Brothers+

Many of us in the 1960's and 1970's thought there was
hope for Christian unity when serious talks were
undertaken between Rome and Canterbury.

Here are the opening lines of a significant ARCIC
document:

THE GIFT OF AUTHORITY (Authority in the Church III)
Anglican-Roman Catholc International Commission
(ARCIC) 
I. Introduction
II. Authority in the Church 
III. The Exercise of Authority
IV. Agreement in the Exercise

PREFACE 
By the Co-Chairmen
An earnest search for full visible unity between the
Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church was
initiated over thirty years ago by the historic
meeting in Rome of Archbishop Michael Ramsey and Pope
Paul VI. The Commission set up to prepare for the
dialogue recognised, in its 1968 Malta Report, that
one of the “urgent and important tasks” would be to
examine the question of authority. In a sense, this
question is at the heart of our sad divisions. 
When The Final Report of ARCIC was published in 1981
half of it was devoted to the dialogue about authority
in the Church, with two agreed statements and an
elucidation. This was important groundwork, preparing
the way for further convergence. The official
responses, by the 1988 Lambeth Conference of the
Anglican Communion and by the Catholic Church in 1991,
encouraged the Commission to carry forward the
“remarkable progress” that had been made. Accordingly
ARCIC now offers this further agreed statement, The
Gift of Authority. 

A scriptural image is the key to this statement. In
chapter one of his second letter to the Corinthians,
Paul writes of God’s “Yes” to humanity and our
answering “Amen” to God, both given in Jesus Christ
(cf. 2 Cor 1.19-20). God’s gift of authority to his
Church is at the service of God’s “Yes” to his people
and their “Amen

"================================================

"The Gift of Authority ARCIC document" was a
foundation stone in further talks and offered concrete
hope future agreements would issue in longed for unity
between to major Christian communions.

In 2004, we received the bad news that the New
Hampshire consecration (Bp Robinson) had provided an
occasion for stopping progress toward unity.

Here are snippets from an IARCCUM  document:
ECCLESIOLOGICAL REFLECTIONS ON THE CURRENT SITUATION
IN THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION IN THE LIGHT OF ARCIC
Report of the ad hoc sub–commission of IARCCUM
presented to the Most Reverend and Right Honourable
Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan
Williams and to the President of the Pontifical
Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Cardinal
Walter Kasper
June 8th, 2004
I. Introduction
1. The Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic
Church have been committed for
almost forty years to ‘serious dialogue which, founded
on the Gospels and the ancient
common traditions, may lead to that unity in truth,
for which Christ prayed’ (Common
Declaration of Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Michael
Ramsey, 1966). Over these
decades, remarkable progress has been made towards the
‘restoration of complete
communion of faith and sacramental life’ called for by
the 1966 Declaration. The
importance of steady movement towards this goal was
emphasized by Pope John Paul II
and Archbishop Robert Runcie in their Common
Declaration of 1989:
Against the background of human disunity the arduous
journey to Christian
unity must be pursued with determination and vigour,
whatever obstacles are
perceived to block the path. We here solemnly
re-commit ourselves and
those we represent to the restoration of visible unity
and full ecclesial
communion in the confidence that to seek anything less
would be to betray
our Lord’s intention for the unity of his people…
We also urge our clergy and faithful not to neglect or
undervalue that certain
yet imperfect communion we already share.... This
communion should be
cherished and guarded as we seek to grow into the
fuller communion Christ
wills.
The Anglican and Roman Catholic bishops who gathered
in Mississauga in May of
2000, after reviewing the extensive progress made both
in theological agreement and in
practical relationships since the Second Vatican
Council, confidently observed that the
communion we already share is ‘no longer to be viewed
in minimal terms’. It is ‘a rich
and life-giving, multi-faceted communion. We have ...
moved much closer to the goal
of full visible communion than we had at first dared
to believe’.1
2. It is a significant confirmation of the progress we
have made, and of the importance of
our common commitment to the goal of full ecclesial
communion, that the appearance
of a fresh obstacle to achieving that goal has led to
a common initiative to address that
difficulty. The question raised by the episcopal
consecration in New Hampshire is
immediately an Anglican concern and is being addressed
by the Anglican Communion
itself. However, consultations with the Roman Catholic
Church led the Archbishop of
Canterbury to take the initiative of inviting Cardinal
Kasper of the Pontifical Council
for Promoting Christian Unity to join him in setting
up a special sub-commission of the
1 Communion in Mission, nn.5-6.
<snip>


Communion requires visible expression (43).
The New Hampshire consecration has had an effect on
the unity of the Anglican
Communion. Recent documents have spoken of ‘impaired
communion’ and even
of ‘broken communion’. In the light of the centrality
that ARCIC gives to
communion for the realisation of the Church, we ask
whether the damage that the
recent consecration is doing to communion can be
acceptable to those who profess
belief in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
B. Constitutive elements of ecclesial communion, the
episcopal office, unity and
diversity in communion, and the relationship between
local churches and the
universal Church
25. ARCIC is clear that there are inter-related
constitutive elements and facets which
‘belong to the visible communion of the universal
Church. Although their possession
cannot guarantee the constant fidelity of Christians,
neither can the Church dispense
with them.’ (Church as Communion, n.46); indeed the
Church has received these
elements and has an obligation to pass them on (Gift
of Authority, 14). 
>snip>
 ARCIC understands that there is an essential
relationship between all of the
constitutive elements of the Church. They interrelate
and belong to a single life of
communion. To deny or damage one is to weaken the
total life of communion of
the Church. The New Hampshire consecration raises
questions about how
constitutive elements of communion - the unity of the
episcopate, the authority of
Scripture and its interplay with Tradition, and the
holding of ‘the same basic
moral values’ - have been honoured, singly and
together.
26. ARCIC has much to say about the role of the
bishop, both within the local church and
in the service of the communion of all the churches.
At ordination, every bishop
receives ‘both responsibility for his local church and
the obligation to maintain it in
living awareness and practical service of other
churches. The Church of God is found
in each of them and in their koinonia’ (Authority I,
10). Within the local church, the
bishop carries a pastoral authority, by virtue of
which he is primarily ‘responsible for
preserving and promoting the integrity of the koinonia
in order to further the Church's
response to the Lordship of Christ and its commitment
to mission’ (Authority I, 5). The
bishop is to teach ‘the faith through the proclamation
and explanation of the Word of
God’, to provide for the celebration of the
sacraments, and to maintain the Church in
holiness and truth (Gift of Authority, 36). ‘The
exercise of this teaching authority
requires that what (is taught) be faithful to Holy
Scripture and consistent with apostolic
Tradition’ (Gift, 44). ARCIC also communicates the
understanding of both Anglican
and Roman Catholic Communions that bishops carry out
their ministry in succession of
the Apostles, which is ‘intended to assure each
community that its faith is indeed the
apostolic faith, received and transmitted from
apostolic times’ (Church as Communion,
33).

"---------------------------------------------

The groundwork laid in agreement on authority and the
forty years of progress was interrupted by an apparent
and embarassing failure in the Anglican ranks to honor
the authority and teaching tradition of the church.

The Archbishop of Canterbury could give no assurance
to Walter Kasper that ECUSA would remain in the
Anglican Communion.  Rowan Williams' plea for the
conservatives in his church to be patient and wait for
the Holy Spirit to bring insight that ECUSA was ahead
by recognizing same sex committed relationships  This
idea of waiting for inspiration to teach new truths
about marriage could not have inspired confidence in
Walter Kasper that Canterbury was devoted to tradition
and truth.

By year's end (December 2004) Walter Kasper gently
instructs Rowan Williams in the meaning of Christian
tradition and apostolic authority. 

Charles+
Church of the Good Shepherd, Indianapolis

LETTER OF HIS EMINENCE CARDINAL WALTER KASPER
TO HIS GRACE DR ROWAN WILLIAMS ARCHBISHOP OF
CANTERBURY
17 December 2004 
To His Grace
the Most Reverend and Right Honourable Dr Rowan
Williams
Archbishop of Canterbury                              
Your Grace, 
I greatly appreciate your letter of October 18th, the
very day in which the Windsor Report was made public,
inviting my informal reaction to the Report’s
contents.
I am grateful for the ecumenical way in which the
Anglican Communion has proceeded in the preparation of
the Report, and in particular, for the invitation last
December to join you in establishing an ad hoc
sub-committee of IARCCUM to reflect on how the Agreed
Statements of ARCIC over the past thirty-five years
could contribute to the current Anglican discernment
process. The significant ecumenical concern which has
been structured into the process by which the Windsor
Report will be studied and reflected upon is, for us,
a sign of trust and friendship and an encouragement to
continue our relations and our dialogue.  
My first and overarching comment is that the Windsor
Report proceeds in a direction which for the most part
I find helpful. I welcome the ecclesiological approach
by which the Report seeks to address and resolve the
problems which confront the Anglican Communion.
Consistent with the ARCIC documents - in particular,
“Church as Communion” (1991) - and the IARCCUM
ecclesiology sub-committee’s reflections, the Windsor
Report takes as its point of departure and builds upon
the foundations of an ecclesiology of communion
(koinonia).  Notwithstanding the substantial
ecclesiological issues still dividing us which will
continue to need our attention, this approach is
fundamentally in line with the communion ecclesiology
of the Second Vatican Council. 
The consequences which the Report draws from this
ecclesiological base are also constructive, especially
the interpretation of provincial autonomy in terms of
interdependence, thus “subject to limits generated by
the commitments of communion” (n. 79). Related to this
is the Report’s thrust towards strengthening the
supra-provincial authority of the Archbishop of
Canterbury (nn.109-110) and the proposal of an
Anglican Covenant which would “make explicit and
forceful the loyalty and bonds of affection which
govern the relationships between the churches of the
Communion” (n.118). All these consequences are in the
line with the general thrust of ARCIC’s statements. As
expressed in “The Gift of Authority” (1999),
maintaining and strengthening the koinonia and a
commitment to interdependence are constitutive aspects
of the Church and vital for its unity.

From this Pontifical Council’s perspective, the core
recommendations of the Report would have a positive
ecumenical impact, and we pray that these suggestions
and proposals will be received and implemented. In a
spirit of ecumenical partnership and friendship, we
are ready to support this process in whatever ways are
appropriate and requested. 
Though we are fundamentally encouraged by the Windsor
Report, and note that its recommendations reflect the
major insights of our common ecumenical documents,
there are two points also found in the ARCIC texts
which we hope can be more clearly articulated and
directly addressed in the ongoing reception and
implementation of the Windsor Report.
The first point concerns the text’s ecclesiological
approach itself.  While the Report stresses that
Anglican provinces have a responsibility towards each
other and towards the maintenance of communion, a
communion rooted in the Scriptures, considerably
little attention is given to the importance of being
in communion with the faith of the Church through the
ages. In addressing the exercise of authority in the
Church, “The Gift of Authority” speaks not only of the
necessity of a synchronic communion of churches but
also of a diachronic consensus; in fundamental matters
of faith and discipline, the decisions of a local or
regional church must not only foster communion in the
present context, but must also be in agreement with
the Church of the past, and in a particular way, with
the apostolic Church as witnessed in the Scriptures,
the early councils and the patristic tradition.  While
the Windsor Report stresses the catholicity of the
Church, we believe that in the discussion that will
follow, it might be helpful for the Anglican Communion
to place more stress on the Church’s apostolicity.
This aspect also has important ecumenical
ramifications, since we share a common tradition of
one and a half millennia. This common patrimony - what
Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Michael Ramsey called our
‘ancient common traditions’ - is worth being appealed
to and preserved.
The second area we would hope to see more directly
addressed in discussions of the Report and its
implementation concern the moral questions at the
heart of the current controversy. The Report stresses
that it was not its mandate to deal with disputed
questions concerning homosexuality. We have noted that
the problematic character of decisions taken in the
Episcopal Church of the United States and the Anglican
Church of Canada is addressed from an ecclesiological
perspective but not a moral one. While the Windsor
Report calls for a moratorium on same-sex blessings
and episcopal appointments of those in same-sex
relationships, this in itself is open to different
interpretations. We would ask whether the traditional
Christian understanding of marriage and human
sexuality doesn’t need to be reasserted more clearly.
As you know, the position of the Catholic Church in
this matter, as expressed in the Catechism of the
Catholic Church (nn. 2357-59), is clear, and for us,
remains binding.  We believe that on these matters, we
appeal to a shared apostolic patrimony which includes
the Scriptures, but also includes a common tradition -
grounded in a common interpretation of the Bible - of
over 1900 years.  In light of this patrimony, we ask
whether there might be occasion to affirm the vision
of human sexuality which was set forth in the ARCIC
document “Life in Christ” (1994) (n.b. nn. 55-58, 87),
in which we began to articulate together that shared
patrimony. From a practical and pastoral perspective
these moral questions are laden with strong emotional
resonances and are potentially divisive, and therefore
are of special importance for Christian unity and
ecumenical relations.
In conclusion, the Windsor Report has important
ecumenical implications insofar as it would provide
for a greater coherence within Anglicanism, allowing
an enhancement of our understanding of the Anglican
Communion precisely as a communion. 

 For the continuation of our ecumenical dialogue, it
is important for us to have a clear understanding of
who our partner is. The text stands in line with our
ARCIC documents, though there are other elements of
ARCIC’s work which we believe deserve further
attention.  Its recommendations address two underlying
questions of broad ecumenical significance: the
relationship between the universal Church and the
local church; and a question which is becoming
increasingly acute, namely, the tension between the
Gospel, as reflected in the apostolic witness, and the
approaches and trends of our post-modern societies.
Both questions are faced by all Churches; though in
different ways, we are confronted by many of the same
problems and the same challenges. Therefore we should
seek to undertake to address these issues in dialogue,
so that we can give witness together to a world which
has a pressing need for the common witness of the
Church. 
As we prepare to celebrate the birth of our Saviour, I
assure you of my prayers for you and for all the
members of the Anglican Communion.  On behalf of all
of us at the Pontifical Council, I wish you, your
family and the Lambeth Palace staff the peace which
Christ alone can give as you ponder the mystery of his
Incarnation.
Yours sincerely in Christ,
Walter Cardinal Kasper
President
 
17 December 2004
"===========================================

It has to be embarassing for Abp Williams to be in a
position where his opposite number must call him back
to the ancient Christian traditions, the teaching of
Scripture and of the responsibilities of bishops to
teach the truth. 

Obviously the ship of ecumenism is sinking on the
rocky shores of the British Isles.

Charles+
Church of the Good Shepherd, Indianapolis