The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionVatican confirms: five Anglican bishops convert
Nov. 08, 2010
VATICAN CITY -- Five Anglican bishops have decided to join the Catholic Church and step down from their current positions with the Church of England, a Vatican spokesman said.
Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, confirmed to reporters a statement issued Nov. 8 by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales welcoming the five bishops.
Father Lombardi said that a "constitution" that would govern the entry of former bishops of the Anglican Communion was being studied.
One year ago, Pope Benedict XVI established a special structure for Anglicans who want to be in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church while preserving aspects of their Anglican spiritual and liturgical heritage. The move was seen as a bridge to those unhappy with recent Anglican decisions on the ordination of women and the acceptance of homosexuality in some areas.
Father Lombardi said, "Regarding the declaration of five bishops until now belonging to the Anglican Communion who have decided to join the Catholic Church and who therefore are obliged by conscience to resign from their current pastoral duties in the Church of England, we can confirm that the constitution of a first ordinariate is under study, according to the norms established by the Apostolic Constitution 'Anglicanorum coetibus,' and that any further decisions regarding this will be communicated at the proper moment."
Under the arrangement Anglicans can be received into the Catholic Church as a group while retaining their distinctive patrimony and liturgical practices, including married priests.
Father Lombardi was referring to a statement issued Nov. 8 by the Episcopal Commission of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales that said, "We welcome the decision of Bishops Andrew Burnham, Keith Newton, John Broadhurst, Edwin Barnes and David Silk to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church through the Ordinariate for England and Wales, which will be established under the provisions of the apostolic constitution 'Anglicanorum coetibus.'"
"At our plenary session next week, the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales will be exploring the establishment of the ordinariate and the warm welcome we will be extending to those who seek to be part of it. Further information will be made known after the meeting."
The statement was signed by Auxiliary Bishop Alan Hopes of Westminster, the highest-ranking former Anglican priest in England and Wales. He joined the Catholic Church in 1994 after the Church of England agreed to ordain women as priests.
Preview NCR's Family Life Issue
Watch this video from NCR Editor Dennis Coday for highlights from our annual Family Life special section.
You won't find these articles on our website. Subscribe now to receive all the content from each biweekly issue.
A statement from Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury said he would initiate the process for filling the vacant sees.
In a joint statement released Nov. 8 the five bishops, who resigned their posts effective Dec. 31, said that despite ecumenical efforts, they had been "dismayed, over the last 30 years, to see Anglicans and Catholics move further apart on some of the issues of the day." They said they were particularly "distressed by developments in faith and order in Anglicanism which we believe to be incompatible with the historic vocation of Anglicanism and the tradition of the church for nearly 2,000 years."
The five said that "Anglicanorum coetibus" was "both a generous response to various approaches to the Holy See for help and a bold, new ecumenical instrument in the search for the unity of Christians, the unity for which Christ himself prayed before his passion and death."
"It is a unity, we believe, which is possible only in eucharistic communion with the successor of St. Peter," they said.
"As bishops, we have even-handedly cared for those who have shared our understanding and those who have taken a different view," they added. "We have now reached the point, however, where we must formally declare our position and invite others who share it to join us on our journey.
"We shall be ceasing, therefore, from public episcopal ministry forthwith, resigning from our pastoral responsibilities in the Church of England" and joining an ordinariate once one is created, they said.
The bishops said they were "very grateful for all that the Church of England has meant for us and given to us all these years, and we hope to maintain close and warm relationships, praying and working together for the coming of God's Kingdom."
- - -
Contributing to this story was Simon Caldwell in Manchester, England.
Let's face it: These bishops
Let's face it: These bishops are not joining the R.C. because they see the "truth." They are joining it because of its deep-seated tradition of self-justifying, gender inequality.
Two Anglican couples recently
Two Anglican couples recently approached a priest friend of mine and asked to join the Roman Catholic Church. My friend asked why they wished to join. Both couples explained that they were unhappy about their own church's attitude to married clergy, female ordination and gay clergy.
My friend refused their request on the grounds that these were not good enough reasons.
My congratulations to your
My congratulations to your priest friend. We need no more sexists in our Church. I hope the Pope will come to his senses and do the same.
So your friend decided to put
So your friend decided to put the salvation of this couple in jeopardy because he didn't like their political leanings?
One good turn deserves
One good turn deserves another. Catholic bishops and priests who've had it with Benedict , his fawning prelates, his apologists, and their continuing assault on gays, women,and the intelligence of enlightened Catholics perfectly capable of thinking for themselves have their work cut out for them. They're being asked to buy into Il Papaduce's Fortress Catholicism, where Clement VII and Leo X appear to be the model popes after whom Anglican converts are being asked to pattern their lives, should ask the Anglican Church to start it's own "Catholic Ordinariate". I think Catholic priests and bishops taking advantage of such an opportunity will get the better end of the bargain than do the five Anglican prelates swimming the Tiber.
Benedict is leading the Church toward the shoals of a new and disturbing western culture clinging to the destroyed arsenals of reaction, phariseeism, and over-arching clericalism. A happy, simple days of a papal absolutism drenched in the self-enhancing dramaturgy of the medieval church. But this time, it takes on the appearance of a rag tag traveling theatrical troupe with all the talent of a poorly directed kiddies' Christmas play. Benedict's henchmen in the prelatical court are basically bungling clowns who couldn't run a child's lemonade stand and make a profit, but they're desperately trying to save the Church by destroying it first.
Benedict and the ilk worshipping at his feet are the starry-eyed romantics desperately trying to restore the simple truisms and certitudes associated with their Catholic childhood. Like all ultra traditionalists, they're being buffeted in the storm of 21st century freedom and liberality and seek solace and comfort in a glorified past. So, for them this pope becomes their St. Michael, the Archangel always ready to do battle with the forces of darkness, but all too often those forces are of their own making too.
So, in embracing a mythic past of unabashed ecclesiastical totalitarianism, their misguided journey into obscurantism both on the liturgical and theological level is leading the rest of us to embrace with equal fervor the second phase of not only the UNFINISHED Vatican II , but the second scene of the Protestant Reformation.
It isn't so much Mozart this music-loving pontiff delights in now, but the power and call to heroics of a Wagner.
All Anglician orders are, and
All Anglician orders are, and have always been, invalid. Anglican clergy have never stood in succession to the Apostles and never will, thus having no authority for anything but a lot of beezledwazzle. The bishops converting to the true Faith have at last recognized this and are most welcome.
"All Anglician orders are,
"All Anglician orders are, and have always been, invalid."
What you don't know about Anglican orders would fill a parking lot. Anglican orders may have been invalid in Leo XIII's day, but since a number of Catholic priests have converted to Anglicanism since 1970 many Anglicans have had validly served sacraments.
Renegade Orthodox bishops, Polish National Catholic, and Church of Utrecht bishops continue to ordain within Anglicanism with sacraments recognized by Rome. In Africa and South America (especially Brazil) , there are excommunicated Roman Catholic bishops who ordain Anglicans to both the priesthood and to the episcopate regularly. Illicit to be sure, but valid. There is one in France who has remained unidentified, and perhaps more, who perform the same service to the Universal Church.
Let's cease spreading dated propaganda and tiresome nostrums about Anglican orders.
Even if the men carrying out
Even if the men carrying out the liturgies are validly ordained as either bishops or priests, one has to look at the intention of the prayers. At an Anglican/Episcopalian ordination the matter and the form of the sacrament are not present. The prayer of consecration in the Anglican Communion does not intend the same thing as the prayer of consecration in the Catholic Church. Thus, since the intention is not the intention of the Catholic Church, which is Christ's intention then we do not have a valid ordination. This was the basis of Leo XIII's decree, not who was doing the ordaining. The same thing applies to the celebration of the Eucharist. Even in the Anglican Usage of the Ordinariate, the prayers have not been adopted wholesale but have been modified to make sure they are in line with what we believe. Lex orandi, Lex credendi.
Let us cease spreading uninformed propaganda and tiresome platitudes about Anglican orders.
Anglican orders are valid ---
Anglican orders are valid --- for all the reasons stated previously. In addition, the Church of Rome has some serious soul-searching of its own regarding the validity of Catholic orders centuries ago. In his PRIESTHOOD: A HISTORY OF THE ORDAINED MINISTRY IN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, theologian Kenan Osborne devotes several pages of historical background that would suggest (to me, anyway) that Rome in its glass house should not be prepared to throw stones at others. Much scholarly literature on the subject in recent years would suggest (at least from a sacramental theological perspective) that the issue is not the simple black-and-white one you attempt to portray.
Aside from the issue of "validity" of ministerial orders, we should recall that the primitive Christian communities, i.e., those believers closest in time and place to Jesus and his disciples, did not have ordination to ministry. Their liturgical presiders, known as episcopoi or presbyteroi (title depending on local usage and not to be confused with our understanding of bishop and priest today), led their fellow priests at worship by virtue of the presiders' community leadership. Ordination itself was not part and parcel of Christian community life for perhaps a century or more. The earliest extant ordination rituals for bishop, presbyter, and deacon are in The Apostolic Tradition, customarily attributed to Hippolytus and dated ca. 215 AD, although more recent scholarship suggests they are *redactions* (works written, massaged, edited, etc. by various writers from various communities over decades or more) that date from perhaps as early as 150 to as late as 350 AD. What's most significant is that the ritual for bishop includes only a threadbare reference to liturgical leadership --- whereas the ordination ritual for presbyter includes no such reference whatsoever!!! Using your thinking, "Anonymous", those primitive Christian communities led by ordained presbyters did not have "valid" eucharists. Are you prepared to deny official church teaching that these earliest Christians did, indeed, have "valid" liturgies at which they received the body and blood of Christ in the eucharist?
The term 'valid' means, in essence, "what works" or "is effectual". Can we really say that a Protestant Christian community's worship service does not "work"? If we do so assert, are we not stating that Jesus does not welcome and accept such community's collective act of eucharistic thanksgiving? What hubris! We may have different understandings of eucharistic theology and, thus, different Christian traditions on the subject. Thus, the importance of ecumenical dialogue as encouraged by Vatican II.
Contrary to your understanding, we are not "spreading uninformed propaganda and tiresome platitudes about Anglican orders." If anything, we are pointing out historically based weaknesses of Rome's own arguments.
If anybody needs to be informed and open-minded here, I'd suggest that person is YOU.
You miss the core of the
You miss the core of the argument. The Church was given the authority by Christ to determine the governance of sacraments. While I won't take the time to argue with your "history" (the laying on of hands for leaders is attested by scripture) I will say that the Church determines matter and form and the Anglicans don't have it. Therefore their ordination is not valid.
You make some good points
You make some good points here. In order for orders to remain valid, you really need a schism like the one the Orthodox had with Rome. So one need not maintain the Catholic Church as the one true Church in order for orders to remain valid.
Catholic priests who convert to Anglicanism could become Anglican bishops but this is where Leo's edict comes in that the orders are not valid. So the ex-Catholic priest could not become a valid bishop in becoming an Anglican bishop because the whole Anglican structure is invalid. In other words he could only be raised to the episcopacy by 3 Anglican bishops who are not valid bishops themselves. Hence the theoretical bishop could not confer valid orders on a male Anglican candidate for the priesthood.
However, the question of whether an ex-Catholic priest could still confer the sacraments validly if illicitly is debatable. The Anglo-Catholics have a form of the Mass which is probably closer to the traditional Mass than the Novus Ordo is, so when this priest says the words of consecration it is conceivable that the transubstantiation could take place. However, I don't really know enough about this to make any definite statement which is a rare admission for paulte to make!
In simple terms, this is the
In simple terms, this is the Roman Church claiming to have magical powers which it can deny to others. This has nothing to do with Christianity but everything to do with crude authoritarianism based on a fear of entertaining the notion that it may be wrong. It has a long history of wrapping itself up in self-perpetuating ideas e.g., apparitions of the Virgin Mary only happen to Catholics - if these ideas are so central to faith, they why do not devout Protestants receive such visitations? - or are they mere pagans?
Validity of orders is a crudity, an invention of men more concerned with preserving their status than with the spread of the Gospel. Jesus did not direct that communion and sacraments could only be undertaken by agents authorized by an organisation in Rome.
The historic priesthood is one in which, hopefully, good order and choice of candidates is exercised wisely, but it cannot be the conferring of magical powers.
The Anglican bishops defecting to Rome are denying their own publicly professed vows when they were ordained; one hopes they will do better when they accept Roman ordination. In accepting Roman ordination they are confirming the Roman Church's thoroughly un-Christian claim that Anglican orders are 'null and void and a cruel deceit'; one hopes they can square their consciences and live with the thought of all those Anglicans whom they were deceiving by not possessing the right magic.
So if you're sexist you can
So if you're sexist you can enter in our Church. But isn't sexism a sin itself? Because you oppose women's ordination is no reason to abandon a church and enter in another. You're just bringint to the new church your sexist attitudes and that is not OK.
How are they sexist? Because
How are they sexist? Because they don't agree with their ecclesial communion trying to do something that is impossible--ordain women or marry homosexuals?
There is no one more intolerant than a liberal who preaches tolerance.
Good little commentary Alban.
Good little commentary Alban. You get your theme across with a panache that I thought approaches the margins of mirth.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Deo Gratias.Welcome home.
Deo Gratias.Welcome home. Lets hope they have never heard of the NCR!!lol
Who wants them? They are
Who wants them? They are coming because they share the same hatred, bigotry, and arrogance of our own bishops. Why should we welcome more of that? Let them stay in their own church. Do they realize what they are giving up? What they have in the Anglican Church is equality, honesty, courage and integrity on the part of the clergy and the members who are willing to face problems head on. They give up all that for the orthodox police, fear mongering, inequality of the sexes, lies, deceit, and exploitation of the faithful, especially the children, and pompous leaders who are more interested in where they live rather than in how they live. Are these Anglicans crazy ow what?
I propose a POW exchange.
I propose a POW exchange. We'll trade the five departing Anglican bishops for JayB, Chittister, Kung, Kennedy, Gumbleton, and throw in Mahoney as a bonus at no extra cost......ok...ok...just kidding...no one should be forced to take Mahoney.
O, whoopy-ding, we're getting
O, whoopy-ding, we're getting five new episcopal bigots!!!
"And Jesus wept."
One of the bishops is a
One of the bishops is a former Roman Catholic, returning to his old stomping grounds. Under the terms of Benedict's Anglican Ordinariate ("Anglicanorum Coetibus"), he won't be permitted to be ordained a priest, let alone function as a bishop.
Rome should be suspicious of the entire pack of "bigots", but Benedict is looking for apostles to accompany him on his journey to meet Attila at the gates. I think these guys are buying a pig in a poke.
If Rome expects to get a bunch of beautiful churches in the bargain, they can forget it. It isn't going to happen. Parliament won't allow it.
These bishops are like the flies being invited in the pope's parlor. Less pay, taking orders from a pack of dictators living in the past. Where there is little or no real consultation or association with the laity (the true royal priesthood), as all Anglicans will discover. A marked contrast to the strong role the laity have in the CofE and Protestant Episcopal Church.
The Disaffected Five accepting a schizoid liturgical mess of Rome's creation with no clear evidence Anglican liturgical traditions will be maintained, despite the promises and guarantees of this pope, shows they have more trust than many would have . Some Anglican skepticism is well founded. Rome has a long history of trying to destroy eastern rite liturgies, and the philistines around Benedict have strong objections to anything composed by Cranmer or that isn't purely Tridentine.
They're entering a Church in decline with a disgraced hierarchy and papacy losing public respect from all but desert dwelling hermits, the extraordinarily pious poor, and the brain dead. So,what's to like about any of this traveling circus Benedict keeps peddling to them?
Jesus better quit crying and
Jesus better quit crying and buck up!
Time for Jesus to tell the Pope hell no to bigotry!
Episcopalian to Roman is not
Episcopalian to Roman is not a "conversion," even for a bishop.
Good grief. Now RCC is not
Good grief. Now RCC is not only the Church of the Pedophiles-Clergy-Protectorate-Pope(s) as it is also Bigots R Us.
My family can not be card carrying misogynist homophobes. I doubt Jesus was a misogynist homophobe either.
The disordered pope is alienating most Catholics. Fastest growing group is disaffected Roman Catholics who continue to give up on this immoral hierarchy of a church. This BXVI is so bizarre, as was JPII. You can not make this stuff up. Yet there it is, wierd pappa joe, messing up everything big time.
Ah yes the supposed
Ah yes the supposed "tolerance" of the left. Anyone who does not agree with my agenda is racist, bigoted, homophobic, sexist, ageist, you name it-ist. Everyone must be tolerant by agreeing with me. Any disagreement with my idea of tolerance will not be tolerated!
Wow why hasn't Rome seem fit
Wow why hasn't Rome seem fit to find us "independent catholics"? You know us, we were once Roman or never Roman but make what is 'catholic" work for folks who cant stomach Rome.
I happen to think we need these anglicans, they will sure give the R church a run for their money. If the laity want to lie down and quit being involved, welcome home. These new priests will find an apathetic laity that wants Fr. to do it all for them.
Folks wake up, it is our church...you are baptized to be a preist prophet and steward of what God gives. Take your rightful place in God's house.
Post new comment