Could Anglicans Join As New Rite

[DL82]

The Eastern churches that were formerly in scism with Rome re-joined but retained their own rites, priests and patriarchs. Could the Anglican church or a splinter of Anglicanism, say a faction large enough to boast its’ own Archbishop, be re-admitted to communion with Rome while remaining Anglican, i.e. become the English Rite Catholic Church?

If so, I think there could be a few candidates for this given the current moral crisis in the Anglican communion. The Archbishop of Nigeria being one who immediately springs to mind.

If not, why not?

 

[kangnamdragon]

I would think all of their priests would have to go through a valid ordination.

 

[colliric]

The Eastern churches that were formerly in scism with Rome re-joined but retained their own rites, priests and patriarchs. Could the Anglican church or a splinter of Anglicanism, say a faction large enough to boast its’ own Archbishop, be re-admitted to communion with Rome while remaining Anglican, i.e. become the English Rite Catholic Church?

If so, I think there could be a few candidates for this given the current moral crisis in the Anglican communion. The Archbishop of Nigeria being one who immediately springs to mind.

If not, why not?

Anglo-Catholics and High Church Anglicans probally wouldn’t join under a new rite, they would simply become a part of the Latin rite, only with the old English Hymnals. Thats because that is what they once were apart of and their services are still the same as the modern Latin Rite, only they were put into english many years ago and they say the apostles Creed instead of the Nicrene creed.

The structural organisation of their church is still exactly the same as when they were part of the Latin Rite so long ago now. All the Pope would really need to do is simply re-communicate a willing Archbishop of Canterbury(or other archbishops) back into communion and swap the Apostles creed with the Nicrene, and their back in the Latin Rite again. This would require jostling for position within Archdioceses and diocese, but I think the fact that Parish numbers would significantly increase would allow them to retain their same positions and rank over their own parishes or to split a diocese in area size into 2 evenly spread dioceses. For example my own archdiocese of Melbourne has more than a few Anglican high church parishes and an Anglo-Catholic cathedral, and the responsibility might need to be shared between both Archbishops. For example, it could be one is given the responsibility of East melbourne, and another given the responsibility of West melbourne.

meh, I guess your way would be easier, or returning them to the Latin Rite would simply be done by election or poll of some sort. anyway it would be cool for Melbourne to have 2 Catholic cathedrals practically within walking distance of each other, St Peter’s(Catholic) and St Paul’s(Anglo-Catholic). I’d like that, and to be honest with you I’d probally join the St Paul’s congregation… that church is really really beautiful on the inside, I’ve gone in there for quiet reflection in the past and it’s really nice and solemn.

 

[colliric]

I would think all of their priests would have to go through a valid ordination.

Not really at least for the “anglo-catholics” and even the High Church anglicans, it would only have to be a touch up on Marian beliefs and Confessional, two practices even some of their more “Anglo-Catholic” priests already follow. They already believe in the Real Presence in the full catholic sense of it and in all other Catholic doctrines pre-split, with exception of Papal Infallibility.

Their mass services and liturgical year practices are practically the same(the only difference during mass is the Apostles Creed which is said instead of the Nicene, and also as I recall they mention the Archbishop instead of saying “together with his holiness the Pope”, oh and “for thine is the kingdom” is part of their lord’s prayer and not said as a responsive). It’s only really the doctrine that was clarified after their split from Rome which they would require more knowledge of.

 

[MelanieAnne]

As an American, I am more familiar with the Episcopal Church in America. There is some division, as I recall, about the Filioque clause in the Nicene Creed. Does this confusion exist among Anglo-Catholics as well?

 

[colliric]

To me, the Catholic church does not accept their ordination because the Anglican church is a true protestant church and does not teach full catholic doctrine in it’s entirity as a organisation, unlike valid mass churches which in some way have apostolic sucession (SSPX, Orthodox, etc) or follow the complete catholic belief only have had an external source put them under extreme duress and force them to place their true following of the Pope deep within their hearts(I’m pointing my finger at the Chinese government).

 

[colliric]

As an American, I am more familiar with the Episcopal Church in America. There is some division, as I recall, about the Filioque clause in the Nicene Creed. Does this confusion exist among Anglo-Catholics as well?

Not sure it’s been 6 years since I attended mass in an Anglo-catholic church. I’m not sure why they actually say the Apostles Creed in place of the Nicrene creed, but perhaps that confusion may be a reason why?

Maby they just thought best to just go with the Apostles creed instead and not go near the debate…

umm actually I just did some wikipedia:

The Gathering of the Community: Beginning with a Trinitarian-based greeting or seasonal acclamation; followed by the Collect for Purity; the Gloria in Excelsis Deo, Kyrie eleison, and/or Trisagion; and then the collect of the day. During Lent and/or Advent especially, this part of the service may begin or end with a penitential rite.

The Proclamation of the Word: Usually two to three readings of Scripture, one of which is always from the Gospels, plus a psalm (or portion thereof) or canticle. This is followed by a sermon or homily; the recitation of the Apostles’, Nicene or Athanasian Creeds; the prayers of the congregation or a general intercession, a general confession and absolution, and the passing of the peace.

The Celebration of the Eucharist: The gifts of bread and wine are received, along with other gifts (such as money and/or food for a food bank, etc.), and an offertory prayer is recited. Following this, a Eucharistic Prayer (called “The Great Thanksgiving”) is offered. This prayer consists of a dialogue (the Sursum Corda), a preface, the sanctus and benedictus, the words of institution, and the epiclesis. The Lord’s Prayer usually follows, followed by the fraction (the breaking of the bread), the Prayer of Humble Access, the Agnus Dei, and the distribution of the sacred elements (the bread and wine). After all who have desired to have received, there is a post-Communion prayer. A doxology or general prayer of thanksgiving may follow. The service concludes with a Trinitarian blessing and the dismissal.

So there you go, they do say the Nicrene creed, It just wasn’t said in my parish, we just did the apostles creed every week!

 

[Jayda]

hola,

i do not know what serious liturgical differences exist between the high church anglicans and the latin rite that would require the creation of a particular church… but then again i do not think there are any serious differences between the latin right and ambrosian rite so maybe that is not what matters…

i think it makes the most sense to wait for the anglican communion to work out its internal issues before approaching the idea of bringing them back into communion with Rome. if we just embrace the high church we are turning our back on the fact that for a very long time there was full communion worked out between catholic (high church) and evangelical protestant (low church) within anglicanism. important lessons could be drawn from that association for when we begin to approach the evangelical protestants about returning to full communion…

i think ideally the entire anglican communion could come back into full communion with Rome… if that happened we could especially learn from the dynamic of the low Church evangelicals now in communion with Rome and apply that to all the other remaining protestant groups…

does that make sense?

Dominus Vobiscum

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

A good many of my Anglican friends have asked this, or similar, questions. Often, they, too, point out former schismatic groups that have returned to full communion with the See of Peter, sometimes being allowed to, say, retain married priests, as in the Uniate case.

But there is a profound misunderstanding in these assumptions. Anglican orders are null and void. Full stop, period, nothing further to say. Their Deacons, Priests and bishops have not received the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Their clergy are simply not in the same position as were the clergy of returning schismatics, or even the position of the Eastern Orthodox clergy today.

Anglicanism is a Protestant sect, and as welcome as any of its members will be on return to the See of Peter, they will be welcomed as converts, not as returning schismatic Catholics.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[MelanieAnne]

Former Anglican/Episcopal priests that become Catholic priests, if already married, can become married Catholic priests. (They get to keep their wives! ) I would think that, in transition, any reunited Anglican communion priests would enjoy the same process. If I remember correctly, they would not be eligible to become Bishops, however. So there could possibly be some carryover from Anglicanism, at least temporarily.

 

[GKC]

Anglo-Catholics and High Church Anglicans probally wouldn’t join under a new rite, they would simply become a part of the Latin rite, only with the old English Hymnals. Thats because that is what they once were apart of and their services are still the same as the modern Latin Rite, only they were put into english many years ago and they say the apostles Creed instead of the Nicrene creed.

Anglicans use both the Apostle’s Creed, and the Nicene Creed, as appropriate. The Nicene Creed, at Mass, for example, in the ECUSA 1928 BCP, the Apostle’s Creed at Evening Prayer. Where did you get that idea?

The issue raised here by the OP might relate to whether a formal Anglcain Rote, as opposed to the current Anglcian Use, might bring more converts.

GKC

*Anglicanus Catholicus *

The structural organisation of their church is still exactly the same as when they were part of the Latin Rite so long ago now. All the Pope would really need to do is simply re-communicate a willing Archbishop of Canterbury(or other archbishops) back into communion and swap the Apostles creed with the Nicrene, and their back in the Latin Rite again. This would require jostling for position within Archdioceses and diocese, but I think the fact that Parish numbers would significantly increase would allow them to retain their same positions and rank over their own parishes or to split a diocese in area size into 2 evenly spread dioceses. For example my own archdiocese of Melbourne has more than a few Anglican high church parishes and an Anglo-Catholic cathedral, and the responsibility might need to be shared between both Archbishops. For example, it could be one is given the responsibility of East melbourne, and another given the responsibility of West melbourne.

meh, I guess your way would be easier, or returning them to the Latin Rite would simply be done by election or poll of some sort. anyway it would be cool for Melbourne to have 2 Catholic cathedrals practically within walking distance of each other, St Peter’s(Catholic) and St Paul’s(Anglo-Catholic). I’d like that, and to be honest with you I’d probally join the St Paul’s congregation… that church is really really beautiful on the inside, I’ve gone in there for quiet reflection in the past and it’s really nice and solemn.

 

[GKC]

A good many of my Anglican friends have asked this, or similar, questions. Often, they, too, point out former schismatic groups that have returned to full communion with the See of Peter, sometimes being allowed to, say, retain married priests, as in the Uniate case.

But there is a profound misunderstanding in these assumptions. Anglican orders are null and void. Full stop, period, nothing further to say. Their Deacons, Priests and bishops have not received the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Their clergy are simply not in the same position as were the clergy of returning schismatics, or even the position of the Eastern Orthodox clergy today.

Anglicanism is a Protestant sect, and as welcome as any of its members will be on return to the See of Peter, they will be welcomed as converts, not as returning schismatic Catholics.

Blessings,

Gerry

Your position, is, of course, correct for the RCC, IAW the wording in Apostolicae Curae. Anglicans differ, and that’s one reason some have not converted, IMO.

And some Anglican priests have received *sub conditione *ordination, upon converting. Which means that there was further to say, in those cases.

*AC *is a complicated issue historically, but boils down roughly to what you said, for RCs.

I always remind RCs that AC says what AC says, and they should affirm it. Me, I don’t. But I’m Anglican.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

Anglo-Catholics and High Church Anglicans probally wouldn’t join under a new rite, they would simply become a part of the Latin rite, only with the old English Hymnals…

My understanding is that there already is a “Usage” within the Latin Rite for “Anglican Use”. It was introduced in the 1980’s to help Anglican and Episcopal clergy converting their parishes.

More info:
ewtn.com/expert/answers/catholic_rites_and_churches.htm

 

[kangnamdragon]

Not really at least for the “anglo-catholics” and even the High Church anglicans, it would only have to be a touch up on Marian beliefs and Confessional, two practices even some of their more “Anglo-Catholic” priests already follow. They already believe in the Real Presence in the full catholic sense of it and in all other Catholic doctrines pre-split, with exception of Papal Infallibility.

Their mass services and liturgical year practices are practically the same(the only difference during mass is the Apostles Creed which is said instead of the Nicene, and also as I recall they mention the Archbishop instead of saying “together with his holiness the Pope”, oh and “for thine is the kingdom” is part of their lord’s prayer and not said as a responsive). It’s only really the doctrine that was clarified after their split from Rome which they would require more knowledge of.

They may believe in the real presence, but they don’t have the real presence. They lost Apostolic succession.

 

[sandmountainsli]

Bah!
Anglicanism is just an old outdated form of Methodism!

Let us see if THAT starts a nice knockdown argument
WP

 

[GKC]

My understanding is that there already is a “Usage” within the Latin Rite for “Anglican Use”. It was introduced in the 1980’s to help Anglican and Episcopal clergy converting their parishes.

More info:
ewtn.com/expert/answers/catholic_rites_and_churches.htm

There is indeed an Anglican Use, as I mentioned above. It is not intended to be permanent, as it would be if it were tranformed into a Rite, but 5-6 parishes currently are Anglican Use, with a modified form of the 1979 prayer book for their liturgy. With the exception of 2-3 showcase parishes, in Texas, all AU parishes can expect to be transitioned to NO parishes, when the orginal former Anglican priest leaves or dies. That is what happen to the AU parish in my home town, and to most such parishes formed so far. It is a transitional situation.

GKC

*Anglicanus Catholicus *

 

[GKC]

Bah!
Anglicanism is just an old outdated form of Methodism!

Let us see if THAT starts a nice knockdown argument
WP

Not here.

GKC

 

[LilyM]

My understanding is that there already is a “Usage” within the Latin Rite for “Anglican Use”. It was introduced in the 1980’s to help Anglican and Episcopal clergy converting their parishes.

More info:
ewtn.com/expert/answers/catholic_rites_and_churches.htm

Exactly what I was thinking … although remember the Anglican church has a broad umbrella of levels of liturgy (such as ‘high church’ v ‘low church’), so the Anglican Use might not be appropriate for all. Although I imagine most of those who didn’t like it wouldn’t be too uncomfortable with the Pauline Mass as is.

There would be issues integrating the clergy for sure.

 

[GKC]

They may believe in the real presence, but they don’t have the real presence. They lost Apostolic succession.

For those who respect the authority of a Papal Bull, that is what they believe, yes. Only a few Anglicans fit into that category.

GKC

 

[mark_a]

Check this out:

Anglican Use Rites of the Catholic Church