Pope Includes Anglican Orders on List of Issues Written Into Canon Law
Episcopal News Service. September 3, 1998 [98-2221]
(ENS) Pope John Paul II has issued an apostolic letter July 1 that writes into binding canon law his position on a number of key issues and warns that dissenters may be subject to "just punishment."
The pope said that he took the action "to defend the faith of the Catholic Church against errors that arise on the part of some of the faithful, above all those who dedicate themselves to the disciplines of holy theology," a clear warning to theologians who had been pressing for wider discussion of issues such as the ordination of women.
In listing what he defines as essential Catholic beliefs, the pope said that he was establishing norms that "impose the duty to observe the truths."
Accompanying the apostolic letter was a detailed doctrinal commentary by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican's most powerful conservative. Included in the commentary as "infallibly taught" doctrine are issues like sexual relations outside of marriage, euthanasia and the ordination of women but also the declaration by Pope Leo XIII on the "invalidity of Anglican ordinations."
While considerable progress has been made in official dialogue between Anglicans and Roman Catholics, it was clear that Cardinal Ratzinger places reconciliation with Protestant churches low on his list of priorities.
Coming a few weeks before the world's Anglican bishops assemble in Canterbury "touches a pretty tender nerve," the Rev. Francis Sullivan, a Jesuit who teaches theology at Boston College told the New York Times. "The fact that he would include the declaration of invalidity as an example of what is infallibly taught is going to raise a reaction from our Anglican brethren-and from many Catholics."
Early reactions to the apostolic letter varied, ranging from outright anger to more cautious let's-wait-and-see attitude.
Among Roman Catholic theologians, for example, some were calling it "a sad day" while others said the pope was warranted in warning to theologians-especially the Americans who had challenged the Vatican on some doctrinal issues and were crossing some boundaries in expressing themselves.
"I think it will have a chilling effect on theological discourse throughout the Catholic world," Scott Appleby of Notre Dame told the Boston Globe. He worried that the document could be used to curb academic freedom and put pressure on anyone who supports dissenting theologians.
Dr. William Franklin, dean of Berkeley Divinity School at Yale and participant in the official dialogue between Episcopalians and Catholics, could barely suppress his disappointment. And he expressed concern for the Catholic scholars and theologians as they attempt to participate in continuing dialogue. "It shifts the ground of ecumenical dialogue," he said in an interview. "This shuts down the ecumenical methodology of the last 33 years, based on a free scholarly exchange that will no longer be possible."
Franklin added that, "from the Vatican point of view, the apostolic letter brings to an end a hopeful relationship going back to 1965. "We can't avoid looking at this squarely and deciding the consequences for our community."
Even though the apostolic letter caught him and other ecumenical scholars off guard, its timing may actually be an advantage because it will give the meeting of the Anglican bishops in the Lambeth Conference this summer an opportunity to respond. "The bishops must now determine what is possible and chart the next period for Anglican-Roman Catholic relationship. Yet it is clear that it will not be as productive as the last 33 years have been," he said. "It will be the most important ecumenical decision facing Lambeth."
The recognition of Anglican orders "has been the underlying issue of our dialogue all along, the key issue in our progress towards the goal of full communion," Franklin said. "And Roman Catholic scholars have made major creative contributions to those discussions. The Vatican's action will make that "community of scholarship very difficult now-and that will be a loss for both sides."
The Rev. David Perry, the church's ecumenical officer, is convinced that the personal relationships forged over the years of dialogue between the two churches will "sustain us through this difficult time. We are still clearly on path forward, despite the potential detour, in response to our Lord's will that we be one."
Perry and others point out that the Pope's letter is "essentially an interior document so we will need the help of our Roman Catholic dialogue partners to understand the significance and weight, especially of Cardinal Ratzinger's commentary." Until then both he and Presiding Bishop Frank T. Griswold, co-chair of the dialogue with Roman Catholics in this country, are reluctant to comment.
While not minimizing "the difficulties that might be created" because the validity of Anglican orders were on the list, Perry hopes that the "very productive dialogue" so far will continue. And he expressed some eagerness to see how the Lambeth Conference deals with the issue.
Bishop Roger White of Milwaukee said in an interview with the local press that the papal letter appears to be part of "a great retraction" of much of the ecumenical progress during the Second Vatican Council. "I regret that the pope has seen fit to make the Roman Catholic Church look even more closed than it has been," he said.
While recognizing the threat, White said, "One would hope that the door, not only between Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism, but also between the church in the east and the church in the west could remain open."