Ok, I hope you and others point out and elaborate positive features of TEC. This thread is about them, not defending the RCC.
I just answered the other poster who asked:
What does the Episcopalian teaching give you that Roman Catholic church teaching can’t give you?
I just find it to have more of an approach of inclusivity, which is appealing to me.
I don’t think that my answer requires anyone to defend the RCC. We are all entitled to our opinions.
No. I said “inclusivity”
I guess we’ve had different experience. Again, we’ve spoken quite frankly about sin in the church that I’ve attended on and off. Most of the sin discussed tends to be inter-relational, and no one goes near sexual transgressions.
While I don’t appreciate the latter being ignored, I also think that Catholics get too wrapped up in it to the point of focusing exclusively on sexual sin. And believe me, there’s more to being a Catholic than just being an uptight jerk who doesn’t masturbate.
Ah - there’s the rub! EVERY Christian denomination - OK, every religion - claims to Have It Right.
This is where apologetics training and adult ed is so crucial in the Catholic faith. In order to engage a diverse marketplace, we need to go well beyond, "Because the Gospels/the Pope/my priest says so.
Yes! And there are other things that are deliberately called a Mystery, like the Eucharist, because we acknowledge that we don’t fully understand what is going on.
We’re all dogmatic about at least some things, and nobody is a relativist. If you doubt me, post something bigoted on social media and await the coming explosion of moral outrage. (I’m guessing you’re fortunately not a bigot, so please don’t. But hopefully my point is clear; every one of us has some inner sense of right and wrong).
I can see that. However, humans seem to favor sexual sin in a lot of ways, so I would expect it to always be a “hot topic”.
Indeed. Which is why each person needs to dive into the apologetics of different religions, do a compare/contrast , pray unceasingly and make their decision after full consideration. OTOH, I think that what is so attractive about other religions, in this thread the Episcopalian Church, is the emphasis on “inclusivity” or lack of rules. And it was attractive to me, as well. What I came to realize, again…through prayer and reflection and reading and experiencing, is that it was the possibility of me fitting God to my ideas of right and wrong rather than me fitting myself to His Truth of right and wrong that was so attractive to me within the liberal denominations. In the end, I found that it was ME that needed to find Truth, not God. And I found the fullness of that Truth in the RCC. Experiences will vary
I love this part of being a Catholic, as well. Always something to chew on and to discover and re-discover. I find the RCC to be both firm in her defense of Christ’s teachings and at the same time, humble in her declaration of the existence of Mystery. The Church is very nuanced and it requires commitment to realize this and to delve into the nuances.
Catholics are very concerned with abortion and sexuality right now. Why? Because the culture proudly believes that abortion is a good thing and that sexual sin is a good thing. The culture is loudly proclaiming its values in that area, but it’s not doing so as much in other areas, say by deciding that theft is actually good and we should all steal as much as possible.
As a former Episcopalian, I can tell you that 1.
Doesn’t apply anymore, they removed the requirement to be baptized for communion. They now just say “all are welcome”.
There was also no confession when I was EP, it was never brought up as an option.
I never saw anyone praying a rosary at any time be it an Anglican one or otherwise. I had no idea that there was such a thing.
The only thing at all in common with Catholicism is the form of the liturgy. We left the EP church and became Catholic because we knew in our hearts that God’s word never changes and the EP church was going off the rails right in front of our eyes. They do have good music though, that’s the only thing I miss!
What makes me long to return to the RC Church is that Anglicanism 1) has no identity and 2) doesn’t expect anything of you. As a RC I belonged to a world-wide family. The Pope has rock star status and is reference by the secular media even when they totally disagree with him. Catholicism has guts, it stands for something. It expects you to go to church, to keep holy days, to fast and deny yourself. It has symbols and the saints and devotions to Mary. Anglicanism isn’t just Catholic lite, its relativist on a whole range of issues. But what Anglicanism gets right (according to me) is its engagement with laity, its synodical governance, its inclusivity and willingness to tackle messy issues internally, the role of women in the church and its common prayer. I absolutely miss being a Catholic but love being Anglican.
I feel like this overwhelming need the EP church has to be inclusive is what has driven them off the cliff of relativism that makes it mean nothing. I think a church can be inclusive and connect with laity without declaring that sins are not sins, if that makes sense. I wish that the EP church had decided to go about being inclusive another way.
Exactly. Inclusivity is about love for all because we all sin, not about love for sin.
I think the liturgy was beautiful as well. I may, one day, attend a Anglican version RCC Mass just to be a part of it once again.
The Pope drives me bonkers sometimes having to explain to protestants what he meant by such and such statement lol.
I’ve been Anglican as well. Conservative parishes are getting hard to come by in that denomination. They can’t really expect much from you because technically it’s part of the reformation, which is splintered in to the thousands. Get tough with a parishioner and they will probably just cross the street and hit the ECUSA or Anglican-lite, UMC Church. There they can feel warm and fuzzy eating potluck dinners and glorifying Yoga and other un-Godly practices.
No offense to faithfull UMC Christians, but that is what I saw and heard from UMC.
The Catholic Church has primates too ;).
There are primates in the Americas. In Canada, that honour goes to the Archbishop of Quebec. For all the Americas, North and South, that honour goes to the Archbishop of Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic).
I meant the United States.
I thought the Archdiocese of Baltimore was our primatial see?
Yes, but we don’t have a ‘Primate of America’. If we did, it would be Baltimore. But we don’t.
Why wouldn’t the occupant of the primatial see (i.e. Archbishop of Baltimore) be the primate of the US? I’m not trying to be argumentative here. I genuinely don’t understand.
I genuinely don’t completely know. I may well be wrong…