tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post2171019681467990304..comments2024-03-24T15:19:06.377-04:00Comments on The Continuum: ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTIONFr. Robert Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-52002374859359321702010-08-12T23:07:28.190-04:002010-08-12T23:07:28.190-04:00I have to disagree to a degree, I can receive the ...I have to disagree to a degree, I can receive the Eucharist at a Roman Catholic Church and Romans Catholics are allowed to commune at an Orthodox Church (I know some that sneek communion by lying to the priest). I am not allowed to commune at a Roman Catholic parish as an Orthodox Christian not are our priest supposed to commune RC's. It seems that Anglicans and Rome are more charitable in that they will allow me to partake of the mysteries (not that I would) and never have I been asked to submit to anything.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12686622941862667157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-81513751527243445452010-08-10T18:51:54.664-04:002010-08-10T18:51:54.664-04:00It is always worth the effort for Anglicans to hav...It is always worth the effort for Anglicans to have another go at reunion with Rome but the TAC leadership should have worked for reunion in the Continuum and reunion with the faithful remnant in the impaired Church first.If the talks had involved the considerable abilities of many traditional Anglican leaders which the TAC excluded from participation and if the body represented by them had been much larger then things could have turned out altogether different.I am not saying that reunion would have been achieved but at least the chances would have been better and the selling out of the TAC's loyal Churchmen could have been avoided.Fr.Jas.A.Chantlernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-85132737826266058992010-08-10T10:21:04.509-04:002010-08-10T10:21:04.509-04:00Fr. Marriott has very fairly described the present...Fr. Marriott has very fairly described the present situation. However, I note his line, "The concept has changed, when the leaders ... moved the process beyond simple intercommunion to the concept of ordinariate." <br /><br />While I think that statement is correct as an assessment of what the ordinary (pardon the pun) clergy and laity of the TAC perceived and expected, the leaders, at any rate, should have done enough of their homework to know that there is no such thing as simple "intercommunion" with the Roman Communion. <br /><br />Even the Eastern Orthodox and the PNCC have never achieved that but, instead, only a distant sort of mutual recognition of validity that the Romans themselves have expresslys stated does not amount to intercommunion. What the Romans do not state, but which is understood by all concerned, is that even that recognition of the PNCC was only extended under the belief that merger of the PNCC into the RCC was just on the threshhold. Where that did not eventuate -- and with 50% of the PNCC's clergy being former RCC clergy it is unlikely ever to eventuate -- the Romans will probably never repeat that formal "recognition" experience with anyone else.<br /><br />Communion with Rome means submission to Rome. For a millenium now, that is the way it has been and that is how it is going to continue. Therefore, in that context, which is a given and which the TAC's leaders certainly knew was a given, from the Roman perspective even the offer of a separate administrative setup is, indeed, truly generous. Rome can hardly be faulted for taking seriously its own currently most basic (if unfortunately late-developed) principles.<br /><br />John A. Hollister+John A. Hollisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01325615323834517909noreply@blogger.com