A Cardinal for Canterbury?

The Reformation was bad for England, and the nation would do well to become a Catholic country again.

This was the affirmation proposed by Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor on Tuesday during a debate hosted by The Spectator magazine as part of its debate series. The topic under discussion was “England Should Be a Catholic Country Again,” and the cardinal — who is a retired archbishop of Westminster — was joined by author Piers Paul Read and Dom Antony Sutch, parish priest of St. Benets Catholic Church, in speaking for the motion.

Speaking against the motion were Lord Richard Harries, retired Anglican bishop of Oxford; Matthew Parris, former Conservative Member of Parliament and currently a columnist for the Times; and Stephen Pound, Labour Party Member of Parliament.

Though affirming that the Reformation “brought a tremendous loss to this country,” the core of Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor’s contribution focused on an ecumenical vision.

“My vision is for the English Church, united with all its history and genius, is to be aligned and in communion with the billion and more Catholic Christians throughout the world, with 4,000 or 5,000 bishops and in communion with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope,” he said.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, * Religion News & Commentary, Anglican Provinces, Archbishop of Canterbury, Church of England (CoE), CoE Bishops, England / UK, Other Churches, Religion & Culture, Roman Catholic

6 comments on “A Cardinal for Canterbury?

  1. Cennydd says:

    ‘In communion with Rome?’ Perhaps, but not a ‘part of Rome.’ I don’t see full union with the Church of Rome.

  2. austin says:

    The Church of England, and Anglicanism, comprises at least three (perhaps five or more) different religions. Only the Catholic, and perhaps in time Evangelical, wings could possibly end up being part of the Catholic Church. Full corporate reunion with those revisionists, rationalists, and liberals that loom so large in today’s Anglicanism would make sense neither for Rome or for this collection of post-Christians.

  3. Cennydd says:

    Could even the ACNA go with Rome? I highly doubt it.

  4. Ad Orientem says:

    Re #3
    Cennydd,
    The ACNA is as theologically fractured as TEO. Their only real point of agreement is that they don’t like sodomy.

  5. dwstroudmd+ says:

    Would the cardinal have a backbone so there would be at least one leader of one religious persuasion in Canterbury?

  6. Robert Hopper says:

    Re #4
    Amen!