Anglican vs Episcopal

  • Thread starter Thread starter hermit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
pipper said:
Yes I know all of that, I was trying for a short overlook. I know of the Scots reformation and John Knox who liked to insult his annointed Queen Mary, calling her a “Papist whore” and worse, and I know that Elizabeth had her beheaded. Those were bloody times in history in general.

Many Protestants like to go on about Foxes Book of Martyr, and yet like to ignore or gloss over the many English Catholic martyrs who were beheaded on Elizabeth’s orders.

I was merely trying to help people keep the dynasties straight, hope that passes your inspection. I am sorry but if you read the posts you would know that I am mentally challeged since I had a bad stroke. I think I am doimg fairly well under the circumstances.

Tell me, have YOU had a stroke, are YOU mentally challenged?

Trying to have patience and Christian Charity, Pip
Click to expand...
It’s not likely that Gottle saw that. I only knew it because it was in a thread with posts between you and me.

Both my parents had dibilitating strokes. Hang in there, Pip.

GKC
 
GKC, thanks a lot. It really gets frustrating on here for me at times. I just finished responding to a “Catholic Christian” who really let me have ot with both barrels about “political correctness” etc, including the Americans With Dissabilies act which he seems to despise.

I got so angry responding to such junk, I could barely type. Is it any wonder that I lean left?

I know this is very unchartible to say, but at times I wish people like him could be struck with their own disabillites.

God have mercy on my soul.
 
pipper said:
GKC, thanks a lot. It really gets frustrating on here for me at times. I just finished responding to a “Catholic Christian” who really let me have ot with both barrels about “political correctness” etc, including the Americans With Dissabilies act which he seems to despise.

I got so angry responding to such junk, I could barely type. Is it any wonder that I lean left?

I know this is very unchartible to say, but at times I wish people like him could be struck with their own disabillites.

God have mercy on my soul.
Click to expand...
So say we all. Anyone fighting that condition has my prayers. I’ve seen it, up close.

GKC
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:
##s.

The rest of that is more or less OK overall. BTW, rulers, even if they belong to dynasties, don’t take the name of their dynasty as part of the Royal style - rather as Popes do not take their surnames as part of their style: Benedict XVI is not Pope Ratzinger, nor is he Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger. (Those who talk of Pope+surname - as in “Pope Ratzinger” - should IMHO be shot for being so ignorant.)​

Click to expand...
**In England it is quite usual to refer to Queen Mary as Mary Tudor, if only to differentiate between herself and her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots.
The Lady is correct! There were two other Queen Marys over the next hundred or so years, so it is a job trying to work out who is who!

We have Mary Tudor, Mary Stewart, Queen Mary, Henrietta Maria] wife of S.Charles the Martyr and Queen Mary Beatrice wife of James the Second! [Marie D’este].With the exception of Mary Tudor, all these ladies were Roman Catholics, Mary Tudor was an Anglo Papist!**
 
luckyfredsdad said:
**In England it is quite usual to refer to Queen Mary as Mary Tudor, if only to differentiate between herself and her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots.
The Lady is correct! There were two other Queen Marys over the next hundred or so years, so it is a job trying to work out who is who!

We have Mary Tudor, Mary Stewart, Queen Mary, Henrietta Maria] wife of S.Charles the Martyr and Queen Mary Beatrice wife of James the Second! [Marie D’este].With the exception of Mary Tudor, all these ladies were Roman Catholics, Mary Tudor was an Anglo Papist!**
Click to expand...
LOL, I am no lady, I am a man, the name pipper comes from my little girl. Haven,t you seen South Park, they have a male on their called Pip.
 
pipper said:
Yes I know all of that, I was trying for a short overlook. I know of the Scots reformation and John Knox who liked to insult his annointed Queen Mary, calling her a “Papist whore” and worse, and I know that Elizabeth had her beheaded. Those were bloody times in history in general.

Many Protestants like to go on about Foxes Book of Martyr, and yet like to ignore or gloss over the many English Catholic martyrs who were beheaded on Elizabeth’s orders.

I was merely trying to help people keep the dynasties straight, hope that passes your inspection. I am sorry but if you read the posts you would know that I am mentally challeged since I had a bad stroke.
Click to expand...

I’m sorry, but I had no idea​

I think I am doimg fairly well under the circumstances.

Tell me, have YOU had a stroke, are YOU mentally challenged?

Trying to have patience and Christian Charity, Pip
Click to expand...

I could answer that question, but this is not the best place for it.​

As, despite your handicap, you are able to post - and good for you 🙂 - is it unfair to point out inaccuracies ? If I were to make the mistake of saying that the state of Georgia is near the Black Sea, posters from the USA would be quite justified in objecting to confusion between the US state, & the East European country. Am I not allowed to point out that Scotland is not England ? The Reformation becomes harder to understand if two independent nations are brought under the name of one of them.

This is relevant to the thread, because the Scottish Reformation left Scotland with a national Church that was not Catholic, & not Anglican either, but Presbyterian. The Reformation developed into a contest between three types of Christianity; in which all three parties had plenty to complain of at various times.
 
luckyfredsdad said:
In England it is quite usual to refer to Queen Mary as Mary Tudor, if only to differentiate between herself and her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots.
The Lady is correct! There were two other Queen Marys over the next hundred or so years, so it is a job trying to work out who is who!

We have Mary Tudor, Mary Stewart, Queen Mary, Henrietta Maria] wife of S.Charles the Martyr and Queen Mary Beatrice wife of James the Second! [Marie D’este].With the exception of Mary Tudor, all these ladies were Roman Catholics, Mary Tudor was an Anglo Papist!
Click to expand...

However:​

  • Charles I AKA Charles the Martyr was king in in his own right - not a king consort
like:
  • Henrietta Maria (his wife)
  • Maria d’Este
  • Mary II ( the wife of William III, AKA William of Orange)
To refer to kings regnant by surname is not correct - & the same applies to queens regnant, such as Mary I & Elizabeth. Mary I is the same individual as Queen Mary Tudor: it does not follow that “Mary Tudor” or “Queen Mary Tudor” was her style; it wasn’t, any more than “Pope Ratzinger, by Divine Permission Pope” is the correct style for Benedict XVI. Two different methods of reference are being confused. If hacks simply must refer to him as “Pope Ratzinger”, there is little one can do about it - but it is still a barbarism, which could & should be corrected. It’s sloppy, like the almost universal habit of referring to clergymen as [Revd. + surname]: e.g. as “Reverend Bloggs”. :eek:

“Mary Tudor” is not that queen’s style, any more than “Queen Tudor” (:eek:) would be,. or than “Queen Mary Tudor” is - but it’s legitimate, because a monarch’s style is not the only way in which to refer to him or her. “Bloody Mary” is a legitimate mode of reference to her for the same reason.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

However:​

  • Charles I AKA Charles the Martyr was king in in his own right - not a king consort
like:
  • Henrietta Maria (his wife)
  • Maria d’Este
  • Mary II ( the wife of William III, AKA William of Orange)
    arism, which could & should be corrected. It’s sloppy, like the almost universal habit of referring to clergymen as [Revd. + surname]: e.g. as “Reverend Bloggs”. :eek:
**I will ignore your studied rudeness in regard to the canonisation of S. Charles The Martyr and will simply remark that your insertion of Mary of Orange in to the story is faulty if only because she was an intruder who gained the English throne by the conquest and occupation of the country by the Dutch Army led by her Husband the Prince of Orange,'Dutch William."
" I do have a genuine question however, regarding the use of the term reverend ? I use the term ,Rev, J. Coppoch FRGS, F. His,Soc. on my calling card, would that be correct, if not why? Further what should I put on?
Many thanks.

James!**
Click to expand...
 
pipper said:
LOL, I am no lady, I am a man, the name pipper comes from my little girl. Haven,t you seen South Park, they have a male on their called Pip.
Click to expand...
**Sorry! It comes from tripping over my two big feet!

But you are still correct in your statement!

Luckyfredsdad.**
 
Hello, Folks.
I was searching for this answer at Google. It apparently led me to this thread, admittedly one that has been tucked away in the back of the cyber closet, at the bottom of some trunk. What I took away from this was “All Episcopalians are Anglicans, but not all Anglicans are Episcopalians”; that the Episcopalians trace their roots back to the Anglicans; that they chose the name to separate themselves from the British during the revolutionary war; and that there is some apparent animosity between the two groups. I see that there are some thoughts about Catholicism sprinkled here and there.

Where worship and sensitivity to the current human condition is concerned, how do these three groups temper dogma (make dogma meaningful and workable in today’s world) compare and contrast?

While Catholic, I have relegated myself to the belief that the Roman Church is desperately out of synch with the current human condition, both in management and in spiritual guidance. It would be great if I could find another faith that was less about dogma and more about living a life as Jesus did.

Perhaps I’m looking for the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything?

. . . Thanks . . .
 
This is a REALLY old thread…
Ursaminorbeta said:
Hello, Folks.
I was searching for this answer at Google. It apparently led me to this thread, admittedly one that has been tucked away in the back of the cyber closet, at the bottom of some trunk. What I took away from this was “All Episcopalians are Anglicans, but not all Anglicans are Episcopalians”; that the Episcopalians trace their roots back to the Anglicans; that they chose the name to separate themselves from the British during the revolutionary war; and that there is some apparent animosity between the two groups. I see that there are some thoughts about Catholicism sprinkled here and there.

Where worship and sensitivity to the current human condition is concerned, how do these three groups temper dogma (make dogma meaningful and workable in today’s world) compare and contrast?

While Catholic, I have relegated myself to the belief that the Roman Church is desperately out of synch with the current human condition, both in management and in spiritual guidance. It would be great if I could find another faith that was less about dogma and more about living a life as Jesus did.

Perhaps I’m looking for the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything?

. . . Thanks . . .
Click to expand...
 
Ursaminorbeta said:
Hello, Folks.
I was searching for this answer at Google. It apparently led me to this thread, admittedly one that has been tucked away in the back of the cyber closet, at the bottom of some trunk. What I took away from this was “All Episcopalians are Anglicans, but not all Anglicans are Episcopalians”; that the Episcopalians trace their roots back to the Anglicans; that they chose the name to separate themselves from the British during the revolutionary war; and that there is some apparent animosity between the two groups. I see that there are some thoughts about Catholicism sprinkled here and there.

Where worship and sensitivity to the current human condition is concerned, how do these three groups temper dogma (make dogma meaningful and workable in today’s world) compare and contrast?

While Catholic, I have relegated myself to the belief that the Roman Church is desperately out of synch with the current human condition, both in management and in spiritual guidance. It would be great if I could find another faith that was less about dogma and more about living a life as Jesus did.

Perhaps I’m looking for the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything?

. . . Thanks . . .
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure it’s 57.

GKC
 
Simple: Dune, the Civil War, the Atonement, theology, television sci-fi, uh…

wait a minute, I’m just listing stuff GKC doesn’t want to ever talk about?! 😃

**
GKC said:
Just trying to remember the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything.

GKC
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top