Questions to Traditionalists

A couple of friends will, almost certainly, respond to this, but I'd be interested to hear from others, too. Having grown up in an evangelical Anglican church, I both know the arguments and understand the instincts of that constituency of the church, even though I'm no longer a card-carrier for that viewpoint. However whilst I have seen the arguments put, I have some unresolved questions about the traditionalist catholic position within the C of E, regarding the recent debate on women bishops etc. Now the dust is settling from Synod, I'd be genuinely interested to read some responses without it being a ding-dong battle.
My interest is around the what is usually called the three-fold ministry. Some churches which came out of the reformation, separated from what we now call the Roman Catholic church, retained the pattern of ministry of that church - i.e. they continued to ordain deacons, priests or presbyters, and bishops. The Church of England is one such church. As things stand, Anglican ordination is not recognised by the Roman Catholic Church, having been declared null and void in a Papal Bull called Apostolicae Curae in 1896. This continues to be the RC position, and those Anglican priests who have become Roman Catholics have had to be ordained again in order to serve as deacons or priests.

If I have understood the arguments correctly, one of the key concerns for traditionalists is to keep Anglican ministry as compatible as possible with that in the Roman Catholic Church, so that a formal reunion is still possible, with the aspiration that recognition of Anglican ordination might also be part of that. That being the case, my first question is why was there so little fuss when women were ordained deacon in 1987? If the three-fold ministry is that important (and the traditionalist position would say it is), then surely the admission of anyone to any of those 3 orders needs to be in keeping with Roman Catholic practise?

Ordaining women deacon caused a reaction at the time in terms of women being seen in dog collars, but there was no exodus and no structural provision for conscience. In fact Andrew Burnham, a leading traditionalist who was a 'flying bishop' and has now become a Roman Catholic, had a woman deacon on his staff when a vicar in Nottingham. If ordaining women as priests and bishops is seen as unacceptably moving us away from the historic churches (Roman Catholic and Orthodox) then it seems to me that the key moment was 1987. Either that or you have to say the diaconate doesn't matter as much, which is not the historic view of three-fold orders. (Conservative evangelicals could cope with women deacons, as it didn't place them in positions of authority, so women becoming priests/presbyters & bishops were the problem for them.)

The second issue is more about the aspiration of my traditionalist colleagues. I presume that the reason they don't just become Roman Catholics is that there is something about being Anglican which they would wish to retain if Anglicans were reunited with Rome. My question is what, exactly, would they hope to carry through into a church which came under Roman authority? Many traditionalist catholic Anglicans already accept Roman Catholic understanding on many theological issues, and many use Roman Catholic liturgies, so I imagine it's a hope of carrying the church community into formal unity and recognition. Perhaps there is also an aspiration that something of the Anglican experience, story and possibly even some liturgy, might find an accepted place in any future union. But I'm not clear on what that really means, and many of their fellow Anglicans, whilst keen on ecumenical cooperation in many areas, wouldn't accept all that being a Roman Catholic entails - which is why they're Anglicans.

The Church of England's Finest Hour?

All the recent fuss and bad headlines for the Church of England set me thinking: what was the Church of Englands finest hour? Is there something CofE clergy like me can look back on with pride, rather than embarrassment?

One key moment for me was the opening up of ordained ministry to women in the church. I remember attending a service in 1987 in Ely cathedral when deaconesses were first ordained deacon, including 3 I worked with in Cambridge. It was the first time women wore dog-collars in the C of E. And then the 1992 vote for women priests was a cause for celebration for those of us who had campaigned for it, followed by those first ordinations. I remember being involved in the one at Southwell in May 1994 and later Debbie's on 11 June 1994, and they were very special moments. Longer-term experience would suggest that the rather messy arrangements that were adopted way back then have left us with an even messier legacy, which may well come home to roost when the women bishops vote takes place in July.

Any other candidates? Well, for a (comparitively) young ordinand in the late 1980s, it seemed quite exciting that we were getting a whole new set of worship resources through, which eventually updated, expanded and replaced the 1980 Alternative Service Book (mainly modern-language services which are authorised alongside the 1662 Prayer Book). But once it all arrived, it has been complicated to use (unless you have a suite of software and excellent printing resources) and people who look for creativity and variety in worship had already moved on to alternative worship, etc. Furthermore, all liturgy (there's a technical church word already) seems more and more culturally removed from the people we hope might use it.

My candidate would be the publication of Faith in The City, a report published in 1985 by the Archbishop of Canterbury's Commission on Urban Priority Areas. At a point when the political opposition to Margaret Thatcher was in disarray, and Britain was in the aftermath of urban riots, the Church managed to say something that carried some clout on behalf of the poor. Although described by Thatcher's ministers as "Marxist theology", written by "Communist clerics", it influenced policy and showed the Church was concerned. The Church Urban fund, a recommendation of the report, was created in 1987 and in 20 years raised and distributed £55 million to projects in poor urban areas. Today, CUF continues and many of projects it has supported continue to provide important, albeit small, signs of hope for many of the poorest communities around England. They may not grab the headlines, but they do make a real difference to real people.

I started my journey towards ordination seriously in 1985. Maybe it wasn't a coincidence that it was the same year as Faith in the City. The Church was a real sign of hope in a difficult and depressed era, and perhaps that was part of my vocation. I hope today's church might still have the capacity to give today's ordinands similar inspiration.

Personal Ordinariates: A view from Craggy Island

To be read in a strong Irish accent. Similarities with a popular Irish sitcom are purely coincidental.

D: Ted, Ted, where are you, Ted? We’re getting women!

Father Jack briefly wakes and shouts “Girls!” and various obscenities before succumbing again to the effects of drink.

T: Now what’s that you’re on about, Dougal?

D: Priests, Ted. The Holy Father is inviting the Anglicans to come, so there’ll be women everywhere, there will. I like that vicar of Dibley – you know, the nice smile, the chocolate, and all the crazy people. I’d love to have her here, I would. Mind you, she’d have to get used to not being surrounded by nutters.

T: No, no, no, you’ve got it all the wrong way round, Dougal. The women are the problem.

D: Now why would that be Ted?

T: The Holy Father is inviting the Anglican clergy who don’t want women priests and Bishops to join us.

D: Why would he do that, now, Ted?

T: That would be an ecumenical matter, Dougal.

D: Well, at least we’ll be getting a few more priests in the church, eh? We could do with a bit more help on Craggy Island. Let’s get one to say mass tomorrow and we can go on the beach or stay in and play Buckaroo.

T: Ah, there’s a problem with that, Dougal.

D: What would the problem be, now, Ted? I know where you hid the Buckaroo. I found it while I was hiding Jack’s whiskey.

Jack wakes again, yells “Drink!” and is placated with a large slug from an open bottle.

D: Back to this problem, Ted, what is it?

T: Well these Anglicans, they’re not really priests.

D: But I just thought you said they were.

T: Not exactly, Dougal. You see they think they are, but the Holy Father doesn’t.

D: So let me get this right, Ted. The Holy Father is inviting priests who aren’t really priests to become priests so that they don’t have to be with the women priests who aren’t really priests either.

Ted hesitates slightly

T: Yes, that’s about it, Dougal.

D: So why would he do that Ted?

T: That would be an ecumenical matter, Dougal.

D: But Ted.

T: (wearily) Yes Dougal.

D: These priests, who aren’t priests but want to be real priests like us.

T: Yes

D: What will happen to them?

T: Ah, well they believe they are the proper priests, unlike the women priests, so they want to be accepted by a church that has real priests, which will say that they aren’t real priests, only lay people, but is willing to ordain them to be real priests in a church that hasn’t got any women priests. It’s simple really, Dougal.

D: Who’d be a Protestant, eh Ted?

T: Ah. That would be an ecumenical matter.

Jack bursts back into life.

J: GIRLS! **** ****