TAC and Eastern Catholics?

[Peter_J]

There’s been a lot of talk about the possibility of the TAC or other Continuing Anglican groups coming into full communion with Rome, including the possibility of having an Anglican-Rite sui iuris Church.

I’d like to ask a slightly different question: do you see any possibility of the TAC (or another Continuing Anglican group) entering into full communion with one (or more) of the Eastern Catholic Churches, without entering into full communion with Rome – in short, dual-communion?

 

[Ghosty]

There’s been a lot of talk about the possibility of the TAC or other Continuing Anglican groups coming into full communion with Rome, including the possibility of having an Anglican-Rite sui iuris Church.

I’d like to ask a slightly different question: do you see any possibility of the TAC (or another Continuing Anglican group) entering into full communion with one (or more) of the Eastern Catholic Churches, without entering into full communion with Rome – in short, dual-communion?

I think it’s unlikely to the point of being barely mentionable. The patrimony of the TAC is Latin, not Eastern. There’s no reason they’d be looking to Eastern Catholic Churches while not looking to Rome.

Furthermore, it’s impossible to be in full Communion with an Eastern Catholic Church and NOT be in full Communion with Rome; that was one reason the Antiochian Orthodox rejected the Zoghby initiative outright.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Aramis]

There’s been a lot of talk about the possibility of the TAC or other Continuing Anglican groups coming into full communion with Rome, including the possibility of having an Anglican-Rite sui iuris Church.

I’d like to ask a slightly different question: do you see any possibility of the TAC (or another Continuing Anglican group) entering into full communion with one (or more) of the Eastern Catholic Churches, without entering into full communion with Rome – in short, dual-communion?

No. They lack established valid ordinations, and thus valid sacraments, even tho’ their form is otherwise valid. (In short, a valid cleric could confect the sacraments with their formulae, but they themselves can not.)

See, they have this issue with having done away with the ordination of Bishops for a while.

Also, while the TAC is asking for admission as a Sui Iuris Church, it’s likely that, if they do get it, the process will mirror that used by the Antiochian Orthodox when they accepted the Evangelical Orthodox into themselves: reordination of EVERY cleric, in large ordination liturgies.

as a comparison, when the Assyrian Church’s Mar Soros and his followers (several priests, several deacons, and a bunch of subdeacons, plus several thousand laymen), the clerics of which hold valid and licit ordination via the Assyrian Church of the East chose to come into union, they simply read the patriarchal acceptance (they were accepted by the Chaldean patriarch), and the letter of agreement at their liturgies, as did the neighboring Chaldean Catholic Parishes.

 

[Peter_J]

No. They lack established valid ordinations, and thus valid sacraments, even tho’ their form is otherwise valid. (In short, a valid cleric could confect the sacraments with their formulae, but they themselves can not.)

I thought someone would bring that up.

I believe, however, that most or all of TAC clerics have an Old Catholic bishop in their “lineage”, hence should have valid orders.

See, they have this issue with having done away with the ordination of Bishops for a while.

“they” being the Anglicans in general? or the TAC? In either case, I’m unfamiliar with the time period you refer to.

 

[Peter_J]

I think it’s unlikely to the point of being barely mentionable. The patrimony of the TAC is Latin, not Eastern.

If two groups desire full communion with each other, why should it matter if one is Western and the other is Eastern?

 

[Ghosty]

If two groups desire full communion with each other, why should it matter if one is Western and the other is Eastern?

It’s not that it would cause a problem per se, it’s more that if the TAC (which is of Latin Patrimony) is seeking Communion with the Catholic Churches, why wouldn’t it approach “it’s own” first? What would be the point of the “Latin” TAC entering Communion with, say, the Melkite Church without approaching the Latin Church?

Furthermore, since the Pope is still the centerpoint of Catholic unity, direct Communion with Rome is critical to Catholic identity, and let’s not forget the fact that the Anglican Church was founded off of a dispute with Rome, not with any of the other Catholic Churches.

All of these things add up to Rome and the Pope being the first “go to” point for the TAC. Whether they’d have their own Anglican Catholic Church after that is another question (though I doubt they would either have one, or request one), but Rome is definitely the key figure in any reunion talks between the TAC and the Catholic Church, IMO.

A very recent example of a similar occurrence would be the reunion between the Chaldean Church and the Assyrian diocese under Mar Bawai Soro. So far as I know it was settled between the in-coming Assyrians and the Chaldeans first and foremost; now that the Chaldean Church has accepted them, there are some details to be worked out with Rome, but it was still a primarily “Chaldean/Assyrian issue”.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Peter_J]

Thanks, I think I understand what you’re saying better now.

why wouldn’t it approach “it’s own” first? What would be the point of the “Latin” TAC entering Communion with, say, the Melkite Church without approaching the Latin Church?

Well, I believe the TAC has approached the Latin Church; and I imagine that, in general, Continuing Anglican groups would do so if/when they are interested in full communion with Catholics.

Nevertheless, I think that the Melkite Church (for example) and the Continuing Anglicans might be very close on issues which pertain to full communion (although very different with respect to Rite). In particular, I cannot see the Vatican agreeing to full communion with any group with didn’t affirm the Immaculate Conception, Papal Infallibility, and Universal Ordinary Jurisdiction; but I think the Melkite Church might. (Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the TAC as my original example, b/c I hear that they recently affirmed the CCC.)

 

[Peter_J]

Furthermore, it’s impossible to be in full Communion with an Eastern Catholic Church and NOT be in full Communion with Rome; that was one reason the Antiochian Orthodox rejected the Zoghby initiative outright.

Peace and God bless!

I believe that the reason the Vatican rejected the Zoghby initiative outright.

Can you explain your reasoning for thinking it was a reason the Antiochian Orthodox rejected the Zoghby initiative outright?

 

[LilyM]

I think it’s unlikely to the point of being barely mentionable. The patrimony of the TAC is Latin, not Eastern. There’s no reason they’d be looking to Eastern Catholic Churches while not looking to Rome.

Furthermore, it’s impossible to be in full Communion with an Eastern Catholic Church and NOT be in full Communion with Rome; that was one reason the Antiochian Orthodox rejected the Zoghby initiative outright.

Peace and God bless!

I personally know a few formerly Anglicans (clergy and religious included) who went to the Antiochian Orthodox - so clearly there’s something about the East that is attractive to at least some (in this case possibly the desire NOT to enter into communion with Rome )

 

[Ghosty]

I believe that the reason the Vatican rejected the Zoghby initiative outright.

Can you explain your reasoning for thinking it was a reason the Antiochian Orthodox rejected the Zoghby initiative outright?

You can read some tidbits of the Antiochian Orthodox response here:

cin.org/east/melkite.html

It’s in the top section, and they mention that they are not yet ready for Union with Rome.

In particular, I cannot see the Vatican agreeing to full communion with any group with didn’t affirm the Immaculate Conception, Papal Infallibility, and Universal Ordinary Jurisdiction; but I think the Melkite Church might. (Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the TAC as my original example, b/c I hear that they recently affirmed the CCC.)

Yes, but they couldn’t do so without Rome also joining in, as the failure of the Zoghby initiative shows, at least on the Catholic side (the Antiochians voiced the same concerns from the Orthodox side).

Lily M:

I personally know a few formerly Anglicans (clergy and religious included) who went to the Antiochian Orthodox - so clearly there’s something about the East that is attractive to at least some (in this case possibly the desire NOT to enter into communion with Rome )

Yes, but this is about ecclessial reunion, not so much about individual conversion.

 

[Peter_J]

You can read some tidbits of the Antiochian Orthodox response here:

cin.org/east/melkite.html

It’s in the top section, and they mention that they are not yet ready for Union with Rome.

I think this is the portion you have in mind: “In this regard, our Church questions the unity of faith which the Melkite Catholics think has become possible. Our Church believes that the discussion of this unity with Rome is still in its primitive stage.”

I interpret that differently than you do: I see it as saying that at this time, not only is full communion with Rome impossible, but so is dual-communion. (Just my opinion, of course.)

 

[Peter_J]

I personally know a few formerly Anglicans (clergy and religious included) who went to the Antiochian Orthodox - so clearly there’s something about the East that is attractive to at least some (in this case possibly the desire NOT to enter into communion with Rome )

That bring up another interesting possibility.

If the TAC (or another Continuing Anglican group) came into full-communion with Rome (leaving aside the dual-communion question for the moment), would they be allowed to be a Church sui iuris?

I’ve heard various opinions expressed on this question. But for the sake of argument, let’s suppose the answer is no. What if, then, the TAC makes an arrangement with one of the EC Churches, resulting in the TAC people/parishes joining that Church en masse? (They wouldn’t even need to switch to that Church’s Rite. There could be two co-existing Rites in the same church.)

 

[Aramis]

All of these things add up to Rome and the Pope being the first “go to” point for the TAC. Whether they’d have their own Anglican Catholic Church after that is another question (though I doubt they would either have one, or request one), but Rome is definitely the key figure in any reunion talks between the TAC and the Catholic Church, IMO.

The TAC put in a press release that they had asked for Sui Iuris status, as did the Vatican News Service.

They want to join, but they do not want to be “romanized”. If you search the back threads in the traditional catholics forum, I’m certain you’ll find links to the stories.

The question over whether or not any Western church will have Sui Iuris status (ignoring the Byzantines in the west for now) in the future is a huge one. One which impacts Lutherans, Anglicans, and several other groups.

Apparently, before his misbehaviors, Abp. Lefebvre (sp?) was trying to get JPII to grant Sui Iuris status to the Traditionalists. (Not a bad idea, IMO, but it is obvious Abp. Lefebvre was NOT the right one to establish it under…)

 

[twf]

It seems that our current Holy Father envisions the current forms of the Latin Rite (the Ordinary Form, also called “Pauline” or “Novus Ordo”, and the Extraordinary Form, also called “Tridentine”) to exist side by side…even within the same parish. I’m not sure if he would be willing to grant Sui Iuris status to any Western tradition. It is, however, possible. An alternative solution would be to grant the TAC autonomy without Sui Iuris status as a personal prelature within the Latin Church. (For those of you not familiar with the term, a personal prelature is a canonical entity within the Latin Church under a bishop which is defined by “persons” where ever they may be and not by geographical boundaries. Opus Dei is the only current example, though there are talks of SSPX being granted similar status if and when it reconciles with Rome).

 

[Amadeus]

It is correct that the Opus Dei is the only Personal Prelature of the Pope today. However, the TAC situation is not at all akin to how the Opus Dei came about as a Personal Prelature.

A Personal Prelature should be distinguished from a Personal Apostolic Administration, which would be closer to what the TAC situation is, if Rome approves. Even then, the TAC cannot qualify as a Personal Apostolic Adminstration as they are coming into the Catholic Church as converts, not as an existing Catholic community with a special attachment to certain patrimony of the Catholic Church.

The latest Catholic community that was granted status as a *Personal Apostolic Administration *was the community of St. John Vianney of Campos, Brazil, a traditionalist group then allied with the SSPX.

Further, the TAC cannot be granted a sui iuris status as currently defined by the Codes of Canons (East and West) because: one, it is not an Eastern Church different from the 22 Eastern Catholic Churches sui iuris now in communion with Rome and with each other and, second, the only Western Church in the Catholic communion of Churches allowed/identified as a sui iuris is the Latin Church.

For all intents and purposes, therefore, the TAC would be absorbed by the Latin dioceses where they are or, at best, they could be denominated as “Anglican Use” parishes if Rome expands the ambit of operation of the Pastoral Provisions (governing the conversion of entire Episcopal parishes in the U.S.) worldwide to include TACs and other Anglican conversions.

 

[Ghosty]

I think this is the portion you have in mind: “In this regard, our Church questions the unity of faith which the Melkite Catholics think has become possible. Our Church believes that the discussion of this unity with Rome is still in its primitive stage.”

I interpret that differently than you do: I see it as saying that at this time, not only is full communion with Rome impossible, but so is dual-communion. (Just my opinion, of course.)

We may actually be talking past eachother. I wasn’t refering to the possibility of “dual-Communion” at all, other than to say that it is impossible by definition. My understanding is indeed that the Antiochians were rejecting both notions, and I actually agree with them on the rejection of the concept of “dual-Communion”, at least as a goal.

Dual-Communion may be an unfortunate reality as a step before full schism, but I don’t see how it can be a move towards ending one. I believe the Antiochian Church was basically saying “we’re not ready to reunite with Rome, so we can’t reunite with the Melkite Church”; the concept of “dual-Communion” was right out. I also believe that they weren’t ready to make a move without the rest of the Eastern Orthodox Communion.

I can’t find it online right now, but there was recently an article on the Zoghby Initiative in the Melkite “Sophia” magazine. I typed it up and posted it at ByzCath, but I can’t access that thread at the moment due to website issues. The article makes for interesting reading, as a Melkite “re-evaluation” of the initiative, though the article is actually more about discussing Sayedna Zoghby’s vision and honoring his life.

I do agree with one of the conclusions of the author of that article that the vision of dual-Communion is “a fantasy”.

Aramis:

The TAC put in a press release that they had asked for Sui Iuris status, as did the Vatican News Service.

They want to join, but they do not want to be “romanized”. If you search the back threads in the traditional catholics forum, I’m certain you’ll find links to the stories.

Interesting. Thanks for the information.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Badaliyyah]

It appears they are going to be brought in through an extension of “Anglican Use”.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_thompson/blog/2008/07/16/exanglican_communities_to_become_catholic_rome_confirms

hattip to the people over at byzcath.org

salaam.

 

[Ghosty]

It appears they are going to be brought in through an extension of “Anglican Use”.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_thompson/blog/2008/07/16/exanglican_communities_to_become_catholic_rome_confirms

hattip to the people over at byzcath.org

salaam.

Very interesting, and promising. If true this would mean that “Anglo-Catholic” parishes can enter the Catholic Church, via the Latin Church, and remain totally “Anglo-Catholic”.

If things do continue in this apparent direction, I think it’s likely that this will cease being a provision to ease the transition towards “mainstream Latin practice”, and will become a provision protecting the authentic Anglo-Catholic tradition. I certainly hope that’s the case, at least.

Peace and God bless!

P.S. the article I mentioned earlier can be found in this online issue of Sophia

melkite.org/Sophia/SophiaWinter08.pdf

 

[Peter_J]

Badaliyyah,

It appears they are going to be brought in through an extension of “Anglican Use”.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_thompson/blog/2008/07/16/exanglican_communities_to_become_catholic_rome_confirms

hattip to the people over at byzcath.org

salaam.

Thanks for that info. That does sounds like really big news. Hopefully in the next couple days we will see a confirmation from CWNews, Zenit, etc.

On the negative side, I fear that many people reading that blog will misinterpret this:

The obvious interpretation of the Archbishop’s words is that the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), a “continuing church” which has hundreds of thousands of members worldwide (though few in the UK), will eventually be given its own Catholic parishes which use a Eucharistic Prayer incorporating Cranmerian language.

That sentence makes it sound like the TAC and the Vatican have already come to an agreement, when in fact all we know is that the Vatican has made a new offer.

Thanks again,
Peter.

 

[Peter_J]

Ghosty,

I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t agree with it.

-You understand the Antiochian Orthodox Church to be saying:
“we’re not ready to reunite with Rome, so we can’t reunite with the Melkite Church”
-I understand the Antiochian Orthodox Church to be saying:
“we’re not ready to reunite with Rome, or even with anyone in full communion with Rome, like the Melkite Church”