Anglicans to Rome - Thread 2

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

As I’ve said before, the “Continuoum” contains a veritable alphabet soup that ranges in churchmansip and doctrine from LOW-CHURCH EVANGELICAL to HIGH-CHURCH ANGLO-CATHOLIC.

The “Holy Catholic Church-Anglican Rite” happens to be more towards the LOW-CHURCH EVANGELICAL end of that spectrum doctrinally.

No, no! They’s be upset to hear you say that. They removed themselves from the larger American group because they were too Anglo-Catholic for them. If anything this small group (only four bishops?) is closer to Orthodoxy in their beliefs.

Here is an info snippet…

In 1992 the Anglican Catholic Church in America opened dialogue with the Orthodox Church of America and in 1994 Father Michael Wright (Regional Dean for South West England) and **Bishop Alexander Price ** of the Anglican Catholic Church in **New Zealand ** published A Catechism for Anglican Catholics, in which their inspiration was clearly the theology of the Orthodox Church. Unfortunately their commitment to Orthodoxy was not representative of all Anglican Catholic dioceses and certain tensions, both theological and personal, have remained.

These have recently surfaced following the Metropolitan (The Most Rev’d William O. Lewis) having suffered a stroke and a crisis over the degree of his incapacity, with the result that the Trinitarian (the official journal of the Anglican Catholic Church) for October 1997 announced “5 bishops inhibited after apparent coup try”. Among these five bishops are Bishop Leslie Hamlett and Bishop Alexander Price. Pending their trial before the Provincial Court for the Trial of Bishops the oversight of the United Kingdom has been given to Bishop John T. Cahoon, Jr.

These sad events clearly indicate a further serious schism within Continuing Anglicanism and must be deeply regretted among all those who welcome the positive theological witness maintained by Bishop Leslie and his diocese. It is hoped that reason and good-will may yet prevail to prevent further damage to that important witness and to enable Bishop Leslie to continue the oversight of his diocese with the loyalty and confidence of his own flock, free from attempts at disruption and division coming from outside.

Whatever the outcome, it now seems probable that those pro-Orthodox portions of the Anglican Catholic Church will be able to consolidate their theological position and to abandon the last vestiges of theological comprehensiveness which has proved so damaging to the churches of the Anglican tradition. Out of these sad upheavals a stronger witness may appear which Orthodox Christians should welcome and encourage.

uk-christian.net/~theodore/boc/96a.shtml

 

[MaggieOH]

Matt16_18:

You need to see what was written by either the Pope or his legates.

The same thing can be said about Presbyterians, Lutherans and Mormons.

.

I have to correct an error that you have made here. The position of the Mormons has nothing to do with the position of the Lutherans, Presbyterians and the TAC. The LDS is not a break away group from the Catholic Church and its roots are steeped in heresy. It is unfair to compare the other three with the Mormons.

I do not think that you have made a very good case for your claims, especially if you find it necessary to clump good Christian men and women, who sincerely believe all of the Marian dogma and who have a difficulty with one doctrine alone (papal infallibility) with the LDS.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

jwehlitz:

So much for unimpeachable sources. Everyone is capable of misunderstanding, and this issue, from the start, looked like one where someone (or several someones) along the line of communication thouroughly misunderstood what they were told. Wishfull thinking can play a role as well.

I guess that one reason that I just couldn’t see this happening is that parts of the TAC are pretty far from Rome in many ways. One example that comes to mind is that although TAC is very big on opposition to the ordination of women, they never seem to mention an objection to gay lifestyles. I personally have only visited one TAC parish, and the place was absolutely crawling with same sex couples. It’s kind of odd to be so focused on the fact that the Episcopal Church, C of E etc. have (or attempt to have) women priests, but to ignore a very big moral issue. It would be hard to imagine that particular parish being greeted with open arms by the Catholic Church. I’m not going to identify the parish, since I too am capable of misunderstanding.

I am not sure that this one case can be extrapolated over all the TAC parishes. From what I had been reading, the ordination of a homosexual bishop is the reason that many are now ready to leave the Anglican communion and join Rome.

I do not accept that this moral issue has been ignored by the TAC. Perhaps the Church that you attended is not one that will make the jump if all of this happens.

As Michael said, more talks are needed, and there is a lot of negotiation and catechesis to take place.

For your information, here in Australia we have a fair number of Anglicans who have made the swim across the Tiber and have come home to Rome. These people know what they are doing and what has been happening amongst the Spong heretics has ensured their response.

MaggieOH

 

[MaggieOH]

azcelt:

this could snowball!maybe the lutherans would be next.

I hope so, but it will take a longer period of time because they have to return to the things that were taught by Martin Luther before reconciliation with the Catholic Church can be considered.

p.s. there is an early precedent for the return of those in schism to the Church. Look up the history on the crisis caused by the Donatists.

MaggieOH

 

[MaggieOH]

Matt16_18:

Do you understand that Protestants are received into the Church through reception of the Sacraments of Initiation (i.e. Baptism, Confirmation and Eucharist)? To be in full communion with the Catholic Church necessitates the reception of the Sacrament of Communion (the Holy Eucharist).

A Protestant that desires to be in perfect communion with the Catholic Church needs to be a member of the Catholic Church. The Pope has no authority whatsoever to allow Protestants that do not accept the infallible teachings of the Church to receive the Sacraments of Initiation, since that would require the pope to radically alter the nature of the Sacraments of Initiation. Such a radical altering of the Sacraments of Initiation would render the Sacraments invalid.Catechism of the Catholic Church

**Christian Initiation **

1229 From the time of the apostles, becoming a Christian has been accomplished by a journey and initiation in several stages. This journey can be covered rapidly or slowly, but certain essential elements will always have to be present: proclamation of the Word, acceptance of the Gospel entailing conversion, profession of faith, Baptism itself, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and admission to Eucharistic communion.

**The Effects Of Confirmation **

**1303 **… Confirmation brings an increase and deepening of baptismal grace:
…

• it renders our bond with the Church more perfect;
• it gives us a special strength of the Holy Spirit to spread and defend the faith by word and action as true witnesses of Christ …

**The Eucharist - Source And Summit Of Ecclesial Life **

1327 In brief, the Eucharist is the sum and summary of our faith: “Our way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn confirms our way of thinking.”

Matt

you are wrong when you say that Protestants have to receive Baptism, Confirmation etc. to be initiated into the Catholic Church.

For your information, all Baptisms that can be proved as having been performed under the Trinitarian formula are accepted by the Catholic Church. The initiates who fall into this category do not receive a second baptism. Also, where it is proved that the Candidate for RCIA has received Confirmation, that person does not receive the Sacrament of Confirmation. There is a “pledge” if that is the right word that these people recite as a form of their acceptance of all of the doctrines of the Catholic Church. They will then receive their first Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. My parish has been very fruitful in the years that I have been there, and we have had sometimes up to 15 people being received into the Church. This year we have 4 RCIA candidates and 1 Catechumen who will be received at the Easter Vigil. The Catechumen will be baptised but the others will not have to be baptized. They will will more than likely have to be confirmed. These four have partners who are already Catholic. One woman is a widow and her late husband is a Catholic. There is a father and daughter in law combination as well. In other words there has been a steady stream of these people coming into the Church.

They are not fools and they are not as far from Rome as you seem to think. Already there is one former pastor, 50 members of his former parish, and another 10 from an Anglican parish close by who are preparing to enter the Church because they have made that final decision to come home to Rome. A few years ago a Pentecostal pastor led a number of his parishioners into the Catholic Church.

No matter what you think, we should be praying for unity with our brothers and sisters in Christ.

All of this pride is not doing any good at all. In fact it is very damaging to Michal and others like him who actually want to be a part of the Catholic Church but in the tradition that they understand. If it can be granted to the Eastern Rite Catholics, then why not to those who are willing to have an allegiance to the Pope rather than to a failing monarchy and bishopric in England.

MaggieOH

 

[steve_b]

Gottle of Geer:

**## LOL. **

**The whole thing is perfectly genuine - some of us rely on books Unfortunately, this subject is too obscure to have been copied on to the Net. **

---

---

If it’s so obscure, that Fr A could only find it on 1 Orthodox site but it’s not available anywhere else, then I’m going to question the accuracy and genuineness. Especially since this is supposed to be the

**"**Declaration of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in **Ireland" 1826. **

So it ought to be available in Catholic sources also correct, and not JUST on a pholemical Orthodox web site?.. Oh and I saw it on 1 other geocity site that looks like it copied it off the Orthodox site, but that’s it. No other references available. All I’m saying is, I’d like to see proof of this declaration in more than 1 highly pholemic web site…
Gottle of Geer:

---

**The Emancipation Act has a background in which all those issues were discussed - **

---

---

You mean if the Catholic hierarchy in Ireland denounced papal infallibility, the British would grant Catholics the right to vote and hold office? Otherwise they stay unemancipated? Kind of a quid pro quo?

---

**
gottle of geer:

---

---

one cannot look at the events of 1826, as though the events of 1870 had occurred before them. That would be daft. ##**

1870 defined the teaching on papal infallibility. So even if the bishops in 1826 said what they were alleged to say on that 1 web site, it doesn’t matter anyway. Because it’s only AFTER a belief is defined and made an article of faith, that it must be believed. And that was my original point.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

MICHAEL:

If you scare aware aspiring converts from the Church, you scare tham away from the Kingdom of God and from Salvation. Do you really want to do that?

Remember, we aren’t talking about a Core Dogma that’s defined as “necessary for Salvation,” by an Ecumenical Council.

I can obey the Pope in all things and NOT believe that he’s Infallible…
Gottle of Geer:

It is better to scare away aspiring converts by being uncompromisingly firm on dogma, than to accept as converts people whose acceptance of dogmas is incomplete. There can no more be a negotiable dogma than there can be a lying Holy Spirit.

…The Eastern Church did on at on at least occasion that we know of when needed to deal with a Christological heresy.

Michael, when you and Matt refuse to acknowledge my pleas about the humanity of the people whose case I’m pleading (Posts #144, #147,Ê#154, #186, #190, #191 & #210) you leave me with little else but Et tu quoque, esp, when the quoque is as egregious as the American branch of the Catholic Church.

**Given my preferences, I would much rather have dealt with the human need for some MERCY by the 300,000 people I’m trying to represent, som of who took me in when I was in pretty dreadful shape.
Gottle of Geer:

How does the unbelief of those already RC justify any unbelief among those in the TAC who wish to become and be known as RCs?

Michael, you talk as if I don’t know that, but the law and Dogma are to serve us and to fget us to heaven, not serve as a bar from heaven. I realize that you’re not as guilty as Matt, but you still acted as part of the bar…
Gottle of Geer:

Dogma is dogma, no matter who denies it, or how many.

Michael, what do you call it when you and someone else repeat the same thing 20 times, never acknowledging my name or even my humanity, let alonethat I’m a brother in Christ, never acknowledging the human stories that I’m telling, or the humanity of the people I’m talking about, or that they’re brothers and sisters in Christ?

I’d call that a “Broken Record” and you would, too, if it had been done to you for 4 days…Maybe you haven’t seen what happened, but could you please put yourself in my shoes and read ALL the posts directed at me. I believe that if you do, you’ll see that the next statement you made, about “sensitively”, is just not true…
Gottle of Geer:

It’s no tape recording. It has to be said, clearly, unambiguously, explicitly, honestly, accurately, sensitively, openly. Be instructed, accept the entirety of RCC teaching, and be received.

…And that what happened was a case of piling on…Before you react, please read ALL the posts directed at me since Wednesday, and count just how many times someone (not Fr Ambrose, Michael Toma or Maggie) actually calls me by name. I’d be surprised if the sum total is more than the times I’ve called you by name in this ONE POST!

Michael, I’ll let Irenicist supply the answer to you statement bolw - It’s a more patient approach that arrives at the same place, and probably saves a few more souls:
Irenicist - Post #65
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=465250&postcount=65
Gottle of Geer:

Be instructed, accept the entirety of RCC teaching, and be received
or
Be instructed, accept something less than the entirety of RCC teaching, and don’t be received.Take it - or leave it. It is that simple.

Michael, you aren’t “accepting as Catholics people who are known not to accept the whole faith of the Church,” You’re accepting into Communion people that you know will be faithfull in the 99% that you know they acdept, and who say they’ll listen to you on the rest…

“But this is not pastoral”, someone may say. OK - but it is not pastoral to accept as Catholics people who are known

not to accept the whole faith of the Church. One might as well call John Spong or Gene Robinson Roman Catholics, if someone can become a Catholic without recognising the need to accept all Catholic teaching. The TAC’s members would no more be RCs than those men are, if they could be received into the CC while not giving their full assent to all dogmas.

…It’s unfair and WRONG to compare people who’ve suffered at the hands of the likes of Spong and Robinson to Spng and Robinson, and you know it!

Michael, how do you think you’re going to pursuade these faithful and persecuted people who given up prosperous perishes and easy lives because of the likes of Spong and Robinson to accept the dogmas the Church demands by comparing them to Spong and Robertson who are acknowledged heretics?

You stepped over the line on that one, Michael.

God bless. Michael**

 

[Traditional_Ang]

jwehlitz:

So much for unimpeachable sources. Everyone is capable of misunderstanding, and this issue, from the start, looked like one where someone (or several someones) along the line of communication thouroughly misunderstood what they were told. Wishfull thinking can play a role as well.

I guess that one reason that I just couldn’t see this happening is that parts of the TAC are pretty far from Rome in many ways. One example that comes to mind is that although TAC is very big on opposition to the ordination of women, they never seem to mention an objection to gay lifestyles. I personally have only visited one TAC parish, and the place was absolutely crawling with same sex couples. It’s kind of odd to be so focused on the fact that the Episcopal Church, C of E etc. have (or attempt to have) women priests, but to ignore a very big moral issue. It would be hard to imagine that particular parish being greeted with open arms by the Catholic Church. I’m not going to identify the parish, since I too am capable of misunderstanding.

Ijwehlitz:

Regarding the same sex couples - Anglicanism is unalterably opposed to gay marraige, or to any other form of blessing of same sex couples. The TAC also agrees with the Pope and Sacred Scripture regarding any other form of Gay sexuality.

The Anglican Communion (Abp. Canterbury), however, has been warming up to the idea, and we all know that ECUSA has ordained gay and lesbian priests and even has consecrated a gay Bishop.

Are you sure you were even in a TAC parish and not a parish of the Anglican Communion (C of E of ECUSA)? If the Priest had a nice suit to wear so that he could take off his cassock after Mass, you were in a parish of the Anglican Communion (++Canterbury) and not of the TAC. Sorry.

I saw that difference displayed betweeen 2 Australian Bishops, one from each Communion. The one whose outfit (good quality wool suit with silk shirt and Gold cross and Mephistos) was worth $1,200 and who had a rental SAAB waiting outside was from the was from the Anglican Communion (++Canterbury). The one who outfit (Poly-cotton cassock over slacks and a cotton/ploy shirt with an iron cross and well worn SAS shoes) was worth 1/3 of that and who was being driven around by my Pastor was from the TAC.

Big difference in financial resources - One is a State Church in many countries and also has endowments gained over centuries of it’s existence.

It also didn’t help that many of the parishes in the TAC (Northern Hemispher) had their buildings taken away when they left ECUSA and the other Churches in Union with the Anglican Communion (++Canterbury), and that many of the Parishes in the Southern Hemisphere are just as poor as the rest of the societies they’re in.

Blessings and Peace. Michael

 

[MaggieOH]

I have some news from my local paper to share. I am not sure where to find this news on the Internet so I am going to type in the details:

Primate to give ‘bishop’ his marching orders - The Australian

The Anglican Primate has moved to expel from the Australian communion a conservative cleric who plans to act as a flying bishop for parishes opposed to the ordination of women.

Peter Carnley declared unacceptable yesterday the consecreation of Queensland priest David Chislett as a biship by a conservative offshoot of the US Episcopal Church.

Fr. Chislett, rector of All Saints Wickham Tce in Central Brisbane was consecrated by the Traditional Anglican Communion in Rosemount Pennyslvania on Wednesday.

“It seems that the Rev. David Chislett has left the Anglican Church of Australia to join the TAC” Dr Carnley said in a statement.

Dr. Carnley, the liberal who defied canon law more than a decade ago to ordain women as priests, said the Anglican Church was not in communion with the TAC and there was no constitutional provision for licensing someone consecrated by it.

Fr. Chislett, vice-chairman of the conservative Forward in Faith movement and a vocal critic of the 1992 decision to all the ordination of women, plans to travel around Australia pastoring to parishes who refuse to accept the ministrations of women priests.

Bishop of the Murray Ross Davies has licensed him as a bishop in his diocese.

“We need a flying bishop and now we have one,” Bishop Davies said.

In a fiery sermon at Fr. Chislett’s consecration, TAC primate John Hepworth said: “Your ministry is partly unknown but it is a ministry to communities that are broken and altars that are cracked.”

Dr. Carnley said he was disappointed with Fr. Chislett’s move.

The soon to retire Primate warned conservative Anglicans leaning towards the Catholic Church to take not of Fr. Chislett’s status.

In Newry, Northern Ireland the 38 primates of the Anglican communion will today begin what some in the church regard as crisis management talks.

Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams will chair the five day closed meeting. Its main agenda will be the recent Windsor report which made proposals to hold the fragile church federation together.

Threatened by the cross currents of homosexual ordination and same sex marriages the primates are confronted with maverick bishops such as Michael Ingham who has sanctioned homosexual marriages in Canada.

MaggieOH

BTW, I refuse to call homosexuals “gay”. They have taken a perfectly good word and destroyed its meaning. Also, I refuse to use the euphemism same sex marriage. They are homosexuals and therefore it is a homosexual marriage, male or female it does not matter, except it is disgusting.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

Regarding the same sex couples - Anglicanism is unalterably opposed to gay marraige, or to any other form of blessing of same sex couples

Down here in New Zealand, the Primate of the Anglican Church is not only opposed to same-sex marriages, he is opposed to INTER-RACIAL marriages also.

I bet that rocks your world! But it is absolutely true. Here is one of his statements from September 2004…

The new Anglican Archbishop has surprised Anglicans throughout New Zealand by calling for the break-up of all inter-racial marriages. Archbishop Whakahuihui Vercoe defends the Church’s radical new policy on the grounds that he is merely enforcing “clear biblical injunctions against mixed marriage”.

“Moreover, it is just an accepted human norm that the races are not to be mixed in marriage,” asserted Archbishop Vercoe. “I mean to say, you don’t see cats mating with dogs, or kiwi mating with kakapo, do you, eh? It’s just common sense, isn’t it? Different is bad.”

Archbishop Vercoe cites Ezra Chapter 10 as biblical support for a move that is expected to affect thousands of Anglicans nationwide.

“Just as Israel’s new head priest Ezra came in and forced the break-up of all the inter-racial marriages in Israel, I’m doing the same as the new head priest of Aotearoa,” stated Archbishop Vercoe.

“It is the will of God. The book of Ezra chapter 10 verse 11 clearly states: ‘Now make confession to the Lord the God of your ancestors, and do his will; separate yourselves from the peoples of the land and from the foreign wives.’ Mixed marriage is an abomination in the sight of the Lord.”

The biblical story Archbishop Vercoe refers to relates that every marriage between an Israelite and foreign woman was forcibly broken up, and the wives and children from each marriage sent away to survive on their own.

Archbishop Vercoe’s decision has provoked outrage from many of the country’s 600,000 Anglicans. Dave Lamb of Remuera, Auckland counts himself as a typical Anglican. Although he never attends Anglican Church services, he is “sure proud to tick the box that says ‘Anglican’ every five years when a census comes round.”

However, Dave refuses to send away his Maori wife Rowena - despite the command of the new Archbishop. “I’d have to reconsider being an Anglican if it meant suddenly having to follow rules and stuff.”

When asked to address Dave and Rowena Lamb’s situation, Archbishop Vercoe denounced the Lambs’ response as “culturally prejudiced,” describing their attitude as “typical Pakeha neo-colonialism”.

“It has always been a sacred part of Maori cultural values not to marry with outsiders. Before the Pakeha came here, Maori never married non-Maori,” claimed the Archbishop.
Pastor Brian Tamariki of Density Church has lent his full support to Archbishop Vercoe.

“It is about time that a godly man has stood up for what is good and right and biblical in this country - and recognised that inter-racial marriage is unnatural and wrong and unbiblical,” he said. “One day our society will wake up and discover that mixed-marriage is morally unacceptable. It may not come in our time but it will come. There will be a strong reaction, and later generations will suddenly discover a new morality: God’s morality!”

Archbishop Vercoe also wished to remind Anglicans that they could learn from the example provided by Jesus.

“When confronted by a Canaanite woman begging him to heal her sick daughter, Jesus initially refused to help her, explaining that ‘It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs’ [Matthew 15:26]. If Jesus made this distinction between different races, referring to this foreign woman as a lowly “dog”, then is the greater ‘tolerance’ shown by our society really such a good thing? Or have we strayed from the eternal truth - as discovered for all time by a fairly backward and mostly illiterate tribal people living 2000 years ago?”

continued…

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

“And what about the Good Samaritan?” he added. “We tend to forget what Jesus told his disciples in Matthew 10:5-7: ‘"Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel … Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers’. In other words, heal Israelites, but not those damn foreigners! If Jesus saw fit to discriminate on the basis of race, then so must we.”

More liberal Anglican leaders clearly struggled to respond to Archbishop Vercoe’s decision. The world’s first female Anglican bishop, Dunedin’s Bishop Penny Jamieson, commented that “the Church must respect the opinions of Maori, because who are we to judge the cultural viewpoints of others, except perhaps where those cultural viewpoints may contradict other cultural viewpoints - not that we are then condemning one set of valued cultural viewpoionts and preferring the other cultural viewpoints, oh no - not at all - but merely respecting the difference between the first set of cultural viewpoints and the second set of cultural viewpoints, without judging one set of cultural viewpoints as ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, and without in any way reinforcing patriarchal binaries by preferring one of those cultural viewpoints over the other cultural viewpoint, but respecting each of the cultural viewpoints equally. So while we are completely and utterly opposed to racial discrimination, we are also very supportive of racial discrimination when that is in accordance in traditional Maori values.”

Archbishop Whakahuihui Vercoe believed he would one day “rejoice” to preside over a Church that had completely separate structures for Maori and Pakeha, in accordance with the Christian ideal for marriage.

“Just think, if we lived in South Africa, we would have to put up with their deplorable, sinful and thoroughly unbiblical policy of ‘full integration’. Thank God that here in Aotearoa we follow the Bible instead.”

 

[MaggieOH]

I have a very serious question. How can this man be made Archbishop when he does not understand the meaning of the texts he is using to try and break up “inter-racial” marriages?

I do not want to get off topic here, but this is a good example that will tip people over the edge and make them take a dip into the Tiber river.

The problem with this idea is that the reason given for the edict about marriage to foreign wives is that they brought their gods with them and the men kept on falling into apostasy. What this Maori Archbishop is attempting to do is to put into place a church LAW that would force people who are legally married to divorce. That is not Biblical.

If husband and wife are Christian - that is Anglican married to Anglican, or Anglican married to Catholic, or any other permutation of the same theme, then they meet the legal Scriptural definitions.

This is self-interpretation gone mad. I can understand that something like this is bound to bring about a crisis in New Zealand. Fr. Ambrose you better get ready to pick up the slack as people decide to quit the Anglican communion.

As for the woman posing as a bishop in Dunedin. She did not make one sentence that was coherent. It was all wishy washy mush.

MaggieOH

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Maggie:

I can’t say if jwehlitz was even in a TAC Parish. Abp. Hepworth is just slightly more strict on the gay issues than the Pope, thanks partially to the ECUSA ordination of the Gay Bishop who left his wife and young children so he could move in with his gay lover.

The TAC teaches what the Pope, the Church and the Scriptures teach on the subject of homosexual sin. There’s NO ambiguity in their position. Same sex activity is a grave and mortal sin that puts ones salvation and your relationship to God in jeopardy. If jwehlitz was trying to make the TAC sound “Intolerant” to the liberals, he succeeded.

If jwehlitz would send me the name of the parish and the country/state on PM - I could go on the TAC locator and tell you right away…If true, and on the West Coast, it would give my source a change to fix a problem.

What he most probably saw was a parish within the Anglican Communion (++Canterbury) which could present just such a parish in some jurisdictions, because they are much more “tolerant” of those activities…

MaggieOH:

I am not sure that this one case can be extrapolated over all the TAC parishes. From what I had been reading, the ordination of a homosexual bishop is the reason that many are now ready to leave the Anglican communion and join Rome.

I do not accept that this moral issue has been ignored by the TAC. Perhaps the Church that you attended is not one that will make the jump if all of this happens.

As Michael said, more talks are needed, and there is a lot of negotiation and catechesis to take place.

For your information, here in Australia we have a fair number of Anglicans who have made the swim across the Tiber and have come home to Rome. These people know what they are doing and what has been happening amongst the Spong heretics has ensured their response.

MaggieOH

…I would also require that before we give any credence to any accusation by anyone, that we demand particulars from the accusar, unless it is something that’s been agreed to.

For my part, seeing that there are "Continuing Anglicans but no TAC in New Zealand, I’ll have to be more precise in differentiating the groups. ie., All TAC are Continuing Anglicans, but not all Continuing Anglicans are TAC. In fact, many Continuing Anglicans are NOT TAC.

Thank you for your posts and your viewpoint.

May God Bless and keep you.

Michael

 

[MaggieOH]

Traditional Ang:

Maggie:

I can’t say if jwehlitz was even in a TAC Parish. Abp. Hepworth is just slightly more strict on the gay issues than the Pope, thanks partially to the ECUSA ordination of the Gay Bishop who left his wife and young children so he could move in with his gay lover.

The TAC teaches what the Pope, the Church and the Scriptures teach on the subject of homosexual sin. There’s NO ambiguity in their position. Same sex activity is a grave and mortal sin that puts ones salvation and your relationship to God in jeopardy. If jwehlitz was trying to make the TAC sound “Intolerant” to the liberals, he succeeded.

If jwehlitz would send me the name of the parish and the country/state on PM - I could go on the TAC locator and tell you right away…If true, and on the West Coast, it would give my source a change to fix a problem.

What he most probably saw was a parish within the Anglican Communion (++Canterbury) which could present just such a parish in some jurisdictions, because they are much more “tolerant” of those activities…

…I would also require that before we give any credence to any accusation by anyone, that we demand particulars from the accusar, unless it is something that’s been agreed to.

For my part, seeing that there are "Continuing Anglicans but no TAC in New Zealand, I’ll have to be more precise in differentiating the groups. ie., All TAC are Continuing Anglicans, but not all Continuing Anglicans are TAC. In fact, many Continuing Anglicans are NOT TAC.

Thank you for your posts and your viewpoint.

May God Bless and keep you.

Michael

Michael

you have confirmed what I thought, that the TAC is very much in line with the Catholic Church, but as you say, some continuing Anglicans are not TAC. This might explain the situation. I could not understand why this was said when I understood from what you had been saying that homosexual relationships like that are frowned upon as they should be if a church is to be based upon the Scripture.

God Bless

MaggieOH

 

[steve_b]

traditional ang:

Since several have made such a wonderful case for the EXCLUSION of the TAC from the Catholic Church at this time, I was wondering if someone would want the task of trying to make the case for the INCLUSION of the TAC into the Catholic Church?

You might have missed my question to you on entering this thread. I was looking for the evidence that these talks were really going on
traditional ang:

The reason I’m asking is simple - The Council of Florence was an attempt at Reconciliation between East and West that failed because the LAITY weren’t prepared, or “weren’t buying it.”

Maybe someone wanted to know if this attempt at union would run into the same problems.

Blessings and peace.

Michael

At least on the Catholic side, the laity usually don’t have a say in these matters. As far as the East is concerned, all the efforts being made for reconcilliation with the East as I can see, have been made by the West. When the pope went to visit the East, Russian, Greek, Rumanian, Ethiopian etc Orthodox, pull the usual anti Catholic demonstration stuff, that followed JPII wherever he went. If one of their patriarchs comes West, he’s welcomed. That’s the difference between West and East… Here’s an example, when JPII wanted to visit Catholics in the Ukraine, it’s common courtesy to visit the patriarch of Russia. However,

This from radio free Europe

"Russian Orthodox Patriarch Aleksii II, who has publicly refused to meet with Pope John Paul II, said the pope’s visit to Ukraine will “cause new confrontation between religious confessions there.” Ukraine’s Orthodox priests subordinated to the Moscow Patriarchate have been using the media, as well as their pulpits, to criticize the pope’s visit.

Father Gerontii is an Orthodox priest at the Pecherska Lavra monastery. As one of the leaders of antipapal protests, he said there is much to lose from Pope John Paul II’s visit.

“We don’t want him to come here and proselytize, to be a missionary. What do we need that for? His program is like a nightmare for us,” he said. “If an enemy comes to you, are you going to keep quiet? And he is an enemy of man’s souls.”

Father Gerontii claimed that the pope will be stopped by demonstrators if he attempts to visit either the Pecherska Lavra or the St. Sophia cathedral. “We will never allow him into the Lavra. The people have said that they will lie down in order to block his path, not only for one week, but two, three,” he said. “Nobody will get into the Lavra, just as they will not get into St. Sofia. They’re our holy shrines.”
(As a side note Aleksii II is a past KGB agent)

infoukes.com/rfe-ukraine/2001/0619.html

I have to hand it to JPII. He’s truly walking in the shoes of Peter. What’s also magnificent about JPII and the East, Gorbeschev, credits JPII for the collapse of communism in the East. As Gorby said

“What has happened in Eastern Europe in recent years would not have been possible without the presence of this Pope, without the great role even political that he has played on the world scene” (quoted in La Stampa, March 3, 1992)."

daughtersofstpaul.com/johnpaulpapacy/meetjp/thepope/jpcommunism.html

God is truly working through JPII.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

FR. Ambrose:

This man is not fit to be a parish Priest, let alone an Archbishop! What he is doing is contrary to this:

There is no longer Jew or Gentile, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:28 NRSV
Fr Ambrose:

Down here in New Zealand, the Primate of the Anglican Church is not only opposed to same-sex marriages, he is opposed to INTER-RACIAL marriages also.

I bet that rocks your world! But it is absolutely true. Here is one of his statements from September 2004…

The new Anglican Archbishop has surprised Anglicans throughout New Zealand by calling for the break-up of all inter-racial marriages. Archbishop Whakahuihui Vercoe defends the Church’s radical new policy on the grounds that he is merely enforcing “clear biblical injunctions against mixed marriage”.

“Moreover, it is just an accepted human norm that the races are not to be mixed in marriage,” asserted Archbishop Vercoe. “I mean to say, you don’t see cats mating with dogs, or kiwi mating with kakapo, do you, eh? It’s just common sense, isn’t it? Different is bad.”

Archbishop Vercoe cites Ezra Chapter 10 as biblical support for a move that is expected to affect thousands of Anglicans nationwide.

“Just as Israel’s new head priest Ezra came in and forced the break-up of all the inter-racial marriages in Israel, I’m doing the same as the new head priest of Aotearoa,” stated Archbishop Vercoe.

“It is the will of God. The book of Ezra chapter 10 verse 11 clearly states: ‘Now make confession to the Lord the God of your ancestors, and do his will; separate yourselves from the peoples of the land and from the foreign wives.’ Mixed marriage is an abomination in the sight of the Lord.”

The biblical story Archbishop Vercoe refers to relates that every marriage between an Israelite and foreign woman was forcibly broken up, and the wives and children from each marriage sent away to survive on their own.

Ezra was dealing with a situation where the intermarraige had destroyed the nation people and religion of Israel, where foreign wives had led their families into idol worship, and the worshop of the Lord God had all but disappeared.

Because of this,God had poured out His wrath upon the land and the people of Israel and desparate meassures were called for and taken. This was one of them, the full year of Jubilee was another…Is the Archbishop ready to redistribute all of New Zealand’s wealth??
Fr Ambrose:

Archbishop Vercoe also wished to remind Anglicans that they could learn from the example provided by Jesus.

“When confronted by a Canaanite woman begging him to heal her sick daughter, Jesus initially refused to help her, explaining that ‘It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs’ [Matthew 15:26]. If Jesus made this distinction between different races, referring to this foreign woman as a lowly “dog”, then is the greater ‘tolerance’ shown by our society really such a good thing? Or have we strayed from the eternal truth - as discovered for all time by a fairly backward and mostly illiterate tribal people living 2000 years ago?”

continued…

Someone needs to remind this crazy Archbishop how that ended and that Jesus praised the greatness of the woman’s faith before he healed her daughter!

FR. Ambrose, I think that you and your friends are going to be very busy over the next few years.

May God bless you and your congregation.

Michael

 

[steve_b]

Steve B - Referring to your # 110:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=467059&postcount=110

As I said in my post #1:

So, with that in mind, as of two weeks ago, I was informed by my source, who happens to be my Pastor, that an offer had been made to Archbishop John Hepworth, the Primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion by Pope John Paul II for FULL COMMUNION with the Catholic Church and His Holiness, Pope Paul II.

The details were no less astounding to me than they were to many of the other poster of the forum, because they included that the TAC would NOT be required to accept the Infallibility of the Pope or the two Marion doctrines (The Assumption of the BVM & the Immaculate Conception of the BVM).

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=460243&postcount=1

This is the extent of what I have. The only thing that caused me to post was the INTEGRITY and the PLACEMENT of my source. As Fr. Ambrose has posted, there has been an information lockdown for the last month, and I can tell you that these people are very good at keeping a secret when they want to.

For the life of me, I don’t know why they allowed me to post the information.

Regarding Catholic politicians and others who are defying the Church on various issues - my point is that these people aren’t denied the comfort of the Church and its Sacraments. Right or wrong, they’re given the Sacraments and every chance of repentance! That’s what you would deny to the TAC members who are NOT defiant, but who are (according to my source) only guilty of being allowed to not voice assent to doctrines many Catholics don’t believe in!

I understand that after death there’s a judgement, and that many of us will not fare so well. That’s why I “Work out my own salvation in fear and trembling” and why I plead the case for the Traditional Anglicans who can’t come to places like this board and plead it for themselves.

Regarding Thomas - Did our Lord handle Thomas’ doubts by sending apostles at him to argue the correctness of the Resurrection while Thomas waited outside the door being refused admittence? or, Did Our Lord come to Thomas while the Eleven were GATHERED TOGETHER in the upper room?

Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.”
John 20:27

If you were in the TAC and I were a Catholic on the Board, what would you want to hear?

Blessings and peace.

Goodnight, Michael

Michael,

I’ve tried to find anything close to what you’ve been describing. I can’t find anything from the Catholic Church on this. Do you have anything official to point to from the Catholic Church?

 

[MaggieOH]

Traditional Ang:

FR. Ambrose:

This man is not fit to be a parish Priest, let alone an Archbishop! What he is doing is contrary to this:

There is no longer Jew or Gentile, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:28 NRSV

Ezra was dealing with a situation where the intermarraige had destroyed the nation people and religion of Israel, where foreign wives had led their families into idol worship, and the worshop of the Lord God had all but disappeared.

Because of this,God had poured out His wrath upon the land and the people of Israel and desparate meassures were called for and taken. This was one of them, the full year of Jubilee was another…Is the Archbishop ready to redistribute all of New Zealand’s wealth??

Someone needs to remind this crazy Archbishop how that ended and that Jesus praised the greatness of the woman’s faith before he healed her daughter!

FR. Ambrose, I think that you and your friends are going to be very busy over the next few years.

May God bless you and your congregation.

Michael

Michael,

I second your comment, and Fr. Ambrose you better be ready for the steady stream as people leave the Anglican Communion and head towards either the Orthodox or the Catholic Church.

I really wonder why this man is a priest if he makes such racist comments. If it was said in South Africa he would be arrested.

MaggieOH

 

[Matt16_18]

Michael_Thoma:

Matt,

The question is, if TAC Anglican ordinations are a maybe, are Anglican confirmations a maybe?

As far as I can determine, the Catholic Church does not recognize the validity of Anglican Confirmation, and all Anglicans in the RCIA program receive the Sacrament of Confirmation.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Steve:

I didn’t miss your question, but, as I and Fr. Ambrose have both explained, there’s been an information lockdown for the past 2 months, so I haven’t been able to get any information from the media…
steve b:

You might have missed my question to you on entering this thread. I was looking for the evidence that these talks were really going on

Today, I quoted a TAC Bishop, whom I spoke to today, as to the nature of the talks and the requests by the Vatican. I told you where and when I talked to him and the terms he asked me to use.

If you’ll give me your e-mail, I’ll forward the bulletin announcing his presence at St. Mary’s today so that you can verify those details yourself. I can’t do any more.

If that’s not enough, I’m sorry.

Steve, believe it or not, the Catholic Laity have some say on the issue, too. All of those crowds cheering the Pope and his efforts are a guage of faithful Catholics’ feelings about what him and what he’s trying to do…
steve b:

At least on the Catholic side, the laity usually don’t have a say in these matters. As far as the East is concerned, all the efforts being made for reconcilliation with the East as I can see, have been made by the West. When the pope went to visit the East, Russian, Greek, Rumanian, Ethiopian etc Orthodox, pull the usual anti Catholic demonstration stuff, that followed JPII wherever he went. If one of their patriarchs comes West, he’s welcomed. That’s the difference between West and East… Here’s an example, when JPII wanted to visit Catholics in the Ukraine, it’s common courtesy to visit the patriarch of Russia. However,

This from radio free Europe

"Russian Orthodox Patriarch Aleksii II, who has publicly refused to meet with Pope John Paul II, said the pope’s visit to Ukraine will “cause new confrontation between religious confessions there.” Ukraine’s Orthodox priests subordinated to the Moscow Patriarchate have been using the media, as well as their pulpits, to criticize the pope’s visit.

Father Gerontii is an Orthodox priest at the Pecherska Lavra monastery. As one of the leaders of antipapal protests, he said there is much to lose from Pope John Paul II’s visit.

“We don’t want him to come here and proselytize, to be a missionary. What do we need that for? His program is like a nightmare for us,” he said. “If an enemy comes to you, are you going to keep quiet? And he is an enemy of man’s souls.”

Father Gerontii claimed that the pope will be stopped by demonstrators if he attempts to visit either the Pecherska Lavra or the St. Sophia cathedral. “We will never allow him into the Lavra. The people have said that they will lie down in order to block his path, not only for one week, but two, three,” he said. “Nobody will get into the Lavra, just as they will not get into St. Sofia. They’re our holy shrines.”
(As a side note Aleksii II is a past KGB agent)

infoukes.com/rfe-ukraine/2001/0619.html

I have to hand it to JPII. He’s truly walking in the shoes of Peter. What’s also magnificent about JPII and the East, Gorbeschev, credits JPII for the collapse of communism in the East. As Gorby said

“What has happened in Eastern Europe in recent years would not have been possible without the presence of this Pope, without the great role even political that he has played on the world scene” (quoted in La Stampa, March 3, 1992)."

daughtersofstpaul.com/johnpaulpapacy/meetjp/thepope/jpcommunism.html

God is truly working through JPII.

…Steve, could you please call me by name on your posts and append your name at the bottom? I seem to recall that everyone used to and that the lack of it has been part of the coarsening over the past few days - Frankly, between that and the fact that all I’ve heard is the Law of the Church for the last 5 days, I’ve pretty much been made to feel like a used car salesman or a telemarketer, or like a member of the Pope’s entourage confronted by the Orthodox Protestors you described.

Thank you.

I don’t think someone should have to beg to have his humanity recognized or that of the people he’s representing on a CATHOLIC Forum.

Blessings and peace. Michael