I've Changed My Mind on Some Things
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.ย. 2024
- Praying to Saints, the Canterbury Communion and GAFCON, Protestantism, other Denominations, the Eucharistic Sacrifice and Salvation by Faith Alone - how have I changed my beliefs about these things?
Some answers to your questions about this video here:
• Sola Fide, Regeneratio...
Related Articles:
newkingdom.med...
newkingdom.med...
newkingdom.med...
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (2/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GgeGQOP10RQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Im from Egypt and i was raised as a coptic orthodox church.... After revising the main doctrines of my denomination, I finally took the view of evangelical anglicanism which im happy that u share mostly the same view
Woow im eastern orthodox and im surprised to find someone who has been in my position
@@maximhornby5493 welcome my brother in christ ❤️❤️❤️
Bassem?
Very cool. I've been in the reformed camp for over a decade now and am just beginning my journey into high church Anglicanism from a reformed Baptist starting point. Looks like we are ending up in the same place from opposite starting lines!
same
@@morgunism why is it difficult?
was raised Episcopalian, left and for 40 years been in bible churches, charismatica, etc...Returned to my roots and its been a blessing and learning the meanings of the eucharist and liturgy.
Did you read John owen's schism (defense of congregationalism)? Or any of the defenses of the dissenters in general in English?
Same here!
Currently visiting an ACNA church and love it after being in several different streams of Christianity-it is so beautiful! Really appreciate how well explained your videos are.
Thanks for your series of videos on the Anglican tradition-I'm currently in some sort of discernment process between Catholicism and Anglicanism and am thankful to hear the Anglican perspective in a straightforward manner. God bless!
Did you listen to Defense of the Augsburg Confession and Apology of the Church of England?
Thank you for being brave enough to clarify some of the things in earlier videos I was a bit worried about. Not many "internet Christians" would do that.
Thank you for this! I wholeheartedly agree with your statement about the ACNA and what it really means to be part of the Anglican Communion!
God bless and I am glad that you changed of your views! (I'm a Protestant Molinist btw)
I started going to an ACNA church a couple months ago and currently undergoing catechesis. I love the Anglican expression of the faith, but the divide does trouble me.
Love the channel my man.
I'm in the ACNA as well (well, specifically, in the REC). There are some issues on the diversity of beliefs, I will admit.
I have been contemplating joining a Anglican Church that falls under the ACNA, what are concerns that you have about ACNA?
@@eric_wood It's not so much in my church (to my knowledge) but I'm aware of some of the divide this channel has stated in other videos. But, there seems to be a push to get the layfolks back to the basics. The clergy are holding adult discipleship classes about the Trinity (stuff that I just went through one-on-one in my catechesis). I'm in the Jacksonville area by the way.
I love hearing your testimony! I have been studying Anglicanism for several years now. I was Reformed Baptist, but have since become convinctionally and confessionally Anglican. I am in transition to the Anglican communion but am not yet a confirmed Anglican. I was initially drawn to the historicity of the communion and was drawn also to Anglo Catholic and High church expressions of Anglicanism. But I was deeply convinced of justification of faith alone and leary of legalism and Romanism. I discovered Reformation Anglicanism and like you moved into more of a Reformed high church place.
I have come to understand many of the things you are articulating here. I am very excited about where you have come. I look forward to you studying this more and to the future videos you put out. I hope we can talk sometime. Grace and peace.
Awesome and God bless! Anglo-Catholics take exceptions all over the place to Anglican doctrines and replace them Roman or Orthodox Church doctrines not because of their Scriptural hermeneutic.
So you have to have a long inititation and be confirmed to be Anglican, like w/ Catholicism? I guess that means that other Christians can't come to church and take communion until they are confirmed. I have heard that you don't have to be baptized again, so not sure how that works. I know how it works w/ Catholicism, having to do RCIA classes first, and then having to attest to all the doctrines and dogmas.
Hey there. Commenting on an old thread, I’m technically reformed baptist but we are being more drawn to Anglicanism. We mainly no longer affirm “Calvinism”/limited atonement; however, we affirm the rest of the traditionally held reformed views. Do you find reformed Anglicanism to be Calvinistic?
@@briannalipham4402 the Anglican formularies do not affirm a strict Limited atonement in the vein of later puritanism. I think you may find their moderate Reformed position appealing
I'm right there with you! I consider myself Presbyterian theologically, but I prefer liturgy, have a very high view of the Sacraments, etc.
We believe in communion of saints. The realm of God is working within us as Jesus said The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!”Mark 1:15 already among us. It's not up there. We are living and worshipping with all saints.
Rev 8;4 and the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, rose before God from the hand of the angel. Please reflect on Hebrew 12. It's good not to throw the baby with water
After a long absence from Christ, practically a rebellion against faith, I'm investigating the ACNA as a path back. I was raised United Methodist., but went through phases of adherence to the teachings of BIll Gothard, Pentecostalism, and finally atheism. The matter is far from settled, but I am drawn to the grace and peace I sense in talking Communion. I appreciate that your views have evolved. Mine are doing so as well, and I hope that this change is occuring under the influence of the Holy Spirit.
Lutheran here. About sacrifice in the Eucharist. More recent attention on the meaning of remembrance (αναμνησιν) has helped forge ecumenical agreement where once there were only irreconcilable differences. Remembrance should be viewed as a bringing into the present moment the one atoning sacrifice of Christ at the cross, not simply a mental exercise of thinking about what happened long ago. Sure, we can bring our praise and thanksgiving, but it’s the sacrifice of Christ on the cross that is sufficient for the forgiveness of sin. So, more important than what we bring to the celebration is what God has provided. The Spirit brings us together to receive through faith what God has provided. We are re-membering or bringing into the present what God has done at the altar of the cross. It’s not a new sacrifice, but that same sacrifice at Calvary but now.
Blessings to my Anglican brothers and sisters!
I asked about being conservative in the Episcopal Church. I was told by the Priest, we have people of all political views. At church we are one people as taught by Christ and the Apostles both in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
Greetings from Canterbury ( The U.K. one.)
I'm an Anglican and belong to the Church of England. I'd say it would be good to have all anglican churches in communion with Centebury. Because right now, we need all the voices within the communion pushing back on the Liberal theology creeping in.
Bro the more you pray and study the more God will reveal to you. Keep up the great work 👍🏾
Can't say I agree with all of your conclusions, but I am quite grateful for your dedication to truth.
You've articulated these positions quite clearly. I am from a Evangelical Low Church Anglican background though would consider myself leaning more towards a High Church expression over the last year or two. Though as you have expressed, I also place my Evangelicalism above my leaning Low or High Church. As a result I happily worship with my Low Church brethren in my local Parish which I work for. Would I like something a little more rooted in the Tradition so as to be a little deeper in the faith each week? Sure. But my main concern is that the truth is being preached.
I'm probably the only "Continuing" Anglican posting thus far but here are a few thoughts off the top of my head. First, greetings from the USA, I am greatly enjoying your videos which among other things reinforce my appreciation for the diversity of thought among believing Anglicans. It is good to know that Reformation Anglicanism is alive and well in the next generation. Please, keep up the good work. Second, direct prayers to saints are problematic and I avoid them whenever I use the Anglican Missal. The furthest I’ll go in certain parishes during public worship is to petition God for a particular saint’s intercession and always use the antiphon, “through Jesus Christ our Lord” but I’m even uncomfortable with that, truth be told. Better to just address petitions to one or all three persons of the blessed Trinity. Third, regarding communion with Canterbury, as I mentioned earlier, I am a Continuing Anglican (we pre-date ACNA/Gafcon by some 30 odd years). At our commencement, we never broke communion with Canterbury. Canterbury broke communion with us! We subsequently broke communion with Canterbury in 1985 over the ordination of women. As it stands now, at least informally, we consider ourselves in communion with faithful Anglicans wherever we can find them. We do talk with ACNA but tend to be closer to it's more Anglo-Catholic elements. My particular jurisdiction has a formal concordat with the REC. Fourth, I think you are on to something regarding via media as a middle way between Calvinism and Lutheranism (I personally lean Lutheran especially in terms of Christology and sacramentology) but there has always been a significant Calvinistic pulse to Anglicanism (which at one time was dominant) and it has an illustrious history. That said, I tend to shiver whenever people pose protestant and catholic in opposition. A true Protestant is a Catholic who "protests" on behalf of the Bible. But yes, we are definitely not "Roman" Catholic in any way, shape or form. Fifth, the term ”Eucharist" is usually not used amongst traditional Anglicans. While we rejoice with great thanksgiving in this marvelous gift of God, and while it is most appropriate to go forth in proclamation as Christ has indeed commanded, to name this Sacrament for our response to it seems to me a bit inappropriate. The focus is not to be on what we do, but on what God has done and delivers to us through Jesus Christ in this Sacrament. Sixth, my understanding is that churches lacking the historic episcopate are “irregular” (you might even say, "non-conformist," lol) not “unChristian.” Anglicanism has a history of being careful NOT to "de-Church" others. I'm reminded of something my ancestors used to say during slavery, "The Lord can hit a straight lick with a crooked stick." The wisdom being that God can take our imperfections, even our wayward churches, and still achieve his purposes. Finally, here's some extra reading for your calculus: anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/p/affirmation-of-st-louis.html and www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009AWAL7G/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_6?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1 Blessings to you, brother!
Thank you for this link Father. I will read on this. I am a Continuing High Church - Anglocatholic.
Fr James ??/?/&/!
I love the Episcopal Church. I am so happy to have discovered that church. I am very happy to be a member of it.
Episcopal Church is heretical and abandoned the truth in the scripture. Join ACNA (if you leaning towards low church) or Continuing Anglican (if you are leaning more anglo-catholic) brother.
@@CYC_JP No, thank you. I am perfectly happy in the Episcopal Church. All the best.
@@CYC_JPim not too familiar with the episcipalian church. What exactly are these heresies they spout. Do they deny the divinity or humanity of christ? Do they have a flawed understanding of the trinity? Do they give communion to the un baptised? Or are they just liberal?
@@webz3589they're just liberal, we say the Nicene creed every Sunday at my high church Episcopal congregation.
Outstanding!! Lots of deep thought and prayer involved herein. Congratulations! I too subscribe to the via media but with a strong right lane! + Fr. Mel McMinn
As Anglican I consider myself Catholic but not Roman Catholic. As Lancelot Andrews describes it I’m Catholic as the Church universal before the split. The Church where East and West agreed before Rome declared themselves head of the Church though the other four Churches did not agree.
The beauty of the Anglo Catholic label is not just that we believe in the creeds of the undivided church pre-Rome, but it also means that a good Anglican should feel just as home in an Anglican or Roman church.
I do attend a catholic church every now and then, since not many Anglican churches around here have a daily mass (they used to, before Covid). I cringe when they talk about purgatory and I don't take communion, but almost everything about the service is identical to an Anglican or Episcopal church service.
A purely protestant Christian would need much more adjustment if they entered a Roman church.
I admire your approach in dealing with the challenges of understanding your religion. Raised a Catholic, converted to Anglicanism due to marriage, I remain totally confused. IMHO God wants us to think about these things and make up our own mind.
Great video. Pushed me to fully invest in a GAFCON church
I really like a lot of your calirificstions and I thank you for emphasizing some Protestants aspects of our faith as well, even some stuff I didn’t know about. For me personally, the only major disagreement I have is in regards to saintly intercession (for me, it’s been a very helpful spiritual practice), but I appreciate you saying you don’t think people that do it are heretical.
Good video. However, I remain in the Anglo Catholic point of view that Anglicanism spread from the undivided church from the first millennium. For this reason, I stick to the tractarian point of view and have a high view of the sacraments and don’t bother about reformers like Zwingli and Calvin at all.
Ironically most of the Anglo-Catholics today are Liberal Anglicans, they abandoned all Anglican/Catholic theological traditions expect the sacraments.
When you say that Anglicanism is a via media between Calvinism and Lutheranism, do you see a place for Arminianism in there too? And what are you thoughts on Molinism?
ISAIAH 55:11 KJV "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall.
Great video, sorry for the late comment but I just found your channel.
As a fellow Reformed (probably mid-to-high Church) Anglican attending a Presbyterian seminary, I think it’s worth pointing out that historically, it was the Presbyterians who held a more narrow/strict view of the Church militant and the Conformists who had the broader view.
If you read Hooker’s “Lawes” (as well as his sermons on justification) you can see how broadly and charitably he draws the boundaries of the Church, compared to the early Puritans who would often go so far as to prohibit even the reading of Holy Scripture if it wasn’t accompanied by an extended lecture.
In this way I think the Anglican Church has historically had a strong comprehension of the difference between the visible and invisible Church. Again, historically speaking, it was the Presbyterians who insisted on a positively stated, limited definition of the valid marks of the Church. I don’t think such a view prevailed in the Anglican communion until the Oxford movement.
" Puritans who would often go so far as to prohibit even the reading of Holy Scripture if it wasn’t accompanied by an extended lecture." Where can I read about this? I haven't heard it before.
As a cradle Episcopalian (who now attends an ACNA church) I'd just like to say that PECUSA is called the Episcopal Church, not the Episcopalian Church. Episcopalian is a noun, referring to a member of the Episcopal Church, so the word Episcopal is an adjective. Maybe this sounds pedantic but the phrase 'Episcopalian Church' makes Episcopalians cringe.
😊
Nice to see you moving in this direction. It's scriptural.
Thank you for having the courage to stand for Biblical truth.
First time viewer. I think Protestantism gets a lot right, but I would reevaluate the Calvinist predestination stance. Many of the verses used as Calvinist proof texts have good Arminian and Provisionist explanations.
Romans 9 for instance is explained well by Mike Winger.
I'm checking out your channel because many of the Christian TH-camrs I listen to are from a single denomination, and I wanted to get a different perspective. I'm a big fan of C.S. Lewis and respect the KJV and many of the old theologians, hence my looking into Anglicanism.
Hey there! I’m considering Anglicanism as well. I was previously a reformed baptist, but now more molinist or provisionist. Do you think that is compatible with Anglicanism? I’ve learned that not all anglicans are Calvinistic.
@briannalipham4402 They seem to generally believe in free will, but may differ on the details. I wouldn't necessarily recommend joining them as a denomination though because they have their own issues (especially holdovers from Catholicism). But I think they are generally our brothers and sisters in Christ.
For instance, I'm a big fan of C.S. Lewis; he gets a lot right, has a knack for explaining things, and I like how he approaches everything from a place of general revelation. But he also apparently believed in purgatory, and had a few errors in his understanding of the new creation we become in Christ.
N.T. Wright has an excellent way of emphasizing the kingdom of heaven part of the gospel message. But I don't say that everything he ever said was true.
So, like any denomination, we need to take what teachers say with a grain of salt and be good Bereans, "examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things are so."
If you're looking for a denomination to attend, I think the most consistently good denomination is Calvary Chapel. Mike Winger and Chuck Smith (its founder) are good people to listen to on TH-cam. On predestination they lean toward free will, but generally have the attitude of "either way whoever believes is saved, and we're told to preach the gospel."
They're especially good about doing verse by verse teaching. Chuck Smith taught through most of, if not all, of the Bible.
Here's Mike Winger's channel:
youtube.com/@mikewinger?si=TuldXFFMMQW9xPx1
Here's a channel with Chuck Smith's sermons:
youtube.com/@pastorchucksmithtwft?si=fOX7q_ieWb3KxFwC
Also, provisionism is generally associated with Baptists. You might just look for a non-Reformed, Baptist church. The only issue there is that it seems like they vary a little more than Calvary Chapel.
You MIGHT look into Methodism (which is descended from Anglicanism) if you're determined to go in the Anglican direction, but they can really be hit or miss, sometimes even ordaining homosexual pastors.
I would just look into what they all believe, compare it to Scripture, and pray about it.
Thanks for the comment, I pray that you'll find the right place. And congratulations on getting out of Reformed theology; there are a lot of godly Reformed brothers and sisters out there, but their theology on predestination and election is wrong, and there's so much more joy in realizing that God loves everyone and extends the offer of salvation to us all.
@@jessehendrix2661 Mike Winger and Leighton Flowers are actually the first people we listened to when leaving Calvinism. Unfortunately, as a family with children, the Methodist churches here are either full of no potential fellowship or woke. All the baptist churches completely lose their ground with any sound doctrine or they are Calvinist. There aren’t any close Calvary chapel’s, we have looked there too. Part of the draw to Anglicanism is due to their reverence for doctrine (and leaving room for disagreeing as far as soteriology goes and other tertiary issues). There does seem to be a solid “Church of Christ” near us. I know it seems opposite of Anglicanism, but those two camps seem to draw us the most 😅
@briannalipham4402 Same two people for me actually. Mike Winger's video on Romans 9 was a turning point in particular.
Something I've also considered is having a small house church. When I was in college, I was in a small group and was never more on fire. But it may be hard to get started.
I certainly would go to a good, godly Anglican church rather than nothing. Not very familiar with Church of Christ. But whatever church you consider, just find out what they believe and compare it to Scripture (like it seems you're doing), and pray about it a lot. God will put you in the right place.
You should give the church grace on some issues, like a general belief in free will without a clear doctrine on it, or a church where the dress code isn't what you're used to; there will be no perfect church. But I would stay away from a church that believes in works righteousness, or one which harps on a wrong doctrine (Reformed churches for instance).
Coincidentally, the church I went to with the small groups was Reformed, but predestination wasn't emphasized, and, since we had some autonomy as small groups, there were a variety of beliefs.
I'll pray for you about it. Glad to hear we have so much in common, sister.
@@jessehendrix2661 thank you so much for your prayers. It’s hard for me to leave the reformed/Calvinistic world. It truly feels like I’ve left a cult and don’t know where I belong anymore! 🥲 most churches I am drawn to (that aren’t obsessed with lights/children’s church/etc and have a focus on familial worship/elder led instead) seem to be reformed. I’m in the southern baptist Bible Belt, so I’m so hesitant to go to any particular baptist church due to the lack of deep dive into the scriptures and the lack of zeal.
To my understanding, some believe the Church of England began BEFORE its union with the Roman Church. If that is true, then what "church" brought the gospel to England? and was that "church" affirming of the creeds, and if so, then how could it not be the Roman church?
If baptism only becomes effectual when the baptized person comes to faith in Christ, and infants can’t have faith in Christ, and God predestines everyone to either salvation or reprobation, then we can be confident that baptized children who die in infancy were chosen by God for reprobation. Have I got that right?
I have been Anglican here in the states most of my adult life. I have had the same journey myself. And in my reading of the English reformers and the formularies the Anglican Church is mildly Reformed. I simply do not see how one comes to any other conclusion.
Stupid question, but where'd you get that shirt?
Invoking saints- yes- in order for saints to hear us they would have to be omnipresent and omniscient. No one has those attributes but God. Honor the saints? Remember? Yes. Cantebury? Important for history - not important now. Does not affect apostolic succession. ( I'm glad you changed your mind).
Please don't write off Episcopalians (a term which refers to congregants, not the church). You know that we are a diocesan church. Our diocese did not leave for the ACNA, but we are a conservative anglo-catholic diocese in a red state holding true to faithful Anglicanism. It is not our fault that our diocese did not leave. The situation is not totally hopeless for our parishes, though our connection to the mother church may be.
If I could attend an ACNA church, I would, probably. Nearest one is 200 miles away. To do so, not only would I have to move (which I am not naturally or incidentally inclined towards at the moment), but I would also have to swear off allegiance to my own church, which I am very loyal to, regardless of their loyalty to our diocese, and regardless of their loyalty to Canterbury.
It is just regrettable to me that while I consider all my brothers in the continuing anglican movement to be fellow Anglicans, that they might not share the same perspective, even though the takeaway we both should have is that it is our faith and practice that make us true Anglicans and not our affiliation.
Regarding the point about churches being or not being in communion with Canturbury, i think an issue here is that Anglicanism doesnt seem to me to be a church, at lest not the way Rome is. It seems to me to be better described as a communion of seperate churches with a shared tradition. When that ditinction is made, it's much easier to just say "the acna is a real church, in the anglican tradition, so is an anglican church" and not be too fussed that much about the fact it's not an anglican church in the anglican communion
Yes, although there needs to be connections that are maintained in order to not be schismatic. Certainly faithfulness to the Formularies should be considered a much more important test of truly being an Anglican church than communion with Canterbury though.
@@newkingdommedia9434 Thank you! I'm glad to see you are growing as a believer!!! With prayers and best wishes.
Lots here to commend to listeners, and some surprising bits. Two things you said that prompted thoughts for me that you might consider addressing more in the future: (1) you said Anglicans believe in "salvation by faith alone", however, the Art. XI teaches *justification* by faith alone, not "salvation by faith alone". The references to "salvation" in the XXXIX Articles are a broader term that includes the sacraments and "all things necessary to salvation" (Art. VI), which is also the title given to the Homily in Art. XI. You appear to be conflating justification and salvation; (2) you said that only predestined infants are regenerated by baptism, and reprobate infants who are validly baptized are not regenerated; however, the 1662 Book of Common Prayer at the end of the baptism liturgy says "it is certain" that all children who are baptized as infants and die before committing actual sin "are undoubtedly saved." You appear to be denying the Formularies in this regard.
Thanks for this. I think it'll be best if I respond to this in a separate video
th-cam.com/video/NdYOMvxADu4/w-d-xo.html
@Dakota Bledsoe Ephesians 2:8: We “have been saved.” 1 Corinthians 1:18: We “are being saved.” Romans 13:11: “Salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed.” 1 Pet 3:21: "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ"
High Church Evangelical over here.
If the Saints in heaven can’t hear us then they are dead and not alive. God days he is a God of the living and not the dead.
And God bless you for your humility!
I would be curious to know how you would reconcile your portrayal of the Anglican Fathers' view of sacramental theology with the fact that Arch Bishop Cranmer baptized, confirmed and communed Queen Elizabeth on the same day as an infant.
I live in a small town in the northwest corner of the United States, a place I firrst visited about twenty years ago. At that time the local Episcopal Church was very much an orthodox anglican congregation. But, alas, when I moved here a few years ago I found that they had just about completely abandoned the faith once received to eplace it with a mix of new-age, identity-political, nonsense which more or less celebrates their abandoning faith. I understand that the conversion to apostasy has taken longer than that. (I was in the D Min program at Sewanee about forty years ago when, with the updating of the prayer book, the slope began to get slippery.) But it seem that the decline has been a sort of exponential curve. But one need not apologize for having hope I would also suggest that it is helpful to think of 'sacrifice' in a more literal sense than we usually do. The word literally means to make something sacred. They liturgy is a beautiful way our Lord has given us to make ourselves sacred, to make ourelves, our souls and bdies, holy as our Father is holy. The Sacrifice of the Son, once offered, becomes active in us through faith. Anelm's "cur Deus homo?"
So, I eally appreciate your working out your salvation right out here in the public. It is a, IMHO, a great witness.
Where'd the scripture come from?
What are you referring to as heretical that the Episcopalians believe?
He opposes same sex relationships and marriage. Obviously.
I still ask saints to pray for me. Living ones, of course!
This video popped up in my feed. It's interesting to hear you say these things because in Reformed, my views would be closest to Presbyterian, I love the WMC and other Reformed confessions such as the 3 forms of unity. One of my biggest reasons for not becoming Anglican is some of the very reasons you have changed your mind on. Too much of Anglicanism is way too catholic for me. It's funny because what you have said is essentially Presbyterian theology except for Apostolic succession and the episcopal structure. I especially agree with you in the sacraments. Great video, thanks.
Excellent presentation of the gospel 🙏🏻
Thanks for the update!
I was scolded once by a priest because I said " take communion". Now I always say I receive communion.
I feel your pain and somewhat confusion with your last point
Thank you for your video. One thing I will add, while I do think preserving scriptural teaching should be our first priority as Anglicans, preserving unity with Canterbury should be our second. The Body of Christ is already fractured enough as it is, and one of Anglicanism's strengths is that it's the most united Protestant church in existence. Even the ACNA, while not recognized by Canterbury on Paper, is still in fellowship with most provinces of the Anglican communion and even has a CofE bishop as the Visiting Bishop of South Carolina. However, I notice that GAFCON, while I support their mission, is starting to go a little willy-nilly on the breakaway groups. I understand establishing them in the US and Canada, but do we really need a breakaway diocese in England, where they have flying bishops, and Australia, home of the ultra-conservative dioceses of Sydney, the Murray, and North West Australia? All I could see these breakaway groups doing is causing more division in the body of Christ, and allowing the liberals in the Anglican Communion to further destroy the church with their unscriptural teachings, now that those "pesky conservatives" are out of the way. While preserving biblical orthodoxy is extremely important, and breaking away from a church body is sometimes necessary as a very last resort to do so, Christ prayed that we all may be one before His crucifixion. As St. Augustine said, "The church is a ship, and even if the ship is in difficulty, it is important that we at least be on it".
I think that this is your best work yet.
My mediating voice regarding salvation is that the thief on the cross was saved.
All mandatory happenings in this life can happen in a moment in a cross.
Balance that with the conviction of those who know what Christ calls us to do and if we do not do them for us that is a sin.
I agree with the idea that sacraments consecrated by a non episcopal christian can be valid. However, I'd explain it with the scholastic distinction between the Faith and the Church. What saves is the Faith, by the preaching of the word and the administration of the sacraments. However, communion with the Church is what makes a person holy. Valid word and sacrament places the person under the protection of almighty God, sort of like a permanant resident of a country, however what entitles a person to the welfare of the state is full citizenship, and I thinl that is what the Church is. It is the Magisterium of the bishops in apostolic succession and the Canons of the undivided Church, and it is necessary for a Christian to submit to both to be a direct part of God's kingdom, rather than just a benefector or a subject of its influence. We are called to be sons, not slaves, but slavery tp God is preferable to sonship from the carnal world.
It would be interesting to see your reading list.
I have seen any that required communion with gap of Canterbury. You could write a book on it.
Instead anglican formulae require that a that if you quack like a duck and walk like a duck you are duck.
So over the passage of time many christian entities have being accepted as churches by Anglicans. Sometimes the process could be picky e.g. the church of south India. The Episcopal church of Soctland found itself in the wilderness for many decades. Anglican did not expect churches to be clones of itself as church polity was determined by each nation. So in England the queen is anglican but Scotland the queen is Presbyterian. This idea has been extended to accept as interchangeable the clergy of Scandinavian churches even though they have major doctrinal differences from Anglicans. This is possible for anglicans because we are not a confessional church. Some would say anglican are inconsistent in that some will accept Morman baptism and will happily accept communion in congregation which reject their understanding of the Eucharist.
I prefer the idea that Anglicans pray with the saints, rather to them. So prayingwith the blessed virgin mary is not a bad thing and does not deny that Jesus is our only advocate and mediator.
What are the great errors of the Episcopalian church of the USA? It would be specific rather than this foggy envy of this anglican group that punches above its weight.
How do you explain John 6: 51 to 70.
Love this video. You’re a smart man. I’ve come to the same conclusions.
21-22 minutes It leads to more than salvation through your denomination. It's also salvation through works. The taking the Eucharist saves you then, and it's not valid unless it's the right church, w/ the right bishop. So the bishop too is now the vehicle of salvation, as well as the ordained priest. That's right back to the RCC view that their church saves you.
Great developments
Great articulated content, well done.
Great content and interesting to see your development in theology.
There is nothing that says the Church of England must be the premier church in the Anglican Communion. Justin Welby said as much, indirectly, at Lambeth, when he said he wasn't a leader with the authority to find a compromise between the Progressives and traditionalists of the communion.
The future geographical center of the traditional Anglican understanding of our faith, as well as the majority of our congregants, will be in Africa. The GAFCON convention in Kigali next year will likely draw a brighter line between the present parts of the "communion."
I am a non-denominational Protestant Christian in the USA. I recognize that the five points of Calvinism/etc are sometimes arbitrary and not an exact description, but do you believe in a) unconditional election and b) preservation of the saints? I.e., free will does not truly exist, and that our salvation is "guaranteed" or not outside of our control? I.e. if someone backslides and falls away from the Church, he/she was not saved at all?
Sorry, just wanted to note: I ask this from a completely non-sectarian point of view. I find way too much time/energy/emotion is spent on denominations. God doesn't care what name is on the outside of someone's church... and just because someone goes to a church A B and C, does not mean he abides by all those teachings. God judges the heart and mind, not the denomination.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this:
Growing up in nondenominational protestant churches I’ve often heard “salvation by grace through faith alone”. It wasn’t until I listened to some Roman Catholic apologist that I realized we have added the “alone“ portion to that statement of Paul’s. They are careful to point out that the only time “faith alone” is found in scripture is in the book of James where he says we are not justified by faith alone. It’s clear in scripture that we can never earn or merit our salvation through works but do you think there’s validity in the Roman Catholic view that there is an expectation for us to be doing our work and if we aren’t then in fact we will not be saved? I think that may be Jesus‘s implication as well when he references those who call him Lord but do not serve him. I know at least a couple scholars have referenced this idea of “salvation by allegiance alone“. That it is a combination of our belief and then the outworking of grace through our good works that is a true expression of faith. Again please don’t take this as argumentative, I would honestly love to hear your thoughts.
Hi thanks for your thoughtful comment. Here's some thoughts.
1. The Formularies are clear that a true and living faith will always manifest itself through good works. This is stated clearly in the Articles but is also discussed in detail in Homilies 3, 4 and 5. This is how we understand James 2 and our Lord's comments about a good tree being known by its fruit.
2. A helpful phrase that Thomas Cranmer once used is that we are justified by faith alone but not by faith only. What he meant was that a true faith which justifies is always accompanied by works.
3. Crucially and perhaps most importantly, all this only makes sense within the wider framework of election and predestination. Luther, the great hero of justification by faith alone, said that the real issue is actually free will, and Calvin and Cranmer would agree. Ultimately, according to the Formularies (e.g. Article 17) we are saved as a result of God's unconditional election of us to salvation. Because of his election, he calls us through faith, and because of our faith our hearts will be transformed which enables us to do good works, but these can never justify us as they are only caused by God and are never without the stain of sin either.
4. Read Ephesians 2:8-10. We are saved through faith alone, which itself is a gift, and not by works, but ultimately because we were predestined for salvation and for the good works God intended us to do.
Since you classify yourself as a Reformed High Churchman, you would definitely appreciate John Williamson Nevin and his work. Especially his debates with Charles Hodge involving justification and the sacraments.
As a Presbyterian minister who used to be an Anglican-I appreciate you not excommunicating us! 😉
Great video.
The ACNA is Anglican in name only. It has no connection with the real Anglican Church. This is not to be disrespectful to them. It is just a fact. Gafcon does include some Anglicans but ACNA is not.
As a Lutheran, I do not think that we need or even should pray to/through the saints. They pray for us up in Heaven for us unbidden. Beseeching them to pray for us is pointless.
Glad that you have moved to the Reformed position. At the end of the day Christ has paid the price for our sin once and for all and faith in his finished work on the cross is what ultimately brings salvation. That is not to undermine the sacraments. There is no such a thing in the NT as a believer who isnt baptised or doesn't receive communion. Focusing on one aspect of salvation is wrong. We should follow the NT pattern.
How about the thief beside Jesus at Calvary . . Christ stated that on this day he would be in Paradise.
Have you read 'The Cruelty of Heresy: An Affirmation of Christian Orthodoxy' by C. Fitzsimmons Allison yet? It's an extremely helpful guide to Christology and very helpful to understand historical debates. His second book the Rise of Moralism I thought was super great showing how the Church of England and some other English Protestant mainstream view on justification changed over time. It's also a great reference for understanding the debate among English Protestants of the 16/17th century.
"hererics and believers: a history of the English reformation' by Peter Marshall was also very helpful, esp the second half.
I think there’s a serious problem with the way the inward vs. Outward is put at odds in the third article with the inward being the evangelical and type outward the high churchmanship. It’s certainly not patristic. Also what group believes that baptism is profitable if one becomes a non-believer? No historic church does and as for the Eucharist, no church teaches it’s efficacious for those refusing unbelieving, the reason it’s harmful though is because there’s an external reality beyond just one’s psychological disposition.
I pressed the send button before my completing my comment.
The a primary difference between Anglicans and the Roman church is that for one to be catholic requires obedience to the bishop of Rome. We have just been reminded of this with pope Francis instruction that celebration of the mass old or new should be at the direction of the local bishop. Whereas Anglicans define catholick with opening verse of the Athanasian Creed (not shared with all anglican churches). Not obedience to a polity but keeping a deposit of christian faith. For some Anglicans this deposit is very elastic.
I would be surprised if Cranmer and his followers understood Christian belief as requiring emotional conversion. When conversion is noted it is an external event wrought by God. E.g. Damascus rd event. Not one freely consenting to belief so baptism of adults is only made possible in 1662 a century after Cranmer. For Cranmer there was no doubt baptism made us members of the kingdom heaven. But some were not going to get there but we could not identify them we should leave that judgement to God only excluding notorious evil doers.
Enjoy your videos
Cheers
Wayne
Cheers
Wayne
Presbyterian here. Just wanted to offer a caveat to this. Presbyterians do believe we have bishops. They just believe the office of bishop and presbyter are the same office from different perspectives. A presbyter represents his church body to the other churches, but as a bishop, he rules over his own church.
The reason for this is that the Bible uses these terms interchangeably to talk about the same people, and the early church shows this pattern as well. Even Gregory the Great ("pope" all the way into the 600s) lamented not getting to teach in the church as much as he wanted to. We believe the idea of a separated and non-pastoral office is a middle ages innovation.
All of this is wonderfully explained and argued Calvin's institutes Book 4 with citations to go with it. If someone is worried about apostolic succession (which they probly don't need to be), it's not very likely that either the practice of ordination of pastors or the gospel itself would end up going anywhere without having a lineage back to the apostles. Just some food for thought.
Whilst the word Priest is used in the BCP they are not sacrifical Priests, they are Elders, Presbyters. Believers in Christ are a Royal Priesthood. It is not necessary for there to be an ordained priest at communion even though in our tradition that does happen. An upstanding and recognised leader of a congregation it acceptable to me. There are no Priests in the NT. Only Bishops/Elders and Deacons. I have no idea where the 3 fold ministry comes from.
From the ancient Church, the one that canonized the Holy Scriptures. Look into the letters of Ignatius of Antioch, circa A.D. 107.
Some answers to your questions about this video are here: th-cam.com/video/NdYOMvxADu4/w-d-xo.html
Amen.
Big step in the right direction. But I think you need to keep reforming. Make sure you're getting your theology from Scripture before Anglicanism (or anything else).
It’s funny watching this video cause it feels like all the stances you have moved away from, I find myself moving closer towards.
I don’t see that changing personally.
I was enjoying your video but then You lost me when you said that Episcopalians worship a "different God". Harsh statement.
He is non-affirming. He also is in New Zealand and clearly has no clue what he's saying. I am Episcopalian and my parish is orthodox and worships God.
Yeah he lost credibility with me when he said the Episcopalian Church instead of the Episcopal Church. People focus way too much on gay marriage
@Dystopia Lutheran The Bible does not mention gay marriage
Not Anglicans pray to the saints and thats a good thing.
I was rather enjoying your channel but I will be moving to other sources. Your distain for my Church is so evident and wrong-headed that I no longer feel welcome as a viewer. Best of luck.
Which church?
@@puremercury The Episcopal Church USA.
@@thethinplace My church, too. I can see you not enjoying his opinion on it, but it is "wrong-headed?" I disagree with him on the LGBT issue, but he is in no way wrong that there have been admitted atheists and Resurrection deniers in senior TEC roles. That is objective fact, and it's a problem for us.
@@puremercury I'm specifically referring to the LGBT stuff. I openly and loudly condemn the mistakes TEC makes. Spong is a blight on our Church as are other priests like that.
@@thethinplace Then you and I are on the same side, but I will defend River in that his positions on gay marriage and clergy are not just made up out of nowhere. He certainly has a Biblical basis for how he feels. I think people in good faith can disagree on some things. We have God-given reason to guide us, and reason isn't going to lead us all to the same place.
Personally, I think it's sad that so many Anglicans are no longer in communion with one another. I wish schism did not happen, but I also wish theological conservatives could feel at home in our AC churches that they wouldn't want to leave.
The rite of baptism seems clearly lutheran to me. It says that this child is *now* regenerate, and if it dies then it goes to heaven as a result. You can "fix" that from the perspective of the sacraments requiring faith by saying that children always have faith, since God is monergistically, universally giving them faith, they havent had the chance for their conscious thoughts to resist God yet, but that requires Lutheran soteriology. I wonder if someone has done a study about what overall system results when you take lutheran/reformed positions on certain issues where the formularies seem to allow for both, sinc ethe article on baptism does read more Calvinistic
Sure, just taking the 39 Articles, Anglican theology is quite Calvinist/Reformed. Sure, not full TULIP (thankfully), but still, more so that say Lutherans. Theologically I'd call myself an Anglo-Lutheran, though liturgically I'm quite High Church (much influenced by Lutheran liturgy, where much of the liturgy is sung by not just the priest, but also the congregation, even for normal Sunday services... e.g. the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus and Agnus Dei).
Don't be so glum looking, it's not that bad...smile a bit
They were alive in the New Testament experience. So of course there's no Ave Maria or novenas to Saint Jude.
Dear brother, its sad to see that you have different views. There is biblical evidence, that the saints can her our prayers.
“And concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, `I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” --Matthew 22:31-32
----Note that Jesus is telling us that those in heaven are alive. But, they now have a new and higher way of living. They have been glorified in Christ once they enter into heaven. In fact, it could be said that they are much more alive than those of us still on earth.
“And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, conversing with him. Then Peter said to Jesus in reply, "Lord, it is good that we are here. If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah." While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud cast a shadow over them, then from the cloud came a voice that said, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.” --Matthew 17:3-5
----Here, during the Transfiguration, Jesus talks to Moses and Elijah, who are very aware of what has been happening on earth. So, from this we can come to the conclusion that death does not separate those in heaven from those on earth.
Remember Paul teaches that we are all members of Christ’s body, the Church.
The Book of Hebrews echoes this when it teaches that those who have gone before us into heaven still witness what happens on earth.
“Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us rid ourselves of every burden and sin that clings to us and persevere in running the race that lies before us” --Hebrews 12:1
What I believe is the most amazing evidence from the Bible of the Saints in heaven hearing our prayers is from the book of Revelation.
“When he took it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones.” --Revelations 5:8
----We see that the elders and four living creatures (who represent the Saints and Angels in heaven) are offering the prayers of those on earth before Jesus. I don’t think it could get much clearer. In Revelation 8 there is another incident of heavenly intercession.
“Another angel came and stood at the altar, holding a gold censer. He was given a great quantity of incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the holy ones, on the gold altar that was before the throne. The smoke of the incense along with the prayers of the holy ones went up before God from the hand of the angel. Then the angel took the censer, filled it with burning coals from the altar, and hurled it down to the earth. There were peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning, and an earthquake.” --Revelations 8:3-5
Lastly, we have evidence from Christ himself.
“I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance. "Or what woman having ten coins and losing one would not light a lamp and sweep the house, searching carefully until she finds it? And when she does find it, she calls together her friends and neighbors and says to them, `Rejoice with me because I have found the coin that I lost.' In just the same way, I tell you, there will be rejoicing among the angels of God over one sinner who repents.” --Luke 15:7-10
----Those in heaven could not rejoice over a sinner repenting on earth unless they knew about it.
One more reference of Christ talking about this subject is found in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16. Those who have suffered bodily death, still are asking for help for those on earth (intercession) with knowledge of what is happening.
I’m an American Episcopalian who was excited about your video to hear a more global view of Anglicanism, but I’m disappointed in your dismissal of and visible disdain for the Episcopal church…We adhere to the liturgical calendar and we use the Book of Common Prayer, which you once called the unifying text for all Anglicans. I understand that some of the decisions of the American church may be too “progressive” for some, but at the end of the day we are all coming to church on Sunday with full hearts to receive the Eucharist. Your assertion that we are not Bible believing Christians is as wrong as it is hurtful. I certainly will be unsubscribing from the channel, but I do wish you the best and hope you continue to find fellowship with those who believe like you.
Hello, thank you for expressing your dissatisfaction. Perhaps I should have added that I do acknowledge the many orthodox parishes that remain within TEC. However, I'd like to retort that: 1. In TEC the 1662 BCP is technically unauthorised now. 2. Regardless of the administration of the Sacraments within TEC, if the Church has fallen away from the truth of Scripture these signs lose their full weight. I would recommend the article linked in the description of this video about how Apostolic Succession is useless without the proclamation of truth. Our first duty is to "teach them to obey everything that [Christ] commanded you" (Matt 28.20) and for TEC to allow Bishops (Spong) to be openly atheist, countless clergy to deny the resurrection and to officially allow homosexual relationships to become married by the Church is to fall away from this commandment. We cannot allow our fidelity to the Sacramental and Liturgical heritage of the church to distract us from the far more important goal of faithfulness to God's teachings. I would encourage you to read the 1662 liturgy for the consecration of Bishops to see this idea expressed clearly.
I mean this with a humble heart, but how can you truly stay in the Episcopal church and not detest the unbiblical teaching and heretical doctrine that they are implementing in the church. We truly need to ask ourselves if we going to church to worship and find communion with our Lord or is it just formality.
First of all, I AM NOT ANGLICAN. With that said, I've seen some of the topic titles you offer on TH-cam, listened to a few minutes of various presentations, and found them interesting in terms of your take on Anglicanism. Today I listened to your whole video. You state
that YOUR views have changed on THIS or THAT religious practice from what they were a few weeks ago. I have a question: since you
are not an ecclesial leader in your denomination 1) who made you the spokesman/referee concerning matters of faith and 2) why should I
(an outsider) or any Episcopalian, Anglican care?
I have a copy of the modernest liturgical book of the Anglican Church of New Zealand. What a heterodox mess! It simply is neither ANglicanor CHristian.
If you keep travelling down the sola-scriptura road, you will end up as a Mennonite.
Appreciate your video. I am a former Baptist, but now high church Anglican. I encourage you to ponder the great cloud of witnesses. I wrestled mightily with the saints, but after looking deeply into that piece of scripture I found peace with asking the saints to pray for me. Best wishes to you my brother.
There's no real Unity in Anglican nor Rome. Lip service.
You lost me with this video.
Warning ,: If you keep changing like this you end up a Roman Catholic. Keep exploring.👍✝️🙏💒 All roads lead to Rome.
He ends up a Roman Catholic by. . . becoming less Anglo-Catholic and more Reformed?