Australian Traditional Anglicans vote to become Catholic [CN-USA]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Technically, officially, and IOW Apostolicae curae, there can be no doubt. The ordinations would be absolute, not re-ordinationss, unless (as has only occurred twice, officially, since 1896) they are performed sub conditione, for specific reasons. My interest in the slight, very slight, chance that this might happen (and it would have to be on a case by case basis) is that it would speak volumes as to the attitude of the RCC in this process. I do not expect it do happen.

GKC
Isn’t that what I said? Sub conditione is when the consecrators think there might be doubt as to form, intention, or something in the consecration of the recipient, right? So they do it again to be safe. I just didn’t bust out the Latin like some people! 😃
 
The Anglicans had no doubt. As a Baptist, you were not ordained sacerdotus, in apostolic succession, with all the technical requirements, as Anglicans, RCs and Orthodox believe is necessary. Which is the point of Apostolicae curae; The RCC maintains that Anglicans are not ordained/consecrated in apostolic succession, either, since 1559, due to technical issues. Hence they must be ordained (not re-ordained, there is no such thing).

That the RCC insists on ordination to the priesthood, in her priests, is logical, to say the least. That you can submit to ordination, as a layman (per AC) is commendable, given your convictions. That some Anglicans, knowledgeable in the history, personalities and theology involved in the story of Apostolicae curae, might remain convinced of their own valid orders is also logical. And if so, they are not convinced that the nature of the authority of the RCC permits that judgment to be (for all purposes), absolute. That is, they have not truly submitted to Rome. If you believe your orders valid, you have not accepted the authority of Rome, as expressed in AC. Until you affirm they are absolutely null and utterly void, without question.

As I said, I am interested in whether any use is made of sub conditione ordination. It would take a good deal of work.

GKC
I agree gurney. I was ordained in the SBC. The Anglican Church just did not recieve me and give me a parish. They required me to be ordained by an Anglican Bishop. I had to go through confirmation, layreader, chalicebearer, Deacon and then Priest. I submitted so the Anglicans would be sure and not have any doubt. Ditto (little Rush lingo for ya!😃 I know just how close you two are:eek:) for the Roman Catholics. The cure of souls is at stake, so everything must be in order to remove any doubt.

Why are some opposed to ordination or re-ordination? As I talk with those who are opposed, they truly believe they have valid orders on par with the Catholics and Orthodox. They are slightly miffed that even though Anglicans recognize Catholic and Orthodox orders and sacraments, the Catholics and Orthodox do not recognize theirs. Basically, we are playing nice why won’t they. They seem unable to understand the Catholic/Orthodox position. I believe my orders are valid, but do understand the Catholic position. I can not fault them, especially with everything going on in the last 40 years in Anglicanism. I will submit, if allowed, to remove any doubt about me.

Fr.Mark
 
Fr. Mark, I realize to those already ordained in their specific churches the idea that the Catholic church would want ordain them again because doubt crept into whether their previous ordaination was valid or not can be insulting. However, those that are insulted should relax and try to understand that they’d be in effect moving from one church to another. With that in mind remember that even though the Catholic church doesn’t recognize the validity of the other churches as having everything the Catholic church has, doctrine, ceremony, etc. The Catholic church is viewed the same way by the Jewish community. They don’t recognize us either. So it is just a by product of who came first. No offense is intended.
 
Fr. Mark, I realize to those already ordained in their specific churches the idea that the Catholic church would want ordain them again because doubt crept into whether their previous ordaination was valid or not can be insulting. However, those that are insulted should relax and try to understand that they’d be in effect moving from one church to another. With that in mind remember that even though the Catholic church doesn’t recognize the validity of the other churches as having everything the Catholic church has, doctrine, ceremony, etc. The Catholic church is viewed the same way by the Jewish community. They don’t recognize us either. So it is just a by product of who came first. No offense is intended.
No offense is taken by me. I understand the Catholic position, and the Jewish etc. Even the Anglican position that requires ordination of others coming into the Anglican Communion. The priests I know who are making this move, at first had the emotional reaction when ordination was mentioned. I did! Once the “shock” or emotions pasted, we took stock of the situation, the Holy Spirit lead us to make a decision we belong in the Catholic Church, we want to be in communion. And we will not be the stumbling block, our pride or whatever to that communion. We all approach Rome with no absolutes of ever being a priest. I may have said my last Mass this past January.

This is an emotional experience for Anglican Bishops, Priests and Deacons. Some, many or all may lose what they hold very precious, being a priest. This is lost on boards such as this and in conversations or right/wrong, valid/invalid…the 100+ year old arguments, or 500 year old. Many men are making a great sacrifice in this walk of faith. As are their families. Lose of income, insurance, house, friends and family and an uncertain future. I think in our discussions we all too easily over look the human element in this movement.

Anyway, the HOB of the TAC is close to reaching a decision, according to my fly on the wall. If a senior warden can be a fly? Well they can annoy ya at times:D. I would be surprised if it is anything but positive. The dissenting Bishop already left the TAC for the ACC. Once the meeting is over, I will post a website to go to read the results. If it is not against the rules of the forum.

Fr.Mark
 
It was just announced that TAC in the US has voted to have ordinariates here.

I am praying that my old parish which is a TAC parish will join also. It is a ways from where I live, but I will make the drive whenever I can. I also hope that there will be others in my area who will join the Ordinariate and start a mission.

You can find more information on the Anglo Catholic blog and I am sure that more informaton will be coming.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette
 
:extrahappy: HALLELUJIAH!

The sooner we get this up and running in Orlando, the happier I’ll be!
 
No offense is taken by me. I understand the Catholic position, and the Jewish etc. Even the Anglican position that requires ordination of others coming into the Anglican Communion. The priests I know who are making this move, at first had the emotional reaction when ordination was mentioned. I did! Once the “shock” or emotions pasted, we took stock of the situation, the Holy Spirit lead us to make a decision we belong in the Catholic Church, we want to be in communion. And we will not be the stumbling block, our pride or whatever to that communion. We all approach Rome with no absolutes of ever being a priest. I may have said my last Mass this past January.

This is an emotional experience for Anglican Bishops, Priests and Deacons. Some, many or all may lose what they hold very precious, being a priest. This is lost on boards such as this and in conversations or right/wrong, valid/invalid…the 100+ year old arguments, or 500 year old. Many men are making a great sacrifice in this walk of faith. As are their families. Lose of income, insurance, house, friends and family and an uncertain future. I think in our discussions we all too easily over look the human element in this movement.

Anyway, the HOB of the TAC is close to reaching a decision, according to my fly on the wall. If a senior warden can be a fly? Well they can annoy ya at times:D. I would be surprised if it is anything but positive. The dissenting Bishop already left the TAC for the ACC. Once the meeting is over, I will post a website to go to read the results. If it is not against the rules of the forum.

Fr.Mark
What is going on is not lost on me.

GKC
 
I especially like Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, and Chris Matthews (though I don’t agree with them on everything, I do love it when Keith froths at the mouth).
You rascal. I’m a Bill O’Reilley moderate Repub, you know that! I do listen to Hannity and I like Mark Stein, the stand-in for Rush much more than Limbaugh anyday! 😛
 
Oh, Usbek, Keith Olbermann is a psychotic! While I disapprove of both Maddow’s lesbian lifestyle as well as her liberal commie philosophies, she is far more sane and charitable and human than Keith. Olbermann is a loon. I have noticed that Chris Matthews has come out of the liberal closet far more in the last two years or so than in previous ones. He used to sock it to both sides a little more. Now you’ll see him openly laugh at a Republican who doesn’t believe in evolution and question them as if they’re some idiot that doesn’t believe in gravity or oxygen. He also talks about the liberal health care agenda in "we "terms and tries to persuade conservatives and moderates, more of an apologetics and evangelization course for Dems now than what he was in the past. I totally disagree with his politics, but Matthews has a good eye for motivations and maneuvering. He’s good at disecting the game of politics. I think Sean Hannity is a lousy host most of the time. Glen Beck would be great if he’d stop the theatrics. He acts like a vaudvillian on uppers. And please, who uses a chalkboard in 2010! LOL…Greta Van Susteran just plain terrifies me! Ed Shultz is a reverse-Rush wannabe…Rush scares me most of the time…like I said, I like O’Reilly a lot. I also like Candy Crowley a lot on CNN. Anderson Cooper’s a wimp! lol
I especially like Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, and Chris Matthews (though I don’t agree with them on everything, I do love it when Keith froths at the mouth).
 
Anode, Maybe its the parish I go to but I don’t see that. Oh don’t get me wrong I do have reservations about some Doctrines, but I just take it on faith and go to church. I ask questions and when I have doubt I pray. Keep in mind I’m only a catachumen but I still intend to join the Catholic church. Your right in some respects though some people I work with are lapsed catholics that fell away from the faith over a variety of issues though most was over money. I have reminded a few that even if they’ve stopped going their still catholic and are always welcome back.
I don’t live on either coast.
 
I would agree with other posters who say it is too much to say the Anglican church is falling apart. The Anglicans do face some problems (as with other churches, declining attendance and ageing congregations) but so do other churches including the CC. I think it should be kept in mind Mass attendance in most Western countries is only about 10-15% of the total number of those that have been baptised.

The TAC in Australia is a branch of the church whose practices are similar to Catholics and it has about 500,000 members (though in my view these may well be inflated; the levels of actual attendance is quite small in the Anglican church in Australia). Their theology, sacramental practice and moral beliefs are highly conservative and mostly in line with the CC. However it should be remembered the Australian Anglican church also has a large evangelical wing whose liturgical practice has far more in common with Pentecostalism than with Catholicism (i.e. the Hillsong style of church).

Many evangelicals would have reservations about joining the Roman church, as would the liberal Catholic wing of the church, because of the highly centralised and authoritarian style of leadership, the lack of freedom to decide a range of matters on conscience, and the hard line on issues like divorce, contraceptive use, dissent, etc. Anglicans are somewhat more relaxed on these matters and certainly Catholics fed up with the hardline conservatism of the Roman church can go the other way, as conservative Anglicans fed up with liberal practices in the Anglican church (such as ordaining women, permitting homosexual unions to be blessed, and ordaining practicing gays as ministers) go to Rome.

I would prefer to see churches to try and resolve internal differences rather than encouraging members to defect to another church. The Vatican should certainly do more to work out the problems between liberal and hardline conservative Catholics, without adopting a position which represents a defacto endorsement of the hardline position which hardliners have then used as a weapon to try to browbeat liberals into submission to their views. The Vatican should also not adopt measures which undermine the internal integrity of other churches. I am sure the Vatican would cry foul if the Anglican or Orthodox church started to encourage Catholics to leave the church en masse, which would be disruptive to the unity and Catholicity of the church. Churches should work towards reunification but not by encouraging members of other churches to leave their original denominations. Doing so undermines the integrity of the community and helps engender hostility and inflame tensions. But if people want to join a church for bona fide reasons and in good conscience, then no church should, by reason of that person’s prior denomination, act in a manner hostile or judgemental to them.
 
The TAC is not a part of the official Anglican Communion, it is what is known as a Continuing Anglican jurisdiction, not in communion with Canterbury. In Australia, it’s manifestation is known as Anglican Catholic Church in Australia; associated with it is the Church of Torres Straits. The history of how the TAC was formed, years ago, is complex. In America, the constituent group which is associated with the TAC is the Anglican Church in America.

The TAC, consisting of a world-wide group of such local Anglican jurisdictions as these, states it has a membership of around 400,000, which number has lately been stated as including around 200,000 in average Sunday attendance. Both figures came as a surprise to many other Anglicans in the Continuing movement.

The TAC, and most of the Continuing Anglican movement, are on the Anglo-Catholic side of the historical Anglican spectrum, Thus, while not excluding the evangelical portion, the TAC is more likely, generally to find the idea of some sort of union with the RCC to be a good thing. And, starting around 10 years ago, has been pursuing that end. Anglicanorum coetibus is the form in which Rome has, at long last, decided to reply, influenced somewhat by the interest shown by two Church of England bishops, last year, given the state of Anglo-Catholicism in the CoE.

The point of the TAC approach, and the hitch-hiking from that small group in the CoE, is to look for a place where the Catholic faith can be followed, in the distinctive Anglican mode, not losing such Anglican patrimony as can be retained. This is what Rome has opened a door to, and it was a solicited offer, from a subset of Anglicans. While not all Anglo-Catholics, Continuing Anglicans, or even all laity of the TAC will respond, the offer was a good one, and I wish those who accept it well, as I wish those who offered it the same.

GKC

*posterus traditus Anglicanus, Anglicanus-Catholicus *
I would agree with other posters who say it is too much to say the Anglican church is falling apart. The Anglicans do face some problems (as with other churches, declining attendance and ageing congregations) but so do other churches including the CC. I think it should be kept in mind Mass attendance in most Western countries is only about 10-15% of the total number of those that have been baptised.

The TAC in Australia is a branch of the church whose practices are similar to Catholics and it has about 500,000 members (though in my view these may well be inflated; the levels of actual attendance is quite small in the Anglican church in Australia). Their theology, sacramental practice and moral beliefs are highly conservative and mostly in line with the CC. However it should be remembered the Australian Anglican church also has a large evangelical wing whose liturgical practice has far more in common with Pentecostalism than with Catholicism (i.e. the Hillsong style of church).

Many evangelicals would have reservations about joining the Roman church, as would the liberal Catholic wing of the church, because of the highly centralised and authoritarian style of leadership, the lack of freedom to decide a range of matters on conscience, and the hard line on issues like divorce, contraceptive use, dissent, etc. Anglicans are somewhat more relaxed on these matters and certainly Catholics fed up with the hardline conservatism of the Roman church can go the other way, as conservative Anglicans fed up with liberal practices in the Anglican church (such as ordaining women, permitting homosexual unions to be blessed, and ordaining practicing gays as ministers) go to Rome.

I would prefer to see churches to try and resolve internal differences rather than encouraging members to defect to another church. The Vatican should certainly do more to work out the problems between liberal and hardline conservative Catholics, without adopting a position which represents a defacto endorsement of the hardline position which hardliners have then used as a weapon to try to browbeat liberals into submission to their views. The Vatican should also not adopt measures which undermine the internal integrity of other churches. I am sure the Vatican would cry foul if the Anglican or Orthodox church started to encourage Catholics to leave the church en masse, which would be disruptive to the unity and Catholicity of the church. Churches should work towards reunification but not by encouraging members of other churches to leave their original denominations. Doing so undermines the integrity of the community and helps engender hostility and inflame tensions. But if people want to join a church for bona fide reasons and in good conscience, then no church should, by reason of that person’s prior denomination, act in a manner hostile or judgemental to them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top