III.
ARCIC and the Lambeth Commission
21. The theological conversations of ARCIC I
and II have explored areas which have a bearing on the current situation
in the Anglican Communion. ARCIC's Agreed Statements hold differing
degrees of authority. The official responses of both Communions
to the work of ARCIC I recognized 'substantial agreement' or 'significant
convergence' in the areas treated in its Agreed Statements. The
Agreed Statements of ARCIC II have not received official responses
on the level of our two Communions. However, the Anglican and Roman
Catholic bishops gathered at Mississauga in May 2000 were able to
point to all the documents and note 'the very impressive degree
of agreement in faith that already exists'.24
Such recognition would seem to imply that actions or decisions taken
by either Communion, which touch the communion of the Church, necessarily
have implications for the other. Moreover, how each Communion acts
either gives credibility to what has been agreed in our theological
dialogue or calls that agreement into question. How we act also
confirms, or denies, something about the sort of life we look to
live together in the future and indicates the seriousness, or lack
of seriousness, of our intention to move together in conformity
with what has been agreed.
22. We believe that the theological Agreed Statements
have insights to offer in interpreting the current situation and
may even help to suggest a possible way forward. We would group
these insights under five headings, as follows:
A. the nature of the Church as communion;
B. the constitutive elements of communion, the episcopal office,
unity and diversity in ecclesial communion, and the relation between
local churches and the universal Church;
C. discernment in the communion of the Church, authority and the
use of Scripture and Tradition;
D. the qualities and obligations of life in communion;
E. morals and discerning in communion.
A. The nature of the Church as communion
23. The understanding of the Church as communion
is fundamental to all of the work of ARCIC - 'union with God in
Christ Jesus through the Spirit is the heart of Christian koinonia'
(Final Report, Introduction, "). 'God wants his people to
be in communion with him and with each other' (Church as Communion,
7). This communion thus embraces 'both the visible gathering of
God's people and its divine life-giving source' (Church as Communion,
3). These two aspects of the nature and life of the Church must
never be divorced. The Final Report goes on to talk of the
eucharist as the effectual sign of koinonia, episcope
as serving koinonia, and primacy as its link and focus
(Introduction, 6).
24. Church as Communion is ARCIC's fullest
treatment of the theme of koinonia, and notes in its conclusion
that 'our two Communions agree in their understanding of the Church
as communion' ("6). The report expands upon the nature of
communion and sees how that notion is unfolded in Scripture. The
Church, as the body of those baptized into the life and love of
God, is the communion of believers called to be an effective sign,
in and for the world, of all God intends for the whole of humanity.
It is also an instrument of salvation and in its life, here and
now, we are given a foretaste of the life God intends for all. It
is inadequate to speak only of an invisible communion.
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 realization 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). Church as Communion notes:
For all the local churches to be together in communion,
the one visible communion which God wills, it is required that
all the essential constitutive elements of ecclesial communion
are present and mutually recognized in each of them. Thus the
visible communion between these churches is complete and their
ministers are in communion with each other. (43)
The
text proceeds to describe what constitutes ecclesial communion:
It is rooted in the confession of the one apostolic faith, revealed
in the Scriptures and set forth in the Creeds. It is founded upon
one baptism. The one celebration of the eucharist is its pre-eminent
expression and focus. It necessarily finds expression in shared
commitment to the mission entrusted by Christ to his Church….
Also constitutive of life in communion is acceptance of the same
basic moral values, the sharing of the same vision of humanity
created in the image of God and recreated in Christ and the common
confession of the one hope in the final consummation of the Kingdom
of God. (4")
The
text goes on to state that the ministry of oversight, the fullness
of which is entrusted to the episcopate, is needed to maintain and
express the Church's unity and to hold together believers in the
communion of the local church in the communion of all the churches.
'This ministry of oversight has both collegial and primatial dimensions….
It is exercised so that unity and communion are expressed, preserved
and fostered at every level - locally, regionally and universally.'
It is precisely within the context of the communion of all the churches
that 'the Episcopal ministry of a universal primate finds its role
as visible focus of unity' (4").
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, "). 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).
27. ARCIC sees the mission of the local church
as being held within the mission of the universal Church. Authority
I notes that 'koinonia is realized not only in the local
Christian communities, but also in the communion of these communities
with one another' (8). The text goes on to state:
A local church cannot be truly faithful to Christ if it does not
desire to foster universal communion, the embodiment of that unity
for which Christ prayed…. Every local church must therefore ever
seek a deeper understanding and clearer expression of this common
faith, both of which are threatened when churches are isolated
by division.' (Authority I, 13)
Each
bishop, in communion with all other bishops, is responsible to preserve
and express the larger koinonia of the church, and 'participates
in the care of all the churches' (Gift, 39). The bishop is
therefore 'both a voice for the local church and one through whom
the local church learns from other churches' (Gift, 38).
By means of communion among the bishops, 'the whole Church is made
aware of the perceptions and concerns of the local churches: at
the same time the local churches are enabled to maintain their place
and particular character within the communion of all the churches'
(Church as Communion, 33). Authority I (") had already
affirmed the 'mutual responsibility and interdependence' of all
who minister in the Church, and Gift of Authority underlines
more deeply the same notion in speaking of the role played by the
college of bishops in maintaining the unity of the Church - a topic
which will be further addressed in the forthcoming section (29ff)
on discernment:
'The mutual interdependence of all the churches is integral to
the reality of the Church as God wills it to be. No local church
that participates in the living Tradition can regard itself as
self-sufficient.... The ministry of the bishop is crucial, for
his ministry serves communion within and among local churches.
Their communion with each other is expressed through the incorporation
of each bishop into a college of bishops. Bishops are, both personally
and collegially, at the service of the communion …' (Gift,
37).
28. While communion with other local churches
safeguards the Church's unity and catholicity, this is not to result
in a narrow uniformity. The challenge and responsibility of bishops
in this regard is 'so to exercise their ministry that they promote
the unity of the whole Church in faith and life in a way that enriches
rather than diminishes the legitimate diversity of local churches'
(Gift of Authority, 33). A diversity of traditions, faithful
to the Word revealed in Jesus Christ, is indeed 'the practical manifestation
of catholicity and confirms rather than contradicts the vigor of
Tradition' (Gift, 27). Church as Communion speaks
of a legitimate diversity in liturgies and forms of spirituality,
in ways of exercising authority and canonical structure, in theological
approaches, and in diverse theological expressions of the same doctrine
(36, 43). The text notes: 'These varieties complement one another,
showing that, as the result of communion with God in Christ, diversity
does not lead to division; on the contrary, it serves to bring glory
to God for the munificence of his gifts' (36). The text proceeds
to speak about the framework within which that diversity is held
together, including a reference to a common ministry of oversight:
Amid all the diversity that the catholicity intended by God implies,
the Church's unity and coherence are maintained by the common
confession of the one apostolic faith, a shared sacramental life,
a common ministry of oversight and joint ways of reaching decisions
and giving authoritative teaching. (39)
-
From
the perspective of ARCIC's understanding of the episcopate,
we conclude that the collegiality of bishops is seriously
affected if the majority of bishops in the Anglican Communion
will neither receive nor recognise the ministry of the
Bishop of New Hampshire.
-
How
can a bishop whose ordination made him a cause of controversy
(leading others to break communion with him and with those
who consecrated him) represent the local community in
the councils of the Church? How can he mediate the unity
of the universal Church to his diocese when he is at odds
with large segments of the universal church, the latter
arguing that he has departed from the moral teaching of
the apostolic faith?
-
Does
not this situation damage both the communion of the local
church of New Hampshire and the communion of the diocese
of New Hampshire with all churches in the Anglican Communion?
|
C. Discernment in the communion of the Church, authority and the
use of Scripture and Tradition
29. Church as Communion notes that tensions
are inevitable in the life of the Church.
Some are creative tensions, others are not: Some may cause a loss
of continuity with apostolic Tradition, disruption within the
community, estrangement from other parts of the Church. Within
the history of Christianity, some diversities have become differences
that have led to such conflict that ecclesial communion has been
severed. Whenever differences become embodied in separated ecclesial
communities, so that Christians are no longer able to receive
and pass on the truth within the one community of faith, communion
is impoverished and the living memory of the Church is affected.
(30)
Amid
internal tension and conflict, it is the Church's task to 'distinguish
between tolerable and intolerable diversity in the expression of
the apostolic faith'. Church as Communion adds that 'in the
area of life and practice the Church has to discover what is constructive
and what is disruptive of its own communion' (40).
30. These evocative citations serve to highlight
the decisive importance of discernment, most especially when the
unity of the communion is at stake. This sub-commission's reflections
on ARCIC's understanding of Christian discernment are offered mindful
of the discernment process with which the Anglican Communion and
its churches are currently engaged.25
Our reflections also have in mind the New Hampshire consecration,
which was itself the result of processes of discernment on the diocesan
and provincial levels. The Diocese of New Hampshire issued a statement
noting that they 'faithfully and prayerfully considered and followed
a Spirit-led process' in their election of a new bishop.26
As we have already seen, these processes of discernment all have
broad ecclesiological implications, and with these in mind we turn
to what ARCIC has to say about the nature of discernment in communion.
31. In the Elucidation of Authority I,
ARCIC notes that in all it says, it takes for granted two fundamental
principles: 'that Christian faith depends on divine revelation and
that the Holy Spirit guides the Church in the understanding and
transmission of revealed truth' (1). All Christian discernment has
as its foundational reference point God's revelation in Christ,
who 'sums up in himself the whole of God's self-disclosure' (Authority
I, Elucidation, 2). Christian discernment is therefore always
a seeking of the guidance of the Holy Spirit, a discerning of the
mind of Christ, an attentiveness to how God speaks into a particular
situation. This discernment is not principally a matter of subjective
insight; it is done in communion, recognizing the objectivity and
givenness of the Word that addresses us.
32. Scripture and Tradition play foundational
roles in Christian discernment. The fullness of revelation manifest
in Jesus Christ is mediated to the Church of subsequent generations
by the apostolic community's reception of that revelation, as recorded
in the New Testament. The Commission states clearly and strongly
the place and authority of the Scriptures: 'Scriptures are the uniquely
inspired witness to divine revelation' (Authority I Elucidation
n. 2). Within Tradition the Scriptures occupy a 'normative place'
and are 'uniquely authoritative'; the Church is 'constantly to measure
its teaching, preaching and action' against the Scriptures (Gift,
19). In ARCIC's understanding, Scripture and Tradition are indelibly
bound together. Scripture arises from the living proclamation of
the Church and the formation of the Canon takes place within it
(Gift, 22). However, every generation needs 'prophetically
to translate' the Gospel (Authority I, 1"). 'Tradition is
a dynamic process, communicating to each generation what was delivered
once for all to the apostolic community. Tradition is far more than
the transmission of true propositions concerning salvation' (Gift,
14). The handing on involves stating the Gospel message in new ways.
Yet all such restatement 'must be consonant with the apostolic witness
recorded in the Scriptures' (Authority I, 1"). Finally, the
Gospel 'is fully understood only within the Church. God's revelation
has been entrusted to a community.' Hence, individualistic interpretation
of the Scriptures is 'incompatible with the nature of the authority
of the revealed Word of God. Word of God and Church of God cannot
be put asunder' (Gift, 23).
33. ARCIC understands bishops as having a vital
role in the process of discernment, bearing 'a special responsibility
for promoting truth and discerning error' (Authority I, 18)
and for preserving and promoting communion; but this is never exercised
apart from the whole body of the faithful. The 'interaction of bishop
and people' in this exercise of discernment and teaching 'is a safeguard
of Christian life and fidelity' (Authority I, 18). Church
as Communion reflects on this interaction, noting:
In responding to the insights of the community, and of the individual
Christian, whose conscience is also molded by the same Spirit,
those exercising oversight seek to discern what is the mind of
Christ. Discernment involves both heeding and sifting in order
to assist the people of God in understanding, articulating and
applying their faith. (32)
The
Gift of Authority develops this further by emphasizing the role
of the whole people of God as bearers of the living tradition: discernment
is the duty of all, together in communion. Each Christian who is
seeking to follow Christ and who is incorporated into the life of
the Church has a sense of faith, and 'when this capacity is exercised
in concert by the body of the faithful we may speak of the exercise
of the sensus fidelium' (Gift, 29; cf. Authority
I Elucidation, 3-4). The Church is like a symphony in which
all have a part to play; all are walking together on the way. 'Consulting
the faithful is an aspect of episcopal oversight' (Gift,
38).
34. ARCIC texts also reflect on the decisive
role of the college of bishops and synodal and collegial structures
in the Church's discernment.
'When bishops take counsel together they seek both to discern
and to articulate the sensus fidelium as it is present
in the local church and in the wider communion of churches. Their
role is magisterial: that is, in this communion of the churches,
they are to determine what is to be taught as faithful to the
apostolic Tradition.'(Gift, 38)
The
teaching office, which 'is not above the Word of God but serves
it' (Gift cites Dei Verbum, n. 10), is exercised in
communion. As Gift of Authority puts it: 'the authenticity
of the teaching of individual bishops is evident when this teaching
is in solidarity with that of the whole episcopal college. The exercise
of this teaching authority requires that what it teaches be faithful
to Holy Scripture and consistent with apostolic Tradition' (Gift,
44). Both personally and collegially, bishops are to be concerned
with synodality 'in all its expressions':
These expressions have included a wide variety of organs, instruments
and institutions, notably synods or councils, local, provincial,
worldwide, ecumenical. The maintenance of communion requires that
at every level there is a capacity to take decisions appropriate
to that level. When those decisions raise serious questions for
the wider communion of churches, synodality must find a wider
expression. (Gift, 37; cf Church as Communion, 4";
Authority I, 16)
When
a discernment process issues forth in authoritative teaching, an
important role is also played by the reception of this teaching
by the faithful as an authentic expression of the apostolic faith.
Particularly in challenging situations, or when contradictory interpretations
of Scripture or Tradition are proposed, Christian discernment in
the Church requires the participation of the whole body of believers,
not only of those charged with the ministry of memory and teaching
(Gift, 43). The people of God must be able to recognize that
what is presented as authoritative teaching expresses the apostolic
faith and operates within the truth of Christ, the Head of the Church.
In the formulation of Authority I Elucidation (3), reception
'does not create truth nor legitimize the decision', but 'is the
final indication that such a decision has fulfilled the necessary
conditions for it to be a true expression of the faith' (cf Authority
I, 6, 16; Church as Communion, 32).
35. Finally, ARCIC also touches briefly on the
role of the bishop of a principal see in the Church's discernment,
reflects at length on a universal primacy which would serve the
koinonia of the Church, and invites cooperation between our
churches in discernment.
- Authority
I notes that it is the duty of a bishop of a principal see
to assist the bishops of his region to promote right teaching,
unity and the Church's mission. 'When he perceives a serious deficiency
in the life or mission of one of the churches he is bound, if
necessary, to call the local bishop's attention to it and to offer
assistance' (Authority I, 11).
- Regarding
a universal primacy, what Authority I notes is that 'if
God's will for the unity in love and truth of the whole Christian
community is to be fulfilled, this general pattern of the complementary
primatial and conciliar aspects of episkope serving the
koinonia of the churches needs to be realized at the universal
level (23; cf. Gift, 46). While our two Communions haven't
yet reached full consensus on a universal primacy, ARCIC has explored
this subject intermittently for thirty years, and its reflections
are an integral part of its reflection on discernment. The
Gift of Authority envisioned a primacy which would help to
'uphold the legitimate diversity of traditions, strengthening
and safeguarding them in fidelity to the Gospel' (Gift,
60; cf. 47).
- Regarding
consultation between our two Communions, Gift of Authority
noted: 'For the sake of koinonia and a united Christian
witness to the world, Anglican and Roman Catholic bishops should
find ways of cooperating and developing relationships of mutual
accountability in their exercise of oversight' ("8). We see the
invitation for this sub-commission to offer these reflections
as a valuable example of the latter.
ARCIC's
thorough treatment of discernment within the Church offers various
insights to the Anglican Communion in its current discernment process,
and raises numerous questions, among which we would highlight the
following:
ARCIC
is clear about the normative role of Scripture within the
Tradition of the Church and the need to have recourse to Scripture
and Tradition in discerning the will of Christ. The teaching
of the Anglican Communion on the issue of homosexuality is
set forth in Resolution 1.10 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference.
Roman Catholic teaching is stated in the Catechism of the
Catholic Church (nn. 23"7-"9). Both see their conclusions
as grounded in Scripture and Tradition. While in recent times
differing interpretations of Scripture have emerged with regard
to the issue of homosexuality, the traditional teaching continues
to be upheld by our two Communions. In this context, should
there not be restraint within Anglican Provinces while together
in the communion of the Church we seek the guidance of the
Holy Spirit regarding issues facing us?
|
ARCIC
holds that the maintenance of communion requires that decisions
which raise questions for the wider communion of churches be
addressed in appropriately wide synodal structures and processes.
- Should
the decision to ordain a priest in a committed same sex
relationship for the office and work of a bishop be taken
in a local or regional church when the matter is considered
to touch the moral life of the whole Church?
- The
fact that the New Hampshire Consecration took place in opposition
to Resolution 1.10 passed by the bishops at the Lambeth
Conference, to Resolution 34 of ACC 12, to the statement
of the Primates' Meeting in October 2003, and to a public
statement of the Archbishop of Canterbury, would seem to
call into question the processes of discernment in communion,
and in particular the place of the episcopate and the ministry
of primacy in their respective responsibilities for the
maintenance of unity in the Anglican Communion. When individual
dioceses and provinces act autonomously against the recommendations
of the Communion's instruments of unity, at what cost is
this done?
- How
can these instruments of unity more effectively serve and
safeguard the koinonia of the Anglican Communion?
- How
can the effective governance of the Church on diocesan and
provincial levels be complemented by collegial and primatial
structures in such a way that the unity of the Anglican
Communion is creatively maintained in the Apostolic faith
and not under recurring threat of dissolution?
|
Alongside
these questions, those posed to the Anglican Communion at the end
of The Gift of
Authority
about authority and decision-making in the life of the Church
seem particularly pertinent:
Is
the Communion open to the acceptance of instruments of oversight
which would allow decisions to be reached that, in certain
circumstances, would bind the whole Church? When new questions
arise which, in fidelity to Scripture and Tradition, require
a united response, will these structures assist Anglicans
to participate in the sensus fidelium with all Christians?
To what extent does unilateral action by provinces or dioceses
in matters concerning the whole Church, even after consultation
has taken place, weaken koinonia? (Gift, "6) 27
|
D. The qualities and obligations of communion
36. Church as Communion also stresses
that our koinonia is a participation in the life and love
of the Trinity, and must therefore be modeled on and grounded in
the love which is at the heart of the divine life (1"). 'It is a
life of shared concern for one another in mutual forbearance, submission,
gentleness and love; in the placing of interests of others above
the interests of self; in making room for each other in the body
of Christ…'(4"). It includes a sharing in one another's joys and
sorrows, a common responsibility for maintaining unity and peace,
and a mutual giving and receiving of gifts because of the fellowship
that exists in Christ.
E. Morals and discerning in communion
37. In its 1994 Agreed Statement Life in
Christ: Morals, Communion and the Church, ARCIC addressed the
Church's moral teaching. In this context, the Commission briefly
touched upon the question of homosexual relationships, affirming
a significant degree of common teaching,28
while also drawing attention to remaining differences in Anglican
and Roman Catholic approaches.29
We are mindful that our sub-commission has not been asked to reflect
directly on questions pertaining to human sexuality, but rather,
to address the ecclesiological implications arising from the recent
developments in the Anglican Communion in light of the work of ARCIC.
In what follows, we draw attention to three themes in ARCIC's work
on morals which complement the topics presented in our previous
sections on koinonia and discernment. They are:
a)
the relationship that ARCIC sees between communion and the process
of moral judgement;
b)
the foundational moral positions that are held in common by Anglicans
and Roman Catholics and an understanding of the factors that have
led to divergences between us on certain matters;
c)
the mutually felt need for common study, consultation and common
witness on moral questions.
The
relevance of these three themes to the debate about homosexuality
is evident.
38. First, the subtitle of Life in Christ,
namely 'Morals, Communion and the Church', reflects the close
relationship upheld by ARCIC between morals and the communion of
the Church. The text begins by noting that Church doctrines and
morals are closely inter-connected (2), and that 'authentic Christian
unity is as much a matter of life as of faith' (Co-Chair's Preface).
The Preface reiterates the statement made in Church as Communion
(4") that 'acceptance of the same basic moral values' and 'the
sharing of the same vision of humanity created in the image of God
and re-created in Christ' are constitutive elements of ecclesial
communion. The text (3) notes that our koinonia determines
'both the structure of the moral order and the method of the Church's
discernment and response':
Life in Christ is a life of communion.... (C)ommunion means that
members of the Church share a responsibility for discerning the
action of the Spirit in the contemporary world, for shaping a
truly human response, and for resolving the ensuing moral perplexities
with integrity and fidelity to the Gospel. (96- 97)
39. Secondly, Life in Christ reflects upon the
common foundations that Anglicans and Roman Catholics share on moral
questions, but also identifies divergences on particular issues,
and explores underlying reasons for those divergences. Regarding
common foundations, the text notes that both Anglicans and Roman
Catholics 'appeal to a shared tradition' and 'recognize the same
Scriptures as normative of that tradition', respecting the role
of reason in moral discernment (102). We derive from that common
heritage a shared vision of human nature and destiny fulfilled in
Christ, upholding the same fundamental moral values and identifying
common general principles for discerning the mind of Christ on moral
questions (1, 12, 23-32, 96). Our centuries of separation led to
a breakdown in communication and to developments in our moral teachings
and practices 'in isolation from each other' (88; cf. 89); the resulting
differences, however, are not on the level of fundamental moral
values, but on their application or implementation in practical
judgments (37, 83, 84, 86, 88, 96). Reflecting on these differences,
Life in Christ notes divergent views on the way in which
authority on moral matters 'is most fruitfully exercised and the
common good best promoted' (49):
Anglicans affirm that authority needs to be dispersed rather than
centralized, that the common good is better served by allowing
to individual Christians the greatest possible liberty of informed
moral judgment, and that therefore official moral teaching should
as far as possible be commendatory rather than prescriptive and
binding. Roman Catholics, on the other hand, have, for the sake
of the common good, emphasized the need for a central authority
to preserve unity and to give clear and binding teaching. (49;
cf. "2)
Could
it not be that, in our drawing together, we can learn from one another
and take advantage of the complementary value of both these factors
of moral discernment?
40. Thirdly, Life in Christ proposes
that steps should be taken even at the present stage of our journey
towards unity in view of dealing together with moral issues. It
argues for the importance of such a shared approach from the need
to give common witness to the world. 'The urgency of the times and
the perplexity of the human condition demand that (our two Communions)
now do all they can to come together to provide a common witness
and guidance for the well-being of humankind and the good of the
whole creation' (88). The final section of the text, entitled 'Towards
moral integrity and full communion', draws helpful connections between
the desire of Anglicans and Roman Catholics for full communion and
the desire to resolve our differences on certain moral teachings,
noting concisely that the integrity of our moral response requires
a movement towards full communion (99ff; 3). After highlighting
the benefits of further exchange between our two traditions on moral
questions, the Agreed Statement concludes by proposing that 'steps
should be taken to establish further instruments of co-operation
between our two Communions at all levels of church life (especially
national and regional), to engage with the serious moral issues
confronting humanity today' (103). Such co-operation would be 'a
practical way of expressing the communion we already enjoy, of moving
towards full communion, and of understanding more clearly what it
entails; without such collaboration we run the risk of increasing
divergence' (104).
41. ARCIC's proposal for a communion-seeking
approach to moral matters by Anglicans and Roman Catholics has,
unfortunately, had limited fulfilment The degree of communion that
exists between us has, indeed, been put at risk by both our churches
when they have made statements, or acted, on matters that affect
communion without taking the other into due consideration. The bishops
gathered at Mississauga in May 2000 took up this issue again. They
expressed the hope that their Action Plan would in future promote
collegiality through various means, including 'examining ways of
ensuring formal consultation prior to one Church making decisions
on matters of faith and morals which would affect the other Church,
keeping in view the agreed statements of ARCIC.'
The
decision of an Anglican diocese and province to consecrate as
bishop a priest who is in a same-sex relationship seems to us
to call into question the criteria for moral discernment that
we have found in the ARCIC agreed statement on moral matters.
Specifically we ask:
- Has
the decision given sufficient weight to the commonly-held
belief, shared by ARCIC, that teaching on homosexuality
touches those basic moral values' about which agreement
is needed in order to establish and preserve communion;
and that consequently significant decisions about it should
be taken only with the agreement of those who are in communion
with each other?
- When
moral discernment on an issue that matters for communion
is undertaken by one part of the Anglican Communion independently
of the rest of the Communion, and actions are taken on the
basis of that discernment, are not the same kind of fractures
of communion that have occurred, and still exist, between
Anglicans and Roman Catholics liable to occur within the
Anglican Communion?
- When
such decisions are made by one part of the Anglican Communion
with little attentiveness to the ecumenical relationships
of their Communion with other churches and Christian bodies,
is there not an undermining of the movement towards restoration
of full communion to which the churches are committed, and
does not there occur by default a serious diminishment of
what our relations and our dialogue have already achieved?
- Could
not the Anglican Communion, as it struggles with this issue,
offer a model of how moral discernment might be done, in
communion, in a way that takes full advantage of the grace
that communion brings to such endeavour?
|
F. Conclusion
42. There is an immense amount to be grateful
for in the recent developments within Anglican-Roman Catholic relations.
Our international commissions have produced valuable work and have
given us reasons for hope. Relations between Archbishops of Canterbury
and the Holy See have grown and deepened. There are an impressive
number of instruments for theological dialogue, maintaining communication,
and fostering relations between Anglicans and Roman Catholics -
reminders of how deeply our relationship has evolved over the past
decades. What we have achieved and the hope this has given rise
to accentuate the pain and awkwardness of the current situation
for us.
43. One concern which has motivated us is the
desire to preserve that which has been gained through our theological
dialogue. That is why in writing this report we have particularly
wished to show the ways in which we have together articulated our
understanding of communion and the dynamics and structures which
nurture and sustain it. Communion is simultaneously both a gift
and a calling; it makes demands. All through its history, by God's
grace, the Church has been striving to bear witness to this gift
and respond to the calling, and to accept its demands. The living
of communion in history requires an effective way of dealing with
new and difficult issues, so as to be able to continue to live and
grow together. This applies both within the Roman Catholic Church
and the Anglican Communion, respectively, and it applies also between
us as we make every effort to grow closer in our life and witness,
in search of the unity which we believe is the will of Christ.
44. We have tried to show how the decision of
the Episcopal Church USA to proceed with the recent consecration
despite sustained strong opposition from large segments of the Anglican
Communion calls into question significant portions of our agreed
statements on authority and ecclesiology: the nature of ecclesial
communion; the mutual interdependence of churches; the role of episcopal
and collegial authority in maintaining the unity of the communion;
the process of discernment in the communion of the Church, and the
decisive role of Scripture and Tradition therein. This decision
also challenges our mutual claim that we uphold a shared vision
of human nature and the same fundamental moral values.
45. We believe that interdependence is of the
essence of communion. It causes us concern that the New Hampshire
consecration went ahead contrary to the resolutions and requests
of the Anglican instruments of unity. Archbishop Runcie's warning
of the need to confront the 'shibboleth of autonomy' and choose
between independence and interdependence has taken on a new urgency
in the light of recent events. The new obstacles which have arisen
need to be addressed in the strength of our increasingly shared
understanding of the apostolic tradition, and with a great resolve
born of the profound conviction that communion matters crucially;
it is what the world most needs and what the Church empowered by
the Holy Spirit (2 Cor 13:13) is charged to show forth and minister.
46. If Anglican Dioceses or provinces were to
embrace the notion of a "local option" for important decisions about
the teaching of the Church in matters of faith and morals, and if
bonds of communion were weakened in the direction of a federation
of autonomous provinces rather than a relationship of mutual responsibility
and interdependence, then our consensus on the ecclesiology of communion
would be seriously undermined, and perhaps irreparably damaged.
A federal arrangement cannot adequately express the profound link
between the visible gathering of God's people and its life giving
source, and is a pale shadow of a proper ecclesiology of communion.
47. We have also sought to show that ARCIC's
statements on koinonia and discernment in communion are consistent
with and find a clear echo in recent Anglican (and Roman Catholic)
ecclesiological statements, and are consonant with developments
within the Anglican Communion concerning the four instruments of
unity. They are also grounded in 'the ancient common traditions'
as we saw these developing in the 4th century.
48. In reflecting on the effect of decisions
in the Diocese of New Westminster and the Episcopal Church USA on
the communion that Anglicans and Roman Catholics already share,
we have taken seriously the following concerns raised frankly by
representatives of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian
Unity in recent discussions with leaders of the Anglican Communion:
Unitatis
redintegratio n. 13 singles out the Anglican Communion as
occupying a special place among Churches and Ecclesial
Communities with roots in the 16th c. Reformation.
On that presumption we have proceeded to maintain relations at
the highest level possible. Even at difficult moments in the past
we have not sought to downgrade our relations, and do not seek
to do so now.
But in the same breath, we must add: the current decisions you
face are of monumental ecclesiological importance.... Clearly
the ecclesiological decisions you make will be a decisive factor
in determining the shape of our future relations. As we see it,
the kind of answer you will give to the current situation will
tell us what kind of communion you are.
It is profoundly worrisome that the term communion needs increasingly
to be qualified by the adjectives impaired and broken,
and that ecclesiological anomalies threaten to pile up as means
of responding to tensions within Anglican provinces.... Decisive
in this regard, if the term 'communion' is still to be meaningfully
applied, is the interpretation given to the autonomy of the Anglican
provinces, and the parameters of that autonomy.
If you choose to strengthen the authority structures and instruments
of unity within the Anglican Communion and find an effective means
of addressing the tendency towards divergence on matters of faith
and doctrine, we would clearly see this as enhancing the possibility
of meaningful and fruitful dialogue in the search for Christian
unity, and of an increasing commitment to shared witness and mission.
It is our overwhelming desire that the Anglican Communion stays
together, rooted in the historic faith which our dialogue and
relations over four decades have led us to believe that we share
to a large degree.
49. The members of this sub-commission are conscious
of how many Christians and others are watching the Anglican Communion,
to see how it responds to its difficulties. We hope that these reflections,
rooted in the work of our theological dialogue commission, will
assist your discernment process as you seek the mind of Christ.
We find it a hopeful sign that this small group was invited to comment
on recent events in the light of the work of ARCIC. We hope that
the work of IARCCUM will soon be resumed and that the Commission
will be able to carry out its mandate of fostering the reception
of the work of ARCIC and finding means of giving tangible expression
in our ecclesial lives to the level of faith we share. We accompany
the work of the Lambeth Commission with our heartfelt prayers.
50. Church as Communion notes that 'the
closer we draw together the more acutely we feel those differences
which remain', words which resonate strongly for us and for many
who, over the past decades, have worked and prayed for closer relations
between us. The text closes with a word of encouragement and an
invitation to persevere in our pursuit of that unity to which God
is calling us:
The forbearance and generosity with which we seek to resolve these
remaining differences will testify to the character of the fuller
communion for which we strive. Together with all Christians, Anglicans
and Roman Catholics are called by God to continue to pursue the
goal of complete communion of faith and sacramental life. This
call we must obey until all come into the fullness of that Divine
Presence, to whom Father, Son and Holy Spirit be ascribed all
honor, thanksgiving and praise to the ages of ages. Amen. ("8)
The
Members of the Ecclesiological Sub-Commission of IARCCUM were:
Anglicans
The
Rt Revd David Beetge - Anglican Co Chair of IARCCUM
The
Rt Revd John Baycroft
Dr
Mary Tanner
The
Revd Canon Gregory Cameron, Anglican Co-Secretary, IARCCUM, ex
officio
Roman
Catholics
The
Revd Peter Cross
The
Revd Dr Paul McPartlan
The
Revd Liam Walsh, OP
The
Revd Canon Donald Bolen, Roman Catholic Co-Secretary, IARCCUM,
ex officio
ENDNOTES
-
Communion
in Mission, n. 4.
Back to text
-
The
'Guide for Ecumenical Partners', issued by the Anglican Communion
Office following the Primates' Meeting of Oct. 15-16, 2003,
anticipated the consequences of the New Hampshire consecration
and spoke of the (forthcoming) discernment process in the
following terms: 'Questions remain about the nature, extent
and duration of this impaired or broken communion. Will a
breach in Communion between two parts of the Anglican Communion
mean a Communion-wide split with each province having to choose
between one side or the other? How will these divisions affect
the relationship of each province with the See of Canterbury
as the center of unity of the Communion?' (Anglican Communion
News Service, October 17, 2003).
Back to text
-
Statement
from the Diocese of New Hampshire, October 17, 2003 (Anglican
Communion News Service 3639). Regarding the discernment process
at the General Synod of the Episcopal Church USA, see the
statement of ECUSA Primate and Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold,
August 8, 2003 (General Convention website).
Back
to text
-
Gift
(53) also takes note of the 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution
which requested the Primates' Meeting to initiate a study
in each province 'on whether effective communion, at all levels,
does not require appropriate instruments, with due safeguards,
not only for legislation, but also for oversight … as well
as on the issue of a universal ministry in the service of
Christian unity' [Resolution III, 8 (h)].
Back
to text
-
Regarding
homosexual relationships, Life in Christ (87) notes:
'Both our communions affirm the importance and significance
of human friendship and affection among men and women, whether
married or single. Both affirm that all persons, including
those of homosexual orientation, are made in the divine image
and share the full dignity of human creatureliness. Both affirm
that a faithful and lifelong marriage between a man and a
woman provides the normative context for a fully sexual relationship.
Both appeal to Scripture and the natural order as the sources
of their teaching on this issue. Both reject, therefore, the
claim sometimes made, that homosexual relationships and married
relationships are morally equivalent, and equally capable
of expressing the right ordering and use of the sexual drive.
Such ordering and use, we believe, are an essential aspect
of life in Christ.
Back
to text
-
'…
our different approach to the formulation of law are relevant
(cf. Para 52). Roman Catholic teaching holds that homosexual
activity is 'intrinsically disordered', and concludes that
it is always objectively wrong. This affects the kind of pastoral
advice that is given to homosexual persons. Anglicans could
agree that such activity is disordered; but there may well
be differences among them in the consequent moral and pastoral
advice they would think it right to offer to those seeking
their counsel and direction' (Life in Christ, 87).
Back
to text
|