Thoughts on the Anglican Ordinariates?

Started by Melkite, February 01, 2024, 03:17:23 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

awkward customer

Quote from: Melkite on February 02, 2024, 01:56:45 PM
Quote from: awkward customer on February 02, 2024, 01:29:50 PMIt's not a problem.

The continual undermining of the Faith is the problem.  And the Ordinariate was concocted by the very men who have done most to continue the undermining.

And not all ordinariate priests stay in the ordinariate.  Some become Trads and offer the TLM, including married ones.  Tradition does not need this.

It's a problem if a Catholic, because of an errant folk piety, is scandalized by something that is not scandalous.  It's a serious problem if, because of that folk piety, an entire church (or significant part thereof) is unduly scandalized.

You have yet to explain *how* married ordinariate priests are undermining the faith.  Merely restating the claim is not an argument.

What does it matter who created the Ordinariates?  Do you think they are inherently invalid or illicit because of it?  If it weren't for the men who created them, would you still have a problem with their establishment?  If so, why?

Ordinariate priests not staying in the ordinariate is irrelevant.  That's a separate issue that doesn't have to do with the goodness or badness of the ordinariates.

Back to the original question: what did you think of their mass?  Before you left half-way through because you were incensed that a married man had the audacity to stand at the altar?  What did you think of it before you realized it was an ordinariate mass?

And since it wasn't in Latin, I assume for the first half, you were under the impression it was a reverent Novus Ordo.  Do you see the ordinariate mass as having even less validity than the NOM?

I've only just noticed that you're a Melkite Catholic.  Does that explain your position in this discussion, which is to trash the Western tradition of priestly celibacy?

As for the Mass, I knew it was the Ordinariate as soon as I arrived and only stayed out of curiosity. 

It was a TLM said by an Ordinariate priest and there was no indication that he was married.  I left because I doubted if he was actually a priest.

Melkite

Quote from: awkward customer on February 02, 2024, 06:02:45 PMI've only just noticed that you're a Melkite Catholic.  Does that explain your position in this discussion, which is to trash the Western tradition of priestly celibacy?

As for the Mass, I knew it was the Ordinariate as soon as I arrived and only stayed out of curiosity. 

It was a TLM said by an Ordinariate priest and there was no indication that he was married.  I left because I doubted if he was actually a priest.

I have a feeling that anything, short of praising priestly celibacy as the only legitimate practice and being of certain apostolic origin, is something you would find to be trashing.  So history trashes Latin tradition.

You said earlier in the thread that you got up and left when you realized it was an ordinariate mass.  You also said you left because the ordinariate was a way of sneaking married men into the Catholic priesthood.  But if the priest wasn't married, then why did you get up and leave?  On principle?

What reason did you have to doubt he was actually a priest?

awkward customer

Quote from: Melkite on February 02, 2024, 11:08:32 PMI have a feeling that anything, short of praising priestly celibacy as the only legitimate practice and being of certain apostolic origin, is something you would find to be trashing.  So history trashes Latin tradition.

You have trashed the Western tradition of priestly celibacy repeatedly. 

Meanwhile, I haven't said a word against the way the Eastern Catholics do things.  Not a word, and neither would I.

Now please learn some manners and until you do - get lost. 




LausTibiChriste

#18
Quote from: awkward customer on February 03, 2024, 04:16:00 AM
Quote from: Melkite on February 02, 2024, 11:08:32 PMI have a feeling that anything, short of praising priestly celibacy as the only legitimate practice and being of certain apostolic origin, is something you would find to be trashing.  So history trashes Latin tradition.

You have trashed the Western tradition of priestly celibacy repeatedly. 

Meanwhile, I haven't said a word against the way the Eastern Catholics do things.  Not a word, and neither would I.

Now please learn some manners and until you do - get lost. 





You're a perfect example of why women shouldn't have, and historically haven't had, a voice. Get in the kitchen, if you want to be so "traditional"
Lord Jesus Christ, Son Of God, Have Mercy On Me A Sinner

"Nobody is under any moral obligation of duty or loyalty to a state run by sexual perverts who are trying to destroy public morals."
- MaximGun

"Not trusting your government doesn't make you a conspiracy theorist, it means you're a history buff"

Communism is as American as Apple Pie

awkward customer

Quote from: LausTibiChriste on February 03, 2024, 06:43:43 AMYou're a perfect example of why women shouldn't, and historically haven't, had a voice. Get in the kitchen, if you want to be so "traditional"

Hilarious.

Especially when it comes from a man who regularly loses his rag and shrieks hysterical insults as a result.

Melkite

Quote from: awkward customer on February 03, 2024, 04:16:00 AMYou have trashed the Western tradition of priestly celibacy repeatedly. 

Meanwhile, I haven't said a word against the way the Eastern Catholics do things.  Not a word, and neither would I.

Now please learn some manners and until you do - get lost. 


While I don't think it should be enforced across the board, I see the value in priestly celibacy, and recognize that bishops have the right to restrict candidates for ordination to celibate men.  Even Orthodox bishops here and there have refused to ordain married men.

Being honest about history is not trashing your tradition.  You, on the other hand, only came onto this thread to trash the ordinariates.  I mean, I did ask what everyone's thoughts were on them, so if trashing them is your thought on the subject, I can't fault you for that. But maybe you should take the plank out of your own eye before trying to take the speck out of others'.

martin88nyc

I've never been to an Ordinariate Mass but I joined an Ordinariate Facebook group. They seem very devoted and traditional. They rarely "whine" about the Vatican II revolution like we tend to  ;D  :P  ;) and that's understandable as they haven't been affected by it much until joining the Ordinariate. I just wished they kept their traditional calendar and lectionary instead of the NO one. That's the biggest issue I have with them. They should have just stayed high church. Otherwise I'm glad they exist. Perhaps one day they would restore the Serum Rite.
 Don't know why but I am very drawn to the ordinariate. Perhaps its because of the sacral usage of english and rich ecclesial history. I even got their Daily office prayer book and sometimes listen to sermons online. The ordinariate priests often talk about the priestly celibacy and I assume they defend it more than NO priests.
"These things I have spoken to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you shall have distress: but have confidence, I have overcome the world." John 16:33