|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Ordinariate Blues
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
That's fine LsK. But then you must permit me the corresponding right to always refer to Anglican pretensions to Catholicity, or Anglican pretensions to an episcopacy.
Why not. We're all entitled to be wrong in our own way.
It must be hard, if one is truly convinced of the superiority of one's own position, to completely eliminate the polemical tone you yourself employ. And we all do it, so why should you be any different?
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I suppose that one of the key elements leading toward acceptance of B16's offer is that folks realized that their position was so untenable (and I speak primarily of the North American situation as the English one remains incomprehensible to me) that holding on to or resisting pretensions of any sort was a secondary consideration.
While I'm not one of the customers, I can appreciate that B16 and his associates were open enough to accept that different worshipping cultures should not be the barrier and that Borg-like assimilation is not the only approach to unity. If we now see more clearly that there are other barriers, this is not a bad thing. We can perhaps address ourselves to them.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
I would have thought that an official organ of the North American Ordinariate would have avoided hyperbolic propaganda about dancing around altars and the meltdown of liberal Christianity in N. America. The more I read of Ordinariate postings, the more I am convinced the adherents show no more maturity than the founders of the Continuing Anglican movement 35 years ago.
But do continue the march into ecclesiastical obscurity, the invisible Continuing Anglican denominations having blazed the trail ahead for you.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I would have thought that an official organ of the North American Ordinariate would have avoided hyperbolic propaganda about dancing around altars and the meltdown of liberal Christianity in N. America. The more I read of Ordinariate postings, the more I am convinced the adherents show no more maturity than the founders of the Continuing Anglican movement 35 years ago.
But do continue the march into ecclesiastical obscurity, the invisible Continuing Anglican denominations having blazed the trail ahead for you.
Official organ? What on earth are you talking about? It's a private blog. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Magic Wand
Shipmate
# 4227
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I would have thought that an official organ of the North American Ordinariate would have avoided hyperbolic propaganda about dancing around altars and the meltdown of liberal Christianity in N. America. The more I read of Ordinariate postings, the more I am convinced the adherents show no more maturity than the founders of the Continuing Anglican movement 35 years ago.
Well, LsK, anyone who attends your parish should know all about "the meltdown of liberal Christianity in N. America." That's what now, about fifteen or sixteen gone in the last year, since Gordon started his campaign of Episcopalianizing the place? And all of them to the Roman Catholic Church, both traditional and Ordinariate. But I'm sure that's just a blip on the radar, right? After all, it still takes two hands to count attendance on Sundays, so things are fine. Now that's what I call a pretension!
Posts: 371 | From: Princeton, NJ | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Magic Wand, you are perhaps unaware that our shack is bringing new people in. Yes, fancy that. Some folks are actually attracted to an Anglo-Catholic parish that doesn't have bones to pick with the diocese and national province of which it is a constituent part.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I would have thought that an official organ of the North American Ordinariate would have avoided hyperbolic propaganda about dancing around altars and the meltdown of liberal Christianity in N. America. The more I read of Ordinariate postings, the more I am convinced the adherents show no more maturity than the founders of the Continuing Anglican movement 35 years ago.
But do continue the march into ecclesiastical obscurity, the invisible Continuing Anglican denominations having blazed the trail ahead for you.
Official organ? What on earth are you talking about? It's a private blog.
Well, it's representing official pronouncements of the Ordinary and others in governance, is it not? And, like a blog previously posted by Comper's Child, it has its share of shrill exaggeration (putting it nicely; the comments on the blog post linked by Comper's Child were far worse, really contemptible). The point is, we've heard the same song before from so many who went with the "Continuing Church".
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I've seen the blog before-- there are no useful official sources these days and one relies on gossip and private blogs such as this. I've seen worse. I cannot say that anyone in this fight has a lot of feel proud of in the past 5-10 years and Lietuvos is really so very lucky not to have been in a battleground parish. At least the Ordinariate is a new theme and we will see how it works out.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Magic Wand
Shipmate
# 4227
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Magic Wand, you are perhaps unaware that our shack is bringing new people in. Yes, fancy that. Some folks are actually attracted to an Anglo-Catholic parish that doesn't have bones to pick with the diocese and national province of which it is a constituent part.
Well, Gordon and his cronies are certainly telling everyone that new people are coming. But is it actually happening? No. Fewer each week, and money troubles a-plenty. But it's only the truth, right? Why should that get in the way of a good story?
And that's symptomatic of too much of ECUSA these days; they're like an ecclesiastical "Baghdad Bob," telling everyone as loudly as possible that everything is fine and victory is assured, as the tanks roll up behind him and his oppressive regime is defeated.
So, go on, tell Fr TT that the members of the Ordinariates are immature and that they will "march into ecclesiastical obscurity." No one believes you. After all, we know the facts, and not just the carefully censored propaganda.
Posts: 371 | From: Princeton, NJ | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Who is Gordon please?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magic Wand:
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Magic Wand, you are perhaps unaware that our shack is bringing new people in. Yes, fancy that. Some folks are actually attracted to an Anglo-Catholic parish that doesn't have bones to pick with the diocese and national province of which it is a constituent part.
Well, Gordon and his cronies are certainly telling everyone that new people are coming. But is it actually happening? No. Fewer each week, and money troubles a-plenty. But it's only the truth, right? Why should that get in the way of a good story?
And that's symptomatic of too much of ECUSA these days; they're like an ecclesiastical "Baghdad Bob," telling everyone as loudly as possible that everything is fine and victory is assured, as the tanks roll up behind him and his oppressive regime is defeated.
So, go on, tell Fr TT that the members of the Ordinariates are immature and that they will "march into ecclesiastical obscurity." No one believes you. After all, we know the facts, and not just the carefully censored propaganda.
Look, I'm not going to conduct a discussion about parish affairs with you on a public forum, nor indeed anonymously via any internet means of whatever sort. What I can tell you is that you are ill-informed. Indeed, pledges are up and I'm in a reasonably good position to know the facts.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Who is Gordon please?
Gordon Reid, Rector of St. Clement's, Philadelphia with a very questionable past in Scotland.
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
What would be questionable about his past? Or was that an idle slur, on a public forum where he probably can't respond, from a fellow Christian (perhaps you'd forgotten you were of the same faith)?
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
What would be questionable about his past? Or was that an idle slur, on a public forum where he probably can't respond, from a fellow Christian (perhaps you'd forgotten you were of the same faith)?
His past is matter of public record so fill your boots.
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Sorry, but I'm still only seeing your veiled slur.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Canon Reid's ecclesiastical career entails a CV of distinguished service to the Church of England in the several key posts in the Diocese of Europe, and representing Cantuar to the His Holiness the Pope. He was invited to become rector of St Clement's by some of the same people who are recently attacking him, an attack that stemmed from his daring to exercise his normal and canonical prerogatives as Rector, in defiance of a vestry and group of servers whom he had long indulged. Several of those folks were, BTW, Roman Catholics who have since left the parish; in at least one or two cases, they had occupied prominent positions in the parish whilst remaining active communicants of the Roman Catholic Church and by the same token not receiving Communion in the Episcopal Church.
As to a "public record" of Canon Reid's difficulties in the Scottish Episcopal Church many years ago, this includes reporting from a tabloid paper notorious for its libelous "reporting" and intermittent attention from the most hate-mongering website on the fringes of the Anglican world, an internet "news" outlet that seems to reflect a mindset not too far removed from that of Westboro Baptist Church.
[ 29. September 2012, 22:32: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
I haven't had time to look at this in detail (and am just back from a long day at Wembley) but just on a skim read before I turn in, may I remind you of Commandment 7?
quote:
7. Don't post illegal material
Posting libellous material, copyright violations or links to sites advocating illegal activities puts us in legal hot water, which makes us very unhappy.
When in doubt, leave it out. The Ship has no funds to get involved in any legal defence against allowing potentially libellous comments.
I'll have a closer look tomorrow when I'm less knackered; this "cease and desist" is a precautionary action.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
" ... an attack that stemmed from his daring to exercise his normal and canonical prerogatives as Rector, in defiance of a vestry and group of servers whom he had long indulged. Several of those folks were, BTW, Roman Catholics who have since left the parish; in at least one or two cases, they had occupied prominent positions in the parish whilst remaining active communicants of the Roman Catholic Church and by the same token not receiving Communion in the Episcopal Church ... "
One would think that Canon Reid has now been at St. Clement's long enough to have identified those people and put a stop to their behaviors.
The bad old days have come to a close for Anglo-Catholic or any other types of special case parishes. If Reid has begun to "Episcopalianize" St. Clements, it is surely high time for it and way overdue.
*
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I haven't had time to look at this in detail (and am just back from a long day at Wembley) but just on a skim read before I turn in, may I remind you of Commandment 7?
quote:
7. Don't post illegal material
Posting libellous material, copyright violations or links to sites advocating illegal activities puts us in legal hot water, which makes us very unhappy.
When in doubt, leave it out. The Ship has no funds to get involved in any legal defence against allowing potentially libellous comments.
I'll have a closer look tomorrow when I'm less knackered; this "cease and desist" is a precautionary action.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
Sorry, Barnabas62. I did not see this post at the time when mine went up, less than 30 minutes later. I had been called away from my computer while composing my reply to LsK, came back, finished and pressed the send button. Then I saw your above notice.
*
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Mr Rob
No problem, easily done.
General update on the cease and desist. This morning it looks a safe, but marginal, call. So I've taken it to Admin for further guidance. In general we tend to be cautious about libel, to protect the site owner. I'm sure you understand.
Worth adding that there's also a guideline against washing "local congo" linen in public, unless there's a prior public interest expression in the media.
Watch this space.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
[ 30. September 2012, 07:24: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
It's only available for viewing to Australians, Sir P. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
The one break-away diocese in the TEC scene that I follow a bit from their website is the (so-called) Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, which left TEC en masse, though with several important parishes remaining in TEC and a TEC diocese being reconstituted within boundaries that are co-terminous with its old territory. This is finally possibly reaching a watershed, as the Texas Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in TEC's lawsuit against the break-away jurisdiction in October.
Isn’t this a bit, well, hypocritical considering how, exactly, anglicanism came about? What is the principled difference between a diocese breaking away from the Church of which it is a part (e.g. the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth breaking away from the TEC) and a Church (two archdioceses) breaking away from the Church of which it is a part (e.g. the Church of England breaking away from the Catholic Church)? Please tell.
I am myself part of the Church of Norway, and if a diocese in Norway were to break away, I don’t see how one could principially argue against it and still be keep one’s integrity. The Church of Norway broke away from the Catholic Church and took its assets. I don’t see any principled difference between this and what has been done in the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth.
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
In any event, what has become apparent from following developments is that several priests who were prominent in the break-away Episcopal diocese have subsequently defected to the Ordinariate, in which some of them are apparently already assuming significant positions of political power. By contrast, I know of only one group of parochial laypersons who have gone into the Ordinariate there, that being a portion of the congregation of the advanced A-C and historically rather ultramontane St Timothy's Fort Worth (where I was a member back in the 1970s and early 1980s).
So just like the Reformation, then? Only back across the Tiber?
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
k-mann, I suppose the big difference is that when the English Church 'broke away' from Rome it was in effect throwing itself - or being thrown - out of THE Ark of Salvation. The modern RCC may be kinder in their recognition of ecclesial groups and their terminology to fellow Christians. But Protestants weren't referred to as heretics for centuries, for nothing.
I'm sure there can't be many Anglicans who would consider ex-Anglicans in that light today (I hope!). So not like the Reformation at all, really. However, schism as a generality is, of course, not at all new as Apollos and Peter could have told us!
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
k-mann, I suppose the big difference is that when the English Church 'broke away' from Rome it was in effect throwing itself - or being thrown - out of THE Ark of Salvation. The modern RCC may be kinder in their recognition of ecclesial groups and their terminology to fellow Christians. But Protestants weren't referred to as heretics for centuries, for nothing.
I'm sure there can't be many Anglicans who would consider ex-Anglicans in that light today (I hope!). So not like the Reformation at all, really. However, schism as a generality is, of course, not at all new as Apollos and Peter could have told us!
I’m not entirely sure if you were actually answering my post, but my point is that being an Anglican (or, for instance, a state church Lutheran) and criticizing a diocese because it breaks out of the communion of which it is a part, with its assets, is hypocritical. Unless one actually advocates the turning back of all the old churches and cathedrals to the Catholic Church.
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by k-mann:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
k-mann, I suppose the big difference is that when the English Church 'broke away' from Rome it was in effect throwing itself - or being thrown - out of THE Ark of Salvation. The modern RCC may be kinder in their recognition of ecclesial groups and their terminology to fellow Christians. But Protestants weren't referred to as heretics for centuries, for nothing.
I'm sure there can't be many Anglicans who would consider ex-Anglicans in that light today (I hope!). So not like the Reformation at all, really. However, schism as a generality is, of course, not at all new as Apollos and Peter could have told us!
al. Unless one actually advocates the turning back of all the old churches and cathedrals to the Catholic Church.
A wonderful idea indeed! Westminster Abbey is my vote to be returned first ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
(and bring the Benedictines back there while you are at it)
[ 04. October 2012, 03:02: Message edited by: SeraphimSarov ]
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
k-mann, yes I was replying to your post. And my point was that you were wrong, imo. The situations you were comparing, to prove your point about hypocrisy are not in essence comparable. I can see why you've used that example - there is a similarity in the cases undoubtedly. But the logistics of the Reformation in its time, over and against those of the Ordinariate in this time are just not close enough to compare them as you are doing. But that's just my opinion .
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
k-mann
Shipmate
# 8490
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
k-mann, yes I was replying to your post. And my point was that you were wrong, imo. The situations you were comparing, to prove your point about hypocrisy are not in essence comparable. I can see why you've used that example - there is a similarity in the cases undoubtedly. But the logistics of the Reformation in its time, over and against those of the Ordinariate in this time are just not close enough to compare them as you are doing. But that's just my opinion .
I’m not talking about the Ordinariate as such. I was addressing Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras’ post in which he he adressed the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth as “the (so-called) Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth.” In 2008, the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth voted to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church (the TEC), to join a continuing anglican body. (See here.) This is something other than a few parishes going into the Ordinariate.
But anyway, my point (which was in answer to Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras and which didn’t have anything directly to do with the Ordinariate) is that adressing the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth as “the (so-called) Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth” would be the equivalent of the Catholic Church, during the english reformation, adressing the archdioceses of York and Canterbury as “the (so-called) archdioceses of York and Canterbury.” There is no principled difference between moving two archdioceses out of communion with the Catholic Church, and moving a diocese out of communion with the TEC. It is hypocritical of the TEC to react to that. If one cannot tolerate that, one shouldn’t be part of a Church which started that way. And the reason for the move was doctrinal reasons, as it was in the Reformation.
--------------------
"Being religious means asking passionately the question of the meaning of our existence and being willing to receive answers, even if the answers hurt."
— Paul Tillich
Katolikken
Posts: 1314 | From: Norway | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by k-mann:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
k-mann, yes I was replying to your post. And my point was that you were wrong, imo. The situations you were comparing, to prove your point about hypocrisy are not in essence comparable. I can see why you've used that example - there is a similarity in the cases undoubtedly. But the logistics of the Reformation in its time, over and against those of the Ordinariate in this time are just not close enough to compare them as you are doing. But that's just my opinion .
I’m not talking about the Ordinariate as such. I was addressing Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras’ post in which he he adressed the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth as “the (so-called) Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth.” In 2008, the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth voted to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church (the TEC), to join a continuing anglican body. (See here.) This is something other than a few parishes going into the Ordinariate.
But anyway, my point (which was in answer to Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras and which didn’t have anything directly to do with the Ordinariate) is that adressing the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth as “the (so-called) Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth” would be the equivalent of the Catholic Church, during the english reformation, adressing the archdioceses of York and Canterbury as “the (so-called) archdioceses of York and Canterbury.” There is no principled difference between moving two archdioceses out of communion with the Catholic Church, and moving a diocese out of communion with the TEC. It is hypocritical of the TEC to react to that. If one cannot tolerate that, one shouldn’t be part of a Church which started that way. And the reason for the move was doctrinal reasons, as it was in the Reformation.
Wow! I think you are carrying your analysis of the term so called Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, used by LsK, a bit too far, k-mann. That's because there are, in fact, two current entities using that exact same name. There must, of necessity, be some means employed to distinguish between the two.
Given the fact that the majority part of the original Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth voted to leave the Episcopal Church, then joined up with the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, and now is a constituent part of the Anglican Church of North America, one might assume that it is well past time for a change of name, dropping the word Episcopal and perhaps using Anglican or whatever.
The remaining parishes not succeeding from The Episcopal Church were formed into the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth with a provisional, Episcopal bishop. It is that group which is the successor Episcopal body, part of The Episcopal Church and with a de facto right to use of the Episcopal name.
LsK I'm sure was trying to distinguish between these two groups with his use of "so-called" in reference to the break away group that insists on keeping the Episcopal name while not being part of The Episcopal Church at all. I know it's confusing, but don't blame LsK for that.
See the two entiries linked below.
Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth I (TEC)
Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth II (ACNA)
*
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
A wonderful idea indeed! Westminster Abbey is my vote to be returned first
(and bring the Benedictines back there while you are at it)
Too late. Can't be done anymore. On 29 September, 1850, by the Bull Universalis Ecclesiae, Pope Pius IX re-established the Catholic hierarchy in England, which had become extinct with the death of the last Marian bishop in the reign of Elizabeth.
With the publication of this bull, all claims to the ancient English sees, cathedrals, endowments and properties ceased. An entirely new English Roman Catholic hierarchy was established with its own new dioceses, cathedrals and the rest. It can honestly be said that from that point, any de jure return of ancient properties and sites formerly claimed by the Roman church was nothing more than a dream.
*
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Rob:
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
A wonderful idea indeed! Westminster Abbey is my vote to be returned first
(and bring the Benedictines back there while you are at it)
Too late. Can't be done anymore. On 29 September, 1850, by the Bull Universalis Ecclesiae, Pope Pius IX re-established the Catholic hierarchy in England, which had become extinct with the death of the last Marian bishop in the reign of Elizabeth.
With the publication of this bull, all claims to the ancient English sees, cathedrals, endowments and properties ceased. An entirely new English Roman Catholic hierarchy was established with its own new dioceses, cathedrals and the rest. It can honestly be said that from that point, any de jure return of ancient properties and sites formerly claimed by the Roman church was nothing more than a dream.
*
You do know that the Catholic Church was/is prevented by law (Ecclesiastical Titles Act of 1851) from having dioceses with the same name as CofE dioceses?
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
What about Southwark or Liverpool?
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
The Catholic Church is prevented from erecting dioceses with the same name as extant CofE ones. Nothing prevents the CofE from using ones employed by the Catholic Church. Southwark, Liverpool, Birmingham, Portsmouth were all Catholic dioceses before the CofE ones were created.
The recent CofE forays into Catholic names for dioceses include adding Leeds to Ripon and Nottingham to Southwell.
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Did not the Bull precede the Act? I am under the apprehension that the Bull was a cause of the Act (popish aggression and all that).
I have always found it interesting that, as RC hierarchies were re-established in Reformation countries, very few erections of dioceses used the names and identities of their pre-Reformation counterparts. Some of them (e.g. Holar, Skalholt, and Lund) are now titular sees.
I think that the only country where the RCs claim continuity against a Reformation church rival is Ireland, causing the untold expenditure of ink and paper as newspapers must distinguish between the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh and the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Armagh, often enough even when the context makes it painfully obvious. An Irish canonist friend told me that the chaos of the early Elizabethan period often left cathedral chapters divided between popish and protestant factions, and there were cases where arguments could be made that one or the other could legitimately claim to consider themselves the heirs of the founding saints of a particular see.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
The Anglican Liverpool and Southwark were established after the Catholics had established theirs.
It appears that the Anglican church has no imagination in determining the names of new dioceses.
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
To be more exact - the Roman Catholic Church is not allowed to establish a See with the same name as an Anglican one. But, this only applies one way round, so if the Church of England decides to create a diocese with the same name as a pre-existing RC one, then one can end up with two diocese called the same thing.
Hence, the CofE already had London and Manchester so the RC hierarchy created Westminster and Salford which basically function over the same areas. Liverpool and Birmingham were however available, and only afterwards became diocese in the CofE as well (although in both of these cases the Anglicans have a bishop rather than an archbishop so the titles are slightly different... in Newcastle they are identical however).
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
The Anglican Liverpool and Southwark were established after the Catholics had established theirs.
It appears that the Anglican church has no imagination in determining the names of new dioceses.
And to think we could be the Diocese of Everton.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
I think that the only country where the RCs claim continuity against a Reformation church rival is Ireland, causing the untold expenditure of ink and paper as newspapers must distinguish between the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh and the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Armagh, often enough even when the context makes it painfully obvious. An Irish canonist friend told me that the chaos of the early Elizabethan period often left cathedral chapters divided between popish and protestant factions, and there were cases where arguments could be made that one or the other could legitimately claim to consider themselves the heirs of the founding saints of a particular see.
I'm under the impression that is correct. One would imagine the Treaty of Westphalia means it hasn't applied anywhere else.
quote:
Originally posted byPeteC
The Anglican Liverpool and Southwark were established after the Catholics had established theirs.
It appears that the Anglican church has no imagination in determining the names of new dioceses.
I can see that Southwark is only one of a number of different places on the south bank, but that is where the cathedral is.
What else would you call the Bishop of Liverpool? Bishop of Everton would hardly be a display of imagination.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Angloid, you got in while I was checking my spelling.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
What else would you call the Bishop of Liverpool? Bishop of Everton would hardly be a display of imagination.
Well there are other possibilities. Knotty Ash might have had an interesting bishop. John Bishop could be Bishop of Woolton. Fazakerley would make for some tongue-twisting episcopal signatures especially if any of them were called Frederick or Francis. Or the Bishop of Aintree might be an appropriate person to host the Canterbury Sweepstake, aka the Grand C of E National.
And Enoch: quote:
Angloid, you got in while I was checking my spelling.
No worries.
As for Southwark: John Betjeman would have liked Temple Moore's church of All Saints, Tooting, to be the cathedral. Imagine the Ship's favourite boozy bishop as +Tom Tooting.
[ 05. October 2012, 20:34: Message edited by: Angloid ]
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Very good! But I think PeteC's observation would have been better addressed had we located our dioceses in places with more Trollopian names. For some reason, Great Snoring, Middle Wallop and Wyre Piddle spring to mind.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Surely Nether Wallop as well. And Much Binding in the Marsh.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Maureen Lash
Apprentice
# 17192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
in Newcastle they are identical however).
Not really. The title of the Catholic see is "Hexham and Newcastle".
Posts: 32 | From: Moseley | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen Lash:
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
in Newcastle they are identical however).
Not really. The title of the Catholic see is "Hexham and Newcastle".
Yes, you are quite right. Sorry!
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
To be more exact - the Roman Catholic Church is not allowed to establish a See with the same name as an Anglican one. But, this only applies one way round, so if the Church of England decides to create a diocese with the same name as a pre-existing RC one, then one can end up with two diocese called the same thing.
Hence, the CofE already had London and Manchester so the RC hierarchy created Westminster and Salford which basically function over the same areas. Liverpool and Birmingham were however available, and only afterwards became diocese in the CofE as well (although in both of these cases the Anglicans have a bishop rather than an archbishop so the titles are slightly different... in Newcastle they are identical however).
Westminster is an interesting case, as a diocese of Westminster was carved out of London as part of the reformation diocesan restructuring. When in 1550 the first incumbent of the see was translated to Norwich, no successor was appointed. So is the see in a state of suspended animation, or is it definitively defunct? Do different rules apply if the RCs want to have an archbishop rather than an ordinary one? At least there could be no confusion about which is which.
--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.
Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
A bit of googling sugests that the Diocese of Wetminster was re-absorbed into the Diocese of London and that its cathedral returned to abbatial status in 1556 and, presumably, on Elizabeth's tenure, became a collegial church and royal peculiar. IIRC from my one reading of the text of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, it refers to sees, and there is no mention of a distinction between a bishop or an archbishop in the see.
In any case, I prefer Westminster Cathedral to the Abbey, but that is likely on account of my predeliction for bright colours.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
I would also note the massive shift between 'a code of practice will not do' to a slogan that says 'we are better together'
I notice from the editorial of October's "New Directions" that the mantra is still the same:
"We have long said a Code of Practice will not do, and indeed it will not...The time has come to see that the legislation that is coming before the General Synod is bad legislation, it does not offer the answer that the Church of
England needs, and it will not resolve
divisions over this issue...We urge the General Synod to return to the drawing board and to speak and listen to those who need provision before deciding what provision to offer...It is time to think again."
So FiF has now come to the position that their only hope is to scupper the legislation and send it back to the drawing board, which would result in a delay of several years before women can become bishops. Whether or not any of this increases the size of the Ordinariate, I think the FiF position has lost all integrity. Leo, on another thread, described himself as a recovering Anglo-Catholic, and it seems that some former members of FiF are now distancing themselves from its position and are throwing in their lot with the inevitable changes that are coming in the C of E.
So if the legislation is carried, which I believe it will be and should be, after all the time it's taken, what will these hard line Fifers do then? The Church of England has decided to ordain women bishops. It has decided that it can only offer a code of practice to those who dissent, and that it will revoke the Priests(Ordination of Women) Measure 1993 and remove the protection in law given back then. The game is up for Forward in Faith.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Never having been able to understand the view that being pro-OoW makes one automatically not Catholic, I'm well outside this debate. But ISTM that the only logical position for FinF is to live with compromise or join the Ordinariate. A retired priest friend of mine is 'against' OoW to the extent that he thinks it goes against the tradition, that he would search out a church with a male priest, but he would not walk out or refuse to receive communion if a woman were presiding.
Most of us in the C of E have to grit our teeth and put up with views and practices that we find uncomfortable, without unchurching those with whom we disagree. For an organisation to insist that only an ideologically-pure segment of the church is tolerable, is effectively to create a church within a church. Those who have joined the Ordinariate recognise that is as much a compromise as any other Anglican position.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif){kind=icon}
