Potential Anglican Church joining Catholic Church ?

[vocatio]

I don’t support a new rite. They would have to become Eastern or Western catholic. I don’t see how it could be done. But who am I but nobody.

I see the Pope as the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Rome has primacy still as long as the Church exists.

I’m an anglo-eastern catholic orthodox… or a pratholic or a cathostant… my wife’s joke. She want’s to just be Catholic… which is what we are.

PAX

 

[Lilyflower]

Traditional Ang, Harpazo, et al.,

I wouldn’t complain the slightest bit if an Anglican-Rite sui iuris Catholic Church were created.

But having said that, I skeptical about whether that will actually happen.

The Pope is still considered “Patriarch of the West”, even if that title is no longer in the Annuario Pontificio. Having a second sui iuris church in the West is certainly possible but … as I say, I’m a little skeptical.

I would have no objections to an ‘Anglican’ Rite. Infact I think it would be a good idea, after all the Indians have their own Rite.

The Catholic Church is also about diversity. The greater the senitivity to individual culture the greater the likelihood folk will be attracted to Catholicism.

Blessings and peace

 

[Hesychios]

Anglicans making individual conversions is wonderful and reason to celebrate. But conversion ‘en-masse’, I regret I am very cinical because we have seen it all before.

The REAL reason behind this I suspect is more to do with protestations in what is happening within the Anglican communion than a genuine desire to embrace Catholicism. That is not in my view a good enough reason to accept them. In short: becoming Catholic out of protest is not genuine and an insult to the authentic Church of Christ.

Such conversions rarely last. At the next whim they will probably move on.

I just do not believe that they will accept all things Catholic without expecting some sort of special concessions. Now sorry but that is just not Catholic!

Actually, I am in agreement with much of this as far as world Anglicanism is concerned. Of the more than 70,000,000 Anglicans in the world, most are not of the Catholic tradition, they are Evangelical Protestants and willingly affirm that.

As a practical matter the TAC is different, and probably should receive special considerations IMO.

However, I have other thoughts on that possibility as well.

 

[Hesychios]

Traditional Ang, Harpazo, et al.,

I wouldn’t complain the slightest bit if an Anglican-Rite sui iuris Catholic Church were created.

But having said that, I skeptical about whether that will actually happen.

The Pope is still considered “Patriarch of the West”, even if that title is no longer in the Annuario Pontificio. Having a second sui iuris church in the West is certainly possible but … as I say, I’m a little skeptical.

I don’t agree with the term rite, in this case. I think it is indeed a version of the Latin rite. Theologically there is no admitted difference or interpretation and the externals are important only on an aesthetic level.

“Usage” is an inappropriate term, it seems to be a legal description of the “permission” to practice. The proper (to my way of thinking) description is of an Anglican Recension of the Latin Rite.

I see no reason why the Anglican tradition could not have a Sui Iuris church, but that designation really only applies if they have unique Canons which are codified into a separate set. (It is possible the long delays we seem to be experiencing are simply the Vatican staffers working out the details of a codified set of laws for a particular church.)

What the people are really looking for is a fully separate but equal jurisdiction, whatever one calls it, to better preserve their unique external qualities. They want independent bishops to protect them from the abuse (or shall we say ‘influence’) of the majority.

Everyone should know by now that this never really happens, the big dog runs every yard and all the little dogs in one way or another adjust to the reality.

Michael