Skip to comments.British Anglicans Preparing Mass Defection to Roman Catholic Church
Posted on 01/30/2011 2:26:12 PM PST by fabrizio
LONDON -- Hundreds of disillusioned Anglicans were preparing Sunday to defect from the Church of England to the Roman Catholic Church in time for Lent, Sky News reported.
It follows a campaign by a former Anglican bishop in protest at its stance on the ordination of women and gay clergy.
Father Keith Newton has encouraged Anglicans to join the Ordinariate -- a special branch of Catholicism established by the Pope -- to welcome protestant defectors.
Despite the efforts of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Anglo Catholics have begun leaving following the conversion of three Anglican bishops in mid-January.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I think a “sheep and goats” allegory would be appropriate in this case.
And the goats will have all the trappings of faith, and shall take all the fine churches for their revelries and feasts, but their spirits will remain empty, and they will drift away from these houses in disinterest, whence the houses shall fall into disrepair.
But while the sheep shall dwell in only modest houses, driven out of their ancient sacred places by the goats, they shall still prosper because within them is the true meaning of scripture, uncorrupted and without pollution by the goats. Because of their faith, they will someday dwell in fine houses, built on that firm foundation.
‘I noticed the Pope created a new denomination to accommodate these people. How divisive of him.’
The Ordinariate is NOT a new denomination, it is ‘a special branch of Catholicism established by the Pope’ possibly in the direction of setting up an Anglican Rite within the Church. This would be the same as the other non-Roman Rites in the Church.
Now my own church would have demanded that ~ and by immersion ~ no messing around with dippers and stuff either.
This is the ruination of Rome ~ no hard core there anymore! (/s)
This is cheap XVI century English propaganda devoid of all factual content (besides, at the time the Church was having problems with the Spanish crown as well). The Church has always prohibited divorce as commanded by Jesus. Henry had contracted a valid marriage and he had no chance of ever obtaining a declaration of nullity.
Of course there have been abuses on behalf of some ecclesiastical courts in granting declarations of nullity, but that was always IN VIOLATION of clear and constant and never abrogated Church doctrine and canon law. And, there is no such thing as an “annulment”. Marriage can never be “annulled”: either it exists or it doesn’t. Only if it can be ascertained - and it seldom can - that it never existed in the first place can nullity be granted. Just the other day Pope Benedict insisted on the need to be more strict in granting declarations of nullity. This has been also a battle of John Paul II to combat the secularist/protestant mentality that has become widespread among ecclesiastical judges and bureacrats. You won’t find a single Pope from Peter to Benedict XVI teaching or allowing something different as regards marriage. All Popes have insisted on the indissoluble nature of marriage and warned against putting eternal salvation at risk by messing with the Sacrament of Matrimony.
Mat 10:14 And if any one will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town.
That good one Rich LOL!
Very Blue Brothers
I am glad that some of our Anglican brothers and sisters are coming back to fold
Well, the Spanish were at the time invading and looting and desecrating Rome. Plus Hnery VIII wanted an annullment because he suddenly thought that his entire marriage had been invalid and therefore reduced his wife Katherine of Aragon to an unwitting concubine and his daughter Mary illegitimate. Then in the end the Church of England simply became a vehicle for an easy annulment/divorce whenever Henry got tired of his wives. The Church at that point was just a religious organization suited to make laws for the convenience of the monarch’s lifestyle choices.
SKY (FOX) News continues to propogate the lie that it’s all about the ordination of women. Nice try.
In Henry’s case, the problem was he had already had to go to the Pope to marry his first wife, Catherine of Aragorn, inasmuch as the marriage would have been considered incestuous, because she was his brother’s widow. The Pope gave him the sought after dispensation.It was a bit rich of Henry to go back to the same Pope seeking an annulment from the same wife he got the dispensation for.
Do you even know what Matthew 10:14 means?
I didn’t think so.
Not a right more similar to Opus Dei They were Roman Rite when they left and are still Roman.
Part of the problem is that the national church is controlled by iron-fisted radicals who took over while individuals in local churches weren't paying attention. They changed the rules so that they control the seminaries and the church property.
The radicals tried the same thing in the Catholic Church, but were defeated (at least so it appears at the moment) by the strong central organization and the Church's principled stand against all the foolishness proposed by the Anglicans (homosexuals and women's ordination are only the obvious issues. There are many more, including the divinity of Christ, the existence of sin, the Trinity, etc.)
The other part of the problem is the absence in the Episcopal/Anglican church of any kind of final ecclesiastical authority on faith and morals. You can believe pretty much whatever you want to believe, like the husband and wife Episcopal priests who were Wiccan priest and priestess on the side, or the idiot vicar who converted to Islam and didn't think that was inconsistent with her being an Episcopal priest (I think her jurisdictional bishop slapped her down, but only after the local bishop said he thought it was just fine and dandy.)
At some point you simply can't fight any more. For those of us who were "high" Episcopalians and had been telling ourselves all along that we were Catholics, just separated from Rome, there was one obvious refuge.
It has turned out to be a much better home than we expected or deserved.
“Of course there have been abuses on behalf of some ecclesiastical courts in granting declarations of nullity, but that was always IN VIOLATION of clear and constant and never abrogated Church doctrine and canon law. “
There have been abuses in the historical past, recent past, and will no doubt be in the future. In short, little has changed in Rome on that issue. However, it is not my quarrel or concern. The statement that Henry wanted a divorce so started a different church is wrong. It doesn’t reflect any better on Henry or other monarchs or Popes that divorces/annulments were routinely granted when palms were greased with alms, but it was the reality of the time.
Other than that - if you think the fact that Rome favored Spain over England is “devoid of all factual content” then by all means provide the “truth”.
‘Opus Dei They were Roman Rite when they left and are still Roman.’
Opus Dei is in the Roman RITE and always has been. Nor have they gone anywhere. It is a ‘personal prelature’ of the Pope. That is they have a secular bishop who leads them worldwide and are not subject to local bishops. Their members are lay people and secular priests.
Perhaps temporarily. However, considering the eternal ramifications of his immorality I would venture that only Lucifer himself considers it a "win".
I notice that the ignorant are exercising their free will opining on that which they know not.
Rome has always recognized local rites, whether Ambrosian or Mozarabic (which date from the earliest days of the Church), or the Eastern churches which recognize the authority of the Holy Father. The Roman Rite is simply the most common, the others are just as Catholic and just as valid. I've always admired the Maronite rite, which still says the words of consecration in Aramaic . . . the very words that Christ himself used at the Last Supper.
The Anglicans simply join all the other Catholic groups that are allowed to preserve their own customs in worship. In point of fact, their translation (Cranmer's brilliant work, preserved in this country in the 1928 Book of Common Prayer) is in most parts more accurate and true to the original Latin than the English translation currently in use in the Roman Rite. That's going to change this year, though, we're finally getting a decent (or at least more decent) translation.
“Well, the Spanish were at the time invading and looting and desecrating Rome. “
The Pope was indeed an effective hostage, I believe. It sort of gave the Spanish a bit of leverage.
“Then in the end the Church of England simply became a vehicle for an easy annulment/divorce whenever Henry got tired of his wives. The Church at that point was just a religious organization suited to make laws for the convenience of the monarchs lifestyle choices.”
No. The Church of England was put in place because Rome was favoring Spain for political, not religious reasons and manipulated religious elements - not appointing Bishops so that diocesian funds would go directly to Rome for political purposes. That Spain wanted to dominate England was no secret.
The formation of the Church of England mirrored the decline of political power of Rome and the rise of nation-states.
There were also notable doctrinal disputes, but really - I don’t seek to state one religion is better than another. We are free to choose in this country.
I’m happy for anyone who finds a religious home wherever they find it. I certainly wouldn’t disagree with the stated reasons for some to choose Catholicism if they feel it is best for them.
I don't think St. Thomas More and Bishop St. John Fisher would agree that a question of foreign policy was all that was at stakeas opposed to the sanctity of the sacrament of marriage and the teaching authority of the Popewhen they chose to go to their executions rather than change their minds.
You have no legitimate response, so you engage in ad hominen attacks. Nice.
Stick to the facts, A.A., rather than jump to the defense of your denomination.