Traditional Anglican Communion Congregation Becomes Catholic
June 24, 2012 10 Comments
Dcn Greg Kandra on his fantastic (in other words read: highly recommended) blog, The Deacon’s Bench (yes, again) has the news:
Great news from my home state (h/t to Fr. Scott Hurd):
The sign outside Christ the King Church is currently blank, still a work in progress. Like all things at the tranquil, leafy site of this Hampton church, it’s in a state of transition.
“White-out doesn’t work on these signs,” Father Edward Meeks said with a laugh.
Father Meeks, like a third of his congregation, grew up Catholic. And this weekend, Meeks and his congregants will return to the church. Meeks will be ordained by Washington Archbishop Donald Wuerl in a ceremony at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington. Then, in a Sunday morning mass, his congregation will be received into the Catholic church.
Meeks, 64, is the fourth Anglican priest in Maryland to be ordained in the Catholic church since a 2009 directive by Pope Benedict XVI established the Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter to receive Anglican churches that wished to transition to Catholicism but still keep some Anglican traditions.
The most important allowance is that priests who move from the Anglican to Catholic church can still be married, per special dispensation from the Vatican. Meeks has been married for 41 years to wife Jan, who serves as his secretary.
The pope’s 2009 move and the actions since then have been in the works for more than three decades, since Pope John Paul II began allowing Anglican parishes into the church. Thirty former Episcopal priests are scheduled for ordination this summer nationwide, and 30 more are set for next year.
Meeks began the process as quickly as he could. Last April, Washington Archbishop Donald Wuerl, a liaison to the ordinariate, asked interested Anglican priests to submit detailed dossiers, including resumes, his baptismal certificate and his marriage certificate.
In January, Meeks was given the green light to head to St. Mary’s Seminary in Houston for a weekend retreat then came home for 13 weeks of training “to kind of round out our catholic theology to address those issues of Catholic formation that might be lacking,” he said.
Meeks was raised Catholic, but left the church in the 1970s, a period he called “a time of great conflict and turmoil in the church.” About a third of his congregation, he said, was also raised Catholic.
“I wrongly concluded that the church was starting to lose its way. I realize now that’s impossible,” he said. “The holy spirit is always in the church.”
Of the 140 people in Meeks’ congregation, only about 10, he said, have not yet opted to join him in the move.
The Anglican church has faced some splits in the last several years over social issues, including the election of the first gay bishop in 2003. However, Meeks said Christ the King’s move was based merely out of a desire for apostolic authority.
“We have always been on what I would call a kind of catholic trajectory. By that I mean that our theology, our doctrine, our liturgy have all had a decidedly Catholic flavor,” he said, adding that his church has been “seeking for a long time a way to be in full unity with the Catholic church.”
The move, he said, “is a very important step in regards of undoing some of the damage of the Reformation.”
Christ the King Church has a smart-looking website here.
I must also quickly make mention here of a most thoughtful (and kind) comment made yesterday by Bishop Louis Campese (in case you missed it) on this blog regarding Fr Ed Meeks’s ordination:
Praise God and how proud I am, as one of my former priests, Fr. Meeks, was ordained , today… Fr. Meeks is one of the most humble, honest and loyal priests I have had the privilege of having in my diocese… He was and still is an awesome priest, father and friend…PAX + Bishop Louis Campese
About Fr Stephen Smuts
I’m confused! First off I love this Church. I have seen pictures of it and it is will be a jewel in the crown of the Ordinariate.
I thought if you left the church and became ordained in another that you couldn’t return and become a priest. Am I misunderstanding? No problem for the laity as they can be reconciled through Confession and Penance but……? Haven’t read the whole article yet.
As I understand it the “absolutely not” rule applies only to Catholic clergy who leave the Catholic Church. For those who left as laymen, the decision as to whether they may proceed to ordination is taken on a case-by-case basis.
But I may be completely wrong.
People who apostazied as teenagers are eligible to become priests in the ordinariate, considering they didn’t have the full capacity to understand the consequencies of this act. Mgr. Broadhurst and Fr. Aquilina in England are another example of this.
+ PAX et BONUM
“apostazied”? Don, you love to throw that word mate! Btw, you might want to read what Luther himself had to say about Apostasy and Rome! If nothing more, than for the historical value.
Because it is what it is. If you leave the religion, you APOSTATIZE. In other words? If not atheistic or heathen, then schismatic and heretical. Which is what Luther was, and his reprobate churches are. SCHISMATIC AND HERETICAL. Not to say that each individual members of the church are heretics, but the things being taught to them, making Martin Luther is an arch-heretic. Even King Henry VIII didn’t like Luther, and attempts to make the English more Lutheran resulted in Methodism. And then even he “Defender of Faith” apostatized; the ruined monasteries of England and multitudes of dead Catholics are proof of this. The many splintered groups of protestants is proof of Luther’s heresy; the rise of Western Secularism is proof of Luther’s heresy. The marginalization of religion in the West is proof of Luther’s heresy. Let us call a spade a spade and call those who apostatized as apostates or we are being disingenuous for the sake of not hurting anyone’s feelings. How I detest this inoffensive “Church of nice feelings”!
@Ioannes: This is and profoundly where theology, and make that Biblical Theology and certainly somewhat systematic theology must come into play, and here you are quite simply NOT biblical or theological as to what Apostasy is! Sorry mate, I stand biblically and theologically with the Magisterial Reformers, like Luther and Calvin, here! Upon the revelation of the Incarnate Christ Himself! Not that I expect you to understand this, for you are following the idea of an Infallible Church, which not even St. Peter or St. Paul presented, for the true Church of Christ is founded not upon a man, even Peter, but upon the revelation of Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God! (Matt. 16:16-17; 20). See also, (1 Peter 2:4-8, etc.)
Indeed, even John Paul II could write: “The mystery of the Church”, its “invisible dimensions”, is “larger than the structure and organization of the Church”, which are “at the service of the mystery.” The Church of Christ will always be a Pilgrim Body on earth, and this is really part of the mystery of a Church that is human, and in the mystery of that Incarnation itself! It is here that we must see: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak trough the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Romans 8: 3-4)
Well of course a layman like myself would relatively be ignorant, but darn it, I try- usually, laypersons couldn’t care less if someone in position of teaching Church doctrine to them is in error when they should care, right? They’d say “It’s none of my business if the priest or catechist is wrong!” At the same time, it’s not a coincidence that heresy usually arises from among the clergy, the theologically educated class of the Church.
‘Indeed, even John Paul II could write: “The mystery of the Church”, its “invisible dimensions”, is “larger than the structure and organization of the Church”, which are “at the service of the mystery.” The Church of Christ will always be a Pilgrim Body on earth, and this is really part of the mystery of a Church that is human, and in the mystery of that Incarnation itself! It is here that we must see: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak trough the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Romans 8: 3-4)’
I agree with you on that! The Church is in fact, not just the Magisterium, but also all the Baptized, even Martin Luther himself. I agree that we ought not to treat the Church as an organization, but as an Organism, a living, Entity. And yet it does not mean that those who expressly deny any sort of legitimate authority, (and Sola Scriptura is incorrect because Scripture is a document, and documents must be interpreted by legitimate authority) have orthodoxy in their positions, though. It is, at least for me, better to err on the side of caution; I am convinced by arguments that affirm Papal authority as the ultimate among bishops, but only if local pastoral issues are not resolved with certainty. I have a feeling that this is the same thing as what the Orthodox Churches were demanding of the Pope, that the Pope usually does not micromanage everything. The doctrine of Papal Infallibility is troublesome, though, in this respect.
O.K. great. I know Father Edward Meeks was a good Anglican Pastor so he will make a really good Catholic Pastor. How many Anglicans can bring in virtually their whole congregation! Well, he is the same age as me and if he left the church in the 70′s, he and I both were in our 20′s – ahhhhh sooooo long ago! I’m glad they didn’t hold it against him.
Aquilina did not ” apostasise” as a teenager. He was a married man when he joined the Church of England.
Btw, I can remember when apostasy was used theologically for an “Apostate”, someone who could not change, or come back to true faith. Just an old point (from Heb. 6:4-6, etc.)