www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Italian media speculates: Vatican will announce massive reception

They are, Father. And a lot of them, apparently object to that lack of recognition, which is why they aren't flocking to sign up. While the TAC has no love lost for the TEC or the more evangelical conservative Anglican groups, they also, for the most part, have no real desire to be Roman.

Well, Stuart, whether or not they wish to be Roman, they certainly wish to be Roman Catholic - which is why they signed the Catechism of the Catholic Church and why they are seeking "full, corporate, and sacramental union" with the Holy See.

Alexis

Not very many of them, at least not here. There are an estimated 2500-3000 members of TAC in the states, and only a couple of hundred have so far applied. Some of their leading theologians, like Robert Hart, have written some pretty scathing denunciations of the constitution.

I can say with some confidence that there really are a lot of traditionalist Anglicans that don't want to be Roman Catholic. First of all, there are many whose spiritual/theological affinity lies instinctively with the Christian East. But there are also a great number that simply fancy they can be 'Catholic' on their own terms.

I don't mean this to sound critical, but if I did an appraisal of all my former brethren-in-ministry, I am certain that only a couple would seriously consider 'pope-ing' (as they used to call conversion).

Stuart, I'm not sure what more you want. The official stance of the TAC is that they are seeking to enter into the Catholic Communion, and every one of their bishops has signed the Catechism.

As far as what the majority of the faithful want to do? I don't know. Take a poll. But the bishops, at least, are leading whomever wants to come with them into the Church.

Alexis

I don't want anything. I'm just telling you what is going on in TAC, courtesy of my friends who are well connected therein (well, it's so small, just to be a member is to be well connected). We've been discussing this for a month on a mailing list to which I belong.

Pope Benedict has already acted with remarkable pastoral generosity. Now we must see what develops.

Fr. Serge

Indeed, that is all we can do. Attempts to help or speed the process are likely to be counterproductive.

Stuart,

I guess I'm just wondering how you square the official TAC stance, that of actively pursuing entrance into the Church, with your proposition that the TAC does not desire to be Roman.

If you mean they do not desire to be Roman at the expense of retaining their uniquely Anglican heritage, then I agree. If you mean they do not desire to be Roman Catholic (i.e., members of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church), then I am left somewhat befuddled.

Maybe you mean that while there exists the "official" TAC position, not many of their parishioners are likely to follow them Romeward?

Alexis

For the simple reason that the TAC bishops apparently did not speak for the majority of TAC members. TAC's official position is being heavily criticized in TAC websites by important TAC clerics and theologians. I think their bishops underestimated the degree to which many of their members have invested in anti-papalism, or the problems many of them have with aspects Catholic mariology, not to mention the whole area of clerical celibacy. For these people, the Thirty Nine Articles represent authentic Catholicism, from which the Roman Church has deviated. They aren't coming home to Rome. Also understand that a lot of TAC rank and file have a highly romanticized, yeah, mythological view of Church history, and mere facts are unlikely to sway them.

Fr Loya talked about the Apostolic Constitution in his Light of the East program this morning, Sunday, November 22, 2009. It's not archived here [byzantinecatholic.com] yet but will be in the next day or so.* He has some interesting reflections I thought re the apparently uniate nature of it, as compared to the East and West having renounced that model for any future move toward union East and West. I was in the car listening to him so got only bits and pieces and look forward to hearing it through when it is up on the archives.

*I see the last couple of weeks haven't been archived yet. That's unusual.

But it isn't uniatism, since the Anglicans were never a Church in the manner that e.g., the Ukrainians, Ruthenians and Melkites were. Rather, they were once part of the Roman Church that went into schism (if not outright doctrinal heresy) and now is returning to the Church whence it came. For it to be an example of "uniatism", one would have to say that TAC was actually a sui juris Church, as opposed to a mere ecclesial community, and that the purpose of establishing these personal ordinariates was to create a parallel hierarchy in order to lure away other Anglicans and Episcopalians. Instead of ordinariates, there would be real dioceses, with real bishops independent of the Roman hierarchy, truly self-governing in its internal affairs. The ordinariates are more ad hoc than that, and seen as a purely transitional phase in the reintegration of those members of TAC who take advantage of it.

As I recall, at the time the Byzantine Catholics joined Rome
yeah many centuries ago, they not only were allowed to have a married priesthood (must be married prior to presbyters ordination)but they were supposed to be able to elect their own bishops which was later taken away from them. I wrote a paper on this in semin ary years ago but can't find it to quote the references but I'm fairly certain that this was the case. Someone more knowledgeable needs to correct me if I'm wrong.

The last figure I heard quoted from Rome was that they expected 500,000 former Anglicans to cross the tiber. I don't believe that for one minute. A friend of mine who is making that move is highly skeptical of those numbers.

I wish them all well and hope that they will be happy with what they are doing.

Fr. Mike
raised Ruthenian, now retired episcopal priest

In the seventeenth century no one at all would have been called "Byzantine Catholic", and even today the expression is pretty well limited to the USA.

Back in Ukraine, our hierarchs are elected by the Synod.

Fr. Serge

The fundamental differences between the TAC and the Greek Catholics is the Greek Catholics entered communion with Rome from Churches of an entirely different Tradition. They were never part of the Roman Church, and their Tradition and usage was independent of Rome. In contrast, the TAC was part of the Anglican communion created when Henry VIII separated the Church in England from the Church of Rome. Prior to that, all Englishmen were Catholics following the Latin Tradition. Even their preferred liturgy, the Sarum Rite, was a variant of the Roman rite, not something independent of it, like the Byzantine, Antiochene or Alexandrine rites. Therefore, they were subject to all of the doctrines and disciplines of the Roman Church.

All that is happening today is a number of Anglicans are returning to the particular Church whence they came. A proper analogy would not be 17th century uniatism, but what might occur if communion between Rome and the Orthodox was established: the Greek Catholic Churches would return to the particular Orthodox Churches from which they separated in the 17th-19th centuries. The Orthodox might make some pastoral provisions for differences in usage that have emerged among the Greek Catholics (e.g., the preference for the bastard Vesper-Divine Liturgy service), but eventually all would fall under the same doctrine and discipline.