> For me, the primary obstacle to my joining the Ordinariate is the requirement of absolute (rather than conditional) ordinations and confirmations for people c

> For me, the primary obstacle to my joining the Ordinariate is the requirement of absolute (rather than conditional) ordinations and confirmations for people coming over from Anglicanism. To me, submitting to that would be an implicit admission that I was effectively just “playing church” for all the years I’ve been a priest. It would be to acknowledge that the sacraments (baptism excepted) that I’ve administered to my people were in some sense a sham. I can see where you're coming from and I bet I'd feel the same if I were in your shoes. I'm just a lay Catholic who likes to read, but I also can't see any reason a conditional conferral of those sacraments should be a problem. Of course as a somewhat educated lay Catholic I'm obliged to believe what the Church teaches with respect to Anglican orders, but as you say I think there's some nuance there and I don't claim to understand the theological technicalities. Nevertheless, I think it's fair to say that we both believe Apostolic succession is of vital importance to the Church that Jesus personally founded and that we're both members of. I would however urge you to never view your current ministry as in any respect a sham, regardless of where God guides you. I do believe that some of the goofier Episcopalians are playing Church, especially the ones ordaining women and otherwise going all in on scandal of various sorts, but that's not you. Obviously I don't know you, but based on charity and your other comments I'm inclined to believe that God has conferred real and significant graces on you to aid in your ministry. > After much research and prayer, I remain convinced that my orders are valid, and I cannot in good conscience consent to the repetition of two sacraments of character (namely, confirmation and ordination). Given those conditions, your position is entirely theologically sound to my understanding and I wouldn't dream of telling you to go against your conscience. I'm no apologist so I won't try to change your mind, but know that I'll pray for you and that I wish you the most successful possible ministry. I'll also pray that the Catholic hierarchy understands and properly addresses the concerns you have and share with many other Anglicans. > Beyond that, I have some objections to a few of the papal claims There's a fair bit the various Popes have said that I also disagree with where I'm free to do so. > Plus, I’m not convinced there is much of a future for the Ordinariate. I’ll be surprised if it makes it a full generation before it disappears or is effectively suppressed, as the TLM communities have been. Yes, the current Pope's desire to enforce uniformity at the expense of unity strikes me as grossly imprudent and a huge step back from the achievements of his two immediate predecessors. It would appear that some of the hierarchy have a paranoid fantasy of sedevacantists hiding behind every copy of the 1962 Roman missal. All I can do is pray for him and them and accept that perhaps they have knowledge that I don't that makes these apparently wrong decisions make sense. But in any event, popes come and go—it's the magisterium that endures. That's not to dismiss the reality that the successor of Peter is the visible head of the Church, but I'm confident that Latin will not only retain its place in the Latin rite, but its role will continue to grow, by the grace of God. I'm a little surprised that the Ordinariate is getting caught up in that panic though. It's indisputable that no Anglican seeking communion with Rome can possibly be a sedevacantist. Similarly I'm not aware of any movement to suppress any of the eastern rites. But there's much that I'm not aware of, so take that with a grain of salt. God bless you.