Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashworth:
I feel that there is a difference in attitude between clergy and laity. I also think that there is a difference between both priests and laity in the Northern and Southern Provinces. Most of the talk about leaving seems to be coming from a number of fairly high profile FinF priests in London and the south.

For me as a lay person the whole idea of leaving and going to Rome raises almost as many problems as the ordination of women. There certainly do seem to be more clergy talking about leaving than there are laity and that is what concerns me. I'm in a diocese where finf is very weak and there only a handful of finf clergy. If the laity don't feel they can leave who will support and minister to their needs if large numbers of finf clergy do go?
I think this is becoming a very sad situation where thousands of people are going to be left stuggling in the wilderness, perhaps unchurched, because of a lack of charity and compromise on both sides of the argument. It does seem that the C of E is going overboard to be an inclusive church where every minority are to be welcomed and encouraged with open arms except those people who cannot accept the ordination of women.
I am only in my early 50's and would like to think that there would still be a welcome in the C of E for me, with my views, for at least another 30 years. However, I greatly fear there will not be.

I did find the Bishop of Beverley's recent letter an encouragement. Is he saying that he will be staying to look after those of us who want to stay? Unfortunately he too must soon be coming towards retirement.

http://www.bishopofbeverley.co.uk/news.htm

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leetle Masha:
[Slight tangent] I read back in the days when they published the "Unabomber Manifesto", that the Unabomber reversed the original expression "Eat your cake and have it too" so that it came out "Have your cake and eat it too", and the Unabomber's version became current then. [/tangent]

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:
As an outsider to this, can I just ask - for you, perhaps for FinF generally, what is/are your doctrinal differences with Rome ?

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashworth:


Although I have a great personal devotion to Our Lady, and indeed I am part of a Walsingham Cell, I do have problems with the idea of the Immaculate Conception. I cannot agree with the infalibility of the the Pope. The whole issue of birth control causes me problems especially as I see nothing particularly unnatural about using a condom. I am not sure whether the Roman Church is always correct in its views on divorce. I am not in agreeance regarding celebacy as in my experience a priests wife can often be a great asset both to the priest and more importantly to the parish. I believe that the priests that have ministered to me and administered the sacraments to me within the C of E over many years have been valid priests with valid sacraments as indeed I was confirmed by whom I believe to be a valid bishop. I could go on.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ashworth:
I think many anglican lay people feel the same as I do.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Many, and I include myself, have no strong views on the oow, but love catholic cermeony, and fear what will be left in the C of E if large numbers of AC priests leave.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
The problem surely lies in certain AngloCatholics having a certain number of Catholic beliefs,but not being sure enough of them to commit 100% to them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Qoheleth:
Could you expand on this, please?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

I think in the West we compartmentalise those things

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leetle Masha:
are you asking for a kind of "cafeteria" Catholicism?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leetle Masha:
are you asking for a kind of "cafeteria" Catholicism?

---

Mary, as ever, you are full of wisdom! Many Anglo-Catholics like the freedom of thought which goes with the Protestant tradition. Does that make them Protestants? I don't know! I always feel that the veil between heaven and earth is at its thinnest when I kneel at the altar rail. I pray for the dead, in the belief that my prayers, and much mor so the intercession of the saints, can lighten their darkness. all very Catholic. But talk about the Spanish Armada and I'm a Prot! As you say, perhaps we are not yet ready to take on the yoke of the Apostolic tradition

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leetle Masha:
Whoaaa..... the Duke of Norfolk!

Paul, I think we're talking about apples and oranges. What some call "Freedom of thought", we call The Fullness of the Faith, because we buy the whole programme. We don't say "I believe this but not that". If we said we believed one teaching of the Church but not another, we simply wouldn't have all of Orthodoxy's teachings. We would be "Orthodoxes-manqués". For us, when God gave out eyes, if we were taking one thing and not another, we might have said, "OK, God, I can see fine with the left eye You just gave me. You can keep the extra one...."

Best wishes,

Mary

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leetle Masha:
Whoaaa..... the Duke of Norfolk!

Paul, I think we're talking about apples and oranges. What some call "Freedom of thought", we call The Fullness of the Faith, because we buy the whole programme. We don't say "I believe this but not that". If we said we believed one teaching of the Church but not another, we simply wouldn't have all of Orthodoxy's teachings. We would be "Orthodoxes-manqués". For us, when God gave out eyes, if we were taking one thing and not another, we might have said, "OK, God, I can see fine with the left eye You just gave me. You can keep the extra one...."

Best wishes,

Mary

---

From the Protestant standpoint, belief in the teachings of the Church--and I'm referring specifically to social teachings--is not considered a fundamental necessity. Faith is very simply expressed in the three Creeds. Everything else is open to investigation and debate. This business of accepting every single teaching of the Church, which admittedly has fallible humans in positions of power, is not a Protestant concept.

Since we're people of scripture, we go by examples in the Bible, and in the Gospels (time and time again) it is shown that faith can be expressed very simply: "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." We see it as unnecessary to impose further human strictures (such as "You must believe church teaching on birth control to be admitted to communion") on something that is, to us, clearly meant to be simple.

Of course, life isn't simple, and issues do arise that call for the church's voice. However, it ultimately comes down to a matter of individual conscience. We can gather together to express our common fullness of faith, and still differ on issues where human interpretation kicks in.

In this regard, I'd be so bold as to say that worldwide Anglicanism as a whole has seemed to move more and more toward a Catholic way of thinking...one in which total doctrinal unity seems increasingly to be the goal.

---

It was put very succinctly in the last issue United Church Observer: we (the United Church of Canada) are a confessional church, not a creedal one. We confess our faith in the Trinity. There is no other test of membership. So all other statements of faith not absolute barriers. The Nicene Creed is certainly our guide, but it isn't used to exclude absolutely. Which is why we annoy other churches by constantly coming up with statements of faith, which looks like so much unnecessary theologizing to them.

We can't help but be who we are.

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

Posted                       

quote:

---

There has been a rumour coming out of the Vatican that Benny was not happy about C of E not keeping it's part of a deal made when the B'lair of Shyte a Roman Catholic
It appears part of the deals was in taking him the Vatican could open up a chain of St Peter's Coffee Shops in a number of prime churches; as well as providing the pasta for the Alpha suppers. One of the main reasons they have thrown open the doors.

Trust me it is all one big conspiracy

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Man, that spring fellow is one prophetic guy, can we look forward to Pizzeria Maria Immaculata with every Brompton Margerita from now on??

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
PaulTH.... Many Anglo-Catholics like the freedom of thought which goes with the Protestant tradition. Does that make them Protestants?

Well I like the freedom of thought that goes with the Catholic tradition. There seems to be much more debate within the RCC than within the confines of Protestantism. As a friend of mine who is 2ic at the Catholic University here said to me once. "What I love about the Church is that no matter how bizarre your opinions may be you'll always find another Catholic who shares them."

Maybe the difference is that we are all aware of being privileged to be part of the RCC and have the tendency to stay rather than rush off to another church or even start our own.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

We can't help but be who we are.

---

Exactly, SPK. And if you are definitely a protestant, then you wouldn't want to sign your name to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and perish the thought you'd try to become Orthodox where you'd have to be asked to renounce Calvinism. If I were a sincere protestant like you and others on this thread, I never could have become Orthodox.

Why would anyone want to sign their names to something they don't believe? I'd say, "Thank you so much for thinking of me, but maybe later."

However, I didn't want to be what I was when I became Orthodox. I wanted to be made new.

I don't know how new I am at this point, but I am certainly not the same as I used to be, spiritually. It seems like I am walking into different spiritual landscapes every single day, and it's quite an adventure! But I won't go into details about it, as I do become inarticulate these days when I try to talk about spiritual matters. Plus, I doubt many people would want to read my wordy meditations.

Mary
(Orthodoxy is not just an "alternative".)

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
I'm not quite sure what you mean by that, Comper's Child. I suppose it depends on your interpretation of Catholic Doctrine. Both Kung & Benny are priests in the Catholic Church. So were Theillard de Chardin and Dennis Hurley. It doesn't mean that they have the same opinions.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fuzzipeg:
Kung is in full communion with the Church and, as you said, has not been suspended from the priesthood. He cannot be considered a "Catholic Theologian" what-ever that means.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Nathan Die Weise has the measure of them all!

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:


But it seems to me that anyone who has a real "issue" with anything in the Catechism, to the point of being unwilling to give inner assent to it, is quite possibly not ready to become a Catholic. Certainly, one must be able to accept all that the Church has definitively taught in faith and morals, and be corrigible when one's personal judgements differ with those of the Church. [And this is what Patrick Kennedy is not demonstrating on the issue of abortion with his bishop.]

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

So they proposed two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also known as Justus, and Matthias. Then they prayed and said, ‘Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which one of these two you have chosen to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.’ And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.

Acts 1: 23-26

---