Episcopalian/ Anglican services

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mystagogy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Contarini said:
As SpiritMeadow has pointed out before, the trend in our culture is away from such female endings, which to contemporary ears sound diminutive and demeaning. Of course this trend has an ideological basis, as does your resistance to it. But as a matter of fact your analogy carries no weight, since the trend extends way beyond the word “priest.”

In all courtesy, you ought either to call female priests what they wish to be called or find some neutral term. Of course, you may have ideological reasons for casting courtesy to the winds. I can respect that. I sometimes call members of your Communion “Roman Catholics” even when it offends them, because in certain contexts I deem it to be necessary in order to express what I am trying to say. And I routinely call radical greatgrandchildren of the Reformation (and fellow Anglicans, for that matter) “Protestants” even though they object strenuously to the label.

Edwin
Click to expand...
Or, some of us, languidly.

GKC
 
After reading numerous postings on the debate if Anglican/Episcopal sacraments and ordination and other denominational differences between “we are the TRUE church Rome” and Reformation period churches , specifically Anglican and Lutheran , I am now of the opinion that Luther and his reformation was correct and that he should hove gone further in reforming the biased , opinionated one sided doctrines of the popes and the Roman Church who changed scripture to suit their needs and purposes . Rome and Roman Catholics need to go back and study the Proterstant reformation beliefs starting with the 95 Thesis and the Augsburg Confession and the sacred scriptures themselves. Rome and the popes have tried to read in and add too much man made doctrine into the church and call it tradition or relevation, Scripture calls it non scriptural additions. SOLA SCRIPTURA SOLA FIDES .
 
SpiritMeadow said:
Your opinion is noted. I don’t agree with it, and shockingly millions of others don’t either.
Click to expand...
Because you and those other people believe feminism should rule theology.
Paul referred to a female deacon and a apostle Junia which is a woman and was considered a woman by your church for 1000 years before it was changed to be a man. Problem is there is no such male name in the history with that name. There are cave paintings where Paul and a female are both painted, each giving the sign of teacher. Paul speaks of women prophesying as men do. The rest of your remarks have zero to do with his conversation.
Click to expand...
They do not have Holy Orders of the priesthood. Not one female has of the true Church for 2,000 years and I see no reason at all why it should change.
There are still hundreds of women priests happily going about their business of preaching and confecting the bread and wine.
Click to expand...
I guess when they themselves are a mockery to begin with, it isn’t much of a stretch to think what they are doing are mockeries. The sad point is, is they are not conferring grace on anyone.
Yes we are aware what your church teaches. That does not of course make it necessarily true. We don’t think it is.
Click to expand...
The Lord’s and the Apostles examples, as well as 2,000 years of Sacred Tradition, stand as stalwarts to the truth. Not modern day nonsense.
Well, so now you take it upon yourself to declare anyone who disagrees with you not a Christian. I would like to hear you explain that one to the Lord.
Click to expand...
Not my declaration, but their example. How much of the Gospel can you disregard and still make it to heaven? Abortion, homosexual acts (Robinson), gay marriage,…
 
Augie1530 said:
After reading numerous postings on the debate if Anglican/Episcopal sacraments and ordination and other denominational differences between “we are the TRUE church Rome” and Reformation period churches , specifically Anglican and Lutheran , I am now of the opinion that Luther and his reformation was correct and that he should hove gone further in reforming the biased , opinionated one sided doctrines of the popes and the Roman Church who changed scripture to suit their needs and purposes . Rome and Roman Catholics need to go back and study the Proterstant reformation beliefs starting with the 95 Thesis and the Augsburg Confession and the sacred scriptures themselves. Rome and the popes have tried to read in and add too much man made doctrine into the church and call it tradition or relevation, Scripture calls it non scriptural additions. SOLA SCRIPTURA SOLA FIDES .
Click to expand...
You are so full of it! :whacky: :bluelite: 🍕 What a laugh! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
 
Contarini said:
You’re never languid. Dignified, yes. Courteous, certainly. I’d even call you laconic. But not languid.

Edwin
Click to expand...
Sometimes, around midnight I am.

But, on line, I seem to be more snarky of late. Or so I read my correspondence.

GKC
 
Augie1530 said:
After reading numerous postings on the debate if Anglican/Episcopal sacraments and ordination and other denominational differences between “we are the TRUE church Rome” and Reformation period churches , specifically Anglican and Lutheran , I am now of the opinion that Luther and his reformation was correct and that he should hove gone further in reforming the biased , opinionated one sided doctrines of the popes and the Roman Church who changed scripture to suit their needs and purposes . Rome and Roman Catholics need to go back and study the Proterstant reformation beliefs starting with the 95 Thesis and the Augsburg Confession and the sacred scriptures themselves. Rome and the popes have tried to read in and add too much man made doctrine into the church and call it tradition or relevation, Scripture calls it non scriptural additions. SOLA SCRIPTURA SOLA FIDES .
Click to expand...
Oh dear. After reading the posts of members of various Christian groups on an internet forum, you have decided that you know who is right and wrong when it comes to a 500 year old divide? I sincerely hope you have done more reseach than that.

I can’t quite see why you have ‘‘Cath’’ in your religion section when quite clearly you are not.
 
masuwerte said:
I don’t think you should mock this woman or call her horrendous. If she’s faithful to her calling, whether you believe it to be genuine or not, she loves God and her neighbors and she’s done a lot of good in this world.
Click to expand...
I’m not mocking her. I’m calling that picture scary. She is one symbol to her church and another to me. To me that picture stands for what is wrong in our society today. 2,000 years of tradition trashed essentially because we know so much more than Christ and his Apostles. I blamed women’s lib for much of today’s woes, then someone pointed out contraception was the root of it. I read Humana Vitae and was shocked by the prophecy of it. I’m not getting into the back and forth of it and I hope that I’m not being rude about it, but that’s the short version of my opinion.
 
cothrige said:
I’ve written on this on other threads, so won’t get into it here in too much detail, but I do wonder where St. Paul’s mention that in Christ there is no slave or free, male or female fits into all of this for you.
Click to expand...
That’s just what I was thinking too. If ‘in Christ there is no slave or free, male or female’ means that women can be priests and bishops, then wouldn’t St. Paul himself have understood it that way?
Click to expand...
 
Contarini said:
I sometimes call members of your Communion “Roman Catholics” even when it offends them, because in certain contexts I deem it to be necessary in order to express what I am trying to say.
Click to expand...
Sadly, we Catholics are just as prone to play the victim card as anyone else. I would suggest that you ask your offended friends why the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission is called “the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission”, given that Roman Catholic is an “offensive” term.
 
Augie1530 said:
After reading numerous postings on the debate if Anglican/Episcopal sacraments and ordination and other denominational differences between “we are the TRUE church Rome” and Reformation period churches , specifically Anglican and Lutheran , I am now of the opinion that Luther and his reformation was correct and that he should hove gone further in reforming the biased , opinionated one sided doctrines of the popes and the Roman Church who changed scripture to suit their needs and purposes . Rome and Roman Catholics need to go back and study the Proterstant reformation beliefs starting with the 95 Thesis and the Augsburg Confession and the sacred scriptures themselves. Rome and the popes have tried to read in and add too much man made doctrine into the church and call it tradition or relevation, Scripture calls it non scriptural additions. SOLA SCRIPTURA SOLA FIDES .
Click to expand...
I’m willing to concede that there may well have been popes who have tried to add man-made doctrine into the church – certainly there have been some pretty bad popes – but the question is, did any pope actually add man-made doctrine into the church? Do any of the various dogmatic definitions contain error? I think not.
 
Peter_J said:
That’s just what I was thinking too. If ‘in Christ there is no slave or free, male or female’ means that women can be priests and bishops, then wouldn’t St. Paul himself have understood it that way?
Click to expand...
I know lots of people will think this is heresy, but I’m not sure the Biblical authors always understood the full implications of what they were saying. We certainly assert this quite frequently of the OT writers.

Edwin
 
kuanyin said:
I’m not mocking her. I’m calling that picture scary. She is one symbol to her church and another to me.
Click to expand...
I can’t see why she needs to be any sort of symbol to you at all? Why can’t you just leave her alone?
To me that picture stands for what is wrong in our society today.
Click to expand...
Given the link between a certain kind of feminism and abortion, I can’t simply dismiss this, much as I’d like to. I think you are terribly wrong, but I understand why you would think this.
2,000 years of tradition trashed essentially because we know so much more than Christ and his Apostles.
Click to expand...
No, because the principles they taught are revealing implications of which Christians of the past may not have thought. (I put no stock whatever in the argument that if Jesus had wanted women to have full equality He would have chosen some to be among the Twelve. That assumes that you know way too much about Jesus’ priorities and methods.)
I blamed women’s lib for much of today’s woes, then someone pointed out contraception was the root of it. I read Humana Vitae and was shocked by the prophecy of it. I’m not getting into the back and forth of it and I hope that I’m not being rude about it, but that’s the short version of my opinion.
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair the two are linked. A certain kind of feminism, which wants women to have the same kind of arrogant, self-centered autonomy that men have claimed for a long time, looks with disfavor on the biological processes that tie women to childbearing. There are healthier forms of feminism, and on the whole one finds them more among younger feminists (at least Christian feminists), which is a hopeful sign.

Edwin
 
Why do women “have” to be ordained as priests and bishops? If the pro-ordination people are “right”, and women are denied the priesthood, then nothing really happens except a few people don’t get to live out their own personal dreams. God will reward them for their obedience and will correct people for their error. If anti-ordination people are right, you’re damaging a priceless tradition. The church, wheather it is Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, or otherwise, shouldn’t be a battleground over human ideologies like feminism, gay rights or any of those other things. It’s not like the Catholics and Orthodox didn’t have alot of women saints without a “priestesshood”.

I talked to a woman once who spurned interested in the Orthodox faith, even though she was Armenian. She was interested in Evangelicalism because she could be a minister and wanted to be “cclose to God”. God had “called” her to that. Of course she disparriaged the tradition teachings of the church. I was just shocked she would do something like that… where does respect for the people that brought you that faith you now have fit in? I really wonder if “God” is calling women to the priesthood, or something else.
 
“That assumes that you know way too much about Jesus’ priorities and methods.”

Priorities and methods I know not. But one thing I know: actions.

GKC
 
BernadetteM said:
Dear Kuanyin,

Yes I have heard of your parish. It is called Our Lady of Hope. How many members has it started out with? Usually they start small, but some have grown to be very large. You are very lucky to have one. Do they use Rite 1? To me that is the most true to the Anglican Use liturgy. Do you have a priest full time yet?

Since I am Anglican Use I am very interested in how parishes are doing. I live in California and it will be impossible for us to have an Anglican Use parish unless when the Cardinal retires, soon thank God, we get a caring Cardinal or Bishop here.

California is where the AU had its roots. If possible it would be nice if your church could expand your website and also have a place for comments from interested parties. Are you going to the AU conference in June? I would love to go, but it is at an inconvenent time.

Please know that starting a new parish takes patience and much faith. Hopefully you have a Bishop who stands behind you 100%.

God Bless

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette
Click to expand...
We do have a full time priest, but we have an unusual set up. He is a pastoral provision priest who had been at St. Therese Little Flower for a year or two, I think. Our church also has a “Gospel Mass” and he must feel rather multiple personalitied going from one to the other! There couldn’t hardly be more opposite ends of the spectrum. He and our Bishop both had hoped to eventually have Anglican Use in Kansas City and, yes, Bishop Finn is wonderful-we are blessed! When many in our former church wanted to join with the Mother Church, then we were placed under our priest’s care and came to St. Therese. It has been an eventful year. I hope our little group will grow and be able to survive. How sad that your Bishop isn’t supportive.
 
Contarini said:
No, because the principles they taught are revealing implications of which Christians of the past may not have thought. (I put no stock whatever in the argument that if Jesus had wanted women to have full equality He would have chosen some to be among the Twelve. That assumes that you know way too much about Jesus’ priorities and methods.)
Click to expand...
I would agree that on its own this is not a convincing argument. Our Lord obviously worked within his times to a great degree, and so it really doesn’t mean all that much that he selected men. There are many reasons he may have done this without intending to make it an absolute condition for the priesthood. I also can accept this of the apostles to a degree. However, for me, the real problem comes in with a view to the Church in total. Our faith is not based on human reason or wisdom, but is revealed by God. And the arguments for women priests are all human arguments, based on ideas of things like equal rights, and don’t come from revelation. The Church, the pillar and foundation of the truth, has been consistent for 2000 years in ordaining men and not women. Not only that, she has taught that this was necessary. Personally I would not have been troubled by women priests at all, if the Church and the Spirit had decided it was the right thing. They didn’t though, and there just comes a point when we must accept what has been revealed.
 
Kuanyin,

Thank you for your reply. Yes you are very blessed to have a caring Bishop. I think as time goes by and the word gets around that AU parishes are not a threat or not orthodox that many more Bishops will be more open to establishing them in their area.

From what I understand some of the Bishops are very happy with the AU parishes.

I will keep your parish in my prayers that it will grow and that someday you will have your own building.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top