Rorate Caeli

The most beautiful poster in January

Welcome home!


From the local archdiocesan newspaper:

Baltimore Episcopal parish, priests to be received into Catholic Church
By Catholic Review Staff


Cardinal-designate Edwin F. O’Brien, apostolic administrator of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, announced Jan. 19 that Mount Calvary Church, a Baltimore parish of the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland, will be received into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church through the newly created Anglican Ordinariate for the United States.

Father Jason Catania, Mount Calvary’s pastor, informed the archdiocese that it has reached an agreement with the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland, effectively ending the parish’s 169-year history with the Anglican Church. In October 2010, the parish’s vestry unanimously voted to leave the Episcopal Church and to become an Anglican-use Catholic parish.

Mount Calvary’s reception into the Catholic Church marks the second such Anglican community in Baltimore to do so. In 2009, Cardinal-designate O’Brien welcomed 10 Episcopal nuns and their chaplain to the Archdiocese. In 2011, the nuns, members of the All Saints Sisters of the Poor in Catonsville, were welcomed into a newly erected Roman Catholic diocesan priory of the same name. Their chaplain, Father Warren Tanghe, was ordained a Catholic priest in June.

“The steady flow of Mount Calvary alumni to Rome, combined with the decision by the All Saints Sisters and the publication of Anglicanorum coeitbus, made it clear to the people of the parish that our future lies with the Catholic Church,” Father Catania said.

Mount Calvary will continue to worship at its Eutaw Street church. A settlement was recently reached between Mount Calvary and the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland that will enable the parish to retain the property.

Representatives from the Episcopal Diocese of Maryland met for mediation on Nov. 17 with representatives from Mount Calvary and the Joseph Richey House hospice. Joseph H. H. Kaplan, a retired judge, served as mediator. Though a settlement was not reached that day, significant progress was made and negotiations continued. The agreement states that the property currently occupied by Joseph Richey House, a hospice that started as a joint ministry by Mount Calvary and the All Saints Sisters of the Poor, will be permanently deeded to Joseph Richey House along with the parking lot shared by the congregation and Joseph Richey House. The Anglican Use Congregation will be deeded the church building, adjacent offices, and rectory, will keep all furnishings and personal property, and will retain the right to use the parking lot shared with Joseph Richey House. The Episcopal Diocese of Maryland will receive a monetary sum as part of the settlement, and will retain first right of refusal if the congregation vacates the property.

The Rev. Canon Scott Slater, on the bishops’ staff and part of the mediation team representing the Episcopal diocese, said, “This has been a thoughtful, prayerful, and respectful process by all three entities, and I am pleased that we have reached a solution that meets the needs of all three groups.”

Mount Calvary is expected to be the first Anglican-use community in the United States to enter the Catholic Church through the new Anglican Ordinariate since it was announced Jan. 1. The head of the new ordinariate, Father Jeffrey N. Steenson, will receive Father Catania, three fellow priests and 40 parishioners on Jan. 22 at Mount Calvary.

“The ordinariate stems from the apostolic constitution Anglicanorum coetibus issued by Pope Benedict XVI in November 2009 that authorized the creation of ‘ordinariates,’ geographic regions similar to dioceses but typically national in scope,” according to a United States Conference of Catholic Bishops November 2011 press release. At this time, the only other ordinariate exists in the United Kingdom.


Jan 19, 2012

30 comments:

P.K.T.P. said...

I can now report much more important news than this. There is now a tentative--note, tentative--date for the reception of the Fellowship of Blessed John Henry [Cardinal] Newman. This is the group of incomers from the Anglican-Catholic Church of Canada. It includes their Metropolitan Bishop for Canada, Peter Wilkinson, about four of his priests, and about a dozen laics. They are set to cross the Tiber at a Mass to be held at 5.00 p.m. on Low Sunday, 15th April. Again, this is a tentative arrangement and the date could change. Still, it is joyous news. It has been 470 years in the making (corporately, of course: Bishop Wilkinson is not *that* old).

There are many other things I could say about the prospects. I avoid some of them. They will likely be assigned a chaplain and form a 'community' in the Diocese of Victoria, which covers Vancouver Island, B.C., Canada. It is now expected that, once the other TAC communities have come over (those which are coming over, for about half are not), they will likely be incorporated into the American Ordinariate. This is definitely not what was hoped for. However, it may be only a termporary measure until a Canadian ordinariate can be erected. Another option would be for these communities simply to remain as diocesan personal parishes and quasi-parishes, or as chaplaincies, until there are enough to form a Canadian ordinariate.

The TAC people at Ottawa are apparently coming over and wish to bring their real estate with them--as far as I can see. They have now finished the Evangelium programme, except for some shut-ins, who need to complete it before they can enter into communion with the Holy Father.

I belive that TAC communities at Calgary, Alberta, and Oshawa, Ontario, will be coming over with their buildings but I'm not sure.

P.K.T.P.

New Catholic said...

Have they got a nice poster?

poeta said...

Wonder if they will change their name. It sounds unusual to have a Catholic parish named after a place.

Ecclesia Militans said...

Fr. Scott (SSPX) answers Anglican Communion with the Church:

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php?topic=3425914.0;wap2

GQRep said...

Excuse my ignorance on this issue, but how can we welcome these Anglicans "home", when they are allowed to keep their Protestant Anglican traditions largely intact (liturgy, music , married clergy, etc.)
Welcoming them home would mean that they would leave all the 500 years of Protestant tendencies and observances at the door, and accept in total the entire theology and belief and tradition (even if that means the at present norm of the Novus Ordo) of the Roman Catholic Church.

Perhaps I am wrong that it seems that in general they seem to have recieved permission to basically still function as Anglican Protestants. I fail to see the reason to celebrate something like that.

Jordanes551 said...

GQRep, how can one function as an Anglican Protestant while breaking communion with the Anglican Church(es), accepting the primacy and infallibility of the Pope, and accepting the teachings of the Catholic Faith?

As Mr. Perkins has often explained, the liturgy of the ordinariates is less than ideal. As for Anglican musical tradition, would that all Catholic parishes had music that could rival Anglican sacred music!

Adfero said...

NC I agree. This news is bigger due to the poster.

Spy Kid said...

Ecclesia Militans,

I just read (well, mostly read) Fr. Scott's appraisal of the Anglican Ordinariate. He takes issue with the "subsists in" definition of the Church promulgated in VatII, as do many readers of this blog, as I have noticed over the last year or so.

Although I consider myself a traditionalist Catholic, I do believe that the "subsists in" clause is 100% orthodox, for the following simple reasons:

1. I think the Church has always taught that the Baptism of heretics, although illicit, is certainly valid.

2. A person becomes a member of the Church via Baptism (Catholic and biblical).

Ergo, a protestant who is Baptised is in partial communion with the true Church of Christ (the Catholic Church). That is, is cannot simply be the case that "being in the Church" is identical to "being Roman Catholic".

I don't write this to be polemical. It is just that I have read it so many times here, and I cannot see the error of my logic above. I would be most appreciative is someone could correct me and show me my flaw, if any.

With many thanks to all Rorate readers,

Spy Kid

Dymphna said...

GQRep, that's the question I've been asking. I think everyone is so excted that nobody is talking about how this actually going to work out. It seems to me that they will remain Anglicans in practice but Csholic in name.

Tired of Sour Grapes said...

Ecclesia Militans:

I'd rather believe Msgr. Fellay.

http://cantuar.blogspot.com/2009/12/sspx-comments-about-popes-anglican.html

Regarding the return of traditional Anglicans Bishop Fellay said:

"This is great. This is a big joy. There is only one ship that goes to Heaven, and this is the Catholic Church. When apostates return, it is surely a grand joy."

Bishop Fellay looks at it as a hopeful sign during what presently: "happens to be quite murky circumstances of (Vatican) ecumenism."

ora et labora said...

So people are so selective and bias is not funny.

john said...

1. I do not see how Mr. Perkins' news is "more important than this". Thank you NC for this beautiful poster and excellent news.

2. I fidn Fr. Scott to be a little bit protty himself. Ironic.

3. For those of you who do not like the Anglican traditions of married clergy, liturgy, and music, understand that the Catholic Church is larger than you, and includes not only the Roman Rite and traditions but also many others. The Byzantine comes to mind immediately. They are as Catholis as you and I, with different music, liturgy, and married clergy.

P.K.T.P. said...

John:

My news is 'bigger' because Bishop Wilkinson is the Metropolitan Bishop for all of Canada and he is crossing the Tiber in a community on 15th April. along with four of his priests. His auxiliary bishop, who lives at Ottawa, will be crossing over at about the same time. He is also truly the spiritual leader of the Traditional Anglican Communion in Canada. That is much bigger news than the coming over of a single parish from the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A., much as the latter is also wonderful. The TAC, unlike the conservatives in the E.C.U.S.A., is entirely Catholic in theology.

G.Q.: I could answer your questions in detail as I have done here so many times before, but I lack the energy to do it any more. So I leave it to others who also know those answers. No offence to you in the least but I've answered these questions too many times now and I'm tired of the entire subject. The TAC people are not ordinary Anglicans. They are 'Anglo-Catholic' Anglicans who accept all the teachings we accept, and their bishops have accepted the C.C.C. by placing a copy on their High Altar in England and swearing to it. They are typically much more 'Catholic' than nearly everyone who attends the N.O. Their liturgy has long ago been deCranmerised, so they have its cultural treasure but with no whiff of heresy included.

Really, to cross over, they only needed to abandon the false branch theory of the Church.

Bishop Mercer, who lives in England, was the TAC bishop for Canada in the past and he is, in my view, a great spiritual figure. He crossed the Tiber into the English Ordinariate on 7th January. Now Bishops Wilkinson and Reid, and several of their Canadian priests, are coming over. That counts as major news. These are men of principle, and they are the Anglican parallel to the traditionalist groups in the Catholic Church (e.g. F.S.S.P.).

P.K.T.P.

Cunjo said...

@Spy Kid
A baby of protestant parents that is validly baptized becomes Catholic until it reaches the age of reason and rejects the Catholic Church, if it rejects Her.

Also i would argue that a protestant who reached the age of reason and recieves baptism with the right formula and intention(remission of sins) has original sin and his past sins remitted by the grace of the baptism(since right faith is not necessary on the part of the baptized but only intention - SummaTh. III, q.68, a.7-8 - and thus the effect of baptism is not hindered) but they immediately become quilty of schism and heresy.


From the a.8
On the contrary, Gregory writing to the bishop Quiricus says: "We have learned from the ancient tradition of the Fathers that when heretics, baptized in the name of the Trinity, come back to Holy Church, they are to be welcomed to her bosom, either with the anointing of chrism, or the imposition of hands, or the mere profession of faith." But such would not be the case if faith were necessary for a man to receive Baptism.


So this is what is happening here. They are welcomed back by the sacrament of Confirmation. They are welcomed back becouse they once were Catholics, even for a brief moment.

Ben Vallejo said...

Well those "Protestant" Anglican liturgies are more Catholic and Traditional that what we see in many Roman Catholic liturgies of today!

Welcome home Mt Calvary parish! You are no longer separated from us.

New Catholic said...

We apologize to anyone in Mt. Calvary who may read some of the comments here. We are ecstatic with your reunion with us, and we hope that yours is the first of many communities joining the Ordinariate with so much of your legitimate and acceptable heritage (including the church building itself) intact.

NC

GQ Rep said...

"GQRep, that's the question I've been asking. I think everyone is so excted that nobody is talking about how this actually going to work out. It seems to me that they will remain Anglicans in practice but Csholic in name."

Thank you Dymphna, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this!

These Anglicans are still bringing their Protestantism with them into the Church, so this can't be anything but bad.
I think they should have been recieved into the Roman Catholic Church the way the late Fr. Paul Wasson and Mother Laurana (co-founders of the Franciscans of the Atonment-priests, brothers, and sisters) in the early 20th Century. They and their Order started as Episcopalians, and became Roman Catholics around 1910. But they left in total ALL of their Episcopalian/Anglican Protestant traditions, and embraced the Roman Catholic Church, it's Holy Mass, and traditions. Fr. Paul Wasson died in 1940, having lived to see his Order grow from a handful of Episcopalians, to over 200 Catholic friars in less than 30 years. Mother Laurana died in the 1950's I believe, and even lived to see her Sisters in China before being expelled by Mao tse Tung's Communists in 1952.
Unfortunatly, after Vatican II the Atonment friars embraced all the radical liberal dissenting positions, liturgical "reforms", and the spirit of ecumenism. They have declined from close to 400 friars in 1962, to less than 90 today with a median age in the mid 70's.

My immediate family on both sides is all Catholic, and has been since St. Francis Xavier brought the Catholic Faith to the land of my ancestors in the 16th century. BUT,some of my more distant relatives in their late 50's and 60's were Buddhists, who converted when marrying Catholics from my family. It was just the way things were done. In the early 1960'sor even the 70's it would have been unthinkable for them to remain as practicing Buddhists. Same with afew of our neighbors who married spouses who used to be Protestants (or in 1 case Jewish),but left their heritage and accepted in total the Catholic Faith. They are all older people.
Today, I've been told that it is no longer strongly suggested by the Church (or even ordered or expected) for the non-Catholic party to convert. They can keep being whatever they are. Which I think is a disgrace and insult to our Faith.
I have 1-2 friends/co-workers in the agency I work for/represent who used to be Catholics, but one is now a Muslim, and the other is a Mormon.
It's gotten to be the common thinking that Roman Catholicsm is no better/worse than any other religion in the world. We are no longer (to many, even Catholics) the One True Church. I think the actions of JP II are largey responsible for that.
Which is why I think it is so wrong for the Vatican, and this Pope in particular (and his immediate prececessor), to allow Anglicans into the Church and keep their traditions, or to engage in huge pan-religious meetings (Assisi I, II, III) which givens the impression (and impressions are what stick the most), that we're all equal and the same.
The Anglicans converts will benefit, for they really give up nothing. Their liturgy will not be corrected because the Vatican of this Pope has ground to a halt.
So the Anglicans really have given up nothing....they "acknowledge" the primacy of the Pope etc., but they still function as Protestants.
Unthinkable 60 years ago! And it's much to our detriment as the One True Church.

P.K.T.P. said...

G.Q.:

You work under some misconceptions. The Anglo-Catholics of the TAC (and there are some in the regular Anglican Communion) have traditions which are completely compatible with the Catholic Faith, unlike most Anglicans in the regular Canterbury Communion. So there is a difference there. Moreover, the situation has changed with Vatican II because the New Mass is more Protestant in ethos and outward form than are many of the Anglo-Catholic traditions. It could have been argued in the past that Anglo-Catholic traditions at least had the connotation of 'High Protestantism' owing to mere association (e.g. the cadences of the prayerbook connoted that). This argument holds little force in light of the pablum of the New Mass, a Mass that, in outward form, reminds one of the United Church of Canada (or of Christ in the U.S.A.).

I think that we should concentrate on celebrating the reception of these very devout people. Their presence in Holy Church can only bring us closer to what we have lost, and that is truly needed.

P.K.T.P.

Spy Kid said...

Thank you Cunjo for your reply. I greatly appreciate it.

However, consider an adult Christian, say a Baptist, who in good faith firmly believes that their faith is correct, having, say, received such a distorted view of Catholicism as to reject it, thinking this is God's will (to reject Catholicism). And say they received Baptism. Millions of souls fall into this category.

Now, granted, they are material heretics. But, I believe that they are still part of the Church, because, not having full knowledge and not giving full consent to this evil, they cannot (given my scenario) be guity of mortal sin, and neither formal heresy nor formal schism.

Thus, the Baptist in this scenario (like some people I know), would have to be part of the Church by virtue of their Baptism and their Christian (non-Catholic) faith being practiced in good faith and believing it to be correct and in accord with God's will.

So, as long as I can find one person in the world who satisfies the above criteria, I would then have proven that the "Church" is greater in breadth than the Roman Catholic Church, no?

Again, I cannot see the flaw in the above, and would greatly appreciate being corrected.

However, Cunjo, I appreciate your points, and they make sense if a person has full knowledge so as to commit the mortal sin of schism, because, in the state of mortal sin, they are not part of the Church anyway....

Spy Kid said...

More thoughts...

The "Church" is both invisible and well as visible. The visible Church of Jesus Christ is the Catholic CHurch. But it seems to me that the invisible CHurch - the mystical body of Christ - is a realty that is broader in scope, and may include, under certain circumstances as outlined above, some protestants.

Ergo, the Vat II definition of "subsists in" is true and makes sense.

Comments?

Ecclesia Militans said...

Spy Kid,

You should read about the implicit Baptism of Desire.
For a person, e.g. that baptist, to be an invisible part of the visible Church it is neccessary for the person to be in nothing short than invincible ignorance about the Catholic Faith, and to have perfect charity for God, nothing less.

This cannot be fulfilled by most protestants, because their very religion is an opposition, a protestation to the Catholic teaching. This is how their mentality works - Catholics think like this, but we think the opposite. An example is the baptist obsession with affirming that the Catholic Church and the Pope are from antichrist.

If that non-Catholic is both in invincible ignorance and has perfect charity for God, along with perfect contrition for his sins, then he is united to the soul of the Church, although he is not in the body, so he is unknowingly a part of the Catholic Church and a Catholic.

He is an invisible member of the visible Church.
The Church is not the one that is invisible, that would be a heresy.

Marko Ivančičević said...

@Spy Kid
If you read the Catechism of st. Pius X you will find that he speaks of soul and body of the Church.

"The Soul of the Church consists in her internal and spiritual endowments, that is, faith, hope, charity, the gifts of grace and of the Holy Ghost, together with all the heavenly treasures which are hers through the merits of our Redeemer, Jesus Christ, and of the Saints."

and

"The Body of the Church consists in her external and visible aspect, that is, in the association of her members, in her worship, in her teaching-power and in her external rule and government." (questions 22 and 23 under Creed section)

Also
"If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God's will as best he can such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation."(q.29)

So you see it is the same, and one Catholic Church that is, Christ's Church but some aren't in communion with Her body but only soul(if they are baptized, even only with baptism of desire, and are in good faith - which means a very little number of people concerning what i've written here below about media).

Todays communicating services has made alot easier for someone to find the Truth, but has also put him in the worse position, he having bigger responsibility.

Again i say. Only one Church of Christ. Catholic Church is in no way subordinated to the Church of Christ. I would argue even that Catholic Church is the name of the Church of Christ.
Pax+
(Cunjo)

Loyolakiper said...

I have a question... When did England need it's own Rite? Are they now part of the Latin (Roman) Rite? So why is it that we allow them their own Rite when their true patrimony is Latin? The patrimony that we are accepting them with is one that grew out of contempt for the true faith...

I realize that the Church is bigger than I and I agree that it is a great occasion that they unite with the Church established by Christ, so please do not misunderstand where I am coming from... I just have questions about this.

Spy Kid said...

Thank you Cunjo and Ecclesia Militans for your thoughtful and kind replies.

I have read your replies with an open mind, but still can't fully agree.

I am not saying the Church is invisible. That is Protestant heresy, and clearly contrary to scripture. As a good Catholic, I subscribe to both/and in many situations. As you agree, I am sure, the Church is both visible and invisible at the same time. But that is the whole point. The Baptist in my scenario is in the invisible Church (the soul), but not the visible one (the body).

Let me rephrase: "the body subsists in the soul". This is perhaps what Vatican II taught (if I may be so bold to interpret it that way). But the soul is not the same thing as the body (just ask a soul in purgatory). The soul is something greater than the body: which is why the invisible Church is "greater" than the visible one.

In all humility, I think the quotations from the Pius X catechism add to my point, rather than detract from it. For the body of the Church is visible, the soul invisible, and someone can be in the latter without being in the former. Thus, "subsists in" is orthodox and makes sense.

I am learning a lot and would appreciate more correspondence on this issue.

Thanks guys and God bless you!

Spy Kid

Spy Kid said...

Cunjo said: "I would argue even that Catholic Church is the name of the Church of Christ".

Yes, of the visible Church, for sure!

P.K.T.P. said...

I should make one comment about my post re the Fellowship of Bl. John Henry Newman crossing the Tiber. It would seem that the date I mentioned is not certain at all and was only a proposed date. Sorry, but I'm afraid that we must go back to praying that the event will occur soon. Frankly, I was surprised that it would not happen before Lent rather than afterwards. But it seems that it may occur long after Easter. So we must go back to waiting, waiting, waiting. As we all remember, there were rumours of an impending clarification of S.P. of 2007 by 2008. It was to happen 'any day now'. It came three year later. This may also be the case for the Fellowship. Sorry for overeager reporting but the date I supplied must now be regarded as purely speculative.

P.K.T.P.

Marko Ivančičević said...

@spy kid
Now we must make a certain distinction.
Body of Church and Body of Christ.

Church has it's soul and body, i.e. invisible and visible parts.

Church, the Church of Christ, the Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ therefore that same Mystical Body of Christ has it's body and soul, i.e. visible and invisible parts.

Invisible parts of the Church, her soul(her internal and spiritual endowments, that is, faith, hope, charity, the gifts of grace and of the Holy Ghost, together with all the heavenly treasures which are hers through the merits of our Redeemer, Jesus Christ, and of the Saints.) is not anything other than the same Church nor is in some way separated from the same Church nor from Her body.

If the Church of Christ is one and Her names(or rather Her marks) are the four: one, holy, catholic and apostolic, then
those same marks are the marks of the whole Church, and all Her parts, namely Her Body and Soul.

If someone is united to the soul of Church he is united to the Catholic Church and to no other Church, because he is united to the Church of Christ. Church of Christ is nothing that is greater or broader reality than the Catholic Church nor is the latter in any way narrower than the other.

The word "subsists" implies that the part of the Church of Christ resides, lays and exists in the Catholic Church, and that the part of it exists outside of the Catholic Church, or that the Church of Christ consists in Catholic Church and other realites(religions, churches), or that the Catholic Church is just one part of the Church of Christ(all those things mean the same thing just to mention). This term is thus, in my eyes, very ambiguous and dangerous term.

P.S.
Please explain how does body subsists in the soul?
Also here are a few dictionary references just to clearout the meaning of the term:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subsist

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/subsist

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/subsist?q=subsist

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/subsistence

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subsistence

Ecclesia Militans said...

Spy Kid,

What you are basically saying, perhaps unintentionally, is that there are two Churches of Christ, that Our Lord founded two Churches, one visible, which is the Catholic Church, and the other invisible, a phantom church composed of all those who are Catholic but don't know it.

Let me get straight to the point - this is heresy. Our Lord founded only one Church, which is why we confess "I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church". There is only one door of salvation.

Those people that are in invincible ignorance, with perfect contrition and perfect charity for God, do not know that they are Catholic, but they are Catholic still. They do not belong to a phantom church, they belong to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church. There is no other.
And these people are unfortunately very few, because it is very very difficult to meet the above terms.
That is why missionary activity is so important.

Our Lord is not a liar nor a gnostic, and He did not found any secret invisible churches. His Church is perfectly visible.
He said to Peter: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church", so he built one church, not many, and he built it on Peter, which is the Pope, i.e. Rome, i.e. the Catholic Church.
To say Our Lord founded more than one Church is a protestant heresy, as they say that Christ founded all of their 40 000 "churches".

Salvation is not a right. Our ancestors - Adam and Eve - gave up that right for all of us by sinning and that is why we are all born as children of sin, in a state of enmity with God. By shedding His Blood on the Cross, Our Lord Jesus Christ redeemed us and opened for us the door of salvation which was closed. Since then all those who enter the Church he has founded have the privilege to be children of God.
So, salvation is a privilege, not a right.
There is only one reason why a person who is not visibly Catholic can be saved. I will let Pope Pius IX explain it:

"Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments."
(Pope Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, 1863)

Dixie Forever said...

Beautiful Church. I hope they are as orthodox as the building. Welcome! JMJ

Steve Cavanaugh said...

For those of you interested in the Anglican Use and the Ordinariates, I would offer the following:

An Evensong held at St. Anselm's Abbey, Washington D.C. on 1/21/2012 in thanksgiving for the Ordinariate:
http://anglicanusenews.blogspot.com/2012/01/video-of-evensong-at-st-anselms-abbey.html

A post with some photos from Sunday's reception of Mount Calvary (including another beautiful sign that was on the outside of the Church on the busy road it fronts).
http://anglicanusenews.blogspot.com/2012/01/historic-day-at-mount-calvary-baltimore.html

For those who think that these new Catholics are only Catholics in name, please do spend some time viewing the websites of parishes and groups such as Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio, Our Lady of Walsingham in Houston, St. Athanasius in Boston, etc. I think you will find that we who worship according to the Anglican Use of the Roman Rite are your allies in seeking the things of Christ and his Church.