When defining the Church many Anglicans refer to Article XIX of the Thirty-nine Articles.
“The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.
As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, have erred; so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith.”
This definition does not adequately summarize the Prayer Book, in my estimation. First, nowhere within the Prayer Book do we see a statement even implied that the visible Church consists of only “faithful men.” There are many in the Church that are not faithful! This particular article contradicts itself by first stating that the Church consists of the faithful and then only a few sentences later explaining that the Church errs. Erring is not faithful! Even if the original intent was to combat the doctrine of papal infalibility, it still says what it says and cannot be expected to stand as a profession of our theology.
Assuming the “intention argument” the document is not properly written to stand as a profession. The original intention of the words “faithful” and “err” hardly matter. What matters is what it means according to what it says in plain English, that the Church consists of the faithful. This supposes that the Church is invisible and merely an ideal - theology straight from the Puritains. But the fact that it says the Church also errs confuses the matter and implies a completely different theology. It’s obvious that they slid this in thier to refute Rome’s doctrines - just your typical overzealous Puritanism.
The Prayer Book, as a whole describes the Church by using the Creeds. This means that the Church is made up of an ecclesiastical body of bishops, priests and deacons - since this is what “Apostolic” means - as well as what the church administers, which is the Sacraments and the very revelation of God through the Holy Scriptures.
The above definition does not mean that God in Spirit does not govern the Church and that it has no “faithfulness” or heavenly aspect to it. The Collect on Good Friday states that the “Spirit” governs and sanctifies the Church. But how could this be if the clergy governs?
As Christ states in the Gospel of Matthew, the Prayer Book, in its Office of Institution of Ministers, states that the “keys of the Church” are given to the ordained minister. This means that the Holy Spirit is working through him to “loose and bind” the sins of the people. He is Christ’s ambassador! The Office of Institution also describes the Church as being founded by the Holy Apostles, the Prophets and Jesus Christ himself as being the “chief -cornerstone.”
The Church is a tangible entity and not a mere concept. When one is baptized one enters into it. In the Office of Instruction (p. 290 BCP) the question arises: “What is the Church? The Church is the Body of which Jesus Christ is the Head, and all baptized people are the members.” The new believer was once born into a carnal life of worldliness but is now, through baptism being born into the spiritual life. But all of these baptized people will not be faithful, even though they are a part of the Church; even though they are Christians.
Interesting article on what I believe to be the beginning of a great revival within Christendom:
Congratulations to Jonathan and Kim Byrd from St. James Anglican Church. They just had a 7lb. baby boy!
Here is a very honest summary of GAFCON. It cannot be emphasized enough that women’s ordination to Holy Orders (this includes the Holy Order of Deacon) is heresy. Yet GAFCON seems to think that it is not a vital issue that effects the salvific calling of the Church. It seems clear that there are liberals within this group that have weakened the barrier for future betrayal.
Today marks the One Year Anniversary of AnglicanThought! There have been 598,847 hits (35,198 visits) since its inception in July of 2007. Hope you have enjoyed thus far.
Blessings,
Mike
One of the most overlooked sins within the Christian faith is the tenth commandment: Though shall not covet - this in light of the fact that the Scriptures place heavy emphasis on avoiding it.
St. Paul explains in 1 Timothy 6:10 that coveting money is a root of all types of sin. This does not mean that coveting is not the root of all sin. Here, St. Paul is addressing a certain need and is obviously not writing a systematic theology paper. The desire for anything that is contrary to God’s will is covetousness (idolatry).
Covetousness is so serious that (1) It is one of the Ten Commandments (2) St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 5:11 that we should avoid covetous men, and (3) St. Paul also says in 1 Timothy that men who practice this sin are disqualified from the ministry.
How does one know that they are coveting or know that another is coveting so that we may avoid them? One may know that they are coveting if they suddenly discover that they have neglected certain responsibilities that God has given them to chase after what they may think to be a higher calling of some sort. Men do this in the ministry quite often. I once knew a man that wanted so badly to climb the ecclesiastical ladder that he neglected his flock and family only to eventualy find out that both his flock and family were given up to foreign faiths.
Many times covetousness involves taking paths that do not involve any type of spiritual or even basic existential growth but only places ones self in harms way, as St. James says in James 1:14; that man is drawn away into sin by his very own desires.
Look at your life and see! We all have coveteousness within us, just some more than others; some to the point of being involved in mortal sin (Ephesians 5:5). It is so obvious in some that one can hardly stand the stench of being in the presence of the person. Every little thing that is discussed in the basics of conversation is so heavily weighed by the covetous person that he/she becomes very insecure and inconsistent in their actions and overall ethics. As St. James says, the person who is insecure in his faith is “double-minded.” The double-minded man says one thing to one group of people in order to satisfy them but then goes on to say something completely contrary to another group. This can many times be a sign of covetousness! The person is spreading their nets wherever they can in order to catch the first prey that comes along. If this person is one of Christ’s he will likely and hopefully never prosper, having a tight disciplinary reign on them from God. Their riches will, as Proverbs 23:5 says, “fly away as an eagle toward heaven.”
The covetous man is a compromising opportunist. We all are “opportunists” in some sense. We should always be ready for blessings that God has in store for us. But we should never covet these blessings to where we begin compromising the beliefs that God has shown to us, becoming double-minded.
The worst coveters are those that are in positions of authority. These men cast their nets even within the front yards of their own disciples. They insist that the disciple disregard godly ethics that they have once learned so that they may embrace the coveter’s personal ethic. These types of men that are in authority, as St. Paul says in 1 Timothy 6:5, use their faith as a means of gain. They say that God calls them to “take dominion” of the earth, only they fail to realize the ethic of Christ: that this is spiritual dominion and not materialistic dominion (not to exclude the spiritual element of the culture).
The covetous man in authority will manipulate - sometimes even unconsciously - his disciples for his gain. He will build mini empires for himself where people are trained to do the same thing he does, thus creating armies of coveters - almost like a tri-level marketing scam. The coveter in authority is a greedy manipulator. He should be avoided at all costs! He is not truly on ones side but he is on his own side.
Good Lord, deliver us.
From all inordinate and sinful affections; and from all the deceits of the world, the flesh and the devil. - 1928 BCP Litany
This is one reason why the Anglican Church/Rite must continue to exist! The Pontiff recently proposed a more conservative change to the Novus Ordo mass, taking out particular wording that seemed…well, to say the very least, ambiguous and unclear, compared to what the Roman Catholic Church has taught through the first nineteen-hundred and sixty some years; got to love those hippies. The Pontiff proposed some of the Latin language that was and has been being used in the Tridentine mass.
So far the Bishops of America - a country never very fond of traditional or doctrine - have rejected this proposal. Perhaps the Pontiff will speak Ex Cathedra (prophetic) on this matter - something that has not been done in quite some time!
The Anglican liturgy and mass was designed so that the ancient Latin mass could be understood by the common people - not that the common people could not already spiritually feed upon the mass in Latin but so that the common people could begin to digest the liturgy intellectually. Now, of course, this has gotten out of control both in the Protestant as well as Catholic Churches. We seem to be changing the liturgy so that any barbarian and his brother can feel comfortable at church and not have to learn anything new or become sanctified (set apart) for what is meant to be set apart for: God. But the Anglican liturgy, as presented in the format of the 1928 and 1662 Book of Common Prayer, contains no such radical changes. It is a true representation of the way the Church has been worshiping prior to the Reformation - some sixteen-hundred years. I am convinced that it is one of the most godly ways to worship God and become blessed by him.
“Twice a year I put weed-killing fertilizer on my lawn. One applies the finely granulated material when the lawn is damp from the dew, and it sticks to the broad leaves of the weed, infiltrating the plant through the leaf and, within a few weeks, destroying it at the root. It does not bother fine-leaved grasses, but encourages their growth, not only by fertilizing them but also by freeing them from competition with weeds for water and nutrients.
If one severs an accomplished weed above the root, the plant will disappear for a while, but the living root will send up a new one; in fact, it is likely to send up multiple new plants. To deal effectively with it, the root must be killed.
A Christian must, I believe, think like that about the application of God’s Word [as it presents itself through not only the written text but through life itself] to deep-rooted human problems. The object is to get a grain of real, undiluted truth to stick to one of the leaves, in hope that the plant itself will make it systemic, and destroy the evil thing at the root. The grain does not look like much, or its chances of success very hopeful, when it first goes down. Only later do the effects become evident.”
- S.M. Hutchens
I’m just not sure how many times the Anglican Church can split and still be considered Anglican. This nonsense is deminising the doctrine of Apostolic Succession to a mere nothing. First we split from Rome, then we split from England, next we split from the split of England, and now we split from the split of the split of England (now called GAFCON). Some would take out that first “split” by calling it unification of the split of the split of England, but if one looks at the 14 Points of CAFCON (when will we finally learn that bulletpoint theology only causes division?) one will notice that they are exclusive to many Anglo-Catholics and even those that use the authorized 1928 Book of Common Prayer. Here is a fine statement on the matter.
“Then there is the man who prefers the radio service to his parish church, which may indeed be more edifying; but Our Lord seems to have omitted to tell us on which wave-length sacramental Grace is purveyed.”
- Martin Thornton, Christian Proficiency (p.13)
That is a great statement by Thornton! According to the logic of the Evangelical churches, listening to the radio and hanging out with Christian friends is sufficient enough for eternal life with Christ. After all, according to them, grace is given to us merely by information.
I would like to humbly offer this challenge to those of you that believe the Roman Catholic Church has been apostate since the Council of Trent (or any time period).
What is Anglicanism? Some say that it is distinguished by its tradition of ecclesiology and liturgy, that is based on the Bible - succession of the early church [emphasis mine]. This, I believe, is correct, but how shall God prevent this rich tradition from being abused and split into thousands of pieces like that of Protestantism? How shall we (God working through us of course) guard ourselves from becoming apostate? Is it time to examine ourselves through our very history in order to determine our next step? Should we consider unifying under Rome somehow?