S
Sixtus
Guest
Well Sixtus, you diarrhoea of the fingers has concreted my opinion that “any reunification is just a pipe dream…”
- Status
S
Sixtus
Guest
Joe Warren if you are going to insult me, at least spell it correctly: diarhea is spelt diarrhoea, reunfication is ‘reunification’!.
The KSC are a euphemism for catholic thuggery.
We would not want Anglicans seeing what goes on in their meetings would we! Most Anglicans upon witnessing a bloody brawl would leave never to return!!!
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
Catholic thuggery? Like the Catholic mafia?
Watchout for those drive-by baptisms!
Watchout for those drive-by baptisms!
P
PaulDupre
Guest
What the hell are you talking about? I have been a 3rd degree knight for many years, and there is no “thuggery” or “bloody brawls” involved. A typical meeting goes like this:
Opening prayer.
Discussion of old business: results of fund-raising projects, including how funds were spent - supporting charities and buying equipment for the parish, etc.
Discussion of new business: new fund-raising projects, reports of requests for assistance by various charitable groups, brother knights and their families who need prayers or assistance, etc. Votes taken to allocate efforts and funds to various causes. Call for volunteers to staff new projects.
Closing prayer.
Fellowship, including pizza or sandwiches and soda/beer.
Typical KofC projects include supporting Right-to Life groups, shelters and adoption services for teen mothers, Christmas presents for poor kids, care packages, bibles and Catholic magazine subscriptions for soldiers overseas and people in prison, support for poor seminarians and Catholic Information Service which provides free tracts and books on Catholic Doctrines and devotional bible materials.
Thuggery? Hardly. It’s religion in action - “pure and undefiled” (see James 1:27).
Paul
C
Chris_LaRock
Guest
Don’t you discuss God’s word, or doctrine durring the meetings?
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
I think Sixtus was joking, just as I was joking when I used the diarhea comment…
R
rr1213
Guest
Six or seven parishes out of thousands is not much.
G
GKC
Guest
Sum total of all parishes that have been Anglican Use is more in the 12-15 range (I know, not that big a deal). Point is, the RCC doesn’t intend the AU to be permanent in a given parish. It’s supposed to be transitional, and once the original Anglican priest (reordained, to be sure) is gone, the parish usually converts to standard Novus Ordo. That happened in my home town, to an AU parish that had been part of the group of Anglicans who left ECUSA in the late 70s. My Continuing Anglican parish is the other part.
Some AU parishes probably will survive, as showplaces. But until the Use becomes a Rite, it’s never going to be permanent.
GKC
W
Windmill
Guest
AU parishes are attracting parishioners like crazy because of the particular style of worship. I was a member of one. There were people moving to live near the parish because they wanted it to be nearby for prayer, devotions, and Mass. The parishioners are usually very devout and orthodox, and none of them would want to go to a standard NO form.
Though the original intent may have been for the parishes to be a temporary halfway house, the Anglican Use is becoming more permanent. If a parish is forced to give up this heritage, I would bet the parish would die. It is just too special to all the converts AND those who have migrated from the NO churches.
The only reason I left was that I moved to a new town. If not, I would seriously have considered staying and starting my business there in town.
For those who look at the AU in strictly academic terms, you really should visit an AU parish and see what it has to offer. It is very ethereal and reverent. I have never seen its equal in a NO parish. Never. Just be careful. You might find yourself transported to Heaven and not wanting to leave.
Wait…isn’t Mass supposed to be Heaven on Earth? That’s hard to believe with some of the goofy guitar music you hear at many parishes.
Though the original intent may have been for the parishes to be a temporary halfway house, the Anglican Use is becoming more permanent. If a parish is forced to give up this heritage, I would bet the parish would die. It is just too special to all the converts AND those who have migrated from the NO churches.
The only reason I left was that I moved to a new town. If not, I would seriously have considered staying and starting my business there in town.
For those who look at the AU in strictly academic terms, you really should visit an AU parish and see what it has to offer. It is very ethereal and reverent. I have never seen its equal in a NO parish. Never. Just be careful. You might find yourself transported to Heaven and not wanting to leave.
Wait…isn’t Mass supposed to be Heaven on Earth? That’s hard to believe with some of the goofy guitar music you hear at many parishes.
G
GKC
Guest
As an Anglican, I share your enthusiamum for the AU liturgy (though I think the 1928 BCP would have been a better basis for the Book of Divine Worship than the 1979 version). Still, the AU is limited to roughly 6-8 parishes, and there is little chance this will grow significantly. The AU is not well received in many dioceses.
And the local parish I spoke of, that became NO, is now the local TLM indult parish. Not surprisingly, it is usually packed.
GKC
R
rr1213
Guest
Ok, I was going off the list at the website, but that probably doesn’t include parishes (like those in your hometown) that converted to the NO. I’m not Catholic (at least yet) so I suppose I have no say in the matter–and even if I was Catholic I suppose I would have no say in the matter–but I agree with your assessment that this is going to be a sideshow unless the Catholic Church sets up the Anglican Use as a separate rite. Although some Catholics object saying that such a rite would not be historically ancient, I don’t see why it couldn’t be done if the Church wanted to do it. You’d think that sufficient authority lies with “bind and loose” and all that you know…
R
rr1213
Guest
From my review of the liturgy from the Book of Divine Worship, the Liturgy of the Word follows the BCP Rite I pretty closely with only slight modifications. As might be expected, however, the Liturgy of the Eucharist is very different from BCP Rite I… I assume to make it conform with what is deemed necessary for a Catholic mass.
G
GKC
Guest
I agree. But I think the 28 BCP would be better model. Check the Creed. “I believe”, or “We believe”?
GKC, reader of Jack McDevitt books.
J
JonathanKinsman
Guest
Hello from California, Old Dominion!
I believe that there are 6 Episcopalian parishes in Texas alone which are now Anglican Use parishes under Catholic Diocesan supervision.
There are two in the Sacramento Valley area discussing reunion with Rome with which I am aware.
Is there a source that you know of where one could get the actual numbers of converting parishes?
Pax Christi
H
Hesychios
Guest
It seems that Texas is about it. Almost no other bishops want them.
According to the official policy on the Anglican Use, when the priest retires the parish MUST become a Latin rite parish. They have no choice in the matter.
That means that any converting parish will self destruct (or lose it’s identity) at a predictable time. This is not intended to be a way to restore (or incubate) orthodox Anglo-Catholicism, it is a way of easing the absorption of Anglicans into the local Latin rite diocese by steps.
Small wonder very few will agree to the arrangement.
Further, the title of property is in the hands off the diocese. If, after the parish is converted to the latin rite (sometime in the future), it is seen as too small to have a priest dedicated to it, the bishop could possibly close it down and sell the property, merging the congregation with another.
To repeat something I stated in the other thread under this heading (and has already been touched upon here), there is no realistic church backed plan to unite the Anglican Communion with Rome, that prospect is now further away than it has been since the beginning of those talks forty or more years ago. If anything the Anglican Communion has more in common with Methodists and Lutherans, so if there were any serious merger talks it would be with them now.
- Michael*
R
rr1213
Guest
Hey California!
I’ve a couple of bookmarks for websites that I don’t have access to now, but will later in the week. I’ll post something then. I don’t remember that these sites discusses converting parishes, but they did have a list of Anglican Use parishes. There are about six or seven at the present (assuming that the info on the websites is current…which it may not be). This might be a great idea, but if there is not a parish within driving distance they might as well be on the moon if you know what I mean.
RR1213
R
rr1213
Guest
Maybe this is just me, but I see this as an opportunity that is being lost by the Catholic Church. There are many dissatisfied Episcopalians now and to offer something that might draw them closer to the Catholic Church would seem, to me, to be a logical and admirable move. So why not make the move? Does the Church leadership think that such action would be vain? Does it not want a “competing” liturgy (albeit one which has been approved by the Church?) Is there not enough interest from the Episcopal side of the equation? If anyone has the real answers to these questions I’d love to hear them.
G
GKC
Guest
There are several reasons. The American hiearchy, like the English, prefers individual submission. And the last thing that most American ordinaries want to see showing up in their dioceses is a bunch of organised, traditionalist Anglicans who are more Catholic than the Pope. Or more traditionalist Catholic than the ordinary, anyway. Sounds like trouble.
As to a competing liturgy, how open are most dioceses to the indult?
GKC
- Status