The Vatican has mounted a direct challenge to the unity of the Anglican Communion. It established last month a new legal structure by which Anglicans may enter the Catholic Church. Traditionalist Anglicans, for whom the arrangement was designed, were delighted. But Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was treated unconscionably in the process. Dr Williams will meet Pope Benedict tomorrow in Rome. In the interests of his own authority and the integrity of the Anglican tradition, he should give the pontiff two clear messages.
First, the Anglican Communion is not an arrangement of convenience among disparate parties. In creating the new structure, known as an apostolic constitution, the Vatican acted precipitately. Second, there is an impeccable case for the Church to welcome women priests and homosexual clergy. On these issues that have sharply divided Anglicans, Dr Williams is clearly liberal by temperament. Stating that position openly, regardless of its effect on Anglican-Catholic relations, is overdue….
The author puts forth this piece of fiction :
“… there is an impeccable case for the Church to welcome women priests and homosexual clergy.”
“In creating the new structure, known as an apostolic constitution,”
They can’t even get this right. The new structure is the personal ordinariate. The apostolic constitution, [i]ANGLICANORUM COETIBUS [/i], is the legal act and device that establishes the creation of and the norms governing the same.
They moan that the Vatican acted “precipitately” and “unconscionably” to Rowan Williams yet then go on to say that “Stating that position openly, regardless of its effect on Anglican-Catholic relations, is overdue …”
So Rowan Williams is to act without regard for ecumenical relations (is that acting unconscionably?) and is overdue (whilst the Vatican is precipitate). In reply, I can only think of Jane Austen’s great lines given in [i] Mansfield Park [/i]: “Oh, do not attack me with a watch. A watch is always too fast or too slow. I cannot be dictated to by a watch.”
Perhaps the Editors at the (London) Times simply believe that they should have been consulted as to content and timing of Papal decrees and is having a fit of pique?
The [i]Thunderer[/i] (as Trollope called it in the Barchester novels) isn’t what it used to be. That a Murdoch publication can pontificate about the future state of the Church of England in this manner is one of the best arguments for disestablishment I’ve seen.
[url=http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com]Catholic and Reformed[/url]
“The Vatican mounted a direct challenge to Anglican Unity”? Puleeze. The challenge came from Anglicanism itself.
[blockquote]Anglican-Catholic relations have been undermined by Vatican politics[/blockquote]What is that, some kind of sick joke? I couldn’t even get past the headline. Fact is, Anglican-Catholic relations have been undermined repeatedly by pretty much everything that emanates from the Church of England. I give the Bishop of Rome credit for even having the stomach to conduct inter-faith discussions with us Anglicans.
The sooner Christchurch Canterbury is returned to its rightful owner the better.
Nikolaus, are you trying to destroy the Catholic Church in England? The fastest way to ruins us financially would be to give us the medieval cathedrals. Anyway the Church of England is an excellent custodian (well, not at the time of Reformation iconoclasm, but now admirable custodians).
RE: “The Vatican has mounted a direct challenge to the unity of the Anglican Communion.”
Yes. How can the Pope not see how unified we all are?
We are so very unified that nothing can break that unity. Nothing. Not even the pope’s offer.
So I’m sure that nobody will take him up on his offer.
Because . . . we are all unified.