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

  • Thread starter Thread starter ComplineSanFran
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
St. George’s Chapel began as a Catholic chapel I believe. So at least they were married in what once was a Catholic property, even though they did not have a Catholic wedding.
 
I agree, as to the mechanics of the invite.

It does leave one wondering who it was first came up with the name.
 
Brings to mind the son of the 16th Duke of Denver, Gerald, styled Viscount St. George. It was Gerald’s death serving in the RAF, that brought Peter Death Bredon Wimsey to the peerage, succeeding to his brother’s title.

If one believes what one reads.
 
Indeed. Gerald died in the fire, if I remember rightly. And when one of the staff called Lord Peter “Your Grace” he said: “Too early for that” or words to that effect.

Have you read the Jill Paton Walsh continuations? I bet you have.
 
Two of the four only. I must get on with that. Swallows, Amazons, 17th Duke of Denver, all my other addictions. So much to do.
 
Sounds more likely than what I read; that the bride and groom suggested it.
 
“ComplineSanFran said:
For Roman Catholics, it is a grave sin. And no one is saying your branch of the church cannot divine what is a grave sin and what is not. Just as Judaism has its own discernment over following Torah. Keeping kashrut is the law. Do Christians keep kashrut? No, we chose to disregard that particular law. [/qutoe]

Of course Christians don’t keep the Law as Christ fulfilled the OT Law. Mortal sin is mortal sin for every Christian and cannot be changed by any faith group seeking salvation by Jesus Christ.

[1Jn2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.]

[Is5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!]

[Rms1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;]

[1Cor6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.]

[Eph5:5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. 6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
jlhargus said:
By your own post you show how weak and nonexistent your reasoning and evidence is for changing the gospel of Christ. If you had evidence worth posting you would have done so. Obviously one can reason the gospel away.
Click to expand...
What is weak is this pathetic attack on Compline’s statement of faith. Catholics who use such tactics make me want to stay far away from the CC.

Reported.
 
Last edited:
ComplineSanFran said:
I have it from good sources that Archbishop Welby made the suggestion.
Click to expand...
exnihilo said:
And why would he suggest it? What possible reason could he have for making the suggestion?
Click to expand...
Compline’s “good sources” gave him correct information, according to the Daily Mail:

And it wasn’t Harry or Meghan who thought of asking the effervescent Bishop Michael Curry of the Episcopal Church to compose the sermon (and then rewrite it at considerable length as he went along). That had actually been the suggestion of the Archbishop of Canterbury, with the full endorsement of the Supreme Governor of the Church of England – and well-known fan of the evangelical preacher Billy Graham – the Queen.

 
exnihilo said:
He might be preaching part of it but it isn’t the whole. If he promotes homosexual acts, and he does, then he is promoting gross immorality. That isn’t the Gospel of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Respectfully opinion only. Just heard Bishop Michael Curry preach at the wedding > preaching the Gospel of Love, what a sermon!! Beautiful!
Love conquers all was Jesus whole message. Jesus preaching, teaching, preaching was about changing harden hearts of stone, within each one of us? Lacking Love within, right?

Bishop Michael Curry Sermon gave the whole of Jesus gospel>>The Fire of Love. 💗

Pondering on 🤔 Are we to be naive assuming that homosexuality did not exist in Moses time or in Jesus time, well it did, but Moses nor Jesus made it not an issue did they, why?

Not a sin to love or to love another, but it is sin to judge those who do?

Judging others, because whom they choose to Love, does one break all the Commandments? >>Love your neighbor as you love yourself?

Our Heavenly Father in all his infinite Wisdom and all knowing surely would of created a law if this was a sin would he not?

Where in the Royal Ten Commandments does it state about Eunuchs, them doing so is a sin?

One who has broken the least Commandment has broken them all, is it not written?

All that was said by Jesus on this issue in
Matthew 19:12 >
For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth
and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others
and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.
Let anyone accept this who can.

Notice Jesus last sentence, says it all? Let anyone accept this who can?
Jesus Judges them not, does he?
Nor does Jesus give us instructions what to do about it does he?
But Jesus gives us knowledge and understanding, to why this is and Jesus simply states >> Let anyone who can accept this who can.

Jesus was he not fully aware there were>> Holy Priestly Laws given to his Priest and commanded to obey, to render themselves Holy to serve and remain on his altar?
Those who serve him , remain Holy what not to do?
Is this maybe where it takes root such misunderstanding of the word used, was in the Priestly Laws was it not?

Homosexuality (eunuch?) and pedophilia?
2 different words and 2 different meanings right?
Meaning of one, are two consenting adults?
Other word means what? 🤔

Warning against judging another

James 4 :11 Do not speak evil against one another, brothers and sisters. Whoever speaks evil against or judges another, speaks evil against the Law and judges the law, but if you judge the law your are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is one Lawgiver and Judge who is able to save and to destroy, So who then are you to judge your neighbor?

Which Commandments says if one breaks this Thou shall not is greater then another Commandment if broken? There is none right?
Jesus tells us if one breaks the least of the commandments one has broken them all right?

Love your neighbor as you love yourself, doing so, we do not break any one of the commandments right?

Peace 🙂
 
Last edited:
I’m open for evidence from scripture, tradition or even reason but not personnel attacks. Got any?
 
“jlhargus said:
ComplineSanFran said:
For Roman Catholics, it is a grave sin. And no one is saying your branch of the church cannot divine what is a grave sin and what is not. Just as Judaism has its own discernment over following Torah. Keeping kashrut is the law. Do Christians keep kashrut? No, we chose to disregard that particular law. [/qutoe]
Click to expand...
Respectfully opinion only pondering on His spoken Word and Laws given as instructions to know right from wrong morally, spiritually also and aspire to becoming righteous and how to maintain such Holiness?
Pondering 🤔 There were Priestly Laws known as The Code of Holiness for his Priest to be obeyed. Tthose who freely choose to make it their profession and what would be acceptable and not acceptable into his hands.
Stricter Laws of Holiness for his Priest to obey The Code of Holiness Priestly Laws and Priestly>> Ceremonial Laws>>telling his Priest>> how? when? to Worship him, right?
Question what would be a grave sin for the Priest? Is it not mentioned in their The Code of Holy Priestly Laws to be obeyed?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
🤔 Then Our Heavenly Father, there is Laws given for his>>> Congregation, called The Royal Ten Commandments and his teaching on The Sermon on the Mount>> gives us instruction to know right from wrong and to be doers of his Laws and know in doing so, what is pleasing to him, right? What would be grave sin for the Congregation?>>The only sin that will never be forgiven >>is the one against the Holy Spirit?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
If one reads Matthew Chapter 23 whom is Jesus rebuking strongly and boldly and why? He tells us does he not within His Spoken Word ? Woe to you scribes=teachers? priests? Written is it not? My Father’s House is not a den of thieves? But a House of Prayer? You know the letter of the Law but you yourselves do not obey the law?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
🤔 Just pondering trying to understand His Spoken Word.

Asking…True>> Free Will was given to all>> we can chose what to disregard within His Spoken Word >> but in the end, judgement day, will our Heavenly Father also choose to disregard what and whom He wills also?

Peace 🙂
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
BartholomewB said:
That had actually been the suggestion of the Archbishop of Canterbury, with the full endorsement of the Supreme Governor of the Church of England
Click to expand...
Of course it was approved by the queen. But what motivation would one have to involve him? He has no personal or spiritual ties to anyone. Inviting him just makes no sense to me.
 
Anglican ceremony; organisers keen that the bride’s American background should be reflected during the service; organisers keen that the African-American part of the bride’s background should be reflected during the service. Who will give the address?

You can’t see why a distinguished African-American Anglican Bishop noted for his address should come to mind? Really?
 
Sure, racism. If the bride had been Scottish and there had been pipers in the chapel, that would have been racism, too, no doubt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top