Jeremy ⚓

7.1K posts

Jeremy ⚓ banner
Jeremy ⚓

Jeremy ⚓

@the_thin_place

PECUSA || Confessional Anglican || Prayer Book Fanatic || Born of water and of the Spirit || Soli Deo Gloria

Southern Virginia Katılım Nisan 2024
180 Takip Edilen763 Takipçiler
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings I don't believe in one single institution as "the one, true church".
English
1
0
1
14
Paul Goings
Paul Goings@pgoings·
@the_thin_place I don't accept that. At this stretch of time there are all sorts of factors to consider. But if you are comforted by believing that ECUSA is the one, true church, that's fine with me.
English
1
0
0
12
mike k
mike k@mikek55905054·
@the_thin_place Ryan is a genius. Roman catholics hate him because they can't refute him with any facts.
English
1
0
1
43
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings If the Reformation was unlawful, schismatic, and a mistake then all Protestants should seek to return to the Roman Catholic Church. Otherwise we willfully persist on schism when the mechanisms of reunion are readily available.
English
1
0
2
16
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings Then you are voluntarily schismatic because your are part of a tradition which exists in unlawful separation from its proper ecclesial authorities.
English
1
0
0
18
Paul Goings
Paul Goings@pgoings·
@the_thin_place It was unlawful and schismatic. But it occurred many hundreds of years before I was born and has zero impact on my participation in Anglicanism. It was far from the first error in judgment made by churchmen, and it certainly wasn't the last.
English
1
0
0
16
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings If you believe that then you should not be Anglican. Because you would necessarily have to believe that the Church of England's rejection of papal power was unlawful and schismatic.
English
1
0
3
23
Paul Goings
Paul Goings@pgoings·
@the_thin_place I mean, whatever helps you sleep at night... But it's fundamentally the same thing. It's just okay when people you approve of do it.
English
1
0
0
16
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings No. The church in England rejected the authority of a foreign Bishop in its lands. That is not the same as a lone bishop fleeing the ACNA and starting a further fragmented micro denomination.
English
1
0
2
32
Paul Goings
Paul Goings@pgoings·
@the_thin_place I mean, that position, rigidly applied, makes the origins of Anglicanism itself kind of dodgy, no? And, to be clear, I have been a part of ECUSA for all of my 57+ years, so this isn't someone looking to critique Anglicanism from the outside.
English
1
0
0
19
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings They are authorized via their office in the Church to do so, yes. What they are not, are solo agents who can go rogue to escape church discipline and freely ordain others to start their own denomination.
English
1
0
2
16
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@JohnIrishAnglcn To what do you refer? The above citation is him in lock step with his predecessors Thomas Cranmer and Nicholas Ridley.
English
1
0
1
19
John The Irish Anglican
John The Irish Anglican@JohnIrishAnglcn·
@the_thin_place I do wonder what May have been if the Right Reverend and Right Honourable William Laud was successful in his reforms.
English
1
0
0
17
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@A_A_Ron_314 @AmericanPolack The Church can teach authoritatively and it's Ministers are tasked with shepherding Christ's flock. As new issues arise we look to biblical principles which inform our philosophy of ethics where scripture does not appear to be clear.
English
1
0
1
50
Aaron
Aaron@A_A_Ron_314·
@the_thin_place @AmericanPolack Ok, the Catholic Church also believes that nothing should teach contrary to scripture. I think where we differ is that not everything was necessarily written down and as new issues emerge that aren’t fully addressed in scripture how do we make determinations on it?
English
2
0
0
38
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings We differentiate between Sola Scriptura and the modern nonsense of Nuda Scriptura.
English
0
0
2
35
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@A_A_Ron_314 @AmericanPolack Put most simply, by looking to the 39 articles, it means that scripture contains all things necessary for salvation, uniquely establishes our doctrine, and possesses a unique authority as the sole rule of faith, such that the church cannot teach contrary to it but must be normed.
English
1
0
3
52
Aaron
Aaron@A_A_Ron_314·
@the_thin_place @AmericanPolack From the Anglican view, what does Sola Scriptura mean? Because I get different definitions every time I ask depending on the Protestant sect.
English
2
0
0
56
Paul Goings
Paul Goings@pgoings·
@the_thin_place Corporally present? This would overthrow Transubstantiation, as I understand it. And random RC priests online aren't the ultimate arbiter of RC sacramental theology.
English
1
0
0
18
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
Persistence of the hallowed state of the elements of bread and wine beyond the liturgy of the Table does not in any way support Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. One can believe the Sign remains efficacious to the faithful recipient of the Promise without Transubstantiation.
English
3
0
31
837
Jeremy ⚓
Jeremy ⚓@the_thin_place·
@pgoings For Rome, it does. They already reject consubstantiation and impanation. Christ must be substantially, corporally present in the elements so that he is there to adore. As Fr. Mike Schmidts admits (to paraphrase) "If Transubstantiation is not true then we are idolaters."
English
1
0
0
48
Paul Goings
Paul Goings@pgoings·
@the_thin_place Adoration of the consecrated Bread and Wine is not dependent on Transubstantiation being correct.
English
1
0
0
50
Nicholas
Nicholas@nicholasvogt513·
@the_thin_place There is no hallowed “state of the elements”. After the consecration, the wine and bread ARE Jesus’s body. If you don’t adore them as such you don’t have the Catholic faith.
English
1
0
1
55