Schizoid?

A week from now and the next (last?) Assembly of Forward in Faith will be ended. I guess it cannot be over too soon for the Chairman and his committee. The latest issue of New Directions (mine only arrived today) demonstrates the problem. Geoffrey Kirk writes about our Point of Decision; "If there was any doubt about whose side one should be on in the coming life and death struggle between the Catholic Religion and its Cultured Despisers, the matter is now settled". A few pages earlier and Fr Garry Waddington, recently arrived in Harrogate from Portsmouth, takes the opposite "Northern" view. "Proper Provision is still needed. The Society model might well be the way in which it could with enough support be secured".

There must be many in the Church of England deciding which is the right side of the fence for them. Join SSWSH and hope that an honourable solution may be pulled out of the hat? At the Southern Synod it was the Bishop of Plymouth who attempted this conjuring trick - to the obvious embarrassment of the southern PEVs. In the north, it seems it was the PEV himself, Bishop Martyn of Beverley - and at that meeting the Ordinariate was clearly not encouraged.

Fr Waddington asserts that 'whilst the Church of England still holds marks of Catholicity there is a future for us'. I had always assumed the marks of Catholicity were four: that the Church was One, Holy, Universal (catholic) and Apostolic. What marks will be left when there are women bishops? An interchangeable ministry? Only if catholics agree that women bishops are according to the Will of God. 'High Mass' and incense here and there? Nothing but a well dressed corpse. SSWSH is to be a 'corporate body for clergy and laity gathered around faithful bishops'. Fine for this generation; but what after that? We were concerned to provide a catholic solution for our children and grandchildren. Who will give us the faithful bishops we need?

New Directions continues this month with the same Punch and Judy show; one article (Matthew Chinery's "Oh no you can't") balanced against the Statement on behalf of "a group of Catholic Bishops" headed 'To Protect and Preserve Anglican Tradition'. Their concern, it seems is to help Anglicans "who do not accept (the ministry of the Pope) or would want to see that ministry in different ways". They are wanting to help "those who cannot accept the innovations proposed in legislation and who are hurt and frustrated by General Synod..."

Well of course none of us likes what General Synod is doing. But is a Society however large likely to divert Synod from its path? The juggernaut is rolling; better get out of its way. Oh, of course, we have misgivings about the Pope! How much better if he were to be more like Rowan, ready for Synods to over-rule him. They want to see the Papal Office "in different ways"? Then they had better show us just what ways they might be which could still preserve the Church's unity.

Then in New Directions something I never expected to see; an Editorial which reads like something from the Church Times; "on the one hand - and on the other". Clearly the Editor himself finds it difficult to commend SSWSH, just as the Northern Synod found it hard to commend the Ordinariate. He does his best though, and concludes "We wish them well in their task". Maybe that is all we can hope from the Assembly: a gentlemanly agreement to follow our separate ways.

If I had not already paid for the train fare, I might have given Friday and Saturday at the Emmanuel Centre a miss. As it is, I shall grit my teeth and try, at least, to enjoy catching up with a few old friends. I do not have much expectation of learning how the Bishops of Plymouth and Beverley and their colleagues are going to achieve what we all want, a Province with the capacity for providing a succession of bishops and priests to care for Catholics who 'cannot yet accept the Pope's offer'. They have a resonsibility to tell us, for A CODE OF PRACTICE WILL NOT DO!

A time to plant, and a time to pluck up...(?courage?)

Signs of the Fall

Americans call this Season "The Fall". How especially appropriate that seems this year. Curiously, though as a retired bishop I have no vote, I was sent some of the addresses by would-be synodspersons. They will all be anxiously waiting on the result of the General Synod elections. For me, I fear (as someone said of Parliamentary elections) it is just "One lot of sinners out; another lot of sinners in". The sinners on Synod, though, have a very tedious time ahead.




On one hand there is the monstrous regimen, champing at the bit, wanting to see which of them will be first past the post in the Episcopessa Stakes. On the other, the far smaller group (and, I expect, much diminished even since 2005) of 'traditionalists' doing their utmost to win some concessions for those opposed to women's consecration.




Neither party will have had much cheer from the announcement of the Revision Committee on the Legislation. There are some of those eight appointed members about whom I know nothing at all - but even from those I do know it is clear that the liberal ascendancy has the majority. So that might encourage WATCH and its friends. The timetable, though, can only annoy them. "The expectation is that the House will bring a draft of the code to Synod in February 2012". The House is, of course, the House of Bishops. It is their Standing Committee which set up the working group, and that working group is expected to "conclude its report for the House (of Bishops) by next autumn, having consulted the House and the legislative Steering Committee first".

Rowan in the Fall

For six years I had the joy of attending (but not voting at) meetings of the House of Bishops. The Agenda was always overpacked, and discussion, even of the most serious matters, often cursory. So this new working group will have to meet, get to know one another, look at previous reports and see why they were rejected, discover their terms of reference, begin to make suggestions, go to the House of Bishops and ask them to comment, wait for the response, make a stab at a draft, get the legislative Steering Committee to look at it, redraft it in the light of what the Steering Committee said and the House of Bishops and (provided they have not been simply told "go back and do it again") produce the rabbit from the hat "by next Autumn". A busy twelve months for those three Bishops (Ed & Ips, Coventry and Whitby) two archdeacons (Christine Hardman of Lewisham and Greenwich, and Jane Sinclair of Stow and Lindsey) one parish clergyman and two unordained ladies.




Assuming this is achieved, "the expectation is that the House (of Bishops) will bring a draft code to Synod in February 2012 - though the final version of the code cannot be drawn up by the House and approved by Synod until the legislation itself has received Royal Assent - which cannot in practice be before 2013".




I suppose that is because Royal Assent will only be given once the Ecclesiastical Committe of Parliament has looked at the legislation, and determined whether it is satisfied with the draft statutory code of practice. Last time round, in '92, it was not. It might not satisfy them this time, either, but for quite different reasons. Whereas last time Parliament wanted to put in safeguards for those unable to accept women's ordination, now the reverse might be true; they could well say that in view of equal opportunities legislation &c, there should be NO permission for any priest to refuse the ministrations of a woman bishop. They might then demand of the church a single clause measure, without any safeguards.




Yet many, I guess, will be hanging on in the C of E by their fingertips during all that time, desperate that something will be done which will make it possible for them to remain. For me, and I suspect many others, this is the culmination of what began with Keble's 1833 Assize Sermon. He started there the movement to free the Church from the power of the State; to enable it to become truly a part of the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Now, the battle is all but ended, with the Church rolling over and assenting to every new wind of doctrine, based not on Revelation but on Rights: the rights of women, gay and transgendered rights, the right to end one's life. What a blessing is the Ordinariate!

This Isle is full of Noises

A day spent overseas. We were on the 8.55 ferry from Lymington to Yarmouth, IoW, heading for St Michael's, Swanmore. Until a few months ago it was looked after by Fr Malcolm Jones. Now he has retired to a House for Duty post at Holy Trinity Winchester, so priests on the Island are looking after them most of the time.

Swanmore: the Sanctuary

The day started out very dismal, low cloud and little white caps on the waves during the crossing. The day itself, though, proved far from gloomy. They were celebrating their patronal festival, a litle group of singers had been imported to enliven the occasion, and we had a very jolly time indeed. I preached about the folly of calling someone (like the late Princess of Wales) "an angel". We are at present 'a little lower than the angels'; but in the fulness of time, our destiny is greater than theirs; not disembodied spirits, but the sons and daughters of God, come to full maturity in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Apres Mass

After Mass there was a wonderful buffet lunch - hardly a bun-fight, for there was so much food that no-one needed to fight for it - and a chance to talk to people. It was wonderful to find them so gung-ho for the Ordinariate. It may be, of course, because they have a number of 'third resolution' parishes on the Island. All Saints Ryde is a strong member church of Forward in Faith; but there are others, too. We called on old friends in Cowes, Ryde and Godshill, and everywhere they were speaking enthusiastically about the Ordinariate. This may be because there has been good clerical leadership. Even today, I heard, one of the Island Churches was distributing printed material about the Ordinariate after the morning service.






So we should be calling on Michael and all the Holy Angels to strengthen us as we put on the whole armour of faith to withstand the temptations of the world, the flesh and the devil; and even to resist the siren voices which would try to lure us onto the rocks of half-heartedness and Anglican fudge.

Trying to be Helpful

Expensive business, getting to London for Synods and Committees. Just occasionally there is a bonus spin-off; the Royal Academy provided it yesterday, with its wonderful exhibition from Budapest. After a Church Union committee meeting, Jane and I met and spent a couple of hours in the RA. The Goya young girl used in their publicity poster (above) is wonderful. There is also some magnificent Church art, much of it collected by the Esterhazys.

There was, though, one later painting which particularly caught my eye. It is by Philip de Laszlo, a portrait of Pope Leo XIII. Now we have a new society, named after those two great Romanisers, SS Wilfrid and Hilda. Why not add this great Pope, progenitor of Apostolicae Curae, as a third patron? He would sit very well with the other two Saints. You can't say I don't try to be helpful.

And if you possibly can, get to the Royal Academy to see the Treasures from Budapest. Perhaps you could squeeze a visit in during the Forward in Faith Assembly?

It is a large exhibition: a smaller one at the V&A might appeal:

Raphael: Cartoons and Tapestries for the Sistine Chapel 8 September – 17 October 2010
Free ticketed admission - pre-booking is strongly advised as ticket numbers are limited

The tapestries are displayed alongside the full-size designs for them – the famous Raphael Cartoons. This is the first time that the designs and tapestries have been displayed together –something Raphael himself never witnessed. The tapestries have not been shown before in the UK. More details on the website of the Victoria & Albert Museum

Watch it!

Chichester explains

I never thought I would say it, but WATCH (Women Against the Church, or some such thing) have written something sensible. Mind you, it comes in the midst of a deal of rubbish about how Hilda of Whitby would have really been ordained and so on; still, credit where it is due, when it comes to writing about the 'Society Model' they are almost as accurate as Fr Hunwicke. This is what they wrote:-

'The “Society model” (which this proposal seems to embody), was discussed in depth by the Revision Committee when it looked at how best to provide for those who would not accept women as bishops. It was rejected because, ‘Crucially the majority of us came to believe that there was some risk of creating a society that was an even weightier body than a Diocese. This was because some of the representations made to us seemed to envisage that jurisdiction would in some way be conferred on the society itself and through it to its bishops… we therefore voted by 11 votes to 7 that we did not wish the draft Measure to be amended to give effect to a society model.’ (Report of the Revision Committee, page 22 paras 110, 115)'

Now Fr Houlding, at least, knows all this, because he made the report which the Revision Committee threw out. So why was he supporting it (albeit very luke-warmly) at the "Sacred Synod" last week?

(rt)The Bishop of Ebbsfleet enthralled by Fr Houlding's defence of the Society Model

BTW, is it only me who thinks of Christine Keeler when they say "Society Model" ?

Bishop Andrew hits the spot

+ Fulham (l) and + Richborough (r) attentive to Bishop Andrew

Once again, it seems to me that Bishop Andrew Burnham (Ebbsfleet) has succinctly discovered the weakness of those labouring to delay or undermine the Ordinariate. He wrote this in response to a posting on the Anglo-Catholic, but rather than giving you the labour of seeking that out, here is what he said:

"Fr Tomlinson's mistaking of the source of the press release, corrected by Fr Marsden, and the postal address of the Society being the same as FiF's encourages me to pass on the questions asked by some groups at the Ebbsfleet Lay Conference on Saturday 25th September. Isn't FiF the very Society we need and which we have already got? There were reminiscences of the language of 'seizing' what is not granted and 'our bishops' consecrating new bishops over the border. Why would FiF, re-inventing itself under new episopal leadership – the Society's named bishops, including the chairman of FOAG, instead of the 'old guard' of Fulham and PEVs – and called a 'Society' succeed now at 'seizing' where it previously failed? This is what the laity asked.

My own reflection is that when Bishop Mark talked at the Sacred Synod of a Society 'within the Church' he put his finger on the trojan which may destroy this project. 'Within the Church' means interchangeability of sacraments and ministers, dependence on a parent model. It is exactly the difficulty of those issues which has led the Church of England to reject traditionalists' proposals six times (Guildford, Gloucester-Guildford, Manchester Group, Synod 2008, Revision Committee, Synod 2010) and I don't think the Society proposal disguises the difficulties sufficiently to allow traditionalists proposals to slip through the seventh time round.

I offered a paper on the various solutions, including the Society model, five years ago and I discussed it then with bishops, including both archbishops (one of whom was a bishop at the time in the area Ebbsfleet serves), and subsequently by some of those on the Revision Committee. The problem then -and ever since – has been the same old issues of interchangeability of sacraments and ministers and relationship with the parent body.

My own conclusion is that those Anglicans who are not convinced by the ministry of Peter – beautifully proclaimed in the visit of the Holy Father to the UK this month – should remain with the untidiness of Anglicanism and relate to the rest of the Anglican world as they are directed to by bishops and synods – for that is the Anglican system. Those who accept the ministry of Peter should accept his warm welcome into full communion, a welcome re-iterated in the published speech to the Catholic bishops at Oscott College. There are two routes: one for groups ('the caravan') and the other for individuals journeying alone ('solo swimmers'). Despite press excitement, we have no timetable as yet for the first – though there are groups preparing themselves – and the second route is always available and is even open, at present, for married priests, though whether that would continue alongside an Ordinariate provision we have yet to discover.

We must not rain on each other's parades but there is much work to be done by the Society of Wilfred and Hilda before it is self-evident that it is viable. And it does need to be clear about its attitude to the Holy See and Anglicanorum Coetibus. Several have pointed out that both Wilfrid and Hilda were zealous supporters of bringing a fragmented British Christianity into a proper relationship with Roman conventions and the Latin Church. Is that its aim or among its objectives?
+Andrew"

Hither and Yon

I abandoned the 'Sacred Synod' on Friday before it ended; to get home to welcome four dinner guests. When they left I posted a blog for the Anglo-Catholic http://www.theanglocatholic.com/2010/09/here-we-go-round-the-mulberry-bush/

(it seems to have caused a little interest), packed for the weekend, and went to bed a little after midnight. At seven am on Saturday we were on the road to Bury St Edmunds, where I was honoured to preach for the Revd Dr Michael Peel's 5oth anniversary of priesting.

Fr Peel was on good form

Jane had found the journey rather tiring

Michael, when I first met him, was Warden of the Homes of St Barnabas in Sussex, but he already had a long and distinguished parochial ministry behind him. Also behind him, as ever, was his wife Daloni - their Golden Wedding is in two years' time.

Their sons and families supported them, as did many old friends. Fr David Palmer (now a Catholic Priest) gave one of the speeches; another was by a former Curate, Fr John Sclater (left), now a Priest Vicar of Wells Cathedral. Fr Michael himself celebrated the Mass in time-honoured Prayer Books style (albeit with Incense and some modest ceremonial).

At the end of Mass

Fr Peel's wife, Daloni (rt), welcomed guests to the after-Mass drinks at the back of Church.

The Church of St Peter, Thurston, is a large imposing East Anglian edifice; its tower fell dramatically in the 19th Century, demolishing the greater part of the nave. Amazingly, within eighteen monthsof the disaster it was completely rebuilt!









After a great reception we drove southeast into Essex from Suffolk, to the parish of Thorpe-le-Soken. There Fr Jeremy Dowding was in mid-festival, and we joined the parish that evening for a marvellous concert - the outstandingly good Tenor, Andrew Bain, had been a chorister at St Peter's and like his fellow artist the Soprano Natasha Shipp, gave his services freely to the Church, as did also their accompanist Helen Allison.

The party that followed the concert went on in the Vicarage until three am. Jane and I made our excuses and retired around midnight. On Sunday morning, I preached at a confirmation when the one Candidate, Patricia, was supported by her daughter and grand-daughter.




It was a lovely occasion, in the church decked with flowers and produce for Harvest, and there was a large congregation. In the past year the regular communicant numbers has grown by around twenty - while all around churches are in decline. We were joined for lunch in a nearby pub by Fr Jeremy and his wife and four of his leading parishioners. When we made our getaway in mid-afternoon we headed into torrential rain and traffic returning from other weekend jollifications, so it took us four hours to cover the 190 miles home. So much for retirement - but I would sooner wear out than just rust away. You might like one or two pictures from the weekend. Below is the 16th Century tower of Our Lady and St Michael, Thorpe-le-Soken; most of the rest of the church is 19th Century rebuild.