Very interesting talk - Probably good to add a brief bio to say who it is you are talking to, for those of us on the far fringes of Episcopalianism shrouded in mists, lost in the heathered hills of Caledonia.
Originism/ Universalism is a condemned heresy in the Orthodox Church. He shouldn’t be talking about the Orthodox Church if he doesn’t know her or her teachings.
We in the UK badly need an equivalent of ACNA, i.e. an ACUK which faithful Anglicans churches can join. But we need leaders with the vision and courage to call churches out of the CofE into this new body.
Gordon-Conwell is a fine school and does have an Anglican Studies program, but Nashotah House and Trinity School for Ministry are both specifically Anglican.
He says that the Anglican Church may be led by a Bishop outside Canterbury. How is a Bishopric outside of Canterbury consistent with Apostolic succession? Or does “orthodox Anglicanism,” plan to do away with that teaching?
The Episcopal Church is part of the Anglican Communion. However, the growing regions of the AC are at odds with the Episcopal Church (which is US based).
The more I listen, the less orthodox this sounds. I think the current Bishop of Canterbury is terrible, but to follow all of McDermott’s suggestions you have to change quite a number of Ecclesiastical governances (most of all your Bishop). You can’t reject your Bishop and decide to set up a new one of your own choosing. Nothing about this is “orthodox.” It’s all very Protestant and as much of a departure from orthodoxy as the heretical issues that it’s condemning.
A 'bishop' is not a bishop if he (or, increasingly, she) denies the basic tenets of the faith. I'm afraid that includes all Roman Catholic clerics (and others) who anathematise the teaching that one is justified by faith alone, as the Bible teaches.
@@alanhowe1455 James 2 has many points on faith and works. One of many, “faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by works, is dead.” This is why Luther wanted to remove the book of James from scripture. Christ teaches on the separation of the sheep from the goats saying to some to enter in good and faithful servant… you clothed me when I was naked, you fed me when I was hungry, you visited me when I was in prison… To the goats he says enter into eternal punishment for when I was hungry he did not feed me, when I was naked you did not clothe me, when I was in prison you did not visit me…. Neither the Orthodox Church, nor the Catholics, nor the scripture teach that someone is saved through their works. None of these teach “by faith alone,” unless you find the German Bible where Luther added it to “correct” St Paul’s letter to the Romans. Even to say “faith alone,” without context is an offense to the Cross since Christs work on the cross is a “work” for your salvation. Faith without works is dead though and obviously not what the scripture teaches. Protestants love to isolate one scripture which they then manipulate to fit their own perverse theology while ignoring the entirety of the rest of scripture. The Orthodox Church excepts the fullness of the scripture, the traditions taught to the church by the apostles, the lives of the Saints which clothe the church in royalty with the precious blood they spilled for the sake of the gospel, and the councils which have been guided by the Holy Spirit. This is why the fullness of the church is present in the orthodox church, and it has endured from the first century until today.
@@joachimjustinmorgan4851 The biblical formulation is that one is *justified* (declared righteous) by faith alone. Consider the thief on the cross: all he had was faith in Christ, and yet the Saviour told him he would with him in paradise. His faith alone was enough to save him.
@@alanhowe1455 exactly my point. You have isolated one scripture to the exclusion of all other scripture for the sake of attempting to win an argument that you yourself started. The Penitent thief had works, otherwise we would not know about him. He confessed Christ from the cross and this became a martyr and was baptized in his own blood as other martyrs. He in fact becomes a model for martyrs who go to martyrdom without having been baptized in the church. Protestants are one of the only groups in history to advocate lawlessness while simultaneously trying to peddle the idea that it’s what the scripture teaches. Where Catholics declared their Bishop to be the universal head of the Church, Protestants took it one step further to say that they individually are the universal head of the Church. The only true way taught to the Church is to humble yourself and accept the traditions taught to the Church by both word of mouth (Orthodox tradition), and by letter (scripture). Scripture itself also tells us to follow tradition which Protestants have lawlessly abdicated for the sake of self righteousness. Non of this is your fight though. Reject the lawlessness of the reformers and accept the Church. You won’t regret it. : 1 Corinthians 11 - “1 Be my imitators, even as I imitate Christ. 2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things, and hold firm to the traditions as I delivered them to you.” 2 Thessalonians 2: “15 And so, brethren, stand firm and keep the traditions which we taught you, whether by word or by letter. 2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw yourselves from every brother [or sister*] who walks in rebellion, and not after the tradition which they received from us.
@@joachimjustinmorgan4851 That's false. The thief was justified by faith alone in Christ alone. He had no works. But the Biblical formula for most who don't die immediately after the receipt of saving faith is that one is justified by faith alone in Christ alone - but not by a faith that subsequently proves to be alone. That would be antinomianism. "“We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified." Galatians ch.2,vv.15-16. The problem is the confusion of justification and sanctification - common, tragically, to both Orthodox and RC communions. Please read St Basil of Caesarea, Homily on Humility, ch.22.
Why not go all the way i.e., take Orthodox Anglicanism to its rightful logical conclusion by coming home to the Orthodox Church, which is the original One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (A Communion of Local Churches led by the four ancient apostolic See of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, currently comprising around 250-300 million Orthodox Christians all over the world)?!
The Anglican church in existence long before Nicaea. Distinctly Celtic in practice. Westerners can't t comprehend that easily. Practices date back to the early church
@@paulkern8847 no. That was done away with at Whitby. It became the same in most ways as Rome. Anglicanism is not the Orthodox Church of the West. It's only losely based on it.
@Paul Kern There were Celtic / British representatives at Nicaea. If you oppose the Nicene creed then you are in direct opposition to the things that you espouse supporting.
That’s like saying “come to my family because we are the original family”. No. There are many many families out there, but we are part of the one human race. Likewise, we are one expression of the Church, one part of the body of Christ. We don’t “come home” to the Roman Church or the Orthodox Church. Christ invites us to his body, his Church.
God bless those faithful Nigerian Christians.
The Nigerian Christians i met are some of the most serious Christians
Very interesting talk - Probably good to add a brief bio to say who it is you are talking to, for those of us on the far fringes of Episcopalianism shrouded in mists, lost in the heathered hills of Caledonia.
"Salvation by grace, judgement by works".
Great statement.
Thank you. This was quite informative and hopeful.
catholic substance with reformation critique.. I love that so much:)
Originism/ Universalism is a condemned heresy in the Orthodox Church. He shouldn’t be talking about the Orthodox Church if he doesn’t know her or her teachings.
We in the UK badly need an equivalent of ACNA, i.e. an ACUK which faithful Anglicans churches can join. But we need leaders with the vision and courage to call churches out of the CofE into this new body.
If this happened for the Church of Ireland I would join aswell.
It certainly has happened in Australia. A new Anglican diocese has been created.
You do! Anglican Mission in England and Anglican convocation of Europe
@@GreatKhanMatt Trouble is, incumbents have to leave their buildings, stipends, etc. They don't want to.
This inspires me so much..
Is Anglicanism and uts orthodoxy set by the Lambeth Conference.
What seminaries train Orthodox Anglicans. Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary?
Gordon-Conwell is a fine school and does have an Anglican Studies program, but Nashotah House and Trinity School for Ministry are both specifically Anglican.
Read Peter Berger on the optimism of Pentacostal I sm.
He says that the Anglican Church may be led by a Bishop outside Canterbury. How is a Bishopric outside of Canterbury consistent with Apostolic succession? Or does “orthodox Anglicanism,” plan to do away with that teaching?
Pope Justin Welby?
Or am I confusing this with Episcopalianism?
The Episcopal Church is part of the Anglican Communion. However, the growing regions of the AC are at odds with the Episcopal Church (which is US based).
Why is it not growing within immigrant communities that are Nigeruan in the United States.
Arch Bishop of Cantebury?
He's no longer a reliable teacher or leader. We should dissociate ourselves from him.
More of them are Pentecostal in Philly and New York City.
The more I listen, the less orthodox this sounds. I think the current Bishop of Canterbury is terrible, but to follow all of McDermott’s suggestions you have to change quite a number of Ecclesiastical governances (most of all your Bishop). You can’t reject your Bishop and decide to set up a new one of your own choosing. Nothing about this is “orthodox.” It’s all very Protestant and as much of a departure from orthodoxy as the heretical issues that it’s condemning.
A 'bishop' is not a bishop if he (or, increasingly, she) denies the basic tenets of the faith. I'm afraid that includes all Roman Catholic clerics (and others) who anathematise the teaching that one is justified by faith alone, as the Bible teaches.
@@alanhowe1455 James 2 has many points on faith and works. One of many, “faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by works, is dead.” This is why Luther wanted to remove the book of James from scripture. Christ teaches on the separation of the sheep from the goats saying to some to enter in good and faithful servant… you clothed me when I was naked, you fed me when I was hungry, you visited me when I was in prison… To the goats he says enter into eternal punishment for when I was hungry he did not feed me, when I was naked you did not clothe me, when I was in prison you did not visit me…. Neither the Orthodox Church, nor the Catholics, nor the scripture teach that someone is saved through their works. None of these teach “by faith alone,” unless you find the German Bible where Luther added it to “correct” St Paul’s letter to the Romans. Even to say “faith alone,” without context is an offense to the Cross since Christs work on the cross is a “work” for your salvation. Faith without works is dead though and obviously not what the scripture teaches. Protestants love to isolate one scripture which they then manipulate to fit their own perverse theology while ignoring the entirety of the rest of scripture. The Orthodox Church excepts the fullness of the scripture, the traditions taught to the church by the apostles, the lives of the Saints which clothe the church in royalty with the precious blood they spilled for the sake of the gospel, and the councils which have been guided by the Holy Spirit. This is why the fullness of the church is present in the orthodox church, and it has endured from the first century until today.
@@joachimjustinmorgan4851 The biblical formulation is that one is *justified* (declared righteous) by faith alone. Consider the thief on the cross: all he had was faith in Christ, and yet the Saviour told him he would with him in paradise. His faith alone was enough to save him.
@@alanhowe1455 exactly my point. You have isolated one scripture to the exclusion of all other scripture for the sake of attempting to win an argument that you yourself started. The Penitent thief had works, otherwise we would not know about him. He confessed Christ from the cross and this became a martyr and was baptized in his own blood as other martyrs. He in fact becomes a model for martyrs who go to martyrdom without having been baptized in the church. Protestants are one of the only groups in history to advocate lawlessness while simultaneously trying to peddle the idea that it’s what the scripture teaches. Where Catholics declared their Bishop to be the universal head of the Church, Protestants took it one step further to say that they individually are the universal head of the Church. The only true way taught to the Church is to humble yourself and accept the traditions taught to the Church by both word of mouth (Orthodox tradition), and by letter (scripture). Scripture itself also tells us to follow tradition which Protestants have lawlessly abdicated for the sake of self righteousness. Non of this is your fight though. Reject the lawlessness of the reformers and accept the Church. You won’t regret it.
: 1 Corinthians 11 - “1 Be my imitators, even as I imitate Christ. 2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things, and hold firm to the traditions as I delivered them to you.”
2 Thessalonians 2: “15 And so, brethren, stand firm and keep the traditions which we taught you, whether by word or by letter.
2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw yourselves from every brother [or sister*] who walks in rebellion, and not after the tradition which they received from us.
@@joachimjustinmorgan4851 That's false. The thief was justified by faith alone in Christ alone. He had no works. But the Biblical formula for most who don't die immediately after the receipt of saving faith is that one is justified by faith alone in Christ alone - but not by a faith that subsequently proves to be alone. That would be antinomianism.
"“We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified." Galatians ch.2,vv.15-16.
The problem is the confusion of justification and sanctification - common, tragically, to both Orthodox and RC communions.
Please read St Basil of Caesarea, Homily on Humility, ch.22.
Why not go all the way i.e., take Orthodox Anglicanism to its rightful logical conclusion by coming home to the Orthodox Church, which is the original One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (A Communion of Local Churches led by the four ancient apostolic See of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, currently comprising around 250-300 million Orthodox Christians all over the world)?!
Amen.
The Anglican church in existence long before Nicaea. Distinctly Celtic in practice. Westerners can't t comprehend that easily. Practices date back to the early church
@@paulkern8847 no. That was done away with at Whitby. It became the same in most ways as Rome. Anglicanism is not the Orthodox Church of the West. It's only losely based on it.
@Paul Kern There were Celtic / British representatives at Nicaea. If you oppose the Nicene creed then you are in direct opposition to the things that you espouse supporting.
That’s like saying “come to my family because we are the original family”. No. There are many many families out there, but we are part of the one human race. Likewise, we are one expression of the Church, one part of the body of Christ. We don’t “come home” to the Roman Church or the Orthodox Church. Christ invites us to his body, his Church.
Anglicanism in UK seems weak...light and fluffy and for the upper crust. I wish it were not so. Honestly, protestant churches in UK are really bleak.
They are NOT universal, None in South Florida at all...