Any Episcopalians here?

[SnakeMauler]

I take it you think +Robinson should go to conversion therapy so he can become straight

First of all, I have no idea what you are talking about in saying “conversion therapy.” Second of all, I don’t think you could biblically try and justify a bishop having a civil union and engaging in male to male anal sex. I mean what are you going to say, “Paul was gay?”

 

[CARV]

So how is it that you understand St. Paul’s words? Do you simply disregard them? If so, do you disregard others writings of Scripture, and what do you use for your canon?

I would ask you how you understand Paul when he speaks of the obligation to return slaves to their masters, telling women to remain silent in church, shunning heretics, demanding female head coverings, and the like. The Catholic Church at large has no problem “simply disregarding them”. Do you?

 

[CARV]

First of all, I have no idea what you are talking about in saying “conversion therapy.” Second of all, I don’t think you could biblically try and justify a bishop having a civil union and engaging in male to male anal sex. I mean what are you going to say, “Paul was gay?”

First of all, conversion therapy is an attempt to make a gay person straight. Second of all, I have no desire to argue human sexuality with someone who is obviously very entrenched in their views. But rest assured there is a Biblical argument to be made. If you’re interested, use Google.

 

[PRmerger]

I would ask you how you understand Paul when he speaks of the obligation to return slaves to their masters, telling women to remain silent in church, shunning heretics, demanding female head coverings, and the like. The Catholic Church at large has no problem “simply disregarding them”. Do you?

Well, since I asked you first, you ought to answer first. How do you as a Christian interpret Paul’s words about slaves obeying their masters? Do you simply disregard?

 

[CARV]

Well, since I asked you first, you ought to answer first. How do you as a Christian interpret Paul’s words about slaves obeying their masters? Do you simply disregard?

The question was my answer. Your anwer just might just answer your own question. Let’s see.

 

[Pitcharan]

I have been attending an Episcopal church for almost 2 years now.

What drew you to the Episcopal church?

The only real reasons to join the RCC in my opinion …

Do you mean that you have joined the RCC?

Regards
Pitcharan

P.S. If you feel I am being too inquestive, sorry. Genuinely curious, that’s all.

 

[CARV]

What drew you to the Episcopal church?

Do you mean that you have joined the RCC?

Regards
Pitcharan

P.S. If you feel I am being too inquestive, sorry. Genuinely curious, that’s all.

I was formerly a convert to Catholicism but I have since left. Initially, I was drawn to the Episcopal Church because of my familiarity with western liturgy and the absence of the papacy in a western liturgical church.

 

[Izdaari]

I choose the 3rd option, leaning Episcopalian, since because of the strong influence on my faith of C.S. Lewis and N.T. Wright, I will probably always consider myself an honorary Anglican (and in case you didn’t know, Episcopalianism is the American branch of Anglicanism). My actual church is Assemblies of God. Sometimes I visit the local Episcopal cathedral, when I get in the mood for liturgy.

 

[CMatt25]

Did you know that St. Paul was talking discipline and not* doctrine* here, Matt?

I know the Church has developed quite an elaborate system of dogma, doctrine, catechism, teaching, and disciplines.

 

[Pitcharan]

I was formerly a convert to Catholicism but I have since left. Initially, I was drawn to the Episcopal Church because of my familiarity with western liturgy and the absence of the papacy in a western liturgical church.

Your understanding of scriptures: is it inspired? OR was it acquired when you were with the RCC? OR did you acquire it from the Episcopal church?

Regards
Pitcharun

P.S. Again, its just genuine curiosity

 

[CMatt25]

I take it you think +Robinson should go to conversion therapy so he can become straight

There’s such a thing? Seriously I once heard +Robinson speak on TV. He absolutely captivated me and had me glued to the screen with his words and added humor along the way. It was the only time I’ve heard him, but I found him quite an interesting speaker who seemed fillied with the spirit of Christ’s love and compassion irregardless of his orientation.

 

[CMatt25]

So how is it that you understand St. Paul’s words? Do you simply disregard them? If so, do you disregard others writings of Scripture, and what do you use for your canon?

Does the CC disregard a creation from start to a finish with man… all completed in exactly 144 hours? Disregard the practice of slavery in the Bible? Disregard a whole host of things practiced back then?

 

[CMatt25]

I would ask you how you understand Paul when he speaks of the obligation to return slaves to their masters, telling women to remain silent in church, shunning heretics, demanding female head coverings, and the like. The Catholic Church at large has no problem “simply disregarding them”. Do you?

:clapping: Oh sorry CARV. I’m taking a post at a time to read and didn’t realize you had already made this pt.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I still say you’re in the wrong church—you’re a closet Episcopalian, Matt, time to convert

Anyone who finds Bishop Robinson inspiring or even sane definitely is an Episcopalian at heart, no doubt whatsoever.

There’s such a thing? Seriously I once heard +Robinson speak on TV. He absolutely captivated me and had me glued to the screen with his words and added humor along the way. It was the only time I’ve heard him, but I found him quite an interesting speaker who seemed fillied with the spirit of Christ’s love and compassion irregardless of his orientation.

 

[CMatt25]

I still say you’re in the wrong church—you’re a closet Episcopalian, Matt, time to convert

Anyone who finds Bishop Robinson inspiring or even sane definitely is an Episcopalian at heart, no doubt whatsoever.

See Gurney, I haven’t even attended a service there and I did only hear the bishop one time. And someone tryin to push me over to the other side. :bigyikes:

 

[Soldier_X]

I still say you’re in the wrong church—you’re a closet Episcopalian, Matt, time to convert

Anyone who finds Bishop Robinson inspiring or even sane definitely is an Episcopalian at heart, no doubt whatsoever.

Agreed

 

[PRmerger]

The question was my answer. Your anwer just might just answer your own question. Let’s see.

Well, since you’re not going to answer for yourself, I’ll give your answer:

CARV: You know, PR, I think that I get your point. I understand now, thanks to you, the other Catholic CAF posters, and the CC, that Scripture must be understood in light of the Church which provided me with these Scriptures. Where I diverge from the Apostolic teaching is where I need to re-evaluate my interpretation.

There! Question answered!

 

[PRmerger]

I know the Church has developed quite an elaborate system of dogma, doctrine, catechism, teaching, and disciplines.

Only in the same way that Science has developed an elaborate system of determining the human genome…

Or Philosophy has developed an elaborate system of determining the issues of utilitarian “agency and intention”…

Or Calculus has developed an elaborate system of determining a curve’s derivative.

I mean, if you really want to have a first grader’s understanding of Theology you could dismiss the dogmas, doctrines, catechisms and disciplines.

OR!! You could try to advance your understanding with knowledge that’s been given to you by the Church!

 

[PRmerger]

I would ask you how you understand Paul when he speaks of the obligation to return slaves to their masters, telling women to remain silent in church, shunning heretics, demanding female head coverings, and the like. The Catholic Church at large has no problem “simply disregarding them”. Do you?

So now I will answer your question: I understand it in light of the Church which provided you with these verses. They were disciplinary teachings of St. Paul. Nothing more and nothing less.

Incidentally, the CC does not “simply disregard them”. If they had, they simply would have removed them from the canon, right? After all, it was the CC which had the power to determine what actually went into the Bible.

 

[PRmerger]

Does the CC disregard a creation from start to a finish with man… all completed in exactly 144 hours? Disregard the practice of slavery in the Bible? Disregard a whole host of things practiced back then?

No, the CC included those verses in Scripture, so it clearly did not disregard them.

But since you disregard the authority of the CC (whenever it doesn’t fit in with the religion you’ve created in your own image), how is it that you interpret those verses from St. Paul?