Branch Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter CutlerB
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CutlerB

Guest
Dear CAF members,

I am looking for some good apologetics to read about the “branch theory” that is mostly promoted by Anglicans. Do you have any resources, on the Internet or else, that refute this idea?

Thank you and God bless.
 
The branch theory is simply that they have apostolic succession as do rome and the East.

Why would you want any apologetic on that?
 
Newman had this to say

IOW, it is a benign theory offered by very well meaning Anglicans. However the paradox of this theory, also hinders the good and earnest seeker after truth.
 
AmbroseSJ said:
Newman had this to say

IOW, it is a benign theory offered by very well meaning Anglicans. However the paradox of this theory, also hinders the good and earnest seeker after truth.
Click to expand...
I’m not quite sure what Newman had to say? I am only referred to a table of contents.

What I mean by apologetics is: “Why is Anglicanism not a branch of the one true Church? How can one make that case?” Preferably without apostolic succession, as I am trying to explain my conversion to our Anglican priest/minister. I don’t want to risk insulting him.
 
CutlerB said:
I’m not quite sure what Newman had to say? I am only referred to a table of contents.

What I mean by apologetics is: “Why is Anglicanism not a branch of the one true Church? How can one make that case?” Preferably without apostolic succession, as I am trying to explain my conversion to our Anglican priest/minister. I don’t want to risk insulting him.
Click to expand...
oops. sorry. Go to page 252.

JHN writes that 2 sovereign states claiming to be one state is a paradox that doesn’t stand up to reason or reality. Newman thinks the theory is considerate and well meaning, but just doesn’t square with the facts. He also thinks it harms those that seek the truth (from within the Anglican communion.) Newman himself had a very difficult time seeing the problem with this theory in the course of his own conversion. It is a prejudice more than a theory (he thinks.) And prejudices are very difficult to assess in oneself, especially when you share your prejudice with an entire communion!

IOW, it would be very difficult to NOT insult your minister with this line of reasoning. Perhaps another tack, and one that JHN used in his own lifetime, to explain his conversion to his Anglican family and friends, is to say that the Truth is leading YOU in this direction, and it has become a matter of conscience for YOU. That you understand it appears otherwise to the outside world, but you must do what you think is right. For Newman’s COMPLETE explanation, see his Apologia Pro Vita Sua.
 
Hello, I’m new here. I know a little about Anglicanism; maybe I can help.

First, have you established that your friend believes in the theory you describe? Anglicanism is a broad family of denominations whose members hold very diverse views about the Church.

Secondly, even if he does believe in Apostolic Succession and a branch theory, I don’t think that the issue in question is something you can easily settle for him with a few arguments. You might want to give him a copy of Four Witnesses by Rod Bennett, or perhaps Newman’s Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine to get him thinking. But his acceptance of their arguments will depend largely on where he’s coming from as an Anglican.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top