Would you be more likely to join…

[Paidiske]

That is your opinion, but it is Catholic doctrine

Not everything you posted is Catholic doctrine. The idea that a woman can be a priest to her minor children, for example, does not at all match with Catholic doctrine.

What is the basis for your believing that it is untrue?

Which bit, specifically?

You disagree. I am asking if you would tell me why?

I disagree with the idea that Anglican orders are no longer valid partly because I find the arguments for that position to be specious. And partly because I have experienced God's presence and grace within the life of the Anglican church.

Tell me again thjs great wisdom that has liberated women so.

Your accounting of history is very selective. You note some negative things (without demonstrating that they are even true), and assign them to causes without demonstrating a causal relationship. And you do not note the positive things which have happened alongside them.

where have I heard that before? We will not serve…..

The irony, of course, in this thread, being that ordained women are indeed taking on a life of service.

 

[concretecamper]

That is your opinion, but it is Catholic doctrine
What is the basis for your believing that it is untrue?

In the opinion of the Apostolic priesthood, your faith group has mitigated the priesthood, which is why Anglican orders are no longer valid

You disagree. I am asking if you would tell me why?

The Catholic Church upholds the biblical doctrine of authority. The husband is the head of the wife, she is subject to him. Granted, modernism and feminism had people no longer living like that, including those that would call themselves Catholic.

That is tares among the wheat. The teaching is still there as it is the faith once delivered to the saints. The husband is the head of the wife. She can deny it and rebel, but we are reaping the fruits of that rebellion begun in the 19th century and flowering full force in the 20th. Doesn’t look good.

Over 60,000,000 dead babies sacrificed in the altar of moloch. Broken marriages, broken homes, deserted children. Promiscuity so rampant as to be expected and chastity scorned
Men ridiculed and mocked. Tell me again thjs great wisdom that has liberated women so.

God says He desires obedience rather than sacrifice. Deny yourself and take up your cross.
Feminists exalt themselves, shout to overthrow the patriarchy, and scoff at the service of men

Hmmm, where have I heard that before? We will not serve…..

These days ( past 30 years) people can identify as whatever they want. Trying to explaining historical Church teaching is pointless to them

 

[boughtwithaprice]

These days ( past 30 years) people can identify as whatever they want. Trying to explaining historical Church teaching is pointless to them

Yet we stand, we do not put light under a bushel.
It is not our intellect or the eloquence of our arguments that will convert them rather the Holy Spirit. I understand your frustration. As Proverbs says Chapter 26

4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou be made like him. 5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he imagine himself to be wise.
6 He that sendeth words by a foolish messenger, is lame of feet and drinketh iniquity. 7 As a lame man hath fair legs in vain: so a parable is unseemly in the mouth of fools. 8 As he that casteth a stone into the heap of Mercury: so is he that giveth honour to a fool. 9 As if a thorn should grow in the hand of a drunkard: so is a parable in the mouth of fools. 10 Judgment determineth causes: and he that putteth a fool to silence, appeaseth anger.

. 12 Hast thou seen a man wise in his own conceit? there shall be more hope of a fool than of him. 13 The slothful man saith: There is a lion in the way, and a lioness in the roads. 14 As the door turneth upon its hinges, so doth the slothful upon his bed. 15 The slothful hideth his hand under his armpit, and it grieveth him to turn it to his mouth.


The doctrine is the doctrine and the scripture is the scripture. I will not fear to say it just because others have discarded it or no longer believe it
It matters not what they do to me here. Whether they see what I am saying and be convinced or harden themselves in opposition. It matters only what I will answer the Lord when He asks me, did you stand with My words and My Church, or did you flee in fear?

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Not everything you posted is Catholic doctrine. The idea that a woman can be a priest to her minor children, for example, does not at all match with Catholic doctrine.

Which bit, specifically?

I disagree with the idea that Anglican orders are no longer valid partly because I find the arguments for that position to be specious. And partly because I have experienced God's presence and grace within the life of the Anglican church.

Your accounting of history is very selective. You note some negative things (without demonstrating that they are even true), and assign them to causes without demonstrating a causal relationship. And you do not note the positive things which have happened alongside them.

The irony, of course, in this thread, being that ordained women are indeed taking on a life of service.

Neither have you demonstrated a causal relationship. The whole of your reply appears to be an attack on me and my person. I do not mind that, as my person does not matter. What matters is the word of God and obedience to it.

You say that you have a spiritual presence in the Anglican order. How do you know it is God? We know from scripture that Satan appears as an angel of light. Without attacking me or the Catholic Church, how do you demonstrate that Anglican orders are valid?

You say that ordained women are serving, but who are you serving? Do you build the kingdom of God? Or is it your own kingdom which you call God? The Psalmist says unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.

It matters not what becomes of me, as what becomes of me has no relevance to the truth. I offer my person in sacrifice, and feel free to flame me, but you will not make your point

The whole thing hinges on whether you can demonstrate that Anglican orders are valid.
Saying that you feel the presence of God is not an argument, as it would put our feelings above the truth of God. If we let that happen then Satan has already won. Even Mormons claim the same.

How are Anglican orders valid?

 

[Paidiske]

Neither have you demonstrated a causal relationship.

I am not claiming one.

The whole of your reply appears to be an attack on me and my person.

Not at all.

You say that you have a spiritual presence in the Anglican order. How do you know it is God?

By its fruit. When I can see the growth of people in love, in joy, in peace, and so on, I can be confident of which Spirit is at work.

Without attacking me or the Catholic Church, how do you demonstrate that Anglican orders are valid?

If you take disagreeing with Catholic ideas as an attack, I don't really know how to have that conversation. Anglicans do not tend to view the validity of orders in the same terms that Catholics do, but even within a Catholic frame of reference, the arguments used to say that Anglican orders are invalid are questionable, especially since, in more recent times, we have had bishops whose apostolic succession is not in question by Catholics.

That said, the validity of Anglican orders in general is really off topic.

You say that ordained women are serving, but who are you serving? Do you build the kingdom of God?

Yes, we do. We proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ. We teach and nurture people in the Christian faith. We respond to the needs of God's people with loving service. That is building the kingdom of God.

 

[RileyG]

If you want to improve communication with the Black community,
I would suggest more Black women police officers.

St. Thomas More was a humanist and a Catholic.

God loves all souls.

Ever heard of black saints such as St. Moses the Black, St. Benedict the Moor, St. Martin de Pores, St. Josephine Bakhita. You can also include St. Augustine & St. Monica since they were from North Africa.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Yes, we do. We proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ. We teach and nurture people in the Christian faith. We respond to the needs of God's people with loving service. That is building the kingdom of God.

Your statement here is made without defining terms.

What is your definition of the gospel?
What is your definition of the Christian Faith?’
What needs are you meeting?

You believe that is what you are doing, but how do you know ?
The validity of Anglican orders is most certainly relevant. If they are not valid, then what you say is not true. If what you say is not true then you could think you are serving God, yet not be.

You claim to know by the fruits, but how do the fruits you describe prove truth. What you describe is mostly feelings which can be achieved by delusion in a limited amount of people, but when viewed in a larger context can be complete falsehood. Basing the truth on feelings is precisely what the Christian faith tells us not to do. There has to be another standard in which to measure rather than feelings alone

The Gospel tells us that narrow is the way, straight is the gate that leads to life. It is not an easy life. We are called to self denial and mortification of the flesh. Those things do not feel good, yet the good feelings result from obedience

Women are meant to be mothers and men are meant to be fathers. You can maintain good feelings and claim the fruit of the Spirit on a temporary basis, but eventually the delusion breaks and misery results in being worse than having obeyed.
A Christian that has obeyed the Gospel, denied himself and taken up his cross is dead to sin and the world. He can walk through the valley of the shadow of death and fear no evil. Those that rely on feelings require safe spaces then deny logic or even truth as oppressive.

Do you have any basis for what you are saying is true, rather than the nice feelings?

 

[JEBofChristTheLord]

What is most interesting to me, about both Anglican and Rome-based "orders", is their requirements of vowtaking.

 

[RileyG]

What is most interesting to me, about both Anglican and Rome-based "orders", is their requirements of vowtaking.

Yes, they live in community. it's almost like being married to someone- in a spiritual sense.

 

[JEBofChristTheLord]

I was thinking of what the Lord has said about vows.

 

[RileyG]

I was thinking of what the Lord has said about vows.

Monastic communities developed over time to get away from the world. Over time, some are focused on praying for the world, others are more active and have jobs such as teachers or nurses.

Depends on each community, though.

 

[Paidiske]

Your statement here is made without defining terms.

What is your definition of the gospel?
What is your definition of the Christian Faith?’
What needs are you meeting?

You believe that is what you are doing, but how do you know ?

I don't need to define those terms with precision, to know that our churches proclaim the same gospel, nurture the same faith, serve the same communities. If you look at what I do, and what my male colleagues do, there might be nuanced differences across the denominations (Catholic priests probably hear more confessions, for example, and your governance structures I believe give your priests more administrative responsibility), but there is no fundamental difference of principle in how we conduct our ministries. Preaching, administering the sacraments, leading people in prayer, pastoral care, and so on, are not things which set us apart.

You claim to know by the fruits, but how do the fruits you describe prove truth.

Matthew 7:15-20 was the passage I had in mind.

What you describe is mostly feelings

No, it most certainly is not. Love is not mostly a feeling. It is a consistent commitment to building up those around us.

We are called to self denial and mortification of the flesh. Those things do not feel good, yet the good feelings result from obedience

And do you imagine that the ordained life involves self denial and mortification of the flesh? That it "feels good" most of the time?

Women are meant to be mothers and men are meant to be fathers.

Irrelevant to ministry.

Do you have any basis for what you are saying is true, rather than the nice feelings?

It has nothing to do with feelings, nice or otherwise.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

I don't need to define those terms with precision, to know that our churches proclaim the same gospel, nurture the same faith, serve the same communities. If you look at what I do, and what my male colleagues do, there might be nuanced differences across the denominations (Catholic priests probably hear more confessions, for example, and your governance structures I believe give your priests more administrative responsibility), but there is no fundamental difference of principle in how we conduct our ministries. Preaching, administering the sacraments, leading people in prayer, pastoral care, and so on, are not things which set us apart.

Matthew 7:15-20 was the passage I had in mind.

No, it most certainly is not. Love is not mostly a feeling. It is a consistent commitment to building up those around us.

And do you imagine that the ordained life involves self denial and mortification of the flesh? That it "feels good" most of the time?

Irrelevant to ministry.

It has nothing to do with feelings, nice or otherwise.

Well, your post ignores the question and does not give an answer. What is the basis for your position?

The Bible says to be instant in season and out of season always ready to give a reason for the hope that you have. If you refuse to answer, how can you be trusted as a minister?

What I see in Christianity today is more Free Masonic thought rather than Christian humility. The error of the Free Masons is indifferentism. It doesn’t matter what you believe in as long as you believe in a higher power, a grand architect of the universe.

Sounds pious but is really a refutation of God and an elevation of the human intellect above God. Christianity can be a part of Masonry, but is subservient to it. That is straight up Luciferian teaching. We can be righteous apart from Jesus, so we no longer worship Him, but sit in judgement of Him. Masons make themselves look good, but like Satan as an Angel of light, they have the original lie told to Eve. Ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil. It is absurd for a Christian to be a Mason as it would to be a Christian witch or warlock. That is the lie of indifferentism.

How do you know that you are not doing the same thing? All denominations are basically the same and it doesn’t matter what we believe as long as we say it is Jesus. Is it really, and how do you know?

Jesus called His Apostles and commissioned them to build His Church. He sealed them with tongues of fire in the Holy Spirit and they went out baptizing in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, teaching to obey all that Jesus commanded them. We had the Apostolic faith once delivered to the saints. The history is there for anyone to read.
Then men had it in their minds to rebel against the apostolic faith. They said we don’t have to submit our wills to the Church, we can do things ourselves, the way we want, as we read the Bible.
How do you know that is not what you are doing?

What reason do you give for your faith? You say that you cannot define it with precision. Why not? Is God the author of confusion? We can’t know what He wants, so we just go forward with a guess? That does not sound very trustworthy

Would you clear the confusion ?

 

[Paidiske]

Well, your post ignores the question and does not give an answer.

If I have not yet made it clear enough, I reject the premises of your line of questioning. That is why I am not keen to engage in discussion on your terms.

How do you know that you are not doing the same thing? All denominations are basically the same and it doesn’t matter what we believe as long as we say it is Jesus. Is it really, and how do you know?

Having an ecumenical sensibility - one which recognises that more than one denomination can be valid - is not the same as indifferentism.

Are our denominations different? Yes, of course. Do those differences matter? Yes, they do. Do they mean that we are fundamentally practicing a different faith? No. They are second-order issues, at best.

Then men had it in their minds to rebel ... How do you know that is not what you are doing?

Absolutely nothing I have done - in seeking ordination, or in ministry - has been in rebellion to the church. It has been in submission and obedience to it. I did not, after all, ordain myself.

What reason do you give for your faith? You say that you cannot define it with precision. Why not?

No, I said I didn't need to define such things as the gospel, for the purposes of this discussion.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

If I have not yet made it clear enough, I reject the premises of your line of questioning. That is why I am not keen to engage in discussion on your terms.

Having an ecumenical sensibility - one which recognises that more than one denomination can be valid - is not the same as indifferentism.

Are our denominations different? Yes, of course. Do those differences matter? Yes, they do. Do they mean that we are fundamentally practicing a different faith? No. They are second-order issues, at best.

Absolutely nothing I have done - in seeking ordination, or in ministry - has been in rebellion to the church. It has been in submission and obedience to it. I did not, after all, ordain myself.

No, I said I didn't need to define such things as the gospel, for the purposes of this discussion.

If we do not define terms, how can we have a discussion? We would leave ourselves in confusion. Is that your desire ?

If I were unbaptized seeking to know the Christian Faith, and I see you unwilling to define terms, it would give me pause.

How can I trust you to be a minister of the Gospel which you refuse to define? Do I place my trust in your view of yourself as a minister? I don’t think so, as that would have me trusting man (in this case woman) rather than God.

If you cannot tell me what you are talking about, how can I trust anything else that you say you are talking about?

We do not hide our light under a bushel, if indeed we have light

You need not speak with me any longer. I’ll leave this between you and God. You need to come to terms with your position that you purport to be a minister of a gospel that you will not share.

May the Holy Spirit lead you into all truth.
Good day

 

[Paidiske]

If we do not define terms, how can we have a discussion? We would leave ourselves in confusion. Is that your desire ?

I have no desire to have the discussion you want to have. You want to interrogate, for example, whether I really proclaim the gospel? I know I do, and I have no desire to endlessly justify myself to a hostile anonymous random on an internet forum, simply because you, as a man, want to make a point about my inferiority as a woman. Go find someone else to denigrate.

If I were unbaptized seeking to know the Christian Faith, and I see you unwilling to define terms, it would give me pause.

But that is not the conversation we are having.

 

[Love365]

Ever heard of black saints such as St. Moses the Black, St. Benedict the Moor, St. Martin de Pores, St. Josephine Bakhita. You can also include St. Augustine & St. Monica since they were from North Africa.

Thank you

 

[The Liturgist]

It really frustrates me when people attack my friend @Paidiske and her ministry. If it wasn’t for her there would be no one to serve her parishes. She does excellent work and has been a good friend ever since I joined the forum however many years ago. We don’t agree on everything, for example, she finds the subject of the liturgical history of comparative lectionary systems to be boring (if I recall, she used that exact adjective the last time I tried to show her some interesting details concerning some obscure historical lectionaries), whereas I get a thrill down my spine just looking at the lectionaries of two different liturgical rites and comparing them. Which more than probably makes her the more normal of us.

Also, there is no one on Christian Forums more knowledgeable about safeguarding and professional pastoral care across the broadest range of situations in terms of avoiding the abuse of people in the Church than @Paidiske

 

[The Liturgist]

Ever heard of black saints such as St. Moses the Black, St. Benedict the Moor, St. Martin de Pores, St. Josephine Bakhita. You can also include St. Augustine & St. Monica since they were from North Africa.

The Coptic Orthodox monastery of St. Anthony’s in Southern California has a beautiful new cathedral dedicated to St. Moses the Black, which was built adjacent to a tree where Thrice Blessed Bishop Karas (or he might be St. Karas by now), the founder of the monastery, who was initially Hegumen and later made a suffragan bishop to the Diocese of Los Angeles had a vision of St. Moses. I have been there on his feast day, in 2015.

 

[RileyG]

The Coptic Orthodox monastery of St. Anthony’s in Southern California has a beautiful new cathedral dedicated to St. Moses the Black, which was built adjacent to a tree where Thrice Blessed Bishop Karas (or he might be St. Karas by now), the founder of the monastery, who was initially Hegumen and later made a suffragan bishop to the Diocese of Los Angeles had a vision of St. Moses. I have been there on his feast day, in 2015.

Very cool!