Oh, so one true believer standing, for instance, against an apostate church could not be considered the true church, but the apostate church would? That overthrows the Gospel. Seems some are confused as to what makes a true church. The true church does not equal an institution.
Don't apologise .One follows the Gospel of Christ as taught by the agency of the Holy Ghost, through Scripture and the Councils.Celtic, there's no need amongst friends.
Extreme individualism and delusions of being "the only true Christian" stand in contrast with our understanding of the Church. It is trendy to say things like "it's not a religion, it's a relationship" or "Jesus didn't create an institution," but these modern concepts present a false ecclesiology. The Church is an institution - the most important one on Earth. Its members have responsibilities before God. Care must be taken before declaring that one's Church is apostate, and departing.
What happens if the local church - or 70% of the episcopacy - actually does apostasize, as with Arianism? Do we call St. Athanasius derogatively, "Me-And-My-Bible Athanasius", or do we not heroically call him "Athanasius Contra Mundum"? An extreme reaction against non-denominationalism, by exalting the Church, is just as immoral as non-denominationalism is heretical. Those who exalt the Church's Tradition only do so in contradiction against the contemporary hierarchy. So, why do you follow "the Church" of an older era to the scorn of "the Church" in this modern era? Each should be equally listened-to, according to your ecclesiology, no? Relying entirely on the hierarchy has led us to accept that which heretofore was unacceptable, in many areas. The Church may have authority to change rites etc., but some eras manifestly display absolutely no authority. We need give and take.
Thank you brother Stalwart I love Anglican Church. And if we can not be one church, let at least acquaint each other better. In modern day Europe I think all three sorts of Christians should be united against secularized front against us.
Canadian Cousin!! I have already said on this board several times, that to be an Anglican Catholic, one has to hold the faith, one has to believe. If a large part of the Church falls away from accepted values and will not listen to reason, what can we do? We cannot force them, it is simply the fact that no belief, or wrong belief, means there is no church within them. We simply carry on as best we can., whilst still preserving, following and practicing the faith once reveled to the Saints!
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. The Church does not exist in "all those who agree with me." The Church exists. Period. Those who are bishops don't cease to be bishops. That which is called the Church remains the Church. Those who are baptized are still baptized. In the example you gave, St. Athanasius did exactly what he should have done. What he didn't do is leave, form a schismatic group, denounce all the Christians of his era as apostate, and set himself up as a mini-pope in his own private Rome. Far from it. He stood for the Truth in the midst of overwhelming odds. And what happened? God blessed his effort.
You are perfectly clear, Dark Knight. Thank you. What I take exception to is your insistence that anyone who "sets himself up" in defense of the Scriptures against certain apostate bishops is somehow acting like his own "mini-pope". The term itself is derogatory to a healthy respect of private judgment and the Reformation. When one Magisterium clashes with another, and Sacred Tradition goes against Holy Tradition (as with the Romans and the Orthodox), how does a poor fellow know "which Magisterium is right"? Only private interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, faith, and reason can lead him to discerning which is correct. Once that has occurred, however, he ontologically has no need for either Magisterium: he is above them, by being able to discern between them. That is the primary problem in issues of Orthodox & Anglican unity, perhaps?
The church is the body of Christ made up of individual believers. All that is needed to form a church is two believers -- no institution with man-made rules and regulations necessary. If any body professing Jesus departs from traditional Biblical morality, whether small or large, local or denominational, it has become apostate.
Who agrees on the orthodoxy of the faith? Thee and me, And, I'm not sure of thee. Through this door lies anarchy.
This is America. Each individual can choose what elements of dogma constitute abandonment of the faith. In fact, we do not accept it when national church bodies make such decisions. We trust only our own interpretation and analysis. After all, Scripture is plain and we each are most capable. You choose to consider the definition of marriage and holy orders (two secondary sacraments) sufficient to define the faith. Some would look to the Creed or the Councils. But you are certainly free to your own definitions of the faith.
Hello, I just joined the forum and I haven't had time yet to read all the posts in the Orthodox and Anglican thread, but I am looking forward to reading what everyone has to say.
No, I do not, and you cannot point to any post where I have said that. What I consider to define the faith is Biblical doctrine and Biblical morality -- abandon either, and you have abandoned the faith.
Anglican Enculturation / Orthodox Enculturation http://ancientfaith.com/specials/episodes/anglican_orthodox_enculturation Orthodox priest William Olnhausen and Anglican priest Jack Gabig.
An friend from Europe sent me this video, "The Orthodox Church fracture in the Ukraine. What can be done?" Can anyone shed light on the details of what they discussed here?
Anglicans and orthodox have a long history of working together going back to the 17th century. Found this article which might be interesting to this topic: http://calvinistinternational.com/2012/04/23/anglicans-and-orthodoxy-in-the-17th-cent/#more-827
There is but one ~Church! One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church! It is a matter of Christ's revelation to the saints. If you do not hold to the Catholic Faith, you are in a sect and that is what the Calvinists are Sectaries. No amount of ducking and weaving will change things ,Anglicans are Catholics, probably the oldest Catholic Church in Europe and for some 600 years the Calvinists have tried, physically even,to supplant the Anglican Church.
Enthronement of the head of the Anglican Church in Canterbury A delegation of the Moscow Patriarchate led by Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk was present with the blessing of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia... https://mospat.ru/en/2013/03/22/news82739/ There is nice text on official Church of Serbia web page about the enthronement of Archbishop Justin Welby, but just in Serbian: http://www.spc.rs/sr/ustolichen_poglavar_anglikanske_zajednice Serbian bishop Dositheos was there in the name of Serbian Patriarch.