October 2010

Referring page



ACA Situation

Those three ACA bishops may find that staying in the Continuum may prove not to be the way of the grassroots. This is reassuring for the American situation.


Article in the Church Times about the Flying Bishops

Without comment:

* * *

Source: Flying bishops: We’re not going yet

By Ed Thornton

Two Church of England bishops have denied reports they will resign to take up the Ordinariate before the end the year.

The Bishop of Ebbsfleet, the Rt Revd Andrew Burnham, and the Bishop of Richborough, the Rt Revd Keith Newton, both Provincial Episcopal Visitors, were said this week to have decided to leave the Church of England and had accepted the Pope’s invitation to join an Ordinariate within the Roman Catholic Church.

The Catholic Herald said today: “Senior Anglo-Catholic bishops are likely to take up the Pope’s offer of an Ordinariate before the end of the year.” Bishop Burnham was quoted in The Tablet saying that Pope Benedict XIV had made the offer “and I’ve decided to respond to it”.

The statement, though, is ambiguous, and, in any case, has no date attached to it. Bishop Burnham said on Friday: “If there is to be an announcement, it will be early in the new year.”

Bishop Newton said on Friday that he had not resigned. “There’s nothing definite yet.”

The two bishops will be on study leave from 9 October until the end of December, during which time they are expected to consider the implications of the Pope’s offer.

Earlier this year, Bishop Burnham and Bishop Newton, along with the Bishop of Fulham, the Rt Revd John Broadhurst, travelled to Rome to meet members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (News, 7 May).

Bishops Burnham and Newton said in a statement to The Catholic Herald that the Ordinariate offer was not dependent on any action by the Church of England’s General Synod. “The initiative should be judged on its own merit. It will require courage and vision on the part of those who accept the invitation, particularly among the first to respond.”

A retired Bishop of Richborough, the Rt Revd Edwin Barnes, told The Tablet this week that he would join the Ordinariate “because the Anglican Church is no longer the one holy and apostolic Church it says it is”.

The news comes in the same week as the launch of a new society, formed to “give some sort of identity” to traditionalist Catholic clergy and laity who do not yet wish to leave the Church of England for the Ordinariate. The Bishop of Plymouth, the Rt Revd John Ford, said the new Society of St Wilfrid & St Hilda would “provide a place within the Church of England where Catholics can worship and minister with integrity”.


Patrimony of the Primate

* * *

From the Primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion,

Archbishop John Hepworth.

For much of this year, I have taken part in a phone conference each week with the bishops of the Anglican Church in America, the United States part of the Traditional Anglican Communion. In a pastoral and collegial manner, we have sought to reach an understanding of the implication of the Apostolic Constitution On the gathering of the Anglicans, and of issues concerning its implementation.

In July, I made this proposal to the House of Bishops of the ACA:

1. The Primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion will accept into the Patrimony of the Primate those clergy and laity whose diocese or province has determined, through a declaration of its bishop or bishops, that it is not seeking corporate reunion under the terms of the Apostolic Constitution at this time.

2. This facility is offered in every province of the Traditional Anglican Communion in which need is established in the terms of Paragraph 1.

3. The clergy and laity who are admitted to the Patrimony for this purpose will remain incardinated in the diocese in which they presently serve, and will retain all entitlements arising from their present position, until the time at which they formally become part of the Ordinariate. No canonical or legal action will be taken in any way by a diocese or national body of a member church against those availing themselves of this facility, whether corporately or individually.

4. As soon as a person seeks membership of the Patrimony for this purpose, the Primate (acting where necessary through a delegate) will recognise reception into the Patrimony for the purposes of the formation of an Ordinariate.

5. The bishop or priest delegated for this purpose will expedite the documentation and any other matter pertaining to the formation of the Ordinariate, and will report to the Primate as necessary.

It would be my intention, supported by Archbishop Falk, that I appoint Bishop Moyer as delegate for this purpose in the USA.

On 18th August, Archbishop Falk communicated with me in the following terms:

As just discussed with the Bishops of the ACA a few minutes ago, the action of our House of Bishops earlier this year in recommending an “interim status” situation for ACA clerics and/or congregations already determined to seek entry into an Ordinariate in the USA under the terms of Anglicanorum Coetibus is reaffirmed. It is our position that no impediment exists to your going ahead with the same at such time as you may choose.

It is my judgement that this is the appropriate time to establish the Patrimony of the Primate in the United States. With the consent of Archbishop Falk, I appoint Bishop David Moyer as my delegate for this purpose. All enquiries and applications are to be made to Bishop Moyer.

With the unanimous consent of the House of Bishops of the ACA, all those entering the Patrimony will retain their present position within the ACA until the establishment of the Ordinariate in the United States.

Bishop Moyer has the documentation for clergy seeking entry to the Ordinariate that was provided to the Traditional Anglican Communion bishops and Secretary to the College of Bishops on our recent meeting with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

I have informed Cardinal Levada of this development, which enables those members of our Communion seeking entry to the Ordinariate in the United States to make corporate preparations.

With my continued prayers and blessing for all those engaged in this time of discernment,

+John Hepworth


Continuing Anglicanism and its Future

I feel unqualified to make a judgement on this, since I am not American and have very little real contact with continuing Anglican communities. This movement toward Rome is motivated by the old aspiration of Anglo-Catholics (Anglo-Papalists) to find a way into corporate reunion with Rome rather than by individual conversions.

In 2006, Dr. William J. Tighe of Muhlenberg College was asked by Catholic authorities to write a description of the Anglican scene in the USA to help ecumenical work. The result was Anglican Bodies and Organizations. In this piece, Dr Tighe wrote about the origin and history of the continuing groups, and their current situation. Most of the groups originating from the Affirmation of St Louis suffered severe fracturing in the 1980’s and 90’s and grudges remain to this day. The ACA in 2006 was estimated to contain four dioceses, 84 congregations, 138 clergy and 5,240 communicant members. The Anglican Catholic Church (Original Province) (ACC – OP) claimed six dioceses, 88 congregations, approximately 110 clergy and approximately 4,000 to 5,000 members. The Anglican Province of America had three dioceses, 69 congregations, 126 clergy and roughly 6,000 members. I find no statistics for the Anglican Province of Christ the King).

The sheer number of Continuing Anglican groups in America is bewildering, though the ‘mainstream’ seems to be limited to the bodies listed above. The TAC is the only continuing body known to have made a request to Rome and to have received a response, thus being taken seriously. I read that the Anglican Catholic Church, the Anglican Province of Christ the King and the United Episcopal Church of North America are united. Is this a long-term and viable union, or something that could be fractured by the wrong men looking for a mitre? This is a minefield subject, and largely irrelevant outside the United States. Those more or less of that grouping, mostly ‘classical Anglicans’ à la Continuum, have said Thanks but no thanks, preferring to work towards repairing the breaches between the original Affirmation of St Louis groups. It seems to be a position that shrinks away from the kind of comprehensiveness we used to know in England – and one that centres on a narrow and quite ‘foreign’ notion of Anglicanism. It is certainly not a version of Anglicanism I ever identified with.

Lacking other independent information, I would like to throw this question open to commenters. Is the Continuing Church movement viable in the long term? Can Rome include the TAC in the Ordinariates without having to give equal consideration to the hundreds of small bodies, in some cases consisting of only a bishop and his immediate family? If continuing Anglicanism is, to some commenters, the way forward, what can be done about limiting numbers of bishops, a disproportionate number of clergy for the low number of laity, and, above all limiting fragmentation that seems to occur at a higher rate than unions between church bodies?

What distinguishes ‘respectable’ groupings from ‘vagante’ groups? Are large groups to be pulled down by the wannabes? The American and English scenes are bedevilled with the activities of episcopi vagantes, and distinctions are hard to make for those not involved. From this comes the instinct to deal only with establishment churches, even when they have gone down the road of female clergy and associated agendas. Reflections, anyone?


Patrimony of the Primate revisited

Normally, in Roman canon law, Patrimony is a concept of material assets, property and money which exist to make the mission of the Church possible. The Roman Curia has an office called the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See. It deals with the “properties owned by the Holy See in order to provide the funds necessary for the Roman Curia to function“. (Pastor Bonus, 172). It was established by Pope Paul VI on 15th August 1967. Its current President is Cardinal Attilio Nicora since 1st October 2002. It consists of two sections. The Ordinary Section continues the work of the Administration of the Property of the Holy See, a commission to which Pope Leo XIII entrusted the administration of the property remaining to the Holy See after the complete loss of the Papal States in 1870. The Extraordinary Section administers the funds given by the Italian government to implement the Financial Convention attached to the Lateran Treaty of 1929. These funds were previously managed by the Special Administration of the Holy See.

Archbishop Hepworth’s Patrimony is obviously not based on that concept. The Anglican Catholic Church of Australia (TAC) owns property and assets, but not to that tune.

Under the old Code of Canon Law (before 1983) clerics were only ordained when it was ascertained that they would be properly financed. Usually a man was ordained for a benefice, usually a parish or a canon’s stall. Incardination in a diocese is a more recent concept. It was also possible to be ordained ad titulum mensae communis, meaning being a part of a community of priests. The titulum paupertatis designated monks and friars. Priests with private means (an invested legacy for example giving high enough interests to live on) were ordained ad titulum patrimoniis suis. I once met a prelate in London by the name of Monsignor Alfred Gilbey. He had been a university chaplain in Cambridge and lived at the Travellers Club in London. He came from the rich and famous gin distilling family. It was always the same question – by what financial means would the priest live on.

If we look at things under that angle, incardination into a diocese means being supported by the diocese’s patrimony – the money it has from it investments, assets, gifts and legacies. Theoretically, a priest could be supported by the private means of his Bishop, and that would be the patrimony of the bishop.

The concept, as used in this case, does not involve material assets or financial support. I have never been financially supported by Archbishop Hepworth, and it had always been agreed that I would be ad titulum patrimoniis suis, meaning living from my work as a professional translator. This concept of the “tent-maker” priest is accepted in the complementary norms to Anglicanorum coetibus (Article 7 §3. When necessary, priests, with the permission of the Ordinary, may engage in a secular profession compatible with the exercise of priestly ministry (cf. CIC, can. 286).

In the TAC and some other Continuing Anglican Churches, it has come to mean a kind of personal jurisdiction of the Archbishop, Metropolitan or Primate, to remedy anomalies in dioceses or to give episcopal oversight to those clergy not living within the territory of a diocese. I recently read that the concept, following this meaning, originated in the Anglican Catholic Church when two Bishops (Morse and Watterson) refused to accept the Constitution and Canons. This was a temporary measure which allowed parishes belonging to those two bishops to remain within the ACC. Therefore, the concept remained in constituent bodies of the TAC, some of which were at one time parts of the Anglican Catholic Church.

What are the precedents of personal as opposed to territorial jurisdictions? In the Catholic Church the concept of some episcopal jurisdiction overlapping with a normal territorial jurisdiction (a diocese) originates with the personal prelature. It was invented for and was applied to Opus Dei, founded by St Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer. The idea was conceived during the sessions of the Second Vatican Council in no. 10 of the decree Presbyterorum ordinis and was later enacted into law by Paul VI in his motu proprio Ecclesiae sanctae. The institution of the personal prelature was later reaffirmed in the 1983 Code of Canon Law (can. 294–297).

There were already precedents for exemption from diocesan episcopal jurisdiction, monasteries and nullius abbeys. The Augustinian Abbey of St Maurice in Switzerland has its own “mini-diocese”, which is a little island surrounded by the Diocese of Sion. The Abbot of St Maurice is a bishop. Exempt communities are said to be of Pontifical Right. Examples – the Oratory of St Philip Neri and its independent houses, just like the Benedictine Abbeys of the Benedictine Confederation.

With the military ordinariates, the personal prelature became a precedent for other special pastoral provisions to deal with special needs in the Church. When rumours were rife about the TAC and Rome between October 2007 and October 2009, many people thought the solution would be the personal prelature. However, the personal prelature is not a particular church as dioceses and military ordinariates are. Anglicanorum coetibus of November 2009 has instituted the personal ordinariate as a particular church.

Another concept is what the Church does in mission territories where there are no established dioceses. Another situation was what was done for the pastoral care of Catholics living in formerly Catholic countries taken over by Christians hostile to Catholicism (England or Holland for example) or by persecuting ideologies like Communism in the old Soviet Bloc. For the missions, the Roman Curia has the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples (Congregatio pro Gentium Evangelizatione) responsible for missionary work and related activities. It is better known by its former title, the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith (Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide). It had been renamed by Pope John Paul II in 1982. This Congregation was founded in 1622 by Pope Gregory XV, and charged with the missions and the regulation of Catholic ecclesiastical affairs in non-Catholic countries. From the Reformation until 1850, Recusant English Catholics were under this Congregation, and their bishops were Vicars Apostolic.

Thus, the Patrimony of the Primate (to which I have belonged since when I joined the TAC in 2005), is inspired by this concept of a personal jurisdiction to cover a special need. My pastoral need was one of episcopal oversight whilst I was living in a country that is outside the territory of a TAC diocese. The concept is based on long-established custom and pastoral adaptation in the Church from exempt religious communities, personal prelatures, prelatures nullius, personal ordinariates and the means the Church gives itself to fulfil her mission in every situation that occurs that puts people out of the ordinary channels of institutional Catholicism. Where there is a pastoral need, the Church always adapts her laws to accommodate the need.

In extending the Patrimony of the Primate to the United States, where there are four Anglican Church of America dioceses, Archbishop Hepworth seems to have followed the precedent of Propaganda Fidei in his concern for priests and lay people who are ordinariate-bound. In this context, Bishop Moyer fulfils the role of a Vicar Apostolic – until such time as Rome establishes an Ordinariate in the USA, and those who wish to join it will be able to do so.

What may seem anomalous is the double membership of clergy and laity to one of the ACA dioceses and the Patrimony of the Primate. The basis of this is that the three ACA bishops have not yet left the TAC or actually committed a canonical fault (eg. unilateral intercommunion agreement with another continuing body). Yet, there will be tensions between those for the Ordinariates and those against. We cannot take it for granted that one side or the other will dominate. What Archbishop Hepworth wanted is for no community or person to be forced out of its property for the simple reason of a disagreement with the diocesan Bishop about the Ordinariates. With the three bishops still belonging to the TAC, their having accepted the conditions as laid down in October 2007, explicitly through signing the documents or implicitly by accepting episcopal consecration in this Communion, their having changed their minds constitutes the anomaly which creates difficulties for ordinariate-bound clergy and laity.

This new application of an existing institution in the TAC is a truly pastoral provision to provide alternative oversight for those parishes and individuals in those three dioceses who choose with the remaining bishops of the ACA to accept the Ordinariate scheme.


Bishop Brian Marsh issues another pastoral letter

Dr. Tighe quotes Bishop Marsh and makes a short remark.

Entering an Ordinariate requires that all who do so convert to Roman Catholicism.

We must be of “one accord” as we seek a way forward. For that reason, I discourage any parish “votes.

If so, I simply ask that the parish reach full consensus with ALL parishioners before requesting admission.

“In other words, as has been clear for some time, he is cutting his losses”.

* * *

ANGLICAN CHURCH IN AMERICA – Diocese of the Northeast

Rt. Rev. Brian Marsh, Bishop

October 12, 2010

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

This pastoral letter comes to you after a very busy period of time. Our diocesan synod was indeed a blessing and I want to thank all who participated in that wonderful gathering. Since my last major pastoral letter of June 3, many events have come to pass that require our prayerful discernment. Accordingly, I commend the following to you for your thoughts and prayers. I request that this letter be shared with every parish in the diocese.


Few of us would argue against the principle of Christian unity. The unity of God’s people is something that we earnestly pray for and eagerly seek. Indeed, on the Day of Pentecost when the church was born, all were gathered together in one place and “with one accord.” It is that quality of being in accord with each other that makes the church a healthy, functioning home for God on earth. That spirit of accord is also one that we should endeavor to create and celebrate in our parishes.

We all wish in our heart of hearts to be of one accord, in unity with each other in a bond of love that replicates the very bond of love between the Father and the Son.

I am very happy to report that most churches in our diocese are indeed of one accord, particularly as it relates to our desire to worship God in the Anglican tradition. While we are far from perfect, we do recognize the necessity of continually aspiring to join with each other in closer bonds of unity. It is clear that God has called us to be together in unity and serve His church faithfully.

Above all, we must remember that unity begins at home. Just as a family should stay together in unity, so should our parishes and diocese remain unified, committed to each other and to our common life and mission. We all know that divorce and separation causes pain and disruption to family life. Similarly, any splits or separations within the Christian family will cause pain and disruption to the lives of God’s children. It is vital that we stay together.

What does seem clear to me is this: breaking our diocese and parishes apart for the sake of some imagined unity makes no sense. We must be of “one accord” as we seek a way forward. For that reason, I discourage any parish “votes.” Any such votes seem certain to produce winners and losers. Children are often placed in difficult decisions during divorce proceedings when asked to vote whether to go with their Mother or Father. How wrenching such decisions must be for the hearts and souls of vulnerable children. We must never allow this to happen to us. Rather, I ask that all parishes seek to reach consensus about the future direction of their parish. Consensus requires a parish to be of one accord. This is the Godly thing to do. Just as all of God’s children are loved by God, we must love each other and seek to prevent hurt and separation. This is certainly a much more challenging task than taking a simple vote. But I do not believe that God asks us to take a simple path; God asks us to take His path. That will mean that we treat all of God’s children with love and respect. It will mean treating all parishes with love and respect, creating Christian communities where no one is voted in or out. God, I believe, would have it that way.

Since the Apostolic Constitution was released nearly a year ago, many of us have sought to discern our way forward with regard to its provisions. Should we accept the Vatican’s offer to become Roman Catholics and enter an Ordinariate or should we maintain our present course? Entering an Ordinariate requires that all who do so convert to Roman Catholicism. Archbishop Donald Wuerl, the Catholic archbishop in charge of Ordinariates in this country, has made this very clear; entering an Ordinariate requires that all who do so must convert to the Roman Catholic Church.

Should any individuals be moved to seek entry into the Roman Catholic Church or Ordinariate, there are three basic options: one, you may simply join a Roman Catholic parish; second, you may write your bishop a letter seeking entry as an individual into an Ordinariate; or third, should your parish as a whole wish to join an Ordinariate, you may write to me and make that request. Should your parish be of “one accord” in seeking to join an Ordinariate, that path is clearly open. To date, I have received several letters from parishes that are indeed of one accord in seeking to remain with the ACA and the Diocese of the Northeast. These parishes have decided against entering an Ordinariate. I have not asked for such letters, but the parishes felt moved to send them along. I received one letter from a group that does seek admission to the Ordinariate. That body had reached a complete accord in its desire to accept the Vatican’s offer. I asked that they send a letter to me in that regard. Upon receiving the letter, I forwarded it on to Archbishop Falk. He was, until recently, the person who collected all such requests.

As I have traveled around the diocese, I have noted that there are presently few parishes seeking entry into the Ordinariate. There may be one or two. If so, I simply ask that the parish reach full consensus with ALL parishioners before requesting admission. As I mentioned in my June pastoral, those parishes that do not wish to join an Ordinariate need do nothing.

You also should know that, as your bishop, I remain committed to Christian unity, which certainly includes the traditional Anglican Church bodies whose practices and beliefs are consistent with our own. I remain also firmly committed to the Anglican Church in America. But, even more, I remain committed to the people of the diocese I have been called to serve. May we seek always to be of one accord in our lives within God’s holy church.

Your Brother in Christ,



Archbishop Hepworth speaks to Forward in Faith

He began by reflecting on the first year, and things are actually going faster than we thought they might. What distinguishes this offer from the Pope from individual conversion? It is the way the Church deals with and accepts ‘lingering Anglicanism’. Bishop Jarret in Australia, once an Anglican priest and now a Catholic bishop, is known to attend Anglican services when visiting London. Blessed John Henry Newman wrote once to Keble and said something to the effect of “If only Rome could have made provision for groups”.

Benedict XVI is clearly setting out a challenge to Anglicans, that of bringing our heritage and treasures into the service of the whole Church. Cardinal Levada likened things to a symphony being played on the piano, and that Anglicanorum coetibus is adding the orchestration. What a thing for a Cardinal to say!

What about the permanence of the Apostolic Constitution? It will be a lot more permanent than that other elephant in the living room, Apostolicae Curae of 1896. The bull of Leo XIII certainly won’t be revoked, but it might be forgotten and become irrelevant as the Ordinariates come into being [and develop into more traditional ecclesiastical structures].

The important thing is how we are going to define our patrimony, treasures and community. Archbishop Hepworth is confident that the first ordinariates will be established next year in the USA, Canada, the UK and Australia. We will certainly be asked to keep enduring relationships with Anglicans. Our Archbishop gently upbraided Anglo Catholics for tending to leave out the best bits – using the modern Roman rite rather than a more Anglican rite like the Anglican Use or the English Missal. It would appear that Benedict XVI has been practicing the Prayer of Humble Access – We do not presume to come to this thy table with his heavy German accent! He would like to say an Anglican Mass, presumably from the Book of Divine Worship already approved by Rome, or a modification thereof to be approved.

What are the lessons of this first year? Anglicans are more terrified than we thought they would be. Cardinal Levada knows that “this will pose exquisite challenges to the consciences of Anglican men and women”. That is why there is no rush but a solid process. However, there is a real problem of understanding between us and their bishops. Catholic bishops show their inability to understand Anglicans by their asking the typical question of whether the Queen of England is a kind of Anglican Pope who defined dogmas and runs the whole show! I am certainly used to this through talking with French Catholics, who are clueless. More basic books and articles need to be written, showing that the matter is relevant to ordinary Catholics. Heck! Too few already have any idea about the Oriental Catholics, and they have been around for centuries, and in our countries! On the other hand, we Anglicans see the spectre of the Inquisition and wonder if they still torture people to extract confessions to heresy!

What are our treasures? How many of us have no longer used the Prayer Book for years? Archbishop Hepworth actually asked this question to the assembly of Church of England clergy and people using the modern Roman rite. There needs to be a liturgical movement, and the injection of Anglican traditions into the Catholic communion will help to recover a sense of the Apostolic origins of our worship. Archbishop Hepworth has just sent an Anglican Breviary (compendium of the Prayer Book offices with material from the Latin rite in Cranmerian English) to Rome. We are building a future Church, united but with far more diversity than over the last 500 years. Now the bombshell – we are more of a challenge than the Society of St Pius X because of our diversity and our pastoral approach to the faith. This brings in not only a liturgical dimension of our patrimony, but the pastoral aspect.

What is the principal aspect of Anglican Patrimony? The parish priest knows the names of his people! Very few Catholic priests can say that in the big parishes. Archbishop Hepworth was once talking with a Cardinal in Rome who confessed there are loopholes in the text (yes, canonical inconsistencies), and the Cardinal said they should be closed up. Yes, our Archbishop said, but not before we use them. Lutherans ask the Church to get rid of Indulgences. We would say that one should not get rid of indulgences until we’re in and have got a few! The audience laughed.

Finally, we (the TAC as well as Forward in Faith) are designing the Ordinariates as well as the local delegates and the CDF who find it difficult to understand what we are about. This is why it is vital that this work should not be excessively outsourced and made vulnerable to manipulation by unsympathetic diocesan bishops determined to make the whole project fail. Cardinal Levada needs to keep a firm hand over everything and make sure only the right men are doing the job. It can’t be bungled at this stage! There just isn’t a high level of understanding among the Catholic bishops, and this does make us jittery. We need to teach them as they teach us. The Holy Father understands, and it would seem that Cardinal Levada does too, but how many other senior and high-ranking Catholic prelates do?

The large numbers of clergy and faithful in places like India and Africa are looking keenly to the successful establishment of the first Ordinariates in North America, Australia and the British Isles. There is too much at stake.

* * *

Bishop John Broadhurst (Suffragan of Fulham in the Diocese of London) has announced his intention to resign from the Church of England and join the English Ordinariate when it happens. He is prepared to continue as Chairman of Forward in Faith if the committee wants him to stay. The good Bishop has our best wishes and prayers.

Also see Damian Thompson’s Earthquake in Anglo-Catholicism: Bishop of Fulham to convert to Rome; Forward in Faith ‘not part of Church of England’.


Archbishop Hepworth treated by Rome like Royalty?

I don’t think it will be a problem Mousey. Isn’t Hepworth, the Archbish behind the whole thing, an ex-Catholic? He is treated in Rome like royalty! I am fairly certain that what that paragraph refers to as the previously baptised are people who are already Catholics, ie your ordinary Catholic laity and priesthood. They can’t join the Ordinariate. Which seems a bit of a shame to me…

It seems that Bishop Broadhurst has now replaced our long suffering Archbishop Hepworth as the liberals’ whipping boy. As for Archbishop Hepworth being treated like Royalty by the Roman Curia, may Ms. Gledhill’s words rise from her lips to God’s ear!


An Emerging Role of the ‘English Catholic’ blog

Tomorrow, I will be crossing the Channel to Portsmouth for the TTAC Synod, and will be taking notes and photos to do a report for this blog.

There are few other sources of TAC news, other than The Messenger which last published some spiritual words from Bishop Elliott in August of this year. The Traditional Anglican Church website still faithfully publishes monthly letters on its Communications page. Some reports concerning the TAC find their way onto The Anglo-Catholic, especially individual American parishes joining the Patrimony of the Primate (Patrimony of the Primate – Revisited) or directly approaching the Delegate appointed by the CDF. The Anglo-Catholic now generally seems to be more concerned with Ordinariate-bound groups of Anglicans made up of current members of the Anglican Communion and Roman Catholics who are interested in converting Anglicans and apologetics.

I get excellent reports from my colleague Deborah Gyapong, and we see that the ACCC (TAC in Canada) is an example for us all.

For this blog to be able to publish TAC news with any regularity and accuracy, I depend on you, the readership, to send reports and photos. I know, for example, that Bishop Michael Gill of the TAC in South Africa reads this blog and sends encouraging comments. It would be wonderful to receive some reports and photos from him. I wonder if Archbishop Prakash in India has Internet access, how wonderful it would be if this blog could do more to draw us all together in solidarity and brotherly love!

I therefore invite readers to send me an e-mail using the address found here with their reports and photos. Let’s help the Holy Father and the Roman Curial officials get to know the TAC and our work even better, and from our own sources! I am particularly interested in knowing about:


News from the TTAC Synod

At the assembly of the Traditional Anglican Communion of England and Wales (TTAC), today, the following 3 resolutions were passed:-
1. This assembly endorses the resolution of 2009, that:
‘This Synod, representing the Traditional Anglican Communion in Great Britain offers its joyful thanks to Pope Benedict XVI for his forthcoming Apostolic Constitution, allowing the corporate re-union with the Holy see, and request the Primate and College of Bishops of the TAC to take the steps necessary to implement this constitution.’
2. This Synod welcomes the fact that some clergy and people in Forward in Faith are preparing to accept Pope Benedict XVI’s generous offer of full communion with the See of Peter, as set out in Anglicanorum Coetibus, thus fulfilling the Concordat between the Traditional Anglican Communion and Forward in Faith. We look forward to positive collaboration with all those involved in the establishment of the Ordinariate in England and Wales.
3. We continue in our prayers that all Anglicans may one day find reconcilliation with the See of Peter.
Regards Ian Cresdee - St Agatha's Church