For me it's becoming quite central. I think it's probably the main thing I walked away with after my brief time in OCIA. I have a Catholic prayer book with tons of Marian prayers. I'll keep it near for sure.
HBU?
And no, I'm not asking about Anglo-Catholicism. Just Mary.
I'm very queer. I'm also old enough to have fought for many of the rights we queer people currently enjoy. And I've fought long and hard won battles against a lot of hatred in my day. So I ask, how am I supposed to love the people that would do me and my people harm? How do I love as He taught when I still feel like they'd hunt me for sport if given the chance?
And I'm learning a lot, both of import and tangential. one of the big things is that when LORD (all caps) is written, it stands for the Tetragrammaton, the Wholy (or Holy) Unspeakable Name of God. When the word is Lord (only initial capital letter), it is a title... I think an honorific, although the relationship between the person speaking and that which is addressed as Lord isn't made clear. Reading Wikipedia, Adonai is translated as Lord... BTW, the Wikipedia entry on the 7 names of God is fascinating. I didn't know that Adonai and the name of the Greek god Adonis are linguistic cognates.
The Nicene Creed makes a distinction between Father and Lord. I understand the relationship implied by the word Father, it's the Creator and the created. I'm still not sure about the relationship implied by Lord.
Cary says he gets all his information from a book, Early Christian Creeds by Kelly. I'd love to read that larger work, but it's $80, and I can't afford it.
I've been researching a lot about the Episcopal/Anglican tradition for a few months now, and I almost made a post detailing all the cool things I've learned, but I figured I really needed to actually experience mass first. I just moved to Chicago this week so I went Church of the Ascension because many people here recommended it as a solid inclusive Anglo-Catholic parish, which is the movements that caused me to be drawn towards Episcopalianism.
Not gonna lie, I paced around the block a few times because I was a bit scared to go in, but I'm so glad I did! I was raised Catholic-ish and I've been to countless churches across many countries and this might be one of the most beautiful I've ever seen, the pictures I took don't do it justice. Throughout the liturgy I had to stop myself from getting lost in all of the ornate details. Speaking of the liturgy, I found it to be so incredibly reverent and I can't believe the congregation gets to experience such high quality music for free every week! I was also surprised by the amount of parishioners in the 20s to 30s age range, like obviously its a mainline church so it is gonna skew older, but having any young people is a good sign.
After, I introduced myself to one of the ushers and the priests and they were all are super friendly. I didn't go to the coffee hour because I was ravenously hungry and needed some alone time to collect my thoughts, but I'll try to muster up the courage next time.
I'm still not sure if I believe in God/Jesus/Christianity, but if there is anyone else out there lurking online thinking about the Episcopal Church, get off your phone and go, you won't regret it!
I ordered the 1979 “Book of Common Prayer Deluxe Personal Edition: Black Bonded Leather” from Amazon but I’m not sure I received the right product. For one, the material feels a lot cheaper than my other leather BCPs/Bibles; much like how “imitation leather” feels. Secondly, the inside flap on the pictures in the amazon review looks different than the one I got. In the reviews it says “genuine bonded leather” in gold whereas mine says nothing. I wonder if they sent me the “Economy Edition” on accident? Although the wrapping/packaging says “deluxe personal” so I’m not sure. Can’t find YT reviews to compare. Has anyone here bought this product? If so, does this look correct to you?
So this is a bit of an odd situation. So basically my ex (who I have gotten back together with) and I were married in the Catholic Church. We were pretty active members of our congregation. Long story short, things between us became difficult due to some personal issues and money issues and we drifted and eventually got divorced. Our Catholic priest was devastated, he broke down crying even when I told him. He said he would try to find a way to support us though. We applied for na annulment, which was initially denied. After the denial, the priest sent both of us this very long winded email stating we were making a mistake and needed to get back together and that God had spoken to him in a dream and that we were in danger of adultery. 😱
There was a lot of back and forth, but I basically told the priest no, we are in fact not getting back together, and that is that. I was going to just close the book and accept the difference of opinion at that point. I was also thinking if he was going to refuse communion to me, so be it, I’ll find a different church. Weeks later without a response, he replied to me stating he would revisit the annulment. This went on for a couple of years. There was another denial and then him approaching me after mass in person begging me to find a way to get back with my ex who I was separated with for about a year at that point. At this point, I was pretty sure the priest had some serious mental issues. So anyway continued back and forth and I decided I’m done, I want to find a more accepting church that is more open and get away from this drama. I also found myself starting to drift with the church hardline stance on queer issues. So I found the episcopal church and it was amazing! What came to my surprise is that a year ago, I found my ex at church. I sat next to them a year ago, and we started a new path to make amends.
A couple of months ago, I got a random email from the Catholic priest stating that my ex’s and my annulment was approved?! My ex and I read this together, and we just laughed. We have rediscovered our love and have recently met with our episcopal priest to discuss getting remarried.
Then I made an error, I decided to send a friendly email to our Catholic priest as I was pretty good friends with him (he was sad after I left but we emailed every couple of months) and figured he’d at least be happy to hear this. How wrong I was. He was livid. Basically saying after all this time and energy and now we want to get married again….he didn’t use any profanity but his email back to me a couple of weeks ago felt like a big f*** you basically.
This past weekend, my now soon to be spouse again and I went to our local pub for dinner (we live in a small town) and saw the Catholic and episcopal priest eating together and talking very conspicuously. The episcopal priest waved but the Catholic priest stared at us with fury. He then stood up suddenly and left… the episcopal priest came over to us and basically we will discuss at our next appointment and have a good evening.
I’m just so confused and feeling uncertain how we should move forward here…
This post has been approved by the mods, may the rain fall soft upon their fields.
Hatchett's Commentary on the American Prayer Book is one of the essential books that sits on my shelf next to the BCP and Michno's Handbook . This was a seminary textbook for me, and I've seen it recommended frequently in this sub as a resource for unpacking the 1979 Book of Common Prayer.
With prayer book revision (shhhh don't say it out loud) realistically a long, long way off, books like this become even more vital to helping us understand the shape and riches of the prayer book that sits at the heart of our shared life of faith.
Unfortunately, it is out of print.
Are you in seminary? Has your professor told you to go find a used copy? Did they have to find another book to recommend because they can't stock it in the bookstore? Are you in EfM or exploring The Episcopal Church and can't stomach paying $139 for a used copy on eBay?
Don't worry, I might be able to help.
Originally published in 1980 by Seabury Press, the rights and assets transferred to Winston Press when Seabury Press went out of business in 1984. Winston-Seabury in turn was sold in 1986 to Harper and Row, which in turn was sold the very next year to News Corp and later merged with the UK publisher William Collins to form Harper-Collins in 1990.
Following this series of acquisitions and mergers, Hatchett's book was published through an imprint of HC, HarperOne, I think until at least 2014 or so when I bought it from the Cokesbury bookstore on campus. I've contacted Harper-Collins as well as Church Publishing, and it seems the book is out of print for good, with no additional print runs planned or even an option for print-on-demand. One copy on Amazon is listed at $849, most others are well worn, with those in new condition commanding a high price.
Thanks in part to the Disney Corporation's copyright lobbying, the timeframe for a work entering the public domain is 96 years. For a book published in 1980, that means we're looking at 2076 before this text is free to share. Excuse me while I consult my calendar to see if I'll even still be alive.
So what do we do now? How are Episcopal learners and newly-forming clergy supposed to access this trusted and treasured reference tool?
I found a high resolution native scan of the book courtesy of Claremont School of Theology on Internet Archive. By digitally borrowing the book and making use of some know-how, I've been able to generate a PDF copy that is searchable, easier to read, and smaller in size (just 45.6 MB).
Unfortunately, I'm hesitant to share it directly for fear of running afoul of copyright law (even though the author has been deceased for 17 years and the publisher that holds the rights has stated:
>Thank you for your inquiry. Unfortunately, this title is out of stock indefinitely. We recommend searching for the ISBN 9780060635541 on alternative book retail sites.
Fair Use can be a little complicated to untangle, but in light of the above, it does seem like there's a strong case here. The common standard of Amount Copied generally states that a sharing no more than 10% or a single chapter (whichever is smaller) is considered fair use.
I don't think I can share it here in its entirety, but here is a sample that includes the TOC and Introduction:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nKekd-2w3h4K4FSOcV8P8e1iWUW6oVqv/view?usp=sharing
If you would like to request a specific chapter, I'd be happy to provide help there too.
Just send me a DM.
I know this reading about the Canaanite woman came up in the Episcopal Church's lectionary this last Sunday. I think we rightly read the Gospel of the Canaanite woman for liberationist themes, and I'm wondering if there is a way to do it that also keeps in balance certain key Christological ideas—for instance that Jesus Christ should be called Immanuel, God-with-us (Matt 1:13), that he is the fulfillment of the law (Matt 5:17), that he is innocent and sinless (Matt 27:24; 2 Cor 5:20–21; Heb 4:15). Perhaps this comes close:
>Jesus, seeing this sin arise among his members, does what Jesus always does: he takes this sin upon himself. He loads this sin upon his own shoulders, places it on his own burning lips—but somehow he does this sinlessly. This is what he always does: he takes our sin while yet remaining sinless. We do not see this. We do not understand this. And so like Pilate, like the high priest, we reckon Jesus Christ a transgressor, just like the Prophet Isaiah said we would. We judge him. We judge him for he says, “It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.” Never mind that he says this the way a rabbi or a Socratic teacher proposes a thesis—so that it can be refuted and shred to bits by the disciple, so that the disciple will grow in their own strength and power. (And indeed, that is what the Canaanite woman does.) But more than a rabbi or a Socratic teacher, Jesus acts like the God he is: taking the evil that breeds death and division, and throwing it into the fire of faith that is his own life in the heart of the Canaanite woman.
I was saying the Rosary and since it was Tuesday, it was the Sorrowful Mysteries. And for one reason or another I rarely pray the Rosary on Tuesdays. So this was a new experience. I couldnt help but marvel at how Christ's Sorrowful Mysteries mirror so much myriad human suffering.
The Agony in the Garden shows Christ in emotional turmoil and grief
The Scourging at the Pillar puts Him through physical agony.
The Crowning of Thorns puts Him through mockery.
The Carrying of the Cross is pure exhaustion and a knowledge of impending dread
And His Crucifixion and Death (obviously) show us mortality in its most brutal form.
I'm sure wiser minds than mine have already written on this, but it hit me and I thought I'd share.
Lately I’ve been dealing with some very heavy things and struggling with a relationship that is slowly just making me feel weak and sad. My health is a mess from being a type one diabetic and I’m feeling burnt out. I’m waiting for classes to start again here soon so I can have something to look forward to and not just work all the time and sit around. I really need some prayers if possible because I don’t really feel as supported in a way. Idk it sounds stupid but yeah :/
If anyone is looking for a brief, but good read, I'd recommend Candles in the Dark, by Rowan Williams. The former archbishop of Canterbury makes my personal Mount Rushmore of Anglican theologians (along with Michael Curry, Frank Griswold, and Desmond Tutu), so I went in expecting to like it, and I did. It was written during the early days of COVID and is a series of meditations, covering spring to autumn of 2020. The biggest drawback is that it's short. Although it's meant to be read one meditation per day, if you really wanted to, you could easily knock the whole book out in an afternoon. The other downside being, is that it was written during the COVID lockdown as a way to keep Christians engaged when many churches were closed. Obviously, that's going to date the book somewhat, but the bulk of the entries remain applicable and timeless. My biggest regret is that I didn't know this book existed during the lockdown, but better late than never. It's easy to read, but he can pack a lot of information into just a couple of pages, so it may be a good resource for someone who in new to the Church, or even just curious.
Hello, I don’t mean to cause offense by asking this question. I understand the message of the gospels is love. But when it comes to the fate of those who are not saved, what is the general feeling? I’m sure there are possibly a range of views from universalism, purgatorial universalism, annihilationism, traditional ECT.
I myself seem to have come to the conclusion that annihilationism makes the most sense. Matthew 10:28 says we can lose both body and soul in Gehenna. The Apostle Paul says the wages of sin is death in Romans 6:23
The wicked often described as being destroyed and ceasing to exist. Scripture speaks of “eternal life” for the believer. Not “eternal bliss compared to eternal torment” but “life vs death”.
Perhaps the parable of Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31 is explaining the temporary torment in Hades that happens before the second death Revelatiom 20:14 is where Hades is thrown into the Lake of Fire.
The eternal fire Jesus references (Mark 9:48) is an old Hebrew reference of the literal corpses being completely consumed by fire and worms (Isaiah 66:24). Meaning the fire does its job until nothing is left. It’s still going because the world is continually producing more of the wicked.
But ultimately it’s the punishment of non existence that is eternal not the experience of eternal conscious torment in hellfire. ECT just doesn’t seem compatible with a loving God.
I’ve heard the Anglican Communion was open to this view but I wanted to ask and see how the Episcopal Church answers this question.
Has anyone else come across this "Emphasized" Bible from 1902? I'm kind of fascinated by it. The translator, Joseph Rothertham, translated the Bible from Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew sources with the goal of maintaining the emphases of the original language. He includes a variety of markings to show the reader what it feels like to read the language in the original (no stress v. light stress v. "decided" stress).
Included is a picture of the reading from yesterday, Matthew XV. I find both the translation itself and the added emphases to change my reading of the passage about the Canaanite Woman. I was interested particularly in the translation of "dogs" as "little dogs," which adds a degree of both playfulness and condescension to Jesus's remark. I found the original Greek word online ("κυναρίοις"), punched it into Google Translate (I'm no Greek scholar), and it immediately offered "Little dogs." The fact that this phrase is emphasized by Jesus so significantly paints the passage in an even more extreme light.
Thus far, just paging through, it seems to be a pretty colorful and engaging translation, and having the emphases allows for more a more "dramatic" reading.
Rant incoming!
A few years ago I moved and joined a new parish.
It’s a small church, with rarely more than 15 people at a service.
At the peace, everyone in the parish gets up and gives everyone else the Peace. And then they ask how’s everything, how’s your dog, I saw your daughter yesterday and so forth
I realized I hate this. I’m not sure why. When I grew up we didn’t even shake anyone’s hand at the Peace. Now it’s a total confab. We’re almost at the end of the service - can’t this chatter wait?
Anyone else get annoyed? I know very well I’m an Old Grouch.
For anyone who is affiliated with a community/ order as an associate or oblate can you tell me a bit about your journey? I'd love to know how you found your community and decided to embark on this particular path. I'm working on setting up discovery calls with a few in particular but would love experiences from anyone here! Thank you.
I have been following the episcopal church for a while and am wanting to finally change denominations. Here is the issue, I love the liturgy and tradition but am looking for a more open-minded parish. I’ve been to ones that are traditional and been to progressive ones and I can’t find a happy medium with more open-minded theology but traditional service.
I will be moving to the Tampa/Wesley Chapel/Temple Terrace area soon and would love church recommendations. My husband is a little skeptical of liturgy/sacraments so help would be appreciated
Hey folks.
Today at service the quoted (below) portion of romans 11 was read:
"I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew."
The sermon didnt touch on it at all, nor did any other part of service. After getting home, I read the whole chapter - which I will quote below:
"I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel: 3 “Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me”[a]? 4 And what was God’s answer to him? “I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”[b] 5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. 6 And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.
7 What then? What the people of Israel sought so earnestly they did not obtain. The elect among them did, but the others were hardened, 8 as it is written:
“God gave them a spirit of stupor,
eyes that could not see
and ears that could not hear,
to this very day.”[c]
9 And David says:
“May their table become a snare and a trap,
a stumbling block and a retribution for them.
10 May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see,
and their backs be bent forever.”[d]
Ingrafted Branches
11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!
13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. 15 For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches.
17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.
22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!
All Israel Will Be Saved
25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, 26 and in this way[e] all Israel will be saved. As it is written:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27 And this is[f] my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”[g]
28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable. 30 Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now[h] receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you. 32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all."
Let me pause here cause this is the internet. I dont hate anyone (though I find people who assume I do pretty annoying). Jesus loves everyone. The church accepts everyone. So do I. This isnt that, and any attempt to make this *that* will just isolate me from the episcopalian community that much more. Ok, on to my questions
why the selective edit. Reading just the 1st portion without context leads itself to the conclusion that the biblical jews who rejected jesus are saved anyway- a politically relevant talking point. Reading the whole chapter clearly, to me, illustrates that *anyone, jew or gentile* who believes in christ is saved. Id love input on this, as theres a consistent narrative going on that pushes the idea that jews who reject christ are saved regardless - despite whats actually written in the bible.
why are narratives, political agendas, and etc being pushed from the pulpit at all? Is this just at my church? Its really annoying, ngl. Is anyone else experiencing anything like this? Thoughts?
Thanks in advance folks, and god bless <3
I recently started attending an Episcopal church in the new city I moved to. I really like this church and they're quite traditional and reverent on Sunday mornings. I saw they were hosting a yoga/breathwork/sound healing event so I went. It was held in the sanctuary.
The breathwork and sound healing were pretty straightforward, but the instructor for the yoga practiced Kemetic (Egyptian) yoga and talked about our energy flowing through us, our pineal gland opening our third eye to the divine, etc. She didn't mention any Egyptian dieties but it still left me feeling a bit...off.
Should I feel weird about this? I have an evangelical background that might explain my unease...but it just seemed weird to be engaging to some degree in another spiritual tradition at church. Open to all thoughts and opinions. Thanks!
I spend a lot of my day listening to podcasts and audiobooks. Im wondering if anyone has any recommendations for things one should listen to if one was considering entering discernment for the Diaconate.
A loved one, who is a conservative Evangelical, has suggested a couple of Bible study books as potential birthday gifts. They are "Ten Women of the Bible" by Max Lucado and "Women of the Bible: 52 Bible Studies for Individuals and Groups" by Jean Syswerda.
I'm happy to provide both of these volumes at her request, but here's my question: are there any additional volumes on similar subject matter that offer a slightly more progressive view, but without being specifically antagonistic or off-putting to someone of an Evangelical background?
Thanks for your input!
(Note: my goal here is not to denigrate the authors who have been requested, so let's not go there if possible. Thanks!)