tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post3037692296003096711..comments2024-03-24T15:19:06.377-04:00Comments on The Continuum: Clear as mudFr. Robert Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-72096940877226650202010-02-12T22:25:05.491-05:002010-02-12T22:25:05.491-05:00Curiously, I appear to have been deleted from the ...<i>Curiously, I appear to have been deleted from the AngloCatholic Website for posting comments identical to those to which you responded.</i><br /><br />Opposite churchmanship from Stand Firm, but just as cowardly. They can't live with dissent because they have no defense for their unmitigated hogwash. Here, you may agree or disagree, but you won't be banned.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-25915381085776859022010-02-12T22:03:36.545-05:002010-02-12T22:03:36.545-05:00Dear Father Hart,
Thank you for your comments.
...Dear Father Hart,<br /><br />Thank you for your comments. <br /><br />Curiously, I appear to have been deleted from the AngloCatholic Website for posting comments identical to those to which you responded. I was most interested in the article to which you referred me and found it helpful.<br /><br />Am I wrong in supposing that Archbishop hepworth appears to be calling Anglican Orders into question all the way through his letter?<br /><br />Perhaps I have misread him but it does not seem so to me. <br /><br />In answer to Jackie, I must state that the TAC's primate received the orders of deacon and priest while he was in communion with the Pope. He received the order of bishop in the TAC. Therefore, I would guess he would be only questioning that aspect in his case.<br /><br />As he would unable to function as a bishop in the Ordinariate, I suppose that doesn't matter. <br /><br />TactfulAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-1986683614907656132010-02-08T18:51:58.061-05:002010-02-08T18:51:58.061-05:00Jackie-
You said "Pardon this question from ...Jackie-<br /><br />You said <i>"Pardon this question from the laity.......if Abp. Hepworth is encouraging all the clergy to be ordained in initio, isn't he saying HIS orders are not valid????????? So, why should anyone listen to him? If his orders are not valid, he has no more authority than I.</i><br /><br />In my opinion even someone with valid orders has no more authority before God than a layman. They merely have a different job, and that job has authority within its boundaries. Someone like Hepworth has no authority that has not been given to him ultimately from God with the consent and call of the laity, so in effect, you have the authority to give a man authority to publically preach and administer the sacraments. You also have the authority, under God, to cease to assent to him, or any bishop that teaches doctrines contrary to the Word of God (Rom 16:17, Titus 3:10)<br /><br />So, in other words, whether one regards anyone's orders as "valid" or not, there is no real authority without assent under the Word of God. That's the real authority.<br /><br />TTnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-48411520480970462122010-02-08T09:15:03.478-05:002010-02-08T09:15:03.478-05:00Pardon this question from the laity.......if Abp. ...Pardon this question from the laity.......if Abp. Hepworth is encouraging all the clergy to be ordained in initio, isn't he saying HIS orders are not valid????????? So, why should anyone listen to him? If his orders are not valid, he has no more authority than I.Jackiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16132328501421700876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-88078532162036929452010-02-07T17:14:13.348-05:002010-02-07T17:14:13.348-05:00TACtful:
Anglican Orders are and always have been...TACtful:<br /><br />Anglican Orders are and always have been valid. Validity cannot exist in degrees; it is strictly either or, never more or less.<br /><br />Among the many times we have taken this matter up, you will find <a href="http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/2009/12/anglican-priests-and-universal-church.html" rel="nofollow">this essay</a> most relevant.Fr. Robert Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05892141425033196616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-80861853365769966632010-02-07T04:31:38.022-05:002010-02-07T04:31:38.022-05:00Recently I read Archbishop Hepworth’s pastoral let...Recently I read Archbishop Hepworth’s pastoral letter of 27 January 2010 on the subject of the Apostolic Constitution. As always, whenever I have heard the Primate speak or have read something he has written, I find myself impressed and convinced by his words. But then I go away and think about them…..<br /><br />I was particularly struck by his use of the word “certainty” which he states that we will have if his clergy are ordained “ab initio”, as the Constitution requires, and his statement that they will be able to stand at the tombs of the Holy Apostles assured that their orders are as valid as those of the men beside them. There seems to be an agenda hidden in the Primate’s words. He doesn’t actually say it. He hints at it, and leaves it for us to find it and hopefully agree. He seems to imply there is still a lingering doubt, a trace of invalidity which needs righting.<br /><br />Like many others, I believed the Continuing Church was the answer for an Anglican troubled by women’s ordination and related liberal issues. I believed Anglicanism had valid orders and the Continuing Church intended to continue them because they were in the process of being lost in our former home. The Affirmation of St. Louis was a solid document which gave voice to the authentic teaching of the Church and I considered it a sound foundation on which we could build.<br /><br />So, I was happy. Then came Deerfield Beach. Archbishop Falk, Bishop Mercer and others who are now negotiating with Rome told us that a conditional ordination needed to be bestowed on everybody participating in the union with the AEC so that we, and others, could have “certainty”.<br /><br />Archbishop Hepworth was not involved in this. He did not join the TAC until a little later, but he has defended the actions taken there. Thus far, nobody has ever told me why conditional ordinations were required in the USA and India, but not in Australia, Canada, Guatemala or other parts of the church, yet all the orders in those places have a common origin with those in the USA and India. Surely then, they all needed a common cure.<br /><br />Then the Primate tells us that an infusion of orders from the Polish National Catholic Church would give certainty to certain certainty. I thought Anglican Orders were already certainly certain even before Deerfield Beach. Am I missing something?<br />Although the Affirmation seeks unity with all Christians who hold the Apostolic Faith, it also starts from the viewpoint that there is certainty about Anglican Orders. Do we then sacrifice one part of the Affirmation to achieve another? Is not agreement in truth essential for real unity? <br /><br />We have not achieved that agreement with Rome on one of the 4 basic matters Anglicans hold that there should be unanimity on – the Scriptures, the Creeds, the Sacraments and the Apostolic Ministry. The leaders of the TAC, I hope, believe that we have – and always have had – valid orders, although the Archbishop once again seems to hint that we have not. Rome, holding to Apostolic Curae, does not.<br /><br />Now, Archbishop Hepworth, Archbishop Falk, Bishop Mercer et al are telling us we can have certainty for certain, certain certainty if our clergy are ordained yet again, and not conditionally at that.<br /><br />Am I the only one confused about all this? I am sending this question to the two blog sites that refer regularly to each other in this ongoing debate in the hope that one or the other might give me an honest answer. Does the TAC believe totally and unequivocally in the validity of Anglican Orders and that, therefore, ordination “ab initio” is wrong? If not, have they been fooling us all these years?<br /><br />I certainly want certain, certain certainty about this.<br /><br />TACtfulAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-23515184327937919862010-02-05T20:10:44.037-05:002010-02-05T20:10:44.037-05:00The AC does set up some interesting potential prob...The AC does set up some interesting potential problems. Paragraph I section 3 of the AC says that an ordinariate is juridically comparable to a diocese. However, paragraph V of the AC states that the power of the ordinary is to be exercised jointly with that of the local diocesan bishop. This seems to give the local diocesan considerable influence on at least certain aspects of governance in the ordinariate. Several such apparent contradictions exist in both the AC and the norms. Article 7 section 2 of the norms instructs the ordinary to enter into discussions with the conference of bishops regarding funding for the ordinariate. If the episcopal conferences hold the purse strings they may well have considerable influence when the ordinary and the diocesan come into conflict. Recently, Benedict told his English bishops to be "generous" in applying the AC. If the local bishops have no control over the ordinariates why would they need to be generous?<br /><br />-Mark NewsomeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18902745.post-86740130617234560692010-02-05T18:41:24.028-05:002010-02-05T18:41:24.028-05:00Reverend and dear Father Hart,
My understanding i...Reverend and dear Father Hart,<br /><br />My understanding is that this Auxiliary Bishop of Melbourne, +Peter J. Elliott was a former Anglican Priest before going to Rome. I read this on a RC Blog a few days ago I believe. The TAC Archbishop, was a former Priest of the Roman Communion, correct? If this is truth, then these two are purposely misleading people in regards to what is Anglicanorum Coetibus. <br /><br />I can make that statement as a former Priest of the Latin Church; knowing her inner workings for over a period of twenty-five years as a Priest. I can attest that your “observations” to date are on the money, so-to-speak. I would speculate that like many who went to Rome under the “provisions” provided during the Pontificate of John Paul II, many will return to the traditional Anglican Communions after they get a real taste of what I call “Roman Justice.” As the old saying goes: “if it’s too good to be true, then buyers be aware.”Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com