Why I Am Anglican

All Too Common ^ | 7/28/2005 | The Common Anglican

[sionnsar]

"Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints." ~ Jude 1:3

Introduction
This is a very difficult time in the life of Christ's Church. Here I will attempt to explain the reasons why I believe Anglicanism to be the most complete expression of the Christian faith, despite these dark times she is in now. Many believe that Anglicanism is another branch of Christianity, which it certainly is, but merely that. Many believe that Anglicanism is now defunct and is living out her last days as a true expression of the faith. This remains to be seen. Many who once believed in Anglicanism have left her due to their private convictions that Protestantism is a doomed movement and was doomed from the beginning; it has no Magisterium such as that of the Roman Catholic Church. There is a small bit of truth to this, for sure, and there are solutions to this being proposed within the Anglican Communion. Many feel that the catholicity that Anglicanism inherited is no longer sustainable. Others think that because the Communion allows a plurality of views, that it allows too much and therefore allows heretical ideas to be incubated. This certainly has some truth to it, but it is not due to the foundations of Anglicanism, as these same heresies are present in every branch of Christianity today; rather, it is due to an embracing of secular fundamentalism and a rejection of the gospel. Hopefully I can address, briefly in this essay, some of these concerns, and address others in more detail at another date.

This is also a very difficult time in my own personal life. As many of you know, my move to Anglicanism is due to a progression of theological and philosophical discoveries that, I believe, the Holy Spirit revealed to me in my study of Scripture, the common ecclesiastical tradition, and life overall. My move has not fared well with most of those closest to me. My pastor at my church I attended most of my time in college was disappointed, but did state that if God was leading me into the Episcopal Church, he was not going to stand in God's way. He is a strong man of God and I highly respect him. My close friends are all worried about me becoming influenced by heresy. I too am worried about unintentionally embracing sinful ideas. My girlfriend's parents are also worried this and about my move into the ECUSA and are justifiably unsympathetic. I hear stories almost daily about orthodox individuals, clergy, and congregations leaving the ECUSA. It makes me sad that they leave the fight and makes me wonder if I am boarding a burning ship that cannot be saved. This decision of mine was made totally independent of any influences from any close friends or family, therefore it is hard for them to understand. Before I had decided on choosing the ECUSA to join and hopefully one day, become a priest, I did not know any Episcopalians or Anglicans. So, I have really nobody who is sympathetic to my move or who really understands why I am doing so, except one person. My lovely girlfriend has been so supportive of me and is as sympathetic as she can be, for which I am blessed. Therefore, this is the purpose of this essay: to better explain my position and to help others better understand my way of thinking.

To help reveal the evangelistic nature, which is the crux of all my reasoning for choosing Anglicanism, of why I believe the Anglican Church is the best place for me, let me quote George Sumner. Here Sumner recalls his own call to ministry to the Navajo Mission. He arrived here with his bishop and not only did he discover the despicable state that the two former priests left the Mission in (one of whom was an alcoholic, and the other an adulterer), but the bishop went on to inform him of other corruption that was going on in that seemingly hopeless place. After telling this short story, Sumner tells us this:

You see, the harsh things you think about the [Anglican] church are all true. And let me tell you a few more, in case you missed one: it is biblically illiterate; it is culturally and morally compromised; it is a church that cannot tell the doctrine of atonement from a lamp stand. It is shrinking, squabbling, maybe broke and yet, in spite of all that, incredibly proud. By God's grace I hope that you will see, when the pickup rolls in, what a wonderful time this is to serve God as an ordained minister of the good news of Jesus Christ in the Anglican Church. (Sumner, George. "The Future of Ordained Ministry." Ed. Lewis, Donald M. The Future Shape of Anglican Ministry. 48.)

I have been warned by almost everyone I know that the "writing is on the wall" for the Episcopal Church, and possibly even the Anglican Communion. Certainly they are probably right about the ECUSA, but as it is the Anglican Church here in America, that is where I must go. If it shatters and leaves the Communion, then I go with whatever church remains faithful to the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and more importantly to the Scriptures. The headship of, or communion with, the Archbishop of Canterbury is most important, as that is Anglicanism. That ties us back to the Apostles. So what makes Anglicanism so important, for me to value it as the truest expression of the Christian faith?

Tension Between Unity and Doctrine
This passage sums up the highest goal of historic Anglicanism:

I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. (John 17:20-23, ESV)

Here Christ prays to the Father for Christians to have love for one another and for God, as the God-head loves Himself. Trinitarian love is the perfect example, as God is the source, of perfect love. This mindset is what drove the early English Reformers in a different direction than their Continental contemporaries. This is not to say that the other Continental Reformers did not have Christian love, or that the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox leaders did not, either. What I mean to say is that the Church of England was founded at a unique time in history that allowed it to make a conscious decision to allow a plurality of beliefs, all of which were under the supreme authority of Scripture. The Church did and does condemn open heresy, but allows for diversity on other doctrines. It was founded as a balance between Protestantism and Catholicism. Certainly there were times in the history of the Anglican Church when one group dominated another and pushed its beliefs over the other, but nevertheless the concept remained and remains to this day. This, like all others, is an imperfect branch of the Christian tree. Thankfully the sanctification of the Holy Spirit will one day totally perfect Christ's entire Bride.

St. Paul writes direct commands to the Colossian Christians, and they are commands that all Christians are to follow due to their nature. He wrote:

Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming. In these you too once walked, when you were living in them. But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth. Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator. Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all. (Colossians 3:5-11, ESV)

These are commands to live morally and upright. These are characteristics of what Christians are. The are the fruits a true Christian will bear. In our Christian love for one another, we must heed these commands for moral and doctrinal purity. As St. Augustine is reported to have said, "In essentials, unity; in nonessentials, diversity; in all things charity." This must be the goal of all Christians. All too often, Christians fight over non-essentials, leaving unfinished business that is essential. All too often, we Christians loose focus of Christian love. Yet during our quest to achieve a high level of unity, we Christians often loose focus of Christian characteristics. We must strive to keep that balance between doctrine and love, and history has shown that the Anglican Communion has done this.

Ecclesiology
Now onto the issue of the Episcopal form of government. I often here Baptists and Presbyterians regect the Epicopacy, saying that the word ἐπισκόπους

is only an overseer of a local congregation, as that is the use of the word in the examples in Scripture. I am not surprised to hear a Baptist object, because their hermeneutics go something like this, in regards to ecclesiology and sacramentology: "we should only practice and believe what is explicity taught doctrinally or through example in Scripture; if it is not explicitly in the Scriptures, we should not believe or practice it." This is their argument against paedobaptism, for instance. They fail to see examples of it in Scripture, doctrinal teachings to do it, or the correlation between circumcision and baptism. Therefore, for the Baptist theologian, reading Acts 20:28 or Titus 1:7 gives them the only context to form a definition for the word, ἐπισκόπους. Strikingly, many Presbyterians use this same heremeneutic when objecting to the Episcopacy. I find this to be very inconsistent, considering their hermeneutics of defending paedobaptism. Not only do they see strong continuity between circumcision and baptism, they realize, correctly, that because defintions are given in Scripture, it does not necessesarily mean that it is the only one allowed. This is the line of argumentation given to Baptist objectors to paedobaptism. This is the same line of argumentation that I give both the Baptist and the Presbyterian, as well as to other Congregationalists.

The word ἐπισκόπους merely means "overseer" or "curate." Just because the example given in Scripture is of an overseer (bishop) of a local congregation, does not negate the possibility of higher bishops over lower bishops. In fact, the Scriptures themselves are indeed very silent on the exact form the Church should have. It mentions presbyters, pastors, and bishops and explains how they should conduct themselves and some of their roles, but it does not say much more beyond that. I find it also very interesting that Baptists have no problem coming together in conventions and Presbyterians coming together in Synods/Presbyteries/Assemblies. These are not mentioned in Scripture at all either.

The fact that history records the early Church as having an Episcopal form of Church government and having no real objections to it until the Reformation is telling, to say the least. It is also important to mention that the disciples of the Apostles themselves modeled the Episcopalian form of government after what the Apostles themselves did. They travelled around the world building congregations into churches and then would move off to do the same elsewhere. Then they would often write back or re-visit and take care of ordaining new ministers, disciples, or church discipline. The Council of Jerusalem, found in the Book of Acts, is a good example of Apostolic authority. The Apostles gave their own disciples this same authority, and that disciple became a higher overseer over an individual church overseer.

This reveals the importance of continuing the tradition and of continuing the line of Apostolic authority. As the Church of England had a much milder, though equally as violent, Reformation, the line of Apostolic authority has continued, as the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury has continued. What it means to be an Anglican, or a part of the Ecclesia Anglicana, is that historically authority has gone unbroken from generation to generation, across the world, back to England, back to the Romans, back to the early Church fathers, and back to the Apostles, to whom Christ gave the authority. Similarly, the same Apostolic line has transcended down through the Church of Rome as well as the Eastern Orthodox Churches. It has not transcended down, physically speaking, through any other branch of Christianity.

Because Anglicanism is rooted deeply in tradition, as well as the Reformation, Anglicanism has two main groups within it. The Anglo-Catholics who are modern-day descendants of the Anglicans who left Rome when the Church of England was formed but held on to the theology. The Evangelicals are modern-day descendants of the Reformed Protestants in the Anglican Church. Obviously both camps are orthodox Christian believers who proclaim the grace of Christ, just in different ways. Many of each group's beliefs conflict with the other group's, but both agree on the essentials of the faith. Both agree on the authority of Scripture, interpreted by Tradition and Reason (Hooker's "Three-Legged Stool"). They agree on the Apostle's and Nicene Creed for the interpretation and expression of their faith. Their common hope is Christ alone for their salvation and the salvation of the world. This should be the same for all Christians, but unfortunately it is not.

For this reason, Anglicanism includes representatives from all the different trends, theologies, and movements within Christendom, except anti-paedobaptism. Obviously I have been focusing more on the positive side of this inclusiveness, rather than the negative, which is so apparant--just flip on any news channel or religion website to read about the developing schism due to immorality, heresy, apostasty, and sheer and outright blasphemy of God Himself.

Conclusion
Anglicanism, for the reasons stated above, is the most complete expression of the Christian faith. Notice I did not say the Church of England, the Episcopal Church, or even the Anglican Communion. These are churches currently swept along in rivers of unrepenance to one degree or another. The flaws of Anglicanism are being revealed right now. However that does not mean that the system, or the ecclesiology of Anglicanism is sinful; just the opposite. Certainly it, like all others, is a Communion in dire need of reform and repentance. However, the focus on Christian love being the cornerstone of all Christ-centered theology, is what sets Anglicanism apart from all others. Many Evangelical Protestant churches do not allow Roman Catholics to partake in the Eucharist, and the Roman Catholic Church does not allow Protestants to partake as well. As if Christ was on one side and not on the other. Many Protestant churches teach that Roman Catholics are not even Christian, and the Roman Catholic Church has declared Protestants "anathema." Eastern Orthodox are seperated from Roman Catholicism and are far removed from Protestantism. However, all three groups are welcomed into the Anglican Communion. The Anglican Communion includes Thomists, Arminians, Amyraldians, Molinists, Calvinists, Lutherans, Charismatics, those who support the Emergent Church movement, Wesleyans, Augustinians, those who believe in theosis, and a host of other theologies. Obviously these are all different, but subscribing to a strict view of Christianity is not the Anglican way. The Christian life is the narrow path and is narrow enough already. Why make a hard journey even harder by excluding our brothers and sisters in Christ?

There is much more that I could go into and spend time discussing, but I will save that for a later date. Right now I ask your prayers for me as I enter the Anglican Communion at a time of darkness and in a time of identity crisis. Please pray for those who have not abandoned the faith that was once and for all delivered to the saints. Pray for those who guard the teachings of Christ and the Apostles in the Anglican Communion. Pray for those within the Episcopal Church here in America, as well as the leaders in the Church of England. May God restore this branch of the Church Universal again, and renew a right spirit within her. Please pray specifically that God will not remove His spirit from me. Pray that I will continually repent of my sins and point others to the cross, for there is salvation in no one else but Christ Jesus and there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.

O God glorious and mericiful, please give us repentant and humble spirits and enable us to love others, as Jesus Christ your Son loved us. Bring us all to a common unity, a common worship of you, a common voice, a common prayer, and a common love for all. Amen.

~ The Common Anglican

[sionnsar]

[Apologies. The Greek text did not render... --sionnsar]

[sionnsar]

Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.

FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (typically 3-9 pings/day).
This list is pinged by sionnsar and newheart.

Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com

Humor: The Anglican Blue (by Huber)

Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15

[Unam Sanctam]

But Episcopal bishops don't believe or defend the deposit of the faith handed down from the Apostles. That is the whole purpose of bishops! What good is the episcopal form of government if Christian doctrine is completely thrown out the window?

[sionnsar]

I'm not sure you can tar the entire bunch with that brush. There is a huge difference between Spong and Schofield, for example. Today it's the Anglican Communion dealing with trouble. But that's hardly the first time a church has had problems.

[i.l.e.]

But that's hardly the first time a church has had problems.

There's a lot more wrong with the ECUSA and the Church of England than gays and women priests. As the Queen said several years ago - "there are shadowy forces at work" and their main objective is the destabilization and domination of Christianity.

It is common knowledge that control of the church - at the highest offices - is the global goal of anti-Christian forces. They have succceeded beyond their wildest dreams with the Episcopalions. If not for the luck of the Irish - so to would go the vatican.

[Alkhin]

From the article :

The fact that history records the early Church as having an Episcopal form of Church government and having no real objections to it until the Reformation is telling, to say the least. It is also important to mention that the disciples of the Apostles themselves modeled the Episcopalian form of government after what the Apostles themselves did. They travelled around the world building congregations into churches and then would move off to do the same elsewhere. Then they would often write back or re-visit and take care of ordaining new ministers, disciples, or church discipline. The Council of Jerusalem, found in the Book of Acts, is a good example of Apostolic authority. The Apostles gave their own disciples this same authority, and that disciple became a higher overseer over an individual church overseer.

This reveals the importance of continuing the tradition and of continuing the line of Apostolic authority. As the Church of England had a much milder, though equally as violent, Reformation, the line of Apostolic authority has continued, as the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury has continued. What it means to be an Anglican, or a part of the Ecclesia Anglicana, is that historically authority has gone unbroken from generation to generation, across the world, back to England, back to the Romans, back to the early Church fathers, and back to the Apostles, to whom Christ gave the authority. Similarly, the same Apostolic line has transcended down through the Church of Rome as well as the Eastern Orthodox Churches. It has not transcended down, physically speaking, through any other branch of Christianity.

Because Anglicanism is rooted deeply in tradition, as well as the Reformation, Anglicanism has two main groups within it. The Anglo-Catholics who are modern-day descendants of the Anglicans who left Rome when the Church of England was formed but held on to the theology. The Evangelicals are modern-day descendants of the Reformed Protestants in the Anglican Church. Obviously both camps are orthodox Christian believers who proclaim the grace of Christ, just in different ways. Many of each group's beliefs conflict with the other group's, but both agree on the essentials of the faith. Both agree on the authority of Scripture, interpreted by Tradition and Reason (Hooker's "Three-Legged Stool"). They agree on the Apostle's and Nicene Creed for the interpretation and expression of their faith. Their common hope is Christ alone for their salvation and the salvation of the world. This should be the same for all Christians, but unfortunately it is not.