There is HOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[gtsecc]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEdyIvvUJB0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEdyIvvUJB0)

[JasonV]

While I am a High Churchman, I don't think we should insult our Low Church brothers and sisters with tripe like this.

[gtsecc]

While I am a High Churchman, I don't think we should insult our Low Church brothers and sisters with tripe like this.
a bit over the top.
I am not sure it is meant as an insult.

[RadixLecti]

Is this in response to the RCC approval of the Latin mass? Does anyone know if there any anglican churches that conduct mass in Latin?

[gtsecc]

Is this in response to the RCC approval of the Latin mass? Does anyone know if there any anglican churches that conduct mass in Latin?
I doubt it.
So, I suppose the question is, "how does this affect us?"
If you realize that We said "And with thy Spirit,” for 500 years, yet many started saying "And also with you" after Vatican 2, we see just how Roman Catholic liturgical reforms have a strongly influenced us.

[EvAng]

Reminds me of what Spurgeon preached in 1865:

"Ritual performances are very pretty spectacles for silly young ladies and sillier men to gaze upon—but there is no shadow of spirit or life in them. The High Church ritual does not look like a Divine thing—on the contrary—if I stand among the throng and gaze at all its prettiness, it looks amazingly like a nursery game, or a stage play! Lack of taste, you say. Not so, I reply. My eyes admire your glittering colors and the splendor of your services is taking to me, as a man. I enjoy the swell of your organ and I can even put up with the smell of your incense (if you buy it good), but my spirit does not care for these fooleries—it turns away sickened and cries, "There is nothing here for me. There is no more nourishment for the spirit in all this than there is food for man in a swine’s trough!" The words of Jesus Christ are throughout unceremonial and unformal—they are spirit and they are life—and we turn to them with all the greater zeal after having seen enough of your childish things! On my Lord’s words I fix my hope in the battle now waging with ceremonialism and I wish that all ministers of Christ would scorn to use any other weapons. I know the talk is that we ought to vie with the false churches in the beauty of our services—but this is a temptation of the devil! If the simple preaching of the Cross will not attract the people, let them go away. Let the Lord’s servants renounce the sword and shield of Saul and go forth with the Gospel sling and stone! Our weapons are the Words of Jesus—these are spirit and these are life. Architecture, apparel, music, liturgies— these are neither spirit nor life. Let those rest on them who will—we can do without them, by God’s help. Our sires, in the Puritan age, fought and won the battles of Christ without these things. In later days Whitfield stirred his age with nothing but the Word of God. Rowlands and Christmas Evans roused the men of Wales with no attraction but the Cross."


A Blow for Puseyism (http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols10-12/chs653.pdf)

[gtsecc]

Obviously, I disagree with you.

[gtsecc]

The first thing we must understand is that Anglo-Catholicism isn’t in any way a matter of taste or style. If that were the case, we could well be accused of being frivolous and superficial. One of the fatal flaws of the mega-church movement (Willow Creek, and places like it) is that it caters to that true American god, choice. The logic runs like this:
More people like Rock bands than classical music. More people like a casual atmosphere than a formal one. Most people are not intellectual and they watch TV more than they read books, so sermons should be anecdotal, funny, and sentimental. It is easier to read a power-point presentation on a screen than fumble with a prayer book. Therefore, we will make church look just like what people want. It’s as simple as that. We will do it, and we will grow.
The fatal flaw in this strategy is that giving people what they want is an ever-moving target. Tastes change more quickly than the weather. Furthermore, giving people what they want may not be helpful. In fact, it may even be destructive. I am convinced, that in terms of what passes for Christianity in many places, it is destructive because it re-enforces the subtle, and yet ever so insidious notion, that worship is about us. Worship is never about us. It is never about what we can get out of it. It isn’t a product to be produced nor consumed, bought nor sold.
Likewise, our Catholic faith is not about taste. It is not simply that we like incense while others do not (smoking or non-smoking? the waiter might ask). We are Catholics and we worship as we do because we have a profound belief that God demands our best efforts, and that a liturgy that has come down to us unchanged in its essentials for two thousand years is a gift. We are stewards of a treasure, not innovators who must tinker and experiment.
So if not about preference nor taste, what defines us? To answer this question, we must go back nearly 170 years ago. A group of Anglican priests and scholars began what would eventually be called The Oxford Movement on July 14, 1833. Having studied the Fathers of the ancient church, they determined that the Church of England, in all of its essentials, was the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. It was not, as some of their contemporaries believed, merely the Department of Religion of the English Government. They set about writing pamphlets called Tracts for Our Times (from whence they received the nickname, Tractarians). These helped to educate the public to certain truths that had, for various reasons, been neglected or forgotten.
First among these truths was that Anglicans are not Protestants. The Reformation, they taught, over-reacted to medieval abuses and did away with much that was essential to the nature of the church. Those Anglicans who emphasized a Reformation heritage were mistaken, and Anglo-Catholics had a missionary task in restoring a proper understanding to the whole Communion.
Secondly, Anglo-Catholics rejoiced that the Apostolic Succession had been preserved for us, thereby insuring the validity of our Sacraments. Without this gift of Holy Orders, an ecclesial body could not properly be called church per se.
Thirdly, they cherished the gift of Common Prayer. Archbishop Cranmer’s liturgy in English (particularly the 1549 book, which is the basis of our own parish eucharist) clearly preserved the teaching, shape and practice of the Holy Eucharist of the ancient church.
In short, Anglo-Catholics believe and worship as they do because they are heirs of the very same church that was founded by Jesus Christ. This is a very different thing than picking a church that makes us "feel good." We reject choice because there IS no other choice! Like Simon Peter, we say to Jesus, Lord, to whom (else) would we turn? You have the words of eternal life.
This is but a brief summary. I should like to write more in the future about the implications of our Catholic Faith, but let it suffice for me to close with this: If we don’t know who we are, we can’t fulfill our mission. We are called to make Christ known, and to bring others into the Kingdom. That is why we must be sure of our foundational understanding of the faith, for we cannot call others into that which we don’t fully understand. Let us continue the vibrant Anglo-Catholic witness that we have inherited, preaching the Word urgently, administering the sacraments faithfully, serving the poor obediently, and praying for a continual growth in our own understanding, that we may show forth in our lives what we proclaim with our lips.
Blessings to you all!
Father Sanderson

[PaladinValer]

This is the last sort of thing STR needs now.

Let's drop the liberal vrs. conservative, Anglo-Catholic vrs. Evangelical, and high-church vrs. low-church debates, issues, and angers. They are only going to detract our attention to what is really most important: the reorganization of STR into a vibrant and much more friendly community.

[Albion]

Is this in response to the RCC approval of the Latin mass? Does anyone know if there any anglican churches that conduct mass in Latin?

Outside of monastic communities where it sometimes happens, I know of only one. But no, it has nothing to do with what Rome's view of the practice is at the moment.

[gtsecc]

This is the last sort of thing STR needs now.

Let's drop the liberal vrs. conservative, Anglo-Catholic vrs. Evangelical, and high-church vrs. low-church debates, issues, and angers. They are only going to detract our attention to what is really most important: the reorganization of STR into a vibrant and much more friendly community.
Agreed, but the video is funny as noted by the music choice, and pictures.

[RadixLecti]

Reminds me of what Spurgeon preached in 1865:

"Ritual performances are very pretty spectacles for silly young ladies and sillier men to gaze upon—but there is no shadow of spirit or life in them. The High Church ritual does not look like a Divine thing—on the contrary—if I stand among the throng and gaze at all its prettiness, it looks amazingly like a nursery game, or a stage play! Lack of taste, you say. Not so, I reply. My eyes admire your glittering colors and the splendor of your services is taking to me, as a man. I enjoy the swell of your organ and I can even put up with the smell of your incense (if you buy it good), but my spirit does not care for these fooleries—it turns away sickened and cries, "There is nothing here for me. There is no more nourishment for the spirit in all this than there is food for man in a swine’s trough!" The words of Jesus Christ are throughout unceremonial and unformal—they are spirit and they are life—and we turn to them with all the greater zeal after having seen enough of your childish things! On my Lord’s words I fix my hope in the battle now waging with ceremonialism and I wish that all ministers of Christ would scorn to use any other weapons. I know the talk is that we ought to vie with the false churches in the beauty of our services—but this is a temptation of the devil! If the simple preaching of the Cross will not attract the people, let them go away. Let the Lord’s servants renounce the sword and shield of Saul and go forth with the Gospel sling and stone! Our weapons are the Words of Jesus—these are spirit and these are life. Architecture, apparel, music, liturgies— these are neither spirit nor life. Let those rest on them who will—we can do without them, by God’s help. Our sires, in the Puritan age, fought and won the battles of Christ without these things. In later days Whitfield stirred his age with nothing but the Word of God. Rowlands and Christmas Evans roused the men of Wales with no attraction but the Cross."


A Blow for Puseyism (http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols10-12/chs653.pdf)



The ritual and ceremony has incredible meaning when it is surrounded by deep Christian faith, so if the faith isn't there then the ritual is empty. A lot of times people forget that the bible is full of ritual and ceremony, not just in the Temple, but also in the way Christ implements the Eucharist, Baptism and other sacraments. Also many people fail to realise that the High church traditions are rooted in ancient Jewish traditions. For example the High church tradition involves a processional with a cross at the begining and the Bible at the end. Even today, in Jewish synagogues there is a procession where the Torah scrolls are carried around the congregation. The torah scroll is later read from a platform (usually in the center of the room) called the bemah, almost exactly the same way the high church tradition reads the lectionary in the center of the congregation.

[Albion]

The ritual and ceremony has incredible meaning when it is surrounded by deep Christian faith, so if the faith isn't there then the ritual is empty. A lot of times people forget that the bible is full of ritual and ceremony, not just in the Temple, but also in the way Christ implements the Eucharist, Baptism and other sacraments. Also many people fail to realise that the High church traditions are rooted in ancient Jewish traditions. For example the High church tradition involves a processional with a cross at the begining and the Bible at the end. Even today, in Jewish synagogues there is a procession where the Torah scrolls are carried around the congregation. The torah scroll is later read from a platform (usually in the center of the room) called the bemah, almost exactly the same way the high church tradition reads the lectionary in the center of the congregation.

Keep in mind that Low Churchmen are ritualists. Yes. They do follow ritual, enough of it that it could curl the hair of any Pentecostal or Baptist. It's ceremony, not ritual, that I think you have in mind.

[EvAng]

Obviously, I disagree with you.

What's new then ;)

[Secundulus]

The last part of that video could have been filmed at my Anglican Church any Sunday or Holy Day of Obligation throughout the year.

[gtsecc]

worth a bump

[RadixLecti]

worth a bump

you crack me up ^_^

[Wigglesworth]

I liked the Happy Days part, and I smiled with Father Benedict.

:)

[gtsecc]

still worth a bump

[Colabomb]

who cares what rome is doing. Last I checked I was an Anglican.

And while you like to do the rome catches a cold joke.....

We were doing mass in english a good several hundred years before rome was. So..... no, we don't just copy rome.

[gtsecc]

who cares what rome is doing. Last I checked I was an Anglican.

And while you like to do the rome catches a cold joke.....

We were doing mass in english a good several hundred years before rome was. So..... no, we don't just copy rome.

How can you not understand this?
No one thinks we just copy Rome.
It is a great thing that we have held the Mass in English for 500 years - I often say that myself. But, I am not sure what that has to do with my point, or your rebuttal to what you think my point is.

It is foolish to say, "Who cares what Rome thinks."
But, that is another thread.

I did not say, “We should care what Rome thinks,” but something slightly different – “We should care what Rome does.”

I then gave an example of something Rome did which affected us – the use of “And also with you.” Heck, this even affected Hollywod. Were it not for Vatican 2, Star Wars would have used different wording in some parts.

[Albion]

How can you not understand this?
No one thinks we just copy Rome.

He probably was just misled by that silly editorial by Father Sanderson which did seem, yes, to make imitating Rome a virtue.

[Colabomb]

How can you not understand this?
No one thinks we just copy Rome.
It is a great thing that we have held the Mass in English for 500 years - I often say that myself. But, I am not sure what that has to do with my point, or your rebuttal to what you think my point is.

It is foolish to say, "Who cares what Rome thinks."
But, that is another thread.

I did not say, “We should care what Rome thinks,” but something slightly different – “We should care what Rome does.”

I then gave an example of something Rome did which affected us – the use of “And also with you.” Heck, this even affected Hollywod. Were it not for Vatican 2, Star Wars would have used different wording in some parts.

Glen, you've said countless times that if Rome Catches a cold, we sneeze.

[gtsecc]

Glen, you've said countless times that if Rome Catches a cold, we sneeze.
Which is undeniable - weather someone likes it or not, what they do affects us.

[SirTimothy]

I love "And Also with you." Not quite as much as: "The Lord is Here/His Spirit is With us" however.

[Colabomb]

Which is undeniable - weather someone likes it or not, what they do affects us.

And Vice versa.

How about instead, when the Church gets a cold, the Church sneezes.