If the apostates cared about the broader communion they would never have adopted their post christian belief system. Sour grapes from bad people.

once you start talking with Anglicans, the talking never ever stops.

You know, Chris, this may be the most useful observation on the papal action. If certain Anglican groups take this to heart, and follow suit, perhaps the ABC and other “instruments of unity” will have to admit that the “talk till they drop” strategy is moribund.

I’m RC and I’m not embarrassed

I’ll bet nobody he knows voted for Nixon, either.

which says actually I’m happy to see division

Imputing motives to others is usually thought to be bad argumentation and (horrors!) bad form. We’ve heard a lot of libcats and Anglicans – conservative and liberal – forgetting that the pope was approached, repeatedly over years about this. If this prelate doesn’t know that, he’s an idiot; if he does, he’s a liar. In either case, he ought to keep his mouth shut.

I am embarassed … that the simplest concept of truth cannot fit into Richard Cameron’s brain. Why is he not “poaching” Catholics? Especially when some of them are his friends? Why is his archbishop not? They have putative State backing, for Pete’s sake!

I read somewhere that the ABC admitted to a fortnight’s notice.

And you are right, Mr. Johnson, B-16 has plans to implement before Christ returns.

Maybe the liberal Anglicans could understand the urgency if they imagined the injustice of waiting just a few years longer before giving practicing gays full inclusion into every orofice (oops, “office”) of the church.

Notice how this simmering resentment of the Pope’s demarche also manages to coexist with a breezy dismissal that there’s anything very important likely to come of it? This article is typical: http://www.religiousintelligence.co.uk/news/?NewsID=5193 Now that the first shock is wearing away, the stand-patters in Anglicanism are furiously spinning this story, claiming that really, almost nobody is going to take advantage of the chance to move to Rome as a group. Only a few individuals. Maybe they’re right, and all those “pleas” to the Vatican over the years were just some Anglo-”Catholic” drama queens who just liked to hear themselves talk. But I don’t think the Pope is stupid, and he wouldn’t have changed the rules if there was NOTHING to be gained by it. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Much as I greatly appreciate Benedikt’s offer, I’m not likely to take him up on it. That said, I ‘m sick to death by these sneering Leftists. It just confirms to me that he hit the mark.

By the way, I laughed at this headline on an article in Church Report (linked on David Virtue’s site): http://www.thechurchreport.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=siteContent.default&objectID=16303 “Pope to Meet Anglican Chief” Somehow that just sums it all up for me: on the one had you have The Pope…and on the other, some guy dressed up in feathers and a pooka shell necklance, carrying a piece of driftwood.

Yo, Bish Cam, do you remember that Frankie the Grizwold, a former PB of the ECUSA/TEC/alleged “member of the Anglican Communion”, of some notoriety for a certain drama queen he ordained a bishop of somewhere he’s never at under his PBship, had to resign from the ARCIC agreement on Mary before they published the results because Frankie had consulted the POPE before the drama queen’s “ordination”? NOT.

It seems to me that what we’ve got here is basically a case of ecumenical bad manners… There was no consultation whatsoever with the leadership of the Anglican Communion.

Thing is, the Catholic Church teaches that she has the fullness of revealed truth, and that she is the Church Christ founded. Thus, where Anglican (or any other religious) doctrine deviates from Catholic doctrine, they are deficient. If the Church believes this, in a situation that souls are potentially at stake, then they SHOULD be inviting in anybody and everybody. Neither the Pope nor anybody else (Catholic or not) should feel obligated to ask the ABC’s permission to speak what they see at the fullness of truth. What “consultation” should there be? The Vatican gave them a heads-up so they didn’t get caught publicly surprised, but they don’t owe the ABC anything beyond that. This is a Catholic evangelistic effort, and they don’t need the ABC’s permission to do so.

I would expect no less from any group that feels another group’s theology is lacking. I don’t get offended when fundamentalists tell me I’m going to hell for being Catholic. I think they’re wrong, but I don’t take offense. I don’t expect them to “try and keep unity as far as possible in each others Christian world communions” if they think my soul is potentially in danger; it would be cruel of them not to try to convert me.

I’m quite the opposite of “embarrassed;” I’m proud of the move Benedict is making. I’m not proud because he’s reaching out to disgruntled Anglicans; I’m proud that he’s reaching out to non-Catholics. He’s doing what a strong Christian leader should be doing.

I think that the problem is that the Anglicans were consulted but really didn’t pay attention to the warning signs. I recall at almost every step of the way Rome has been throwing gentle warnings that the bold moves of liberal anglicanism were creating difficulty in ecumenical matters. The liberal anglican reply has been to thumb its nose at Rome’s concerns. You can only do that so many times before you fall past the threshold of a Church that Rome needs to give further notice to.

Rome has given years of notice that something like this would eventually be a response. Liberal Anglicanism was just too self absorbed to pay much attention, thinking that there was no bite to go along with the bark.

It seems to me that what we’ve got here is basically a case of ecumenical bad manners.

Ah! The ultimate Anglican sin! Bad Manners are worse than bad theology or sexual abomination. Bad Manners are worse than schism or heresy. Bad Manners are the sin against the Holy Spirit Of The Times, which cannot be forgiven.

“I think there is a sort of unwritten convention between the Christian world communions..”

Ah, but the operative word here is Christian, and since you’re no longer in the club, you’re fair game.

Anglican Humor Alert: We have passed from LEVEL – TRENCHANT to LEVEL – MORDANT.

Maybe we shameless poaching Papists should start getting huffy about Episcopalian sheep-rustling?

I noted from reading the bios of the candidates for the election of the Bishop of Minnesota that we had, out of five candidates, two (possibly, if Bonnie was one) ex-RCs, one with a RC father, and one who quoted Dorothy Day as an influence.

Oh sure, they elected the cradle Episcopalian, but take all the RC connections out of the race, and it’d be left looking like Genpo’s effort! Stop stealing our clergy!

I liked the end of the article, when the Bishop is replying to “Later in the programme Roy Jenkins read a quote from one Anglican Catholic in Wales who is on record questioning the loyalty of the Anglican Communion to some of its members.”:

“And, in spite of what I was saying earlier, I think perhaps a good thing is that at least the Pope is probably giving them a home to be able to go to.’”

So Papa Benny may be rude, but at least he’s giving them a roof over their head.

Cameron is having a hissy fit because the Pope did not consult with the ABC. Why should the Pope consult with the ABC? It is not news that certain Anglican bodies have applied to the Roman Catholic Church to be accepted. Those bodies were not part of the Anglican Communion anyway. So what is there about which to consult?

Besides which, it is sounding more and more that when the actual apostolic Constitution is published that the deal will not look so inviting anyway. So why all the fuss? It is not like the Anglican Communion has been all that good about consulting with Rome whenever one of the AC Provinces is doing a “New Thing”.

Bad manners eh? Well, I supposed that is better than dissident James Carroll who said the pope’s move is a threat to the whole human race.

They just want to be considered relevant. They need to realize that AA probably has a higher average weekly attendance than ECUSA, while here in Atlanta my suburban parish is bursting at the seams for 5 masses this weekend.

Of course, at an AA meeting, the serenity prayer has more sincerity and theology than most bleatings from an Episcopalian pulpit.

Allen Lewis makes a good point. Rereading the Roman offer, I note it refers to ‘former Anglicans’ implying that the offer is primarily addressed to TAC and any other ‘Continuing’ spin-offs from the Anglican communion who wish to take advantage. Are some people wetting their knickers over nothing?

Daniel Muller: the diocese of St Asaph is part of the Church in Wales, which is disestablished and over which the ABC has no jurisdiction. It has refused to continue the provision of a bishop to oversee Anglo-Catholic parishes, so hasn’t a leg to stand on in criticising B XVI.

“There was no consultation whatsoever with the leadership of the Anglican Communion.”

What is this “leadership” of which he speaks??

the diocese of St Asaph is part of the Church in Wales, which is disestablished

Whoops, good catch. But all the more reason to save the souls of those backwards Catholics in a free market of ideas in which those of the Church of Wales are clearly more advanced, n’est-ce pas? My advice remains the same: quit whining and start “poaching” yourself!

Duane gets my award for comment of the thread:

Of course, at an AA meeting, the serenity prayer has more sincerity and theology than most bleatings from an Episcopalian pulpit.

I have been a vistor at three or so AA meetings, attending with friends. I would agree that there was more sincerity and theology AND reverence than from multiple TEC pulpits I’ve witnessed.

I also give the Pope credit for giving a home to the disenfranchised – the homeless so to speak. TEC is more like our current financial system – sue the hurting out of their home – no roof over your head – tough. While you’re left to suffer, I’ll just sit back in my hot tub and sip my sherry/scotch/whatever paid by your sacrifice.

I recall a church service in 1987 when a large group of Evangelicals entered the Orthodox Church. At the time I commented to an Orthodox priest connected with those congregations that they had really taken action with respect to the Orthodox where the Anglicans had simply had inconclusive chit-chat for a hundred years. He sighed and said “Yeah, the Episcopalians. On the pot and never deciding what they’ll do”. When someone actually does something, it offends those who don’t. Anglicans aren’t supposed to make up their minds except on topics like gay marriage, and then only to approve. To leave the orgy is simply impolite. To be astonished that the Pope didn’t “Consult” the Anglican non-leader in advance? Some times you get tired of waiting for people to take their thumb out.

Here is an update. http://transfigurations.blogspot.com/2009/11/vatican-issues-clarification-of.html

Hat tip: Transfigurations

“Consultation? Mutual respect? Bishop, how long did you “consult” with the Roman Catholic Church before you decided to ordain women? How much respect did you display when the Episcopalians unilaterally changed 2,000 years of Christian teaching and the Communion decided to never do anything about it.”

Chris, you read my mind.

-Cameron has a lot of gall to say what he did. If he had any shame, he would just SHUT UP!

Spot-on, Chris.

Didn’t I recently read an article on how the Diocese of St Asaph was closing down many churches due to lack of attendance? Does it occur to the good bishop that it may be the the poor quality of his product and not the predations of his competitors that has brought his organization to this pass?

If more folks buy Toyotas than Oldsmobiles (R.I.P), isn’t it valid to attribute that success to Toyota’s providing greater satisfaction rather than to unethical ‘poaching’ of customers?

Tut, tut. Terribly bad form, Bennie old boy… May have to discuss this at the next meeting of the club’s membership committee. Care for more tea?

What kills me is that this isn’t even a particularly aggressive move. “Poaching” and “sheep-stealing” would seem to me to involve, you know, showing up at people’s houses with the Elite Apologetics Crusaders or offering them cash and valuable prizes to convert.

People have tried sheep-stealing on me. It involved lying to me about where a party was being held (and that it was not a party but an evangelical event), isolating me from everybody I knew at this ‘party’, and then trying to get me to admit that I wasn’t even Christian so that they could convert me away from being a godless pagan Catholic. Very similar to one of those “free” real estate seminars, really.

So it amuses me that anyone would even bother to complain about what the Pope is doing. “We’ll set you up in an ordinariate where you’ll have a chance to live out your part of the Christian tradition, in whatever way doesn’t conflict with the Church’s rules and obedience to the Pope” is not exactly giving people cookies and beer. It’s total free will. It’s offered to everyone who wants to take it. It’s giving people a nice chance to be Catholic in their own way, but that’s all. If people want cookies and beer, they’ll have to make their own. (Which is fine with most people.)

“cash and valuable prizes to convert.”

I like it! Everyone who receives first Communion at Easter vigil has his name put in a hat. Winner gets a pimped-out 2011 Popemobile.

It involved lying to me about where a party was being held (and that it was not a party but an evangelical event)

I never get invited to those parties

This is through the looking glass stuff. The Pope is “happy to see division,” and he’s showing that by creating a mechanism for bringing splinter groups back into the larger Church. Greg Cameron, on the other hand, is interested in unity, and we know that because he advocates all the churches staying separate.

I never cease to be amazed at the vacuity of name-brand Anglican discourse.

[...] GOOD MANNERS TRUMP TRUTH– “Add Gregory Cameron, the Anglican Bishop of St. Asaph, to that long list of Anglicans [...]