Wednesday, 20 October 2010

Ordinariate, Societies, GS elections

Updated Thursday morning

The Catholic Herald reports, Anglicans urged not to accept Pope’s offer, and there is a related Catholic News Service story, Anglican bishop announces he will resign, join Catholic ordinariate.

Damian Thompson has blogged twice in one day on this topic: see The Ordinariate has got Anglican and Catholic mediocrities seriously rattled and later, Church of England civil war looms as ‘Hinge & Bracket’ join forces with hardline Protestants to block women bishops.

The press release to which he refers was issued twice. Both versions are copied in their entirety, below the fold here, for general interest.

Ed Tomlinson has encouraged his readers to listen to the recordings of the Forward in Faith National Assembly (which we have linked previously here). He has however chosen a rather odd photo to illustrate the article. His blog article is here. The picture comes from the website of the US Holocaust Museum, here.

Update

Tim Ross at the Telegraph claims that Archbishop of Canterbury moves to flush out Anglicans plotting to defect to Rome. This refers to the comments made in the Hindu interview linked, and indeed quoted, over here.

Two versions of a press release

Earlier version

From: Christian News Release Service (UK) [mailto:admin@cnrs.org.uk]
Sent: 18 October 2010 14:27
To: Christian News Release Service (UK)
Subject: WOMEN BISHOP LEGISLATION CAN NOW BE BLOCKED IN BOTH HOUSE OF LAITY AND CLERGY - UNLESS AMENDED
Importance: High

MEDIA STATEMENT October 18,2010

Following the results of the Church of England’s General Synod Election, 2010, Anglo Catholic and Evangelical Groups opposed to the current legislation have assessed the results.

In the House of Clergy, 66 Clergy would block the current legislation being sent down to the diocese, (i.e.32.10%)

And

77 laity would block the current legislation being sent down to the diocese (35.46%)

Only 34% is needed to block this when it returns from the dioceses. In the clergy only a further 1.81% is needed, and that’s just ONE person. There are 21 new evangelicals on this new synod, and one more cleric out of 62 votes, it is a given!

ENDS.

For further information/interview:
Revd Rod Thomas (Chairman, Reform): 0790 6331110
Fr Simon Killwick (Chairman, Catholic Group on General Synod): 07788 408529

———————————-

Later version

From: Christian News Release Service (UK) [mailto:admin@cnrs.org.uk]
Sent: 19 October 2010 09:00
To: Christian News Release Service (UK)
Subject: Women Bishops in the CofE now to be BLOCKED after latest General Synod Election
Importance: High

MEDIA INFORMATION ON GENERAL SYNOD ELECTION

Following the Election of the new General Synod of the Church of England, Evangelical and Catholic Groups on Synod have now swapped lists of candidates.

The results show that 66 Clergy (32.10%) and 77 laity (35.46%) will vote against the current Women Bishop legislation unless it is amended to give those who for conscious/scriptural reasons, cannot accept WBs.

Only 34% is needed to block this when it returns from the dioceses. For the first time, it can and will be blocked by both fully ELECTED houses. In the clergy only a further 1.81% is needed, and that’s just ONE person. There are 21 new evangelicals on this new synod, and one out of a possible 58 undecided is a given!

The Bishop of Fulham’s departure to Rome, announced on Friday, was therefore a little too early and the Catholic Group on General Synod have distanced themselves from his position and will be staying within the CofE.

ENDS.

For Interview/comment:
Rev Rod Thomas (Reform): 0790 633 1110
Fr Simon Killwick (Chairman of Catholic Group on General Synod): 0778 8408529

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Wednesday, 20 October 2010 at 6:13pm BST | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Church of England
Comments

In a way, I think Simon Killwick's urgings are positive. There will be a deal: there will be women bishops, there will be more distinct provision for those who oppose them. Neither the majority of Anglo-Catholics (in the FiF sense) nor the Reform Evangelicals want to leave the C of E. It's not ideal - it's tolerable. It's even profoundly Anglican. It's better than any of the alternatives.

Posted by: john on Wednesday, 20 October 2010 at 9:27pm BST

Hi!...

As a humble open minded Roman Catholic, let me send some questions: If results of conservatives are so strong in your General Synod elections, why are they so nervous? And why are they so anxious with the possibility of leaving the Church? Is it possible to you to find a better place to accomodate those Christians? Even if it requires to accept somewhat as a global Diocese like the one for the Opus Dei in our RC Church? Is it so difficult? Or is it necessary to have a government and parliament intervention or even an emergency intervention of the Queen? I hope some moderates should do anything respectful and without doubts in this matter!...

Excuse me to be so long!...

Posted by: Pensamento Positivo on Wednesday, 20 October 2010 at 9:38pm BST

Isn't there a real lack of integrity here on three counts?
Firstly, I have heard both 'Traditionalist Catholics' and 'Conservative Evangelicals' claim over the last few weeks that synod is not 'fit for purpose', is broken etc etc. Now they think it can deliver what they want, they rush out a press release saying that they can all stay in the C of E after all.
Secondly, I've heard 'Traditionalist Catholics' claim that the three houses in synod are not equal and that the House of Bishops have a more significant role in all of this. No mention of the HofB in this press release I see - their tactics rely entirely on the other two houses.
Thirdly, the two groupings have such diametrically opposed ecclesiologies - what they really believe are two totally different things - but they are prepared to use each other in this unholy way.
How do they square these three circles?

Posted by: Canon Andrew Godsall on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 9:08am BST

Canon Godsall's concern for holiness is welcome, though his criticism of those with whom he disagrees is not. 'What they really believe are two totally different things'. This has always been the case within the CofE and people who disagree have not sought to unchurch their opponents. What Synod has decided (by failing to achieve a 2/3rds majority in the house of clergy though an overall majority in the Synod as a whole) is not to provide a mechanism (other than an advisory Code) by which a minority can be contained within the Church. I don't think it 'holy' or in the spirit of Anglicanism to have an ecclesiology that would effectively unchurch other people. So I am glad the Trads and the Con Evs (who accept there will be women bishops) look as if they might be able to keep a breadth and a balance in the CofE, and withstand any 'fascist' tendency that would insist on 'my way' or the' highway'.

Posted by: Neil on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 12:23pm BST

'Under Pope Benedict XVI’s plan, Anglicans would be able to move into full communion with Rome while at the same time preserving some of their traditions and heritage' - D Telegraph.

I wonder which bits of their traditions and heritage they are going to take? - unauthorised use of someone else's missal? - being nasty to the bishops and other clergy with whom they disagree? - plotting together? - setting up rival structures? threatening to leave if they don't get their own way? Why there is so much here that the ordinariate is going to look rather like the Church of England. Do the RCs know about this cuckoo in their currently comfortable nest?

Posted by: Richard Ashby on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 1:07pm BST

Canon Godsall makes some excellent points. I watch the tortured comings and goings, demands for "honoured places", threats to leave etc, over this with a sense of disappointment and frustration.

Many anglo catholics who oppose WB appear to think that a no-WB stance is the same thing as being an Anglo Catholic. It's not. I also know anti-WB in the AC (priests, bishops and laity) movement who are privately or openly gay. Yet that, for them, is no bar to bishopdom (and here I agree with them - but they can't have it both ways - but actually it seems they think they can).

Through all of this, I am overjoyed I am a member of an inclusive Anglo Catholic congregation, within the Scottish Episcopal Church which has had, for several years now, statutory provision for WBs. It's a done deal - thank God. And the world has not come to an end.

Posted by: sibling on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 1:49pm BST

That photo is not the first "rather odd" thing to show up on Ed's blog, which has lately become one of the most poisonous on the religion beat.

Sometimes I think he is on a mission to render himself unemployable in both Canterbury and Rome.

Posted by: JPM on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 2:28pm BST

Mr. Thompson writes:
"I'm more and more convinced that the Apostolic Constitution will bear fruit in the shape of new evangelistic parish communities that will challenge the sluggish mediocrity of Eccleston Square Catholicism. No wonder so many younger, orthodox, cradle Catholics are excited by the Ordinariate mission."

So in what way are these evangelistic parish communities supposed to evangelize? Perhaps thay can stand on the street corner and say "Come on in. Our priest may be gay but at least he ain't no she."

And in what sense is he using the word "many" in the second sentence? Many in terms of numbers or in terms of a percentage. Because I seriously doubt that there are really that many young, orthodox, cradle Roman Catholics, unless one greatly waters down the term orthodox.

Posted by: Doug on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 3:39pm BST

IIRC, there used to be a popular TV show in the UK -- a talk show hosted by a nun (before she was silenced) where some former C of E types were guests & she blurted out that they were not the sort of people that the RCC should want to have joining them (which was, no doubt, part of why she was silenced) -- but I suppose people who want to want "unauthorised use of someone else's missal? - being nasty to the bishops and other clergy with whom they disagree? - plotting together? - setting up rival structures? threatening to leave if they don't get their own way" need to have someplace to worship, too ... SIGH!

Posted by: Prior Aelred on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 5:37pm BST

Damian Thompson is so easily duped. First we were told 400,000 Anglicans were converting. Then it turned out that the worldwide Traditional Anglican Communion had less than 10,000. Then must of them decided not to cross the Tiber.

There will be no mass influx from the Church of England and as for evangelisation there will be very little. These men did very little when they were Anglicans. I know of no large Anglo catholic congregations.

Posted by: Robert Ian Williams on Thursday, 21 October 2010 at 11:55pm BST

RIW: "There will be no mass influx from the Church of England and as for evangelisation there will be very little. These men did very little when they were Anglicans. I know of no large Anglo catholic congregations."

There is a lot of truth in that, Robert.

Posted by: Fr Mark on Friday, 22 October 2010 at 8:29am BST

"So I am glad the Trads and the Con Evs (who accept there will be women bishops) look as if they might be able to keep a breadth and a balance in the CofE, and withstand any 'fascist' tendency that would insist on 'my way' or the' highway'. - Neil on Thursday -

Exactly who is demanding in all of this that is is 'either my way or the highway? Is it not the very Trads and Convevos who are holding the Church to ransom here? That's how it appears to some of us who are looking in from the outside.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Friday, 22 October 2010 at 11:12am BST
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.