Why Presbyterians and Lutherans need a Bishop to be Biblical and Apostolic. (Historic Episcopacy)

Подписаться 2,1 тыс.

Просмотров 1,4 тыс.

50% 1

Working through Ch. 14 of the Lord's Service and the Ecclesiology of Ministers. As Anglicans, we disagree with Meyer's presbyterian form of government.
Notes:
CAPTAINS AND COURTS (A BIBLICAL DEFENSE OF EPISCOPAL GOVERNMENT) by the Rev. Dr. Ray R. Sutton
www.stevemacias.com/wp-conten...
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans Ch.8:
"See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
John Calvin's (erroneous) rejection of Ignatius:
"With regard to what they pretend as to Ignatius, if they would have it to be of the least importance, let them prove that the apostles enacted laws concerning Lent, and other corruptions. Nothing can be more nauseating, than the absurdities which have been published under the name of Ignatius; and therefore, the conduct of those who provide themselves with such masks for deception is the less entitled to toleration." (Institutes, Book I, Chapter 13, Section 29)
Lightfoot's presbyterian position that Overseer/Bishop is the same as the Presbyter/Elder is from "Essay on the Christian Ministry” “It has been shown that in the apostolic writings the two are only different designations of one and the same office.” (pg. 192)

Опубликовано:

14 янв 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 27

@budicaesar1213

Presbyterians and Lutherans have bishops... They just don't want to call them bishops, instead they call them session/district leaders.

@sharoncherian5408

Very interesting! I've never heard a discussion quite like this and it's well worth pondering, especially how the Biblical model is top-down. Also, great line about staying silent in the church. Looking forward to more of these videos.

@matiasgamalieltolmosuarez790

My denomination has heritage in the Christian and Missionary Alliance and Methodist Church, in Chile, and have understood by divine revelation that the historical episcopal model is the more biblical form of government. Even when we don´t have an episcopal succession to Anglican or catholic we have followed the exception of the church of Alexandria, armenia, celtic church and some others who appointed bishops and ordained them by the presbytery. We would really like to have an episcopal succession, especially from Anglican but the problem is that in our area there´s not any Anglican bishop, and also some we have asked wouldn´t be willing to come here or receive us in a close country.

@stevenreynolds553

Still watching, thanks for posting! I think it's important to clarify that Lightfoot wasn't a Presbyterian scholar, but rather an Anglican Bishop himself. His scholarship is heavily used by Presbyterians, but he didn't intend to supply them with ammunition.

@abbottdietrich

Does the REC have any plans or ways in specific situations to build orthodoxy and improve biblical literacy across the ACNA

@DeFyYing

As much as I deplore how American Lutheranism has neglected the historic episcopate unlike the Lutheran Nordic state churches and appreciate our Anglican brothers and sisters, I just find the doctrinal variety to be too steep. I do appreciate the efforts and product of the Elizabethan Settlement, but now the tent is so wide where it's hard to define what Anglicanism is when Tridentine Catholics, Calvinists, Lutherans, Wesleyan Arminians, even charismatics are all considered Anglican. So with this impasse between these two traditions, I personally went with doctrinal consistency over polity.

@gunsgalore7571

Catholic here. I do think there is a growing interest for high-church Protestantism with apostolic succession. A lot of Evangelicals/Baptists/etc. are becoming convinced (often through Catholic apologetics) that the way they do church is not biblical, but they're not necessarily willing to totally swim the Tiber and become Catholic or Orthodox, either due to specific objections to either of these churches or, as is often the case in Catholicism, simply due to not liking the idea of being under the Pope.

@no-page

I appreciate your clear argument, but there is a key point that I did not understand. I do understand that the apostles wrote letters to churches and visited occasionally, providing insight, and guidance as well as correcting error. I could accept calling them bishops, but I don't recall any apostle assigning a successor to rule over a church let alone an entire city. Could you cite an example of that in the Bible?