D
Daprato
Guest
It required more cleaning than that when Cranmer’s BOCP was “revised” for the Anglican-use Catholic Mass. It’s a done deal.
- Status
B
BobP123
Guest
Not to mention more openness to female priests.
B
BobP123
Guest
If “cleaning” involves changing the words of consecration to suit the modernists, I’m definitely against it. We already have too many “for all” Masses.
A
AJV
Guest
eh?
One of the main reasons the TAC is separate from the ‘mainstream’ Anglican Communion is over the issue of women’s ordination.
D
drafdog
Guest
Golly, the Pope is really offering Anglican converts his personal protection? How many divisions of Swiss Guards does he plan to send to fend off the troops of the British Crown? That should be an interesting conflict.
Matthew
Matthew
J
Joab_Anias
Guest
Lol. Don’t forget he still has the Knights of Malta and of Columbus.
A
Aramis
Guest
I’d gleefully strap on me rapier and go defend a TAC parish if they are brought in union… I’d prefer an uzi, but I already own the sword!Lol. Don’t forget he still has the Knights of Malta and of Columbus.
(I’m a 4th degree KofC…)
D
Daprato
Guest
While I’m fairly sure you have no idea what a “modernist” is, my comments were that the translation is a done deal, but it did take more than simply mentioning the Pope’s name during the Mass.
J
Joab_Anias
Guest
Me too but I never splurged for the Garb. Do own the tux though haven’t had it on in several years. Good thing it has the expanding waste band in case the occasion arises.I’d gleefully strap on me rapier and go defend a TAC parish if they are brought in union… I’d prefer an uzi, but I already own the sword!
(I’m a 4th degree KofC…)
B
BobP123
Guest
Hey, what do I know about the Anglican Church other than what I saw at the wedding of Prince Charles and Diana?eh?
One of the main reasons the TAC is separate from the ‘mainstream’ Anglican Communion is over the issue of women’s ordination.
So who’s the head of it these days, the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury?
S
SemperFidelis
Guest
I’m willing to bet he does. I find it quite distasteful, when you come on the Traditional Catholicism forum, one in which you in fact despise, and verbally attack good and faithful Catholics who have been on this forum far longer than you. If you don’t like what some of the Catholics post here, take your insults somewhere else.
S
SemperFidelis
Guest
No one. Hardly anyone pays attention to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and I doubt the Queen is even really Anglican. Someone feel free to correct me if I’m wrong on the last part though.
Z
zagjames
Guest
The issue with married Priests is moot. Married bishops would likely be forced to resign and become parish priests again, or maybe Auxillary Bishops with no further elevation.
There is already provisions for Anglican Priests coming into the church, their priests can become Catholic Priests and remain married.
There is also the Anglican Use of the Roman Rite. It is based around the Book of Divine Worship (a, orthodox Catholic version of the Book of Commen Prayers). Their priests can be married if they were when the converted, no new priests can marry.
The Anglican Use is a form of the Roman Rite so it will never be a sui juris(spelling) church. The Anglican Use is basically the Roman Mass as it was celebrated in England before the Reformation. It is the Mass that St. Thomas More knew (only translated into Elizabethian English). It is celebrated ad orientem, and is very solemn from what I have heard. I think they can stand on their own against modernests. (Actually for people who want the Mass in English I think they should use the Anglican Use instead of the NO, the Mass is more orthodox but in the vernacular!)
There is already provisions for Anglican Priests coming into the church, their priests can become Catholic Priests and remain married.
There is also the Anglican Use of the Roman Rite. It is based around the Book of Divine Worship (a, orthodox Catholic version of the Book of Commen Prayers). Their priests can be married if they were when the converted, no new priests can marry.
The Anglican Use is a form of the Roman Rite so it will never be a sui juris(spelling) church. The Anglican Use is basically the Roman Mass as it was celebrated in England before the Reformation. It is the Mass that St. Thomas More knew (only translated into Elizabethian English). It is celebrated ad orientem, and is very solemn from what I have heard. I think they can stand on their own against modernests. (Actually for people who want the Mass in English I think they should use the Anglican Use instead of the NO, the Mass is more orthodox but in the vernacular!)
Z
zagjames
Guest
G
GKC
Guest
Neither. You’re thinking of the Church of England.Hey, what do I know about the Anglican Church other than what I saw at the wedding of Prince Charles and Diana?
So who’s the head of it these days, the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury?
GKC
G
GKC
Guest
G
GKC
Guest
You’re right. It would. But all you asked was to be corrected, if wrong.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is the Primate of the Church of England, and in that post gets listened to about as much as any Anglican Primate; that is, occasionally. Anglicanism is much more built around the diocese level than the national church level, but Canterbury’s status as symbolic head of the official Anglican Communion does give him a little extra clout.
The British monarch, by the Act of Supremacy of 1559 is offically the Supreme Governor of both the Church of England and the British state. So she is* ipso facto *an Anglican. I have no reason to believe she does not adhere to the CoE, personally, not being privy to her private convictions. But she certainly acts like an Anglican. Why would you think otherwise?
GKC
C
Chatter163
Guest
test
J
jedi
Guest
very good, more anglican will be fully communion with the pope. especially under the leadership of POPE BENEDICT 16, (the great)
- Status