Will a lifeline be accepted by struggling Anglicans

[gurneyhalleck1]

Catherine was Charles’ aunt.

GKC

LOL…oops…here I go again, as Reagan would say! Good thing I always have the hearty Anglophile master GKC to throw out the trampoline when I fall out of the plane! LOL I stand corrected…again!! lol.

This is what happens when you throw a sixth grade teacher back into school for a couple of hot summer days with 32 kids! Suddenly aunts turn into sisters, etc.!

Thanks, GK

 

[GKC]

LOL…oops…here I go again, as Reagan would say! Good thing I always have the hearty Anglophile master GKC to throw out the trampoline when I fall out of the plane! LOL I stand corrected…again!! lol.

This is what happens when you throw a sixth grade teacher back into school for a couple of hot summer days with 32 kids! Suddenly aunts turn into sisters, etc.!

Thanks, GK

I’m a nuisance, I know.

Charles’ mother was one of Catherines’s older sisters, Joanna (eventually called the Mad), who was married to Phillip the Handsome, son of Maxmillian of Austria, the Holy Roman Emperor of his day.

Catherine and Joanna, along with their two other sisters, were used by the Catholic Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, to forge marriage alliances around France, the last and least of which was Catherine’s union with Arthur. Marriage was as much political dynastic manuvering as it was sacramental, in the day. Henry ran aground on that.

GKC

 

[Padrej]

I’m a nuisance, I know.

Charles’ mother was one of Catherines’s older sisters, Joanna (eventually called the Mad), who was married to Phillip the Handsome, son of Maxmillian of Austria, the Holy Roman Emperor of his day.

Catherine and Joanna, along with their two other sisters, were used by the Catholic Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, to forge marriage alliances around France, the last and least of which was Catherine’s union with Arthur. Marriage was as much political dynastic manuvering as it was sacramental, in the day. Henry ran aground on that.

GKC

I am glad that quotes of this nature are coming forth to “clear the air” so to speak on this issue. I have too often heard the Henry VIII argument spoken with such a vile tone from Roman Catholics that it sickens me to think that their history has been so one sided and revisionist. When one looks at the petition of Henry to the Pope for a legal seperation of wife #1 it HAD the blessings of many European bishops and cardinals who had placed their wax seals upon it. As was so aptly pointed out, for the Pope to grant this he would loose his protector’s favor so Henry was forced into the move he made. NOW, Catholic historians like to also conveniently omit that Henry was not excommunicated until many rears AFTER his death. The question then becomes how can a person be given a Christian burial by the church and proclaimed to be in Heaven, then years later be excommunicated and be placed in Hell?

I usually come back to thos who insist on being ignorant and rude regarding their history in regard to Henry and wish to attack fellow Christians by placing them in judgement (when the Bible clearly says judge not) to explain the Roman Catholic justification for the Inquisition. Cartainly torturing a person to death or torturing them to get a confession to Christ is not a legitimate confession of faith. When it comes down to it we all have some things we are not proud of doing. as Jesus said “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone,” certainly there is NOBODY on either side of this discussion and even in the Orthodox faith that does not fall under that clause.
Lets face it there is enough hatred on both sides of the fence to go around, and spewing more of it is not going to get one to merge or even want to be part of you. If Christ said, “a tree is known by its fruits” I would almost surmise that as much hatred and venom as was in the previous post over Henry VII would make one question if this person was even of God when you consider that God is love. Satan does nothing but spread hatred and discord and is called “the accuser of the bretheren,” does this not fit in with what was going on with one of the previous Henry VII posts? Being accused??? Just something to ponder when it comes to every idle word we speak.

 

[querying]

Why does so much time and threads get dedicated to discussing the ever obsolete Anglicans?

They will thankfully fade into obscurity when their communion collapses entirely, along with this new so called traditional Anglican communion.

They bring nothing to the Christian body whatsoever.

Their Church is nothing but a big social club led by the spirit of typical white middle class relativism, where the topic of their day in Church is how fancy their Church looks, and where they’ll be sending little Tommy and Sally for vacation next year.

Mormons, I respect, for they have been very effective in fighting homosexual marriage. Evangelicals I respect, for they have been very effective in the pro life movement- moreso than Catholics, if you ask me.

The above groups bring something to the table, which is making the world a better place (fighting for the family which is for the good of society, and fighting to end the holocaust of the unborn)

But Anglicans- what do they bring which is relevant to Christian morality and the good of society??

Absolutely nothing.

I’m tired of all the threads on this group of relativists.

Can we please focus on Christians who actually act like Christians, and don’t cater to practicing homosexuals/transsexuals/transvestites/butch feminazi’s/ pro abortionists ________ ((name removed by moderator)ut any other group of people whose activity, according to the NT has stated unequivocally will warrant them death in the next life)

That Church “is too much with the world late and soon” (William Wordsworth’s sonnet paraphrased)

The sooner the CofE implodes here in the UK, the better. Funny how most countries with state Churches have abysmal Church attendance and are very Godless…

 

[GKC]

Why does so much time and threads get dedicated to discussing the ever obsolete Anglicans?

They will thankfully fade into obscurity when their communion collapses entirely, along with this new so called traditional Anglican communion.

They bring nothing to the Christian body whatsoever.

Their Church is nothing but a big social club led by the spirit of typical white middle class relativism, where the topic of their day in Church is how fancy their Church looks, and where they’ll be sending little Tommy and Sally for vacation next year.

Mormons, I respect, for they have been very effective in fighting homosexual marriage. Evangelicals I respect, for they have been very effective in the pro life movement- moreso than Catholics, if you ask me.

The above groups bring something to the table, which is making the world a better place (fighting for the family which is for the good of society, and fighting to end the holocaust of the unborn)

But Anglicans- what do they bring which is relevant to Christian morality and the good of society??

Absolutely nothing.

I’m tired of all the threads on this group of relativists.

Can we please focus on Christians who actually act like Christians, and don’t cater to practicing homosexuals/transsexuals/transvestites/butch feminazi’s/ pro abortionists ________ ((name removed by moderator)ut any other group of people whose activity, according to the NT has stated unequivocally will warrant them death in the next life)

That Church “is too much with the world late and soon” (William Wordsworth’s sonnet paraphrased)

The sooner the CofE implodes here in the UK, the better. Funny how most countries with state Churches have abysmal Church attendance and are very Godless…

Glad to be of service. And sure, you can focus on any Christians you like, within the strictures of the board. If needed, just inquire on how to start a thread.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus, posterus traditus Anglicanus

 

[GKC]

I am glad that quotes of this nature are coming forth to “clear the air” so to speak on this issue. I have too often heard the Henry VIII argument spoken with such a vile tone from Roman Catholics that it sickens me to think that their history has been so one sided and revisionist. When one looks at the petition of Henry to the Pope for a legal seperation of wife #1 it HAD the blessings of many European bishops and cardinals who had placed their wax seals upon it. As was so aptly pointed out, for the Pope to grant this he would loose his protector’s favor so Henry was forced into the move he made. NOW, Catholic historians like to also conveniently omit that Henry was not excommunicated until many rears AFTER his death. The question then becomes how can a person be given a Christian burial by the church and proclaimed to be in Heaven, then years later be excommunicated and be placed in Hell?

I usually come back to thos who insist on being ignorant and rude regarding their history in regard to Henry and wish to attack fellow Christians by placing them in judgement (when the Bible clearly says judge not) to explain the Roman Catholic justification for the Inquisition. Cartainly torturing a person to death or torturing them to get a confession to Christ is not a legitimate confession of faith. When it comes down to it we all have some things we are not proud of doing. as Jesus said “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone,” certainly there is NOBODY on either side of this discussion and even in the Orthodox faith that does not fall under that clause.
Lets face it there is enough hatred on both sides of the fence to go around, and spewing more of it is not going to get one to merge or even want to be part of you. If Christ said, “a tree is known by its fruits” I would almost surmise that as much hatred and venom as was in the previous post over Henry VII would make one question if this person was even of God when you consider that God is love. Satan does nothing but spread hatred and discord and is called “the accuser of the bretheren,” does this not fit in with what was going on with one of the previous Henry VII posts? Being accused??? Just something to ponder when it comes to every idle word we speak.

Henry’s Great Matter, including the world of impediments/dispensations/decrees of nullity, etc., as the system was set up, pre-Trent, is one of my hobbies; has been for years, as also the sad story of Apostolciae Curae. I get to exercise them here often. History is complicated and interesting.

GKC

 

[querying]

Glad to be of service. And sure, you can focus on any Christians you like, within the strictures of the board. If needed, just inquire on how to start a thread.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus, posterus traditus Anglicanus

I’m well aware that I can create a thread on any other Christian Church. That is not the point however.

Why are so many threads dedicated to such a “nobody” Church on a Catholic forum?

Reall, what is it about you guys that is of such importance on this forum, as I can’t pick out anything.

And why are their so many Anglicans on this forum, peddling their wannabe quasi Catholic identity?? What do you guys actually get out of this?

 

[GKC]

I’m well aware that I can create a thread on any other Christian Church. That is not the point however.

Why are so many threads dedicated to such a “nobody” Church on a Catholic forum?

Reall, what is it about you guys that is of such importance on this forum, as I can’t pick out anything.

And why are their so many Anglicans on this forum, peddling their wannabe quasi Catholic identity?? What do you guys actually get out of this?

I personally think that we have the usual fascination of a train wreck. Everybody rubbernecks.

And posting here keeps us off the street. Sometimes, it allows some local folk to get a little deeper into history. And you know that’s to the good.

GKC

 

[rr1213]

I’m well aware that I can create a thread on any other Christian Church. That is not the point however.

Why are so many threads dedicated to such a “nobody” Church on a Catholic forum?

Reall, what is it about you guys that is of such importance on this forum, as I can’t pick out anything.

And why are their so many Anglicans on this forum, peddling their wannabe quasi Catholic identity?? What do you guys actually get out of this?

I think that there are a number of legitimate reasons for the time and effort devoted on these boards to the Anglican traditions. First of all, this is an English-speaking board, so English-speaking ecclessial bodies are a natural subject of discussion. The Church of England and the Anglican Communion fall within that category. Secondly, the Anglicans profess to be a Catholic Church within the Catholic tradition. As a Roman Catholic (and former Anglican), I must of course disagree with this assessment, nonetheless it is certainly true that the Anglican tradition has historically been more Catholic in nature than most other-Catholic bodies. In other words, the Anglicans are closer relations than, say, the Baptists and, thus, more worthy of discussion. Third, the Anglican Communion is one of the largest non-Catholic bodies in the Western Church. Fourth, the Anglican liturgy and Anglican music are wonderful gifts to the English-speaking world. Frankly, the Catholic Church can learn from the Anglicans with respect to an effective yet majestic use of the English language during worship. Fifth, and finally, there is a movement among various Anglican bodies, as well as individual Anglicans, to seek corporate or personal union with the Catholic Church. That is monumental in and of itself.

 

[GKC]

I think that there are a number of legitimate reasons for the time and effort devoted on these boards to the Anglican traditions. First of all, this is an English-speaking board, so English-speaking ecclessial bodies are a natural subject of discussion. The Church of England and the Anglican Communion fall within that category. Secondly, the Anglicans profess to be a Catholic Church within the Catholic tradition. As a Roman Catholic (and former Anglican), I must of course disagree with this assessment, nonetheless it is certainly true that the Anglican tradition has historically been more Catholic in nature than most other-Catholic bodies. In other words, the Anglicans are closer relations than, say, the Baptists and, thus, more worthy of discussion. Third, the Anglican Communion is one of the largest non-Catholic bodies in the Western Church. Fourth, the Anglican liturgy and Anglican music are wonderful gifts to the English-speaking world. Frankly, the Catholic Church can learn from the Anglicans with respect to an effective yet majestic use of the English language during worship. Fifth, and finally, there is a movement among various Anglican bodies, as well as individual Anglicans, to seek corporate or personal union with the Catholic Church. That is monumental in and of itself.

Those are good reasons, too.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Why does so much time and threads get dedicated to discussing the ever obsolete Anglicans?

They will thankfully fade into obscurity when their communion collapses entirely, along with this new so called traditional Anglican communion.

They bring nothing to the Christian body whatsoever.

Their Church is nothing but a big social club led by the spirit of typical white middle class relativism, where the topic of their day in Church is how fancy their Church looks, and where they’ll be sending little Tommy and Sally for vacation next year.

Mormons, I respect, for they have been very effective in fighting homosexual marriage. Evangelicals I respect, for they have been very effective in the pro life movement- moreso than Catholics, if you ask me.

The above groups bring something to the table, which is making the world a better place (fighting for the family which is for the good of society, and fighting to end the holocaust of the unborn)

But Anglicans- what do they bring which is relevant to Christian morality and the good of society??

Absolutely nothing.

I’m tired of all the threads on this group of relativists.

Can we please focus on Christians who actually act like Christians, and don’t cater to practicing homosexuals/transsexuals/transvestites/butch feminazi’s/ pro abortionists ________ ((name removed by moderator)ut any other group of people whose activity, according to the NT has stated unequivocally will warrant them death in the next life)

That Church “is too much with the world late and soon” (William Wordsworth’s sonnet paraphrased)

The sooner the CofE implodes here in the UK, the better. Funny how most countries with state Churches have abysmal Church attendance and are very Godless…

Querying,

I happen to be a Roman Catholic and a former Anglican and I am appauled by your post from beginning to end. It is uncharitable, nasty, condescending, and accomplishes nothing but blast Anglicans as an irrelevent and worthless group of people. You obviously don’t know much about Anglicanism to paint them with the insanely broad brush you use here. Do all Anglicans embrace homosexuality and moral relativism? Really? Why did the various dioceses from all over the U.S. and Canada just break off from the Episcopal Church and merge into a new province, the ACNA? The main issue WAS homosexuality and their frustration and outrage that this sinful lifestyle has been embraced and finally given a stamp of approval by Episcopalians. These folks DON’T want to be Episcopalians anymore but rather Anglicans more true to their heritage morally.

Also, if you bothered to pay attention you’d notice that the ACNA is officially pro-life and adopted a 100% pro-life stance in their charter at the convention kick-off. Also, the feminazis (someone’s been listening to a little too much Rush Limbaugh here!) lost some power with ACNA that they had in TEC. They are limited to being ordained in 6 out of 28 dioceses. I am in full agreement with you that women’s ordination is heresy, ridiculous, and a dangerous indicator of future turmoil and collapse.

But that being said, you also ignore Africa, specifically Nigeria, the LARGEST Anglican province in the world membership-wise, and it is HARDCORE ANTI-GAY in its agenda.

There are many Anglican provinces and dioceses that are opposed to the gay agenda. Archbishop Greg Venables in South America is another notable. CANA, AMIA, continuing Anglicans, Reformed Anglican Church, ACNA, most of Africa, the whole kit and kaboodle are not into this sinful stuff you mention. You are taking the tainted and evil TEC and spreading their sins to the entire communion, which I don’t think is fair.

I will concede that Anglicanism is far too tolerant and not tough enough. The ACNA should’ve smacked down and eliminated this women’s ordination silliness once and for all. But they chose the noodleback approach and tolerated it in the name of unity…which could prove to be a powder keg. But I hope I’m wrong and wish them well.

But your post claims Anglicans are abortionists, relativist, homosexual supporters, and that they are just frilly and fluffy worrying about “Tommy and Sally’s vacation.” I think you have a lot to learn about Anglicans of a conservative brand and you need to stop blending Episcopalians and Anglicans into one fruit salad. Keep in mind that there are many pro-abortion Catholics out there. If you don’t believe that then you’re in denial. There are many Catholic either pro-choice or who are willing to set their morals aside with this issue. A large margin of Catholics voted for Obama, keep that in mind. Also there are countless Catholics who are divorced and remarried and yet take the Eucharist week after week. There are many Catholics who are rich and only care about the frilly images and looks of their Church who care only for “Tommy and Sally’s vacation” also. You can’t stereotype Anglicans and then try to paint this image of Catholicism as being perfect. We’re not. We have just as many folks under our tent who have lost their way. We’re just better at keeping that fact quiet, Anglicans are not.

I’d rethink some of your statements.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I personally think that we have the usual fascination of a train wreck. Everybody rubbernecks.

And posting here keeps us off the street. Sometimes, it allows some local folk to get a little deeper into history. And you know that’s to the good.

GKC

GKC, as always, you’re the epitome of a Christian IMO. You just got your denomination ripped apart by this guy, insulted like crazy, and the heritage of your faith tradition smashed up and yet you still reply with a sense of humor and real class. Anglicans may be in the midst of a messy realignment with a heap of burps and sputters along the way but they don’t deserve this level of generalization and mockery. As you have said, Anglicans are a motley crew! Stereotyping Anglicans is a contradiction in terms!

 

[BernadetteM]

Episcopalians/Anglicans have always had different doctrinal beliefs and have stayed one until the last 30 years or so. Yes the Episcopal church has gone by the way side, but many have had to leave what they considered their faith community for years.

It is really very sad for them, it is like they are in limbo right now searching for a place where their beliefs will be substained without further division. Instead of condemning them, let us pray that they find the place where our Lord wants them to be.

We have our own problems and can thank God that we have Peter to lead us and keep the faith pure and true.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[GKC]

GKC, as always, you’re the epitome of a Christian IMO. You just got your denomination ripped apart by this guy, insulted like crazy, and the heritage of your faith tradition smashed up and yet you still reply with a sense of humor and real class. Anglicans may be in the midst of a messy realignment with a heap of burps and sputters along the way but they don’t deserve this level of generalization and mockery. As you have said, Anglicans are a motley crew! Stereotyping Anglicans is a contradiction in terms!

You are very kind. For an Anglican of the traditional flavor, a sense of humor, it seems to me, is salutary these days. One may was well laugh as cry.

Of course, as you know, I can deconstruct the contemporary world of Anglicanism myself, as can others, yourself included. From a position of knowledge and experience, which is a little more meaningful than waving cardboard cutouts. That sort of thing never affects me. Which drives some folks batty.

Thanks.

GKC.

 

[Padrej]

I think that there are a number of legitimate reasons for the time and effort devoted on these boards to the Anglican traditions. First of all, this is an English-speaking board, so English-speaking ecclessial bodies are a natural subject of discussion. The Church of England and the Anglican Communion fall within that category. Secondly, the Anglicans profess to be a Catholic Church within the Catholic tradition. As a Roman Catholic (and former Anglican), I must of course disagree with this assessment, nonetheless it is certainly true that the Anglican tradition has historically been more Catholic in nature than most other-Catholic bodies. In other words, the Anglicans are closer relations than, say, the Baptists and, thus, more worthy of discussion. Third, the Anglican Communion is one of the largest non-Catholic bodies in the Western Church. Fourth, the Anglican liturgy and Anglican music are wonderful gifts to the English-speaking world. Frankly, the Catholic Church can learn from the Anglicans with respect to an effective yet majestic use of the English language during worship. Fifth, and finally, there is a movement among various Anglican bodies, as well as individual Anglicans, to seek corporate or personal union with the Catholic Church. That is monumental in and of itself.

I would like to add a little something to this comment if I may.
Many Roman Catholics are not aware that traditional Anglican (NOT Episcoplalian) bishops have Roman Catholic lines in their apostolic lineage as well as Orthodox. For example I have 13 cardinals and 4 popes in my direct line going back to Peter. The Episcopal Bishops cannot claim these lines.
It would seem that there are some of us that are more in communion with you than you would like to admit.
I do not know where Querying is getting his ideas of moral superiority because of being Roman Catholic, the last time I checked I did not see Jesus Christ’s name responding on this forum and saing “you are right with God and you are not.” I will say it again: Lets face it there is enough hatred on both sides of the fence to go around, and spewing more of it is not going to get one to merge or even want to be part of you. If Christ said, “a tree is known by its fruits” I would almost surmise that as much hatred and venom as was in the previous posts would make one question if this person was even of God when you consider that God is love. Satan does nothing but spread hatred and discord and is called “the accuser of the bretheren,” does this not fit in with what was going on with one of the previous posts? Being accused??? Just something to ponder when it comes to every idle word we speak.

 

[Padrej]

I would like to add a little something to this comment if I may.
Many Roman Catholics are not aware that traditional Anglican (NOT Episcoplalian) bishops have Roman Catholic lines in their apostolic lineage as well as Orthodox. For example I have 13 cardinals and 4 popes in my direct line going back to Peter. The Episcopal Bishops cannot claim these lines.
It would seem that there are some of us that are more in communion with you than you would like to admit.
I do not know where Querying is getting his ideas of moral superiority because of being Roman Catholic, the last time I checked I did not see Jesus Christ’s name responding on this forum and saing “you are right with God and you are not.” I will say it again: Lets face it there is enough hatred on both sides of the fence to go around, and spewing more of it is not going to get one to merge or even want to be part of you. If Christ said, “a tree is known by its fruits” I would almost surmise that as much hatred and venom as was in the previous posts would make one question if this person was even of God when you consider that God is love. Satan does nothing but spread hatred and discord and is called “the accuser of the bretheren,” does this not fit in with what was going on with one of the previous posts? Being accused??? Just something to ponder when it comes to every idle word we speak.

Before any Roman Catholic starts in on me, I do NOT believe that my apostolic lines from the RCC make me equal to you. I am merely pointing out a point of fact that many Anglican bishops have them.

 

[Padrej]

Episcopalians/Anglicans have always had different doctrinal beliefs and have stayed one until the last 30 years or so. Yes the Episcopal church has gone by the way side, but many have had to leave what they considered their faith community for years.

It is really very sad for them, it is like they are in limbo right now searching for a place where their beliefs will be substained without further division. Instead of condemning them, let us pray that they find the place where our Lord wants them to be.

We have our own problems and can thank God that we have Peter to lead us and keep the faith pure and true.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

Finally a voice of reason comes from out of the storm. I agree with you that the Episcopal Church has gone by the wayside, in fact when I started in the ministry in the Episcopal church one of my professors stated “the Episcopal church died in 1979 and it has never been able to admit it.” What he meant was the the intoduction of the 79 BCP brought in a whole host of new ideas that should have never been brought to the table. How did it get done? The retired bishops used to have vote in the house of bishops, when it came to accepting the 79 BCP they were told “you no longer have vote” and were lead out of the meeting. The younger bishops voted the new book in and then invited the retirees back and allowed them to keep voting on other matters, but the die was cast.

When I applied for Holy Orders in the Episcopal Church I was rejeced because “I was not black, female or homosexual.” I was blatantly told this to my face. Any other place you could sue them for discrimination. I however am Anglican now.

I believe that union with the Anglicans and the break aways from the Episcopal Church will be far easier than it ever wil be than to even talk merger with the Episcopal Church. The present presiding bishop Jefferts-Shcorri (whose main education background is in marine biology BTW not theology) has made it quite clear that she is going to thumb her nose at even the Archbishop of Canturbury. She has made blatant comments like “Jesus is not the only way to God” and her latest was calling the salvation through Christ formula the “great western herrisy.” With that said I believe you will find a flood gate opeing in the Episcopal church of conservatives that would gladly go into the Roman Catholic church because of its similarities. This is one more reason to keep your mouths shut over attacking the Anglican church as being doctrinally wrong. You will as the old proverb goes, “catch more flies with honey than vinegar.”

If we start looking at what makes us similar and what makes each the great church they are you will win them over. The world gives us enough hatred. Let us not allow it to marr this discussion but speak only with charity and the things that will bring us closer.

 

[rr1213]

I would like to add a little something to this comment if I may.
Many Roman Catholics are not aware that traditional Anglican (NOT Episcoplalian) bishops have Roman Catholic lines in their apostolic lineage as well as Orthodox. For example I have 13 cardinals and 4 popes in my direct line going back to Peter. The Episcopal Bishops cannot claim these lines.
It would seem that there are some of us that are more in communion with you than you would like to admit.
I do not know where Querying is getting his ideas of moral superiority because of being Roman Catholic, the last time I checked I did not see Jesus Christ’s name responding on this forum and saing “you are right with God and you are not.” I will say it again: Lets face it there is enough hatred on both sides of the fence to go around, and spewing more of it is not going to get one to merge or even want to be part of you. If Christ said, “a tree is known by its fruits” I would almost surmise that as much hatred and venom as was in the previous posts would make one question if this person was even of God when you consider that God is love. Satan does nothing but spread hatred and discord and is called “the accuser of the bretheren,” does this not fit in with what was going on with one of the previous posts? Being accused??? Just something to ponder when it comes to every idle word we speak.

As a Catholic, I believe that Anglican orders per se are null and void. Nonetheless, we do know that since that proclamation that there has been a number of ordinations in the Anglican ranks by outside bishops with valid apostolic succession that have taken the proper form and manifesting the proper intent. To the best of my knowledge, the Catholic Church has not yet spoken definitively on whether this alters the conclusion of Apostolicae Curae. My personal belief is that it some Anglicans consequently have valid orders yet, until this addressed by the Church, I won’t know for certain. Maybe if Rome ever acts on TAC’s proposal we’ll have our answer…

 

[GKC]

I would like to add a little something to this comment if I may.
Many Roman Catholics are not aware that traditional Anglican (NOT Episcoplalian) bishops have Roman Catholic lines in their apostolic lineage as well as Orthodox. For example I have 13 cardinals and 4 popes in my direct line going back to Peter. The Episcopal Bishops cannot claim these lines.
It would seem that there are some of us that are more in communion with you than you would like to admit.
I do not know where Querying is getting his ideas of moral superiority because of being Roman Catholic, the last time I checked I did not see Jesus Christ’s name responding on this forum and saing “you are right with God and you are not.” I will say it again: Lets face it there is enough hatred on both sides of the fence to go around, and spewing more of it is not going to get one to merge or even want to be part of you. If Christ said, “a tree is known by its fruits” I would almost surmise that as much hatred and venom as was in the previous posts would make one question if this person was even of God when you consider that God is love. Satan does nothing but spread hatred and discord and is called “the accuser of the bretheren,” does this not fit in with what was going on with one of the previous posts? Being accused??? Just something to ponder when it comes to every idle word we speak.

The distinction you make between Episcopal and Anglican lines here is not clear to me. Setting aside the problems of valid matter in recent Episcopalian episcopacy, and ignoring any consideration of vagantes, all Anglican (considered as the broadest term) bishops share all RC lines, pre-Henrician days. Post Henry, all such Anglican bishops derive from ++Parker, who conveyed the same lines. The point that the RCC makes, re:validity of orders post Parker (Apostolicae Curae), centers on problems of form and intent, not the minister.

GKC

 

[Contarini]

She has made blatant comments like “Jesus is not the only way to God”

She later refined this by claiming that she was only saying what Vatican II said–that people of good will may be saved even if they are not explicitly Christian. I remain skeptical as to whether she understands Vatican II very well.

and her latest was calling the salvation through Christ formula the “great western herrisy.”

No, she did not say that. She said that individualism was the great Western heresy. And she’s right.

Also, since when is salvation through Christ a formula?

Edwin