Hey guys,
I just stumbled upon something interesting:
According to the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, Anglicans (particularly Anglo-Catholics) believe in many Catholic doctrines like the seven sacraments.
I remember Jukes or someone else once quoted the BCP which says purgatory and transubstantiation is repugnant of the word of God, but that's from the 1926 version of the BCP. The 1979 BCP says some really interesting things (read it for yourself!):
http://www.holycross-raleigh.org/bcp/859.html
http://www.holycross-raleigh.org/bcp/860.html
http://www.holycross-raleigh.org/bcp/862.html
I've been discussing some of this with an Anglo-Catholic. While I don't know if he agrees with transubstantiation, he doesn't really care about that than the Real Presence. Here's what he had to say about it:
It almost seems as if the entire philosophy behind the 'mechanics' of the bread and wine becoming the flesh and blood is almost like trying to explain the trinity. LOL But I like how he said, "It ain't no symbol"
And concerning Marian doctrine, here's what he said:
And his three-legged stool is understood this way:
heh, I think his third leg of the stool has a little problem there, but this definitely sounds Catholic.
With all this in mind, I'm beginning to believe that the Church of England may eventually be restored with Rome, as long as all the anglican heresies go away. It just might take a really long time...
Thoughts?
-Jason
I just stumbled upon something interesting:
According to the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, Anglicans (particularly Anglo-Catholics) believe in many Catholic doctrines like the seven sacraments.
I remember Jukes or someone else once quoted the BCP which says purgatory and transubstantiation is repugnant of the word of God, but that's from the 1926 version of the BCP. The 1979 BCP says some really interesting things (read it for yourself!):
http://www.holycross-raleigh.org/bcp/859.html
http://www.holycross-raleigh.org/bcp/860.html
http://www.holycross-raleigh.org/bcp/862.html
I've been discussing some of this with an Anglo-Catholic. While I don't know if he agrees with transubstantiation, he doesn't really care about that than the Real Presence. Here's what he had to say about it:
Well, we don't agree totally 110% with transubstantiation. Then again, we don't disagree with it either. (I personally am a consubstantialist, but I know of Anglicans who are transubstantialists.) The particulars about how Christ makes himself present in the Eucharist is much akin to arguing about how many angels dance upon a pinhead, IMHO. The fact of the matter is that we receive the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. It ain't no symbol--we receive Christ in the Eucharist, eat his flesh, and drink his blood. And this is serious business, and should not be taken lightly. Eaten and drank properly--with due reverence--we do so rightfully and to our betterment. If done so improperly, we gamble with eating and drinking damnation upon ourselves. Regardless, one must have a prayerful consideration with the Holy Mysteries, as God would have us.
It almost seems as if the entire philosophy behind the 'mechanics' of the bread and wine becoming the flesh and blood is almost like trying to explain the trinity. LOL But I like how he said, "It ain't no symbol"
And concerning Marian doctrine, here's what he said:
Anglo-Catholics teach Assumption and Immaculate Conception. Other Anglicans may or may not. We don't hammer it as hard as Rome does, however. This doesn't bother me. God chose Mary, as she was "blessed above all women." How he did it by making her sinless, well, Immaculate Conception appears to be a totally acceptable explanation, even if it isn't directly in Scripture. (Hence, the three-legged stool.)
And his three-legged stool is understood this way:
Anglicans ascribe this to what Anglican theologian Richard Hooker referred to as the "Three-legged stool" of Scripture, Holy Tradition, and Reason. Scripture is primary in the way we view Holy Tradition, which is, in turn, how we are to use the Godly gift of reason. All three legs are attached to the same stool, although some legs are longer than others--Scripture being the longest, for obvious reasons.
heh, I think his third leg of the stool has a little problem there, but this definitely sounds Catholic.
With all this in mind, I'm beginning to believe that the Church of England may eventually be restored with Rome, as long as all the anglican heresies go away. It just might take a really long time...
Thoughts?
-Jason