TOTAL Blasphemy in the Episcopal Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter jay29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
VARC said:
Interesting. It is the “real issue” when Anglican accept conraception but apparently no big deal the the orthodox do so. This doesn’t appear to hinder Roman Catholic enthusasim for reunion in their case. Or perhaps you are opposed to reunion with them as well? You are either out of touch with your own church or you have a double standard.
Click to expand...
rome will always say that any church that approves of contraception is dead, flat wrong–reunion or no.
 
VARC said:
Interesting. It is the “real issue” when Anglican accept conraception but apparently no big deal the the orthodox do so. This doesn’t appear to hinder Roman Catholic enthusasim for reunion in their case. Or perhaps you are opposed to reunion with them as well? You are either out of touch with your own church or you have a double standard.
Click to expand...
when you say the orthodox church approves of contraception, i believe you are oversimplifying things. for one thing, they disapprove of abortifacients–where does the episcopal church stand on those?
 
GKC said:
The Articles are not binding on any Anglican, save for the ordinands (technically) of the Church of England, due to the Erastian nature of the CoE. A couple of the African provinces have declared them normative, recently, over the recent odd goings-on in the Anglican Communion, but generally, any Anglican is free to accept, reject, or partially do either, with respect to the Articles. The 1979 prayer book, which EmeraldCoast uses, places the Articles in a section marked "historical documents. It is what they are. It is difficult to get the idea across, against a lot of misconceptions, but I never stop trying.

Many Anglicans, and any Anglo-Catholic, will be happy to explain that the Eucharist is a re-presentation, within time, of the One Sacrifice of the Cross, made present before us on the altar, at the hands of the sacerdotal alter Christus. Some affirm transubsantiation, as per Trent, Session XIII; others leave the Real Presence a Mystery.

Attempting to generalize about Anglicans is generally an error.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
Click to expand...
go find a 1928 BCP and read the communion service. i do not think you will find any language at all that could support the notion that a mass is being said.
 
captainmike said:
when you say the orthodox church approves of contraception, i believe you are oversimplifying things. for one thing, they disapprove of abortifacients–where does the episcopal church stand on those?
Click to expand...
You are backpedaling. Some orthodox churches (including the Coptic Church of Alexandria) approve of artficial contraception, which you feel is the “real issue” with the problems of anglicanism. So why don’t you have the same repugance towards orthodoxy? Double standard no doubt.
 
captainmike said:
rome will always say that any church that approves of contraception is dead, flat wrong–reunion or no.
Click to expand...
It appears that you not only have a double standard but are out of touch with your church as well. Rome is licking her chops to reunite with the orthodox.
 
VARC said:
That’s more like it 👍
Click to expand...
yeah, but “real presence” didn’t necessarily mean we were consuming the body and blood of christ. it could have meant that, but it didn’t have to mean that. it meant whatever you wanted it to mean.
 
captainmike said:
plus, there are a lot of low church episcopalians who do not believe it is christ’s body and blood.
Click to expand...
I am not aware of a substantial number of low churchers who deny the true presence. I know this was an issue in the 19th century when the REC left TEC. But deniers of the true presence are a very rare breed in TEC now. The 1979 BCP slanted even further in the catholic direction. Though I suppose they are out there.
 
captainmike said:
go find a 1928 BCP and read the communion service. i do not think you will find any language at all that could support the notion that a mass is being said.
Click to expand...
OK. I didn’t have to go far; the closest one is 2 feet to my left.

Depends on how you read the words of institution and the epiclesis; the form is valid for the intent. And the words of administration are a combination of both the 1549 and the 1552 books of common prayer, to permit both the wings of Anglican thought to hear what they want to; a memorial or the Real Presence.

I do hear that liturgy, every Sunday. Unless it’s supplemented from the Anglican Missal, which is even more explicit. And occasionally I get a Ita, Missa est, too. Before the Angelus.

Generalize about Anglicans; generally, you will err.

GKC
 
VARC said:
You are backpedaling. Some orthodox churches (including the Coptic Church of Alexandria) approve of artficial contraception, which you feel is the “real issue” with the problems of anglicanism. So why don’t you have the same repugance towards orthodoxy? Double standard no doubt.
Click to expand...
maybe a little bit. however, the orthodox church is a lot more “orthodox” than the episcopal church that i left. that said, in time, the orthodox church’s error on contraception likely will lead to the same errors as there are in TEC. As Aristotle said, “The least initial deviation from the truth is multiplied later a thousand fold.”
 
captainmike said:
yeah, but “real presence” didn’t necessarily mean we were consuming the body and blood of christ. it could have meant that, but it didn’t have to mean that. it meant whatever you wanted it to mean.
Click to expand...
I refer you again to the prayer of humble access. page 337

We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful
Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold
and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather
up the crumbs under thy Table. But thou art the same Lord
whose property is always to have mercy. Grant us therefore,
gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ,
and to drink his blood, that we may evermore dwell in him,
and he in us. Amen.

I know that a minority of low churchers might dissent. But there are many RCs that dissent on many dogmas. That only means they are dissenters.
 
VARC said:
I am not aware of a substantial number of low churchers who deny the true presence. I know this was an issue in the 19th century when the REC left TEC. But deniers of the true presence are a very rare breed in TEC now. The 1979 BCP slanted even further in the catholic direction. Though I suppose they are out there.
Click to expand...
All sorts out there. Including those of us who affirm Trent, Session XIII, canon 1.

GKC
 
VARC said:
It appears that you not only have a double standard but are out of touch with your church as well. Rome is licking her chops to reunite with the orthodox.
Click to expand...
it won’t happen anytime soon, because the east won’t accept the papacy, and that is nonnegotiable.

at any rate, rome will never accept artificial contraception. just like it will never accept women’s ordination.
 
GKC said:
What took you 22 years? (serious question).

GKC
Click to expand...
because i loved being an episcopalian. leaving was very difficult. but i came to believe that it was wrong and rome was right.
 
captainmike said:
because i loved being an episcopalian. leaving was very difficult. but i came to believe that it was wrong and rome was right.
Click to expand...
that sort of describes my journey also. but i had a big gap in the middle. i did come to the realization that i sadly would not be able to remain in TEC because they were obviously open to almost anything. and Rome did seem right.
 
VARC said:
I refer you again to the prayer of humble access. page 337

We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful
Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold
and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather
up the crumbs under thy Table. But thou art the same Lord
whose property is always to have mercy. Grant us therefore,
gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ,
and to drink his blood, that we may evermore dwell in him,
and he in us. Amen.

I know that a minority of low churchers might dissent. But there are many RCs that dissent on many dogmas. That only means they are dissenters.
Click to expand...
this prayer is from rite I, of course. rite II is more watered down and, again, doesn’t contain much language at all suggesting that a mass is occurring. at best, it is ambiguous on the point. plus, i suspect that in most TEC parishes, if the rector wanted to refer to the service as The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass rather than The Holy Eucharist, lots of people would not like that at all.
 
7_Sorrows said:
that sort of describes my journey also. but i had a big gap in the middle. i did come to the realization that i sadly would not be able to remain in TEC because they were obviously open to almost anything. and Rome did seem right.
Click to expand...
i also have three young kids. what will the episcopal church be like when they are adults? it’s scary to contemplate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top