Good video 👍🏻 --as an Anglican who came into Anglicanism about 18 years ago by way of the Anglican Catholic Church, but who’s been a member of a traditionally minded parish in ACNA for the past 14, I’ve definitely developed a greater appreciation for the 39 Articles over the past several years and regard them as a confessional standard for traditional Anglicanism. I’ve never understood the supposed dichotomy btw being a confessional church and a creedal one. The Articles affirm the Three Creeds as does the Book of Concord in confessional Lutheranism.
Excellent video. While you mention it wasn't part of your argument, the line one hears about the the Protestant Episcopal Church not holding the Articles of Religion in high esteem is also untrue. They are specifically mentioned in the 1789 Constitution in Article 8 and in 1829, to make it even clearer, they add it to the section commanding, 'No alteration' can be made to them. Men had to swear to uphold the canons and thus swear to uphold the articles.
Good video, I can tell that much work has been put into its formulation. I think the primary resistance against the 39art. functioning in this way amongst modern anglo-caths is twofold: (1) There seems to be a disdain or embarrassment over the early form of the C o E and it's ties to unashamedly protestant distinctives, and (2) a dangerous leaning towards an infatuation with italain baroque RC. Also liked the implementation of the scholastic method in the beginning and end. Be diligent in more work like this.
I’m in ACNA and we affirm the Jerusalem Declaration which states, “ We uphold the 39 articles as containing the true doctrine of the church agreeing with God’s word and as authoritative for Anglicans today.” I’m not sure how else to understand that, except that these are a statement of faith that has authority in the life of the church to define and clarify our teaching.
@@danielhixon8209 i’m in the ACNA as well! however most anglicans who deny that the articles are a confession of faith (like bp. jones) are in the continuum.
@@catfinity8799 that’s fine. the scope of this video was pretty narrow so i didn’t get into that. i know there’s strict subscriptionists among presbyterians. my point was , if westminster functions as a confession in the PCA, then the 39A definitely did so in the CoE.
The 39 articles are most certainly a confessional document for anglicans. It's no different than the book of concord for lutherans. The only difference is it's very vague. This is what led to anglicanism being so diverse. Reformed anglicans, anglo-lutherans, and anglo-catholics. Some might say that anglicanism was meant to be reformed, but then why were the articles written like that?
The problem is that "Anglicanism" has never been a unified church. The split into puritan evangelicals, high church and semi skeptical liberals has been a constant. What USED to hold it together somehow was Englishness. Its real religious ground was ethnicity. But now that England has been blasted to pieces by Third World invasion, the word means nothing.
Good video 👍🏻
--as an Anglican who came into Anglicanism about 18 years ago by way of the Anglican Catholic Church, but who’s been a member of a traditionally minded parish in ACNA for the past 14, I’ve definitely developed a greater appreciation for the 39 Articles over the past several years and regard them as a confessional standard for traditional Anglicanism.
I’ve never understood the supposed dichotomy btw being a confessional church and a creedal one. The Articles affirm the Three Creeds as does the Book of Concord in confessional Lutheranism.
preach it brother
Excellent video. While you mention it wasn't part of your argument, the line one hears about the the Protestant Episcopal Church not holding the Articles of Religion in high esteem is also untrue. They are specifically mentioned in the 1789 Constitution in Article 8 and in 1829, to make it even clearer, they add it to the section commanding, 'No alteration' can be made to them. Men had to swear to uphold the canons and thus swear to uphold the articles.
Good video, I can tell that much work has been put into its formulation. I think the primary resistance against the 39art. functioning in this way amongst modern anglo-caths is twofold: (1) There seems to be a disdain or embarrassment over the early form of the C o E and it's ties to unashamedly protestant distinctives, and (2) a dangerous leaning towards an infatuation with italain baroque RC.
Also liked the implementation of the scholastic method in the beginning and end. Be diligent in more work like this.
@@AnglicanSE appreciate it, brother! i think you’re right.
We are so back
@@nathanieljamal3836 very true
Impressive. Very nice.
@@TheOtherPaul means a lot, thanks🙏🏽
I’m in ACNA and we affirm the Jerusalem Declaration which states, “ We uphold the 39 articles as containing the true doctrine of the church agreeing with God’s word and as authoritative for Anglicans today.”
I’m not sure how else to understand that, except that these are a statement of faith that has authority in the life of the church to define and clarify our teaching.
@@danielhixon8209 i’m in the ACNA as well! however most anglicans who deny that the articles are a confession of faith (like bp. jones) are in the continuum.
Hope you'd make more video's on UA-cam
@@Joshua12w2o i would like to! i’ve got a few ideas
Traditionally, Presbyterians wouldn't have allowed dissent from Westminster like they do today.
@@catfinity8799 that’s fine. the scope of this video was pretty narrow so i didn’t get into that. i know there’s strict subscriptionists among presbyterians. my point was , if westminster functions as a confession in the PCA, then the 39A definitely did so in the CoE.
@@kyoto8911 Yeah, I was just making a clarification. The PCA isn't exactly representative of traditional Presbyterianism.
@@catfinity8799 gotcha👍🏽
The 39 articles are most certainly a confessional document for anglicans. It's no different than the book of concord for lutherans. The only difference is it's very vague. This is what led to anglicanism being so diverse. Reformed anglicans, anglo-lutherans, and anglo-catholics. Some might say that anglicanism was meant to be reformed, but then why were the articles written like that?
The problem is that "Anglicanism" has never been a unified church. The split into puritan evangelicals, high church and semi skeptical liberals has been a constant. What USED to hold it together somehow was Englishness. Its real religious ground was ethnicity. But now that England has been blasted to pieces by Third World invasion, the word means nothing.
I blame Cromwell
@@americanjedi3198 he was just a symptom.