>No. Recall what I wrote earlier. I was commenting on the Articles as they did not exist here in PECUSA/ECUSA/TEC. Many clerics in the C of E (like Newman) endeavoured to explicate the Articles so that their integrity could remain in good conscience. Keble, Froude and those men found a way thru the thicket (The English are often very good at this sort of thing!).Newman and others did not. Blessings. GDVW+ So do I have your position right: that the "true religion" of a pure > Anglo-Catholic variety never existed in the Church of England? Either > that or the clergy who thought as you seem to took a false oath. > > It seems the true faith as defined by Fr. Wiebe only existed in that > part of the US Episcopal Church that rejected the Articles for declared > Catholic reasons after the Oxford Movement began, but certainly not that > part that rejected them for Latitudinarian reasons. > That is the main reason they were not adopted by the US Church until > 1801- the Broad Church, semi-Unitarian branch hated the Articles. Even > Samuel Seabury did not object to the Articles. But the liberals managed > to approve them in such a way as to not make anyone subscribe to them > personally. > > So they paved the way for your rather narrow definition of "Anglican." > > "The Rev GDVWiebe SSC.,PhD" <gdvw@...> wrote: > > I am not a cleric in the C of E. In TEC no one ever had to subscribe > to > the 39 Articles. That is the point of fact I was mentioning. I have also > made clear the role of Bishop Bicknell. Blessings. GDVW+ > > > > > > > Everyone in the Church of England must subscribe to the Articles. >> Does that mean it has never been Anglican or Catholic (in the fullness >> of both terms?) >> >> "The Rev GDVWiebe SSC.,PhD" wrote: >> > No one in TEC was EVER made to sign or subscribe to the Articles. I >> have >> said before that if we accept Bishop Bicknell's analysis then the >> Articles for the most part are bearable but they are not mandatory. In >> this post it is protestant Protestan PROTESTANT! I am not a Protestant. >> It is as simple as that-nor are any of the AC's I know. Please >> understand and accept that and then we move on. Blessings. GDVW+ >>> >>> KnoxDuncan wrote: I call >>> myself Anglican because I accept the 39 Articles that summarize my >>> religious practice. Labeling oneself as Anglican without accepting the >>> Articles seems to me disingenuous. Many have commented on the >>> Evangelical >>> and Reformed nature of the Church of England. The 19th Century Bishop >>> J.C. >>> Ryle explained in 1877 that the Articles are ‘eminently Protestant and >>> eminently Evangelical.’ Gregory Dix argued in the 1940s that Cranmer’s >>> order for the Lord’s Supper in the 1552 Book of Common Prayer, (which >>> is >>> mostly what is in the 1662 BCP), as the ‘only effective attempt ever >>> made >>> to give liturgical expression to the doctrine of justification by faith >>> alone.’ The Presbyterian Arthur Cochrane wrote in the 1960s that ‘A >>> Reformed Church would surely see in a Church of England professing the >>> 39 >>> Articles a genuine Evangelical and Protestant Church…’ In the same >>> decade, >>> J. I. Packer contended that ‘there is no real room >>> for doubt as to the interpretation of the Articles. They are >>> demonstrably >>> Protestant…and Reformed.’ A modern American Presbyterian Professor of >>> Apologetics, William Edgar, described the Articles as ‘a balanced, >>> biblical statement of Reformed Theology.’ Finally, on 2nd June 1953, >>> when, when Queen Elizabeth 11 gave her coronation oath, one of the >>> promises she made was:…to the utmost of [her] power maintain in the >>> United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law >>> [i.e. >>> in the Church of England]." >>> The Articles outline a "via media" in repudiating teaching and >>> practices that Reformers in general condemned in Roman Catholicism. >>> Article XX sides more with Luther than with Zwingli in treating the >>> authority of Scripture as the FINAL and LAST word on religious matters >>> rather than the ONLY word. For example, they deny supererogation of >>> merit (XIV), transubstantiation (XXVIII), the sacrifice of the Mass >>> (XXXI), and implicitly the sinlessness of Mary (XV). Like continental >>> Protestants, the Articles affirm that Scripture is the final authority >>> on salvation (VI); that Adam's fall compromised human free will (X); >>> that justification is by faith in Christ's merit (XI); that both bread >>> and wine should be served to all in the Lord's Supper (XXX); and that >>> ministers may marry (XXXII). The Articles borrow some wording from >>> Lutheran confessions, especially on the Trinity (I), the church (XIX), >>> and the sacraments (XXV). But the Articles take on a Calvinist hue on >>> baptism (XXVII), "a >>> sign of Regeneration" and on the Lord's Supper (XXVIII)—"The body of >>> Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Lord's Supper, only after a >>> heavenly and spiritual manner." >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >>> faithandlife-unsubscribe@... >>> >>> >>> Fr. Duncan: >>> >>> Just Ditto the above for expressing my own opinion. >>> >>> Archdeacon James T. Payne >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >>> faithandlife-unsubscribe@... >>> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >> faithandlife-unsubscribe@... >> >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >> faithandlife-unsubscribe@... >> > > -- > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: > faithandlife-unsubscribe@... > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: > faithandlife-unsubscribe@... >