Wednesday 22 September 2010

Happiness in the Church of Rome

Now that the incense and euphoria of our Holy Father's visit are beginning to dissipate, our minds inevitably turn to the next thing on the agenda which is, I think, the prospect of the establishment of Anglican-Patrimonial bodies in communion with the Holy See as proposed in the Holy Father's letter Anglicanorum Cœtibus.

When, many years ago, I was an undergraduate, a friend (Anglican) then told me with great authority of Blessed John Henry Newman's misery once in the Catholic Church. He told me with great pathos of the aged Newman leaning over the gate at Littlemore and weeping for what had once been. 'People become Romans', said my friend, 'but they all come back'.

Some do, in fact, return to the Church of England, having failed to find what they sought in Catholic communion; I have indeed known some, including one who (to the surprise of all who knew him) went on to receive not just a mitre but also a wife.

After 1992, practices differed in different dioceses as to the various hoops that clergy being received into full communion were required to jump through. At the time, Cardinal Hume's arrangements in Westminster were considered particularly generous: clergy continued to wear their collars, and would attend what were facetiously variously called 'Confirmation classes' or 'Irish dancing classes'. Ordination would speedily follow. Some dioceses refused to make any concessions to convert clergy whatever and were consequently avoided. Others took a middle path. In the diocese of Arundel and Brighton, then headed by the man who was to become Hume's successor, Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, clergy were required to sit in the pew for a minimum of two years, usually being associated with a particular parish and pursuing some studies in the seminary where I am sitting right now, with the view of topping up whatever had lacked to their studies for Anglican priesthood. This was perceived as being somewhat hard (indeed, I thought so at the time), but yet we must acknowledge that several of those whom Basil Hume ordained returned to the Church of England (with all the consequent scandal), and none of those (as far as I am aware) that Cormac Murphy-O'Connor ordained have done so. In the end, the tougher path was the better.

The reason, no doubt, is that greater knowledge of the church which one is joining is valuable, and in some cases essential, to make a good assessment of just what one is doing. Men building towers, and kings going to war, that sort of thing.

Potential Ordinariates, of course, are an unknown quantity. Life may be similar enough to what has been left behind to obviate any sense of profound loss or disorientation in an unfamiliar setting that unsettled those who waded over the Tiber in 1992. But there will be differences and (at least in this country) there will be need for some education in matters like canon law and moral theology. Perhaps this can satisfactorily be arranged within the Ordinariate itself. But it must not be assumed that a cleric, his feet still wet with Tiber mud, can easily settle into the new situation, 'because it is just the same, really, only with the Pope added'.

As to happiness, and the Blessed JHN, I am engaged, at the moment, in writing a book in which the late Francis Cardinal Bourne of Westminster (d.1935) features largely. I came across a letter written by Newman to Bourne's father, who had been received into the Church a few months before the Beatus. Bourne senior had been distressed to hear the rumours that Newman was profoundly unhappy in the Catholic Church, and the rumours were sufficiently strong to inspire Bourne to write to Newman and ask if they were true. Newman replied:

Dear Sir,
I return an immediate, though necessarily hasty, answer to your inquiry, which made me more than smile.
It is wonderful that people can satisfy themselves with rumours which the slightest examination, or even attention, would disprove; but I have had experience of it long before I was a Catholic. At present the very persons, who saw through and reprobated the Evangelical misrepresentations concerning me, when I was in the Church of England, believe of me things quite as extravagant and as unfounded. their experience of past years has taught them nothing.
I can only say, if it is necessary to say it, that from the moment I became a Catholic, I never have had, through God's grace, a single doubt or misgiving on my mind that I did wrong in becoming one. I have not had any feeling whatever but one of joy and gratitude that God called me out of an insecure state into one which is sure and safe, out of the war of tongues into a realm of peace and assurance. I shrink to contemplate the guilt I should have incurred, and the account which at the last day would have laid against me, had I not become a Catholic, and it grieves me to the heart to think that so many excellent persons should still be kept in bondage in the Church of England, and should, among the many good points they have, want the great grace of faith, to trust God and follow his leadings.
This is my state of mind, and I would it could be brought home to all and every one, who, in default of real arguments for remaining Anglicans, amuse themselves with dreams and fancies.
I am, Dear Sir,
Truly Yours,
John H. Newman Maryvale, Perry Bar, June 13, 1848.

As for the person who told me of Newman's unhappiness in the Catholic Church, well, he is a Catholic priest now, too.

4 comments:

berenike said...

Isn't it/wasn't it the rule that converts can't enter religion for at least two years after their reception/baptism?

It seems even more sensible in the case of priestly ordination for someone who is presumably going to be "in charge" of other Catholics to have been one for a bit: to settle in, get a feel for how things work, etc. To observe and think without having to opine or teach. Convertitis gets a chance to wear off.

I've been interested to learn from the horse's mouth (in the gloriosu world of the blogosphere)to read several ex-Anglicans say what Newman wrote, that being a Catholic is unexpectedly unlike being an Anglican. That's mere hearsay, as it would take too long to hunt down examples, so feel free to delete this.

GOR said...

Thank you Father for reproducing Blessed John Newman's letter. It certainly puts to rest any claims that he had 'second thoughts'. Somehow I can't imagine a similar letter being written by a certain former PM - though perhaps in time...?

Loved the postscript too!

Wanderwide said...

"...In the end, the tougher path was the better."

With all due respect, Father, not necessarily: it all depends on the candidate and on the wisdom of the Bishop concerned.

Blessed John Henry Newman was received into the Catholic Church in October 1845, and was ordained as a Catholic Priest in May 1847.

Cardinal Manning's case was dealt with even more expeditiously: he was received in April 1851, and was ordained in June of the same year!

It is fortunate that these cases were handled with more imagination than that displayed by some bishops in England and Wales when dealing with more recent cases, and that neither Newman nor Manning was "required to sit in the pew for a minimum of two years".

Personally, I certainly had no cause for complaint: I was received abroad, and was ordained there 20 months later, having received nothing but kindness and encouragement. I celebrated my 15th anniversary a few days ago, and my sentiments were exactly those expressed so eloquently by Blessed John Henry.

However, the excessive caution and lack of imagination displayed by some Catholic Bishops and Priests undoubtedly impeded the conversion of many Anglican clergy and laity. This was bad not only for the souls concerned, but also for the Church which was thereby deprived of the services of some men who would have made excellent Catholic Priests.

It should be a matter of deep regret - and it is a stain on the record of the Bishops concerned - that "some dioceses refused to make any concessions to convert clergy whatever and were consequently avoided."

It is to be hoped that the Holy Father's recent instruction to the Bishops to be "generous in implementing the apostolic constitution ‘Anglicanorum Coetibus" will serve as a salutary corrective to such negative attitudes.

Dominic Mary said...

'I can only say, if it is necessary to say it, that from the moment I became a Catholic, I never have had, through God's grace, a single doubt or misgiving on my mind that I did wrong in becoming one. I have not had any feeling whatever but one of joy and gratitude that God called me out of an insecure state into one which is sure and safe, out of the war of tongues into a realm of peace and assurance.'

I think it is in many ways impudent of me to echo the Blessed John Henry; but I certainly do . . .

That said, I think that the wisest solution to dealing with converts is simply to consider each case entirely separately. I know, for instance, one Anglican priest who is truly saintly in many ways; and yet might in some ways raise more eyebrows if he is received than many far less holy, precisely because it must be harder to understand why someone so intelligent, so informed, and so naturally Catholic, has remained outside the Church for so long.

I have many friends left behind for whom I pray, and many who, like me, have swum the Tiber in whose company I rejoice : but the only thing I can say with certainty, considering them all, is 'horses for courses'. In other words, every one is different, and thus every one must be subject to individual consideration.

That said, all of the potential converts - and indeed all of us who have preceded them - will greatly benefit from your prayers : for which many thanks.