Episcopalians Reaching Point of Revolt

[AuntMartha]

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.

And all I am hearing from you is how wrong Catholics are for sticking to tradition in the Liturgy (describing it as “idolatry” and “legalism” - how insulting). The structure of the Liturgy and the insistance of the Church to keep that structure and keep doctrine has a great purpose. It prevents the sort of thing going on in the Protestant church every day, i.e. people making it up as they go along, people changing doctrine to suit the shifting in the wind of the culture (as in the Episcopal church saying “gay is okay!” and questioning the divinity of Christ), one preacher saying he has the truth, while the preacher down the street says he has the truth, and then there’s the 60,000 other preachers worldwide claiming they have the truth. Who has the Truth? Only one can. Guess which church is the True Church? The Catholic Church.

Thanks ahead of time for not mearly dismissing someone who truly is open to the Church.

If you are truly open to the Catholic Church, then you need to embrace Her. Stop over-analyzing! You are the one getting hung up on petty details. You want there to be structure, but not too much. Just the right amount. “Wait, that’s a little too much. Hold on, I’m uncomfortable genuflecting!” In the meantime you are missing the Truth of the Church. You are being blinded to the Truth by letting yourself get all hung up on the way Tradition has handed down the Liturgy.

What may help you overcome your doubts is reading/listening to a convert such as Scott Hahn. He is a biblical scholar, former presbyterian preacher who converted when he realized that, without a doubt, the Catholic Church is the Truth. Once he acknowledged that, the rest was easy.

One book is Rome Sweet Home:
amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0898704782/stpaulcenterf-20/002-0802523-7455220

The other is an audio CD of his conversion story:
salvationhistory.com/bookstore/scott_personal.cfm

Finally, try to see the beauty in the traditions of the Catholic Church. I love the traditions! The Holy Water, the bowing to the Tabernacle when one crosses the Church, genuflecting at the pews, the Sanctus bells ringing at the Consecration, and more and more. It all directs me, yet it frees me - I can focus more easily on God because of the structure of the Liturgy.

 

[Ladybug42]

If you are truly open to the Catholic Church, then you need to embrace Her. Stop over-analyzing! You are the one getting hung up on petty details. You want there to be structure, but not too much. Just the right amount. “Wait, that’s a little too much. Hold on, I’m uncomfortable genuflecting!” In the meantime you are missing the Truth of the Church. You are being blinded to the Truth by letting yourself get all hung up on the way Tradition has handed down the Liturgy.

I am not hung up on those things. I do them, and I feel close to the Lord as I do them. I am seeing folks on here getting hung up on them, though. I am seeing folks say that each and every one of those “petty” details are vital to being Catholic. Why? It seems legalistic to me. I do them out of love, because God has given them to us to use. I don’t believe that they should be changed at my whim…but I do see that some “petty” little detail like the things mentioned, are not central to Christ’s message of salvation, and it bothers me that I would have to accept this and other things as being the ONLY way in order to become Catholic.

I don’t know where to look for answers. Please don’t ask me to accept without using my 'noggin–That’s exactly what the Mormons asked me to do, with the exception that they asked if I had a burning bosom to confirm that their church was true. And that if I had doubts, it was the Devil tempting me. This kind of mentality scares me, to accept without knowing why.

Would it be better if I had a private folder? I really want learn more.

 

[Ladybug42]

And all I am hearing from you is how wrong Catholics are for sticking to tradition in the Liturgy (describing it as “idolatry” and “legalism” - how insulting).

I think you are misunderstanding me. That is not what I felt, and not what I was trying to express.

 

[mercygate]

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 am a former Anglican, and I know many Anglicans who have come into the Church. Before we got here most of us already believed with better understanding and more conviction ALL the teachings of the Church (except Petrine supremacy, which is the last speed-bump). I used to spend a lot of time explaining to Catholics why contraception is wrong, why the Immaculate Conception and Assumption are true, and why it is not OK for Catholics to receive Communion in non-Catholic Churches. Give us a break.

 

[rr1213]

I am seeing folks on here getting hung up on them, though. I am seeing folks say that each and every one of those “petty” details are vital to being Catholic. Why? It seems legalistic to me. I do them out of love, because God has given them to us to use. I don’t believe that they should be changed at my whim…but I do see that some “petty” little detail like the things mentioned, are not central to Christ’s message of salvation, and it bothers me that I would have to accept this and other things as being the ONLY way in order to become Catholic.

If you have any Catholic friends and speak with them, I think you will find that many Catholics are a bit “looser” than the people who post in this forum. This forum is a Catholic Apologetics forum, which means that it is a place for Catholics to better understand, debate and learn how to express the truths of their faith in a manner that is convincing to Catholics and non-Catholics alike. That being the case, this forum attracts Catholics who: (1) like to argue and debate, (2) are generally quite devout, and (3) are often “more Catholic than the Pope”. It also attracts many converts to the Catholic Church. As we know, converts tend to be more zealous than people who are cradle members of the Church…or any organization for that matter.

In light of all of this, sometimes people become strident or uncharitable or caught up in legalistic details. The moderators generally do a good job keeping the lid on these things, but there also needs to be a good ebb and flow if important theological issues are to be vigorously explored and debated. So, in sum, this is a good place to learn about much of the theology and practices of the Catholic Church, but finding Catholic friends is a better way to get a more realistic view of the Church in everyday life.

 

[Mickey]

(1) like to argue and debate, (2) are generally quite devout, and (3) are often “more Catholic than the Pope”.

As to # 1–I say there is a difference between defending the faith and enjoying a good argument. As to # 2–you are correct. As to # 3–I say is an uncharitable joke.

 

[rr1213]

As to # 1–I say there is a difference btween defending the faith and enjoying a good argument. As to # 2–you are correct. As to # 3–I say is an uncharitable joke.

Well, you can certainly defend the faith without arguing, what did St. Francis say? Still, this is an apologetics website so arguing and debate comes with the package. And, as I noted, the Catholics on this site seem to be the folks who take their faith very seriously…I am not criticizing them for that at all. As for “more Catholic than the Pope”, I don’t think that I am being uncharitable there. I’ll tell you that it was a faithful Catholic friend who made the comment to me. I’ll also say that this is one of the few places where I’ve seen Benedict criticized by people who don’t think he is being “Catholic enough”.

 

[a_cermak]

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 feel you do Anglicanism an injustice by this description. Henry VIII, whatever his lack of merits were, had every expectation that he would receive the annulment just like all the other monarchs eager to preserve their dynasties. The Catholic Church had embraced temporal politics to a great degree and it was this wrong that Henry VIII rebelled against. In fact, Henry didn’t change much of what the Catholic Church taught, he simply set up an autocephalous Church ruled by himself. It was later monarchs that changed the theology and later theologians who set out to correct where some of these divergences had gone awry.

It has been 500 years now (give or take) and in that time, Anglicanism has become the Tradition of English Protestantism. It has given birth to Methodism which has given birth to other denominations of Christianity. The Episcopal Church was one of the first Protestant churches set up in the new USA and I believe one of the first to allow the laity to have a voice in its conventions.

And the Monarch of England has no real connection to the Episcopal Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury is kind of recognized as a Instrument of Unity or Symbolic Head or some such of the Anglican Communion, but the Primate of the Episcopal Church is elected by both laity, clergy, and Bishops at Convention which is the main ruling body of the Episcopal Church.

My theology can be summed up by the Nicene creed. I believe in the Real Presence, in the Immaculate Conception, in the Mary Queen of Heaven, in the Communion of Saints… I diverge on the issue of the Pope as single unified ruler of the Church (though I have no problem with Patriarch of the West).

I have no problem with birth control whether people want to take it or not. I don’t feel that it has yet risen to be a charism of the Church nor do I feel that anti-gayness has risen to that point. Nor do I feel that women priests are problematic. I have one, she does a terrific job.

 

[Mickey]

arguing and debate comes with the package.

Indeed.

I’ll tell you that it was a faithful Catholic friend who made the comment to me.

Oh well, then–if it was a Catholic friend–then that is okay.

I’ll also say that this is one of the few places where I’ve seen Benedict criticized by people who don’t think he is being “Catholic enough”.

Can’t say that I’ve seen that here–tis a pity if it’s true.

 

[Ladybug42]

If you have any Catholic friends and speak with them, I think you will find that many Catholics are a bit “looser” than the people who post in this forum. This forum is a Catholic Apologetics forum, which means that it is a place for Catholics to better understand, debate and learn how to express the truths of their faith in a manner that is convincing to Catholics and non-Catholics alike. That being the case, this forum attracts Catholics who: (1) like to argue and debate, (2) are generally quite devout, and (3) are often “more Catholic than the Pope”. It also attracts many converts to the Catholic Church. As we know, converts tend to be more zealous than people who are cradle members of the Church…or any organization for that matter.

In light of all of this, sometimes people become strident or uncharitable or caught up in legalistic details. The moderators generally do a good job keeping the lid on these things, but there also needs to be a good ebb and flow if important theological issues are to be vigorously explored and debated. So, in sum, this is a good place to learn about much of the theology and practices of the Catholic Church, but finding Catholic friends is a better way to get a more realistic view of the Church in everyday life.

Thanks, I was beginning to get reallly worried after reading things on here. I’ll try to get involved with more things in my parish. And I’ve missed Mass two times in a row, which is abnormal for me–the Holidays have thrown me off. I feel so…enriched…after attending Mass. I can only imagine how it would feel to be able to Receive. I want to be as close to Jesus as I can be, I want to eat Him, drink Him, breath Him, and immerse myself totally in Him.

God bless you, dear, for the encouragement!

 

[rr1213]

Thanks, I was beginning to get reallly worried after reading things on here. I’ll try to get involved with more things in my parish. And I’ve missed Mass two times in a row, which is abnormal for me–the Holidays have thrown me off. I feel so…enriched…after attending Mass. I can only imagine how it would feel to be able to Receive. I want to be as close to Jesus as I can be, I want to eat Him, drink Him, breath Him, and immerse myself totally in Him.

God bless you, dear, for the encouragement!

Not a problem. I wish you the best in your journey across the Tiber.

 

[rjs1]

I feel you do Anglicanism an injustice by this description. Henry VIII, whatever his lack of merits were, had every expectation that he would receive the annulment just like all the other monarchs eager to preserve their dynasties. The Catholic Church had embraced temporal politics to a great degree and it was this wrong that Henry VIII rebelled against. In fact, Henry didn’t change much of what the Catholic Church taught, he simply set up an autocephalous Church ruled by himself. It was later monarchs that changed the theology and later theologians who set out to correct where some of these divergences had gone awry.

You and GKC both attempt to defend Henry VIII. As an ex-Anglican one thing that always alarmed me was to hear Anglicans, who were very Catholic in their theology, suddenly become one-eyed about the founder of their church.

What Henry did was indefensible. He took a country that had been called Mary’s Dower because of its long history of strong Catholic faith, ripped it from the Vicar of Christ’s leadership and made himself "pope’. He threw away a Catholic wife of strong faith and high moral values, he destroyed the one social welfare and educational agency that England had - the monastries - to grab their money, because he had plunged England into shocking debt with his continuous wars and finally he ruthelessly executed mentors and former friends - St Thomas Moore amd St John Fisher - because they would not recognise him as head of the Church.

To try and argue that he was really Catholic is nonsense. Anyone who renounces the Pope, destroys monastic life and executes those who remain faithful to Rome can hardly be considered Catholic. This is the sort of argument that the liberal Catholics use today - "I am really Catholic, I just don’t believe in the Church’s teaching on Papal infalability and/or contraception and/or abortion and/or women priests and/or transubstantiation etc. etc. etc. "

By any standard Henry was a tyrant, a heretic and the last person worthy to be proclaimed as the head of the Church.

I sincerely hope that those Anglicans who are coming across to the Catholic Church are not going to expect us to regard Henry VIII as some sort of legitimate figure in Church history who was simply misunderstood.

Having left the Anglican church and come home to the Catholic Church, I can truthfully say that the more I study the period of Henry VIII ( and I have extensively studied it!) the more I consider what he did to have been utterly indefensible and a disaster for England.

I can only hope that the Anglican Usage might be some way of turning that disaster to some good, by making it easier for many Anglicans and Episcopalians to find their way to the Church Christ founded, the Catholic Church.

 

[GKC]

You and GKC both attempt to defend Henry VIII. As an ex-Anglican one thing that always alarmed me was to hear Anglicans, who were very Catholic in their theology, suddenly become one-eyed about the founder of their church.

What Henry did was indefensible. He took a country that had been called Mary’s Dower because of its long history of strong Catholic faith, ripped it from the Vicar of Christ’s leadership and made himself "pope’. He threw away a Catholic wife of strong faith and high moral values, he destroyed the one social welfare and educational agency that England had - the monastries - to grab their money, because he had plunged England into shocking debt with his continuous wars and finally he ruthelessly executed mentors and former friends - St Thomas Moore amd St John Fisher - because they would not recognise him as head of the Church.

To try and argue that he was really Catholic is nonsense. Anyone who renounces the Pope, destroys monastic life and executes those who remain faithful to Rome can hardly be considered Catholic. This is the sort of argument that the liberal Catholics use today - "I am really Catholic, I just don’t believe in the Church’s teaching on Papal infalability and/or contraception and/or abortion and/or women priests and/or transubstantiation etc. etc. etc. "

By any standard Henry was a tyrant, a heretic and the last person worthy to be proclaimed as the head of the Church.

I sincerely hope that those Anglicans who are coming across to the Catholic Church are not going to expect us to regard Henry VIII as some sort of legitimate figure in Church history who was simply misunderstood.

Having left the Anglican church and come home to the Catholic Church, I can truthfully say that the more I study the period of Henry VIII ( and I have extensively studied it!) the more I consider what he did to have been utterly indefensible and a disaster for England.

I can only hope that the Anglican Usage might be some way of turning that disaster to some good, by making it easier for many Anglicans and Episcopalians to find their way to the Church Christ founded, the Catholic Church.

No, what I do is try to get some foks a little deeper into history. Hank was a fascinating train wreck, and the cartoon cut-out of him that folks tend to wave is mostly evidence of a shallow understanding of how things worked at the time.

I always suggest J. J. Scarisbrick’s bio, HENRY VIII. It’s not pro-Henry. It’s pro-history.

GKC

 

[crosstimbers]

Greetings,
This is my first post here. I am a US Anglican considering a swim in the Tiber. Last October my parish left the Episcopal church and is now under the authority of an Anglican archbishop in South America. I live in a small town and the RC church here is also small. I went to Mass yesterday and I have to say I was unimpressed. Everyone seemed to be just going through the motions and the music was awful. Hardly anyone in the congregation even sang the hymns. BUT, as much as I love the Anglican liturgy, I’m not sure I should stake my soul on it. Its like I told my twenty-something sons…If all you look for in a wife is external beauty, you’ll get exactly the kind of wife you deserve!

 

[GKC]

Greetings,
This is my first post here. I am a US Anglican considering a swim in the Tiber. Last October my parish left the Episcopal church and is now under the authority of an Anglican archbishop in South America. I live in a small town and the RC church here is also small. I went to Mass yesterday and I have to say I was unimpressed. Everyone seemed to be just going through the motions and the music was awful. Hardly anyone in the congregation even sang the hymns. BUT, as much as I love the Anglican liturgy, I’m not sure I should stake my soul on it. Its like I told my twenty-something sons…If all you look for in a wife is external beauty, you’ll get exactly the kind of wife you deserve!

Good luck, Crosstimbers.

GKC

 

[ricmat]

Greetings,
This is my first post here. I am a US Anglican considering a swim in the Tiber. Last October my parish left the Episcopal church and is now under the authority of an Anglican archbishop in South America. I live in a small town and the RC church here is also small. I went to Mass yesterday and I have to say I was unimpressed. Everyone seemed to be just going through the motions and the music was awful. Hardly anyone in the congregation even sang the hymns. BUT, as much as I love the Anglican liturgy, I’m not sure I should stake my soul on it. Its like I told my twenty-something sons…If all you look for in a wife is external beauty, you’ll get exactly the kind of wife you deserve!

It is said often, but probably can not be said enough: You go to Mass for what you give not what you get.

If you have any musical ability, perhaps the rest of the congregation would appreciate your presence!

Is there a “best way” to worship? Yes - it’s the Mass.

 

[genealogist]

Crosstimbers’ last post shows what I mean. One can’t pick a religion like one picks a spaghetti sauce. I am sure that the music at 99+% of Masses is abysmal. The Eucharist though should be in order at those Masses. No matter how wonderful the choir is at an Anglican worship service, the Eucharist is still pretend. I know that is not PC but if it is true than so be it.

Henry VIII may habe been right to expect an annulment but just because one politician got the court to okay his abuse does not mean that the next fellow is allowed to do wrong if the court unfairly rules against him.

I am sure that many Anglicans are in full communion on many issues but that alone is not enough. While Henry kept the Church of England mostly Catholic in theory he did great harm and set it up for Edward and Elizabeth’s complete breaks.

 

[Alexius]

Dale_M: Its sad that the Episcopalians are having these difficulties, but perhaps the dissension will help stop the Anglicans from drifting too far into accomodation with Western secular culture. Recent comments by the Archbishop of Canterbury suggest that he is open to secularizing drift, such as ordaining female bishops.

!!!

 

[crosstimbers]

It is said often, but probably can not be said enough: You go to Mass for what you give not what you get.

If you have any musical ability, perhaps the rest of the congregation would appreciate your presence!

Is there a “best way” to worship? Yes - it’s the Mass.

Well said. I intend to seek Christ’s will for me, wherever that may be. If His will is the RC church that’s where I’ll be, music or not!

 

[crosstimbers]

Crosstimbers’ last post shows what I mean. One can’t pick a religion like one picks a spaghetti sauce.

No you can’t. But neither can you jump the Tiber on a whim because you are trying to escape somewhere else. I’m not “picking a religion”, I’m trying to discern where God wants me and I intend to do that carefully and soberly. The Anglican Church, for all it lacks from a Catholic perspective, is where I first met Jesus. It is where I was married and baptized my babies and buried my mother. It is not a small thing what I am considering and has involved much grief and tears. Please keep that in mind when you greet other Anglicans who are serious enough about their faith to show up here.