Vatican welcomes Anglicans into Catholic Church

[BigSqwert]

The Gospel according to

St. Matthew

7

 

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. Mk. 4.24

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

 

Didn't you know a true Christian has a right to pick and choose what they want to literally interpret in the bible?

[southsider2k5]

Didn't you know a true Christian has a right to pick and choose what they want to literally interpret in the bible?

 

I know you are here to mock and laugh, just like you always do when Christianity comes up, but there is a very important distinction that AHB is totally missing.

 

Man is not to sit in judgment of others. All of us are sinners, whether we want to admit it or not. The bible pretty clearly states that all sins are equal under his eyes, because at the end of the day, they all are about us taking away the decision making power for what is best for our lives away from God. Even if you believe that the bible is telling you homosexuality is wrong, it is not up to you, me, the Catholic Church, or anyone else of this world to deny them God. That is between that person and God. Especially when you factor in the best example of a Christian life we have, and look at type of people that Jesus Christ took into his inner circle, I don't think there is a sin around that should be powerful enough to deny someone who wants to know God that chance. We ALL commit enough sins that applying the same standard of biblbical wrongness to ourselves, not a single person alive should be a priest.

[BigSqwert]

I know you are here to mock and laugh, just like you always do when Christianity comes up, but there is a very important distinction that AHB is totally missing.

My last comment was not intended to mock Christianity. It was a shot at AHB for picking and choosing the passages he wants to live by.

[southsider2k5]

Religion...bwahahaha.

 

 

My last comment was not intended to mock Christianity. It was a shot at AHB for picking and choosing the passages he wants to live by.

 

lol. I wonder where I would have gotten that idea from...

[BigSqwert]

lol. I wonder where I would have gotten that idea from...

I'm not saying I don't make fun of religion. Just saying that one particular comment was a dig at AHB.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Turning this discussion more toward the subject of religious rites, aside from the selectivity of allowing full communion with married male Anglican priests but not married female Anglican priest, etc., what about the conflicted Anglican views on transubstantiation of the eucharist? Anglicans are all over the map as to whether consecration results in transubstiation, "pneumatic presence" (consubstantiation), or whether it is merely a symbolic act. For faithful Roman Catholics, on the other hand, the occurrence of the miracle is beyond question. How will "full communion" (whatever that means) be attained with breakaway Anglicans if fundamental faith differences like that exist?

[bmags]

you did who to the what now?

[StrangeSox]

The policy of celibacy they probably liked as a way to show how strong their messengers of God are, but surely they realize what an consequential policy it is.

 

It also means they have no heirs and its more likely that their property and wealth gets left to the church.

[FlaSoxxJim]

It also means they have no heirs and its more likely that their property and wealth gets left to the church.

 

Vows of poverty pretty much already ensure there is not a lot of personal wealth (at least first-generation) among parish priests.

[Rex Kickass]

Turning this discussion more toward the subject of religious rites, aside from the selectivity of allowing full communion with married male Anglican priests but not married female Anglican priest, etc., what about the conflicted Anglican views on transubstantiation of the eucharist? Anglicans are all over the map as to whether consecration results in transubstiation, "pneumatic presence" (consubstantiation), or whether it is merely a symbolic act. For faithful Roman Catholics, on the other hand, the occurrence of the miracle is beyond question. How will "full communion" (whatever that means) be attained with breakaway Anglicans if fundamental faith differences like that exist?

 

I think that could be the real outstanding theological question, although frankly not one that will matter to most. I think, on a practical level, the average Catholic doesn't give much thought to the concept of transubstiation.

 

Frankly, the more I think about this particular move, the more nakedly political it seems on the Catholic Church to peel away the more conservative ends of the Anglican communion which is finding itself more and more isolated from a church that is willing to make accomodations to provide a safe place to worship and fully engage with a spiritual community to communities which frequently find themselves excluded from it. There are 77 million members of the Anglican communion - many of them in Africa and Asia - both areas where the Catholic church could still grow. By offering a chance to bring these Anglicans in, it makes the merger of some of these churches much more feasible in the near future.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I think that could be the real outstanding theological question, although frankly not one that will matter to most. I think, on a practical level, the average Catholic doesn't give much thought to the concept of transubstiation.

 

Frankly, the more I think about this particular move, the more nakedly political it seems on the Catholic Church to peel away the more conservative ends of the Anglican communion which is finding itself more and more isolated from a church that is willing to make accomodations to provide a safe place to worship and fully engage with a spiritual community to communities which frequently find themselves excluded from it. There are 77 million members of the Anglican communion - many of them in Africa and Asia - both areas where the Catholic church could still grow. By offering a chance to bring these Anglicans in, it makes the merger of some of these churches much more feasible in the near future.

 

That pretty much sums up what I think if the announcement as well. And I can't say I feel much warmth toward an algamated church body that is united first and foremost by intolerance, exclusion, and ignorance.

[Soxy]

Turning this discussion more toward the subject of religious rites, aside from the selectivity of allowing full communion with married male Anglican priests but not married female Anglican priest, etc., what about the conflicted Anglican views on transubstantiation of the eucharist? Anglicans are all over the map as to whether consecration results in transubstiation, "pneumatic presence" (consubstantiation), or whether it is merely a symbolic act. For faithful Roman Catholics, on the other hand, the occurrence of the miracle is beyond question. How will "full communion" (whatever that means) be attained with breakaway Anglicans if fundamental faith differences like that exist?

I really don't think that this is a well thought out move by the vatican. Like you and Rex I think this is a blatant political type move. I imagine as many Anglicans will go to like Missouri Synod Lutheran churches as much as they will go to the Catholic churches.

 

Within Anglican churches there is just too much variation--I imagine people from High churches will go Catholic and low churches will go conservative protestant.

 

I am also unconvinced this will mean a lot for the wider Anglican communion--most of the African churches are extremely conservative (one even is refusing aid that comes from the Episcopal church) so I doubt they will deflect much. In fact some of the conservative anglican parishes in this country have acknowledged an archbishop that is actually in an African diocese. I doubt this will matter much for either roll.

[Rex Kickass]

I really don't think that this is a well thought out move by the vatican. Like you and Rex I think this is a blatant political type move. I imagine as many Anglicans will go to like Missouri Synod Lutheran churches as much as they will go to the Catholic churches.

 

Within Anglican churches there is just too much variation--I imagine people from High churches will go Catholic and low churches will go conservative protestant.

 

I am also unconvinced this will mean a lot for the wider Anglican communion--most of the African churches are extremely conservative (one even is refusing aid that comes from the Episcopal church) so I doubt they will deflect much. In fact some of the conservative anglican parishes in this country have acknowledged an archbishop that is actually in an African diocese. I doubt this will matter much for either roll.

 

There's another possible motivation, there are a large number of more liberal Roman Catholic churches in the US, and there have been a number of rumblings about possibly creating a separate American Catholic Church which represents a more liberal view towards social policy. Could this also be giving precedent to allow American Catholic Churches more freedom to have their own policies and views on social issues and still remain the Roman Catholic communion? Similar to what the Church of England has done with the Anglican communion.

[FlaSoxxJim]

There's another possible motivation, there are a large number of more liberal Roman Catholic churches in the US, and there have been a number of rumblings about possibly creating a separate American Catholic Church which represents a more liberal view towards social policy. Could this also be giving precedent to allow American Catholic Churches more freedom to have their own policies and views on social issues and still remain the Roman Catholic communion? Similar to what the Church of England has done with the Anglican communion.

 

I'd say that's unlikely given that the apparent goal of this announcement is to peel away the most conservative disaffected Anglicans, which to me is not a show of any softening views of the Vatican on liberal catholicism.

[Rex Kickass]

I'd say that's unlikely given that the apparent goal of this announcement is to peel away the most conservative disaffected Anglicans, which to me is not a show of any softening views of the Vatican on liberal catholicism.

 

I don't know if its a show of any kind of softening, but possibly giving the Catholic Church some precedent to work with if they are suddenly faced with a loss of half of their North American congregation.

[southsideirish71]

There's another possible motivation, there are a large number of more liberal Roman Catholic churches in the US, and there have been a number of rumblings about possibly creating a separate American Catholic Church which represents a more liberal view towards social policy. Could this also be giving precedent to allow American Catholic Churches more freedom to have their own policies and views on social issues and still remain the Roman Catholic communion? Similar to what the Church of England has done with the Anglican communion.

 

The vatican doesn't work this way. They don't want an independent church or more liberal social policy unless it comes from vatican decree. This is what it is. Its a basic play for new converts and churches that have a similar ideology.

[FlaSoxxJim]

The vatican doesn't work this way. They don't want an independent church or more liberal social policy unless it comes from vatican decree. This is what it is. Its a basic play for new converts and churches that have a similar ideology.

 

I'd particularly agree the Vatican is pretty hardline now under Emperor Palpatine's Pope Benedict's command.

[CanOfCorn]

I know you are here to mock and laugh, just like you always do when Christianity comes up, but there is a very important distinction that AHB is totally missing.

 

Man is not to sit in judgment of others. All of us are sinners, whether we want to admit it or not. The bible pretty clearly states that all sins are equal under his eyes, because at the end of the day, they all are about us taking away the decision making power for what is best for our lives away from God. Even if you believe that the bible is telling you homosexuality is wrong, it is not up to you, me, the Catholic Church, or anyone else of this world to deny them God. That is between that person and God. Especially when you factor in the best example of a Christian life we have, and look at type of people that Jesus Christ took into his inner circle, I don't think there is a sin around that should be powerful enough to deny someone who wants to know God that chance. We ALL commit enough sins that applying the same standard of biblbical wrongness to ourselves, not a single person alive should be a priest.

 

I don't know how anyone could WANT to be part of a faith that believes this...how depressing. Stop looking at the nurse with those bedroom eyes, newborn. Sinner!

[Rex Kickass]

I don't know how anyone could WANT to be part of a faith that believes this...how depressing. Stop looking at the nurse with those bedroom eyes, newborn. Sinner!

I think it's all a matter of perspective, actually. Why would you not want to be a part of a faith that allows you to reach a personal understanding with your flaws and your own lapses from an ethical code - be it your own or your faith's?

 

There comes a point in many people's lives where they come up against their own demons, flaws and failures. As far as I'm concerned, this part of the Christian faith - which essentially draws a fat line under our imperfections - helps people come to terms and move beyond and past those imperfections with a degree of humility. Frankly, I think it's one of the most appealing parts of Christianity - the knowledge that we are all broken people and that our deeds are what helps us rise above our flaws.

[CanOfCorn]

I think it's all a matter of perspective, actually. Why would you not want to be a part of a faith that allows you to reach a personal understanding with your flaws and your own lapses from an ethical code - be it your own or your faith's?

 

There comes a point in many people's lives where they come up against their own demons, flaws and failures. As far as I'm concerned, this part of the Christian faith - which essentially draws a fat line under our imperfections - helps people come to terms and move beyond and past those imperfections with a degree of humility. Frankly, I think it's one of the most appealing parts of Christianity - the knowledge that we are all broken people and that our deeds are what helps us rise above our flaws.

 

While I understand that...some people may not feel that way....

 

The constant uphill battle to try to figure out what you've done morally wrong and how to be better can be very taxing. Especially for someone who might be more weak-minded. Everyone needs a day to feel like they are ok...and Christianity doesn't allow for that, at least not without consequences.

[The Critic]

I don't see this as anything more than a way to bring more paying customers into their shop.

[Rex Kickass]

While I understand that...some people may not feel that way....

 

The constant uphill battle to try to figure out what you've done morally wrong and how to be better can be very taxing. Especially for someone who might be more weak-minded. Everyone needs a day to feel like they are ok...and Christianity doesn't allow for that, at least not without consequences.

 

Many Christian faiths do, in fact, allow for that. Catholicism, for example, offers you the chance to confess and atone for your sins - literally giving you a clean slate. Others state that you can atone for your sins by accepting God into your heart.

[kapkomet]

While I understand that...some people may not feel that way....

 

The constant uphill battle to try to figure out what you've done morally wrong and how to be better can be very taxing. Especially for someone who might be more weak-minded. Everyone needs a day to feel like they are ok...and Christianity doesn't allow for that, at least not without consequences.

I disagree with that premise as well. You can't pick and choose what you want out of the Bible and make a hill to die on, so to speak. It is equal to the sum of its parts. You can't take what Paul said in Acts forward in the Bible only nor can you take what the book of James in sole disgression. Now you enter Catholicism, Protestant, religion in general and at the end of the day, none of them have it perfect because religion is as imperfect as a human is. You just have to do the best you can.

[CanOfCorn]

Many Christian faiths do, in fact, allow for that. Catholicism, for example, offers you the chance to confess and atone for your sins - literally giving you a clean slate. Others state that you can atone for your sins by accepting God into your heart.

 

So does Judaism with Yom Kippur. Fast for one day and atone for your sins of the last year. The difference is that Catholicism drills it into your head EVERY DAY! I just don't understand how some people can deal with that. I mean, basically, you walk out of the confessional...and you've sinned again. Ugh.

[FlaSoxxJim]

So does Judaism with Yom Kippur. Fast for one day and atone for your sins of the last year. The difference is that Catholicism drills it into your head EVERY DAY! I just don't understand how some people can deal with that. I mean, basically, you walk out of the confessional...and you've sinned again. Ugh.

 

Ach, it's lifetimes of guilt either way you slice it. For the Catholics it comes from the religion. For the Jews, it comes from your Mother.