Question for Anglicans

[gurneyhalleck1]

Anglicans can be an eccentric lot but it always makes for great table talk. Like I told you before, seeing a guy dressed annually as a court jester with the multi-colored hat, bell hanging from his head, striped getup, long beard and crazy eyebrows, wow, what a sight!

We had a guest priest at St. Paul’s one time. I’ll NEVER forget it. He was from Romania and he looked and talked TOTALLY like Bela Lugosi. Couldn’t stop wanting to laugh through Mass. He said in that Dracula-style voice: may thees become thee bahhhdee and theee bluhhhhd of Our Lord Jueeesoos Curayyst…

While he was celebrating the Mass, giving the sermon, my mom looked over at me and I was making the famous hand gestures Bela made in “White Zombi” and my mom let out an outburst of laughter…I about died!

I love Bishop John David Schofield but even he was eccentric. The man has the gentlest tone you’ve ever heard in your life…starts off a sermon sounding like Winnie the Pooh…sure miss that guy!

“The Anglicans let crazy aunt run around and rant and rave sounding like Ron Wood from the Rolling Stones while the Catholics hide auntie in the basement.”

You’ve been to one of our parish Annual Meetings, haven’t you?

GKC

 

[CMatt25]

Randy,

I read through this Thread. I want to visit the Episcopal Church in the next few weeks. I’ve been searching online for Episcopal beliefs. I have found it a bit confusing, as some of the beliefs do vary widely. Somehow, I expected them to be more united in beliefs, as Catholics are. I’m still going to visit though.

Anna

Edited to add P.S.
I asked some questions on the Thread: “Episcopal and Catholic.” No response yet. Are there any Episcopal Christians who would answer on this Thread? Would really appreciate it. Thanks.

Hi Anna, I am not Episcopalian but have looked into the Episcopal Church myself and have corresponded with wonderful priests at my local Episcopal parishes. I am referring to the ECUSA here. I’m one of those awful cafe Caths which someone referred to in an earlier post so have looked into the ECUSA as perhaps a better fit for me in my walk with Christ. From what I gather they are very welcoming wherever one is on their walk.

The Episcopal Church (ECUSA) seems to unite in common worship. Not necessarily requiring complete allegiance in all matters of faith. They allow it seems to me greater freedom of reason and conscience. Faith, tradition, and reason are sometimes how it is described.

Anyway here’s what I can maybe help you with. Yes Episcoplaians baptize infants. If you have already been baptized in the Roman manner and ever decide to actually join an Episcopal Church, you would not need to be baptized again. The same goes for if you have already been confirmed in the Roman tradition. All that would then be required is for you to be received into the Episcopal Church by the bishop. Perhaps after taking a course offered thru the local churches, simlar to RCIA I suppose. But the one at my local Episcopal church is 6 wks I believe. Confirmation would not be needed again.

Official Episcopalian teaching is Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. The Communion minister will say, “The Body of Christ” to which the person receiving responds “Amen.” They don’t have the elaborate doctrine Roman Catholics do in trying to define how this is achieved. Episcopalians concentrate on it being a mystery of faith and leave it at that. Now all of this aside, any in the trinity Baptized Christian may receive Communion in the Episcopal church. No one is interrogating anyone when they go forward. If a Christian feels called to receive, so be it!

In regard to confession to a priest sometimes Episcopalians like to say "all may, some should, none must.

Episcopalians sometimes are called Catholic lite and some describe themselves as Catholic but not Roman. Between Catholic and Protestant. No papal infallibilty. Allow women priests, married priests.

I know I didn’t answer all of your questions but hope this helps just a little. I’ve never visited yet but I often feel I might too. You may find various types of Masses ranging from the traditional similar to a Roman Mass to the more contemporary even within the same parish. I you go, I hope it is a wonderful experience for you on your walk. Peace and God bless.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I never used the word “awful” in conjunction with cafeteria catholics, just to make sure that’s clear. My point in the post was not to demonize anyone who doesn’t tow the line perfectly. My point was that theological diversity doesn’t just exist in Anglicanism but also in Catholicism. Some people believe that Catholicism is all like EWTN or CAF and that everyone is in total agreement and unity of faith and dogma. Not so. That was my statement. You’re not awful. But I would seriously reconsider your idea of joining TEC (they’re not ECUSA anymore, haven’t been for a while). It’s a denomination that accepts many heretical teachings from gay marriage to praising abortion to bisexual, gay, and cross-dressers for clergy, they are neo-pagan in that they worship with Buddhists, Hindus, and Muslims and include foreign gods in their liturgies and litanies, they are full of folks that believe Christ is not the only saviour (the “presiding bishop” Schiori said Christ is “a” way to God, not “the” way), they accept women’s ordination despite 2,000 years of obvious teaching against it, and they sue the pants off any parish that wants to split from them. They have no theology, no sense of truth, no orthodoxy whatsoever. They stand for nothing. If you are of that mindset, which I would hope you’re not, then you do belong there and not in the Catholic Church. The Unitarians might also be for you or Quakers.

Hi Anna, I am not Episcopalian but have looked into the Episcopal Church myself and have corresponded with wonderful priests at my local Episcopal parishes. I am referring to the ECUSA here. I’m one of those awful cafe Caths which someone referred to in an earlier post so have looked into the ECUSA as perhaps a better fit for me in my walk with Christ. From what I gather they are very welcoming wherever one is on their walk.

The Episcopal Church (ECUSA) seems to unite in common worship. Not necessarily requiring complete allegiance in all matters of faith. They allow it seems to me greater freedom of reason and conscience. Faith, tradition, and reason are sometimes how it is described.

Anyway here’s what I can maybe help you with. Yes Episcoplaians baptize infants. If you have already been baptized in the Roman manner and ever decide to actually join an Episcopal Church, you would not need to be baptized again. The same goes for if you have already been confirmed in the Roman tradition. All that would then be required is for you to be received into the Episcopal Church by the bishop. Perhaps after taking a course offered thru the local churches, simlar to RCIA I suppose. But the one at my local Episcopal church is 6 wks I believe. Confirmation would not be needed again.

Official Episcopalian teaching is Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. The Communion minister will say, “The Body of Christ” to which the person receiving responds “Amen.” They don’t have the elaborate doctrine Roman Catholics do in trying to define how this is achieved. Episcopalians concentrate on it being a mystery of faith and leave it at that. Now all of this aside, any in the trinity Baptized Christian may receive Communion in the Episcopal church. No one is interrogating anyone when they go forward. If a Christian feels called to receive, so be it!

In regard to confession to a priest sometimes Episcopalians like to say "all may, some should, none must.

Episcopalians sometimes are called Catholic lite and some describe themselves as Catholic but not Roman. Between Catholic and Protestant. No papal infallibilty. Allow women priests, married priests.

I know I didn’t answer all of your questions but hope this helps just a little. I’ve never visited yet but I often feel I might too. You may find various types of Masses ranging from the traditional similar to a Roman Mass to the more contemporary even within the same parish. I you go, I hope it is a wonderful experience for you on your walk. Peace and God bless.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Hi Anna, I am not Episcopalian but have looked into the Episcopal Church myself and have corresponded with wonderful priests at my local Episcopal parishes. I am referring to the ECUSA here. I’m one of those awful cafe Caths which someone referred to in an earlier post so have looked into the ECUSA as perhaps a better fit for me in my walk with Christ. From what I gather they are very welcoming wherever one is on their walk.

The Episcopal Church (ECUSA) seems to unite in common worship. Not necessarily requiring complete allegiance in all matters of faith. They allow it seems to me greater freedom of reason and conscience. Faith, tradition, and reason are sometimes how it is described.

Anyway here’s what I can maybe help you with. Yes Episcoplaians baptize infants. If you have already been baptized in the Roman manner and ever decide to actually join an Episcopal Church, you would not need to be baptized again. The same goes for if you have already been confirmed in the Roman tradition. All that would then be required is for you to be received into the Episcopal Church by the bishop. Perhaps after taking a course offered thru the local churches, simlar to RCIA I suppose. But the one at my local Episcopal church is 6 wks I believe. Confirmation would not be needed again.

Official Episcopalian teaching is Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. The Communion minister will say, “The Body of Christ” to which the person receiving responds “Amen.” They don’t have the elaborate doctrine Roman Catholics do in trying to define how this is achieved. Episcopalians concentrate on it being a mystery of faith and leave it at that. Now all of this aside, any in the trinity Baptized Christian may receive Communion in the Episcopal church. No one is interrogating anyone when they go forward. If a Christian feels called to receive, so be it!

In regard to confession to a priest sometimes Episcopalians like to say "all may, some should, none must.

Episcopalians sometimes are called Catholic lite and some describe themselves as Catholic but not Roman. Between Catholic and Protestant. No papal infallibilty. Allow women priests, married priests.

I know I didn’t answer all of your questions but hope this helps just a little. I’ve never visited yet but I often feel I might too. You may find various types of Masses ranging from the traditional similar to a Roman Mass to the more contemporary even within the same parish. I you go, I hope it is a wonderful experience for you on your walk. Peace and God bless.

CMatt25,

I really appreciate your taking so much time to answer some of my questions. Your post is a great help.

Though I’ve been reading about Episcopal beliefs online, I did find some wide variants in beliefs on certain issues. So, wanted to get a little more study under my belt. And–Don’t want to feel completely lost, when I do visit.

I received a very nice PM today, from an Episcopal member, who recommended the “Book of Common Prayer,” which contains the Catechism. I’m going to buy one this week.

Good to know they offer a course, at least, somewhat similar to RCIA.

I was baptized in the Baptist Church, as a child. So, from your explanation of Episcopal Baptism, sounds like I would have to be Baptized, if I decide to join.

Thank you so much for your help,
Anna

 

[CMatt25]

I never used the word “awful” in conjunction with cafeteria catholics, just to make sure that’s clear. My point in the post was not to demonize anyone who doesn’t tow the line perfectly. My point was that theological diversity doesn’t just exist in Anglicanism but also in Catholicism. Some people believe that Catholicism is all like EWTN or CAF and that everyone is in total agreement and unity of faith and dogma. Not so. That was my statement. You’re not awful. But I would seriously reconsider your idea of joining TEC (they’re not ECUSA anymore, haven’t been for a while). It’s a denomination that accepts many heretical teachings from gay marriage to praising abortion to bisexual, gay, and cross-dressers for clergy, they are neo-pagan in that they worship with Buddhists, Hindus, and Muslims and include foreign gods in their liturgies and litanies, they are full of folks that believe Christ is not the only saviour (the “presiding bishop” Schiori said Christ is “a” way to God, not “the” way), they accept women’s ordination despite 2,000 years of obvious teaching against it, and they sue the pants off any parish that wants to split from them. They have no theology, no sense of truth, no orthodoxy whatsoever. They stand for nothing. If you are of that mindset, which I would hope you’re not, then you do belong there and not in the Catholic Church. The Unitarians might also be for you or Quakers.

I certainly apologize if it sounded as if I meant YOU thought Cafe Caths were awful. I only meant you mentioned the existence of Cafeteria Catholics. Not that you personally consider Cafe Caths awful. Only that some Catholics think Cafertera Catholics are bad. So I do apologize for my typing appearing otherwise.

I didn’t know the Episcopalaians no longer use ECUSA. An Episcopalian priest referred to the ECUSA within the past yr in my correspondence with her. While their unity is in common worship, I wouldn’t say they stand for nothing. They have canon. They simply allow people more leeway in following their consciences. They seem to meet people more where they are along their walks of faith. They actually are more open to allowing the differences in the body of Christ of which you refer to. Rome may claim 2000 yrs of teaching exists only in Rome. But the Church was made up of various groups from the beginning as you know. Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome and so forth. Then Rome claimed supremacy over all others and thus the reforms began.

I believe in the Trinity so if you mean Unitarian Universalists, no they are not for me. 90% of UU’s no longer consider themselves Christians. I am baptized and confirmed Roman but I am first and foremost Christian. Does Rome no longer consider Episcopalians Christian?

 

[gamewell45]

they sue the pants off any parish that wants to split from them.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think they only sue if there is real estate or monies involved. I think if the parish splits off and its a “clean” split, then they file no action. At least thats all I can recall ever happening.

 

[CMatt25]

CMatt25,

I really appreciate your taking so much time to answer some of my questions. Your post is a great help.

Though I’ve been reading about Episcopal beliefs online, I did find some wide variants in beliefs on certain issues. So, wanted to get a little more study under my belt. And–Don’t want to feel completely lost, when I do visit.

I received a very nice PM today, from an Episcopal member, who recommended the “Book of Common Prayer,” which contains the Catechism. I’m going to buy one this week.

Good to know they offer a course, at least, somewhat similar to RCIA.

I was baptized in the Baptist Church, as a child. So, from your explanation of Episcopal Baptism, sounds like I would have to be Baptized, if I decide to join.

Thank you so much for your help,
Anna

Anna, I’m not familiar with Baptist baptism other than it is done by immersion. But if you were baptized with water in the name of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost, then from what I’ve been told you are good to go.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna, I’m not familiar with Baptist baptism other than it is done by immersion. But if you were baptized with water in the name of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost, then from what I’ve been told you are good to go.

Good to know.

Baptist Baptism (by immersion) is done in the name of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Thanks,
Anna

 

[Justy90]

Anglicans are all over the map, but they’re honest about it. I think cafeteria Catholicism with a pick and choose version is far more popular than orthodox Catholicism. In my diocese there are many folks at confession, many people I’ve talked to who use NFP and pray the rosary, follow the magisterial teachings, etc. But there are far more folks who have divorced and remarried, who are “shacking up,” who have premarital sex, who miss Mass all the time, who show up only at major holidays, who don’t know jack squat about the catechism or the faith at all, who don’t sing, and who haven’t a clue about sacramental theology. I myself wasn’t even taught about the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist as a child at CCD. I didn’t even know it until I was a teen and that opened my eyes to sacramental life. Many Catholics voted for Obama, vote pro-choice, and are for stem cell research or gay rights, you name it. Catholics are all over the map. The Father Corapi Catholics are dwarfed by the cafeteria folks.

Anglicans are just more honest, really, about their denomination. It’s like a crazy aunt, as I’ve said before, who is drunk, doped-up, screams and yells, and wears her underwear outside her dress with her hair desheveled running to and fro…Both churches have that crazy lady amongst them. The Anglicans let crazy aunt run around and rant and rave sounding like Ron Wood from the Rolling Stones while the Catholics hide auntie in the basement.

That is the best explanation of this issue that I have heard in a long time. Gurney hit it on the head here folks.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The Anglican ACNA diocese in my area, the San Joaquin Diocese, broke off from the Episcopal Church. In fact, they were the first diocese to do so a couple of years back. The diocese OWNS their own property lock, stock, and barrel. St. Paul’s, the lovely little parish church in my town, voted along with the diocese fo depart the liberal TEC. Only about 50 liberal episcopalians left SP’s. Not long after they got the TEC to help them issue a lawsuit to take SP’s away from the Anglicans and give it over to they and their liberal cohorts. Despite the fact that SP’s owns the deed to the property and the school that goes along with it, TEC is suing to steal out of under these Anglicans all the property in the entire diocese. They were actually winning early in the litigation but were dealt a blow recently and, thanks be to God, they probably won’t get it. Episcopalians are under a misguided, bizarre mode of thinking that believes the TEC is a national church that owns all the property and that any parish or diocese that breaks off must surrender back something that TEC itself never owned to begin with. The Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States was NEVER a hierarchical or national church. It was patterned deliberately as to NOT be like the Church of England. As a result, in its day the U.S. Church was the only member of the Anglican Communion that did NOT have an archbishop. It’s a matter of historical fact that they created the office of “presiding bishop” instead of “archbishop” deliberately to make sure no metropolitan-like or pope-like oversight would exist. Each diocese was and is, independent and they have their own constitutions. They meet as a courtesy and for the sake of trying to keep unity and for good polity reasons but essentially what Katharine Jefforts-Schiori is trying to do is assert her office to be not only an archbishop of sorts but beyond the power of the pope for TEC. She is a thief, pure and simple and Anglicans of the conservative orthodox faith will not put up with her or that mentality. You’ve heard the old saying “all politics is local.” Amend that to be “all anglicanism is local” as well.

QUOTE=gamewell45;6196610]Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think they only sue if there is real estate or monies involved. I think if the parish splits off and its a “clean” split, then they file no action. At least thats all I can recall ever happening.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Hi Matt,

Thanks for the explanation. I wasn’t mad at you or anything, just wanted to make myself clear and didn’t want to come off the wrong way

I would disagree with you about what the TEC stands for, which I maintain is nothing despite what Episcopalians might say. I would also be careful in drawing comparisons with the TEC and the diversity of the early church. Take note that the only early “church” group that ‘ordained’ women was the GNOSTIC CHURCH, a heretical quasi-pagan group. Women’s ordination is a modern innovation of the 1970’s in Anglicanism and it’s a cancer that has threatened to nearly destroy her. The jury’s still out. I hope it doesn’t.

Allowing TOO MUCH “lee way” in our choices of morality and theology leads to chaos and moral bankruptcy. Are you familiar with good ole’ Bishop Spong? If not, google him and see what that “diversity” yielded his flock! Google Katharine Jefforts Schiori and check out her draconian leadership style and statement that Christ is “a” way to salvation, not “the way.” Please go to Virtueonline and read the almost daily insanity coming out of that group of people.

Do you think the early church would’ve condoned abortion or gay marriage or remarriage in their many different diverse groups? Do you think Buddhist and Hindu co-worship would’ve happened in the first churches? Or how bout Spong’s philosophies that Christianity is a farce because any God who would allow his Son to be crucified would be “committing child abuse.”

My post never said you must become Roman Catholic. I didn’t imply it. The Anglican ACNA and other Anglican groups believe in many wholesome, godly, orthodox ideas as does the LCMS Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, the many Orthodox Churches, the Catholic Church, etc. I’m not trying to choose your path for you or steer you to Rome or else. I’m just warning you about TEC. I would be very careful treading that road. It’s not a “Christian walk” but a pagan hike.

I certainly apologize if it sounded as if I meant YOU thought Cafe Caths were awful. I only meant you mentioned the existence of Cafeteria Catholics. Not that you personally consider Cafe Caths awful. Only that some Catholics think Cafertera Catholics are bad. So I do apologize for my typing appearing otherwise.

I didn’t know the Episcopalaians no longer use ECUSA. An Episcopalian priest referred to the ECUSA within the past yr in my correspondence with her. While their unity is in common worship, I wouldn’t say they stand for nothing. They have canon. They simply allow people more leeway in following their consciences. They seem to meet people more where they are along their walks of faith. They actually are more open to allowing the differences in the body of Christ of which you refer to. Rome may claim 2000 yrs of teaching exists only in Rome. But the Church was made up of various groups from the beginning as you know. Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome and so forth. Then Rome claimed supremacy over all others and thus the reforms began.

I believe in the Trinity so if you mean Unitarian Universalists, no they are not for me. 90% of UU’s no longer consider themselves Christians. I am baptized and confirmed Roman but I am first and foremost Christian. Does Rome no longer consider Episcopalians Christian?

 

[GKC]

Yep.

GKC

the anglican acna diocese in my area, the san joaquin diocese, broke off from the episcopal church. In fact, they were the first diocese to do so a couple of years back. The diocese owns their own property lock, stock, and barrel. St. Paul’s, the lovely little parish church in my town, voted along with the diocese fo depart the liberal tec. Only about 50 liberal episcopalians left sp’s. Not long after they got the tec to help them issue a lawsuit to take sp’s away from the anglicans and give it over to they and their liberal cohorts. Despite the fact that sp’s owns the deed to the property and the school that goes along with it, tec is suing to steal out of under these anglicans all the property in the entire diocese. They were actually winning early in the litigation but were dealt a blow recently and, thanks be to god, they probably won’t get it. Episcopalians are under a misguided, bizarre mode of thinking that believes the tec is a national church that owns all the property and that any parish or diocese that breaks off must surrender back something that tec itself never owned to begin with. The protestant episcopal church of the united states was never a hierarchical or national church. It was patterned deliberately as to not be like the church of england. As a
result, in its day the u.s. Church was the only member of the anglican communion that did not have an archbishop. It’s a matter of historical fact that they created the office of “presiding bishop” instead of “archbishop” deliberately to make sure no metropolitan-like or pope-like oversight would exist. Each diocese was and is, independent and they have their own constitutions. They meet as a courtesy and for the sake of trying to keep unity and for good polity reasons but essentially what katharine jefforts-schiori is trying to do is assert her office to be not only an archbishop of sorts but beyond the power of the pope for tec. She is a thief, pure and simple and anglicans of the conservative orthodox faith will not put up with her or that mentality. You’ve heard the old saying “all politics is local.” amend that to be “all anglicanism is local” as well.

Quote=gamewell45;6196610]correct me if i’m wrong, but i think they only sue if there is real estate or monies involved. I think if the parish splits off and its a “clean” split, then they file no action. At least thats all i can recall ever happening.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

No Latin? Come on now!

Yep.

GKC

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

Just a point of order here. Episcopalians are Anglicans. The Episcopal Church is the US constituent of the Anglican Communion. When you say Episcopalians are “stealing” from Anglicans", suggest that Episcopalians are not Anglicans. You might properly say they are stealing from the ACNA. Frankly, if you go to Anglicans Online, you will find a dizzying array of “Anglican” churches, all, including the ACNA, not part of the Anglican Communion (though the ACNA is in communion with some large parts of the Anglican Communion). So, since the ACNA does not comprise all non-TEC “Anglicans”, kindly be more precise.

It galls me no end to hear a Episcopalians considered distinct from Anglicans.

I am an Anglican, I am P.E.
Not the High Church, nor Low Church
But Protestant, Episcopal, and Free.
Not a Presby, nor a Congo,
Nor a Baptist, white with foam,
I am an Anglican, one step from Rome.
I am an Anglican, one step from Rome.

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

I think that Roman Catholics interested in the rich liturgical life of high church Anglicans would be well advised to learn of the Diocese of Wenchoster:

dioceseofwenchoster.co.uk/

 

[gamewell45]

The Anglican ACNA diocese in my area, the San Joaquin Diocese, broke off from the Episcopal Church. In fact, they were the first diocese to do so a couple of years back. The diocese OWNS their own property lock, stock, and barrel. St. Paul’s, the lovely little parish church in my town, voted along with the diocese fo depart the liberal TEC. Only about 50 liberal episcopalians left SP’s. Not long after they got the TEC to help them issue a lawsuit to take SP’s away from the Anglicans and give it over to they and their liberal cohorts. Despite the fact that SP’s owns the deed to the property and the school that goes along with it, TEC is suing to steal out of under these Anglicans all the property in the entire diocese. They were actually winning early in the litigation but were dealt a blow recently and, thanks be to God, they probably won’t get it. Episcopalians are under a misguided, bizarre mode of thinking that believes the TEC is a national church that owns all the property and that any parish or diocese that breaks off must surrender back something that TEC itself never owned to begin with. The Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States was NEVER a hierarchical or national church. It was patterned deliberately as to NOT be like the Church of England. As a result, in its day the U.S. Church was the only member of the Anglican Communion that did NOT have an archbishop. It’s a matter of historical fact that they created the office of “presiding bishop” instead of “archbishop” deliberately to make sure no metropolitan-like or pope-like oversight would exist. Each diocese was and is, independent and they have their own constitutions. They meet as a courtesy and for the sake of trying to keep unity and for good polity reasons but essentially what Katharine Jefforts-Schiori is trying to do is assert her office to be not only an archbishop of sorts but beyond the power of the pope for TEC. She is a thief, pure and simple and Anglicans of the conservative orthodox faith will not put up with her or that mentality. You’ve heard the old saying “all politics is local.” Amend that to be “all anglicanism is local” as well.

QUOTE=gamewell45;6196610]Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think they only sue if there is real estate or monies involved. I think if the parish splits off and its a “clean” split, then they file no action. At least thats all I can recall ever happening.

I’m sure if TEC was wrong the court would have tossed the suit out?

Since I’m not a member of the San Joaquin Diocese, it has no direct impact on my Diocese, However If I were the ACNA, I would have just walked away from the building and assets that TEC claimed were theirs and started fresh. That way no one could make a claim to what was rightfully yours. After all its the parishioners who make a church, not the physical building. Schisms can be such nasty things and unfortunately when groups of opposing people cannot reach compromise, the courts are the only mechanism left for them to use.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

So you’re saying that ACNA Anglicans in my parish, about 600 of them, should give over their property that they paid for lock stock and barrel to 100 liberals who left and decided to stay Episcopal? Why is that weird logic? The diocese VOTED and AMENDED the constitution and left. It’s theirs. There is no such thing as a national church, I think you missed that point in my post. You’re acting like the majority should abandon to a minority and for what? The logic escapes me.

I’m sure if TEC was wrong the court would have tossed the suit out?

Since I’m not a member of the San Joaquin Diocese, it has no direct impact on my Diocese, However If I were the ACNA, I would have just walked away from the building and assets that TEC claimed were theirs and started fresh. That way no one could make a claim to what was rightfully yours. After all its the parishioners who make a church, not the physical building. Schisms can be such nasty things and unfortunately when groups of opposing people cannot reach compromise, the courts are the only mechanism left for them to use.

 

[CMatt25]

Hi Matt,

Thanks for the explanation. I wasn’t mad at you or anything, just wanted to make myself clear and didn’t want to come off the wrong way

I would disagree with you about what the TEC stands for, which I maintain is nothing despite what Episcopalians might say. I would also be careful in drawing comparisons with the TEC and the diversity of the early church. Take note that the only early “church” group that ‘ordained’ women was the GNOSTIC CHURCH, a heretical quasi-pagan group. Women’s ordination is a modern innovation of the 1970’s in Anglicanism and it’s a cancer that has threatened to nearly destroy her. The jury’s still out. I hope it doesn’t.

Allowing TOO MUCH “lee way” in our choices of morality and theology leads to chaos and moral bankruptcy. Are you familiar with good ole’ Bishop Spong? If not, google him and see what that “diversity” yielded his flock! Google Katharine Jefforts Schiori and check out her draconian leadership style and statement that Christ is “a” way to salvation, not “the way.” Please go to Virtueonline and read the almost daily insanity coming out of that group of people.

Do you think the early church would’ve condoned abortion or gay marriage or remarriage in their many different diverse groups? Do you think Buddhist and Hindu co-worship would’ve happened in the first churches? Or how bout Spong’s philosophies that Christianity is a farce because any God who would allow his Son to be crucified would be “committing child abuse.”

My post never said you must become Roman Catholic. I didn’t imply it. The Anglican ACNA and other Anglican groups believe in many wholesome, godly, orthodox ideas as does the LCMS Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, the many Orthodox Churches, the Catholic Church, etc. I’m not trying to choose your path for you or steer you to Rome or else. I’m just warning you about TEC. I would be very careful treading that road. It’s not a “Christian walk” but a pagan hike.

Hi, I’m not at all mad at you either. Here is a link of when some churches began to ordain women. But I’m thinking some of them such as the Quakers you may not consider Christian since you mentioned them in an earlier post as one I should stay away from unless I was of a certain mindset in which you hoped I was not.

religioustolerance.org/femclrg13.htm

But does Spong and others represent all TEC any more than Kung represents all Roman Catholics? Did Cardinal Law represent the actions other Catholics might have taken? People sin. Peter denied Jesus 3 times. Paul corrected Peter because he was wrongly favoring Jewish Christians over the Gentiles.

I am still as of now Roman Catholic as you yourself acknowledge in admitting the existence of varying degrees of agreement within Roman Catholicism. But I’m pretty certain neither of us represent all who are in the Catholic Church. In regard to Jefforts, do Catholics believe non-Christians have no chance whatsoever by the grace and mercy of God?

I’m not certain how the early church would have dealt with the social issues you raised and civil rights in an evolving hetrogeneous democratic society made up of different faiths and beliefs with a separation of church and state.

But we can agree to disagree and in the spirit of Christ’s love by all means I call and consider you a friend in Christ. God bless you and peace my friend in Christ.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Peace be with you as well, Matt

Hi, I’m not at all mad at you either. Here is a link of when some churches began to ordain women. But I’m thinking some of them such as the Quakers you may not consider Christian since you mentioned them in an earlier post as one I should stay away from unless I was of a certain mindset in which you hoped I was not.

religioustolerance.org/femclrg13.htm

But does Spong and others represent all TEC any more than Kung represents all Roman Catholics? Did Cardinal Law represent the actions other Catholics might have taken? People sin. Peter denied Jesus 3 times. Paul corrected Peter because he was wrongly favoring Jewish Christians over the Gentiles.

I am still as of now Roman Catholic as you yourself acknowledge in admitting the existence of varying degrees of agreement within Roman Catholicism. But I’m pretty certain neither of us represent all who are in the Catholic Church. In regard to Jefforts, do Catholics believe non-Christians have no chance whatsoever by the grace and mercy of God?

I’m not certain how the early church would have dealt with the social issues you raised and civil rights in an evolving hetrogeneous democratic society made up of different faiths and beliefs with a separation of church and state.

But we can agree to disagree and in the spirit of Christ’s love by all means I call and consider you a friend in Christ. God bless you and peace my friend in Christ.

 

[emeraldcoast]

Hi Anna, I am not Episcopalian but have looked into the Episcopal Church myself and have corresponded with wonderful priests at my local Episcopal parishes. I am referring to the ECUSA here. I’m one of those awful cafe Caths which someone referred to in an earlier post so have looked into the ECUSA as perhaps a better fit for me in my walk with Christ. From what I gather they are very welcoming wherever one is on their walk.

The Episcopal Church (ECUSA) seems to unite in common worship. Not necessarily requiring complete allegiance in all matters of faith. They allow it seems to me greater freedom of reason and conscience. Faith, tradition, and reason are sometimes how it is described.

Anyway here’s what I can maybe help you with. Yes Episcoplaians baptize infants. If you have already been baptized in the Roman manner and ever decide to actually join an Episcopal Church, you would not need to be baptized again. The same goes for if you have already been confirmed in the Roman tradition. All that would then be required is for you to be received into the Episcopal Church by the bishop. Perhaps after taking a course offered thru the local churches, simlar to RCIA I suppose. But the one at my local Episcopal church is 6 wks I believe. Confirmation would not be needed again.

Official Episcopalian teaching is Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. The Communion minister will say, “The Body of Christ” to which the person receiving responds “Amen.” They don’t have the elaborate doctrine Roman Catholics do in trying to define how this is achieved. Episcopalians concentrate on it being a mystery of faith and leave it at that. Now all of this aside, any in the trinity Baptized Christian may receive Communion in the Episcopal church. No one is interrogating anyone when they go forward. If a Christian feels called to receive, so be it!

In regard to confession to a priest sometimes Episcopalians like to say "all may, some should, none must.

Episcopalians sometimes are called Catholic lite and some describe themselves as Catholic but not Roman. Between Catholic and Protestant. No papal infallibilty. Allow women priests, married priests.

I know I didn’t answer all of your questions but hope this helps just a little. I’ve never visited yet but I often feel I might too. You may find various types of Masses ranging from the traditional similar to a Roman Mass to the more contemporary even within the same parish. I you go, I hope it is a wonderful experience for you on your walk. Peace and God bless.

Great post! Thank you!

God Bless!