English Catholicism as a separate Western Rite?

[HopkinsReb]

HopkinsReb:

Sorry for hijacking the thread, OP.

No problem at all, I am OK with thread drift. I view this as a community and I like to see discussions go where they will.

Well, that’s not a very European approach. That’s a nice, American laissez-faire approach.

BAM. Full circle.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Sorry for hijacking the thread, OP.

I would say it probably is kind of European. I have found that Poles (the European nationality with which I have the most familiarity, having married into them) are very pleased with having long, thoughtful discussions, where every speaker gets their say for as long as they want to talk — no interruptions — and everyone else listens intently, then someone else gets their turn, and so on. That plus some vodka, tea, and cakes, and you’ve got yourself a whole evening around the dinner table.

 

[phil19034]

In short… no. None of the former Latin Rites of the West were every considered separate from the Latin Church.

And it honestly doesn’t make sense to create a new su juris from the Latin Church.

NOW, it may make sense to one day consider the Ordinariate as a “sui juris” Church if it grows larger (which is a way it is), but right now, it’s fine the way it is.

 

[HopkinsReb]

I have found that Poles (the European nationality with which I have the most familiarity, having married into them)

I would argue that the Poles may be among the most American Europeans. Though I was making a quip about a general inclination towards rigid central planning rather than about conversation.

 

[GordonP]

Is it possible that English culture (or even the larger British culture taken as a whole) is so distinct from that of continental Europe that an Anglican Rite, in union with the Holy Father, could ever exist as a separate sui juris Church, akin to the various Eastern Rites?

What real-world problem would that be a practical response to? And how do you imagine that your solution would address that problem in the real world?

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I have found that Poles (the European nationality with which I have the most familiarity, having married into them)

Good quip, touché.

I can tell you that Poles absolutely love the USA, though they do not like being excluded from the Visa Waiver Program, which every one of their neighbors, aside from Russia/Belarus/Ukraine, is a part of. Traditionally they have sought “tourist visas” to come here and work for a time, accumulate cash, and then go home — not condoning this, just stating the fact. Now with the EU’s freedom of movement, many prefer to stay closer to home, and to be in a situation where their immigration status isn’t an issue.

Just outside of Zyrardow* in central Poland, there is (or was when I was there) one of the largest, most massive, American flags you have ever seen, on a flagpole in front of the main highway. You see things like that in Poland. My son is going there later this summer, I’ll ask him to keep an eye out for anything new.

*corrected spelling, I can’t spell in Polish to save my life. One time I even misspelled my in-laws’ surname on an envelope!

 

[InThePew]

I would definitely agree that British culture is very different to European culture but I’m not so sure that this feeds into the celebration of the mass. At the same time, Scottish culture is definitely not the same as English with Irish being different again - notably, both have separate Bishops’ Conferences and seminaries!

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Is it possible that English culture (or even the larger British culture taken as a whole) is so distinct from that of continental Europe that an Anglican Rite, in union with the Holy Father, could ever exist as a separate sui juris Church, akin to the various Eastern Rites?

The first thing that comes to mind is to allow disaffected Anglicans to migrate to Catholicism without any great disruption to their spiritual life or aesthetic, in other words, to mirror the historical church of the English people as it was before the Henrican schism. I know the ordinariates do this to some extent, I was just thinking of taking it a step further.

 

[HopkinsReb]

As an Anglican considering swimming, I don’t know how that would make it easier.

 

[GordonP]

to allow disaffected Anglicans to migrate to Catholicism without any great disruption to their spiritual life or aesthetic, in other words, to mirror the historical church of the English people as it was before the Henrican schism.

The problem you are describing is hardly on the scale that it requires special action. As you mentioned, the ordinariates already do this job, and “taking it a step further” will probably not be worth the extra effort. In other words, there are probably too few disaffected Anglicans that are not attracted by the ordinariates that would be attracted by your solution to seriously matter. Those who would have most likely found alternative arrangements that they are satisfied with. And they are largely ageing out and dying.

A couple of sobering facts: church identification and church participation are plummeting precipitously among UK natives, both Catholic and Anglican. Very few in the younger generations want anything to do with either church, and that process will continue and even accelerate in the forseeable future.

Catholic church attendance among UK natives is plummeting as well, and church attendance among Catholics is highly bolstered by immigrants, primarily from Poland. Poles and their children will eventually become the majority of practicing Catholics in the UK.

The ratio of converts to defectors 1 to 10 for Catholics, and 1 to 12 for the C of E.

By the way, I lived in Poland for 12 years, the first four in Skierniewice, the town next to Żyrardów.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

By the way, I lived in Poland for 12 years, the first four in Skierniewice, the town next to Żyrardów.

I’m familiar with the area. We took a wrong turn on the way out of Warsaw one time, and ended up at Żyrardów (meant to drive towards Radom instead).

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The first thing that comes to mind is to allow disaffected Anglicans to migrate to Catholicism without any great disruption to their spiritual life or aesthetic,

The Anglican Ordinariate does this already.

Also, I don’t think there’s a huge desire among any people to go back 700 years and take up a form of worship that was in use then. Nobody remembers it, their grandparents don’t remember it, it has no cultural connection.

 

[tafan2]

I was speculating that the English nation is so sui generis , and has been throughout history, that it can be thought of as a separate, distinctive expression of Western Catholic Christianity, something apart from the Roman Rite while retaining union with the Holy Father, as the Eastern Rites do.

Throughout it’s history? Anglo-Saxons were from Germany. They displaced most Britons from England until the 11th century, and then came the Normans, who largely displaced/assumed the Anglo-Saxons. Prior to all of that, there was the Romans. Wales and Ireland maintained their Celtic origins, but not much of England did. A little more so the Scots.

A separate culture from Europe? Somewhat since the 16th century.

 

[TomH1]

I am an American of both English and Scotch-Irish blood.

You mean Scottish. Scotch is a drink; another word for whiskey. I can assure the Scots do not like being called Scotch.

 

[TomH1]

I really am at a loss to decide what you are trying to say. We in Britain have far more in common in so many ways with the rest of Europe than we do with the USA.

There once was a Celtic Church but that disappeared after the Norman Conquest well over a thousand years ago. Since then we have used the rites of the Roman (or Latin) Catholic Church. There were local uses such as Bangor, Hereford, Sarum and York. Those don’t make England unique as there were many local uses prior to the Council of Trent.

Since the Council of Trent we have used the Roman Rite.

I do not think there is a case for a separate English Rite for the liturgy nor for England or the wider UK to have a sui iuris church. Indeed, if it did it would be unique.

 

[tafan2]

I am just glad the Scots make such good scotch

 

[GordonP]

You mean Scottish.

In American parlance, the term Scotch-Irish, often truncated to Scotch, means specifically descendants of Scottish people who were settled in Ulster (Northern Ireland) by the English. Many eventually emigrated to the US, especially Appalachia, and a very large number of Americans are descended from them.

Americans frequently confuse Scotch-(Irish) from Northern Ireland, and Scottish from Scotland, even those with Scotch or Scottish ancestry.

Here’s a Wikipedia article on the Scotch-Irish:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch-Irish_Americans

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I am an American of both English and Scotch-Irish blood.

In American parlance, the term Scotch-Irish, often truncated to Scotch, means specifically descendants of Scottish people who were settled in Ulster (Northern Ireland) by the English. Many eventually emigrated to the US, especially Appalachia, and a very large number of Americans are descended from them.

That is what I was referring to. In my part of the country, we said “Scotch-Irish” when referring to precisely that, Ulster Protestant descendants.

 

[PickyPicky]

Anglo-Saxons were from Germany.

Among other places.

They displaced most Britons from England

That’s a very outdated view. Most Britons stayed put.

then came the Normans, who largely displaced/assumed the Anglo-Saxons.

Didn’t displace Just stole the land.

 

[tafan2]

I won’t argue with your corrections of my post. My point is that the OP’s idea that England has been culturally distinct from (western) Europe throughout its history is wrong. With your corrections to my post, the point still stands.