Abb Mathew
Documents
ARCHBISHOP ARNOLD HARRIS
MATHEW
Bishop Mathew was born at Montpellier, Herault in France in 1852. His father, Major Henry Octerlony Mathew regarded himself the third Earl of Landaff of Thomastown, Co. Tipperary.
Arnold Mathew was baptised with Catholic rites in France, although received Anglican baptism according to the wishes of his mother. He was educated at Cheltenham, Bonn and Stuggart and ordained priest in the Roman Catholic Church on June 24th 1877.
Although Bishop Mathew's early ministerial career was a checkered one between his own beliefs and his place within organized churches, he was a man of utmost sincerity and spiritual commitment. Erraticism may have been evident in his character he was, nonetheless, kindly disposed and above reproach morally.
The turn of the twentieth century in England saw many problems within both the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church. The report of the Ritual Commission set up in 1904 to examine evidence relating to alleged illegal ritual and ceremonial in the Established Church led many priests and laity to question the validity of Anglicanism. Some Roman Catholics in England were even disposed to reject the jurisdiction of the Roman Curia.
Mathew recognized a need to create a valid Catholicism by the Old Catholic Church, exercising a legitimate jurisdiction in England from the Dutch Episcopate. Mathew encouraged the possibility, although not suggesting being the first bishop. He did, however, find himself involved with a small group of disgruntled Roman Catholics under the leadership of Fr Richard O'Halloran. Two other Roman priests who had been excommunicated by the Latin Rite contacted Mathew. Herbert Ignatius Beale and Arthur William Howarth, both formerly of the Catholic Diocese of Nottingham were accused by Bishop Robert Brindle, a former army chaplain of irregularities over mass stipends and related issues. The truth was rather an element of opposition towards Roman authority and domination through membership of the Primrose League, to which both belonged.
Brindle's former colleague at Nottingham, Bishop Bagshaw, was aware of this membership but was less harsh over the issues it presented. Inflammatory letters followed, even involving cardinal Vaughan at Westminster. Penalties inflicted on Beale and Howarth were without trial and considered null and void. Both priests left the Roman obedience and pioneered the way for the Old Catholic Church to gain an entry.
Mathew himself was corresponding with the Old Catholics in Holland and Switzerland and then informed Archbishop Davidson at Canterbury that:
'…..we shall open a Mission in this country for the benefit of those
Roman Catholics who are unable to continue conscientious adhesion to the Vatican, and this we shall do in a spirit of perfect and cordial amity for the Church of England and in no spirit of aggression, still less proselytism…….I am now in correspondence with the Archbishop of Utrecht, who will formally authorise the formation of a branch of the Church in Great Britain on the lines I have indicated.' The Anglicans could not support such an idea.
Halloram obtained support from seventeen priests and sixteen laymen that Mathew's name be forwarded to Utrecht as a candidate for the Episcopate. Bishop Herzog of Berne and Bishop Demmel of Bonn received the recommendation.
The Dutch bishops convened a meeting at Haarlam agreeing to proceed with the Consecration at Rotterdam on April 26th 1908. The Church Of England at the time protested, but were ignored as having no legitimate position to refute such regularity.
Mathew's Consecration within the historic continuity of the apostolic succession would not be questioned. In 1908 the Church of Rome herself accepted the validity of orders conferred by the Church of Utrecht which had been outside Roman jurisdiction for nearly two hundred years.
Mathew witnessed a move by the Dutch Old Catholics towards Lutheranism and to adopt changes to the Catholic Liturgy. Subsequently he decided to break with Utrecht to continue the Old Catholic Church in Great Britain independently of the Mother Church. Utrecht eventually linked itself with Anglicans, validating Anglican orders and receiving reciprocal satisfaction from membership of the wider Anglican Communion. Mathew's ministry became a source of great embarrassment to them, which they attempted to eradicate from their own ecclesiastical history. The Lambeth Conference of 1920 experienced similar embarrassment, especially as bishops and priests succeeding from Bishop Mathew were actively at work since 1908.
The Liberal Catholic Church, continuing a worldwide continuation of his jurisdiction, although the so-called Old Roman Catholic Church maintained a small and local presence. In America, Catholic bodies claiming a succession from Mathew actively pursue an Old Catholic Ministry and attract considerable adherents in their churches.
The finer points of Archbishop Mathew's Episcopal career are open to scrutiny. He has been both vilified and elevated for both his initiative and cause of confusion. But at the centre of his work was a desire to continue the Catholic Christian Ministry as his vocation saw best to interpret it.
Clearly, his ministry exposed him to criticism and harsh and uncompromising treatment from the Establishment. The full worth of Mathew's vision may yet be realized; his Episcopal oversight and influence may still be a guiding hand within the lives of the communities whose origin he helped to make manifest.
Only God himself can judge that. From the letters Mathew wrote and the enthusiasm he demonstrated to fulfill the will of God and to engage with many for the rites of his kingdom. Criticism and ill-considered judgement on Mathew, or even upon his fellowship and organizations resulting from his original endeavors, do little to assist the promulgations of the truths of the glorious gospel of Christ to our people.
God will surely use whatever is purposeful to his desire to bring women and men into fellowship with himself. Mathew always maintained a legitimization for his efforts. He firmly believed he had restored the Old or Ancient Catholic faith to the shores of Britain.
Perhaps if he could witness all the fresh developments now taking place he would pause for thought- even the Ordination of women to the sacred Orders!
But doubtless, deep within his heart, he would recognize the need to advance on many different fronts, and confess that all had been for a purpose.
Bishop Mathew was born at Montpellier, Herault in France in 1852. His father, Major Henry Octerlony Mathew regarded himself the third Earl of Landaff of Thomastown, Co. Tipperary.
Arnold Mathew was baptised with Catholic rites in France, although received Anglican baptism according to the wishes of his mother. He was educated at Cheltenham, Bonn and Stuggart and ordained priest in the Roman Catholic Church on June 24th 1877.
Although Bishop Mathew's early ministerial career was a checkered one between his own beliefs and his place within organized churches, he was a man of utmost sincerity and spiritual commitment. Erraticism may have been evident in his character he was, nonetheless, kindly disposed and above reproach morally.
The turn of the twentieth century in England saw many problems within both the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church. The report of the Ritual Commission set up in 1904 to examine evidence relating to alleged illegal ritual and ceremonial in the Established Church led many priests and laity to question the validity of Anglicanism. Some Roman Catholics in England were even disposed to reject the jurisdiction of the Roman Curia.
Mathew recognized a need to create a valid Catholicism by the Old Catholic Church, exercising a legitimate jurisdiction in England from the Dutch Episcopate. Mathew encouraged the possibility, although not suggesting being the first bishop. He did, however, find himself involved with a small group of disgruntled Roman Catholics under the leadership of Fr Richard O'Halloran. Two other Roman priests who had been excommunicated by the Latin Rite contacted Mathew. Herbert Ignatius Beale and Arthur William Howarth, both formerly of the Catholic Diocese of Nottingham were accused by Bishop Robert Brindle, a former army chaplain of irregularities over mass stipends and related issues. The truth was rather an element of opposition towards Roman authority and domination through membership of the Primrose League, to which both belonged.
Brindle's former colleague at Nottingham, Bishop Bagshaw, was aware of this membership but was less harsh over the issues it presented. Inflammatory letters followed, even involving cardinal Vaughan at Westminster. Penalties inflicted on Beale and Howarth were without trial and considered null and void. Both priests left the Roman obedience and pioneered the way for the Old Catholic Church to gain an entry.
Mathew himself was corresponding with the Old Catholics in Holland and Switzerland and then informed Archbishop Davidson at Canterbury that:
'…..we shall open a Mission in this country for the benefit of those
Roman Catholics who are unable to continue conscientious adhesion to the Vatican, and this we shall do in a spirit of perfect and cordial amity for the Church of England and in no spirit of aggression, still less proselytism…….I am now in correspondence with the Archbishop of Utrecht, who will formally authorise the formation of a branch of the Church in Great Britain on the lines I have indicated.' The Anglicans could not support such an idea.
Halloram obtained support from seventeen priests and sixteen laymen that Mathew's name be forwarded to Utrecht as a candidate for the Episcopate. Bishop Herzog of Berne and Bishop Demmel of Bonn received the recommendation.
The Dutch bishops convened a meeting at Haarlam agreeing to proceed with the Consecration at Rotterdam on April 26th 1908. The Church Of England at the time protested, but were ignored as having no legitimate position to refute such regularity.
Mathew's Consecration within the historic continuity of the apostolic succession would not be questioned. In 1908 the Church of Rome herself accepted the validity of orders conferred by the Church of Utrecht which had been outside Roman jurisdiction for nearly two hundred years.
Mathew witnessed a move by the Dutch Old Catholics towards Lutheranism and to adopt changes to the Catholic Liturgy. Subsequently he decided to break with Utrecht to continue the Old Catholic Church in Great Britain independently of the Mother Church. Utrecht eventually linked itself with Anglicans, validating Anglican orders and receiving reciprocal satisfaction from membership of the wider Anglican Communion. Mathew's ministry became a source of great embarrassment to them, which they attempted to eradicate from their own ecclesiastical history. The Lambeth Conference of 1920 experienced similar embarrassment, especially as bishops and priests succeeding from Bishop Mathew were actively at work since 1908.
The Liberal Catholic Church, continuing a worldwide continuation of his jurisdiction, although the so-called Old Roman Catholic Church maintained a small and local presence. In America, Catholic bodies claiming a succession from Mathew actively pursue an Old Catholic Ministry and attract considerable adherents in their churches.
The finer points of Archbishop Mathew's Episcopal career are open to scrutiny. He has been both vilified and elevated for both his initiative and cause of confusion. But at the centre of his work was a desire to continue the Catholic Christian Ministry as his vocation saw best to interpret it.
Clearly, his ministry exposed him to criticism and harsh and uncompromising treatment from the Establishment. The full worth of Mathew's vision may yet be realized; his Episcopal oversight and influence may still be a guiding hand within the lives of the communities whose origin he helped to make manifest.
Only God himself can judge that. From the letters Mathew wrote and the enthusiasm he demonstrated to fulfill the will of God and to engage with many for the rites of his kingdom. Criticism and ill-considered judgement on Mathew, or even upon his fellowship and organizations resulting from his original endeavors, do little to assist the promulgations of the truths of the glorious gospel of Christ to our people.
God will surely use whatever is purposeful to his desire to bring women and men into fellowship with himself. Mathew always maintained a legitimization for his efforts. He firmly believed he had restored the Old or Ancient Catholic faith to the shores of Britain.
Perhaps if he could witness all the fresh developments now taking place he would pause for thought- even the Ordination of women to the sacred Orders!
But doubtless, deep within his heart, he would recognize the need to advance on many different fronts, and confess that all had been for a purpose.