Sunday, October 25, 2009

Mary Hunt on the "Theological Scandal" of the Vatican's Luring of Disaffected Anglicans

Catholic feminist theologian Mary Hunt has an incisive commentary published at ReligiousDispatches.org. It’s reprinted in its entirety below.

___________________________________


Vatican’s Come-Hither to Anglicans:
A Theological Scandal


By Mary Hunt
Religious Dispatches
October 22, 2009

While the Catholic Church is touting its warm welcome
to conservative Anglicans, it’s also a simple union
of those who reject gay and women’s ordination.

The Vatican’s new scheme to lure unhappy conservative Anglicans into the fold might have caught the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams off guard, but Catholics are not surprised by anything Rome does to shore up its market share. Conservative clergy, whose opposition to the ordination of women and LGBTQ people motivated them to split from the Anglican Communion, are now welcome to switch to Catholicism.

Let history record this theological scandal for what it is. Touted by Rome as a step forward in ecumenical relations with a cousin communion, it is in fact the joining of two camps united in their rejection of women and queer people as unworthy of religious leadership.

A forthcoming Apostolic Constitution will spell out the details: Anglicans against ordination of women and LGBTQ people (like Bishop Gene Robinson, for example) are in full communion with Rome. Why bother, then, with individual conversion requirements or superfluous paperwork? These Anglicans can even make the transition as congregations or whole dioceses if they choose. They will be Catholics, but like the Eastern Rite Catholics they will do it their way. They can bring their own smells and bells and their Book of Common Prayer; even their own priests and bishops who will head the “Personal Ordinariates” which will function like dioceses. Come as you are, welcome to discriminate to your heart’s content in the name of God.

Rome changes not one whit on the arrival of the dissident Anglicans. It keeps in place its celibate clergy while welcoming married Anglican men with gusto. I predict more than a little consternation in the Roman ranks on that score. Current policy allows Lutheran and Episcopal married priests to jump the fence with the family in tow. Yet Roman Catholic men who wish to marry, never mind Roman Catholic women who might even agree to celibacy, are prohibited from being ordained. No Roman Catholic official seems to be able to say in a straightforward way why this is the case. They mumble something about tradition and certain distinctions. But the rhetoric is increasingly thin as they defend the indefensible against their own practice. It is not pretty.

Rome maintains its liturgy and theology wholly intact. Theological education stays the same, with the addition of small formation groups for Anglican candidates for the priesthood who can appreciate their own “patrimony” while also getting a good dose of Roman thought. In no way does the Vatican engage the issues that led to the English Reformation in the sixteenth century. Rather, Rome pretends to be flexible and modern about all this, gracious and accommodating like a fox. When the property fights begin, I predict the niceties will give way to some serious struggles and we will see just how accommodating Rome can’t be.

Denominations are businesses, after all, and as such they pay as much attention to the bottom line as to their teachings. Maybe more so. In this case, the low-hanging fruit is British Anglicans who have not figured out how to reorganize themselves in light of their denomination’s changes. Early word from the US group led by the Rev. Martyn Minns of Virginia is that they are in fine shape, thank you, setting up their own structures so they will not need to convert.

One wonders how long they can resist Rome’s charms. Imagine the real estate opportunities as US Roman Catholic churches close and conservative Anglicans need buildings. Think of the brilliant solution to the priest shortage as guaranteed-to-toe-the-line Anglican priests replace the Roman boys as they die off and/or think for themselves. Conjure the sight of high mass with a raft of altar servers and incense so abundant it makes parishioners forget there ever was a Vatican II. For the more “Catholic” among the Anglican dissidents, it is a marriage made in heaven. But the more evangelical of the conservative Anglicans may well consider it their worst nightmare.

What is to prevent other denominations from following Rome’s lead? For example, what if the Anglican Communion set up a Catholic wing where those Roman Catholics who believe in the ordination of women and same-sex loving clergy could be Anglicans of the Roman Catholic Rite? The Mennonites might create a Catholic rite for those who follow them on peace issues, resulting in Catholic Mennonites. I doubt it. It is more likely that Rome might decide that one does not even have to be Christian; that discrimination against women and gays is enough of a common bond to create some Catholics of the Muslim rite, for example. The permutations are endless but the result is the same: a perversion of everything the ecumenical movement has stood for in the last hundred years. Ecumenical Christians have tried to learn about one another’s traditions and find positive places of agreement — not little pockets of shared prejudice.

I feel sorry for Rowan Williams if he did not know what he was up against when he engaged in bilateral relations with Rome, only to be subject to its treachery. Beleaguered on all sides in his own communion, he now presides over the potential exodus of some of his members who will find in the new dispensation a comfortable place to live out their outmoded ideas of humanity. I only hope Williams and company are consoled by the fact that they are in good company among ecumenical colleagues who respect one another’s traditions, understand the dynamics of internal struggles, and resist the temptation to profit from one another’s problems. Rome, on the other hand, is in a class — however low — by itself.

Mary E. Hunt, Ph.D., is a feminist theologian who is co-founder and co-director of the Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual (WATER) in Silver Spring, Maryland, USA. A Roman Catholic active in the women-church movement, she lectures and writes on theology and ethics with particular attention to liberation issues.

_____________________________


There are a number of comments on Mary’s commentary posted on the Religious Dispatches website. The one that resonated with me most was by “Fr. Harry,” who writes:

It’s ironic to see the Roman old guard out-Protestant the Protestants, creating new articles of faith based in skewed readings of the Bible designed to baptize the rawest of social prejudices. Apparently misogyny and homophobia have now been promoted to the ranks of church councils and creeds as tenets of faith. What a sad day for the rank and file Catholic to see their leadership acting like fundamentalist used car salesmen.


For more of Mary Hunt at the Wild Reed, see:
Our Catholic “Stonewall Moment”
Crisis? What Crisis?
A Mountain Out of a Molehill
Mary Hunt: “Catholicism is a Very Complex Reality
The “Ratzinger Letter” of 1986 as “Theological Pornography”

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
The Catholic Cafeteria Line: Stretching Now to the Right
Episcopal Fundamentalists Take Their Toys and Run
When Unity Trumps Truth


5 comments:

Mark Andrews said...

What "property fight" is Mary Hunt on about?

Episcopal traditionalists in the U.S. are losing fights for their property more than they are winning them. Those who manage to keep their property are finding other, continuing Anglican jurisdictions to their liking more than the newly offered personal prelature (sic) from Rome.

As for the Traditional Anglican Communion, do you suppose somebody has actually taken the time to inventory each individual part of that affiliative (and not legally corporate) body to see who has clear title to what dinky little building?

Ms. Hunt should stick to what she knows: fomenting a 2nd Reformation and a 3rd Vatican Council.

Jayden Cameron said...

I'm all for a 2nd Reformation and a 3rd Vatican Council! Sounds great, how do we begin?

Liam said...

Mary Hunt should ask her questions serious of mainline Protestant denominations. Historically, Catholics are welcome to cross over, but "natives" very very frequently talk behind their back if they try to rearrange the furniture - metaphorically - in too Catholic a way. Of course, many ex-Catholics have done reaction-formation that makes them unlikely to do this, but the problem is frequent enough. I have testimony of many friends (Protestant and ex-Catholic) about their experiences in this regard.

What indeed would it look like if mainline Protestant denominations offered a "Roman Use"? If they would complain about being asked to consider that, what might that tell us about how they see ecumenism? Maybe it would be revealing....

Mareczku said...

I think MS Hunt got a little carried away here. Catholics of the Muslim rite? I think that letting Episcopalians into the Catholic Church, complete with married clergy, may well help to lead to married clergy in the Latin Rite. In regards to gay clergy, I hope that most of these new Catholics realize that an estimated 30-40% of Latin Rite Catholic priests (& bishops too) have a homosexual orientation. So they are not joining a church that is free of gay people.

Terry Nelson said...

ROFLMAO!