Sad experience

[Bonifatius]

Dear all,

I hope no one takes offence of me writing this post.

Yesterday I was utterly amazed and happy about the ARCIC Report about the Blessed Virgin. What a wonderful step towards unity in faith with our brothers and sisters in the Roman Catholic Church!

Then I had a look at what was going on in OBOB and was totally shocked. I've always felt (not only here in STR but in church and wherever I've been) that we Anglicans tried to treat Roman Catholics with respect, understanding and brotherly love. The sermons of our (low church!!) priest here after the death of the late Pope were remarkable. Even the official statements that came from our Archibishop about JP II and B 16 were very friendly and heart felt. I took this not only as a sign of political correctness but as an expression of our inmost feelings. Most Anglicans I've met during the last years had even more positive feelings toward the Roman Catholic Church than many "C"atholics!

What was going on in OBOB yesterday disturbed me. Not only the views that people expressed there towards the Anglican Church, but also the negative emotions and the fact that they did not seem to know the official statements of their own church nor documents like Lumen Gentium or Dominus Iesus that have to say a lot about members of the church catholic outside the Roman Catholic Church. It all felt like "I know what I think - so don't confuse me with the facts".

Very irritating. Is that the kind of normal reaction you'd expect from American Roman Catholics? Is there such a kind of cold war from their side?

I posted about the same thingy about this agreement in a German speaking RC forum (www.kath.net) which tends to be very very conservative (lots of Tridentine Rite Catholics there) and the reactions were much more positive than in OBOB.

What do you think?

Greetings
Boni

 

[Aymn27]

Bonifatus,

When I joined CF it was to "fellowship" with Anglicans and RCs, because although I am a practicing RC, my theology/beliefs would probably be much closer to a conservative Anglo-Catholic (minus the bells and smells in worship). If you notice, I changed my RC icon to reflect being only Christian, b/c quite honestly, I don't want to be associated with a large portion of RCs on this Forum. IMO, they are very uncharitable and generally hostile to anyone who has a different opinion/thought that does not coincide with the ultra-montanist views. Honestly, they do not reflect the Church at large, and I would suggest just not going over there to avoid feeling like you were maligned. I still post every once in a while, but try to stay away from posts that seem doctrinal in any way (unless I feel up to getting bashed and labeled as a liberal). I was quite shocked by the uncharitable and downright nasty posts concerning Anglicanism yesterday. You are correct that their statements reflect a high level of ignorance on Church teaching - especially when it comes to documents. Oh yes, many of the fundamentalist-type will pull quotes and used them as proof texts of their phariseeic (sp?) views, yet they fail to recognize the spirit of the documents or analyze the text as a whole. Sadly, it seems the election of our new pope has only fueled the holier-than-thou attitudes on the board.

Don't loose heart or let them get you down! Indeed, many faithful Catholics (the Pope included, lol) are praying for the "cold war" to end - and yes, that would even include Anglicanism (which I think the document yesterday is a perfect example - why would we even care if you weren't 'Catholic'), despite what some would say. I, for one, enjoy all of your (well at least most ) fellowship here on this board and apologize for the negative hurtful/comments made by a few of the Catholics on CF.

Blessings and peace to all my Anglican (and yes you are Catholic) brothers and sisters,

Aaron.

 

[Timothy]

Y'know, I now am really tempted to permanently refer to them as the RCC EVERY time I can just to irritate the heck out of them. I won't, of course, but it would irritate them. Especially since I know the correct terminology. I think I know how Henry VIII felt now over the RCC's quibbling.

Timothy

 

[Bonifatius]

Y'know, I now am really tempted to permanently refer to them as the RCC EVERY time I can just to irritate the heck out of them. I won't, of course, but it would irritate them. Especially since I know the correct terminology. I think I know how Henry VIII felt now over the RCC's quibbling.

Timothy

Hi Timothy,

that is something that really surprised me: some of the contributors in OBOB seem to reject the term "Roman Catholic Church" as if that was something pejorative. Over here the RCC uses that very term (Römisch-katholische Kirche) even on their official website!!!

Greetings
Boni

 

[Zacharias]

Hi Timothy,

that is something that really surprised me: some of the contributors in OBOB seem to reject the term "Roman Catholic Church" as if that was something pejorative. Over here the RCC uses that very term (Römisch-katholische Kirche) even on their official website!!!

Greetings
Boni

Dominus vobiscum!

Our Catechism book is called "The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church". Pope John Paul II wrote an intoduction in it and person who allowed it's imprimatur (the imprimatur shows that those publishing them have complied with the law of the Church) was Pope Benedict XVI (then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger).

I don't mind being called "Roman Catholic".

 

[pmcleanj]

The mission of Christian Forums is "uniting all Christians as one Body". If we truly seek that goal, then we need to recognize that the Christians on OBOB are part of the same Body we are part of. I believe that this is part of what the Anglican Church means when it refers to the Church as "the whole company of all faithful people". The simple Anglican understanding of Church as truly Catholic -- universal in time and place; undivided -- is the mission of CF.

Hunt through the 1662 Book of Common prayer, and you will see no mention of denominations, nor of branches -- except in the Articles which reject certain teachings but do not reject the Christians who belong to groups that hold to those teachings. Simply put, there is only one Church, and the divisions in it are an illusion we have created that the framers of our prayer book managed to see through.

But if we are to move forward on that mission, we are going to have to forgive the brothers and sisters who seek to push us away. Not ignore them so as not to be hurt by them, because then we would be distancing ourselves. Not try to persuade them, because they are not in a mood to listen to us. But forgive them, pray for them, and welcome them here whenever they come in kindness and mutuality.

For that reason -- that they should be welcome here -- we should avoid venting about other forums or other denominations here. It is enough that we have our own liturgy and church-life to discuss; it need not be done in comparison against others. I have been hurt many times by reading things in other forums about our Church. Yesterday was a prime example. But the best response is to listen to the underlying message you can decipher, about what those people believe and feel that inspires such posts. That way you take away a deeper understanding, even if it grieves you; and (I hope) a greater commitment to not hurting others in the same way here.

And definately avoid interfering in their forums in any way that they could consider invasive.

 

[Zacharias]

Dominus vobiscum!

Our Catechism book is called "The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church". Pope John Paul II wrote an intoduction in it and person who allowed it's imprimatur (the imprimatur shows that those publishing them have complied with the law of the Church) was Pope Benedict XVI (then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger).

I don't mind being called "Roman Catholic".

Even our official Bibles call us Roman Catholic.

 

[Epiphanygirl]

I posted a letter over in OBOB about it.

 

[Fish and Bread]

Very irritating. Is that the kind of normal reaction you'd expect from American Roman Catholics? Is there such a kind of cold war from their side?

In a word, yes. I was raised Roman Catholic, went to a Roman Catholic school for several years, have many Roman Catholic friends, and the whole nine yards, so I know of what I speak. I was actually a non-practicing agnostic for about ten years, but it was actually when I started looking into returning to Christianity by exploring non-Roman Catholic churches that people started getting really upset at me. To many conservative Roman Catholics, it is actually better that you be nothing than be a Protestant. Protestants, which for the purposes of the RCC includes Anglicans (Even though we also consider ourselves Catholic), are basically considered fake Christians with fake sacraments who rebell against the truth revealed. In a sense, they almost think we're either making fun of them by our very existence and should really just be honest and admit we're Godless heathens who just like a Christian-themed worship experience or else that we're simply badly deluded heretics.

Now, I should note that such views are not held by all Roman Catholics. I do know many folks in the RCC who are very ecumenically minded and have great respect for other non-RCC Christians. Interestingly enough, though, those are usually (Though not always) the RCC members who have been taught by Jesuits or who are just very independent minded and insist on thinking for themselves. In other words, they're ecumenical in spite of being RCC rather than because of it, or because of exposure to a religious order that has been on the outs with most of the RCC magisterium as of late (The Jesuits are a great treasure to the Christian faith, by the way -- one of the RCC's greatest contributions to Christianity IMO). Many of these are people who have had their own run-ins with ultra-traditionalist Roman Catholics are are derogatorily refused to as "cafeteria catholics", which to the next worst thing to being a Protestant to a traditional RCCer, but stick by their faith in spite of the insults.

If you ask me the RCC in general has been fairly steadily falling further and further into error since the 6th century or so, though, with the lowpoints theologically coming at the Council of Trent and Vatican I. Vatican II gave a lot of folks hope that the Holy Spirit was guiding them back into truth, but the changes seem to gradually be getting redacted instead of built upon. Nevertheless, as Christians, we Anglicans have an ideal to try to live up to of turning the other cheek and working for the unity of all of our Christian brothers sisters, and our esteemed moderator makes a very good point when she says that we should take care to recognize that the RCC is part of the universal Church even as some of their leadership figuratively spits in our faces. It's no worse than Jesus endured at the hands of the Pharisees of his time.

It is also notable that theoretically it would be ideal to be able to have the Bishop of Rome at the head of a united church organization if his power were limited in the way it was intended to be -- we're in some ways an incomplete church without the Bishop of Rome from a historical perspective. Better there be a missing spirtual guide than a false teacher with the ability to force us to believe his errors at the head of our church for the time being, but if we can restore the office of the Papacy to it's proper role and the historical Christian faith, it would be ideal to have the Bishop of Rome as our head again one day in the far future. Ecumenicalism is the most likely road to that outcome.

Ecumenicalism is a very worthy goal, we just have to be careful that we don't wind up becoming Roman Catholics with special permission to have married priests and a different liturgy, as the Traditional Anglican Communion is rumored to be negotiating themselves. Anglicanism is about a lot more than a few liturgical modifications and married priests. We need to be accepted for who we are as a body and not for who the RCC wishes we were, else we wind up adopting their errors as our own.

John

 

[julian the apostate]

catholics you meet on the internet are in no way represenative of the average catholic on the street

the average catholic on the street and in the pew is virtually indistinguishable from a liberal
episcopalian

 

[pmcleanj]

This is an official moderator post.

This thread is being read by our guests as well as our members, members of OBOB among them.

We must remember that we were badly hurt yesterday by what we saw as Anglican-bashing. Please take great care that we do not lash out and hurt back in retaliation.

Obviously, we have legitimate differences of doctrine from the Roman Catholic Church; and since we believe our doctrines to be right and true, that means that where their teaching differs we believe their teaching to be in error. But let us also understand that whatever errors they may hold to, they hold to them with sincere belief, and for the most part with good will, not ill will. Do not be afraid to acknowledge our differences! But leave space always for mutual respect, for listening to one another, for tolerance.

So please, even here in our own home, be generous with love and tact to all other denominations.

 

[gtsecc]

I hope folks on boths side see the goal as reuniting.

 

[chocko]

Dear all,

I hope no one takes offence of me writing this post.

Yesterday I was utterly amazed and happy about the ARCIC Report about the Blessed Virgin. What a wonderful step towards unity in faith with our brothers and sisters in the Roman Catholic Church!

Then I had a look at what was going on in OBOB and was totally shocked. I've always felt (not only here in STR but in church and wherever I've been) that we Anglicans tried to treat Roman Catholics with respect, understanding and brotherly love. The sermons of our (low church!!) priest here after the death of the late Pope were remarkable. Even the official statements that came from our Archibishop about JP II and B 16 were very friendly and heart felt. I took this not only as a sign of political correctness but as an expression of our inmost feelings. Most Anglicans I've met during the last years had even more positive feelings toward the Roman Catholic Church than many "C"atholics!

What was going on in OBOB yesterday disturbed me. Not only the views that people expressed there towards the Anglican Church, but also the negative emotions and the fact that they did not seem to know the official statements of their own church nor documents like Lumen Gentium or Dominus Iesus that have to say a lot about members of the church catholic outside the Roman Catholic Church. It all felt like "I know what I think - so don't confuse me with the facts".

Very irritating. Is that the kind of normal reaction you'd expect from American Roman Catholics? Is there such a kind of cold war from their side?

I posted about the same thingy about this agreement in a German speaking RC forum (www.kath.net) which tends to be very very conservative (lots of Tridentine Rite Catholics there) and the reactions were much more positive than in OBOB.

What do you think?

Greetings
Boni

the way i see it their is only one god and he loves us all blessed are the peace makers the leaders of our church seem to turn every thing into political correctiveness which is not the way of the average believer.PRAISE BE TO GOD

 

[Look Homeward Anglican]

I hope folks on boths side see the goal as reuniting.

I hope so, too, but I think the Roman Catholic definition of reuniting can only involve all other Christian groups accepting Roman Catholic doctrines and dogma and confessing themselves to be Roman Catholic. They really have no interest in accepting us as part of the Church as we currently exist. We, on the other hand, might see reunification as a broadening of their definition of Christ's Church, or of all definitions that attempt to exclude any members of the body of Christ from the recognition of our Catholicity, our oneness.

 

[michaeldimmickjr]

What is the title of the thread on their forum?

Your Brother in Christ,

Michael

 

[UberLutheran]

And actually, for that matter -- most conservative Christians aren't like the ones I run into on CF, either.

I'd say 95 percent of the conservative Christians, Missouri Synod Lutherans, WELS Lutherans, Roman Catholics -- and even Calvinists are very, very nice people who are also very, very approachable.

We may not agree theologically -- but as a general rule, we tend to get along just fine as people.

I don't know what it is about message boards such as CF, but it tends to bring out real extremes in groups and even people. I've run into conservative Christians, all flavor of Lutherans, Roman Catholics and Calvinists with whom I've been at loggerheads, and we've gotten into very heated and very pointed discussions.

I think it's easier to engage in that kind of behavior on messageboards because while there is a certain level of intimacy as we share together, we never really see each other face to face so we don't have to put a name to a face. A lot of humanizing occurs when we can actually SEE the person with whom we're discussing (or arguing). I also think it's also easier to write things in response to someone we can't see which we'd NEVER say if we were actually communicating face to face.

Not to diminish your feelings in any way -- but I think what you've experienced (as a lot of us have experienced) is part of the nature of the messageboard medium we use to communicate here. Forums can be very informal, very intimate -- and incredibly impersonal.