Anglicans are being bashed because of ignorance of Anglicanism

  • Thread starter Thread starter SIA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SIA

Guest
There seems to be a very enticing urge to unload on the Anglican Communion at large for all of the social-political agenda mongers in the very most liberal minority primates of the Anglican Communion. Let me for the record just clarify one thing; the Anglican Communion does NOT teach that same sex unions are acceptable and it also does not teach that clergy involved in actively gay relationships is acceptable either. There are many more Anglicans in the world that hold true in these teachings and doctrines unchanged and Biblical than you could ever find to the contrary. Episcopalians have gone off the road and are headed for the cliff at a high rate of speed, no doubt about it in my mind. But they do not account for the majority of Anglicans worldwide. It is a fact that there are more Anglicans in church in a Sunday morning in Uganda than there are in all of the U.K.
 
I think the devil is hard at work against the Anglicans and Episcopalians, as he is against all Christians. Bless you in trying to represent the truth as you are.
 
The Anglican Communion does NOT teach that same sex unions are acceptable and it also does not teach that clergy involved in actively gay relationships is acceptable either.
Click to expand...
I think Gene Robinson would disagree with you.
 
Dempsey1919 said:
I think Gene Robinson would disagree with you.
Click to expand...
No doubt the gracious Vicki would. But note that the OP didn’t say that no Anglican would teach odd things about sexuality, but that the Anglican Communion did not teach certain things. He’s correct.

OTOH, I’m reasonably well informed on Anglicanism, and I bash the home team all the time.

GKC
 
I hope that what SIA says is correct. I have a feeling that SIA’s words bear more truth than not. What one or two “spokes-persons” say…may or may not reflect the actual feelings, beliefs and or dispositions of the people they are allegedly speaking “for”.

Frankly, I know a number of Anglicans/Episcopalians who are quite Biblically oriented and are not supporters of the sheenanigans taking place at the present time…
 
Here’s my two cents’ worth: I’m Anglican, Episcopal-flavored of the Anglo-Catholic variety.

I for one do NOT believe in same sex marriages nor do I believe that active homosexuality is condoned by God. After all, my copy of the Bible still has the Old Testament attached. And there’s nothing in the New Testament to indicate that Our Lord Jesus Christ made any changes regarding homosexual activity.

Insofar as what’s going on in the Episcopal Church let me say that I feel they’ve gone way overboard and made changes and accommodations that were better not made. As a result the entire Anglican Communion is in turmoil. I wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury toward the end of last year about this issue and did get a response but without anything definite having been said. His meeting with the House of Bishops wasn’t all that conclusive either.

Lots of things to consider here, my brothers and sisters. Here’s one “separated brother” who may not be separated all that long… didn’t Our Lord say “by their fruits ye shall know them?”:gopray2:
 
The wondrous joy of our faith is that there is no required dogma one has to adopt. We believe very strongly that God endowed all humans with reason, and we each much find our place. I am new here, certainly, but I wonder at the clear anti-anything but Rome attitude here. I was told we were all welcome, and this subset is for non-Roman denominations, yet I find it filled with Rome is the ONLY or BEST at every turn. Is there no catholicity here? I thought this was about interfaith dialog, not about advising people they are wrong!
 
AlexiaMusing said:
The wondrous joy of our faith is that there is no required dogma one has to adopt. We believe very strongly that God endowed all humans with reason, and we each much find our place. I am new here, certainly, but I wonder at the clear anti-anything but Rome attitude here. I was told we were all welcome, and this subset is for non-Roman denominations, yet I find it filled with Rome is the ONLY or BEST at every turn. Is there no catholicity here? I thought this was about interfaith dialog, not about advising people they are wrong!
Click to expand...
Caution: This response is not personal, not is it intended to inflame passions or anger anyone…OK? 😃

Alexia…this is a Catholic site…and as such it is a safe haven for many of us who would rather not wander into any sites where just our identity sets off another “blitzkrieg” of attacks on Catholicism.
All are welcome, and you are welcome here. I have no problems with “anyone”…and will not have a problem with anyone…until they cross the imaginary line in the sand that violates forum rules by attacking me personally or the Catholic Church…which is not terribly uncommon here.

Dialogue is two sided, not unilateral. All of us are entitled to express our opinions. Me, I am Catholic, and very much so. I have often been told that I should have been a “Jesuit”, but I will do my level best not to be offensive because I realize that being that way is of no benefit to anyone.

You will find people here who speak their mind…as you will yours. You can and should rightly presume that many here will be “Pro Rome”… And you can and should rightly presume that many of us are as un-antagonistic as we can be regarding much. But it is not safe or right to presume that we will not defend our faith, and may never concede an inch of ground on any issue.

I think you will find that in the “sub-sets” that discuss only things “Catholic” that many non-Catholics do the same thing Catholics do here…such is mankind…always straying over the lines. I couldn’t keep the crayons between the lines when I was a child… 😃

Have fun, enjoy…and if you are as fortunate as I have been here, you will learn something or two… Peace!
 
Hi Alexia and welcome to the forum!

A few things I’d like to say in response:
AlexiaMusing said:
I am new here, certainly, but I wonder at the clear anti-anything but Rome attitude here. I was told we were all welcome, and this subset is for non-Roman denominations, yet I find it filled with Rome is the ONLY or BEST at every turn.
Click to expand...
I believe that “Rome”, i.e. Roman Catholicism, is the best option. I don’t try to hide that belief, but I try not to pester people with it either. Ideally, I would like to see all of my fellow Catholics do likewise – and correspondingly, my seperated brethren; realistically, however …
AlexiaMusing said:
Is there no catholicity here? I thought this was about interfaith dialog, not about advising people they are wrong!
Click to expand...
Catholic posters here are welcome to tell Protestants (and Orthodox for that matter) that they are wrong; likewise Protestants (and Orthodox) are welcome to tell Catholics that we are wrong (within reason, of course).

As I always say, in order to be fair you need to do an apples-to-apples comparison: don’t just compare the behavior of Catholic posters to the behavior of Protestant and Orthodox posters on this one website; rather look at this site and also look at some typical Protestant and Orthodox discussion forums. If you do, I think you’ll have to agree that the behavior of Catholics on this site measures up pretty positively in comparison to those non-Catholics website.

Hope that helps!
 
AlexiaMusing said:
The wondrous joy of our faith is that there is no required dogma one has to adopt. We believe very strongly that God endowed all humans with reason, and we each much find our place. I am new here, certainly, but I wonder at the clear anti-anything but Rome attitude here. I was told we were all welcome, and this subset is for non-Roman denominations, yet I find it filled with Rome is the ONLY or BEST at every turn. Is there no catholicity here? I thought this was about interfaith dialog, not about advising people they are wrong!
Click to expand...
Welcome to the forum, AlexiaMusing!

God Bless!
 
After the first 11 posts that I have read, I am truly pleased with the positive and cordial dialogue that I have seen out of the posts. Thank you for them!
 
I don’t think Anglicans should be bashed at all. Not even the ones who (we believe) have tragically erred. . .bashing does no good. Fraternal correction and charity, yes, but certainly not bashing.

But as has been pointed out, that ‘some’ Anglicans may say X does not mean that all Anglicans do, so we need to be extra careful that if we are pointing out something that needs notice of correction, we are pointing it out to those who need the correction–not those who don’t. Right?
 
SIA said:
There seems to be a very enticing urge to unload on the Anglican Communion at large for all of the social-political agenda mongers in the very most liberal minority primates of the Anglican Communion. Let me for the record just clarify one thing; the Anglican Communion does NOT teach that same sex unions are acceptable and it also does not teach that clergy involved in actively gay relationships is acceptable either. There are many more Anglicans in the world that hold true in these teachings and doctrines unchanged and Biblical than you could ever find to the contrary. Episcopalians have gone off the road and are headed for the cliff at a high rate of speed, no doubt about it in my mind. But they do not account for the majority of Anglicans worldwide. It is a fact that there are more Anglicans in church in a Sunday morning in Uganda than there are in all of the U.K.
Click to expand...
If “Episcopalians have gone off the road” as you say, why hasn’t the Anglican Communion formally cut ties with them? IIRC, isn’t Rowan Williams a big supporter of Gene Robinson?
 
IIRC, isn’t Rowan Williams a big supporter of Gene Robinson?
Click to expand...
From what I read about the Conference this year (2008) not only was Mr. Robinson asked **not **to attend (although he showed up in London anyway to ‘make sure he presented his fellow clergy and laity with the ‘face’ of their gay members’–like they’re in danger of forgetting?) but furthermore, if I recall correctly, the Archbishop asked the Communion to refrain from ordaining any more gay OR female bishops at this time. . .
 
Tantum_ergo said:
From what I read about the Conference this year (2008) not only was Mr. Robinson asked **not **to attend (although he showed up in London anyway to ‘make sure he presented his fellow clergy and laity with the ‘face’ of their gay members’–like they’re in danger of forgetting?) but furthermore, if I recall correctly, the Archbishop asked the Communion to refrain from ordaining any more gay OR female bishops at this time. . .
Click to expand...
Well, that’s comforting, at least.
 
Tantum_ergo said:
but furthermore, if I recall correctly, the Archbishop asked the Communion to refrain from ordaining any more gay OR female bishops at this time. . .
Click to expand...
Not to get into a debates over semantics, but I’m assuming that you using “gay” here in the sense of “actively lively a ‘gay’ livestyle”.
 
Yes, I believe that the ‘active’ part was either mentioned or tacitly assumed in light of the decision about Mr. Robinson. (Oh, I am actually using Mr. not because I don’t want to call him bishop, but because, and I could be wrong here, I thought that it would be all right as he is the Rev. Mr. Robinson, right? And also because to some Anglicans his elevation to bishop is in question. So that’s why I used “Mr”.)
 
I used to feel if I ever was to be anything other than Catholic it would be Anglican…not any longer

I feel sorry for what their clergy have done to them…If I were one I would be swimming the Tiber right now
 
How do anglicans answer the question “who is the Anglican Communion?”. By this I mean, when you say that bishops x, y, and z believe THIS but THIS is not the belief of the Anglican Communion what do you mean exactly?

What does the Anglican Communion believe and how do you know what the Anglican Communion really teaches?

Also about what William said, apparently he have a different belief with the belief of the ‘Communion’. How do you make sens of this.

I think as Christians, we have an obligation to adjust our opinions and make the belief of the Church our belief. This is what we call conversion. Otherwise, how can a bishop theaches something he does not believe.

To Catholics, can the pope be a pope while his personnal belief are contrary to the belief of the Church?

I believe that in the Catholic Church when our belief are different than those of the Church we have already excommunicated ourselves and shouldn’t show up for communion.

I believe Communion is for those who hold the same belief, the same faith, the same deposit of doctrine. Isn’t this what a Communion is all about?

God bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top