The pope has issued his apostolic constitution making provision for former Anglicans to become Roman Catholics. There will be many words spilled over this, but I will simply note what the pope has not granted:

A married former Anglican bishop is eligible to be appointed the Ordinary, but only as a priest. He may, however, petition the Holy See to use the "insignia of the episcopal office." This means the pope will allow a married former Anglican bishop to dress like a bishop and exercise the jurisdiction of a bishop but not to be ordained a bishop in the Roman Catholic Church. Bottom line: No married Catholic bishops.

The Ordinary may petition the Holy See to allow married men to be ordained priests who have never been ordained, but the dispensation from clerical celibacy will be on a "case by case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See." These criteria have yet to be issued. I imagine they will be rather narrow: that only if a married man is the last available solution will the dispensation be granted. The culture of married clergy will, otherwise, die out.

Following from this, men who are ordained may not later get married; once ordained, the discipline of celibacy is lifelong, unless the man is later laicized.

What does this amount to, then? A very comfortable ghetto for those Anglicans who are itching for a resolution to the discomfort they feel, but nothing that would safeguard the continuation of "Anglican patrimony" in an organic nature into the future.

Why? Because, as the commentary asserts, "these Personal Ordinariates cannot be considered as Particular Ritual Churches since the Anglican liturgical, spiritual and pastoral tradition is a particular reality within the Latin Church." The reason given for this in the commentary is that "the creation of a Ritual Church might have created ecumenical difficulties." On the one hand, given the history of the Uniate churches and the formal repudiation of this method of reunion at Balamand in 1993, this is true. On the other hand, it is a cop-out; if the Holy See were truly interested in lasting results, it would be wise to re-visit the issue of whether uniatism has, in fact, proved to be the most effective way of bringing significant ecclesial communities back into full visible and jurisdictional communion with the successors of Peter.

The argument that the Anglican tradition is [merely] "a particular reality within the Latin Church" is to ignore the fact that over the course of nearly 500 years, the Anglican tradition has developed its own culture of a married clergy, including a married episcopate, which--while unprecedented compared to Rome and Orthodoxy--is normal and as much of a potential "gift" to the whole Church as celibacy has been to the Latin Church. Until Rome recognizes that such a gift is not the Trojan Horse it fears (an end to celibacy in the West), former Anglicans will simply be ghettoized, and then assimilated. Rome could stretch a little bit further and get some really great results--but to do so would require the most significant ecclesial development since Vatican II.

As things stand, the pope will likely get some takers, but Rome will not benefit from the Anglican "patrimony" over the long term, and the results will not be as dramatic as some might hope.

Should the pope really want to find the tipping point in this situation, I have two words for him: Married bishops.

And should the pope want to make Anglican patrimony a permanent feature of the Catholic Church, I have three words for him: Particular Ritual Church.

So far, that's a bridge too far for this pontifex maximus.

It remains to be seen whether the pontiff has erected, with this Apostolic Constitution, a bridge to nowhere.