Episcopalian Vs. Catholic?

[grandfather]

DANGER RANT FOLLOWS:

]1: I know the Episcopal church/Anglican Church has its issues, find me a church that does not. I know that ours have been brought to the forefront thanks to some news stories, nevertheless others have issues too.

There are scandals in every church. Scandals are caused by people who fail to follow the precepts of religion. The issues at Lambeth and that have been brewing for a long time are not about Anglicans or Anglican clerics who have failed morally and what to do about it. The issues are about changing what has been universally accepted as moral and immoral for two thousand years. The top Anglican authorities are engaged in a debate that has torn their church in pieces. It is not about something esoteric or challenging, like some fine point in sacramental theology. It is about whether men can marry men. How could this even become an issue? How could it be seriously discussed as a possibility? Something is seriously wrong somewhere with the internal mechanisms that allow this to happen. Maybe people have become so inured to insanity that having a conversation about this and taking it seriously seems normal.

2: Catholics and Anglicans/Episcopalians have dialogue all the time, it happens when people that come with a true and loving interest in the conversation happen. Look, if the Pope and the ABC can do it, surely we can to.

We can love one another, I hope, but when people say things that are outrageous they have to be called what they are.

3: I know that everyone likes to be right, I know the Romans believe with their whole being that they have the fullness of the Faith, thats great, no one wants to take that away from you. No one wants you to not believe your faith. However, you have to meet us half way, you have to put that aside if you want a real conversation. Know you’re right, thats fine, just know we think we are too, the conversation should never become who’s right/who’s wrong but rather…how can we we together grow in the Love of Christ.

This is going to be difficult. Let’s take it out of the context of a religious discussion. Let’s say that two people are tryng to solve an Algebra problem. Solve for X. Say the answer is X = 1. Suppose the two people come up with two answers. X = 1 and X = 5. Should they meet half way? X = 2.5. Someone is right and someone is wrong. If they meet half way, both are wrong. If there is one God, there are not seven or a million. The conversation is always about which proposition is right and which is wrong. Both could be wrong. Maybe X = 20, but X does not equal 1 and 5 or 2.5. So now put it back into a theological context. Men can marry men or they can not, as absurd as that sounds. Some group within the Anglican universe is right and the other is wrong. Catholics and Anglicans disagree. Catholics say women can not be ordained priestesses. Anglicans say they can. One is right and the other is wrong. How can you say the conversation should not be about who is right and wrong? This in fact was the death knell of Anglicanism. They tried for years to make everyone right as a way to deal with conflict. Don’t offend anyone by telling them thay are wrong.

4: I went Catholic school, married a Catholic man, go to Mass with him, I love the Roman Catholic Church almost as much mine however it is because of people like the few mean spirited people here that make me so glad to have Church who’s sign says “all are welcome”. I never use to understand why protestants hated Catholics so much…thank you for helping me understand

Christians in our time are accused of being hateful. The liberals in our culture say that Christians who tell homosexuals that their behavior is immoral, are judgmental and hateful. Who said we should not judge? But suppose for a moment the teaching of Saint Paul in the Bible is true, and his prophesies about the end times. Suppose that God really did destroy Sodom and Gomorrah for their immoral behavior. Suppose that Chrisitians of all centuries are right about this behavior, that it is sinful, evil and will lead souls to hell. Suppose not only that, but that all sexual activity outside marriage will do the same thing. Suppose that Jesus was right when he said even looking at a woman in lust is sinful. Suppose the libertines of our day are wrong and the religious folk are right. Is it hateful that they warn people in danger of losing their souls that they need to repent?

Someone is right and someone is wrong. If the Anglicans are right the Catholics are wrong or vice versa. Whichever party is right it is not mean to tell the other it is wrong. In fact it is kind.

If I am an alcoholic and you tell me to get treatment I might resent your interference. That does not change the fact that I am a drunk and need help. You can drop hints, but you know that won’t work. I might get angry at you and never want to speak with you again. That does not change the fact that you are trying to help me.

5: You’ve all said you aren’t being mean spirited, its just the truth we (episcopalians/anglicans are just wrong and you want to bring us to the truth…while again I respect your wanting to share with us, be nice about it. We aren’t going on about the awful parts of the Catholic church and what doesn’t work so why do you do it with us.

The Church is full of sinners. I may be the worst. Jesus came so that we could know truth. The disputes within Anglicanism are about what is true, or not. Whatever the answers are we need to have the answers. We can’t endlessly debate it. We need to know it so we can know how to live. Some people say that the disputes are about matters that are not consequential. If they are not that important then why are they allowed to tear everything apart. The Anglicans are at war with one another over what is not important.

6: Anglicans/Episcopalians and the Romans can have discussions that can be are respectful…it forces both sides to accept that we aren’t going to change peoples minds if their hearts are hardened, and being rude hardens peoples hearts.

Your house is on fire. If you think it is not on fire and it is, someone has to tell you the truth. Telling you your house is on fire is not mean. It is burning down. Go read the proceedings from Lambeth and try to convince yourself otherwise. Rowan Williams tried to put the fire out by continuing the debate. He failed. He did not have the tools or power or wherewithal. When your house is on fire there are three options. You can try to put it out. You can get out and escape the flames. You can deny the house is on fire and sit in the room and watch tv, or debate whether the fire is really real, until it is too late.

7: There are so many wonderful people on here, thank you for being wonderful and kind and open to discussion…I just needed to rant…thank you for letting me.

Go for it. Rant away. Please let it all vent. Clear the air.

I love you.

8: FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THINGS HOLY THERE IS MORE TO MY CHURCH THEN GAY PEOPLE!!!

End rant

Your church is full of souls loved by God including al the gay people. There are also many mislead souls there and they also are loved by God.

 

[Wonderboo]

I guess my whole problem is found in the premise. The debate does not have to be about right or wrong. When Romans and Episcopalians have this conversation it isn’t about right or wrong. There is much in common between our two churches and that ought to always be the foundation of the discussion.
I understand that if you feel that souls are at stake you should tell the person, thank you. My problem is with the method. You can beat me over the head with your ideas all you want, it won’t work and it doesn’t work with most. Rather, if you think you are right as you clearly do, being pastoral is better choice. Learn and understand why Anglicans/Episcopalians think the way we do and then meet us at the table.
I also have a fundamental problem with you making it an all or nothing thing. The Catholic Church herself has agreed that Protestants and Anglicans in particular have parts of the truth, we are not all wrong. We may be, in your eyes, mostly wrong, but even then you have to grant us something. I am not saying we have to be right all the time, I’m saying however you have to meet us there.
I’m willing to grant that Anglicans have done some really stupid, immoral things. I’m also willing with grant that the Romans have as well. My problem is you can call us on it but we can’t call you on it.
At the end of it all I guess I’m still irked because your comments seem to reflect that you do not understand nor care to really understand what it is about us that made it get this way.

 

[jesusluv]

Wonderboo, you have no idea how much I sympathize with you. I am a Catholic, but for the last 6 months to a year, I’ve gotten tired quickly of the, quite frankly, stupid attacks by other Catholics on this forum. I’ve tried arguing against it, even pointing out specific things when I got the “I don’t know what you are talking about” response. All that got me was turned in to the moderators for “attacking” someone!!!

That is ludicrous. Apparently you get turned in for pointing out the attacks people do on here, unless you are attacking a faith aside from the Roman Catholic faith.

This thread is no different from the other 100 threads here that do essentially the same thing. The title, Episcopalian VS. Catholic sums it up. In many poster’s minds on this forum, they have to be AGAINST every other Christian entity on the planet, because that is the only thing that makes them secure in what they believe to be the truth.

It shouldn’t matter that you think the person beside you has the most untrue faith on the planet, you should take some tips from some of the greatest saints the church has ever seen.

My personal favorites are St. Patrick and St. Francis. They both showed many thousands the truth in their lifetimes and millions through the centuries, and didn’t attack others, they just showed others the truth they had.

St. Francis famous quote “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.” sums up what every Christian on the planet should do.

It has become the norm to use words to show people how “wrong” they are by ripping their faith to shreds, then use the Gospel if you have to. Completely backwards.

Here’s hoping I don’t get turned in for “attacking” someone for speaking the truth again.

 

[grandfather]

I guess my whole problem is found in the premise. The debate does not have to be about right or wrong. When Romans and Episcopalians have this conversation it isn’t about right or wrong. There is much in common between our two churches and that ought to always be the foundation of the discussion.

There are many shared beliefs. When we are separated what will bring us back together is resolving differences, not listing the things on which we agree.

I understand that if you feel that souls are at stake you should tell the person, thank you. My problem is with the method. You can beat me over the head with your ideas all you want, it won’t work and it doesn’t work with most. Rather, if you think you are right as you clearly do, being pastoral is better choice. Learn and understand why Anglicans/Episcopalians think the way we do and then meet us at the table.

I am an opinionated old grouch. I do not represent the Catholic Church in any official capacity as you presumeably do not speak for yours. For decades it seems to me that everyone is pusstfooting around the elephant in the room. I think it is time to call an elephant an elephant. You can have all the discussions you like, but don’t pay any attention to the man hiding behind the curtain. This has not worked.

I also have a fundamental problem with you making it an all or nothing thing. The Catholic Church herself has agreed that Protestants and Anglicans in particular have parts of the truth, we are not all wrong. We may be, in your eyes, mostly wrong, but even then you have to grant us something. I am not saying we have to be right all the time, I’m saying however you have to meet us there.

Here is a way of looking at being 99% right. Your theology is a fundamental way of looking at the world and operating in it. It tells you how to live and approach life. Maybe an analogy is a computer program. If there is a glitch in it it can run fine for a long time until you hit the glitch. Then the system breaks down. A Baptist minister told me no denomination has all of its doctrines correct. I asked him which of his is wrong. He said he did not know, or if he did he would not believe those particular errors. If you do not know which of your doctrines are wrong (false), you do not know which are right (true). He said it is arrogant to think all of your doctrines are true. This same man, a shepherd of souls councilled women it was ok to abort their babies.

You can’t be a little pregnant. You are either pregnant or not. You can’t be a little married. You are married or you are single. Being doctrinally ordered is like this. If you are a little wrong the wrong will eventually manifest itself and the wheels fall off. The wheels are falling off Anglicanism. The witness of the recent Lambeth Conference makes this undeniably clear.

If the answer to the math problem is one and the person with the right answer meets the person with the wrong answer half way and they split the difference, both are wrong. I am sorry this seems like hitting you over the head. Logic says it iis impossible for different churches with contradicting doctrine to be right. Maybe Catholicism is wrong, but Catholicism and Anglicanism can’t both be right. One can be only 1% wrong, but it is still wrong. That might be the Catholics, according to logic. Looking at the total confusion and breakdown within Anglicanism and the issues that are causing it, seems to say there is something wrong in this denomination, not a little wrong, but very wrong.

I’m willing to grant that Anglicans have done some really stupid, immoral things.

No! That is irrelevant. We are all disordered behaviorally. Sin makes us soft in the head. Look at the scandals in the Catohlic Church. They are horrendous. But they are perpetrated by those who failed to live the faith the Church professes. What we need to do is look at the faith professed. If there is confusion there on such elemental things as God made them male and female and a man leaves his mother and father to take a wife there is something so fundamentally wrong that this denomination has lost credibility.

I’m also willing with grant that the Romans have as well. My problem is you can call us on it but we can’t call you on it.

Nonsense! Our sins are always before us. I went to confession on Sunday. I went there because I am sinful and need mercy. I confess it. If I said I am not sinful I would be a liar. You don’t have to tell me I am rotten. I know it and admit it. The problem is when we say sin is not sin. When we try to say evil is good.

At the end of it all I guess I’m still irked because your comments seem to reflect that you do not understand nor care to really understand what it is about us that made it get this way.

We are all the same. You and I share the same nature. We are fallen creatures. For some reason God loves us. He does not give His love to Catholics and withhold it from Protestants. His will is that we all know His love. He loves us all. We need to find access to it.

I think I might know why Anglicans are confused, but the point is that they are confused right now and if I know why or not is not important.

Maybe you would not be irked if you understood what I hope for you. In fact I don’t care what made you the way you are. What I care more about is what you will become, and me too. I hope for you eternal beatitude with God and Mary and all the saints in heaven and nothing but blessings in this life as well. There is not a single shred of animosity in me toward you. I think your theology is mixed up. That does not mean I hate you, or that I will you evil. There are consequences of having a disordered theology. Sooner or later the wheels fall off and that is happening in Anglicanism. Saying this does not mean I dislike you or the people with whom you spend your Sundays. God bless every one of you, now and forever.

 

[Peter_J]

5: You’ve all said you aren’t being mean spirited, its just the truth we (episcopalians/anglicans are just wrong and you want to bring us to the truth…while again I respect your wanting to share with us, be nice about it. We aren’t going on about the awful parts of the Catholic church and what doesn’t work so why do you do it with us.

As I always say, you’ve got to compare apples with apples.

Yes, I agree that Anglican posters on this forum, by and large, are courteous and don’t point out Catholic faults ad nauseam.

But what would I find if I went to Anglican forums? I would bet that the way they talk about Catholics there would be just about as bad as the way Catholics talk about Anglicans here – just as rude, polemical, mean-spirited, what-have-you.

Hence, I don’t think that the good behavior of Anglicans (and non-Catholic Christians in general) on this forum can be attributed to any particular virtue on their part, but rather to the simple fact that this is a Catholic forum. (No offense, obviously. )

6: Anglicans/Episcopalians and the Romans can have discussions that can be are respectful…it forces both sides to accept that we aren’t going to change peoples minds if their hearts are hardened, and being rude hardens peoples hearts.
7: There are so many wonderful people on here, thank you for being wonderful and kind and open to discussion…I just needed to rant…thank you for letting me.
8: FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THINGS HOLY THERE IS MORE TO MY CHURCH THEN GAY PEOPLE!!!

End rant

FYI, we prefer to be called “Roman Catholics”, or simply “Catholics”.

But taken as a whole, I actually thought your :mad :mad mad: mad: rant was pretty good.

 

[Peter_J]

P.S. In saying that, I don’t mean to sound like “Oh this forum is as good as or even better than the typical Anglican forum (or non-RC Christian forum in genera) so we shouldn’t bother trying to improve it.”

By all means, if this forum can be improved then I think we ought to try and improve it.

 

[grandfather]

I
At the end of it all I guess I’m still irked because your comments seem to reflect that you do not understand nor care to really understand what it is about us that made it get this way.

Wonder,

It is not true that I do not care about your church or what your problems are. We all have problems and when one of us is hurt we are all hurt. All souls are connected in some way. We are in the same boat. We face the same flesh and blood issues.

We are all broken. God gives us a way to be fixed. We have to do something to be made whole together. We have to love one another. We have to belong to one another. We can not be separate from one another. We have to be in communion. God, not the Catholic Church, designed us this way, .

There is a reason that the Anglican communion is coming apart right now. The reason has nothing to do with sexual morals or sin. That is a subject of argument, but that is not what the problem is that is causing this church to tear itself apart. If the reason were sexual morals and sin, the Catholic Church would also be exploding as well.

The problem is the mechanism used to resolve conflict and maintain unity.

There have always been disputes within Christendom and there always will be. If the mechanism we use to resolve them is faulty we will not be able to find resolution while maintaining unity. We will not be able to remain in communion. We will continually break into parts separate from one another.

The Anglican mechanism is to appoint or elect men and women as leaders and have them discuss things collegially to resolve controversies and determine church position in matters of faith and morals. It does not work. The evidence is conclusive. It is a noble ideal, but turns into a circus.

The Catholic mechanism is the papacy. The pope can have lots of advisors and committees of bishops with whom to consult, but in the end, the pope is the recognized head of the Church. Jesus named Peter as the leader of the apostles. They all were given authority to act in His name and teach, but Peter was chosen to be their leader.

A past Apb of Canterbury may have acknowledged that the pope is the head of the Church, but Anglicans are not in communion with him. They have separated themselves. The pope can not help them. The Catholic Church can not help, because we are separate from you. You are on your own, because you made it that way. You have rejected the authority of the papacy, the Catholic mechanism for resolving disputes or controversies. Recognizing someone as the leader is not helpful unless you follow him, unless you are subject to his authority.

Catholics and Anglicans live in the same world and face the same issues. They come up with different answers to the questions they both face using their different mechanisms of governance. Can women be priests? We have faced the same question and have a different answer.

There is nothing the Catholic Church can do to solve Anglican problems, to change the course or destiny of Anglicanism. The leaders of Anglicanism have their debates and votes and go about their business of running their church. They use the mechanisms and methods they have created to define what it is to be Anglican.

The Catholic Church can say we think you are wrong and should not do such and such, but in the end the fate of Anglicanism is determined by Anglican authority alone. We can say if you jump off the cliff you will die. Don’t go near the cliff. Please listen, please, please be careful. We don’t want to see you hurt. You can’t have women priests, or bishops and men can not marry men. Don’t go there. Please turn back.

We can not tell you what to do. You have rejected the Catholic mechanism. You do not believe God established it, so you go your own way. Your way is why you are the way you are, for good or bad.

I am not saying all the Anglican Church is about is gay people. I have nothing to do with that. That is what the Anglican bishops made the focus of their deliberations, not me. They have all said their piece and have no resolution. They are stumped and have made it the issue that would tear them apart. If this makes them look foolish, Rome had nothing to do with it. All it does is illustrate that the mechanism is faulty. It is inevitable that without a visible head of the Church on earth that something like this would happen.

That is why I think you are the way you are. I am not being disrespectful. It does not mean I don’t like you. I am Catholic and believe this is why we need the pope and you do also.

The Anglican house is burning and they are fanning the flames instead of putting the fire out. They don’t have a fire department and will not allow ours to put the fire out. All we can do is watch. That does not mean we do not care about you.

It is certain that the liberal Anglican leaders are not going to back away from the issues that are so dear to them, homosexual marriage and women bishops. They made that clear. This seals the fate of the Anglican Communion. Catholics have nothing to do with this.

 

[jesusluv]

The big thing you seem to be missing with your argument, is that the media gives a very loud voice to a minority within the AC. Who is going to be put on camera or get interviewed, the run of the mill Episcopalian priest or the controversial priest that is bucking the system. We live in an instant world where we get all the news and stuff we want when we want it.

Being Catholic, you should know that decisions or arguments don’t take split seconds to resolve. Sometimes they take hundreds of years. These things everyone loves to bring up about the AC really only started in the late 60’s-early 70’s. A resolution on the controversial matters will be resolved, maybe not in our lifetimes.

Until then, I absolutely think we should be focused on what we have in common. We don’t have to ignore the differences, but if we have a firm grasp on what is common, it will make for much better dialogue in the future. I know to some of you on this forum, the words I’m saying are flying out of your head as fast as you are reading them, and you will no doubt continue with the standard “I’m right/you’re wrong” posting.

 

[emeraldcoast]

The big thing you seem to be missing with your argument, is that the media gives a very loud voice to a minority within the AC. Who is going to be put on camera or get interviewed, the run of the mill Episcopalian priest or the controversial priest that is bucking the system. We live in an instant world where we get all the news and stuff we want when we want it.

Being Catholic, you should know that decisions or arguments don’t take split seconds to resolve. Sometimes they take hundreds of years. These things everyone loves to bring up about the AC really only started in the late 60’s-early 70’s. A resolution on the controversial matters will be resolved, maybe not in our lifetimes.

Until then, I absolutely think we should be focused on what we have in common. We don’t have to ignore the differences, but if we have a firm grasp on what is common, it will make for much better dialogue in the future. I know to some of you on this forum, the words I’m saying are flying out of your head as fast as you are reading them, and you will no doubt continue with the standard “I’m right/you’re wrong” posting.

Jesusluv,

Thank you for your post!

Have a Blessed Day!

 

[grandfather]

The big thing you seem to be missing with your argument, is that the media gives a very loud voice to a minority within the AC. Who is going to be put on camera or get interviewed, the run of the mill Episcopalian priest or the controversial priest that is bucking the system. We live in an instant world where we get all the news and stuff we want when we want it.

Being Catholic, you should know that decisions or arguments don’t take split seconds to resolve. Sometimes they take hundreds of years. These things everyone loves to bring up about the AC really only started in the late 60’s-early 70’s. A resolution on the controversial matters will be resolved, maybe not in our lifetimes.

Until then, I absolutely think we should be focused on what we have in common. We don’t have to ignore the differences, but if we have a firm grasp on what is common, it will make for much better dialogue in the future. I know to some of you on this forum, the words I’m saying are flying out of your head as fast as you are reading them, and you will no doubt continue with the standard “I’m right/you’re wrong” posting.

The media is definitely not an ally of religion. They distort and pounce on every chance to bash us.

Believe it or not I don’t spend hours everyday thinking about what Anglicans or non-Catholic Christians are up to. I followed, out of curiosity and in detail, the proceedings of the Lambeth conference. I read the reports daily from several sources about the deliberations, the topics of debate, the controversies, the goals and objectives. I read Robinson’s speech and the response it got. I read Shori’s statements. She can not be considered a maverick on the lunatic fringe. She was elected by popular vote as the head of the Episcopal Church in the U.S. These are not a fringe element the media is exploiting. This has nothing to do with whether Catholics are right or Anglicans are wrong. The Africans who speak for the largest and growing numbers of Anglicans have declared they are no longer in communion with the worldwide group. There are groups in the U.S. and England who will also not go along with the nonsense. This can not be portrayed as the media highlighting the crazy element. Within Anglicanism there is a polarization that is not resolvable. Saying it will all work out in a hundred years seems naive. This is not about whether Catholics are right and Anglicans are wrong. One of the two poles within Anglicanism is right or wrong. Right and wrong can not abide together. They can talk about the things they agree upon, but that is not their problem. Their problem is the lunatic fringe is not a fringe. It is a major force. The media is not to blame.

 

[Peter_J]

The big thing you seem to be missing with your argument, is that the media gives a very loud voice to a minority within the AC. Who is going to be put on camera or get interviewed, the run of the mill Episcopalian priest or the controversial priest that is bucking the system. We live in an instant world where we get all the news and stuff we want when we want it.

Touché.

Kind of like when the Catholic Church gets in the news and reporters immediate run to Fr. Richard McBrien for a comment.

 

[frej]

I am saddened by the number of misconceptions that have been expressed regarding the Episcopal Church. As an ordained priest in the church, I take my vows seriously and the ordination rite which was used is taken from traditional Roman Catholic practice.

Misconception #1, we consider ourselves catholic with a small “c”.
The word itself means unversal, thus we are part of the uhniversal church established by Jesus Christ.

Misconception #2, jesus is the head of our church as we define church as the Body of Christ entered by all who are baptised. We accept both the baptism and Confirmation of other catholic traditions. They are welcome to receive the body of Chriat at Holy Communion.

We believe in the sacraments instituted by Jesus, Holy Baptism and the Eucharist. We believe that other sacramental rites exist which are not necessary for all persons as are Baptism and Eucharist.

In the United States, the Episcopal Church is led by our Presiding Bishop who is a woman. Woman may be ordained as deacons, priests and Bishops.

I was ordained a priest by a bishop and other presbyters who laid hands upon me. Apostolic succession is a tricky subject and I leave it to those more adept theologians than myself. Unfortunately, I am a simple country priest serving a very small parish. in Western Colorado.

We have a Book of Common Prayer which contains much of the doctrine and discipline of the church. The last part of the BCP contains an Outline of the faith commonly called the Cathechism.
Before ordination, I was a trained catechist using a version of the RCIA.

We believe in the creeds, both the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed. We study the early teachings of the church councils, Nicea, Chalcedon, etc. We also accept and use the Quicunque Vult, known as the Creed of Saint Athanasius.

Henry VII did not found the church of England. The Church of England has existed from the fourth century, established by members of the Roman Church who formed the Catholic Church in England. Priests and Bishops loyal to the Pope exchanged their loyalty to King Henry, undertsandable under duress, it was a difficult time. Catholics may recall that at one time, the Pope gave Henry the special title of Defender of the Faith as he was an extremely gifted theologian and apologist for the Faith. My understanding is that other than turning away from the authority of the Pope in Rome, Henry never turned away from his catholic Faith. That happened during the reign of Elizabeth.

Episcopal comes from the Greek word for Bishop or “overseer” of the faith. We follow the Apostolic Tradition, accept the authority of the Bible, the Creeds, and witness to our faith using Scripture, Tradition, Reason and experience.

As a priest, I celebrate Mass, consecrate the sacraments, Pronounce the forgiveness of sins, and Bless those who ask in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And, I hear private confession which we call the Sacrament of reconciliation.

Whew, I guess that is enough for now.

In referring to other Christian denominations, please attempt to exercise cilvility and respect under the guidance of the Spirit!

In His name,
Fr EJ+

 

[Peter_J]

frej,

Your post makes a lot of good points. But I think this is a case of “Actions speak louder than words.”

Episcopalians make many good statements about Catholics and Orthodox. But when you guys consecrated Bp. Robinson, the message sent to Catholics, Orthodox, and even the more conservative provinces in the Anglican Communion, was “We couldn’t care less what any of you think. We’re going to have things our way and you’d better just get used to it.”

 

[jesusluv]

Thank you for that post frej. Sadly, it will mostly fall on deaf ears. Yes, a state in the United States of America decided to consecrate an openly gay man bishop. That bishop has nothing to do with the Episcopalians in Alabama, TN, Colorado, etc. It is set up much more like the Orthodox is than the Roman church. Again, out of one side of the RC mouth you hear “they can’t make decisions because there is no head”, and the other side “that one state ordained a gay bishop, so obviously the entire episcopal church came together and approved it”.

 

[frej]

Peter,
While I understand your resentment and frustration, it takes a greater understanding of the polity of the Episcopal Church. General Convention, which occurs every three years, is the legislative body of our church. It is also the body which confirms the selection of bishops in the various dioceses. Like it or not, we are a democratic organization which allows great latitude within the function of the church. While I myself may personally be opposed to what happened, there exists no legislaitve prohibition to the ordinationof an openly gay bishop. Once a person enters the Holy Orders process in the church, there is no limitation regarding ordination.

Currently, a moratorium exists in many individual dioceses. However, each diocese has the authority to act as it sees fit! many have asked the main difference between our form of catholicism vs, the Roman Church, this is it, we do not have an authority with the power of a Pope, nor a body of authority such as the vatican Council and the cardinal structure.

We are loosely associated in the Anglican Communion with no true hierarchical structure. Whether this is a bad thing is open for debate. However, it is what it is.

Honestly, I would rather be allowed to make my own choices rather than be dictated to. I believe that the Holy Spirit acts within each member of the church and it is for each individual to speak as guided by the Spirit.

As to doing our own thing in the face of opposition by others, I believe Jesus was accused of the same behavior by the Sadduccees and Pharissees! Our liturgy for Baptism asks every member of the church to strive for justice and respect the dignity of every human being. It is through God’s help that we live into our baptismal covenant.

I don’t expect you to agree with our position, but I do ask that you respect the process we have established as we respect that which exists in the Roman and Orthodox tradition.

frej

 

[LLML]

Wonderboo, you have no idea how much I sympathize with you. I am a Catholic, but for the last 6 months to a year, I’ve gotten tired quickly of the, quite frankly, stupid attacks by other Catholics on this forum. I’ve tried arguing against it, even pointing out specific things when I got the “I don’t know what you are talking about” response. All that got me was turned in to the moderators for “attacking” someone!!!

That is ludicrous. Apparently you get turned in for pointing out the attacks people do on here, unless you are attacking a faith aside from the Roman Catholic faith.

This thread is no different from the other 100 threads here that do essentially the same thing. The title, Episcopalian VS. Catholic sums it up. In many poster’s minds on this forum, they have to be AGAINST every other Christian entity on the planet, because that is the only thing that makes them secure in what they believe to be the truth.

It shouldn’t matter that you think the person beside you has the most untrue faith on the planet, you should take some tips from some of the greatest saints the church has ever seen.

My personal favorites are St. Patrick and St. Francis. They both showed many thousands the truth in their lifetimes and millions through the centuries, and didn’t attack others, they just showed others the truth they had.

St. Francis famous quote “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.” sums up what every Christian on the planet should do.

It has become the norm to use words to show people how “wrong” they are by ripping their faith to shreds, then use the Gospel if you have to. Completely backwards.

Here’s hoping I don’t get turned in for “attacking” someone for speaking the truth again.

I support your statements. I don’t think the people have bad intentions but through their communication style they do give the impression of agression. I think maybe this also stems from having discussed a subject so many times that one starts posting somewhat abruptly. I agree that sometimes people of both faiths become agressive in their communication. I think someone just has to say, “Enough” - let’s not be so concerned with ourselves that we defeat the purpose of the forum. This is how I would have responded:

1. To Alexia - I think where we differ may be to your phrase “man-made laws of morality”. I believe and I think the Catholic Church does also (I am Catholic by the way) that the rules of morality are inherent in nature and come from God; they are God-given. I think C.S. Lewis also made this point. So I think the disagreement comes down to the fact that it appears to me by your comments that you support moral relativism (I am not an expert on Anglican/Episcopal church although I have attended it) and the Catholic Church does not support moral relativism. This point of view has been arrived at through logic, not merely sent down as an arbitrary edict; it has been supported by many scholars and doctors of the Church. This may be where you differ from the Catholic Church. And to the Catholic posters, this is a very different viewpoint.
2. To Wonderboo - Hi, I was not aware that the apostles/early church supported gay marriage (your comment “why an issue now if not before”). I know the Catholic position is that this is not the case. Do you have some evidence to support your claim?

Thanks and God bless,

 

[GKC]

I am saddened by the number of misconceptions that have been expressed regarding the Episcopal Church. As an ordained priest in the church, I take my vows seriously and the ordination rite which was used is taken from traditional Roman Catholic practice.

Misconception #1, we consider ourselves catholic with a small “c”.
The word itself means unversal, thus we are part of the uhniversal church established by Jesus Christ.

Misconception #2, jesus is the head of our church as we define church as the Body of Christ entered by all who are baptised. We accept both the baptism and Confirmation of other catholic traditions. They are welcome to receive the body of Chriat at Holy Communion.

We believe in the sacraments instituted by Jesus, Holy Baptism and the Eucharist. We believe that other sacramental rites exist which are not necessary for all persons as are Baptism and Eucharist.

In the United States, the Episcopal Church is led by our Presiding Bishop who is a woman. Woman may be ordained as deacons, priests and Bishops.

I was ordained a priest by a bishop and other presbyters who laid hands upon me. Apostolic succession is a tricky subject and I leave it to those more adept theologians than myself. Unfortunately, I am a simple country priest serving a very small parish. in Western Colorado.

We have a Book of Common Prayer which contains much of the doctrine and discipline of the church. The last part of the BCP contains an Outline of the faith commonly called the Cathechism.
Before ordination, I was a trained catechist using a version of the RCIA.

We believe in the creeds, both the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed. We study the early teachings of the church councils, Nicea, Chalcedon, etc. We also accept and use the Quicunque Vult, known as the Creed of Saint Athanasius.

Henry VII did not found the church of England. The Church of England has existed from the fourth century, established by members of the Roman Church who formed the Catholic Church in England. Priests and Bishops loyal to the Pope exchanged their loyalty to King Henry, undertsandable under duress, it was a difficult time. Catholics may recall that at one time, the Pope gave Henry the special title of Defender of the Faith as he was an extremely gifted theologian and apologist for the Faith. My understanding is that other than turning away from the authority of the Pope in Rome, Henry never turned away from his catholic Faith. That happened during the reign of Elizabeth.

Episcopal comes from the Greek word for Bishop or “overseer” of the faith. We follow the Apostolic Tradition, accept the authority of the Bible, the Creeds, and witness to our faith using Scripture, Tradition, Reason and experience.

As a priest, I celebrate Mass, consecrate the sacraments, Pronounce the forgiveness of sins, and Bless those who ask in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And, I hear private confession which we call the Sacrament of reconciliation.

Whew, I guess that is enough for now.

In referring to other Christian denominations, please attempt to exercise cilvility and respect under the guidance of the Spirit!

In His name,
Fr EJ+

May I point out that there are Anglicans who disagree with many of these points. And have left the communion because of that. No offesne Father. But what you hold is not what all Anglicans hold.

And 2 other points:

This time I spotted the “VII”.

And the full story of how Henry got his *Defensor Fidei *title is worth telling. I’ve done it before.

GKC

posterus traditus Anglicanus.

 

[frej]

GKC
No offense taken! You are correct, a number of positions have been taken by many Anglicans. When a group prides itself on living out its faith through scripture, tradition, reason, and experience tensions will arise and differing positions will form. Again, I’m not a church historian, nor theologian; merely a country priest seeking to serve the LORD. I wrestle with these same issues constantly and welcome diologue with others who will respect both my searching and the manner I have chosen.

I was born and raised a Roman Catholic, I left the church after leaving minor seminary. My reason is that no one would allow me to ask questins and when I did I was dismissed without being provided a substantive response. The Anglo-catholic form of the faith allows me to engage rational discussion.

Yes, I did incorrectly identify Henry, not enough "I"s. It is Henry VIII, and his story is fascinating as is the story of many of the Popes who have served the See of Rome!

frej

 

[LLML]

GKC
No offense taken! You are correct, a number of positions have been taken by many Anglicans. When a group prides itself on living out its faith through scripture, tradition, reason, and experience tensions will arise and differing positions will form. Again, I’m not a church historian, nor theologian; merely a country priest seeking to serve the LORD. I wrestle with these same issues constantly and welcome diologue with others who will respect both my searching and the manner I have chosen.

I was born and raised a Roman Catholic, I left the church after leaving minor seminary. My reason is that no one would allow me to ask questins and when I did I was dismissed without being provided a substantive response. The Anglo-catholic form of the faith allows me to engage rational discussion.

Yes, I did incorrectly identify Henry, not enough "I"s. It is Henry VIII, and his story is fascinating as is the story of many of the Popes who have served the See of Rome!

frej

Wow, that’s interesting. It’s too bad so many different parts of the Church are so different. I actually became Catholic because of the fascinating responses I got from priests, and the fact that they drew on such a rich tradition, parts of which my Protestant heritage teachers had abandoned because of the Reformation. Also because of the place that reason was accorded in the Church. Do you watch EWTN? What do you think of that? They have some very good priests, none of which, I think, would discourage questions. On the contrary…

 

[Janet_S]

I haven’t read this book, but I’ve heard about it. It’s written by a Catholic historian, Eamon Duffy. If you’re interested in the history of the Catholic Church in England, you might want to read this book, The Stripping of the Altars:

books.google.com/books?id=K48k6JIcPrUC&dq=Dr+Eamon+Duffy&pg=PP1&ots=HoiirLTrQI&sig=SHnvd7W5BEo9e4mcXjiq594uZ0s&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPR8,M1