|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Pope announces plans for Anglicans to convert in groups
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Without wishing to be offensive I would have to take the Martin L/Shadowhund suggestion of a cardinalate as being hilarious.
I'm afraid it was meant to be. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
quote:
Edward Green:
I'll sign up for that Bishop.
Sorry for the snips, but I think this makes a pretty good statement of what the Church of England is.
Especially the bit about getting on with the job.
And there are plenty of others who would agree.
Me for one, FWIW. Although I am inclined to be less generous to the Trad Caths than Pete - while recognising that his position is probably the more responsible one. ISTM that they have to make up their minds whether they want to go to Rome or not- and that many of the best of them have aleady done so, with those who've gone, going, quite rightly, on Rome's terms.
If you are going to cross over, that's the way to do it- as a humble pilgrim, which is something that we can all respect, rather than expecting the sort of elaborate special treatment that the CofE has been indulgent enough to offer for the past few years (for what is the PEV system in practice but a personal prelature?).
That Rome has taken the approach that it has fills me with dismay. I also can't help feeling that it is also storing up trouble for itself, but that's their business. We who are left must get on with doing our job of being the indigenous and reformed Catholic, church in this country. All this other business is a distraction from our mission which (in the CofE in particular, it seems to me as an observer from a neighbouring province) has taken up far too much time and resources over the last few years.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Without wishing to be offensive I would have to take the Martin L/Shadowhund suggestion of a cardinalate as being hilarious.
I'm afraid it was meant to be.
Thank God! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
As a practicing Anglican, I've never been able to decide whether to laugh, or to cry, or to attempt to do both simltaneously at the TAC and their antic progress.
I think - as TT inferred - those who remain loyal to the TAC and all its works, wherever so situated, will be totally on the margin of whatever margin...
That is not to say there are not more substantial men and women who are not in full accord with the way mainstream Anglicanism is going in many countries.
We are sadly divided.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
The TAC's move towards Rome will, I fear, end with a whimper.
Why? It was largely due to the TAC's overtures to Rome that the Apostolic Constitution was considered. The TAC has acepted Rome's generous offer. They will soon be in communion with Rome, with their own ordinariate and, quite likely, able to celebrate Mass according to the beautiful Rite of the English Misaal. How is that ending with a whimper? They may all die out within a generation, but that could be said of many churches whose attendence is in freefall, including the Church of England.
What remains to be seen, from my UK perspective, is how many present members of the Church of England want to be part of this. Will there be anough to make an ordinariate a viable proposition? What will they do about church buildings etc? I think, for themselves, the TAC has it sorted. Its the wider picture which is uncertain.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
.....
A church rooted in scripture, tradition and reason.
A church that is able to hold together Protestants and Catholics. (...)
Except that this has and is only achieved by constantly and idiosyncratically redefining the words 'scripture', 'tradition', 'reason', 'Protestant' and 'Catholic', as the occasion demands. That is not a criticism, rather it is an observation made from the outside of what seems to be Anglicanism's particular genius.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
We who are left must get on with doing our job of being the indigenous and reformed Catholic, church in this country.
Ho ho ho. Anglican snobbery and pretentious self-justification. "How unlike the Italian Mission to the Irish we are, that foreign Church which is not really English".
These days that kind of attitude is described as racist. It's the religious version of the BNP.
Apart from the fact that it is just so wrong. Such nonsense has never quite managed to
suppress the Catholic Church in these islands, even in the darkest days, despite the best efforts of the Anglican State.
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pete173:
Yup - the terms are now absolutely clear - unconditional surrender (as if we hadn't guessed it). Trad Caths will have to make up their mind - if they want to join another denomination, that's what's on offer. It does make all the stuff about refinding the Mother Ship a bit of a mythical nonsense, doesn't it? If you want to join, here's the deal. It's the same deal that there's always been, with a bit of finessing at the edges. Bulk transfer available, but still the same old Vatican when you get there .
Well, Bishop Pete, strangely enough, other people, especially ++ John Broadhurst have been overwhelmed by the Pope's generosity in this measure. But let's face it. The only thing the Pope could do to make you happy would be to dismantle his organisation and commit seppuku as an apology for a thousand years.
I heard the debate in which you and ++ John disagreed over what ARCIC meant and what it meant to you, personally. You are each entitled to your view, but I suspect some traditionally English anti-popery lurks somewhere in your mindset.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
trouty
Shipmate
# 13497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
We who are left must get on with doing our job of being the indigenous and reformed Catholic, church in this country.
Ho ho ho. Anglican snobbery and pretentious self-justification. "How unlike the Italian Mission to the Irish we are, that foreign Church which is not really English".
These days that kind of attitude is described as racist. It's the religious version of the BNP.
Apart from the fact that it is just so wrong. Such nonsense has never quite managed to
suppress the Catholic Church in these islands, even in the darkest days, despite the best efforts of the Anglican State.
Yes, those Anglicans should have followed the methods used by the Catholics in Spain, Italy, central Europe, France and the low countires. Maybe they would have been more successful in suppressing it.
Posts: 205 | From: Somewhere out there | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
They did far worse actually.
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alt Wally
Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
.....
A church rooted in scripture, tradition and reason.
A church that is able to hold together Protestants and Catholics. (...)
Except that this has and is only achieved by constantly and idiosyncratically redefining the words 'scripture', 'tradition', 'reason', 'Protestant' and 'Catholic', as the occasion demands. That is not a criticism, rather it is an observation made from the outside of what seems to be Anglicanism's particular genius.
Yes, and there is of course nothing "catholic" about this as it's the triumph of private judgment and the scuppering of any sort of infallibility of the church. The reformation has won in the CofE, and I agree with a previous poster who says it has done so by popular demand.
Bishop John was right in saying the bluff has been called by Rome by those who have been looking to her.
Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
In a slightly informal way, I shall quote a friend's reaction, one with which I entirely sympathise, understand and agree with.
quote:
§ 2. The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to ... objective criteria approved by the Holy See.
Well f*ck that for Rome's acknowledging the value of Anglican experience of a married clergy. I'm not petitioning anyone for a derogation from canon law to fulfil my twin vocations to marriage and to priesthood. And I pity the wife of any married Anglican priest who thinks this is a step forward.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Quam Dilecta:
In my opinion, Father Hunwicke's blog, to which Alt Wally provided a link, is painfully accurate in asserting that an "Anglican elite" has done everything in its power to preclude any corporate reunion of the Anglican and Roman churches.
"Elite" is an odd word to use to describe the majority of the members of a denomination.
As far as anyone can tell an actual majority of ordinary Anglican churchgoers worldwide do not object to the ordination of women.
As far as anyone can tell an actual majority of ordinary Anglican churchgoers worldwide attend evangelical or charismatic churches that self-identify as Protestant and would not want to have anything to do with organisational bureaucratic union with a Roman Catholic church ruled by a monarchical Pope. Or any other denomination controlled from the centre.
Those two groups are not identical, but they do have a very large overlap - and in England (if not perhaps all other countries) that overlap includes the majority of Evangelicals.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fuzzipeg
Shipmate
# 10107
|
Posted
I'm much amused by Albertus' Indigenous English Church.
We have African Indigenous Churches here and they have Bishops and even female Archbishops one of whom I know personally. They also like wearing purple and have the tendency to disagree with each other and start up other churches from time to time.
I've been following the discussion with considerable interest over the last few weeks. Everyone knows the RCC doctrine of what the Church is. If they don't they can look at the Catechism...and there are enough links to that already. Any accommodation to Anglicans has to be within that framework, no matter what the inessentials may be in terms of liturgy, mitres on letterheads etc. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.
--------------------
http://foodybooze.blogspot.co.za
Posts: 929 | From: Johannesburg, South Africa | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
We who are left must get on with doing our job of being the indigenous and reformed Catholic, church in this country.
Ho ho ho. Anglican snobbery and pretentious self-justification. "How unlike the Italian Mission to the Irish we are, that foreign Church which is not really English".
These days that kind of attitude is described as racist. It's the religious version of the BNP.
Bollocks. Bollocks. And thrice bollocks.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Shadowhund
Shipmate
# 9175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
In a slightly informal way, I shall quote a friend's reaction, one with which I entirely sympathise, understand and agree with.
quote:
§ 2. The Ordinary, in full observance of the discipline of celibate clergy in the Latin Church, as a rule (pro regula) will admit only celibate men to the order of presbyter. He may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to ... objective criteria approved by the Holy See.
Well f*ck that for Rome's acknowledging the value of Anglican experience of a married clergy. I'm not petitioning anyone for a derogation from canon law to fulfil my twin vocations to marriage and to priesthood. And I pity the wife of any married Anglican priest who thinks this is a step forward.
Thurible
The wife of Mascall's "Ultra-Catholic" strikes again?
I'm not sure how the wife of the priest going through the process is prejudiced in anyway, other than the fact that the breadwinner of the family might have to be a "tentmaker" priest, if he is ordained a priest at all. Furthermore, I doubt we are going to see any repeats of the Pierre Connolly debacle.
--------------------
"Had the Dean's daughter worn a bra that afternoon, Norman Shotover might never have found out about the Church of England; still less about how to fly"
A.N. Wilson
Posts: 3788 | From: Your Disquieted Conscience | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alt Wally
Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245
|
Posted
I think Fr. Ghirlanda is talking more about future vocations then he is about the pending formation of the ordinariate. I think it's safe to assume, no matter how current Anglican clergy are received how in terms of ordination, it's hard to imagine married clergy won't be accepted (barring some sort of abnormal circumstances to be addressed by a tribunal).
The experience of the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church in the United States may be an interesting parallel to the ordinariate. Although a particular ritual church, they don't have a synod here and are immediately subject to Rome. They are a small group that has had to live in the midst of a sea of Latins.
Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
I think - as TT inferred - those who remain loyal to the TAC and all its works, wherever so situated, will be totally on the margin of whatever margin...
I think it's the other way around. Rome is mainstreaming the TAC the way it's been mainstreaming it's own traditionalists with Summorum Pontificium and groups like the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. That the TAC was persistent in petitioning to be received makes me think they are very willing to be a part of the normal life of the Church.
I think if they had not petitioned to be received they would have remained more or less on the margins. As an outside observer I also think tradtionalist Anglo-Catholics within the Anglican Communion are most in danger of being marginalized where they are.
I wonder if all of this provides a model for reunion of the Polish National Catholic Church, if that ever happens.
--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"
Posts: 1988 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alt Wally
Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245
|
Posted
An interesting article in the WSJ today. I quote
Satisfied that they can remain true to their convictions, many traditional priests don't plan to seriously consider the offer from Rome. They love the Anglican liturgy and they want to remain firmly within that tradition. Many are also married and while the pope has said he would accommodate them, they aren't sure they would fit into the Catholic Church.
Source
Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alt Wally:
An interesting article in the WSJ today. I quote
Satisfied that they can remain true to their convictions, many traditional priests don't plan to seriously consider the offer from Rome. They love the Anglican liturgy and they want to remain firmly within that tradition. Many are also married and while the pope has said he would accommodate them, they aren't sure they would fit into the Catholic Church.
Source
I don't know how often this has to be said but this response is not some vague 'come on in the water's dreadful' initiative on the part of the Pope. It is a response to repeated and insistent requests from individuals and groups for some kind of accommodation. That it doesn't particularly interest others who have not repeatedly and insistently requested such an accommodation is neither remarkable nor newsworthy.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
This article on the newly published Apostolic Constitution for the Ordinariates may clarify a few matters.
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/80050_116538_ENG_HTM.htm
I understand what PaulTh and Pancho are saying but I believe the TAC and where it continues is pretty marginal to the main game anywhere.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Manx Taffy
Shipmate
# 301
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by trouty:
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
We who are left must get on with doing our job of being the indigenous and reformed Catholic, church in this country.
Ho ho ho. Anglican snobbery and pretentious self-justification. "How unlike the Italian Mission to the Irish we are, that foreign Church which is not really English".
These days that kind of attitude is described as racist. It's the religious version of the BNP.
Apart from the fact that it is just so wrong. Such nonsense has never quite managed to
suppress the Catholic Church in these islands, even in the darkest days, despite the best efforts of the Anglican State.
Yes, those Anglicans should have followed the methods used by the Catholics in Spain, Italy, central Europe, France and the low countires. Maybe they would have been more successful in suppressing it.
Trouty - Pathetic and irrelevant to the current debate.
Albertus - so what did you really mean by "indigenous" that prevents your comment from being at best offensive?
Posts: 397 | From: Isle of Man | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
It is with regret that I must echo Trisagion's comment. B16's offer was directed at TAC and a few other ex-Canterbury Anglican outfits. That other grouplets of Anglicans don't wish to accept the offer is nothing which should surprise anyone or even raise comment. It should be noted that most of the anti-gay etc crowd is fairly low (at least in Canada) and given to waving the XXXIX at anyone in sight.
I do not see the Constitution as being directed toward mainstream Anglicans. The suggestion that Tibercrossers should do so as humble supplicants, begging to be absorbed into the Borg, is peculiar. Recall, dear shipmates, that Paul VI, in his allocution on the canonisation of the English martyrs, went out of his way to refer to the heritage and spirituality of Anglicanism and how it would be welcome into the RCC. Chief superintendents of the Italian Mission have always made it clear that this was their position and that some sort of arrangement would be made. J2P2 did so with the Pastoral Provision and B16 has followed it up.
Given how the US-only Pastoral Provision was barely tolerated by most Latin bishops, if that, the Constitution is pretty generous. I see a great benefit for the Latin church, which could use a whiff of diversity and my friends who earn their crust as minions of the Scarlet Lady, appear to be carefully open to what the new lot will bring. In my area (Ottawa), the ACCoC (part of TAC) is a bit eccentric, but I think that the integration into a more mainstream body will be very helpful for members and clergy, even if a few of the clerics will be rattled at the start by the discipline and duty of their new affiliation. It'll do them good.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
I cannot shake the following idea from my head.
The one sea-change in this for the Vatican is that the Latin Rite (although a particular strand of it) will see a dramatic increase in the number of married priests within it, admitted on the same terms as Eastern Catholic priests are. Augustine the Aleut has mentioned that some in the Roman Catholic Church would welcome the initiative as a way to get more priests into parishes, regardless of where they came from. From a pastoral standpoint I feel this is logical, as if these new Anglican Ordiniate priets are truly Catholic priests, they may as well be used where they are needed. The Mass is The Mass, and if it celebrated in a parish that has had to do without a priest for a significant period of time, so much the better. It would probably help the new Anglican Ords fit into their new setting better.
However a significant part of the Catholic Church, the English-speaking dioceses will now see more married priests then has been normal up to now. Given that the Anglican Ordiniate will have to replenish itself, I can't shake the idea that this is going to lead to open debate on clerical celibacy in the Catholic Church.
To wit, I think the following dialogue will happen in the next few years.
HH The Pope: My son, how is the new Anglican Ordiniate going? Things are well among your flock, I trust?
Random Bishop: Very well, Your Holiness. The Anglican Ordiniate parishes are flourishing. Such excellent singers. Plus we taught them how to play bingo.
HH The Pope: Excellent, my son. All is going according to plan.
Random Bishop: Just so, Your Holiness. Though I must note, I have had some of the Anglican Priests temporarily fill some long-standing vacancies in my diocese. A priest is a priest, so I said to all who asked.
HH The Pope: Wunderbar!
Random Bishop: Just one thing, Your Holiness. I have noted that there are a number of previous Latin laity going over to this new Anglican Ordiniate. They seem to want to be priests. Many said they would rather stay fully Latin if they could be married and ordained. They seem to understand and accept they would never be bishops. Regardless, they persist. Was this part of the plan?
HH The Pope: ....
Ok, so what does this do? I recognize that clerical celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma but it is one of those fundamental Catholic things That Makes Us Not Like Those Icky Protestants.
As I am a Protestant, I hope my Catholic Shipmates could help my understanding.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
The AC provides for the reception of married Anglican clergy as RC clergy, on a case-by-case basis. I don't see an indication that this will be ongoing, i.e. that the discipline of celibacy will be permanently relaxed or waived for the Ordinariates. Once the current wave of married clergy is received & ordained, I don't expect that subsequent ordinations from within the Ordinariate community will allow for marriage without Papal dispensation (see Anglicanorum Coetibus , VI.2).
A separate rite is not being established here. The Anglicans received under this provision will be a Use of the Latin Rite, and thus will be subject to Latin Rite disciplines as a rule.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Indeed, Fr Weber, but for the first time they are foreseeing the possibility of continuing dispensations for married candidates for the priesthood, who had not been previous Anglican priests. While the provision is on an exceptional basis, that is a lot more open (in Vatican-speak) than had ever been in the past, where the only provision for a married candidate was one where he and the Mrs had agreed to renounce their conjugal existence (and where, preferably, Mrs had joined a religious community).
One of the concerns of poping Anglicans was that their supply of married clergy would be dependent on ex-Anglican priests heading over the Tiber. For communities which were accustomed to the services of married priests, this was a headache and, for some, a source of vulnerability to the community's continued existence (whether this fear was justified or not in some places, I do not think I can say).
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
I see what you mean, Augustine. I agree that the door's being left open wider than it was before--well, I guess it was shut before, so I suppose this is a crack?
Nevertheless, I doubt that it will happen often, especially if the Pope himself is the court of appeal.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
...where the only provision for a married candidate was one where he and the Mrs had agreed to renounce their conjugal existence (and where, preferably, Mrs had joined a religious community).
Where on earth did you get that idea? That hasn't been the discipline since before Trent.
[ 11. November 2009, 06:15: Message edited by: Trisagion ]
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Wasn't there an American couple in the 19th century who were married episcopalians who converted to the Catholic faith.They had a surname of Connelly ,I think.
Mr C wanted to be a priest and the couple separated,the husband becoming a Catholic priest and Mrs a nun.
While Father C later abandoned the Catholic faith,Mrs C was an important leader of a women's religious community.
Sorry I can't remember many of the details,but to fit in with the last two posts,the couple were able to enter the religious life by giving up voluntarily their married state.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
trouty
Shipmate
# 13497
|
Posted
[/qb][/QUOTE]Trouty - Pathetic and irrelevant to the current debate.
It wasn't me who started it. I was just responding to what seemed like a persecution complex, and at the same time giving a reason why many, many people will never consider converting, no matter what. Sounds like your prepared to see it given out but not to take it.
Posts: 205 | From: Somewhere out there | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Manx Taffy:
[Albertus - so what did you really mean by "indigenous" that prevents your comment from being at best offensive?
I genuinely cannot see what might be offensive about my comment.
However, on reflection, 'indigenous' does not accurately convey the meaning that I wanted to convey. 'Indigenous' might suggest that I thought that the Church in England and Wales originated here. That, of course, would be absurd: like almost everyone else, we owe our Christianity to missionary activity, and very grateful we should be for it.
What i did mean was that the CofE/CinW are the Catholic church as it has developed in England and Wales ever since these lands were Christianised. That is a pretty mainstream Anglican view. It does not necessarily imply, to anyone but the most abnormally oversensitive, any attribution of inferiority or lower value to other traditions which have (notwithstanding any small continuing presence since the Reformation) largely spread here as a result of later waves of missionary activity.
[ 11. November 2009, 09:21: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cor ad cor loquitur
Shipmate
# 11816
|
Posted
The Constitution wouldn't be a good Vatican document if it didn't leave some ambiguity about how things will be done. I'm sure that the issues about married priests will be clarified soon enough.
Ingo said, some posts earlier, that the new ordinariates will have an interesting liturgical impact. I think that's right. Implementing the Constitution will broaden the range of liturgical choices, a range that's already growing: Novus Ordo (Latin or vernacular, simple or solemn), the various degrees of EF Masses, ad orientem or versus populum, etc. Apparently the Constitution will add quite a range of Anglican-use liturgies: Book of Divine Worship? Anglican Missal?
Catholics in the US are about to get a truly dreadful translation of the Roman Missal, one that is neither sacral nor simple, written in a bizarre language that is neither Latin nor English. I hope that implementation in the UK gets postponed, but doubt that this will happen. The reception of the new translation in South Africa was very poor -- not surprising, because it's a poor translation.
As this shift takes place the English of the Book of Divine Worship could look more appealing to a good number of Catholics.
What I hope we don't end up with is an alphabet-soup of parish and worship types -- e.g. "We're a C1QX54 parish", meaning that the main Sunday Mass is celebrated ad orientem, but in English with the old ICEL translation, and that the music is led by a nun playing a tambourine...
--------------------
Quam vos veritatem interpretationis, hanc eruditi κακοζηλίαν nuncupant … si ad verbum interpretor, absurde resonant. (St Jerome, Ep. 57 to Pammachius)
Posts: 1332 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
...where the only provision for a married candidate was one where he and the Mrs had agreed to renounce their conjugal existence (and where, preferably, Mrs had joined a religious community).
Where on earth did you get that idea? That hasn't been the discipline since before Trent.
My handy Canon Law Reports digest, issued by the CLSA, which, admittedly, I have not perused for a few years. There was a Belgian case in the 1950s which got the canonists digging. Sorry I can't chapter and verse it for you.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
other traditions which have (notwithstanding any small continuing presence since the Reformation) largely spread here as a result of later waves of missionary activity.
I assume that is a circumlocutory way of talking about the Roman Catholics?
Because the other large Protestant traditions in these islands - Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, Methodists, Salvation Army, Pentecostalists, Charismatic/Restorationists - mostly either also share the same Reformed Catholic heritage as the Anglicans do or else started here and spread to the rest of the world. The British Isles are a factory of Christian denominations. One of our major exports!
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oremus
Shipmate
# 13853
|
Posted
Albertus many RC'S will of course argue that we have been in the UK since before the Reformation too.
Posts: 221 | From: Our Lady's Dowry (Catford Branch) | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Major Disaster
Shipmate
# 13229
|
Posted
I really am on the sidelines of this, but want to add my two pennyworth....
Trisagion is out by a few hundred years I think.
There was a benedictine monk on the Isle of Wight (UK) in the 1950's who as a married man felt convinced of his religious vocation, and to fulfill it both he and his wife agreed to the then requirement to separate permanently, both making solemn monastic vows after the normal period of probation/formation (which involved her being in an enclosed community for the rest of her life), and he was subsequently ordained priest. This is significantly later than Trent, being within living, though failing, memory. I have forgotten his name. His paintings were still in the crypt of Quarr Abbey a few years ago.
More generally on the topic of the OP, I cannot sympathise with people who make a personal moral difficulty of something that does not affect anyone now, but may develop in the future. Whether the anglican influx heightens debate about celibacy in the Roman Church, or the anglican ordinariate ends up being staffed by celibate clergy because of the then pope refuses to dispense from the normal canonical rule for latin catholic clergy in the RCC, is surely irrelevant to the decision before the real anglicans now.
They must make a decision under the provisions offered by the Apostolic Constitution of BXVI. The consequences of that decision for their salvation are in God's hands and that of the Church which they join.
If one wants to play devil's advocate, and indulge in silly games of speculation, one is certainly free to do so. But one should not pretend that one is being serious.
I could posit a scenario of anglican clergy moving in numbers disproportionate to the number of lay persons. What would be the sense of ordaning all the clergy to the RCC priesthood in that case? Where would they work as priests? If in normal RCC parishes, how would their attempt to maintain their "anglican patrimony" survive in reality?
Similarly, if laity move but there is no priest of the ordinariate to care for them, what happens to their hold on their "anglican patrimony"? Do they not simply merge with the other Rc's in the parish churches they attend?
With the changes that have been made in Anglican liturgical practices in the 20th and 21st centuries, could a watertight, or even convincing case be made against a full-bodied acceptance of the Roman rite by those who accept the RCC as is? This is not being required under the Aposolic Constitution, and seems generous on the Roman side.
Anglicans can have their married priests now within the RCC. But they must accept the RCC as it is, and it will not change in itself just to suit them. A new generation of Catholics may arise, strengthening the Anglican tradition within the RCC, or that tradition may die out. That is not a matter of any but cultural concern to the Christians who individually have to follow their conscience and the Truth, to achieve salvation for themeslves, and through themselves the world.
--------------------
O Beata Solitudo! Sola Beatitudo!
Posts: 869 | From: Heart of Midlothian | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leetle Masha
Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209
|
Posted
MD, I think the length of the time that married priests accepted into the RCC as already married before they became Catholics will probably have the most to do with the influence of married priests in the RCC. No one lives for ever on this earth.
There's a strict requirement that if any man, ordained or not, wants to bring his wife with him with a view to being a married priest in the RCC, he needs to
1. Be married =and Anglican= before he's ordained.
2. Be the "husband of one wife", so when his wife dies, he can't marry again.
3. Be an Anglican really before he even =starts= such a process.
So since I can hardly envision a scenario where, for example, a married priest coming from Anglicanism via this Apostolic Constitution, would want his mature son, who also wants to be a priest, to remain Anglican (and married) until he gets through Anglican ordination, before he even begins to start the process of becoming a Catholic, so that he turns out to be a Married Catholic priest who is accepted as a convert from Anglicanism.
I just read that all through and it doesn't make a bit of sense the way I've phrased it.... I hope you can follow my "reasoning" ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Bottom line: I think that this particular set of married convert-priests will probably die out in a generation.
Mary
--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner
Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cor ad cor loquitur:
Ingo said, some posts earlier, that the new ordinariates will have an interesting liturgical impact. I think that's right. Implementing the Constitution will broaden the range of liturgical choices, a range that's already growing: Novus Ordo (Latin or vernacular, simple or solemn), the various degrees of EF Masses, ad orientem or versus populum, etc. Apparently the Constitution will add quite a range of Anglican-use liturgies: Book of Divine Worship? Anglican Missal?
Yet another reason that I'm very uneasy about the proposals.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
other traditions which have (notwithstanding any small continuing presence since the Reformation) largely spread here as a result of later waves of missionary activity.
I assume that is a circumlocutory way of talking about the Roman Catholics?
Yes, that's right. I can't think of any long-established (in terms of centuries) other presences here, but if there was one, however small, you could be sure someone on the Ship would know about it, so thought I'd play safe!
In answer to Oremus- yes, of course there has been a continuous RC presence since before the Reformation - that's what i'd intended to suggest. But my other point is that the main historical and institutional tradition of the Catholic church in England and Wales has flowed (I think for better, others doubtless think for worse) into the CofE and CinW.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oremus
Shipmate
# 13853
|
Posted
Albertus whilst I appreciate your POV I would humbly suggest that your "other point" is debatable (some might even say highly) and some might even call it dubious.
Posts: 221 | From: Our Lady's Dowry (Catford Branch) | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Yes, of course it's debatable: I recognise that quite a lot of people don't agree with it. But quite a lot of people do (and it is as I say a pretty mainstream one within the CofE). I don't expect you, as an RC, to agree with it and indeed would find it difficult to see how in conscience you could: and I respect that. But I hope that you can see that this is a view which I can consistently hold as an Anglican. I would expect us to agree to differ: I wouldn't expect to be accused, as I was by Triple Tiara, of racism in making the point.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Wasn't there an American couple in the 19th century who were married episcopalians who converted to the Catholic faith.They had a surname of Connelly ,I think.
Mr C wanted to be a priest and the couple separated,the husband becoming a Catholic priest and Mrs a nun.
While Father C later abandoned the Catholic faith,Mrs C was an important leader of a women's religious community.
Sorry I can't remember many of the details,but to fit in with the last two posts,the couple were able to enter the religious life by giving up voluntarily their married state.
Drat! I have heard/read this tale too. But I cannot recal the details. It was in the 1800s if I recall.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
I agree that one can put forward the point of view that the CofE is the continuation of the Catholic church in England.
How do Anglicans see the Church of Scotland which claims to be the continuation of the Catholic church in Scotland?
If one accepts the first argument about the Church of England,then surely one must accept a similar point of view about the Church of Scotland. If one does,why is it that the Church of England is not in full communion with the Church of Scotland?The C of S would claim equally to have apostolic succession (in a different manner from the anglicans) and to be the Scottish portion of the Church catholic.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Myrrh
Shipmate
# 11483
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
I agree that one can put forward the point of view that the CofE is the continuation of the Catholic church in England.
Only from Canterbury, where if IIRC, the previous two bishops stopped being commemorated from Augustine's time.
The Church existed here before that, for some six hundred years before that. Bishops sent to Nicaea and other councils and such, from its beginnings of the first Christians. Aristobulus was first bishop.
As some RCC council in Spain (?), mentioned in passing, that Britain received Christianity first here. Baronius also referred to this.
Myrrh
Posts: 4467 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fëanor
Shipmate
# 14514
|
Posted
ETA: This is in response to Forthview
It seems to me (and I could be completely wrong) that a claim of Apostolic Succession without Bishops is a bit like a claim of indoor plumbing without pipes (to continue the metaphor, Apostolicae Curae would be the Romans claiming that the Anglicans hadn't soldered their joints properly).
Thus, it's quite logically sound to both accept both that the CofE is the continuation of the Catholic church in England and that the same is not true of the Church of Scotland.
[ 11. November 2009, 14:36: Message edited by: Fëanor ]
Posts: 177 | From: Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fëanor:
ETA: This is in response to Forthview
It seems to me (and I could be completely wrong) that a claim of Apostolic Succession without Bishops is a bit like a claim of indoor plumbing without pipes (to continue the metaphor, Apostolicae Curae would be the Romans claiming that the Anglicans hadn't soldered their joints properly).
Thus, it's quite logically sound to both accept both that the CofE is the continuation of the Catholic church in England and that the same is not true of the Church of Scotland.
Many moons ago Psyduck (who hasn't contributed for ages, sad to say) gave a lucid explanation of how both piskies and presbies could both legitimately claim to be the continuation of the pre-reformation church in Scotland, despite having been at one another's throats in the c17-18, and despite one group ending up with established status of a sort, the temporalities and the bulk of the populace. With reference to Forthview's point about Apostolic Succession - as far as I understand the matter the CoS rejects monarchical episcopacy, and instead vests the concept and duties of episcope in a council or court of the church - the presbytery corporately has the responsibilities of a bishop, though particular tasks may by custom be done by its moderator. That is certainly the case with a URC synod moderator, who is also working in a sort-of presbyterian ecclesial structure. To continue the domestic metaphor, cooking with electricity instead of gas?
--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.
Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
If the claim of the Church of England to be the continuation of the Catholic church in England is based on the fact that it is/was the church of the majority of English people,then one could put forward the argument that by the same process in Scotland the church of Scotland (Presbyterian in government since 1688) is the national Catholic church of Scotland. The church of England as a 'national' Catholic church ought to be in full communion with the church of Scotland.
If the claims of the Church of England to be the national church are based on something else ,as for example apostolic succession,claims of right order etc,then it ought to be in full communion with the wider Catholic church and not to be picking and choosing which doctrines of the wider Catholic church it will accept and which not.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Major Disaster
Shipmate
# 13229
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
Or maybe not cooking at all.
Can we have popcorn while watching this particular aspect of the discussion? ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
O Beata Solitudo! Sola Beatitudo!
Posts: 869 | From: Heart of Midlothian | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fuzzipeg
Shipmate
# 10107
|
Posted
Don't you mean popecorn?
I really can't see anything new coming out of the OP and various red herrings such as Apostolic Succession have already started to drift across. I wasn't sure what the relationship between the CoS & the CoE had to do with the OP.
[ 11. November 2009, 16:00: Message edited by: Fuzzipeg ]
--------------------
http://foodybooze.blogspot.co.za
Posts: 929 | From: Johannesburg, South Africa | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Major Disaster
Shipmate
# 13229
|
Posted
, Actually dried peas for the participants would be useful. Throwing them at a wall, is the Polish expression equivalent to ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
My money's on Forthview, who is being very restrained at this stage, but he has the knock-down argument firmly in hand.
--------------------
O Beata Solitudo! Sola Beatitudo!
Posts: 869 | From: Heart of Midlothian | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
