Msgr Jeffrey Steenson’s Address to the Anglican Ordinariate Fellowship
May 7, 2012 34 Comments
Msgr N. Steenson, leader of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter, addresses a crowd of about 100 people in St. Margaret’s Church in Beverly, Massachusetts. Following his address which you can view below, there was a question and answer period in which Msgr Steenson addressed queries from how could Catholics support this initiative to what the status of the divorced & remarried would be in the Ordinariate.
Following the talk and Q & A, a Mass was celebrated, in which three people from the Fellowship were received into the communion of the Catholic Church.
HT: Steve Cavanaugh
About Fr Stephen Smuts
When push comes to shove, we all can have a subjective place, but that is not the first place, the first place must be the objective and historical truth of God In Christ! And it is here, for myself, I cannot see the “papacy” as in some continuous place of “St. Peter”, and his so-called infallibility. I ain’t buying it! My conscience says NO, as too my theological mind. Btw, it is here also that our baptism must stand…”an appeal to God for or from a good conscience – through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter 3:21) If I am wrong? I will only see it ‘In Christ’, before HIS Throne! He alone is my “judgment”!
We know you are protestant, and we know your opinion. Stop rambling over and over on this subject each time there is an article dealing with the ordinariate or anything Catholic. It is becoming rude.
+ PAX et BONUM
Sorry mate, I am always gonna say my piece, just like you, I will let our blog host speak to me, if he wants me to not say anything? And btw, you can save signing as a so-called “bishop” all the time, it doesn’t cut much with me! You guys are not Anglican’s, nor even Lutherans.. not to me! That’s not being rude either, just speaking my truth!
Fr Robert, I don’t sign as a Bishop. + PAX et BONUM is St Francis’ salutation. It means peace and goodness (the + beeing a cross, and meaning that any peace and goodness comes fro the Cross of Our Lord) Now, you’ve learnt something new today!
Yes, I know some Latin, but I took the Cross, as the sign of the bishop. Are you not such in your group? Btw, thanks for not taking offense, I just don’t see the historical and theological reality of a Protestant Church that seeks the authority of Rome? There are some of us that still see a biblical and theological “protest”, with the papacy. Btw, I find it rather interesting that the pope did not recognize your “Anglicanism”. This surely must be a setback?
Me a Bishop? Haha, I’m not yet even a subdeacon, so a Bishop?! I’ll tell my friends that someone thought I am a Bishop, we’ll have a good laugh. I quite don’t understand your last sentence as I am a craddle Catholic, and know well anglicanism only because I have been a cathedral chorister between the ages of 8 and 14.
+ PAX et BONUM
Forgive my mistake and ignorance, somehow I thought you were a representative of the Anglo Catholic Lutheran Church? Signing with a cross somehow led me in this direction. Again, forgive my mistake and ignorance! Btw, I was raised an Irish craddle Roman Catholic, myself.
*Make that the Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church! Wow, these things do get complicated!
Here is their site…
http://anglolutherancatholic.org/
My point here is: how can one follow both the “Augsburg Confession”, and then confess fully to Roman Catholicism? This is very problematic to say the least! This insults the Reformation, and the history of Luther himself! Why is it, we cannot accept our differences, with some respect, and admit the church in schism? I mean look at the East / West divide, the EO and Rome! That still exists, and that divide is actually over the Trinity of God, more than Catholic/Orthodox ministry. Though surely the latter does also measure some also.
I agree with them that at first, Luther never thought of founding a new church, but to reform the Catholic Church. Then politics entered in the game, with the debt-ridden north-german sovereign princes and dukes eager to spoliate the church, who convinced Luther that they could be “Bishops in case of need” (Notbischoff) to his community. Then he had to find thological arguments to justify this move, and then he surrendered to lust by having a wife even if he was a monk, and then the political situation, his state of life, and the arguments he had used to justify himself self-fueled, having as a result the definitive alenation of his communities from the apostolic Churches (Western and Eastern).
Incidentally, one of the 2 Lutheran Bishops in my country resigned a few years ago, and is now a RC Priest. He said that in his mind, the Catholic church of today accomplishes Luther’s heritage much more than the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Food for thought.
On the other hand, the same “my country”‘s ELC is researching a way to formulate the Petrine primacy (on this rock etc…) in a way it could accept, so as to foster the cause of Church visible and real unity.
Food for thought, isn’t it?
+ PAX et BONUM
Indeed the Church today surely needs to see the biblical Catholic reality of its life and mission, and for me this is best seen in the historical “catholic” and “reformed” nature of the Anglican history, from the Thirty-Nine Articles, to the Irish Articles 1615, on to some of the best of Evangelical history. And whether Roman Catholicism wants to admit it or not they have been pressed here also. (Just noting the hymn sung by these Anglican bound Catholics by Charles Wesley). The simple fact is we in the historical Body of Christ need each other, and we cannot be whole without some kind of ecumenical behavior, and this does not mean we forget our differences theologically or historically. So we should learn each others real positions, and try to understand and dialogue therein.
Myself, I love the real man Dr. Luther, but not so much “Lutheranism”, and I really like Luther’s doctrine of the “theologia crucis”! But then I am an old school type of Evangelical and so-called Low Church Anglican. Note however, I am closer to Luther somewhat on Word & Sacrament. And so I would reject what I would call an old Roman Catholic caricature of Luther. Note, some of the now later Roman Catholic works on Luther, and Calvin too.(The list is real, and I won’t go into depth. One must be willing to look!) But Luther learned to approach Holy Scripture at the place of personal existence, and this is the essence of his hermeneutic, his teaching concerning the interpretation of Scripture. It was here that Luther saw the Christological meaning from Augustine.
Indeed, food for thought!
Although the audio quality was not great, it was good enough to demostrate that Mgr Steenson handles himself very well in informal situations. Every time I hear him speak the more I am certain that those advising the Holy Father on this ciritical appointment have found the right man for the very difficult task entruted to him.
OK, I’m puzzled. On the same weekend that the Ordinariate loses its most prestigious parish, Steenson is in Massachusetts addressing an audience of 100 and receiving three into the Catholic Church. Not exactly St Paul, nor even Billy Graham, and in light of the elephant in the room, one might interpret this as being off in a closet someplace. I’ll say, too, as a veteran of several corporate environments, that the ability to handle oneself well in informal situations is a common quality among executives, though it definitely doesn’t track consistently with other measures of effectiveness, like time management or the ability to set realistic priorities.
@John: You and I are more in agreement, because we are looking more critically, I do wish the Ordinariate well, more for the sake of those I know that are Anglo-Catholic, and desire the stability they are seeking in Rome. But, I am myself not sold on the whole affair, the so-called Anglican to Rome leader needs theological conviction and ability first, then only any smoothness! But this is rarely the way things seem to work today, it seems the political polish first, etc. And just to my mind, they don’t want Steenson to have too much power or authority, indeed ROME is pulling the strings…always!
@John Bruce – I assume you know how schedules work. Msgr Steenson must plan his schedule several weeks in advance. The man is traveling all over the country to receive, energize, and encourage new and existing Ordinariate groups. One setback for the Ordinariate should not derail the entirety of the Ordinary’s upcoming visits.
Also – if you are concerned with the Ordinariate’s prioritization of tasks, scheduling, public relations ability, and overall effectiveness, stop whining about it on the internet to a bunch of strangers; get off your computer and
do something about it! Offer to help Msgr Steenson! Volunteer your time to help the Ordinariate get off the ground! Ask what you can do to assist them with organization! The Ordinariate has no money and very few employees. What it needs most of all, in order to succeed, is HELP – not insults and whining.
Wait a moment — isn’t it Fr Phillips who’s first raised the basic question of whether something’s wrong with the Ordinariate? I’ve definitely made my opinions known to people within the Ordinariate and offered help — doesn’t sound to me as though you’re in touch with the situation. Indeed, if Msgr Steenson, his Chancellor, and his press person would listen to some of the comments I’ve made over the past several months, he might not be trying to dig himself out of the hole he’s in. (I would imagine, too, that if Pope Benedict has made a major donation to the UK Ordinariate, he’s been asking how things are proceeding in the US as well, and I would guess he’s less than happy as we speak. Do you suppose there’s been a call or two between the Vatican and San Antone?)
I wouldn’t call what I’m saying “whining”. I’m saying that at the very minimum, Msgr Steenson is creating major public relations problems for himself, and I don’t think it’s too much of a surmise to say that if he’s doing that, there are more basic problems that Fr Phillips, and no doubt others, have no choice but to try to deal with. I would be in a position to provide help in terms of time, talent, and treasure, and indeed would like to, but Prudence is a virtue, and I would not want to waste resources without a better idea of what’s going on. Msgr Steenson has my e-mail. Does he have yours?
Indeed John the “whining” seems to come from those that wish we would just shut-up and say nothing, but all is well with the Ordinarate! But sadly, this is just not the case. I wonder too if the papacy is just waiting to see somewhat the numbers? If all goes poorly, then they can get a few new priests, and laity, and then move on. And them blame the Anglicans themselves for lack of effort and movement. And one wonders why there has not been more money placed here? And also, where are the “Roman” hierarchy in support? I mean a good strong Brit that has gone to Rome, in “years” past, individually? Have I missed someone?
I can only think the Holy Father is monitoring progress in some way. He (or those close to him) must certainly have had Cardinal Wuerl’s estimates of where the Ordinariate should be from 2011, and I would have to say that if a secular CEO had a pet project and saw numbers less than half of estimates, that secular CEO would be asking questions. My guess, in fact, is that Phillips’s withdrawal of OLA from the Ordinariate, with the explicit endorsement of his bishops, is a cry for help from above.
One thing I’ve noticed about some of the Anglo-Catholic blogs is a tendency, similar to what made some folks become Stalinists in the 1930s. They want a set of certainties, which they seem to find in what might be called a fantasy-Catholicism, but I don’t think it’s that different from the folks who used to say the Party is always right. I don’t think actual Catholic bloggers, like Father Z, have this attitude. (Real Catholics, for that matter, have a sense of humor, which I don’t always see on Anglo-Catholic blogs!)
Hey John, I have plenty of humour here! http://frstephensmuts.wordpress.com/tag/humour/
Indeed John, whatever is going on, and who really knows? Rome, at least for me, does not have the “ball”! The Church in the West is under the glaze of certain Postmodernity, note how so many so-called theologians/theolog’s today are seeking to “right” Postmodernism! But where do we place a Judeo-Christian ethic and life here, save outside? Would that we had a Barth or a Von Balthasar, or even a De Lubac still! As I just stated on another blog, the book by Stanley Grenz (RIP), ‘Renewing the Center, Evangelical Theology in a Post-Theological Era’ (2000/2006..second edition), is still worth the read!
*I am myself enjoying a somewhat older book (1996), ‘Interpreting John Calvin, Ford Lewis Battles, (edited by Robert Benedetto, Baker Books). The chapter (4), ‘God Was Accommodating Himself to Human Capacity’ is grand! Note, some R. Catholic scholars are reading and thus writing about John Calvin these days! So perhaps there is hope?
John, I am helping the Ordinariate. Msgr Steenson has my email address. Here is my point: you constantly cut down and the Catholic Church in your comments. Regardless of whether your comments are meant to be constructive criticism, they often come off as bitter diatribes.
My goodness, where have I “cut down” the Catholic Church? To criticize an individual, even an Ordinary, is hardly to criticize the Catholic Church. I believe Catholic doctrine is that only Christ Himself and his Mother were without sin. It seems to me that the consensus, even in the Anglo-Catholic blogosphere, is that for OLA (a Catholic parish) to withdraw its application to join the Ordinariate (a Catholic organization) is a major, major blow to the Ordinariate. How on earth is any attempt to discuss or analyze this im[portant intra-Catholic problem anti-Catholic? If you’re close in any way to the Ordinary, I would almost think this is symptomatic of the overall problem.
This is the whole point, how dare anyone seek to “Reform”, or call to biblical renewal the Roman Catholic Church? But this is hardly anti-Catholic! It is most interesting that RC scholars have somewhat renewed Luther, for themselves. And some are reading and working on Calvin! The old RC views on the Reformers is going away now, at least with some Roman scholars! See btw, the French Roman Catholic book by Alexandre Ganoczy: The Young Calvin, written in French way back in 1966. (Printed in English in 1987…Westminster Press, my copy). And see too Julie Canlis work on John Calvin, she earned her doctorate from St. Andrews. And see here too her very nice book: Calvin’s Ladder, A Spiritual Theology Of Ascent And Ascension, (2010, Eerdmans). Indeed a ground breaking work!
You missed my point entirely, which was this: it’s ok to question authority, but I have never even once seen a positive mention of the Ordinariate from you. How about tempering your questioning and criticism with even one aspect in which the Ordinariate is a good thing?
I love the Catholic Church, warts and all, because Christ established her. The Ordinariate will succeed, I believe, because it doesn’t just rely on the effectiveness of one man alone. There are many in the church who are supporting its efforts behind the scenes. So what we see on the surface
may look small and potentially ineffective, but there are greater forces at
work than Msgr Steenson by himself.
Renewal for the Roman Catholic Church always means the papacy is in control, those of us that lived through Vatican II could see that. And still that Council is yet to be defined, fully and certainly theologically. For me anyway, at my age this has been one of the losses in Roman Catholicism. And I am not old school here, but just what is Salvation, Saving grace, Saving events and finally Salvation History in the RCC? And is salvation fully ‘In Christ’ for Roman Catholicism? Since Vatican II, all these are up for theological definition, at least to my theological mind!
This was for John Bruce # 6, sorry!
I believe the Holy Father himself is calling the Roman Catholic Church to renewal. Trent, you gonna e-mail him and tell him he’s anti-Catholic?
John, btw, though I am a classic Evangelical Anglican on soteriology/salvation, I would agree that Mary Ever-Virgin became sinless at the Annunciation, as the elect vessel of grace and the Incarnate Son., the Theotokos, Luke 1: 45.
Whoops, Tate, not Trent. I guess I thought you were more Catholic than you are!
I don’t think that OLA’s withdrawal is ‘a major blow’, as these people have been already reunited with the Catholic Church (puting money in another pocket does not make you richer). Fr Steenson made it clear on the very first day that there would be no such thing as automatic transfer of Anglican Use parishes. And OLA will certainly join the Ordinariate some day.
The Ordinariate is clearly implemented as a long-term project intended for decades and there is no compromise on high standards to get bigger numbers or immediate success, as cases of +Moyer and St. Mary’s confirm.
I am also pretty impressed that Fr Steenson travels to Calgary to baptise a daughter of the pastor of the group there or to Beverly to receive just three people. This is the individual/personal style rather than ‘mass/managerial’ approach which I really love in Christian pastors.
This is also pretty obvious that CDF has realised by know that despite all efforts to make the Ordinariare ‘framework’ as flexible as possible, there have been some ommissions which need to be corrected; the two most notable are (i) to enable Ordinariates to cover the territory of more than one conference of bishops and (ii) to make a provision for all Latin Catholics from parishes joining the Ordinariate to enter this structure.
So you feel that traveling thousands of miles to baptize and receive by onesies and threesies is a good use of a bishop’s time?
Actually I do. IMHO, there is something deeply evangelical in caring for ‘one sheep’. It is an indication that in all their administrative and ‘managerial’ tasks or teaching to large assemblies bishops (or ordinaries) have not got alienated from their flock.
In this context all those stories about bl. John Paul II come to mind, who would often, all of the sudden, ‘waste’ his time on some individuals to baptise their child, bless their marriage, etc. (or like in case of that fallen priest whom the late pope kind of bumped into and immediately asked ‘Father, would you later come to my apartments to hear MY confession’).
And in the long run such personal touch in the pastoral care exercised by a bishop (or ordinary in this case) kind of pays back, as there are quite many people who – unlike you – deeply appreciate it, even if it is not them who are received or not their child is baptised.
I don’t understand the constant push on the numbers. This entity is brand new – less than six months old. There is by all accounts a solid group of clergy about to be ordained. Better to have a smaller group of solid, grounded clergy than to ordain people who are obviously going to be causing the Ordinariate greater problems down the road. If you have good solid clergy, their groups will flourish and grow. I have heard that many Anglicans are hanging back waiting to see how this is being run before making a decision. Having an ordinary that cares enough to come to your community, show his support, and baptize your children is a pretty good indication of a the kind of caring that Continential Catholic was speaking about. That matters. Making judgments about an Ordinariate that is carefully taking its time to get started, to get its communities in a healthy place, and to provide them with solid leaders and spiritual guides sounds to me like it is going in the right direction.Furthermore, I’ve got to think that trying to understand and deal with all of the issues that arise from each community coming from different Church backgrounds (TAC, TEC, ACNA, etc.) as well as various pastoral provision parishes has got to be challenging and not an easy task.
Msgr. Steenson is having to do a considerable amount of juggling, and given the challenges he has done amazingly well. I don’t see the “digging out of the hole” you refer to at all. The OLA situation is unusual, but there is nothing preventing all 60+% of those eligible to join the Ordinariate from joining it if the buildings can’t go with them. What good would it do for Msgr. Steenson to have dropped everything this weekend because of OLA? He wasn’t in on the discussion and it wasn’t his call. Maybe JB your problem is that you are applying your “corporate models”or an Anglican mindset to the Catholic Church. It doesn’t work that way in the Catholic Church. And whether he is saying it now, it has been very clear from the beginning that the bishop had no intention of letting that parish go. Just because there may be rapproachment now doesn’t change the issue.