Ask an Anglican/Episcopalian

  • Thread starter Thread starter aidanbradypop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter_J said:
Hmmm … you might want to brush up on history. Anglicans, and Anglican parishes, have been coming into the Roman Communion since well before the Ordinariates. (Or am I misunderstand what you said?)
Click to expand...
My knowledge of Anglicanism is limited to full communion relations with Lutherans. I have read of the Oxford Movement. Is that what you are referring to?
 
EvangelCatholic said:
My knowledge of Anglicanism is limited to full communion relations with Lutherans. I have read of the Oxford Movement. Is that what you are referring to?
Click to expand...
I think he is referring to the Pastoral Provision, and the original Anglican Use. It was possible for portions of a parish to follow a converting Episcopal priest into the RCC.

GKC
 
GKC said:
Today is not 1500-ish. When Hank said that the consecrated elements were, indeed, the very Body and Blood of our Lord, that was not to be trifled with. Not for nothing were the Six called the Whip with the Six Bloody Cords.

Elizabeth invented the via media, of which her Articles are the visible face. Normative for the clergy only, but she accounted that sufficient.

GKC
Click to expand...
True, at his time, church & state separation has not yet been defined (or should I say invented) until one of his great-great-great … grand-nephew’s cascade of mistakes led to establishment of church & state separation across the ocean.

In that sense, Elizabeth was ahead of her time in the concept of religious tolerance (a fundamental pre-requisite for church & state separation). If she had tried to impose her personal religion as her sister did, England would not have been united against her enemies. And this post would have been written in Spanish.
 
jimkhong said:
True, at his time, church & state separation has not yet been defined (or should I say invented) until one of his great-great-great … grand-nephew’s cascade of mistakes led to establishment of church & state separation across the ocean.

In that sense, Elizabeth was ahead of her time in the concept of religious tolerance (a fundamental pre-requisite for church & state separation). If she had tried to impose her personal religion as her sister did, England would not have been united against her enemies. And this post would have been written in Spanish.
Click to expand...
And things would have been more hectic and frantic, in her realm. She was not so much tolerant as she was determined to rule a kingdom not split into warring sects.

GKC
 
jimkhong said:
True, at his time, church & state separation has not yet been defined (or should I say invented) until one of his great-great-great … grand-nephew’s cascade of mistakes led to establishment of church & state separation across the ocean.

In that sense, Elizabeth was ahead of her time in the concept of religious tolerance (a fundamental pre-requisite for church & state separation). If she had tried to impose her personal religion as her sister did, England would not have been united against her enemies. And this post would have been written in Spanish.
Click to expand...
Si! 😃
 
GKC said:
And things would have been more hectic and frantic, in her realm. She was not so much tolerant as she was determined to rule a kingdom not split into warring sects.

GKC
Click to expand...
I agree that her motivations were purely pragmatic and her personal and religious values were subsidiary. Still, for whatever it was worth, it avoided the war that tore France and Germany apart. Right reasons or not, she showed that there was another way to settle religious conflicts which doesn’t involve someone winning and someone else losing. (something some of our more extreme Catholic traditionalists and Protestant fundamentalists doesn’t seem to have yet learnt)

Was it a trail-blazer for Edict of Nantes? Could be but more likely not. Henry VI was similarly not motivated by personal or religious values in his edict but in perserving the civil unity of his country.

Was it a percusor for the American experience? Most likely not and we should remember that the American experience did happen despite her - the early colonists were fleeing religious persecutions in England.

Still she was the first and that ought to be acknowledged. Much like we acknowledge today that the Chinese invented gunpowder and paper money but they have little controbution to modern military technology or economic thought.
 
jimkhong said:
I agree that her motivations were purely pragmatic and her personal and religious values were subsidiary. Still, for whatever it was worth, it avoided the war that tore France and Germany apart. Right reasons or not, she showed that there was another way to settle religious conflicts which doesn’t involve someone winning and someone else losing. (something some of our more extreme Catholic traditionalists and Protestant fundamentalists doesn’t seem to have yet learnt)

Was it a trail-blazer for Edict of Nantes? Could be but more likely not. Henry VI was similarly not motivated by personal or religious values in his edict but in perserving the civil unity of his country.

Was it a percusor for the American experience? Most likely not and we should remember that the American experience did happen despite her - the early colonists were fleeing religious persecutions in England.

Still she was the first and that ought to be acknowledged. Much like we acknowledge today that the Chinese invented gunpowder and paper money but they have little controbution to modern military technology or economic thought.
Click to expand...
I agree with the thoughts there, on Liz. Her family’s history, for the past 50 years, was a cautionary tale. And she decided to skate down the middle, as best she could.

GKC
 
GKC said:
I agree with the thoughts there, on Liz. Her family’s history, for the past 50 years, was a cautionary tale. And she decided to skate down the middle, as best she could.

GKC
Click to expand...
There is also the thought that the terrors of her youth, under both her father and her sister, and indeed her brother, may have been heavily responsible for her character, in terms of her desire for peace, and her willingness to be fierce in her own protection, and her constant claim that she wanted to be loved. Royal youngsters had a rough time in those days, and one with as active a brain and imagination as Liz was clearly emotionally damaged by it, I think. The very nice Elizabeth Jenkins biography majored on that, I remember

Picky Picky Psychologisty
 
Picky_Picky said:
There is also the thought that the terrors of her youth, under both her father and her sister, and indeed her brother, may have been heavily responsible for her character, in terms of her desire for peace, and her willingness to be fierce in her own protection, and her constant claim that she wanted to be loved. Royal youngsters had a rough time in those days, and one with as active a brain and imagination as Liz was clearly emotionally damaged by it, I think. The very nice Elizabeth Jenkins biography majored on that, I remember

Picky Picky Psychologisty
Click to expand...
I agree.

Jenkins is an oldie but a goodie.

GKC
 
jimkhong said:
Right reasons or not, she showed that there was another way to settle religious conflicts which doesn’t involve someone winning and someone else losing. (something some of our more extreme Catholic traditionalists and Protestant fundamentalists doesn’t seem to have yet learnt)
Click to expand...
What is meant by ‘someone winning and someone else losing?’ If it means a body count, then Elizabeth did well to steer a better course.

What is meant by ‘settle religious conflicts?’ Does it dispel error and reveal an agreed-upon truth or is it the kind of ‘I’m okay, you’re okay’ philosophy which keeps Christian unity forever a distant dream? If the latter, religious conflicts, no matter how benign, will persist.

In that context, I’m perfectly willing to be accused of being a Catholic traditionalist and I accept the charge.
 
Ferde_Rombola said:
What is meant by ‘someone winning and someone else losing?’ If it means a body count, then Elizabeth did well to steer a better course.

What is meant by ‘settle religious conflicts?’ Does it dispel error and reveal an agreed-upon truth or is it the kind of ‘I’m okay, you’re okay’ philosophy which keeps Christian unity forever a distant dream? If the latter, religious conflicts, no matter how benign, will persist.

In that context, I’m perfectly willing to be accused of being a Catholic traditionalist and I accept the charge.
Click to expand...
Ferde…do you try to turn everything into an argument?
 
Ferde_Rombola said:
No. To a discussion, Dustin. Or do you think matters like this one shouldn’t be discussed?
Click to expand...
I am all for discussion! If I were not then I would not have started the thread. I just think you read too much into what people say, which often is not what they were really stating. It could just be that it is hard to figure out what they mean just by reading a post, but it just seems you have a chip on your shoulder. I could be wrong and, if so, I am sorry. 🙂
 
aidanbradypop said:
And may I add that many will simply take it as is…Christ stated it is His Body and it is His Blood. No questions on how or why. Simple faith in the mystery.
Click to expand...
Ahhhh! There it is! Its that simple!
OK thats because I was brought up that way. …🙂
 
aidanbradypop said:
I am all for discussion! If I were not then I would not have started the thread. I just think you read too much into what people say, which often is not what they were really stating. It could just be that it is hard to figure out what they mean just by reading a post, but it just seems you have a chip on your shoulder. I could be wrong and, if so, I am sorry. 🙂
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that’s totally fair, Dustin. It’s reasonable, surely, to question whether an accommodation is a genuine coming together or just a fudging for the sake of an easy life?
 
Picky_Picky said:
I’m not sure that’s totally fair, Dustin. It’s reasonable, surely, to question whether an accommodation is a genuine coming together or just a fudging for the sake of an easy life?
Click to expand...
If we are meaning Liz here, it was a iron hand in a velvet glove. So much latitude, no more, imprecise statements on some doctrines,ambiguous ones on others.

GKC
 
aidanbradypop said:
I am all for discussion! If I were not then I would not have started the thread. I just think you read too much into what people say,
Click to expand...
First of all, the message was addressed to jimkhong. I didn’t read anything into it. I asked a couple of questions asking for clarification and posed related hypotheticals. Then I stated why religious conflicts will continue if there is no realistic search for truth. If that’s having a chip on my shoulder, I plead guilty.
 
aidanbradypop said:
GKC (whenever he can) and I will gladly answer questions on the Anglican and Episcopal Churches. Soooo ask away! 😃

Let’s try to keep the debates down please. If you have a question great! I would love to answer! We are not here to argue but simply Q&A. 👍
Click to expand...
When did the Anglicans get their prayer beads and what made them do it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top