Anglicanism and Catholicism (reconcilation)

[poche]

At the Time of Vatican II I get the impression that there was hope for some kind of reunion. However, since they have their ordination of women then this makes is impossible.

 

[poche]

I believe that the ordinariates are a recognition by the Catholic Church that there is a legitimate tradition within the Anglican Communion and that this is the means by which that tradition can be reconciled with the rest of the Catholic Church.

 

[HeDa]

No Catholic deacon or priest, Western and Eastern, can marry after they have been ordained. Marriage has to be before ordination.

 

[HopkinsReb]

At the Time of Vatican II I get the impression that there was hope for some kind of reunion. However, since they have their ordination of women then this makes is impossible.

Yeah, this was my takeaway from a Journey Home show with an English priest, formerly Anglican.

 

[angelic06]

OnAJourney:

Could a strand of Anglicanism become a rite of the Church in the future?

I think Benedict XVI made it abundantly clear that the Ordinariate is not going to gain any kind of independence such as the Maronite rite, for example, enjoys within the Catholic Church. The ordinariate exists to enable ordained Anglican clergy to become Catholic priests, but it cannot recruit or ordain priests of its own.

The last is not correct. The Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter, of which I am a canonical member, has several men in the seminary, two of which will be ordained priests on Friday and another, from my old parish, was never Anglican (as I understand it). He was a school teacher at the parish academy several years ago. Another seminarian, from my current parish - the Cathedral of Our Lady of Walsingham, started the discernment process from the beginning, undergraduate studies.

Please do not confuse the ordinariates (under the apostolic constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, as opposed to other ordinariates) with the old Pastoral Provision. The latter was more restrictive in its usage. Both of the ordinariate parishes I have been members of started out under the Pastoral Provision, but one should note that several ordinariate and pre-ordinariate communities are starting out which have not.

Anglicanorum Coetibus represents the best we can offer to Anglicans without compromising doctrine. We - the ordinariates - offer a form of Mass and Divine Office similar to what you used as Anglicans. But while we are grateful for Anglican priests’ ministry in their old communities, because of the importance of the Holy Eucharist in Catholic life, it is necessary that those seeking to exercise the Catholic priesthood to be ordained afresh, not as a denial of their previous ministry, but to be absolutely sure - without one doubt in anyone’s mind and no misgivings of any kind on the part of the faithful - that what we receive is truly Christ in Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity.

I do not know what else it is that people desire.

In case there is anyone here who has not read Anglicanorum Coetibus - I am not saying anyone in particular has not, I urge you to do so before commenting.

 

[BartholomewB]

Thank you for that correction. A few posts up from this one I posted a link to the Ordinariate’s website where they report on the ordination of eight priests last year. I think I remember reading, a few years ago, that a married man had entered the seminary, but I don’t know how that turned out. Can the Ordinariate, in fact, ordain married men from its own seminaries, as opposed to Anglican clergy who have converted?

And another detail that isn’t quite clear to me. Are those priests who have been ordained by the Ordinariate considered diocesan priests or religious? Will they subsequently be available to serve in any Catholic parish, or will they be forever restricted to serving within the Ordinariate?

 

[OnAJourney]

It’s from my understanding of the Ordinariate that they can’t serve outside catholic parishes, because their role is purely for Anglicans converting into the church but practicing with Vatican approved Anglican Use prayers

 

[Symphorian]

The Ordinariate Priest (Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham) in my locality was also made Priest in Charge of a Catholic Parish in the next county. He resides there and divides his time between serving that Parish and the Ordinariate group he brought over from his former CofE congregation.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I knew an Episcopal priest, married with 5 or 6 children, who converted to the Catholic faith with his family and later was ordained in the Catholic church. At first, there was talk of developing an Ordinariate of which he would be a part of, but that never happened so he has been a Catholic priest for over 10 years now.

 

[porthos11]

I believe that the ordinariates are a recognition by the Catholic Church that there is a legitimate tradition within the Anglican Communion and that this is the means by which that tradition can be reconciled with the rest of the Catholic Church.

Correct. Those will be reconciled. But those are individuals and individual parishes. That does not include the mainstream which has departed too far into heresy. It may take centuries but mainstream Anglicanism is simply going to die out. There will be no corporate reconciliation between Rome and Canterbury.

 

[joyfulandactive]

Heda thank you for your information.

Regarding the Anglican church dying out I would not be so quick to make such an assessment. The church may look very different in the future as it is growing in the Global South and shrinking in the West.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

I see hope. A few centuries ago we were trying to kill each other, a hundred years ago we just called each other heretics. And yesterday I prayed with Christians from about a dozen denominations in our Catholic church. We have had our unity services for many years and they are always a joyful experience.

Jesus has not changed, the Bible has not changed, but thankfully we are starting to change towards each other.

 

[poche]

If the mainstream, or maybe the mainstream the mainstream of a given part of the world wants to move in that direction then now we have a vehicle for that transition.

 

[Edmundus1581]

It’s from my understanding of the Ordinariate that they can’t serve outside catholic parishes, because their role is purely for Anglicans converting into the church but practicing with Vatican approved Anglican Use prayers

We have an Ordinariate parish in Adelaide and the priest there has worked with other priests in the regular confession times at the main cathedral. He’s married BTW.

I attended several of the Ordinariate services expecting to like them because I’d been raised Anglican before converting 37 years ago but didn’t like them as much as I expected to, because I’ve become so used to the Roman Rite. I may try it again some time.

 

[Edmundus1581]

poche:

I believe that the ordinariates are a recognition by the Catholic Church that there is a legitimate tradition within the Anglican Communion and that this is the means by which that tradition can be reconciled with the rest of the Catholic Church.

Correct. Those will be reconciled. But those are individuals and individual parishes. That does not include the mainstream which has departed too far into heresy. It may take centuries but mainstream Anglicanism is simply going to die out. There will be no corporate reconciliation between Rome and Canterbury.

That sounds harsh but I agree with it from my experiences of Anglicanism. In individuals Anglicanism builds a strong “pick and choose” mentality where they read and discuss widely, and form theological schools which are mostly orthodox but have deeply embedded heresies. They are happy to coexist with impossible contradictions amongst themselves, over almost everything major and minor, because the study and discussions are more important to them than the truth of any matter, which they accept can never be known. This isn’t just a veering away from the truth at the last moment but rooted in the institution and reinforced throughout it.

They are very attached to their ways and quite sure in their sense of superiority to both Catholics who they think are too compliant to “What the Church teaches”, if not dimwitted and lazy, and to other Protestants who they regard as lacking aesthetic beauty in their services and sophistication in their theology. Still, as a general observation they are much closer to Protestantism than Catholicism.

 

[Dovekin]

Correct. Those will be reconciled. But those are individuals and individual parishes. That does not include the mainstream which has departed too far into heresy. It may take centuries but mainstream Anglicanism is simply going to die out. There will be no corporate reconciliation between Rome and Canterbury.

I have been puzzling over this, since I agree with most of it. (Not the declaration of heresy…) Unitatis Redintegratio describes ecumenism this way:

This is the way that, when the obstacles to perfect ecclesiastical communion have been gradually overcome, all Christians will at last, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, be gathered into the one and only Church in that unity which Christ bestowed on His Church from the beginning. We believe that this unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.

However, it is evident that, when individuals wish for full Catholic communion, their preparation and reconciliation is an undertaking which of its nature is distinct from ecumenical action. But there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God.

The Ordinariates are individuals, sometimes parishes, that make a choice to join the Catholic Church. Though this “proceeds from the marvelous ways of God,” it is not ecumenism. Ecumenism is about the reunification at a common Eucharist of all Anglicans. This is a completely unreasonable, almost incomprehensible goal.

Fortunately, it is also a requirement of our faith. No matter how ridiculous this goal seems, we have to hope and believe that Christ will accomplish it. If we turn our back on this hope, we turn our back on Christ who prayed that we would all be one. Logic, reason tells me such a reunification cannot happen. Hope tells me it must happen and that we must all strive to change so that it will happen.

 

[HopkinsReb]

In individuals Anglicanism builds a strong “pick and choose” mentality

Catholics literally have a term for the vast hordes of Catholics who pick and choose which church doctrines to believe. This phenomenon is not unique to Anglicans.

They are happy to coexist with impossible contradictions amongst themselves, over almost everything major and minor, because the study and discussions are more important to them than the truth of any matter, which they accept can never be known.

News to me.

They are very attached to their ways and quite sure in their sense of superiority to both Catholics who they think are too compliant to “What the Church teaches”, if not dimwitted and lazy

News to me. I didn’t know I thought this, but I’m glad you’ve enlightened me.

and to other Protestants who they regard as lacking aesthetic beauty in their services and sophistication in their theology.

Wouldn’t you agree with this?

 

[BartholomewB]

They are happy to coexist with impossible contradictions amongst themselves, over almost everything major and minor, because the study and discussions are more important to them than the truth of any matter, which they accept can never be known.

Back in Victorian days – possibly also more recently, though I have no information about that – there was a current in Anglicanism that was labeled “Broad Church”. Is that what you’re describing here? Recently I’ve been reading online one or two books by Edwin Hatch, who was clearly identified with the Broad Church line. I have found them very informative and very helpful, perhaps because – like you – I was brought up in the C of E and Hatch’s general approach is the one I find naturally congenial.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Thanks for the replies @HopkinsReb!

Edmundus1581:

They are happy to coexist with impossible contradictions amongst themselves, over almost everything major and minor, because the study and discussions are more important to them than the truth of any matter, which they accept can never be known.

News to me.

This certainly my observation of Anglican friends and family over many years, and of the communion as a whole. The most obvious instance of an “impossible contradiction” within their ranks is women’s ordination, and then there is the catolog of sexual matters which could form a topic in itself (openly gay clergy, fornication, masturbation, adultery,…). But I’ve seen it over numerous other issues. Just for starters: there are some who don’t believe in the efficacy of infant baptism; there are some who don’t accept the church’s easy divorce and remarriage practice; there are widely different interpretations of The Real Presence; there are widely different interpretations of admissibility to communion; there are some who don’t accept the authority of scripture; some who don’t accept the Nicean Creed, there are differences over the sacramental effect of “confirmation”. There are many who are soft on abortion and same sex marriage. The ones I know are all mature Anglicans, and some are clergy, who regard these differences of opinions as a strength of the church, and are happy to keep studying, debating, and worshipping together knowing that there will never be any progress to the objective truth of these matters, but instead new areas of difference will open up and new camps will emerge, where there was once unity (eg. women’s ordination).

I know an Anglican clergyman who rejects infant baptism. When I pointed out to him that it’s in the Nicene Creed he casually responded “Creeds can be changed”. Referring to all the contradictions within Anglicanism he said that the church is like a “multifaceted diamond”, where the different opinions are different faces of the same diamond.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Part 2.

You make a valid point that a similar phenomon exists within Catholicism but it is not the same, both in kind and extext. In the Catholic Church matters can be settled and the revealed truth known and proclaimed, and dissent silenced. A Catholic person can disagree with the Church over “fornication”, but they know what the Church teaches and know they shouldn’t present themselves for communion. A divorced person may disagree with the church over remarriage, but without an annulment (which is not automatic) they can’t get remarried in the church. With each theological controversy that has arisen over the centuries the Catholic Church has ruled on the way forward and dissent has eventually died out. No Catholic can argue over the divinity of Christ or the physical resurrection, or the seven sacraments. People who dispute Church teaching publically eventually face censure, even excommunication, depending on their position and nature of their opposition. We have the whole of the Catholic nuns in the US being put under watch by the Vatican for progressive activism, and politicians who support abortion being told to not present themselves for communion. Such doesn’t happen in the Anglican church where any sincere belief is respected, especially if the holder can conjure up a plausible argument, which then becomes subject to debate. Except, in recent times, where there has been some censure of Conservatives by Progressives.

A most vivid, recent example of the difference was the issue of women’s ordination. The cause was taken up in the 70’s and 80’s, and the progressives pushed their arguments and built up a force. In just three decades this was settled by the Church with the definitive ruling from Pope John Paul II in 1994: “I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.” There can be no argument about this within Catholic ranks now. I know there is, but such people can be simply ignored by the laity, while the Church, if necessary, takes more severe measures, such as excommunication.

Back in Victorian days – possibly also more recently, though I have no information about that – there was a current in Anglicanism that was labeled “Broad Church”. Is that what you’re describing here? Recently I’ve been reading online one or two books by Edwin Hatch, who was clearly identified with the Broad Church line. I have found them very informative and very helpful, perhaps because – like you – I was brought up in the C of E and Hatch’s general approach is the one I find naturally congenial.

To answer your question, I wasn’t referring specifically to this historical movement, and my answer above explains how my thoughts are a personal observation of many Anglicans I’ve known, and also observation of the communion in my own lifetime.

Thanks for the reference to Edwin Hatch and the “Broad Church”. That makes sense as, possibly, the historical roots of what I’ve observed.