It's my pleasure. I appreciate the well thought out questions that aren't 'gotcha' or 'troll-baiting' questions. I'm glad you ask them and are seeking to understand.
This is a big question. I would say that looking for a nearer congregation/priest/bishop to talk to about your unique situation and being a member within the ACNA would be wise. Though in all honesty, considering where you are, I don't imagine there would be a problem with you being member of the ACNA as long as their is a connection to a 'local-ish' congregation through giving and worship together when able, not purposefully neglecting (as in the wanton disregard/indifference to corporate worship, as opposed to deeply desiring to attend and be connected yet unable to attend due to life circumstances ) the gathering of the saints. That is, theological distinctions aside ;) (I don't know all the possible places where there may be disagreement and how significant each area is in the grand scheme and where some disagreements may actually be complementary aspects of working out an understanding of the Faith). Lastly, I thought you may have misspelled minstral, but then I thought, 'mistral looks like it probably is a real word and not a type, so I looked it up and learned that mistral is a 'strong, cold northwesterly wind that blows from southern France into the Gulf of Lion' and I thought, now that is quite the personal description haha
with apostolic success and the common book of prayer only having priest "grant" absolution (which i take to mean that voicing absolution of our High Priest Messiah Jesus), how does the acna understand the priesthood of believers of 1 Peter?
I think that 'granting' absolution is of the same nature as 'proclaiming' absolution. In the public absolution, the emphasis is certainly a sense of a petition to the Father to bring absolution to the people, but I think that in the broader context of the priesthood, especially with recognition that the original absolution in Morning Prayer does include the phrase that Christ has given authority to his ordained ministers to declare and pronounce absolution to the people (though this form does not have a direct pronouncement, but is still in a petition/blessing form of prayer for the people to receive it from God), that even the petition/blessing forms are a direct pronouncement upon the people of absolution. Alongside that, in the 1662's Visitation of the Sick section, there is a direct pronouncement of absolution in the form of "I absolve you..." And of course, having written this, I look back at your question and realize that you phrase of 'grant' isn't drawing a distinction about the type of absolution/meaning of absolution from a priest, but you are using 'only' to refer to the priest/bishop alone being the ones who grant that forgiveness in that way. haha Sorry, I missed the point, but I'm leaving up my previous thoughts and not deleting them even though they miss the point of your question because I misunderstood the initial clause but that led me to say something useful anyway. Funny how the Holy Spirit works... I'll work out a proper answer in the next comment.
Now, getting to the heart, I believe of the question: If we have priests, then what is the role, if any, of the phrase "priesthood of all believers." One thing that we have to consider is that this particular phrase, that arises out of 1 Peter 2:9's reference to Christians as a royal priesthood, comes from Exodus 19:6 (I know you probably already know the references, but for the sake of clarity, I mention them). In that context, God is speaking of Israel after the Exodus from Egypt and calls them a 'kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' Sometimes, when we think of priests, we think of their work on behalf of others or towards others, and don't fully bring to mind what they are doing before God and toward God in a distinct way. The priest's role before God is to offer sacrifices and bring the people's petitions to God and thus petition God for his grace, to be set apart from everyone else for service, and to be fully committed before God to his service. God calls all of the nation of Israel to be a kingdom of priests, but then he establishes a particular priesthood to do very particular tasks that flow out of the general tasks of the priests. The levitical and Aaronic priests act in as sacrificing priests in a literal sense by actually offering animals, as well as grain, bread, fruit, wine, etc., on the altar to God and through that to intercede for the people. We see that this is the work of Christ for us now. He is the one who offered himself and presents himself now before the Father and intercedes directly on our behalf. So what did it mean for Israel to be a kingdom of priests then? I think that in the context of them then having a regular priesthood crafted out of their general priesthood, that Israel as a kingdom of priests was a group of people called to be committed to God through the covenant, obedient to his commands, making a sacrifice of their own selves through the commitment to the covenant, as well as being petitioners of their neighbors needs to God in heaven and making known his promises to their neighbors as a form of encouragement and assurance, while submitting to the priesthood of the Levites and high priests. And that brings us to 1 Peter's use. I think that St. Peter is considering the broad context here of the people of Israel as priests while having an official priesthood too. Israel as priests doesn't mean they each individually can walk up to the Temple courtyard and through a cow on the altar and sacrifice it before God, no there was a specially set apart group that did that. Israel's priesthood as a nation was a general priesthood of set apartness from the world with a calling to make known the promises of God through the good deeds and words about the covenant to others. Likewise, the general calling of the Christian is one of being in the royal priesthood with priesthood more broadly defined as a people who are set apart to God who offer their whole lives as a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1-3) and through that to make known the Gospel of Christ's forgiveness of sins through his sacrifice upon the cross and to thus through the promises of God offer forgiveness to their neighbors as they draw near to God in Christ. So in that sense, Christian's are a royal priesthood. It is a broad sense that allows for a narrow sense of priesthood as well, which is seen in the calling and ordination of bishops, priests, and deacons, who serve the people and lead the people to God that they might be partakers in the sacrifice that removes their sins. In our case, the narrow priesthood, does not offer a sacrifice to God anymore because Christ has accomplished that aspect, but the priesthood also intercedes for the people through Christ's intercession because they have been particularly set apart and called to dedicate their lives to God's people in a way that other Christians are not called to serve, though the other Christians are part of the general royal priesthood. So, I think that the priesthood of all believers does not negate having a group of clergy (which is not your question, but a totally different issue that some have), but also that having clergy who have apostolic authority, does not undercut the priesthood of all believers. It is ultimately about the broad and narrow understandings of how the Bible speaks of priesthood. The broad category is focused on all believers living a life of set-apartness-from-the-world, being living sacrifices, interceding on behalf of their neighbors, and making known the promises of God through the Gospel, which can include a sense of absolution through the declaration of the forgiveness of sins through Jesus for all who come to him (and when speaking one on one, the non-ordained Christian, can certainly declare an absolution because forgiveness is for all those who are penitent and confess their sins), but none-the-less, there is a unique sacramental absolution that comes through the bishops and priests to the people that Christ has ordained to be so. So the Anglican understanding of priesthood as an ordained group complements the concept of the priesthood of all believers and doesn't take way. They both help each other come more deeply to fruition in the life of the church and help the church to grow and continue to reach towards the ends of the earth. I hope that makes sense and doesn't make a hash of your question despite my initial misreading. haha
blessings on you for enduring my questions!
It's my pleasure. I appreciate the well thought out questions that aren't 'gotcha' or 'troll-baiting' questions. I'm glad you ask them and are seeking to understand.
also, as a wandering mistral, would it be possible for me to unite with the acna?
This is a big question. I would say that looking for a nearer congregation/priest/bishop to talk to about your unique situation and being a member within the ACNA would be wise. Though in all honesty, considering where you are, I don't imagine there would be a problem with you being member of the ACNA as long as their is a connection to a 'local-ish' congregation through giving and worship together when able, not purposefully neglecting (as in the wanton disregard/indifference to corporate worship, as opposed to deeply desiring to attend and be connected yet unable to attend due to life circumstances ) the gathering of the saints.
That is, theological distinctions aside ;) (I don't know all the possible places where there may be disagreement and how significant each area is in the grand scheme and where some disagreements may actually be complementary aspects of working out an understanding of the Faith).
Lastly, I thought you may have misspelled minstral, but then I thought, 'mistral looks like it probably is a real word and not a type, so I looked it up and learned that mistral is a 'strong, cold northwesterly wind that blows from southern France into the Gulf of Lion' and I thought, now that is quite the personal description haha
with apostolic success and the common book of prayer only having priest "grant" absolution (which i take to mean that voicing absolution of our High Priest Messiah Jesus), how does the acna understand the priesthood of believers of 1 Peter?
I think that 'granting' absolution is of the same nature as 'proclaiming' absolution. In the public absolution, the emphasis is certainly a sense of a petition to the Father to bring absolution to the people, but I think that in the broader context of the priesthood, especially with recognition that the original absolution in Morning Prayer does include the phrase that Christ has given authority to his ordained ministers to declare and pronounce absolution to the people (though this form does not have a direct pronouncement, but is still in a petition/blessing form of prayer for the people to receive it from God), that even the petition/blessing forms are a direct pronouncement upon the people of absolution. Alongside that, in the 1662's Visitation of the Sick section, there is a direct pronouncement of absolution in the form of "I absolve you..."
And of course, having written this, I look back at your question and realize that you phrase of 'grant' isn't drawing a distinction about the type of absolution/meaning of absolution from a priest, but you are using 'only' to refer to the priest/bishop alone being the ones who grant that forgiveness in that way. haha Sorry, I missed the point, but I'm leaving up my previous thoughts and not deleting them even though they miss the point of your question because I misunderstood the initial clause but that led me to say something useful anyway. Funny how the Holy Spirit works... I'll work out a proper answer in the next comment.
Now, getting to the heart, I believe of the question: If we have priests, then what is the role, if any, of the phrase "priesthood of all believers." One thing that we have to consider is that this particular phrase, that arises out of 1 Peter 2:9's reference to Christians as a royal priesthood, comes from Exodus 19:6 (I know you probably already know the references, but for the sake of clarity, I mention them). In that context, God is speaking of Israel after the Exodus from Egypt and calls them a 'kingdom of priests and a holy nation.'
Sometimes, when we think of priests, we think of their work on behalf of others or towards others, and don't fully bring to mind what they are doing before God and toward God in a distinct way. The priest's role before God is to offer sacrifices and bring the people's petitions to God and thus petition God for his grace, to be set apart from everyone else for service, and to be fully committed before God to his service.
God calls all of the nation of Israel to be a kingdom of priests, but then he establishes a particular priesthood to do very particular tasks that flow out of the general tasks of the priests. The levitical and Aaronic priests act in as sacrificing priests in a literal sense by actually offering animals, as well as grain, bread, fruit, wine, etc., on the altar to God and through that to intercede for the people.
We see that this is the work of Christ for us now. He is the one who offered himself and presents himself now before the Father and intercedes directly on our behalf.
So what did it mean for Israel to be a kingdom of priests then? I think that in the context of them then having a regular priesthood crafted out of their general priesthood, that Israel as a kingdom of priests was a group of people called to be committed to God through the covenant, obedient to his commands, making a sacrifice of their own selves through the commitment to the covenant, as well as being petitioners of their neighbors needs to God in heaven and making known his promises to their neighbors as a form of encouragement and assurance, while submitting to the priesthood of the Levites and high priests.
And that brings us to 1 Peter's use. I think that St. Peter is considering the broad context here of the people of Israel as priests while having an official priesthood too. Israel as priests doesn't mean they each individually can walk up to the Temple courtyard and through a cow on the altar and sacrifice it before God, no there was a specially set apart group that did that. Israel's priesthood as a nation was a general priesthood of set apartness from the world with a calling to make known the promises of God through the good deeds and words about the covenant to others. Likewise, the general calling of the Christian is one of being in the royal priesthood with priesthood more broadly defined as a people who are set apart to God who offer their whole lives as a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1-3) and through that to make known the Gospel of Christ's forgiveness of sins through his sacrifice upon the cross and to thus through the promises of God offer forgiveness to their neighbors as they draw near to God in Christ.
So in that sense, Christian's are a royal priesthood. It is a broad sense that allows for a narrow sense of priesthood as well, which is seen in the calling and ordination of bishops, priests, and deacons, who serve the people and lead the people to God that they might be partakers in the sacrifice that removes their sins. In our case, the narrow priesthood, does not offer a sacrifice to God anymore because Christ has accomplished that aspect, but the priesthood also intercedes for the people through Christ's intercession because they have been particularly set apart and called to dedicate their lives to God's people in a way that other Christians are not called to serve, though the other Christians are part of the general royal priesthood.
So, I think that the priesthood of all believers does not negate having a group of clergy (which is not your question, but a totally different issue that some have), but also that having clergy who have apostolic authority, does not undercut the priesthood of all believers. It is ultimately about the broad and narrow understandings of how the Bible speaks of priesthood. The broad category is focused on all believers living a life of set-apartness-from-the-world, being living sacrifices, interceding on behalf of their neighbors, and making known the promises of God through the Gospel, which can include a sense of absolution through the declaration of the forgiveness of sins through Jesus for all who come to him (and when speaking one on one, the non-ordained Christian, can certainly declare an absolution because forgiveness is for all those who are penitent and confess their sins), but none-the-less, there is a unique sacramental absolution that comes through the bishops and priests to the people that Christ has ordained to be so.
So the Anglican understanding of priesthood as an ordained group complements the concept of the priesthood of all believers and doesn't take way. They both help each other come more deeply to fruition in the life of the church and help the church to grow and continue to reach towards the ends of the earth.
I hope that makes sense and doesn't make a hash of your question despite my initial misreading. haha
Poor Anglicans only have partial truth.
Prays that they come home