Many Anglicans Will Become Catholic This Easter

alex73

homer911 wrote: »

Hi Donatello

I appreciate I am treading on dangerous ground here, but posts by you, keylem and maybe some others (but not by any means all the RC posters) contain various statements that attempt, from my perspective anyway, to lord the RC faith over any other Christian Faith.. Inwardly I say "here we go again" every time it happens, but I try to accept your perspectives where they differ from mine and are not contrary to biblical teaching

What I dont understand is your parallel criticism of the RC church in so many ways (you will probably say you are critiquing certain members/priests of the church, not the RC church itself, but I dont really see any distinction - the church is the people). No church is perfect - they never will be.

As Catholics we believe that the Church is holy and perfect as the mystic body of Christ. Now that's not to say all its members follow this. But religion will always be a point of contention, There has been endless spinoffs of Christian church's and what you have today are some Christian Church's with Lesbian/Gay pastors, No disrespect to any gay people, but the central teaching the the church as passed to it by the apostles has been diluted and watered down.

If you are looking at which churches have preserved the original teaching of the apostles then its really only the Roman Church and the Eastern Orthodox. (East of course not accepting the Popes Primacy and Filioque, but they do believe in the Bishop of Rome being primus inter pares)

This is an opinion of faith... I respect everyone's right to their own religion. But the reality is that many Anglicans who look to deepen their faith often times result in returning to Rome which has the fullness of the Original Faith. The Church's original teachings are not open to democratic changes, its a faith that has been passed down and which we follow if we want.

homer911

alex73 wrote: »

This is an opinion of faith... I respect everyone's right to their own religion. But the reality is that many Anglicans who look to deepen their faith often times result in returning to Rome which has the fullness of the Original Faith. The Church's original teachings are not open to democratic changes, its a faith that has been passed down and which we
follow if we want.

These are some of the types of statements that are irritating to non-RCs - small groups of anglicans choosing to switch their allegiance to the RC church are not "many anglicans", neither are they "returning to Rome" - they were not alive when the reformation took place and never left the RC church - they have chosen to join the RC church - in the same way that many RCs choose to leave the RC church and join a different denomination - for whatever reason

Saying that the RC faith has the fullness of the Original Faith is equivalent to saying that no other church does - these kind of statements are hardly helpful

I guess we all need to put ourselves in the shoes of our brothers/sisters before we pass comment. There is so much that we do agree on!

Keylem

alex73 wrote: »

As Catholics we believe that the Church is holy and perfect as the mystic body of Christ. Now that's not to say all its members follow this. But religion will always be a point of contention, There has been endless spinoffs of Christian church's and what you have today are some Christian Church's with Lesbian/Gay pastors, No disrespect to any gay people, but the central teaching the the church as passed to it by the apostles has been diluted and watered down.

If you are looking at which churches have preserved the original teaching of the apostles then its really only the Roman Church and the Eastern Orthodox. (East of course not accepting the Popes Primacy and Filioque, but they do believe in the Bishop of Rome being primus inter pares)

This is an opinion of faith... I respect everyone's right to their own religion. But the reality is that many Anglicans who look to deepen their faith often times result in returning to Rome which has the fullness of the Original Faith. The Church's original teachings are not open to democratic changes, its a faith that has been passed down and which we follow if we want.

Well said Alex!!

There is a consequence of creating faith systems based on what people desire rather than on Eternal Truths. Luther regretted that the Protestants of his time were breaking away from the faith he founded and following their own whims. One wonders if he ever had enough insight to realise that he did the same thing, and by his own actions taught others that if they didn't like what was taught in the church, then the answer was to find one that did teach what they liked, or better still, start your own church.

Donatello

homer911 wrote: »

These are some of the types of statements that are irritating to non-RCs - small groups of anglicans choosing to switch their allegiance to the RC church are not "many anglicans", neither are they "returning to Rome" - they were not alive when the reformation took place and never left the RC church - they have chosen to join the RC church - in the same way that many RCs choose to leave the RC church and join a different denomination - for whatever reason

Saying that the RC faith has the fullness of the Original Faith is equivalent to saying that no other church does - these kind of statements are hardly helpful

I guess we all need to put ourselves in the shoes of our brothers/sisters before we pass comment. There is so much that we do agree on!

I understand why you would feel that way. The Catholic claim is either preposterous and arrogant, or it is true. The Catholic Church is not a denomination.

We must remember that Christ promised the Holy Spirit to guide the Church into all truth. The Catholic Church is the Church Christ established and so we cannot deny our divine mission with false humility based on a denial of reality so as not to cause offense. A light on a hill cannot be hid, nor should it be.

I advise all non-Catholics to check out paragraphs 8, 14, & 15 of Lumen Gentium, a document of Vatican II on the Church. It is not long but explains the Catholic Church's outlook on non-Catholics and their relation to the Church. It is too long for me to post here but I would encourage all to read these sections, which are not long.

virmilitaris

Hehe delicious division.

On a serious note I have to agree with some of the previous posters. Fundamentalism is the enemy of all humanity. You can find them in any and all shades of beliefs, in this case catholics and protestants.

While I'm an atheist and disagree with the lot of you, the older I get the more I see that its possible to live alongside religious people as long as they aren't fundamentalist in their views.

Thankfully the fundies are usually greatly outnumbered here by the moderates, both catholic and protestant.

JimiTime

virmilitaris wrote: »

Hehe delicious division.

On a serious note I have to agree with some of the previous posters. Fundamentalism is the enemy of all humanity. You can find them in any and all shades of beliefs, in this case catholics and protestants.

While I'm an atheist and disagree with the lot of you, the older I get the more I see that its possible to live alongside religious people as long as they aren't fundamentalist in their views.

Thankfully the fundies are usually greatly outnumbered here by the moderates, both catholic and protestant.

I think the words 'fundamentalist' and even 'extremist' are poor descriptions of the negative connotations their users seek to bestow. I would say that any Christian who follows Christ and the core tenets of Christianity is a fundamentalist by definition. Also, to be an 'extremist' in a Christian sense means what exactly? To be extremely Christian? People would describe someone like Phelps and extremist, but his extremism is nothing to do with Christianity. I think they're media words that allow people to point at the bad guy. I think they are probably borne out of ignorance. I would see the guy who forfeits his own self and lives for Christ, helping the poor and needy and preaching the gospel as a 'fundamentalist, extremist' Christian. Those who seek to spread hate, or do violence to others, well there's words for such people, and I don't think that just because they may align themselves with religion or atheism or whatever, should their hate etc be automatically referred to in the context of said religion.

Moderate is a filthy word to a Christian, or at least should be. i mean, a Christian should be insulted by the term 'moderate' or at least be moved to realise that they are doing something wrong. Fundamentalism in relation to Christianity should be set upon the Golden rule, Love God, Love your neighbour. Bringing this to the 'extreme' should be a very positive thing.

Maybe it sounds pedantic, but i just think such words are so loose that they can be rendered useless. They become a tool of the Pejorative army. Lazy terms that allow people to point fingers. Anyway, I digress...

philologos

What people commonly call fundamentalism I call distortionism. Fundamentalism if it is actually related to the fundamentals of Christianity can only be a good thing.

JimiTime

Jakkass wrote: »

What people commonly call fundamentalism I call distortionism. Fundamentalism if it is actually related to the fundamentals of Christianity can only be a good thing.

Another 'ism'! Noooooooooooooooo

alex73

homer911 wrote: »

Saying that the RC faith has the fullness of the Original Faith is equivalent to saying that no other church does - these kind of statements are hardly helpful

I guess we all need to put ourselves in the shoes of our brothers/sisters before we pass comment. There is so much that we do agree on!

Look there is no point me lying. I do believe the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church, and so to most traditional Catholics. I'm sure it offends other Christian Churchs to hear it, but its true. I have many Orthodox friends and they tell me all the time Their Church is the true Church not mine... But it does not stop us being friends. Infact I have incredible admiration for them and their traditions. (most of the faith is the same shared faith, bar some parts)

But other Christian Church's have changed the faith so much that you can't say is the same.

Donatello

alex73 wrote: »

Look there is no point me lying. I do believe the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church, and so to most traditional Catholics. I'm sure it offends other Christian Churchs to hear it, but its true. I have many Orthodox friends and they tell me all the time Their Church is the true Church not mine... But it does not stop us being friends. Infact I have incredible admiration for them and their traditions. (most of the faith is the same shared faith, bar some parts)

But other Christian Church's have changed the faith so much that you can't say is the same.

I agree.

I have tremendous respect for Evangelicals (in particular). They, along with all who do not hold fast to the Catholic faith, are wrong about many very important things, and they even condone certain sins (which is really bad), but I do admire their convictions and their strength of faith in Jesus Christ.

Would I be a friend to the Evangelical Christian by pretending that there are not important things they've got wrong? We do what we can to share the fullness of truth and faith in a spirit of charity, respecting the freedom of individuals.

philologos

What exactly have they gotten wrong? (I'm presuming this will be on Biblical grounds)

Donatello

Jakkass wrote: »

What exactly have they gotten wrong? (I'm presuming this will be on Biblical grounds)

The Eucharist, Sacrament of Penance, the priesthood, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Papacy, and the denial of sin (e.g. contraception). We've been over that last one a fair few times!!!

gigino

[snip!]

Take this to the Protestant/Catholic debate thread please/

All answers to this post are being deleted.