I think that in the fairly short term, St Mary of the Angels will get itself free from the ACA and from the hard-core angry dissidents. I need to think about what my goals will be when that happens. My wife and I became Catholic two years ago come Easter because we looked at our age and the likelihood that it would be a long time before St Mary's could enter the US Ordinariate, if it ever did. Since our chief goal was to become Catholic, having good music or a certain style of mass was secondary. We went in via RCIA.
I haven't spoken with Fr Kelley or the elected vestry about what their plans will be once the legal issues are resolved. I assume the parish's position hasn't changed since its letter to the Holy Father of January 2013. I have no idea what the Ordinariate's position is on this matter.
Since my wife and I became Catholic, we're no longer voting members of the parish in its present form, although we often visit the parish following its Sunday mass and attend many court sessions. I can't offer advice, although my personal view is that moving to any other "continuing Anglican" denomination would be no better than returning to the ACA.
If anyone ever did ask me for advice about going to a "continuing Anglican" church, my answer would be simple: you have no assurance that any priest or bishop has been to seminary. You have no assurance that they weren't thrown out of another denomination for something pretty awful. You have no assurance that they've had an adequate background check. In other words, based on what I've learned, it's reckless and dangerous even to go to a mass there. Period. But especially with children.
And of course, there's the old saying about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
So it would be a worthwhile thing if the parish renewed its effort to enter the Ordinariate, but this depends on the Ordinariate. And this leads me to what I think is a dilemma for Anglo-Catholics: since the hope of Anglicanorum coetibus and the reality of the Ordinariate of the Diocese of Ft Worth and Msgr Steenson, the air pretty quickly went hissing out of that balloon. Someone e-mailed me just the other day basically agreeing with what I've said here: the US Ordinariate is nothing but a clone of half a dozen "continuing" denominations, run by an inner clique, a few dozen widely scattered parishes and missions, not much enthusiasm, not much future.
Andrew Bartus went through a background check, so I'd trust kids with him, but I don't know if I'd stay awake for a homily. And frankly, he wouldn't care, and neither would Steenson, and that's what's important to Bartus. So there's the dilemma. And it's not just a dilemma here in Hollywood.
The Catholic blog I follow is Fr Z. More to focus my mind than expecting an answer (he doesn't seem to answer Ordinariate-related questions, probably for very good reasons), I left the following in the "Ask Father" form:
The Holy Father has asked us to create a stir. There are few places more needful of a prod, perhaps even as a Lenten project, than the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter. Lethargy, thy name is Steenson. How might one best direct efforts in this direction?Maybe this is the direction I need to take now with this blog, but I don't kid myself it will be anything like easy. If anyone has insights into how one might proceed to "create a stir" or "make a mess" (depending on how you translate the Holy Father's words) as it relates to the US Ordinariate, my e-mail is on the right.
