www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Cardinal pours cold water on union with rebel Anglican group

I hope this article got it wrong. "Kasper the Unfriendly Ghost" is a nickname I have heard some use... If this quote is accurate, I can understand it.

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/news_2.html

Cardinal pours cold water on union with rebel Anglican group


One of the Vatican�s most senior cardinals has dismissed the idea that a breakaway group of Anglicans might be received into the Catholic Church en masse � despite Benedict XVI�s personal support for such a move.

Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, told The Catholic Herald: �It�s not our policy to bring that many Anglicans to Rome.�

The cardinal�s comments refer to the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), a rebel group which claims to represent 400,000 people. Its bishops sent a letter to Rome last month requesting �full, corporate and sacramental union�.

But the bishops did not send their letter to Cardinal Kasper. Instead they addressed it to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), where, it is understood, they expected a warmer reception.

It has been claimed that 60 Anglican parishes have joined the rebel group since their request became public.

Vatican insiders say that Benedict XVI is scrutinising the matter very closely and believes that the TAC is setting out a path that other Anglicans will follow.

One source said the Pope even gave his blessing to the TAC�s plenary assembly in October, when 60 bishops agreed to seek full communion with Rome. Each bishop reportedly signed a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the church altar.

Benedict XVI sent his message of support through Archbishop Angelo Amato, secretary of the CDF.

But Cardinal Kasper, as president of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, is likely to be cautious about any arrangement that might upset the official leaders of the other Christian churches � notably the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. The cardinal said on Monday: �We are on good terms with the Archbishop of Canterbury and as much as we can we are helping him to keep the Anglican community together.� (??huh??)

When asked whether he felt encouraged by the TAC�s request, the cardinal replied: �It�s not our policy to bring that many Anglicans to Rome and I am not sure there are so many as you are speaking about.�

He added: �Of course, as a Catholic I am happy if one person joins our Catholic Church but I doubt such a big group is coming � I think there are still many questions to solve first.�

The cardinal made his comments just days after another Episcopal bishop announced his intention to seek full communion with the Catholic Church.

Bishop John B Lipscomb of southwest Florida is the fourth bishop this year to ask to be released from his Episcopal vows.
The subject of ecumenism also dominated discussions at the consistory in Rome last weekend, when Benedict XVI elevated 23 clergymen to the rank of cardinal.

The Pontiff told the assembled cardinals that they must be willing to shed their blood to spread the faith.
He singled out Patriarch Emmanuel III Delly, head of the Chaldean Church in Iraq, and said his decision to elevate him was a way of expressing his �spiritual closeness and my affection� for Christians in Iraq. But Benedict XVI chose ecumenism as the main topic for debate at his meeting with all of the cardinals on the eve of the consistory.

Cardinal Kasper, who gave the opening address, said that ecumenism was not �an optional choice, but a sacred duty�.
Later in the day Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O�Connor proposed that the Holy See organise a �pan-Christian� meeting.

Benedict XVI returned to the same theme in his homily on Sunday. �Prayer for peace and unity constitutes your first and principal mission,� he told the assembled cardinals, �so that the Church may be healthy and compact�, a �sign and instrument of unity for the entire human race�.

The homily called on the cardinals, as �the senate of the Church�, to form one whole body under Christ. Commentators have suggested that the plea refers to the reluctance of some cardinals to accept the rulings of Summorum Pontificum, which allows priests to celebrate the traditional form of the Mass without the permission of a bishop.

The consistory also represented the first major test for the Vatican�s new director of papal liturgies, Fr Guido Marini, who replaced Archbishop Piero Marini in October.

Observers noticed several �traditionalist� touches that set the proceedings apart from those directed by Archbishop Marini, who was known as a liturgical innovator.

The Pope�s gold-embroidered mitre, for instance, belonged to the late 19-century Pope Pius IX, and his antique gilded throne was used by Leo XIII, who died in 1903. The consistory was held in St Peter�s Basilica and not in St Peter�s Square or the Vatican�s audience hall.

Wouldn't that be Uniatism? Should we consider it acceptable if it only involves Western Christians?

Jeff

Jeff I suppose a question that then needs to be answered is can "uniatism" be used in situations of "ecclesial communities" rather than true churches possesed of seven valid sacraments.

Also, can Rome create "uniates" by reconciling the sons and daughters of folks who split from the Roman patriarchate? This isn't poaching in another Patriarch perverbial forest, this is welcoming back ours from our own.

But quite frankly the comparison to Orthodoxy would leave me a little non-plussed. If it happened to be the case that the Russian church went off the rails 400 years ago and declared there to be only two sacraments and recently started ordaining lady-priests and promoting/practicing homosexuals, I am willing to be Rome would accomadate disaffected parties.

So no, I am not of the thinking that this would be "uniatism". I am thinking it would be in keeping with the Gospel mandates by helping to restore valid sacraments to the altars of these faithful, and accomadate those seeking (of their own initiative!) communion with the See of Peter.

Good answer - thanks!

Jeff

There is no question of uniatism here. We are dealing with
people whose ancestors broke away from the Roman
Church and who now, reportedly, wish to be reconciled with
Rome. God grant that they may be. What Cardinal Kasper thinks
about this is nothing to the point. He isn't pope; Benedict is.

Edmac

A much shorter answer?

Some (like me) have been upset that Russian Greek Catholics have recieved such a cold shoulder but understand that Rome's reasoning may be to not step on the toes of the Patriarch of Moscow where reconciliation may one day be achieved.

Invalid orders and Protestant theology* in Anglicanism preclude reconciliation ever being possible.

Shorter still? We can fix it with the Greco-Slavic Orthodox. We can't with the Anglicans.

+Kasper should know that. I hope this one is out of his hands.



(*Invariably someone will point out that Anglo Catholics are not Protestant, but my response is two-fold, [1]to privately maintain one is a Catholic in such a fashion is inherently Protestant, [2] and folks with a knowledge of history will know that today's Anglo-Catholics are the descendents of Protestants who adopted vestments and started "doing sacraments" they have little or no historic continuity pre-dating the Reformation.)

Of course I should not neglect to mention, this isn't +Kasper's baby.

In 2003, the TAC project was taken away from his Pontifical Council For Christian Unity and given to the Congregation For The Doctrine of the Faith, whose prefect at the time was a beer-drinking, cat-loving, cigarette-smoking Bavarian cardinal...

Anyone recall? Will give you a little hint... Herr Kardinal got a promotion, a new name, a new outfit and he and Chico (the cat) moved into some rather nice new digs...

Time will tell.

Dear Simple,

The position you set forth above in your first paragraph, while popular with Vatican politicians, is really naive and silly.

The Patriarch of Moscow has, traditionally, been on excellent terms with Russian Catholic Orthodox (the official name of Russian Catholics - happily, they are spared the Austro-Hungarian oddity of "Greek-Catholics").

Yet Rome thinks it is ahead with its Latin missions in Russia. Rome has no idea what it is doing, just as its Kasper has no idea.

And there are Anglicans whose mentality IS Catholic, who accept the principles of Catholicism, with the primacy among equals (or more) of the Pope.

It is these who want formal union with Rome and they should be encouraged.

It is your Kasper who wants to keep Anglicanism together and you should take up your argument about what Anglicanism is with him.

That discussion should be interesting.

Alex

The Cardinal is just plain wrong; just when is it okay for people to join the Catholic Church? Does he want all of the Spongs in the Anglican Communion to accept the Catholic Church first? I shake my head.

Patriarch Alexei has been on excellent terms with the Russian
Catholic Church? First I've heard of it. Please provide details.

Edmac

Alex,

I am confused.

What position did I advance as my own that is popular with Vaticanistas but silly? For the record I dislike very much the fact the Russian Catholics have no hierarchy of their own. I think the politics of it is ill-informed on the face of it... I am just willing to concede that I don't know the full story and it may not be all I think it is... so I am willing to accept as possible explination that has been circulated "Let's not antagonize the ROC with the resurrection of the unia" I don't "buy it" but then again, I am not a purchasing agent...

How is he MY +Kasper??? That truly befuddles me.

I fully agree with you that they (TAC) should be reached out to. I further agree with you that +Kasper's approach is silly.

That ++Alexei is on "Excellent terms with the Russian Catholic Church" I would also like to see more details. I grant readily that my college Russian is in disarray and so I am forced to get my news from English outlets... But all indications I have seen lead me to believe that he is mightily annoyed by the Catholic presense he does have in his midst.

Of course, venerable Alex, I always look forward to your posts and your thinking - I learn much from them... If you could share more insight, I would certainly appreciate it.

I maintain that it is a crypto-Protestant fantasy to persist in the notion that restoring Catholic ritual to your litrugics and publically and privately espousing "Anglo-Catholicism" in the context of Anglicanism is a sort of private interpretation (Protestant) fantasy of the first degree. If today the genteel and loveable Methodists had a movement to adopt Catholic vestments and sacramentaries and started teaching "7 sacraments" even two more centuries of doing so would not make them more than what they would be: an ecclesial community rooted in Protestantism that has adopted much that looks Catholic.

"Uniatism" is a word that lacks an agreed, generally accepted definition, so any attempt to discuss whether this, that, or the other reception of a group into the Catholic Church is an example of "uniatism" is pointless - unless one functions on the principle that "a word means what I want it to mean - one must decide who is master!".

If - and this is a large IF - there really is a substantial, cohesive group of refugees from the Anglicans seeking admission to the Catholic Church, and willing to accept the fullness of Orthodox-Catholic doctrine, there would have to be the strongest of reasons for discouraging them, let alone refusing them. The terms of such a reception would be a matter for discussion. But bear in mind, there are lies, damned lies, statistics, and ecclesiastical statistics!

Ecumenism with the Anglican Communion (headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is also a Druid) can be little more than a matter of trying to maintain friendship and cooperation on some practical matters. It is becoming increasingly clear that Anglicanism is excluding itself from any serious possibility of communion with either Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism.

Oddly enough, it is possible to have a "Catholic mentality" (which appears to be another expression lacking an agreed definition) combined with a Protestant church life on Protestant principles. I remember once being told at an "ecumenical" gathering that the person addressing me "considered herself a member of the Holy Catholic Church". When I responded that perhaps the question is whether the Holy Catholic Church considers her a member, she was quite offended. If I were to announce that I consider myself the Tsar' of Russia, without reference to what Russia might think about the matter, it is not unlikely that I would receive a mandatory invitation to accept psychiatric treatment.

So we must wait and see, and pray that what is pleasing to God and to His Church may be accomplished.

Fr. Serge

Dear SS and Edmac,

My point about the Russian Catholics and the Patriarch of Moscow is that, historically, there has been less antagonism between them than the Latin Church.

The Russicum in Rome IS on good terms with the ROC. They assist the ROC with liturgical publications and the Patriarch of Moscow has even complimented and given awards to Russian Catholic scholars.

Rome is afraid that a Russian Catholic hierarchy will alienate Moscow. In fact, if there MUST be a Catholic presence in Russia, the Russian Byzantine Catholics are the lesser of two evils for the ROC. At least the Russian Catholics, who scrupulously adhere to their traditions, do not threaten the spiritual patrimony of Russia in that sense. The Latin Church, with Russians joining it, certainly does.

Another example of EC's who have won the esteem of the ROC and even the ROCOR is . . . our very own Fr. Serge Keleher.

Even when he was in Toronto, there was nothing but praise for him not only from our Eparch and the "Eastern minded" among us, but also, and notably, from Orthodox clergy and ROCOR. That is a fact.

They all knew Father Archimandrite is an EC and they all admired him for his scrupulous adherence to the rubrics and traditions of the Orthodox-Catholic Church.

And, SS, I wasn't specifically centering you out and if I came across that way (and I fear I may have), I apologise.

Alex

As for the Anglo-Catholics, there are all types, just like there are Orthodox and Catholics etc.

The "High Church" Anglicans I know are very devoted and pious Anglicans who have devotion to the Christ Crucified, the Virgin Mary, Holy Communion, fasting etc.

All of these today, without exception, are now with TAC and want to be fully united with Rome. Their bishops signed copies of the Catholic Catechism and I wonder if all Catholic clergy would be willing to make such a public demonstration of loyalty to Catholic teaching (?)

I say - give these Anglicans leeway and every chance to become one with the Catholic Church and the Pope of Rome. That is what they want, and Rome has already pronounced in favour of them maintaining their Anglican traditions.

As for the Archbishop of Canterbury being a Druid, it is OUR Cardinal Kasper who wants to support him in every way and keep the "Anglican communion together."

If Anglican Catholics (who do accept the seven Ecumenical Councils as indicated on their website by the way) want to stop having communion with Druids, then who are WE to accuse them of bad theology?

Alex

"So we must wait and see, and pray that what is pleasing to God and to His Church may be accomplished."

I like what Fr. Serge said.

I'd add that it may not be wise to universally fold in so many people into communion with Rome when conversion and faith are particular matters.

Terry