FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome (/showthread.php?tid=48770)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6


Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - devotedknuckles - 09-11-2011

hk didnt convert with strings attached. as far as i know he converted period. c.s. lewis was a prod. and died a prod. a belfast prod to boot.. i dont repsect a man that saw the truth daily hitting him int he face yet refused it daily.
i have no plm with anglicans converting. i have a plm with backroom deals that came along with it.



Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - Someone1776 - 09-11-2011

(09-11-2011, 01:45 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: hk didnt convert with strings attached. as far as i know he converted period. c.s. lewis was a prod. and died a prod. a belfast prod to boot.. i dont repsect a man that saw the truth daily hitting him int he face yet refused it daily.
i have no plm with anglicans converting. i have a plm with backroom deals that came along with it.

There are negotiations going on with the SSPX and they are within the church.  I don't see a problem doing the same with Anglicans.  The Anglicans coming into the church seem far less problematic than most of the people we already have here. 

You're right C.S. Lewis frustratingly never made the leap to the Church despite the fact that he should have known better.  The reason I compared him to these guys to him is because they have made that realization. 


Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - jovan66102 - 09-11-2011

C.S. Lewis was never an Anglo-Catholic. He was a solid, Low Church Anglican who was never able to shake His Church of Ireland roots and the Church of Ireland has never, to my knowledge, had an 'Oxford Movement' or 'Anglo-Catholic Revival'. It always was, and remains, much more 'protestant' than the Church of England. In fact, the anti-Catholic '39 Articles' weren't protestant enough for them, so they added three more making 42 to make them even more anti-Catholic.

Were he alive today, I'm sure he would be horrified at what the CofE and the official Anglican Communion have become, but rather than swimming the Tiber, I think he would probably join one of the Low Church, 'evangelical' split offs or one of the 'semi-schismatic' groups like the 'Southern Cone' or one of the other dioceses (such as Sydney, Australia where they now allow lay people to 'lead the Communion Service'!) which were represented in the Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008.




Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - Maldon - 09-11-2011

I am a convert from Anglicanism. My only practising Anglican family members were old aunts of mine who were High Anglicans. Were it not for them, no relative of mine would even have mentioned Christianity for anything other than insult. I owe them much of my conversion. They are all dead now.

The Traditional Anglicans converting to Rome are converting to the Catholic Church, period. Their 'priests' must all be ordained, their bishops as well, they must all be catechized, etc. But make no mistake. These people are on your side, DK. They are a total asset to the Catholic Church, MUCH better than MANY current Catholic clergy and laity.

However, D.K, I totally agree with you about C.S. Lewis. And his former best friend, J.R.R. Tolkien was so amazed that a man such as Lewis refused to cross the Tiber, that in the end it practically ended their friendship. They remained cordial terms, but Tolkien was hurt, amazed and distressed by Lewis' Low Church loyalties.

When the pope made the distinction between "christian churches" on the one hand and mere "communities" on the other, he was indirectly pointing out his priorities: getting groups of people who understand the sacraments into the mainstream of the Catholic Church as soon as possible. This means the Traditional Anglicans, the SSPX, and eventually the Eastern Orthodox, who will be last and hardest to get in.


Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - patricia m. - 09-11-2011

Yes, their priests must be ordained and their bishops also, but their bishops won't become catholic bishops; they'll be downgraded to regular priests because bishops cannot be married at all. Rome is willing to accept the married priests but not at all married bishops. And this "deal" is very clear, it's valid only for the Anglican that convert. With time and new generations of Anglican-Catholic the old Anglican habits and costumes will die out and the Catholic ones will prevail. That's the idea.


Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - Unum Sint - 09-11-2011

(09-11-2011, 02:50 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: C.S. Lewis was never an Anglo-Catholic. He was a solid, Low Church Anglican who was never able to shake His Church of Ireland roots and the Church of Ireland has never, to my knowledge, had an 'Oxford Movement' or 'Anglo-Catholic Revival'. It always was, and remains, much more 'protestant' than the Church of England. In fact, the anti-Catholic '39 Articles' weren't protestant enough for them, so they added three more making 42 to make them even more anti-Catholic.

Were he alive today, I'm sure he would be horrified at what the CofE and the official Anglican Communion have become, but rather than swimming the Tiber, I think he would probably join one of the Low Church, 'evangelical' split offs or one of the 'semi-schismatic' groups like the 'Southern Cone' or one of the other dioceses (such as Sydney, Australia where they now allow lay people to 'lead the Communion Service'!) which were represented in the Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008.

This makes no sense to me as I have read many of his books and the way he treats the Sacraments (even though in Anglicanism are null and void) he refers to them that would be completely alien to any type of low church Anglican of his time or even today. So he may have been a solid member of low church but he def did not held those believes.


Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - jovan66102 - 09-11-2011

(09-11-2011, 03:26 PM)Unum Sint Wrote:
(09-11-2011, 02:50 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: C.S. Lewis was never an Anglo-Catholic. He was a solid, Low Church Anglican who was never able to shake His Church of Ireland roots and the Church of Ireland has never, to my knowledge, had an 'Oxford Movement' or 'Anglo-Catholic Revival'. It always was, and remains, much more 'protestant' than the Church of England. In fact, the anti-Catholic '39 Articles' weren't protestant enough for them, so they added three more making 42 to make them even more anti-Catholic.

Were he alive today, I'm sure he would be horrified at what the CofE and the official Anglican Communion have become, but rather than swimming the Tiber, I think he would probably join one of the Low Church, 'evangelical' split offs or one of the 'semi-schismatic' groups like the 'Southern Cone' or one of the other dioceses (such as Sydney, Australia where they now allow lay people to 'lead the Communion Service'!) which were represented in the Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008.

This makes no sense to me as I have read many of his books and the way he treats the Sacraments (even though in Anglicanism are null and void) he refers to them that would be completely alien to any type of low church Anglican of his time or even today. So he may have been a solid member of low church but he def did not held those believes.

Have you read 'Mere Christianity' in which he espouses the very typical Low Church heresy of indifferentism? No Anglo-Catholic of his time would have written that. They were actually pretty EENS except that they believed in the Branch Theory, whereby Anglicanism and Orthodoxy were the other 'Branches of the Catholic Church'.


Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - Someone1776 - 09-11-2011

My father banned C.S. Lewis and his "protestant pagan" Narnia from my home growing up so I have read very little of his stuff. Sorry for thinking he was a high Anglican.



Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - Laetare - 09-11-2011

(09-11-2011, 03:47 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: My father banned C.S. Lewis and his "protestant pagan" Narnia from my home growing up so I have read very little of his stuff. Sorry for thinking he was a high Anglican.

Indeed, the poor soul was basically a latitudinarian. The introduction to Mere Christianity shows this quite well. He says that arguing over the blessed Virgin's status may be seen by some as an heroic defense of an assailed and noble lady, whereas others will view it as the righteous throwing down of idolatry. In the end he basically concludes it doesn't matter all that much. Indifferentism was very big in his philosophy, though only within the context of Christianity (if that matters).


Re: Canadian Anglicans vote to unite with Rome - Unum Sint - 09-11-2011

(09-11-2011, 03:35 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(09-11-2011, 03:26 PM)Unum Sint Wrote:
(09-11-2011, 02:50 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: C.S. Lewis was never an Anglo-Catholic. He was a solid, Low Church Anglican who was never able to shake His Church of Ireland roots and the Church of Ireland has never, to my knowledge, had an 'Oxford Movement' or 'Anglo-Catholic Revival'. It always was, and remains, much more 'protestant' than the Church of England. In fact, the anti-Catholic '39 Articles' weren't protestant enough for them, so they added three more making 42 to make them even more anti-Catholic.

Were he alive today, I'm sure he would be horrified at what the CofE and the official Anglican Communion have become, but rather than swimming the Tiber, I think he would probably join one of the Low Church, 'evangelical' split offs or one of the 'semi-schismatic' groups like the 'Southern Cone' or one of the other dioceses (such as Sydney, Australia where they now allow lay people to 'lead the Communion Service'!) which were represented in the Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008.

This makes no sense to me as I have read many of his books and the way he treats the Sacraments (even though in Anglicanism are null and void) he refers to them that would be completely alien to any type of low church Anglican of his time or even today. So he may have been a solid member of low church but he def did not held those believes.

Have you read 'Mere Christianity' in which he espouses the very typical Low Church heresy of indifferentism? No Anglo-Catholic of his time would have written that. They were actually pretty EENS except that they believed in the Branch Theory, whereby Anglicanism and Orthodoxy were the other 'Branches of the Catholic Church'.

I do not think you can hold a person accountable for his entire theological world view from one book. That is why I referred to the body of his work and not to "mere Christianity" which to me was more of a philosophical approach at the Christianity in general rather than a summary of Christian dogma.

Also I never said he was a high church Anglican or even an Anglo-Catholic though his views by the end of his life tend to lean very much on the Catholic view rather than the protestant one. I would say that Lewis was a person that much like Merton kinda goes off the rails in parts one because he simply did not know any better and the other because he got him self lost. All through history you have people like this specially when it comes to deal with with the Church and what it believes, you got Tertullian, Origen and the people that make Origen look bad which were his followers.