|(L to R) Fr. Foote, Msgr. Steenson, Mr. Freeman, Bishop Crosby, Msgr. Kroetsch (chancellor).|
MONSIGNOR JEFFREY STEENSON, ORDINARY of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter, visited the parishioners of The Sodality of St. Edmund, King and Martyr earlier this week. During the celebration, the small Anglican Use community was welcomed into the Deanery of St. John the Baptist, which brings together the various Anglican Use parishes and communities in Canada. As part of his visitation, Monsignor Steenson joined Mr. Gary Freeman from St. Edmunds, for a courtesy visit to the Diocesan Chancery. Father Bill Foote, who has been providing Sunday Mass for the community at St. Patrick’s Parish in Cambridge on Sunday mornings, was also present. The community moves forward slowly but surely!
From the "Heart to Heart" page of the Diocese of Hamilton, Ontario.
Hat tip to Gary Freeman
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.ReplyDelete
So this new liturgy that Calgary gets to use, how is it different from Rite I of the BDW? I cannot seem to find a text of this new approved liturgy.ReplyDelete
It has not been posted on St. John the Evangelist website. Their bulletin has the Liturgy for Sunday & Holy Days but Sunday's has not been posted. Don't know if it will be now that someone let the word out. Don't understand the big secret, people will find out. If they are going to play the ISPY game with this new improved liturgy what's the big deal? Their does seem to be a sensitivity on the part of the Ordinariates like they are above criticism. Not a good way to go!Delete
My understanding is that this is not a final version, and so it is not being released to the general public so that when the final version (editio typica) is released it is not then competing with this ad experimentum version. As this is only the order of Mass that is being used in a select number of Ordinariate parishes, without propers, it cannot be considered final. I would say that the fact that this newly released Ordo Missae is being given "test runs" in a few parishes shows a willingness to hear and respond to critiques.ReplyDelete
However, when the liturgy is actually celebrated people will be able to know the text and critique it, as you noted. Once people see the liturgy, there is no way to keep copies of the text from being transcribed and passed around. The "not competing" with final text does not compute unless you search everyone leaving church for copies or recordings and erase everyone's memories. People will compare it to the final text. The only thing they gain is that they spring the provisional text on people without them able to critique it in advance, so that the faithful have no say in advance, but can only do so after the fact, limiting how much they can affect the final draft.Delete
Edmond, I think that if people are asked not to share the new texts and explained why, they will comply.Delete
And thank you, Mr Cavanaugh, for your wise explanation.
I can hardly recall having been censored in my comments ever before ;-) But no offence, I'm sure it was for a good reason. All the best from a complete outsider (yet a great enthusiast of what you do) from across the pond.
So even the other Anglican use parishes are to be kept in the dark during the revision process? Pardon me, but this appears to be really limiting how much input the laity has if they are so requested. It appears that they want to be able to say that they had the laity's input whilst having as few of the laity involved. This secrecy and minimalization of laity involvement will make some conclude that the process is a show for public consumption only and that they already have a result in mind. If people complain, they will say that the people's input is was brought the final draft about. They will blame the people for any unwelcome result. Being the offspring of a convert and a revert to the RCC, I had seen that type of game by RC clergy plenty of times. Every time a RC bishop ahem renews his cathedral we see this happen. I hope and pray that the ordinariate leadership is not engaging in this type of farce, but given especially regular RC clerical involvement in this first draft, that suspicion comes readily to mind. I hope I am wrong.ReplyDelete
@gotfryd: sorry about the censoring. I was asked to pull the link. I should have edited instead of deleting, but was in a rush. Please do feel welcome to post.ReplyDelete
@edmond: "the process is a show for public consumption only and that they already have a result in mind." Actually, there was not supposed to be any public awareness outside of the parishes involved. It was a failure to communicate the desire that an edited version of the parish notes be posted online, without reference to the new version of the Ordo Missae, that led to it's existence coming into wider public knowledge. One person's "secrecy" is another's "privacy". However, I think this incident does make clear that despite some dabbling in online communication, the Ordinariate administration really doesn't understand how in the contemporary age, everything goes viral pretty much as soon as it hits the light of day. It would have been better to have had a press release before the selected parishes began using the liturgy stating what was happening and why.
I suspect, given the tight budget and limited staff of the Ordinariates that use was limited to a few parishes so that there would not be an overwhelming number of comments and critiques to sift through. There does seem to have been some care to attempt to diversify which parishes were selected (St. John's-Church of Canada, OLW Houston-Pastoral Provision) but a better selection would have included a formerly USA Episcopal parish and a former TAC parish.
I understand the limited number of parishes now, but this is public worship. It is not anyone's privacy. It is going to be the public worship of dozens of parishes. It is not the privacy of the ordinariate leadership, such say the disciplining of a cleric would involve said clergyman's privacy. The public worship of the Church catholic is public, not the private actions of the clergy. No one's privacy is involved. They can restrict who they take comments from, but why hide the texts from everyone else unless they are playing that RC farce. By the way our local continuing church is still looking for a priest. We only get Mass every so often. Other times we get morning prayer.ReplyDelete
Well, as I stated previously it is a mistake to do it this way. Limited use - yes but not making it available to read on the Ordinariates sites with 'comments' OFF would be better. At least let the people see the direction it is being taken. IMNSHO it smacks of a cover-up or at the very least another Pope Paul VI NOVUS ORDO debacle. We all know how well THAT turned out. The current Roman Usage is much improved but is still not being celebrated properly by the clergy. Truth, Holiness, Beauty ~ I always experienced this in the pre-Vatican II High Mass and in the Anglican High Mass whether in Latin or English. The Pauline Liturgy still lacks Holiness. It has definitely improved in the 'Truth' arena and although there has been instances of 'Beauty' it is still too few and far between.ReplyDelete