Rome tells Anglicans: it's time to decide if you are Protestants or Catholics

[mercygate]

Good heavens. Do not confuse the Creed, of the undivided Church, with those 39 things in the back of the book, left over from Liz’s day. What do you think I have to do with those historical expressions? Check my recent exchanges with katze.

My experiences made me Catholic, too. Life does that, sometimes.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

Added, since my memory is slow. Some years back, on another board, in a very protracted exchange with a 5 point Calvinist, I was able, with much effort, to get him to stop using Romish, Romanish, and etc. Good for me.

I second the motion.

 

[GKC]

I second the motion.

I could argue him to a standstill, but never made any progress on changing his mind. Did correct a few historical errors he had. And with “Romish”, he finally conceded the point.

Those were the last days that I did much exegesis. I like history.

GKC

 

[katze]

LOL. Like the ROMISH doctrine of Purgatory . . . repugnant to the word of God? (distinct, of course from the ANGLICAN doctrine of Purgatory, which is perfectly aligned with the Apostolic faith.

Them was the days. The Anglican experience made me Catholic.

There is no “Anglican Doctrine of Purgatory”, genuine Anglicans reject ANY notion of Purgatory. We see any Doctrine of Purgatory, Roman or otherwise, as denigrating and taking away and dishonoring the bloody, excrutiating, agonising suffering Atonement and Sacrifice our Lord Jesus Christ underwent on our behalf and in our stead. I believe in Purgatory, Jesus dying on the Cross was and is my Purgatory. BTW I would NEVER use the terms “Romish”, “Romanish”, “Papist”, etc, If you see them in any of my posts it will be from original source quotes to give historical context. I mean no offense to Roman Catholic sensibilities.

 

[mercygate]

There is no “Anglican Doctrine of Purgatory”, genuine Anglicans reject ANY notion of Purgatory. We see any Doctrine of Purgatory, Roman or otherwise, as denigrating and taking away and dishonoring the bloody, excrutiating, agonising suffering Atonement and Sacrifice our Lord Jesus Christ underwent on our behalf and in our stead. I believe in Purgatory, Jesus dying on the Cross was and is my Purgatory. BTW I would NEVER use the terms “Romish”, “Romanish”, “Papist”, etc, If you see them in any of my posts it will be from original source quotes to give historical context. I mean no offense to Roman Catholic sensibilities.

I was an Anglican for 30 years. Took the M.Div. from an Episcopal seminary in preparatiion for the priesthood. So I’m famliar with the various flavors of purgatorial theology floating about in Anglicanism. The term “Romish doctrine of Purgatory” is in the 39 Articles. Hence our little in-joke about the ANGLICAN doctrine of Purgatory.

Purgatory in no way detracts from the Sacrifice of Christ.

 

[katze]

I was an Anglican for 30 years. Took the M.Div. from an Episcopal seminary in preparatiion for the priesthood. So I’m famliar with the various flavors of purgatorial theology floating about in Anglicanism. The term “Romish doctrine of Purgatory” is in the 39 Articles. Hence our little in-joke about the ANGLICAN doctrine of Purgatory.

Purgatory in no way detracts from the Sacrifice of Christ.

If you say that a Christian has to suffer any “temporal” punishment for their sins in “Purgatory”, or that Christians must “expiate” their sins in “Purgatory” then that sure does mock and denigrate Our Lord’s Sacrifice. That would be saying that God requires double “Atonement” for sin, Our Lord’s Propitiatory and Expiatory suffering AND that Christians MUST also “suffer” and “Atone” and “Expiate” for their sins.

Sign me “Catholic, but not Roman”

 

[GKC]

There is no “Anglican Doctrine of Purgatory”, genuine Anglicans reject ANY notion of Purgatory. We see any Doctrine of Purgatory, Roman or otherwise, as denigrating and taking away and dishonoring the bloody, excrutiating, agonising suffering Atonement and Sacrifice our Lord Jesus Christ underwent on our behalf and in our stead. I believe in Purgatory, Jesus dying on the Cross was and is my Purgatory. BTW I would NEVER use the terms “Romish”, “Romanish”, “Papist”, etc, If you see them in any of my posts it will be from original source quotes to give historical context. I mean no offense to Roman Catholic sensibilities.

Wrong.

As in C. S. Lewis. A fairly well known Anglican.

Anglicans usually speak of purgation, as a process or event, rather than purgatory as a place. Duration is not implied or suggested.

As a general rule, any generalization about what Anglicans believe or profess is generally wrong.

Including when Anglicans do it.

GKC

 

[katze]

Good heavens. Do not confuse the Creed, of the undivided Church, with those 39 things in the back of the book, left over from Liz’s day. What do you think I have to do with those historical expressions? Check my recent exchanges with katze.

My experiences made me Catholic, too. Life does that, sometimes.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

Added, since my memory is slow. Some years back, on another board, in a very protracted exchange with a 5 point Calvinist, I was able, with much effort, to get him to stop using Romish, Romanish, and etc. Good for me.

Well GKC I know you claim to be Anglican, but then so do whack-nuts like Spong and Schiori. Please do not misunderstand me, I would rather be in a good Pub with you discussing the Anglican Way than at a cocktail party with the likes of Spong and Schiori. But I still maintain that those “Thirty-Nine Things in the back of the Prayer Book” are what defines what the Anglican Way is as a framework of and for Anglican Theology. Within conservative Anglicanism there are those who claim that the Anglican Way is just as Confessional as the Lutherans and those who Confess the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Sign me “Catholic, but not Roman”.

 

[GKC]

Well GKC I know you claim to be Anglican, but then so do whack-nuts like Spong and Schiori. Please do not misunderstand me, I would rather be in a good Pub with you discussing the Anglican Way than at a cocktail party with the likes of Spong and Schiori. But I still maintain that those “Thirty-Nine Things in the back of the Prayer Book” are what defines what the Anglican Way is as a framework of and for Anglican Theology. Within conservative Anglicanism there are those who claim that the Anglican Way is just as Confessional as the Lutherans and those who Confess the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Sign me “Catholic, but not Roman”.

You know something correct, then. I am Anglican.

Anglicanism is not confessional. The Articles are imposed on ordinands of the CoE, for all others there is no requirement to pay the slightest attention to them, as a document. What defines Anglicanism is a framework of liturgy, the major creeds, scripture, reason and tradition and a certain ability to live with some ambiquity. The range of doctrine found in historic Anglicanism, under the umbrella of “mere Christianity” was wide. From reformed/evagelical, kissing kin to some Puritans or Congregationalists, through the middle range, to Anglo-Catholics, to Anglo-Papalists knee deep in the Tiber. All Anglican, as long as all Christian.

Certainly I know there are some folks who think there is a confessional aspect to Anglicanism. And some folks think Spong is not only an Anglican, but a Christian. What level of authority do you think would enforce the Articles? In the COE, as an Erastian Church, it’s Parliament. Know of any others?

If you found yourself in the Eagle and Child, on Tuesday, talking to Jack Lewis, don’t try the “Anglicans don’t believe in purgatory” bit on him. It’ll ruin your day.

And remember. Neither you nor I am in communion with +Cantaur. Many’s the Episcopalian who has declared me not an Anglican thereby. But that isn’t the test. Neither are the Articles.

GKC

*Anglicanus Catholicus *, out of town for 5 days.