Anglican valid orders

[GKC]

How did that come about?

I’ve read somewhere that at one point Anglicans became concerned with the validity of their Holy Orders (which is in part what we’ve been discussing here) and took this approach on one occasion in order to address that. I wasn’t aware that this kept on going on.

Of course, the Anglican Communion would be in the situation on continually recreating these concerns, at least from a Catholic prospective, by various acts such as the ordination of women and the raising them to the level of of Bishops. But the fact that the concern exists and that the way to address it is through the PNCC is an interesting concession to the Catholic point of view.

To your first question: it was a follow-on to the arrangement made between the Old Catholic/Utrecht, and the Anglicans, following the Agreement of Bonn, to inter into full communion. Which included joint consecrations of bishops. The same relationship was formed the the PNCC in 1948. Which, at least with respect to the Episcopal Church, was ended in 1978, as TEC made…innovations in things.

One often hears that “doubt” as a reason for the arrangement. It was not such, but an agreement for full inter-communion between the OCs and the Anglicans, which had been forming for some years prior to Apostolicae Curae. I suggest Moss/THE OLD CATHOLIC MOVEMENT and Hughes/STEWARDS OF THE LORD, Appendix II, for info.

GKC

 

[Yeoman]

Many of your group 3 will do precisely that: convert.

Many similarly situated do not see that there is an issue of doubt. To automatically assume that such an Anglo-Catholic would make such a submission to the Apostolic Letter is to make precisely the error that Cardinal Vaughan promulgated, back in the 1890s. Such folk already believe themselves to be Catholic. Just not Roman Catholic.

GKC

I agree that this is the case in regards to their views, that’s how many see themselves. My concern, if put that way, is this. They are generally quite devout. They know what they believe, and they often understand Catholic doctrine about the Real Presence and Apostolic Succession better than Catholics do. But they must concede some doubt, as part of the reason they tend to be so aware is because of the doubt.

Wouldn’t it just be better to remove all doubt? Now, with essentially an Anglican form available, it’d be easier than ever for many and option would be available to some degree for all.

 

[Peter_J]

That issue is definitely considered a great deal. Not long ago, in fact, it looked like the entire ACA (Anglican Church in America, a tiny Anglo-Catholic denomination) was going to enter the Roman Communion. I believe about a quarter of them did. Then there was some talk a out possibly going over to the PNCC, but I don’t believe any parish did so. Bottom line, I don’t expect to see any large exodus from Anglicanism.

 

[GKC]

I agree that this is the case in regards to their views, that’s how many see themselves. My concern, if put that way, is this. They are generally quite devout. They know what they believe, and they often understand Catholic doctrine about the Real Presence and Apostolic Succession better than Catholics do. But they must concede some doubt, as part of the reason they tend to be so aware is because of the doubt.

Wouldn’t it just be better to remove all doubt? Now, with essentially an Anglican form available, it’d be easier than ever for many and option would be available to some degree for all.

To remove all doubt, assuming there is any, in the manner you suggest, is certainly possible, for those who affirm all the particular RC dogmas/doctrines, at the appropriate level of theological certainty. For such, nihil obstat: they can easily come over. But that is not the totality of group 3. And. truth be told, not all who have come, under Anglicanorum coetibus are without reservations themselves. Which is, of course, beside the point.

Your assumption that to be aware of the issue is to be in doubt on the issue is unfounded. I’m as aware (and as informed ) on the subject as the next 3 people you might meet, randomly on the street. I have no doubts. Being deep in the history of the sad tale of AC can do that. Or, can do the opposite.

GKC

 

[GKC]

That issue is definitely considered a great deal. Not long ago, in fact, it looked like the entire ACA (Anglican Church in America, a tiny Anglo-Catholic denomination) was going to enter the Roman Communion. I believe about a quarter of them did. Then there was some talk a out possibly going over to the PNCC, but I don’t believe any parish did so. Bottom line, I don’t expect to see any large exodus from Anglicanism.

Far less than a quarter. It was something of a fiasco. But I have no figures.

I agree with your last sentence.

GKC

 

[SyroMalankara]

Far less than a quarter. It was something of a fiasco. But I have no figures.

I agree with your last sentence.

GKC

Yes, but the fiasco was on the non-Catholic side. Pope Benedict’s letter allows long term growth on the Catholic end, even including married clergy in the future. This is groundbreaking.

 

[GKC]

Yes, but the fiasco was on the non-Catholic side. Pope Benedict’s letter allows long term growth on the Catholic end, even including married clergy in the future. This is groundbreaking.

Absolutely. Though the most groundbreaking, and serious difference was the commitment to an Odinariate structure, not limited to the local Ordinary, and the provision for a continuing stream of Anglican trained clergy, as required. Better than the Pastoral Provision.

I watched the lengthy story of the machinations between selected parts of the Anglican Continuum (TAC/ACA primarily) and the RCC for around 10 years. Not much of what happened after Anglicanorum coetibus was announced surprised me.

GKC

 

[Peter_J]

Far less than a quarter. It was something of a fiasco. But I have no figures.

Fair enough. I read the one-quarter estimate on some website, but I don’t even recall which website.

I agree with your last sentence.

GKC

I’m no great student of the Anglicans-going-home saga – in fact, there were a couple years when I was paying almost no attention, until Anglicanorum Coetibus came out – but I have a strong background of studying another going-home phenomenon, i.e. Greek-Catholics-going-over-to-Orthodoxy.

 

[GKC]

Fair enough. I read the one-quarter estimate on some website, but I don’t even recall which website.



I’m no great student of the Anglicans-going-home saga – in fact, there were a couple years when I was paying almost no attention, until Anglicanorum Coetibus came out – but I have a strong background of studying another going-home phenomenon, i.e. Greek-Catholics-going-over-to-Orthodoxy.

Some folks always see the prodigals as coming home, in caravans. I didn’t expect that.

GKC

 

[Peter_J]

Some folks always see the prodigals as coming home, in caravans. I didn’t expect that.

GKC

An addendum to my last post: it should be noted of course that, out of Greek Catholics who regard the trip to Orthodox as “going home”, not all of us actually make that trip.

 

[GKC]

An addendum to my last post: it should be noted of course that, out of Greek Catholics who regard the trip to Orthodox as “going home”, not all of us actually make that trip.

Understood.

GKC

 

[Yeoman]

That issue is definitely considered a great deal. Not long ago, in fact, it looked like the entire ACA (Anglican Church in America, a tiny Anglo-Catholic denomination) was going to enter the Roman Communion. I believe about a quarter of them did. Then there was some talk a out possibly going over to the PNCC, but I don’t believe any parish did so. Bottom line, I don’t expect to see any large exodus from Anglicanism.

With all due respect (and with respect to GKC), the latter is happening, and has been happening, for some time. The Anglican Communion is a mere shadow of its former self in the US and in the UK.

Indeed I was surprised to see local statistics from my community, which has several Episcopal Churches and two which identify as “Anglican”, and which is where the residence of the Episcopal Bishop is located, to find that they are now a small enough group that they’re lumped in with the “others” in local religious categories. This is shocking when it is considered that they had built very nearly the first church in town, and were at one time a church while people joined if they were doing fairly well economically. This story isn’t uncommon elsewhere.

This is not to say, of course, that the former members are flocking to join the Catholic church. But as a church, it isn’t doing well. No doubt it can be noted that all of the “main line” denominations have had their problems, but their story truly is unique if taken over a long period of time, say 50 years. In our community the church actually split when the Priest there found he could not remain loyal to his convictions as he was essentially in Group #3, and took his followers out to a new Anglican “Catholic” Church, and then we had the odd experience of a second Anglican “Catholic” Church which looks towards an African bishop for its organization, was started. And they even saw the oddity at one time of a large Presbyterian church put up a banner about their being “authentic” which seemed sort of aimed at the large Episcopal Church, but which of course may not actually have been.

 

[GKC]

With all due respect (and with respect to GKC), the latter is happening, and has been happening, for some time. The Anglican Communion is a mere shadow of its former self in the US and in the UK.

Indeed I was surprised to see local statistics from my community, which has several Episcopal Churches and two which identify as “Anglican”, and which is where the residence of the Episcopal Bishop is located, to find that they are now a small enough group that they’re lumped in with the “others” in local religious categories. This is shocking when it is considered that they had built very nearly the first church in town, and were at one time a church while people joined if they were doing fairly well economically. This story isn’t uncommon elsewhere.

This is not to say, of course, that the former members are flocking to join the Catholic church. But as a church, it isn’t doing well. No doubt it can be noted that all of the “main line” denominations have had their problems, but their story truly is unique if taken over a long period of time, say 50 years. In our community the church actually split when the Priest there found he could not remain loyal to his convictions as he was essentially in Group #3, and took his followers out to a new Anglican “Catholic” Church, and then we had the odd experience of a second Anglican “Catholic” Church which looks towards an African bishop for its organization, was started. And they even saw the oddity at one time of a large Presbyterian church put up a banner about their being “authentic” which seemed sort of aimed at the large Episcopal Church, but which of course may not actually have been.

Your final para is correct, in essence. But what I was referring to was the sort of predictions made, in the run up to and immediate aftermath of, Anglicanorum coetibus, of unprecedentedly huge numbers, say 500,000 or more, Anglicans storming the gates. Much of this was based on inflated figures for the TAC, and an assumption that all the TAC would join the exodus. My bet then was that it wouldn’t and that the total responding in the US would be in the very low thousands. I have no idea what the figures are now, but I was basically correct. And the rather triumphalist assumptions that AC would plug the plug on Anglicanism in general were not based in reality.

No doubt that the TEC is losing membership, for a number of reasons. As far back as the immediate post-St. Louis meeting, and the forming of the first churches of what became the many splintered Anglican Continuum, in 1978, the traditionalists (first from mainly the Anglo-Catholic side, later from the more evangelical side) have been draining away. And into a number of places: the Continuum, other liturgically based Churches, and the RCC, to be sure. And AC brought in some more. And there is the growth of the ACNA, larger than all the Continuum, home now for 5 former dioceses of TEC.

TEC claims still to have right at 2 million in hand. Other folk estimate more like 1.7 million. A serious drop over the past years. Perhaps 20%; I have no access immediately to the competing figures.

GKC

 

[manualman]

I don’t know but howIunderstand it is that pope Leo picked four cardinals to reseach Anglican oders.Results were a tie two for and two not…Leo was the tie braker with a no .For two to say yes there had to be something there the other two didn’t see the paper Iread said that it might been polictical. Leo was afraid if he said yes he would lose the church to the COE…I think with great respect for the Catholic Church they were wrong and anglicans have valid oders.Thats want I think but the CC and others think I’m worng.

LOL, I wonder if this is the chicken or the egg. This is the same exact obfuscation that undercutters of the encyclical Humanae Vitae attempt. This is not how these advisory bodies historically work. It is NOT a case of “voting” or a case of a pope saying “Gee, guys I can’t decide. I need you to tell me what to do.”

These advisory commissions historically have been charged with finding, identifying and articulating the strongest, most intellectually rigorous cases for BOTH sides of an issue. This is to help educate the pope on the issues and ensure that the issue has been examined thoroughly by many minds and diverse viewpoints before the pope makes an authoritative decision. It’s not unlike the way the Supreme Court accepts briefs by outside parties to shed light on the facts.

In the case of Humanae Vitae, the commission really did try to put pressure on the pope by voting and making an actual recommendation rather than just summarizing the best arguments on both sides in a neutral manner. It sounds to me like perhaps some CoE apologist is attempting to project that scheme backwards onto earlier advisory commission.

Hopefully GKC will comment further on whether the historical record shows any indication of such intrigue or manipulation or whether it is later apologetical wishful thinking.

 

[GKC]

LOL, I wonder if this is the chicken or the egg. This is the same exact obfuscation that undercutters of the encyclical Humanae Vitae attempt. This is not how these advisory bodies historically work. It is NOT a case of “voting” or a case of a pope saying “Gee, guys I can’t decide. I need you to tell me what to do.”

These advisory commissions historically have been charged with finding, identifying and articulating the strongest, most intellectually rigorous cases for BOTH sides of an issue. This is to help educate the pope on the issues and ensure that the issue has been examined thoroughly by many minds and diverse viewpoints before the pope makes an authoritative decision. It’s not unlike the way the Supreme Court accepts briefs by outside parties to shed light on the facts.

In the case of Humanae Vitae, the commission really did try to put pressure on the pope by voting and making an actual recommendation rather than just summarizing the best arguments on both sides in a neutral manner. It sounds to me like perhaps some CoE apologist is attempting to project that scheme backwards onto earlier advisory commission.

Hopefully GKC will comment further on whether the historical record shows any indication of such intrigue or manipulation or whether it is later apologetical wishful thinking.

There was no attempt to articulate a case of anything other than invalidity.

As to your last question, yes, there was evidence of factors beyond the theological. I do not discuss it, in venues like this. I do recommend Hughes’ ABSOLUTELY NULL AND UTTERLY VOID.

GKC

 

[pablope]

;12156866]No…the pope is his own on such decisions. Pope paul vi went against the majority view in not letting the rcc approve birth control, is one instance, that show the pope does not go with popular public opinion…/]Birt
Now
Thats why I left the Catholic Church. UhI don’t think one man should not be inso much power to mmake a decision like that.Birth control should made between a husband and wife.I bet we’ll agree on this one abortion should be outlawed.I’m just saying that popes are only human and some might make decisions on personal motives.

Then your issue is with the Apostles and Christ. They set up the Church not as a democracy.

But do you realize what you just did? You just substituted the authority of the Church for another authority of your own choosing and one that you agree with.

Here is a bit of a current news: catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=21970&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CatholicWorldNewsFeatureStories+%28Catholic+World+News+%28on+CatholicCulture.org%29%29

Anglican leadership will force acceptance of women bishops, sources report

What do you say to this kind of authority being employed by the Arch of C?

 

[Indifferently]

I think the PNCC and the Scranton churches participate in the ordinations of Free Church of England clergy - and the FCE isn’t exactly an Anglo-catholic denomination. I believe the FCE and Reformed Episcopal Church are being considered for entry into the Scranton union.

 

[GKC]

I think the PNCC and the Scranton churches participate in the ordinations of Free Church of England clergy - and the FCE isn’t exactly an Anglo-catholic denomination. I believe the FCE and Reformed Episcopal Church are being considered for entry into the Scranton union.

Not sure but they are certainly involved in joint talks as to their future.

GKC

 

[ChurchSoldier]

I think the PNCC and the Scranton churches participate in the ordinations of Free Church of England clergy - and the FCE isn’t exactly an Anglo-catholic denomination. I believe the FCE and Reformed Episcopal Church are being considered for entry into the Scranton union.

How correct. They just had talks last month somewhere in Pennsylvania. Not sure how much progress was made, or not. PNCC also in communication / talks with factions of the ACNA as well.

 

[f_william]

Nope. You’re right on that.

And if they no longer do it with any Anglican entity at all, I would suspect they won’t do it for the OP. Of course, that’s assuming when he says he is Anglican, he doesn’t mean he’s in TEC. But he certainly seems to be saying that they will lay on hands, not just attend the luncheon, afterwards.

GKC

I belong to the Anglican church in america. I’m conservative but not that conservative to be TEC.í
M