ROME: Anglican Reunion will Create "Huge Cultural Shift" to the Extreme Left in Anglican Church
By Hilary White
www.LifeSiteNews.com
October 26, 2009
By focusing on the issue of married clergy in the Catholic Church, the secular media has got the thin end of the story of last week's offer of reunion from the Vatican to "traditionalist" Anglicans. The more interesting story, says Fr. Philip Powell, a Dominican priest based in Rome and a former Episcopalian, is the "huge cultural shift" in the Anglican Church that it presages.
Fr. Powell gave his analysis of the move in an interview with LSN, saying that despite accusations from the left and from some quarters of the Anglican Communion, it was not an opportunistic grab for numbers by the Vatican preying upon the Anglican Churches. The decision, he said, is purely a matter of pastoral concern and a provision for people in real spiritual "distress."
"It was a request that has been made twice now by the traditional Anglican community in England and Australia and this is a very pastoral response," said Fr. Powell, a popular clerical Catholic blogger and a graduate student in philosophy at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.
"Cardinal Levada said it best, this is not an initiative on the part of the Holy Father; it's a response."
"The Holy Father is doing what pastors do," said Fr. Powell. "When people reach out to them and say, 'We are distressed about our faith, about our spiritual lives, about our relationships with God and we think that we're in trouble,' pastors, shepherds, help."
"I can't imagine that Pope Benedict thinks this is a political thing," he continued. "It's going to be interpreted that way regardless of what he does but I just don't believe that Benedict is being political in the secular sense."
Although Vatican officials did not confirm this, it is widely understood that the decision to allow groups of Anglicans to come into communion with Rome was made in direct response to requests by the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), an Australian based group of some 400,000 lay and clerical members who adhere to traditional moral and doctrinal teachings of classical, biblical Christianity.
But, Powell said, while the numbers will not be much of a statistical change for the 1.2 billion-member Catholic Church, they do represent a "significant" portion of the still practicing Anglicans in the western world.
The removal to Rome of those Anglicans in the Communion who had been fighting for a more traditionally Christian ethos "presages a huge cultural shift in the Anglican Church," he said. It will push the mainstream of Anglicanism in the west further out onto their liberal doctrinal limb. And it will likely push the existing Anglican factions further apart and contribute to the final break-up of the Communion between the liberal west and the conservative evangelical Africa and Asia.
Fr. Powell said, "These are voices that are going to be taken out of the Anglican debates that have been going on. They're not going to be showing up to Lambeth or the synods or parish councils. They're not going to be there now to slow things down."
What will be left for the "liberal" establishment to do after they have won the doctrinal war remains to be seen. "I was an American Episcopalian for years and you reach a point where there's nothing left to surrender," Fr. Powell said. The radical pro-gay, pro-abortion left in the Anglican Church has, he said, identified themselves as the oppressed class fighting injustice who have "identified themselves so entirely with being in opposition to hierarchy, that they don't know what else to do anymore."
"You're so radically inclusive and open and free that there's no barrier left to break down. And if that's been your whole project for thirty years, what have you got left to do?"
"They don't know how to operate any more other than being in opposition."
Sandro Magister, the noted Vatican expert and Italian journalist, wrote last week that the move indicates a shift towards tradition in the Catholic Church, with Pope Benedict gathering in as many as possible who hold traditional doctrinal positions, and earning himself the nickname "Pope of Unity" in the process. While talks with the Orthodox Churches of the east remain slow, doctrinal discussions began this week with the formerly excommunicated bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, a traditionalist Catholic group that broke away from the Vatican after the liturgical changes of the 1960s.
Powell also noted the irony of the situation of the traditionalist Anglicans, who are being accused of being "bigots and homophobes and sexists" by the left, whose mantra all these years has been "tolerance."
"This is the same group of people who elevated tolerance of difference to a dogma. Except you can't differ on these issues. You have people in the Church now who are saying, 'Look, you left wing folks are now the establishment, and now we're the ones pushing difference and you're the ones pushing back'.
"They don't use the word 'heretic' any more; it's 'homophobe and sexist' now."
But Powell made the point that although the invitation has been opened, it is not necessarily going to be easy for some Anglicans to move forward. What is not being talked about, he said, is the Catholic requirement of full assent to all the Church's doctrines from those coming in, including those of papal infallibility, a major sticking point for many in Anglicanism, which five hundred years ago broke with Rome over papal authority.
Those who come over to Rome, Fr. Powell said, will have to understand that they are not going to be Anglicans under the pope. "Simply because they're getting a parallel jurisdiction, doesn't mean they get to pick and choose between doctrines. They become Roman Catholics."
Over the weekend, John Hind, the Anglican bishop of Chichester in south east England and one of the leading traditionalists in the Church of England, announced he would be seriously contemplating taking up Benedict's offer. Hind is a leading traditionalist in the Church of England and was one of the 'rebel' bishops who signed a letter against the appointment of the self-confessed active homosexual, Dr. Jeffrey John as Bishop of Reading in 2003.
Hind, who is married with three children, said he would be "happy" to be "reordained" as a Catholic priest and said that this would depend on his "previous ministry being recognized" by Rome. Fr. Powell pointed to this kind of response as an indication of possible difficulties ahead.
With Anglican clergy who might be putting themselves forward as candidates for the "personal ordinariates" offered under the new provisions, Fr. Powell said, "We're really going to have to make sure that they understand they're not remaining Anglican clergy under the Holy Father. They're becoming Roman Catholic bishops. Roman Catholic priests. That means holding to teaching and preaching what the Church teaches and preaches."
Contrary to other complaints from the Catholic left that the Vatican's decision has put and end to the decades of "ecumenical dialogue," Fr. Powell said, from the Catholic point of view, "the point of ecumenism is to bring people back into the Church."
"I know of no document that says the purpose of ecumenical dialogue is to change Church doctrine in order to make people feel comfortable enough to come back.
"This is not about diluting papal infallibility or the teaching on contraceptives or divorce so that Methodists or Buddhists or whatever, feel comfortable about coming into the Church."
END
| Poster | Thread |
|---|---|
| Alabamian | Posted: 2009/10/27 12:58 Updated: 2009/10/27 12:58 |
Quite a regular ![]() ![]() Joined: 2009/9/8 From: Posts: 49 |
"They become Roman Catholics." "Bring people back to the Church." Well, there you have it folks. The idea of Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism melding together is an illusion, or perhaps delusion. There is no such thing as an Anglican-Roman Catholic and the people who are entertaining its vision are only dreaming. The whole point of he Constitution is to have disgruntled Anglicans become Roman Catholics under some sort of superficial mantle of "Anglicanism."
|
| stmike | Posted: 2009/10/27 13:40 Updated: 2009/10/27 13:40 |
Quite a regular ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/10/19 From: Plymouth, NH Posts: 63 |
Dear Friends,
This article on the Anglican Reunion just points out the decline of the Episcopal Church's leadership. For a hundred years now Liberals (Scott Holland, Gore, etc.) have been celebrating the idea of inclusiveness. In our times the Liberals have carried the idea of "inclusiveness" to an absurd extreme. So it is that the Presiding Bishop wants to brand conversions as heresy and the Episcopal Bishop of Los Angeles wants to give communion to Hindus. So much for unprincipled "inclusiveness". Naturally we are to love everyone, but that does not make everyone a Christian. So much for a decadent Anglicanism. Do people in the pews still want to finance their leadership and give them a platform to persecute orthodox Anglicans? As such, a faithful Anglicanism under the wing of the Vatican looks all that more attractive. Yours in Christ's love, Dean Steward + |
| xenophore | Posted: 2009/10/27 13:56 Updated: 2009/10/27 13:56 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/25 From: Fort Worth, TX Posts: 183 |
fmiguelito, I am sorry that the Melkites and other Eastern Catholics find themselves in such an awkward position, but if you are in union with Rome and have accepted the decisions and doctrines of Rome, especially those of Vatican I and II, then you are an Eastern Catholic priest, but you are not an Orthodox priest. You may wear the same vestments as an Orthodox priest and you may say Liturgy in a nearly identical manner as an Orthodox priest, but that doesn't make you an Orthodox priest.
As I'm sure you do, I hope one day for a reunion between Rome and the other patriarchates from which she separated herself, but there's much work to be done before that happens. As I have posted elsewhere, for an Orthodox perspective on what remains to be done, here's an article by Fr. Thomas Hopko. |
| bcwright | Posted: 2009/10/27 14:34 Updated: 2009/10/27 14:50 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/4 From: Posts: 528 |
The problem with the thesis that this alone will create a "'Huge Cultural Shift' to the Extreme Left" within the Anglican Communion, as this article puts it, is that this process has already been in place for quite some time - in fact, that's at least part of why there are now some traditionalist former Anglicans who have made this petition to Rome (primarily the TAC). Others are moving towards the Continuum or Orthodoxy, or towards various conservative Protestant denominations depending on their individual theological opinions and worship styles.
But the bottom line is that the traditionalists have been leaving Anglicanism for a long time (at least since Newman in the mid-19th Century), and will continue to do so. I don't even think that this will accelerate this process much in and of itself - I think most of those who might be interested have either left for the existing Pastoral Provision of the Catholic Church or have entered the Continuum. Most of those leaving now for groups like the ACNA are more distinctly Protestant in their theology and are generally less interested in Rome. But the important effect may well be that in the public perception, this adds to the impression that there is a rush for the exits - which may contribute somewhat to the exodus even if most of them never cross the Tiber. But even before this happened, the die was cast, and the Anglican Communion will have to live with it. I do not see how the traditionalist wing of Anglicanism can gain control again (or even manage to get a voice again in the affairs of the Communion) until the Liberals start to die off in a generation or two - at which point the Communion will be far smaller than it is now, if it even exists at all. |
| bcwright | Posted: 2009/10/27 15:12 Updated: 2009/10/27 15:22 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/4 From: Posts: 528 |
There is no such thing as an Anglican-Roman Catholic and the people who are entertaining its vision are only dreaming.
if you are in union with Rome and have accepted the decisions and doctrines of Rome, especially those of Vatican I and II, then you are an Eastern Catholic priest, but you are not an Orthodox priest. Clearly, if you're in communion with Rome, you need to accept Roman doctrines (at least if you're going to be intellectually honest). So the idea of simultaneously accepting all of Roman doctrine along with distinctly Anglican or Orthodox doctrine is a fantasy. But I don't think the idea of expressing a specifically Catholic (or Anglican or Orthodox) theology in a new cultural ethos is necessarily a bad idea - in fact I think it is a very appropriate pastoral response. There are any number of examples throughout the history of Christianity, starting with the initial translation of Christianity from its original Aramaic roots to Greek and Latin, continuing with the ministries of Cyril and Methodius to the Slavs and Patrick to the Irish, of Herman to the Alaskans, and so on down to the present day. All of these peoples have brought their own unique linguistic and cultural heritage to Christianity. Somehow I have a hard time seeing this kind of cultural adaptation as anything other than a good thing, though of course I would prefer to see more of it in an Orthodox context such as the Western Orthodox rite. But I find it hard to find much fault with Benedict's response to a specific request by disaffected Anglicans. |
| DPJ071 | Posted: 2009/10/27 16:15 Updated: 2009/10/27 16:15 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2009/7/21 From: Posts: 105 |
Alabamian...okay, I read your posts with interest and have no issue with you claiming to be an "anti-Papist". So be it, that is your choice and yours alone. You lost all your credibility when you inject tones of racisim when you say connect prejudice with who voted for Obama. Who cares! You are saying up to 90% of whites in AL voted against Obama just because he is black. Might you also include that over 90% of blacks voted against McCain because well, you know, he wasn't the black candidate. Your connection of Catholics and non-Obama supporters is really thin and plain silly. As for TEC being the only denomination stand up for human rights...whatever. The last time I checked, transgenderism isn't a human right, but a lifestyle choice. When has TEC stood up for the rights of the unborn? It appears that this issue of Anglicans going to Rome will never be agreed upon and it really doesn't matter unless your own parish or diocese is considering. Bottom line is that TEC/Ang Comm have straid from traditioanl Orthodox Christian beliefs and will suffer.
|
| sentinel | Posted: 2009/10/27 16:21 Updated: 2009/11/1 13:46 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/6/11 From: Posts: 263 |
And having abandoned the Scriptures, that is all the TEC has. The light was snuffed out long ago by apostatasy and heresy in her ranks that went unchallenged, leaving the TEC to stumble about in the dark from one cause to another.
Figthing to insure that a man is not descriminated against because of the color of his skin, or that a working woman is paid equally for work rendered is part of loving one's neighbor. However, once you carry that to the point of encouraging that which God has said is sin, you have gone beyond the boundaries of the Word of God and faith of the church catholic. At that point there is nothing legitmate to accept. Yes, that is the typical response but how accepting is TEC being of those who differ with the zeitgeist they are wallowing in? How many examples have you read of Mrs. Schori outright LYING in her efforts to crush those in the TEC that disagree with the place it has arrived at? How do you define the Gospel? How do you do you define Orthodoxy? The Christian faith is not a color-by-numbers affair. The Church has been given God's revelation of himself in the Scriptures and the traditions which are the result of living a life of faith informed by that revelation. We are therefore not free to define what The Gospel is or what is Orthodox - that is for God to decide. Offering strange fire will only get you burned. |
| ztrzf | Posted: 2009/10/27 18:51 Updated: 2009/10/27 18:51 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/9/21 From: Posts: 10 |
BCWright,
Yes, but some of us in ACNA long for visible global Christian unity “that we all may be (visibly) one”. So pondering: Can inter-communion become a reality for traditionalist and evangelical Episcopalians/Anglicans who believe, alongside Orthodoxy, that papal claims over-reach? Can we have inter-communion without giving up our distinct identity; i.e., an emphasis on The Old Rugged Cross with a typically Anglican pragmatism that we proclaim and cannot fully explain—via canon law, etc.—all of the eternal verities? The Orthodox perceive the entire west as “innovative”, including Rome. To be in inter-communion, do we Anglicans really need to accept the decree of papal infallibility ex cathedra? Do we need to accept the Immaculate Conception? Or is a reasonable understanding of Theotokos adequate? What about the Assumption of Mary? Are these doctrines really essential to salvation? Is there a place in the Church of Rome for inter-communion with Christians who have significant reservations on all papal claims? The on-going and accelerated dialogue and inter-communion discussions between Rome and Constantinople will tell us a great deal about the willingness of the Church of Rome to engage her fellow travelers in genuine visible inter-communion unity. Best and blessings. |
| Alabamian | Posted: 2009/10/27 19:09 Updated: 2009/11/1 13:49 |
Quite a regular ![]() ![]() Joined: 2009/9/8 From: Posts: 49 |
"Orthodox...this is for God to decide."
So let's all of us refrain from standing in judgment on each other's perceived orthodoxy and afixing the stakes for burning. We are only doing the work of those who would love to see Christianity fail. On another note, to our Eastern Orthodox friends out there: Is it possible for one to remain Eastern Orthodox and submit to the authority of the pope? I have said in other contexts that I do not see how one can retain any meaningful identity as Anglican and accept Roman Catholicism because what would be left as "Anglican" is so superficial as to be meaningless. Just curious about the non-Uniate Eastern Orthodox churches? |
| CH-Discern | Posted: 2009/10/28 1:10 Updated: 2009/10/28 1:10 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2009/10/10 From: Posts: 259 |
While I agree with bcwright that the "huge cultural shift" has been happening for a long time in the West, I disagree with Fr. Powell that this shift will continue among Anglicans (other than in TEC, which is shrinking into oblivion). Continuers will continue (and some may cross the Tiber, good for them), ACNA will grow and its connections with GAFCON and Global South will be stronger. The previous shift is now shifting... toward Jesus.
But of course, Western culture itself, apart from Anglicanism, may continue in its current libertine direction, along with ELCA and a few other mainline nominal denoms. I hope that shifts back as well, but I don't see many signs. |
| bcwright | Posted: 2009/10/28 1:49 Updated: 2009/10/28 1:49 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/4 From: Posts: 528 |
I disagree with Fr. Powell that this shift will continue among Anglicans...
What's happening is a fracturing of a once more monolithic Anglican Communion into a number of smaller communions. The "mainline" Anglican communion has been getting increasingly more liberal just about everywhere except in the Global South. It seems just about inevitable that sooner or later it will split up into several smaller groups much like the Methodists. It also appears inevitable that the more liberal groupings will continue to become more liberal even as they shrink into oblivion - but I don't think that that will be limited to the TEc; the ACoC and the Church of England appear to be going down that path as well. This leads to the interesting possible future where these "cultural Anglicans" who preserve something of an "Anglican tradition" will outnumber those nominally "in communion" with Canterbury. This stands on its head the traditional structure of Anglicanism, which used to be defined as those in communion with the See of Canterbury. Perhaps many of these groups could merge with one or another of the Methodist denominations, since they all share a considerable amount of historic, spiritual, and liturgical common ground. It's just rather hard for me to wrap my head around the idea of an "Anglicanism" which is defined more by the adherence to the Prayer Book and a set of cultural traditions, and not as a unified Communion. How is this substantially different from, for example, Methodism? |
| bcwright | Posted: 2009/10/28 2:04 Updated: 2009/10/28 2:05 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/4 From: Posts: 528 |
Is it possible for one to remain Eastern Orthodox and submit to the authority of the pope?
In the current state of affairs, the short answer is No - if you wish to submit to the Pope, you'd normally become an Eastern Rite Catholic. But certainly the Orthodox were once in communion with Rome, and would very much like to see Christ's prayer "that they might all be one" be fulfilled. However the situation is at least somewhat different in that the Orthodox Church is much more unified in their theology than is the Anglican Communion, and there are certain schools of Anglican thought (such as the Tractarians) which are not that far from Rome whilst other schools (such as the evangelicals) are quite far from her. By and large, Orthodox theology is probably closer to Tractarianism than to just about any other school of thought in Anglicanism - but even there the analogy breaks down. In many ways, the Orthodox are closer to Catholics than either one is to the more Calvinistic branches of Anglicanism. But there are also significant differences. |
| sentinel | Posted: 2009/10/28 11:54 Updated: 2009/11/1 13:48 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/6/11 From: Posts: 263 |
Let me be a little clearer, Orthodoxy is not some mysterious, unknowable thing. There is definitely a measuring stick by which biblical orthodoxy can be determined. Does one's beliefs line up with "that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all"? If one's interpretation of one place of Scripture contradicts another or runs against the grain of what has been the accepted teaching of the church (tradition) since apostolic church, then you have no claims of being orthodox and there is no "Agreeing to disagree".
As I said, The Christian faith is not a paint-by-numbers affair - you are either orthodox, heterodox, or completely apostate. TEC falls under the last category and is no longer the Church of Jesus Christ but is a synagogue of Satan, offering lies instead of the truth and has unwittingly become apart of the very forces that would like to see "Christianity Fail". It has fallen into damnable heresy and refuses correction. which is why I will have nothing to do with it. |
| CH-Discern | Posted: 2009/10/30 1:25 Updated: 2009/10/30 1:25 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2009/10/10 From: Posts: 259 |
bc- You wrote:
"It's just rather hard for me to wrap my head around the idea of an "Anglicanism" which is defined more by the adherence to the Prayer Book and a set of cultural traditions, and not as a unified Communion. How is this substantially different from, for example, Methodism?" This is certainly one possibility. An ugly one. But I am holding out for a new center of the Anglican Communion, one that will reform it, one that will hold. The center obviously cannot be England any longer. Those churches that simply continue with Anglican liturgy will not necessarily be part of such a Communion. It will be scripture-based and hold closely to 39 Article doctrine. It will become increasingly global (and not so ethnically English) due to the leadership of GAFCON. This is my dream (I hope it is not just fantasy). God's will....will be done! |



















