I would love to see a video on how you study theology. You are obviously well-researched and knowledgeable about theology and church history, all while pursuing an entirely different field (law student). This is as surprising as it is impressive and any tips and insight you have on how we can also become good students of the Church would be appreciated.
I think Anglicanism is basically a metaphor for Christianity. A diverse religion with a unified framework and outlier beliefs. Anglicanism has unanimous unified beliefs and outlier doctrine. I'm highly comfortable with Anglo-Reform and Anglo-Catholic elements along with it's Wesleyan splinters. But i truly love the Anglicans and can use methodism as a substitute when a Anglican institution isn't nearby with a similar diversity and high or low church. (Example reformed Welsh methodists or reformed Scottish Anglicans but also Arminian Cornish methodists and Arminian Bristol Anglicans)
I attend an Anglican church leaving as a process Calvinism, Reformed systematic theology. I'm in the Christian faith but I don't have a Religious "room in the Christian house" I want Religious Orientation/guidance. I find that the Anglican church"Via Media " is a smaller umbrella in the big umbrella of the whole catholic church... Rome, East, Prodistantism. A smaller model. I find all this plural Religion "faith & practice" as disorientation. Confusing & divisive - the whole church is confused & divided. What can I do, where can I go?! I can't join Rome or the East & these won't have me because I don't believe in the dogmas I need to believe to be any of these 2. I'm searching within the Via Media Anglican but I still feel lost in mixed messages of Theology, mixed Religious interpretations & expressions. Pray for guidance please 🙏
I read Dix's The Shape of the Liturgy several years ago and very much enjoyed it. I'm not fussy about liturgy at all, and he really gets into the minutiae of it. He criticizes Cranmerian revision, which doesn't bother me one way or the other. But he is generally very ecumenical which I appreciate. He has many nice things to say about Puritans, which seems rare these days, especially from the High Church crowd. He is also brutally honest about what early worship looked like and how it developed, which is a refreshing contrast from certain Roman and Eastern narratives. One example: "Yet though the ceremonious tradition of catholic worship thus goes back uninterruptedly to the fourth century and can be shown to have a fair half or more of its roots in the third and second, and even in the New Testament itself, I do not know that it is fair to call it outright an older tradition of Christian worship than its puritan rival. The monks and hermits of the fourth century were catholics in doctrine, but many of them had much of the puritan theory of worship. Augustine speaking fearfully of the enticements to ear and eye in the use of church music and beauty of adornment. Jerome lamenting the substitution of a silver manger for one of sun-baked mud in the grotto at Bethlehem, the deliberate confinement of the recitation of psalms to a single voice while the rest of the company listened in silent meditative attention among the fathers of the desert, these things are clear evidence of the existence among the monks of the puritan theory, that worship is above all a matter of psychological attention, something purely mental which external things are likely to distract. And this puritan ideal of prayer undoubtedly is represented by certain aspects of Christian life in the third and second centuries, things which are to be found substantially in the New Testament. Clear-cut antitheses are as a rule misleading in the study of history. But in this case it does seem more than arguable that while the ceremonious worship of the fourth century was a direct and legitimate development of the corporate worship of the pre-Nicene church in its new public setting, the strong puritan tradition in fourth century monasticism derives equally directly from the pre-Nicene tradition of strictly private prayer." - The Shape of the Liturgy Great video as usual. Your ability to grasp, distill, and accurately communicate large swaths of theology and history is impressive and a gift to the Church. Keep up the good work. God bless!
A couple more fun quotes from him: ""I know of no serious evidence for the existence of any organised cycle of lessons for the ordinary Sunday synaxis anywhere in pre-Nicene times." - Dom Gregory Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy "The arguments by which the retention of Latin for the liturgy is now defended are the precise opposite of those which originally brought about the introduction of a Latin rite at Rome." - Dom Gregory Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy, p. 619
@Young Anglican can you make a new video about what you believe about predestination? I am just interested as to what you think after talking to redeemed zoomer about it if you have come to a conclusion yet
As a committed Arminian, I disagree with much of Ussher's theology, but I think he was right about his synodical take on the episcopacy. The subsidiarity is genius.
I’d love to know some books you’ve read when learning about Anglican history. I’ve recently joined Anglicanism and would love to dive into the history of it
I enjoyed the video. It’s interesting how many unicorns of the faith we have in Anglicanism (unicorn meaning rare folks who don’t fit any mold). For example you have Hooker and Jewel. Two theologians who are tied together who are known for defending Anglicanism against very different views of the faith. Related question: You mentioned that a good place to start for learning about Anglicanism is the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. This book is pretty long. What about starting at the Apology by Jewel? You have a book that is much shorter, and comes from a theological perspective that is not too different from Hooker.
I am in between Lutheranism and reformed atm. I am looking into Anglicanism. Do you think at this time I could find a home here? How would I find a nonwoke church in usa?
The ACNA is theologically conservative and traditional (at least in most parishes). Go online and find the ACNA church finder and put in your zip code and it’ll show you the closest churches to you.
I would use redeemed zoomer’s church finder. In most places ACNA will be the best fit. That said, there are parishes, and even whole dioceses, of orthodox christians left in TEC
Question: What role do the 39 articles take in Anglicanism? Are they authoritative? I ask as I'm currently considering Anglicanism, but I disagree with Article 29 on unworthy communion as I'm a Lutheran.
@@Lugal4391 They are authoritative but I have argued Articlle 29 actually has a quasi Lutheran reading when both the Article and the actual Lutheran position are properly understood.
@@Weavileiscool Anglicanism is its own distinct tradition. So while some theological overlap exists (as I highlighted in the video), noone in the ACNA is a "high church methodist" or a "lutheran" in the true sense and no parish would identify thus
@@Young_Anglican you didn’t answer the question I intended (I worded it very portly not your fault) but you did answer the question I need so thanks a lot I love your videos!
What confuses me is that what would be (besides bishops and apostolic succession) things in theology that a distinctly Anglican? For example as I understand it the cathechism of the Anglican church in the BCP 1662 has the reformed view of the sacraments, others claim the Anglican view is akin to the Lutheran view. So there doesn't seem to be an distinct Anglican view for this issue as well es any other issues I am aware of. Or are there specific Anglican views on issues other than Predestination or the Sacraments?
@@michaelg4919 I had a conversation with Sean Luke on my channel where he discusses the traditional Anglican view in detail and I think that might be helpful
Additionally, Anglican Aesthetics had a 2 hour long dialogue with Scholastic Lutherans where they discuss the differences between their views if you'd like a good contrast. @@michaelg4919
Have you heard of Michael Ferrebee Sadler? I've been reading his book on baptism "The Second Adam and the New Birth" recently and wondering where he fits in with the greater Anglican tradition. Now I'd say somewhere amid the tractarians probably.
Via Media originally meant between Lutheran and Reformed, and nothing has changed. As a tradition, Lutherans are uniformly closer to Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy than Anglicanism. All 8 ecumenical councils have always been affirmed, rather than the first 500 years. Monasteries have always existed, converting directly from Catholicism. Salvation is understood much more like classic Augustinian (including Aquinas) than anything in the remaining Protestant world, including justification happening multiple times, infused righteousness, and the non-elect experiencing and losing genuine salvation. Pastors/priests genuinely offer absolution. There is private confession. The historic liturgy existed from the beginning. The Sacraments are as close to Roman Catholicism as possible without falling into the errors. Prayers for the dead have always always existed as conscience allows. The historic episcopate exists where desired, since Lutherans understanding both Scripture and historical theology, recognize the truth articulated by the greatest exegetes in East and West, Chrysostom and Jerome, that it does not appear in Scripture. But rather, it arose as a custom. With the East, Lutherans recognize that where it does exist there is no special ordination for bishops since the office is not distinct in character. Instead, it is simply a pastor/priest having particular administrative responsibilities. Hence, as with the East, pastors/priests genuinely shepherd their congregations and wearing pectoral crosses are perfectly acceptable. Moreover, when congregations exist within Eastern Orthodox contexts, a modified Eastern liturgy is used. Indeed, Lutheranism never understood itself as reforming the Church but only purifying it. The only accommodations it required to remain under Rome were rights to use earlier liturgies, pastors/priests allowed to marry, and laity receiving both wine and bread. All of which could be shown to have existed in earlier ages. In contrast, Anglicanism abandoned much of this, if ever having held or even known some of it, in favor of Reformed novelties and from the very beginning. Therefore, even if some within Anglicanism align more with Lutheranism and go further by embracing transubstantiation, the majority tradition does not. As a result, the original definition of Via Media logically holds. And given that Anglicanism is one of the original branches of Protestantism, members don't get to revise history and say, somehow, that now either certain elements or the tradition isn't completely Protestant. It is a more conservative expression but still entirely Protestant as no other category has ever actually, much less legitimately, existed.
@@JamesBarber-cu5dz Of course we get to say that some parts of our tradition aren’t completely protestant. We are a living church tradition. If collectively we decide to restore some church practice, or to reexamine the medieval scholastics and take what is good out of them, then we can do it. We do not define ourselves by a list of beliefs but by a common polity and common worship. Anglicanism has never been a confessional tradition. Nor indeed was the patristic church: read the fathers and see how far they really agreed on doctrine. Religion is the worship of god, the contemplation of god, not intellectual submission to a list of propositions. I really think that Luther and Melancthon understood that. It’s not about deciding what box you like and squeezing into it
Anglican via media is a nice idea. I studied at an Anglican seminary for a year and there was much to admire. However, the current state of Anglicanism is far from admirable and it has something to do with the weakness of the Via Media. As well, Anglicanism is, as the name states, ENGLISH Christianity. It is an ethnic religion. And with the destruction of England through mass Third World invasion, the national base on which Anglicanism is based has fallen apart. And so has the Anglican dis-communion. Sad
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
I would love to see a video on how you study theology. You are obviously well-researched and knowledgeable about theology and church history, all while pursuing an entirely different field (law student). This is as surprising as it is impressive and any tips and insight you have on how we can also become good students of the Church would be appreciated.
Thanks for the comment! This made my day. Maybe I will make a video on how to study theology
@@Young_Anglicanplease do!
I think Anglicanism is basically a metaphor for Christianity. A diverse religion with a unified framework and outlier beliefs.
Anglicanism has unanimous unified beliefs and outlier doctrine.
I'm highly comfortable with Anglo-Reform and Anglo-Catholic elements along with it's Wesleyan splinters.
But i truly love the Anglicans and can use methodism as a substitute when a Anglican institution isn't nearby with a similar diversity and high or low church.
(Example reformed Welsh methodists or reformed Scottish Anglicans but also Arminian Cornish methodists and Arminian Bristol Anglicans)
I clicked on this video and I'm leaving a comment solely because of your thumbnail
I attend an Anglican church leaving as a process Calvinism, Reformed systematic theology. I'm in the Christian faith but I don't have a Religious "room in the Christian house" I want Religious Orientation/guidance. I find that the Anglican church"Via Media " is a smaller umbrella in the big umbrella of the whole catholic church... Rome, East, Prodistantism. A smaller model. I find all this plural Religion "faith & practice" as disorientation. Confusing & divisive - the whole church is confused & divided. What can I do, where can I go?! I can't join Rome or the East & these won't have me because I don't believe in the dogmas I need to believe to be any of these 2. I'm searching within the Via Media Anglican but I still feel lost in mixed messages of Theology, mixed Religious interpretations & expressions. Pray for guidance please 🙏
Awesome video!! May God bless you and your channel!!
I read Dix's The Shape of the Liturgy several years ago and very much enjoyed it. I'm not fussy about liturgy at all, and he really gets into the minutiae of it. He criticizes Cranmerian revision, which doesn't bother me one way or the other. But he is generally very ecumenical which I appreciate. He has many nice things to say about Puritans, which seems rare these days, especially from the High Church crowd. He is also brutally honest about what early worship looked like and how it developed, which is a refreshing contrast from certain Roman and Eastern narratives.
One example:
"Yet though the ceremonious tradition of catholic worship thus goes back uninterruptedly to the fourth century and can be shown to have a fair half or more of its roots in the third and second, and even in the New Testament itself, I do not know that it is fair to call it outright an older tradition of Christian worship than its puritan rival. The monks and hermits of the fourth century were catholics in doctrine, but many of them had much of the puritan theory of worship. Augustine speaking fearfully of the enticements to ear and eye in the use of church music and beauty of adornment. Jerome lamenting the substitution of a silver manger for one of sun-baked mud in the grotto at Bethlehem, the deliberate confinement of the recitation of psalms to a single voice while the rest of the company listened in silent meditative attention among the fathers of the desert, these things are clear evidence of the existence among the monks of the puritan theory, that worship is above all a matter of psychological attention, something purely mental which external things are likely to distract. And this puritan ideal of prayer undoubtedly is represented by certain aspects of Christian life in the third and second centuries, things which are to be found substantially in the New Testament. Clear-cut antitheses are as a rule misleading in the study of history. But in this case it does seem more than arguable that while the ceremonious worship of the fourth century was a direct and legitimate development of the corporate worship of the pre-Nicene church in its new public setting, the strong puritan tradition in fourth century monasticism derives equally directly from the pre-Nicene tradition of strictly private prayer."
- The Shape of the Liturgy
Great video as usual. Your ability to grasp, distill, and accurately communicate large swaths of theology and history is impressive and a gift to the Church. Keep up the good work. God bless!
A couple more fun quotes from him:
""I know of no serious evidence for the existence of any organised cycle of lessons for the ordinary Sunday synaxis anywhere in pre-Nicene times."
- Dom Gregory Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy
"The arguments by which the retention of Latin for the liturgy is now defended are the precise opposite of those which originally brought about the introduction of a Latin rite at Rome."
- Dom Gregory Dix, The Shape of the Liturgy, p. 619
@Young Anglican can you make a new video about what you believe about predestination? I am just interested as to what you think after talking to redeemed zoomer about it if you have come to a conclusion yet
Anglican people are amazing 😻
Can you post the full graph with the names of the figures?
Following up here.
As a committed Arminian, I disagree with much of Ussher's theology, but I think he was right about his synodical take on the episcopacy. The subsidiarity is genius.
Great content.
I’d love to know some books you’ve read when learning about Anglican history. I’ve recently joined Anglicanism and would love to dive into the history of it
@@AnglicanLoFi J.R.H. Moorman's "A History of the Church in England" is a great resource.
Not even 54 seconds before Richard Hooker is mentioned 😂
I enjoyed the video. It’s interesting how many unicorns of the faith we have in Anglicanism (unicorn meaning rare folks who don’t fit any mold). For example you have Hooker and Jewel. Two theologians who are tied together who are known for defending Anglicanism against very different views of the faith.
Related question: You mentioned that a good place to start for learning about Anglicanism is the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. This book is pretty long. What about starting at the Apology by Jewel? You have a book that is much shorter, and comes from a theological perspective that is not too different from Hooker.
I am in between Lutheranism and reformed atm. I am looking into Anglicanism. Do you think at this time I could find a home here? How would I find a nonwoke church in usa?
The ACNA is theologically conservative and traditional (at least in most parishes). Go online and find the ACNA church finder and put in your zip code and it’ll show you the closest churches to you.
The ACNA would theologically be a good middle ground for you for sure.
I would use redeemed zoomer’s church finder. In most places ACNA will be the best fit. That said, there are parishes, and even whole dioceses, of orthodox christians left in TEC
Love the Anglican renaissance podcast. Will you put them on Spotify?
They already are luckily! If you look up Anglican Renaissance, it should show up.
@@jaema8281 thanks! Some of the older ones are up but the more recent ones are only on RUclips
Question: What role do the 39 articles take in Anglicanism? Are they authoritative? I ask as I'm currently considering Anglicanism, but I disagree with Article 29 on unworthy communion as I'm a Lutheran.
@@Lugal4391 They are authoritative but I have argued Articlle 29 actually has a quasi Lutheran reading when both the Article and the actual Lutheran position are properly understood.
@@Young_AnglicanI see, thank you!
I am between high church Methodism and Lutheranism and I’m wondering how much of either of those traditions are present in the ACNA right now
@@Weavileiscool Anglicanism is its own distinct tradition. So while some theological overlap exists (as I highlighted in the video), noone in the ACNA is a "high church methodist" or a "lutheran" in the true sense and no parish would identify thus
@@Young_Anglican you didn’t answer the question I intended (I worded it very portly not your fault) but you did answer the question I need so thanks a lot I love your videos!
Great video!
What confuses me is that what would be (besides bishops and apostolic succession) things in theology that a distinctly Anglican?
For example as I understand it the cathechism of the Anglican church in the BCP 1662 has the reformed view of the sacraments, others claim the Anglican view is akin to the Lutheran view. So there doesn't seem to be an distinct Anglican view for this issue as well es any other issues I am aware of. Or are there specific Anglican views on issues other than Predestination or the Sacraments?
@@michaelg4919 I had a conversation with Sean Luke on my channel where he discusses the traditional Anglican view in detail and I think that might be helpful
@@Young_Anglican thanks! God bless you!
Additionally, Anglican Aesthetics had a 2 hour long dialogue with Scholastic Lutherans where they discuss the differences between their views if you'd like a good contrast. @@michaelg4919
Have you heard of Michael Ferrebee Sadler? I've been reading his book on baptism "The Second Adam and the New Birth" recently and wondering where he fits in with the greater Anglican tradition. Now I'd say somewhere amid the tractarians probably.
Sadler’s book CHURCH DOCTRINE, BIBLE TRUTH is also good 👍🏻
Do you have a discord?
Via Media originally meant between Lutheran and Reformed, and nothing has changed. As a tradition, Lutherans are uniformly closer to Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy than Anglicanism. All 8 ecumenical councils have always been affirmed, rather than the first 500 years. Monasteries have always existed, converting directly from Catholicism. Salvation is understood much more like classic Augustinian (including Aquinas) than anything in the remaining Protestant world, including justification happening multiple times, infused righteousness, and the non-elect experiencing and losing genuine salvation. Pastors/priests genuinely offer absolution. There is private confession. The historic liturgy existed from the beginning. The Sacraments are as close to Roman Catholicism as possible without falling into the errors. Prayers for the dead have always always existed as conscience allows.
The historic episcopate exists where desired, since Lutherans understanding both Scripture and historical theology, recognize the truth articulated by the greatest exegetes in East and West, Chrysostom and Jerome, that it does not appear in Scripture. But rather, it arose as a custom. With the East, Lutherans recognize that where it does exist there is no special ordination for bishops since the office is not distinct in character. Instead, it is simply a pastor/priest having particular administrative responsibilities. Hence, as with the East, pastors/priests genuinely shepherd their congregations and wearing pectoral crosses are perfectly acceptable. Moreover, when congregations exist within Eastern Orthodox contexts, a modified Eastern liturgy is used.
Indeed, Lutheranism never understood itself as reforming the Church but only purifying it. The only accommodations it required to remain under Rome were rights to use earlier liturgies, pastors/priests allowed to marry, and laity receiving both wine and bread. All of which could be shown to have existed in earlier ages.
In contrast, Anglicanism abandoned much of this, if ever having held or even known some of it, in favor of Reformed novelties and from the very beginning. Therefore, even if some within Anglicanism align more with Lutheranism and go further by embracing transubstantiation, the majority tradition does not. As a result, the original definition of Via Media logically holds. And given that Anglicanism is one of the original branches of Protestantism, members don't get to revise history and say, somehow, that now either certain elements or the tradition isn't completely Protestant. It is a more conservative expression but still entirely Protestant as no other category has ever actually, much less legitimately, existed.
@@JamesBarber-cu5dz Of course we get to say that some parts of our tradition aren’t completely protestant. We are a living church tradition. If collectively we decide to restore some church practice, or to reexamine the medieval scholastics and take what is good out of them, then we can do it. We do not define ourselves by a list of beliefs but by a common polity and common worship. Anglicanism has never been a confessional tradition. Nor indeed was the patristic church: read the fathers and see how far they really agreed on doctrine. Religion is the worship of god, the contemplation of god, not intellectual submission to a list of propositions. I really think that Luther and Melancthon understood that. It’s not about deciding what box you like and squeezing into it
What if someone wants to be Anglican but the only Anglican Church within a 2 hour drive is a TEC church? It’s on RZs map of conservative churches 🙃
@@MHall-qd4dn that is gonna depend a lot on the details of your situation
@ I’m in a presby church and it’s fine, but I’m just coming to believe things that would align better with Anglicanism.
Are you aware of the Whitchurch press and their free republished Anglican works?
@@elliotrobbie4736 yes :)
I am now. Thank you!
YOU'RE TRULY GODSENT!!! I'VE LITERALLY BEEN SEARCHING FOR A PLACE I CAN FIND ANGLICAN BOOKS
Anglican via media is a nice idea. I studied at an Anglican seminary for a year and there was much to admire. However, the current state of Anglicanism is far from admirable and it has something to do with the weakness of the Via Media. As well, Anglicanism is, as the name states, ENGLISH Christianity. It is an ethnic religion. And with the destruction of England through mass Third World invasion, the national base on which Anglicanism is based has fallen apart. And so has the Anglican dis-communion. Sad
Anglicanism is a via media of Lutheranism and Calvinism, any other broad church articulation is a nonsense that is an innovation.
@@tcideh4929 No, Cranmer and the other authors of the BCP and articles were Calvinist protestants.
The Catholic Church is the real one
Lol
The Anglican Church is the real one. The perfection of the King James Bible proves this beyond any doubt.
They’re all real brother