TAC Making Formal Proposal for Reunion

[Irenicist]

This notice has just been published on the Challenger website, house organ for the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC):

16th October 2007
Statement authorised by the TAC Primate

" The College of Bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) met in Plenary Session in Portsmouth, England, in the first week of October 2007. The Bishops and Vicars-General unanimously agreed to the text of a letter to the See of Rome seeking full, corporate, sacramental union. The letter was signed solemnly by all the College and entrusted to the Primate and two bishops chosen by the College to be presented to the Holy See.
The letter was cordially received at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The Primate of the TAC has agreed that no member of the College will give interviews until the Holy See has considered the letter and responded."

• John

Whether this succeeds or not, the fact that the TAC claims 400,000 makes this the bigest potential move towards Catholic reunion for quite some time.

Irenicist

 

[chris_molter]

Is the text of the letter posted anywhere online? I’d be fascinated to read the proposal.

 

[Nevarlander]

Sweet. The more of us the better.

 

[PaulDupre]

This is wonderful. Praise Jesus!
Paul

 

[Irenicist]

Is the text of the letter posted anywhere online? I’d be fascinated to read the proposal.

It isn’t available yet. It seems to have been hand delivered in Rome by AB Hepworth and two colleagues following the TAC synod in Portsmouth last week, which sort of explains the news blackout until now. As Hepworth’s note suggests, it probably will not be released until Rome responds.

Before anyone gets too excited, this is apparently a proposal for “corporate” reunion. There are lots of issues to resolve, and several models both provisional and definitive that could be on the table. This will take some time.

Some of these issues involve the validity of TAC orders, transitional provisions regarding married TAC bishops, the fate of excommunicated former Catholics who later joined the TAC, the TAC’s current inter-communion agreements with other bodies, papal infallibility, etc…

I think the most we could expect from Rome at the moment would be the setting up of a commission to formally examine prospects for reunion, but that wouls still be a start.

Irenicist

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

That’s a very cogent analysis.

I worshipped among the Anglicans for a number of years before returning Home, and found that among those who were extremely in favour of reunion with the Holy See, there were many misconceptions.

The most common one I found was that there was a desire for the Pope to have a different role among them, after they “return,” than among Catholics today. He wouldn’t be accepted as exercising the charism of infallibility in teaching faith and morals. At its most extreme, some of these good people (and I mean that literally) were looking for a way to safely stay Anglican, not become Catholic.

Overall, there’s a confusion about the nature of any reunion that might take place. In many circles, the perception is that this will be akin to the healing of a schism. This gave rise to the citing of the Uniate reunion as a model in many circles, but the cases are fundamentally different. It is the return to the fold of Protestants, not the end of a schism, and the difference is much bigger than many Anglicans I know understand.

There’s much water to flow under this bridge, but nothing will come of it unless it is recognized that the step will be for the Anglicans to become Catholics, not remain Anglican in a new corporate setting.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Catholicdeacon]

Whether this succeeds or not, the fact that the TAC claims 400,000 makes this the bigest potential move towards Catholic reunion for quite some time.

Irenicist

I can see the headlines now “Mayor traffic disruptions to the Italian commerce as thousands upon thousands jump into the Tiber to swim back home”

Catholic Deacon

 

[mark_a]

That’s a very cogent analysis.

I worshipped among the Anglicans for a number of years before returning Home, and found that among those who were extremely in favour of reunion with the Holy See, there were many misconceptions.

The most common one I found was that there was a desire for the Pope to have a different role among them, after they “return,” than among Catholics today. He wouldn’t be accepted as exercising the charism of infallibility in teaching faith and morals. At its most extreme, some of these good people (and I mean that literally) were looking for a way to safely stay Anglican, not become Catholic.

Overall, there’s a confusion about the nature of any reunion that might take place. In many circles, the perception is that this will be akin to the healing of a schism. This gave rise to the citing of the Uniate reunion as a model in many circles, but the cases are fundamentally different. It is the return to the fold of Protestants, not the end of a schism, and the difference is much bigger than many Anglicans I know understand.

There’s much water to flow under this bridge, but nothing will come of it unless it is recognized that the step will be for the Anglicans to become Catholics, not remain Anglican in a new corporate setting.

Blessings,

Gerry

Thanks for this informed point of view.

But I have to wonder, if these Anglicans would reject the Catholic understanding of papal infallibility, what exactly would be the point of seeking communion?

 

[Irenicist]

Thanks for this informed point of view.

But I have to wonder, if these Anglicans would reject the Catholic understanding of papal infallibility, what exactly would be the point of seeking communion?

I suspect that the TAC bishops will seek clarifications from Rome on what the doctrine involves.

Part of the problem is that Anglicans take a rather expansive everyday view of the term “infallibility”. Most, if not all, Anglicans contest the underlying doctrine of the infallibility of the Church as a whole, and this makes papal infallibility even harder for them to swallow.

The TAC does not consist of “average” Anglicans, however. Its members are self selected from the most orthodox and catholic-minded stream of Anglicanism, and broke with Canterbury over women’s ordination over thirty years ago. Whether and how the TAC would accept whatever clarifications Rome offers on the subject of infallibility can only be speculated on at this stage.

Irenicist

 

[chris_molter]

I agree a lot of what will occur will hinge on how TAC will accept Papal Infallibility. I’m sure they’ll seek a similar arrangement as the Eastern Catholic Churches (Papal Infallibility as a doctrine is accepted, but it is exercised differently than in the West), but since the Church in England was always a part of the Western Rite, I don’t know if that will be a sticking point.

 

[Irenicist]

I agree a lot of what will occur will hinge on how TAC will accept Papal Infallibility. I’m sure they’ll seek a similar arrangement as the Eastern Catholic Churches (Papal Infallibility as a doctrine is accepted, but it is exercised differently than in the West), but since the Church in England was always a part of the Western Rite, I don’t know if that will be a sticking point.

Actually, I hear this argument a lot both from Catholics and skeptical Anglicans. It’s claimed that there could never be a separate Anglican sui juris rite in communion with Rome because Anglicanism is a breakaway from the Western Latin rite and because the high Anglican liturgy is broadly similar to the Tridentine (though in the vernacular).

Yet Rome recognizes and is in communion with nine sui juris rites (ten, if you count Italo-Albanians) that are all direct or indirect offshoots of the Patriarchate of Constantinople or use mainly the Byzantine liturgy (Melkites). It seems to me that an Anglican rite in communion with Rome would be in an analogous position, but I have never seen anyone make this argument.

Irenicist

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

Thanks for this informed point of view.

But I have to wonder, if these Anglicans would reject the Catholic understanding of papal infallibility, what exactly would be the point of seeking communion?

Let me begin by noting that I have not encountered any TAC Anglicans during my time worshipping among Anglicans, so I don’t want to imply that my observations specifically apply to that group.

As for those I encountered, many were convinced that they were as much a Catholic as were those in communion with the See of Peter. They perceived themselves as being even closer to being Catholic than Eastern Orthodox Churches, and got rather shirty if they were referred to as “Protestants.” Reunion, to them, was a process whereby the two groups would say that they are, and really always have been, the same thing, expressed differently. Now of course, that’s just a non-starter.

But reunion by Anglicans is a tricky proposition because of the diversity of views that use the label “Anglican.” I have heard very heated exchanges between evangelical Anglicans and those who identify as Anglo-Catholics, with some very jagged edged comments from the former being directed at the latter.

Anglicanism is splintering as I write this. (This is no schism into a couple of parts; it’s a disintegration into as yet an unknown number of fragments.) Reunions between the See of Peter and a group or groups of Anglicans could, as a side effect, push that shattering process. Already there’s an alliance between some “mainline” Anglicans and the Reformed Episcopal Church. The latter are unreservedly and militantly Protestant, and among the Protestant-leaning “mainline” Anglicans (at least in North America), there’s as much of a change that some of the pieces from the shattering will go that route, rather than towards crossing the Tiber. And they will do it in the name of preserving Anglicanism.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[chris_molter]

Actually, I hear this argument a lot both from Catholics and skeptical Anglicans. It’s claimed that there could never be a separate Anglican sui juris rite in communion with Rome because Anglicanism is a breakaway from the Western Latin rite and because the high Anglican liturgy is broadly similar to the Tridentine (though in the vernacular).

Yet Rome recognizes and is in communion with nine sui juris rites (ten, if you count Italo-Albanians) that are all direct or indirect offshoots of the Patriarchate of Constantinople or use mainly the Byzantine liturgy (Melkites). It seems to me that an Anglican rite in communion with Rome would be in an analogous position, but I have never seen anyone make this argument.

Irenicist

It’s certainly something that should be put forth if TAC’s intent is to become an Anglican sui juris church. I wonder, though what the specific arguments for and against a sui juris versus a personal prelature.

Unfortunately I don’t know enough about the ecclesiology and canon law underlying those subjects to make an educated conjecture!

 

[Irenicist]

It’s certainly something that should be put forth if TAC’s intent is to become an Anglican sui juris church. I wonder, though what the specific arguments for and against a sui juris versus a personal prelature.

Unfortunately I don’t know enough about the ecclesiology and canon law underlying those subjects to make an educated conjecture!

I’m not sure how applicable the personal prelature model might be. TAC members have speculated onthe possibility, but I suspect they don’t quite understand how these currently work. We only have Opus Dei to as an example, and its structure is more similar to that of a religious order with lay “tertiaries” except in its specifically defined mission which brings it outside territorial episcopal supervision.

It strikes that the only three workable models would for reunion would be 1) full undifferentiatied integration into the Latin rite (almost certainly a non starter, at least at the corporate level), 2) large-scale and worldwide extension of the current Anglican Use provision, with “Anglican” bishops appointed as auxiliaries to Latin metropolitans where numbers warrant (probably most likely, at least in the interim), or 3) a full sui juris Church.

I am no canon lawyer, however. I just offer this as food for thought.

Irenicist

 

[Lepanto]

Anglicanism is splintering as I write this. (This is no schism into a couple of parts; it’s a disintegration into as yet an unknown number of fragments.) Reunions between the See of Peter and a group or groups of Anglicans could, as a side effect, push that shattering process.

Is the further splintering of Anglicanism necessarily a bad thing?

I know that you didn’t directly give your opinion on this question, but I’m not so sure sure that the splintering is such a bad thing. Perhaps Anglicanism needs to go through this purgative process in order to get out of self-propagation mode and for some (many?) of its adherents to come home.

 

[Brendan]

IMost, if not all, Anglicans contest the underlying doctrine of the infallibility of the Church as a whole, and this makes papal infallibility even harder for them to swallow.

Perhaps the TAC has come to realize that it is this very belief that got their church into trouble in the first place. Without a belief that one’s church teaches the infallible truth, then it means that anybody can believe anything and remain ‘in communion’ with you.

And that is exactly what has happened in the Anglican Communion.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

Is the further splintering of Anglicanism necessarily a bad thing?

I know that you didn’t directly give your opinion on this question, but I’m not so sure sure that the splintering is such a bad thing. Perhaps Anglicanism needs to go through this purgative process in order to get out of self-propagation mode and for some (many?) of its adherents to come home.

Perhaps it does. The reason I wouldn’t label it as an explicitly “good” thing is that I know a number of Anglican people, who are undoubtedly believing Christians, who are really enduring much pain through what is going on.

I’m not too worried about the faith of these people I know, in so far as there being a risk that they just chuck it altogether. But some folks caught up in this situation have chucked it altogether, and have had done with church, Christianity, or both. It’s never good when people let go of what truth they possess.

I guess at bottom I’m indifferent to the fate of Anglicanism, but not to the fate of Anglican Christians. (And in saying that, I do intend to indicate that there are Anglicans who no longer profess the Christian faith.)

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Contarini]

Without a belief that one’s church teaches the infallible truth, then it means that anybody can believe anything and remain ‘in communion’ with you.

No, it doesn’t mean anything of the sort. This is a non sequitur. Infallibility relates purely to one’s confidence that one’s church will teach truth in the future (well, obviously it increases one’s confidence that it has done so in the past, but it is not necessary for such confidence).

Where a lack of belief in infallibility hurts Anglicans is in making it impossible for us to rule out the eventuality that our church may deny the faith and make it necessary for us to separate from it (or at the very least to dissent unequivocally from its official teaching).

Edwin

 

[JoyforCatholic]

For what it’s worth, I think it’s interesting to note a few recent developments.

In the past year there has been news stories about 4 Former Bp’s of the Episcopal Church in America who have apparently decided to come home to the Catholic Church-- according to these stories (online sources such as Virtuosity Online, an Angican News Blog) they are the former Bishops of Albany, Ft. Worth, Rio Grande and SW Flordia.

The TAC is part of the “continuing church” movement in Anglicanism. They are AKA “vagante” churches in some circles. As someone who left this summer, from the APCK, one of the orignal Continuing jursidictions (formed in late 70’s after the promulgation of female ordinations in the ECUSA), I believe I can say this-- isn’t it interesting that these 4 former Episcopal Bishops are coming home to the Church without going through one of the Continuing church jurisdictions first? I think it is.

While there are a great number of good and holy Christian persons in these continuing church faith communities, they lack the Catholic Unity intended by our Lord that is found in the Papcy and the Church. Furthermore, there are elements of leadership in these various “continuing churches” whose motives ought to be questioned.

Am I happy that the TAC is asking for corporate reunion with the Holy See? Yes, I am. However, as Ronald Regan said, “Trust but Verify”. I am confident that is what the Holy Father and Rome is doing right now-- the verification process.

If the TAC wants its own separate rite then I’d say “no dice” to the deal-- Anglicanism is a “variety” of worship in the Western Rite Church-- the Latin Rite-- it is simply the Latin Rite in English if we get to the original roots-- everything else about Anglicanism today, from an historical perspective, deals with its pride in telling the Papacy to “shove off” as it were in the 16th Century.

So my message to the TAC is this-- “There is a way to come home to the Church-- and it is on God’s terms and the Church’s terms, not your own.”

In Christ,

 

[Metaron]

For what it’s worth, I think it’s interesting to note a few recent developments.

In the past year there has been news stories about 4 Former Bp’s of the Episcopal Church in America who have apparently decided to come home to the Catholic Church-- according to these stories (online sources such as Virtuosity Online, an Angican News Blog) they are the former Bishops of Albany, Ft. Worth, Rio Grande and SW Flordia.

The TAC is part of the “continuing church” movement in Anglicanism. They are AKA “vagante” churches in some circles. As someone who left this summer, from the APCK, one of the orignal Continuing jursidictions (formed in late 70’s after the promulgation of female ordinations in the ECUSA), I believe I can say this-- isn’t it interesting that these 4 former Episcopal Bishops are coming home to the Church without going through one of the Continuing church jurisdictions first? I think it is.

While there are a great number of good and holy Christian persons in these continuing church faith communities, they lack the Catholic Unity intended by our Lord that is found in the Papcy and the Church. Furthermore, there are elements of leadership in these various “continuing churches” whose motives ought to be questioned.

Am I happy that the TAC is asking for corporate reunion with the Holy See? Yes, I am. However, as Ronald Regan said, “Trust but Verify”. I am confident that is what the Holy Father and Rome is doing right now-- the verification process.

If the TAC wants its own separate rite then I’d say “no dice” to the deal-- Anglicanism is a “variety” of worship in the Western Rite Church-- the Latin Rite-- it is simply the Latin Rite in English if we get to the original roots-- everything else about Anglicanism today, from an historical perspective, deals with its pride in telling the Papacy to “shove off” as it were in the 16th Century.

So my message to the TAC is this-- “There is a way to come home to the Church-- and it is on God’s terms and the Church’s terms, not your own.”

In Christ,

Interesting. I think it would be good for there to be an Anglican Rite, with marriagable priests. At any rate, do you know what Continuing Anglican Churches comprise the TAC? If so, is my former church, the Anglican Catholic Church, among them?