J
jj2011
Guest
Now I found the site I was visiting last night-- it was the ordination of Marco Vervoorst. I’m still not sure which version of the ordinal this is:
angelfire.com/nj/malleus/ordines/Vervoorst.html
Validity of Holy Orders in the Tradiational Anglican Communion ?
- Status
angelfire.com/nj/malleus/ordines/Vervoorst.html
A
AJV
Guest
It is TAC. 1662 BCP with various optional elements added in from the old Roman Pontifical.
P.S. You may be interested in the main site also. Mr. Oliveri’s got an interesting take vis the Traditional Roman, revised Roman and the modified Anglican rites of ordination. And good material, even if one wishes to disagree with his conclusions.
As you remarked they are also using the Roman Canon (translation from the English Missal) together with other elements of the Mass and Propers from the Traditional Roman Missal.
B
BobP123
Guest
The Anglicans allow female Ordinations. Why are we even discussing their validities?
A
AJV
Guest
The OP was talking about the Traditional Anglican Communion- originating in the Continuing churches which broke away from the Anglican Communion over precisely this point (OoW).
J
jj2011
Guest
It seems that the TAC basically broke away from the mainline AC because of the latter’s heresies-- so you could look at them as a schism from a heresy, I suppose.
The TAC is in dialogue with the Holy See. Remember, not everybody converts overnight. It took Cardinal Newman about eighteen years, and the problematic trends in Anglicanism helped wake him up.
I pray that the TAC hastens to follow the great Newman’s example, and soon.
J
jj2011
Guest
I find this fascinating. The “Traditional” Anglican Communion may be a misnomer. The tradition to which it is attached includes precisely those elements like the Roman Canon, which to the Reformers stank “of oblation.”
This is why we should pray that the TAC come home to the very Roman tradition that Cranmer set out to destroy.
M
mgrfin
Guest
The matter and form of the Sacrament of Holy Orders is not the canon of the mass; it is the imposition of the hands of the Bishop, saying ‘receive the Holy Spirit’.
peace
mgrfin
B
BobP123
Guest
I’m not familiar with all the various groups here. Which is the one that got its Rite approved by Rome, which today is called the Anglican Use Rite?
M
mgrfin
Guest
You are right. Who knows where any of them are going?
The Lutherans just barely agreed to continue the ban on non-celibate gay and lesbian pastors. God help us.
The Anglican communion has gone down this path.
They are all self-destructing. St. Paul condemned this kind of activity ages ago. Why is it even a question?
2009 will be an interesting year. They have postponed until then a decision on same sex unions. They will concluded a decision on the ordination of lesbian and gay ministers.
I guess the Commandments don’t mean very much to them.
It will only drive people from their church.
peace
mgrfin
J
jj2011
Guest
Don’t feel bad, BobP; it’s mighty hard to keep up with all these terms.
Brief explanation of “Anglican Use” given here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_Use
Overview of TAC here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Anglican_Communion
J
JoyforCatholic
Guest
As someone who was in the “Continuing Anglican Movement” for far too long and who has come home to the Church, I couldn’t agree more.
While I would say that there are many in the Continuing Anglican Church (in the pews anyway) who are very sincere Christians, there are many in the leadership who are, let’s see how I can put this gently, “colorful characters”; in other words, I don’t think I’d trust them.
Unfortunately, the Anglican lack of unity around a cohesive institution such as the Papacy has lead to the many problems in Anglicanism itself. Really the logical conclusion of Anglicanism is that of Unitarianism unfortunately or even worse, Nihilism; where anything or nothing is accepted. Look at the Episcopalians and C of E today with all their issues! The “Continuing Anglicans” are not far behind. This stems from their “Branch Theory of Catholicism” and The Church.
Many Anglo-“catholics” are indeed in a tree that is in the same garden however they are a separate tree as are all the other protestants sects/groups/ecclesial communities out there-- this does NOT mean they are void of God or God does not work in them-- who am I to dictate what the Almighty may choose to do!!! My point is that though, they are indeed not Catholic as understood by the Church Fathers.
We should pray the TAC return home as Catholics and not demand these terms to be accepted as their own “uniate” Church or “special rite”.
Read any of Hilaire Belloc’s books on the English Reformation and you’ll see how English History has been revised to make the Church OF England the great “catalyst” of British culture, society, economy, etc. It was not the Church OF but rather it was the Church IN England which always was the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
In Jesus Christ the Lord,
M
mgrfin
Guest
Amen to that (btw, I love Belloc)
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
There have been more than a few Eastern Orthodox bishops who have presided as co-consecrators at Anglican ordinations in the past couple hundred years.
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
How is the TAC Rite of Ordination stated? Is it stated Priest or Presbyter as the Anglican Communion?
A
aussie_melkite
Guest
no offence…but if you ask me the “false Spirit of Modernism” since vat 2 has done a better job of destroying the Roman Tradition than Cranmer did.
M
Marian_Carroll
Guest
And the topic of this thread is:
Your cooperation and assistance in staying with it is appreciated.
J
JoyforCatholic
Guest
Forgive me if I went off topic-- I would think that Holy Church has made itself quite clear on the issue of anything “anglican” in the sense that Anglican Orders have been and are null and void as Pope Leo XIII declared. While I am in NO POSITION to think that I, a recent convert, can answer for The Church, I know what the Church has said on record in the Encyclical of Apostolica Cureae by Leo.
The Holy Father simply declared what was the case, if you will-- what the Facts were and are and remain to be-- the defect in intent and form remain-- the Apostolic Succession was lost in the English Realm in the Edwardian Ordinal.
In my journey home into the Church-- that is the Catholic Church of the Creed (something I had always “thought” or “hoped” that Anglicanism was including Continuing Church/Traditional Anglicanism)-- it became clear to me that for the sacraments to be True and Valid that the ordinations’ validity and the validity of Holy Orders would be paramount.
My studies (lead I believe by the Holy Spirit who leads us into the Truth) and readings of men such as Newman, Knox, Manning and others made it clear that Pope Leo was and is still correct and right.
That is NOT to say that the members of the TAC or the “continuing Anglican church movement” are somehow condemned. As I alluded in my prior post on this thread, such hubris would be the epitome of pride and sinful judgment on my part and God forbid me to engage in such!
While there are indeed many things about the TAC/CC Movement that seem “catholic” and have “catholic” trappings and window dressings, if you will, they lack the KEY of the Catholic Faith which is acceptance of and submission to the office of the Papacy as the source of Unity AND Authority. The readings of the Fathers (specifically Cyprian, Clement, Ignatius and Ireneaus) seem to be clear to me on this.
As I wrote earlier, I was in the CC movement for some time and I knew bishops and clergy in it. There seems to me to be this desire for all things “catholic” and “English” but unfortunately the English Nationalism that is still held in many corners of the CC that I was in, seems to outweigh any rational desire for unity and especially submission to the Holy Father. I won’t specifically question the sincerity of the TAC or its hierarchy in their desire to come to the Church. Just seems to me there is already a way to do so that is not demanding of one’s own special uniate status or “special rite”.
Therefore, in conclusion I would have to deduce that the “sacraments” in the TAC and the CC in general are not “Sacraments” in the Catholic Understanding (outside from perhaps baptism and marriage)-- but certainly what the TAC/CC calls “eucharist” is not “The Eucharist” nor are Holy Orders in the TAC/CC truly HOLY ORDERS as the Church knows them to be.
Come home would be what I say-- the Father is waiting. Coming home to the Church made me face my “English and Anglican Pride” and the submission I am making to the Church and the Holy Father are what I needed. I would imagine that most other Anglicans who are like I was need the same thing.
In Christ the Lord,
M
mgrfin
Guest
The topic is:
"I know that the Church has declared the Holy Orders of the Anglican Communion Void, however I was wondering what the Churches view on the Sacaments of Tradiational Anglican Communion is? "
Well, if your episcopacy is invalid, and your priesthood is invalid, then all you have, sacramentally, is Baptism and Matrimony.
peace
J
JoyforCatholic
Guest
Thank you mgrfin for clarifying what unfortunately took me much more to write!
Sometimes, we converts from Anglicanism tend to be much too verbose; it’s a common problem in “Anglo-catholic” circles I tend to find.
In Christ the Lord,
- Status