Saints

Anna, he quoted Article 22, which labels the invocation of saints an empty practise. If the 39 Articles aren't what make Anglicans Anglican, exactly what does differentiate us from everyone else as a spiritual communion?

 

Again, I'm asking for a source that forbids invocation of the saints. Is it safe to say that apart from the 39 Articles, no such forbidding exists?

 

100% absolutely certain that has been answered elsewhere.

 

Either I'm very dull or it hasn't been answered clearly. If the 39 Articles aren't binding, this Communion can do bugger all to obtain Christian unity.

Also, there's no need to be so grouchy over a simple question. Why doesn't anyone care about the foundational theological statements of the whole English Reformation? Are they not in the least bit important for something like this? The Articles are about the only historical documents unique to us, so why ignore them?

 

Well, the Articles are the only binding document in Anglicanism, so, strictly speaking, yes. However, if you want semi-official documents, look to Nowell's Catechism or the various commentaries on the Articles. Of the latter, Burnet's and Browne's were semi-official in PECUSA. Pearson's Exposition of the Creed would be another good place to study to truly understand Anglicanism's understanding of what happens after death.

 

Anglo-Catholics don't accept the Articles of Religion. Anna's question is a trick question in that she wants me to say that there is nothing to condemn her from invoking saints. She knows before she asks that she will deny any source that I provide that condemns her practice of invoking the saints, so the whole exercise is utterly pointless for me, other than to further demonstrate that she denies any authoritative, doctrinal statements in Anglicanism.

 

Simply because I believe they went too far and they threw the baby out with the bath water...

 

If they wanted a further source, from the Homilies:

Again

Again

 

You know, I'm starting to come around to your way of thinking on "big matters" and "small matters."

 

Agreed. Adherence to the 39 Articles is not stipulated by an authoritative statement of TEC.

Ordinands are no longer required to assent to the 39 Articles.

Resolutions from 1968
Resolution 43
The Ministry - The Thirty-Nine Articles
"The Conference accepts the main conclusion of the Report of the Archbishops' Commission on Christian Doctrine entitled "Subscription and Assent to the Thirty-nine Articles" (1968) and in furtherance of its recommendation:
(a) suggests that each Church of our Communion consider whether the Articles need be bound up with its Prayer Book;
(b) suggests to the Churches of the Anglican Communion that assent to the Thirty-nine Articles be no longer required of ordinands;
(c) suggests that, when subscription is required to the Articles or other elements in the Anglican tradition, it should be required, and given, only in the context of a statement which gives the full range of our inheritance of faith and sets the Articles in their historical context."

Resolutions from 1888
Resolution 19
That, as regards newly constituted Churches, especially in non-Christian lands, it should be a condition of the recognition of them as in complete intercommunion with us, and especially of their receiving from us episcopal succession, that we should first receive from them satisfactory evidence that they hold substantially the same doctrine as our own, and that their clergy subscribe articles in accordance with the express statements of our own standards of doctrine and worship; but that they should not necessarily be bound to accept in their entirety the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion.

Please provide a source for this claim.

After all this discussion, the point remains that Anglicanism does not forbid the invocation of the Saints--apart from the 39 Articles to which Ordinands are no longer required to assent.

 

Perhaps making the Articles (including the anti-invocation bit) non-binding in Episcopalianism was a mistake. TEC has hardly been known for its ability to do things efficiently or even morally, as we have all attested, evangelical or anglo-catholic.

"TEC says so" isn't an argument for its being right or good for Anglicanism, is it? Look at all the horrid stuff they've done lately. I wouldn't trust their judgment on much...

 

Anna, did you read my post? TEC ordinands are required an oath to uphold the doctrine, discipline, and worship of TEC, of which the Articles of Religion are a part. If you claim that the Articles of Religion have no authority, by default, neither does the Quadrilateral.

 

There is no official statement from TEC making the Articles non-binding. Anna regurgitates Lambeth resolutions, which are not binding on TEC, to somehow prove that the Articles aren't binding.

 

Of course they won't listen to it but it doesn't make it untrue. Most Episcopal priests don't believe the Bible to be true but that doesn't make them right.

 

Well, bravo. You're clearly capable of handling this matter. Good luck.

 

I believe you would be right on the money with that one Anna.

 

That is works both ways brother HH.

 

Reading all of Hackney's posts over might rid you of that unfortunate impression.

 

Hackney,

I asked you for sources for your statements. Your end of the discussion has sadly descended into false assumptions and misrepresentation of both my motives and my beliefs.

I really want to know your sources, since I've gone back and forth on the issue of asking the Saints for prayers

 

I provided you with sources, Anna.