P
- Status
M
Masters_Servant
Guest
Thank you for the answer, I plan to save it so I can look at the difference as you outlined. If you have a site you would recommend for the looking at more detail, that would be great.
Thanks and may God bless you as only He is able.
F
FrJohnB
Guest
I would hope whomever is doing your funeral is more merciful in words to you than you are of a well respected Anglican AND Roman Catholic.
Is it not enough that you attack the living on this thread but now the dead?
F
FrJohnB
Guest
More detail
This is rather intense but concise:
newadvent.org/cathen/10472a.htm
This is very early history
religionfacts.com/christianity/history/monasticism.htm
This is a blog site about religious vocations in the catholic church
vocation-network.org/
Now it is also useful to note that the Orthodox Catholics have Religious communities of monks, friars , nuns and the like. Also Anglicans have religious orders, to my knowledge most of them are Benedictine but there are some who follow a Franciscan rule. There are also some United Methodist Benedictines as well, they are associated with a Roman Catholic Convent in Minnesota. You may ask “how can they do this?” The answer is very simple, when SOME religious communities are founded they only answer to the Vatican on Spiritual matters and Benedictines have a particular clause in their rule which allows then to evangelize, so to speak, and form chapters (small groups of friars or nuns or sisters or monks) that are outside of the Roman Catholic church but are under its umbrella because of the fact that they use the Benedictine Rule for its code of conduct and way of life.
I hope this helps.
God Bless you.
Fr. John
M
Masters_Servant
Guest
Thanks a bunch; I have booked marked them for later study; that saved some time and potential unwanted or erroneous information, again may God bless you this night.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
And I always thought the British were so civilised…so much for that theory…
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Lucky, this is a nasty and typically venom-spewing, condescending post, the same that I’ve come to expect from you. Here’s a challenge for you…go back and look at your history of all the few posts you have on CAF and read through them…they’re all REFUTING, contrary, angry, bitter, most start with garbage like “Obviously you don’t understand…” or “it’s quite apparent that you haven’t a clue” type riff-raff, and everything you set out to do is trash Catholicism. Seriously, go back and look at your posts. Are any of them edifying or at all not angry as heck:
Here are a few gems you’ve dealt me recently, some greatest hits:
***It always seems to me that your information comes from ladybird Books! Give ;em up try something better!
Even now, you haven’t managed to get things quite right, have you?
We don’t have papal infallibility! We leave the errors to you! ***
You don’t stand for something you stand against something. You have yet to compliment someone, put up a charitable post, see the other side of an issue and at least respect a different point of view, and you can always be depended upon to consider everyone your opponent and everyone other than yourself an utter idiot. You debate everything, you don’t discuss. You are truly, and I don’t say this lightly, the nastiest poster I’ve seen in CAF. If you represent Anglicanism at all, then you reaffirm my wisdom in leaving it. But thankfully there are folks in here who are Protestant who see both sides of the issue, may not agree with Catholicism, but at least have the decorum and common sense to know they are on a Catholic message board and they are here with a purpose–to exchange ideas, understand, get to the meat of theology, and gain wisdom. Your purpose here is murky to me and you seem like the kid who got picked on on the playground by Catholics and you’re here like Manny Pacquiao with the gloves on to kick some Catholic butt…
Here are a few gems you’ve dealt me recently, some greatest hits:
***It always seems to me that your information comes from ladybird Books! Give ;em up try something better!
Even now, you haven’t managed to get things quite right, have you?
We don’t have papal infallibility! We leave the errors to you! ***
You don’t stand for something you stand against something. You have yet to compliment someone, put up a charitable post, see the other side of an issue and at least respect a different point of view, and you can always be depended upon to consider everyone your opponent and everyone other than yourself an utter idiot. You debate everything, you don’t discuss. You are truly, and I don’t say this lightly, the nastiest poster I’ve seen in CAF. If you represent Anglicanism at all, then you reaffirm my wisdom in leaving it. But thankfully there are folks in here who are Protestant who see both sides of the issue, may not agree with Catholicism, but at least have the decorum and common sense to know they are on a Catholic message board and they are here with a purpose–to exchange ideas, understand, get to the meat of theology, and gain wisdom. Your purpose here is murky to me and you seem like the kid who got picked on on the playground by Catholics and you’re here like Manny Pacquiao with the gloves on to kick some Catholic butt…
gurneyhalleck1;6124720:
****Obviously, you haven’t been listening. Anglicanism stands for Revelation, Scripture and Holy Tradition! The basis of the catholic Church and faith.Unlike Rome, who drops or ignores the parts she disagrees with.I’m spellbound at your stubbornness and refusal to see the big picture, lucky. But so be it. From where you stand the pope is a dictator that usurped the entire Church and created this fiction of his power that he supposedly never had and all Roman Catholics are goobers who blindly follow a bishop who is blinding his flock with a catechism of falsehoods…meanwhile a denomination from England that broke off in the Protestant Reformation thanks to a king’s hormones, sexual appetites, and a corrupt fool (Cranmer) without an ounce of a conscience created a state-run religion that had a few Catholic trappings but in essence was and remains Protestant. With time this religion morphed into a “compromise” with a certain queen and then in the 19th century suddenly convinced itself that it was Catholic and kicked in the turbo thrusters with clerical garb, holy water, confessionals, Marian dogma, some incense, and a few mitres for good measure. And this denomination, in 2010 is in utter disarray and total confusion as to what it even is, struggles with sexuality and ordaining women, hasn’t a clue about church polity or morality, and is slipping into oblivion…right, gotcha, that’s where the “true” church lay while the Roman Catholic Church is a pack of lies…gotcha. I’m convinced!The lawsuits, declining numbers, overlapping boundaries, floating bishops, gay rights movement, pro-abortion crowd, Zen Buddhist interloppers, and guys like Rowan are truly guiding the church in Christ’s direction. Yep, you got me! I’m the lunatic! I’m the fantasy-loon. You caught me…
**Stephen won? he had the support of the west, what is wrong with that? He was a bishop doing his job ! It was the clueless way he went about it, that caused the furore.
**
**Yes, I have read your history books and Roman pamphlets from the, ‘Truth,’ Society. I read Rivington and the Abbe, [can’t remember his name,] as well as Fortescue. I took lessons as well at the local Roman Presbytery, I also have studied the CCC, None of them persuaded me that you were right, or even anywhere near it! As I have said, you need to produce proof from the Church! You have none.
I note ,good and dear, friend, that whilst you enjoy your little jests and japes, you do not attempt to refute the points I made! Don’t bother too much,it’s not just you, Rome has no satisfactory answers for them.
**
L
luckyfredsdad
Guest
**Did he leave his flock, or didn’t he? **I would hope whomever is doing your funeral is more merciful in words to you than you are of a well respected Anglican AND Roman Catholic.
Is it not enough that you attack the living on this thread but now the dead?
I look to Christ for mercy and forgiveness. Not to you!
The Bishop deserted his flock, he left them at a moment of crisis when they were looking for guidance! Thee elaugh is he had no more sense than to turn to heretics? He wasn’t the only one, but that doesn’t in anyway clear him of desertion. When we consider the poor state Anglicanism is in, to my mind it is because of poor guidance from their leaders . We have prayed for him and have of course entered him on the year’s mind. Yet there is no way that I admire him!
F
FrJohnB
Guest
I learned when I was a child that if you had nothing good to say about a person keep your mouth shut. Fine you don’t admire him, then don’t spew venom and hatred, it is unbecoming a Christian. Now you are blatantly calling Catholics heretics. Fine if you do not agree with us, you don’t have to be one.
P
Padrej
Guest
AS an Anglican Let me say to all that luckyfredsdad does not speak for the Anglican world in calling the Roman Catholic Church heretics. True we have problems within our leadership but what denomination does not? The bishop’s flock had the right to follow him to Rome if they wanted so it was hardly a case of desertion.
I only hope and pray that the rest of you on here do not hold the rest of us who are Anglican accountable for the actions, hate speech, and personal attacks of one.
G
GKC
Guest
F
FrJohnB
Guest
I personally know that he does not speak for the Anglican world. Most all Anglicans that I have met have been cordial much like you are.
P
Padrej
Guest
It seems top me that the original intent of this thread was the acceptance of Anglicans (Ordinariates) into the fellowship of Rome and to see how we felt regarding this move on the Vatican.
I for one think that it is a good move on the part of the Vatican as God knows that Canterbury does not have the guts to stand up for scripture and tell the Presiding Bishop of the US to “knock it off, you are out of line.” I feel part of this is Canterbury gets a majority of $$$$ from the Episcopal Church of the US and if they tick them off, when they may cut off the funds. He will not listen to the majority who believe in scripture and want to follow in traditional Anglican ways, so it only makes sense to me that Rome open its doors to allow them back in under an Anglican use rule. This has certainly been done under John Paul II before. I know this move has upset Canterbury as he was in dialogue with Benedict XVI but I have a feeling that he may have been warned that this was going to happen as I doubt the Holy Father would just arbitrarily make such a decision as Canterbury likes to claim.
As I have said before we have more in common that we have not.
I for one think that it is a good move on the part of the Vatican as God knows that Canterbury does not have the guts to stand up for scripture and tell the Presiding Bishop of the US to “knock it off, you are out of line.” I feel part of this is Canterbury gets a majority of $$$$ from the Episcopal Church of the US and if they tick them off, when they may cut off the funds. He will not listen to the majority who believe in scripture and want to follow in traditional Anglican ways, so it only makes sense to me that Rome open its doors to allow them back in under an Anglican use rule. This has certainly been done under John Paul II before. I know this move has upset Canterbury as he was in dialogue with Benedict XVI but I have a feeling that he may have been warned that this was going to happen as I doubt the Holy Father would just arbitrarily make such a decision as Canterbury likes to claim.
As I have said before we have more in common that we have not.
F
FrJohnB
Guest
Padre
I have heard something similar on the Roman Catholic end of the spectrum so to speak in regard to the push to accept ideas espoused by the US Catholics like acceptance of women being ordained, the issue of contraception and the like. It seems like if a “hot button issue” is put forth it seems to be tied to a money issue as if to say, “do as we say or we are going to cut your money off.” Maybe the Episcopal church should learn a lesson or two from Rome on this and not listen to that and stick to its guns and doctrines that have been historically handed down. Of course you will loose a few people here and there, but God always provides and fills in those gaps.
Then you will always have the “militant groups” who just go ahead and claim they are correct anyhow (for example the group of females in the Catholic church that claim “God ordained them to the priesthood”). Groups like that will always have a following but given small attention they eventually do very little. So long as we react and give them the attention they want they have won and their cause moves forward a small step. I do have a real problem with “Militant groups” that disrupt a worship service as they are clearly not of God and there are Laws in some states (like Maryland that you are from) that prohibit disruption of a worship service.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Dittos to the last sentence and to the general sentiment of this post! 
P
Padrej
Guest
The Episcopalians and Anglicans have our little “militant groups” too. They seem to be over the hot button issues and act as if you don’t think their way that YOU are the one that is the racist and the bigot. These groups take scriptural issues of sin and make them “social justice issues” when they have no place being a matter of social justice. When has living a sinful lifestyle been a part of social justice?
I know that there will be those who will blatantly point out that amongst the Roman Catholic Clergy there have been Homosexuals, but may I also point out this has been the same with Protestant clergy as well and we have done our fair share of sweeping under the rug and keeping silent. To me the Vow of celibacy and chastity should have been what covered this area. But what is sad is to hear now that persons of this ilk are now refusing to take this vow (in the Episcopal church and other Protestant denominations) as it makes them unequal to a heterosexual couple. Funny, when I was single in seminary I had to take the vow. Now I hear these words coming out of young seminarians, “take the vow anyway, nobody pays attention to it.” What does this tell you about the next line of clergy coming into our churches? Seminaries are already teaching there is no literal Heaven and no Hell. What is next? No God
G
gpd2543
Guest
I have a question. The Anglican church ordains women as ministers, what will happen to these women?
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Do you mean in the event of going over to the Catholic Church answering the pope’s invitation with the ordinariate? That’s an easy question to answer…they could NEVER be “priests” in the Catholic Church; they’d have to just be regular converts to the Catholic faith and renounce their “orders,” which are invalid. It’s highly highly unlikely that many of these feminists with their collars are going to give up that power trip and humble themselves to accept the truth and be lay Catholics. I hope they do.
M
MarkBrown
Guest
The groups of Anglicans considering and accepting the Holy Father’s offer do not go through the motions of ordaining women. Of the many things they dislike about the way Anglicanism has gone, women ordination is among the top issues.
Back in the 1970’s many of the people accepting the offer left the communion with TEC in the States over the illegal, unscriptural, non-tradition and against reason move to tell women they can be ordained.
So, there will not be any women in these groups who are or think they are ordained seeking ordination in the Catholic Church. There maybe religious and some groups call them deaconess as my jurisdiction calls them. We do not ordain them, but “set aside for the work of God and Church”. They take vows. They would be similar to Catholic Nuns. We even have Anglican Monks, similar to Catholic Monks. I have a friend who is going to an Anglican Monastary this summer.
“Ordained women” leaving the TEC are going into the ACNA, though the ACNA’s canons and constitution does not allow for the ordaining of women by and large, it does allow them to be “grandmothered in” or recieved from jurisdictions that do ordain women.
So, do not worry, the Anglicans coming to Rome will not be joining the liberal Catholics pushing to make the RCC like the TEC. These Anglicans have seen and rejected the innovations to bring the church in line with a sick culture and will not want to see it reproduced in their new home. Hence why on some of the liberal catholic blogs they are very opposed to this “coming home” of conservative, traditional Anglicans. Just ask Hans Kung!
Fr.Mark
ACNA
U
Usbek_de_Perse
Guest
Padre,The groups of Anglicans considering and accepting the Holy Father’s offer do not go through the motions of ordaining women. Of the many things they dislike about the way Anglicanism has gone, women ordination is among the top issues.
Back in the 1970’s many of the people accepting the offer left the communion with TEC in the States over the illegal, unscriptural, non-tradition and against reason move to tell women they can be ordained.
So, there will not be any women in these groups who are or think they are ordained seeking ordination in the Catholic Church. There maybe religious and some groups call them deaconess as my jurisdiction calls them. We do not ordain them, but “set aside for the work of God and Church”. They take vows. They would be similar to Catholic Nuns. We even have Anglican Monks, similar to Catholic Monks. I have a friend who is going to an Anglican Monastary this summer.
“Ordained women” leaving the TEC are going into the ACNA, though the ACNA’s canons and constitution does not allow for the ordaining of women by and large, it does allow them to be “grandmothered in” or recieved from jurisdictions that do ordain women.
So, do not worry, the Anglicans coming to Rome will not be joining the liberal Catholics pushing to make the RCC like the TEC. These Anglicans have seen and rejected the innovations to bring the church in line with a sick culture and will not want to see it reproduced in their new home. Hence why on some of the liberal catholic blogs they are very opposed to this “coming home” of conservative, traditional Anglicans. Just ask Hans Kung!
Fr.Mark
ACNA
Thank you for shedding greater light on the issue of women as priests in the ACNA. I had been under the impression that there was a complete acceptance of women as priests.
Also, it should be noted that there has been at least one female Episcopal priest who become Catholic under the Anglican Use provisions. I noted that one was a speaker at an Anglican Use conference, and that she was identified as a former Episcopal Priest. Of course, she would be no more than an “extraordinary minister” and lector in the RC church.
- Status