Anglican Group Crossing the Tiber.

Cybercelesta

Canadian Anglican Catholic group votes to unite with Rome.

"With “overwhelming support,” a recent meeting of leaders in the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada (ACCC) voted to unite with the Roman Catholic Church through the Apostolic Constitution created by Pope Benedict XVI. The ACCC, part of the Continuing Anglican Movement, is made up of more than two dozen congregations. Its Eighth Provincial Synod and Thirteenth Diocesan Synod were held simultaneously at the Rosemary Heights Retreat Center in Surrey, British Columbia."




http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/canadian-anglican-catholic-group-votes-to-unite-with-rome/


The Anglican Catholic Church of Canada


"We are Anglican in background and tradition. We are Catholic - not in the sense of Roman Catholic, though, no doubt, we have much in common with them. Rather, we accept the whole Christian Faith. We don't want to be 'cafeteria-style' Christians, who pick and choose the parts of the Christian religion that we like, and turn up our noses at the rest."


http://anglicancatholic.ca/acccmain.htm

gimmebroadband

It's not surprising, when some christian groups veer away from christian teaching, such as defining that homosexual acts is normal, when it clearly states in scriptures that it's sinful!

wolfsbane

Cybercelesta wrote: »

Canadian Anglican Catholic group votes to unite with Rome.

"With “overwhelming support,” a recent meeting of leaders in the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada (ACCC) voted to unite with the Roman Catholic Church through the Apostolic Constitution created by Pope Benedict XVI. The ACCC, part of the Continuing Anglican Movement, is made up of more than two dozen congregations. Its Eighth Provincial Synod and Thirteenth Diocesan Synod were held simultaneously at the Rosemary Heights Retreat Center in Surrey, British Columbia."




http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/canadian-anglican-catholic-group-votes-to-unite-with-rome/


The Anglican Catholic Church of Canada


"We are Anglican in background and tradition. We are Catholic - not in the sense of Roman Catholic, though, no doubt, we have much in common with them. Rather, we accept the whole Christian Faith. We don't want to be 'cafeteria-style' Christians, who pick and choose the parts of the Christian religion that we like, and turn up our noses at the rest."


http://anglicancatholic.ca/acccmain.htm

It has always seemed to me to be the honest option for Anglo-Catholics. If the Papacy is what it claims to be, submission to it is not an option.

I of course believe they are tragically mistaken in believing the RCC to be the true Church, but at least they are acting in line with their beliefs.

********************************************************************
1 Kings 18:21 And Elijah came to all the people, and said, “How long will you falter between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.” But the people answered him not a word.

gimmebroadband

There are any number of things that the pope cannot do in religion. He cannot modify, nor touch in any way, one single point of the revelation Christ gave to the Church; his business is only to guard this against attack and false interpretation. We believe that God will so guide him that his decisions of this nature will be nothing more than a defense or unfolding of what Christ revealed.


The pope can neither make nor unmake a sacrament, he cannot affect the essence of any sacrament in any way. He cannot touch the Bible; he can neither take away a text from the inspired Scriptures nor add one to them. His business is to believe the revelation of Christ, as all Catholics believe it, and to defend it against heresy. He cannot take away the divine authority of any of his fellow bishops as long as they are Catholic bishops in normal possession of their sees; though he can, as chief authority of the Church on earth, under certain circumstances, try, suspend or depose an unworthy bishop. The pope can, in extraordinary circumstances, rearrange dioceses; he cannot abolish the universal episcopate"


http://www.stjohn17v20-21.com/magist02.htm

A commonly leveled charge against the Catholic Church is that she “just makes stuff up”. An often circulated list is a series of dates, together with the doctrines that the Catholic Church “invented” on that date. How, the critics say, are we to understand that the Catholic Church is eternal and unchanging when she changes her teaching?
The truth of the matter, of course, is that the Church has never changed a teaching or a doctrine. Doctrines may develop over time, but this is not the same as the changing of a doctrine or the invention of a new one.

http://www.catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/1f.htm

wolfsbane

gimmebroadband wrote: »

There are any number of things that the pope cannot do in religion. He cannot modify, nor touch in any way, one single point of the revelation Christ gave to the Church; his business is only to guard this against attack and false interpretation. We believe that God will so guide him that his decisions of this nature will be nothing more than a defense or unfolding of what Christ revealed.


The pope can neither make nor unmake a sacrament, he cannot affect the essence of any sacrament in any way. He cannot touch the Bible; he can neither take away a text from the inspired Scriptures nor add one to them. His business is to believe the revelation of Christ, as all Catholics believe it, and to defend it against heresy. He cannot take away the divine authority of any of his fellow bishops as long as they are Catholic bishops in normal possession of their sees; though he can, as chief authority of the Church on earth, under certain circumstances, try, suspend or depose an unworthy bishop. The pope can, in extraordinary circumstances, rearrange dioceses; he cannot abolish the universal episcopate"


http://www.stjohn17v20-21.com/magist02.htm

A commonly leveled charge against the Catholic Church is that she “just makes stuff up”. An often circulated list is a series of dates, together with the doctrines that the Catholic Church “invented” on that date. How, the critics say, are we to understand that the Catholic Church is eternal and unchanging when she changes her teaching?
The truth of the matter, of course, is that the Church has never changed a teaching or a doctrine. Doctrines may develop over time, but this is not the same as the changing of a doctrine or the invention of a new one.

http://www.catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/1f.htm

How would you know if a pope did modify, nor touch in any way, one single point of the revelation Christ gave to the Church?

If he sits in the papal chair and declares as infallible moral teaching that negros are non-human apes, and asserts this is the meaning of Scripture or Tradition - how can you say he is mistaken?

******************************************************************
1 Kings 18:21 And Elijah came to all the people, and said, “How long will you falter between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.” But the people answered him not a word.

alex73

wolfsbane wrote: »

How would you know if a pope did modify, nor touch in any way, one single point of the revelation Christ gave to the Church?

If he sits in the papal chair and declares as infallible moral teaching that negros are non-human apes, and asserts this is the meaning of Scripture or Tradition - how can you say he is mistaken?

There is a very narrow window where the Pope is infallable, not since 1954 I think has the Pope used it. ( Ascension of our Lady). I'm not sure the Pope spoke ex catedra on what you have quoted above.

philologos

Another opportunity to post ignorant comments about the way the Anglican Communion works? Sometimes I wish we could actually discuss the core of Christianity rather than discussing other churches politics. Perhaps some should take a critical eye into their own churches as well?

Keaton

philologos wrote: »

Another opportunity to post ignorant comments about the way the Anglican Communion works? Sometimes I wish we could actually discuss the core of Christianity rather than discussing other churches politics. Perhaps some should take a critical eye into their own churches as well?

It seems to me that it is not working, and in fact, due to lack of adherence to very basic Christian doctrine, the communion is breaking down and we see groups keen to join the CC.

This isn't politics, it's about the truth.

philologos

Keaton wrote: »

It seems to me that it is not working, and in fact, due to lack of adherence to very basic Christian doctrine, the communion is breaking down and we see groups keen to join the CC.

This isn't politics, it's about the truth.

This demonstrates the ignorance that I speak of.

You're assuming that every conservative in the Anglican Communion is of an Anglo-Catholic persuasion. This couldn't be any further from the truth. There is also a strong Reformed segment of the church who would be opposed to such changes.

Then you have the more liberal and broad church contingents.

This isn't much different than what has occurred in the RCC actually. There are liberal Roman Catholics in that church as well irrespective of what authorities might want to make out. The reason why disagreement is more prominent in the Anglican Communion is because of the open forum that exists in respect to church practice at a parish, diocesan, province and international level. Disagreement isn't suppressed, it is discussed at length.

gimmebroadband

wolfsbane wrote: »

How would you know if a pope did modify, nor touch in any way, one single point of the revelation Christ gave to the Church?

******************************************************************
1 Kings 18:21 And Elijah came to all the people, and said, “How long will you falter between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.” But the people answered him not a word.

Because we know it wouldn't happen! Some Popes down throughout the centuries may have been sinners, and some downright evil, but there is one thing that they never did was modify scriptures, Jesus promised them that the Holy Spirit would guide them, no matter what!!

Keaton

philologos wrote: »

This demonstrates the ignorance that I speak of.

You're assuming that every conservative in the Anglican Communion is of an Anglo-Catholic persuasion. This couldn't be any further from the truth. There is also a strong Reformed segment of the church who would be opposed to such changes.

Then you have the more liberal and broad church contingents.

This isn't much different than what has occurred in the RCC actually. There are liberal Roman Catholics in that church as well irrespective of what authorities might want to make out. The reason why disagreement is more prominent in the Anglican Communion is because of the open forum that exists in respect to church practice at a parish, diocesan, province and international level. Disagreement isn't suppressed, it is discussed at length.

It isn't ignorance Philo. I understand quite well how 'it's supposed to work.'

There is a unity of faith in the CC. The Modernists and the radical traditionalists may disagree. Some of them are in the process of leaving the Catholic Church, whilst others aren't quite sure what to do. But the core faith is there, and it is summarised in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

For example, there is no debate in the Catholic Church about same-sex unions. Sure, some heretical priests say there is, but there isn't. Same-sex activity is forbidden and that is dogmatic. There's no wiggle room. They must either accept the teaching or ship out. You can't have chalk and cheese in the same Church as the Anglicans seem to want to have.

strobe

Out of interest does it often occur in the opposite nowadays? Where RC churches congregations 'cross the Tiber' in the other direction and declare themselves no longer part of the RC Church? Or is it mainly one way traffic these days?

philologos

strobe wrote: »

Out of interest does it often occur in the opposite nowadays? Where RC churches congregations 'cross the Tiber' in the other direction and declare themselves no longer part of the RC Church? Or is it mainly one way traffic these days?

It is both ways. I've heard of similar cases in Ireland. Difference is I don't post threads to gloat about it.

philologos

Keaton wrote: »

philologos wrote: »

This demonstrates the ignorance that I speak of.

You're assuming that every conservative in the Anglican Communion is of an Anglo-Catholic persuasion. This couldn't be any further from the truth. There is also a strong Reformed segment of the church who would be opposed to such changes.

Then you have the more liberal and broad church contingents.

This isn't much different than what has occurred in the RCC actually. There are liberal Roman Catholics in that church as well irrespective of what authorities might want to make out. The reason why disagreement is more prominent in the Anglican Communion is because of the open forum that exists in respect to church practice at a parish, diocesan, province and international level. Disagreement isn't suppressed, it is discussed at length.

It isn't ignorance Philo. I understand quite well how 'it's supposed to work.'

There is a unity of faith in the CC. The Modernists and the radical traditionalists may disagree. Some of them are in the process of leaving the Catholic Church, whilst others aren't quite sure what to do. But the core faith is there, and it is summarised in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

For example, there is no debate in the
Catholic Church about same-sex unions. Sure, some heretical priests say there is, but there isn't. Same-sex activity is forbidden and that is dogmatic. There's no wiggle room. They must either accept the teaching or ship out. You can't have chalk and cheese in the same Church as the Anglicans seem to want to have.

From my own perspective being a member of that communion it is ignorant.

There is no debate in the RCC because it is suppressed at every turn. At least in the case of Anglicanism it's out in the open rather than swept under the carpet.

Keaton

philologos wrote: »

From my own perspective being a member of that communion it is ignorant.

There is no debate in the RCC because it is suppressed at every turn. At least in the case of Anglicanism it's out in the open rather than swept under the carpet.

If it has been established by divine revelation that 2+2=4, then there is no debate about it and it is pure foolishness to debate the issue.

Heresy and the misleading of souls is a grave matter and it ought to be dealt with by vigilant shepherds.

We do have dissent out in the open in the CC and the option is to shape up or ship out.

As I said previously, as an example, there is no debate about homosexuality in the CC. There are people who reject the Church teaching but still think they can call themselves faithful Catholics.

PDN

This thread seems unnecessary since we already have a Catholic/Protestant Debate Thread.