In a historic step, the Vatican is working toward “full communion” with conservative Anglicans by recognizing Anglican holy orders and churches without requiring “amalgamation or conversion.”
The union will be based on a Malta II proposal presented by the Anglican Church of North America (ACNA), that revives the Malta I report agreed upon by Pope Paul VI and archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Michael Ramsey in 1966.
In my post Book Review: Trevor Gervase Jalland’s The Church and the Papacy, I note the following:
Unless you figure that Protestant and Orthodox churches will simply roll the Roman Catholics–and in some places like Latin America that’s a possibility–sooner or later some accommodation with the See of Peter needs to be considered, or at least the obstacles to that accommodation need to be dispassionately discussed.
Evidently people in both the ACNA and the RCC have been thinking along these lines. As someone who has experienced both the Anglican and Roman Catholic worlds, I find myself with mixed feelings about this whole adventure.
The biggest plus is that it would put some Anglicans on par with the Orthodox, i.e., a church with the apostolic succession and valid sacraments and orders but not in formal union with Rome. I say “some” because, although the model for this is a sixty-year old protocol between Rome and Canterbury, the latter is conspicuously absent from the process. The biggest obstacle is women in the episcopate, which affects the apostolic succession. Since this is extending to GAFCON, how the RCC plans to deal with provinces like Kenya and South Sudan is hard to know at this point. Doing this, however, would undo one of the RCC’s least thought out self-inflicted wounds–denying the validity of Anglican orders.
Doing just this is a major step forward and would go a long way for the unity of Christianity. But there are perils for both sides.
Let’s start with the Anglicans. Ever since the days of Richard Hurrell Froude (I personally find his brother William of greater interest) there has always been the desire within parts of Anglicanism–translated into practice–of being “more catholic than the Pope.” This strikes me as an attempt to “keep up with the Joneses” without realising that we just might be the Joneses! The most tragic occurrence of this in the history of the church is the Old Believers controversy. Although I doubt the Anglo-Catholics have the fires at the ready, they may move (and some are moving) in the direction of things such as the Marian devotions, the merit system of grace, the Immaculate Conception, purgatory and of course the Catholic concept of the priesthood, which appeals to the authoritarian streak. I honestly don’t think that the cause of Christ or the progress of the Church are served by these things, and some of us have lived through a Roman Catholicism where they were virtually absent.
The Roman Catholics have their problems, too. If there’s one thing the current Occupant of the See of Peter hates more than anything, it’s people who are more Catholic than he is, and by that I’m referring to the Trads. It’s possible that he sees the ACNA as yet another dumping ground (along with the SSPX) for these people, whom he has set to drive out of the Church. Driving out dedicated people isn’t new to the RCC, but it is always harmful. (For a church like the ACNA which is having trouble digesting the exvangelicals, this has both promise and peril.) But we should realise that this Occupant, like his counterpart at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, won’t last forever. The ACNA has had its taste of a white-knuckle conclave, but it will pale besides the next one in Rome. The RCC has trashed the reputation it has amongst more traditionally minded Protestants as a “safe haven,” this will certainly affect any ACNA-RCC relationship going forward.
As I said in my book review, the core problem is this:
What Christianity needs is leadership which is committed to transmitting the paradosis of the Apostles without expanding it.
I’d like to think that this union would be a step towards that, but I’m not counting on it.
Positive Infinity 
The start date for the meeting at the DDF, as reported by Mr. Gomes in the “Souls and Liberty” article updated Jul 17 2024, was 26-27 September. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, occurred. However, please read on, for the opinion of this cradle Anglo-Catholic, who at age 65 became a member of the Ordinariate.
“Full communion” means two totally different things in Anglican-speak and in Vatican-speak.
Jules Gomes talks of “full communion” when the only thing even theoretically being discussed is “recognition of Anglican orders” (in a subset of Anglican ecclesial communities) by Rome.
When Rome says “full communion” it has a very specific meaning in both canon law and the ecclesiological doctrines of the Church. It is not simple recognition of orders. “Full communion” in Rome-speak requires submission to the authority of the Pope and to the Vatican dicasteries set up to manage the “full communion” relationship. At the moment, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Divine Worship and Sacraments (DDF/DDW) manage the relationship with the Personal Ordinariates for former Anglicans. The Ordinariates are juridically under the Code of Canon Law for the West. The Dicastery for the Eastern Churches manages the relationship with the 23 sui iuris Eastern Catholic Churches. These Churches are governed by the Code of Canon Law for the Oriental Churches (CCEO) and their local customs.
Full communion has only been realized with the particular churches (i.e. the dioceses, eparchies, ordinariates, etc.) described in the previous paragraph, and no others.
A concrete example of “recognition of orders” without “full visible unity” exists with respect to the PNCC of Scranton, the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and the Assyrian Church of the East. Canon 844§3, and a corresponding canon in the CCEO. If this ACNA-RCC thing really becomes a “thing” (which I doubt will actually happen), it would follow the requirements of 844§3, which DO NOT include any sharing of ministry, nor permission for Catholics to receive communion from ministers of these “recognized” communities, except in danger of death.
It’s interesting that Canon 844§3 does permit members of “recognized” churches to receive communion from Catholic ministers without any “extremis” condition, but in the case of most of the “recognized” churches (i.e. the Eastern Orthodox), their members are forbidden by their own churches from receiving from Catholic ministers.
Could this yield a real “thing”, or is it just talk from some folks at ACNA and some folks not even in the DDF any more?
A report from this first meeting last Thursday/Friday, or lack thereof, might be an indicator as to which.
LikeLike
As I noted in my article, “The biggest plus is that it would put some Anglicans on par with the Orthodox, i.e., a church with the apostolic succession and valid sacraments and orders but not in formal union with Rome.” I don’t think it would go much further than that. I’ve mentioned elsewhere that I was surprised when the Vatican allowed the Ordinariate. As the RCC has become more Ultramontane, accommodations such as we see in the Eastern Rite churches became fewer and further between. Benedict XVI was a more forward thinker than his detractors give him credit for being.
As far as the current Occupant is concerned, he will let this proceed only as it advances his agenda. Many have commented that he wants to take the RCC down the same “reappraising” road (to use Kendall Harmon’s terminology) that the Anglican/Episcopal World has gone, and closer integration with parts of that world might help. Exporting the Trads (which is easier said than done) wouldn’t be bad either. How far any agenda he might want to forward depends upon how long his pontificate lasts; the next conclave will be very important for the RCC and the rest of us.
The ACNA, to use Sun Yat-Sen’s expressive phrase, is too much of a “sheet of loose sand” to be negotiating much of anything with the RCC. Its internal variations make taking a position difficult. Perhaps in a generation there will be more homogeneity in the organisation, but right at the moment they’re still trying to figure out who they really are.
Thanks much for your detailed comment and references to canon law.
LikeLike