UnchartedSpirit
New Member
Could someone explain the Episcopal faith/doctrine to me? I had a piano teacher who was Episcopal and there didn’t seem anything wrong with him….
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Episcopal
- Thread starter UnchartedSpirit
- Start date
I don’t know enough to give a good comment. I did look at their beliefs about a year ago, but nothing seriously, even though you’ll probably get a few responses both positive and negative, and will make for a good discussion. The discussion will probably turn south, because the Episcopal is sorta like Catholicism in a way, but there are differences, so don’t be surprised if this turns into a Catholic bashing session.
If you are truly serious I would objectively research the Episcopal faith by either talking with a Parish Pastor or cautiously researching the net and take the opinions presented here with a grain of salt.
If you are truly serious I would objectively research the Episcopal faith by either talking with a Parish Pastor or cautiously researching the net and take the opinions presented here with a grain of salt.
Paul of Eugene
New Member
The Episcopal faith is the Church of England, only its in America instead of England. They are a split from the Roman Catholic church and therefore considered "protestant" although they use priests and celebrate the sacrament as the catholics do. Long on ceremony and ritual. C.S.Lewis, author of the Narnia books, was Church of England.
The Episcopal doctrine is very broad. Depending on the person you ask it could be a liberal social gospel or even Unitarian Universalist. Or they could be nearly Baptist in their doctrine. Or they could nearly be Lutheran in their doctrine. And just to make it more interesting there are still others who are Roman Catholic in all but name.
One good start would be to study the 39 Articles. They, in essence, will tell you about the Church of England's stand on faith and practice.
I worship as a member of an Anglican Church and have no difficulty with it. I am as sound as anyone in theology and practice. I wear a gown and some call me vicar and I find that no different than when I was a Baptist minister and people called me Reverend. At least they call me!
Cheers,
Jim
I worship as a member of an Anglican Church and have no difficulty with it. I am as sound as anyone in theology and practice. I wear a gown and some call me vicar and I find that no different than when I was a Baptist minister and people called me Reverend. At least they call me!
Cheers,
Jim
Over here, the Anglican Church, as the Church of England, is the state church. It, broadly speaking, can be divided into liberal, Anglo-Catholic and evangelical portions; unusually, perhaps, all three branches tend to have some form of social justice/ social gospel aspect. But in addition the three branches tend to have the following individual characteristics:
Liberal - the most traditional form typically, bearing the most allegiance (even if only on paper sometimes) to the 39 Arts and the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. Tend to wear vestments (but not Roman Catholic-type ones). On communion, they would tend to be Cranmerian receptionist ie: we spiritually receive Christ's Body and Blood when we take communion. OK with infant baptism. Also theologically, they would tend to subscribe to higher critical theories re Scripture and not have a problem with same-sex relationships or women priests. Heroes of this tradition include Lancelot Andrewes, Richard Hooker, Thomas Cranmer (possibly), William Laud (to an extent), the present Archbishop of Canterbury, ++Rowan Williams, and, more on the extreme, +John Shelby Spong and +Gene Robinson.
Anglo-Catholic - "more Roman than the Romans". Have their roots partly in the Laudian reforms of the 1620s and 1630s but more importantly in the Tractarian Oxford Movement of the 19th century. Big emphasis on Apostolic Succession with Anglican bishops, priests, being rooted in the Early Church and Early Church Fathers, and view the 39 Arts as more or less compatible with Roman Catholicism; they see the Anglican Church as sister Catholic Church to the Roman Catholics and Orthodox. Much more Catholic-style 'tat': vestments, incense, candles, statues/ icons, Virgin Mary etc. Against women priests (many of their clergy swam the Tiber after the 1992 decision to ordain them). Divided on same-sex relationships (the Anglo-Catholic group Forward in Faith is opposed but Affirming Catholicism is pro-). Fine with infant baptism. Believe in some kind of Real Presence in communion although unclear as to whether actual transubstantiation. Heroes: William Laud (to an extent), John Henry Newman, and ++John Hapgood, previous Archbp of York.
Evangelicals - much more numerous over here than in ECUSA. Believe in salvation by faith alone, the need for personal conversion, supreme authority of Scripture, and other usual evo stuff etc. Many are Reformed/ Calvinist and tend to stress the Reformed aspects to the 39 Arts. Less sacramental and sacerdotal than the others, but still wheel out a priest (often in plain-clothes) to do communion, which they tend to regard as receptionist (or memorialist in a few cases); divided on infant baptism and tend to encourage believers' baptism. Against same-sex relationships. Divided on women priests. Heroes: Wilberforce, Ashley Cooper/ Shaftesbury, Jim Packer, ++George Carey, previous Archbp of Canterbury and ++John Sentamu, present Archbp of York
I can do links to the various Anglican groups if anyone's interested...
Liberal - the most traditional form typically, bearing the most allegiance (even if only on paper sometimes) to the 39 Arts and the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. Tend to wear vestments (but not Roman Catholic-type ones). On communion, they would tend to be Cranmerian receptionist ie: we spiritually receive Christ's Body and Blood when we take communion. OK with infant baptism. Also theologically, they would tend to subscribe to higher critical theories re Scripture and not have a problem with same-sex relationships or women priests. Heroes of this tradition include Lancelot Andrewes, Richard Hooker, Thomas Cranmer (possibly), William Laud (to an extent), the present Archbishop of Canterbury, ++Rowan Williams, and, more on the extreme, +John Shelby Spong and +Gene Robinson.
Anglo-Catholic - "more Roman than the Romans". Have their roots partly in the Laudian reforms of the 1620s and 1630s but more importantly in the Tractarian Oxford Movement of the 19th century. Big emphasis on Apostolic Succession with Anglican bishops, priests, being rooted in the Early Church and Early Church Fathers, and view the 39 Arts as more or less compatible with Roman Catholicism; they see the Anglican Church as sister Catholic Church to the Roman Catholics and Orthodox. Much more Catholic-style 'tat': vestments, incense, candles, statues/ icons, Virgin Mary etc. Against women priests (many of their clergy swam the Tiber after the 1992 decision to ordain them). Divided on same-sex relationships (the Anglo-Catholic group Forward in Faith is opposed but Affirming Catholicism is pro-). Fine with infant baptism. Believe in some kind of Real Presence in communion although unclear as to whether actual transubstantiation. Heroes: William Laud (to an extent), John Henry Newman, and ++John Hapgood, previous Archbp of York.
Evangelicals - much more numerous over here than in ECUSA. Believe in salvation by faith alone, the need for personal conversion, supreme authority of Scripture, and other usual evo stuff etc. Many are Reformed/ Calvinist and tend to stress the Reformed aspects to the 39 Arts. Less sacramental and sacerdotal than the others, but still wheel out a priest (often in plain-clothes) to do communion, which they tend to regard as receptionist (or memorialist in a few cases); divided on infant baptism and tend to encourage believers' baptism. Against same-sex relationships. Divided on women priests. Heroes: Wilberforce, Ashley Cooper/ Shaftesbury, Jim Packer, ++George Carey, previous Archbp of Canterbury and ++John Sentamu, present Archbp of York
I can do links to the various Anglican groups if anyone's interested...
Some links to Anglican groupings:-
Uber-liberal (ie Spong-types) Sea of Faith
Traditionalist liberal: Prayer Book Society
Conservative Anglo-Catholic: Forward in Faith
Liberal Anglo-Catholic: Affirming Catholicism
Evangelical-Calvinist: Reform
Other evangelical Anglican: The Church Society , Anglican Mainstream , Fulcrum
Evangelical Anglican church about 3 miles away from me: Holyrood Church
Uber-liberal (ie Spong-types) Sea of Faith
Traditionalist liberal: Prayer Book Society
Conservative Anglo-Catholic: Forward in Faith
Liberal Anglo-Catholic: Affirming Catholicism
Evangelical-Calvinist: Reform
Other evangelical Anglican: The Church Society , Anglican Mainstream , Fulcrum
Evangelical Anglican church about 3 miles away from me: Holyrood Church
In Canada, we used to divide between high church and low church Anglicans. Oddly enough, most of the high church men were evangelical and the low church was divided between liberal and evangelical.
Many to-day believe wot the church teaches to be true, but that truth hasn't sunk in to the heart in wot evangelicals call "rebirth". Then, there are many that have a very deep devotion to Christ and truth as any baptist I have known over the years, but they might not be as vocal about their deep religious beliefs.
In some evangelical circles, I have found many who can recite scriptures by rote, but when I see their actions there is much doubt about how deep is their dedication to wot is actually taught.
For years, growing up in the Church of England, both church and church public schools, I could recite scriptures, but it was not until the challenge of confirmation classes that I actually realized Christ as my personal saviour. It was a quiet event, but event it was, every bit as much as anyone who has paraded down an aisle and made a very vocal declaration.
Cheers,
Jim
Many to-day believe wot the church teaches to be true, but that truth hasn't sunk in to the heart in wot evangelicals call "rebirth". Then, there are many that have a very deep devotion to Christ and truth as any baptist I have known over the years, but they might not be as vocal about their deep religious beliefs.
In some evangelical circles, I have found many who can recite scriptures by rote, but when I see their actions there is much doubt about how deep is their dedication to wot is actually taught.
For years, growing up in the Church of England, both church and church public schools, I could recite scriptures, but it was not until the challenge of confirmation classes that I actually realized Christ as my personal saviour. It was a quiet event, but event it was, every bit as much as anyone who has paraded down an aisle and made a very vocal declaration.
Cheers,
Jim
Our local Episcopal church (small town) had a priest who came out of the closet and said he was gay. Immediately about half his church left.
The headquarters of the American Episcopal churches paid the difference in the loss of members income until they picked up new members.
So, I would say they are quite liberal.
The headquarters of the American Episcopal churches paid the difference in the loss of members income until they picked up new members.
So, I would say they are quite liberal.
UnchartedSpirit
New Member
That, I understood, my teacher never said anything about homosexuality...does anyone know about a big Episicopal church in the SF Bay? You know, one with a GIANT organ? Is there any category that a 'John Lennon' Epispocal Liberal might fall under?