Attending an Anglican bible study

[blazerdave]

If the OP is still keeping up with this thread, we (and that particular Anglican Bible study) can all thank God that Henry VIII has nothing to do with the theology of any Anglican church that you will ever encounter. That dude’s reign was no one’s finest hour.

 

[TriuneUnity]

If the OP is still keeping up with this thread, we (and that particular Anglican Bible study) can all thank God that Henry VIII has nothing to do with the theology of any Anglican church that you will ever encounter. That dude’s reign was no one’s finest hour.

You mean there isn’t an Anglican Church of the Continuing Tudor Dynasty?

“If You Could Only Hie to Whitehall”

 

[GKC]

Yep, ole Henry was a piece of work. And Tyndale, shame on him for translating a Bible into a language people could actually read. Shame!

Yeah. And double shame, for writing The Practyse of Prelates.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

He should get extra credit for that spelling of Practice! Too cool. Ya gotta love the British. They finally got a conservative prime minister! That’s novel! Maybe he can lower their taxes from 80% to 60%

Yeah. And double shame, for writing The Practyse of Prelates.

GKC

 

[blazerdave]

You mean there isn’t an Anglican Church of the Continuing Tudor Dynasty?

“If You Could Only Hie to Whitehall”

“Oh, I hied, Jerry!”

/Kramer

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Seinfeld: “what’s the deal with Henry the VIII anyway?”

George: “Henry’s back baby!”

Elaine: “Get out!”

Frank Costanza: “you wanted a Reformation? YOU GOT ONE!!”

Newman: “Hello, Tuuuuudor!”

Henry: “Hello Newmmmmman”

Dave Puddy: “yeah, whatever”

“Oh, I hied, Jerry!”

/Kramer

 

[Hesychios]

Here is one insight I personally got out of this class - now again - don’t bash me this is just something I came up with myself as he was talking about covenant relationships. For ME at least, If instead of the words faith and works, I think trust and obedience, it all becomes clearer for me. I don’t think this goes against what Paul is teaching - hopefully this gets to the spirit of it. To me the word obedience is less meritorious sounding than “works” …

This is the take Frederica Matthews-Greene (an Orthodox author) has on the subject of ‘works’…

… A big factor is that Western theology was based on the Scriptures in Latin translation, and as radically as the Reformers broke with Catholicism, they still unknowingly built on the same Latin-language thought-world. (St. Augustine could not read Greek well, and was led astray by a mistranslation in Romans 5:12). An example is the NT Greek word “energeia,” energy, which appears all through St Paul, eg, “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for God is energizing in you, both to will and to energize for his good pleasure.” But there was no Latin equivalent, so when Jerome made his translation he used “opus,” work. A sculptor creates a statue and that is his opus, but it is separate from him; he’s not “energizing” within it. So you see that this creates a very different sense of whether and how God is present—the reverberations go on and on.

Make of it what you will. The relevant link is here.

 

[Eleyyionsyyhidd]

There are also opportunities for Mormon, Jewish, and Islamic worship. Chaplains in the military are not there to evangelize or convert…they are there to counsel, comfort, and provide opportunities for worship. Often, there are off-post worship opportunities as well. There will be little free time for Bible study during basic training…
Alta White Teeth Whitening

 

[Non_Serviam]

Seinfeld: “what’s the deal with Henry the VIII anyway?”

George: “Henry’s back baby!”

Elaine: “Get out!”

Frank Costanza: “you wanted a Reformation? YOU GOT ONE!!”

Newman: “Hello, Tuuuuudor!”

Henry: “Hello Newmmmmman”

Dave Puddy: “yeah, whatever”

Thanks-now you have me imagining Henry and the Pope airing grievances around the Festivus pole.

 

[PJM]

=ajcstr;6614453]I am attending an Anglican bible study on Romans. The curch is definitely not Anglo-Catholic but I don’t think its at the other extreme either. The pastor told me they are “middle of the road” which is a team that has always confounded me. Anyway, the study is being lead by a member that was a former Presbyterian, but he converted to Anglican and is a big proponent of NT Wright.

It is apparent to me that there is some underlying bias towards Catholics - not strong, but I sense it. There are about 10 people in this thing and the pastor did mention that I was a Catholic. The group leader makes comments like “When Paul is addressing the Church of Rome, he does not mean Roman Catholics, Paul would not know what a Roman Catholic was” (snicker, snicker from the back).
To be fair, he has also made statements like Catholics believe the same basic gospel as the Anglicans so we are in communion with them. And he pointed out thet I would be welcome to receive the Eucharist there but he is not welcome to receive at my church.

I asked him if when Paul talks about justification, are we “declared” justified or are we “made” justified, and he went off on how he is not talking about a Catholic perspective and how we put too much emphasis on Mary. Mary! I asked a question about justification.

Now, I am enjoying the study very much, we are moving at about the pace of one chapter a night but I need some help. In light of the way my last question was received, I want to through this question out here first. He keeps saying that based on what he has read of NT Wright, He has come to the conclusion that Luther and the Reformers “got it wrong” with respect to “justification by faith”. He sited James and and other points where works come into play also. But he also says Roman Catholics got it wrong - I am going to have to ask about this.

But first to the forum - First, do you think he is regarding Roman Catholic theology as a “gospel of works” when he says this (before I tick him off by asking that), and second, is there a “Catholic perspective” on the “New perspective on Paul”? How is what Wright describes as justification similar/different to the Catholic position? We are only on Romans 4, but it sounds pretty similar so far.

Not a BAD idea if your SOLIDLY INFORMED with the Catholic Bible and can with charity defend our beliefs. IF NOT, your presense serves to solidfy THERE theology; NOT a prudent idea!

Love and prayers,
Pat

 

[blazerdave]

Thanks-now you have me imagining Henry and the Pope airing grievances around the Festivus pole.

“Until you pin [Henry VIII], Festivus is not over!”

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m totally convinced that Henry wore a manzear!..or a bro, whichever you want to call it! LOL

“Until you pin [Henry VIII], Festivus is not over!”

 

[Cy_33]

I only read the first few pages of this thread, but since it contains the words “Anglican” and “Bible”, I thought it would be all right to ask this question. Can anyone who’s familiar with the various Continuing Anglican churches enlighten me as to what their position on evolution is, or the literal interpretation of the creation, etc.?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

There is no “Anglican Catechism” so to speak. They vary in viewpoints on everything from evangelicalism to anglo-catholicism to the 39 Articles. I have always observed that the Anglicans are very open to evolution and the various theories. Usually the priests I’ve spoken to have their own opinions on these things and they all agree it’s not a deal-breaker for salvation or a proper understanding of salvation history in any way. Have you looked into any Continuing Anglican websites or blogs?

I only read the first few pages of this thread, but since it contains the words “Anglican” and “Bible”, I thought it would be all right to ask this question. Can anyone who’s familiar with the various Continuing Anglican churches enlighten me as to what their position on evolution is, or the literal interpretation of the creation, etc.?

 

[GKC]

I only read the first few pages of this thread, but since it contains the words “Anglican” and “Bible”, I thought it would be all right to ask this question. Can anyone who’s familiar with the various Continuing Anglican churches enlighten me as to what their position on evolution is, or the literal interpretation of the creation, etc.?

It would vary with the individuals, more so than with any particular Continuing jurisdiction. I’ve never heard the subjects mentioned, myself.

GKC

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It’s still hard to fathom…Anglicans not coming to a defined, pin-pointed, explicit, universal agreement on something in writing. This has never happened before?

It would vary with the individuals, more so than with any particular Continuing jurisdiction. I’ve never heard the subjects mentioned, myself.

GKC

 

[blazerdave]

HAHAHAHAHA

Yep. “Christian, what do you believe?”

Don’t ask us. We don’t know.

 

[GKC]

It’s still hard to fathom…Anglicans not coming to a defined, pin-pointed, explicit, universal agreement on something in writing. This has never happened before?

We all agree that Anglicans are a motley crew.

I think.

GKC

 

[Cy_33]

We all agree that Anglicans are a motley crew.

I think.

GKC

Having attended an Episcopal Church for about five years in the nineties, and having seen what’s happened since, I would have to concur, and this would include the Continuum as well, what with all the re-aligning and bishop hopping. It’s most unfortunate.

As for the first question, I was simply trying to get some kind of idea as to where Anglo-Catholics stood on the matter. Just as an example, I heard Cardinal George say that it is generally agreed (among Roman Catholics I assume) that history begins with Abraham.

 

[blazerdave]

We all agree that Anglicans are a motley crew.

I think.

GKC

Yes. We agree.

http://e-lacrosse.com/blogs/ncaa/files/2009/05/crue.jpg