homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: Pope announces plans for Anglicans to convert in groups (Page 17)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Pope announces plans for Anglicans to convert in groups
Alt Wally

Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245

 - Posted      Profile for Alt Wally     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
quote:
Originally posted by Alt Wally:
Anglican_Brat and Edward Green, I must disagree. The fullness of the catholic faith exists where the true eucharist does, because there is Christ himself.

That is why the issue of ordination, succession, etc. is not a trivial matter.

Surely the Fathers had it the other way round. The church is where he Bishop is, and where the Bishop is, is where true eucharist can be found.
Correct, that is why I posted the quote of St. Ignatius above (or on the previous page now).

[ 13. November 2009, 14:17: Message edited by: Alt Wally ]

Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235

 - Posted      Profile for Trisagion   Email Trisagion   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
The force of the Catholic Reformation is that Rome had departed from the faith represented by the early mothers and fathers and the New Testament.

Do you really mean 'force'? It was hardly that was it? It wasn't even a 'Catholic' Reformation but a local one - if your distinction between a Protestant and Catholic Reformation means what it appears to mean.

Do you really think that the Holy Spirit, promised to the Apostles, managed to fall asleep on the job until the dynastic terror of the English monarchy and the lust for wealth of the English nobility and gentry fortuitously appeared on the scene to allow that same Spirit to make good on that promise. It's preposterous. It's 'Look our Johnny's the only one in step'.

I can take Anglicanism that recognises that from the very first it was grounded in Protestant ecclesiology, soteriology and approach to Sacred Scripture. What I find almost impossible to understand is this perpetuation of the Tractarian myth.

--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse

Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
Do you really think that the Holy Spirit, promised to the Apostles, managed to fall asleep on the job until the dynastic terror of the English monarchy and the lust for wealth of the English nobility and gentry fortuitously appeared on the scene to allow that same Spirit to make good on that promise.

Probably! We Anglicans live in our own little bubble!

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It is said of the scholarly archdeacon of London John Jortin (1698-1770):
quote:
his criticism of Roman Catholicism was such that he argued that it was only the direct supervision entailed by divine providence that had preserved Christianity up to the era of the Reformation.[/QB]
Plus ça change, innit.

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alt Wally:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
quote:
Originally posted by Alt Wally:
Anglican_Brat and Edward Green, I must disagree. The fullness of the catholic faith exists where the true eucharist does, because there is Christ himself.

That is why the issue of ordination, succession, etc. is not a trivial matter.

Surely the Fathers had it the other way round. The church is where he Bishop is, and where the Bishop is, is where true eucharist can be found.
Correct, that is why I posted the quote of St. Ignatius above (or on the previous page now).
So who has the authority to say that the See of Canterbury is not authentically apostolic, therefore not a valid Bishop, therefore not a valid church?

--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com

But maybe not

Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612

 - Posted      Profile for FreeJack   Email FreeJack   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:
Do you really think that the Holy Spirit, promised to the Apostles, managed to fall asleep on the job until the dynastic terror of the English monarchy and the lust for wealth of the English nobility and gentry fortuitously appeared on the scene to allow that same Spirit to make good on that promise.

Probably! We Anglicans live in our own little bubble!
Fog in Channel. Rome cut off from Canterbury.
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Alt Wally

Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245

 - Posted      Profile for Alt Wally     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
So who has the authority to say that the See of Canterbury is not authentically apostolic, therefore not a valid Bishop, therefore not a valid church?

It isn't you or me.
Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Trisagion:


I can take Anglicanism that recognises that from the very first it was grounded in Protestant ecclesiology, soteriology and approach to Sacred Scripture. What I find almost impossible to understand is this perpetuation of the Tractarian myth.

As a sort-of Anglo-Catholic, sort-of Liberal, I frequently cringe at various expressions of Anglican triumphalism, whether it's the barely-disguised jingoism of public-school liberal Angllicanism, or the fantasies of those anglo-catholics who pretend that their little world of Martin Travers baroque and rose-pink fiddlebacks represents Catholicism, let alone the C of E.

But Trisagion's comment epitomises a common misunderstanding of the mainstream (not just a-c) Anglican position. 'Anglicanism', as a distinctive set of doctrines - or rather a distinctive approach to doctrine - may or may not be 'grounded in Protestant ecclesiology'. Theologians may argue either way, though I would think it is not so much 'grounded in' as 'strongly influenced by'.

That's not the point. The C of E (and by extension, the Anglican Communion) has never seen itself as a denomination (hence the dangers of ecclesiastical jingoism); rather, as part of the historic Catholic church. Evangelicals (notably Ken of this parish) hold this view as strongly as those of us who are closer to (and pine for unity with) the RCC. We believe that we are first and foremost Christians, secondly Catholics (though not accepting the centralised Vatican bureaucracy, which not a few Roman Catholics question too), and thirdly Anglicans. Our Church, we believe, is not grounded in anything except the promises of Christ and the foundation of the Gospel... we certainly don't see our foundation as dating from the 16th century Reformation, the 19th century Oxford Movement, or whichever century Papal power began to exert an over-dominant influence on the Western Church.

--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!

Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612

 - Posted      Profile for FreeJack   Email FreeJack   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Do I get the impression that most of those thinking about swimming Tiber-wards now are over the age of 55?
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Manx Taffy
Shipmate
# 301

 - Posted      Profile for Manx Taffy   Email Manx Taffy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Fifi:
And so, if you found yourself in Italy . . . .

[Smile]

. . . . you'd be a lapsed Roman Catholic who shows up at Mass on Christmas and Easter, chatting on a cell phone the whole time! [Razz]
So there's the faithful of a whole country dismissed with a crass generalisation.

Why do it? Do you think its actually true? Or was it just a cheap jibe?

I can assure you that I'm not someone that is generally over sensitive or lacking a sense of homour. But since becoming a Catholic a few years ago I've been struck how, in all sorts of places including the national media, it seems perfectly OK to make offensive generalisation about Catholics in a way that would be totally ubacceptable against say muslims, Poles or methodists!

Personally I can cope, but if you#re going to do it at least make it funny enough to be worthwhile.

Posts: 397 | From: Isle of Man | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sober Preacher's Kid

Presbymethegationalist
# 12699

 - Posted      Profile for Sober Preacher's Kid   Email Sober Preacher's Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Edward Green:
quote:
Originally posted by Alt Wally:

Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God. Thus, whatever is done will be safe and valid. -- St. Ignatius of Antioch

Cut the chord from this and you're in a new paradigm, and one which isn't catholic.

Amen and Amen. The force of the Catholic Reformation is that Rome had departed from the faith represented by the early mothers and fathers and the New Testament. Where the Reformation fell into error was when it abandoned the representative apostolic ministry.

Both still fall short of the fullness of the Catholic faith. But when I look at all sorts of movements in the wider church, be they catholic, sacramental, evangelical, charismatic, (post)liberal or neo-apostolic, I believe the Spirit is working to bring the whole church closer to this fullness.

Perhaps TAC and FiF heading Romewards is part of that. I believe it is.

[Paranoid]

I'm tipping my head left and right to see if it helps in making sense of this ridiculous excuse for an argument

...

Nope, not working.

Seriously, Reformed ecclesiology says that each congregation (parish to some) is to have its own Minister of Word and Sacrament, duly ordained as such into the Holy Catholic Church and exercising the Apostolic Ministry of proclaiming the Word and lawfully administering the Sacraments.

Ministers (Church of Scotland and progeny meaning) are properly infected with the Holy Spirit, you know.

St. Ignatius would be eminently pleased at the current state of the Reformed Churches. A representative of the Apostles in each congregation is surely pleasing to the Lord for the betterment of his Church.

Angloid:

You're flat wrong. No two ways about it. When Anglicans stepped off the boat in Canada they came up against an equal number of French Catholics and another equal number of Scots Presbyterians. And a goodly number of Methodists. They are a denomination along with the rest, no two ways about it. Every single argument you make about the Anglican Church can be made about the Church of Scotland, and when the progenies of both Churches meet in the same land, the fallacy of your argument becomes readily apparent.

The one distinctive about Anglicanism is its episcopacy. This is why IMO Anglicanism has pushed into a more Catholic form in places where Reformed style churches pervade.

--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.

Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Alt Wally

Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245

 - Posted      Profile for Alt Wally     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, and as in the time of St. Ignatius, we have the bishop's representative in each congregation in the person of the priest who dispenses the sacraments only under his (the bishops) authority. Pleasing it is indeed that this tradition didn't disappear for 1500 years or so only to reappear in some Germanic principalities or thereabouts.
Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
Do I get the impression that most of those thinking about swimming Tiber-wards now are over the age of 55?

That would seem on the cards.

TAC congregations in this country are often led by a retired priest. From my observation there would be few young people amongst them.

Why would anyone young, bright and alive join what always will be a fringe movement? [Confused]

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159

 - Posted      Profile for Angloid     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:

Angloid:

You're flat wrong. No two ways about it. When Anglicans stepped off the boat in Canada they came up against an equal number of French Catholics and another equal number of Scots Presbyterians. And a goodly number of Methodists. They are a denomination along with the rest, no two ways about it.

Of course. I should have made clear that the 'non denominational' descriptor is only true for England (and possibly Wales), where Anglicanism began. 'Anglicanism' as a concept only has meaning once the church sees itself not as the normative church of the land, but as a distinctive denomination with distinctive doctrines. As does, I suspect , TEC: which is probably at the root of its problems.

But we are very good at living with compromise (or at least we used to be), and when members of the C of E began to settle in other countries they had to decide what to do. Joining the existing church in the land was, for most people, not possible in majority Catholic countries; when, as in North America, all churches (including the Catholic church) were de facto denominations there was no other option but to become one.

That doesn't alter the fact that the roots of Anglicanism are not based in denominationalism.

Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I spent part of a beautiful late spring afternoon reading the last few pages of the thread, and then going back to the OP and the press release. ISTM that the original intention was to make particular provision for the TAC and some of the other of small groups not in communion with Canterbury, rather than a wholesale raid on the mainstream Anglican churches. Some of those may well convert, but I suspect that the numbers will be few; it is much more than retention of Anglican liturgy which has retained them to date.

It seems strange that some in the FiF group would now consider a change. Marriage may well be relevant to the clergy, but not a major concern for the congregations. If any go, and particularly the bishops referred to, there will be a loss to Anglicanism, but that will probably be overcome in the near future.

The common view is that very few laity will move; indeed, if I read the thread correctly, there will probably be more clergy than lay converts. The question must be asked: why have there been so few converts in the past? I suspect that at heart all those referred to are Anglican catholics, whatever that may mean, rather than Roman. It is much more than a question of liturgy.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:

I'm tipping my head left and right to see if it helps in making sense of this ridiculous excuse for an argument

...

Nope, not working.

Seriously, Reformed ecclesiology says that each congregation (parish to some) is to have its own Minister of Word and Sacrament, duly ordained as such into the Holy Catholic Church and exercising the Apostolic Ministry of proclaiming the Word and lawfully administering the Sacraments.

Ministers (Church of Scotland and progeny meaning) are properly infected with the Holy Spirit, you know.

Firstly I we are exploring Reformed Catholic ecclesiology. I happen to believe that abandoning episcopacy was a mistake. But I would argue that the gift operates anyway even in movements that don't have a tactile succession and the title Bishop or Apostle.

Secondly Reformed does not just mean Calvinist and Presbyterian. It may be what we mean by it today at times, but historically Luther was a reformer as was Cranmer.

Thirdly I didn't say CoS ministers were not infected. :-)

Having said that I believe the Apostle/Bishop is the root and base of Christian ministry. You start with representative apostolicity and build the prebyteriat from that, not the other way round.

--------------------
blog//twitter//
linkedin

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Angloid - the roots of the (Presbyterian) Church of Scotland were not based in denominationalism,but rather in a desire to 'cleanse of idolatry' the Church.One could say the same for many churches which are issue of the Reformation of the Western church.

I am not sure of this,but the word 'denomination' might well have come into use in Scotland ,where from the late 1600s the Reformed church was already beginning to break up in to lots of smaller groups who shred a broadly similar theology but divided on small(but to them vitally important)points.

'Denomination' is a word which is mainly confined to the anglophone world.

BTW I am glad to see that another poster has claimed the word 'Reformed' for other Christians who are not necessarily Presbyterians.I wouldn't dare to do that now.

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612

 - Posted      Profile for FreeJack   Email FreeJack   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:

The common view is that very few laity will move; indeed, if I read the thread correctly, there will probably be more clergy than lay converts. The question must be asked: why have there been so few converts in the past? I suspect that at heart all those referred to are Anglican catholics, whatever that may mean, rather than Roman. It is much more than a question of liturgy.

It could be to do with the relative power of the key laity in many Anglican congregations, of all churchmanships.

Converting priests who convert will still be 'important'. Converting laity will be freshers / nobodies again, unless they move with the whole parish and building, which would be rare.

If you had been vice-chairwoman of the altar guild's wives club, on the flower and coffee rota, ex-churchwarden's wife etc. would you really want to give all that up for no visible change. Only if everyone in the peer group goes, or she becomes spontaneously convinced that Rome is the answer.

I don't think that the average Roman Catholic Church has quite the same level of influential lay groups. Partly the more hierarchical nature of the church, lower lay democracy, and larger parishes, more centred around the mass. (I'm sure some RCs will think they have grim lay politicians too, but I think the CofE/AC can top that.)

Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stranger in a strange land
Shipmate
# 11922

 - Posted      Profile for Stranger in a strange land   Email Stranger in a strange land   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
Do I get the impression that most of those thinking about swimming Tiber-wards now are over the age of 55?

That is not my impression here in the UK. Those with a long priestly ministry find the prospect of 're-' ordination particularly difficult and may feel they can put up with whatever provision the CofE Synod offers for the next 10 years.

For those with potentially 40 or more years in ministry, the prospect of half-hearted provision in the CofE which will likely be weakened further in the future is particularly unattractive. Hence the extremely enthusiastic reception of Benedict's initiative among most of the young clergy and ordinands that I know. (Who also seem to be more 'traditionalist' than previous generations in any case).

Agewise, I'm somewhere in the middle and undecided...

Posts: 608 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
BTW I am glad to see that another poster has claimed the word 'Reformed' for other Christians who are not necessarily Presbyterians.I wouldn't dare to do that now.

I assume you mean you wouldn't claim Reformed as only referring to Presbyterians ...

--------------------
blog//twitter//
linkedin

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stranger in a strange land:
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
Do I get the impression that most of those thinking about swimming Tiber-wards now are over the age of 55?

That is not my impression here in the UK. Those with a long priestly ministry find the prospect of 're-' ordination particularly difficult and may feel they can put up with whatever provision the CofE Synod offers for the next 10 years.

For those with potentially 40 or more years in ministry, the prospect of half-hearted provision in the CofE which will likely be weakened further in the future is particularly unattractive. Hence the extremely enthusiastic reception of Benedict's initiative among most of the young clergy and ordinands that I know. (Who also seem to be more 'traditionalist' than previous generations in any case).

Agewise, I'm somewhere in the middle and undecided...

I agree about the comparitive youth of those in the UK who are tempted by the Holy Father's offer.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Reformed also applies to Congregationalist, Waldensians, Reformed, Protestant (as opposed to Evangelical which is Lutheran). You can check out this partial list if you want examples of such.

Jengie

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I have been told that only certain Christians can refer to themselves as 'Reformed' I understand that in an everyday context it does refer to certain groups of 'reformed' Christians and emphatically not to others.

It is the same argument about exactly what 'Catholic' means.Some people use it in a very limited sense and others use it in a much wider sense.By the same token the word 'Catholic' has a particular meaning in an everyday context.

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
JJ - thanks for the list of 'acceptable' Reformed churches. I see some of them have the title 'evangelical'So I assume one can be both 'evangelical' and 'reformed' There is even a church based in the Czech Republic which uses the word 'evangelisch' which has a slightly different meaning (in common parlance anyway) in German from the meaning it has in English.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804

 - Posted      Profile for Olaf     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Manx Taffy:
Personally I can cope, but if you#re going to do it at least make it funny enough to be worthwhile.

...puh-leeze. [Roll Eyes]

We Protestants spend our whole lives being told time and time again by many Roman Catholics [mostly well-meaning, I'll admit] that we're wrong.

Contrarily, our theology allows us to believe and teach that Roman Catholics are indeed part of the common Christian faith and witness, even though that sentiment is not returned to us very often.

A minor jab every now and then is par for the course aboard Ship. If I were offended every time somebody here (or especially in Eccles) pulled the whole "the faith is dependent on bishops in communion with Rome" card, then I wouldn't come around.

My comment was innocent, and it is clear that I do not seriously believe that. Yet, I constantly have to face being told my faith is wrong by people who do mean it. I don't make a point of whining about it.

Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252

 - Posted      Profile for Divine Outlaw   Author's homepage   Email Divine Outlaw   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
People might be interested to read Nicholas Lash's thoughts on the matter .

--------------------
insert amusing sig. here

Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, its complex I just could not think how to post it.

Firstly Reformed church split and merge readily. There are many Reformed churches that are mergers across traditions so I don't know if if some of Evangelical churches are those that are Lutheran and Reformed (the Italian Waldensians for instance are a merger of Waldensians and Methodists)

The Protestant versus Evangelical is the continental form as opposed to the British. It is wider than Germany, as I think the one clear case is in France. However in English nomenclature Evangelical is used often to mean what Evangelical means in the statement "Evangelical Alliance".

Oh by the way the list isn't even the entirety of "Kosher" Reformed churches. The World Alliance of Reformed Churches days are numbered. The World Communion of Reformed Churches will arise next year out of its merger with the Reformed Ecumenical Council. . There is some commonality of membership between the two but I think that takes the "Kosher" list to the same size as the Anglican Communion, and then I don't know if there are other international Reformed bodies.

Of course then we have the non Kosher lot as well, which I normally guess as being as large - they are of course legion. That is a multitude of denominations, which usually are very small, but do have some significantly large players.

Jengie

[ 14. November 2009, 20:14: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Manx Taffy
Shipmate
# 301

 - Posted      Profile for Manx Taffy   Email Manx Taffy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Manx Taffy:
Personally I can cope, but if you#re going to do it at least make it funny enough to be worthwhile.

...puh-leeze. [Roll Eyes]

We Protestants spend our whole lives being told time and time again by many Roman Catholics [mostly well-meaning, I'll admit] that we're wrong.


Contrarily, our theology allows us to believe and teach that Roman Catholics are indeed part of the common Christian faith and witness, even though that sentiment is not returned to us very often.

A minor jab every now and then is par for the course aboard Ship. If I were offended every time somebody here (or especially in Eccles) pulled the whole "the faith is dependent on bishops in communion with Rome" card, then I wouldn't come around.

My comment was innocent, and it is clear that I do not seriously believe that. Yet, I constantly have to face being told my faith is wrong by people who do mean it. I don't make a point of whining about it.

ML Apologies, I think the problem may be geographical. In my part of the world the boot is definitely on the other foot whereas down your way it sounds like the Catholics are dishing it out.

Either way, why do Christians of all stripes so easily forget the "judge not" commandment.

Sorry if I over reacted. [Smile]

Posts: 397 | From: Isle of Man | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Manx Taffy
Shipmate
# 301

 - Posted      Profile for Manx Taffy   Email Manx Taffy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
P.S.

My only excuse is that my one experience of mass in Italy (at the Duomo in Florence) was very positive. Though thinking about it there were a few Italian older ladies in over the top fur coats and shades who might have been posing!

Posts: 397 | From: Isle of Man | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596

 - Posted      Profile for Knopwood   Email Knopwood   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
They are a denomination along with the rest, no two ways about it. Every single argument you make about the Anglican Church can be made about the Church of Scotland, and when the progenies of both Churches meet in the same land, the fallacy of your argument becomes readily apparent.

Well, it depends on one's understanding of the esse of the Church. If it involves bishops, then there is a line with Anglicans on one side and Presbyterians on the other. Of course, everyone draws the line at a different place: the Orthodox at themselves, Rome with episcopacy plus unbroken valid intention, and many denominations at the "invisible" Church of all the baptised. In any event, the answer doesn't seem forthcoming (although one hopes we can at least rule out the scenario envisioned in South Park).

[ 14. November 2009, 20:51: Message edited by: LQ ]

Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235

 - Posted      Profile for Trisagion   Email Trisagion   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
People might be interested to read Nicholas Lash's thoughts on the matter .

Or maybe not.

--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse

Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252

 - Posted      Profile for Divine Outlaw   Author's homepage   Email Divine Outlaw   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, one can be interested in something without agreeing with it. Although, as it happens, I have not a little sympathy with what Lash says. His concerns are traditional in a sound sense of that over-used words: how do the proposed treatments of convert Anglican bishops relate to the Church's sacramental theology? What is to be made of the treatment of the JPII Catechism as though it were a confessional document? Sensible questions; or so it seems to me.

--------------------
insert amusing sig. here

Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Spot on Gee D! [Cool]

The TAC will end with a whimper.

The future of the fractured Anglican Communion lies firmly within itself.

[Votive]

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sober Preacher's Kid

Presbymethegationalist
# 12699

 - Posted      Profile for Sober Preacher's Kid   Email Sober Preacher's Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LQ:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
They are a denomination along with the rest, no two ways about it. Every single argument you make about the Anglican Church can be made about the Church of Scotland, and when the progenies of both Churches meet in the same land, the fallacy of your argument becomes readily apparent.

Well, it depends on one's understanding of the esse of the Church. If it involves bishops, then there is a line with Anglicans on one side and Presbyterians on the other. Of course, everyone draws the line at a different place: the Orthodox at themselves, Rome with episcopacy plus unbroken valid intention, and many denominations at the "invisible" Church of all the baptised. In any event, the answer doesn't seem forthcoming (although one hopes we can at least rule out the scenario envisioned in South Park).
Quite so, but at least you are frank that it is a matter of debate. This thread developed a tangent that contained some serious misrepresentations of Reformed theology and eccelesiolgy that were extremely grating.

My objection is to the multiple mischaracterizations of what others believe.

Edward:

By Reformed I mean a Reformed Church, one which traces its roots to the reforms of Calvin, in whole or in part. Presbyterian is the English-language descriptor for the most often seen variety of Reformed Church in the English-speaking world. The Kirk has the most influential Reformed Church for English-speakers. Lutheran Churches are "Evangelical". Anglicanism is Reformed Catholicism because it omitted the eccelsilogical reforms of Calvin.

Of course in modern times there are a number of United Churches in the Reformed Churches, the United Church of Canada was one the earliest of these, second only to the Protestant Church of Germany.

My main objection is that we here in the Reformed Camp do believe that the Apostolic Ministry and succession is maintained in our churches. It's fine if you don't like our orders, but we certainly did NOT abandon the concept of Apostolic ministry.

--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.

Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46

 - Posted      Profile for Edward Green   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:

My main objection is that we here in the Reformed Camp do believe that the Apostolic Ministry and succession is maintained in our churches. It's fine if you don't like our orders, but we certainly did NOT abandon the concept of Apostolic ministry.

I would affirm this. I think the Apostolic ministry is so essential to the church that it manifests itself in all 'traditions'. That doesn't change my understanding of episcopacy however. But no-one has made John L. Bell a bishop .... yet!

--------------------
blog//twitter//
linkedin

Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The real issue is how does one define faithfulness to the Apostolic faith? Many Protestants argue that faithfulness to the apostolic faith derives from having correct doctrine and belief. They point to examples of when bishops have fell into error, either doctrinally or morally, as examples of the shortcomings of historic episcopate.

If the Pope tomorrow decides all of a sudden, Arius was correct, and that Our Lord is not equal in majesty with the Father, will the entire Roman Catholic Church follow suit and renounce the Nicene Creed?

I bring up that scenario as an illustration of the Protestant criticism of Catholic ecclesiology. Protestants contend that simply because one is in the apostolic succession, does not mean that one is suddenly immune from doctrinal error.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Alt Wally

Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245

 - Posted      Profile for Alt Wally     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Protestants contend that simply because one is in the apostolic succession, does not mean that one is suddenly immune from doctrinal error.

If one believes apostolic succession is a guardian from error, then one has a pretty poor understanding of the catholic faith and of church history in general. Thank you-know-who that nobody believes that.

Faithfulness to the apostolic faith is summed up in the vincentian canon; and if the Pope woke up tomorrow and decided he was an Arian, the church would recognize him as a heretic.

[ 15. November 2009, 00:28: Message edited by: Alt Wally ]

Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alt Wally

Cardinal Ximinez
# 3245

 - Posted      Profile for Alt Wally     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LQ:
everyone draws the line at a different place: the Orthodox at themselves

Not quite that simple.
Posts: 3684 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LQ:
... it depends on one's understanding of the esse of the Church. If it involves bishops, then there is a line with Anglicans on one side and Presbyterians on the other.[/URL]).

Not really. Plenty of Anglicans recognise the ministry of oversight in the Presbyterian churches, whether or not they have one minister with a pointy hat they call a "bishop".

And another large (but overlapping) set of Anglicans see episcopacy as useful or beneficial to the Church, but not essential top it.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
cor ad cor loquitur
Shipmate
# 11816

 - Posted      Profile for cor ad cor loquitur   Email cor ad cor loquitur   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Damian Thompson's latest blast on this topic is, in my view, utterly disgusting.

--------------------
Quam vos veritatem interpretationis, hanc eruditi κακοζηλίαν nuncupant … si ad verbum interpretor, absurde resonant. (St Jerome, Ep. 57 to Pammachius)

Posts: 1332 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think he obviously was stirring, cor ad cor loquitor.

This whole TAC thing has really shaken the nuts off their trees.

Sane people like you should just laugh.

He's shock jocking with a vengeance.

You should hear some of the reactions to deliberately provocative wank like that on Australian talkback radio. [Paranoid]

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252

 - Posted      Profile for Divine Outlaw   Author's homepage   Email Divine Outlaw   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cor ad cor loquitur:
Damian Thompson's latest blast on this topic is, in my view, utterly disgusting.

His blog in general is a vile little sewer. But, yes, that is partiularly horrible.

--------------------
insert amusing sig. here

Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252

 - Posted      Profile for Divine Outlaw   Author's homepage   Email Divine Outlaw   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So much so that it has prompted me to start a Hell thread.

--------------------
insert amusing sig. here

Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

 - Posted      Profile for Chesterbelloc   Email Chesterbelloc   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Och, Daimster, the wee scamp...

Anyway, apparently, the bishop of Southwark is on today's "World at One" on Radio 4 with Ed Stourton to talk about a "property" settlement for departing CofE folks.

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Damien Thompson's blog is bigoted tripe. Henry VIII was never motivated by Protestant theology, he remained a Catholic all his life. He was motivated by the need to produce a male heir and prevent a return to the War of the Roses. He was also right in his disagreement with the Pope.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LQ:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
They are a denomination along with the rest, no two ways about it. Every single argument you make about the Anglican Church can be made about the Church of Scotland, and when the progenies of both Churches meet in the same land, the fallacy of your argument becomes readily apparent.

Well, it depends on one's understanding of the esse of the Church. If it involves bishops, then there is a line with Anglicans on one side and Presbyterians on the other. Of course, everyone draws the line at a different place: the Orthodox at themselves, Rome with episcopacy plus unbroken valid intention, and many denominations at the "invisible" Church of all the baptised. In any event, the answer doesn't seem forthcoming (although one hopes we can at least rule out the scenario envisioned in South Park).
Thank you for reminding me of the South Park episode. It has quite made my day, having wasted too much time this afternoon arguing with an asshole who tells me that my mortal soul is in danger if I don't submit to the Roman Pontiff.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
chiltern_hundred
Shipmate
# 13659

 - Posted      Profile for chiltern_hundred   Author's homepage   Email chiltern_hundred   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Anglican Brat scripsit:

quote:
If the Pope tomorrow decides all of a sudden, Arius was correct, and that Our Lord is not equal in majesty with the Father, will the entire Roman Catholic Church follow suit and renounce the Nicene Creed?
I used to object to Rome on these grounds, but it turns out that this isn't actually possible. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the VatII Constitution on the Apostolate of the Laity, the Pope formulates and articulates dogma in conjunction with the whole Church and under strictly limited conditions. (Any inaccuracies result from my quoting from memory, as I have neither of these documents in front of me.)

--------------------
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - Galileo Galilei

Posts: 691 | From: Duck City, UK | Registered: Apr 2008  |  IP: Logged
seasick

...over the edge
# 48

 - Posted      Profile for seasick   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, I understood that a Pope who declared heresy automatically ceased to be Pope - isn't that what the sedevacantists use to try and give foundation to their claims?

--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley

Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I just listened on iplayer to The World This Weekend in which Ed Stourton talked to the Bishop of Southwark. Stourton started by asking the bishop about the news that the revision committee will not recommend any legislation to provide an alternative episcopal structure for dissenters from women bishops. The bishop said that things are now "taking shape" in the sense that Rome has made its offer, and the Church of England has made its decision. This is a clear message to the dissenters-its time for you to leave.

When asked about church property, buildings etc, he said that he had taken legal advice, and that all buildings must remain the property of the national church. He countenanced the possibility of local sharing arrangements, which the C of E already has with other denominations, but not of the ceding of any property rights.

This is the final kiss off from the Church of England to Forward in Faith. Its the final betrayal of the promises made in 1992 that both integrities have an honoured place within the C of E. All round, this is put up or shut up time. The Church of England will give no ground that is in any way meaningful, or that those of the FiF persuasion could live with. They will be unchurched unless they take up the Pope's offer.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
.

When asked about church property, buildings etc, he said that he had taken legal advice, and that all buildings must remain the property of the national church. He countenanced the possibility of local sharing arrangements, which the C of E already has with other denominations, but not of the ceding of any property rights.

This is the final kiss off from the Church of England to Forward in Faith.

Nonsense. Whether he wants to or not the Bishop has no power to change the rather peculiar legal status of parish churches as property held in trust by the incumbent for the whole parish. That would take at the very least an Act of Parliament, more likely a substantial measure of disestablishment, that would likely be impossible to get even discussed, never mind passed, for some years. Whether the CofE wanted to or not there is no realistic possibility of simply handing parish churches over to priests who leave for some other church. And no sane member of FiF every thought they would do that.

Its hard to imagine any other large organised body of churches in the world doing as much as the CofE is likely to do for the dissidents within it - and certainly not as much as it probably would have done has this spanner not been thrown in the works, or as much as was done back in 1992.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools