M
mercygate
Guest
I do not know the name of the other “conditional” ordinand. And yes, I understand your reticence about the Orthodox lines, and share it. I cannot p(name removed by moderator)oint what they were.
- Status
G
GKC
Guest
oat soda,
“thanks GKC, i’ll have to read on the difference.”
You are very welcome. The Tractarians and the Oxford Movement certainly paved the way for the later Riutalist controversy, but it was basically two different things. Keble, Pusey, and Newman (inter alia) were Tractarians, Lowder and Mackonochie, Ritualist, following slightly later. I do doubt there would have been a Ritualist movement, if there had not been an Oxford Movment, but they were not the same.
GKC
“thanks GKC, i’ll have to read on the difference.”
You are very welcome. The Tractarians and the Oxford Movement certainly paved the way for the later Riutalist controversy, but it was basically two different things. Keble, Pusey, and Newman (inter alia) were Tractarians, Lowder and Mackonochie, Ritualist, following slightly later. I do doubt there would have been a Ritualist movement, if there had not been an Oxford Movment, but they were not the same.
GKC
G
GKC
Guest
Well, Fr. Hughes was certainly one such, ordained
sub conditione. I strongly recommend his two books on AC, ABSOLUTELY NULL AND UTTERLY VOID and STEWARDS OF THE LORD. A nice match for Francis Clark’s work. I too have heard, anecdotely, that there were others ordained other than absolutely, and am always looking for more info.
GKC
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
The problems with creating an Anglican Rite which ivolved the Anglican Communion, and not the Traditional Anglican Communion, are as follows:
- The Anglican Communion has already ordained dozens of women “Priests” and several women “Bishops” in spite of clear Scriptural and Traditional directions not to do this.
- The Anglican Communion could not bring itself to discipline the people who consecrated a Gay man who left his wife and young children to shack up with his gay lover as Bishop or the body which approved that consecration.
- ECUSA is “Pro-Choice” including Late Term Abortions. The rest of the Anglican Communion can’t bring itself to condemn that position.
- ECUSA is for Embrionic Stem-cel Research. Same problem with the rest of the Communion as above.
- ECUSA is PRO-GAY Marraige, as is the rest of the Anglican Communion.
saviorquest.com/news1/catholicvoters.htm
His Holiness will have NO such problems with the Traditional Anglican Communion or any other groups that may join them in the Pilgrimage to Rome. We agree with His Holiness, Pope John Paul II right down the line.
Most of the rest of your account sounded far more convoluted than the original report:
Regarding the problems with the Bishop you discussed:
**BENNISON MAKES UNWELCOME VISIT TO LARGEST PARISH IN DIOCESE
** By David W. Virtue
virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=891
Some Parishes in Benisson’s Diocese have been granted outside oversight by the Archbidhip of Canterbury. Here is an exchange between Bishop Bennison and one of the "Flying Bishops appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury:
**TWO BISHOPS EXCHANGE WORDS INSIDE BENNISON’S OFFICE
** By David W. Virtue
virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=978
The Church of the Good Shepherd and Fr. David Moyer left ECUSA, and whatever Dicocese Bishop Bennison headed to join the TAC in 2002. From that time forward, their Episcopal oversight was through Archbishop Faulk and Right Reverend Louis Campese, Bishop Ordinary of the ACA/TAC Diocese of the Eastern United States. That’s that parish’s Episcopal oversight, not Bp. Bennison. So, Bishop Bennison had no more right ot go to that parish than you or I would, and only as you or I would, as a guest.
Apparently, Archbishop Faulk And Archbishop Hepworth have decided that diocese was just too large and were going to split it. That’s why we saw the bit about Fr. David Moyer, who seems to be Archbishop Faulk’s choice (and, NO, I haven’t met him).
Now, let me make this clear, The Church of the Good Shepherd and Fr. David Moyer left ECUSA in 2002, and have NO intent of ever returning. Bennison defrocked Fr. Moyer in the hopes that he could force the congregation to accept a “Loyal” priest who would keep the congregation and its income stream and property in ECUSA, while he plotted his LEGAL strategy. The parish rejected this.
Please don’t parse one article for the entire meaning of what’s happening. There are those that know more than I do, and they tell me the negotiations are proceding but require circumspection, patience and prayer.
As I said, I would very much like to see this work, so please keep it down, and don’t rock the boat too much. I believe the Devil would love nothing better than to see this one get dashed on some sort of personality conflict created because someone read something written by someone who read something…
In Him, Michael
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
whosebob said:
Thank you for your prayers and your circumspection.
All I can tell you is that Cardinal Ratzinger and his people are wording on this, and that are are tracing everyone’s orders down to the last known valid Bishop to have laid hands on them. They seem to be trying to avoid “de novo” ordinations and consecrations if at all possible, while assuring the validity of each priest’s orders.
I must admit that I do appreciate the effort, a lot. It’s really quite humbling to see them do this for us. If I ever sit down with you privately, I’ll tell you why.
What they’ve said allows me to believe that I am receiving the body and blood of Our Savior, something I may or may not have been doing as an Episcopalian (depending upon what you believe about the Scottish Non-Jurists who refused to go along with the “Puritan Reforms” and their orders).
Regarding the rest, that’s up to His Holiness, Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger.
Either way, I have to trust God and obey those authorities he’s placed over me, that’s if I want to grow up in the Faith.
Again, thank you for your prayers and circumspection.
In Him, Michael
F
Fr_Ambrose
Guest
Can’t speak for Australia, but the Catholic bishops of New Zealand would certainly not welcome/allow a Rite which competes with the Novus Ordo Novozelandsis
T
TheGarg
Guest
I think that they should swallow their pride and do things according to the Church. Anything else would be in the fashion of current protestantism, and self defeating.I think that they should be given there own rite. Especially if thats the only thing between them and reuniting with the church
Anyone who is “subject to the routine of thier ways” are not “subject to the routine of Christ’s way”. His Will be done not ours.
Peace be to all.
W
wannabee
Guest
Gottle of Geer said:
Umm - sorry - I must be missing something here
Where is the cathedral in Scotland - I’m only aware of the UGCC Cathedral of the Holy Family in London ?
G
Gerry_Hunter
Guest
Traditional Ang:
The big problem with arranging for Anglican and Catholic reunion, as corporate wholes, is the simple fact that no one speaks for Anglicanism as a whole, and there is no Anglican concensus across the communion on doctrinal issues. Even when their bishops at their Lambeth Conference issue a declaration, revisionists are quick to point out it is not authoritative – and they are correct.
Many of my Anglican friends had misunderstandings about the Uniate Churches. They seemed to think that they could have married priests, and women priests, under a Uniate model. (They see both issues as disciplinary, which women priests is not.) Also, they think all their orders will be recognized, since Uniate orders were recognized on the signing of the Treaty. But the Uniate priests and bishops were in schism, with valid orders, and Anglican orders are not valid.
Perhaps some “continuing” communities could return home as a corporate body, since they are smaller and more uniform, but from the “Anglican Communion,” it seems doubtful that anything even as large as a parish is likely to do so as a corporate entity.
Prayer is definately in order for those Anglicans who are struggling, very hard and at high cost, to hold onto that truth that they have. Their Anglican opponents are succintly described as Unitarian theological revisionists with a liturgy dating back to Cranmer.
Blessings
Gerry
About point 5: That’s too general a statement. The “Anglican Communion” is currently in a fission process because some member national churches do, and others do not, support “gay marriage.” I have a number of friends here in Vancouver Canada who are fighting it, and their local revisionist Anglican Bishop (who they have disavowed), tooth and nail.
The big problem with arranging for Anglican and Catholic reunion, as corporate wholes, is the simple fact that no one speaks for Anglicanism as a whole, and there is no Anglican concensus across the communion on doctrinal issues. Even when their bishops at their Lambeth Conference issue a declaration, revisionists are quick to point out it is not authoritative – and they are correct.
Many of my Anglican friends had misunderstandings about the Uniate Churches. They seemed to think that they could have married priests, and women priests, under a Uniate model. (They see both issues as disciplinary, which women priests is not.) Also, they think all their orders will be recognized, since Uniate orders were recognized on the signing of the Treaty. But the Uniate priests and bishops were in schism, with valid orders, and Anglican orders are not valid.
Perhaps some “continuing” communities could return home as a corporate body, since they are smaller and more uniform, but from the “Anglican Communion,” it seems doubtful that anything even as large as a parish is likely to do so as a corporate entity.
Prayer is definately in order for those Anglicans who are struggling, very hard and at high cost, to hold onto that truth that they have. Their Anglican opponents are succintly described as Unitarian theological revisionists with a liturgy dating back to Cranmer.
Blessings
Gerry
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
Gerry Hunter:
The ECUSA House of Bishops has definitely made their choice. I spoke with a woman last night who was visiting from New York (she was seeing her brother, who is a Traditionalist), and she saw NO problem with Women “Priests” and “Bishops” (she was ECUSA), and felt that the Church had to “Change with the times”. I reminded here that these were issues settled by Scripture and Tradition, Her answer was the above and that the Scriptures just had to be ignored. I asked the logical question, “Who is to do the ‘ignoring’ or the ‘picking and choosing’, and by what standard?” She had NO answer. MODERNISM was the answer.
Individuals in the 1st World are fighting, but most of the real dissent is coming from the 3RD WORLD! The Presiding Bishop of ECUSA has actually framed it so that WE sound like the SCHISMATICS, in spite of their real and actual HERESY!! According to the “Windsor Report”, the Anglican Communion has made its decision. I feel sorry for your friends who can’t get out
The Catholic Church has accepted Uniate Churches in the past. I know that there are some here who can’t bear the idea of another Uniate Church under the Holy Father’s authority. I also know there are some on the Catholic Church who are opposed to the idea for reasons I don’t understand and can’t fathom. I also can’t fathom why Archbishops and Bishops would oppose a Rite or a Use which would be guaranteed to bring more faithful to their pews, more priests to minister to their congregations and more aspirants to their seminaries.
The Traditional Catholic Church has a total membership (as of Oct., 2004) of 400,000 people on 6 Continents: acahome.org/tac/
At my parish, we have 3 Priests, 1 Deacon and 3 Subdeacons for some 250 parisioners. Most aren’t that well off, but you can get an idea of how well endowed with clergy we are by going here: acahome.org/tac/members/members.htm
I actually saw some of that mirrored here by people who were parsing the one article to death looking for I don’t know what! So, please, no more parsing of one article by one reporter.
We’re consecrating more Bishops (Bishop Moyer is just one of those being Consecrated) and responding to the Holy See on “The Gift of Authority”:
acahome.org/tac/news/pr041216.htm
acahome.org/tac/news/pr041018.htm
acahome.org/tac/news/messenger.htm
(Current Issue - Pg 1 & Previous Isue Pg 2 Both in pdf)
I apologize for my previous reticence. Most of us have been under a gag order, because of previous experience with Anglican parishes that found deals “going south” as details were leaked to the press.
Now that you know more of the details, please pray for us, and please don’t urge that more stumbling stones be thrown in our way.
In Him, Michael
Gerry:
The ECUSA House of Bishops has definitely made their choice. I spoke with a woman last night who was visiting from New York (she was seeing her brother, who is a Traditionalist), and she saw NO problem with Women “Priests” and “Bishops” (she was ECUSA), and felt that the Church had to “Change with the times”. I reminded here that these were issues settled by Scripture and Tradition, Her answer was the above and that the Scriptures just had to be ignored. I asked the logical question, “Who is to do the ‘ignoring’ or the ‘picking and choosing’, and by what standard?” She had NO answer. MODERNISM was the answer.
Individuals in the 1st World are fighting, but most of the real dissent is coming from the 3RD WORLD! The Presiding Bishop of ECUSA has actually framed it so that WE sound like the SCHISMATICS, in spite of their real and actual HERESY!! According to the “Windsor Report”, the Anglican Communion has made its decision. I feel sorry for your friends who can’t get out
The Catholic Church has accepted Uniate Churches in the past. I know that there are some here who can’t bear the idea of another Uniate Church under the Holy Father’s authority. I also know there are some on the Catholic Church who are opposed to the idea for reasons I don’t understand and can’t fathom. I also can’t fathom why Archbishops and Bishops would oppose a Rite or a Use which would be guaranteed to bring more faithful to their pews, more priests to minister to their congregations and more aspirants to their seminaries.
The Traditional Catholic Church has a total membership (as of Oct., 2004) of 400,000 people on 6 Continents: acahome.org/tac/
At my parish, we have 3 Priests, 1 Deacon and 3 Subdeacons for some 250 parisioners. Most aren’t that well off, but you can get an idea of how well endowed with clergy we are by going here: acahome.org/tac/members/members.htm
I actually saw some of that mirrored here by people who were parsing the one article to death looking for I don’t know what! So, please, no more parsing of one article by one reporter.
We’re consecrating more Bishops (Bishop Moyer is just one of those being Consecrated) and responding to the Holy See on “The Gift of Authority”:
acahome.org/tac/news/pr041216.htm
acahome.org/tac/news/pr041018.htm
acahome.org/tac/news/messenger.htm
(Current Issue - Pg 1 & Previous Isue Pg 2 Both in pdf)
I apologize for my previous reticence. Most of us have been under a gag order, because of previous experience with Anglican parishes that found deals “going south” as details were leaked to the press.
Now that you know more of the details, please pray for us, and please don’t urge that more stumbling stones be thrown in our way.
In Him, Michael
T
twf
Guest
Traditional Ang: This is wonderful news. I will indeed pray for you. I think, however, that you should be prepared for the possibility that the orders will be deemed invalid. If they are invalid…nothing the Pope says can change that. (Though of course Catholic bishops could quickly rectify the situation if this is the case). As well, I can imagine that Rome may require celibacy for priests after the first generation of ‘convert priests’…they may not, but they may. (Many of the Eastern Churches do have married priests…but not all…for example, the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church of India has celibate priests).
God bless.
God bless.
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
This is according to the Church! At least that’s what the Holy See says, so this isn’t “Protestant” in the least.
How do you think the Catholic Church got all of those Uniate Churches from the Eastern Orthodox? You can bet the whole procedure took some very delicate negotiations! In some cases, these negotiations took decades! Ours has been given less than 2 years so far.
Depending on the Source, The TAC is bringing over 400,000-500,000 Catholics, along with a full compliment of Deacons, Priests and Bishops, who will obey and submit to His Holiness on all matters touching faith and morals, just like the various Uniate Catholics do NOW.
Are you saying that you don’t believe that we’re bringing that many Catholics? Or, Are you saying that you’ve never heard of the various Uniate Rite Catholic Churches? Or, That they’re somehow not really Catholics?
I would beg you to reconsider your attitude towards this new Uniate Catholic Church that the Pope, in his Charity, seems to be determined to bring in to the Catholic Church.
If it’s good enough for His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, isn’t it good enough for you?
In HIm, Michael
F
Fr_Ambrose
Guest
Dear Michael,
I have a friend in The Holy Catholic Church (Western Rite)
holycatholicchurch-wr.org/index.htm
This is one of the Continuing Anglican ecclesial groups. I can remember the names of three bishops, Archbishop Leslie Hamlett (UK), Bishop John Appleton and Bishop Alexander Price (retired, here in New Zealand whom I know.) They have other bishops around the British Commonwealth and the USA. For 2-3 years they have been conducting a dialogue with two of the Orthodox Churches, the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese in North America (which has approx. 30 Western Rite parishes. I think that all have come from Anglicanism) and with the Orthodox Church in America.
Have you heard of them? I remember that they broke with the larger Continuing Anglican Church in the USA (name? Anglican Catholic Church?) which preferred to maintain a more “Prayerbook” middle-of-the-road level of Anglicanism, whereas these bishops dialoguing with the Orthodox emphasise things such as the Real Presence, sacramental Priesthood, prayer to Mary, etc.
**Merry ** Christmas!
I have a friend in The Holy Catholic Church (Western Rite)
holycatholicchurch-wr.org/index.htm
This is one of the Continuing Anglican ecclesial groups. I can remember the names of three bishops, Archbishop Leslie Hamlett (UK), Bishop John Appleton and Bishop Alexander Price (retired, here in New Zealand whom I know.) They have other bishops around the British Commonwealth and the USA. For 2-3 years they have been conducting a dialogue with two of the Orthodox Churches, the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese in North America (which has approx. 30 Western Rite parishes. I think that all have come from Anglicanism) and with the Orthodox Church in America.
Have you heard of them? I remember that they broke with the larger Continuing Anglican Church in the USA (name? Anglican Catholic Church?) which preferred to maintain a more “Prayerbook” middle-of-the-road level of Anglicanism, whereas these bishops dialoguing with the Orthodox emphasise things such as the Real Presence, sacramental Priesthood, prayer to Mary, etc.
**Merry ** Christmas!
G
GAssisi
Guest
Dear All,
What blessed news! I pray for successful union in terms of the desires and needs of the incoming Anglicans. Here’s me two cents:
Insistence on the Roman Rite by certain authorities in England may be due to a perception that the Anglicans are regarded as originally belonging to the Western Patriarchate (i.e., the Latin-Rite Church).
A married Anglican priesthood would be no problem since such provisions are already in place for individual Protestant ministers coming into Catholicism.
In the past, many Anglicans have acquired validity for their orders through the Orthodox Churches. Though many of these were involved in schismatic and “independent” movements, it would be fruitful to discover whether any of these orders have continued down through to the TAC.
When I lived in Berkeley (CA), I sometimes attended Mass at an Episcopal church where Franciscan priests from a local seminary would commune. I assume the Episcopal priests had obtained valid orders from another Church with a validly ordained hierarchy. I wouldn’t doubt if this particular congregation is part of the TAC.
Dear Father Ambrose,
Are the talks between the Anglicans you mention and those particular Orthodox Churches regarding the possibility of intercommunion or requests for valid ordination?
God bless,
Greg
What blessed news! I pray for successful union in terms of the desires and needs of the incoming Anglicans. Here’s me two cents:
Insistence on the Roman Rite by certain authorities in England may be due to a perception that the Anglicans are regarded as originally belonging to the Western Patriarchate (i.e., the Latin-Rite Church).
A married Anglican priesthood would be no problem since such provisions are already in place for individual Protestant ministers coming into Catholicism.
In the past, many Anglicans have acquired validity for their orders through the Orthodox Churches. Though many of these were involved in schismatic and “independent” movements, it would be fruitful to discover whether any of these orders have continued down through to the TAC.
When I lived in Berkeley (CA), I sometimes attended Mass at an Episcopal church where Franciscan priests from a local seminary would commune. I assume the Episcopal priests had obtained valid orders from another Church with a validly ordained hierarchy. I wouldn’t doubt if this particular congregation is part of the TAC.
Dear Father Ambrose,
Are the talks between the Anglicans you mention and those particular Orthodox Churches regarding the possibility of intercommunion or requests for valid ordination?
God bless,
Greg
F
Fr_Ambrose
Guest
Dear GAssisi,
The notion of intercommunuion is not really known among the Orthodox. Either one is in communion or one is not, so that is not really a possible topic on the agenda between the Orthodox and the Continuing Anglicans. See Bishop Kallistos (Timothy) Ware’s booklet published by the Anglican Sisters of the Love of God, Oxford “Communion and Intercommunion”
The matter of ordination (although of course I am not privy to these particular conversations) is an interesting question. While the Orthodox do not recognise the Sacraments of those outside the Church there is room for ‘economy’ to come into operation in order to ease the way. The talks of the Anglo-Catholics with Romanians, Greeks and Russians at the beginning of the 20th century made the point that if the Anglicans were able to ‘upskill’ their whole faith community to the level of the Anglo-Catholics, then they would be able to come into the Orthodox communion as a full body without the need for re-ordination. This is not of course tantamount to accepting their Orders within their own Church as they stand. The exercise of ‘ekonomia’ operates only when the entry into Orthodoxy occurs because the Church has the plenitude of grace and the power to bind and to loose and to infuse grace where there was no grace before. It is accepted that entry into the fulness of Orthodoxy will, by the power of the Holy Spirit, provide whatever was lacking in the previous Anglican ordinations.
The Greek Church in Australia has made an interesting decision in an attempt to provide a refuge to the Anglican clergy who are unable to accept women priests, etc… They are willing to accept individual Anglican clergy into the ranks of the deacons. This is a similar exercise of ‘economy.’ Later, they will be progressed up to the rank of presbyter by ordination.
But as I say, I am not privy to details of this particular dialogue with the Holy Catholic Church (Anglican Rite) and one would need to contact the participants.
Forgive me if I expressed this inadequately. If I can help further I am happy to respond to questions.
**Merry ** Christmas!
F
Fr_Ambrose
Guest
I would be interested in learning more of this. The Orthodox would be unwilling to consecrate bishops not of their own faith community. Would you please supply specifics. Which Orthodox Churches? Which Anglican bishops?
I believe that Anglicans who wish to acquire Orders which will satisfy Rome’s standards for validity and apostolic succession turn to Old Catholics and a few other groups for consecration and ordination.
**Merry ** Christmas!
G
GKC
Guest
Fr Ambrose:
I agree. I have occasionally seen references to Orthodox participating in Anglican ordinations or consecrations, but, for the reasons you mention, I have my doubts. Old Catholic participation, particularly in Anglican consecrations, goes back over 40 years and is well documented.
I often ask for details about the supposed Orthodox participation. So far, nothing learned.
GKC
traditional Anglican
Fr. Ambrose.
I agree. I have occasionally seen references to Orthodox participating in Anglican ordinations or consecrations, but, for the reasons you mention, I have my doubts. Old Catholic participation, particularly in Anglican consecrations, goes back over 40 years and is well documented.
I often ask for details about the supposed Orthodox participation. So far, nothing learned.
GKC
traditional Anglican
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
Fr Ambrose:
At the present time, I’m going to have to agree with my Primate who has stated that Union with and submission to the See of Peter is essential, while Union with the See of Canterbury is “Optional”. Seeing that the writs of Excommunication have been lifted, I must conclude that Union with the See of Peter would include some sort of Union with those other Patriarchates as well.
At the same time, it appears that Peter was the one who was drafted “to be the Servant of all” and the one whose desk was to have the sign, "The Buck stops here."Guarantees such as Papal Infallability are not guarantees from the Pope or even from the Church, they are Guarantees from God.
Who knows, maybe we can convince them to come with us…After all, the more the merrier.
Again, your continued prayers are appreciated.
Merry Christmas and Happy St. Stephen’s Day.
In Him, Michael
No, I haven’t, and I’m not too sure their doctrine isn’t a form of “High-Church” Anglicanism combined with some Eastern Orthodox window dressing.
At the present time, I’m going to have to agree with my Primate who has stated that Union with and submission to the See of Peter is essential, while Union with the See of Canterbury is “Optional”. Seeing that the writs of Excommunication have been lifted, I must conclude that Union with the See of Peter would include some sort of Union with those other Patriarchates as well.
At the same time, it appears that Peter was the one who was drafted “to be the Servant of all” and the one whose desk was to have the sign, "The Buck stops here."Guarantees such as Papal Infallability are not guarantees from the Pope or even from the Church, they are Guarantees from God.
Who knows, maybe we can convince them to come with us…After all, the more the merrier.
Again, your continued prayers are appreciated.
Merry Christmas and Happy St. Stephen’s Day.
In Him, Michael
T
Traditional_Ang
Guest
GKC:
Some of the parishes who left PECUSA (the old name for ECUSA) in the late 1970’s, and other Dissident Anglicans, and their Priests joined something called the Western Rite of the Antiochan Orthodox Church. You can see a directory of parishes here:
Western Rite Orthodox Parish Directory
westernorthodox.com/directory
You’ll find more information about these on that Website.
My father was involved in forming one of the parishes. Because of the Forum regs, I’m not allowed to say which one.
Merry Christmass and Happy St. Stephen’s Day
In Him, Michael
G
GKC
Guest
Traditional Ang:
I myself am a member of a Continuing Anglican parish, and am familiar with the Antiochan Orthodox, though not very. In fact, there was once some slight interest in my own jurisdiction (I think) about heading that way.
But when I refer to Orthodox participating in the ordination or consecration of Anglican clergy, I was speaking historically. The Old Catholics and the Anglican Communion began a program of joint episcopal consecrations in 1932, for various reasons, one result of which was that it is possible to argue that the Anglican Episcopate has been throughly intermixed with valid (though illicit, in RC eyes) Old Catholic orders, by now. And occasionally, I see reference to a similar process between Orthodox and the Anglican Communion, per se. I have never seen an historical reference to support that.
Nice to meet you, and Happy St. Stephen’s Day to you. We had an ice storm locally and I found myself the lector at a Low Mass, reading both the Psalm and the Lesson. No music, except our few, but vigorous, voices.
GKC
Anglicanus Catholicus
Greetings, Traditional Ang,
I myself am a member of a Continuing Anglican parish, and am familiar with the Antiochan Orthodox, though not very. In fact, there was once some slight interest in my own jurisdiction (I think) about heading that way.
But when I refer to Orthodox participating in the ordination or consecration of Anglican clergy, I was speaking historically. The Old Catholics and the Anglican Communion began a program of joint episcopal consecrations in 1932, for various reasons, one result of which was that it is possible to argue that the Anglican Episcopate has been throughly intermixed with valid (though illicit, in RC eyes) Old Catholic orders, by now. And occasionally, I see reference to a similar process between Orthodox and the Anglican Communion, per se. I have never seen an historical reference to support that.
Nice to meet you, and Happy St. Stephen’s Day to you. We had an ice storm locally and I found myself the lector at a Low Mass, reading both the Psalm and the Lesson. No music, except our few, but vigorous, voices.
GKC
Anglicanus Catholicus
- Status