Since Oct. 20, when the Vatican announced its plan to welcome Anglicans into its fold, most responses have followed this pattern: Anglicans most directly affected by the plan have expressed gratitude. Others have used the occasion to criticize their fellow Anglicans or the Roman Catholic Church.
The Vatican has now released the full text of Pope Benedict XVI’s constitution, Anglicanorum Coetibus, which explains in detail how Anglicans will be welcomed into the Roman Catholic Church.
The constitution includes these details:
• “A Personal Ordinariate is entrusted to the pastoral care of an Ordinary appointed by the Roman Pontiff.
• “Those who ministered as Anglican deacons, priests, or bishops, and who fulfill the requisites established by canon law and are not impeded by irregularities or other impediments may be accepted by the Ordinary as candidates for Holy Orders … Unmarried ministers must submit to the norm of clerical celibacy.
• “The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff … for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case-by-case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See.”
One of the warmest responses to the plan has come from the Rt. Rev. John Fulham, chairman of Forward in Faith–United Kingdom.
“Today all the accompanying papers have been published and they are extremely impressive,” Bishop Fulham said in a statement on Nov. 9. “What Rome has done is offer exactly what the Church of England has refused. … For some of us I suspect our bluff is called! This is both an exciting and dangerous time for Christianity in this country.”
The Global Anglican Future Conference/Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans primates council praised the Vatican’s plan briefly in a statement issued by its chairman, the Most Rev. Peter Akinola, Primate of the Church of Nigeria.
“We believe that this offer is a gracious one and reflects the same commitment to the historic apostolic faith, moral teaching and global mission that we proclaimed in the Jerusalem Declaration on the Global Anglican Future and for this we are profoundly grateful,” the primates said.
“We are, however, grieved that the current crisis within our beloved Anglican Communion has made necessary such an unprecedented offer. It represents a grave indictment of the Instruments of Communion, whose very purpose is to strengthen and protect our unity in obedience to our Lord’s clear command,” the primates added. “Their failure to fully address the abandonment of biblical faith and practice by the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada has now brought shame to the name of Christ and seriously impedes the cause of the gospel.”
Church Society, an organization within the Church of England that describes itself as “For Church, Bible and Nation,” did not bother itself with even brief praise for the Vatican’s plan.
“While acknowledging the correct stand taken by Anglo-Catholics against theological liberalism (the features of which do not represent true, biblical Anglicanism), it should also be noted that the true doctrine of the Church of England does not embrace any of the teachings or practices which characterize the Church of Rome,” the group said. “For instance, the Church of Rome is fundamentally flawed in its claims about its own nature and authority and in its teaching about the means of salvation.”
The Rt. Rev. John Hepworth of the Traditional Anglican Communion offered specific praise for Pope Benedict XVI.
“He has dedicated his pontificate to the cause of unity,” he said.
He then praised the pope’s proposal: “It more than matches the dreams we dared to include in our petition of two years ago. It more than matches our prayers. In those two years [since petitioning the Vatican], we have become very conscious of the prayers of our friends in the Catholic Church. Perhaps their prayers dared to ask even more than ours.”
Get the next 52 weeks of The Living Church Online, plus convenient access to more than a year of archived issues, all for just $25! Click here to start your subscription to the TLC Online Edition today!
3 Comments
The final document has cleared up only some speculation. The structure of the Ordinariates is not entirely clear but always refers back to the pope. The use of Anglican rites is not clear at all and, again, refers back to the Vatican. The bottom line here is that all decisions will be imposed from the top down in the course of events.
The most surprising thing about the Constitution is the strange convolution the Vatican takes in trying to maneuver around its own self-imposed absolute imperitive of unmarried bishops. Married former Anglican bishops can become sort-of Catholic bishops. Perhaps the saddest provisions of this document are the cold and even harsh treatment given to present and former Catholics. It is as if to say we are going out to our way to relax rules only for these converts, certainly not for our own people. In all, there is a great deal yet to be ironed out, but now we know how it will be done, in an authoritairan top-down system, not from the converts, and certainly not from other Christian bodies.
It is sad that GAFCON and Peter Akinola, in particular, have used the Vatican's move as another opportunity to attack the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada, without engaging in any sort of self-critique. While both ECUSA and ACoC deserve considerable blame, the simple truth of the matter is that the GAFCON movement is quite responsible for numerous problems throughout the Anglican Communion. The profound lack of ethical vision that seems to continually characterize GAFCON is not unlike the sort of one-sided, self-absolving actions that frequently characterize divorce - one spouse constantly criticizing the other without taking blame for their own sins, failures, and shortcomings. To write that ECUSA and ACoC have "brought shame to the name of Christ and seriously impedes the cause of the gospel" is certainly fair in many respects. Yet, the Biblical/Pauline perspective that "there is no one righteous, not even one" (Rom. 3:10) increasingly remains the only viable critique of the Anglican Communion today, because it begins not with "them" but with "us". Because bishops lack the moral and ethical clarity to pursue precisely this critique, the Anglican Communion struggles mightily. Accusing others only highlights our own hypocrisy - whoever "they" and "we" may be. What is wrong with the current crop of leadership that they cannot - or, perhaps, will not - see this?
It is sad that Benjamin Guyer has used FCA's call to the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada to return to Biblical Orthodoxy to attack the FCA and Peter Akinola in particular, without engaging in any sort of self-critique.
Are you for real Benjamin? Think about it! Read the rest of Romans.
You misrepresent the Biblical/Pauline perspective to say there is no-one righteous is the whole message. That takes the verse out of context.
Perhaps start at 3:20 to see that the law prepares us for righteousness - certainly not self righteousness - agreed - but the righteousness given by God in Christ.
This righteousness in Christ is what is at stake for those who have joined FCA (fellowship of confessing anglicans). What you seem to be implying is that there is no-one who has righteousness, which surely is a false modesty and contradicts text after text and millenia of church teaching? The only point of owning the name of Christ is that we are kindly given what is his by right.