I love what you’ve said in this post. I’m baptised Greek Orthodox and am also embracing Anglicanism. I see beauty in all the denominations: we are all followers of Christ. But Anglicanism is a gift I’m really enjoying right now as a big part of my faith. As a fellow Australian (from Perth), I acknowledge the ills of British colonialism, however, I also respect the benefits it has brought around the world. I am grateful that Australia was colonised, otherwise it wouldn’t be the beautiful nation we have now. Same with the USA and many other countries. One such glorious benefit of British colonialism is the gift of an Anglican point of view of Christianity, for which I am very grateful.

@zealousideal

5 ай бұрын

Uhhh why did you leave orthodox?? Just curious… seems like most (especially many Anglicans and their priests) are going from other faiths to Orthodox nowadays versus the other way.

@michealclear3265

4 ай бұрын

@@zealousidealAnd they are becoming Catholic as well.

@zealousideal

4 ай бұрын

@@michealclear3265 I know.

@VictorianChinese1860

18 күн бұрын

One Chinese man agrees on your point about colonialism.

@UnboxingChristianity

5 күн бұрын

I've also switched from Orthodoxy to Anglican. You guys have the Gospel, the power of sola scriptura without boxing yourselves into a trenchant exclusivism.

Anglican Canadian here.

Awesome. And well balanced information. Thank you for taking your time.

I was a Baptist during my educational epoch, same undergrad school Scot McKnight graduated. I flirted with the Westminster experience and finally settled on Anglicanism because the Book of Common Prayer, choral holy eucharist (sung psalms), liturgical experience is a more charismatic and scriptural foundation than I could have ever imagined. It is both cognitive and affective, visceral and ephemeral. I also appreciate the Anglican canon including 2 Es and 4 Macc. The Articles of Religion are something I can agree with, unlike the Belgic or Dort standards. The diversity of the Elizabethan Settlement is awesome. As a Zwinglian / Anglican, I appreciate the flexibility. My wife was a liberal Lutheran with nothing in common with conservative Lutherans. They don't even commune with each other, and each has been said to say that they would rather commune at a Catholic altar than with the other Lutheran. The open table of Anglicanism is what I like best. The feast of the kingdom is an open table.

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

Steve, good to hear!

@jakeabbatacola5092

Жыл бұрын

Just out of curiosity, what is it in the Belgic/Dort standards that you disagree with?

@SibleySteve

10 ай бұрын

Belgic and Dort represent the maximal degree of Calvinism, venturing into speculative inferential ordo salutis, reprobation, lapsarianism, and reaction. There is no via media or settlement or big tent as seen in the English articles. I disagree with the emphasis on old covenant theology within the Presbyterian standards. Most covenant theology curates law of Moses rather than spreads the gospel of grace.

I grew up going to a fundamentalist megachurch, and I find myself drawn to Anglicanism due to its open mindedness and its middle ground between Protestantism and Catholicism. I also believe in a few Eastern Orthodox theological concepts but disagree with their hardline stances on a lot of social issues. The Anglican Church would allow me to keep believing in those concepts while also having an open-minded attitude toward the social issues I mentioned.

I listened to this and I enjoy reading the BCP and have read the 39 articles. However, I say with sadness, UK Anglicanism will need a spiritual awakening to win new souls for Christ and rebuild the denomination.

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

True Jenson!

@rogerwenden1312

Жыл бұрын

❤

Great video. Im loving Anglican breadth having recently left the eastern orthodox churches movement and found the Gospel! I love the humour...and the insights about when churches implode in excessive doctrine homogeneity.

Father Bird: Your midrash on all "this" is breathtaking and Astounding to me. Discipled by C.S. Lewis, Dr. Sam Shoemaker of Calvary Church, Diocese of Pittsburgh & J.B. Phillips' NT "paraphrase" in the early 1960s, matriculated at Antioch College, Yellow Springs, Ohio 1962-67, studying philosophy, religion & sociology, almost ordained--but helpfully redirected--by Bishop Burrill of Chicago in 1966, I began my lay ministry to assist the Church in understanding the American cultural revolutions of the late '60s-early '70s. Still under the Bishop's standing orders, I persist at age 79, here in southwestern Ohio, to seek ways to connect the few pagans-on-the-Way to Pilgrimage. What a long, strange trip it's been, to quote Jerry Garcia ("Come, hear Uncle John's Band, by The Riverside..."). How I would love to share a pint or two in conversation with you at a nearby pub in the Homeland, and tour the Cottage of "Shadowlands" together... I can still Dream, can't I..? 😂 🎉 ❤️

I really like Anglicanism. However, all my attempts to join the Anglican community have unfortunately been unsuccessful. I live in Russia, and there are no Anglicans here who want to start a Russian-speaking church.

I think there might be a slight misunderstanding here. Being both an ACNA Anglican who was raised a conservative American Lutheran and a frequent viewer of both you and Dr. Cooper’s videos, I’d interpreted Dr. Cooper to be saying, “When I left the tradition in which I’d been raised, the one reason I became a conservative American Lutheran rather than an ACNA Anglican is the doctrinal diversity present in the ACNA in comparison with the conservative Lutheran synods.” (It has been my experience that there’s greater (publicly voiced…) doctrinal diversity in the ACNA than in the Lutheran synod in which I was raised, the LCMS, though I usually see that as a strength of the ACNA.)

@augustinian2018

Жыл бұрын

Concerning the ACNA and its doctrinal diversity, that was a big part of why I jumped ship to the ACNA rather than the NALC, a Lutheran synod with which the ACNA is in full fellowship. I found you and N.T. Wright much too compelling on Paul’s theology to stay within the Lutheran tradition once my wife and I had resolved to leave the LCMS. Though both my wife and I had drifted away from confessional Lutheranism on several points over the years, our decision to leave the LCMS ultimately boiled down that in our experience in the LCMS, children are more or less taught that if young earth creationism is false, so is Christianity; this was rather emphatically reiterated shortly after our first child was born, and so we made our exit; that said, I have nothing but (occasionally annoyed) love for folks in the LCMS).

Off-topic: Dr Mike, which book would you recommend as an intro to Old Testament counterpart to The New Testament In Its Own World that you authored with Tom?

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

Jeremy, wait for Scot McKnight's NT translation to come out!

And, Thank God, I am. Orthodoxly so... 1828 Prayer Book Orthodoxly. "We do not presume to come to this, Thy Table, oh Gracious Lord, by our own righteousness, but by Thy manifold & Great Mercies..."

@kathleenpanush7858

2 ай бұрын

🙏🏼

Everything that you said, sir, makes logical sense! And personally speaking, I have to admit that the Book Of Common Prayer is a superb supplement to the Holy Bible; but more than that, Anglican church services are among the most decorous and spiritually enhancing!!

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

4 ай бұрын

Mark, glad you liked it, good Anglicanism is good worship!

What I will say is that whilst the 39 articles and BCP might be the official doctrinal basis for Anglicanism, it seems to me that that is hardly the case in practice, at least in my CofE context. Sure, many Anglicans will agree with much of what is written in these documents (because tbf they’re fairly orthodox anyway), but i doubt many people in an average Anglican Church will have read and accented to the BCP and 39 articles (let alone have heard of them, esp the 39 articles). And sure, maybe that’s just inevitable in a church which doesn’t hammer down on its congregants about doctrinal purity (and within my English context, given its the established church) but I do think it’s fair to say that Anglicanism is very diverse doctrinally. This diversity has been a key part of Anglican history, take for example the development of “low church” and “high church groupings”, and then in the Victorian era both the evangelical revival and on the other side the Oxford Movement. This diversity has been so much that, historically at least, one of the groupings within the church was “latitudinarians” - people who wanted “latitude” in what could be accepted within the church. I think in practice Anglicanism is diverse doctrinally, with some basic orthodox beliefs held by most but significant diversity on most other things, and what unites Anglicanism is less doctrine, and more shared structures (especially episcopacy and the parish system) and practices (primarily liturgical, although even there than can be some variation). Whether this is a bad thing is another question. Part of what I do like about the CofE is the way different Christians with disagreements are able to come together despite those disagreements, but sometimes it can allow too much in).

On a semi-related note, concerning the Eucharist, are there any rigorous studies (akin to your _Jesus among the gods_ ) on the Eucharist in early Christianity and its Jewish roots that you would recommend? (I already have Joachim Jeremias’s _The Eucharistic Words of Jesus_ , David Stubbs’s _Table and Temple_ , and Brant Pitre’s _Jesus and the Last Supper_ lined up.)

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

Read the section in my EvTh about the Eucharist and the literature cited therein.

@augustinian2018

Жыл бұрын

@@earlychristianhistorywithm8684 Didn’t have that book of yours yet so I’ve ordered a copy.

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

@@augustinian2018 I hope you enjoy it!

@dyzmadamachus9842

Жыл бұрын

Brant Pitre wrote also "Jesus and the jewish roots of the eucharist".

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

@@dyzmadamachus9842 And Brant is a great guy and terrific scholar.

Traditional Anglicanism in Canada is dead. I went Lutheran LCMS.

Real Anglicans are great but so many have gone apostate.

@Early Christian History with Michael Bird Can Anglicans hold both to the traditional "really body and blood of Christ" and the more protestant "symbolically body and blood of Christ" view on the eucharist?

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

Yes, they can, at least such a breadth of views is found among them.

@Lepewhi

11 ай бұрын

As a Catholic, this seems strange to me. Seems like Anglicanism is a group of different churches held together by the BCP.

@colinlavelle7806

7 ай бұрын

@@Lepewhi As a fellow RC the Anglican Church in my opinion was a creation of the English State during the reigns of Edward VI and Elizabeth I.

@frederickjones532

10 күн бұрын

@@colinlavelle7806 Traditionally Anglo-Catholics have made the Anglican Holy Communion Service suitable to imply a Catholic doctrine by extensive interpolations from the Roman Missal.

@frederickjones532

7 күн бұрын

@@Lepewhi Fr Aidan Nichols OP "The Panther and the Hind" traced 3 different churches in the State Framework of the C of E.

The Original Brexit 😂

@ryanmulrenin4022

Ай бұрын

Right?

Regarding our roots nourishing from the first 1,000 years A.D., one might affectionately refer to faithful Anglicals as "Western Orthodox... ?"

@michealclear3265

4 ай бұрын

The roots of the Church of England was that it used to be Catholic. St. Augustine of Canterbury was sent by the Pope in Rome. ✝️🇻🇦

@frederickjones532

7 күн бұрын

They are not faithful in that they repudiate the Reformation.

Might another reason for the missional decline in some denominations be the adopted belief in Calvinist Predestination & Limited Atonement? Plus Unconditional Election, and Irresistible Grace (the TULIP of Calvinism).

@RjB555

Ай бұрын

Agreed

@frederickjones532

10 күн бұрын

All Elizabeth 1's bishops , except one, were Calvinists.

Do you know anything about Church of Ireland or anything of the like? I am Roman Catholic but interested in Anglicanism lately..I would want traditional (no gay marriage etc...)

@dyzmadamachus9842

Жыл бұрын

I guess with the CofE last synod's decision on blessing same sex couples you would not be happy there. Sry. Why you leave the catholics?

@proven22x52

Жыл бұрын

I too am a irish roman catholic, a gal I know goes to an angelican church and its not bad. I like how they cast out the children to the world and see if they come back, which mirrors my own life. I also believe in the sanctity of marriage, as a resource and promotion of having children. Its interesting, I prefer the new testament which works, I don't mind no pope tbh, if they took confession, it would be a nice match.

@barbaramacdonald3128

Жыл бұрын

80% of worldwide Anglicans do not support the CoE. The stick to the Bible.

@colinlavelle7806

7 ай бұрын

The protestant Church of Ireland is a member of the Anglican Communion. It was introduced into Ireland to attempt to convert the Catholic Irish and as such the Protestant Reformation was a failure in Ireland. It survived because protestants were re-settled in Ireland from England and Scotland. All catholic churches were taken over by the protestant church. The native Irish catholics were heavily penalised. That's why in Ireland today most of the old churches (buildings) are protestant. Dublin has 2 protestant cathedrals both originally catholic. The RC cathedral in Dublin is called a pro-cathedral.....perhaps the Church of Ireland will hand back one of theirs one day?

@richardsaintjohn8391

6 ай бұрын

Don't marry a gay man!!!! Many women do for 🤑💰

I gotta watch that Tom Hanks video. . . 😂

Kevin Vanhoozer, R. T. France, Ray Ortlund... (Sorry, really late to the party) 😅

If the 39 Articles means "Doctrinal Unity" to be Anglican, I guess I'm not an Anglican. I'm an English Catholic with roots in the doctrine of the British Church and the Apostolic Tradition before the Protestant Reformation.

We got our Apostolic Succession from Gregory the Great, and we have the AV Bible, the Prayer Book 1662/1928, and the 39 Articles, so we don't have to worry what Welby or Francis are saying or doing.

The best reason is cause it’s a little closer to Catholicism then most denominations

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Жыл бұрын

For some that's a good reasons, not so much for others!

@MrKws4700

6 ай бұрын

Interesting point as a practicing Roman Catholic, I see very tight linkages to a form of the described Anglicanism beliefs/

WHY I AM NOT ANGLICAN I have Anglican friends, a long list of Anglicans who have shaped my faith from John Stott to NT Wright I appreciate aspects of the Anglican tradition, but I am not Anglican, here is why. IT'S NOT PROTESTANT ENOUGH Maybe its because I was brought up Pentecostal, come from the land of Knox, and have lived within a few miles of Geneva but for me Anglicanism when it comes to the Reformation left too many things undone. For instance, I just find the whole clerical structure of deacons, priests, bishops, and archbishops, not to mention canons and subdeacons and archdeacons, etc etc a long way from what I see in the New Testament when it comes to church leadership. I have heard that Bishops are there to keep orthodoxy, but in reply, I would hold up the Church of England and Episcopal Church in the US as exhibits A and B of churches that have allowed heterodoxy to thrive and immorality to be condoned. I admit I have an Anabaptist view of the relationship between the church and state, the Anglicans generally are just too connected to the state for me to follow the path of Christ consistently. I remember Archbishop Carey’s call for the UK to return to Christian morals which quickly went silent when he was asked about Prince Charles and his mistress. IT'S TOO INTERTWINED WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT Let’s face it the Anglican church was at least in part created by that paragon of Christian virtue and grace Henry VIII’s need for a divorce and ever since it’s been intertwined with the establishment. The Church of England is still the established Church of England, its bishops sit unelected and in the House of Lords despite it being unrepresentative of the population of the UK and most Christians in the UK. King Charles, not known as a shining example of Christian orthodoxy, piety, or morality, is its Supreme Governor, solely because of an accident of birth and currently a Hindu prime minister has to approve its appointment of bishops. 6.4 % of English children are privately educated but over 50% of CofE bishops went to private schools, that tells you something about its culture, it suggests working-class people are kept largely in their place, which isn’t at the top. What is true of the Church of England is not true of other expressions of Anglicanism, but I think Christendom is in its DNA. Everywhere I have encountered it in the Western world, it has been dominated by the middle class and largely subservient to the ruling class. The “cool kids” Michael Bird describes all seem very middle-class from my perspective. For me there is too much Christendom in the Anglican Church and I can’t square its relationship with establishment with the faith of the New Testament. ITS WORSHIP IS TOO RESTRICTIVE This is personal, but hey I am talking about why I personally am not Anglican, and its worship feels like a straight jacket to me. I know the NT shows that Christian worship was a mix of spontaneity and liturgy but for me when it comes to things like celebrating the Eucharist there is too much liturgy and not enough spontaneity. Anglican worship all seems too clerically dominated compared to the NT, with its elaborate clerical clothing etc. I know there is a wide range of Anglican worship, and I would probably be happier at HTB than Canterbury Cathedral, but if I am choosing a church its worship has to “fit” for me and Anglicanism is too restraining. I am convinced credo Baptist so that is a problem with Anglican worship when it comes to the sacraments too. oh yeah and being Scottish there is the whole Killing Times thing, that's hard to get over

kzread.info/dash/bejne/empk0dKGopq0p84.html I and my whole family were Episcopalian, but the church I belonged to left us. Bishops lost their sheep, and watching Bishops like this confirmed that decision.

@janetsmiley6778

Жыл бұрын

We were Episcopal as well. Now very happy in the ACNA

@Rocking_T_Ranch

Жыл бұрын

Same here. Now we're LCMS. The ACNA church I tried felt less Episcopal/Anglican somehow. Maybe because it was mostly made up of Evangelicals turned Anglican? LCMS feels more old school Anglican; i.e.a little stodgy. God likes stodgy!

@cord11ful

11 ай бұрын

@@Rocking_T_Ranch I can't think of a less 'stodgy' person than Jesus.

@Rocking_T_Ranch

11 ай бұрын

@@cord11ful God is not bound by stodginess, but we are.

But is being Anglican as good as being Pentecostal?

i am Catholic. If i lived in England during the time of Henry 8, i hope i would have had the courage to be faithful to the Church, like Cardinal Fisher and Thomas More.

😂😂😂

You are very welcome to Beth Moore. She is definitely heretical!! You obviously haven't read her books or you wouldn't be saying that. Actually, I am now a Presbyterian NSW style. I am quite happy with it as far as the teaching of the Scriptures goes & can live with the other few things that I don't agree with. As an aside, I am a daily bible reader & believe that what the Scriptures teach God means, not what man decides that God may mean.

Yeah sure blessing gay unions the new style anglican

@barbaramacdonald3128

Жыл бұрын

No not really.

@active6302

Ай бұрын

Sodomy rules this lost church.

@UnboxingChristianity

5 күн бұрын

??? Are people onions? Christianity please......

You are wrong…”Catholic” means universal…connected with one another in a real way…Anglicanism is only tentatively connected with one another…very little unity with too much diversity. Your “protestant” piece quite literally means NOT CATHOLIC.

@UnboxingChristianity

5 күн бұрын

Ecclesial exclusivism is suffocating in the long run.