Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

McGreevey to Enter Episcopal Seminary
New York Times ^ | May 3, 2007 | THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Posted on 05/04/2007 12:26:52 PM PDT by fgoodwin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last
To: toothfairy86; All

I keep waiting for someone to say that Communion for children is not a part of Episcopal practice.

You must be confirmed in the church at a later age...and free choice.

Anyone else confused by this...it seems a non-issue which the Mother does not understand.


21 posted on 05/04/2007 8:03:30 PM PDT by 3D-JOY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother

Did I miss something?

The story says he will study there. This is just a higher education opportunity...not a path to “PRIESTHOOD”.

I am afraid a lot is being read into this story...that is not there.

I am, however very sorry to see that the church has accepted this situation...I believe it makes the point...”follow the money”.

Is this worse than all the schools who accept foreign students at FULL tuition or Rehabs accepting money for weird reasons including privacy?


22 posted on 05/04/2007 8:13:38 PM PDT by 3D-JOY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY
I keep waiting for someone to say that Communion for children is not a part of Episcopal practice.

Used to be true but not any more. I'm in my 50s - when I was a kid you had to be confirmed at about age 12 or 13 before you could receive. Before that age, you left church after the sermon (the "Mass of the Catechumens" in Catholic parlance) to go to Sunday School.

But sometime between then and when my daughter was about six (she's 18 now) the church changed to the Catholic practice of First Communion at about age 6 or 7, long before Confirmation. They had a "First Communicants Class" and then received like everybody else.

So this is most definitely an issue, and if the XGuv is running true to form and being a treacherous hound, the mom is right to worry.

23 posted on 05/04/2007 8:16:03 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY
Other sources than the NYT say he's studying for the priesthood.

This story is all over the Anglican/continuing blogs.

I am very, very glad that I am observing this horrific train wreck from a safe vantage point on a hill, rather than from inside one of the passenger cars . . . we swam the Tiber after GC 2003.


24 posted on 05/04/2007 8:25:25 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother

I guess you have more facts than I do from this reading.

Did Gore ever plan to be a priest when in Seminary? I think not.

I was high church and am over 70...thought it was still the same.

Can “just anyone” take communion today? Not unless confirmed in the church before.

Cannon Cowdery was always making people mad in the “old days” when he refused them at the rail.

I read about the craziness now and see why I “drifted away”.


25 posted on 05/04/2007 8:51:00 PM PDT by 3D-JOY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY
Gore went to seminary simply so he could leave Vietnam early (it was a deferment in those days). He flunked out after a very short time, too.

Maybe the XGuv will do the same thing and solve the problem himself.

Any baptized Christian can receive in ECUSA. We moved from a very "high" church to a moderately "high" church in the 80s -- and so far as I recall this was the practice even then at our new church. Some ECUSA churches now allow "open communion" - anybody who wants to can receive, I guess Buddhists and pagans qualify now.

If you're very "high", have you looked into the Catholic church? Theologically there is actually very little difference, other than acknowledging that there was a problem with Anglican Orders around the time of Edward VI . . . . Apostolicae Curae always did bother me a little, I thought Canterbury and York's response in Sapius Officio was weak. There's a great book by an Englishman, Canon Francis Ripley, addressed specifically to Anglicans/Episcopalians. And of course Cardinal Newman's wonderful autobiography.

We have been extremely happy in our new parish. You do have to be a little careful, because there are some loons left over from the 60s and 70s still running some Catholic parishes out there, but ours is a reverent and traditional church (and the music is surprisingly good!)

26 posted on 05/04/2007 9:01:45 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother

Thanks for the information.

No, the Catholic church would not be an answer for me. I thought there were very many other differences in beliefs, even if the traditions were similar.

I guess I will go on as I have for many years.

I often feel the Republican party has left me behind too! LOL

Now I lay me down to sleep...night-night.


27 posted on 05/04/2007 9:14:52 PM PDT by 3D-JOY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: fgoodwin

Just wait and watch. This guy is going to re-enter politics with his newly purchased moral authority.

He had to pick between the unitarians and the episcopalians. He chose the episcopalians because there are more potential voters, AND he might fool some real christians into voting for him.


28 posted on 05/04/2007 9:48:55 PM PDT by pjr12345 (What is it about "The Radicaleftists want to kill us!" don't you people understand?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: secret garden
Because Catholics don't believe what Episcopalians do...that's why. Catholics believs that Holy Communion IS the Body and Blood of Christ....Episcopalians just think of it as a SYMBOL of the Body and Blood of Christ......HUGE DIFFERENCE!!

May I ask what religion you are? I'm guessing not any Christian denomination or you wouldn't have been quite so cavalier about your response.

29 posted on 05/04/2007 9:53:50 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy (Hillary '08...Her Phoniness is Genuine!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: secret garden

No, God certainly has NOT changed.....Henry VIII changed the religion from Catholic to Anglican/Episcopalian because he wanted a divorce, and it has gone “Lighter” ever since.


30 posted on 05/04/2007 9:56:17 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy (Hillary '08...Her Phoniness is Genuine!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: VeritatisSplendor

You ARE kidding, right?


31 posted on 05/04/2007 9:58:10 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy (Hillary '08...Her Phoniness is Genuine!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

Yeah, feeling snarky tonight, so I left off the /sarcasm.

Mrs VS


32 posted on 05/04/2007 10:04:13 PM PDT by VeritatisSplendor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: VeritatisSplendor

Thank God!!! Thought ANOTHER Freeper went braindead....glad to see you didn’t!! :)


33 posted on 05/04/2007 10:07:59 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy (Hillary '08...Her Phoniness is Genuine!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY
Good morning! I beat you to night-night as it turns out.

What specific differences in belief do you think exist? When we converted I only found two -- the validity of Anglican orders and the supremacy of the Pope. I didn't have any problem with either one, because as to No. 1 the goings on in the ECUSA plainly demonstrate that they don't have God's blessing on their shenanigans and thus probably their orders are invalid . . . and as for No. 2 the ECUSA would be doing much better if it had Adult Leadership and the ABC could deliver a smackdown to Vicki Gene, KJSchori, and all the rest. . . .

If you're "high", you've been ignoring the XXXIX Articles for years. Unless you're high in ritual only, in which case I guess you're really "broad church".

Seriously, you might want to look into it. There's a big difference between what everybody THINKS the Catholic Church believes, and what its doctrine actually IS. People have got some serious misconceptions going on. And some of the worst offenders are Episcopalians.

34 posted on 05/05/2007 8:25:28 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
Actually, some "high church" Piskies do believe in Transubstantiation (I used to be one.)

The XXIX Articles (the charter I guess you would say of the Anglican church) are very anti-Catholic (Edward VI again, or at least his radical Protestant advisers, Edward was really too young to have any say in things, he died at age 14 or 15), but the high churchers have been studiously ignoring them ever since the days of the Oxford Movement and the Tractarians. I certainly did!

35 posted on 05/05/2007 8:46:48 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY; sionnsar; AnAmericanMother
The Anglican Catholic Church continues to require confirmation prior to Communion. Other Continuing Anglican churches may do the same.

Here is a link to resources including Traditional Anglican churches:

Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com

36 posted on 05/05/2007 9:56:20 AM PDT by Huber (And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. - John 1:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY; sionnsar; AnAmericanMother
The Anglican Catholic Church continues to require confirmation prior to Communion. Other Continuing Anglican churches may do the same.

Here is a link to resources including Traditional Anglican churches:

Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com

37 posted on 05/05/2007 9:56:22 AM PDT by Huber (And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. - John 1:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: toothfairy86

Understood. I was seeking clarity regarding at what age the child would be expected to understand the sin and to act independently of McGreevy’s direction.


38 posted on 05/05/2007 11:40:14 AM PDT by Huber (And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. - John 1:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Huber

Not true.


39 posted on 05/05/2007 11:51:28 AM PDT by fatima (Free (((Hugs))) today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Huber; Suzy Quzy; VeritatisSplendor
I was seeking clarity regarding at what age the child would be expected to understand the sin and to act independently of McGreevy’s direction.

I think around age seven, is that right, guys?

A five year old child will not be penalized, so to speak, for disobeying her "parent".

But if McGreevy is deliberately using her as a pawn to get back at his wife, and undermining the child's Catholic education to do so, he might want to consider the possibility that he may be fitted for a millstone by St. Peter . . . Matthew 18:6/Mark 9:42/Luke 17:2

40 posted on 05/05/2007 5:17:15 PM PDT by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson