New head of Episcopal church - liberal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PA2NCCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To answer the question above I have been an Episcopalian all 18 years of my life. And you are wrong moderates have not left the church, in fact moderates make up the majority of the church. Moderate Episcopalians are disgusted by both sides for making sexuality the number one issue. The moderates usually lean to the left because they feal that the Episcopal Church doesn’t discriminate against divorced members of the church and therefore shouldn’t discriminate against a group that isn’t even mentioned in the Bible.

To respond to another comment above about Schori and Robinson not caring about issues of poverty and social justice. Did you not hear Schori’s sermon at her Investiture Service. She talked about the Millenium Development Goals and how the ECUSA plans to achieve them. Also on her first day as Presiding Bishop she sent a letter to conservative Afican bishops and in that letter she wrote that she wanted to work with them to achieve the MDGs and hopes that fighting poverty on that continent can be a common ground for conservatives and liberals alike. Of course she has not received a response from Archbishop Akinola.
 
The AAC is not at all more catholic than the liberals in the ECUSA. The AAC and other conservatives are more protestant in their worship and evangelical in some parishes. The liberal wing of the church has historically been high church and Anglo-Catholic which is why most Roman Catholics who convert to the ECUSA are liberal and find something similar to home in the liberal parishes.
 
ALLFORHIM said:
Hi,.
I am so happy Im not Episcopalian anymore. Now I just have to convince my mom to get out.😦
Click to expand...
Amen!
Apostates run wild.
The Church of Political Correctness over All Else.
Viva the Continuing Anglican Movement!
WP
 
The AAC is not at all more catholic than the liberals in the ECUSA. The AAC and other conservatives are more protestant in their worship and evangelical in some parishes. The liberal wing of the church has historically been high church and Anglo-Catholic which is why most Roman Catholics who convert to the ECUSA are liberal and find something similar to home in the liberal parishes.
Click to expand...
So, the trappings are what makes someone more “catholic”? While I certainly think the trappings are very important, they are worthless without a proper grounding. The “Liberal Catholic Church” service is a combination of the '62 style Mass and their own inventions. All that glitters is not gold.

Also, we don’t consider “orthodox” as the equivalent of “republican”. Personally, I vote Republican (generally speaking) only because they offer the only real alternative to the largely pro-abortion Democrats. Throwing money at social issues doesn’t equal actually giving a hoot, BTW.
Beleive it or not there actaully used to be such a thing as honest-to-God liberal Catholics. a lot of them, they still actually exist, check out the web publication and hard copies of the National Catholic REPORTER, not register.
Click to expand...
The National Catholic DISTORTER-heresy in print. :rolleyes:
 
jw630103 said:
As an Episcopalian I am very proud of my church! She is a progressive, which is a relief to Episcopalians who actually go to church. Studies have shown that weekly church goers are more liberal than Episcopalians who attend church rarely. The homophobic and sexist conservative movement in the Episcopal Church (USA) is a minority and this election only proves that. Bishop Katherine what elected by the majority of bishops in the House of Bishops at General Convention and was confimed by a majority of lay and clergy people in the House of Deputies. Conservative groups like the American Anglican Council (AAC) have criticized the Presiding Bishop’s liberal supporters for their theology. The theology makes a lot more sense than theirs especially in this millenium. The Bible cannot be taken word for word literally, if conservative Christians had their way on every issue in the past slavery would still exist in the United States, women would be a lesser being than man, segregation would still exist in our schools and interracial marriage would be illegal.

Christ rejected no one and neither does the Episcopal Church!
The Episcopal Church — ALL ARE WELCOME!
Click to expand...
The church should let go of theology entirely and just go with the times! If people want to change the definition of marriage, deny sin and reject objective truth, the church should go with it! That is “progressive.” Personal justice to God doesn’t matter, only justice to your neighbor counts! Liberal Christians are enlightened and bigoted Christians who promote the culture of life and any kind of orthodoxy are homophobic and sexist! How dare a women attend the Catholic Church full of male priests, she should protest and become the next pope!

This is the reason people leave liberal churches and enter “Bible” churches, or no church at all. I was an Anglican, raised as one (converted Catholic last Easter Vigil), and will admit that there are some beautiful liturgical prayers and music. Compared to my former Fundamentalist friends (who rejected me after I became Catholic) I have much more in common, at least theologically, with Anglicans ( i.e you have 7 sacraments and weekly eucharist). When it comes to the social issues, the Anglican church is so much at odds with the Church Christ founded on Peter (the Catholic Church), that there is very little hope of reconciliation. That is a painful reality, and I wish things were different, but we aren’t going to change our position. The Catholic Church has been around a little longer (since Christ ordained it - Matt 16:18). I find that this “go with the times” attitude, this false eisegesis (interpreting the Church by the standerds of the world instead of the world by the Church) to be an oddity of our times. Christ didn’t promote it, the apostles didn’t promote it, the Fathers of the Church didn’t promote it, and the Church Herself has never promoted it. Our youth know this! They loved JP 2 and love Pope Benedict because of their orthodoxy and love of the Faith, a Faith that will never bow down to the “go with the times” standard of the world.
 
My many years as an Episcopalian confirms that the vast majority of catholic minded, orthodox and even “middle of the road” Episcopalians have left. I think I was one of the last one’s out the door.

The new presiding bishop is a shame. Obviously General Convention wanted to make a statement and pick a female, otherwise no one with her short tenue as a priest and bishop would have been chosen. She has never even served as a rector.

Some people like belonging to a church where what is and isn’t sinful is decided by vote. I sure am glad I’m gone.

Fred
 
ComradeAndrei said:
Also, we don’t consider “orthodox” as the equivalent of “republican”. Personally, I vote Republican (generally speaking) only because they offer the only real alternative to the largely pro-abortion Democrats. Throwing money at social issues doesn’t equal actually giving a hoot, BTW.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way. I vote for pro-life, pro-traditional marriage candidates. We need laws to protect families and babies. Then, we can address issues like poverty. Besides, Jesus does not tell us to make the government feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc. He tells each one of US to do that. If a candidate who is pro-life and pro-traditional marriage and happens to be a Democrat, I would consider voting for him. If his opponent was pro-abortion or pro-gay “marriage” and happened to be a Republican, I definitely WOULD vote for the Democrat. I’ll never vote for any candidate of any political party who is pro-abortion and/or pro-gay “marriage”.
 
To tell you the truth, I’m not that overly concerned with politics other than with those issues that affect morality and life. I’m personally more of an idealist, I’d just assume have a Catholic monarchy if I had my way.

However, with what we have, we have to vote for life moral issues first and foremost. The poor we shall always have with us, Jesus wasn’t too broken up when the woman annointed Him with the perfume worth 300 denarii (about a whole year’s wage, mind you). St. Thomas says that we have an obligation to help those who are truly in need, but that we have no such obligation to go so far as to give so much as we can’t live in the proper way according to our state in life. NOTHING says that we have to have some socialist “steal from the rich, give to the poor” government, in fact, this is contrary to any orthodox moral theology I’ve read.

Sure, we can do better (in everything we do). However, we do suprisingly well in America. There are plenty of places to go (many if not most of them Catholic) for people who truly need it.

However, the national scandal of abortion trumps “social justice”. How many abortions are performed “legally” in America per year? More people have probably been murdered “legally” by abortionists than Hitler and Stalin murdered. People are not entitled to an upper middle class suburbian lifestyle, but they are entitled to be born in the first place.
 
jw630103 said:
To answer the question above I have been an Episcopalian all 18 years of my life. And you are wrong moderates have not left the church, in fact moderates make up the majority of the church. Moderate Episcopalians are disgusted by both sides for making sexuality the number one issue. The moderates usually lean to the left because they feal that the Episcopal Church doesn’t discriminate against divorced members of the church and therefore shouldn’t discriminate against a group that isn’t even mentioned in the Bible. **What group is that? Practicing homosexuals? I think you’ll find that they are mentioned. **

To respond to another comment above about Schori and Robinson not caring about issues of poverty and social justice. Did you not hear Schori’s sermon at her Investiture Service. She talked about the Millenium Development Goals and how the ECUSA plans to achieve them. Also on her first day as Presiding Bishop she sent a letter to conservative Afican bishops and in that letter she wrote that she wanted to work with them to achieve the MDGs and hopes that fighting poverty on that continent can be a common ground for conservatives and liberals alike. Of course she has not received a response from Archbishop Akinola.
Click to expand...
**No one said they didn’t care about issues of poverty and social justice! Not a single person! Where do you see that? What I accuse them of is making out that the more orthodox Christians in the Anglican communion DON’T care about the poor (I said they’d stolen the argument and stuck a red herring in its place). We know that they care about the MDG’s. The trouble is, the MDG’s, while they may have some things in common with the Gospel, AIN’T the Gospel. ****And I don’t recall Christ, prior to His Ascension, saying to the Apostles,“Go ye therefore unto all the world and do ye precisely what the Untied Nations lays out for ye in a bullet list.” Seems to me He ordered the baptism and formation of disciples, and included the admonition to teach them to obey all that He had commanded. **
 
At the last Lambeth conference there were various resolutions most having a large measure of support from the bishops from Africa.

The majority of US bishops could hardly wait until they got back in the USA to distance themselves. The Bishop of New York and his suffragans issued a pastoral letter that basically said that they were better educated and had a fuller understanding of the gospel than the bishops in Africa.

Basically we were going to have to tolerate the ignorants until they caught up to the US bishops.

I thought it was quite racist and said so in a letter to Mark Sisk, Bishop of New York. It was then I began the process of leaving.

Fred
 
FredM said:
At the last Lambeth conference there were various resolutions most having a large measure of support from the bishops from Africa.

The majority of US bishops could hardly wait until they got back in the USA to distance themselves. The Bishop of New York and his suffragans issued a pastoral letter that basically said that they were better educated and had a fuller understanding of the gospel than the bishops in Africa.

Basically we were going to have to tolerate the ignorants until they caught up to the US bishops.

I thought it was quite racist and said so in a letter to Mark Sisk, Bishop of New York. It was then I began the process of leaving.

Fred
Click to expand...
Fred, welcome home! :bounce:
 
From my experience as someone who was very involved in Episcopal/Anglican affairs until the day I left:

-Many former Catholics DO tend to be very liberal (politically as well as theologically). I don’t know why, but I have definitely noticed it.

-The Anglo-Catholics I’ve known have been rather “conservative” socially and theologically. Theologically they were Catholic-minded, and they also tended to be high church in practice (a lot of times people confuse practice with theology).

Personally I think that the leaders in the United States Province are forcing very extreme issues that the rest of the Communion is not ready for at this time. I don’t think they always consider how the actions of the United States will affect the relations within the Communion as a whole.
 
“The Anglo-Catholics I’ve known have been rather “conservative” socially and theologically. Theologically they were Catholic-minded, and they also tended to be high church in practice (a lot of times people confuse practice with theology).”

That they do.

GKC

*Anglicanus Catholicus *
 
The whole issue is not about politics, really. It is about whether or not one believes in the teachings of the Bible. The Bible tells us that marriage is supposed to be between one man and one woman, and a man who lies with a man as with a woman has committed an abomination. Likewise, a woman who exchanges the natural use of a man with another woman has committed an abomination. We must trust in the teachings of the Scriptures, not what society tells us is popular. Churches that abandon solid Biblical teaching are following Satan, not God. :gopray2: :bible1:
 
This thread has long ceased to address the issue raised by the OP. More distressing, however, is the outright lack of charity and civility shown by posters to one another and in discussion of the faith of others. The thread is closed with the suggestion that, in future, folks give serious consideration to the tone, tenor, content, charity, and civility of their words prior to hitting the “submit reply” button.

Joe Monahan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top