|
brassbandmaestro
|
 |
« Reply #3570 on: 21:38:27, 07-07-2008 » |
|
The trouble with TheAnglican Church, is now they have opened up the can of worms for allowing women to become priests, they have inevitably started the ball rolling for women to become bishops, and also, inevitably, perhaps, Arch Bishop of Canterbury. This is one of the problems thats preventin g me to investigate further about converting from RC to CoE.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John W
|
|
« Reply #3571 on: 21:50:34, 07-07-2008 » |
|
Not a church person (and not English) so I don't understand much of the arguments about C of E women priests or the like, but with all the current concern I find it amusing that The Supreme Governor of the Church of England is a title held by Queen Elizabeth II.
Ok, tell me she's not really the head of the church.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
|
|
« Reply #3572 on: 21:51:25, 07-07-2008 » |
|
This is one of the problems thats preventin g me to investigate further about converting from RC to CoE. A bemused observer writes: why is it a "problem"? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mary Chambers
|
|
« Reply #3573 on: 21:59:00, 07-07-2008 » |
|
This is one of the problems thats preventin g me to investigate further about converting from RC to CoE. A bemused observer writes: why is it a "problem"? I'm somewhat bemused, too. DB, this is probably a naive question - I don't know much about church matters - but if there were a split in the Church of England, would you mind? |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 22:01:42, 07-07-2008 by Mary Chambers »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Antheil
|
|
« Reply #3574 on: 22:25:40, 07-07-2008 » |
|
Following on from Marty's photo on the Cat Thread  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Reality, sa molesworth 2, is so sordid it makes me shudder
|
|
|
|
brassbandmaestro
|
|
« Reply #3575 on: 08:16:01, 08-07-2008 » |
|
This is one of the problems thats preventin g me to investigate further about converting from RC to CoE. A bemused observer writes: why is it a "problem"? Mainly because I am one of those people who dont agree with the ordination or the bishopric as a whole, being a place for women. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Don Basilio
|
|
« Reply #3576 on: 10:41:24, 08-07-2008 » |
|
DB, this is probably a naive question - I don't know much about church matters - but if there were a split in the Church of England, would you mind?
Well, yes, I suppose so. It would be an awful waste of energy. The C of E, as I believe it, is a part of the catholic church in which there are quite enough splits already, and maybe one more is no worse. I heard a sermon on Sunday by a woman priest mentioning the Rule of St Benedict - Bendict didn't expect his monks to agree with each other, or even like each other, but they had to learn to live together because that is how they find Christ. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven.
A time to weep, and a time to laugh: a time to mourn, and a time to dance
|
|
|
|
Don Basilio
|
|
« Reply #3577 on: 11:23:01, 08-07-2008 » |
|
Not a church person (and not English) so I don't understand much of the arguments about C of E women priests or the like, but with all the current concern I find it amusing that The Supreme Governor of the Church of England is a title held by Queen Elizabeth II.
Ok, tell me she's not really the head of the church.
The other interesting thing is that Pope Paul VI declared two women, Catherine of Siena and Teresa of Avila, Doctors of the Church, together with St Augustine, St Ambrose, St Gregory the Great and so on. If a woman can be held to express the authoritative teaching of the Church (one of the roles of a bishop and the definition of a church doctor) when she is dead, then presumably she could do so when alive. Having said that, I am not at all happy with, indeed positively disapproving of, the role of the monarchy in the C of E. The head is Jesus Christ. Elizabeth the First, wily old dame that she was, took the title Supreme Governor. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven.
A time to weep, and a time to laugh: a time to mourn, and a time to dance
|
|
|
|
time_is_now
|
|
« Reply #3578 on: 14:47:51, 08-07-2008 » |
|
Looks like Murray's going down the pan to Nadal. As the Beeb website has it, 'It's as quiet as the Crucible out there, and the gap in class between these two is bigger than a behemoth's bath-tub.'
'These groundstrokes from Nadal are somehow beautiful and terrifying at the same time - it's like being eaten alive by a snow leopard. He crashes his way to 40-0 on the Murray serve and polishes him off with a backhand so brutally fast and accurate that even the ball starts sobbing. '
I LIKE the guy writing these updates!
So do I!! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The city is a process which always veers away from the form envisaged and desired, ... whose revenge upon its architects and planners undoes every dream of mastery. It is [also] one of the sites where Dasein is assigned the impossible task of putting right what can never be put right. - Rob Lapsley
|
|
|
|
brassbandmaestro
|
|
« Reply #3579 on: 16:36:26, 08-07-2008 » |
|
DB: Unfortunately, its always been the case. I agree with you that the whole structure of the CoE is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Don Basilio
|
|
« Reply #3580 on: 18:11:17, 08-07-2008 » |
|
DB: Unfortunately, its always been the case. I agree with you that the whole structure of the CoE is wrong.
I didn't say that, at all. But this is the waffle thread, not the Appropriate Ecclesiology thread. The important bits of creeds, bishops, priests, deacons, baptism and eucharist are all there. And lay people have some say in the governance of the church (all too often the ones who are influential in society in other ways, but an improvement on the RCs.) All parts of the church are a compromise, and at least it is transparent in the C of E. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven.
A time to weep, and a time to laugh: a time to mourn, and a time to dance
|
|
|
|
richard barrett
|
|
« Reply #3581 on: 18:13:31, 08-07-2008 » |
|
This is one of the problems thats preventin g me to investigate further about converting from RC to CoE. A bemused observer writes: why is it a "problem"? Mainly because I am one of those people who dont agree with the ordination or the bishopric as a whole, being a place for women. Why not? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Antheil
|
|
« Reply #3582 on: 18:39:59, 08-07-2008 » |
|
DB: Unfortunately, its always been the case. I agree with you that the whole structure of the CoE is wrong.
I didn't say that, at all. But this is the waffle thread, not the Appropriate Ecclesiology thread. The important bits of creeds, bishops, priests, deacons, baptism and eucharist are all there. And lay people have some say in the governance of the church (all too often the ones who are influential in society in other ways, but an improvement on the RCs.) All parts of the church are a compromise, and at least it is transparent in the C of E. I was going to say let us have an Ecclesiology thread (but wasn't sure if I could spell it) but they say never discuss sex, religion or politics, as it is inclined to get a little heated and then people fall out because two opposing beliefs will never come together. (Notice I have avoided astudiously the Actress said to the Bishop jokes) I think, without checking, it was Timothy who said women cannot be priests, I don't know if Jesus said it. Jesus had his women followers, Mary Magdalen was so faithful. However, this is a very serious schism and many may desert the Anglicans for Rome, although as Don B said, we all part of the Holy Catholic Church. It is one Church, one Faith, but I am not sure about HM being the titular head. What amazes me a little is that the RCs are not up in arms about the reintroduction of The Tridentine Mass? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Reality, sa molesworth 2, is so sordid it makes me shudder
|
|
|
|
martle
|
|
« Reply #3583 on: 18:46:05, 08-07-2008 » |
|
I was going to say let us have an Ecclesiology thread (but wasn't sure if I could spell it) Sounds good to me. As so often on this board, thanks in this case to our man in the pews, Don B, and to Anty and others, I'm learning things about something that I believed held not the slightest bit of interest for me. Despite all those years as a choirboy and server. And nearly making it to confirmation. Oh, and wanting to be either a footballer or a bishop when I grow grew up. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Green. Always green.
|
|
|
|
Mary Chambers
|
|
« Reply #3584 on: 18:49:13, 08-07-2008 » |
|
DB, this is probably a naive question - I don't know much about church matters - but if there were a split in the Church of England, would you mind?
Well, yes, I suppose so. It would be an awful waste of energy. The C of E, as I believe it, is a part of the catholic church in which there are quite enough splits already, and maybe one more is no worse. I asked the question because I feel that if I were a member of the Church of England I would be quite glad if the anti-women and anti-gay people went elsewhere. Since I'm not, though, I suppose I don't know how I would feel. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
