How it Came to This

On December 14th, the Archbishop of Canterbury issued his annual Advent Letter to the Anglican Communion in which he stated (if I may distill it, boldly and crassly, to a few words): "The Communion is in a mess, something should be done but I'm not sure what. Whatever is done, however, nothing more may be asked of the Episcopalians, they've already yielded as much as they can. To ask for more would be most unfair." The Rev. Canon J. Gary L'Hommedieu of the Cathedral of St. Luke, Orlando, FL. has read the letter and writing on VirtueOnLine, explains lucidly how the Archbishop's letter betrays all that is wrong with Anglicanism and why her prospects for survival are dim indeed. Some excerpts:

The long bluff of the Anglican Communion has been called. There is not a conformity of faith, but at any given moment one might observe parallel expressions of faith. Thus, while we may be joint partners in specific ventures or rejoice in a common heritage, we have no basis to call ourselves a Communion. We are simply a gathering of national or regional corporations that share some things in common -- almost by coincidence. We may cheer each other on, but does that make us a Communion?

///

Communal Anglicanism has come to the birthing stool and given up the ghost. If it was ever anything besides the religious mode of the British Empire (before the sun finally set on it), Anglicanism has devolved into a set of rubrics. The genius of the English Reformation is that it was not a confession, like the great Lutheran and Reformed confessions, but a permissive settlement in which the catholic heritage of Christendom might be interpreted within specified parameters. This free acting out of a common heritage is apparent in the construction of the 1979 American Prayer Book. However, the "permissiveness" is not now that of the Common Prayer tradition, but of the 70's American popular culture.

///

...When Gene Robinson's election was approved, this was the trumping of holy writ by the mandate of culture. No amount of acknowledging the good intentions of the national church community could fudge this.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has tried to do just that -- fudge the crisis of Anglican self-definition. Perhaps he has done so with all the best intentions, or then again, perhaps with sheer political calculation. He is clever enough make a go of either. The one thing he has certainly done in his long awaited letter is bear witness to the self-validating quality of personal experience -- and that of those who otherwise would be disciplined! -- and he has declared their experience inviolable. Experience is now the one transcendent reality remaining after the disappearance of Anglicanism.

L'Hommedieu's essay (and the ensuing comments) is well-worth reading in its entirety, by Anglicans and Catholics alike: Anglicans, so they may understand why that noble Church was nonetheless fundamentally flawed; that she could survive the many controversies over the centuries (albeit often by resort to famous Anglican fudging) so long as the combatants were agreed on the basics of Scripture and tradition, but is utterly helpless against the present assailants who reject even those. Catholics should read it to be reminded once again be on guard against those innovators in Holy Mother Church who would be pleased to follow the Anglicans. They know all to well they are constrained by Pope and Magisterium so work non-stop undermining and thwarting them.

The devil is patient and persevering.