"One Holy Catholic and Apostolic"

[WarriorAngel]

If I'm understanding correctly, that sounds fine to me. You mean that Anglicans can post as long as their posts are in line with Tradition? I think Adherance to Tradition is going to be absolutely necessary in this forum because it is the largest thing we all have in common.

Also could you explain what you believe the difference is between a schism and a break off? For Example, do you consider the Polish National Catholic Church a schism or a break off for the purposes of this forum.

A schism breaks off the Church with a Bishop ...
For the sake of this forum they did not create a new Church, but disagreed whereas they kept the same Church Traditions and Bishops.

I make the distinction that Luther removed the Traditions and kept only some. Therefore Reforming Christianity.

I think the dueterocanicals are important books. I also think keeping in line with the ancient concepts is what we agree on.

friend Warrior Angel

So, if I understand the quoted portion of your post, your litmus test for membership in this forum is adherence to Tradition as defined by the Roman Catholic Church

And:
This portion quoted is from your link, which directs one to the New Advent Roman Cathoilc Encyclopedia, and clarifies you position perfectly

Well, I enjoyed my short time here......

AND therein lies the issue that you totally misunderstood.

The quoted part that I used was to show that the Anglican Church did not reform the Church as opposed to Luther.
I used the quote only to show the CoE was already in existence and under the Patriarch aka Pope and therefore did not create a New Church.
I was showing how the Anglican Church has Apostolic history.

I hope you understand the differences I was getting at.

I would be fine banning the topics of women Clergy (Which I support) and non-celebate homosexuals (Which I don't support) for the sake of unity, simply because they are so very controversial.

Thank you, that's all I request.
Too controversial. I think the Anglican Church needs to hash that out in their private space.

I don't mind making some concessions for unity. I am just trying to ensure that this board becomes a place of Equal footing, rather than one that has preferred positions.

For example, I don't mind discussing the Papacy on this forum, as long as I am not forced to believe it to be part of it.

Another Example, I believe the Validity of the Sacrament (Eucharist) is not necessarily dependant on an unbroken line of tactile succession, but rather on the intent of those partaking, and the Promises of God. I realize that I will be a minority on this board, but I don't think it fair to remove me when I agree with the other members of this board more than I disagree.

See what I am getting at? I really am looking for peace here, not confrontation.

You cannot be forced to believe, but we can discuss topics about the ancient Churches.

I really believe that someday the Churches will all unite, and the footing IMO should be about a variety of things that we hold similar and discuss the Traditions.

And we can also see how we have emerged and where we can go.

Its not always going to be rainbows, but no where else can we show prudence and discover so many things about each other..

Are we still discussing the name?

How about something based on Scripture which is directly relevant to Apostolic succession?

The part of Scripture which comes to my mind is Acts 1. We could grab some words from there...

How about 'His Office Let Another Take', or 'Witness to His Resurrection', or 'the lot fell on Matthias'.

How about 'Matthias's Lot'.

HEY, awesome idea.

 

[longhair75]

Friend Warrior Angel,

I did not misunderstand, your posts were more than clear.

 

[E.C.]

Ah, what a lovely way to start off a new forum.