|
|
|---|
|
1984 - 1986
A
further exchange of letters took place between Robert Runcie, Archbishop of
Canterbury, Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Jan Willebrands, President of the
Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity. See the earlier
correspondence between Pope Paul VI and Archbishop
Coggan.
Numbering of paragraphs by John Wijngaards
Letter of Pope John Paul II to Robert Runcie, Archbishop
of Canterbury, 20 December 1984
1.
The long but necessary task of evaluating the Final Report of the first
Anglican/Roman Catholic International Commission (CTS/SPCK, London 1982), in
which both our Communions are now engaged, is a vital part of that journey of
faith on which we have embarked together in our efforts to re-establish full
ecclesial communion. It has been a joy to learn how seriously this task is
being taken in so many countries, and how this study is frequently associated
with joint action and common witness which express, as far as possible, the
degree of communion which has already been brought about between us by the
grace of God.
2.
This degree of communion, indeed God’s very call to us to be one, also
bids us face frankly the differences which still separate us. While the
Catholic Church must always be sensitive to the heritage which she has in
common with other Christians, she must nevertheless base frank and constructive
dialogue upon clarity regarding her own positions.
3. It
was in this spirit that, in an important exchange of letters in 1975-1976, Pope
Paul VI affirmed to Archbishop Coggan the position of the Catholic Church
concerning the admission of women to priestly ordination, a step at that time
being considered by several Churches of the Anglican Communion. The reasons
that he then stated briefly for the Catholic Church’s adherence to the
long tradition on this matter were set out at length by the Sacred Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Declaration Inter Insigniores of 15
October 1976. This same position was again stated clearly by observers from the
Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity during the hearing on this subject at
the Lambeth Conference of 1978.
4. I
know that Your Grace is well aware of the position of the Catholic Church and
of the theological grounds which lead her to maintain it; indeed I am grateful
that, in the recent debate in the General Synod of the Church of England, you
referred to the implications of this question for Anglican relations with the
Catholic and Orthodox Churches. But the outcome of that debate prompts me to
reaffirm with all brotherly frankness the continuing adherence of the Catholic
Church to the practice and principles so clearly stated by Pope Paul VI.
5.
With his well-known affection for the Anglican Communion and his deep desire
for Christian unity, it was with profound sadness that Pope Paul VI
contemplated a step which he saw as introducing into our dialogue ‘an
element of grave difficulty’ even ‘a threat’. Since that time we
have celebrated together the progress towards reconciliation between our two
Communions. But in those same years the increase in the number of Anglican
Churches which admit, or are preparing to admit, women to priestly ordination
constitutes, in the eyes of the Catholic Church an increasingly serious
obstacle to that progress.
6.
Pope Paul VI stated that ‘obstacles do not destroy mutual commitment to a
search for reconciliation.’ We too were ‘encouraged by our reliance
on the grace of God and by all that we have seen of the power of that grace in
the ecumenical movement of our time’ when we set up the new Commission
whose task includes study of ‘all that hinders the mutual recognition of
the ministries of our two Communions’ (Common Declaration, 29 May 1982, n.
3). It is in that same hope, in the charity that ‘hopes all things’
(1 Cor. 13:7) but which seeks the unity of Christ’s Body by ‘speaking
the truth in love’ (Eph. 4:15) that I write these words to you, my dear
Brother, as we celebrate the Birth of the Lord who came in ‘the fullness
of time to unite all things’ (Eph. 1:10).
Pope John Paul II
Letter of Robert Runcie, Archbishop of Canterbury, to
Pope John Paul II, 11 December 1985
1. The
Churches of the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church are fully
committed to the quest for full ecclesial unity. No-one, however, anticipates
that the path towards unity will be without difficulties. One such difficulty,
I fully recognize, is the difference of thinking and action about the
ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood.
2.
The receipt of your letter of December last year on this question therefore
prompted me to confidential consultation with the Primates of the autonomous
provinces of the Anglican Communion throughout the world. They also judged your
letter to be of great importance and by various means themselves sought the
counsel of their own Provinces. Accordingly it is only now that I am able to
make a substantive reply to your letter in the light of the responses I have
received from the different parts of the Anglican Communion.
3.
Before all else I want to thank Your Holiness for the constructive and frank
character of your letter. The question of the admission of women to the
ministerial priesthood is a divisive matter not only between our Churches but
also within them. It is surely a sign of both the seriousness and the maturity
of Anglican-Roman Catholic relations that we can exchange letters on a subject
surrounded by controversy. I read your letter as an expression of that
responsibility in pastoral care for the unity of all God’s people which is
part of the office of the Bishop of Rome. You may be certain that I received
your letter in the same spirit of brotherly love with which it was sent and
also intend this reply to reflect that ‘speaking the truth in love’
of which your letter spoke.
4. In
this fraternal spirit I am bound to report that-although Anglican opinion is
itself divided-those Churches which have admitted women to priestly ministry
have done so for serious doctrinal reasons. I have therefore felt an obligation
to explain this more fully in a letter to His Eminence Cardinal Jan
Willebrands, President of the Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian
Unity, whose recent letter to the Co-Chairmen of the Anglican-Roman Catholic
International Commission now raises the discussion of the reconciliation of
ministries to some prominence in the theological dialogue between our Churches
(Anglican Orders - a new context). I fully realize what a serious
obstacle the actual admission of women to the priesthood appears to place in
the way of such a possibility.
5. I
would therefore propose to Your Holiness the urgent need for a joint study of
the question of the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood,
especially in respect of its consequences for the mutual reconciliation of our
Churches and the recognition of their ministries. Indeed such a study seems
already implicit in the mandate of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International
Commission expressed in our Common Declaration at Canterbury of 29 May 1982.
6.
Though the difficulty is grave, to face it together would, I suggest, give real
substance to the hope expressed at the end of your letter. While neither of us
can under-estimate the seriousness of this obstacle, I know that we are both
convinced that our two Communions ought to maintain the mature trust in each
other which has been built up over recent years. Because we have a grave
responsibility to continue and intensify our co-operation and dialogue in
everything which promotes our growth towards unity, there is a special
obligation to tackle such a potentially serious difficulty. In this I believe
our two communities will be sustained by their hope and confidence in the Holy
Spirit, who alone can bring unity to fulfilment-a fulfilment we need to strive
for without wearying and to receive in humility as his gift.
Letter of Robert Runcie, Archbishop of Canterbury to
Cardinal Jan Willebrands, President of the Vatican Secretariat for Promoting
Christian Unity, 18 December 1985
1. The
letter sent to me by His Holiness Pope John Paul II of December last year
concerning the question of the admission of women to priestly ordination is one
of great importance and weight. As I have explained to His Holiness, I have
needed time for reflection and consultation within the Anglican Communion
before making a considered and substantive reply. I am deeply conscious that
such a letter would not have been written if the Churches of the Anglican
Communion and the Roman Catholic Church were not deeply committed to the search
for full ecclesial unity and that the far reaching progress already achieved
may appear to be checked by the actual admission of women to the priesthood in
some Anglican Provinces-and its possibility in others including the Church of
England.
2. In
my letter to the Holy Father I have stated that those Provinces which have
acted in this matter have done so for serious doctrinal reasons. I have also
said to the Holy Father that I feel an obligation to explain this more fully to
you both out of respect for the integrity of those Anglican Provinces which
have so acted and because an authentic ecumenical dialogue must be built upon
the utmost candour as well as charity. It is my sincere hope that this letter
will help the Roman Catholic Church to interpret the opinions and actions of
the Churches of the Anglican Communion more intelligibly and sympathetically,
while still dissenting from the position of some Anglican Provinces in
admitting women to the ministerial priesthood.
3. In
the first place it must be said that the Holy Father’s statement of the
position of the Roman Catholic Church will clarify the dialogue between our
Churches. Those responsible for the dialogue between us will be able to pursue
their task more realistically by knowing that the position of the Catholic
Church remains the same as it was in the exchange of letters between Pope Paul
Vl and my predecessor, and more fully set out in the Declaration of the Sacred
Congregation of the Faith Inter lnsigniores of 1976. Ecumenical dialogue
must be based on the presentation of the authentic positions of the Churches.
While some Roman Catholic theologians may have suggested otherwise to
Anglicans, I understand the Holy Father’s letter as affirming that the
Roman Catholic Church believes that it has no right to change a tradition
unbroken throughout the history of the Church, universal in the East and in the
West, and considered to be truly Apostolic.
4. On
the Anglican side there has been a growing conviction that there exist in
Scripture and Tradition no fundamental objections to the ordination of women to
the ministerial priesthood. This has been expressed synodically by a number of
Provinces. Within the internal debate upon this matter-a debate which has
developed with growing intensity for over forty years-Anglicans would generally
doubt whether the New Testament by itself alone permits a clear settlement of
the issue once and for all.
5.
When we turn to the Tradition of the universal Church, those Anglican Provinces
which have proceeded to the ordination of women to the presbyterate have done
so with the sincere conviction that the Tradition is open to this development,
because the exclusion of women from priestly ministry cannot be proved to be of
‘divine law’. Nor have they intended to depart from the traditional
understanding of apostolic ministry. Nevertheless, I recognize that in view of
the universal Tradition of East and West, it is insufficient simply to state
that there are no fundamental reasons against the admission of women to the
priesthood. For so significant a theological development it is not enough to
assert that there are no reasons against such a proposed action. It is also
necessary to demonstrate compelling doctrinal reasons for such a development.
6.
Leaving aside sociological and cultural considerations, as these bear mainly
upon the question of whether such ordinations would be opportune, I feel an
obligation to report to Your Eminence what I consider to be the most
substantial doctrinal reason, which is seen not only to justify the ordination
of women to the priesthood by some Anglican Provinces, but actually to require
it.
7.
The fundamental principle of the Christian economy of salvation-upon which
there is no question of disagreement hetween Anglicans and Roman Catholics-is
that the Eternal Word assumed our human flesh in order that through the Passion
Resurrection and Ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ this same humanity might be
redeemed and taken up into the life of the Triune Godhead. In words common to
both our liturgical traditions: ‘As he came to share in our humanity, so
we may share in the life of his divinity.’
8. It
is also common ground between us that the humanity taken by the Word, and now
the risen and ascended humanity of the Lord of all creation, must be a humanity
inclusive of women, if half the human race is to share in the Redemption he won
for us on the Cross.
9.
Some Anglicans would however then go on to point to the representative nature
of the ministerial priesthood. They would argue that priestly character lies
precisely in the fact that the priest is commissioned by the Church in
ordination to represent the priestly nature of the whole body and
also-especially in the presidency of the eucharist-to stand in a special
sacramental relationship with Christ as High Priest in whom complete humanity
is redeemed and who ever lives to make intercession for us at the right hand of
the Father. Because the humanity of Christ our High Priest includes male and
female, it is thus urged that the ministerial priesthood should now be opened
to women in order the more perfectly to represent Christ’s inclusive High
Priesthood.
10.
This argument makes no judgment upon the past, but is strengthened today by the
fact that the representational nature of the ministerial priesthood is actually
weakened by a solely male priesthood, when exclusively male leadership has been
largely surrendered in many human societies.
11. I
must also say something of the experience of those Anglican Churches which have
taken the step of admitting women to the ministerial priesthood. While honesty
compels me to acknowledge deep division on this matter amongst Anglicanseven to
the extent of tensions which strain the bonds of communion-those Provinces
which have taken this step have indicated to me that their experience has been
generally beneficial. Nor have they yet heard compelling arguments to abandon
this development. It is also possible that some other Provinces of the Anglican
Communion will take similar decisions in their respective Synods.
12. It
is however by no means a foregone conclusion that the General Synod of the
Church of England will immediately move in such a direction, for it is not yet
clear whether a sufficient consensus has been reached to effect the proposals
called for by the Synod last November which prompted the Holy Father’s
letter. Other Anglican Provinces have also indicated to me that they are
unlikely to ordain women in the immediate future. While Anglican diversity of
opinion and practice must be a difficulty for the Roman Catholic Church, I
believe it is also an indication of the fact that Anglicans are still seeking
the will of God in this matter. Nor can this be discovered by either of our
Churches without the wider, general study and experience of the role of women m
the community of the Church. In this context the admission of women to the
diaconate in Anglican Churches is important, as is the ministry of women
religious within the Roman Catholic Church.
13. As
you already know, I am not myself convinced that action should be taken on
ordination to the presbyterate by Anglicans alone, no matter how convincing the
positive arguments, until there is a wider consensus in our Churches. I believe
the argument for ecutnenical restraint is also a doctrinal one because it is
only in such a wider perspective that particular Churches can truly discern the
mind of the whole Church.
14. At
the same time realism, together with an acquaintance with the history of the
Church, prompts me to recall that until such time as Christians have clearly
discerned the mind of the Church in matters of contention, there has often
arisen sharp discussion, debate and even conflict. It is indeed through such
conflict and debate that the truth is often discerned. You will already know
that the question of the ordination of women to the priesthood is the occasion
of such sharp debate within the Anglican Communion at the present time. I also
recognize that this development appears to be a serious obstacle to the
eventual reconciliation of our Churches and have expressed this in my letter to
the Holy Father.
15. It
is at such difficult times that dialogue is essential. This is especially
necessary in the light of the increasingly close relationship which has
developed between the Churches of the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic
Church in many parts of the world and in view of the crucial stage we are
reaching as we engage in the task of evaluating the Final Report of the
first Anglican/Roman Catholic International Commission. It is also urgent in
the light of the constructive letter you have sent to the Co-Chairmen of the
ARCIC on the question of the reconciliation of ministries. I believe that
letter provides the proper context for the dialogue I have proposed to the Holy
Father. As the International Commission cannot fail to have to examine the
ordination of women if it is to fulfil its mandate to study all that hinders
the mutual recognition of the ministries of our Communions’ (Common
Declaration, 29 May 1982), I also believe the Commission will be the right
forum for this difficult discussion. Having said this it may be that we should
envisage the possibility of some strengthening of the Commission by the
addition of special consultants for this particular task.
16.
Your Eminence will know that the writing of my letters to the Holy Father and
yourself has been no light matter. When sister Churches have been estranged for
four hundred years, but at last begin to see tangible signs of reconciliation,
it is particularly painful to find this new obstacle between us. But in writing
this fuller letter to you I have been helped by our personal friendship and by
my absolute confidence in your sympathetic understanding of the Anglican
position. I hope I have been able to express my consciousness of the reasons
why the Roman Catholic Church finds herself unable to accept the ordination of
women to the priesthood.
17.
Though we do not yet see the way forward from what at present appear to be
mutually incompatible positions-at least where some Anglican Provinces have
actually ordained women to the priesthood-I am given hope by the fact that
those who began the doctrinal dialogue between us twenty years ago did not
themselves see the end from the beginning. May the same Holy Spirit which
assisted them in the search for agreement in faith, and whose Report
both Churches are in the process of evaluating and receiving, also assist
their successors who will, should the Holy Father be in agreement with my
proposal, have the weighty responsibility for seeking a way forward.
Robert Runcie, Archbishop of Canterbury
Letter of Cardinal Jan Willebrands, President of the
Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, to Robert Runcie, Archbishop
of Canterbury, 17 June 1986
1. I
thank you most sincerely for your letter of 18 December 1985 on the question of
the ordination of women. Especially I thank you for setting out so clearly the
reasons why those Provinces of the Anglican Communion which have proceeded to
ordain women to the priesthood feel justified in so doing. I acknowledge that
your letter is the fruit both of considerable reflection on your part and of
consultation with the Primates of the Anglican Communion. That this matter has
been taken up so seriously is a measure of the confidence that exists between
us and of the progress that has been made to overcome the divisions between
Anglicans and Roman Catholics. It will be especially important for those who
have the task of continuing the dialogue between our Communions to understand
the theological reasons why some in the Anglican Communion see the ordination
of women to be justified and even required. It is equally important that
something be said about the mind of the Catholic Church in relation to the
ideas and arguments set out in your letter.
2. My
purpose in this reply is not to enter in an exhaustive analysis of the
questions which this problem raises. I agree with you that this issue cannot
fail to arise on the agenda of the second Anglican/Roman Catholic International
Commission which has the task of studying all those things which stand in the
way of mutual recognition of each other’s ministries. It is in that
context and in that perspective that I too would envisage further study and
reflection on this question taking place.
3.
What I would like to do is to refer to some specific points made in your letter
and I wish first of all to speak to a point you make towards the end of your
letter. You say that you yourself are not convinced that Anglicans should go
ahead with the ordination of women ‘until there is a wider consensus in
our Churches.’ This observation seems to me to open up a profound
theological dimension of this question. The ordination only of men to the
presbyterate and episcopate is the unbroken Tradition of the Catholic and
Orthodox Churches. Neither Church understands itself to be competent to alter
this Tradition. In 1976 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in the
declaration Inter Insigniores, stated clearly that ‘the Catholic
Church does not consider herself to be authorized to admit women to priestly
ordination.’ The principal reason put forward in the declaration was that
of Tradition (cf. 1-4). The constant Tradition of the Catholic and Orthodox
Churches has considered the practice of Christ and the Apostles as a norm from
which she could not deviate. The practice of the Church to ordain only men
embodies her fidelity under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to what was given
by Christ. The declaration, together with the earlier correspondence on the
subject between Pope Paul VI and Archbishop Coggan, is where Catholics must
look for guidance.
4. I
am aware that some of those in the Anglican Communion who oppose the ordination
of women give as their reason that since the Anglican Communion is part of the
whole Catholic Church, it cannot undertake so radical a departure from
Tradition independently of the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Churches. The
Anglican Communion, on this view, cannot act alone and may not prescind from
the practice and understanding of the wider Church. I propose that this point
of view merits serious reflection. The Catholic Church takes very seriously the
considerable progress that has been made towards our eventual goal of full
communion of faith and sacramental life. Our greater unity must be a
fundamental concern, and it has to be stated frankly that a development like
the ordination of women does nothing to deepen the communion between us and
weakens the communion that currently exists. The ecclesiological implications
are serious.
5.
Having said this, I take very seriously your point that those in the Anglican
Communion who have proceeded to the ordination of women have only felt able to
do so on the basis of serious theological conviction. This I welcome, since it
must be clearly stated that this is a theological issue and cannot be resolved
on sociological or cultural grounds. The question of the rights of women to
hold secular office is a quite separate matter and should not in anyway be
connected or paralleled with the question of women’s ordination. The
context for that discussion is the context of sacramental theology and the
tradition of the Church. My comments will, I trust, illustrate this point.
6. I
have given considerable thought to the theological arguments for the ordination
of women which you report. As I have said, I do not propose to deal in detail
with this question, but I do wish to indicate why I consider these arguments to
be unsatisfactory.
7. If
I understand it correctly, the thrust of the argument is this: Christ is our
High Priest. The humanity he assumed to accomplish our redemption was a
humanity that included both male and female. That is to say, his humanity must
be understood as an inclusive humanity, if the whole human race is to be able
to enjoy the fruits of the redemption. Those who are commissioned as priests in
the Church fulfil a twofold representative function: not only do they represent
the priestly nature of the whole body of the Church; they also stand in a
special sacramental relationship with the risen Christ. Especially in the
Eucharist, they represent Christ. Since Christ’s humanity is inclusive of
male and female, those who represent Christ in the Church would do so more
perfectly if their number included both males and females.
8. My
first observation would be to note that the language used in this argumentation
is the language of priesthood and sacrament. This makes it clear that what is
at issue is precisely the question of sacramental ordination of women to the
ministerial priesthood. It is important to draw attention to this, so as to
make clear that this discussion is directly relevant only to those Christians
who share this understanding of Christian ministry. For our two communions, the
stimulus to our present correspondence is the Final Report of the
Anglican/Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC-I). That Commission
claimed to have reached substantial agreement on the doctrine of ministry. So
we are addressing a problem that arises in the context of real progress being
made towards a common mind on the sacramental nature of ministry. In addressing
this issue now, I write as one for whom the sacramental understanding of the
ministry is part of the faith of the Church. The issue, then, is the ordination
of women to the priesthood and, that being so, it is clear that the question of
who can or cannot be ordained may not be separated from its appropriate context
of sacramental theology and ecclesiology. The practice of only ordaining men to
the priesthood has to be seen in the context of an ecclesiology in which the
priesthood is an integral and essential aspect of the reality of the Church. It
is in and through the ministry of priests that the once-for-all sacrifice of
Christ is present reality. So there is real continuity between the redemptive
work of Christ and the priestly office exercised both by those in the episcopal
order and by their collaborators in the order of presbyters.
9. I
do acknowledge and welcome the fact that the arguments for the ordination of
women which you report are clearly arguments of those who believe deeply in the
important place of the ordained ministry in God’s economy of salvation.
But what I must seriously question is whether they constitute an adequate or
proper understanding of that economy of salvation as revealed in the Scriptures
and meditated and preached in the Church. I will give some indications of why I
say this.
10.
The picture of human redemption that is put before us in the Scriptures is of a
God who is powerful to save and of a people who receive salvation as a free
gift. Feminine imagery is used to reveal the place of the human family in
God’s plan of salvation. In the Old Testament, the people of Israel is
depicted as the bride of Yahweh. In the New Testament, St Paul speaks of the
Church as the bride of Christ. In its tradition, the Church has understood
itself in terms of this feminine imagery and symbolism as the Body which
received the Word of God, and which is fruitful in virtue of that which has
been received. Mary, the Mother of God, is, in her response to the Word of God,
a type of the Church. Christ, on the other hand, is the Head of the Body, and
it is through the Head that the whole Body is redeemed. It is precisely in this
perspective that the representative role of the ministerial priesthood is to be
understood.
11.
Christ took on human nature to accomplish the redemption of all humanity. But
as Inter lnsigniores says, ‘we can never ignore the fact that
Christ is man.’ His male identity is an inherent feature of the economy of
salvation, revealed in the Scriptures and pondered in the Church. The
ordination only of men to the priesthood has to be understood in terms of the
intimate relationship between Christ the Redeemer and those who, in a unique
way, co-operate in Christ’s redemptive work. The priest represents Christ
in his saving relationship with his Body the Church. He does not primarily
represent the priesthood of the whole People of God. However unworthy, the
priest stands in persona Christi. Christ’s saving sacrifice is made
present in the world as a sacramental reality in and through the ministry of
priests. And the sacramental ordination of men takes on force and significance
precisely within this context of the Church’s experience of its own
identity, of the power and significance of the person of Jesus Christ, and of
the symbolic and iconic role of those who represent him in the eucharist.
12. In
saying this I wish simply to make the point that the arguments you relay cannot
count as reasons for the radical innovation of ordaining women to the
priesthood; the arguments do not negotiate the manifold theological issues
which this matter raises. The possible future consequences of introducing such
a practice at this point of time also require careful attention.
13.
This topic will, of course, continue to be a matter of discussion and in the
context of the Anglican-Roman Catholic dialogue the most immediate question
will be about how the ordination of women in some parts of the Anglican
Communion affects progress towards fuller communion between us. We may not
doubt that under the power and inspiration of God, whose ways are not our ways,
and whose thoughts are not our thoughts, those deliberations will contribute
towards the unity for which Christ prayed.
Cardinal Jan Willebrands
Join our Women Priests' Mailing List
for occasional newsletters:
An email will be immediately sent to you
requesting your confirmation.
Please, credit this document
as published by www.womenpriests.org!