Ask an Anglican/Episcopalian

  • Thread starter Thread starter aidanbradypop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter_J said:
Point taken.

Many – among Catholics especially, if I’m not mistaken – have trouble with the fact that the word “church” can mean a particular church or the universal church. This is an intra-Catholic issue as well, since many Latin Catholics will call the Eastern Catholic Churches “rites” in order to avoid calling them “churches”.
Click to expand...
Even the world “catholic” is fought over. 🤷
 
Peter_J said:
Point taken.

Many – among Catholics especially, if I’m not mistaken – have trouble with the fact that the word “church” can mean a particular church or the universal church. This is an intra-Catholic issue as well, since many Latin Catholics will call the Eastern Catholic Churches “rites” in order to avoid calling them “churches”.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand that sensitivity. And then there’s the capital letter quandary. If the Universal Church Catholic is the “Church”, and that building down the road is the “church”, what is the Church of England? “a Church”? “a church”? Small caps, perhaps?
 
Picky_Picky said:
Yes, I understand that sensitivity. And then there’s the capital letter quandary. If the Universal Church Catholic is the “Church”, and that building down the road is the “church”, what is the Church of England? “a Church”? “a church”? Small caps, perhaps?
Click to expand...
Depends on who you ask.

GKC
 
David_Zampino said:
Much has change – on both sides – since 1963.
Click to expand...
I agree. But I also know what he specified he could not accept. And have no reason to believe that might change. Though, as you know, it makes no particular difference to me, since I collect Chesterton, a convert, Belloc, a cradle RC, Tolkien, the same, Lunn, a RC convert, Sayers, a life-long Anglican, Knox, a RC convert, Williams, an Anglican, and likely others, without distinction. They are all my people.

GKC
 
GKC said:
I agree. But I also know what he specified he could not accept. And have no reason to believe that might change. Though, as you know, it makes no particular difference to me, since I collect Chesterton, a convert, Belloc, a cradle RC, Tolkien, the same, Lunn, a RC convert, Sayers, a life-long Anglican, Knox, a RC convert, Williams, an Anglican, and likely others, without distinction. They are all my people.

GKC
Click to expand...
Minor quibble, my friend! Tolkien was also a convert, albeit as a boy! Alas, my copy of Carpenter’s biography is still in a box (I HATE moving) but I believe he was 8 years old.
 
David_Zampino said:
Minor quibble, my friend! Tolkien was also a convert, albeit as a boy! Alas, my copy of Carpenter’s biography is still in a box (I HATE moving) but I believe he was 8 years old.
Click to expand...
I actually knew that, and forgot. Age, I think. Or something equally debilitating.

GKC
 
Picky_Picky said:
But you can see that others might interpret things quite differently: that the break was by both parties, and that both are the bar?
Click to expand...
Re: the separation of the Eastern Church from the Catholic Church, others DO interpret things differently, but history does not support their contention. The split was forced on the Eastern Church by their Muslim overlords, a fact today’s Orthodox refuse to acknowledge. That is on the books.
 
Peter_J said:
Yes. It’s all rather sad of course.

“That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” (Unfortunately, that has been used by some of our fellow Catholics as a cheap-shot to “prove” that the Orthodox should be in communion with Rome; but that doesn’t take away it’s underlying value.)
Click to expand...
What is its ‘underlying value,’ Peter? Does it suppress its clear meaning?

And how else are Catholics to interpret those words? They mean, not only the Orthodox, but the Anglicans, the Lutherans, the Calvinists and all the others in the polyglot.

There is only one ‘one, holy, catholic, Apostolic Church’ and it’s the Catholic Church, the only Church the Lord came to build. The history spoken of by John Henry Newman will tell you that.
 
Picky_Picky said:
Yes, I understand that sensitivity. And then there’s the capital letter quandary. If the Universal Church Catholic is the “Church”, and that building down the road is the “church”, what is the Church of England? “a Church”? “a church”? Small caps, perhaps?
Click to expand...
how about, ‘an ecclesial body?’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top