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 | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » From Roman Catholicism/Eastern Orthodoxy (Page 6)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: From Roman Catholicism/Eastern Orthodoxy
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638

 - Posted      Profile for The Scrumpmeister   Author's homepage   Email The Scrumpmeister       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
There is nothing to forgive, Scrumpmeister.

[Smile]

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:
And the Anglican priest's job is to gently explain why the rules of his church do not permit him to admit them to communion, as they are not in good standing in their own church.

Depending on the flavour of Anglican involved, that's not even technically true. TEC admits "all baptized Christians," which would include the Orthodox couple whatever their standing with their own congregation.
That's true. I had assumed that, because Gamaliel is based in the UK that the situation he describes also was, but of course as he encountered it online it could have been anywhere.

quote:
With respect to the C of E, Canon B 15A (b) does indeed admit those who are communicant members of their own Trinitarian church, and in good standing with that church. Whether this obliges the C of E to pay attention to other churches' decrees of automatic sanction for various acts would be an interesting question for canon lawyers.
It would, and certainly when I was excommunicated by my former Orthodox bishop and somewhat at sea ecclesiastically, I was very grateful to find that Anglican clergy were willing to disregard the restrictions in this particular canon.

However, I cannot think of any reason why Canon B 15a (b), (thank you for finding the exact reference) would put that restriction in place if not as a mark of ecumenical respect for the discipline of other churches.

--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis

Posts: 14671 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004  |  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 Arethosemyfeet:
Does the CofE even have any Canon lawyers?

Dozens of them - am tempted to call them 'parasites'.

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

Posts: 23027 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Scrumpmeister:


However, I cannot think of any reason why Canon B 15a (b), (thank you for finding the exact reference) would put that restriction in place if not as a mark of ecumenical respect for the discipline of other churches.

I think it's probably more aimed at a situation where someone has been excommunicated by their own church for sleeping with their priest's spouse (or other egregious public sin): things that would be out of order whichever church you're a member of. I don't think the goal was to police the disciplinary quirks of particular denominations.
Posts: 2789 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
ThunderBunk

Stone cold idiot
# 15579

 - Posted      Profile for ThunderBunk   Email ThunderBunk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I read it even more broadly, as looking for an equivalent to confirmation. That is, or was, the standard of C of E membership in good standing as an adult. Since some other churches confirm/ed their members and others didn't/don't, a single phrase setting out the standard was required, and this is it.

Of course, if you are intending to be received into the C of E, that's a different matter since you then come under its discipline, and I can see no necessity to regard the regime of the other denomination as directly relevant.

I'm not a canon lawyer, but that seems to me to be what it's driving at.

--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".

Foolish, potentially deranged witterings

Posts: 2113 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
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

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools