Scary Episcopalian Encounter

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cherub
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
teresas1979:
Many catholics espouse themselves as members of the “one true church” thereby judging everyone who doesn’t agree on every little detail as a heretic (And V-II doesn’t cancel out Trent, this is the catholic teaching i have been given). Catholicism teaches its members to think of themselves as better christians and I was pointing out that this in effect here. I agree that you should not teach anything contradictory to the Bible but some of the threads here seem to condemn the man, not just his teaching. You find MY tone offensive but not the belief that the man must be wrong because he thinks differently to you.
Click to expand...
You need definition of terms, because this is key in these types of discussions.

“Catholic” refers to one who is a member of the Catholic Church–and all the rites involved (Coptic, Maronite, Byzantine, Roman, etc.)

“catholic” is the Greek word for “universal” and Protestant Churches, those members whom we refer to as “seperated brethern” also have the Truth…just not the “fullness of the Truth”.

Those who are outside of the catholic (note small “c”) faith will not get to heaven Universal. Those who follow the teachings of Christ. I am not about to get into an argument here regarding circumstances of faith, etc…I trust in God to judge all the hearts of the world and their culpability in following the teachings of Christ…or not.

You are under no obligation to agree or believe, for you have God-given free will.

But please don’t come in to a Catholic forum and flame us for saying that we are the “one True Church”…for we are. And I’m sure other Protestant demominations believe this also, as do Muslims.

Regarding sin…some people do get “judgmental” of another human, however in the context of this particular thread, no human beings have been condemned, rather the teachings of another religion are being condemned. Sins are being condemned.

Regarding your comment about “…not the belief that the man must be wrong because he thinks differently to you.”

I want to understand your position, because this particular line tells me that you follow situational ethics. Or moral relativism.

Just because you disagree with the positions in this thread does not make you right, either. Only God knows, however I know many on this forum in general are following God’s teachings…and HE is the moral authority, and the teachings and example of Jesus Christ are the moral authority and example.

Jesus condemned the Pharisees as hypocrites, yet he extended his hand in mercy to the adulteress. We here do the same…we will condemn those teachings contrary to the authority given by God to the world, and we will extend our hands and our welcome to those who repent of their sins and choose to try to walk the path of Jesus.

We ALL struggle, we are ALL sinners…and if we choose to let someone else fall into sin without extending a hand and a teaching, then we can cheerfully follow them to Hell.

I, for one, don’t look forward to Judgement Day, when I see all the opportunities I had to assist another out of sin, to drop a word of encouragement…and failed to do so. I shall answer to that someday, as will we all.

We will continue to judge the ACTS of others, but leave the HEARTS up to God.
 
40.png
teresas1979:
Have you noticed how Jesus dealt with the Pharisees? He called them hypocrites - in public.

But Jesus is God and God can judge, He never conferred that power on to you. He actually taught:

“So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” John 8:7
Click to expand...
You might want to have a look at this NT verse from 1 Corinthians 2:15 “But the spiritual man judgeth all things; and he himself is judged of no man.” this greek word actually menas “to discern” and has to do with exactly what we’re talking about.

Tolerance of others is no problem, but we will never (God helping us) decide that open, flagrant sin is condoned by the ordination of such to be “men of God”. It’s not right. If it was, then why exactly did God nuke Soddom and Gomorrah into ashes in Genesis 18?

Showing the love of God NEVER means condoning (or even seeming to condone) something that God has decreed is wrong. We grieve for our friends in the Anglican church because they are having such a hard time with all this…

Pax vobiscum,
 
In my search for the church days I visited the Episcopalin church and yes the craziness like this was witnessed and drove me away. Beuatiful liturgy great tradition but god awful morals and theology. I suspect many conservative break away anglican churches will now consider Rome as a viable alternative as the Archbishop of Cantebury has proven he doesn’t have a handle on the chaos going on in american anglican communion.
 
Ezekiel 3:17-21

“Son of man, I have appointed you a watchman for the house of Israel. When you hear a word from my mouth, you shall warn them for me.
If I say to the wicked man, You shall surely die; and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his wicked conduct so that he may live: that wicked man shall die for his sin, but I will hold you responsible for his death. If, on the other hand, you have warned the wicked man, yet he has not turned away from his evil nor from his wicked conduct, then he shall die for his sin, but you shall save your life.
If a virtuous man turns away from virtue and does wrong when I place a stumbling block before him, he shall die. He shall die for his sin, and his virtuous deeds shall not be remembered; but I will hold you responsible for his death if you did not warn him. When, on the other hand, you have warned a virtuous man not to sin, and he has in fact not sinned, he shall surely live because of the warning, and you shall save your life.”

Warning people of their sins is a spiritual act of charity. “Charity demands beneficence and fraternal correction” (CCC 1829). Not warning them is not a sign of your love for them, it is a sign of hate – not only for them, but for yourself and for God.

Don’t such people EVER think there is a time when you have to speak your peace and correct a brother?
 
40.png
teresas1979:
Its good to see YOU are all such good christians that you have the power to judge. Funnily enough, the christians I know DO show love and tolerance to sinners as Jesus did. We are meant to live His Way after all…
Click to expand...
Teressa:

I don’t think you have any concept as to the damning power of heresy:

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any one preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed.

Galatians 1:8-9

The word translated as “Accursed” is the Greek word Anathema

The same thing is said in the Book of Revelation:

If anyone adds to the words of the prophecy of this book, God shall add to him the plagues of judgment which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book

Revelation 22:18,19

Early Church Councils said the same thing about how God and the Church (and believers) dealt with (and were to deal with) REAL HERESY:

1. If anyone does not confess that Christ our God can be represented in his humanity, let him be anathema.
2. If anyone does not accept representation in art of evangelical scenes, let him be anathema.
3. If anyone does not salute such representations as standing for the Lord and his saints, let him be anathema.
4. If anyone rejects any written or unwritten tradition of the church, let him be anathema…
The divine apostle takes pride in them when he cries out, These things which the angels long to gaze upon, and, If an angel brings you a gospel contrary to what you have received, let him be accursed.

Second Couneil of Nicea - 787

geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/8920/churchcouncils/Ecum07.htm#Anathemas%20concerning%20holy%20images

Pretty judgemental, weren’t they?

Heresy of the likes of that which was described TAKES PEOPLE AWAY FROM GOD AND PUTS THEM ON THE ROAD TO HELL!

According to the rule of the Apostles, that man should have been warned, and if he refused to amend, excommunicated.

earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

What he was preaching was TRULY DANGEROUS AND DESIGNED TO LEAD THE ELECT ASTRAY! That’s how bad it is!

Traditional Anglicans and our Catholic and Orthodox friends have been personally attacked for daring to object to the heretical teachings and schismatic actions of these people.

We object to their TEACHINGS and ACTIONS and the fact that these are leading people astray and denying believers in their churches the Grace of the Sacraments.

They object to OUR EXISTENCE, calling us intolerant SCHISMATICS and far worse and telling us to not let the door hit our rears on the way out, provided we let them have the properties we’ve paid for and built up!

That’s a real difference about which you have no knowledge.

CHURCH HEAD FINDS REPORT FROM CANTERBURY “HURTFUL”, COMMUNION TO SEEK UNITY WITH ROME
acahome.org/tac/news/pr041018.htm

“Judge Not”, does not mean to NOT tell the heretic that what he’s preaching is heresy that he’s leading people astray. Remember, Our Lord said exactly that to the Pharisees and the Sadducess time and time again.

We owe it to the people he’s leading astray, and even to him. See the 2 “Prophet’s Charges” in Ezekiel 3:16-21 & 33:1-9. Jesus didn’t suspend or annul those when He created the New Covenant and founded the Church.

Blessings and Good Night.

In Christ, Michael
 
I probably won’t be visiting this forum much in the future, because in the months that have passed since I started this topic out of some sense of shock and self-righteousness, I have come to the realization that I have erred, and that I am not Roman Catholic, I’m just not.

I was wrong to criticize the Episcopal curriculum that I barely bothered to learn anything about – or even to criticize the man who was doing his best to deliver it, despite his sin. What about it? I sin. All the time, I sin, and I truly do repent. I might even sin more often than he does, because who knows? At least now when I sin, it is not because of some over-defined doctrine I don’t agree with in my heart of hearts. It is more a sin to disobey the conscience than to disobey Rome.

Having fully laid aside my difficulty with those within the ECUSA whose views diverge from mine, I have decided to return to my own church and stand with it, no matter what. Who am I to get so offended on behalf of God over any single indiscretion mankind is capable of? God does not need my help, and I cannot help myself. So I’m going forward and I’m going to be the best me I can be in this life – but I will not be quoting canon law or the catechism on the day of judgment when asked why I did this or that, or failed to do it.
 
40.png
teresas1979:
Its good to see YOU are all such good christians that you have the power to judge. Funnily enough, the christians I know DO show love and tolerance to sinners as Jesus did. We are meant to live His Way after all…
Click to expand...
When Jesus told the people ready to stone the woman accused of adultry, he said the person who has never sinned should cast the first stone. When he helped her up he Told her to “Go and sin no more” NOT go and keep sinning and doing whatever you think is right for you.

We are called to take the plank out of our own eye so that we can better see the speck in our neighbors eye and help them remove it, not ingnore the spec in their eye or the plank in ours. We have a responsibility toward our neighbors to keep the Traditions of the chosen people of God intact. We all suffer the reprocussions of sin, even sinless Jesus who suffered as much as any human being could to redeem us of our sin.

“Go, and sin no more,” we are called to be transformed in Christ, to have our branches pruned and to go through the narrow gate by following the Will of God. We don’t get to decide what is sinfull and what is not, only God does, and we must have the courage to stand up to this wishy washy world of relative morality. We must all give up sin, it isn’t easy for anyone. We have a responsibilty to our brothers and sisters to help them find the path, we can tolerate our neighbors, we *cannot *tolerate sin, and blasphemy and heretical misguided teachings, that go against Christian morality as God has revealed Himself to us.
 
40.png
Cherub:
I probably won’t be visiting this forum much in the future, because in the months that have passed since I started this topic out of some sense of shock and self-righteousness, I have come to the realization that I have erred, and that I am not Roman Catholic, I’m just not.

I was wrong to criticize the Episcopal curriculum that I barely bothered to learn anything about – or even to criticize the man who was doing his best to deliver it, despite his sin. What about it? I sin. All the time, I sin, and I truly do repent. I might even sin more often than he does, because who knows? At least now when I sin, it is not because of some over-defined doctrine I don’t agree with in my heart of hearts. It is more a sin to disobey the conscience than to disobey Rome.

Having fully laid aside my difficulty with those within the ECUSA whose views diverge from mine, I have decided to return to my own church and stand with it, no matter what. Who am I to get so offended on behalf of God over any single indiscretion mankind is capable of? God does not need my help, and I cannot help myself. So I’m going forward and I’m going to be the best me I can be in this life – but I will not be quoting canon law or the catechism on the day of judgment when asked why I did this or that, or failed to do it.
Click to expand...
Take time away from this forum, but don’t let it turn you against the Church. These are flawed human beings here, many driven more by a sense of pride and self-riteousness, but some of us are truly driven to defend the Catholic Church because we have found the Truth it holds.

I used to enjoy this site, but only come here rarely now because I am busy living my faith. These little arguments can be fun and stimulate our brains, but it doesn’t substitute prayer time. Sometimes it can feel futile to defend the Church online, there is always someone who will deliberately misinterpret or bash and some who simply try to frustrate us. If you find youself further from your relationship with Christ after being active in these forums then you should take a long time off and spend some time alone in prayer. If you find that discussions at this site bring out “the worst” in you such as making you feel angry, pridefull etc, then it isn’t worth it.
I hope you find peace in your heart. Take some time to 'regroup" I hope you rediscover your Catholic faith in your heart. I pray you find peace in your heart with Christ.

God Bless you.
 
40.png
Cherub:
I probably won’t be visiting this forum much in the future, because in the months that have passed since I started this topic out of some sense of shock and self-righteousness, I have come to the realization that I have erred, and that I am not Roman Catholic, I’m just not. . . It is more a sin to disobey the conscience than to disobey Rome.
Click to expand...
Then I take it you just don’t believe in Transubstantiation? No matter what anyone thinks of the Catholic community, the Catholic faith has the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ…if I were the only person in the whole darned church, I’d still be there…nothing and no one on this earth would drive me away from receiving our Lord in Holy Communion…it ain’t about those in the faith, it’s about receiving our Lord.

There are only sinners in our church–and some of them are self-righteous ones at that…but nowhere else can I receive Jesus Christ, physically, in my soul. And it’s more of a sin to have been taught the truth and disregarded it, than to have just not known the truth at all.

Penitent
 
40.png
SouthCoast:
Hmm, I’ve had high hopes that the Anglicans would all one day reunite with the Catholic Church as their own Rite, but it seems like ECUSA is about a million miles away from that. The Catholic Church wouldn’t have such heresy in ANY Rite of the Church. It makes me want to vomit that anyone purporting to be a Christian could hold such inane and heretical views.

-Michael
Click to expand...
What is happening is that pieces of the ECUSA are splintering into smaller Anglican schisms while a goodly number of Anglicans opt for Presbyterianism, Lutheranism, Eastern Orthodoxy, or Roman Catholicism–whatever liturgical traidition most appeals to them.
 
Peace be with you!

Here is the biggest contradiction in the Episcopal Church:

The gay clergy are living with their partners. In the Bible, not only does it say it is not appropriate for a man to “lie with another man as with a woman” but it also forbids two unmarried people living together in that sense (Jesus speaking with the Gentile woman). So not only are these gay clergymen/women violating God’s commandment in the Old Testament, they are also violating Jesus’ commandment in the New.
My mom told me that modern artists (and these may even be Catholic) are now painting the Last Supper with women present in an attempt to defend the concept of women priests. We’ll have to forget that only the Apostles were present in Scripture for that to work, though.

I am surprised at that Jesuit priest too. If he fell in love and left the priesthood, I can perfectly understand that (depends on who he fell in love with though; man or woman). But why the Episcopal Church? Why not the Orthodox??? And if his reason for leaving was simply that he fell in love, then why is he supporting this “God the mother” idea???
I’ve also heard that some Episcopal churches are saying “Our Parent, who art in heaven”…guess you gotta be PC, huh?

In Christ,
Rand
 
Cherub ----from Post 26:
I probably won’t be visiting this forum much in the future, because in the months that have passed since I started this topic out of some sense of shock and self-righteousness, I have come to the realization that I have erred, and that I am not Roman Catholic, I’m just not.

I was wrong to criticize the Episcopal curriculum that I barely bothered to learn anything about – or even to criticize the man who was doing his best to deliver it, despite his sin. What about it? I sin. All the time, I sin, and I truly do repent. I might even sin more often than he does, because who knows? At least now when I sin, it is not because of some over-defined doctrine I don’t agree with in my heart of hearts. It is more a sin to disobey the conscience than to disobey Rome.

Having fully laid aside my difficulty with those within the ECUSA whose views diverge from mine, I have decided to return to my own church and stand with it, no matter what. Who am I to get so offended on behalf of God over any single indiscretion mankind is capable of? God does not need my help, and I cannot help myself. So I’m going forward and I’m going to be the best me I can be in this life – but I will not be quoting canon law or the catechism on the day of judgment when asked why I did this or that, or failed to do it.
Click to expand...
Cherub

I suggest you examine yourself and see what sins in your life you are hiding. Confession is not simply a matter of telling your sins to the priest. Confession consist of 5 steps, one of which includes the sincere intention to go the route of GO SIN NO MORE.

Didn’t these churches like Anglican, Episcopalian, Methodist, I think even Presbytherian, DIDN’T THESE ALL START WITH KING HENRY VIII who had his wife executed so that in his sick conscience he will be a widower and can marry again?

This is kind or similiar to what’s written about some males. First they have many girlfriends and then have sex with them. You’t think that would make them “macho”. Later you find they graduate into homosexuals. STRANGE BUT TRUE. YOU’LL FIND THIS IF YOU JUST RESEARCH BOOKS or perhaps even movie actors worldwide.
At any rate, all your past talks about the Blessed Mother, the rosary, IT IS IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH THAT YOU SEE PRACTICALLY ALL OF THESE MARIAN APPARITIONS. Just like Jesus was tempted by the devil, the devil also appears to very holy Catholics like Padre Pio, St. John Baptist Vianney (Cure of Ars).

In the past you also mentioned the “Divine Mercy” where Jesus appeared to Sister Faustina many many times. In fact to show you that that is true, let me tell you something which even Catholics and eve Sister Faustina are not aware of. If you look at the upper body of the Divine Mercy, you will see that IT IS THE PICTURE OF THE SACRED HEART, INCLUDING THE HANDS, ONLY HIS ROBE IS WHITE INSTEAD OF RED.

Anyway, although my guess is that it is hidden sins that causes you to flee, it might be possible that it is also IGNORANCE.

Maybe, you’ve never seen the scientific medical findings about the Eucharistic Miracle at Lanciano. They took MICROSCOPIC PHOTOGRAPHS AND YOU CAN SEE BLOOD VESSELS IN THE CONSECRATED BREAD WHICH TURNED INTO FLESH.

negrisud.it/en/abruzzo/miracolo_eucaristico/welcome.html

click “Photographic Documentation of the Scientific Recognition”

================
livingmiracles.net/Incorrupt.html

THESE ARE MIRACLES WHICH ABOUND MOST IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND NOT IN ANY OF THE OVER 30,000 CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS WORLDWIDE!!! These to me are miracles by the True God. By such miracles, God must be speaking to us. “MY SHEEP HEAR MY VOICE”, SAYS JESUS IN THE GOSPELS.
 
Exporter said:
*******************************************************************************
Teresas1979 , Your profile indicates that you are Catholic.

But truthfully you write as I would expect a Menonite or Quaker to write. The next thing you may say is,“What’s your authority?”
Click to expand...

No one has ever questioned my orthodoxy before, but I will take the risk of backing Teresas on this one. You are all (or most of you at any rate) falsely reading support for the views of this liberal Episcopalian priest-to-be in what Teresas has written. I share her unease at the tone of this thread’s discussion. Nothing compels a conservative orthodox Catholic to be homophobic, yet just dangle a practicing homosexual before some and you’d think they were dealing with a practicing abortionist, rapist or pedophile.

We can all agree (I hope) that scripture portrays the acting out of homosexual impulses as sinful. The problem with the ordination of Bishop Robertson, however, is not that he is a practicing homosexual (i.e. a sinner, like most if not all candidates for the episcopate). It wouldn’t be the first time, nor would this fact make a similar ordination in the Catholic Church either illict or invalid. In fact, give me a hardenned sinner as bishop who has the courage to shout out “Do as I say and not as I do. Pray for me for I am a miserable sinner no stronger than the next man” over a prissy, self-important but indulgent prude anytime.

The problem with Robertson and his ilk is that they are heretics. Not satisfied with simply losing the battle against sin (as we all do), they choose to deny that their acts are sinful. They make man and his appetites the measure of all things. They obliterate the line between our desires and objective right.

Perhaps I am just naturally argumentative, but I found the original poster’s timing in departing from the Episcopalian “RCIA” class most unfortunate, coming so shortly after the poor man’s act of self-revelation. I would have stayed and asked him by what authority he was claiming that God wanted to be understood as “mother” or as “the goddess”. I would have stayed and asked him why he felt that “father” and “mother” were interchangeable archetypes incapable of bearing distinct analogic meanings. I would have asked why being understanding of another’s lifestyle meant moral acceptance or denial of sin. I would have asked whether someone’s impulses inherently made one’s actions right or beyond reproach. I would have asked him why he felt that his (entirely commendable and praise worthy) love for his partner had to be given a secular physical expression. Would the love they share be any less without it? Was it the act they loved, rather than each other?

Theological liberals are not to be hated, despised or shunned, even when they are practicing homosexuals. They are to be pitied and brought to see the logical consequences of their theological positions. Love isn’t liscence, acceptance and indifferentism; but it isn’t loathing, judgementalism or contempt either. Love is unconditional truth, sincere affection, genuine understanding, hopeful encouragement and ungrudging support.

Hate the sin, love the sinner. This isn’t a pro forma obligation. If you can’t do it with meaning, sincerity and a straight face, you aren’t evil but you have no business judging anyone.

Irenicist
 
40.png
Irenicist:
I would have stayed and asked him by what authority he was claiming that God wanted to be understood as “mother” or as “the goddess”. I would have stayed and asked him why he felt that “father” and “mother” were interchangeable archetypes incapable of bearing distinct analogic meanings. I would have asked why being understanding of another’s lifestyle meant moral acceptance or denial of sin.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying that thinking of God as ‘Mother’ is a sin?
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
So you’re saying that thinking of God as ‘Mother’ is a sin?
Click to expand...
For a Christian…it certainly should be. Along the lines of thou shall not have any Gods before me.

Jesus…who was god incarnate, took form as a man, and taught us to call God our Father (remember the famous prayer he taught…our Father…who art in Heaven…)

To a Catholic…we already have a mother…Jesus gave her to us while he was suffering on the cross
 
:bigyikes: I almost forgot…Jesus also called out Abba, Abba while on the cross…
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
So you’re saying that thinking of God as ‘Mother’ is a sin?
Click to expand...
How would this follow from what I wrote?

You can think of God as your “mother”, if you want. It isn’t a sin. The problem lies in any derivative meanings and inferences you might then draw from this thought, particularly insofar as they might conflict with orthodoxy. If all you mean is that God is in some way a parent to all of us, then at worst you merely lose the allegorical associations that are specific to His “Fatherhood”.

“Motherhood” is an archetype with a number of very specific associations and connotations such as of nurturing in a protective womb. This role is normally associated with the Church, and not with God. Associating it with God would tend, in my view, to support an unwarranted individualism. The Church that nurtures you consists of people who can teach you things directly and its “womb” is the magisterium which protects you from hostile error. Most of those so nurtured should be able to make distinctions between their own impulses and what they are taught. If, on the other hand, God nurtures you in the isolation of His “womb”, how are you to distinguish your own thoughts from what God means you to know?

This is obviously not a necessary inference from sidestepping traditional orthodox allegories and metaphores, but it is only an example of why novel allegories and metaphores can be problematic. The Church teaches that God is “neither” male nor female, not that He is both. Despite this, we can perceive attributes in Him that we associate respectively (and imperfectly) as male or female (as is only reasonable in that we, both male and female, are made in His image). Yet the relationship we hold towards Him is consistently and allegorically described as specifically to a “Father”. Similarly, His relationship to the Son is also conveyed as that of a “Father” (conveying an important truth about Christ’s oneness with our humanity). Describing God indifferently as our “Mother” or our “Father” thus tends to obscure important truths far more than it enhances the status of the feminine.

Irenicist
 
Cherub

I see in your history that you were very positive about the Church as late as May 9. Then there is a month and a half gap before you posted again on June 20 in a very angry post entitled “Is there a hell?” I can find no reason for you to return to the forums in such a hostile manner - particularly the vitriol in the “Is there a hell” thread. Please don’t unleash on us this hostility against the Church that has built up over the past month and a half in your real life. We don’t deserve it. Thanks. May God bless you on your journey.

Eden
 
Lillith said:
:bigyikes: I almost forgot…Jesus also called out Abba, Abba while on the cross…
Click to expand...

Actually, he said “Eli, Eli”…Aramaic. Abba is a Hebrew translation.

But still, Jesus referred to God as his Father not only in his instruction of the Lord’s Prayer, but EVERY time he spoke about God. He ALWAYS said “my Father” or “the Father”. God is without gender, in the human sense (neither man nor woman; both were created in His image), but He is specifically referred to as being our Father. To even suggest that God is a woman or a mother or a goddess is walking the tightrope of blasphemy.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top