St. Mary of the Angels, its pastor, and Abp. Hepworth are all participating in independent congregationalism, which is not what Roman Catholicism is about. Perhaps SMA has no other choice at this point but to try to seek entry into the OCSP. But there is nothing that prevents its parishioners, Fr. Kelley, and Abp. Hepworth from seeking reception in the Catholic church—in the case of the Abp. I think all it should require is a confession. This business of waiting to all go in together, or to come “with the building,” etc., might be a nice team-building exercise but it is wrong-minded from a Catholic point of view, if they really want to be Roman Catholics (imho, of course).I'm certainly among those who felt it would be more prudent to go in via RCIA than wait for the uncertainties of reception via Anglicanorum coetibus. One side-effect for me was to come more in contact with the full scope of Catholic tradition. As I said several years ago, Bl John Henry Newman is one thing, St Thomas Aquinas is another thing entirely.St. Mary the Virgin withdrew from the Diocese of Ft. Worth fully three years before their reception into the Catholic church, and I often wondered under whose authority Fr. Hawkins considered himself, as he celebrated mass for those three years. He did have a promise of pastoral care from his future Catholic bishop of Ft. Worth, however.
Still, states of limbo are to be avoided, and COULD be avoided, if people would abandon this white-knuckle grip on phony baloney Anglican “patrimony” and just join the one true universal church of God. I think that, like recovering alcoholics, they would then find that everything just falls into place.
On the other hand, the parish, Abp Hepworth, and Fr Kelley are doing nothing more than playing the hand they were dealt. From a pastoral perspective, I believe Fr Kelley felt he needed to take the parish into a better alternative than the ACA, though I believe from his account, he had been leaning toward Orthodox and only slowly began to favor Anglicanorum coetibus. As a shepherd of a flock, he was certainly obligated to think beyond what was good for his own salvation.
I don't disagree that Anglicanorum coetibus has definite syncretistic elements, including the fact that it encourages congregationalism. The idea has flaws, as did the Pastoral Provision, whose flaws Bp Lopes clearly acknowledges. I don't know if someone could get Bp Lopes into the sort of freewheeling exchange Abp Hepworth enjoys, but I suspect he would acknowledge this of ordinariates as well. My surmise is that he privately feels the CDF has also dealt him a particular hand, and he has to play it as well as he can.
At this point, I think it's important to recognize that the parish followed Abp Hepworth's leadership, as expressed in the 2007 Portsmouth letter, in expressing a desire for corporate union with Rome under the terms Rome gave it. The parish then entered the process of joining the OCSP in complete good faith. While one might find flaws in the terms given and in the process, the parish has been doing what it was told. A limbo period, long or short, was going to be inevitable given the way things were implemented.
Actually, I don't believe Abp Hepworth or Fr Kelley is doing anything at variance with a continued good-faith attempt at corporate union with Rome under the terms Rome gave it. Let's keep in mind that the Patrimony of the Primate was set up specifically as a "holding tank" for parishes wishing to proceed with Anglicanorum coetibus. As things fell out, all the other parishes in the Patrimony either entered the OCSP or withdrew, leaving SMA as the last one standing. But this doesn't change the parish's continuing canonical status that began in late 2010 and continues.
Visitors are reading various positive and negative implications here. I would say that as of mid-2012, Abp Hepworth had a series of health crises, from which he began to recover at roughly the same time, late 2015, that the parish began to dig itself out of its litigation problems. At that point, I think the best interpretation would be that he actively resumed the role in which he saw himself before 2012 -- but this role was not at variance, as far as I can see, with the role that he played in bringing a number of TAC bodies into the Church.
You can complain about the hand people have been dealt, but my view is the parish, its pastor, and Abp Hepworth are playing the hand in good faith. From a personal standpoint, I wouldn't have wanted that particular hand, but that's just how things are.
