How Necessary Are Bishops?

Is the idea really so silly to you? Calvinism was clearly a very influential force in the English reformation and many of the statements in the Church of England's official documents show a Calvinist influence. The 39 Articles, if not Calvinist per se, are clearly influenced by Calvinism. Thomas Cranmer admired Calvin and invited him to England.

 

If you read many of the histories of the Reformation & Civil Wars, it is usually claimed that much of the damage done to the Icons and Woodwork within our churches was laid to the blame of Cromwell and the later Puritans.

(PeterHeylin & Bishop Collier!Eccleiastical History of the English Church VOl 6.)

 

I've pointed out before, that as I was taught at school, 'heresie is no more than a false belief'. "Heretic is one who peddles this debased belief.'
If our Scots friends hold similar belief as the Church in England, why has their been such intense antagonism between our two faiths? Part of the Faith held and taught by the Catholic Church is that,There is no salvation out side the Church. " Doesn't this latter make you think that something should be done to warn our Scots friends that at least they are on the wrong path? Or should we simply ignore our Church teaching!
Not to long ago, a most Anglican pocket prayer books warned their readers about frequenting Look again at the comments of Bishop Gunning in the earlier post I sent you.

 

But what about Moslems, Jews and Hindus as well as the Christian denominations you don't like? Certainly you've got your missionary work cut out. It reminds me a bit of those guys on soapboxes urging, "repent or be damned". Mind you, a soapbox in Edinburgh is probably safer than one in Islamabad.

Frequenting what?

 

Most, if not every source I read on the subject tells me that the copy of the canons relevant to the seventh Council was either faulty or forged. If you want further info, there's a book, Anglicanism & The Seventh Council , by C.B. Moss. A brilliant Anglican theologian & historian. (Obtainable through Google Books.) As for John Calvin's like or dislikes? I am discussing Anglican topics on a blog relating to Anglican Church & faith and if Calvin isn't a purveyor of false doctrine I don't know who is!
Another book written in Elizabeth's time. "The Church", by Dean Field. Many , even in our Communion ,class him as a Calvinist, but he says there were Seven Councils ,of these four were dealing with Christological matters and two were explanative, the seventh,(the one under discussion, was a matter of manners dealing with the holy people of god.)
2. What the Council decreed.

The council decreed that similar veneration and honour should be paid to the representations of the Lord and of the Saints as was accustomed to be paid to the "laurata" and tablets representing the Christian emperors, to wit, that they should be bowed to, and saluted with kisses, and artended with lights and the offering of incense.(2) But the Council was most explicit in declaring that this was merely a veneration of honour and affection, such as can be given to the creature, and that under no circumstances could the adoration of divine worship be given to them but to God alone.
This above is more or less what is accepted in modern times, but this is also what the ancient church, western and eastern believed and what the Church in England followed throughout the centuries. Not perhaps individuals, but the Church, which is the Body of Christ! To which I might add we all belong.

You again reveal a shallowness in your argument.
The Church agreed on seven particular councils. I have explained above the reasoning our Anglican Fathers adopted on this matter. There was an official formula, which very few modern authors take time out to account,
it was to affirm the first four general councils, and add the rider" and any other consonant to the same! Thia was done all through the Reformation by the Church and its bishops, Bishop Andrews, all the Bishops of the Stuart
Church and Parliament in Eliza's time.
As for the Doctrine of the English Church concerning the Articles, this was that they should be read through the prism of the Councils and the teaching of the early fathers. It is the laxity that has spread deeply in to our teaching that brings about shoddy articles and information on church matters. We should read more than Coffee Table literature if we desire a reasonable balance.

 

It should have said that at one time all the Anglican prayer Books, or most of them, warned against misleading the Christian Sects by attendance at the meetings .
I never mentioned Non Christians, your slip is showing.
Again , you'r showing a lack of knowledge through lack of study. Just before last Christmass, the Moslems in this town brought out an expensive publication to publicise their 60 year presence and as a thank you to all their friends posted articles and commentaries on them. I don't think you would persuade the Community that I'm there enemy!

 

The answer is yes!
The Calvinists were encouraged to stay in the Church under Eliza! They had strong support from the nobility who feared that they would have to return the monastic & church lands filched during the reign of Edward .It was thought, by us, that a few hard winters would see the elderly off whilst the youth would be taught by their parish priests. It was a terrible miscalculation. The Calvinists were stronger mentally.The result is apparent today. As for the influence being spread by the Calvinists, it was Europe wide. On the Continent the Romanists used the rack and garrot, to say nothing of bonfires and German Emperors burying people alive in religions name. Even then the Protestant teaching showed up quite clearly at Trent. (Kidd.) As for the Articles, again they were the extent of Anglican response to the Calvinist attack. As for the nobility? They were bought off further again by more lands stolen from the Church.
As for Cranmer and the other two martyrs, if you read the Cal S.P. you will find they affirmed their belief in them before the Council.

 

Dear brother seagull, surely you're not suggesting that the hindu, muslim, and jewish faiths are equal to the christian faith, which clings to the word of god as revealed in Jesus Christ, arr e you?

perhaps you could clarify what your understanding of the christian faith is? I have a feeling that your personal confession is very different from what I would recognize as orthodoxy, sidesperson or no.

 

Oh dear. Are we saying that P

i) No I'm not. My point was that if you call Presbyterians "heretics", you must use that label for all religions except a chosen few. I am unhappy about such derogatory, hostile and indeed inflamatory labels. Remember that they, along with words like "infidel" are used by people like Islamic fundamentalists. But not, I hope, Anglicans.

ii) I strive to follow the teachings of Christ. I accept the precepts of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral. I regard myself as a middle of the road, liberal catholic member of the Church of England. It could be that you would not feel at home in that Church, the Mother Church of Anglicanism. I do.

 

seagul

Pray then,
What are the salient parts of the Anglican Faith , that differentiates it from the Christian Sects, or that enables the Church in England to to be a Catholic Communion? Do tell !

 

That doesn't address my point about inflammatory language, but let me answer this question as follows. I am a catholic because my baptismal/confirmation certificate says so; because of the wording of Quicunque Vult; because twice a week I confirm my belief in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church; and because my Church is in the Apostolic Succession.

Ranting on about "heretics", "infidels", etc. is not part of that.

 

You didn't answer the question though! Did You?

Neither did Irant on about heretics and infidels. At least over the last few emails.I'm simply making the point that with membership your supposed to believe the faith .However we have been discussing salient points of the Christian Faith or hadn't you noticed.

 

You have certainly used the word heretic to describe Calvinists.

The Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral qualifies churches in the Anglican Communion to be part of the catholic faith.

 

Heresy is wrong belief! According to Catholic understanding Calvinism, or the teaching of the belief of John Calvin s not found,as far as I have been taught is not to be found in the Revelation of Christ to the Saints, or the Holy People of God.

 

So you accept that Calvinists and many others are "heretics". Are they also "infidels"?

 

So you accept that Calvinists and many others are "heretics". Are they also "infidels"?[/QUOTE]

As far as I know I have never at any time suggested that possibility,I accuse Calvinists of 'wrong belief' and that is all.
In your desperation please don't use innuendo's to win your points.

 

You said it!

 

As far as I know I have never at any time suggested that possibility,I accuse Calvinists of 'wrong belief' and that is all.
In your desperation please don't use innuendo's to win your points.[/QUOTE]


I was going to accuse you of ducking and weaving, + using semantics, but your post of 4 April, quoted above, makes that superfluous.

 

[QUOTE=" Mind you, a soapbox in Edinburgh is probably safer than one in Islamabad.