Anglican Ordinariates get their own Requiem and Matrimonial Rites

  • Thread starter Thread starter YoungTradCath
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Some people really obsess far too much over colors. Of all things relevant to the proper celebration of a mass, the color of the vestments, seems to me, to be very low on the list.

What I find interesting here is the special forms for the ordinate. seems to me like it waters down the universalness of the Catholic Church. If Anglican converts can have a special form, why not anyone else?
 
mburn16 said:
Some people really obsess far too much over colors. Of all things relevant to the proper celebration of a mass, the color of the vestments, seems to me, to be very low on the list.

What I find interesting here is the special forms for the ordinate. seems to me like it waters down the universalness of the Catholic Church. If Anglican converts can have a special form, why not anyone else?
Click to expand...
I have news for you: there are 23 Churches in communion with Rome and there are many, many Rites to which they belong. The Church celebrates unity in her diversity. A quick primer: Catholic Liturgical Rites.
 
mburn16 said:
Some people really obsess far too much over colors. Of all things relevant to the proper celebration of a mass, the color of the vestments, seems to me, to be very low on the list.

What I find interesting here is the special forms for the ordinate. seems to me like it waters down the universalness of the Catholic Church. If Anglican converts can have a special form, why not anyone else?
Click to expand...
England actually had several rites before the Anglican Reformation, this is a lot easier than reviving them.
 
the last question still stands…if we are establishing special (or reviving old) rites and forms here, on what grounds do we prevent the spread of additional rites and forms anywhere someone wants one?
 
mburn16 said:
the last question still stands…if we are establishing special (or reviving old) rites and forms here, on what grounds do we prevent the spread of additional rites and forms anywhere someone wants one?
Click to expand...
The Church doesn’t necessarily prevent it. 500 years ago, she suppressed myriad other localized rites at Trent and replaced them all with the universal Roman Rite. In the modern age, the Church is bringing back many forms of worship thought to be dead. The Dominicans, for example, are permitted again to celebrate the Dominican Rite. The 1962 Missal has been re-authorized (by some reckoning it was never suppressed at all) as the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.

The Anglican case is a very special one, in that the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus specified the particular manner in which Anglicans can be reunited en masse to the Latin Catholic Church. Their form of worship in the Book of Common Prayer is not a distinct Rite, but considered a “Use” of the Roman Rite, in that it diverged from the Tridentine Mass and was translated into English during the time of the Reformation.

It is entirely possible that other Western Protestant ecclesial communities seeking corporate reunion with the Catholic Church could be offered their own Ordinariate structure as well as granted a liturgical practice to match their own patrimony. It just happens that the Anglicans are the first such Protestants to be offered this structure, and they happen to have a fully liturgical practice that is easily adaptable to Catholicism.

22 Eastern Catholic Churches were permitted to keep their own theology and liturgical praxis while returning to communion with Rome. (Some never left communion.) In modern times, the creation of completely new Rites and distinct liturgical traditions doesn’t happen very often. So we will not frequently see a situation such as happened with the Anglican Ordinariates. But it is not entirely ruled other, either.
 
mburn16 said:
the last question still stands…if we are establishing special (or reviving old) rites and forms here, on what grounds do we prevent the spread of additional rites and forms anywhere someone wants one?
Click to expand...
That sounds as if you are describing a disease …

This is not a whimsical or experimental endeavor. The Anglican Ordinariate is still in a formative stage, and this is actually part of the process of solidifying a full, uniform rubric for Anglican usage now that they are in communion with Rome. By all accounts, this process seems to be proceeding in a quite orderly fashion and is apparently drawing on Anglican tradition, as consistent with Catholic tradition, quite fully and respectfully. In some ways, it appears similar to the effort to restore the liturgical traditions of the Eastern Catholic Churches which, in some cases, were altered to conform to Latin Rite usage.

IMHO, it is laudable that the Catholic Church is supporting a process by which the Anglican tradition becomes additive to the fullness of the Universal Church.
 
mburn16 said:
the last question still stands…if we are establishing special (or reviving old) rites and forms here, on what grounds do we prevent the spread of additional rites and forms anywhere someone wants one?
Click to expand...
Don’t we already have 22 rites under Rome right now? I think it will have to play out when and if the problem happens again.

I personally think it is a very happy problem. They want the Truth and a safe haven and they’ve come back. I think it is great that a place has been found for them.

Now can we go to Mass there and receive communion or what if any are the restrictions?
 
aicirt said:
Don’t we already have 22 rites under Rome right now?
Click to expand...
We have 22 other Churches in communion with Rome.

Within the communion, seven principal rites are identfied and in use, with varying forms of expression depending on the particular Church in question:

CCC1203

The liturgical traditions or rites presently in use in the Church are the Latin (principally the Roman rite, but also the rites of certain local churches, such as the Ambrosian rite, or those of certain religious orders) and the Byzantine, Alexandrian or Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Maronite and Chaldean rites.
 
ByzCathCantor said:
We have 22 other Churches in communion with Rome.

Within the communion, seven principal rites are identfied and in use, with varying forms of expression depending on the particular Church in question:

CCC1203

The liturgical traditions or rites presently in use in the Church are the Latin (principally the Roman rite, but also the rites of certain local churches, such as the Ambrosian rite, or those of certain religious orders) and the Byzantine, Alexandrian or Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Maronite and Chaldean rites.
Click to expand...
What are the 22 churches? And I’m assuming being a Roman Catholic I can participate in their services and take communion, yes?
 
aicirt said:
What are the 22 churches? And I’m assuming being a Roman Catholic I can participate in their services and take communion, yes?
Click to expand...
You can indeed - we’re all Catholic.

Here’s a chart offered by Vico, a brother Eastern Catholic contributor on CAF (see attached)
 
ByzCathCantor said:
You can indeed - we’re all Catholic.

Here’s a chart offered by Vico, a brother Eastern Catholic contributor on CAF (see attached)
Click to expand...
Thank you! And I assume we’ll be able to do same with the new Anglican…is this a church too or a rite?

I’ll study what you sent. Appreciate it. :curtsey:
 
aicirt said:
Thank you! And I assume we’ll be able to do same with the new Anglican…is this a church too or a rite?
Click to expand...
Not a Church, but an Ordinariate

There is a decent Wikipedia article explaining the structure, including note on how it differs from the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Catholic Communion.

They are part of the Latin Church, and will have their own leadership and liturgical form, or “usage”, which is viewed as a form of the Roman Rite rather than a new rite in and of itself.
 
YoungTradCath said:
newliturgicalmovement.org/2012/07/first-liturgical-texts-for-ordinariate.html

Very, very, very, very, very interesting. Very interesting indeed…

And I shall note that the Dies Irae is, in fact, part of the funeral Rite. And white is restricted to those children who die under the age of reason.

Their liturgical future looks promising. Septuagesima, Dies Irae, etc.
Click to expand...
You took my idea! 😃

I seriously just logged in so that I could post this lol. My rant was going to be: Why do the Anglican-Use communities have a far better (in my opinion) liturgy than the Latin Rite does?? It’s not far! From my time as an Anglican I do very much love the liturgy and I really, really like the Marriage Rite:thumbsup:
Wish there was a community closer than 35 miles to me.

On a side note, can any priest celebrate and Anglican-Use Mass? or does it have to be specifically for an AU community? I’m asking bc I was going to see if the priest at our college parish would be interested in doing an AU Mass (he’s pretty traditional), bc other than myself there are one or two other people (we’re pretty influential bc we are all traditional) who are converts from Anglicanism.
 
mburn16 said:
Some people really obsess far too much over colors. Of all things relevant to the proper celebration of a mass, the color of the vestments, seems to me, to be very low on the list.
Click to expand...
I agree. In the Byzantine Rite, there is no such thing as colors for most of the year. The only times when a specific color is prescribed is during Pentecost, where the vestments must be green, and Feast Days of the Theotokos where the vestments must be blue. Otherwise the vestments are either bright or dark. Bright usually is either white or gold:



And dark can be red, purple or even black:

http://orthovestments.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/09Embroidered.jpg
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRXLRQ_x39q_1C2ldeTxg8kZtK4SUbKkyiKh754Kr_1qMT7x9tozg

And even then, then shades may vary. Some red vestmens are more maroon or wine, while others are a brighter red.
 
ByzCathCantor said:
Not a Church, but an Ordinariate

There is a decent Wikipedia article explaining the structure, including note on how it differs from the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Catholic Communion.

They are part of the Latin Church, and will have their own leadership and liturgical form, or “usage”, which is viewed as a form of the Roman Rite rather than a new rite in and of itself.
Click to expand...
I’m sure this will put the Queen of England in a bind. I really can’t imagine her condoning same sex marriages, homosexuals as Anglican priests, and women as priests/bishops. I understand her grandson by Anne married a former Catholic who converted so he could maintain his place as the 11th heir to the throne. Recently, the Queen removed the rule that royals could not marry Catholics. I understand she is religious. I’m sure she’s a very conservative Anglican.
 
ConstantineTG said:
In the Byzantine Rite, there is no such thing as colors for most of the year. The only times when a specific color is prescribed is during Pentecost, where the vestments must be green, and Feast Days of the Theotokos where the vestments must be blue. Otherwise the vestments are either bright or dark.
Click to expand...
While technically speaking only bright or dark are specified, traditions of some Particular Churches elaborate particularly in the case some of the Slavic churches. In the Ruthenian Church, for example, bright white is very much the norm for Pascha. Purple/Dark Violet are the norm for the Great Fast. Red on feasts of the Holy Cross and feasts of Martyrs. And as mentioned, green for Pentecost and light blue for feasts of the Theotokos.
 
aicirt said:
I’m sure this will put the Queen of England in a bind.
Click to expand...
The Church of England is unaffected by this, perhaps other than to have lost members to the Anglican Ordinariate. However, to the extent one views that the impetus to establish the Anglican Ordinariates as a means for Anglicans to reunite with the Catholic Church was reactionary to some or all of the issues you mentioned, I would agree - it could be viewed as troublesome.

Pope Benedict XVI did meet with the Archbishop of Canterbury before giving final approval for the Ordinarates, but some say the timing was ill planned (i.e. too late). In any event, this was not done without some due courtesy and prior consultation with the Church of England.
 
aicirt said:
I’m sure this will put the Queen of England in a bind. I really can’t imagine her condoning same sex marriages, homosexuals as Anglican priests, and women as priests/bishops. I understand her grandson by Anne married a former Catholic who converted so he could maintain his place as the 11th heir to the throne. Recently, the Queen removed the rule that royals could not marry Catholics. I understand she is religious. I’m sure she’s a very conservative Anglican.
Click to expand...
Got an article for that? The law was passed by Parliament originally.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top