I think the Anglicans need to re-examine their history. They broke away due to the push of one man’s sexual immorality. Not to mention the Archbishop of Canterbury caved in due to the contraception issue as a result of illicit marriages. I’m not surprised this all happened. Let’s pray for our separated brethren.
Just grinding his Ax. No, not surprised at all.
Who’s axe grinding?
It’s really not hard to figure out…now is it?
or are you saying I’m grinding an axe, because, no…I have gay friends…
oh, and sorry that I spelled axe wrong…ha!
I don’t have any gay friends
oh, bones are you axe grinding? …LOL!
I do however have one friend who is bi-sexual. But she’s marrying a guy though.
What you stated here is baloney!! The Anglican church did not begin on a man’s sexual immorality. These are the kinds of posts that that are purposely propagated to fuel arguments from Anglicans and other Protestants in which you will call disingenuous. Why do you have to chastise others to make your point?
I’ve got a gay friend. He’s also a Trotskyist, and an atheist. Does this mean I’m allowed to comment on things?
Hum…Jesus might have been homosexual, you say Bishop Gene Robinson?
Would you please stop talking in Code and say what you mean, thank you…
I don’t care one way or another but historically the Anglican Church (as we know it today not in communion with Rome) most certainly did begin with Henry VIII’s refusal to honor his marriage so he broke away from the historical Catholic Church and started his own Church. Making himself the head of it.
I don’t think he’s attacking anyone, that is history…
And then there was the question of money…
All those benefices. All those farms and abbeys.
It truly was a ‘church’ founded on a purpose: divorce, political control and financial enrichment.
Look to all those religious who fought Henry and his daughter over this decision. They knew why Henry broke with Rome. Some today, unfortunately, suffer from a fundamental perceptual handicap (a type of cognitive dissonance, if you will) about the Church of England’s origins.
What is your belief as to the reason Henry VII broke from Rome? The Pope’s refusal to grant an annulment when Henry had a dynastic need to sire an heir was certainly part of it, but I think that the historical record is also pretty clear that the man was a serious womanizer on top of that as well.
It might be of interest to note that Henry VIII, at the time he was seeking his divorce from Queen Catherine of Aragon, had an illegitimate son. . .Henry Fitzroy, who was approximately the same age as his legitimate daughter Mary Tudor. Henry was the son of Bessie Blount. Henry ‘could’ have been legitimatized (there was precedent for this, in that Edward III’s son John of Gaunt ‘legitimated’ his illegitimate children by his mistress Katherine Swinford --who happened to be sister-in-law to Geoffrey Chaucer)–these children became the Beauforts and married into and even became, some of them, royalty.
It’s just others were saying that they knew gay people too. I want to join in with the discussion too
You know, I’m from the South, and a woman (lady, I try to be) at that, and we are very, very wordy…I mean, we talk, a lot…and I try my best not to make one liners, but in the case of this thread…I did as well, so I guess I’m just as guilty as talking in code…Peace!