Archbishop of Canterbury On Pope Benedict's “theologically eccentric” Move (Updated)

Father Z has a bit of his usual fun with this very interesting article. See Anglican Archbp. Williams: Benedict XVI’s provisions seen as “theologically eccentric” . Click on his link to see the full article where he touches on other matters. (THOSE OTHER MATTERS WERE QUITE GOOD and DEAL WITH GOD AND POLITICS)

Lets get to the "Catholic" issue as he see its (The Bolding is Mine)

With Anglican friends like those in America and Uganda, one wonders whether Dr Williams really needs Pope Benedict XVI, whose surprise new Anglican Ordinariate in October offered a home in Rome for disaffected Anglo-Catholic traditionalists. Dr Williams declines to be drawn on whether, when he saw him in Rome recently, the Pope was regretful or sorry for effectively jumping him – “private conversation, I think” – but he does concede that the hastily convened press conference, at which he sat uncomfortably alongside the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, was a big mistake.

“I think everyone on the platform was a bit uncomfortable ... I know the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the whole doesn’t go in for much consultation – we were just on the receiving end of that.”

Really? Isn’t there something rather acquisitive and invasive about this Pope, who wants us to know that there is one universal voice of authority and it speaks from Rome? Dr Williams suddenly opens up: “Nothing entirely new about that of course. At the end of John Paul II’s pontificate you have that discussion of how papal authority is meant to be understood, how it might be received by others. I think that’s treading water at the moment. I’d like to see that revived and that’s part of what I was nudging at in Rome.

“Second thing is that in British Catholicism there’s a kind of resurgent – no – recurrent cycle of the 'second spring’, in Cardinal Newman’s imagery, and in the wave of distinguished converts in the interwar years, Evelyn Waugh and so on. There was just a hint of it when Cardinal Hume uncharacteristically talked about the reconversion of England – and I think he regretted that actually. And a few people in the last round.

It’s a pattern, the sense that the Reformation wounds are going to be healed in favour of Rome. And it just keeps coming back – I think this has been the occasion for another little bit of that. It’s bits of the repertoire.”

The languid manner in which he delivers this leaves no doubt that he’s not holding his breath for a Roman second spring either. I wonder whether the Pope has, unwittingly and ironically, provided the kind of “third province” that Anglo-Catholics were demanding because they can’t accept women bishops, lesbian or otherwise. The Revision Committee for women bishops, after all, dropped proposals for legal protection for them in the wake of the Pope’s initiative.

“I would guess that the papal announcement had some impact on the way some people thought and voted on the committee,” concedes Dr Williams. “But actually I don’t think it is a solution. A great many Anglo-Catholics have good reason for not being Roman Catholics. They don’t believe the Pope is infallible. And that’s why they’re still pressing for a solution in Anglican terms, rather than what many of them see as a theologically rather eccentric option on the Roman side.”

Significantly, he still wants formal protection in the Anglican Church for those who can’t accept women priests. I put it to him that ordained women believe that idea has been thrown out.

“Well, we’ll see,” he responds. “We’re still halfway through our process.” But whatever the differences with Rome, Dr Williams was anxious to stress that a third round of ecumenical talks, the “Arcic” initiative, for next year was nailed down in Rome. He calls that a “small miracle”.
“I think reports of the death of Arcic have been much exaggerated,” says Dr Williams with a rare laugh. “There are a lot of Roman Catholics who want a chance to talk. They need an ecumenical forum to do that.”

What to say about all this. First I really wonder if the Archbishop personally believes what he is selling here. It does seem that in response to all this he throws out the "It is all about the Pope wanting to be the Boss" card.

There is also that subtle and again misleading viewpoint inserted that Benedict is different from John Paul the II on this matter. Rowan Williams is a smart man and he is quite aware this not true. Also he know the issues that he says is being ignored in ROME has been and still is the topic of active discussion between Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox as we speak.

I hate to say it but Rowan is doing misdirection here.

In fact in the Vatican Document we see the reason the Church thought they had to act!!! It is right there in black and white
In the years since the Council, some Anglicans have abandoned the tradition of conferring Holy Orders only on men by calling women to the priesthood and the episcopacy. More recently, some segments of the Anglican Communion have departed from the common biblical teaching on human sexuality—already clearly stated in the ARCIC document "Life in Christ"—by the ordination of openly homosexual clergy and the blessing of homosexual partnerships. At the same time, as the Anglican Communion faces these new and difficult challenges, the Catholic Church remains fully committed to continuing ecumenical engagement with the Anglican Communion, particularly through the efforts of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity.

In fact when Pope Benedict came to America in remarks I think were aimed at the American Episcopal Church chiefly he said:
Too often those who are not Christians, as they observe the splintering of Christian communities, are understandably confused about the Gospel message itself. Fundamental Christian beliefs and practices are sometimes changed within communities by so-called “prophetic actions” that are based on a hermeneutic not always consonant with the datum of Scripture and Tradition. Communities consequently give up the attempt to act as a unified body, choosing instead to function according to the idea of “local options”. Somewhere in this process the need for diachronic koinonia – communion with the Church in every age – is lost, just at the time when the world is losing its bearings and needs a persuasive common witness to the saving power of the Gospel (cf. Rom 1:18-23).

I don't think the issue of the Papal Office was on Benedict's mind at all. In fact when looking at Conservative and Orthodox Anglican reaction they don't appear to think that was the major issue at the forefront either.

I mean these meetings are nice and all we have but when agreements we have are just ignored as pointed at above what is the point. It is great that a few High Churchmen from the CofE can come into agreement with Catholics on some issues. The problem is the CofE can't seem to back this up in their own Church and the Communion when the rubber meets the road.

The Reverend Kendall Harmon of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina does not seem to be buying Rowan's spin either. See his prior thoughts when the news broke at Kendall Harmon: Comments on the Latest Move from Rome

He states:
I have a slew of emails and telephone calls asking what I think of this latest development. Herewith a few thoughts for starters.

(1) It represents a huge indictment of the leadership of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Many people question Rome's motivations, but I believe Rome, which has been watching Anglican developments like a hawk in recent years, wanted Anglicanism globally to succeed. Their response to the Windsor Report, for example, was quite favorable. This move to me shows they do not believe the Anglican moment in history to help global Christianity can take place sufficiently under Rowan Williams.

(2) It represents a sweeping judgment on Anglicanism in particular. Rome believes, as John 17 says, that the world may know the gospel if Christians are one as Jesus and the Father are one. Such a unity is only possible through a church with catholic order and evangelical faith. Rome has watched global Anglicanism evolve and has seen the Instruments of Unity be used repeatedly, over a period of time, and they have judged that Anglicanism itself is not and will not work for the cause of real global Catholicism going forward.

(3) It repesents a judgment that the real story going forward is between Rome and the East. Do not underestimate the significance of the fact that in this present unusual "arrangement," if I may call it that, Rome has drawn the line at Episcopal celibacy. That is a gesture Eastward, among many other things.

(4) It represents a sense that only an external action will have any benefit to Anglicanism going forward. Let us not kid ourselves. Rome put a lot into ecumencial conversations with Anglicans because they believed that more internal mechanisms and persuasions were possible. Now, in their judgment, they are not. They don't see a future of greater Anglican unity they see one of greater Anglican splintering. At this level, it represents a shout which one wonders if any Anglicans will hear--KSH.

I think that is the view of many Orthodox Anglicans despite Rowan trying to get all Reformation on everybody.

Updated-
Damon Thompson Comments at Pope's policies 'theologically eccentric', says head of blissfully united Anglican Communion

So Archbishop Rowan Williams reckons that the Pope’s Apostolic Constitution for ex-Anglicans is “theologically eccentric”.

You can see his point. Much better to adopt a clear-cut, rational approach to the problem by allowing parishes to refuse to recognise the orders of the local woman diocesan bishop and neighbouring women vicars by supplying them with the oversight of a male bishop who himself rejects women’s orders but is in full communion with a primate who heads an international communion divided into an inner tier of provinces which obey a moratorium on ordaining gay bishops and an outer tier of provinces not in communion with the inner tier which do ordain gay bishops, both tiers also being internally divided between parishes which do and do not accept women’s orders and also disagree fundamentally on central questions of doctrine such as the nature of Christ’s presence in the eucharist, this difficulty being accommodated by the use of prayer books which contain liturgies that reflect different teachings on the nature of the sacraments and the priesthood, while wider issues of ecclesiology are tackled by herding together the world’s bishops into African tribal meetings called “indabas”.

Nothing eccentric about that, I’m sure you’ll agree.

Father at Standing on my Head also has thoughts at Someone's 'Rather Eccentric'