Forward in Faith?

So yesterday Forward in Faith concluded that the new Apostolic Constitution of Benedict XVI allowing Anglicans to return to the fold while retaining aspects of their distinctive liturgical practices.

Would someone please tell me what has really changed from one week ago? Seven days ago those of a strong Catholic spirituality (i.e. members of Forward in Faith) were free to surrender to Rome's obedience without let from their Anglican overlords.

A week ago whole congregations were free to submit to the Pope's authority if they so wished without hordes of Protestants forcing them to stay in the Anglican Communion.

To believe that their particular liturgical practices (almost uniformly pre-Vatican 2) will be allowed to survive beyond the first generation is to misunderstand Rome's compulsion to exert control over the faithful and have them fall into line with its authorised expressions of being Christian.

And we should not overlook the likely hostile reaction from within the ranks of the current Catholic clergy to all these married priests arriving in some parallel universe, where they can be ordained to exactly the same priestly orders their celibate brethren and yet continue to enjoy all the conjugal rights denied to others.

Lastly, all this is to duck what James Bradley called today the elephant in the belfry - sexuality. Many of these more traditional, single clergy are by nature homosexual. Will the Catholic church suddenly change its position on ordaining avowedly gay men? Unlikely, surely. Besides, there are already thousands ministrering in churches all over the world. There is an inconsistency at the heart of the church's declared position and its current practice.

This move by Rome may look like an attempt to give expression to unity without uniformity but I fear those going may not find the Ordinariate quite the heavenly home they think it is, and cradle Catholics (who have not in the past been especially generous in their judgment of converts) will have to swallow quite hard to accept the new influx on beneficial terms not available to all.

Nice try, Holy Father, but...............

So Rome thinks that by passing some new Apolstolic Constitution great swathes of the more traditional Anglican Communion are going to come cap in hand to the Holy See, begging for admission to the club?

Well, I'm sorry, but it simply won't happen. The vast majority of those Anglicans who have, misguidedly in my opinion, joined the ranks of Gafcon or the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA) have virtually nothing in common with the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) other than their objection to women in authority within the church and their other persistent, outmoded and bigoted approach to homosexuals in ministry. Actually, given the number of gay clergy within RC ranks I'm sure they would have problems with that too.

Ok. That leaves all those lovely Anglican Catholics, distressed, firstly, about women priests and now, secondly, women bishops. It is likely that most of the former have already simply joined the RCC in the past two decades rather than wait for this piece of Jesuitical casuistry. Those remaining already have a functioning system of separate episcopal oversight that allows them to retain their Catholic identity as well as a liturgical pattern that is deeply rooted in the Oxford Movement and spares them the blandness and banality of so much Vatican 2 worship.

This constitution does nothing to address the questions arising that relate to Anglican orders and their validity. Priests moving over to Rome will still have to treat their present orders as invalid (deeply offensive after years of faithful ministry to God's people, pastorally and at the altar), and married bishops will be able to be priests but would never again be allowed to play any significant role in the life of the church at the higher echelons - what a waste of talent.

In short, it is hard to see what Benedict thinks there is to be gained by this measure. Sure, he will successfully manage to poach a few individuals, no doubt. But I can't see any lasting benefit to a parish that is currently enjoying a fully Catholic liturgical life under male episicopal oversight within the Anglican fold.

In a real sense, living out the Catholic vocation in that setting is far more ecumenical than submitting to the 'infallibility' and 'unity' offered yesterday by the Bishop of Rome.