Saturday, 21 November 2009
Anglicans and Catholics: What is Catholic Ecclesiology?
Hat tip to Ruth Gledhill for the portion here of Rowan Williams' speech on the Apostolic Constitution in Rome.
What stands out to me as most frustrating is that this speech seems to want to dismiss with the wave of the hand something that Rowan and Anglican ecclesiology (if there is such a definable thing!) often forgets, which is what he/Anglicans see as 'secondary' issues cannot within Catholic theology as a whole be disregarded as secondary. As one commenter said in the below post, Jesus is praying for a whole lot more than an ecumenical 'group hug' of us all getting along pretending that Ordo as the Sacramental expression of the principle of Tradition is treated as something adiaphorous. Sorry, but that is the very heart of the problem that Anglican ecclesiology and sacramental misunderstandings of the Catholic Church's position on these issues keeps us divided. The Church's structures are at the heart of the gospel of communicating the will of Jesus Christ to the Church and world.
Anglicans have such a wide range of views of the ministry that it is virtually impossible to claim any real unity about structure no matter what names we give to the structure; deacon, priest, and bishop. There is a very deep problem that is being overlooked that the Apostolic Constitution is answering for those Catholic-minded Anglicans. That principle reminds us that for the Catholic the sacrament of Ordo is the sacrament of the Church not, a private way to one's views of the beginnings of Christianity. This is always going to bring us to the issue that continues to divide Anglicans and Catholics and that is the issue of authority seen in the differences in the use of Scripture and tradition.
Here is the heart of the problem and it is seen in the answer to this very important question: 'Can the essential character of the word and the essential character of the Church be present where there is a break with the concrete continuity of the Church that celebrates the Eucharist with the bishops?' (Benedict XVI) Anglicans cannot ultimately claim that in its Ordo, an ecclesial sacrament via the imposition of hands, that real unity is understood in terms of intention. Luther is a clear example of this problem in terms of sacrifice and priesthood. The present crisis in the CofE is a clear marker for this problem by the CofE's General Synod looking for a way for co-existence and not having ALL the bishops in communion with one another. It makes no ecclesial sense to even hope or argue for such a structure and view it as Catholic. Therefore, if Ordo is not a binding of the apostolicity and Catholicity together in the unity of Christ and the Holy Spirit, then it will not be completed in the Eucharistic community no matter how hard one tries to pretend that it is. It is within the Eucharistic community in which one sees and experiences the completedness of Ordo within the apostolicity and Catholicity in union with Jesus that real unity takes place.
It is my humble opinion that until such a time that this issue is dealt with real ecumenical discussions will not and cannot take place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Rowan is being honest for once. Anglicans have affirmed ARCIC since Lambeth '88 but they have gone their own way as well as though it doesn't matter. Anglican eccesiology is essential Protestant. It is time for Rome to draw clear boundaries and for all to recognise that unity talks are very, very limited.
For Rowan to say that Rome is blocking Christian unity by not ordaining women is like a mouse challenging an elephant - about 25% of worldwide believers are Protestant and Anglicans are one strand of this group.
As Scripture says, "If two cannot agree than they cannot walk together."
At last the Church of England has emerged honestly to face a Liberal-Protestant future with a large, active Evangelical rump attached. But this is not new. Since its foundation the C of E has gone through episodes and this is the beginning of another. It will, I hope, prove to Rome that no further serious business can be done with Anglicans and it's best to let them drift guided by their self-appointed chart.
It is a pity about Rowan Williams. He is the best Archbishop of Canterbury since Michael Ramsey but from the beginning he has been immersed in Anglican controversies faced on a large scale by none of his predecessors. He is too good for the job and the Church of England in its present form does not deserve him. But at least he is now being consistent in defending his Church's policies and its probably the present crisis that has enabled him to do so. But at least he is doing so with his eyes open to a chaotic future.
" ... break with the concrete continuity of the Church that celebrates the Eucharist with the bishops ... "
Of course by your comments I see that you consider more, but do you by this statement in fact refer back to the Roman Catholic position on the validity of Holy Orders within the Church of England?
*
Regarding this question about the validity of Holy Orders within the Church of England... It seems to me that for Holy Orders to be valid they would need to be a full sacrament at the very least, and this is not something that Anglicans agree upon.
The Church of England was REALLY ESTABLISHED by Queen Elizabeth I and was thoroughly Protestant from the beginning. The BREAK IN APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION took place then and she INSISTED that this Protestant association of Englishmen be SUBSERVIENT TO THE CROWN AND SUPPORT THE CROWN.
400,000 Catholicizing Anglicans, bless them, have FINALLY seen that there is NOT APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY TO THE "church" of England. This is a trickle among some nearly 80milion adherents. But that can become a stream, and then a river!
Post a Comment