The other day a wretchedly scandalous thing took place in the Lateran Basilica. A group of English Anglicans had their liturgy, like a Mass but of course invalid because they don’t have valid orders, at an altar in the apse of Rome’s cathedral, St. John Lateran. They were led by an Anglican “bishop” who is a highly elevated Mason, divorced and then civilly remarried.
While it seems that this is the perfect scenario for some of the things suggested in the synodal (“walking together”) process over the last 10 years, it seems that their use of the Lateran was just simple matter of screwed up comms.
The Lateran released this:
Rome, 20 April 2023
STATEMENT
The Lateran Chapter, in the person of His Excellency Bishop Guerino Di Tora, Chapter Vicar, expresses deep regret for what happened last Tuesday, 18 April, inside the Basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome. In fact, a group of about 50 clergymen, accompanied by their bishop, all belonging to the Anglican communion, celebrated on the high altar of Rome’s cathedral, in contravention of canonical norms. Monsignor Di Tora also explained that the unfortunate episode was caused by a breakdown in communication,
His Excellency, Bishop Guerino Di Tora Vicar of the Archpriest of the Lateran Basilica
In sum:
“What we have here is a failure to communicate!”
One does not want to ascribe to malice what can be explained by stupidity. So, there is a probability that the no-doubt ultra-competent folks at the Lateran had no idea that these were not, in fact, just regular Catholic Brits in Rome for a Thing. Italians get a little star-struck by Brits for some reason I can’t fathom. “You lika da altare big? We givea you da altare!”
Of course had some group wanting to use the ROMAN RITE in the Basilica had come along they might not have been met with such a cordial welcome.
I can’t tell from the photos of the event if there were female “priestesses” or “deaconettes” among the Anglicans. That might have been a clue to the certainly ultra-observant folks at the Lateran. Or maybe not, given how things are going in that ecclesial community… roles tend to merge and verge, etc., and there are old women of both sexes even in the Catholic Church. Particularly. Widespread toxic masculinity is not really an Anglican thing right now, I believe.
Benedict XVI, the Pope of Christian Unity, didn’t have this sort of thing in mind when he set up the Ordinariates through Anglicanorum coetibus.
I suppose the German Lutherans will now show up and they will be taken for members of the ongoing SynodalWeg (“zusammen gehen”) and they will be allowed to use the Lateran’s central, papal altar. Note of sincere regrets to follow.
Meanwhile, Eccles has this report….
Vicar of St John Lateran apologises for Aztec Service
The vicar of the Basilica of St John Lateran, Rome, has expressed his “profound regret” that an Aztec service of human sacrifice was celebrated on the main altar on Tuesday, contrary to church law.
A Novus Ordo Aztec Sacrifice.
The service, conducted by Bishop Bakerhuatl and his colleague the beautiful Bishop Mullalotl, used the standard “Novus Ordo” Aztec liturgy out of consideration of Catholic sensibilities. Said Cardinal Roche on hearing of the event, “Well, at least it wasn’t an Extraordinary Form Sacrifice conducted in Latin!”
Church Law is very strict about which religions can use the Basilica of St John Lateran. For example, Anglican ceremonies would also be forbidden; this is because the Anglicans already use many churches that were built by Catholics for Catholics, and they have to be watched carefully in case they try to appropriate some more.
“Do you think they’ll notice if we change the locks on this church as well?”
The vicar explained that the Aztec service was permitted on account of a “miscommunication”. That is, Bishop Bakerhuatl made a friendly phone call asking how St John Lateran was coping with the latest dictates from Arthur Roche and was told “We must all make sacrifices these days”.
He naturally understood this as an instruction to go ahead.
Staff from Guinness World Records are rushing to Rome to confirm that an apology has actually taken place. “If so, it will be the first apology we’ve received from the Vatican since 2013,” explained one staff member.
Loading ...
Wait, what? I thought this was Babylon Bee. Now you’re telling me they are renting out our highest basilica to any dissident or pagan group that wants it…not just the protected Amazonians? Guess some pagans are more equal than others!
“highly elevated Mason, divorced and then civilly remarried.”
At he was civil about it.
I’m afraid that if (when) the German bishops ever tie the knot it’ll be anything but civil.
Why do Anglicans even go to Rome? It seems to me like Americans wanting to visit England in 1784. I don’t get it.
What’s really sad is that in some of these pictures these Anglicans look more Catholic than actual Catholics.
Is any of this surprising given the the Pope just gave a relic of the Holy Cross for King Chuckle’s coronation?
Mendacity is the order of the day.
@Ariseyedead
The English have been obsessed with Italy since the rise of the Stuart monarchs. Most post-Elizabethan culture is directly copied from Italy.
Arisyedead, clearly it’s because Anglicanism is the “Catholic Church in England,” donchaknow? {eyeroll} Either that, or it’s rather like going to visit Dear Old Aunt Edna–she has all the nice furniture and everything’s like it was back in Edwardian/Victorian times, and it’s always sweet to check up on the Dear Old Thing. After all, one should make an effort to check in on her every now and again…
Is there anything canonically that needs to be done now? They didn’t exactly profane the altar but there’s a wrongness about it.
Your use of that wonderful quote from “Cool Hand Luke” is appropriate in so many of today’s situations. Of course, eating a lot of hard boiled eggs might be appropriate, too!
Elsewhere, someone claimed to have read that the group identified themselves as anglo-Catholic, and were misunderstood as meaning members of the Anglican Ordinariate.
I received that claim at least 3rd hand, so I am repeating it here at least 4th hand. Although seemingly plausible, it should be treated as unreliable information.
Responding to Father:
While the matter of “anglo-Catholic” confusion is speculative, I’m pretty certain we can at least rule out the possibility of female priestesses in this case. The Anglican group has consistently been reported as being led by the bishop of Fulham. This position specifically exists as a flying bishop – one of those responsible for Anglicans who do not accept female ordination.
As I looked for more information, I was also intrigued by evidence of just how strongly this group of Anglicans might feel about their church’s Catholic heritage. The See of Fulham website openly notes the following about one of the bishop’s predecessors:
I would think saying anything more than “retired” would be sort of scandalous to most Anglicans. I can’t help but wonder many of those under the pastoral care of the See of Fulham may someday return to Rome.
Anglicans at St. John Lateran, Buddhists in a church in Assisi in 1986 courtesy of John Paul II’s World Day of Prayer. Getting to be a habit.
The worst of it is that the Protestants felt right at home using that free-standing table .
A few thoughts, in no particular order:
1) I, as an Anglican, suspect this was a test balloon. “Let’s see what the reaction is if we allow this…”
2) Not all Anglicans are alike, just as not all Roman Catholics are alike. Yes, the Church of England and the Episcopal Church have gone over the edge. But there are others who hold to the Faith. These particular Anglicans are considered by many in the CofE to be too conservative, too traditional. They do not accept the ordination of women to the priesthood, though there is at the very least an administrative participation by female bishops, as they are part of the Church of England. They aren’t quite the Anglican corollary to the SSPX (That would be the Anglican Catholic Church/Anglican Province of America) but they have taken a stand for the gospel.
3) I, as an Anglican, am saddened by the “highly elevated Mason, divorced, and then civilly remarried” part. In my diocese, any of this would prevent ordination.
4) To answer the question, “Why do Anglicans even go to Rome…” Why would we not? It is the capita mundi, the city of Peter and Paul, the place where Gregory sent Augustine to evangelize England, the city and Church which built so much of Western Civilization…
5) I’m really saddened by some of the anti-Anglican postings I’ve seen in the last few days. I get it. I really do. I don’t diminish the problems that exist, but some of us really are on the side of traditional catholics. We traditional Anglicans are trying to help preserve the Roman Rite, often behind the scenes. Sometimes not behind the scenes. One of our cathedrals is hosting Dr. Kwasnewski tomorrow evening…
6) Relative to point 2 above, even the word “Anglican” is becoming meaningless. Come, Lord Jesus.
As someone who was an Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian for 10 years before swimming the Tiber I sympathize with what @21stCentury Anglican says. It was hard leaving the beautiful liturgy and communion kneeling at a communion rail for the Novus Ordo and receiving on the hand in the “supermarket line” at our local Catholic Church. Thank God for Summorum Pontificum and the Traditional Latin Mass which made me realize that the Catholic Church could have the best of both worlds. I wish more faithful Anglicans would abandon the Anglican Communion and help bring the Catholic Church back to its roots.
Ruminating on this…I go back to the mantra that “Never ascribe to malice what can be accounted for by stupidity” recalling, as someone mentioned, they probably presented themselves as “Anglo-Catholic” and whomever was in charge just rubber-stamped their request. IIRC, way back in the 90s, the moderator/founder of a bitnet/usenet (remember them?) newsgroup presented themselves as small-c ‘catholic’ though she was a member of the Episcopal sect. So it goes.
The message from the Lateran post-event is just a CYA exercise.
Fact remains that a consecrated Catholic altar was used by a protestant sect for their ‘mass’. Sorry, saying that it was not used for the simulation of a sacrament celebrated by a Mason (his clerical ‘rank’ notwithstanding) in an ecclesial community not in union with Rome is denying the evidence to the contrary. So, either the Lateran did not do its due diligence or the group in question decided to ignore Catholic sensibilities and go ahead anyway. “Hey ma, lookie here!”
Or…it is just another example of ecumenicism run wild?
The former could be ascribed to laziness, the latter to hubris.
I wonder…if a group of traditionalist Catholics from the US, led by a friendly bishop, appeared at the doors to Westminster Abbey and asked to hold a solemn High Mass in the Abbey, if they’d be ushered in and given access to a church claimed by the CoE post-reformation?
Forgive me, Fr. Z, but I sincerely doubt that this was a mistake. It is right in line with what the powers that be in the Vatican want. As usual, I expect nothing to be done except the continuing rise in restrictions of the TLM, and the persecution of traditional Catholics.
After the Amazonian debacle, the “fool me once, etc.” saying has kicked into gear. I don’t buy it.
This episode reminds me of something that happened to me in my days as a young Anglican parson almost forty years ago. A group of us (all clergy) were on holiday in Rome and a contact in London had assured us before our departure that Anglican clergy were now allowed to celebrate in S. Peter’s.
Despite our scepticism, we decided to test the assertion and presented ourselves in the sacristy of S. Peter’s late one afternoon. The helpful sacristan told us that private Masses could only be celebrated in the early morning but that a concelebrated Mass would begin shortly. He gestured to a clothes rail with a load of chasuble on hangers. We pointed out again that we were Anglicans but the sacristan smiled and pointed again at the row of chasuble a hanging up.
At that we muttered an apology and skedaddled out of there in some considerable confusion. Later that evening we had dinner with a very friendly English monsignor who worked in Rome. He roared with laughter on hearing our tale and surmised that the sacristan thought that Anglicans were a new religious order he’d not heard of.
Anyway, something of that Roman sojourn rubbed off on us; within a decade nearly all of us had become Catholics.
You have to admire the Anglican chutzpah for requesting access to the altar
saying that [the altar] was not used for the simulation of a sacrament […] is denying the evidence to the contrary.
It need not necessarily have been simulation of a sacrament: the celebrant’s orders may have what they, I hear, call a “Dutch touch”, i. e., validity imported from Old Catholic bishops. (The Anglican Orders decision rests on the fact that a past change in the ritual made all Anglican bishops died out. It even cited the fact that the Anglicans themselves felt it insufficient, so they changed it again [but then no real bishops were alive], as further evidence.)
I very much doubt that was checked, though.
One other thing: as far as simulation-of-a-sacrament goes, the celebrants and participants were subjectively guiltless because they did not know they were doing that; they thought they were having Mass even if they were actually not.
The rest is true, though.
@ 21stCentury Anglican
I appreciate your post to share with us the perspective from the Anglican side.
Please don’t be troubled by anti-Anglican postings. I would say not many Catholics have a very good understanding of the Church of England, and tend to think of all non-Catholic Christian denominations as similar, which allows for a very wide variety of stereotypes.
Additionally, I would describe most of the commentary on our side about this matter as primarily frustrated by the Catholic Church seeming to abandon our own norms in pursuit of a misguided form of ecumenism, but merely confused by the wish of any Anglicans to conduct a liturgy in the Lateran Basilica rather than angry at your church as a whole.
@iamlucky13 et al.
“rather than angry at your church as a whole.”
I’m also mad about the theft of property, the destruction of Christendom, and the dethronement of a lawful king. All of which they were complicit in.
These things aside, sentiment doesn’t make the Church Catholic, the facts do. What kind of facts? How might St. Thomas More have phrased it:
https://youtu.be/MlANWgyK2PY
Catholicism is in the essence, not the accidents of sentiment.
Monstrance: Some Anglicans actually celebrate their liturgies “ad orientem” to this day. My parents’ Anglican priest does. It’s a posture that CS Lewis definitely promoted- I paraphrase from memory “sometimes the priest faces God and speaks to God on our behalf; other times he faces the congregation and speaks to us on God’s behalf.”