Come on in, the sharks are friendly
Mary Wakefield assures the nervous frightened Anglicans who can’t stand the thought of female bishops but aren’t quite sure about this Catholic church thingy either even though it does do an admirable job of keeping women in their place – Mary Wakefield assures them, I say, that the only thing they have to fear is fear itself. That, and the sharks, of course.
Well, come on in, I say. The water’s warm. I converted two years ago now, full of cowardly fear about what people might think, and to my surprise, I haven’t regretted it since. But though the water is warm, I’d be lying if I said there weren’t a few sharks around.
Ah. There are sharks around, but come on in? Er – thank you for the thought, but I’m busy that day.
As Catholicism seeps back into Britain (St Thérèse of Lisieux’s UK tour this year, the Pope’s in 2010, the probable beatification of Cardinal Newman, etc), so too our national rage against Catholicism is on the rise…Yes, the church’s history is bloody and corrupt, but so is England’s, and that doesn’t preclude patriotism. Like most other powerful institutions, the church has done some appalling things, but it has also championed women’s rights, campaigned to end slavery, opposed the Iraq war, fed and clothed the poor and sent more and more effective aid to Africa than any other charitable organisation.
Championed women’s rights? The hell it has! It has issued papal declarations that women are Special and Different and Must Not try to deny their femininity and be like men. That’s not championing women’s rights. And how much campaigning to end slavery has it done, when, where? It’s news to me that the catholic church has been prominent in this struggle – and I have a feeling Wakefield is making it up, or just assuming it must be the case. Everybody campaigned to end slavery, nobody supported it, it was all just a big fluke, so of course the catholic church must have been right out there on the front lines next to William Lloyd Garrison.
Anyway that breezy little skip past ‘Yes, the church’s history is bloody and corrupt’ won’t quite do, since a lot of the bloodiness is very very recent, not to say on-going, and the corruption isn’t altogether over either.
I inched towards the Catholic church, baulking like a nervy horse. From the outside, it looked crazy: a mix of dodgy doctrine and arcane ritual. But the closer I crept, the saner, the more light-hearted I felt, and once inside, even transubstantiation made perfect sense.
Once inside – well yes. That’s the problem with going inside.
No, not sharks. It’s more ‘come into my parlour said the spider to the fly.’ I say that because the Anglicans may find getting in a lot easier than getting out.
On the face of it, the offer is a smart move by Pope Benedict. As I read it, Anglicans are invited to set up as an order within Catholicism and retain all their traditional rites and customs, while still excluding the openly homosexual and women from the priesthood. It will be interesting to see how many existing Catholic clergy apply to join this order and thus get the right to marry.
On the face of it, it could solve the problem of priestly celibacy for Rome; which at heart was always about transmission of property to the priest’s next of kin on his departure from this life.
The next move could be an attempt by Rome to get back some of the English real estate siezed from the Catholic Church by Henry VIII. Benedict has two chances there, and neither better than a Protestant’s chance of getting to Heaven.
http://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2006/08/can-non-catholics-be-saved.html
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/CATHDIFF.htm
As one who grew up in the Catholic church, all I can say about those tempted Anglicans is: suckers.
I left the church on a path that intersected Protestant Christianity but was ultimately headed toward atheism. But the archaic beliefs of the church were driving me away waay back in the ’60s and ’70s when the reforms that John XXIII strongarmed into existence were welcomed by the churches I attended. How all those good Catholics continue to attend church every Sunday baffles me. Perhaps I just lucked out and attended a Catholic high school, where they (at the time at least) taught critical thinking.
The Catholic Church’s aid to Africa is effective? I’ll say! The church’s persistent, pernicious, oft-documented and wholly false propaganda about the ineffectiveness of condoms – which is only a part of their world-wide campaign against reasonable, healthy, women-empowering birth control – has been very effective in aiding many African countries with the problem of excess population. What with all the people dying and all.
Although his rhetoric was colorful and memorable, Jean Meslier was wrong: Gutting ’em and using their entrails to strangle kings is far too noble and proud an end for any priest, even the last one. We already have perfectly ordinary statutes and punishments to cover their behavior: fraud, racketeering, extortion, criminal negligence, etc.
That about sums it up:
She was more than certifiably insane from the outset.
There is one upside with the RCC offer, and that is it would be bring the bigots currently hiding within the C of E out into the open. It might also allow the liberal element in the C of E to make better progress.
And where are the better elements of the C of E progressing to?
Dibley.
I shall now always think of the more liberal elements of the CofE as ‘The Dibley Faction’.
“When he calms down, even Stephen Fry knows the church does good – why else would he be hosting a fundraising event next month for the Passage, a day centre for the homeless, founded by Cardinal Hume, supported by Westminster Cathedral, inspired by the life of Christ”
Cardinal Hume might have started Passage -but all the hard work was mostly done by the Daughters of Charity of St Vincent De Paul – who opened up their convent in Carlisle Place, Victoria.
Pauline Gaughan, whom I knew in London, gave up her teaching job to organise behind the scenes ‘Passage’ work with the homeless. She went further afield to Manchester and Liverpool and did more marvellous work with the homeless, marginalised and human rights and justice issues.
With the result of reading this article I googled ‘Passage’. I was stunned to learn that Sr. Ellen Flynn was up ’til recently chairperson of this homeless organisation.
As Sr. Ellen Flynn was the most kindest religious person I ever encountered in my whole young life. She also brought guitar and folk music into my young life and protected me from being kicked out of the girls’ hostel in London. Sr. Anne, who was in charge, could not abide me and wanted rid of me because of some small misdemeanour.
I was stunned to learn that Sister Pauline suddenly died.
i am tempted to e-mail Sr. Ellen. I have had no contact with her for over thirty five years. I have never ever forgotten her kindness.
Surely as she crept closer she felt more light-headed rather than light-hearted. Or perhaps as she felt more light-headed she crept closer.
It’s only fair to remember that there has always been a strong ‘catholic’ faction within the Anglican Church, which expressed itself, very often, by aping the doctrine and ritual of the Roman Catholic Church, although there was always a very strong Catholic tendency amongst some Anglicans since the time of Henry VIII. Archbishop Laud, in the Restoration church, was extremely Catholic in his belief and worship, and was widely despised for precisely this reason. The very strong erastianism of the Anglican Church has, however, tended to keep these tendencies within bounds.
There is still a deep belief within Anglicanism that schism is sinful, and that every effort should be made to repair the fabric of the church that was shattered by the events ot the sixteenth century Reformation, starting with Henry VIII. Since the Oxford Movement in the 19th century, these forces in the Anglican Church are, in some places, very strong indeed, and many Anglicans have made the journey to Rome. Cardinal Newman was a famous Anglican who ‘poped’, in Anglican jargon. So is Ronald Knox. And there have been lesser figures, of course. A recent Bishop of London (whpose name escapes me for the moment, but of whom I once took a picture playing a tenor recorder – I came across it the other day) is now, I believe, a layman in the Roman Catholic Church, and some priests I know have joined the Orthodox Church. I think this may explain Richard Swinburne’s Orthodoxy, though that is only a guess.
There are already a number of Anglican priests, married priests, who have been ordained in the Roman Catholic Church. One of the obstacles to movement from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism has always been the fact that the Roman church does not recognise Anglican orders, and so required re-ordination. I haven’t read the latest proposals, but I assume this rule still holds. This will make movement for some very difficult, but the fact that Anglicans will have a ‘uniat’ status, so that their ecclesiastical traditions will be able to be preserved will certainly be attractive to some. However, Anglicans have always valued a fair amount of doctrinal freedom. Even the very conservative have treasured the fact that they can still think wildly retrogressive thoughts while still remaining members in good standing of the church. The tipping point is the ordination of women to the episcopate, which means, according to the tranditionalists in the Anglican church, that all those who are ordained by them (by women bishops, that is) will be invalidly ordained, and that does raise for them the spectre of the general invalidity of Anglican orders, which they have tended to defend strenuously until now. I suspect that the pope’s appeal might fall on many willing ears, and that there may in fact be a fairly significant exodus from the Anglican to the Roman Catholic Church, at least by priests, who are the most actively bigotted ones, though they do manage to drum up considerable support amongst the laity.
I doubt very much, however, whether the law in England would permit them to take church properties with them. If the pope hopes to get back churches which, in his view, ought to have remained within the Catholic fold, he will have to offer more than uniat status for those who decide to make the switch. I suspect, if there are enough people who want to take their churches with them, they will have to pay for them first. But that is only a guess. However, it’s one thing to grow up Roman Catholic. It’s another thing for an Anglo-Catholic to make the switch. You really do have to read the fine print, and accept ex anima all the dogmas of Roman Catholicism. That will surely make the change difficult for some honest souls. Tony Blair seems to have done so, though he has slid backwards from time to time. Perhaps his visit to Saint Theresa’s relics – her story is quite revolting really – have miraculously brought him back to the straight and narrow path of Vatican supremacy. It’s a very interesting situation. I suspect there is a degree of cynicism behind the present offer by the pope that would make the Ayatollah blanch.
Many Anglo-Catholics, however, will find Roman Catholic liturgy a bit bland, I suspect, since Anglo-Catholicism has developed a liturgical tradition of great ornateness and, for those who like that type of thing, haunting beauty. The solemnity of an Anglo-Catholic High Mass would make the ritual of St Peter’s look rather plain by comparison.
The solemnity of an Anglo-Catholic High Mass would make the ritual of St Peter’s look rather plain by comparison. Yes, but do they have chair gymnastics? It always annoyed the crap out of me that every time you’d nearly fallen asleep due to the droning of the priest you’d have to kneel or stand up or something else. Argggg! A good nap ruined.
“So why did I convert? The short answer is that I needed somewhere to believe. When I took my questions and doubts to the C of E, the priests looked embarrassed: ‘Believe? Gosh, don’t bother with that!’ They were nice, reasonable ambassadors for a nice, reasonable church and they left me feeling like a lunatic. So where to go? I inched towards the Catholic church, baulking like a nervy horse. From the outside, it looked crazy: a mix of dodgy doctrine and arcane ritual. But the closer I crept, the saner, the more light-hearted I felt, and once inside, even transubstantiation made perfect sense. Put it down to brainwashing if you like. Me, I’m with St Augustine of Hippo. Credo ut intelligam, he said. Believing is seeing.”
Perhaps. But for my money, believing is a means to belonging. Disgruntled Anglicans (and even some who are still gruntled) will be making use of the Catholic Church’s ability to filter out those in their present congregations, such as gays and women clergy, whom they find objectionable.
However none of them will be ‘going to’ Rome. They will all remain in Dibley, with their co-thinkers. But in new premises, for they will be taking not a scrap of Anglican stone, brick or timber with them.
There are few certainties in life, but that is one of them.
Well, yes, it can be that too! But, don’t forget, these people take it all with very deadly seriousness. That’s why people get killed over religion. Somehow, it’s all tied up with the way God wants it to be – and wants you to be too! But, in this case, I hazard the guess that some people are going to be hurt, and that doesn’t seem to bother the pope at all. That may not be surprising, since the Vatican is one of the world’s oldest con games, but, if they paid attention to at least some of the things that Jesus said, he should be a bit concerned. It’s the cynicism of the whole charade that gets me in the end. And this is all, we are to understand from la Armstrong, about love and compassion. It takes a lot to reach that level of self-deception, but how do you keep it up in the face of what religions are really like?
Ask Madeleine Bunting. Tortured by the Ryan report one day, defending dear Mother Church the next. I would love to know how she manages that.
There’s an interesting bit of psychology research that those who get less from something requiring effort, or get nothing at all, will defend what they did as being legitimate or worthwhile to justify to themselves the amount of effort they put in.
If I recall correctly, in one study, people were asked to do some mind numbingly boring task. Some were paid $10 others something like $100. The ones who were paid $100 said they did it for the money and wouldn’t have done it otherwise. The ones paid $10 said it was an interesting task and recommended it to others. I’ll have to look up the research again….
Re: Ecumenism. Pectoral crosses were given to visiting Anglican bishops by Pope John Paul II. Some Roman Catholic critics were discombobulated by the fact that the pope would give an emblem of episcopal power to an Anglican bishop when the Catholic Church had not recognised Anglican orders.
Yes Eric, you are quite right there, and I know from personal experience that Anglicans take it all very seriously as a rule. Some of them may be in for a surprise given the relatively slack attitude of many born into Catholicism. “I am not sure what we believe about…” could only be stated by a Catholic. (Well, only ever in my experience.)
Wakefield does inadvertently bring up an interesting issue. My mother once stirred up the local Anglican parson when he came on a home visit by declaring her belief that as long as you believed in something – Christianity, Buddhism or whatever, you would be OK. Her belief was in the therapeutic and saving power of belief itself. The parson of course, disagreed.
Belief in belief. I accept that belief can have therapeutic power for some people, and that trying to pull their belief mats out from under them can be psychologically dangerous. So I don’t do it. But personally, I have always looked for a rational basis for belief, and will only believe when one of sufficient quality is provided.
Nobody believes in nothing; not even a nihilist. I have never encountered anyone who does not believe that the sun will rise tomorrow, or in a whole lot of other well precedented and empirically founded propositions. But to become a Catholic one must agree to submit oneself to the decisions of the Pope, whose pronouncements lack the ambiguity and elasticity of the Bible.
An Anglican can (selectively) believe in (some of) the Bible. But declaration of belief in all of it, even parts one has never read, rings a bit hollow. All Catholics however, must agree to submit to the Church and to accept its past and future directions, or fall into mortal sin. That to them is the price and reward of belonging.
In commanding submission, Catholicism is a bit like Islam: in both form and function.
All Catholics however, must agree to submit to the Church and to accept its past and future directions, or fall into mortal sin. That to them is the price and reward of belonging. In theory. I’m not so sure about the practise. I know many catholics who disregard this or that rule while still maintaining they’re catholics….
Er. She does realize that the whole appeal of Catholicism to these runaway Anglicans is that it doesn’t much care about women’s and gay rights, compared to the liberal Anglican church, right?
Brian, all religions tend to become what their adherents want them to be. But those Catholics you know would be a bit like my grandfather, who converted to Catholicism as the result of a visit from a priest while he was in hospital with terminal cancer. The expected result: after he died the parish priest came around to make sure his family was not too hard up, even though none of them were Catholics.
My grandfather’s intentions were good, I am sure. But the parish priest probably had his doubts, even before my grandmother sent him packing with a flea in his ear. Despite that, my grandfather probably did time in Purgatory for acedia, seeking to use the Holy Church as a means to an end, and for other sins against Faith, Hope and Charity.
Could still be there.
http://www.saintaquinas.com/mortal_sin.html
Possibly Ian. They’re not converts though.
“As Catholicism seeps back into Britain (St Thérèse of Lisieux’s UK tour this year, the Pope’s in 2010, the probable beatification of Cardinal Newman, etc),”
Denial of Catholic religious child abuse of neighbouring Ireland is mostly kept out Britain. There is no chance of it seeping in too much – as it would flood the Church to overflowing.
The plans such as the above are media-driven so as to try to bring back so-called respectability into the Catholic church. Britain,because of its near silence, would be a safer bet to kiss its imperial ground.
The pope would find it hard to show his pontifical face in the child abuse climate that now prevails in Ireland. I reckon when he goes to Britain he will take in the North of Ireland.
Marie-Therese: “The pope would find it hard to show his pontifical face in the child abuse climate that now prevails in Ireland.”
Do you think we are likely to see a popular exodus from the Catholic Church in Ireland as a result?
Ian, nope! Definitely not! Where shall they flee to, if not into the arms of their lovers – the politicians; who are themselves, I might add, mostly fierce right wing conservative Catholics. Sure, did not the last Taoiseach himself let it be known to all that he was a fervent daily mass-goer. The government is also rife with daily cra-thumpers.
Opus Dei is alive and kicking.
Besides, there is a recession on in the country and people will be seeking new hope. Alas, the church will be there as usual, to pick up the pieces. Where there is poverty – there is the church.
If atheists went into the ‘business’ of allievating poverty in the way the the church does, I expect people would be seeking in their hordes, to become atheists. Therein lies the business success and power of the Catholic church.
The third world countries are now churning out priests, akin to what Ireland was doing in the fifties and thereafter. They are being sent to Ireland to help out dwindling parishes.