Anglicans to Rome?

[GAssisi]

Dear Michael,

This is great news indeed! However, I am concerned with the issue which I’m sure you already know I’m concerned about – the statement that the Anglicans do not have to accept papal infallibility, the Assumption or the Immaculate Conception.

I can accept the idea that the Pope respects freedom of conscience, and that this allowance falls under the purview of invincible ignorance.

What I think is happening is that this first generation of the Anglican Catholic Church will not be required to believe in these three dogmas by reason of invincible ignorance. This might even apply to the next generation who are currently living. However, I think this allowance will stop there. I believe what will happen is that these dogmas will still be taught and explained in the Anglican Catholic parishes of today, though they will not be REQUIRED to be believed at this point. However, I think it will be expected that these dogmas will be taught to NEWBORNS as their Faith. What do you think?

God bless,

Greg

 

[GKC]

GKC AND ALL OTHER ANGLICANS:

I’ve been asked to keep you appraised of any DEVELOPMENTS in the negotiations between Pope John Paul II and Archibishop Hepworth of the Traditional Anglican Communion.

This may turn out to be a real shocker, and may cause those Anglicans who’ve rejected Re-Union with Rome to reconsider their position…

…I was informed this morning that an offer has been made by Pope John Paul II and preliminarily accepted by Archbishop Hepworth for the following: Full Communion…The Traditional Anglican Communion, hereinafter to be called the Anglican Catholic Church would NOT have to accept Papal Infallibility, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

If the Bishops are going to Rome this summer as has been rumored, it would be for ORDINATION SUB CONDITIONE and NOT "Re-Ordination, as Cardinal Ratzinger has already verified the validity of the Orders. Order and Discipline for Bishops, Priests and Deacons would be as per Anglican Useage under Archbishop Hepworth’s authority in submission to Pope John Paul II.

The deal in practice will look a lot like those used to bring the Eastern Catholic Churches into union with the See of Peter.

I would strongly advise All members of the TAC to enthusiastically accept this offer. I would also advise All believing Anglicans who have left or who are leaving the Anglican Communion (C of E), and their parishes, to consider this offer.

I also think the Orthodox need to reevaluate some of their opinions about Rome. I understand that’s 3 out of the 5 objections, and the 33 Articles of Brest say how Rome would handle at least one other.

Blessings and peace.

In Christ, Michael

It is a shocker indeed, that at first glance, flies in the face of 550 years of history, with particular emphasis on the last 109 years. I am most anxious to hear more of it. Any idea when and where it might be officially announced, and by whom??

A proposal such as this should stir the dove cotes on both sides of the Tiber.

Thanks for the info, T.A. Please continue to relay what you have heard.

GKC

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Paul:

I was born and raised in a “Low Church” (Protestant/Evangelical) Parish. I don’t recall doing Eucharistic Adoration, Invocation of the Saints or Dovation to the BVM. We had Holy Communion (Low Mass with music and a Sermon) 2x/month. The standard service was Morning Prayer - Sung, of course.

WE didn’t have weekly Holy Communion until we got a new Rector, and even then, it was a Song Mass, not a High Mass.

pgoings:

Boethius,

Glad to answer.

1. The Anglican bishops in Africa (especially eastern Africa) tend to be of the protestant/calvinist school, despite being “Biblically orthodox.” Thus, many of our beloved practices such as Eucharistic Adoration, the invocation of saints, etc. would be considered idolatrous.

The Church I attend now (after 20 years on the outside) is most definitely High Church. We do Solemn High Mass weekly, along with Adaration of the Blessed Sacrament (3rd Sunday of the Month), Devotions to the BVM and Invocations to the Saints.

It’s amazing what gratitude at finding a home and a place to know God after 20 years’ absence will do, and it’s amazing how we can learn to love those parts of our Tradition.

Anglicans (like the Orthodox) accept the first 7 Councils of the Church. At least one dealt with the some of the above subjects. In addition, Abp Hepworth has risked his life for one of his Bishops. I can’t give you any of the details, escept to tell you that it involved the TAC Bishop of Pakistan.

The Bishops in East Africa know the details and that he’ll do the same thing for them.

pgoings:

1. As to the motivations of the various Clementines, there are several issues above the validity of the sacraments, and the breadth of* praxis* which we currently have available. The major problem is that Anglicanism has largely allied itself with the “spirit of the age,” to an extent which was previously unknown. In a few short years (absent some form of divine intervention) there will no longer be any traditional Anglo-Catholic clergy remaining in “official” Anglicanism. Faced with this, those of us who would like continue to practice the Catholic religion in its fullness are remaining in place until our destination becomes clearer. In the end that might be the local Indult parish, or the “Anglican Rite” uniate parish, if TAC is successful in their negotiations. Of course, there are also those who are just there for the pretty music and vestments (not a phenomenon peculiar to Anglo-Catholicism) who will stay even if heresy is taught from the pulpit by a woman “priest.”

Well,…I think the destination became a little clearer with the latest offer from the Pope. It seems that Abp Hepworth is telling Traditional Anglicans and our clergy to accept it.

I’m telling any Anglican who’ll listen to accept it.

If you’ll read my post on the “Working Theology” of ECUSA, you’ll see that the whole body is riddled with heresy. I can understand why people of faith are staying, but I can’t really condone it, because I believe they’re endangering their spiritual health.

pgoings:

There is a small TAC parish about 40 mins. away. To the best of my knowledge is fairly moderate, and not very Anglo-Catholic. Sadly, the makeup of TAC is not nearly as monochromatic as Abp Hepworth would have the Curia believe–this may cause real problems at some point.

–Paul

Mine is 25 min. away. That’s not so bad, because I live in a city where an hour is a normal commute.

I believe that those who really don’t want to go on the “trans Tiberian Swim” will find some way to opt our and find homes elsewhere. Remember, there’s a varitable alphabet soup of Anglican jurisdictions that are more Protestant/Evangelical in Doctrine and Practice who use the BCP 1928 or some variant.

O also believe there are those who would join if they believed they could get a deal like the one I’ve posted today. Hopefully, there are far more of them than of those who just won’t do it.

I don’t believe that Abp Hepworth has present the TAC to the Curia in quite the way you’ve suggested. Anyway, from what I’ve heard, the Vatican contacted him in 1994.

Now, we know how long the secret was kept before It finally was allowed out here. I didn’t know about it until 11 months ago.

Please pray that St. Michael porotects the final workings from the enemy of all things good.

Blessings and peace.

Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

GAssisi:

Dear Michael,

This is great news indeed! However, I am concerned with the issue which IÕm sure you already know IÕm concerned about Ð the statement that the Anglicans do not have to accept papal infallibility, the Assumption or the Immaculate Conception.

I can accept the idea that the Pope respects freedom of conscience, and that this allowance falls under the purview of invincible ignorance.

What I think is happening is that this first generation of the Anglican Catholic Church will not be required to believe in these three dogmas by reason of invincible ignorance. This might even apply to the next generation who are currently living. However, I think this allowance will stop there. I believe what will happen is that these dogmas will still be taught and explained in the Anglican Catholic parishes of today, though they will not be REQUIRED to be believed at this point. However, I think it will be expected that these dogmas will be taught to NEWBORNS as their Faith. What do you think?

God bless,

Greg

Greg:

Pope John Paul II didn’t consult me before making the offer…And I’ve actually given all the details I know.

Regarding whether or not the Catholic Church would change the Terms of Unity with another Catholic Church, I think we need to ask those who belong to the Eastern Catholic Churches if that is the case.

Michael_Thoma? Byz_Catholic? Any other Eastern Catholics? Could you please let us know some of the details of your Church’s Doctrine? Thanks…

Greg, Father said that he believed that Pope John Paul II was establishing a precedent for UNITY with the Orthodox Churches. As you know, those three doctrines figure prominently in their objections to Catholicism, and they’ve always claimed that they wouild be forced to accept them as well as the Filioque Clause. If we (the TAC) can come in (with urging by Abp Hepworth and some from yours truly) without having to accept those doctrines, the Orthodox will lose a whole series of objections to Unity.

Please understand that I accept these doctrines and that one of the parishioners from St. Mary’s can defend them from Scripture, but no one seems to be asking us…

May God richly bless you.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

. If we (the TAC) can come in (with urging by Abp Hepworth and some from yours truly) without having to accept those doctrines, the Orthodox will lose a whole series of objections to Unity.

Huh!! There can be no union while Rome holds heretical doctrines. We will always object to them.

We are not objecting to the hope of unity but we are not about to enter a false unity which would create an un-Church where millions believed that the Pope is infallible and millions believed he is not. What a nightmare of faith!! This would be the gates of hell prevailing against the Church. This would not be unity but a diabolical dis-unity.

The invincible ignorance approach advanced by GAssisi? Weird! How far can you take it? Will Anglicans who deny the divinity of Christ or the RealPresence be allowed to become Catholics, using the reasoning that over time and with education their grandchildren will accept it?

---

Never, O man, is that which relates to the Church corrected through compromises: there is no middle way between the Truth and the lie… and although one can say that there is a mean between light and darkness which is called the morning and evening twilight, nevertheless between the Truth and the lie, however hard you try, you will never find a mean.
-St. Mark of Ephesus

 

[Traditional_Ang]

oat soda:

it’s the devil. in case you haven’t noticed, we’re in an all out spiritual war right of good vs. evil and the devil has made his way even into the vatican. not to sound gloom, but the devil is doing a good job right now, 4,000 abortions a day in this country alone!

part of satans tactics is to divide and conquer. he sifted the episcopalians like wheat. so he’ll do everything in his power to keep us divided. he uses our pride against us. he’s the lord of pride - that’s what got him in hell.

Unfortunately, itÕs not ÒcoolÓ to talk about life in this reality. Catholics will say ÒitÕs a complex problemÓ just like bishop Flynn says about giving communion to homo-activists. This is just what the satan wants, us to not recognize him. HeÕs a master of being subtle.

Oat Soda:

I know he exists.

One day I was watching a Hitler Speech without the subtitles (my German is absolutely atrocious at best). Much to my horror, I found myself standing up ready to yell, “Zieg Heil!” It was one of the scariest experience of my life…I can only attribute his success, and people’s blindness to him to the influence of the Devil.

The Head of the Italian Islamic Association actually calls much of the Judeophobia coming out of Arab societies “Shaytanic” (Arabic for “Satanic”), and I don’t know what else one would call the wanton slaughter of 2 million African Christians and Animists and the enslavement of 350,00 more. Or, the fact that most of the world’s press ignored this outrage.

And then there’s the slaughter of 4 million in the Congo and 800,000 in Rwanda, both under the “Watchful Eyes” of the UN.

All of the above in the 1990’s, along with over 40 million Abortions in the USA just since 1973…

Yes, the Devil exists, and he’s been hard at work, and what’s been our response…Many deny that he exists, and that’s a BIG mistake.

Pray for St. Michael to protect the proceedings.

Peace and blessings to you and your hour household.

Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

Most of the objections voiced on this board by Orthodox members of the forum (including you) have objected to Unity with Rome on the Basis that you would be forced to espouse doctrines you believe to be heretical.

Between the various Articles of Unity between the various Eastern Catholic Churches and the Roman Catholic Church, and this latest offer from the Vatican to the Traditional Anglican Communion, that has been shown to be false.
Fr Ambrose:

Huh!! There can be no union while Rome holds heretical doctrines. We will always object to them.

We are not objecting to the hope of unity but we are not about to enter a false unity which would create an un-Church where millions believed that the Pope is infallible and millions believed he is not. What a nightmare of faith!! This would be the gates of hell prevailing against the Church. This would not be unity but a diabolical dis-unity.

The invincible ignorance approach advanced by GAssisi? Weird! How far can you take it? Will Anglicans who deny the divinity of Christ or the RealPresence be allowed to become Catholics, using the reasoning that over time and with education their grandchildren will accept it?

So, now you come up with this, which was probably the real reason for preventing Unity. You want us to teach what you teach, because you believe that the Orthodox can’t make a mistake, or teach a heresy, no matter what it teaches.

Fr., we have documented here several times in the past where the Eastern Church was forced to appeal to the Western Church, and specifically to the Pope, to deal with various Christological heresies. How can the Church that was forced to do that all of the sudden become Free From Error?

Fr. What grace are you claiming for the Orthodox Church, which has changed its teaching on at least one issue in the 20th Century, that you are saying it didn’t have then?

Think carefully. I believe that there’s a nasty persecution coming, and that it will go far worse for us if we’re apart than if we’re together.

And, how can you compare the Infallibility of the Pope to the Divinity and Resurrection of Jesus, which is necessary for our salvation? Or, the two Marion doctrines with the Real Presence which is necessary to “Discern the Lord’s Body and Blood in the Eucharist”?

Remember, I believe in both, but I can’t see how both are essential to Salvation in the ways the other Doctrines I pointed out are.

Blessings to you and your congregation.

Michael

 

[HagiaSophia]

Traditional Ang:

One day I was watching a Hitler Speech without the subtitles (my German is absolutely atrocious at best). Much to my horror, I found myself standing up ready to yell, “Zieg Heil!” It was one of the scariest experience of my life…I can only attribute his success, and people’s blindness to him to the influence of the Devil.

Taking nothing away rom the devil, there are great rhetorical speakers who can sway crowds…

Those that knew Hitler and actually attended some of his speeches in the beer halls of Munich will tell you that when he spoke he was absolutely hypnotic. Many left those speeches with eyes crossed which is often a sign of having been hypnotized. I know it doesn’t seem to from the snippets of film we see here, but the eyewitness accounts will tell you that he could bring thousands to their feet when he had finished speaking.

Another example is Mussolini, when you see the film clips of this posturing, over theatrical buffoon in our day he looks absolutely idiotic - yet he moved a nation…

I have heard Americans tell me that when Roosevelt spoke over the radio he had the same effect. People who disliked him and disagreed with him after listening to his persuasion over radio, would often reverse themselves.

Look at the story of St. Anthony who when he spoke not only converted crowds but caused the fishes to raise their heads from the water and listen - it appears to be a gift and like all gifts can be used for evil or good.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

Most of the objections voiced on this board by Orthodox members of the forum (including you) have objected to Unity with Rome on the Basis that you would be forced to espouse doctrines you believe to be heretical.

There is a difference of approach between us here. Rome is willing, as we have seen from the concessions to the TAC, to admit into its Church communities which deny dogma defined by Rome as infallible teaching. I find this unbelievable but I have to believe you.

The Orthodox are not willing to compromise the Faith and we hope that Rome will eventually return to the faith espoused by the Church of the first Millennium, before the Great Schism. Once unity of faith is reached, we shall enter into communion with Rome.

Between the various Articles of Unity between the various Eastern Catholic Churches and the Roman Catholic Church, and this latest offer from the Vatican to the Traditional Anglican Communion, that has been shown to be false.

Michael, I honestly doubt, forgive me, that the Roman Catholic authorities have made such an offer to your Church - to receive Christians who deny key RC doctrines, infallibly defined dogma, is beyond any imagining. Let us await confirmation of what you have reported.

So, now you come up with this, which was probably the real reason for preventing Unity. You want us to teach what you teach, because you believe that the Orthodox can’t make a mistake, or teach a heresy, no matter what it teaches.

The Orthodox Church believes itself to be the Una Sancta. The Roman Catholic Church believes the same of itself. Of course we want all Christians to come to an acceptance of the orthodox faith. This should not be any sort of surprise revelation!

And, how can you compare the Infallibility of the Pope to the Divinity and Resurrection of Jesus, which is necessary for our salvation? Or, the two Marion doctrines with the Real Presence which is necessary to “Discern the Lord’s Body and Blood in the Eucharist”?

Somebody here has mentioned that the TAC does not enjoy a uniform Anglo-Catholic level of belief. Presumably this means that there are traditional/classical Anglicans in the TAC who do not believe in the Real Presence and who accept only two Sacraments, Baptism and Eucharist. Will these Protestant Anglicans also be entering the Roman Catholic Church en masse as part and parcel of the TAC?

---

Thus saith the Lord: “Stand at the crossroads, and see and ask for the ancient paths which is the good way, and walk therein, and you shall find rest for your souls.” -Jeremiah 6:16

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

And, how can you compare the Infallibility of the Pope to the Divinity and Resurrection of Jesus, which is necessary for our salvation? Or, the two Marion doctrines with the Real Presence which is necessary to “Discern the Lord’s Body and Blood in the Eucharist”?

Remember, I believe in both, but I can’t see how both are essential to Salvation in the ways the other Doctrines I pointed out are.

We don’t have central doctrines, core doctrines, or minimal doctrines. Orthodoxy is maximalist.

One of your own most notable Archbishops grasped this very well and he expressed it nicely at the Anglo Russian Theological Conference at Moscow in 1956

Dr Michael Ramsey, expressed the Orthodox viewpoint exactly:

**The Orthodox said in effect: " … The ‘tradition is a concrete fact. There it is, in its totality. Do you Anglicans accept it, or do you reject it?’ The Tradition is for the Orthodox one indivisible whole: the entire life of the Church in its fullness of belief and custom down the ages, including Mariology and the veneration of icons. Faced with this challenge, the typically Anglican reply is: ‘We would not regard veneration of icons or Mariology as inadmissible, provided that in determining what is necessary to salvation, we confine ourselves to Holy Scripture.’ But this reply only throws into relief the contrast between the Anglican appeal to what is deemed necessary to salvation and the Orthodox appeal to the one indivisible organism of Tradition, to tamper with any part of which is to spoil the whole, in the sort of way that a single splodge on a picture can mar its beauty." **

‘The Moscow Conference in Retrospect’, in Sobornost, series 3, no. 23, 1958, pp. 562-3.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

You have the testimony of the 33 Articles of Brest and of the other Terms of Union that brought the various Eastern Catholic Churches into Union with Rome. You’ll find out that almost NONE of those CATHOLIC CHURCHES uses or is required to use the Filioque Clause, and almost none have a CELEBATE PRIESTHOOD!
Fr Ambrose:

There is a difference of approach between us here. Rome is willing, as we have seen from the concessions to the TAC, to admit into its Church communities which deny dogma defined by Rome as infallible teaching. I find this unbelievable but I have to believe you.

The Orthodox are not willing to compromise the Faith and we hope that Rome will eventually return to the faith espoused by the Church of the first Millennium, before the Great Schism. Once unity of faith is reached, we shall enter into communion with Rome.

How can you expect to enter into the “Unity of Faith” if you do not pray and talk together at the level of CONGREGATIONS??

Have of what I hear comes from a sense of RUPTURED TRUST. How do you expect to repair that trust if the people never worship together and you continue to teach about all the wrongs the west has ever done while portaying the East as innocent victim only and never as perpetrator?

Fr., in the Paragraph above, you said you have to believe me. In the one below, you said that you couldn’t see how Catholic authorities could make such an offer to the TAC. Which one is it? Thje Articles of Brest exist, do they not? I’m only transmitting what I’ve been told by my Rector who claims he received it from Archbishop Hepworth and that it’s available on the press. I was asked to give details as soon as I heard them.

That’s what I’ve done.
Fr Ambrose:

Michael, I honestly doubt, forgive me, that the Roman Catholic authorities have made such an offer to your Church - to receive Christians who deny key RC doctrines, infallibly defined dogma, is beyond any imagining. Let us await confirmation of what you have reported.

And, are you willing to put any of the dogmas arrived at since the split to the same test you demand of Rome? Are you willing to place any of the Doctrines you hold that was in dispute at the time of the Schism to the same test as you demand of Rome?

Why should Rome be the only party who has to examine herself?
Fr Ambrose:

The Orthodox Church believes itself to be the Una Sancta. The Roman Catholic Church believes the same of itself. Of course we want all Christians to come to an acceptance of the orthodox faith. This should not be any sort of surprise revelation!

Fr., I know of no one in the TAC who denies the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I know that the “Articles of Religion” of the C of E (and of PECUSA) were opposed to Transubstantiation, but almost all of those who left PECUSA after they ordained women Priests tossed that out the door.
Fr Ambrose:

Somebody here has mentioned that the TAC does not enjoy a uniform Anglo-Catholic level of belief. Presumably this means that there are traditional/classical Anglicans in the TAC who do not believe in the Real Presence and who accept only two Sacraments, Baptism and Eucharist. Will these Protestant Anglicans also be entering the Roman Catholic Church en masse as part and parcel of the TAC?

Regarding 2 Sacraments v 7 Sacraments - That was taught Low Church Parishes. The first 7 Ecumenical Councils (Which Anglicans Accept) teach 7 Sacraments (No, I can’t name the Council right now). The Anglicans in Question will either have to accept those first 7 Councils as they claim they do, and the DOCTRINES of those Councils (two of which are above), or they may find themselves unable, for reasons of conscience, to make the “Swim”.

Obviously, we have many in our body who can argue the Catholic case at least as well as I can, so I have no doubt that most of those people will be persuaded as to the truth of the Catholic Doctrine and the necessity of its acceptance.

As regards the rest, I’m going to be sorry to see them go, as will Archbishop Hepworth. luckily, there are Protestant/Evangelical bodies in the Continuoum who won’t be making the trip.

IMO, those who will be making the trip will be convinced of the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and of 7 Sacraments as described by the Church Fathers and the First 7 Councils of the Undivided Church.

May God bless you and your congregation.

Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

in the Paragraph above, you said you have to believe me. In the one below, you said that you couldn’t see how Catholic authorities could make such an offer to the TAC. Which one is it?

Michael , this shows how completely bewildering the report is.

I believe you because I am sure, from what I know of you on the forum, that you are an honest man.

BUT I find it hard to believe that Rome has offered these ‘conditions’ to a Church entering its jurisdiction.

I honestly never thought I would live to see the day when Catholics are told by Rome that they can deny papal infallibility, the Assumption (ouch, that really hurts!) or the Immaculate Conception. And if you in the Anglican Catholic Church may deny them, why cannot other Catholics?

These are the THREE key doctrines associated with Papal Infallibility

So in short, I believe you have reported honestly the information which you received. I just do not trust the information itself.

Very very confused here at my end of the telephone line

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

And, are you willing to put any of the dogmas arrived at since the split to the same test you demand of Rome? Are you willing to place any of the Doctrines you hold that was in dispute at the time of the Schism to the same test as you demand of Rome?

AAAAaaaaarrrgghhhhhhh! The dreaded question!! The answer, not to beat around the bush, is no.

**The Orthodox Church true to her historical consciousness declares that she has maintained an unbroken continuity with the Church of Pentecost by preserving the Apostolic faith and polity unadulterated. She has kept the “faith once delivered unto the saints” free from the distortions of human innovations. Man-made doctrines have never found their way into the Orthodox Church, since she has no necessary association in history with the name of one single father or theologian. She owes the fullness and the guarantee of unity and infallibility to the operation of the Holy Spirit and not to the service of one individual. It is for this reason that she has never felt the need for what is known as “a return to the purity of the Apostolic faith.” ** She maintains the necessary balance between freedom and authority and thus avoids the extremes of absolutism and individualism both of which have done violence to Christian unity.

We re-assert what was declared at Evanston and what has been made known in the past at all interdenominational conferences attended by delegates of the Orthodox Church. It is not due to our personal merit, but to divine condescension that we represent the Orthodox Church and are able to give expression to her claims. We are bound in conscience to state explicitly what is logically inferred; that all other bodies have been directly or indirectly separated from the Orthodox Church. Unity from the Orthodox standpoint means a return of the separated bodies to the historical Orthodox, One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

From
**The Oberlin Statement: Christian Unity As Viewed by the Orthodox Church **
Statement of the Representatives of the Greek Orthodox Church in USA at the North American Faith and Order Study Conference, Oberlin, Ohio, September 3-10, 1957

orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/oberlin.aspx

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

You may very well be dealing wiht the idea of the pure Faith in all of its beauty. I must admit that I’m too much of an Augustinian or of the mindset that produced the Athanasian Creed…
Fr Ambrose:

We don’t have central doctrines, core doctrines, or minimal doctrines. Orthodoxy is maximalist.

One of your own most notable Archbishops grasped this very well and he expressed it nicely at the Anglo Russian Theological Conference at Moscow in 1956

Dr Michael Ramsey, expressed the Orthodox viewpoint exactly:

**The Orthodox said in effect: " … The ‘tradition is a concrete fact. There it is, in its totality. Do you Anglicans accept it, or do you reject it?’ The Tradition is for the Orthodox one indivisible whole: the entire life of the Church in its fullness of belief and custom down the ages, including Mariology and the veneration of icons. Faced with this challenge, the typically Anglican reply is: ‘We would not regard veneration of icons or Mariology as inadmissible, provided that in determining what is necessary to salvation, we confine ourselves to Holy Scripture.’ But this reply only throws into relief the contrast between the Anglican appeal to what is deemed necessary to salvation and the Orthodox appeal to the one indivisible organism of Tradition, to tamper with any part of which is to spoil the whole, in the sort of way that a single splodge on a picture can mar its beauty." **

‘The Moscow Conference in Retrospect’, in Sobornost, series 3, no. 23, 1958, pp. 562-3.

…I’m far more worried about what’s needed to get someone into a relationship with God and then into the Presence of the God in Three Hypostasis. I figure if I’ve done that for the right reasons, God can take care of the rest.

The Orthodox Rabbi who dragged me back after all these years didn’t worry about getting me to the perfect Church. he just worried about getting me to the Church.

May God bless you, Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

…I’m far more worried about what’s needed to get someone into a relationship with God and then into the Presence of the God in Three Hypostasis. I figure if I’ve done that for the right reasons, God can take care of the rest.

LOL! So what about all these days writing about how imperative you feel it that you must be subject to the Supreme Pontiff and accept his divinely given infallibility, etc…?

Why not just stay where you are and get on with getting people “into a relationship with God and then into the Presence of the God in Three Hypostasis.”

Why do you need to say “I’m going to have to agree with my Primate who has stated that Union with and submission to the See of Peter is essential”?

“Guarantees such as Papal Infallability are not guarantees from the Pope or even from the Church, they are Guarantees from God.” and other sundry statements

 

[Traditional_Ang]

**Regarding the questiong about “Low-Church” Protestant/Evangelical Bishops in East Africa in the TAC: **

Many of the Bishops and congregations in Africa are fairly “Low Church”, or Protestant/Evangelical, exp. those in areas presently confronting Radical Islam. I agree that this should, at least on the surface, present a real problem for Archbishop Hepworth as he tries to get them to follow him into the Catholic Church.

I don’t believe that they will cause him as many problems as they might cause other Churchmen in the same position.

Here’s why - About 19 months ago, an Orthodox Rabbi risked his life for me. He only knew me from a forum that we posted on together. A few months later, he traded in the capital from that to save my spiritual life by getting me return to the Faith (and Church) of my youth. I wouldn’t have done what he said except that he had risked his life for me.

Last year, Abp Hepworth risked his life for a TAC Bishop (I know of at least this one occasion). He was a Bishop in an Islamic country. Every one of those Bishops in Africa know the details and that he would do the same for them.

They’ll follow, because he’ll lead, and because of what they know he’ll do when the chips are down.

Peace and Goodnight to all.

Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

I’m also concerned about the conditions that will allow the rest of the TAC to actually join Abp Hepworth and me on the “Trans Tiberian Swim”. It really does very little good if most of the members don’t make the trip.

And, Pope John Paul II made the offer. I think the TAC would have to be fools to pass it up. I’m trying to convince them of that.
Fr Ambrose:

LOL! So what about all these days writing about how imperative you feel it that you must be subject to the Supreme Pontiff and accept his divinely given infallibility, etc…?

Why not just stay where you are and get on with getting people “into a relationship with God and then into the Presence of the God in Three Hypostasis.”

Why do you need to say “I’m going to have to agree with my Primate who has stated that Union with and submission to the See of Peter is essential”?

“Guarantees such as Papal Infallability are not guarantees from the Pope or even from the Church, they are Guarantees from God.” and other sundry statements

You’ve stated a Theology, one that’s principled and complete, but one that’s stalled when it comes to spreading the word of God to those who don’t yet know Him (I’m not talking about “converting” Catholics and Protestants)!

Since I’m concerned about getting people, including myself, into the Kingdom of God, I’m concerned about which body has the best record when it comes to doing this. That’s the Catholic Church!

I’ve also come to the same realization that Abp Hepworth has, that small bodies of Squabbling Anglicans just won’t be able to maintain Apostolic Succession and teaching authority for any kind of long haul, and that The Anglican Communion has given up Apostolic Succession and, therefore, valid sacraments.

The best way to save my soul, and those of the people around me is to place those of us who are willing in a structure that can preserve the Apostolic Succession, provide Teaching Authority, and tempor the squabbles, while giving us an Evangelical outreach and purpose, so that we begin to renew ourselves and our movement in the same way that St. Mary’s and parishes like it have done.

Last time I looked, the Pope was the best man for the job. In the case of Pope John Paul II, I’ve had the rare opportunity to follow his pontificate from the POV of a sceptic and have become convinced of his Holiness and gifts of authority, teaching, discernment, prophecy, healing and Infallibility. I’ve seen a man use real power for real good. You can call that part of my second conversion.

FR. Ambrose, it’s your choice how we deal with this issue. We can deal with this as two brothers in Christ who areout our salvation in fear and tembling (to quote the Apostle Paul) and who know that we must try to help others to be saved as well as ourselves. Or, We can deal with this as 2 polemicists only interested in scoring points.

I think you know which one glorifies God and which one demonstrates to unbelievers that we don’t care about each other.

Blessings to you and your congregation. Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

Fr. Ambrose:

We can choose to deal with this as two brothers in Christ who are struggling to save our own souls as well as those of the people around us…Or we can choose to deal with this as two polemicists!

Which shall it be?

Both. I am convinced of the Una Sancta of which I have the extraordinary blessedness to be a member. I also like to take part in discussions in the Non-Catholic Religions section of the forum.

You’ve stated a Position, one that’s principled, but one that’s stalled when it comes to spreading the word of God to those who don’t yet know

This is not quite true. While Orthdoxoy has been hampered for centuries by periods of persecution (muslim hegemony, communist atheistic regimes) it has never stalled but it has continued to carry on missionary work.

Japan, Alaska, Uganda, Kenya, France, Madagascar, the UK, even Ireland. In my country New Zealand in 1980 there were approx. 5000 Orthodox. In 2005 there are 25,000.

We need also to look at the immense effort to re-evangelize the countries of Eastern Europe which 20 years ago were officially atheistic. This is a stunning success, thanks to the blood of the martyrs of the 20th century.

We don’t have the high profile of the Roman Catholic Church and nor do we have the financial resources but in our quiet way we are engaged in spreading the Gospel of the Lord.

Here are the latest stats for Western Europe. Twenty years ago these figures were minimal. Now they are increasing, with new church and new monasteries being built with enthusiasm. The bishops in Germany say they could build a church in every town if they had the clergy.

Germany 800 000

United Kingdom 350 000

France 250 000

Austria 150 000

Sweden 100 000

Switzerland 80 000

Spain 20 000

Belgium 40 000

Italy 250 000

Holland 10 000
-oOo-

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Fr. Ambrose:

The source I have on this is more reliable than the one that started this thread, and I would not have transmitted the report if the source had been almost anyone else…
Fr Ambrose:

Michael , this shows how completely bewildering the report is.

I believe you because I am sure, from what I know of you on the forum, that you are an honest man.

BUT I find it hard to believe that Rome has offered these ‘conditions’ to a Church entering its jurisdiction.

I honestly never thought I would live to see the day when Catholics are told by Rome that they can deny papal infallibility, the Assumption (ouch, that really hurts!) or the Immaculate Conception. And if you in the Anglican Catholic Church may deny them, why cannot other Catholics?

These are the THREE key doctrines associated with Papal Infallibility

So in short, I believe you have reported honestly the information which you received. I just do not trust the information itself.

Very very confused here at my end of the telephone line

My source is well placed in the Diocese…The only people more trustworthy are the Primate, the Metropolitan and a couple of the Bishops in the ACA (American branch of TAC). He’s finally letting out what he knew about the negotiations - They’ve been ongoing since 1994!

Talk about keeping a secret!

Goodnight and may God keep your health.

Michael

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Traditional Ang:

The source I have on this is more reliable than the one that started this thread, and I would not have transmitted the report if the source had been almost anyone else…

It would be interesting to take this to the Catholic members of the forum and ask for their reactions.

How do they feel that there will soon be 500,000 new Catholics who will deny, and with Rome’s permission, Papal Infallibility, the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception?

Michael, this boggles the mind!!

Catholics, how do you feel about this?