25 thoughts on “Watching the Tiber Go By (Part 7)”

1. God bless you all on your journey! As Mark Shea is fond of saying, “The great thing about the Catholic Church is that it’s like one big family. The bad thing about the Catholic Church is that it’s like one big family.”

   You will find some people who are welcoming, but you’ll also see some of the differences in how Catholics interact with their co-religionists. You might feel isolated at times, and expect to be let down to a degree. The Catholic Church is the perfect place for us because it is, as a human institution, so imperfect. It helps us build patience and charity toward one another—if we let it.

   I do suggest getting involved in parish organizations as soon as you can. That is the best (if not only) way to truly meet people in the parish.

   Deo gratia!

   LikeLike

2. Point taken. I didn’t expect to leave trouble behind when I rejoined the Church; on the contrary. As for getting involved in parish organizations, that’s the plan…but one week at a time. This past week was Religious Education for the kids; this next week (with luck) will be RCIA for Jane; and then we’ll see.

   Thank you for your blessing!

   LikeLike

3. What a wonderful end to the beginning of your “coming home” story. I especially like the way that God surprised you with something on a completely different level than you’d been experiencing thus far … the senses versus the intellectual. Thank you so much for sharing this story with us. 🙂

   LikeLike

4. Beautiful, Will. I posted your story on my blog. May many people find inspiration in your journey! God bless you.

   LikeLike

5. WOW. What a great story. Just read straight through! Wonderful!

   Warren

   LikeLike

6. I am a ‘lapsed Catholic’. Had a wonderful talk with a priest a few weeks back. Have been going to Mass a bit since then, but somehow I find it difficult. But last Sunday evening… the light was shining through the stained glass onto the wall… and it was very beautiful.

   On Palm Sunday a few years back I was in Notre Dame in Paris for Mass. It was ‘standing room’ only and I ended up near the big rose window near the main altar. As the light shone through the stained glass, and the organ played…. I felt like I was in heaven.

   LikeLike

7. KiwiNomad06 (Gosh, what an interesting name–is there an interesting story to go with it?), may God bless you and keep you and make his face to shine upon you, and draw you back fully into the life of the Church. I’d be interested to hear how it goes for you.

   LikeLike

8. The story of your journey is an inspiration to anyone who is on a journey into the Catholic faith. Meeting the dear and holy Fr Ed Dover was no mere accident, God surely placed him in your path into the Church. Over the years Fr Ed has come in and out of my path to Christ and I know that you cannot meet this man without knowing that you have had an encounter with a wonderful and holy Priest of God.

   LikeLike

9. Lol as far as the name goes…. I am from New Zealand (Kiwi) and I am at a ‘travelling’ stage of life. I plan to leave NZ next April and walk some of the Camino of St James from Le Puy. And as friends /family will tell you, it is not long since my last trip!
   Churchwise… not sure whether I will ‘come back’ or just work out how to live on the edges… but found your accounts interesting and encouraging.

   LikeLike

10. Dear Will:
    Though a few yrs older than you we had some similar beginnings and endings! I returned to the Church of our youth almost four years ago and have never looked back!
    God bless you and your family
    TJ

    LikeLike

11. Dear Will – Inspiring story. One of the best organizations for Catholic men is in a small group -two well known umbrella organizations are Catholic Mens Fellowship and St. Joseph Covenent Keepers (the founder of which has a similar story as yours). Google will help you out. If there is a group, join. If not start one! Catholic guys can hang out and talk about things other than sports!!

    God Bless

    Coggie

    LikeLike

12. Will, your experience entering Holy Redeemer is a beautiful example of the individual tender mercies that the Lord shares with those who seek Him. I’m happy for you.

    LikeLike

13. Thanks so much for coming in to strengthen and rejoice us!

    Welcome. Whatever difficulties and even scandals you may face in the future, that sound, strong REALITY is genuinely there.

    As Brigham Young said on arriving at the valley of the Great Salt Lake, “This is the place.”

    LikeLike

14. I stumbled onto this blog from Catholic World News, and must say that I am very impressed with your story.

    I grew up Lutheran until I reached college, at which time I could no longer have been considered Christian. That is, until I met my wife, who is Catholic. We talked of marriage once while dating, but she said it could never happen b/c I wasn’t Catholic. I jokingly said that I would convert; I had no idea how those words would actually come to pass.

    I served in the infantry in the US Army in Iraq, and it was there in my spare time that I found my faith again. When I had a chance to look at the internet, I researched the history and theology of the Catholic faith, and over time, I realized that it really WAS the one true faith, the one true Church begun by Christ himself.

    Once I returned home, I immediately enrolled in RCIA, and I was confirmed last year. Then my wife and I were married in the Church, and my life has never been better. We are relatively poor in material goods but rich in spirit. The void I used to have in my soul has been filled, and I have my wife’s fine example of Catholic living to thank for my interest in the first place.

    I just want you to know that you have made the right decision for yourself and your family. May God bless you and yours all the days of your lives.

    LikeLike

15. What a great story – and told so well! I wandered around for years through varieties of Protestantism, Russian Orthodoxy, and finally just gave up and became a Roman Catholic (which was where I’d started out for as a young teenager).

    And yes, it’s all about the truth. Some days I think it would be nicer if the music (I’m a musician) and the community (I’m naturally gregarious) caught up as well. But it’s the truth – and nothing else.

    LikeLike

16. As a convert myself, I love conversion stories, especially when they are heavy on the intellectual side. “Thanks for sharing!” We converted in 1975, but not until 1992 did we find a church where we could learn the Faith. And there was a long lapse along the way. We’ve been gloriously happy in a chapel at a monastery for 15 years, even having the joy of having one of our sons and his children join us, with the kids in school with the Sisters. God bless you!

    LikeLike

17. As a member of Mark Shea’s home parish in Seattle, I visit his blog often…and found the link to your saga. Welcome aboard!–hope you enjoy the ride on the bark of Peter, it’s the adventure of a lifetime.

    You do not have to leave the Book of Common Prayer behind. It just changes shape a little. When the time is right, check out the Liturgy of the Hours–I recommend the shorter Christian Prayer for the youngsters. Should ring familiar in your psyche.

    Do Lent this year. I mean really, really do Lent this year. Fasting, prayer, almsgiving, the whole gamut. May it then be the most joyous family Easter of your lives, as was mine the year I was received into the Church.

    Welcome, welcome, oh joy! and in company with all the catechumens, candidates, and newly reconciled of the Church around the world, our prayers are with you.

    LikeLike

18. Thanks to everyone for their prayers!

    Loretta, as regards the Book of Common Prayer–given that I was not a cradle Episcopalian, all I ever knew was Rite II of the 1978 prayer book, which reads a lot like the post-Vatican-II mass I grew up with except with a few bits left out. I’ve met folks who fell in love with Anglicanism because of the beautiful prayer book language, but little of that beautiful style remains in the Rite II service. It’s clean, elegant, and was mostly familiar to me almost immediately. And I never much did Morning and Evening Prayer. So while I may well check out the Liturgy of the Hours, and while it very well might resonate with my psyche, it won’t, alas, be because of my familiarity with the BCP. Nice thought, though. 🙂 As regards Lent, absolutely. I’ve always observed Lent, and I don’t see any reason to become a Catholic at my age just to be luke-warm.

    Again, thanks to everyone for the encouragement!

    LikeLike

19. This is from the Biography of Hebert cardinal vaughn
    It is the definitive description of why anglican orders were dismissed.
    Bishop Fabian Brusekewitz also wrote a very good similar description in a homily to priests.
    How can the anglican church have the Eucharist when it is a dogma published as the steps in their beliefs that their eucharist?? is not actual and not to be believed as such.
    ……………………………………………
    “What had been a question turned into a problem when, urged from both sides, Leo XIII examined the thesis of the validity of Anglican orders and found it wanting.” He disappointed the expectations of many Anglican clergy who were obliged to be ordained unconditionally if they wished to enter the Catholic communion as priests, and others, both Roman Catholics and Anglicans, who hoped to move towards a corporate reunion. The legacy of the controversy, and the disappointment of many who looked forward to reunion, remains alive.
    Cardinal Herbert Vaughan was a leader of the opposition and he did not stand-alone. He represented the English bishops. He established a commission set up to study the issue in 1895. It was made up of Canon James Moyes, Dom Adrian Gasquet, and the Franciscan David Fleming. They concluded in their 1896 report that Anglican orders are null, and Anglican clergy who converted must always be ordained again absolutely and not conditionally. In Rome, the future Cardinal Raphael Merry del Val acted as the agent for the English bishops at the Vatican and lobbied on behalf of a negative answer by the Pope to the proposition.
    There were English Catholics who did not share that view. Among the upper classes some were sympathetic to the English Church Union, a society of Anglican clergy and lay people formed for the defense and maintenance of Catholic principles in the Church of England. The Union was founded in 1844 by Anglo-Catholics, within the Anglican Church. From 1868 its president was Charles Lindley Wood, the second Viscount Halifax, a man personally inclined toward the Roman Catholic Church. The Pope had censured Roman Catholic members of the Union in 1865. Between 1894 and 1897 the old schemes of the Association for the Promotion of the Unity of Christendom (APUC) were revived, “despite the censure of its attitudes and assumptions by the Holy See in 1865.” In the 1890s, Anglican sympathizers initiated the idea of reunion. Lord Halifax was its leading promoter.
    Lord Halifax while on the island of Madeira with his family in the winter of 1889-90, met a French Vincentian, thirty-four-year-old Abbe Etienne Fernand Portal, a student of the reforming Bishop Felix Dupanloup of Orleans. Abbe Portal was on the island partly for his health and partly in connection with work, he was doing for the Sisters of St Vincent de Paul. Halifax found him extremely kind and one of “the quickest and most intelligent people I have ever met.” According to Snead-Cox, the men soon discovered they had many common interests, and took long walks together discussing the condition of religion in their own countries. Portal was equally impressed with Halifax. “Here was a representative of the Anglican Church, the President of the English Church Union, and yet what a little seemed to separate him from Catholicism!” Following their meeting, for the “astonished Abbe, all things seemed possible, while the work of doing everything that could be done to put the position of the Anglican Church fairly before Catholic Europe became an imperative duty. To bring about a reunion between England and Rome seemed a project which required only patience and good-will.”
    Halifax, however, represented only a very narrow section of his co-religionists. Within the Church of England, ritualism and Anglo-Catholicism were attractive to some, but aroused fierce antagonism on the part of many others. One faction called it “Anglo-Romanism,” and felt that the movement did not belong within the Protestant establishment. Ritualism, especially in the use of the confessional, was unpopular among the middle classes and evangelical churchmen. In addition, there were divisions and tensions within the Anglo-Catholic movement, which surfaced later in the Cavalier case of 1899. Therefore, Lord Halifax was representative of an ambiguous position within the Anglican Church. Nonetheless, during 1892, Portal and Halifax corresponded and searched for a way to unify the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Church in the near future. They decided that a discussion about the validity of Anglican orders was one way to reach the goal of corporate reunion. According to John Jay Hughes, theirs was a daring idea for the time “too daring as the sequel was to show.” In July 1892, Halifax visited Cardinal Vaughan at Westminster and presented his plan. From the outset, Vaughan made it clear that the recognition of the Pope’s primacy was the decisive element and not the validity of Anglican orders. According to Hughes, Vaughan was honestly convinced that Halifax’s movement was a threat to the Roman Catholic Church and faith. “He made use of every means at his disposal to thwart what Halifax and Portal were attempting. Given his convictions, it is difficult to see how Vaughan could have acted otherwise.”
    Vaughan wrote in February 1894:
    “Halifax and his party are anxious to get some kind of recognition anything that and could be twisted into a hope of recognition will serve their purpose. They wish to keep people from becoming Catholics individually and tell them to wait for a corporate reunion. He wrote this will never be until after the Last Judgment and all the poor souls that will be born and die in heresy before reunion must suffer in their own souls for this chimera of corporate reunion. They are also most anxious to get some kind of assurance about their Orders, at least the statement that they are possibly valid! But, this again is to keep souls back from submission to the Church”.
    What Hughes terms Vaughan’s “ruthlessly logical approach” finds support in observations made by Snead-Cox and Wilfrid Ward. Snead-Cox noted that Vaughan’s application of some theological proposition to everyday life often had “little regard for the special circumstances and without a thought for such an irrelevancy as the feelings of the person concerned.” Wilfrid Ward saw Vaughan as a man with “a curious combination of romantic ideals with intensely unromantic details.” He had seen a Vaughan who could override, “almost brutally, the romance of ordinary home life and human love if they stood in his path. Nothing could be more practical than the means he took. He followed the well-known General’s advice to his soldiers, for according to Ward, “he kept his powder dry while he said his prayers. In the mean time Portal had thrown himself into the scheme and published in France, under the pseudonym F. Dalbus, a pamphlet entitled “Les Ordinations Anglicanes.” In it, he called the consecration of Matthew Parker, who had been appointed Archbishop of Canterbury in 1559 by Elizabeth I, valid in terms of the “historical facts,” but expressed doubt concerning the “intentions” of the consecrator. The pamphlet achieved “an astonishing popularity, and attracted the attention of many scholars on both sides of the English Channel” when it was reviewed by Abbe Louis Duchesne, a church historian and author of the Liber Pontificalis, in the Bulletin Critique. Duchesne used Catholic teaching on the sacraments to argue against Portals’ treatment of intention and said, that “the conclusion is, that Anglican Orders may be regarded as valid.’’ Hughes considers the purpose in bringing up the issue of “intention” as a tactical move to get the discussion moving.
    Just as Ambrose Phillippe De Lisle had convinced Nicholas Wiseman, who had in turn convinced Pope Pius IX, that a substantial part of the Church of England was ready to reunite with Rome, so also did Portal and his supporters in Rome convince Leo XIII that the Anglican Church was ready to submit. “I hear they are on the point of coming over,” Pope Leo told Vaughan, who, Edward Norman writes, “had to bear the onus of seeming to be unresponsive and un-open to the daring vision of a wider movement of opinion.” Even the historian Abbot Gasquet, “with realism that was like Vaughan’s, whose opinions he was representing in Rome on the question-was lectured by Leo on ‘how the whole nation was being drawn to Catholicism.’
    In an interview on his first day as Archbishop, Vaughan was asked about Protestants and the Church of England. He stated clearly that “I recognize Protestants as fellow Christians but I do not recognize their religion as the true faith.” He continued: “There are two currents even in the Church of England itself today-one towards Catholicism and the other towards rationalism. It is only what I would expect in a church of so many inconsistencies.” In September 1894, Portal visited Halifax in England and was introduced to Anglican bishops. The Archbishop of Canterbury, E. W. Benson, was very cool to the idea and just as sure of his convictions as Herbert Vaughan. At the same time, Vaughan was annoyed that Portal did not come to visit him at Westminster. Vaughan, writes Hughes, could understand the Church of
    England as a “thoroughly Protestant and Erastian institution” but not the position of an Anglican like Halifax, nor Portal’s advocacy of “friendly theological discussions” that might lead one day to corporate reunion. The Church of England, as he saw it, was a familiar enemy he could come to grips with, “an age-old foe which had oppressed his forefathers.” He would not accept dealing with a Church, that claimed to be “the ancient Catholic Church of this land,” whose archbishop and others denounced him and other Roman Catholics with scorn as “the Italian mission,” who “claimed to feed its children in the Eucharist with the true body and blood of Christ, and to forgive their sins in the sacrament of penance as truly as the pope himself this was too much for Herbert Vaughan.”
    Vaughan’s answer to calls for a “gradual ‘rapprochement’ was characteristically simple and straightforward submission.” He was to repeat it time after time “with a sublime disregard of its negative ‘psychological effect. Individual submission to the see of Peter, he said in a speech at Bristol on 9th September 1895, was the only hope there was for reunion, and the greatest obstacle to this submission was pride.” Any other path suggested for reunion was to him a snare and a delusion, a “trick of Satan to keep people back from the truth.”
    Portal went to Rome and saw Cardinal Rampolla, the Vatican Secretary of State, to whom he gave his impressions of the Church of England. The next day he met with Pope Leo XIII for an hour. Portal suggested that the Pope call for a conference between the Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches. He returned on the third day in hope of receiving a letter from the Pope for Archbishop Benson of Canterbury, but instead he received one from Cardinal Rampolla. The Secretary of State’s.1etter praised Portal’s efforts and expressed a hope that England “return to the only centre of unity.”
    Portal then traveled to England to visit the Archbishop of Canterbury again and received an even cooler reception than the first time. Benson considered it imprudent for such a momentous interview with Halifax and Portal to be just sprung upon him and was “deeply annoyed, and made no attempt to dissimulate his feelings.” Snead-Cox quotes Benson: “Portal had seen only one side of English Church life with Lord Halifax; and that the Pope could have no complete view of England before him.
    Halifax met Pope Leo XIII and proposed a direct offer to the Anglican bishops, bypassing Cardinal Vaughan. Abbot Gasquet brought the news to Vaughan that the Pope had decided to write such a letter to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. Vaughan asked Gasquet to return to Rome, and the Cardinal came close behind, arriving on the evening of 19 January 1895. The next day he saw the Pope at 12 noon.
    Vaughan wrote to Fr Farmer at Mill Hill about his visit to the Pope. He had gone first to Cardinal Rampolla and suggested that if the Pope wrote the letter “Ad Anglos”, he should do it as an appeal to all who were seeking the truth in England, just as Jesus did when he taught his disciples how to pray. “I urged upon him the need of trusting more thoroughly to the supernatural in the central government of the Church.”
    On 28 January 1895, Vaughan went to see the Pope. He had been warned by Gasquet through Moyes that the Pope had been convinced by Dalbus and the “French influence” in Rome about the possibility of reunion. “One idiot,” Gasquet continues, “advised the Pope to write to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York.” “We Catholics have all along misjudged most unfairly the position of these good men,” the Pope wrote in a letter received privately by Gasquet. In the matter Gasquet thought “it a most fatal policy to give home authority away like it has done.. No doubt the Cardinal will hear about it when he goes to Rome.”
    Vaughan gave Farmer an unflattering description of Pope Leo’s appearance during his visit: “When he opened his mouth there appeared here and there some rather unpolished tusks-probably not over four or five-a great mouth and dark eyes in a deeply set-face crumpled and not well shaven.”
    Vaughan was greeted “affectionately” and asked, if he had anything interesting from England. “I said I had brought him the results of the bishops’ meeting of January 4th.” Vaughan first spoke of their request to withdraw the prohibition against Catholics attending Oxford and Cambridge. He then commented to Farmer about the conversion of England: “If he appears before England as the Doctor of prayer like his Divine Master, no better preparation could be made for any doctrinal encyclical he might issue later on.. This is a matter that needs much prayer.” The “great work for the conversion of England is thus now in the balance and next week or so may determine whether I am under a delusion or not as to one of the measures that have to be adopted by the Holy Father. “Halifax “and his party” were looking for recognition. “They are also most anxious to get some kind of assurance about their orders, at least a statement that they are possibly valid! But this again is in order to keep souls back from submission to the Church. I have my hands quite full with pressing these facts on people here. At the same time it is most important to keep in touch with these people and if possible to lead them to the truth.” In his conversation with the Pope, Vaughan emphasized that there was no chance of corporate reunion and the only prospect was in the increasing number of converts who were coming into the Roman Church.. He warned the Pope of Anglican intentions and that they were “all opposed to the supremacy of the Pope, and that his letter could not alter that..” Leo Xll finally told Vaughan that he would issue an “Encyclical on the Church and her Head in the middle of this year, if he lived so long?“
    From the English College Vaughan wrote to Carmel, Notting Hill, concerning the issue, on 25 February 1895: “It has been an unspeakable consolation to me to find that the Vicar of Christ has fully entered into the supernatural way of dealing with England by means of prayer. Lord Halifax is coming out to see and argue! with the Pope. I am in correspondence with him and he is in great need of prayer.. Though so good and earnest, it will be a miracle if he, the head of a sort of sect, is converted. But what cannot prayer do! ‘If Stephen had not prayed, Paul would not have been converted’ says St. Augustine.” On 13 March he wrote again from Rome that “Lord Halifax arrived today and came to me at once to have a good talk. The Holy Father will see him, but I have not much hope of a good result.
    Abbot Gasquet had seen the Pope at the end of January in the presence of the new Secretary of State, Rafael Merry del Val. After the Pope finished speaking, Gasquet took the opportunity to support the warning given earlier by Vaughan. Merry del Val, part English himself, supported Gasquet. According to Hughes, without the assistance of Rafael Merry del Val, “none of those who worked so hard for the condemnation of Anglican orders-not: Gasquet, nor Moyes, nor even Cardinal Vaughan himself could have achieved the outstanding success which ultimately crowned their efforts.” By 1896, for example, Merry del Val, a confidant of the Pope, was convinced that Portal was “spreading heresy and poisoning people’s minds.” The Pope called in Rampolla, and Gasquet repeated what he had told Pope Leo. “That interview was decisive, and the Pope knew that the dream of corporate reunion was not to come true in his time.”
    On 14 April 1895 the Pope issued an apostolic letter, Amantissimae voluntatis, addressed to the English people, urging that a discussion of the validity of ordinations might lead to a conference which could start the process towards reunification. According to Derek Holmes, it is clear that this call by the Pope
    for the English people to pray for the light to know the truth in all its fullness was influenced by Gasquet, Vaughan and Merry del Val. The letter was published in England on 22 April. It was not addressed to the Anglican Archbishops or to the Church of England, but to the whole nation: “To the English people who seek the Kingdom of Christ in the unity of the Faith.” It was an invitation for England to pray for the truth. Towards the end of the letter Ad Anglos, the Pope urged Roman Catholics to pray the rosary for the conversion of England and granted indulgences for doing so. In general, the letter was well-received in England. Even Archbishop Benson spoke of its “honest appeal” but noted that it made no mention of the Anglican Church. Vaughan wrote to Carmel from Paris on 11 May 1895, informing Mother Mary that had he been that day to see the Cardinal Archbishop about an appeal he planned to make throughout the convents of Europe for prayers for England. He had already begun at Orleans. “I have today recommended you and your anxiety to the Mother at Notre Dame des Victoires. I spend my mornings there, not without fruit. ”
    Vaughan explained to Fr Farmer that he had written directly to the Pope: “My letter to him has been a very bold thing to do–but I have done it deliberately.” The letter referred to was probably that of 25 August 1895: “The extreme importance to the Church in England of the way in which the Anglican question is treated by Rome is my apology for writing direct to your holiness.” Vaughan warned that it would be a serious mistake if a decision on Anglican orders were made in Rome, “reversing the practice of the Church from the very beginning of the Anglican heresy,” without having fully heard from the theologians and historians of the Catholic Church in England. He did not object to “French Ecclesiastics identifying themselves with Lord Halifax,” but asked that the Pope allow the English hierarchy to “see their
    statements and arguments.” “We fear lest matters closely concerning the Church in England should be discussed and carried on towards a decision without our knowledge and behind our back.”
    Vaughan was in favor of an examination of the question but “if the representatives of the Catholic Church in England are excluded, while foreigners who are partisans obtain a place and a dominant influence in certain quarters, the discontent and mischief in England will be of the gravest kind.”
    He then reminded the Pope that the previous April he had asked that if a commission on the subject of Anglican orders were formed, he would be informed and the Pope would appoint two or three English experts to the commission. Shortly after an announcement at the Preston Conference, in September 1895, that Rome was going to reopen formally the question of the validity of Anglican orders, a committee was formed in London to consider the evidence. The year 1896 was also to see the publication in June of the encyclical De Unitate addressed to all the bishops of the Church. In March 1896 Pope Leo XIII appointed an international commission to meet in Rome to look into the question. Cardinal Mazzella presided and Merry del Val was secretary; Merry del Val kept Vaughan informed. The members of the commission were
    Gasquet, de Augustinis, Duchesne, Gasparri, Fleming, and Moyes. The pro-validity members also had the help of Anglicans, Lacey and Puller, who supplied them with information from England. Two more members were added: Fr T. Scannell and Jose Calasanzio de Llevaneras.
    On 30 April 1896 Vaughan wrote to Archbishop James Smith in Scotland asking for his support:
    “The English Bishops have unanimously desired me to express to the Holy See their opinion on Anglican orders. They consider that any departure from the tradition of 300 years, during which the Church has treated them as invalid, would be a shock and a scandal to the faithful. They hold that Anglican Orders are not valid and would pray the Holy See to declare them invalid, if such be its judgment. They consider that this modern pretention of Anglicans to possess sacerdotal powers is being pushed, and that recognition of them by Rome is being sought, in order to give color to the Anglican Communion to be an integral part of the Church Catholic, and hinder conversions. It would be exceedingly valuable if we could add the adhesion of the Irish and Scotch Archbishops to our letter to the Holy Father. I should, therefore, be very grateful if your grace would give me your adhesion to this letter, or a letter, which I might use, not of course for publication!
    The commission met on twelve occasions between 24 March and 5 May 1896. Vaughan’s letter, in the name of the bishops of England and Wales, accompanied by letters of support from Archbishop Smith and the bishops of Ireland and Scotland, was sent to Mazzella on 10 May 1896. Tavard considers the document disingenuous: “It showed both a ferocious determination to stop any recognition of Anglican orders, and a great ignorance of the theological mood of the Church of England past and present.” In his opinion, the emotional appeal of the letter needs to be remembered. The devil was “at work in the Anglo-Catholic movement,” and a happy result might be expected from a condemnation; a large influx of converts. It was a line of thought that could not be dismissed by a pastorally-minded pope, who lived before the start of the ecumenical movement.” The final vote took place on 7 May 1896. Voting for recognition of Anglican orders were Louis Duchesne and the Jesuit Emilio De Augustinis. Pietro Gasparri and another member said that the orders were doubtful. “The Vaughan group voted against it.” According to Tavard, the commission could not reach a conclusion and handed its documentation to the Dominican Raffaele Pierotti. Leo XIII asked him to sum up the commission’s work and present the findings to the Holy Office, which would make a formal recommendation to the Pope!
    On Thursday, 16 July, the Holy Office met in the presence of the Pope and voted unanimously that Anglican orders were not valid. Only the Secretary of State, Mariano Rampolla, was absent. On 10 August Vaughan wrote to Mother Mary of Jesus from Llandrindod, Wales:
    I am having a novena to our Lady to help the Holy Father in the matter of Anglican Orders. It is important that nothing should be said of his intentions, because your Abbe Portal, and my Halifax and one of my own colleagues in Rome would exert every effort to hinder the condemnation of Anglican Orders, if they thought a condemnation likely. I hear all over the country they are resting in their sacerdotal offices and care very little for the Encyclical compared to the idea that they are sacrificing priests. This is the last ruse of the devil to keep the people in heresy and schism. Much prayer is therefore needed just now.”
    The validity of Anglican orders was formally rejected in the papal document Apostolicae Curae of 13 September 1896. It was composed by Merry del Val.32
    The expectation that the numbers of conversions would increase if submission to the authority of the pope was clearly demanded was not fulfilled. The Pope, one month after the decision, sent a letter to Vaughan concerning the economic hardship experienced by converted Anglican clergymen. Leo XIII expressed his own ideas on conversions from the Anglican Church and, from his initiative, the Convert’s Aid Society was formed.

    LikeLike

20. Dear Mr. Duquette,

    You may not remember me, but we had two or three “edgy” exchanges on Pontifications back in, I think 2004, about Catholicism and Anglicanism, and then you, as it were, disappeared. Now, quite by chance, I stumbled on your blog, and wish to offer you my congratulations for your return to Catholicism.

    You may perhaps be aware that “the Pontificator” (Fr. Al Kimel) became a Catholic in June 2005 and then was ordained a Catholic priest in December 2006. I had the pleasure and honor of being at his ordination.

    With best wishes,

    William Tighe

    LikeLike

21. Mr. Tighe, I don’t remember the particular exchange you mention, but I certainly remember your name–I didn’t really disappear, I simply went back to lurking. But I kept tabs on Fr. Kimel’s progress, and his journey had an influence on mine, even if I found lots of what he had to say….disturbing. At least at that point. 🙂 In any event, thank you for your welcome!

    LikeLike

22. Come to think of it (not that it matters) our little “clash” may have been on “Midwestern Conservative Journal.”

    LikeLike

23. Thank you so much for sharing your journey. God bless you.

    LikeLike

24. William, was it possibly about Bishop Bruno? In which case, I own I was mistaken.

    LikeLike

25. Thanks for posting the details and insights of your journey. I was confirmed last week in the Roman Catholic Church after 40 years of faithful participation in the Episcopal Church. Your thinking in reaching the decision you made is strikingly similar to my own. I too asked God for guidance and found it each time I went to mass in the form of the Roman Churches “tangibility” (for lack of a better word to use). I also came to realize that the Catholic Church as an historical and religion institution has had to be all things to all people at all times in all cultures and that its moral theolgy, while troublesome to many in our contemprary times, must deal in absolutes. But this fact, I came to understand, in no way subordinates one’s conscience or capacity to think for themselves.

    LikeLike

Comments are closed.