Maryland Episcopal parish to become Catholic

[IAGladfelter]

Thanks for your reply and blessings to you!

I can understand why smaller parishes are merging. We have the same problem at my church. The members are dying off and not too many young folks to replace them. The church doors do not stay open by prayer alone. Bills have to be paid and etc…

My sister in law attends an Episcopol church. She asked me if the Catholic church was having the same problems, lack of attendence. I told her yes. Every week, we are operating in the red. Some Catholic schools even closed because of it.

The same thing is going on in my city. The Episcopal Church parishes are shrinking and “greying” rapidly. One wonders how many will be left in 50 years. The same is true for the small number of Continuing Anglican parishes. Only one is growing and it is both Evangelical and experimenting with praise music, house bands, etc., and could not be less interested in an Ordinariate. The Catholic Church consolidated its smaller parishes into large ones and some of those are operating in the red.

Anglican Use Pastoral Provision priest Fr. Dwight Longenecker wrote the following in Catholic Online on January 6, 2011 (catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=39836) “The Anglican ORdinariate must be seen in a wider context . . . The wider context is the present re-alignment within all of Christianity. Thie re-alignment is not between Catholics and Protestants, but between those who elieve in a revealed religion and those who believe in a relative religion. It is between two different foundational philosopies. The re-alignment is between those, on the one hand, who believe that all religion is a human construction devised in particular historical circumstances and therefore flexible, ambiguous and necessarily adaptable, and between those who believe that religion is revealed by God in particular circumstances and places and times . . . There are plenty of both types within the different denominations, and at this time in church history the great re-alignment is taking place. Pope Benedict XVI has opened the way for Anglicans who believe in this revealed religion to join with others who believe the same.”

It would be a shame for some to be excluded because they are “Continuing Anglicans” rather than “Canterbury Anglicans” or because their connection to Anglicanism is historical and tenuous.

Today, we are presented with a rare, historic opportunity to visibly, corporately re-unite Christ’s Church with the one and only Church established in 33 A.C., headed by Christ and led on earth by his Vicar, the Successor to St. Peter. This is what Christ prayed for in Gethsemane - that all his followers would be one. Let’s pray to God that we don’t “blow” this historic opportunity to reunite Christ’s Church because of our own individual (and corporate, political) narrow parochial interests.

Blessings,
Irl

 

[Inishfree]

Thank you for your post. I haven’t learned about the differences in the Anglician faith.

In my little corner. I have only experienced first hand, what the Methodist and Catholic churches teach.

 

[IAGladfelter]

Thank you for your post. I haven’t learned about the differences in the Anglician faith.

In my little corner. I have only experienced first hand, what the Methodist and Catholic churches teach.

It is hard to generalize about the Anglican faith, but as a former Anglican, I will give it a try. Remember that this is only a generalization and we all know what Mark Twain said about generalizations - that none are worth anything including this one.

First off, they are not very many Anglicans in the United States. With some notable exceptions, their church buildings tend to be small but tastefully appointed, While not a State Church in the U.S. some tend to act as though they are, and each Anglican Church, whether Episcopalian or Continuing Anglican, tends to consider itself to be the only true and valid successor to “the Church of England in the American Colonies.”

Anglicans are (in my humble opinion as a former Anglican) by far the most diverse group in Christendom. They all use one or another version of the Book of Common Prayer, and are governed by bishops in apostolic succession, some in Anglican lines alone and other who also share Dutch Old Catholic and Polish National Catholic lineages.

Anglican worship runs all the way from “high church” pre-Vatican II Gregorian (and Anglican) chant, hymnody is staid and traditional, accompanied by elaborate organ music by wonderful virtuoso organists, paid choirs, with bells, incense, elaborate traditional catholic vestments and lace cottas etc., through dignified, simple services right out of the Book of Common Prayer without embellishments, to skilled “praise (rock) bands” playing “Christian rock” “praise music” sung by “praise teams” with a truncated liturgy led by male and female, straight or gay clergy wearing anything from “modern art” chasubles to “docker slacks and polo shirts” with a stole thrown on for the Eucharistic Prayer and distribution.

Theologically, basing everything on the Elizabethan settlement’s terms (paraphrasing - consciences must not be forced - let all believe as they will, but worshiping with the Prayer Book and remaining subject to our bishops,) they run from solidly Roman Catholic through “Presbyterians, Unitarians, and 'fashionable agnostics”" with a prayer book," from "almost Bishop Sheen types to types almost sympathetic to Hitchens and Dawkins who believe all religions are relative, of human origin, and therefore must be informed by and in compliance with contemporary culture with a “low” view of the nature and authority of the Bible to those who believe that Christianity is revealed by God in specific places and times, that its Truth is universal, with a “high” view of the nature and authority of the Bible (along with Tradition and Reason, and among the more Calvinistic perhaps experience as well.

Socially, they have been called "the conservative Rebublican Party at prayer; but actually, they run the gamut from ultra traditionalist and “almost Tea Party” types to ultra liberals, “old hippies” and “almost European Socialist” types (especially among the clergy.) They tend to be socially of the upper echelons of society and “social climbers” who want to enter those upper echelons and in any case, tend to be very well educated.

Somehow this diverse group manages to live in relative peace under what may be arguably “the biggest tent in Chistendom.”

Those interested in entering the Anglican Ordinariates are from the most Roman Catholic of the “high church” and at least from my limited perspective, the most socially and theologically traditionalist part of the “high church” element of this very diverse Communion - or set fo Communions including the “non-Canterbury” Continuing Anglicans ."

As you know, the Methodists are also of basic Anglican heritage, having been originally an un-intended schism of part of the Anglican Church’s Evangelical or “low church” element. Doctor Herman Sasse, a theologian and seminary professor of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, once wrote than whenever one hears the term “high church” being used among Lutherans to describe their Catholic-oriented element, he saw the influence of Anglo-Catholicism (“high church” Anglicanism.) He considered it to be not a good thing, though other Lutherans disagreed.

Hope this helps.

 

[GKC]

It is hard to generalize about the Anglican faith, but as a former Anglican, I will give it a try. Remember that this is only a generalization and we all know what Mark Twain said about generalizations - that none are worth anything including this one.

First off, they are not very many Anglicans in the United States. With some notable exceptions, their church buildings tend to be small but tastefully appointed, While not a State Church in the U.S. some tend to act as though they are, and each Anglican Church, whether Episcopalian or Continuing Anglican, tends to consider itself to be the only true and valid successor to “the Church of England in the American Colonies.”

Anglicans are (in my humble opinion as a former Anglican) by far the most diverse group in Christendom. They all use one or another version of the Book of Common Prayer, and are governed by bishops in apostolic succession, some in Anglican lines alone and other who also share Dutch Old Catholic and Polish National Catholic lineages.

Anglican worship runs all the way from “high church” pre-Vatican II Gregorian (and Anglican) chant, hymnody is staid and traditional, accompanied by elaborate organ music by wonderful virtuoso organists, paid choirs, with bells, incense, elaborate traditional catholic vestments and lace cottas etc., through dignified, simple services right out of the Book of Common Prayer without embellishments, to skilled “praise (rock) bands” playing “Christian rock” “praise music” sung by “praise teams” with a truncated liturgy led by male and female, straight or gay clergy wearing anything from “modern art” chasubles to “docker slacks and polo shirts” with a stole thrown on for the Eucharistic Prayer and distribution.

Theologically, basing everything on the Elizabethan settlement’s terms (paraphrasing - consciences must not be forced - let all believe as they will, but worshiping with the Prayer Book and remaining subject to our bishops,) they run from solidly Roman Catholic through “Presbyterians, Unitarians, and 'fashionable agnostics”" with a prayer book," from "almost Bishop Sheen types to types almost sympathetic to Hitchens and Dawkins who believe all religions are relative, of human origin, and therefore must be informed by and in compliance with contemporary culture with a “low” view of the nature and authority of the Bible to those who believe that Christianity is revealed by God in specific places and times, that its Truth is universal, with a “high” view of the nature and authority of the Bible (along with Tradition and Reason, and among the more Calvinistic perhaps experience as well.

Socially, they have been called "the conservative Rebublican Party at prayer; but actually, they run the gamut from ultra traditionalist and “almost Tea Party” types to ultra liberals, “old hippies” and “almost European Socialist” types (especially among the clergy.) They tend to be socially of the upper echelons of society and “social climbers” who want to enter those upper echelons and in any case, tend to be very well educated.

Somehow this diverse group manages to live in relative peace under what may be arguably “the biggest tent in Chistendom.”

Those interested in entering the Anglican Ordinariates are from the most Roman Catholic of the “high church” and at least from my limited perspective, the most socially and theologically traditionalist part of the “high church” element of this very diverse Communion - or set fo Communions including the “non-Canterbury” Continuing Anglicans ."

As you know, the Methodists are also of basic Anglican heritage, having been originally an un-intended schism of part of the Anglican Church’s Evangelical or “low church” element. Doctor Herman Sasse, a theologian and seminary professor of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, once wrote than whenever one hears the term “high church” being used among Lutherans to describe their Catholic-oriented element, he saw the influence of Anglo-Catholicism (“high church” Anglicanism.) He considered it to be not a good thing, though other Lutherans disagreed.

Hope this helps.

And folks, when you see me say that Anglicans are a motley crew, depends on which one you ask, this excellent overview explains precisely what I am referring to. Not that I might not quibble with a point or two.

GKC

posterus traditus Anglicanus, Anglicanus Catholicus

 

[Inishfree]

Thank you, IAGladfelter for your explanation.

I didn’t know there were different denominations within the Anglican church.

 

[GKC]

Thank you, IAGladfelter for your explanation.

I didn’t know there were different denominations within the Anglican church.

Denominations is not precisely the word wanted. All are Anglicans. But there is a wide range of theological belief, and a large number of independent jurisdictions, within Anglicanism.

GKC

 

[waxwing]

Denominations is not precisely the word wanted. All are Anglicans. But there is a wide range of theological belief, and a large number of independent jurisdictions, within Anglicanism.

GKC

Hello

Was wondering if the Angican Church in North America “denomination” is still considered Anglican by say the Anglican Church of Canada. I understand this ACINA is a new branch of Anglicanism and is more on the conservative side so wasn’t sure if this would be considered a independent jurisdiction with the Church, but still considered Anglican by the “powers that be”

Thanks

 

[GKC]

Hello

Was wondering if the Angican Church in North America “denomination” is still considered Anglican by say the Anglican Church of Canada. I understand this ACINA is a new branch of Anglicanism and is more on the conservative side so wasn’t sure if this would be considered a independent jurisdiction with the Church, but still considered Anglican by the “powers that be”

Thanks

There are no powers that be to establish what is Anglican. Some Anglicans are in the historical mainstream, organizationally; that is, are in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. Some, such as the ACNA, and the entire range of Continuing Anglicans, have left, and are not.

GKC

 

[waxwing]

There are no powers that be to establish what is Anglican. Some Anglicans are in the historical mainstream, organizationally; that is, are in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. Some, such as the ACNA, and the entire range of Continuing Anglicans, have left, and are not.

GKC

So if someone were to ask a leader within the historical mainstream of the Anglican Church, someone in communion(not exactly sure what this means though:shrugwith the Archbishop of Canterbury they would say no the ACNA is not considered Anglican…
Thats how read your post but just wanted to make sure I understood

 

[GKC]

So if someone were to ask a leader within the historical mainstream of the Anglican Church, someone in communion(not exactly sure what this means though:shrugwith the Archbishop of Canterbury they would say no the ACNA is not considered Anglican…
Thats how read your post but just wanted to make sure I understood

The Anglican Communion is a group of Anglican jurisdictions, including the Anglican Church in Canada, that are said to be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, as the titular figurehead of historic Anglicanism.

As to your assumption, no one can say. Such a person might say yes, might say no. Might say that the ACNA was a schismatic Anglican group. It depends on which Anglican you ask. But the answer certainly would be that the ACNA is not in communion with Canterbury. As Constantinople is not in communion with Rome.Being in communion with Canterbury is not the definition of Anglican, which involves apostolic succession, Anglican polity, formularies, and liturgy.

GKC

 

[waxwing]

The Anglican Communion is a group of Anglican jurisdictions, including the Anglican Church in Canada, that are said to be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, as the titular figurehead of historic Anglicanism.

As to your assumption, no one can say. Such a person might say yes, might say no. Might say that the ACNA was a schismatic Anglican group. It depends on which Anglican you ask. But the answer certainly would be that the ACNA is not in communion with Canterbury. As Constantinople is not in communion with Rome.Being in communion with Canterbury is not the definition of Anglican, which involves apostolic succession, Anglican polity, formularies, and liturgy.

GKC

Thanks, this does help. So being out of communion with Canterbury isn’t necessarily a “deal breaker” in terms its (splinter group) very Anglicanism/identity.

 

[GKC]

Thanks, this does help. So being out of communion with Canterbury isn’t necessarily a “deal breaker” in terms its (splinter group) very Anglicanism/identity.

Generally, yes. Though ( I hate to say it) it might depend on which Anglican you ask.

GKC

 

[GaryTaylor]

I am all for unity as Our Lord wished.

I think the same way, I’m postive in this period in time its Overdue.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

LOL…you can ask me, it’s a hobby of mine. This motley crew is varied and history is complicated.

Generally, yes. Though ( I hate to say it) it might depend on which Anglican you ask.

GKC

 

[GKC]

LOL…you can ask me, it’s a hobby of mine. This motley crew is varied and history is complicated.

I can’t get away from it.

Surprised to see you, check your email

 

[dgj23112]

Couple of items…if they’ve already been addressed, I ask your forgiveness…

A.) Regarding the Archbishop of Canterbury: I remember being taught that he (she/it) was considered the spiritual head of the worldwide Anglican Communion. No direct authority outside the British Iles…I think someone may have alluded to this earlier in the thread.

B.) Regarding the general attitude/theology/thinking/etc. of many would-be, or hopefull Anglican converts: Yes, a large number of us are die-hard traditionalist, conservative, “high church” Anglicans. We are possessed of this “quaint” notion that nothing was ever wrong with our “stilted” sacral English, and we choose to “worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness” with the most reverence we can bring to bear; with a fully appropriate sense of Mystery, Majesty, and Awe for our God and King. This little bit being said…there ain’t no way in h#ll that we buy in to anything that’s come out of Canterbury in recent history.

I really hope that Father Longnecker’s idea of the potential extended influence of the Anglican Ordinariates plays out. I know many of you may still not be so sure of all this…all I can do is ask your prayers, and those of Our Lady and all the saints. The idea of having (finally) a rock solid Magesterium…(with, sadly, no bravo sierra teaching coming from all directions) is a powerful one indeed. We Anglicans can ask no more…o.k., well, we might wish for the hierarchs to get moving in the U.S…sorry, couldn’t help it…:>)

 

[GKC]

Couple of items…if they’ve already been addressed, I ask your forgiveness…

A.) Regarding the Archbishop of Canterbury: I remember being taught that he (she/it) was considered the spiritual head of the worldwide Anglican Communion. No direct authority outside the British Iles…I think someone may have alluded to this earlier in the thread.

B.) Regarding the general attitude/theology/thinking/etc. of many would-be, or hopefull Anglican converts: Yes, a large number of us are die-hard traditionalist, conservative, “high church” Anglicans. We are possessed of this “quaint” notion that nothing was ever wrong with our “stilted” sacral English, and we choose to “worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness” with the most reverence we can bring to bear; with a fully appropriate sense of Mystery, Majesty, and Awe for our God and King. This little bit being said…there ain’t no way in h#ll that we buy in to anything that’s come out of Canterbury in recent history.

I really hope that Father Longnecker’s idea of the potential extended influence of the Anglican Ordinariates plays out. I know many of you may still not be so sure of all this…all I can do is ask your prayers, and those of Our Lady and all the saints. The idea of having (finally) a rock solid Magesterium…(with, sadly, no bravo sierra teaching coming from all directions) is a powerful one indeed. We Anglicans can ask no more…o.k., well, we might wish for the hierarchs to get moving in the U.S…sorry, couldn’t help it…:>)

Para 1 is basically accurate. Para 2 is what I find to be true also.

Last para: I wish you all the best on your journey.

GKC

 

[Nicea325]

I think the same way, I’m postive in this period in time its Overdue.

Amen brother!