differences between catholic and church of england?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

I am just beginning to discover jesus, but I have many questions that need answering before I know where I am going with this faith. If Catholic and Church of England are both christians, why is there a divide? What do catholics believe in that CofE don't? Jayne

-- jayne b (jaynebirtles@hotmail.com), March 05, 2001

Answers

Hi Jayne,

The Church of England has many beliefs and teachings that are the same as that of the Catholic Church. The main differences are with Authority. The division over Papal authority is being addressed and joint document was released a year or two ago on Authority in the Church that addressed this division. Most notably however is the invalidly of Angelican Ordinations. After a study of changes in the wording of Ordinations in the Angelican church. Pope Leo XIII issued a Papal Bulla stating that they were invalid because of the changes and lack of intent. So today Angelican Priests are from a Catholic view simply Lay Ministers without the Sacramental powers of Holy Orders.

-- Br. Rich SFO (repsfo@prodigy.net), March 05, 2001.


Jmj
Hello, Jayne.
Not wanting to trust my memory on this subject, I sought out the following synopsis at catholicenquiry.com (a voice of the Catholic bishops of Australia, who have much contact with members of the Anglican Communion):

"Anglicanism and Catholicism have much in common and share a large communality of Christian beliefs. Yet there are important differences which despite continuing efforts between the official representatives of both religions, have, alas, not been resolved. There are differences too among members of the Church of England themselves. But by and large the main differences of belief between Anglicans and Catholics centre on the Holy Eucharist, ministerial priesthood, and authority within the Church.

"Concerning belief in the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and the substance of the wine are changed into the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. It is not simply a symbolic change, but a real and actual change so that the Blessed Eucharist is truly an object of divine worship and that it is Christ Himself we receive in Holy Communion. Catholic belief then, is at variance with what is commonly known as the 'black rubric' of the Book of Common Prayer which reads '... the sacramental bread and wine remain still in their natural substances and therefore may not be adored.'

"Concerning ministerial priesthood, the Catholic Church makes a clear distinction between the common, or baptismal priesthood of the people of God and the priesthood of the ordained ministry, i.e. the priesthood conferred by the Sacrament of Holy Orders. In Catholic teaching, it is only the ordained clergy which have the power to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass and confect the Holy Eucharist [and to give absolution in sacramental Confession]. At the time of the Reformation in England, the Church of England introduced a new ordinal (Ordination Service) from which the power to sacrifice is absent. Hence the Catholic Church does not recognise Anglican Orders as truly valid. It is not that Catholics wish them to be invalid, but they cannot change what happened in history so long ago.

"Lastly, concerning authority within the Church. The Catholic Church teaches that the Bible, Sacred Tradition, and the Teaching Authority of the Church form a single deposit of faith such that one cannot exist without the other, nor contradict the other. The Catholic Church traces its origin through Apostolic succession to its foundation by Christ, and that primacy of jurisdiction resides in the Pope, that Christ commissioned it to teach all nations with His authority, that He promised the Holy Spirit to be its guide and that He would be with it to the end of the world, and that this authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit will protect it from error in its doctrinal and moral teachings, that Christ instituted Seven Sacraments for the sanctification of souls, that it alone exhibits the characteristics of the Church founded by Christ one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, and as explained, infallible."

[I should add a few things ... The Anglican Communion is represented by the Episcopalian denomination in the U.S. -- though there are also some churches in America that call themselves "Anglican." Because there is not a personal focus of doctrinal unity within Anglicanism (while there is one in Catholicism, the pope), Anglican doctrine is subject to change through a system wherein a majority rules. I am no expert on that process of change, so I will not try to give any details. It is enough, however, to say that Anglican doctrine has been altered in the past 475 years on various subjects, so much so that Anglicans and Catholics now partially or fully disagree on ...
certain aspects of sexual morality (e.g., remarriage after divorce, contraception, sterilization, masturbation),
life issues (e.g., abortion, in vitro fertilization, artificial insemination),
sacraments (ordination of women deacons, priests, and bishops)]

St. James, pray for us. St. Bede the Venerable, pray for the healing of our divisions.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), March 05, 2001.


Hi Jayne,

As an Episcopalian may I say that both Br. Rich's and especially J.F. Gecik responses were both balanced and factual. They are to be commended on refraining from "bashing" that, unfortunately is so prevalent on other Christian forums.

Since this is a Catholic forum, let me be brief. In a nutshell, the Anglican Church got it's start when Henry VIII of England wanted his marriage with Catherine of Aragon annulled because she could not provide him with a male heir. Pope Clement VII said NO. So, Henry did what any good rich, powerful and self-centered king would do, he started his own church! He appointed Thomas Cromwell as the first Archbishop of the Anglican Church who promptly annulled Henry's marriage with Catherine. That left Henry free to chase the skirts of five more women as it turned out, and finally get an heir.

How many other churches that you know of were founded on LUST. :)

Thank you Catholics, for your indulgence.

Kindest regards,

Craig Miller

-- Craig Miller (cmiller@ssd.com), March 08, 2001.


Dear Jayne
In a country as truly great and powerful as England has been and still is, pride takes the place of prudence and love for the many. The world is that way, you know. Most English people who have regard for the ''High'' church are well aware of the past circumstance that gave it existence. They know that their church has origins in the Roman Church.

But because of imagined (or legitimate, for that matter) slights aginst their ''sovereignty'', they might never allow a reunion with Catholicism. They prefer to ''jury rig'' their own claim to apostolicity and call themselves Catholic despite the Catholic Church's claims upon their loyalty. Too much water has gone by, under the bridge.

I'm afraid I started to alienate Sharon Guy, an Anglican lady that frequents this forum, by relating something like what Craig Miller just wrote. Sharon took it for a type of Catholic arrogance; such statements to her seem to say other churches are worthless, or inferior. I guess I don't blame her. Catholics see only an opposition to the Church, and hardly consider the good things about other churches. It's conditioned in us, knowing how Catholics were persecuted by the English for such a long time. Blood is thicker than water, and we are only human, after all.

I've travelled in England, and seen the tremendous devotion of her Catholic English people. If anything, they rival the Irish and Spanish and Polish Catholic Church for their love of Christ's Holy Church. Well they should. The soil of England is enriched with underground blood of martyrs for the Faith. It is a truly holy land! I speak as a practicing Catholic when I say, England was blessed in a Henry and an Elizabeth I. Their sins brought about a great testimony of faith from the English Catholic Church. Many thousands of faithful testified to God in heaven of their unselfish LOVE for His Church, and for the Blessed Sacrament. Their properties and loved ones and finally their own lives were given up for their faith. God is glorified many times more by this than by a lukewarm faith. I always keep this in mind, when I criticize the English. Catholics can learn a lot from England, even estranged from us as she is. God bless the English, and bring them back someday to their Holy Mother Church; as a nation.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), March 08, 2001.


Thanks all for a reasoned description of our differences with no trace of arrogance from anybody. See! Catholics and Anglicans can discuss sensibly!

Eugene, you haven't completely alienated me and I am, for the most part enjoying my lessons in Catholicism. I am English but have never persecuted anyone. I am not responsibible for the accident of my birth. I could have been Italian or Japanese! I do work to try to ensure that nothing like the persecutions of the past can happen again and theats why I get upset when certain people on both sides of the debate muddy the waters with arrogance or hate or intolerance. There should be no place for it in our discourse.

I respect your beliefs, even those I don't understand. There are many in the Anglican church whose beliefs match all thos you mentioned as being Catholic but feel there is no place for them due to their gender or sexuality or calling.

I hope that the anglican/catholic divide can be at least narrowed and I pray that this forum will be a tool for bringing people to a deeper understanding of all denominations of christianity, so that ignorance can be overcome and bridges built between us.

-- Sharon (sharon@sguy.co.uk), March 09, 2001.



Yay! Me too, Sharon. Also, remember, in the USA, there really isn't a big problem between Catholics and Protestants. Actually, I heard of this great program where Catholic and Protestant teens from Ireland come to the USA and live for the summer together. They pair Catholics and Protestants together in the same house. It's had good success so far. The teens said they learned more about their own religion and that they could be friends with people of other religions.

-Hannah

-- Hannah (archiegoodwin_and_nerowolfe@hotmail.com), March 09, 2001.


Dear Hannah,
It's fine to be friends with non-Catholics, even some that may be vehemently anti-Catholic Church. But Catholics are NOT free to learn from non-Catholic sources. If they happen to agree on some aspects of the faith, there still remain many absolutely incompatible differences. I have literally hundreds of friends outside the Catholic faith. But many of them would be an actual danger to my eternal salvation, if I were to accept their beliefs. Just one, for instance. If a friend is pro-abortion, I can still be friends with him/her. But I am adamantly pro-life, and would never dream of a compromise with my friend in the matter. The same should that friend argue against Christ's divinity, or the existence of an afterlife, heaven, hell, etc.,

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), March 09, 2001.

Dear Eugene:

Well, of course, Eugene. We should never compromise our beliefs to please our friends. The things the teens were saying was that they had never really known the difference between their religions; they had just been prejudiced against each other. And these teens were from Northern Ireland, where Catholics and Protestants have major problems with each other. I also think that many of the host families were Catholic.

-Hannah

-- Hannah (archiegoodwin_and_nerowolfe@hotmail.com), March 09, 2001.


Jmj

Thanks, Craig and Sharon, for stating that we Catholics are making an effort to be fair and accurate in this thread.

Although not wanting to give up on that spirit of good will, I think that Sharon has given me an opening to state something that will be quite a bit more controversial. I will try to state my case gently.

Sharon wrote: "There are many in the Anglican church whose beliefs match all those [Eugene] mentioned as being Catholic, but feel there is no place for them due to their gender or sexuality or calling."

Now this reminded me of what I was once told by a woman of the Anglican Communion: "I would be an unhappy Catholic since I use the pill for birth control, do not like statues, and feel called to the priesthood. I would find it hard to remain faithful to a church that denied me my identity."

I can understand that feelings and beliefs concerning a person's sex (gender), his/her sexual practices, and his/her vocation in life can be very strong -- even overwhelming at times. However, a person must not allow those things to stand in the way of conversion to the Catholic Church, as soon as the person realizes and acknowledges interiorly that it is the true Church of Jesus. As the Second Vatican Council put it (with my emphasis added): "Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved."

A non-Catholic woman who uses the pill, a man or woman who dislikes statues, or a woman who feels called to the priesthood -- but who, for some reason, is interested in Catholicism -- can be helped by knowing that he/she has been preceded into the Church by huge numbers of similar souls who admitted that they had been mistaken, because they could see that the Bible and history showed the Catholic Church to be the only one that Jesus founded. These folks, while preparing to enter the Church, or even some time after entering, received special graces that helped them to do a complete "about-face" on the subjects of contraception, statues, ordination, and many other difficult issues. This has even happened for female Protestant clergy (and wives of clergymen) who have converted. [I myself had the amazing "about-face" experience on various subjects (including contraception) when I returned to the Church after fifteen years away. I believe that much of it has to do with graces received through the Sacraments of Reconciliation and Holy Eucharist.]

Therefore, the important thing is for us not to judge each of the religions or churches of the world by how it stacks up to (or how tolerant it is of) our personal creed, tendencies, habits, ambitions, or perceived vocation. Rather, each religion/church must be judged rationally and by objective standards -- by consulting Divine Revelation and history -- aided by supernatural grace. Catholics are convinced that, with these as a sincere person's guides, he/she will choose to become Catholic, even when that could mean sacrifice and humble acknowledgment that one has been mistaken about certain things.

St. James, pray for us.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), March 09, 2001.


Yes John, you did state your case gently and yes, you did open the spigot, so to speak, so here goes.

"Therefore, the important thing is for us not to judge each of the religions or churches of the world by how it stacks up to (or how tolerant it is of) our personal creed, tendencies, habits, ambitions, or perceived vocation. Rather, each religion/church must be judged rationally and by objective standards -- by consulting Divine Revelation and history -- aided by supernatural grace" [JFG]

What you have stated in your last paragraph is PRECISELY why the Protestant church I attend is so full of ex-Catholics. Their position, and mine is 180 degrees in the opposite direction of your position. I judge a church based on MY needs, wants and desires and those of my family. What is God's mission for my life? The answer won't come from the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the President of the Southern Baptist Convention. And it will NEVER come from statements like "Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved." Salvation through intimidation? Sorry.

I'm sure John, you could give me glowing accounts of people who found the path of salvation through the Catholic church. I could counter with just as many accounts of people who opted out for the Protestant church. Not to mention the poeple I know who thumbed their noses at BOTH institutions and embraced Wicca. The point is, it would turn into a tit-for-tat with no winners.

God's answer WILL come from thoughtful prayer and reflection. If God's answer to me or anyone is the Catholic church, so be it. If not, then have the grace to accept that also. Statements of condemnation by individuals OR institutions is the work of cowards. I am simply not impressed.

We could engage in Prayer Wars. That would be fun. What would OUR Boss have us do? (WWJD)

Regards,

(:raig Miller

-- Craig Miller (cmiller@ssd.com), March 09, 2001.



Dear Craig,
The amazing thing is you think a Church must fulfill your own agaenda or expectation. This is precisely what the Jews have always thought. They are blinded for the sake of all the nations, but you would accept blindness for your present needs, wants and desires (Your words.) on your own volition.

Nobody gives a fig if the church you attend has a 100% ex-Catholic congregation. That doesn't help a single member! What does? The True Church does.

Is my use of the word ''blindness'' hard to accept? I'll give it up and say you would accept a ''substitute''. Well, all those ex-Catholics at your church have got used to faux Catholic teaching, and they think it tastes just as good. Susan Magistro thinks it's better!I wish you all luck. It is still not the Church as Jesus Christ left it for you. I can't imagine why you would any of you have to be ''forced'' to join the Church of the Glorious Son of God. Go figure /

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), March 09, 2001.


Dear (:raig,

You said: <> Does that mean you only believe in *relative* morals? After all, if the Catholic Church is right, then people should follow its teachings regardless of their personal desires. For example, the Church teaches that people should not have sex outside of marriage and that homosexual sex is wrong. Not all churches do, though. Should people search for religions that approve of her particular lusts? Should a person who is pro-abortion just join a religion that is pro-abortion? And if you take it that far, what good would religion really be doing in your life? Because if your religion doesn't help you understand and overcome your sins, then it's pretty useless spiritually.

What I'm saying, Craig, is that religious beliefs are more than a matter of comfort. When it comes to most of them, there is a right and there is a wrong. Abortion is wrong, or it's not. Human's have fundamental rights from the moment of conception, or they don't. The Church is infallible, or it's not. God exists, or He doesn't. The Eucharist is the Body of Christ, or it's not. These are mutually exclusive ideas.

Of course, I may have totally misunderstood your post. If I did, I apologize.

-Hannah

-- Hannah (archiegoodwin_and_nerowolfe@hotmail.com), March 09, 2001.


Off italic

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), March 09, 2001.

Hannah,

You just taught me something. I have often thought that some people chose religions that matched their particular habits, but what never occurred to me was that this practice kept them from correcting their sins in these areas. Thanks for the insight.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), March 09, 2001.


Jmj

Hi, Craig.
I was sorry to read your post. Hannah has eloquently expressed my thoughts about the major problem in it, so I won't pile on.

I will just say that I was terribly disappointed at your reaction to the quotation I gave from the Second Vatican Council -- which I offered with a friendly intent. You failed to notice that I intentionally "bolded" the word "knowing." I did that to assure you that my Church does not teach that non-Catholics and ex-Catholics are automatically damned. One has to "know" (i.e., admit to oneself) the truth about the Catholic Church, and yet turn one's back on her, before one can be in danger on that score. This is not "intimidation," as you mistakenly called it! Rather, it is eminently reasonable and conciliatory!

"Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved."

St. Thomas More and St. John Fisher and all other holy martyrs of the British Isles, please pray for the unity of Anglicans and Catholics.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), March 09, 2001.



Oh, Hannah. I forgot to mention that you cannot place a quotation between "less than" and "greater than" signs, if you'd like it to show up in your post. (You can see how Craig's words disappeared from your message.) The reason is that those symbols start and end HTML (hypertext markup language) tags, which are used to cause bolding, italicizing, underscoring, etc.. I recommend that you use quotation marks or other symbols. Chris Butler used to use triple braces! {{{ blah-blah-blah. }}}

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), March 09, 2001.


Aha! So that's what went wrong there. Thanks, John. I'm used to using those for French class. I'll remember not to use them online!

-Hannah

-- Hannah (archiegoodwin_and_nerowolfe@hotmail.com), March 09, 2001.


Ah, but God does not run a democracy. When what He asks of us conflicts with our desires, aspirations, or philosophy, it is demanded that we change those desires, aspirations, or philosophies and not simply hang around people who endorse our own view.

Who had the quote about people "surrounding themselves with teachers whose messages suited them" on another thread?

.......................................................

-- anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), March 10, 2001.


Yes, Anthony,
Let's suppose Jesus Christ had restored the Davidic Kingdom to the Jews. He is now a Messiah after their own hearts! They can be lords of all the nations; and there He is: The King!

Would they have had to cry, ''Crucify him!''

No way! Crucifixion is for slaves; Jesus is our King. He did what He's supposed to do! He made us powerful and splendid over all the nations of the earth. We love Him!

But they cried ''CRUCIFY HIM!'' He didn't fit their mold.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), March 10, 2001.


Jmj

I am the "guilty" party, Anthony, and here is the quotation, within its context -- St. Paul solemnly addressing the new bishop, St. Timothy:

2 Timothy, chapter 4
1: I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom:
2: preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching.
3: For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings,
4: and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), March 10, 2001.


thanks, John. 'preciate it...

....................

-- anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), March 10, 2001.


huummm? I HAVE BEEN DIGESTING ALL THE COMMENTS. I AM A VERY LOST CATHOLIC TRYING TO FIND A PLACE THAT MATCHES MY BELIEFS. THESE ARE NOT THINGS I PICK AND CHOOSE. THE BELIEFS ARE EMBEDDED, ENGRAINED IN MY SOUL. I BELIEVE ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING HERE ON EARTH IS INFALLIBLE. THAT INCLUDES THE CHURCH AND THE POPE, BUT EXCLUDES JESUS CHRIST WHO WAS GOD HIMSELF WHO CHOSE TO SAVE OUR RETCHED SOULS. EVERYTHING GIVEN TO US IS A GIFT OF GRACE GIVEN TO US BY OUR FATHERS DISCRETION. THE TRUTH LIES WITHIN OURSELVES VIA THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD WHO IS NOT FALLIBLE. THE KINGDOM OF GOD LIES WITHIN. THE HOLY SPIRIT OF TRUTH WILL GUIDE AND DIRECT EACH OF US WHO WERE CHOSEN BY GOD. I DO NOT BELIEVE ANY CHURCH WILL SATISFY ALL OF OUR NEEDS AS THEY ALL HAVE FLAWS...NONE ARE PERFECT.

I LEFT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AFTER 40 YEARS BECAUSE THERE WERE TOOOO MANY MISTAKES THAT I ENCOUNTERED WITH PRIESTS. THE LAST STRAW THAT BROKE THE CAMELS BACK WAS:...I HELP WITH THE CCD ON WED. NIGHTS. I WAS VERY ACTIVE IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. MY SON WAS GOING TO MAKE HIS FIRST COMMUNION. DURING THE FIRST CONFESSION EVENING, WHEN MY SON MADE HIS FIRST CONFESSION, I THEN ENTERED TO GIVE MY CONFESSION. (IN OUR CHURCH DURING THE FIRST COMMUNION CEREMONY THE FAMILY WOULD PARTAKE IN COMMUNION TOGETHER.) I WAS IN THE CONFESSIONAL BOTH POURING OUT MY SINS CLEANSING MY HEART.... THE PRIEST SAID HE WOULD NOT ABSOLVE ME OF MY SINS..... I COULD NOT BELIEVE MY EARS. I TOLD HIM HE DID NOT NEED TO GOD WOULD. NOW I KNOW PRIEST ARE PEOPLE AND THEY MAKE MISTAKES, BUT I AM JUST NOT HAPPY THERE NOW, AND I AM LOST BECAUSE I WAS RAISED CATHOLIC. I DO NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE IN ANOTHER CHURCH, SO I AM LOOKING FOR SOMETHING THAT IS CATHOLIC BUT MAYBE A DIFFERENT BRANCH OF CATHOLIC.

THE REASON HE CHOSE NOT TO ABSOLVE ME OF MY SINS IS BECAUSE I AM NOT MARRIED IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. THE PRIEST KNEW THIS. HE KNEW WHO I WAS. I HAD SPOKEN TO HIM PREVIOUSLY OF MARRING IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ON OUR 25 ANNIVERSARY WHICH WAS ONLY MONTHS AWAY WITHIN 6 MONTHS. HE INSISTED THAT WE MARRY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AS IF I WERE LIVING IN SIN... I WAS MARRIED IN THE LUTHERAN CHURCH. MY HUSBAND WAS CONVERTED TO A CATHOLIC. HE WAS LUTHERAN. IT TOOK MANY YEARS TO CONVERT HIM. FOR MANY MANY YEARS ME AND THE KIDS WENT TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. HE STAYED HOME. THEN ONE SUNDAY WE ALL STARTED GOING. I REFUSE TO ACCEPT THAT MY CHILDREN ARE ILLEGITIMATE. WHICH IS WHAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH WOULD HAVE ME BELIEVE. THAT I AM LIVING IN SIN UNTIL I AM MARRIED BY THE ONE AND ONLY TRUE CHURCH--NOT. WE ARE GATHERED TOGETHER TO SHARE IN OUR FAITH WORSHIP GOD TOGETHER. JESUS STARTED HIS OWN CHURCH. HE MADE MAJOR CHANGES THAT WERE HARD TO ACCEPT BY MANY, BUT ARE NOW WIDELY ACCEPTED. THEREFORE I SAY CHANGE IS GOOD, AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH NEEDS TO CHANGE. AT ONE TIME PRIEST DID MARRY. THAT WAS CHANGED. I FEEL THAT GOES AGAINST GOD AS HE TOLD US TO GO OUT AND FILL THE EARTH. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADVICE FOR ME I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT AS I NEED TO TAKE MY FAMILY TO CHURCH. ONE THAT WILL ACCEPT MY MARRIAGE BUT IS CATHOLIC REFORMED MAYBE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IN THE TRINITY..+++...<>< TAAS

-- toryann s. (ptdpjkns@lycos.com), July 01, 2001.


I meant the church and pope are both fallible, they both are cabable of making mistakes because nothing on earth is perfect except GOD.

-- toryann s. (ptdpjkns@lycos.com), July 19, 2001.

Since the title of this thread is "differences between catholic and church of england?" -- I hope that no one will be upset by the fact that I am going to start a new thread consisting of Toryann's two messages (which are unrelated to the Church of England).
Please do not reply to her here, but rather on the new thread, which will be entitled, "LOST CATHOLIC TRYING TO FIND A PLACE THAT MATCHES MY BELIEFS." [That title comes from the beginning of Toryann's first message.]
Thanks. JFG

-- (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), July 19, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ