Anglican squabbles

The BBC News website has had a couple of reports about the decision of Philip North, the Anglican suffragan Bishop of Burnley to withdraw his acceptance of the Bishopric of Sheffield. The more recent version can be seen via the link below:


Church of England at war after Bishop Philip North's U-turn

Why is there so much anger among Anglicans after Philip North chose not to be Bishop of Sheffield?

As the articles point out Bishop North, previous to his elevation to Burnley, had withdrawn under similar pressures from accepting the Bishopric of Whitby, the usually Anglo-Catholic suffragan of the diocese of York.

Several thoughts come to my mind about this sorry state of things in the Church of England, of which I was once a member.

Firstly there is the rigid feminist and liberal intolerance that is now entrenched amongst so many of those who have chaplaincies and deaneries - read the article - and those they support and encourage. There are no enforceable safeguards to protect the consciences and opinions of traditionalist Anglo-Catholics, Evangelicals or anyone else who objects to the foisting of women clergy upon what still claims to be part of a fractured but historic Church. That failure to give proper safeguards contributes to the creeping decay of the Anglican Church - and it really ought to offend the tender consciences of those very liberals who doubtless claim it everywhere else save in the organisation they belong to...

Secondly, Anglo-Catholics really should wake up and smell the incense ( or lack thereof ) and do the sensible thing and seek the Roman option either directly or through the Ordinariate. One Anglican friend told me recently that the present trend in Rome inhibits him from making the move. I heard what he said, but it really should not deter - things and people and office holders change...

Thirdly, I feel sorry for Bishop Philip North, whom I have met occasionally through Pusey House and when he was at Walsingham. I gather that his ministry as Bishop of Burnley has been widely appreciated by Evangelicals as much as Anglo-Catholics and that he has been very successful in working with church youth groups.

The last time I encountered him was before he became a bishop at a study day at Pusey House on the proposal to establish the Ordinariate back in, I suppose, 2010. He was then arguing that the established and recognised nature of the Church of England enabled him to reach people he would not be able to do were he to join the Ordinariate. He was, therefore, not attracted by that project. He may just have had a point - a point - but now the squawking elite in the Church of England are preventing him reaching the people of the Sheffield diocese. It is not an especially Anglo-Catholic minded one, but with some notable if isolated centres ( or so it used to be) and he surely has a right to be heard there.

The withering of Anglo-Catholicism

A friend told me the other day of a conversation with a leading member of the congregation of an Anglo-Catholic parish that currently is looking for a new incumbent. When my friend said they assumed the parish was looking for someone in that tradition they got the answer "Oh we wouldn't object to a woman, especially if she was young and had children as that could be good for the village school." 

So much for sustaining the Anglo_Catholic witness of the parish. Was it for this that Fr Tooth and others went to prison?

Act of Uniformity

Today is St Bartholomew's Day and the 350th anniversary of the coming into force of the Act of Uniformity which definitively restablished the Church of England and the Book of Common Prayer. Those of more Congregationalist sympathies who could not accept the restored settlement were excluded from the national Church, and the Dissenting Minister and his convecticle came into being.

The new Book of Common Prayer was slightly amended, but essentially that of 1559, itself with slight changes the 1552 book. The 1662 Act of Uniformity is the continuing guarantee of the Established Church and of its primary Liturgy, the BCP.

Image: justus.anglican.org

It occurs to me that the tragedy of the contemporary Church of England is this loss of Uniformity. By that I do not mean the loss of liturgical uniformity. That was blown away by the second and third generation of Tractarians - the Ritualists - and ill considered measures such as the Public Worship Regulation Act of 1874 and its debacle in the Lincoln Judgment of 1890 did nothing to halt such changes. The 1927 and 1928 debates on revising the Prayer Book marked the end of attempts to enforce real uniformity of practice - the 1928 Prayer Book issued on the authority of the Archbishops is a landmark in terms of practice and policy.

The loss of Uniformity I mean is that loss of coherence in belief and practice. In the last half century the Church of England seems to have abandoned any consistent sense of having a shared set of beliefs both with fellow Anglicans and fellow Christians.

As a former Anglican and as an Englishman I regret this - it is not good news for our society. The awareness of that fragmentation of underlying shared views led in part to my seeing that my true home was elsewhere, in thaa Catholic Church of which there are still residual parts in the Church of England, but not enough to sustain me on the journey.

The confidence of being a national Church that could re-evangelise the nation has gone. The idea once held by Anglo-Catholics such as T.S.Eliot that by becoming more Catholic the Church of England could thereby Catholicise the country has proved, or been shown to be, a chimera.

The Church of England was always a strange sixteenth century theological and constitutional compromise. By 1662 it was nevertheless the majority faith of the English people. Its loss of that identity in the last half century may well have exposed those inherent contradictions to the glare of full daylight, but in abandoning any real coherence or discipline in anything the Anglican establishment has progressively (sic) abandoned its ability to speak to the nation.

Confessions of a Convert

I recently read Robert Hugh Benson's Confessions of a Convert, which was published in book form in 1913, but based on some articles he wrote for an an American Catholic magazine a few years previously, and recounting the story of his reception as a convert in 1903.

It is easily read, with a fluent style and is not , in any case very long. Nevertheless it is very well worth reading, both as an account of Benson's own progress as son of a former Archbishop of Canterbury and as an exemplar of a conversion narrative.

In that respect it stands in many respects alongside Newman's Apologia and Knox's almost contemporary Spiritual Aeneid. What struck me was not only its balance and readbility as an account but its continuing appositeness. More than a century since the events he describes it retains an immediacy that describes a process not dissimilar to that which led to my own reception. Benson's career as a clergyman and monastic was entirely different from my own, but his description of how he had justified and expounded his position as an Anglo-Catholic was one I could recognise very clearly. Here was that delight in doing things in the "proper Catholic way" that I too had once shared in whilst outside the full communion of the Roman obedience.

I was also aware of how true his comments are about how, once one leaves that world, and however much one had appreciated its charms, that then the thought patterns which had one explained its claims rapidly become a thing of the past, irrecoverable to explain why one had remained so long.

I heartily recommend this book to those who have already made the journey, to those thinking of it, and to those cradle Catholics who wonder what holds Anglo-Catholics back. An ideal present for those being received into the Ordinariate.

Thoughts on the Ordinariate

I have had several conversations in recent weeks with various friends about the proposed Ordinariate, and it occurs to me that this might be an appropriate time to draw the various strands together.

The July meeting of the General Synod made it quite clear that there was going to be no provision made for traditionalist Anglo-Catholics, now or, let's face it, in the future. As Ancient Richborough has argued this really is the end of the road. I understand there will be meetings of Ebbsfleet and Richborough clergy in September to discuss the way forward. It is reasonable to get the holiday season out of the way and have time to reflect. However, what is there to reflect upon? There are two options - stay with the Church of England (and all that implies in 2010 and for the future) or look elsewhere - and that in reality means Rome, with Anglicanorum Coetibus already issued. Simple.

One can respect individuals needing to take time to pray and reflect, and also to make practical decisions. I sympathize with the wish to retain one's habitual place or worship - that is a real wrench in prospect for some. Nonetheless the fundamental choice is clear - clinging on, as an ever declining group, unloved and unwanted by so many of their fellow Anglicans, hoping against hope that there will be a new Oxford Movement - yes, I have heard that argued in recent months - or entering into union with the Catholic Church, reuniting with that body from which the Ecclesia Anglicana was severed, along with not a few human heads, and, to borrow a phrase, going Forward in Faith.

Yet, almost a year after Anglicanorum Coetibus was announced and then published, and allowing for Synod meetings and all the necessary practical discussions, things seem not to be moving very far. That is not to say discussons and planning may well not be happening - I assume, and hope, they are - but that is not the public perception. The process appears to be losing momentum. Thus,whilst individual parishes are looking to their future, the larger scheme, in England at least, seems uncertain.

Thus one Anglican friend tells me that his church is considering the option of Rome or Cconstantinople - Benedict or Bartholomew - well, yes, fine, but for one parish to be playing hard to get with the greatest sees of Christendom does seem a little bit presumptious. He added "Well, we've four years." True - unless you are run down crossing the road.

So there we have a version of ecclesiastical politics. Trouble is, this is not negotiating your way through a prospective "hung parliament" or "hung synod" - yes, I know some of you are saying would that it were. This is about Truth, it is about the Faith. If it is about a political compromise we have have not moved on from the mid-Tudor polity, but it may be bit less bloody.

Meanwhile individuals are making the move across the Tiber, or are making their plans to, regardless of the Ordinariate. Some need or are anxious to fufill contractual or moral obligations before they go, but go they will. As a fellow convert I am delighted for them, and believe they will be not only valuable additions to the Church, but will find a safe haven therein.

Looking back at the Anglican shore I am somewhat surprised by evidence of more than one Anglican clergyman who would identify themselves as being in the Anglo-Catholic tradition showing elements of hostility to the forthcoming Papal visit and beatification of John Henry Newman -it smacks of the "Papal Aggression" agitation of 1850.

So we wait for the Ordinariate to come into being, but when - will it be September? October? 2011? It seems such a missed opportunity not to have had it at least with some members when the Pope will be here. Yes, there are practical issues to resolve, but that can take till Kingdom come, and this is about the Kingdom.

Church politics four centuries ago got the Church in England into this mess, and more politics will not solve it. The Pope, as even the dreadful Ruth Gledhill can see, has made an offer that cuts through centuries of accumulated practice and prejudice, and not only is it an offer of historic significance, it is also the best one on offer now, or in the future. Seeing if the Synod will offer something better is not only daft, it is ungracious. Looking elsewhere is the path to separatism or eccentricity. Remember the fate of the Non-Jurors? How many Non-Juror churches do you know?

Cradle Catholic friends are bemused and somewhat irritated by this lack of response. They can accept the need to make plans for a move, but cannot see why, when such an offer is made, and it is what so many have said they have wanted, that there is not a more enthusiastic public response. They also feel some of their worst fears about Anglo-Catholics and Anglicanism are being justified when the impression is being created that Anglo-Catholics are playing one bidder off against another, and not realising that they may be less well placed so to do and more in need of a helping hand - and that is what Anglicanorun Coetibus is. I stress to such Catholic friends that those who want to avail themselves of the provisions the Pope has offered are very much "full Faith" and that they can add very considerably to the life of the Universal Church. However I do increasingly understand what they think, and begin to think it myself. If not now, when?

Anglican Patrimony

Today's post from the New Liturgical Movement reproduces an article from The Anglo Catholic which deals with points I have commented on recently in Anglo-Papalist style and Michael Yelton books, that is the potential of the Ordinariates to realise the dream of Anglo-Papalists and effect reunion, and the amongst the central issues, that of liturgical life. The article, by Br Stephen Treat O.Cist., addresses the question as to what is the Anglican patrimony and how it relates to that of its elder sister, and is very well worth reading. It can be found here. I have inserted the link to The Anglo Catholic as that has more comments than the NLM version does at present.

Plain speaking from Ancient Richborough

There is a typically lucid and forceful reply from Ancient Richborough on his blog to the statement from fifteen Anglican bishops who see themselves as being in the Catholic tradition of the Church of England in the wake of the General Synod meeting. It can be read here.

He makes the issues clear, and states a confidant case for realising that, in a well known phrase, "It's all up." I hope and pray that his wisdom will be appreciated and followed by those directly affected.

Michael Yelton books

An additional benefit of staying with my friends in Norfolk was being shown books they had but which I had not so far seen. Notable amongst these were two recent books by Michael Yelton - Anglo-Papalism and his biography of Alfred Hope Patten, the restorer of the Shrine at Walsingham, both published by Canterbury Press.

I had read a complimentary review of Anglo-Papalism, but the reviewer's emphasis on the book was perhaps different from that which I would take. From skimming through both books I think they look both interesting and entertaining - Anglo-Papalism has never lacked colourful characters.

One point made by Yelton struck me as topical - he concentrates on the period down to 1960 in Anglo-Papalism, and his life of Fr Hope Patten closes with his death in 1958, with notes as to the later lives of his collaborators. However he contrasts the unrealised vision c.1920 of the Anglo-Papalists of taking a substantial body of Anglicans into union with Rome with the fact that the result of their endeavours has not been that but, at Walsingham, and through Walsingham, a much wider dissemination of Marian devotion in the Church of England and Anglicanism as a whole.

That point is true, but we may now be on the brink of actually seeing some clergy and parishes actually fulfilling the vision under the terms of Anglicanorum coetibus and through the proposed Ordinariates. The "vision glorious" may yet be realised, more than half a century to a century late, but it may still happen, just as there is a revival of those very things in liturgical matters which marked out the pre-Vatican II Anglo-Catholics, and to which so many of them clung so tenaciously. For many others that vision, presented in word and act, has led them to individual union with Rome. The Anglo-Papalists and the restorers of Walsingham - who thus spurred on an unresponding Catholic hierarchy to do something there and restore the Slipper Chapel - have, in their own, delightfully individual, way yielded a rich harvest. We should remember them with gratitude, and pray that we may all rejoice together upon another shore.

Anglo-Papalist style

Ex Fide, the blog of the self-styled 'Premier Sacristan' of St Magnus the Martyr in London, always has interesting posts and two recent ones caught my eye. The first deals with their commemoration of the Translation of the relics of St Thomas of Canterbury - a feast of interest to me from my days at St Thomas here in Oxford. Clearly a rather splendid occasion - and a topic to which I shall return.

The second post also has an Oxford connection, starting as it does with Colin Stephenson's Merrily on High. Fr Stephenson had been vicar of St Mary Magdalen's in Oxford, a church I used to periodically attend in my early days in the city. More than anyone else it was Stephenson who made 'Mary Mags' the "highest" church in the Church of England before he went to Walsingham. The post and its comments, which are worth looking at, are here.

The post is a series of reflections, as indeed are the interesting comments, to which I will add my halfpennyworth. Anglo-Papalists who abandoned the heritage they had assumed did not do themselves, or the tradition they espoused any favours. Indeed it was where that tradition was preserved that Anglo-Papalism and Anglo-Catholicism had serious pulling power - it was a significant factor which kept me within the Anglican orbit for a long time.

Happily, nay, mercifully, things have moved along on the other bank of the Tiber . Those Anglo-Papalists who value the beauty of holiness expressed in traditional forms will be far safer and ultimately far happier within the proposed Ordinariates, or within the widening traditionalist movement within the Catholic Church. They should value and preserve, or indeed revive, their ceremonial practices, and bring them on board the barque of Peter. Yes, bring your lace and folded chasubles - they really can be the new and living way.

Which brings me back to St Thomas. Whatever the intricacies of the dispute with King Henry II, and indeed not a few of the English hierarchy, and however much issues were lost sight of or changed out of recognition, one thing St Thomas did believe in and stress was his fidelity to the Holy See in the person of Pope Alexander III, but also to the Papacy in principle. St Thomas, whatever else he may have been, came to be seen as a martyr for the independence of the Church under the Pope. No wonder King Henry VIII was so determined to destroy his cult. So yes, it is good to see St Magnus Martyr celebrating St Thomas, but, with great respect and genuine concern, may I suggest that they should perhaps give some thought to what St Thomas might, conceivably, be saying to them,particularly in the present circumstances of Ecclesia Anglicana.

Anglo-Papalist style

Ex Fide, the blog of the self-styled 'Premier Sacristan' of St Magnus the Martyr in London, always has interesting posts and two recent ones caught my eye. The first deals with their commemoration of the Translation of the relics of St Thomas of Canterbury - a feast of interest to me from my days at St Thomas here in Oxford. Clearly a rather splendid occasion - and a topic to which I shall return.

The second post also has an Oxford connection, starting as it does with Colin Stephenson's Merrily on High. Fr Stephenson had been vicar of St Mary Magdalen's in Oxford, a church I used to periodically attend in my early days in the city. More than anyone else it was Stephenson who made 'Mary Mags' the "highest" church in the Cof E before he went to Walsingham.

The post and its comments, which are worth looking at, are here .

Now the post is a series of reflections, to which I will add my halfpennyworth. Anglo-Papalists who abandoned the heritage they had assumed did not do themselves, or the tradition they espoused any favours. Indeed it was where that tradition was preserved that Angl-Papalism and Anglo-Catholicism had serious pulling power - it was afactor which kept me within the Anglican orbit.

Happily, nay, mericfully, things have moved along on the other bank of the Tiber . Those Anglo-Papalists who value the beauty of holiness expressed in traditional forms will be far safer and ultimately far happier within the proposed Ordinariates, or within the widening traditionalist movement within the Catholic Church. They should value and preserve, or indeed revive, their ceremonial practices, and bring them on board the barque of Peter. Yes, bring your lace and folded chasubles - they really can be the new and living way

Which brings me back to St Thomas. Whatever the intricacies of the dispute with King Henry II, and indeed not a few of the English hierarchy, and however much issues were lost sight of or changed out of recognition, one thing St Thomas did believe and stress was his fidelity to the Holy See in the person of Pope Alexander III, but also to the Papacy in principle. St Thomas, whatever else he may have been, came to be seen as a martyr for the independenc eof the Church under the Pope. No wonder King Henry VIII was so determined to destroy his cult. So yes, it is good to see St Magnus Martyr celebrating St Thomas, but, with great respect and genuine concern, may I suggest that they should perhaps give some thought to what St Thomas might, conceivably, be saying to them.