F
fred_conty
Guest
Hi, I have a question. What does byzintiened by the ruthaniians mean? Does this mean the orthodox church or a catholic eastern church? Forgive the spelling
- Status
M
Mberg3
Guest
My agreement is a moot point. What matters is what is passed down to us from the Apostles.
So, please post your experts that have studied the original sources. I am eager to explore them.
This is nonsense, Mberg. Yes, all heresies use the Sacred Writings to bolster their errant views. However, heresy does not “corrupt” or “damage” orthodoxy.
It might be difficult for you to grasp this concept, since you don’t espouse the Christian view that the Scriptures are inspired of God. But Chrisians believe that the Word of God is immutable, which means it cannot be “damaged” by any kind of attacks in the universe.
Further, any heretic claiming writings are a “pure source” is questionable due to the origin of the claim.
And finally, Chiristians don’t accept the views of heretics as accurately representing the faith of Christ and emphatically deny that Paul is the “only pure source” of Jesus’ early teachings.
Why did Paul need to be “redeemed” if Marcion was claiming Paul was the ony pure source of Jesus’ teachings? What better “champion” would one require? Your logic does not make any sense.
YOu are not addressing the problem with your claim, Mberg. This is beside the point. I suspect your arguement is starting to unravel.
Mberg3;7842527:
This is false, Mberg. Ignatius was anxious to hold on to the faith that was passed down to him from the Apostles. I can assure you that he was a very careful scholars, and was quite confident about his “sources”.
However, ifyou wish to assert that Ignatius did not “check his sources” and that he thought the Pauline Pastorals were from Paul, but were not, please produce the sources that bolster this claim. That should keep you busy for a couple decades.
To be honest, Mberg, I have not been able to detect much in your posts that reflects any faith at all, much less a Christian faith. It seems that your faith may be in yourself, in your own ability to determine what is true and false. It seems your faith (or perhaps better described as hope) that you can mate with a Catholic and share faith with her, despite your own lack of faith in her religion.
That’s fine, Mberg. It is becoming increasingly clear that you have very little interest in living a Christian life. It may be that God has yet to inflame your heart with passion for HIm, and that you do not know HIm at all, which is why this attempt on your part to discern the truth is grasping at thin straws to justifiy your lack of faith.
If you do not believe that God has revealed HImself to mankind, why are you here?
G
guanophore
Guest
Mberg, Iggy was interested in preserving the Sacred Teachings as they were passed down to him by the Apostles. This was his duty as a bishop. He was given custody of the Scriptures and the mysteries of the faith, and was willing to give his life for this divine deposit of faith.
It has always been a mystery to me why modern people think that ancient Christians would sacrifice their lives for that which was not really True, or that they knew was false. Would you give your life in exchange for a position you knew was not true?
Back to the OP, in your case, no, you are not ready to become Catholic. Coming into unity with the One Faith that has been passed down from the Apostles would require that you accept all that the Church believes and teaches. Clearly, you do not believe that the Holy Scriptures are inspired by God, nor do you believe in their Sacred origins. If you came for baptism or confirmation, you would have to basically misrepresent yourself in order to be received.
M
Mberg3
Guest
guanophore;7845326:
This was a mistaken postMy agreement is a moot point. What matters is what is passed down to us from the Apostles.
So, please post your experts that have studied the original sources. I am eager to explore them.
This is nonsense, Mberg. Yes, all heresies use the Sacred Writings to bolster their errant views. However, heresy does not “corrupt” or “damage” orthodoxy.
It might be difficult for you to grasp this concept, since you don’t espouse the Christian view that the Scriptures are inspired of God. But Chrisians believe that the Word of God is immutable, which means it cannot be “damaged” by any kind of attacks in the universe.
Further, any heretic claiming writings are a “pure source” is questionable due to the origin of the claim.
And finally, Chiristians don’t accept the views of heretics as accurately representing the faith of Christ and emphatically deny that Paul is the “only pure source” of Jesus’ early teachings.
Why did Paul need to be “redeemed” if Marcion was claiming Paul was the ony pure source of Jesus’ teachings? What better “champion” would one require? Your logic does not make any sense.
YOu are not addressing the problem with your claim, Mberg. This is beside the point. I suspect your arguement is starting to unravel.
M
Mberg3
Guest
My agreement is a moot point. What matters is what is passed down to us from the Apostles.
So, please post your experts that have studied the original sources. I am eager to explore them.
Here is a nice simple overview on the debate as it stands: abu.nb.ca/courses/ntintro/1Tim.htm
This is nonsense, Mberg. Yes, all heresies use the Sacred Writings to bolster their errant views. However, heresy does not “corrupt” or “damage” orthodoxy.
There was no orthodox canon at the time of Marcion. By using only the Undisputed Letters of Paul as the core of his canon, Marcion was claiming that Paul did not support the Church as it was developing. When the Church created its own canon, Paul had been “damaged” because he was first presented in an anti-orthodox light. To remedy the problem the Pastorals could have been attributed to Paul because of their Pro-orthodox content.
It might be difficult for you to grasp this concept, since you don’t espouse the Christian view that the Scriptures are inspired of God. But Chrisians believe that the Word of God is immutable, which means it cannot be “damaged” by any kind of attacks in the universe.
This event happened before inspired scripture was officially defined.
Further, any heretic claiming writings are a “pure source” is questionable due to the origin of the claim.
Marcion was only a heretic from the stand point of the Church, of course he was not a heretic from his own perspective. He helped start the debate on what would be considered orthodox and what would be anathema.
And finally, Chiristians don’t accept the views of heretics as accurately representing the faith of Christ and emphatically deny that Paul is the “only pure source” of Jesus’ early teachings.
This it true but has nothing to do with whether Paul was the true author of the epistles
Why did Paul need to be “redeemed” if Marcion was claiming Paul was the ony pure source of Jesus’ teachings? What better “champion” would one require? Your logic does not make any sense.
Marcion claimed that Paul was on his side theologically. Much in the same way Paul was exploited in the Reformation. The Catholic Church needed to present Paul as a “Catholic” author, and the Pastorals secured that claim of Paul as Catholic.
YOu are not addressing the problem with your claim, Mberg. This is beside the point. I suspect your arguement is starting to unravel.
Not so, Just a side comment about Tertullian’s that I find interesting given his early hatred of Montanism
Mberg3;7842527:
This is false, Mberg. Ignatius was anxious to hold on to the faith that was passed down to him from the Apostles. I can assure you that he was a very careful scholars, and was quite confident about his “sources”. However, ifyou wish to assert that Ignatius did not “check his sources” and that he thought the Pauline Pastorals were from Paul, but were not, please produce the sources that bolster this claim. That should keep you busy for a couple decades.
To be fair to you “check his sources” might have been misleading. The point I was trying to make is that if the Pastorals were not written by Paul, and Ignatius thought that they were, then he must not have had access to the original source material, whether because he did not look into or it was no longer available the effect is the same.
To be honest, Mberg, I have not been able to detect much in your posts that reflects any faith at all, much less a Christian faith. It seems that your faith may be in yourself, in your own ability to determine what is true and false. It seems your faith (or perhaps better described as hope) that you can mate with a Catholic and share faith with her, despite your own lack of faith in her religion.
Am I the only one who finds the use of the word “mate” slightly offensive?" Besides the obvious attempt to discredit my faith this adds nothing to the conversation. In fact it allows you to not have to answer any direct question. If you would like to present your arguments and cite the sources you used we can have a calm and rational discussion about this. There is no need to make this personal. I still assume you are a descent smart human being despite my instinct to feel like you are insecure and ignorant. I know you are not, it only will take a little more effort and less attacking on your part to validate my hope in you.
That’s fine, Mberg. It is becoming increasingly clear that you have very little interest in living a Christian life. It may be that God has yet to inflame your heart with passion for HIm, and that you do not know HIm at all, which is why this attempt on your part to discern the truth is grasping at thin straws to justifiy your lack of faith.
How so? All I did is to present to you a logical conclusion that the Gospels contain error. How does that preclude my living a Christian life. I have been a Christian all my life. I just ask you do Judge not lest you be judged. But it is your life I will answer your questions as long as you keep asking them.
If you do not believe that God has revealed Himself to mankind, why are you here?
But i do believe he has. It is through fallible people through fallible documents, but that does not mean the inspiration is not there. It is just necessary to work a little harder to see the revelation that has been distorted by human weakness.
M
Mberg3
Guest
I don’t think you can determine the nature of his relationship with God by a google search.
Being heavily impacted by heresies and apostasy does not make a person an adequate representation of the Catholic faith.
It is a bit disingenuous of you, don’t you think to proclaim this man’s scholarship “impeccable” when you do not accept the history of the Holy Scriptures?
Impeccable=without sin, also irreproachable… It was a word play… Get it? Anyway I do believe that his presentation of history is thorough and well documented. It also flows logically and remains consistent. If you would like to defend your point of view I ask you to do so, but you need to show why the research is wrong. You cannot claim it does not exist and claiming it is intentional to discredit Catholicism is bordering schizophrenia
I guess I will bown out on this one, since I have no interest in discussing this kind of history and so called scholarship. I am here to talk about the Catholic faith, not those who depart from it.
Why is this only “so-called” scholarship. What was the flaw in their methods. What was the flaw in their logic. Because you dont want it to be true does not make if false.
Of course you can base your opinion on whatever collective consensus your heart desires.
As may you. Just don’t expect me to accept your “consensus” without facts. If you are willing to show me how the history is wrong I will gladly change my thinking
Just dont’ come to a Christian forum claiming you are thinking about becoming Christian and expect that we will approve of your decision.
Who are “we”? Everyone else on here has been wonderfully supportive.
There is a strong following of Paganism in our culture which is really getting popular, and I think a case can be made that it may well be the new consensus. I think the 'scholarship" you wish to espouse would fit in quite well. Perhaps you can google “why should I become a Pagan” and you will get a lot better results than you will here on CAF.
This has slowly degraded into childishness
Ok.
It has become quite clear that your posts do not belong it the Traditional Catholic forum, since they are not even Catholic, and don’t even appear to be Christian, this is the best place for them.
I agree the change was for the best. I was not sure where to originally place
I can assure you that there are many Lutheran and secular historians that represent the Catholic faith better than your “devout historian” has done.
Such as…
On the contrary, Mberg. My faith fits perfectly in to the findings of history. I do acknowledge that your perception of it does not. However, I don’t think either of these things will help you, as you seem to be suffering from a lack of internal experience of the Holy. No amount of scholarship will get you to heaven.
You keep saying your faith fits in with history and I am not doubting you. I am just saying that you have had an a-historic view of some moments of Christianity
You might be playing the role of a non-Christian who wishes to mate with a Catholic, and wants to fit in with her faith.
You have said this already and it is- frankly- offensive
No one here is able to judge your “spiritual condition”. This is between you and your Maker. I can only draw conclusions from reading your posts, which may be fabricated.
I assure you they are not fabricated and you are drawing your conclusion for a very unique place. I just hope that you may be playing a role, but if not I still care about you.
I am sure he has a faith, just like you have a faith in your own ability to form logic. Some have faith in money, others in power, etc. Putting one’s faith in things does not make a person Christian.
And some people have faith that history doesnt happen… People misplace their faith all the time I agree.
You are right, plenty of non-Christian scholars have much of value to contribute to the history of Christianity. His contributions are not valid because they are inaccurate, as are your own.
Once again I am sure you have a wealth of knowledge, but it is not fair for you to keep it hidden. You must tell me where these brilliant historians who contradict him are so I may learn from them.
G
guanophore
Guest
Do I understand this to mean that your arguement is NOT unraveling? If not, and you wish to continue to engage in it, then I fervently pray that you take the quotation tutorial so that your posts are easier to read and respond to.
Fruitless effort on my part, Mberg. If you do not accept the NT as inspired, I don’t think any number of “experts” will help. This is one of the doctrines of the faith, a mystery that needs to be accepted by grace, through faith. You have shown no evidence that you are ready, willing, or able to do any such thing. You might as well study it as literature or poetry.So, please post your experts that have studied the original sources. I am eager to explore them.
Very imaginitive speculations. I commend you to them.Code:There was no orthodox canon at the time of Marcion. By using only the Undisputed Letters of Paul as the core of his canon, Marcion was claiming that Paul did not support the Church as it was developing. When the Church created its own canon, Paul had been "damaged" because he was first presented in an anti-orthodox light. To remedy the problem the Pastorals could have been attributed to Paul because of their Pro-orthodox content.
Mberg3;7848369:
No, Mberg. What defines Scripture (for Christians) is that they are writings inspired by God. As such, they are Scripture from the moment they are penned.
Well, of course! Jesus founded ONE CHURCH and it contains ONE FAITH. Those who depart from it, from the perspective of the Church are either heretics, or apostates. Naturally the ones departing think otherwise.
It is true that heretics to help to define the faith, to the extent that the truth becomes for visible when there are detractors and persecuters. It is these that caused the Church to define and then close the canon of Holy Writings.
Suffice that you have been given the Christian position on this matter, Mberg. For us, the canon of scripture has everything to do with the authors, the origin, and the nature of the writings. Since we believe them all to be inspired by God, He is the primary author, and we are of the position that they are inerrant. That includes the references to the authors.
No, Mberg. The pastoral letters are not what “secures” the claim of Paul as a Catholic. The Pastoral letters reflect the faith of Paul, and the faith of the Church, which is Catholic.
The Catholicity of the Church, and the Apostles, was intact before any of the Scriptures were written. It did not cease to be intact after they were.
For the record, let me restate that a person who does not accept the Holy Scriptures as
inspired and inerrant is not ready to become Catholic. You also seem to be suffering from a deficient understanding of the Church, which is also prohibitive.
G
guanophore
Guest
Very well. You have chosen a modern “impeccable” scholar for your source of Truth. You are free to do so.
Rather, I think it is time to smack the sandals together.
I don’t think you could understand it, Mberg, because it relates to the revelation by God of Himself to mankind, a principle you apparently reject.
It is also based on the Scriptures, which you reject as from God, and therefore, they will be of no account to you.
This standard makes no sense to me, since history is told from the perspective of the one telling it. Since there are as many perceptions as there are belly buttons, history cannot be “wrong”. An historical account always reflects the perspective of the person giving the history. If you wish to adopt an ant-Christian perspective on history, that is your perogative.
I can see why it would seem that way to someone who rejects the New Testament and the early fathers as witness to the Christian faith.
If that is the case, then it would stand to reason that you are not role playing, and that your posts, which do not reflect Christian faith are accurate reflections of your state.
I have never met any. I have met people here on CAF that disregard history, but none that have claimed it does not happen.
The Truth about the Catholic faith is far from hidden, Mberg. It is like a city, set on a hill. I recommend the Catechism for a good start. I will warn you, though, you will have trouble with it because it is a scholarly document based upon history, that of the NT and of the ECF’s.
M
Mberg3
Guest
Fruitless effort on my part, Mberg. If you do not accept the NT as inspired, I don’t think any number of “experts” will help. This is one of the doctrines of the faith, a mystery that needs to be accepted by grace, through faith. You have shown no evidence that you are ready, willing, or able to do any such thing. You might as well study it as literature or poetry.
M
Mberg3
Guest
You should take that to mean I quoted what you said and accidentally sent that without responding to any points that you had brought up… the fact that you were taking issue with several point that you had said earlier makes me wonder how much you care about anything besides being heard. You are like my youngest sister used to be. I will give you attention if you would like but not through responding to nonsense.If you want to live in a world that is controlled by accepting everything at face value and everyone who disagrees is a heretic I commend you for that. I hear that ignorance is bliss, but all I have gotten from this conversation is that there is a conspracy to take down the truths inspired by God by pesky things called “facts” and “analysis” unfortunately for me I think such things better illuminate our God for us… But call me crazy.
M
Mberg3
Guest
Actually I had just finished the Catechism last night. Its a wonderful outline for the faith and you seem to have a very dense understanding of what Historical Criticism is. If you have ever read an instruction manual and found that there was a better way to understand what was being said than by following the step by step instructions you do not disrgard the usefullness of the manual, you just see the underlying truth more clearly than the manual is saying. There are errors and discrepancies like every other piece of work in the Gospels, but the underlying truth is the same and becomes even more evident when you compare and contrast all 4 Gospels. Just like studying one Church Father does not reveal the whole truth of the Catholic Church, but together they form a complete and stable doctrine of Faith. That is how is see the Bible. If there are glaring errors, such as the fact 1 Timothy probably was not authored by Paul, it still does not mean there is NO truth in it whatsoever. There just needs to be more caution in examining the texts. So in short, when taken together the Gospels and the rest of the NT show an infallible truth about God, but when taken individually they contain cultural biases and editing errors that must be overcome to get to the truth.
M
Mberg3
Guest
Thank you for that. I must admit that there has been a hole in my study of Christianity when it comes to Eastern Traditions. That helps clarify things a little more.
M
Mberg3
Guest
I highly respect Dr. Hahn. He seems to have presented the best explanation of Catholicism that I have heard
P
pablope
Guest
That is good. Have you read any of his books? I recommend one, Reasons to Believe, for your study of the Catholic faith.
Blessings…
PS: I see from your some of your replies that you are still having trouble with the “quote” button, it is hard to read your replies.
Highlight a portion of a post you want to reply, and click the “Quote” icon or button. It is located on top of the response box, next to the “#” icon or button.
Also, delete the “quote” word in the post you are responding to, at the beginning and at the end of the post you responding to. Hope this helps.
V
veilofveronica
Guest
Hi there,
First of all, warm welcomes and greetings to Catholic Answers forums, I hope you’re enjoying it here.
Congrats, also, on your engagement.
My recommendation would be that you look and see if there is an RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults) class in your parish (if you attend one, or one near by you.)or diocese (area, the diocese covers all the churches for where you live). The class is for those interested in the Catholic faith. When you join the class, there is no “pressure” to become a Catholic or to formally make any commitments to the Church just yet. You will have a lot of your questions answered there, and enjoy fellowship with other people that are learning.
I think the answer to “Why be a Catholic” is different for each one of us. Even those that grew up in the Church still make the choice to stay there. I left the Church and came back after several years away. Why did I come back? The Catholic Church is home to me. I might complain about it sometimes, but it’s simply home. I see it as holding the fullest expression of truth that I have found out of any other religion. This isn’t to say that there isn’t beauty, truth, and faith to be found in the Protestant religions. I believe there is. We are all worshiping the same God, and the same Christ, after all. I think that salvation comes through Christ. I love the Mass and the Seven Sacraments. I love the devotion to the Virgin Mary that seems to have the greatest following in the Catholic Church. I love that there is room for liberals and conservatives. I love that no matter where I go in the world, the parishes might have different styles, but the Mass remains the same. I love the Traditions and the Scriptures. (which, of course, the Scriptures are common to all Christians. Our Bible, though, is slightly different as it contains more Books.)
I would suggest that you spend time in prayer and reflection as to why the Roman Catholic Church is calling to you. Talk to the Lord. He will give you the Answers that you seek. Conversion is a process, even for life-long Catholics. We sometimes have dramatic moments, but generally it doesn’t happen all at once.
I’d also suggest that you make an appointment to talk to a local priest, at your parish (if you are attending Mass), or one that is closest to you. Our priests are more than happy to discuss these questions with you and to help to make this decision a prayerful one. It’s not one to be entered into lightly, but we rejoice when it’s made and welcome you with open arms, whether you are discerning a full communion with the Catholic Church, or have already decided.
Many RCIA classes don’t start until the fall, so don’t be disheartened if they haven’t started up yet. Talk to a priest, talk to other Catholics about what they like about the faith. Look at online resources. Pray and talk to Jesus. He will never steer you wrong.
I can relate to your decision. My fiance recently decided to begin the conversion process, also. He was raised Anglican (Episcopal) and started attending Mass with me when I went back to Church.
May God bless you as you make your discernment.
First of all, warm welcomes and greetings to Catholic Answers forums, I hope you’re enjoying it here.
Congrats, also, on your engagement.My recommendation would be that you look and see if there is an RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults) class in your parish (if you attend one, or one near by you.)or diocese (area, the diocese covers all the churches for where you live). The class is for those interested in the Catholic faith. When you join the class, there is no “pressure” to become a Catholic or to formally make any commitments to the Church just yet. You will have a lot of your questions answered there, and enjoy fellowship with other people that are learning.
I think the answer to “Why be a Catholic” is different for each one of us. Even those that grew up in the Church still make the choice to stay there. I left the Church and came back after several years away. Why did I come back? The Catholic Church is home to me. I might complain about it sometimes, but it’s simply home. I see it as holding the fullest expression of truth that I have found out of any other religion. This isn’t to say that there isn’t beauty, truth, and faith to be found in the Protestant religions. I believe there is. We are all worshiping the same God, and the same Christ, after all. I think that salvation comes through Christ. I love the Mass and the Seven Sacraments. I love the devotion to the Virgin Mary that seems to have the greatest following in the Catholic Church. I love that there is room for liberals and conservatives. I love that no matter where I go in the world, the parishes might have different styles, but the Mass remains the same. I love the Traditions and the Scriptures. (which, of course, the Scriptures are common to all Christians. Our Bible, though, is slightly different as it contains more Books.)
I would suggest that you spend time in prayer and reflection as to why the Roman Catholic Church is calling to you. Talk to the Lord. He will give you the Answers that you seek.
Conversion is a process, even for life-long Catholics. We sometimes have dramatic moments, but generally it doesn’t happen all at once.I’d also suggest that you make an appointment to talk to a local priest, at your parish (if you are attending Mass), or one that is closest to you. Our priests are more than happy to discuss these questions with you and to help to make this decision a prayerful one. It’s not one to be entered into lightly, but we rejoice when it’s made and welcome you with open arms, whether you are discerning a full communion with the Catholic Church, or have already decided.
Many RCIA classes don’t start until the fall, so don’t be disheartened if they haven’t started up yet. Talk to a priest, talk to other Catholics about what they like about the faith. Look at online resources. Pray and talk to Jesus. He will never steer you wrong.
I can relate to your decision. My fiance recently decided to begin the conversion process, also. He was raised Anglican (Episcopal) and started attending Mass with me when I went back to Church.
May God bless you as you make your discernment.
J
JIMBARRY1946
Guest
I cannot imagine ever not being Catholic. I NEED the Holy Eucharist. It helps sustain me. It IS the Body, Blood, Soul, and Devinity of Jesus Christ. At the Last Supper, Jesus didn’t say, “This is sorta like My body in some way, but not really;” he said, “This IS My Body.”
Jesus also said, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you” (John 6:53). This is what you get in every Catholic Mass.
Jesus also said, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you” (John 6:53). This is what you get in every Catholic Mass.
G
guanophore
Guest
guanophore;7848471:
Fruitless effort on my part, Mberg. If you do not accept the NT as inspired, I don’t think any number of “experts” will help. This is one of the doctrines of the faith, a mystery that needs to be accepted by grace, through faith. You have shown no evidence that you are ready, willing, or able to do any such thing. You might as well study it as literature or poetry.
I can see why you are confused, Mberg. When you learn to use the quotation feature, you will be able to tell the diference between what you posted, and what others have posted. You will also be able to trace back (using that little blue button next to the name) where the quote originated, like this:
So, please post your experts that have studied the original sources. I am eager to explore them.
Here is a nice simple overview on the debate as it stands: abu.nb.ca/courses/ntintro/1Tim.htm
G
guanophore
Guest
Well, we have all done it.
I am here to strive to provide you with Catholic Answers, Mberg. You don;t seem to be interested in any.
I can’t imagine why you would. I should think such an existence is far from commendable. It does not honor the intellect that God gave us, or is it a tribute to His wisdom.
Matt 13:45-46
45 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, 46 who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it.
How can anyone acquire the Pearl of Great Price without searching?
I am sorry that is all you are getting, but it does not surprise me. I am not aware that anyone has mentioned a “conspracy” in this thread, either.
If one wants to find the Truth of Christ, Mberg, then one must come as a little child. That means to be teachable. Instead of receiving the message of the Apostles with an open heart, and open mind, you seem to be fervently set about finding reasons to devaluate and discredit the message in advance.
Had you ever considered listening to the Catholic gospel first, before trying to “take down the truth” as you call it?
I
IGoALot
Guest
The best advice I can give is to find a church that has adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. Go there and sit, talk to Jesus. Tell him that you are unsure of what He wants you to do. You WILL get an answer but you have to be open to it. Sometimes the answers are not what we want to hear. It will not be immediate but you will know.
L
LOCO
Guest
I’m sure some of those Anglicans returning home would be insulted by your statement. Allowing female clergy and then openly gay clergy is a Theological difference not a political one.There is no scriptural argument to support this change. This is a manmade change.
Historically, there may have been a laying on of hands etc but you will find NO evidence supporting the theory that they operated SEPARATELY to the Catholic Church. They were always answerable to Rome. They were like any Catholic Church today outside of Rome and to say otherwise is to rewrite history.
The only reason the Anglican Church was given legitimacy was because the King of England wanted a divorce and the Pope would not allow it. The King sulked and decided he would give legal protection to a church with the monarch as the head of it.
The Anglican Church is a church that bowed to the modern world, adopting its trends and contributing directly to its declining moral fibre. When people see a church changing its core beliefs this way it becomes ‘popular’ and is described as ‘progressive’ and ‘open minded’. When in truth, it has sold out, which is sad for its congregation. Of all the Prots. this is the denomination which is in worship closest to the CC.
If it was the one TRUE church, the Pillar of Truth then it would stand strong and true to Jesus teachings regardless of how unpopular it makes you.
**“Surely the purpose of having an open mind is to shut it on something solid”
GK CHESTERTON**
- Status