Will a lifeline be accepted by struggling Anglicans

[jordananglo]

“… whilst many Catholics are all too happy to attack orthodox Christians such as the Mormons and Evangelicals”

Who the heck are you, and where do you come from?

 

[querying]

I would encourage Anglicans as well as other Christians to use the Catechism of the Catholic Church as an aid to catechise their students and their children. It is an excellent expression of Christian truth and worth reading. The Anglican encouragement to “read, mark, learn and inwardly digest” the Scriptures can apply just as appropriately to the CCC.

I’m sorry, maybe I’m missing something, but why should protestants- which Anglicans are- use non protestant books to teach their students??

If they accept some of Catholic doctrine, most Catholic doctrine is in opposition to the “believe anything you want- Buddhism included” ideology pervasive in their churches (social clubs), so what sense does it make for them to teach from a Catholic Catechism?

Would you advise Catholic parents to catechise their students and children with protestant books?

 

[querying]

“… whilst many Catholics are all too happy to attack orthodox Christians such as the Mormons and Evangelicals”

Who the heck are you, and where do you come from?

Who the heck am I?

I’m querying- or did you miss my username?

Where do I come from? I live in the UK

As for the snippet of my post you quoted, here is evidence supporting the statement:

Why are people mormon considering it is obvioulsy fabricated?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=363749

(I would like to see a **"Why are people Anglican considering it is obvioulsy fabricated and psuedo Catholic social group?"

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=366234

 

[josie_L]

“… whilst many Catholics are all too happy to attack orthodox Christians such as the Mormons and Evangelicals”

Who the heck are you, and where do you come from?

Yah I’m more than confused by this comment. I’m not sure who this querying is but how does a fallen away Catholic claim Mormons and evangelicals are “orthodox Christians”? God bless.

 

[jordananglo]

querying has shown himself to be out of touch with reality, so I will simply ignore his comments from now on.

Coming back to GKC’s comment:

“History makes copies of itself. The run-up to Apostolicae Curae, the reaction of the English RC establishment to what modest goals Halifax and Portal hoped to pursue, was a sold reaffirmation of one by one, in line, through the gate, individual submission and let there be no talk about narrowing the distance between the two Churches. I think of it as the Recusants’ Revenge.”

You would think that this sort of reasoning changed with Vatican II - there is so much time and energy spent on ecumenical dialog. This presumes that it is possible to have corporate reunion with other Christian bodies. The Catechism goes out of its way to talk in detail about how other churches are worthy of being called Christian in its wounds to unity' section, and has a lengthy section about the path to unity’. The language is very charitable. It is thus clear that corporate reunion is very much part of the churches teaching.

I also found it interesting to read Bishop Chislett’s paper on this topic.
tiny.cc/pIeOK

In it there is the following quote about Cardinal Ratzinger:

“When it comes to the more practical questions about the way of moving forward toward Christian unity, Ratzinger has stated that Catholics cannot demand that all the other Churches be disbanded and their members individually incorporated into the Catholic church. However, Catholics can hope that the hour will come when ‘the churches’ that exist outside ‘the Church’ will enter into its unity. They must remain in existence as churches, with only those modifications which such a unity necessarily requires. In the meantime the Catholic Church has no right to absorb the other churches. The Church has not yet prepared for them a place of their own to which they are legitimately entitled.”

This provides a clear path forward from the pope himself.

 

[querying]

Yah I’m a more than confused by this comment. I’m not sure who this querying is but how does a fallen away Catholic claim Mormons and evangelicals are “orthodox Christians”? God bless.

I’m a fallen away “RC” not so much a “C”.

And about Mormons and Evangelicals, by me saying they are orthodox I mean that that they contracept much less than Catholics according to many statistics, hold an orthodox view on human sexuality and are more pro family than many identified Catholics in the west.

Many Christian denominations are “orthodox” in comparison to Anglicans.

 

[josie_L]

I’m a fallen away “RC” not so much a “C”.

And about Mormons and Evangelicals, by me saying they are orthodox I mean that that they contracept much less than Catholics according to many statistics, hold an orthodox view on human sexuality and are more pro family than many identified Catholics in the west.

Many Christian denominations are “orthodox” in comparison to Anglicans.

Well then you have a too narrow view of what orthodox means because if you actually knew what they taught doctrinally, then you would understand how absurd it is to claim that Mormons (and to some extent evangelicals) are orthodox.

 

[querying]

Well then you have a too narrow view of what orthodox means because if you actually knew what they taught doctrinally, then you would understand how absurd it is to claim that Mormons (and to some extent evangelicals) are orthodox.

Very well- their sexual teachings and teachings on the family are rather orthodox, certainly in comparison to the monstrosity known as Anglicanism.

And at least unlike Anglicans, they acknowledge unanimously that truth is not relative- although I disagree with some of the “objective truths” they’ve discerned.

**PS- Someone please answer this: **Why is it bordering on anathema to criticise Anglicans but perfectly acceptable to criticise Evangelicals and Mormons- and even the Orthodox who have more in common with Catholicism than the ghastly Anglicans?

 

[RevDrNorth]

Very well- their sexual teachings and teachings on the family are rather orthodox, certainly in comparison to the monstrosity known as Anglicanism.

And at least unlike Anglicans, they acknowledge unanimously that truth is not relative- although I disagree with some of the “objective truths” they’ve discerned.

**PS- Someone please answer this: **Why is it bordering on anathema to criticise Anglicans but perfectly acceptable to criticise Evangelicals and Mormons- and even the Orthodox who have more in common with Catholicism than the ghastly Anglicans?

Your statement is ridiculous! You apparently know next to nothing about Anglicans to paint with a broad stroke. I can point to millions of Anglicans who hold the most orthodox views on sexuality and the family. Literally millions! In fact, some of these Anglicans hold even more orthodox views than many Evangelicals (i.e. if divorced you may not remarry). The VAST majority of Anglicans (third largest denomination in the world) ARE in the Global South and ARE orthodox.

You make a fundamental error of equating what some Episcopalians say, or some Canadian or English Anglicans say with Anglicanism. This is no more the case than heresies within Evangelicalism speak for all Evangelicals OR the liberal leanings of some Roman Catholic clergy and Bishops in the US and Europe speak for the Catholic Church (eg Bishop Wantland, or the gay Catholic priest I met living in a partnered relationship).

Never mind the Mormons who had polygamy and then when issues with the government arose had a sudden revelation as they did over racist issues with blacks. I respect many aspects of Mormon faith and life but please do not try to hold them or Evanglicals up as some sort of role model in comparison to Anglicans.

 

[rr1213]

I’m sorry, maybe I’m missing something, but why should protestants- which Anglicans are- use non protestant books to teach their students??

Because it is a masterful exposition of theological truth. All truth is God’s truth.

Would you advise Catholic parents to catechise their students and children with protestant books?

No, but I have no problem advising Anglican and Protestant parents to catechise their children using the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[rr1213]

Hardly a convincing refutation…

Much of the posts I’ve caught of yours are based on times past and your “grand” liturgy/ Book of Common Prayer.

I must have missed the overwhelming amount of posts of yours focused on truth, the everlasting consequences of rejecting objective truth and discerning the true Church.

Anglicans conform truth to their liking- which is in turn conformed to their white middle class identity, not vice versa

You have made this very clear, along with Contari.

You know deep down that Anglicanism will come to an end, and the events of the last couple of decades support this firmly. Yet you cling to your church, as it is firstly and most importantly a social club for people of your demographic, not a place for “working out ones salvation through fear and trembling”. (Philippians 2:12)

I do not know or have read about a single person who has become Anglican by result of long and hard searching about finding the Church which will help them in their journey of reaching heaven, which takes precedence before all other things such as the style of worship and the physical appearance of the Church. **Not one. **

However, on this forum, there are many ex Anglicans/ ex Episcopalians who have fled their previous social club due to seeking truth first- and not comfort.

If you want to use the Catholic Catechism- that is the Catechism written by members of the Church Jesus founded 2000 years ago- then become Catholic. And accept all that Holy Mother Church teaches with no reservation. You can’t have your cake and not eat it.

Get some self respect and stop pretending at being Catholic. Because you are not.

For those who are offended by my strong words, sorry, but this needs to be said, considering so much significance is attributed to the obsolete Anglican Church on this Catholic forum, whilst many Catholics are all too happy to attack orthodox Christians such as the Mormons and Evangelicals- who don’t have the gall to cloak themselves in a veneer of quasi Catholic identity.

PS- You are NOT “Anglo Catholic- but Anglo catholic”.

You are being manifestly unfair and uncharitable to Anglicans in general and in particular to the Anglicans on this board. That is neither helpful nor edifying.

 

[GKC]

His name is Contarini. It’s an historical reference.

As I said, you don’t know me very well. Nor do you know anything of the Church I am a member of. No reason you should; you would have had to be reading here for a number of years for it to be otherwise. .

And I don’t know you. But such posts as you have made suggest to me that what is going on here is not merely theological. It’s got a personal component. This impression is strengthened by a constant refrain that occurs in this post, too.

GKC

Hardly a convincing refutation…

Much of the posts I’ve caught of yours are based on times past and your “grand” liturgy/ Book of Common Prayer.

I must have missed the overwhelming amount of posts of yours focused on truth, the everlasting consequences of rejecting objective truth and discerning the true Church.

Anglicans conform truth to their liking- which is in turn conformed to their white middle class identity, not vice versa

You have made this very clear, along with Contari.

You know deep down that Anglicanism will come to an end, and the events of the last couple of decades support this firmly. Yet you cling to your church, as it is firstly and most importantly a social club for people of your demographic, not a place for “working out ones salvation through fear and trembling”. (Philippians 2:12)

I do not know or have read about a single person who has become Anglican by result of long and hard searching about finding the Church which will help them in their journey of reaching heaven, which takes precedence before all other things such as the style of worship and the physical appearance of the Church. **Not one. **

However, on this forum, there are many ex Anglicans/ ex Episcopalians who have fled their previous social club due to seeking truth first- and not comfort.

 

[querying]

Your statement is ridiculous! You apparently know next to nothing about Anglicans to paint with a broad stroke.

Hello- I made the mistake of attending an Anglican school for a while. I was forced to attend your ghastly church services whilst there too.

I can point to millions of Anglicans who hold the most orthodox views on sexuality and the family. Literally millions!

And they have absolutely no FOUNDATION to hold such views on, seeing as their social club allows for a “believe whatever you want” ideology. Admittedly, by GKC, all you guys affirm unanimously is the Nicene Creed- nothing else.

In fact, some of these Anglicans hold even more orthodox views than many Evangelicals (i.e. if divorced you may not remarry).

Please, Anglicans have women priests/homosexual priests, so they most likely permit remarriage after divorce.

Even if you don’t, give it a few years and you guys will vote on what is considered Christian truth on divorce and remarriage, whilst you quietly tuck away scripture into the crevices of your churches.

The VAST majority of Anglicans (third largest denomination in the world) ARE in the Global South and ARE orthodox.

Yes , because the **cultures **of Anglicans outside of the West are conservative. Don‘ t you dare attribute the orthodoxy of Anglicans in developing countries to that joke of a Church known as Anglicanism.

You make a fundamental error of equating what some Episcopalians say, or some Canadian or English Anglicans say with Anglicanism.

Again, Anglicans have little doctrine and allow for plurality on many issues.

What a liberal Episcopalian proclaims about Anglican truths is equal in validity to the proclamations from a conservative Anglican.

There is no objective truth with them outside of the Creed. Full stop.

This is no more the case than heresies within Evangelicalism speak for all Evangelicals OR the liberal leanings of some Roman Catholic clergy and Bishops in the US and Europe speak for the Catholic Church (eg Bishop Wantland, or the gay Catholic priest I met living in a partnered relationship).

**Again, for the millionth time, Catholicism is not defined by what her Bishops and members proclaim. Our dogmas are clearly defined and are unchangeable- even by the Pope. **

We have that** foundation **for consistency. Anglicans do not seeing as they make their beliefs up according to the age. They have no authority to make a case for objective truth.

Never mind the Mormons who had polygamy and then when issues with the government arose had a sudden revelation as they did over racist issues with blacks. I respect many aspects of Mormon faith and life but please do not try to hold them or Evanglicals up as some sort of role model in comparison to Anglicans.

The practice of polygamy is at least biblical (Solomon having hundreds of wives) and was accepted until the New Covenant.

Female priests, blessing homo sex, fornication and contraception never has been accepted in Jewish and Christian history.

 

[RevDrNorth]

Hello- I made the mistake of attending an Anglican school for a while. I was forced to attend your ghastly church services whilst there too.

And they have absolutely no FOUNDATION to hold such views on, seeing as their social club allows for a “believe whatever you want” ideology. Admittedly, by GKC, all you guys affirm unanimously is the Nicene Creed- nothing else.

Please, Anglicans have women priests/homosexual priests, so they most likely permit remarriage after divorce.

Even if you don’t, give it a few years and you guys will vote on what is considered Christian truth on divorce and remarriage, whilst you quietly tuck away scripture into the crevices of your churches.

Yes , because the **cultures **of Anglicans outside of the West are conservative. Don‘ t you dare attribute the orthodoxy of Anglicans in developing countries to that joke of a Church known as Anglicanism.

Again, Anglicans have little doctrine and allow for plurality on many issues.

What a liberal Episcopalian proclaims about Anglican truths is equal in validity to the proclamations from a conservative Anglican.

There is no objective truth with them outside of the Creed. Full stop.

**Again, for the millionth time, Catholicism is not defined by what her Bishops and members proclaim. Our dogmas are clearly defined and are unchangeable- even by the Pope. **

We have that** foundation **for consistency. Anglicans do not seeing as they make their beliefs up according to the age. They have no authority to make a case for objective truth.

The practice of polygamy is at least biblical (Solomon having hundreds of wives) and was accepted until the New Covenant.

Female priests, blessing homo sex, fornication and contraception never has been accepted in Jewish and Christian history.

Get a life dude! My friend you need to do a lot more internalizing of the faith so that what comes out of you more resembles a Christlike attitude.

I have a lot of respect for the Roman Catholic Church (esp Pope Benedict XVI). In fact, I pray that the next Pope is as theologically orthodox. Whether any group agrees or disagrees with the Catholic Church, it (the RCC) and the Pope are powerful witness for the faith.

As for Anglicans, what you say is in general wrong and uncharitable (but you know that already). Millions and millions of Anglicans are theologically orthodox.

On a side note, to borrow from the Anglican Province of Christ the King web site:

The dynamic Anglican faith that produced:
* the King James Bible
* most of Western Christendom’s great church music
* the literature of writers such as William Shakespeare, T. S. Eliot, C. S. Lewis, and
Dorothy Sayers
* eleven U.S. presidents and most of our nation’s founding fathers
(and of course so many more of the great writers, artists and politicians).

 

[querying]

His name is Contarini. It’s an historical reference.

As I said, you don’t know me very well. Nor do you know anything of the Church I am a member of. No reason you should; you would have had to be reading here for a number of years for it to be otherwise. .

I have lurked here on and off for about years, and If I’m not mistaken, you are a member of a continuing church.

And I don’t know you. But such posts as you have made suggest to me that what is going on here is not merely theological. It’s got a personal component. This impression is strengthened by a constant refrain that occurs in this post, too.

GKC

It doesn’t take a genius to figure that out. I had a very bad experience in one of your schools after finishing from a Catholic girls school, and being lied to that Anglicans were “just like Catholics”.

I learnt the hard way that you guys are not, not only in terms of theology, but how you treat people outside of your, how can I say, ethnic demographic, although your schools were none to happy to ram abortion and contraception ideology down the throats of their whoring Godless white “Christian” students. Funnily enough, I was one of the few people who was saving myself for marriage as Christianity requires, along with attending Mass every Sunday- as the Church requires also.

Teachers were more concerned with the aesthetics of appearing Christian- and not acting like one.

My tolerance for such “all style and no substance” Christianity had already diminished by that time, as I have been very unfortunate to be raised by vacuous hypocritical “Catholic” idiotic parents who would rather applause “appearing to act like Christians” over actually being Christians.

That your church institutionalises and morphs Christianity into a cultural and class identity angers me greatly. You are free to hold such viewpoints, but not under the guise of Christianity, and not with unsuspecting young minds who often up wounded by the junk Christianity you peddle.

I’m so sick of seeing “Christian” and “Catholic” imprinted on the outside of buildings which serve no true Christian purpose, deceiving those of us who wish to get some Christian perspective on education and other areas.

Call a spade a spade and admit what you are: quasi European Catholics where Christianity comes second place.

Again, like I’ve said repeatedly, I will receive my justice when the CofE here in the UK implodes. There are already calls to remove the Anglican Bishops in the House of Lords, and abrogate the 1701 Law of settlement.

Faith will only begin to flourish again in the UK, when that joke of a church relinquishes her stranglehold on England.

I eagerly await the day.

 

[GKC]

You are correct. I am a Continuing Anglican.

And, genius or not, I see that I am correct, too. I was afraid of that.

I don’t have any schools, I fear. You don’t know much, it would appear, about what Continuing Anglicans are, or why they are, at all. I could explain (for example) that our parish was one of the primary movers in getting the largest abortion clinic in the area closed, but that is the sort of point for point refutation of your errors that would be, ultimately, pointless

I’m sorry you had the sort of experience that I suspected you were speaking of, beneath the invective. And I’m sorry it made you the sort of person that it did.

GKC

I have lurked here on and off for about years, and If I’m not mistaken, you are a member of a continuing church.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure that out. I had a very bad experience in one of your schools after finishing from a Catholic girls school, and being lied to that Anglicans were “just like Catholics”.

I learnt the hard way that you guys are not, not only in terms of theology, but how you treat people outside of your, how can I say, ethnic demographic, although your schools were none to happy to ram abortion and contraception ideology down the throats of their whoring Godless white “Christian” students. Funnily enough, I was one of the few people who was saving myself for marriage as Christianity requires, along with attending Mass every Sunday- as the Church requires also.

Teachers were more concerned with the aesthetics of appearing Christian- and not acting like one.

My tolerance for such “all style and no substance” Christianity had already diminished by that time, as I have been very unfortunate to be raised by vacuous hypocritical “Catholic” idiotic parents who would rather applause “appearing to act like Christians” over actually being Christians.

That your church institutionalises and morphs Christianity into a cultural and class identity angers me greatly. You are free to hold such viewpoints, but not under the guise of Christianity, and not with unsuspecting young minds who often up wounded by the junk Christianity you peddle.

I’m so sick of seeing “Christian” and “Catholic” imprinted on the outside of buildings which serve no true Christian purpose, deceiving those of us who wish to get some Christian perspective on education and other areas.

Call a spade a spade and admit what you are: quasi European Catholics where Christianity comes second place.

Again, like I’ve said repeatedly, I will receive my justice when the CofE here in the UK implodes. There are already calls to remove the Anglican Bishops in the House of Lords, and abrogate the 1701 Law of settlement.

Faith will only begin to flourish again in the UK, when that joke of a church relinquishes her stranglehold on England.

I eagerly await the day.

 

[querying]

Get a life dude!

I have one

My friend you need to do a lot more internalizing of the faith so that what comes out of you more resembles a Christlike attitude.

And you need to discern Truth and not settle for what gives you comfort. Not doing so will ensure your damnation in the next life.

As for Anglicans, what you say is in general wrong and uncharitable (but you know that already). Millions and millions of Anglicans are theologically orthodox.

And this nonsensical argument has been refuted time and time again:

1. Orthodox Anglicans have no foundation to elevate their orthodoxy above that of heterodoxy as they have no authority- unlike Catholics.
2. Orthodox Anglicans are predominantly non European.
3. Orthodox Anglicans are orthodox in spite of being Anglican.

On a side note, to borrow from the Anglican Province of Christ the King web site:

The dynamic Anglican faith that produced:
* the King James Bible (The Latin Vulgate and the Douah Rheims trumps this much preferred handbook of fundamentalist Christians)
* most of Western Christendom’s great church music(woopdy doo! Lets party- forget learning about how to get to heaven)
* the literature of writers such as William Shakespeare, T. S. Eliot, C. S. Lewis, and
Dorothy Sayers(about CS Lewis, try reading the following geocities.com/Heartland/2964/cslewis-catholic.html)
* eleven U.S. presidents and most of our nation’s founding fathers(please- most founding fathers were deists. The ones who weren’t seemed to be more of the “Bible believing” Chrisitian variety- not the quasi Catholic variety like Anglicans are today)
(and of course so many more of the great writers, artists and politicians).
*

 

[peary]

Great article about the possibility of Anglican communion with the Church.
catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=34217

Quote from the website:
At the centre of my friend’s Christianity is public worship, and (so far as I can judge from many conversations with him) the main reason he did not leave the Church of England is that he could not accept the claims of a Church which did not get its worship right. His objection was not to Vatican II, but to a casual approach to the celebration of Mass that made it harder to believe in the unique universal status of the Roman Church.

Does anybody see hope for Anglican communion? Will the Church breath with both lungs as John Paul the Great hoped for?

I do not see a unity within the Anglican communion, if that is what you are referring to. It may continue as a schismatic ecclesial community within itself, dividing over and over again.

The quote from the website reveals a total denial of the Church of England’s failure to get its own worship right or its doctrine.

On one point, he is correct - an over-casualness in the celebreation of Mass in the Catholic Church. But, when all is said and done, the celebration of Mass is THAT - a communal CELEBRATION of Christians in their community. WE come together; it is not I who participates alone.

Both John Paul II and Benedict XVI have been blessings for the Church in our time. They have been a stabilizing influence on the Church, particularly with regard to Liturgy and bringing the Church back to its roots and traditional beliefs.

If Anglicanism wants to get itself right, it will need to make a serious effort to unite with the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. Otherwise, the Anglican communion will go the way of all other protestant sects.

 

[querying]

You are correct. I am a Continuing Anglican.
I’m sorry you had the sort of experience that I suspected you were speaking of, beneath the invective. And I’m sorry it made you the sort of person that it did.

GKC

The kind of person it made me was someone who is no longer swept away by outside labels and appearances. I now look inwards at all Churches- including the RC- which I no longer count myself to be a part of.

Your pretence of Catholicism is very very damaging to the unsuspecting and if you guys were any sort of Christians, you’d advertise this very clearly to those entering your institutions expecting to find some sense of Christian belief.

Those who are wise will leave before it all comes crashing down, if not for Catholicism but Orthodoxy or even the Evangelical Churches who have more hope for sustenance than the Anglican Church.

 

[GKC]

I have one

And you need to discern Truth and not settle for what gives you comfort. Not doing so will ensure your damnation in the next life.

And this nonsensical argument has been refuted time and time again:

1. Orthodox Anglicans have no foundation to elevate their orthodoxy above that of heterodoxy as they have no authority- unlike Catholics.
2. Orthodox Anglicans are predominantly non European.
3. Orthodox Anglicans are orthodox in spite of being Anglican.

Your link to the post on Lewis is a good one. That is a fair summary of Lewis, from a RC standpoint.

Hooper was not an Anglican priest, but a deacon. Lewis did, in fact, discuss why he didn’t become a RC, most specifically in a letter in May 1945. It is not likely that Lewis would have become a RC, if he had lived longer. And it wouldn’t bother me if he had; I’ve been a Chesterton collector and student for just as long as I have been one of Lewis (45 years, or so).

But that’s a fair bit of words on CSL and worthy to be read and remembered.

GKC