E
exnihilo
Guest
Look up Rev. Bede Parry.
Also see Rev. Bede Parry. There are plenty more examples.
Episcopal Presiding Bishop Michael Curry to preach at Henry and Meghan's Wedding
- Status
Q
QContinuum
Guest
And if I had claimed the CC were the only ones who’ve abused, that would mean something.
My point - once again - is that despite the CC’s systemic issues with child abuse, I don’t quarantine all Catholic bishops and priests from my hearing as a result of that defect. I think the CC has a defect in the way they define and invest authority, which contibuted to the destruction of many lives.
Here’s another example: I happen to affirm Jewish belief regarding the necessity of preserving the mother’s life, in cases where it is threatened by pregnancy, before viability.
Catholic bishops all teach this is wrong. I believe they are wrong, and that their position is directly at odds with the right of a woman to preserve her own life.
You and I could argue until kingdom come about natural law, double effect, church teaching, etc. I hold my position because of my training in biological sciences, as well as a great deal of research into the subject. I’m against abortion in most cases, but here is where I draw the line.
So, I believe a bishop’s position is wrong and poses a threat to some women’s lives. Do I refuse to hear him preach at a friend’s baby’s baptism?
Others can decide for themselves, but I would go.
Last edited:
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
I believe Meghan Markle is pro-LGBT and whatever other letters might follow.
Her Dad is or was Episcopalian and I think Harry has a little of his Mother’s rebelliousness in him and would like to stir the pot a little bit. We know they are big fans of the Obamas and wanted them at their wedding and not President Trump.
So they are in their 30’s and trying to show what grownups they are and trying to make a statement. I pray the Bishop does well because he will be representing America in a sense and will be speaking before a tough crowd.
Her Dad is or was Episcopalian and I think Harry has a little of his Mother’s rebelliousness in him and would like to stir the pot a little bit. We know they are big fans of the Obamas and wanted them at their wedding and not President Trump.
So they are in their 30’s and trying to show what grownups they are and trying to make a statement. I pray the Bishop does well because he will be representing America in a sense and will be speaking before a tough crowd.
F
fin
Guest
Frankly I do not know why faithful Catholics are excited about the wedding. Dunno if it is even valid, given that Meghan was married before. Obviously as like many Catholics too, these people do not have a true underatanding of marriage, and not blaming them at all.
G
GKMotley
Guest
I agree with much here. I am known, in some local circles, for a marked disagreement, not with a given RC, but with the RCC’s stated position on an historical point and what it requires RCs to affirm on that issue. But I don’t argue that moral point, even when I have to (grudgingly) correct much history on the subject.
J
JSAD
Guest
Meghan has been annulled before as well. Please look it up.
What has Trump got to do with anything here? Classic sidestep there .
What has Trump got to do with anything here? Classic sidestep there .
P
Pup7
Guest
What’s more disturbing - and I’m married to a British Royalist, as some may remember, though as an American I really have no dog in this fight - than the 6th in line to the throne being married to a divorcee is the fact that the heir apparent is a publicly confessed adulterer, divorced, and married to a divorcee who is the woman he was known to be carrying on with for pretty much all of his marriage to the Princess of Wales.
And my understanding is she will still be crowned Queen Consort, though I’m hoping she has the sensibility to refuse - if she can under their law. I don’t know enough to know the answer.
Princess Margaret was advised against marrying the man (at risk of revoking everything she had) that was arguably the love of her life because he was divorced. A King abdicated because his wife was twice divorced. Oh how times have changed.
The person Prince Harry marries, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty much irrelevant. What an enviable position to be in.
Last edited:
A
Axsenex
Guest
I’m fine with their decision after all it’s their lives & not my problem.
Off-topic about sexuality is stupid and juvenile trash talk.
Off-topic about sexuality is stupid and juvenile trash talk.
G
greenrangerx
Guest
I’m surprised he was invited… isn’t the Episcopal Church still censured from the Anglican Communion?
G
GKMotley
Guest
Not in no way particularly important or relevant to this issue. And if the CoE and/or the Monarch (I didn’t see the invitation), says come on over, it’s a done deal.
G
GKMotley
Guest
I take no chances. Used to wear a belt and suspenders. Metaphorically.
P
phil19034
Guest
Yeah, but the difference between Princess Margaret and Prince Charles & Prince Harry was the fact that the Parliament would not allow Princess Margaret an exception. The Queen was willing to allow Margaret to marry in the Church of Scotland, but her advisers told her that the Church of England and the Parliament would never allow it.
Parliament did allow Prince Charles and Prince Harry their current situations.
And in regards of the Church of England, for Prince Charles, he didn’t get married in the Church of England and the Church of England pulled out a penitence prayer that they created for Henry VIII.
In regards to Harry, Megan was just baptized (according to the Telegraph) so I’m sure the Church of England was able to dissolve her previous marriage using something similar to Petrine privilege and/or Pauline privilege.
God bless!
Last edited:
When Bishop Michael Curry gets into the pulpit of St George’s Chapel , Windsor Castle , the Queen’s reaction will be no different than normal .
“The love that has brought and will bind Prince Harry and Ms Meghan Markle together has its source and origin in God, and is the key to life and happiness,” Bishop Michael Curry has said. “And so we celebrate and pray for them today.”
I doubt very much that he will come across as a loud-mouthed preacher .
P
phil19034
Guest
As a Catholic, I’m personally, I’m not concerned what he’s going to say in a religious standpoint. I just don’t want him to embarrass us as Americans.
Heck, not only is he not Church of England, he’s not even from a Commonwealth nation. He’s from the biggest nation to rebel against the United Kingdom via Civil War and win their freedom!
I’m sure he won’t .Rob2:
As a Catholic, I’m personally, I’m not concerned what he’s going to say in a religious standpoint. I just don’t want him to embarrass us as Americans.
You have one high-ranking figure who is adept at that .
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
I don’t think anyone, including myself, implied that the Bishop is a ‘loud-mouthed preacher.’
M
Maximilian75
Guest
Family is the foundation of society.
A family is based upon a man and a woman, usually bonded sexually.
If sex becomes disordered, so goes the family, and then society.
A family is based upon a man and a woman, usually bonded sexually.
If sex becomes disordered, so goes the family, and then society.
Neither did I .
P
Pup7
Guest
My point was that times had changed drastically from the 1930s to the 1950s to today. A king abdicated because he couldn’t marry a divorcee (twice, in Wallis’ case, but still), Margaret was denied a marriage…yet the next King has been divorced and is married to a divorcee.
The 6th in line to throne is almost 100% irrelevant in this case. I’m thinking in the next two years Harry could end up 7th in line.
I know about Parliament and how that’s governed. But that wasn’t my point.
Last edited:
- Status