Posted on 09/05/2002 12:35:50 PM PDT by NYer
PHILADELPHIA (AP) _ An Episcopal priest who says the church has become too liberal on issues such as the ordination of women and recognition of same-sex unions was defrocked Thursday by the bishop of Pennsylvania.
The Rev. David Moyer is a leader of Forward in Faith, a movement that sought to make him a bishop for more conservative congregations within the church.
Bishop Charles E. Bennison Jr. said it was not Moyer's beliefs but his rejection of the bishop's authority that prompted his dismissal from the ministry. ``I find it grievous for him, and for his family. I did everything I knew to make it otherwise,'' Bennison said.
Moyer, pastor of the Church of the Good Shepherd, had said recently that he expected to be removed. He did not immediately return a call Thursday. Bennison supports the ordination of women and of homosexuals who are in committed relationships.
Nationally, the Episcopal Church allows the ordination of women. It officially opposes same-sex relations, but in practice it brings no sanctions against those who ordain actively homosexual clergy or conduct same-sex unions.
If Roger Cardinal Mahony could, he would reinstate this practice!! He needs every dime possible to keep his palatial cathedral up and running.
Thank you, sweetliberty, for the MOST INFORMATIVE insight into the Anglican religion. Have you, personally, ever attended a Anglican Use Catholic service? It would be interesting to hear your perspective on the difference there.
Ah, no. Both of those links are continuing Anglican churches. In fact, they used to be one continuing Anglican church.
Actually, no, although I have had some discussions with a couple of different priests who departed the Episcopal church to minister at Anglican churches. I am not familiar with the term "Anglican use" although I am somewhat familiar with Anglican, if they're the same. I have actually had some personal issues over some of the more liberal stands in recent years of the Episcopal church and as a result I have had trouble finding a new church home in the area I have lived for going on 2 years now. It was suggested to me that I try a Reformed Episcopal church and there is one very close to me so I may go there this Sunday.
The "Anglican Use" is a "romanized" version of the 1928 BCP Liturgy. It is used by RC parishes that were formerly Episcopal parishes and have been received into the Roman Catholic church. The liturgy is very nearly identical to the 1928 prayer book liturgy.
By all means, you should visit the Reformed Episcopal church that is close to you. I think you will find it very familiar. The REC is more along the lines of the evangelical branch of the Church of England. They are orthodox in their beliefs. You should find it familiar - particularly as you grew up in a "low church" environment.
LOL! And it would be filled to the brim with democrats. You think Hillary and Bill were bad renting out the Lincoln bedroom, imagine what they could do with this gem! Talk about influence peddling. Of course, while laughable, it is exactly that kind of abuse that occurred when a corrupt church was in effect married to a corrupt state and the very essence that sparked the protestant Reformation. This was also the basis for the founding fathers adamant opposition to the establishment of a state church.
Did you learn your history from looking at the www.theonion.com website or from reading "Mad" magazine???
I took history, including church history in college and I spent 2 years in seminary.
Now let me ask you a question. Where did you learn your manners? Sure wasn't at church.
I had never heard it either until I watched an episode of Journey Home, where Marcus Grodi interviewed an Anglican "Use" priest. It was a riveting program. As Siobhan pointed out, two of the forum posters, sockmonkey and B-Chan, are members of the Anglican Use Church community.
In 1980, His Holiness Pope John Paul II granted a Pastoral Provision for the establishment of parishes composed of former Episcopalians which could use a modified liturgy from _The Book of Common Prayer_. There are, at present, six parishes in the USA now using the Anglican Use liturgy. (There are other groups now forming. Canonically, any groups seeking permission to use the Anglican Use liturgy must be composed of former Episcopalians. But once permission is given any Catholic may participate.) These parishes are in the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, but permitted to have their own distinctive liturgy and also permitted to follow their own customs at Mass.
This link will give you the historical perspective on this Anglican rite:
I do, however, take umbrage at your calling the Catholic Church a "corrupt church" - I do not agree. Certainly some of the men within Her were corrupt, that has been true since Judas. However, the Truth was the same in 33 AD, 1533 AD and now.
The founding fathers (assuming you mean the founding fathers of the USA), merely stressed "freedom of religion" for everyone, regardless of creed therefore, no established state church. They were still mindful of how our country was founded. And who was persecuting the Pilgrims? Not the Catholic Church.
Again, I apologize. I took the latter part of your post as a gratuitous slap at the Catholic Church.
Thank you for your gracious apology. My post was in no way intended to be a shot at the Catholic church. The Catholic church has a very rich tradition and it is indeed the mother of the Christian church. I was simply trying to explain some of the roots of the differences between the Catholic and Anglican churches as NYer and Siobhan had requested. I was not suggesting that all in the church were corrupt. The truth is that there were many schisms within the church itself, often originating with clerics and monastics within the church who saw the corruption that was prevalent at various times in history. This is not widely disputed even within the Catholic church itself.
Yes, I did mean the founding fathers of the U.S. And granted, there was a lot of interdenominational bickering and persecution. What a lot of people don't realize, or in some cases choose to ignore, is that the idea of the separation of church and state was never intended to prevent the practice or appearance of religion in a public venue. Quite the contrary. Prayer, sermons and public displays of faith were all commonplace until more recent years. It was a matter of keeping the government from adopting as preferable one denomination over another and religions other than Judeo-Christian were never figured into the equation. I would go so far as to say that it was intended to keep us from being subjected to the very kinds of things that we are dealing with today...attempts to abolish the one true God and His Son, Jesus Christ, from the public arena.
Anyway, I apologize for not making myself clearer. I do not find it in any way productive to bash any fellow believer's church. Our true fellowship comes from partaking in the death and resurrection of Christ. The Scripture says that it is not edifying for believers to indulge in the strife of tongues (loosely paraphrased). We have common enemies that we would do better to focus our energies on.
Well, all rules are good as long as they don't infringe on your own personal liberty! ;-)
The truth is that there were many schisms within the church itself, often originating with clerics and monastics within the church who saw the corruption that was prevalent at various times in history. This is not widely disputed even within the Catholic church itself.
You must mean the "Great schism" of 1054 and the Reformation of the 16th century? Other than that, the only "schisms" I know of are in part, the schisms of Anacletus, Henry VIII, the Jansenists, Old Catholics, Novatians, Arianism, Meletius, Donatus, Luciferians.... none of whom left due to corruption in the Church. So I don't agree that your statement isn't widely disputed within the Catholic Church.
Yes, I did mean the founding fathers of the U.S. And granted, there was a lot of interdenominational bickering and persecution. What a lot of people don't realize, or in some cases choose to ignore, is that the idea of the separation of church and state was never intended to prevent the practice or appearance of religion in a public venue.
Oh! I thought you wrote that the following: Of course, while laughable, it is exactly that kind of abuse that occurred when a corrupt church was in effect married to a corrupt state and the very essence that sparked the protestant Reformation. This was also the basis for the founding fathers adamant opposition to the establishment of a state church. - so I am kind of confused why you answered the way you did. It sounds from your above statement that you are saying "because of a corrupt Catholic Church, the founding fathers were adamant in their opposition to a state church."
I guess I'm being picky tonight ;-)
His intervention is the most dramatic move yet in the war between traditionalists, evangelicals and liberals which threatens to split the Episcopal Church of the United States of America and could ultimately lead to the disintegration of the worldwide Anglican communion.
My heart and soul reach out to Dr. Moyer for his adamant stance on these positions of morality. Kudos to those who have now chosen to stand at Dr. Moyer's side in his defense.
It never occurred to me when I first posted this story that it's implications were so far reaching. I pray that God will shelter and protect Dr. Moyer and his supporters in this hour of need.
Thank you to all who have witnessed for your faith in the Anglican community. It has been a veritable blessing to learn about your church.
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.