Episcopal Church Draws the Line

[Peter_J]

Since you don’t exhaust the category “Catholic Church”, for me, I use the defining adjective.

That’s what I mean. For you the terms “Catholic Church” and “Roman Catholic Church” aren’t interchangeable.

 

[GKC]

That’s what I mean. For you the terms “Catholic Church” and “Roman Catholic Church” aren’t interchangeable.

Yep. But they aren’t mutually exclusive.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m not seeing the problem with calling her a priestess. There is no such thing as a priest or bishop who is female (like drawing a circle, calling it a square, and trying to sell it as art), so there has to be some other terminology.

As to the country club comment, I do seem to recall that the OP said that it’s NOT just a country club. Apparently converting to islam is the straw that breaks the camel’s back on being an anglican priest(ess)

As to the rest, as you say, that was a bishop who is still not allowed to minister until such time as he recants his position. The controversy was caused by removal of his excommunication because many people don’t understand what excommunication is or the fact that it is NOT simply a political weapon.

Interestingly enough, I was speaking with a prominent Anglican priest here in the Central Valley of California. He’s a great guy and a member of the diocese that courageously broke off from the Episcopal Church a year or so ago. He told me, “Scott, our church is in crisis and we are fervently praying to the Lord to renew the diocese and the church in general. Episcopal churches have steadily turned into nothing more than religious-looking, glorified rotary clubs in the last thirty years. We get together, we all feel good about ourselves, we do some charity, and we have a bunch of activities. But religiously we have gotten into a fill-in-the-blank theology and there is little depth. The Episcopal Church epitomizes the intellectual country club member that has lost touch with traditional, orthodox Anglicanism.” That’s a direct quote from this higher-up priest.

So it’s funny that some episcopalians in here get all roughed-up about the “country club” comment when I’ve heard a few Anglicans say that and even prominent clergy?

And several of these Episcopalians think that because they have some charity and soup kitchens and doing the Lord’s work in that regard that they are indeed a church. Pope Benedict’s term “ecclesiastical communities” is more accurate no matter how badly that irks 'em. The continuing Anglicans and some of the more orthodox Anglicans who have received the ‘dutch touch’ indeed have valid orders and beautiful sacraments but would be considered “licit” in the vatican’s eyes.

And the term “priestesses” gets these liberal folks all juiced up angry because they are from the same crowd that believes there are no differences between men and women save the obvious plumbing. They like all women and men to be called actors and they rail at the term “acTRESS” that we’ve used for the past 100 years. Just remember, “progressive” folks think that just about everything in America is bad and needs to be changed. They can’t leave well enough alone. And I think it’s courteous of us to even use the base-word ‘priest’ at all seeing as how these ladies are not by any means valid sacerdotally at all.

I had a talk with a woman the other day at the grocery story who still attends our old Anglican parish since we’ve moved on to Catholicism. She and many of the Anglicans I’ve spoken with enjoy the church more because of the social element and get-togethers, bazaars, rummage sales, and Wednesday night socials. They like coffee hour and all that jazz but they seem to know little theologically. That’s what the priest was speaking about when he said “glorified rotary clubs.” Country clubs and rotary etc are charitable, full of get-togethers and they give back much to the community. I think some folks think there is little difference between an episcopal church and a rotary club. I’m not even saying I believe this personally but that’s what many people’s take is that I’ve heard.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

There is no such thing IN YOUR TRADITION. The RCC does not own the word priest. It most certainly is gender neutral, since my tradition uses the term for both men and women ordained to the priesthood. The dictionary refers to priest as “a person.” There is no gender in ANY of the definitions. There are no longer stewardesses, they are all flight attendants, male and female. But as an orthodox RC, you don’t recognize Any Anglican clergy, so stop playing games, you simply do this to irritate.

Well for starters, I call them stewardesses still. I could care less what the P.C. police have brought down from on high! I still call it Easter Vacation instead of Spring Break, too, rebel that I am! And why is the term priest “gender neutral since YOUR church uses the term for both men and women?” You get angry at the Catholic posters in here who gauge their outlooks through a Catholic lens. You always imply they are narrow, intolerant lenses. Looks like yours is as well?

And also your logic is weak in that you are using secular sources to define theological phenomenon such as “the dictionary says…” Who cares what the dictionary says? Much of the popular media is ultra-liberal and I daresay the friendly folks at Websters have probably been influenced by the counter-culture 60’s and beyond, too. The Church has always understood the sacerdotal priesthood as being male and only male. That is the tradition and faith of the East and West. Only gnosticism, a horrific heresy, condoned this behavior. That should tell us something.

At our school our “custodial technician” prefers to be called a janitor. I am not an “instructor” or “educator,” I’m happy with good ole’ teacher. Our school district has instructed us that we may no longer call substitute teachers, substitutes but rather “guest teachers.” Likewise we also may not use the term “graduation” at sixth grade or kindergarten because the liberal powers that be have decided that term has a negative connotation implying that their learning experience is over?? Therefore we know much call it “sixth grade/kindergarten promotion.” lame…nobody complies! Why? Because it’s lame!

I just beg you, Spirit Meadow, to read a book by Lois Lowry called “The Giver.” It is a dystopian tale of a future U.S. where the thought police and the P.C. cops have taken over to the point of absurdity. It’s a common book in sixth and seventh grades across this country. Please read it!!

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

In any case I’m done with it. It’s nearing Holy Week, and I have no intention of engaging in this kind of ugly rhetoric any more.

I have no reason to disagree that there is bashing of Catholics elsewhere, but we are here, and well, having been RC, I expected a higher class of discussion and intellectualism, **not the childish display of people who are often unchurched **and simply spouting pure personal opinion. I would expect as much from them, I expected more here, and am just astounded at the utter double standard that is maintained.

I.

I can’t think of one Catholic or Protestant I’ve ever met in CAF that is “unchurched?” Wow! What an elitist statement? You may disagree with a Catholic or two, but just because their opinion differs from you doesn’t not mean they are unchurched. Wow!!

 

[josie_L]

“There is no such thing IN YOUR TRADITION. The RCC does not own the word priest. It most certainly is gender neutral, since my tradition uses the term for both men and women ordained to the priesthood.”

Since it’s less than 25 years old, it is less a tradition than an innovation. Or an aberration.

GKC

You took the words right out of my mouth. :hey_bud:

P.S. Hi GKC!

 

[rpp]

There is no such thing IN YOUR TRADITION. The RCC does not own the word priest. It most certainly is gender neutral

That is the funniest and most hilarious thing I have seen on this site since i join here. I guess Demi Moore is an actor and Michelle Obama is the “first mate”.

 

[4Squarebaby]

That is the funniest and most hilarious thing I have seen on this site since i join here. I guess Demi Moore is an actor and Michelle Obama is the “first mate”.

Funny thing I’ve noticed that except during awards ceremony season when seperating actor from actress means being able to give twice as many awards that female actresses are often referred to as the gender nuetral actor. And while Mrs. Obama may not be refereed to as the First Mate with leaders like Thatcher of the UK, Arroyo of the Philippines and Bhutto of Pakistan having First Gentleman I can see where we described Presidents and their First Mates. In the case that Mrs Obama may be with a First Gentleman should there be a meeting between their spouses, the elected leader.

 

[GKC]

Funny thing I’ve noticed that except during awards ceremony season when seperating actor from actress means being able to give twice as many awards that female actresses are often referred to as the gender nuetral actor. And while Mrs. Obama may not be refereed to as the First Mate with leaders like Thatcher of the UK, Arroyo of the Philippines and Bhutto of Pakistan having First Gentleman I can see where we described Presidents and their First Mates. In the case that Mrs Obama may be with a First Gentleman should there be a meeting between their spouses, the elected leader.

In Catholic theology, the term priest is not defined by popular usage, any more than morality would be, but by ontological factors related to the sacrament of order. A strict adherence to what a priest is, in this sense, prevents a Catholic from using the word in a fashion indicating a change in the sacramental definition.

GKC

 

[GKC]

You took the words right out of my mouth. :hey_bud:

P.S. Hi GKC!

Hello, and a blessed Palm Sunday to you.

GKC

 

[Peter_J]

I just beg you, Spirit Meadow, to read a book by Lois Lowry called “The Giver.” It is a dystopian tale of a future U.S. where the thought police and the P.C. cops have taken over to the point of absurdity. It’s a common book in sixth and seventh grades across this country. Please read it!!

I’m not sure how much it has to do with this discussion, but yes that is a very good book. I read it about five years ago, and re-read a few months ago.

 

[Peter_J]

Interestingly enough, I was speaking with a prominent Anglican priest here in the Central Valley of California. He’s a great guy and a member of the diocese that courageously broke off from the Episcopal Church a year or so ago. He told me, “Scott, our church is in crisis and we are fervently praying to the Lord to renew the diocese and the church in general. Episcopal churches have steadily turned into nothing more than religious-looking, glorified rotary clubs in the last thirty years. We get together, we all feel good about ourselves, we do some charity, and we have a bunch of activities. But religiously we have gotten into a fill-in-the-blank theology and there is little depth. The Episcopal Church epitomizes the intellectual country club member that has lost touch with traditional, orthodox Anglicanism.” That’s a direct quote from this higher-up priest.

Yes, there can definitely be a lot of hard feeling with regard to one’s former denomination.

I’m reminded of something I read not to long ago. It was a commentary (a fairly critical one) on the book “Orthodoxy Revisited: Contrasting the Faith and Practice of the Eastern Orthodox Church with Evangelical Doctrine” by Robert Lloyd Arnold, about his conversion from Protestantism to Orthodoxy. Anyhow, the particular line that stands out most in my mind was this: “Who wants to watch a man fall out of love with the bride of his youth? Few like to see the ex’s defamation after a messy divorce.”

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Well for starters, I call them stewardesses still. I could care less what the P.C. police have brought down from on high! I still call it Easter Vacation instead of Spring Break, too, rebel that I am! And why is the term priest “gender neutral since YOUR church uses the term for both men and women?” You get angry at the Catholic posters in here who gauge their outlooks through a Catholic lens. You always imply they are narrow, intolerant lenses. Looks like yours is as well?

And also your logic is weak in that you are using secular sources to define theological phenomenon such as “the dictionary says…” Who cares what the dictionary says? Much of the popular media is ultra-liberal and I daresay the friendly folks at Websters have probably been influenced by the counter-culture 60’s and beyond, too. The Church has always understood the sacerdotal priesthood as being male and only male. That is the tradition and faith of the East and West. Only gnosticism, a horrific heresy, condoned this behavior. That should tell us something.

At our school our “custodial technician” prefers to be called a janitor. I am not an “instructor” or “educator,” I’m happy with good ole’ teacher. Our school district has instructed us that we may no longer call substitute teachers, substitutes but rather “guest teachers.” Likewise we also may not use the term “graduation” at sixth grade or kindergarten because the liberal powers that be have decided that term has a negative connotation implying that their learning experience is over?? Therefore we know much call it “sixth grade/kindergarten promotion.” lame…nobody complies! Why? Because it’s lame!

I just beg you, Spirit Meadow, to read a book by Lois Lowry called “The Giver.” It is a dystopian tale of a future U.S. where the thought police and the P.C. cops have taken over to the point of absurdity. It’s a common book in sixth and seventh grades across this country. Please read it!!

I guess you didn’t read my last few posts. I am done engaging in this. My Church needs no defense and I will no longer stoop to this. This rotary club member is too busy this Holy week with working on my meditation for “The Seven Last words” following our Good Friday Service and before our stations of the cross. May you have a blessed Holy Week, and I urge you to spend some time with the world humility. I have found it most enlightening, along with pride, and arrogance. I additionally find that trying to recall that Jesus is standing next to me before I open my mouth efficacious.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

That is the funniest and most hilarious thing I have seen on this site since i join here. I guess Demi Moore is an actor and Michelle Obama is the “first mate”.

Wow, that is saying a LOT! Who would have thunk I was such a talented humorist. Were you unaware that most women prefer to be referred to as actors? Most of the ess words are falling into disuse. In any case, one question. Your signature quote? Do you ever read it?

 

[MrDickerson]

Sounds like folk who insist on calling Black or African Americans, “negros”. It may be correct in the dictionary but only serves to let others know you want to fight.

I still call blacks “negros”–what’s wrong with it? It isn’t a derogatory term–it’s the equivalent of calling white people “caucasians” or east Asians “mongoloids” or “asiatics”.

 

[4Squarebaby]

I still call blacks “negros”–what’s wrong with it? It isn’t a derogatory term–it’s the equivalent of calling white people “caucasians” or east Asians “mongoloids” or “asiatics”.

English as a language grows and evolves. Since the 1980s negro is only used in situations to hurt. You are just using a “ne”, instead of “ni”, with the knowledge that the government can’t take action against you. That is the way the community uses the word now as oppose to its use up until the late 1970s as an empowerment word over the use of “colored” as the publically accepted term and the various slang words that were used to hurt Black or African/American peoples.

Just as Asians balk at the use of Mongoloid and Oriental (at least in the United States, in Europe Oriental still sees some usage as Asian is saved for Pakistanis and Indians). To use the terms that a community ask you not to use is to intentionally pick a fight. And as the bumber sticker ask, “what would Jesus do?”

 

[MrDickerson]

English as a language grows and evolves. Since the 1980s negro is only used in situations to hurt. You are just using a “ne”, instead of “ni”, with the knowledge that the government can’t take action against you. That is the way the community uses the word now as oppose to its use up until the late 1970s as an empowerment word over the use of “colored” as the publically accepted term and the various slang words that were used to hurt Black or African/American peoples.

The government couldn’t take action against me if I did you an “ni” instead of an “ne”. And the community I hear the word “n—er” the most from is (surprise!) the Negro community. I refuse to let our vocabulary be mangled by the whims and fashions of society. Our language must be precise and accurate. I don’t know if you have ever read “1984” by George Orwell; in the novel, he demonstrates how limiting vocabulary and watering down a language (“doublespeak”) limits our thought and expression, and makes it easier for us to be oppressed by outside forces. “Negro” is more accurate than “African American” (which, when used accurately, would cover white Americans of Dutch South African descent, or Egyptian or Moroccan Americans who are Arab, not Negro). In the same way, “Asian” is not as precise as “Mongoloid”. Indians and Pakistanis are Asian; Turks, Russians, Indians, Arabs, Persians (all of which are actually of the Caucasian race, just different sub-categories from Northern Europeans) are Asian too–why do we limit “Asian” to Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, etc.?

 

[tomarin]

I still call blacks “negros”–

To their faces?

what’s wrong with it? It isn’t a derogatory term–it’s the equivalent of calling white people “caucasians” or east Asians “mongoloids” or “asiatics”.

The fallacy here is you’re not recognizing that a word can have more than one meaning.

 

[4Squarebaby]

The government couldn’t take action against me if I did you an “ni” instead of an “ne”. And the community I hear the word “n—er” the most from is (surprise!) the Negro community. I refuse to let our vocabulary be mangled by the whims and fashions of society. Our language must be precise and accurate. I don’t know if you have ever read “1984” by George Orwell; in the novel, he demonstrates how limiting vocabulary and watering down a language (“doublespeak”) limits our thought and expression, and makes it easier for us to be oppressed by outside forces. “Negro” is more accurate than “African American” (which, when used accurately, would cover white Americans of Dutch South African descent, or Egyptian or Moroccan Americans who are Arab, not Negro). In the same way, “Asian” is not as precise as “Mongoloid”. Indians and Pakistanis are Asian; Turks, Russians, Indians, Arabs, Persians (all of which are actually of the Caucasian race, just different sub-categories from Northern Europeans) are Asian too–why do we limit “Asian” to Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, etc.?

So I’m to understand if you have a young Japanese American asking about Christianity and should the subject of race and/or ethnicity comes up you will insist on calling him a Mongoloid? Do you wish to fight thinking you are scientifically precise or are you attempting to introduce another soul to the Kingdom?

Do you think Jesus would call the assorted Romans, Samaritians, etc a name which was precise to the jews but was not accepted by the Romans, Samaritians, etc anymore? Or would Jesus use the name that community wishes to use? And what should the followers of Jesus do?

 

[neploho]

An Episcopal Diocese has “defrocked” one of its priestesses for becoming a Muslim. Other than the fact that they “ordained” a woman in the first place, I’m favourably impressed. Perhaps the Anglican Church isn’t just a glorified country club after all:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/02/muslim.minister.defrocked/index.html

Don’t other diocese permit the same thing, though?

To her parishioners and family, though, Redding has turned her back on her faith and office. There was, she said, “universal puzzlement” at her decision to convert to Islam but still remain an Episcopal minister

lol, that cracked me up. Some people found here decision to “convert” to Islam and remain an Episcopalian Priest “puzzling”? No kidding.

I’m not a member of either religions but I’m pretty “puzzled” myself. She must live in a very interesting world.