Hello father. I've been attending an Anglican parish since June. It's ACNA and part of the rocky mountains diocese. I have really been falling in love with the tradition and am firmly convinced of Anglican distinctives. I have a Presbyterian friend and he says I'm on my way to Rome and I tell him "I'm not going to be Roman Catholic for the same reason I'm not Reformed... I don't want to believe in new doctrine " My question is though what's wrong with the 2019 BCP? I come from a Reformed Baptist background and they were really into the 1689 LBCF and the regulative principle and all that. So the 2019 BCP for me is an absolute Godsent. It just makes me feel connected to the church catholic because of the liturgy and daily office as well as the different collects. All this stuff was missing from my Reformed Baptist upbringing. So I guess long story short I love the 2019 BCP maybe it's just because I'm new to Anglicanism lol.
Oh, I don't hate the 2019; I do like it in many ways. My issue with it is that it has too many options, which diminishes the concept of "common prayer". There is a lot I love about the 2019, especially the Traditional Language Edition.
This stream sums up many of the historical theological fights within the CoE. How protestant do we want to be? How much ceremony should we retain? Will this portray to the dumb peasants that we are performing magic?
1662 removes any suggestion that you are sacrificing christ. The prayers are after communion has been consumed and therfore places the content of sacrifice on the people as living sacrifice. That is what the oblation in the 1928 does. Real presence has nothing to do with it. Mode of presence is not mentioned in the oblation. Also it is hardly a more lutheran rite to mention any kind of oblation because Lutherans are very adamant about not thinking communion is any kind of oblation of the body of christ.
@@hexahexametermeter you're giving a surface-level critique of the issue: as Anglicans (and the Lutherans and even early Puritans agree), we do not reject ANY and ALL understandings of the Mass being a sacrifice. Chiefly, we ALL confess that by the Sacrifice we mean that we are united to Christ in the Mass.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Of course. You think I'm going to exhaust this subject for you in a single comment on your vlog? You didn't even know the part of the prayerbook was even called The Oblation. Surface level indeed. But reject any understanding that what is offered in the sacrifice is Christ? Absolutely.
@@barelyprotestant5365 The Book of Concord speaks directly to exactly what you are doing, which is taking advantage of the ambiguity of the word 'sacrifice'. "In the Confutation they have said many things concerning “sacrifice,” although in our Confession we purposely avoided this term on account of its ambiguity. We have set forth what those persons whose abuses we condemn now understand as a sacrifice. .... [Eucharistic sacrifices] Eucharistic sacrifices are called sacrifices of praise, Lev. 3:1f.; 7:11f.; Ps. 56:12f., namely, the *preaching of the Gospel, faith, prayer, thanksgiving, confession, the afflictions of saints, yea, all good works of saints*. These sacrifices are not satisfactions for those making them, or applicable on behalf of others, so as to merit for these, ex opere operato, the remission of sins or reconciliation. For they are made by those who have been reconciled. "And such are the sacrifices of the New Testament, as Peter teaches, 1 Pet. 2:5: An holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices. Spiritual sacrifices, however, are contrasted not only with those of cattle, but even with human works offered ex opere operato, because spiritual refers to the movements of the Holy Ghost in us. Paul teaches the same thing Rom. 12:1: Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable, which is your reasonable service. Reasonable service signifies, however, a service in which God is known, and apprehended by the mind, as happens in the movements of fear and trust towards God. Therefore it is opposed not only to the Levitical service, in which cattle are slain, but also to a service in which a work is imagined to be offered ex opere operato, The Epistle to the Hebrews 13:15, teaches the same thing: By Him, therefore, let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually; and he adds the interpretation, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. He bids us offer praises, i.e., prayer, thanksgiving, confession, and the like. These avail not ex opere operato, but on account of faith. This is taught by the clause: By Him let us offer, i.e., by faith in Christ."
@@hexahexametermeter I did not know the part of which he was speaking. Calm down and maybe don't be so defensive? You seem upset. Do you reject Christ our sacrifice is offered to us? Because that is one of the proper understandings of sacrifice.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Not upset at all. Reject Christ? Why would you come to that conclusion? Bizarre to me that a pastor would assume that of someone.
Hello father. I've been attending an Anglican parish since June. It's ACNA and part of the rocky mountains diocese. I have really been falling in love with the tradition and am firmly convinced of Anglican distinctives. I have a Presbyterian friend and he says I'm on my way to Rome and I tell him "I'm not going to be Roman Catholic for the same reason I'm not Reformed... I don't want to believe in new doctrine "
My question is though what's wrong with the 2019 BCP? I come from a Reformed Baptist background and they were really into the 1689 LBCF and the regulative principle and all that. So the 2019 BCP for me is an absolute Godsent. It just makes me feel connected to the church catholic because of the liturgy and daily office as well as the different collects. All this stuff was missing from my Reformed Baptist upbringing.
So I guess long story short I love the 2019 BCP maybe it's just because I'm new to Anglicanism lol.
Oh, I don't hate the 2019; I do like it in many ways. My issue with it is that it has too many options, which diminishes the concept of "common prayer". There is a lot I love about the 2019, especially the Traditional Language Edition.
@barelyprotestant5365 that makes sense thank you for the response.
another book to order.
2019 TLE is dope.
I don't think that Fr. Toon actually left the CoE. I think he kept his canonical membership over there.
This stream sums up many of the historical theological fights within the CoE.
How protestant do we want to be?
How much ceremony should we retain? Will this portray to the dumb peasants that we are performing magic?
Would you say this is the result of not having a more defined confession?
@@redknightsr69 Perhaps; moreso the issue of trying to appease the Puritans, I would say.
Great video, but no to a new BCP. Use of the 1928 is the main unifying element and we have trouble achieving organic unity as it is
@@C.EricWood once the G3 get together, there should be a new BCP.
1662 removes any suggestion that you are sacrificing christ. The prayers are after communion has been consumed and therfore places the content of sacrifice on the people as living sacrifice. That is what the oblation in the 1928 does. Real presence has nothing to do with it. Mode of presence is not mentioned in the oblation. Also it is hardly a more lutheran rite to mention any kind of oblation because Lutherans are very adamant about not thinking communion is any kind of oblation of the body of christ.
@@hexahexametermeter you're giving a surface-level critique of the issue: as Anglicans (and the Lutherans and even early Puritans agree), we do not reject ANY and ALL understandings of the Mass being a sacrifice. Chiefly, we ALL confess that by the Sacrifice we mean that we are united to Christ in the Mass.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Of course. You think I'm going to exhaust this subject for you in a single comment on your vlog? You didn't even know the part of the prayerbook was even called The Oblation. Surface level indeed.
But reject any understanding that what is offered in the sacrifice is Christ? Absolutely.
@@barelyprotestant5365 The Book of Concord speaks directly to exactly what you are doing, which is taking advantage of the ambiguity of the word 'sacrifice'.
"In the Confutation they have said many things concerning “sacrifice,” although in our Confession we purposely avoided this term on account of its ambiguity. We have set forth what those persons whose abuses we condemn now understand as a sacrifice.
....
[Eucharistic sacrifices] Eucharistic sacrifices are called sacrifices of praise, Lev. 3:1f.; 7:11f.; Ps. 56:12f., namely, the *preaching of the Gospel, faith, prayer, thanksgiving, confession, the afflictions of saints, yea, all good works of saints*. These sacrifices are not satisfactions for those making them, or applicable on behalf of others, so as to merit for these, ex opere operato, the remission of sins or reconciliation. For they are made by those who have been reconciled.
"And such are the sacrifices of the New Testament, as Peter teaches, 1 Pet. 2:5: An holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices. Spiritual sacrifices, however, are contrasted not only with those of cattle, but even with human works offered ex opere operato, because spiritual refers to the movements of the Holy Ghost in us. Paul teaches the same thing Rom. 12:1: Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable, which is your reasonable service. Reasonable service signifies, however, a service in which God is known, and apprehended by the mind, as happens in the movements of fear and trust towards God. Therefore it is opposed not only to the Levitical service, in which cattle are slain, but also to a service in which a work is imagined to be offered ex opere operato, The Epistle to the Hebrews 13:15, teaches the same thing: By Him, therefore, let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually; and he adds the interpretation, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. He bids us offer praises, i.e., prayer, thanksgiving, confession, and the like. These avail not ex opere operato, but on account of faith. This is taught by the clause: By Him let us offer, i.e., by faith in Christ."
@@hexahexametermeter I did not know the part of which he was speaking. Calm down and maybe don't be so defensive? You seem upset.
Do you reject Christ our sacrifice is offered to us? Because that is one of the proper understandings of sacrifice.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Not upset at all. Reject Christ? Why would you come to that conclusion? Bizarre to me that a pastor would assume that of someone.