How has the Anglican Communion gone wrong?

[GKC]

Following the scriptures as they are written, and asking that others also do this is not uncharitable at all.

Nowhere in scripture is there any provision for “updating” their meanings. And, it is not just in the Old Testament where same sex relations are condemned.

The Anglican Church claims to be a part of the Catholic Church (Large C), and to follow its traditions and practices. Yet, in fact, it has never done this at all. From it’s very beginning (which was to allow Henry VIII a divorce), till today, the Anglican Church has flouted Catholic Doctrine, Catholic Traditions and Catholic Mores.

Today, it has completely removed itself from even the sham Catholic teachings that it professed to hold dear. Instead, it chooses to destroy itself in its quest to be “relevant” to the world.

It is shrinking, in ALL areas of the world. In England, its home, less than 10% of the nominally Anglican people attend church services. The church is seen as being totally irrelevant by the people. The Christian churches that are growing are the Roman Catholic and the much more fundamentalist churches.

The same is true in Canada, the USA, all of the former British colonies, in fact in all of the world.

Sadly, the Anglican Communion can not see that the further it removes itself from the Bible, and from Christian traditions, the smaller it becomes.

At the rate it is dying out, in another 100 years, there will be no Anglican Church left, other than the Anglican Ordinariate within the Roman Catholic Church. Perhaps it is better that this happen, to remove this remnant of a church that once actually stood for Christian beliefs and principles.

Decree of Nullity.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

So let me get this straight—you’re joining the Anglican Church this Sunday ASAP!?

Following the scriptures as they are written, and asking that others also do this is not uncharitable at all.

Nowhere in scripture is there any provision for “updating” their meanings. And, it is not just in the Old Testament where same sex relations are condemned.

The Anglican Church claims to be a part of the Catholic Church (Large C), and to follow its traditions and practices. Yet, in fact, it has never done this at all. From it’s very beginning (which was to allow Henry VIII a divorce), till today, the Anglican Church has flouted Catholic Doctrine, Catholic Traditions and Catholic Mores.

Today, it has completely removed itself from even the sham Catholic teachings that it professed to hold dear. Instead, it chooses to destroy itself in its quest to be “relevant” to the world.

It is shrinking, in ALL areas of the world. In England, its home, less than 10% of the nominally Anglican people attend church services. The church is seen as being totally irrelevant by the people. The Christian churches that are growing are the Roman Catholic and the much more fundamentalist churches.

The same is true in Canada, the USA, all of the former British colonies, in fact in all of the world.

Sadly, the Anglican Communion can not see that the further it removes itself from the Bible, and from Christian traditions, the smaller it becomes.

At the rate it is dying out, in another 100 years, there will be no Anglican Church left, other than the Anglican Ordinariate within the Roman Catholic Church. Perhaps it is better that this happen, to remove this remnant of a church that once actually stood for Christian beliefs and principles.

 

[Manassah]

Manassah, you’re obviously a troll and trying to gode me into a turf war with the insults and “your mama!” type barbs. Not takin’ the bait, son. I’m putting you on ignore. Have a good one!

You put people on ignore because you cannot refute what they say. Capisce?

You and you’re handy-dandy litlle emoticons. What are you twelve gurney? I suspect you are intellectually. I see how things work here at “Roman Catholic Central”.

I came in here to see how intelligent people conversed without judgment and an understanding of religions other than solely the Roman Catholic one. I came to see where devout Roman Catholics stood. And if this is where they stand we’re in deep doo doo.

I see, by in large, that this forum should be named “hate central” for most of you will brook no disagreement nor will you consider that there are other religions as valid and worthwhile (if not more so) than the Christian one. As you hold back from masturbating (without success) I can just hear you judging the adulterer or the homosexual!

If this is what passes for today’s “modern Catholic” few of you have studied the early Roman Church and the changes made in the first several hundred years to the tome you today call “The Word of God”. Entire books were eliminated! During the Middle Ages and the Renaissance the Vatican was the very epicenter of corruption and greed. Throw in some avarice, murder, and fornication and you’ll have your historical Roman Catholic Church. But most of you (especially the poster to whom this is directed) would rather call me “troll” than address the fact that you go through life with blinders on thinking your way is the only way. Small wonder your numbers are dwindling.

Well you’re sorely mistaken in your myopic view of God’s world.

I’m beginning to think with the last two Popes under whom the world has suffered that the Roman Church is the embodiment of evil rather than good.

As for me I’ll thank everything good in this world I was raised by kind, intelligent, considerate people who would never have bashed your religion the way you speak of others. You’re an affront to Christianity most of you.

I praise God that the Protestants recognized the atrocities and corruption of the Roman Church and separapted from Rome. Yet all that is conveniently forgotten (or unknown) to you. Heard of the Medicis or the Borgias? The Roman Church is a business not a religious institution. And on this board it’s primarilly represented by foolish sheep who have done nothing further in the education dept. to instruct themselves in truth from the time they sat at some priest or some nun’s knee.

The French have a wonderful word for this sort of behaviour. You’d be called “plouc”.

That I descend from generations of Unitarians and Quakers is a source of considerable comfort. These were the people who were so invested in the emancipation of the black people during the Civil War. Heard of William Lloyd Garrison? He wasn’t any Roman Catholic.

So go on all of you who decide who’s damned and who’s not … who’s saved and who’s a sinner. You’re doing precisely as your Christ told you never to do.

I will say this. You’ve been a source of enlightenment (albeit a sobering one).

Oh and the fellow in your avatar? It looks like the actor Patrick Stewart. He’s an out and proud GAY man.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Following the scriptures as they are written, and asking that others also do this is not uncharitable at all.

Nowhere in scripture is there any provision for “updating” their meanings. And, it is not just in the Old Testament where same sex relations are condemned.

The Anglican Church claims to be a part of the Catholic Church (Large C), and to follow its traditions and practices. Yet, in fact, it has never done this at all. From it’s very beginning (which was to allow Henry VIII a divorce), till today, the Anglican Church has flouted Catholic Doctrine, Catholic Traditions and Catholic Mores.

Today, it has completely removed itself from even the sham Catholic teachings that it professed to hold dear. Instead, it chooses to destroy itself in its quest to be “relevant” to the world.

It is shrinking, in ALL areas of the world. In England, its home, less than 10% of the nominally Anglican people attend church services. The church is seen as being totally irrelevant by the people. The Christian churches that are growing are the Roman Catholic and the much more fundamentalist churches.

The same is true in Canada, the USA, all of the former British colonies, in fact in all of the world.

Sadly, the Anglican Communion can not see that the further it removes itself from the Bible, and from Christian traditions, the smaller it becomes.

At the rate it is dying out, in another 100 years, there will be no Anglican Church left, other than the Anglican Ordinariate within the Roman Catholic Church. Perhaps it is better that this happen, to remove this remnant of a church that once actually stood for Christian beliefs and principles.

The Old Medic,

You are making blanket statements about the Anglican Communion. There are many conservatives within the Anglican Communion, myself included, who still hold fast to Christian orthodoxy. To say that Anglicans have never held to practices and traditions of Catholicism is a false statement. We still share many practices and traditions.

The Church of England did not begin with Henry’s divorce. The Church of England/Anglican Catholic Church was Catholic long before Henry’s divorce. Henry did not intend to start a new religion when he broke with Rome’s authority. He still considered himself and England to be Catholic, just Catholic minus submission to the Pope. Protestant influences entered later, and remain in varying degrees. Our Parish leans heavily toward Catholic tradition with many Eastern Orthodox influences. However, we do not submit religious mind and will to the Roman Pontiff, as Catholics in communion with Rome are required to do. The Eastern Orthodox Churches do not either. Please be careful about generalizations.

Peace,
Anna

 

[GKC]

The Old Medic,

You are making blanket statements about the Anglican Communion. There are many conservatives within the Anglican Communion, myself included, who still hold fast to Christian orthodoxy. To say that Anglicans have never held to practices and traditions of Catholicism is a false statement. We still share many practices and traditions.

The Church of England did not begin with Henry’s divorce. The Church of England/Anglican Catholic Church was Catholic long before Henry’s divorce. Henry did not intend to start a new religion when he broke with Rome’s authority. He still considered himself and England to be Catholic, just Catholic minus submission to the Pope. Protestant influences entered later, and remain in varying degrees. Our Parish leans heavily toward Catholic tradition with many Eastern Orthodox influences. However, we do not submit religious mind and will to the Roman Pontiff, as Catholics in communion with Rome are required to do. The Eastern Orthodox Churches do not either. Please be careful about generalizations.

Peace,
Anna

Decree of Nullity.

GKC

 

[Anna_Scott]

Decree of Nullity.

GKC

GKC,

Why do you keep saying that? Specifically, how are you applying this to Henry?

According to the Decree of Nullity, my first marriage was not valid, because I entered into the marriage having told my fiancé I did not want to have children. I made that very clear and he reluctantly agreed. I changed my mind after we married, but that’s a long and complicated story. I am blessed with a wonderful son, and I can’t imagine life without him.

According to the Decree of Nullity, there’s a good chance my second marriage wasn’t valid either, considering the fact that the man I exchanged vows with did not actually exist. He was a persona created by my lying, deceitful, and very scary second husband. By the end of that marriage, I was afraid my husband was going to kill me in my sleep.

Legally, I’ve been twice married and twice divorced. According to the Decree of Nullity, I may not have ever been married at all. And of course, I was not married in a Catholic Church, which brings up the Sacrament issue too.

So, what are your thoughts on the Decree of Nullity?

Anna

 

[The_Sentry]

The Old Medic,

You are making blanket statements about the Anglican Communion. There are many conservatives within the Anglican Communion, myself included, who still hold fast to Christian orthodoxy. To say that Anglicans have never held to practices and traditions of Catholicism is a false statement. We still share many practices and traditions.

The Church of England did not begin with Henry’s divorce. The Church of England/Anglican Catholic Church was Catholic long before Henry’s divorce. Henry did not intend to start a new religion when he broke with Rome’s authority. He still considered himself and England to be Catholic, just Catholic minus submission to the Pope. Protestant influences entered later, and remain in varying degrees. Our Parish leans heavily toward Catholic tradition with many Eastern Orthodox influences. However, we do not submit religious mind and will to the Roman Pontiff, as Catholics in communion with Rome are required to do. The Eastern Orthodox Churches do not either. Please be careful about generalizations.

Peace,
Anna

Preach it, sister

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

LOL

Preach it, sister

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

In the Anglican church it isn’t an issue at all; in the Catholic Church I think you’d have no problem, most likely, taking care of these two marriages as there was some serious deception, mitigating circumstances, etc. You’d have a strong case and I think you’d be fine. They’d most likely nullify them aka annulment, that is, if you wanted to be Catholic, of course. I admire your strength, Anna, going through all this nonsense! God bless you! But then again, I think you’re an amazing person anyway so I’m already prejudiced!

GKC,

Why do you keep saying that? Specifically, how are you applying this to Henry?

According to the Decree of Nullity, my first marriage was not valid, because I entered into the marriage having told my fiancé I did not want to have children. I made that very clear and he reluctantly agreed. I changed my mind after we married, but that’s a long and complicated story. I am blessed with a wonderful son, and I can’t imagine life without him.

According to the Decree of Nullity, there’s a good chance my second marriage wasn’t valid either, considering the fact that the man I exchanged vows with did not actually exist. He was a persona created by my lying, deceitful, and very scary second husband. By the end of that marriage, I was afraid my husband was going to kill me in my sleep.

Legally, I’ve been twice married and twice divorced. According to the Decree of Nullity, I may not have ever been married at all. And of course, I was not married in a Catholic Church, which brings up the Sacrament issue too.

So, what are your thoughts on the Decree of Nullity?

Anna

 

[DavidKays]

Anna, Catholics tend to stick on this submission to the Pope as if their dear lives depend only on this. However while they like submission to the Pope they hardly read any statements by him. Anna you seem to be a great Anglo-Catholic and yes you are right about your statements. While I do not approve of Protestant teachings that have crept into the Anglican Communion, I do believe that Anglicans are not in the same category as mainland Protestants or like the Scottish Protestants. Basically the Catholic Church in England was forced into exiled, kidnapped if one can say and really was not as responsible to retaining Catholic truth and doctrine like the Protestants in mainland Europe. The Anglicans did retain the priesthood and that was a plus for them. However since the ordination of women the Angicans threw whatever leverage they had right out the window. I understand that some Anglicans like yourself will not enter into the liberal minded Church we see today. I grew up in a High Church of England for my first 35 years with much Catholic flavour and it gave to me my first taste of Catholicism. For a Greek Orthodox it was a treat to get to know how the West worships and I owe it all to the High Church of England.

 

[Anna_Scott]

The Old Medic,

You are making blanket statements about the Anglican Communion. There are many conservatives within the Anglican Communion, myself included, who still hold fast to Christian orthodoxy. To say that Anglicans have never held to practices and traditions of Catholicism is a false statement. We still share many practices and traditions.

The Church of England did not begin with Henry’s divorce. The Church of England/Anglican Catholic Church was Catholic long before Henry’s divorce. Henry did not intend to start a new religion when he broke with Rome’s authority. He still considered himself and England to be Catholic, just Catholic minus submission to the Pope. Protestant influences entered later, and remain in varying degrees. Our Parish leans heavily toward Catholic tradition with many Eastern Orthodox influences. However, we do not submit religious mind and will to the Roman Pontiff, as Catholics in communion with Rome are required to do. The Eastern Orthodox Churches do not either. Please be careful about generalizations.

Peace,
Anna

Preach it, sister

LOL

Sorry guys. Guess I need to step off the soapbox. lol

Anna

 

[GKC]

GKC,

Why do you keep saying that? Specifically, how are you applying this to Henry?

According to the Decree of Nullity, my first marriage was not valid, because I entered into the marriage having told my fiancé I did not want to have children. I made that very clear and he reluctantly agreed. I changed my mind after we married, but that’s a long and complicated story. I am blessed with a wonderful son, and I can’t imagine life without him.

According to the Decree of Nullity, there’s a good chance my second marriage wasn’t valid either, considering the fact that the man I exchanged vows with did not actually exist. He was a persona created by my lying, deceitful, and very scary second husband. By the end of that marriage, I was afraid my husband was going to kill me in my sleep.

Legally, I’ve been twice married and twice divorced. According to the Decree of Nullity, I may not have ever been married at all. And of course, I was not married in a Catholic Church, which brings up the Sacrament issue too.

So, what are your thoughts on the Decree of Nullity?

Anna

I keep saying that because it was what Henry sought, in his causa.. Divorce was not a concept known to the Church, in Henry’s day (and Henry’s day is my hobby area). What was known was a sacrament of matrimony, which, like all sacraments, had to have certain characteristics to be valid. If these characteristics were not present, no valid sacrament was confected. In the case of matrimony, the system evolved by the Church (and it was a constant process of evolution) involved two connected concepts. One was the need to control matrimony, as a sacrament, under the Church. The other was to permit, as political and dynastic reasons required, the making and breaking of marriages, for reasons of state. This resulted in a very complex system of impediments, dispensations and decrees of nullity, to handle specific cases. The concept of divorce, that is, a concept of breaking a valid marriage, did not exist. What did exist was a process to determine if a valid marriage had taken place, or had failed to take place, due to one of a large number of impediments.

Henry presented his case that the dispensation of the impediment (an impediment of affinity,in the second degree, collateral), to allow him to marry his brother’s widow was not valid, in that (by his reasoning) it involved the so-called Leventine Prohibition, and was ultra vires, beyond the power of even a Pope (Julius, in this case) to dispense. Hence, the dispensation was not valid, Henry and Catherine were not valid subjects or ministers of the sacrament of matrimony, and his marriage was null from the start. As was common in such cases (and such cases were very common, indeed, in the day), Henry sought a decree of nullity, a statement that his marriage had been null (not a valid marriage) from the start. His marriage would not have been made null by this decree, the decree merely would recognize that no sacramentally valid marriage had occurred. Nor would the decree have divorced him from Catherine. It would have said they were never married, validly.

Every time I see divorce, in such a discussion, I put in “decree of nullity”. Just keeping things neat.

Henry’s search for a decree of nullity is a complicated story, which I haven’t had to discuss in a long while.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I keep saying that because it was what Henry sought, in his causa.. Divorce was not a concept known to the Church, in Henry’s day (and Henry’s day is my hobby area). What was known was a sacrament of matrimony, which, like all sacraments, had to have certain characteristics to be valid. If these characteristics were not present, no valid sacrament was confected. In the case of matrimony, the system evolved by the Church (and it was a constant process of evolution) involved two connected concepts. One was the need to control matrimony, as a sacrament, under the Church. The other was to permit, as political and dynastic reasons required, the making and breaking of marriages, for reasons of state. This resulted in a very complex system of impediments, dispensations and decrees of nullity, to handle specific cases. The concept of divorce, that is a concept of breaking a valid marriage, did not exist. What did exist was a process to determine if a valid marriage had taken place, or had failed to take place, due to one of a large number of impediments.

Henry presented his case that the dispensation of the impediment (an impediment of affinity,in the second degree, collateral), to allow him to marry his brother’s widow was not valid, in that (by his reasoning) it involved the so-called Leventine Prohibition, and was ultra vires, beyond the power of even a Pope (Julius, in this case) to dispense. Hence, the dispensation was not valid, Henry and Catherine were not valid subjects or ministers of the sacrament of matrimony, and his marriage was null from the start. As was common in such cases (and such cases were very common, indeed, in the day), Henry sought a decree of nullity, a statement that his marriage had been null (not a valid marriage) from the start. His marriage would not have been made null by this decree, the decree merely would recognize that no sacramentally valid marriage had occurred. Nor would the decree have divorced him from Catherine. It would have said they were never married, validly.

Every time I see divorce, in such a discussion, I put in “decree of nullity”. Just keeping things neat.

Henry’s search for a decree of nullity is a complicated story, which I haven’t had to discuss in a long while.

I appreciate the information. I know I used “divorce” incorrectly. This is your area of expertise. If I remember correctly, weren’t such decrees given to others with much less cause than in Henry’s case? Seems there was quite a power play going on.

Anna

 

[GKC]

In the Anglican church it isn’t an issue at all; in the Catholic Church I think you’d have no problem, most likely, taking care of these two marriages as there was some serious deception, mitigating circumstances, etc. You’d have a strong case and I think you’d be fine. They’d most likely nullify them aka annulment, that is, if you wanted to be Catholic, of course. I admire your strength, Anna, going through all this nonsense! God bless you! But then again, I think you’re an amazing person anyway so I’m already prejudiced!

Curiously enough, within recent time, it was simpler in the RCC than in the CoE. C.S. Lewis’ marriage to Joy Davidman is an example. At the time, the CoE had no such procedure as a decree of nullity, which caused a problem. It would have been simpler under the RCC, since there was, indeed, a case that Joy had not been legally married to William Gresham, since he was still married to a previous wife, when they were wed, hence she was not validly wed to him.

In any case, as I’ve said before, it would be a decree of nullity, not a nullification of a marriage.

GKC

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna, Catholics tend to stick on this submission to the Pope as if their dear lives depend only on this. However while they like submission to the Pope they hardly read any statements by him. Anna you seem to be a great Anglo-Catholic and yes you are right about your statements. While I do not approve of Protestant teachings that have crept into the Anglican Communion, I do believe that Anglicans are not in the same category as mainland Protestants or like the Scottish Protestants. Basically the Catholic Church in England was forced into exiled, kidnapped if one can say and really was not as responsible to retaining Catholic truth and doctrine like the Protestants in mainland Europe. The Anglicans did retain the priesthood and that was a plus for them. However since the ordination of women the Angicans threw whatever leverage they had right out the window. I understand that some Anglicans like yourself will not enter into the liberal minded Church we see today. I grew up in a High Church of England for my first 35 years with much Catholic flavour and it gave to me my first taste of Catholicism. For a Greek Orthodox it was a treat to get to know how the West worships and I owe it all to the High Church of England.

DavidKays,

I really appreciate your comments from a Greek Orthodox perspective. My Parish is “High Church.” As for the ordination of women, I’m still not sure I’m sold on that. I was at one time, but I seem to be moving in a more conservative direction. There are some Anglican Churches in my area that do not ordain women. We have no women Priests in our Parish, but they abound within the Diocese.

Peace,
Anna

 

[GKC]

I appreciate the information. I know I used “divorce” incorrectly. This is your area of expertise. If I remember correctly, weren’t such decrees given to others with much less cause than in Henry’s case? Seems there was quite a power play going on.

Anna

Henry’s case was as strong as was common, in his day (and he had an even stronger case, an impediment against the justice of public honest, which he never used). It was stronger than the case his sister Margaret used, to get her first decree of nullity. And as strong as the two dispensations given to Henry Brandon, to marry his other sister, Mary.

The necessity for marriages which were essentially statecraft, the marriage of country, realm, family, interest, as opposed to individual to individual, to be made and unmade, for political reasons, made the whole thing commonplace. It was a constantly evolving system, which grew increasingly complex, until Trent took it in hand (Session XXIV).

GKC

 

[Anna_Scott]

Curiously enough, within recent time, it was simpler in the RCC than in the CoE. C.S. Lewis’ marriage to Joy Davidman is an example. At the time, the CoE had no such procedure as a decree of nullity, which caused a problem. It would have been simpler under the RCC, since there was, indeed, a case that Joy had not been legally married to William Gresham, since he was still married to a previous wife, when they were wed, hence she was not validly wed to him.

In any case, as I’ve said before, it would be a decree of nullity, not a nullification of a marriage.

GKC

Very interesting.
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

In the Anglican church it isn’t an issue at all; in the Catholic Church I think you’d have no problem, most likely, taking care of these two marriages as there was some serious deception, mitigating circumstances, etc. You’d have a strong case and I think you’d be fine. They’d most likely nullify them aka annulment, that is, if you wanted to be Catholic, of course. I admire your strength, Anna, going through all this nonsense! God bless you! But then again, I think you’re an amazing person anyway so I’m already prejudiced!

Gurney,
That might just be the incentive I need to swim the Tiber. lol.

I appreciate your kindness, thought it is not deserved. I’ve committed more than my share of sins in this lifetime.
Anna

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m sure! Keep moving, Anna, Keep moving!! LOL You can’t be “too conservative” with W.O.! As Jim might say, “just say no to laying hands on hairspray!” LOL

DavidKays,

As for the ordination of women, I’m still not sure I’m sold on that. I was at one time, but I seem to be moving in a more conservative direction. Peace,
Anna

 

[GKC]

I’m sure! Keep moving, Anna, Keep moving!! LOL You can’t be “too conservative” with W.O.! As Jim might say, “just say no to laying hands on hairspray!” LOL

I always do.

GKC