- Status
C
c659smith
Guest
You have your facts a little wrong on Tony Blair and if you stay out of the left wing british papers and into the facts of these items being passed in and by Parliament you would know from his speeches and votes that Blair is pro-life. Lowered the point og viability was removing partial birth abortionReally?
So what?
Very funny.
Is this the same Tony Blair that legalized gay ‘marriage’ in England and called it ‘cival partnership’
Is this the same Tony Blair who voted against lowering the point of viability so more abortions can take place?
Is this the same Tony Blair who had the law changed so that Roman Catholic adoption agencies have to give children to gay couples or risk prosecution?
Is this the same Tony Blair who lied to the British parliament to send us into an unjust illegal war?
If he’s a typical Roman Catholic, I will never become one.
Blair also was for civil unions and aganist same sex marriage and was able to settle for civil unions as Parliament had their mind set on calling it a marriage.
Catholic Adoption Agencies will never give an orphan to a Gay Couple so where your facts come from I do not know. They backed out of Massachussetts and Massachussetts had to repeal the law in order for the Catholic Church to take the orphanages and adoption agencies back. By the way without the Catholic Adoption Agencies in England the British Goverment would go broke if they had to take it over.
and finally the so on attendance in the churches in England is that they are going broke and closing down due to non-support.
Many are turning into Islamic houses of worship.
B
beckycmarie
Guest
Personally, I don’t find it surprising that a denomination founded on the basis of denying the sanctity of marriage has degenerated into what it has become.
I think they are sleeping in the bed Henry VIII made for them in 1534.
I think they are sleeping in the bed Henry VIII made for them in 1534.
C
c659smith
Guest
He asked what rulers were not tyrants at the time.
My point is that the church of England was founded by a tyrant and murderer which makes it fallible from the get go which he agrees.
the split occurred due to the Catholic Church getting away from ruling goverments(THEOCRACY). If the Catholic Church wanted to at the time it could have easily crushed Luther and King Henry.
the Catholic Church was founded by Christ with some leaders gone bad but whose basic beliefs have not changed since Christ making the Catholic Church infallible.
C
c659smith
Guest
The point being that being the spoiled brat King Henry when the Catholic Church said no he created his own church and in order to do so created his church with destruction,theft, and mass murder. At least the crusades were fighting an armed opponent not defense less priests, deacons, and Bishops. To include the executions of all who would not kneel before him and declare him head of the church. He made the Spanish Inquisition look like childs play.
Hopefully our children don’t do the same to us for King Henry was a child and leader of the Church.
J
jay29
Guest
The Episcopals/Anglicans have NO MORALITY at all. Anything goes. Pathetic and soul destroying.
C
c659smith
Guest
maybe they can translate the reign of Pope Paul II 1534 and when King Henry left the Church 1534 and decide who took the road of being Christ like.
C
Contarini
Guest
Not true at all.
With what army? You completely misunderstand sixteenth-century politics. Invading England was never an easy task. And the Pope had very limited military forces under his own command–these were barely (not always) enough to defend his territories in central Italy. No Catholic rulers simply jumped to do the Pope’s bidding. That’s not how it worked.
Edwin
C
Contarini
Guest
And as I have pointed out before, this is completely false, because the Church of England held a very strict view of divorce and remarriage until quite recently, and even in the case of Charles and Camilla tried to draw a distinction between remarrying them in church (which could not be done) and blessing the civil marriage. (I agree with the earlier poster who said that this distinction doesn’t make theological sense. But the fact remains that the C of E did draw such a distinction.)
Edwin
M
Mickey
Guest
Careful with that beam.
C
chris_molter
Guest
Untrue. The Prime Minister certainly CAN be Catholic.
C
chris_molter
Guest
I was merely responding to someone who claimed Blair committed various offenses as a Catholic when he was an Anglican at the time he did those things.
Personally, I doubt his views have changed (especially after seeing his wife on TV blabbering about how it’s ok to use contraception… like we really want to know about the Blair’s sex life!! Sorry, I digress), but I can’t read his mind or his heart, so unless you have some miraculous abilities along those lines, all either of us can do is pray for him.
E
East_Anglican
Guest
THe only reason he did not become RC when he was Primeminister was because he thought it would lose him votes.All those things he did when he was a member of the CofE.Of course, we can’t know one way or another if he’s actually repudiated those beliefs which conflict with Catholic teaching, so we can only pray for him.
Not true.
I think I know a bit more about our former Primeminster than you because he’s effected my life. I don’t know how he’s effected lives in Florida.
Also, the only left wing papers here are The Mirror and The Guardian, neither of which I read.
Renaming something doesn’t stop it from being what it is!
What Massachusetts got to do with British government demestic policy?
Well the fact of the matter is that RC adoption agencies have 5 years to implement a polocy of allowing gay couples to adopt after this they will havbe to shut down or be prosecuted.
Also, Blair and Brown beteween them have made this country broke already.
Source please!
I live here and I’m not seeing any of this taking place.
J
jay29
Guest
Look at their ROTTEN teachings. Condoning gays and abortions. Sickening. They teach people to sin.Careful with that beam.
E
East_Anglican
Guest
T
tomarin
Guest
i looked into this and you’re right. according to this (centreforcitizenship.org/church1.html) it is the head of state in great britain who must be a member of the church of england and not marry a catholic (although i don’t know where this rule is written down since they have no constitution). i guess i confused head of state and head of government. it was an honest mistake, for which i humby beg pardon.
J
jay29
Guest
We all do, but condoning gays and abortions is teaching people to sin.
E
East_Anglican
Guest
I’m an Anglican!Look at their ROTTEN teachings. Condoning gays and abortions. Sickening. They teach people to sin.
Since when have I condoned homosexual practice or abortion?
Since when have I tought people to sin?
Read some of the stuff Nazir Ali Bishop of Rochester says. I agree with him and not the Arch-bishop of Canterbury who was selected by not so closet Roman Catholic Blair!
T
tomarin
Guest
you paint with a mighty big brush, jay.
T
tomarin
Guest
actually it was i who asked what rulers of the era were not tyrants. i was accusing you of treating gkc unfairly when you said he twisted facts. i’m pretty sure he has a very solid command of the facts regarding this period in history. the difference is that sometimes facts are not as important as how you analyze them and what preconceptions you bring to that analysis. that is, the facts alone don’t by themselves add up to a theory about how to interpret them.
the bottom line is that anglicans do not believe that henry viii established their church; and bashing them over the head with attacks on henry viii’s character is not likely to persuade them otherwise.
- Status