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

[JohnnyReb]

Johnny, I know that you are aware of my position. I wasn’t trying to convert you to an anti-WO position, friend. But I’m gratified that you are opposed to it as I am. But I think perhaps you haven’t known me long enough to assume I’m a one-issue kinda guy or a simpleton one trick pony. Women’s ordination is AN issue that bothers me about Anglicanism, but goodness not THE only issue. I think I’ve been quite clear and open, above board on this forum about my concerns about the Anglican Communion, women’s ordination being a hot button issue for many (including me) but not the only one by a longshot? I’m sad you’ve reduced me to just this? I’m also confused as to why you’ve reduced me to ONLY obsessed with WO and willing to surrender or not care about all the other issues. When did I say it was MORE important than those other issues?

Maybe I need to be more clear. I wasn’t trying to reduce you or belittle you. I was confused by the tone of your previous post, given your openness about other issues you have with Anglicanism (which let me add are sadly legitmate). It just seemed the tone of it was that WO, and WO by itself, was enough to choose Catholicism. Such a move would be odd to me at best. As far as the other issues are concerned, again that is just was I got from the post. Perhaps I read something into it that wasn’t there. If I did, my bad. Epic fail on my part.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you say you don’t know anyone well enough through a message board to judge or evaluate or critique someone’s heart on these matters. You’re right. I feel the same way. I’ve tried to make it clear that I don’t have all the answers and am searching for them. I’m not convinced that Rome has violated the integrity of the Gospel. I have great respect for Catholicism. And I’m honest when I say that at this point in my life I’m having not a crisis of faith but a crisis of theology. I’m not sure whether I buy into imputation or infusion of grace. I respect the evangelical position oriented toward Romans and Galatians but I also understand the historic infusion model and theosis of the Orthodox. I’m very cynical about indulgences and the treasury of merit, etc. but in the end we all have to decide where we belong in the grand scheme of things. You ignore the fact that I said I was considering possibly returning to Catholicism. I never told you that I’m reporting back tomorrow, film at eleven? I might never go back or I might go this year. I don’t know. I’m praying for the Holy Spirit to guide me.

I pray that you are ready to listen to the Spirit when he speaks and guides. I sympathize with your struggles. I’m still there myself in so many ways. While I love my parish now, I don’t know what the future holds. If I had to guess now, I would say that I’m Anglican for the long haul, and if not that, I will find myself in Orthodoxy, but who knows? Only God. I mean I have so much in common with Catholicism its scary sometimes. Perhaps even I will end up there for the long haul. Maybe this is a season where the Holy Spirit is trying to teach me some things. I do think that maybe I went too far in saying Rome has violated the integrity of the Gospel. I am not sure they have. I have a hard time with those issues, but I have respect for Catholicism. I’m just frustrated by its dogmatic nature and some of the developments that have come from there. That frustration came out, I think.

Your tone about women’s ordination, your verbage chosen, indicates a cynicism yourself about the anti-WO position almost as if you yourself are fine with it but you’re YIELDING to the reason and logic of 2,000 years of tradition. In other words, you’re looking at the Church and saying it might be wiser than Johnny. Please respect me when I say the Catholic Church might be wiser than Gurney and I might return and decide to accept some doctrines on faith as well.

I think you dead on here and I understand where you are coming from!

You know me by now that I try to be fair and charitable and open minded to Protestants and Catholics. I’m not a polemical hot-head who leans all the way in extreme directions. I’m not sure how much we see things differently, Johnny. I guess we’ll find out as we continue to post and hopefully learn from one another. I learn PLENTY in here listening to teh wisdom of so many great posters. May God bless you.

Bless you too man. I respect you alot. You and others here are why I come to this site, to talk with people who have similar struggles and frankly don’t act like this kind of discussion is way over their head. I try to speak my mind always, but I am actually very insecure about that, even over the interwebs. I felt like I took a big risk in my previous post saying what I did. In writing I am much more blunt than in person. In person, I am easy going and far less bold. My friend compared it to the Apostle Paul, who was rediculed for being strong in letter but timid in person.

 

[GKC]

So then you would oppose that to things like purgatory of indulgences which don’t, I guess? That I suppose is true, but they lead to incredibly unhealthy spiritual practices. On the face of it that may be a small thing, but I’m not sure if that is actually so.

I think it is a far different thing.

Whatever you feel about purgatory and indulgences, it addresses the bene esse of the Church, not the esse.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Hi Johnny,

Well personally I’m THRILLED you’re here and never miss one of your posts. I read them all and find you a kindred spirit as well. I deeply appreciate your kind words in this post and your “online friendship.” I’m a pretty fair-minded person and I hate to see people who are not intellectually honest. It’s my biggest pet-peeve. (sp?) On another thread I had to just bail because I got so fed up with the anti-Lutheran rancor in there. You are indeed courageous to express your faith and struggles openly in here as it will occasionally meet with a royal smack-down from polemical tribalistic types but overall I think there are some awesome Catholics in here and this forum is very friendly to all allowing all views. It’s my favorite forum online period.

No harm done in your post. You didn’t anger me at all, so don’t worry. I just wanted to make my positions clear to you because I consider you a great poster and I want you to know how I really feel. I’d hate to think you see me as a one-issue dude!

I do have to say, however, that if the Diocese of San Joaquin, the Anglican Diocese to which I belong at this time, did go for women’s ordination, I would swiftly be gone to either Catholicism or heck maybe Lutheran Church Missouri Synod! I’ve been around these folks because my son goes to a Lutheran school and I love the Lutherans. What amazing people. They are so faithful and I appreciate their sacramental views. Interestingly enough they are more historical and orthodox in their view of the Eucharist than Anglicans! I was reading their order of worship while we were waiting for the Christmas Musical my son was in and boy it’s a beautiful worship service. The wording is much like the Book of Common Prayer.

There are things I miss about Catholicism, no doubt. I miss confession. To be honest, I found it a powerful sacrament. I miss the uniformity of worship also. I miss the holy water and sacred art and the unity.

But I am still troubled by several things that impede my return, no doubt about it. And just when I seem to solve one problem, another replaces it.

My wife and I were talking the other day about novenas, for example. Why does one spend all those days flattering saints? It feels like saint flattery, “Oh holy St. Jude. Oh cousin of Our Lord. Great martyr, holy apostle, patron saint of the hopeless, healer of illnesses, powerful saint, mighty soldier for Christ” on and on…it’s like the Christian is trying to flatter the saint into getting the person’s wish. Why not just pray directly to Christ? Sometimes I feel so evangelical

Maybe I need to be more clear. I wasn’t trying to reduce you or belittle you. I was confused by the tone of your previous post, given your openness about other issues you have with Anglicanism (which let me add are sadly legitmate). It just seemed the tone of it was that WO, and WO by itself, was enough to choose Catholicism. Such a move would be odd to me at best. As far as the other issues are concerned, again that is just was I got from the post. Perhaps I read something into it that wasn’t there. If I did, my bad. Epic fail on my part.

I pray that you are ready to listen to the Spirit when he speaks and guides. I sympathize with your struggles. I’m still there myself in so many ways. While I love my parish now, I don’t know what the future holds. If I had to guess now, I would say that I’m Anglican for the long haul, and if not that, I will find myself in Orthodoxy, but who knows? Only God. I mean I have so much in common with Catholicism its scary sometimes. Perhaps even I will end up there for the long haul. Maybe this is a season where the Holy Spirit is trying to teach me some things. I do think that maybe I went too far in saying Rome has violated the integrity of the Gospel. I am not sure they have. I have a hard time with those issues, but I have respect for Catholicism. I’m just frustrated by its dogmatic nature and some of the developments that have come from there. That frustration came out, I think.

I think you dead on here and I understand where you are coming from!

Bless you too man. I respect you alot. You and others here are why I come to this site, to talk with people who have similar struggles and frankly don’t act like this kind of discussion is way over their head. I try to speak my mind always, but I am actually very insecure about that, even over the interwebs. I felt like I took a big risk in my previous post saying what I did. In writing I am much more blunt than in person. In person, I am easy going and far less bold. My friend compared it to the Apostle Paul, who was rediculed for being strong in letter but timid in person.

 

[GKC]

Hi Johnny,

Well personally I’m THRILLED you’re here and never miss one of your posts. I read them all and find you a kindred spirit as well. I deeply appreciate your kind words in this post and your “online friendship.” I’m a pretty fair-minded person and I hate to see people who are not intellectually honest. It’s my biggest pet-peeve. (sp?) On another thread I had to just bail because I got so fed up with the anti-Lutheran rancor in there. You are indeed courageous to express your faith and struggles openly in here as it will occasionally meet with a royal smack-down from polemical tribalistic types but overall I think there are some awesome Catholics in here and this forum is very friendly to all allowing all views. It’s my favorite forum online period.

No harm done in your post. You didn’t anger me at all, so don’t worry. I just wanted to make my positions clear to you because I consider you a great poster and I want you to know how I really feel. I’d hate to think you see me as a one-issue dude!

I do have to say, however, that if the Diocese of San Joaquin, the Anglican Diocese to which I belong at this time, did go for women’s ordination, I would swiftly be gone to either Catholicism or heck maybe Lutheran Church Missouri Synod! I’ve been around these folks because my son goes to a Lutheran school and I love the Lutherans. What amazing people. They are so faithful and I appreciate their sacramental views. Interestingly enough they are more historical and orthodox in their view of the Eucharist than Anglicans! I was reading their order of worship while we were waiting for the Christmas Musical my son was in and boy it’s a beautiful worship service. The wording is much like the Book of Common Prayer.

There are things I miss about Catholicism, no doubt. I miss confession. To be honest, I found it a powerful sacrament. I miss the uniformity of worship also. I miss the holy water and sacred art and the unity.

But I am still troubled by several things that impede my return, no doubt about it. And just when I seem to solve one problem, another replaces it.

My wife and I were talking the other day about novenas, for example. Why does one spend all those days flattering saints? It feels like saint flattery, “Oh holy St. Jude. Oh cousin of Our Lord. Great martyr, holy apostle, patron saint of the hopeless, healer of illnesses, powerful saint, mighty soldier for Christ” on and on…it’s like the Christian is trying to flatter the saint into getting the person’s wish. Why not just pray directly to Christ? Sometimes I feel so evangelical

Still don’t understand why you don’t go to confession. Can’t find a priest?

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Do you mean an Anglican priest as a confessor?

Still don’t understand why you don’t go to confession. Can’t find a priest?

GKC

 

[GKC]

Do you mean an Anglican priest as a confessor?

Yes. I got a couple here you can use; Advent confessions are being scheduled, at this time .

And the only time I miss Holy Water is if I’m not looking at the font when I reach out.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I still have not had any Anglican or otherwise give me a satisfactory answer to this question of mine:

Anglicans believe that sins are forgiven during the group absolution phase of the Mass. Confession is “all may, some should, none must.” Anglicans claim to be part of the historic catholic faith, especially Anglo-Catholics. The historic Church in both Orthodoxy of the East and Catholicism in the West BOTH affirm that confession is necessary and the penitential rite is only good for small and venial type sins. If a person has committed serious, mortal, or hurtful sins that harm the soul or estrange one from God, then the penitential rite is totally insufficient and auricular confession is mandatory.

If this is true in East and West then why do Anglicans choose to depart from this praxis and choose a more informal and easy route that seems a huge change? Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals seem very lax on this issue and don’t seem to think it’s very important when I ask why…?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Father James has made it clear that they only time we’ll EVER see holy water is when we have baptisms! He’s not a fan! He’s always talking about sacred art as idolotrous so when I met with him a week ago to discuss my spiritual crisis I pointed out how much I liked his GREEK ICONS AND CRUCIFIX AS WELL AS MARY HOLDING BABY JESUS OIL PAINTINGS!

Yes. I got a couple here you can use; Advent confessions are being scheduled, at this time .

And the only time I miss Holy Water is if I’m not looking at the font when I reach out.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Father James has made it clear that they only time we’ll EVER see holy water is when we have baptisms! He’s not a fan! He’s always talking about sacred art as idolotrous so when I met with him a week ago to discuss my spiritual crisis I pointed out how much I liked his GREEK ICONS AND CRUCIFIX AS WELL AS MARY HOLDING BABY JESUS OIL PAINTINGS!

Well, what can I say. I contributed a Holy Water container for the church sacristy, and paid for the painting of an icon of the saint for which our college chapel is named, so I got it all, here.

Maybe you’re on the wrong coast.

GKC

 

[GKC]

I still have not had any Anglican or otherwise give me a satisfactory answer to this question of mine:

Anglicans believe that sins are forgiven during the group absolution phase of the Mass. Confession is “all may, some should, none must.” Anglicans claim to be part of the historic catholic faith, especially Anglo-Catholics. The historic Church in both Orthodoxy of the East and Catholicism in the West BOTH affirm that confession is necessary and the penitential rite is only good for small and venial type sins. If a person has committed serious, mortal, or hurtful sins that harm the soul or estrange one from God, then the penitential rite is totally insufficient and auricular confession is mandatory.

If this is true in East and West then why do Anglicans choose to depart from this praxis and choose a more informal and easy route that seems a huge change? Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals seem very lax on this issue and don’t seem to think it’s very important when I ask why…?

Orthodox and Anglicans share a view of the role of the Papacy that differs from the RCC.

Catholics, all.

Go to confession. Nihil obstat. Don’t worry about those other folk.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It’s not that I’m worried about other folks, I just like to try and understand the thinking of the Anglican church on this issue? Orthodox and Catholics have a clear teaching and are consistent with the historical understanding of the penitential process but it seems even Anglo-Catholics within Anglicanism seem to have departed from history on this? Anglicans, especially Anglo-Catholics, claim to be a branch of the OHCAC then why such a huge departure from orthodoxy in this dept?

Orthodox and Anglicans share a view of the role of the Papacy that differs from the RCC.

Catholics, all.

Go to confession. Nihil obstat. Don’t worry about those other folk.

GKC

 

[GKC]

It’s not that I’m worried about other folks, I just like to try and understand the thinking of the Anglican church on this issue? Orthodox and Catholics have a clear teaching and are consistent with the historical understanding of the penitential process but it seems even Anglo-Catholics within Anglicanism seem to have departed from history on this? Anglicans, especially Anglo-Catholics, claim to be a branch of the OHCAC then why such a huge departure from orthodoxy in this dept?

Understand? Thinking? Anglican Church?

RC and Orthodox have clear thinking on the Holy See, too. Not much convergence there.

Go to confession. You’re starting to worry me.

GKC

 

[Bluegoat]

It’s not that I’m worried about other folks, I just like to try and understand the thinking of the Anglican church on this issue? Orthodox and Catholics have a clear teaching and are consistent with the historical understanding of the penitential process but it seems even Anglo-Catholics within Anglicanism seem to have departed from history on this? Anglicans, especially Anglo-Catholics, claim to be a branch of the OHCAC then why such a huge departure from orthodoxy in this dept?

I don’t know the answer to this. I think it is a mistake. I do know someone I can ask though, so maybe I can find a good answer.

I do know that private confession is much more common among Anglo-Catholics. Most of the priests I knew as a student used it themselves, and would provide it to those who asked. I think that this has been lessening in recent years - honestly I suspect a lot of Anglo-Catholics aren’t - they are Anglicans who like fancy dress.

If your priest isn’t keen, I would ask him to find you a confessor - given the “all can” bit he really would have to I think. There might be a retired old-school Anglican priest around in the weeds somewhere who would be willing to be your regular confessor. It wouldn’t matter if he had been with TEC or whatever. Another possibility might be a priest in a monastery if you could find such a person.

Anglican confession can be a bit different - it isn’t usually anonymous, and they don’t go in for the list of sins thing some Catholics use, and the idea behind penance is different.

 

[Bluegoat]

I think it is a far different thing.

Whatever you feel about purgatory and indulgences, it addresses the bene esse of the Church, not the esse.

GKC

Yes different. I think both are very bad. Purgatory (as understood by the CC) and indulgences speak to a particular understanding of salvation, which to my mind is very much a matter of the esse.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Why make such a statement? Worry you? I fail so see how?

Understand? Thinking? Anglican Church?

RC and Orthodox have clear thinking on the Holy See, too. Not much convergence there.

Go to confession. You’re starting to worry me.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

or well being vs. being. English is a great language, Jim. I still think you’d make a great Roman Catholic. God knows our penchant for Latin would serve you well. English! English! Didn’t you learn anything from the Reformation!? English!

I think it is a far different thing.

Whatever you feel about purgatory and indulgences, it addresses the bene esse of the Church, not the esse.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Why make such a statement? Worry you? I fail so see how?

'Cause you;re not going to confession and it worries you.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

That’s not it. I’m trying to UNDERSTAND the Anglican mindset about it. That’s mainly it. I’m not worried so much. I’m just not happy about how I cannot understand some of the variables of Anglicanism that bug me. This is one of them. If I were to go to the Lutheran Church, this wouldn’t bug me. Why? Because Lutherans are very consistent in their view of confession and why it is optional. Anglicans have never really done much of a good job explaining why it’s optional with them? When I read the Staley book he makes it sound imperative that a good Anglican use the “sacrament” of Confession frequently. In fact, he argues that Anglicanism has retained all “seven” sacraments including the crucial penance/confession sacrament and that is what makes Anglicanism “catholic.” So when I turn and read the majority Anglican opinion that it’s really just for people who are ill at ease and need reassurance, I scratch my head? It seems like confession is more of a reassurance for a troubled soul rather than a vital, life-giving Sacrament. It’s as if to say, “Look, Sam, God has already forgiven your sins, wiped them away, and you’re clean as a spotless lamb now. But because you’re overly-scrupulous, you need reassurance. So, come to Father Jones’ office tomorrow and hear absolution to set your mind at ease.”

In Catholicism and Orthodox this angle is totally foreign.

So I’m really about understanding, not troubled-minded paranoia

'Cause you;re not going to confession and it worries you.

GKC

 

[GKC]

That’s not it. I’m trying to UNDERSTAND the Anglican mindset about it. That’s mainly it. I’m not worried so much. I’m just not happy about how I cannot understand some of the variables of Anglicanism that bug me. This is one of them. If I were to go to the Lutheran Church, this wouldn’t bug me. Why? Because Lutherans are very consistent in their view of confession and why it is optional. Anglicans have never really done much of a good job explaining why it’s optional with them? When I read the Staley book he makes it sound imperative that a good Anglican use the “sacrament” of Confession frequently. In fact, he argues that Anglicanism has retained all “seven” sacraments including the crucial penance/confession sacrament and that is what makes Anglicanism “catholic.” So when I turn and read the majority Anglican opinion that it’s really just for people who are ill at ease and need reassurance, I scratch my head? It seems like confession is more of a reassurance for a troubled soul rather than a vital, life-giving Sacrament. It’s as if to say, “Look, Sam, God has already forgiven your sins, wiped them away, and you’re clean as a spotless lamb now. But because you’re overly-scrupulous, you need reassurance. So, come to Father Jones’ office tomorrow and hear absolution to set your mind at ease.”

In Catholicism and Orthodox this angle is totally foreign.

So I’m really about understanding, not troubled-minded paranoia

In Anglicanism, auricular confession is for any who need it, when they need it.

Go.

GKC

 

[JohnnyReb]

I still have not had any Anglican or otherwise give me a satisfactory answer to this question of mine:

Anglicans believe that sins are forgiven during the group absolution phase of the Mass. Confession is “all may, some should, none must.” Anglicans claim to be part of the historic catholic faith, especially Anglo-Catholics. The historic Church in both Orthodoxy of the East and Catholicism in the West BOTH affirm that confession is necessary and the penitential rite is only good for small and venial type sins. If a person has committed serious, mortal, or hurtful sins that harm the soul or estrange one from God, then the penitential rite is totally insufficient and auricular confession is mandatory.

If this is true in East and West then why do Anglicans choose to depart from this praxis and choose a more informal and easy route that seems a huge change? Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals seem very lax on this issue and don’t seem to think it’s very important when I ask why…?

Good question. Very good question. All I can speak towards is even the Catholic Church believes that venial sins are forgiven in the Mass. Only Mortal sins must be confessed (although confessing venial sins at confession is beneficial). Anglican Christianity rejects the distinction of venial vs mortal sin, so confession is never necessary. I know that doesn’t help but that is my answer…LOL