Disagreements : a follow up comment

Reprinted from yesterday's blog post  & in response to the comment of "Don Camillo SSC"

... I would largely concur with what you say. If the Ordinariate is given by the Catholic Church sufficient space and genuine encouragement to prosper, it may well (in the long term) be the only form in which the Anglo-Catholic tradition (the classical Anglican tradition itself, some might argue) will be allowed to survive, given the ruthless determination of our opponents to impose their new religion upon us all. 

In the meantime, we should certainly not be attacking each other and encouraging what is, in today's cultural situation, an utterly nonsensical anti-Romanism - our fire should be directed elsewhere.

It’s not hard to understand the possible motivation behind the somewhat critical rhetoric now being directed at the Ordinariate. It is an easy way of demonstrating to our new masters and mistresses that we are “loyal Anglicans” and do not intend to leave for other ecclesial shores. But it also runs the huge risk of being perceived as aligning ourselves, even if only tactically and rhetorically, with those whose theology is so utterly corrosive of the historic Christian faith, and also giving the mistaken impression that our ecumenical goal – that of the reunion of the Catholic Church, East and West - has been jettisoned in favour of a (semi)protected position within an ecclesial body which is drifting, it seems inexorably, towards heresy.

The immediate agenda and prospects of those who have left to form the Ordinariate and those who have chosen to continue the struggle within Anglicanism [these are tough judgement calls – but we should be grown up enough to respect others’ decisions in this regard, even if we believe them to be flawed} are of necessity different, yet I think it is still in the best interests of everyone in the wider 'catholic' tradition, and of ecumenism itself, if orthodox Anglo-Catholic parishes can continue to thrive, even against all the odds, within the 'Canterbury' structures, but, surely, ultimately, we are on the same side.

Or so I believed ... and will continue to believe ... 

And see yesterday's comment thread ...