There are many Catholic-minded Anglicans like me who have wondered, more than once whether we should become Roman Catholics. Rome is clearly the senior church of the Western tradition and I find so much to admire about it.
I rejoice in its internationalism, its capacity to produce saints in even the most unpropitious times and its ability to inspire poets such as Gerard Manley Hopkins, novelists such as Evelyn Waugh, and a number of distinguished modern composers.
I am deeply moved by the ministry of priests working in the shantytowns of Latin America and elsewhere. Then, of course, for those with an orderly mind, there is the ability of the Vatican to present a clear message for the outside world.
So why remain an Anglican? And why would it not be good for the country to become Roman Catholic again? For me the answer is summed up in a remark that a well-known Anglo-Catholic priest made to the mother superior of an Anglican religious order shortly before he died: “Mother, you know, the Church of England is now the only part of the Catholic Church which is open to the future.”
“It is a Church that is open to the future, to the continuing developments in our society.” Ah yes. The Church that reflects modern culture. How about the Church of Why Bother?
I remember when this man was a local vicar and had, nearly thirty five years ago, “married the spirit of the age.” He has been a prime mover in the process of the secularization of the Church of England. He will sadly continue to contribute to its spiritual demise. While not quite a “Spong” with the latter’s belligerence, why on earth did they have to make him a Lord?
they wouldn’t ‘ave ‘im…..
The Roman Catholic Church is far more open to the future described in Revelation. I’ll take my chances on that.
The “church that is open to the future” approves of contraception and abortion. Apparently, it’s a future grounded on its own terms.
Oh the rich irony! You see every word in this deluded and self indulgent and very ignorant rant is the reason I WILL most probably be joining the Roman Catholic church sooner rather than later!!
“It is a Church that is open to the future, to the continuing developments in our society.â€
I supopose that had the classical Gnostics had our modern historical consciousness, Carpocrates, Basilides, Valentinus and the whole lot of that rabble (but not Marcion, I think) might have vaunted the same thing about themselves and their various speculations and “accomodations” to the Zeitgeist, as opposed to the “reactionary fundamentalism” of the Katholike Ekklesia of Ignatius, Justin and Irenaeus. Funny (or perhaps not) to find the Church of England keeping such company, but plus ca change, etc.
Wow – Erastianism is commonly seen as a theological error but I admit there’s a kind of intellectual pleasure in seeing someone defending it.
Another cleric who expects the Church to be ever allowing itself to be molded by “the world, the flesh, and the devil.” Instead, the Church should be ever putting on its spiritual armor to protect its Teachings and Traditions from Satanic corruption while molding the world to its vision of the moral and the good.