Mods, I apologize if I have posted in the wrong forum. I’m a convert to the faith and recently discovered that an old friend who was raised Roman Catholic is preparing to become an Anglican priest. He used the term Anglican Use in our conversation, but I haven’t found much information on that term. He is divorced, dating from time to time, and has children, so the news was a bit of a surprise. According to him, the only difference between Anglicans and Roman Catholics is that Anglican priests can marry. Is this true?
Your friend is not correct. There are differences in the two faiths. The Anglican church was started by King Henry the Eighth when the Church refused to grant him a divorce. He made himself pope and had his bishop who was faithful to the Catholic Church and the pope beheaded, St. Thomas More.
The priests are not part of the line of apostolic succession and so they are not recognized by the Church. A priest must be ordained by a bishop of the Catholic church to be Catholic. Since they are not recognized by the Church, the service and sacraments they perform are not valid.
Anglican use refers to former Episcopalians in the U.S. and former Anglicans mostly in the UK who have converted to the Catholic Chrurch but have been allowed to keep some of the liturgy of the church they left.
Thomas More was not a bishop, but he was executed. Henry’s Church representative at the time of his desire for separation from the Church was Cardinal Wolsey, who conveniently died on his own before Henry had a time to get to him. He was replaced in power and influence by Archbishop Cranmer, who went on to write the Book of Common Prayer under Edward VI. Henry did execute bishops, such as Fisher.
The Anglican Use is for those Episcopal/Anglican parishes who choose to leave their respective churches to join the RCC, but still maintain a level of closeness with Anglicanism. There is a Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham to serve as sort of an umbrella diocese for these parishes. The church service is in agreement with RC form but includes Anglican elements.
St John Fisher was the Bishop and St. Thomas More was the King’s Chancellor.
“Anglican Use” is in communion with the Roman Catholic Church.
Thank you all for your help. The Wikipedia article was especially helpful. I don’t understand why he wouldn’t just become a deacon.
It’s a different vocation.
Either he doesn’t understand what the Anglican Use is or there was miscommunication between you both.
Since he is divorced, Rome will have to review his status and he must remain celibate if he comes into the Church through the Anglican Use.
Only former Anglicans/Episcopalian priests who are already married may be ordained. Each person’s situation is unique.
There is now an Ordinariate in the US, called The Chair of Peter and although it is newly established there have been several ordinations. If all the established Anglican Use parishes are allowed to join the Ordinariate, there will be at least 4000 members, I believe.
If the Anglican Communion continues down the past they have been going there will probably be many more coming into the Ordinariate.
In fact, I just attended the ordination to the priesthood this week of a former Anglican priest into the US Ordinariate. Members from two different parishes were received into the Church at the Mass of Ordination and Reception. It was a beautiful ceremony and several Bishops, an Abbot and many priests attended.
First, Henry VIII, whatever his faults, never made himself pope. I would agree that he was, apparently, a rather unpleasant tyrant.
Second, the issue of Anglican orders, despite the official teaching of the Catholic church, is a bit murky. Despite the official practice of the Catholic church, a number of Roman churchmen have suggested that a reexamination is in order. That issue, however is clouded by the recent Anglican practice of ordaining women to both the presbyteriate and the episcopate.
Body counts are a poor guide to piety. Acting, no doubt, with at the behest of the pope’s representative, Queen “Bloody” Mary beheaded not one but at least three bishops, Latimer, Ridley and Archbishop Cranmer.
I think of Hank as a fascinating train wreck.
As to Apostolicae Curae, it is a subject that warrants some study. But it’s conclusions stand, for RCs.
Bloody Mary also killed a fair few Catholics in her day it should be noted and was actually fairly oppressive in her policies regarding Plantation in Ireland. It would appear if you weren’t the right sort of Catholic you were in as much danger from her as if you were a dissenter.
I think you misread the OP: the man in question was raised Roman Catholic is preparing to become an Anglican priest – not the other way around.
Thank you for pointing out that the English habit of persecuting the Irish had little to do with religion. They were doing it before the reformation and they did it after.
Yes I did miss the point. Although the OP’s friend should not be using the word “Anglican Use” for any Anglican/TEC church, as it only refers to former Anglicans who are now Catholic whether priests or laypeople and the Liturgy used etc. which is their Anglican Patrimony. There may be other groups of Anglicans who call their parishes Anglilcan Catholic and so on and are what I consider new denominations which have broken away from the Anglican Communion.
Since the downfall of the Anglican Communion there are many different Continuing Groups and it all can be rather confusing.
Yep, as to your last sentence.
Think of it like Greek Catholics, they have the Holy Father while keeping their own traditions.
I regret to say that this post is completely and utterly false. The Anglican church today is not a product of King Henry VIII and we do not have a pope. Anglican priests ARE in line with the Apostles as is proven by history, Dutch Touch, Polish Pat etc. Likewise, Anglican sacraments ARE as valid as Roman ones.
We should also be very careful when spewing around blame for murderring in the name of religion. The Spanish Inquisition and other inquisitions, Bloody Mary and the Crusades of the Roman church were responsible for at least their fair share of bloodshed against Protestants.
They are not I am afraid, it is possible that a percentage of Anglican priests are validly ordained due to the points you mention and I agree that the rationale that the Anglican Church is simply a product of King Henry the VIII is simplistic but for the most part it is safe to rely on the traditional understanding of the Church and view only baptism and marriage as valid within the Anglican ecclestical communities as ultimately these are not Churches although one should respect the commitment of their clergy in devoting their lives to God in keeping with the knowledge of the faith they have retained.
I respectfully disagree with you:). I believe that Apostolicae Curae was mostly tit for tat as was the counter reformation. I do not accept it on its merit or lack thereof.