Good news....

Since no news is good news, here is some no news. A wonderful sunny day in Lymington, and a free Sunday! Our daughter brought 10yr old grandson yesterday to stay for half-term (looking pensive on the right). She has now gone back to Wales but after attending an 8 o'clock said Communion at St Thomas' - very BCP for Trinity xxi - it was good to stroll along the cliffs and on the beach just a few miles Southwest of home. Very restorative. There was even one hardy family with a toddler paddling!

If I weren't an anglo-catholic, I think I'd be a blue-domer. Notwithstanding the claims that science has 'disproved' God, the sea and the sky always set me wondering. The tide has been going in and out from whenever it was that water and land were separated; and when I consider the heavens, the works of His fingers, the moon and the stars that He has ordained; well "what is man that thou art mindful of him; and the son of man, that thou visitest him?"

Even empty beachhuts can look lovely in such weather. Next weekend will be less restful; three sermons in two days, and a trip to East Kent into the bargain. But that will be All Saints, which is a great time.

Many or Few Revisited

I have been properly rebuked for the harshness of what I said in the last paragraph of "By Many or By Few" , so I have amended it.

I've been too ready to criticise those who have not yet been able to decide in favour of the Ordinariate. Theoretically I have known it's been much easier for me, in retirement; but in practice I have still been horribly judgemental. I am very sorry for that.

I suppose after thirty-five years of being on, or following, General Synod, I have become a bit case-hardened. I have seen that body grow progressively more illiberal, and have come to the conclusion that we can expect NOTHING of any value from it for Traditionalists. The offer of the Ordinariate came as such a relief to me that I failed to appreciate the difficulties for many others. As a result, SSWSH appeared to me as a last straw, an attempt by the Establishment, under the guise of being 'catholic', to undermine what the Pope is doing for us.

Others have thought much the same (for instance William Oddie) - but it is not the whole truth. There are honourable men among those setting up SSWSH, and some doubtless genuinely believe that the Church of England will back down and give anglo-catholics their own bishops (as in the former Act of Synod) but this time with Jurisdiction. I think they are wrong, but it is clearly a hopeful shelter for those who cannot yet accept the Ordinariate. So, we go on praying, for those who are deciding (some at great cost to themselves) to seek to join the Ordinariate, and those who still trust in the generosity and good will of the Church of England.

For myself, once again, I ask pardon of those I have offended by harsh and judgemental words; I will try to do better in future.

Pre-Nups

So busy with posts about Ordinariates and such that most blogs seem to have missed the court decision to allow Pre-Nuptial agreements. These are set up to avoid a millionaire having to pay the bulk of his or her fortune to a gold-digging spouse. What no-one seems to notice is that such an agreement would nullify the marriage; for it is setting limits to the "Have and hold - better or worse - richer or poorer" - to say nothing of "with all my worldly goods I thee endow". Surely if a marriage is entered into with its ending foreseen and pre-arranged, it cannot be a lifelong marriage?

I seem to remember that French kings were always married with great splendour in Cathedrals - Rheims or Paris, I think - but despite the presence of Cardinal Archbishops, one person was always excluded - the local parish priest. That was because in law his presence was necessary for a valid marriage; so if things did not work out, it could always be claimed the marriage had been illegal from the start.

Maybe that was just a Protestant canard; but if anyone wanted an easy escape from a marriage, a pre-nuptial agreement might prove equally helpful. If Henry VIII had had such a pre-nup with Catherine of Aragon, maybe there'd have been no Church of England? Now that's a happy thought...

By Many or by Few

Simon Killwick addresses the Assembly

Great excitement in the Wifred & Hilda bunch (the soft-centre Anglo-Catholics), and Reform (the hardline Evangelicals). Between them these two strange bedfellows can derail the consecration of women bishops; that at least is according to a press release from the Christian News Release Service UK, reported and commented on by Damian Thompson in his Telegraph blog. Here is what is claimed:


"Subject: Women Bishops in the CofE now to be BLOCKED after latest General Synod Election
MEDIA INFORMATION ON GENERAL SYNOD ELECTION
Following the Election of the new General Synod of the Church of England, Evangelical and Catholic Groups on Synod have now swapped lists of candidates.
The results show that 66 Clergy (32.10%) and 77 laity (35.46%) will vote against the current Women Bishop legislation unless it is amended to give those who for conscious/scriptural reasons, cannot accept WBs.
Only 34% is needed to block this when it returns from the dioceses. For the first time, it can and will be blocked by both fully ELECTED houses. In the clergy only a further 1.81% is needed, and that’s just ONE person. There are 21 new evangelicals on this new synod, and one out of a possible 58 undecided is a given!
The Bishop of Fulham’s departure to Rome, announced on Friday, was therefore a little too early and the Catholic Group on General Synod have distanced themselves from his position and will be staying within the CofE."


Well, we have been here before, notoriously in the General Synod on 11.xi.92. On that day we were to be saved by our clear 1/3rd in the House of Laity. And if they did not prevent the Ordination of Women as Priests, then the House of Bishops would. In fact, a couple of women (who had been elected because they were opposed to women's ordination) abstained and the Bishops, who thought they would leave it to the laity, caved in; hence women's ordination went ahead. Incidentally, one of those women who changed her mind has since been 'ordained' as a priest - and her priest husband is now a Roman Catholic.


It would only require one or two of the laity or clergy to be indisposed when the vote happens - a funeral, a heavy cold, something compelling of that sort - and all the prognostications could once more prove wrong. But in any case, should the doctrine of the Church be determined in such a way? Far from being 'too early', the Bishop of Fulham's promise could not have come at a better time.


Some of us have spent half our lives seeing the Church of England descend into chaos. The question is not primarily one of women's ordination; it is about Authority. The Church of God is not ours to alter at will, its future depending on whether a third of the elected members of a Synod is ready to stand firm. We already have women as priests, and no doubt we shall have them as bishops before very long. Then, whatever 'safeguards' can be squeezed out of a reluctant Synod, it will not alter the fact that the Church of England can no longer claim continuity with the Church founded by Our Lord.


And what are those safeguards likely to be? Reform and SSWSH have very different requirements. For SSWSH (as the Bishop of Burnley reminded the FiF Assembly last week) "a Code of Practice Will Not Do". For Reform, it is all about Headship; and provided their parishes do not have to accept the ministry of women bishops, it will not matter greatly to them who joined in the laying on of hands when their Vicar was ordained. He is a man, that is enough. For them, a Code of Practice (even without Jurisdiction) probably will do. There may be concessions made next time round - perhaps in a Synod in 2012 - but those concessions cannot satisfy Catholics in the Church of England.


I originally ended this with some pretty harsh comments about those who remain undecided; and that resulted in a couple of helpful rebukes (see comments below); so I have deleted that, and would simply say that we must go on trying to find the right way ahead for us, for now - but don't be too easily deceived into thinking there will be a rescue package from the C of E similar to the Act of Synod. Sooner or later, women are going to be admitted to the Episcopate; and sooner or later we shall all have to decide if a church which determines doctrine by majorities in Synod can honestly claim to be part of the "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" which we have always said it was. Meanwhile all of us should be praying for discernment, our own and others'.

Remember, "nothing restrains the LORD from saving by many or by few.” I Sam. xiv 6

[This post also appears on the Anglo-Catholic site]

A Parish Sermon

'The need to pray continuously and never lose heart' : from today's Gospel

We were secluded in Walsingham this week, and only heard second-hand about the rescue of the Chilean miners. One report though that came to us said that one of the men, on being released, knelt to thank God; and the crowd fell silent. How heaven must have been battered with prayers for those trapped men, not just with prayers from their families but from all over the world; and those prayers were heard and answered.

We don’t seem terribly good in the Church of England – or maybe not terribly good in England at all – at calling on people to pray. It happened during the war, the second world war; and even more during the first war, the Great War. But I don’t recall much of a public response in prayer even during the Falklands, and the nearest thing to prayer with the present conflict in Afghanistan is the crowds who gather to welcome home the bodies of the dead as they arrive at Compton Bassett. Perhaps we no longer have Church leaders who believe they have the authority to call the nation to prayer. So there have to be spontaneous events, like Wootton Bassett – or the national outpouring when Diana died.

Just occasionally, though the call is not to the nation at large, our bishops and archbishops ask the churches to pray. We took the week of Prayer for Christian Unity very seriously back in the sixties; Portsmouth Guildhall would be filled with Christians of every denomination back in those days. That praying continued for a long while; certainly all through my student days, and well into my early years as a priest. It seemed as though the answer was being given us; it came in a series of reports by the Church of England and the Methodists; and by the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion. Somehow, when the Anglican-Methodist report produced no results, we gave up on praying for Unity. Our schemes had come to nothing, and we were in no mood to go on asking.

Well, someone must have continued to ask; for suddenly there came an answer that none of us had expected. It is only a year since that time-bomb with the strange name was planted among us. Anglicanorum Coetibus it is called, in that peculiar Latin way that the Catholics use when they are being serious. It is just the Latin version of the first words of the Pope’s document, which in English is “Groups of Anglicans”. That is who it is for – groups of Anglicans.

As we saw during his visit to England, the Pope is very straight-forward. He had been heavily involved in those earlier conversations, the ARCIC conversations as they are called, the Anglican Roman Catholic International Conversations. They seemed to be getting somewhere, in all sorts of previously difficult areas. They reached agreement on paper over the Eucharist, the Ministry, even the role of the Pope in a unified church. But what was also clear was that though there might be agreements on paper, it made no difference to the way the Church of England behaved. You would think that since we were agreeing on the ministry, we would not alter that ministry.

There were pressures, though, to change the ministry quite dramatically. For twenty centuries, following the example of Jesus in appointing his apostles, the ordained ministry was always male. The Archbishop of Canterbury consulted with the leaders of the Orthodox and Catholic churches. They made it clear that if our church altered the unvarying practice of all the Episcopal churches up to that time, it would be erecting great obstacles to Christian Unity. The Pope even sent a Cardinal to the Anglican Bishops to tell them this. Well, we all know that the Bishops, and the General Synod, ignored this advice, and ploughed on regardless.

Actions have consequences; and the consequence was that the Catholic Church felt it could no longer deal with the Anglican Communion as a whole. Instead it would be prepared to deal with Groups of Anglicans - (Anglicanorum Coetibus, you remember) – who asked for help. Some of us, who would call ourselves catholic Anglicans, had been dismayed at our church’s action. It was not just a matter of ordaining women as priests or bishops; it was, rather, the question of where our Church thought its authority lay. Were we a Church founded by Jesus Christ on the Apostles, continuing their teaching; or were we a body which could make up its own doctrine, change the unbroken tradition of the Universal Church? How could our little fragment of a church dare say that we knew better than the overwhelming majority of all Christians?

But the prayers we had made for unity were not wasted; it is just that they were answered in a surprising way. No one supposed that an octogenarian Pope would be a great innovator. Well, we reckoned without God’s sense of humour. He answered our prayers, unexpectedly, not by giving success to any of our schemes for reunion, but with a generous offer from an aged Pope – an offer which had no precedent in history.

It has taken a year from the time of that offer for many of us to get our act together. It is beginning to happen now, and within a year, possibly even within six months, both the Catholic Church and the Church of England will look very different. Some of you here at St Francis are taking the Pope’s offer very seriously indeed. No amount of planning, though, will produce results. Only prayer will resolve things. Today’s gospel tells us how even an unjust judge will give in if an old lady goes on battering at his door; God is not unjust, quite the contrary; and he wants to answer our prayer. But we must make that prayer, and go on making it. This is a crucial time, not just for the churches, but for England, and indeed for the whole of Britain. We must pray and pray and go on praying, and be ready to be surprised by God’s answer. As Jesus taught his disciples, pray continually, never lose heart. Then it will be better for us, and more overwhelming, than we can imagine. Nothing less than the start of the re-Christianisation of our Nation.

[A Sermon preached at St Francis' Bournemouth, 17th October 2010]

When 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly

Same blog, different site: sorry if you have seen this already on the Anglo Catholic, but there was not time for something utterly new.

Odd, isn't it, that Forward in Faith is compelled to worship in a building belonging to a defunct sect, the Irvingites, and to hold its Assembly in a former Christian Science building, now the home of a group of Evangelical Chinese? Yet that is how it was these last few days, meeting in the "Emmanuel Centre" in Westminster and celebrating the Eucharist in the Catholic Apostolic Church of Christ the King in Gordon Square. Perhaps this is how it will always be for us in future, having to beg, borrow or rent buildings from others. You might also find it odd that my text – the title at the top of this piece – is not from Holy Writ but from the Scottish Play of Wm Shakespeare. We performed it at school, and I was Duncan and Noises Off. Duncan does not last long, so giving me the opportunity for my second role. I made a great owl. In the play Lady M is determined to do away with Duncan at the earliest possible moment. Would that the Church of England were equally expeditious and kind where Anglo-Catholics are concerned. Instead, it engages in a drawn-out death by a thousand cuts, gradually letting us realise that there is no place for us any longer.

The Assembly occurred just as a sizeable number of us have realised that "the game is up". The Reverend Judge James Patrick outlined the sort of route which may be available to anyone entering the Ordinariate – it sounded remarkably quick, his draft; something set up soon after Christmas, a short time of preparation, then a joyful Easter and Pentecost. For those of us who are seriously considering this option it seems incredible that anyone should still think there is anything left to play for. Yet there are honourable men and women who plainly do think this. For their sake, we heard the other day about the launch of a new Society, under the patronage of those two incorrigible Romanisers Saints Wifrid and Hilda.

Well, today we heard about this Society (SSWSH as it has become known) once again. Some of us were looking forward to being able to ask questions of the sponsors of the Society Model. There is a string of distinguished bishops who have lent their names to this, indeed the Bishop of Plymouth came all the way to London a fortnight ago to tell a Sacred Synod what was being done. There was no debate at that time, no room for questions. But that was all right, for on the agenda for today we saw the name of that same Bishop, and also that of the Bishop of Beverley, the North's own Flying Bishop. In the event, neither of them found it possible to be present. Instead it was left to the Bishop of Burnley and Fr David Houlding to do their best to "reflect on developments following the Sacred Synods". Now I have a great affection for Bishop John Goddard. His father was Vicar of St Nicolas' Guildford when I was in the next-door parish, and he was my confessor for a time, so I knew Bishop John when he was nobbut a lad. He did his best with a brief to tell us why things are different up North. He told us that in the Synod elections there had been some gains by lay catholics especially. There was no great enthusiasm for the Ordinariate and it had been left to Bishop John himself to put the case for it at that northern Synod. Now it could be that the two things are not unrelated. If you have to have as spokesman someone who is not keen on it, small wonder that the laity are seeking to get help from the Synod. In the South, the PEVs have consistently helped us to understand and appreciate what the Holy Father is offering. The North has not had, it seems, any similar explanation or help.
I worked for nearly a decade in the Northern Province. I believe that priests and people there deserve better than having to rely on a bishop who does not support the Ordinariate telling them about it. Instead, they are being offered SS Hilda and Wilfrid. It must be said that Bishop John Goddard did his best with us; but he had to admit that unless the Society could achieve Jurisdiction for reliable bishops, it would have failed. Well, I was on the General Synod back in the 1980's [representing the Diocese of York, as it happens] and we got nowhere. Bishop John's wife pleaded with us today, tearfully, to give it once last chance. She was elected to General Synod not many years after me,and she has been a doughty fighter for the catholic cause. And of course we will try to give Synod a chance, those of us who are left. But no-one should expect us, who have been in the battle for thirty years and more, to put the offer from Pope Benedict on the back burner while we draw one more line in the sand and give Synod one more chance.

After the Bishop of Burnley, Fr David Houlding was given an opportunity to gild the Hilda. "In July we failed" he told us. "It was about jurisdiction and alas it is not to be". So why does he persist in clinging to the wreckage of the General Synod? The Society Model was floated in the Revision Committee, the details all worked out by Fr Houlding, and it was turned down flat. Now Fr David finds merit in having it rejected by a committee but not put to the vote in General Synod. He believes it may yet succeed second time round where all else has failed. But again, he says "it will be useless unless it has jurisdiction", and asks "Will the House of Bishops recognise such a grouping?" Well, I am ready to bet my zuchetta against a burst balloon that it will not. Still Fr David persisted, and laid out five requirements of the Society. Mission, our Catholic Identity being honoured, the ARCIC vision, a guaranteed sacramental life and being seen as a Gift to the Church of England. In speaking of the guaranteed sacramental life (you can hear the whole of his and other contributions on the Forward in Faith website) he asked "Will those bishops be prepared to break the rules? We must ask that question now at the beginning". I wish that question could have been put to the galaxy of SSWSH bishops – Plymouth, Beverley, Horsham, Chichester and the rest. Unfortunately, there was a question which preceded this: where were they? None of them but Burnley had found time to come to the Assembly. They are men who claim to be leaders in the catholic movement. So where were they when we needed them today? Indeed where have they ever been? John Broadhurst, John Richards, Michael Houghton and other PEVs have had to bear the brunt of it, with only sniping from some who reckon themselves catholic bishops. What is different now? I hope SSWSH will flourish and achieve what has never been achieved up to now, the things which Fr Houlding listed … but I am not holding my breath. And even Fr David seems to think it will be short-lived – about up to his date for retirement, I would guess.

The Assembly ended with tributes being paid to Fr Geoffrey Kirk, without whom many of us would not have survived these past acrimonious years. His learning, his wit, his friendship and good humour have sustained us. John Broadhurst spoke of him with great affection, a presentation was made to him, and if you listen to nothing else from the podcast, do listen to Fr Geoffrey's words of farewell. He has seen it, and told it, as it is. We shall still need him, although he has retired as Secretary, to continue to prick the pompous nonsense of any of us when we are tempted to rely on the promises of the Church of England.

Finally, an unashamed plug: 'Sea Without a Shore', the life and ministry of Michael Houghton, one-time bishop of Ebbsfleet is now out, available from the Additional Curates' Society for £15.99; their website is at www/additionalcurates.co.uk

Walsingham

A great place for catching up with old friends, is Walsingham. The last four days FCP held its annual Pilgrimage/Retreat/Conference, and very good it was. Well attended, but also very well addressed. Fr Owen Higgs spoke about Keble, Fr William Davage tackled Pusey, and Fr Jonathan Baker gave his paper on Newman. When the next FCP Acta comes out, it will be worth binding in vellum and putting on library shelves - terrific talks all of them, making us re-assess our (or at least my) rather simplistic ideas about Keble the Poet, Pusey the Scholar and Newman the giant of them all. Especially good to be given these progenitors of the Oxford Movement in the new dawn of Anglicanorum Coetibus.

The Administrator of the Shrine, Bishop Lindsay Urwin OGS, gave us generously of his time - and spoke from the heart about the competing pressures he feels just now; pressures which, in smaller ways, many of us would echo.

Brother Paschal SSF made up the Staggers quartet. He was our Chaplain, and I have never found the holy mile from the slipper chapel more devotional or helpful than under his leadership.

The organisation of these few days is in the hands of the FCP executive, but none works harder than the Chairman, Fr Stephen Bould, or the Secretary General, Fr Brian Tubbs. Both will continue in office (by acclamation) with the intention of keeping the Federation on as even a keel as possible during the impending next stage of the 'parting of friends'. Many of the younger priests are likely to have moved on before the 2011 Pilgrimage.

Among other friends who just turned up while we were there I met Fr Paul Berrett and June, who were holidaying nearby. They are an advertisement for retirement, looking and sounding well and happy. I am due at Fr Paul's former church, St Francis' Bournemouth, on Sunday, so shall be able to take their greetings to his ex-parishioners.

It was not all old chums; there were new ones, too, and it was a delight to meet Fr Lee Kenyon and his people from Canada. I had heard about their parish from Fr Ed Tomlinson's blog, and it was good to discover such an enthusiastic bunch, delighted to be able to respond to the Pope's offer.

A Retreat is partly a time for looking back; and although priests are tempted to say "Parish X where I served has gone to the dogs" or "I wonder what good I did in parish Y" it was a great personal boost for me to recall that our three main speakers and the chaplain had all been students at St Stephen's House in my time there. I claim no credit for myself in their scholarship or piety; only, perhaps, in having had the wit to offer all four of them places at the House.