This brought me back to Fr Longenecker's presentation at our parish last week. He told us that while he was studying for the Anglican priesthood at Oxford, he had a Catholic spiritual director, an abbot. He kept insisting to his spiritual director that he was "Catholic within Anglicanism" or some such thing. The abbot kept making the point, very politely, that you weren't Catholic unless you were in communion with the Holy Father. It seems that for some years, Fr Longenecker didn't listen, although eventually he did.
But I listened to the segment several times to be absolutely sure Mr Madrid made no mention of Anglicanorum coetibus, the granny flat for the Anglicans. Mr Madrid is a major Catholic spokesman and apologist, up there certainly with Bp Barron. We know he's at least vaguely aware of the granny flat, since a while ago he took a call from Fr Baaten, though once he found out what Baaten had to say, he spent most of his effort getting him politely off the line.
So why didn't Mr Madrid mention the granny flat? Couldn't he have wound up the call with Char saying something along the line of "But Char, the Church has made a special provision for those Anglicans who want to be in full communion, where you can hear the beauty of their precious spiritual treasures, especially if you're within several hundred miles of. . ." -- but no. Poor Char's left with the real presence just in novus ordo down the street. And frankly, I think Mr Madrid is about as well informed as anyone. If he'd thought it worth his while to bring up the granny flat, he would have.
On Anglicanism, the words Mr Madrid came up with were "tricky" and "nightmare". He had his site link to Apostolicae Curae, not Anglicanorum coetibus. Maybe Mrs Gyapong could send him a huffy e-mail. On the other hand, I also think about syncretism, and I think about words like "tricky" and "nightmare". Somehow I don't think Mr Madrid just made an oversight.