Although I was not present at the signing of the Portsmouth Petition, Bishops Langberg and Williams signed for the ACA. [The list is incomplete -- Campese, Moyer, and Falk also signed, all then ACA bishops. I suspect the omission is deliberate.] The text of the petition was not publicized until months later. I did not know of the contents of that petition until it was delivered orally by Archbishop Falk at a meeting of several ACA bishops in 2008. That meeting was held in Fort Worth. Also present were bishops Iker and Wantland of The Episcopal Church. Upon hearing the text, it was my impression that the petition sought “organic unity” with the Roman Catholic Church on a corporate basis. Indeed, that is what I and others had been led to believe was in fact on the table.In other words, what went on in Portsmouth in 2007 was of so little interest to Marsh that he showed no curiosity about it until sometime in 2008, when he listened to an oral presentation from Louis Falk, and his version is that Falk and Hepworth misled him as to what was in it. I'm not going to disagree that Falk made a misleading presentation -- I've found other reason to question his credibility over Anglicanorum coetibus here. But Marsh's lack of curiosity is remarkable. Marsh goes on:
The Portsmouth Petition was just that – a petition. To suggest that it was a contract of any kind would be to misrepresent the intent of the document. The Portsmouth Petition was a request on the part of some members of the College of Bishops, a request for a means whereby the TAC might enter into unity with the RC Church.The Vatican had no reason not to take the Portsmouth Letter seriously, and more importantly, parishes within the TAC who responded favorably had every reason to rely on Hepworth's eventually necessary assurance to them that they would be protected from the adverse actions of ACA bishops. (In the end, the ACA purged Hepworth, regained full control, and resumed adverse actions. But it wasn't a contract, so ordinary bad faith is OK!)
Then we have:
The signing of the Roman Catholic Catechism as the most complete statement of the catholic faith was simply a statement of fact. The subsequent statement that the bishops aspired to teach that catechism in no way implied their full acceptance of the catechism nor their intent or desire to become members of the Roman Catholic Church. While there were undoubtedly some bishops present who wished to do just that, the simple signing of the catechism does not imply their wish to become Roman Catholics.This is meaningless and absurd. (I'm told that Bishop Strawn has given this version privately as well, so notwithstanding Marsh's assertion that he's speaking only for himself, this is apparently received ACA opinion.) The problem continues to be that ACA members had every reason to take the Portsmouth Letter as a good-faith expression of what the denomination intended. Marsh here has aleady acknowledged:
- He had little interest in the letter when it was issued;
- he didn't read it;
- he relied a year later on Falk's unreliable oral representation of what was in it;
- and as soon as it was convenient, he said it didn't mean anything anyhow.
A few hundred “former Anglicans” have entered the Ordinariate established here, along with some former Episcopalians. . . . Although individuals are welcome to seek membership in the Ordinariates, until now few have chosen to do so. We certainly wish those who have entered Ordinariates godspeed! We pray that they will be happy with the choices they have made. We believe God has called us to labor in another part of the vineyard and we will attempt to do so as best we can.Marsh is utterly misrepresenting the situation here. The number that has already entered the US Ordinariate seems to be between 1-2000, not far from the original estimate of Cardinal Wuerl in 2011, and probably equal to or larger than the entire ACA. Second, as Marsh must certainly be aware, the major focus of Anglicanorum coetibus was to allow Anglicans to become Catholics in groups, not only in parishes but conceivably in dioceses, and former ACA parishes -- some of its most important, in fact -- have indeed joined the Ordinariate on that basis. It's not just individuals, and not just a few!
But third, Marsh and the ACA most definitely have not wished them "godspeed"! The House of Bishops specifically read former ACA Bishop and Portsmouth Letter signer Louis Campese's Pro-Diocese out of the ACA in its letter of January 10, 2012 in decidedly non-conciliatory terms. It then proceeded to seize St Mary of the Angels Hollywood, another Ordinariate-bound parish, which had voted twice in accordance with its Bylaws to join the Ordinariate, and a third time to leave the ACA. It also excommunicated at least nine St Mary's parishioners who had favored the Ordinariate on the sole and spurious grounds of "abandonment of communion", presumably for the sin of wanting to join the Ordinariate. Godspeed indeed! (It's worth pointing out that the former ACA parishes that have gone into the Ordinariate were among the largest and most successful of a generally scrawny bunch. Even the 64 members in good standing of St Mary's prior to the excommunications placed it among the ACA's very largest.)
I simply don't know what game Fr Chadwick is playing here -- if I had to characterize it based on what I'm seeing, I might call it footsie. In his current series of posts on the TAC, he's giving thoroughly disreputable figures like Brian Marsh, who has officially expressed the ACA's complete confidence in the despicable Anthony Morello, an uncritical platform. If in his own complicated priestly journey he's painted himself into this particular corner, I can only offer a heavily qualified sympathy. But as the saying goes, he who sups with the devil best have a long spoon.
