Klaus Heinrich Neuhoff

Building on

THE Bonn Agreement

An historical study of Anglican - Old Catholic relations before and after the 1931 Bonn Agreement with special reference to the Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians ’ Conferences 1957-2005

Building on the Bonn Agreement

'' '[kamp;ol l/.S'^.OO hl

Klaus Heinrich Neuhoff

Building on the Bonn Agreement

An historical study

of Anglican - Old Catholic relations before and after the 1931 Bonn Agreement with special reference to the Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians ’ Conferences 1957-2005

Universiteitsbibliotheek

Utrecht

Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, vol. 46 Amersfoort/Sliedrecht 2010 Merweboek

Cover image: Miniature of Saint Willibrord, represented as an Archbishop, and two holy deacons. Oldest known portrait of Saint Willibrord, probably painted in a monastery in Reichenau, Southern Germany, about the year 1000.

Uitgeverij Merweboek

Postbus 217, NL-3360 AE Sliedreeht

www.merweboek.nl

(Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, vol 46)

ISBN 978-90-5787-149-8

©2010 Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, Amersfoort

All rights reserved. No parts of this publication may be produced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.

The ‘Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie’ is published under the responsibility of the staff and members of the Board of Administrators of the Old Catholic Seminary.

Preface

This dissertation was originally submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for M.Th. (Master of Theology, University of Southampton) by instructional course at Chichester Theological College, 1994. It was updated by the author in 2009. It would not have been written without the generous material support by the German Academical Exchange Service {DAAD}, Bonn, and by the Society of St. Willibrord (English Branch).

The idea to write about the relations between Anglicans and Old Catholics was inspired by the work of Ralph Kirscht, who wrote in 1988 about these relations between 1908 and 1931J The special focus on Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences was suggested by the Old Catholic Bishop of Switzerland, then the Rev’d Dr. Harald Rein who, when he wrote his book about the communion of churches,^ felt the need of a more detailed study of the history and contents of these conferences. He helped me to find the primary sources, and I am very grateful to him for doing so.

Already when 1 was planning my studies in England, Bishop Henry Richmond, then representative of the Archbishop of Canterbury for the relations with the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht, had become a loving personal tutor to me. I want to acknowledge all his work, as well as the support of his predecessor in the office of the president of the English Society of St Willibrord, Bishop Colin Docker.

Furthermore, I want to give thanks to Dr. Thaddäus A. Schnitker, then President of the Society of St. Willibrord (German Branch), Münster, for encouraging me to study abroad, to Prof Em.Dr. Christian Oeyen, Bonn, and to Prof Dr. Jan Hallebeek, Amsterdam, for several clarifications and corrections. The Rev’d Charlotte Methuen, Oxford, and the Rev’d Lars Simpson, St. Gallen, were so kind as to check the English of this book. Drs. Lidwien van Buuren took upon herself the huge work to make out the name index at the end of the book, adding many years of birth and

' R. Kirscht, Die Beziehungen zwischen den anglikanischen und den altkatholischen Kirchen von 1908 bis 1931, Altkatholisch-theologisches Seminar der Universität Bonn (not published), 1988.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft: Die anglikanisch-altkatholisch-orthodoxen Beziehungen von 1870 bis 1990 und ihre ökumenische Relevanz, Band I: Allgemeine Einführung, Die anglikanisch-altkatholischen Beziehungen, Bern 1993.

5

death, and gave to the book its final shape. Naturally, all flaws and errors remain mine.

Finally, I thank the students and staff of Chichester Theological College, especially my teacher, and personal tutor, Rachel Moriarty, for welcoming myself and enabling my work in that beautiful city, and the late Bishop of Chichester, Dr. Eric Kemp, who, having taken part in many Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences, kindly agreed to answer several questions about his understanding of the catholicity of the Church. The interview is given in Appendix I and a list of these conferences in Appendix II of this volume.

May this work be a contribution to further mutual understanding and growing together of the various Christian Churches.

Starrkirch-Wil near Olten/Switzerland, 2010

6

Contents

Preface

Introduction

1. History of the Bonn Agreement

• 1 .0. Text and ratification of the Bonn Agreement

• 1 .0.1 Anglican

• 1 .0.2 Old Catholic

• 1.1. ‘Pre-History’ : the Church of England and the See of Utrecht 20

• 1.2. Since Vatican I;

The establishment of further Old Catholic Churches

• 1.2.1 Germany (1873) and Switzerland (1876)

• 1.2.2 United States of America (1897)

• 1.2.3 Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Austria (1924f);

Poland(1936)

• 1.3. The Bonn Agreement (1931)

• 1.3.1 The‘Mathew Affair’(from 1908)

• 1.3.2 Acceptance of Anglican Orders by Utrecht (1925)

• 1.3.3 Preparations in 1930

• 1.3.4 The meeting in Bonn (1931)

• 1.3.5 From‘Intercommunion’to‘Full Communion’(1961) 40

• 1.3.6 Full Communion with three further churches (1965)

• 1.4. Problems relating to the Bonn Agreement

• 2 . Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences

• 2 .0. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Introduction

• 2.1. Overlapping jurisdictions

• 2.1.1 Europe

• 2.1.2 U.S.A, and Canada

• 2.2. Ecumenical dialogues

• 2.2.1 Reconciliation of ministries?

Indian churches and Methodists

7

• 2.1.1.1 United Churches in India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan 55

• 2.2.1.2 Methodist churches

• 2.2 .2 Full doctrinal agreement? Orthodox churches

• 2.2 .3 Universal jurisdiction iure divinol

Roman Catholic Church

• 2.2 A Eucharistic hospitality? Protestant churches

• 2.3 . Ordination of women

• 3. Considerations for today

• Appendix I:

Interview with the late Rt.Rev’d Dr. Eric Kemp, Bishop of Chichester

Appendix II;

Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences 1957-2008

• 1. Rheinfelden 1957: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Eucharist

• 2. Oxford 1960: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ecclesiology

• 3. Amersfoort 1961: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;The Early Church

• 4. Oxford 1966: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ecumenism

• 5. Bem 1972: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Theological Dialogues

• 6. Oxford 1973: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Full Communion

• 7. Luzern 1974: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;The Bonn Agreement

• 8. Chichester 1977: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Ordained Ministry

• 9. Trier 1980: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Authority

• 10. Vienna 1982: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Authority in the Church

• 11. Chichester 1985: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Primacy

• 12. Toronto 1987: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Koinonia

• 13. Morschach 1990: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;All the Essentials of the Christian Faith 106

• 14. Guildford 1993: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Co-ordinating Council

• 15. Leeds 2005; nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Towards Further Convergence

Abbreviations

Index of persons

8

Introduction

‘We hope that Catholic theologians, in maintaining the faith of the undivided church, will succeed in establishing an agreement upon questions which have been subject of controversy ever since the divisions which have arisen between the churches. ’

Declaration of Utrecht, 1889, no. 7

‘It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, and utterly like, for at all times they have been divers (...)’ Article XXXIV, 1571, ‘Of the traditions of the Church’

My first contact with the Church of England — not counting an evening prayer at Windsor Castle when I was in England as a boyscout — happened in Switzerland when in 1991, at an International Old Catholic Youth (lOCY) meeting, two Anglican Youth workers were present: Graham Richards, member of the Society of St. Willibrord, and Deacon Christine Dyer, from the Diocese of Derby.^ This Anglican presence at an Old Catholic youth event was, indeed, the beginning of a renewed commitment towards each other: for since then, Anglican Youthquot;* was working together with lOCY.

So apparently, the ‘church of the times to come’ (which is just as much today’s church!), has been very much interested in cultivating the bonds which have been connecting our churches for over hundred years. What are these bonds? What is their theological basis? What has changed by establishing the ‘Bonn Agreement’ in 1931 — whose contents and history will be explained in the first chapter of this book? What is the nature of the ‘intercommunion’ stated therein, which has been called ‘full communion’ since 1958, and sometimes also, more recently, simply ‘communion’? What if anything has changed as a result of the different ecumenical unions, contacts and dialogues both communions of churches were involved in: with the Orthodox churches; the Methodists; the United Church in South India; the EKD {Evangelische Kirche in Deutschland)', and the Roman Catholic Church? And on the whole, have

’ The Archbishop of Canterbury’s representative to the Old Catholic Churches in the year 1994, the Rt. Rev’d Henry Richmond, belonged then to that Diocese, as well.

An organization which has unfortunately stopped working recently; for present contacts, see; Volker Ochsenfahrt, lOCY -

Introduction/History: http://baj-deutschland.de/20/index.html.

9

the theologians of both churches fulfilled their task to build up, take seriously, and sharpen the common mind within the churches, i.e. the sensus fidelium, in a way which promotes Christian unity? This, at least, was Johann Joseph Ignaz von Dollinger’s view of the task of theology within the church?

Theology can be one-sided if it takes into account only the history of the church, or only an ‘eternal’ doctrine. In the first case, doctrinal questions would be treated only ‘between the lines’ and not directly; therefore, they would remain unspoken implications which are not necessarily agreed by the reader and, therefore, should be discussed. A doctrinal discussion, though, without recognizing the historical background of all the teachings of the church (the second case) would not recognize the historical nature of the gospel, in other words; the basic Christian doctrine that the eternal Word became incarnated flesh!

According to Ignaz Döllinger,^ theology should use both ‘eyes’: the historical, and the speculative point of view. In my opinion only a combination of both reflects that the world can be described — and should be described — in terms of history and philosophy, because, according to the creed, it is both visible and invisible. Also the church has both changing and unchanging characteristics. A third, and mystical, dimension of theology would, then, deal with God himself; the Triune God who in Christ encompasses - and transcends! - both time and eternity. In this book, doctrinal problems will be looked at from an historical point of view, and vice versa. Questions of an ecumenical ecclesiology such as ‘What are the essentials of the Christian faith?’, or ‘Whose authority is decisive in decision-making?’ and ‘Why not build up organic church union immediately?’ are thereby dealt with in a twofold method, both historically and doctrinally.

In the first chapter, ‘History of the Bonn Agreement’, the history of Anglican - Old Catholic relations, before (1.1.) and after (1.2.) the First Vatican Council (1870), will be described, with special reference to the doctrinal expression these relations have found in the Bonn Agreement in 1931. Its text and ratification will be described in 1.0.; its history, in

See: M. Ring, Ähnlich dem Prophetentume in der hebräischen Zeit...; Anmerkungen zum Charismatischen in der Theologie Ignaz Döllingers und insofern auch zum Verhältnis von Lehramt, Theologie und sensus fidelium, IKZ 80 (1990), 106-136.

E.g. in his speech Die Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der katholischen Theologie, held on 28'*’ September 1863 before the Gelehrtenversammlung in Munich. See: J. Finsterhölzl (ed.), Ignaz von Döllinger, Graz/Wien/Köln 1969, 227-263, quoted in: Ring, Prophetenthume {supra, n. 5), 115, n. 35.

10

1.3. This history has already often been described, so I can draw on books and articles of other theologians (Angela Berlis,^ Ralph Kirscht,^ Claude Beauford Moss,^ Martien Parmentier,'¹’ Harald Rein,quot; and Christoph Schuler)'^.

In the second chapter, ‘Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences’, the theological dialogue concerning ‘overlapping jurisdictions’ (2.1.), relations to other churches (2.2.), and the ordination of women (2.3) will be described as it took place after the Second World War. This theological dialogue has never before been described scholarly, as a whole. ” So I hope, by this dissertation, to help close a gap in describing the essence of texts which today can only be found in the several archives. An overview of the described conferences is given in Appendix II.

A. Berlis, 1931-2006; 75 Jahre Bonner Abkommen zwischen Alt-Katholiken und Anglikanern, Ökumenische Rundschau 55 (2006), 526-535.

• * R. Kirscht, Beziehungen (supra, n. 1).

’ C.B. Moss, The Old Catholic Movement; Its Origins and History, London (1948) 1964,2005.

'° M.F.G. Parmentier, Evangelical Anglicans and Old-Catholics in 1931, in: C. van Kasteel, P.J. Maan e.a. (red.). Kracht in zwakheid van een kleine wereldkerk; De Oud-Katholieke Unievan Utrecht, Amersfoort 1982, 125-144.

’* H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2).

Chr. Schuier, The Mathew Affair. The failure to establish an Old Catholic Church in England in the context of Anglican Old Catholic relations between 1902 and 1925 [Publicatieserie Stichting Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, 30], Amersfoort 1997.

• A. Berlis, 1931-2006 (supra, n. 7), 532, n. 22; ‘Eine umfassende wissenschaftliche Aufarbeitung (sc. der Entwicklungen seit 1931) ist bisher nicht geschehen. ’

In this book, the following archives are used:

• • Prof Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne. Address: Neuhausweg 53, CH-3097 Liebefeld;

• • Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Churches in Full Communion / CFC’ (formerly ‘Wider Episcopal Fellowship / WEF’; ‘WEF’ is an abbreviation for ‘Wider Episcopal Fellowship’, the group of non-Anglican churches in full communion); Box ‘Eric Kemp Address: Lambeth Palace, London.

II

¹

Dekan em. Edgar Nickel, Freiburg, Address: Mühlematten 21, D-79224 Umkirch.

• Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn. Address; Gregor-Mendel-Str. 28, D-53115 Bonn.

• Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche''. Box 'Nachlass Küppers’. Address: Adenauerallee 33, D-53113 Bonn.

• nbsp;nbsp;Rijksarchief Utrecht, Archief Oud Bisschoppelijke Clerezij (OBC), Supple

ment Inventaris Bruggeman. Address: Alexander Numankade 201, NL-3572 KW Utrecht.

In the third chapter, ‘Considerations for today’, 1 have tried to draw out from both history (chapter 1) and theological dialogue (chapter 2) the most significant conclusions and implications. Although they are only few, they are, I believe, able to show a direction for the future of Anglican - Old Catholic relations. The interview with Bishop Eric Kemp of Chichester (Appendix I) may illustrate the major shift in the shape of theological thinking which has occurred since the time of his own episcopate: twelve years later, Anglican - Old Catholic matters have entered into new dynamics. At the 29*’’ International Old Catholic Congress, which took place from 7*’’ to 11”’ August 2006 in Freiburg/ Breisgau (Germany), and which I as a theological member of the International Old Catholic Congress Committee was asked to help to prepare, our two leading Archbishops, Dr. Rowan Williams of Canterbury and Dr. Joris Vercammen of Utrecht, gave strong witnesses to the common way of our two, still distinct but already in sacris united church families.

With the support of the Anglican - Old Catholic International Coordinating Council (see: 2.0), the unifying work of the Society of St Willibrord has been followed on at a very high level, and the tradition of common Theologians’ Conferences has been continued once more at the Anglican and Old Catholic Theologians’ Conference which took place in Hinsley Hall, Leeds, from 29“* August to 2quot;” September 2005, comparing Anglican and Old Catholic ecclesiologies, and heading ‘towards further convergence’.’^ I hope that the work of Anglican and Old Catholic theologians may contribute to an ever growing understanding of the church as they find opportunities to reflect, work, and also worship together in a spirit of mutual interdependence, which upholds the catholicity of the universal church whilst respecting the independence of each church tradition.

Texts in: IKZ 96 (2006); Beiheft.

12

London, Lambeth Palace, July 1930; Franciscus Kenninck, Archbishop of Utrecht (left) and Dr. Cosmo Gordon Lang, Archbishop of Canterbury. See: De Oud-Katholiek 46 (1930), 231-233.

14

• 1. History of the Bonn Agreement

• 1 .0. Text and ratification of the Bonn Agreement

Before describing the history of the Bonn Agreement in detail, I want to document its authoritative text, and the process of its official ratification by the churches.

‘Statement agreed between the representatives of the Old Catholic Churches and the Churches of the Anglican Communion at a conference held at Bonn on July 2quot;^*, 1931.

• 1. Each communion recognizes the catholicity and independence of the other and maintains its own.

• 2. Each communion agrees to admit members of the other communion to participate in the sacraments.

• 3. Intercommunion does not require from either communion the acceptance of all doctrinal opinion, sacramental devotion, or liturgical practice characteristic of the other, but implies that each believes the other to hold all the essentials of the Christian faith.’

This text, quoted according to the original report,'^ has been called the ‘Bonn agreement’. There are two different German translations; one was made immediately after the meeting in Bonn, the other one was made in the same year before the meeting of the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference on 7* September in Vienna. Both translations, however, differ only as to style.'quot;

The Bonn agreement was officially accepted by the following churches.

• 1 .0.1 Anglican'*

• 1. The Church of England

• 2. The Episcopal Church in Scotland

Report of the meeting of the commission of the Anglican Communion and the Old Catholic churches held at Bonn on Thursday, July 2, 1931, London 1931/32, 7, quoted from: H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 173f., n. 161.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 175f.

H. Rein {Kirchengemeinschaft, supra, n. 2, 353f.) quotes a document called ‘Details of Acceptance of the Bonn Agreement by Churches of the Anglican Communion’ (Archive of the Lambeth Palace, WEF/file 8, 2 pages, from 27quot;’ August, 1971). 'quot;7A:Z 22 (1932), 37.

15

• 3. The Church of the Province of the West Indies

90

• 4. The Church of England in Australia and Tasmania

• 5. The Church of India, Burma and Ceylon

— all (1. to 5.) in 1932^'

• 6. The Anglican Church of Canada

• 7. The Protestant Episcopal Church of the U.S.A?^

• 8. Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui (China / Hong Kong) — all (6. to 8.) in 1934^^

• 9. The Church of the Province of South Africa

• 10. The Church of the Province of Central Africa

• - both (9. and 10.) in 1935

• 11. The Church in Wales in 1937

• 12. Nippon Sei Ko Kai (Japan) - before the 2quot;^* World War^^

• 13. The Church of the Province of New Zealand - in 1948^^

• 14. The Church of Ireland - in 1950^^

• 15 The Church of the Province of West Africa - in 1958.^*

The more recently founded Anglican Provinces of Tanzania (founded in 1969), the Indian Ocean and Melanesia (both founded in 1973), entered into full communion with the Old Catholic Churches before 1978.The Provinces of Uganda (founded in 1961), Brazil (in 1965), Kenya (1970), Sudan (1974), Jerusalem (1976), Papua New Guinea (1977), Burundi/

2® IKZ 24 (1934), 74ff.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 353, n. 498. 2Ua:Z25 (1935), 98f.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 353, n. 498.

IKZ 25 (1935), 98f.

The author of the document ‘Details of Acceptance (...)’ (Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘WEF', file 8, 27* August, 1971) quotes Bishop Bayne (the first Executive Secretary of the Anglican Communion) who wrote: ‘There was a pre-war agreement, but all traces of it disappeared. In order to regularise the situation, I suggested to the Presiding Bishop that an exchange of letters with the Archbishop of Utrecht would be in order and adequate. This exchange has now taken place, on the basis of the Bonn Agreement.’

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 353, n. 498. 2’/^Z41 (1951), 60.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 353, n. 498.

‘The Fourteenth International Conference of Anglican and Old Catholic Theologians’, held at the Maryvale Pastoral Centre, Guildford, September 26*-30*, 1993, Appendix 3 (a table of churches in full communion with the Anglican Churches which was compiled for the Lambeth Conference 1978). This report was given to me when I was present at the conference centre but not allowed to participate.

16

Rwanda/ Zaire (1980), and South America (CASA) (1983)^® have — as far as I know — not entered into full communion with the Old Catholic Churches so far; but as they continue to be in communion with their ‘preceding’ provinces, they can be held to be within an ‘indirect’ or ‘historical’ communion with the Old Catholic Churches. The first Anglican - Old Catholic interconsecration of bishops, for example, was that of Bishop George Francis Graham-Brown for the Anglican Church in Jerusalem in 1932 in London, where Bishop of Haarlem Henricus Theo-doris Johannes van Vlijmen was a coconsecrator.^' There is no Anglican Church which has officially rejected full communion with the Old Catholic Churches. So by 1958, the whole Anglican Communion accepted intercommunion with the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht.

• 1 .0.2 Old Catholic

At the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference in Vienna on September, 1931, Archbishop of Utrecht Franciscus Kenninck, Bishop of Haarlem Van Vlijmen, Bishop Adolf Kiiry (Switzerland), and the bishops Robert Tiichler (Austria), Aloysius Paschek (Czecho-slovakia), Marko Kalogjera (Yugoslavia), Valentine Gawrychowsky, and John Zenon Jasinski (both U.S.A.) officially agreed to the proposal of both theological commissions meeting in Bonn, suggesting the establishment of intercommunion by the following statement.

‘The Archbishop and Bishop Kiiry have reported about the negotiations of the Old Catholic commission with the Anglican one. There is a report about this in English, to be printed in German in the IKZ, number 3. Both commissions propose the intercommunion. We agree to this proposal by stating,

• 1. The conference of Old Catholic bishops united in the Union of Utrecht, which met on 7th Sept. 1931 in Vienna, agrees to the intercommunion between the Old Catholic Churches and the Anglican Communion, because of the acceptance of the validity of the Anglican orders.

For the years of foundation, see: G.R. Evans and J. Robert Wright (ed.), The Anglican Tradition. A Handbook of Sources, London / Minneapolis 1991 (the documents are in chronological order).

’’ H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 27If.

17

• 2. The intercommunion consists in the mutual admittance of the members of both communions to the sacraments.

• 3. Intercommunion does not require from either communion the acceptance of all doctrinal opinion, sacramental devotion or liturgical practice characteristic of the other, but implies that each believes the other to hold all the essentials of the Christian faith.’^2

This text has been called the ‘Vienna modification’ of the Bonn Agreement, the difference between this text and the one agreed in Bonn being that it does not contain an explicit mutual recognition of ‘catholicity and independence ’. It was sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. William Cosmo Gordon Lang, on 18'^ September 1931.^^ But in October, the text of the Bonn Agreement was published in England by the Rev’d George Francis Graham-Brown.’'* In January, 1932, the four Houses of the Convocations of Canterbury and York agreed to the terms of Bonn, and ‘to the establishment of Intercommunion between the Church of England and the Old Catholics on these terms’.”

‘Der Erzbischof und Bischof Küry berichten über die Verhandlungen der alt-katholischen Kommission mit der anglikanischen. Darüber liegt ein Bericht in englischer Sprache vor, der in deutscher Übersetzung im 3. Heft der Internationale Kirchliche Zeitschrift erscheint. Die beiden Kommissionen beantragen die Interkommunion. Dem Antrag wird mit folgendem Beschluss zugestimmt: l. Die am 7. September 1931 in Wien versammelte Konferenz der in der Utrechter Union vereinigten altkathoUschen Bischöfe stimmt aufgrund der Anerkennung der Gültigkeit der anglikanischen Weihen der Interkommunion der altkatholischen Kirchen mit der anglikanischen Kirchengemeinschaft zu. 2. Die Interkommunion besteht in der gegenseitigen Zulassung der Mitglieder der beiden Kirchengemeinschaften zu den Sakramenten. 3. Interkommunion verlangt von keiner Kirchengemeinschaft die Annahme aller Lehrmeinungen, sakramentaler Frömmigkeit oder liturgischer Praxis, die der andern eigentümlich ist, sondern schließt in sich, dass jede glaubt, die andere halte alles Wesentliche des christlichen Glaubens fest. ’ - English translation: Klaus Heinrich Neuhoff (K.H.N.). - The text, published in: IKZ 21 (1931), 161 f, unfortunately reads ‘das Wesentliche ’ (the essential), and It had been suggested that by this expression, the authors of the Vienna modification meant to talk about Tess than all of the Christian faith’ or only one ‘essential’ doctrine. This seems, however, to be an error in print as the protocol of the bishops’ meeting, which I have quoted above, indeed reads ‘alles Wesentliche’, as Harald Rein discovered {Kirchengemeinschaft, supra, n. 2, 177-9, n. 167). See: Rijksarchief Utrecht, Archief OBC, Supplement Inventaris Bruggeman.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 177, n. 168.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 251, n. 290.

H. Riley and R.J. Graham (ed.). Acts of the Convocations of Canterbury and York, 1921-1970, London (SPCK) 1971.

18

It has been suggested by Harald Rein that at the Vienna conference, those members of the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference not present in Bonn felt the agreement to be too far-reaching?^ Archbishop of Utrecht Kenninck in particular, offered vehement opposition?^ The ‘Vienna modification’, then, seems to be a compromise between him and other Old Catholic Bishops.

After the publication of the Bonn text in England, and its ratification by the Convocations, Archbishop Kenninck apparently joined with the other bishops in welcoming the establishment of intercommunion by the English convocations in the terms of the text of the Bonn Agreement. He asked Bishop Ktiry to declare that in Vienna, by the declaration of the Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference (the so-called ‘Vienna modification’), the Bonn Agreement was officially accepted. So by 1932, in the understanding of the Old Catholic Bishops, intercommunion in the terms of the Bonn Agreement was established by the Bishops’ Conference on 7th September, 1931, in Vienna, and by the Convocations at their sessions of 20‘'’-22quot;^ January.

Two bishops, Valentine Gawrychowski of Chicopee, and John Jasinski of Buffalo, both bishops of the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC), had also accepted the ‘Vienna modification’. They declared, however, at that same conference, that their churches did not want any closer contacts with the Protestant Episcopal Church of the U.S.A. (PECUSA). In their opinion, two non-Roman, catholic, national churches were necessary in the United States on grounds of language, culture, and for social reasons.

In 1946, intercommunion between the PNCC and the PECUSA was ratified,'**’ and its implications were described in 11 points. In 1958, the

dass) die in Bern nicht dabei gewesenen Mitglieder der Internationalen Altkatholischen Bischofskonferenz das Abkommen anscheinend als zu weitgehend empfanden H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 253.

‘Der Erzbischof hat in Wien gegen die Bonnerbeschlüsse heftig opponiert und Ablehnung beantragt’, writes Bishop A. Küry (Switzerland) to Bishop G. Moog (Germany), on 20'*' February, 1932 (Bischöfliches Archiv Bonn, No. aXII 66a). ‘Der Grund wurde mir nicht klar. Um die Sache zu retten, schlug ich die Fassung vor, die im ‘Katholik’ S. 301 steht und die auch angenommen wurde. H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 254, n. 297.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 260f, n. 308f.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 264-266; n. 314.

The PNCC ‘ratified the Bonn agreement at its Seventh General Synod held in Scranton, October 15-18, 1946, and so entered into intercommunion with the Episcopal Church’: Advisory Council on Ecclesiastic Relations, Intercommunion between the

19

PNCC in Canada also agreed to this paper?’ In late 1976, however, when the Episcopal Church, at its General Convention, voted to ordain women to the priesthood and episcopate. Prime Bishop Thaddeus Zielinski of the PNCC ‘suspended sacramental intercommunion with the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada (which had also decided to ordain women)’,'*^ and the Fifteenth General Synod of the PNCC also voted in 1978 to support this termination of ‘sacramental intercommunion’. They did not, though, terminate ‘intercommunion’ because according to Prime Bishop Zielinski, intercommunion, in itself, was meant to be ‘only a cordial relationship’.'^^ As it is not clear what exactly is meant by this term the Anglican Episcopal members of the North American Working Group which has been set up in 1983quot;*^ declared in 1987 that in their opinion, ‘it seems best’ (for their churches) ‘to act now upon the assumption that nothing of that formal relationship’ (established in 1934/ 1947 / 1958) ‘still remains (...)’.

Since the PNCC has left the Union of Utrecht in 2003, it can be said now that all members of the Union of Utrecht have accepted the Bonn Agreement.

1.1. ‘Pre-History’: the Church of England and the See of Utrecht

The relationship between the Old Catholic Churches and the Anglican Communion cannot be understood without reflecting on the history both of the See of Utrecht and of the Church of England. It cannot be sufficient only to compare and contrast the Declaration of Utrecht with the Lambeth Quadrilateral, the Book of Common Prayer, and the 39 articles

Protestant Episcopal Church amp;nbsp;the Polish National Catholic Church; Being the Report of the Joint Meeting between the Committees Appointed by the Presiding Bishops of the Two Churches, Held in the Diocesan House, Albany, New York, June 27, 1947, New York 1947, 4.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 421; 426.

W.C. Platt, Intercommunion between the Episcopal Church and the Polish National Catholic Church. A Survey of its Development, IKZ 82 (1992), 142-165, 160.

Fifteenth General Synod of the PNCC, Chicago, Illinois, October 3-6, 1978, 186, quoted in: Platt, Intercommunion (supra, n. 42), 161, n. 54.

L.J. Orzell, Polish National Catholic - Episcopal Relations: Some Historical Observations, IKZ 82 (1992), 166-181; 180.

‘*5 Relations of the Polish National Catholic Church with the Episcopal Church in the USA and the Anglican Church of Canada: Observations and Recommendations of the four Anglican/Episcopal members of the North American Working Group, based upon the proceedings and discussions of the International Anglican-Old Catholic Theological Conference meeting at Toronto 7-11 July 1987 (Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 7-11 July 1987).

20

(or even the catechisms of a particular time, say, 1931). It is even more insufficient, in my eyes, to use this method - as Harald Rein does i?*^ -in order to find out whether or not the Bonn Agreement is right in stating that both communities hold ‘all the essentials of the Christian faith’, for this statement is, explicitly, a declaration of faith: ‘each (communion) believes the other to hold all the essentials (...)’ (Art. 3 of the Bonn Agreement). This assertion of belief is made with the awareness for the mentioned texts but not on their basis, for the basis of faith can only be the ‘true tradition’ in the sense of the First Union Conference of Bonn, 1874: ‘the un-interrupted, partly oral, and partly written, tradition of the first proclaimed teachings of Christ and the ApostlesThis tradition, and not catechisms, was the basis on which the Bonn Agreement was negotiated.quot;*^

Therefore in the following, the main question is to what extent the two church families recognized the true, catholic tradition in each other. I will first consider the Anglican theologians, John Mason Neale,quot;*^ and Claude Beaufort Moss,^*’ and afterwards the Old Catholic writers Berend Willem Verhey^' and Harald Rein.^^

‘The Church of Utrecht owes its origin to that of England’, wrote Neale in 1858, and he describes how in the seventh century, the Englishman Willibrord came to preach the Gospel in Friesland, under the protection of Pepin, and was ordained Archbishop of the Frisones by Pope Sergius I: ‘On his return, the city of Utrecht was assigned to him as his episcopal residence by Pepin’. After the martyrdom of St. Willibrord’s successor, St. Boniface, however, Utrecht ceased to be an

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), chapter 1.2.4.8.

‘(...) die echte Tradition, d.i. die ununterbrochene, teils mündliche, teils schriftliche Überlieferung der von Christus und den Aposteln zuerst vorgetragenen Lehre quoted in U. Küry, Die Altkatholische Kirche; Ihre Geschichte, ihre Lehre, ihr Anliegen [Die Kirchen der Welt. Band III], Stuttgart 1966. - Translation: K.H.N.

Stress was laid upon the historic continuity with the Ancient Church: IKZIX (1931), 155.

J.M. Neale, A History of the so-called Jansenist Church of Holland; with a sketch of its earlier annals, and some account of the Brothers of the Common Life, Oxford 1858.

Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9).

B.W. Verhey, L’Eglise d’Utrecht. Son histoire, sa vie et sa doctrine. Sa place dans ‘l’Union d’Utrecht’. Ses relations avec les Anglicans, les Orthodoxes et les Catholiques-Romains. Sa place dans le mouvement Œcuménique, Delft 1984.

Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2).

21

archbishopric, ‘the see of Cologne being at the same time raised to metropolitical rank’?’

In the year 1054, St. Bemulphus died, one of the ‘worthy successors of St. Willibrord’. Neale describes the time after that year - in which also the schism between the East and the Western Churches arose - as the times of the ‘degeneracy of the mediaeval Bishops of Utrecht’.’quot;* Their clergy, he writes, ‘by their luxury, want of learning, and too often dissolute lives, promised but a feeble defence against the wave of the Reformation, as it rolled onwards from Germany’.” In 1559, Utrecht was raised again to archiépiscopal rank, and many new bishoprics were founded, among them even a new metropolitan see in Malines; but these measures, according to Neale, ‘only hastened the downfall’ of the Church of Holland, for the imperial treasury would not furnish a due maintenance to the new prelates. In 1581, when the States General proclaimed the Seven United Provinces free and independent from Spain, the Roman Catholic Church was given liberty of religion only in theory, for although the Union of Utrecht (signed 1579) guaranteed freedom of conscience (art. 13), the public exercise of it was made practically impossible by the magistrates (1580).” Like in some states in Germany (e.g. Prussia) in the XIXth century the question was; what happens to the episcopacy of the Catholic Church if the local government is not catholic? For in 1528, the Bishop of Utrecht, after a faction, had given up his temporal sovereignty.’^

From 1602, the successors of St. Willibrord were consecrated for dioceses in partibus infidelium and appointed as Vicar Apostolic after being elected by the chapters. So, Sasbout Vosmeer was consecrated in Rome to be an Archbishop for Utrecht, but under the title of Philippi, ‘in order to avoid unnecessary offence’.’^ He was promised, though, that he would obtain his proper title, as soon as the Archduke, Albert of Austria,’^ would be willing to restore it. Vosmeer’s successor, Philippus Rovenius, bore the same title (Philippi); Jacobus de la Torre - later to be

Neale, History (supra, n. 49) 62f.

5“* Neale, History (supra, n. 49), 65.

Neale, History (supra, n. 49), 103f.

5^ Neale, History (supra, n. 49), 111-113.

5^ Neale, History (supra, n. 49), 72.

5* Neale, History (supra, n. 49), 121.

5’ Being the lawful sovereign in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church: Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 98.

22

counted as ‘fourth Archbishop of Utrecht’^*’ although at this time, the official title still was Vicar Apostolic — had been consecrated under the title of Archbishop of Ephesus in 1647. In 1648, Spain recognized the independence of the Dutch Republic.®' But still, the Vicars Apostolic of Utrecht were consecrated under foreign titles: 5. Johannes van Neer-cassel, ‘Bishop of Castoria’; 6. Petrus Codde, ‘Archbishop of Sebaste’.

It was only after the formal election of Codde’s successor, Cornelis Steenoven, Archbishop of Utrecht from 1724-1725, that, according to Moss,®^ the permission of the magistrates were given but, at the same time, communion with the Church of Rome was lost. As the following history is connected with the Formulary of Pope Alexander VII and the bull Unigenitus, it is important to first examine these documents. Both documents were addressed against ‘Jansenism’, and all the members of the clergy of the Church of Utrecht were asked to sign up to them - until 1966, when after the Second Vatican Council, the Church of Rome officially declared that to accept these documents was no longer a prerequisite for official dialogue (see 2.2.3).

Cornelis Jansen (also called by his Latinized name, Cornelius Janse-nius), in his book Augustinus, took a different view on the doctrinal questions of grace and free-will from that of the Jesuits of his time: like the late Augustine, he taught that the grace of God is irresistible. These questions were ardently discussed at the University of Paris: whereas the Jesuits were accused of Pelagianism, they themselves accused the theologians of Port-Royal, including Amauld,®^ and Pascal®'' of being rather protestant ‘Jansenists’. In 1653, five propositions which were said to be found in the book Augustinus were condemned by the Pope.®® These propositions were:

(1) Some commandments of God are impossible to righteous persons even desiring and endeavouring to keep them, according

“ Not counting Willibrord, and Boniface; the succession is listed in: Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), Appendix D, 354.

Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 103.

Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 122.

Antoine Arnauld (1612-1694), French philosopher, linguist, theologian, logician und mathematician.

Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), French mathematician, physicist, author, theologian and philosopher.

Innocence X, Constitution Cum occasione, 31” May 1653; Latin text: H. Denzinger, Enchiridion symbolorum definitionum et dedarationum de rebus fidei et morum, Freiburg im Breisgau ^’1991, 614f, Nos. 2001-7.

23

to the strength which they then possess; and such grace is lacking to them as would render them possible.

• (2) In the state of fallen nature, internal grace is never resisted.

• (3) In order to merit and demerit in the state of fallen nature, freedom from necessity is not required of man, but it is enough that these be freedom from constraint.

• (4) The semi-pelagians admitted the necessity of infernal preve-nient grace for each separate act, and even for the beginning of faith. Their heresy consisted in this that they considered that grace to be such as the will of man might either resist or obey.

• (5) It is a semi-pelagian error to say that Christ died or shed His blood for all men absolutely.

As it was possible to interpret these propositions in an orthodox way and in a heretical way (to discuss this would however go beyond the remit of this book), the question arose whether by accepting their condemnation it was still possible to hold the teaching of Jansenius. In order to defend their position, the so-called Jansenists mostly did not discuss the theological quaestio facti but the canonical quaestio iuris: namely, that the five propositions did not contain the teaching of Jansenius, as they could not all be found, literally, in the book Augustinus. So they, accepting the papal bull, still were able to regard themselves as catholic.®’

At this point, however, the question of papal authority became crucial. For the Pope had implied that by condemning the five propositions, he had as well condemned the theology of Jansenius. In 1665, he forced the French clergy to sign that the five propositions were taken from the book of Jansenius ‘even in the sense of this very author’.®^ Here, however, the adherents of Jansenius could not follow the Pope, and they refused to subscribe. So in 1710, also Vicar Apostolic Petrus Codde, one month before his death, wrote, regarding the ‘Formulary of Pope Alexander VII’ (respectively the confirming of the former by Clement XI in 1705),

‘The famous five propositions, which the Papal See has condemned, 1 also have ever condemned, (...) in whatever book they may

Translation: C.B. Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 44ff.

Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 44ff. - In fact, according to Prof.Dr. Jan Hallebeek, Amsterdam, many wanted to sign conditionally, but this was not acceptable to Rome.

Bull Regiminis apostolici, the so-called ‘Formulary of Alexander VIT (1656): Denzinger, Enchiridion {supra, n. 65), 619, No. 2020.

24

be found, — even in the “Augustinus” of Jansenius, if they are really contained in that work. 1 never experienced any difficulty, except on the mere question of fact; namely, whether those propositions, which 1 sincerely condemn, are indeed contained there, if the book be understood in the genuine sense of the writer. (...) And since I saw, on the one side, that such a question is not of the faith, and cannot be brought under a charge of heresy, and believed, on the other hand, that it would be a horrible sacrilege to call God to witness that 1 asserted what was in reality doubtful, I confess 1 considered that it would be a sin to subscribe in such a disposition of mind, and to run the risk of committing a profligate perjury.

Apart from the bull Unigenitus (1713) which condemned 101 propositions of the ‘Jansenist’ theologian Pasquier Quesnel, and again the 5 propositions ‘in the sense in which they were condemned’,^” it was this ‘Formulary’ which led to the schism between Utrecht and Rome. For by this ‘Formulary’, the papal see claimed the authority to give an ultimate statement about the interpretation of theologians. In 1717 4 French bishops formally protested against the bull Unigenitus by appealing to a next Ecumenical Council. In a short time the Sorbonne and thirty other French bishops joined the protest movement, including the Archbishop of Paris, Louis Antoine de Noailles. On May 9, 1719, the Chapter of Utrecht, joined the ‘appellants’, who in 1718 were excommunicated by the Pope (bull Pastoralis officii)^' They could not accept the Papal authority being exercised in questions regarding matters of fact (did the book of Jansenius really contain those propositions?) - matters of fact which, on the other hand, had severe doctrinal implications (was the grace of God really resistible?). Therefore, the priest they had elected to be bishop - according to their ancient rights - , was consecrated in the end without the election being confirmed by the Pope.

Only one bishop consecrated Archbishop Steenoven in 1724, Dominique Marie Varlet, a former Sorbonne professor consecrated in Paris to be bishop-coadjutor of Babylon in Persia.^^ This was due to the fact that the Chapter of Utrecht was still refusing the anti-Jansenist, papal bull

® Neale, History (supra, n. 49), 228.

™ Denzinger, Enchiridion (supra, n. 65), 682, No. 2502.

Denzinger, Enchiridion (supra, n. 65), 670.

Verhey, Eglise (supra, n. 51), 58.

25

Unigenitus and the ‘Formulary’ of Pope Alexander VII; by accepting these texts, however, the Church of Utrecht would have had to assert infallibility to the Pope, not only in matters of faith, but also in matters of fact, and this against every evidence. By this exercise of personal conscience, the Church of Utrecht lost its full communion with the Church of Rome, and in the following centuries, became known as the ‘Jansenist’ Church of Utrecht.

In its view of the Church of Utrecht, the Church of England changed her mind in the 19**’ century. Still in 1847, the existence of this Church, and the influence of ‘Jansenist’ ideas throughout Europe served to the Tractarian theologian, William Palmer,^^ as to ‘prove’ that the Roman Catholic Church ‘be infected with heresy’: he mentions Jansenius, Quesnel, Amauld, Pascal in France; Zeger-Bemard Van Espen in Belgium; Johann Nikolaus von Hontheim alias Febronius, and the Archbishops of Cologne, Mayence, and Treves in Germany; Joseph II*“*, and the Archbishop of Salzburg in Austria; Scipione de’ Ricci and the Synod of Pistoia in Italy (all these are theologians of the famous ‘Old Catholic preliminary movements’); and ‘even Portugal’, he writes, ‘was not exempt from the novel opinions’.^'* John Mason Neale, on the contrary, 16 years later (1858) talks about ‘a church which, cut off from the communion of Rome, has clung fast to the catholic faith, and suffered for the maintenance of primitive doctrine '

So it can be said that, before the First Vatican Council, as it is today, there were different opinions within the ‘catholic wing’ of the Church of England about the Church of Utrecht. Some took the Church of Utrecht only as an example of heresy within the Church of Rome; others - since the second half of the 19**’ century^^ - regarded it as catholic, as it was declared later in 1931.

The Church of Utrecht, on the other hand, could not possibly regard the Church of England as catholic because it still accepted all the doc-

W. Palmer, A Treatise on the Church of Christ, Oxford 1842. Palmer was the first theologian in the Church of England known to Moss (Movement, supra, n. 9, 330) to write about the Church of Utrecht.

Palmer, Treatise (supra, n. 73), 258.

Neale, History (supra, n. 49), preface, page iii.

For more details, especially about the time after 1842, see: A. Berlis, Aneinander wachsen - zusammenwachsen; Alt-Katholische und anglikanische Zusammenarbeit in den Niederlanden, in: A. Berlis und M. Ring (red.), Im Himmel Anker werfen;

Vermutungen über Kirche in der Zukunft, Festschrift für Bischof Joachim Vobbe, Bonn 2007, 174-178, chapter 3: Historische Hintergründe.

26

trines of the Council of Trent. So by accepting this council, they could not regard the Church of England as catholic before 1870. And even later, in 1894, two years before papal encyclical ‘On the Nullity of Anglican Orders’ {A^ostolicae Curae, promulgated September 18, 1896 by Pope Leo XIII),'' an archiépiscopal commission issued, in Amsterdam, a document entitled ‘De apostolische Opvolging in de Anglikaansche Kerk’ (‘The apostolic succession in the Anglican Church’) arguing that the Anglican ordinal did not mention the special grace of the priestly office, namely, according to the commission, the power to offer the sacrifice of the mass.^^ This position was later revised (see 1.3.2).

1.2. Since Vatican I:

The establishment of further Old Catholic Churches

During the First Vatican Council (1869-1870), the appeals of the Church of Utrecht and of the French ‘appellants’ were not considered. Further, by the decisions of this Council, all the appeals to the next Ecumenical Council against papal bulls were rejected in principle. For the Bishop of Rome, against the tradition of the Undivided Church (before 1054), and of the Western Church thereafter - cf. Council of Constance (1414-1418), sessiones 4 amp;nbsp;5,^^ and even the Council of Trent (1545-1563) - , was not only declared infallible in ex cathedra declarations on matters of faith, and of morals (these definitions being irreformable in themselves, and ‘not by the consent of the Church’),^*’ but was also given

The historical background, especially of the ordination of Matthew Parker on the 17* December, 1559, was described by J. J. Hughes, Absolut Null und Nichtig. Zur Ablehnung der anglikanischen Weihen durch die Bulle Leos XIII Apostolicae Curae vom 13. September 1896, Trier 1968.

Kirscht, Beziehungen (supra, n. 1 ), 31.35f. - The report was composed by G.C. van Schalk, E. Wijker, G. van der Poll and N. Prins. In reaction on the Dutch report, Bishop John Wordsworth of Salisbury wrote a letter to Archbishop Gerardus Gul on S* October 1894 (De validitate ordinum Anglicanorum; Responsio ad Batavos. Epistola ad reverendissimum Gerardum Gul Archiepiscopum Ultrajectensem, Salisbury-London 1894). Herein, he gives a historical discussion about the consecration-formular of Edward VI and the question whether a non-Roman form can be valid. Wordsworth had also written a letter about the same issue to Gul’s predecessor, Johannes Heykamp (De successione episcoporum in ecclesia Anglicana), on 13*’’ May 1890.

‘This synod ... has authority directly from Christ, and everyone,... even if he be of Papal dignity, is obliged to obey her in matters of faith ...’: Denzinger, Enchiridion (supra, n. 65), 431.

Denzinger, Enchiridion (supra, n. 65), 833, No. 3074 (translation: K.H.N.).

n

o I

‘full supremacy’ by the fathers of that council, concerning the discipline, and the government of the universal church.

1.2.1 Germany (1873) and Switzerland (1876)

Being unable to accept these two new dogmas - bearing in mind that, for instance. Pope Honorius 1 had been anathemised by the 6th Ecumenical Council - some ‘Old Catholics’, lay people and priests, in Germany, Switzerland, and other countries, found themselves excommunicated by the Council. What was their ecclesiological status? Without bishops, they were not complete as Catholic Churches, so after several discussions (International Old Catholic Congresses in Munich 1871, Cologne 1872, Constance 1873), they built up congregations, made themselves constitutions on a basis of the laws of the old traditions from the Early Church, and elected candidates for consecration as bishops.

These consecrations took place in Rotterdam, 1873; Joseph Hubert Reinkens, Germany, consecrated by Hermanus Heykamp, Bishop of Deventer,*^ and Rheinfelden 1876: Eduard Herzog, Switzerland, consecrated by Joseph Hubert Reinkens.^quot;* No Dutch bishop was present at Herzog’s consecration. This had to do with differences in understanding of church structures and the role of the laity between the Dutch and the Swiss Old Catholic Churches: for the Dutch Church it was unthinkable that a layperson, and not a bishop, could preside over the National Synod. These differences were cleared up in the following years.

Between the two consecrations, the Old Catholic movement had been struggling for a proper doctrinal basis. In Bonn, theologians from the Old Catholic, Anglican, Orthodox, and Protestant Churches met twice (1874; 1875) at ‘Union Conferences’.Both the Anglican and Old Catholic theologians present agreed about eight articles of faith,*^ and

Denzinger, Enchiridion {supra, n. 65), 830, No. 3064.

Denzinger, Enchiridion {supra, n. 65), 255, No. 550.

Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 24If.

Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 255f.

See; C. Oeyen, Die Bonner Unionskonferenzen (habilitation treatise, unpublished), Bonn 1972; cf. C. Oeyen, Döllinger und die Bonner Unionskonferenzen, in: IKZ 90 (2000), 176-185.

Concerning the Holy Scriptures (articles 1-3), the Liturgy (art. 4), Justification (articles 5-7), and the Sacraments (art. 8): Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 263f. German text in: Dr. Steinwachs, Die Unionsbestrebungen im Altkatholizismus, IKZ 1 (1911), 169-186; 471 -499; here 179-181.

28

together with the Orthodox theologians present they agreed about another six articles in 1874ƒand about another six articles in 1875?*

For the year 1876, a third conference was planned but had to be cancelled as a dispute had risen within the Anglican Church: Dr. Edward Bouverie Pusey and others would not agree with the articles concerning the filioque question (the articles stated that it was not lawful to include the filioque clause into the creed), and the Evangelical church party

OQ would not agree to the articles concerning Confession and Eucharist. Also within the Orthodox Church, Dr. Julian Joseph Overbeck^*’ appealed to the Patriarchs and Holy Synods not to accept the articles of the ‘Union Conferences’, but to demand from the Western Churches a complete acceptance of Orthodox doctrine.^'

In Switzerland, the National Synod declared, in 1874, to accept ‘as ecumenical (general) councils only the 7 councils which have been recognized as such by the undivided church of the Orient and of the Occident, according to the authentic text of their decrees.’ The Swiss Bishop, Eduard Herzog, wrote in 1881, after a journey to the United States of America, ‘The main result’ (of my journey) ‘is that 1 entered

QT into full church communion with the Episcopal Church of America.’

As the Swiss Old Catholic Synod had done in 1879,^^ so the 8**’ Synod of the German Old Catholics passed a resolution in 1883, ‘to administer

’’ Concerning Tradition (Art. 9), Mariology (Art. 10), Confession (Art. 11), Indulgences (Art. 12), Prayers for the faithful departed (Art. 13), and the Eucharist (Art. 14): Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 263f; IKZ 1 (1911), 179-181.

Concerning the filioque question: Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 269; IKZ 1 (1911), 185.

” It had been agreed that it was right to continue the practice of confessing sins to the congregation, or to the priest (though, ‘without constraint’) and that the nature of the Eucharist is sacrificial insofar as it is the commemoration and representation

( ‘Vergegenwärtigung’) of the one and sufficient sacrifice of Christ.

” For the life of Overbeck, a married, former Roman Catholic priest who, after having converted to Congregationalism, tried to establish a ‘Western Orthodox Church’, see: C. Oeyen, Westliche Orthodoxie, IKZ 60 (1970), 35-47.

” IKZ 1 (1911), 476.

(... dass sie nur anerkenne) ‘als ökumenische (allgemeine) Kirchenversammlungen nur die 7 als solche von der ungeteilten Kirche des Morgen- und Abendlandes anerkannten Konzilien, und zwar nach dem authentischen Text ihrer Beschlüsse ’: IKZ 1 (1911), 473; translation: K.H.N.

’’ ‘Das Hauptergebnis (meiner Reise) ist das, daß ich mit der bischöflichen Kirche Amerikas in völlige Kirchengemeinschafigetreten bin’-. IKZ 1 (1911), 478; translation: K.H.N.

Moss, Movement {supra, n. 9), 333.

29

Holy Communion to the members of the English Church in both kinds’.^5 This decree had been recommended to the Synod by the Synodal Representative Body {Synodalrepräsentanz) writing, ‘The Church of England is to be regarded as a part of the Catholic Church, as it has been stated at the Union Conferences’?^

In response to this, the Lambeth Conference declared in 1888, concerning the German, and the Swiss Old Catholics, ‘We see no reason why we should not admit their Clergy and faithful Laity to Holy Communion on the same conditions as our own Communicants, and we also acknowledge the readiness which they have shown to offer spiritual privileges to members of our own church’?^

So before the Declaration of Utrecht (1889) in which a common doctrinal basis for all Old Catholic Churches was found, the German, and the Swiss Old Catholic Churches, unlike the Church of Utrecht, saw no difficulties in admitting members of the Church of England to Holy Communion, and accepting the same privilege given to themselves by that Church.

The reforms undertaken by both the Swiss and the German Old Catholic Churches (Liturgy in the vernacular, married clergy, etc.), were eo ipso a break with some of the decrees of the Council of Trent in matters of discipline and by administering Holy Communion in both kinds to the members of the English Church, and later also to their own members, they had rejected the disciplinary authority of the Council of Constance.

By the Declaration of Utrecht, 1889, the Archbishop of Utrecht and the Bishops of Haarlem, Deventer, Germany, and Switzerland professed ‘the faith of the primitive Church as formulated in the ecumenical symbols and specified precisely by the unanimously accepted decisions of the Oecumenical Councils held in the undivided Church of the first thousand years’ (Article 1). The decrees of the Council of Trent were rejected ‘in matters of discipline, and as for the dogmatic decisions of that Council

Y-..) daß den Mitgliedern der englischen Kirche das hl. (heilige) Abendmahl unter beiden Gestalten gereicht werde. ' : IKZ 1 (1911), 479; translation; K.H.N.

‘Die englische Kirche ist, wie schon auf den Unionskonferenzen festgestellt worden ist, als ein Teil der katholischen Kirche anzusehen. IKZ 1 (1911), 480; translation: K.H.N.

’’ H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 143, n. 91; Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 336; German translation: IKZ 1 (1911), 484.

QO nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;,

Denzinger, Enchiridion (supra, n. 65), 437, No. 1199.

30

we accept them only so far as they are in harmony with the teaching of the primitive Church’ (Article 5).

This meant in practice that the Old Catholic Churches were not bound any more by the decisions of the Council of Trent. At the same time it was decided, according to Moss,'*’^ that ‘no church was to have priority or jurisdiction over any other’ and the bishops ‘would not consecrate any bishop without the consent of all the Old Catholic bishops, and without acceptance of the Convention of Utrecht by the candidate.’

For the Old Catholic Churches, the teaching of the Primitive Church -i.e. the consensus of its theologians, the church fathers - is central to all decisions in matters of discipline and of faith. No church, not even the Church of Rome, may have jurisdiction over other churches when this church is true to this teaching and discipline. This is why misunderstandings can arise when Harald Rein talks about an Old Catholic ‘denomination’ ( ‘Konfession ’) writing, ‘it was only with this (the Declaration of Utrecht) that doctrinally and structurally, an Old Catholic denomination and Church Communion, in a genuine sense, came to existen-102 ce .

The ‘denomination’ of Old Catholics can only be catholic and nothing else. Otherwise (that is: if read like a creed or a confession of a ‘new’

” Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 28If. - This had already been declared at an Anglican-Old Catholic conference in Bonn 1887; see: Amtliches Kirchenblatt, Bonn 1887,447f.

Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 280. - Moss wrote this text in 1948 when § 8 of the ‘Utrecht agreement’ dating from IS* Oct. 1952 ( ‘Insbesondere verpflichten sich die Bischöfe, keine Bischofsweihe für andere Kirchen ohne Zustimmung der Konferenz zu erteilen ’ - ‘The bishops commit themselves especially not to consecrate bishops for other churches without consent of the conference’) was not yet written but implicitly contained in § 5 dating from 24* Sept. 1889: ‘Die Mitglieder der Konferenz werden anderen Kirchen gegenüber keine Verpflichtungen eingehen, ohne dass diese vorher in gemeinschaftlicher Berathung besprochen und von allen Mitgliedern gebilligt worden sind. ’ - ‘The members of the conference will not enter into commitments towards other Churches without common discussion and acceptance by all of its members.’ German texts in: U. von Arx, Synopse der drei Fassungen der ‘Vereinbarung’ der Utrechter Konvention der altkatholischen Bischöfe, IKZ 84 (1994), 55. Translations: K.H.N.

‘We adhere faithfully to the Rule of Faith laid down by St. Vincent of Lerins in these terms: Id teneamus, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum. ’ (‘We hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all; for that is truly and properly catholic.’)’ Declaration of Utrecht (Art. 1)

‘Erst mit ihr (der Utrechter Erklärung) entstand lehrmäßig und strukturell eine altkatholische Konfession und Kirchengemeinschaft in einem genuinen Sinn. ’ H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 122, translation: K.H.N.

31

denomination), the Declaration of Utrecht would not make any sense and would indeed appear as ‘quite enigmatic’ and as ‘only too much concerned with the present state’ of the church (Kurt Stalder, 1982). Being a common document of three different churches, though, its target was rather to avoid new creeds and confessions and to call into mind those creeds and confessions which are common to the whole of Catholic Christianity.

1.2.2 United States of America (1897)

By 1897, a number of Polish congregations in Chicago and the neighbourhood were ‘dissatisfied with the control exercised by their Roman Catholic bishops (who were mostly Irish)’ and this led them to seek episcopal oversight. Stanislas Kozlowski was consecrated Bishop of Chicago for the Polish National Catholic Church by the Swiss Old Catholic Bishop, Eduard Herzog, in Berne. One of the consequences was that the newly-planned negotiations for union between Old Catholics and the Anglican Communion, which were foreseen for immediately after the third Lambeth Conference (1897) were cancelled.The consecration was, however, not the only reason for their cancellation. As Harald Rein points out. Bishop Herzog was able to clarify the situation towards the Protestant Episcopal Church of the U.S.A. (PECUSA), which had felt very angry because of Bishop Kozlowski’s consecration. Furthermore the Church of Utrecht was still not prepared to accept the validity of Anglican orders, on similar grounds to those of Pope Leo XIII in 1896 (theological but not historical).'®^

The Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC), as the name suggests, has always wanted to be a national church, praying in Polish, although living in the U.S.A, and would never have wanted to question the catholicity of PECUSA just by its very existence on the same territory. Indeed, Bishop Kozlowski, four years after his consecration, ‘submitted

K. Stalder, Ekklesiologie und Rechtsstruktur der Utrechter Union der altkatholischen Bischöfe, in; Van Kasteel e.a.. Kracht (supra, n. 10), 107-121, 109; the complete sentence is: ‘Beachtet man, daß die Bullen Unigenitus und Auctorem fidei heute nur relativ Wenigen bekannt sind und die Stellungnahme zum Tridentinum sich recht änigmatisch ausnimmt, wirkt die ‘Erklärung ’ im Gegensatz zu dem, was man von einem Basistext erwarten würde, doch allzusehr auf den damaligen Augenblick ausgerichtet. ’

Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 292.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 151.

About the document ‘De apostolische Opvolging in de Anglikaansche Kerk ’, see above (end of 1.1).

32

a ‘Memorial’ to PECUSA requesting intercommunion in 1901’.’*’^ Before his death in 1907, there was a plan for him to enter PECUSA as a suffragan bishop for the Poles, but PECUSA ‘took no action on his petition’.'*’* His successor, Franciszek Hodur, who was consecrated in Utrecht in 1907 by Archbishop Gul, was in fear that his own Polish Church could be swallowed up by the huge Episcopal Church. He found it ‘unacceptable’ just to ‘become an Episcopal prelate responsible for “Polish affairs’”. So here, the question of authority was mixed with ethnic, and socio-cultural factors and has prevented a church union between ECUSA (PECUSA’s name from 1979) and PNCC up to the present day.

Therefore we can see that even after the Declaration of Utrecht there were separate negotiations and steps towards intercommunion taken by different Old Catholic Churches, according to each Old Catholic Church’s doctrinal self-understanding within the framework of that Declaration.

1.2.3 Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Austria (from 1924);

Poland (1936)

In 1924, the bishops Alois Paschek (Wamsdorf, Czechoslovakia), and Marko Kalogjera (Zagreb, Yugoslavia) were consecrated by the Archbishop of Utrecht, Franciscus Kenninck. After the First World War, the Old Catholics in Austria were also allowed by the government to have a bishop, and Adalbert Schindelar was consecrated in 1925 by Bishop Adolf Küry in Berne.”*’ The first Polish Bishop, Joseph Padewski, was consecrated by PNCC-Bishop Francis Hodur in Scranton, U.S.A., after the Bonn Agreement, in 1936.’”

1.3. The Bonn Agreement (1931)

The text and the ratification of the Bonn Agreement have already been described above (chapter 1.0.). In the following paragraphs, I want to describe what happened in the years before and, against the background of this history of the text, try to discern its genuine meaning.

L.J. Orzell, Polish National Catholic-Episcopal Relations; Some Historical Observations, IKZ 82 (1992), 166-181; 166ff.

IKX 82 (1992), 166ff.

'®’/A:Z82(1992), 166ff.

'*® Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 312-314.

Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 356.

33

1.3.1 The ‘Mathew Affair’ (from 1908)

In April 1908, Arnold Harris Mathew was consecrated ‘to the regionary episcopate of the Catholic church in the Kingdom of Great Britain at St Gertrud’s Cathedral, Utrecht’, by Archbishop Gerardus Gul, assisted by the Bishops of Haarlem and Deventer and Bishop Josef Demmel from Germany. Christoph Schuler has called the events which led to this consecration, ‘The Mathew Affair’.quot;^ In the description and evaluation of these events, I will follow Schuler who writes, ‘The consecration of A.H. Mathew as an Old Catholic bishop for England has to be seen in the wider context of Anglican - Old Catholic relations’.”quot;*

Schuler describes these relations as being excellent only during the years following the first Vatican Council, especially between England, Germany and Switzerland. The reason for the cooling off in the relationship, according to Schuler, was the refusal of the Church of Utrecht to accept the validity of Anglican orders. As I wrote above (chapter 1.2.2), the consecration of an Old Catholic bishop in the U.S.A, was also a cause (or a sign) of a rather difficult relationship at the end of the 19* century. So in Schuler’s opinion, ‘the Mathew affair was not the reason for the cooling of relations between the Anglicans and Old Catholics (Moss, Kiiry), rather it represented the lowest point (Rein, Kirscht).’ In the end, however, ‘the affair proved to be a catalyst for a new rapprochement between the two communions’.'”

The affair ended when, in 1910, Mathew secretly consecrated two excommunicated Roman Catholic priests to the episcopate, thereby breaking the A^eement of Utrecht,”^ and declared his ‘autonomy and independence’. ' Consequently, he made himself persona non grata with the See of Utrecht, and with the other Old Catholic Churches.

Since then, his consecrations, and the consecrations of all the episcopi vagantes who were consecrated by him or by his followers, have not been recognized by Old Catholics and Anglicans, because he had deceived the Old Catholic bishops: before his consecration he pretended to have been elected by parishes which, in reality, did not exist. There were

Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 29.

'*’ In his Chichester MTh dissertation of 1993, The Mathew Affair, published 1997

(supra, n. 12).

Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 44.

Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 44.

Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 34.

Moss, Movement (supra, n. 9), 304.

34

only two parishes and a hand-written list of names of parish priests and parishes whose names had been dictated to him, shortly before his consecration, by Richard O’Halloran, another former Roman Catholic priest. According to Mathew, O’Halloran had told him that he was ‘organizing’ these parishes.quot;^

Whatever view one might have about the validity of the orders of epis-copi vagantes, it has been, in my opinion, very prudent of the Anglican Communion to state that

‘the circumstances of Bishop Mathew’s consecration are so uncertain, and his subsequent isolation is so complete, that, without casting any sort of reflection on the validity of Old Catholic orders (...) we feel that as a matter of practice, in the event of any persons ordained by him or by his successors desiring to come over to the Anglican Church (...) the onlv proper course would be for them to be ordained sub conditione.

According to the Western theology of ordination, formulated by Augustine of Hippo, Mathew was in valid orders. On the other hand, there exists an older theology of apostolic succession which binds the bishop much more closely to his church, as Louis Bouyer writes,

‘any bishop, even regularly appointed and consecrated, as long as he has no church of his own, is not yet a bishop properly speaking, but just a person who has received the full preparation for some future episcopate (...).’ ‘^*

So by secretly consecrating two bishops, Mathew had broken communion with the Old Catholic Churches of the Union of Utrecht, and had started a ‘succession’ of episcopi vagantes.

Letter of Mathew to Bishop Herzog in Berne, 6*'’ August 1915, Bischöfliches Archiv der Christkatholischen Kirche der Schweiz, Bem, AH 14 / AH 87-90, quoted in Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 58, n. 10.

Lambeth Conference of 1920, Report 155; cf. Resolutions 27 amp;nbsp;28: Lord Davidson of Lambeth, The Six Lambeth Conferences 1867-1920, London ^1929, quoted in: Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 42; 70, n. 8.

Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 42.

L. Bouyer, Bishops in the Church; The Catholic Tradition, in: P. Moore (ed.), Bishops, But What Kind? London 1982, 37, quoted in: Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 40.

35

• 1.3.2 Acceptance of Anglican Orders by Utrecht (1925)

In 1922 and 1923 three Orthodox Churches (the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Jerusalem, and Cyprus) declared that, in their view, the orders of the Anglican Church ‘possess the same validity as the orders of the Roman, Old Catholic, and Armenian churches’.

John Anderson Burley, honorary Canon of Utrecht and former General Secretary of the Executive Committee of the Society of St. Willibrord (which had been founded in 1908 in order to promote intercommunion between Anglicans and Old Catholics) wrote in 1983: ‘The acceptance of Anglican Orders by the Oecumenical Patriarchate in 1922 changed the whole climate of Anglican - Old Catholic relations’.

In June, 1925, Archbishop of Utrecht Kenninck told Archbishop of Canterbury Randall Thomas Davidson that an appointed commission of his church had come to the conclusion that bishops and priests, ordained by bishops with laying-on-of-hands and prayer, according to the intention of Christ, the apostles, and the early church, are truly bishops and priests and therefore, there were no reasons why the ordained ministers of the Anglican Communion should not be validly ordained. So by 1925, the main obstacle to intercommunion between Old Catholics and Anglicans had been removed.

• 1.3.3 Preparations in 1930

During the Lambeth Conference 1930 in London, there were two meetings between the Old Catholic Bishops’ delegation, consisting of the three Dutch Bishops, and an Anglican Bishops’ delegation, consisting in seven, later ten, Anglican Bishops. The President was Bishop of Gloucester Arthur Cayley Headlam who, in 1932, convinced the Upper House of the Convocation of Canterbury to agree to the Bonn Agreement.

die nämliche Gültigkeit besitzen, die den Weihen der römischen, altkatholischen und armenischen Kirchen zukommt. ’ IKZ 12 (1922), 176f.; translation: K.H.N.

J.A. Burley, The Society of St. Willibrord: (a) Its History, in: G. Huelin (ed.). Old Catholics and Anglicans; 1931-1981, Oxford 1983, 62-74; 66.

See: Kirscht, Beziehungen {supra, n. 1), 43; IKZ 15 (1925), 65.

By reading ‘a very long speech which sent their Lordships into a comfortable sleep’: Headlam in a letter to his niece, quoted in: R. Jasper, Arthur Cayley Headlam, London 1960, 218. M.F.G. Parmentier, Anglicans {supra, n. 10), 128, commented in 1982: ‘The Bishop of Gloucester must have had a great sense of humour. ' ’^®The minutes are printed in German inthe/A'Z2I (1931), 139-146; 139.

36

The first meeting took place on Wednesday, July 16th. The subject of the discussions was the Declaration of Utrecht, Articles I to VI - articles VII and VIII contain an expression of ecumenical hope, and a statement against unbelief - . With regard to these articles, there was sufficient agreement in the eyes of the participants, as the Archbishop of Utrecht declared that the first four oecumenical councils are more important than the other three (Article I), that the Bishop of Rome has a historical primacy but not a doctrinal one (Article II); that it was right to reject the dogma of the immaculate conception (Article III). The other three articles (Article IV, about the Papal Bulls against Jansenism, and the Syllabus of 1864; Article V, about the rejection of the Council of Trent; Article VI, about the Eucharist) found sufficient agreement.

At the second meeting, which took place on July 19*, a document entitled ‘Suggested Terms of Intercommunion between the Church of England and the Churches in Communion with her and the Eastern Orthodox Church’was discussed. The Archbishop of Utrecht had two main questions, concerning the relation between Scripture and tradition (Point III of the document), and concerning the doctrine of Order in the church (Point XII).

Concerning Point III (‘Of the sufficiency of Holy Scripture’), the Archbishop wondered whether the sufficiency of scripture was too heavily emphasized. From an Old Catholic point of view, it is necessary to interpret scripture within the Catholic tradition. Bishop Headlam answered that the Anglican Church respects what the Great Russian Catechism says about the worth of tradition to explain scripture, and he remarked that in the ‘Thirty-Nine Articles’ (Article 34), the Church of England adheres to the tradition of the church, insofar as it is not ‘repugnant of the Word of God’. So it is clear that matters, which had been raised at the Council of Trent, were still being discussed but the Archbishop accepted Headlam’s answer.'^**

Concerning Point XII of the document (‘Of the Holy Orders of the Church’), the Archbishop declared that it would be a hindrance for reunion if those who did not accept the Apostolic Succession were allowed to administer sacraments. In a longer speech Bishop Headlam answered that in the Anglican Communion nobody, who was not epis-

1KZ2\ (1931), 140f.

The Christian East 2 (1931), Vol. XII, No. 2, London 1931, 49-57, quoted from H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 218, n. 235.

Evans, Tradition {supra, n. 30), 169.

IKZ2}. (1931), 143f.

37

copally ordained, would be allowed to administer sacraments. On the other hand, the Old Catholic saw a problem with possible agreements which the Church of England was considering with churches, whose ministers were not episcopally ordained. Their ordinations, though, had a spiritual value, and plans like the scheme of union for the Church in South India meant an interim agreement by which all people in this Church were united into the one. Catholic Church.’^'

The problem of union with Churches without episcopal ordinations is regarded by Harald Rein'^^ as ‘the most delicate question’ or ‘the weakest point’ in the relationship between Anglican and Old Catholics. In my opinion, however, it was quite clear that, as Bishop Headlam pointed out at the end of the discussion of this point, it would never be asked from the Old Catholic Churches to accept non-episcopal ordinations or consecrations as valid.

In Resolution 35c, the Lambeth Conference declared ‘that there is nothing in the Declaration of Utrecht inconsistent with the teaching of the Church of England’, and a Doctrinal Commission consisting of theologians of both church communions was inaugurated.

1.3.4 The meeting in Bonn (1931)

This meeting of the two theologians’ commissions, appointed by the two Archbishops, took place one year later, on 2quot;'’ July, in Bonn.

Harald Rein discovered’^^ that prior to the conference, the two leading figures of the Anglican commission. Bishop Headlam of Gloucester (who was, apparently, an intimate friend of the high church Archbishop of Canterbury Cosmo Gordon Lang), and the Rev’d Graham-Brown (who was an intimate friend of the evangelical Archbishop of York William Temple), agreed that Graham-Brown should present a common text on ‘Suggested conditions on which the Church of England and the Churches now in Full Communion therewith might rightly contemplate formal Intercommunion with the Old Catholic Churches’ in Bonn. It contained the Anglican understanding of intercommunion, and a short summary of the faith of the Church of England, comprising the first

IKZ21 (1931), 143f.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 223: ‘der heikelste Schwachpunkt'. IKZ2i (1931), 145.

The Lambeth Conference 1930, 49.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 246.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC, file 1, No. 1-7. German translation in: 1KZ21 (1931), 159f.

38

three points of the Lambeth Quadrilateral, the 39 Articles and the Book of Common Prayer, and the ordination as a means of maintaining discipline.

This was necessary because there had been a strong evangelical criticism of the Lambeth Conference resolution.In the words of the Rev’d Graham-Brown’s ‘Memorandum of Observations’, the evangelical position was that ‘it is difficult to accept the statement of the Lambeth Conference that there was nothing in the Declaration of Utrecht inconsistent with the teaching of the Church of England (...) The view that Evangelicals take is that it is impossible to bring about union on the basis of identity of doctrine’.

During the sessions of 2quot;‘* July in Bonn, both texts (the ‘Suggested Terms’ and the Evangelical ‘Memorandum’) played decisive roles, and one might take the behaviour of the English Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics to be an example of how, in a re-united Church, union between Catholic and Protestant/Evangelical Christians might be possible.

In the morning, each commission answered questions of the other which had been exchanged beforehand. The main Old Catholic question regarded the evangelical ‘church party’ and the authority of the Lambeth Conference, the question of the 39 Articles and the understanding of ordination and consecration within the Church of England and in the churches in communion with it?” Most of the answers were given by Bishop Headlam. They stressed the comprehensiveness of the Anglican Church. After that, he quoted the Rev’d Graham-Brown’s ‘Memorandum’ about the evangelical understanding of intercommunion. Interestingly, the question of the Old Catholic Bishop of Deventer Johannes Hermanus Berends was whether the Evangelicals within the Church of England regarded themselves to be identical (i.e. in communion) with the church before the Reformation, and the Rev’d Graham-Brown agreed that they did?^° So in the opinion of Bishop Berends, the historical continuity of a Church with the Catholic Church before the Reformation was decisive in the question of the catholicity of a Church - this had also been Dollinger’s theology: his opinion was quoted at the close of the first part of the morning session.

On the whole development, see: Parmentier, Anglicans (supra, n. 10).

’’’ ‘Memorandum of Observations on the Declaration of Utrecht as interpreted by Evangelicals’ (11 pages; Bischöfliches Archiv Bern), quoted in: H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 233f, n. 26If.

IKZ2\ (1931), 149-151.

“”’/A:Z21 (1931), 155.

39

The Anglican questions regarded the relation between scripture and tradition, the councils, the creeds, and the sacraments of confession and marriage. Most of the questions were answered by the Bishop of Deventer, Berends.’'**

In the afternoon, the discussion was based on the paper about ‘Suggested conditions on which the Church of England and the Churches now in Full Communion therewith might rightly contemplate formal Intercommunion with the Old Catholic Churches’*'*^ which had been prepared, on behalf of the Anglican commission, by the Rev’d Graham-Brown. Bishop Küry (Switzerland), however, suggested that they should avoid attempting to ‘sketch a new creed’. *'*^ Therefore, the ‘Suggested conditions (...)’ were shortened to the present Bonn Agreement. So, the Bonn Agreement contains the Anglican comprehensiveness with regards to doctrine on the basis of a mutual recognition of the other Church’s historical continuity with the Catholic Church before the Reformation period.

• 1,3.5 From ‘intercommunion’ to ‘full communion’ (1961)

Following partly the recommendations of the Lund Faith and Order Conference in 1952, the term to describe the relationship between the Anglican and the Old Catholic Churches was changed in 1961. According to the Lund Conference, ‘intercommunion’ was indeed the right term to describe Anglican - Old Catholic relations:

• ‘(3) Intercommunion: where two churches, not of the same confessional family, by agreement allow communicant members freely to communicate at the altars of each, e.g.. Churches of the Anglican Communion and Old Catholics, Protestant Episcopal Church and Polish National Catholic Church in USA. Subject to differences of language etc., intercommunion in most cases would also involve inter-celebration; (...)’

‘Full communion’, in Lund, was the term reserved for ‘Churches in doctrinal agreement or of the same confessional family’.*'*'*

““ IKZ2\ (1931), 156-158.

‘Memorandum of Observations on the Declaration of Utrecht as interpreted by Evangelicals’, Bischöfliches Archiv Bern, 11 pages, lOf.

IKZ2\ (1931), 160.

O.S. Torkin (ed.). The Third World Conference on Faith and Order, held at Lund 1952, London 1953, 52.

40

In Resolution 14, the Lambeth Conference 1958 accepted the term ‘full communion’, but related it to the Bonn Agreement by stating that

‘where between two churches not of the same denominational or confessional family, there is unrestricted communia in sacris, including mutual recognition and acceptance of ministries, the appropriate term to use is ‘full communion’, and that where varying degrees of relation other than ‘full communion’ are established (...) the appropriate term is ‘intercommunion’.’

Thus, for the Church of England, it was not doctrinal agreement, or membership to a special confessional family which was essential for the term ‘full communion’ (which, according to the Lund Conference describes the highest form of church relationship before organic union), but unrestricted communia in sacris.

On 22quot;“^ and 23quot;^^* September 1961, the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference ‘agreed to the suggestion made by the Lambeth Conference for the renaming of the intercommunion which has existed since 1931 between the Anglican and Old Catholic Churches, as Full Communion and to describe this in German as: Valle Kirchliche Gemeinschaft' By stating that this was a renaming and not a change in the relationship, the Bishops’ Conference, in my opinion, made it quite clear that full communion in 1961 meant the same as intercommunion in 1931 : unrestricted communia in sacris.

1.3.6 Full Communion with three further churches (1965)

On 2P' September, 1965, the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference agreed to enter into full communion with the Philippine Catholic Independent Church, the Spanish Reformed Episcopal Church, and the Lusitanian Church.*'*^

The Spanish Reformed Episcopal Church was founded in 1871, and the first Bishop, Juan Bautista Cabrera, was in 1894 consecrated by

The Lambeth Conference 1958; The Encyclical Letter from the Bishops together with the Resolutions and Reports, London (SPCK), 1.35.

Letter from Bishop Urs Küry (Switzerland), Secretary of the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference, to the Rev’d John R. Satterthwaite, General Secretary of the Council on Inter-Church Relations (Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 8, no date).

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 409.

41

William Conyngham baron Plunket, Anglican Archbishop of Dublin.*'*^ It entered into full communion with the PECUSA in 1961 and with the Church of England in 1963

The Lusitanian Church (the complete name is, ‘The Lusitanian Church, Catholic, Apostolic, Evangelical’) was founded in 1880. Subsequently, it received episcopal support from the Episcopal Bishop of Mexico and from Bishops of the Church of Ireland. In 1958, the Rev’d Antonio Ferreira Fiandor was consecrated Bishop by the Anglican Bishop of South-Western Brazil dom Plinio Lauer Simoes.'^' Like the Spanish Reformed Episcopal Church, it became a member of the Anglican Communion in 1980.

The Philippine Catholic Independent Church'^^ {Iglesia Católica Filipina Independienté} had come into existence when in 1902, after decades of rebellion against the Spanish/Roman Catholic colonial system, one of the spiritual leaders of that rebellion, Gregorio Labayan Aglipay, was ‘consecrated’ Prime Bishop by the laying-on-of-hands by several priests. But after several changes in doctrine (towards Unita-rianism), neither the PECUSA missionary bishop Charles Henry Brent nor the Old Catholic bishop Eduard Herzog (Switzerland) were able to enter into communion with this Church.^^4 ()n|y nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;1947, the Church

returned to an orthodox-Trinitarian doctrine, and asked PECUSA for the consecration of their bishops. On 7“^ April, 1948, Isabelo de los Reyes jr., Manuel N. Aguilar, and Gerardo M. Bayaca were consecrated bishops by the American missionary bishop of the Philippine Episcopal Church Norman Binsted, and all priests were re-ordained.'^^ In 1958, the

A brief history of this, and of the Lusitanian Church, is in the Committee Report of the Lambeth Conference 1958 {supra, n. 145), 2.56, and in Henry Long (editor). Who Are the Anglicans? Profiles and maps of the Anglican Communion, with brief descriptions of inter-Anglican agencies and their history (Prepared for the Lambeth Conference 1988), 63. See also: D.J. Schoon, Van bisschoppelijke Cleresie tot Oud-Katholieke Kerk, Amsterdam / Nijmegen 2004, 675.

IKZ 52 (1962), 60.

53 (1963), 246.

'5* The Lambeth Conference 1958 {supra, n. 145), 2.56.

'5^ A history of this church is given in an Open Letter to the Archbishops and Bishops of the Anglican and Old Catholic Churches. Parts of a German translation of this letter were published in IKZ 52 (1962), 213-215.

For the history of this church, see: E.W. Heese, Die Philippinische Unabhängige Kirche, IKZ 54 (1964), 57-82; L.B. Whitemore, Struggle for Freedom, New York 1961.

‘5'* IKZ 54 (1964), 6Iff.

IKZ5A {\9M), 69f.

42

Lambeth Conference declared its pleasure at the vigorous growth of the church, and in 1960, the Philippine Bishops entered into full communion (on the terms of the Bonn Agreement!) with the Anglican Provinces of the U.S.A. (1961); Japan; Uganda, Ruanda and Burundi; West Indies; Central Africa; Canada (all 1962); India, Pakistan, Burma, and Ceylon; and England (both 1963) ƒ

1.4. Problems relating to the Bonn Agreement

In this chapter, I have described the history of the official ecumenical relationships between Anglican and Old Catholic Churches. These relationships have found their expression in the Bonn Agreement. As we have seen, the Bonn Agreement - as did the Declaration of Utrecht -avoided as far as possible stating what can be called a ‘new creed’. It placed the main emphasis upon the mutual agreement that all churches involved are in a historic continuity with the Early Church, confessing the Christian faith in continuity with the Bible, the tradition of the church fathers, and the truly Ecumenical Councils. It is the task of theologians to express this faith in a language which can be understood today, and which promotes Christian unity. Therefore, in the following chapter I want to describe how theologians of both church communities have fulfilled their task.

Three main difficulties relate to the Bonn Agreement. The first one is: how do the churches involved (Anglican and Old Catholic Churches) relate to each other when there are overlapping jurisdictions! The second is: how do they take part in each others decisions about ecumenical relationships with other churches? And thirdly: who has the authority to decide about questions like the ordination of women to the priesthood (and diaconate, and episcopacy)?

By describing the Anglican - Old Catholic theologians’ conferences, I want to try to throw a little bit more light on these issues.

IKZ 54 (1964), 73f.

43

S53;\f

tt(^UJWlt;lt;Slilt;àofvmnîto«n^ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;lôe^gÿiÂÏIjnrMi^wiilt»

!lto«5toi¥ö-i8: aöi^l8lïéiOfigt;^lt;4^t!ïn»m«n8A rwoH erfJlo amp;ami sto no)

lJa»ÄnliwimÄid4Äß ^ji«füt^iv^ti«B8^alt;»q8b;(H�) iAÆibbtaÂ

CîtofetSp ôMuM4inuÉ^)4itoÂig^ wbaêiiCâ^f^J^ tba«^

^equenU », lî received episcopal suc port Îrofît ’ tfi(^4)ilito^èr8igto|)bs£ iVIegt;(tco and troin üv-'^'p'; Ot the lt;nbsp;h inch o.i heiarid In I^^S, the Kev d Antonio leattifä

toattrtpniO^àüôîW^wUîto Mtot«lfUïAlS*^fa«^’-*b*!WfJdln1ws^Mateiî^ rtoe

'»paii'fcb .^«slôWlild . biaîb*hjW9iîôftAnnew3Qd'^

AWiijAainewWWAionoô WÔ-rtlttoiamlt;|K3 listo bnooî sverf gqiriznoilsiso îrt»9Wil?s{rtôàBi®tebQieto!ib^jiwi^ ’rtnlt;^j|ilÄ7.n6’?»lt;«^

lMfetolt;f0rÈïd7rcs«th|«aite8«tfl» lÄJ^bÖ«»«»

jitm«2lôfto«5triOwilt;^ii(îW tóWtoiswolt;)iitórt^tK«ttoOii^ tak ^l^nöröteäafe tto

âewWtati -Mbe^ieli^afOfiltvletóBïBtttaaleïKhto' oüt ieK(wiée^

returned to art onhod^at.Tfinjuuïan ducuine, and 4ilaM»äßiäöiibl0ylMi

»to W-Ori A' .totitovbnA V«Ml3Wri'J istoo tow

Artr/ïo/icAeAt-fA. Amsterdam/Nij'iregcr. ^tKU 6î‘ _

’ /A/52 (1962). 60.

'''P AZ 53 0963), 246. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;’

’' ll.e Lairibeth Conference 1958/ nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'4?! ?''gt;'lt;

‘'' .A history of this church is ^ven m sû lt;nbsp;tw l.e«ct fó ihc nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;'i:?* ■.*gt;

ra'tht-Aflghtan andOldCatbo»kQw««»W' ^’^■'■” nbsp;nbsp;« Cen’ia,, transist.oii .e e-- hater

were paWiahed in /JCZ 52(1962), 213-215

”' Fw the h«»*ary of this ohweh* a«e; E.W. Hee«, !gt;ic f’twi tfminische Unabhängige Kinhe /AZ 54 (1964), 57-«2-. L.B. Whttemore. /-r Freedom, New Vork

1961 '*‘/A:Z54{1964).61ff '”/äZ54(J964).691

44

2. Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences

2.0. Introduction

After the Bonn Agreement, there were three different groups of Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences. The first group dealt with jurisdictional and other ecclesiastical problems concerning the cooperation between Anglican and Old Catholics in Europe, including the two Iberian Churches. They were official conferences of bishops and of theologians appointed by the different Churches. They took place in Amersfoort 1947, Utrecht 1958, Trier 1972, and Amersfoort 1979. Similarly, from 2000 onwards the Anglican - Old Catholic International Co-ordinating Council (AOCICC) met,’^^ at first four times: in 2000 (Rotterdam), 2001 (Ely), 2002 (Prague), 2004 (Canterbury), and then again, with a new mandate of the Archbishops of Canterbury and Utrecht, in 2005 (Luzern), 2007 (Madrid) and 2008 (Beuggen). In this Council, both practical/juridical and theological/doctrinal questions have been dealt with.

The second series of conferences took place in Northern America. After the ratification of Anglican - Old Catholic intercommunion by the Protestant Episcopal Church of the U.S.A. (PECUSA), the Anglican Church in Canada in 1934, and the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) in 1947, theologians of both church communities met for twelve joint meetings between 1947 and 1976, to discuss the practical implications of the Bonn Agreement. After the decision of the PNCC to suspend sacramental intercommunion, a North American Working Group met regularly.

It is about these two, more regular and efficient, groups of conferences that I will report in the first part of this chapter (2.1. Overlapping jurisdictions).

There is a third form of theological consultation between Anglican and Old Catholics which began with a number of more informal conferences. It was started by the Society of St. Willibrord. Since the Bonn Agreement, the object of the Society has been ‘to promote friendly relations between the Anglican Communion and the Old Catholic Churches, including the fullest use of the intercommunion now established between

A. Berlis, 1931-2006 (supra, n. 7), 533.

45

them’. ¹nbsp;^2nbsp;35’ In 1955, Canon Eric Waldram Kemp, Theological Secretary of the Society of St. Willibrord and Principal of Exeter College, Oxford, suggested to John Burley, Honorary Secretary of the Society of St. Willibrord, to have a theological conference between Anglican and Old Catholic theologians. John Burley, subsequently, asked Fr. Geoffrey Curtis, CR, one of the Mirfield Fathers, to consult professor Werner Küppers in Bonn while he was visiting Germany in December 1955. So professor Küppers, together with Canon Kemp, organized — not on behalf of their churches, but from within them — the first six conferences of theologians between 1957 and 1973. Until 1985, Canon Kemp, later Bishop of Chichester, took part in every conference.'^® The PNCC participated in a number of the conferences.'®'

From 1966, the Anglican Council on Foreign Relations took part in the organization of these conferences. After professor Christian Oeyen succeeded professor Küppers in his office in Bonn, the seventh conference (Lucerne, 1974) demanded ‘that both the International (Old Catholic) Bishops’ Conference and the Archbishop of Canterbury should appoint Standing Committees for liaison between the two churches’.'®^ So indeed from 1980, the partaking theologians were officially appointed by their churches'®quot;' and after 1990, the conference was reconstituted ‘as a “Standing Anglican - Old Catholic International Consultation’”.'®®

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Nachlass Küppers’ 18.2.1956.

46

¹

5’ Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 17, 31” March, 1956.

An interview with Bishop Kemp about the main question of this chapter is recorded in Appendix I.

1961, 1966, 1972, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1990. The dates, places, participants, papers read on these conferences and the records which still exist, are recorded in Appendix II.

Letter from E.M. Atkinson, Secretary to Canon Satterthwaite (General Secretary of the Council on Foreign Relation), to Canon Kemp, 24'*’ June 1966 (Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp ’, 27*** June 1966).

‘THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY’S COUNSELLORS ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Anglican-Old Catholic Theological, Conference, held in Lucerne, 18quot;’-22quot;quot; September 1974’ (this is a wrong date: 14quot;’-!8* Sept is right), ‘REPORT, Document No. A/OCC (1974) 11, C.F.R. 45’, page 2: Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 18quot;'-22quot;quot; Sept. 1974 (wrong date).

²

Joint Statement of the Anglican-Old Catholic Theological Conference, Trier. 14quot;’-18quot;’April, 1980 (Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 14quot;’-18quot;’ April, 1980).

³

Draft Report of the Anglican - Old Catholic Theological Conference August 22quot;quot;-26quot;’ 1990, in a letter from Colin Docker, Bishop of Horsham, and Chairman of the

These conferences, beginning in Rheinfelden (1957), and ending, so far, in Leeds (2005), will be described in the second part of this chapter (2.2 Ecumenical dialogues). In the third part (2.3. Ordination of women), I want to investigate how the subject of women’s ordinations was discussed at these conferences, and how, on the whole, it affected full communion between Anglicans and Old Catholics.

2.1. Overlapping jurisdictions

The Lambeth Conference 1908, after Bishop Mathew’s consecration, had strongly disapproved of the existence of Old Catholic Churches on ‘Anglican territory’, ‘more especially in cases where no difference of language or nationality exists’.Although difference of nationality is indeed the practical reason for all overlapping jurisdictions, it has always been Old Catholic policy, and it was also written in the Archbishop of Utrecht’s answer (on 5th July 1909) to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s letter following the ordinations of Mathew, and to the Lambeth Conference 1906, that Old Catholics ‘were not willing to give up their independence and would support Catholics who organized themselves into a national church, even if there was an Anglican church in that place, because the Anglicans could not always meet their interests’

I r-y (paraphrased by Christoph Schuler).

Bearing in mind that this letter was written at a time of very poor relationships between the two communities (in the same letter, the Archbishop complains that ‘the Anglicans always sacrificed the friendly relations with the Old Catholics for their own interests’: paraphrased by Christoph Schuler'^^), it is still true that in theory, following the Bonn Agreement, different structures of authority may exist in the same area, because of the mutual recognition of independence.

There are overlapping jurisdictions in Europe, except in England (see 2.1.1), in the U.S.A, and in Canada (see 2.1.2). The overlapping jurisdictions in the Philippines between the ECUSA and the PIC do not affect

Society of St. Willibrord, to Bishop Dr. Sigisbert Kraft (Germany), 13“’ November 1990: Archive Prof.Dr. U. von Arx, University of Berne, 13* November 1990.

Resolutions 68 and 69: Davidson, Conferences (supra, n. 119), 334, quoted in: Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 64, n. 3.

Letter from Archbishop Gul to Archbishop Davidson, 5* July 1909, in: Het Utrechts Archief, inv. 86-1 (Aartsbisschoppen van Utrecht van de Oud-Katholieke Kerk van Nederland), inv. nr. 682; the summary of the letter was made by C. Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12) in his dissertation, 94, n. 1.

Schuler, Mathew Affair (supra, n. 12), 65, n. 7.

47

Anglican - Old Catholic relations directly as the bishops of the PIC are not members of the Union of Utrecht.

• 2.1.1. Overlapping jurisdictions in Europe

There are no Old Catholic parishes and, therefore, no Old Catholic bishops in Britain; none of the episcopi vagantes are in communion with Utrecht (see chapter 1.3.1). There are Anglican parishes in continental Europe. Their bishops used to be: the Bishop of Fulham (in London) for Northern Europe, and the Bishop of Gibraltar for Southern Europe. Today, there is one diocese: the Diocese in Europe, part of the Province of Canterbury. There are also American Episcopalian parishes and bishops in continental Europe. Their churches are bound together in the ‘Convocation of American Churches in Europe’; they belong to Province II.'^®

The first conference after the Bonn Agreement concerning overlapping jurisdictions in Europe took place in Amersfoort after the war, in 1947, after a visit of Archbishop of Utrecht Andreas Rinkel to Oxford and Dublin.’’’ The following basic principles were adopted:

• ‘(1.) Each Communion has the right to provide its own ministrations for its own people, wherever they may be, i.e. the Church of England to send its clergy and build churches, etc., in Holland, the Rhineland and Switzerland, etc., for its own people, and vice-versa the Old Catholic Communion to send its clergy and build churches in England for its own people. A clergyman of one Communion when ministering in the church of the other is under the jurisdiction of his own Ordinary and of the Ordinary of the Church where he is ministering.

• (2.) It is desirable that where the two Communions are working in the same locality their congregations should as far as possible maintain their own distinct life, with their own clergy and liturgy, working in close contact with one another.’’”

On the subject of the practical relations in Holland arising from intercommunion, it was agreed to recommend:

Long, Anglicans {supra, n. 148), 54f.

Long, Anglicans {supra, n. 148), 35f. - Province II also comprises several states around New York, Haiti, and the Virgin Islands.

See: Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp', 10quot;‘June, 1947.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 16, 29quot;' and 30'quot; October, 1947.

48

• ‘(1.) That Anglicans wishing to receive Communion in an Old Catholic church should, if possible, carry a letter of introduction from their own vicars.

• (2.) That Anglicans residing in Holland should normally attend their own church.

• (3.) That Anglicans temporarily residing in Holland who are out of reach of their own church ministrations and wish to receive regular ministrations in an Old Catholic church should be inscribed in the church in question in accordance with Old Catholic custom.’

In regard to specific questions as to the status of Anglicans from the Old Catholic point of view, it was stated:

• ‘(1.) An Anglican can receive the sacraments in accordance with the Bonn Agreement.

• (2.) He can take part in the parochial life.

• (3.) He can only be a member of a Parochial Church Council if he becomes a member of the Old Catholic Church.

• (4.) An Anglican clergyman can minister in Old Catholic parishes providing that:

• (a) The permission of the Old Catholic and Anglican Diocesan bishops has been obtained;

• (b) Such ministrations are limited to certain periods;

• (c) He can be recalled if desirable.’*’'*

After another visit of Archbishop Rinkel to England, there was a consultation at Utrecht on 24*’’ April 1958, regarding large numbers of Catholic Apostolic people resorting to Church of England churches in Amsterdam and The Hague because of the absence of any Catholic Apostolic ministers in Holland.*’^ The following proposals were accepted by the Dutch Old Catholic bishops*” and by the Lambeth Conference 1958 (resolution 47).*’^

’’’ Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 16, 29* and 30* October, 1947.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 16, 29* and 30* October, 1947.

IKZ48 (1958), 177.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp 24* April, 1958.

’’’ Archive Lambeth Palace, Box 'Eric Kemp’, 16* December, 1958

The Lambeth Conference 1958 (supra, n. 145), 1.40 - 1.41.

49

• ‘(1.) The Catholic Apostolic body cannot be recognized as a Church;

• (2.) Therefore the sacrament of the Eucharist cannot be provided for them as a group;

• (3.) Members of the Catholic Apostolic Church could however, be received as communicants and be offered the sacraments as individuals;

• (4.) In the case of individuals receiving Anglican sacraments, they must submit to the discipline of that church whose Sacraments they receive and they must not receive Communion where this would not be permitted by the discipline in question;

• (5.) The children of Catholic Apostolic parents may be received for Confirmation and prepared according to the usual practice of the Church that confirms them;

• (6.) Adult Catholic Apostolic communicants should be pressed to conform to the practice of the church to which they resort, but individuals may be admitted to Communion without Confirmation at the discretion of the Bishop.’

The following practical suggestions were agreed upon:

• ‘(1) The possibility of concélébration in Anglican churches with Anglican and Old Catholic priests taking part. In this case the Anglican service could be partly in English and partly in Dutch.

• (2) That Old Catholic priests might be invited from time to time to celebrate the Holy Communion according to the rite of the Church of England in the Dutch language, but only with the express permission of the Bishop of Fulham and the Archbishop of Utrecht.

• (3) That Anglicans might be invited to Old Catholic churches for similar purposes.’'^*’

After the failure of the Synod of the Church of England on 3'*’ May 1972 to give the necessary authority for the Anglican-Methodist unity scheme to go forward, an Anglican/Iberian/Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box 'Eric Kemp 24* April, 1958.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp’, 24* April, 1958.

50

was heid in September, at the abbey of St. Matthias, Trier. participants agreed to the following report:

‘The traditional theology of Episcopacy, as stated for example in the report Doctrine in the Church of England and the Anglican/Methodist Ordinal, speaks of the bishop as the head of a community of Christians (normally understood as territorially defined) and stresses the function of the bishop as a centre of unity, as a chief pastor and as a guardian of the faith. The divisions within Christendom and the movement of peoples have produced a situation in which there are overlapping jurisdictions in certain areas. Differences of language, race and culture make the continuance of this situation pastorally necessary for an unforeseeable future. We believe that acceptance of it can be justified theologically if it is remembered that as a member of the apostolic college a bishop's jurisdiction is potentially universal, though normally limited and if in such situations as have been described the bishops whose jurisdictions overlap work together in overseeing the mission of the Church in that area while at the same time each retains jurisdiction over particular congregations and priests. (...)’

The report ended by stressing the importance of close consultations between ‘foreign’ bishops and the local Churches, ‘most fully in the case of those churches with which there exists a relationship of full communion and where consequently there are no problems of faith or order.’

Even after the suspension of sacramental intercommunion in the U.S.A. (1976), this relationship of full communion was not given up in Europe. A Theologians’ Conference in Chichester (1977) requested a better Anglican - Old Catholic communication (cf. Appendix IL, No. 8). The question of authority was reconsidered by the Lambeth Conference 1978. From December 1979, a conference of Anglican and Old Catholic bishops took place in Amersfoort. Concerning Anglicanism in Europe, it was agreed that there was no need for an ‘Anglican Council

Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 18‘''-20quot;' September 1972.

Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 18*-20quot;’ September 1972.

‘Resumé of Conference of Anglican and Old Catholic Bishops at the Old Catholic Seminary, Amersfoort, The Netherlands from 4quot;'-5* December 1979’, Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, December 1979.

51

of Europe’ but for further Bishops’ Conferences. At the conference, some questions concerning the meaning of the term ‘full communion’ were raised. Concerning the ordination of women, Archbishop of Utrecht Marinus Kok gave an outline of his Church’s firm opposition to the ordination of women and said that any purporting to be ‘priests’ would be proscribed from any functions whatsoever in Old Catholic Churches. The background was that Bishop Richard Millard, Bishop-in-charge of the American Convocation of Churches in Europe, had asked the conference for reactions to his plan to ordain a woman to the priesthood in Geneva, and license her to work in the American Church there. The conference indicated its inability to approve this proposed action.

This led to what Bishop Eric Kemp called, ‘impaired communion between Old Catholics and (American) Anglicans in Europe’ (see Appendix I, question 7), as the ordained ministry of women in the Church was not recognized by the Old Catholic Churches. Unlike in America, though, the Bonn Agreement was not called into question but rather was celebrated two years later in London and Utrecht (1981).

As with the relationship between the different Anglican Churches, it was possible for Anglicans and Old Catholics in Europe to accept each other’s decisions by accepting each other’s independent jurisdictions -as long as they did not interfere with one’s own church laws.

2.1.2 Overlapping jurisdictions in the U.S.A, and in Canada

The first Joint Meeting'*quot;* between the Committees appointed by the presiding bishops of ECUSA and PNCC was held in New York on June 27, 1947.'*5 They declared:

‘The relationship between the Churches, it was agreed, is one of intercommunion, that is, sacramental communion between two autonomous churches, each respecting the independence and jurisdiction of the other, and avoiding any actions that would tend to weaken the faith or loyalty of those in its sister Church, while seeking to cultivate all suitable means for increasing mutual acquaintance and fellowship.’

For the history of these Joint Meetings, see: Platt, Intercommunion {supra, n. 42). ‘*5 The document, ‘Intercommunion between the Protestant Episcopal Church and the Polish National Catholic Church (...)’ (see: Bibliography) is in Bishop Kemp’s collection of records (Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp’, June 27, 1947).

Advisory Council, Intercommunion {supra, n. 40), 5.

52

In addition to the Bonn Agreement, which they quoted, they declared the following:

‘(...) (2.) In introducing the principles upon which intercommunion is based, we shall be guided by this method: In essential matters, Unity. In non-essential matters. Freedom. In all things. Love. (...)

(5.) In this closer relationship of the P.N.C.Church to the Episcopal Church and vice versa, we feel that it is necessary to proceed gradually and slowly, and that the clergy of both churches should strive for a full understanding of the principles and rules of intercommunion, and through this understanding bring to both a positive benefit and a firm faith in the Christian Church. (...) (7.) Participation of the clergy and laymen of both Churches in Church services of a special character is desirable.

(8.) Receiving Sacraments by the faithful of the P.N.C.Church in the Episcopal Church and vice versa is permissible only in cases of necessity or by agreement of the respective bishops concerned

For some members point 8 ‘seemed to nullify the fact of intercommunion by making it ineffective at the parish levelTherefore, at the second Joint Meeting it was added ‘But occasional receiving of Holy Communion in the other Church by a member of either Church in good standing may be permitted as a token of our intercommunion.’

At the following joint meetings, many practical suggestions and theological declarations were given, including different understandings of intercelebration: the service should be conducted either according to the rite of the church in which the celebration took place (5th joint meeting, Connecticut, 1951), or according to the liturgy of the other church on special occasions (7th joint meeting, Buffalo, 1955), or according to the rite and liturgy of either church (8th joint meeting, Scranton, 1956)/^^

Advisory Council, Intercommunion (supra, n. 40), 7f.

Second Joint Meeting: Intercommunion Committees of the Polish National Catholic Church and of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the USA, Buffalo, New York, Polish National Catholic Cathedral, January 14, 1948 (New York: Advisory Council on Ecclesiastical Relations), 6f. (Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp’, January 14, 1948).

Platt, Intercommunion (supra, n. 42), 149-151.

53

From 1956, members of the Anglican Church in Canada joined the meetings.'^*’ After the 10th meeting (1966), the commissions didn’t meet for 10 years. When the subject of women’s ordination arose, the 11”^ meeting in Scranton declared in January 1976,

‘Since each Communion does not require acceptance of all doctrinal opinion or liturgical practice of the other Communion, should a Church of the Anglican Communion by its processes of legislation authorize the ordination of women to the diaconate, priesthood or episcopate and thereby hold a doctrinal opinion different from that of the Polish National Catholic Church, the Polish National Catholics would continue to support the objectives of the agreement of Intercommunion, with the condition that ordained women would not be permitted in sanctuaries of the Polish National Catholic Church, nor to function in any sacramental acts involving its members or priests.’*^'

These recommendations were not, however, accepted by the Synod of the PNCC, which met in Chicago in 1978, and as the ‘sacramental intercommunion’ (mutual partaking in all the sacraments) ceased, so did the meetings of the Joint Commission.By not following the theological recommendations of the officially appointed theologians’ conference, the Synod of the PNCC accepted in 1978 the termination of‘sacramental intercommunion’ which had been declared by their Prime Bishop in 1976, after the ordination of women to the priesthood in the ECUS A.

2.2. Ecumenical dialogues

The Bonn Agreement was very much inspired by the Ecumenical Movement after the first World War, and — more importantly — by the first World Conference of Faith and Order in Lausanne, 1927, where Bishop Adolf Küry (Switzerland) presented a paper about intercommunion and reunion. But already in the 19^ century, the aim of Döllinger and of the Union Conferences, organized by him, had been the ‘reunion of churches’, catholic, orthodox, and protestant; the Chicago /

Platt, Intercommunion {supra, n. 42), 153f.

Supplement to the Report of the Joint Commission on Ecumenical Relations to the 65*** General Convention of the Episcopal Church, The Ecumenical Bulletin, 18 (1976), 27, quoted from: Platt, Intercommunion {supra, n. 42), 159, n. 48.

Platt, Intercommunion {supra, n. 42), 160f.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 198.

54

Lambeth Quadrilateral also described what is ‘essential to the restoration of unity among the divided branches of Christendom’ (Chicago 1886)/^^ and therefore tried to ‘supply a basis on which approach may be by God's blessing made towards Home Reunion’ (Lambeth 1888)?’^

It is, then, natural that both church communions, Anglican and Old Catholic, have had conversations with various other Christian denominations, including Lutherans, Methodists, Orthodox and other Eastern Churches, Presbyterians, Reformed Churches, Roman Catholics, and United Protestants (in Austria, Germany, and India). These conversations were one of the main contents of the series of Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences beginning in Rheinfelden, 1957.

The following parts of this chapter will, therefore, describe how the ecumenical dialogues of either community — on the various levels — with the Indian, and Methodist Churches (2.2.1), the Orthodox (2.2.2) the Roman Catholic Church (2.2.3), and with the different Protestant Churches (2.2.4), were communicated at these Theologians’ Conferences.

• 2.2.1 Reconciliation of ministries? Indian Churches and Methodists

  • 2.2.1.1 United Churches in India, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan

At the end of the first conference in Rheinfelden (Switzerland 1957), Canon Kemp, who himself was a member of the Joint Committee on Relation with the Church of South India of the Convocation of Canterbury, reported about the question of the Church of South India (CSI).*’® The CSI is a united church which, in 1947 and after 20 years of negotiation, brought together Christians from the Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Congregationalist and Reformed traditions.'’^ As, for an interim period, a decreasing number of its deacons and priests were not episco-pally ordained, and as the church retained its full communion with all its ‘mother’ churches, it was not in full communion with the Church of England: only bishops and episcopally ordained priests, were ‘free to celebrate the Holy Communion in a church of the Church of England’, the others, e.g. when desiring to enter the ordained ministry of the Church of England, were ‘subject to its rules and regulations regarding

Evans, Tradition {supra, n. 30), 346.

'’5 Evans, Tradition {supra, n. 30), 354. 48 (1958), 56.

’’’ Long, Anglicans {supra, n. 148), 75.

55

London, Lambeth Palace, June 18th, 1947: Dr. Andreas Rinkel, Archbishop of Utrecht, is gifted with the Lambeth Cross by Geoffrey Francis Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury. See: De Oud-Katholiek 63 (1947), 159.

56

admission to its ministry’, in other words: they had to be episcopally ordained?’^

Archbishop Rinkel was present at the Rheinfelden conference, and was very much impressed by Canon Kemp’s paper.There remained, however, several doubts and questions regarding the CSI, and so he wrote a personal memorandum to the Archbishops of York and Canterbury, and to the Presiding Bishop of ECUS A declaring — thereby quoting from his paper on Eucharist and Ministry he had read at Rheinfelden — that ‘if God wills, this way (of reunion) can lead to a satisfactory end, — it can just as well be a failure' His main objection was that the non-episcopally ordained ministries were considered valid, and he pointed out that the conference had asked for further study of the matter. Archbishop of Canterbury Geoffrey Francis Fisher, in his reply, said that indeed there were certain abnormalities but that no parish, against its will, was to have a non-episcopally ordained minister; and that, because of the abnormalities, the CSI was indeed not a member of the Anglican

I

Communion and only in restricted intercommunion with her. Subsequently, the two Archbishops met,^®^ and as I have found no further records concerning this matter, I assume that these answers satisfied the Archbishop of Utrecht.

Today, however, ‘a majority of Anglican Provinces have ratified agreements of full communion with (...) the Church of South India’.^”’ So indeed, a majority of Anglican Provinces is in full communion with both Old Catholic Churches and a Church which might still include a few ‘Protestant’ ministers (ordained before 1947).

At the end of the second conference (Oxford, 1960), the Rev’d F.P. Coleman informed the Old Catholic participants about ‘The North India and Ceylon Unity Schemes’.The difference between this, and the South India Scheme was, that in order to avoid non-episcopally ordained ministers, all the priests and deacons — whether they had been formerly Anglican or Congregationalist/Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Brethren, or Disciples of Christ — should be equally prayed for in the special

Riley and Graham (ed.), Acts {supra, n. 35), 191.

Die Kirche von Südindien: Ein Briefwechsel zwischen dem Erzbischof von Utrecht und dem Erzbischof von Canterbury, in: IKZ 49 ( 1959), 1 -15, 1.

IKA 49 (1959), 4.

2®' IKZ 49 (1959), 8f.

“^/KZ48 (1958), 177.

Long, Anglicans {supra, n. 148), 79.

2®UKZ51 (1961), 57.

57

service at the inauguration of union, followed by laying-on-of-hands. The prayer to be used was to ask God that he might

‘endue each according to his need with grace for the ministry of Presbyter in the Church of God and according to the order of the Church of Lanka,’

and the form of words to be used at the laying-on-of-hands was,

‘For as much as you were called and ordained minister/ Priest/ Presbyter in the Church of God within the ... Church, and are now called to minister within this Church of Lanka as Presbyter in the Church of God: Receive from God the Grace of the Holy Spirit. Take thou authority to exercise the office of Presbyter in the Church of Lanka to preach and teach the word, to fulfil the ministry of reconciliation and to minister Christ's sacraments in the congregations whereunto you shall be duly appointed. Amen.

In March 1961, the Archbishops of York and Canterbury sent questions to the Archbishop of Utrecht, asking,

(Canterbury:) ‘If the Church of England expressed its willingness to enter into full communion with a Church of Lanka in accordance with the Scheme in its present form, would the Old Catholic Churches consider that their relationships with the Church of England as set out in the Bonn Agreement still hold good or not?’,

(York:) ‘(1.) If this province were to go into full communion with the proposed United Church of Lanka, would this affect our relations with the Old Catholic Churches?

(2.) (respectively) (...) with the proposed United Church of North India and Pakistan (...)?’2*^

S.F. Bayne, Jr., Ceylon, North India, Pakistan; A Study in Ecumenical Decision, London (SPCK) 1960, 34f.

A. Rinkel, Lanka und Nord-Indien/Pakistan, IKZ 52 (1962), 48f, including the Archbishop’s Answers to the Questions put by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to the Archbishop of Utrecht (51-57), and the Declaration of the IBC (57-59).

58

In his answer, in April, the Archbishop said neither ‘yes’ nor ‘no’. He wrote,

‘(...) there is a possibility of difference of opinion in the third term of the Bonn Agreement in which it is said that if each (Communion) believes the other to hold all the essentials of the faith this does not require “the acceptance of all doctrinal opinion, sacramental devotion or liturgical practice characteristic of the other.” — Here remains always the imminent danger that what is called “doctrinal opinion” by one is part of “the essentials of the Christian Faith” in the other’s eyes.’

He went on to say,

‘We do not disguise that this danger is present in the proposed Scheme and Plan. And if the Anglican Communion, without any restrictions, would agree with all expressed, or less clearly expressed or even unspoken conceptions of Scheme and Plan, the possibility of a difference of opinion between Anglicans and Old Catholics in regard to the interpretation of the Agreement would become real. And this would possibly “affect our relationship” and might require a restriction to our otherwise unconditional “yes’’.’^'^^

So the Archbishop warned the churches of the Anglican Communion to enter into full communion with the proposed United Churches of Lanka and North India, for, although former protestant ministers might think the prayer was a ‘catholic’ ordination, still, without goodwill, doubt might arise about the ‘catholic’ character of these ordinations.

Subsequently, only the Upper Houses of the Convocations of Canterbury and York declared, in May 1961, their willingness to enter into full communion with the proposed Church of Lanka (Ceylon) - the Upper House of Canterbury suggested indeed to order the relations between the Churches on the basis of a Concordat similar in all essentials to the Bonn Agreement - ; but these proposals were rejected in the Lower Houses.

‘Yes’ meaning, ‘the relationship still holds good’: Rinkel, Lanka {supra, n. 206), 53f.

2®* Riley and Graham (ed.). Acts {supra, n. 35), 196-198.

59

In September 1961, the International Bishops’ Conference declared ‘to be in agreement with the contents’ of the Archbishop of Utrecht’s answer to the English Archbishops, and expressed ‘its uneasiness about Scheme and Plan’, there being several uncertainties, and the ‘wish that renewed studying of Scheme and Plan might remove these uncertainties before the churches of the Anglican Communion would come to a definite decision’?*’’

Similar requests were given as well by the Lower House of the Canterbury Convocation, regarding the Church of Lanka, in October 1961.2^® Regarding the proposed Church of North India and Pakistan, only the Convocation of Canterbury (both houses) agreed to enter into full communion with it on terms similar to the Bonn Agreement, the Convocation of York regretted not to be able to do so?quot;

So as with the opinion of the Old Catholic bishops, there was a certain ambiguity in the decisions of the English Convocations. It might be interesting to mention that in November 1961, after the new Archbishop of Canterbury, Arthur Michael Ramsey, had taken part in the third conference in Amersfoort, his predecessor. Lord Fisher, wrote to Canon Kemp,

‘My dear Kemp, on page 3 of the Church Times of Nov. 17 1 saw a column headed “Links between Anglican and Old Catholics” based on a report by you. There was a reference to three points about full communion made by my successor, though it did not say whether the points had been made at or before the Congress. The first of the three points startled me when I read that the Anglican and Old Catholic Churches could hold conversations with other Christians anywhere provided that any actual steps towards full communion with others must be taken jointly by the two churches. I can hardly think that the Archbishop meant to give to the Old Catholics a power of veto over our freedom of action such as is possessed by no members of the Anglican Communion itself

IKZ 52 (1962), 57-59.

Riley and Graham (ed.), Acts {supra, n. 35), 196-198.

Riley and Graham (ed.), Acts {supra, n. 35), 196-198.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 18, Nov. 24”’, 1961.

60

Archbishop Fisher was right. The report was mistaken. - Anyway, it clarified what Bishop Headlam had said to Archbishop Kenninck in Lambeth 1930: in spite of Anglican agreements with churches without episcopal ordination, it would never be asked from the Old Catholic Churches to enter into full communion with these churches (see 1.3.3. Preparations in Lambeth).

The Church in Sri Lanka is still extra-provincial to Canterbury, and therefore not in full communion with the Old Catholic Churches. It has not yet been united mainly for political reasons.The Church of North India and the Church of Pakistan were, finally, founded in 1970. Both United Churches are today in full communion with a majority of Anglican Provinces.^'quot;* So here again, a majority of Anglican Churches is in full communion with churches which, in the opinion of the IBC, might include ‘Protestant’ ministers, as these ministers still might hold their own non-episcopal ordinations from before 1970 to be valid (this uncertainty, though, being a question of time).

In his book, Harald Rein suggests that the warnings of the Archbishop of Utrecht, in April 1961, have become reality: the ‘possibility of a difference of opinion between Anglican and Old Catholics in regard to the interpretation of the Agreement’ has indeed ‘become real’. As Rein states, ‘The Anglican Church, as a whole, could accept the Bonn Agreement only because they understood it in a way different from the Old Catholics, ecclesiologically as well as in terms of “ecumenical strategic’”. should be pointed out that already in 1931 there were theologians from different church parties who would have had varying interpretations of church politics and ecumenical goals. It should also be taken into account that the dispute about the theology of ordination (once again - as before 1925!), can indeed be understood as a dispute about theological opinion rather than about the essentials of the Christian faith, and that -after all - Old Catholics, before the Bonn Agreement, were told that Anglicans were about to enter into close relationships with non-episcopal churches; the South India Scheme was mentioned in Lambeth, and

Long, Anglicans (supra, n. 148), 49.

Long, Anglicans (supra, n. 148), 79.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft (supra, n. 2), 350: ‘Die Anglikaner konnten als Gesamtkirche das Bonner Agreement nur dadurch annehmen, daß sie es anders verstanden als die Altkatholiken, sowohl ekklesiologisch als auch ökumenisch / strategisch. ’ Translation: K.H.N.

61

it was agreed that this is a matter which Anglicans have to decide for themselves?'^

2.2.1.2 Methodist Churches

In a memorandum concerning the Anglican-Methodist Conversations?'^ the International Bishops’ Conference, again, took a critical view towards Anglican initiatives for church unity. ‘In the manus impo-sitio of the “Service of Reconciliation’”, they wrote in 1964, ‘the IBC does not see a conclusive guarantee’ {i.e. for a ‘catholic’ consecration), ‘because here it is only supposed that, by the imposition of hands from the one side, God will grant to the other side what it “might” be lacking, while this deficiency is unsufficiently described and recognized.’

In order to clarify open questions. Canon Kemp came to Utrecht in 1965,2'^ and in 1966, the 4quot;’ Conference was held in Oxford. At this conference — the principal of Richmond Methodist College, Dr. H. Roberts, was present — and in subsequent discussions in Zürich,^'’ and in the IKZ, Old Catholics were given opportunity to participate in the shaping of theological opinion within the Church of England.

The difference between the Anglican-Methodist and the proposed CNI union scheme was in the prayers. With regards to Anglican priests, God was asked to ‘send (his) Holy Spirit upon them, each according to his need, that in the office as presbyter in (his) Church, in the coming together of the Methodist Church and the Church of England, they may serve (him) acceptably’, whereas in the prayers which were to be said over Methodist ministers, God was asked to ‘send upon each of these (his) servants, according to his need, (his) Holy Spirit for the office and work as a presbyter in (his) universal church and in the coming together of the Methodist Church and the Church of England’.

So again, the prayers could be understood as a (conditional) ordination of Methodist ministers into the catholic ministry, but there was no need, on the other hand, to understand it in this way.

IKZli (1931), 144f.

^'’/A:Z56(1966), 194-200; 197.

2'*/A:Z56 (1966), 193.

Where Canon Kemp read a paper on the Anglican-Methodist Union Scheme for the IO* International Old Catholic theologians’ meeting, 1968: IKZ 59 (1969), 126-133.

Bishop U. KUry, Switzerland: IKZ 56 (1966), 218-233; E.W. Heese, Germany: IKZ 59 (1969), 134-149.

Anglican-Methodist Unity: Report of the Anglican-Methodist Unity Commission, Part 2 - The Scheme, London 1968, 173f. Underlining: K.H.N.

62

In May 1969, the IBC issued a declaration“““ - similarly to its declaration of September 1961 - expressing concern that a Methodist minister might not conceive this prayer as a Catholic ordination, therefore making it difficult to see this ordination as valid because of a possible lack of intention on the side of the minister (following the ‘catholic’ understanding of ordination).

Nevertheless the Old Catholic bishops approved of the ordinal, and they declared that they had no right, and that they did not want, to say no to the scheme. Unfortunately, on 14* January, 1969, both Convocations had agreed that ‘an overall majority of 75 per cent should be required’ so that the voting on 8th July (Yes - 263; No - 116; Percentage - 69) did not approve of the full communion between Anglicans and Methodists. In any case, however, the Old Catholic bishops had declared themselves to be willing to uphold full communion with the Church of England even in the case of (step one of the) church union with the Methodist Church.

In conclusion, it might be said that in this matter, the Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conference proved to be a very good means of communication between the Churches, in addition to letters and personal meetings. The Bonn Agreement had also been able to weather the ‘storms’ of different (‘protestant’ versus ‘catholic’) ways of its understanding; Both ‘sides’ within the churches had tried to respect each other and to provide a church ‘policy’ which comprehends all the ‘mainstream’ Christian theology, and, therefore, to be truly catholic.

2.2.2 Full doctrinal agreement? Orthodox Churches

Similar to their attitude towards the Anglican Churches, and following the Western tradition, the Church of Utrecht, until 1922, had regarded the Orthodox Churches as schismatic (and, of course, vice versa). At the Union Conferences in Bonn, though, and at the International Old Catholic Congresses, hopes for reunion between Old Catholics and Orthodox had been expressed already in the nineteenth century: in 1893, a Russian Orthodox Commission (St. Petersburg Commission), and in 1894, an Old Catholic Commission (Rotterdam Commission) were inaugurated. In 1894, 1896, and 1897, they published several opinions.The Patriarchate of Constantinople instituted a Commission, as well. The open

Erklärung der Internationalen Altkatholischen Bischofskonferenz zum anglikanischmethodistischen Unionsplan, IKZ 59 (1969), 150-153.

S. Zankof, Sofia, Beziehungen zwischen Altkatholiken und Orthodoxen Kirchen, translated into German and shortened, IKZ 52 (1962), 25-37; 27-29.

63

dogmatic questions were; (1.) the filioque, (2.) Eucharist and transub-stantiation, and (3.) Ecclesiology.

At the Faith and Order conference in Lausanne 1927, another Orthodox-Old Catholic conference took place, and again two commissions were initiated. These commissions met in Bonn, in October 193The Old Catholic delegates declared after the conference that they had the authority to offer intercommunion to the Orthodox Churches. Several Orthodox delegates said they were convinced that there were no further dogmatic hindrances, but a definite decision could be taken only by the Pro-Synod of all Orthodox Churches.^^^

It is obvious that in the eyes of some Orthodox theologians, the Bonn Agreement made it necessary to enter into dialogue with the Anglicans, as well. In autumn 1964, the third Pan-Orthodox Conference of Rhodes decided that theological dialogue, both with Old Catholics and Anglicans, should be taken further.

Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey, at the third Old Catholic -Anglican Theologians’ Conference in Amersfoort, 1961, apparently tried to convince professor Küppers (Bonn) ‘that Anglicans and Old Catholics should “woo Orthodoxy” together’. But as there were some tensions between Anglicans and Old Catholics at that time, regarding the Anglican-Methodist conversations (cf. the above quoted Letter^^^ of Ramsey’s predecessor. Lord Fisher, from 24**’ November, 1961), it was quite clear that each communion was to lead their own theological dialogues. M.A. Halliwell, in his report on this conference, wrote, ‘It is significant that Küppers had to leave the Theological Conference before its conclusion, and was therefore absent from the whole of the (International Old Catholic) Congress, in order to go to Rhodes’^^^, where the first Pan-Orthodox Conference took place.

So theological dialogue with the Orthodox Churches was conducted independently by the two church communions, beginning with the Old

C. Oeyen, Chronologisch-bibliographische Übersicht der Unions Verhandlungen zwischen der orthodoxen Kirche des Ostens und der altkatholischen Kirche der Utrechter Union, IKT. 51 (1967), 29-51; 38.

A. Rinkel, Archbishop of Utrecht, Orthodox und altkatholisch: Offener Brief an Prof. H. Alivastos (2“* February, 1956), /KZ 48 (1958), 2-83; 5f.

M.A. Halliwell, Assistant General Secretary of the Council on Inter-Church Relations, Old Catholic-Anglican Theologians’ Conference and Old Catholic Congress in the Netherlands, September 1961, Archive Lambeth Palace, Box 'CFC', file 18, September 1961, 5.

Cf. supra, n. 212.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 18, September 1961, 5.

64

Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue (1967-1988), followed by the Anglican-Orthodox Dialogue (beginning 1973). Here it must be said that, although the Bonn Agreement did not require it, both Churches could — and should — have been working together more closely. On the other hand, as the Old Catholic Church does not include an ‘evangelical’ party, dialogue with the Orthodox Church might have been easier for them.

The Old Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue text was vehemently criticized by Christian Oeyen in 1989 as it holds many ‘Eastern’ theological opinions to be essential.22^ This is why it will probably not be accepted by all the Old Catholic Churches. At the third Pre-Conciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference it was said that intercommunion with the Anglican Churches (and Eucharistic Hospitality towards Protestants: see 2.2.4.) ‘diminish 90 A

the meaning of the (dialogue) texts about ecclesiology’ (!).

2.2.3 Universal jurisdiction hire divino? Roman Catholic Church

Since the Second Vatican Council, the Roman Catholic Church has officially dispensed with the requirement to sign the Papal Bull Unigenitus and the Formulary of Pope Alexander VII (see 1.1.). In 1969, Pope Paul VI (1897-1978), for the first time since 1723, responded in a friendly way to the letter of the chapter of Utrecht indicating the election of the new Archbishop, Marinus Kok. Several local pastoral agreements were made after the Second Vatican Council, but none of them was approved of in Rome; an agreement on transfer of clergy was made for Germany in 1999.^^^

From 1966, local dialogues between Old and Roman Catholics were held, internationally co-ordinated, in Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada, and the U.S.A., but the official international dialogue {‘Internationaler Römisch-katholisch — Altkatholischer Dialog’, IRAD) only started in 2004, following recommendations of a preparation group which had met in 2003 after consultations in the great Jubilee year 2000, and aiming to reach full communion. The dialogue resulted in May 2009

229

C. Oeyen, Ekklesiologische Fragen in den orthodox-altkatholischen Kommissionstexten, IKZl^ (1989), 237-265; 265.

230

Die Beschlüsse der III. Vorkonziliaren Panorthodoxen Konferenz, Una Sancta 42 (1987), 10, quoted in: Oeyen, Fragen (supra, n. 229), 24If.

W. Krahl, Ökumenischer Katholizismus; Alt-Katholische Orientierungspunkte und Texte aus zwei Jahrtausenden. Borm 1988, 100.

IKZ 94 (2004), 277f.

65

in the report ‘Church and Community of Churches’- Concerning the rejection of the Papal dogmas on Mary from 1854 and 1950 by the Declaration of Utrecht (1889), the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference (1950) and the Old Catholic - Orthodox Dialogue Commission (1977), an Old Catholic Theologians’ Conference declared in 2008,

‘On the basis of the noticed openness for the figure of Mary and in the context of bilateral ecumenical dialogues, it seems not to be excluded that in case of new definite Roman Catholic interpretations of the two dogmas, these rejections will be considered gt;234 anew.

The IBC, in 1970, issued a Declaration concerning Primacy in the Church,^^^ in which they acknowledge that — following the position of Peter amongst the Apostles as primus inter pares — a pre-eminence was given by the Church to the Bishop of Rome ‘which developed into a sign of unity’ (Point 3). They regret, however, that the Second Vatican Council ‘has again confirmed the decrees of Vatican I’ by which a ‘one-sided legalistic understanding of the primacy to the detriment of its original task of service’ (Points 6; 4) had been dogmatically confirmed.

The Anglican Church entered into a theological dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church in 1968 (‘Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission’, ARCIC). The texts thereby produced were diligently discussed at the Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences in Berne 1972 — together with John Richard Humpridge Moorman, Bishop of Ripon, himself a member of the dialogue commission —, in Trier 1980, Vienna 1982, and Chichester 1985, where matters of ‘authority’ were discussed.

Pressemitteilung, IKZ 94 (2004), 202. The report is written in German, see: Kirche und Kirchengemeinschaft. Bericht der Internationalen Römisch-Katholisch -Altkatholischen Dialogkommission, Paderborn 2009.

‘Aufgrund der festgestellten Offenheit für die Gestalt Marias und im Kontext bilateraler ökumenischer Dialoge scheint es nicht ausgeschlossen zu sein, dass bei neuen verbindlichen römisch-katholischen Interpretationen der beiden Dogmen diese Verwerfungen neu bedacht werden. ’ Erklärung zur Stellung Marias im Heilswerk Gottes und zur Frage einer altkatholischen Marienfrömmigkeit, Neustadt/Weinstrasse, 29. August 2008, in: Christkatholisches Kirchenblatt 131 (2008), No. 20f. (27* Sept. -24* Oct. 2008), 5.

IKZ{\9IQ\ 57-59; U. Küry, Kirche {supra, n. 47), 458-460.

66

The latter discussions (1980-1985) took place after the conference had been given a more official status (see 2.O.). In Trier, ‘authority’ was discussed from the following perspectives:

• - The Place of Authority in Religious Belief;

• - The Biblical View of Authority and the Authority of the Bible;

• - The Authority of Councils;

• - Authority in the Church (with particular reference to the relationship between Bishops, Priests and Laity);

• - Authority in a Divided Church.

In Vienna, the dialogue document ‘Authority IT (ARCIC: Windsor 1981) was discussed, with special reference to the concepts of koinonia, ius divinum, jurisdiction, and infallibility.Finally, in Chichester, the following statement was agreed upon.^^^

‘Statement agreed by the Anglican - Old Catholic Theological Conference meeting at Chichester, 6-10 August, 1985. (...)

(12.) (...) [Quotations from the IBC’s Declaration 1970, and from the ARCIC ‘Authority IT Statement] This, and other similarities of view already noted, seem to suggest that both churches could recognize a universal primacy in the see of Rome for the purpose of serving the unity and continuity of the whole church in truth and love.

• (13) We are well aware that over the centuries the Roman primacy has developed from that simple conception into a centralized authority claiming to be of divine Institution {iure divino), to have the power to intervene directly in every diocese and to appoint and to limit the authority of bishops (jurisdiction), and to define questions of faith to be believed by all Christian people (infallibility). Neither of our churches could accept the papal primacy as it is at present interpreted and exercised by the Roman see, although we are aware that many Roman Catholics, bishops, priests and laypeople, would like to see major changes to reduce papal power. (...)’

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 24, 14*-18* April, 1980.

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche September, 1982.

Prof.Dr. U. von Arx, University of Berne, 6*-10* August, 1985. A German translation of this statement has been published in: IKZ 80 (1990), 5-11.

67

Quoting the conclusions of a Joint Committee of the Convocation of Canterbury from 1902, the conference also declared that ‘(7.) (...) ‘theology justifies and history demonstrates that the ultimate authority and right of collective action lie with the whole body, the Church, and that the co-operation of Clergy and Laity in Church Government and discipline belongs to the true ideal of the Church.’

Concerning the divisions of Christianity, and the authority of the councils, it was stated,

‘(7.) (...) The divisions of Christendom put grave difficulties in the way of the church taking decisions on important question of doctrine and practice. They hinder the proper exchange of experience and views between the various local churches and impair the sacramental relationship which should exist between them. Yet the authority of Christ still exists in the divided churches and each day decisions have to be taken in his name. In the more important matters, however, a local church should not act on its own without serious consultation with other churches.’

and,

‘(8.) In reaching these decisions the judgement of Councils has always had a special place. This does not mean that every decision of every council is correct. By subsequent reception the Church affirms that a council has safeguarded the truth and recognizes the decrees as consonant with Scripture. Both our traditions ascribe special importance and binding authority to the dogmatic decrees of the first four ecumenical councils. The Old Catholics regard the other three ecumenical councils of the Church before the divisions of East and West as having the same binding authority. The Anglican position is less clear but this does not constitute a major difficulty between the Old Catholic and Anglican churches.’

Without the work of Bishop Kemp, this statement would not have been written. It was signed by him (as official representative of the Anglican Church) and by the Archbishop Emeritus of Utrecht, Marinus Kok.^^’

So in spite of the rapprochement of the Roman Catholic Church with Anglicans and Old Catholics after the Second Vatican Council, the main obstacles which had led to the schism in the nineteenth century remain:

Prof.Dr. U. von Arx, University of Berne, August, 1985.

68

the decrees of the first Vatican Council, the dogmas unilaterally promulgated by the Pope, and the non-acceptance of Anglican ordinations by Rome. It was the discussion of the common Anglican - Old Catholic position in this question which was the main subject of Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences after 1980. Again, they proved to be a successful site of Anglican - Old Catholic communication.

2.2.4 Eucharistic hospitality? Protestant Churches

At the Lambeth Conference 1968, the following resolutions were agreed upon:^'^'’

• ‘(45.) The Conference recommends that, in order to meet special pastoral need of God’s people, under the direction of the bishop Christians duly baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity and qualified to receive Holy Communion in their own Churches may be welcomed at the Lord’s table in the Anglican Communion.’

• ‘(46.) The Conference recommends that, while it is the general practice of the Church that Anglican communicants receive the Holy Communion at the hand of ordained ministers of their own Church or of Churches in communion therewith, nevertheless under the general direction of the bishop, to meet special pastoral need, such communicants be free to attend the Eucharist in other Churches holding the apostolic faith as contained in the Scriptures and summarized in the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds, and as conscience dictates to receive the sacrament, when they know they are welcome to do so.’

This may be called, eucharistie hospitality. In an agreement (1982),^^’ Lutherans in the U.S.A, and ECUSA speak of an ‘Interim Sharing of the Eucharist’. Here, eucharistie hospitality is combined with a mutual recognizing that in the other Church ‘the Gospel is preached and taught’.

At the Conference in Luzern 1974, the subject of eucharistie hospitality was discussed, and it was discovered there that in this matter it is necessary to distinguish between the invitation of individuals, and the invitation of churches. ‘In the discussion (...) the fact was accepted that intercommunion should be a relationship between churches, whilst

http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1968/1968-45.cfm;

http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1968/1968-46.cfm.

Discussed in Chichester, 1985: Dekan em. E. Nickel, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1982.

69

allowance should be made for exceptional cases in which individuals might be admitted to communion’

As there was a discussion on ecclesiology in general and especially — in the resolution of the conference — a request of discussing ‘Authority’ at subsequent conferences (see 2.2.3), the matter itself was somehow left open. It was stated, though, that the interpretation of the Bonn Agreement as a complete communio in sacris vios, borne out by the subsequent behaviour of the churches, i.e. the mutual partaking in the consecration of bishops {ibid).

In March 1984, the Old Catholic Church in Czechoslovakia and the Silesian-Protestant Church of the Augsburg Confession (Lutheran) agreed about several basic Christian doctrines and also that

‘there is not only no reason to prohibit our Clergy and Laity from partaking in the blessed common service, and in the saving community of the Lords fable, in the (respectively) other Church, but that the faithful should be led to this, especially if there is no possibility to receive the Holy Communion in the own Church because of long distances or other inconveniences, and then also in ecumenical occasions and gatherings.

Equally, in March 1985, an Old Catholic - Protestant Commission in Austria declared,

‘The Old Catholic - Protestant dialogue commission has discussed the question of Eucharistic Hospitality. It stated that access to the table of the Lord in both churches is open for those who approach (it) with confidence in Christ who invites us. Therefore we feel to have no right to exclude anybody from the Lord’s Supper who wants to take part in Holy Communion as a guest in the other church, drawn by his conscience. The membership in his own church is not affected hereby.

The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Counsellors on Foreign Relations, ‘Anglican-Old Catholic Theological Conference, held in Lucerne, 18quot;’-22quot;‘* September 1974 [wrong date: 14quot;’-18quot;’!], REPORT (A/OCC (1974) 11), C.F.R. 45’, 1 (Dekan em. E. Nickel, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1982).

Translation from the German translation: K.H.N.: Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box 'Anglikanische Kirche’, 18‘'’-22quot;‘* Sept. 1974 (wrong date: 14*- 18*!).

Evangelisch-altkatholischer Dialog, in: Altkatholische Kirchenzeitung 20 (1985), 5: ‘Die altkatholisch/ evangelische Gesprächskommission hat die Frage der

70

According to Bishop (Emeritus) Bernhard Heitz/'’^ the churches both followed the recommendations of this commission, and on 7* December 2006, the Eucharistic Hospitality was declared, referring to the declaration of the year 1985, also between the Methodist and the Old Catholic Church of Austria?'*^

In May 1985, the Old Catholic Church in Germany {AKD) and the Evangelical (or Protestant) Church in Germany {EKD) agreed on several points of doctrine, including the first three points of the Lambeth Quadrilateral (Scripture, the two ecumenical creeds, and the two dominical sacraments), the Trinitarian and Christological doctrines of the first four ecumenical councils, and the (Pauline/ Lutheran) doctrine of justification by grace through faith. Then they state, that these basic agreements allow the churches to invite mutually the members of the other church to partake in the eucharist.^'*^

Subsequently, this agreement was accepted by all the authorities of both AKD and EKD, but criticized by the IBC: in autumn 1988, they stated that ‘the agreements in doctrinal question’ mentioned in the text.

gegenseitigen gastweisen Teilnahme am heiligen Abendmahl erörtert. Sie hat festgestellt, daß der Zugang zum Tisch des Herrn in beiden Kirchen jedem offensteht, der im Vertrauen auf Christus, der uns einlädt, herantritt. Darum fühlen wir uns nicht berechtigt, jemanden vom Abendmahl auszuschließen, der von seinem Gewissen gedrängt, am Abendmahl in der anderen Kirche gastweise teilnehmen möchte. Dadurch wird die Zugehörigkeit zu seiner Kirche nicht berührt. ’ Translation: K.H.N.

Fax from 28quot;’ January, 2009, to K.H.N.

‘Feststellung zur gegenseitigen Zulassung zum Abendmahl. In Anlehnung an die Vereinbarung „ Gegenseitige Zulassung zum Abendmahl “ von 1985 zwischen der Evangelischen Kirche A.B. und H.B. in Österreich und der Altkatholischen Kirche Österreichs stellen die Evangelisch-Methodistische Kirche Österreichs und die Altkatholische Kirche Österreichs fest, dass „der Zugang zum Tisch des Herrn in beiden Kirchen allen offen steht, welche im Vertrauen auf Christus, der uns einlädt, herantreten. Darum fühlen wir uns nicht berechtigt, getaufte Christen und Christinnen unserer Kirchen, die in ihren Kirchen zum Abendmahl zugelassen sind, vom Tisch des Herrn auszuschließen, die vom Gewissen gedrängt, am Abendmahl in der anderen Kirche gastweise teilnehmen möchten. Dadurch wird die Zugehörigkeit zur jeweiligen Kirche nicht berührt. “ Für die Evangelisch-Methodistische Kirche in Österreich: Lothar Föll, Superintendent; für die Altkatholische Kirche Österreichs: Bernhard Heitz, Bischof. 7. Dezember 2006’ ‘Bericht des Bischofs für die Ordentliche Synode 2006’, Beilage 5, fax from 28quot;' January, 2009, to K.H.N.

Vereinbarung über die gegenseitige Einladung zur Teilnahme an der Feier der Eucharistie, in: Ökumenische Rundschau 34 (1985), 365-7, 365f.

71

‘are not a sufficient foundation for an agreement about Eucharistic Hospitality. Therefore (...) the agreement cannot be approved of’

In a declaration about Eucharistic Hospitality which was subsequently accepted also by the Old Catholic Synod of Germany in 1994, the IBC declared in October 1992,

‘(1.) Christ, in the Eucharist, unites us into one body: his church.

(...)

(2.) The church invites to the Eucharist in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. - Some today wide-spread expressions like ‘Eucharistic Hospitality’ (....) give the impression that in the sacrament of the Eucharist, the faithful in Christ are not guests of him but that members of one denomination are guests of another denomination. (...)

(4.) At present, (full) church communion is — even with several churches who share with us the faith of the Early Church in the triune God and in the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ - unfortunately not yet possible, because of remaining differences, especially regarding the understanding of the church and its ministry. (...)

(5.) If the sacrament of the Eucharist is administered to Christians belonging to other churches, (...) this happens in the light of the situation of the persons concerned and at their own responsibility. It should be clarified that this is not a confirmation of the division but an application of oikonomia, i.e. it is solely to serve pastoral needs and to give spiritual help.’^quot;*^

Translation by K.H.N. from the German text quoted in: H. Rein, Der orthodoxaltkatholische Dialog ist abgeschlossen: Folgerungen und Perspektiven aus altkatholischer Sicht, Orthodoxes Forum 4 (1990), Heft 2, 164, n. 51.

‘(1.) In der Eucharistie macht uns Christus immer wieder zu einem Leib, seiner Kirche. (...) (2.) Die Kirche spricht die Einladung zur Eucharistie im Namen des Herrn Jesus Christus aus. Manche heute weit verbreiteten Ausdrücke wie „Eucharistische Gastfreundschaft“ (...) erwecken den Eindruck, daß beim Sakrament der Eucharistie nicht die Christgläubigen Gäste Christi, sondern die Glieder einer Konfessionskirche Gäste einer anderen Konfessionskirche sind. (...) (4.) Gegenwärtig ist Kirchengemeinschaft auch mit einigen Kirchen, die mit uns den altkirchlichen Glauben an den dreifältigen Gott und die Menschwerdung Gottes in Jesus Christus teilen, wegen weiterer Differenzen, insbesondere im Verständnis der Kirche und ihres Amtes, leider noch nicht möglich. (...) (5.) Wenn das Sakrament der Eucharistie Christen aus anderen Kirchen gespendet wird, (...) geschieht dies im Hinblick auf die Situation der betroffenen Personen und auf ihre Verantwortung hin. Es soll auf geeignete Weise

72

So by introducing the orthodox theological expression, oikonomia, the practice of ‘eucharistie hospitality’ in several Old Catholic Churches was theologically justified. It was made clear that still, similar to the situation of Anglican-Protestant relationships, the differences concerning (ecclesiology and) ministry remain unresolved.

2.3. Ordination of women

After the ordination of 11 PECUSA women deacons to the priesthood against the consent of the Convocation in 1974^^^ and further ordinations with its consent in 1976, the IBC stated that it ‘does not agree with a sacramental ordination of women to the catholic-apostolic ministry of deacon, presbyter and bishop.’ They referred to the Twelve, and to the practice of the early undivided church, and they stated that ‘the question (...) touches the basic order and mystery of the Church’, and that ‘the churches which have preserved continuity with the ancient, undivided church and its sacramental ministerial order, should jointly discuss this question (...), being fully aware of eventual consequences resulting from unilateral decisions.’ There was, however, one vote against this statement, by the Bishop of Haarlem, Gerardus Anselmus van Kleef

Subsequently, the matter was discussed in Chichester, 1977, at the theologians’ conference. The theologians acknowledged that ‘independent action by any of our churches in ordaining women to the priesthood leads to a certain limitation of communion since the ministry of such women would not necessarily be recognized by other churches’, but that on the other hand, ‘on both sides we are divided as to whether it is right for a particular church in the last resort to take unilateral action in ordai-,252 ning women.

Since 1982, women were allowed to be ordained deacon in the Old Catholic Churches, and in 1987, the first female deacon was ordained in

deutlich gemacht werden, daß es sich dabei nicht um eine Institutionalisierung der Trennung handelt, sondern um eine Anwendung der Oikonomia, d.h. um ein Verhalten, das ausschließlich pastoralen Bedürfnissen und geistlicher Hilfe dienen soll. ’ Translation: K.H.N. from: Eucharistiegemeinschaft, Christen Heute 38 (1994), No. 6, 94f.

Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 1. August 1974.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp 7* December, 1976. About the ‘voting against’ by Bishop van Kleef, see: Lidwien van Buuren, Wislikofen 11: een compromis over ‘vrouw en ambt’, in: De Oud-Katholiek 113 (1997), 114-116, 115.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 23, 18'*’ to 22quot;** April, 1977; German text: IKZ 67 (1977), 185.

73

• nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;253

Zurich. Until 1997, however, there was diversity in the question of the ordination of women to the priesthood and to the episcopacy. In 1991, the IBC required all its members to undertake a comprehensive theological reflection on women and the ordained ministry among themselves and with other churches, especially with those with whom they stand in the (Catholic understanding of the) Apostolic Succession {i.e. Roman Catholics, Orthodox, and Anglicans):

‘The bishops (...) therefore require more intense and coordinated continuing study of the question and common dialogue about the question [of the ordination of women], taking in all theological and pastoral aspects in all local churches. This will enable a decision in principle, which all churches can uphold together.

As the Old Catholic Church regards itself to be in continuity with the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church, it wishes to seek clarification of this question also in dialogue with other churches, especially those, with whom it shares the ministry in apostolic succession, in order to come to its own resolution.

This meeting of 15 Old Catholic bishops, 9 consultant theologians and 12 more members of commissions, translators and secretaries in Wisli-kofen in the Northern part of Switzerland was later called, ‘Wislikofen T. It was followed up and concluded by a subsequent meeting with the resolution, ‘Wislikofen IT, which took place in 1997. Even before 1997, though, the German Old Catholic Synod (after similar votes in 1989 and 1991) decided in May 1994 to allow the ordination of women to the threefold ordained ministry; in 1996, the first two women priests were ordained. The Polish and the Polish North American Old Catholics,

U. von Arx, Sondersession der IBK, IKZ 82 (1992), 195f., 195.

‘Erklärung der Internationalen Altkatholischen Bischofskonferenz (IBK) zur Frage der Frauenordination’ (5. Juli 1991), IKZ 82 (1992), 197f., 198: 'Die Bischöfe (...) wünschen daher eine intensivierte und koordinierte Fortsetzung des Studiums der Frage und des gemeinsamen Gesprächs darüber unter allen theologischen und pastoralen Aspekten, und zwar in allen Ortskirchen. Dies wird eine gemeinsam verantwortete Grundsatzentscheidung ermöglichen. Da die altkatholische Kirche sich in Kontinuität mit der einen, heiligen, katholischen und apostolischen Kirche weiss, will sie die Klärung dieser Frage auch im Dialog mit anderen Kirchen, insbesondere mit jenen, mit denen sie das Amt in apostolischer Sukzession gemeinsam hat, vorantreiben, um auf diesem Weg zu einem Beschluss in eigener Verantwortung zu kommen. ’ Translation: K.H.N.

U. von Arx, Sondersession (supra, n. 253), 196.

74

on the other hand do not even recognize female deacons?^^ This tension could not be bridged - even not by an Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference which met in 1995 in Poland declaring,

‘ 1. The bishops of the IBC promise to do everything in their power to strengthen the Union of Utrecht and deepen their coherence. (...)

5. The German bishop tries to convince his church that a postponement of the ordination of women to priests after the time of Wislikofen II could contribute towards healing of the weakened state of the Union of Utrecht.

As the German bishop could not convince his church, he was not allowed to exercise his membership rights within the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference (IBC) until 1997 when in a special IBC meeting in Switzerland (‘Wislikofen IT, from 6* to 15*'’ July), a majority of the bishops agreed to the ordination of women stating that the decision of 1976 which had been taken with one voice of dissent was not binding, according to the ‘Utrecht Agreement’ (Article 7 of 1974).^^^ As a second result of ‘Wislikofen IT, structural reforms of the Union of Utrecht were planned (a new Statute, containing the ‘Utrecht Agreement’ and a revised text of the ‘Regulations’ as the rules of procedure for the Bishops’ Conference).

At Wislikofen 11, a two third majority of the bishops present (from the U.S.A., only Prime Bishop John F. Swantek took part) felt that the introduction of the ordination of women is the responsibility of each local church (until today, the Polish Catholic Church in Poland has not ordained women but upheld full communion). Again, this majority was

256

G. Reynders, Die Entscheidung, quoting from Dr. S. Kraft, Report before the 5T‘ Synod in Mainz, Christen Heute 38 (1994), No. 6, 90.

257

‘1. Die Bischöfe der IBK verpflichten sich, alles in ihrer Macht Stehende zu tun, um die Utrechter Union zu stärken und ihren Zusammenhang zu vertiefen. (...) 5. Der deutsche Bischof versucht, seine Kirche zu überzeugen, dass eine Verschiebung der Weihe von Frauen zu Priesterinnen auf die Zeit nach Wislikofen II zur Heilung des geschwächten Zustandes der Utrechter Union viel beitragen könnte. ’ U. von Arx, IBK-Sondersession in Wislikofen 1997, Bericht, IKZ 87 (1997), 225-240, 227f.

U. von Arx, Bericht (supra, n. 257), 225. Vgl. ‘Erklärung der vom 6. bis 16. Juli in Wislikofen/Schweiz tagenden Internationalen Altkatholischen Bischofskonferenz (IBK)’ (14* July 1997), 3.a), in: U. von Arx, Bericht (supra, n. 257), 237.

U. von Arx, Bericht (supra, n, 257), 230.

75

not enough to reach a formal resolution?®'’ Indeed, one church, the PNCC, had terminated communion with another, the German Old Catholic Church?®' Therefore, the bishops had to accept that ‘full communion’ was not present any more between the Old Catholic Churches and that therefore. Art. 1 of the ‘Utrecht Agreement’ (1974) was injured.^®^

The question whether a decision to ordain women implies a change in the apostolic faith or not, though, had to be decided in any case. Therefore, the discussion of ‘authority’ in the Conferences at Trier (1980), Vienna (1982), and Chichester (1985) did indeed contribute to a solution in stating that clergy and laity should partake in government of the church (see 2.2.3.). This partaking in the government of the church is exercised in synods. It is the responsibility of the bishops to make sure that the synodal decisions do not violate the faith of the church. If they did, they would have to declare it.

As for the PNCC, the ordination of women in 1976 did affect the fundamentals of the Christian faith. Therefore this church felt obliged to break off intercommunion with PECUSA. But for the other Old Catholic Churches, full communion — and therefore the recognition of the catholic faith of the Anglican Communion — was not broken by the fact of women’s ordination. Therefore, the subject of women’s ordination was treated not as a substantial matter of faith but as a matter of order subject to the authority of the local church. Indeed, it led to a restriction of communion as women were not allowed to exercise their ministry in all Old Catholic Churches?®^ but this has also been the case within the Anglican Communion.

U. von Arx, Bericht {supra, n. 257), 232.

U. von Arx, Bericht {supra, n. 257), 2.e), 236.

U. von Arx, Bericht {supra, n. 257), 4., 237.

Cf. U. von Arx, Bericht {supra, n. 257), 233: ‘Freilich haftet der angestrebten vollen kirchlichen Gemeinschaft (...) insofern ein Makel an, als die sog. volle Austauschbarkeit der Amtsträgerinnen nicht gewährleistet sein kann. '

76

3. Considerations for today

‘The ordination of women was the most divisive thing that has happened in my lifetime’, said Bishop Eric Kemp at the end of the talk I had with him on June 2P‘, 1994 (see Appendix I). As a member of a church which has decided to remove all legal hindrances to ordaining women, I talked to someone whose church had already ordained many women priests. But already from 1976 the crisis had been there (see 1.0.). In this last chapter of my dissertation, only a few short remarks will be made.

The Bonn Agreement contains a mutual recognition of catholicity and independence. Problems have arisen when one of these seemed to endanger the other; could catholicity still be recognized when another church entered into full communion with a church which comprised ministers not episcopally ordained? Or when another church ordained women? Did independence still exist when one church seemed to prescribe what the other should or should not do?

Full communion had become possible after the First Vatican Council when in the Declaration of Utrecht (1889), the Church of Utrecht abandoned her adherence to the Council of Trent (1.1.) and was able, in 1925, to recognize the Anglican orders as valid (1.3.2); and after the Lambeth Conference 1930 had stated that the Declaration of Utrecht was not against Anglican teaching (1.3.3). Other churches used the text of the Bonn Agreement in 1965 in order to enter into full communion with the Old Catholic Churches (1.3.6). Overlapping jurisdictions in Europe and in America were never seen as a hindrance to full communion. They were regarded as an anomaly but legitimated through pastoral reasons (2.1.).

Full communion has been called into question when Anglican Churches have sought to include United Churches into this relationship (2.2.1). In principle, Anglicans and Old Catholics agree that they can only be in full communion with episcopal Churches. They differ, however, (and so do the different Anglican Churches!) in their recognition of certain churches as episcopal churches: the Churches of North and South India, and of Pakistan, as well as the Nordic and Baltic Lutheran Churches now that the Porvoo Common Statement (1993) has been accepted. It depends on the decisions of the local churches whether a communion is indeed full or whether it has in certain cases become

77

impaired, especially in cases where the catholic character of an ordination can be, or is, doubted - ordinations without a bishop in ‘Apostolic Succession’ - or not recognized, as in the case of the ordination of women.

Full communion was not only impaired but broken between the PNCC and PECUSA, when the latter ordained the first women (2.3.). Apart from this historic exception, it has been possible at least in an impaired form to maintain communion in all other countries, especially in Europe. In the Old Catholic Churches in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and the Netherlands, ordained women preside at the Eucharist, and in Czechoslovakia, female deacons have also been ordained.

It was not easy for Old Catholic Churches opposed to the ordination of women to find arguments in order to prevent the German and, eventually, other Old Catholics from ordaining women priests. For by not cancelling the Bonn Agreement in 1976 (as the PNCC in the U.S.A, and in Canada did: see 1.0) they implicitly agreed that PECUSA — although acting in a different way from themselves and thereby exercising their independence — did not violate catholicity. For if PECUSA — in the opinion of Old Catholic Churches opposed to the ordination of women — had violated catholicity, these churches would have had to cancel full communion. After all, independence in matters of church discipline (regarding the interpretation of matters of fact concerning theological questions not defined by ecumenical councils) had been the reason for the schism between Utrecht and Rome, in the first place (1.0.).

The fact that women have never been excluded from the ordained ministry by any ecumenical council (as even Pope Paul VI declared in 1976),^^^ firmly suggests, in my opinion, that, according to Old Catholic theology, the decision about women’s ordination is the common task of the local churches. It remains a challenge how individual local churches come to a common mind and a mutually-accepted decision to proceed with the ordination of women or to accept such ordinations within other churches. This question is also a central task which needs to be addressed within the Anglican Communion. The same also now applies to the issue of human sexuality.

A perceived weakness of the full communion between Anglicans and Old Catholics has been the lack of a common decision-making process. This has revealed itself when one side, independent of the other, has sought dialogue with further churches. It has therefore been all the more

Denzinger, Enchiridion {supra, n. 65), 1386, No. 4590.

78

important to inform each other at theologians’ conferences and discuss dialogue papers together. The ARCIC dialogue text has been discussed at several of these conferences, and these discussions led to a common statement of Anglican and Old Catholic theologians (2.2.3). In 1993, it was decided to discuss the Orthodox - Old Catholic dialogue texts at future conferences,^^^ but this aim has not yet been fulfilled. Concerning the relation to Protestant Churches, practices which might be called, ‘eucharistie hospitality’ or, - in order to avoid misunderstandings - ‘interim sharing of the Eucharist’, should be described as an exercise of oiko-nomia as thereby, a very strict understanding of the implications of ecclesiology in the Eucharist may be violated (2.2.4).

It appears that in the history of the Bonn Agreement, in cases of doubt, independence was given the priority to an understanding of catholicity by which one church might exercise episcopacy over another. Now such a lax understanding of church communion, as it is implied in the Bonn Agreement, has been criticized at its 50th anniversary (1981) by Lukas Vischer; ‘The Bonn Agreement declares Eucharistic Communion, but excludes the possibility of a new, up-to-date confession and of organizational consequences’.

This is not true. Indeed, these things are not required; they are, however, not excluded, and more and more, they are, in the different national contexts, being introduced.Since 1988, the Old Catholic Churches have been invited to send delegates to the Lambeth Conference. This invitation was accepted, although so far. Old Catholics did not take any part in voting. Several official conferences have taken place in Europe (2.1.1) and the U.S.A. (2.1.2), and since 1982, Anglicans and Old Catholics from North America had been meeting on an official level. At the

See. Fourteenth International Conference {supra, n. 29), 2.

Bonner Abkommen erklärt Abendmahlsgemeinschaft, schließt aber sowohl die Möglichkeit eines neuen zeitgemäßen Bekenntnisses als auch organisatorische Konsequenzen aus. ’ L. Vischer, Das Bonner Abkommen von 1931 im Lichte der ökumenischen Bewegung, IKZ1\ (1981), 237-253; 252f.

Berlis, Aneinander wachsen {supra, n. 76), 184, n. 22: ‘vgl. dazu die Vorschläge, die Jan Visser 1982 zur Gestaltung der kirchlichen Gemeinschaft machte und die heute realisiert sind (u .a. Beiwohnen von Bischöfen bei Versammlungen der anderen Gemeinschaft, Einbeziehung von Beratern der anderen Gemeinschaft bei bilateralen Dialogen, Konsultation in wichtigen Fragen, Teilnahme von Pfarrern an Pastoralkonferenzen der anderen Gemeinschaft). Vgl. Jan Visser, Dogmatische betichting van de Intercommunie, in: Peter J. Maan / Jan Visser, 1931-1981. Vijftig jaren full communion tussen de anglikaanse en oud-katholieke kerken, Amersfoort 1982, 16-33, V. a. 27-31. ’

79

1993 Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conference the proposal was made for a new organizational link between Anglicans and Old Catholics in the form of a ‘standing’ Anglican - Old Catholic International Consultation, and in 1998, the Anglican Old Catholic International Co-ordinating Council (AOCICC) was founded (2.0). In the Czech Republic, a Covenant makes it possible for the Anglican and Episcopal Chaplaincies to be part of the Old Catholic Church while not losing their official bonds to their mother churches. Further proposals, including the suggestion of ‘a united province of mainland Europe that would incorporate the various Anglican and Old Catholic jurisdictions’, were made at the latest Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conference in Leeds, 2005 (cf. appendix 11, no. 15.).

Last but not least, the Society of St. Willibrord continues to be a forum for all kinds of matters (and indeed up-to-date matters) with regard to both Anglicans and Old Catholics. It is the task of everybody who would like that our church communities proceed together to join this society, and to contribute to its life.

80

Appendix 1 Interview with the late Rt. Rev’d Dr. Eric Kemp, Bishop of Chichester (1915-2009)

The questions were given by the interviewer, Klaus Heinrich Neuhoff (K.H.N.), to Bishop Eric Kemp (E.K.) a week before the talk with him, on June 2E', 1994. The answers are a shortened transcript of what was recorded.

1. ‘Bishop Eric, you have taken part personally in many events of the common history of the Old Catholic and Anglican Churches. You published your ‘personal memories’ about this engagement in the book ‘Kracht in zwakheid van een kleine wereldkerk’Are there any further memories you would like to add, according to what has happened meanwhile, especially the ordination of women to the priesthood in England and, later on, also in Germany?’

The Bishop answers that after 1985, he didn’t take part in many Anglican - Old Catholic events. He mentions a meeting of Old Catholic Bishops organized by Bishop of Gibraltar John Richard Satterthwaite, two years ago, in order to discuss the Meissen Agreement (1991), but he himself had taken part in only one session of this conference, ‘nor do I know at first hand what is happening about the decision of the German Synod, but I should imagine that it is causing a complete split in the Union of Utrecht. I can’t believe that the Polish National Catholic Church will agree to it at all and the impression I had from what I have read in the Swiss Christkatholisches Kirchenblatt was that the Archbishop of Utrecht was not very pleased. I know that he is in favour of the ordination of women and so are other bishops, but I got the impression that they were not very pleased about the German Church.’

Eric Kemp, Persona! Memories, in: Van Kasteel, e.a., Kracht (supra, n. 10), 205f.

81

‘I’m watching with interest what is going to happen about the Austrian bishop’s election, because, you see, I think professor Oeyen is the boss of all the most liberal movements in the German Church. He has always been very hostile to Anglo-Catholics. He seemed to me not to be in agreement at all with what I always understood to be the Old Catholic tradition. He had a very, very different outlook from professor Klippers.’

K.H.N. mentions that the different Old Catholic Churches, according to their origin at different points in history, also had different identities.

E.K.; ‘Yes, but my impression has always been that whereas there was a great deal of common identity in the Dutch Old Catholics and the Swiss Old Catholics, the German Church was quite different.’ K.H.N.: ‘In the beginning, the Swiss Church had very much a liberal identity so that the Dutch Archbishop did not wish to consecrate a bishop for them.’

E.K.: ‘Yes, but that didn’t last very long. I have known the Swiss Church, and Bishop Gauthier and Bishop Urs Küry, and the people who were associated with him like professor Rüthy, they were all of the same sort of outlook as professor Küppers and professor Maan in Holland and Archbishop Rinkel, Archbishop Kok. They all seemed to me to share a fairly common outlook which, 1 think, is very different from that of professor Oeyen.’

2. ‘What is your attitude towards the different ecumenical dialogues today?’ The interviewer mentions that Old Catholics have led a dialogue with the Orthodox, independent of the Anglicans.

E.K.: ‘The Old Catholic suspicions of Anglicanism were based ( 1.) on the fear that it would hinder their dialogue with the Orthodox and (2.) that Anglicans were rather compromised by Evangelicals, in other words, that we were doing all the sorts of things that the German Old Catholic Church is now doing.’

K.H.N.: ‘The Orthodox have said that in order to reach church union or eucharistie communion with them the Old Catholic Churches would have to ‘abandon’ the Anglican Church and that whereas the problem of eucharistie hospitality might have been solved by describing it in terms of oikonomia, the remaining problem — now also among the different Old Catholic Churches — was the ordination of women to the priesthood. Is it a question of faith or a question of order?’

E.K.; ‘Well, rather a question of faith or a question of authority.’

82

K.H.N.: ‘It is the question on which level questions of authority should be solved.’

E.K.: ‘I have always understood the question to be, that for a major change in the ministry of the whole church you should require ecumenical agreement.’

K.H.N.: ‘Then all churches in East and West would have to agree.’

E.K.; ‘Yes.’

K.H.N.: ‘Then we would need an ecumenical council.’

E.K.: ‘Well, not necessarily, because it could be obvious that the churches do agree.’

K.H.N.: ‘According to Old Catholic and to Anglican theology, laity and clergy should be involved in church government; in the Roman Catholic Church, there is no authoritative expression for the feelings of the laity, and in the Orthodox Church, the laity do not really express their thoughts, either. ’

E.K.: ‘I think this has to start with the bishops. If it is obvious that the bishops of all the churches agree then, I think, the general agreement will probably follow.’

K.H.N.: ‘Roman Catholic bishops would obviously state only what they are allowed to state and it might be difficult to bring all the bishops together in order to decide about this question.’

E.K.: ‘Yes, but we should wait until that is possible, and — after two thousand years of Christianity ...’

K.H.N.; ‘So we would probably have to wait another two thousand years.’

E.K.: ‘Or another hundred.’

2a. ‘Could you please comment on other ecumenical dialogues, beginning with the dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church (ARCIC)?’

E.K.: ‘The second ARCIC commission which was set up by Archbishop Ramsey and the Pope is now working. They are, I think, now dealing with the criticisms made by the Congregation of the Definition of the Faith about ARCIC I on the Eucharist.’

2b. ‘... with the Protestants of the ‘Leuenberg Concord’ in Germany (EKD) — Meissen Declaration, and with the Lutheran Nordic and Baltic Churches — Porvoo Common Statement?’

E.K.: ‘They established an extent of agreement in faith but they still leave open - both of them - the question of the Apostolic Succession. They agree a great deal about the Apostolic Succession, but the

83

question of the actual continuation of the episcopate in it is still to a certain extent open, although I think that there has been some move on the Scandinavian side to recover the succession in those churches who didn't have it. For a long time, the Danes and the Norwegians would not allow the Swedish bishops to take part in their consecrations because the Swedish had the succession and they didn’t. The trouble with the German Protestant Church is that it’s such a mixed body. When we as a diocese in 1984 tried to recover the links that Bishop Bell had with the German Protestants we went to Speyer (as there is a Chichester link with the Roman Catholic diocese of Chartres, and a link of that diocese with the Roman Catholic diocese of Speyer) and met the president of their synod and found them not at all favourable to this. We then established a link with the (Lutheran) Protestant Church in Franconia.’

2c. ‘... with the Orthodox Church?’

E.K.: Tn a way things are better now than they were a few years ago because of the new Metropolitan of Thyatira. Since Bishop John Zi-zioulas has been made chairman, the dialogue was continuing much more profitably. The Orthodox Church made it very plain that the ordination of women was an obstacle but also that they were not going to break off’

K.H.N.: Tn my dissertation I argue that as the Old Catholic Churches have not broken full communion with the Anglican Churches in 1976, they obviously regarded it as a matter of authority, respectively church order: as a matter which does not change the essentials of the faith as they were agreed upon in Bonn. For otherwise, one would have to say that in 1993, the faith of the Church of England was changed by the ordination of women.’

E.K.: ‘Well, I think here to distinguish between faith and order is far too simple, because there are questions of order which are much more important than other questions. The question of the ordination of women is of a different kind from the question of celibacy.’ The bishop agrees that the local church can decide about celibacy of priests as celibacy has never been a requirement of the universal church. K.H.N. asks whether maleness has always been a requirement.

E.K.: ‘O yes: there was no precedent for it {i.e. female presidency in the Eucharist), except in heretical bodies.’

K.H.N. mentions Junia being called ‘Apostle’ by Paul (Rom. 16:7); Prisca presiding a kind of house communion (1 Cor 16:19); Mary Magdalene being the very first Apostle (John 20:2.).

84

E.K.: ‘The question is: were they accepted ? How were they accepted? What did they actually do? What kind of authority did they exercise?’

K.H.N.: ‘Mary actually brought the faith to the Twelve which is the ministry of an Apostle.’

E.K.: ‘Well, she told them, that’s a different matter. 1 doubt she was an Apostle in the full sense. There is no evidence that she was chosen by the Lord to be one of the Twelve.’ K.H.N.: ‘Still she was an Apostle.’

E.K.: ‘The word ‘Apostle’ is used in so many different senses. When it is said that the bishops derive from ‘the Apostles’, the word is used in the sense of ‘the Twelve’.’

K.H.N.: ‘The Orthodox Church regards Junia as an Apostle.’

E.K.; ‘They even call Constantine an Apostle.’

• 3. ‘Have these ecumenical dialogues used the right method in trying to state what common theology is?’

E.K.: ‘I think the experience of the last fifty years has been that the attempt to agree on just very short statements is not in the end satisfactory. We in the Anglican Church for a long time used simply the Lambeth Quadrilateral but it became clear in conversations with other Churches that it is necessary to fill out the clauses of the Lambeth Quadrilateral and to discuss further the understanding of the Eucharist or the understanding of what is meant by the Apostolic Succession.’ K.H.N.: ‘Ecumenical agreements after extended dialogue are not always any better than shorter agreements, like the Bonn Agreement, in securing unity.’

E.K.: ‘Yes. As far as I can see the dialogue between Rome and the Orthodox doesn’t seem to be dealing with what once was assumed to be the principal differences. They seem to have concentrated on the sacraments, the nature of the Eucharist and all that range of things which one would have thought didn’t raise any great difficulties, and so they were going quite round before approaching the central issue of the primacy of the Pope.’

• 4. ‘One of the problems of the church today is the question of authority in the church. Is there a ‘hierarchy’ of authority in the Catholic Church, such as Pope over against Council, Synod over against Bishop, and Scripture over against Tradition?’

85

E.K.: ‘The Anglican - Old Catholic Theologians’ Conference in Chichester 1985 prepared a statement on Authority and the Primacy was discussed at Lambeth 1988. Since then, there hasn’t been any great discussion about it as far as I know. I think the actions of the present Pope are raising this question but 1 don’t think it is possible for the Roman Catholic Church to discuss it very fruitfully as long as he is Pope. The latest Papal letter is obviously causing a great deal of discussion, and 1 don’t think it is going to stop discussion about the ordination of women, but has in fact created more discussion about the actual authority of the Pope.’

• 5. ‘What is the ideal relationship between Bishops and Archbishops / Metropolitans? And what is the ideal relationship between General Synods and Diocesan Synods?’

E.K.: ‘All those are matters of administration as distinct from the inherent authority of the particular diocese. It is a matter of convenience and history that the Archbishop of Canterbury has a certain extra authority over the dioceses in the Canterbury province but the grouping of dioceses into provinces and the relationship of the metropolitan to the diocesan bishops has been entirely a matter of historical convenience. As our constitution stands in the moment, the General Synod has authority over a whole range of things that our synod doesn’t; on the other hand, a great deal of what it does depends on the readiness of the particular synods to provide the financement.’

• 6. ‘What is your understanding of Catholicity? Is it necessary in order to be ‘catholic’: (a) To be baptized and believe in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Redeemer, to the honour of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (WCC)? (b) To accept the Lambeth Quadrilateral (Scripture, Creeds, Dominical Sacraments, Orders)? (c) To accept the (seven) oecumenical councils (OCC)? (d) To accept the Council of Trent (Archbishop Lefebvre) / the Vatican Councils (RCC)? (e) To accept the (historical) Primacy of the Pope? (f) To reject the ordination of women to the priesthood? And by whose authority do you determine catholicity?’

The bishop refers to the Anglican Canons and Constitutions and to the Declaration of Assent; ‘the first three of those we accept. Of the ecumenical councils we accept the first four; we never regarded us as bound by the other three. Certainly we don’t accept the Council of Trent or the Vatican Councils. The Primacy of the Pope depends entirely on

86

how it is defined. If by chance there was ever an ecumenical council, everybody would agree that the Bishop of Rome should take the chair.’ K.H.N.: ‘In ancient graphic representations of councils the gospel is put on the chair in order to symbolize that Christ is the head of the church.’

E.K.: ‘An inanimate thing can’t preside. But when the Pope visited England and we had a service in Canterbury Cathedral, the gospels were placed on the throne.’

7. ‘How will it be possible for Christians with different attitudes towards the ordination of women to the priesthood / to the episcopate, to live together in the one, holy. Catholic, and apostolic Church? Is it necessary to have different bishops, according to the different attitudes? In the Church of England, ‘two integrities’ concerning the question of the ordination of women are officially recognized. Would this be a model for the Old Catholic Churches, in your opinion?’

E.K.; ‘This is what we are trying to work out. The Church of England has definitely and officially recognized that both points of view have the right to exist and that we are part of the process of testing reception of the whole church. In England we don’t have any women bishops yet, but when there are women bishops, an ordination performed by women bishops becomes in itself another obstacle and that means that you have got to have bishops whose ordinations can be accepted — and we cannot accept the ordinations performed by the Bishop of the Canadian Church and the two women suffragan bishops in America. There is nobody of any standing who says that they cannot administer valid sacraments, but the question is whether they have made themselves so irregular that one should not have communion with them. It is accepted that this position exists and therefore one is providing Provincial Episcopal Visitors so that anybody should have access to a bishop who has not ordained women. There is also a distinction to be drawn between the authority of the two Archbishops and metropolitans and their authority as diocesan bishops: as diocesan bishops, they ordain women. As metropolitans of a province, they can appoint and consecrate the Provincial Episcopal Visitors.’

K.H.N.: ‘How is the unity of the local church maintained?’

E.K.: ‘In the Province of York where the Bishop of Beverley is a Provincial Episcopal Visitor, all fourteen diocesan bishops have said that they are happy for him to come and minister to the congregations.’ K.H.N.: ‘Could this be a model for dealing with different attitudes within the Old Catholic Church communion?’

87

E.K.: ‘Well, it could be a model if numbers are big enough.’ •W-N.: ‘Is there still full communion within the Church of England.’

E.K.: ‘No, it is what we call impaired communion: full commu-implies complete interchange of ministers. So you see: the ordi-^ation of women is the most divisive thing that has happened in my lifetime.’

K-H.N.: ‘Thank you for the conversation.’

88

Appendix II: Theologians’ Conferences 1957-2008

• 1. Rheinfelden 1957: Eucharist

Place: Rheinfelden, Switzerland: Town Hall / restaurant ‘Salmen’.

Time: 15***-18*‘* September, 1957,^®’ before the n* International Old Catholic Congress.

Participants: 35: Anglican: 11; Old Catholic: 24.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Kenneth Riches, Bishop of Lincoln, Chairman; the Rev’d Preb. Eric Kemp; the Rev’d Dr. C.B. Moss; the Rev’d Preb. C.L. Gage-Brown; the Rev’d Geoffrey Curtis, CR; the Rev’d Canon C.K. Sansbury; the Rev’d F.J. Taylor, Principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford; the Rev’d D.E. Jenkins, Chaplain of Queens College, Oxford (England).^™

Old Catholic:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Dr. A. Rinkel, Archbishop of Utrecht; the Rev’d Dean Prof. B.A. van Kleef; the Rev’d Dean Th. Moleman; P.J. Jans, President; the Rev’d ProfDr. P.J. Maan; the Rev’d Prof. M. Kok (Netherlands);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop Dr. Urs Kiiry, the Rev’d ProfDr. A.E. Rüthy, the Rev’d Max Heinz, the Rev’d Léon Gauthier, the Rev’d Hans Frei, the Rev’d Franz Ackermann, the Rev’d Paul Heinz, the Rev’d M. Schwarz (Switzerland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop J.J. Demmel, the Rev’d ProfDr. W. Küppers, the Rev’d Fritz Hermann, the Rev’d Ernst Wilhelm Heese (Germany);

• • Hofrat Dr. J. Werner, the Rev’d K. Spuller, the Rev’d Deacon Herwig Aldenhoven (Austria);

• • the Rev’d Dragutin Hrsak, the Rev’d Huzjak (Zagreb/ Yugoslavia).

Papers:

• 16* Sept.

• (I) Canon Sansbury: The Sacrifice of Christ and the meaning of Sacrifice;

• (II) A.E. Rüthy: Opfer Christi und Eucharistie (The Sacrifice of Christ and the Eucharist);

• (III) D. Jenkins: The Eucharist and the Body of Christ

• 17* Sept.

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box 'Nachlass Küppers’, 15*- 18* Sept. 1957.

Archive Lambeth Palace, box ‘CFC’, file 17, 5* June, 1957; Universitätsseminar

Bonn, Box ‘Nachlass Küppers’, 17* August, 1957.

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box 'Nachlass Küppers’, 17* August, 1957.

89

• (IV) A. Rinkel: Die Eucharistie und das Amt in der Kirche (The Eucharist and the Ordained Ministry in the Church);

• (V) J.F. Taylor; Eucharist and the Order of Creation;

18* Sept

• (VI) W. Küppers: Eucharistie und Eschatologie?'^^

Additional Papers:

• (A) P.J. Maan: Bericht über Geschichte und Stand der altkatholischanglikanischen theologischen und kirchlichen Beziehungen (Report on the History and the Present State of Old Catholic - Anglican theological and church relations);

• (B) E. Kemp: Bericht über die Frage der südindischen Kirche (Report about the question of the Church of South India).

Record of Papers:

There are summaries of all six papers, and of the paper of Canon Kemp in; IKZ 48 (1958), 47-58; 65-83. There is a report about the discussions about Papers (I) to (VI) in IKZA^ (1958), 40-47.

• 2. Oxford 1960: Ecclesiology

Place; Oxford, England: Exeter College.

Time: 2E‘-25* September, 1960,^^’ before an ordination of priests and deacons. Participants; about 25: Anglican; about 10;”* Old Catholic: 14.

Among the Anglican participants:

• • The Rev’d Canon Eric Kemp; the Rev’d F.J. Taylor, Principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford; the Rev’d Dr. E.L. Mascall, Oxford; the Rev’d F.P. Coleman, London (England).

Old Catholic;

• • The Rt.Rev’d P.J. Jans, Amersfoort, Bishop of Deventer; the Rev’d ProfDr. P.J. Maan; the Rev’d Prof. M. Kok; the Rev’d G.A. van Kleef (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Prof. Rüthy, the Rev’d Dr. Léon Gauthier, the Rev’d Hans Frei, and the students Hans Gemy and Peter Amiet (Switzerland);

• • the Rev’d Prof. Küppers, the Rev’d Dr. Hammerschmidt, the Rev’d Benno Schöke, the Rev’d Edgar Nickel (Germany);”®

• • Dr. Elfriede Kreuzeder (Austria).”^

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Nachlass Küppers’, IS**quot; - 18quot;’Sept. 1957;/A?Z47 (1957), 20If.

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘AnglikanischeKirche’, 2T'-25''' Sept 1960.

H. Rein, Kirchengemeinschaft {supra, n. 2), 366.

”^/ÆZ51 (1961), 57.

Letter from Küppers to Kemp, Copy (Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 13th Sept 1960).

90

Papers:

22quot;‘‘ Sept.

• (I) L. Gauthier: Die Grenzen der Kirche vom altkatholischen Standpunkt aus gesehen (The Borders of the Church - from the Old Catholic Point of View);

• (II) F. J. Taylor: Who are the Members of the Church?

• (Ill) E.L. Mascall: An Anglican’s Attitude to the Papacy;

23quot;* Sept

• (IV) W. Küppers: Die Bedeutung der Konzilien in der Alten Kirche (The Significance of the Councils in the Early Church);

• (V) E.W. Kemp: Principles governing the Relations of Episcopal Churches which are in Communion with one another;

• (VI) P.J. Jans: Der Weltkirchenrat - seine Stellung, Aufgabe und seine Grenzen gegenüber den Mitgliedskirchen (The World Council of Churches - its Place, its Task, and its Borders towards the Member Churches).

Additional Papers:

• (A) W. Küppers: Der Stand der altkatholisch-orthodoxen Beziehungen (The State of Old Catholic - Orthodox Relations);

• (B) F.P. Coleman: The North India and Ceylon Unity Schemes^^’

Record of Papers:

Papers (III), (IV), and (V), in German are in Bonn;^’” the additional paper of Prof. Küppers might have been based on his thoughts on the present state of Old Catholic - Orthodox Relations from 1958.^®*

• 3. Amersfoort 1961: The Early Church

Place: Amersfoort (Netherlands): Old Catholic Seminary.^’^

Time: 18‘’'-20‘'’ September 1961, immediately before the IS'** International Old Catholic Congress in Haarlem and the 1” Pan-Orthodox Conference in Rhodes. Participants: 26: Anglican: 11; Old Catholic: 15.

Letter from Kreuzeder to Küppers (Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche ’, 13th Sept 1960).

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box 'Anglikanische Kirche’, 2F'-25’*' Sept 1960.

IKZ5\ (1961), 57.

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche ’.

Gedanken zum ‘Gegenwärtigen Stand der alt-katholisch-orthodoxen Beziehungen’ zusammengefasst als eventuelle Grundlage einer Besprechung auf der alt-kath.

Theologenkonferenz in Wien am 21 September (1958), in: Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Nachlass Küppers’, 25'*’ Sept 1958.

Archive Lambeth Palace, box ‘CFC’, file 18, 11* Sept 1961.

91

Anglican:

• • His Grace Dr. M.A. Ramsey, Archbishop of Canterbury; the Rev’d M. Halliwell, Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury; the Rt.Rev’d D. Savage, Bishop of Buckingham; the Very Rev’d Canon E.W. Kemp, Oxford; the Rev’d L.M. Schiff; the Rev’d M. Bruce, Secretary of ILAFO;^*’ the Rev’d Dorn R. Petitpierre OvS.B.; the Rev’d C.E. Jones; the Rev’d Preb. C.L. Gage-Brown; the Rt. Rev’d R.N. Coote, Bishop of Fulham (Church of England);

• • the Rev’d H.K. Lutge, PECUSA, representing the Bishop of Long Island.

Old Catholic:

• • Dr. Andreas Rinkel, Archbishop of Utrecht; the Rt.Rev’d P.J. Jans, Bishop of Deventer; the Rev’d Prof .Dr. P.J. Maan; the Rev’d Prof. M. Kok; Prof. M.A. Zwart; the Rev’d G.A. van Kleef (Netherlands);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop Dr. Urs Küry, the Rev’d Prof Dr. A.E. Rüthy, the Rev’d H. Frei (Switzerland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop J.J. Demmel, the Rev’d ProfDr. W. Küppers, the Rev’d J. Brinkhues, the Rev’d B. Schöke, the Rev’d E.W. Heese (Germany);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Th.F. Zielinski, Bishop of Buffalo-Pittsburgh, PNCC (USA)?**

Papers:

18* Sept

• (I) L.M. Schiff: The Mission of the Church in the World today; reader of supplementary paper: W. Küppers;

19* Sept

• (II) M. Ramsey: The relation of patristic thought to modem Anglican Theology;

• (III) P.J. Maan: Our continuity with the ancient church.^*^

Additional Papers:

(A) Th.F. Zielinski (without title).^*®

Record of Papers:

The German translation of papers (II) and (III) are published in: IKZ 51 (1961), 294-308. Discussions about papers (II)-(III), and (A) were recorded for the

The International League for Apostolic Faith and Order (ILAFO) had existed since 1951 and terminated its activity when in 1967, the International Ecumenical Fellowship (lEF) started its work.

Archive Lambeth Palace, box ‘CFC’, file 18, 18*-20* Sept 1961.

Archive Lambeth Palace, box ‘CFC’, file 18, 18*-20* Sept 1961.

Archive Lambeth Palace, box ‘CFC’, file 18, September 1961.

92

Archbishop of Canterbury by M.A. Halliwell. The text is in the Archive of Lambeth Palace.^^^

• 4. Oxford 1966: Ecumenism

Place: Oxford, England: St. Stephen’s House.

Time: 10^-14*** July, 1966, 2 years after the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference’s Memorandum concerning Anglican-Methodist Conversations (1964), and 3 years before another International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference’s Declaration concerning the unity scheme (in: IKZ 59 (1969), 150-153); also 1 year before the invitation of all duly baptized Christians (who are qualified to receive Holy Communion in their own Churches) to the Lord’s table in the Anglican Communion (cf. The Lambeth Conference 1968: Resolution and Reports, London 1968, 42).

Participants: 26: Anglican: 15; Old Catholic: 11.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d H.J. Carpenter, Bishop of Oxford, Chairman; the Rt. Rev’d S.F. Allison, Bishop of Winchester; the Very Rev’d Canon Eric Kemp; the Rev’d Colin Buchanan; the Rev’d David M. Paton; the Rev’d Canon J.R. Satterthwaite, General Secretary of the C.o.E. Council on Foreign Relations (England);

• • the Rev’d John Macdonald (Wales);

• • the Rt. Rev’d. W.C. de Pauley, Bishop of Cashel (Ireland);

• • the Very Rev’d W.B. Currie (Scotland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d L.L. Scaife, Bishop of Western New York; the Rt. Rev’d J.S. Higgins, Bishop of Rhode Island; the Rev’d Prof. Edward R. Hardy, Berkeley; Dr. Peter Day, Ecumenical Officer of PECUSA (USA);

• • the Rev’d Dr. W.E. Jackson (Canada);

• • the Rev’d Canon J.A.I. Falope (West Africa).

Old Catholic:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Bishop P.J. Jans, Deventer; the Rev’d Prof. M. Kok; the Rev’d Dr. J. Visser (Netherlands);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop Dr. Urs Küry; the Rev’d Herwig Aldenhoven (Switzerland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop J. Brinkhues; the Rev’d ProfDr. W. Küppers; the Rev’d T. Dietz; the Rev’d Dr. Ernst Hammerschmidt; the Rev’d Ernst Wilhelm Heese (Germany);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Dr.Th.F. Zielinski, Bishop of Buffalo-Pittsburgh (USA).

M.A.H. (M.A. Halliwell), Old Catholic-Anglican Theologians’ Conference and Old Catholic Congress in the Netherlands, September 1961, 7 (Archive Lambeth Palace, box ‘CFC’, file 18, September 1961).

93

Papers:

11* July

• (I) H.E. Root; Anglican Relations with the Roman Catholic Church;

• (II) W. Küppers: Old Catholic - Roman Catholic Relations;

12* July

• (III) L.L. Scaife: The Situation of the Eastern Orthodox Churches in the United States;

• (IV) Herwig Aldenhoven: Old Catholic-Orthodox Relations;

13* July

• (V) E.W. Kemp: The Anglican-Methodist Conversations;

• (VI) M. Kok: An Old Catholic View of the Anglican-Methodist Conversations;

Additional Papers:

10* July

• (A) D.M. Paton: Union Schemes in the Anglican Communion;

12* July

• (B) H. Roberts (Methodist); Anglican-Methodist Conversations?^’

Record of Papers:

Papers (II), (III), (IV), and (A) are in Bonn (in English);^” Papers (V) and (VI) are published in IKZ 56 (1966), 200-217 (in English and German). A summary of all papers and discussions was made for the Council of Foreign Relations (Document No. O.C.C. 33), probably by J.R. Satterthwaite.^’”

• 5. Bern 1972: Theological Dialogues

Place: Berne, Switzerland: Christ-Catholic Faculty?

Time: 10*-12* April, 1972, immediately before an International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference in Berne (10*-14* April); a month before the disapproval of the reunion scheme between Anglicans and Methodists by more than 25% of General synod.

Participants: 24: Anglican: 8; Old Catholic: 16.

Anglican;

• • The Rt.Rev’d J. Moorman, Bishop of Ripon; the Rt.Rev’d H.J. Carpenter; the Very Rev’d E.W. Kemp; the Rev’d F.D. Chaplin; the Rev’d M. Moore; the Rev’d C. Davey (England);

. the Rev’d J. Backus (ECUSA).

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp 25* June, 1966 / 10* to 14* July. ^’’Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 10*-14* July, 1966.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp ’, July 1966.

94

Old Catholic;

• • The Rt.Rev’d Marinus Kok, Archbishop of Utrecht; the Rt.Rev’d Andreas Rinkel, Archbishop Emeritus of Utrecht; the Rt.Rev’d P.J. Jans, Bishop of Deventer; the Rt.Rev’d G.A. van Kleef, Bishop of Haarlem; the Rev’d ProfDr. P.J. Maan (Netherlands);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop Dr. Urs Kiiry; the Rev’d H. Aldenhoven (Switzerland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop J. Brinkhues; the Rev’d ProfDr. W. Küppers; the Rev’d E.W. Heese (Germany);

• • the Rt.Rev’d L. Paulitschke (Auxiliary Bishop of Austria);

• • the Most Rev’d Th. Zielinski, Prime Bishop of the PNCC; the Rt.Rev’d F.C. Rowinski; the Rt.Rev’d A.M. Rysz (USA);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Julian Pekala, the Rt.Rev’d T. Majewski (Poland).

Papers:

IO* April

• (I) Michael Moore: Anglican Involvement in International Dialogue;

• (II) W. Küppers: (a similar survey for the Old Catholics);

11* April

• (III) H.J. Carpenter: Anglican-Orthodox contacts since the 17th century;

• (IV) W. Küppers: Orthodox - Old Catholic Dialogue;

• (V) G.A. Van Kleef: Dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church;

• (VI) J. Moorman: Anglican - Roman Catholic Dialogue.

Additional Papers:

12* April

(A) E.W. Kemp: Anglican - Old Catholic Relations, and the consequences of Full Communion.^’*

Record of Papers: Paper (VI) is in London;^’^ the contents of all the papers, and some of the subsequent discussion, were recorded.^” Paper (IV) might be similar to W. Küppers, Stand und Perspektiven des altkatholisch-orthodoxen Dialogs, in: IKZ 62 (1972), 87-114, which he held in Athens and Thessaloniki in March 1971?’*

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche', April 10*-12*, 1972.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp ', without date (1972).

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche', Apó\ 10*-12*, 1972.

Letter from Küppers to Kemp, Copy (Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 13* Sept 1960).

95

• 6. Oxford 1973: Full Communion

Place: Oxford, England, Pusey House.

Time; 25“’-29“’ June, 1973.

Participants: 11; Anglican: 6 (all from England); Old Catholic: 5.

Anglican:

• • The Very Rev’d E. Kemp (Co-Chairman); the Rev’d H.R.T. Brandreth, O.G.S. (Theological Secretary); the Rev’d Canon C.P.M. Jones; the Rev’d Dr. John Halliburton; the Rev’d Roger Beckwith; the Rev’d Frank Weston.

Old Catholic:

• • The Rev’d ProfDr. P.J. Maan, the Rev’d M.F.G. Parmentier (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Urs von Arx (Switzerland);

• • the Rev’d ProfDr. Hammerschmidt (Co-Chairman); the Rev’d Prof. Dr. W. Küppers (Germany).“'’quot;

Papers:

26* June

• (I) Martien Parmentier: The Development from intercommunion to Full Communion between the Anglican and Old Catholic Churches;

• (II) Frank Weston: The Effect of Eucharistic Communion on Christian Mission;

• (III) Cheslyn Jones: The Communion of the People of God in the New Testament; reader of supplementary paper: Dr. P. J. Maan;

• (IV) Urs von Arx: Ämter in der neutestamentlichen Zeit und das Amt in der Kirche heute (Ministry in New Testament Times and today);

27“* June

• (V) both Prof. W. Küppers, and

• (VI) Roger Beckwith: Doctrinal Agreement and Full Communion;

• (VII) John Halliburton: The Bearing of Eucharistie Theology on Eucharistie Hospitality;

28 “* June

• (VIII) E. Kemp: Ministry and Full Communion.^’®

Record of Papers:

Papers (I) and (IV) are in Beme,’^’’ a short summary of the discussions was given by H.R.T. Brandreth;“'”* a revised version of Parmentier’s essay was

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp ', 25*** July, 1973 / 25* to 29* June, 1973.

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, 8* June, 1973.

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, 1973.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘Eric Kemp ', 25* July, 1973 / 25* to 29* June, 1973.

96

printed later in Kracht in Zwakheid, 1982 {supra, n. 10), 125-144, under the title. Evangelical Anglicans and Old-Catholics in 1931.

• 7. Luzern 1974: The Bonn Agreement

Place: Luzern, Switzerland: Haus Bruchmatt.

Time: 14“'-18“’ September 1974, immediately before the 2P‘ International Old Catholic Congress.

Participants: 20: Anglican: 11; Old Catholic: 9.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d John Trillo, Bishop of Chelmsford, representing the Archbishop of Canterbury; the Very Rev’d Eric Kemp; the Rev’d Dr. J. Halliburton; the Rev’d Roger Beckwith; the Rev’d H.R.T. Brandreth; the Rev’d Peter Staples; the Rev’d Roger Greenacre; the Rev’d David Murfet, representing the Bishop of Fulham and Gibraltar (England);

• • the Rt.Rev’d A.E. Swift, in charge of the American Convocation of Churches in Europe.

Old Catholic:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Marinus Kok, Archbishop of Utrecht; the Rt.Rev’d P.J. Jans, Bishop of Deventer; the Rt.Rev’d G.A. van Kleef, Bishop of Haarlem; the Rev’d Teunis Horstman (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Prof Dr. Kurt Stalder; the Rev’d Dr. Peter Amiet; the Rev’d Urs von Arx (Switzerland);

• • the Rev’d Prof. Chr. Oeyen; the Rev’d Dr. Kurt Pursch (Germany).“’’

Papers:

14“* Sept

• (I) Peter Staples: Eucharistic hospitality in three Contexts;

• (II) Kurt Stalder: Eucharistic Hospitality {Eucharistische Gastfreund

schaft}',

15“* Sept

• (III) Roger Beckwith: All the essentials of the Christian faith: Doctrinal Agreement and Full Communion;

• (IV) Kurt Pursch: All the essentials of the Christian faith;

• (V) both Christian Oeyen, and

• (VI) John Halliburton: The Catholicity and Apostolicity of the Church; lb* Sept

• (VII) Eric Kemp: Ministry and Ordination in the Church;

• (VIII) Peter Amiet: Das Amt in der Kirche (Ministry and Ordination in the Church).^““

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx. University of Berne, Zó* Aug., 1974.

Counsellors, Report {supra, n. 242).

97

Record of Papers:

Papers (II), (VI) and (VII) in German, papers (III) and (IV) in English, and a copy of the report for the Archbishop of Canterbury's Counsellors on Foreign Relations about the conference, are in Bonn (S). Paper (VI) in English, and a hand-written record of the papers and discussions are in Berne^'”. Paper (V) was printed in: IKZ 64 (1974), Beiheft ‘Hundert Jahre Christkatholischtheologische Fakultät der Universität Bern’, 128-144.

Additional Texts:

• (A) General Synod GS 212, The Theology of Ordination and the Integration of Ministries: An Interim Paper by the Faith and Order Advisory Group of the Board for Mission and Unity (Chairman: E.W. Kemp).

• (B) General Synod GS 202, Patterns of Ministry: A discussion paper prepared by Hugh Melinsky for the Advisory Council for the Church's Ministry.

• (C) ARCIC, Ministry and Ordination (Canterbury Statement 1973 on the Doctrine of the Ministry).^'’^

Resolutions:

At the end of the conference, two resolutions were approved regarding an Old Catholic demand for official theological discussion, and the appointment of two Anglican and two Old Catholic theologians to prepare a statement on Authority to be discussed at the next Conference. The texts are in the report for the Archbishop of Canterbury's Counsellors on Foreign Relations.

• 8. Chichester 1977: Ordained Ministry

Place: Chichester (England), The Theological College.

Time: 18‘*’-22quot;‘* April, 1977,^®“* four months after a Declaration of the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference concerning the Ordination of Women (7quot;'December, 1976).

Participants: 17: Anglican: 7 (all from England); Old Catholic: 10.

Anglican:

• • fhe Rt.Rev’d Eric Kemp, Bishop of Chichester; the Rt.Rev’d Kenneth

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, mAisquot;’ September 1974.

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche', 18quot;’-22‘’® September (wrong date!). German text in: H. Meyer e.a. (ed.), Dokumente wachsender Übereinstimmung, Frankfurt 1983 (Bd. I), 148-155; 1992 (Bd. 2).

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche ’, 18‘*’-22'’‘* September (wrong date!).

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, 1977.

98

Cragg; the Rev’d Prof. Howard Root; the Rev’d Canon Roger Greenacre; the Rev’d Dr. John Halliburton; the Rev’d Roger Beckwith; the Rev’d Deaconess Hilary, CSA.

Old Catholic:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Marinus Kok, Archbishop of Utrecht; the Rt.Rev’d G.A. van Kleef, Bishop of Haarlem; the Rev’d Dr. M.F.G. Parmentier; the Rev’d Teun Horstman (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Prof. H. Aldenhoven; the Rev’d Dr. Urs von Arx (Switzerland);

• • the Rev’d Prof.Dr. Christian Oeyen; the Rev’d E.W. Heese (Germany);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Nikolaus Hummel, Bishop of the Old Catholic Church in Austria; the Rev’d Gunther 0010731.^”^

Papers:

None. In November 1976, the International Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference had appointed Dr. Urs von Arx and Prof Dr. Christian Oeyen to be the two theo-logians on the Old Catholic side who, together with Bishop Eric Kemp and the Principal of Chichester Theological College, Dr. Halliburton, were to prepare the material on ‘Authority’ (see 7. Luzern 1974: ‘The Bonn Agreement’, Reso-lutions).^®^ Prof Dr. Oeyen felt that the time was too short and asked for a later date.’®^ On behalf of the Bishop of Chichester, though, the following texts were sent to Dr. von Arx and Prof Dr. Oeyen.

Additional Texts:

• (A) General Synod GS 104B, The Ordination of Women to the Priesthood;

• (B) General Synod GS 281, The Theology of Ordination;

• (C) General Synod GS 307, The Reconciliation of Ministries;

• (D) Miss Christian Howard, The Ordination of Women to the Priesthood;

• (E) ARCIC, Authority in the Church (Venice Statement 1976 on the Doctrine of Authority I); German text in: Dokumente wachsender Übereinstimmung {supra, n. 302), 159-177.

Prof Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, 1977.

Letter from G.A. van Kleef the Bishop of Haarlem, to the Rt. Rev’d Dr. Eric Kemp, Bishop of Chichester, All Saints’ Day (U‘ November) 1976, Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, T'Nov., 1976.

He had to undergo medical treatment: Letters from Prof Dr. Christian Oeyen to Von Arx, Van Kleef Bishop Kemp, Archbishop Kok, Bishop Gauthier, 11* and 12**' November, 1976 (Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 11 quot;’and 12'*' Nov., 1976).

Letter from the Assistant Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Counsellors on Foreign Relations, the Rev’d Christopher J. Hill, to Prof. Oeyen, SO* March, 1977 (Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 30* March, 1977).

99

Resolutions:

A 6-point-resolution was agreed stating that within both churches, there are different opinions about the theological and canonical questions about women’s ordination, and demanding better conditions for consultations between Anglicans and Old Catholics for the future. The English text of the resolution is in London,^®’ and it was published in German in the IKZ 67 (1977), 185.

• 9. Trier 1980: Authority

Place: Trier, Germany: Abbey St. Matthias

Time: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;April, 1980, 10 years after the Declaration of the Old Catholic

Bishops on Primacy in the Church (18 July 1970: see IKZ 60 (1970), 57-59). Participants: 20: Anglican: 12; Old Catholic: 8.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Eric Kemp, Bishop of Chichester (Co-Chairman); the Rev’d Ian Cundy; the Rev’d Prof. Howard Root; the Rev’d A. Cole, representing the Bishop of Fulham and Gibraltar (England);

• • the Rev’d Chancellor O.G. Rees (Wales);

• • the Very Rev’d D.G.A. Clarke (Ireland);

• • Prof. A.B. Wilkinson (Scotland);

• • the Rt. Rev’d H. Hill, Bishop of Ontario (Canada);

• • the Rev’d Dr. J.R. Wright; Dr. W. Domemann (USA);

• • the Rev’d S. Tumwesigire, appointed by the Anglican Consultative Council (Uganda);

Old Catholic:

• • The Rt.Rev’d M. Kok, Archbishop of Utrecht; the Rt.Rev’d G.A. van Kleef, Bishop of Haarlem; the Rev’d Dr. Martien Parmentier (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Prof Dr. H. Aldenhoven (Switzerland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop J. Brinkhues, the Rev’d Prof Dr. Chr. Oeyen, the Rev’d Dieter Kniese (Germany);

• • Dr. G. Dolezal (Austria).’

Papers:

14* April

• (I) Ian Cundy: The Place of Authority in Religious Belief;

15* April

• (II) H. Aldenhoven: The Biblical View of Authority;

• (III) O.G. Rees: The Biblical View of Authority and the Authority of

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 23, 18“’-22quot;‘‘ September (wrong date). ’'° Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 14*-18* April, 1980.

100

the Bible;

• (IV) both D.G.A. Clarke, and

• (V) Martien Parmentier: The Authority of Councils;

16* April

• (VI) C. Oeyen: Authority in the Church, with particular reference to the relationship between Bishops, Priests and Laity;

• (VII) A.B. Wilkinson: The Relationship of Bishops, Clergy and Laity in respect of Authority;

• (VIII) both H.E. Boot, and

• (IX) C. Oeyen: Authority in a Divided Church?quot;

Record of Papers:

Papers (I), (III), (IV), (VI), (VII), (VIII), and 6 theses about (IX), are in Bonn (S). Paper (V), and some notes on (II), are in Bernequot;^.

Resolutions:

A Joint Statement has been discussed and drafted, including a description of the discussion?quot; It was published in: One in Christ 16 (1980), 375-379; as an appendix, the Declaration of the Old Catholic Bishops on Primacy in the Church (18* July 1970: see IKZ 60 (1970), 57-59) was added to the Joint Statement?quot;

• 10. Vienna 1982: Authority in the Church

Place: Vienna, Austria: (?).

Time: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;September, 1982, one year after the solemn, but also critical

celebrations of the 50* anniversary of the Bonn Agreement in London and Utrecht, July/November 1981?quot;

Participants: 21: Anglican 9: Old Catholic: 12.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Eric Kemp, Bishop of Chichester; the Rt.Rev’d E. Knapp

-Fisher; the Rev’d Canon Christopher Hill; the Rev’d Ian Cundy; the Rev’d J.V. Holder; the Rev’d Canon Christopher Frey (England);

• • the Rev’d J. Robert Wright; the Rev’d Daniel G. Conklin (USA);

• • the Rev’d D.E. Morris (Wales);

Old Catholic:

• • The Rt.Rev’d G.A. van Kleef, Bishop of Haarlem; the Rt.Rev’d Mari-

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 14*-18* April, 1980.

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne.

Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 24, 14*-18* April, 1980.

ProfDr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, 14*-18* April, 1980.

Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche', 3Ay* September, 1982.

101

nus Kok, Archbishop Emeritus of Utrecht; the Rev’d Prof Dr. Jan Visser (Netherlands);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop L. Gauthier; the Rev’d ProfDr. Kurt Stalder (Switzerland);

• • the Rev’d Dietrich Schuld; the Rev’d Dean Edgar Nickel (Germany);

• • Dr. Günter Dolezal; Dr. Ernst Kreuzeder (Austria);

• • Stanley Skrzypek (USA);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop ProfDr. M. Rode; the Rev’d Dr. W. Wysochanski (Poland).’*®

Papers: None.

According to the Aide Mémoire and Recommendations of the Anglican - Old Catholic Theological Conference,’*^ the following texts were discussed.

• (A) ARCIC, Authority in the Church 11 (Windsor Statement 1981 on the Doctrine of Authority 11); German text in; Dokumente wachsender Übereinstimmung {supra, n. 302), 177 - 190;

• (B) Swiss Old Catholic - Roman Catholic Commission, Ortskirche - Universalkirche, Amt und Bezeugung der Wahrheit (Local Church and Universal Church — Ordained Ministry and Bearing Witness to the Truth); German text in: IKZ 72 (1982), 33-45;

• (C) Declaration of the Old Catholic Bishops on Primacy in the Church (IS* July 1970, see: IKZ(gt;G (1970), 57-59).

Resolutions:

Aide Mémoire and Recommendations of the Anglican - Old Catholic Theological Conference,’** commenting positively on ARCIC 1 and 11, stressing the theology of koinonia, though registering as well ‘some differences of opinion’ (page 2), concerning mainly the problems of universal jurisdiction (ARCIC II, paragraph 20) and papal infallibility with regards to the reception of decisions by the church (page 4).

• 11. Chichester 1985: Primacy

Place: Chichester, England: The Theological College.

Time: 6'*’-10*'’ August 1985, 3 months after the acceptance by the German Old Catholic Synod of the ‘Vereinbarung Uber eine gegenseitige Einladung zur Teilnahme an der Feier der Eucharistie ’ (agreement about mutual Eucharistie Hospitality) between the German Old Catholics and the German Evangelical (Protestant) Church {EKD} (German text in: Ökumenische Rundschau 34

’*® Archive Lambeth Palace, Box ‘CFC’, file 25, 3-7 September 1982.

’*’ Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche’, 2-7 September, 1982.

’** Universitätsseminar Bonn, Box ‘Anglikanische Kirche ’,2-7 September, 1982.

102

(1985), 365 -367).

Participants: 25: Anglican: 12; Old Catholic: 13.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d John Satterthwaite, Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe; the Rt.Rev’d E.G. Knapp-Fisher; the Rt.Rev’d Dr. Eric Kemp, Bishop of Chichester; the Rev’d Canon Howard Poet, Centro Anglicano, Rome; the Rt.Rev’d Felix Arnott; the Rev’d George Braund; the Rev’d Alan Cole; the Rev’d Ian Cundy (England);

• • the Rev’d D. Morris (Wales);

• • the Rt.Rev’d H. Robinson, Bishop of Western New York; the Rev’d Dr. Robert Wright (USA);

• • the Rev’d H.J. Nahabedian (Canada).

Old Catholic:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Marinus Kok, Archbishop Emeritus of Utrecht; the Rev’d Dr. Martien Parmentier (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Dr. Bert Wirix (Belgium);

• • the Rev’d Dr. Urs von Arx (Switzerland);

• • the Rev’d Dean Edgar Nickel; the Rev’d Wilhelm Perqui; the Rev’d Dietrich Schuld, Henfield/West Sussex (Germany);

• • Dr. Gunter Dolezal (Austria);

• • the Rt. Rev’d Dr. Wiktor Wysoczanski; the Rev’d Ryszard Dabrowski (Poland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d John Swantek; the Very Rev’d Stanley Skrzypek (USA);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Joseph Nieminski (Canada).

Papers:

• 7“’ August

• (I) Eric Kemp: The Ministry in the New Testament and the Early Church (German: Das geistliche Amt im Neuen Testament und in der Frühkirche)', Reader of supplementary paper: Martien Parmentier (Ib);

• (11) The Rev’d Prof Dr. Kurt Stalder (read by Urs von Arx): Apostolic Succession and Authority (German: Apostolische Sukzession und Autorität)', Additional Theses (from 12* July): the Rev’d Prof Dr. J. Visser (lib); Reader of supplementary paper: Ian Cundy (lie);

• 8* August

• (III) The Anglican - Old Catholic North American Working Group of the International Anglican - Old Catholic Theological Conference: Primacy in the Church.^*’

Letter from Bishop Kemp to the participants of the conference, U* July 1985, with handwritten additions by Dr. Von Arx (Prof Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, August 6*- 10*, 1985).

103

Record of Papers:

Papers (1), (Ib), (Ilb), and (III) in English, and paper (II) in German and English, are in Beme’^®. A German translation of (I) is in the possession of Dean Edgar NickeP^'.

Resolutions:

On 9“’ August, a statement, prepared by Bishop Eric Kemp, was agreed on consisting in 15 points regarding Authority and Primacy in the Church, and signed by the Bishops Kemp and Kok. A German translation has been published in the IKZ 80 (1990), 5-11.

• 12. Toronto 1987: Koinonia

Place: Toronto, Canada: Trinity College.

Time: 7“'-l 1* July, 1987.

Participants: 36: Anglican: 19; Old Catholic: 17. Delegates are in bold print. Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Colin Docker, Bishop of Horsham; the Rt.Rev’d E. Knapp-Fisher; the Rev’d Ian Cundy (England);

• • the Rev’d D. Morris (Wales);

• • the RtRev’d H. Robinson, Bishop of Western New York; the Rev’d Carole J. McGowan; the Rev’d Dr. Warren Platt; the Rev’d Robert Wright; Dr. William Domemann; Dr. R. William Franklin; the Rev’d Elizabeth Turner (USA);

• • the Rt.Rev’d H. Hill, Ontario; the RtRev’d C. Mitchell, Bishop of Niagara; the Rev’d David Holeton; the Rev’d A. Thomas Little; the Rev’d Victoria Matthews; the Rev’d Brian Prideaux; the Rev’d Harold Nahabedian (Canada);

Old Catholic:

• • the Rev’d Dr. Martien Parmentier (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx (Switzerland);

• • the RtRev’d Bishop Dr. Sigisbert Kraft; the Rev’d Dean Edgar Nickel; the Rev’d Dietrich Schuld (Germany);

• • the Very Rev’d Chancellor Ryszard Dabrowski (Poland);

• • the Most Rev’d John Swantek, Prime Bishop of the PNCC; the Rt.Rev’d Thomas Gnat; the Veiy Rev’d Jan Chwiej; the Very Rev’d Stephen Gnas; the Very Rev’d Robert Nemkovich; the Very Rev’d Stanley Skrzypek; the Rev’d Sigmund Peplowski; the Rev’d Walter Thomas; mr. Laurence Orzell, PNCC Theological Commission; mrs.

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, ô*-10* August 1985. Dekan em. E. Nickel, Freiburg im Breisgau.

104

Cheryl Gaszak (USA);

• the Rt.Rev’d Joseph Nieminski (Canada)?^^

Papers:

8* July

• (I) Urs von Arx; Eucharist and Ecclesiastical Communion — Aspects of Koinonia in the New Testament; Response: J. Robert Wright: Koinonia Today in Ecumenical Dialogue (Ib);

9* July

• (11) Sigisbert Kraft: Liturgy and Terminology, or: How do we speak of ecumenical community in the divine service? (German: Liturgie und Terminologie. Wie sprechen wir von ökumenischer Gemeinschaft im Gottesdienst?}-, Responses: David Holeton (Ilb), Ian Cundy (IIc);

• (III) panel discussion about ‘Ecclesiology: Problems and Progress in North America Today’, three participants: (a) Lawrence J. Orzell, The Polish National Catholic Church: Contemporary Ecclesiological Developments, (b) B. Prideaux, (c) E. Turner;

10* July

• (IV) Robert Wright: Intercommunion and Full Communion; Responses: M. Parmentier (IVb), W.C. Platt (IVc), L.J. Orzell: Models of‘Communion’. A Polish National Catholic Perspective (IVd);

• (V) Edward Knapp-Fisher: Unity and Diversity. The Ordination of Women; Responses: Victoria Matthews (Vb); Cheryl Gaszak (Vc); D. Schuld (Vd).’^

Record of Papers:

Papers (II), (III), (IV), (IVb), (IVd), (V), and (Vc) are in Bonn^^'* in English language; (II) is there also in German. Paper (I) is in Berne,^^^ handwritten, in English.

Resolutions:

An Aide-Memoire was drafted but not published, demanding ‘clarification, identification and exploration’ but as well, ‘perseverance in the pursuit of our goal

Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 7-11 July 1987.

Minutes of the International Anglican-Old Catholic Theological Conference, held at Trinity College, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, July 7-11, 1987 (Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 7-11 July 1987); see: Urs von Arx, Zwischen Krise und Stabilität: Bericht über die Anglikanisch Altkatholischen Theologenkonferenzen in Toronto 1987 und Morschach 1990 (Between Crisis and Stability: Report about the Anglican-Old Catholic Theologians’ Conferences in Toronto 1987 and Morschach 1990), IKZ 81 (1991), 1-40; 2-6.

Bischöfliches Ordinariat, Bonn, 7-11 July 1987.

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne

105

- whether it be described as Intercommunion, Full Communion, Organic Unity or in other terms’The Anglican/Episcopal members of the North American Working Group made three Observations and recommendations based upon the proceedings and discussion of the conference?^^

• 13. Morschach 1990: All the Essentials of the Christian Faith

Place: Morschach, Switzerland; Antoniushaus Mattli.

Time: 22'quot;^-26'*' August, 1990; 2 years after the ‘Meissen agreement’ between the Church of England and the Evangelical/Protestant Church of Germany {EKD).

Participants: 16: Anglican: 8; Old Catholic: 8.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Colin Docker, Bishop of Horsham (retiring chairman); the Rt.Rev’d Henry Richmond, Bishop of Repton (succeeding chairman); the Rev’d Ian Cundy; the Rev’d Canon John Halliburton (England);

• • Dr. Keith D. Warren (Wales);

• • the Rt.Rev’d H. Robinson, Assisting Bishop of New York; the Rev’d Prof Dr. J. Robert Wright (USA);

• • the Rev’d Dr. John Pobee, (WCC Geneva).

Old Catholic:

• • The Rev’d Dr. M. Parmentier (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d ProfDr. Urs von Arx; the Rev’d ProfDr. Herwig Aldenhoven; the Rev’d Dr. H. Rein (Switzerland);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop Dr. S. Kraft; the Rev’d Dean Edgar Nickel (Germany);

• • the Rev’d E. Ickelsheimer (Austria);

• • the Very Rev’d S. Skrzypek (USA).

Papers:

23'^'* August

• (I) J. Robert Wright: All the Essentials of the Christian Faith (at Bonn, 2 July 1931); H. Rein: All the Essentials of the Christian Faith - the Bonn Agreement studied from the 1930/31 perspective (the Old Catholic View) (Ib);

• (II) J. Halliburton: Anglican - Old Catholic Conversations (after 1931); Response: H. Aldenhoven (Ilb);

ProfDr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne, .7-11 July 1987; Dekan em. Edgar

Nickel, Freiburg im Breisgau, 7-11 July 1987.

Bischöfliches Ordinariat. Bonn, 7-11 July 1987.

106

24* August

• (III) 1. Cundy; The Significance of the Bonn Agreement in the Light of the Ecumenical Developments since 1931; M. Parmentier: The Realis Praesentia of the Bonn Agreement (Illb); S. Kraft; Einige Überlegungen zur Gemeinschaft zwischen Alt-Katholiken und Anglikanern in Deutschland (Some thoughts concerning the communion between Old Catholics and Anglicans in Germany) (IIIc)?28

Record of Papers: All the papers are in Beme?^’

Resolution:

In a 2 page resolution (also in Berne’^®), the members of the conference request their Archbishops to reconstitute the conference ‘as a “standing” Anglican - Old Catholic International Consultation’, having a fourfold task.

• 14. Guildford 1993: Co-ordinating Council

Place: Maryvale Pastoral Centre, Guildford.

Time: September 26*-30*, 1993.

Participants; 14; Anglican: 7; Old Catholic: 7.

Anglican:

• • The Rt.Rev’d Henry Richmond (Chairman); the Rt.Rev’d Ian Cundy; the Rt.Rev’d Edward Holland; Dr. Gillian Evans (England);

• • the Rev’d Canon Dr. J. Robert Wright (USA);

• • the Rev’d Dr. Donald Anderson (Anglican Communion Office);

• • the Rev’d Dr. Richard March (Lambeth Palace).

Old Catholic;

• • The Rt.Rev’d Teun Horstmann, Bishop of Haarlem; the Rev’d drs. Wietse van der Velde (Netherlands);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Bishop Dr. Sigisbert Kraft (Chairman), the Rev’d Dean Edgar Nickel (Germany);

• • the Rev’d Prof Dr. Urs von Arx (Switzerland);

• • Dr. Gunter Dolezal (Austria);

• • the Rev’d Jerzy Bajorek (Poland).

Resolutions: Fourteenth International Conference {supra, n. 29).

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx. University of Berne, 22.-26. 8. 1990; IKZ 81 (1991), 8.

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne , 22‘’L26''’ August, 1990.

Prof.Dr. Urs von Arx, University of Berne.

107

• 15. Leeds 2005: Towards Further Convergence

Place: Hinsley Hall, Leeds

Time: August 29“'- September 2quot;“, 2005.

Participants: 69: Anglican: 30; Old Catholic: 39.

Anglican:

• • The Rev’d Joop Albers; the Rev’d John de Wit; Maryon Jägers; the Rev’d David Mumford (Netherlands);

• • the Rev’d Preb. Dr. Paul Avis; the Rt.Rev’d Ian Brackley; the Rev’d Preb. Margaret Cameron; the Rev’d Kenneth Clark; the Rev’d Canon William Croft; the Rt.Rev’d Ian Cundy; Matthew Duckett; the Ven. Richard Gillings; the Rt.Rev’d Jonathan Gledhill; the Rt.Rev’d David Hamid; the Rev’d P. Geoffrey Harbord; the Rt.Rev’d John Hind; the Rev’d Brian Lewis; the Rev’d Dr. Charlotte Methuen; the Rev’d Canon Andrew Norman; Dr. Colin Podmore; the Rev’d Dr. Kevin Walton; Louise Walton (RC); the Rev’d Dr. John Williams; the Rev’d Canon Paul Williams (England);

• • the Rev’d Ariadne van den Hof (Wales);

• • the Rt.Rev’d Peter Barrett (Ireland);

• • the Rev’d Leo M. Joseph; the Rt.Rev’d Mike Klusmeyer; the Rev’d Bjorn Marcussen; the Rev’d Canon Prof.Dr. Robert Wright (USA).

Old Catholic:

• • Sarah Aebersold; the Rev’d Erwin Gut; the Rev’d Daniel Konrad; the Rev’d Klaus Heinrich Neuhoff; the Rev’d Christoph Schuler; the Rev’d Lars Simpson; the Rev’d Peter-Ben Smit; the Rev’d ProfDr Urs von Arx (Switzerland);

• • the Rev’d Johannes Arens; Bernd Wallet (England);

• • the Rev’d Dr. Angela Berlis; the Rev’d Canon Jake Dejonge; the Rev’d Robert Frede; ProfDr. Jan Hallebeek; the Rev’d Canon Jan Kinneging; the Rev’d Martina Liebler-Münch; the Rev’d Harald Münch; the Rev’d Mattijs Ploeger; the Rev’d Deacon Pim Rijnders; The Rev’d Rudolf Scheltinga; the Very Rev’d Dr. Dick J. Schoon; drs. Lidwien van Buuren; the Rev’d Jan van der Steen; the Rev’d Canon drs. Wietse van der Velde; the Rev’d Canon Pieter van Tilburg; the Most Rev’d Dr. Joris Vercammen, Archbishop of Utrecht; Robin Voorn (Netherlands);

• • Monika Bormet; the Rev’d ProfDr Günter Esser; Stefan Kandels; the Rev’d Holger Laske; the Rev’d ProfDr. Klaus Rohmann; the Rev’d Nikolaus Schönherr (Germany);

• • the Rev’d Generalvikar Mag Martin Eisenbraun; the Rev’d Kurat Mag Franz Handler; the Rev’d Erich Ickelsheimer; Regina Lechner (Austria);

108

• • the Rev’d Prof.Dr David Holeton; Petr Vins (Czechia);

• • Stefan Wedra (Italy).

Papers:

29*** August

• (la) Urs von Arx: Historical Background to the Bonn Agreement (Old Catholic);

(Ib) Charlotte Methuen (Anglican Response);

30* August

• (2a) Mattijs Ploeger: Catholicity, Apostolicity, Trinitarian and Eucharistic Concepts of the Church (Old Catholic);

(2b) Paul Avis (Anglican Response)

• (3a) Colin Podmore: Episcopacy, Conciliarity, Collegiality, Primacy (Anglican);

• (3b) Günter Esser (Old Catholic Response);

3U‘ August

• (4a) Sarah Aebersold: The Church Local and Universal (Old Catholic);

(4b) Robert Wright (Anglican Response);

1 September

(5a) John Hind: Unity and Communion, Mystical and Visible (Anglican)

(5b) Urs von Arx (Old Catholic Response).

Record of Papers: All texts have been published in: IKZ 96 (2006), Beiheft.

Affirmations and questions:

In the final plenary session, the following ‘affirmations’ and related ‘questions’ received significant support.’^' Whereas the affirmations give the basics of the present Anglican - Old Catholic relations, the questions open much room for further considerations.

• 7. Ecclesiological convergences and some questions that they evoke

• a. Anglicans and Old Catholics affirm that the local Church, interpreted as the diocese, is the basic ecclesiological entity.

How should we relate this common ecclesiological understanding of the local Church to the situations of parallel jurisdictions in mainland

IKZ % (2006), Beiheft, 176-178.

109

Europe? Is the Prague model, where congregations of one church come under the oversight of the bishop of the other, helpful?

How can we find wider (national, regional and universal) structures for decision-making without violating the ‘local’ emphasis of our ecclesiologies?

• b. Anglicans and Old Catholics affirm, with different emphases, a ‘eucharistie ecclesiology’.

How does ‘mission’ fit into a eucharistic-ecclesiological approach? What is the significance of baptism for eucharistie ecclesiology?

• c. Anglicans and Old Catholics are in ‘full communion’ through the Bonn Agreement: this is a sufficient and definitive basis for any steps to deeper unity.

What is the significance of the fact that many of us feel that we are already ‘one Church’, even though we are actually constituted as separate churches?

How does ‘full communion’ relate to the goal of the ‘full visible unity’ of Christ's Church; does the imperative of visible unity impel us to look for further development of our relationship?

What structural model would enable us to be ‘united, not absorbed’, so that the distinctive traditions, theologies and practices of our communions were preserved?

Are our ‘bonds of communion’ strong enough (what about common structures for consultation and decision-making)?

Could the Old Catholic communion and the Anglican Communion become more fully united, perhaps in a united province of mainland Europe that would incorporate the various Anglican and Old Catholic jurisdictions?

Is the Anglican Communion receptive to the presence of traditions that are not distinctively Anglican? Is the fact that the United Churches of South Asia and the Portuguese Lusitanian Church are members of the Communion a helpful precedent?

Would a deeper structural expression of our communion be a matter of concern for our relationships with the Orthodox, Roman Catholic and episcopal Lutheran Churches?

How can we connect a ‘top down’ approach (at the theological and episcopal level) to further steps with a ‘bottom up’ approach that helps Anglican chaplaincies and Old Catholic parishes to work together more?

110

• 2. Convergences in mission and the practical questions they evoke

• a. Anglicans and Old Catholics preach the Gospel in a pluralist and increasingly secular Europe.

To what extent should we be prepared to let ‘belonging' (communitybuilding; exploring spirituality) precede consensus in faith and theology?

• b. Anglicans and Old Catholics ought to work together more closely than they currently do.

Anglicans and Old Catholics need to get to know each other better locally, in order to overcome ignorance or prejudice and to learn to trust one another.

Anglicans and Old Catholics could be encouraged, when on holiday, to worship in one another's churches.

During ordination training, finding out about the other Church should be included in the teaching, and study exchanges should be encouraged if possible, taking account of language ability, time, and finance.

There is scope for more exchanges of parish clergy.

Should the election of bishops in the Old Catholic Churches become open to candidates from the Anglican Communion (and vice versa)?’

Ill

ABBREVIATIONS

114

INDEX OF PERSONS

A

Ackermann, the Rev’d Franz (1920-2006)

Aebersold, the Rev’d Sarah (*1975)

Aglipay, Gregorio Labayan (1860-1940), Obispo Maximo of the PIC 42 Aguilar, Manuel N., Bishop of the PIC

Albers, the Rev’d Joop R. (*1947)

Albert VII, Archduke of Austria (1559-1621)

Aldenhoven, the Rev’d Dr. Herwig (1933-2002) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;89,93,94,95,

99,100,106

Alexander VII, Pope ( 1599-1667) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;23,24,24n68,

26,65

Allison, Sherard Falkner, Bishop of Winchester (1907-1993)

Amiet, the Rev’d Dr. Peter (* 1936)

Anderson, the Rev’d Dr. Donald

Arens, the Rev’d Johannes (*1969)

Arnauld, Antoine (1612-1694) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;23,23n63,26

Arnott, Dr. Felix Raymond, Archbishop of Brisbane (1911-1988)

Arx, the Rev’d Dr. Urs von (*1943) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;96,97,99,

99n307,103,104, 105,106,107,108

Augustinus, Bishop of Hippo (354-430)

Avis, the Rev’d Canon Dr. Paul (*1947)

B

Backus, the Rev’d J.

Bajorek, the Rev’d Dr. Jerzy

Bayaca, Gerardo M., Bishop of the PIC

Barrett, Peter Francis, Bishop of Cashel and Ossory (*1956)

Bayne, Stephen Fielding, PECUSA-Bishop of Olympia (1908-1974) 16n25 Beckwith, the Rev’d Dr. Roger T. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;96,97,99

Bell, George Kennedy Allen, Bishop of Chichester (1881-1958

Berends, Johannes Hermanus, Bishop of Deventer (1868-1941)

Berlis, the Rev’d Dr. Angela K.H. (*1962)

Bernulfiis, B ishop of Utrecht (t 1054)

Binsted, Norman Spencer, PECUSA Missionary Bishop (1890-1961) 42 Bonifatius, Archbishop of Utrecht (672-754) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;21,23n60

Bormet, Monika

Bouverie Pusey, Dr. Edward ( 1800-1882)

Brackley, Ian, Bishop of Dorking (*1947)

Brandreth, O.G.S., the Rev’d H.R.T.

Braund, the Rev’d George

Brinkhues, Josef, Bischöfin Bonn (1913-1995) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;92,93,95,100

Brent, Charles Henry, PECUSA Missionary Bishop (1862-1929)

Bruce, the Rev’d Michael

115

Buchanan, the Rev’d Colin

Burley, the Rev’d John Anderson, Hon. Canon of Utrecht (1911-1999)

Buuren, Lidwien M.A. van, MA (*1947)

c

Cabrera, Juan Bautista, Bishop of the Spanish Reformed Episcopal Church (1837-1916)

Cameron, the Rev’d Preb. Margaret

Carpenter, Harry James, Bishop of Oxford (1901-1993)

Chaplin, the Rev’d F.D.

Chwiej, the Very Rev’d Jan

Clark, the Rev’d Kenneth

Clarke, the Very Rev’d D.G.A.

Clemens XI, Pope ( 1649-1721)

Codde, Petrus, Archbishop of Sebaste, for Utrecht (1648-1710)

Cole, the Rev’d Alan nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;100,103

Coleman, the Rev’d F.P.

Conklin, the Rev’d Daniel G.

Constantinus, Flavius Valerius Aurelius, Roman Emperor (280-337) 85

Conyngham baron Plunket, William, Archbishop of Dublin (1828-1897)

Coote, Roderick Norman, Bishop of Fulham (1915-2000)

Cragg, Kenneth, Ass. Bishop in Jerusalem (*1913)

Croft, the Rev’d Canon William

Cundy, Ian, Bishop of Peterborough (1945-2009) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;100,101,103,104

106,107,108

Currie, the Rev’d Wilfred Bennetto

Curtis, Fr. Geoffrey, CR, (1902-1981)

116

117

118

119

Leo XIII, Pope (1810-1903)

Lewis, the Rev’d Brian (*1952)

Liebler-Münch, the Rev’d Martina (*1961)

Little, the Rev’d A. Thomas

Lutge, the Rev’d H.K.

M

Maan, Dr. Petrus Johannes (1913-1993) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;82,89,90,92,95

Macdonald, the Rev’d John

Majewski, Thaddeus Richard, 3d Prime Bishop of the PCC (1926-2002)

March, the Rev’d Dr. Richard

Marcussen, the Rev’d Bjorn

Maria Magdalena

Mascall, the Rev’d Dr. Eric Lionel (1905-1993)

Mathew, Arnold Harris, Bishop (1852-1919) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;34.36,47

Matthews, Victoria, Bishop of Edmonton (*1955)

McGowan, the Rev’d Canon Carole J.

Methuen, Canon Dr. Charlotte (*1964)

Millard, G. Richard, PECUSA Bishop (*1914)

Mitchell, Clarence Malcolm, Anglican Suffragan Bishop of Niagara 104

Moleman, the Rev’d Theodorus (1899-1986)

Moog, Dr. Georg, Bischöfin Bonn (1863-1934)

Moore, the Rev’d Michael

Moorman, John Richard Humpridge, Bishop of Ripon (1905-1989)

Morris, the Rev’d D.E. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;101,103,104

Moss, the Rev’d Dr. Claude Beaufort (1888-1964) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;21,23,31,34,89

Mumford, the Rev’d David

Münch, the Very Rev’d Harald, MA (*1960)

Murfet, the Rev’d David

N

Nahabedian, the Rev’d Canon Harold J.

Neale, John Mason (1818-1866)

Neercassel, Johannes Baptista van, Bishop of Castoria, for Utrecht (1623-1686)

Nemkovich, Robert M., 6th Prime Bishop of the PNCC (*1942)

Neuhoff, the Rev’d Klaus Heinrich (*1968)

Nickel, the Rev’d Dean Edgar (*1929)

Nieminski, Joseph, Bishop of the PNCC of Canada (1926-1992)

Noailles, Louis Antoine de. Archbishop of Paris (1651-1729)

Norman, the Rev’d Canon Dr. Andrew

o

Oeyen, Dr. Christian (*1934)

120

121

122

Thomas, the Rev’d Walter

Tilburg, the Rev’d Canon Pieter van (*1948)

Torre, Jacobus de la, Archbishop of Ephesus, for Utrecht (ca 1608-1661)

Trillo, Albert John, Bishop of Chelmsford (1915-1992)

Tüchler, Robert Georg Heinrich, Bishop in Vienna (1874-1952)

Tumwesigire, the Rev’d S.

Turner, the Rev’d Elizabeth

V

Varlet, Dominique Marie, Bishop of Babylon (1678-1742)

Velde, the Rev’d Canon Wietse Berend van der, MA (*1953) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;107,108

Vercammen, Dr. Joris August Odilius Ludovicus Archbishop of Utrecht (*1952) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;12,108

Verhey, Berend Willem (1917-1990)

Vinä, the Rev’d Petr Jan (*1982)

Vischer, Dr. Lukas ( 1926-2008)

Visser, the Rev’d Dr. Jan (*1931) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;93,103

Vlijmen, Henricus Theodoris Johannes van, 13th Bishop of Haarlem (1870-1954)

Voorn, Robin (*1981)

Vosmeer, Sasbout, Archbishop of Philippi, for Utrecht (1548-1614) 22

W

Wallet, the Rev’d Bernd, MA (*1972)

Walton, the Rev’d Canon Dr. Kevin

Walton, Louise (RC lay chaplain)

Warren, Dr. Keith D.

Wedra, Stefan (*1958)

Werner, Hofrat Dr. J.

Weston, the Rev’d Frank

Wijker, the Rev’d Engelbertus ( 1844-1917)

Williams, the Rev’d Dr. John

Williams, Paul Gavin, Bishop of Kensington (*1968)

Williams, Dr. Rowan Douglas, Archbishop of Canterbury (*1950)

Willibrordus, Archbishop of Utrecht (ca 658-739) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;21,22,23n60

Wilkinson, Dr. A.B.

Wirix-Speetjens Dr. Jan Lambert, 17th Bishop of Haarlem (1946-2008)

Wit, the Rev’d John de (*1948)

Wordsworth, John, Bishop of Salisbury (1843-1911)

Wright, Canon Dr. J.Robert (*1936) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;100,101,103,

104,106,107,108

Wysocsanski, Dr. Wiktor, 4th Prime Bishop of th PCC (*1939) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;102,103

Z

Zielinski, Thaddeus, 3d Prime Bishop of the PNCC (1904-1990) nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;20,92,93,95

123

Zizioulas, John, Metropolitan of Pergamon (*1931) Zwart, the Rev’d Marinus Antonius (1903-1975)

124

List of previous publications of the ‘Seminariereeks’-.

• F. Smit, J. Visser en A.J, Glazemaker: 250jaar Oud-Katholiek Seminarie, 1975.

• 2 J. Visser: De kandelaar van het licht, 1976.

• 3 M.A. Haitsma: De Rooms-KathoHeken te Leiden van ongeveer 1650 tot de tweede helft van de achttiende eeuw, 1977.

G.Chr. Kok: Beknopte bibliografie van de geschiedenis van de Oud-Katholieke Kerk van Nederland, 1978.

• 5 P.J. Maan: Chiliastische en charismatische stromingen en de Clerezie in het begin van de 19e eeuw, 1979.

J.J. Hallebeek: Communis omnium possessio et omnium una libellas. Twee opstellen over Thomas van Aquino, 1979.

• 7 H.J. W. Verhey: Naamlijst der pastoors van de Oud-Katholieke Kerk in Nederland, 1979.

• 8 J. Visser: Het ideaal van de ‘ecclesia primitiva’ in het jansenisme en het oud-katholicisme, 1980.

• 9 F. Smit: Franse oratorianen en de Clerezie in de jaren 1752-1763, 1981.

• 10 J.A.C. de Jonge: Eenheid in conciliariteit, 1981.

• 11 P.J. Maan en J. Visser: 1931-1981. Vijftig jaren full communion tussen de anglikaanse en oud-katholieke kerken, 1982.

• 12 F. Smit: Het hofje van Buytenwech te Gouda, in de jaren 1684-1713. Bijdrage tot de katholieke armenzorg in de 17e en 18e eeuw, 1983.

• 13 P.J. Maan: 1054. In het spanningsveld van Utrecht, Rome, Constantinopel en Canterbury, 1984.

• 14 * C.E. Schabbing: Verzuilingstendenties in de Oud-Katholieke Kerk van Nederland 1870-1940, 1985.

• 15 * K. Ouwens: De theorie van de pentarchie en het primaatschap in de kerk, 1986.

• 16 F. Smit: De fundaties van Sasbout en Pieter van der Dussen te Delft (1622-

1752). Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van de katholieke armenzorg in de 17e en 18e eeuw, 1987.

125

G.Chr. Kok; Uit de geschiedenis van de synode. Een kleine kerk op weg in de 20e eeuw, 1987.

G. Theys: Van Van ‘t Sestichhuis tot College van de Hoge Heuvel, 1633-1752, 1988.

C. Tol: Concelebratie. Afscheidscollege 28 september 1985, 1988.

M.F.G. Parmentier: Vincentius van Lerinum, de beide Commonitoria, 1989.

Angela Berlis: Gottes Haushalter. Der Bischof im Alt-Katholischen Kirchenrecht Deutschlands, 1990.

Martien Parmentier: Het pastoraat aan katholieken tussen Vecht en Eem (1638-1646), 1991.

Jan Hallebeek: Over de oorsprong van jurisdictie, 1992.

Fred Smit: Batavia Sacra, 1992.

Idelette Otten: Uitblazing als aanblazing. Over het doven van de paaskaars in de christelijke eredienst, 1994.

Joris Vercammen: Vrouwen, mannen en macht in de kerk, 1994.

‘De Haagse teksten’: Referaten en beschouwingen op de studiedagen ‘Vrouw en kerkelijk ambt’, 18-20Januari 1994 (bijdragen: Angela Berlis, James Flynn, Joris Vercammen, Jan Visser), 1995.

Koenraad Ouwens: Het Stukjesboek; Missen en Gezangen 1745-1803.

De basis van het oud-katholieke kerklied in Nederland. Proefschrift, 1996.

Jan Hallebeek: Alonso “el Tostado’’ (c. 1410-1455). His doctrine on Jurisdiction and its influence in the Church of Utrecht, 1997.

Christoph Schuler: The Mathew Affair. The failure to establish an Old Catholic Church in England in the context of Anglican Old Catholic relations between 1902 and 1925, 1997.

Jan Hallebeek: De ‘Wondere Afscheidpreekens ’ van pater Daneels. Oudewater 1705, 1998.

Jan Visser, Joris Vercammen, Theo Beemer, Angela Berlis, Dick Tieleman: Staat de kerk haar eigen boodschap in de weg? Symposium en afscheidscollege van prof dr. J. Visser op 1 mei 1996 te Utrecht, 1998.

Matthieu Spiertz; Op weg naar een rehabilitatie van Petrus Codde?, 1998.

126

Koenraad Ouwens en Adrie Paasen (red.): Liturgievernieuwing in de Oud-Katholieke Kerk. Bijdragen aan het symposium ter gelegenheid van het afscheid van Can. J.N. van Ditmarsch als voorzitter van de Bisschoppelijke Commissie voor de Liturgie van de Oud-Katholieke Kerk van Nederland op 21 maart 1998 (bijdragen: Wietse van der Velde, Koenraad Ouwens, Edgar Nickel, Ko Joosse, Hans Uytenbogaardt, Wim Verhoef), 1999.

Martien Parmentier (ed.): The Ecumenical Consistency of the Porvoo Document. Papers read at a symposium held by the Anglican - Old Catholic Society of St. Willibrord at Amersfoort on 15 October 1997 (bijdragen: Wietse van der Velde, Martien Parmentier, Ariadne van den Hof, Egbert van Groesen, Frans van Sark, Bernd Wallet, Mattijs Ploeger, Lidwien van Buuren, Koenraad Ouwens, Christopher Rigg), 1999.

Mattijs Ploeger: High Church Varieties. Three Essays on Continuity and Discontinuity in Nineteenth-Century Anglican Catholic Thought, 2001.

Jan Hallebeek (red.): Gezag als gave. Gezag in de kerk in oecumenisch spanningsveld. Symposium op 13 december 2003 (bijdragen: Joris Vercammen, Jan Hallebeek, Jeremy Caligiorgis, Daniel Ciobotea, Martien Brinkman, Christopher Hill, Angela Berlis), 2004.

A.J. van den Bergh (1883-1943): De drie hoofdgeschillen van Het Zwarte Boek. Openingsles studiejaar 1927-1928, uitgesproken aan het Oud-katholiek Seminarie te Amersfoort op 9 september 1927 (bezorgd en ingeleid door Jan Hallebeek), 2005.

Ineke Smit: Reasonable and Reverent. The critical orthodoxy of Charles Gore and Lux Mundi, 2006.

Angela Berlis: Vergelijking als weg tot historische kennis, 2007.

Hubert Huppertz: Ignaz von Döllingers Lutherbild, 2007.

Ellen Weaver: The message of Port-Royal for our Godless world.

First Quasimodolecture, 14 april 2007 (Dick Schoon ed., with contributions by Angela Berlis, Kees de Groot and Joris Vercammen), 2008.

Willem Jan Otten: De ambigue gelovige. Met Augustinus tegen de ‘ietsisten ’. Tweede Quasimodolezing, 29 maart 2008 (red. Angela Berlis en Lidwien van Buuren, met bijdragen van Martijn Schrama, Angela Berlis, Dick Schoon en Rudolf Scheltinga), 2009.

Angela Berlis (red.): Toegewijd denken. Pascalprijzen 2008 en 2009.

Met de lezingen van de beide laureaten: Urs von Arx: Dooperkenning en kerkelijke gemeenschap', Anton Houtepen: De droom van Descartes en het visioen van Pascal (verdere bijdragen: Angela Berlis, Jan Hallebeek, Jan Visser), 2009.

127

45 Erik Jurgens: Bescheiden en bewogen. Over christenen in de politiek.

Derde Quasimodolezing, 18 April 2009 (red. Lidwien van Buuren, met bijdragen van Greetje Witte-Rang, Jan Hallebeek, Joris Vercammen en Elly Hessel), 2009.

*) out of print

The series of publications produced by the Old Catholic Seminary Foundation, which is abbreviated in Dutch as the ‘Seminariereeks’, was begun in 1975. The series are published under the responsibility of the Foundation’s staff and the members of the Board of Administration of the Old Catholic Seminary in Amersfoort/Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Editorial team: Lidwien van Buuren MA; Prof Dr. Jan Hallebeek; Dr. Mattijs Ploeger; Adrie Paasen.

Administration:

Centraal Oud-Katholiek Boekhuis

Koningin Wilhelminalaan 3

3818 HN Amersfoort

The Netherlands

If you wish to order older volumes of the series or to subscribe to the series, please visit the ‘webshop’ section of the Dutch Old Catholic Church;

www.okkn/webshop/seminariereeks.nl

or contact the Office of the Bishops in Amersfoort, the Netherlands, at e-mail address buro@okkn.nl or on telephone number 31 (0) 33 462 08 75.

128