Ship of Fools: The Ordinariate vs, er, not the Ordinariate

Thread: The Ordinariate vs, er, not the Ordinariate Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020114

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

Toss up between here and Purg, but I think it's Eccles by the skin of its teeth... Hosts please move if I've got it wrong.

Something I've been considering a lot over the past few weeks/months/years, and then turbo-charged by the events in Sheffield.

If one were to go to Rome, ought one to go via the local parish or not? In this hypothetical situation, for a person living in the middle of nowhere, there is an RC parish church 8 miles in either direction, or at about 10 miles there's a city with an Ordinariate congregation.

So, what actual difference does it really make? The person would hypothetically know many of the Ordinariate congregation from a pre-Ordinariate CofE (in its loosest sense) establishment, but is that leaping from one ghetto to another?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

I suppose there might be a danger of leaping from one ghetto to another if both pre- and post-Ordinariate groups are inward-looking, and not really playing a part in the wider Church, whether in the C of E or the RCC.

But, with all due respect to those who have joined the Ordinariate (or are thinking of doing so), I can't quite see the point, unless it is to continue in close fellowship with a particular priest (who might be moved on to other duties) or group of friends.

If the C of E really is pants filled with smelly poo, and no longer bearable, then why not simply go the whole hog, and join a mainstream RCC parish? If one still finds a yearning for the occasional BCP Matins or Evensong, surely one would be permitted by the RCC to attend such services in an Anglican church or cathedral?

FWIW.

IJ

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

If it was me I'd just be a normal Roman Catholic, without all that funny Olde Worlde language (although the current RC translation of the mass is pretty weird).

Then I would be regularly worshiping with working class and ethnic minority Christians far more than in the C of E.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Then I would be regularly worshiping with working class and ethnic minority Christians far more than in the C of E.

Not at all sure what you mean by this. Is that good, bad or indifferent? Perhaps you'd like to tease it out a bit.

The Ordinariate does not look to have had any great success in England. AIUI, some clergy and very few laity took the step, or swim. It's been an even more complete flop here both absolutely and proportionally.

As to Betjemaniac's "middle of nowhere" - 8 miles/10km is scarcely any great distance. We in suburban Sydney travel further to St Sanity and many others in the congegation do also.

[ 13. March 2017, 20:18: Message edited by: Gee D ]

Posted by Roman Cataholic (# 18736) on :

Let us not forget that many ordinariate clergy are leaving the ordinariate to be incarnated into their local dioceses.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

The Ordinariate in England is quite different from that in North America, as many (if not most) English Anglo-Catholics were using the novus ordo anyway, while the North Americans were generally BCP+ and, in any case, with them it was a matter of (trying to) integrate independent and disorganized groups of separated Anglicans into a larger entity.

If it's an issue of not liking ghettoes, then I wonder what the individual is doing in any church anywhere. Going to any church is really an exercise in belonging to a ghetto (although we more politely call them communities).

I am not sure if there be any virtue in adhering to a larger entity (Latin) than to the smaller Anglican ordinariate. From my bookstrewn computer room, a half hour walk lands me into a choice of French, English, Croatian, Polish, or Portuguese language Latin parishes, or Melkite, Maronite, Romanian, or Chaldaean Catholic parishes, so five minutes further to the little Anglican Ordinariate cathedral is no big deal. There's no such thing as going to a "normal RCC" parish in most Canadian cities.

If the individual likes the Ordinariate, then it's fine, and there's no more or less virtue in attending that or the Latin church.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Toss up between here and Purg, but I think it's Eccles by the skin of its teeth... Hosts please move if I've got it wrong.

Something I've been considering a lot over the past few weeks/months/years, and then turbo-charged by the events in Sheffield.

If one were to go to Rome, ought one to go via the local parish or not?In this hypothetical situation, for a person living in the middle of nowhere, there is an RC parish church 8 miles in either direction, or at about 10 miles there's a city with an Ordinariate congregation.

It depends on whether one wants to enter the Catholic Church as a member of the Ordinariate or as a member of his geographic diocese.

I'm not clear on how it is in the U.K. but in the U.S. one has to petition to become a member of the Ordinariate*. In the U.S. if an Ordinariate parish or group isn't close by one can go through the initiation process at the local territorial parish first and then, once one has received all of the sacraments, one can contact the Ordinariate to seek enrollment.

I don't know if that can be done in the U.K. so I think it's best to contact the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham first, either through its closest congregation or through its website, if someone is thinking of becoming a Catholic in the Ordinariate. If someone's Anglican heritage is of any importance to him then that's the advice I would give him.

That doesn't mean he can't or shouldn't enter the Catholic Church through the local territorial parish. I just don't know how easy it would be to enter the Ordinariate afterwards if that's important to him and he does this in England.

Once someone is Catholic, he is free to attend any Catholic church anywhere whether he entered through the Ordinariate or the local diocese. He would be as free to attend Mass with the Ordinariate congregation as he would be to attend Mass at an inner-city or Eastern Catholic parish in London, or a Gaelic-speaking parish on the Isle of Barra in Scotland.

quote:
So, what actual difference does it really make? The person would hypothetically know many of the Ordinariate congregation from a pre-Ordinariate CofE (in its loosest sense) establishment, but is that leaping from one ghetto to another?

One difference would be in the jurisdiction to which he would belong. One is the local diocese which is a territorial jurisdiction, covering a certain geographic area. The other is the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham which is a personal jurisdiction and looks after its members wherever they are in the U.K. It might make a difference in certain things like marriage and ordination.

It might also make a difference in worship and spirituality because the Ordinariates were set up to preserve elements of the Anglican tradition that are compatible or in harmony with the Catholic Faith. Members of the Ordinariate are Latin a.k.a. Roman Catholics but of Anglican heritage and in the Ordinariates, through things like its own service books, etc., they can live out that heritage a bit differently that in a regular diocese.

There are over a billion Catholics worldwide in communion with the Pope. It's only leaping from one ghetto to another if one lives that way.

*Fun Fact: in North America, Methodists are also eligible to become members of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Then I would be regularly worshiping with working class and ethnic minority Christians far more than in the C of E.
Not at all sure what you mean by this. Is that good, bad or indifferent? Perhaps you'd like to tease it out a bit.

Eminently a Good Thing.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:

That doesn't mean he can't or shouldn't enter the Catholic Church through the local territorial parish. I just don't know how easy it would be to enter the Ordinariate afterwards if that's important to him and he does this in England.

My understanding is that if you are confirmed in a normal parish, it's basically impossible to migrate to the Ordinariate, unless you have family in the Ordinariate that you want to join.

Any Catholic may, of course, attend Mass at an Ordinariate church, but a Catholic who was confirmed in a normal church would remain under the authority of his local Bishop, and not the Ordinary of the Ordinariate.

Posted by John Holding (# 158) on :

As this has developed, it's clearly not about worship practice, so I'm forwarding it to Purgatory.

John Holding
Ecclesiantics Host.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

quote:
*Fun Fact: in North America, Methodists are also eligible to become members of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter.

On your side of the border, there is the United Methodist Church, and on this side there is the United Church of Canada. And they are Not the Same Thing.

The Ordinariate will have me? Really? [Ultra confused]

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Yes, but wouldn't you have to accept Roman doctrines like Papal Infallibility, the Immaculate Conception etc.?

Can't see Father Wesley liking it all that much...

IJ

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

Part of my point. Methodism in Canada and the US are very different beasts. In fact Methodism generally gets higher the further south you go.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Yes, but wouldn't you have to accept Roman doctrines like Papal Infallibility, the Immaculate Conception etc.?

Can't see Father Wesley liking it all that much...

The CofE isn't that sold on those doctrines either. People who are persuaded of them, usually leave it.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Part of my point. Methodism in Canada and the US are very different beasts. In fact Methodism generally gets higher the further south you go.

Doesn't matter. The Ordinariate isn't Catholic-lite. You're not becoming a half-Catholic, and you don't get an exemption from anything Catholics have to believe or do.

It's just Catholicism that looks and sounds a bit like Anglicanism.

From your standpoint, should you desire to convert to Catholicism, I don't imagine it would make much difference to you, as both will be very different from your current church.

But if you decided that the claims of the RC church were true, the Ordinariate would be open to you, should you wish to find a home there.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
My understanding is that if you are confirmed in a normal parish, it's basically impossible to migrate to the Ordinariate, unless you have family in the Ordinariate that you want to join.

Any Catholic may, of course, attend Mass at an Ordinariate church, but a Catholic who was confirmed in a normal church would remain under the authority of his local Bishop, and not the Ordinary of the Ordinariate.

As a matter of curiosity, and asking from a position of total ignorance, if you are an ordinary person, i.e. not a priest, how much does this matter?

It's a distinction that doesn't really correspond to anything on our side of the Tiber. If you move parishes, for example, and your previous parish was under the episcopal oversight of a flying bishop, that doesn't mean you can only sign up to go on the electoral roll of another parish that is also under separate episcopal oversight, or vice versa.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

Enoch asks:

quote:
As a matter of curiosity, and asking from a position of total ignorance, if you are an ordinary person, i.e. not a priest, how much does this matter?

In non-liturgical things, not a bit. A parishioner in the Latin Archdiocese of Ottawa is a Roman Catholic, and their neighbour, a parishioner in the Ordinariate, are both RC, subject to the discipline of the RCC, taking note of what Pope Frank is up to and, it being Ontario, both supporters of the Separate School System.

Liturgically....In North American Ordinariate parishes, pew fodder would immediately note that they would be using a version of the BCP with which they were already familiar, and that the operation would likely be spikier than in a Latin church and, as well, that they were operating in much smaller communities.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
My understanding is that if you are confirmed in a normal parish, it's basically impossible to migrate to the Ordinariate, unless you have family in the Ordinariate that you want to join.

Any Catholic may, of course, attend Mass at an Ordinariate church, but a Catholic who was confirmed in a normal church would remain under the authority of his local Bishop, and not the Ordinary of the Ordinariate.

I'm afraid that is mistaken.

What matters first is whether someone is eligible for consideration of canonical membership. Someone can be eligible even if that person has already received Confirmation in a Catholic Church. As stated on the website for the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter, eligibility exists if someone can answer "yes" to one or more of the following questions:

quote:

#1. Are you a former Anglican, Methodist, or member of an ecclesial communion that includes those of Anglican heritage (United Church of Canada, Charismatic Episcopal Church, etc.) who is now in full communion with the Catholic Church?

#2. Are you a current Anglican or Methodist intending to be received into the Catholic Church AND currently enrolled in adult catechesis to be received into the Catholic Church?*

#3. Are you a Roman Catholic in full communion with the Catholic Church AND who has a family member(s) who is (are) a canonical member(s) of the Ordinariate?

#4. Have you completed or are you a candidate for any or all of the Sacraments of Initiation through an Ordinariate or Pastoral Provision parish?

#5. Are you a Roman Catholic in full communion with the Catholic Church AND who has a family member(s) who is (are) a candidate(s) for any or all Sacraments of Initiation through an Ordinariate or Pastoral Provision parish?

Anyone in group #1 and some in group #4 would have already received Confirmation. #4 might possibly include someone who was never Anglican or Methodist in the past but joined the Catholic Church through an Ordinariate group, or was baptized Catholic but didn't receive the other Sacraments of Initiation (First Holy Communion and Confirmation) until he or she returned to the Church through an Ordinariate group. In these last two cases he or she (from what I can tell) wouldn't need family members already in the Ordinariate, especially since those cases seem to be covered explicitly in groups #3 and #5.

In a footnote to #4 it explains what I mentioned above, that someone eligible may be received into the Church through a local parish if the Ordinariate group or parish is too far away and then he or she may contact the Ordinariate for enrollment.

A Catholic confirmed in a normal church under the local territorial bishop may still be eligible to enroll in the Ordinarite if he or she still happens to fulfill one of the conditions above such as those people in group #1 (former Anglicans, Methodists, etc., already in full communion with the Catholic Church.)

I emphasize that this is what's stated for the Ordinariate in North America. Someone in the U.K. should get in touch with the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham in case there are any differences of application of norms.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:

quote:
*Fun Fact: in North America, Methodists are also eligible to become members of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter.

On your side of the border, there is the United Methodist Church, and on this side there is the United Church of Canada. And they are Not the Same Thing.

Why the laughter?

In my post I wrote "In North America, Methodists are also eligible to become members of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter". I never wrote that the United Methodist Church and the United Church of Canada are the same thing. I never indicated that I believed that in my post. I hadn't mentioned the United Church of Canada. I hadn't even mentioned Canada. Don't you think you're jumping to conclusions?

Also there are a few very small groups of Methodists in Canada than never joined the group that eventually formed part of the United Church.

quote:
The Ordinariate will have me? Really?

Didn't you used to have "Scoto-Catholic" in your signature?

The United Church of Canada was formed from a union of Methodists with other churches therefore at least some of its members have a Methodist background or inheritance. The Catholic Church has deemed the Methodists to have enough of a share in the Anglican heritage that they can join the Ordinariates so there's nothing strange about members of the United Church being eligible to join the Ordinariate if that is what they desire.

The OP was about someone troubled by current events and seeking advice about entering the Catholic Church. Let's not make this another thread about the United Church of Canada.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

Enoch - Catholic churches in the UK generally don't have electoral rolls. As a Catholic you would find yourself living within the territory of a parish which is part of a diocese. The parish priest of your parish is your parish priest and the bishop of the diocese is your bishop. hat is all. Of course you may attend Mass and fulfil these obligations, such as Easter duties,in any Catholic church.

Of course ,it is not actually all. The parish priest of your parish might be from a religious order, a religious order which would be subject to the authority of the diocesan bishop as far as the celebration of the sacraments are concerned, but where the bishop would not have the authority over the employment of the priest. That would be up to his religious order.

It is sometimes suggested that the Ordinariate is something like a religious order ,but one difference which I have noticed is the following : when I go to a church run by a religious order the prayer for the bishop is always that for the bishop of the diocese. On occasions when I go to an Ordinariate celebration, the prayer for the bishop is replaced by a prayer for the Ordinary. As said already a diocesan catholic can attend a Mass celebrated in the Ordinariate rite and be made welcome but cannot come under the jurisdiction of the Ordinary.
I had never thought about it before but it seems that a person who might earlier on have been Anglican and then became Catholic and was confirmed by a Catholic bishop could then later ,now that the Ordinariate exists, become a member of the Ordinariate.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
As a matter of curiosity, and asking from a position of total ignorance, if you are an ordinary person, i.e. not a priest, how much does this matter?

I suppose if you were a layperson seeking an annulment of a marriage, it might matter - would you go through the office of the Ordinary of the Ordinariate rather than the Diocesan Bishop?

Perhaps your local Diocesan Bishop has waived the rules of some particular penitential discipline because of some local activity, but the Ordinary hasn't.

But these are details.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Of course ,it is not actually all. The parish priest of your parish might be from a religious order, a religious order which would be subject to the authority of the diocesan bishop as far as the celebration of the sacraments are concerned, but where the bishop would not have the authority over the employment of the priest. That would be up to his religious order.

I'm not sure if that's quite right but I'll have to look into it. A diocese often entrusts a parish to a religious order and some aspects of the order will affect what is done at the parish. For example, when I attended a Jesuit parish, we once celebrated the feast of St. Ignatius of Loyola on a Sunday in Ordinary Time because it was a Jesuit parish and for Jesuits his feast is a "solemnity" (for the non-Catholics, a "solemnity" is the highest rank of holy days on the liturgical calendar). But the bishop is ultimately responsible for his parishes and he may still have some or a lot of say in who staffs them even when the staff belongs to a religious order, but again I'm not sure so I would have to look into it.

In any case, even when an order runs a parish the layfolk are not normally members of that order unless one is an Oblate or member of a Third Order so in this sense it would be different from the Ordinariates. The Ordinariates (as far as I know) are comprised of laypeople as well as clergy and religious.

Incidentally, the heads of religious orders are not always bishops. The Superior General of the Jesuits, for example, is not an ordained bishop. You may remember that St. Francis of Assisi was only ever ordained a deacon and Brother Elias, his successor, was a lay brother. I think (my opinion is) that orders commemorate the local bishop at parishes they run because ultimately the parish is run by them for the diocese and they are located in that diocese. It might be different in houses of religious orders (i.e. convents, monasteries, etc.) since these serve the order and not the diocese but I don't know. I spent a few days at a Franciscan friary once but I don't remember who was commemorated during mass.

quote:
It is sometimes suggested that the Ordinariate is something like a religious order ,but one difference which I have noticed is the following : when I go to a church run by a religious order the prayer for the bishop is always that for the bishop of the diocese. On occasions when I go to an Ordinariate celebration, the prayer for the bishop is replaced by a prayer for the Ordinary. As said already a diocesan catholic can attend a Mass celebrated in the Ordinariate rite and be made welcome but cannot come under the jurisdiction of the Ordinary.
I had never thought about it before but it seems that a person who might earlier on have been Anglican and then became Catholic and was confirmed by a Catholic bishop could then later ,now that the Ordinariate exists, become a member of the Ordinariate.

I think it is better to think of an ordinariate as a different type of diocese. Just like if I went to mass in L.A. the prayer for the ordinary (the head of the jurisdiction) is for Archbishop Gomez, and if I went to mass in New York the prayer for the ordinary is for Cardinal Dolan, at an Ordinariate mass the prayers for the bishop naturally are for its ordinary.

Whereas the archdiocese of of L.A. and N.Y. are arranged according to geography, the Ordinariates are arranged according to its members. In this it is similar to the personal prelature of Opus Dei and to the Military Ordinariates, which are responsible for the pastoral care of members of the armed forces in different countries.

Just like New York and L.A have different pastoral needs, as do the Miltary Ordinariates, so do the Anglican Ordinariates have their own pastoral needs and those needs go beyond feast days and calendars. An Anglican Ordinariate can serve the pastoral needs of Anglican converts in a way the local, geographic diocese cannot, just like a Military Ordinariate can serve the pastoral needs of soldiers and sailors in a way a geographic diocese cannot. This is why the need for a potential convert to investigate the Anglican Ordinariates if he is eligible is important and that importance should not be dismissed.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

As far as religious orders running parishes are concerned I think it would depend on who built and who owns the church. As far as I know the Jesuit church in Edinburgh was built by the order who are responsible for the staffing of the church. Yes, they are allowed to use their own calendar including,as was the case last year ,to celebrate the Feast of St Ignatius (31st July) on a Sunday when normally it would be a Sunday in Ordinary Time. However to celebrate the sacraments, in particular the Sacrament of Reconciliation, for the Catholic people of the diocese they would have to have the permission of the bishop.

Certainly in this country you might find a member of a religious order,in particular the Jesuits ,who are working in parishes which are not actually Jesuit parishes. In this case they would be fully under the control of the bishop.Presumably it would have been agreed with the diocesan bishop exactly how long the member of the religious order would be in the parish.

Your explanation of the Ordinariate as a (sort of ) non-territorial diocese makes sense. I suppose that my idea of the Ordinariate being something like a religious order was more focussed on their calendar which can diverge from that of the normal diocesan calendar - for example I think that they have the pre-Lent Sundays of Septuagesima and Sexagesima.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:

quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:

quote:
*Fun Fact: in North America, Methodists are also eligible to become members of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter.

On your side of the border, there is the United Methodist Church, and on this side there is the United Church of Canada. And they are Not the Same Thing.
Why the laughter?

In my post I wrote "In North America, Methodists are also eligible to become members of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter". I never wrote that the United Methodist Church and the United Church of Canada are the same thing. I never indicated that I believed that in my post. I hadn't mentioned the United Church of Canada. I hadn't even mentioned Canada. Don't you think you're jumping to conclusions?

Also there are a few very small groups of Methodists in Canada than never joined the group that eventually formed part of the United Church.

quote:
The Ordinariate will have me? Really?
Didn't you used to have "Scoto-Catholic" in your signature?

The United Church of Canada was formed from a union of Methodists with other churches therefore at least some of its members have a Methodist background or inheritance. The Catholic Church has deemed the Methodists to have enough of a share in the Anglican heritage that they can join the Ordinariates so there's nothing strange about members of the United Church being eligible to join the Ordinariate if that is what they desire.

The OP was about someone troubled by current events and seeking advice about entering the Catholic Church. Let's not make this another thread about the United Church of Canada.

Quite, I am a United Church member. The number of absolute snakebelly low churches included in this provision is hilarious.

Posted by PaulTH* (# 320) on :

I joined the Ordinariate in 2011 before subsequently deciding to return to the Church of England. I think, at least on this side of the Atlantic, it's been a flop. About 1500 people joined it at it's inception, and it hasn't grown much since then. I think the reason behind this, and why it's so much more successful in the USA, revolves around this term "Anglican Patrimony." Before Vatican II, most extremely Anglo-Catholic parishes worshipped according to the English Missal, which was a translation of the old Roman Rite, now known as the Extraordinary Rite, interspersed with the Book Of Common Prayer. The use of the EM was always canonically illegal, but when used with the BCP, the Interim Rite, as it was known, could be passed off as "BCP with traditional enhancements."

Following Vatican II, when both the RCC and the C of E modernised their rites, most AC parishes preferred the use of the modern Roman Missal to The Alternative Service Book and later Common Worship, and I can't say I blame them there. In America "Prayer Book Catholicism" continued to the point that sveral parishes were received into the Catholic Church as "Anglican Use Parishes" who subsequently produced "The Book of Divine Worship." When the Ordinariate was formed, a Dicastry in Rome decided that the BDW would be adapted as the "Ordinariate Use" for English speakers. Most Ordinariate priests in England had never used such a liturgy. Most of them weren't interested in learning it.

When you add that to the fact that most Ordinariate priests in England work also for their diocese, an Ordinariate Mass is usually an ordinary Mass with some extra hymn singing. The Ordinariate Use is worshipped quite regularly at the flagship church in Warwick St London, and I know of one provincial priest who uses it at least once a week, but it's at an odd time and to a congregation of 3 people. His main Sunday Mass is in the Ordinary Form. So I see the eventual route of the Ordinariate on this side of the Atlantic will be assimilation. I would have hoped that the experience could have enriched the Catholic Church liturgically, especially as, to me, the OF is quite dire, though not in he same league as Common Worship for banality, I don't think it will have much long term influence.

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

thanks to everyone who responded. Just to head off another flurry of private messages, I've decided to hold on for now.

I went to HC at my little village church on Sunday, was a tenth of the congregation and as usual felt the Betjemanic challenge to deny the presence of Christ at the altar. Of course, it's easy while the rector and team vicar are both men, and (obviously) ordained by a male bishop, but as Bill Deedes would say of any future difficulty, let's burn that bridge when we get to it.

Thanks for the prayers, all those who told me they were - much appreciated.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

FWIW, I think it's important that you are, and that you remain for as long as possible, a regular member of your local congregation.

Without wishing to be too critical of those who joined the Ordinariate, it all seems to me to be rather self-indulgent, and cutting oneself off from the mainstream church.

All best wishes, anyhow.

IJ

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

FWIW, I agree with Bishop's Finger. I also can't help thinking that if in your heart of hearts, you really believed, or even suspected that Christ was not present there, rather than that you were feeling irritated by aspects of the way your local village church does things, then you wouldn't have been there either.

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

Whilst I have no 'dog in the fight' I think one has to remember that the Roman Catholic Church,even simply in its manifestation in the Roman rite alone,not counting the many other rites, is far more 'mainstream' than the Church of England,even in all of its different rites and communities.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
FWIW, I think it's important that you are, and that you remain for as long as possible, a regular member of your local congregation.

Without wishing to be too critical of those who joined the Ordinariate, it all seems to me to be rather self-indulgent, and cutting oneself off from the mainstream church.

All best wishes, anyhow.

IJ

While liking the supportive character of this post, I fear that I cannot but recall the writer (was it Orwell?) who cautioned us against the self-indulgence of those who attend "mainstream" functions so as to be seen as one of the regular folks. If our friend is more comfortable in a niche, then splendid; if not, then splendid that they be elsewhere. There's no perfect solution, but there may be one which fits one's needs at a certain time.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Actually, I should have said that by 'mainstream', I meant the 'mainstream Roman Catholic church'. Apologies for the ambiguity.

Augustine raises an interesting and fair point - yes, the 'niche', whatever it may be, might well be the right place at the right time for a particular individual. OTOH, the little local congregation does merit support, if at all possible.

IJ

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Actually, I should have said that by 'mainstream', I meant the 'mainstream Roman Catholic church'. Apologies for the ambiguity.

Augustine raises an interesting and fair point - yes, the 'niche', whatever it may be, might well be the right place at the right time for a particular individual. OTOH, the little local congregation does merit support, if at all possible.

IJ

Just to be clear, this was spiralling out of the treatment of the Bishop of Sheffield - the "little local congregation" was never the problem. I'm very happy there - I was/am much less happy with the CofE and the prospects for long term flourishing of the Trad ACs. Of which I am one, even though I'm worshipping in proper Mud-and-Mattins rural England. Because it's my parish church.

I've managed to move house from Res ABC nosebleed high land to one of the few FCA sympathising rural parishes in England but that certainly wasn't intentional! There's a title for my putative autobiog right there - "From FiF to GAFCON."

Anyway, I'm staying for the moment
[Smile]

Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on :

Bishop's Finger I do apologise for what I wrote. I saw the ambiguity of meaning after I had posted.

In a personal capacity I much prefer the modern Roman rite (even the new translation which I hope will be retranslated soon) to the Ordinariate rite which I have attended on a few occasions,although I cannot officially join it..

I accept that it is a very devotional rite but prefer more modern language.

Our Good Lord is present everywhere when two or three gather in his name and everyone, but everyone is best to stay where they feel comfortable. That includes, of course, those who might feel themselves more comfortable, were they to move to the Roman Catholic Church. As some of the Ordinariate seem to have discovered , it is not necessarily a panacea against all that made them feel uncomfortable in the CofE.

Posted by CL (# 16145) on :

In other Ordinariate news; Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio, the original Pastoral Provision parish, by has as of March 21st been admitted to the OCSP. That's about 2,000 new members of the Ordinariate. Additionally the relevant decree from Rome has ordered that all other existing PP parishes/groups that have not already been incorporated into OSCP are to transferred be as soon as possible. This probably marks the end of the PP.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

betjemaniac, FCA? Financial Conduct Authority? Franchise Council of Australia? These and similar are the only clues thrown up by a quick search. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles perhaps?

Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on :

Would appear to be this lot

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

Yes, I was puzzled as to what FCA stands for, and I'm still puzzled by what Pastoral Provision, the OCSP and whatever might be the difference between them is all about.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

Thanks Thunderbunk. A rather odd bunch by the sound of things.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Yes, I was puzzled as to what FCA stands for, and I'm still puzzled by what Pastoral Provision, the OCSP and whatever might be the difference between them is all about.

Pastoral Provision: the provision in the RCC that allowed priests and their congregations that had converted from Anglicanism to use an Anglican Liturgy (based on the US 1979 BCP with RCC Novus Ordo (Vatican II) Eucharistic Prayers and other changes). Pastoral Provision parishes were under the jurisdiction of the local RCC bishop. The Ordinariates allowed such parishes to be under a separate jurisdiction that covered all Ordinariate parishes in the country.

OCSP: Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter. The Ordinariate established for the US and Canada.

At first, Pastoral Provision parishes that did not want to join the ordinariate and wanted to stay as they were could do so (they might have had a good relationship with the local bishop and may have enjoyed more autonomy in their current situation, etc.). Based on what CL says it seems that in the US (which is the only place where the Pastoral Provision exists, I think, except maybe Canada), Pastoral Provision parishes now have to join the Ordinariate.

Also of note is that the pastor of one of the "star" parishes in the Pastoral Provision (with a big thriving congregation) that may or may not have joined the Ordinariate has been suspended because of insisting on doing things his way. Someone who knows the specifics could probably elaborate.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Actually, I should have said that by 'mainstream', I meant the 'mainstream Roman Catholic church'. Apologies for the ambiguity.

Augustine raises an interesting and fair point - yes, the 'niche', whatever it may be, might well be the right place at the right time for a particular individual. OTOH, the little local congregation does merit support, if at all possible.

IJ
Just to be clear, this was spiralling out of the treatment of the Bishop of Sheffield - the "little local congregation" was never the problem. I'm very happy there - I was/am much less happy with the CofE and the prospects for long term flourishing of the Trad ACs. Of which I am one, even though I'm worshipping in proper Mud-and-Mattins rural England. Because it's my parish church.

I've managed to move house from Res ABC nosebleed high land to one of the few FCA sympathising rural parishes in England but that certainly wasn't intentional! There's a title for my putative autobiog right there - "From FiF to GAFCON."

Anyway, I'm staying for the moment

Betjemaniac, just out of curiosity, if you don't mind answering - is the Liturgy at your local AC parish the Novus Ordo, is it using Common Worship in order to approximate the Novus Ordo as much as possible, is it English Missal (ie Tridentine with or without some Anglican additions), is it 1662 BCP celebrated with AC ceremony, or is it something else?

Posted by CL (# 16145) on :

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Yes, I was puzzled as to what FCA stands for, and I'm still puzzled by what Pastoral Provision, the OCSP and whatever might be the difference between them is all about.
Pastoral Provision: the provision in the RCC that allowed priests and their congregations that had converted from Anglicanism to use an Anglican Liturgy (based on the US 1979 BCP with RCC Novus Ordo (Vatican II) Eucharistic Prayers and other changes). Pastoral Provision parishes were under the jurisdiction of the local RCC bishop. The Ordinariates allowed such parishes to be under a separate jurisdiction that covered all Ordinariate parishes in the country.

OCSP: Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter. The Ordinariate established for the US and Canada.

At first, Pastoral Provision parishes that did not want to join the ordinariate and wanted to stay as they were could do so (they might have had a good relationship with the local bishop and may have enjoyed more autonomy in their current situation, etc.). Based on what CL says it seems that in the US (which is the only place where the Pastoral Provision exists, I think, except maybe Canada), Pastoral Provision parishes now have to join the Ordinariate.

Also of note is that the pastor of one of the "star" parishes in the Pastoral Provision (with a big thriving congregation) that may or may not have joined the Ordinariate has been suspended because of insisting on doing things his way. Someone who knows the specifics could probably elaborate.

All of the PP parishes wanted to join the Ordinariate ab intio. OLA in San Antonio presented a few problem by virtue of the fact that it was one of the largest and most successful parishes in the Archdiocese and a large portion of the congregation were not from an Anglican background and thus not technically eligible for Ordinariate membership under the relevant terms of reference.

Fr Phillips was suspended by the current Archbishop on a technicality despite not doing anything wrong. The situation came to a head resulting in Rome intervening and cutting the Gordian knot; Fr Phillips was reinstated and the parish immediately transferred to the OCSP.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

I want to respond to a few things up thread but I won't be able to do so for a few days.

quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
thanks to everyone who responded. Just to head off another flurry of private messages, I've decided to hold on for now.

Betjemaniac,
I wasn't one of those who sent you a private message, but if you have any questions feel free to send me one. Even if its just idle curiosity about a random aspect of the Catholic Church. I'm not an expert but an orthodox cradle-Catholic who, I like to think, has a decent amount of common sense and perspective on things. I mean, I was the shipmate who predicted the election of Pope Francis.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0