Rorate Caeli

Is this what this Anglican Patrimony thing is all about?

As it is known by now, it is foreseen that the Holy Father will establish the Personal Ordinariates for Catholics of Anglican Patrimony in the United States and Australia on the first days of the year of Our Lord 2012. Our best wishes for these brethren in their structures - may they one day be shining lights of what is right and proper and beautiful, for gloriam plebis tuae Israel...


  1. Yes! I hope to have "Once in Royal David's city" sung first in next year's Ordinariate Christmas service.

  2. I never thought I'd say this, but us Latin Rite Catholics have a lot to learn from the Anglicans/Anglo-Catholics/Ordinariate folk: In terms of English liturgies, they have a good 420 year head start on us.

    Of course, those who believe Latin liturgies to be vastly superior will take that with a grain of salt, but with the overwhelming majority of Latin Rite Catholics celebrating Mass in the vernacular, we might as well take a few pointers on how to do it well...

  3. Off topic question - Will Australian Ordinariate be established on 1st of January 2012 too?

  4. Latin Catholics can learn much from the Anglicans on what "things of beauty" have been preserved by the Anglican Communion and may I say the post Vatican II Roman Church mindlessly threw away. In this sense Catholic continuity lived in Anglicanism and are now being restored to its proper place in the Catholic Church. These expressions of Anglican spirituality has its real roots in the Catholicism of the undivided Church.

    However the "Anglican patrimony" as understood by the Holy Father Benedict XVI is not JUST THE SPIRITUALITY AND LITURGIES of pre Reformation England but also those that have developed in and after the Reformation. Despite what Traditional Catholics think of Thomas Cranmer, the prose of the Book of Common Prayer is extremely beautiful and cannot be considered inferior to the Latin.

    Thus the Pope has deemed it worthy to bring these expressions into full Catholicity and as such no Roman Catholic in obedience to the Pope can consider these inferior.

    Thus in a liturgical rite like Evensong, we feel that we have heard what Heaven sounds like.

    Our Lady of Walsingham, we thank thee for interceding that these things of beauty are restored in our Holy Catholic Church!

    All ye holy men and women of England and Wales, pray for

    All ye Catholic martyrs of England and Wales, pray for us.

    St Augustine of Canterbury, pray for us.

    Blessed John Henry Newman, pray for us.

  5. P.K.T.P.7:56 PM

    The Book of Divine Worship, approved by Rome in 1983, contains the Mass text for the only Anglican Use so far allowed in Article III of Anglicanroum Cœtibus, 2009. Unfortunately, the Mass there is taken not from the traditional Anglican Prayerbook of 1928 but from the vastly inferior American prayerbook of 1979. Even worse, the Bugnini Offertory is intruded and in non-sacral English, thereby causing a linguistic discontinuity with the rest of the text: God is a Thou, then he becomes a You in the Offertory, and then He returns to Thou status after their Offertory.

    The Bugnini Offertory is Protestant in tone, Protestant in spirit, Protestant in the intention of the heretics who formulated it, although not in the intention of Holy Church, and it is open to a Catholic meaning, even if this is not the most obvious meaning. Where is the Divine Victim? Anyway, it is a blight upon the Liturgy of the Roman Church.

    The good Fr. Christopher Phillips did not want the Bugnini Offertory, and I believe he favoured insertion of of the Offertory from our 1962 Roman Mass, but in sacral English. This was disallowed by Rome in 1983.

    Rome has decided that a committee will soon be formed to revise the 1983 texts. It will sit, apparently, for at least three years (according to a statement of Msgr. Burnham of the English Ordinariate). I think that the 'real' Offertory--that of the Latin Mass--will be included at least as an option, and that the 1979 American prayerbook readings might be changed to the 1662 English readings. We shall see. There is also a plan to consider a TAC Mass text for outside the U.S.A., and this would be a much better text than the American Anglicans have.

    The liturgical problem should have been solved BEFORE,not after, formation of the Ordinariates. But there is nothing more we can do now but pray on this. As for how the TAC has been treated in all of this, I can only weep. But Bishop Robert Mercer, C.R., the TAC bishop in (but not of) England, will be crismated and received into the Ordinariate in England on 7th January coming.

    The Australian Ordinariate will come after 1st January, some time in the new year. We hope for a Canadian one as well. Archbishop Thomas of Toronto likeley doesn't want one, but there are signs that Rome does.

    Merry Christmas!

    Peter Karl T. Perkins

  6. Unfortunately, The Anglicans suffer from the very same postmodernist cultural barbarism as the new catholic church, liturgically and pastorally. The modern Anglican liturgy would be condemned by Cranmer no doubt as would the presence of women priests, bishops and sodomite clerics. New catholicism is only a bare step away from those ungodly politically correct additions to its already fabricated protestantised liturgy.

    While the nine lessons and carols are very beautiful in their own right as are many aspects of traditional Anglican spirituality they can never be equated with orthodox Roman Catholic sprituality which practiced with full and open heart is unequalled by any man-made religion. Truly Traditional Roman Catholics have thrown away nothing that is of worth to their Faith: this is why we have to be viglant and resist the modernists in Rome who want to destroy what we have managed to preserve with their hybridist mentality. Some of the claims made here are specious at best and downright ignorant at worst. These are the toxic seeds of liberal modernism manifesting themselves once again.

  7. Rev Daniel Hesko2:09 PM

    All most all of the so called anglican patrimony is pre-reformation Catholic. Check out Cramners prayerbook, prayer after prayer is from the old missal and divine office of Catholic Church of the time.I think the Patrimony that we must discover is our own.

  8. I agree with Peter that the BODW has a major flaw which a lot of our PECUSA brothers and sisters know, the fact that the 1979 American BCP was made a Roman Catholic prayer book.

    However the Eucharistic service in the 1928 BCP is still Protestant. Mere removal of the Cranmerian Eucharistic prayers won't make it Catholic. What needs to be done is to probably use the prayers from the English Missal which are faithful sacral English translations from the Old Mass.

    While some Traddie Roman Catholics may say this is in itself is a modern 19th Century Oxford Movement invention, (why not just go Sarum?!) we have to remember that the Tractarians and their descendants are part of the spirituality that developed as a response to the Anglican Church losing its Reformed and Catholic via media. Rightfully so the Tractarians chose the Catholic side of the road! This is even if Anglicans and Catholic liturgists agree that these books while used in many Anglican churches weren't authorised and so aren't part of the "patrimony"

    But that is bollocks as the English would have it. The "patrimony" refers to the prayer expressions of groups of Anglicans and not any decision made in Rome and/or Canterbury!

    This problem reappeared when Bishop Chartres of London disallowed the new translation of the Roman Mass. But even if canonists on both sides of the Tiber agree, the lay faithful and their Anglo Catholic clergy are likely to ignore the bishop. And in true Church of England fashion, Bp Chartres can't do anything!

    Thus it is imperative that the Anglo Catholic Missals (once vetted by Rome) be used as a legit option in the Ordinariates, together with the Mass of Paul VI and the Old Mass and whatever Mgr Burnham and Rome come up as the normative liturgy of the Ordinariate.

    And "Truly Traditional Roman Catholics have thrown away nothing that is of worth to their Faith'

    is correct but "Traditional Roman Catholics" are part of the communion of Catholics, Latin, Greek, Oriental, Coptic and Anglican Ordinariate, under the care of the Roman Pontiff.

    So instead of SSPX like triumphalism and schismatic tendencies, they should rejoice that the old things of beauty have been recovered!

  9. "So instead of SSPX like triumphalism and schismatic tendencies..."

    Irrational assumption being made there.

    Western Latin Rite Catholics have a liturgical tradition second to none and do not need to search elsewhere for recompense of any kind. While one can well-appreciate the aesthetics of other traditions they actually carry little of any value to traditional Roman Catholic praxis. It is complete in itself. This is neither triumphalist nor schismatic thinking. The Latin tradition has its roots in Apostolic times. It is complete in itself - liturgically alone this has been guaranteed by papal and conciliar decrees.

    In a church composed of various disparate groups :- Neo-Cats; Charismatics; Focolare; Opus Dei; NO etc., etc., plus Anglicans it is doubtful to what extent Latin Rite Roman Catholics have anything much in common except the assurances of a post-conciliar church built on the quicksands of postmodernist novelties, endless changes together with increasing liturgical and pastoral chaos. Moreover, this papacy has little time left to run. What will follow is not a thought for the faint of heart.

    There is no triumphalism in watching the church, so recently united and robust, liturgically and pastorally imploding. If there is any schismatic thinking to be found at all then we need look no further than the increasing numbers of bishops, presbyters & lay who totally ignore papal directives and who have reinvented their version of the post-conciliar new catholic faith.

    While not an SSPX member myself nor sedevacantist, for that matter, I can well comprehend why most of The Confraternity want nothing to do with this Pandora's Box of destruction and ruin.

    I shall continue to enjoy The Kings College Choir for what it is as I do the Anglican musical tradition but to consider it has something, however meagre, to offer Latin Rite Roman Catholicism is entirely fallible thinking. It certainly does not.

    In fact, it is quite shocking that Anglicans are being offered a very apologetic and wan form of the faith in this Ordinariate. It is coloured mainly by compromises characteristic of post-conciliarist ecumenism and it does almost nothing to restore all things in Christ. On the contrary, it further disunifies & ruptures the church. Clearly, no lessons have been learned there yet.

  10. Romualdus5:18 PM


    Well said!

  11. Ecclesia Militans1:08 AM

    Once Tradition is restored in Rome and this "ecumenical" direction becomes a thing of the past, so will the "Catholic Anglicans". You cannot sit on two chairs.

    Do not confuse the traditions of the Sarum rite with the traditions of schismatics and heretics.

    England shall be Catholic (again), but the right way.

  12. That is not the mind of Holy Father Benedict XVI

    And may I remind the Latin traditionalists of Benedict's words.

    "We have to allow expressions that have EVOLVED outside the Catholic Church to come into communion"

    "Due to the petitions of many Anglicans"

    "This did not come from us [Catholics] but from the Anglicans"

    Nothing triumphalist about that at all!

    The Catholic Church in the Latin West is universal enough and can have an Anglican seat in the pews and any Catholic can sit on it and remain a Catholic! No need for two chairs, Ladies and Gentlemen. That is not the will of the Pope.

  13. Ecclesia Militans1:02 PM

    Ben Vallejo,

    You just confirmed my statement with your words:
    "Anglican seat...", "remain Catholic" - two obvious contradictions here.

    Are the "(pro)Catholic Anglicans" being asked to abjure their heresy and schism before they rejoin the Church, as Cardinal Newman did in 1845 and as all the preconciliar popes ordered? No.

    Then does this mean that Anglicans are not outside the Church, does this mean that they are already Catholic? No, not even the Vatican would say that.

    Once again the Conciliar Church (their own name) is in contradiction.

    The Eternal Church of Catholic Tradition, however, is never in contradiction, and even if the mind and the intentions of the present Pontiff are ecumenical, the next one could easily leave this postconciliar 'escape from reality' and return to Tradition.

    Do not be fooled, you must choose whether you are for the Catholic Church or for the protestant Anglicanism and its doctrines. God himself obliges you to choose, not merely men.

    The Catholic Church is not a reserve option that Anglicans can take when they decide they've had enough unnatural scandal in their own front yard.
    The Catholic Church must be embraced with all your hearts, in all the entirety of its holy doctrine.

    This is not just a random guy/bloke talking - this is the voice of Catholic Tradition, as it was heard and as it will be heard.


Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.


(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!