Question for Episcopalians

[mpeacock]

Come on , estesbob and della, Play nice and remember that our mission is to love one another.
Your meanspiritedness is becoming rather tiresome.
Gentle, gentle and quiet will win more than your ire.
I am a convert from a very “high” anglican tradition and wound up being driven away by the likes of you.
It wasn’t until I found true loving Catholics that I came back and it has been great.
Why do you want to drive people away? Are you afraid there won’t be room for all of us?

 

[a_cermak]

1ke:

Yes, but how sad that people actually think like this-- let’s pick a church where I can do whatever I want without feeling guilty… I’m sure God really won’t mind.

Hmmm, I must’ve missed the memo that says I can now sin freely. Must not have been in my welcome package.

 

[Evan]

mikew262:

Yeah, your attitude with a_cermak. This person was unhappy in the Catholic Church, so he/she chose a different Christian denomination where he/she felt more comfortable. This person is still a Christian, and has just as much chance of making it to heaven as you do.

With a Catholic understanding of Church and Sacrament, she would not have ‘as much a chance’ because of the lack of sacramental graces that could be received from Sacraments administered by validly ordained priests; for example, confession and communion.

She certainly can get to heaven, but it’s like the difference between a gravel road and a highway with rest areas(confession), and gas stations(communion).

In fact, she may have had the sacramental graces, if her paster were a validly ordained priest who then converted to Anglicanism. However in her case, she said that her parish had a priestess, so that would not be the case.

Possible, but travelling a more difficult road.

 

[a_cermak]

A priest who happens to be female, not a priestess–I hate that word. And so do all the female priests I know, well all two of them–my parish priest and my niece.

My niece moved over quite a while back, when she got her vocation. She switched to discern and about a year later entered the seminary. Her parish definitely is on the Catholic side of the spectrum as were her residencies before. It could be that the Evangelical side would be less receptive of a female priest. Here in Chicago, I don’t even know where I would find a 39 Article parish.

 

[a_cermak]

Evan:

With a Catholic understanding of Church and Sacrament, she would not have ‘as much a chance’ because of the lack of sacramental graces that could be received from Sacraments administered by validly ordained priests; for example, confession and communion.

But in my Church, they are validly ordained and I believe them to be validly ordained. Further, I believe in the validity of the sacraments and that I receive Grace from them. In ECUSA it is not at all surprising to see multiple bishops consecrate a new bishop. One will frequently be from the Old Roman Catholic Church Utrecht line which does have RCC approved apostolic succession. I don’t believe this lineage is broken by female bishops because I (and ECUSA) don’t believe that women are inherently unable to be priests or bishops.

 

[estesbob]

mikew262:

Yeah, your attitude with a_cermak. This person was unhappy in the Catholic Church, so he/she chose a different Christian denomination where he/she felt more comfortable. This person is still a Christian, and has just as much chance of making it to heaven as you do.

Do they? Unlike you I dont (and our Church does not) claim that all Christian Faiths are interchangeable. She walked away from the one true Church for a Church that does not offer her the fullness of the TRUTH. Since she had been exposed to the fullness of truth she can not even fall back on “invincible ignorance” as most of our sperated bretheren can. I suggest you familarize yourself with Church teachigs before making such rash and incorrest statements as you did above.

 

[estesbob]

mpeacock:

Come on , estesbob and della, Play nice and remember that our mission is to love one another.
Your meanspiritedness is becoming rather tiresome.
Gentle, gentle and quiet will win more than your ire.
I am a convert from a very “high” anglican tradition and wound up being driven away by the likes of you.
It wasn’t until I found true loving Catholics that I came back and it has been great.
Why do you want to drive people away? Are you afraid there won’t be room for all of us?

How is proclaiminmg the teachings of the One True Church meanspirited? In fact the meanspirited thing to do would be to, like you, condone her actions.

 

[estesbob]

a_cermak:

A priest who happens to be female, not a priestess–I hate that word. And so do all the female priests I know, well all two of them–my parish priest and my niece.

My niece moved over quite a while back, when she got her vocation. She switched to discern and about a year later entered the seminary. Her parish definitely is on the Catholic side of the spectrum as were her residencies before. It could be that the Evangelical side would be less receptive of a female priest. Here in Chicago, I don’t even know where I would find a 39 Article parish.

There is no such thing as a female priest. You have traded the TRUTH for a watered down distorted version of the TRUTH.

 

[estesbob]

a_cermak:

But in my Church, they are validly ordained and I believe them to be validly ordained. Further, I believe in the validity of the sacraments and that I receive Grace from them. In ECUSA it is not at all surprising to see multiple bishops consecrate a new bishop. One will frequently be from the Old Roman Catholic Church Utrecht line which does have RCC approved apostolic succession. I don’t believe this lineage is broken by female bishops because I (and ECUSA) don’t believe that women are inherently unable to be priests or bishops.

There we go with “your” beliefs again. Its not about YOU. its about the TRUTH as handed down over the centuries by the Church founded by Jesus Christ. It is at your own peril that you reject the TRUTH and replace it was your “beliefs”

 

[1ke]

a_cermak:

Hmmm, I must’ve missed the memo that says I can now sin freely. Must not have been in my welcome package.

It’s under “a” for Abortion.

 

[a_cermak]

1ke:

It’s under “a” for Abortion.

And I won’t have one so I don’t see how that one’s relevant.

 

[rayne89]

a_cermak:

A priest who happens to be female, not a priestess–I hate that word. And so do all the female priests I know, well all two of them–my parish priest and my niece.

Main Entry: priest·ess [m-w.com/images/audio.gif](javascriptopWin(’/cgi-bin/audio.pl?priest02.wav=priestess’))
Pronunciation: 'prEs-t&s
Function: noun
1 : a woman authorized to perform the sacred rites of a religion
2 : a woman regarded as a leader (as of a movement)

You can dislike the word but you can’t change the meaning. My guess is you dislike the word because of it’s connection with paganism. “-ess” is added to words to denote the noun is female.

Main Entry: -ess
Pronunciation: &s, is *also *"es
Function: noun suffix
Etymology: Middle English *-esse, *from Old French, from Late Latin -issa, from Greek
: female <giantess>

prince:male
princess:female

god:male
goddess:female

waiter:male
waitress: female

Priest:male
Priestess: female

 

[a_cermak]

But the ess has fallen out of favor. For instance the usual word is waiter or waitstaff now and actor is commonly used for both genders as is steward or flight attendant. Many professions such as scientist, engineer, doctor don’t even have a gender relation.

 

[GKC]

a_cermak:

But in my Church, they are validly ordained and I believe them to be validly ordained. Further, I believe in the validity of the sacraments and that I receive Grace from them. In ECUSA it is not at all surprising to see multiple bishops consecrate a new bishop. One will frequently be from the Old Roman Catholic Church Utrecht line which does have RCC approved apostolic succession. I don’t believe this lineage is broken by female bishops because I (and ECUSA) don’t believe that women are inherently unable to be priests or bishops.

This is a sort of triangular discussion. I’m the voice of traditional Anglo-Catholicism.

The joint consecration with Old Catholics has been going on for about 65 years in ECUSA. And, until the issue of females came up, the PNCC also jointly consecrated Anglican bishops. It’s really hard to find a Anglican bishop without some Dutch touch, or PNCC lines. This led to a lot of discussion about Anglican orders being valid but illicit, in such cases. actual progress toward some sort of understanding was being made, back in the days of Paul VI and Archbishop Ramsey. But now you have the matter of matter. And as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church has taught from the first, the proper matter for valid orders is a baptised, confirmed male. That’s a straight-forward and not so theoretical issue, compared to intent and form.Thus ECUSA and much of the first world Anglican communion have made the long fight over intent and form in *Apostolicae Curae * what we used to call in the military OBE. Moot, in a word.

I know you believe your sacraments are valid. I believe a Eucharist confected by my priest is, too. But I’ve got a stronger historical argument available to me, contra Apostolicae Curae, than you do contra Ordinatio Sacerdotalis.

GKC

 

[billkarr]

a_cermak:

As has already been said, this is definitely a question that highlights the diversity which can be found in ECUSA. On the one end are 39 Article Episcopalians who reject the Real Presence, claim only 2 sacraments, eschew the Communion of Saints and on the other end you have Episcopalians that are Catholic in theology in all but Papal Primacy (and many of those would recognize him as being the Patriarch of the West and First Among Equals). It all depends on the parish.

I’m a former Catholic, new convert to ECUSA (well convert may be an overstatement–there’s no need for any rite of initiation because they recognize all the Sacraments of the Catholic Church. So “conversion” is pretty much just a matter of registering at the parish.)

Why did I change?

Well, mainly because I’m expecting my first-born and started looking at baptism and the baptismal promises and realized that I couldn’t make them in the Catholic Church. I discovered that I had a set of core beliefs that weren’t going to change and I would not like myself if they did change. And some of these values did not mesh with Catholicism. So I got introduced to ECUSA by a TV show (believe it or not) and investigated it and discovered that there was a parish in my area that was very Catholic in practice (in fact, about half of its members are former RC) and it has a woman priest (the only departure from “pure” Anglo-Catholicism, a departure of which I approve).

So I’ve found a Church where my politics are not an issue, where I can continue to use my Jerusalem Catholic Edition bible, where I can still say a Rosary and adore the Sacrament, where my statue of Our Lady is not a shocking thing to find in a believer’s front yard, where I can go to Confession and receive absolution, where a Catholic missalette would be a drop in replacement for the Order of the Mass leaflet, and where I can make the baptismal promises without crossing my fingers behind my back.

Pax,
Amy

I know what you mean. I couldn’t except some of the churches teachings. So I went to the Episcopal church it was very much Catholic but not enough for me. I feel it’s great that you found a place in it. I went to the Polish National Catholic Church and joined it. It to uses the Catholic bible, say the rosary,honor Mary adore the Sacarments and believe in the real presence. It part of the Old Catholic and was a part of The Union of Urtecht. It hold the Catholic faith before vatican1. It also has valid sacarments proclaimed by Pope John Paul II. Aren’t goverment and religion suppose to be separated. This thread wasn’t to have any religion put downs I’ll get alot of responce against what I’m writing. But it doesn’t matter if you’re Roman Catholic,Episcopal or anything else we all worship the same God.

 

[UtahMaggie]

My question is regarding the saints. I know that Episcopals recognize some of the saints but do the recognize all of them? Which ones do the recognize? Do they recognize the ones cannonized more recently like St. Juan Diego? How do they decide? I’ve wondered about this for years.

Thanks,
Maggie

 

[mikew262]

mary bobo:

Someday that naggy little voice called a conscience will get to the OP and she will realize what she has done. I only pray that she lives long enough to get right with the church and God.

I started this thread and I asked that no bashing go on. I can see it has started.

BTW, who says being Episcopalian is not right with God? Any Christian, no matter the denomination, has just as much a chance of getting to heaven as any other.

 

[mikew262]

estesbob:

Do they? Unlike you I dont (and our Church does not) claim that all Christian Faiths are interchangeable. She walked away from the one true Church for a Church that does not offer her the fullness of the TRUTH. Since she had been exposed to the fullness of truth she can not even fall back on “invincible ignorance” as most of our sperated bretheren can. I suggest you familarize yourself with Church teachigs before making such rash and incorrest statements as you did above.

I don’t remember anything in the Bible that says unless you are a Catholic, you cannot be saved. IMO, if you accept Christ as the Son of God, and try to live your life as he instructed, then your chances of getting to heaven are pretty good. While I believe being a Catholic comes the closest to what Jesus intended, not being one, does not eliminate one from salvation.

 

[Della]

mikew262:

I started this thread and I asked that no bashing go on. I can see it has started.

I don’t think anyone intends to bash but to stand up for the truth, as we need to do, although some of us, me included, could have been more loving in the way we did it. Mea culpa!

BTW, who says being Episcopalian is not right with God? Any Christian, no matter the denomination, has just as much a chance of getting to heaven as any other.

What anyone who leaves the Catholic Church for a Protestant denomination or a non-Christian religion or atheism does is commit an act of formal heresy because he or she is denying one or more teachings of the Church in order to embrace whatever teaching they will accept of another body of believers not in full communion with the Catholic Church (putting it in my own poor words).

Now, we don’t know if the poster being discussed is culpable or not because we don’t know if she left with full knowledge, full understand, and full consent of her will. I assume from what she has told us that it was at least with full consent of her will, but I very much doubt it was with full knowledge and full understanding. All that would be for her confessor to determine, not us, anyway. But, we cannot rejoice that she has abandoned Christ’s one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church merely because she doesn’t want to believe some of the things the Church teaches. That is a tragedy not a good thing.

As for those who were brought up ECUSA and other Protestant denominations, they are material heretics, which is another whole ball of wax with another whole set of determinations as to whether or not they will be saved. Of course none of us knows if we will be saved (although we can have moral certainty of it), so we are not judging anyone’s salvation but merely saying that by abandoning the Church she has cut herself off from fully participating in the life of the Church. Instead of picking and choosing what she will practice and believe and what she won’t, she ought to have done what she recited every Sunday at Mass and embraced the full teaching of the Church, conforming herself to it instead of listening to other voices that obviously robbed her of her faith in the Church.

 

[Contarini]

UtahMaggie:

My question is regarding the saints. I know that Episcopals recognize some of the saints but do the recognize all of them? Which ones do the recognize? Do they recognize the ones cannonized more recently like St. Juan Diego? How do they decide? I’ve wondered about this for years.

Thanks,
Maggie

The Episcopal Book of Common Prayer commemorates pre-Reformation saints–post-Reformation it includes only Anglicans. I dislike this myself, and prefer the Church of England’s calendar, which includes Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant saints from the past 500 years.

“Recognizing” a saint is not as official a matter for us as it is for you. But there is an official process by which someone gets included in the calendar–one General Convention has to approve the inclusion provisionally, and the next General Convention has to confirm the decision for it to become permanent. C. S. Lewis was put in the calendar provisionally in 2003 (GC 2003 is better known for more controversial decisions!), and therefore is up for a second vote this year (GC meets every three years).

Edwin