9-Mar-11 - 600 ANGLICANS PREPARE TO ENTER ORDINARIATE [EWTN]

[BernadetteM]

Which said, the treatment of the ECC’s in the modern world ranges from “OOH, NEAT!!! Let’s grant the local EC parish Roman Personal Parish status as well!” through “Rome says you are not my problem, so don’t be my problem.”

Most bishops are well aware of the existence of the ECC’s, and stay out of the way. The Ordinariate, because its priests can serve as relief Roman clergy without significant additional training. It’s the same Rite, a slightly different use, and the rest of the liturgical praxis varies far more than the mass itself. In a pinch, an Anglican Ordinariate priest could use the Anglican missal in a Roman Parish and only cause issue for a few hard-headed hardliners. A significant number would note something was different, but not what.

With the new translation coming there will be less of a difference in the prayers, however the Anglican liturgies are in many respects very different in some of the traditions during the Mass… I am sure that if an Ordinariate priest celebrates the OF he will follow it exactly. Of course he won’t tell the parishioners not to hold hands or give the sign of peace etc. From my understanding the priests and the Ordinary are to give mutual respect towards how the parishes celebrate the liturgy.

There is an underlying feeling from some Bishops that they are less than happy to have an Ordinariate, however the Pope is extremely happy and I think will do all in his power to protect the Ordinariates from interference from the local diocese.

There are some Bishops who have an Anglican Use parish in their diocese and have even celebrated the Anglican Use. Hopefully once the dioceses get more familiar with the Anglican Use parishes they will be more open.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[Aramis]

With the new translation coming there will be less of a difference in the prayers, however the Anglican liturgies are in many respects very different in some of the traditions during the Mass… I am sure that if an Ordinariate priest celebrates the OF he will follow it exactly. Of course he won’t tell the parishioners not to hold hands or give the sign of peace etc. From my understanding the priests and the Ordinary are to give mutual respect towards how the parishes celebrate the liturgy.

There is an underlying feeling from some Bishops that they are less than happy to have an Ordinariate, however the Pope is extremely happy and I think will do all in his power to protect the Ordinariates from interference from the local diocese.

There are some Bishops who have an Anglican Use parish in their diocese and have even celebrated the Anglican Use. Hopefully once the dioceses get more familiar with the Anglican Use parishes they will be more open.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

The point of the ordinariate is to take that decision COMPLETELY out of the local Bishop’s hands… once the 2/3 majority passes to establish the Ordinariate, its run as a diocese, in almost the same manner as an Eastern Diocese… the local bishop, even if he hates the AUM, can not stop an AU parish of the Ordinariate from function, can’t control who the Ordinary of the Ordinariate appoints, and can’t discipline the Ordinariate’s clerics. He can grant them faculties for the Roman Missal and the EF missal, if they ask for it and the Ordinariate’s Ordinary and the local bishop agree… but he can neither demand it nor use it to steal clerics of the Ordinariate.

If a local Anglican parish opts to come in via the Ordinariate, the local Roman Bishop is again out of the loop. The Anglican Ordinary can receive them, and if he’s celibate or widowed, might even be a bishop and be able to ordain their clergy into the ordinariate; if not a bishop, he can give the legal permission needed to ordain them to ANY bishop of the Catholic Church.

The worst a local bishop can do is preach against them… at which point the bishop is likely to find his retirement called for. He has no authority over them. For His Holiness has said, this is the deal…

And the deal is, it’s as autonomous as an Eparchy, and yet of the same church Sui Iuris as the local bishop.

And there are many who want similar for the FSSP and ICRSS. (And if they are willing to come back into visible obedience and unity, the SSPX.) It is, in many ways, exactly what His Excellency Marcel Lefebvre was asking for.

 

[BrushedByAngels]

Some that I have spoken with are shell-shocked at the differences they’re seeing when they go to Catholic parishes. “Nobody sings?” I hear a lot. Abuses from priests with the Mass and lax disciplines with altar servers, poor homilies, disappointment with the verbage of the Mass, and a host of things they didn’t see coming. The seminaries are loaded with liberation theology liberals and seminarians who are in favor of women’s ordination, pro-choice, etc. I hear this from folks in the seminaries. It’s scary. I think some Anglicans are feeling like they’re leaving the Spongs behind bound for a new undiscovered country that contains Cardinal Mohoneys. It’s like The Who song: come meet the new boss, same as the old boss!

The Catholic Church has some serious issues that are painful—priestly sex scandals that don’t seem to want to go away, a massive priestly shortage, financial issues, attendance that is mostly thanks to hispanics from Mexico, etc., and a large portion of Catholics are poorly-catechized. The Catholic university system is marred with unorthodox thinking–especially insitutions like Georgetown and Notre Dame, and Anglicans coming into the Catholic Church expect things to be so conservative, orderly, unified, uniform, and I’m sure seeing a lot of things will be a wake up call after the honeymoon is over. Satan is after ALL Christians, Anglicans and Catholics alike…

Yep, I agree. Like I said in another post… When I went to an Anglican Catholic Church it felt like I was actually in a Roman Catholic Church but from a long time ago. The Anglican Catholic Church was a real eye opener for me. Our RC masses have lost so much… in more ways than one.

 

[BernadetteM]

The point of the ordinariate is to take that decision COMPLETELY out of the local Bishop’s hands… once the 2/3 majority passes to establish the Ordinariate, its run as a diocese, in almost the same manner as an Eastern Diocese… the local bishop, even if he hates the AUM, can not stop an AU parish of the Ordinariate from function, can’t control who the Ordinary of the Ordinariate appoints, and can’t discipline the Ordinariate’s clerics. He can grant them faculties for the Roman Missal and the EF missal, if they ask for it and the Ordinariate’s Ordinary and the local bishop agree… but he can neither demand it nor use it to steal clerics of the Ordinariate.

If a local Anglican parish opts to come in via the Ordinariate, the local Roman Bishop is again out of the loop. The Anglican Ordinary can receive them, and if he’s celibate or widowed, might even be a bishop and be able to ordain their clergy into the ordinariate; if not a bishop, he can give the legal permission needed to ordain them to ANY bishop of the Catholic Church.

The worst a local bishop can do is preach against them… at which point the bishop is likely to find his retirement called for. He has no authority over them. For His Holiness has said, this is the deal…

And the deal is, it’s as autonomous as an Eparchy, and yet of the same church Sui Iuris as the local bishop.

And there are many who want similar for the FSSP and ICRSS. (And if they are willing to come back into visible obedience and unity, the SSPX.) It is, in many ways, exactly what His Excellency Marcel Lefebvre was asking for.

Yes you have an understanding that many Catholics don’t have. Although most Catholics don’t know about the Ordinariate and aren’t interested, there many who are very welcoming and others who show much less charity. It seems obvious that the Holy Father has watched the Anglican Use parishes over the years and has seen that bringing Anglicans home to the Church will be beneficial for the Reform of the Reform.

I just heard on a Catholic site that there are several Cardinals now who feel that the Church must bring back the reverence that has been lost in many parishes. From what the moderator said it seems that they feel this is why many Catholics have left the Church.

As I have stated before on posts there are many Anglicans and Catholics who are very unhappy that the Church has opened the door to Anglicans and some feel that they are getting special treatment. I don’t see it that way, yes there are some Bishops who are very kind to the Anglican Use and to those coming into the Ordinariate, however there are others who seem to feel threatened. I am sure that their reasons are from completely different viewpoints. Hopefully the Anglicans won’t be targeted from both sides of the Tiber once the Ordinariate has been in place for some time. It is sad to see the anger in some people towards their brothers and sisters in Christ.

God Bless

Bernadette

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I prefer the Anglican service by a longshot. I think the English translation is far superior. But I think there are reasons why the Anglican mass is better to attend: no crying babies (childcare, what a novel idea!), less people (Catholic parishes are enormous, Anglican ones tiny), more elderly folks in the Anglican circles keep it quiet, the small numbers allow the church to let people knee at the railing to receive communion instead of the fast line-ups in Catholic parishes, in my Anglican parish the rector only says mass twice on Sunday and a couple times during the week so he is fresh, pumped-up, and rearing to go while Catholic priests are spread too thin, overworked, exhausted, and it’s hard to keep the passionate drive going after saying Mass 15 times per week. In Anglican circles singing and the choir are HUGE, they put a lot of emphasis on it. Add to that the fact that the Book of Common Prayer has lovely language and Elizabethan tones about it so it’s more joyous to hear.

The Catholic Church would have to have WAY MORE priests, smaller parishes, more parish churches, and a real overhaul of the liturgy, re-training the priests, and a fundamental change of focus and outlook on the Mass to get it to where the Anglicans are for the most part.

However, in saying all this, as GKC points out all the time, there are MANY different types of Anglicans spanning the spectrum of Calvinist to more Catholic than the pope. Attending a more low church parish would be a HUGE let-down for you and I and a Catholic Novus Ordo Mass would seem like the Middle Ages Gothic next to those calvinistic evangelical worship services! Anglicans are a “motley crew” it has been said…

Yep, I agree. Like I said in another post… When I went to an Anglican Catholic Church it felt like I was actually in a Roman Catholic Church but from a long time ago. The Anglican Catholic Church was a real eye opener for me. Our RC masses have lost so much… in more ways than one.

 

[GKC]

I prefer the Anglican service by a longshot. I think the English translation is far superior. But I think there are reasons why the Anglican mass is better to attend: no crying babies (childcare, what a novel idea!), less people (Catholic parishes are enormous, Anglican ones tiny), more elderly folks in the Anglican circles keep it quiet, the small numbers allow the church to let people knee at the railing to receive communion instead of the fast line-ups in Catholic parishes, in my Anglican parish the rector only says mass twice on Sunday and a couple times during the week so he is fresh, pumped-up, and rearing to go while Catholic priests are spread too thin, overworked, exhausted, and it’s hard to keep the passionate drive going after saying Mass 15 times per week. In Anglican circles singing and the choir are HUGE, they put a lot of emphasis on it. Add to that the fact that the Book of Common Prayer has lovely language and Elizabethan tones about it so it’s more joyous to hear.

The Catholic Church would have to have WAY MORE priests, smaller parishes, more parish churches, and a real overhaul of the liturgy, re-training the priests, and a fundamental change of focus and outlook on the Mass to get it to where the Anglicans are for the most part.

However, in saying all this, as GKC points out all the time, there are MANY different types of Anglicans spanning the spectrum of Calvinist to more Catholic than the pope. Attending a more low church parish would be a HUGE let-down for you and I and a Catholic Novus Ordo Mass would seem like the Middle Ages Gothic next to those calvinistic evangelical worship services! Anglicans are a “motley crew” it has been said…

Motley crew. I like it. It has a nice ring.

We usually have a childcare facilty available, but we don’t insist on it being used. I sort of like the occasional baby noise. Makes me overly optimistic for the future, given the high percentage of elderly in the pews.

GKC

 

[BrushedByAngels]

I prefer the Anglican service by a longshot. I think the English translation is far superior. But I think there are reasons why the Anglican mass is better to attend: no crying babies (childcare, what a novel idea!), less people (Catholic parishes are enormous, Anglican ones tiny), more elderly folks in the Anglican circles keep it quiet, the small numbers allow the church to let people knee at the railing to receive communion instead of the fast line-ups in Catholic parishes, in my Anglican parish the rector only says mass twice on Sunday and a couple times during the week so he is fresh, pumped-up, and rearing to go while Catholic priests are spread too thin, overworked, exhausted, and it’s hard to keep the passionate drive going after saying Mass 15 times per week. In Anglican circles singing and the choir are HUGE, they put a lot of emphasis on it. Add to that the fact that the Book of Common Prayer has lovely language and Elizabethan tones about it so it’s more joyous to hear.

The Catholic Church would have to have WAY MORE priests, smaller parishes, more parish churches, and a real overhaul of the liturgy, re-training the priests, and a fundamental change of focus and outlook on the Mass to get it to where the Anglicans are for the most part.

However, in saying all this, as GKC points out all the time, there are MANY different types of Anglicans spanning the spectrum of Calvinist to more Catholic than the pope. Attending a more low church parish would be a HUGE let-down for you and I and a Catholic Novus Ordo Mass would seem like the Middle Ages Gothic next to those calvinistic evangelical worship services! Anglicans are a “motley crew” it has been said…

The Anglican Catholic Church that I have attended was considered high church with all the incense, alter servers, communion rail, quiet reverence before mass, etc… and when I researched online I see that they believe in (taken from their website) the following:

"We believe in the One, Holy, Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe that there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved, and that most holy name is Jesus, Lord of heaven and earth. We believe that only through Him is the full revelation of God given to man and that we have the awesome responsibility to preach the Good News of salvation to all nations and tongues.

We believe that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the authentic record of God’s revelation to man, a revelation that is valid for all men and all time. In the Bible we have God’s revelation of Himself, His saving activity, and His moral demands. We believe that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works (2 Timothy 3:16).

We believe the Catholic Faith as set forth in the three recognized Creeds of Christendom: the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and that known as the Creed of St. Athanasius. We receive and believe them in the sense they have had always in the Catholic Church.

We believe in the holy Tradition of the Church as set forth by the ancient catholic bishops and doctors, and especially as defined by the Seven Ecumenical Councils of the undivided Church.

We hold dear the seven Sacraments of Grace, namely, the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and the Holy Eucharist, Holy Matrimony, Holy Orders, Penance, and Unction of the Sick. We believe them to be objective signs of Christ’s continued presence and saving activity among us. We believe in the holy sacrifice of the Mass and that the body and blood of Christ is truly and really present in the Holy Eucharist.

We believe in God’s gift of the apostolic ministry to His Church, asserting the necessity of a bishop in apostolic succession (or a priest ordained by such) as the celebrant of the Eucharist.

Furthermore, we hold that the Holy Orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons consist exclusively of men in accordance with Christ’s will and institution.

We believe in the sanctity of human life; that life begins at the moment of conception; and that the willful taking of that life in the womb by abortion to be a grave sin (Title XV, Canon I, 1.01 of the Canons of the Anglican Catholic Church).

We believe in the family, in the God-given sacramental bond in marriage between one man and one woman. We profess that sexual activity is to be practiced only within the bonds of Holy Matrimony.

We believe that man is very far gone from original righteousness, is in rebellion against God’s authority, and is liable to His righteous judgment. We believe that all people, individually and collectively, are responsible to their Creator for their acts, motives, thoughts, and words, since we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ.

We believe it is the duty of the Church and her members to bear witness to Christian morality, to follow it in their lives, and to reject the false standards of the world.

Lastly, the Anglican Catholic Church acknowledges that rule of faith laid down by St. Vincent of Lerins: Let us hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all, for that is truly and properly Catholic.

The Bishops of this Church are committed to seeing that the Faith of Christ is kept entire as it was given to this Church. Any assertion to the contrary has no basis in fact. We call upon all the communicants of this church to believe without reservation that deposit of Faith that has been given to the Anglican Catholic Church and to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints."

 

[BernadetteM]

The Anglican Catholic Church that I have attended was considered high church with all the incense, alter servers, communion rail, quiet reverence before mass, etc… and when I researched online I see that they believe in (taken from their website) the following:

"We believe in the One, Holy, Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe that there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved, and that most holy name is Jesus, Lord of heaven and earth. We believe that only through Him is the full revelation of God given to man and that we have the awesome responsibility to preach the Good News of salvation to all nations and tongues.

We believe that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the authentic record of God’s revelation to man, a revelation that is valid for all men and all time. In the Bible we have God’s revelation of Himself, His saving activity, and His moral demands. We believe that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works (2 Timothy 3:16).

We believe the Catholic Faith as set forth in the three recognized Creeds of Christendom: the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and that known as the Creed of St. Athanasius. We receive and believe them in the sense they have had always in the Catholic Church.

We believe in the holy Tradition of the Church as set forth by the ancient catholic bishops and doctors, and especially as defined by the Seven Ecumenical Councils of the undivided Church.

We hold dear the seven Sacraments of Grace, namely, the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and the Holy Eucharist, Holy Matrimony, Holy Orders, Penance, and Unction of the Sick. We believe them to be objective signs of Christ’s continued presence and saving activity among us. We believe in the holy sacrifice of the Mass and that the body and blood of Christ is truly and really present in the Holy Eucharist.

We believe in God’s gift of the apostolic ministry to His Church, asserting the necessity of a bishop in apostolic succession (or a priest ordained by such) as the celebrant of the Eucharist.

Furthermore, we hold that the Holy Orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons consist exclusively of men in accordance with Christ’s will and institution.

We believe in the sanctity of human life; that life begins at the moment of conception; and that the willful taking of that life in the womb by abortion to be a grave sin (Title XV, Canon I, 1.01 of the Canons of the Anglican Catholic Church).

We believe in the family, in the God-given sacramental bond in marriage between one man and one woman. We profess that sexual activity is to be practiced only within the bonds of Holy Matrimony.

We believe that man is very far gone from original righteousness, is in rebellion against God’s authority, and is liable to His righteous judgment. We believe that all people, individually and collectively, are responsible to their Creator for their acts, motives, thoughts, and words, since we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ.

We believe it is the duty of the Church and her members to bear witness to Christian morality, to follow it in their lives, and to reject the false standards of the world.

Lastly, the Anglican Catholic Church acknowledges that rule of faith laid down by St. Vincent of Lerins: Let us hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all, for that is truly and properly Catholic.

The Bishops of this Church are committed to seeing that the Faith of Christ is kept entire as it was given to this Church. Any assertion to the contrary has no basis in fact. We call upon all the communicants of this church to believe without reservation that deposit of Faith that has been given to the Anglican Catholic Church and to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints."

That particular Anglican group of over 80different groups worldwide appears to accept most of the catholic beliefs. However if they truely believed in the Catholic Church they would become Catholic. The Church considers their priesthood to not be valid, that means that the priest cannot confect the True Sacramental Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, nor forgive sins in the Sacrament of Penance, nor the Sacrament of Confirmation.

The main problem for many Anglicans is they don’t like authority, meaning the papacy. There is no real leadership within these churches. The only person that I have seen to speak out to the whole world on moral issues is the Pope.

God Bless

Bernadette

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

And Anglicans would reply with the idea that one can indeed be catholic without the pope. They don’t believe unity with the See of Rome is the litmus test for Catholicity. Orthodox say as much.

I agree with you that the Pope is the loudest moral voice in the world. Sadly, in an age where the Church has dropped the ball and has been so corrupt with this pedophilia scandal, the pope is losing credibility in the eyes of many.

That particular Anglican group of over 80different groups worldwide appears to accept most of the catholic beliefs. However if they truely believed in the Catholic Church they would become Catholic. The Church considers their priesthood to not be valid, that means that the priest cannot confect the True Sacramental Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, nor forgive sins in the Sacrament of Penance, nor the Sacrament of Confirmation.

The main problem for many Anglicans is they don’t like authority, meaning the papacy. There is no real leadership within these churches. The only person that I have seen to speak out to the whole world on moral issues is the Pope.

God Bless

Bernadette

 

[benidict]

I hear ya. In my experiences apart from the internet, Catholics and Episcopalians usually get along pretty well, with a few notable exceptions. But here, mentioning the word “Episcopal” is like waving a red cape in front of a bull.

Only the pro gay, pro abortion, liberal Episcopalians. We do however get along with the Conservative wing of your communion quite nicely. On the internet, and off. Peace

 

[BrushedByAngels]

And Anglicans would reply with the idea that one can indeed be catholic without the pope. They don’t believe unity with the See of Rome is the litmus test for Catholicity. Orthodox say as much.

I agree with you that the Pope is the loudest moral voice in the world. Sadly, in an age where the Church has dropped the ball and has been so corrupt with this pedophilia scandal, the pope is losing credibility in the eyes of many.

Yes, this is true! That’s all I ever hear from my co-workers and friends talk about the Pope and how he downplayed the sexual abuse scandals all because he wanted the church to appear sinless. I did some investigating on my part and I was highly disappointed.

From what I was told the Anglican Catholic Church was asked, but they refused, their answer being that they do not want ACC properties sold off to pay for the RC pedophile scandals.

 

[BernadetteM]

Yes, this is true! That’s all I ever hear from my co-workers and friends talk about the Pope and how he downplayed the sexual abuse scandals all because he wanted the church to appear sinless. I did some investigating on my part and I was highly disappointed.

From what I was told the Anglican Catholic Church was asked, but they refused, their answer being that they do not want ACC properties sold off to pay for the RC pedophile scandals.

Just curious, who asked them? From what I know only those who on their own initiative petitioned Rome.

The reason they gave doesn’t seem to be accurate either. Pope Benedict has been proven to not be part of any cover up. I can’t recall the article, however, before he was the Pope he issued a paper on sexual abuse.

People love to smear all Catholics and especially the Pope. It would be great if others would clean up their own houses, which the Church has been doing. Even the new accusations are from 15 to 20 years ago. I am not excusing any abuse, but it is a reality in all churches, just kept more quiet

Bernadette

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The only problem is, in saying that others should mind their own business and clean their own rooms, it ends up being excuse-making and an attempt to keep accountability at a minimum. The media, who are usually hated and lambasted in here by many, have led the charge exposing these disgusting cover-ups and sins. I’m glad they did. The media often gets it wrong but they were right to hold the Catholic Church to a high standard and go after the lies and coverups. Who will keep these bishops, vatican officials, cardinals, and pastors accountable if the Church doesn’t? And while the Pope has not been implicated in a cover-up, he knowingly played a part in taking forever and a day to act as Cardinal Ratzinger when he was the head of the key office that deals with such abuse. It’s well-chronicled that he took as long as a year to respond to many of these and in many rejected the bishops’ requests to defrock/laisize these evil priests. He was very ineffective. The only reason he is doing something now is the $$$$ lawsuits and outside exposure, the pressure to do something is unavoidable. The Church totally failed on this.

I have no problem re-opening 15-20 year old cases also. These villains who ruined children’s lives should be made to pay.

Just curious, who asked them? From what I know only those who on their own initiative petitioned Rome.

The reason they gave doesn’t seem to be accurate either. Pope Benedict has been proven to not be part of any cover up. I can’t recall the article, however, before he was the Pope he issued a paper on sexual abuse.

People love to smear all Catholics and especially the Pope. It would be great if others would clean up their own houses, which the Church has been doing. Even the new accusations are from 15 to 20 years ago. I am not excusing any abuse, but it is a reality in all churches, just kept more quiet

Bernadette

 

[Aramis]

The only problem is, in saying that others should mind their own business and clean their own rooms, it ends up being excuse-making and an attempt to keep accountability at a minimum. The media, who are usually hated and lambasted in here by many, have led the charge exposing these disgusting cover-ups and sins. I’m glad they did. The media often gets it wrong but they were right to hold the Catholic Church to a high standard and go after the lies and coverups. Who will keep these bishops, vatican officials, cardinals, and pastors accountable if the Church doesn’t? And while the Pope has not been implicated in a cover-up, he knowingly played a part in taking forever and a day to act as Cardinal Ratzinger when he was the head of the key office that deals with such abuse. It’s well-chronicled that he took as long as a year to respond to many of these and in many rejected the bishops’ requests to defrock/laisize these evil priests. He was very ineffective. The only reason he is doing something now is the $$$$ lawsuits and outside exposure, the pressure to do something is unavoidable. The Church totally failed on this.

I have no problem re-opening 15-20 year old cases also. These villains who ruined children’s lives should be made to pay.

The problem is multifold, and your logic is flawed.

In many cases, the perpetrators are dead. We, the faithful, are the ones paying, not the priest-offenders, via the Chancery’s coffers.

Even when still alive, the vast majority of these men convicted are indigent aside from their pittance of a retirement. Again, the church pays in their stead.

The bishops who did most of the provable coverups are dead. I suspect they wish they’d had an anchor-induced dive instead of a bishopric… but the mortal courts have no sway over them.

In some cases, the church settles to get it out of the press, despite prosecutors breaking the law and/or suborning perjury. (An Anchorage retired Monsignor was sued under the recovered memory exception, but the suit was not dropped when it was revealed that the “victim” had in fact filed criminal complaint at the time of the supposed molestation, and been found to have been non-credible, and no evidence was available at the time; the recovered memory statute does not allow for refiling 20 years later when the complaint was unprosecutable at the time for lack of evidence. Now, while said monsignor DID provide alcohol to underage individuals, myself included, I’ve never seen any evidence that he molested anyone. Oh, and the original claim? Made after Monsignor dismissed him from serving; apparent sour grapes.) The press treated Monsignor as if guilty from the accusation.

Further, the press avoids the even more prolific protestant sexual abuse issue… the very same sources treated a police officer as “alleged” and sowed doubt whilst he was being tried for rape by abuse of authority… following his dismissal for cause for same… but had implied that Monsignor had been a sexual predator before a trial judge had even been scheduled! “The priest who abused him was not available for comment.”

Now, Gurney, the press is pursuing an anti-catholic agenda openly, and you are praising them for it?

 

[Aramis]

I would like to ask my fellow Episcopalians how many Episcopal priests they personally know who were once Roman Catholic. I can think of two in my diocese, at least.

The road between Rome and Canterbury travels in both directions.

I know of four in Alaska… but not a one of them was clergy in the Catholic Church.

I know of one former Catholic Priest turned Anglican priest… Fr. Cutie. I’ve read of a dozen or so in the US in similar circumstances… abandoning their promises of celibacy, and going anglican to be allowed to marry their lovers.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I beg to differ, Aramis. You accuse me of praising the media for exposing sex abuse in the Catholic Church and for exposing bishops covering it up? You bet. You seem to want me to be an apologist for the Church’s behavior. I will not. You are correct when you say that the laity are the ones paying $$$ for this. We are the ones putting the money in the coffers on Sunday that is going to pay for the settlements. Personally I am not in favor of settling. I say hand them over to the authorities unless there is ample evidence that they are innocent or plenty of reasonable doubt. This Church needs to purge itself of this filth, not pay it off. You made the case that all these bishops are dead. Last time I checked, Cardinal Bernard Law is alive and well. Cardinal Mahoney has allegedly covered-up the predatorial priest Oliver O’Grady. Last time I checked, Mahoney was breathing. Anthony Bevilacqua of Philadelphia is alive and well. Several of the folks involved with this in Ireland and other countries are alive as well. But it wasn’t only the priests or only the bishops, it was also the hierarchs at the Vatican under Cardinal Ratzinger that sat on their thumbs with this.

Are the newspaper and tv media all angels and is everything they do and say just and full of good intentions? Heck no. Nobody is that naive. But is everything they report a conspiracy to destroy the See of Peter. Nope.

I don’t appreciate you saying that I’m supporting an “anti-catholic agenda.” I am supporting an anti-pedophile agenda and if Catholics are the ones committing it, I’m too intellectually honest and fair and out for justice to try and become an apologist at all costs. Please don’t make this personal, just stick to the issue.

The problem is multifold, and your logic is flawed.

In many cases, the perpetrators are dead. We, the faithful, are the ones paying, not the priest-offenders, via the Chancery’s coffers.

Even when still alive, the vast majority of these men convicted are indigent aside from their pittance of a retirement. Again, the church pays in their stead.

The bishops who did most of the provable coverups are dead. I suspect they wish they’d had an anchor-induced dive instead of a bishopric… but the mortal courts have no sway over them.

In some cases, the church settles to get it out of the press, despite prosecutors breaking the law and/or suborning perjury. (An Anchorage retired Monsignor was sued under the recovered memory exception, but the suit was not dropped when it was revealed that the “victim” had in fact filed criminal complaint at the time of the supposed molestation, and been found to have been non-credible, and no evidence was available at the time; the recovered memory statute does not allow for refiling 20 years later when the complaint was unprosecutable at the time for lack of evidence. Now, while said monsignor DID provide alcohol to underage individuals, myself included, I’ve never seen any evidence that he molested anyone. Oh, and the original claim? Made after Monsignor dismissed him from serving; apparent sour grapes.) The press treated Monsignor as if guilty from the accusation.

Further, the press avoids the even more prolific protestant sexual abuse issue… the very same sources treated a police officer as “alleged” and sowed doubt whilst he was being tried for rape by abuse of authority… following his dismissal for cause for same… but had implied that Monsignor had been a sexual predator before a trial judge had even been scheduled! “The priest who abused him was not available for comment.”

Now, Gurney, the press is pursuing an anti-catholic agenda openly, and you are praising them for it?

 

[pablope]

Yes, this is true! That’s all I ever hear from my co-workers and friends talk about the Pope and how he downplayed the sexual abuse scandals all because he wanted the church to appear sinless. I did some investigating on my part and I was highly disappointed.

From what I was told the Anglican Catholic Church was asked, but they refused, their answer being that they do not want ACC properties sold off to pay for the RC pedophile scandals.

Are you talking about the Anglican-Lutheran CC? There is a recent thread about them. They petitioned and were asked to join the Anglican Ordinariate in the USA as they entry or communion with Rome.

 

[SnakeMauler]

Finally people realize that God’s real church wasn’t intended to be founded in “England.”

 

[nhylan]

Finally people realize that God’s real church wasn’t intended to be founded in “England.”

Snake… you don’t know what your talking about.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t follow?

Finally people realize that God’s real church wasn’t intended to be founded in “England.”