Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. ping
I am glad that I wholeheartedly accept and believe the teachings of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Where you stand in regard to Rome depends on where you are. If you happen to be in the US, then you are some 3000+ miles to the west of Rome.
I notice this statement is not footnoted. It appears to contradict what the Church teaches.
1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:40
40 Cf. Council of Trent (1547): DS 1529.
1993 Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom. On man's part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:
When God touches man's heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God's grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God's sight.42
42 Council of Trent (1547): DS 1525.
Methinks Dr. Sanders still doesn't understand Catholic doctrine.
The comparison of the infallibility of Rome to the pronouncements of Griswold is laughable and spurrious. The problem with Griswold is that he contradicts 2,000 years of Christian tradition and scripture. Infallibility is the opposite tendency: Once spoken, a doctrine can never be rescinded. It is not a liberal impuse, but the ultimate preservation against liberal impulses.
--I am hesitant to be critical of Rome. After the rampart heresies of the liberal Protestant churches, one cannot help but admire Rome in her steadfast refusal to bow before certain idols of modernity. Further, in the sections on the Church, I found her teaching most irenic, holding to her own supremacy yet not condemning of others.25
--On the other hand, so much is at stake. According to the Anglican Reformers, this Roman teaching does not do justice to Scripture, to the holiness of God, the depth of human sin, the fallibility of our understanding of Christian truth, the power of Christ's atonement, and the need for peace with God in regard to our salvation. In the end, it leaves us before a holy God dependent on our own righteousness. I would not want to stand there. I cannot be in a church that would have me stand there. No one can stand there. No one, none, except Christ and those clothed in his righteousness received in faith, can stand.
--I cannot imagine having to decide if certain of my sins are mortal, if the venial ones will send me to the torments of purgatory, if the church is always right, if indulgences are necessary, if my confessions are truly adequate, my prayers sufficient, and my good works acceptable. I want to know that I am safe with God, safe with the wholesome, saving righteousness of Christ. I want to plead nothing but his blood, no hope but his word of promise, no worry but his peace, no guilt but his shame, no darkness but his light.26
GRPL ping?
Hrm. Looks perhaps like my ignorance of the Anglicans is vast. Time to do a research frenzy...
Sinnsar, any good pointers for books or websites?
SIMUL JUSTUS ET PECCATOR!!!
(always wanted a bumpter sticker that says that...seems especially appropriate while driving...)
Maybe some reasons as pointed out on:
http://www.chnetwork.org/converts.htm
http://www.chnetwork.org/trconv.htm
Trackback Pontifications: http://catholica.pontifications.net/?p=2124