Of all the aspects of the Apostolic Constitution, the section which seems to be the cause of most concern and questions is found in the Complementary Norms, Article 5 §1. The lay faithful originally of the Anglican tradition who wish to belong to the Ordinariate, after having made their Profession of Faith and received the Sacraments of Initiation, with due regard for Canon 845, are to be entered in the apposite register of the Ordinariate. Those baptized previously as Catholics outside the Ordinariate are not ordinarily eligible for membership, unless they are members of a family belonging to the Ordinariate.
First of all, this is referring to future situations because at this point there is no Ordinariate. Therefore, every Catholic baptism, whether in an Anglican Use parish or in a territorial Latin Rite parish, is administered 'outside the Ordinariate.' Does this mean that the hundreds of people I've baptized at Our Lady of the Atonement over these past twenty-six years will be ineligible for membership in the Ordinariate? Obviously that would not be the intention expressed in the Constitution.
What about Catholics who have been baptized as regular Latin Rite Catholics whose children have received one or more of the Sacraments of Initiation at an Anglican Use parish? Obviously, the child is eligible for membership in the Ordinariate, and it's apparent that the parents would have that same eligibility.
Because there have been Anglican Use parishes in existence for many years, there are many people who have made attachments to these parishes. They've been married in these parishes; their children have been baptized in these parishes; their loved ones have been buried from these parishes. Do we think for a moment that the Holy Father, who has been overwhelmingly generous in this Constitution, would intend that these Faithful should not maintain their ties - indeed, their membership - in these parishes? Of course not.
What about an older couple, with no other ties to a parish other than the fact that they've attended for years and have made the parish their own? Would the Church tell them, 'Sorry, this isn't your parish any more.' I doubt it.
In fact, I asked these very questions when speaking with a couple of members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. As I was told by one of them who has been closely involved in developing the Constitution, 'What does membership mean, other than a person attends regularly, receives the sacraments regularly and contributes to the work of the parish? There will be nothing stopping people from doing that in parishes of an Ordinariate when they are established.'
The only time there will be actual canonical questions is in the case of marriage. The Sacrament of Matrimony must be witnessed by the proper pastor (or his delegate) of one or both of the parties. If two persons wish to be married in an Ordinariate parish, neither of whom would be automatically eligible for membership, delegation can be given by one of their proper pastors for the marriage to be witnessed by a priest or deacon of the Ordinariate. But those cases will probably not be frequent, and there are always ways of dealing with such things in a pastoral way.
I think the bottom line is this: the rule sounds as though it's exclusive. But even the rule is tempered by the word 'ordinarily.' Those baptized previously as Catholics outside the Ordinariate are not ordinarily eligible for membership... There's no such thing as a wasted word in an Apostolic Constitution. The word 'ordinarily' wouldn't have been included in the text without the probability that there will be exceptions. Those wonderful words, 'for pastoral reasons,' will be much in evidence, I have no doubt.
These are just my private thoughts. I'm not writing with any authority or in any official way. But I know how things have been working for the past twenty-six years in our parish, and have no reason to think things will change with the Apostolic Constitution. And remember - the Ordinariate will have an Ordinary, a real live person who has the pastoral responsibility for those who are attached (or who desire to be attached) to this spiritual patrimony. Surely he, in his pastoral role, will assist any Catholic who has a sincere desire to be part of this, no matter where they've been baptized.
Honestly, I don't think there's anything to worry about. God's in control, and this is really going to work.
12 comments:
Thank you Father for taking time from your busy trip to offer reassurances to people such as myself. It is much appreciated.
MJS
Father:
Were you able to get the pen that Pope Benedict used to sign the Apostolic Constitution?
Father,
Thanks for your note, very helpful and encouraging.
It seems rather odd that after making a clarification that there is basically no change regarding celibacy, which referred to the constitution and how the related article should be interpreted, and considering what was said in the explanation of the significance; that the Norms wound up saying:
"Article 6 §1. In order to admit candidates to Holy Orders the Ordinary must obtain the consent of the Governing Council. In consideration of Anglican ecclesial tradition and practice, the Ordinary may present to the Holy Father a request for the admission of married men to the presbyterate in the Ordinariate, after a process of discernment based on objective criteria and the needs of the Ordinariate. These objective criteria are determined by the Ordinary in consultation with the local Episcopal Conference and must be approved by the Holy See. "
That sounds like a change to me.
Daniel,
I have wondered the same thing myself. If that clause is interpreted broadly, it could mean that the married priesthood will last perpetually in the Anglican Ordinariate.
So... the unintended consequence of this will be that Catholic parents will baptize their male children as Anglicans, have them make a profession of faith and complete their sacraments of initiation as Catholics, and sign them up as members of an ordinariate so that when they reach their adulthood, they can have the option of a celibate or married priesthood...
Anonymous, that would be rather extreme measures, and they wouldn't even seem necessary. Baptizing the baby at a Personal Parish should be sufficient for them to be eligible for membership in the Ordinariate, they wouldn't need to be baptized as Anglicans and convert back. I don't picture there would be many parents going out of their way to provide the circumstances that might allow their son to be a married priest. They'd like him to be a priest, but still want grandchildren? Since a married priest will be allowed to take another job to be able to support his family, he can still be a doctor as well?
It also seems like a family that would be so conniving that they'd put their own immortal souls at risk is likely to provide an environment in which their son would ever discern a vocation to the married priesthood.
Dear Fr. Phillips,
With the greatest respect, I have to voice my own more heightened sense of concern, or rather fury, over Art. 5.1 of the Complementary Norms. As you know, for many years we at least in Houston have had to put up with clerics of various rank telling their faithful that they could not even attend Our Lady of Walsingham because "it is only for ex-Anglicans". One always suspected that, just as you have indicated, this aggressive interpretation of the Pastoral Provision norms was implemented solely for the purpose of "protecting" the Latin Rite pastors from the "competition" of our parish. Of course those who knew could have come over anyway, as many of us have done, but we all know how famously gullible and inattentive to these niceties are most of the good and true ordinary Catholic faithful.
And so one is entitled to ask, how many poor souls who might have benefitted from the enhanced truth, goodness and beauty of an Anglican Usage parish were misled into thinking that they could not even try it, much less, Heaven forfend, "vote with their feet". This kind of thing smacks of the late unlamented Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain rather than pastoral concern for souls, which is what is supposed to be the sole motivation of the pastors, but which, quite evidently, is not in this case. Instead we are confronted with rank clericalism.
This provision is not just the fly in the ointment of the Apostolic Constitution, it is the cockroach in the ointment. And as a good transplanted Texan you will be familiar with Darrell Royal's famous saying about cockroaches: it isn't what they eat that bothers you but what they spoil.
Keep up the good work and I hope to see you all at Thanksgiving.
With kindest regards,
Woody Jones
I do understand what you're expressing, Woody. But we need to remember that we'll have our own Ordinary who will necessarily have as part of his role that of being our protector from, and interpreter to, those Catholics who might try to place inappropriate limitations on the Ordinariate.
This is why we really need not only to pray for God's Will in the choice of Ordinary, but it wouldn't hurt to make our particular pastoral needs known to those who will do the choosing.
All of this comes under the direction of Cardinal Levada at the CDF. This is clearly stated in the Constitution and Complementary Notes. Some of our people have already written to him, and I'm sure others will do the same. I encourage all of those in the Anglican Use parishes to express themselves politely but clearly. Our Fathers in God cannot fully know our needs if we don't express them.
Is Our Lady of Walsingham allowed to have Latin Rite Catholics as members now? I believe this happened at another AU parish by the Bishop, but the rule has been recinded now. I am sure that many Catholics will go where they please. I go to the parish I choose and it isn't in my area. I am registered there. In time I feel that the Ordinaites will be a great help for the growth of the Anglican Use in what ever form it will now be known.
Yes, we at Our Lady of Walsingham accept membership enrollments from any Catholic who wishes to join the parish, the more the merrier. Although we are smaller than Our Lady of the Atonement (which is, after all, the "Mother Church"), we are now growing at a rather more rapid rate than before, and have many young families with numerous children, so it is all very uplifting. The membership situation is more favorable today than it was in the past, and we are very grateful to Cardinal DiNardo for his support and pastoral care.
I have been told by one in a position to speak authoritatively that the enrollment of Catholics who are not former Anglicans as OLOW parishioners is perfectly all right under current canon law, since OLOW is a personal parish of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston, thus Catholics transferring from other parishes to OLOW do this in the same manner as they would in transferring to any other parish in the archdiocese. At the same time, it was also suggested that if the parish moves over to the ordinariate, once erected, the parish membership situation might still be treated essentially the same if, as is thought likely, there is "cumulative jurisdiction" (a term that I am not fully versed on) as to the parish in its relations with the archdiocese, in whose territory it will reside.
Thus, as Fr. Phillips was saying in the main blog, there will likely be only very small practical issues with Art. 5.1 of the Norms (assuming that it is even enforced at all). In any case, at my age, marriage is not an issue, and it looks like funerals will be under the ordinariate anyway (not, like Woody Allen, that I plan to be there when it happens).
As Fr. Phillips was saying, much will depend on the Ordinary, so we must now pray a lot about that.
Post a Comment