what is the difference between episcopal and catholic

  • Thread starter Thread starter barbgal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
wisdomseeker said:
Jesus doesnt tell us to work with the system, He calls us into obedience.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t that mean working with the system, such as seeking a decree of nullity rather than a civil divorce? If Henry had wanted a civil divorce, as King he certainly could have gone that route.
 
masuwerte said:
Wouldn’t that mean working with the system, such as seeking a decree of nullity rather than a civil divorce? If Henry had wanted a civil divorce, as King he certainly could have gone that route.
Click to expand...
You cannot have a nullity just because you want to marry somebody else. He had a good wife. there was no justification for nulity.
 
masuwerte said:
It’s an important distinction, Julianne. Henry would say that he tried to work with the system. I think.
Click to expand...
Henry would be wrong. He wanted to marry someone else, and was constantly looking for the next woman to bed/marry/make sons with. Don’t make Henry VIII into a paragon of virtue and a good man of the faith.
 
ByzCath said:
So wanting a valid marriage to be declared invalid and also wanting to be the head of the Church in place of the pope are not “doctrinal issues”?
Click to expand...
Not in the same way that the Protestant reformation occurred on the continent.

Anglicans often have a similar ecclesiology to the Eastern Orthodox. Some have left Anglicanism for “Western Orthodoxy” (primarily associated with the Church of Antioch). That is how they justify independence from the pope. As an Anglican, I was taught the Three Branches Theory – that the Church Catholic has split into three primary parts: the Eastern Orthodox, the Roman Catholic, and the Anglican. This is how they justify caesaropapism.
 
masuwerte said:
Wouldn’t that mean working with the system, such as seeking a decree of nullity rather than a civil divorce? If Henry had wanted a civil divorce, as King he certainly could have gone that route.
Click to expand...
There was no civil divorce. As with many people, back in the day, he sought a decree of nullity. It was the manner in which he would have a legitimate line of succession for male any heirs of his body, from Anne.

It was common place, and why the immensely complicated systems of impediments, dispensations and decrees of nullity had evolved (and continued to evolve).

GKC
 
TheRealJuliane said:
Henry would be wrong. He wanted to marry someone else, and was constantly looking for the next woman to bed/marry/make sons with. Don’t make Henry VIII into a paragon of virtue and a good man of the faith.
Click to expand...
Henry was a fascinating train wreck, who is a small hobby of mine (esp. his Great Matter). He did work within the system, for 10 years, from the first submittal of his Causa in 1525 to the passage of the Parliamentary Acts in 1534.

It’s an interesting history, not to be understood by waving cardboard cutouts.

GKC
 
wisdomseeker said:
You cannot have a nullity just because you want to marry somebody else. He had a good wife. there was no justification for nulity.
Click to expand...
His case was about as good as the average at the time, though the Levintine prohibition he based it on was not the stongest possible point. But it was still better than was usual, certainly better than the Causa that got decree of a nullity for his sister Margaret, shortly before Henry submitted his own Causa (as I said, the need for making and breaking dynastic marriages was common place, then).

As Cardinal Wolsey saw, Henry had a stronger case in an undispensed diriment impediment of the justice of public honesty, in the original dispensation given to permit Henry and Catherine to Wed, by Pope Julius. But given the political facts of the day, it didn’t really matter what Henry submitted. While his case was as strong as usual, the usual case did not involve the aunt of the Holy Roman Emperor.

GKC
 
JugglingReferee said:
If by Episcopal, you mean the US branch of the Anglican Church, I would like to know why the US re-named the Anglican Church the Episcopal Church for their purposes. Why not just leave the name alone? Is this the USA’s way to “put their stamp” on everything?
Click to expand...
It wasn’t exactly popular to be praying for the king and calling yourselves “Anglican” at the time of the American Revolution. Also, since the US did not have Anglican bishops for a long time, seminarians would have to sail over to Europe to be ordained, IIRC, they were primarily ordained by bishops of the Scottish Episcopal Church.
 
Isn’t it amazing how far one stray can rationalize and believe they have true message from God?
 
Might this help?

#include <stdio.h>

main()
{
int post_entry;
int post_num;

if (post_entry != post_num)
printf("%d
", post_entry);
else
logout;
}

(Ok! I know it’s really dumb! I’d need an array to store all the post numbers. 😃 )
 
:confused::confused::confused:😛
Poco said:
Might this help?

#include <stdio.h>

main()
{
int post_entry;
int post_num;

if (post_entry != post_num)
printf("%d
", post_entry);
else
logout;
}

(Ok! I know it’s really dumb! I’d need an array to store all the post numbers. 😃 )
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top