Do Episcopalians believe that monotheistic religions have a plan of salvation?

[bbcrane]

Hi, I am a 50 year old female cradle Catholic who is very seriously considering moving to Episcopalian. I have always felt that my core beliefs fit in more with the Episcopalian beliefs and I guess I am tired of being a cafeteria Catholic and want to be true to myself. However, I have some core beliefs that I want to make sure that I stay true to. That is why I am searching for answers in many different forums. In a nutshell, I don’t believe in the Pope’s infallibility, I think priests should be allowed to marry, I think women should be allowed to be priests. I have always said that what kept me Catholic though, was from the Catholic catechism where it talks about monotheistic religions having a plan of salvation. I definitely believe that so want to stay true to that.

 

[Contarini]

Hi, I am a 50 year old female cradle Catholic who is very seriously considering moving to Episcopalian. I have always felt that my core beliefs fit in more with the Episcopalian beliefs and I guess I am tired of being a cafeteria Catholic and want to be true to myself. However, I have some core beliefs that I want to make sure that I stay true to. That is why I am searching for answers in many different forums. In a nutshell, I don’t believe in the Pope’s infallibility, I think priests should be allowed to marry, I think women should be allowed to be priests. I have always said that what kept me Catholic though, was from the Catholic catechism where it talks about monotheistic religions having a plan of salvation. I definitely believe that so want to stay true to that.

The phrase is a little vague–I believe that what the Catechism actually says is that God’s plan of salvation includes members of other faiths, particularly of course monotheists.

You would be unlikely to find in the Episcopal Church a more restrictive view in this regard than the one taught in the Catechism. Our 39 Articles do say that salvation is to be found only in the name of Christ, but they are not regarded as binding by most Episcopalians, and furthermore this is really just basic Christian teaching, which can be interpreted along the lines of Vatican II (that all salvation comes through Christ but that those who in good faith are not Christians may somehow be included in God’s plan of salvation). This would be what all the conservative Episcopalians of my acquaintance (including myself) would believe. I would not be surprised if there are those who have a more conservative view (Gerald McDermott is rather coy about what he believes in this regard, though I *think *he’s basically an inclusivist like myself), but it’s likely that at this point most or all of them have left the Episcopal Church (which Fr. McDermott may have done–he was an Episcopalian when I met him eight years ago, but a lot has happened since then).

Many Episcopalians would take a more liberal, “pluralist” view. Our Presiding Bishop was criticized by conservatives for saying that Jesus was “a” way to salvation. She later claimed that she had meant by it to express the teaching found in the documents of Vatican II, but it is possible that she interprets Vatican II rather differently than I do (many Catholics also seem to interpret it in a pluralistic direction).

In short, you need not fear that in becoming Episcopalian you are somehow committing yourself to a harsher view of other religions than is found in the Catholic Church. Rather the reverse if anything.

There are in my opinion many reasons why a Catholic ought normally to stay in her own communion and not transfer to ours, but this is not one of them!

Edwin

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

Hi, I am a 50 year old female cradle Catholic who is very seriously considering moving to Episcopalian. I have always felt that my core beliefs fit in more with the Episcopalian beliefs and I guess I am tired of being a cafeteria Catholic and want to be true to myself. However, I have some core beliefs that I want to make sure that I stay true to. That is why I am searching for answers in many different forums. In a nutshell, I don’t believe in the Pope’s infallibility, I think priests should be allowed to marry, I think women should be allowed to be priests. I have always said that what kept me Catholic though, was from the Catholic catechism where it talks about monotheistic religions having a plan of salvation. I definitely believe that so want to stay true to that.

Hi,

From what you say, your beliefs seem in line with the Episcopal Church. As far as monotheistic religions having a plan of salvation, that also is in line with Episcopal beliefs. I would say, however that the Episcopal Church has nothing similar to the Cathechism of the Catholic Church. Episcopalians have varied beliefs about certain subjects, and there is nothing beyond the Creeds and sacraments that one is required to assent to. I, for example, believe in something like Transubstantion; I believe in purgatory; I have no problem with the Marian doctrines, etc.

You will also find Episcopalians who do not believe in the Real Presence, and whose attitude is essentially protestant. We all merrily go along, packed into the same church.

 

[bpbasilphx]

“Plan of salvation” is actually a Christian concept.

Other relgions don’t have this idea.

 

[Publisher]

Perhaps what is meant is that EVEN if a different religion is followed…salvation is possible because all salvation occurs through the universal work of Christ…not necessarily through any religious tenet being adhered to.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Perhaps what is meant is that EVEN if a different religion is followed…salvation is possible because all salvation occurs through the universal work of Christ…not necessarily through any religious tenet being adhered to.

I don’t think the Catholic Church teaches that, does it? I think it teaches instead that God will have mercy on those of different religions that have not properly received the Gospel.

 

[Publisher]

I don’t think the Catholic Church teaches that, does it? I think it teaches instead that God will have mercy on those of different religions that have not properly received the Gospel.

Perhaps…but as I understand it that “mercy” is based on the work of Christ…ALL salvation is through His work.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Hi, I am a 50 year old female cradle Catholic who is very seriously considering moving to Episcopalian. I have always felt that my core beliefs fit in more with the Episcopalian beliefs and I guess I am tired of being a cafeteria Catholic and want to be true to myself. However, I have some core beliefs that I want to make sure that I stay true to. That is why I am searching for answers in many different forums. In a nutshell, I don’t believe in the Pope’s infallibility, I think priests should be allowed to marry, I think women should be allowed to be priests. I have always said that what kept me Catholic though, was from the Catholic catechism where it talks about monotheistic religions having a plan of salvation. I definitely believe that so want to stay true to that.

bbcrane,
I am visiting an Episcopal Church, after a long estrangement with the Baptist Church, which eventually lead to my resignation from the Baptist Faith, altogether.

I have found there are some variations in beliefs among Episcopal Churches. So, I am asking many questions.

I have the same question you are asking here. The Episcopal Church I am attending does lean toward the ideas expressed by Contarini (Edwin.)

I plan to make an appointment with the Episcopal Priest to ask my list of questions, after I have visited and attended classes for awhile. Right now, I am on a fact-finding mission.

May God bless you and lead you to the place of His choosing,
Anna

 

[bbcrane]

Thank you all so much for your (name removed by moderator)ut. It truly was helpful! I have to admit, I was a bit hesitant to post it, based on some of the, uh, rather lively discussions I have seen here. I was almost afraid I would get blasted! At any rate, I am very happy that I did post and will definitely post more as more questions arise as I am sure they will.

Until then, blessings to all,

Barbara

 

[Anna_Scott]

Thank you all so much for your (name removed by moderator)ut. It truly was helpful! I have to admit, I was a bit hesitant to post it, based on some of the, uh, rather lively discussions I have seen here. I was almost afraid I would get blasted! At any rate, I am very happy that I did post and will definitely post more as more questions arise as I am sure they will.

Until then, blessings to all,

Barbara

Barbara,
You probably already have these resources, but will post just in case:

Articles of Religion
As established by the Bishops, the Clergy, and the Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, in Convention, on the twelfth day of September, in the Year of our Lord, 1801.
Link: anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html

The Book of Common Prayer, The Episcopal Church (Current 1979 Edition)
justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/bcp.htm

The Historical Documents of the Church is especially helpful.
justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/Historical_Docs.pdf

Anna

 

[bbcrane]

Barbara,
You probably already have these resources, but will post just in case:

Articles of Religion
As established by the Bishops, the Clergy, and the Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, in Convention, on the twelfth day of September, in the Year of our Lord, 1801.
Link: anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html

The Book of Common Prayer, The Episcopal Church (Current 1979 Edition)
justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/bcp.htm

The Historical Documents of the Church is especially helpful.
justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/Historical_Docs.pdf

Anna

Anna, thanks so much I did have the first one but not the other 2. I appreciate it!

Barbara

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna, thanks so much I did have the first one but not the other 2. I appreciate it!

Barbara

You are very welcome.

I recently bought The Oxford Guide to The Book of Common Prayer, A Worldwide Survey, Edited by Charles Hefling & Cynthia Shattuck. Great book from an historical standpoint-just wish the print size was a bit larger (telling my age here.)

Anna

 

[Contarini]

I don’t think the Catholic Church teaches that, does it? I think it teaches instead that God will have mercy on those of different religions that have not properly received the Gospel.

What do you see as the difference between the two statements? Publisher is certainly right that the Catholic Church teaches that all salvation comes through the work of Christ. But I’m not sure that is what you were objecting to.

Edwin

 

[Anna_Scott]

. . . .There are in my opinion many reasons why a Catholic ought normally to stay in her own communion and not transfer to ours, but this is not one of them!

Edwin

Edwin,

What reasons?

Anna

 

[manualman]

Not to be THAT guy, but I wonder if your recognize the extents of the differrence you are contemplating. Your posts indicates some rather catholic thinking that may not be very prevalent in Episcopalian circles. Contarini is a superb and precise resource for historic Anglican theology, but there frankly aren’t many left like him in the Episcopal Church. You seem keenly interested in making sure the theological convictions you hold are compatible with Episcopal convictions (more on that below). To be blunt, you could probably be an openly practicing Wiccan and join the Episcopal Church and not receive any sort of censor. Their attitude towards doctrine today isn’t much at all like catholicism’s anymore. They take a rather ‘big tent’ approach.

Again at risk of being far too blunt for a first conversation, does it seem awfully much like you are going in search of a religion that fits what you already believe instead of struggling to conform yourself to God? You may not see it that way, but it kind of came off that way in the way the post was worded.

In any case, I sure respect your intellectual honesty in recognizing your difficulty accepting catholicism as a seamless whole. Thanks for that. Just be sure you’ve spent enough time in prayer to make sure the defects are in the Church, not in you. That’s a pretty bold thing to declare and it pays to double check.

 

[Contarini]

Edwin,

What reasons?

Anna

First and most importantly of all, the Bishop of Rome is certainly the historic primate of the entire Catholic Church, and there is some reason for thinking that that the promises made to St. Peter apply in a particular manner to that See. Certainly the search for union among Christians needs to involve the Bishop of Rome. Therefore, a Roman Catholic who breaks communion with Rome is working against the reunion of Christians, and rejecting an authority which is at the very least highly venerable within historic Christianity.

Furthermore, the Roman Communion stands firmly for historic, orthodox Christianity, while being open to further development and richer understanding of the faith once delivered to the saints. In particular, the moral teaching of the Catholic Church is unparalleled in its clarity and orthodoxy (although the way it is promulgated and implemented is often a legalistic caricature). Someone moving from Rome to “Canterbury” is in some rather important ways moving away from the center of historic Christian orthodoxy. I am very sympathetic to the reasons why many people find themselves impelled to do this (one of my Catholic students, a Catholic, has started attending my parish–I am very conflicted about this but of course am not going to tell her she’s not welcome, and of course it’s not in my authority to do so anyway). But I cannot but regard it as a tragedy every time it happens.

Edwin

 

[Ahimsa]

I don’t think the Catholic Church teaches that, does it? I think it teaches instead that God will have mercy on those of different religions that have not properly received the Gospel.

The issue lies within the phrase “properly received the Gospel”. What does that mean, to you?

Do you believe that someone like Gandhi (who actually studied Christianity in depth, but re-affirmed his commitment to Hinduism) had properly received the Gospel?

The Catholic Church would say that even someone like Gandhi, who studied the Gospel but instead decided to commit himself to a non-Christian tradition, could possibly be saved. In other words, Gandhi would not be automatically excluded from salvation just because he committed to Hinduism after studying Christianity.

 

[Contarini]

The issue lies within the phrase “properly received the Gospel”. What does that mean, to you?

Do you believe that someone like Gandhi (who actually studied Christianity in depth, but re-affirmed his commitment to Hinduism) had properly received the Gospel?

The Catholic Church would say that even someone like Gandhi, who studied the Gospel but instead decided to commit himself to a non-Christian tradition, could possibly be saved. In other words, Gandhi would not be automatically excluded from salvation just because he committed to Hinduism after studying Christianity.

Right. The question would be his reasons. I just taught Gandhi in my Religions of the World class (at an evangelical college). Last semester I was falsely accused by a very conservative student of having said that I thought Gandhi was in heaven, so I made my position explicit this time. I said that I worried about him a bit because it looked to me as if possibly one of his problems with Christianity was a distaste for the idea that Jesus was any more divine than he (Gandhi) was. But I don’t know that. I can’t read his heart. So I leave Him to the mercy of God (which is what all of us depend on anyway).

But I do hammer home to my students that Gandhi did not (contrary to the stereotype) just reject Christianity because he had bad experiences with Christians. He actually respected many Christians deeply, but he had problems with Christian doctrine.

Edwin

 

[Anna_Scott]

To be blunt, you could probably be an openly practicing Wiccan and join the Episcopal Church and not receive any sort of censor. Their attitude towards doctrine today isn’t much at all like catholicism’s anymore. They take a rather ‘big tent’ approach.

manualman,
This may be the case in Some Episcopal Churches. I can’t say, since I am only visiting one. I am not finding such a loose acceptance of beliefs, as you describe.

The Episcopal Priest seems to hold fast to a more orthodox view of Christianity, with some Eastern Orthodox “leanings.” For example, he has taken a firm stance against the ordination of, and marital union of those in “same-sex affection” relationships.

The Priest’s view on the Eucharist, though not claiming “transubstantiation,” does treat the consecrated bread and wine with all reverence–never to be disposed of, as in many Protestant Churches–which treat the Lord’s Supper as purely “remembrance.”

The Priest does reserve consecrated bread and wine for Communion of those who are ill or otherwise unable to attend the Eucharist–even though Article 28 speaks against reserving or carrying about the Sacrament: “The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was not by Christ’s ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshiped.”

The Worship services are heavily liturgical and reverent, appearing much like a Catholic Mass.

First and most importantly of all, the Bishop of Rome is certainly the historic primate of the entire Catholic Church, and there is some reason for thinking that that the promises made to St. Peter apply in a particular manner to that See. Certainly the search for union among Christians needs to involve the Bishop of Rome. Therefore, a Roman Catholic who breaks communion with Rome is working against the reunion of Christians, and rejecting an authority which is at the very least highly venerable within historic Christianity.

Furthermore, the Roman Communion stands firmly for historic, orthodox Christianity, while being open to further development and richer understanding of the faith once delivered to the saints. In particular, the moral teaching of the Catholic Church is unparalleled in its clarity and orthodoxy (although the way it is promulgated and implemented is often a legalistic caricature). Someone moving from Rome to “Canterbury” is in some rather important ways moving away from the center of historic Christian orthodoxy. I am very sympathetic to the reasons why many people find themselves impelled to do this (one of my Catholic students, a Catholic, has started attending my parish–I am very conflicted about this but of course am not going to tell her she’s not welcome, and of course it’s not in my authority to do so anyway). But I cannot but regard it as a tragedy every time it happens.

Edwin

Edwin,
Very interesting comments. I can see the logic in what you are saying; and I have given Catholicism much consideration, myself.

Yet, must ask what obstacles you see, personally, that prevent your own “reconciliation” with the Catholic Church?

Anna

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Great post, manual. So many seek to find a religion that “fits” them instead of seeking to conform themselves to the difficult task of conforming oneself to Christ Jesus. Jesus is a difficult master, not the big-tent easy-rider some are seeking. I would recommend the OP read the history of women’s ordination and look deeply into it before just saying, “I believe in WO!” 2,000 years of deliberately ensuring only males can be priests for deep theological reasons is worth noting. Observing that the only female “priests” in Christian history were gnostic (!!) heretics is compelling and the lack of understanding “in persona christi” sacramental theology will also lead people down the WO path. I would recommend the OP to at least consider a more conservative, orthodox Anglican group like ACNA or TAC or REC rather than Episcopalianism, which is really an anything-goes, no hang-ups, I’m ok-you’re ok feel-good group with some miters and liturgy thrown in…

Religion should challenge, make us uncomfortable, mold us into a new creature in Christ, and make us “slaves” as Paul puts it. We’re not put here to subdue Christ into our slave and make him fit into a different peg for our benefit. I concur with your post whole-heartedly…

Not to be THAT guy, but I wonder if your recognize the extents of the differrence you are contemplating. Your posts indicates some rather catholic thinking that may not be very prevalent in Episcopalian circles. Contarini is a superb and precise resource for historic Anglican theology, but there frankly aren’t many left like him in the Episcopal Church. You seem keenly interested in making sure the theological convictions you hold are compatible with Episcopal convictions (more on that below). To be blunt, you could probably be an openly practicing Wiccan and join the Episcopal Church and not receive any sort of censor. Their attitude towards doctrine today isn’t much at all like catholicism’s anymore. They take a rather ‘big tent’ approach.

Again at risk of being far too blunt for a first conversation, does it seem awfully much like you are going in search of a religion that fits what you already believe instead of struggling to conform yourself to God? You may not see it that way, but it kind of came off that way in the way the post was worded.

In any case, I sure respect your intellectual honesty in recognizing your difficulty accepting catholicism as a seamless whole. Thanks for that. Just be sure you’ve spent enough time in prayer to make sure the defects are in the Church, not in you. That’s a pretty bold thing to declare and it pays to double check.