Pages

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Anglo-papalism and coherence

http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=14256

[Spero News] 6 Feb 2008--There has been much discussion recently at our blog on Anglo-Papalism, a tradition within Anglo-Catholicism, and whether it makes any consistent sense. This discussion has been prompted by the news that the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) is seeking full sacramental communion with Rome and has signalled, by its College of Bishops signing the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that the TAC has no doctrinal disagreement with the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). This action has caused a certain degree of consternation amongst many contributors to the blog, including members of the TAC, and defence of the action and the principles behind it by others.

The first thing I wish to suggest is that the TAC hierarchy has been unwise to restrict the substantive discussion of this move and the reasoning and planning behind it largely to its episcopal College. There is an undeniable “disconnect” between what the College is doing and what much of the laity and lower clergy are thinking. While the general intention of the bishops had been made abundantly clear, there appears to have been little or no attempt to explain the details or address through patient theological education and dialogue the inevitable and serious reservations or objections of many within the TAC. It is not enough for their Primate simply to state, as he has done in the past, that there are no differences in doctrine, especially when differences had appeared to exist in the past. It was incumbent upon the bishops either to explain precisely what had changed in the doctrine of the TAC or RCC, or to show that previously identified divergences in doctrine were in fact only apparently divergent, and that further theological clarification had achieved reconciliation. I think it is manifestly the case that this has not been done, and so an unfortunate impression has been created that the TAC hierarchy has acted more out of unreflective expedience than considered principle.

No comments:

Post a Comment