Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

The Anglicans


ICTHUS

Recommended Posts

If your friend was Catholic, who became a married  Anglican priest, and reconverted he may not become a Catholic priest.

They just talked about this on EWTN last week.

Converted married Anglican priests are permitted to have sex with their wives.

They can and do make exceptions . . . the question is whether or not he left in order to get married and become a priest. He did not . . .

However when he came back, he told his Old Congregation, they walked him down to the Catholic Church . . . he made a Confession and went to Sunday mass and received the Eucharist all in one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only know one married priest in the Byzantine Rite and he originally from Europe.  He and his wife have to make a promise of "continence" Which means that they are not allowed to have relations with each other.

The Ukranian Rite Catholic priest I interviewed mentioned something about his going to bed with his wife might bother some people, so I somehow don't think that he was forbiden to have relations with his wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IronMonk's history is right on target. With one added question. Did the Anglicans lose valid ordinations, the minute they left Rome? In other words, while the original Bishops and priests (who were Catholics before the split) anyone ordained after the split would be automatically invalid? Yes? This is what is going on with SPX and other schismatics, right? Just a bit confused...

peace...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hyperdulia again

that's not true, if that was the case then the orthodox churches wouldn't have apostolic succession and valid sacraments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point, Hyper. I actually hadn't thought of that. So, does that mean that all the schismatics retain Holy Orders, and can validly ordain priests?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'all know, don't you (now you do!) that the Lord Bishop of London, The Reverend and Right Honorable Father Graham Leonard, (Anglican, obviously, and married) became a Catholic priest? He's now a monsignor, an honorary title, but he's just an ordinary priest in the Catholic Church. The Lord Bishop of London is third in the Anglican hierarchy; only two archbishops precede him in rank. As Lord Bishop, he was advisor to the Queen and a member of the House of Lords.

"To say that we came [to the Catholic Church] because we could not accept women priests, homosexual practices, remarriage after divorce, the doctrines of sola fide or sola scriptura is not only to take no account of the reasons why we believed the Catholic Church to be right and asked her to embrace us. . . we became Catholic because we were convinced that the Catholic Church is the pillar and ground of truth about God and man." Fr. Graham Leonard, My Personal Path to Rome

He said to his friends, "I have to become a Catholic because I must be a Catholic or an infidel!" And "Catholicism and Christianity had in my mind become identical so that to give up the one would be to give up the other." [ibid]

He has been a Catholic since April, 1994.

Charming, holy man, lovely wife, also a Catholic convert. I've heard him speak twice at a "Path to Rome" conference sponsored by Miles Jesu, of which he is a member.

The other married priest I know was Episcopalian; he has four children. Great priest, very orthodox, loves the BVM.

I don't think there's any restriction on conjugal relations for these married Catholic priests, though I think some may forego conjugal relations voluntarily.

Edited by Katholikos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Katholikos, thanks for that information. I think I will find it very helpful to read about his journey from the Anglican church to the Catholic faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Katholikos, thanks for that information. I think I will find it very helpful to read about his journey from the Anglican church to the Catholic faith.

"My Personal Path to Rome" is a little booklet which can be ordered from

http://www.milesjesu.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IronMonk's history is right on target.    With one added question.  Did the Anglicans lose valid ordinations, the minute they left Rome?  In other words, while the original Bishops and priests (who were Catholics before the split) anyone ordained after the split would be automatically invalid?  Yes?  This is what is going on with SPX and other schismatics, right?  Just a bit confused...

peace...

The Anglican's that were priests had valid orders until they died....

All new Angelican Priests that were ordained had valid orders until 16 years after the split... i.e. if someone was ordained 17 years after the split, their ordination was not valid, but someone who was ordained 15 years after had valid orders.

God Bless, Your Servant in Christ,

ironmonk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Ironmonk, you do realize that I am unable to spend my whole day in front of a computer - I also have duties to perform on CGR, as I am a mod there. So if I don't respond to some of these challenges you dig up from the annals of phatmass history, please do forgive me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CatholicforChrist

Ellenita, the Apostles left their wives to follow Christ. This does not mean that God did not intend them to be married in the first place. Also, people are often deceived of God's will, especially when they are outside the unity of His Church (outside of which there can be no worship pleasing to God, cf., Roman Catechism). This itself should indicate that those outside the Church have an erroneous understanding of God's will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Oct 21 2003, 09:01 PM'] The Anglican's that were priests had valid orders until they died....
All new Angelican Priests that were ordained had valid orders until 16 years after the split... i.e. if someone was ordained 17 years after the split, their ordination was not valid, but someone who was ordained 15 years after had valid orders.

God Bless, Your Servant in Christ,
ironmonk [/quote]
But this is due to the pomulgation of the new Edwardian Ordinal in 1549/1550, not merely to the fact that they had been apart from Rome for some odd years (16 years). The ordinal reflected the change in theology about the Mass and the priesthood and therefore it was deficient in form and intention. HAd they retained the old ordinal and retained a Catholic view of the MAss and priesthood (as the Orthodox did) they would have maintained valid orders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...