why should I care

this post is just too long and too reddit autism languaged for me to want to read it

>>18080192
As said, incredibly based.

Hopefully the Church of England realizes their pick for archbishop was terrible and undo that mistake FAST.

>>18080192
Because everyone saw it coming and just talked about it. Funny seeing Reddit cry about it. All screaming that Anglicans just hate women

>>18080200
It's absolutely not going to happen, if anything it's going to turn even more woke in the next years.

>>18080206
Gonna go full speed into Church of Sweden levels of retardation.

File: 1000041203.jpg (188 KB, 890x643)

188 KB JPG

>>18080192
https://gafcon.org/communique-updates/the-future-has-arrived/
In GAFCONs own words:
>We reject the so-called Instruments of Communion, namely the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), and the Primates Meeting, which have failed to uphold the doctrine and discipline of the Anglican Communion. (I should mention the Lambeth Conferance is that Anglican Communion Con in England I mentioned previously)
>We cannot continue to have communion with those who advocate the revisionist agenda, which has abandoned the inerrant word of God as the final authority and overturned Resolution 1.10, of the 1998 Lambeth Conference.
> Provinces of the Global Anglican Communion shall not participate in meetings called by the Archbishop of Canterbury, including the ACC, and shall not make any monetary contribution to the ACC, nor receive any monetary contribution from the ACC or its networks.

GAFCON makes up 80-85% of International Anglicanism, which is about 85 million people.

No monetary contribution, no recognition of authority, GAFCON has cut all ties with the CofE and any church that remains in the Anglican Communion with them. This is a huge loss of UK soft power and a gut punch to finances.

>>18080192
Redeemed Zoomer must be crashing the fuck out.

>>18080192

>>18080214
I think he’s Presbyterian if I’m remembering right. It’d be worse if he actually was Anglican, he might rage quit at that point.

File: 1000040167.jpg (97 KB, 534x800)

97 KB JPG

>>18080194
Imagine if the Pope lost control over 85% of his church. It would be a catastrophic reordering of Christian power. Obviously global Anglicanism is nowhere near Catholicsm in terms of numbers alone, but 85% of their soft power just got cut from their body overnight. Do not underestimate the amount of money 85% of 85 million people worldwide generate, even if they are majority African.

It also remains to be seen if more churches join GAFCON. This announcement just happened today after all.

Serious question here.
Should GAFCON reach out to the Orthodox? Many Americans have flooded into the Antiochene Orthodox Church which is now majority Western here. (Some also join the Greek or Slavic churches but they retain their ethnic character.)

File: 1000041205.jpg (254 KB, 1080x701)

254 KB JPG

>>18080216
https://x.com/redeemed_zoomer

He's been in full crash out mode after the announcement of the female "Archbishop".

He says picrel without even an ounce of self reflection that this argument would apply to the protestant reformation and the Pope. This is glaringly obvious to me and I'm not even Catholic. Idk why he has made it his personal mission to prevent the Anglican schism as a Presbyterian but as of today RZ has been irreversibly BVCK BRQKEN by VNGLICVN VFRICVN BVLLS

File: 1000040172.jpg (355 KB, 736x1101)

355 KB JPG

>>18080228
I can relate, myself and my parish being former Anglican and now Eastern Orthodox. (Although we are ROCOR not Antiochain) I think the number 1 denom to convert to EO are in fact Anglicans, so I hope they do.

I would say if I were in a position of authority within the Church I'd be extending an olive branch to GAFCON and offering an alternative interpretation of their heritage of faith.

>>18080194
Because you are negro and rooting for death of whity.

File: 1000041208.jpg (620 KB, 3840x2160)

620 KB JPG

This is fun. Because this is happening in real time we get to watch Churches like the ACNA who were previously out of Communion with the Anglican Communion for years due to the same issues now unite with GAFCON making it grow even larger.

England eternally BTFO forever </3

Why would any biblically serious Protestant stay Anglican? The ship sailed a long time ago, it's like an American politician starting a party over reverting to British rule.

>>18080317
Nobody told the niggers the CoE was just a social club for the English upper class

I wonder what based NT Wright thinks of this.

>>18080317
They should begome

>>18080317
Because a lot of conservatives float this retarded idea that breaking away from a degenerate church is bad. Being nice and quiet in the pew and continuing to go along with all the blasphemous things these people do is going to make them stop, somehow.

I personally think it's a psyop to keep people from going back to actual Christianity, but that's neither here nor there.

>>18080231
Would he have been content if they declared the Church of England schismatic, the See of Canterbury vacant, and appointed their own Archbishop and demanded that Charles III recognize him?

>>18080231
He's mad about Anglicanism, but mention Orthodoxy around him and he'll start absolutely foaming at the mouth. According to RZ if you say "Patriarch" three times into a mirror at midnight John Chrysostom will appear and drag you to Mt. Athos (or Hell, which to him is probably preferable).

>>18080192
>Claims continuity with the original Anglican Church
>Not Anglos
One of these two groups should probably change their name

File: jews real jews.jpg (56 KB, 1131x624)

56 KB JPG

>>18080192
>How is there not a thread about negroes disagreeing with feminists about how to correctly be jewish

>>18080192
>She's a pro-abortion, pro-LGBT, self-hating white woman
>>>/pol/tranny

>>18080192
>African Anglican churches
White men will not touch GAFCON with a ten foot pole

>>18080192
So you're telling me the church of England has divested itself of millions of Africans?

Will it increase interracial christian couples?

>>18080192
We had a small thread about it earlier but it died
At this point I'm waiting for the CoE's official response to the events.

>>18080243
>>18080228
Why so many into the Antioch church?

>>18080317
Because the part about gay being bad is a minor part (mentioned clearly only once) while the parts about not disobeying your bishop is mentioned dozens of times.

File: 1000040150.jpg (127 KB, 736x733)

127 KB JPG

>>18080823
This is unfortunately just true, not everything is a smear from the opposite side.
>>18080826
ACNA is joining
>>18080827
Yes and those Africans were the only brakes on the liberalizing train, as for whatever reason they typically tend to be when it comes to Churches
>>18080940
From what I've seen so far, their response yesterday was putting a freeze on ordaining homosexual clergy. Too little too late I'm afraid.
>>18081101
Antioch and ROCOR are the only bodies in EO that allow Western Rite. For example, my old parish that was WR ROCOR that used to be Anglican before our conversion used the Divine Liturgy of Pope St. Gregory the Great, whereas most other EO parishes use either St. Basil's Liturgy or St. John Chrysostom, but they all recognize the legitimacy of Pope St. Gregory's, even if at times they protest to the "Latin influences" in western EO churches.

The only difference between ROCOR and Antiochian WR is the esthetics imo. In ROCOR it still looks and feels Eastern Orthodox, whereas in Antioch WR it can feel very Catholic. Anyone in the west who converts to EO and wishes to feel Anglican/Catholic will almost always become Antiochian.

>>18081128
>be ethnically anglo or English-American
>convert to a Slavic religion because it's trad
Peak clown world. I respect converts to Islam more. The obvious move is to become Roman Catholic or some other kind of Protestant.

>>18080192
The Anglican Communion needs this, it has been wrestling with this shit for decades now and maybe finally the majority of the church can leave the clearly heretical modernist segment in the dust. Anglicanism is dying a slow death in the first world because of this half-assed degenerate leadership, if the future of the church is in Africa then so be it.

>>18081128
none of those anons, I'm inquiring at an OCA parish that was started by like 20-30 episcopals who all decided to leave for Orthodoxy. I'd like to check out a WR parish, there aren't any in my state though.

Curious to see how England reacts to losing 85% of their church body though, or if they will care.

>>18080894
GAFCON is almost entirely black and the ACNA always has black bishops consecrating its Churches so this will unironically make Churches like The Episcopal Church in the US much whiter, particularly as it is slowly merging with the United Methodist Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

>>18080222
anglicanism has never been centralized like the catholic church once the colonies gained independence from britain so that's not really a correct way to look at it. like the episcopal church in the US full on blesses same sex marriages for over a decade now. the anglican communion seethed and gave them a slap on the wrist that did nothing.
all this will do is just strengthen the reformers hand among the western churches that remain, welby and co. spent years hemming and hawing to try to keep the african churches in the fold. if they go they have much less reasoning to deny further movement on lgbt stuff anymore

>>18081136

It’s very mutt like behavior. I get it. But I don’t at the same time. It takes a strong lack of knowing oneself or interest to join any of the Orthodox churches and not being of that ethnicity.

If you really want to”tradition” find yourself a TLM and enjoy. It’s far better than Divine Liturgy in every way. Not to mention the entire history of the Catholic Church is far more based than Orthodoxy. The Catholic Church is what preserved Europe and it’s amazing how quickly some of these mutts convert and accept Orthodoxy cause they heard its le trad and le based somewhere online.

>>18081162
To add to this. Technically there isn't any reason why an Anglican primate can schism for the communion. As they work the same way as Eastern Orthodox bishops. Where it is clearly absurd is when they start trying to make their own schism churches in Primate's territory. Example from Mbanda's (head of Gafcon) church in Highwood Illinois that is featured on his wikipedia page. He has no authority to do that and it's patently absurd. Particularly because he has a female priest in that picture kek. Clearly this is about his and the Nigerian's egos more than anything else.

File: Archbishop Elpidophoros, (...).jpg (92 KB, 873x482)

92 KB JPG

>>18081136
From our (that is EO) POV, the West was Orthodox at a point in time. I will even grant that a lot of EO churches are fairly nationalistic like the Russian, Greek, and Serb Churches, but you have to understand that unlike the west, these churches had to deal with Islamic, and then Communist oppression. Many many martyrs were made in the 20th century. It has less to do with a "slavic" religion and more to do with the truth. It's a hard pill to swallow at first.

As for being EO in the west, as previously mentioned, we have Western Rite. Some Western Rite parishes are so Western that the priests wear clerical collars (ex. picrel). People who reduce Orthodox conversion to aesthetics have no idea what they're talking about. I invite them, like always, to come and see for themselves with their own eyes.

>>18081170
If you are of non-Irish descent from the British Isles TLM isn't trad either, as that mass was invented during the counter reformation. Pre-Norman mass was actually done in Old English and vernacular mass was pretty common in the British Isles during the Middle Ages. There was only a period of about 300-400 years (tops) of Latin mass in England before it went back to vernacular. If you are American, most trad service is weirdly enough the no-music congregationalist service, which is unironically older than the Tridentine Mass (even if it's boring). The Anglican service is also older than the TLM, which is kind of wild too.

>>18081174
Issue is theological, in that EO doesn't have Augustinian and general Latin West philosophy going on. So it's not the same religion under the hood. Much like Syriac Christianity, which is older than EO, isn't the same under the hood.

>>18081174

Yes because the Orthodox have too much pride about themselves. It’s that pride which put you guys in persecution for as long as it did because your fathers no longer wanted to be a part of the true church and served to break it apart which isn’t biblical at all.

Just look at what happened in Egypt. It was a Christian land but they had too much pride on their backwards view of Christilogy and now they’re nothing but a small minority in their own country because they “knew better”. Worse they use the persecution as a means to manipulate themselves and others into thinking this adds to the credo if it being the true church.

No. All it does is show how your own arrogance and pride gets in your own way and causes you all to suffer as you have. And now you guys are trapped in this weak persecution complex from it all which only further reinforces your shitty beliefs.

Sorry. But the Orthodox were pretty useless when it came to dealing with Islam and defending Christianity on the whole. If it weren’t for Catholics and the crusaders Christianity probably wouldn’t even be much of a thing anymore.

Wake up.

>>18081182
TLM was officially canonized in the 1500s but it is far older than that. So no you are incorrect. It dates back to the early church with minor revisions in between.

>>18081191
Eastern Orthodoxy is effectively the same religion as Methodism. Which is really funky when you look at both theologies. Kind of sad that the United Methodist Church and the Eastern Orthodox churches don't seem to notice this as they literally have like the same theology.

File: 1000040156.jpg (114 KB, 640x870)

114 KB JPG

>>18081144
My old parish was WR, I had to move for work and now attend a OCA parish but I enjoyed my time at the former. St. John Maximovitch was a huge supporter of WR and thought it was a beautiful expression of Western culture within the Church. If people truly wish their Church to feel Western, that option exists.
>>18081146
This is true, but it remains to be seen if more offshoots of Anglicanism in America and Australia who left before the GAFCON exist join GAFCON.
>>18081162
Of course, I was just using the RCC as a general example. Ironically, the Anglican Communion operated more similarly to EO autocephaly than it did Roman Catholic Papal Supremacy, the glaring difference being there was no enforced standard of practice. You have evangelical style contemporary worship, and you have traditional Catholic style worship in communion with one another.
>>18081170
Except TLM is being gutted everywhere in favor of Norvus Ordo, and TLM itself not even being that old. WR Orthodox parishes that use the Liturgy of Pope St. Gregory the Great are, in my opinion, truly an expression of the Western traditionalist faith.

>>18081195
This is such tradcath bullshit that is comical to see parroted. The Tridentine mass wasn't even the same mass as the one used in Northern Italy at the time of its implementation. The Gallic mass is also completely different.

>>18081189
>Syriac Christianity, older than EO
Lol
>>18081191
This is a lot of yapping that amounts to literally nothing
>>18081196
What in the hell am I reading dude, EO is effectively Methodist? I mean I like John Wesley's hymns like Iudema but give me a break dude.

>>18081191
This is a "Christianity caused the roman empire to collapse" tier argument.

Go read City of God before ever posting again. Empires rise and fall, independent of the truthfulness of a religion. American protestants dominating the world doesn't make Catholicism and Orthodoxy false.

>>18081202
What's extra funny about TLM is you can look at records from the British Isles and see that Latin Language mass was pretty new in the late middle ages and that they didn't really want to adopt the practices coming from Rome. Anglicanism and Presbyterianism seem to have roots back to the 11th century with intense local resistance to specific aspects of Roman liturgy, and monastics only really existing for a brief 300 year period.

>>18081204
LMAO

The only cope here is saying it was invented. Like yeah bro Catholics were just doing whatever for 1500 years then suddenly invented a super ancient liturgy for some reason.

It already existed and was celebrated but was standardized in response to protect the liturgy from Protestantism and further schism.

>>18081211
Theologically. The aesthetics of Christianity aren't the point anon. Theosis and sanctification are the same thing.

>>18081221
>The only cope here is saying it was invented. Like yeah bro Catholics were just doing whatever for 1500 years then suddenly invented a super ancient liturgy for some reason
Uh yeah. That's literally what they said at the council of Trent. It's literally in the records. Like why tf are the masses are different, let's make a standard one that is the same everywhere.

File: 1000041215.jpg (145 KB, 1280x720)

145 KB JPG

>>18081221
But TLM is not the same thing as Pope St. Gregory's Divine Liturgy. You can literally put the two side by side and notice the differences. The Western half of Christianity used to be a lot more "Eastern" than tradcats would like to admit. Interestingly enough, St. Gregory denied Papal Supremacy, and is quoted as saying if any Pope after him claims as such, they are "a forerunner of the Antichrist" lol
>>18081224
I assume you meant to say they aren't the same thing.

>>18081242
They are. Methodists just suck at explaining themselves and they should merge into Anglicanism or Eastern Orthodoxy depending on how they individually define sanctification.

File: 1000040153.jpg (99 KB, 735x1012)

99 KB JPG

>>18081246
Even if that were true, that would just mean they have a kernel of actual Christianity in their denomination. Anyone can extract this from scripture, Christ Himself says "ye are gods" when pressed on how He is God and human. Peter's epistles even go on to clarify that we become "partners in God's divine nature" in 2 Peter 1:4. That doesn't mean Methodists are somehow "Orthodox" it just means they actually read their Bible lol.

>>18081242
>>18081270
You guys changed your entire structure of liturgy and monasticism in the 1700s. Stop larping as trad. Your priests had short hair and different vestments until the 19th century. Primary sources document this. Your entire religion is just 19th century Russian romanticism.

File: 1000040667.jpg (188 KB, 500x685)

188 KB JPG

>>18081279
LOL this is so obviously false, you can simply look at Orthodox Bishop portraits to confirm this.

File: 1000040670.jpg (96 KB, 400x564)

96 KB JPG

>>18081279
Provide a "primary source" that Orthodox vestmants and hair (as if the hair even matters) were changed in the 19th century. I've never even come across this claim before, but it made me lol so thanks for that.

>>18080192
This is a huge story. It's important to also see that the same thing is happening in nearly every other denomination; and that nearly every other denominating will go through the same sort of schism. The world has been going down this path for the last 15-20 years, and it's probably unstoppable now

File: IMG_2179.jpg (340 KB, 704x1000)

340 KB JPG

>>18081288
Note the Tonsure and short hair on the Bishop. I can't pull your image on a search. Please identify it.

>>18081296
Are we talking about Russian orthodox, which was created in 1589 and is literally newer as a religion than the Amish, are we talking about the Kievans, or are we talking about the Greeks, who in their own murals had short hair? Slavs were literally Pagans until the 11th century anon. This is why the Orthodox position is so laughable as it's the Greeks who are actually the old ones, not you.

>>18081309
I dont have an issue with tonsure, and I also notice he has a beard, isn't that interesting?
>>18081318
I'm reading a lot of claims but none of these "primary sources" that I heard about.

File: IMG_2180.jpg (73 KB, 960x600)

73 KB JPG

Here is the current Archbishop of Athens. He is bald, but note the trimmed not long hair as instructed by Paul in 1 Cor 11. Also note his non-weird clothes. Because Russian and Ukrainian Orthodoxy isn't actually the ancient religion it pretends to be and its very noticeable when you look at current ancient Churches. Luther himself was born 100 years before the Russian Orthodox church was created. This is also bullshit as the Anglicans were involved with setting his stuff up in the early 19th century.

>>18080252
Nice English you fucking spic.

>>18081323
Primary source was Byzantine art from the middle ages showing completely different vestments. Can you provide any actual proof of the antiquity of your religion? Can you confirm are we talking about Slavic or Greek orthodox?

>>18081332
Russian church was under the Euchmentical patriarch before that. What point are you trying to make because the tradition was there beginning with kyiv in the 900s or so

>>18080231
Why do people actually listen to this twink? It's primarily zoomers, I assume?

File: 1000041219.jpg (2.05 MB, 3840x2160)

2.05 MB JPG

>>18081332
I don't understand, is your issue the Mitre? You realize he wears those vestmants too, right? LOL

Here is Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow side by side. What are you even TALKING about this is hilarious dude.

>>18080192

Mainline Protestants are starting to realize they can't win over both LGBT and blacks at the same time. The two cancel each other out.

>>18081341
The Slavis church does its liturgy in Slavonic not Greek. Your oldest point was Kiev in 988. That is two centuries after the Venerable Bede, and English Anglo Saxon monk, calculated easter for Western Christianity that is 391 years after Augustine of Canterbury, the original Archbishop of Canterbury was consecrated. The use of Sarum, which is an Anglican-Catholic liturgy still in use today was in use in 988. Just stop pretending your religion is ancient.

>>18081355
The physical stone chair they will consecrate that woman on is older than the first traces of the written language that Russian orthodoxy uses in its liturgy.

File: 1000041220.jpg (54 KB, 395x600)

54 KB JPG

>>18081336
Are we really doing this? Is this the best argument against Orthodoxy you people can come up with?

Wow look! It's Eutychius of Constantinople under the reign of Justinian the Great in the 500s. He's wearing "weird" vestments! Someone should also tell him the non-existent Russians have influenced him to grow his beard long!

This is comedy man keep going.

>>18081359
So because the slavs do their liturgy in a slavic language is evidence it's invented? Does my English Bible prove the Bible was invented when modern English was developed?

Hahahahahahahaha

>>18080192
Heretics doing heretic things.

>>18080192
>negro Anglicans
An oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp. Failure to maintain the proper definition of the body of Christ is the root of all the most troublesome heresy.

>>18081364
The physical building the woman Bishop has as her seat is 100 years older than the city of Moscow. Also note the hair. Not long. And where is the weird hat?

>>18081370
Point is the Slavs pretend to be sooo ancient and do their liturgy in Slavonic rather than Russian because muh ancient. But it's like if people did the liturgy in old english. At least the Roman Catholics have an explanation. This Criticism doesn't extend to Greek Orthodoxy, which does it in Greek, which makes perfect sense as they literally speak Greek.

File: 1000041224.png (432 KB, 640x368)

432 KB PNG

>>18081384
>hair not long
we aren't believing our lying eyes then I suppose
>the weird hat
You mean like picrel? LOL
>>18081386
I accept your concession

If GAFCON takes over are the Africans going to "we wuz English" like the Russians do about being Greeks?

>>18081395
That picture features a Latin Pope. Sanctus is a latin word Dimitri.

>>18081401
This may be surprising to hear but the Church was unified until 1054. Got anymore wise observations for me or are you done embarrassing yourself?

>>18081410
When the Greeks split. Obviously there was no Russian church in 1054. Your whole village was still pagan.

>>18080192
The real issue here (which most anons already know but those public figures in mainstream religion won't admit), is the growing push the edit out the 'problematic' parts of the bible.

The bible has clear prohibitions against certain acts; but people today feel that this is 'unfair'. So they are pushing churches to ignore these prohibitions in the name of unity or membership.

The schism happening right how will divide all Christian churches into two groups... those who believe the bible should not be edited down, and those who think it should.

>>18081396
>millions of Africans start wewuzzing as the heirs to Tudor England in some tropical or subtropical shithole
my sides

>>18081416
I'm not even Russian LOL I attend an American Orthodox Church that uses the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. Try again I'm sure you'll BTFO me if you keep trying!
>>18081418
So Christians and non-Christians then.

>>18081418
What is interesting is that it's highly specific about gay buttsex and it doesn't actually mention being lesbian, that being something they try and edit in. So maybe, if strictly Biblical, they should allow the blessing of Lesbian unions but not gay men?

>>18081427
What language is this "liturgy of St. John Chrysostom" conducted in at your church?

>>18081432
Jokes aside I believe Romans 1:26-27 explicitly names men and women participating in same-sex acts.

>>18081432
Oddly, for a very long time, neither religion nor the law thought that lesbianism existed.

>>18081435
What language do you read your Bible in?

>>18081359
Your argument is about language? Its still using the liturgy of John chrissosym

>>18081436
Which goes to the heart of the matter. On the one side you have the 1000+ year old bible which is absolutely clear, with no wiggle room; and on the other side you have people who think it's unfair that people are being punished for something which is, quite possibly, out of their control.

It is that battle between fairness and submission to authority which is creating the problem. It is part of the larger trend toward wanting to have the rewards/trappings of religion without the required effort/work (which, to be fair, most people including straight people already do to a certain extent)

But the LGBT issue is forcing it to the surface, forcing the question to be formally answered. And because there are two answers, all of Christianity will be divided into the two camps

>>18081441
>>18081442
Obviously in English, and my liturgy is in English, and so I consider it to be from when it was turned into English. I don't consider it to be the same as it was when it was in Latin. If the liturgy is translated or adapted it is a new liturgy. Your liturgy is probably from the 1990s. Russian liturgy is from the 1700s at the absolute earliest.

>>18081436
>>18081440
>>18081446
Romans 1:26-27 is not clear at all. Look at the Greek and then read it through Plato. It's super ambiguous in terms of Lesbianism as Lesbianism even existing is a new concept.

>>18081448
Let me help you
>I dont consider my Bible to be the same as it was in Greek. If the Bible is translated or adapted, it's a new Bible.

You are a moron.

>>18081454
Paul is referring to a specific temple prostitution practice involving castrated priests in Romans 1:26-27, look at acts 19. The buttsex references elsewhere are literally "men who lie with men" so it's very clear. But this isn't dispositive in Anglicanism as it has RCC style rules for interpretation.

>>18081460
What language larper? Answer my question. Also is it translated from Greek to that language or is it translated from Russian?

Damn it feels good to be a ACNAchad

>>18081467
Let's think, it's an American Orthodox Church, I'm an American, in America... I wonder what language that would be! Hahahahaha
>>18081469
Apparently ACNA is joining GAFCONs global communion

>>18081469
What even is the point of being an ACNA member when you are in schism and don't have real apostolic succession, and you have priestesses? Like do you believe that being under a Bishop in Africa makes you have apostolic succession somehow, when you are literally in a province? Like this refutes the entire argument that Anglicanism uses to justify its schism with Rome as it's my understanding you guys left the Episcopalians at a parish level (correct me if I am wrong) which literally defeats the entire basis of Anglicanism.

>>18081475
Look at it in the Greek. It is describing something involving metēllaxan which is weird. I also don't seriously care enough about are lesbians allowed or not the keep thinking about it. But it is clearly describing some kind of temple prostitution, perhaps the men and the women throw gay orgies for each other in a religious setting? It's weird and not clear wtf he is talking about unlike the very clear arsenikoitai in 1 Cr 6:9.

>>18081474
So it's not in the original Greek. You know the service in the Book of common prayer is a translation from a Latin service that was created in the 6th century right? And by your definition it's the same service used by Saint Augustine.

>>18081489
So a translation from Latin is correct but not from Greek?

File: my-anglican-response-to-l(...).png (183 KB, 640x640)

183 KB PNG

Would she be GAFCON

>>18080192
Timeline
>Murdering power-drunk obese King of England Henry VIII wants a divorce
>le Pope says no
>Henry spergs and seperates from the Roman Catholic Church
Ah yes lets not question this annymore and pretend henry came up with the idea and no one else had a problem with the church or the pope and john wycliffe hadnt been condemning it 200years earlier

>>18081358

This. As much as people want to pretend they're part of the same cause or fight. Blacks and LGBT will never attend the same church. Ever.

>>18080192
Well probably because they clearly stated its not a schism and theyre not leaving the church

>>18081508
rule 34 on Hyldi

>>18081522
But they are. I saw this 8-minute video yesterday, and it explains it well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMxOLiS9DOo

From what I gather, the bottom line is...
> the Anglican church is defined by communion/association in three ways
> the new group is breaking off communion in all three

So you can call it anything you want; but they have become and independent entity which different beliefs. It's a schism whether you call it one or not

>>18081522
Wrong, they declared themselves the actual Anglican Church, and the CofE to have departed from the faith.

Essentially GAFCON is calling the CofE and the wider Anglican Communion to be schismatics.

>>18081508
>rosary
>quoting articles of Canon
>African-Caucasian
She is the literal embodiment of GAFCON

>>18081511
Henry certainly took advantage of his current situation though.
>people are separating from the Catholics for theological reasons
>Henry says he wants a son but his wife isn’t giving him one and the Pope won’t let him divorce her
>uses preexisting infighting as convenient public excuse to schism and get his way, annulling his 1st marriage
>still doesn’t have a son with the new queen and divorces again
>third wife grants him a son, still divorces 3 more times

>>18081556
Bob Smith's New Baptist Church of Arkansas says the same thing about the rest of Christianity. Does it make it true?

>>18081578
Bob Smith's New Baptist Church of Arkansas doesn't have 85% of the laity supporting him

>>18081577
This is why the ToE doesn't really have a case against GAFCON and doesn't seem to want to try and make one, as by Anglican logic a national primate has to right to leave. However, this is also why the ACNA is just laughable as they aren't following this specific rule.

>>18081585
That already happened. All non-Episcopal protestants in America ARE lay led schismatics from the CoE. Also in the logic of Anglicanism if 99.99% of the lay leave but the bishop is still in the CoE the Bishop is still the Church. Same way it works in Roman Catholicism. You are using congregationalist/presbyterians ecclesiastically to try and justify something that on a fundamental level rejects that.

File: 1000039276.jpg (129 KB, 736x920)

129 KB JPG

>>18081578
That's not the point, the claim was that there wasn't an Anglican schism, there absolutely was.

As for who's claim is more right, I'm Orthodox, so I don't really give a shit. It's just entertaining to watch the CofE get BTFO for retarded decisions.

As far as what I'd want, I'd like to see the Eastern Orthodox Church bridge the gap with GAFCON, even though that is highly improbable if not impossible.

>>18081616
No no no, you misunderstand me. It's not the way it works in Roman Catholicism, because the Anglican Communion is structured more like Eastern Orthodoxy. The ABC is the first-among-equals, and the majority of bishops have declared the seat empty and schismatic.

>>18081624
Are you from an orthodox country?
>>18081626
Are you ACNA?

>>18081636
>Are you ACNA?
No, I'm LCMS, but I might become catholic or some kind of orthodox.

And yes, I do think I'm an armchair expert just because I watched all of the Ready2Harvest videos.

>>18081636
Oh Christ not this retarded argument again

I attend an American Orthodox Church.

>>18081553
based ready ready to harvest watcher

>>18081651
Ok. Well that's actually fair as it's in America which doesn't have an established church.
>>18081648
>LCMS
You guys claim to be Lutheran and to follow the bible but you practice closed communion. If you dropped the Lutheran from the name I would get it, but until you do it's very hard to take your denomination seriously. Plus you guys literally don't have Bishops. You should become Orthodox, Roman Catholic immediately. Like wtf.

>>18081648
Praying for you brother. Glad you’re on the path returning closer to God.

>>18081648
Stay where you are man. I'm not Lutheran, but LCMS is much closer to the actual faith than Catholicism, and it's miles closer than Orthodoxy.

Don't let the smells and bells fool you, they aren't it.

>>18081666
Thanks for proving my point, Satan.

>>18081768
LCMS isn't even valid Lutheranism anon. Just because a church is socially conservative doesn't mean it makes any sense at all on a theological level. Do you also say the same about unaffiliated Baptist Churches and Anabaptists?

>>18081768
>LCMS is closer
Even if I were to grant the Anglican view of apostolic Succession, meaning it can exist outside Christ's church, how in any way does that apply to the LCMS that doesn't even possess that much? Lmao

protestantism = retarded
therefore catholicism must be true

>>18081784
They don't worship saints so at least they don't have the "active idolatry" part going against them.

>inb4 it's veneration, not worship.
No. I can't speak for the Catholics though I think they have much the same thing, but I was once Orthodox and you literally have to pray to Mary in order to be saved. The Bible is clear as day on this, Acts 4:12 "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”. There's no, "Oh, and Mary, as well." tacked on there. It's idolatry plain and simple, and any church not practicing open idolatry is miles ahead of any church that is.

>>18081821
when has someone ever said grace originates from mary. she is an optional channel for grace.

File: XZoomie.png (76 KB, 340x240)

76 KB PNG

>>18080192
>bros.....

>>18081396
In real time, we get to watch this happen, such a blessing.

>>18081825
I was never a fan of going to Mary, for the same reason I wouldn't enjoy someone nagging my mother into making me do something I did or did not want to do.

>>18081821
It's a very technical point which gets lost in the 30-second sound bite arguments:
> people believe that 'saints' are people who have shown a special relationship with God
> Catholics believe in life after death; where some will spend eternity praising God
> invocation of saints is not praying TO saints, but asking these now eternal praying souls to put a good word in for you while they are praying

tldr:
> we ask the saints to pray to God for us, not that they have power themselves

>>18081821
Ok but like can you please convert to a form of Lutheranism that doesn't practice closed communion in the way LCMS does. It is heretical on like 10 levels, unbiblical, and against the entire spirit of the Protestant reformation and the solas.

youtube.com/watch?v=IMxOLiS9DOo

>>18081826
>Noooo you can't just leave, you have to accept the pro-choice, pro-gay marriage woman archbishop, I don't care if there's no mechanism to remove her from office if you aren't actually in the Church of England and just "in communion" with her, you have to because... you just have to!

>>18081841
What's wrong with closed communion and where does the Bible forbid it?

I think other protestants are way too loose with communion, and most don't even think it's the body and blood of Christ. Paul was pretty serious about it.

2025 - the day Protestantism died

Legitimately hilarious that the African bishops (who don't believe in real presence) are making this about the eucharist. Absolute clown world.

>>18081853
Notice how 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 says examine yourself. Not have a pastor examine you. Literally worse than the faggot shit going on in the Gay churches.

>>18081856
Both sides are clowns 2bh. I'm not even advocating Protestantism, we should just break from every church institution on the planet. They've all been pozzed.

>>18081864
>im not protestant
>argument that can only be made becauas of protestant-liberal society

>>18081825
>optional channel for grace.
No, not if you're Orthodox. You MUST ask for her intercession in order to fully participate in the liturgy, which you must do to be eligible for the Eucharist.

>>18081875
it would be heretical as an orthodox to assume that intercession is doubtful in any capacity.

In a world where it was not in the liturgy, you would be a informal heretic, but in a world where it is in the liturgy your heresy in shined upon by God. Either way you are doubting the truth of intercession.

>>18081839
Please see >>18081875
I'm well versed in the intercession vs actual prayer argument. As I said, I can't speak for the Catholics, but I imagine they have something similar to "Through the intercessions of the Theotokos, Savior, save us." in their Mass, as well.

>>18081891
the NO does have an intercession for mary and the saints in most masses, its not always in the mass though

"I confess to almighty God
and to you, my brothers [and sisters],
that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,
through my fault, through my fault,
through my most grievous fault;
therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers,
to pray for me to the Lord our God"

>>18081875
>>18081891
> You MUST ask for her intercession in order to fully participate in the liturgy, which you must do to be eligible for the Eucharist.
I was unware of that, regarding the Orthodox

>>18081864
Don't forget that Laurent Mbanda had partially said it was because female ordination at one point, which is again hilarious as he has ordained women in like the last 5 years kek. This is very transparently about him being a scammer.

either intercession is true inwhich case there is no harm in doing it or intercession is false and it shouldnt be done

There is no case where you should be offended as an orthodox that the liturgy has intercession in it

>>18081886
So, just like I was saying, you literally cannot be saved as an Orthodox Christian without calling on Mary. If somebody MUST be called upon in order for my salvation to be carried out, they are a name by which I am saved.

I forget which one it is, but there's a youtube priest you compares asking for intercession from Mary to applying for a job and asking the boss' mother to put in a good word for you. If I HAVE to ask both the boss and his mother, I'm not interviewing for a job with the boss, I'm interviewing with both of them.

>>18081917
it is possible to be orthodox without praying to mary, but everyone does it because its obviously better

You *can* live your whole life without ever wearing clothes, but everyone wears clothes. That does not mean that wearing clothes is necessary for living.

>>18081908
Glad I could help. I was Greek Orthodox for years and pondering over this is what made me decide to leave. I don't want anybody else going down the same path without knowing exactly what's going to be required of them.

>>18081917
This is why the reformation was unironically right. There are just 1.2 billion Catholics permanently seething about this and Orthodox shills take advantage of westerners lack of knowledge about Orthodoxy to shill their clownish Russian monstrosity.

>>18081875
Yes because it mirrors God asking Mary to incarnate. The Orthodox understanding is that God is obviously all powerful and *could* have incarnated without Mary's consent, but it would completely defeat the purpose of doing it in the first place.

God could have simply prevented Adam and Eve from sinning, but He loves humanity and desires our love as well. There is no love without choice. God needed consent, just as Eve consented to sin, just as Mary, the new Eve, consented to not sin.

Thats why we ask for Mary's intercession, and why she's so important to us.

>>18081926
if you percieve catholics to be seething about protestants who constantly call us heretics and hate us then you are delusional

>>18081921
No, it isn't. Ask your priest. I ended up talking to three who told me the same thing. To not call on Mary during the Divine Liturgy would be to purposely refuse to fully participate, and you cannot lawfully (there's probably a better term for it) receive the Eucharist if you have done so. Do you believe you can be a good Orthodox Christian without ever have partaken of the Eucharist?

>>18081862
If they don't believe they're eating Jesus' body, then it is a danger to them. "Being a Believer" isn't enough when people have different views on the Lord's Supper.

>>18081940
You are operating on the premise that intercession is a bad thing. The orthodox framework presumes that it is not harmful, so why would you want to abstain from it?

It is not NECESSARY but it is simply done, and to resist it is to object to it being good which would be a rejection of orthodoxy (im catholic btw so im just doing devils advocacy. but the principles are almost the same)

>>18081927
So is it optional, or is it mandatory? Can I refuse to participate in this part of the liturgy and still rightfully receive the Eucharist? I'd love to hear your opinion because three Orthodox priests (including a monk) have told me absolutely not.

>>18081954
Why would you be able to recieve the eucharist if you reject intercession

>do not intercede
you are in heresy because you think it is harmful

>do intercede
Its not necessary, but you acknowledge it is a pious practice so you do it

>>18081944
Yes which is why YOU WARN them prior in the service. You don't examine them because you don't know what the fuck is going on inside their heads. Your church would deny Luther, Paul and Christ himself eucharist.

>>18081930
Thank you for your input Caiaphas.

>>18081952
I'm operating on the premise that intercession is a bad thing when it becomes a mandatory part of salvation. It absolutely is necessary, if it wasn't I probably would have stayed in the church. When it becomes a mandatory practice for me to call on other names besides Christ's to be saved, it is a huge problem. Try as you might, I have yet to see somebody square that circle with Acts 4:12.

>>18081965
>Catholics are jewish authority
This ia lutheran error. You would reject moses if you saw him, which is why you won't be saved.

>>18081966
Why would intercession EVER be bad in any case if it was true

if it was true, than why would it be bad for it to be necessary?

you are only rejecting intercession in the mass because you reject intercession in general

if intercession was objectively true you wouldnt have any problem with it being in the mass

>>18081967
Do you pray to Moses too?

>>18081957
So in reality is is necessary. What you're saying is I don't have to do it, but if I don't I'm a heretic. I believed the Nicene Creed, I simply had a problem with Mary being a MANDATORY part of my salvation. You can say she's not, but I'm taking the word of several priests I spoke to in person over an anonymous user of a Mongolian underwater basket-weaving forum.

>>18081980
The entire point of being a Orthodox or Roman catholic is to just trust the plan and not ask any questions. Your attitude isn't the correct way to examine their religion.

>>18081983
And if your religion that claims to be Christian can't stand up to basic Biblical questioning, it's false.

>>18081980
Im saying in an alternative universe where intercession was not in the mass, but you thought it was pious practice you would not be in heresy

but in this alternative universe, you would still reject intercession as maybe idol worship, so essentially you are potraying the problem as the mass, but in reality your problem is the practice itself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMzyMK07mo0
Zoomerism 2.0 just dropped

>>18081910
speaking of female ordination weren't there still a group of holdouts the CoE was allowing to keep banning female priests in their dioceses in England? I imagine they have to schism or cuck out now given the archbishop is a woman you can't fudge things like they did before

>>18081993
I am not an orthodox or a Roman Catholic. I am just explaining, as a Protestant, that their Christianity doesn't have the same hermeneutics as sola scriptura Protestantism. Anglicanism is also not sola scriptura and doesn't have the same hermeneutics as it. For ourposes of this thread in Anglicanism they have Article VI:
>Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation
>Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church
Notice how its not that scripture contains everything to run the church, or for all policies, but that it's enough for an individual themselves to be saved. Big difference.

>>18081997
No, my problem is the practice only when it becomes a mandatory part of salvation. The Bible clearly states there is only one name under heaven by which we are saved. If I have to, read this very carefully, have to call on another name to be saved, that is a clear violation of Acts 4:12. Like I said in an earlier post, I asked several priests about the issue and all of them gave me a flat no, you cannot receive the Eucharist without calling on Mary in the Liturgy. If any of them had said yes, I'd probably still be Orthodox, but that isn't the case. You must call on another name to receive salvation in the Orthodox church, which makes it heretical.

>>18082034
Yes so my argument is true. You reject the practice itself, but you are just using all this junk justification.

>>18082019
Depends on lots of factors. Like why exactly they hold that belief. On a theological level MBanda's help with the ACNA doesn't actually make a ton of sense and this is more political, as he has every right as a primate to leave the communion. Like if it's at a parish level they have absolutely no authority to leave their Bishop, the ACNA is clownworld stupidity, wracked with scandals (they keep hiring former Catholic priests that are literal pedos), and based on a rejection of the fundamental justification for why Anglicanism exists in the first place. But if its a primate splitting that just is how the Anglican cookie crumbles. Like they set it up the way they did to allow such a split, and there is nothing fundamentally wrong with it happening.

>>18082038
>>18082034
You guys have different hermeneutics and are talking past each other. Questions for both of you:
>does the bible require intercession from it's text alone

>>18082055
i dont believe in sola scriptura

>>18082062
I know. But can you explain it to him that way? Or can you explain what Church tradition needs to be added to scripture to justify it? Like I am not arguing against you or him. I am just pointing out that he is clearly arguing sola and you aren't, and you should be truthful if it's just a church tradition he has to accept. On his end he should realize the bible itself is a church tradition he has to accept.

File: 2e70a31a6cea66c5c92a27c03(...).jpg (169 KB, 720x960)

169 KB JPG

>>18082034
I understand where you're coming from, and your concern, and trust me I was raised protestant and had the exact same issue, but in the Liturgy we simply ask for Mary's prayers, the same goes for the Saints and the Angels in Heaven.

This line of argument can be applied to other aspects as well
>do I NEED to believe in the real presence in the eucharist as well to be saved
Technically no, not in the legalistic sense. It's understood that anything you don't personally understand or comprehend is taken with the faith that the Church is correct in practice, so a better way to say it would be
>you need to partake in communion, but take it on faith that the Church's understanding of it is the correct one.

So applying this to the intercession of Mary in liturgy, you can have doubts, you can wonder to yourself if this even does anything at all or if Mary is indeed praying for you, but you do it anyway because you trust the Church. I had this same view of icons when I first started attending an Orthodox Church, it felt weird, I didn't really like it, and I didn't understand why it was even necessary. I realized over time that the line of thinking "do I NEED to do this" is an entirely protestant way of thinking.
>do I NEED to baptize
>do I NEED to partake in communion
>do I NEED to believe these things in the way the church does

Put your faith in the Church, and the same men who debated on and chose the canon of scripture, are also trustworthy when it comes to tradition.

File: trad cath.jpg (24 KB, 503x610)

24 KB JPG

>>Murdering power-drunk obese King of England Henry VIII wants a divorce

>>18082076
no. if he is going to use protestant presuppositions he cannot come to orthodox conclusions. There is no reason to argue on that basis.

>>18082082
Not catolick that's just agreed history so sorry!

>>18082076
>the bible itself is a church tradition
No it isn't. It may be passed down through the Church, but the bible is the word of God. Its history between its writing and today is relevant only as its history between its writing and today. It is not a "tradition".

>>18082098
>it's the word of God
Does that include the parts where Paul says "this is just my personal opinion dont take it as divine law"?

>>18082089
Roman Catholicism does this all the time and they have tons of wild beliefs, but they always find a way to justify it in a sola scriptura way when pressed. Why should orthodoxy not apply rigorous analysis to its theology? I think it is perfectly reasonable that if God is real then understanding what he asks from us should be given as serious consideration as possible.

>>18082102
there has never been made any argument that contradicts what paul said, and so it should be treated as though it were infalliable

>>18082108
We are justifying it in a sola scriptura way to appease your benefit. Catholics dont need to do that we choose to do that.

I am telling this orthodox man the reason he cant accept orthodox is because he is thinking like a protestant. to entertain his protestant thinking is worthless and even harmful.

>>18082102
This has always been the funniest part of growing up mainline Protestant in a Evangelical area where people literally quote passages out of context. I also like when they quote a part of the old testament, usually about Israel, that has been nullified by something in the New Testament as if that didn't happen.

>>18082116
Have you considered that it's also just big brain to do so and in the tradition of Thomas Aquinas's steelman arguments?

>>18082102
There is no such part.
>>18082078
This is a profanity which exposes the author of this human tradition. Nobody is to be worshipped but God, nobody is to be invoked but God, and, assuredly, faith is to be placed in none but God. He is a usurper who would have himself be believed, as though he were God, but God alone is He in whom we place our faith. If God says it, we must believe it, if man says it, by what authority does he proclaim it? How shall men be made equal with God, or the foundation of faith? It is an old lie, "the same men who debated on and chose the canon of scripture". How are they not ashamed to pretend God was subordinate to their false authority? The canon of scripture was chosen by God who authored it, it is to be believed because God is its author, and every human word is to be conformed to it, and not the other way.

File: 1000040168.jpg (77 KB, 736x981)

77 KB JPG

>>18082108
Completely different framework. Orthodoxy doesn't desire no presume to even be able to explain the exact workings and miracles of the all knowing all powerful Creator.

Again I'll repeat
>Do I NEED to do this for salvation
Is super legalistic and arguably talmudic. The better question is
>Do I possess greater discernment than the father's of the Church whom I trust to give me the correct scriptures but not trustworthy enough to give me the correct practice

It's completely hypocritical and arbitrary.

>>18082128
Ok. So I am taking this as "it's church tradition" as the reason correct?

>>18082116
>to entertain his protestant thinking is worthless and even harmful
That "Protestant thinking" being that Jesus is the only Savior, God is the only worship, and the bible is the rule of faith. I agree, that is distinctly Protestant thinking, so shamefully absent is it from the traditions of men. What spirit do you have, to describe basic Christian faith as "worthless and harmful"?

>>18082128
>whom I trust to give me the correct scriptures
I trust nobody but God to give me the authentic scriptures, you are badly deceived in trusting men.

>>18082142
Surely God handed you the texts then, not men, correct?

>>18082126
>nobody is to be envoked than God
This isn't nearly as complicated as you make it seem.

ALL Christians believe in the potency of prayer. If they did not, then you'd never ask anyone else in your life, not your family, not your friends, not your church, to pray for you. Your prayers alone should suffice, yet we ask for others prayers anyway. Why? Because we all believe they possess potency. The Bible tells us the Saints are alive in Heaven, that they are like a "cloud of witnesses" for the faithful, and that their prayers in Heaven are like incense at the Altar of the Lord.

So, asking a Saint to pray for you is like asking a friend, except Saints pray unceasingly, as the Bible tells us so, and unlike a friend they are right next to the Lord.

It's that simple.

>>18082140
Keep in mind that until Vatican II lay Catholics weren't even allowed to ask basic questions about Catholicism, they just had to accept it. They just turtled up after the council of Trent and seethed for 400 years and now they are exploding out in smugness because they began accepting protestant points at Vatican II. The deeper you look into Catholicism, especially now, the clearer it is that the Reformation was correct and entirely justified and they simply don't have arguments except shouting. They literally burned tend of thousands of people in the reformation and put entire towns to the sword and yet remain furious about like 30 or 40 people total killed in a two hundred year period for being Catholic.

>>18082133
Yes, the Church founded by God, and that through it by the Holy Spirit was granted the divine discernment to preserve the practice. Why think that discernment simply stops at scriptures?

>>18082158
>Keep in mind that until Vatican II lay Catholics weren't even allowed to ask basic questions about Catholicism, they just had to accept it.
what is he talking about?

>>18082164
Universal call to holiness in Vatican II and the lay theologians issue.

>>18082140
boring. stop strawmanning Catholicism if you want us to treat ur position with respect. it's just so tiresome

>>18082163
I am a third party that was trying to tease that out of you so that the original guy could get your point. Orthodoxy requires accepting the teachings of the Orthodox church alongside the bible. He didn't seem to get that and you weren't expressing it. To you the Bible is a book used by the church along with the teachings of the Church to accomplish the goal of salvation, while to him the Bible is the source of all knowledge of how to achieve salvation including what the church should and shouldn't be. Different hermeneutics.

Protestants and Orthodox need to come to terms with their faith is built on rejecting vatican 2, and not on the reformation or great schism.

It's all just coping because they are in obstinate denial of the True Catholic Faith.

>>18082128
Sigh. I tried to help the orthodox man return to orthodox and this is what orthobro larp converts do in return. fine i'll crash out on orthodox and tell him to convert to protestantism next time. what do i care

>>18082149
I would not have the bible if God did not preserve it.
>>18082158
Yes, and the only reason there is any ambiguity for any that Rome is a counterfeit is due to the ignorance cultivated by secularism enabling ignorant histories which are so popular among the "tradcaths". A prime example of why sola scriptura is so essential is the denial of the cup to the laity. Many do not realize, Rome has not changed on this any more than its other errors. Vatican II only made it optional to the bishop whether the people will receive communion in both kinds, and they continue to teach that it is not required to receive it, while Jesus Christ said "take, drink, this is my blood". If you allow false authorities to sit on God's throne they will forbid what God commanded and permit what God prohibited. You cannot be faithful to God without sola scriptura.
>>18082163
The Holy Spirit is not responsible for disobedience to His own commands.
>>18082153
>ALL Christians believe in the potency of prayer
Prayer to whom?
>The Bible tells us the Saints are alive in Heaven, that they are like a "cloud of witnesses" for the faithful, and that their prayers in Heaven are like incense at the Altar of the Lord.
And none of it says to invoke them, or that they can hear your prayers. The appeal to their life is a mere red herring, for I do not suppose that if I shout a man's name who is on the other side of earth he will hear me, though he is alive. We ask other saints to pray for us, but we do not pray to them, we do not address and invoke them in our prayers as you do. To pray is to worship, it is to place you trust in the object of prayer to fulfill the request or to be worthy of the glory, and to ascribe to then the omniscience and omnipotence exclusive to God.

>>18082190
>rejecting vatican 2
No, it's fine for Catholics, we just don't have to become Catholics

>>18082184
You mean calling the kettle black

>That "Protestant thinking" being that Jesus is the only Savior, God is the only worship, and the bible is the rule of faith. I agree, that is distinctly Protestant thinking, so shamefully absent is it from the traditions of men. What spirit do you have, to describe basic Christian faith as "worthless and harmful"?

Jesus is the only Savior, God is the only worship, and the bible is the rule of faith.

we believe in this too dipshit.

>>18082204
Real question is get getting cucked out of communion of both kinds or not?

>>18082205
Meanwhile in reality
>Most Holy Virgin Immaculate, my Mother Mary, to Thee who art the Mother of my Lord, the Queen of the universe, the advocate, the hope, the refuge of sinners, I who am the most miserable of all sinners, have recourse this day.

>I venerate Thee, great Queen, and I thank Thee for the many graces Thou hast bestowed upon me even unto this day; in particular for having delivered me from the hell which I have so often deserved by my sins.

>I love Thee, most dear Lady; and for the love I bear Thee, I promise to serve Thee willingly for ever and to do what I can to make Thee loved by others also. I place in Thee all my hopes for salvation; accept me as thy servant and shelter me under thy mantle, thou who art the Mother of mercy.

>And since thou art so powerful with God, deliver me from all temptations, or at least obtain for me the strength to overcome them until death. From Thee I implore a true love for Jesus Christ. Through Thee I hope to die a holy death. My dear Mother, by the love thou bearest to Almighty God, I pray Thee to assist me always, but most of all at the last moment of my life. Forsake me not then, until thou shalt see me safe in heaven, there to bless Thee and sing of thy mercies through all eternity. Such is my hope.

>>18082213
latria - dulia distinction. holy boring dude.

>>18082212
my Catholic church does communionn of both kinds

>>18082215
>look at these Greek words I said that I don't understand, now it's ok for me to worship many other gods
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

>>18082221
dulia is not worship it is veneration, honoring.

>i dont know greek
>posts bible verse

you are not sending ur best

>>18082216
1. Would it be wrong for them to give you only one kind? 2. Would it be wrong for you to accept only one kind? 3. Was the medieval church wrong to deny the cup to the laity?

File: hindu idolatry.jpg (229 KB, 982x655)

229 KB JPG

>>18082225
These people are just venerating Vishnu so it's ok

>>18082229
no
no
no

>>18082233
>And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it
You cannot be faithful to God while you are enslaved by the tyranny of the Roman church.

>>18082232
Mary = vishnu

congratulations for being sacriligious and sinning.

>>18082236
It is no sin nor sacrilege to speak against your gods and idols, but thank you for the clarity, that the sole difference between what you do and what the Hindu does is the object, idolater.

>>18082235
Ok my church gives the cup. so your position is wrong. next

>>18082239
No, my position is not wrong, because you just told me three times it's not wrong to directly disobey the commands of Christ. You honor Him with your lips but your heart is far from Him.

>>18082238
You just compared the Virgin Mary to vishnu. That is objectively sacriligious.

Even if you reject intercession, comparing Mary to vishnu is still sacriligious. Take a step back dude.

>>18082243
its a sin not to give someone the eucharist? so men are entitled to the eucharist?

The eucharist is a privledge.

>>18080192
Prots Proting? Why should I care? Unless GAFCON joins the Holy Roman Catholic Church the same thing will happen again and again

>>18082246
NTA you are responding too but it's seriously fucked up the Roman Catholics, Orthodox, and Lutherans from Missouri (I think LCMS?) deny a gift given by God to all humanity based in their own whims. Like if your church doesn't give communion to all those Baptized in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit you are seriously demonic.

>>18082244
>You just compared the Virgin Mary to vishnu. That is objectively sacriligious.
I compared an idol to an idol. That which you worship is not the Lord's mother.
>Even if you reject intercession, comparing Mary to vishnu is still sacriligious
How could that be sacrilegious? Can you explain to me how it is wrong to do it toward Vishnu but right to do it toward Mary?
>>18082246
1. It is a sin to disobey the command of Christ, such as "take, drink, this is my blood" 2. No man has a right to grace, otherwise it would not be grace, but every man in the Church has a right to the means of grace because God has given it to him. We may demand the Eucharist not from God, but from men.

>>18082195
>Point out a single sentence of my previous post you're replying to that is false. Name one.
>>18082198
>prayer to whom
You know to who, to God. The Bible tells us the Saints are the cloud of witnesses, which tells us they both hear and see us. The Bible tells us they are alive.

So they can:
>hear us
>see us
>and and are indeed alive in Heaven
>pray in Heaven for the faithful

How is this in any way different than asking a friend to pray for you? You either have to reject the Saints are alive, or that they arent the cloud of witnesses and those witnesses are someone else.

>>18082256
>its seriously fucked up
atheist redditor

bud, we dont give the eucharist to anyone who doesnt go to confession first. you dont even know what you are talking about

>>18082257
even as a protestant you should not be attacking the Virgin Mary as a pagan diety. You are disgusting.

>>18082261
So you withhold the gifts of God himself based on your manmade laws? For me it's Luke 10 that comes to mind. Plenty of other passages but Luke 10 is the one I am thinking of.

>>18082265
just dont talk if you are an athiest. theres too much to explain and its just not worth the effort

>>18082246
It’s amazing that Papists argue like leftists. They use the same discourse where they pretend not to understand things. Thus making discourse impossible. They feign confusion to evade reality and shut down debate. This is the weaponization of willful ignorance.

>>18082264
I do no such thing, I deny that the idols are the blessed virgin. I have no shame to attack an idol, I am proud to do that. The one who is truly disgusting is the one who steals God's worship and gives it to creatures, wood and stone. Repent, and worship God alone.
>>18082258
>You know to who, to God
And not the saints?
>The Bible tells us the Saints are the cloud of witnesses, which tells us they both hear and see us.
Not one word could be given in defense of this interpretation, which is plain scripture-twisting. There is absolutely nothing in the context to imply the apostle's intent was to communicate anything like this. The "cloud of witnesses" is a metaphorical descriptor for the series of examples of faith in the Old Testament saints cited in Hebrews 11, which are expressly given to stir us to similar works of faith, which is why he then follows with the chief example of faith, the Lord.
>So they can:
They can neither hear or us nor see us nor act on our supplications. They are far to busy with the glory of the Lord to worry about us.
>How is this in any way different than asking a friend to pray for you?
Because my friend is not dead, and when I ask him to pray for me it is not by invoking him in my prayers, which is idolatry.
>You either have to reject the Saints are alive
They are self-evidently not alive physically, which is really the only sense that is relevant to this.

>>18082275
you are mad because catholics dont have eucharist of 2 kinds after i told you I as a catholic do have eucharist of 2 kinds. You are actually arguing against a hypothetical situation 800 years ago.

But i am the one being dishonest

>>18082078
>Liturgy we simply ask for Mary's prayers, the same goes for the Saints and the Angels in Heaven.

I don't know how to make this clearer for you guys. I was a chrismated convert to the Orthodox church for several years. I fully understand the difference between between worship and intercession, and the difference between praying to the saints vs praying to God. I do not think asking the saints for intercession in and of itself is a bad thing.

My problem is when asking for that intercession becomes a mandatory part of salvation, what's the difference between the intercessor and the savior if both are required to save you? It elevates the intercessor, be they Holy Mary or any of the other saints, to a position equal to Christ, which is idolatry. When you make asking for their intercession a mandatory part of salvation, it's akin to saying that without them Christ alone could not save, and that is a huge problem.

>>18082267
You are a Romecuck. You probably couldn't explain why I referenced the whole chapter rather than a specific verse. Go read the whole thing. You are not just the Levite but also the unrepentant city. Outside that: You are also the withering tree, you are the Pharisees who stone Stephen, you are Ninevah unrepentant, you are the defiled temple.

>>18082277
you said the virgin mary was the same as vishnu

Fuck you.

>>18082282
That was too far on him. You don't pollute bodies of water with your idols.

>>18082280
>huge
k dude. you said you didnt even know what sacraments lutherans have. I just dont care to explain to you what "state of grace" and "state of sin" means and the function of the sacrament of confession when your argument is

>its like totally fucked up not to give everyone the eucharist

just go home

>>18082285
Are you lutheran now?

>>18082278
He's mad because you're intellectually dishonest.
>do have eucharist of 2 kinds. You are actually arguing against a hypothetical situation 800 years ago.
1. It was anything but a hypothetical situation, it was in fact mandatory practice and enforced by the sword (Hussite Wars) 2. This abuse continues to be non-hypothetical *today*, it only is no longer universal 3. You openly are disinterested in this command of Christ, and consider it acceptable for the pontiff to trample it underfoot. There may be outward conformity to the law but in your heart you sin 4. The council of Trent pronounced the anathema against any who said the Roman church did not have good reason to deny the cup, so this will always be an issue as wrong as Rome stands no matter what their actual practice is

>>18082291
im replying to this post
>>18082256

Using reddit language and not knowing what lutheranism is indicates you dont know anything so its not worth engaging with you

>>18082282
Do you think your hurt feelings over a perceived slight against your idol will vindicate your idolatry before the throne of Christ?

>>18082293
The Roman Church does have good reason to deny the cup, because laymen shouldnt touch the chalice.

>>18082300
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it

>>18082297
Are you LCMS? Because what I said is the truth is the orthodox Lutheranism and the writings of Martin Luther.

>>18082299
You are going to hell over this moment.

>>18082304
You will go to hell to join the demons you worship through idols.

>>18082304
You Lutheran or not? If you are you are a fucking nut job because like 90% of all Lutherans worldwide practice open communion and they are extremely pissed off at the tiny minority who don't and who literally deny communion to other Lutherans because they are power tripping over their little rural churches.

>>18082195
I appreciate the consideration and concern for me. But yeah, I was fine with Tradition until Tradition clashed with Scripture, and I've yet to have somebody explain to my satisfaction how mandatory intercession isn't in conflict with Acts. The longer this goes on, the more I doubt they ever will. That's fine though. I've found a good Baptist church and I'm doing alright there.

>>18082277
This is very simple, are the Saints alive in Heaven? A simple yes or no will suffice.

>>18082317
I am not the orthodox guy. What type of Baptist? Calvinist or Freewill?

>>18082317
You must realize you can't only have this one issue with them, the fact you say they are wrong and are willing to attend church elsewhere means necessarily you reject their authority claims and claim to be the Catholic Church, for even if they persuaded you of this one point, that you should continue to maintain them being wrong is possible and justifies separation from them in and of itself denies those claims.

>>18082325
>This is very simple
This is an equivocation fallacy.
>are the Saints alive in Heaven?
Physically, no.

>>18082325
The Romish doctrine concerning purgatory, pardons, worshipping and adoration, as well of images, as of reliques, and also invocation of saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God

>>18082337
Who is this from? Tyndale? Perkins?

>>18082326
I am the (former) Orthodox guy. Freewill. OSAS is a joke.

File: 1000040174.jpg (37 KB, 400x600)

37 KB JPG

>>18082279
>what is the difference in intercessor and savior if both are required for salvation?

Ask yourself this, was Mary required to exist for Jesus to be born of a Virgin woman and fulfill the Old Testament prophecy? Obviously, right? Does that mean Mary is your savior like Jesus is? Absolutely not, but she was certified a requirement.

So to answer your question, it's: yes and". Mary, even in her sinlessness, needed a Savior lile everyone else. She was going to die a mortal death. So she isn't our Savior, that's her Son, but she was indeed required.

>>18082339
It's directly from 39 articles. I just wanted to make an on topic post.

>>18082342
>was Mary required to exist for Jesus to be born of a Virgin woman and fulfill the Old Testament prophecy?
No. God could have used any woman.
>Mary, even in her sinlessness, needed a Savior lile everyone else. She was going to die a mortal death
Why and how would she die if she was without sin?

>>18082332
What does physicality matter? Jesus told the thief on the cross "truly I say to you, that on this day you will be with me in paradise".

You dont want to say "yes" because it blows up your entire argument. You're being intentionally obtuse. God bless you.

>>18082350
>What does physicality matter?
Because human beings are physical creatures which exist in space and time. So when I speak, people on the the other side of the globe cannot hear me, even if they are alive in every sense. There is no relationship between being alive and being able to see and hear everything, it is a red herring.
>You dont want to say "yes" because it blows up your entire argument. You're being intentionally obtuse.
You are deeply irrational.

>>18082350
You aren't a very good Catholic if you think they are bodily alive in heaven. Those, like Mary, are, but those who weren't physically assumed into heaven are bodily dead down here and spiritually alive up there. Why do you think Jesus and Mary ascending is important?

>>18082345
Are we playing this game now? Okay do hypothetical "any woman" was required for Jesus to incarnate and fulfill the prophecy, right? Lmao this is pathetic.

She would die because the Orthodox understanding is that she did not consent to sin, but she still bears the price of Adam and Eve's fall. The wage of sin is death.

But please go ahead and misrepresent what I just said so you can stay in denail more. Be my guest.

>>18082357
>She would die because the Orthodox understanding is that she did not consent to sin, but she still bears the price of Adam and Eve's fall
Then she was subject to original sin and was not conceived immaculate.
>but my church doesn't believe in original sin
Then your church is wrong

>>18082354
Catholicism isn't an inherently rational religion. It doesn't have to make sense to humans. You are applying a protestant view here to understand something that doesn't follow Protestant rules.

>>18082355
I'm not catholic and I never said the body is alive in Heaven. Protestants are so retarded my GOD.

>>18082354
You're still limiting Heaven to "the other side of the world" in comparison. You are in deep deep denial.

>>18082362
>Catholicism isn't an inherently rational religion
I didn't say your religion was rational or not rational, I said you are irrational.
>You are applying a protestant view
Rational thought is a Protestant view? Wow, it's like you're making my case for me.

>>18082342
> was Mary required to exist for Jesus to be born of a Virgin woman and fulfill the Old Testament prophecy?
No, any virgin woman from the line of David would have sufficed.
>Does that mean Mary is your savior like Jesus is?
By saying she was both required for Jesus to come into the world and for us to pray to in order to be saved you're putting her pretty close. Like I've said, this flirting with making Mary equal to Christ is what finally bothered me enough to break communion. I tried very hard to justify it through Scripture and it just cannot be done. Where Scripture and Tradition come into conflict, I'm choosing Scripture.

>>18082363
>You're still limiting Heaven to "the other side of the world" in comparison
No, the situation is much worse for you. I can call someone on the other side of the world on the phone, I cannot do that for the dead. It is absolutely impossible for the saints on earth and the saints in heaven to communicate with each other.

>>18082363
Are you orthodox? The physically alive in heaven part is actually very important anon. The Assumption of Mary is literally a dogma. It's like denying the resurrection of Christ.

>>18082372
>Where Scripture and Tradition come into conflict, I'm choosing Scripture.
God bless you.

File: 1000040757.jpg (30 KB, 680x496)

30 KB JPG

>>18082360
I'm about to lose my fucking MIND

ATTENTION ALL RETARDED PROTESTANTS:

EASTERN ORTHODOX DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION. IT IS UNNECESSARY WITH OUR VIEW OF INHERITED SINFUL NATURE.

MARY DID NOT CONSENT TO SIN, BUT INHERITED THE FALLEN NATURE THAT MEANS SHE WILL DIE WITHOUT A SAVIOR.

I'm like arguing with three retarded prots who keep trying catholic gotchas
I'm crashing outtttttt

>>18082378
Ok. Some Anglicans do and some Anglicans don't. Just like the Assumption of Mary. It's not a mandatory view but is a permissible one.

File: 1000039745.jpg (392 KB, 1108x1280)

392 KB JPG

>>18082375
He was talking about the Saints not being physical with their bodies, assumption and sanctification are similar but two different things. His argument is essentially
>the saints are dead in the ground, I dont care if they are in heaven, they have no physical bodies

As if that would matter if they can hear your request to pray for you or not.

>>18082372
>By saying she was both required for Jesus to come into the world and for us to pray to in order to be saved you're putting her pretty close.
I'm going to explain this one more time and then please no more.

>God obviously possesses the ability to do whatever He wants. He could appear in front of you flesh and blood as a fully grown man if He so desired
>God desires our love and a relationship with us
>There is no love without choice, since the love would have no value and it would simply be mindless submission
>due to His desire for our love, we have the freedom of choice
>with this freedom we disobeyed him (and continue to do so) and fell from paradise, resulting in death
>God COULD have simply stopped Adam from sinning, or taken away his ability to do so all together, but he let us make our choice.
>God must now incarnate as a man, and pay the wage of OUR mistake and die so we may live, he does this out of an act of LOVE for us
>For God to do this, again, He must have consent to incarnate in the womb of the Virgin Mary
>Once again, He obviously possesses the power to incarnate with or without her consent, but to right the wrong of Adam, that is, a result of a choice, he chooses to abide by OUR choices, NOT the other way around

This is why our salvation is our choice. I'm not saved against my own will if I deny Jesus and His Church. I must choose love. I must CHOOSE to love God and CHOOSE to partake in His sacraments.

I'm not explaining this again.

>>18082424
>As if that would matter if they can hear your request to pray for you or not.
How do you expect dead people to hear me?

>>18082378
>Orthodtard is mad that Latin Christianity has continued to explore theology since the 5th century and lashes out.
Pottery.

File: John Calvin.jpg (260 KB, 1200x1200)

260 KB JPG

>>18082424
>our salvation is our choice
>mfw

>>18082362
Catholicism is inherently rational. Just because protestantism is rational doesn't mean Catholicism isn't also. Prots, Catholics and atheists are all western and so they are rooted in reason.

If you want an irrational mystery relation you want orthodox

>>18082430
You're trolling. Admit the Saints are alive in Heaven or you simply disagree with scripture. Physicality has nothing to do with it.
>>18082432
I'm not even mad at latins although I think the doctrine of immaculate conception retarded, I'm mad at brain damaged protestants for trying to get me in catholic gotchas. I imagine next someone is going to demand me to defend the papacy at this rate.
>>18082433
Calvin would be a bigger retard than Luther if Luther hadn't explicitly called the Epistle of James "an epistle of straw" simply because it BTFO's his belief of sola fide

Why is the majority of this thread about Orthodox and Catholicism when the OP is about Anglicanism?

>>18082460
Because protestants see ghosts of Byzantium and Rome in every single discussion about theology. Truly a buck broken people.

>>18082424
>I'm going to explain this one more time and then please no more.
You didn't explain it the first time. How does any of that make it so I require Mary's consent for my entrance into Heaven?

>>18082460
Orthodoxy was flirting hard with Anglicanism before they went off the deep end with modernity. It's a bit of a sore spot for the Orthobros and where they go, retarded arguments follow.

>>18082456
>You're trolling. Admit the Saints are alive in Heaven or you simply disagree with scripture. Physicality has nothing to do with it
I accept your concession and God bless you sir. I will pray for God to open your eyes.

>>18081136
>I respect converts to Islam more
Because you're an Evangelikike

>>18082456
Calvin and Luther were both much smarter than you.

The reason why is because anglicans are just western Orthodox (both of them need to become the One Holy Catholic Orthodox sedeprivationist Church

File: 1000041238.jpg (1.49 MB, 1008x1310)

1.49 MB JPG

>>18082468
Because. God. Needed. To. Incarnate.

If God simply forced Mary to carry His incarnation and raise Him, then He simply could have forced Adam and Eve to not sin in the first place. The entire story from Genesis to Revelation comes full circle. By a choice we lost our place in paradise and by a choice we return. None of this means He COULDN'T do these things, but He chooses to respect OUR choices.

Your salvation requires Mary saying yes to God. Sorry, I know you protestants really want to hate her for some bizarre reason, but your salvation is indeed incumbent on her consent.

You may thank her now.

Say: "Thank you Holy Virgin, Mother of God, for saying yes to God so I don't die a permanent death."

>>18082251
Why did Pope Francis argue against converting Jews to Christianity?

>>18082480
>>18082483
You both got blown the fuck out LOL

>>18082483
>Calvin
absolute retard

>>18082512
>>18082518
Cope

>>18082482
I am actually an in communion with Canterbury Anglican. Probably the only one itt.

>>18082133
>So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter. - Thessalonians 2:15

I'm a lutheran probably turning orthodox soon. But when you stop to look at every single ancient church, that is, any church founded in the first millennium, and any church on a holy site that Jesus or the apostles actually visited, you notice patterns. You notice commonality in their procedures, even if they have different liturgies. I'd consider icon veneration suspect if it were just the Catholics and the Greeks doing it, but we see the Nestorians doing it, the Church of the East doing it, the Coptics doing it, even the Ethiopians doing it. And a lot of these regions were long in isolation from the rest of the world due to the islamic conquests. If it were an accretion and not a longstanding tradition, there would be evidence of that by a church existing that rejects icons. But there isn't. Doesn't that compel you to think that's an ancient tradition that has been passed on and preserved?

>>18082551
Theres no logical reason to choose Orthodox over Coptic besides strawmanning

>>18082551
I'd even go as far as to point things like the Ark of the Covenant as being an icon.
>>18082556
>no reason
How about rejecting Chalcedon and the Hypostatic Union for starters?

>>18082265
>manmade laws
Paul said priests/pastors are "the stewards of God's mysteries." (1 Cor. 4:1) and Hebrews 13:17 commands “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.”

I can't speak for orthodoxy or catholicism but I assume they have similar views. Communion is DANGEROUS to people who are not properly prepared for it. That is why we close the communion off.

>>18082584
Larp
Hypostatic union only makes sense if ur Catholic. If ur orthodox it's just jester and ripping Catholics flow bar for bar

>>18082279
Job 42:8

>>18082592
The reformation are indeed sending their best and brightest

>>18082556
I visited a coptic church and no one there could explain to me why Chalcedon mattered.
"Two Natures of Christ" vs "Two Natures in Christ" feels like an etymological dispute and rather than an actual theological dispute, but I'm probably just as ignorant as the coptic laity.

>>18082602
Facts. Coptics are based because their laity don't larp as clergy. That's how you know they are the real church.

>>18082602
They'll usually affirm they have the same definition of Chalcedon they just don't like the wording. If that were the case why not just simply accept it and choose to articulate it with different words in their churches? Autocephaly exists for a reason.

https://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/anglicans-in-exile/

>>18082551
Rome and Constantinople have virtually nothing in common which they do not also have in with Geneva. This includes their images, about which they have different dogmas (i.e. are images of God the Father permitted, or forbidden? Are statues permitted, or only paintings?)
>I'm a lutheran probably turning orthodox soon
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel, which is not another.
>>18082584
>I'd even go as far as to point things like the Ark of the Covenant as being an icon.
You would be wrong

>>18082551
I am Anglican so like I already accept tradition as part of it. We just don't pray at icons or directly venerate them as they are just a nice image of a saint or biblical scene. However, a counterpoint is in the OT the Israelites repeatedly started creating and worshipping idols as sinful behavior, indicating that it is inherently an error one would be predisposed to engage in, which would explain why so many Churches do it in a negative way. The Anglican middle way is nice as you can have icons and stained glass and real presence and such but not go overboard on them. Things are a spectrum.

>>18082551
>I'd consider icon veneration suspect if it were just the Catholics and the Greeks doing it
You should consider it repugnant merely because it is repugnant according to God. Do you now seek to please men, or God?

The problem with all this orthodox this Anglican that Lutheran that is that you guys are all just larping because you schismed from Rome the pillar of all truth

>>18082549
And you'd rather a White American Protestant convert to the cult of Islam rather than to Astern Orthodoxy, you're a retarded LARPer who's only an "Anglican" because its part of your ethnic identity,

>>18082624
Anglicanism and Orthodoxy didn't schism, Rome just changed the rules about Primates after the Anglicans left to try and make themselves look right. Then refused to do any ecumenicalism about it and sack Constantinople and later repeatedly tried to invade England. Pope was first among equals not absolute monarch. Same with the Archbishop of Canterbury. Which is why Gafcon can leave.

>>18082636
American converts to Orthodoxy are consistently horrible people. At least those who convert to Islam don't do it out of an obsession with Russian propaganda. I guess I would rather you be an idiot than a monster.

File: 1000039172.png (282 KB, 400x579)

282 KB PNG

>>18082612
>"you would be wrong"
>no answer as to why of course

Leave it to Protestants to turn a thread about the Anglican Schism into them being repeatedly BTFO'd again and again

>>18082647
Are you even a Christian? I can't imagine a Christian writing something like this. It's weird.

>>18082647
Why do you associate Eastern Orthodoxy with Russian propaganda?

>>18082654
Are you Orthodox and somehow less philosophically advanced than a Muslim and basically living in the dark ages, or Roman Catholic and still trapped in the primitive and vain mists of the middle ages?

>>18082658
He probably considers himself an ethnic "Anglican", i.e. he's just an Atheist.

>>18082661
It's the same retard who was saying Orthodox have beards and that makes them pagan or something he's some deranged idiot just ignore him

>>18082612
Prayer to saints is pretty much the same across the board even if icons/statues is up for dispute. But I think that's one where I'd go with Ambrose and say, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
>quickly
I dunno if I'd call it quick. I have been wrestling with this for about 10 years now.
>different gospel
Oh yeah, I'm turning from the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to... the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Tell me, is reading the Wisdom of Solomon or Judith going to make me catch fire, when Jude quoted Enoch in his epistle?
>>18082615
I like your perspective, and I appreciate the genuine response in a thread full of shitflinging (how dare you not tell me why I'm not based for failing to become anglican). I basically am making an appeal to popularity. I can see how you can get swept away into idolatry by icon veneration. I also grew up with icons/stained glass as well in the lutheran churches. But if everyone knows what's going on and that we still ultimately pray to God that the saints pray for us, I don't think there's an issue.
>>18082661
for me, it's thinking that Antioch is a city in Russia.

>>18082663
I can feel the vitriolic anger behind this post

Hope your keyboard is okay :^(

>>18082658
Yes. Because you know it by their fruits.
>>18082661
Experience with converts irl.

>>18082672
Thanks. I do ecumenical stuff with Catholics irl and I was trying to give 39 articles vibes.

>>18082615
I would argue that the Ark of the Covenant is proof that God's commandment only applies to pagan idols.

God told the Israelites to not make "any graven or carved image of that which is above and below". Yet He commanded them to adorn the Ark with Cherubim. Does that not fit the commandment of "above"? Is God making an exception? Being hypocritical?

Of course not, it was obviously intended to mean no pagan idols. A rule which the Israelites violate over and over and over again.

>>18082667
If I was an "ethnic anglican" I would have joined a schism church. But I dead serious believe in the middle way. And I also know exactly who converts to Eastern Orthodoxy and it is bad for everyone involved. Like no shitting on existing Eastern Orthodox members because they happen to be Greek or Serbian, specifically talking about converts...

>>18082685
I don't think you should have images of God the father. But I am ok with a dove or Saint Paul, or a crucifix.

File: 6d9cd345e88d87cf0a2e043ab(...).jpg (154 KB, 736x734)

154 KB JPG

>>18082699
This contrived red herring attack on converts is slow low lol

>300 AD
>"And I also know exactly who converts to Christianity and it is bad for everyone involved. Like no shitting on existing Jewish Christian members because they happen to be Levite or Gaddite, specifically talking about Roman converts..."

>>18082723
Converting to EO is rejecting 1,600 years of western philosophy. That's a no thanks for me.

>>18082741
Western philosophy is not the pillar and foundation of truth.

File: 1000041242.jpg (134 KB, 624x800)

134 KB JPG

>>18082701
Images of the Father are banned in Eastern Orthodoxy per the Synod of Stoglav in 1551 and later at the Moscow Synod of 1666, due to the understanding thay nobody has seen the Father.

There are, however, icons of the Ancient of Days from the book of Daniel, which is viewed as the pre-incarnate Son. It also aligns with the description of Jesus in Revelation. Some interpret the Ancient of Days as the Father, but that isn't the Church's position.

Also, you will find Orthodox icons and paintings that do depict the Father, but they are considered heretical, even if they mean well.