Gospel of John and Confession

[Anna_Scott]

Poguy, this argument actually strengthens the Anglican argument of validity and legitimacy. The Anglicans back in the early 20th century had co-consecrations with the Utrecht Old Catholic Church bishops. So let’s pretend for a minute that Leo’s Apostolicae Curae in the late 1800’s was true. Even if it were, the “Dutch Touch” of the early 1900’s re-infused apostolic succession lines back into the episcopacy of countless bishops and priests worldwide. It’s hard not to find a priest or bishop who has not been re-infused by the “Dutch Touch.” You can easily find anglo-catholic parishes that believe in transubstantiation, confession, benediction, Marian dogmas, have valid apostolic succession, incense, the whole nine yards. So from that standpoint, the debate is moot. If you want to put the pope in the mix and say that unity with him is the ONLY valid sign of true catholicism and orthodox belief, then you’d be right…Anglicanism lacks that, deliberately.

gurneyhalleck1,

Very interesting post. True–Anglicanism does deliberately lack Papal authority, though more so in some Anglican Churches than others. With your background, you would understand this far better than I.

Our Rector tells us we may choose to be a Papist; and he certainly holds a high regard for the Pope. I’m not sure how this works, exactly. I would think to choose to be a Papist would lead one into Catholicism. It’s a complicated issue.

Anna

 

[po18guy]

To Anna Scott and Mikeoffaith: You both have pointed out that my post lacked charity. And, for that I am truly sorry - especially since both of you are siblings in Christ. For some reason, I have had such difficulty this week, and I shall pray for an increase in faith, hope and love - the greatest being love.

Less serious, but still serious, is that I was ignorant of any and all re-establishment of Apostolic succession in various communities. That would make their Sacraments valid, but illicit only in the view of the Catholic Church as relates to full communion. Anna, you are absolutely right. It is very complicated, and kudos to those who are working tirelessly in favor of re-establsihing unity in the Body of Christ.

Christ’s peace be with you.

 

[po18guy]

Poguy, this argument actually strengthens the Anglican argument of validity and legitimacy. The Anglicans back in the early 20th century had co-consecrations with the Utrecht Old Catholic Church bishops. So let’s pretend for a minute that Leo’s Apostolicae Curae in the late 1800’s was true. Even if it were, the “Dutch Touch” of the early 1900’s re-infused apostolic succession lines back into the episcopacy of countless bishops and priests worldwide. It’s hard not to find a priest or bishop who has not been re-infused by the “Dutch Touch.” You can easily find anglo-catholic parishes that believe in transubstantiation, confession, benediction, Marian dogmas, have valid apostolic succession, incense, the whole nine yards. So from that standpoint, the debate is moot. If you want to put the pope in the mix and say that unity with him is the ONLY valid sign of true catholicism and orthodox belief, then you’d be right…Anglicanism lacks that, deliberately.

This entire history certainly complicates things, doesn’t it?

 

[Anna_Scott]

To Anna Scott and Mikeoffaith: You both have pointed out that my post lacked charity. And, for that I am truly sorry - especially since both of you are siblings in Christ. For some reason, I have had such difficulty this week, and I shall pray for an increase in faith, hope and love - the greatest being love.

Less serious, but still serious, is that I was ignorant of any and all re-establishment of Apostolic succession in various communities. That would make their Sacraments valid, but illicit only in the view of the Catholic Church as relates to full communion. Anna, you are absolutely right. It is very complicated, and kudos to those who are working tirelessly in favor of re-establsihing unity in the Body of Christ.

Christ’s peace be with you.

po18guy,

It takes courage to step up, as you did, here. Don’t be too hard on yourself. I’ve had to apologize a number of times, after posting less than charitable comments; and I’m sure it will happen again.

The authority issue is probably one of the most complex issues discussed on the forums. I think we just need to keep the lines of communication open.

If you believe the Catholic Church has the sole authority; just tell me why—without the “club-over-the-head” technique. uch: lol

I’ll certainly listen. I’m still studying; and I may change my mind somewhere along the line.

Anna

 

[po18guy]

The authority issue is probably one of the most complex issues discussed on the forums. I think we just need to keep the lines of communication open.

If you believe the Catholic Church has the sole authority; just tell me why—without the “club-over-the-head” technique. uch: lol

I’ll certainly listen. I’m still studying; and I may change my mind somewhere along the line.

Anna

Well, some of the split was over obeying the Bishop of Rome (the Pope, successor to Peter) as primary amongst all of the Bishops. This is a major cause of the Orthodox Catholic split in 1,054, but not all of it. In the early 1500s, a rotten Pope and Church corruption caused both a “reformation” and a “counter-reformation” without and within the Church. Notable here is that the saints who reformed the Church from within suffered nearly as much as the protestants did. The protestants also rejected the primacy of Peter’s successor, or even the need for him. In the 1800s, the “old Catholics” split off over the doctrine of Papal infallibility - which strikes my weak mind as them saying they infallibly decided that the Pope was not infallible. Early 20th century, we have the SSPX, or society of Pope Pius the Tenth. They split off, um, I can’t even remember why. Certainly this is why Jesus prayed to the Father that we all be one as He and the Father are one.

As to the primacy of Peter, the bible provides ample and clear evidence for that, as well as considering the structure of the very early Church. As a practical matter, nothing will exist for almost 2,000 years without someone, a CEO so to speak, in charge. How about starting a thread on this subject? I would be happy to provide charitable responses on it.

Christ’s peace be with you.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Well, some of the split was over obeying the Bishop of Rome (the Pope, successor to Peter) as primary amongst all of the Bishops. This is a major cause of the Orthodox Catholic split in 1,054, but not all of it. In the early 1500s, a rotten Pope and Church corruption caused both a “reformation” and a “counter-reformation” without and within the Church. Notable here is that the saints who reformed the Church from within suffered nearly as much as the protestants did. The protestants also rejected the primacy of Peter’s successor, or even the need for him. In the 1800s, the “old Catholics” split off over the doctrine of Papal infallibility - which strikes my weak mind as them saying they infallibly decided that the Pope was not infallible. Early 20th century, we have the SSPX, or society of Pope Pius the Tenth. They split off, um, I can’t even remember why. Certainly this is why Jesus prayed to the Father that we all be one as He and the Father are one.

As to the primacy of Peter, the bible provides ample and clear evidence for that, as well as considering the structure of the very early Church. As a practical matter, nothing will exist for almost 2,000 years without someone, a CEO so to speak, in charge. How about starting a thread on this subject? I would be happy to provide charitable responses on it.

Christ’s peace be with you.

po18guy,

Interesting information. I love your new and improved “charitable” posts. Who knows, we may end up being the best of friends.

I really can’t say that I disagree that the “keys” were given to Peter; or even that there is a line of Apostolic Succession leading to the present Pope.

In all three “catholic” communions: Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, and Catholic; laying on of hands is central to apostolic succession. So, we come to the question of whether or not a continued line of valid orders is found in all three.

Gurney made excellent points regarding “co-consecrations” and “re-infusions” of authority.

Poguy, this argument actually strengthens the Anglican argument of validity and legitimacy. The Anglicans back in the early 20th century had co-consecrations with the Utrecht Old Catholic Church bishops. So let’s pretend for a minute that Leo’s Apostolicae Curae in the late 1800’s was true. Even if it were, the “Dutch Touch” of the early 1900’s re-infused apostolic succession lines back into the episcopacy of countless bishops and priests worldwide. It’s hard not to find a priest or bishop who has not been re-infused by the “Dutch Touch.” You can easily find anglo-catholic parishes that believe in transubstantiation, confession, benediction, Marian dogmas, have valid apostolic succession, incense, the whole nine yards. So from that standpoint, the debate is moot. If you want to put the pope in the mix and say that unity with him is the ONLY valid sign of true catholicism and orthodox belief, then you’d be right…Anglicanism lacks that, deliberately.

I have also heard the argument from an Episcopal Priest: “The sacramental ministry is not an extension of the priests authority, but that the presbyter’s authority is a fulfillment of the sacramental life with which he has been entrusted.”

I would love to see a thread on the authority issue; but I have not read enough to host such a thread. It’s a complicated subject. However, since I’m in the reading mode, I welcome any resource suggestions—books, online documents: Catholic, Anglican, and Orthodox.

If you want to host a thread, I would certainly participate in the discussion.

My apologies to our OP, zz912, for veering off topic, again.

Anna

 

[guanophore]

Actually that’s not true. Heliocentrism had been a theory discussed for a century or two before Galileo, and discussed quite a bit in the Church. Galileo’s work on that didn’t land him in trouble at all. He got into trouble when he started dabbling into reinterpreting Scripture. Most current history books distort what really happened to grind a particular axe against the Church.

It wasn’t just re-interpreting. He actually wanted them to change the way things were worded in scripture to fit his theory.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Are all churches equal?

Define church.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

To Anna Scott and Mikeoffaith: You both have pointed out that my post lacked charity. And, for that I am truly sorry - especially since both of you are siblings in Christ. For some reason, I have had such difficulty this week, and I shall pray for an increase in faith, hope and love - the greatest being love.

Less serious, but still serious, is that I was ignorant of any and all re-establishment of Apostolic succession in various communities. That would make their Sacraments valid, but illicit only in the view of the Catholic Church as relates to full communion. Anna, you are absolutely right. It is very complicated, and kudos to those who are working tirelessly in favor of re-establsihing unity in the Body of Christ.

Christ’s peace be with you.

Po18guy-

I agree with Anna. Don’t go beating yourself over this. This is a place where we can put out our ideas and opinions and maybe learn something from each other and come into greater understanding. I am constantly learning new things here that I didn’t know or didn’t think about before.

But if we stop talking altogether and stop learning, and questioning each other, we can never hope for any unity.

And yeah this is very complex. Each side has had 500 years to dump more stuff onto the pile. And in the case of the Orthodox 1000.

Peace to you.

 

[po18guy]

Define church.

Well, ecclesial communities or “denominations”, I would guess. But, of course, we both know that some have more substance than others. Here on CAF, I have been pleasantly surprised at the Lutheran response. It is far more concerned with Christian unity, and far friendlier to Catholicism than so many others. It is a learning experience - when I allow it.

Christ’s peace be with you.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Well, ecclesial communities or “denominations”, I would guess. But, of course, we both know that some have more substance than others. Here on CAF, I have been pleasantly surprised at the Lutheran response. It is far more concerned with Christian unity, and far friendlier to Catholicism than so many others. It is a learning experience - when I allow it.

Christ’s peace be with you.

Peace to you po18guy. Here’s the deal with most Lutherans. We share more in common with the Roman church than most Roman Catholics would like to admit to or have a clue. Do we differ on things? Sure! Do we differ greatly? On some but not most. On Reformation Sunday, we had a Roman Catholic priest come in and give the homily. A few Sundays before, he came to my church and sat in on the liturgy. He looked at me and he said, “This isn’t much different than our liturgy.” He was so surprised. And I was like no kidding.

JonNC is a good guy on here pushing for unity. And he tends to be more on the calmer side. There is another guy on here from the WELS church I believe he is TriuneUnity or something like that. He’s pretty knowledgeable. I myself have probably had more exposure to Roman teaching than most of them, going to a Roman Catholic High School and being exposed to Roman theology. But I tend to be a bit more reactionary when it comes to “We’re the only true church” statements.

Good luck here and I look forward to seeing your posts.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Well, ecclesial communities or “denominations”, I would guess. But, of course, we both know that some have more substance than others. Here on CAF, I have been pleasantly surprised at the Lutheran response. It is far more concerned with Christian unity, and far friendlier to Catholicism than so many others. It is a learning experience - when I allow it.

Christ’s peace be with you.

Sorry to answer your question of are all churches equal. Define equal.

 

[po18guy]

Sorry to answer your question of are all churches equal. Define equal.

Well, I was going toward the concept of whether or not all faith communities provide one with an equal chance of attaining eternal life. I would guess that your answer might be that they do not.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Well, I was going toward the concept of whether or not all faith communities provide one with an equal chance of attaining eternal life. I would guess that your answer might be that they do not.

I can’t speak for all faith communities. I don’t know enough about some denominations to form an opinon, but I would say that all the confessional churches are equal, even if the Roman church somewhat disagrees.

 

[po18guy]

I can’t speak for all faith communities. I don’t know enough about some denominations to form an opinon, but I would say that all the confessional churches are equal, even if the Roman church somewhat disagrees.

I would think that the Apostle’s creed is the unifying theme here. In my mind, If one cannot agree to that, I think they have drifted off path, and are in need of being called back to a solid foundation of core beliefs.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Well, ecclesial communities or “denominations”, I would guess. But, of course, we both know that some have more substance than others. Here on CAF, I have been pleasantly surprised at the Lutheran response. It is far more concerned with Christian unity, and far friendlier to Catholicism than so many others. It is a learning experience - when I allow it.

Christ’s peace be with you.

Peace to you po18guy. Here’s the deal with most Lutherans. We share more in common with the Roman church than most Roman Catholics would like to admit to or have a clue. Do we differ on things? Sure! Do we differ greatly? On some but not most. On Reformation Sunday, we had a Roman Catholic priest come in and give the homily. A few Sundays before, he came to my church and sat in on the liturgy. He looked at me and he said, “This isn’t much different than our liturgy.” He was so surprised. And I was like no kidding.

JonNC is a good guy on here pushing for unity. And he tends to be more on the calmer side. There is another guy on here from the WELS church I believe he is TriuneUnity or something like that. He’s pretty knowledgeable. I myself have probably had more exposure to Roman teaching than most of them, going to a Roman Catholic High School and being exposed to Roman theology. But I tend to be a bit more reactionary when it comes to “We’re the only true church” statements.

Good luck here and I look forward to seeing your posts.

Sorry to answer your question of are all churches equal. Define equal.

Well, I was going toward the concept of whether or not all faith communities provide one with an equal chance of attaining eternal life. I would guess that your answer might be that they do not.

I can’t speak for all faith communities. I don’t know enough about some denominations to form an opinon, but I would say that all the confessional churches are equal, even if the Roman church somewhat disagrees.

I would think that the Apostle’s creed is the unifying theme here. In my mind, If one cannot agree to that, I think they have drifted off path, and are in need of being called back to a solid foundation of core beliefs.

po18guy & Mikeoffaith,

I’ve been following your discussion. I do think there are a number of people here who truly desire unity. In that spirit, I will say that these forums provide a great place to discuss our differences and our common ground. There are many people here who will put a great deal of effort into their posts–stating beliefs and support for those beliefs. I’ve changed my views on a number of doctrines through these discussions. I realized I could not support some of my views through Scripture or tradition of the early Church.

Anna

My apologies to the OP for veering off topic.

 

[po18guy]

My apologies to the OP for veering off topic.

Yeah, what was the topic again? But, this is further evidence of the mysterious ways in which the Holy Sprit brings together those who need to talk.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Yeah, what was the topic again? But, this is further evidence of the mysterious ways in which the Holy Sprit brings together those who need to talk.

Very true, my friend.
Anna

 

[zz912]

po18guy & Mikeoffaith,

I’ve been following your discussion. I do think there are a number of people here who truly desire unity. In that spirit, I will say that these forums provide a great place to discuss our differences and our common ground. There are many people here who will put a great deal of effort into their posts–stating beliefs and support for those beliefs. I’ve changed my views on a number of doctrines through these discussions. I realized I could not support some of my views through Scripture or tradition of the early Church.

Anna

My apologies to the OP for veering off topic.

No worries. I’m always fascinated by how conversations develop. I only get perturbed when someone intentionally sidetracks a discussion because their position is weak.

 

[Anna_Scott]

No worries. I’m always fascinated by how conversations develop. I only get perturbed when someone intentionally sidetracks a discussion because their position is weak.

zz912,

Thank you so much. I don’t intentionally sidetrack. It just happens sometimes in the course of a good discussion.

Anna