Anglican Church in America (TAC) and the Polish National Catholic Church

[RevDrNorth]

I wonder with all of the struggle of the TAC/ACA to move towards union with Rome (and the constant expectation of an announcement…over and over), why they do not look towards forming an alliance with the Polish National Catholic Church?

The PNCC has valid orders (according to Rome) and has limited intercommunion. They are seen in a way similar to the Eastern Orthodox in that in extraordinary circumstances the PNCC and Catholics can receive sacraments from one another.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_National_Catholic_Church

This would seem to be beneficial to both groups. The PNCC was for a while a member of the Anglican Communion (left over the ordination of women, etc). They hold to Catholic doctrine as does the ACA/TAC and have a married priesthood. They would then simply become part of the process as the PNCC moves closer to Rome (the PNCC has twice yearly meetings and on going dialogue with Rome). The infusion of the ACA parishes and the PNCC would give them both great greater numbers.

youtube.com/watch?v=UbICsKjVXbY
youtube.com/watch?v=bkllZ_O1JaU

 

[bauerice]

I believe with the conservative ACNA now in full bloom, a lot will change. They are trying to become a full member of the Anglican Communion. I believe if this happens there may be a lot of splinter Anglican Groups begin intercommunion. They also may pull in some of the independent Catholic groups as well.

 

[Hesychios]

…why they do not look towards forming an alliance with the Polish National Catholic Church?

I had thought of the same thing before, they are like kindred spirits. Why not merge?

Phyletism perhaps? But it has been so many generations these groups should be long since past that nonsense. Both groups have pretty mixed ethnic composition these days, despite their names.

The TAC might be anxious to preserve it’s “Englishness”, while the PNCC might be anxious to preserve it’s “Polishness”. They are actually using two different versions of the Latin liturgy. The PNCC, an American church, uses the Gregorian “Tridentine” liturgy in English (and Polish in some places) while the TAC is international in scope, but uses the Sarum-based Anglican liturgy.

On another note, the PNCC has been negotiating with Latin bishops off-and-on for decades, but they seem less enamored of the Papacy than the TAC at present. Theologically the PNCC might be more comfortable in communion with the Orthodox, but the first generations of that group would have been strongly prejudiced against the (mostly Orthodox) Russians and Ukrainians. That does not seem to be the case for the TAC, these would have little to no prejudice against Orthodox nationalities in general while at the same time are more committed to the idea of ‘Papacy’.

Origins have a lot to do with this. The PNCC was born under the cloud of abuse of their communities by Latin (mostly Irish) bishops, within decades of Vatican I. There was still some residual shock and doubt over the Papal dogmas in the ranks of the priesthood at the time. The bad handling of the Polish immigrants triggered the schism, just like similarly bad handling of Ruthenian and Ukrainian Catholics provoked a return to Orthodoxy in the same time period.

The TAC shares none of that recent history, it seems to owe more to the Oxford Movement than anything else. They were not directly impacted by Vatican I, nor did they suffer discrimination at the hands of Latin bishops within memory.

They really should talk to each other, it might help them both come to some resolution. They are not apples and oranges, but they are certainly two very different kinds of apple.

 

[GKC]

I wonder with all of the struggle of the TAC/ACA to move towards union with Rome (and the constant expectation of an announcement…over and over), why they do not look towards forming an alliance with the Polish National Catholic Church?

The PNCC has valid orders (according to Rome) and has limited intercommunion. They are seen in a way similar to the Eastern Orthodox in that in extraordinary circumstances the PNCC and Catholics can receive sacraments from one another.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_National_Catholic_Church

This would seem to be beneficial to both groups. The PNCC was for a while a member of the Anglican Communion (left over the ordination of women, etc). They hold to Catholic doctrine as does the ACA/TAC and have a married priesthood. They would then simply become part of the process as the PNCC moves closer to Rome (the PNCC has twice yearly meetings and on going dialogue with Rome). The infusion of the ACA parishes and the PNCC would give them both great greater numbers.

youtube.com/watch?v=UbICsKjVXbY
youtube.com/watch?v=bkllZ_O1JaU

The PNCC were in communion with Canterbury, but were not part of the Communion itself. Otherwise, I don’t know.

GKC

 

[GKC]

I had thought of the same thing before, they are like kindred spirits. Why not merge?

Phyletism perhaps? But it has been so many generations these groups should be long since past that nonsense. Both groups have pretty mixed ethnic composition these days, despite their names.

The TAC might be anxious to preserve it’s “Englishness”, while the PNCC might be anxious to preserve it’s “Polishness”. They are actually using two different versions of the Latin liturgy. The PNCC, an American church, uses the Gregorian “Tridentine” liturgy in English (and Polish in some places) while the TAC is international in scope, but uses the Sarum-based Anglican liturgy.

On another note, the PNCC has been negotiating with Latin bishops off-and-on for decades, but they seem less enamored of the Papacy than the TAC at present. Theologically the PNCC might be more comfortable in communion with the Orthodox, but the first generations of that group would have been strongly prejudiced against the (mostly Orthodox) Russians and Ukrainians. That does not seem to be the case for the TAC, these would have little to no prejudice against Orthodox nationalities in general while at the same time are more committed to the idea of ‘Papacy’.

Origins have a lot to do with this. The PNCC was born under the cloud of abuse of their communities by Latin (mostly Irish) bishops, within decades of Vatican I. There was still some residual shock and doubt over the Papal dogmas in the ranks of the priesthood at the time. The bad handling of the Polish immigrants triggered the schism, just like similarly bad handling of Ruthenian and Ukrainian Catholics provoked a return to Orthodoxy in the same time period.

The TAC shares none of that recent history, it seems to owe more to the Oxford Movement than anything else. They were not directly impacted by Vatican I, nor did they suffer discrimination at the hands of Latin bishops within memory.

They really should talk to each other, it might help them both come to some resolution. They are not apples and oranges, but they are certainly two very different kinds of apple.

I like the way this sounds.

GKCX

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I believe with the conservative ACNA now in full bloom, a lot will change. They are trying to become a full member of the Anglican Communion. I believe if this happens there may be a lot of splinter Anglican Groups begin intercommunion. They also may pull in some of the independent Catholic groups as well.

Either that or the ACNA will splinter itself over time due to the big enormous elephant in the room that they all try to sweep under the rug and avoid…women’s ordination. There is murmuring and some big disagreements about this topic already in the ACNA. They’re becoming the Episcopal Church reloaded…give 'em time…they’ll split up and have in-fighting…

 

[Peter_J]

I wonder with all of the struggle of the TAC/ACA to move towards union with Rome (and the constant expectation of an announcement…over and over), why they do not look towards forming an alliance with the Polish National Catholic Church?

I’ve wondered about that too.

The PNCC has valid orders (according to Rome) and has limited intercommunion. They are seen in a way similar to the Eastern Orthodox in that in extraordinary circumstances the PNCC and Catholics can receive sacraments from one another.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_National_Catholic_Church

This would seem to be beneficial to both groups. The PNCC was for a while a member of the Anglican Communion (left over the ordination of women, etc).

The PNCC used to be a member of the Union of Utrecht, not the Anglican Communion.

 

[RevDrNorth]

Yes, the ACA/TAC seems to have more in common with the PNCC than differences. Certainly, PNCC recognition and dialogue with the Catholic Church is further along. The two of them joining together would appear to offer benefits to both of them.

Peter, yes but the Union of Utrecht had a sort of intercommunion with the Anglican Communion and therefore so did the PNCC. Of course the PNCC pulled out of the Union of Utrecht as did at least one other I can recall over the issue of the ordination of women and other liberal drift. My terminology was not clear (sorry).

 

[mark_a]

I wonder with all of the struggle of the TAC/ACA to move towards union with Rome (and the constant expectation of an announcement…over and over), why they do not look towards forming an alliance with the Polish National Catholic Church?

A move toward unity anywhere by any non-Catholics seems like it would be a good thing for the Catholic Church.

 

[Peter_J]

Peter, yes but the Union of Utrecht had a sort of intercommunion with the Anglican Communion and therefore so did the PNCC.

Agreed.

 

[RevDrNorth]

A move toward unity anywhere by any non-Catholics seems like it would be a good thing for the Catholic Church.

And in the case of the ACA/TAC and the PNCC, they are moving toward unity with the RCC (though many sticking points). The PNCC actually has limited intercommunion with the RCC (something the ACA can benefit from).

The ACA and PNCC could develop some sort of intercommunion that respects both of their traditions. That unit would effectively give the ACA a seat at the twice a year talks between the PNCC and the RCC. Here is info on the talks pnccsatx.org/rich_text_7.html

I suspect that as GKC has pointed out before, not much seems to really be happening in the TAC/RCC issue. Many problems are evident in the process as pointed out in another link posted somewhere on this forum. Also, in one sense why bother with the ACA/TAC when Benedict XVI can start from scratch even if he were to create a personal prelature. With upset Anglo Catholics in the Anglican Communion, this may well be beneficial but if he starts from scratch he does not have the TAC baggage (divorced Catholic clergy and so on). Benedict could create the Prelature and then put one of the current former Anglican Priests (now Roman Catholic priest) in charge of it. Then possibly stream line the process for conversion and reception of Anglican clergy BUT with greater control over how that is done. I imagine it may have to be set up to receive (as the Ant Orthodox Church did) congregations who go through RCIA and stay intact (along with clergy). In this way if TAC wants to become part of it, their congregations and clergy could go through the process of reception without the RCC having to accept the whole TAC communion.

 

[GKC]

Agreed.

The intercommunion between Utrecht and the Anglican Communion was pursuant to the Agreement of Bonn, in 1932, which led to joint episcopal consecrations and the Dutch Touch. The PNCC didn’t sign on to the Bonn Agreement until 1946, which marked the beginning of the joint Anglican/PNCC consecrations.

GKC

 

[mark_a]

And in the case of the ACA/TAC and the PNCC, they are moving toward unity with the RCC (though many sticking points). The PNCC actually has limited intercommunion with the RCC (something the ACA can benefit from).

The ACA and PNCC could develop some sort of intercommunion that respects both of their traditions. That unit would effectively give the ACA a seat at the twice a year talks between the PNCC and the RCC. Here is info on the talks pnccsatx.org/rich_text_7.html

I suspect that as GKC has pointed out before, not much seems to really be happening in the TAC/RCC issue. Many problems are evident in the process as pointed out in another link posted somewhere on this forum. Also, in one sense why bother with the ACA/TAC when Benedict XVI can start from scratch even if he were to create a personal prelature. With upset Anglo Catholics in the Anglican Communion, this may well be beneficial but if he starts from scratch he does not have the TAC baggage (divorced Catholic clergy and so on). Benedict could create the Prelature and then put one of the current former Anglican Priests (now Roman Catholic priest) in charge of it. Then possibly stream line the process for conversion and reception of Anglican clergy BUT with greater control over how that is done. I imagine it may have to be set up to receive (as the Ant Orthodox Church did) congregations who go through RCIA and stay intact (along with clergy). In this way if TAC wants to become part of it, their congregations and clergy could go through the process of reception without the RCC having to accept the whole TAC communion.

That’s a nice job of getting your point across. But man, the issue complicated!

 

[RevDrNorth]

That’s a nice job of getting your point across. But man, the issue complicated!

Anglicanism IS complicated

 

[LJinPA]

I see the last post to this thread was in mid August. In light of the big news last week about the Pope’s new provisions for traditional Anglicans if this will have some effect on the Polish National Catholics. There have been years of friendly talks between the RC and the PNCC with a recent declaration of intercommunion and the validity of their sacraments is recognized (I’m pretty Father Hodur, their founder became a bishop with Old Catholic lineage.) Supposedly the PNCC broke off for church government issues rather then dogmatic ones but there are some differences: The PNCC allows or at least tolerates birth control, is somewhat more flexible with divirce and remarriage, and does confession differently for adults, there is a general absolution during the mass and no need to enumerate personal sins to a priest.
There are talks and hopes on both sides for full communion. But if there is I would think many RC’s would be running to PNCC masses to get absolution and it would imply that whatever a Polish Ntl Catholic is allowed to do a Roman can too. (Like trying to boil milk and water on 2 sides of a pot but keeping the 2 seperate.)

Also there is something unique about the PNCC. Right now there is a polarization between “ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal” and other similar polarized camps in all denominations right now (One side for example resembling radical Islam on the role of women… and an opposite camp praying to Mother Earth). Also almost every breakaway Catholic group seems to be either ultra-traditionalist and angry, or ultra-liberal (to the point they might as well have full communion with the kitchen sink) and both sides focused on a few pet issues. On the other hand the PNCC broke off from Utrecht over women’s ordinations yet is pragmatic on the issues I mentioned above. It seems to be one of the few “moderate” or “via media” churches left (although RC’s and Orthodox seem to be holding together well also). Could the PNCC become “the new Anglicans”?

The PNCC is small though. I live in the region where the PNCC all started and probably has one of the highest concentrations of them yet I only know one family in the past who belonged to it.
Also most people I know here are Roman Catholic and at least a small majority do not agree with the magisterium on everything… Yet I never see anyone joining the PNCC. I knew of one lady who joined an Episcopal church but usually dissenting Catholics either stay with Rome or leave organized religion alotgether.

These are just random thoughts, I’m not passing judgment either way but curious as to what the impact of this Anglican Provision will be…

 

[GKC]

I see the last post to this thread was in mid August. In light of the big news last week about the Pope’s new provisions for traditional Anglicans if this will have some effect on the Polish National Catholics. There have been years of friendly talks between the RC and the PNCC with a recent declaration of intercommunion and the validity of their sacraments is recognized (I’m pretty Father Hodur, their founder became a bishop with Old Catholic lineage.) Supposedly the PNCC broke off for church government issues rather then dogmatic ones but there are some differences: The PNCC allows or at least tolerates birth control, is somewhat more flexible with divirce and remarriage, and does confession differently for adults, there is a general absolution during the mass and no need to enumerate personal sins to a priest.
There are talks and hopes on both sides for full communion. But if there is I would think many RC’s would be running to PNCC masses to get absolution and it would imply that whatever a Polish Ntl Catholic is allowed to do a Roman can too. (Like trying to boil milk and water on 2 sides of a pot but keeping the 2 seperate.)

Also there is something unique about the PNCC. Right now there is a polarization between “ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal” and other similar polarized camps in all denominations right now (One side for example resembling radical Islam on the role of women… and an opposite camp praying to Mother Earth). Also almost every breakaway Catholic group seems to be either ultra-traditionalist and angry, or ultra-liberal (to the point they might as well have full communion with the kitchen sink) and both sides focused on a few pet issues. On the other hand the PNCC broke off from Utrecht over women’s ordinations yet is pragmatic on the issues I mentioned above. It seems to be one of the few “moderate” or “via media” churches left (although RC’s and Orthodox seem to be holding together well also). Could the PNCC become “the new Anglicans”?

The PNCC is small though. I live in the region where the PNCC all started and probably has one of the highest concentrations of them yet I only know one family in the past who belonged to it.
Also most people I know here are Roman Catholic and at least a small majority do not agree with the magisterium on everything… Yet I never see anyone joining the PNCC. I knew of one lady who joined an Episcopal church but usually dissenting Catholics either stay with Rome or leave organized religion alotgether.

These are just random thoughts, I’m not passing judgment either way but curious as to what the impact of this Anglican Provision will be…

Fr. Hodur was consecrated by three Utrecht OC bishops in 1907. He was the founder of one strand of the PNCC. Bishop Kozlowski, consecrated by those same three OC bishops, in 1897, was the founder of a separate PNCC group. These two groups united in 1907, when Bishop Kozlowski died.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus

 

[LJinPA]

I must also point out that the PNCC is also pro-life. Many other Independant Catholic and “high-church” protestant groups are not. There is also a Mexican National Catholic Church which has similar positions to the PNCC but is not in communion…
I looked at the sites for many independent “high churches” and others and it seems gays, gender, and abortion are the big litmus test issues of the day and when you look at the websites of both the “traditionalist” and “modernist” websites one of the first things you see is where they stand on those issues and sometimes little else. The PNCC is more comprehensive and has deep roots. Father Hodur whether you agree with him or not seems to have a well thought out theology.

Some of these other groups I suspect have more clergy than laity and others seem to think the “Dutch Touch” is magic and if you use it you can ordain dogs and cats bishops and still have valid sacraments. OK thats tongue in cheek.

I think part of these divisions is that many want their “individual freedom of thought” away from Papal infallability but then want everyone else to see it their way. As if they break from Papal authority because they “want to give freedom to all from the pope” but than “They” want to be pope and thus we have thousands of denominations.

I do wonder why the PNCC remains so small, and even in this area many Catholics never heard of them…or why so many divorced Catholics havent gone there unless the words "Polish National " scare people away.

 

[Hesychios]

I do wonder why the PNCC remains so small, and even in this area many Catholics never heard of them…or why so many divorced Catholics havent gone there unless the words "Polish National " scare people away.

I think the name has something to do with that. It puts people off.

They should realize by now the Great Commission is not limited to any one group, but to all people. The parochial issues that gave rise to this church are no longer important.

Actually, I happen to know that they are very welcoming to people of all backgrounds, they just need to change the name to reflect that.

 

[LJinPA]

You are right. My area is NE Pennsylvania is one of the most Polish-American places in the country by percentage in 2000. Over 1/3 of the Scranton/W-B area reported Slavic descent. On the other hand, while we still have Polkas and Pieroghi sales most of the younger generation is of mixed ancestry and not as ethnically self-conscious as past generations. Some young people aren’t even sure where their great grandparents came from, therefore if a church like this is to survive in a time when small ethnic RC parishes are closing or merging all over the place, the chruch would have to highlight its theological distinctives rather than just ethnic. (e.g. very few Poles or Irish are going to want to join the Sons of Italy unlessw they have Italian roots.)
Most Catholics I know of (not all) have beliefs more in line with the PNCC than the RC…(married priests, contraception, general absolution).
The term Old Catholic is also a problem although the PNCC doesn’t use this term anymore. Most though certainly not all Old Catholic churches are on the “liberal” side yet no modern minded person would think to enter a church that calls itself “Old”… Not to mention the tern “National Catholic” sounds like an oxymoron although in this case it is derived from a Polish word meaning “ethnic”.

   *Here's a complication... read carefully...Until the women priests issue in the 70's the PNCC was in full communion with Episcopalians and of course with Old Catholicism. Rome declared all Anglican orders null and void a decade before the PNCC was even started. In the 90's there were talks and agreements for limited intercommunion between Rome and PNCC acknowledging PNCC orders to be valid. Yet it wasn't until 2003 when PNCC broke it's communion with Utrecht and yet Utrecht is still in communion with Canterbury. So between the mid 90's and 2003 you had Rome recognizing PNCC sacraments as vald yet they had not yet broken off with Utrecht, which was still in Communion with Canterbury whom Rome declares their orders null and void.

On the other hand Canturbury is now talking about full communion with Lutherans and Methodists who may not necessarily believe in transsubstantiation and many have women priests. Though I’m not sure if this part was going on before 2003.

My point is that although I do like ecumunism and have respect for other denominations like the PNCC the logical side of me wonders how Church A can recognize valid orders in B while it’s in communion with C yet A doesn’t recognize valid orders in church C.

I’m also pretty sure Rome still recognizes Old Catholic orders as valid yet they are in communion with Canturbury.

All I can think of is there are 2 ways of looking at validity, the legalistic or mechanical “pipeline” theory or the “intent” theory which the Orthodox seem to have. I see logical theories in both. The only solution I can think of is looking at Validity on a case by case basis and admitting that the validity of some jurisdictions may be “uncertain”.

 

[GKC]

“I’m also pretty sure Rome still recognizes Old Catholic orders as valid yet they are in communion with Canturbury.”

AFAIK, being in communion with Canterbury would not cause Rome to make a judgment on the validity of OC orders, which would be based on Apostolic succession, form, intent, matter, and minister, in the transmission. Once Utrecht began placing hands on hairspray, matter and intent were gone, and the judgment on the OC Utrecht orders would follow. Some sub-groups of OCs might still be considered to possess valid orders.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus