Pope Wants Personal Prelature For Ex-Anglicans

[Dempsey1919]

The 400,000 members of the Traditional Anglican Communion may finallly achieve complete union with the Catholic Church. It has been suggested that the TAC could operate under the status of a personal prelature, like Opus Dei.

This move would allow the TAC to operate as a kind of global diocese, with it’s own bishops, clergy, and liturgy. If this happens, I believe that many other traditional-minded Anglicans would convert to the Catholic faith under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome.

Here is a news report detailing this possible development:

catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000469.shtml

I would like to discuss this one point within the article:

One problem for the Holy See would be the fact that most of the TAC’s bishops are married. Bishop Hepworth is twice married and a former Catholic. There is no question of married men being ordained as bishops under any new arrangement. In 2007 Archbishop Hepworth personally wrote to Pope Benedict indicating that the TAC planned a meeting of its world bishops where they would unanimously agree to sign the Catechism of the Catholic Church and to seek full union with the Catholic Church.

Does this mean that married men will be ordained as Bishops in the TAC personal prelature? This move goes against the teaching of the Church on the issue. Personally, I believe the author of this article must be wrong on this point. What do you think?

 

[Contarini]

I don’t understand your question. The article explicitly says that “there is no question of married men being ordained as bishops.” In other words, it ain’t going to happen. You seem to have read it as "no one is questioning the fact that married men will be ordained. . . " which is the opposite of what it says.

My problem is with the whole un-traditional concept of a “personal prelature.”

Edwin

 

[GKC]

As always, I await further definitve, official RCC statements. Let us see what Easter brings.

GKC

 

[chris_molter]

My problem is with the whole un-traditional concept of a “personal prelature.”

Edwin

I assume you have some slight reservations about Anglican ecclesiology as well, then?

(not trying to start a fight, just ribbing you a bit, my friend!)

 

[LUISV]

My problem is with the whole un-traditional concept of a “personal prelature.”

Edwin

Personal prelatures is an extension of the rare diocean personal parish. Here in San Antonio, let me quote from their site:

“Our Lady of the Atonement Church is a Roman Catholic parish of the Archdiocese of San Antonio, and is the first of several “personal parishes” erected in the United States for the Anglican Use Liturgy. This parish has no affiliation with the so-called “Continuing Anglican Movement,” nor with any branch of the Episcopal or Anglican churches. Rather, its members, many of whom are converts from the Episcopal Church, have been granted permission to retain some elements of the Anglican liturgical heritage while being fully Roman Catholic.”

Even the pastor is a married ex-Anglican minister. The question of married Bishops is going to be a fun one to answer. They are true bishops but from Roman and Orthodox tradition, bishops should not come from the married clergy. What may happen is a transitionary period where no new married bishops would be ordained.

 

[Hesychios]

My problem is with the whole un-traditional concept of a “personal prelature.”

Edwin

It is a novelty.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I don’t understand your question. The article explicitly says that “there is no question of married men being ordained as bishops.” In other words, it ain’t going to happen. You seem to have read it as "no one is questioning the fact that married men will be ordained. . . " which is the opposite of what it says.

My problem is with the whole un-traditional concept of a “personal prelature.”

Edwin

These came along in 1947, as an idea of Pius XII. I think Opus Dei (founded in 1928) was the very first.​

I don’t know what is distinctive about them.

 

[rr1213]

Personal prelatures is an extension of the rare diocean personal parish. Here in San Antonio, let me quote from their site:

“Our Lady of the Atonement Church is a Roman Catholic parish of the Archdiocese of San Antonio, and is the first of several “personal parishes” erected in the United States for the Anglican Use Liturgy. This parish has no affiliation with the so-called “Continuing Anglican Movement,” nor with any branch of the Episcopal or Anglican churches. Rather, its members, many of whom are converts from the Episcopal Church, have been granted permission to retain some elements of the Anglican liturgical heritage while being fully Roman Catholic.”

Even the pastor is a married ex-Anglican minister. The question of married Bishops is going to be a fun one to answer. They are true bishops but from Roman and Orthodox tradition, bishops should not come from the married clergy. What may happen is a transitionary period where no new married bishops would be ordained.

The Anglican Use is pursuant to a pastoral provision of John Paul II, but as I understand matters it is an entirely different matter than a personal prelature.

 

[Contarini]

I assume you have some slight reservations about Anglican ecclesiology as well, then?

The ecclesiology I was taught when preparing for confirmation and the “national-church” ecclesiology apparently embraced by many Episcopalians are two different things. Admittedly, the “national-church” ecclesiology is supported by 16th-century Anglicanism. But I guess I had naively assumed for years that all Anglicans now recognized that national-church ecclesiology was idolatrous nonsense. Apparently not.

But at least the Archbishop of Canterbury agrees with me. There is the universal Catholic Church (and given our sad divisions, we can at least treat the Anglican Communion seriously as a poor temporary stand-in for the real thing), and there is the local church headed by the bishop. Nothing else (and so ultimately, not even the Anglican Communion in and of itself) really matters ecclesiologically.

But for members of your Communion it appears that only the universal Church as you define it matters, and the integrity of the local church can just go jump in the Tiber. And the Orthodox have their weird ethnic divisions. So in the end it appears that none of us are perfectly Catholic in our ecclesiology–one of the reasons I remain Anglican.

Edwin

 

[Peter_J]

These came along in 1947, as an idea of Pius XII. I think Opus Dei (founded in 1928) was the very first.​

According to wikipedia, “the personal prelature was conceived during the sessions of the Second Vatican Council”.

And yes, Opus Dei is the first and only one at this point (founded in 1928, made into a personal prelature in 1982).

Wikipedia also says “It was speculated that in case of a reconciliation of the Society of St. Pius X, the same status of personal prelature could be conferred upon that priestly institute to facilitate its (still regarded as illicit) pastoral activities in dioceses from which they are independent.”

 

[Peter_J]

My problem is with the whole un-traditional concept of a “personal prelature.”

Edwin

Granted. But, given the difficult circumstances created by our current state of division, I think a personal prelature for the TAC might very well be justified. (Whether it was justified for Opus Dei is a whole other question.)

 

[GKC]

The Anglican Use is pursuant to a pastoral provision of John Paul II, but as I understand matters it is an entirely different matter than a personal prelature.

This is my understanding, also. It is merely a Use, within the Latin Rite.

GKC

 

[chris_molter]

But for members of your Communion it appears that only the universal Church as you define it matters, and the integrity of the local church can just go jump in the Tiber. And the Orthodox have their weird ethnic divisions. So in the end it appears that none of us are perfectly Catholic in our ecclesiology–one of the reasons I remain Anglican.

Edwin

Well, if we can develop doctrine ala Newman, then why not ecclesiology to some extent, right?

 

[utunumsint]

Well, if we can develop doctrine ala Newman, then why not ecclesiology to some extent, right?

Something tells me he doesn’t agree with Newman’s theories either.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

According to wikipedia, “the personal prelature was conceived during the sessions of the Second Vatican Council”.

And yes, Opus Dei is the first and only one at this point (founded in 1928, made into a personal prelature in 1982).

Wikipedia also says “It was speculated that in case of a reconciliation of the Society of St. Pius X, the same status of personal prelature could be conferred upon that priestly institute to facilitate its (still regarded as illicit) pastoral activities in dioceses from which they are independent.”

hat’s intresting, because I have a copy of one of the books in the (unfinished) “Catholic Encyclopedia of the Twentieth Century” series - the French original is called something much snappier - which is slightly earlier than V2; & IMO it is probably more reliable than Wikipedia (though Wikipedia has some good stuff in it).​

The SSPX is a priestly fraternity, & was one at its founding in 1970; I don’t see the point in changing its status. First things first, surely - it’s not as though its position had been regularised yet (unlike that of the former schismatics of Campos under bishop Rangel, or the former Transalpine Redemptorists (who have also been re-named).

The man who is “head” of the TAC is an ex-Catholic - it would be a grotty idea to reward heresy & schism (both of which he has committed) by making him a Catholic bishop Criminals should not be rewarded: those are both ecclesiastical crimes. Oh for ecclesiastical prisons…

 

[LUISV]

The Anglican Use is pursuant to a pastoral provision of John Paul II, but as I understand matters it is an entirely different matter than a personal prelature.

True. But along the same vane. The personal prelature is global in nature and has jurisdiction for all its members regardless of teritorial boundries. The personal parish is much the same. As it is structured here in San Antonio it has no geographic boundry within the diocese.

 

[adowcday]

According to wikipedia, “the personal prelature was conceived during the sessions of the Second Vatican Council”.

And yes, Opus Dei is the first and only one at this point (founded in 1928, made into a personal prelature in 1982).

Wikipedia also says “It was speculated that in case of a reconciliation of the Society of St. Pius X, the same status of personal prelature could be conferred upon that priestly institute to facilitate its (still regarded as illicit) pastoral activities in dioceses from which they are independent.”

Aside from the realities of which provision of canon law applies, the situation is akin to that of Eastern rite catholic churches that aligned with Rome but retained married clergy (priests, not bishops), liturgical distinctives, etc. I’d welcome an Anglican Rite Catholic Church. I’m not so sure the Anglicans would be eager for their bishops to be drawn solely from the ranks of celibate clergy, but they have enough monks to supply them with bishops if pushed to it, I’d guess.

 

[Hesychios]

True. But along the same vane. The personal prelature is global in nature and has jurisdiction for all its members regardless of territorial boundries. The personal parish is much the same. As it is structured here in San Antonio it has no geographic boundry within the diocese.

I never heard the term “personal parish” before you mentioned it here.

In Chicago Archdiocese we had many “national” parishes. These were without boundary and organized for various ethnic groups, such as the Poles, Czechs, Lithuanians, Slovaks and Croatians. If memory serves me correctly there was one Korean parish in the suburbs.

Likewise most eastern Catholic parishes that I know of have no formal boundaries.

I just never heard of a personal parish.

In the older Mediterranean districts (such as much of Italy), the church was not organized as parishes originally. There was the cathedral and then outlying churches. No defined boundaries between them. Baptisms were expected to be done in the cathedral.

The parish as a defined structure came later and became common in missionary districts, like Gaul, which had fewer bishops strung out across difficult country. The parishes were actually like mini-dioceses, because all of the sacraments could be done there and a long trip to the cathedral town was not usually necessary.

In any case, the reason Opus Dei was the first (and so far as I recall the only) Personal Prelature was that they conceived of the idea and promoted it. It really was never well defined, it was whatever the Opus Dei organization wanted it to be. It is definitely not a religious order, this is a form of church.

All of this bucks the tradition of the early church, which was organized by locality.

I would like to see a reference to this organizational structure in the documents of Vatican II, I didn’t realize it was seriously discussed at that time.

One could say with some accuracy that the SSPX is a Personal Prelature, except that it is not formally in submission to the Pope. They can call it whatever they like, it is already organized just like one.

The TAC could be accepted in this form, but I do not see the point of it unless perhaps the Vatican just considers it to be too small to be anything else.

 

[Peter_J]

I know of one personal parish: Christ the King in Ann Arbor, MI.

I don’t think the concept of “personal parish” is anything too strange. It still belongs to one particular diocese, but it’s “territory” is anywhere in that diocese. Hence, I think the comparison between the concept of “personal parish” and the concept of “personal prelature” is rather weak.

Also, Hesychios makes a good point: a lot of ethnic parishes are un-officially organized as “personal parishes”.

 

[Peter_J]

The SSPX is a priestly fraternity, & was one at its founding in 1970;

Good point. No lay person is actually in the SSPX, even if he/she attends an SSPX chapel every Sunday and receives communion.

I don’t see the point in changing its status.

Perhaps not. But stranger things have been suggested. I recall, a few years ago, someone suggesting that the SSPX could become a Patriarchate. (I suspect that the person who said that was just putting words together. )