The Big Question: Why is the Catholic church offering a home to congregations of Anglicans?
Why are we asking this now?
Pope Benedict XVI has just announced his intention to allow Anglicans to convert in groups to the Roman Catholic Church. Whole congregations would be allowed to move to Rome, while retaining elements of Anglican spiritual and liturgical practice.
This is a significant change. Those who left the Church of England in the past, such as those who would not accept the ordination of women, were told that they would have to become Catholics as individuals. Now Anglicans will be allowed to join as groups. They will even be allowed their own church within a church, called something like the Anglican Ordinariate but which would be subject to the discipline of Rome. Some fear that this will decimate the Church of England.
What changed?
For years Catholic bishops in England were reluctant to open the door wide to traditionalist Anglicans, partly because their "more Catholic than the Pope" smells-and-bells churchmanship was out of step with modern Catholicism. They also did not want to upset Church of England bishops with whom they had developed strong ecumenical relations.
But then last year the Church of England's General Synod voted to allow women to become bishops. More importantly it also voted for no special provision to be put in place to allow traditionalists to bypass a woman bishop and seek episcopal oversight from a man. The decision radically shifted attitudes in Rome.
So whose initiative is this?
It began with Anglican dissidents for whom women bishops were the final straw but who were already alarmed by women or gay priests.
Two years ago an Australian archbishop, John Hepworth, leader of the Traditional Anglican Communion which claims to represent 400,000 worshippers worldwide, went to the Vatican to seek terms for his flock to be accepted into full communion with Rome. Part of the Roman Curia received him sympathetically, but the dominant group of Vatican bureaucrats were against him.
But then came the Synod vote. After it, six Church of England bishops approached the Vatican and said they were being frozen out of the Anglican communion. They pleaded for some sort of structure to be created inside the Catholic Church for their wing of Anglicanism.
So is Rome being generous – or predatory?
The spin is that the Pope is just being helpful. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, wrote to his bishops to say that the move was not "an act of proselytism or aggression" or "at all intended to undermine existing relations between our two communions". But when he and the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, appeared together to launch the initiative, both men looked uncomfortable.
In Rome the announcement was made by Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – the Vatican's doctrinal watchdog. Cardinal Walter Kasper, the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, was noticeable by his absence. The word was that the Vatican's leading ecumenists had fought the move behind the scenes – and lost.
Is this a snub for Rowan Williams?
Certainly the Archbishop was caught unawares by the move. Until now Rome has privately taken the view that it did not want to undermine his attempts to maintain Anglican unity. They even sent, unprecedentedly, three cardinals to support him at the last Lambeth Conference. Cardinal Kasper told Anglican bishops that they had to choose between being a church in the first-century apostolic tradition, or one in the 16th-century reformed tradition.
Rome decided that the Synod vote had answered that question decisively. Anglicanism was a lost cause. Vatican officials told Dr Williams about their plan just three weeks ago. Cardinal Levada came only last weekend to spell out the detail of the radical proposal to him. Publicly Dr Williams insists that the Pope's plan was in no way a "commentary on Anglican problems". Privately he is said to be rather cross.
What does it mean for Anglicanism?
Some think it bad news. Evangelicals are already creating a major split in the Anglican Communion over liberals' embrace of gay priests. The Pope's plan will allow traditionalists to defect in the other direction, leaving the Archbishop of Canterbury and a dwindling centrist core with an ever more difficult job to fend off calls for disestablishment from increasingly aggressive secularists.
But other Anglicans are delighted. They argue that it will mean the CofE can stop tying itself in knots trying to make concessions to traditionalists. They can be told, accept the Anglican way or shove off to Rome. Some hardline liberals even want to see the dissident bishops disciplined over their negotiations with Cardinal Levada, which they say breached the oath of obedience they took at their consecration. And there have been calls for the Queen to refuse to meet the Pope and for plans for next year's papal visit to England to be scrapped.
Probably, compromise being the Anglican genius, nothing so extreme will happen either way.
How many people will leave?
It is in many people's interests to big this up. There has been talk of as many as a thousand CofE priests leaving, plus thousands more in America and Australia. The 1,000 figure comes from the church's traditionalist Forward in Faith faction (whose critics call it Backward in Bigotry).
But how many will carry out the threat?
When women priests were first ordained it was said 1,000 priests would quit. In the event only 441 took the financial compensation package on offer, and scores of those have returned from Rome disillusioned since.
The main movement will probably not be in England. Of the 50 Anglican bishops who have made tentative approaches to Rome, only half a dozen are from England. Rome is taking more notice of the concerns of the US rather than UK Catholic bishops on how to handle all this.
As a counterbalance, women priests who were unhappy at the prospect of second-class female bishops will now probably withdraw their threats to leave, though they numbered only dozens.
What does it signify for Rome?
That's hard to read. It may want a separate Anglican Ordinariate in order to quarantine the newcomers from cradle Catholics. Rome doesn't want the influx of married priests to add legitimacy to the call for married priests among mainstream English Catholics. But it may also reflect the emerging difference in style between Pope John Paul II, who loved to do battle with those who disagreed with him, and his successor, who prefers to ignore his mainstream liberal critics and instead promote those who unquestioningly accept his view of the church and the world.
On Monday Vatican officials begin talks with the extreme Lefebvrist traditionalists in the Society of Saint Pius X, whose Holocaust-denying bishop the Pope controversially readmitted to the church earlier this year. The structure of an Anglican Ordinariate might offer a useful precedent for their readmission to the bosom of Rome.
Has the Pope overstepped the mark?
Yes...
* He sprang his plan on the Archbishop of Canterbury with no consultation and hardly any warning.
* The Vatican officials responsible for Christian Unity tried to block the move – but they were over-ruled.
* He could have stuck to the policy of welcoming individuals but he is now trying to entice whole congregations.
No...
* The Archbishop of Canterbury has said the Pope's move is not "an act of proselytism or aggression".
* Rome is merely welcoming those the General Synod has frozen out.
* The Pope gave Anglicans every chance to back the Archbishop of Canterbury's quest for unity, but they failed.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited



Comments
In other words - we do job lots now - much quicker to do bulk orders.
One and twos are no use - we have to move this thing on, man.
The pope's a man on a mission.
As regards poaching vicars - that's a really good idea. Boiling makes them soft.
Simple as that really, as with all religeons the more members the better for them.
Elizabeth the First will be turning in her grave!
To think how this brave British Queen, Elizabeth 1, with her very real Christian faith, bravely stopped the Roman Catholic plots from France & Spain to try and return England back into a Roman Catholic Country.
She was a true defender of the Church of England & The Christian faith and of this nation against Southern European Roman Catholic invaders. But now our wishy washy academic Archbishop Dr Rowan Williams just allows the bullish German Pope to seduce up to 20 % of of the Anglican Bishops, Clergy and laity; with the Archbishop of Canterbury giving not much more than a shrug of his shoulders and wringing of his hands; with his bearded blank expression seems to be saying: don't blame me, I didn't get us into this mess! (The fact I am such a bad Christian leader and more interested in secular issues like climate change than being the leader of the main Christian church has nothing to do with what is happening). Oh but it does! If he had any humility he would resign immediately and allow a real Christian who actually believes the Christian Gospel and who is not afraid to defend our nation and our protestant Christian faith and Anglican church from foreign invaders. I thought a good shepherd was supposed to look after his sheep not let them wander all over the place; ready to be devoured by known predators.
This Pope made his intentions very clear; not long after he was appointed when he publicly declared ' The Roman Catholic is the only real Christian faith in the world'. (such arrogance, he implied that all other Christian denominations were heretics, so it seems nothing has changed since the brutal years of the Spanish inquisition and the slaughter of thousands the protestants including the Calvinist Huguenots in France; that saw religious cleansing in Europe on a massive scale). So who will stand up to this aggressive Pope? Before he causes massive outrage and reaction in England? Mark my words once the protestants in England & Wales and NI wake up to what is being proposed, we will be on very dangerous ground indeed. And only God knows where it could lead. This can all be avoided if the Pope stops his religious crusade in England & Wales and 'wishy washy' Dr Rowan Williams stands down as soon as possible.
What this country needs right now is a Wesley, Spurgeon or a Whitefield to lead the Anglican Church; someone who has the boldness to stand and be counted and be proud to be a Protestant Anglican Christian.
Regards
John U.K.
But one thing's for sure: it won't happen any other way, for the simple reason that there aren't enough of your sort of Protestants left for there to be the "massive outrage and reaction in England" that you predict.
You might get that sort of response in Northern Ireland, but for most mainland Brits, whether Christian or secularist, the religion of the Orange Order hardly appeals. This isn't 1580.
The pope invade England, a fourth rate nation of shirkers and wasters that stood idly by while Thatcher shafted you. .
As regards being the only Christians: think of all the innocent men and women imprisoned by perjury day in day out...not to mention the hot air in Westminster..some christians
1. Arrogance:
The Times 11 July 2007:
'If it isn't Roman Catholic then it's not a proper church' Pope tell Christians. The Vatican has described the Protestant & Orthodox faiths as not proper churches in a document issued with the full authority of the Pope:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen
2. Protection of Child Abusers:
New Catholic Archbishop Most Rev Vincent Nichols May 2009 praised the courage of guilty clergy for admitting their guilt: Daily Mail 21.05.09:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art
But what about the courage of the victims who suffered for years at the hands of these child abusers? The Archbishop should be ashamed of himself for making such a ridiculous statement like this.....
It doesn't need courage to abuse a child only some sick and twisted perversion. These people should be named and shamed and brought to justice in a criminal court for their disgusting crimes against children.
Whilst a Rector or Vicar is vested with the freehold of the property of the living (church and churchyard in effect) it is held ON BEHALF OF THE PARISHIONERS.
The Incumbent who decided to sell the churchyard to a property developer would not get very far. There is an extremely complex system for the sale of redundant church buildings and property. The diocese can't simply put an ad in the property section of the local paper on Friday evening.
The incumbent who tried to affiliate with Sydney or Zaire would not get very far, either. English parishes are geographical and their boundaries are set by a legal process. It is therefore simply impossible to transfer the parish of St Etheldreda's, Sludgetown, to the diocese of Abuja, because the "gap" it would leave cannot exist in law. The congregation can go and worship in a local school: it's happened many times. But they cannot any longer claim any interest in St Etheldreda's, its parish, its property, or its goods and ornaments. They cease to be St Etheldreda's, and they are no longer in communion with the local bishop. This happened not long ago in Worcester diocese."Posted by: cryptogram on Monday, 7 April 2008 at 8:24pm BST
So if an Anglican parish goes over to Rome, it may have to find a new building. It might be given a church surplus to requirements, or indeed a Catholic church which would otherwise be redundant, or share an RC parish building. lots of potential for lawcourt disputes, anyway.
Rev Dr F Marsden