pope opens door for anglicans to come over

[Quiddity]

The issues are even more fundamental than that. There is active debate about whether clergy must be celibate, for instance. There is active debate about Mary despite the fact that the Pope has pronounced ex cathedra on certain aspects of the Marian doctrines. At least, this is what my Roman Catholic friends tell me.

I can only hope that the church revisits such doctrines as transubstantiation and the necessity for Christians of other traditions to have to be re-baptized in order to participate fully in the Roman Catholic church. That would help me a great deal, because I simply cannot accept either position. But that's just me, and I don't expect this issue to be resolved here on these forums.

I'd be curious to read what those aspects were. I can't say I see that many Marian threads in the catholic forums I visit.

Transubstantiation may just require clarification......I'm not entirely convinced there is a real disagreement here; there could be, I'm just not sure. The re-baptism is news to me. I've bumped into several Christians (of the protestant mainline type) whose baptism's were accepted by the Church. There is only a few non-Trinitarian like (a sect of pentecostal) that I've heard had issues with this. The local priest would have to evaluate your situation. I can't imagine any high-church Christians having any problems with the transition. They of ALL Christians should have it the easiest.

You should visit the other forum I speak of. There are catholics of all kinds on staff there. There are priests, deacons, lawyers, theologians, etc. Far more qualified then I to answer the details of your stance on things.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I wonder if this is just setting up another split.

The current Pope may expect a "mass-conversion" - which really isn't a conversion, because the Anglicans will be keeping their clergy and rites, and the church will be in a heap of trouble if a next Pope wants to press Roman tradition on these new "converts."

It would be a royal mess - especially with respect to church property --- I wonder if this is just a ploy to succer property rights out of a splitting church.

 

[pastor dave]

It would be a royal mess - especially with respect to church property --- I wonder if this is just a ploy to succer property rights out of a splitting church.

now that is a question......Does anyone know whether property will change hands along with the converts? because i really cannot see the anglican church allowing its property to go with its clergy.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

now that is a question......Does anyone know whether property will change hands along with the converts? because i really cannot see the anglican church allowing its property to go with its clergy.

The Bishop owns the property, just like in the Catholic church.

That's the problem now in Episcopal life -- bishops are limiting access to church property parishioners and their clergy to whatever position they hold regarding homosexuality and women in the ministry.

This is no small problem, because church people have paid for this property, and may be liberal under a conservative bishop --- or conservative under a liberal bishop, and the bishop distributes funds for ministries or building projects, etc. at his liking.

If he moves to the Catholic church, the property goes with him.

note: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE5045IF20090105

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1728134,00.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-church1-2009oct01,0,1455513.story

 

[pastor dave]

thanks for clearing that up evangellous

 

[angellous_evangellous]

thanks for clearing that up evangellous

It seems to me like it's a HUGE sell-out. Literally.

Pope gives up a little theological ground, Episcopals chance their heritage and property. It's a win-win situation for the Catholics, who can wait a few decades or so to lay some roots down in the property systems.

As soon as the Pope is assigning bishops to Episcopalian or Anglican churches, the property rights will be completely divorced from their Anglican heritages.

 

[pastor dave]

i see what you mean by a win win situation,in the long run i feel this is a closer step to harmonising the christian faith that has so long been divided.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

i see what you mean by a win win situation,in the long run i feel this is a closer step to harmonising the christian faith that has so long been divided.

I don't see how it can work... there is no harmony. The Romans aren't abandoning their historic theological beliefs and niether are the Episcopals, although they share the common enemy of liberalism.

Would the Roman church carry out Episcopal rites? Who would the Roman church appoint to serve in Episcopal churches when the current preists and bishops are no longer willing or able to serve their diocese / churches?

 

[pastor dave]

what i can see happening is those who wish to return to the traditional way of christian practice will very much welcome this move, where as the liberal christian (whose numbers are very much dwindling) will shy away.I expect an almighty war of words to happen but i doubt very much if it will return to the riots that occured in the 19th century that broke out across london( R:E traditionalists verses the protestants).

 

[Quiddity]

I wonder if this is just setting up another split.

The current Pope may expect a "mass-conversion" - which really isn't a conversion, because the Anglicans will be keeping their clergy and rites, and the church will be in a heap of trouble if a next Pope wants to press Roman tradition on these new "converts."

It would be a royal mess - especially with respect to church property --- I wonder if this is just a ploy to succer property rights out of a splitting church.

I don't know Nathan. I know I sound like a broken record......but......it's not the first time the Church has to figure out a way to get recent converts to understand the real differences and they'll just have to make a decision then. I mean, even when it's not a large group people still can misunderstand what the Church teaches.

So really, what conversion is real? One that understands all the details of the faith? If that's the case, then technically I haven't converted either.

Don't you think conversion is simpler then that?

The re-ordination is messy. The Apostolicae Curae stated definitively in the late 1800s that Anglican ordinations "are utterly null and void" because the would-be "reformers" broke the ordination rite, and it was not repaired until there were no bishops left with valid orders. In recent decades, however, bishops from later breakaways (e.g., Old Catholic, Polish National Catholic) who do have valid orders have been co-consecrators at some Anglican ordinations to the episcopate. AFAIK, Rome has never come to a determination on whether this works and whether the rite(s) Anglicans now use is/are valid.

As a whole, then, the Anglican Church doesn't maintain it, but it is possible that there are bishops and priests within the Anglican Church who have valid orders (and that's not accounting for Catholic priests who left).

It is my understanding that Anglicans who request Catholic ordination under the pastoral provision can request conditional ordination ("If you are not already ordained ..." or something like that; I don't know the exact procedure) if they can trace their lineage back to a co-consecrator with valid orders. They still can't enter Catholic ministry without the Church's making sure their orders are valid, but someone who doesn't have such lineage is ordained without condition because their orders are known not to be valid.

Here is more on it:

USCCB - SEIA - Anglican Orders: A Report on the Evolving Context of Their Evaluation in the Roman Catholic Church

As to the properties, I think you're right about them belonging to the Bishop. However, I will say that it's not always the case. Dioceses operate similar to any other business and they sometimes borrow money from other Dioceses or Rome. In some cases the Bishop owns very little property.

 

[Quiddity]

I don't see how it can work... there is no harmony. The Romans aren't abandoning their historic theological beliefs and niether are the Episcopals, although they share the common enemy of liberalism.

Would the Roman church carry out Episcopal rites? Who would the Roman church appoint to serve in Episcopal churches when the current preists and bishops are no longer willing or able to serve their diocese / churches?

Some of these things have already been worked out:
JIMMY AKIN.ORG: New Structures Announced for Reception of Anglicans into Full Communion

 

[angellous_evangellous]

USCCB - SEIA - Anglican Orders: A Report on the Evolving Context of Their Evaluation in the Roman Catholic Church.

This seems a bit outdated, particularly with reference to what we're talking about today...

I agree, every diocese is different --- but traditionally the property belongs to the bishop and the Roman church operates on good faith for unity... it's when the church wants to split that issues with property come up -- in our time as with every other schism.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Some of these things have already been worked out:
JIMMY AKIN.ORG: New Structures Announced for Reception of Anglicans into Full Communion

This merely points out the problems.

 

[Quiddity]

*Shrug*......some are there. You just have to follow the yellow brick road.

It'll work itself out. Or you can just wait for the conspiracy theory book to come out on 2012.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

*Shrug*......some are there. You just have to follow the yellow brick road.

It'll work itself out. Or you can just wait for the conspiracy theory book to come out on 2012.

haha

I've been working in splitting churches for years. I know exactly how it works. :yes:

This one I find to be particularly worrisome.

 

[Quiddity]

haha

I've been working in splitting churches for years. I know exactly how it works. :yes:

This one I find to be particularly worrisome.

Don't worry. We do a wonderful job without Papa angellous. We know exactly what we are doing. We go way back baby.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Don't worry. We do a wonderful job without Papa angellous. We know exactly what we are doing. We go way back baby.

hahaha

I'm good at what I do, too.

And I agree, I think that the Catholic church and the Anglican/Episcopal church knows what is going on, too.

 

[keithnurse]

what are peoples oppinion on the catholic faith opening the doors to dis-illusioned anglican bishops and priests to convert?

personally i believe this is a great idea myself.

The Pope isn't really "opening the doors" to Anglicans but is making it easier for Anglican/Episcopal priests to switch to Roman church. In 1980 Pope JP2 created "the pastoral provision" which was a new process for married Episcopal/Anglican priests in the US and England to become RC priests and still be married to their wives. See www.pastoralprovision.org and www.anglicanuse.org This lastest document from the Vatican just streamlines the process or Episcopal priests to become Catholic priests and for Episcopal/Anglican parishes to switch en masse and become Catholic parishes. There are already about a dozen "Anglican Use" Catholic parishes in the US listed on the above links.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

now that is a question......Does anyone know whether property will change hands along with the converts? because i really cannot see the anglican church allowing its property to go with its clergy.

Church Property is not involved... neither the Clergy nor congregations have any property rights, they are all held by the church comissioners. A Church has to get what is called a faculty to even sell modify or buy a small item on the church inventory. This is a very involve process and take up to a year for larger items such as when I made a new altar for our church. To get a faculty for a new toilet has taken over two years.

Part of the problem is that the Church of Englend is "established" under the Crown.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

In the Church of England this is all far more complicated than posts on this and Catholic forums in the USA are suggesting.

Not even in the High Church Anglo-catholic Parishes are things quite the same.
Most young priests are taught in the Anglo Catholic tradition, however some support women priests and bishops and some don't. Our Previous Priest left our parish when he "married" his partner, and took up a new post as priest to one of the most wealthy London parishes. His preferred rites were extreme high church, Roman vestments,Incense, bells, genuflection, relics,ikon's and all the normal outward signs.
When you saw the Clergy and wives at the recent Conference of priests convened by Anglo Catholics to discuss the matter it was notable that most were past 50 and nearing the end of their careers. This brings up the question, strange to catholics, of housing and pensions for married Clergy. Anglican Clergy are salaried employees living in tied houses.

The three house of the Anglican Synod is the body that decides all questions in the Church of England,( bishops,Clergy, laymen) Not even the arch bishop can override these decisions.
They have decided on women Priests, and decide on the ordination of women Bishops but not yet the timing or details on the Bishops.

It would simplify matters ,if those who wished to leave did so.
Very few congregations would follow, as many such priests have unsympathetic congregations.
There was a time before such social mobility, that congregations and priest were likely to be of the same persuasion, this is rarely true today.

You now find strange mixtures , like myself, who prefers the high church rite, but is of a liberal persuasion.

I suspect the Anglican faith will remain as varied as ever, but will lose a further 300 of it's more "difficult" priests.

What the Roman church will gain I am not sure.
Certainly some very strong minded priests, who are practiced in not being coerced into anything. Whose religious rites tend to resemble more those of English Roman Catholics of 60 years ago.
But who have some remarkably liberal views on matters of sex and marriage.