|
Post by blasphemer on Aug 1, 2008 20:21:34 GMT
Colin, The answer is utterly simple, obviously they desire to change their Doctrine to conform with Catholic Doctrine. If that were not true, they would not be approaching the Catholic Church for acceptance into full communion. "How" is simply a matter of applying that desire within themselves to the Catholic Doctrine which they already fully believe in. Your observation as I quote, "who doesn't believe in fundamental tenements of catholicism" is incorrect as it implies that the Traditional Anglicans are approaching the Catholic Church with the intent to remain Traditional Anglican. The meaning of full communion evades you. Full communion means that the Doctrine of the Catholic Church is entirely accepted as the complete and only Doctrine of what was previously titled "The Traditional Anglican" and what will be changed in title to "Catholic". In simpler terms Traditional Anglicans will cease to exist. But how can they throw away their beliefs just to join your club?
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 1, 2008 21:17:31 GMT
]But how can they throw away their beliefs just to join your club?[/quote][/i]
Colin, The fact that they approach the Catholic Church for full communion proves that they have already thrown away their beliefs. To use an analogy, if you were at one time Catholic, you would have had to thrown away your Catholic beliefs to become atheist. The process is done Spiritually through what is known as Revelation whereby God makes known to an inidividual certain truths regarding His Nature. When the person has full knowledge of those certain truths, they automatically discard what was untrue. The Traditional Anglicans, providing they are telling the truth, have experienced that "Spiritual Revelation" of the truth.
You see, Colin knowing God in Catholic truth is not a matter of logic or reasoning. In order to know the Catholic truth, God Himself must reveal that truth to you Spiritually. When you know the truth, then you no longer believe in the lie and so you throw the lie away.
This is purportedly what happened to the Traditional Anglicans, they simply do not any longer believe in their own lies and now believe in the Catholic truths and so want to become Catholic.
|
|
|
Post by blasphemer on Aug 1, 2008 21:37:53 GMT
Colin, The fact that they approach the Catholic Church for full communion proves that they have already thrown away their beliefs. To use an analogy, if you were at one time Catholic, you would have had to thrown away your Catholic beliefs to become atheist. The process is done Spiritually through what is known as Revelation whereby God makes known to an inidividual certain truths regarding His Nature. When the person has full knowledge of those certain truths, they automatically discard what was untrue. The Traditional Anglicans, providing they are telling the truth, have experienced that "Spiritual Revelation" of the truth. You see, Colin knowing God in Catholic truth is not a matter of logic or reasoning. In order to know the Catholic truth, God Himself must reveal that truth to you Spiritually. When you know the truth, then you no longer believe in the lie and so you throw the lie away. This is purportedly what happened to the Traditional Anglicans, they simply do not any longer believe in their own lies and now believe in the Catholic truths and so want to become Catholic. Who says that all Traditional Anglicans have had the truth revealed to them. Surely this is a move by the first amongst equals, or whoever runs the TAC. I highly doubt they had a vote. And even if 99.9% of all Traditional Anglicans did have the truth revealed to them why do the 0.01% have to join a club they don't belong in.
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 1, 2008 23:23:56 GMT
Who says that all Traditional Anglicans have had the truth revealed to them. Surely this is a move by the first amongst equals, or whoever runs the TAC. I highly doubt they had a vote. And even if 99.9% of all Traditional Anglicans did have the truth revealed to them why do the 0.01% have to join a club they don't belong in.[/quote][/i]
Colin, It is not necessary for the entire body of the Traditional Anglicans to follow the path to Catholicism, only the first among equals as you call them or whoever runs the TAC. Those who are not in agreement, which I am certain there will be some, may depart for another belief community. There is no vote in religion as it is not a democracy. Many confuse democracy as a religion when it is nothing of the sort, it is a form of government. Religion on the other hand is a body of members who hold the same belief, or should. As those who do not share the same belief will prove themselves untrue to their professed faith, they will eventually fall off and away from the body of faith. And so the process is not done by vote, rather falling off and falling away for those who do not believe and for those that do, full communion with the Catholic faith. In democracy when there is a vote, the majority vote dictates the behavior of all who live in the democratic state. The Traditional Anglican church is not even close to a democracy and neither is the Catholic church.
|
|
|
Post by blasphemer on Aug 2, 2008 0:10:21 GMT
Colin, It is not necessary for the entire body of the Traditional Anglicans to follow the path to Catholicism, only the first among equals as you call them or whoever runs the TAC. Those who are not in agreement, which I am certain there will be some, may depart for another belief community. There is no vote in religion as it is not a democracy. Many confuse democracy as a religion when it is nothing of the sort, it is a form of government. Religion on the other hand is a body of members who hold the same belief, or should. As those who do not share the same belief will prove themselves untrue to their professed faith, they will eventually fall off and away from the body of faith. And so the process is not done by vote, rather falling off and falling away for those who do not believe and for those that do, full communion with the Catholic faith. In democracy when there is a vote, the majority vote dictates the behavior of all who live in the democratic state. The Traditional Anglican church is not even close to a democracy and neither is the Catholic church. Well why don't those in the TAC who want full communion with Rome leave the TAC and become a Catholic if that is the case?
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 2, 2008 0:34:42 GMT
Well why don't those in the TAC who want full communion with Rome leave the TAC and become a Catholic if that is the case?[/quote][/i]
Colin, That is exactly the case of what Noel is reporting on. There are those who want full communion with the Catholic church, although those persons are in fact the major body of leadership in the TAC. They are in fact willing to leave the TAC to become fully Catholic, however, when they do leave, the TAC will crumble into nothingness, leaving anyone who is undecided without a place of worship and so those undecided will have to choose another God-based religion if they do not want to become Catholic. Without the leadership personalities in place in the TAC, the building will be leaderless as is similar to vacant communites where the leaders are gone from the premises. When the leaders are gone, what are the followers to do? They have to go somewhere else and the TAC will vanish as we know it and in it's place will be the Roman Catholic Church led by faithful leaders and followed by faithful followers.
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 2, 2008 2:12:41 GMT
I have noted: The Holy See is following with "serious attention" the request from the Traditional Anglican Communion for "full, corporate, sacramental union" with Rome. What do you think of this? What will be the outcome? Noel, It appears as though the ordination of homosexuals may be blocking the unification as well as ordination of women according to this article from Zenit both of which the Catholic Church is opposed to entirely: VATICAN CITY (Zenit) - The Holy See is following with "serious attention" the request from the Traditional Anglican Communion for "full, corporate, sacramental union" with Rome. This was affirmed by the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal William Levada, in a July 5 letter to the primate of the Anglican group, Archbishop John Hepworth. The letter was written before the beginning of the Lambeth Conference, the once-a-decade gathering of Anglican leaders that is under way in England through Aug. 4. The Lambeth Conference is facing unprecedented controversy, and some bishops boycotted it altogether. The conflict within the Communion has arisen over debate about the possibility of ordaining homosexual bishops and blessing homosexual marriages. A synod decision this summer to pave the way for the episcopal ordination of women has further alienated some Anglican leaders, many of whom were in disagreement with the Communion's decision to ordain women as priests. According to Cardinal Levada's letter, "over the course of the past year, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has studied the proposals which you presented on behalf of the House of Bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion during your visit to the offices of this dicastery on Oct. 9, 2007."
|
|
|
Post by braveheart on Aug 4, 2008 15:40:37 GMT
Theres a TAC 'parish' in the K&L Diocese. I wish I knew what could be done to bring them along in promoting the Latin Mass. Anyone any suggestions?
In fairness the 'parish' is probably very small and used to be a location for the Russian Orthodox to visit because a few locals got fedd up with the Anglicans.
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 4, 2008 20:54:02 GMT
Theres a TAC 'parish' in the K&L Diocese. I wish I knew what could be done to bring them along in promoting the Latin Mass. Anyone any suggestions? In fairness the 'parish' is probably very small and used to be a location for the Russian Orthodox to visit because a few locals got fedd up with the Anglicans. Braveheart, My unfounded opinion is not to use Latin at all, rather the use of Maronite Rite [3rd Century] or Ukrainian Rite [3rd Century] forms of Liturgy which establishes early root characteristics of the universal church. Like planting a garden if you establish deep roots then you will grow large and beautiful plants. All newly acquired communions would benefit from developing deep roots which the Latin Rite does to a certain degree, although not deep enough to connect universally. The original Mass Liturgy was Arabic. Once learned, one who worships begins to see Christ in His Jewish form of being which is not exactly the form Latin lovers see Him as though he wears a completely gaudy Vestment and rigidly speaks to us with His back turned toward us. The Jewish Christ was far more docile and meek yet courageous and loving. It is also my unfounded opinion that the vast majority of Catholics do not realize that Christ was 1/2 Jewish from the Blessed Virgin Mary who was a Jew and 1/2 God whose face no one has seen, except Moses perhaps. The only deeper form of Liturgy we could try is depicted by Da Vinci in the Last Supper scene which is very hard to recreate when there are more than 12 people to recline at table. For a group of over 2 or 300 Catholic you would need a table approximately 500 feet across for everyone to recline at the table. I have already attended a Catholic Mass which reclined at table which was granted to me by a Franciscan Priest a certain Father Valerius. I do not know his ancestry although the unique closeness of the "recline at table" Mass was extraordinary and did resemble the original 12 Apostle Mass Liturgy. This is impractical of course yet effective and sometimes necessary to see Christ as He really was in His native Jewish kosher table manners which are far more comfortable than stiff Latin recitations which are largely misunderstood by Laity for the most part. I do believe the Latin was finally agreed upon in the Vatican use of the Liturgy and ongoing discussions as a means to accomodate Priests [Cardinals] from various cultures so that the meetings would not be delayed by translators to the multifarious language requirements.
|
|
|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Aug 14, 2008 0:08:37 GMT
I am stating my beliefs concerning your development into denial of God while I know that you did believe in Him when you were born. All newborn babies have intrinsic knowledge of their Creators, God, the Mother of birth and the Father of birth. Interesting idea. It reminds me of Wordsworth's Intimations of Immortality (Stanza 5 — I checked): Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting: The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star, Hath had elsewhere its setting, And cometh from afar: Not in entire forgetfulness, And not in utter nakedness, But trailing clouds of glory do we come From God, who is our home ...
|
|
|
Post by Michael O'Donovan on Aug 14, 2008 0:19:12 GMT
One who worships begins to see Christ in His Jewish form of being which is not exactly the form Latin lovers see Him as though he wears a completely gaudy Vestment and rigidly speaks to us with His back turned toward us... The only deeper form of Liturgy we could try is depicted by Da Vinci in the Last Supper scene which is very hard to recreate when there are more than 12 people to recline at table... I do believe the Latin was finally agreed upon in the Vatican use of the Liturgy and ongoing discussions as a means to accomodate Priests [Cardinals] from various cultures so that the meetings would not be delayed by translators to the multifarious language requirements. Royal, I'm afraid I disagree with you on three of these points. When the priest celebrates Mass ad orientem he is not speaking to us with his back turned toward us; whether he celebrates in Latin or in the vernacular (and Vatican II intended ad orientem to be the norm) he is not speaking to us, he is facing God and leading us in prayer. As regards the idea of people at Mass reclining at table, that is I think too much influenced by the Lutheran notion of Mass as a communal meal rather than a sacrifice. The Mass is only partly a re-enactment of the Last Supper. It is also a re-enactment of the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. Finally, as regards Latin, it was chosen for the Liturgy because it was a dead language — in other words, none of the meanings of the words could be changed by usage.
|
|
|
Post by Diane on Aug 16, 2008 15:41:34 GMT
I have a close friend who is an Anglican and tells me that her church celebrates the Latin Mass and she participates as an acolyte . Her wish is that the Anglican Church again be joined in communion with the 'Roman' Catholic Church. (note please I, unlike her, do not use 'Roman' since our church is apostolic and universal). I think many Anglicans, especially in the states, agree with her. I am not sure if there is ever going to be a solution to join both within the same communion but hope I am wrong.
She cannot understand the obstacles since she sees only the commonality as being apparently the same.
I pointed out to her that my recent update on the discussions was the nonacceptance of the Holy See on two major points although there may be others of equal worth: 1. Bishops cannot not be practicing homosexuals as is now the case with Robinson and, 2. Women cannot be priests.
She argued that we were not accepting but dictating. I made the point that if communion is the intent then Catholic beliefs cannot take a back seat in favor of what I and many others agree is deemed in the bible as an abomination... homosexuality. And although I am a woman who personally would like for there to be women priests perhaps in the vein of service as was Mary Magdalene, I do fully understand the tradition of men as representatives of Christ on the altar seeing that His chosen apostles were all men. Oh well! Diane
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 17, 2008 3:33:09 GMT
Royal, I'm afraid I disagree with you on three of these points. When the priest celebrates Mass ad orientem he is not speaking to us with his back turned toward us; whether he celebrates in Latin or in the vernacular (and Vatican II intended ad orientem to be the norm) he is not speaking to us, he is facing God and leading us in prayer. As regards the idea of people at Mass reclining at table, that is I think too much influenced by the Lutheran notion of Mass as a communal meal rather than a sacrifice. The Mass is only partly a re-enactment of the Last Supper. It is also a re-enactment of the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. Finally, as regards Latin, it was chosen for the Liturgy because it was a dead language — in other words, none of the meanings of the words could be changed by usage.[/quote][/i]
Michael, I understand what you are saying about the Priest leading the people in prayer and agree with your explanation. It was the perception whether false or not that many before Vatican 11 sensed that the Priest had his back toward the people which was a point of discussion at Vatican 11. The perception people have at any Mass is obviously created by their own discernment and some discern he is facing God to lead the people and some felt he had his back toward the people. It all depends I suppose on who needs the Priest to face them directly as also was changed in the confessional during Vatican 11 that the kneeler and curtain could be dispensed with in favor of a face to face confession with the Priest. Not everyone at Mass is in tune with God as much as they are in tune with the behavior of the Priest. I was raised entirely on the Traditional Latin Mass until age 18 when I went to service and I thoroughly enjoy it, however I have attended the Maronite Rite [Lebanese] regularly who speak the Mass in Arabic [Aramic] which is the language Christ indeed spoke to the Apostles and the Jews. When involving in that Mass. the Jewishness of Christ comes alive in the language and customs of the Lebanese which is so close to Israel that you can throw a stone to play catch. When I attend Mass, I find myself searching for the true identity of Christ and find him difficult to comprehend in Latin wheras in Arabic the distinct Jewishness of Christ is not only apparant in the Mass language but also in the Lebanese who are sitting beside me. I would not even think of proposing a Mass reclining at table, it is impossible to seat that many, I simply wanted Willy to expand his thinking beyond Latin and I wish the same for you as well, much as I love Latin, there is a special closeness to Christ found in the Arabic and Lebanese culture and Maronite Rite of the Mass that cannot be comprehended without involvement. I am also very fond of the Ukrainian Rite which was formed during the Reign of Constantine which evokes a tremendous amount of ritual, moreso than Latin. The typical Ukrainian Rite Mass is 2 1/2 hours long with Holy Communion received in the mouth only by silver spoon dipped from a cup with both Body and Blood united. The Body of Christ is in the form of a cube of bread. The Liturgy is spoken by the Priest from the back of the Church behind the last row of pews. I also attended in French, Italian and Norwegian Mass. I love the Mass no matter who celebrates it but I am most fond of the Maronite Rite and at one time considered Priesthood in the Maronite Rite and was accepted by the Seminary there for formation, however my wife objected. The Maronite Rite allows married Priests.
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 17, 2008 3:59:57 GMT
I have a close friend who is an Anglican and tells me that her church celebrates the Latin Mass and she participates as an acolyte . Her wish is that the Anglican Church again be joined in communion with the 'Roman' Catholic Church. (note please I, unlike her, do not use 'Roman' since our church is apostolic and universal). I think many Anglicans, especially in the states, agree with her. I am not sure if there is ever going to be a solution to join both within the same communion but hope I am wrong. Diane, The reason for "Roman" preceding Catholic Church has no effect adversely to it's universal intent. The use of the word, "Roman" was added at the time after the Vatican was moved to France at the request of I believe Saint Bridgette. Later, after the danger to the Pope had passed, the Pope moved back to Rome which caused for a period of time the need to describe the Church as the Roman Catholic Church as opposed to the French Catholic Church. Either location will describe the one and same Catholic Church. Even in this day, certain Bishops and Cardinals are suggesting moving the Vatican to another country other than Italy, prompting the immediate resounding clamor from the College of Cardinals, "Keep the Roman Catholic Church in Rome". She argued that we were not accepting but dictating. I made the point that if communion is the intent then Catholic beliefs cannot take a back seat in favor of what I and many others agree is deemed in the bible as an abomination... homosexuality. Diane, I agree with you entirely, the Church is not a democracy and is not founded on the law of man, rather the law of God in the person of Christ and in imitation of Christ who specifically forbade homosexuality and also chose 12 men to lead his church, not women. The Catholic Church is explaining that there is no authority granted to the Pope to declare a break from the tradition of male Priests according to Christ. And although I am a woman who personally would like for there to be women priests perhaps in the vein of service as was Mary Magdalene, I do fully understand the tradition of men as representatives of Christ on the altar seeing that His chosen apostles were all men. Oh well! Diane[/quote][/i] Diane, If you would like to see women Priests, you will probably have to see them on some television satire program. The historical record of the Bible does not include women as Priests and so the Church, not being a democracy, is unwilling to break from tradition established in the Bible according to Christ. Mary Magdalene most definitely had an intimate relationship with Christ in a Spiritual sense, uniquely in communion with the Apostles and the Blessed Mother, however Christ did not call her nor His own Mother Mary to the ministry of the Church in the Priesthood or as at that time it was referred to as Presbyter and/or Bishops. Certainly not to disqualify women as dysfunctional in the Church, rather to emphasize the Infinite Wisdom of God in the design of Creation as he made them male and female with the understanding that the female was taken from the rib of man to be his "helpmate". The role of woman as helpmate is clarified in the Catechism and well defined as equal to man in dignity, while at the same time in correct placement in the order of Creation. To practice any type of function out of the order of Creation according to Infinite Wisdom would bring disaster to the Church from God Himself in the person of Jesus Christ. This actual disaster has already been experienced within the Church on many occasions throughout history when the order of Creation was disturbed. It is God's will that we all are to accomplish, not our own will, nor our own desires in a democratic "vote", rather a distinct fear of disturbing God's order of Creation and historical tradition.
|
|
|
Post by royalosiodhachain on Aug 17, 2008 12:22:58 GMT
Interesting idea. It reminds me of Wordsworth's Intimations of Immortality (Stanza 5 — I checked):
Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting: The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star, Hath had elsewhere its setting, And cometh from afar: Not in entire forgetfulness, And not in utter nakedness, But trailing clouds of glory do we come From God, who is our home ...[/quote][/i]
Michael, This is true according to the Holy Scriptures: * The Prophetic Books o Jeremiah + Chapter 1
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I dedicated you, a prophet to the nations I appointed you.
This is to indicate that before our parents conceived us in the womb of our mothers, God conceived us first in heaven. This applies not only to the Prophet Jeremiah but to all humankind including atheists.
From the Catechism:
Where does the soul come from?
366-368 382
The spiritual soul does not come from one’s parents but is created immediately by God and is immortal. It does not perish at the moment when it is separated from the body in death and it will be once again reunited with the body at the moment of the final resurrection.
He does whatever he pleases"104
269 The Holy Scriptures repeatedly confess the universal power of God. He is called the "Mighty One of Jacob", the "LORD of hosts", the "strong and mighty" one. If God is almighty "in heaven and on earth", it is because he made them.105 Nothing is impossible with God, who disposes his works according to his will.106 He is the Lord of the universe, whose order he established and which remains wholly subject to him and at his disposal. He is master of history, governing hearts and events in keeping with his will: "It is always in your power to show great strength, and who can withstand the strength of your arm?107
The commands of God are written on the heart of the newborn infant by God just as the commands were written on tablet for Moses to present to the children of Israel.
Therefore, atheist and Catholic alike share the same creation of heart by God. Atheism is a man made religion developed through hatred of God the creator, for who would disown his own Father and Mother except through hatred?
|
|