Comments: Anglicanorum Coetibus: some history

Well, well, the truth will out! For too long Andrew Burnham & Keith Newton were painted as the bad guys - popping off to Rome for cosy chats and leaving poor Rowan in the dark. Now the real story is emerging - they had little involvement with Rome and Rowan knew about it. It was other Anglican bishops doing the cloak and dagger stuff behind the archiepiscopal back. And not just diocesans either. If Tighe is correct, and I suspect he is very correct, Martyn Jarrett, (that nice loyal anglican in the North who has kept his distance from Burnham, Newton and the Ordinariate) was in on the whole thing!!!!! Wilfrid & Hilda: eat your heart out!!

Posted by David Malloch at Monday, 18 July 2011 at 5:06pm BST

Is this (Genesis link) the first known use of the phrase "a pseudogamously partnered man", and should this be reported to the OED as a novelty?

Posted by Mark Bennet at Monday, 18 July 2011 at 8:53pm BST

Cloak and dagger perhaps...but lets face it, it hasnt come to much...nor will it.

Posted by Perry Butler at Monday, 18 July 2011 at 8:55pm BST

Fascinating as it is, this account of the machinations of various bodies and individuals leading up to the establishment of the 'Ordinariate' is deeply unpleasant. Firstly because it seems to indicate extensive duplicity by priests and bishops who, while drawing their stipends from the Church, were at the same time preparing both to denounce it and to leave it. Andrew Burnham intended all along to leave the Church of England, taking his 'See of Ebbsfleet' with him because he has now said so. Others seem to have the same intention but have been even less open.

Secondly the language of the piece is just nasty, larded is it is with loaded language. Here are some examples I have identified:-

'pseudogamous sexual partnerships', 'pretended ordination of women', 'purported consecration of a woman', 'the ministrations of female clergy and of bishops purporting to ordain such clergy.'

Not only does this sneer at the beliefs and actions of those with whom the writer disagrees but the writing has an air of snobbish superiority. He seems to have a nasty smell under his nose, as if he is dealing with something rather distasteful which he is really too refined to touch but for which he has made an exception in this case.

Finally I think it worth reminding those who share the view that only in orthodox Catholicism can be found the true church, that this orthodoxy hardly seems to chime in with most Christians these days. At the Petertide ordinations in Chichester Diocese this year some 40 men and women were ordained priest or deacon. That is considerably more than the total for the whole Church of Rome in England. Roman Catholicism may well be maintaining its purity, but what is the point of trying to buck evolution if that way leads to extinction?

Posted by Richard Ashby at Monday, 18 July 2011 at 9:37pm BST

I was always suspicious that Rome would not respond to a rag tag bob operation like the Traditional Anglican Communion...this explanation makes sense.

Apparently Fort Worth diocese wanted to jump ship, but the billionaire financing Iker's legal case threatened to withdraw if he took the diocese to Rome.

Another development, apparently there will be a legal case if the Ordinariate tries to use bits of the BCP in the Ordinariate liturgy and bastardises Cranmer's original!

Posted by robert ian williams at Monday, 18 July 2011 at 10:13pm BST

"the language of the piece is just nasty...He seems to have a nasty smell under his nose, as if he is dealing with something rather distasteful which he is really too refined to touch"

We're surprised, Richard A?

This whole enterprise has NOTHING to do w/ "orthodoxy" (however defined) and *everything* to do w/ malevolent misogyny (inc. homophobia).

Posted by JCF at Monday, 18 July 2011 at 11:01pm BST

Probably the nastiest thing in it -- and it's quite a contest to make that determination, I must say -- is its characterization of "the distinctive beliefs of Affirming Catholics, [as] 'girls on the altar, boys in bed and "Mother" on the Throne of God.'"

"Yes, they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love; yes, they'll know we are Christians by our love."

Posted by dr.primrose at Monday, 18 July 2011 at 11:24pm BST

Actually JCF, your description of "malevolent misogyny" isn't far from the mark. In my mid-western USA city, the issue of female ordinations was mostly settled, except for one small and well-endowed Anglo-Catholic parish that latter became a part of something called the Anglican Church of North America. But homophobia-?
It has a good small mostly paid choir, singing to the twenty or so congregants, mostly not-so-closeted gay men playing around the altar. In the music circles around town it's known informally as "Our Lady of Raging Queens", and sadly has become the sole representation of truly elegant high church liturgy with an undertow of a wicked combination of cattiness and female hatred. Ultimately, a sad example that probably could use a great deal of psychotherapy.

Posted by evensongjunkie at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 12:56am BST

This unpleasant article is full of nastiness about women and at least one gay man, but the Ordinariate group tends to tread lightly around gays, at least the ones in their midst. Their purported outrage about a gay bishop didn't send them to Rome when it happened in 2003. Many are the kind of anglo-catholics who want a pure male-only priesthood for their self-evident reasons.

Posted by Derek Gagne at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 2:22am BST

When I read articles like this I can't help but wonder if the Romans really know what they are giving birth to or what they're getting into. If they don't, they will have to deal with this kind of bigotry where being Catholic is a kind of selfish, snooty hobby. If they do, they should be ashamed of what they are supporting.

Posted by Richard Grand at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 2:36am BST

"Apparently there will be a legal case...." What is the basis of this statement?

Posted by Richard at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 3:18am BST

What a bunch of vipers masquerading as commenters.

Posted by Nick at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 5:50am BST

At least you know where you stand with a viper... unfortunately all the double speak from Rome..about a proud patrimony, disguisng the fact that the proud patrimony is subject to revision is rather distressing.

Posted by Robert ian Williams at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 8:38am BST

JCF - indeed, I should have written 'orthodox'.

Posted by Richard Ashby at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 9:48am BST

What does pseudogamous mean?

Posted by Erika Baker at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 11:33am BST

Dear Nick-The whole point of making comments is to say what needs to be said in a forthright way. The original artcile is full of viperishness. Most of these comments simply repeat these comments and point out how hypocritical and mean they are. Giving Mr. Tighe and others a free pass would be dishonest and irresponsible. Hypocrisy and misogyny wrapped up in a false intellectualism and dubious theology is not tolerable.

Posted by Richard Grand at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 12:16pm BST

@Richard Ashby,

You write:

"…this orthodoxy hardly seems to chime in with most Christians these days."

and,

"…what is the point of trying to buck evolution if that way leads to extinction?"

To the first observation, I am curious as to what scriptural authority you would cite to suggest that questions of orthodoxy are matters of democratic process.

To your question, I would suggest that the answer can be found by contemplation of the words of our Lord that "many are called but few are chosen" as well as of the words of the Letter to the Hebrews—"Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever."

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer

Posted by Martial Artist at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 3:59pm BST

A senior Roman Catholic told me at Chris Morgan's funeral in June 2008 most of the details that became this special ordinariate. Though at that time he was predicting secret negotiations with the Orthodox would lead to their not complain at the presence of married bishops. Well, that was not quite so - though to all intents and purposes their ordinary looks and sounds like a duck. A friend who sleeps in high places in Rome confirmed the proposed scam.

I posted here on TA about it (though I can't find where!), and contacted Gregory Cameron then at the ACO who rang back some time late after he "took it to the top" - who told him it "was a load of rubbish".

It is interesting to see how this relates to the time frame as laid out by Dr Tighe.

Nick, I know Dr Tighe's prose can be rather flowery - but this is the first time I have seen him described as "a bunch" .....

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 4:10pm BST

Tighe was once a pretty regular commentator at Stand Firm, though I don't recall having seen him over there for quite a long time. He is aggressively and - to his mind and apparently to that of his 43 Facebook followers - wittily Anti-Anglican. Long-time (25 years) teacher at a small Pennsylvania private college, with what his online vita indicates is a thin record of publication (still an associate prof). That someone so strongly bigoted towards the Anglican Church was invited to give a "keynote" speech at the Anglican Use Conference, raises questions about the nature of the North American Ordinariate.

raises quest

Posted by Lapinbizarre at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 5:01pm BST

'It's not "vipers" it's pronounced thzzzzsnakes". Hittttthhhhhhsssss!!!!!! "Sahhhhlyyyytharin!!!(Tongue flipping out of mouth)

Posted by evensongjunkie at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 6:52pm BST

"Commenters", Nick? Is that what we're calling the Ordinariate now? [I'm done, I'm done! Mea culpa]

Posted by JCF at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 7:59pm BST

Tighe was once a pretty regular commentator at Stand Firm
Posted by: Lapinbizarre on Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 5:01pm BST

I believe Dr Tighe's posting priveledges were withdrawn and not only from SF ......

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 9:08pm BST

Lapin...I think you are a bit unfair on Doctor Tighe. he is a veritable encylopedia on Anglicanism and one of the few Americans who actually understands its nuances.

Posted by robert ian williams at Tuesday, 19 July 2011 at 9:41pm BST

I will grant you the benefit of the doubt on your being unfamiliar with Dr Tighe's Stand Firm posts, RIW. I imagined that that was what had probably happened, Martin, but did not know it. I do know that his attacks on Anglicanism were frequently so strong as to offend SF regulars, who tend, as a breed, to have pretty strong stomachs where that sort of thing is concerned.

Posted by Lapinbizarre at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 12:09am BST

"Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever."

Except that what we think is unchanging is very different from the actual days of Christ.....

I know, it's so FUN to be apart of an oppressed minority, even when you're not! It's like that treehouse many of us had in that back yard...girls keep out! This is a CLUB for the CHOSEN ONES (The ones choosing themselves!)

Posted by evensongjunkie at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 12:39am BST

Martin Reynolds:

Dr Tighe, who is himself a Uniate Roman Catholic (he attends St Josaphat Ukrainian Catholic Church in Bethlehem, Pa.) has been banned from posting on a number of Anglican websites because he insists on using the words "priestess" and "bishopess" to refer to ordained women. For some background, see http://idrathernotsay123.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/banned/

Posted by Pennsylvanian at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 12:43am BST

Yes, Dr. Tighe was banned from Stand Firm for being rude and obnoxious.

Let that sink in for a moment.

http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/2007/12/stand-wobbly.html

Posted by JPM at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 3:56am BST

@Erica and Mark:

A newly invented word surely, but though no-linguist, I would guess that it is incorrectly taken from monogamous - having only one sexual mate in a life-time (in the animal world) or in human terms literally having only one spouse (ie not divorcing or remarrying after his/her death) but more often used to mean having only one spouse at a time. Gene Robinson was not married at the time he was elected and consecrated bishop, although now he and his partner are married (not pseudo- since marriage is 'also' a civil contract which the state has the right to regulate, like it or not). Interesting (?) that although officially for the RC Church all Anglican clergy (including all the bishops Tighe names and the now re-ordained ordinary et al) are 'purportedly ordained' he reserves the scurrilous adverb solely for women priests. He seems to be a deeply unhappy and unresolved person.

Posted by Sara MacVane at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 6:16am BST

"'It's not "vipers" it's pronounced thzzzzsnakes". Hittttthhhhhhsssss!!!!!! "Sahhhhlyyyytharin!!!(Tongue flipping out of mouth)"


In Parseltongue, it's more like

"sssaa-ha-sheh"

- at least, according to the Parseltongue translator at the HP films website. Of course, I don't speak Parseltongue. Speaking in the tongue of snakes is a mark of Dark Wizards, certain Archbishops of Canterbury and most conservative "christians."

Posted by MarkBrunson at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 6:49am BST

Tighe quotes a Vatican document:

In 1976, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued its declaration Inter insigniores, stating that the Church does not consider herself authorized to ordain women, not on account of socio-cultural reasons, but rather because of the “unbroken tradition throughout the history of the Church, universal in the East and in the West”, which must be “considered to conform to God’s plan for his Church.”

He doesn't pause to consider the claims of this document, and that's the crux of the whole issue, not whether certain bishops scuttled off in private to make arrangement, but whether the Vatican's claims are valid.

It's a glib and thoughtless slide from, 'it's never happened', to, 'therefore it's God's will that it never should'. That's not theology, or logic, or a prayerful atention to the will of God. It's just a presumption that's been challenged and found wanting in the priestly ministry of countless women. There are lots of ways in which we can discern what is 'considered to conform to God's plan for his church', but just doing the same thing over and over over again, without any other justification, isn't one of them.

Posted by Toby forward at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 8:09am BST

Doctor Tighe is a gentleman and a scholar... I think the reason for his banning is certainly nothing to do with his manner. Often the truth hurts and pricks consciences.

He is an encylopedia of knowledge on Anglicanism.

Posted by Robert ian Williams at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 4:04pm BST

"There are lots of ways in which we can discern what is 'considered to conform to God's plan for his church', but just doing the same thing over and over over again, without any other justification, isn't one of them."

One is reminded of the statement of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in his famous 1897 article "The Path of the Law" about courts' blindly and thoughtless following the precedent of previous court decisions -- "It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was laid down in the time of Henry IV. It is still more revolting if the grounds upon which it was laid down have vanished long since, and the rule simply persists from blind imitation of the past."

Posted by dr.primrose at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 6:18pm BST

We have, for OED, an new usage for the word "nuanced".

Posted by Mark Bennet at Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 11:31pm BST

@RIW: His language is neither gentlemanly nor scholarly however, at least in my definition of those terms.

Posted by Sara MacVane at Thursday, 21 July 2011 at 5:44am BST

Please will commenters avoid making personal remarks about Dr Tighe and concentrate on the content of his article. Thanks.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento at Thursday, 21 July 2011 at 8:43am BST

The word "pseudogamy" is being used to describe an action that mimics marriage; its application need not be limited to what homosexuals do. The very issue in question is whether marriage is inherent to our having been created male and female -- as Jesus taught; see His strictures against divorce -- or whether it is merely a social construct, a kind of ratification of friendship-plus. Dr. Tighe argues that a man can no more marry another man than he can marry a bedpost or a parabola or Queen Margaret of Scotland or any other thing that is not a living flesh-and-blood woman. To call the language "nasty" is just to beg the question.

The same thing goes for the word "purported". That too strikes to the heart of the issue. What the Pope decided, for instance, was not that the Catholic Church should not ordain women to be priests, but that the Church COULD not ordain them to be priests; that such ordinations would be more than illicit; they would be null, of no effect. If, for instance, I "baptize" someone in the name of the Creator, the Redeemer, and the Sustainer, it is the church's teaching that that is not a baptism at all. So I can never say, "Bishop So-and-So ordained twelve women to be priests," because the teaching is that that is an impossibility. Now you can argue about that, but you can't blame him for expressing in language exactly what his position is, which is exactly what his Church teaches -- and the Eastern Orthodox church too, I might add.

Posted by Tony Esolen at Thursday, 21 July 2011 at 4:50pm BST

So well put Tony..

Catholicism ( and by that I mean being in full ecclesial communion with the successor of St Peter) is not a speculative religion..but a hierarchical religion with God endowed authority and infallibility ( albeit in a limited sense)...

I became a Catholic because I believe its claims to be true , whereas evangelicalism and liberalism are intrinsically subjective. If there is a God , there must be a definitive religion.

Posted by Robert Ian williams at Thursday, 21 July 2011 at 5:29pm BST

Tony, it is possible for a person to speak on such matters without being willfully offensive. I understand that the Roman Catholic Bishop of Edmonton (Alberta), for example, never refers to his Anglican counterpart as a "purported" bishop or "pseudo" bishop.

That is because he has manners.

Posted by Malcolm French+ at Thursday, 21 July 2011 at 5:44pm BST

Great post, MF.

The distinction between content and writer is a good one but sometimes style is content. So an important point of the content here is: 'I hate and despise liberal Anglicans'.

Posted by John at Friday, 22 July 2011 at 11:57am BST

I cant help feeling that the visit of the "other C of E bishops" in early 2008 may have fanned the fantasies of the Vatican regarding the likely numbers who would defect to the Ordinariate.I do wonder if the Roman authorities really have much of a grasp of the state of Anglo-Catholicism in the Church of England...or indeed the sociology of English religion generally. Yes "no popery" has subsided, but I would judge most members of the C of E ( even those of a moderately high-ish persuasion, still view Roman Catholicism as something "other".

Posted by Perry Butler at Friday, 22 July 2011 at 12:03pm BST

"Catholicism ( and by that I mean being in full ecclesial communion with the successor of St Peter) is not a speculative religion..but a hierarchical religion with God endowed authority and infallibility ( albeit in a limited sense). I became a Catholic because I believe its claims to be true , whereas evangelicalism and liberalism are intrinsically subjective. If there is a God, there must be a definitive religion." --RIW

Of course, if there is no God, then a definitive religion is very useful, as it removes the need to deal directly with the supposed deity. Whatever the Pope says!

And the Pope isn't a successor of Peter, whatever his actual authority (not much, in the Christian scriptures). The church in Rome predated any visit from the apostle, and there were no bishops at the time for him to lay hands on. If Peter died in Rome (not certain), it confers no necessary mantle on future leadership there. The Bishop of Memphis doesn't inherit the mantle of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In fact, the Bishop of Rome began to aggregate the local and national churches into a bureaucratic worldwide diocese only around 1100, supported by a raft of admitted forgeries (the “Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals,” “the Donation of Constantine,” “the Apostolic Constitutions,” etc.). We're not supposed to worry about the forgeries now -- they've become "The Tradition."

The church exists locally -- "wherever two or three are gathered together" -- whether Papist, Anglican, or Quaker. Above that, stasis or actual corruption set in. Put not your trust in princes, ecclesiastical or secular. It's all subjective in a way, RIW, even your trust in a morally compromised, historically dishonest papacy.

Posted by Murdoch at Friday, 22 July 2011 at 8:02pm BST

"Catholicism...is...a religion with...infallibility" - Robert Ian Williams

Try telling that to the Taoiseach, Dáil or Irish Catholic laity...

Posted by A J Barford at Friday, 22 July 2011 at 9:26pm BST

Perry Butler's remarks are very apposite: clearly someone has given Rome a vastly inflated estimate of what the Ordinariate might become and achieve.

Perhaps some of these people were the same ones who were lining up Anglican funds to cushion the 'cost of conscience' for those of this particular 'integrity'.

Posted by Lister Tonge at Friday, 22 July 2011 at 10:37pm BST

"I became a Catholic because I believe its claims to be true, whereas evangelicalism and liberalism are intrinsically subjective. If there is a God, there must be a definitive religion."

ALL of the above is your *subjective* claim, RIW. [And no disrespect for that!]

There's not a thought in my head---a firing of synapses, a bubbling beaker of brain chemistry---which is not subjective. Nor in yours. God made us that way: embrace it! :-)

Posted by JCF at Saturday, 23 July 2011 at 7:29am BST

According to this weeks Church Times, Mgr Newton says the Ordinariate will need £1 million pounds a year to keep going. Something of a challenge for a group of 900 laity and clergy...the CBS "grant" has apparently offered "a breathing space".I cant see this admission likely to stimulate further clergy who would need financial support to make the move. Mgr Newton also said he had hoped Ordinariate groups would meet in Anglican buildings, but so far it had "not been possible". Nor I imagine will it ever be likely, nor do the RC bishops wish it...not a very auspicious start I would judge. What is happening abroad?I dont get the sense of much interest at all in the US, Canada or Australia or, indeed, any interest in other parts of the Communion.

Posted by Perry Butler at Saturday, 23 July 2011 at 9:08am BST

"I dont get the sense of much interest at all ...." - Tighe's account of the Traditional Anglican Communion's place in this makes absolutely no mention of Archbishop Hepworth's angry withdrawal from TAC's negotiations with Rome. http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=14361

Posted by Lapinbizarre at Saturday, 23 July 2011 at 12:50pm BST

I didn't mention Archbishop Hepworth's "withdrawal," because within a week the contretemps was settled, and Archbishop Collins' "misunderstanding" was set to right; and so the "withdrawal" is better to be characterized as an "interlude."

Posted by William Tighe at Saturday, 23 July 2011 at 5:15pm BST

Apropos of Perry Butler's comment:

So these people have been led astray (OK, in some cases have led themselves astray). One feels sorry in a way. Something, after all, to be said for the Grand Old Duke of York - into which category most FiF leaders and followers increasingly obviously come.

Posted by John at Saturday, 23 July 2011 at 6:53pm BST

Thank you for posting this illuminating link, Lapinbizzarre,to the situation affecting the TAC in general. But is it surprising? The oddness, idiosyncracy, poor training and ambiguous matrimonial situations of many TAC clergymen and their people are bound to raise questions with Rome once their files are examined. Strong measures were needed to impose order on a hopeless situation. Frankly, it would be better if those without canonical impediments submitted to Rome on an individual basis and forgot any tenuous 'continuing Anglicanism'.

Conscientiously few will be able to return to formal Anglicanism for the reasons so clearly set out by Dr Tighe in his paper. Staying as they are will be spiritually and ecclesiologically undermining. Individual submission is the only realistic way forward.

Posted by John Bowles at Saturday, 23 July 2011 at 8:27pm BST

None of the Bishops in the 2008 meeting named by Dr Tighe have denied their participation in this meeting. It would be interesting to hear from them what actually was said...it certainly seems a curious thing...did the Archbishop know it was taking place? It has been said that +Chichester might convert after retirement, but it is difficult to imagine any of the others doing so.
I wonder if the creation of the Ordinariate has, in fact, helped the Woman Bishops legislation.The numbers voting in favour of the legislation has certainly exceeded what many anticipated, I think.

Posted by Perry Butler at Sunday, 24 July 2011 at 11:46am BST

"I wonder if the creation of the Ordinariate has, in fact, helped the Woman Bishops legislation.The numbers voting in favour of the legislation has certainly exceeded what many anticipated, I think."

I truly hope and trust that it will do so, and so disabuse those of a truly Catholic mind remaining in the Church of England that they have any prospect of their views being protected in the Brave New Church (which all along has been a fundamentally Erastian organization); and that they will assess their position rationally and choose to become Catholic or Orthodox.

In fact, my own outsider's personal preference is for a simply single-clause measure mandating the acceptance throughout the Church of England of the "Orders" or future woman bishops and of all clergy of whatever gender purportedly ordained by them. The Church of Sweden had demonstrated the way forward for the Church of England; let us hope that the Church of England will have the courage to follow through.

Btw, you can find various articles of mine on the Church of Sweden here:

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/author.php?id=123

Posted by William Tighe at Sunday, 24 July 2011 at 5:59pm BST

"I truly hope and trust that it will do so, and so disabuse those of a truly Catholic mind remaining in the Church of England"

Au contraire, William T, it is those "of a truly Catholic mind" who are working and praying the most devotedly to uplift God's Call of the Imago-Dei-Made-Female to ALL orders! [Regardless what the Bishop of Rome, w/ his *purported* infallibility, may say about the matter]

Posted by JCF at Tuesday, 26 July 2011 at 6:43am BST

The Bristol and Hereford diocesan Synods have voted overwhelmingly for the legislation..hasnt registered here yet. the rest of the Synods vote September to December. It will be interesting to see which buck the trend ( very few by the looks of it)

Posted by Perry Butler at Tuesday, 26 July 2011 at 9:27am BST

"Au contraire, William T, it is those "of a truly Catholic mind" who are working and praying the most devotedly to uplift God's Call of the Imago-Dei-Made-Female to ALL orders! [Regardless what the Bishop of Rome, w/ his *purported* infallibility, may say about the matter]"

Great is Diana of the Ephesians!

Posted by William Tighe at Tuesday, 26 July 2011 at 12:43pm BST

William Tighe: "The Church of Sweden had demonstrated the way forward for the Church of England; let us hope that the Church of England will have the courage to follow through."

Well, that would hardly be a surprise, given how similar the C of E and Svenska Kyrkan are - probably more similar than any other two national churches in Europe (?), and given how similar public opinion in both countries is on equality of treatment for women and gay people (perhaps the UK is a little behind Sweden, but catching up fast).

Church attendance is at similar low levels in both countries too. Oh, and did I mention, Sweden currently has the EU's fastest growing economy, is one of the world's most equal societies, is one of the world's top per capita aid donors... what's not to imitate about Sweden, for goodness' sake?

Posted by Fr Mark at Tuesday, 26 July 2011 at 9:00pm BST

Always thought it was so coincidental (not) that Mary was proclaimed "Mother of God" in Diana's hometown? ;-/

No matter. Holy Mary, Mother of Christ's Priests (Male and Female!), pray for us!

Posted by JCF at Wednesday, 27 July 2011 at 8:20am 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.