- Status
P
prodigalson12
Guest
Well, that is a good point, but I count on it NOT changing, I do so saying, what is in place, has been in place fine tuned and continues to be refined through the ages. It’s like a piece of software, each year it gets a little more debugged, a few more options, and it becomes more stable and useful in the process. That original piece of software, it’s core programming is the same. I am taking it, with what you are saying, we should throw it out entirely and start form scratch with a new programming language? In software land, that would require not an upgrade or patch, you cannot exchange anything between the two, so the output being so dissimilar because they are created on seperate platforms, integration between the two are impossible. Taking this into the real world, remember the advent of windows Vista, how horribly it failed and one of the biggest gripes people had, their old windows based software will not work on it, now that it’s been out for a while, I’m seeing people revert to an older version, I even see Rat Shack is selling brand new laptops with XP on it, not because they are behind the times, because that OS has proven it is a dog, so would rather revert to the default rather then continue to embrace this new so called upgraded version. It’s the same thing here when it comes down to it, and being a very down to earth traditionalist, I would be happier seeing even protestant tradition within their own churches taking a bigger role rather then simply moving with the times forward blindly, which in turn is further distancing themselves from the origin within their very own church formations.
B
benedictus2
Guest
No. Let’s make this NOT a battle all the way to Oct 13, the anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima.
Interesting dates: October 31, 1517 Martin Luther nails the 95 Thesis and starts the free fall of the ever splintering Protestant denominations.
Ocober 13 1917, Our Lady performs her greatest miracle, the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima.
Incidentally a new movie about Fatima is coming out titled “The 13th Day”.
See the trailer here: http://www.the13thday.com/
And it is being released in the state on October 13 2009.
J
Justy90
Guest
Thank you Gurney for attempting to put a rational and sensical view on this. I think these folks know quite well that the Anglican Communion does not condone these things. It certainly doesn’t take a genius to know that the Episcopal church does not speak for 38 and soon to be 39 other provinces of the church. They just love to stereotype and throw mud instead of having rational conversations about what really matters.
B
brb2
Guest
P
prodigalson12
Guest
Here, I created it for you guys that insist upon keeping the discussion off topic to use.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5808451#post5808451
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5808451#post5808451
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
Give me a break with the theatrics and drama, prodigal. Just because you started the thread doesn’t mean you own it. You asked people why they were protestant, you got answers. Anglicans got bashed around a bit, some people didn’t agree with that, some sparks flew, and a lively debate took place. You didn’t like the outcome, that’s life in the big city. Nobody’s going to your fighting thread. In case you haven’t noticed in CAF, most threads end up getting somewhat diverted as the original discussion becomes stale and tired. It’s not like the “why are you protestant?” question hasn’t been hurled around a zillion times already anyway.
That old cliche, “be careful what you wish for!” comes into play here. If you don’t want some protestant-catholic debate and a few sparks, quit starting threads like this I’d say…
P
prodigalson12
Guest
Gurn, we have the Apologetic section for the debate factor. No biggie if things go a little off topic, that happens, but when it’s all that is discussed, you should either split it into a new thread entirely. If this topic is stale, then don’t be part of it instead of changing it to better suit your personal tastes.
The nature of this thread will go on tangents, it’s the subtle nuances and discussion between beliefs that should be the natural result of many of the answers to the OP, it also gets us into one thread this topic is covered more exclusively, really digging down to see what we believe and why. With this new knowledge on hand, really understanding both sides, when you travel to other threads, instead of bashing one another, you end up knowing each others sides of reasoning, so in areas where you know clearly, that you dissagree, instead of putting it yet back on the table for all the world to see yet again, you simply focus on what you have in common. I do this very thing in the real world when I’m at protestant services, when I’m at study with them especially, they initially think of me as one way because I’m Catholic, only to find, I’m on the same page with them in regards to study of the scripture and my understanding of Christ is the same as theirs. The misconceptions melt away and in most cases, I’m considered an asset to their community, not a deterrent, they also find my church is not such a foreign entity because too often, the only exposure they had to it was standing outside of mass, not understanding what is really going on, which I know from an outsiders perspective, a myriad of speculation tends to override the truth to it all, which in turn establishes a flawed understanding of what the church is about entirely.
The nature of this thread will go on tangents, it’s the subtle nuances and discussion between beliefs that should be the natural result of many of the answers to the OP, it also gets us into one thread this topic is covered more exclusively, really digging down to see what we believe and why. With this new knowledge on hand, really understanding both sides, when you travel to other threads, instead of bashing one another, you end up knowing each others sides of reasoning, so in areas where you know clearly, that you dissagree, instead of putting it yet back on the table for all the world to see yet again, you simply focus on what you have in common. I do this very thing in the real world when I’m at protestant services, when I’m at study with them especially, they initially think of me as one way because I’m Catholic, only to find, I’m on the same page with them in regards to study of the scripture and my understanding of Christ is the same as theirs. The misconceptions melt away and in most cases, I’m considered an asset to their community, not a deterrent, they also find my church is not such a foreign entity because too often, the only exposure they had to it was standing outside of mass, not understanding what is really going on, which I know from an outsiders perspective, a myriad of speculation tends to override the truth to it all, which in turn establishes a flawed understanding of what the church is about entirely.
G
guanophore
Guest
Justy, I apologize in advance for having trouble figuring out which quotes belong to whom.
However, when you say "Rome won’t see the error of it’s ways’ it makes it sound like you think that the doctrine is corrupt as well as the persons, and that is not the case. The Church is infallible because she has Christ as her Head, and the HS as her soul. these divine elements prevent error.
Persons who do not walk in the faith of the Church separate themselves from her by their sins. Again, it is the men who are in need of reform, not the doctrine.
What the King of England did was react with the same politics and power, trying to wrench political control by force. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
"Justy 90:
I understand that the Anglican communion was striving to do this. However, it is not up to any of us to decide what is to be kept, and what is to be thrown out. This was the basis of the separation. The standard is the Teaching of the Apostles, and when moderns start adapting that according to their own perceptions, we depart from the One Faith that was given once for all time to the Church. Part of the error throughout the reformation is that people thought reforming people required reforming doctrine, and this is not the case. It was not the doctrine that was incorrect, but the faithless persons claiming to represent it.
No, I don’t think rebellion is unavoidable. I do realize that there were many political and economic factors involved. Catholicism no longer plays this role in politics so that such collusion can be avoided. Priests are no longer permitted to hold political office. Conflating the two has caused too many problems.The colusion of the pope and Spain made this whole thing unavoidable. Politics always seems to play a major role in Catholicism, go figure.
It is not an oxymoron. I think we can all agree that certain members of the church, some of them in high positions of responsibility and influence, were corrupt.
However, when you say "Rome won’t see the error of it’s ways’ it makes it sound like you think that the doctrine is corrupt as well as the persons, and that is not the case. The Church is infallible because she has Christ as her Head, and the HS as her soul. these divine elements prevent error.
Persons who do not walk in the faith of the Church separate themselves from her by their sins. Again, it is the men who are in need of reform, not the doctrine.
The same choice that the early church had when they were being persecuted by the Empire. Prayer, fasting, martyrdom. These are the things that purify God’s Church, not disobedience, rebellion and schism.
What the King of England did was react with the same politics and power, trying to wrench political control by force. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
This is a false statement. Augustine was Catholic. If you think that his writings do not reflect Catholic faith, then you are taking him out of context.Code:St. Augustine wrote many things including some that don't have much in common with Catholic doctrine.
Justy90;5807271:
hopefully we will all be more knowledgeable at the end of the day.
G
guanophore
Guest
No, actually, I dont know these things. I have very little experience with the Anglican or Epis.communions. I have heard the news about the disagreements, but don’t have a lot of clarity about the details. As I said, at the end of the day, I hope to learn more!
When you say that “Rome wont’ change”, this is exactly why. The Pope is our symbol of unity all over the world, and for all the 23 sui iuris Catholic Rites. Although they all have differences in language, culture, liturgy, and disciplines, they all have a oneness in doctrine. I am not sure how this is established and maintained in other congregations. It does not appear that there is any central deposit of unity.
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
I didn’t know about the Anglican struggles. I’m realizing that a world of hurt can come across as anger. That’s the disadvantage of not speaking face to face.
I am learning from this thread.
Anna
I am learning from this thread.
Anna
G
gamewell45
Guest
L
Lutheranteach
Guest
I like this site as well. While I do not agree with some of the posters, nor the Catholic Chuch in many matters, I do find this site provides me with some answers and a greater understanding of my Catholic family members and friends.
B
benedictus2
Guest
I never claimed to be well versed in the Anglican World. All I said was that the Anglican Communion has allowed these ordinations.
The fact remains that the Anglican Communion has allowed it. You can label them the lost sheep but they remain part of the Anglican Communion. As far as I know the Episcopals have not separted from the Anglican Communion nor have they been excommunicated.
There must be some tacit approval from the Anglican heirarchy for this to happen.
Also, here is an extract from a wikipedia article
Issues concerning homosexuality are controversial in the Anglican Communion. During the thirteenth Lambeth Conference in 1998, a resolution was passed stating that homosexual acts are “incompatible with Scripture” by a vote of 526-70;[1] however, it also contained a statement declaring this policy would not be the final word and research would continue. (Lambeth Resolutions are not binding on member churches of the Anglican Communion, but carry considerable moral authority.)
In 2003, the Church of England announced the appointment of Jeffrey John, a priest living in a celibate domestic partnership with another man, as the Suffragan Bishop of Reading. Many Anglican traditionalists reacted strongly and John eventually succumbed to pressure from the Archbishop of Canterbury (who had initially supported the appointment) and others to withdraw before he had been formally elected.citation needed] John was later appointed as the Dean of St Albans instead. As of 2004, other Anglican provinces such as the Episcopal Church in the USA [2], the Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil, the Anglican Church of Mexico, the Scottish Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Southern Africa permitted the ordination of non-celibate gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions. In the Anglican Church of Canada, six parishes in the Diocese of New Westminster bless same-sex unions, and Dean Peter Elliott of that diocese is a gay man in a committed relationship. In 2003, the Episcopal Church in the USA consecrated Gene Robinson, a gay man, as the Bishop of New Hampshire.
Responding to these theological disputes, many provinces, primarily from central Africa also some in Asia, America and Australia—representing about half of the 80 million practicing Anglicans worldwide—declared a state of impaired communion with their counterparts.[3] Minority groups in Western provinces have stated their opposition to what they consider unscriptural actions by the Churches of England, Canada, Australia, and the ECUSA, and in the United States, some (such as the Anglican Mission in the Americas and the Convocation of Anglicans in North America) have withdrawn their affiliation with the ECUSA and realigned themselves with African provinces such as the Churches of Uganda and Rwanda
K
Kenneth_Jones
Guest
Well, first, what he says is “The Body of Christ!” not “This is My Body.”
Second, every Catholic Christian is a born again Christian, so what you’re offering is no argument, it’s just true
, although we respond “Amen!” (So be it, I agree, you said it, pal, and other similar thoughts of assent to the assertion.) Our emphasis is on Him, not me.And third, we would not knowingly invite you to place yourself in grave danger by allowing you to receive Our Lord when you are not in full communion with The Church of Christ, est. AD33. If indeed you made it clear to him that you were not properly disposed to receive the Eucharist, but were nevertheless presenting yourself for that purpose, you probably would be given a blessing by the priest, but he would withhold the Eucharist.
In Him,
Ken
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
As a Protestant, who grew up in Southern Baptist Churches (no longer Baptist); I have to comment on the “born again Christian” phrase (which I have heard my whole life.) I think every faithful Christian, regardless of denomination, would be born again. Christ transforms us, changes us. So, “born again Christian” seems rather redundant; and implies exclusion of other Christians.Well, first, what he says is “The Body of Christ!” not “This is My Body.”
Second, every Catholic Christian is a born again Christian, so what you’re offering is no argument, it’s just true
And third, we would not knowingly invite you to place yourself in grave danger by allowing you to receive Our Lord when you are not in full communion with The Church of Christ, est. AD33. If indeed you made it clear to him that you were not properly disposed to receive the Eucharist, but were nevertheless presenting yourself for that purpose, you probably would be given a blessing by the priest, but he would withhold the Eucharist.
In Him,
Ken
Similarly, “Bible believing Christian” also implies exclusion. What Christians do not believe the Bible? We may disagree on interpretation; literal vs. allegorical; etc.; but don’t we all believe in the Bible?
sckcd: This is not intended to be in any way disrespectful. I know that Christians use these terms often. My perspective has changed over time.
In Christ,
Anna
C
Christ_Imitator
Guest
I believe as a follower of Jesus Christ that we are to live our lives as Christ did when he walked our Earth. I do not believe that all that hail marry, Lord’s Prayer, cross over your heart, etc, is necessary at all. God wants us to live out a lifestyle that would resemble the “fruits of the spirit.” I don’t believe he calls us to practice all these rituals.
{Rituals are for pagans, not for Christians.} --And I strongly believe this. If you can give me Biblical references, or even where in the Bible that you would get the idea to practice all of these ritualistic (un-Biblical) traditions; I would love to read through it, thank-you.
{Rituals are for pagans, not for Christians.} --And I strongly believe this. If you can give me Biblical references, or even where in the Bible that you would get the idea to practice all of these ritualistic (un-Biblical) traditions; I would love to read through it, thank-you.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Do you believe these verses?I believe as a follower of Jesus Christ that we are to live our lives as Christ did when he walked our Earth. I do not believe that all that hail marry, Lord’s Prayer, cross over your heart, etc, is necessary at all. God wants us to live out a lifestyle that would resemble the “fruits of the spirit.” I don’t believe he calls us to practice all these rituals.
{Rituals are for pagans, not for Christians.} --And I strongly believe this. If you can give me Biblical references, or even where in the Bible that you would get the idea to practice all of these ritualistic (un-Biblical) traditions; I would love to read through it, thank-you.
Matthew 18
17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
Luke 10
16"He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."
John 20
21Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
1 Timothy 3
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
2 Thes 2
15So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
Matthew 16
17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
P
prodigalson12
Guest
Matthew 6:9-13
9.) "This, then, is how you should pray: "
‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be thy name.
10.) your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
11.) Give us today our daily bread.
12.) Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13.) And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.’
9.) "This, then, is how you should pray: "
‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be thy name.
10.) your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
11.) Give us today our daily bread.
12.) Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13.) And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.’
S
sckcd
Guest
**Originally Posted by mpjw2 **
sckcd…As a baptist I am sure you receive communion as a spiritual remembrance of our Lord’s sacrifice
In Catholic church, catholics believe the bread and wine are miraculously changed during mass to the body and blood of Jesus.
Another reason I am not catholic is I do not believe it.
So as you are offered communion in a catholic mass, the priest says to you “this is my body”
before taking the host tell the priest you are a born again christian
What do you believe he will do?
sckcd…As a baptist I am sure you receive communion as a spiritual remembrance of our Lord’s sacrifice
In Catholic church, catholics believe the bread and wine are miraculously changed during mass to the body and blood of Jesus.
Another reason I am not catholic is I do not believe it.
So as you are offered communion in a catholic mass, the priest says to you “this is my body”
before taking the host tell the priest you are a born again christian
What do you believe he will do?
I wasn’t the one who said that in what you quoted. It was someone else who was saying it to me, so no biggie.As a Protestant, who grew up in Southern Baptist Churches (no longer Baptist); I have to comment on the “born again Christian” phrase (which I have heard my whole life.) I think every faithful Christian, regardless of denomination, would be born again. Christ transforms us, changes us. So, “born again Christian” seems rather redundant; and implies exclusion of other Christians.
Similarly, “Bible believing Christian” also implies exclusion. What Christians do not believe the Bible? We may disagree on interpretation; literal vs. allegorical; etc.; but don’t we all believe in the Bible?
sckcd: This is not intended to be in any way disrespectful. I know that Christians use these terms often. My perspective has changed over time.
In Christ,
Anna
- Status