Catholic Orders and some protestant groups

[GregoryPalamas]

I surmise that there are few if any groups among protestants that are orthodox enough to as a group become Catholic but I will through out this idea. I suspect the Vatican is way ahead of all of us on this, but this may begin an interesting conversation.

A friend of mine suggested that some protestant groups that may be only some subgroups of denominations may wish to break away and reunite with the Church. In theory it is a fascinating idea. For example are there presently any “Anglo-Catholic” groups that may still be orthodox enough to form an order within Catholicism? My friend was maybe stil is a United Methodist but quite orthodox in his theology. He wondered if there might be enough United Methodists orthodox enough to desire becoming as a group an order within the Catholic faith.

I understand that if one wishes to become Catholic they should become Catholic. I’m just wondering aloud if this is one way for them to do so. Of course this would necessitate a great deal of investigation but the idea at least intrigues me.

CDL

 

[1ke]

What do you mean “an order within the Catholic Church”?

 

[JMBNH]

There’s a case to be made for an Anglo-Catholic sui iuris Church, appointing its own bishop with its own traditions but answerable to the Holy See and still being bound by Catholic dogma, as there is with the different Eastern Catholic Churches. Though not sure if this is what you mean

 

[Harpazo]

That would be interesting.

A friend of mine and I were discussing this the other day. The Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) which grew out of the Oxford movement in the mid to late 1800s has officially applied for union with the See of Rome, and invariably the other Churches that are in union.

From what I can recall, there are at least 500,000 members in this Anglican branch. What if the Pope were to make the leader of that Communion, should they enter in (and I pray they do!!), the Patriarch of that Church? It could be officially called the Anglo-Catholic Church and it’s leader could be given the title of “Patriarch of Canterburry and all the Anglo-Catholics.” Sounds pretty cool, eh?

Hopefully if the Holy Father and the Church did this, then that would send a message to the Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox that we’re serious about reunion and that they could keep their traditions, respective jurisdictions, etc.

Has anyone else thought about this?

Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew

 

[GregoryPalamas]

What do you mean “an order within the Catholic Church”?

What if a large group of more traditional Methodist (there are a few though I know it sounds oxymoronic) converted and applied as an Order like the Dominicans? Or what if they followed the example given by Harpazo?

CDL

 

[GKC]

That would be interesting.

A friend of mine and I were discussing this the other day. The Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) which grew out of the Oxford movement in the mid to late 1800s has officially applied for union with the See of Rome, and invariably the other Churches that are in union.

From what I can recall, there are at least 500,000 members in this Anglican branch. What if the Pope were to make the leader of that Communion, should they enter in (and I pray they do!!), the Patriarch of that Church? It could be officially called the Anglo-Catholic Church and it’s leader could be given the title of “Patriarch of Canterburry and all the Anglo-Catholics.” Sounds pretty cool, eh?

Hopefully if the Holy Father and the Church did this, then that would send a message to the Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox that we’re serious about reunion and that they could keep their traditions, respective jurisdictions, etc.

Has anyone else thought about this?

Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew

It’s a little misleading to say that the TAC grew out of the Oxford movement (or the Tractarians, or the Ritualists). It is true that, to the extent thaat the TAC is Anglo-Catholic (and it is, largely) Anglo-Catholicsm is the offspring of these Anglican movements in the CoE. But the TAC exists, as an entity, because it split from the official Anglican Communion over heretical and apostate doctrine. Without that, they would be Anglo-Catholic members of the Worldwide Anglican Communion.

I’ve seen 500,000 as a figure, too. Like most folks in the Continuing Anglican movement (which is what the TAC is), those figures seem a little hard to believe.

And, whatever is the truth about whatever might be going on between the TAC, and Rome, making Archbishop Hepworth the Patriach as you suggest would be problematic, in that he was a RC priest. Otherwise, sounds kinda cool.

GKC

*posterus traditus Anglicanus *

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

What if a large group of more traditional Methodist (there are a few though I know it sounds oxymoronic) converted and applied as an Order like the Dominicans? Or what if they followed the example given by Harpazo?

CDL

I am not sure how that could work. the religious Orders such as Dominicans, Franciscans, etc… grew out of following the life and devotions of the saint for which they are named and if I am not mistaken the laity does not belong to any Order even if your Parish church happens to be run by one. I really don’t think that there could be a Methodist order of laity. Now I do think that It would be workable for say any church (denomination) to come into Union with Rome and even for their minister ( even the married ones) to become priest.

 

[1ke]

What if a large group of more traditional Methodist (there are a few though I know it sounds oxymoronic) converted and applied as an Order like the Dominicans? Or what if they followed the example given by Harpazo?

CDL

They would be Latin Rite Catholics, nothing else.

 

[Harpazo]

They would be Latin Rite Catholics, nothing else.

Why? Why wouldn’t they be allowed to maintain their traditions (assuming they aren’t heretical), but conform to the Catholic theology? The Eastern Catholic Churches that returned to the Church didn’t have to give up everything. Although some did due to Latinization (which is a shame), they are getting back to their roots.

Who’s to say it couldn’t be the same for these groups that wanted to convert en masse?

Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew

 

[Harpazo]

It’s a little misleading to say that the TAC grew out of the Oxford movement (or the Tractarians, or the Ritualists). It is true that, to the extent thaat the TAC is Anglo-Catholic (and it is, largely) Anglo-Catholicsm is the offspring of these Anglican movements in the CoE. But the TAC exists, as an entity, because it split from the official Anglican Communion over heretical and apostate doctrine. Without that, they would be Anglo-Catholic members of the Worldwide Anglican Communion.

I’ve seen 500,000 as a figure, too. Like most folks in the Continuing Anglican movement (which is what the TAC is), those figures seem a little hard to believe.

And, whatever is the truth about whatever might be going on between the TAC, and Rome, making Archbishop Hepworth the Patriach as you suggest would be problematic, in that he was a RC priest. Otherwise, sounds kinda cool.

GKC

*posterus traditus Anglicanus *

Ah, I stand corrected. Thank you for the correction.

I could see where it would be problematic in making Hepworth the Patriarch from what you said, but it also would be a slap in the face to the Anglicans and their head, Williams. But if Rome did do such a thing and make Hepworth the Patriarch of the Anglo-Catholics (a cool sounded title), it would be because the Anglican communion cannot get their act together and purify their community of the heresies they have adopted since their separation with Rome.

Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew