The poor Church of England is falling apart

[jesuitinnam]

The “poor Church of England” has been “falling apart” for a long time; but being British, its death will be a slow one. The Church of England for many years has been a church in which you could believe anything you liked, provided you didn’t make too much noise about it. That is a recipe for long-term disaster; and now the “Anglican chickens” have finally come home to roost. But I do feel sorry for the traditionalists though, who are caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, they find the liberal agenda of the liberal wing (who is calling most of the shots) to be abhorrent; while on the other hand, they have nowhere else to turn to. Returning to Rome is not exactly an option for them; because they (quite rightly) find the Catholic dogmas of Mary worship, Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary, Transubstantiation, the Mass as sacrifice, mandatory celibacy for priests, and a dozen other unscriptural and false teachings and practices of the Catholic Church to be equally unacceptable. So basically they have nowhere else to turn to—unless they formed their own breakaway group, which would be equally unsustainable in the light of thousands of breakaway Protestant groups that already exist in the world.

Of course, if their eyes were opened, they would see a third and only viable option that does exist—the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—the Restored gospel! Yes, Mormonism! But of course, having your eyes opened to see the truth of that is not an easy task for everyone.

zerinus

Catholics do not worship Mary. I know Protestants and other religions think we do, but we don’t. Catholics worship only God. They have a deep respect for MAry, whom we believe to be the Mother of God - and we venerate her as such.

 

[Tracy10]

Don’t feel too bad about that. My thoughts are that women at one time did indeed have the power of priests. In fact in pagan days, women were worshipped over men and considered of higher status, especially if they were virgin. But later thousands (including some who were even considered saints) were burnt to death by men as witches and men decided to seize the power for themselves alone.

In John 2 11:2 Mary annointed the Lord with ointment. She didn’t just cover him with the ointment. She “annointed” him with it. I believe that annointing at that time was generally a power given to priests.

I don’t feel that any church will fall apart simply because a member of the female sex is given rights. The only things that will destroy churches are the failings of the leaders’ souls.

 

[dolphinlove]

The “poor Church of England” has been “falling apart” for a long time; but being British, its death will be a slow one. The Church of England for many years has been a church in which you could believe anything you liked, provided you didn’t make too much noise about it. That is a recipe for long-term disaster; and now the “Anglican chickens” have finally come home to roost. But I do feel sorry for the traditionalists though, who are caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, they find the liberal agenda of the liberal wing (who is calling most of the shots) to be abhorrent; while on the other hand, they have nowhere else to turn to. Returning to Rome is not exactly an option for them; because they (quite rightly) find the Catholic dogmas of Mary worship, Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary, Transubstantiation, the Mass as sacrifice, mandatory celibacy for priests, and a dozen other unscriptural and false teachings and practices of the Catholic Church to be equally unacceptable. So basically they have nowhere else to turn to—unless they formed their own breakaway group, which would be equally unsustainable in the light of thousands of breakaway Protestant groups that already exist in the world.

Of course, if their eyes were opened, they would see a third and only viable option that does exist—the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—the Restored gospel! Yes, Mormonism! But of course, having your eyes opened to see the truth of that is not an easy task for everyone.

zerinus

Your passages speak for themselves, i shall not comment.
But really zerinus, has one person ever converted because of you on these forums? If they have, which mental institution are they in so i can find out for myself.

 

[abucs]

zerinus,

Mary worship aside (which is just not true), those extra unscriptural and false teachings you speak of were accepted in England for over a thousand years as routine and basic Christian beliefs.

And the idea of mormonism was not to be invented until a few centuries after that.

If you want to be Christian then go back to the early Christian church, otherwise you’re just distorting Christianity for your own ends.

 

[Peter_J]

Well, at least you have a sense of humour

Alright, I have a sense of humor. That doesn’t change the fact that your claim, that there are 22 Eastern Rites, is completely false. (So is Dempsey1919’s claim that there are 22 Rites total.)

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Don’t feel too bad about that. My thoughts are that women at one time did indeed have the power of priests. In fact in pagan days, women were worshipped over men and considered of higher status, especially if they were virgin.

In pagan days, while female goddesses of fertility were worshipped, women were seen primarily through the same sexual lens. Only when Catholicism, with its devotion to Mary, swept Europe did perspectives of women change so that they could be respected as people rather than seen merely as baby-makers and sex-dolls.

But later thousands (including some who were even considered saints) were burnt to death by men as witches and men decided to seize the power for themselves alone.

Women submitted to men in marriage and were generally not allowed to have positions of authority over men long before that. It was all over all cultures until the last few centuries. You can see this kind of thing in the writings of St. Paul more than once. The submission of woman to her husband was seen as typological of the submission of the Church to her Christ.

In John 2 11:2 Mary annointed the Lord with ointment. She didn’t just cover him with the ointment. She “annointed” him with it. I believe that annointing at that time was generally a power given to priests.

She wasn’t even officially one of his followers at that point- there’s no way she could have been a presbyter. Jesus declared her sins to be forgiven after she anointed him. Before that, she was a whore and a great sinner. Also a beautiful woman in soul, in many ways, but still a great sinner. She was not one of Jesus’ followers at that earlier point, and was not until he made her so by forgiving her of her sins, which happened after she anointed him with oil. So she could not have been a presbyter, anointing him in that function.

In fact, presbyters were ordained by the bishops. Mary was never ordained, so her anointing of Jesus cannot be seen in the same sense.

I don’t feel that any church will fall apart simply because a member of the female sex is given rights.

“Rights.” Since when are what you advocating “rights”? Who made them so? Who declared them to be so? Certainly not God, certainly not his Church . . . feminists might declare them to be so, but what authority do they have? None beyond human opinion. What you are advocating are not “rights” in either canon law or in the secular government’s law. You might consider them to be natural rights, but that is merely a human perspective that comes from modern thinking. It has no foundation in the revealed teaching of Christ or his Church. It has no historical roots either, prior to the feminist movement.

The only things that will destroy churches are the failings of the leaders’ souls.

Or the parishioners. Sin destroys, I agree.