Leader of Anglican Ordinariate admits interest has waned [CatholicCulture]

Leader of Anglican Ordinariate admits interest has waned


CWN - April 17, 2014

The leader of the new Anglican ordinariate in England has admitted that the number of Anglicans entering the Catholic Church has fallen short of expectations.

"We have to be honest and say that the Ordinariate has not increased as much as we hoped it could,” said Msgr. Keith Newton. He conceded that the ordinariates, created on the initiative of Pope Benedict XVI to encourage Anglicans into the Catholic Church, had not yet stirred widespread interest among the Anglican clergy. “The project was not welcomed,” he said.

Msgr. Newton suggested that members of the ordinariate “have to communicate our message more fully and with more vigor and enthusiasm” to revive interest in the project among Anglicans who hold to the traditional doctrines of Christianity.


Click here for the rest of the article:
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=21158

 

I think an issue being that a lot of even Anglo-Catholics - conservative as they may be, and even agreeing doctrinally - still don't like the idea of being subjected to the Pope of Rome. As I understand the ordinariate is not a new "Anglican Rite" or "Anglo-Catholic Church" (aka Ukrainian Catholic, Melkite, etc.) but a "special provision" of the Latin rite which could be dropped at any time. Also, I would assume some just prefer their autonomy, even if this were not in the picture.

 

The whole Ordinariate fiasco has been most sad. Ratzinger's failure to consult the Archbishop of Canterbury saddened Anglicans and embarrassed many English RCs. The press response, especially in the (RC) Murdoch press was way over the top. For example the phrase "seismic change" was used . It's also unfortunate that the Ordinariate's failure will attract so little publicity.

The whole structure, incidentally, is very top heavy: one priest to every eighteen lay person.

 

Does anyone know what the state of the American version is?

 

I have tried to incorporate this in two Wikipedia articles, one on Personal Ordinariate(s) (which also includes the American and Australian ones) and the other one which is specifically on the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham. The watchful "minders" there have been quick to delete my amendments. They do not like the truth. I will battle on, but help from fellow Anglicans in this Forum would be appreciated.

 

There are two new congregations under the ordinariate in my area (Southeastern Pennsylvania). I don't know how large they are. I think part of the problem is how diverse Anglo-Catholicism is and the ordinariates seem a little bewildered as to how to welcome one group that prefers to use the post-Vatican II mass and another that wants to do the Tridentine mass in Elizabethan English.

 

In England the Ordinariate has had little success, and most of the small numbers are in the south-east. I gather that the many of the mainstream RCs who come across them find them odd to the point of embarrassment.

 

Mainstream RCism has plenty to be embarrassed about of itself. The Anglo-Catholic churches that I've seen have continued the Catholic liturgy much better than the average RC parish.

 

Well, for what it's worth, I've read of a RC parish in Kent in the south of England where the seventy or so regular parishioners, a quiet lot, have suddenly found themselves "augmented" by a group of Ordinariate types and find themselves somewhat taken aback by what they consider to be old fashioned, even eccentric worship.

 

I'm sure genuine reverence would look very strange to those raised on Vatican II silliness. My family is RC and their churches tend to look like dentist offices and the worship is Protestant. A little ordinariate "eccentricity" can only help. Worship is not a "fashion" and the Church was not founded in the 1960's.

 

There are some beautiful RC churches here in San Diego, many in the mission revival style, but the parish nearest to my home is an ugly 1960's design. I have attended mass there with friends and honestly, you could just as easily be in a Lutheran or Methodist church. Nothing about it looks Catholic. Remove the small standing crucifix and it could be used by any Protestant church. The layout of the building is reminiscent of a community center.

 

Our local RC church is like that. Light and refreshing. My own church is a bit higher. I like both.

Incidentally the RC Cathedral in Berlin also has a low church feel to it.

 

I think that before Vatican II we were branded as heretics and condemned to the inferno ad infinitum when we died.

I was pleased that John XXIII was made a saint. Not sure about JPII.

Somehow I doubt if we'll ever see Benedict XVI aka Ratzinger sainted.

 

Baby boomers do tend to go for this sort of thing but eventually their influence will wane.

 

The RCC still considers you heretics, they're just more polite about it. Vatican II was not all bad- allowing the liturgy in vernacular language was good, but the other liturgical changes were disastrous. Thank God for those Anglo-Catholics who have preserved what real Western Christian worship looks like.

 

In the Seventies a group of Anglo Catholics made a bid to be accepted as a ,'sister church,' they thought they had achieved their object, but all turned sour when Cardinal Ratzinger sent for their leaders. They were turned down and one of the leadership, now a bishop,asked why? He was told , Anglo Catholics were ,"Bad Anglicans and would be bad Romans!"
It didn't stop most of them changing in 1994 and going as ,'Converts,'!
I admire the old man, Ratzinger!

 

Could you be more specific, please?

 

Why?

 

You know, old hippy farts.

 

No, I don't know anyone like that.