High church / low church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jabronie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mercygate said:
Without denying the “smells and bells” aspect of High Churchmanship, technically, “High Church” refers to a “high” doctrine OF the Church: her Apostolic authority, sacramental effectiveness, and such.

Of course, that goes WITH smells and bells . . .

When I came into the Catholic Church, the RCIA director talked to me for a while and then asked me: Is the Catholic Church “catholic” enough for YOU?

I had a problem answering that diplomatically.
Click to expand...
I actually wish there was an Anglican-Use parish nearby. From what I have seen on their websites, I would probably really like the Mass. It reminds me of the TLM, only in the vernacular.
 
lak611 said:
I actually wish there was an Anglican-Use parish nearby. From what I have seen on their websites, I would probably really like the Mass. It reminds me of the TLM, only in the vernacular.
Click to expand...
Yeah: they do REAL good!
 
“Without denying the “smells and bells” aspect of High Churchmanship, technically, “High Church” refers to a “high” doctrine OF the Church: her Apostolic authority, sacramental effectiveness, and such.”

This is what I was referring to as the Anglo-Catholic dimension, above. It is a distinction that I find useful but it is not one made universally. High church can be found hand in hand with a more reformed concept of the sacraments, etc. It’s not the norm, but I’ve seen it happen.

GKC
 
Wolseley said:
“High Church” = Tridentine Mass.

“Low Church” = Novus Ordo.
Click to expand...
This is very offensive as Low Church typically do not believe anything that Catholics believe.

Such as shame that such disrespect is still out there towards that Church.
 
GKC said:
From what perspective?

GKC
Click to expand...
All the talk of infallibility and such I think seem over-rated. With all of the pedophilia and such happening, I thought there would have been more done to stop it quickly. The pope is a man as well, how could his teaching be perfect. Doesn’t the Bible tell us that only Jesus was perfect?? Just my thoughts.
 
BrewMax said:
All the talk of infallibility and such I think seem over-rated. With all of the pedophilia and such happening, I thought there would have been more done to stop it quickly. The pope is a man as well, how could his teaching be perfect. Doesn’t the Bible tell us that only Jesus was perfect?? Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe the Papal office involves the personal charism of infallibility, either. But you have to make the distinction between infalliblity and impeccability. The doctrine of Papal infallibility holds that a Pope, within certain narrowly defined limits, will not teach doctrine that is erroneous; that is (briefly), he will be infallible in proclaiming Christian doctrine on faith or morals to the universal Church. That’s very circumscribed. It does not mean that a Pope cannot err or sin, outside that very tightly defined area. It is not that the Pope is said to be perfect, but that, in this one circumstance, he is believed to be kept from proclaiming and teaching error, through divine assistance.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
 
GKC said:
I don’t believe the Papal office involves the personal charism of infallibility, either. But you have to make the distinction between infalliblity and impeccability. The doctrine of Papal infallibility holds that a Pope, within certain narrowly defined limits, will not teach doctrine that is erroneous; that is (briefly), he will be infallible in proclaiming Christian doctrine on faith or morals to the universal Church. That’s very circumscribed. It does not mean that a Pope cannot err or sin, outside that very tightly defined area. It is not that the Pope is said to be perfect, but that, in this one circumstance, he is believed to be kept from proclaiming and teaching error, through divine assistance.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
Click to expand...
I think he’s failed. Just my opinion.
 
BrewMax said:
I think he’s failed. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
He didn’t. When people commit sin against children they failed. You cannot blame the Pope. He was **greatly distressed **when the sex scandal rocked the US.

People failed only when they fall into sin.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
He didn’t. When people commit sin against children they failed. You cannot blame the Pope. He was **greatly distressed **when the sex scandal rocked the US.

People failed only when they fall into sin.
Click to expand...
Why didn’t he do something sooner?
 
BrewMax said:
Why didn’t he do something sooner?
Click to expand...
I don’t know the facts of what the Pope knew, or when he knew it, or what he did or didn’t do, but remember, that’s not infallibilty you’re talking about.

GKC
 
BrewMax said:
Why didn’t he do something sooner?
Click to expand...
He received the news of the sex scandal as much as we did when it came out of the news. These scandals were not reported to him. At the time John Paul II, when hearing the news later summon the bishops in the US to address the scandal.
 
GKC said:
I don’t know the facts of what the Pope knew, or when he knew it, or what he did or didn’t do, but remember, that’s not infallibilty you’re talking about.

GKC
Click to expand...
What would be the point of infallibility then if horrific things like this couldn’t be handled better and more timely?
 
Mannyfit75 said:
He received the news of the sex scandal as much as we did when it came out of the news. These scandals were not reported to him. At the time John Paul II, when hearing the news later summon the bishops in the US to address the scandal.
Click to expand...
This seems like a complete failure then. Isn’t that what I said earlier? I stand by it.
 
BrewMax said:
What would be the point of infallibility then if horrific things like this couldn’t be handled better and more timely?
Click to expand...
Infallibility only has to do with Church doctrine. If a Pope tried to teach as revealed doctrine that it was not a sin to hide Church officials’ sins, and that all must believe it, that would have involved infallibility.

Infallibility doesn’t have anything to do with whether a Pope can make an error in judgement, lead a scandalous life personally, sin, or make a mistake, outside the narrow range that I’ve described to you. The point of the concept is to insure that what the Church teaches is correct and true, and the RCC believes that divine assistance makes the Pope infallible in doing this, and in nothing else.

GKC
 
GKC said:
Infallibility only has to do with Church doctrine. If a Pope tried to teach as revealed doctrine that it was not a sin to hide Church officials’ sins, and that all must believe it, that would have involved infallibility.

Infallibility doesn’t have anything to do with whether a Pope can make an error in judgement, lead a scandalous life personally, sin, or make a mistake, outside the narrow range that I’ve described to you. The point of the concept is to insure that what the Church teaches is correct and true, and the RCC believes that divine assistance makes the Pope infallible in doing this, and in nothing else.

GKC
Click to expand...
Thanks, GKC, for explaining infallibility correctly. 🙂
 
lak611 said:
Thanks, GKC, for explaining infallibility correctly. 🙂
Click to expand...
You are very welcome. I was, of course, focusing narrowly on the Pope’s role, and ignoring that of the Episcopate taken as a whole, but one thing at a time.

Whatever may be the case, re: Papal infallibility, it’s not related to anything beyond the definition as the RCC proclaims it.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
 
GKC said:
I don’t believe the Papal office involves the personal charism of infallibility, either. But you have to make the distinction between infalliblity and impeccability. The doctrine of Papal infallibility holds that a Pope, within certain narrowly defined limits, will not teach doctrine that is erroneous; that is (briefly), he will be infallible in proclaiming Christian doctrine on faith or morals to the universal Church. That’s very circumscribed. It does not mean that a Pope cannot err or sin, outside that very tightly defined area. It is not that the Pope is said to be perfect, but that, in this one circumstance, he is believed to be kept from proclaiming and teaching error, through divine assistance.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
Click to expand...
. . . . because he teaches with the authority of Jesus Christ.

Thanks GK for your always lucid exposition! It’s great when a non-Catholic, who does not fully subscribe to Catholic teaching, can explain it so carefully and accurately!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top