Posted on 03/12/2013 7:47:33 PM PDT by marshmallow
Catholics may not believe in all the Roman church stands for yet are still seduced by its all-encompassing culture and ritual
What's the appeal of Roman Catholicism to a fairly liberal person? Why don't they jump ship? They say they dislike clerical celibacy, which they largely blame for the abuse scandals. Well, there's a church close at hand that rejects it. They say they want to see the ordination of women. Well, there's a church close at hand that ordains women (more or less). They say they dislike the church's intransigence on homosexuality. Well, there's a church close at hand that has an honest, messy debate about this issue. They say they dislike the church's legalistic approach to birth control, abortion, and various other moral issues. Well, there's a church close at hand that rejects such an approach. They say they dislike the church's authoritarian structure, the monarchical aura of the papacy. Well, you know what.
Why do they stay in a church that is so full of things they dislike, when there is one close at hand that is more or less free of those objectionable things? Presumably they would reply: because, despite everything, the Roman church seems to us the authentic church, and the Anglican church does not. But there is a sector of Anglicanism whose style of worship is scarcely distinguishable from that of Roman Catholicism. Yes, they might reply, but the institution lacks authenticity: it was founded by a randy monarch, and remains confined by its national character. Fair point perhaps, but does it really outweigh the benefits of Anglicanism to a liberal believer? Is this really a reason to stay in an authoritarian, illiberal church – that at least it wasn't founded by Henry VIII? The man had his faults but he wasn't Satan.
So what's.......
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
And now his monarchial descendant, the present head of the Anglican church, has signed on with the gays.
“Why Be a Liberal Catholic When You Could Be an Anglican?”
Excellent question.
Ronald Knox, after he converted, said that what he most missed was the liturgy of trhe prayer book. After the new mass was introduced, I once asked a priest why they just didn’t use the prayerbook and modify its language to fit Catholic teaching. He looked at me strangely. Pope Benedict managed to eliminate some of the banality of the English translation of the New Mass and, ironically, to extend the use of the “Anglican useage” by opening the Church to Anglicans wanting to come it. But even the Prayer Book has been robbed of much of its dignity by reforms of its language.
John Cogley, the editor of “Commonweal,” back in the ‘60s, joined the Episcopal Church after Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae. I respected him for that. Too bad the rest of the crew didn’t follow him. But they wanted to play dog in the manger.
protestants are simply those who will not submit in obedience to a legitimate authority. they will, instead, concoct their own “truth” of which there will be a version for everyone who does the concocting. there cannot be one million versions of the truth now can there? either truth is one or it is nothing. anglicans change the “truth” along with their underwear.
I grew up in the DC area and attended a wonderful Episcopalian church. We had a Children’s Choir (not jr choir) that rehearsed every Saturday morning from 9:00 am until noon. Mrs Adams was very demanding and expected nothing less than perfection. It was a thriving traditional family church. Now I belong to a local very small conservative Anglican congregation.
I think the Divine Office, in the form of “Christian Prayer” is quite similar to the prayer book.. Mostly the same structure, same psalms. I wonder if he was talking about some of the specific prayers or..
BTW, speaking of Knox, I recommend the book “Second Friends” to anyone who hasn’t read it...
“protestants are simply those who will not submit in obedience to a legitimate authority”
As it turns out this describes a good portion of Catholics. So there you have it. tit for tat.
you miss the point...catholics who are not obedient to Church teaching are protestants
They have to bring their own snakes. We can’t be sharing ours.
No, he was talking about the Book of Common Prayer, originally the work of Archbishop Cranmer, a heretic but a master of the language. People may sentimentalize about the Latin mass, but most low masses were pretty dreary affairs. He knew he had got the better part, but he still felt the loss. He was, I think, the son of a bishop.
It just goes to prove the emptiness of the woman’s liberation movement. Rather than affirm the beauty of being a woman that is a complement to man, they must reject all that makes them woman in an attempt to be like man.
Chesterton said something to the effect that he can’t understand why women who claim women are equal to or as good as men, then spend all their lives trying to be like men.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.