[For discussion: Is it a self-excommunication? --sionnsar]
1 posted on
03/09/2005 5:11:27 PM PST by
sionnsar
To: ahadams2; SuzyQue; LifeofRiley; TheDean; pharmamom; Vicomte13; TaxRelief; Huber; Roland; ...
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder
Arlin Adams.
FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (typically 3-7 pings/day).
This list is pinged by
sionnsar and
newheart.
Resource for Traditional Anglicans:
http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15
2 posted on
03/09/2005 5:12:20 PM PST by
sionnsar
(†trad-anglican.faithweb.com† || Iran Azadi || Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?)
To: sionnsar; Agrarian; pharmamom
"When I now hear that some of the Primates, having declared broken communion", have refused to share the Eucharists with Bishop Griswold, I have a deep sense of sacrilege. The Lords table does not belong to them. It does not belong to us. None of us has a right to say I will not share the Eucharist with someone who has offended me. To do so is a self-excommnication!
This speaks volumes about the level of catchesis among the vestrymen of this parish. His false equivalency to the contrary notwithstanding, the irony of this religiously befogged person's comment is that it would have indeed been a sacrilege HAD the Primates taken communion with the heresiarch Griswold. The self-excommunication comment is so pathetic that I can't laugh at it. Its just so sad.
5 posted on
03/09/2005 7:00:12 PM PST by
Kolokotronis
(Nuke the Cube!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson