The Reformation was bad for England, and the nation would do well to become a Catholic country again.
This was the affirmation proposed by Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor on Tuesday during a debate hosted by The Spectator magazine as part of its debate series. The topic under discussion was "England Should Be a Catholic Country Again," and the cardinal -- who is a retired archbishop of Westminster -- was joined by author Piers Paul Read and Dom Antony Sutch, parish priest of St. Benets Catholic Church, in speaking for the motion.
Speaking against the motion were Lord Richard Harries, retired Anglican bishop of Oxford; Matthew Parris, former Conservative Member of Parliament and currently a columnist for the Times; and Stephen Pound, Labour Party Member of Parliament.
Though affirming that the Reformation "brought a tremendous loss to this country," the core of Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor's contribution focused on an ecumenical vision.
"My vision is for the English Church, united with all its history and genius, is to be aligned and in communion with the billion and more Catholic Christians throughout the world, with 4,000 or 5,000 bishops and in communion with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope," he said.
Read it all.
Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal • Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams • Anglican Provinces • Church of England (CoE) • CoE Bishops • * Culture-Watch • Religion & Culture • * International News & Commentary • England / UK • * Religion News & Commentary • Other Churches • Roman Catholic
Posted March 9, 2010 at 5:39 am
To comment on this article: Go to Article View
The URL for this article is http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/28713/
|
2. austin wrote:
The Church of England, and Anglicanism, comprises at least three (perhaps five or more) different religions. Only the Catholic, and perhaps in time Evangelical, wings could possibly end up being part of the Catholic Church. Full corporate reunion with those revisionists, rationalists, and liberals that loom so large in today’s Anglicanism would make sense neither for Rome or for this collection of post-Christians. March 9, 12:46 pm | [comment link] |
|
3. Cennydd wrote:
Could even the ACNA go with Rome? I highly doubt it. March 9, 5:21 pm | [comment link] |
|
4. Ad Orientem wrote:
Re #3 |
|
5. dwstroudmd wrote:
Would the cardinal have a backbone so there would be at least one leader of one religious persuasion in Canterbury? March 9, 9:39 pm | [comment link] |
© 2012 Kendall S. Harmon. All rights reserved.
For original material from Titusonenine (such as articles and commentary by Dr. Harmon) permission to copy and distribute free of charge is granted, provided this notice, the logo, and the web site address are visible on all copies. For permission for use in for-profit publications, please email KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com
<< Return to Mobile view (headlines)
‘In communion with Rome?’ Perhaps, but not a ‘part of Rome.’ I don’t see full union with the Church of Rome.
March 9, 11:31 am | [comment link]