TAC BeliefsThanks Cobbfmly!
I thought they already believed in transubstantiation. I wonder what other Marian doctorines they ascribe to if any beyond her being the Mother of God? Then there are the issues of Purgatory, and intercession of the Saints.
Makes my head swim thinking about it…:whacky:
That’s not true. There are a number of possible rationales for prayer for the dead other than a belief in Purgatory. My own approach and that of many Episcopalians (which may be too fuzzy for the TAC, as most of our attitudes are) is that we don’t need to know how prayer for the dead works, since we don’t really know how prayer for the living works.Prayer for the Dead - Yes (it is likely TAC believes in Purgatory as there is no need for these prayers otherwise)%between%http://www.saint-mary.info/STMPAR.htm
Episcopalian isn’t exactly different from Anglican, but these are “traditionalist” Anglo-Catholics. GKC can best tell you what traditionalist Anglo-Catholics think about transubstantiation, but generally I think it’s fair to say that their theology is essentially that of the Orthodox (i.e., they believe in what Catholics call transubstantiation but may not like to use the term), and their practice is the traditional practice of the Western Church (i.e., they reserve the Sacrament, celebrate Benediction, etc.) Such views do exist in the Episcopal Church as well, but the real hard-line Anglo-Catholics by and large oppose the ordination of women, so many of them left for groups like the TAC in the 70s, and many of those who didn’t have now left or are now leaving in the aftermath of +Robinson’s election.In the case of Episcopalians like me (well, as I USED to be) there’s transubstantiation, which is the most important concept of all. No matter how different Episcopalian is from Anglican,
The Pope has gone on record rejecting “ecumenism of return,” promising Protestants (and how much more Anglo-Catholics) that we can be reunited without giving up our particular traditions, and expressing a firm commitment to corporate reunion. I don’t think any of this has been said in such a way that you as a Catholic would be obliged to agree, but it’s worth noting that if you reject corporate reunion and insist on individual conversion you are disagreeing with your Pope.There’s work to do in conversion and I have a hard time believing it can be done on the “group” or “express” basis!
Why is that more likely? The Orthodox option?I think its more likely the TAC converts to Orthodoxy. The issue of married priests is surmountable. I doubt Rome will accept married bishops. I doubt the TAC bishops will back away on this.
I think your seminarian pal should consider postponing his studies till he knows better what he wants to do.A seminarian I know is seriously considering converting to an Eastern Rite as he wants to marry. The “foreign” nature of the Rite is holding him back. If there was an Anglican Rite with married priests in the US he would have converted to that Rite long ago.
I’m in no way trying to set up a straw man here… my sarcasm however was intentional and I apologize, (it was a bad day for me!) I was merely trying to point out that people joining the church, whether it be one at atime or whole congregations, need to be propberly formed/educated.No, they are not saying that… but if the Straw Man works for ya…
In fact dozens of congregations have come in en masse. These folks appear to be asking for an opportunity to do the same - they also appear willing to do it on Rome’s terms.
Prayers would be good at this time…
I doubt the TAC will accept closing its parishes and merging into existing Catholic parishes - many of which are far less orthodox than TAC.So what will happen in the end? Will all of their parishes “convert” to Catholicism? Will each parish become part of the diocese of which it is physically located? Will they just start closing down the TAC churches and sending their parishioners to the nearest Catholic Churches.
Or will this whole “Anglican Rite” thing expand and all of their parishes will lie under their own set of bishops outside of the Latin Rite?
Or will it end up being too difficult and the TAC will start seeking unity with the Eastern Orthodox groups instead?
No matter what, we need to continue praying for Christian unity.
I think the Antiochean jurisdiction in the US would be the best way for the TAC to go. Its an Orthodox jurisdiction - here a Vineyard charismatic church converted along with its 2 pastors a few years back. Going to Rome was too much an obstacle and the group has a vibrant Orthodox parish in the south Bay now.Why is that more likely? The Orthodox option?
Do you have any reason to believe that Orthodox jurisdictions would be more accomadating? If you are reducing the churches down to who has married priests as a norm and who does not it might look like their is far more commonality. But that is in fact a minor discipline.
I think it would be tougher still for them to find a home in most Orthodox jurisdictions. The mentality of the TAC - from what I can see - is decidedly western and most certainly Catholic. There is much on the net by apologists for “Western Rite Orthodoxy”… Despite the very vocal and near-omnipresent internet presence of its most erstwhile supporters, I see much evidence that it is an inorganic, much isolated movement that may not be sustainable and is certainly prone to the manipulations of persons with strong agendas.
I think your seminarian pal should consider postponing his studies till he knows better what he wants to do.
Eastern Catholic Churches are not meant to be there as a “marriage option for Latins.” If he makes a bold move like transfering sui juris churches he should do it for love of the church he is entering in, not as a loop-hole manuever.
Also, Catholics don’t “convert” to rites - they transfer between particular churches.
Either way, I am rather doubtful that if Rome did allow for a group like this to enter into full communion and maintain their practice of ordaining married men that it would open the doors for any and every Catholic male with presbyteral and marital aspirations to just transfer into the jurisdiction or group…
Not if they are committed to the papacy and the idea of returning to their Patriarch - the patriarch of Rome.I think the Antiochean jurisdiction in the US would be the best way for the TAC to go. Its an Orthodox jurisdiction - here a Vineyard charismatic church converted along with its 2 pastors a few years back. Going to Rome was too much an obstacle and the group has a vibrant Orthodox parish in the south Bay now.
I am concerned that your statement and others on this post suggests that the TAC should choose Rome for liturgical or cultural reasons and that Orthodoxy is a legitimate alternative.Not if they are committed to the papacy and the idea of returning to their Patriarch - the patriarch of Rome.
And certainly the TAC knows the options they have, some were ex-Romans. And still this was the path they chose. They knew it could have been easier to go to the Antiochans, I am sure.
As it stands, we have at least 7 parishes in the Catholic Church in the US who worship with the Catholic “Book of Divine Worship” - a Catholic version of the BCP. More could certainly be added.
Again, on paper, the Antiochians may seem the way to go - but in point of fact, many continuing Anglicans and the like evince greater interest and yearning to stick to their western patrimony.
As a Catholic I am of the thinking that they should become Catholic - I am not certain why you think the Orthodox option is so much more attractive.
I think you misread what I write… I am NOT an advocate of WRO or “simply going Roman” because they are western. I am a papist to be sure, and believe the Catholic Church as lead by the Pope of Rome with the keys of Saint Peter, is the fullness of the Christian faith.I am concerned that your statement and others on this post suggests that the TAC should choose Rome for liturgical or cultural reasons and that Orthodoxy is a legitimate alternative.
As an ex-Anglican I chose Rome, not as simply the best choice among several good choices, but rather because it is the ONLY Church founded by Our Lord Himself under the leadership of Peter and his successors. Orthodoxy may have many good points but in rejecting the Pope it is wrong. The Pope is NOT an optional extra to the faith. Jesus chose Peter and said, “Upon this rock I will build my Church.”
I would urge the TAC to fully convert to the Catholic faith and rejoice in being under the guidance of Peter!
By all means, if they can bring their beautiful liturgy with them when they come home, so much the better.
rjs1
Firstly I would contend that “first among equals” is genuinely vague enough to satisfy a whole gamut of folks who would offer this as a vague comprimise to a Petrine ministry that they will otherwise reject.Yeah but*** the Orthodox don’t reject the ancient seat of Peter. We even see him as the first among equals and if Rome were to find communion with the Orthodox churches than we would put Rome back to its rightful position of first among equals.*** Not Bishop among the Bishops which even God understands the concept of checks and balances and didn’t want to create a position that could succumb to corruption and not be “put” in line by the other positions.
Our Lord did not make Peter first among equals. He gave Peter a unique authority as the Rock upon which the Church was founded and He gave him the keys, symbols of authority, to bind and loose.Yeah but the Orthodox don’t reject the ancient seat of Peter. We even see him as the first among equals and if Rome were to find communion with the Orthodox churches than we would put Rome back to its rightful position of first among equals. Not Bishop among the Bishops which even God understands the concept of checks and balances and didn’t want to create a position that could succumb to corruption and not be “put” in line by the other positions.