"One Holy Catholic and Apostolic"

[WarriorAngel]

Traditional should be in there.
Less confusion.

 

[Letalis]

"Traditional Apostolic Churches - This is My Body, This is My Blood"

It's pretty long.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Traditional Apostolic Churches - My Body, My Blood

OR just add on to what Letalis offered underneath..
Traditional Apostolic Succession.

 

[talitha]

hey, y'all, while I'm here, I just wanted to say that I applaud this effort to bridge a centuries'-old gap..... God bless you all.

tal

 

[RadixLecti]

hey, y'all, while I'm here, I just wanted to say that I applaud this effort to bridge a centuries'-old gap..... God bless you all.

tal

Thanks Talitha!

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

Here is PaladinValer's idea:

For a church or body to be considered Apostolic by this congregational forum, it must:
It must proclaim an adherence to the authority of Holy Tradition
It must proclaim the necessity to have Apostolic Succession
It must proclaim a sacramental/mystical system of Grace
It must have an episcopal polity of church governance
It must have a traditional interpretation of the Nicene Creed (ie: Baptism for the forgiveness/remission of sins is seen literally, and is not up for contradictory reinterpretation
This would include the "Vatican" Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Anglican Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, the various Old Catholic churches, and many of the various Continuing Anglican churches. This list is in no particular order.

Would this not also include the various Scandinavian Lutheran Churches that claim Apostolic Succession?

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

How about;
This is My Body, This is My Blood, Apostolic.




Apostolic is not a Title, it is a type.
Apostolic means the Pope, Patriarchs, Bishops, priests and such that have been in one line of ordination since the Apostles.

So I think the names of the Churches who can attend should be immediately under the name of the Title.
TO avoid confusion.


Now, I have a question...one I need to address...
WAS Luther a monk, or a Bishop?
Lutherans feel they are alike Apostolic.
However, Luther was the first reformer, so I tend to think his changing things from Tradition is not Apostolic.

In manner of the duetero's, purgation of sort, Saints and so forth, prayers for souls etc.

They do not follow Tradition, and so I would like to bring this up as to why they are not considered Traditional Apostolic Churches.

Hey...maybe that should be the title...

Traditional Apostolic Churches.

Lutherans do follow tradition. We just try not to let it cloud salvation, and there are a good number of Lutheran Churches that claim Apostolic Succession! I would hope that they would be vaild enough for people who subscribe to the belief of apostolic succession.

 

[Iosias]

This is My Body, This is My Blood

Why has this phrase been used?

 

[Colabomb]

What about those of us who use Tradition as a valuable asset in understanding Scripture, but not as infallible in its own right?

What about those of us who value Episcopal Government, but do not believe that the Sacraments are bound to the Line of Bishops?

Will we be allowed on this forum?

 

[xristos.anesti]

Catholics - the all of them.

 

[Colabomb]

Catholics - the all of them.

Including me?

*smiles at his new friends*

 

[RadixLecti]

What about those of us who use Tradition as a valuable asset in understanding Scripture, but not as infallible in its own right?

I think you may have stronger feelings about scripture than you think. (just a hunch ) In STR you did a great job advocating the creeds, and those are all examples of Church Tradition. The decisions of the seven Ecumenical counicils are also examples of Church Tradition. These are all based on Scripture, but a superficial reading of scripture could easily lead someone to a different conclusion. So when we hold strongly to the Creeds we are holding to the value of Church Tradition. Even the compilation of the Bible could be seen as an example of Church Tradition. We believe the Holy Spirit was guiding the Church to determine what should and should not be in the Bible, in the same way it guided the Church in making a definitive statement about the Trinity.

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

Does the Episcopal Church have Apostolic Succession? They ordain women and homosexuals, are they not validly ordained in the apostolic sense and only Episcopal male priests are truly ordained? Serious question I would like to hear the views from the RCC and the EO church on churches who claim apostolic succession, and also ordain women.

 

[RadixLecti]

Would this not also include the various Scandinavian Lutheran Churches that claim Apostolic Succession?

It might (and maybe moravians too) I think it all depends on how that church views the necessity of apostolic succession, and if they have a desire to form a closer relationship with Christians from other Apostolic Churches (which is required for anyone to post, Apostolic or not).

 

[Colabomb]

I think you may have stronger feelings about scripture than you think. (just a hunch ) In STR you did a great job advocating the creeds, and those are all examples of Church Tradition. The decisions of the seven Ecumenical counicils are also examples of Church Tradition. These are all based on Scripture, but a superficial reading of scripture could easily lead someone to a different conclusion. So when we hold strongly to the Creeds we are holding to the value of Church Tradition. Even the compilation of the Bible could be seen as an example of Church Tradition. We believe the Holy Spirit was guiding the Church to determine what should and should not be in the Bible, in the same way it guided the Church in making a definitive statement about the Trinity.

Oh I definitely believe the Holy Spirit did Move the Church at certain times and places for His purposes of course. When I was speaking of Church Tradition, I was speaking more of Quotations from the Fathers, which I know is not the whole of Tradition.

 

[WarriorAngel]

hey, y'all, while I'm here, I just wanted to say that I applaud this effort to bridge a centuries'-old gap..... God bless you all.

tal

Thanks.

Does the Episcopal Church have Apostolic Succession? They ordain women and homosexuals, are they not validly ordained in the apostolic sense and only Episcopal male priests are truly ordained? Serious question I would like to hear the views from the RCC and the EO church on churches who claim apostolic succession, and also ordain women.

Does the AC have two Churches in itself?
I heard they did...one is broke off to a more relative stance of breaking Tradition.

I do not consider ordination of women to be Tradition.

It is against Tradition, and therefore it is not a part of the Traditional Apostolic Churches in this sense.

Oh I definitely believe the Holy Spirit did Move the Church at certain times and places for His purposes of course. When I was speaking of Church Tradition, I was speaking more of Quotations from the Fathers, which I know is not the whole of Tradition.

WHen we term the use of Traditional, we mean absolutely and fully.
AND I restate that a Bishop of the Church with succession must be schismed for purpose of the forum.

Everyone will eventually claim succession ...which is not the tour de force of the forum.

Traditional, Apostolic, And Succession through a Bishop upholding absolute Traditional values.

Since the Church never throughout an entire history condoned women priests, or Bishops, it will stand that we will not accept Churches that have recreated the Anicent Traditions to conformity.

You may come in and ask questions...if you have a new tradition not based on the ancient teachings...outside of scriptures...
But the church itself is not considered APostolic.

Tertullian and MArcion, and Arian were all priests or Bishops at one time...
BUT they were removed for following heretical concepts that was never taught since the Apostles.

That will be our litmus test.

Absolute Authority in Tradition must be maintained.

 

[Colabomb]

I guess, paladinvaler, one of the loudest voices for the forum you now Enjoy... will be out.

 

[RadixLecti]

Does the AC have two Churches in itself?
I heard they did...one is broke off to a more relative stance of breaking Tradition.

The Anglican Communion (all Anglicans in Communion with Canterbury) is divided into 38 provinces. When the North American provinces began to ordain women to the priesthood and episcopacy, there was massive fragmenting and many bishops left and formed "continuing" Anglican churches. These are conservative churches lead by bishops that left the North American provinces because the NA provinces no longer held strictly to Scripture and Tradition.

The vast majority of Anglicans adhere strictly to Scripture and Tradition (the male episcopacy, traditional interpretation of scripture, the sacraments etc.)

Most of what you read in the news about the AC comes from places like the US, UK, Canada, and Australia. However, more Anglicans live in Africa than all these places combined.

It is also worth noting that there are many Anglicans in the Episcopal Church that hold to Church Tradition.

 

[WarriorAngel]

The vast majority of Anglicans adhere strictly to Scripture and Tradition (the male episcopacy, traditional interpretation of scripture, the sacraments etc.)

LINK
The medieval Western uses (Paris, Sarum and so on), of which people at one time made much for controversial purposes, were in no sense really independent rites, as are the remnants of the Gallican use at Milan and Toledo. These were only the Roman Rite with very slight local modifications. From this conception we see that the practical disappearance of the Gallican Rite, however much the archeologist may regret it, is justified by the general principle that rite should follow patriarchate.


We see also that the suggestion, occasionally made by advanced Anglicans, of a "Uniate" Anglican Church with its own rite and to some extent its own laws (for instance with a married clergy) is utterly opposed to antiquity and to consistent canon law. England is most certainly part of the Latin patriarchate.When Anglicans return to the old Faith they find themselves subject to the pope, not only as head of the Church but also as patriarch.

What I am saying is the local Church schismed, and the 'broken off' from them are not.

So...the variations not in line with the immediate Church of England are like reformed Churches.

Breaking off immediate succession.

SO who is in, the purest sense, the Church of England?
Parishes thereof are acceptable, break off's are not.

Does this make sense?

 

[Secundulus]

Does the Episcopal Church have Apostolic Succession? They ordain women and homosexuals, are they not validly ordained in the apostolic sense and only Episcopal male priests are truly ordained? Serious question I would like to hear the views from the RCC and the EO church on churches who claim apostolic succession, and also ordain women.

The Traditional Anglican Communion broke communion with Canterbury in 1978 specifically over the ordination of women. We do not think it is valid.