Episcopal Presiding Bishop Michael Curry to preach at Henry and Meghan's Wedding

[exnihilo]

The fact that you are defending and promoting an institution that housed, promoted, protected and defended child rapists - on a global scale, no less- means, by your own logic, I must disregard your opinion.

You aren’t following my logic at all. If I defended and promoted illicit sex acts then you could follow my logic. But I’m not.

In short, I’m a fairly conservative sort, comparatively speaking.

The goal isn’t to better than everyone else. It is to be perfect.

But the way gays are spoken of here - comparing them to pedophiles, by members of an institution actually guilty of committing and covering such crimes up in the tens of thousands, really turns my stomach.

I don’t really appreciate how you trot this out. It isn’t that there weren’t serious problems with the Catholic Church. But there were problems with all churches. In fact your Episcopal church has plenty of pedophiles in it. It isn’t nearly as large as the Catholic Church so the numbers aren’t as big in absolute terms. But that doesn’t mean TEC escapes criticism for the exact same problem.

 

[QwertyGirl]

Not really. In fact, not even close.

And you respond by pointing the finger at someone else?

 

[QContinuum]

I don’t really appreciate how you trot this out.

Since I don’t enjoy delving into such a disturbing and despicable topic, I don’t appreciate having to make the point, myself. But needs must.

As the saying goes: those in glass houses.

It isn’t that there weren’t serious problems with the Catholic Church. But there were problems with all churches. In fact your Episcopal church has plenty of pedophiles in it.

I’m quite aware there are problems in TEC. My head is not in the sand.

The difference is I do not go into a specifically Catholic thread, and then make a show of deriding a particular bishop or pope. Even the ones who I believe hold anti-Christian attitudes and opinions about gays.

In short: bad form.

It isn’t nearly as large as the Catholic Church so the numbers aren’t as big in absolute terms. But that doesn’t mean TEC escapes criticism for the exact same problem.

Escapes criticism? Be serious. There is not a thread on this board that, when TEC is even mentioned in passing, doesn’t get singled out for criticism. It’s so predictable now, Pavlov’s hounds seem amateurish by comparison.

Let’s see, since I’ve been here, I’ve had rainbow vestments pics lobbed about as sport, various charges of evil, heresy, anti-Christian motives, deliberate ensnarement of souls (to hell), lots and lots of cheap shots taken regarding Hank VIII, etc. Getting told on a daily basis how defective our orders are. Oh, and clown masses.

The point is Catholics in this board almost never miss an opportunity to disparage my faith tradition. Or to mock it.

Lutherans, I’ve noticed, are also frequently subject to similar treatment.

So don’t talk to me about how TEC needs to take criticism. Not until some twinkle toe Catholics around here also learn to take it with a stiff upper lip. As far as I can tell, the concept of charity towards other faiths is an individual virtue that some Catholic posters here practice, but many others seem to consider optional to their witness.

And by the way - I have frequently defended the CC and its theology on this board and off it. I have always tried to show respect even in disagreement. Which is why I will listen to a Catholic bishop preach, even while maintaining he is gravely wrong on certain subjects.

 

[GKMotley]

Direct the Orders and Hank points to me.

But I hold no brief for TEC, as it has become. I wouldn’t be outside the Anglican Communion if it had not taken the turns it has, beginning in the late 60s.

 

[masuwerte1]

Some few people out there, including some Catholics, feel they have to denigrate what they can’t own.

 

[exnihilo]

Escapes criticism? Be serious. There is not a thread on this board that, when TEC is even mentioned in passing, doesn’t get singled out for criticism. It’s so predictable now, Pavlov’s hounds seem amateurish by comparison.

This is a Catholic forum.

So don’t talk to me about how TEC needs to take criticism. Not until some twinkle toe Catholics around here also learn to take it with a stiff upper lip. As far as I can tell, the concept of charity towards other faiths is an individual virtue that some Catholic posters here practice, but many others seem to consider optional to their witness.

I have been nothing but charitable. You seem to mistakenly think charity means ignoring the fact that TEC and its presiding bishop promote the gross immorality of homosexual acts. That’s not at all what charity means.

And by the way - I have frequently defended the CC and its theology on this board and off it. I have always tried to show respect even in disagreement. Which is why I will listen to a Catholic bishop preach, even while maintaining he is gravely wrong on certain subjects.

That is wonderful. But it isn’t a quid pro quo. I think the modern ecumenism isn’t very useful. I’d rather non Catholics say the Pope is the anti Christ. Then they’d at least have a good reason for not being Catholic.

 

[GKMotley]

Tu quoque finger pointing fails, either direction.

 

[QwertyGirl]

Finger pointing is fine as long as the person pointing the finger isn’t trying to deflect the issue from himself to someone or something else.

 

[QContinuum]

With pleasure, GK.

TEC will meet its demise soon if it can’t make meaningful connections to the past and its traditions. I do think some doctrinal development is good and healthy. I believe TEC cut off her nose to spite her own face, though and it will take many mercies and hard work to salvage her.

But I already tried a couple of continuing Anglican churches - in PA and later in Fort Worth’s diocese (Iker’s) that broke off. I loved the liturgy but found the bitterness of those places stultifying.

It’s what turned me agnostic for several years.

I found a very positive, balanced Episcopal church now, so here we are.

 

[GKMotley]

I don’t think the issue over +Curry is trying to avoid the issue over RC problems in the sexual area.

 

[phil19034]

It is remarkable and wonderful. I really think there are some people who are so pre-occupied with issues of human sexuality that they aren’t able to appreciate much about their faith. It is a shame.

It’s not that we are pre-occupied with sex. It’s that we believe sex is sacared.

When it a sacared act is not treated as such, it becomes a blasphemy

God bless

 

[QwertyGirl]

The poster, in response to a previous poster expressing concern over the RCC sex abuse scandal, basically said “Well the Episcopal Church has the same issues”.

 

[QwertyGirl]

It’s not that we are pre-occupied with sex. It’s that we believe sex is scared.

When it a sacared act is not treated as such, it becomes a blasphemy

God bless

No. Many posters on CAF are indeed obsessed with all things related to sex. Full stop. Look at the threads. Serious topics, having nothing to do with sex or sexual morality and 4 posts in, its “those homosexuals” or “that masturbation”, etc.
Not on topic, not balanced, not helpful.

 

[QContinuum]

This is a Catholic forum.

Which I translate to “Don’t expect any kindness or charity therein.”

I don’t usually sweat the near-constant jabs, but this particular thread was about a nice, ANGLICAN wedding, in a non-Catholic topic.

What you dismiss as “modern ecumenism” I call having good manners.

Unless that too, is incompatible with Catholicism?

 

[phil19034]

I wonder if the Queen was totally fine with this, or allowed it while privately wishing it was a Bishop from the Church of England?

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

It’s not that we are pre-occupied with sex. It’s that we believe sex is scared.

When it a sacared act is not treated as such, it becomes a blasphemy

God bless

No. Many posters on CAF are indeed obsessed with all things related to sex. Full stop. Look at the threads. Serious topics, having nothing to do with sex or sexual morality and 4 posts in, its “those homosexuals” or “that masturbation”, etc.
Not on topic, not balanced, not helpful.

Again… it’s because we believe it to be sacred. We have many posts regarding this because it’s one of the Church’s hardest teachings.

Therefore, we get lots of questions / challenges to the teachings.

Now: I will agree that some people might not be able to express themselves with lots of charity, but I have never read anything from any orthodox Catholics on here who appear to be obsessed.

If you believe so, you will need to post a real example.

God Bless

 

[QwertyGirl]

The real example is in the threads. You just have to look at them for yourself.

I have decided to call posters out when they derail a thread by doing that, repeatedly.

 

[GKMotley]

That is indeed a tu quoque finger, and fallacious reasoning, standing alone.

To point out that TEC has formally and doctrinally deviated from orthodox, traditional Christianity, in sexual areas is not. To reply that the RCC is guilty of departing from orthodox Christianity, and moral and legal standards, in dealing with and punishing personal actions, as a defense, is likewise a tu quoque retort.

 

[exnihilo]

The poster, in response to a previous poster expressing concern over the RCC sex abuse scandal, basically said “Well the Episcopal Church has the same issues”.

Right. Because you can’t belong to a church that has the same issue and say that damages the credibility specifically of the Catholic Church.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

I wonder if the Queen was totally fine with this, or allowed it while privately wishing it was a Bishop from the Church of England?

That’s a good question, Phil. Just pondering about this, I would guess that in theory, the Queen might say it would be a nice gesture. In reality, she may be in for a rather startling experience. I know the CofE and there aren’t too many like our Bishop Curry.