lay) take vows. Diocesan clergy make promises of chastity and obedience to their bishop.
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
There's a [url= http://"https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002575198970"]facebook profile[/url] questioning the move. It definitely seems dubious and not the behaviour I would expect of trustees. Though my main question is why do they have nearly £2m in the first place!
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
I don't know if it applies in this case, Carys, but it's quite usual for charities to invite bequests, which are then invested so that the income from them can be used to support the charitable work on a regular basis, rather than the ad hoc basis that would otherwise be needed.
But if so, that highlights the fact that giving your capital away is also changing (restricting) the ways you can work in future.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
There's a [url= http://"https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002575198970"]facebook profile[/url] questioning the move. It definitely seems dubious and not the behaviour I would expect of trustees. Though my main question is why do they have nearly £2m in the first place!
Carys
Most of the so-called catholic societies have loads of money because they were formed at a time when anglo-catholicism was a very fragile plant and they persuaded wealthy people to leave large legacies to buttress themselves against 'protestant bishops'.
Those of us who are 'affirming' catholics are aware that we cannot compete because we rely on annual subscriptions and have little capital in the bank.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi
I don't know if it applies in this case, Carys, but it's quite usual for charities to invite bequests, which are then invested so that the income from them can be used to support the charitable work on a regular basis, rather than the ad hoc basis that would otherwise be needed.
If a charity has a large fund which it is treating as its endowment, it isn't usual for it suddenly to donate 3/5 of it at once - even to something that is within its objects, yet alone something that appears not to be.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Leo writes;
quote:
Those of us who are 'affirming' catholics are aware that we cannot compete because we rely on annual subscriptions and have little capital in the bank.
Not necessarily so, Leo. As many of the funds you mentioned were, as you describe, enriched by legacies, it would seem that all there is to do is wait for a generation of affirming catholics to die off.
I know little of UK charities law, but the group's decision seems to me to be a counsel of despair, in terms of keeping ACism running in the CoE.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi
I don't know if it applies in this case, Carys, but it's quite usual for charities to invite bequests, which are then invested so that the income from them can be used to support the charitable work on a regular basis, rather than the ad hoc basis that would otherwise be needed.
If a charity has a large fund which it is treating as its endowment, it isn't usual for it suddenly to donate 3/5 of it at once - even to something that is within its objects, yet alone something that appears not to be.
That was the meaning of my last paragraph, Enoch, though perhaps I could have worded it more explicitly.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664
|
Posted
Lots to say on this one...
According to the Catholic Herald article, the CBS has been "asset-rich" for over a hundred years.
I am firmly of the opinion that the grant falls within the charitable objects, which have remained the same since amendment in 1999 (NOT 2009/2010 - that's the membership rules, which is a different point). If the objects were drafted with the Ordinariate in mind it shows a miraculous level of foresight!
Whether the membership rules had changed or not, the Ordinariate would have been eligible for a grant - of course whether the trustees would have made such a large grant is another matter.
If the Ordinariate is eligible for a £1 grant, it's eligible for a £1 million grant. Indeed it's far more 'needy' than most of the other applicants, given it needs to clothe and house 61 priests + families. How else are the CBS going to spend the money? They might have been saving it for a rainy day, but some would argue that rainy day has come.
I think many of those jumping up and down now would jump up and down even more if CBS restricted itself to the CofE and then was taken over by the Affirming and middle ground of the CofE in due course. Fr Williamson has certainly made his view on "priestesses (his words not mine)" very clear in several attempted court cases!
The Trustees have made it quite clear that they will not personally benefit from the grant. I take the indirect point, but that can be managed. There is some degree of conflict in most ecclesiastical charities - notably DBFs where (paid) Archdeacons are trustees.
Whether the Trustees went about this in the right way, I don't know. But they seem to have carefully taken legal advice every step of the way and believe what they are doing is in the interests of the Charity (which does not necessarily have to be the same as what the majority of the members think).
So, a bit of a PR issue for the Ordinariate perhaps but I don't see how the Trustees have done anything legally wrong.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgerow Priest
Shipmate
# 13905
|
Posted
I cannot see that the ordinariate boys have done anything legally, nor, I am sure, can their lawyers. Rather than getting into this debate as such, I think what is interesting - and I really mean that, not in an antagonistic way - Is the nascent, ongoing relationship between the ordinariate crowd, and those who remain in the CofE. What I mean is that basically, in years to come, historians will pore over the self-understanding of the ordinariate, ex-episcopal monsignores. I just find the whole thing very interesting - OK, CBS - predominantly Anglican Membership, 5/6 officers submit to Rome, yet it remains an entity. dont really know wot I am driving at, but I think that ppl will study this in years to come.
--------------------
"Where is the Love"
Saint Fergy de Pea
Posts: 362 | From: London | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgerow Priest
Shipmate
# 13905
|
Posted
missed edit window - what i meant to say was, "cannot imagine ordinariate has done anything legally WRONG" - certainly not accusing them or lawyers of anything! How long do you get to edit a post?
--------------------
"Where is the Love"
Saint Fergy de Pea
Posts: 362 | From: London | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
The money is almost irrelevant. The problem is integrity. Anglo-catholics go on about two integrities. Where is any integrity at all? If the Ordinariate compromises its integrity, it serves no purpose at all. If it serves no purpose at all to Rome, it will be shut by B16 more quickly than Murdoch shut the News of the World.
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
The money is almost irrelevant. The problem is integrity. Anglo-catholics go on about two integrities. Where is any integrity at all? If the Ordinariate compromises its integrity, it serves no purpose at all. If it serves no purpose at all to Rome, it will be shut by B16 more quickly than Murdoch shut the News of the World.
I think you're getting confused here. The Ordinariate is not any part of the "two integritites" model. That is and was purely an internal Anglican model for coping with the differences in principles.
By joining the Ordinariate, anglo-catholics are becoming Roman Catholics. Full stop. The Ordinariate does not exist to serve an intra-Anglican model of anything. Its purpose is to worship God and save souls - like any other part of the Catholic Church.
That it should do so with integrity is unquestionable. But whether by taking the proferred CBS money to support its priests (most of whom have made a quite heroic sacrifice and act of faith in God's plan for them, giving up homes, status and livelihoods) the Ordinariate has done anything improper or unbecoming is very much questionable.
Any member of the CBS - let alone officebearer - who did not realise that the Confraterity was highly likely to suppport such a venture as the Ordinariate represents really hasn't been paying attention since at least the early 1990s.
Can I just remind everyone who the person was who kicked up the fuss over this donation in the first place? It was this "vexatious litigant." This guy has serious form.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Treasurer
Apprentice
# 13036
|
Posted
All of this sounds so very Church of England. It's the last rites being played out by people who can't see how ridiculous they are.
Posts: 1 | From: Bed | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
Please clarify,
P.
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fifi
Shipmate
# 8151
|
Posted
Am I the only person who thinks it odd that the Ordinariate is so lacking in financial support from the Catholic Church that it needs to solicit and then accept what is, by any estimate, Anglican money?
(I say 'Anglican money' simply because something like 95% of members of CBS remain in the C of E and churches in communion with her.)
Posts: 591 | From: Here | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:
How else are the CBS going to spend the money?
Erm, in encouraging devotion to the Most Blessed Sacrament within the Church of England? Just a wild guess there...
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
It sounds a bit like scorched earth policy to me, and I wonder if the Ordinariate will be allowed to accept it (by a higher Catholic authority).
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Chester, can you really not see how using monies donated to support an Anglican Eucharistic fraternity to support people leaving the Anglican Church might be, well, at least an eensy-weensy misdirection of funds?
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Shadowhund
Shipmate
# 9175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
It sounds a bit like scorched earth policy to me, and I wonder if the Ordinariate will be allowed to accept it (by a higher Catholic authority).
If the higher Catholic authority forbids the Ordinariate to accept it, then, in justice, same authority needs to scrounge for a practical alternative other than bingo.
--------------------
"Had the Dean's daughter worn a bra that afternoon, Norman Shotover might never have found out about the Church of England; still less about how to fly"
A.N. Wilson
Posts: 3788 | From: Your Disquieted Conscience | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
The same goes for you, Shadowhund. You cannot possibly think the board of directors of this fraternity believe this move is about furthering devotion to the Eucharist.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
You cannot possibly think the board of directors of this fraternity believe this move is about furthering devotion to the Eucharist.
Zach
Unfortunately, they do seem to believe this, Zach - most likely on the basis that they have thought for some time that they are the only ones in the Anglican tradition who have any respect for the Blessed Sacrament; and that now they have indubitably valid sacraments, so the rest of us can go hang!
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Chester, can you really not see how using monies donated to support an Anglican Eucharistic fraternity to support people leaving the Anglican Church might be, well, at least an eensy-weensy misdirection of funds?
Yes I can. But I can also see the other side of the argument. That's all.
My hunch - not more than that - would be that the overwhelmingly vast majority of members (especially clerical) are opposed to the OoW and are sceptical at best about whether there is any future whatsoever for the kind of traditional A-Cism which the foundation of the CBS was premised upon.
In that context, I can easily see why CBS would want to redirect the funds to trad A-Cs who accepted the kind of Papal offer the many in the Catholic societies have been yearning for for over 100 years.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AberVicar:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
You cannot possibly think the board of directors of this fraternity believe this move is about furthering devotion to the Eucharist.
Zach
Unfortunately, they do seem to believe this, Zach - most likely on the basis that they have thought for some time that they are the only ones in the Anglican tradition who have any respect for the Blessed Sacrament; and that now they have indubitably valid sacraments, so the rest of us can go hang!
Surely they've been waiting for something like the Ordinariate for so long they want to make sure it converts from a nice idea into a sustainable reality while stocks last, as it were. There are currents and cross-currents here, though, I suspect. After all, one possible reading of the gesture is that they want to ensure the ongoing influence of the Anglican heritage, and indeed the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament, under the new arrangements. They've been more or less running their own show for a wee while now; can't have these nasty bishops coming in and ruining it, even if they are the Pope's bishops rather than the ABC's....
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
My crystal ball says:
The Ordinariate will return the money to CBS.
The CBS trustees who have become Roman Catholic priests will resign as trustees, and be replaced by Anglicans.
- I really don't see how Roman Catholic priests can run a charity which gives money regularly for the purchase of Anglican chalices and stoles.
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
I think your crystal ball is a very good one Freejack.
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowhund:
If the higher Catholic authority forbids the Ordinariate to accept it, then, in justice, same authority needs to scrounge for a practical alternative other than bingo.
Are you aware of what has already been done, and is being done financially by the Catholic Church? But where do you think it should get this money from? And which other part of the Catholic Church gets such a free hand-out?
There needs to be a little give on both sides. If Ordinariate clergy want to be uncontaminated by the wider Catholic Church, then they must find their own money. I'm sure there are some such. On the other hand, most have been realistic enough to know they cannot expect a church building etc of their own, for a tiny number of congregants relatively, paid for by someone else. And that it is unrealistic to expect someone somewhere to pay for them to minister exclusively to said congregants. The Catholic Church has done a great deal in order to find accommodation and employment (hospital, school and even parish ministry). A good dose of realism is needed, cutting your cloth and all that.
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
I think, as you put it TT, it's a matter of practical Christian Ethics in realtime.
If some Ordinariate clergy expect the full Anglican package (currently worth A$90,000.00 PA in Brisbane) they are really not in touch with reality. Any form of reality.
Ordinary Latin Rite clerics in these parts don't have it quite so good.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Surely they've been waiting for something like the Ordinariate for so long...
As I understand from this thread, the vast majority of the fraternity's members are not jumping ship. Which makes "the other side of the argument," as Chester puts it, look kind of dubious to me. How can "the other side of the argument" possibly be construed as good for the organization these guys were the trustees of?
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hairy Biker
Shipmate
# 12086
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowhund:
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
It sounds a bit like scorched earth policy to me, and I wonder if the Ordinariate will be allowed to accept it (by a higher Catholic authority).
If the higher Catholic authority forbids the Ordinariate to accept it, then, in justice, same authority needs to scrounge for a practical alternative other than bingo.
You mean like regular, sacrificial giving by the whole congregation? The way every CofE church has to fund itself and always has done.
--------------------
there [are] four important things in life: religion, love, art and science. At their best, they’re all just tools to help you find a path through the darkness. None of them really work that well, but they help.
Damien Hirst
Posts: 683 | From: This Sceptred Isle | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
I think your crystal ball is a very good one Freejack.
Our crystal balls are converging on parallel lines.
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
quote:
Surely they've been waiting for something like the Ordinariate for so long...
As I understand from this thread, the vast majority of the fraternity's members are not jumping ship. Which makes "the other side of the argument," as Chester puts it, look kind of dubious to me. How can "the other side of the argument" possibly be construed as good for the organization these guys were the trustees of?
Zach
But it's not a private members club, it's a charity for the furtherance of the (state-sanctioned) charitable objects. What the majority of members think is not the be-all and end all.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:
But it's not a private members club, it's a charity for the furtherance of the (state-sanctioned) charitable objects. What the majority of members think is not the be-all and end all.
True. But what the majority of members think should surely count for something.
As I said earlier - had this huge sum (let's not forget that we are talking about over half of the charity's funds) been offered AFTER a consultation with the members, then I don't think that there would have been a problem. But it has been pushed through without consulting members and in a manner that invites criticism. It is not enough to be legal - it must be morally right as well.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
But it's not a private members club, it's a charity for the furtherance of the (state-sanctioned) charitable objects. What the majority of members think is not the be-all and end all.
The legality of the move is completely uninteresting to me. I don't think it is right, and do tell me if you don't know the difference.
My argument was based on what was best for the organization. That is what the trustees are supposed to look after. How raiding the organization's coffers and leaving the vast majority of its members in the lurch can be construed as faithful stewardship of this organization is beyond me.
Now, I think I've been working up some respect and understanding of the people going Roman. But I will lose that respect if screwing over the flock they are leaving behind is to be seen as appropriate on the Roman side of things.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with the Stick
But it's not a private members club, it's a charity for the furtherance of the (state-sanctioned) charitable objects. What the majority of members think is not the be-all and end all.
Not quite. True, that the members cannot agree to dosh out the charity's assets for their own benefit. Ignoring the members and disposing over 3/5 of the assets without taking their views into account, if this is what has happened, is likewise an abuse. If the trustees have actually parted with the money, they could be at risk of having to pay it back from their own pockets.
There are all sorts of different sorts of organisations with charitable status. A lot of them have members who pay subscriptions because it is a cause they support and want to be involved in. A lot also have received donations in peoples' wills etc. Some of the six activities listed in this ones objects are things members will presumably want to share in, and through the charity to meet like minded people.
Nor is it quite correct to say 'state sanctioned'. If one is going to involve the state in this at all, it's more that in return for charitable status and commitment to charitable objects, rather than the mere benefit of the members for themselves, the charity gets certain legal and taxation benefits. 'Recognition' would be a better description.
Applying money that has been subscribed or donated for a purpose that is different from what people thought they were giving to as described in the objects, however worthy and public spirited the trustees might think they are being, is a fraud on the members and the dead.
This isn't my sort of cause. And I'm not going to predict whether this will get litigated or not, or if so what the result would be. But if one knows anything about what was going on in the C19 CofE, it is difficult to conclude that a C19 charity set up 'for the advancement of the Catholic Faith in the Anglican tradition' and specifying six particular ways, would have envisaged including the funding of people to 'go over'.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adrian1
Shipmate
# 3994
|
Posted
I don't truthfully know how this whole sorry business will end. However I don't think it will end well or, for that matter, deserve to.
Although not a member of CBS, I was shocked to see the report in Friday's Church Times and, to be honest, relieved that I didn't join CBS when I became eligible to.
For the greater part of its existence, CBS has been one of the most exclusive of exclusive Anglican clubs. It was unthinkable that members of other denominations who had a devotion to the Blessed Sacrament, might conceivably be allowed to become members, whether on the Roman side or the Free Church one. I therefore found it something of a revelation to learn only today that CBS has apparently amended its constitution during the past couple of years in a way which would appear to allow Roman Catholics to become members.
Even more revealing was the discovery that five out of the six current trustees are guys who've swam the Tiber and are now members of the Ordinariate. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, Rome decides to do about it.
It would wrong to try and prejudge the Charity Commission's findings. Even if the award of such a grant is held to be legal, which it may well be, it's still an act of bad faith. Why? Because the CBS members who gave the money over the years will have been loyal Anglicans who gave it on the understanding that it would be used for Anglican ends.
Had it been a token grant of perhaps a thousand pounds, I suspect it would have gone largely unnoticed and nobody would have really minded. However before the grant was made, CBS had nearly two million pounds in the bank. Now it has rather less than a million. Such a substantial giveaway can only be considered as ill-judged and foolish. I predict that this business will damage both CBS (if it doesn't kill it altogether) and the Ordinariate. I don't foresee any of the parties to this fiasco emerging smelling of roses.
--------------------
The Parson's Handbook contains much excellent advice, which, if it were more generally followed, would bring some order and reasonableness into the amazing vagaries of Anglican Ritualism. Adrian Fortescue
Posts: 1986 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fuzzipeg
Shipmate
# 10107
|
Posted
Adrian1, I think the Ordinariate would come out smelling of roses if they said "No thank you" and returned the money. I don't think they will unless they are forced to...and I hope they are!
Triple T would know far better than I whether this is likely to happen and seems to think it will. The Ordinary is not accountable to the Bishops so presumably somebody in the ecclesiastical ionosphere would have to say that this is not kosher.
It doesn't reflect well on the trustees who have joined the Ordinariate. If you are generous with other people's money as an Anglican won't you have a similar approach as a Catholic?
--------------------
http://foodybooze.blogspot.co.za
Posts: 929 | From: Johannesburg, South Africa | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
