Protestant ordinariate?

[7_Sorrows]

And what about Dominus Iesus issued by the CDF in 2000? In Dominus Iesus, the Anglican church is regarded as an ecclesial community and not a proper Church. How can valid orders be conferred by an organisation that is not even a Church? How can an organisation that is not a Church actually create a valid rite of ordination? Could a group of lay-people, not even part of a valid Church, meet together and come up with a rite of ordination and validly authorise it? Surely relevant authority is needed for this, i.e through a valid Church?

they are not being ordained to be Catholic priests in the Episcopal/Anglican churches.

One of the Episcopal priests I had decided to convert to Catholicism and did the extra needed to become a Catholic priest. He is also married with 5 children.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

To know and understand the TRUTH is a lot different than “submitting” to have been “playing pretend priest”, Apostolic Succession is absolutely essential to a valid priesthood and no amount of years can change that TRUTH. God Bless, Memaw

Your words are rather dismissive, Memaw. ‘Playing pretend priest’? I assure you that in the Anglican Communion, there are very few men and women who ‘pretend’ to carry out their priestly vocation.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Your words are rather dismissive, Memaw. ‘Playing pretend priest’? I assure you that in the Anglican Communion, there are very few men and women who ‘pretend’ to carry out their priestly vocation.

I never met any either.

 

[Brendan_64]

they are not being ordained to be Catholic priests in the Episcopal/Anglican churches.

One of the Episcopal priests I had decided to convert to Catholicism and did the extra needed to become a Catholic priest. He is also married with 5 children.

They’re not ordained at all. The Anglican/Episcopalian Churches are not proper Churches, and their orders are not valid. That is what our Church teaches.

When an Anglican minister ‘crosses the Tiber’ and subsequently becomes a Catholic priest, he does not simply ‘do the extra needed’, he has to be ordained as a priest. It’s not just a case of doing a few ‘top-up courses’, he is ordained because as far as the Catholic Church is concerned Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void”. “Absolutely null and utterly void” might sound harsh, but that is how the Church describes Anglican orders.

As for being married with 5 kids, that has absolutely nothing to do with the validity or otherwise of his orders. As far as the Church is concerned celibacy in the priesthood is a matter of discipline to which exceptions can be made (and rightly so in my opinion in the case of married Anglican ministers who wish to cross the Tiber). But the invalidity of Anglican orders is not a matter of discipline, it is a matter of doctrine.

 

[7_Sorrows]

They’re not ordained at all. The Anglican/Episcopalian Churches are not proper Churches, and their orders are not valid. That is what our Church teaches.

When an Anglican minister ‘crosses the Tiber’ and subsequently becomes a Catholic priest, he does not simply ‘do the extra needed’, he has to be ordained as a priest. It’s not just a case of doing a few ‘top-up courses’, he is ordained because as far as the Catholic Church is concerned Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void”. “Absolutely null and utterly void” might sound harsh, but that is how the Church describes Anglican orders.

As for being married with 5 kids, that has absolutely nothing to do with the validity or otherwise of his orders. As far as the Church is concerned celibacy in the priesthood is a matter of discipline to which exceptions can be made (and rightly so in my opinion in the case of married Anglican ministers who wish to cross the Tiber). But the invalidity of Anglican orders is not a matter of discipline, it is a matter of doctrine.

no he did have to do what was necessary. he did not have to start all over and begin the studies from the beginning. yes he was required to learn Catholic doctrine and study everything to be a Catholic priest, but they also take into account what one has already studied. it did not take another 6-8 years.
yes they are ordained to be priests in their appropriate churches.

 

[Brendan_64]

no he did have to do what was necessary. he did not have to start all over and begin the studies from the beginning. yes he was required to learn Catholic doctrine and study everything to be a Catholic priest, but they also take into account what one has already studied. it did not take another 6-8 years.
yes they are ordained to be priests in their appropriate churches.

He had to be ordained. The studying is a separate matter, and of course he would not have to do as much study as someone starting from scratch, but it is not the studying that makes a person a priest, but the ordination.

And no, they are not priests in their appropriate churches. The Catholic Church teaches that Anglican orders are utterly null and void. In fact the Catholic Church teaches that the Anglican church is not a proper Church, but an ecclesial community.

A priest is created by God through the sacrament of Holy Orders. God does not have separate categories of priests, he only has priests.

Orthodox Church priests are priests, Anglican priests are not priests. That is what our Church teaches.

 

[Memaw]

I am NOT trying to be “harsh”, just truthful. I don’t doubt their sincerity in what they do .Sincerity is not the same as being validly ordained. But “the truth is the truth even if no one believes it”…, as the very Holy and learned Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen said. And we can’t change that. And if they are not validly ordained in the Apostolic Succession, they cannot administer the sacraments except for Baptism, and Marriage. God Bless, Memaw

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Orthodox Church priests are priests, Anglican priests are not priests. That is what our Church teaches.

You are well within your rights to say that that is what your church teaches. But please know that it is not the case for those of us who are not in your church.

Don’t forget your Pope Paul VI when he gave our beloved Michael Ramsey, Archbishop of Canterbury, his Archbishop’s ring. Do you think he would do that for the local garbage man? No. He gave it from one Bishop to another Bishop. Deo gratias.

 

[7_Sorrows]

 

[Memaw]

And I was doing just that! I was NOT the one that called them “pretend priests”, I was referring to the one who did. I believe it was an Episcopalian poster that did. Go back and read my posts! God Bless, Memaw

 

[7_Sorrows]

And I was doing just that! I was NOT the one that called them “pretend priests”, I was referring to the one who did. I believe it was an Episcopalian poster that did. Go back and read my posts! God Bless, Memaw

that would be post #32. I believe he was referring to why there haven’t been more parishes join the Ordinariate. I believe he is saying most Episcopal/Anglican priests don’t believe they have been playing pretend priests. I might be wrong. Perhaps that poster can clarify.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

(1) They’re not ordained at all. The Anglican/Episcopalian Churches are not proper Churches, and their orders are not valid. That is what our Church teaches.

(2) When an Anglican minister ‘crosses the Tiber’ and subsequently becomes a Catholic priest, he does not simply ‘do the extra needed’, he has to be ordained as a priest. It’s not just a case of doing a few ‘top-up courses’, he is ordained because as far as the Catholic Church is concerned Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void”. “Absolutely null and utterly void” might sound harsh, but that is how the Church describes Anglican orders.

As for being married with 5 kids, that has absolutely nothing to do with the validity or otherwise of his orders. As far as the Church is concerned celibacy in the priesthood is a matter of discipline to which exceptions can be made (and rightly so in my opinion in the case of married Anglican ministers who wish to cross the Tiber). But the invalidity of Anglican orders is not a matter of discipline, it is a matter of doctrine.

1. They are ordained but their ordination is not recognised for purposes of reciprocity. They must be ordained by a Catholic bishop – either absolutely or conditionally, epnding on their previous ordination. The documents of both the pastoral provision and the Ordinariate recognize them as Anglican CLERICS. If they were laymen who had not been ordained in the Anglican communion and actually exercised a sacred ministry there, they could not petition to be ordained as Catholic priests without going through seminary formation (for which Anglican priests are dispensed) nor, if married, be dispensed from the solemn promise of celibacy (for which married Anglican priests are).

The enacting norms for Anglicanorum coetibus also declare that an Anglican bishop who comes over to Rome and is ordained is to be accorded a place in the National Conference of Catholic Bishops at the rank of a retired bishop…not because he is now ordained as a Catholic priest but because he was ordained a bishop in the Anglican communion. It is the prerogative of a former bishop in the Anglican communion, once ordained by the Roman Church to request from the Holy See the use of pontificals as a Catholic cleric even if married and therefore not ordained as bishop. If the request is made, the Holy See will grant it. Again this is a courtesy to him because he was an Anglican bishop. The enacting norms also advise such a former Anglican bishop to understand that he may be requested to undertake a role of governance within the Ordinariate of his country commiserate with his role and dignity as a former bishop in the Anglican Communion.

1. An Anglican cleric may be received into full communion with the Roman Church without asking the Holy Father for a rescript to be ordained as a Catholic priest…and a number have. He may, however, “do the extra needed” and present a petition for ordination by the Roman Church…either for the Ordinariate or, via the pastoral provision, for a willing diocese.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

You are well within your rights to say that that is what your church teaches. But please know that it is not the case for those of us who are not in your church.

Don’t forget your Pope Paul VI when he gave our beloved Michael Ramsey, Archbishop of Canterbury, his Archbishop’s ring. Do you think he would do that for the local garbage man? No. He gave it from one Bishop to another Bishop. Deo gratias.

This was an extraordinary moment. The ring that Blessed Pope Paul VI gave to the Archbishop of Canterbury was the ring the pope had and used as Archbishop of Milan. It was an emotional moment, actually, for both men.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

You are quite correct. Pope Francis specifically asked Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to bless him – something he does not do when a layman visits him.

The photo of the Pope, bowing to receive the Archbishop’s blessing:
d2jkk5z9de9jwi.cloudfront.net/content/uploads/2015/05/20140625cm00620-800x500.jpg

Here you will find the Pope’s address to “His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury and his entourage.”

w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2014/june/documents/papa-francesco_20140616_arcivescovo-canterbury.html

His Holiness concluded their conversation by adding: “Your Grace, I thank you once more for your visit. I ask the Lord to shower his blessings on your ministry and to sustain you and your loved ones in joy and peace. Amen.”

This was the second meeting between the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Their first meeting was in 2013 and the speech of the Pope may be found here:
w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2013/june/documents/papa-francesco_20130614_welby-canterbury.html

I would particularly highlight this passage, which was very memorable:

*Your Grace, Dear Friends,

On the happy occasion of our first meeting, I make my own the words of Pope Paul VI, when he addressed Archbishop Michael Ramsey during his historic visit in 1966: “Your steps have not brought you to a foreign dwelling … we are pleased to open the doors to you, and with the doors, our heart, pleased and honoured as we are … to welcome you ‘not as a guest or a stranger, but as a fellow citizen of the Saints and the Family of God’” (cf. Eph 2:19-20).

I know that during Your Grace’s installation in Canterbury Cathedral you remembered in prayer the new Bishop of Rome. I am deeply grateful to you – and since we began our respective ministries within days of each other, I think we will always have a particular reason to support one another in prayer.

/…/

I am grateful, too, for the sincere efforts the Church of England has made to understand the reasons that led my Predecessor, Benedict XVI, to provide a canonical structure able to respond to the wishes of those groups of Anglicans who have asked to be received collectively into the Catholic Church: I am sure this will enable the spiritual, liturgical and pastoral traditions that form the Anglican patrimony to be better known and appreciated in the Catholic world.

Today’s meeting, my dear brother, is an opportunity to remind ourselves that the search for unity among Christians is prompted not by practical considerations, but by the will of the Lord Jesus Christ himself, who made us his brothers and sisters, children of the One Father. Hence the prayer that we make today is of fundamental importance.*

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Article 11 from the Norms for Anglicanorum Coetibus:

*Former Anglican Bishops

Article 11

§1. A married former Anglican Bishop is eligible to be appointed Ordinary. In such a case he is to be ordained a priest in the Catholic Church and then exercises pastoral and sacramental ministry within the Ordinariate with full jurisdictional authority.

§2. A former Anglican Bishop who belongs to the Ordinariate may be called upon to assist the Ordinary in the administration of the Ordinariate.

§3. A former Anglican Bishop who belongs to the Ordinariate may be invited to participate in the meetings of the Bishops’ Conference of the respective territory, with the equivalent status of a retired bishop.

§4. A former Anglican Bishop who belongs to the Ordinariate and who has not been ordained as a bishop in the Catholic Church, may request permission from the Holy See to use the insignia of the episcopal office.*

 

[7_Sorrows]

Thank you Don for your posts!

 

[Brendan_64]

Of course it is not right to use language to deliberately hurt or offend someone, but the comments on this thread were not directed at individual Anglican members, or at Anglicans in general. The comments were made in response to comments made by fellow Catholics, and therefore could not be construed as being directed to cause offence.

And the problem with nuanced language is that it often skirts around matters and leads to misunderstandings as it assumes that everybody actually knows the truth of the matter being addressed, so therefore does not directly state it, but instead hints at it. The problem there is that it could lead some people to actually think (on this matter) that Anglican priests are actually valid priests who simply need to do a ‘top-up’ when they cross the Tiber, because after-all they are actually already valid priests (of a sort) anyway (just of a different denomination). That road leads to false ecumenism and can lead to indifferentism.

We should not moderate ourselves when it comes to speaking the truth, just because it might offend somebody, so long as our intention is not to offend.