1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. We are holding our 2022 Angel Ministry Drive now. Please consider signing up, or if you have any questions about being an Angel, use our staff application form. The world needs more prayer now, and it is a great way to help other members of the forums. :) To Apply...click here

Are Anglicans required to accept the 7th ecumenical council?

Discussion in 'Scripture,Tradition,Reason-Anglican & Old Catholic' started by Noscentia, Nov 30, 2021.

  1. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian Supporter

    +3,605
    United States
    Generic Orthodox Christian
    Celibate
    Indeed, this is something I love about Anglicanism.

    Implementing at least a partial monastic episcopate in the Anglican and Lutheran churches is viable considering the long tradition of Lutheran monasticism in Germany and Sweden and the less ancient, but more widespread, Anglican monasticism, with many Benedictine orders. Sadly, Anglican monasticism is in decline and the Episcopalian monastery relatively near me, across the border in California*, recently closed; I thought about joining the OHC but they could have assigned me elsewhere.

    *Fun fact: California is the only US state to have the appearance of an internal border with other states, because all major highways leading to California pass through an Agricultural Inspection Station.
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2022
  2. Paidiske

    Paidiske Clara bonam audax Supporter

    +17,443
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    No, come on, no. This is not a matter of "facilitating Anglo Catholic worship," as if it were the adiaphora of incense or chasubles. We're talking about core doctrinal convictions, and nor can we re-interpret them to mean exactly the opposite of what their drafters (and everyone in their original context) understood them to mean.

    That means, no, we don't put consecrated hosts in monstrances for adoration. No, we don't ask the saints to pray for us. And no, we don't do these things and then pretend that they don't violate basic historic Anglican norms.

    I don't think we should abandon our convictions for the sake of "ecumenical progress." It's not true ecumenism if it just means agreeing with others for the sake of it. And I think you're coming close to the edge of debating inappropriately in the Anglican forum.

    But the Book of Common Prayer could only unite Anglicans because the church set boundaries around it. As soon as you say, "Do what you like, everything's fair game, don't bother about what's authorised (or even what can legitimately be authorised within our understanding)" you might as well not bother having a BCP.
     
  3. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian Supporter

    +3,605
    United States
    Generic Orthodox Christian
    Celibate
    Whoops, thought I was in Traditional Theology
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2022
  4. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian Supporter

    +3,605
    United States
    Generic Orthodox Christian
    Celibate
    Oh SNAP! I am extremely sorry - I thought this was Traditional Theology. Please forgive me. I can understand why you got ticked off at me. I am vaporizing the offending post.
     
  5. Paidiske

    Paidiske Clara bonam audax Supporter

    +17,443
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    I hope I wasn't too grumpy. It just happens to be a topic about which I have some fairly firmly held views, as they say. (Stubborn, who, me? Surely not. ;) )
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
    • List
  6. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian Supporter

    +3,605
    United States
    Generic Orthodox Christian
    Celibate
    No, its quite alright, I routinely chew people out for posting off-topic in TT and I made a huge faux pas. I admire your doctrinal firmness and have come to trust your orthodoxy.
     
  7. PloverWing

    PloverWing Episcopalian

    +3,902
    United States
    Anglican
    Married
    I agree with your view of oaths: either take the oath seriously, and hold people to it, or don't require the oath. I don't like oaths that don't mean anything.

    As to the Articles themselves: I'm, of course, from one of the national churches that moved the Articles to a "historical documents" appendix, so that's going to influence my viewpoint. I'm glad for the move. There are Roman Catholic beliefs that are called "corrupt" and "repugnant" in the Articles, that I think of as harmless differences of opinion, and I would feel I was being false if I affirmed the Articles in their entirety. I think of those statements as understandable for their time, because the split with the RCC was still fresh, but less needed now that tempers have cooled.

    You speak of one province/area discarding the Articles without consulting others, and I admit that the American church does have a history of going off in our own direction without waiting for agreement from others. What would you think of a procedure that involved the wider Communion that could revisit the Articles, to keep them or amend them or move them to "historical documents", but do this with all the national churches in conversation?
     
  8. Paidiske

    Paidiske Clara bonam audax Supporter

    +17,443
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    To my mind, the point about those Articles is not about their rhetorical force (tact not having been a driving consideration in their drafting, I agree), but about the boundaries they set. If the Articles say, for example, that transubstantiation and purgatory are "repugnant to the plain words of Scripture" then we don't teach it, or structure our liturgies in ways which affirm it. If we move that statement to "historical documents," then what's to stop some Anglican clergy from teaching transubstantiation from the pulpit?

    In theory, I'd be open to a global council. In practice, given we can't even get a bunch of our bishops to turn up to Lambeth, I'd not hold my breath expecting it to be realistically possible just now.

    I would prefer to amend them (I do think there are aspects which could be improved), rather than to discard their normative force, though.
     
  9. Shane R

    Shane R Priest Supporter

    +893
    United States
    Anglican
    Widowed
    There's a joke among certain clergy who favor the 39 button cassock. If they miss a button they say it represents an Article they disagree with.
     
  10. Paidiske

    Paidiske Clara bonam audax Supporter

    +17,443
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    And if you get to the point where you have too few buttons done up to hold the cassock on, it's time to shift denominations. ;)
     
  11. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian Supporter

    +3,605
    United States
    Generic Orthodox Christian
    Celibate
    So do the rare cassock-wearing Methodists have 25-button cassocks?
     
  12. Shane R

    Shane R Priest Supporter

    +893
    United States
    Anglican
    Widowed
    I was reading a booklet by the liturgy scholar Peter Toon recently and he commented on the four councils benchmark. It was his assertion that the fifth and sixth councils were seen only as further clarification of the Chalcedonian Definition and the Church of England already accepted the Athanasian Creed. He claimed that the seventh council was little known or understood by the early Anglican divines.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  13. DeFyYing

    DeFyYing New Member

    49
    +13
    United States
    Lutheran
    Single
    No not at all, I actually really appreciate your input as someone deciding between the Lutheran and Anglican traditions. It's interesting to see someone else concerned about the status in the Articles which are technically still binding in England, the Mother church! For that reason I was interested in the Laudian "Old High Church" tradition as they seem to have continuity with historic Anglicanism and its formularies while having a high view of the sacraments and episcopate, is that school of thought alive and well around you in Australia?
     
  14. Paidiske

    Paidiske Clara bonam audax Supporter

    +17,443
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    Hmm. Well, that's a question that would take quite a bit of unpacking.

    I think it would be fair to say that the high church/Anglo-catholic side of the church a) have been heavily impacted by the Oxford movement and its aftermath, so that a Laudian tendency does not come down to us unfiltered by history since that point, and b) are currently concerned with different arguments than those which were core concerns historically.

    If that makes sense?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  15. DeFyYing

    DeFyYing New Member

    49
    +13
    United States
    Lutheran
    Single
    Gotcha, I really like the Anglo-Catholic movement I guess that I just worry about if there is a lack of continuity with the English reformation and the Elizabethan Settlement. I'm certainly grateful for the Oxford Movement for things like weekly Eucharist but doctrinally it seems very different than the theology of the Caroline Divines. Like it seems strange going to an Episcopal service with Eucharistic Adoration when I look at the 39 Articles
     
  16. Paidiske

    Paidiske Clara bonam audax Supporter

    +17,443
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    I think that's a really fair observation.
     
  17. DeFyYing

    DeFyYing New Member

    49
    +13
    United States
    Lutheran
    Single
    I've actually done some more reading and am quite interested in the "Prayer Book Catholic" tradition as there seems to be an inherent moderation in the Dearmerites compared to that of the more radical Anglo-Catholics. Still stuck between Lutheranism and Anglicanism though
     
  18. Arcangl86

    Arcangl86 Newbie

    +5,821
    Anglican
    Single
    US-Green
    I tend to identify as a prayer book catholic myself. It's easier though in The Episcopal Church though, which was hit harder by the Oxford movement then most of the Communion. I also used to be ELCA and even went to an ELCA seminary.
     
  19. DeFyYing

    DeFyYing New Member

    49
    +13
    United States
    Lutheran
    Single
    Oh wow what made you make the switch? I see so much similarities in both traditions that I find it hard to decide.
     
  20. DeFyYing

    DeFyYing New Member

    49
    +13
    United States
    Lutheran
    Single
    What I find frustrating is how a liturgical expression of Lutheranism would be exactly what I would be looking for, but at least around me the ELCA seems to cater to low church evangelical sensibilities. I was fortunate to find an "Evangelical Catholic" parish but it seems like those that self-identify as them are more prevalent in LCMS.
     
Loading...