Where does it end.

[Colabomb]

Anglicans are being weeded out for our "untraditional" beliefs.

However, Roman Catholics believe that the Papacy is indeed Clear and Obvious in the Tradition of the Church. Do you guys want to throw out those untraditional Orthodox?

What about the Orthodox who see counciliar government with Rome as a mere figurehead? Gonna throw out those ridiculous Catholics who made a mere metropolitan into the vicar of Christ on earth?

When is it going to stop?

As far as I can tell, this board is going to become OBOB2.

I am making one last plea to not throw us out. I want nothing but the best for this board. I want fellowship between the Ancient Churches of God, I don't want to debate our "Controversial" topics. I had no intention of even bringing them up. I don't believe The ordination of women should be forced upon those who would reject it, so why would I make an issue of it on the forum?

DOn't be afraid of us, we are your brothers, not your enemies.

[WarriorAngel]

You are talking about things that have been known in history of the Church vs a new tradition of man.

Neither Tradition NOR Scripture will back up some beliefs such as gay married Bishops...[Read Romans 1 and the Didache] .AND women clergy are again UNKNWON traditions...through out an almost entire 2000 years of history.

So this is exactly what was concern for this place..
That many would try to promote new tradtions. Which is why I would like to have no discussions about it whatsoever.

Yes, the Pope has been lead since Peter was given the keys.

The EO respectively understand he is FIRST among equals, even if that is their preference...it still remains that the Pope as the Roman Patriarch has a high position...

WHICH is not debateable.

It was not something that was created over night. IT is in fact a position of direct Apostolic succession.

[WarriorAngel]

I am making one last plea to not throw us out. I want nothing but the best for this board.

Then please drop the subject!!!!

[xristos.anesti]

I am not sure where you are getting this from Colabomb. Really, I do not think that anyone is being weeded out. The forum is called Apostolic Churches, we all - even with rather different ecclesiology can fairly easy assume who should be able to argue in here - for regardless of the differences no-one should really question things that we all agree on - or are rather similar in.

Anyway, I do not think that anyone is being weeded out.

Many years.

[Colabomb]

I am not sure where you are getting this from Colabomb. Really, I do not think that anyone is being weeded out. The forum is called Apostolic Churches, we all - even with rather different ecclesiology can fairly easy assume who should be able to argue in here - for regardless of the differences no-one should really question things that we all agree on - or are rather similar in.

Anyway, I do not think that anyone is being weeded out.

Many years.

But you don't understand. There are threads saying that those of us in Communions that ordain women, should not be allowed on the forum. We are being told to go away. Look at the forum, you will see what I mean.

[Colabomb]

You are talking about things that have been known in history of the Church vs a new tradition of man.

Neither Tradition NOR Scripture will back up some beliefs such as gay married Bishops...[Read Romans 1 and the Didache] .AND women clergy are again UNKNWON traditions...through out an almost entire 2000 years of history.

So this is exactly what was concern for this place..
That many would try to promote new tradtions. Which is why I would like to have no discussions about it whatsoever.

Yes, the Pope has been lead since Peter was given the keys.

The EO respectively understand he is FIRST among equals, even if that is their preference...it still remains that the Pope as the Roman Patriarch has a high position...

WHICH is not debateable.

It was not something that was created over night. IT is in fact a position of direct Apostolic succession.



The Orthodox recognize him as a patriarch. However he has no authority outside of his patriarchate.

We agree 100%.

I move that these untraditional Catholics, who deny the obvious teaching of Church tradition be moved from the board. (sarcastic of course)

And btw, it is your belief that Women's ordination has no backing in Scripture and Tradition. We obviously disagree. I would never knowingly go against Scripture.

Why should your interpretation of Tradition trump ours?

Like I said before, noone has brought the subject up besides those who are afraid of it. There is not a single thread on this board arguing for ordination of women, we respect and honor your beliefs. We simply ask that you respect and honor ours.

[Colabomb]

Then please drop the subject!!!!

If I drop the subject, I will be voted off the forum.

[Colabomb]

For your reference.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5708275-wiki-apostolic-churches-male-bishops-succession.html

[xristos.anesti]

But you don't understand. There are threads saying that those of us in Communions that ordain women, should not be allowed on the forum. We are being told to go away. Look at the forum, you will see what I mean.

There were couple of suggestions made and these were negated by the majority - and even if they weren't - the ordination of women, even though it is an unknown practice of the Orthodox Churches - is an operational reality of the Anglican Churches and as such will be vehemently argued against/for when the occasion arises - but regardless of this fact, this forum belongs to all those who accept whatever the term Apostolic carries and means - Anglicans are part of that. This has been my understanding from the beginning.

Many years.

[Colabomb]

There were couple of suggestions made and these were negated by the majority - and even if they weren't - the ordination of women, even though it is an unknown practice of the Orthodox Churches - is an operational reality of the Anglican Churches and as such will be vehemently argued against/for when the occasion arises - but regardless of this fact, this forum belongs to all those who accept whatever the term Apostolic carries and means - Anglicans are part of that. This has been my understanding from the beginning.

Many years.

Thank you brother. I do not intend to be so confrontational about these things. But I am simply afraid of censorship. I don't want to be shut off from my bretheren, and if it means temporary argument it is worth it.

I am in general a very peaceful person.

[WarriorAngel]

The Orthodox recognize him as a patriarch. However he has no authority outside of his patriarchate.

We agree 100%.

I move that these untraditional Catholics, who deny the obvious teaching of Church tradition be moved from the board. (sarcastic of course)

And btw, it is your belief that Women's ordination has no backing in Scripture and Tradition. We obviously disagree. I would never knowingly go against Scripture.

Why should your interpretation of Tradition trump ours?

Like I said before, noone has brought the subject up besides those who are afraid of it. There is not a single thread on this board arguing for ordination of women, we respect and honor your beliefs. We simply ask that you respect and honor ours.

Therin lies the issue.

Tradition means what was always done and upheld which includes the writings of the ECF's which back up scriptures, and give us a fulness of understanding the entire history of the Church.

SO taking apart scriptures and giving it new meaning won't work IF you do not have historical references to back it up.

IE...no where in close to 2000 years of history will you ever see women priests and Bishops....

SO it is of the opinion that this is a NEW understanding of the Anglican Church is not backed up by neither the entire history of the Church nor in fact scriptures.

A deaconess was already explained in history as to a woman who helped other women in baptism.
IN fact, there were even rites of initiation that have been maintained that show us they were not ordained as priests.

You will not find an ordination of a woman anywhere...until modern relativism.

SO until you can show me clear documentation of any early teachings to include the ordination of women that is not spurious, then the it is not Traditional.

[xristos.anesti]

Colabomb,
It is your right to defend what you believe in.

I believe that (as I said before) we should not argue among ourselves (Orthodox among Orthodox, Roman Catholics with Roman Catholics, Copts with Copts, Anglicans with Anglicans etc...) in regard to issues that are internal issues - as that should be done in either private or in particular forums - but, regardless of that - we are what we are and it is our right and even more - a duty to defend what we are - I do not think that censorship in this regard would pass.

Happy birthday.

Many years.

[Colabomb]

Colabomb,
It is your right to defend what you believe in.

I believe that (as I said before) we should not argue among ourselves (Orthodox among Orthodox, Roman Catholics with Roman Catholics, Copts with Copts, Anglicans with Anglicans etc...) in regard to issues that are internal issues - as that should be done in either private or in particular forums - but, regardless of that - we are what we are and it is our right and even more - a duty to defend what we are - I do not think that censorship in this regard would pass.

Happy birthday.

Many years.


i agree that there shouldn't be intradenominational debate.

But that is not what certain discussions are proposing. some are proposing that we not even be welcome on the board.

[xristos.anesti]

i agree that there shouldn't be intradenominational debate.

But that is not what certain discussions are proposing. some are proposing that we not even be welcome on the board.


Well, they will have a problem pushing that through the parliament.^_^

[WarriorAngel]

READ the OP and tell me where the Anglicans were not invited.

In fact, it was by specific request that they would be invited.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5486952-apostolic-churches-sub-forum-debate.html

[nestoj]

READ the OP and tell me where the Anglicans were not invited.

In fact, it was by specific request that they would be invited.
I to havn't seen this as forbiding entrance and posting to Anglicans. I thought it was about wheter they should argue among themeselves regarding their internal differences???

Is that right?

nestoj
God helps

[Colabomb]

READ the OP and tell me where the Anglicans were not invited.

In fact, it was by specific request that they would be invited.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5486952-apostolic-churches-sub-forum-debate.html

Sister, this is not about you, while i disagreed with some of the things you proposed earlier, I believe you have the best in heart for this forum.

I am talking about this.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5708275-wiki-apostolic-churches-male-bishops-succession.html

[Colabomb]

ANd I agree there should not be intradenominational debate. I have altered my position on that, after further thought.

[zhilan]

I don't understand why this is even an issue. We decided FROM THE BEGINNING that this forum was for Anglicans, Catholics, and Orthodox. Why are we trying to say only some Anglicans are "really" Apostolic. As far as I understand, the Catholics technically don't consider ANY Anglicans to have true Apostolic succession, but that is not the point of this thread. Obviously if we all agree with each other we would all be the same religion. Orthodox don't believe that there should be female altar servers, should we only allow Catholics of the Eastern Rite and those from Trinidine Latin Mass parishes to post?

Can we just drop this and go with what we started with??

[HyacinthBouquet]

Anglicans are being weeded out for our "untraditional" beliefs.

However, Roman Catholics believe that the Papacy is indeed Clear and Obvious in the Tradition of the Church. Do you guys want to throw out those untraditional Orthodox?

What about the Orthodox who see counciliar government with Rome as a mere figurehead? Gonna throw out those ridiculous Catholics who made a mere metropolitan into the vicar of Christ on earth?

When is it going to stop?

As far as I can tell, this board is going to become OBOB2.

I am making one last plea to not throw us out. I want nothing but the best for this board. I want fellowship between the Ancient Churches of God, I don't want to debate our "Controversial" topics. I had no intention of even bringing them up. I don't believe The ordination of women should be forced upon those who would reject it, so why would I make an issue of it on the forum?

DOn't be afraid of us, we are your brothers, not your enemies.

I think you are right. I wish I had never joined CF. I feel like I've walked into the middle of a battlefield. I've never come across these types of prejudices before. I cannot help feeling very insulted everytime I come to this forum. I'm out of here now.

Bye.
:wave:

[Mary of Bethany]

There were couple of suggestions made and these were negated by the majority - and even if they weren't - the ordination of women, even though it is an unknown practice of the Orthodox Churches - is an operational reality of the Anglican Churches and as such will be vehemently argued against/for when the occasion arises - but regardless of this fact, this forum belongs to all those who accept whatever the term Apostolic carries and means - Anglicans are part of that. This has been my understanding from the beginning.

Many years.

I completely agree with this post. There is no way we're going to agree on all things. But this is an "Apostolic Church" forum, which by definition includes the Anglican Church. If all in this forum had to agree on our own Church's definition of Apostolic Succssion then we'd each end up with our own forum, wouldn't we?

Mary

[Colabomb]

Agreed sister. That's all I want.