OK, Let's Get Real

I've had a couple of interesting reactions to yesterday's post on the sketchy attendance -- or at least, the appearance thereof -- at the institution mass at St John the Baptist Bridgeport, PA. The points my visitors raise boil down to these:

• I see the glass as half empty, others may see it as half full. The spaces in the pews in fact represent the parish's potential for growth
• And attendance notwithstanding, the parish is meeting its cathedraticum, as well as a hefty assessment in the Bishop's Appeal. It has paid for, and is maintaining, its building.

My knowledgeable regular correspondent, whose familiarity with the details of the OCSP makes me wonder why neither Bp Lopes nor Msgr Steenson has made greater use of this individual, tells me that my estimate of 100 in the church on November 18 is probably right -- parish bulletins on regular Sundays show attendance considerably lower; 100 would be a really good day.

Nevertheless, my correspondent pointed me to the OCSP's Guide to Parish Development. On Page 5, the minimum size for a parish is listed as 30 families or 100 members. My correspondent feels that this makes the Bridgeport parish eligible to be designated as such, but I think there has to be acknowledgement that it is squeaking by at the bare minimum if it can muster 100 on only the best days.

Stability is another criterion, and naturally, this is especially important if the parish is hovering at the minimum criterion for membership. It's worth pointing out that that capacious nave with so much room for growth must be heated in the winter, and presumably for daily offices. Winter hasn't even started in Philly, and I assume the parking lot has to be plowed as well. What kind of resources are available for emergency organ and furnace repair? My correspondent asks, "The big questions are whether the parish can grow to a size where the disappearance of particular donors will not have a serious impact, and who will be available to replace Fr Ousley."

My correspondent points out as well, "Fr Ousley is a retired TEC clergyman and presumably has pension income. He is 65, the second-oldest of the current OCSP pastors, but he seems to be an active and dynamic leader." This raises two questions. Is the parish getting a bargain in the pastor's salary and benefits if Fr Ousley can rely on his TEC pension and health care? And how does the OCSP plan to replace him five years down the road with its current small crop of seminarians?

Another point neither visitor raised yesterday is the general demographics apparent in the photos of the mass: lots of gray hair, no multigenerational groups. This is a big contrast to my successful diocesan parish, where my wife and I exchange the peace with well-behaved and reverent children and teens every Sunday. And this goes to what I think is a central problem in Anglicanorum coetibus: the account of Bp Pope's and Msgr Steenson's 1993 meeting with Cardinal Ratzinger, as well as Fr Barker's account of the Pastoral Provision, both make the point that the market for the constitution was disaffected US Episcopalians and "continuing" Anglicans.

The size of this group has always been overstated, according to its chief historian, Mr Bess. But people familiar with the movement, like David Virtue, have made the point that it is in fact graying, and whatever appeal "continuing" groups had in the late 20th century has been superseded largely by the low-church ACNA, definitely not a Catholic-friendly market. The visible attendance at the Bridgeport institution was, let's face it, overwhelmingly aging baby boomers, a low birthrate group, and nobody was visible there from their progeny. Period. I won't go into vocations.

So let's back up a little and ask what's going on here. Msgr Steenson was summarily "retired" a year ago at 63, a remarkably unusual occurrence in the Church, where the most underperforming bishops frequently last to 75. I think a reasonable explanation (though possibly not the only one) was simply a failure of the OCSP to thrive, although given the factors working against it, often discussed here, this was a predictable result not necessarily Msgr Steenson's fault.

I've got to think the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith came to some kind of a tipping point: fix this thing or shut it down, and Bp Lopes, I would assume, has got to be under some amount of pressure. As a result, with his one-year performance review looming, he had to show some visible progress, and the Bridgeport institution, somewhat iffy in my view, was a "success" he could point to.

This may also be an explanation for the very recent St Alban's fiasco, whereby a remarkably optimistic message was clearly drafted with Fr Perkins's cooperation (and I would have to think approval) and then sent out as, effectively, a press release. Also, I betcha, with Perkins's approval, if not at his specific instigation. The problem is that it bubbled over about Bp Matano's state of mind and effectively committed Bp Matano to doing things a year from now.

Bad move would be my guess, which Houston then told Rochester to pull back in a hurry, trying to blame it on the bloggers, even though Houston had to be behind it. (Bp Lopes, you want me on your side.) But why would the OCSP hierarchy feel the need to make such an ill-advised announcement? Pressure to succeed, or at least to create the appearance of success next year maybe, would be my surmise.

This is a marginal thing. Even after churning out its whole first generation of managers, it's still running an amateur night. I don't give it a whole lot of future, frankly.

Maybe I'm Spoiled

By going to a diocesan parish, but looking at the photos currently posted at Ordinariate News of the institution mass at St John the Baptist, Bridgeport reminds me more of my days in TEC than as a Catholic.

One memory my wife and I have of being Episcopalians is the common experience of having to lean over two rows of pews to exchange the peace. This mass at St John the Baptist was, admittedly, on a Friday night, although the mean temperature for that day in Philadelphia was 56, with no precipitation.

I have simply never seen such a sparse attendance at our diocesan parish, even at noon mass on holy days of obligation. But this was a special occasion -- presumably the most important in the parish's history. No need, it seems, for ushers to direct traffic to the communion rail. My rough guess here is that the maximum attendance would have been maybe 100, including choir and altar party.

I've mused in the past that pushing too hard to provide visuals of success is likely to result in embarrassment over any medium or long term. But realistically speaking, these photos of what ought to be a very special occasion for the parish are on the borderline of discouraging already.

I'm wondering if Bp Lopes is under heavy pressure to show some kind of success with the OCSP.

A Suggestion For Bp Lopes

I've been made aware that certain quarters are unhappy with recent posts here concerning the St Alban's Rochester group. The concern appears to be that the speculation could in fact be a hindrance to the group's progress. I have several observations to make.

• I have passed on information that appears, wisely or not, to have been released on a fairly wide basis. An item of concern, the most recent e-mail from Mr Smith at the Rochester group, was also posted on the Ordinariate News site. As best I can see, there was no breach of confidence in publishing this e-mail. A quick search brings up 23 posts mentioning the St Alban’s group on my blog over a period of years, nearly all based on public releases from the group's lay leadership, with no previous objection.
• The speculation on my blog has been clearly identified as speculation. It has been based on previously published information in the public record, including Fr Catania's sudden departure from Rochester last April, Msgr Steenson's 2015 replacement as Ordinary, and Bp Matano's arrival as Bishop of Rochester in 2014, as well as his characterization as a centrist bishop. I can see no calumny in publishing this speculation. My assumption is that both Bp Lopes and Bp Matano are sincerely doing their best.
• On that basis, although a request was made that I delete the recent posts on the Rochester group, I've got to say that I can't see a reason to do this, especially considering that the same information, often with speculation in the comments, has consistently been published at Ordinariate News over the years.

I'm told that the same request was made of Mr Murphy to delete the announcement from Mr Smith on his blog that was made of me. So far, Mr Murphy hasn't done this. But this indicates the problem is bigger than this blog, or Mr Murphy's blog.

My knowledgeable regular correspondent has often suggested that Houston's press relations function needs work. If Bp Lopes is concerned that bloggers are putting the wrong spin on public information, it would probably be a positive step to find someone who can put the Ordinariate's press relations on a more professional basis. It's worth pointing out that each of the OCSP's parishes and groups puts out individual e-mails and announcements, apparently without central coordination in Houston.

Normally this would be fine -- my diocesan parish bulletins carry lots of announcements covering landscaping projects, school events, and fundraisers that give rise to little speculation. The problem is that events as they apply to Rochester do give rise to speculation. If Houston doesn't like that, it needs to take control of publicity from all parishes and groups, and indeed to take this issue seriously.

I have every good wish for Bp Lopes and the OCSP, but I'm entitled to express my opinion that a good many things still need fixing. My regular correspondent adds,

I suppose if there were obstacles in the past and Fr Perkins is using his skills to remove them he and his Ordinary would not want attention to be drawn to his efforts, lest Bp Matano be reminded of something that would be counterproductive to the OCSP's plan. [We have no reason to think this is the case, except that the concern here may feed such speculation.] But as you say, your role is not to augment the Ordinariate's PR staff. The latter, like that of many other dioceses, exaggerates its ability to control the message, despite the abundant evidence in recent years that this is neither possible nor desirable. It is particularly absurd in the case of the OCSP, whose Communication and Strategic Planning Director's time seems entirely taken up by fund-raising campaigns and attempts to get the membership list, contact information, and other basic matters into some kind of order. The idea that they are trying to get out some kind of coherent message which you are sabotaging is clearly nonsense.

My blogger profile in the sidebar used to include a warning that e-mails are subject to publication here unless there is a specific request to keep the information confidential. (I dropped this when I began two other blogs using the same profile, and I saw no need to adopt this sort of stance there.) Most of my correspondents have understood this precaution, but I want to stress it again here: I definitely keep information confidential when requested, or indeed, without a request if it's clear it shouldn't be public.

However, this particular situation, involving an essentially public announcement, appears to be a policy issue that needed to be better clarified in Houston, and I don't feel a need to correct a problem that should have been addressed there.

More Rochester Comment

A regular visitor notes,

With respect to your recent posts on the situation in Rochester, the web site of the Diocese of Rochester shows that Bishop Matano, previously Coadjutor of the Diocese of Burlington (Vermont), was installed as Bishop of Rochester on 03 January 2014. Here are a few observations.

1. If there was any "bad blood" between the diocese and the ordinariate, or its congregation there, it probably arose during the tenure of the previous bishop and involved Msgr. Steenson's team. Both of those circumstances have changed, perhaps paving the way for relations between the ordinariate and the diocese to move forward.
2. It typically takes a new diocesan bishop several months to figure out who is who and where problems exist in the diocesan curia, then to make the appropriate personnel moves to resolve them.
3. In his former position as Coadjutor of the Diocese of Burlington, Bishop Matano probably had no contact at all with any ordinariate members because the ordinariate did not, and still does not, have a community in that diocese. Upon learning that there was an ordinariate community in his new diocese, which likely did not happen on "day one" of his tenure as bishop, he probably needed some amount of time to understand it. It's also possible that he had concerns about the orthodoxy of clergy coming from an Anglican background. Additionally, if there was previous "bad blood," he probably was getting negative input about it from his inner circle of advisors that he inherited from his predecessor, perhaps including the Bishop Emeritus himself.
4. On the other hand, his diocese has a serious shortage of clergy -- according to the diocesan web site, a couple dozen of its parishes do not have resident clergy. Thus, he probably would welcome anybody who can help the situation, once he was certain of the potential pastor's theological orthodoxy.
5. Of course, none of this discounts the possibility that Bishop Matano might have received some, ah, "guidance" from somebody high up in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or perhaps from the Papal Nuncio, that the establishment of an ordinariate community in his new diocese is an important project that he would do well to support....

But in any case, the new-found support of the Diocese of Rochester for St. Alban's Fellowship is certainly welcome news!

With my visitor, I'm inclined to endorse the Scholastic position that entities should not be multiplied, or that we should take the simplest explanation that fits the known facts. The problem for me is that we do have pieces of the puzzle that don't seem to fit. Bp Matano went to Rochester in 2014, but Fr Catania didn't suddenly leave for Omaha until just last April. It's possible that Bp Matano, replacing a very liberal bishop, had so much on his plate that he couldn't get to resolving any conflict (if it existed) with Houston for a couple of years. But there could be other explanations, too.

From my viewpoint as a centrist diocesan Catholic, I would think that bringing in an OCSP priest resolves only one problem for a bishop like Matano, the shortage of parish priests. Unless the new candidate is exceptional, he doesn't address the cultural issues the Church faces, the dropoff in faithful Catholics, the need to revitalize Catholic education, and so forth.

Rochester News Reaction

My regular correspondent comments,

This is very good news for the St Alban's group. I recall that Msgr Steenson ran into a complete brick wall trying to line up a similar arrangement for Fr Catania so something has certainly changed. I also recall that back in April 2015 Evan Simington was scheduled to make a visit to the St Alban's group. This didn't come off, but even the tentative plan suggests there might be some Rochester connection which made the community of interest to him. Mr Simington is now a deacon as you probably know and one assumes due for priestly ordination in June 2017.

The news item over Fr Catania's sudden move from Rochester to Omaha appeared here in April 2016. The information at the time suggested that the Rochester diocese's opposition to the St Alban's group dated back as far as Msgr Steenson's tenure. What's puzzling is that Bp Matano is generally seen as a conservative or centrist bishop. Anglicanorum coetibus is seen as, at minimum, a pro-liturgy move from a pope who focused on liturgy, although Msgr Steenson, possibly under the influence of Cardinal Wuerl, dissociated the OCSP from Latin mass or traditionalist tendencies.

A reasonable interpretation of events might be that Bp Lopes was able to change Bp Matano's mind and reassure him that the OCSP was compatible with centrist or conservative tendencies in the Church, whatever his earlier impression may have been. A reservation I've expressed here is that despite appearances, Anglicanism is thoroughly Reformed and congregational, and the differences with Catholicism can't be finessed. In that context, Evangelium isn't especially thorough as catechesis, and the "instant ordinations" of favored Anglican clergy in 2012 weren't reassuring. It appears that Dcn Simington will be more fully formed as a Catholic priest, on the other hand. But we may never know more.

Rochester News

Prof Jordan has kindly passed on an e-mail from Peter Jesserer Smith of the St Alban's group:

I talked with Father Timothy Perkins, our vicar general, and we have some very encouraging news coming out of his meeting on Monday with Bishop Salvatore Matano! First of all, Father Perkins wanted to express his deep gratitude for the wonderful hospitality he received from the St. Alban's. He very much enjoyed his fellowship with us, and was glad for the opportunity to know us better.

Father Perkins said the meeting with Bishop Matano was "wonderful," and very much a meeting of the mind and heart. He told me that he had high hopes for the meeting, and even those were truly surpassed. Bishop Matano expressed his admiration for the Ordinariate's English spiritual and liturgical patrimony, and told Father Perkins he found our prayers very beautiful and moving. Bishop Matano also recognized that our mind and heart as a Catholic community are right in line with his own, and he appreciates that we are both going in the same direction.

Bishop Matano also told Father Perkins that he is working on a plan to put St. Alban's in a parish setting where we would be able to thrive, do a lot of good to spread the Gospel here in Rochester. He recognized that our current situation is no where near ideal, and is trying to fix it. Right now, Bishop Matano is trying to figure out the parish setting that would allow us to have a morning Mass time, full use of their facilities for other prayer and church functions, and be a good fit for the priest the Ordinariate would send.

Father Perkins said there are still a lot of discussions that need to take place, but this first meeting covered a lot of important ground, and we should really be encouraged. Bishop Matano told him St. Alban's has an important role to play in Rochester, and he's always been enormously impressed by everyone in St. Alban's he's met. He was also going to look into whether a diocesan priest could offer us the sacraments in our Ordinariate form.

In sum, Father Perkins said he's very hopeful that we shall have a new pastor by the summer or fall of 2017, so please pray for him!

With the end finally in sight, Father Perkins also said the months leading up to our new priest also provides St. Alban's an opportunity to look for creative ways to build our community and evangelize.

So please pray Bishop Matano and Bishop Steven Lopes as they continue to work together to find a priest and a parish setting for St. Alban's!

I've recently seen Bp Matano characterized elsewhere as a "good bishop". It does look like his vision for an Ordinariate parish follows a different model from the usual BDW mass between the Spanish and Korean ones on Sunday afternoon or whatever, which would certainly be a step forward. We'll have to see what develops, but I agree that this looks like good news.

Updated Theory Of The Frammis

Reflecting on yesterday's post, I believe I've underestimated Msgr Stetson's role in events from December 2011 to April 13, 2012, when Fr Bartus, dismissed from the St Mary's parish on Easter Monday. April 9, was received into the Catholic Church under Stetson's sponsorship. I doubt if the timing was accidental.

Stetson, I'm increasingly convinced, was intimately familiar with every detail in the process running up to Anglicanorum coetibus and then the erection of the OCSP. Since he was on the scene at St Mary of the Angels, I have no choice but to believe he transmitted everything he saw and heard to Wuerl, Hurd, and Steenson, and probably to Margaret Chalmers, the OCSP's attorney working under the title of chancellor.

The first big puzzle I have is why he appears to have ignored the legal problem with the St Mary's bylaws, which presented a can't-get-there-from-here. Fr Kelley told me about the problem in December 2011, and he told me later that the OCSP authorities, presumably Stetson and Hurd at minimum, wouldn't listen. According to the parish bylaws, the members had to be Anglican. Thus if any members were received as Catholics, absent a bylaw revision, they would cease to be voting members on the spot.

However, if any members of the parish remained Anglican, as a minority were certain to do, they would remain as voting members of the parish, and the property would belong to them. (This problem was over and above the issues raised by the January 2011 bylaw revision putting the parish in the Patrimony of the Primate, a major focus of the ongoing litigation.) It's a puzzle to me how Ms Chalmers, the OCSP attorney, and Msgr Stetson, with a degree from Harvard Law, could have ignored this, but they did.

The only way to handle this would have been a bylaw revision. But by December 2011, the parish was so bitterly divided that it would probably have been impossible even to conduct a parish meeting to consider such a revision -- even removing individuals threatening violent disruption, of which they were fully capable, would have been an insurmountable problem. In hindsight, Msgr Stetson was not the sort of leader such circumstances required, and he seems not to have wanted to address even the legal issue.

Stetson made no direct announcement following the apparent postponement of the parish's reception into the OCSP in early January 2012; it was explained by St Mary's clergy during a mass that Houston wanted a new vote on joining the Ordinariate. However, vote or no, this would still not have resolved the legal issue that would have resulted from receiving the parish majority without a bylaw revision.

Instead, as I noted here, Stetson addressed the parish on January 22, 2012 and answered our questions. As he put it, "Archbishop Falk contacted Cardinal Wuerl with new information that's caused us to re-evaluate what's happening." In that meeting, in response to a direct question that may have been from me, Stetson said definitely that no bylaw revision would be required before the parish could be received into the OCSP -- Houston simply wanted another vote.

In hindsight, I've got to conclude that Msgr Stetson here was either disingenuous or stunningly incompetent. My guess, based on what I've subsequently learned of chanceries and the like, is that nobody in Washington took the information Falk is said to have passed on seriously. (This was apparently an ungrammatical 40-page rant against Fr Kelley drafted by dissident parishioners, although no one outside that group has seen it.) Get real, if Wuerl wanted the parish in, it would have come in, 40-page rant or no.

I would guess instead that both Stetson and Fr Hurd were listening to back-channel allegations of financial impropriety from Fr Bartus, which they likely took no more seriously, but nevertheless found convenient to their purposes. However, it would also have been convenient to blame the issue on Falk and keep Bartus out of it.

But the bottom line is that the conditions Houston was now imposing, a new vote and, I believe subsequently to January 22, an audit, would still not have cleared the legal way for receiving the parish. At this remove, to negotiate the full set of obstacles that Houston had placed in the way of reception, and then to revise the bylaws to prevent a legal debacle, would have required a strong leader with solid organizational and interpersonal skills. This wasn't Stetson, it wasn't Steenson, either.

We can only surmise what the precise agenda was for Wuerl, Stetson, and Steenson, although I have got to assume it was precise. Stetson, I'm now convinced, was not the guy to try to bring it about, since whatever it was -- it must have involved putting Bartus in as pastor of St Mary's and harvesting the parish's resources -- it was ignominiously thwarted, in large measure by Stetson's apparent incompetence.

Whether Steenson's replacement arose from leadership qualities that may have contributed to this and other disasters is an open issue. But I'm learning that this sort of problem isn't unique in the Church as we now have it.