Vatican cardinal opens door to Lutheran ordinariates
#11
Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter
Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham

These don't mention Anglican or Cranmer, so why should the Lutherans have "Lutheran" in it. Perhaps it will be the "Personal Ordinariate of Saint Boniface"?
Reply
#12
Point taken, but it's not addressing the principal issue. The founding document was Anglicanorum coetibus: the actual liturgy is the "Anglican Use": etc.

I think this basic problem addresses a significant difference here. Lutheran church bodies located in various parts of Germany or elsewhere are not comparable at all to the Anglican experiment. In that case, a liturgical life was intimately tied with an ethnonational culture, and indeed a single national church was effectively interchangeable with the nation for a few centuries. There's a reason that Anglicans often hoped to come to some sort of agreement with the Orthodox, and thus, for Anglican-use Catholics, parallels with the Eastern Catholic churches. The ordinariate has always been justified on grounds of liturgical and devotional heritage.

A "Lutheran ordinariate" betrays a mission creep in the idea.

Again, what is the liturgical tradition which requires preservation here? I've been around high church Lutherans - it's a Tridentine-looking NO. (They also do chanted hours of our pre-VII Divine Office).
Reply
#13
(10-30-2012, 09:54 PM)Cordobes Wrote: Point taken, but it's not addressing the principal issue. The founding document was Anglicanorum coetibus: the actual liturgy is the "Anglican Use": etc.

I think this basic problem addresses a significant difference here. Lutheran church bodies located in various parts of Germany or elsewhere are not comparable at all to the Anglican experiment. In that case, a liturgical life was intimately tied with an ethnonational culture, and indeed a single national church was effectively interchangeable with the nation for a few centuries. There's a reason that Anglicans often hoped to come to some sort of agreement with the Orthodox, and thus, for Anglican-use Catholics, parallels with the Eastern Catholic churches. The ordinariate has always been justified on grounds of liturgical and devotional heritage.

A "Lutheran ordinariate" betrays a mission creep in the idea.

Again, what is the liturgical tradition which requires preservation here? I've been around high church Lutherans - it's a Tridentine-looking NO. (They also do chanted hours of our pre-VII Divine Office).

Sure. I think part of the point is getting people into the Church while not placing excessive demands on them to completely abandon their heritage. While errors need to be purged, they do have 500 years of heritage. That's the way I see it. To not provide that I think would be much less effective at drawing them in. I think these people don't want to be "swallowed up" by a purely Roman vision of things, much as an Easterner would want to have their heritage honored sans errors.
Reply
#14
(10-30-2012, 07:04 PM)Cordobes Wrote: What would they even call such an ordinariate? There's no getting around the word "Lutheran."

(edited language)
They could use the word "Evangelical"
Reply
#15
Traditionalists lumped together with Progressives?

This is perhaps the most off-tangent remark from a head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. 

Let us see who really is "progressive." It proceeds from a wrong and erroneus and mistaken interpretation of "ecumenism" (the false kind).  E.G., the approach made with the Lutherans was in a way a "hemeneutics of discontinuity" and this Cardinal is saying it was the correct way?  The Lutherans must first abjure their heresies and then the dialogue with them can proceed.

And - to lump traditional Catholics with the Progressives (such as McBrien, Xavier U, Boston College, Georgetown, et al., who can no longer call themselves Catholic) is not only unfair but malicious.  We try our best to maintain what has been handed down to us the purity of the Apostolic Faith and we are trying to "save" the Church from these progressive prelates, who are truly suffering from the same kind of theological ailment called Modernism."
Reply
#16
(10-31-2012, 01:15 AM)Vincentius Wrote: Traditionalists lumped together with Progressives?

This is perhaps the most off-tangent remark from a head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. 

Let us see who really is "progressive." It proceeds from a wrong and erroneus and mistaken interpretation of "ecumenism" (the false kind).  E.G., the approach made with the Lutherans was in a way a "hemeneutics of discontinuity" and this Cardinal is saying it was the correct way?  The Lutherans must first abjure their heresies and then the dialogue with them can proceed.

And - to lump traditional Catholics with the Progressives (such as McBrien, Xavier U, Boston College, Georgetown, et al., who can no longer call themselves Catholic) is not only unfair but malicious.  We try our best to maintain what has been handed down to us the purity of the Apostolic Faith and we are trying to "save" the Church from these progressive prelates, who are truly suffering from the same kind of theological ailment called Modernism."

Thank you Vince.
Reply
#17
I think you guys might be giving this statement too much weight. I could be wrong, but I'm not sure that there are many Lutheran groups that would consider becoming Catholic, so I doubt anything like this will be happening any time soon.
Reply
#18
The Lutheran service isn't even in HIGH GERMAN, so I can't see what "tradition" they would possibly bring over.
Reply
#19
Why on earth is there not simply a "conversion"? If they truly believed that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, outside of which no one can be saved, they would be converting en masse, not wanting a "personal ordinariate" so they can bring over their culture and legacy of heresy and schism over with them.
Reply
#20
^ Agreed. With the Anglican Use, I think it is a bit different, as they tried to bring elements from the Sarum rite with them. But what did the Lutherans have before the reformation? They just celebrated the Latin rite, correct? They're named after a heretic. That'd be insane to let them continue as Lutherans under Rome.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)