Traditionalists preparing for Catholic conversion

Church of England Newspaper ^ | 4 December 2003 | staff writer

[dangus]

He seems to be pushing for one, but there alreasy is an Anglican-use liturgy. I'm pretty sure the only distinction between that and a full-blown "Anglican Rite" is that there is no Anglican patriarch. Seeing how the patriarchates are based on the apostles, I'm not sure there could be one. Unless Joseph of Arimathea gets a promotion. (Little King Arthur dig.)

[dangus]

Union with.
One can unite with another and submit to that other. (e.g., husbands and wives in the Pauline letters.)
However, they do mean submission as part of that union. The Roman church has offered to be in Eucharistic communion with the Eastern churches without requiring submission to the Pope. (COMMunion is the bringing of two or several together. UNION is a singularity.)

[dangus]

Not a first... There are seven other Uniate churches, collectively known as "Byzantine Catholics" (because from the Roman-Byzantine schism of 1052). It would be the first formerly *Protestant* uniate church, as opposed to the six formerly *Orthodox" churches.

If memory and understanding (of who is what) serves me well, they are:
Maronite
Chaldean
Ukranian
Syrian
Melchite
Romanian
and Ruthenian.

I've seen reference to a "Russian Catholic" church, but I believe this refers to the "Ukranian."

[dangus]

And Ken, I hate to dignify that comment with a response, but Anglican-rite Catholics would be able to be married. (Not that celibacy is a cause of the perversions, but you bigots seem to think that it is. The non-celibate Anglicans have loads of sex scandals too, per capita.)

Herm:
I'm surprised! Do you really think that a seperate rite is possible? Wouldn't there need to be an apostolic patriarch? Aren't we really talking about an "Anglican-use" liturgy? Or maybe we can get the Romanians or the Melchites to adopt our Anglican fellows?

[ahadams2]

Hermann does have a point with regard to the Anglo-Catholic side of the aisle - tract 90 pretty much defines what they teach on the 39 Articles, and from the Evangelical perspective (like bobjam I'm from the Evangelical side, though I'm Charismatic, and I don't know if bobjam is) anyway, from the Evangelical perspective tract 90 intentionally redefines the 39 Articles in counter-reformational ways.

OTOH tract 90 is a good illustration of why the Anglo-Catholic portions of at least the western provinces of the Anglican Communion may eventually end up reconnecting with Rome; and why the rest of us wont be following suit.

[dangus]

Celibacy is not a doctrine, and non-Latin Roman Catholics do not require it of their priests. Purgatory is not infallibly defined. The Mariology is mostly non-mandatory devotions, although the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception are infallibly defined.

So, there will need to be some bending, but not an impossible amount. Papal infallibility is the biggest hurdle.

[ahadams2]

I suppose one could go with Joseph of Arimathea as one possibility for the origins of an Anglican Patriarchate, though a bit more feasable solution might be to trace back to the pre-whitby Celtic Church, much of which was due to converts coming back from long trading journeys to the Middle East. Although I'm not certain exactly how to one might document it, these contacts would seem to have to date back to the Apostolic period, in order for the Church to have had a significant presence prior to Augustine's arrival, which it did. Just thinking out loud here, of course....
[note to the casual reader: that's Augustine of Canterbury, not Augustine of Hippo.]

[dangus]

>>How is papal infallibility a "limited concept"?

The Pope is fallible on all opinions and disciplines. Infallibility is limited in that it applies only to doctrine issued from the chair (authority) of Saint Peter. The Pope will only declare infallibly when he senses a historic and a modern consensus among the bishops, who are heirs of the apostles.

Reading the declaration on abortion, the Pope establishes that he has been asked to rule on the matter by the bishops, and that he has contacted all the bishops (!) on the issue. As such, this is different from an ecumenical council only in its form, and that concensus already exists (whereas occasionally the concensus emerges through deliberation in a council.)

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Cardinal kasper said a uniate rite will be erected if "a whole diocese or province were to convert".

If FIF can free itself from the ECUSA and Anglican Church in England and Canada, and brings over the TAC, I can't see how this would not count also.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Seeing how the patriarchates are based on the apostles, I'm not sure there could be one

It would require the erection of a "Major Archbishop" for a seperate rite, not a Patriarchate. Or even simply an "Apostolic Administration" within the Roman Rite.

And not all Patriarchates are Apostolic in origin - see the Patriarch of Babylon.

[dangus]

Coredemptrix does not mean we are redeemed through Mary *or* Christ, but rather that we are brought to Christ by Mary as we are brought to Christ through the workings of the Church. I do doubt that it will be infallibly defined, since it has been considered in the past.

While I cannot confirm that the belief was popularly established in England, without further research, the doctrines of the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception did not originate in the 19th Century. They were infallibly declared then.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

There are seven other Uniate churches, collectively known as "Byzantine Catholics" (because from the Roman-Byzantine schism of 1052).

A few corrections.

Some uniates are ex-Monophysites (The Syrians, Copts, Ethiopians, and Malankarese) or ex-"Nestorians" (Chaldeans and Malabarese). The Maronites are ex-Monothelites.

The Italo-Greek Church (Grottaferetta, et al) has never been in schism from Rome.

Great source of info here - http://www.cnewa.org/ecc-introduction.htm

[dangus]

I was joking about promoting Joseph to "apostle." Since he did, according to Arthurian legend, establish a church in England, one could then assert that England was his See, as each of the apostles had a See.

[Eala]

Thank you!

[ahadams2]

Hey we Anglicans take these sorts of things semi-seriously! :-)

[trad_anglican]

Not a first... There are seven other Uniate churches

I didn't mean it would be the first uniate church. Substitute the words former and latter in my post # 10 for the words first and second and my meaning will become clearer.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

OTOH tract 90 is a good illustration of why the Anglo-Catholic portions of at least the western provinces of the Anglican Communion may eventually end up reconnecting with Rome; and why the rest of us wont be following suit.

Out of curiosity, what has all this (if anything) to do with the Unification between the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America??

[trad_anglican]

Out of curiosity, what has all this (if anything) to do with the Unification between the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America??

Little, and perhaps nothing. Neither of those groups are involved in the talks that the article is describing. It is nice to see Anglican groups coming togehter instead of splitting apart, though.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Little, and perhaps nothing. Neither of those groups are involved in the talks that the article is describing. It is nice to see Anglican groups coming togehter instead of splitting apart, though.

My kid brother is pretty happy about it. He's Reformed Episcopalian, and I believe that the RE's have always sought re-union with Canterbury -- just never if it meant having anything to do with the ECUSA. As I understand it, uniting with the Anglican Province of America allows the Reformed Episcopals to return to communion with Canterbury -- in the manner of an "end run" around the ECUSA, so to speak.

That's just my understanding, I could have the details wrong.

[trad_anglican]

As I understand it, uniting with the Anglican Province of America allows the Reformed Episcopals to return to communion with Canterbury -- in the manner of an "end run" around the ECUSA, so to speak.

I don't believe that the Anglican Province of America is in communion with Canterbury.