A Sober View of the Anglican-Roman Kerfuffle - William Wheatley
Date 2009/11/3 2:50:00 | Topic: As Eye See It
| A Sober View of the Anglican-Roman Kerfuffle
By William A. Wheatley
Special to Virtueonline
www.virtueonline.org
November 2, 2008
 After Cardinal Levada announced the impending release of a new Constitution that will offer groups of the Anglican tradition a vehicle for corporate and sacramental union with Rome, there has been a flurry of speculation in the press, some of it joyously positive, but much of it bitterly negative.
Entrenched Anglicans of the "Affirming" Catholic mindset (most of whom are Anglo-Catholic in style) are upset. Evangelical Anglicans are amused at the battles in the Anglican Communion between the two camps of their traditional foes, the Anglo-Catholics. Traditional Roman Catholics are (a) happy that their conservative allies on the Anglican side of the schism may join them, bolstering the numbers of traditional Catholics in the Roman Catholic Church; and (b) worried that the influx of married clergy may undo the tradition of a celibate clergy. Liberal Roman Catholics are (a) angry that there will be an influx of theologically conservative Anglo-Catholics; and (b) happy that the influx of married clergy may undo the tradition of a celibate clergy. Almost all of the articles offer speculation on what the Constitution will - or won't do. I note in passing that traditional Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals have more in common with each other and with Rome than do "affirming" Catholics (both those in the Anglican Communion and those in the Roman Catholic Church). We should sort out the facts from fiction in this grand kerfuffle.
The most bitter criticism I have gathered from the commentary by those who are upset about the new initiative can be summarized as follows:
1. The conservative Pope Benedict xvi is making the move to steal conservative Anglicans to bolster the numbers of conservatives in the Roman Catholic Church. This is seen as a blatantly political move by the Pontiff in the political games being played by the conservatives to try to stop and undo Vatican II's reforms.
2. The hinted-at promise that Anglicans crossing the Tiber will be allowed to keep their married clergy is illusory. While they will be allowed to do so initially, married clergy will not be ordained in the future, and the Anglicans will cease to lose their "identity," being absorbed into the masses of Roman Catholics.
3. Like its predecessor, the Pastoral Provision promulgated by Pope John Paul ii in 1980, this new provision will attract only a handful of Anglicans and will then die on the vine.
4. Those Anglicans who initially will take advantage of the new provision are upset with their own communion about the ordination of women, the consecration of women as bishops, and the embracing of homosexual sexual activity as valid for Christians. They have other differences with Roman Catholic teaching that eventually will drive them back to the Anglican Communion.
I believe that all of these are false, and I think it is time for a more serious and sober review of what is known about what the new Constitution. The Vatican has made this move not to "steal" disaffected Anglicans, but in direct response to three groups of disaffected Anglicans who have been begging the Roman Catholic Church for several years to let them in. Bear in mind that the married clergy issue is a non-issue.
For decades, the Roman Catholic Church has been receiving and re-ordaining married Anglican clergy to the Roman Catholic Priesthood, including married bishops. The Pastoral Provision set up by Pope John Paul II to facilitate this hasn't worked very well because certain local "liberal" Roman Catholic Bishops have fought it and made life miserable for those they were forced to accept into their ranks. The new provision is more likely to work because it removes such power from the local Roman Catholic bishops. The only Anglicans who are expected to cross the Tiber in the near future as a result of this new provision are those who have already left the Anglican Communion, and those who will leave the Anglican Communion when their Provinces start consecrating women as bishops.
The two primary issues that are driving this move by traditional Anglo-Catholics to Rome are (1) female ordination/consecration and (b) acceptance of homosexual sexual acts as acceptable for Christians. Neither of these will ever happen within the Roman Catholic Church, and both have already happened in the Anglican Communion. Those in the Anglican Communion who disagree with their Communion on these issues will certainly leave the Anglican Communion, unless the Anglican Communion changes, which is almost certainly not going to happen. Rome is allowing these pilgrims a home, and it is a generous, pastoral thing to do. It will not "change" the Roman Catholic Church in any way, nor will it "hasten" the departure of Anglicans from the Anglican Communion.
As best I can tell, from the information the Vatican has released so far, the provisions of the new Constitution will be implemented as follows:
(1) Groups of people from the Anglican tradition, together with their clergy, can apply for full organic and sacramental communion with Rome while retaining their Anglican traditional liturgical forms, married clergy, spirituality and theology, to the extent they do not conflict with Catholic Doctrine. The applications will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and the individual clergy will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Those coming into communion under this new provision will have to be in accord with Catholic Doctrine.
(2) Ordinariates similar to non-geographical dioceses will be established to receive them, with an Ordinary in charge of each, usually drawn from the clergy of that group. Ordinaries may be unmarried bishops, or married or unmarried priests. Episcopal oversight by a suitable bishop will be provided for those not headed by a bishop. This is just about as close to "Uniate Rite" status as can be achieved without calling it "Uniate Rite."
(3) Anglican clergy (deacons, priests and bishops), both married and unmarried, will be eligible to apply to be clergy under the new Constitution. Each will be evaluated on an individual basis to ascertain that the individual is suitable, as viewed by Rome, to continue as a member of the clergy. This is partly due to recent publicity about a former Roman Catholic priest who was installed as an Anglican priest by an Anglican bishop who did not know that the priest left the Roman Catholic Church because he was a paedophile. The Roman Catholic Church has always considered applicants for the clergy individually.
(4) In most cases, Anglican clergy will be re-ordained. Those who can prove by documentary evidence that their orders derive from a bishop after the Reformation whose orders are recognized by the Roman Catholic Church may be conditionally re-ordained. In some cases, where the evidence is especially strong, I believe certain clergy may be simply received as clergy. There is precedent for all three modes of reception.
(5) Unmarried Anglican clergy who are accepted into Roman Catholic Orders may be considered for the Episcopacy. Married Anglican clergy will not be considered for the Episcopacy (at least for now).
(6) Those currently preparing for Anglican Orders, both married and unmarried, will be considered individually. If selected to continue preparation for ordination, they may continue in their present seminaries, but with supervision from a Roman Catholic seminary, or may be transferred to Roman Catholic seminaries, depending on circumstances. There is a provision in the Constitution under which the Ordinariates in the future might be permitted to set up their own houses of worship for the training of future clergy.
(7) There is nothing in the Constitution (at the moment) that would prevent in the future candidates for the priesthood within the Ordinariates to enter seminaries, to be married and continue through ordination. As Cardinal Levada stated, every candidate for Orders will be considered on an individual basis, as is the case in the Roman Catholic Church for its own clergy. I know of at least one case under the existing Pastoral Provision ("Anglican Use" community in the U.S.) in which a parishioner of an Anglican Use Roman Catholic Church entered seminary, then got married, then was accepted for ordination. It is already happening, so there is no reason to suspect that Rome will shut that down.
(8) There have been more than 150 Episcopalian priests and bishops who have come into the Roman Catholic Communion through the Pastoral Provision. About eight to ten of these are running Anglican Use parishes. The rest are serving as priests alongside celibate Roman Catholic priests in Roman Catholic parishes. This has caused not even a ripple of adverse publicity. All the speculation about the problems the influx of married priests will cause the Roman Catholic Church is just that - speculation - and without merit. Rome has also received married ministers from Protestant churches, and allowed them to be re-ordained as Roman Catholic priests. These include Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyterians. One Black Baptist congregation in the Midwest and its minister were received, the minister was re-ordained, and the former Baptist church is now a Roman Catholic parish.
(9) While there are statements to the effect that married Anglican bishops may not become married bishops under the Ordinariate scheme, bear in mind that Rome always considers individuals on a case-by-case basis and can make exceptions to the rule when it sees fit.
In 1945, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Botucatu in Brazil, Bishop Don Carlos Duarte Costa, left the Roman Catholic Church over several issues, one of which was celibacy, and formed the Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church. It has grown now to encompass 58 dioceses in several countries. Rome recognizes the validity of the orders of its bishops, because all were consecrated by bishops whose Apostolic Succession was unquestionable, and whose consecrations were performed using the Roman Catholic ritual. In 1945 Costa consecrated as one of his bishops in the new church Salomão Barbosa Ferraz. In 1958, Bishop Ferraz reconciled with the Roman Catholic Church under Pope John xxiii. He was accepted by Rome as validly a bishop, even though he was married, and was neither re-ordained nor conditionally re-ordained. He was at first assigned pastoral work in Brazil, and then was appointed titular bishop of Eleutherna by Pope John xxiii. He sat as a bishop in all four sessions of Vatican Council II, and was appointed to a Vatican working commission by Pope Paul vi. So, there is precedent for Rome to allow married bishops under the present canon laws that forbid bishops from being married. Remember, canon law is merely a set of regulations and subject to change, and a Pope can override (by Papal dispensation) any canon law if he sees reason to do so.
I believe that the issue of celibacy/married clergy is a non-issue, and is being played up as an issue by those both within the Roman Catholic Church and in the Anglican world who do not want to see this initiative by Benedict xvi succeed. I further believe that this is the most significant ecumenical event since the Great Schism of East and West. It provides a model under which any church body that can reconcile with Rome over doctrine can come into full corporate and sacramental union with Rome without losing their cultural and spiritual heritage. Because it is established as a Constitution, a future Pope may not undo it. A Constitution, like a Papal Bull, is not retractable. One pundit (I do not remember who or I would give him credit) said that heretofore Anglicans who entered communion with Rome did so with difficulty and were said to have "swum the Tiber." Pope Benedict xvi is making it much easier with this Constitution. No more do they need to "swim the Tiber." Benedict xvi is building a permanent bridge. There may not be a massive influx as soon as the gates are opened, but I believe that the flow of pilgrims will continue for some time. We are witnessing, if not the completion of the Counter Reformation, a grand re-formation of the Church that was splintered by the Reformation.
----William A. Wheatley is an architect in the Philadelphia area who manages a consulting firm. He is an Anglo-Catholic at The Church of The Good Shepherd in Rosemont, Pennsylvania, and was formerly a student for the Roman Catholic priesthood at St. Mary's Seminary in Houston.
|
|