[Y]our remarks about the official Catholic position with respect to ecumenism are completely off the mark. The Catholic doctrinal underpinning of ecumenism is No. 15 of the dogmatic constitution Lumen gentium on the Church, promulgated by the Second Vatican Council. The boldfacing of critical points and removal of internal citations mine.I'm commenting here only as a new Catholic who's been drawn to look more closely at the Church following a particular failure in implementing Anglicanorum coetibus, which Bp Lopes has defined at least since 2014 as "ecumenism in the front row". Clearly I've never seen Bp Lopes wearing a rainbow stole or singing kumbaya. On the other hand, I've been posting to a specialized audience here for five years now that this particular ecumenical effort has been deeply flawed -- and it seems to me that by forcing many of the much-vaunted first wave of prestigious ordinands, including the first ordinary, into retirement during this time, Bp Lopes and the CDF have acknowledged this.“15. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical communities. Many of them rejoice in the episcopate, celebrate the Holy Eucharist and cultivate devotion toward the Virgin Mother of God. They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood. In all of Christ's disciples the Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd, and He prompts them to pursue this end. Mother Church never ceases to pray, hope and work that this may come about. She exhorts her children to purification and renewal so that the sign of Christ may shine more brightly over the face of the earth.”The entire decree Unitatis redintegratio on ecumenism promulgated by the same council on the same date unpacks this paragraph and provides direction for the way forward. You would do well to read this document in its entirety. In a nutshell, this document is the complete antithesis of “people wearing rainbow stoles and so forth singing kumbaya.” Rather, the Catholic Church holds that there must be true unity based on common in faith, manifest by universal acceptance of the whole of Christian doctrine as taught by the Catholic Church, before we can restore full communion with a separated body.
Later in his e-mail, the visitor says,
I’m not sure where the statement that “the Anglican Communion occupies a special place” among the separated ecclesial communities of the West in No. 13 of Unitatis redintegratio stands today. The fact that several provinces of the Anglican Communion, including The Episcopal Church (TEC) here in the States and the Anglican Church in Canada to our north, have abandoned doctrinal orthodoxy is clearly troubling: they may well be in a state of apostasy now. On the other hand, that abandonment clearly does not extend to the provinces of the Global Anglican Futures Conference (GAFCON), including the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). Nevertheless, it’s the province of the magisterium of the Catholic Church — not you or me — to sort out those issues and their implications for ecumenism.I have a serious concern that those involved with developing Anglicanorum coetibus fundamentally misunderstood Anglicanism. Unlike the Church, Anglican bodies have traditionally been hesitant -- indeed, unable -- to enforce any sort of orthodoxy among laity or clergy. This probably dates to the original Tudor agenda, which essentially said that as long as English Christians acknowledged the supremacy of the State over the Church, by following the minimal legal requirements for this, they might privately believe what they chose. It's hard to distinguish what the ACNA believes from TEC, since they use the same BCP, and both ordain women. (Even Rome has gay bishops, after all.)
But in addition, Diarmaid MacCulloch has made the important point that Anglicanism, unlike most Protestant denominations, retained bishops and cathedral chapters and used them as instruments of State political patronage. Anthony Trollope based much of his fiction on his insights into the particularly secular political nature of Anglican parish and diocesan life. In the OCSP, we're seeing echoes of Anglican careerism even in the way groups-in-formation are established merely as vehicles to justify ordaining favored candidates, but as soon as the candidates move to a better opportunity, their original groups fold. Fr Vidal is simply the latest example. The cynicism here is hard to miss, though the CDF may be doing so.
I think the simplest version of my position is that for Anglicans and any others, the usual path for non-Catholics to enter the Church, RCIA or other preparation by priests, is far more widely available and, since it involves a more regular integration into Catholic diocesan and parish life, likely to produce more complete formation in any kind of long run. I don't see how I'm trying to say anything against the magisterium here. On the other hand, it is in fact the responsibility of laity to hold bishops accountable.
