There is quite a lot of news on Foolishness to the world and Fr Smuts’ blog about the Ordinariates and the new Deanery in Canada. I have met Fr Wilkinson and corresponded with him a few times, and congratulate him on having been ordained to the priesthood by a Roman Catholic bishop.
The Ordinariate tends to be a “radioactive” subject on account of some persons on the Internet concerned for imposing their particular “truth” on others without any consideration of personal circumstances. At the same time, it brings me pleasure to learn of the fulfilment and joy of those who have made it though the system with their vocations intact.
I am glad it has worked out well for some, and the original vision has survived in microcosmic form. Reconstruction is happening.
Similarly, I expect the TAC to find a way to pull itself together and pick up the pieces, as expressed by the desires of Bishop Michael Gill in South Africa. Many terrible things have happened over this year, but yet we have to know what we want as individual priests with the bishops we have. The Armchair Inquisition might want to have them for breakfast, but life has to go on somehow. It isn’t all-or-nothing. Such is the mystery of life and our call to forgive others so that we ourselves may obtain forgiveness.
It is also interesting to discover that Peter Slipper has been cleared from the serious accusations against him. As many of you know, he was ordained a priest by Archbishop Hepworth. Some have seen opportunism in that act, but knowing Archbishop Hepworth as I have known him, I see more of a pastoral and fatherly concern, a capacity for cutting through the cancer of Donatism that has afflicted the Church since probably the beginning. Christ called it the leaven of the Pharisees. We may well be in for more surprises as time goes on.
The Blue Flower 
Hi Fr Anthony, I too was stunned but heartened by the news of the reversal in Slipper’s case. And it reminds me of how Archbishop Hepworth remained loyal to him as a friend and bishop when many were using Slipper’s woes to further tarnish Hepworth. I guess we must all be reminded not to believe most of what we hear, read or see in the mainstream news media or on blogs!
I’m not sure ‘cleared’ is the right expression. He wasn’t, in the criminal sense at least, ‘accused’. It was a civil claim, and was thrown out because the judge determined that it had been brought for an improper purpose (a political one, rather than a purpose of obtaining compensation for harm or for premature termination of employment being brought about by or on account of the matters alleged). The judgment is instructive in this regard (and is, apparently, going to be appealed, which will add yet more to the circus):
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2012/1411.html
Because of the nature of the judgment, it was not necessary for the judge to make any findings of fact as to whether or not many of the alleged communications were made, although it was held that some of the allegations were irrelevant (and scandalous, oppressive and vexatious). So the judgment, as it presently stands, leaves us with more questions than answers and a lot of material that should never have made it into the public domain. Welcome to Australian politics.
But indeed, we should be very wary of what is written in the mainstream media (which doesn’t even begin to understand us) and the blogs (whose authors have a better understanding of what we are about but are often in possession of limited facts). The information age has left us with a very soupy fog.