Sun 26th Oct 2014 | Last updated: Fri 24th Oct 2014 at 18:39pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

Bishop of Fulham to take up Ordinariate

By on Friday, 15 October 2010

The Anglican bishop of Fulham and the chairman of Forward in Faith International has announced he will resign before the end of the year to join an Ordinariate.

Speaking at Forward in Faith’s National Assembly today, Bishop John Broadhurst, who is a senior figure in the Anglo-Catholic movement, said he intended to tender his resignation before the end of the year and join the Ordinariate in Britain when it is established. He has said that he will remain the chairman of Forward in Faith, which is in not a Church of England organisation.

Bishop Broadhurst is a suffragan bishop of the Diocese of London. He said the Bishop of London would likely appoint someone new to fill the post Bishop Broadhurst is vacating.

He is the first senior Anglo-Catholic to announce publicly that he will join an Ordinariate when it is founded.

Two “flying bishops”, or bishops who are appointed to provide pastoral care for Anglicans who cannot in good conscience accept women priests, are also likely to tender their resignations before the end of the year in order to join an Ordinariate.

Both Bishop Andrew Burnham of Ebbsfleet and Bishop Keith Newton of Richborough are believed to be taking up the offer Pope Benedict made last autumn with the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus, which allows for a new canonical structure for Anglicans wishing to be in full communion with Rome while retaining their identity.

This year, the General Synod of the Church of England voted down proposed measures which would have offered traditionalists a structural protection from being overseen by women bishops.

At a series of meetings called last month by the Anglican bishop of Plymouth to the signatories of a 2008 open letter against women bishops written to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York, traditionalists discussed taking up the Ordinariate. They also created a new society called St Wilfrid and St Hilda for Anglo-Catholics who were not sure about the Ordinariate.

Groups of Anglicans wishing to take up an Ordinariate must first write to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith formally requesting the canonical structure to be erected.

The Personal Ordinariate most resembles a military diocese and is thought to range over the territory of individual Episcopal conferences.

Pope Benedict XVI published the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus last November.

So far formal requests have been made in the United States, Canada and Australia among other countries.

In Britain Ordinariate groups have been forming informally over the last year as flying bishops have tried to explain to their clergy and lay people what the Pope’s offer would entail.

Among the largest worry for Anglicans considering taking up Anglicanorum coetibus is the fact that they are unlikely to be able to take buildings with them when they cross the Tiber.

  • EditorCT

    AlfredHaddock,

    You're way behind the times (pun intended) pal. Here's another link you should have checked out before rushing in where informed people never tread

    http://www.pcc.org.uk/news/index.html?article=NDc0NA==

    Had you visited our About Us section and followed the links to our various Press Complaints Commission successes, you WOULD have been able to vouch for the INaccuracy of the rubbish penned in The Times (not once, but twice in the same week. The idiot David Aronavitch or whatever he's called, had a go at me the very next day, taking all his information from the David Blister article Think about it. He begins by saying I hate being photographed. I've been on Television four times, radio countless times and I've got a passport. Still, when you look like me, you're not advertising the fact. Be that as it may (and it is) Blister fails to mention in his daft article that he only asked if he could bring a photographer to my home at the very last minute – and it didn't suit me. I had plans afoot. I didn't add that I didn't trust him as far as I could throw him, and as it transpired, my gut instinct was spot on.

    As for the Poor Mouth article – puleeeese!

    You've stirred memories in me of all the disappointment I felt on not getting the Bigot of the Year Award. I was so very disappointed. After all that publicity, an Anglican “bishop” (as it happens) got it. There's no justice in this Bigotry Old World…

    Mind you, there was a very interesting column in one of the Scots dailies at the time which reported on my nomination and made some very derisory comments about the kind of folk who would think up such nasty awards, let alone actually dish them out to folk just because they happen to – shock horror – have a different point of view.

    Like, something's been illegal for centuries and it's suddenly de-criminalised and not everyone jumps onto the bandwagon without asking a question or two – that sort of thing.

    Anyway, I'm flattered that you went Googling me. I'm very Google-able, thanks to the cheerful brigade.

  • EditorCT

    Answer my question Robert T. Is it homophobic to support Catholic moral teaching on the immorality of homosexual acts?

    Speak up… I can't hear you…

  • Derby priest

    In response to EditorCT's comment that ex-Anglicans will continue to use their “liturgies”: if you take time to read Anglicanorum Coetibus, you will see that they will use those liturgical books proper to the Anglican Tradition 'which have been approved by the Holy See'. The idea is to welcome (again I quote from Ang Coetibus) 'the precious gift' of Anglican liturgy, and spiritual and pastoral traditions in to the fullness of the wider Catholic church. On the question of doctrine and morality, Anglicans entering an Ordinariate will accept Catholic teaching: therefore, de facto rejecting that which isn't Catholic teaching. I don't suppose the Holy Father is pushing for some public humiliation, I think he is a man of generosity. Again Ang Coetibus states that 'the Catechism of the Catholic Church is the authoritative expression of the Catholic faith professed by members of the Ordinariate'. That seems quite clear.

    It is important to keep clear in all this time of change that Anglicans coming in to full communion with the See of Peter will not become 'special' Catholics or 'lower class' Catholics, but simply Catholics, with some Anglican patrimony to share: nothing new in that, compare, for example, Vatican II Catholics with Catholic Uniates or, yes, SSPX.

  • EditorCT

    Derby priest,

    I have, indeed, taken time to read the Anglicanorum Coetibus, and following the words you quote: “Anglicans will be permitted to use those liturgical books proper to the Anglican Tradition which have been approved by the Holy See” we read: “so as to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.” I find that statement quite scandalous.

    This “Anglican Tradition” (like all the other “reformed Traditions”) is no such thing. Tradition, in Christian theology, is what was handed on from the Apostles – not from Martin Luther, John Knox and all the other Joe Bloggs who felt like starting up his own church. And yes, I am aware that Henry VIII did not really mean to break with Rome, that Catholics at that time sleepwalked into Protestantism, but Tradition, in the proper sense of the term, Anglicanism is not, and it is disappointing, not to say scandalous, that the Vatican and the Pope did not take more care over their use of language in this document. I hope you will appreciate, then, that I don't have sympathy for the view that there is an “Anglican patrimony” to share. No offence intended – I'm speaking objectively, and won't bore you with a list of all my Anglican friends and acquaintances over the years, whose goodness and friendship I've always valued. Doesn't change the facts of the history of their religious adherence.

    And this suggestion of yours that the Holy Father would be “pushing for some public humiliation” by requiring a public rejection of previously held heresies, is very interesting – and telling.

    It seems to me, that if I thought I had been wrong in such major matters of faith and morals as divides Protestants, including Anglicans, from Catholicism, so much so that I decided to convert albeit in the context of the Ordinariate provision, I would want to shout my errors from the rooftops, not least to help my fellow-Protestants to see the light. I certainly wouldn't see it as a humiliation. More a liberation.

    Having said that, I accept that the Vatican is requiring acceptance of all that the Church teaches as laid down in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (the Catechism of the Council of Trent is much clearer, but let's leave that aside – Trent is amply quoted in footnotes in the new Catechism.) Believe me, we could use some help from articulate proponents of all that the Church teaches in faith and morals, so if, as is implied, all these newcomers from Anglicanism do, in fact, hold to all that the Church teaches, I'll be first to publicly withdraw my reservations. And I won't feel humiliated in so doing. Who wants to be wrong about something… anything? Not a lot of us, which is why, certainly in my own case, I'd be keen to set the public record straight if, in God's good time, it ever transpires that I have, after all, been wrong about something …

    However, seriously, Derby priest, I have to say that there will be no such situation ever arise with the SSPX precisely because the SSPX is not in schism from Rome. The SSPX priests and bishops adhere to – wait for it – the authentic Tradition of the Church, rejecting all that has been condemned by past Popes, such as ecumenism, religious liberty and the idea that the Church founded by Christ has to look to breakaway groups for “elements of the truth.” No chance. The SSPX will remain in their irregular situation (not schismatic) until Rome comes to its senses. They could easily be regularised tomorrow, if they accepted the errors that have arisen in the Church since Vatican II but they won't. God will use the SSPX as in the Middle Ages, He used the Jesuits, to restore the Faith. You'll see.

    Thing is,will the Ordinariate Anglicans/Catholics be on the side of the SSPX or the Modernists including the Modernists in Rome?

    Now, there's a question with “Tradition” written all over it!

  • sketeman

    Many moons ago, a priest once said to me that if you wanted to see a lack of charity in full colours then go to the letter pages of the Catholic press. I had some sympathy with that but still felt it was a bit over the top, now reading this, I believe it to be true! There is such a thing as a good healthy discussion but come on editor, some of this is beyond the pale – literally an occasion of sin!

  • Maria in Pennsylvania

    It is interesting that former communist countries returned many Catholic Churches and church properties, yet democratic countries don't seem to be compelled or required to do that. And that comes from countries who deem a private property as one one of the “citizens rights”. I guess catholics in these countries are not considered “citizens”. How ironic!!!! As for the Anglican Bishops and Anglican Faithfull joining the Catholic Church- Welcome Home Brothers and Sisters!!!!