As you may or may not know, 26 bishops from around the world are meeting in lovely Mississauga, Ontario, hashing out how to get the Anglican and Catholic churches to join (after the Anglicans split off at the behest of Henry VII).
Once this happens, of course, the Anglican Protestants in Ireland will suddenly all be Catholics. Will they have to think of something else to be hostile about?
What other issues arising from this can we foresee?
Well, I understand that married Anglican clergy who have converted to Catholicism in the past were permitted to continue acting as priests, while remaining married. If that were the case under a unification plan, then perhaps all Catholic priests would eventually be allowed to marry.
IMHO, this would be a sensible change; I always thought it was a little unrealistic to expect bachelor priests to be effective marriage counselors, for example. It also might help resolve the problem of shrinking numbers of clergy if those who felt a calling to both marriage and a religious life were allowed to pursue both.
Of course, there then would be issues concerning a priest’s salary & housing if he had a family to support, but I don’t see why those couldn’t be settled reasonably.
It won’t happen soon. The primary theological imediments have always been recognized as minor (as compared to the obstacles between the RCC and followers of Calvin, for example). The medium level theological obstacles were resolved to the point where both sides could sign a statement saying “the other guy doesn’t say this right, but we agree with what he was trying to say” several years ago.
However, the Anglican community and its daughter churches have a 400 year tradition of control at the national level (with a fair amount of input from the folks in the pews). The only way the RCC is going to be able to reconcile with that would be to treat the various communities as sister churches in the way that the Maronites and the Greek, Byzantine, and Chaldean Catholics are viewed today. However, even if the RCC accepted that, there would still be the sticking point on the other side regarding the exact relationship to the pope. (The Latin Rite RCC is perfectly willing to refrain from interfering with Eastern Rite decisions such as how to pick bishops and whether priests may marry, but if there was ever a real dispute, those groups are expected to defer to the authority of the pope.) I cannot see any of the Anglican/Episcopelian communities ever agreeing to that.
And then there is that little matter of the churches where they have ordained women as priests. That is a show stopper at the moment.
Leaving aside the very sticky issue of women’s ordination, I would see that the best to be hoped would be an agreement that they would be “in communion” theologically, thereby allowing members of each group to fully participate in liturgical services of the other group on special occasions.
The Ulstermen have nothing to fear for many years.
I believe that most of the Protestant Irish you are talking about are actually descended from Prebestyrian (pardon my spelling of THAT religion) Scots. So they still won’t be Catholic if the Anglican church rejoins. Plus the hostilities actually are over the centuries old transplantation of Scots to the Ulster plantation (now Northern Ireland) which displaced thousands of Irish from their ancestral land. Religion is part of the problem, but not all of it.
Really? I always thought that the Protestants in Ireland were English.
Nope, though the English were the ones that moved 'em there. If you really are interested there is a great book about the whole mess of the Ulster Plantation (which remains the mess of Northern Ireland)…called the Scotch-Irish by James Leyburn.
LOL…not that this is a funny issue, but it brings to mind an episode of a couple years ago. I’m Episcopalian, and my friend brought a Catholic friend of hers to church one Sunday. I wasn’t at the services, but Amanda - the Catholic one - approached me with a huge grin on her face on Monday. “You know, I’m gonna have to come to church at All Saints more often,” she said. “Why?” I asked. “I went up for communion, expecting grape juice. So I took a slug from the chalice…and it was REAL wine!”
On a more serious note, the issue of confession will probably have to be addressed if it hasn’t been already. For general info purposes, Episcopalians generally don’t confess individually - it’s done en masse during the services. Catholics, on the other hand, do confess one by one to a priest in the confessional booth. Just a small difference, but sometimes the implications of the difference are kind of important. (For me, the Episcopal way of doing it reinforces the idea that everyone sins in a multitude of different manners - plus it saves embarassment to a point. The Catholic way seems like it does encourage more responsibility on the part of the individual, though.)
Interestingly enough, I was raised Episcopalian, but we never confessed at all in our churces…singularly or in groups. Unless, of course, I didn’t notice, which is entirely possible given I am usually bored in church, and trying to peek at the pretty ladies in the crowd. Never was much of a Christian was I. 
Quadzilla, I missed the point of your anecdote. In the RCC, only real wine is permissible.
What about divorce – the issue that drove King Henry VIII to split England off from the Catholic church in the first place? Do the modern Anglican or Episcopalian churches allow divorce? If so, what happens to Anglicans or Episcopalians who have gotten divorced, when their churches become Catholic again? Will their divorces not count anymore? What if they’ve married someone else since their divorce?
Just to correct, Matt: it was Henry VIII, not Henry VII, who split the Anglican (Protestant) Church from the Catholic Church.
groan what a doofus I am. I know it was Henry VIII (the fat guy with all the wives, which is why he got in trouble with the pope in the first place). I should have just written Henry the Eighth and be done with it.
Technically it wasn’t the issue of divorce so much as the issue of that specific divorce(or more accurately, annulment.) The Pope refused to grant it due to Catherine Of Aragon’s strong political, and famillial connections to the HRE.
avalongod:
Whatever the origination of the problems in Ireland (which there are probably many more than one of, starting 800 years ago), I’m pretty sure that the people in Northern Ireland don’t consider the hostilities to be “over the centuries old transplantation of Scots to the Ulster plantation”. The Irish in general get along pretty well with the Scots; if you ask the average Joe, you’re probably more likely to get an explanation of how one doesn’t want to be ruled by GB, and how one does. Or you might get, “I don’t know anymore.” I’m also sure that there are many Protestant Irish that are of English decent.
Disclaimer: I hope I haven’t offended anyone with this exceedingly simplified post. As most people do, I love the Irish.
PeeQueue
[/hijack]
The average Joe in Northern Ireland still has a pretty clear idea of which flag he wants flying over his head.
As for what the hostilities are over, you may be surprised at how often the plantations are still mentioned (by republicans, anyway; I don’t think unionists like to bring up the subject much but then again I don’t know many unionists). It is true that national identity is what’s really at the heart of the conflict but there are genuine religious divisions in the province as well.
To clarify about who the Protestants in Ireland are: in Northern Ireland they’re largely descended from (Presbyterian) Scots; the relatively few in the Republic are more likely to be descended from English (Anglican) settlers - or from Irish families that changed religions. The Anglican church is called the Church of Ireland here, btw.
Are you sure about this Tom? As an altar boy, there was one priest who was a recovering alcoholic; we were instructed to use the Non-Alcoholic wine, for his masses.
Were we breaking some rules?
pat
Even though my anecdote is unrelated to either group listed in the OP, I can’t resist adding to the grape juice/wine discussion.
A minister at my church (United Methodist, which almost ALWAYS uses grape juice (to the point at which a friend of mine wondered why the minister even bothered calling it wine since it obviously wasn’t)) told a story of how he served communion to a group of college students and used wine for a change of pace, without telling anyone (He may have had a reason, if so, I forgot). After the service he had a couple of VERY upset young men he had to calm down who had broken vows to NEVER let alcohol past their lips, and all because he put wine where it would not be expected to be and didn’t warn them.
There are some special considerations for alcoholic priests, but the wine at mass for the congregation must be wine.
When I worked at a recovery/treatment center for alcoholic priests (as night clerk/receptionist), the priests had a dispensation to use either grape juice or a very, very weak wine during detox. After that, they were expected to use a weak wine and water it heavily during the mixing of the water and wine. This does not mean that every church in every diocese followed the same rules, of course.
The point remains that what the congregation receives is supposed to be real wine. (It isn’t supposed to be brandy or fortified wine, but it must be real.)
a few points:
On divorce, there is some variation between the different national Anglican churches. For example, in the Anglican Church of Canada, by canon law re-marriage is permitted, provided the parties go through special counselling and seek permission from the local Bishop. The local Bishop has a marriage commission which reviews the applications and makes a recommendation to the Bishop. My impression is that most Bishops are fairly flexible on this issue - the main concern is to help the couple make the new marriage work, not to castigate them for the previous marriage. If you get divorced twice and want to marry a third time, it’s a bit more iffy - some suspicion that you may not get what’s all about.
My understanding is that the Church of England takes a stricter approach to re-marriage, and only allows it in limited circumstances. Re-marriage to a person who divorced over adultery is a big problem, hence the concerns that church leaders have expressed about Prince Charles marrying Camilla - she is divorced from her husband. Since Charles will be the Supreme Head of the Church of England, this causes people to say “hmmm.” (Interestingly, the Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) takes a more liberal approach to this issue, which is why Princess Ann re-married in Scotland.)
On confession, Avalongod, you may not remeber it because it’s not a specific listing of sins by each individual (that would be way too exhibitionist for good restrained Anglicans). It’s a three step process, before the priest begins the consecration of the elements for communion: the priest exhorts the congregation to confess their sins, the congregation replies with the general confession, and the priest (or bishop if present) then gives absolution.
As well, Anglicanism does have individual confession, if a person feels the need to talk directly to the priest (“Father, I’ve been reeeal bad…”) The way indvidual confession is dealt with is summed up with the statement: “All may. None must. Some should.” (This phrase summarises a lot of Anglican thought.)
CK, there’s some debate about whether Anglicans are Protestants. The Anglicans in Ireland are very sure they are, but there are also Anglicans who downplay the Protestant tag, and see a greater affinity for the RC church than for some of the more extreme Protestant groups. For examples, Anglicanism has the hierarchy, the concept of a priest giving absolution, the sacraments, and the emphasis on ritual. These are all things that some Protestants of other groups find too “papist” to be comfortable with the idea that Anglicans are Protestant. (I’ve been to some High Masses in Anglican churches that are indistinguishable, on the surface, from a RC High Mass - Smells and Bells (incense and gong at the most important parts of the service), Priest, Deacon and Sub-Deacon, crucifer and thruifer, etc.)
And, to end a long post and to add to matt’s original information, I read that (of course) Iain Paisley and his crew have stirred up some of the local Canadian Irish Presbyterians in the Toronto area to protest the talks between the Anglicans and the RCs. What, he doesn’t have enough to keep him busy killing the Good Friday accord?