@@TheCanadianCatholicChannel The same applies to John Newman, which is why people should stop using the quote to try and bash Protestants actually make an argument instead.
I had the exact same experience. I grew up baptist and I fell in love with the Eastern Orthodox theology. However I had a few qualms with the exclusivity of EO. Anglicanism has been the one denomination that I feel comes closest to heart of the early church and the love of Christ.
I also started off in the independent fundamentalist baptist church. I was ordained deacon in 2008 and a year later priest in the Anglican Church. Many of the same reasons.
I had a very similar experience coming to Anglicanism. I came from Hebrew Roots and started studying the temple liturgy and a friend invited me to a Greek Orthodox Church and I went there for a while and then ended up in an Anglican Church because it was the via media. Also, I grew up Independent Baptist KJV only!
Hi brother, thanks for the video. I myself came out of the pentecostal tradition. I think we share a similar experience, though I ended up in the confessional Lutheran Church (specifically LCMS), for which I give God thanks because has changed my life and faith. I also have respect for the Anglican tradition. God bless!
I took a similar route to Anglicanism myself. Raised Methodist, IFB in early adulthood and found Anglicanism through investigating Eastern Orthodoxy in my late 50's.
I'm not a big fan of the "via media" term because I find it generally unhelpful. I would focus more on the fact that we listen well to the consensus of the Church over the centuries. I would argue Anglicans have generally done this better than any other tradition. I thought you discussed this pretty well!
As a rallying call to a kind of doctrinal laxity and unwillingness to draw boundaries , via media has been bad. Though not as bad as the using of the three legged stool to ignore Scripture and Tradition. But it's undeniably true as a historic reality, that since Cranmer the Church of England has been Reformed but not strictly Calvinist and with Lutheran elements, strong in maintaining the Church structure and traditional beliefs in response to the Baptists, Anabaptists, Puritans and so forth, and also closer to Rome than any other of the Reformed tradition. It's arguably providential, since it wasn't what anyone wanted until Hooker's writings gained popularity. It just happened that way
That part of the sacraments providing an objective assurance of salvation for failing Christians was quite interesting. For a Christian to even have the courage to still return to God even though he/she failed miserably actually is evidence of genuine salvation.
Thank you for sharing your experiences leading you to the Anglican Church, Im ExJW discovered I was in a cult just over a year ago and got heavily into the King James controversy since the missing verses support fundamental doctrines like the trinity and make JW doctrine impossible. The KJB literally changed my religious worldview I went from denying/twisting all the fundamentals of the Christian faith to believing them. I believed the sinners prayer understanding of salvation for a while then finally listened to apologists from different Christian traditions and tried not to let my former ideas, bias me too much. I also was getting very interested in orthodoxy and value much of that tradition but I also have some hang ups that I just can’t get past and your explanation of the Anglican approach has made me lean heavily towards them. Loved your explanation of Sacramental theology and the traditional liturgy.
Wow, this is so similar to my journey. I grew up a convinced southern Baptist, but began to question some of my long held beliefs such as OSAS and the symbolic-only understanding of the ‘ordinances’. I considered the claims of Rome, but ultimately found the biblical and historical case for the papacy unconvincing. I seriously explored Easter Orthodoxy and was even a catechumen for a brief time, but had some key reservations which kept me from swimming the Bosphorus. I finally landed In Traditional Anglicanism about 15 years ago, and have been a member of the local ACNA mission parish for the past 12 years.
I used to be an IFB pastor. I’m now a Reformed pastor. Extreme low views of the sacraments and even neglect of the sacraments is one of the reasons I left the IFB. Other reasons were the anti-Protestant mentality, dishonesty about Church History, a rejection of historic Confessions of faith, pelagianism, antinomianism, decisional regeneration, extreme dispensationalism, non-repentance gospel, divine inspiration of the KJV, irreverent worship, and many more. Not to say all IFB churches stand for these things but my group did. John Wesley got me rethinking my views while serving in the Philippines as an IFB evangelist. From there I began using the Book of Common Prayer which transformed my spiritual life in so many ways. I then got ahold of the Westminster Confession of Faith and in January will begin to function as a licensed preacher and assistant pastor in a Calvinistic Methodist church. Interesting to see how God led you out of the IFB back to a more historic Christian church. Glory be to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen.
The antinominianim concerns me most and the extreme KJV onlyism - I know there are some good independent baptist churches, but lots of dangerous ones as well.
Great video. I agree that Orthodoxy is beautiful, but very alien to most western minds. Traditional Anglican/Anglican Catholic tends to feel like "coming home" to the soul.
@A Man Western Orthodoxy does seem intriguing, but they are few and far between. I agree with most of Orthodox teachings and rites, though not all. I am doing the best with what I have, for me, family and the Lord. The Scripture I tend to drift towards is,".. whoever comes to Me, I will never turn away". (Jn6:37 ). He sees the heart, and knows all things. He is a merciful God. Thank you for trying to bring me to the Orthodox faith. May God bless you richly.
It's only alien because western people don't want to be the change they want to see. Orthodoxy can only grow in the west if western people want to work for it
Why all the talk about Orthodoxy. This is Anglican channel. 🤦♂️ obviously he didn’t become Ortho for reasons. And no it’s not for everyone. - Ex EO here
Wow, as someone who was a young IFB preacher who is now under the Anglican Communion, I really appreciated this. A lot of the issues you have raised were issues I have too. Selective literalism is the name of the game for IFBs.
This is very helpful. I've been in a similar boat after growing up in a pretty conservative Presbyterian church and then attending one of those "concert churches" you talked about when I was a teenager. I've explored many of the major trinitarian denominations since I started college. I loved the Divine Liturgy of Eastern Orthodoxy. The beauty of it all blew my mind, but I didn't end up joining because I ended up falling into new age deception. I fell away from Christianity for a couple of years, but now as a 22 year old I'm repentant and looking for a church to settle down in. Apart from the Episcopal Church, which I just can't bring myself to attend because of all the liberal theology... there's an ACNA church about half an hour from where I live and there's a very small Anglo-Catholic church in town. I think I'm gonna check them out. You've convinced me to give them a try.
I'm glad this video popped up as I was scrolling through RUclips. I remember when you first posted this. God has done some great things in your life, Fr. James.
I have been looking into various denominations the last few weeks and feel called to Anglicanism or some similar tradition. Similarly as you, I came to it by first looking into Eastern Orthodoxy.
On the so-called "vain repetitions," I like to ask "is reciting Psalm 23 or the Lord's Prayer vain repetitions?" The answer is obviously no. The vain repetitions is a reference to the pagan practices of prayer, repeated invocations and loud, public prayers, which are tendencies we all can fall into, whatever denomination.
@@barelyprotestant5365 I am an Anglican who does a lot of, private, repetitive chanting of the Psalms, praying the Anglican rosary with various prayers and scripture as well as the various Roman Rosarys. I find it very useful for stilling my mind and for focusing it on the things of God.
"[sigh] The Trail of Blood", lol! That's all you've got to say. Ex-Baptist, now fellow REC'er. A lot of your video resonates with me. Thanks for sharing!
Thank you very much for sharing, I find it illuminating as I have the same background and intellectual growth on these points as you. I wish I had discovered/seriously considered Anglicanism and liturgical worship much sooner but I’m grateful to be awakened and receptive to it now...and it feels like everything I’ve thought Church ought to be with reverence, beauty, intentionality, structure, and doctrine and theological tenants supported by history and tradition. You brought up many sincere elements I’ve encountered in the past and reasons why I’ve grown exceptionally frustrated and disillusioned with my experience attending the Baptist churches I have for the majority of my life when most of it appears to be a conflict with overall alignment on theological positions than mere aesthetic or philosophical desires... If you haven’t already, I would appreciate learning more of what convinced you to officially convert and make that change - perhaps a more in-depth video analysis/comparison on why you left the IFB/SBC and what solidified your resolve to do so...like explaining it to Southern Baptists or other non-denominational believers in a way they would understand or your Biblical justification in doing so to Anglicanism specifically? Maybe even a “5 Reasons I Left Being a Southern Baptist” as a companion to this video? Anyways, I am sure you’ve covered many of these topics in your other content but at the same time, something like this may help greatly in shining light and enabling the inconsistencies to dawn on others on top of explaining why and how to genuinely learn more about Anglicanism and about converting. In all honesty I’ve been wrestling with my Southern Baptist upbringing and faith since 2015 ever since I recognized the reality of the Eucharist with a friend after we visited a few Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. She eventually converted into the Roman Catholic Church but I could not merely drop and fully embrace misgivings/apprehensions about Papist practices or other issues, such as the extended elevation of Mary or transubstantiation that I cannot reconcile. Still, I have been exploring Roman Catholicism because it feels like it may ultimately be the most authentic option (RC monopoly on interpreting the Church can be quite convincing...) but I still cannot rationally/intellectually accept all positions so I cannot convert to that and yet I’ve realized I fully do not hold to Baptist theology due to so many gaps/errors in doctrine. Finding that Anglicanism values and embraces the best and largest consensus from the other Christian traditions without its severe abuses/extensions gives me hope
I'm glad to hear you're searching, and Thank you for your kind words! I will say that the claims of Rome are the least coving to me, out of the historic, liturgical and sacramental traditions. I'd much sooner become Lutheran, or Eastern Orthodox, before I became Roman. In fact, I've done quite a few debates against Roman Catholics. Some of them are on this channel, and some are on the playlist connected to this channel. Check them out!
@@barelyprotestant5365 thanks for the responses and understanding where I’m coming from and current dilemma but I’m excited to explore and learn more and of all of them, the Anglicanism you’ve explained so far seems to be what I’ve been seeking, whereas many Anglican and Episcopal churches near me seem to be rather progressive/liberal and not adhering to Scripture so I began to get discouraged but perhaps I will continue my search. Also, working my way through your videos now, thank you for the work you do in sharing on Anglicanism in an accessible way so I’m able to better understand and grow through this!
I can’t share my entire story but my biggest gripe with Anglicanism is the liberalism I see all over the place. Idk if there is a more conservative branch within Anglicanism but if there is lmk.
Former church of Christ, came to the Anglican Way (Old High Church Episcopalian) through Eastern Orthodoxy. Still use KJV for devotional reading. Love acapella worship too.
Good stuff. Wish there was an Anglican Church close by where I live. Instead, my family worships in a UMC. While there are many things I appreciate about the Methodist church, I miss receiving the body and blood of the Lord in the Eucharist.
This is very nearly identical to my Southern Baptist to confessional Lutheranism journey. Obviously Anglicanism is very similar on paper, but the “wide tent” has definitely gotten too wide on clear, Biblical issues for me to go your route. I hope you and others can be a voice for scriptural authority on the issues of ordination and marriage within the ACNA.
@@barelyprotestant5365 I know for now, but women’s ordination historically has been the first domino to fall. I’m aware ACNA is more nuanced with only priests and only in some episcopates, but to me it’s a clear issue. I pray the ACNA takes a firm stance on that. I hope my comment didn’t come off disparaging. I enjoy your content!
Very good video! I am currently in the process of deciding to be either Roman Catholic or Anglican and am struggling with the route to take. Pray me and any advice or talking points would be helpful.
Prayers for you, sir! I would recommend looking at the debate videos I've done, especially the one on the Papacy (linked below). The question at the end of the day comes down to whether or not the Papal claims are true. ruclips.net/video/auiLAv8BYpk/видео.html
@@jeremiahong248 I think you need to research the Early Church more, they didn’t emphasise on Saints, Mary etc isn’t mentioned at all in the epistles etc. In the more Catholic side of Anglicanism they hold the essential Catholic Dogmas, but leave out the excessive ones such as the immaculate conception, excessive devotion and prayer to Mary and Saints among many other traditions that came out from the middle ages. Alot of people even say the Anglican Church is what the Catholic Church would look like if it turned further back to scripture and dropped the excessive man-made doctrines with no Biblical context.
@@jeremiahong248 And ironically you say what the apostles taught the Early Church is the exact same as what the Catholic Church has taught for 2000 years is very contradictory to the Catholic traditions that have been brought in over time.
@@jeremiahong248 Also King Henry VIII was the tipping point of the reformation, there had been much time wanting a reformation and Thomas Cranmer etc used Henry and the divorce to break from Rome. Also the Church is far from built on Henry. Henry was still a Roman Catholic in all beliefs, minus the Pope. Henry wanted Clerical Celibacy, Latin as the language. Among many other Catholic traditions and dogmas. However after his death and when James came around they finally were able to fully assemble the Anglican faith which had returned more back to the Scriptures, and Early Church etc, dropping all the excessive traditions
@@jeremiahong248 This all does seem to sound alot like traditional Anglicanism, we do accept Sacred traditions from the Early Church Fathers etc, and we have an episcopal hierarchy. Traditional Anglicanism is the Catholic Church minus traditions that have come randomly such as the immaculate conception and transubstantiation among more.
I have a question regarding Baptismal regeneration. If a person puts their faith in Christ, are they saved before or after baptism? I think a lot of traditions are rich whether they are Protestant, Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox, but Baptismal regeneration is something that I struggle with. I liken baptism to circumcision in the old testament. It was necessary but was not what saved, it was faith in God that saved. I do think Baptism is extremely important. There is an emphasis on it in scripture. I just feel like Baptismal Regeneration can quickly turn into legalism as if faith isn't what saves. That is an overarching concern I have (I'm not trying to make a caricature of baptismal regeneration). Or with cases like infants. Do infants who die without being baptized go to hell? Does a person who puts their faith in Christ and dies before getting baptized go to hell? If the answer is yes, I don't understand it and feel like it is legalistic. And goes against what Romans says when it says that Abraham was justified by faith. I by no means think baptism should be neglected, but I don't want it to be something that is legalistic. And I believe that faith in Christ comes, and then people are baptized. Maybe I'm misunderstanding baptismal regeneration. If you see this and can respond, I will be extremely appreciative.
I like what you say about assurance. I want to find a tradition I can commit to. I like Anglicanism, but I think I am too politically conservative to be a good fit
I find traditional Anglicanism to be very conservative, especially Anglican Catholic Church(ACA)Anglican Province of America(APA), Reformed Episcopal Church, etc. Others like the Anglican Church of Canada, The Episcopal Church are usually very liberal. A good, traditional Anglican church is hard to beat.
In England the Anglican church is sometimes called, (disrespectfully) "the Conservative Party at prayer". But I'm slightly Leftish, and they haven't thrown me out!
@@patbarrett9713 : When you consider that the Church of England was established by an Act of Parliament, the Act of Uniformity, which took effect on June 24, 1559, that's hardly surprising. Not to mention the 26 C of E bishops who have seats in the House of Lords!
Really appreciated this video. I'm wrestling through much of the same things at the moment. I've been looking into checking out an Anglican church. There are no ACNA churches near me, but there is an Anglican Province of Christ the King church. From what I understand, that denomination is quite Anglo-Catholic. Any opinions on that denomination? Are they similar to ACNA?
I am an Eastern Orthodox, a convert from Lutheranism since 2012, and I have lately begun to feel more and more drawn to High Church Anglicanism (this is not entirely new development; it was always my second choice). I still firmly believe in the Orthodox theology, but Anglicanism feel easier to belong to. I do not know should I go towards Anglicanism or remain in Orthodoxy.
Remain in the True Faith, my brother. While High Church Anglicanism is certainly appealing in certain aspects, Orthodoxy is time tested and will always remain - as it is the True Church of the Apostles, and the Faith once for all delivered to the Saints (Jude 1:3). High Church Anglicanism is dying, and soon will be overlapped by the more "liberal" branches within Anglicanism. It is sad, but the truth nonetheless.
Honestly, I would say become Anglican. There are theological issues with Eastern Orthodoxy, as much as I love it. But don't become Anglican unless you are convinced that there are errors in the Eastern Orthodox that you are forced to believe.
No matter you are a believer of any Christian denomination; as long as you dutifully read the Bible and regular systematic theology books, you will know what the Christian doctrine is, and you will not be misled by individual denominations that deviate from the biblical doctrine. The Anglican Church is also a member of the WCC, the WCC denominational association that advertises that it can cater to fallen believers and agree that it is not necessary to observe pure biblical teachings.
Can you you show me how orthodoxy lies within scripture? Non related to the video but I saw you comment that. You can answer it here or send me a link to a video where you have discuss this already?
@@barelyprotestant5365 by Constantinople, I mean Greek Orthodoxy. My reason why. They seem to me to be the earliest church. My reasons why not, they have dogmatized things that cannot be and discarded things that should not be. But then the question is asked, where does orthodoxy lie?
@@davidwatson9064 Constantinople means Byzantine Catholic.The Rite founded by St. Andrew the apostle.Some didn’t become “orthodox” until going into schism in 1054.There are 22 other eastern Catholic Churches like the Antiochian Catholic Church,Coptic Catholic Church,Melkite Catholic Church,Chaldean Catholic Church,Syriac Catholic Church,Syro-Malabar Catholic Church,Ukrainian Catholic Church,etc...
I would love to see you dialogue with Gavin O on Baptist churches. I'm sure you know that lots of baptists (their confessions) reject the 'sinners prayer,' the 'trail of blood' or the idea that the church fell away after the apostles [restorationist]. I think the idea of grace as going through the physical 'material' Christ [True Sacrement] does that in Baptist/Puritian/Reformed theology which emphasizes the Reformed Christology of Two Natures in One Person, with a true human body. I'm not sure how the Lutheran Lords Supper makes sense unless ubiquity works. I cant speak to IFB specifics, i think of the particular baptists - and southern baptists and conservative northern baptists.
He already dialogued with Dr. Jordan Cooper, a Lutheran. The traditions and theology are similar enough that a babtist (or Papist for that matter) isn't going to prefer one to the other.
Love this! There are so many similarities concerning my Walk of Life. I want to ask you a question concerning what church should I attend in Memphis Tennessee? I've never visited the Anglican Church before in my life. I began as Southern Baptist then became independent fundamental Baptist then became calvinistic Baptist and now for the last couple of years due to reading early church fathers started visiting Lutheran Church and that led me to now Orthodox antiochian Church which I love but have some problems.
Certainly elements of Catholicism required reform some of which was accomplished at Vatican II and certainly Anglicanism has a special charism for working with the Bible and combining it with authentic traditions. So have you ever seen an Anglican eucharistic miracle or read about one that had believable documentation?
@@barelyprotestant5365 Please describe it or them so that I too can be inspired by how God works in the Anglican church (and maybe have something to share with open minded Catholics)
@@barelyprotestant5365 Jesus said that a little wicked and adulterous generation seeks a sign. Of course he was speaking to those without faith. The context today is very different. The bottom line is that if the Anglican church has valid orders there's no way for me to tell that apart from a miracle. I've done my own due diligence and did not find most of Leo the 13th's reasoning on Anglican orders to be valid. But at the same time it's just kind of depressing to read the type of Protestant bishops who were appointed after of the schism between Rome and the Anglican church. How can you possibly know for sure that they didn't invalidate the ordinations by their heretical belief about church and sacrament? Almost all of them were anti liturgical, didn't believe in all the sacraments, and had a very very stripped down approach to the real presence.
@@FaithHopeandLoveMinistry your understanding of Bishops within the Anglican Tradition is wrong. Only in the 20th century do you see any widespread liberalism within Anglicanism. We are actively fighting against that. Roman Catholics have the same exact issue. See Cardinal Marx and Germany, as just one example.
could i ask you what about the orthodox doctrine you didnt agree with? im on the fence about anglican vs orthodox as well (as a pentecostal) and was wondering what the doctrine you didnt agree with in orthodoxy was. thanks!
Great video! I had not heard your story before and it's always something I'm interested in, why people believe different things and change beliefs. Are you part of the Anglican Communion? Is the Episcopal Church in it after blatantly disobeying the 1998 Lambeth Conference? Does it matter who is in it? Is that part of the link to the past, tracing a direct line back to the Apostles?
So, the question of what constitutes the Anglican Communion is difficult. I can say this: my province (the ACNA) is recognized by the vast majority of the Communion. The Episcopal Church is formally part of the Anglican Communion but has been under censure for its allowance of gay "marriage", which goes completely against Lambeth 1998. It doesn't necessarily matter who is in/out, as we do not consider one "outside of the Church" for not being part of this particular Communion. I'm not sure what "that" is that you're referring to in the last sentence. We hold to Apostolic Succession, so I can say that.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Thanks for your answer. By "that" I meant is the question of who is or is not in the Anglican Communion relevant to the question of Apostolic Succession? But otherwise thanks for your recent videos. I'm currently part of a Baptist congregation in France, but I love hearing from different Christians as well.
@@christophekeating21, Apostolic Succession is held, always, by the individual Bishop rather than a Communion of Bishops. That is how it is traced: from one generation's Bishop to another.
I grew up going to a fundamentalist megachurch, and I find myself drawn to Anglicanism due to its open mindedness and its middle ground between Protestantism and Catholicism.
About the ABC analogy: It doesn't matter which song or melody you use. You're not less authentic depending on which melody you use, even non traditional melodies is still authentic. But you don't want to go too deep into the reading analogy, there is fierce controversy on whether you should use the "global" ("Peter and Jane" type) method vs the alphabetical, syllabical methods, and whether one or the other causes dislexia. You'll be introduced to all that should you have kids. In my family, we learned to read according to the "via media" the so called "méthode mixte" so I guess if we had dislexia, proponents of both extremes would say it was the fault of the other, not to mention our reader followed the story of a "kind" ghost, so there might have been demonic influences, lol. Thankfully, none of my siblings have dislexia.
As to your point on vain repetitions, nearly all nondenominational or evangelical congregations that I have attended at least point to the Psalms or the “Our Father” as a standard for prayer.
Jesus brings presence and enlightenment through the Holy spirit...the ritual of sacrament is,while a good thing...it is not required for salvation...genuine acceptance Jesus in your heart is all that is necessary....if you pray the sinners prayer over and over and still have doubts,it's not because you didint make a ceremony of it. The same can be said of baptism..the water holds no power,the spirit does.
Speaking as a member of the Episcopal church in USA: What we believe as Anglicans is not dictated by priests and bishops, but it is informed by scripture, reason and tradition. You are not bound by the beliefs of others in your congregation. You are bound by the word of God and by apostolic tradition. The church should be a place where we can work out our salvation in fear and trembling. Not everyone may have the same beliefs but we can come together and pray for wisdom for ourselves and for each other.
The ACNA, Continuing Anglicanism, etc. There are even parts of the Episcopal Church that don't support gay marriage and haven't ordained women if it bothers you that much.
The sinner's prayer is a prayer made popular by Billy Graham. It's basically treated like Baptism, for Baptists: it's what "saves you", for many of its proponents.
I see how Anglicans and Catholics have much in common. You briefly touched upon Catholicism, but I'm interested in why didn't you become a Catholic. I would like to hear that part of the story. Also, don't think I'm trying to be rude and correct me if I'm wrong, why would you become Anglican when it seems it started because Henry the 8th wanted a divorce? May the Lord guide us!
I can give a short reply here in the meantime, though: 1) I am Catholic, as Anglicanism is part of the Catholic Tradition. Roman Catholicism is not the entirety of the Church Catholic. 2) If you are asking why I didn't become Papal, it is for *many* reasons; most of those reasons having to do with the Papacy itself. 3) It wasn't started by Henry VIII, Henry VIII did not seek a divorce.
@@barelyprotestant5365 yes, there are Greek, Byzantine etc Catholics, but I always connected Anglicans with Protestantism in spite of them not sharing much in common. Btw, I watched your debate on the papacy and the ecumenical councils and I admire how knowledgeable you are. Ok, it seems I will see your response as a video adressing other questions. I'm interested in your statement how it didn't start with Henry wanting the divorce so I would be grateful if you could elaborate on that.
@@eugengolubic2186 Protestant and Catholic are not mutually exclusive. To be Catholic is NOT to be under the Papacy; that is not its historic definition. As Anglicans we do not consider Henry VIII as our founder; not even Rome officially thinks that, as they claim we started under either Edward VI or Elizabeth I. We trace our lineage back to the Apostles, through Apostolic Succession.
I am (nearly) convinced that Biblical (and _Historical_ ) Christianity lies somewhere between Anglicanism, and Baptist theology (and you could probably put Lutherans in there too). With a conservatist, moderate Charismatic expression.
I'm Catholic and I reckon you chose well as Catholic tradition is seeping through the Anglican church as our nations wher all maidens of the holy Roman empire of charlimagne onwards all Thea's Christian kingdoms appear with monarchs...this is what Peter said in his epistles _we are to be a nation of priests and kings_(new jrslem txt)so I would choose Anglicanism as it is the most on track to the original plan of the holy spirit ..learn the prophecy of st Francis de Paola...(in the world there will be 12 monarchs 1 emperor 1 pope)this is after the wars in Europe and the great monarch steps in ...as a scotch Catholic I love this stuff because we where all Christian kingdom I recommend the great monarch prophecy as it is so inspiring this man more or less prepares god's warriors for the battle of antichrist as he comes before the antichrist according to some prophecies ...ther are so many prophecies of the great monarch it is the most prophecied subject in Christendom.... basically it points to one of the monarchs of the Fleur de ly stepping in to help a holy pope, at a very tough time in the world....it's worth learning
Honest inquiry: Anglicanism has a reputation of being ultra-liberal and pretty much anti-scriptural. However, as a Lutheran I understand that there are two types of Lutherans: the ultra liberals and the confessionals (the REAL Lutherans). Us confessional are not at all in communion with the liberals and so we have nothing to do with their heresies. Is it the same in Anglicanism?
@@raymondsaint4156 that is still a contentious issue. My own diocese and group, the REC, utterly rejects women's "ordination". The largest Anglican provinces reject it as well (Nigeria, for instance). As well, all of GAFCON (the 70% of the entire Communion that rejects the liberalism of the Episcopal Church, Anglican Church of Canada, etc.), rejects women in the episcopate. As for rejecting women in the priesthood, there is a majority within GAFCON that rejects women's "ordination", but it's an issue that is being worked out still; some in GAFCON still allow for it, unfortunately.
Under benadict 16 we Catholics really took up the liturgical beauty again and found a new appreciation of the liturgy as a whole I could really see Christ and how the paschal mystery comes out during the liturgy ...Christ's church needs no innovation on the liturgy in the vast history and treasury if tradition we have a Carolingian Catholic rite of worship wich has not been used for centuries....the service is sung and veil is put up and the ancient mass is sung always facing Calvary hill ...the mass is sung ,cathecumens must leave before the consecration of the bread and wine...as a veil is up and the faithful could only hear the mass being sung in Latin....the veil is opened at communion ....alas the symbolic language if the churches rites have been lost or misunderstood while dark sects in the occult profane the sacred by inversion of the rites and profanation....but this form of liturgy with the veil was ancient and revered,full of Christian symbolism , especially around the cross and the crucafixion of our lord ...it was a miniature recapitulation of Calvary the churches wher built toward Calvary and shaped like a crosd,it's measurements wher even sacred to numerology and the placing of icons wich tell us stories or point to a virtue wher set in a deliberate place ...like today it is even lost why the tabernacle in the church is flanked by an icon of Joseph on one side and Mary on another like two pillars at the entrance to the temple..(the temple of Solomon had two pillars with two characters at top one masculine one feminine) Joseph was a carpenter and Mary was a seamstres ....plus the meaning of their names means alot ,but this depends what order or society has made the place of worship....eg the knites of John built their chapels in the sign of a cross wich can be seen from above if you line all the chapels together ... people would be confounded if they knew how advanced Christendom was at its hight... every thing was built for a reason Even mathematics was used in churches and iconography all pointed to biblical truths ....we have a great great faith there real faith revealed by god ....that's why it's a contradiction to everyother natural religion ....as Peter binds and loosens laws like a parimiter of sorts his job is to strengthen the followers of Christ ...so even Catholics feel contradictory being thrown by the media Into just another world religion?when hidden in its Bossom is the revealed way if god ..as all the traditions of Christendom point ....some may see the church as a whole as too divided into sects and unrecognisable due to the ausault of the world.....I leave that to the mother of god .. people could not recognise Christ as his flesh was married and he was hard to recognise with the wounds and blood and his scourge at the Piller ripping his flesh....yet unrecognisable as he was his mother recognised him ... behind all the blood and puss and cut flesh was her son... unrecognisable by what evil men had done ...his mother knew and saw him and followed him ...let us pray for the mystical body that men may see him behind the wounds and media afflictions of men not knowing they are crucifying Christ again (meditations on via cruxis)
To be fair, the “once saved, always saved” nonsense you cited is not what is meant by the perseverance of the saints and eternal security in other, more theological serious traditions. More serious than Fundamentalist Baptists , that is. In confessional traditions, the idea is not that baptism or the Sinner’s prayer preemptively gives you carte blanche to murder and steal. The idea is that your salvation is an act of G-d not of man, and that you cannot lose G-d’s grace, just as you cannot earn it. So although a sinner may appear to have faith, it is known primarily to G-d whether that faith is sincerely a work of the Holy Spirit and therefore saving faith. And that it certainly biblical; of that I have no doubt
Yes; I did not associate "once saved always saved" with "perseverance of the saints". They very much are different. I will be doing a video on why I am not Reformed when I get the chance to.
Something must have happened to cause you to leave Independent Baptist church? Did you let up on your evangelistic Baptist outreach and personal Bible study?
A Pope is a dress-up Antichrist. A Russian Patriarch is a dress-up murderer of Old Believers. A Greek Patriarch is a dress-up murderer of Old Calendarists.
Well I see the more "poetic" KJV prayer book as catering to your desires and your needs and your wants. I don't see how that is different in any way to the way contemporary music "feeds" you. People prefer the liturgical worship because they LIKE it better. They feel it feeds them better, but the same can be said about a contemporary service. I can connect with God in a more meaningful way at a contemporary service with a VARIETY of hymns, modern songs, Gospel songs, etc. Now on to liturgy. Why do you say "modern" churches don't have liturgy. They may not have OLD liturgy, but isn't the order of service liturgy? Most churches follow opening worship > welcome > announcements> giving > message > Communion > closing worship. How is that not liturgy? If you're talking about "ancient" liturgy then it was "brand new" at some point in time. Especially since Justin Martyr talks about NOT using incense. Sinner's prayer is wrong, most churches realize this. But it is the pistis, faith, trust, that actually conveys grace. Please show me Biblically where the Eucharist conveys grace? Show me where a conveyance of grace is sacramental. Jesus dying on the cross did NOT convey grace to us! Otherwise everyone would be saved. Faith conveyed grace that was offered on the cross.
"Barely" Protestant, but still Protestant! Grapple some more with the theology of the Church -- your preference for Anglicanism is still based on its being in accord with *your* preference and *your* understanding. IOW, *you* are still the arbiter of religious truth -- which, of course, is the foundation of Protestantism.
I mean, this accusation can be laid upon anyone, especially those in the Papal Communion. People find comfort in having an infallible magisterium. Therefore...the magisterium is bad? Did you not judge for yourself whether or not the claims of the Papacy are true? Well, isn't that you "just making yourself your own Pope"?
@@barelyprotestant5365 I didn’t become Catholic because it was easy or fit though. Being Catholic (Western) is hard, because Christ’s teachings are hard. We’d still consider you philosophically liberal. Plus, your Orders aren’t valid.
@@WestsidePredator you're more than welcome to debate me on the issue of our Holy Orders. Also, no: we're more traditional than you are. Look at Germany. We aren't in Communion with anyone who does anything even close to what Germany does.
@@WestsidePredatorno, Anglican orders are valid, regardless of what the Pope says. All Rome has is genealogies, not the ultimate claim to apostolic succession. Many of these genealogies are either guessed at or made up. But Anglican priests have never been self-ordained, lay ordained, or not ordained. So Anglican orders are valid.
Ok, I have to say that I am a little concerned. It seems to me like your denomination picks and chooses based on whatever it likes/feels good about. Like, you say, we like Augustine (early A and some later A, huh?), we like liturgy, we are 'Catholic' (I do not recognize this definition I might add) in that we follow Church history, like you decide this and that pretty randomly it seems to me. What is that via media mentality? You pride yourselves in being between the 'extreme' Roman Catholics, and the Puritans? It seems to me like in the end it is you guys who decide what each thing is, and if something maybe sorta kinda resembles your position, Woohoo Welcome!!! if not, Disregard, because it's extreme? IDK man, seems very arbitrary to me.
"...chooses based on whatever it likes/feels good about." One of the things that attracted me to Anglicanism is that it does not rely entirely on "feelings" as a basis for faith. It also relies on concrete things like verifiable historical facts, ancient teachings of men who knew the Apostles personally, and church tradition. Before becoming Anglican , I wrestled with the fact that many Christians believe their faith is manifested entirely by their feelings. But the Taliban could say that, too. As could any member of any faith on the globe. Brad Pitt was raised as an Evangelical, and he once said that when he started attending rock concerts he got the same "feelings" of exhilaration as he did singing in church. So he decided to go with the best "feelings." Anglican faith is grounded in so much more than that. Father "Barely Protestant" might need to correct me on that; I'm relatively new to the faith.
@@barelyprotestant5365 I don’t declare Catholicity is defined by Rome. I declare it is defined by the Petrine doctrine, that built upon Christ’s declaration to Peter on his special role, and the nearly 2000 year old, continuous and organic link of the Chair of Peter is now found in Rome, the Bishop of Rome.
We ARE in the Catholic church - just not Roman Catholic. I keep saying this - Catholic & Protestant are not opposites. "Catholic" opposite is "Heretic"; "Protestant" opposite is "Papist"
Personally as a Catholic I don’t like it because it’s too strict……… I love it because it’s not at my convenience or preference. It is the Church Christ himself created 2,021 years ago. I’m not knocking your video I think you’ve explained Anglicanism very well. I just think that for me it feels too convenient rather than original.
@@barelyprotestant5365 if you believe that ok but personally I believe in apostolic succession and I personally believe there isn’t being Catholic unless one is Catholic. And believe me I’m not trying to drive a wedge I’m very much in favour of Christian unity. It just in my opinion doesn’t sit right with me. But clearly it works for you.
@@SOUNDWAVEMAN as Anglicans we have Apostolic Succession. And "there isn't being Catholic unless one is Catholic" is a tautology. Note that I never refer to those under the Papacy as merely "Catholic"; there is a theological reason for that.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Ok then that's my error. I just personally believe the Catholic Church is the original one and that the Papacy dates back to St Peter. As I say I believe the universal church is the one and only church Christ himself set up until he returns. I apologise if I've come across rude. I'm just curious about other theologies and doctrines. Take care and God bless.
@@SOUNDWAVEMAN I don't reject the Papacy en toto. I reject the innovations of the Papacy. I would love to be in Communion with Rome, provided Rome repented of her heresies.
You are in complete error concerning the Eucharist, John 6 is not speaking of the physical Flesh and Blood of the Christ, he is speaking spiritually not physically, concerning the last supper, the last supper the Christ is speaking of remembrance and this is the operative word, Paul is speaking of the disrespect of those partaking in the breaking of bread, none of these scriptures is speaking that the bread or the wine is the physical body and blood of the Christ, because in itself it is spiritually barbaric to do so, if a person hates his brother he is a murderer even though he has not physically murdered, if a man looks upon a woman to lust after her she has committed adultery with her in his heart, yet he has not physically done anything, it has to do with the spiritual content, because as it is written, the spirit is life the flesh counts for nothing, to think that the bread and the wine is the physical body and blood of the Christ, you may as well lay his corpse on a dining table and eat his flesh and drink his blood because this is what you are spiritually doing, thus it is barbarie to do so it is in itself cannibalism thinking that to eat the flesh and the blood of the Christ has some kind of power when in-and-of-itself it does not, Christ is speaking of the power of the spirit in a person, the content of a person's heart not the physical because it counts for nothing, when you think that the bread and the wine is physically the Christ's body and blood you give power to the physical when it counts for nothing,
@@barelyprotestant5365 yes, because it is the spirit which is incarnate not the body, The Spirit Within body, for the spirit sanctifies the body, the body does not sanctify the spirit,
@@barelyprotestant5365 this is an ignorant statement, there are many factors concerning the gnostic, you cannot then assume that I am a gnostic due to my comment alone,
@@TempleofChristMinistries um, pretty much the only thing that all gnostic have in common is some denial of the goodness and/or the importance of the material, especially the body of Christ. So on the contrary, I can call you that precisely because you agree with the gnostic on the one thing they all agree on.
I won't co-sign Newman fully, but at the very least, "To be deep in history is to cease to be a KJV-Only fundamental Baptist".
You won't co-sign Newman fully... But I would. ^^
Do you choose religion based on ethics or theology?
"to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant"- John cardinal. I say "to be deep in Holy Scriptures is to cease to be a catholic/orthodox" - me
@@mynameis......23 You can say it all you want, it's still false.
@@TheCanadianCatholicChannel The same applies to John Newman, which is why people should stop using the quote to try and bash Protestants actually make an argument instead.
I had the exact same experience. I grew up baptist and I fell in love with the Eastern Orthodox theology. However I had a few qualms with the exclusivity of EO. Anglicanism has been the one denomination that I feel comes closest to heart of the early church and the love of Christ.
Enjoyed this. I’ve wrestled with the whole “sinners prayer” my entire Christian life.
I also started off in the independent fundamentalist baptist church. I was ordained deacon in 2008 and a year later priest in the Anglican Church. Many of the same reasons.
I had a very similar experience coming to Anglicanism. I came from Hebrew Roots and started studying the temple liturgy and a friend invited me to a Greek Orthodox Church and I went there for a while and then ended up in an Anglican Church because it was the via media. Also, I grew up Independent Baptist KJV only!
Hebrew roots is so dangerous had some friends fooles into that, glad you got out
Same Here
Same.
Hi brother, thanks for the video. I myself came out of the pentecostal tradition. I think we share a similar experience, though I ended up in the confessional Lutheran Church (specifically LCMS), for which I give God thanks because has changed my life and faith. I also have respect for the Anglican tradition. God bless!
Was it assembly of God Church or United/ oneness Pentecostals?
@@mynameis......23 a group called the Potter’s House (not TD Jakes) very similar to Assemblies of God. Thankfully trinitarian.
I took a similar route to Anglicanism myself. Raised Methodist, IFB in early adulthood and found Anglicanism through investigating Eastern Orthodoxy in my late 50's.
I'm not a big fan of the "via media" term because I find it generally unhelpful. I would focus more on the fact that we listen well to the consensus of the Church over the centuries. I would argue Anglicans have generally done this better than any other tradition. I thought you discussed this pretty well!
As a rallying call to a kind of doctrinal laxity and unwillingness to draw boundaries , via media has been bad. Though not as bad as the using of the three legged stool to ignore Scripture and Tradition. But it's undeniably true as a historic reality, that since Cranmer the Church of England has been Reformed but not strictly Calvinist and with Lutheran elements, strong in maintaining the Church structure and traditional beliefs in response to the Baptists, Anabaptists, Puritans and so forth, and also closer to Rome than any other of the Reformed tradition. It's arguably providential, since it wasn't what anyone wanted until Hooker's writings gained popularity. It just happened that way
What do u find wrong about Orthodoxy?
That part of the sacraments providing an objective assurance of salvation for failing Christians was quite interesting. For a Christian to even have the courage to still return to God even though he/she failed miserably actually is evidence of genuine salvation.
I converted from Roman Catholicism to Anglicanism (Anglican Church of Canada).
Thank you for sharing your experiences leading you to the Anglican Church, Im ExJW discovered I was in a cult just over a year ago and got heavily into the King James controversy since the missing verses support fundamental doctrines like the trinity and make JW doctrine impossible. The KJB literally changed my religious worldview I went from denying/twisting all the fundamentals of the Christian faith to believing them. I believed the sinners prayer understanding of salvation for a while then finally listened to apologists from different Christian traditions and tried not to let my former ideas, bias me too much. I also was getting very interested in orthodoxy and value much of that tradition but I also have some hang ups that I just can’t get past and your explanation of the Anglican approach has made me lean heavily towards them. Loved your explanation of Sacramental theology and the traditional liturgy.
Good stuff here! I like your explanation of "by grace through faith."
Wow, this is so similar to my journey. I grew up a convinced southern Baptist, but began to question some of my long held beliefs such as OSAS and the symbolic-only understanding of the ‘ordinances’. I considered the claims of Rome, but ultimately found the biblical and historical case for the papacy unconvincing. I seriously explored Easter Orthodoxy and was even a catechumen for a brief time, but had some key reservations which kept me from swimming the Bosphorus. I finally landed In Traditional Anglicanism about 15 years ago, and have been a member of the local ACNA mission parish for the past 12 years.
Praise God!
I used to be an IFB pastor. I’m now a Reformed pastor. Extreme low views of the sacraments and even neglect of the sacraments is one of the reasons I left the IFB. Other reasons were the anti-Protestant mentality, dishonesty about Church History, a rejection of historic Confessions of faith, pelagianism, antinomianism, decisional regeneration, extreme dispensationalism, non-repentance gospel, divine inspiration of the KJV, irreverent worship, and many more. Not to say all IFB churches stand for these things but my group did. John Wesley got me rethinking my views while serving in the Philippines as an IFB evangelist. From there I began using the Book of Common Prayer which transformed my spiritual life in so many ways. I then got ahold of the Westminster Confession of Faith and in January will begin to function as a licensed preacher and assistant pastor in a Calvinistic Methodist church. Interesting to see how God led you out of the IFB back to a more historic Christian church. Glory be to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen.
Praise the Lord Jesus! George whitefield's sermons and his letter to Wesley on the 5 points were helpful to me.
The antinominianim concerns me most and the extreme KJV onlyism - I know there are some good independent baptist churches, but lots of dangerous ones as well.
Very good points! By the way, the prayer of humble access is also my favorite prayer. I pray it always before receiving holy communion.
My favorite prayer as well.
Great video. I agree that Orthodoxy is beautiful, but very alien to most western minds. Traditional Anglican/Anglican Catholic tends to feel like "coming home" to the soul.
@A Man
Western Orthodoxy does seem intriguing, but they are few and far between. I agree with most of Orthodox teachings and rites, though not all. I am doing the best with what I have, for me, family and the Lord. The Scripture I tend to drift towards is,".. whoever comes to Me, I will never turn away". (Jn6:37 ). He sees the heart, and knows all things. He is a merciful God. Thank you for trying to bring me to the Orthodox faith. May God bless you richly.
It's only alien because western people don't want to be the change they want to see. Orthodoxy can only grow in the west if western people want to work for it
Look up on RUclips St. Patrick Western Rite Orthodox Church, granted, it is incredibly rare, but it exists and God willing, it will grow.
Why all the talk about Orthodoxy. This is Anglican channel. 🤦♂️ obviously he didn’t become Ortho for reasons. And no it’s not for everyone. - Ex EO here
Wow, as someone who was a young IFB preacher who is now under the Anglican Communion, I really appreciated this. A lot of the issues you have raised were issues I have too. Selective literalism is the name of the game for IFBs.
This is very helpful. I've been in a similar boat after growing up in a pretty conservative Presbyterian church and then attending one of those "concert churches" you talked about when I was a teenager. I've explored many of the major trinitarian denominations since I started college. I loved the Divine Liturgy of Eastern Orthodoxy. The beauty of it all blew my mind, but I didn't end up joining because I ended up falling into new age deception. I fell away from Christianity for a couple of years, but now as a 22 year old I'm repentant and looking for a church to settle down in. Apart from the Episcopal Church, which I just can't bring myself to attend because of all the liberal theology... there's an ACNA church about half an hour from where I live and there's a very small Anglo-Catholic church in town. I think I'm gonna check them out. You've convinced me to give them a try.
Glad to hear that!
Thank you very much for this video, I love the prayer before the Eucharist that we all say before going to the alter to partake in the meal.
I'm glad this video popped up as I was scrolling through RUclips. I remember when you first posted this. God has done some great things in your life, Fr. James.
I have been looking into various denominations the last few weeks and feel called to Anglicanism or some similar tradition. Similarly as you, I came to it by first looking into Eastern Orthodoxy.
On the so-called "vain repetitions," I like to ask "is reciting Psalm 23 or the Lord's Prayer vain repetitions?" The answer is obviously no. The vain repetitions is a reference to the pagan practices of prayer, repeated invocations and loud, public prayers, which are tendencies we all can fall into, whatever denomination.
What makes repetition "vain" and therefore bad is its usage continually without thought.
@@barelyprotestant5365 I am an Anglican who does a lot of, private, repetitive chanting of the Psalms, praying the Anglican rosary with various prayers and scripture as well as the various Roman Rosarys. I find it very useful for stilling my mind and for focusing it on the things of God.
"[sigh] The Trail of Blood", lol! That's all you've got to say. Ex-Baptist, now fellow REC'er. A lot of your video resonates with me. Thanks for sharing!
What is REC? Just asking.
@@jjjsalang Reformed Episcopal Church
Very thoughtful snd useful. I am a new Episcopalian and have much to sort out.
Wrote dow n this beautiful prayer of humilty to say in preparation for communion.
Very interesting video, thank you for your testimony
I also love the prayers of Humble Acess we say it every Sunday in our Anglican church in South Africa
Thank you very much for sharing, I find it illuminating as I have the same background and intellectual growth on these points as you. I wish I had discovered/seriously considered Anglicanism and liturgical worship much sooner but I’m grateful to be awakened and receptive to it now...and it feels like everything I’ve thought Church ought to be with reverence, beauty, intentionality, structure, and doctrine and theological tenants supported by history and tradition. You brought up many sincere elements I’ve encountered in the past and reasons why I’ve grown exceptionally frustrated and disillusioned with my experience attending the Baptist churches I have for the majority of my life when most of it appears to be a conflict with overall alignment on theological positions than mere aesthetic or philosophical desires...
If you haven’t already, I would appreciate learning more of what convinced you to officially convert and make that change - perhaps a more in-depth video analysis/comparison on why you left the IFB/SBC and what solidified your resolve to do so...like explaining it to Southern Baptists or other non-denominational believers in a way they would understand or your Biblical justification in doing so to Anglicanism specifically? Maybe even a “5 Reasons I Left Being a Southern Baptist” as a companion to this video? Anyways, I am sure you’ve covered many of these topics in your other content but at the same time, something like this may help greatly in shining light and enabling the inconsistencies to dawn on others on top of explaining why and how to genuinely learn more about Anglicanism and about converting.
In all honesty I’ve been wrestling with my Southern Baptist upbringing and faith since 2015 ever since I recognized the reality of the Eucharist with a friend after we visited a few Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. She eventually converted into the Roman Catholic Church but I could not merely drop and fully embrace misgivings/apprehensions about Papist practices or other issues, such as the extended elevation of Mary or transubstantiation that I cannot reconcile. Still, I have been exploring Roman Catholicism because it feels like it may ultimately be the most authentic option (RC monopoly on interpreting the Church can be quite convincing...) but I still cannot rationally/intellectually accept all positions so I cannot convert to that and yet I’ve realized I fully do not hold to Baptist theology due to so many gaps/errors in doctrine. Finding that Anglicanism values and embraces the best and largest consensus from the other Christian traditions without its severe abuses/extensions gives me hope
I'm glad to hear you're searching, and Thank you for your kind words! I will say that the claims of Rome are the least coving to me, out of the historic, liturgical and sacramental traditions. I'd much sooner become Lutheran, or Eastern Orthodox, before I became Roman. In fact, I've done quite a few debates against Roman Catholics. Some of them are on this channel, and some are on the playlist connected to this channel. Check them out!
@@barelyprotestant5365 thanks for the responses and understanding where I’m coming from and current dilemma but I’m excited to explore and learn more and of all of them, the Anglicanism you’ve explained so far seems to be what I’ve been seeking, whereas many Anglican and Episcopal churches near me seem to be rather progressive/liberal and not adhering to Scripture so I began to get discouraged but perhaps I will continue my search. Also, working my way through your videos now, thank you for the work you do in sharing on Anglicanism in an accessible way so I’m able to better understand and grow through this!
I grew up IFB as well KJV only but i ended up LCMS good video
I can’t share my entire story but my biggest gripe with Anglicanism is the liberalism I see all over the place. Idk if there is a more conservative branch within Anglicanism but if there is lmk.
Former church of Christ, came to the Anglican Way (Old High Church Episcopalian) through Eastern Orthodoxy. Still use KJV for devotional reading. Love acapella worship too.
Good stuff. Wish there was an Anglican Church close by where I live. Instead, my family worships in a UMC. While there are many things I appreciate about the Methodist church, I miss receiving the body and blood of the Lord in the Eucharist.
@Pond3r Thiz is there a particular reason every one of your comments so far have been antagonistic?
If you compare Methodist Liturgy with Anglican it is very similar. Never forget John Wesley was an Anglican priest.
@@christopherwalker2281 I don't think it's about the Liturgy, it's about the belief in the Eucharist and Aposolic Suscession.
I would suggest trying an LCMS Lutheran church if there is one near you!
This is very nearly identical to my Southern Baptist to confessional Lutheranism journey. Obviously Anglicanism is very similar on paper, but the “wide tent” has definitely gotten too wide on clear, Biblical issues for me to go your route. I hope you and others can be a voice for scriptural authority on the issues of ordination and marriage within the ACNA.
The...ACNA isn't pro-gay "marriage"...
@@barelyprotestant5365 I know for now, but women’s ordination historically has been the first domino to fall. I’m aware ACNA is more nuanced with only priests and only in some episcopates, but to me it’s a clear issue. I pray the ACNA takes a firm stance on that.
I hope my comment didn’t come off disparaging. I enjoy your content!
Very good video! I am currently in the process of deciding to be either Roman Catholic or Anglican and am struggling with the route to take. Pray me and any advice or talking points would be helpful.
Prayers for you, sir! I would recommend looking at the debate videos I've done, especially the one on the Papacy (linked below). The question at the end of the day comes down to whether or not the Papal claims are true.
ruclips.net/video/auiLAv8BYpk/видео.html
@@jeremiahong248 I think you need to research the Early Church more, they didn’t emphasise on Saints, Mary etc isn’t mentioned at all in the epistles etc. In the more Catholic side of Anglicanism they hold the essential Catholic Dogmas, but leave out the excessive ones such as the immaculate conception, excessive devotion and prayer to Mary and Saints among many other traditions that came out from the middle ages. Alot of people even say the Anglican Church is what the Catholic Church would look like if it turned further back to scripture and dropped the excessive man-made doctrines with no Biblical context.
@@jeremiahong248 And ironically you say what the apostles taught the Early Church is the exact same as what the Catholic Church has taught for 2000 years is very contradictory to the Catholic traditions that have been brought in over time.
@@jeremiahong248 Also King Henry VIII was the tipping point of the reformation, there had been much time wanting a reformation and Thomas Cranmer etc used Henry and the divorce to break from Rome. Also the Church is far from built on Henry. Henry was still a Roman Catholic in all beliefs, minus the Pope. Henry wanted Clerical Celibacy, Latin as the language. Among many other Catholic traditions and dogmas. However after his death and when James came around they finally were able to fully assemble the Anglican faith which had returned more back to the Scriptures, and Early Church etc, dropping all the excessive traditions
@@jeremiahong248 This all does seem to sound alot like traditional Anglicanism, we do accept Sacred traditions from the Early Church Fathers etc, and we have an episcopal hierarchy. Traditional Anglicanism is the Catholic Church minus traditions that have come randomly such as the immaculate conception and transubstantiation among more.
I have a question regarding Baptismal regeneration. If a person puts their faith in Christ, are they saved before or after baptism? I think a lot of traditions are rich whether they are Protestant, Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox, but Baptismal regeneration is something that I struggle with. I liken baptism to circumcision in the old testament. It was necessary but was not what saved, it was faith in God that saved. I do think Baptism is extremely important. There is an emphasis on it in scripture. I just feel like Baptismal Regeneration can quickly turn into legalism as if faith isn't what saves. That is an overarching concern I have (I'm not trying to make a caricature of baptismal regeneration). Or with cases like infants. Do infants who die without being baptized go to hell? Does a person who puts their faith in Christ and dies before getting baptized go to hell? If the answer is yes, I don't understand it and feel like it is legalistic. And goes against what Romans says when it says that Abraham was justified by faith. I by no means think baptism should be neglected, but I don't want it to be something that is legalistic. And I believe that faith in Christ comes, and then people are baptized. Maybe I'm misunderstanding baptismal regeneration. If you see this and can respond, I will be extremely appreciative.
I like what you say about assurance. I want to find a tradition I can commit to. I like Anglicanism, but I think I am too politically conservative to be a good fit
I am pretty politically conservative, and I fit fine.
I find traditional Anglicanism to be very conservative, especially Anglican Catholic Church(ACA)Anglican Province of America(APA), Reformed Episcopal Church, etc. Others like the Anglican Church of Canada, The Episcopal Church are usually very liberal. A good, traditional Anglican church is hard to beat.
In England the Anglican church is sometimes called, (disrespectfully) "the Conservative Party at prayer". But I'm slightly Leftish, and they haven't thrown me out!
@@patbarrett9713 :
When you consider that the Church of England was established by an Act of Parliament, the Act of Uniformity, which took effect on June 24, 1559, that's hardly surprising.
Not to mention the 26 C of E bishops who have seats in the House of Lords!
I threw my trail of blood away. 😅
Really appreciated this video. I'm wrestling through much of the same things at the moment. I've been looking into checking out an Anglican church. There are no ACNA churches near me, but there is an Anglican Province of Christ the King church. From what I understand, that denomination is quite Anglo-Catholic. Any opinions on that denomination? Are they similar to ACNA?
They are good! I like them.
I am an Eastern Orthodox, a convert from Lutheranism since 2012, and I have lately begun to feel more and more drawn to High Church Anglicanism (this is not entirely new development; it was always my second choice). I still firmly believe in the Orthodox theology, but Anglicanism feel easier to belong to. I do not know should I go towards Anglicanism or remain in Orthodoxy.
Remain in the True Faith, my brother. While High Church Anglicanism is certainly appealing in certain aspects, Orthodoxy is time tested and will always remain - as it is the True Church of the Apostles, and the Faith once for all delivered to the Saints (Jude 1:3). High Church Anglicanism is dying, and soon will be overlapped by the more "liberal" branches within Anglicanism. It is sad, but the truth nonetheless.
Honestly, I would say become Anglican. There are theological issues with Eastern Orthodoxy, as much as I love it. But don't become Anglican unless you are convinced that there are errors in the Eastern Orthodox that you are forced to believe.
No matter you are a believer of any Christian denomination; as long as you dutifully read the Bible and regular systematic theology books, you will know what the Christian doctrine is, and you will not be misled by individual denominations that deviate from the biblical doctrine.
The Anglican Church is also a member of the WCC, the WCC denominational association that advertises that it can cater to fallen believers and agree that it is not necessary to observe pure biblical teachings.
Can you you show me how orthodoxy lies within scripture? Non related to the video but I saw you comment that. You can answer it here or send me a link to a video where you have discuss this already?
Thank you for making this. I've left nondenom for Anglicanism and now I'm looking at the Constantinople. I just want to be closer to truth.
Why Constantinople?
@@barelyprotestant5365 by Constantinople, I mean Greek Orthodoxy. My reason why. They seem to me to be the earliest church. My reasons why not, they have dogmatized things that cannot be and discarded things that should not be. But then the question is asked, where does orthodoxy lie?
@@davidwatson9064 Orthodoxy lies within Scripture.
@@davidwatson9064 Constantinople means Byzantine Catholic.The Rite founded by St. Andrew the apostle.Some didn’t become “orthodox” until going into schism in 1054.There are 22 other eastern Catholic Churches like the Antiochian Catholic Church,Coptic Catholic Church,Melkite Catholic Church,Chaldean Catholic Church,Syriac Catholic Church,Syro-Malabar Catholic Church,Ukrainian Catholic Church,etc...
Orthodox worship Mary also idolatry kissing idols etc
Go anglicanism
I would love to see you dialogue with Gavin O on Baptist churches. I'm sure you know that lots of baptists (their confessions) reject the 'sinners prayer,' the 'trail of blood' or the idea that the church fell away after the apostles [restorationist]. I think the idea of grace as going through the physical 'material' Christ [True Sacrement] does that in Baptist/Puritian/Reformed theology which emphasizes the Reformed Christology of Two Natures in One Person, with a true human body. I'm not sure how the Lutheran Lords Supper makes sense unless ubiquity works. I cant speak to IFB specifics, i think of the particular baptists - and southern baptists and conservative northern baptists.
He already dialogued with Dr. Jordan Cooper, a Lutheran. The traditions and theology are similar enough that a babtist (or Papist for that matter) isn't going to prefer one to the other.
Love this! There are so many similarities concerning my Walk of Life. I want to ask you a question concerning what church should I attend in Memphis Tennessee? I've never visited the Anglican Church before in my life. I began as Southern Baptist then became independent fundamental Baptist then became calvinistic Baptist and now for the last couple of years due to reading early church fathers started visiting Lutheran Church and that led me to now Orthodox antiochian Church which I love but have some problems.
Hello! I would recommend St. James church in Memphis; I've only been there once, but I did love it.
@@barelyprotestant5365 thanks brother!
"Father, just, just Father, please just" lolll
Certainly elements of Catholicism required reform some of which was accomplished at Vatican II and certainly Anglicanism has a special charism for working with the Bible and combining it with authentic traditions. So have you ever seen an Anglican eucharistic miracle or read about one that had believable documentation?
Yes I have.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Please describe it or them so that I too can be inspired by how God works in the Anglican church (and maybe have something to share with open minded Catholics)
@@FaithHopeandLoveMinistry what did Jesus say about those seeking a sign?
@@barelyprotestant5365 Jesus said that a little wicked and adulterous generation seeks a sign. Of course he was speaking to those without faith. The context today is very different. The bottom line is that if the Anglican church has valid orders there's no way for me to tell that apart from a miracle. I've done my own due diligence and did not find most of Leo the 13th's reasoning on Anglican orders to be valid. But at the same time it's just kind of depressing to read the type of Protestant bishops who were appointed after of the schism between Rome and the Anglican church. How can you possibly know for sure that they didn't invalidate the ordinations by their heretical belief about church and sacrament? Almost all of them were anti liturgical, didn't believe in all the sacraments, and had a very very stripped down approach to the real presence.
@@FaithHopeandLoveMinistry your understanding of Bishops within the Anglican Tradition is wrong. Only in the 20th century do you see any widespread liberalism within Anglicanism. We are actively fighting against that. Roman Catholics have the same exact issue. See Cardinal Marx and Germany, as just one example.
I believe in the "Via Media" however mine has a strong right lane!
Rev. Dr. Mel McMinn
could i ask you what about the orthodox doctrine you didnt agree with? im on the fence about anglican vs orthodox as well (as a pentecostal) and was wondering what the doctrine you didnt agree with in orthodoxy was.
thanks!
Their exclusivity and anti-western mindset were two major things I dislike.
The BCP says there are only 2 sacraments necessary for salvation; NOT 7!
What is the purpose of this comment?
0:17 - women were not allowed to wear pants? So what do they wear under their trousers?
Joking, lots of love from an Anglican from London
Credo in unam sanctam Catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam.
Amen! We do!!!
AMEN!
John William Burgon was an Anglican.
Great video! I had not heard your story before and it's always something I'm interested in, why people believe different things and change beliefs.
Are you part of the Anglican Communion? Is the Episcopal Church in it after blatantly disobeying the 1998 Lambeth Conference? Does it matter who is in it? Is that part of the link to the past, tracing a direct line back to the Apostles?
So, the question of what constitutes the Anglican Communion is difficult. I can say this: my province (the ACNA) is recognized by the vast majority of the Communion. The Episcopal Church is formally part of the Anglican Communion but has been under censure for its allowance of gay "marriage", which goes completely against Lambeth 1998. It doesn't necessarily matter who is in/out, as we do not consider one "outside of the Church" for not being part of this particular Communion. I'm not sure what "that" is that you're referring to in the last sentence. We hold to Apostolic Succession, so I can say that.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Thanks for your answer. By "that" I meant is the question of who is or is not in the Anglican Communion relevant to the question of Apostolic Succession? But otherwise thanks for your recent videos. I'm currently part of a Baptist congregation in France, but I love hearing from different Christians as well.
@@christophekeating21, Apostolic Succession is held, always, by the individual Bishop rather than a Communion of Bishops. That is how it is traced: from one generation's Bishop to another.
@@barelyprotestant5365 ok thanks
I grew up going to a fundamentalist megachurch, and I find myself drawn to Anglicanism due to its open mindedness and its middle ground between Protestantism and Catholicism.
Each pope is elected by a conclave of cardinals.
Who elected Henry VIII?
I'm sorry; what does that have to do with anything?
Pat:
It's clear that Henry elected himself!
@@alhilford2345 he was appointed, validly, as king.
@@barelyprotestant5365 :
Surely you see the irony in that!
@@alhilford2345 no, I see no irony in that.
About the ABC analogy:
It doesn't matter which song or melody you use. You're not less authentic depending on which melody you use, even non traditional melodies is still authentic. But you don't want to go too deep into the reading analogy, there is fierce controversy on whether you should use the "global" ("Peter and Jane" type) method vs the alphabetical, syllabical methods, and whether one or the other causes dislexia. You'll be introduced to all that should you have kids.
In my family, we learned to read according to the "via media" the so called "méthode mixte" so I guess if we had dislexia, proponents of both extremes would say it was the fault of the other, not to mention our reader followed the story of a "kind" ghost, so there might have been demonic influences, lol. Thankfully, none of my siblings have dislexia.
So now that there is an adulterer as Supreme Governor of the CofE, according to Scripture, what is gafcon going to do about this?
It seems you're not really aware of how the Anglican Communion is structured.
Can you point out some good, Conservative Anglican RUclips channels to watch (in addition to yours), and perhaps some of the ones we should avoid?
As to your point on vain repetitions, nearly all nondenominational or evangelical congregations that I have attended at least point to the Psalms or the “Our Father” as a standard for prayer.
All that I've been to have at best been silent and at worst decried such usage as "vain repetition".
Jesus brings presence and enlightenment through the Holy spirit...the ritual of sacrament is,while a good thing...it is not required for salvation...genuine acceptance Jesus in your heart is all that is necessary....if you pray the sinners prayer over and over and still have doubts,it's not because you didint make a ceremony of it.
The same can be said of baptism..the water holds no power,the spirit does.
"Baptism now saves you."
@@barelyprotestant5365 of the spirit yes,but you don't need to formally do it by water.
I am curious…what kept you away from Eastern Orthodoxy?
Its anti-Westernism, its exclusivism, its fundamentalism.
How do you reconcile this fine lecture with the LQBT agenda in the Anglican church and liberal position on divorce and remarriage.?
Speaking as a member of the Episcopal church in USA:
What we believe as Anglicans is not dictated by priests and bishops, but it is informed by scripture, reason and tradition. You are not bound by the beliefs of others in your congregation. You are bound by the word of God and by apostolic tradition.
The church should be a place where we can work out our salvation in fear and trembling. Not everyone may have the same beliefs but we can come together and pray for wisdom for ourselves and for each other.
The ACNA, Continuing Anglicanism, etc. There are even parts of the Episcopal Church that don't support gay marriage and haven't ordained women if it bothers you that much.
Hey, what are your views about homosexuality? Thank you!
Engaging in homosexual acts is a sin.
This is hilarious.
What is the sinner's prayer?
Are not all prayers sinners' prayers?
The sinner's prayer is a prayer made popular by Billy Graham. It's basically treated like Baptism, for Baptists: it's what "saves you", for many of its proponents.
@Pond3r Thiz This might help you a bit:
ruclips.net/video/Wlzll_GL4-4/видео.html
I see how Anglicans and Catholics have much in common.
You briefly touched upon Catholicism, but I'm interested in why didn't you become a Catholic. I would like to hear that part of the story.
Also, don't think I'm trying to be rude and correct me if I'm wrong, why would you become Anglican when it seems it started because Henry the 8th wanted a divorce?
May the Lord guide us!
Thank you for your questions! They are very commonly asked, so I have considered doing a video on them.
I can give a short reply here in the meantime, though:
1) I am Catholic, as Anglicanism is part of the Catholic Tradition. Roman Catholicism is not the entirety of the Church Catholic.
2) If you are asking why I didn't become Papal, it is for *many* reasons; most of those reasons having to do with the Papacy itself.
3) It wasn't started by Henry VIII, Henry VIII did not seek a divorce.
@@barelyprotestant5365 yes, there are Greek, Byzantine etc Catholics, but I always connected Anglicans with Protestantism in spite of them not sharing much in common.
Btw, I watched your debate on the papacy and the ecumenical councils and I admire how knowledgeable you are.
Ok, it seems I will see your response as a video adressing other questions.
I'm interested in your statement how it didn't start with Henry wanting the divorce so I would be grateful if you could elaborate on that.
@@eugengolubic2186 Protestant and Catholic are not mutually exclusive. To be Catholic is NOT to be under the Papacy; that is not its historic definition.
As Anglicans we do not consider Henry VIII as our founder; not even Rome officially thinks that, as they claim we started under either Edward VI or Elizabeth I. We trace our lineage back to the Apostles, through Apostolic Succession.
@@nathanc5778 ok, educate me.
I am (nearly) convinced that Biblical (and _Historical_ ) Christianity lies somewhere between Anglicanism, and Baptist theology (and you could probably put Lutherans in there too). With a conservatist, moderate Charismatic expression.
No the church created the Bible
I'm Catholic and I reckon you chose well as Catholic tradition is seeping through the Anglican church as our nations wher all maidens of the holy Roman empire of charlimagne onwards all Thea's Christian kingdoms appear with monarchs...this is what Peter said in his epistles _we are to be a nation of priests and kings_(new jrslem txt)so I would choose Anglicanism as it is the most on track to the original plan of the holy spirit ..learn the prophecy of st Francis de Paola...(in the world there will be 12 monarchs 1 emperor 1 pope)this is after the wars in Europe and the great monarch steps in ...as a scotch Catholic I love this stuff because we where all Christian kingdom
I recommend the great monarch prophecy as it is so inspiring this man more or less prepares god's warriors for the battle of antichrist as he comes before the antichrist according to some prophecies ...ther are so many prophecies of the great monarch it is the most prophecied subject in Christendom.... basically it points to one of the monarchs of the Fleur de ly stepping in to help a holy pope, at a very tough time in the world....it's worth learning
Honest inquiry:
Anglicanism has a reputation of being ultra-liberal and pretty much anti-scriptural.
However, as a Lutheran I understand that there are two types of Lutherans: the ultra liberals and the confessionals (the REAL Lutherans).
Us confessional are not at all in communion with the liberals and so we have nothing to do with their heresies. Is it the same in Anglicanism?
Yes. Liberal Anglicanism is actually a minority within the Communion; it's mostly the Western Provinces.
@@barelyprotestant5365 so the majority of Anglicans reject women pastors and things like that? Thanks for the reply btw!
@@raymondsaint4156 that is still a contentious issue. My own diocese and group, the REC, utterly rejects women's "ordination". The largest Anglican provinces reject it as well (Nigeria, for instance). As well, all of GAFCON (the 70% of the entire Communion that rejects the liberalism of the Episcopal Church, Anglican Church of Canada, etc.), rejects women in the episcopate. As for rejecting women in the priesthood, there is a majority within GAFCON that rejects women's "ordination", but it's an issue that is being worked out still; some in GAFCON still allow for it, unfortunately.
@@barelyprotestant5365 I will pray for your church my friend, I'm glad to see there's still a lot of hope for Anglicanism!!!
Under benadict 16 we Catholics really took up the liturgical beauty again and found a new appreciation of the liturgy as a whole I could really see Christ and how the paschal mystery comes out during the liturgy ...Christ's church needs no innovation on the liturgy in the vast history and treasury if tradition we have a Carolingian Catholic rite of worship wich has not been used for centuries....the service is sung and veil is put up and the ancient mass is sung always facing Calvary hill ...the mass is sung ,cathecumens must leave before the consecration of the bread and wine...as a veil is up and the faithful could only hear the mass being sung in Latin....the veil is opened at communion ....alas the symbolic language if the churches rites have been lost or misunderstood while dark sects in the occult profane the sacred by inversion of the rites and profanation....but this form of liturgy with the veil was ancient and revered,full of Christian symbolism , especially around the cross and the crucafixion of our lord ...it was a miniature recapitulation of Calvary the churches wher built toward Calvary and shaped like a crosd,it's measurements wher even sacred to numerology and the placing of icons wich tell us stories or point to a virtue wher set in a deliberate place ...like today it is even lost why the tabernacle in the church is flanked by an icon of Joseph on one side and Mary on another like two pillars at the entrance to the temple..(the temple of Solomon had two pillars with two characters at top one masculine one feminine) Joseph was a carpenter and Mary was a seamstres ....plus the meaning of their names means alot ,but this depends what order or society has made the place of worship....eg the knites of John built their chapels in the sign of a cross wich can be seen from above if you line all the chapels together ... people would be confounded if they knew how advanced Christendom was at its hight... every thing was built for a reason Even mathematics was used in churches and iconography all pointed to biblical truths ....we have a great great faith there real faith revealed by god ....that's why it's a contradiction to everyother natural religion ....as Peter binds and loosens laws like a parimiter of sorts his job is to strengthen the followers of Christ ...so even Catholics feel contradictory being thrown by the media Into just another world religion?when hidden in its Bossom is the revealed way if god ..as all the traditions of Christendom point ....some may see the church as a whole as too divided into sects and unrecognisable due to the ausault of the world.....I leave that to the mother of god .. people could not recognise Christ as his flesh was married and he was hard to recognise with the wounds and blood and his scourge at the Piller ripping his flesh....yet unrecognisable as he was his mother recognised him ... behind all the blood and puss and cut flesh was her son... unrecognisable by what evil men had done ...his mother knew and saw him and followed him ...let us pray for the mystical body that men may see him behind the wounds and media afflictions of men not knowing they are crucifying Christ again (meditations on via cruxis)
To be fair, the “once saved, always saved” nonsense you cited is not what is meant by the perseverance of the saints and eternal security in other, more theological serious traditions. More serious than Fundamentalist Baptists , that is. In confessional traditions, the idea is not that baptism or the Sinner’s prayer preemptively gives you carte blanche to murder and steal. The idea is that your salvation is an act of G-d not of man, and that you cannot lose G-d’s grace, just as you cannot earn it. So although a sinner may appear to have faith, it is known primarily to G-d whether that faith is sincerely a work of the Holy Spirit and therefore saving faith. And that it certainly biblical; of that I have no doubt
Yes; I did not associate "once saved always saved" with "perseverance of the saints". They very much are different. I will be doing a video on why I am not Reformed when I get the chance to.
@Pond3r Thiz This might help you understand better: ruclips.net/video/Wlzll_GL4-4/видео.html
Something must have happened to cause you to leave Independent Baptist church? Did you let up on your evangelistic Baptist outreach and personal Bible study?
No, I actually have read Scripture far more often now, as an Anglican. Same with evangelism.
If I do not believe in the unique, only, authentic, real and truly trustable catholic religion, why should I believe in the FALSE ones????
Ouch! I just got OWNED!
An Anglican is a dress-up Protestant.
A Pope is a dress-up Antichrist.
A Russian Patriarch is a dress-up murderer of Old Believers.
A Greek Patriarch is a dress-up murderer of Old Calendarists.
Well I see the more "poetic" KJV prayer book as catering to your desires and your needs and your wants. I don't see how that is different in any way to the way contemporary music "feeds" you. People prefer the liturgical worship because they LIKE it better. They feel it feeds them better, but the same can be said about a contemporary service. I can connect with God in a more meaningful way at a contemporary service with a VARIETY of hymns, modern songs, Gospel songs, etc. Now on to liturgy. Why do you say "modern" churches don't have liturgy. They may not have OLD liturgy, but isn't the order of service liturgy? Most churches follow opening worship > welcome > announcements> giving > message > Communion > closing worship. How is that not liturgy? If you're talking about "ancient" liturgy then it was "brand new" at some point in time. Especially since Justin Martyr talks about NOT using incense. Sinner's prayer is wrong, most churches realize this. But it is the pistis, faith, trust, that actually conveys grace. Please show me Biblically where the Eucharist conveys grace? Show me where a conveyance of grace is sacramental. Jesus dying on the cross did NOT convey grace to us! Otherwise everyone would be saved. Faith conveyed grace that was offered on the cross.
"Truly truly I tell you, unless you eat My Flesh and drink My Blood, you have no life in you."
"Barely" Protestant, but still Protestant! Grapple some more with the theology of the Church -- your preference for Anglicanism is still based on its being in accord with *your* preference and *your* understanding. IOW, *you* are still the arbiter of religious truth -- which, of course, is the foundation of Protestantism.
I mean, this accusation can be laid upon anyone, especially those in the Papal Communion. People find comfort in having an infallible magisterium. Therefore...the magisterium is bad? Did you not judge for yourself whether or not the claims of the Papacy are true? Well, isn't that you "just making yourself your own Pope"?
@@barelyprotestant5365 I didn’t become Catholic because it was easy or fit though. Being Catholic (Western) is hard, because Christ’s teachings are hard. We’d still consider you philosophically liberal. Plus, your Orders aren’t valid.
@@WestsidePredator you're more than welcome to debate me on the issue of our Holy Orders. Also, no: we're more traditional than you are. Look at Germany. We aren't in Communion with anyone who does anything even close to what Germany does.
@@WestsidePredatorno, Anglican orders are valid, regardless of what the Pope says. All Rome has is genealogies, not the ultimate claim to apostolic succession. Many of these genealogies are either guessed at or made up. But Anglican priests have never been self-ordained, lay ordained, or not ordained. So Anglican orders are valid.
Ok, I have to say that I am a little concerned. It seems to me like your denomination picks and chooses based on whatever it likes/feels good about. Like, you say, we like Augustine (early A and some later A, huh?), we like liturgy, we are 'Catholic' (I do not recognize this definition I might add) in that we follow Church history, like you decide this and that pretty randomly it seems to me. What is that via media mentality? You pride yourselves in being between the 'extreme' Roman Catholics, and the Puritans? It seems to me like in the end it is you guys who decide what each thing is, and if something maybe sorta kinda resembles your position, Woohoo Welcome!!! if not, Disregard, because it's extreme? IDK man, seems very arbitrary to me.
It's not.
@@nathanc5778 😂🤷🏻♂️🙄
the papacy is arbitrary af bro. it's literally a retcon of the early Church
"...chooses based on whatever it likes/feels good about."
One of the things that attracted me to Anglicanism is that it does not rely entirely on "feelings" as a basis for faith. It also relies on concrete things like verifiable historical facts, ancient teachings of men who knew the Apostles personally, and church tradition.
Before becoming Anglican , I wrestled with the fact that many Christians believe their faith is manifested entirely by their feelings. But the Taliban could say that, too. As could any member of any faith on the globe. Brad Pitt was raised as an Evangelical, and he once said that when he started attending rock concerts he got the same "feelings" of exhilaration as he did singing in church. So he decided to go with the best "feelings." Anglican faith is grounded in so much more than that.
Father "Barely Protestant" might need to correct me on that; I'm relatively new to the faith.
You should work to have the Anglicans seek communion with the Catholic Church!!!
As Anglicans, we are already Catholic. Catholicity is not defined by Rome.
@@barelyprotestant5365 I don’t declare Catholicity is defined by Rome. I declare it is defined by the Petrine doctrine, that built upon Christ’s declaration to Peter on his special role, and the nearly 2000 year old, continuous and organic link of the Chair of Peter is now found in Rome, the Bishop of Rome.
@@michaelegan3774 OK. I disagree.
We ARE in the Catholic church - just not Roman Catholic. I keep saying this - Catholic & Protestant are not opposites. "Catholic" opposite is "Heretic"; "Protestant" opposite is "Papist"
@@patbarrett9713 Well, there are also the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, etc., but otherwise, I totally agree!!!
Personally as a Catholic I don’t like it because it’s too strict………
I love it because it’s not at my convenience or preference. It is the Church Christ himself created 2,021 years ago. I’m not knocking your video I think you’ve explained Anglicanism very well. I just think that for me it feels too convenient rather than original.
I mean, as an Anglican I am Catholic. That was one of my points.
@@barelyprotestant5365 if you believe that ok but personally I believe in apostolic succession and I personally believe there isn’t being Catholic unless one is Catholic. And believe me I’m not trying to drive a wedge I’m very much in favour of Christian unity. It just in my opinion doesn’t sit right with me. But clearly it works for you.
@@SOUNDWAVEMAN as Anglicans we have Apostolic Succession. And "there isn't being Catholic unless one is Catholic" is a tautology.
Note that I never refer to those under the Papacy as merely "Catholic"; there is a theological reason for that.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Ok then that's my error. I just personally believe the Catholic Church is the original one and that the Papacy dates back to St Peter. As I say I believe the universal church is the one and only church Christ himself set up until he returns. I apologise if I've come across rude. I'm just curious about other theologies and doctrines. Take care and God bless.
@@SOUNDWAVEMAN I don't reject the Papacy en toto. I reject the innovations of the Papacy. I would love to be in Communion with Rome, provided Rome repented of her heresies.
You are in complete error concerning the Eucharist, John 6 is not speaking of the physical Flesh and Blood of the Christ, he is speaking spiritually not physically, concerning the last supper, the last supper the Christ is speaking of remembrance and this is the operative word, Paul is speaking of the disrespect of those partaking in the breaking of bread, none of these scriptures is speaking that the bread or the wine is the physical body and blood of the Christ, because in itself it is spiritually barbaric to do so,
if a person hates his brother he is a murderer even though he has not physically murdered, if a man looks upon a woman to lust after her she has committed adultery with her in his heart, yet he has not physically done anything, it has to do with the spiritual content, because as it is written, the spirit is life the flesh counts for nothing,
to think that the bread and the wine is the physical body and blood of the Christ, you may as well lay his corpse on a dining table and eat his flesh and drink his blood because this is what you are spiritually doing, thus it is barbarie to do so it is in itself cannibalism thinking that to eat the flesh and the blood of the Christ has some kind of power when in-and-of-itself it does not,
Christ is speaking of the power of the spirit in a person, the content of a person's heart not the physical because it counts for nothing,
when you think that the bread and the wine is physically the Christ's body and blood you give power to the physical when it counts for nothing,
Ah, so Jesus' physical Body, the Incarnation, literally counts for nothing?
@@barelyprotestant5365 yes, because it is the spirit which is incarnate not the body, The Spirit Within body, for the spirit sanctifies the body, the body does not sanctify the spirit,
@@TempleofChristMinistries so you're a gnostic and not a Christian. Gotcha.
@@barelyprotestant5365 this is an ignorant statement, there are many factors concerning the gnostic, you cannot then assume that I am a gnostic due to my comment alone,
@@TempleofChristMinistries um, pretty much the only thing that all gnostic have in common is some denial of the goodness and/or the importance of the material, especially the body of Christ. So on the contrary, I can call you that precisely because you agree with the gnostic on the one thing they all agree on.