Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Does the Church of England hold to the 39 Articles? Where can I find a confession of what they believe about baptism? More importantly, what do they teach about baptism? What would I expect to hear from an Anglican preacher about baptism?
There are four reasons why the Church of England, unlike some other Christian traditions, has retained the practice of infant baptism.
* First, infant baptism is a practice that goes back to the very earliest days of the Church and is therefore something that the Church of England does not feel free to discard.
* Secondly, the Church of England believes that God’s merciful love, what Christians call God’s ‘grace’, always precedes our human response and enables it. Personal confession of faith following on from and responding to the grace of God received in infant baptism is consistent with this fact.
* Thirdly, we read in the gospels that Christ welcomed and blessed those infants that were brought to Him (Mark 10:13-15) and the Church of England believes that infant baptism is a way He continues to do this today.
* Fourthly, the Bible as a whole tells us that the children of believers are themselves part of God’s family and therefore The Church of England feels that it is right that they should have the sign of belonging to the family just as Jewish boys in the Old Testament had the sign of circumcision (Genesis 17:9-14, Acts 2:39, 16:31, 1 Corinthians 7:14).
I agree, but I think this represents one particular church and not a diocese.
With that sacrament, the high church Anglicans hold a view that is very close to Rome, the low church are much more reformed in their view.
With that sacrament, the high church Anglicans hold a view that is very close to Rome, the low church are much more reformed in their view.
In what way, is the Anglican view on the Lord's Supper "very close to Rome?"
With that sacrament, the high church Anglicans hold a view that is very close to Rome, the low church are much more reformed in their view.
In what way, is the Anglican view on the Lord's Supper "very close to Rome?"
I know 'high-church' Anglicans (Anglo-Catholics) who fully believe in the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation. On the other hand, I have met some 'low-church' Anglicans (Evangelicals/Reformed) whose views on the sacrament are basically the same as what Westminster Confession-adhering Presbyterians believe. Your run-of-the-mill liberal/moderate 'middle way' Anglican, who knows...
Uniformity on these kinds of doctrinal points has never been one of the Anglican Communion's virtues.
In what way, is the Anglican view on the Lord's Supper "very close to Rome?"
I know 'high-church' Anglicans (Anglo-Catholics) who fully believe in the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation. On the other hand, I have met some 'low-church' Anglicans (Evangelicals/Reformed) whose views on the sacrament are basically the same as what Westminster Confession-adhering Presbyterians believe. Your run-of-the-mill liberal/moderate 'middle way' Anglican, who knows...
Uniformity on these kinds of doctrinal points has never been one of the Anglican Communion's virtues.
Deviation occurs in any denomination, even among Presbyterians and Baptists. My question is not how various groups or individuals deviate, but whether the official Anglican stance is "very close to Rome."
If the OP is asking what is the official teaching on baptism within the Church of England, that is different than how certain Anglicans view Baptism. The same is true in regards to the Lord's Supper.
I know 'high-church' Anglicans (Anglo-Catholics) who fully believe in the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation. On the other hand, I have met some 'low-church' Anglicans (Evangelicals/Reformed) whose views on the sacrament are basically the same as what Westminster Confession-adhering Presbyterians believe. Your run-of-the-mill liberal/moderate 'middle way' Anglican, who knows...
Uniformity on these kinds of doctrinal points has never been one of the Anglican Communion's virtues.
Deviation occurs in any denomination, even among Presbyterians and Baptists. My question is not how various groups or individuals deviate, but whether the official Anglican stance is "very close to Rome."
If the OP is asking what is the official teaching on baptism within the Church of England, that is different than how certain Anglicans view Baptism. The same is true in regards to the Lord's Supper.
I was more curious to find out what was being taught. Sometimes what a denomination or religion believes is not what is taught.
Deviation occurs in any denomination, even among Presbyterians and Baptists. My question is not how various groups or individuals deviate, but whether the official Anglican stance is "very close to Rome."
If the OP is asking what is the official teaching on baptism within the Church of England, that is different than how certain Anglicans view Baptism. The same is true in regards to the Lord's Supper.
I was more curious to find out what was being taught. Sometimes what a denomination or religion believes is not what is taught.
That is definitely true. So, if it is not the official stance you are seeking, are you seeking what individual pastor's teach, or individual churches, or seminaries?
Wonder what really happened to the thief on the cross?
In what way, is the Anglican view on the Lord's Supper "very close to Rome?"
My question is not how various groups or individuals deviate, but whether the official Anglican stance is "very close to Rome."
I am interested in what kinds of presuppositions my two parishoners from the Church in Wales might have about baptism. I realize they may have been educated in some of the official doctrine but from what I understand the Church in Wales is fairly liberal which means they might leave out some stuff in their teaching.
In what way, is the Anglican view on the Lord's Supper "very close to Rome?"
My question is not how various groups or individuals deviate, but whether the official Anglican stance is "very close to Rome."
Well, you asked two different questions. I didn't respond to the first one, since Mr. Tyler had done a fine job of answering. If you want the 'official Anglican stance', I'd refer you to the 39 Articles. If you want to know what they actually believe, I'd refer you to my post above. Some, probably a minority, actually follow the Articles. Some follow the Roman formula. Some probably consider it a spiritually meaningless social tradition.
In what way, is the Anglican view on the Lord's Supper "very close to Rome?"
My question is not how various groups or individuals deviate, but whether the official Anglican stance is "very close to Rome."
Well, you asked two different questions. I didn't respond to the first one, since Mr. Tyler had done a fine job of answering. If you want the 'official Anglican stance', I'd refer you to the 39 Articles. If you want to know what they actually believe, I'd refer you to my post above. Some, probably a minority, actually follow the Articles. Some follow the Roman formula. Some probably consider it a spiritually meaningless social tradition.
To state that a particular (deviant) group within a denomination define the teachings of a denomination doesn't really prove much at all. One could say that the PCA believes in FV by citing the Auburn Ave. webpage, or that it believes in deaconesses by citing the NY Metro. My question still stands .. How does Anglican theology on the Lord's Supper come "very close to Rome?"
I am acquainted with the 39 Articles and do not find Rome in them.
Well, you asked two different questions. I didn't respond to the first one, since Mr. Tyler had done a fine job of answering. If you want the 'official Anglican stance', I'd refer you to the 39 Articles. If you want to know what they actually believe, I'd refer you to my post above. Some, probably a minority, actually follow the Articles. Some follow the Roman formula. Some probably consider it a spiritually meaningless social tradition.
To state that a particular (deviant) group within a denomination define the teachings of a denomination doesn't really prove much at all. One could say that the PCA believes in FV by citing the Auburn Ave. webpage, or that it believes in deaconesses by citing the NY Metro. My question still stands .. How does Anglican theology on the Lord's Supper come "very close to Rome?"
I am acquainted with the 39 Articles and do not find Rome in them.
You've gotten answers to your various questions. If you don't like the answers you've gotten, do your own research.