In this video, I discuss my perspective on what I believe will shape the future of the Anglican Church in North America and explain why I have aligned myself with the Reformed Episcopal Church.
I really wanted ACNA to be for me but I just couldn’t do it after researching and visiting a parish. I ended up becoming Eastern Orthodox and I’m happy I did. I felt like Anglicanism just isn’t clear enough (or maybe allowed too much difference in opinion) on certain issues for me. This was especially true in the area of sacramental theology. I also struggled because women’s ordination is an absolute no for me and all of my local parishes had women deacons or “lay pastors.” Although I should say that I have so much respect for Anglicans who seek to stay true to the word of God and the tradition of the Church, and I really hope that true and historic Anglicanism can prevail.
It's interesting, I know a family of lifelong Calvary Chapel people, both of their grown children became Orthodox Christians. Sometimes people are looking for more structure and tradition in their church lives. (I'm one of them.)
The women’s ordination issue is clearly a divisive issue for the Anglican Church of North America along with other issues about theology and worship. Women’s ordination represents a different hermeneutical approach to Scripture that is irreconcilable with traditional hermeneutics, so the only way to maintain peace, unity, and integrity for both sides of this issue is amicable separation. There should be a separate jurisdiction for supporters of women’s ordination and a another jurisdiction for Anglicans who maintain the Apostolic Catholic orders received from Christ. This will maintain the two integrities that are not in communion with each other but consistent with their position in their separate jurisdictions. Time will tell whether women’s ordination is of God or not.
The fact that the Roman Catholic Church makes claims against women's ordination does not mean to support women's ordination makes one a liberal. There are conservative evangelical denominations which accept women's ordination besides that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Catholic denominations have expansive women's ministries analogous to Bishops(abbesses), priests(nuns) and deacons(sisters). Using them as a claim that apostolic-wise women's ministries are not permitted is a figment of Roman Catholic canon law where by renaming a rose it becomes something else. Why would an Abbess hold a Bishop's staff and wear a Bishop's ring and cannot be termed a Bishop while performing Episcopal functions. That is the crux of the matter. Roman Catholic monasticism holds the record of female ordination practices buried under layers of theological gibberish.
I spent over 40 years working as a conservative activist in the Republican Party. Held several unit committee offices. State Conventions. Worked in several Congressional campaigns. Did all the in--the-trenches stuff you are no doubt familiar with. I likewise constantly read the blogs -- Hot Air, Red State, Ace of Spades, Instapundit, the Federalist -- etc, etc -- which have basically turned into intellectual wastelands. So I definitely understand where you and Old Carl are coming from. I dropped out of that world. I became an Anglican -- APA, which is in communion with the ACNA, though we don't ordain women. I agree with you that our efforts must be focused mostly on just creating good, solid Anglican churches. (I'm on the Vestry and doing what I can.) America's Christians are in a similar situation to that of California conservatives -- we are a minority and probably will be for many years. There is a lot of apostacy and just plane weirdness in our ranks. I like a Benedict Option approach for the foreseeable future.
It's funny: I never realized I was a so-called "Traditionalist" until I watched your videos and attended an ACNA service. Being a lifelong LCMS (very) confessional Lutheran, I just assumed many of the practices, rites and rituals of my church to be the norm. Tomorrow I get paid and will buy my first 1928 BCP and will attend my first non-ACNA Anglican service at an ACC church near me, because I am not yet up to a 3 hour commute to an APA congregation. ( and no REC parishes in Florida, yet ) Your videos are helping me make sense of this journey I am on. Thank you.
At 19:11 I was having this conversation with somebody who said 'Trump is the worst President in US history". I said, "how would you compare his policies to those of Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman, or Dwight Eisenhower?" "I never heard of those people." I said "they're all US Presidents. How can you compare Trump to people you never heard of?" Obviously a poll having people who don't know anything about US Presidents rank Trump among US Presidents is meaningless.
Agreed that IRL being church, fellowship, worship and discipleship is the way forward. What is YOUR circle of influence? I think of RZ's Reconquista plan which is nothing more than a slightly organized version of working within one's own circle of influence. Are you a layman? Find an orthodox pastor, join his church and support the heck out of it. Can you join a committee? Join it! Can you join a seminary faculty? (not achievable by everyone of course) Join. Can you become a seminarian for a "squishy" ACNA diocese (or heck, even TEC) and watch what happens to your circle of influence! Nothing will change over night but remember that the progressives won because they played the long game: they didn't pack up and leave after various setbacks, plodded long even for decades, worked out how to form friendly relationships with conservatives and traditionalists, waited for people to retire, joined committes, slowly voted for their friends to various offices, joined seminaries, got ordained, waited some more and then slowly and incrementally brought in changes. It worked for them, it will work for us.
8:30 I was at an Evangelical Anglican church that watered down the Anglican distinctives do much that I left and went Presbyterian because at least they did what they believed with conviction. I say that with mega churches, baptists, non-denoms and pentecostals on every corner, Anglicans gotta carve our their niche! What difference do Anglicans bring to the table?? BE that difference!
Enjoy listening to you and share some similarities. I was christened Methodist as a child and then Confirmed United Presbyterian and raised Presbyterian. However, the term Presbyterian you have to use loosely as it can pertain to many denominations within that umbrella or name. I come from the mainline which is now PCUSA and our was traditional and high church, not too far from Anglican or Lutheran. So there are some Presbyterians that are evangelical and more like traditional but having some puritan influence. Most of those churches are offshoots from the mainline Presbyterian denominations and are very different. The mother church of the PCUSA is the Church of Scotland and in Scotland it would be St. Giles Cathedral. As a liturgical Presbyterian it is closer for me to join a Reformed Anglican r Episcopal vs Lutheran or even Methodist. Presbyterians and Anglicans share a history from way back. BTW I am also in Los Altos. Perhaps I will come and visit sometime. Many blessings to you.
Critical to a continuing faith is a consistent faith. One cannot serve two masters, orthodoxy and cultural fads are in many ways incompatible. I am reminded of the use of the anchor as an early Christian symbol - maritime themes are abundant in the Anglican Church. To be a firm anchor for the People, that Church must be firmly anchored in Christ, firmly anchored in the Old & New Testament, firmly anchored with the direct teachings & lived conduct of the Apostles. Consistency, at times, can be THE selling point. Take the political examples of Ron Paul on the libertarian right, Bernie Sanders on the socialist left. Their rabid followings didn’t make sense by most metrics. Neither unusually handsome, neither tremendously charismatic, both fairly outside the establishment, both kinda old and crusty, both known for doing a lot of moral critique of establishments of state and commerce. I know what made me, and keeps me, a big Ron Paul fan. The consistency of his political ethics and principles. Bernie fans, and I know more than a few being a in Portland Oregon, love his consistency about him. The effect these crusty old critics have had on the sociopolitical landscape, for good or ill, have been measurably significant. This analogy, the curious viral popularity of uncompromising crusty old politicians is the answer to your question how we grow our old-world church - remaining firmly anchored in the stated principles of our orthodoxy. When society & politics decides to loose its mind, and it does so fairly regularly, the Church has always been the mechanism of them finding it again through Christ. Call it revival, call it the fifth or sixth great awakening, our greatest selling point is our consistency in being sanctuaries of sanity, fortresses of faith, strongholds of order, under the protection of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit, the worse society goes bananas the more converts will come. Especially as society has again decided to lose its mind, right on schedule. Just as nobody builds an appetite for liberty as tyrants abusing power, nothing builds an appetite for God as the godless abusing authority. Wow, that was long comment… 😂… great video, left us a lot to unpack.
We really need to stop wanting to separate whenever we find a snag, on all sides. It is driving me crazy seeing this happen in historic denominations in America for no good reason. Christ calls us to be bold in our faith. I struggle with this, but we can work together and push through.
I read somewhere that California is the world leader in the creation of new churches. I work with a guy who attends a nondenominational church, and he was telling me how a disagreement over some point in doctrine had led to half the church leaving and forming a new church. I asked "how many people were in the church before it split?" He answered "around fifteen people." I was dumbfounded. "You couldn't get 15 people to agree on doctrine??" The whole story was that he started out as a member of a MegaChurch, but at one time he was part of a group of around a hundred people who left to form their own church. Then this church in turn split, then split again, then again, which is how he came to be in a 15 member church. Then this church split, and he now attends an 8-member church. Each split was over doctrine.
@@RichardDCook At some point, the details of theology being written in stone becomes worthless if it threatens our faith in Christ. Thanks for the story. It sounds unbelievable, yet sadly plausible
I think because of Apostolic succession. Since traditionalists hold female ordinations as invalid, they can't receive communion from them and there definitely cannot be female bishops because any ordinations that they would perform would also be invalid.
@RobertG3567, but what of the bishops that do hold to WO? Can a traditionalist be confirmed by one, take communion from one, be ordained by one, if they have a fundamentally different understanding of this (or other) issues?
