Churches Back Plan to Unite with Pope


***Originally Posted by Abira
actually this is an article from the newspaper i read in england concerning this issue… I don;t wanna derail the thread though but it could be that a schism is the anglican communion could allow a reunion with rome for those left in the communion:

February 19th 2007: churches back plan to unite under pope…cle1403702.ece**


Abira posted this in another thread and I found it fascinating since it implies that both Anglicans and Catholic Bishops are actually working on it. I suppose it would involve conservative Anglican Bishops and parishioners who oppose womens ordination and gay clergy.

Rev North


There’s also the Anglican Centre in Rome which has been going since the second vatican counil to bring the two churches closer in their understanding of one another. The pope gave a papal ring to the archbishop of canterbury when they decided on opening the centre.



I am sure there are many Anglicans who would like to set the liberals afloat and join Rome IF they could remain distinct as an Anglican entity.

Rev North


I think many of the reasons that they made their own identity do not apply now… with there being so many denominations allowed now anglicans do not feel a pull to anglicanism in the same way catholics do to catholicism…

if there are ever any problems in parishes, or people do not like the priests theology they often leave and join a methodist church or another denomination…

the problems would come politically as the archbishop of canterbury is appointed by the government i believe…although tony blair did set in motion a law that would allow the church alone to appoint its own ministers…

though there were rumours that tony blair was catholic, or converting lol…but these were never founded.



for some reason the link in my OP didn’t work even though i copied it in… if that doesn’t work on your browser try this one…



I have my own thoughts on this that I can’t share right now because I’m recovering from a 14 hour roundtrip to Pittsburgh, but specifically speaking about the Anglican Communion, how exactly are they going to get around the issue of Apostolicae Curae? Is the Archbishop of Canterbury realistically going to say “yes, Anglican orders are and have always been invalid…” And I don’t like to gamble, but I would be willing to bet money that the papal bull will never be retracted.


I doubt if anything wil come of such an effort, either. But if all sides wanted to, the Dutch Touch, and ordination sub conditione might allow some wiggle room.



Well, all of you are far more informed than I about matters of the church, but I can assuredly say, as a former Episcopalian, now Catholic, that our Mass might be improved if Anglican/Episcopal language were considered. Even in the words of my own pastor, the Mass would be “more elegant” that way

But maybe “elegance” isn’t the only thing.

Anyway, I took the “fast track” to Catholicism, (i.e., I converted.) but I would welcome reunification of the various Protestant congregations with Rome, whichever choose to do so. I’d like to think the Episcopalians would be among them, but I’m not going to hold my breath!


I would like to see the COE rejoin communion with the Catholic Church of Christ, it would probally have to be an entirly diffrent rite. It could be called “The English Rite of the Catholic Church” or “The English Catholic Church”… I favor the first one.

I don’t think there is as much hurdles as some people think. Some English priests/bishops do have valid ordinations, hence they would simply need to re-do the ordinations with the provision that “if the previous ordination was not valid, this is your valid ordination”, as occurs sometimes when protestants arn’t sure if they’ve been baptised validly or not.

In fact, isn’t that what happens already if an Anglican priest of the COE decides to switch?


I only know of two instances of Anglican priests being ordained sub conditione, since *Apostolciae Curae * was issued.



oh ok, I wasn’t really knowledgeable about it.


I could be wrong here… but I had a feeling that the archbishop o canterbury was considering at one time kind of splitting anglicans and having a ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ group…

if this article is true then my understanding would be that the easy way round this would be to kind of get rid of the liberal groups and then the rest reunite with rome as some dividing issues would be done away with ie. women priests and the gay bishop thing…

in England anyways, many Anglican services are very high anglican, and there are many anglo-catholics also… i don’t believe that the american episopal church would unite with rome because it went against the wishes of the anglican church worldwide when it ordained a gay bishop…so this group would not be one of those that reunites…

i don’t know though, that is just my logic on it.



I don’t know if it would work having a seperate rite…we have a roman catholic church down the street from us… by having a reunion of any kind, but keeping a seperate identity doesn’t promote unity in the long run and i think they’d be more likely to break off again because they see their identity as not fully united…

all this is just hypothetical though.



I am sure there are many Anglicans who would like to set the liberals afloat and join Rome IF they could remain distinct as an Anglican entity.

Rev North

If the Church of England reunites with the Catholic Church then they should join the Latin rite. They shouldn’t have their own identity. There have been Catholics in England for centuries. The Anglicans should join with us. Afterall, they were the ones who left.

The Church of England will never re-join the CC anyway, too much has changed in terms of them allowing birth control, women priests, ordaining openly practicing homosexuals as Bishops etc. And let’s not forget that the Queen is still the head of the Church; I can’t see her giving up this position to the Pope.

Sectarianism is still a problem in some areas of the British Isles and many Anglicans are still anti-Catholic. They would never accept the unification. There’s just too much history.

Before a reunion with Rome, they should renounce all of the reforms listed above, and be dissolved. Then they should join the existing Catholic dioceses.


I’m a wee bit confused…:blush:

Are we talking the whole Anglican Communion or just the COE?

I don’t want to say never, but I do not see the ECUSA wanting any part of this.


Maybe not but what about her Charles whose faith may be a little less well defined?!

The article in The Times referred to a leaked document and many since then have denied that the CofE would be likely to re-align itself to Rome - at least in it’s current state!


Maybe not but what about her Charles whose faith may be a little less well defined?!

You could have a point. I recently heard that, upon his coronation as King, he wishes to change his title from “Defender of the Faith” to “Defender of the Faiths” in order to acknowledge that Britain is now a multi-faith country.

many since then have denied that the CofE would be likely to re-align itself to Rome - at least in it’s current state!

If the CofE does decide to join the Catholic Church then it should be dissolved. The Church of England should not remain as a separate entity; they should not be called Anglican Catholics or something like that. The CofE should assimilate into the Catholic Dioceses that are already in existance.

However, as previously said, I can’t see this ever happening.


That makes no sense. The existing Catholic dioceses date from the 19th century. The See of Canterbury dates from the end of the sixth century, and is unquestionably the rightful primatial See. You are proposing this weird and counterintuitive procedure out of sheer vindictiveness.

Anglicanism is in schism. When the schism is over, the Anglican dioceses will be reunited to Rome.

Furthermore, it’s not obvious that “we were the ones who left.” You excommunicated us, after all, not the other way round (don’t cite Henry to me–that schism was resolved under Mary). The fact that this was the decisive point is shown by the fact that only after this did the Catholic Church send missionary priests to England. This was not done under Henry or Edward or in the early years of Elizabeth, because what was going on was a schism between a national church and the Western Church as a whole–a schism that might have proven to be temporary.



Identity problem? What about the Eastern Catholics in union with Rome? They most certainly have a separate identity.


And it seems to me that this is a problem, especially in places like the U.S. I don’t see why separate rites have to go with separate episcopates. The Fathers seem clear that there should be one bishop for one place, and anything else is schism. There can be liturgical and theological diversity without rival episcopates.

I think the real problem is that the Eastern Catholics rightly do not trust the Latin bishops. Which shows how flawed the unity of the Roman Communion is.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit