Episcopal Church participating in more neo-paganism rituals

[gurneyhalleck1]

virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=12292

I remember being blasted by some liberal Episcopalians in here about the use of the word “neo-pagan” in describing the Episcopalians. According to lefties there’s nothing pagan about the TEC…read this article about how an Episcopal parish allowed a wiccan group to come in and worship a mother goddess for the equinox…nah, the Episcopalians aren’t sympathetic to neo-paganism, nah!

 

[mariahloves]

Is this a widespread practice?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t know if I’d go as far as to say “widespread” but they are definitely sympathetic in many parts to this pagan dribble.

Is this a widespread practice?

 

[Yggdrasil]

Didn’t John Paul II sponsor a similarly controversial World Day of Prayer at Assisi in 1986—where crucifixes were removed from chapels, and Buddha statues sat on Christian altars?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Never heard of it. Give me a link if you don’t mind, thanks…

Didn’t John Paul II sponsor a similarly controversial World Day of Prayer at Assisi in 1986—where crucifixes were removed from chapels, and Buddha statues sat on Christian altars?

 

[Nine_Two]

Didn’t John Paul II sponsor a similarly controversial World Day of Prayer at Assisi in 1986—where crucifixes were removed from chapels, and Buddha statues sat on Christian altars?

While John Paul II was for Christian unity and never missed an opportunity to promote ecumenism, I have a hard time believing he would allow something like that.

 

[Yggdrasil]

Never heard of it. Give me a link if you don’t mind, thanks…

Here is a link to a so-called “traditionalist” Catholic site that provides pictures of the Buddha on the altar.

Here is an article from a “mainstream” Catholic site which concedes that the 1986 event was controversial and seeks to defend it.

An SSPX page carries the banner of the usual Lefebvrist outrage prior to another ecumenical convocation in 2002, citing the 1986 gathering as cause anew for hand-wringing.

 

[JM_Wells]

virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=12292

I remember being blasted by some liberal Episcopalians in here about the use of the word “neo-pagan” in describing the Episcopalians. According to lefties there’s nothing pagan about the TEC…read this article about how an Episcopal parish allowed a wiccan group to come in and worship a mother goddess for the equinox…nah, the Episcopalians aren’t sympathetic to neo-paganism, nah!

The Episcopalian Church along with much of the rest of the Anglican Communion is one of the most theologically liberal religious groups in the world. Of course we should remember that it was founded not even on theological grounds but essentially for political reasons. Basically… because Henry VIII wanted special exemption from the bonds of a valid marriage. And of course, the Pope said “Nope!”

Having been founded on these conditions and its orders having been declared “…null and void”, it is no surprise to me that the Episcopalian Church cannot even affirm what they believe; the presiding Bishop has implied, in stating that it’s good that people can disagree, that such is a good thing! It has become like one elaborate mass with no substance. The rest of mainline Protestantism seems to be heading in this direction. (While the more conservative Protestants, i.e. the Southern Baptists, some Evangelicals reject the reality of global warming, support an unjust war in Iraq, and scare people away with their fire and brimstone sermons, all the while relying on their private interpretations of scripture, coupled with American exceptionalist politics of course).

Here is where the hope lies:

If you watch the news, you may know that some of the High-Church Anglicans are talking about coming into communion with Rome. We should hope and pray that such will be the case, as their Oxford movement-based masses are truly something. This would certainly help bring Anglicans who are disillusioned with people like Schiori or Robinson into the fullness of the faith.

-Wells

 

[GKC]

Hank’s quest for a decree of nullity, based, in his causa, on a supposed ultra vires dispensation of a impediment of affinity, second degree, related to the Levitical prohibition, is dripping with theology. As is the even stronger case he had, of an undispensed impediment of the justice of public honesty. And the refusal to grant the decree (as was common in the day), by Clement, is deep in politics. History is like that, complicated. Similarly with the sad story of the personalities, politics, history, and theology involved in Apostolicae curae

OTOH, the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church is a steam-powered yoyo, as we may agree.

And yes, the reaction of the Traditional Anglican Communion and some folks in Forward in Faith, esp. in England, to the Pope’s Apostolic Constitution bears watching. Esp. the reaction of the laity, as I have often said.

GCK

The Episcopalian Church along with much of the rest of the Anglican Communion is one of the most theologically liberal religious groups in the world. Of course we should remember that it was founded not even on theological grounds but essentially for political reasons. Basically… because Henry VIII wanted special exemption from the bonds of a valid marriage. And of course, the Pope said “Nope!”

Having been founded on these conditions and its orders having been declared “…null and void”, it is no surprise to me that the Episcopalian Church cannot even affirm what they believe; the presiding Bishop has implied, in stating that it’s good that people can disagree, that such is a good thing! It has become like one elaborate mass with no substance. The rest of mainline Protestantism seems to be heading in this direction. (While the more conservative Protestants, i.e. the Southern Baptists, some Evangelicals reject the reality of global warming, support an unjust war in Iraq, and scare people away with their fire and brimstone sermons, all the while relying on their private interpretations of scripture, coupled with American exceptionalist politics of course).

Here is where the hope lies:

If you watch the news, you may know that some of the High-Church Anglicans are talking about coming into communion with Rome. We should hope and pray that such will be the case, as their Oxford movement-based masses are truly something. This would certainly help bring Anglicans who are disillusioned with people like Schiori or Robinson into the fullness of the faith.

-Wells

 

[Yggdrasil]

The Episcopalian Church along with much of the rest of the Anglican Communion is one of the most theologically liberal religious groups in the world. Of course we should remember that it was founded not even on theological grounds but essentially for political reasons. Basically… because Henry VIII wanted special exemption from the bonds of a valid marriage. And of course, the Pope said “Nope!”

Having been founded on these conditions and its orders having been declared “…null and void”, it is no surprise to me that the Episcopalian Church cannot even affirm what they believe; the presiding Bishop has implied, in stating that it’s good that people can disagree, that such is a good thing! It has become like one elaborate mass with no substance. The rest of mainline Protestantism seems to be heading in this direction. (While the more conservative Protestants, i.e. the Southern Baptists, some Evangelicals reject the reality of global warming, support an unjust war in Iraq, and scare people away with their fire and brimstone sermons, all the while relying on their private interpretations of scripture, coupled with American exceptionalist politics of course).

Here is where the hope lies:

If you watch the news, you may know that some of the High-Church Anglicans are talking about coming into communion with Rome. We should hope and pray that such will be the case, as their Oxford movement-based masses are truly something. This would certainly help bring Anglicans who are disillusioned with people like Schiori or Robinson into the fullness of the faith.

I’m probably an isolated case, but I’m a “high church” Episcopalian who spent seven years in the Catholic Church only to return to my native fold. There are “liberals” in both camps. Perhaps to its credit, the Anglican Communion has traditionally been more tolerant of theological variations, and the reigning character of the day tends to vacillate depending on where one is in history. This is a tent that has claimed, at various times, Milton and Cromwell, Newman and Froude, T.S. Eliot and Alan Watts. Right now the Schoris and Robinsons are in ascendancy in the Episcopal Church, and this is simply because America is trending secular and tolerant, and hardcore orthodoxy has a strictly limited appeal. Expect some lunacy.

For my part, I’ve decided to live with it. I’ll take the ease of a Church comfortable with its diversity than the tension of a Church that was thrown into it at a single council. If Catholics want to criticize the easy targets in the Episcopal Church, however, they ought to be cognizant of some of the thoughtful and intelligent criticism from their own “high church” wing leveled against the antics of the post-conciliar popes and the novelties of the ecumenical movement. It cuts both ways.

 

[Publisher]

Here is a link to a so-called “traditionalist” Catholic site that provides pictures of the Buddha on the altar.

Here is an article from a “mainstream” Catholic site which concedes that the 1986 event was controversial and seeks to defend it.

An SSPX page carries the banner of the usual Lefebvrist outrage prior to another ecumenical convocation in 2002, citing the 1986 gathering as cause anew for hand-wringing.

Hmmmm, it would seem that Episcopalians aren’t the only ones open to dialoge with other faith traditions.

The original post kind of took on an irony all it’s own…didn’t it?