Pope tells Anglicans, "Come on Down!"
- Thread starter Spade
- Start date
I'm glad they've given up on some kind of reunion to Catholicism and Anglicism. The Anglican Church has become apostate, and anything resembling a 'union' would mean an intolerable compromise to the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church.
I'm not sure how to read this solution however. It does not establish an Anlican Rite of the Catholic Church with an exclusive episcopacy, and its own parish structure, which would respect some of the liturgical traditions of the Old English Catholic Church, including perhaps reinstituting the old Sarum Mass (a beautiful and eleaborate version of the Latin liturgy, exclusive to the English Church prior to its schism with Rome), while retaining ultimate faelty to the Holy See.
It also does not resolve the issue of a celibate priesthood. Presumably an Anglican Rite could include provisions for marriage under the strict conditions of the Eastern Rite Catholics (marriage only before ordination, no divorce, and perhaps limitation to diocesian and pastoral duties only), but trying to merge a celibate and married priesthood is going to be murky at best.
I think the Vatican is going to have to distinguish between the Latin Rite and traditional Anglican Catholic rather than trying to bring it into the administrative auspices of the Latin Rite. This can only be a step in a process of resolving the Anglican issues. I think its going to create a lot of problems. I'm not even sure its necessary, given the number of Anglican converts who are abandoning the High (English) Anglican Church to join the Latin Rite, as the former unravels into a New Age cult, under the aegis of homosexual cultural imperatives.
I'm not sure how to read this solution however. It does not establish an Anlican Rite of the Catholic Church with an exclusive episcopacy, and its own parish structure, which would respect some of the liturgical traditions of the Old English Catholic Church, including perhaps reinstituting the old Sarum Mass (a beautiful and eleaborate version of the Latin liturgy, exclusive to the English Church prior to its schism with Rome), while retaining ultimate faelty to the Holy See.
It also does not resolve the issue of a celibate priesthood. Presumably an Anglican Rite could include provisions for marriage under the strict conditions of the Eastern Rite Catholics (marriage only before ordination, no divorce, and perhaps limitation to diocesian and pastoral duties only), but trying to merge a celibate and married priesthood is going to be murky at best.
I think the Vatican is going to have to distinguish between the Latin Rite and traditional Anglican Catholic rather than trying to bring it into the administrative auspices of the Latin Rite. This can only be a step in a process of resolving the Anglican issues. I think its going to create a lot of problems. I'm not even sure its necessary, given the number of Anglican converts who are abandoning the High (English) Anglican Church to join the Latin Rite, as the former unravels into a New Age cult, under the aegis of homosexual cultural imperatives.
Last edited:
Coldstream,
Your obsession with homosexuality is becoming obvious. Perhaps you would be happier if you came out.
Your obsession with homosexuality is becoming obvious. Perhaps you would be happier if you came out.
Oh yeah, the catholic church is looking to expand. As the OP suggests, I'd love to see RatzAss on The Price Is Right with his Prada shoes, long flowing robes and coffee cozy on his head. The ratings would go through the roof. The wheel on the set keeps on turning.
It's not an obssesion, Cliffy. Every woe that's ever been is the fault of homosexuality. I thought everyone knew that.
Oh, crap, I forgot to turn the kettle on for my tea. Must be because of homosexuality. Damn, I got a flat tire the other day and couldn't think of who to blame, till now.
lol I have a hard time seeing much difference between big religion and big politics.
I think perhaps people get mired in it and are afraid to move on. It's nice and cozy to ignore the message and get stuck in the dogma, and uncomfortable to accept the message and move on.
I'm certainly not a fan of the catholic church but do you really believe they are any different than the Anglican church? The Anglican church paid out so much money to the res. schools that they almost went broke.
I'm sure you're right. Maybe if we get really lucky, they'll give up in frustration, fold their tents and wander off into the desert, never to be seen again, freeing the world of two major superstitions.
Two down, only a million to go...
Are you closet religious? Goodness knows you are obsessed with posting about religion in pretty much every thread where religion is brought up. :lol:
Now, had the article never brought up homosexuality as a huge part of this issue, then I might see calling coldstream obsessed for bringing it up anyway, but.... it did bring it up.
Coldstream brings up homosexuality in every thread he posts in. And I am openly a spiritual anarchist. You are pretty level headed about religion but some of the more fanatical, like herald and coldstream beg for counter views with there constant condemnation of everybody who doesn't follow their brand of dogmatic beliefs.
I did spend 40 years studying comparative religions, philosophies and different spiritual paths, as well as psychology. So I think that my posting on religious threads is a continuation of basically my life long interest in the subject. I guess I should thank my catholic upbringing for that.;-)
I think if you check my posting history you'll see that is not true Cliffy. I did it here because homosexual affirmation is the central element in the Anglican Church's fall from grace.
Homosexuality is a central facet, in fact, of apostacy, for whatever reason, and that has been the common thread of my posts. The fact that it represents an utter squandering of, an utter rebellion against, the God given gift of procreation and love, into a rough charicature of gratification, futility and human usery is probably the reason... but it is always there.
I have to say all your study of 'comparative' philosophies and theologies have led you increasingly into radically individualistic (and therefor narcissistic) and relativistic (and therefor atheistic) confusion. You'll have to wonder if it has done you any good or just made you more miserable.
Religion, after all, at its origins is not about study, but about an assertion of faith, that we all now cannot be proven or disproven by material methods, and from thense all your intellectual growth will be prejudiced by that fundamental assertion.
What i object to in your comments, is you deny that a fundamental atheistic assertion, of disbelief, colours all of your comments with an equal prejudice. All i know is that both of us can't be right. And there is no way around choosing between one or the other.
Last edited:
In you opinion. To me it is about people who are stuck in the past and cannot grow with the rest of humanity.
And that is your personal prejudice. It is your judgmentalism that I find offensive.
You are the one spouting hatred. I'm quite happy pointing that out to you.
Wrong! I have said and still assert that I am agnostic because the existence of god cannot be proven in any way. You automatically assume that anyone who is anti religious is atheist but that is just plain silly. Religion is the bane of humanity and has caused more harm and destruction in the world than any other reason. It is the judgmental attitude of people like you that makes life difficult for many. If your god sanctions such archaic attitudes then I believe it to be a false god.