Bishop Burnham predicted there would be defections among Anglo”“Catholic clergy and laity because of the July 7 ruling by the General Synod of the Church of England, the mother church of the Anglican Communion, to move ahead with plans to allow the ordination of women bishops. Anglo”“Catholics are those whose customs and practices within Anglicanism emphasize continuity with Catholic tradition.
The bishop recently traveled to Rome to discuss the reception of large numbers of dissenting Anglican traditionalists with Cardinal William J. Levada, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.
He was joined by Anglican Bishop Keith Newton of Richborough, England, also a flying bishop of the Canterbury Archdiocese.
I considered that too. However, when I went about reading the doctrines of the RCC to refresh myself why I never did join before, I was very quickly brought back to the truth. I could NEVER join the RCC. They, also have doctrines that are totally unbiblical. That’s where it stops for me. If a church holds even ONE doctrine that is not Biblical, then their authenticity of being the church that Jesus built and is the head of truly comes into question for me.
I can’t remain an Anglican either. I’ve come to understand through my research and deep Biblical studies in the last few months that they, also, are not the TRUE church that Jesus started and is the cornerstone of. I came to realize that NONE of the mainline denominations are. Jesus didn’t start a church and plan for it to have several totally conflicting doctrines. That makes no sense at all. He was very clear on His teachings with the apostles. He warned about the wolves that would come in and teach false doctrine. It already began and was addressed by Paul and Jude in the very first century. It’s only grown progressively worse since then. That’s how I came to conclusion that these denominations are just not the church that Jesus built. They are churches based on HUMAN traditions, and very little Biblical truth remains in them. Why do you think all these churches are names after PEOPLE, such as Luther. They are based on HUMAN philosophical beliefs promoted by people like Calvin, Wesley, Augustine, Constantine, and so on, and so on. If you are truly willing to open your mind and look at it without any bias you can only come to that conclusion. That’s how I got there. The Anglican crisis actually did me a favor. I was born into and raised in the Anglican church. It was all I knew and held dear to my heart. However, that was my problem. I was clinging to something of the WORLD, and NOT God’s TRUE teachings in the Bible. When this crisis became too much and the church was so obviously apostate, I began to fervently study the Bible for myself. I began to check things out for myself. Boy, did I get an eye opener. I’m still searching and studying, but I’m free at last from the hold the Anglican deception had on me most of my life.
So, what do I do?? I keep studying my Bible. I keep praying intensely to God every day for his guidance and deliverance. He knows where my heart is.
I pray for the same for all of you.
#1 mugsie
I hope you have find a church. Not joining any church is not biblical either. Hebrews 10:25. I doubt you will ever find a perfect church. Just find the best one you can.
Mugsie:
Sounds like Eastern Orthodoxy might be a good fit for you or Western Orthodoxy if you live in The U.S.
The Eastern and Oriental churches have remained virtually untouched by all the current controversies.
Mugsie:
Do some research on the Reformed Episcopal Church. You will find that they have retained the closest thing to true anglo-catholic Christianity that you will find anywhere. You will be pleasantly surprised. The only problem is that they are small and few and far between, so it might be hard to find a convenient congregation.
I doubt Orthodoxy is what Mugsie is looking for. It sounds like he has a Protestant mindset (sola scriptura). And while he did not identify any of the multitude of doctrinal issues he has, my guess is many of them would also be found in Orthodoxy since Rome was once part of the Orthodox Church and retains much of its teachings.
ICXC NIKA
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
#4
You are greatly mistaken. The Reformed Episcopal Church is most certainly NOT Anglo-Catholic. They LEFT the Episcopal Church because of increasing Anglo-Catholic tendencies and are reactionary, low-church, 39 article loving, tippet wearing, sacramental Protestants. A quick Google search will prove athan-asi-us very wrong. Having said that, they are an excellent choice if classical Protestantism is what your looking for but Anglo-Catholic they most certainly are not and they would be the first to tell you that!
Maybe Mugsie should consider a confession church in the Lutheran Church-Missouri Snyod. We are Evangelical Catholics.
since Rome was once part of the Orthodox Church and retains much of its teachings.
John, you are sounding more and more like a troll. Remind us why you are posting to and Anglican blog? I don’t see much respect for anything Anglican. Do you come here to do anything but bash Anglicanism?
Re # 8
Justinmartyr,
I have numerous family members affiliated with TEC including my mother, a sister and brother in law and my niece and Goddaughter. The latter alone gives me full rights and even the moral duty to address the crisis in Anglicanism as long as she is part of it. In addition I also note the penchant some in this forum have for making sharp attacks on the apostolic churches (Rome & Orthodoxy) and I think it not a horrible thing to have people around who are prepared to offer a little counterweight to such attacks.
Since we are asking questions though… when exactly did you become the policeman of T-19?
Yours in ICXC
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
John, you know, of course, that Catholics would say that the Orthodox Church was once a part of the Catholic Church. 🙂
Alas, as an Anglican I cannot respond in kind because Anglicanism does not hold to the One True Visible Church idea. The minute I start to believe in the One True Visible church, though, I will have to bail on Anglicanism and join either Orthodoxy or Rome.
[i] Slightly edited[/i]
[i] #8 and #9, please return to a discussion of the post. [/i]
-Elf Lady
#6 Archangellicum: You are greatly mistaken. I have been through Bishop Sutton’s seminary lectures in great detail and their theological and doctrinal position is the closest thing you are going to find to reformed catholicism or early Christianity of the first five centuries. I don’t know how they were in 1875 but I do know what they are teaching and practicing today.
Re # 10
Chris,
[blockquote] John, you know, of course, that Catholics would say that the Orthodox Church was once a part of the Catholic Church. grin[/blockquote]
I do indeed. Nor are they restrained in making that observation here and elsewhere. I don’t fault them for it. It’s part of what they believe. Obviously though I don’t agree with their interpretation of the record. 😉
ICXC
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
archangelica,
There is a pretty wide swath in the REC nowdays. We have the tippets, but also the chasubles. We have candles, incense, processions, all to varying degrees depending on the local congregation. Yes, the REC was formed in reaction to Anglo-Catholics in PECUSA. Besides what I would personally consider the mistake of bringing dispensationalists on board in the beginning, the REC did overreact to Anglo-Catholicism and, much like the Continental Reformation, tossed out some good things simply because they were “Roman”. Conversely, the Anglo-Catholics were overreacting to perceived threats and were in a bit of a purge mode within PECUSA at the time, much as the liberals are today which contributed greatly to the split. History tells us that there was plenty of blame and overreaction to go around back then. I pray that as we deal with modern Anglicanism we will be able to learn from our prior mistakes.
As a postulant finishing up the second year at Cranmer I can verify that most of the lectures in the classes, from our Bishops and Priests alike, as well as the occasional professor from elsewhere are along the lines that athan-asi-us has pointed out.
Mugsie, honestly there is no church on this Earth that would suit you. All will not meet the measure of your search for perfection. Since you have concluded the churches you have examined have added to the Bible, what defense can they raise against your accusations? You get to define the terms by which a church may declare itself as teaching and practicing Truth. No doubt the marks on this yardstick move according to your will. Since you have a monopoly on understanding what the Bible says, prehaps you should start your own church. I am certain like minded believers would welcome the chance to be in the right place.
As for converting to another Christian denomination. The only reason to convert is you become convinced that what that Church teaches is the fullness of Truth and to stay outside of her would jeopardize you soul. It sure better not be because you are looking for Peace as in no conflicts.
Elves , what in heavens’s name was offensive or off topic in my post that you edited it? Details please.
PS, Mugsie, I do pray you find a place where you can worship Christ without barriers. But I do think for you it will be a very long and often depressing journey. So it is a very good thing our hope is in Christ.