LONDON. Are you surprised?

News of the appointment of  the next Bishop of London, Sarah Mullaly, has come as an early Christmas present for some in that diocese. For others it appears to have come as a shock and a distincly unwelcome gift. No doubt, though, they will find a way of living with the latest new reality, some by emulating the Bishop of Horsham and discovering they were wrong all along, others by drawing yet another line in the sand as they retreat up the beach, back towards an unyielding cliff face.

When the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham was established, many of us who took the opportunity given us by the Holy Father were surprised. Friends who had previously declared themselves staunch Anglo-papalists discovered reasons why it was impossible for them to make the leap just now. In a year or two, when conditions in the Cof E became unbearable, they would jump, but not just yet. There was the children's education to consider, or the wife's work, or the need to build up a larger pension. Few admitted that their incumbency was too comfortable just now, or that they might have to amend their lifestyle.

As an Anglo-Catholic I had taught and believed that the Church of England was what it claimed to be, 'part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church' and that our task was to persuade the rest of the C of E that this was the case. Even when the ordination of women to the priesthood happened, we convinced ourselves (because we were told it constantly) that this was an experiment which could be reversed in future.

Since then the Church of England has been challenged with many other developments in society, easy divorce, abortion on demand, the Royal Family not just tolerating but celebrating adulterous relationships. and now the ability for anyone to change gender at will. Soon more in the Church of England will be celebrating same-sex 'marriages'. Yet it seems nothing will convince those who still call themselves Anglo-Catholics that the game is up, that there is no catholic future within the established church. What once seemed a local expression of the Universal Church now is quite clearly an utterly erastian, protestant body, sometimes dragging its feet but in the end determinedly copying society in the vain hope of appealing to the masses. A 'catholic' sect, a society for those who like that sort of thing, might be permitted for another year or two, before it is crushed under the weight of the zeitgeist and political correctness. The treatment of Philip North over Sheffield was not a one-off aberration; it is destined to become the norm, despite Philip Mawer.

There is no joy in writing this. I recall a church which could once claim to be stupor mundi, a scholarly compassionate body which was founded on the Apostles and the ancient Fathers and was prepared to speak the truth to power.  Ichabod, the glory has departed. So why will anyone with integrity still try to prop up this decaying corpse?

Thank the Good Lord for the new springtime of the Church, for Pope Benedict and his foresight in enabling the Ordinariates to happen, and for the Catholic Church which has welcomed home so many of us who were feeling bereft. There is still time for the rest of you; don't leave it too late. The message of Advent has never been more appropriate ... "while it is still today".

Saints of England

Back in the day there was in the Church of England's Calendar a celebration on November 8th for "Saints and Martyrs of England". The propers for that day came under "Group Commemorations" in 'Lesser Festivals and Holy Days' .. and you might have used those same propers just nine days earlier to celebrate (commemorate?) The Reformation. The Collect was unspecific: "Almighty God, you call your witnesses from every nation and reveal your glory in their lives. Make us thankful for their example and strengthen us by their fellowship that we, like them, may be faithful in the service of your kingdom.' Luther, I suppose, and Zwingli and the rest. So far, so bland.

Alolng Offa's Dyke

It is perhaps part of our Patrimony that has us (in the Ordinariate) celebrating a Feast on Wednesday next called simply "All Saints of England" (or if you are across Offa's Dyke "All Saints of Wales"). So I started researching the propers for the day. Maybe the Ordinariate web site could help? That simply announces Whilst we await the publication of the Divine Worship Missal, Ordinariate Groups and Missions have access to the Order of Mass and the Ordinariate Calendar but not to the Propers
The Ordinariate Missal is kept in St Osmund's, to which I do not have ready access, and the Lectionary is an American publication so misses out anything specifically English (such as the Feast of Our Lady of Walsingham); not much joy there, I suspect. If there ARE propers in the Ordinariate Missal I shall, of course, use them. Meanwhile a little liturgical ingenuity (another part of the Patrimony?) might be required.

Now the Irish are pretty good at keeping up their national end. They have, in the Roman Missal, propers for All Saints of Ireland on November 6th. Readings, Psalm &c can happily be lifted from this, recast in RSV (American Catholic) usage and printed off. Prayers will have to be 'thee-d' and thou-d' to fit in with the Ordinariate's notion of Tudor English, but it will probably work.

Someone's notion of Tudor architecture

Still I have a conundrum over the collect. There are two given us in the Customary, a third is in a collection called "supplement of Canticles and Collects", then there is the Irish one. Here they are for you to compare and contrast.
1. (Ireland) Lord, grant us your grace more abundantly as we keep the feast of all the saints of our land; we rejoice to be their countrymen on earth, may we merit to be their fellow-citizens in heaven.
2. (Customary #1) We beseech thee, O Lord, to multiply thy grace upon us who commemorate the Saints of our nation:that, as we rejoice to be their fellow-citizens on earth, we may have fellowship also with them in heaven.
3. (Customary#2) O God, whom the glorious company of the redeemed adore, gathered from all times and places of thy dominion: we praise thee for the Saints of our own land, and for the lamps that were lit by their holiness; and we beseech thee that, at the last, we too may be numbered among those who have done thy will and declared thy righteousness.
4.(Customary supplement)  Grant, we beseech thee, almighty God; that we may in all things be comforted by the intercession of holy Mary, Mother of God, of all the holy Apostles, Martyrs, Confessors and Virgins, and all the Saints of England; and that like as we do call to mind* their godliness of life; so we may be effectually defended by their help.

No D----d merit

I expect Fr Hunwicke will tell me exactly what I MIGHT have done; and I expect Mgr Andrew will instruct me in what I SHOULD have done. And others will complain that I am washing linen in public (though it seems pretty clean to me).
If I had a choice, I think 2 is favourite: just a straightforward bit of half-timbering applied to the Irish collect, with no mention of MERIT (it was King Edward VII, I think, who said he liked the Order of the Garter above other decorations because "there was no d-mn-d merit in it".) 4 is altogether too florid and wordy, and makes the Saints of England (whom we are celebrating) just an appendage to the Glorious Company of the Apostles ktl. But I expect I shall use it, since it seems to be the one we are meant to use at Mass that day. Oh dear - Cranmer was alway so much more succinct.

*'as we do call to mind' indeed! Very Tudor-bethan; very half-timbered. Why not just "as we recall"or "as we remember". And what does "effectually" add to the sense in this prayer? Grrr.

The tongue holier than the hand?

The Bishop in Wisconsin in the USA has apparently claimed  'The practice of Communion in the hand grew out of a disobedience that can be traced back to Holland. Because of the widespread abuse of receiving in the hand, Pope Paul VI granted an indult for the practice in a 1969 letter from the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship.' He also asserts that  'Communion on the tongue is more reverent'. Reverence is a cornerstone of Anglican worship, as it was once generally practised by Anglo-Catholics, and still is by a few. It may be though an uphill task, in view of Cardinal Sarah's support for receiving on the tongue, but at least a case should be made for reverent receiving of Commuion in the hand .

The Dutch might have used reception in the hand as an act of disobedience. In the Church of England, the very reverse was true. Long before Dutch disobedience, many young confirmation candidates were taught that the correct way to receive was on the palm of the hand, one hand placed on the other, for we understood St Augustine had said that in this way we made "a throne for God". Then we were taught to bow our heads to receive the Host from the palm of the hand. We were also taught to sign ourselves with the cross just before receiving the Host or the Precious Blood. It may be that it is the taking of the Host between finger and thumb that looks irreverent to the Bishop of Madison and other upholders of, as they would claim, 'the tradition'. Well, there are many different traditional ways of receiving Communion - for instance it is administered on a spoon in the Eastern Churches, and that can probably claim at least as long a history as reception on the tongue.

What appears particularly irreverent to many former Anglicans is the way so many Catholics studiously avoid receiving from the Chalice, seemingly deliberately avoiding reception of the Precious Blood when it is offered to them. We are well aware of the assertion that 'the Lord is the same in either kind', but we still find it strange that if that is so He chose to initiate the Communion with both bread and wine. It has come as a great encoragement to us to be able to use again the words (taken by Cranmer originally from a Spanish Cardinal) 'that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his Body, and our souls washed through his most precious Blood'. What is more the words accompanying Communion are terribly brief, whereas in the Ordinariate when we say AMEN we say it at the end of a prayer with which the Sacrament is given to us - that the Body, the Blood, of Our Lord Jesus Christ might preserve us, body and soul, to everlasting life.  Brevity, haste even, seems to be the prerequisite for some Catholics.  I fancy too that our Anglo-Catholic forefathers would have told communicants that they should not attempt to receive on the tongue; it was rude to poke out your tongue, and the priest did not want to be slobbered over from so many open mouths.

In all this, though, what matters is the interior disposition of the Communicant. If he or she intends to be reverent, then how that reverence is expressed is a matter for them and the Lord, not for any onlooker. The non-conformist who receives Communion from the hands of his neighbour, seated, is not doing so from irreverence, but because that is how he believes he might get nearest to the way it was for the first disciples in the Upper Room.  I seem to recall Our Lord telling us not to judge, least of all to judge another's servant. And certainly the tongue is no holier than the hand.

An Honoured Place

What possible right does a Roman Catholic priest of the Ordinariate have to make any comment on events over the fence in the Church of England?  I think I have two pretty good reasons for writing just now; first, because I was there when the Church of England said that catholic Anglicans held and would continue to hold an honoured place within it. That was one of the reasons I felt it right back in 1995 to try to make that promise a reality, and accepted the post of Bishop of Richborough. Then we were told that the Church of England could not determine finally what was right concerning women's ordination. We were in a time of discernment, until all the Churches, Eastern and Western, came to a common mind. Today the inability or unwillingness of the Church of England to allow an Anglican with doubts about the rightness of women's ordination to become a diocesan bishop seems to be a breach of those promises, one more nail in the Anglo-Catholic coffin.

Archbishop Justin Welby and Bishop Philip North

That would be reason enough for me to express an opinion; but there is another reason I presume to write now. When Philip North trained for the ministry at St Stephen's House, I was its Principal. In his year the academic achievements of that small college were outstanding. Of a handful of candidates who entered for degrees in Oxford University's Honours School of Theology, four were awarded Firsts. One of them is Philip North. There are few Bishops, Anglican or Catholic, with a more impressive academic grounding. There are even fewer with Philip's generous pastoral heart.
As he withdraws from the post of Bishop of Sheffield, to which he was recently nominated, I simply want to express my sadness for Philip, and for the Church of England. It is no joy to any Christians when fellow Christians are hurt - when one member suffers, every member suffers. If the Church of England is diminished by the activities of a so called 'liberal' group, intent on driving out any who disagree with them, then all the Churches are wounded too. Worse still, it is a wound in the Body of Christ Himself.

Then pray for the Church of England, and for Bishop Philip. He wants a place where he can minister to the poor and the neglected for whom he has an especial care. Pray that he may find that place.  Pray for the women in ministry in the Church of England, many of whom have tried to support and encourage Philip, and have valued his pastoral care - even while others have refused his ministry. Pray too for the whole Church of God, all baptized Christians, for a spirit of penitence and reconciliation in this holy season of Lent.

Bigots all

Many in the Church of England will have been thrilled to hear that the first woman bishop has been nominated. It would be sad, though, if that announcement were to lead to bitterness; and so far as I can see there has been none from those opposed to this new move.  So I was sorry to receive a green ink letter today with a picture of the newly appointed lady, headed "Church of England names Rev Libby Lane first women (sic) bishop".

The Revd Mrs Lane

No problem with that apart from the grammar, but beneath it the caption went "Wishing all the Anglo-Catholic bigots a Merry Christmas and a Peaceful New Year!" Were I an Anglo-Catholic that might have stung me a little. As I am not it is really no concern of mine what the Church of England does - I maintain an interest simply because so many of my old friends continue (I am not sure how) within that body. No, I am sorry for the person who, in his or her jubilation at the appointment, felt it necessary to rub salt into the wounds of those who hold legitimate theological views about the steps the Church of England is taking.

There are, I suppose, two good things to come of such vitriolic mailings. First, it might make some realise just how hated they are by the triumphant majority, and so get them looking once more at the Catholic option. The other is that the (anonymous) mailer used a first class stamp, and I still hold some Royal Mail shares.

After the Fall

Mass of St Hilda this morning at Lymington Church (Our Lady of Mercy). I offered the Mass for the Church of England, and especially for my friends who will have found today so hard - I well remember Synod on November 11th 1992, when I had to return to face those at St Stephen's House who really had believed (as I once did) that "the Church of England is part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church". For me, that became an increasingly difficult position to defend .

Acer

But what picture could be appropriate for such a day? Maybe a series of lines drawn in sand, with an incoming tide sweeping them all away?  No, too unkind. Instead here are a couple of images from the garden. On this damp and dull day the dying foliage glows with one last burst of splendour. Of course, such visual parables cannot be pressed too far; for the Wisteria and the Maple there may be new glory next year. Institutions, though, simply wither on the vine.

Wisteria

Cheer up, though. There is new life - but maybe not for the branch severed from the trunk. Pope Benedict XVI (blessed be he) found a way of grafting us back into the stock where we belong. That way is still open for those brave enough to ask for it. It is called the Ordinariate.

Il Faut Cultiver NotreJardin

Overtaken by Nile Lilies - Agapanthus

Some while ago I was posting what might be thought marginally political matters: and I was told by a very senior member of the Ordinariate that I would be well advised to stick to gardening - which you, dear reader, will have noticed I have done. Nothing about the present state of the Church of England, no comments on the 'ordination' of women as bishops. So it came as something of a surprise - a pleasant surprise I must own - to find Mgr Burnham breaking his own rule and blogging about the Church of England's recent adventure in modernity. 

Of course, he did not sink so low as to create a blog himself; instead he let Fr Tomlinson do it for him. I was particularly struck by this paragraph attributed to Mgr Burnham:   'The position of those opposed to women’s ordination is respected. Once more they are said to have an honoured place and it would be churlish and discourteous to point out that, in this matter, rhetoric has always been stronger than practice in the twenty years since women have been ordained priest in England. The important difference now is that the language of reception and communion have been largely ditched in favour of the language of tolerance.' All of Mgr Burham's piece is well worth reading, and I trust that the author of "Consecrated Women?"  and the many other Anglo-Catholic leaders who were until very recently saying that "A code of practice will not do" are busily reading it - unless they genuinely are now very happy with the code of practice (for it is nothing more) that has been offered them.

I suppose Mgr Burnham's essay struck me particularly, since like him I had been a flying bishop. How truly he observes that rhetoric has been stronger than practice in regard to giving Anglo-Catholics an 'honoured place'. Like me he will recall the women Directors of Ordinands who made it impossible for men to proceed as candidates for ordination unless they denied their belief that Christ instituted a male episcopate (and presbyterate) when he set apart the twelve Apostles. Like me he will remember battles over presentation to livings of traditionalist candidates when there was a woman Archdeacon overseeing it.

But all that is now over. We sought an honoured place because we thought that the Church of England really was part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and all that was needed was to remind her of her vocation. Now that is no longer possible. Instead of being a voice recalling the Church of England to her roots, Anglo-Catholicism s now reduced to being simply a tolerated minority, expected very soon to die out when it has once experienced the reality of women in the episcopate.

It will be a very gentle process. After all the facilitated discussions of the past year, everyone knows how valued Anglo-Catholics are. They lend a bit of colour to the scene, and because they are so obviously wrong they can be put up with - for a while.

What a relief not to have to concern myself with all this any longer, now that I am a Catholic priest in the Ordinariate. Certainly we must continue to pray for our brothers and sisters in the C of E, especially those of a 'catholic' bent. There was a time when Bishop (now Mgr) Broadhurst would say “don’t trust a bishop – even me”. But of course women bishops will be entirely different, totally to be trusted. None of them will ever bully their priests into toeing any sort of official line. They will be quite different from any of  their predecessors; or indeed from any women in positions of authority in the Church up to now. They will be models of generosity, and no Anglo-Catholic will have anything to fear. He will be treated equally over matters of preferment, there will be a new swathe of traditionalist bishops from both the Catholic and the Reform wing....

Oh dear, I am quite overcome at the wonderful prospect opening out for the future Church of England. I really must get back to my garden.

On this, at any rate, Voltaire was right: get on with the gardening