Anglican Ordinariate Established for Roman Catholic Priests

Requests are also coming in from Uruguay, Ecuador, and Argentina. You can read about it here.


    1. Is that what God told you? Many RC priests here in the U.S. simply found a new way to maintain and expand that vocation under circumstances which were impossible for them after the Council. The Episcopal Church has had the equivalent of the Ordinariate in effect for years. Now, I’m waiting for a whole generation of bishops to be generated from their numbers.
      If Rome can have an Ordinariate, one good turn deserves another.

  1. A sort of “Romanorum Coetibus”… there were jokes made about this a while back.

    From reading the article, it seems that the Catholic Priests involved have left the Church already through a varity of actions, at least that is the impression given.

    It’s confusing in one sense though. In one place the article calls the 10 men “RC Priests” (presumably meaning “Roman Catholic”), but then in the very next sentence, notes that “About half of them [5?] are from churches that have become indepen­dent from the RC Church, often because the priests have got married”, leading to the conclusion that they are no longer “Roman Catholic Priests”, at least not in the common understanding of the term.

    Also, the language used to describe the numbers involved (“growing number of Roman Catholic priests who are keen to join the Anglican Church”, “Priests leaving on a larger scale”, “many of these Priests”) don’t seem to be describing a situation in which 10 Priests are considering becoming part of a Diocese with 35 current clerics. There seems to be an editorial desire to make an isolated situation look like a trend.

    1. Since the clerical state is only revoked by a process of laicization, these men remain Roman Catholic priests, even when their faculties are withdrawn, no?

      1. Even if they were laicized, they’ll still be Roman Catholic priests forever. They won’t be clerics, but they’ll still be Roman Catholic priests. It would be misleading to describe them as such in a newspaper article without qualification, but they’re priests forever.

      2. Rita… my question is not with the nature of the Priesthood (I understand that pretty well!), but with the current status of these men in regards to the Church. It notes that ““About half of them are from churches that have become indepen­dent from the RC Church”.

        “Become independent”? How would a Church become independent from the Catholic Church unless the Church herself so seperated it. My question is whether these Priests have been laicized because of their marriages. If such is the case, it is at least misleading to continue calling them RC Priests.

        Also there is the obvious question: Is it really news that ex-Catholics are becoming Anglicans, whether priests or not?

      3. I would guess that the churches in question would be understood to be in a state of schism from the perspective of Canon Law. Whether or not that is “formal” schism — recognized by their local bishops (and/or Rome) — isn’t reported.

  2. Whatever the canonical status of the priests prior to joining, as members of the Anglican Communion they will enjoy an excellent ecclesial insertion. (I understand that the Anglican Communion does not accept people excommunication by their church of origin.) If Anglicanorum Coetibus is such a wonderful ecumenical idea, it seems churlish not to greet the same idea in the other direction. Cardinal Kasper has said that we should view with favor not only Anglicans who become Roman Catholics but also Roman Catholics who become Anglicans.
    Let us broaden our outlook, please.

    1. Anglicans de facto accept persons, including clergy, excommunicated by the Roman Catholic church into their (i.e. our) ranks: Catholics who join the churches of the Anglican Communion incur latae sententiae excommunication from the Roman side.

      I suspect that one key factor for these folks (and others making that journey) is that Anglicans do not re-confirm persons who were confirmed by a bishop in historic succession. Neither are clergy re-ordained if they are coming from that situation. In both cases, the integrity of their personal sacramental histories and faith-journeys is honored and upheld.

      1. “Thus, the application of this cannon to a particular individual and precise situation requires great caution… In addition, external actions do not always or necessarily correspond to interior dispositions; we must maintain the distinction between the external forum and the internal forum as well as realize that harmony between these two fora does not always exist.” 1983, Canon 205 commentary. “At times it is difficult to determine precisly when an individual or group is canonically guilty of apostacy, heresy, or schism. This is especially true given increased theological pluralism, expanded contacts with other christians and members of other religious traditions, and confessional boundaries not as sharply defined as formerly. Furthermore, penal measures may be innapropriate in dealing responsibly with persons so distancing themselves from the church. It might be better simply to declare formally an incompatability between their faith and that of the church.” Canon 1364 Comentary. Is it your pontifical opinion that those who have switched churches for a period or for life are heratics, apostates, or schismatics? Experts are experts because they are familiar with the material!… And thanks for playing mind games with those of us who switched with your off the cuff uninvestigated and insensitive remark!

  3. Does the Diocese of the Southern Cone ordain women to the priesthood? From what I understand, the Southern Cone’s main sticking point is the ordination of partnered gay clergy in the ministry.

    A fellow student of mine who is an Anglican priest here in Montreal belongs to an Anglican church that is interested (or has completed) a transfer to authority under the bishop of the Southern Cone. He noted that the issue of women’s ordination is mostly non-controversial among the priests and laity of his church and the diocese. His church did not leave the Anglican Church of Canada over that issue. His parish accepts women priests, but only women priests that hold to their doctrinal views on homosexuality. It’s interesting to see the different layers of belief and opinion in various dioceses of the national Anglican churches.

  4. Many of the so-called “Anglicans” joining the Roman Catholic are members of various small groups that are not part of the Church of England or the Anglican Church of Australia (in Australia, probably all are such – ie. former Anglicans or indeed former Roman Catholics). So the situation mirrors that in South America. But Roman Catholic priests have been joining Churches of the Anglican Communion for some time. In Dublin, one tenth of the priests in the Church of Ireland there are former RCs, including e.g. the Dean of Christ Church Cathedral, as are one tenth of those studying for the priesthood of the Church of Ireland. The traffic is in both directions, but at the ordinary level, the division is often not important. Here I know it is not uncommon for Anglicans to receive Communion in RC Churches and for Roman Catholics to receive Communion in Anglican Churches, whatever the authorities say ! It is God’s one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church after all and our Lord is the host at HIS Table.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *