G
- Status
S
seanman611
Guest
I don’t, you should read the whole post. Furthermore, why do you think I remain Episcopalian?
However, I think that a pretty rosy picture get painted to Anglicans on here. I think that it is important to understand that all churches have problems. However, when a bishop or priest in Anglicanism violates the official teachings of the Anglican Church, it gets its own thread and some Catholics engage in running down the whole Communion and all the faithful people in it, while gloating about the magisterium.
S
SteveVH
Guest
I did read the whole post. You used an example of a priest and bishop who, if what you say is true, are in violation of the teachings and doctrines of the Catholic Church and using them as an example of why Anglicans should not join the Ordinate or the Catholic Church.
I have no idea.Furthermore, why do you think I remain Episcopalian?
Yes. We are all sinners.
Please show me a thread on this forum that is based upon what an individual cleric from the Anglican Church, in violation of the teachings of that church, has done?
If we have a problem with the Anglican Church or any other faith community it is based upon their official teachings, not those who violate those official teachings.
S
seanman611
Guest
No, I simply said that if you think that running to the Catholic Church is the solution to Anglican liberalism and secularism, you may be in for a disappointment. I said that any decision should not be taken hastily or lightly and that one is likely to issues in the Catholic Church
If I really held to the idea that authenticity is compromised by those who break the rules, I could never be Anglican.
Indeed
Any of the threads on Spong’s theology, Marcus Borg, or even Katharine Schori. No one person represents Anglicanism.
S
SteveVH
Guest
The difference is that the liberalism and secularism in the Anglican community are being institutionalized. These are not rogue clerics, but Church policy. Not so in the Catholic Church. And, just so I don’t catch the wrath of GKC, we recognize that this is not across the board with all Anglicans, motely as they are.
Well, I am not familiar with any of them. But the fact that, as you say, no one person represents Anglicanism kind of opens the door a little wider, does it not?
M
Mirkwood
Guest
I’ve never heard much on the Anglican Church at all, so I think saying that Catholics obsess over all things Anglican is a pretty brash statement.
On the other hand the Catholic Church would of course be interested in the well being and going ons of it’s fallen away denominations, just as a mother to her children.
I was only interested in this topic because an English friend mentioned this to me about the women bishops. And although some of my family is Episcopal I have no idea much about it other than the foundations and the murder of dear St. Thomas Moore. But I am very sorry to hear you have not had a pleasant experience with Catholics on this forum, that’s quite embarrassing on our part I feel.
G
GKC
Guest
No wrath here. What you said is accurate, for much of the motleydom.The difference is that the liberalism and secularism in the Anglican community are being institutionalized. These are not rogue clerics, but Church policy. Not so in the Catholic Church. And, just so I don’t catch the wrath of GKC, we recognize that this is not across the board with all Anglicans, motely as they are.
Well, I am not familiar with any of them. But the fact that, as you say, no one person represents Anglicanism kind of opens the door a little wider, does it not?
GKC
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Granted I haven’t read this thread and don’t know you or all of the Anglican/Episcopalians but are there even any Episcopalians on CAF who support Katherine Schori and who espouse all the actions of TEC like one of my local Episcopal rectors told me her church does? If so I’d like to know who they are because mostly all I’ve seen are Anglicans more or less of the GKC fold here. No offense to GKC but his version just wouldn’t be my cup of tea.
G
GKC
Guest
No offense taken. The gracious Katherine is not something I’d like to find at the breakfast table, myself.
Tastes differ, no doubt.
GKC
S
seanman611
Guest
Like GKC has mentioned, Anglicans are a diverse and motley group. There is a joke about Anglicans that no two Anglicans think alike, however, the reality isn’t too terribly that far off from the joke.
CAF is a traditional Catholic forum that is quite conservative. Naturally, a forum like this will attract those Episcopalians of a similar traditionalist mindset. If we are talking about the majority of laity, poll after poll reveals that the vast majority of lay Episcopalians are moderate. Historically, being moderate has almost always been the way of TEC. That being said, I wouldn’t think it a stretch to say that the majority of priests, bishops, and national leaders lean far more liberal than the average person in the pew.
Truth is, the national church hierarchy certainly supports her and I would say a majority of bishops support her (or at least say they do publicly). However, TEC is in a state of turmoil and there are certainly plenty of detractors, in TEC, when it comes to Katharine Schori.
C
Contarini
Guest
That isn’t true. There are quite a few Episcopalians here. But we don’t have many really liberal ones. I myself am what could be described as a middle-of-the-road Anglican–although I’m an odd duck in that I also believe in the need to be in communion with Rome. (I accept women’s ordination, for instance, and while I believe in the traditional understanding of sexual morality I have come to see the push for blessing same-sex unions as something quite other than the slide into immorality and decadence portrayed by most conservatives.) I am therefore not on the same page with either traditionalist Anglicans in general or the small subset of traditionalist Anglicans who entertain the idea of “swimming the Tiber.” (Which is one reason why I find it so frustrating when well-meaning Catholics on this forum say, “Oh, I hope you can find an Ordinariate parish.” Two other reasons are that there aren’t in fact any such parishes near me or likely to be and that I don’t believe in parallel jurisdictions within the Church, which is one reason why I want to be Catholic in the first place.)
It is my experience that the Episcopal Church as a whole (and obviously this is even truer of the worldwide Anglican Communion) is much more orthodox than most outsiders believe it to be. And I agree with seanman’s complaints that Catholics on this forum judge Anglicans by notorious (and usually misunderstood) incidents. For instance, in the past ten years there have been three notorious cases of interreligious syncretism among Episcopal clergy: the neo-pagan priest couple in Pennsylvania, the Muslim priest in Seattle, and the Buddhist bishop-elect in Michigan. What gets ignored in coverage of these incidents is that the two priests were disciplined and the bishop-elect was not confirmed and thus never became bishop. (I don’t myself think that practicing Zen Buddhism is necessarily heretical, but this particular bishop was heretical in ways clearly influenced by Zen Buddhism–the heresy and not the Buddhism per se was the problem.) The Episcopal Church, in other words, has in fact acted to maintain basic Christian orthodoxy, disciplining priests who worshiped other gods and denied the Divinity of Christ and refusing to consecrate as bishop a priest who changed the baptismal liturgy to delete references to salvation from sin by Christ. Yet this plays in the media as “the Episcopal Church is so liberal that it even has clergy who try to practice other religions.”
In other words, Episcopalians are condemned not for having adopted these kinds of views officially, but simply for the fact that there is a debate about them.
My impression is that in the past ten years basic creedal orthodoxy has become stronger in the Episcopal Church, even as commitment to “social liberalism” has also strengthened. The younger clergy are, in my experience, pretty much of a relatively orthodox bent.
N
Novocastrian
Guest
I’d say the same for the CofE.
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Not sure what you mean by liberalsism but liberal and open doors are not bad words to me.The difference is that the liberalism and secularism in the Anglican community are being institutionalized. These are not rogue clerics, but Church policy. Not so in the Catholic Church. And, just so I don’t catch the wrath of GKC, we recognize that this is not across the board with all Anglicans, motely as they are.
Well, I am not familiar with any of them. But the fact that, as you say, no one person represents Anglicanism kind of opens the door a little wider, does it not?
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
That’s why I said I don’t know all of the Episcopalians and why I asked. I agree with seanman too. Even on an issue such as abortion, I had a different impression from here about what Episcopal official teaching is until I actually went and looked elsewhere. Regarding what has been discussed about Episcopalians in the pews being more moderate than their leadership, I’ve heard the same about other mainline faiths too such as UCC and PCUSA. But then I’ve also heard the reverse about Catholics. That their leadership is more conservative than much of the laity. Not referring to CAF laity. I know CAF is quite conservative as seanman said.
S
SteveVH
Guest
How does this wash with your seeking to enter the Catholic Church? That women cannot be ordained is a Catholic doctrine and same sex unions will never be blessed or approved.
S
SteveVH
Guest
Ordination of women, same sex marriage, actively gay priests and bishops… You get the idea.
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Oh ok thanks.
C
commenter
Guest
Terms such as “liberal”, and “conservative” are borrowed from the political arena, and are misleading to apply to churches. Catholics are either “orthodox” - in union with their pope and bishop - or they aren’t. Catholics who reject Vatican II, and those who reject Church teaching on contraception and ordination, aren’t opposites, they are both on the same side - outside - of the fence. The term “moderate” isn’t from the gospel, either, it’s from the media. It’s no virtue to be moderately Christian.
I have political opinions about the government, they represent me. I don’t have political opinions about the Gospel of Luke, St. Augustine, or Pope Francis. They don’t “represent” me, but I have a special relationship to them. I wouldn’t want them to weigh my views in deciding what the Truth is.
Orthodoxy is not quite as defined IMHO in Protestant churches, but historically the leaderships all adhered to a certain scripture and tradition, what C. S. Lewis described as “mere Christianity” up till several decades ago. Since then, the leaderships of most of them have moved away from the scripture and tradition standard of their predecessors, and follow the secular culture - the media. The leaderships of other groups, like the LCMS, have fought that trend, remained within “mere Christianity” in doctrine and morals, and are still “orthodox”; they adhere to Scripture, ECFs, the Creeds, their own Confessions.
There’s nothing “liberal” about churches that become subservient to the secular media; there’s nothing “conservative” about a Mother Theresa who changed so many lives. But the second example was orthodox, and the first is not.
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
Yes but what Steve calls liberalism such as female bishops and ordination and I gather you call unorthodox, and no doubt most on CAF agree with you and Steve, others OTOH might call it growing in further understanding. It really depends a lot on the faith.
- Status