Anglican Monastic Congregations

[Memento_Mori]

Hi , i think someone else posted a similar thread about this issue , if that is the case, my apologies , but that person forgot to include the links that explain who are these congregations :

holycrossmonastery.com/index.html

freepages.religions.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~oakcottagefamily/AllSaintsConvent/

stmaryseast.org/

saintgregorysthreerivers.org/

ssje.org/ ( im not quite sure if this one is roman catholic or anglican )

I wonder why after the attacks religious orders had suffered under english reformation …why now the anglican church had permitted them …i also believe that they follow the anglo-catholic traditionalist way instead of the american episcopalian liberalism …

even thought they are anglicans i found them CLOSER to the Roman Catholicism then ever before …look they are our LOST BOTHERS and i happy that we had founded them

 

[Nine_Two]

The Anglican Church tolerates them now simply because the Anglican Church will tolerate anything now.

 

[BernadetteM]

I don’t know what one considers new, but religious orders have been around for at least 60 years or more in the Anglican Communion.

One order has just entered the Catholic Church and will be entering the Ordinariate.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[BernadetteM]

All Saints Sisters of the Poor is the order that has entered the Catholic Church.

Bernadette

 

[GKC]

I don’t know what one considers new, but religious orders have been around for at least 60 years or more in the Anglican Communion.

One order has just entered the Catholic Church and will be entering the Ordinariate.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

More, as you suggest. More like 160 years.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

GKC is correct. They are not just now “tolerating” them. There’ve been such congregations for a long time.

The Anglican Church tolerates them now simply because the Anglican Church will tolerate anything now.

 

[Nine_Two]

GKC is correct. They are not just now “tolerating” them. There’ve been such congregations for a long time.

Yes, but regardless it is an about-face from early-Anglican policy.

 

[BernadetteM]

The first monastic order for women in the Anglican church was started in 1841.

That was 169 years ago. Just because the Anglican Communion does tolerate anything today, that has nothing whatsover to do with Anglican religious orders.

I really don’t see your connection.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[Nine_Two]

The first monastic order for women in the Anglican church was started in 1841.

That was 169 years ago. Just because the Anglican Communion does tolerate anything today, that has nothing whatsover to do with Anglican religious orders.

I really don’t see your connection.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

I misspoke (or rather miswrote) before, I did not mean to say they are allowed because anything goes, although certainly looking over it again it certainly appears that is what I was saying.

I would clarify what I was trying to say, but I realize now it is something that would have best been left unsaid, my apologies for any offense given (to anyone).

 

[Matthew_Holford]

ssje.org/ ( im not quite sure if this one is roman catholic or anglican )

99% sure they’re Anglican. You’ll notice on their website the order’s magazine is called Cowley and there is an Anglican Order called the Society of St. John the Evangelist which is headquartered in Cowley a suburb of the English city of Oxford.

 

[GKC]

99% sure they’re Anglican. You’ll notice on their website the order’s magazine is called Cowley and there is an Anglican Order called the Society of St. John the Evangelist which is headquartered in Cowley a suburb of the English city of Oxford.

Also known as the Cowley Fathers.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

As long as it’s not Aleister! I know, I know…it’s Crowley not Cowley…

Also known as the Cowley Fathers.

GKC

 

[GKC]

As long as it’s not Aleister! I know, I know…it’s Crowley not Cowley…

Do what thou wilt…

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

LOL! That guy was a real nut. It always cracked me up how Jimmy Page bought his castle because it was supposedly near the loch ness monster and was haunted! LOL…talk about some real estate I wouldn’t be interested in!

Do what thou wilt…

GKC

 

[GKC]

LOL! That guy was a real nut. It always cracked me up how Jimmy Page bought his castle because it was supposedly near the loch ness monster and was haunted! LOL…talk about some real estate I wouldn’t be interested in!

I’d have it steam-cleaned, at least.

Given your (our) liking for Tolkien, and your mention of Crowley, I will mention that a friend of mine did a graphic novel in which Tolkien and Lewis, led by Charles Williams (historically the best choice), confront Crowley:

amazon.com/Heavens-War-Micah-Harris/dp/1582403309

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

That is one heck of a weird premise for a graphic novel I must say! Weird! I do like Tolkien a lot. I haven’t read much Lewis, just a bit of Narnia. I found Narnia tedious and bland. But from the excerpts I’ve read of Screwtape and some others, Lewis sounds intriguing. I think we all know where Crowley ended up! Let’s just say he better like warm temperatures!

I’d have it steam-cleaned, at least.

Given your (our) liking for Tolkien, and your mention of Crowley, I will mention that a friend of mine did a graphic novel in which Tolkien and Lewis, led by Charles Williams (historically the best choice), confront Crowley:

amazon.com/Heavens-War-Micah-Harris/dp/1582403309

 

[GKC]

That is one heck of a weird premise for a graphic novel I must say! Weird! I do like Tolkien a lot. I haven’t read much Lewis, just a bit of Narnia. I found Narnia tedious and bland. But from the excerpts I’ve read of Screwtape and some others, Lewis sounds intriguing. I think we all know where Crowley ended up! Let’s just say he better like warm temperatures!

You might find Williams a bit of a surprise.

GKC