C
- Status
W
WanderAimlessly
Guest
T
truthsilence
Guest
This is what our prayers in mass each week are all about, right?
Since becoming Catholic last Easter, I’ve felt such a connection to all of Christianity; well all of humanity, really.
Wow, this seems like awesome news.
Since becoming Catholic last Easter, I’ve felt such a connection to all of Christianity; well all of humanity, really.
Wow, this seems like awesome news.
C
Contarini
Guest
God grant that this is true! But we’ve heard such rumors before, and they always turn out to be just talk. The Times is not noted for accuracy in its coverage of Christianity (yes, I know this is the London paper, not the equally famous one in New York which is just as bad that way).
Edwin
C
Contarini
Guest
This article gives a much more realistic spin on the story. As I feared, the Times didn’t know what it was talking about.
Edwin
Edwin
J
JonathanKinsman
Guest
Contarini,
Your article does absolutely nothing to qualify what the original Times articles discussed. In fact, they both touch upon the same points with the Times’ article going into more depth than the Spero link.
There are Anglican parishes who have left the Episcopal Church to become Catholic, Anglican Use parishes.
The centuries old dike of founding a religion for political and sexual reasons (divorce of Catherine of Aragon and the dismantling and taking of Abbey properties throughout England for reasons of revenue enhancement) is starting to show many, many cracks.
The recent slide of E and A churches into heresies, such as approval of homosexual unions and scripture revisionism (“it wasn’t rampant, pervasive sodomy that God was disturbed about in those two cities, it was ‘inhospitality to strangers’!!”) is doing more to bring the CC and Anglican Communion together than anything else.
Pretty soon, I hope to say to you: welcome home, brother.
Pax Christi
S
sterryfamily
Guest
Thanks, Edwin
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
I saw that this morning - & I doubt very much that anything will come of it.
There has been excitement & speculation of this kind before - as in 1992: there was a lot of talk about how the decision by the C of E to allow women to be ordained to the priesthood would be the end of the C of E - it wasn’t; about a thousand Anglican clergy (so I’ve read) became Catholics, but that was about it. The whole thing was rather embarrassing for the English bishops - I think they felt that it mucked up telations with the C of E: they have refused to allow any resort to the Anglican Use; you in the US are lucky to have it.There was a lot of excitement in the 1850s as well - the C of E survived that too; & England (meaning England: not Scotland - people in the US tend to confuse England with Britain as a whole) was not converted to Catholicism, though there had been all sorts of rather fevered hopes that it would.
What is surprising is that the article completely ignores the detail that Anglicanism is not homogeneous: there are plenty of Roméphiles in the C of E, but there are also plenty of Anglicans who want absolutely nothing to with Rome: in 1992, some of them also left the C of E, to join more uncompromisingly Protestant bodies. There are Anglicans whose distaste for “Popery” is at least as vigorous as the distaste of many Catholics for “Protestantism” - writers from both groups have said that ecumenism is a betrayal of their respective creeds. The only gainers from this are the anti-Christians
It does not follow that because certain Anglicans agree with Rome on certain ethical matters, they will also accept the Assumption (say). The article ignores that too. But if they want to “pope”, they are going to have to accept the lot. Another TAC affair, no one needs
The whole thing looks (TM anyway) less like something specifically Christian, than management of personnel & resources, such as any big firm might undertake while discussing a merger with another one. But maybe that is mere cynicism.
Thanks for posting the link
Presumably this will be discussed on weblogs - that ought to be interesting. ##
G
GKC
Guest
GoG,I saw that this morning - & I doubt very much that anything will come of it.
There has been excitement & speculation of this kind before - as in 1992: there was a lot of talk about how the decision by the C of E to allow women to be ordained to the priesthood would be the end of the C of E - it wasn’t; about a thousand Anglican clergy (so I’ve read) became Catholics, but that was about it. The whole thing was rather embarrassing for the English bishops - I think they felt that it mucked up telations with the C of E: they have refused to allow any resort to the Anglican Use; you in the US are lucky to have it.
There was a lot of excitement in the 1850s as well - the C of E survived that too; & England (meaning England: not Scotland - people in the US tend to confuse England with Britain as a whole) was not converted to Catholicism, though there had been all sorts of rather fevered hopes that it would.
What is surprising is that the article completely ignores the detail that Anglicanism is not homogeneous: there are plenty of Roméphiles in the C of E, but there are also plenty of Anglicans who want absolutely nothing to with Rome: in 1992, some of them also left the C of E, to join more uncompromisingly Protestant bodies. There are Anglicans whose distaste for “Popery” is at least as vigorous as the distaste of many Catholics for “Protestantism” - writers from both groups have said that ecumenism is a betrayal of their respective creeds. The only gainers from this are the anti-Christians
It does not follow that because certain Anglicans agree with Rome on certain ethical matters, they will also accept the Assumption (say). The article ignores that too. But if they want to “pope”, they are going to have to accept the lot. Another TAC affair, no one needs
The whole thing looks (TM anyway) less like something specifically Christian, than management of personnel & resources, such as any big firm might undertake while discussing a merger with another one. But maybe that is mere cynicism.
Thanks for posting the link
And some Anglicans accept the Assumption. But you are correct. Nothng will come of this.
GKC
Anglicanus Catholicus
C
Contarini
Guest
Yes, it does. It clarifies that these are the same discussions that have been going on for a long time. Nothing secret, nothing new, nothing radical. It’s all talk. No one will be happier than I if I’m proved wrong.
I can’t see that it goes into more depth. Trust me, I’ve read Times articles on religion before. They get muddled all the time. They thought the Plymouth Brethren have priests, for heaven’s sake. The tone is all wrong–exaggerated journalese.
About half a dozen. Isolated enclaves of snooty Anglo-Catholicism with very little encouragement from the Catholic hierarchy. They’re a dead end.
On an individual basis, sure. But that only postpones corporate reunion. The Catholic-minded Anglicans just become Catholic (or Orthodox), leaving the liberals, the evangelicals, and the Anglo-Catholics who are more Anglo than Catholic. The Epioscopal Church is full of ex-Catholics (many of them divorced) who are bitter against Catholicism and want nothing less than reunion. It’s a natural cycle–the folks who want to be Catholic become Catholic and the folks who don’t become something else. In a free society, there’s no way to stop this.
Edwin
R
Rolltide
Guest
And… the other shoe drops.
From Zenit.org
Date: 2007-02-19
Anglicans and Catholics Take Times to Task
Prelates Clarify Upcoming Document
LONDON, FEB. 19, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The co-chairs of an Anglican-Catholic dialogue commission said that an article in the Times newspaper, headlined “Churches Back Plan to Unite Under Pope,” sensationalizes and misrepresents the truth.
The article by Ruth Gledhill reports information supposedly leaked to the Times regarding an unpublished document entitled “Growing Together in Unity and Mission,” to be released by the International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission.
Gledhill’s article, published today, claimed: “Radical proposals to reunite Anglicans with the Roman Catholic Church under the leadership of the Pope are to be published this year, The Times has learnt.”
The prelates that co-chair the commission have clarified the reporting in Gledhill’s article. They released this statement (adapted here):
“Growing Together in Unity and Mission” is being published as an agreed statement of IARCCUM (the International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission), and is to be published under the commission’s authority, not as an official statement of the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion. It is being put forward to foster discussion and reflection, as the statement clearly states.
The statement was recently completed by IARCCUM, and is scheduled to be published by the commission as soon as a Catholic commentary to accompany the document has been completed; an Anglican commentary has already been prepared for publication.
The text was made available to the Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council and to the Anglican primates, currently meeting in Tanzania. The primates were also presented with a copy of the agreed statement of the International Commission of the Anglican-Orthodox Theological Dialogue, entitled “The Church of the Triune God.”
Through these two texts, Anglican leaders were able to look at the recent results of important international dialogues with which the Anglican Communion is currently engaged. Both of these texts address the theology of the Church, and given that the Anglican primates are currently discussing the nature of the Church, it was felt that the dialogue documents had something to contribute to those discussions.
“Growing Together in Unity and Mission” has not yet been officially published. It is unfortunate that its contents have been prematurely reported in a way which misrepresents its intentions and sensationalizes its conclusions.
The first part of the document, which treats doctrinal matters, is an attempt to synthesize the work of ARCIC (the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission) over the past 35 years. It identifies the level of agreement which has been reached by ARCIC, but is also very clear in identifying ongoing areas of disagreement, and in raising questions which still need to be addressed in dialogue.
Those ongoing questions and areas of disagreement are highlighted in boxed sections interspersed throughout the text. It is a very honest document assessing the state of Anglican-Roman Catholic relations at the present moment.
Both the heading of the article (“Churches back plan to unite under Pope”) and its opening sentence, which speaks of “radical proposals to reunite Anglicans with the Roman Catholic Church under the leadership of the Pope,” need to be put into proper perspective.
For 35 years this dialogue has addressed questions of authority, including the papacy. The so-called “radical proposals” found in “Growing Together in Unity and Mission” are the same proposals which ARCIC has been putting forward over the past 35 years.
What this document says about the Petrine Ministry is not new, but a synthesis of what is said in ARCIC’s documents on authority (“Authority in the Church I,” 1976; “Authority in the Church II,” 1981; “The Gift of Authority,” 1999).
While it is encouraging that a document of this kind can be produced and that practical day-to-day cooperation between Catholics and Anglicans can be strengthened, talk of plans to reunite the two communions is, sadly, much exaggerated.
The second part of the document sets forward proposals for concrete initiatives, identifying aspects of common mission, common study, common prayer which are for the most part already permitted according to authoritative sources of the Catholic Church and the provinces of the Anglican Communion.
From Zenit.org
Date: 2007-02-19
Anglicans and Catholics Take Times to Task
Prelates Clarify Upcoming Document
LONDON, FEB. 19, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The co-chairs of an Anglican-Catholic dialogue commission said that an article in the Times newspaper, headlined “Churches Back Plan to Unite Under Pope,” sensationalizes and misrepresents the truth.
The article by Ruth Gledhill reports information supposedly leaked to the Times regarding an unpublished document entitled “Growing Together in Unity and Mission,” to be released by the International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission.
Gledhill’s article, published today, claimed: “Radical proposals to reunite Anglicans with the Roman Catholic Church under the leadership of the Pope are to be published this year, The Times has learnt.”
The prelates that co-chair the commission have clarified the reporting in Gledhill’s article. They released this statement (adapted here):
“Growing Together in Unity and Mission” is being published as an agreed statement of IARCCUM (the International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission), and is to be published under the commission’s authority, not as an official statement of the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion. It is being put forward to foster discussion and reflection, as the statement clearly states.
The statement was recently completed by IARCCUM, and is scheduled to be published by the commission as soon as a Catholic commentary to accompany the document has been completed; an Anglican commentary has already been prepared for publication.
The text was made available to the Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council and to the Anglican primates, currently meeting in Tanzania. The primates were also presented with a copy of the agreed statement of the International Commission of the Anglican-Orthodox Theological Dialogue, entitled “The Church of the Triune God.”
Through these two texts, Anglican leaders were able to look at the recent results of important international dialogues with which the Anglican Communion is currently engaged. Both of these texts address the theology of the Church, and given that the Anglican primates are currently discussing the nature of the Church, it was felt that the dialogue documents had something to contribute to those discussions.
“Growing Together in Unity and Mission” has not yet been officially published. It is unfortunate that its contents have been prematurely reported in a way which misrepresents its intentions and sensationalizes its conclusions.
The first part of the document, which treats doctrinal matters, is an attempt to synthesize the work of ARCIC (the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission) over the past 35 years. It identifies the level of agreement which has been reached by ARCIC, but is also very clear in identifying ongoing areas of disagreement, and in raising questions which still need to be addressed in dialogue.
Those ongoing questions and areas of disagreement are highlighted in boxed sections interspersed throughout the text. It is a very honest document assessing the state of Anglican-Roman Catholic relations at the present moment.
Both the heading of the article (“Churches back plan to unite under Pope”) and its opening sentence, which speaks of “radical proposals to reunite Anglicans with the Roman Catholic Church under the leadership of the Pope,” need to be put into proper perspective.
For 35 years this dialogue has addressed questions of authority, including the papacy. The so-called “radical proposals” found in “Growing Together in Unity and Mission” are the same proposals which ARCIC has been putting forward over the past 35 years.
What this document says about the Petrine Ministry is not new, but a synthesis of what is said in ARCIC’s documents on authority (“Authority in the Church I,” 1976; “Authority in the Church II,” 1981; “The Gift of Authority,” 1999).
While it is encouraging that a document of this kind can be produced and that practical day-to-day cooperation between Catholics and Anglicans can be strengthened, talk of plans to reunite the two communions is, sadly, much exaggerated.
The second part of the document sets forward proposals for concrete initiatives, identifying aspects of common mission, common study, common prayer which are for the most part already permitted according to authoritative sources of the Catholic Church and the provinces of the Anglican Communion.
R
Rolltide
Guest
Most of these proposals aren’t new, and some of them have been implemented for decades in some places. The document draws together a series of proposals which IARCCUM’s members believe are possible in the present context given the degree of faith we share. But it also says that local bishops in each part of the world will need to discern what is appropriate locally, given that the context and dynamics of relationships between Anglicans and Roman Catholics differ widely across the world.
The Times article speculates about the Catholic Church’s response to a possible schism within the Anglican Communion. It should be pointed out that the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has consistently spoken of the value of the Anglican Communion remaining a communion, rooted in the Apostolic faith, as indicated in this statement from 2004: “It is our overwhelming desire that the Anglican Communion stays together, rooted in the historic faith which our dialogue and relations over four decades have led us to believe that we share to a large degree.”
During the visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury to Pope Benedict in November, 2006, the Holy Father noted: “It is our fervent hope that the Anglican Communion will remain grounded in the Gospels and the Apostolic Tradition which form our common patrimony and are the basis of our common aspiration to work for full visible unity.”
We hope that when published, “Growing Together in Unity and Mission” invites a good deal of discussion, and that it will be a helpful instrument on the long journey towards full communion which has been the stated goal of Anglican-Roman Catholic relations for the past 40 years.
From Archbishop John Bathersby, Catholic Co-chair of IARCCUM
and Bishop David Beetge, Anglican Co-chair of IARCCUM
The Times article speculates about the Catholic Church’s response to a possible schism within the Anglican Communion. It should be pointed out that the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has consistently spoken of the value of the Anglican Communion remaining a communion, rooted in the Apostolic faith, as indicated in this statement from 2004: “It is our overwhelming desire that the Anglican Communion stays together, rooted in the historic faith which our dialogue and relations over four decades have led us to believe that we share to a large degree.”
During the visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury to Pope Benedict in November, 2006, the Holy Father noted: “It is our fervent hope that the Anglican Communion will remain grounded in the Gospels and the Apostolic Tradition which form our common patrimony and are the basis of our common aspiration to work for full visible unity.”
We hope that when published, “Growing Together in Unity and Mission” invites a good deal of discussion, and that it will be a helpful instrument on the long journey towards full communion which has been the stated goal of Anglican-Roman Catholic relations for the past 40 years.
From Archbishop John Bathersby, Catholic Co-chair of IARCCUM
and Bishop David Beetge, Anglican Co-chair of IARCCUM
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
dem dang false prophets!
RollTide Roll Tide!
Saban the Cheerleader, Saban the World!
RollTide Roll Tide!
Saban the Cheerleader, Saban the World!
S
Sixtus
Guest
I have grave concerns about whether so rich a diversity of interpretation of Scripture would stand up to quite a narrow Catholic interpretation.
Three has always been minor defections by individuals and small groups but for a major reintegration, I am not sure mainstream Catholicism would be able to cope. Then we would see our own mass attendances dwindle.
Mainstream Catholics would have to make adaptations to accomodate Anglicans else they would not stay.
Since the Reformation, things have moved on somewhat.
I am not convinced reunification is desirable or in everybody’s best interests.One side must lose out. Which is a matter of conjecture.
Three has always been minor defections by individuals and small groups but for a major reintegration, I am not sure mainstream Catholicism would be able to cope. Then we would see our own mass attendances dwindle.
Mainstream Catholics would have to make adaptations to accomodate Anglicans else they would not stay.
Since the Reformation, things have moved on somewhat.
I am not convinced reunification is desirable or in everybody’s best interests.One side must lose out. Which is a matter of conjecture.
S
Sixtus
Guest
I have grave concerns about whether so rich a diversity of interpretation of Scripture would stand up to quite a narrow Catholic interpretation.
Three has always been minor defections by individuals and small groups but for a major reintegration, I am not sure mainstream Catholicism would be able to cope. Then we would see our own mass attendances dwindle.
Mainstream Catholics would have to make adaptations to accomodate Anglicans else they would not stay.
Since the Reformation, things have moved on somewhat.
I am not convinced reunification is desirable or in everybody’s best interests.One side must lose out. Which is a matter of conjecture.
Three has always been minor defections by individuals and small groups but for a major reintegration, I am not sure mainstream Catholicism would be able to cope. Then we would see our own mass attendances dwindle.
Mainstream Catholics would have to make adaptations to accomodate Anglicans else they would not stay.
Since the Reformation, things have moved on somewhat.
I am not convinced reunification is desirable or in everybody’s best interests.One side must lose out. Which is a matter of conjecture.
S
Sixtus
Guest
I have grave concerns about whether so rich a diversity of interpretation of Scripture would stand up to quite a narrow Catholic interpretation.
Three has always been minor defections by individuals and small groups but for a major reintegration, I am not sure mainstream Catholicism would be able to cope. Then we would see our own mass attendances dwindle.
Mainstream Catholics would have to make adaptations to accomodate Anglicans else they would not stay.
Since the Reformation, things have moved on somewhat.
I am not convinced reunification is desirable or in everybody’s best interests.One side must lose out. Which is a matter of conjecture.
Three has always been minor defections by individuals and small groups but for a major reintegration, I am not sure mainstream Catholicism would be able to cope. Then we would see our own mass attendances dwindle.
Mainstream Catholics would have to make adaptations to accomodate Anglicans else they would not stay.
Since the Reformation, things have moved on somewhat.
I am not convinced reunification is desirable or in everybody’s best interests.One side must lose out. Which is a matter of conjecture.
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
The real questions should be:
How many Catholics actively share their faith with non-Catholics?
How many Catholics are actually pushing people away by not being as freindly as they could be when they do encounter non-Catholics?
Misconceptions about what one another teaches seems to be a big obstacle. (Many Protestants think Catholics worship idols, and many Catholics think Protestants are just rebellious people who want to create a Christian faith that suits them.)
How many Catholics actively share their faith with non-Catholics?
How many Catholics are actually pushing people away by not being as freindly as they could be when they do encounter non-Catholics?
Misconceptions about what one another teaches seems to be a big obstacle. (Many Protestants think Catholics worship idols, and many Catholics think Protestants are just rebellious people who want to create a Christian faith that suits them.)
A
AuntMartha
Guest
What sort of accomodations do you mean?
S
Sixtus
Guest
Aunt Martha,
I have been well hammered for thinking re-unication is a bad thing. But whatever else, at least I am a realist.
For starters, I do not believe the case as it does not have its origin from within the Catholic Church but from the media, whose creative journalise is anything and everything fiction. The media is not interested in the truth, but what sells news!!
So let us assume it is true. The catholic chatecism is very tight in its interpretation of ‘what catholics believe’. That belief is 'not shared with many mainstream Anglicans. This forum would need to make concessions for starters to accomodate ‘the new catholics’ who are on their second, third and in some cases forth marriages. Divorce and re-marriage is rife among some!
The commitment in some parishes to 'pray the Rosary at the end of mass would irritate some Anglicans. The presence of statues would also be a contentious issue. We may need to either put screens over them or remove them, else there would be a lot of disagreement about ‘graven images’! We know they are not, but that is not what lots of Anglicans would say.
Catholic customs such as ‘the blessing of throats’ on the feast of St Blaise would be seen as utter nonsence. This would have to be discontinued.
High Anglicans are more Catholic than Roman in their liberal use of smells and bells. We altar servers have a distinct code for ringing bells.
We generally disagree about which wine can be used for the consecration. We only use grape from one part of the world, they another. We insist on ‘wine of the grape’ whereas some Anglicans insist on the use of other ingredients. How do we reach a compromise?
If Anglicans wish to re-allign, I see no reason why they could not just accept the Catholic teaching magisterium and apostolic succession and tradition, then continue in their own respective tradition and culture.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Well Sixtus, your diarhea of the fingers has concreted my opinion that “any reunfication is just a pipe dream…”
I am a realist as well.
I don’t even see us reuniting with the EOC. Papal Primacy, Papal Infallibility, and Purgatory are not even negotiable with them. Even if the EOC in Europe united, the EOC here in the states would break away from the European EOC. I’ve been to some Eastern Orthodox Forums. They are just as bad as Protestants when it comes to those 3 topics.
Any reunification will be done by conversion by person by person until the local church is no longer financially sustainable or Pastorally sustainable.
I am a realist as well.
I don’t even see us reuniting with the EOC. Papal Primacy, Papal Infallibility, and Purgatory are not even negotiable with them. Even if the EOC in Europe united, the EOC here in the states would break away from the European EOC. I’ve been to some Eastern Orthodox Forums. They are just as bad as Protestants when it comes to those 3 topics.
Any reunification will be done by conversion by person by person until the local church is no longer financially sustainable or Pastorally sustainable.
- Status