From the UK’s best Catholic weekly, The Catholic Herald, comes this news.
Archbishop calls off Methodist ordinations
By David V Barrett on Wednesday, 25 May 2011
The controversial proposed ordination of Methodist ministers in Liverpool’s Metropolitan Cathedral in July has been called off.
On the advice of the Vatican Archbishop Patrick Kelly of Liverpool has withdrawn the invitation he gave to the Methodist church last year.
In a statement last week the archbishop said he had always recognised that “the occasion would be a symbol”.Given “the iconic reality of the Metropolitan Cathedral far beyond Merseyside it would be watched, interpreted, scrutinised quite properly by many. And symbols are dangerous things; they can explode,” he said.
“Every pattern of ordination known to me is at the service of communion and an occasion for profound renewal of the most personal, hidden demands of discipleship. Spotlights, controversy, fear of misinterpretation undermine the prayer and discipleship into which the Spirit would lead us,” Archbishop Kelly said.
The proposed ordination service was roundly attacked by Catholic bloggers earlier this year. One called it “sacrilege”, while others criticised it for the confusion it would bring.
“It might result in people who protest against Catholic truth… conducting a service in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament in whose presence they don’t believe,” Ben Trovato wrote on the blog Countercultural Father. He continued: “It might lead people to imagine some equivalence between Methodism and the One True Church founded by Christ.”
Archbishop Kelly gave permission for the ordination service last autumn when he was approached by the Rev James Booth, chairman of the Liverpool Methodist District.
Methodist ordinations take place in conjunction with the annual Methodist Conference. Buildings of other denominations are often used because the Methodist have fewer large churches of their own.
But over the last few months, while convalescing following his hip replacement surgery, Archbishop Kelly said he had “time to reflect” on his decision.
“I found myself often wondering if what I had encouraged was inappropriate at this time and a possible scandal in the original meaning of that word, a stumbling block for an ordination and for the ecumenical journey.” [That’s twice with the “ecumenical journey” line. BTW… “ordination” implies the conferral of “orders”. Methodists don’t have Holy Orders.]
He said he was “not entirely surprised” when learning that “this was the judgment of the Holy Father’s Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity in their interpretation of the principles set out in the ecumenical directory of that same Pontifical Council”. [So… reflection and the input from two dicasteries of the Holy See.]
Sadly, he said, he would have to withdraw the invitation. “I recognise that this decision will bring pain to some, relief to others, and confusion to many. [I understand the points about pain or relieft. But confusion? It seems fairly clear: it is not going to happen.] I am very aware that it gives rise to very practical problems for the Methodists only two months before their ordinations,” he said. [Doesn’t the SSPX use big tents? Is there no auditorium available in or near Liverpool?]
“I can only apologise for any drift for which I am responsible and pledge that I will continue to be as faithful as I have for all the nearly 50 years of my life as a priest to the ecumenical journey to which the Second Vatican Council committed every Roman Catholic,” he said. [Thrice.]
Mr Booth said he had been delighted when Archbishop Kelly had agreed to the ordination “in the glorious building that is the Metropolitan Cathedral”.“There had been careful conversation about how the Methodist ordination service could appropriately and properly be held in the cathedral, honouring and respecting both Roman Catholic and Methodist tradition and understanding, while at the same time affirming the ecumenical journey that we share and the fact that the destination of that journey is not yet reached,” he said. [Four times so far. “ecumenical journey” seems a favorite phrase.]
“To say that I am disappointed that this decision has had to be taken would be an understatement, but it is a decision that I, and the Methodist church, must respect and understand,” he continued.
Referring to Archbishop Kelly as “a colleague and friend” he said he knew it was “a decision he has not taken lightly, but under that discipline of belonging that, as Methodists, I hope we understand”.
The Methodist ordinations will now take place in the Anglican cathedral in Chester. [Doesn’t that make more sense? Isn’t there a more natural relationship there?]
One of those who had been due to be ordained in the Metropolitan Cathedral, Mark Rowland, said in his blog that the withdrawal of the invitation “reflects the rather colder wind that is now blowing for our ecumenical dialogues and relationships”. [Frosting the road of the ecumenical journey?]
He said: “The 21st century will look very different to the 20th in that regard and it is perhaps regrettable that we did not seize more fully the opportunities that were then available but are now fast slipping away, if they have not already gone.
“If this can be a wake-up call to us all as to the urgency of the ecumenical task then it has the possibility to be a blessing, but I suspect it may simply be a sign of what is to come.” [It’s a journey, after all.]
Archbishop calls off Methodist ordinations
We had a discussion about a similar situation in the case of the parish priest in Texas who was going to allow a Jewish community to use the parish church for services. That resulted in a withdrawal of the invitation.
I agree completely that we are, as a Church, committed to ecumenism. We have to be. But we should be committed to the right kind of ecumenism. It might be good to review, along with all the other things written about ecumenism over the last forty years or so Pius IX’s Mortalium animos.
I am not against the generous occasional lending of our churches for the services of other Christian groups, so long as what is done is not out of keeping with the sacred character of the place and its meaning. Say, for example, some Coptic Christians lose their church because of a fire. I don’t know where the line must be drawn, but… an “ordination”?
What do you think?
Does letting other groups use our churches bring those groups closer to the Catholic Church?
Does such a move break down our own Catholic identity?
Does it help or hurt ecumenism?
Chose your answer and then add a comment in the combox.
