Posted on 07/08/2008 8:50:51 AM PDT by CTrent1564
The Bishop of Ebbsfleet, the Rt Rev Andrew Burnham, is to lead his fellow Anglo-Catholics from the Church of England into the Roman Catholic Church, the Catholic Herald will reveal this week.
Bishop Burnham, one of two "flying bishops" in the province of Canterbury, has made a statement asking Pope Benedict XVI and the English Catholic bishops for "magnanimous gestures" that will allow traditionalists to become Catholics en masse.
He is confident that this will happen, following talks in Rome with Cardinal Levada, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Cardinal Kasper, the Vatican's head of ecumenism. He was accompanied on his visit by the Rt Rev Keith Newton, Bishop of Richborough, the other Canterbury "flying bishop", who is expected to follow his example.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
Ray’sBeth:
That is a legal issue that is something I can’t answer with any confidence. My guess is those properties belong to the Church of England thus those Anglican clergy and laity that do come into full communion will most likely be assigned to Catholic Churches that are not being fully used at this time. Of course this is just a guess. I have a friend of mine who is in London as we speak. I worked with him during is RCIA process, which was very short (he was a Traditional Anglican), and he was involved in getting an Anglican-Use Vespers started at a parish in the Archdiocese of New Orleans. He was at a July 4th party, where both some Catholic and Catholic leaning Anglicans were at and according to him, there is a structure already in place to bring in Catholic leaning Anglicans back into Rome.
Regards
Obligatory celibacy in the Eastern Curch applies to bishops, most of whom are chosen from the monastic ranks. This is as strict as Latin celibacy for all priests, inlcuding the bishops.
But all this is moot since no Anglican bishop can be received into the Catholic/Orthodox Church as a bishop. As far as the Eastern Church is concerned, only Western (Catholic) priest can cross over. All other clergy from Protestant sects are considered invalidly ordained and can onyl be ordained through the seminary.
The point I was making with the picture of a woman "bishop," was that the so-called Anglo-Catholics are not Catholics at all. They may have the vestments and they even celebrate Mass versus populi!, but they have altar girls and women incensers.
Are you coming to the Anglican Use Society Conference? It starts Thursday afternoon at sockmonkey’s church, Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio.
http://www.anglicanuseconference.com/
“Obligatory celibacy in the Eastern Curch applies to bishops, most of whom are chosen from the monastic ranks. This is as strict as Latin celibacy for all priests, inlcuding the bishops.”
Actually, it's far more strict than Latin celibacy for priests. Priestly celibacy is readily admitted to be a discipline, not a doctrine or a dogma. It is a matter of Canon Law, not Divine Law, and thus, could theoretically be changed, or provision for exceptions made.
On the other hand, married bishops is beyond the experience of either the Orthodox or Catholics, and is not subject to change or exception.
“But all this is moot since no Anglican bishop can be received into the Catholic/Orthodox Church as a bishop.”
I thought I'd read here on the forum that at one point (some decades, or perhaps a century or so ago), the Orthodox were considering some sort of union or intercommunion with the Anglicans. Did I read wrong?
sitetest
No I can’t make it. But I will be following it closely. According to Msg. William Stetson, who handles the pastoral provision certification, 7 former Anglicans/Episcopalians were certified for ordination under Pastoral provision. Also, back in February, some 5 other Episcopalians and 1 Lutheran clergyman were also certified.
According to Msgr. Stetson, there is likely to be another certification process in September after Lambeth is done.
God Bless and Regards
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Like I said, I think we need to wait and let this play out. I doubt anything will become public until after the Anglican Communion has Lambeth.
The article mentioned that the reason they did not go to the local Catholic Bishops was that several of them tried to quash this about 10 years ago. It also mentioned that some of these Catholic Bishops were quite liberal.
About 2 months ago, Marcus Grodi had Fr. Peter Geldard and about 1 month ago, Prof. William Oddie. Both of them were Trad. Anglicans who came into Rome during the period 1992 to 1994. In fact some 700 Anglican clergy came to Rome, and of those 450 were ordained as priests, and 150 of those were ordained as married priests.
At that time what was offered was that any Anglican clergy that came to Rome would be incorporated into Roman-Rite parishes celebrating the Novus Ordo, or the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite as we know it today. Another option that was proposed was a personal prelature that allowed for Anglican-Use Liturgies and parishes similar to what we have in the States (e.g. there are 6 Anglican-Use parishes). However, that was not a proposal that was thought viable at the time and as you have noted, the Catholic Bishops in the U.K. were not comfortable with that one. I don’t know the reason but one suspects that all of the tension with the Liturgy could have been the issue as in the late 1980’s and up to 1992-1994, we were only a few years removed from the SSPX issue and the dissent on Woman’s ordination was still being voices in the public until JPII issued the document on no women’s ordination.
However, times have changed, and the Motu proprio, and Pope Benedict’s desire to restore Liturgical Tradition, and the fact that it seems that this group of Anglicans have been dealing directly with Rome. And, just recently Cardinal Hoyos was in the U.K. and stated that the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite is something that should find its place in every parish in the U.K. and the world. I think the English Bishops have finally got the memo and will not cause to much tension on what Pope Benedict is trying to do.
Now, the U.S. Bishops who keep holding up the Liturgical Translations (well some of them) need to be sent to retirement fast, or perhaps Cardinal Hoyos needs to come to ST. Patricks in NY and do the same thing he did at Westminister last month, that is, the Classical form of the Roman Rite is for all parishes.
While I don’t attend a parish that celebrates the Classical form of the Roman Rite, I understand its importance in helping Reform the Normal Roman Rite in line with what the Second Vatican Council intended, not what this marxist-sandanista Catholic liberals want it to be .
Regards
Rome minded Anglicans who wished to corporately cross the Tiber have had the same problem in the US. Cardinal Mahony in LA was one of them. He said (I'm paraphrasing) it would hurt the cause of ecumenism. He also mentioned that the "two Rogers" were agreed on that issue. The other Roger being his Episcopalian counterpart in LA at the time. I forget the Episcopalian Bishop's last name.
It got very ugly, and there were no winners. That much I do recall. There were truly only a handful of US Bishops open to the Anglican Use back in the day.
I believe the plan is that Anglican bishops remain priests but can never become Catholic bishops.
“I thought I’d read here on the forum that at one point (some decades, or perhaps a century or so ago), the Orthodox were considering some sort of union or intercommunion with the Anglicans. Did I read wrong?”
About 100 years ago, +Raphael Hawaweeny as the presiding hierarch here in America came very close to a sort of inter communion with the Episcopalians. Really what he did was exercise economia and allowed Orthodox faithful to attend liturgies in Episcopal parishes. After a few years, as I recall, he concluded that the Episcopal hierarchs he had been dealing with had been less than truthful on some pretty basic theological issues and so he issued an encyclical telling the Orthodox to stay away from Episcopal services and “sacraments”.
Here’s a link to an article about the matter as well has his letter to the faithful:
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/hawaweeny.aspx
You are delusional and a quite incompetent student of actual history.
“I’m curious, because my knowledge in this area is markedly weak - first, which canons prohibit married bishops? Second, there is some precedent in the early Church with some married members of the episcopate, correct? Third, and purely academic, if the canons are infallible, how does that relate back to married bishops who lived prior to the promulgation of the canon?”
There are a number of canons from any of a number of local councils. The usual one cited, because it is Ecumenical, is canon XII of the Quinisext Council. In the early church there were indeed married bishops, but The Church determined that that state was scandalous to the faithful and thus the canon. The canon, while ecumenical, is disciplinary, not a matter of dogma. Therefore it could be changed by an ecumenical council, but only by an ecumenical council. Finally, as this is a disciplinary canon, “infallibility” really has little or nothing to do with it. Here’s a link mto the canon:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.iii.xiii.html
Discuss the issues all you want, but do NOT make it personal.
Loved your post! It was most optimistic and intriguing. Let us pray it all come true.
They have zero chance of becoming Catholic Bishops.
“They have zero chance of becoming Catholic Bishops.”
I’m glad to hear that. Were it otherwise, the consequences would be more than unfortunate.
Source for that claim, please. Heretofore the career aspirations of Anglican converts has been limited to being Priests.
$60 is better(but over priced for Motel 6). I usually stay in the mid level Hiltons and those went up from $90 last year to $110-$120 this year. Oh well. I will just have to plan for next year. Does the conference move around? I can’t see us hosting it unless we have it at one of the bigger parishes.
Stating a fact is not making it personal. People who attempt to engage in untruthful revisionist history here should not be given carte blanche to do so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.