Anglican Church? Really confused.

[GKC]

This fact alone should pretty much end the discussion regarding Anglicanism. Why on earth would one follow a religion founded on one man’s lust and greed? It just does not make sense.

At least Luther and Calvin originally split over theological principles (wrong as they were) rather than selfishness.

I’m in a bit of a hurry this morning, so only a brief observation. I find Henry a fascinating train wreck. But I’m guessing you don’t know a lot about his quest for a decree of nullity, or how the system of impediments, dispensations and decrees of nullity worked, in the early 16th century.

GKC

 

[GKC]

“Right. We admit this, you don’t. At least you try not to. In recent years reality has been catching up with you, and you have nuanced your belief in the unity of the Church to the point that the difference between your view and ours (at least mine–admittedly I have a stronger view of the authority of the See of Rome than most Anglicans) takes a lot of explaining.”

I’m with you, on this one.

GKC

posterus traditus Anglicanus

 

[Subrosa]

I am sure this has been brought up before, but I would like some quick thoughts on this.
Last nite I was at my Daughters Volley Ball game. My ex mother-in-law was there with her husband. She has been having some medical problems so I asked how she was doing…some small talk and so on. Then I told her I have been going to Mass on a regular basis, which she was shocked.

Then she told me she has been going to this angelican Church with her husband. What? I said. I thought you were Catholic, I said. Then her husband sat down next to me and started to basically try and recruit me.

They dont believe in the Assumption, they do not follow the Popes word and they preach mostly from the Bible. He also said they say the same prayers, have Communion and all the other things us Catholics do.

He talked to me the whole time at the game. Trying to get me to come to their Church. I said, but not recognizing the Pope and folowing the Catholic Catechism is a sin. He laughed.

Then he went on about Gay priests in the Episcopal Religion and how they left the Church…blah blah blah.

When I left that place, I was like totally confused. It was like they are Catholic but not. He wants me to come to their Church and said I will like it better.

I will not go. My faith is with the Roman Catholic Church and thats it. PERIOD Who are these people? Sorry for being so long winded.
Did they just decide to do what they want?

You should let him know that the head of the Anglican Church is the Queen of England. She is the one who installs bishops.

Then let him know that the Pope is a ministry installed by Christ Himself (Mt 16:13-19)

I think that you can follow through with that!

Subrosa

 

[rr1213]

Yes, but people ought to have enough sense not to judge an entire group of Christians by one man , however loud and obnoxious he may be.
Edwin

In a perfect world, sure, but there remains a number of problems with this. Spong, of course, is also a media hound and the media are more than willing to give him his 15 minutes of glory…and much, much more, precisely because he is so controversial. More importantly is the Episcopal Church’s failure to discipline the man when he’s gone so far outside of orthodox Christianity. It is one thing when a Bishop “goes bad”…it’s another thing when the Church does nothing to deal with such a Bishop. In that case, which is the case of the Episcopal Church, blame should rightfully be laid at the side of the Episcopal Church as well as the Bishop in error.

 

[GKC]

You should let him know that the head of the Anglican Church is the Queen of England. She is the one who installs bishops.

Then let him know that the Pope is a ministry installed by Christ Himself (Mt 16:13-19)

I think that you can follow through with that!

Subrosa

Subrosa, I think we’ve been through this before. The monarch of Great Britain is the titular head of the Church of England. The Queen has nothing to do with the other 37 self-governing provinces of the Anglican Communion. In the Episcopal Church, USA, for example, the bishops are elected, without reference to any agency or personage outside the Episcopal Church.

I know Anglicanism is complicated. But take my word for it. The Queen is the supreme governor of the Church of England, nothing else.

GKC

 

[tomarin]

This fact alone should pretty much end the discussion regarding Anglicanism. Why on earth would one follow a religion founded on one man’s lust and greed? It just does not make sense.

At least Luther and Calvin originally split over theological principles (wrong as they were) rather than selfishness.

i’ve often thought the same thing, but to be fair, i think most protestants believe that their religious groupings were founded by Christ, not men, within the context of the Reformation and the institutional corruption of the catholic church of that era. i don’t buy it either, but that’s how they justify founding a church “on one man’s lust and greed”.

i’m enough of an ecumenicist to believe we shouldn’t be unduly antagonistic to the anglicans/episcopalians in our midst. after all they’re the most catholic-friendly of the protestant denominations.

i’ve been to not-a-few anglican or episcopalian bookstores that stock more books by catholic writers than protestant ones. there must be some common bond there and we should probably build on it (without neglecting to make clear our own beliefs and convictions in a forthright manner, of course).

they say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. and you catch more bees with honey than vinegar. ok, i’m out of cliches now.

 

[tomarin]

Authority is a problem in Anglicanism. But it’s clearly a problem in Catholicism as well. It is all very clearcut on paper, but I’m not really interested in a “paper church,” to adopt and reverse a telling phrase of Newman’s.

with all due respect, edwin, i think you’re conflating authority and discipline here. orthodox catholicism (or as i like to think of it, “catholicism” tout court) doesn’t have a problem with authority. it may have a problem with discipline, but there are many signs that that appears to be diminishing as the dust settles from the liturgical reforms of vatican 2 and lingering confusion is dispelled by clear and consistent church teaching.

 

[tomarin]

Among other things, the impression of others is shaped by Bishop Spong who, in his latest incarnations, may reasonably not even be described as Christian let alone non-trinitarian.

who is bishop spong and why is he so controversial? i’ve seen his books on the shelves of my local bookstore. is he a garden-variety modernist perhaps?

 

[AgnosTheist]

However, we Anglicans do not believe that God has called all people to be Anglicans, so we have no business proselytizing for Anglicanism among members of other parts of the Church.

Oooh, so anglicans dont have the common christian diseased mentality of “we are the only true church”. Awright!

 

[tomarin]

Oooh, so anglicans dont have the common christian diseased mentality of “we are the only true church”. Awright!

that’s true of most if not all protestants. that’s why when you go from one denomination to another you don’t need to “convert”, you just join their “church”, that is, register as a member with their church (that’s small “c” church, as in, the building and it’s people).

 

[rr1213]

who is bishop spong and why is he so controversial? i’ve seen his books on the shelves of my local bookstore. is he a garden-variety modernist perhaps?

I think you can get a sense from the Wikipedia article.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong

I’m fairly confident that if he had been a Bishop in the Catholic Church he would have been disciplined a long time ago. That would be to your Church’s credit.

 

[Contarini]

with all due respect, edwin, i think you’re conflating authority and discipline here. orthodox catholicism (or as i like to think of it, “catholicism” tout court) doesn’t have a problem with authority. it may have a problem with discipline, but there are many signs that that appears to be diminishing as the dust settles from the liturgical reforms of vatican 2 and lingering confusion is dispelled by clear and consistent church teaching.

I don’t think I’m confusing them–I think Catholics distinguish them artificially.

Authority is a living, active thing. If it’s just a paper procedure then shucks, we have authority too.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

i’ve often thought the same thing, but to be fair, i think most protestants believe that their religious groupings were founded by Christ, not men, within the context of the Reformation and the institutional corruption of the catholic church of that era.

Well, Anglicans would by and large say that our church (the small “c” is very important) was founded by St. Augustine of Canterbury in 596. And he was, of course, a man. And, of course, he was part of the Catholic Church–sent by a Pope in fact. (We can also talk about British Christianity before the Saxon invasions, but organizationally St. Augustine is the best place to start.)

Separation from Rome is, to us, one incident in our history, not the decisive moment. Many of us consider it unfortunate and are quite willing to shoulder much of the blame. But the question now is how the division can be reconciled without our giving up whatever is true and good in the distinct tradition we have developed in the past 500 years.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

In a perfect world, sure, but there remains a number of problems with this. Spong, of course, is also a media hound and the media are more than willing to give him his 15 minutes of glory…and much, much more, precisely because he is so controversial. More importantly is the Episcopal Church’s failure to discipline the man when he’s gone so far outside of orthodox Christianity. It is one thing when a Bishop “goes bad”…it’s another thing when the Church does nothing to deal with such a Bishop. In that case, which is the case of the Episcopal Church, blame should rightfully be laid at the side of the Episcopal Church as well as the Bishop in error.

I’m all in favor of laying blame at the door of the Episcopal Church. What I’m criticizing is the simple equation of “one retired bishop says X and is not disciplined for it” with “the Episcopal Church teaches X.”

If you [people in general, not you personally] want to know what the Episcopal Church teaches, read the 1979 Book of Common Prayer.

Edwin

 

[tomarin]

I don’t think I’m confusing them–I think Catholics distinguish them artificially.

Authority is a living, active thing. If it’s just a paper procedure then shucks, we have authority too.

Edwin

i’m no good at predictions, but if we revisited this issue in a decade and what i call a discipline problem and you call an authority problem has tightened (that is, more and more wayward clergy, theologians and laypeople have gotten in line behind orthodox teachings) will you feel the need to revise your views?

 

[Contarini]

i’m no good at predictions, but if we revisited this issue in a decade and what i call a discipline problem and you call an authority problem has tightened (that is, more and more wayward clergy, theologians and laypeople have gotten in line behind orthodox teachings) will you feel the need to revise your views?

Why would it make any difference? I will simply see that as the Catholic Church implementing a stricter view of authority.

For that matter, I don’t particularly want the Catholic Church to crack down. I think that this is the wrong approach, and that the relatively gentle, teaching-based approach of recent Popes is much wiser than the harsh authoritarianism many conservatives want. My point is simply that authority is more complex than many folks working off a paper scheme make it sound. If you can point to the fact that our reliance on patristic authority and consensus doesn’t always pan out well in practice, I can point to similar practical problems with your view.

Edwin

 

[East_Anglican]

I’m not confused. Those who think ordaining homosexual priest is ok and call sin a gift from God are the ones who are confused. Do not go to such an establishment that adheres to such nonsense!. Their Eucharist is a mere social gathering. They are noot a church but a social club for wierd people.

Rome isn’t the hoar of Babylon! They are!

Thank God I’m in England.

 

[Contarini]

I’m not confused. Those who think ordaining homosexual priest is ok and call sin a gift from God are the ones who are confused. Do not go to such an establishment that adheres to such nonsense!. Their Eucharist is a mere social gathering. They are noot a church but a social club for wierd people.

Rome isn’t the hoar of Babylon! They are!

Thank God I’m in England.

And you seriously claim that you don’t have homosexual priests or a theology that sees homosexuality as a gift from God in England?

I agree that this teaching has less official status than it is coming to have in America, and it would certainly be easier for me to stay Anglican if I lived in England. But I think your dichotomy is a tad complacent and naive!

Edwin

 

[rr1213]

I’m all in favor of laying blame at the door of the Episcopal Church. What I’m criticizing is the simple equation of “one retired bishop says X and is not disciplined for it” with “the Episcopal Church teaches X.”
Edwin

A valid point.

If you [people in general, not you personally] want to know what the Episcopal Church teaches, read the 1979 Book of Common Prayer.
Edwin

Well, reading the 1979 BCP would give someone a good idea of what the Episcopal Church teaches through it’s liturgy, but less than an adequate idea as to what the Episcopal Church teaches generally, i.e., the positions taken at General Council or, more importantly, the theology expounded upon from the pulpit. As we know, the latter varies very considerably.

 

[tomarin]

For that matter, I don’t particularly want the Catholic Church to crack down. I think that this is the wrong approach, and that the relatively gentle, teaching-based approach of recent Popes is much wiser than the harsh authoritarianism many conservatives want.

i’m not in favor of harsh authoritarianism, i just think it would be desirable if all catholics even nominal and incompletely formed ones had a proper understanding of, and respect for, the weight of the church’s teaching authority with respect to faith and morals. that desired clarity is not well served by, for example, allowing catholic universities sponsor workshops on contraception by planned parenthood!

My point is simply that authority is more complex than many folks working off a paper scheme make it sound. If you can point to the fact that our reliance on patristic authority and consensus doesn’t always pan out well in practice, I can point to similar practical problems with your view.

food for thought. it seems like there’s no way to convince you that your “paper scheme” does a disservice to the reality of catholicism, but i will keep trying.

i’m reminded of a passage in chesterton’s “orthodoxy” in which he singles out the Church for straddling paradoxes (if that’s the right phrase): too peaceful for some, too warlike for others; too sexually restrictive for some, too pro-fertility for others. likewise i feel that some non-catholic christians accuse us of being simultaneously too centralized and authoritarian while others accuse us of lacking that same authority.