Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Anglocatholic

  • Rank
    New Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Iconography. People. Theology. Education. History.

    Actually, a combination of all five, all mixed up into one.

    My work is here:
  1. So, I have been here for just a short time, and have been interested to see what other people's approaches are, and in particular whether the tolerance levels of this place are rather more broad than those of other faith message boards. They are, but not for the right reasons. I agree with the general content of the 8 points of PC, but nonetheless I am now at the position of concluding that I am not a progressive. The reason for this is that my understanding of the Church, by which I do not mean any one denomination, but the church as a whole, is that it is a body of believers, each
  2. 'Terrorist' is a modern construct, anachronistic in the context of first century Judea. A more appropriate term would be zealot or even anti-imperialist freedom fighter. More French Resistance than Al Quaeda, in other words. However, in the possible universe where this is true, there would be a different gospel emerging as a result of the teaching of this particular variant of messiah. In other words, the tree is known by its fruit. The gospels are the fruit, and they cannot come from a Zealot tree. There is no evidence in the gospels that the Lord acted against the occupying power
  3. Call my an old cynic, but this kind of book is pointless from an academic pov, and seems calculated only to generate the soundbyte type of publicity that will sell copies to the overcredulous. What is the point of suggesting that Paul did not exist otherwise? What would be the point of doing the same with any other historical figure; Pompey was not really Pompey, but Pliny the Younger in disguise; Cicero was really Caligula; Boudica never really existed, because we don't have a photograph of her, or any document signed by her. Part of understanding history is understanding that evid
  4. Thanks for the story of your journey, T. It sounds a very challenging one. I am glad you have found peace with your wife. She sounds a very special person, and I am sure you fully deserve one another. Personally, I don't think it matters what label we prefer to use for our own faith. What matters is how God sees us, and to be true to ourselves. Gratitude is good; I don't think I have got that far as yet. I am at times still full of resentment about what could have been, if only. I try to be grateful for the many blessings that I have, but somehow can't help looking to see what others
  5. Hiya Valerie I always find it helps to remember two things about dear Paul. The first is that he was a hot head, often speaking from the heart but not always putting his mind in gear first. The second is that when people are speaking generally to others, chances are the person they are actually addressing is their own self (always fun to remember this one on a Sunday, when listening to those interminable sermons). Therefore, in reading of Paul's salvific message, very often what we have is his description of his own experiences, in moving from a very strident, very antagonistic pov towa
  6. Hiya Z The beautiful irony of this whole question is that 'Bible Believers' are actually not doing that. When you find the bit that says that the Bible was dictated, word for word by God, and is intended to be used as The Way, the Truth and The Life, then you are welcome to believe it, and I will happily join you. It would make God rather a bizarre character, but at least there would be grounds for believing Scripture to be of equal status with him. Fortunately, there are no such grounds. Until then, none of us is under any obligation to believe anything that cannot be proven fro
  7. I am an Anglo Catholic, but not a Roman. I find your suggestion rather bizarre - that any non Roman choosing to attend a Roman church in order to worship alongside Roman friends constitutes some form of disrespect. This level of hypersensitivity would seem to be rather a dysfunctional kind, and not exactly conducive to ecumenism. I will not take communion where I am not welcome to do so, but I will certainly accept a blessing from a Roman priest (as indeed I have done, many times), should I find myself attending a Roman mass. Perhaps a little less broad sweeping might be in order. Pe
  8. I read all my books over and over. I have read the complete works of Dickens about ten times, maybe more. Jane Austen, perhaps the same. If a book is good I read it over and over. If it is not good, it gets passed on via a charity shop. Too long ago to remember any of those. Where would you go on holiday if you could go anywhere in the world, and who would you take with you?
  9. I agree. I don't mind other people having another interpretation, but to me the historical Jesus is as real as any other historical figure; all are necessarily distorted by the passing of time and by the addition of mythologies, but that does not negate the reality of the originals; it just makes identifying the authentic realities a bit harder (and perhaps, with some figures, mostly impossible.)
  10. That is not very friendly, is it? How would your agoraphobia have responded to being on the receiving end of these particular words, do you think? Mine is struggling with them, to be honest, particularly the very unfortunate term 'loop of insanity'. The problem with being a broken person is that we often think we are the only one who is broken, in a world of whole, healthy, sound people. We are not. Everyone is broken, in a different way. I am as prone to this as anyone else, and I recognise it in you. I think, therefore, the best thing for me to do is to accept all that you say a
  11. You might do well to take a look at Grail mythology. This also deals with the seeker, among many other themes, and I think your story may well fit into the same tradition. Nice to meet you.
  12. I am reluctant to enter a debate which has been continuing for some time, but I wanted to comment on this one point, where I think you are somewhat mistaken in your interpretation of what being a reasoning creature entails. The ability to reason does not give the logical conclusion that we can determine all truth, any more than understanding mathematics means that we can determine the conclusive value of pie. We can learn more every day, but we will never learn all that there is to know. 'The truth' is not attainable by man until the day we stand face to face with God. Until then, we
  13. This is an interesting distinction. Do you not think that there must have been someone, however different from the Biblical version, on whom the Bible version was based? Even Santa can be traced to a historical figure; St Nicholas of Smyrna. Similarly, mythical characters such as Zeus and Odin are postulated as being based on shamen figures in prehistory, rather than conjured out of thin air. It seems unlikely to me that such a rich, and relatively recent, Christian tradition could be fabricated out of a wholly mythical or imaginary creation. We know that Julius Caesar existed.
  14. Indeed it does require a spiritual gift. That of discernment.
  15. Neither is better; the two go together. 'Laborare est orare'; to work is to pray. St Benedict.
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service