learning from Anglicans
#11
What's all this talk of heresy?  This calls for an Inquisition. 
Reply
#12
Aye get the stakes lads!!!
I'd rather be buenin heretics too doc
sip
sakwatrhb says
Reply
#13
(06-08-2011, 09:33 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(06-08-2011, 06:32 PM)NECatholic Wrote: I don't understand how the heretical Book of Common Prayer, authored by heretic and executioner of Catholics - Thomas Cranmer, is now a legitimate Roman Catholic Liturgical book.   Sure, you can change it's name to the Book of Divine Worship and tweak a few words here and there and "presto chango" we have another new and "valid" Catholic Mass.  I've read the Book of Divine Worship and it is 90-95% heretical Book of Common Prayer.  How can this heretical liturgy (with the few tweaks I mentioned) be accepted after reading Pope Leo XIII's Papal Bull, Apostolicae Curae, and accepting said Bull as part of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church?  Formerly, converting Anglicans forswore their former worship and accepted the Mass of All Ages (TLM).   This acceptance of a now "sort-of" heretical liturgy turns Apostolicae Curae on it's head.  Anyone want to attempt to enlighten me?  And please, don't throw your sensus Catholicus out the window when answering.  Thank you!   
:tiphat:
Why would the Anglicans want to return to a Mass that they never had, since the Sarum rite was what the Anglicans were using when they broke away, and it wasn't abrogated by Rome until Trent?

The Sarum Rite was basically put in mothballs after the English "Reformation" in the 1500's.  It fell into almost complete disuse.  In my opinion the best thing to do would be to bring back the Sarum Rite.  But that is not what has happened and probably never will happen except as an oddity Mass "performance" here and there.  The Sarum Rite is very similar to the Tridentine Mass (almost identical).  The Vatican II modernists would never allow the full Sarum Rite to be restored as a regular liturgy.  They opted for the next best thing to the Novus Ordo "mass" and that's the Book of Common Prayer liturgy.  The new ordinariate calls it the "Book of Divine Worship".  Read it, it is online, and it is pure Protestant Cranmarian with a few bits of Novus Ordo thrown in.   Truly a twisted piece of Catholic "liturgy" if I say so myself.  Especially read page four of the link below listing the acknowledgments (it's quite an eye opener).  Remember, this is an authorized Roman Catholic liturgy (believe it or not).

http://www.atonementonline.com/BODW.pdf

In 1845 John Henry Newman, a former Anglican cleric, returned to the Catholic Church embracing the Mass of All Ages.  He would have never dreamed of the Catholic Church allowing a psuedo-Book of Common Prayer liturgy.
Reply
#14
NECatholic Wrote:In 1845 John Henry Newman, a former Anglican cleric, returned to the Catholic Church embracing the Mass of All Ages.  He would have never dreamed of the Catholic Church allowing a psuedo-Book of Common Prayer liturgy.

This has been my bone of contention with the Ordinariate as well. We have had countless souls convert to the true faith from the Anglican sect and I've yet to hear of an example prior to the most recent waves of converts desiring to retain their "Anglican patrimony". As Melita, stated, if you wish to retain a certain English identity, why not tap into the genuinely English Catholic liturgical heritage such as the Sarum Use, York Use, etc.?
Reply
#15
(06-08-2011, 11:18 PM)NECatholic Wrote: Read it, it is online, and it is pure Protestant Cranmarian with a few bits of Novus Ordo thrown in.  Truly a twisted piece of Catholic "liturgy" if I say so myself.  Especially read page four of the link below listing the acknowledgments (it's quite an eye opener).  Remember, this is an authorized Roman Catholic liturgy (believe it or not).

http://www.atonementonline.com/BODW.pdf

Everyone has to read from page 277.  This is the liturgical equivalent to the mangled monstrosity at the end of the film The Fly.  I had no idea it was this bad.

At Father Z's blog, I was one of the three who offered mere reservations about the ordinariate, and thus was accused of dissenting from 'the Pope of Christian Unity.'  Now I realize that, even aside from the murmurs of some converting that they are not converting to Roman Catholicism but rather are being accepted as 'Catholics they were,' the liturgical implications of this scheme actually set back true patrimony.

(06-09-2011, 01:27 AM)Joshua Wrote: This has been my bone of contention with the Ordinariate as well. We have had countless souls convert to the true faith from the Anglican sect and I've yet to hear of an example prior to the most recent waves of converts desiring to retain their "Anglican patrimony". As Melita, stated, if you wish to retain a certain English identity, why not tap into the genuinely English Catholic liturgical heritage such as the Sarum Use, York Use, etc.?
 

In our age, we celebrate multiculturalism to the point of putting witch doctors at the table with us.  The two and only exceptions are organic European history pre-French Revolution (especially the rich culture of the Middle Ages) and in particular the various Rites of the Catholic Church. 

There is no defensible argument for permitting an actual Cranmer liturgy, threaded with Novus Ordo.  NeoCatholics who like liturgical eye candy just don't get it.  It takes more than just better vestments and ad orientem to qualify as a legitimate Use.
Reply
#16
(06-09-2011, 01:27 AM)Joshua Wrote:
NECatholic Wrote:In 1845 John Henry Newman, a former Anglican cleric, returned to the Catholic Church embracing the Mass of All Ages.  He would have never dreamed of the Catholic Church allowing a psuedo-Book of Common Prayer liturgy.

This has been my bone of contention with the Ordinariate as well. We have had countless souls convert to the true faith from the Anglican sect and I've yet to hear of an example prior to the most recent waves of converts desiring to retain their "Anglican patrimony". As Melita, stated, if you wish to retain a certain English identity, why not tap into the genuinely English Catholic liturgical heritage such as the Sarum Use, York Use, etc.?

Ok, I thought they were already basically using the Sarum rite and that that's what they'd be returning to.  If they aren't and won't, I think I agree with your and NEcatholic's concerns.
Reply
#17
(06-09-2011, 08:12 AM)Melkite Wrote:
(06-09-2011, 01:27 AM)Joshua Wrote:
NECatholic Wrote:In 1845 John Henry Newman, a former Anglican cleric, returned to the Catholic Church embracing the Mass of All Ages.  He would have never dreamed of the Catholic Church allowing a psuedo-Book of Common Prayer liturgy.

This has been my bone of contention with the Ordinariate as well. We have had countless souls convert to the true faith from the Anglican sect and I've yet to hear of an example prior to the most recent waves of converts desiring to retain their "Anglican patrimony". As Melita, stated, if you wish to retain a certain English identity, why not tap into the genuinely English Catholic liturgical heritage such as the Sarum Use, York Use, etc.?

Ok, I thought they were already basically using the Sarum rite and that that's what they'd be returning to.  If they aren't and won't, I think I agree with your and NEcatholic's concerns.

That's essentially what I thought; that there were Anglican Traditionalists who, like Traditionalists in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, went back to an older Use, or at least were using a modified Sarum (but not Cranmer) liturgy.
Reply
#18
Well listen up here pardners. Get off your hobby horses boys cause you can't get the bad guys rocking on them, get a real horse and a pair of six guns cuz fighting evil ain't for hobby horsing.

tim
Reply
#19
Is that liturgy actually 90-95% heretical? I know that percentage may have been writtein by Cranmer, but that doesn't necessarly make everything he wrote heretical. Maybe what he wrote was 5% heretical, and that is the 5% that was fixed? Just scanning it, it doesn't seem that 95% of the sentences contain a heresy.

Also, I'm not sure what this has to do with Apostolicae Curae, which dealt with ordinations--all the new clergy are being ordained Catholic priests upon their conversion.

Personally, as long as there isn't actual heresy in the liturgy, I don't see why it can't be permitted if it is a help to the conversion of some weak brethren, to use a phrase of St. Paul's. To me, it doesn't seem much different than the "baptizing" of certain pagan practices, etc., again, for the sake of the conversion of some who are attached to them.

Reply
#20
My responses as OP to your responses:

1. Sarum would be best, but besides difficulties mentioned, the actual information as to how to do it has been lost forever.  It would need to be reconstructed (taking basically what we know and important from other forms of the Roman Rite).

2. BDW is not the best, but it has the potential, when used tradition-mindedly, to be much better than the NO>

3. The BDW might be mostly the BCP,  but I don't really care ... heretical elements have been taken out ... and it's Cranmer influenced, but that's much better than Bugnini influence.  Think about this: 1955 Holy Week has a non-zero Bugnini influence factor, the BCP has a ZERO Bugnini-influence factor.

4. Yes, I still say Sarum would be best.

Final response: I think one of the main points Oddie is making about "Anglican patrimony" is that they can indirectly give us things we have lost.  The NO crowd may not re-learn the Te Deum from those of us who go to the TLM because of whatever biases and sociological reasons and hardness of heart.  But maybe they will (some of them) re-learn the Te Deum from the former Anglicans.

The truest Anglican Patrimony is really Catholic, which they guarded despite the heresies and problems in their "church," and which in this time of crisis might be very helpful to us.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)