In just three months, the Anglican Church in North America has welcomed 39 new congregations. When the Anglican Church in North America officially launched in late June, it included 703 churches in the United States and Canada. Today, there are 742 congregations affiliated with the Anglican Church.
“We have an ambitious goal of planting 1,000 new churches in the next five years. It is very encouraging to see how much progress has already been made,” said Archbishop Robert Duncan.
The Rev. Dr. Frank Larisey, rector of the Episcopal Church of the Redeemer in Orangeburg, says another resolution will ask the diocese to sign the Anglican Covenant. The theological document is an attempt to state the common beliefs that holds the church together.
“It is basically a conservative, orthodox document that carefully holds the line on traditional Christian values with some places for other judicious interpretation,” Larisey said. “The first three sections deal with how we come together, theologically, as a body.”
“The fourth section is the punitive one, the one with teeth. That spells out what will happen if the covenant is entered and then abandoned,” he said. “This is an attempt at discipline in the church that has never been there before.”
Larisey says he feels the document is worth signing, although he points out that the Episcopal Church has a long history of signing agreements and then member components going their own way. Lawrence is asking that the entire four sections of the covenant be accepted by the diocese.
“It’s not as strong as I would like, but it is a good document,” Larisey said. “It will be of help especially if the fourth section is finalized, although that won’t be until at least 2012.”
The gloss from those sources boils down to three basic points:
* This move is a natural response to requests from some Anglicans to join the Catholic church, rather than a case of the Vatican going fishing for new converts. (That’s why many Catholic leaders have winced at headlines using the term “lure” to describe what’s going on; their line is, ‘We didn’t go looking for them, they came to us.’)
* By allowing these folks to bring a fair bit of their spiritual heritage into the Catholic church, the decision is a gesture of respect for the Anglican tradition. (The statement from Williams and Nichols actually said this move would not have been possible without forty years of Anglican/Catholic dialogue.)
* The decision will not disrupt official ecumenical relations between the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church.
The traditional Anglican group in England, Forward in Faith, seemed enthusiastic: “It has been the frequently expressed hope and fervent desire of Anglican Catholics to be enabled by some means to enter into full communion with the see of Peter whilst retaining in its integrity every aspect of their Anglican inheritance which is not at variance with the teaching of the Catholic church.
“We rejoice that the Holy Father intends now to set up structures within the church which respond to this heartfelt longing. Forward in Faith has always been committed to seeking unity in truth and so warmly welcomes these initiatives as a decisive moment in the history of the Catholic movement in the Church of England.”
But traditionalists in the United States were more circumspect.
Robert Duncan, who as bishop of Pittsburgh led his diocese out of the Episcopal church and is now archbishop and primate of the Anglican Church in North America, issued a statement on the Web site Standfirminfaith.com.
“We rejoice that the Holy See has opened this doorway,” he wrote, but “we believe that this provision will not be utilized by the great majority of the Anglican Church in North America’s bishops, priests, dioceses and congregations.”
They still have problems with the Roman church, Duncan points out, namely: “historic differences over church governance, dogmas regarding the Blessed Virgin Mary and the nature of Holy Orders.”
1 The text of the Apostolic Constitution itself has not been made public as yet. Until it is it is not possible to comment on the details of this provision, and precisely what is being proposed.
2 The provision is directed both to those of Anglican tradition who have left the Anglican Communion, (such as the members of the Traditional Anglican Communion, TAC) as well as those who are presently still part of the Anglican Communion.
3 It is clear that the consideration of such a pastoral provision is only possible because of .significant convergence which has emerged over 40 years of international official dialogue ”“ ARCIC ”“ on matters thought to divide Anglicans and Roman Catholics.
The Vatican announcement had come as no surprise, said Prebendary David Houlding, a member of the General Synod’s Catholic Group, on Wednesday.
It did not mean that all Anglo-Catholics had to jump on the bandÂwagon and suddenly disappear. “But they’re very excited about it, and we know there won’t be another offer as generous as this on the table,” he said. He said that the offer placed “an even greater obligation on the revision comÂmittee on women bishops to get the provision right. Far from not having to bother about it, we have to bother about it even more.”
Forward in Faith issued a stateÂment on behalf of the Bishop of Ebbsfleet, the Rt Revd Andrew BurnÂham, and the Bishop of Richborough, the Rt Revd Keith Newton, in which they “warmly welcomed” the news. They said that they had chosen 22 February, the feast of the Chair of Peter, as a day when priests and people could decide if they wanted to explore the Pope’s initiative futher.
The Church of England could not comment on numbers likely to convert, with one source adding: “It’s all guesswork.” But Stephen Parkinson, director of FiF, said a figure of 1,000 Church of England priests, reported in the media, was “credible.” Read our news story on this here.
Estimates of laity are “much harder,” Parkinson said. “Inevitably if you say 1,000 priests you are then talking about several thousand laity.”
But he said he “would not be at all surprised at a dozen” bishops in England switching. However, in England, bishops were likely to move individually rather than take their entire dioceses, which tend to have diverse views, with them.
At its last meeting, the Standing Committee of the Church of Ireland General Synod approved the following response to ACC-14’s request for reconsideration of the text of Section 4: “Having considered Section 4 of the Draft Anglican Covenant very carefully, and bearing in mind a full range of points of view, we believe that the text of Section 4 as it stands commends itself in the current circumstances. The term ”˜Joint Standing Committee’ clearly needs to be updated following its restyling at ACC-14. We appreciate the work of the former Covenant Design Group, not least in taking into account the Church of Ireland’s views, and encourage the Archbishop of Canterbury and his new group under the chairmanship of the Archbishop of Dublin as they seek to conclude the work on the text of the Covenant.”
As a former Episcopal priest who became a Roman Catholic priest in 2002, the Rev. Paul Sullins welcomed the news on Tuesday that the Roman Catholic Church is widening its welcome of Catholic-minded Anglicans.
“It’s a wonderful development,” said Fr. Sullins, an associate professor of sociology at the Catholic University of America. “It provides a structure, and even a place in the hierarchical structure, for Anglicans who come in.”
The special provision for those ”˜originally belonging to the Anglican Communion’ (as they will be termed) was announced with not much notice to either the Archbishop of Canterbury or to the Archbishop of Westminster. This doesn’t mean it is intended to ”˜poach’ priest and people from the Church of England or the other Anglican Churches. While there are questions about its ecumenical communication, it was a known fact that both former Anglicans ”“ such as members of the Traditional Anglican Communion ”“ and those still belonging to Churches of the Anglican Communion have asked the Vatican to consider some group recognition as some way of retaining an Anglican identity in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. The Vatican has responded to their requests. What does the Apostolic Constitution, about to be finalised, entail? What is a Personal Ordinariate for former Anglicans? What is clear is that it won’t be all such individuals or groups have been looking for. It is not a diocese or Anglican Rite Church in communion with Rome.
A Personal Ordinariate is a pastoral provision in juridical form which will allow some continuing Anglican heritage to be expressed. But it is what it says on the box, it is ”˜personal’ that is to say for a network of individuals and groups rather than the norm of a territorial diocese. The Note issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith makes this quite clear in saying that the structure of a Personal Ordinariate ”˜will be similar in some ways to that of Military Ordinariates’, that is to say the distinct jurisdiction of military chaplains. The model is that of a society. But this will not be entirely separate from the Roman Catholic territorial dioceses, and there has to be consultation with the local Roman Catholic bishops before they can be established. How many Anglicans, priest and laity, will want to avail themselves of this provision remains to be seen.
Her election came three decades after the Episcopal Church allowed women to become priests and bishops, the first of whom was consecrated in 1989.
Jefferts Schori and her husband, Richard Miles Schori, a retired mathematician (topologist), were married in 1979. They have one daughter, who is a pilot and captain in the Air Force.
As the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop, Jefferts Schori inherited oversight of a denomination rent by differences over the ordination of women, openly gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions.
The 2003 election of Gene Robinson, an openly gay man in a committed relationship, as bishop of New Hampshire — with Jefferts Schori voting in favor — a rift widened between the Episcopal Church and parts of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
It may be an Anglican Church, but All Saints in Brisbane openly admits to being a Catholic community that practises the Catholic faith.
It describes itself as as “a leading centre of the Catholic Revival within the Anglican Church”, boasts a Society of Mary and believes parts of the Anglican Church have made a “terrible mistake” in ordaining women to priesthood.
The congregation prays for the Pope as well as Anglican archbishops and also believes in the feasts and dogmas of the Virgin Mary, such as her immaculate conception.
All Saints Father Richard Martin sees no contradiction in these beliefs.
Archbishop Philip Freier estimates up to 30 Melbourne clergy consider themselves to be Anglo-Catholics.
He says their departure would be regrettable, but it is a matter of conscience.
“I think the Anglican Church expresses the doctrines of Christianity and it’s been a very nurturing place for me, and my faith, and many other Anglicans,” he said.
“But if people have a decision on conscience, I’d want to respect that because I think that we’re fortunate to live in a society where our religious beliefs are a matter of principle and conscience.”
Surely, all the Catholic Church did was make itself as welcoming as possible for those Anglicans already disillusioned by recent innovations in their communion’s theology. Anglicans have often done the same for dissenting Catholics without much objection from anyone.
There are naturally a range of quite mixed reactions to Pope Benedict XVI’s initiative in offering an ‘Apostolic Constitution’ within the Roman Catholic Church for Anglicans wishing to flee their own troubled shores.
Some have greeted it as an aggressive attempt to poach members, others have conceived of it as a generous recognition of the regard in which the Vatican holds the Anglican ‘patrimony’.
In truth, it is both a cause for sadness and celebration. On the one hand, it is clearly a recognition by the Vatican that divisions within Anglicanism are now so bad that it is no longer possible to address Anglicanism entirely through the traditional ‘diplomatic’ channels. Indeed, I am aware that some Anglican bishops have had private meetings with Cardinal Kasper of the Secretariat for Unity over the years about the setting up of some form of Uniate scheme, similar to some church relationships in the Middle East.
South Florida’s Episcopal bishop said he did not expect the Vatican’s decision to put a dent in his 38,000-member diocese.
“In a given year I can assure you that I receive more Roman Catholics into our communion than they would receive of ours,” said the Rt. Rev. Leo Frade of the Episcopal Diocese of Southeast Florida, which covers an area from Jensen Beach to Key West and includes 83 churches.
“The reality is that those who wanted to leave have left already.”
Five years ago, when the Episcopal church approved the election of a gay bishop in New Hampshire, hundreds of South Florida Episcopalians broke away in protest, aligning themselves with the more-conservative Anglican Mission in America.
The Vatican’s announcement this week that it will allow former Anglicans who join the Catholic Church to retain a collective identity, using many of their traditional prayers and hymns in their own specially designed dioceses, is an event with profound implications for both Anglican and Catholic life.
The decision, made to accommodate Anglicans upset with their church’s growing acceptance of homosexuality and of women clergy, is likely to transform ecumenical relations between the churches. It will also heighten the internal Catholic debate over the requirement of priestly celibacy (which is to be routinely waived for married Anglican clergy who convert under the new rules, extending an exception made on a limited basis till now).
Perhaps the most striking effect of the Vatican’s move is the likelihood that, within the next few years, Catholic priests around the world will be celebrating Mass in a form that draws largely from the Book of Common Prayer. This resonant text, in its many versions, has informed Anglican worship since shortly after King Henry VIII led the Church of England away from Rome nearly five centuries ago.
However, Archbishop Wabukala told the BBC’s Network Africa programme there was “no possibility” of his becoming a Catholic.
“The Protestant family understands faith in different ways, for example, the idea of the Eucharist, the Lord’s Supper, the interpretation of ministry,” he said.
He said his fellow African Anglican bishops were “deeply evangelical”.
The parishioners at St. Savior’s come from various backgrounds: Afro-Caribbean countries, Eastern European nations, Britain itself. But it may be that all roads are leading them to Rome.
The East London church is Anglican in name but Roman Catholic in spirit and worship, with the “smells and bells” of traditional Roman Catholic liturgy. Father David Waller sticks to the Vatican’s line on doctrines such as transubstantiation — the transformation of bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus — and teachings such as the ban on contraception. Neither he nor his congregation believes in allowing women into the priesthood.
So Pope Benedict XVI’s stunning announcement this week of a new dispensation that would, in effect, give traditionally minded Anglicans their own niche within the Catholic Church seems almost too good an offer to pass up.
When the Catholic Church announced this week that the Vatican would make it easier for Anglicans to convert to Catholicism, much was made of the many similarities between the two faiths. And there are a few Catholic beliefs that might strike Anglicans as foreign, and one or two that could be deal-breakers for potential defectors.
The Times of London published a handy list of some Catholic beliefs Anglican converts would have to embrace. Social conservatives who are upset by the Anglican Church’s acceptance of female priests and openly gay bishops are unlikely to have trouble adopting the Catholic beliefs that only men can become priests and that, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it, “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” and “under no circumstances can they be approved.”
Ideas that might be harder for Anglicans to accept include the concept that the Pope is infallible, at least at certain moments, that Mary was the product of an “immaculate conception,” and so born without sin, and the belief known as transubstantiation, which means, essentially, that the communion bread and wine are not just symbols but actually become the body and blood of Christ.
The Holy See has been exceedingly patient in waiting for the Anglican communion to determine what it stands for, and has made clear that the innovations of female priests and same-sex marriage would be insuperable obstacles to reunion. In other words, to proceed with the standard ecumenical venture, Rome needed reassurances of two kinds: 1) that there existed an authoritative body that could authoritatively state what an Anglican must believe; 2) that the content of this belief would be recognizably connected with traditional Christian doctrine. In both respects the situation within Anglicanism has worsened with time, and indeed the rate of delamination is increasing. Standard ecumenism — what I call vegetarian lasagne ecumenism, an endless exchange of compliments between liberals — proved futile, and the spiritual needs of real human beings became acute enough that Rome decided it needed to act for the good of souls — a notion hard to grasp by most players in the ecumenism business and, it would seem, vexingly opaque to Williams.
Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ. It was good to be with you at General Convention to get to know you a bit better and watch your thoughtful participation in the legislative process. Thank you for all you brought to the work of the House of Deputies.
I am writing to you regarding the five resolutions proposed for consideration at your upcoming Convention on October 24th. The resolutions have come to my attention and I wanted to be in touch with you about them. Several of them, especially Resolutions 3 and 4 speak of developing mission initiatives, partnership and relationships throughout the Episcopal Church, North America and the Anglican Communion. The Diocese has a strong commitment to mission. The continued commitment to mission is one we clearly share as evidenced by our work in that area at General Convention. Thank you for this continued commitment.
Looking at Resolutions 1 and 2 in particular and at Resolutions 1-4 as a whole, entitled “Guiding Principles for Engagement,” I am concerned that some in the Diocese are seeking through these resolutions to move the Diocese out of the full life of the Episcopal Church and perhaps even see the resolutions as steps preliminary in attempting to separate the Diocese from the Church. I fervently pray that is not what is intended. Several of these resolutions are similar to resolutions adopted by dioceses in which the bishop and some Church members have claimed that the diocese has left the Episcopal Church. While individuals have left the Episcopal Church, dioceses have not, and to do so would require the permission of General Convention.
I am concerned that several of the proposed resolutions contain misleading statements or assert positions that are in conflict with those of this Church. For example, in Resolution 1 in the third Whereas, the language referred to comes from the Preface to the Book of Common Prayer which states “This Church is far from intending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline or worship; or further than local circumstances require.” The emphasized words were not included in the Whereas or in any part of the Resolution. Without the omitted language, someone reading the Resolution could come away with the idea that no departures from the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Church of England are permitted at all when the expectation has always been that alterations would be made. The Preface, set forth in October 1789, acknowledges our debt to the Church of England for this Church’s “first foundation and a long continuance of nursing care and protection” and goes on to quote from the Preface of the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England at that time that “the Forms of Divine Worship are alterable and changes should be made according to the various exigency of times and occasions.”
The proposed addition of a statement of understanding of the meaning of the Constitution’s Article VIII Oath of Conformity is of concern for several reasons. The actual Oath in the Constitution is not included in the Resolution and it is unlikely many delegates or even clergy to your Convention will look it up. I encourage you to inform the Convention of the contents of the Oath so it can consider the proposed resolution in light of what the Constitution already requires. The Oath recited is:
I do believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation; and I do solemnly engage to conform to the Doctrine, Discipline and Worship of the Episcopal Church.
The items referred to in the proposed understanding, or most of them, are set forth in the Book of Common Prayer in the section entitled “Historical Documents of the Church.” The Creed of Saint Athanasius, Preface to the Church of England First Book of Common Prayer of 1549, and the Thirty-Nine Articles are not part of the doctrine, discipline, or worship of The Episcopal Church. To the extent that “the Creeds” in the proposed resolution refer to the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds, they are already recognized as part of the doctrine of this Church. The Episcopal Church’s Doctrine, according to the Canons, is to be found in the Canon of Holy Scripture as understood in the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds and in the sacramental rites, the Ordinal and Catechism of the Book of Common Prayer.” The documents listed in the proposed understanding do not fall within this definition. The Church’s Discipline, according to our Canons, is “found in the Constitution, the Canons, and the Rubrics and the Ordinal of the Book of Common Prayer”. Again, the listed documents are not included in our definition of Discipline. The proposed understanding is inconsistent with the definitions we have of Doctrine and Discipline and attempt to add matters to the Church’s Doctrine and Discipline that are not a part of them. Adoption of this proposed resolution risks creating misunderstanding among both clergy and lay of the meaning of the Church’s Doctrine, Discipline and Worship; of suggesting that the Church holds as authoritative and binding things that it does not.
Regarding proposed Resolution 2, there certainly are different interpretations and understandings being given to resolutions D025 and C056. It is not uncommon for people to interpret actions of General Convention differently. On the issues addressed in the two resolutions, the Church has acknowledged that it is not of one mind. However, declaring actions of General Convention to be null and void and having no effect in a diocese is contrary to our polity and our Constitution and Canons. All dioceses must make an unqualified accession to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church. The General Convention is the governing body of the Church and the authority of all other entities and offices comes from General Convention. So, adoption of a resolution declaring an action of General Convention null and void is itself, a nullity. Actions of General Convention are binding on dioceses regardless of whether their bishops and deputies voted for or against them, agree with them or even participated in General Convention. The Executive Council considered this matter during the last triennium regarding dioceses that had adopted amendments to their Constitutions purporting to limit or lessen the unqualified accession of the Diocese to the Constitution and Canons of the Church. Resolution NAC 023 adopted June 14, 2007 states:
Resolved, That the Executive Council, meeting in Parsippany, New Jersey from June 11-14, 2007,
reminds the dioceses of The Episcopal Church that Article V, Section 1 of the Constitution of The
Episcopal Church requires each Diocese to have a Constitution which shall include “an unqualified
accession to the Constitution and Canons of this Church;” and be it further Resolved, That any amendment to a diocesan Constitution that purports in any way to limit or lessen an unqualified accession to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church is null and void; and be it further Resolved, That the amendments passed to the Constitutions of the Dioceses of Pittsburgh, Ft. Worth, Quincy, and San Joaquin, which purport to limit or lessen the unqualified accession to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church are accordingly null and void and the Constitutions of those dioceses shall be as they were as if such amendments had not been passed.
While what your Convention will consider is a resolution and not a constitutional amendment, the principle is the same. A diocese is, of course, free to express its disagreement with an action of General Convention and to work to change it but it may not declare it to be null and void and of no effect in the diocese.
The resolve in proposed Resolution 2 to begin withdrawing from bodies of the Church is likely counter-productive. The views and voices of the Diocese and Bishop will be absent from the Church’s continuing discussion and discernment of these and other issues. Withdrawing will decrease the opportunities for dialogues in which we discover that we are all committed to Christ’s mission and ministry. At ordinations of priests the bishop describes the work of a priest as including “to take your share in the councils of the Church.” Bishops at their ordinations promise to “share with your fellow bishops in the government of the whole Church.” Priests and Bishops are called to be part of the councils and government of the Church, not to withdraw from them. We believe that the Holy Spirit works through the councils and gatherings of the Church. I encourage the Diocese of South Carolina to stay involved, stay active, and participate in the full life of The Episcopal Church, including its governance structures, so that we may embody the unity we all share in Christ to the greatest extent possible.
It is my prayer that Resolutions 1-4 are not steps being proposed to move the Diocese away from The Episcopal Church and towards efforts by others to create an alternate Anglican structure in our midst. While affirming the call to mission partnerships across churches across North America and in the wider Communion, I hope that those will not be used as a substitute for living within The Episcopal Church or to undermine in any way the life of The Episcopal Church.
I am blessed to be a part of God’s Church with you. I hold you and the great Diocese of South Carolina in my daily thoughts and prayers. I pray your diocesan convention is one of joy and thanksgiving.
In Peace,
Bonnie Anderson, D.D.
Here is one:
Sir, The Anglican bishops of Ebbsfleet and Richborough flew to Rome to negotiate a special deal for their followers, apparently without the knowledge of the Archbishop of Canterbury (reports, Oct 21 and 22; letters, Oct 22); and Edwin Barnes, a former Anglican Bishop of Richborough, says that “the Church of England must transfer churches to us” (Thunderer, Oct 21).
The mind boggles. The Church of England has taken, by its proper procedures, some decisions about gays and women in its ministry that a minority do not like. Members of that minority are free to leave and join a church of their choice. By what principle do they demand that they take some Church of England assets with them?
A hundred years ago, in Scotland, the courts were dragged into a similar dispute. When they awarded the assets of the Free Church of Scotland to a minority faction, the result was so absurd that it had to be reversed by legislation. I doubt whether the courts would make the same mistake again in either England or Scotland.
Of course people should follow their consciences. But conscience does not look so good when accompanied by demands for money and assets.
Professor Iain Mclean
University of Oxford
But the provision for married clergy, which the Catholic church has made on a limited basis since at least the 1980s, remains a qualified one. Only unmarried men will be eligible to serve as bishops in the new dioceses, the Vatican said, consistent with a “long historical tradition” in both the Catholic and Orthodox churches.
Other details of the new rules remain unclear pending their still-unscheduled publication, but Cardinal William Levada, head of the Vatican’s doctrinal office, suggested on Tuesday that the new dioceses will not ordain married men unless they have already started their preparation in Anglican seminaries, or permit unmarried priests to take wives after ordination.
For some potential converts, those qualifications are a deal breaker.
“I find the lack of a permanent provision for a married priesthood to be a serious obstacle to unity,” said Anglican Bishop Jack Iker of Fort Worth, who has considered joining the Catholic church in the past.
What changed?
For years Catholic bishops in England were reluctant to open the door wide to traditionalist Anglicans, partly because their “more Catholic than the Pope” smells-and-bells churchmanship was out of step with modern Catholicism. They also did not want to upset Church of England bishops with whom they had developed strong ecumenical relations.
But then last year the Church of England’s General Synod voted to allow women to become bishops. More importantly it also voted for no special provision to be put in place to allow traditionalists to bypass a woman bishop and seek episcopal oversight from a man. The decision radically shifted attitudes in Rome.
So whose initiative is this?
It began with Anglican dissidents for whom women bishops were the final straw but who were already alarmed by women or gay priests.
Two years ago an Australian archbishop, John Hepworth, leader of the Traditional Anglican Communion which claims to represent 400,000 worshippers worldwide, went to the Vatican to seek terms for his flock to be accepted into full communion with Rome. Part of the Roman Curia received him sympathetically, but the dominant group of Vatican bureaucrats were against him.
But then came the Synod vote.
The Rev. John Kimble, a retired Episcopal priest in Toledo, believes the Vatican is being deceptive with the proposal, calling it “a subtle attack on Anglicanism.”
“If they were really interested in Anglicanism and coming together, they need to acknowledge that we have women priests and people who are homosexuals,” he said. “What undergirds this statement is a subtle attempt to reinforce the biased, prejudicial, and sectarian stances” of the Catholic Church….
Father [Charles] Singler said the Vatican’s intent is to meet the spiritual needs of people in crisis, not to steal members from another Christian body. “It shows the church’s desire to provide a place for those who are trying to find a spiritual home. ”¦ It’s a way to provide an option for people trying to find some sense of stability and tradition,” he said.
The Vatican is welcoming Anglicans to return to Catholicism centuries after their ancestors left. The Vatican said it will permit married Anglican priests to become ordained Catholic priests. John Allen, senior correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, talks with Steve Inskeep about how this week’s announcement calls into question a long-held Catholic tradition of celibacy in the priesthood.
Pope Benedict’s overture to disaffected Anglicans created shock waves among Ottawa church officials Wednesday as they weighed the meaning of the historic event.
Many welcomed the Vatican’s decision to create a new structure within the Catholic Church that will make it more comfortable for conservative Anglicans to join.
Earlier this week, the Pope announced he will permit Anglicans who share the same essential beliefs as Catholics to maintain their traditions within the embrace of the Roman Catholic Church.
Was Pope Benedict XVI inspired by Cardinal John Henry Newman, whom it is hoped he will beatify in England next year, when he suddenly threw open the gates of Rome to disaffected Anglicans on Tuesday morning?
The official website for Newman’s Cause hinted as much when it greeted the announcement with a reminder of Newman’s support for a proposal to establish an Anglican Uniate Church for converts, similar to that provided for Byzantine-rite Catholics. The plan was conceived by Ambrose Phillips de Lisle and Newman rightly guessed that it would be unworkable. But if it could be made to work, he said, he was all in favour. As he wrote to de Lisle in 1876:
“Nothing will rejoice me more than to find that the Holy See considers it safe and promising to sanction some such plan as the Pamphlet suggests. I give my best prayers, such as they are, that some means of drawing to us so many good people, who are now shivering at our gates, may be discovered.”
Since the Vatican launched its bold bid Tuesday to make it easier for Anglicans to join the Roman Catholic Church, the question on everyone’s mind has been: How many will convert?
Will the much ballyhooed Anglican divide over the Church’s moves to accept openly gay and female clerics now cause hundreds of thousands of conservative Anglicans ”“ mostly in Africa and parts of the US ”“ to flock to Catholicism?
Early indications from African bishops are that most Anglicans, despite their fierce opposition to homosexuality, will be saying “thanks but no thanks” to Rome’s new offer, largely because of the autonomy that they enjoy within the Anglican church.
“I don’t think that priests in Uganda are going to leave and join the Roman Catholic church,” says Bishop Stanley Ntagali, head of an Anglican diocese in the east African country of Uganda. “Uganda is [already] a separate region from the Church in Canterbury. They are able to do things their way, and we have to do things our way.”