Episcopalian Vs. Catholic?

[grandfather]

Trying my hardest to prove how wrong Muslims, Hindu, JW’s, Mormons, Protestants, etc. are does NOT make my faith any more true.

There are two sides of the coin. A proposition or statement that is false must be proven false. A statement that is true is defended.

It is frankily, very Pharisaical to do this.

Please explain!

Standing back with my “fullness of truth” and telling every person that walks by how wrong they are and this is why does nothing but make me look just like the Pharisee that was thanking God for not making him like the wretch beating his chest and pleading for forgiveness beside him.

Whenever I look at this scripture I always see myself as both men. If it were not for your grace which I do not deserve I could be both. Thank you God that I am not a drug addict and a murderer. Forgive me God for all of the evil I have done. I wonder if anyone else shares this perspective.

You are correct in repeating over and over that there is no head man in charge. I actually respect the way things are done there, whether it is flawed or not. You have a combination of clergy and lay people that make most of the decisions.

If the shoe fits wear it.

 

[grandfather]

Actually, the decision to ordain Bp. Robinson could not have been made without the active consent of a majority of the ECUSA bishops and their dioceses. The ship is seriously listing to port and taking on water fast. Person the lifeboats!

Women and children first.

 

[grandfather]

This is off topic, a bit. Does anyone think that it is possible to be both provocative and polite? Is it possible to effect change without provoking? Can we both make people comfortable and at the same time help them to change? Is change possible without discomfort?

Listen to Jesus words. “Your father is the devil, a murderer and liar from the beginning”. “You brood of vipers”.

Would anyone say talk like that is not very Christian? It is not very “pastoral” at all. When Jesus tells the pharisees that they are going to die in their sins He is telling them they are going to hell. Is that uncharitable, unkind, impolite?

Of course none of us know who is going to hell or heaven. I pray for mercy for all souls, including the pharisees.

When we see the things going on in the Anglican communion that are clearly berserk should outsiders warn them that they have severe problems and are in peril, or should we be polite and smile and wish them well and hope they muddle through?

 

[Peter_J]

Now, to the Episopalians. Assuming that everyone that doesn’t agree with decisions like the consecration of Gene Robinson is just going to stay and shut their mouth, is unwarranted. There is a sizeable breakoff going on right now with GAFCON over this extremely liberal shift. GAFCON consists of right at 25% of the AC’s bishops. This doesn’t count those existing breakoffs like the Traditional Anglican Communion and the “continuing” anglicans.

That depends on what you mean by “breakoff”.

Many conservative Anglicans provinces are breaking off communion with the ECUSA, or have already done so.

But if by “breakoff” you mean that they’re leaving the Anglican Communion, then I would say that it’s the other way around: they want to remain in the Anglican Communion themselves, but they don’t want some of the more liberal provinces, like the ECUSA, in the Anglican Communion.

 

[jesusluv]

I think it is more likely for conservatives to leave the AC than it is for the AC to kick out the ECUSA. The AC as a whole is becoming more liberal with the EC.

If I were personally to become an Anglican, it would be one of the Anglo-Catholic flavors, but I actually enjoy the wording of the ECUSA’s Eucharistic Rite II liturgy. It is “King James free”. I have nothing against the old style speach and wording, but the 1928 BoC liturgy has you repeating the 10 commandments at the beginning of every Mass and I’m not a fan of praying in KJV personally.

The 1979 BoC Rite II mass is almost Verbatum the Novus Ordo liturgy all RC’s are familiar with now. The only exceptions I can think of are the singing of the Doxology(Praise God from whom all blessings flow…) and the wording when you go forward for the Eucharist. The RC simply says “the body of Christ” and “the blood of Christ”, where the EC says “the body of Christ, the bread of heaven” and “the blood of Christ, the cup of salvation”.

As far as wording, I have to confess that I like the Episcopal Rite II liturgy better than either the Novus Ordo or 1928 BoC/1979 Eucharistic Rite I liturgies.

 

[PerryJ]

Well now that we have the definitive word. LOL. Is this the method used to gain converts to RCC? By being utterly rude, and nasty? On whose authority personally speaking have you been made aware that the Holy Spirit is not in any other church by the Roman one? I didn’t think your Pope was making such pronouncements. Nobody saved but you?

I believe your statement is confusing the visible and invisible Church.

 

[emeraldcoast]

I think it is more likely for conservatives to leave the AC than it is for the AC to kick out the ECUSA. The AC as a whole is becoming more liberal with the EC.

If I were personally to become an Anglican, it would be one of the Anglo-Catholic flavors, but I actually enjoy the wording of the ECUSA’s Eucharistic Rite II liturgy. It is “King James free”. I have nothing against the old style speach and wording, but the 1928 BoC liturgy has you repeating the 10 commandments at the beginning of every Mass and I’m not a fan of praying in KJV personally.

The 1979 BoC Rite II mass is almost Verbatum the Novus Ordo liturgy all RC’s are familiar with now. The only exceptions I can think of are the singing of the Doxology(Praise God from whom all blessings flow…) and the wording when you go forward for the Eucharist. The RC simply says “the body of Christ” and “the blood of Christ”, where the EC says “the body of Christ, the bread of heaven” and “the blood of Christ, the cup of salvation”.

As far as wording, I have to confess that I like the Episcopal Rite II liturgy better than either the Novus Ordo or 1928 BoC/1979 Eucharistic Rite I liturgies.

I agree with you on the BCP 1979 Rite II Eucharist is basically the same as what the RC folks are familiar with at Mass. I do my best to attend our children’s RC school’s weekly Mass and it is very familiar if not the same for me. The thing that I have to remember is to stop when saying the Lord’s Prayer at the part during RC Mass and let the priest only say “For Thine is the kingdom…”

In addition, after the Lord’s Prayer, our priest will say -
[Alleluia.] Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us;

And we say -
Therefore let us keep the feast. [Alleluia.]

After Communion we all say together…

Eternal God, heavenly Father,
you have graciously accepted us as living members
of your Son our Savior Jesus Christ,
and you have fed us with spiritual food
in the Sacrament of His Body and Blood.
Send us now into the world in peace,
and grant us strength and courage
to love and serve you
with gladness and singleness of heart;
through Christ our Lord. Amen.

I can’t recall if the RC priest also says at the breaking of the consecrated host what our priest says–

The Gifts of God for the People of God.
Take them in rememberance that Christ died for
you, and feed on Him in your hearts by faith, with thanksgiving.

The standard seems to be “the body of Christ, the bread of heaven” and “the blood of Christ, the cup of salvation” but these words may also be said “The Body(Blood) of our Lord Jesus Christ keep you in everlasting life”. (Amen)

I think that we both agree on “Thanks be to God”!

 

[jesusluv]

Yes, we do agree on that.

 

[frej]

A further review of the past few days postings leads me to believe that it is not our liturgy that is in conflict but in our polity. Unfortunately, I can not change that. The Episcopal Church in the US came out of the Revolutionary War during which the remaining Anglicans had to choose between King or adopted Country. Most chose to remain in America as Americans. The church that arose was not an established church nor one that accepted a fixed human hierarchy. Our beliefs and liturgical practice parallel the RC church. Our polity does not.

Grandfather and I will choose to agree to disagree. In the end, a divine power will sort it out. I strongly believe that nothing I preach or teach distances people from God and Jesus Christ. It is our human ego that feeds the arguments that I have read here. However, when each of us focuses on the core of our beliefs, we discover the Christ, sent by God to return us to Divine Union. In the spirit we are one, it is the flesh that divides us.

 

[grandfather]

]A further review of the past few days postings leads me to believe that it is not our liturgy that is in conflict but in our polity. Unfortunately, I can not change that. The Episcopal Church in the US came out of the Revolutionary War during which the remaining Anglicans had to choose between King or adopted Country. Most chose to remain in America as Americans.

Unless I am mistaken an earlier poster claimed that the Episcopal Church predated the Anglican Church. I was under the impression that The Episcopal phenomenon was American and was driven by politics. American Anglicans could not accept the English king as the head of their church. They were at war with him, so they formed a separate organization. Is this the case?

The church that arose was not an established church

What does that mean?

nor one that accepted a fixed human hierarchy.

Do you mean that the Episcopal church is not hieararchical?

Our beliefs and liturgical practice parallel the RC church. Our polity does not.

Do you believe abortion is evil? Contraception? Do you believe women can be ordained? Do you believe homosexual activity is sinful? Do you allow for divorce and remarraige? Do you believe the bishop of Rome is the visible head of the Church?

In the spirit we are one, it is the flesh that divides us.

Saint Paul tells us to be of one mind and agree on all things. We don’t. We lack that unity. Christ commands us to be one.

As we witnessed what went on at Lambeth and with the Africans who refused to show up and instead declared that they are not in communion with the rest, and what we saw go on between the polarized factions there, to claim that these people are one in spirit is quite a stretch. It is being in denial. Unity is broken. Communion is destroyed, because they believe different things.

I will your good. My hope for you is eternal beatitude. That does not make us one.

 

[jesusluv]

I will your good. My hope for you is eternal beatitude. That does not make us one.

Nothing you have said in this entire thread has given me any shred of evidence that you even desire unity between all Christians. If you believe all Christians must come to Rome before unity can be had, then show them, don’t tell them. There is a huge difference.

Anytime someone bursts into a building firing guns, the people inside are going to scatter. Same thing here. I can just about guarantee that anyone who isn’t currently RC, would want nothing to do with the RCC after having a conversation with you about what they believe.

 

[anon52328184]

i was a member of the episcopal church for 54 years. i believed we were very close to being Catholic.

while growing up in the episcopal church, i did not know much about its english heritage.

i began looking in catholicism 10 years ago and immediately knew i had entered a different culture and how different it was from being episcopalian.
i felt like an outsider. i was coming from a different background.

i find the episcopal church very much influenced by the american culture from which it originated.
i find the anglican church very much influenced by the english culture from which it originated.
i find the roman catholic church very much influenced by the roman culture from which it originated and especially the early church fathers.

i see today how protestant the episcopal church is. they have the Eucharist every Sunday and they say the Nicene Creed, but otherwise, they don’t have a lot in common i don’t think with the Roman Catholic Church.

those were very good links that emeraldcoast posted on the first page.

 

[TriuneUnity]

i was a member of the episcopal church for 54 years. i believed we were very close to being Catholic.

while growing up in the episcopal church, i did not know much about its english heritage.

i began looking in catholicism 10 years ago and immediately knew i had entered a different culture and how different it was from being episcopalian.
i felt like an outsider. i was coming from a different background.

i find the episcopal church very much influenced by the american culture from which it originated.
i find the anglican church very much influenced by the english culture from which it originated.
i find the roman catholic church very much influenced by the roman culture from which it originated and especially the early church fathers.

i see today how protestant the episcopal church is. they have the Eucharist every Sunday and they say the Nicene Creed, but otherwise, they don’t have a lot in common i don’t think with the Roman Catholic Church.

those were very good links that emeraldcoast posted on the first page.

I have looked long and hard at Anglicanism. Maybe you being on the inside you’d have a better observation. To me…it’s just another variant of Reformed Christianity, with more emphasis on liturgy and tradition (small t).

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I have looked long and hard at Anglicanism. Maybe you being on the inside you’d have a better observation. To me…it’s just another variant of Reformed Christianity, with more emphasis on liturgy and tradition (small t).

I agree with Triune. Having been Anglicnn for 5 or 6 years, it outwardly has the traditions of Lent, Advent, Stations of the Cross, etc. with liturgy and vestments. But at its core it is more based on reformed Christianity. And I noticed a ton of folks going back and forth between the episcopal church and methodist or presbyterian or unitarian to episcopal and back and forth etc. Episcopal churches tend to align more with other liberal churches like the evangelical lutheran church of america, etc. Their bible studies, outreaches, etc. are very protestant. They tend toward ‘promise-keeper’ type things. They have nothing to do with Catholicism except the outward trappings.

 

[anon52328184]

i also agree with Triune. it tries to appear Catholic and maybe wants to convince itself it is Catholic, but i also see it as another Reformed Christianity.
that is a good way of defining it.

yes, many of the american episcopal churches are much like the liberal presbyterian, methodist and lutheran churches in their views of same sex marriages, interpretation of scripture, female priests or ministers, etc.

 

[AnyoneAnybody]

Visited San Francisco and mistook an Episcopal church for a Catholic church. Walked in and so an inter-faith chapel for Budhists, Episcopalians, and just about anyone could pray together. It was very interesting to be confronted in a real sense by its reputed liberal stance that many paths can lead to God. In some way they seem to be re-discovering something church of Christ but a passion for liberal theology.

i also agree with Triune. it tries to appear Catholic and maybe wants to convince itself it is Catholic, but i also see it as another Reformed Christianity.
that is a good way of defining it.

yes, many of the american episcopal churches are much like the liberal presbyterian, methodist and lutheran churches in their views of same sex marriages, interpretation of scripture, female priests or ministers, etc.

 

[grandfather]

i was a member of the episcopal church for 54 years. i believed we were very close to being Catholic.

i began looking in catholicism 10 years ago and immediately knew i had entered a different culture and how different it was from being episcopalian.
i felt like an outsider. i was coming from a different background.

i see today how protestant the episcopal church is. they have the Eucharist every Sunday and they say the Nicene Creed, but otherwise, they don’t have a lot in common i don’t think with the Roman Catholic Church.

.

This is very interesting and perhaps reveals something important coming from a person who has experience both worlds. She belonged to a group she believed to be “close to being Catholic”.

Then there was an immediate discovery of how different the religions are. Once she began looking at Catholicism she was immediately aware of how different not close are the two. At first as an Episcopal she shared the Catholic-lite view of her church, then as a Catholic she sees “how Protestant” her former church is. I think both views are true. There are many similarities, but similarities do not create unity. We are miles apart as are the Anglicans from one another at Lambeth.

I met a man who was converted to Christianity and joined the Epricopal denomination. He stayed there for twelve years before becoming Catholic. There were several reasons for the second conversion. He discovered the saints. It was immediately apparent to him after learning about so many lives full of so much supernatural phenomena, the incorrupt bodies, stigmatists, countless miracles, that he did not find in the Episcopal denomination this caused him to think that something might be missing. The second thing that happened to him was losing faith in the validity of the Episcopal Eucharist. He told me that as he went to the Episcopal Mass he became aware that Jesus was not sacramentally present. I don’t know if this was from some internal sense or an intellectual conclusion.

I have another good friend who is Protestant and quite content being Protestant. He belongs to a small conservative denomination that originated in Oklahoma where he grew up. I have a great deal of respect for this man and his wife. They are true witnesses of what it is to be Christian, married over forty years, generous, kind, loving people. His attitude is that all Christians agree on all the essentials and that is all that matters. There are a few minor points of disagreement. They are so petty they don’t matter. Ignore them. Look at all the areas where we agree and forget about the inconsequential things where we don’t.

What I like about this attitude is it reveals a built in desire to be one. It is undeniable.

Why does unity matter to Christians? Even though the Anglicans at Lambeth and in the world have become completely polarized they struggled hard to maintain communion. They become excommunicated from one another. This was formally declared by the Africans, but none of them wanted this.

Why does anyone want to remain part of any group that believes totally opposite things about morals and religion? The Africans and others said to the rest that what the liberals or progressives now believe and teach is so outrageous there is no longer any communion. That happened, but why is it painful to separate? If you want to go east and I want to go north why not simply say goodbye and take our separate routes?

What is wrong about my friend’s attitude has nothing to do with him. His life, at least by appearances, seems to be in good order. He loves his neighbor and his family and believes in God.

If he is correct that we agree on all the essentials and the petty things where we do not agree are not important, what does this say about the reasons that so many thousands of separate denominations were created? Christians created formal separations and divisions and broke unity with one another over petty disagreements that don’t matter.

My Protestant friend and I truly love one another, so what does it matter if the Church is divided? What does it matter that as a body we are fractured into parts?

We have to look to Jesus’s words. When He commands us to be one He tells us why we MUST be one. Go read what He said.

What we see in our once Christian civilization today is a Church divided, but also a Church that has become disenfranchized from
the civilization it built. Don’t talk about God in the public forum. You might offend someone. It is against the law to pray in school. There is nothing wrong with men marrying men and it is ok for women to kill their babies. Civilization has moved off its foundation and it is coming apart at the seams as a result. Our civilization was built by the Church and now it rejects all moral norms of the Church and in some place people who say they are of the Church do the same. This all happened, because the Church is divided over petty issues if my friend is correct. Is it true that we have allowed pettiness to divide us and destroy our once Christian civilzation? I am afraid that is true.

What are the necessary ingredients for unity? Surely we must love one another. Surely we need grace. Are these enough? We need truth. We can only be in communion when we are united by a common understanding of what it true. Saint Paul calls is being of one mind.

 

[Janet_S]

Why does anyone want to remain part of any group that believes totally opposite things about morals and religion? The Africans and others said to the rest that what the liberals or progressives now believe and teach is so outrageous there is no longer any communion. That happened, but why is it painful to separate? If you want to go east and I want to go north why not simply say goodbye and take our separate routes?

Good question. This is the fallacy of moral relativism–people mistakenly believe it will lead to peace, but it leads to anarchy and division.

What we see in our once Christian civilization today is a Church divided, but also a Church that has become disenfranchized from
the civilization it built. Don’t talk about God in the public forum. You might offend someone. It is against the law to pray in school. There is nothing wrong with men marrying men and it is ok for women to kill their babies. Civilization has moved off its foundation and it is coming apart at the seams as a result. Our civilization was built by the Church and now it rejects all moral norms of the Church and in some place people who say they are of the Church do the same. This all happened, because the Church is divided over petty issues if my friend is correct. Is it true that we have allowed pettiness to divide us and destroy our once Christian civilzation? I am afraid that is true.

What are the necessary ingredients for unity? Surely we must love one another. Surely we need grace. Are these enough? We need truth. We can only be in communion when we are united by a common understanding of what it true. Saint Paul calls is being of one mind.

Christians become a laughingstock to the rest of the world when they can’t agree on the most basic issues, especially moral ones. We can have freedom and peace only by embracing truth. We can’t each make up our own truth.

“you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” Jesus Christ

“I am the way and the truth and the life.” Jesus Christ

Indeed, “if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism”. Pope John Paul II Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (May 1,1991)

 

[mercygate]

My own 40-year stint in Anglicanism enabled me to detoxify from a poisonous anti-Catholic past. Slowly, over time, I up-churched until one day I realized I was “more” Catholic than most Catholics and the Boss asked me what I was going to do about it.

OK. Let’s lighten this up a bit. I still get Anglican Digest, and this was in the number that arrived in yesterday’s mail:

A Gilbert and Sullivan Parody . . . for Episcopalians

WE ARE THE VERY MODEL OF TODAY’S EPISCOPALIAN

We are the very model of today’s Episcopalian,
We’re broad and high and low and wide and somewhat bacchanalian,
We’re mystical, political, we’re secular and clerical;
We can be charismatic but we seldom get hysterical.
We’re traditional and modernist and socialist-monarchical;
We’re protestant and catholic but not too hierarchical;
About ordainig women we are teeming with a lot of views
As well as on the Prayerbook that our Bishops say we gotta use,

Chorus: As well as on the Prayerbook that our Bishops say we gotta use, etc.

We’re prosperous. By daily work our stewardship is merited,
Abetted by the little bit that some of us inherited;
In monetary matters we are very economical
The portion that we give the Church is best described as comical.

*Chorus *In monetary matters wer are very economical; the ortion that we give the Church is best described as comical.

We’re very well acquainted too with matters ecumenical,
In spite of beng vague about our vows catechumenical.
A knowledge of our church remains to most of us a mystery.
(Someday we’ll take the time to learn our heritage an history!)
Dont ask us what we mean with our responses doxological;
They sound so grand they must mean something highly theological!
In short, we’ve just a smattering of elementary Sunday School,
Including cheerful facts about the meaning of the Golden Rule.

*Chorus: *Including many facts about the meaning of the Golden Rule, etc.

 This goes on for three more verses . . . St. Luke's Church, Fort Myers, Episcopal Diocese of Southwest Florida.

Stuff like this is what I miss most about being an Anglican. We had – and I see some still have such a droll sense of their own foibles.

 

[anon52328184]

mercygate, what do you mean a droll sense of their own foilbles? that one went over my head?

i received anglican digest too when i was episcopalian.

i am not sure if your last statement is positive or negative? LOL

i actually get the feeling about being anglican and episcopal, they just want to go about things their own way and they are happy with the way they are
and they see themselves as very enlightened. do you agree?

i converted to RCC this july.