The difference between the words Anglican and Episcopalian is they are two seperate and distinct denominations in the USA. Both denominations appear to be similar on the surface and are members of the "Anglican Communion." The Anglicans believe the bible and take it literally sort of like liturgical Baptists. Episopalians are focused on liberal-progressive politics, same sex marriage, women clergy.
MA didn't say anything wrong, but I think it's worth adding that there has been a developing distinction in the US. "Anglican" typically refers to splinter groups here, like the ACNA. That's not to say the ECUSA is not Anglican, but there's a growing implication that if you describe yourself or your church as "Anglican" that it means you're in a church that separated. It also implies your beliefs and church are staunchly conservative. Again, this seems to be unique for the US.
My goodness, poor maple Anglican, I checked this site to learn something I didn't know before, I found it straight and to the point, . I liked it and I thank you because I learned something I didn't know before. Suddenly the comments are going every which way and I can't see the reason for them in this video. I am catholic, I learned something today, but something just happened in these comments that just don't apply here. Good luck friend.
It's a good video, and I appreciate the history of the term "Episcopalian." However, you completely missed the heart of the question, in my opinion. At least here in the USA, the term "Anglican" refers to the Anglican Church in North America or perhaps one of the small continuing bodies. "Episcopalian" refers to the Episcopal Church in the USA. This question is really asking what is the difference between ACNA and the ECUSA. If you wish to make a follow up video to clarify, it is my suggestion to answer that question.
Most, if not all, of the churches that call themselves "Anglican" in the USA are not in communion with the See of Canterbury and therefore not in the Anglican Communion. The Episcopal Church of the United States of America is the only US church in the Anglican Communion.
This video was designed to deal with the terminology difference within the Anglican Communion. This channel does not do videos on "Current Events" in the Anglican Communion. Conversely, my content is only specific to the Anglican Communion, and I don't do videos on any schismatic Anglican groups like the Traditional Anglican Communion or any other Anglicans no longer in communion with the See of Canterbury.
I recently found out that the Episcopalian church supports the LGBT lifestyle. Online sources are saying that this has caused a split between the two churches.
Basically the Episcopal Church of the United States supports the LGBT lifestyle (even in leadership roles) and Anglicans do not. Many Episcopal Priests and churches have split over this and have formed "Anglican" communities because of this alone.
Bruno Jupiter Anglicans and Episcopalians both support LGBTQIIA2S5+ (yea, that is an acronym, have no idea what most of it means, Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans, Indeterminate, something else I, Asexual, 2 spirited, whatever 5 means, and more. Really just a bunch of made up crap) here in North America, that is why there are not Anglican Churches in Canada or the US that are in communion with the Anglican Church (Church of England) or with the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Here in the Bahamas, most Anglican Churches are called Anglican/Episcopal after their names so that American tourists can relate. For example Saint Barnabas Anglican/Episcopal Church or Saint Gregory's Anglican/Episcopal Church
K, I wasn't going to point anything out the first time you spelled it wrong the first two times but now that you have done it three times I have to point it out: the word is resurrection and not "ressurection". Here is a better question: How do I justify being in full Communion with those who supported lynch mobs for gays in Nigeria? Or even fellow Anglicans here in Canada who operated the Residential Schools for Natives? The answer is simple: with Christian love.
No, I said that due to the various schisms and voices from within TEC and from other provinces in the Anglican Church, the idea that there is "silence" on those who deny the resurrection/Creed/etc is simply untrue. Furthermore, I again point to the priest who was found to have been apostate and who then repented and recanted the apostate beliefs and returned to the orthodox fold.
You need to go a bit deeper. Anglican describes the worship and practice of the Church, while Episcopalian (referring to their Church structure) identifies a denomination of Churches within that umbrella. However, there are Anglican denominations, even in the United States, that refer to themselves as such to distance themselves from the Episcopalian denomination, which they perceive as having wrongly adulterated the Anglican faith. You might compare this with the term "Calvinist". There are two major Calvinist branches in the US, the Reformed Church from the continental tradition, and the Presbyterian church from the Scottish tradition. Both would identify as Calvinist, but their names signify a different denominational pedigree.
Yep. Back in 1532, Henry VIII separated the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church. And following our war of independence, the Anglican Church in the U.S. broke off from the Church of England. The Anglican Church is officially led by the Bishop of Canterbury. The Episcopal Church (U.S.) is headed by a council of bishops (Episcopal = led by bishops). The theology is the same, the difference is a matter of organizational structure.
I wonder to what extent, if any, the difference in terminology stems from the period of American history in which all things British were highly unpopular? Could there be a socio-political element to this?
I think many people here are old enough to have watched "The Addams Family," back in the 60s. And others have no doubt seen it on re-runs. And I put it to you, that Jesus is a lot like "Lurch!" Remember, whenever Lurch would answer the door, he would place his hand on the person's shoulder, and say, "FOLOW ME!" That's what Jesus said....and to follow Him, we must feed the hungry, clothe the poor, comfort the grieving....it's not about doctrine, or "alter calls," or obeying a list of bullshit rules. It's about doing GOOD!
Can you name one active Priest or Bishop in the Anglican Communion who denies the Resurrection? If so, please give us his or her name and I will gladly let you know how to contact their Bishop so that discipline and/or correction can be sought. If not I would urge you to find something else to talk about.
Sorry; I wrote badly; I meant to say "I don't know if other provinces that officially use the term 'Episcopalian' instead of 'Anglican' have the same problem we do, but (continued)." What I don't really get is the whole concept of "necessary schism". I almost think it an Anglican version of Conclavism which results in, pardon the phrase, "too many chiefs; not enough Indians". If such "orthodoxy" leads to more splits and no union of them all into one body, then is it orthodoxy? IMO, I think not.
I tend to ignore and/or not mention ACNA, AMiA, CANA and other schismatic groups of Anglicans. However, in the US they call themselves Anglicans to contrast themselves from the Episcopalians in the ECUSA. In Canada, they still call themselves Anglicans but they are much fewer in number, and much less vocal. In conservative Alberta I am aware of only two mission Parishes present, one in Calgary and one in Athabasca.
Anglican Church of North America is a denomination but not a National Church/Province. TEC is a Province. However, with that said Anglican Churches (parish units in ACNC dioceses) are attached by membership to other National Churches that are recognized by the Anglican Communion. It is a subtle detail of the organizational structure but they are in fact members of the Anglican Communion. It is a great blessing to receive spiritual direction, provincial leadership from a Primate NOT in the USA.
I second this. I'm not sure if other provinces that officially use the term "Episcopal" in the name of their province of the Anglican Church in their county or countries, but brinmat's post is, in at least a general sense, correct.
Yet in the episcopal church there are those who deny ressurection, even deny the existence of a meaningful God. IE spong. Not saying they are representative of Anglicnaism or Episcopalism, but it seems such ideas are tolerated.
I would agree but I would tend to compare these groups with groups of Old Calendarist Orthodox Christians. At the same time there are also the "Continuing Anglicans" who schismed from the mainstream starting in the 1960-70s, and of course the Reformed Episcopal Church which schismed in the 1870s.
"active Priest or Bishop ... who denies the Resurrection?" You'll notice I said "active" because of ... He Who Shall Not Be Named. Other than that my grandmother (bless her heart) said that if I couldn't say anything nice I shouldn't say anything at all. So, I won't say anything more about a certain *retired* Bishop of Newark ...Who Shall Not Be Named.
Not really, as since we are Creedal Christians whose liturgies include the recitations of the Apostles and Nicene-Constantinoplean Creeds which both state beliefs in the Resurrection and "basic christian ideas and etc".
The Church in Brazil uses both names -- Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil. It seems to me that this terminology issue is somewhat limited to some places.
The real difference, the practical difference, the difference that is the elephant sitting on the coffee table is LGBT. I can understand why the video didn't mention that. He is selling the good parts of both. But why is there no mention of that in the comments below?
Walter Clark I'm going to presume you either didn't watch the video, or are being obtuse as the answer given in the video in that the words are Synonyms of each other. Unless you are just wanting to refer to the unique position in the United States were all Episcopalians are Anglicans but not all Anglicans call themselves Episcopalians as they are in schism from The Episcopal Church which is the official province of the Anglican Communion in the United States.
Maple Anglican I'm Obtuse? My point was not why you didn't address LGBT, but why commenters didn't. By the way, what is your position on LGBT. Should the church welcome them to even be bishops? Or are they only to be welcomed as laity to be converted back to straight?
Walter Clark Position is that your grammar is horrible since LGBT is an adjective, schism is worse then heresy, we're all sinners, that "conversion therapy" doesn't work, and that you are trolling me. Bye.
Maple Anglican Sorry about the grammar. I hope that isn't why you think I'm trolling. Just curious to know about the practical difference between the two. As you may know Catholics who don't agree with the papal position on a lot of things have Anglican or Episcopalian Churches to go to. But which one is most open to the more liberal leaning Catholics?
+Agent2377 I'm sorry to say, however, it appears that you are using an incorrect defintion of apostate. "apostate (noun) 1. a person who forsakes his religion..." dictionary.reference.com/browse/apostate Either that or you are trolling. I figure you are trolling. In which case I'd ask to go troll someone else.
I can think of the episcopalians, but none in the anglican communion (as you have defined these as distinct communions). I Just ask, how can you accept being in communion with those minority? Do you at least think they should be excommunicated? That there is a serious problem with a church that does not even accept the ressurection?
We -allow?- I think Maple said it best that all churches and denominations have individuals within them that go against the established norm. I known of a number of Roman Catholic priests who have publicly stated they have no issue giving Holy Communion to Anglicans/Episcopalians, and they aren't defrocked. The same idea is true in all churches, denominations...in all religions. It isn't something solely within Anglicanism. The official teaching is the Nicene and Apostles Creeds; can you refute?
NEMeinradt, this is not true in two ways: 1) No group bearing the name "Anglican" in its official name is a recognized member of the Anglican Communion: they are not recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury to be in communion with that See, their primates have no seat in the Primates' Meeting, they are not invited to Lambeth, and they have no representation in the Anglican Consultative Council. The only body in the United States that is within the Anglican Communion is The Episcopal Church.
K, that four times now. When you spell that word incorrectly it does make your comment a tad less professional. Episcopalians are Anglicans and they are part of the Anglican Communion. I'm also in Full Communion with the Old Catholics in the Union of Utrecht and several Lutheran bodies. Our doctrines don't match up completely with those other Christians but we still hold Full Communion with them. TEC, like all Churches in the Anglican Communion, accepts the Resurrection of the Lord.
If Maple will allow, as I -AM- from TEC... Iconodule, the fact of the matter is, while individuals, even as clerics, may unfortunately choose erroneously to not believe, the Anglican theological standard of "lex orandi lex credendi" does not change, nor does it change that our canons stipulate that the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed are dogmatic for us. Your fallacy is one of Categorical Error; just because some Episcopalians don't believe, doesn't mean TEC as a whole doesn't as well.
What silence? Has not there been yet another schism? Have not other voices who do choose to remain in TEC been raised who don't agree with those like Spong? How about all the voices throughout the rest of the Anglican Church? Being a conservative-leaner myself, I know of many "liberals" who are adamant about the Creeds and I give them the respect they are due. And quite honestly, there HAVE been clergy who were brought upon charges; in one case, the priest repented and returned to orthodoxy.
Hmmm, I bet that priest hasn't reported his ideas to the bishop or will act on them however. Definetely while he is wrong in that opinion, he won't ever act on it and if he does, he will probably be stripped of his priesthood, at least thats what I hope. But when it comes to such crucial things, such as the ressurection, how do you justify being in communion with such people? People who even deny God? Do you at least think its a problem that needs to be solved?
Well, 1) I'm not in the Episcopal Church, 2) Name a mainstream Christian Church that still regularly carries out investigations related to Heresy and Heterodoxy. I know of an active Roman Catholic Priest who effectively denies Transubstantiation. I know an Orthodox Priest who wouldn't oppose ordination of women to the major orders. Yet both these men still serve in their Churches.
Wow, that no mention was made of the issues that have lead to the split between Continuing Anglicans and Episcopalians typifies the type of sweet dishonesty that has led to the split. Typical.
Are those that say there is no resurrection actually schismed from the anglican church? Well thats good then, and then I have no qualm. Well on that issue anyway.
See, I know not all episcopalians believe in these ideas, thats good. But my problem is that when you allow these ideas within your church, that even the foundation of Christianity can be denied and be in communion with such people, I gotta say I see that as a serious problem.
I made a video about 9 things I like about the Episcopal Church! Y''all should check it out! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ignGRQOxR3U.html
This video explains the usage of the words "Anglican" and Episcopalian" as they have been used for centuries. The fairly recent advent of the "Anglican Church of North America", I believe they call themselves, is another matter altogether. They split off from the Episcopal Church (which is recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury) mainly over changes such as the use of female priests and the acceptance of Gays. These new "Anglicans" are NOT recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury because they are extraterritorial, that is they are infringing on the territory of an existing Anglican (Episcopal) diocese. Hard to explain to the outsider, but you simply can't put up a sign calling yourself "Anglican" and ignore the existing Bishop and diocese that was already there just because you don't agree with the interpretation of scripture.
Episcopalians aren't Anglicans. The Church of England wouldn't ordain Americans after the Revolution but Anglicans in Scotland would. After some bishops moved to America, they broke from the Church of England making the Episcopal Church. The whole supporting of the LGBTQ+ community caused some parishes to break from the Episcopal Church so they started to call themselves "Anglican" without actually being apart of the Anglican Communion
2) The Episcopal Church does not, to my knowledge, any canon, and does not have any of its official liturgies or lectionaries any promotion of "liberal-progressive politics," and the current -trial- "blessing" of a covenant between two people is neither sacramental in form or language nor is it intended to be under the canons by which it passed. Furthermore, 32 out of the 38 provinces ordain women at all (84%); 28 as priests (73%), and 17 as bishops (44%), so it isn't a TEC-only thing.
What the hello are you talking about? "That anglican's can't even agree on the foundation of Christianity?" I would have you say look no further than the Creeds in our prayer book. Are their Anglicans who might deny or downplay this? Yes, but I point out they are a small minority. However, you seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill. I therefore challenge you to name one, just one, Diocesan Bishop in the Anglican Communion whom denies the resurrection.
I can't refute that, but this silence on the part of anglican leadership and it seems the lay people as tot hese elements within your church is disturbing to me. That being said, I can't think of any other major church, Catholic, Orthodox, oriental and etc who allows someone to be a priest that denies the ressurection. Sure there may be those liberals in the church in regaurds to other doctrines, but not the ressurection.
What does it mean to be a "Christian?" I'll give two definitions. 1): Anyone who believes that Jesus was a great teacher or prophet, and that His teachings should be followed. The Unitarian/Universialists, Unity Church, and some others maintain that. 2): That Jesus is the Son of God, the Mesaiah described in Isaiah, who allowed Himself to be sacrificed to provide forgiveness of sins to all who believe in Him. Most Christian denominations hold to that---Catholics, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Baptists, etc. As for me, I believe in Jesus as my Lord and Savior, but I also recognize the truth and wisdom found in other religions. How do Episcopalians or Catholics differ from other Christians? I think it's a matter of how we worship...eg, liturgy vs long sermons, Holy Communion vs "the Lord's Supper," etc.
Clyde Wary so according to what you wrote, muslims are christians because they believe that Jjesus was a great teacher or a prophet. To me unitarians are not christians
I am sorry, but this is not how the Anglican Communion works. The canons forbid any province or diocese to encroach upon the territory of another; this has been true since the Early Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury does NOT recognize any of the extraterritorial bishops, clergy, or congregations within Canada or the United States, nor were they invited to Lambeth. They have no recognition in the ACC nor is Duncan invited to the Primates' Meeting. Thus, they are NOT a part of the Ang Communion
Krishna is The Land Lord. The Queen of England is also The Land Lord. The Great Lakes are Krishna's Chariot Hand. The Great Lakes are The Maple Leaf. Radiometric photos. The U.S.A. and Catholic Church worship..." primarily " The AIR LORD. Krishna said the asteroid bounced over the Great Lakes. England...The Chess piece.... and Ireland....The Checker piece said God carved out the Great Lakes. ☕☕☕☕☕☕☕☕☕☕🍰🍰🍰🍰🍰
