The Continuing Anglican Churchman

As my priestly ordination is fast approaching, the rector has been teaching me to say mass. I must say that I find it quite enjoyable. Timing all of the complex manual acts, and navigating the American Missal has its difficulties. Also, careful attention must be paid to the singing and proper reading of the prayers. In short, getting everything "perfect" takes dedication and concentration. With enough patience and practice, though, I should be able to offer the Holy Sacrifice in a beautiful and reverent manner one day when I am finally ordained. The Holy Mass is re-presentation to God of the one sacrifice of Christ for the sins of the world. It is first and foremost an offering to God. Thus, it should be said with the greatest dignity and solemnity.

At today's session, the rector went through the mass and let me stop him and ask questions along the way. Towards the end, though, we realized that the dominical words had been said by him over the host which was upon the corporal. Had it been consecrated? We briefly discussed personal intention vs. the intention of the Church, and related topics (which was fun in and of itself). But since we were running out of time he decided to simply consume the host. Better to just play it safe. Maybe next time we will use something else instead of a priest's host to practice with!

Here is an innovative idea: an inflatable church. Can't afford a new building? Get the inflatable church instead! Kicked out of your building by your ECUSA bishop? Buy an inflatable church, and set up across the street in protest! It even has inflatable pews and stained glass windows. It would probably be too risky to use incense inside, so it may not appeal to anglo-catholics, but for everyone else this thing might be a real problem solver.

While we are waiting for Fr. Jones to provide us with the last two installments of his "Stand Up For Jesus" travelogue, I will go say a few words about a topic that is very important: giving to support the work of the Church. On page 291 of the BCP, in the First Office of Instruction, we are taught that our bounden duty as a member of the Church is to (among other things) "...work and pray and give for the spread of his kingdom."

It is not my intention here to go over the exact details of the word 'tithe' and how it is used in the Old Testament, nor the difference in meaning between that word and 'offering'. My point is to say simply that we should worship God with our whole person and being, and bring our entire lives under the Lordship of His son, Jesus Christ. One of the most important areas in which we should do this is in our finances. In a day and age when people are so irresponsible with their money, and so self-indulgent, how much more important is it that we earnestly strive to honor God with how we use our money? When we live in such a prosperous nation, how much more important is it for us to be generous with the money that God has entrusted to us? We think nothing of spending gobs of money on little indulgences for ourselves (e.g. buying a $50 bottle of French vodka, or something like that), but many times shudder at dropping Ben Franklin into the offering plate every other week. We worry about getting our bills paid early lest our credit report be damaged, but we think nothing of slighting the maker and ruler of the universe.

The Church is a volunteer organization, and it relies on voluntary giving by members to exist. Many continuing Anglican parishes - well, many parishes in many different traditions in general - are not able to minister as they should because they lack the necessary financial support to hire additional staff, build, have outreach programs, buy necessary items, and more! Giving to causes outside of the Church (e.g. Red Cross for Katrina Relief, etc.) is important, and should not be neglected. But we should give first and foremost, I believe, to our own local parish. Giving to your parish is a powerful way of worshipping God.

I used to never give money to the Church. I always had some excuse why I couldn't give. Once in a while I would drop $20 in the offering plate and think I was so great and generous. But finally it occured to me that I was not honoring God with my finances. The background to this was that I was always short on cash, and struggling to get by - even though I was making great money in the IT industry for a while. But when I started to regularly give to the Church, in obedience to God and in love and worship of Him, a strange thing happened. Despite the fact that my pay was cut in half when I changed careers, and despite the fact that I still had the same amount of bills to pay, I was able to get ahead on my bill paying, sell more of my art, and put more and more money away into savings! Pretty amazing.

Now, I don't think we should give to God to "make it rich" (I am by no means rich, I can assure you), but I do believe that when we seek to honor and glorify God with our money that He will bless us. When we are obedient and devoted to God, we should expect His blessing. Let us remember our responsibility to provide financially for the work of the Church. Let us remember the work and expenses of our own parish, and prayerfully consider how much we drop in the offering plate each week. We are ultimately giving for God, and for His glory.

Thursday 7th April 2005

More groggily than before I rose on Thursday morning with a half-start and rushed down the street to Gordon Square at attend the beginning liturgy of the day. After Exposition of the Most Blessed Sacrament beneath the yawning fan-vaulted ceiling of Christ the King Church, and Matins sung with an intense beauty, Father Barry Swain presented another very stirring meditation on the 'architecture of the priesthood,' reminding us all of the need continually to awaken and deepen the sense of vocation to serve Our Lord in priestly life. Thursday brought a great deal more excitement for the British participants, admittedly, than for some of us from the Colonies. Perhaps it was less exciting still for those of us who are proud 'Non-Jurors' of the orthodox Continuing Church tradition. For, you see, Thursday was devoted largely to the visit to the Society of the Holy Cross of His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. In reality, for me at least, this was a bitter-sweet experience. On one hand, Archbishop Rowan, an astoundingly brilliant theologian, philosopher, teacher, and preacher, is one of the most intellectually gifted men ever to sit in the Chair of Saint Augustine. Additionally, the Archbishop is a Welshman, a true Celtic Archbishop of the British Church, the first Welshman to hold the Archiepiscopate of Canterbury for a thousand years - which thing gladdens the heart of every Welshman like myself. On the other hand, however, Archbishop Rowan has renounced Catholic Faith and Order by accepting and promoting the innovation of women's 'ordination.' More troubling, the Archbishop was once a thorough-going Anglo-Catholic, committed to the fullness of the Catholic Faith as received and practised in the Church of England, a clear sometime exponent of the theology of the Great Tradition. Some brothers of the SSC see his former allegiance to Catholic orthodoxy as a means by which he may more personally and sympathetically understand the plight of traditional Anglicans in a modernist-laden communion. Others see his abandonment of historic Catholicism as a devastating and painful betrayal. Needless to say, I greeted the occasion with very mixed feelings indeed.

From the Church on Gordon Square the long line of becassocked priests and bishops filed down the street to the conference centre at the University of London where the Archbishop was to address us. As we made our way into the auditorium a palpable sense of energy and anticipation began to fill the room. A friend and I seized front row seats, next to those reserved for high-ranking dignitaries and representatives of the SSC. I noticed once we were seated that we strategically positioned next to the only religious sisters present for the SSC gathering, the Sisters of the Holy Cross, Rempstone. Once everyone was seated, a hush fell over the crowd. Then, when all was ready, the Master General briefly addressed the group, and, a few seconds later, a tall man with incredibly bushy white hair and a thick unruly beard wearing a simple black cassock with a red cincture very briskly made his way down a side aisle and onto the stage: the audience burst into applause. Introductory remarks from the Master followed, and the Archbishop proceeded to give one of the most eloquent and engaging presentations I have ever heard in my life. A more admirable character one will never meet. Being a preacher myself, I noticed immediately the Archbishop's smooth, rich, deep basso voice which continued for over 45 minutes to give a penetrating and understandable explanation of the meaning of worship as explicated in the Epistle to the Hebrews. He tied his subject to the life and ministry of the Catholic priest with love and devotional attentiveness. +Rowan never made one verbal mistake or gaffe; his speech was absolutely flawless, his grammar perfect. He neither stumbled nor uttered a single 'er' or 'uh.' And I know the presentation had to be good because I still remember what he said. In a chameleon-like way (from the perspective of a strictly traditional Anglican), the Archbishop gave an exposition of the nature of worship and the Incarnation that could have been delivered by an Eastern Orthodox Bishop or the Pope himself - it was perfectly orthodox. The Archbishop had certainly tried to connect with his Anglo-Catholic audience, and he succeeded ingeniously. After an extensive question-and-answer period, the 104th Archbishop of Canterbury was whisked away to his awaiting car to be flown directly from our meeting to Rome in order to attend the funeral of the late John Paul II. But the Archbishop could not get away before a certain priest from Oviedo, Florida presumptuously introduced himself and shook the archiepiscopal hand. He was most gracious, impeccably kind and polite. And with that the spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion disappeared as briskly as he arrived. It appears the group as a whole was genuinely and profoundly touched by the Archbishop's generosity and grace. Some English priests after the meeting explained to me their enthusiasm by saying that Anglican Catholics in the Church of England still hold the Archbishop in the highest veneration because he is second only to the Monarch as a personification and representative of the Nation. To meet the Archbishop of Canterbury, they contended, is to meet the Ecclesial Person, the Man of the Church, just as to meet the Queen is to meet the Royal Person, the embodiment of the State. I must confess that, in the face of the Archbishop's known problems with Holy Order and other moral questions, I was not fully convinced. Perhaps that feeling naturally arises in the heart of an American whose own Church has been autocephalous from the 18th century - it more definitely arises in the heart of one whose Church's commitment to uncompromising orthodoxy caused a necessary breach with Canterbury only thirty years ago in defence of the Catholic priesthood. Having met both Archbishop George Carey and Archbishop Rowan Williams, I should assert that +Rowan is the far more formidable of the two, but I still remain unconvinced that one must be in full communio in sacris with either of them to be a genuine Anglican. If anything, my personal conviction that the measure of one's Anglicanism is determined by one's fidelity to the faith and order of the Seven Ecumenical Councils and the Undivided Catholic Church of the first millennium was only reinforced in a new and positive way by the experience on 7th April 2005. No doubt the SSC owes the Archbishop of Canterbury a debt of gratitude for his willingness to visit us, as his schedule was far more complex than he had originally thought. He left us in that government car to board an aircraft of The Queen’s Flight with the Prime Minister and the Prince of Wales to fly to the Vatican. As a result, the Archbishop was unable to sing High Mass that day and preach to us, which he had originally intended to do; but the address he gave and subsequent questions entertained for nearly two hours were a thoughtful gift to the Society of the Holy Cross, which he has known for many years. In his speech, he attempted to assure us of the importance of our vocation as Catholics in the Anglican Communion. It can safely be said that the current successor to Saint Augustine is a talented and creative theologian whose understanding of the Faith originated in time past from the Catholic milieu.

Thursday’s Noon Mass was sung at Christ the King, Gordon Square, and Father Jeremy Sheehy, SSC, Principal of Saint Stephen’s House, Oxford, preached to us in place of the Archbishop. The sermon was stimulating and given with care and concentration.

We were in for far more than we bargained in the afternoon, as our programme resumed with a symposium and conversation entitled 'The Church of Christ: Principles of Ecumenism.' Our presenters were two outspoken modernist ecumenists in the Church of England. These choices, as it was to turn out, were indeed rather curious considering the character of those participants who were seated in the audience. The Bishop of Guildford, Christopher Hill, co-chairman of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, spoke first; as this reflection goes to press, Bishop Hill is currently involved in creating the official legislation in the C of E which will permit the purported consecration of women to the Sacred Episcopate. His liberal views are well-known and unambiguous. The second presenter, Dr Mary Tanner, former secretary for the Council for Christian Unity, spoke on the matter of relations between the Anglican Communion and the Church of Rome. Bishop Hill's presentation was very academic; he clearly intended to avoid ruffling the feathers of the Anglo-Catholic constituency before him. Dr Tanner was less nebulous and sought to be outright politically-correct in her remarks. Speaking on ARCIC and the remarkable progress made between the Anglican and Roman Churches over the last four decades, she unwisely decided to give the revisionist rationale for the 'ordination' of women. She went so far as to attempt to justify the irreparable damage in ecumenical relations with Rome done in favour of the innovation of priestesses. She could not have had a more unsympathetic and delicate audience before which to make such insensitive claims. As the question-and-answer period began and continued, the good priests of SSC became more and more agitated and more and more pointed in their comments and questions. The atmosphere in the auditorium grew thick with anxiety and irritation. It was most uncomfortable. Finally, exasperated and having taken quite an unanswerable theological critique from the assembly, our undaunted revisionist, frustrated to no end but still convinced of her superior knowledge, clamoured with that self-importance which is typical of modern theological entrepreneurs, 'the ordination of women is still in the 'process of reception' - it is going to continue, it is going to happen and we might as well accept that fact now!' She might as well have thrown a bomb into the room. Priests in significant numbers rose from their seats in a dignified huff and exited the hall quietly and quickly. Some decided to stay and listen to what else was said. Still others began to protest in that quintessentially fabulous British way... some began to murmur, some began to boo, and others began to shout such succinct summaries as 'heresy!' and 'nonsense!' As Dr Tanner tried to persevere, I knew I could take no more. Feeling particularly British I blurted under my breath 'this is absurd!' and with that I rose and joined the rest of the recessional which made its way solemnly out into the street. That afternoon conference is one of the most unforgettable of my life. It was both amazingly humorous and terribly disappointing. To this day I still do not know how such persons so wholly incompatible with the Society's vision of the Faith found their way into our 150th anniversary celebration. It seems in the Church of England one can never avoid or escape controversy, even if one tries.

In the evening came the magnificent Solemn Evensong and Benediction held at Saint Alban's Church, Holborn in celebration of our SSC anniversary. Cormac Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, head of the Roman Church in England and Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, was scheduled to preach. Sadly, of course, this was not to be as the Cardinal had already arrived in the Vatican to take his rightful place in the funeral ceremonies for the deceased Pope. The Bishop of Guildford, curiously enough again, was asked to preach in the Cardinal's place and addressed the congregation on the subject of John Paul II and his ministry and legacy. The liturgy was celebrated with tremendous reverence. At the lovely champagne reception that followed Evensong and preceded Benediction, I enjoyed a thoroughly delightful encounter with Bishop Ewen Ratteray of Bermuda and his charming wife. After a rather lengthy conversation and an invitation to visit the island, I pledged that I would somehow make my way to Bermuda at some point to visit the Diocese. I am still trying to figure out how to fulfil that pledge! Then the day ended as it began, before Our Blessed Lord in the Most Holy Sacrament. The highlight of the day for me was Solemn Benediction, replete with a dozen servers and two deacons, given by my friend Bishop Edwin Barnes, the retired Bishop of Richborough. Father Daniel Clarke of Charleston, South Carolina and I knelt next to each other in the heavenly glow of the church as seemingly hundreds of candles burned around the Most Holy on the Altar. It was one of the most riveting and powerful sights I have ever been privileged to witness. I have never seen so many servers and candles in my life as
I did on the evening of 7th April - the scene was so otherworldly and so profound that I believe the most hardened opponent of Benediction could not help but be moved by the great love and adoration for Our Blessed Lord manifested in that most dignified of services. We beheld the Throne and the Lamb in the midst of the Throne. I was helplessly moved to tears as I contemplated the love of God tangible in that place, shown in sacramental sign, in the history of the parish in which I knelt and the witness for the Faith, through trial and suffering, which had been prophetically maintained there for decades upon decades. My mind floated to the great saints and confessors whose lives in that very spot had been caught up in love of the same Lord adored on that same Altar. The response that welled up in me, gratitude, was the only right one I could imagine. The next day would bring the best experience of all, the ultimate Anglican pilgrimage... Walsingham.

It seemed like a very short night indeed. I rose by 7.30 AM in order to join the rest of the brethren on a quick walk down the street to Gordon Square, only a few blocks away. I shall never forget entering the neo-Gothic church building which resides on a busy and very elegant corner in east central London. The Church of Christ the King, Gordon Square is the official headquarters of Forward in Faith United Kingdom and of Bishop John Broadhurst, replete with its own offices, library, and meeting spaces. It is a truly impressive building, but what is most remarkable about it is its architecture. I have never seen such complex and beautifully interwoven arches and columns in a church. The building is a 19th century Victorian creation erected by a strange sect that has long since disappeared - the 'Catholic Apostolic Church' founded by the Rev'd Edward Irving. This colourful charismatic sect established an amazingly elaborate liturgical and sacramental life, which in turn gave rise to the truly magnificent church building on Gordon Square. The Irvingites also created another familiar phenomenon - the dispensationalist doctrine of the Rapture. LaHaye and Jenkins of Left Behind fame owe their religion and their livelihood to a defrocked Presbyterian minister and his eccentric liturgical community. If one happens to find oneself in London at any given time, a trip over to see Christ the King is a must. To this day, the Anglican Catholics still rent the building from an Irvingite trust which owns and maintains the property. Upon arriving in the dimly-lit church with its incredibly ancient feel, all found their places in the pews and knelt before the Most Blessed Sacrament exposed on the simple Altar beneath the great canopy of windows, columns, and arches which comprise such a unique temple. It was truly breath-taking. After half an hour of silent Eucharistic adoration, Morning Prayer was sung according to the modern Common Worship rite of the Church of England. Father Barry Swain of Resurrection Church, New York City, gave a moving and very thoughtful address on the 'Architecture of the Priesthood,' combining his verbal images with those of the stunning building surrounding us. After Mattins and a short break, we assembled in the lecture hall of the University of London, just across the street the Royal National Hotel, for our first academic exercise of the Synod: the Society of the Holy Cross is very keen to combine prayer and spiritual formation with serious theological training and study. After all, the Anglican ideal of priestly ministry has always been that of the pastor-scholar. And so Wednesday and Thursday of our meeting were devoted to a conference on Christology, the Person of our Blessed Lord. Entitled, 'Who Is This Son of Man?', the conference began with an introduction by Father Houlding, the Master of the Society, and an excellent exposition of the Church's faith in Our Lord's Person by Father Jonathan Baker, Principal of Pusey House, Oxford. Father Baker was joined in a discussion session by my friend Father Martin Warner, Canon Pastor of Saint Paul's Cathedral, London. It was an illuminating conversation which dealt with the fact that the crisis currently swirling in the Anglican Communion and in western society in general is a direct result of error, Christological error regarding the Incarnation of Our Lord and Saviour. Everything from the innovation of women's ordination to the election of an unchaste man to the episcopate to the breakdown in the structure of societies at large can surely be traced to a faulty understanding of the nature of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. To summarise the discussion: in short, if we misapprehend the Incarnation, we get the Gospel and its application wrong. After another short break, we returned to the Church of Christ the King, Gordon Square, for the Noon Mass. The liturgy was celebrated with reverent dignity and solemnity according to the Common Worship rite: I was struck by the way in which the modern rite was offered with such great decorum and beauty, so unlike what we often see in modern-rite American parishes. The celebration was impeccable and the music was grand. Bishop Andrew Burnham of Ebbsfleet, one of the English Church's 'flying bishops,' gave a powerful and well-articulated sermon on the Resurrection. Never before had I seen a bishop preach with a purple biretta firmly planted on his head. After Mass, luncheon followed back in the University hall. In the afternoon, a group of pilgrims, including myself, decided to take a walking tour of the old city of London. Off the Underground at The Strand in central London, we made our way first to the National Gallery for the once-in-a-lifetime Caravaggio exhibit. After our tour of the Gallery, we started off on foot towards London Bridge. Our band of pilgrims shared a break at Saint Paul's Cathedral for a photo-op. Eventually we worked our way down the streets of old London to the eminent Anglo-Catholic Church of Saint Magnus Martyr, where we enjoyed the fantastic conflation of architectures old and new. Saint Magnus Martyr is an Wren building refurbished by that quintessential English artist Martin Travers in the early 20th century, under the auspices of the famous Catholic priest Father Fynes-Clinton. After our memorable stop, we slowly made our way back to the Hotel. At 5 PM we enjoyed Evensong again in the glowing evening light of Christ the King, Gordon Square. The incense formed a cloud which filled the entire Church - my mind was filled with the images of Isaiah 6, of the Lord in His holy Temple. Following Evensong, a special treat was held at the Church of Saint Mary-le-Strand in central London. The Society of King Charles the Martyr sponsored a Solemn High Mass according to the rite of the Laudian Liturgy, the 1637 Scottish Book of Common Prayer, celebrated by Bishop Keith Ackerman of Quincy, Illinois. The Mass in the traditional rite, in honour of Anglicanism's Royal Martyr, was moving beyond description. At the conclusion of the Mass, the relics of King Charles Stuart I of England, including the shirt and gloves he wore at his decollation, were brought out for the veneration of the faithful. The event brought to the fore the unquestioned and unbroken Catholicity of the English Church, and of our heritage as members of the living Body of Christ. Dinner and bed followed - another incredible day in the journey which was to be unlike any other...

It is my great pleasure to post over the next couple weeks the travel journal of the Rev. Fr. Chandler Holder Jones SSC (Sub-Dean of St. Alban's Anglican Cathedral - Oviedo, FL) from his trip to the SSC conference "Stand Up For Jesus" held last year in England. Fr. Jones is one of several APA priests (and one bishop) who are members of the SSC. Thank you, Fr. Jones, for sharing this with us.

++++++++++++++++++++

Tuesday 5th April 2005

I rose on the morning of Tuesday 5th April in my room in the Royal National Hotel to discover a note under my door. My luggage had finally arrived and was downstairs in the concierge office. 24 hours ago American Airlines had managed to leave my bags in Orlando while it flew me first to Raleigh and then to Gatwick. What a day yesterday had been: after discovering that my luggage had been 'left behind,' I finally managed to escape the Monday-morning panic at Gatwick by taking the number 6 Gatwick Express train to Victoria Station. By the time I arrived at Victoria, the morning hub-bub had settled down a bit. A moment's visit to the cashpoint for some desperately needed British Pounds, and the next thing you know I am in a taxi on my way to East London. Upon arrival in Holborn, I realise that I am mere seconds from the Senate House of the University of London and the British Museum. Naturally, the front desk cannot locate my name and registration. Why? My name has been listed as 'Holder-Jones' in the British way, not simply Jones. I rather like the affectation. Mercifully, I had managed to place my toothbrush and toiletries into my carry-on bag, so I could at least freshen-up before launching out for a London adventure. Clad in a raincoat and water-proof shoes, I spent that whole typically and gorgeously grey, rainy, damp, cool British Monday afternoon on my own in the British Museum. It is my first trip to the Museum, and I am simply and unabashedly awestruck. Its sheer size is enormous, and the treasures to be found within it are, to succinctly describe it, beyond imagination. Although haze and blurriness of jet-lag begin to set-in during my tour, I still remember now most distinctly the vast array of Egyptian mummies and artefacts, the massive Assyrian wall bas-relief images, the seemingly endless collection of ancient Greek vases, Roman military gear, Celtic artwork, the Rosetta Stone, the original statues of the Athenian Parthenon, an original cuneiform tablet of the Epic of Gilgamesh, the oldest Christian mosaic in Britain, dozens of Christian vestments, images, and vessels from the 2nd century forward, and the oldest artefact in the Museum, an idol over 30,000 years old. And all this having been seen, I believe I actually visited about 1/4 of the entire facility. My next trip to the UK is going to be a solid week spent just in the British Museum! After a short nap, I caught up with my dear friends Father John and Mary Klein of Baltimore for a splendid Greek dinner at a local spot across the street from the Hotel. And then Tuesday arrived...

It might help to remind the reader what my trip was all about: the Society of the Holy Cross (SSC) was founded as an institute for Anglican parish clergy in London on 28 February 1855, and was based upon a model organised by Saint Vincent de Paul in France in the 17th century. Many priests of Anglicanism's Catholic Revival have been members, and the parish work of many of its clergy has been well known. Many parishes in Britain have had nothing but SSC clergy for much of the past one hundred and fifty years, and would thus insist on the 'SSC standard' of worship, doctrine, and teaching. The SSC is the greatest legacy of the Oxford Movement, and the lasting bequest of the Catholic Movement to the Anglican Tradition.

The week of 5th April was a truly amazing week in our lives, and in world history. Pope John Paul II grew more and more ill and died three days before the Synod began. In the United Kingdom, a General Election approached and the Prime Minister went to the Palace to ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament. Millions crowded into Rome to pay homage to the Pope as world leaders rushed to his funeral on Friday. The wedding of Britain's most infamous couple, the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker-Bowles, was postponed at Saint George' s Windsor, just around the corner from our hotel, until Saturday. Just as mourning for the Pope was beginning, Prince Rainier of Monaco died. And through it all, much of Anglo-Catholicism's priestly leadership converged on a humble parish church in London. It seemed that God had designed a truly providential week for our time in old Albion.

On Tuesday morning, my luggage was swiftly recovered from the Hotel office, and once into a black suit I was straight out the door and directly headed for... a bookstore. For a little detour on the way to the parish church, which was only minutes from our Hotel by foot, two fellow American priests and I decided to take a side-tour of some lovely out-of-way shops and stores in Holborn. One bookstore proffered many theological titles too expensive and too tempting for me to buy. I believe one of us did happen to buy a book or two. In a hardware shop, one bought some simple items while another bought an authentic sign for his parish's WC. Our Holborn detour carried us through streets lined with many modern flat buildings and business complexes all built after WWII. This area of London was devastated by bombing during the War. Finally we happened upon our destination, the modest parish church nestled amongst the 60's-looking school buildings and flats of East London.

Saint Alban’s Church, Holborn, in London, was the parish church of Blessed Alexander Mackonochie, one of the first and most famous Masters of SSC and one of the pioneers of the liturgical, sacramental, and pastoral implementation of the Catholic Revival. Saint Alban’s, like much else in this section of the city, was remodelled by the Luftwaffe during the Second World War, and the only part of the Victorian neo-gothic church remaining as it was from the 19th century is the Mackonochie Chapel itself, outside the main body of the new faithfully-reconstructed church. Today the new church houses a dramatic and very modern painting portraying the glorified Christ with saints of the ancient and Anglican Churches behind the restored high Altar. Devotion to Blessed Charles Lowder, the founder of the Society of the Holy Cross, as well as to Father Mackonochie, is alive and well in that place of mystic prayer and communion, a place aptly described as one in which the veil between heaven and earth is strangely thin. People still venerate the effigy of Father Mackonochie in the Chapel, light candles of votive intention, and remain in silent reverence before the memory of that great Anglo-Catholic lover of souls. The Shrine of Father Mackonochie is surprisingly separated from the nave, found at the rear of the Church and opposite its main entrance; without some guidance, it would be easy to miss the entrance to it. I only learned upon my pilgrimage to Saint Alban's that Father Lowder, Father Mackonochie, and Father Stanton, amongst others, are buried in a parish cemetery several miles outside of the city of London. The memorial of Father Arthur Stanton, possibly the holiest curate in history of the Church of England, lies before the sanctuary on the epistle side of the nave. I was tickled and delighted to see a representation of his pet dog with him on the effigy. The church itself, so lovely and so graceful, so filled with the prayers, sacrifices and sufferings of dedicated and unwavering conscience-bound Catholics for so many years, mostly destroyed in World War II and rebuilt with costly devotion, can easily bring a person to tears. Next to Walsingham it should be regarded as the Anglo-Catholic 'mecca.' If Saint Alban's may be seen as an accurate indicator, it is certain that real Anglo-Catholicism (as opposed to the 'Affirming' variety) is living and healthy in the Church of England. Some of our readers will be pleased to know that Saint Alban's continues unabated a strong, vibrant, active, very orthodox Anglo-Catholic tradition. Although the parish, with typical British Anglo-Catholic curiosity, uses the modern Roman Rite, its liturgy is splendid: beautiful and reverent with the highest calibre of music and vesture imaginable. All in all, Saint Alban's Holborn is Christocentric, incarnational, sacramental, organic, transcendent, mystical, grace-bearing Religion at its very best. It's really Catholic.

Upon our arrival, we slowly made our way through the church to the parish hall, collected our registration packets, and found our way back into the church in time for the proceedings to begin. Hundreds of priests packed the parish church to begin the Synod - there was very little room for comfortable seating so all of us had to be quick to find a good spot. At 12 Noon the Synod programme officially began and all stood. We began to sing the Marian Anthem for Easter, the Regina Caeli, 'Joy to thee, O Queen of Heaven,' sung beautifully to the tune of 'Jesus Christ is risen today.' Imagine the thrill one instantly has upon hearing six hundred male voices all singing together with proper pitch and energetic joy. It was truly remarkable. Following the Anthem, all the Brothers of the Society present sat to hear both the Registrar and Secretary General report on the Roll, or membership, of the Society. We were first greeted by Father Howard Levett, the Vicar of Saint Alban the Martyr, Holborn. We then learned that there are currently over 1200 priests of the Society of the Holy Cross worldwide. Following the Roll and a financial report, the Synod moved to its most vital function, worship. Exposition of the Most Blessed Sacrament of Our Lord's Body and Blood ensued, with a meditation by Father Martin Warner, now Canon Pastor of Saint Paul’s Cathedral. It was a supreme privilege for me to get to know Father Warner during my 2000 pilgrimage to the Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham, when he was Administrator of the Shrine. One powerfully personal moment in the meditation came when I realised that I was kneeling next to a man so deeply absorbed in prayer that he began to cry in the midst of the love and beauty that surrounded us - it turned out that the man was the former Bishop of Papua New Guinea, who had just retired to England. At the end of Exposition, Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament was given by the Bishop of Beverley, Martyn Jarrett, a member of our Society. Bag lunches were provided for all of us as we processed outside to a sunny, warm, beautiful, spring day to enjoy our repast on the church lawn. My break was spent sitting on the ground, lunch in hand, conversing with Father Graham Canham, the Master of the Province of Wales. We discovered both our families originated from the same region of Cymru.

After lunch, the Synod proper, the Ordo ad Synodem, began. The Master-General of SSC, the Society’s head throughout the world, Prebendary David Houlding, gave a tremendous address. Then the Provincial Masters, from the USA, Wales, and Australia, addressed the Synod. These speeches were followed by the Right Reverend Geoffrey Rowell, Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe, who gave an address on the Society’s past and future entitled 'In This Sign Conquer'. Bishop Rowell is arguably the greatest living historian on Anglo-Catholicism and gave a fascinating and compelling presentation. Many expected it to be a bit 'dry' or academic, but its power made it quite dynamic and stirring. The Bishop of Gibraltar has consented to become the new Visitor of the Society consequent to the resignation of the former Archbishop of York David Hope, who has returned to parish work. After the special address, a service of Veneration of the Relic of the True Cross followed. Then at 4 PM the piece de resistance occurred: the Synodal High Mass. It was truly magnificent liturgy. Imagine all of the prelates, in silken purple and tall mitres, arrayed in flowing copes and other pontifical regalia. The music was a combination of classical sacred style and inventive (if not kitsch) contemporary settings. The Mass was celebrated with stunning red vestments according to the modern Roman Rite. The only way one could distinguish our celebration from that typically found in parishes across the Tiber was that ours was more reverent, more tasteful, and closer to the rubrics of the Missal! The Mass was concelebrated by the Master General, the Provincial Masters, and all Local Vicars of the Society. Our preacher was the Right Reverend Keith Newton, SSC, the Bishop of Richborough, and successor of my friend Bishop Edwin Barnes, whom I first met in 1992 while studying at Oxford. The celebration of the Mass was profound and incredibly moving - the deepest emotions, gratitude, wonder, peace, thanksgiving, welled-up as I approached the Blessed Sacrament at Communion and received a holy card commemorating the event. 150 years of love, dedication, priestly self-sacrifice and devotion were perfectly expressed in the postcommunion hymn:

In our day of thanksgiving one psalm let us offer
for the saints who before us have found their reward;
When the shadow of death fell upon them, we sorrowed,
But now we rejoice that they rest in the Lord.

In the morning of life, and at noon, and at even,
He called them away from our worship below
But not till his love, at the font and the altar,
Had girt them with grace for the way they should go.

These stones that have echoed their praises are holy;
And dear is the ground where their feet have once trod;
Yet here they confessed they were strangers and pilgrims,
And still they were seeking the city of God.

Sing praise then, for all who have here sought and here found him
Whose journey is ended, whose perils are past:
They believed in the Light; and its glory is round them,
Where the clouds of earth's sorrows are lifted at last.

The official 150th Anniversary Banquet of SSC was held at the Imperial Hotel, just down the street from the Royal National. The facility, named the 'Elizabeth Room,' was spacious and yet packed to capacity as we socialised and conversed for a solid hour or more before dinner. The champagne was excellent and abundant. At the dinner table I was privileged to enjoy the company of several priests from all over the world: to my left was an American priest from Denver, Colorado, on my right, an English priest from Devonshire. Most of our dinner conversation addressed the recent history of the SSC, the abortive effort in the mid-1990's to erect a Roman Province of the Society, the ongoing dilemma regarding the effort to introduce bishopesses into the Church of England, and the seemingly-hopeless divisions of the Continuing Church in the USA. My English and Australian dinner companions were visibly amused by my description of our American liturgical practice centred on the Book of Common Prayer, which thing they find very quaint and antiquarian - you see, most Anglo-Catholics worldwide use either modern alternative service books issued by the various provinces of the Anglican Communion or the modern Novus Ordo Missae of the Roman Rite. They seemed fascinated yet befuddled by our insistence on using the BCP! My English colleague suggested that we should strike up an arrangement for altar and pulpit exchange - he recommended that I should come back to the UK and serve in his parish with him for a duration, and then he should come to Oviedo to serve with me at Saint Alban's Cathedral. His was a brilliant idea. Perhaps we may still make those plans someday. Dinner concluded with toasts to the Queen, the Archbishops, the Church, our respective nations, and detailed stories about them all. By the way, the food was actually delicious, contrary to what many expect of English food. It was one of the most memorable meals of my life, and all for the most positive of reasons.

After dinner, two Britons, an Australian, a Canadian and myself all trekked off for a walk and then a pint at the local pub. Pimms and lemonade (real UK lemonade) followed beer. After more conversation lasting at least another hour, I finally made it back to my room - exhausted. As I lie on my bed, I can't help but think: 'so much has happened, and it's only the first day - how tired will I be by this time tomorrow?!'

CHJ+

Here is a picture of the former Christ Church (Episcopal) in downtown Baltimore. It is an absolutely stunning church that has three Tiffany windows, and other stained glass windows imported from England. There are huge wood carved angels going down each side of the nave up near the clerestory windows. The pulpit is intricately carved with all of these tiny, medieval looking figures. The floor has intricate mosaics all over it. It is a masterpiece of a building. Apparently it was once pretty anglo-catholic. My former spiritual director who was quite spikey used to preach there every once in a while when he was a military chaplain. The church's rector at the time, I understand, eventually went to Rome after ECUSA began ordaining women, but not after letting the congregation die, and running through the various endowments the church had by constantly throwing lavish parties. My feeling on priests like that: I don't care how "orthodox" they are, or how anglo-catholic they are... who needs lazy people like them. I presume this priest - now a Roman priest, as he was never married - is presently busy destroying some Roman Catholic parish somewhere out there. Eventually the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland sold the building in the 80's.

It is now called the "New Refuge Deliverance Cathedral", and it is completely falling apart. Quite sad. I guess they do not have the money to properly maintain the building. Honestly, I don't know why groups like these buy buildings like this when they can't maintain them! So year after year it just continues to rot. The most intriguing thing about the group there now is that they use all of this catholic terminology for their staffs' titles, and their pastor is called: "Her Eminence: Archbishop Naomi DuRant". They even make up such interesting titles as "co-Archdeacon". I can only figure that the "archbishop" must have an Anglican or Roman background, even though the church itself was organized as a Holiness church. Anyway, it all seems pretty weird to me... but what do I know.

Maybe one day churches like this will become Anglican churches once again, and the Holy Sacrifice will once again be offered on the altars within these grand edifaces. Maybe one day we will be able to buy back buildings like this in order to minister to people in the cities. But until then, they will continue to sit and decay.

An interesting little article on Zenit today about whether or not deacons (in a seminary setting) should serve in other liturgical roles at mass. This is intersting to me as a deacon at a small parish, where I sometimes have to act as a server at the late mass. The professor who addressed the issue says that deacons should not serve in any other capacity, but that other seminarians should be used as lectors since they have already been instituted in those offices.

All of this got me thinking about the idea of "minor orders" in Anglicanism. The 'minor' orders were: porter, exorcist, acolyte, and sub-deacon; the 'major' orders are deacon, priest, and bishop. The Roman Church has retained something of this, as they have specific rites that institute people as lectors, and acolytes, but I think that is all they have. We Anglicans seem to have maintained the tradition of sub-deacons, but it seems to be seen as a purely liturgical role. I wonder if there was ever a movement in the anglo-catholic tradition to bring back the each of the seven offices, or if we would have something to gain by doing so? Many times it is the same men who serve in the various roles at mass - right down to collecting the offering plates. So why not have a rite where they are "set apart" for their role, and where we pray for God's to give them grace for their work and ministry?

Last night when my wife and I got back from church for the feast of the Epiphany, we were just kind of lazing around watching some tv, and we came across this incredibly idiotic NBC program, that is apparently new, called "Book of Daniel". It is about a middle aged episcopal priest who lives with his wife and family in a small, wealthy suburban town. This show is a real piece of work. Let's see... in this episode we learned: the wishy-washy priest is addicted to prescription meds; his son is openly homosexual and is in love with a guy in the choir; his father - who is the diocesan bishop - is having a clandestine affair with a woman because his wife has dementia; one of his vestryman's wife (also a neighbor) is a racist; his daughter is pot-head; another church "family" is openly lesbian (oh, but they just broke up - plot twist!); and all of the older women on the show get toasted on martinis all day long. The most ridiculous thing of all? "Jesus" makes cameo appearances and talks to the priest giving him counsel. For example, when one of the priest's sons goes off one night to spend time with his girlfriend, the priest suspects that some hanky-panky is going to go on. As he watches his son skateboard away, "Jesus" wanders by and they talk about it. Jesus' words are "Well, boys will be boys". There's also a Roman Catholic priest on the show who has mob connections and is trying to use them to help the Episcopal priest build a Christian school or something weird like that. This show is offensive in so many ways. From an artistic perspective, the acting is awful, and the writing is banal. Everyone mumbles - especially the Jesus character. I wonder if any mainline episcopal bishops have come down hard on this show? It doesn't make their church look good at all. Actually, I guess it doesn't make any ministerial family look good. Anyway, it was the first - and LAST - time I will waste time watching that trash. It's too bad that this is how Anglicanism gets mainstream exposure. Why not do a drama about an episcopal priest that is positive?

Yesterday a few of us APA and REC clergy got together over lunch to discuss our upcoming joint choral evensong service. It reminded me to, once again, suggest that some you all try this. If your parish is not doing this with other continuing churches in your area, you need to think about trying it out. It has been a really edifying experience for us. We get together once a quarter - sometimes more - and have joint choral evensong services, with preaching, and followed by a reception afterwards. The responsibilties of the liturgy are divided up amongset the clergy, and the location varies each time. It has been a great way to build community, discuss new ministry opportunities, discuss starting new missions, and brainstorm about strengthening older parishes, etc. It has also allowed us to share prayer concerns with each other (as clergy). Sometime in the not-too-distant future we will be having a joint communion as well, and we have also talked about having a joint clergy retreat sometime in Lent. There are infinite possibilities. Worshipping together in Word and Sacrament is one of the main ways to bring organic unity about. Once again, I heartily recommend you try it!

There is wonderful book published by Ignatius Press called Parochial and Plain Sermons which are sermons preached by John Henry Newman while an Anglican priest. One of the nice things about this expensive little book (about $70.00 new) is that it is arranged according to the traditional BCP lectionary, so those of us who use the old prayer book can read his sermons as the Church year progresses. It also contains "plain" sermons that are topical in nature. There are many things that could be said of this book and how useful and interesting it is.

This past Sunday, after preaching for the Feast of the Circumcision, I came home and decided to read the Newman sermon for that day to see what he had to say. His topic was the "Ceremonies of the Church". He argues that while Paul and the early Church clearly did not believe the Old Testament Law and rituals to have any value in terms of adding to our salvation in Christ, they clearly had a great deal of respect for the rituals of the Jewish "church" - especially circumcision. Custom was a sufficient reason to maintain them in most cases. Paul circumcised Timothy himself, shaved his head because he made a vow, and more. Jesus did the same thing, of course - paying the Temple tax, telling people to offer the sacrifices commanded by Moses, etc.

Newman uses this as a jumping off point in discussing the ceremonies of the Church. Quite often people ask: "Why do we bow at the Holy Name? Why do we kneel at the Holy Communion?" Because ceremonies and actions like that are not "in the Bible", they either remain indifferent to them or deride them. The most extreme example of this is the unsound teaching held by some extreme Reformed Christains known as the "regulative principle in worship." Simply put, this corrupt doctrine teaches that worship can only consist of things that are positively commanded for corporate worship in scripture. This teaching is based on a faulty understanding of the nature of revelation and the scriptures. There are many things that we prohibit that scripture is completely silent on, such as suicide. Yet no one would argue that suicide is okay. And there are many things that we do that scripture is silent on. We find out about these things in other ways (e.g. Paul: through nature). Newman says that the Bible gives us the spirit but that the Church must provide the body in which that spirit is to be lodged. It tells us what to believe and aim at, but not how to do it. Scripture talks about meeting for prayer, but it doesn't say where, or for how long, or what to pray for, or who should pray first, etc. The wisdom of the Church in her tradition, and human experience guided by God's Holy Spirit tells us these things.

Newman says that when people attempt to worship God in the excessively "spiritual" way described above that they very often end up not worshipping God at all. The mindset that goes, "Why pray at mass when I can stay home and pray in bed?" in most cases eventually leads one to neglect of prayer altogether! But the ceremonies of the Church give flesh and blood to the biblical admonitions on prayer and worship. They give them form, and help us remain faithful to the teachings of scripture and to God. Newman says that when "profane persons scoff at our forms" we can say: "These forms, even were they of mere human origin (which learned men say is not the case, but even if they were), are at least of as spiritual and edifying a character as the rites of Judaism. Yet Christ and His Apostles did not suffer these latter to be irreverently treated or suddenly discardeed. Much less may we suffer it in the case of our own; lest, stripping off from us the badges of our profession, we forget there is a faith for us to maintain, and world of sinners to be eschewed."

Normally I am not one to be interested in the whole creation vs. evolution debate. I find that the most important parts of the creation story are not scientific, but rather philosophical and theological. It is those ideas that I ponder from time to time - not whether or not the earth is "old or "young". Still, one cannot listen to NPR, or read the newspapers today without finding out about the whole "intelligent design" debate going on in schools and universities, and it is those scientific questions that are always discussed. Political questions, such as with the separation of Church and State - are also raised, but they do not concern me here.

Recently I was listening to the Diane Rehm Show on NPR ("Nationalist" Public Radio, as they say), in which she took on this topic. It was quite interesting. She had about about three guests, one of whom was the president of Stanford Medical School. Numerous points were raised during the program. One was that "science is under attack" in America, and that there is a growing "anti-science" movement. Another was that religion does has a place in public life, but that it should not overlap with science. Overall, listening to the guests discuss the issues underscored how there are more important foundational questions and assumptions that are not even part of the debate.

First, scientists (When I say "scientists" in this post I am thinking of those on the DR Show that day in particular) who oppose intelligent design seem to be annoyed that people other than scientists are daring to probe the questions of human origins and to take part in the debate at all, despite their platitudes about religion being a part of public life. What they need to understand is that there are fields other than science that have an interest in human origins, so they should not be surprised that people of faith are trying to see how the two overlap and relate to each other. It would be like a theologian just flatly writing off any insights that science may bring to the table regarding ethics. Most fields of study overlap at some point. To deny that, or severely downplay it, is not very accurate or intellectually honest. These scientists need to seriously acknowledge the insights that people from other fields bring to the table, and not be offended when others outside of their field join in the debate.

Second, these scientists clearly have little to no philosophical training. Yet the debate is to a great extent a philosophical one, at least as much as it is religious and scientific. The scientists are not aware of some very basic philosophical issues at stake, such as the problems of inductive reasoning raised by David Hume, the nature of evidence, and more. Hume undermined the validity of scientific reasoning by stating that there is no reason to suppose that the future will be like the past. So scientific theories are really just that: theories. Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, brings to light the mercurial nature of scientific progress in general, and how science is not a long, organic development, but "progresses" in radical leaps and bounds, with new theories many times completely eradicating a previously held theory or idea. They also presume that scientists are completely unbiased in their work. But all people are biased. A very basic philosophical principle is that there are no brute facts. All that we experience is filtered through our presuppositions and assumptions. Scientists have been known to fake results of studies, be bought off (e.g. the people at NIH a year or so ago who were being paid by drug companies, and the South Korean cloning fraud recently uncovered), and bring their own personal convictions into their work (e.g. Alfred Kinsey). So their false neutrality, and their complete ignorance of hermeneutics is highly problematic. Also, the scientists presume that because there is supposedly a majority consensus on traditional evolution that it is therefore true. This is known as the "tyranny of the 51%" - something is right or allowable because of more people believe it. How would they like it if we approached their other theories and discoveries that way? Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't necessarily mean that it is true. I could go on, but you get the point. The debate would be much more productive if they had some people trained in the philosophy of science involved.

If these two items - openness to the insights from other areas of study, and acknowledgment of the philosophical issues at stake - were brought into the debate it would be much more productive, I think. These scientists can whine and complain about a so-called anti-science movement (I really don't see one myself), but they need to realize that science cannot give us all of the answers in life. Everyone else is smart enough to realize that, it seems. Just because one can mix chemicals, has the periodic table memorized, or can remove a spleen doesn't mean that he or she has an olympian knowledge of the world.