FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Vatican cardinal opens door to Lutheran ordinariates
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Vatican cardinal opens door to Lutheran ordinariates
CWN - October 30, 2012

The president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity said in an interview that the Vatican would entertain a hypothetical proposal by Lutherans to establish ecclesial structures modeled on the ordinariates developed for Anglican communities that wish to enter into full communion with the Holy See.

“Anglicanorum coetibus was not an initiative of Rome, but came from the Anglican church,” said Cardinal Kurt Koch, referring to the 2009 papal document that established the ordinariates. “The Holy Father then sought a solution and, in my opinion, found a very broad solution, in which the Anglicans’ ecclesial and liturgical traditions were taken into ample consideration. If similar desires are expressed by the Lutherans, then we will have to reflect on them. However, the initiative is up to the Lutherans.”

Cardinal Koch also said that both “'progressives and traditionalists suffer from the same ailment”: a refusal to interpret the Second Vatican Council with a hermeneutic of “renewal in continuity.”

“Both see the Council equally as a break, even if in a very different way,” he said. “The Holy Father has questioned this understanding of the conciliar hermeneutics of the break and proposed the hermeneutics of reform, which unites continuity and renewal.”

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/head...ryid=16080
Come one, come all! Bring your heresy and we'll find a way to work it into the hermeneutic of continuity... How disgusting!
(10-30-2012, 03:47 PM)OldMan Wrote: [ -> ]Come one, come all! Bring your heresy and we'll find a way to work it into the hermeneutic of continuity... How disgusting!

Wow, no way to satisfy you.
Read the original Zenit article:

http://www.zenit.org/article-35839?l=english

"It is a question of renewal in continuity.  This is the difference: the progressives profess a hermeneutics of discontinuity and break.  The traditionalists profess a hermeneutics of pure continuity: only that which is already noticeable in Tradition can be Catholic doctrine, therefore, practically, there cannot be a renewal."

Anticipated conservative defense: "This is just one cardinal's opinion!  It's not binding!"

P.S.  --  In the original article/interview, there's not one word spoken of the Lutherans' need to accept the Catholic Faith whole and inviolate.

Pure continuity would imply that Catholic doctrine hasn't changed one iota since the Council, would it not?  Are we to believe that all of Vatican II's novel points of doctrine (cf. Pope John Paul II) had been in Tradition for the previous two centuries (viz. religious liberty, imperfect communion, a general allowance of communicatio in sacris)?
(10-30-2012, 04:28 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Read the original Zenit article:

http://www.zenit.org/article-35839?l=english

"It is a question of renewal in continuity.  This is the difference: the progressives profess a hermeneutics of discontinuity and break.  The traditionalists profess a hermeneutics of pure continuity: only that which is already noticeable in Tradition can be Catholic doctrine, therefore, practically, there cannot be a renewal."

Anticipated conservative defense: "This is just one cardinal's opinion!  It's not binding!"

P.S.  --  In the original article/interview, there's not one word spoken of the Lutherans' need to accept the Catholic Faith whole and inviolate.

Pure continuity would imply that Catholic doctrine hasn't changed one iota since the Council, would it not?  Are we to believe that all of Vatican II's novel points of doctrine (cf. Pope John Paul II) had been in Tradition for the previous two centuries (viz. religious liberty, imperfect communion, a general allowance of communicatio in sacris)?

Didn't Pope Leo XIII allow for communion to Orthodox under certain circumstances?
nmoerbeek,
Do you mean to say that Pope Leo XIII allowed Cathoics to receive communion from the Orthodox under certain circumstances?

I'm aware of other Pontiffs allowing it under particular circumstances and situations, but I'm arguing against a general allowance of communicatio in sacris, as though there was no principle which forbids it in nearly all cases.
Seriously, what great particularities exist in the Lutheran service  to justify a separate liturgical body? Couldn't they be well served in the Pauline mass?

What would they even call such an ordinariate? There's no getting around the word "Lutheran."

(edited language)
(10-30-2012, 04:26 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-30-2012, 03:47 PM)OldMan Wrote: [ -> ]Come one, come all! Bring your heresy and we'll find a way to work it into the hermeneutic of continuity... How disgusting!

Wow, no way to satisfy you.
You may not like his response or style or whatever, but you ought to at least acknowledge that it is problematic that converts are not required to explicitly abjure their errors any longer. To my knowledge, no Anglican, "clergy" or lay, was required to do this in order to join the Ordinariate.
(10-30-2012, 07:04 PM)Cordobes Wrote: [ -> ]Seriously, what differences in liturgy are there between Lutheran service and the Pauline mass?

What would they even call such an ordinariate? There's no getting around the word "Lutheran."
And why would that be much of a problem for Benedict XVI?
Pages: 1 2 3