Protestant Franciscans, Augustinians, and Benedictines. Are these guys in denial?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lepanto said:
Is there an identity problem here? Are these guys in denial?

s-s-f.org/

staugustineshouse.org/
Click to expand...
No they are not in denial. 😃 Remember that the Anglican (Episcopal Church) sprang from the Catholic Church (as did the Lutherans). I know many Anglicans who absolutely consider themselves Catholic just not Roman Catholic. There are far more Anglican orders than this (Dominicans, Benedictines, etc).

RevNorth
 
Contarini said:
I dunno. They may be. Or they may simply be trying to recover lost parts of our heritage. You guys have a problem with this because it threatens your monopoly.

Edwin
Click to expand...
Do they not know that the founders of these orders were Catholics and that their constitutions were approved by popes?

What’s next? Will a group of Protestant Jesuits be founded to convert Protestants back to the Catholic Church? It’s about as absurd as a dog thinking that it’s a cat just because they both have fur and four legs. The external trappings may be there, but neither the substance nor essence are the same.

Rather than threatening the “monopoly”, these psuedo-orders are adulterating the true orders. The founding saints must be spinning in their proverbial graves.
 
lepanto said:
Do they not know that the founders of these orders were Catholics and that their constitutions were approved by popes?

What’s next? Will a group of Protestant Jesuits be founded to convert Protestants back to the Catholic Church? It’s about as absurd as a dog thinking that it’s a cat just because they both have fur and four legs. The external trappings may be there, but neither the substance nor essence are the same.

Rather than threatening the “monopoly”, these psuedo-orders are adulterating the true orders. The founding saints must be spinning in their proverbial graves.
Click to expand...
Actually, as I underdstand it, although they cannot share the Eucharist there is often a bond between these Religious orders that crosses denominational lines since they share something in common. I have heard of considerable fraternity.

RevNorth
 
“Is there an identity problem here? Are these guys in denial?”

Last time I looked Christ was a Jew. Has your family celebrated a seder recently?😃

They’re following Christ, what’s the big deal?

Peace, Steve
 
SteveLy said:
They’re following Christ, what’s the big deal?
Click to expand...
Many people follow Christ, but they don’t pretend to be in Catholic religious orders. Am I the only one that is not missing the obvious? To repeat:

Do they not know that the founders of these orders were Catholics and that their constitutions were approved by popes?
 
lepanto said:
Many people follow Christ, but they don’t pretend to be in Catholic religious orders. Am I the only one that is not missing the obvious? To repeat:

Do they not know that the founders of these orders were Catholics and that their constitutions were approved by popes?
Click to expand...
Why would either the Anglicans or Lutherans have a problem being part of something started by a Roman Catholic saint? Both the Anglican church and Lutherans came from the RCC. They rejected Roman rule and the papacy of their day. That doesn’t mean they can’t have religious orders based on orders that existed prior to the split. To call them invalid is ludicrous.
 
lepanto,

For what it is worth I see what you are saying. It is very odd that they will reject the faith of the founder of the order, yet try to follow his example. However, if they follow the examples of good Catholic men perhaps, God willing, it will lead them home to the faith of the founder and to Holy Mother Church.
 
Lighten up, Lepanto!

These guys may be in partial denial, but we can rejoice that they see in these forms of life a way that will draw them closer to Christ, and that they are acting on the call.

Many, many souls have been won for the Faith through attractions to the “peripherals.” The call to full commitment to Christ is heard by many who are not yet intimate members of the Household. We should rejoice that Seekers are responding according to the best light they have and we can encourage them on their journey.

Sneering at people who are still not all the way home is repellant.
 
lepanto said:
Do they not know that the founders of these orders were Catholics and that their constitutions were approved by popes?
Click to expand...
As SteveLy said, do you not know that Jesus was a Jew?
The difference between Christianity and Judaism is far bigger than that between Protestantism and Catholicism.
What’s next? Will a group of Protestant Jesuits be founded to convert Protestants back to the Catholic Church?
Click to expand...
That would be rather odd, indeed. First of all because the purpose of a Protestant religious order, while it hopefully will include a search for reunion, should hardly be to convert Protestants to something else. That is presumably not the purpose of the orders you are describing. But in the second place, the huge difference is that the Jesuits were a post-Reformation group. (Contrary to what you may think, they were not actually founded to convert Protestants to Catholicism–that became one of their major missions but was not Ignatius’s original purpose. See John O’Malley, The First Jesuits.) There is nothing necessarily to stop Protestants from imitating post-Reformation Catholic movements, just as Catholics imitate Protestant traditions such as the small-group Bible study. But the revival of medieval traditions is in a completely different boat. Medieval Christianity is part of our heritage. If we are ever to have reunion, it will only come by our growing more deeply into our common heritage.

I know that you find this kind of thinking threatening. Many conservative Catholics don’t want reunion. Never mind that the Pope has clearly rejected “ecumenism of return”–you insist on the one-to-one conversion method as the only way.
It’s about as absurd as a dog thinking that it’s a cat just because they both have fur and four legs.
Click to expand...
Insulting analogies, however amusing they may be to you, are a rather poor substitute for actual argument.
Rather than threatening the “monopoly”, these psuedo-orders are adulterating the true orders.
Click to expand...
You are saying exactly the same thing I said, just from a different perspective.
The founding saints must be spinning in their proverbial graves.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps they have got beyond the petty proprietary concerns that seem to obsess you. I suspect that St. Francis and St. Dominic are too busy with the Beatific Vision to think, “Blast it! Those darn Protestants are stealing my logo!”

Edwin
 
jesusluv said:
Why would either the Anglicans or Lutherans have a problem being part of something started by a Roman Catholic saint? Both the Anglican church and Lutherans came from the RCC. They rejected Roman rule and the papacy of their day. That doesn’t mean they can’t have religious orders based on orders that existed prior to the split. To call them invalid is ludicrous.
Click to expand...
As ludicrous as it may sound, invalid is the word. I would even use null, void and incomplete.
In our elevated, intellectual, learned and well intentioned minds, we tend to fall into the error of thinking that we can do better outside of the One, True Church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first Pope - 263 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI. As is also the case Saint Francis; Saint Augustine and Saint Benedict…founders of these orders and in communion with the roman pontiff.
The anti-christs of the world must be very pleased with this turn of events. What’s next?..anti-nuns; anti-priests; anti-monks - how fitting in an age that seems to be ushering in the Anti-christ at an ever increasing degree of expediancy. Vade retro satana, non suade mihi vana, sunt mala quae libas, ipse venea bibas.
Crux sacra sit mihi lux, numquam draco sit mihi dux.

Sancte Michael Arcangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli, esto praesidium. Imperet illi Deus, suplices deprecamur, tuque princeps militae caelestis, satanam aliosque spiritus malignos, qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo, divina virtute in infernum detrude. Amen
 
mangy_dog said:
As ludicrous as it may sound, invalid is the word.
Click to expand...
What exactly is a “valid” religious order anyway? Are you saying that their vows are not binding? That’s the only aspect of a religious order that seems to admit of “valid” or “invalid.”

Edwin
 
They will certainly be accountable to their vows. Their separate orders and the Holy Mother Church are guided by the Holy Spirit. Their decision to break from their orders (for I just can’t imagen their superior saying, " great idea guys! Strike out on your own, maybe you’ll accomplish something we will never accomplish within".) And consequently breaking from the One, True Catholic church, places them and others in the risk of conveying error. I apologize for sounding convoluted but to me a Franciscan, Augustinian or Benedictine who is also a protestant!!!..is to me like a kickstand on a horse.

And that’s what I mean by invalid.
 
Well What is the problem, remember, Anglicans and Lutherans do see as reforms on Catholism unlike Baptists who invented the whole trail of blood story to say they do not own anything to Catholism. These orders were in existance before the reformation and in the case of some German ones, actually were around during the reformation and choosed the other side. So so there is a historic continuity. Now, Protestant Jesuits or Reformed Discalced Carmelites or Opus Dei would be a chase of extreme case of copycatism.
 
inthecloud said:
Well What is the problem, remember, Anglicans and Lutherans do see as reforms on Catholism unlike Baptists who invented the whole trail of blood story to say they do not own anything to Catholism. These orders were in existance before the reformation and in the case of some German ones, actually were around during the reformation and choosed the other side. So so there is a historic continuity. Now, Protestant Jesuits or Reformed Discalced Carmelites or Opus Dei would be a chase of extreme case of copycatism.
Click to expand...
Thank God! finally, someone who is as convoluted as I am. 🙂
But I do see where you are going with this. It still seems to me like a case of the proverbial football bat.
 
Since monastic forms of life are not even exclusively Christian, much less exclusively Catholic, what’s the beef?

The Catholic Church has nothing to fear and nothing to lose if Protestants realize that an important expression of Christian life has been missing from their observance for 500 years and borrow from their own history (insofar as the history of the entire West is Catholic) in an attempt to fill in the blank.

I see Protestant monasticism as a bridge.
 
I’m doubting that protestant monasticism is new. It’s not like these religious orders started last week in the Anglican church, they’ve been around since they split from Rome.
 
Contarini said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lepanto forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
*Is there an identity problem here? Are these guys in denial?

s-s-f.org/*

staugustineshouse.org/

I dunno. They may be. Or they may simply be trying to recover lost parts of our heritage. You guys have a problem with this because it threatens your monopoly.
Click to expand...
They can do as they like.

They’re PROTESTANTS, fer goodnie sake…!!!

That’s what THEY DO…!! Whatever the fnerk they wanna do…!!

You’d expect what? Playing by our rules? They’ve got rules. Theirs.

What’s the problem here…? 🙂

I do like the “monopoly” part, though. How very protestantly mercantile.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top