400,000 Anglicans becoming Catholic

[Reader Antonius]

There is much to be done before this can happen, yet isn't it interesting! And encouraging (at least to me as a re-vert to the Catholic Church)

Traditionally Christian Anglicans Ask to Join Catholic Church En Masse
Homosexuality the flash point
By Hilary White

PORTSMOUTH, UK, October 25, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The splits in the Worldwide Anglican Communion over the church’s secularising trends and growing enthusiasm for homosexuality has led some to seek reunion with the Catholic Church after nearly 500 years apart.

The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC)are reported to have met in Plenary Session in Portsmouth, England, in the first week of October 2007 and “unanimously agreed” to send a letter to the Pope seeking full, corporate, sacramental union” with the Catholic Church. The group has agreed not to give interviews until the Vatican has responded to their request.

The TAC boasts of some 400,000 members worldwide with at least 100 parishes in the US. It has been estimated that the TAC could have as many as 500 parishes supporting its goals in the UK.

TAC has been seeking for some years to establish some agreement with Rome that would see the entire body into the Catholic Church.

Any thoughts my brothers and sisters?

 

[TomUK]

There is much to be done before this can happen, yet isn't it interesting! And encouraging (at least to me as a re-vert to the Catholic Church)

Traditionally Christian Anglicans Ask to Join Catholic Church En Masse
Homosexuality the flash point
By Hilary White

PORTSMOUTH, UK, October 25, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The splits in the Worldwide Anglican Communion over the church’s secularising trends and growing enthusiasm for homosexuality has led some to seek reunion with the Catholic Church after nearly 500 years apart.

The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC)are reported to have met in Plenary Session in Portsmouth, England, in the first week of October 2007 and “unanimously agreed” to send a letter to the Pope seeking full, corporate, sacramental union” with the Catholic Church. The group has agreed not to give interviews until the Vatican has responded to their request.

The TAC boasts of some 400,000 members worldwide with at least 100 parishes in the US. It has been estimated that the TAC could have as many as 500 parishes supporting its goals in the UK.

TAC has been seeking for some years to establish some agreement with Rome that would see the entire body into the Catholic Church.

Any thoughts my brothers and sisters?

The person who wrote that article doesn't have a clue what they're talking about, and it's quite clear from the way it's written that balanced reporting isn't exactly that sites main aim.

 

[Reader Antonius]

The person who wrote that article doesn't have a clue what they're talking about, and it's quite clear from the way it's written that balanced reporting isn't exactly that sites main aim.

Hmmm, interesting. Could you explain what you mean my brother?

 

[Albion]

There is much to be done before this can happen, yet isn't it interesting! And encouraging (at least to me as a re-vert to the Catholic Church)

Traditionally Christian Anglicans Ask to Join Catholic Church En Masse
Homosexuality the flash point
By Hilary White

PORTSMOUTH, UK, October 25, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The splits in the Worldwide Anglican Communion over the church’s secularising trends and growing enthusiasm for homosexuality has led some to seek reunion with the Catholic Church after nearly 500 years apart.

The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC)are reported to have met in Plenary Session in Portsmouth, England, in the first week of October 2007 and “unanimously agreed” to send a letter to the Pope seeking full, corporate, sacramental union” with the Catholic Church. The group has agreed not to give interviews until the Vatican has responded to their request.

The TAC boasts of some 400,000 members worldwide with at least 100 parishes in the US. It has been estimated that the TAC could have as many as 500 parishes supporting its goals in the UK.

TAC has been seeking for some years to establish some agreement with Rome that would see the entire body into the Catholic Church.

Any thoughts my brothers and sisters?

TomUK's right about this. It's not accurate.

However, the writer appears to be adept enough to word things such that the reader thinks one thing while he can't be charged with having said it.

1) For example, are there 400,000 Anglicans converting? TAC "boasts of some 400,000" is more like it. That means that the figure is only what the church claims. And even if it were correct, there's no way to predict which members would actually choose to join the Roman Church.

2) TAC's appeal to Rome is not based upon issues with homosexuality, but he doesn't exactly say that it is, in case you notice this error. Although the article is ostensibly about TAC, the homosexuality concern is said, rightly, to be about splits in "the Worldwide Anglican Communion" which TAC has never been part of. It is a number of OTHER Anglican churches and associations which are involved with that.

3) 500 UK parishes? Notice that there is no evidence of this, just "estimated" by unknown parties and "
could have" "as many as" 500. Why about 500 NON-TAC churches would or even could join if TAC's proposal is successful isn't explained. If TAC's appeal is approved, it doesn't include non-TAC churches. TAC itself has a handful of parishes in the UK, but this 500 figure apparently refers to Anglican parishes in the UK which have grievances against the CofE while having no part in anything TAC is engaged in.

 

[Reader Antonius]

TomUK's right about this. It's not accurate.

However, the writer appears to be adept enough to word things such that the reader thinks one thing while he can't be charged with having said it.

1) For example, are there 400,000 Anglicans converting? TAC "boasts of some 400,000" is more like it. That means that the figure is only what the church claims. And even if it were correct, there's no way to predict which members would actually choose to join the Roman Church.

2) TAC's appeal to Rome is not based upon issues with homosexuality, but he doesn't exactly say that it is, in case you notice this error. Although the article is ostensibly about TAC, the homosexuality concern is said, rightly, to be about splits in "the Worldwide Anglican Communion" which TAC has never been part of. It is a number of OTHER Anglican churches and associations which are involved with that.

3) 500 UK parishes? Notice that there is no evidence of this, just "estimated" by unknown parties and "
could have" "as many as" 500. Why about 500 NON-TAC churches would or even could join if TAC's proposal is successful isn't explained. If TAC's appeal is approved, it doesn't include non-TAC churches. TAC itself has a handful of parishes in the UK, but this 500 figure apparently refers to Anglican parishes in the UK which have grievances against the CofE while having no part in anything TAC is engaged in.

Interesting...go on.

 

[Albion]

Interesting...go on.

Well, that's a serious list of errors, given a pretty short article we were dealing with, don't you think?

Anyway, TAC had earlier petitioned to join the RCC as something of a Uniate jurisdiction and didn't receive a successful answer. However, the bishops had been predicting to TAC's people the imminent success of the venture and, in advance of it, had adopted the stance that they are Catholics, accept the Pope's position, etc.

When success wasn't theirs, they opted to do what could be done and asked just to join the RCC straightaway.

To TAC's credit, it did not tell the membership that this will happen in the near future, reporting that the new initiative might take a long time and might well never come to pass.

 

[Reader Antonius]

Well, that's a serious list of errors, given a pretty short article we were dealing with, don't you think?

Anyway, TAC had earlier petitioned to join the RCC as something of a Uniate jurisdiction and didn't receive a successful answer. However, the bishops had been predicting to TAC's people the imminent success of the venture and, in advance of it, had adopted the stance that they are Catholics, accept the Pope's position, etc.

When success wasn't theirs, they opted to do what could be done and asked just to join the RCC straightaway.

To TAC's credit, it did not tell the membership that this will happen in the near future, reporting that the new initiative might take a long time and might well never come to pass.

Thanks brother Albion!

 

[Colabomb]

I believe in unity, but in true unity. Submission to Rome, when you don't believe Roman Doctrine, is disingenuous.

 

[PaladinValer]

TAC wasn't formed due to homosexuality.

Rather, it was the Liturgical Movement.

And since the Vatican Catholic Church accepted the Liturgical Movement and the TAC did not, it makes me even more uneasy about the whole thing.

 

[Colabomb]

Actually, the TAC, and most other continuing churches broke off because the Episcopal Church started ordaining women. Calling it a result of the "Liturgical movement" is not only untrue, it unjustly puts down the continuers. \

It was a bigger issue than "the Liturgical movement"

 

[Albion]

Actually, the TAC, and most other continuing churches broke off because the Episcopal Church started ordaining women. Calling it a result of the "Liturgical movement" is not only untrue, it unjustly puts down the continuers. \

It was a bigger issue than "the Liturgical movement"

That's quite right, Cola. Thanks for keeping the record straight for our inquirer.

 

[PaladinValer]

Actually, the TAC, and most other continuing churches broke off because the Episcopal Church started ordaining women.

It seems that was a more minor quip compared to the other that I named.

Calling it a result of the "Liturgical movement" is not only untrue, it unjustly puts down the continuers.

Sorry, but it is true.

It was a bigger issue than "the Liturgical movement"

You've flip-flopped. Above you say saying that it is the result of the Liturgical Movement is untrue, and now you say it was a bigger issue, which means that you admit it was a reason.

Please clarify.

 

[Albion]

Sorry, but it is true.



You've flip-flopped. Above you say saying that it is the result of the Liturgical Movement is untrue, and now you say it was a bigger issue, which means that you admit it was a reason.

Please clarify.

The "Gotcha" game aside, the Liturgical Movement was not a significant cause of the founding of the Continuing Anglican churches...not unless by that term one includes the theological changes in the Prayerbook and the discarding of the concept of Common Prayer itself. But I can't imagine most people making that mistake.

Even then, it would be secondary in importance to the ordination of women.

 

[PaladinValer]

I am mystified why TEC is constantly criticized for its BCP for being so different from the 1662 when so many others in other provinces are also rather different.

 

[haulpak]

I am mystified why TEC is constantly criticized for its BCP for being so different from the 1662 when so many others in other provinces are also rather different.

Hello PV

What elements of the TEC BCP are different to the English (original) BCP?

Or are you meaning the more 'modern' prayer book? If so, how do they differ in theology (if at all)?

 

[ebia]

I am mystified why TEC is constantly criticized for its BCP for being so different from the 1662 when so many others in other provinces are also rather different.

Maybe it's because for most of us our modernised prayerbooks don't have BCP status. APBA, CW, etc are not BCPs, just authorised alternative service books. Our BCP remains the 1662.

 

[Colabomb]

It seems that was a more minor quip compared to the other that I named.



Sorry, but it is true.



You've flip-flopped. Above you say saying that it is the result of the Liturgical Movement is untrue, and now you say it was a bigger issue, which means that you admit it was a reason.

Please clarify.

I didn't flip flop on anything. I commented that calling the split a result of the Liturgical movement makes the differences seem Trivial. The ordination of Women, which I support, is a huge theological question, one of significant importance to how the church is run.

You make it seem as if They left because they didn't like the style of the newer liturgies.

 

[Albion]

Maybe it's because for most of us our modernised prayerbooks don't have BCP status. APBA, CW, etc are not BCPs, just authorised alternative service books. Our BCP remains the 1662.

An excellent point. Not only did TEC replace the BCP with an Alternative Service Book that she chose to name "The Book of Common Prayer," but she then also effectively prohibited the use of the 1928 book except on rare occasions. Had she only done what was done, for example, in your country, I personally think that the response would have been much more limited.

We ought to remember that opposition to women's ordination motivated the theologians and clergy more than it did the laity. The laity were less inclined to consider women's ordination to be "apostasy," but loved the old book, saw no need to eliminate it, and complained that while they knew its words by heart, with the new one they couldn't even figure out which setting was to be followed at what part of the worship service.

 

[PaladinValer]

I didn't flip flop on anything.

I showed where you did.

I commented that calling the split a result of the Liturgical movement makes the differences seem Trivial.

I hate to say it, but sometimes "trivial" things are the cause of significant problems.

The ordination of Women, which I support, is a huge theological question, one of significant importance to how the church is run.

Hardly true. It doesn't change the autocephalous episcopal governing system.

You make it seem as if They left because they didn't like the style of the newer liturgies.

Yet this is why.

 

[Albion]

You make it seem as if They left because they didn't like the style of the newer liturgies.

Yet this is why.

If you mean that you have been laboring under the impression that the Continuing Churches were founded because of opposition to the newer liturgies, you are quite wrong in that and it's time to put that mistake to bed.

I'm not following all the tit-for-tat bewteen you two, but Colabomb is entirely correct about this particular matter.