Can't see this "open letter" having much effect
There is, apparently, an "open letter" to Anglican "dissidents" considering entering the Church through Anglican Ordinariates in the Tablet. The irony is that it is not on-line, so not very "open", eh? Still, thanks to Catholica for posting it. I don't think it will have much effect on those considering entering the Ordinariates, since "the deeply anti-modernist thinking (and pessimism towards modern culture) which has obsessed Pope Benedict XVI" is exactly what is attracting these folk away from the Anglican communion towards communion with the Catholic Church.
posted by Schütz @ 10:23 pm
13 Comments
.JPG)
13 Comments:
I am deeply puzzled by this paragraph:
"The deeply anti-modernist thinking (and pessimism towards modern culture) which has obsessed Pope Benedict XVI can be read in nearly every speech he gives and, for example, in his decision to end the schism between the Lefebvrists and the Catholic Church. He and the Curia did not even demand that this fundamentalist group accept the teaching of the Second Vatican Council."
As I understand, the schism has not been healed and the Pope's demand of their acceptance of VII remains an obstacle to reunification. I don't esteem The Tablet very high but shouldn't this blatant kind of error be picked up on by an editor?
And as for "accepting" Vatican II, well, as it was a pastoral council that enunciated no new doctrines, and Lefebvre himself signed all but two of the Conciliar decrees, from what I understand the chief issue the SSPX has is with apparent ambiguities and contradictions inherent in the documents, above all relating to religious freedom; as a certain Cardinal, now Pope, himself criticised some aspects of the documents as downright Pelagian, I suspect that a good deal of leeway will be available - so long as the SSPX doesn't denounce the Council as downright heretical.
What the more "liberal" Catholics mean by "the Council" is shorthand for, not the letter of the documents, but for their image of the modern Church, as opposed to the nasty old pre-conciliar Church and the nasty old men in the Vatican who are for ever trying to wind the clock back: a risible fantasy indeed.
The dear old Tablet. They have a rocky and often estranged relationship with such trifling things like facts and the truth, so no surprises really.
To echo your thoughts, David, were I an Edward Manning today and I read that letter, I'd think to myself, "Ooooh, sounds even more lovely than I imagined. How quickly can I swim the Tiber?"
Throw a Henry in front of his name too. *rolls his eyes at his own omission*
I disagree. I think that was precisely why the letter was written. Why else bother? Anglicans not distressed by the current developments don't pay much attention to the Pope anyway!
Peregrinus,
But if that's true, so what? What does the letter do or say that specifically speaks to them such that they'd care? Oh, there are some Catholics that think like we do, thus our church won't split after all? I'm not sure I see it.
Well, Peregrinus, that's a fair point. :) I'm appalled at myself for going anywhere near a fallacy, much less using it. :)
Then what is the point of the letter, Perry? Why bother writing such a thing to people who are not in the least tempted to take the plunge into the Tiber, since those who sympathise with the sentiments expressed in this (not very) Open Letter are hardly likely to want to become Catholics anyway? As I said, what possible effect could such a letter be expected to have?
Isn't it obvious? He wants to encourage and support them in the path they are taking, viz. the consecrationo f women bishops, and he wants them to know that there are Catholics who hold this view.
Yes, I had heard that about the Universe and the Catholic Times. They're also universally reviled by all sides it seems.
We could get into the politics of participating in the auditing thingimy, questions as to motive are not always fallacious, for example. I'm not sure how the ABC receives its funds; I haven't found that on its website. But the auditing/accrediting organisation to which we belong requires an annual subscription, and it's not cheap by any means. For a small circulation paper, and let's face it all Catholic publications are likely to be small circulation regardless, the cost may seem prohibitive for a benefit deemed unnecessary (especially if your audience is rather "captive" in the narthex, nave or wherever you put the paper). I mean when it's all said and done the ABC's reports are of great use to advertisers as a check to ensure accuracy in circulation figures, among other valid purposes. But advertisers in Catholic papers don't always care about circulation figures per se. Some factors they consider might be editorial strategy, attention to orthodoxy etc. So again, it might simply have been deemed by someone at the Herald oh those ages ago not to be in the slightest necessary due to the cost and lack of benefit for the cost. Dosh out to the door, eh whot?
But all that is somewhat immaterial, I guess. We can go back and forth over niggling details. It seems to me, in the end, David's point is spot on if for no other reason then no Anglicans, of whatever persuasion, seem to have taken any notice, judging from the complete lack of ... well ... taking any notice really.
My inverted commas really went for a walkabouts in that last paragraph. It should just be "quoted in the blogosphere" and the inverted commas should have stayed jolly well put!
Then it shall forever be a point of disagreement between us then. :)
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home