Episcopalians Reaching Point of Revolt

[estesbob]

How nice!

I found it very comfortingt that a man with so much power starts his day receiving Our Lord and savior. it was evident from the way he hung around to talk to the parishioners that he is a regular atendee.

 

[Riley259]

I have a big problem with there being a genetic transmission. Why would God condemn someone for something they can’t help? I just don’t think that flies.

Even if same-sex attraction was purely genetic, people still have the will to not engage in sex - having sex is a behavior. Humans are so much more than mindless drones that absolutely have to engage in sex or else. Sex is a gift from God that needs to be used responsibly (mutual self-donation for unity and procreation) and in the right divinely willed context (sacramental marriage between a man and woman). Apart from this, however, most of the evidence suggests that homosexuality isn’t primarily driven by genetics but instead is mostly a psycho-sexual and environmental phenomenon. That’s not to say that genetics may play some role because apparently there is some evidence that it does but it’s clearly not the overriding factor. Yes, there are people with gender identity disorder issues and these individuals are at risk for later same-sex attractions if an intervention isn’t done early enough (childhood) but to say that this problem is solely genetic is absurd. Gay activists have pushed hard for the purely biological explanation but this interpretation is strictly based on politics not science. Don’t be swayed by the mass media on this - most of them are apparently in the secular progressive camp and are falling over themselves to accommodate the gay lifestyle. As usual, the Catholic church strikes the right balance on this issue.

 

[Vigis]

I said in my earlier post that I was glad to out of the mess that is Anglicanism and I meant what I said.

However, it is true that traditional Anglicans used to have a dignity of worship that is sorely lacking in the Catholic Church today.

There used to be an expression that in Church of England worship everything was done “decently and in order.” I sometimes get the impression that in many modern Catholic Churches everything is done “indecently and in disorder.”

Therefore, I wish Fr Phillips and the Pastoral Provision for Anglican Usage in the Catholic Church all God’s blessings.

I make this statement with one big proviso.
I purchased a DVD of the Anglican Usage mass and found it beautiful, just what the Catholic Church is crying out for today.

However - I also purchased a copy of the Anglican Usage Book of Worship and as I read it alarm bells began to ring loudly. Throughout the book they have introduced modern language version of the mass and offices and lots and lots of ALTERNATIVE options. I strongly believe that this is what began the decline in Catholic worship after Vatican 2.

What has possesed the Anglican Usage people to begin the very nonsense that has brought the Novus Ordo to such a sorry state? Are they trying to apease the modernist Catholics?

I would urge the Anglican Usage to be faithful to their mission - beautiful worship in the Catholic Church. They must not sell themeselves out or their reason for existing will vanish, and so eventually will the Anglican Usage.

It is true that some hippish ideas were introduced after Vatican II. I love the sound of Latin, the Mideval songs (I love the Middle Ages), amongst other things. Their is no wrong though in updating the songs or having them in English. Their is no wrong in making things in modern English as well. Indeed a service must be organized among other things. I like many of the traditional services. They are quite enjoyabl in my opinion. My church has youth services as well, but they do not appeal to me as much as the traditional services. I find no wrong in them though. God speed.

 

[rjs1]

It is true that some hippish ideas were introduced after Vatican II. I love the sound of Latin, the Mideval songs (I love the Middle Ages), amongst other things. Their is no wrong though in updating the songs or having them in English. Their is no wrong in making things in modern English as well. Indeed a service must be organized among other things. I like many of the traditional services. They are quite enjoyabl in my opinion. My church has youth services as well, but they do not appeal to me as much as the traditional services. I find no wrong in them though. God speed.

We must be very careful to not continually “update” or "modernise " our liturgy. The Orthodox Church has a very strong teaching that the way we worship is part of our Tradition of faith and that the Liturgy can no more be tampered with than can doctrine.
I strongly suspect that this theological view was also the Catholic view up until the years after Vatican 2.
In other words, our liturgy expresses our faith and if we keep changing it we run the real risk of changing our faith.
I strongly believe that this is the main reason why the liberal and modernist theologians have constantly brought in new ways of celebrating the mass. They know that this is the way to destroy the traditional faith.
That is why I was disappointed to see so many options and alternatives offered the the Anglican Usage Book of Divine Worship. Their traditional liturgy, in beautiful Elizabethan English, could offer a real option for English speaking Catholics who want a beautiful, reverent and uplifting liturgy.

 

[estesbob]

We must be very careful to not continually “update” or "modernise " our liturgy. The Orthodox Church has a very strong teaching that the way we worship is part of our Tradition of faith and that the Liturgy can no more be tampered with than can doctrine.
I strongly suspect that this theological view was also the Catholic view up until the years after Vatican 2.
In other words, our liturgy expresses our faith and if we keep changing it we run the real risk of changing our faith.
I strongly believe that this is the main reason why the liberal and modernist theologians have constantly brought in new ways of celebrating the mass. They know that this is the way to destroy the traditional faith.
That is why I was disappointed to see so many options and alternatives offered the the Anglican Usage Book of Divine Worship. Their traditional liturgy, in beautiful Elizabethan English, could offer a real option for English speaking Catholics who want a beautiful, reverent and uplifting liturgy.

We must also be very careful that we do not end up Worhshiping our Liturgy as much as or more than we do the Lord.

 

[hoosiertoo]

We must also be very careful that we do not end up Worhshiping our Liturgy as much as or more than we do the Lord.

Or to worship it at all. Amen!

 

[rjs1]

Or to worship it at all. Amen!

It is true that we must not “worship” the liturgy.

However for Catholics, the Liturgy is our ultimate means of worshipping God and the means by which we come closest to Him here on earth. In fact, there is nothing greater we can do than worship God. It is the pinnacle to which we as creatures are called. It is the activity that will continue eternally in Heaven.
Therefore it is important that we get it as right as we can. The Church does NOT allow us to make up our own liturgy. The Church has spent two thousand years getting the liturgy as correct as it can be. The Eucharist is not meant to be celebrated in some “make it up as you go along” manner. Nor is it meant to be dependant on this or that particular person’s whim or personality.

Far too much of modern masses seems to be what “Father feels like at the time”.

This is what I meant when I pointed us towards our Orthodox brethren. They have a profound sense of the timelessness of the Liturgy and its continuous links with the liturgy of the past two thousand years. This is because we worship a God who is the same yesterday, today and forever.

No, I do not “worship” the liturgy, but I certainly DO worship the God Whom the liturgy is meant to enable us to worship - and He deserves only the best. Continuous fickle changes, dependant upon the prevailing mood of the moment, do not honour God but only honour us.

 

[Ladybug42]

The Eucharist is not meant to be celebrated in some “make it up as you go along” manner. Nor is it meant to be dependant on this or that particular person’s whim or personality.

There is a difference between different worship styles and “making things up as you go along.” I’ve seen some very reverent Communion meetings at the local Mormon church, where they had the correct spirit although not the correct belief. I’ve seen folks at the local Catholic church have little to no reverence, yet the right belief.

The Bible says nothing about the liturgy. As long as we are imbibing the bread and wine as Christ’s body and blood, and doing so reverently, having properly prepared ourselves…then the rest is only a tool. To get hung up on something that, in my opinion, was arrived at according to chance just as much as anything else…is legalism. I see no problem in someone celebrating the Eucharist outside of the Catholic liturgy. I see NO problem in celebrating it in an Anglican church. I see NO problem in worshipping God according to how God wills it, instead of how church tradition has arbitrarily evolved. I certainly will not follow liturgy simply because it is what happens to have been handed down to me. If it doesn’t aid my worship of the Lord, if something in it detracts from it…then ya better believe that I am not going to use it. How many people go to Mass, and feel empty inside, because the words they are “supposed” to say, they do not mean? God does not want us to use vain repetitions. Liturgy that is forced is vain and repetitious. Only for the one who is sincere in what they are saying, is it not so.

 

[AuntMartha]

The Bible says nothing about the liturgy.

That’s the problem with believing in sola scriptura. It just totally throws out Sacred Tradition.

As long as we are imbibing the bread and wine as Christ’s body and blood, and doing so reverently, having properly prepared ourselves…then the rest is only a tool.

What part is “only a tool”?

I see the Liturgy as part of the proper preparation to receive the Eucharist. You make it sound like it should be “anything goes!” before receiving the Precious Body and Blood of Christ - that the form doesn’t matter.

To get hung up on something that, in my opinion, was arrived at according to chance just as much as anything else…is legalism…

I don’t believe it was arrived at by chance. Christ instituted the Eucharist. Christ istituted His Church here on earth.

I see no problem in someone celebrating the Eucharist outside of the Catholic liturgy. I see NO problem in celebrating it in an Anglican church. I see NO problem in worshipping God according to how God wills it, instead of how church tradition has arbitrarily evolved. I certainly will not follow liturgy simply because it is what happens to have been handed down to me. If it doesn’t aid my worship of the Lord, if something in it detracts from it…then ya better believe that I am not going to use it.

Yeah, you know, the do-it-yourself church. Whatever feels good, that’s what to do. To heck with all that other stuff. [/sarcasm]

How many people go to Mass, and feel empty inside, because the words they are “supposed” to say, they do not mean?

I don’t know - how many? Can we rightly assume that there are multitudes of Catholics out there who say what they don’t mean?

Liturgy that is forced is vain and repetitious.

Who says the Catholic liturgy is “forced”? It is a Sacred Tradition that is willingly followed by faithful Catholics.

Only for the one who is sincere in what they are saying, is it not so.

Again, you are making the unfair assumption that Catholics don’t say what they mean. Do you think we are a bunch of mindless drones?

 

[Ladybug42]

Again, you are making the unfair assumption that Catholics don’t say what they mean. Do you think we are a bunch of mindless drones?

No, darlin’, not at all. hug I’m sorry if I gave that impression. Some folks who participate in high church, in any denominational setting, feel forced to say something that they don’t mean. I like high church, but I am trying to say that to get hung up on kneeling or standing to receive, how to cross yourself, when to say the Our Father during the service… these are all tools given to us to bring us closer to God. If we get too worried looking at the signpost, then we get distracted from looking to where it points.

And I was very agitated when I wrote that, and I apologize if it sounded anti-liturgy. I love liturgy, but I don’t like being told that I have to do it. I want to choose it freely, I guess. Like God doesn’t force me to love Him, I want to choose the Liturgy freely, as well. And for some, a major stumbling block to becoming Catholic is the liturgy. They see it as a distraction. Try to imagine (assuming you have never grown up Protestant–if you have, then try to remember) growing up where you just prayed to God in your own words, heartfelt prayers that you made up yourself, awkward at times, and sometimes you didn’t know how to worship, but your focus was utterly and completly on God. Now imagine trying to go to Mass with this background. Suddenly you are trying to learn when to kneel, memorize the prayers, and know how to cross yourself, when to say “Amen”, and how to receive Communion. When before, your focus was totally on God, now…it isn’t anymore. For those who didn’t grow up knowing these tools, they can be a hindrance. Try to understand from that perspective. Maybe if more people grew up with the liturgy…but they all don’t, and the fact remains, that I see many Catholics bicker on this forum about the little rules of the Eucharist, about who can give it, how it is given, and when and how things are said.

Maybe it isn’t the liturgy, maybe it is just generally not making Christ a focus. Should we really be nitpicking over such minute details of the Liturgy? Would Paul approve of dissension over issues that are not salvational in nature?

*** edited later to add: Just in case people think this is aimed just at Catholics…nope. It’s aimed at anyone in any denom that gets too stuck on the little details of worshipping God, instead of being stuck on worshipping God. I hope and pray that this is not a prevalent problem in the RCC.

 

[lak611]

No, darlin’, not at all. hug I’m sorry if I gave that impression. Some folks who participate in high church, in any denominational setting, feel forced to say something that they don’t mean. I like high church, but I am trying to say that to get hung up on kneeling or standing to receive, how to cross yourself, when to say the Our Father during the service… these are all tools given to us to bring us closer to God. If we get too worried looking at the signpost, then we get distracted from looking to where it points.

And I was very agitated when I wrote that, and I apologize if it sounded anti-liturgy. I love liturgy, but I don’t like being told that I have to do it. I want to choose it freely, I guess. Like God doesn’t force me to love Him, I want to choose the Liturgy freely, as well. And for some, a major stumbling block to becoming Catholic is the liturgy. They see it as a distraction. Try to imagine (assuming you have never grown up Protestant–if you have, then try to remember) growing up where you just prayed to God in your own words, heartfelt prayers that you made up yourself, awkward at times, and sometimes you didn’t know how to worship, but your focus was utterly and completly on God. Now imagine trying to go to Mass with this background. Suddenly you are trying to learn when to kneel, memorize the prayers, and know how to cross yourself, when to say “Amen”, and how to receive Communion. When before, your focus was totally on God, now…it isn’t anymore. For those who didn’t grow up knowing these tools, they can be a hindrance. Try to understand from that perspective. Maybe if more people grew up with the liturgy…but they all don’t, and the fact remains, that I see many Catholics bicker on this forum about the little rules of the Eucharist, about who can give it, how it is given, and when and how things are said.

Maybe it isn’t the liturgy, maybe it is just generally not making Christ a focus. Should we really be nitpicking over such minute details of the Liturgy? Would Paul approve of dissension over issues that are not salvational in nature?

*** edited later to add: Just in case people think this is aimed just at Catholics…nope. It’s aimed at anyone in any denom that gets too stuck on the little details of worshipping God, instead of being stuck on worshipping God. I hope and pray that this is not a prevalent problem in the RCC.

Personally, I like the Pauline Mass better than the TLM.

 

[rr1213]

No, darlin’, not at all. hug I’m sorry if I gave that impression. Some folks who participate in high church, in any denominational setting, feel forced to say something that they don’t mean. I like high church, but I am trying to say that to get hung up on kneeling or standing to receive, how to cross yourself, when to say the Our Father during the service… these are all tools given to us to bring us closer to God. If we get too worried looking at the signpost, then we get distracted from looking to where it points.

And I was very agitated when I wrote that, and I apologize if it sounded anti-liturgy. I love liturgy, but I don’t like being told that I have to do it. I want to choose it freely, I guess. Like God doesn’t force me to love Him, I want to choose the Liturgy freely, as well. And for some, a major stumbling block to becoming Catholic is the liturgy. They see it as a distraction. Try to imagine (assuming you have never grown up Protestant–if you have, then try to remember) growing up where you just prayed to God in your own words, heartfelt prayers that you made up yourself, awkward at times, and sometimes you didn’t know how to worship, but your focus was utterly and completly on God. Now imagine trying to go to Mass with this background. Suddenly you are trying to learn when to kneel, memorize the prayers, and know how to cross yourself, when to say “Amen”, and how to receive Communion. When before, your focus was totally on God, now…it isn’t anymore. For those who didn’t grow up knowing these tools, they can be a hindrance. Try to understand from that perspective. Maybe if more people grew up with the liturgy…but they all don’t, and the fact remains, that I see many Catholics bicker on this forum about the little rules of the Eucharist, about who can give it, how it is given, and when and how things are said.

Maybe it isn’t the liturgy, maybe it is just generally not making Christ a focus. Should we really be nitpicking over such minute details of the Liturgy? Would Paul approve of dissension over issues that are not salvational in nature?

*** edited later to add: Just in case people think this is aimed just at Catholics…nope. It’s aimed at anyone in any denom that gets too stuck on the little details of worshipping God, instead of being stuck on worshipping God. I hope and pray that this is not a prevalent problem in the RCC.

I think it depends on whether or not you come from a liturgical protestant church. My background is predominately Methodist and Episcopal. When I converted from the Methodist to the Episcopal Church, I had some of the same insights you mention here. Once I got used to the Episcopal service (I attended a “low” evangelical church), and then attended some Catholic services, I certainly didn’t think that I had “stepped up” liturgically. Some of the Catholic services were somewhat less liturgical, some more, than what I was used to as an Episcopalian.

 

[Ladybug42]

You are right.

 

[mercygate]

There is a difference between different worship styles and “making things up as you go along.” I’ve seen some very reverent Communion meetings at the local Mormon church, where they had the correct spirit although not the correct belief. I’ve seen folks at the local Catholic church have little to no reverence, yet the right belief.

The Bible says nothing about the liturgy. As long as we are imbibing the bread and wine as Christ’s body and blood, and doing so reverently, having properly prepared ourselves…then the rest is only a tool. To get hung up on something that, in my opinion, was arrived at according to chance just as much as anything else…is legalism. I see no problem in someone celebrating the Eucharist outside of the Catholic liturgy. I see NO problem in celebrating it in an Anglican church. I see NO problem in worshipping God according to how God wills it, instead of how church tradition has arbitrarily evolved. I certainly will not follow liturgy simply because it is what happens to have been handed down to me. If it doesn’t aid my worship of the Lord, if something in it detracts from it…then ya better believe that I am not going to use it. How many people go to Mass, and feel empty inside, because the words they are “supposed” to say, they do not mean? God does not want us to use vain repetitions. Liturgy that is forced is vain and repetitious. Only for the one who is sincere in what they are saying, is it not so.

Holy Cow! You’re not an Anglican, are you?

Who says that liturgy is “forced?” Moreover, the idea that sincerity equals validity is just plain off the wall. Why do you think that if you are not in the mood to use “what is handed down to you” at any particular moment that it is not aiding in your worship of the Lord? “I feel,” “I like:” I, I, I.

Liturgy is about the Body of Christ, not about my mood at the moment; it is not a private devotion (although profound personal devotion is often experienced in it). Liturgy is handed down (albeit in localized expressions) as a universal form of praise and worship in the Body of Christ.

 

[Ladybug42]

Holy Cow! You’re not an Anglican, are you?

Yup, I am. I did not grow up Anglican, though.

mercygate:

Who says that liturgy is “forced?”

I am saying it, right now. Sometimes, folks say it just to fit in. Sometimes, folks don’t want to say it, they want to say something else. Sometimes, folks leave the faith because they think that they have to believe in some small and obscure rule about how to perform an action. When that isn’t the case.

Moreover, the idea that sincerity equals validity is just plain off the wall. Why do you think that if you are not in the mood to use “what is handed down to you” at any particular moment that it is not aiding in your worship of the Lord?

I didn’t say that. Truth is not relative. I do not assume that what is handed down to me is always exactly the way it started out. And just because I am not “in the mood” as you put it, does not make something distracting from my love and worship of the Lord.

Liturgy is about the Body of Christ, not about my mood at the moment; it is not a private devotion (although profound personal devotion is often experienced in it).

I agree completely. Liturgy should be about God. And liturgy is a community activity.

Liturgy is handed down (albeit in localized expressions) as a universal form of praise and worship in the Body of Christ.

Liturgy is handed down in an effort to prevent wrong doctrine from seeping in. Read about the first Christians, they didn’t all practice their worship in exactly the same minute and exacting detail.

My point is that to get too hung up on the small things detracts from the big things. I am not advocating anarchy!

Raising tools higher than the one who created them is idolatry. And legalism. I don’t advocate that we do whatever we want, whenever we want. But I do not think that our salvation depends on genuflecting “properly”, either.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

What all is involved in an epsicopal Parrish jopining the Catholic Church? Do they have to buy new property and a new church buiding because they do not have title the property andd church building?

Can they use the Anglican Rite?

What is involved in their priest becoming a Catholic priest? Can he minister to his new Anglican Use Parrish while he is studying to be a Catholic priest or do other Catholic priests fill in for him until he receives Catholic holy Orders?

 

[rjs1]

I am disappointed that this thread has somehow been moved to a Protestant, “do your own thing” approach to worship.

My original post was aimed to support the Anglicans who are coming across to the Catholic Church and aiming to bring with them a beautiful sense of liturgical worship.
I then went on to say that I was concerned that the Anglican Usage Book of Divine Worship was showing some of the features that I think helped undermine Catholic worship after Vatican II.

However, to the Anglican Usage people I repeat my statement: you are very welcome and I believe your traditional Eucharistic liturgical setting is truly beautiful and would fill a real need in the Catholic Church.
I have attended several beautiful authorised traditional Latin masses, celebrated with the utmost reverence, however I still believe that the traditional Anglican Usage mass would fill a desperate need for those of us who do not know Latin but want truly beautiful worship.

 

[Ladybug42]

I want to make very clear something. I am an Anglican who is interested in becoming Catholic. I am not a Protestant. And I have come here to voice my doubts, and hopefully have someone explain things to me. All I have heard so far, however, is how wrong I am, and how wrong Protestants are. If someone would be so kind as to actually show enough charity to explain with the love of Christ why some things are, that would be great. My RCIA class is not meeting over Christmas break, and this is an anonymous way of asking. My class has around 30 people, most of which are already Catholic. I feel uncomfortable voicing my doubts in this class and I have had the hardest time catching the priest outside of class–he is being shared by more than one parish. Thanks ahead of time for not mearly dismissing someone who truly is open to the Church.

 

[genealogist]

I can appreciate the desire to welcome these fellow traditional Christians home into the Church. However, they must come for one and only one reason; they reognize that the Catholic Church is the only church founded by Jesus, Similarities in liturgy, outlook and theology are not enough. We have enough members who do not accept all the teachings and we do not need anymore. That goes for bringing Mel Gibson and other Tridentine Mass types who have left.

I can’t finish without mentioning that of all the Protestant communities out there, the Anglican Chrurch is definitely the one with the weakest claim to legitimacy. Henry VIII left the Church in a huff because he wanted a younger wife who might bear him a male heir. Even if his critique of his marriage to Quenn Catherine was 100% valid, his dynasty’s survival was much less important than the salvation of the souls in that kingdom. With an absolute falsehood of the Church of England as its foundation, there is no where for Anglicanism to go but down. It has taken many centuries but they led the charge with birth control, jumped on board with women and divorced clergy and now have a gay bishop here in the USA. How much water does a church have to take on before people come to their senses? The Catholic Church is struggling as well but faith and moral teaching seems intact.

 

[GKC]

I can appreciate the desire to welcome these fellow traditional Christians home into the Church. However, they must come for one and only one reason; they reognize that the Catholic Church is the only church founded by Jesus, Similarities in liturgy, outlook and theology are not enough. We have enough members who do not accept all the teachings and we do not need anymore. That goes for bringing Mel Gibson and other Tridentine Mass types who have left.

I can’t finish without mentioning that of all the Protestant communities out there, the Anglican Chrurch is definitely the one with the weakest claim to legitimacy. Henry VIII left the Church in a huff because he wanted a younger wife who might bear him a male heir. Even if his critique of his marriage to Quenn Catherine was 100% valid, his dynasty’s survival was much less important than the salvation of the souls in that kingdom. With an absolute falsehood of the Church of England as its foundation, there is no where for Anglicanism to go but down. It has taken many centuries but they led the charge with birth control, jumped on board with women and divorced clergy and now have a gay bishop here in the USA. How much water does a church have to take on before people come to their senses? The Catholic Church is struggling as well but faith and moral teaching seems intact.

I agree with your assessment of contemporary Anglicanism, of the official variety. But Henry’s search for a decree of nullity, while not necessariily 100% valid, was over 100% arguable. It was precisely how the game was played at the time, and his likely undispensed diriment impediment of the justice of public honesty, arisng from Juluis’ original dispensation, would normally have been granted without a hesitiation. It was far stronger, for instance than any causa advanced by his sister,when she received her two decrees. Henry was trumped by an emperor and trapped by politics, and he made a political response.

I have, as I said, made my own judgement on contemporary Anglicanism. If any Anglicans can find their way across the TIber, it would be a good thing. Or elsewhere, for that matter.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus