Boring

I was born across the river in Philadelphia, but my family moved to New Jersey soon after that, and I was a New Jersey boy until I was 15. So it was with some interest that I saw a screen shot of a discussion on the Anglican Ordinariate Facebook group about an Episcopalian parish in Hackensack, NJ that failed in an attempt to join the North American ordinariate. Thanks to my regular correspondent, here it is. (Click on the image for larger print).

I mean no disrespect to the fine people of Hackensack, but from the time I grew up nearby, there was something about that town's name that made me think it must be a terribly boring place. That it would have an Episcopalian parish that didn't make it into the ordinariate somehow strikes me as par for the course.

Only a handful of TEC parishes have ever succeeded in coming in with their property, clergy, and vestries, even though this was the clear purpose of Anglicanorum coetibus. The sun shone in this case yet again, having no alternative, on the nothing new.

Several things strike me about the discussion. One is the complete lack of insight into the situation from any of the participants, with the exception of a later contribution by a former Hackensack parishioner, John J O'Sullivan. A screen shot is below:

Mr O'Sullivan's account gives perspective to particularly obtuse remarks by Fr Stainbrook, to the effect that the ordinariate doesn't publicize the intent of TEC parishes to join the ordinariate until they make it public themselves, due to the serious repercussions that could ensue. But for starters, no parish leaves TEC without serious repercussions, no matter when, with very, very rare exceptions. Ask the ACNA. But then Mr O'Sullivan points out that the parish did make its intention public -- only to be told a week later by Bp Lopes that its TEC priest could not be ordained in the ordinariate, which killed the whole deal.

Couldn't that somehow have been better timed? But Mr O'Sullivan goes on to raise two other interesting points. The first is the strong implication that the process of deciding to join the ordinariate was actually extremely divisive for the parish, and in fact Mr O'Sullivan speaks from the standpoint of a leader in the losing faction. How on earth could this process have been healthy for anyone involved? It takes me back to the stories I've heard over and over, from the decades of controversy at St Mary of the Angels to the stories that have emerged from parishes and dioceses that left TEC for the ACNA. No good seems to come from any of this.

There's a second and more disturbing thread in Mr O'Sullivan's account. He heavily deprecates the nearby diocesan Catholic parish, which he accuses of opposing the TEC parish's entry into the ordinariate on the basis that it would poach the Spanish-speaking parishioners (?). And he's extremely bitter about the "bad Tobin" and, it would seem, the diocesan Church generally. This seems to be behind his move to an Eastern rite jurisdiction, rather than a diocesan parish.

I repeat my experience, that it's entirely possible to find a successful diocesan parish with a reverent OF mass just about anywhere. If you have to drive an extra 15 minutes, so be it. The puzzling thing is the strain of opinion I see from Mr O'Sullivan and others, common in the ordinariate, that they're somehow too good to be diocesan Catholics. If they can't be special and exclusive in the ordinariate, then by golly, they're gonna be special and exclusive some other way. The lack of insight by contributors to the discussion, such as Fr Stainbrook and Mr Reed, is a symptom of what I think is missing here.

The only good thing here is how few people the ordinariate involves.