Was reunification between the Catholic Church and Anglican Communion ever a viable prospect?

[Xarto]

That might be the way forward, for liberal to join with liberal and conservative with conservative. It still won’t solve the issue with women clergy though so maybe the real solution is for each parish to join on a case by case basis.

 

[scousekiwi]

I don’t disagree with you, and both churches have accepted this recommendation by the Joint Implementation Commission:

We recommend that the Faith and Order Commission of the Church of England and the Faith and Order Committee of the Methodist Church work together to bring forward proposals for:

1. the Methodist Church to consider afresh expressing the Conference’s ministry of oversight in a personal form of connexional, episcopal ministry and the Church of England to recognise that ministry in the Methodist Church as a sign of continuity in faith, worship and mission in a church that is in the apostolic succession;
2. the Church of England and the Methodist Church to address the question of reconciling, with integrity, the existing presbyteral and diaconal ministries of our two churches, which would lead to the interchangeability of ministries.

However, as the 2019 report Mission and Ministry in Covenant demonstrates, unity is still a long way off.

To a large extent, I think this is due to the diversity of opinions within Anglicanism. Personally, I am very happy to receive Holy Communion from the hands of a Methodist minister. In fact, I am happy to receive Holy Communion at any service which is a liturgical celebration of the Lord’s Supper by an ordained minister. I take the view that if the minister has been thus authorised by his or her denomination, and if he or she uses the form of celebration laid down by that denomination, I am happy to accept the validity of the liturgy on its own terms. Out of friendship, I will also receive if I attend a church where the tradition is for each member of the congregation to hold a small piece of bread and a small cup of grape juice and to eat and drink it together after a prayer. Thus, the only circumstances in which I do not take part in a form of communion service is when the celebrant is a layperson and/or no formal liturgy is observed.

Many Anglicans, however, hold to a much stricter interpretation of holy orders and validity of the sacraments. A very High Church gentleman once told me that his Anglican church had been used for a Methodist service simply because the Methodists needed a large venue to borrow for a particular service. After the service, he found that the Methodists had left behind a couple of bread rolls that had been used in their Holy Communion service (i.e. what we would call consecrated) but not consumed. With evident glee, he told me that he had eaten them with butter and jam and a cup of tea, explaining that, as far as he was concerned, they were just bread rolls which a layperson wearing fancy dress had used as props while pretending to celebrate Holy Communion.

Admittedly, these are perhaps two extremes, but this does illustrate the problem.

 

[scousekiwi]

Most Protestant faith Traditions are split between liberals and conservatives.

Or, in Scottish Presbyterianism, they are split between moderates, conservatives, ultra-conservatives, and off-the-scale conservatives.

 

[Dovekin]

I do agree with some of your points, but I wonder whether you are a little too optimistic on some topics.

Unrealistic optimism is certainly a part of ecumenism. It is an expression of hope and faith rooted in Christ rather than practical policies based on uneven readings of the signs of the times. Despite all the difficulties we see, my hope is that Christ will bring us together. “Insurmountable obstacles” like the ordination of women are not a reason to stop seeking unity. Can God create an obstacle so large that God cannot overcome it?

I assume you are responding to:

quote=“Dovekin, post:7, topic:630163”]
Reunification will not come by repudiation, but by understanding what we share. The Eucharist is an excellent example since the Pope and the Abp of Canterbury have affirmed our agreement on the subject.
[/quote]

The ARCIC-I agreement on the Eucharist has elements of hope in it like:

We believe that we have reached substantial agreement on the doctrine of the eucharist. Although we are all conditioned by the traditional ways in which we have expressed and practiced our eucharistic faith, we are convinced that if there are any remaining points of disagreement they can be resolved on the principles here established. We acknowledge a variety of theological approaches within both our communions. But we have seen it as our task to find a way of advancing together beyond the doctrinal disagreements of the past. It is our hope that in view of the agreement which we have reached on eucharistic faith, this doctrine will no longer constitute an obstacle to the unity we seek

.
The document quoted went through a process of elucidations and clarifications as it was evaluated by Anglicans and Catholics. It culminated in a joint statement from St John Paul II and Abp of Canterbury George Carey that said:

We affirm the signs of progress provided in the statements of ARCIC I on the Eucharist and on the understanding of ministry and ordination, which have received an authoritative response from both partners of the dialogue.

The statement on ministry and ordination acknowledges continuing disagreements, but on the Eucharist there is “substantial agreement.”

So I will stand by my original statement, that the Pope and the Abp of Canterbury have affirmed our agreement on the Eucharist. This is the work of a small group of theologians, but it has received authoritative responses at the highest and broadest level of authority. It is possible to read too much into our agreement, and so into what I said, but hope is still an important part of ecumenism.

 

[commenter]

by my original statement, that the Pope and the Abp of Canterbury have affirmed our agreement on the Eucharist. This is the work of a small group of theologians, but it has received authoritative responses at the highest and broadest level of authority. It is possible to read too much into our agreement, and so into what I said, but hope is still an important part of ecumenism.

The ARCIC process?
There is a dance between RCC and the leadership of AC.

Over the course of a decade the AC leadership and some components such as TEC takes 10 steps farther away from from the RCC and historic Christianity.

Meanwhile The ecumenism professionals take 5 steps closer together, and get top leaders to sign off and recognize very publicly only that half of the dance, their 5 steps.

I’m not ignoring or minimizing that 5 ARCIC steps. But even counting them, overall, it’s a net 5 steps farther apart.
It’s not “hope” that causes some to ignore the larger picture.

The real ecumenism hope is Catholics standing shoulder to shoulder with evangelicals praying at the abortion “clinic”.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

We have an amazing Churches Together Group in our town. through praying together we have opened up five houses for homeless people, a basics food bank. street Pastors, CAP debt service and more.

These projects would probably be too big for any one church. But I see a great hope when we do things together with prayer.

 

[BohemianBrother]

It is easy to be pessimistic about corporate Ecumenism with liberal mainline Protestants. However I still see much hope around in my part of the world. The Latvian Evangelical Lutheran Church started ordaining women in 1975, but then managed to overturn that decision 20 years later.

I hope official Ecumenical dialogue can help to appreciate some theological and moral positions of the other churches. (Maybe mainline Protestant moral theology can be gradually “catholicized”, the same way Catholic liturgy was supposedly “protestantized” after VII.) It may seem tedious and futile at first, but with the help of God, anything is possible. Remember, it hasn’t even been a hundred years since the start of the official dialogue!

I pray for the time when Catholics and Evangelicals will stand in front of the abortion clinic, shoulder to shoulder, together, and then go and receive Christ at one Altar, as one. (Well, actually I pray that there are no abortion clinics by then…)

 

[bpd_stl]

Dovekin:

by my original statement, that the Pope and the Abp of Canterbury have affirmed our agreement on the Eucharist. This is the work of a small group of theologians, but it has received authoritative responses at the highest and broadest level of authority. It is possible to read too much into our agreement, and so into what I said, but hope is still an important part of ecumenism.

The ARCIC process?
There is a dance between RCC and the leadership of AC.

Over the course of a decade the AC leadership and some components such as TEC takes 10 steps farther away from from the RCC and historic Christianity.

Meanwhile The ecumenism professionals take 5 steps closer together, and get top leaders to sign off and recognize very publicly only that half of the dance, their 5 steps.

I’m not ignoring or minimizing that 5 ARCIC steps. But even counting them, overall, it’s a net 5 steps farther apart.
It’s not “hope” that causes some to ignore the larger picture.

The real ecumenism hope is Catholics standing shoulder to shoulder with evangelicals praying at the abortion “clinic”.

Yup. To this, I’d add the obvious: ARCIC statements are now largely meaningless, and have been for some time. A relic of a bygone period. Not only because of the issue of women’s ordination (a serious issue when they become “ordained/confirmed/appointed” bishops throughout the Communion), but also because of the disturbing fact that the Anglican Communion is literally defragmenting before our eyes. Schism is open talk among the African provinces. Anglicans world-wide can’t even agree with each other anymore.

The issue now becomes: who are we (the Roman Catholic Church) actually talking to now?

 

[Eric_Hyom]

(Maybe mainline Protestant moral theology can be gradually “catholicized”, the same way Catholic liturgy was supposedly “protestantized” after VII.)

The greatest commandments are to love God and our neighbours. The parable of the Good Samaritan explains these commandments and with no mention of religion. These commandments are the greatest way to unite us.

 

[commenter]

BohemianBrother:

(Maybe mainline Protestant moral theology can be gradually “catholicized”, the same way Catholic liturgy was supposedly “protestantized” after VII.)

The greatest commandments are to love God and our neighbours. The parable of the Good Samaritan explains these commandments and with no mention of religion. These are the greatest way to unite us.

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ (NIV)

End
No mention of religion?
Actually a lot of people involved in social action would disagree with the priority and detail given to the first commandment. Some would drop it completely.

 

[Dovekin]

We must therefore seek unity without being discouraged at the difficulties that can appear or accumulate along that road; otherwise we would be unfaithful to the word of Christ, we would fail to accomplish his testament. Have we the right to run this risk?
St John Paul II. Redemptor Hominis 6

The title of this thread reflects a misunderstanding of ecumenism. Everyone, especially those involved in ecumenism, knows that there will be “difficulties that can appear or accumulate along that road”; that it is not about “a viable prospect” by any reasonable evaluation. Whatever objection anyone can find does not lessen the obligation we have to seek unity.

Can we reunite more easily with evangelicals? Maybe, but would it be true ecumenism? Are the ARCIC agreements “relics of a bygone era”? Probably, but important for those who revere tradition.

Hearing objections should not affect our hope or our commitment.

 

[commenter]

We must therefore seek unity without being discouraged at the difficulties that can appear or accumulate along that road; otherwise we would be unfaithful to the word of Christ, we would fail to accomplish his testament. Have we the right to run this risk?
St John Paul II. Redemptor Hominis 6

St JP 2 didn’t rely on decades old data if more recent data was available.

Some evangelicals have been reconsidering, on some level, the Catholic view of Liturgy and Tradition.

ACNA and the Continuum didn’t exist when ARCIC began. They do now, for good reasons. Meet with them instead of AC.

Bureaucratic functions over time tend to take on an unholy momentum of their own, apart from the original purpose, even when participants are not bad people. They self perpetuate.

I saw this when I worked in government. Every annual report for a certain office shows amazing progress, but significant obstacles that are always on the verge of being overcome, with just a little more progress. Nobody wants to be against hope.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

There is only One Jesus Christ, so unity makes sense.

John 17

Jesus Prays for All Believers​

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

 

[Dovekin]

ACNA and the Continuum didn’t exist when ARCIC began. They do now, for good reasons. Meet with them instead of AC.

Why “instead of” rather than along with? It becomes more complicated, but it has to be done. You will hear more about the Anglican Church because it is larger, but dialogue happens with smaller groups as well.

Bureaucratic functions over time tend to take on an unholy momentum of their own, apart from the original purpose, even when participants are not bad people. They self perpetuate.

This is a major problem in ecumenism. Churches, as bureaucracies, want to continue to exist in an identifiably distinct way. They have often developed traditions and attitudes that should not be lost, alongside those that should be lost. Practically speaking, ecumenism is a lost cause. It is only on the level of hope and our obligations that it can be pursued.

 

[commenter]

Practically speaking, ecumenism is a lost cause. It is only on the level of hope and our obligations that it can be pursued.

There are gospel verses as to the importance of unity, and other verses as to the reality that living the gospel sometimes results in division. In recent years “unity” has been elevated to a virtue (almost the only one) and division a sin (almost the only one).

It’s not that those who are cautious about certain alignments are jaded, practical types who have lost their hopes and ideals. A lot of other hopes and ideals (like Prolife) and other ideals have been diluted, or compromised, in an obsession to make everybody accept us.

It’s not a lack of hope or ideals that should cause us to discontinue certain alignments, prioritize others, based on current data. Some parts of the AC are so bad, it goes against hope, against ideals, to offer the institution credibility by continuing ARCIC.

ARCIC may be encouraging a few individuals in TEC to postpone a positive decision.

 

[BohemianBrother]

It is a bit more complicated matter than that though. Jesus established a Church, an earthly organization. Just as a human is soul, spirit, and body, and not just one of these, so too is Christ’s Church not only an invisible mystical bond between all Christians and God, the body of Christ, but also a visible entity, a physical communion here on Earth. Striving for and protecting correct doctrine is very important - we have to follow Christ in truth, not just our opinions.

So yes, while love of God and neighbours is the greatest commandment, it is not the only one. It is a basis for all the other ones.

On the other hand, something I could clearly see when I was still atheist: People who had a love for God and their neighbour also had something more. Only then I realized they had Christ himself present in their lives. The Holy Spirit isn’t bound by our worldly divisions, He moves freely.

Nonetheless, we as Christians simply cannot be content with some kind of spiritual unity in face of doctrinal and institutional disunity. Jesus clearly gave us a religion and told us to maintain His teachings.