Monday, February 28, 2011

Can you mind your own business

This makes me wonder...

What does an Episcopalian priest have anything to do with the liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church?

When does his opinion matter on anything about the Catholic Church when he is not even a Catholic or even shows any interest of becoming one?

That is Rev. Cody C. Unterseher is Priest Associate and former Theologian in Residence at Christ Episcopal Church, Bronxville, NY.

I think Unterseher should just go and swim the Tiber and come home just like most Anglicans are doing right now.

But what he is doing is scratching the back of another ranting liturgist named Anthony Ruff, OSB of that ho-hum liturgy blog Pray Tell.

In it he gives his opinion on the coming translation of the Roman Missal!

What's next for him, giving his two cents worth about the Dalai Lama and about reincarnation?

Talk about barber shop talk!


  1. What is then his take on the New Translation of the Roman Missal?

    This is another case of Argumentum ad Verecundiam, or the appeal on false authority. Should we need expert opinions regarding this matter, we better consult Catholic priests who are faithful to the Church....

  2. He is an alumnus of GTS, and that should tell us much! He won't get on board the Papal boat

    Nonetheless, not ALL ANGLICANS have a broad church approach to the Mass. There are some Anglican priests and theologians who are faithful to what the Magisterium teaches.

  3. will, he should mind his own business. after all he is not a catholic priest nor valid priest. Pope Leo XIII Apostolic Curae Anglican orders are null and void. He start swimming through the tiber and join the others.
    Outside the catholic church there is no salvation.

  4. Episcopalian priests commenting about the Roman Missal. Filipino Atheists commenting about the Church doctrines. Idiot politicians telling the Church what it "should" do.

    We have enough of these people commenting about the Church Doctrines. I guess it is time for our Church leaders and the laity to be more noisy and to express more about their Faith so as to drown these pakialamero.

    Before they can even comment about Catholicism, I suggest that they study the teachings of the Church thoroughly.

  5. We should reserve the determination of Anglican orders to the Holy See, which evaluates them if Anglican clergy asks for reception into the Catholic Church.

  6. Doc Ben, I think the Holy See has upheld Apostolicae Curae. That is why those who are opt for the Ordinariate are ordained by Roman Catholic bishops.

  7. Meanwhile, here is an example of a high Anglican prelate (with likely valid orders, say Vatican insiders) that can still be redeemed!

    Let's say more novenas to Our Lady of Walsingham! He knows that a contraceptive worldview is the root of all the Anglican Communion's troubles.

  8. That is why Anglican clergymen has to be ordained because they are null and void from their original ordination. they claim that old catholic where present on the ordination but the ordaining prelate is anglican. Apostolic Curia Pope Leo XIII Anglican order are null and void. That is the reality.

  9. However in the case of the former Anglican Bishop Msgr Graham Leonard, it was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who declared that there is prudent DOUBT ON THE INVALIDITY of Bp Leonard's Anglican orders. Thus Bp Leonard was CONDITIONALLY ordained as a Catholic priest. Note that Bishop Leonard was not ordained as a deacon first. This is tacit recognition of the possible validity of Bp Leonard's orders.

    Cardinal Ratzinger and the CDF were silent on the Anglican Episcopal orders of Leonard, since the former Anglican bishop did not raise this issue with the CDF. In all humility Bishop Leonard was content to be a priest. It may be prudent to assume that Anglican Bishop Leonard has valid episcopal orders but as a married man, this is moot since by tradition, he cannot function as a bishop in the Catholic Church.

    This is the thesis of Cardinal Basil Hume about the validity of Anglican orders. Hume believed that almost all bishops in the Church of England have valid but illicit orders. However that is the Cardinal's opinion and the Holy See did not comment on it nor deny what the statement means.

    Paul VI and John Paul II were open to reexamining Apostolicae Curae. Paul VI in his heart wanted to recognize Anglican Orders. We don't know why Paul VI felt like this but I suppose it was by the Holy Ghost. Even John XXIII implicitly recognized the Orders by giving his own breviary (a priest's prized possession and meant for a priest only) to a visiting Anglican priest at the Vatican. Paul VI gave his Episcopal ring and a pectoral cross (the insignia of bishops) to the Archbishop of Canterbury and by tradition the visiting Archbishops of Canterbury have always worn them since when visiting the Pope. This is a sign of communion (which we pray will be fully restored) to the Apostolic See.

    John Paul II was more reserved but he gave a pontifical stole to the Archbishop of Canterbury as well as a pectoral cross. The stole that the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams wore in services with the Benedict XVI last September was the one given by John Paul II.

    All these Papal implicit recognitions of the Anglican episcopal office have been torpedoed by the Anglican Communion's decision to ordain women priests. This is the issue that sank the reexamination of Apostolicae Curae (which Benedict XVI given his radical offers to the Anglicans would have likely done). Women's ordination proves that the lack of authority in the Anglican Communion resulted in a departure from Catholicity. If Rome had reexamined the papal bull, then the establishment of the Ordinariate would have been more fully realized for I would be inclined to believe that given the difficulties, Bishops Newton, Broadhurst and Newton, were strengthened by the grace of episcopal orders that are authentically Catholic. This allowed them to shepherd their flock towards Catholic unity with Pope Benedict XVI. Even if in their heart they knew they had valid orders, they in all humility submitted themselves to the authority of the Holy See. This is what is remarkable about these men. I could only pray that the same grace and humility animates schismatic Traditionalist Catholic bishops, which we are sure have valid orders!

  10. Bishop Mendez of Brazil had catholic order.
    Archbishop Thuc of Vietnam had catholic order.
    Rome has no valid orders apart from those Bishops and priests ordained before the introduction of the 1968 ordinal which left out exactly the same thing as the protestant Edwardine rite condemned as invalid by the Bull apostolic curae.

  11. Sedevacantists are not Catholics! They are dirty phrase-mongering apostates! Yuck!