Posted on 01/30/2011 2:26:12 PM PST by fabrizio
LONDON -- Hundreds of disillusioned Anglicans were preparing Sunday to defect from the Church of England to the Roman Catholic Church in time for Lent, Sky News reported.
It follows a campaign by a former Anglican bishop in protest at its stance on the ordination of women and gay clergy.
Father Keith Newton has encouraged Anglicans to join the Ordinariate -- a special branch of Catholicism established by the Pope -- to welcome protestant defectors.
Despite the efforts of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Anglo Catholics have begun leaving following the conversion of three Anglican bishops in mid-January.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Jvette:
Well for starters, it is going to translate for example, St. Luke’s Gospel where the Angel Gabriel greets Mary as Hail Mary Full of Grace, consistent with St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate Translation, rather than Rejoice Most Favored Daughter, etc.
Another chance is that the Creed will be I believe [Credo] rather than We believe. I think the Creed will also state that Christ is “consubstantialem with the Father” rather than One in Being, etc.
I also think The Lord Be with You in the Introductory Rite will now have the response “And with Your Spirit” which is the correct translation of et cum spiritu, rather than “And also with you”
Those are a few of the changes that I am aware of but there will be many more.
People never realize the mentality of the times when the Tudors ruled. While there was no Salic Law, boys are preferred and Henry was no different in that need, he was simply more ruthless about getting one.
Jvette:
Hey, I have those types in my parish and even my family. God bless them and love them we just need to help them along the way.
And No, I don’t have a false sense of her. I am sure she is a good soul, just maybe needs some better catechesis.
It's a little easier to accept these changes when you consider that the Latin version is still the normative version of the Roman Rite, and that the changes bring the English closer to the meaning and the flavor (the style, the sound) of the Latin.
The original translation, while everybody's used to it, had some flaws that arose out of some fashions in translation at the time which have since fallen by the wayside. The most dangerous aspect of the translation was something called "dynamic equivalence", in which the translators argued that they not only didn't need a literal translation, they could use quite different words to say something that they thought was "better" than the original words. What this meant, of course, was that all sorts of dated idioms and personal hobbyhorses and what not worked their way into what should have been first and foremost an accurate translation . . . but wasn't.
Oh that link is great, thanks.
Well, a least some people will have to pay a little closer attention now, lol.
I only mean that some things in the Mass can be very automatic if one is inclined to wander in the mind while there.
I pay very close attention to everything the priest says and that I say, so that it isn’t just going through the motions.
This is going to be interesting.
“They both want to push their beliefs that men and women are interchangeable and not different in any way.”
If you really want ot find out the truth of that mentality, ask a man if he owuld prefer that female cheerleaders be replaced with buff male Chippendale dancers and ask women if they would prefer female dancers at Chippendales. The responses will highlight the differences succinctly.
If I get on serious autopilot I find myself saying Cranmer's Creed, since I didn't convert until I was 47 and that's a LOT of Nicene Creeds since I started singing in the choir at age six.
I'm going to make a real effort to learn the new Creed correctly and get it into the hard drive. (I'm still saying Cranmer's translation of the Apostle's Creed while praying the Rosary though).
Thanks to you and CTrent1564 I will have some info to share with her and possibly make the changes a little less of a shock to her system.
I really think it's just a matter of seeing the new translation and knowing the reasons for it. Once you understand why it's being done, it's a lot easier to accept.
The USCCB website has a good section on the new translation, with FAQs and all sorts of useful information in addition to the new translation here.
I believe that what brings to the Mass is what one will get out of it.
If one comes thinking it is boring and rote, then that is what it will be.
If one comes knowing that for that hour we are truly residents of heaven, and we truly partake in the Lamb’s Supper then that hour is not nearly enough.
Having been unable to receive communion for nearly 8 years, I will never take for granted the joyous, glorious gift that is ours as Catholics.
God willing, they’ll find the right hand of fellowship where ever the Lord leads them.
But there's an economic back-story here. The church controlled about 25% of the British economy, with vast tracts of the best developed farmlands in the realm belonging to the monastic orders, substantial holdings by the Bishops, and many prerogatives that effectively left them a law unto themselves. When the trouble between the King and the Church began, the economic issues made a radical solution financially attractive.
Henry VIII was no "Protestant." He merely wanted to run the Roman Catholic Church in England without Romans. He seized Church property, sold it on the cheap, or gave it to his pals, and built a strong anti-Rome constituency, which became more "Protestant," after Henry's death, and Edward's and Elizabeth's Reforms.
Me, I hope the Pope just sets up an Anglo-Catholic outfit in communion with Rome, sort of like the Greek, Chaldean, Syrian, Coptic, etc. rites that drop by the Vatican to have an espresso once in a while, keep the Pope's picture in the office, and with whom the Pope checks in by phone before doing anything really big. Other than that, they have their own liturgy, trick hats, and customs different from Monsignor O'Houlihan's parish.
I’d certainly say that wherever the Lord is, is where they ought to think about going. The Anglicans have gone way too looey to be recognizable as Christian any more.
“We’re getting the band back together.”
ROFLMAO.
So the Catholic church got rid of all if its homosexuals?
Sounds like “out of the frying pan into the fryer,” to me.
You say “usurping the provenance of God”, or alternately you could say “correcting the domination of the Bishop of Rome”.
It’s not a UK thing. It’s a media thing. They like to sensationalise everything. “Defect” implies dissention and distrust and disharmony. On this issue that exists, but actually, there is far more agreement than disagreement in both Catholicism and Anglicanism. That is not as newsworthy of course.
Maybe he will canonise Martin Luthor next.
The fact that Catherine of Aragon was from the Spanish royal family, the same spanish royal family that had a dagger to the pope’s throat, made no difference at all, of course.
The purpose is not to get rid of them. The purpose is not to allow them in any leadership role. Sinnners can still come to church.
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.