Anglican bishop lays mitre, crozier at our lady?s feet as he leaves for ordinariate [ewtn]

[JesusforMadrid]

The Orthodox do accept that Mary was immaculate, just don’t define when this happened. Read some of their liturgies. Many Orthodox believe in Toll Houses, which appear to be similar to Purgatory. I much prefer having one head of the Church as Christ appointed Peter to be. This has kept the Church without error in doctrinal beliefs. I understand that many don’t like authority, but without authority you have heresy and schism. Christ said there is to be One Church not many. Many evangelicals would rather be Orthodox as it is easier and more like the Protestant churches, i.e. birth control, being allowed to be divorced and remarried three times. Although the Catholic Church recognizes Orthodoxy as a valid and sister Church, I personally still feel that I prefer being part of the Western Church and also believe that we must be in communion with the See of Peter.

I do not want to highjack this thread into an Orthodox/Catholic debate, especially since I am not Orthodox (yet). However, based on what the Orthodox say, I think you are whitewashing significant differences between the way Orthodox and Roman Catholics approach doctrine.

On the Immaculate Conception, I have never met an Orthodox who accepted this as defined by the RCC. As for the sinlessness of the Theotokos, there are many different viewpoints according to this Orthodox source: orthodoxanswers.org/answer.aspx?ID=497 Perhaps a majority of Orthodox would say she remained sinless for some or all of her life. Yet there are also Orthodox who believed she sinned, one of which, John Maximovitch of San Francisco, was cannonised. St John Maximovitch could point out to the fact that a very important prayer in the Divine Liturgy calls Jesus Christ “the only sinless one.”

Can you imagine someone in the RCC in the 20th century who rejects the idea that the Theotokos remained sinless and who is nonetheless declared a saint?

So on the sinless of the Theotokos, if Anglicans struggle with this, they will find more understanding in the Orthodox Church.

And on the “toll houses” issue, the Orthodox Church seems to be divided and this is certainly not dogma. See, for example, stlukeorthodox.com/html/evangelist/2000/deathtoll.htm Again, for Anglicans struggling with the idea of purgatory (or toll houses for that matter), the Orthodox church would seem less problematic.

In a latter post, you state

I understand that the Orthodox don’t define doctrines, which to be honest, bothers me. I have asked questions of Orthodox and can’t seem to get a straight answer.

I agree completely with you, but this contradicts your idea that the Orthodox and the RCC are so similar in such troubling dogmas as the IC, infallibility and purgatory. The RCC does define such doctrines…as dogma; the Orthodox do not. I think the very lack of scholasticism in the Orthodox Church is one of its attractions.

For those of us on the outside considering both the RC and Orthodox churches, the fact is there is a lot more dogma that one has to accept in order to become Roman Catholic than to become Orthodox. If I don´t accept purgatory or the IC, I am effectively not in communion with the Roman Catholic Church; I could however be in communion with Orthodoxy, even though I reject these beliefs.

 

[JesusforMadrid]

I agree with all you’ve said here. I have experienced a triumphalist anti-Protestant zeal at times that isn’t healthy. As many in here know, my grandmother is dying. She has been dying in the hospital due to a massive hemorragic stroke the day after Thanksgiving. It devastated her and she’s completely gone mentally but physically hanging by a thread. It has been HARD on us, especially on my mom and I. Today I told a co-worker of mine, a religious woman and wife of a Mennonite minister. She quickly asked me, “Scott, can we pray together please!?” She ran to me, took my hand, asked another teacher to come over to us, held her hand, and she gave the most amazing, heart-felt, faithful, loving prayer that just made my morning. It really strengthened me and I felt such peace. All the Catholics I work with wouldn’t even consider such an action. Yet my Protestant co-workers regularly pray like that. It’s impressive and their faith is strong. They may not have all the theological points down and they don’t have sacramental interaction like Catholics but good grief they’re loyal to God, faithful, and just full of joy. I like that. I’m just not willing to marginalize these folks and cast them aside as being “popes unto themselves” and “prideful because they won’t come to Rome!” because most of these good people don’t ponder these issues each day, as you said! Most people, let’s say Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Anglicans, don’t get up each day and actively ponder the Church of Rome and consider the pope the Whore of Babylon. In fact, they rarely think about Catholicism, just their own faith life. That’s my experience. So the venom directed at them and the chiding that those poor slobs on have a bible and no tradition and magisterium, that’s off my radar. I concur with your sentiments, Tomarin!

This chimes with me and is one thing that holds me back from jumping to either the RCC or the Orthodox Church. Does that mean that you hold to the “Branch Theory”?

 

[ConstantineTG]

I think the annulment mentality has dangers though. In the Philippines, where my wife is from, divorce is actually illegal because the Church has such a grip on the secular government. What ends up happening is men leave their wives (this has happened in like five cases in my wife’s family alone!) and abandon them. The man then shacks up with someone younger and prettier, impregnates her, then moves on. All the women are left with crying babies, having to work two jobs, and NO ALIMONY because divorce is illegal. They have “annulments” that cost around $800 to obtain. In the Philippines an entire month’s salary is around $300 AT BEST on a good month and that’s just to survive. So the men come out ahead, women left in the dust. The result? I’ve been to the Philippines four times and keep in touch with what’s going on there a lot. What’s the result? Men and women aren’t marrying. They’re cohabitating and having kids together and doing more of the “trial marriage” stuff. If they decide they’re not right for each other, they can split and still have a possibility of marrying. If they marry and it doesn’t work out, no more chances. The women are paranoid about being dumped, understandably. It’s crazy.

Can a Filipino like myself give my view here?
The problem in the Philippines is not divorce laws, the problem is colonial mentality. Hispanic machismo + western liberalism = these problems. Yes, I’ve known many people too who are in the same boat as your wife’s family members. But granting divorce wouldn’t solve the problem. The recent acceptance of trial marriages stems from heavy western influence in the media. And sadly the problem is anything we see as American, we see as great, fantastic and progress. Sadly since it isn’t our culture people are at a loss on how to handle it. And no, I don’t think its a representation of the entire American culture, but thats how we view it given what we see on TV and in the movies.

 

[Bluegoat]

The Orthodox do accept that Mary was immaculate, just don’t define when this happened. Read some of their liturgies. Many Orthodox believe in Toll Houses, which appear to be similar to Purgatory. I much prefer having one head of the Church as Christ appointed Peter to be. This has kept the Church without error in doctrinal beliefs. I understand that many don’t like authority, but without authority you have heresy and schism. Christ said there is to be One Church not many. Many evangelicals would rather be Orthodox as it is easier and more like the Protestant churches, i.e. birth control, being allowed to be divorced and remarried three times. Although the Catholic Church recognizes Orthodoxy as a valid and sister Church, I personally still feel that I prefer being part of the Western Church and also believe that we must be in communion with the See of Peter.

I have attended the Western Rite of the Orthodox and felt very uncomfortable during the liturgy, it is a Western Rite in an Orthodox Church, Where the Anglican Use is another Latin Rite liturgy. Most Anglicans are more in line with the Catholic Church. Also the Orthodox have their own problems and in some ways are not united. The Catholic Church is universal including around 23 different rites, including Eastern Rite Catholics. I find it more welcoming than the Orthodox Church. It has been the major missionary Church for the past 2000 years and I don’t find this true of any other church. Of course in the past 100 years many protestant denominations have become missionaries, but many times instead of trying to bring in unbelievers they try to convert Catholics who are already Christian.

The Sarum Use is not one that very few Anglicans in the US or even in England have been exposed to. Although the Canon used in the Anglican Use Catholic parishes is taken from it and from the Canon used in the Tradiational Latin Rite liturgy.

I always wonder why protestants and some Orthodox try to convert Anglicans to become Orthodox instead of Catholic. This is a personal decision and they have been led by the Holy Spirit to Christ’s Church. The Church is holy and pure, although as in all churches there are individual sinners, but their sins do not reflect the truth of the Catholic Church.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

I think many Orthodox would argue that having one centralized leader actually led to many serious heresies - that the problem of the papacy and other doctrines that the Orthodox consider a problem are possible because there is one leader who can sanction changes. In Orthodoxy this kind of change is very difficult - you would have to get everyone, from the bishops to the lay-folk, to agree with it throughout the Church. That is why they tend to be so conservative - it is almost impossible to get everyone to agree to something like that.

As for why an Orthodox Christian would encourage Anglicans to come there rather than to the Catholic Church - I would think that was obvious - they don’t consider Catholics to be part of the Church. Why would they try and get someone to become Catholic?

As far as Anglicans go - in general, most Anglicans feel strongly about some doctrines that are found in Catholicism but not Orthodoxy. I find that most people actually don’t have strong feelings about the filioque - they might have an opinion about it, and feelings about the politics surrounding it, but usually people don’t get hot about it.

I don’t think Anglicans want to go there because it is easier. They might think that is the case at a first glance, but that is not likely to last long. Yes, they allow divorce, and may allow ABC. If you divorce you may get 6 months penance, it’s not like it’s a cup of tea. You may not be given permission to use ABC, and even if you are, you are still fasting, quite likely from sex as well as food, for half the year. And they really expect you to listen to what your priest/confessor says, in a way few Catholics expect. A friend of mine was told by her priest not to be alone with her boyfriend, ever. The first time they kissed was they day they got married. I don’t think it is easier.

What is more likely to be an issue for Anglicans I think is cultural unfamiliarity, or just not knowing much about it.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Of course you can give your opinion as a pinoy, Constantine! You don’t have to ask here, brother!

I actually disagree to a point. I don’t think that filipinos are a virtuous lot who have been spoiled and tainted by Western TV and movies. Filipinos are human beings like anyone else–prone to sin and fallen. They don’t need Americans telling them to have illicit sex. I do get tired of everyone blaming the West or especially Americans for spoiling and ruining the supposedly spotless third world. We could learn a thing or two from them, they could learn a thing or two from us. I do believe that the entire world is opening its heart to sin. It’s no one nation brainwashing or influencing so much as it is a libertine mentality that the entire world has embraced. The Filipinos have a colonial mentality indeed. No argument there. But if you really talk to people in the Phils, this whole out-of-wedlock thing didn’t start ten years ago or when MTV was invented. My wife has a lot of family skeletons she can tell ya that took place in the 1940’s and 50’s that would make ya blush, brother! And it wasn’t General MacCarthur causing them to sin. They did right fine by themselves!

I’m not saying divorce is the answer to stop infidelity and a libertine sexual culture; far from it! I’m merely saying that it is a nation that brags about and lauds its ‘staunch’ adherence to the Catholic teaching against divorce and yet look at the results? And look at the amount of out of wedlock births. Look at the cohabitation rates. Look at the ‘unofficial’ divorces going on. The sadness of these things is happening. So, in the process I would like to see women at least be empowered enough to get a civil divorce and be able to collect alimony and not be at the mercy of deadbeat men who dump them on a whim. Women are almost always the victims and the prey of these machismo dufus deadbeat guys. These men need to at least financially show responsibility in helping to raise these poor children and if not—jail time. And time in a filipino jail is a wakeup call, man! I don’t think divorce will fix morality but it would at least give women civily some say and hope financially.

I see this first-hand. My wife’s middle sister was dumped by her husband leaving her with two teenage boys and a teenage girl. Dumped. She had to work two jobs. While she’s at work he’s in another province on heroin impregnating a couple girls. He now has three kids by a young girl in another province! He spends his days drinking and doing drugs. My wife’s eldest sister was dumped by her husband about fifteen years ago. He now drinks San Miguel beer for a living. Money contributed to help mom raise two girls? Nada.

My wife’s dad left when she was two years old. She never knew him, met him only twice briefly before he died in the early 1990’s. He dumped my wife, her three sisters, and brother. Money chipped in by dad? Nothing. Mom worked as a hair-dresser and they lived in poverty in their barangay that is staggering. My wife grew up in intense poverty. Her dad left a great-paying job to become a professional drinker.

Men need to contribute and do their parts. I have no problem with civil divorce, alimony, and jail time for these dirt bags. Just my fifty cents!

Can a Filipino like myself give my view here?
The problem in the Philippines is not divorce laws, the problem is colonial mentality. Hispanic machismo + western liberalism = these problems. Yes, I’ve known many people too who are in the same boat as your wife’s family members. But granting divorce wouldn’t solve the problem. The recent acceptance of trial marriages stems from heavy western influence in the media. And sadly the problem is anything we see as American, we see as great, fantastic and progress. Sadly since it isn’t our culture people are at a loss on how to handle it. And no, I don’t think its a representation of the entire American culture, but thats how we view it given what we see on TV and in the movies.

 

[JohnnyReb]

Father Mark,

Why wouldn’t many of these Anglo Catholic churches go Western Rite Orthodox. They could keep their Anglo Catholic rites basically unchanged (after removing the filioque), especially with the Divine Liturgy of St. Tikhon, based on the 1928 BCP or the English Liturgy, based on the 1549 English Book of Common Prayer. I have read the Sarum rite, a pre-Reformation English rite that is also used and it is very beautiful and also available in Spanish. So liturgically, I should think Western Rite would be easier.

Also, for some Anglo Catholic Churches that cannot stomach some of the more recent dogma such as the IC, papal infallibility or purgatory, Western Rite Orthodoxy would seem an easier choice.

For others like the TAC or ALCC that have accepted 100% of the Catechism of the RCC, I suppose going to Rome is the obvious choice, but even for them they will need to submit to liturgical changes, as you admit.

This makes me think of Orthodox Bishop Timothy Ware’s statement that many individual Anglican’s faith may be almost indistinguishable from that of Orthodoxy. I do see alot I like in Orthodoxy. It is some of those recent dogmas that have me uncomfortable with Rome at the moment.

I can’t go to Orthodoxy right now though. I like the 39 articles too much. I’m way too Protestant, somewhat reformed but not completely, western thinking, imputed righteousness/justification. I could never shake that as a Catholic. I have always held onto it. That does not jive well with Orthodox thought. I do like Orthodoxy’s thoughts on sanctification though!

 

[JohnnyReb]

It’s funny how in so many of the relationships I read in CAF (mine included!) one spouse is super into religion and on this deep, well-read, probing, complex spiritual journey and the other spouse is content with a simple faith. My wife doesn’t have all the crazy religious issues I have. She wants to stay Anglican, pure and simple. If we never went back to the Catholic Church a day in our life she’d be ok with it, and she grew up in the Philippines. I’m on a daily struggle to understand my faith, which Church I belong in, and a quest for the truth. My wife told me last night, “I believe in Jesus and that He died for my sins, and that we should live the life He wants for us. That’s enough for me.” And she’s a whole lot happier about this stuff than me! Maybe a simple philosophy is the key!

I’m on Catholic Answers Forums every night, my wife is on Facebook and kids websites or reading recipes or uploading pictures. We’re so different in this regard. And I think she’s a ten times better person than yours truly! Maybe I need to follow her example. My dad is so much like my wife. And they’re both the easy-going ones!

Are you kidding me LOL. Man I can relate to that. Everyone in my family tells me I am so good at overcomplicating religion. I have been asked “Why good old Bapist isn’t good enough for me.” And I get asked why I have to go online to debate religion with strangers whom I have never met. I think my family is just glad I am away from those crazy Pentecostals now.

 

[Harpazo]

Not to get off topic but I’ve heard several Orthodox posters on here tell me that Orthodox Christians are usually allowed three divorces and they actually call a spade a spade and use the word “divorce” rather than other jargon. I agree with your assessment that the Catholic Church issues a lot of “annulments,” which are supposed to be declarations that a valid marriage never really took place, but the reality is they often are just divorces wrapped in different paper. I do appreciate, at least, the fact that the Catholic Church cares enough about marriage and its sanctity to at least have a process and require Catholics to enter the annulment process to analyze the situation, not making it too easy, and trying to discourage it. I think marriage has become all too trivial in this country and this day and age in general.

I think the annulment mentality has dangers though. In the Philippines, where my wife is from, divorce is actually illegal because the Church has such a grip on the secular government. What ends up happening is men leave their wives (this has happened in like five cases in my wife’s family alone!) and abandon them. The man then shacks up with someone younger and prettier, impregnates her, then moves on. All the women are left with crying babies, having to work two jobs, and NO ALIMONY because divorce is illegal. They have “annulments” that cost around $800 to obtain. In the Philippines an entire month’s salary is around $300 AT BEST on a good month and that’s just to survive. So the men come out ahead, women left in the dust. The result? I’ve been to the Philippines four times and keep in touch with what’s going on there a lot. What’s the result? Men and women aren’t marrying. They’re cohabitating and having kids together and doing more of the “trial marriage” stuff. If they decide they’re not right for each other, they can split and still have a possibility of marrying. If they marry and it doesn’t work out, no more chances. The women are paranoid about being dumped, understandably. It’s crazy.

Sorry to hear about the problems in the Philippines. That’s really a shame.

The Orthodox will allow a MAXIMUM of 3 marriages, not divorces. The Church will not under any circumstances permit another union to occur past 3. A second marriage is allowed occasionally and is usually on the grounds of their spouse having passed away or divorced them due to infidelity. If it is for trivial reasons, then the bishop will more times than not say no. A third marriage is very rare and would only be permitted in certain circumstances. No one is guaranteed a second or third marriage in the Orthodox Church and I get the feeling that some people here think it is.

In his lectures a few years ago, Fr. Josiah Trenham spoke about marriage from an Orthodox perspective and I have found them incredibly helpful as I am currently in search of an Orthodox woman (St. Xenia, pray to God for us! ). They are also very catechetical in nature, too, and would be good at explaining the Orthodox understanding of marriage, procreation, sexuality, etc. He touches on divorce in lecture 4, I believe. I cannot recommend the lectures enough!

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks so much for your post

Sorry to hear about the problems in the Philippines. That’s really a shame.

The Orthodox will allow a MAXIMUM of 3 marriages, not divorces. The Church will not under any circumstances permit another union to occur past 3. A second marriage is allowed occasionally and is usually on the grounds of their spouse having passed away or divorced them due to infidelity. If it is for trivial reasons, then the bishop will more times than not say no. A third marriage is very rare and would only be permitted in certain circumstances. No one is guaranteed a second or third marriage in the Orthodox Church and I get the feeling that some people here think it is.

In his lectures a few years ago, Fr. Josiah Trenham spoke about marriage from an Orthodox perspective and I have found them incredibly helpful as I am currently in search of an Orthodox woman (St. Xenia, pray to God for us! ). They are also very catechetical in nature, too, and would be good at explaining the Orthodox understanding of marriage, procreation, sexuality, etc. He touches on divorce in lecture 4, I believe. I cannot recommend the lectures enough!

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[ConstantineTG]

Of course you can give your opinion as a pinoy, Constantine! You don’t have to ask here, brother!

I actually disagree to a point. I don’t think that filipinos are a virtuous lot who have been spoiled and tainted by Western TV and movies. Filipinos are human beings like anyone else–prone to sin and fallen. They don’t need Americans telling them to have illicit sex. I do get tired of everyone blaming the West or especially Americans for spoiling and ruining the supposedly spotless third world. We could learn a thing or two from them, they could learn a thing or two from us. I do believe that the entire world is opening its heart to sin. It’s no one nation brainwashing or influencing so much as it is a libertine mentality that the entire world has embraced. The Filipinos have a colonial mentality indeed. No argument there. But if you really talk to people in the Phils, this whole out-of-wedlock thing didn’t start ten years ago or when MTV was invented. My wife has a lot of family skeletons she can tell ya that took place in the 1940’s and 50’s that would make ya blush, brother! And it wasn’t General MacCarthur causing them to sin. They did right fine by themselves!

I’m not saying divorce is the answer to stop infidelity and a libertine sexual culture; far from it! I’m merely saying that it is a nation that brags about and lauds its ‘staunch’ adherence to the Catholic teaching against divorce and yet look at the results? And look at the amount of out of wedlock births. Look at the cohabitation rates. Look at the ‘unofficial’ divorces going on. The sadness of these things is happening. So, in the process I would like to see women at least be empowered enough to get a civil divorce and be able to collect alimony and not be at the mercy of deadbeat men who dump them on a whim. Women are almost always the victims and the prey of these machismo dufus deadbeat guys. These men need to at least financially show responsibility in helping to raise these poor children and if not—jail time. And time in a filipino jail is a wakeup call, man! I don’t think divorce will fix morality but it would at least give women civily some say and hope financially.

I see this first-hand. My wife’s middle sister was dumped by her husband leaving her with two teenage boys and a teenage girl. Dumped. She had to work two jobs. While she’s at work he’s in another province on heroin impregnating a couple girls. He now has three kids by a young girl in another province! He spends his days drinking and doing drugs. My wife’s eldest sister was dumped by her husband about fifteen years ago. He now drinks San Miguel beer for a living. Money contributed to help mom raise two girls? Nada.

My wife’s dad left when she was two years old. She never knew him, met him only twice briefly before he died in the early 1990’s. He dumped my wife, her three sisters, and brother. Money chipped in by dad? Nothing. Mom worked as a hair-dresser and they lived in poverty in their barangay that is staggering. My wife grew up in intense poverty. Her dad left a great-paying job to become a professional drinker.

Men need to contribute and do their parts. I have no problem with civil divorce, alimony, and jail time for these dirt bags. Just my fifty cents!

I never said Western influence is solely to blame. The root of the problem is the machismo we inherited from the Spanish. Being manly is such a big thing among men and womanizing is part of flaunting your manliness. More women = more manly. Western influence just made it worse introducing things like living together. Also I hope other people here don’t think every Filipino is this way, we’re also known for being hopeless romantics. I guess depends on the upbringing, the boys in my mom’s family all had “chicks” (the colloquial term for mistress) while the boys in my dad’s family are all faithful.

Back to the topic, I’m curious what the Traditional or Conservative Anglican view is on divorce and remarriage. This may settle this issue whether the ecclesiastical divorce that the Orthodox has would conform more to Anglican belief or not.

 

[JesusforMadrid]

This makes me think of Orthodox Bishop Timothy Ware’s statement that many individual Anglican’s faith may be almost indistinguishable from that of Orthodoxy. I do see alot I like in Orthodoxy. It is some of those recent dogmas that have me uncomfortable with Rome at the moment.

I can’t go to Orthodoxy right now though. I like the 39 articles too much. I’m way too Protestant, somewhat reformed but not completely, western thinking, imputed righteousness/justification. I could never shake that as a Catholic. I have always held onto it. That does not jive well with Orthodox thought. I do like Orthodoxy’s thoughts on sanctification though!

What about the 39 articles do you “like too much”? Are you sure that that is not compatible with Orthodoxy?

For me, the key question is “What is authentic Christianity?” In other words, how *should *the Church that Jesus established *be *today? To answer that I look back to Holy Scripture and the Early Church Fathers. What I discover reading the Apostolic Fathers and other early writings such as St. Clement of Rome, the Didache, St. Ignatius and St. Irenaeus is that they didn’t spend much papyrus writing about justification and imputed righteousness, but did emphasise allowing God to make us Christ-like (a process the Orthodox would call “theosis”). At first I thought “These early Christians are legalistic and just don’t understand grace”, which is a rather arrogant thing to think about the disciples of St. Paul and St. John.

My Holy Spirit was too small.

My views have changed, for I no longer think the “Spirit of Truth, who are in all places and fill all things” would abondon the Early Church.

 

[JohnnyReb]

What about the 39 articles do you “like too much”? Are you sure that that is not compatible with Orthodoxy?

For me, the key question is “What is authentic Christianity?” In other words, how *should *the Church that Jesus established *be *today? To answer that I look back to Holy Scripture and the Early Church Fathers. What I discover reading the Apostolic Fathers and other early writings such as St. Clement of Rome, the Didache, St. Ignatius and St. Irenaeus is that they didn’t spend much papyrus writing about justification and imputed righteousness, but did emphasise allowing God to make us Christ-like (a process the Orthodox would call “theosis”). At first I thought “These early Christians are legalistic and just don’t understand grace”, which is a rather arrogant thing to think about the disciples of St. Paul and St. John.

My Holy Spirit was too small.

My views have changed, for I no longer think the “Spirit of Truth, who are in all places and fill all things” would abondon the Early Church.

While I appreciated the early church fathers, I cannot take them over or instead of the scriptures. They provide much valuable insight into the early church, especially in areas like worship and ecclesialogy.

What I really like about Orthodoxy is, as you point out, their theology of theosis, how the Holy Spirit works to transform us by grace. Often more reformed Protestants make the mistake of treating Christianity like its some kind of legal declaration. While Romas and Galatians seem to support a Protestant view of justification and spend a great amount of time talking about it, justification is just the beginning of Christianity, not the be all end all. What about what comes after justification? Not sure they have a sufficient answer.

In the 39 articles we see a strong support of the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith. Hope that helps.

 

[JesusforMadrid]

While I appreciated the early church fathers, I cannot take them over or instead of the scriptures. They provide much valuable insight into the early church, especially in areas like worship and ecclesialogy.

In the 39 articles we see a strong support of the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith. Hope that helps.

I don’t know anybody who would ascribe more authority to the ECFs than to Holy Scriptures. Orthodoxy doesn’t and instead sees a hierarchy of authority in the writings of the Early Church, with the Bible on top.

The key question is: how can we best understand Scripture? How did the Early Church understand the teachings of the disciples? For the ECFs, justification is only the beginning of our life in Christ. They wrote more about the “two ways” and how to work out our salvation, Who understood Romans better: Clement of Rome, St. Paul’s disciple or Calvin, writing 1500 years later?

Is the 39 Articles more authoritative than the consensus of the Early Church Fathers? If so, you are ineluctably forced to conclude that the Holy Spirit–the Spirit of Truth–abandoned some amazingly Godly men such as Clement who were martyred for the cause of Christ.

I cannot do that. One of the joys of both Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy is not having to conclude that the Holy Spirit allowed the Church to enter into error.

 

[tomarin]

I agree with all you’ve said here. I have experienced a triumphalist anti-Protestant zeal at times that isn’t healthy.

Sorry to hear about your grandmother, Gurney. She’ll be in my prayers.

I have a lot of respect for the kind of Protestants you’re referring to here. I remember when Jerry Falwell (of all people) died I had just gone through my own conversion experience and I reflected on how he had spent almost his entire career devoted to raising awareness of the moral horror of abortion and helped make it a publically-debated issue, and how surely that must please God. How could such a godly man (and I’m sure he was a complicated character, but nevertheless give credit where it’s due) not make it to Heaven despite his non-participation in Catholicism? It would be a pretty unfair system if he didn’t.

As GKC might say, life is complicated.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Usually Evangelical Anglicans tend to passionately wrap their theology around the 39 Articles and hold fast to them as a central roadmap to their Anglican journey. I would agree with you about the Fathers and their opinions being more valid than cats like Zwingli, Calvin, or Bucer, especially since a few of them like Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp actually lived during the close of the apostolic age and are believed to have been disciples of St. John.

Are you saying that you’re considering becoming Catholic or Orthodox, Madrid? Your last statement indicated you are departing evangelical Anglicanism for the Tiber or Bosphorus…

I don’t know anybody who would ascribe more authority to the ECFs than to Holy Scriptures. Orthodoxy doesn’t and instead sees a hierarchy of authority in the writings of the Early Church, with the Bible on top.

The key question is: how can we best understand Scripture? How did the Early Church understand the teachings of the disciples? For the ECFs, justification is only the beginning of our life in Christ. They wrote more about the “two ways” and how to work out our salvation, Who understood Romans better: Clement of Rome, St. Paul’s disciple or Calvin, writing 1500 years later?

Is the 39 Articles more authoritative than the consensus of the Early Church Fathers? If so, you are ineluctably forced to conclude that the Holy Spirit–the Spirit of Truth–abandoned some amazingly Godly men such as Clement who were martyred for the cause of Christ.

I cannot do that. One of the joys of both Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy is not having to conclude that the Holy Spirit allowed the Church to enter into error.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Thanks so much for the prayers, brother! I’m very liberal about God’s grace, mercy, and desire to save. I will say that one aspect of Catholicism that I really DO appreciate is the fact that the catechism takes into account the salvation of non-Catholics and is actually pretty charitable. It is by no means a pharisaic statement of exclusivity of salvation but rather a declaration of the unique truth of Catholicism and yet the reality that not all are privy to, understand, or are exposed to that Catholic truth. Some evangelicals I know believe that EVERYONE who isn’t baptized and even a member of their specific sect will fy in the pits of Hades quickly. Catholicism is more charitable, understanding, and loving to people of different faiths than some give it credit for.

And I agree with your sentiment. Look at the James Dobsons of the world and look at what Protestants like Bush and many Protestant congressional folks have tried to do with stopping stem cells and abortion, homosexuality, etc. Only God knows…

Sorry to hear about your grandmother, Gurney. She’ll be in my prayers.

I have a lot of respect for the kind of Protestants you’re referring to here. I remember when Jerry Falwell (of all people) died I had just gone through my own conversion experience and I reflected on how he had spent almost his entire career devoted to raising awareness of the moral horror of abortion and helped make it a publically-debated issue, and how surely that must please God. How could such a godly man (and I’m sure he was a complicated character, but nevertheless give credit where it’s due) not make it to Heaven despite his non-participation in Catholicism? It would be a pretty unfair system if he didn’t.

As GKC might say, life is complicated.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Although the Orthodox might discourage divorce and remarriage, it is my understanding a given that one might be allowed to be married three times. Yes in these past years it has become easier to get an annulment, but a person still must go through this process and hopefully just going through this will open up one’s eyes to what marriage is. The US is full of liberals and it seems that Pope Benedict is trying to bring back more orthodoxy.

I understand that the Orthodox don’t define doctrines, which to be honest, bothers me. I have asked questions of Orthodox and can’t seem to get a straight answer. Of course I accept that Christ gave Peter the authority to bind doctrines and disciplines on earth. I think that this is the crux of the matter of defining what the Church teaches. Whether one is Eastern Rite Catholic or Latin Rite Catholic we are all equal in the eyes of the Church. We are one body and within this body we express our individual traditions, which to me is a beautiful thing. I know that many Catholics aren’t familiar with the Eastern Rites, nor shall they be with the Anglican Use/Ordinariate. We need the Church to educate all Catholics that there is more than one liturgy and traditions within the Church.

I think that at least in the beginning many Catholics will be critical of the Ordinariates, as they will have no understanding of them, this is also true for the Eastern Rites. My prayer is that in time we will have a better system of teaching the fullness of what it means to be Catholic, including those who are different than the typical Latin Rite Catholics.

I have attended one Eastern Rite liturgy many years ago and felt very welcome. As I have stated trying to put a Western Rite within Orthodoxy doesn’t seem natural to me. It was Antiochian (sp). They had left my former Episcopal church and joined the Orthodox. I found the two experiences very different. I also attended one in Michigan and they were all former Episcopalians and latched on to my daughter and I trying to convince us to join. I am a very private person and really don’t attend church to bring attention to myself. I also found this to be the case when I attended some protestant churches.

I have watched Eastern liturgies and they are beautiful and have brought their own treasures into the Church. The Church is diversified, but one in unity.

God Bless

Bernadette

Bless you too, Bernadette - always a pleasure to read posts written by one so articulate and devoted to God and His Church!

Alex

 

[JesusforMadrid]

Are you saying that you’re considering becoming Catholic or Orthodox, Madrid? Your last statement indicated you are departing evangelical Anglicanism for the Tiber or Bosphorus…

Maybe. We all should take Jn 17:21 “that they may be one” seriously, I think. I would probably go Western Rite Orthodox or maybe Anglican Use Roman Catholic, if I could. But I am Continuing Anglican for now.

But what I meant is that Christians from the RCC and OC at least don’t have the burden of having to conclude that the Holy Body of Christ, his Church, apostatized.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I concur that the idea of the Church teaching error and being tainted by untruths is a tough notion to ponder. The 39 Articles make it clear that all have erred at some time. All churches have erred, including Rome and the East, according to the 39 Articles. But for me, I find the Calvinistic parts of the Articles as difficult to stomach as the idea of Rome erring. Receptionism, a Cranmerian notion, bugs me a great deal.

Maybe. We all should take Jn 17:21 “that they may be one” seriously, I think. I would probably go Western Rite Orthodox or maybe Anglican Use Roman Catholic, if I could. But I am Continuing Anglican for now.

But what I meant is that Christians from the RCC and OC at least don’t have the burden of having to conclude that the Holy Body of Christ, his Church, apostatized.

 

[BernadetteM]

Bless you too, Bernadette - always a pleasure to read posts written by one so articulate and devoted to God and His Church!

Alex

Thank you Alexander, my brother in Christ. It is such a joy to be in Communion with the See of Peter. No longer must I live in turmoil over what doctrine or belief will be changed.

I really do believe that much of the suffering some are going through, questioning every teaching of the Church, lies in the fact that one does not believe in Jesus’s words to Peter. That he is the rock that the Church would be built on and that what so ever he bound on earth would be bound in Heaven. If one can just accept that authority, I think, they will find peace. We are willful human beings and it seems must be in control, when if we let God take over the control we find that peace many are searching for.

I do feel a sadness for those who must question everything and never seem to find the answer. For those who choose a different path than the Catholic Church, they should be at peace with their decision, so I do wonder when posters keep bringing up what they feel as negative in our beliefs, as if they are sure that their choice is the correct one, why be so concerned with what the Catholic Church teaches. I am not concerned when my friends are not Catholic, although I would pray they would someday find the truth I have found. I believe that the Holy Spirit reaches people where they are at and some cannot see what has been shown to me. I am not anyones judge and only have to answer to our Lord for my own life.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette