Thread: Purgatory: Ordinariate Blues Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000892

---

Posted by Solly (# 11919) on :
 
The Ordinariate has gone very quiet and judging by the deteriorating literacy of the Portal magazine and the disconsolate groups interviewed therein, things aren't going terribly well. Ed Tomlinson's spirited blog is running out of steam and turning into a little Catholic bubble and the only bright spot seems to be the ever-bubbly James Bradley's jolly tweets. Does anyone have the inside story?

[ 01. December 2012, 10:41: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 

---

Posted by chive (# 208) on :
 
I haven't noticed anything changing. The ordinariate members I know, including myself, are busy concentrating on attending mass, getting to know diocesan Catholics and otherwise having lives. The reality of being a member of the Ordinariate is just the reality of being a person.
 

---

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :
 
If 'quiet' means 'nobody's talking about it on the Internet', that would suggest it's doing quite well ...
 

---

Posted by Lucrezia Spagliatoni Dayglo (# 16907) on :
 
There's an Ordinariate group in my parish. I think they are doing very well
 

---

Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :
 
I don’t take the “going quiet on the internet” as a bad sign. More of a going through the next stage of adaption and change. It must have been a huge wrench to leave and much of the stuff written had a smack of undirected grief and anger. I am glad that stage has passed.

I am avoiding any chance of crossing the Hosts by mentioning other sites by name but I have noted my “gibbering idiot” responsometer has dipped dramatically as various sites and blogs reference less “what the C of E has done wrong” and move on to more appropriate Roman Catholic matters. Pet dogs for instance.

Below is the beginning of the post I decided against.

Fly Safe, Pyx_e


Assimilation is the process by which the Borg add new members and new technology to the Collective. The Borg generally do not assimilate individuals, and instead preferred to target larger groups such as the crews of starships and the populations of planets ............
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:
Fly Safe, Pyx_e

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
The Ordinariate has gone very quiet and judging by the deteriorating literacy of the Portal magazine and the disconsolate groups interviewed therein, things aren't going terribly well. Ed Tomlinson's spirited blog is running out of steam and turning into a little Catholic bubble and the only bright spot seems to be the ever-bubbly James Bradley's jolly tweets. Does anyone have the inside story?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chive:
I haven't noticed anything changing. The ordinariate members I know, including myself, are busy concentrating on attending mass, getting to know diocesan Catholics and otherwise having lives. The reality of being a member of the Ordinariate is just the reality of being a person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
What does 'BDW' stand for?

---

quote:

---

'Book of Divine Worship'. The liturgy of Anglican Use parishes in the US which is permitted as an interim use in the Ordinariate until our own Mass texts are approved.

---

quote:

---

using management-speak jargon which hasn't been in use in the real world they filched it from for five years

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ondergard:
I know I probably shouldn't, but when I read all this Ordinariate stuff - in fact anything related to the subject of Anglican Catholics or Anglicans becoming Catholic, such as

quote:

---

'Book of Divine Worship'. The liturgy of Anglican Use parishes in the US which is permitted as an interim use in the Ordinariate until our own Mass texts are approved.

---

or stuff about what someone wears, or where they stand, or the use of words like thurible and aubrey and exposition of the blessed sacrament, or whether someone who is deficient in the penis department can be a priest, or whatever, i have to wondr what relevance it has to Jesus, or real faith, or the real world, come to that.

I both despair at the pre-occupations of so many Christians, and rejoice that apart from when reading SoF I don't even have to think of it all, because I'm a Methodist...

... and then I see Methodist honorary ecumenical Canons rejoicing in putting "Rev Canon Dr" in front of their name when it isn't a Methodist style (or worse, "Rev Prebendary" when 99.99% of Methodists (including me) have no idea what a prebendary is) , or using management-speak jargon which hasn't been in use in the real world they filched it from for five years, or coming up with phrases like "a discipleship movement shaped for mission" as a euphemism for managing decline, and I think, "Bloody hell! What the FUCK do we think we look and sound like, we Christians? I mean, what the f...." and then I splutter wordlessly and helplessly into silence...

... I can take the piss endlessly out of the precious little anglo-caths, or catholic misogynists of all stripes, but then I look at my own denomination, or the URC, or the buttoned-up "that's my chapel, and that's the chapel I wouldn't be seen dead in" little Welsh independents, and for crying out loud...

... it's time every single Augean stable was cleansed, isn't it? I mean, really?

---

Aww diddums.
 

---

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
Haven't we discussed this before?
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
Ondergard: it's much the same in all walks of life. Especially with politicians. That's why Denis Healey was so right when he said that every politician should have a 'hinterland'. So should every priest, minister, professional church-committee person, ecclesiantic, liturgist, prebendary (whatever they are), circuit superintendent....
 

---

Posted by Honest Ron Bacardi (# 38) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
Haven't we discussed this before?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ondergard:
I know I probably shouldn't, but when I read all this Ordinariate stuff - in fact anything related to the subject of Anglican Catholics or Anglicans becoming Catholic, such as

quote:

---

'Book of Divine Worship'. The liturgy of Anglican Use parishes in the US which is permitted as an interim use in the Ordinariate until our own Mass texts are approved.

---

or stuff about what someone wears, or where they stand, or the use of words like thurible and aubrey and exposition of the blessed sacrament, or whether someone who is deficient in the penis department can be a priest, or whatever, i have to wondr what relevance it has to Jesus, or real faith, or the real world, come to that.

I both despair at the pre-occupations of so many Christians, and rejoice that apart from when reading SoF I don't even have to think of it all, because I'm a Methodist...

... and then I see Methodist honorary ecumenical Canons rejoicing in putting "Rev Canon Dr" in front of their name when it isn't a Methodist style (or worse, "Rev Prebendary" when 99.99% of Methodists (including me) have no idea what a prebendary is) , or using management-speak jargon which hasn't been in use in the real world they filched it from for five years, or coming up with phrases like "a discipleship movement shaped for mission" as a euphemism for managing decline, and I think, "Bloody hell! What the FUCK do we think we look and sound like, we Christians? I mean, what the f...." and then I splutter wordlessly and helplessly into silence...

... I can take the piss endlessly out of the precious little anglo-caths, or catholic misogynists of all stripes, but then I look at my own denomination, or the URC, or the buttoned-up "that's my chapel, and that's the chapel I wouldn't be seen dead in" little Welsh independents, and for crying out loud...

... it's time every single Augean stable was cleansed, isn't it? I mean, really?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stranger in a strange land:
Ondergard,

it is late and perhaps I am being dumb but I just don't get how I offended.
Leo asked a question about an abbreviation - one which is not as well known in the UK as in the US - and I tried to explain it as simply and concisely as I could.

---

quote:

---

"People are often sufficiently self-centred in their own debate (a Christian-atheist/secular tug-of-war) that it doesn't occur to them that anyone might be outside that debate altogether."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ondergard:
I just get so tired of all the prissiness of it all... not just Caths and Anglo-Caths, as I hoped I made clear... in this case, the idea that we can't possibly worship God properly unless we've got someone's permission to use certain words in a certain way.

---

quote:

---

I feel exactly the same about the slackness, ugliness and downright stupidity of a lot of non liturgical services. When we worship God we should do it properly not just make things up as we go along. That's why you're a Methodist and I'm a Catholic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chive:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ondergard:
I just get so tired of all the prissiness of it all... not just Caths and Anglo-Caths, as I hoped I made clear... in this case, the idea that we can't possibly worship God properly unless we've got someone's permission to use certain words in a certain way.

---

I feel exactly the same about the slackness, ugliness and downright stupidity of a lot of non liturgical services. When we worship God we should do it properly not just make things up as we go along. That's why you're a Methodist and I'm a Catholic.

---

I really hope you're not saying that Methodist worship is slack, ugly and downright stupid.
 

---

Posted by the long ranger (# 17109) on :
 
I think you're all wrong and a plague on all your houses. Goes rather with the course, doesn't it?
 

---

Posted by Thyme (# 12360) on :
 
'making it up as we go along' 'extempore worship'

We call it creative liturgy.

quote:

---

Ondergard posted: congratulating each other on our particular arrangement of the flowers on the windowsill whilst the roof is falling in.

---

 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
Perhaps I should have added to my list above

quote:

---

Denis Healey was so right when he said that every politician should have a 'hinterland'. So should every priest, minister, professional church-committee person, ecclesiantic, liturgist, prebendary (whatever they are), circuit superintendent....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thyme:
My thoughts exactly Ondergard.

There is another thread somewhere on these boards titled 'Fake mass' about how people train to do/perform/celebrate the mass. And someone said that the training mass (ie before ordination) felt very real. My thought was that it probably was 'real', whatever real means in this context.

I share bread and wine with friends, we've said the words Jesus said etc, etc, and it all feels very real to us. Although I seem to remember another thread where we were told that 'feelings' are irrelevant.

Orfeo on the Ship of Fools 6/7/12 'Religious is not a synonym for Christian thread' said:

quote:

---

"People are often sufficiently self-centred in their own debate (a Christian-atheist/secular tug-of-war) that it doesn't occur to them that anyone might be outside that debate altogether."

---

I thought this was so good I kept it in my own personal quote file.

And this is how I feel. When I read the thread about online sacraments it seems to be taken for granted by many that the crux of the matter is whether or not an ordained person can do the business remotely, and how will we know it is a genuine ordained person and so on. But this just all seems to be irrelevant to me.

I expect I will get told off for making a tangent on this thread, but like you I feel increasingly detached from much of the stuff the churches seem to think is important.

So I try to stay outside the debates now and get on with my life. Just wanted you to know you are not alone. I think there are a lot of us about. We look on and quietly despair while those on planet Church look out and wonder why we don't join them.

Mutual incomprehension.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beachcomber:
As the rcc itself is separated from the Church (I hate to say it) then Ordinariate v. C of E etc is moot.

---

quote:

---

My question: What is a 'little Catholic bubble'? What do you mean by this?

---

quote:

---

I've never understood exactly what the 'Anglican Identity' or 'Patrimony' is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beachcomber:
As the rcc itself is separated from the Church (I hate to say it) then Ordinariate v. C of E etc is moot.

---

 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Harold Darke died in 1976. Difficult to see how he could count as being Victorian. In what way is Darke in F emotional?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chiltern_hundred:
Well, Ordinariate life may be a bit humdrum at the moment, but three Ordinariate ordinands are starting their studies in Oxford at the end of September.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by beachcomber:
As the rcc itself is separated from the Church (I hate to say it) then Ordinariate v. C of E etc is moot.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thyme:
I think (but maybe mistaken) that unmarried ex Anglican priests who join the Ordinariate are not allowed to marry subsequently, and those training or wanting to be selected for training are not allowed to be married or marry in the future.

I think it is only ex Anglican priests already married that can be married.

(A bit muddled that, but I hope you get the gist).

Basically exactly the same as it was before the Ordinariate when Anglican priests crossed over.

---

I suspected that might be the case. In which case, it's hardly being faithful to the Anglican patrimony which assumes most clergy will be married.

It's also not consistent with what applies to Eastern Rite Catholics. Or is this the punishment for returning to the fold from somewhere that until 450 years ago came under the western patriarchate?
 

---

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :
 
Article 6.1 of the Complementary Norms for the Apostolic Constitution provides a potential opening for the future priestly ordination of married candidates, but I gather that the "objective norms" referred to have not yet been finalized. I have no idea if this will be forthcoming, but the authors of the text (as well as its papal signatory) can hardly have been oblivious to the long-term implications of the wording. But for the time being, I would say that they are only thinking of married ex-Anglican clergy who would be getting (re)ordained. I gather that the authorities require the consent of candidate's wife before ordination and, judging by photos and accounts of (re)ordinations, the wives and families take a visible role, with the wife often assisting in the priestly vesting of their husband.
Article 10 answers the above questions on seminary training. I gather from one of my contacts that the more common stream of Anglican theological training (BA + BD/MDiv) gets supplemented either by a short course (3-6 months) RC seminary classes on pastoral practice & canon law or, in exceptional cases, some distance or night-course work under supervision. Some of the delay for the (re)ordaining of other-stream clergy is that some had very minimal or sketchy academic training, and they are looking at 1-2 year course packages to supplement what they had. Knowing a few of them, I think that much more would be required.
 

---

Posted by Maureen Lash (# 17192) on :
 
Though it is barely relevant to the matter of the failed Ordinariate experiment, Leo's remark about Darke in F is quite the stupidest comment I've read on this thread, and a sure indication that once Christian Orthodoxy has been abandoned every other kind of sense goes out of the window with it.

Darke wrote his Communion Service in F in 1926, a quarter of a century after the death of Queen Victoria. As to being in Victorian "mode' it is true that it is 'modal' in its harmonic language, with one of its characteristic features being the E flat to F cadence. This makes it very un-Victorian in style and puts it more alongside the emerging 'English' style of Vaughan Williams and Sumsion etc.

As to emotional, that may be more descriptive of the cognitive state of the hearer rather than the music itself, unless, of course one counts grandeur and numinosity as emotions.

Barry Rose considered Dark in F the greatest piece of Anglican church music ever written. Whether it is or not, it is certainly a very worthy piece of Anglican patrimony to export.
 

---

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
At the risk of being taken to task.......

......is it just me, or do others see the Ordinariate (at least in the UK) as a complete and nonsensical waste of time and effort?

Surely, if the C of E is Pants filled with Poo, and Rome is the only True Church, then why not do (as several of our congo have done - with some honesty and integrity, ISTM) and simply join the mainstream Roman Catholic Church?

Or am I missing something obvious and fundamental to the continuance of the True Faith?



I'm not being snarky - I just don't see the point of the Ordinariate.

Ian J.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
Isn't it because Benedict XVI has got a completely unrealistic view of anglo-catholicism (or at least the sort of anglo-catholics who want to join him)? He thinks that they are all into Choral Evensong and stately cathedral-type worship, when most of them are much happier with the straightforward Roman rite and breviary, modelling themselves on a (probably equally unrealistic view of) the Catholic Church as lived and practised in the Vatican. In other words, they are probably only too keen to get rid of any vestige of 'Anglican patrimony'.

[response to Bishop's Finger on the previous page]

[ 08. September 2012, 18:44: Message edited by: Angloid ]
 

---

Posted by Fifi (# 8151) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I just don't see the point of the Ordinariate.

---

The point is in the name. Anglicanorum coetibus. Groups of Anglicans. A methodology whereby a priest and a number of his people can convert as a group, staying together. The theory is that it makes a scary journey a whole lot less intimidating. Seems like a good wheeze to me (even if I'm put off a little more every time Fr RPP holds forth here and elsewhere! )
 

---

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
I suppose that it comes from an intermediate position - that Anglicanism has strayed from the true Faith, but that this doesn't mean that it is to be discarded as 'Pants filled with Poo' (thanks for the image, BF!)

Rather that the culture of the Church of England includes things which could enrich Roman Catholicism if incorporated into it. I'm inclined to see it as a rather nice idea, although I suspect it will always be a bit of a fringe concept.
 

---

Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fifi:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I just don't see the point of the Ordinariate.

---

The point is in the name. Anglicanorum coetibus. Groups of Anglicans. A methodology whereby a priest and a number of his people can convert as a group, staying together.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arrietty:

quote:

---

Originally posted by chiltern_hundred:
Well, Ordinariate life may be a bit humdrum at the moment, but three Ordinariate ordinands are starting their studies in Oxford at the end of September.

---

Fascinating - as I understand it, the initial training to be a Catholic priest involves 7 years at a seminary.

Are these people who were in orders in the C of E who are receiving some kind of top up training before being re-ordained in the Catholic Church, or is the Ordinariate acting as a separate Church with its own selection procedures, training and orders?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maureen Lash:
Though it is barely relevant to the matter of the failed Ordinariate experiment, Leo's remark about Darke in F is quite the stupidest comment I've read on this thread, and a sure indication that once Christian Orthodoxy has been abandoned every other kind of sense goes out of the window with it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fifi:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I just don't see the point of the Ordinariate.

---

The point is in the name. Anglicanorum coetibus. Groups of Anglicans. A methodology whereby a priest and a number of his people can convert as a group, staying together. The theory is that it makes a scary journey a whole lot less intimidating. Seems like a good wheeze to me (even if I'm put off a little more every time Fr RPP holds forth here and elsewhere! )

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
The real tragedy is those I see who couldn't/wouldn't join for whatever reason and who I also know would be so very much happier here. Put crudely we belong here and dont in the C of E.

---

quote:

---

A methodology whereby a priest and a number of his people can convert as a group, staying together.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
At the risk of being taken to task.......

......is it just me, or do others see the Ordinariate (at least in the UK) as a complete and nonsensical waste of time and effort?

Surely, if the C of E is Pants filled with Poo, and Rome is the only True Church, then why not do (as several of our congo have done - with some honesty and integrity, ISTM) and simply join the mainstream Roman Catholic Church?

Or am I missing something obvious and fundamental to the continuance of the True Faith?



I'm not being snarky - I just don't see the point of the Ordinariate.

Ian J.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:

Then again, anglo-papalism never caught on here, and the Ordinariate crowd are largely those who left on account of OWP and the new services book in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and would generally qualify as Prayerbook Catholic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fifi:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I just don't see the point of the Ordinariate.

---

The point is in the name. Anglicanorum coetibus. Groups of Anglicans. A methodology whereby a priest and a number of his people can convert as a group, staying together. The theory is that it makes a scary journey a whole lot less intimidating. Seems like a good wheeze to me (even if I'm put off a little more every time Fr RPP holds forth here and elsewhere! )

---

I find that quite helpful in understanding the purpose of the Ordinariate, as I sort of felt like Bishop's Finger about it.

So, once everyone has moved together is the aim eventually to make the 'Anglican' bit of the 'Anglican coetibus' a redundancy? And do the ex-Anglicans eventually move into a fuller physical assimilation (if you see what I mean!) with ordinary Catholics? No need for different liturgies, or specific categories of Catholics as in 'ex-Anglican Catholics' worshipping together as a separate entity?

Or does the Vatican foresee that there will always be Anglican groups continually wishing to convert over as groups, to Catholicism in this fashion, for whatever future reasons there may be? And that this new way of receiving new members is the way to do it?

---

You are missing the point completely. There is no need for (and it contradicts the entire point of the Ordinariates) "fuller physical assimilation". These people are fully Catholic. They just happen to have a distinctive liturgical and spiritual tradition, a permanent home for which has been established under the terms of Anglicanorum coetibus.

Protestants really have a bizarre notion that the Catholic Church is monolithically Novus Ordo Roman Rite.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

Protestants really have a bizarre notion that the Catholic Church is monolithically Novus Ordo Roman Rite.

---

quote:

---

Though it would be interesting to discover if they have become more Anglican, not less, since becoming Catholics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
But the majority of (English) ordinariate clergy were using that rite before their 'conversion', so why do they need a special Anglican-flavoured bit of the Catholic Church?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:
My understanding at present is that despite all the talk of Anglican Patrimony the irony of Ordinariate members is they never used Common Worship (or BCP) favouring the Roman Rite and now they HAVE to use the Missal.

Patrimony I see no Patrimony.

---

I've been doing a bit of googling trying to get some concrete idea of what the Anglican patrimony is in this context, and it is like trying to plait mist.

I understand the point of groups of people joining the RCC as groups, thanks Fifi, but I still don't see why all the effort and expense of setting up Ordinariates was necessary.

quote:

---

Augustine the Aleut says it just happens in Canada within the existing structures:
I think that the answer would be that you are missing something relevant, that Catholicism's continuance is not bound to a particular rite or use. I will let folks in England speak from their experience, but in Canada we are accustomed to: a) a general division between anglophone and francophone RCs (many dioceses have anglo and franco vicariates-general, and dedicated auxiliary bishops for each group), b) a second division with ethnic and heritage language parishes (within half an hour's walk, I can attend RC services in Latin, German, Croatian, Italian, Portuguese, Tagalog, Malayalam and Polish), and c) several sui juris churches with their own hierarchies (in Ottawa alone, Latin, Ukrainian, Slovak, Melkite, Maronite, Coptic, Malankarese). Renfrew, Ontario (pop. 4500), boasts three RC parishes, French, English, and Polish.

So when someone says, go to a mainstream RC church, the answer can easily be: Which one? In this context, Anglican-use parishes are no problem. If there's a population that wants that, it seems to be fine by Benedict, and the local hierarchies appear to be supportive.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:
My understanding at present is that despite all the talk of Anglican Patrimony the irony of Ordinariate members is they never used Common Worship (or BCP) favouring the Roman Rite and now they HAVE to use the Missal.

Patrimony I see no Patrimony.

Fly Safe, Pyx_e

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
You are missing the point completely. There is no need for (and it contradicts the entire point of the Ordinariates) "fuller physical assimilation". These people are fully Catholic. They just happen to have a distinctive liturgical and spiritual tradition, a permanent home for which has been established under the terms of Anglicanorum coetibus.

Protestants really have a bizarre notion that the Catholic Church is monolithically Novus Ordo Roman Rite.

---

Well, gee, thanks for answering my genuine questions. Personally, I think it's bizarre that my questions should be considered bizarre!

I also find it bizarre (though not necessarily in a bad way) that one Church communion should apparently create a virtual enclave to make it possible for entire groups and ordained priests of another Church communion to convert to that first Church's communion but apparently still maintaining some fundamental essence of the second Church's communion, which was presumably not essential to the first Church Communion!

Presumably there must also be some kind of future envisaged for such an enclave, so it seems reasonable to wonder how that works. Especially if the current creation was in response to particular current events. And to also wonder what the implications are for those ex-Anglicans who became Catholics with their group, rather than individually, worshipping together in their particular way.

I appreciate that there is more than one way to be a Roman Catholic liturgically, I really do. I'm just curious about how an ordinariate of this nature works in practice, and in the long-term. I may be a Protestant and a very happily committed Anglican with not the least inclination to move elsewhere; but I think it's okay to know as much about this phenomenon as possible, isn't it?
 

---

Posted by Trisagion (# 5235) on :
 
Four answers:-

quote:

---

1. Does this mean that the Ordinariate has PCCs?

---

quote:

---

2. Does it have many lay people?

---

quote:

---

3. If the style of choral music really is 'the distinctive feature', is this enough to sustain an identity? And will it mean the Ordinariate
will be forever frozen in the musical styles of 2012 rather as some of the presbyterian break away groups are frozen in the style of 1670?

---

quote:

---

4. Do Ordinariate parishes use modern music, of the sort fairly popular in less extreme Anglo-Catholic parishes? Or are they actually musically stuck in 1952?

---

quote:

---

Some may regard this as a tangent, and others may be surprised to hear this, but over the years, I've encountered quite a lot of seepage in the opposite direction, including priests. Although I agree with +London on use in his diocese of the Novus Ordo, would an alternative be to authorise it under stringent restraints, to provide a reverse ordinariate.

Only former Catholic clergy, and possibly female former lay Catholics who had been subsequently been ordained as Anglicans would be permitted to celebrate. The Novus Ordo would have to be altered slightly to be compatible with an Anglo-Catholic understanding of the Eucharist and to sound less like a literal translation of Latin - e.g. by reverting to 'cup' and not 'chalice'. It would have its own songbook, with specifically Catholic 1970s guitar music. Graham Kendrick and the Gettys would be forbidden. Would there be any demand for such a thing?

By the way, before anyone thinks I'm expressing my own prejudices, I like the Gettys' music a lot, and quite a lot of Kendrick as long as there isn't too much of it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:
I have a list of those who might be delighted to avail themselves of your kind offer. I have a slightly longer list of those who I might be delighted to send you. I know many Anglicans were delighted to see the back of a number of those who joined the Ordinariate: it cuts both ways.

---

 

---

Posted by Thyme (# 12360) on :
 
@Augustine the Aleut - I don't understand any of it, and I think I will stop trying. My understanding or lack of it won't make any difference so I'm probably better off doing my knitting. Someone here has a sig about being bewildered in a much more informed way than before which is how I feel.
 

---

Posted by Solly (# 11919) on :
 

quote:

---

They just happen to have a distinctive liturgical and spiritual tradition, a permanent home for which has been established under the terms of Anglicanorum coetibus

---

But do they have a 'distinctive liturgical and spiritual tradition'? I always regarded myself as an Anglo-Catholic until I went to Mass at S Bartholomew's in Brighton: it was like watching Three Little Maids From School from The Mikado. I was transfixed - and bored because I like to participate in the Mass. That is not my dls tradition although I surmise it is RPP's. I shouldn't think it appeals to many RC's either - unless they have a passion for light opera. If all ACs defected to the Ordinariate they would not take a shared dls tradition with them.
 

---

Posted by Trisagion (# 5235) on :
 
@Solly, you don't know RPP in IRL, do you? He's about as far from Three Little Maids as you could imagine. Your post seems characteristic of the Anglican responses to the Ordinariate on these boards: based largely on conjecture and larded with plenty of bad grace. I suspect RPP might turn up at some time to give his own perspective but until then it's worth noting that the extreme GIN and lace brigade did not, in the main, join the Ordinariate

[ 09. September 2012, 18:55: Message edited by: Trisagion ]
 

---

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 
Trisagion, it's not too late to take 'em. Please? Just make us an offer...
 

---

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thyme:
@Augustine the Aleut - I don't understand any of it, and I think I will stop trying. My understanding or lack of it won't make any difference so I'm probably better off doing my knitting. Someone here has a sig about being bewildered in a much more informed way than before which is how I feel.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
@Trisagion- do note that there are different Anglican responses to the Ordinariate. Solly is one, I may be another.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:
I have a list of those who might be delighted to avail themselves of your kind offer. I have a slightly longer list of those who I might be delighted to send you. I know many Anglicans were delighted to see the back of a number of those who joined the Ordinariate: it cuts both ways.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
@Trisagion- do note that there are different Anglican responses to the Ordinariate. Solly is one, I may be another.

---

Indeed, but if this thread is anything to go by you appear to be a minority of one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
@Trisagion- do note that there are different Anglican responses to the Ordinariate. Solly is one, I may be another.

---

Indeed, but if this thread is anything to go by you appear to be a minority of one.

---

I'd like to know where the 'bad grace' was in my questions.

I was netural, if not hopeful, about the Ordinariate. I didn't see it as an opportunity to off-load embarrassing tat queens or undesirables (whoever they are). Losing fellow Anglicans - even to another part of the Christian Church - is a real form of bereavement in some ways. Though I've always wished Ordinariate members all the best.

I tried to express the questions I've had as clearly as I could. If I offended anyone, I really didn't mean to.

However, apparently, I'm just a Protestant with 'bizarre' ideas, offending sensitive souls with 'bad grace' and 'conjecture' . Guess that puts me in my place; maybe I'd just better keep my queries about the Catholic Church for my own Catholic friends - lay and clergy.
 

---

Posted by rugbyplayingpriest (# 9809) on :
 
The other point worth making regards ecumenism.

Through the Ordinariates Pope Benedict is moving the debate forward. Instead of endless sandwich suppers and watered down services that do not really move things forwards in a meaningful way- the Ordinariate witnesses to what is needed for true unity to occur. What gathers people around an altar is a shared proclamation of truth.

That is not the same as uniformity- hence we retain Anglican customs and patrimony. Diversity is good. But doctrinally we need to come together- hence we all accept the magisterium.

It really is clever. And, in fact, the whole C of E could accept the offer and heal the reformation rift. What stops people is Protestant views. Fine. But no longer can it be claimed that Rome is not opening the door.

All interesting stuff. Not least for a communion struggling/unable to hold even it's own members around one altar. The reason being there is no shared proclamation of truth.
 

---

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 
It's certainly made Rome's attitude to ecumenism clearer: 'Look, we're perfectly happy for you to keep some of your practices and patrimony. In fact, we think we'd all be enriched by you doing so. All we're asking is that you believe what we believe and accept our authority, and then we can all be one. Simples!'
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:

It really is clever. And, in fact, the whole C of E could accept the offer and heal the reformation rift. What stops people is Protestant views. Fine. But no longer can it be claimed that Rome is not opening the door.

---

Two points. From the point of view of many Christians, the Reformation(s) were not merely a regrettable incident brought about by a handful of rebellious sons of the Church family who didn't know when to keep their mouths shut; it was essential for the integrity of the work of the Holy Spirit within the universal Body of Christ. The fact that significant sections of the Church worldwide do not see the reformation as a 'rift to be healed' but as something to be circumspectly grateful for, is really a bigger problem for the RCC than for non-Catholics.

Secondly, to paraphrase your post, 'we'd all be happy Roman Catholics by now if it weren't for those pesky Protestants.' Er... what an ecumenically progressive attitude. Except, of course, it's not.

Yes, the Pope is holding the door open. The door to his own Church and his own authority. Fair enough. It wouldn't make a lick of sense for him to do anything else. But while it may seem inexplicable or sinfully ignorant, nevertheless, at least some of those of us who do not seek to put ourselves under the particular authority of the RCC are very happy with that situation and believe ourselves to be in a better place, every bit as much as those who do go to Rome. We can even live with the idea that our Catholic brethren may consider us deluded and doctrinally inferior, for being so.

Though it's probably too much to expect us to be grateful for your attempting to point this out to us at every opportunity! Albeit so ecumenically, of course.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
From the point of view of many Christians, the Reformation(s) were not merely a regrettable incident brought about by a handful of rebellious sons of the Church family who didn't know when to keep their mouths shut; it was essential for the integrity of the work of the Holy Spirit within the universal Body of Christ. The fact that significant sections of the Church worldwide do not see the reformation as a 'rift to be healed' but as something to be circumspectly grateful for, is really a bigger problem for the RCC than for non-Catholics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Albertus:
It's certainly made Rome's attitude to ecumenism clearer: 'Look, we're perfectly happy for you to keep some of your practices and patrimony. In fact, we think we'd all be enriched by you doing so. All we're asking is that you believe what we believe and accept our authority, and then we can all be one. Simples!'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
The Anglican brain sees everything in congregationalist terms...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I would call the reformation a regrettable necessity, and the schism that resulted as regrettable but unnecessary. A little humility from the Pope as to the problems within the church and a little magnaminity towards those who had pointed them out would have healed a lot of wounds. Saying "my way or the highway" isn't ecumenism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vaticanchic:
The massive proportion of receptions to the Ordinariate being clergy speaks for itself, and for the nature/purpose of the venture from the AC point of view. I don't think Rome quite understood this, but I could be wrong.

Fair play to the clergy who have instead gone through the existing diocesan systems, risking non-selection.

---

quote:

---

First, "the massive proportion of receptions to the Ordinariate being clergy" makes it sound as if the majority of "ordinariti" are clerics - which is of course ridiculous. But perhaps you didn't mean to imply that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:

quote:

---

First, "the massive proportion of receptions to the Ordinariate being clergy" makes it sound as if the majority of "ordinariti" are clerics - which is of course ridiculous. But perhaps you didn't mean to imply that.

---

You know exactly what was meant.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:
I would estimate about 100 clergy and 1000 lay. So the proportion of clerical or lay conversions set against the usual proportion of lay to clerical in a parish is way out of kilter. There are proportionally more clerics.

The Ordinariate clergy also has a much higher age profile than the C of E, being mostly pensioners.

Fly Safe, Pyx_e

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vaticanchic:
The massive proportion of receptions to the Ordinariate being clergy speaks for itself ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vaticanchic:
The massive proportion of receptions to the Ordinariate being clergy speaks for itself, and for the nature/purpose of the venture from the AC point of view. I don't think Rome quite understood this, but I could be wrong.

Fair play to the clergy who have instead gone through the existing diocesan systems, risking non-selection.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:
I would estimate about 100 clergy and 1000 lay. So the proportion of clerical or lay conversions set against the usual proportion of lay to clerical in a parish is way out of kilter. There are proportionally more clerics.

The Ordinariate clergy also has a much higher age profile than the C of E, being mostly pensioners.

Fly Safe, Pyx_e

---

Perhaps SAGA could instead charter a large cruise ship so they could sail around the world ministering to each other.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

The Ordinariate clergy also has a much higher age profile than the C of E, being mostly pensioners.

[/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
So, once everyone has moved together is the aim eventually to make the 'Anglican' bit of the 'Anglican coetibus' a redundancy? And do the ex-Anglicans eventually move into a fuller physical assimilation (if you see what I mean!) with ordinary Catholics? No need for different liturgies, or specific categories of Catholics as in 'ex-Anglican Catholics' worshipping together as a separate entity?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
So, once everyone has moved together is the aim eventually to make the 'Anglican' bit of the 'Anglican coetibus' a redundancy? And do the ex-Anglicans eventually move into a fuller physical assimilation (if you see what I mean!) with ordinary Catholics? No need for different liturgies, or specific categories of Catholics as in 'ex-Anglican Catholics' worshipping together as a separate entity?

---

I don't know if that is the aim, but I believe it's what will eventually happen. Although my case may be unusual in that I joined the Ordinariate with a group with which I had never been a regular worshipper, and didn't really know, I now find that I very rarely visit them anymore. I either go to Central London to a choral Mass (often in Latin), or worship at my local Catholic Church, where I've made many friends.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percy B: I'm coming in late to this, so sorry if I repeat a little stuff already said.

Two points - its a limited view of patrimony in my opinion. Anglicans stand for a lot more, and have contributed a lot more, than the narrow Ordianriate interpretation of Anglican patrimony allows. For example, lay involvement and lay voice at all levels - including choosing bi/shops. A the parish level church wardens arena special feature, and often a very valued feature of Anglicanism. Then there is a tRadition of welcome to radical and open thinking. Wide diversity in liturgy at the local level. And so on...

Secondly I understand the Ordinariate is for disaffected Anglicans. But surely they will move into it, and some back, but after the first flow there will only be a trickle. I believe the 'heathen' will not be permitted to enter the Ordinariate but rather go to mainstream RC. Even ifit is permitted its not going to attract many as its not very visible.

In some ways a generous provision, but in other ways a semi detached house in suburbia...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percy B: I'm coming in late to this, so sorry if I repeat a little stuff already said.

Two points - its a limited view of patrimony in my opinion. Anglicans stand for a lot more, and have contributed a lot more, than the narrow Ordianriate interpretation of Anglican patrimony allows. For example, lay involvement and lay voice at all levels - including choosing bi/shops. A the parish level church wardens arena special feature, and often a very valued feature of Anglicanism. Then there is a tRadition of welcome to radical and open thinking. Wide diversity in liturgy at the local level. And so on...

Secondly I understand the Ordinariate is for disaffected Anglicans. But surely they will move into it, and some back, but after the first flow there will only be a trickle. I believe the 'heathen' will not be permitted to enter the Ordinariate but rather go to mainstream RC. Even ifit is permitted its not going to attract many as its not very visible.

In some ways a generous provision, but in other ways a semi detached house in suburbia...

---

That is not correct. A 'heathen' is perfectly entitled to convert through an Ordinariate, just as they are free to convert through an Old Rite, Dominican, Ambrosian, Ukrainian, Melkite, Chaldean, etc, parish/diocese. The only restriction on Ordinariate membership is for those Anglicans who were once Catholics (and exceptions can and have been made) and cradle Catholics (and there are exceptions in that regard too).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
What about other schismatics? If a Methodist becomes a Catholic are they allowed to do so via the Ordinariate? Or a Baptist? Or even a Lutheran? Would it make any difference that to Roman eyes, Anglicans and Methodists may look much the same the thing, whereas Baptists or Lutherans might be more different?

---

quote:

---

Likewise, if an Orthodox becomes a Catholic individually, do they have to be annexed to the Roman rite, or can they join a Greek Catholic community.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:


And, given that it sounds, from what PaulTH* has said, that a person who was received via the Ordinariate is Catholic enough to be able to worship with ordinary Latin rite Catholics - does that include receive Mass rather than just hear it? - can an ordinary lay Latin rite Catholic participate in an Ordinariate rite Mass, as long as he or she is actually on whatever is the Catholic equivalent of the electoral role in an ordinary Roman rite congregation?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Albertus:
Thanks, CL. What does 'jurisdiction' mean, in practice, for lay people in the RCC?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Albertus:
Right, I see. But in practcial terms, when might it make a difference? Excommunication, application for annulment of marriage or faculties to marry, that sort of thing?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percy B:
Can a day to day RC priest (i.e. Latin Rite) celebrate and minister in the Ordinariate?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Though it would be interesting to discover if they have become more Anglican, not less, since becoming Catholics.

---

quote:

---

One might not be able to go to Communion but one would certainly not be excommunicated

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Garasu:
Originally posted by Forthview:

quote:

---

One might not be able to go to Communion but one would certainly not be excommunicated

---

.

Er... From a position totally outside all of this... How are you not excommunicated if you can't go to communion?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Garasu:
Originally posted by Forthview:

quote:

---

One might not be able to go to Communion but one would certainly not be excommunicated

---

.

Er... From a position totally outside all of this... How are you not excommunicated if you can't go to communion?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Holy Smoke:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Garasu:
Originally posted by Forthview:

quote:

---

One might not be able to go to Communion but one would certainly not be excommunicated

---

.

Er... From a position totally outside all of this... How are you not excommunicated if you can't go to communion?

---

My understanding was that it was one of those cases where one doesn't have to be formally excommunicated because one is automatically so because of one's actions. Or does it not count if the original marriage was an Anglican marriage?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
Enoch - you use the phrase to 'receive Mass' - one doesn't 'receive Mass' - one receives Communion. there is a phrase 'hear Mass' but it is not normally used by Catholics nowadays - one would 'take part in Mass' 'Hearing Mass' (as well as 'missing Mass' belong to previous generations and the use of them shows that one is out of touch with everyday Catholicism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
Holy Smoke - I cannot see rules about who can or cannot marry in church being any different for Ordinariate Catholics or diocesan Catholics - but who told you that one is automatically excommunicate if one finds oneself in such a situation ? One might not be able to go to Communion but one would certainly not be excommunicated.

Enoch - you use the phrase to 'receive Mass' - one doesn't 'receive Mass' - one receives Communion. there is a phrase 'hear Mass' but it is not normally used by Catholics nowadays - one would 'take part in Mass' 'Hearing Mass' (as well as 'missing Mass' belong to previous generations and the use of them shows that one is out of touch with everyday Catholicism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
Excommunicate means not being able to participate in any of the Sacraments - being outside of the Catholic christian community -means having to have the permission of the bishop to be reconciled.
Not being able to go to communion means that one is not in a state of grace,but one remains part iof the community.
Granted it seems the same but it is not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Holy Smoke:
[QUOTE] ..... one of those cases where one doesn't have to be formally excommunicated because one is automatically so because of one's actions.

---

quote:

---

? Is that then an invalid mass?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gee D:
...

All this with one very sad exception: The Church of the Torres Strait. That was a vibrant and integral part of the diocese of Carpentaria/North Queensland, but broke away 15 years ago for reasons of governance rather than theology. That Church has petitioned for acceptance seeking its own ordinariate rather than that to be established for the remainder of Australia. It still awaits a reply.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Thanks. I understand a little more now.

Ok then, what do I have to do that, by my actions, renders me excommunicate?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Thanks. I understand a little more now.

Ok then, what do I have to do that, by my actions, renders me excommunicate?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
The main reasons for secession and wanting a separate Ordinariate would be family control. I doubt Rome would fall for this. The Torres Strait Islanders (not Aboriginal but more like the people of New Guinea) have always been fairly close and exclusive with a very tight hierarchy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Forthview and CL, not being allowed to communicate, and yet not actually to be excommunicate would seem to many of us in the CofE an odd distinction and a bit of a misnomer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gee D:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sir Pellinore:
The main reasons for secession and wanting a separate Ordinariate would be family control. I doubt Rome would fall for this. The Torres Strait Islanders (not Aboriginal but more like the people of New Guinea) have always been fairly close and exclusive with a very tight hierarchy.

---

As we understand it, the break from the Anglican Church came about because the bishop appointed someone whose cultural affiliations were with the Aboriginal mainlanders and not those of the Islanders; followed by what was seen as insensitive advice from the Metropolitan to whom they turned. If Rome stalls much longer, that delay in turn will be seen as insensitive at best and insulting at worst

---

quote:

---

I suppose I will be Vicar General of Church of Torres Strait until my Chrismation day which should be before year’s end. My Parish of St Clare’s,Cairns, will join the OLSC Ordinariate and with the blessing and encouragement of Bp Nona and the Synod of CTS which will also ‘release’ the Parish at that time. So, relax, gasp and horror brigade. St Clare’s and myself will perhaps act as a kind of pathfinder and encouragement for the CTS in the Torres Strait islands proper.

When the Torres Strait Ordinariate is formed St Clare’s might transfer to it. We will see at that time.

An ordinariate for the Torres Strait is progressing albeit slowly and with the considerable help of the local Catholic Bishop.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Holy Smoke:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Forthview and CL, not being allowed to communicate, and yet not actually to be excommunicate would seem to many of us in the CofE an odd distinction and a bit of a misnomer.

---

Actually, looking it up, it doesn't seem to be all that different in the CofE, thus:

"XXXIII. Of Excommunicated Persons, how they are to be avoided.
That persons which by open denunciation of the Church is rightly cut off from the unity of the Church and excommunicated, ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the faithful as an heathen and publican, until he be openly reconciled by penance and received into the Church by a judge that hath authority thereto."

The problem as I see it is that there is no real theological justification for the practice. OK, one might need to exclude people from certain activities for obvious practical reasons, but to exclude people for 'denouncing the church' (or for some of the reasons used by the RC's) seems to treading on very thin ice. Once you say to someone 'you are an enemy of the Church', then you'd better be sure which side you are on, otherwise you are effectively casting yourself out. At least, that's how I see it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Enoch - unless there are some statistics held on this somewhere, it's going to be almost impossible to know how frequently it happens in the CofE. It's treated as a matter of personal discipline, not an occasion to shame somebody, so is rarely made public.

We has two excommunications fairly recently in the next parish to mine - I only know that due to a technicality. I suppose all I am saying is that it may conceivably be more common than you think. But certainly not a common occurrence, IYSWIM.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
...

An ordinariate for the Torres Strait is progressing albeit slowly and with the considerable help of the local Catholic Bishop.

---

[/QUOTE]

The local Catholic bishop should be fully aware of the particular vagaries of Torres Strait Islander relationships. Like with most small ethnic groups these can be extremely divisive. I hope he informs the Vatican appropriately. TI religious politics can be quite diabolical and it is important that the Vatican not be seen to be on the side of one particular family group.
 

---

Posted by Godric (# 17135) on :
 
My question is whether or not the ordinariate is signed up to the idea of 'human rights', 'equality of opportunity' and the anti-discriminatory legislation that exisits in the UK and which is familiar to Anglicans. If the the ordinariate cannot sign up to such [Legal] equality issues should any of us be entertaining the ordinariate as a possible alternative home for traditionalist Catholicism?

Godric


I write about funeral and burials at http://godsacre.blogspot.co.uk/
 

---

Posted by CL (# 16145) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Godric:
My question is whether or not the ordinariate is signed up to the idea of 'human rights', 'equality of opportunity' and the anti-discriminatory legislation that exisits in the UK and which is familiar to Anglicans. If the the ordinariate cannot sign up to such [Legal] equality issues should any of us be entertaining the ordinariate as a possible alternative home for traditionalist Catholicism?

Godric


I write about funeral and burials at http://godsacre.blogspot.co.uk/

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Godric:
My question is yada yada yada...

---

What in the name of God are you wittering about?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Godric:
My question is whether or not the ordinariate is signed up to the idea of 'human rights', 'equality of opportunity' and the anti-discriminatory legislation that exisits in the UK and which is familiar to Anglicans.

---

Anglicans may be familiar with these things, but I don't think they all actually apply to them, do they?
 

---

Posted by Solly (# 11919) on :
 

quote:

---

My question is whether or not the ordinariate is signed up to the idea of 'human rights', 'equality of opportunity' and the anti-discriminatory legislation that exisits in the UK and which is familiar to Anglicans.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
However the arguments against women priests and particularly homosexuality from some Ordinariatees (and others) appear to be rooted in disgust and bigotry rather than the Bible. Makes me wonder, sometimes, why I persevere with my faith.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maureen Lash:
In my experience, those who are opposed to women arrogating the priesthood, and novel interpretations of the marriage ordinance, do so only because scripture and tradition tell them to take this course.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
Religion is a 'protected characteristic' under the Equality Act which also allows religions limited dispensation to discriminate with regard to other protected characteristics such as sexual orientation. However the arguments against women priests and particularly homosexuality from some Ordinariatees (and others) appear to be rooted in disgust and bigotry rather than the Bible. Makes me wonder, sometimes, why I persevere with my faith.

---

quote:

---

I have never had anyone say anything negative about my sexuality at all

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
Ordinariatees are probably encouraged to give reasons other than women priests and bishops and CofE tolerance of homosexuality (amongst other tolerances) as their reasons for leaving the Church of England because it looks better. And for some, their reasons really are based on scripture and tradition and can therefore be respected But for others (the majority?)- it's plain, old fashioned intolerance and bigotry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Godric:
The big issue for many young people is "why do so many gay men and women continue to subjugate themselves to a homophobic Church?" whether or not the label on the outside of the building is 'Anglican' or 'Ordinariate'


I compile a blog on funerals and burials at http://godsacre.blogspot.co.uk/ and sometimes deal with theological matters

---

Oh for crying out loud.
 

---

Posted by Solly (# 11919) on :
 

quote:

---

I genuinely do not believe that your 'experience' is normative or based on anything other than bigotry itself.

---

quote:

---

I genuinely do not believe that your 'experience' is normative or based on anything other than bigotry itself.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
Whether that helps Enoch or not I don't know as I think that he is almost certain to remain confused.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maureen Lash:
A lay catholic in a civil partnership who has failed to be sexually abstinent will have committed a mortal sin and therefore must seek absolution before he presume to receive holy communion. I should have thought that that was simple enough to understand. Next question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maureen Lash:
A lay catholic in a civil partnership who has failed to be sexually abstinent will have committed a mortal sin and therefore must seek absolution before he presume to receive holy communion. I should have thought that that was simple enough to understand. Next question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Exactly, Pyx_e. It's obvious that official Catholic teaching is ignored (or given a 'fluffy' interpretation.) Either that means it is impractical and outdated, or that the majority of practising Catholics are apostate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maureen Lash:
A lay catholic in a civil partnership who has failed to be sexually abstinent will have committed a mortal sin and therefore must seek absolution before he presume to receive holy communion. I should have thought that that was simple enough to understand. Next question.

---

Why are the queues for the confessionals not round the block?

Fly Safe, Pyx_e

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Maureen Lash:
A lay catholic in a civil partnership who has failed to be sexually abstinent will have committed a mortal sin and therefore must seek absolution before he presume to receive holy communion. I should have thought that that was simple enough to understand. Next question.

---

Why are the queues

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
Chesterbelloc - I do know exactly what the teaching of the Catholic church is on matters of sexuality and many other things.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
His parish priest expected him to confess occasional masturbation, which he did, but he came to think of himself as hypocritical because he knew he was likely to do it again sometime and so hadn't really repented. So he went to church less and less and gradually dropped out. He was also quite bitter about it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
However the arguments against women priests and particularly homosexuality from some Ordinariatees (and others) appear to be rooted in disgust and bigotry rather than the Bible.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
PaulTH, if you think those ideas are absent from Anglo-Catholicism you are very severely mistaken. This includes all we catholic Anglicans who really have no time for the pretenses of the Bp of Rome.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Caricatures! All of them!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
the pretenses of the Bp of Rome.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
the pretenses of the Bp of Rome.

---

I thought the phrase was "The Bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormities".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
However the arguments against women priests and particularly homosexuality from some Ordinariatees (and others) appear to be rooted in disgust and bigotry rather than the Bible.

---

Apart from the fact that this is veering into dead horse territory, it seems to me that some people on this forum are unable to understand that some of us may want to be Catholics for reasons other than misogyny or homophobia! The second part of the Confiteor is:

"therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God."

All the ideas contained in this one sentence are entirely absent from Protestantism, as is praying for the dead. This theology is why I want to be Catholic, not because I hate women or gays. There are more issues to church membership than women priests or gay marriage. But just as the Catholic Church won't remarry divorcees, because of the sacramental nature of marriage, it can't perform same sex marriages without totally changing the meaning of marriage as it has always been understood. This has nothing to do with homophobia, any more than not ordaining women, which again, changes the understanding of the nature of priesthood, has to do with misogyny.

I am Catholic because I believe that salvation is not just a personal isssue, that we are all in it together, and that, if any souls are lost, then God's plan of salvation is incomplete. So I hope that the Church Triumphant will pray for me, as I pray for the souls of the departed. These, to me, are the important issues of why an individual would choose to belong to a certain faith.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sebby:
I cannot answer for another, but maybe because the question might be seen to be: 'are you, or are you not, with Peter?'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I would have thought that it could be more readily argued that if one were concerned about receiving the faith in the plenitude of catholic and orthodox tradition, one would opt for one of the Orthodox churches of the East, since these bodies unquestionably preserve the doctrine and praxis of the early Fathers most faithfully and authentically, relatively unencumbered by later accretions and doctrinal innovations. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Tell that to the Orthodox.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
"therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God."

All the ideas contained in this one sentence are entirely absent from Protestantism, as is praying for the dead.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
"therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God."

All the ideas contained in this one sentence are entirely absent from Protestantism, as is praying for the dead.

---

I have been thinking about this ever since you posted it and read it.

I do not, as an anglo-catholic, accept the label 'protestant' but that is what RCs would call me - so as a 'protestant' I need to inform you that every time i go to sacramental confession, those words are on the card that i read before my shopping list of sins.

Those words are also in the prayers we say in the vestry before going into church for the eucharist.

We pray for the dead at every eucharist every day.

Much of the above also applies in churches that do not label themselves 'anglo-catholic'.

---

quote:

---

Not just Anglo-Catholics, but Anglicans generally, acknowledge the Communion of Saints, amongst other concepts that are encapsulated in that bit of the Confiteor, and Anglo-Catholic expressions of the Faith emphasise such concepts every bit as much as does Roman Catholicism.

---

quote:

---

originally poated by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Yes, this is why I was so dismayed by PaulTH's post. Not just Anglo-Catholics, but Anglicans generally, acknowledge the Communion of Saints, amongst other concepts that are encapsulated in that bit of the Confiteor, and Anglo-Catholic expressions of the Faith emphasise such concepts every bit as much as does Roman Catholicism

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
OK, but why are you not Orthodox ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
[QUOTE] Although RC liturgy has been used for years in the Church of England, it has never been canonically legal. The Bishop of London, earlier this year, wrota a pastoral letter to all his parishes, in which he said that the use of the Roman Rite within the C of E is not acceptable, and that he takes a dim view of it. So if Leo is asking for the intercessions of the BVM and the saints, or praying for the dead, he is doing so according to unauthorised canon. The only acceptable liturgical material in the C of E is the 1662 BCP or Common Worship.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
If you are going to object to TEC it has to be on grounds other than our Eucharistic litugies and essential doctrinal formulariies (as opposed to disciplinary matters).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
I apologise for the double post, but I meant to include this. In the proposed 1928 Book of Common Prayer, was this prayer for the dead at funeral services:

"and we beseech thee...that when the judgment shall come... both
this our brother and we may be found acceptable in thy sight’."

This was one of the main reasons (along with the reserved sacrament, that parliament rejected it, on the grounds that it was incompatible with the reformed doctrine of the Church of England. Such prayers have been used many times at funeral services, but only because bishops have turned a blind eye to this and many other non canonical practices of Anglo Catholicism.

---

quote:

---

For our brother/sister who shared the bread of life, that in Christ he/she may be raised up on the last day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Anglicanism is not a confessional church and tolerates a wide variety of doctrines and practices as long as they are compatible with Scripture or the Creeds.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doublethink:
On what basis do you believe in the primacy of the see of Peter ? Do you not think the orthodox inherited their tradition through the apostolic line ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jubilate Agno:
What I'm trying to say is that there's been always ambiguity and arguably even dishonesty regarding the nature of Anglo Catholisism and therefore if we're to move "forward in faith" it's not a bad idea to know where we are at the moment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jubilate Agno:
If we recognise that in fact we are people who hold Catholic beliefs but are members of a Protestant church, what are the implications for those of us who have decided to remain in the CofE?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
... bishops such as + Londin who will try to pull the rug out from under them theologically and liturgically, because their views are no longer important to the future of the C of E. They will say: "if you want to ... say Benediction after Evensong or end Mass with the Angelus, go and join the Ordinariate-it was set up for people like you."....

---

quote:

---

originally posted by Angloid:
So I'd be surprised if +Richard Chartres takes the position Paul implies.]

---

quote:

---

The exodus of the most hard boiled Anglo-papalists to the Ordinariate has made the C of E realise that without those pesky popists about, they can dismantle the structures behind which they have sheltered for almost 20 years, ie Forward in Faith, the flying bishops and the extended oversight provided by them.

---

Paul what you guys never realised is that just a God is bigger than his church so Anglo Catholicism is much bigger than the falling off edge you describe above. The twin horrors of the last 20 years is not only the death of mission driven by single issue politics but also the shit-storm thrown up that has hidden the truth about mysterious, sacramental and incarnational church that the Catholic wing holds as dear.

Rest assured what I am seeing is a growth in "Catholic" virtues as the room grows quiet after our noisy brothers went to a better party. Suddenly there is room for everyone to explore that which is our heritage. Post-Evangelicals are finding the beauty and mystery of the Sacraments, men and women of faith are discovering (or rediscovering) a place for a higher liturgical expression and us Catholics feel less guilty about being enriched by charismatic and moderns approaches to loving God.

One of the most Evangelical priests in this Deanery retreated recently and spent half an hour every day in front of the Blessed Sacrament. It is happening, a further shame is that those who loves it the most left rather than be the champions they purported to be. In their evermore fervent attempts to grasp the TRUTH more closely to them they managed to almost kill it. And as it fell from their hands they departed in disgust at what they had strangled. Yet the Holy Spirit manages to pick the threads and weave a new cloak for those who would wear it. It is happening and it is a joy to behold. It reminds me of why I leant toward the Catholic wing of the church in the first place a missional grace and beauty.

Fly Safe, Pyx_e
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
Pyx_e: What I tried to say, although much less elegantly.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
Yes - isn't what he said fantastic and moving?

Even to a hard-bitten cynic like me.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
You mentioned the Eucharistic theology of 1552 as being where the Church of England has remained ever since. certainly 1662 was unchanged.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Though the change seems little to us now, 1662 banished two appalling protestantisms of 1552

receiving communion sitting down
not doing the ablutions but allowing any remaining consecrated elements to be taken to the curate's home for 'his own use.'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
.... My position was the same as jubilate Agno, in that I believed it was our job to work for the conversion of the Church of England to the Catholic faith....

.... Lastly is the realisation that the majority of the Church of England doesn't, and never did, have any wish to go down the road of conversion to Catholicism....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:
Rest assured what I am seeing is a growth in "Catholic" virtues as the room grows quiet after our noisy brothers went to a better party. Suddenly there is room for everyone to explore that which is our heritage. Post-Evangelicals are finding the beauty and mystery of the Sacraments, men and women of faith are discovering (or rediscovering) a place for a higher liturgical expression and us Catholics feel less guilty about being enriched by charismatic and moderns approaches to loving God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Anglicanism still IMHO has the potential to hold together both poles, and not just to keep them peacefully apart but ignoring one another, but to engage in dialogue and learn from one another.

---

quote:

---

I am surprised by this assertion about it all being better now that the "noisy brothers" have left. I thought the assertion was also that very few have joined the Ordinariate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Come along to our church and I'll show you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

If people have stayed it's because they have come to terms with their position in the C of E and believe it is possible to be Catholic without being Roman. To TT and the Ordinariate this might seem a contradiction, but it is possible to live with it as many holy priests and people have shown and continue to show.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fifi:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

If people have stayed it's because they have come to terms with their position in the C of E and believe it is possible to be Catholic without being Roman. To TT and the Ordinariate this might seem a contradiction, but it is possible to live with it as many holy priests and people have shown and continue to show.

---

I suspect that it's a little more nuanced than that. Large numbers have 'stayed' for the simple reason that there is, as yet, no reason to need to leave - the C of E is precisely the same place as it was five, ten or fifteen years ago, with PEVs ministering to those parishes which have petitioned under the Act of Synod. That is what they 'have come to terms with'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:

A certain blogger has repeatedly moaned about those within the CofE using the new translation of the missal. Whether or not I agree with using ‘foreign liturgy’ (and, for the record, I don’t really), I just don’t get his point. It makes exactly the same amount of sense as him having used the old translation before he converted.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Come along to our church and I'll show you.

---

CL, I'll grant there aren't many places, but come along to my parish, too, and you'll see it in action.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Though the change seems little to us now, 1662 banished two appalling protestantisms of 1552

receiving communion sitting down
not doing the ablutions but allowing any remaining consecrated elements to be taken to the curate's home for 'his own use.'.

---

And the restoration of the words of administration: "The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul to everlasting life."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:
It makes exactly the same amount of sense as him having used the old translation before he converted.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I would say it is the venom and hatred expressed in that blog and the numerous comments to it that are truly beyond the pale and utterly unacceptable.

---

quote:

---

The Holy Father is not a traditionalist

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
[QUOTE]Though the change seems little to us now, 1662 banished two appalling protestantisms of 1552 ....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I would say it is the venom and hatred expressed in that blog and the numerous comments to it that are truly beyond the pale and utterly unacceptable.

---

Pretty extraordinary stuff, isn't it...

I particularly like this aside:

quote:

---

The Holy Father is not a traditionalist

---

stated as though this were a truism nobody could doubt.

As to whether Ordinariate clergy are or are not allowed to use the Extraordinary Form of the Latin rite - is it forbidden, given that they don't use the Ordinary Form? Or is it allowed because their Anglican Use acts as an equivalent of the Ordinary Form within the Latin rite?

Puzzled.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:
.... A certain blogger has repeatedly moaned about those within the CofE using the new translation of the missal. Whether or not I agree with using ‘foreign liturgy’ (and, for the record, I don’t really), I just don’t get his point. It makes exactly the same amount of sense as him having used the old translation before he converted.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
It is being claimed that 'nothing has changed' for Anglo Catholics. I would point to this very thread as refutation of that point!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
Furthermore the very reality of the Ordinariate is a game changer. It might suit people to downplay its significance. It might suit to claim it is not the real deal. We all adopt positions to defend our decisions. But the fact remains that the Ordinariate called bluffs and the unity Anglo Catholics once cried for- yes including those now staying put- is offered. To say no- given the clear direction of the C of E- is to make a Protestant statement. Why better together with bishop Rita and not Peter?

Decisions have consequences and I guarantee that the Ordinariate will transform Anglocatholicism. It already has.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
What I don't understand is why those offered all they claim to want in the Ordinariate think they have a right to refuse it but stay in Canerbury and ignore synod too. Not much integrity there from where I stand. As to using Roman Rite post Ordinariate that is just insane...

I look to Rome for liturgy but not for this. That is just playing God for yourself and inventing your own religion

---

quote:

---

It is being claimed that 'nothing has changed' for Anglo Catholics. I would point to this very thread as refutation of that point! I would also point to incoming clergy to ordinariate stripped parishes wearing hood and scarf and I would also note the massive shift between 'a code of practice will not do' to a slogan that says 'we are better together'

---

quote:

---

What I don't understand is why those offered all they claim to want in the Ordinariate think they have a right to refuse it but stay in Canerbury and ignore synod too. Not much integrity there from where I stand. As to using Roman Rite post Ordinariate that is just insane...

I look to Rome for liturgy but not for this. That is just playing God for yourself and inventing your own religion

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Organ Builder:

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
Furthermore the very reality of the Ordinariate is a game changer. It might suit people to downplay its significance. It might suit to claim it is not the real deal. We all adopt positions to defend our decisions. But the fact remains that the Ordinariate called bluffs and the unity Anglo Catholics once cried for- yes including those now staying put- is offered. To say no- given the clear direction of the C of E- is to make a Protestant statement. Why better together with bishop Rita and not Peter?

Decisions have consequences and I guarantee that the Ordinariate will transform Anglocatholicism. It already has.

---

I'll leave it to the English shipmates to comment on this for their own country, but in the US this is simply an impossibly over-inflated claim. Most US Anglo-Catholicism has never been the ultra-montaine Anglo-Papalism that seems to have been more common in England. The number of parishes interested in the Ordinariate is quite small, and doesn't include mst of the flagship historically A-C parished . The Ordinariate will have transforming consequences for those parishes which join it, of course, but there are whole states and regions which will be basically untouched by any Ordinariate presence.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
... I would also point to incoming clergy to ordinariate stripped parishes wearing hood and scarf ...

---

If the ordinariate claims to be preserving the Anglican patrimony within the Roman obedience, shouldn't ordinariate clergy also be wearing these for the offices that they are still presumably dutifully saying?
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
I doubt if they have ever worn them or even possess them.

Nasty cottas seem to rule.
 

---

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 
You mean Fr Stephenson's 'tropical rig'
 

---

Posted by Solly (# 11919) on :
 
You mean like a bum-freezer?
 

---

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
I'm amazed at the assertion that clergy are wearing hoods and scarves - is this referring to the Eucharist ? That would be an extremely rare phenomenon, and one that parishes searching for such a thing are hard-pressed to find!

(If it is referring to Evensnog, I don't see what the problem is, OTOH!)
 

---

Posted by Fifi (# 8151) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
I'm amazed at the assertion that clergy are wearing hoods and scarves - is this referring to the Eucharist ? That would be an extremely rare phenomenon, and one that parishes searching for such a thing are hard-pressed to find!

(If it is referring to Evensnog, I don't see what the problem is, OTOH!)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fifi:
Fr RPP is no doubt referring to the licensing of his successor a few weeks ago. Numbers of clergy did indeed wear very Anglican Choir Dress on that occasion, as indeed did significant numbers appear dripping in lace, clutching their birettas. The SSC priest being licensed was no doubt wearing what the Diocesan Bishop required him to wear!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:
There was a photo on facebook.

They don't but, in some/most A-C circles, cotta has become normative with surplice and scarf left to the more Protty types. More recently, more and more trad A-Cs have begun to embrace the eucharistic vestments of dear John Henry when not at the altar themselves.

Thurible

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

Do I have this sad tale of martyrdom incorrect?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

Do I have this sad tale of martyrdom incorrect?

---

Yep. Staggers-trained visitors wearing the garments of Geneva.

Thurible

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fifi:
Of course, it might be that their wearing the surplice, scarf & hood was in fact an oblique piss-take, aimed at the previous Parish Priest and at the fact that he probably wouldn't know 'Anglican Patrimony' if it bit him on the bum.

Or, there again, it might not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

Do I have this sad tale of martyrdom incorrect?

---

Yep. Staggers-trained visitors wearing the garments of Geneva.

Thurible

---

 

---

Posted by rugbyplayingpriest (# 9809) on :
 
How funny. Rather than answer my original points and explain how one can refuse the Ordinariate offer, stick with the C of E and yet claim to be Catholic.... many just resort to petty pulling apart of my demonstration of where things have changed. It is certainly more comfortable ground I guess!

I only mentioned the hood and scarf because someone in the thread claimed nothing had changed. Clearly it has because I never used to see Res C clergy attend a Eucharist wearing Anglican choir dress- joke or none! As I said earlier this may be good. Who knows? And for the record I always wore mine for Evensong in my curacy and would happily wear them in the Ordinariate if asked to. That is all beside the point I was making... that things HAVE changed. That was one small example and there are others.

So come on, lets get back to the point.

1) How can you claim to be Catholic having made the clear Protestant choice of saying no to this offer of unity?

2) How can you continue to deny the authority and desire of Synod having refused? where is the integrity there?

3) By what authority do you use Roman Catholic material? Do not point out that the ordinariate uses Anglican stuff as the crucial difference is that it has been given the green light by our bishops

4) Why is it better together within a liberalising body than in communion with 1.4 billion truly Catholic souls?

5) Why do you anticipate that having offered the ordinariate that the path of unity lies with Arcic and that something different will be offered to the whole C of E? How can you prove that isnt just convenient pie in the sky?

6) What DID happen to a Code of Practice will not do?

I could keep going but wont. The point being that, as stated, bluffs have been called. So why not simply accept that you WANT to remain Protestant and take all that goes with it. I am sure AFFCATH would be only too happy to make room for you and that living in harmony within the Church of England will bring a LOT more happiness than sticking heads in the sand and pretending that both the Ordinariate and Women Bishops dont exist. The danger with that is that you now fall between two stalls....
 

---

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :
 
Honestly rpp you need to stop. For two reasons, both from St Francis de Sales.

1. "It is always necessary to speak the truth - it is not always necessary to speak". What you say may well all be true, but do you honestly think it will affect anyone?

2. "You attract more flies with a teaspoon of honey than with a barrel of vinegar". Nobody will be converted because you pour scorn on them - honest. People are like that.

The reasons people stay Anglican and don't become Catholics are myriad. Telling them they have no integrity won't win them over. Play the ball, not the man is a good rule of thumb in rugby, isn't it?
 

---

Posted by rugbyplayingpriest (# 9809) on :
 
Actually in rugby you are always better to play the man- but I take your point- sort of.

Yet only today I had a message from an Ordinariate bound person thanking me for speaking up and making things clear. So whilst some wont and others can't - there are still others who benefit from the challenge. Certainly nobody else is giving them the full facts and allowing the choice...it is all well and good clergy staying becuase of X, Y and Z...but what of the people they hold back?
 

---

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
Certainly nobody else is giving them the full facts and allowing the choice...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Your exchange with the Church Army Captain at the FiF Assembly (I listened to it online) demonstrates this. She said she was like a stick of rock with "Church of England" running through her middle. I'm sure she was speaking for most of the laity actually.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Man with a Stick:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Your exchange with the Church Army Captain at the FiF Assembly (I listened to it online) demonstrates this. She said she was like a stick of rock with "Church of England" running through her middle. I'm sure she was speaking for most of the laity actually.

---

A priest in the audience later stated he was like a stick of rock with the words "Indian Takeaway" running through his middle, which was one of my favourite lines from that year.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chive:
I don't know whose words of wisdom it was that said that when you leave a church you shouldn't discuss it for a number of years.

---

quote:

---

I could keep going but wont.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rugbyplayingpriest:
1) How can you claim to be Catholic having made the clear Protestant choice of saying no to this offer of unity? ....

3) By what authority do you use Roman Catholic material?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyx_e:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fifi:
Of course, it might be that their wearing the surplice, scarf & hood was in fact an oblique piss-take, aimed at the previous Parish Priest and at the fact that he probably wouldn't know 'Anglican Patrimony' if it bit him on the bum.

Or, there again, it might not.

---

Oh please say it is true, please. LOL. Finally the C of E Anglo Catholics have re-discovered their sense of humour? Signs and Omens, signs and Omens .........

Fly Safe, Pyx_e

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

I challenge the claim of the RCC to be the only catholic church - The catholic church is shattered into denominational fragments and there will only bed one catholic church when the whole comes together again. Meanwhile, i suspect the Orthodoxen have a more justifiable claim to be the 'true' church.

---

quote:

---

We have an exciting future being part of the Catholic church. For many of us the journey has been difficult and getting used to the culture of a new faith community has been hard but that is what we have been called to do and that is what we should be concentrating our energies from.

---

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.

---

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.
 

---

Posted by Magic Wand (# 4227) on :
 

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Who is Gordon please?

---

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)?

---

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.

---

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 ... "

---

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.
*
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
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 ]
 

---

Posted by Sir Pellinore (# 12163) on :
 
This video on the Australian Ordinariate (Compass Episode 29 on the site) may be of some interest:
http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#
 

---

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
It's only available for viewing to Australians, Sir P.
 

---

Posted by Sir Pellinore (# 12163) on :
 
Sorry about that, Lyda*Rose.

Not much in the press about the program.

This is only marginally informative: http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=113526
 

---

Posted by k-mann (# 8490) on :
 

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.

---

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).

---

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!

---

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

(and bring the Benedictines back there while you are at it)

[ 04. October 2012, 03:02: Message edited by: SeraphimSarov ]
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
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 .
 

---

Posted by k-mann (# 8490) on :
 

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 .

---

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)

*
 

---

Posted by Mr. Rob (# 5823) on :
 

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)

---

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.
*

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:


What else would you call the Bishop of Liverpool? Bishop of Everton would hardly be a display of imagination.

---

quote:

---

Angloid, you got in while I was checking my spelling.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
in Newcastle they are identical however).

---

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".

---

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).

---

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'

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0