M
- Status
N
Nella
Guest
uh what?? didn’t get that, try again…
N
Nella
Guest
I don’t spread unsubstantiated rumors about the RCC. Do you think I do? Name one then.
C
Contarini
Guest
He was declared an outlaw. His chances would not have been good, barring miraculous intervention
Edwin
C
Contarini
Guest
This is complete mythology from beginning to end. The only kernel of truth is that Luther lived in the former Augustinian convent, which was given him by the Elector.
And your comments about Episcopalianism are, again, weird.
As for the other post–I keep forgetting that you and other Catholics here count Cromwell’s atrocities in Ireland as part of the English persecution of Catholics. I thought you were talking about the Elizabethan persecution in England. What Cromwell did in Ireland was not an “Inquisition”–it was on the ferocious end of standard military procedure in that period, heightened no doubt by religious hatred (and isn’t it true that Catholics had massacred Protestants just a few years earlier?). You keep comparing things that are not similar. If you start talking about Cromwell’s massacres, you have to start talking about the atrocities committed by Spanish soldiers in the Netherlands, the sack of Magdeburg in the Thirty Years’ War, etc. Like must be compared with like. And with the possible exception of Geneva and a few other hardline Reformed states (such as Scotland perhaps), Protestant countries didn’t have anything like the Inquisition. In Anglican, Lutheran, and some Continental Reformed countries the Church was basically reduced to an arm of the State. I think that was worse in practically every way than the Inquisition, so I am honestly not making this distinction to defend Protestantism, but simply to be accurate.
Many of your other claims are completely unsubstantiated (atrocities against children and pregnant women, for instance). If you are talking about Cromwell’s soldiers, then I won’t dispute it–soldiers did some pretty horrific things in the early modern period. But if you are talking about judicial actions (which your use of the term “Inquisition” implies), then I flatly deny that anything of the sort happened, and I challenge you to prove me wrong. (I’m not talking about the crushing with weights–I know that happened, though it was not a Protestant innovation but a feature of English law before the Reformation.)
Edwin
N
Nella
Guest
I don’t appreciate your uncharitable comments and your insults. I don’t care who you think you are.
C
Contarini
Guest
Nella, on a debate board it is not insulting to challenge someone’s facts, which is what I did in the above post. Where have I insulted you? What is uncharitable about pointing out that you are making vague claims? If you can describe the issues at stake between Luther and Catholicism, then do so, If you can’t, then you have no right to be offended because I point out the limits of your knowledge.
Nor should you. In fact, there’s no reason why you should care who I really am on a board like this. You should care about the truth and nothing else.
So deal with my posts on the level of truth instead of taking offense. You have clearly been hurt by Catholicism and are lashing out. But at some point you have to move beyond bitterness and start thinking clearly about the issues.
In Christ,
Edwin
N
Nella
Guest
I have dealt with them, in fact if you want truth, you should change your signature because you are truly no Episcopalian.
N
Nella
Guest
Luther claimed that we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. He also claimed that selling indulgences through relics were of no value except to further the wealth of the church. His teachings were also that Jesus founded his church upon himself rather than on Peter. Petros vs. Petras. he challenged this interpretation of Scripture.
R
Rbt_Southwell
Guest
Don’t read much about what Luther said, do you Nella?
The sale of indulgences is wrong. It is a sin. So is starting your own version of what is true Christianity for personal and nationalistic reasons. (All that property, all those benefices!).
Of course, don’t mention how Luther wanted to reorganize the Bible and delete certain words and phrases: especially about not being saved by faith alone.
He never taught that Jesus founded the Church upon himself.
Give me the source on that one. For Luther to have said that was to be hypocritical about leaving the Church in the first place.
Do a little research, Nella.
Robert
R
Rbt_Southwell
Guest
Nella,
Now you’re “unchurching” people!
Wow! Have you been promoted to Archbishop of Canterbury or something??
Belated congratulations, Nella.
Robert
G
GKC
Guest
N
Nella
Guest
Just what exactly was Luther’s arguments then?? Do you even know who Martin Luther was sir? He most certainly believed that Jesus founded the church upon himself. Looks like you need the research.
R
rr1213
Guest
I wouldn’t agree with that…there is an awful lot of territory covered by the description “Episcopalian”. Edwin certainly falls within those parameters.
N
Nella
Guest
he sounds more like a confused Catholic to me.
R
rr1213
Guest
He’s certainly more Catholic than Protestant, but there are many Anglicans and Episcopalians like that, including more than a few that post in these very forums. Nonetheless, they still have the right to call themselves Anglicans or Episcopalians and rightfully do so with the same validity as you do…and as I used to do.
J
JoyforCatholic
Guest
To get back to the main “Question” of the Thread-- Do Catholics Despise Anglicans–
my experience thus far with a Catholic wife (married almost 10 years, known each other for 13), Catholic Friends and now becoming a Catholic-- I’d answer that in general, NO.
In reality, this seems a bit silly to even be asking-- If anything, I have found a tremendous amount of charity in Catholics towards Protestants of all stripes; be they Anglican, Lutheran, Baptist, etc. It is usually the opposite from the other side though towards Catholics.
It is still considered acceptable and “en vogue” if you will, to have anti-Catholic prejudices in American and the West today. Many of the more rabid Protestants simply say that such anti-Catholic bias is “proof” of Catholics being “fallen” from God and the Gospel, etc. It really is the kind of bigoted remarks one expects of Klansmen and White Supremacists and Nazis/Fascists.
What my experience in the Continuing Anglican “church” Movement has lead me to believe, although I didn’t want to at first, that many of the CLERGY in its movement probably do harbor anti-Catholic sentiments due to the problems they have with submission to the authority of the Holy Father. This is only my opinion and speculation however it is based on my own experience there.
I want to be clear that I am NOT talking about the Episcopal Church (TEC). While the TEC has its own issues with the whole “sexual identity crisis” going on right now; they are are for the most part MUCH more charitable about their clergy who come home to the Church-- I’d refer you to the kind comments given in regards to Michael Herzog, former Episcopal Bp. of Albany who “swam the Tiber” earlier this year-- the public praise of Mr. Herzog were given by his successor in Albany.
The main issue, from what I can tell, that Anglicanism (especially the Continuing “church” part) has is that it on this search for identity-- it says it is both “protestant” and “catholic” yet in reality is much more the former than the latter because it’s like saying one is a little bit pregnant-- no, you either are or are not. One can’t be Catholic AND protestant. One is merely Protestant at that point.
While you have the CC types who are searching for the “validity” of their orders and other things they simply can’t bring themselves to recognize (or accept is a better word) what Cardinal Newman, Cardinal Manning, Monsignor Ronald Knox (the son of the Anglican Bp. of Winchester) and Monsignor Hugh Benson (the son of the Abp. of Canterbury) and countless others saw (my humble self included)-- that the FULLNESS of CATHOLIC FAITH is found in the Chair of Peter and those Bishops in Communion with the Successor of Peter-- the Holy Father, the Pope.
THIS HUBRIS is what keeps many an Anglican (at least in the CC clergy circles, in my opinion from my experience) practicing Protestants and outside the Ark of the Catholic Church.
St. Thomas More, Pray for us!
In Christ the Lord
my experience thus far with a Catholic wife (married almost 10 years, known each other for 13), Catholic Friends and now becoming a Catholic-- I’d answer that in general, NO.
In reality, this seems a bit silly to even be asking-- If anything, I have found a tremendous amount of charity in Catholics towards Protestants of all stripes; be they Anglican, Lutheran, Baptist, etc. It is usually the opposite from the other side though towards Catholics.
It is still considered acceptable and “en vogue” if you will, to have anti-Catholic prejudices in American and the West today. Many of the more rabid Protestants simply say that such anti-Catholic bias is “proof” of Catholics being “fallen” from God and the Gospel, etc. It really is the kind of bigoted remarks one expects of Klansmen and White Supremacists and Nazis/Fascists.
What my experience in the Continuing Anglican “church” Movement has lead me to believe, although I didn’t want to at first, that many of the CLERGY in its movement probably do harbor anti-Catholic sentiments due to the problems they have with submission to the authority of the Holy Father. This is only my opinion and speculation however it is based on my own experience there.
I want to be clear that I am NOT talking about the Episcopal Church (TEC). While the TEC has its own issues with the whole “sexual identity crisis” going on right now; they are are for the most part MUCH more charitable about their clergy who come home to the Church-- I’d refer you to the kind comments given in regards to Michael Herzog, former Episcopal Bp. of Albany who “swam the Tiber” earlier this year-- the public praise of Mr. Herzog were given by his successor in Albany.
The main issue, from what I can tell, that Anglicanism (especially the Continuing “church” part) has is that it on this search for identity-- it says it is both “protestant” and “catholic” yet in reality is much more the former than the latter because it’s like saying one is a little bit pregnant-- no, you either are or are not. One can’t be Catholic AND protestant. One is merely Protestant at that point.
While you have the CC types who are searching for the “validity” of their orders and other things they simply can’t bring themselves to recognize (or accept is a better word) what Cardinal Newman, Cardinal Manning, Monsignor Ronald Knox (the son of the Anglican Bp. of Winchester) and Monsignor Hugh Benson (the son of the Abp. of Canterbury) and countless others saw (my humble self included)-- that the FULLNESS of CATHOLIC FAITH is found in the Chair of Peter and those Bishops in Communion with the Successor of Peter-- the Holy Father, the Pope.
THIS HUBRIS is what keeps many an Anglican (at least in the CC clergy circles, in my opinion from my experience) practicing Protestants and outside the Ark of the Catholic Church.
St. Thomas More, Pray for us!
In Christ the Lord
G
GKC
Guest
R
rr1213
Guest
Albany is a a conservative diocese though.
N
Nella
Guest
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I do not agree with you. I came from a Catholic parish where coffee hour after mass may as well have been called bashing Protestants hour. Anglicans were always at the top of the list with such cheap shots as: they think they are us, they aren’t smart enough to be real Catholic people and they are just watered down Catholics and not real ones of course. That is Anglican bashing in the purest form.
- Status