Wed 16th Apr 2014 | Last updated: Wed 16th Apr 2014 at 19:02pm

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.

  • Ynysgoradgoch

    Why would they want to “take buildings with them”??

    On second thoughts, so many redundant Anglican churxhes have already been bought by Catholic parishes or become museums or concert halls, that it's difficult to see why this should be unlikely

  • James Holdaway

    Reading opposing web sites to the St Wilfrid and St Hilda I wonder if the government realise what they have done by inventing the equal Rites Act to intrude into ecclesiatical life in such a hap-hazard way. Now women will not stop until everything is ruined and who will they blame then. We are now facing a trying period akin to the Reformation with hate and spite from those same women who nwant to be clergy. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

  • Tiggy

    I hope they do bring some of their lovely old Churches. Largly unvandalised, unlike most Catholic Churches in the last 40 years.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/72LG7NUK55DEBNRN67RFYDRAMM Jason Liuzza

    Indeed Tiggy. That's one of the things Anglicans bring to the table, unmolested liturgy and unmolested church buildings. While sound liturgy and beautiful churches exist in the Catholic Church, the last 40 years have produced some horrendous things in way too many parishes.

    May God bless the Anglican faithful as they make their journey.

  • PhilipH

    I would have thought that it makes no financial sense to attempt to take the existing buildings with them – especially if an existing Catholic Church building can be shared, or other suitable premises can be found. In my opinion, Henry VIII did the Catholic Church in England and Wales a big favor when he took away all those expensive to maintain and cold medieval buildings. Old churches may look lovely, but in my experience they are not so nice to live with.

  • http://mundabor.wordpress.com/ Mundabor

    A somewhat dangerous development as FiF going into the Church as such (as FiF) would not help to clearly distinguish between Truth and Heresy. There must be a clear swimming of the Tiber, not the idea that it is the same barque now simply moored on the other side. Let's hope there is a clear work on that.

    M

  • Robert T.

    FinF does seem to be on the side of truth. The reality is that you can find plenty of milk & water orthodoxy, if not exactly heresy, in the RC church. As has been often pointed out, Pope Benedict's “resoursement” theology is actually in the tradition of classical Anglican orthodoxy: patristic, scriptural & appealing to authentic development. When I think of the theology I upheld as an undergraduate at Durham in the 1970s, at St Stephens House and at the feet of Professor MacQuarrie, I feel quite at vhome with the theology of Pope Benedict, Henri De Lubac and Aidan Nichols.

  • Corbus

    Vincenze, on the Folkestone piece you commented you would email the Catholic Herald's subscription department to get boxes of the English version of Magnificat sent to the participating parishes…Can you make sure you include Fulham and Ebbsfleet?

  • RJ

    One might point out that many of those lovely old churches were once Catholic, so it would be nice to see them returning, but they could be a heavy burden financially. I would have thought that most of the mediaeval churches were heavily vandalised at the 'Reformation' and after – destruction of statues, whitewashing of walls etc., but they are still beautiful.

  • Stephen Way

    Interesting that he does not feel Forward in Faith (Backwards in Bigotry in MHOP) is Anglican. Perhaps he needs to ask for the about us page on their web site to be updated. If he cannot stay in the broad church of the C of E just go and stop trying to keep a foot in both camps..

  • Douglassykes

    While we have to respect the views of those who leave the Church of England to jhoin the Ordinariate, It would seem somewhat premature to do so when the new Synod has yet to meet and the Diocese have to vote and then report back. This is the time for standing together, not running away, and who knows what the Holy Spirit will give us if only we trust in him.

  • EditorCT

    What journey? These Anglicans are being permitted to remain Anglicans and be “in full communion” with the Catholic Church. They're not having to accept Catholic doctrine and morality, they can continue their “liturgies” with the non-ordained clergy, and we will probably all be encouraged to attend their services without the “shock horror you attend an SSPX Mass?” that up with, traditional Catholics must put.

    Would someone like to explain how this can be, to moi? I'm a simple gal, brought up in the belief that schismatics must publicly reject their previously held false beliefs and publicly embrace the Faith to which they claim conversion, before they can be in full communion with the one, true Church.

    I missed the Breaking News story that changed all that – will someone enlighten me, please?

  • EditorCT

    Spot on.

  • EditorCT

    Well, Robert T, all I can say in response to that is, enjoy your new religion.

  • EditorCT

    Who knows what the Holy Spirit will give us if only we remain faithful to what He has already revealed to us through 2000 years of teaching that Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation – and there is certainly no salvation through schismatic Ordinariates – even when they are instituted by a Pope.

    What a scandal.

  • Torkay

    I hope this scandal is really a means to set a precedent for the SSPX to be in full communion with Rome. But why set a precedent by creating a scandal? The “ends justify the means” is nothing more than Masonic behavior.

  • CETHERINGTONP

    Cartmel Priory in Cumbria was founded in 1189 and still retains its wonderful sense of prayer and peace. 70K visitors a year can't be wrong. Old churches give us chilly services, but SO MUCH more. I plan to join the ordinariate if it is possible from the wilds of the Lake District I just wish I could take our wonderful Priory with me! Pat Etherington (age 73 yrs)

  • Robert T

    But it's not new. What I am saying is that Anglo-catholic orthodoxy accepts the fullness of Catholic teaching. That is why Newman did not change his theology but built on it. That is what Pope benedict means by the Hermeneutic of Continuity. It's roots are in Newman's development of Christian doctrine. There is nop pre and post conciliar church. all the councils lead through to the magisterium of the church. Some Anglo-Catholics look back to the first seven councils but those seeking the Ordinariate accept the full teaching of the church. Why should a different culture not be tolerated? Differences exist not. If you like a SolemnLatin Mass with a choir you will go to Farm St, Westminster Cathedral etc. If you are charismatic, you will go elswhere. Both can be authentically catholic. I really do believe the fullness of teaching you find among A/Cs is closer to the magesterium than your opwn Hans Kung with whom you are in communion! It i9s the liberals in the RC church who do not want Anglican conversions precisely because of the catholic orthodoxy of those who wish to cross over.

  • Robert Williams

    lets get things in perspective. Only the PCC of the church has said it wants to convert..this does not represent all the 40 who are in the congregation. It is very unlikely that the Diocese of Canterbury will let them keep the church, vicarage and associated school.

    The Bishop of Fulham is a former Catholic who converted to Anglicanism as a young man. According to the teaching of the Catholic Church his current marriage is invalid..not just his Anglican orders!

  • Marcel

    With respect, Robert T, liturgy is not entertainment, eg. if you like music you watch MTV and if you like History you watch the History Channel! The Catholic liturgy, codified by St. Pius V, is the most perfect act of worship. The Canon if the Roman Rite is free from error. The fabricated, man-made liturgy of anglicanism has no place in the Catholic Church.

    You say that Anglo-Catholic teaching accepts the fullness of Catholic teaching. That's interesting. However, if this was truly the cae then there would be no need for an Ordinariate, would there? Anglicanism is a heresy, condemned by Pope Leo XIII. If these “Anglo-Catholics” truly accepted Catholic teaching then they would do the decent thing and convert in the real sense of the word.

    Again, this is an example of being able to “pick and choose”. The word “heresy” comes from the Greek hairetikos “able to choose”. Anyone who wants to convert to the Catholic Church has to humbly submit to the authentic magisterium. Anglicanism is a heresy and cannot exist alongside Catholicism. One cannot be an Anglican and a Catholic. Error cannot co-exist alongside Truth. Indeed, error has no rights!

  • Robert. T

    EditorCT (Church Times?) seems to be employing the arguments against Anglican Catholic converts that one finds in the Tablet. I subcribe to the Herald but we'll se where it's going! One of your bloggers, William Oddie, is from that same stable. Is he suspect too? The important thing is for the RC church to evangelise in Britain and fight against the “dictatorship of relativsm. ” The converts will be very effective agents of this. Anglican prelates are beaurocratic authoritarians as Bishop Broadhurst has indicated.

  • Robert T

    Robert Williams above comment is just pharasaical and spiteful. The couple are the celebrants of the sacrament of marriage according to Catholic teaching. The Herald might think of closing this blob if it is going to stoop to these low levels of debate and personal abuse.

  • Robert T.

    But the point is that they would not be schismatic. Editor CT clearly does not accept the authority of the Pope. That's up to him but he cannot be describes as Catholic. I hope he's not the Editor of the Herald otherwise I think some subscriptions might be cancelled.

  • Robert T.

    Pius V. You presumably mean the Tridentine USE. Actually the Roman Rite predates that rite. It certianly is not normative for the RC church. In Bedford, there is a Uktanian church in communion with Rome using a rite much older than the Tridentine rite. The Oxford Oratory sometimes uses the Old (ie Sarum) Rite which also predates the rite of Pius V and some elements of which appear in Anglican forms. In the USA,some ex Anglican parishes use the Roman Rite in Cramnerian English. I'm not arguing for that but the Catholicism you are varguing for runs the risk of becoming a cult in a cul-de-sac. An RC Church welcoming people who wish to join in good faith can work as a “sacrament to the world” (De Lubac). That is more important than the tribal defensiveness you seem to espouse.

  • Marcel

    What you've said about Marriage is too simplistic, Robert T. Catholic marriage is a sacrament and is subject to Canon Law. Have a look at this:

    Canon 1108.1 Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who, in the presence of two witnesses, assists, in accordance however with the rules set out in the following canons, and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. 144, 1112.1, 1116 and 1127.2-3.

    However, the “Bishop” of Fulham's marriage was may be valid because he had defected from the Church by a formal act. I'm sure a Canon Lawyer would recommend that the “Bishop” and his wife have a convalidation just to be sure.

  • Marcel

    Robert T, you really make a schoolboy error here. This Ordinariate business is not binding on Catholics. We are only bound to accept infallible teaching. This scandal is very, very, fallible. You have a poor understanding of the nature of the papacy and the Church's teaching on infallibility.

  • Prmackin

    I am well aware that there are many ancient rites in the Church and I am well aware that there Roman Rite pre-dates St. Pius V. You have clearly misunderstood what I said. The Roman Rite of Mass of CODIFIED by St. Pius V in his Papal Bull “Quo Primum” This is really quite self-explanatory:

    “We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.

    Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid.”

  • Robert T

    More from the Pharisees. This blog is enough to put anybody off joining the RC church but fortunately, the comments on here have no authority and represent the private opinions of the writers. I can see why the RC church does not want a general synod as it would attract the same obscurantism that the Anglican one does.

  • Marcel

    Please provide evidence to back up your uncharitable words….who are the pharisees and what makes them so?

  • Robert T.

    The same can be said of Pius V & the Roman rite. There is nothing wrong with the Roman rite and as Pope Benedict has siad it exists today in its ordinary and extraordinary forms. It is not the only rite of the RC church. As I pointed out, both forms of it exist alongside the Byzantine rites within the Catholic church but Pius V was not making an infallible statement.

  • AlfredHaddock

    Robert,
    EditorCT is the 'editor' of Catholic Truth, a Scottish Roman Catholic newsletter and is, it seems, female.
    The newsletter is very right wing and there seems to be quite an obsession with “outing” allegedly gay priests.
    See:
    http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/

  • Robert T

    She clearly has a problem. One person with whom I was at Oxford who is now openly gay, was once stridently homophobic and sought to out other people. To be Scottish, Catholic and right wing is a most odd mix. I speak as an English tory.

  • Robert T

    There is a difference. The ordinariate accepts full catholic teaching and and most Anglo-Catholics follow Roman norms which SSPX does not. I suspect a theological difference too. Most F in F people and A/C theologians are in the same resource,ment tradition as Pope Benedict- hence the common admirartion of Newman. Most SSPX clergy (it is a clerical institution) follow the neo-scholastic form of Thomism which the Pope moved away from.

    Further, F inF seeks reconcilation with Rome; SSPX has perpetrated schism. Also, I have yet to hear an Anglo-Catholic espouse anti-semitism and holocaust denial.

  • RJ

    A lovely church at Cartmel.

  • RJ

    Does this exclude all development? It would seem to me that a validly convoked council consisting of about 2000 bishops + several legitimately elected Popes thought not.

  • Marcel

    Really, Rob?

    “Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”

  • Marcel

    No, it doesn't exclude organic development. What it does exclude is to create a new rite of Mass. Archbishop Bugnini himself said that the “Roman Rite has been destroyed”. Organice development – yes! A New Rite of Mass (Novus Ordo!) – no!

  • Marcel

    I am gonna start yawning if I hear another false accusation of anti-semitism or holocaust denial. First of all, these are nothing to do with the Catholic Religion. They are not theological errors, ecclesiological errors, nor do they constitute breaking Canon Law. Therefore, they cannot be punished by the Church.

    His Lordship did not deny the holocaust. He gave a personal opinion questioning the numbers. As for the accusation of anti-semitism – grow up. Most people will not know that when His Lordship was a seminary rector, he regularly had a Rabbi come on to lecture his seminarians. Get a grip. Isn't it crazy that we have bishops denying the faith, leading souls to Hell, condoning outrageous sacrilegious abuses of the Blessed Sacrament, but we choose to get our knickers in a twist over a bishop who questions an historical event! Diabolical disorientation at it's finest!

  • EditorCT

    Robert T,

    I've read your posts with a mixture of amusement and disbelief. Those who disagree with you are all, to a man (or in my case, a woman) either “pharisees” or “schismatics.” Get a grip.

    You make a judgment about me that is false. You state that I “clearly do not accept the authority of the Pope” without explaining what you mean and without giving me the opportunity to respond.

    I do accept the legitimate authority of the Pope, otherwise I place myself outside the Church. But if the Pope says it's going to rain tomorrow, I'm not going to dash out and buy a brolly. That sort of ignorance has got a name – Papalotry http://www.cfnews.org/MarraPop.htm

    Apology accepted.

  • EditorCT

    AlfredHaddock,

    You make a false statement about the Catholic Truth newsletter and about me personally, without a jot of evidence. As readers will see if they follow the link you've kindly provided to our website, there isn't any mention of homosexuality in the current edition of our newsletter. So much for being “obsessed.”

    And we have NEVER “outed” anyone. We did, some years ago, IN ONE EDITION ONLY (one, note out of ten years of publication) REPORT information already known to the authorities, and which, in most, if not all, cases, was also widely known within the Catholic community. We didn't “out” them, we merely exposed the truth. Nobody, I note, accused the Daily Telegraph of being uncharitable when they exposed the politicians who were stealing from the public purse during the expenses scandal.

    Priests and others who are taking their living from the Catholic Church while enjoying double lives, must be prepared to be exposed for the hypocrites they are. Seems you disagree. WOW – something fishy there, Mr Haddock…

  • EditorCT

    Robert T, what is my “problem”? Is it upholding Catholic teaching on homosexuality?

    Does that make me “homophobic”?

    What was that about accepting the authority of the Pope?

  • EditorCT

    Hear hear!

  • EditorCT

    Game set and match, Marcel! Game set and MATCH!

  • EditorCT

    Robert T,

    To say, as you do above, that Pope Benedict's “theology” “is actually in the tradition of classical Anglican orthodoxy…” is insulting (not to say totally ridiculous.)

    The Anglican group, like the Presbyterians and other schismatics, is a man-made religion. Neither the Pope nor any of the rest of us has anything to learn from their “theology.” Anything in Anglicanism and all the other “isms” that is true, they've got from the Catholic Church. The errors they managed all by themselves.

    And if it is true, as you say, that “Anglo-Catholic orthodoxy accepts the fullness of Catholic teaching”

    then why are these Anglicans not flooding into the one true fold? Why do they want to remain “Anglicans”?

    Hans Kung is NOT in full communion with the Church. Anyone, Hans Kung included, who rejects evern a single doctrine, places himself outside the Church. Since Kung rejects even the most basic Catholic teachings like, let me see now, oh yes, papal authority, he's a heretic.

    You're right that the liberals don't want the Anglicans, but the reason is their ignorance. They, like you, think these Anglicans are sound Catholics, whereas, the very fact that they cling to what they see as their legitimate “tradition” shows they are no such thing. Converts need to, well, er, convert before they can be considered as, well, converts.

    As for them “crossing over” – no they're not. That's why I'm so cross about this “cross over” – it's no such thing. They're staying as Anglicans, own liturgy, own (non-ordained) priests and wives, and so on and so on.

    Let's wait and see what happens here. I'd be the first to welcome hordes of FORMER Anglicans into the Church. I just don't want them to be adding to the already huge numbers of “CINO” (Catholics in name only.)

    Luv 'n stuff.

  • EditorCT

    Robert T,

    For my sins, I am editor of Catholic Truth, not the Church Times and not, as another blogger mistakenly thought, the Catholic Times. Nope, humble ole Catholic Truth. That's what I edit.

    And it is not the Church's mission to fight against secular relativism. It is the business of the Church to save souls. Once the Pope gets back on that track, all the rest will come right. We are suffering the diabolical disorientation foretold at Fatima and until the Pope obeys Our Lady and consecrates Russia as prescribed by her, then relativism and all the other evil “isms” will continue apace.

    Jesus' final words on this earth to His first apostles were to go out into the world and baptise – not to into the world and lecture them about politics and secularism.

  • EditorCT

    Robert T,

    For my sins, I am editor of Catholic Truth, not the Church Times and not, as another blogger mistakenly thought, the Catholic Times. Nope, humble ole Catholic Truth. That's what I edit.

    And it is not the Church's mission to fight against secular relativism. It is the business of the Church to save souls. Once the Pope gets back on that track, all the rest will come right. We are suffering the diabolical disorientation foretold at Fatima and until the Pope obeys Our Lady and consecrates Russia as prescribed by her, then relativism and all the other evil “isms” will continue apace.

    Jesus' final words on this earth to His first apostles were to go out into the world and baptise – not to into the world and lecture them about politics and secularism.

  • AlfredHaddock

    moved

  • AlfredHaddock

    @ Robert T,

    Robert, a couple of sites for information.
    I cannot, of course, vouch for their accuracy or otherwise.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article1945860.ece

    http://thepoormouth.blogspot.com/2007/10/patricia-mckeever-in-running-for.html

  • MeIamHernandez
  • RJ

    One could say that was Bugnini's opinion. Others just as well informed clearly don't think so.