homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: One Million more reasons to join the Ordinariate. (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: One Million more reasons to join the Ordinariate.
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
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!

Seconded.

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It seems from this piece in Jezebel's Trumpet that a donation was sought before the Ordinariate had yet come into being:
quote:
The present Superior-General, Fr Christopher Pearson, now a priest in the Ordinariate, has reported that, in December, the Ordinary of the Ordinariate, Mgr Keith Newton, then the (Anglican) Bishop of Richborough, approached him “asking whether it was within the remit of the Confraternity to make a financial grant to the proposed Ordinariate”.
Whatever one thinks about this particular donation, it is very much part of Mgr Newton's role to ensure there is enough money to keep his clergy housed, fed, etc. and able to support their families in the first few months of its existence.

[ 11. July 2011, 15:14: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804

 - Posted      Profile for Olaf     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
Whatever one thinks about this particular donation, it is very much part of Mgr Newton's role to ensure there is enough money to keep his clergy housed, fed, etc. and able to support their families in the first few months of its existence.

Isn't this the Catholic Church's problem, now? Why should Confraternity money be used to do this?

If the money were truly contributed with the intention it be used to provide the equipment necessary for a liturgical devotion to the Blessed Sacrament, then I'd suggest the money may not be necessary. In the event an ordinariate church had to go without the necessaries (such as a monstrance or the ever-popular humeral veil), a request could be put out to all Catholic churches. Surely someone has an extra they would be willing to donate to a good cause, or surely there is a wealthy Catholic who would be willing to throw some cash their way.

Give the money back, Ordinariate!

Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Whatever one thinks about this particular donation, it is very much part of Mgr Newton's role to ensure there is enough money to keep his clergy housed, fed, etc. and able to support their families in the first few months of its existence.
Even if he has to run off with as much as the silver as he can carry to do it?

That's not any sort of integrity, Catholic or otherwise.

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
Adrian1
Shipmate
# 3994

 - Posted      Profile for Adrian1   Email Adrian1   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I agree absolutely. Whatever the legal position and the findings of the Charity Commission, what's beyond doubt is that there's a moral issue at stake. For a wholly Anglican organisation to change its constitution nearly 150 years after it was founded, just in time for a group of non-Anglicans to be given half its assets, stinks to my mind. I hope very much that Rome insists on the money being handed back, whatever the outcome of any enquiry. If the Ordinariate are allowed to keep it, that won't do Rome any good and,I suspect, a great deal of harm. Let it not be forgotten that those who are in the Ordinariate are there because they've decided voluntarily to forsake the English Church, mostly because they're unable or unwilling to accept its synodically expressed mind.

--------------------
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
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
It seems from this piece in Jezebel's Trumpet that a donation was sought before the Ordinariate had yet come into being:
quote:
The present Superior-General, Fr Christopher Pearson, now a priest in the Ordinariate, has reported that, in December, the Ordinary of the Ordinariate, Mgr Keith Newton, then the (Anglican) Bishop of Richborough, approached him “asking whether it was within the remit of the Confraternity to make a financial grant to the proposed Ordinariate”.
Whatever one thinks about this particular donation, it is very much part of Mgr Newton's role to ensure there is enough money to keep his clergy housed, fed, etc. and able to support their families in the first few months of its existence.
The whole course of events sounds of very dubious morality to me.

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Adrian1
Shipmate
# 3994

 - Posted      Profile for Adrian1   Email Adrian1   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I would say that the whole business was of very dubious morality indeed and this is why I don't envisage it coming to a good end. The last bad course available would be for the Ordinariate to hand the money back, assuming it's not been spent, and for the trustees to stand down in favour of wholly Anglican ones. However I don't intend holding my breath in anticipation of that happening.

--------------------
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
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664

 - Posted      Profile for The Man with a Stick   Email The Man with a Stick   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Why do we assume that the Ordinariate would be able to simply hand the money back, as a matter of charity law?

Whilst the law can indeed be an ass at times, it's equally foolish not to comply with it.

Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Adrian1
Shipmate
# 3994

 - Posted      Profile for Adrian1   Email Adrian1   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:
Why do we assume that the Ordinariate would be able to simply hand the money back, as a matter of charity law?

Whilst the law can indeed be an ass at times, it's equally foolish not to comply with it.

You're probably better versed in Charity Law than I am. However I wasn't aware of any rule which prevented money from being repatriated to a charity if it had been granted on questionable grounds.

--------------------
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
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adrian1:
because they've decided voluntarily to forsake the English Church,

No, they have forsaken the Tudor Church, not the English Church.

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
No, they have forsaken the Tudor Church, not the English Church.
This Tudor Church?

I swear, this crap is going to destroy the Bon Homie I was feeling after joining with the Romans to argue for the catholic faith against pluralist heresy.

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
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Tetchy eh?

You see, when Anglicans throw around terms like Romans, the English Church, Italian Mission etc, they say it's a perfectly valid way of speaking from their perspective.

So I just throw in an opposite perspective from time to time in response, so that we are all on an equal footing.

Lesson to be learnt? Don't use partisan terminology in discussions like these.

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
PD
Shipmate
# 12436

 - Posted      Profile for PD   Author's homepage   Email PD   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
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.

It seems 'a little funny' given that most traditional Anglo-Catholics won't give up and run for Rome no matter how much Rome and some Liberal Anglicans wish they would! On the other hand, they are not contravening their own rules by doing this so it cannot possibly be illegal - just, you know, funny (peculiar not haha!) in the circumstances.

I think in the end there will be provision made for traditionalists to remain in the C of E, so to pull the handle now seems a little premature unless you are genuinely convinced that you now accept RC doctrine. I am from the Catholic tradition within Anglicanism, but going over to Rome is not an option because I dissent from some key RC doctrines. There is no point to me thinking about the ordinariate because I don't want to convert. If I wanted to go over I would just become regular RC and find the most rubrically observant parish within reach.

It seems to me that to accept the whole cycle of Roman dogma and remain C of E is just as dishonest as rejecting bits of it and remaining RC. But then, I am the sort to put belief ahead of expediency.

PD

--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!

My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com

Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682

 - Posted      Profile for GreyFace   Email GreyFace   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
So I just throw in an opposite perspective

With all due respect I wish you'd pack it in. Given our respective official positions regarding each other, responding to shorthand terminology or jocular but affectionate language with something that can mean only "Yeah, well, you lot stopped being a proper Church 500 years ago" isn't very becoming.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
With all due respect I wish you'd pack it in. Given our respective official positions regarding each other, responding to shorthand terminology or jocular but affectionate language with something that can mean only "Yeah, well, you lot stopped being a proper Church 500 years ago" isn't very becoming.

I agree with you entirely. Our "partisan" language is intended to maintain our membership in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and theirs is intended to deny it, so really there is no comparison and TT's accusations of tetchiness was silly.

But perhaps in the spirit of that ecumenical Bon Homie I was talking about, perhaps we should stick with the much more laborious "Roman Catholic Church."

Zach

[ 12. July 2011, 18:58: Message edited by: Zach82 ]

--------------------
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
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
So I just throw in an opposite perspective

With all due respect I wish you'd pack it in. Given our respective official positions regarding each other, responding to shorthand terminology or jocular but affectionate language with something that can mean only "Yeah, well, you lot stopped being a proper Church 500 years ago" isn't very becoming.
I'm sorry, that just doesn't wash. If you want to reserve the right to use offensive terminology which you regard as "jocular but affectionate" you resign the right to object when the favour is returned.

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Real question, TT. Why is "Roman Church" so offensive when, as I said above, it isn't denying the validity of the Roman Catholic Church, it's merely positing a world in which both Rome and Canterbury are valid.

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
The Silent Acolyte

Shipmate
# 1158

 - Posted      Profile for The Silent Acolyte     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Can I interrupt this fraternal love-fest to ask a, somewhat off point, question?

How and when did Jezebel's Trumpet earn that delightfully partisanal sobriquet?

Zach82, I was schooled by Triple Tiara several years ago on this point of Roman vs. Roman Catholic Church vs. Catholic Church. There never having been the scale of the fratricide in these former colonies (well, the Know Nothing assault on the Ursuline Convent in Charlestown, Massachusetts, excepted) as there was in the Olde Countrie, so I think we're on reasonably safe grounds saying "Roman" hereabouts. Leastwise, it never raised so much as an eyebrow when I was at my little Jesuit Schoolhouse.

[ 12. July 2011, 23:03: Message edited by: The Silent Acolyte ]

Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Zach82, I was schooled by Triple Tiara several years ago on this point of Roman vs. Roman Catholic Church vs. Catholic Church. There never having been the scale of the fratricide in these former colonies (well, the Know Nothing assault on the Ursuline Convent in Charlestown, Massachusetts, excepted) as there was in the Olde Countrie, so I think we're on reasonably safe grounds saying "Roman" hereabouts. Leastwise, it never raised so much as an eyebrow when I was at my little Jesuit Schoolhouse.
Well, it is his pretense for denying the validity of Anglicanism. That and the phrase "English Church," which makes it even more astonishing he's offended, considering his confession calls itself the Catholic Church!

Zach

[ 12. July 2011, 23:06: Message edited by: Zach82 ]

--------------------
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
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Tie it in with "the English Church" Zach. In these parts, don't forget, the Roman Catholic Church was outlawed and remains the only religion that has specific legislation against it. That's not just about who may marry into the royal family, it continues in lots of little hidden ways. These are innocuous in and of themselves and don't really impinge on ordinary life, but the fact remains they exist. An RC Diocese, for example, cannot be granted a Coat of Arms because the only legal claimant to such things is the CofE. No RC Diocese can be set up bearing the same name as a CofE one - though that doesn't work the other way: Southwark, Portsmouth, Birmingham, Liverpool were all Catholic Diocesan names before the Anglicans later assumed them as well.

The reason is in order to make clear that the RCC is "foreign". It's subject to a "foreign Power", namely the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormities (to quote the Book of Common Prayer). It's not for good decent English folk. It's for Irish and Italian peasants. It's the Italian Mission to the Irish. Sensible Englishmen belong to the English Church, not that foreign Roman peasant outfit.

There is of course another strand to this, I know. The desire of some Anglicans to claim the title Catholic is a relatively recent phenomenon arising out of the Anglo-Catholic revival. It was much simpler when Anglicans were happy, indeed proud, to claim the title of Protestant. But things have changed, so there seems to be this desire to distinguish the "Romans". You know, you are the only ones who seem intent on doing this. It never gets through to you that we ourselves have to think twice about who you are referring to when you do this, because that terminology is unheard of amongst us.

Talk among yourselves that way all you like, but like I said: in a discussion such as this that kind of partisan and polemical terminology ought to be avoided - unless you are equally willing to accept the return of the favour and allow us to call you Protestants, the Tudor Church or the like.

Just think about how much it grates when you hear Catholics unthinkingly doing just that, and you will recognise what I am talking about.

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Silent Acolyte

Shipmate
# 1158

 - Posted      Profile for The Silent Acolyte     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Zach82, It's probably best to take a deep breath.

When Adrian1 flings "forsake the English Church" at the Ordinariate, it can only be with partisan bite.

With no established church in America, when we Episcopalians, adrift on a Sea of Irish Catholicism, say "English Church", we are indulging in a little fuzzy-headed, faux-nostalgic Anglophilia. Anyone who would hear 1960s, anti-Kennedy, taking-order-from-Rome, Catholic-baiting when we say Rome (1 syllable), ought to redirect their animus to the Garabedians of the world. "Italian Mission" [!!] in the Northeast? It is to laugh. They are (well, used to be) the established church.

[x-posted with TT]

[ 12. July 2011, 23:22: Message edited by: The Silent Acolyte ]

Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Triple Tiara

Ship's Papabile
# 9556

 - Posted      Profile for Triple Tiara   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That of course was written and cross-posted with your latest outraged potshot. Hey-ho.

(and I didn't mean Silent Acolyte of course. We're all live at the moment!)

[ 12. July 2011, 23:24: Message edited by: Triple Tiara ]

--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.

Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Silent Acolyte

Shipmate
# 1158

 - Posted      Profile for The Silent Acolyte     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
When I say, "we're on reasonably safe grounds saying "Roman" hereabouts," I don't mean here on SoF.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'll call you Roman Catholic all you like, though I confess to continue to be perplexed at your offense. Protestants in Catholic countries can complain of nothing less than English Catholics, and we both know full well the Anglican Church has always believed itself part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

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
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Double post here-

I don't need to take a deep breath. My question about why "Roman" is so offensive was sincere, and my resolution to not use it anymore was too.

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
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
All of this goes to why I believe that TEC owes nothing more than a big FU to the CoE, the ABC, and all the other misbegotten rubbish who've lately made up the leadership of the CoE and the whores who've left for the Ordinariate, including the English clergy who once ministered to me as Priests and who now post on their FB pages that they are off to South London "to be ontogentically changed" or whatever crap they posted. FU!! Traitors and pieces of shit!
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
aredstatemystic
Shipmate
# 11577

 - Posted      Profile for aredstatemystic   Author's homepage   Email aredstatemystic   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Has anyone called this move of the CBS into Hell?
Or, perhaps, the Ordinariate as a whole?
I'd do it but Hell scares me, frankly.

Posts: 154 | From: Oh, You Know. | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
LSK, I'm as excitable about the Great Anglican Divorce as anyone, but even I have to wonder what you're on about.

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
MarsmanTJ
Shipmate
# 8689

 - Posted      Profile for MarsmanTJ   Email MarsmanTJ   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adrian1:
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:
Why do we assume that the Ordinariate would be able to simply hand the money back, as a matter of charity law?

Whilst the law can indeed be an ass at times, it's equally foolish not to comply with it.

You're probably better versed in Charity Law than I am. However I wasn't aware of any rule which prevented money from being repatriated to a charity if it had been granted on questionable grounds.
IIRC, the Trustees are technically liable for the whole sum. However the Ordinariate, once they've accepted it... I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure it could be argued either way, that the Ordinariate once they've accepted it can't give it away unless it is something that agrees with their stated aims as a Registered Charity, however equally there must be something in law for accepting illegal donations...

Meanwhile, I /suspect/ that even if they wanted to give it back, it's being spent right now and that the Ordinariate could not afford to give it back any longer.

[ 13. July 2011, 07:49: Message edited by: MarsmanTJ ]

Posts: 238 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Adrian1
Shipmate
# 3994

 - Posted      Profile for Adrian1   Email Adrian1   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Triple Tiara. I don't think there's anything rude or unpleasant about the term 'Rome' - so long as one understands that it referes to a denomination rather than a geographical location. Ditto Roman. 'The English Church' is an old-fashioned alternate term for the Church of England. I know my literary style sometimes comes across as slighly redolent of an inter-war colonial bishop - maybe I was one in a previous life. I don't like the phrase 'Italian Mission' and don'r use it. It's a term used by some old school Aglo-Catholics, rarely heard nowadays, who want to be needlessly rude about their RC brethren.

Under English law as it currently stands, there are few if any real disabilities suffered by Roman Catholics. Of course the monarch may not be a member of the RC church, nor may the heir to the throne etc marry one. If the Act of Settlement were scrapped however, the only way to avoid a lengthy, complicated business of diesastablishment, would be another Act of Parliament requiring any monarch belonging ton another religious body to also declare himself/herself to be a member of the Church of England.

The grant of Arms is a matter for the Garter King of Arms. I'm aware of no prohibition on a Roman Catholic diocese having a grant of Arms and many if not all, use Arms whether so entitled or not. I cannot imagine that any great objection is raised to the practice, be it licit or otherwise.

The convention that Roman Catholic dioceses in England don't use the same names as their Anglican counterparts is a matter of courtesy as much as anything else. It also helps to avoid confusion, although somer potential confusion has been created in recent years on the Anglican side by renaming of Ripon as 'Ripon & Leeds' and Southwell as 'Southwell & Nottingham.' It's my fortune - or should I say misfortune - to live in the latter.

Silent Acolyte. There was no partisan spirit intended when I referred to those who had forsaken the English Church. Rather it was a statement of fact. They've forsaken relative comfort and the freedom to do pretty much as they pleased (except remake the church in their own image) for a new venture and the great unknown. Rome itself cannot know at this stage how the Ordinariate's going to work out or, for that matter, whether it's going to last for long.

--------------------
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
Adrian1
Shipmate
# 3994

 - Posted      Profile for Adrian1   Email Adrian1   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh and I forgot, there's nothing 'recent' about the Anglican Church claiming the title 'Catholic.' The Book of Common Prayer (1662) constantly uses the term, although it's spelt 'Catholick.' The term Protestant isn't used at all.

--------------------
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
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664

 - Posted      Profile for The Man with a Stick   Email The Man with a Stick   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
quote:
Originally posted by Adrian1:
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:
Why do we assume that the Ordinariate would be able to simply hand the money back, as a matter of charity law?

Whilst the law can indeed be an ass at times, it's equally foolish not to comply with it.

You're probably better versed in Charity Law than I am. However I wasn't aware of any rule which prevented money from being repatriated to a charity if it had been granted on questionable grounds.
IIRC, the Trustees are technically liable for the whole sum. However the Ordinariate, once they've accepted it... I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure it could be argued either way, that the Ordinariate once they've accepted it can't give it away unless it is something that agrees with their stated aims as a Registered Charity, however equally there must be something in law for accepting illegal donations...

Meanwhile, I /suspect/ that even if they wanted to give it back, it's being spent right now and that the Ordinariate could not afford to give it back any longer.

You have my essential point yes.

If the grant was illegal then it will either be returned or the Trustees held liable to make good to the charity. I'm yet to see a shred of evidence that this grant was unlawful.

If it just offends the English sense of "fair play" (slightly flippant terminology to make the point) but was legally valid, then the Ordinariate would have to justify giving it back under their charitable aims. Which I'm not convinced would be legally possible.

Which puts the Ordinariate in a really sticky situation. Is this outpour of against the Ordinariate as a whole just for being cheeky enough to ask for a grant? Hardly crime of the century.

Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
aumbry
Shipmate
# 436

 - Posted      Profile for aumbry         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
We are told above that the Society's object is devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and that it is a charity. If the Society's trustees believe it can best serve its objects by making a substantial donation to the Ordinariate then this is perfectly proper. It is the Society's money not the Church of England's.
Posts: 3869 | From: Quedlinburg | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451

 - Posted      Profile for AberVicar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by aumbry:
We are told above that the Society's object is devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and that it is a charity. If the Society's trustees believe it can best serve its objects by making a substantial donation to the Ordinariate then this is perfectly proper. It is the Society's money not the Church of England's.

There's a lot more than that above, aumbry!

Specifically, the charitable aims of CBS begin by stating:
quote:
FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH IN THE ANGLICAN TRADITION
(not cobbled or restated by me, but cut and pasted from the Charities Commission website).

The issue is whether the (Roman Catholic) Ordinariate, which aims to preserve 'Anglican patrimony', is actually in the Anglican tradition or not.

Until various people started re-defining the meaning of 'communion' it was reasonably straightforward to define the Anglican tradition as being held by people in communion with Canterbury. Those members of the CBS who have become part of the Ordinariate are likely to have considered themselves in 'impaired' communion with Canterbury or with their diocesan bishops since 1993, and it is clear that some of them (e.g. here) believe they are taking the final vestiges of Catholic order from the Anglican tradition with them.

Legally and morally, I think they are on very thin ice.

--------------------
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
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
In these parts, don't forget, the Roman Catholic Church was outlawed and remains the only religion that has specific legislation against it.

Serious question out of ignorance: if that is so why is no Catholic (individual or organization) suing the living daylights out of the UK government? If need be via the European courts.

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I don't need to take a deep breath. My question about why "Roman" is so offensive was sincere, and my resolution to not use it anymore was too.

Perhaps because of not being English, I don't find the term terribly offensive. Mostly it's confusing and, well, wrong. I'm not a Roman. I neither hail from today's city of Rome nor am I a citizen of the great Roman Empire of antiquity. I am a Roman Catholic, not a Catholic Roman. So if you want to abbreviate, just call me a Catholic. In writing at least, the more precise RC works well, too.

quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
All of this goes to why I believe that TEC owes nothing more than a big FU to the CoE, the ABC, and all the other misbegotten rubbish who've lately made up the leadership of the CoE and the whores who've left for the Ordinariate, including the English clergy who once ministered to me as Priests and who now post on their FB pages that they are off to South London "to be ontogentically changed" or whatever crap they posted. FU!! Traitors and pieces of shit!

Misbegotten rubbish? Whores? Traitors? Pieces of shit? Are you off your meds or something?

--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear

Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Woodworm
Shipmate
# 13798

 - Posted      Profile for Woodworm   Author's homepage   Email Woodworm   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Will CBS please disclose the legal advice it received?

Speaking with my lawyer's hat on, I don't see how you can possibly claim that this donation was in accordance the articles of the charity.

The opening sentence of the articles is, "The Confraternity is established for the advancement of the catholic faith in the Anglican Tradition..."

This was a donation to group that has chosen to leave the Anglican tradition and join the Roman Catholic church. The donation is 180 degrees from advancing the catholic faith "in the Anglican Tradition". You don't need to be Rumpole of the Bailey to see that.

Lawyers have a way of framing their advice so that "no you can't" reads as "well, there is the faintest possibility that you might be able to, if we stand on a stool, cock our heads, squint, and hope for the best". In the client's mouth advice like that becomes "we have been advised that this is legal".

If I were an unhappy member of CBS then I would be pushing for a copy of the advice. There nothing at law that stops a charity (or anyone else) sharing the legal advice it received.

Come on CBS, show us the advice!

(PS I have nothing at all against the Ordinate. But I do dislike people bullshitting about the law.)

--------------------
NUH MUH! Nuh.. muh...

Posts: 137 | From: the ship's fo'sicle | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38

 - Posted      Profile for Honest Ron Bacardi   Email Honest Ron Bacardi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Doesn't that all rather hinge on the meaning of "Anglican Tradition", Woodworm? If it had said Anglican Church or Anglican Denomination or suchlike I would be more inclined to agree with your POV, but we have numerous churches now who trace their lineage in some way from Anglicanism, and The Anglican Tradition doesn't seem too much of a stretch in describing them. Why not the ordinariate?

(Not that I've changed my views, though).

--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic

Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
MarsmanTJ
Shipmate
# 8689

 - Posted      Profile for MarsmanTJ   Email MarsmanTJ   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I guess it will ultimately depend on how well:

quote:
Originally posted by: http://www.ordinariate.org.uk/faq.htm#Are_members_of_the_Ordinariate_still_Anglicans

The central purpose of Anglicanorum coetibus is "to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared". Members of the Ordinariate will bring with them, into full communion with the Catholic Church in all its diversity and richness of liturgical rites and traditions, some aspects their own Anglican patrimony and culture.

(Bolding mine)

Stands up in a court of law.
Posts: 238 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451

 - Posted      Profile for AberVicar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
I guess it will ultimately depend on how well:

quote:
Originally posted by: http://www.ordinariate.org.uk/faq.htm#Are_members_of_the_Ordinariate_still_Anglicans

The central purpose of Anglicanorum coetibus is "to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared". Members of the Ordinariate will bring with them, into full communion with the Catholic Church in all its diversity and richness of liturgical rites and traditions, some aspects their own Anglican patrimony and culture.

(Bolding mine)

Stands up in a court of law.
A self definition on a website will need to be tested in a Court of Law before anyone can know whether it stands or falls.

--------------------
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
The Silent Acolyte

Shipmate
# 1158

 - Posted      Profile for The Silent Acolyte     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
IngoB confesses:
I'm not a Roman.

I'm guessing then that you don't want us to call you Caligula.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664

 - Posted      Profile for The Man with a Stick   Email The Man with a Stick   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AberVicar:
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
I guess it will ultimately depend on how well:

quote:
Originally posted by: [LINK DELETED]
The central purpose of Anglicanorum coetibus is "to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared". Members of the Ordinariate will bring with them, into full communion with the Catholic Church in all its diversity and richness of liturgical rites and traditions, some aspects their own Anglican patrimony and culture.

(Bolding mine)

Stands up in a court of law.
A self definition on a website will need to be tested in a Court of Law before anyone can know whether it stands or falls.
1.) It's not a self-definition. It's a definition by Fr Stock, General Secretary of CBCEW, who is not a member of the Ordinariate. However it's lifted from the text of Anglicanorum Coetibus itself!

III. Without excluding liturgical celebrations according to the Roman Rite, the Ordinariate has the faculty to celebrate the Holy Eucharist and the other Sacraments, the Liturgy of the Hours and other liturgical celebrations according to the liturgical books proper to the Anglican tradition, which have been approved by the Holy See, so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church , as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.

[ 13. July 2011, 14:40: Message edited by: The Man with a Stick ]

Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
aumbry
Shipmate
# 436

 - Posted      Profile for aumbry         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
All of this goes to why I believe that TEC owes nothing more than a big FU to the CoE, the ABC, and all the other misbegotten rubbish who've lately made up the leadership of the CoE and the whores who've left for the Ordinariate, including the English clergy who once ministered to me as Priests and who now post on their FB pages that they are off to South London "to be ontogentically changed" or whatever crap they posted. FU!! Traitors and pieces of shit!

I do like it when folk come off the fence.
Posts: 3869 | From: Quedlinburg | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451

 - Posted      Profile for AberVicar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:
It's not a self-definition. It's a definition by Fr Stock, General Secretary of CBCEW, who is not a member of the Ordinariate. However it's lifted from the text of Anglicanorum Coetibus itself!

Err... the Ordinariate is a group of people who are in communion with Rome, which has given a broad definition of what it is they are joining, with which they identify. Exactly how is this not a self definition?

To follow on, it isn't exactly clear to me how the same group of people, no longer in the Anglican Communion, can espouse a tradition using the definition of Anglican.

Perhaps they will end up spending the remaining £800K in court, and then the devotion to the Blessed Sacrament will not benefit from it, either in Anglican or RC churches.

--------------------
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
Fuzzipeg
Shipmate
# 10107

 - Posted      Profile for Fuzzipeg   Author's homepage   Email Fuzzipeg   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The Ordinariate is fast becoming the biggest bore since the unicorn refused to go into the ark.

The more I read about it, read comments on it and listen to certain members of it and their justification for accepting the perfidious pounds the more I am convinced that it is a flash in the pan.

Incidentally I prefer to be called a Catholic....if you ask the average person in the street what a Catholic is he or she would immediately assume that it was my Church you were talking about. If asked about the English Church, here in South Africa they would know it was the Anglican Church you were talking about.

--------------------
http://foodybooze.blogspot.co.za

Posts: 929 | From: Johannesburg, South Africa | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612

 - Posted      Profile for FreeJack   Email FreeJack   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
£1m will only keep them going so long even if they keep it.

I take it the vast majority of their new congregations are not viable with a full-time priest, so the whole thing will collapse in a decade or so.

Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
LA Dave
Shipmate
# 1397

 - Posted      Profile for LA Dave         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
While we're at it, I really hate the term "nonconformist."

Signed, LA Dave

Roman, Catholic, ex-Tudor Church American Branch, also known as Catholick but not the Italian Mission variety, etc.

Posts: 981 | From: Take a guess | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
badman
Shipmate
# 9634

 - Posted      Profile for badman     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
By joining the Ordinariate, anglo-catholics are becoming Roman Catholics. Full stop.

Quite.

Hence, they are not entitled to charitable funds donated by and for Anglicans.

Posts: 429 | From: Diocese of Guildford | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
Manipled Mutineer
Shipmate
# 11514

 - Posted      Profile for Manipled Mutineer   Author's homepage   Email Manipled Mutineer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AberVicar:
quote:
Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:
It's not a self-definition. It's a definition by Fr Stock, General Secretary of CBCEW, who is not a member of the Ordinariate. However it's lifted from the text of Anglicanorum Coetibus itself!

Err... the Ordinariate is a group of people who are in communion with Rome, which has given a broad definition of what it is they are joining, with which they identify. Exactly how is this not a self definition?

To follow on, it isn't exactly clear to me how the same group of people, no longer in the Anglican Communion, can espouse a tradition using the definition of Anglican.

Whether to be in the Anglican Communion is a necessary prerequisite to being "Anglican" is subject to dispute in itself, of course. [As, indeed, HRB has noted upthread.]

[ 14. July 2011, 11:38: Message edited by: Manipled Mutineer ]

--------------------
Collecting Catholic and Anglo-
Catholic books


Posts: 1533 | From: Glamorgan, UK | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by badman:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
By joining the Ordinariate, anglo-catholics are becoming Roman Catholics. Full stop.

Quite.

Hence, they are not entitled to charitable funds donated by and for Anglicans.

You know that for a fact, do you? Because the legal advice the CBS received seems to say otherwise. What do you know that they don't?

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
You know that for a fact, do you? Because the legal advice the CBS received seems to say otherwise. What do you know that they don't?

You know full well the difference between something being legal and something being right, Chester.

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



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools