Anglican "Formularies" with Bp. Chandler Holder Jones

How should Anglo-Catholics think about the Anglican "formularies" like the 39 Articles and the Book of Homilies? Fr. Creighton and Fr. Wesley sit down with Bp. Chandler Hold Jones, Presiding Bishop of the Anglican Province of America, to discuss these historic documents and their place in Continuing Anglicanism.
You can send your feedback and questions to [e-mail] or reach out to us on Twitter @sacramentalists. Be sure to join our Communion of Patreon Saints for only $5 a month: / thesacramentalists

[@albertodecristofaro5605]

Thank you everyone for clarifying the placement of the 39 articles within Anglo-Catholicism. The latest response from Bishop Chandler Holder Jones was truly fantastic.

[@themissionanglicanchurchpcola]

Great video. I'm glad to hear this explanation from Bishop Chandler Holder Jones.

[@matthew7491]

I'm curious what your perspectives would be on HOW the 7 councils are affirmed. I'm thinking mainly about Dr. Ortlund's recent video "Icon Veneration is CLEARLY an Accretion!". I don't think it's wrong to call icon veneration some sort of accretion/development, but acknowledging it as such seems to be in conflict with the 7th council and its anathemas against those who disagree with icon veneration. Would you agree that it is a later development but a valid one? Or would you disagree and argue it's been Christian practice since the beginning?

[@thesacramentalists9855]

Matthew, I tried to reply to you from my personal account but it looks like it got filtered out by KZbin. Certainly, doctrine develops and sometimes those developments do not accord with how some previously thought. A good example of this is Ante-Nicene and Nicene/Post-Nicene Christology. In the particular example of icons, Dr. Ortlund is right to point out that icon veneration developed (though sometimes I think he overstates his point). I think the point is that we accept the conclusion of the Council. We don't think the Councils are inerrant in their reasoning or the historical data they cite.

[@pastorjoshuaschooping4702]

@@thesacramentalists9855 - My question would not regards the affirmation of the legitimacy of icons, but the anathemas that attend that affirmation. Because of how they frame it as a theological issue, the 7th Ecumenical Council stipulates that one must venerate them with bowing and kissing, and with affection, otherwise one is accursed. If Anglicans accept and affirm the 7th Ecumenical Council, just how are these anathemas understood?

[@thesacramentalists9855]

​@@pastorjoshuaschooping4702 Sorry, we didn't see this reply. I believe the anathema would be directed against those who intentionally refused to show veneration towards an icon. In other words, simple carelessness is not being condemned (though that's not ideal); it's active rejection of icons. Specific ways of venerating icons vary by tradition.

[@spaceman001e7]

What your guys future plan for the 6 G-3? Is it to organize into one provience and join the TAC?

[@thesacramentalists9855]

It's a good question! These questions are slightly above our pay grade but we are big supporters of G3 unity and pray that it will happen sooner rather than later. Of course, we should say that we are already unified insofar as we are in communion with one another. But it will be nice when we're institutionally unified too!

[@jamesbarksdale978]

There isn't an Anglican church in Port St Lucie, FL. Wish you would consider it, as our city is one of the fastest growing in the US with a population of 257,000. The county has 565,000.

[@thesacramentalists9855]

Sadly, it appears that, at the moment, our closest parish is St. Mark's in Vero Beach.

[@TruLuan]

This is a prime example as to why I'm hesitant to leave Roman Catholicism and believe it's the true church, as one of the marks of the true church is the Great Commission. I'm sure you'd have absolutely no issues finding a Catholic church near you.

[@anselman3156]

10:29 I think he is wrong about the Athanasian Creed being recognized by Eastern Ortgodoxy. Do they not have an issue with it holding the Holy Spirit to proceed from the Father and the Son? (which is their objection also to the filioque clause in our amended Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed).

[@pastorjoshuaschooping4702]

A modified form of the Athanasian Creed (i.e. minus the filioque) is included in a Russian Orthodox Psalter, so there is some sense in which it is accepted.

[@anselman3156]

@@pastorjoshuaschooping4702 That's interesting. Thank you.

[@jamesbarksdale978]

I'm currently Lutheran. When it comes to the Anglican via media, although I hold to justification by grace through faith, I don't believe that regeneration precedes faith (in contradistinction to Lutheranism and the Reformed churches), and am probably closer to the Orthodox understanding of salvation as healing, with theosis as the goal. If I desired to become Anglican, are my beliefs acceptable?

[@thesacramentalists9855]

Your position of Justification is not necessarily a make or break for most Anglican churches. Though Continuing Anglicans tend to be more Catholic and do not necessarily hold to justification by faith alone.

[@pipsheppard6747]

I would like to see a response to Shooping's question below.

[@jamesbarksdale978]

It seems to me that an Anglican can claim a heritage that precedes the CofE back to Celtic Chtistianity prior to pressure from Rome to conform, c. 700 or so.

[@johng7681]

I think he may have mis-spoke and got ahead of himself.

[@darkduck-qg2so]

An Anglicanism that fully excludes either the Low or High Church interpretations of the faith within the understanding of the ancient faith and the less dogmatic but more specifically Anglican BCP and 39 articles (the vagueness is a good thing) is not a full Anglicanism. This is a problem I have with the Continuum, it's purely High to the exclusion of the Low... even the commentary the good (and I do mean good) Archbishop recommends on the 39 articles while a very lucid and spirited defense of an Anglo-Catholic interpretation... seems to more or less condemn a Calvinist interpretation of election and predestination. The Articles were broad for a *reason*, Anglicanism is defined in my eyes by three things... Episcopacy, English patrimony, and by liberty and diversity of thought limited by the confines of a particular spectrum of doctrine... as long as you believe you eat Christ, you should have liberty to believe in a receptionist subjective Real Presence, or an objective Real Presence by either it's Virtualist or Sacramental Unionist modes... as long as you follow the basic bones of the liturgy as laid out in the BCP, who cares if you're ornate and have images of Christ or if you're more subdued and sparse in your decoration... Anglicanism is the religion of compromise within the confines of biblical and creedal orthodoxy, the religion that is Reformed and Catholic

[@Simonlazarus-n3u]

Are y'all the same as ACNA?

[@thesacramentalists9855]

We are not. Frs. Wesley and Creighton are priests in the Anglican Province of America (APA) and Fr. Hayden is a priest in the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC). Fr. Creighton currently serves at an ACC parish.

[@johnlarkin-i3z]

They are in breach with the successor of St Peter and the Apostolic Succession ... they can not escape this.

[@thesacramentalists9855]

The truth of the matter is that being in breach with the successor of St. Peter does not deny a Church Apostolic Succession. The Roman Catholic Church's stance towards the Orthodox Church is a great example of this. The fact is that we can trace our Episcopal lineage to the Apostles because we are a part of the Catholic Church.

[@johnlarkin-i3z]

Anglican Episcopal lineage was intentionally breached at the Reformation, when the Eucharistic priesthood was repudiated, and the words, form and intention of ordination were changed. This breach of the Apostolic Succession can not be restored merely by desire, or an act of will of some Anglican priests; that is why some seek the participation of an Old Catholic (Dutch) bishop at their ordinations, as the latters' orders remain valid and authoritative outside of communion with Rome.

[@thesacramentalists9855]

@@johnlarkin-i3z The Anglican episcopal lineage was not breached because it was not repudiated. This is the point decisively made in Saepius Officio which cites a number of compelling evidences to support that fact (more evidence than is cited in Apostolicae Curae). But yes, the "Dutch Touch" decisively solves the issue and makes the original comment moot.

[@johnlarkin-i3z]

Why then did Anglican priests anxious about their place in the Apostolic Succession, appeal to the supreme authority of Pope Leo XIII for recognition of the validity of their orders, only to have them declared "utterly null and void", after Rome's diligent examination of the issue?

[@thesacramentalists9855]

@@johnlarkin-i3z That's not really the context of Apostolicae Curae. It was a joint venture from a Roman Catholic and Anglican for the sake of unity. Further, under Cardinal Reginald Pole, England was (a) absolved of all ecclesial sins committed under the reigns of Henry and Edward and (b) priests who were ordained during that period were allowed to serve as priests in the Roman Catholic Church without any sort of re-ordination. Further, if you check out our episode with Fr. Becket Soule, you'll hear his personal experience which is that he was conditionally ordained in the Roman Catholic Church because they believed his Anglican orders to be valid. Also, you should read John Jay Hughes' book Absolutely Null and Utterly Void. I'm not sure an objective assessment of the process could be called "diligent examination," especially given the reasons cited in the Bull itself which do not reflect Anglican theology, a point harped on at length by Archbishops of Canterbury and York in Saepius Officio.