Unity in the Eucharist?

[Anna_Scott]

But, seriously, I would call it “switching sides”.

Peter J,

I appreciate your comment, but I really wouldn’t consider entering Rome “switching sides.” Though I do not find validity in the authority Rome claims; I see us as being on the same side. We are all Christians. We are all part of the Body of Christ. Sadly, we are not in full Communion with one another. The lack of unity saddens me, and I pray that we may one day meet at the Altar Rail.

I respect the Catholic faith and often rely upon Catholic sources in my studies. It is not uncommon for our Rector to quote a Pope or a Catholic author in his lessons. I am actually behind in my reading, as many in my Parish have already read Jesus of Nazareth, by Pope Benedict XVI.

So, no “switching sides,” at least not from my point of view.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

 

[GKC]

Peter J,

I appreciate your comment, but I really wouldn’t consider entering Rome “switching sides.” Though I do not find validity in the authority Rome claims; I see us as being on the same side. We are all Christians. We are all part of the Body of Christ. Sadly, we are not in full Communion with one another. The lack of unity saddens me, and I pray that we may one day meet at the Altar Rail.

I respect the Catholic faith and often rely upon Catholic sources in my studies. It is not uncommon for our Rector to quote a Pope or a Catholic author in his lessons. I am actually behind in my reading, as many in my Parish have already read Jesus of Nazareth, by Pope Benedict XVI.

So, no “switching sides,” at least not from my point of view.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

I agree.

GKC

 

[Anna_Scott]

I actually opened that up to general use, a while back, hoping it would be widely disseminated.

GKC

GKC,

“Motley Crew” has been widely disseminated. You are famous for it.

Anna

 

[GKC]

GKC,

“Motley Crew” has been widely disseminated. You are famous for it.

Anna

That, and my “history is complicated”.

GKC

 

[JonNC]

I agree.

GKC

Me, too.

Jon

 

[Anna_Scott]

Peter J,

I appreciate your comment, but I really wouldn’t consider entering Rome “switching sides.” Though I do not find validity in the authority Rome claims; I see us as being on the same side. We are all Christians. We are all part of the Body of Christ. Sadly, we are not in full Communion with one another. The lack of unity saddens me, and I pray that we may one day meet at the Altar Rail.

I respect the Catholic faith and often rely upon Catholic sources in my studies. It is not uncommon for our Rector to quote a Pope or a Catholic author in his lessons. I am actually behind in my reading, as many in my Parish have already read Jesus of Nazareth, by Pope Benedict XVI.

So, no “switching sides,” at least not from my point of view.

Peace and blessings,
Anna

I agree.

GKC

Me, too.

Jon

Jon and GKC,

Not surprised that either of you agree. We hold much in common, as multiple threads have demonstrated.

I think we hold a shared respect for Catholicism (despite theological differences) and a shared desire for unity.

Anna

 

[Peter_J]

Peter J,

I appreciate your comment, but I really wouldn’t consider entering Rome “switching sides.”

So noted. I admit I’m less familiar with the Anglican point of view. I’m really more into studying Catholic-Orthodox relations; and I certainly consider it “jumping ships” or “switching sides”, or whatever phrase one might pick, when someone departs from one of those two communions in order to join the other communion. (As I’ve said on other threads, if I were Orthodox I certainly wouldn’t convert to Catholicism – but that doesn’t mean that, being Catholic, I’m necessarily going to convert to Orthodoxy.)

P.S. If you did become Catholic, would you still consider yourself to be subject to the authority of your old (Anglican) bishop?

 

[Peter_J]

To better understand the Catholic p.o.v., consider this quote from Vatican II:

“However, it is evident that, when individuals wish for full Catholic communion, their preparation and reconciliation is an undertaking which of its nature is distinct from ecumenical action. But there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God.”

 

[JonNC]

To better understand the Catholic p.o.v., consider this quote from Vatican II:

“However, it is evident that, when individuals wish for full Catholic communion, their preparation and reconciliation is an undertaking which of its nature is distinct from ecumenical action. But there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God.”

Hi Peter,
Would you then say that reconciliation, used in this sense, is essentially the same as “switching sides”?

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

Hi Peter,
Would you then say that reconciliation, used in this sense, is essentially the same as “switching sides”?

Jon

Well that depends. Yes, if by reconciliation you mean e.g. a Protestant becoming Catholic.

 

[Peter_J]

I guess the perspective of Eastern Catholics (and Eastern Orthodox) is a tad different from the way you (Protestants) look at it, because of the memory of the Union of Brest and the like.

 

[Anna_Scott]

So noted. I admit I’m less familiar with the Anglican point of view. I’m really more into studying Catholic-Orthodox relations; and I certainly consider it “jumping ships” or “switching sides”, or whatever phrase one might pick, when someone departs from one of those two communions in order to join the other communion. (As I’ve said on other threads, if I were Orthodox I certainly wouldn’t convert to Catholicism – but that doesn’t mean that, being Catholic, I’m necessarily going to convert to Orthodoxy.)

P.S. If you did become Catholic, would you still consider yourself to be subject to the authority of your old (Anglican) bishop?

Peter,
Interesting question.

If I became Catholic, I would not be subject to the authority of my “old Anglican Bishop.” Otherwise, I would not be submitting to Papal authority. The Catholic Church has declared Anglican Holy Orders invalid (Apostolicae Curae.) Of course, Anglicans disagree.

The Anglican Communion is different from Catholicism in that we are free to disagree with Bishops, even our Presiding Bishop, and even the ABC. Our freedom of thought is both a blessing and a curse–as all the woes of TEC and the Anglican Communion in general has clearly demonstrated.

Anna

 

[MaryT777]

Anna:

Does ABC =ArchBishop of Canterbury?

I know it’s not artificial birth control

Just to clarify…
Mary…

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna:

Does ABC =ArchBishop of Canterbury?

I know it’s not artificial birth control

Just to clarify…
Mary…

Mary,
It’s not artificial birth control. It is the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Anna

 

[MaryT777]

Mary,
It’s not artificial birth control. It is the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Anna

Whew…that’s what I thought
Ok then, carry on…
lurkers sometime write me and tell me that Catholics have too many abbreviations
Aha, now I note the Anglicans have at least one!

Maybe I can be on jeopardy…
I’ll ask for
Anglican abbreviations for $200 please… LOL…

 

[GKC]

Whew…that’s what I thought
Ok then, carry on…
lurkers sometime write me and tell me that Catholics have too many abbreviations
Aha, now I note the Anglicans have at least one!

Maybe I can be on jeopardy…
I’ll ask for
Anglican abbreviations for $200 please… LOL…

Anglicans sometimes refer to him as Cantuar. Does that help?

GKC

 

[Peter_J]

Hi all. I was offline for a while, starting right after my last post, and I thought of a couple things.

One is that I probably shouldn’t have brought in the phrase “jumping ships”, which opens a can of worms needlessly. I think I was being a bit reactionary there, after reading the posts from you three about there not being two sides.

The other is that this probably isn’t a very good conversation for me to be getting into. I’m pretty opinionated about uniatism (Union of Brest, etc), and when you combine that with the anticipatable wide variety of statements that are typically made on a public forum, it tends not to be productive. (You may or may not have seen a recent statement on another thread, to the effect that “uniatism” really means when an Orthodox converts to Catholicism but joins the Latin Church instead of an EC Church, and that that was what the Balamand Statement condemned. But I should really stop now or I’ll need a trail of bread crumbs to find my way back. )

 

[Anna_Scott]

Hi all. I was offline for a while, starting right after my last post, and I thought of a couple things.

One is that I probably shouldn’t have brought in the phrase “jumping ships”, which opens a can of worms needlessly. I think I was being a bit reactionary there, after reading the posts from you three about there not being two sides.

The other is that this probably isn’t a very good conversation for me to be getting into. I’m pretty opinionated about uniatism (Union of Brest, etc), and when you combine that with the anticipatable wide variety of statements that are typically made on a public forum, it tends not to be productive. (You may or may not have seen a recent statement on another thread, to the effect that “uniatism” really means when an Orthodox converts to Catholicism but joins the Latin Church instead of an EC Church, and that that was what the Balamand Statement condemned. But I should really stop now or I’ll need a trail of bread crumbs to find my way back. )

Peter,
No worries. It’s good to hear the perspective of other Christians when discussing unity, and in the case of this thread Unity in the Eucharist.

I must confess my ignorance of the term “uniatism.” I had to look it up. LOL. The history and current views of such a union with Rome would make a very interesting thread, if you are inclined to start one. I really can’t recall any past threads on the topic.

Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Whew…that’s what I thought
Ok then, carry on…
lurkers sometime write me and tell me that Catholics have too many abbreviations
Aha, now I note the Anglicans have at least one!

Maybe I can be on jeopardy…
I’ll ask for
Anglican abbreviations for $200 please… LOL…

Mary,
Yes, we Anglicans do have a few abbreviations of our own. I have seen ABC used for “artificial birth control”; but I hadn’t considered that meaning in the context of this discussion…

As a sidebar (my apologies to our OP, SteveVH), here is a **Glossary of Anglican Acronyms **

Anna

 

[Peter_J]

I really can’t recall any past threads on the topic.

I just did a search. Out of 2012/2013 threads, the term “uniatism” comes up in a number of threads; but the only thread that could be considered about uniatism is the thread “Balamand Statement not authoritative?” (Note that the full title of the Balamand Statement is “Uniatism, method of union of the past, and the present search for full communion.”)