25 October 2022

Farewell to Neasden

Since the Ordinariates were erected, I have sometimes wondered if we should have made rather more of a Negotiation of it, rather than just gratefully accepting the crumbs that fell from Vatican tables. 

For example ... and this suggestion follows on from my two previous pieces about Cardinal Nichols and Neasden ... we could have sought, as our bit of the bargain, that the English Catholic Bishops should agree ... for, let me suggest, fifty years ... not to commit Idolatry. Instead, we took up a suppliant position. 

Well I remember the joy with which we individually welcomed the nulla osta which came so easily and generously from Cardinal Mueller's CDF. (Not, of course, that this was the only hurdle to get over. After my own nulla osta came hurtling back from Rome at break-neck speed, there was the attempt by a couple of English bishops to put a spoke in my own wheels because of my attitude to the Mass of S Pius V ... but that's another story.)

Not that Idolatry is the only thing we might usefully have negotiated about. We could have asked that, in each country destined to have an Ordinariate, the local hierarchy should undertake not to encourage Adultery or Sodomy. Again, the agreement could have been for fifty years. And the question of Ordination of Women to Major Orders could have been on our shopping list.

Who knows ... had we gone for such agenda in subtle, crafty ways, we might have been able eventually to get entire local hierarchies signed up to the entire decalogue!!!!

Seems incredible now, doesn't it?

Lost opportunities ...


Moritz Gruber said...

The thing is that one doesn't, in negotiations, put one's soul to bargain. It may be that Roman Catholic bishops have committed idolatry, but it is better to be inside the true Church, whose bishops happen to commit idolatry sometimes, than outside her even if the "outside bishops" don't.

David J Critchley said...

Perhaps the Ordinariate could have insisted on being given the duty of reviving those forms of the Roman rite that were forbidden by the secular power in the sixteenth century.

Greyman 82 said...

I can't think of anything the Ordinariate really needs that it might have negotiated for when it was set up. Rome obviously decided that we shouldn't have our own bishop - they didn't want us to be able to ordain new priests and bishops for ourselves, so ordination is under the control of the English bishops.

My liking for the Ordinariate Use for Mass is huge, and I am very grateful that those who set up the Ordinariate were able to get this form of Mass accepted by the powers that be in Rome. As long as we continue to have the Ordinariate form, I will be quite happy. I'm not too concerned about the English hierarchy as long as they don't try to interfere in the running of the Ordinariate. If we maintain the level of autonomy we currently have, I'll settle for that.

Amongst the current English Catholic diocesan bishops, there are one or two who seem to be very good, such as of Philip Egan of Portsmouth and Mark Davies of Shrewsbury, some who are bland and nondescript such as Ralph Heskett of Hallam, and some who have turned out to be enemies of Tradition, such Malcolm McMahon of Liverpool. I'm a little concerned that Bishop John Sherrington, an auxiliary bishop in the Diocese of Westminster is being groomed for the very top of the hierarchy. I'm wary of him and I don't want him as Archbishop of Westminster or anywhere else for that matter.

Fr Edward said...

Your thesis is simply bankrupt, if I may say so. You clearly haven’t read your Newman with sufficient theological guidance.

May I recommend that you read ‘An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine’. Particularly useful are the recent Chicago and Vienna editions, especially when read alongside the theological exposition of their chief doctrinal guardians. You’ll learn a lot that you never knew before.

You'll see quite clearly that all these things that you rail against, are simply some of the ways in which the deposit of faith both 'encounters' and 'expresses' for modern human persons, the dynamic Spirit-filled encounter with the Gospel, as the secrets of the heart of man unfold, to be affirmed and celebrated. Who are we to hold back the Spirit, as we are lead into the sunlit uplands, of which our foreparents could never have dared dream?

Please try to remember: New Wine - New Wineskins.
In our being alongside modern human persons in today's modern world, in a very real way, we know that it is the spirit of the God of Surprises that leads us on.

We are Church, and Maranatha is our song!

Matthew F Kluk said...

What did Arthur Roche bargain? What did the Sanct Gallen Mafiosi bargain? China was bargained by Pope Francis and Cardinal Vlad Parolin I believe. They made a deal with the devil.

FDR hates Waugh said...

Dear Father, I enjoy these pages for many reasons, not least of which is your intellectual brilliance. Though, of all the the offerings to be found at “Mutual Enrichment” it is in your mastery of mockery (as seen above) where you induce in me the most cathartic laughter and prove yourself matchless.

Mick Jagger Gathers No Mosque said...

Dear Fr Edward. Can you identify the Saint, Pope or Ecumenical Council, poor to 1963, that defined God as the God of suprises?

JOSEPH said...

Well,well,Fr. Edward quite the Charismatic of you.As the Church of Christ would say "The church has left the building." Newman would not recognize any of YOUR authority to harness the spirit.

Michael Leahy said...

I took Fr Edward's post as irony and satire. Goodness, I hope I'm right!

FrB. said...

Fr Edward is not a Modernist. His humour betrays his orthodoxy.