THE Catholic Group in the General Synod was described on Wednesday morning as “incandescent” about Tuesday’s announcement of the membership of the group that will prepare the draft code of practice to accompany the women-bishops Measure.
The drafting group was set up by the House of Bishops, which has the responsibility of presenting a draft code to the General Synod.
You may read the names of the members appointed to the group with responsibility for preparing the draft code of practice on women bishops at the website.
Prebendary David Houlding, a leading member of the Catholic Group, said on Wednesday: “We are all so angry and dismayed. It’s clear from the compilation of this group that there is to be no honoured place in the Church of England for traditionalists — that we are not wanted. This group is set up to fail before it begins. It’s one [Bishop Martin Warner] against seven.
“To put two members of the revision committee and no members of the Catholic Group — the audacity of it. I think it’s a disaster.”
Meanwhile, back at the Ranch of the Disaffected:
TWO Church of England flying bishops have denied reports that they will resign in order to join the Roman Catholic Ordinariate before the end of the year.
The Bishop of Ebbsfleet, the Rt Revd Andrew Burnham, and the Bishop of Richborough, the Rt Revd Keith Newton, both Provincial Epis copal Visitors, were said last week to have decided to leave the C of E and accept the Pope’s invitation to join the Ordinariate within the Roman Catholic Church.
....
The two bishops will be on study leave from tomorrow until the end of December.
Well, it appears that there may not be the quick rush for the door that certain bishops and clerics on both sides of the Tiber would have predicted.
The report also said that Bishop Burnham favoured joining the Ordinariate, and was not optimistic about the new Society of St Wilfrid and St Hilda for Catholic clergy and laity (News, 1 October).
That would be SSWSH.
Describing the society’s purpose, Bishop Ford said that it “had been worked up in embryo to be offered as an option so that those who could not, in conscience, see a way forward in the Ordinariate would have some sort of identity”. It “is not competing with the Ordinariate”, he said, and it would “not be another club or pressure group”, but “a common life”.
....
The Revd Ivan Aquilina, Vicar of St John the Baptist, Sevenoaks, who attended the sacred synod, said: “So far, what the aims and objectives are is not clear, so, while some are joining it, already others will want to wait and see. . . The society may or may not secure some sort of provision or a stronger code of practice. It may also be an honoured vehicle for those who, for personal or ecclesial reasons, cannot be part of the Catholic family.”
It appears that in England there will be this group and that group of the disaffected formed until the motherland rivals its daughter, the US, in alphabet soup mixtures of "Anglican" religious bodies.
The current issue of the The Church Times is a gold mine of information.
Incandescent. I love that word. Google dictionary lists four definitions for incandescent:
ReplyDelete1. Emitting light as a result of being heated
(plumes of incandescent liquid rock)...
2. (of an electric light) Containing a filament that glows white-hot when heated by a current passed through it....
3. Extremely angry
(she was incandescent at the way the IRS acted)....
4. Of outstanding and exciting quality; brilliant
(Mravinsky's incandescent performance of Siegfried's Funeral March)
I'm guessing these blokes were not using incandescent as in no. 4. Sigh.
It's no. 3, then?
ReplyDeleteIt will all come out in the SWASH.
ReplyDeleteDamian Thompson, the Telegraph's overall Blog Editor and its religion correspondent, is that wonderful creature an ultra-conservative, ultra-papist. He is also, quite frequently, exceedingly funny, often at the expense of Anglicans in general and in particular of Anglo-Papalists, whose inconsistencies and foibles he delights in exposing.
ReplyDeleteI can strongly recommend his latest post on the Society of SS Hinge & Bracket, as he calls the SS Wilfred & Hilda bunch. He hits several nails firmly on the head, not least the “dear ladies” in the vicarages of Chichester. Do not, miss the delightful video at the foot of the post - nothing to do with religion - which explains, for Americans, the "Hinge & Bracket" allusion.
As Joe.My.God. would say: call the Waaah!mbulance!
ReplyDeleteLapin, I'll check out the column and the video. Just the play on the name of the Society is funny.
ReplyDeleteRighto, JCF.
Wilfrid comes before Hilda in SSWiSH's name, of course.
ReplyDeleteAs I've said before, the Ordinariate is the Molokai of the Roman Catholic Church. The Romans don't want a set of disaffected sh*t-stirrers from the Anglican Communion to destroy the supposed peace of their own closets, so instead they have constructed a leper colony into which to place the Anglicans-Who-Don't-Care-For-Women (like the "Knights Who Say Nee" of Monty Python fame). They will not contaminate Holy Mother the Church, nor will they unduly trouble the currently male and celibate clergy, who become enraged when they see Anglican priests being received into the ranks, re-ordained, and allowed to keep their wives.
ReplyDeleteThe only question now is: who's to be the Damian to the leper colony? Some celibate Anglican bishop who can swim the Tiber, one would suppose.
Lapin, Damien Thompson's column is "exceedingly funny". The Church Times once called him "a blood-crazed ferret", a description in which he obviously takes great delight.
ReplyDeleteIf you go over to read Thompson, do watch the wonderful Hinge and Bracket video posted there.
And of course, St Hilda follows St Wilfrid. It's a wonder that she's included at all.
Chris, your analogy of the ordinariate to a leper colony seems apt to me. Already all does not go as planned. The entrance of SSWSH onto the scene is a complication that was perhaps unforeseen. Does anyone doubt that there will be further unintended consequences following upon the ordinariate scheme?
ReplyDeleteAs to who will be in charge, I have no clue.
Chris, am I wrong to see the anti-women movement in the CofE as mainly clergy-driven?
There are some conservative writers who are so funny - Auberon Waugh, Evelyn's eldest, was another - and sometimes so right, this being a case in point, that one forgives much because of it.
ReplyDeleteThe gestures in Hinge & Bracket's "Three Little Maids" are a reflection of the "Japanese" gestures traditional in performances of "The Mikado". Did you see "Topsy-Turvy", Mike Leigh's 1999 film about Gilbert & Sullivan & the making of "The Mikado"? Had little circulation, either side of the Atlantic, but is brilliant - (numerous awards - two Oscars for design, & best movie & best director, New York Film Critics' Circle). If you've not seen it, do so!
To whet your appetite, "Three Little Maids" from Mike Leigh's movie.
“So far, what the aims and objectives are is not clear,..."
ReplyDeleteThe aims and objectives are quite clear. They aim to have a place where misogynists and homophobes can meet and feed each other's misogyny and homophobia in relative safety and without criticism.
I believe that some of the C of E and other Anglican provinces have twigged to the fact that the Ordinariate, rather than uniting disaffected Anglican with Holy Mother the Church, is meant to keep them separate to avoid "mixing" of the Anglican gynophobes with the RC women-ignorers. Thus this new society. I look on it as an equivalent of the "third province" that a number of the opponents of woman's ordination wanted. This will allow them to "separate" from the C of E after it consecrates woman bishops, have a structure with bishops it can live with, and yet not fall into the arms of the Romans.
ReplyDeleteWhether this will work is yet to be seen. The parochial structure of the Church of England makes it enormously difficult for any dissident parish to separate from that Church and keep its property, as some in the Episcopal Church have tried to do. No dissident Episcopal Church parish or diocese seems to have been finally triumphant at keeping its property and assets, but they have sequestered them (and spent them, of course) for a good long while, and many still do so pending court rulings. Here parochial property cannot be alienated and every parish priest and holder of a Bishop's License must swear allegiance to the Queen and adherence to the 39 Articles and the Canons of the Church of England, which, being the Church by law Established, has the civil authorities on its side in any dispute. So dissident clergy and parishes cannot take their property with them if the depart. I believe that the Roman Catholics would be extremely loth to get into a pissing contest with the Church by law Established here in England over the possession of property belonging to parishes which wished to join the Ordinariate. Not only would they lose, but they'd look like sheep-stealers.
Chris, am I wrong to see the anti-women movement in the CofE as mainly clergy-driven?
I think that about 75% of the gynophobes are Church of England priests and bishops. However, there is a minority of what we used to call "sacristy rats", those men who end up as virgers and sacristans and women who find Father extremely handsome and thus join the Altar Guild in order to stay close to him. I know of a parish not too far from here which began as a Resolution A and B parish. This means that they have resolved not to call a woman as incumbent and will not permit a woman to celebrate Communion or give absolution at the altar. Over the years, the number of laypeople who are in favour of this has declined in the pews but swollen the crematoria. The incumbent has changed his views (and, to be frank, was never a gynophobe but was seriously troubled about the validity of sacraments) and now privately espouses the right of all to approach and administer all the Sacraments. Only one laywoman in the parish actually is a member of Forward in Faith now, and she is an older woman who, long may she live, but she will sooner or later shuffle off this mortal coil, as shall we all.
As the late, lamented Bishop of Southwark, the Rt. Rev'd Mervyn Stockwood, used to say (in reference to elderly vicars who would not retire): "Where there's death, there's hope."
Indeed, there are younger laypeople in the ranks of the gynophobes, but not that many.
I look on the gynophobic clergy as being those who feel threatened by the presence of women in the command chain. There is a large proportion of gay male clergy in this segment: the ones who have Mad Tea Parties with large slugs of sherry and gin, for example. It is such fun slagging off women, isn't it? (Irony and sarcasm alert here, please! It isn't really fun at all and is actually quite sad and frightening to me.)
There is a smaller number who are not overtly woman-hating, but who are genuinely troubled by Apostolic Succession, the future of ecumenism with the Romans and Orthodox, and the validity of the Sacraments. This segment can be convinced to the other side of the discussion by skillful debate and thoughtful prayerful discussion.
Lapin, agreed about certain conservative writers.
ReplyDeleteAll on my own, I picked up the Japanese flavor in the movements in the video. I did not see Topsy Turvy, but I shall make a note-to-self to try to find it. The snippet did, indeed, whet my appetite.
“So far, what the aims and objectives are is not clear,..."
BooCat, perhaps there's a certain reluctance to clarify, because your following statement is pretty much on the mark.
Chris, what splendid commentary! I want to respond properly, but I will take my time.
ReplyDeleteRight off, I must tell you that "Where there's death, there's hope", had me rolling on the floor. I shouldn't be, though. What do I know? Perhaps certain people say that about me!
Chris, with respect to the matter of property, I've heard a number of Church of England bishops and a Church in Wales bishop criticize the leadership of the Episcopal Church for engaging in litigation over property. In England, because the CofE is the state church, the matter would not get as far as litigation.
ReplyDeleteBut what if a priest and all or part of a congregation occupied church property, while claiming to have left the CofE to be part of a body other than the CofE? Would the leadership not have them evicted if negotiations failed? Or would the powers permit them to have the church property?
But what if a priest and all or part of a congregation occupied church property, while claiming to have left the CofE to be part of a body other than the CofE? Would the leadership not have them evicted if negotiations failed? Or would the powers permit them to have the church property?
ReplyDeleteIn England the Church of England is required to have a church in each parish. The entire country is divided up into parishes. The incumbent of the parish is required to live in the parish, and has the freehold of the church land and building as well as the vicarage/rectory. This does not mean that s/he can alienate the property at will. It is held in trust for the next incumbent.
If an incumbent declares that s/he is no longer in communion with or a member of the Church of England, s/he is no longer entitled to the freehold. Thus, the property reverts to the diocesan bishop or his nominee (normally the churchwardens or the Diocesan Board of Finance) until a new incumbent is named. If the former incumbent refuses to leave the vicarage, the DBF is likely to force them to leave through eviction if it goes on long enough. Normally in such cases (and they do happen) the DBF negotiates with the former incumbent until s/he leaves on his or her own.
The congregation does not hold the deed to the church: the incumbent does (in law). The churchwardens own all the furnishings inside the church building. So the incumbent by right of office owns the land and building, and the churchwardens by right of office own the pews, the sacred vessels, the kneeling hassocks, and the dustpan and brush and Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all. Abandoning the Church of England means they all automatically lose office and therefore ownership.
I think that it is likely that any parish where the members and incumbent wish to transfer to the Ordinariate will be told by their new Spiritual Leader to leave the C of E property they were worshipping in. The Romans do NOT want to get into a legal wrangle with the Church of England. The Romans have enough churches around so that they can give the lepers^WOrdinariate Mass time in their spaces.
Many dioceses are struggling with parishes that are too small to support their incumbents and their diocesan quota. Having some of these groups leave for the Romans will assist the C of E in consolidating parishes and saving money. Southwark has something like 310 incumbencies, which is around 30 more than the national church has agreed we should have. As no one wants to go to Northern dioceses, but everyone wants to be down in London where the boys are...oops...where the action is...er...where it's warmer, Northern dioceses are going begging for priests but Southwark can pick up those extra posts for itself. However, it does mean that we have smaller parishes and too many of them.
I would be astounded if the C of E allowed any Ordinariate secessionists to keep their parish church. They might sell them the building, but the rules for doing that are so arcane it might take years to get permission to do it.
A few years ago I went down to the Lizard in Cornwall with my mother (her family has on and off holidayed there for 80+ years and still know a moderate number of locals). We had a lovely tea with one who bemoaned that her parish was lacking a permanent priest because some holdouts refused to consider a woman; they now have a female priest (though several parishes have been merged and there is the problem of the churches mostly being very old [one has a 250 year old tree growing on it, some odd saints, and a declining permanent population). People are coming around.
ReplyDeleteBTW the name St. Wilfred always reminds me of the Kipling short story involving him though I'm not sure whether the dissidents would like it.
There are several combined benefices (ie, parishes that are considered together for the provision of one priest) where one of the parishes in the combination has signed Resolution B and thus a woman cannot be appointed to the combined benefice. There is no easy way out of this except to separate them from the combination. It has gotten very ugly in several instances.
ReplyDeleteChris, then the leadership in the CofE would move ahead to retain their property if a group tried to leave the church and continue to use the property, but the process would be different from that in TEC.
ReplyDeleteIn May of last year, I linked to and quoted a statement from Bishop Gregory Cameron, who was then a bishop in the Church in Wales, who criticized the litigation in the US church, and asked what he would do in such a situation. He visited my comments, (or so I believe) where we had an exchange, but I don't know that he ever understood that TEC's property is held in trust by the national church and is not owned by the diocese or the parish.
Erp, better no priest than a woman priest? I'm pleased to hear the congregations are coming around.
ReplyDeleteI don't know the Kipling story about St Wilfrid. I'll check it out.
Chris, it seems to me that the system of resolutions against having a woman priest is way past the sell by date and needs to go in the trash. When the one church is separated out, it doesn't have the resources to support a full-time vicar.
ReplyDeleteI will try to answer all your questions in one comment.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I am not aware of how property in the Church in Wales is held. As it's disestablished, their rules are (presumably) different from ours.
I looked at the link, and Bishop Cameron's comment seems to boil down to "Can't we all just get along?" That attitude doesn't get you too far with the AMIA crowd.
Second, in order to get General Synod to agree to ordain women as priests, the rules were skewed so that a parish that did not want woman priests either as incumbents, or celebrants, or who wanted a bishop untainted by having ordained a woman, could pass resolutions that would legally allow them to refuse woman's ministry. No one was thinking clearly when they passed them about combined benefices where one parish could thwart the will of all the other parishes in the benefice. It's caused quite a bit of angst here and there.
Third, for those parishes which do not believe in the priesthood of women, having no priest and having a woman priest boil down to the same thing. Sad but true.
Chris, I'm learning so much from your comments about the Church of England. Thank you. Some of their ways of functioning seem odd to me, indeed, but I'm quite sure that our ways seem odd to them. Witness: Abp. Williams seems to have difficulty in grasping that the bishops in TEC just don't have the power to do some of the things that he asks them to do.
ReplyDeleteOf course, you've had the experience of living in both worlds.
Right, DP.
ReplyDelete