Re: Your "article"

Ken,

You are reading Lutheran theology into Anglicanism. It plainly says "it is also a SIGN of regeneration or new-birth" and that we are "grafted into the Church" by baptism. But being a member of the church is not necessarily a guarantee of election, regeneration or salvation since the wicked may also be members of the church and later commit apostasy.

Article XXV

Of the Sacraments

Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses and effectual signs of grace and God's good will towards us, by the which He doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm, our faith in Him.

There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.

Those five, commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures; but yet have not the like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God.

The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon or to be carried about, but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same, have they a wholesome effect or operation: but they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves damnation, as S. Paul saith.

Against Lutheranism, there is no "objective" presence of the body and blood of Christ in the bread and wine or with the bread and wine but IN those who "worthily" receive him. And what is the only "worthy" way to receive him? BY FAITH. This can be proved from the 1662 BCP where the recipients are told:

THE Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith with thanksgiving.

And the Minister that delivereth the Cup to any one shall say,

THE Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. Drink this in remembrance that Christ's Blood was shed for thee, and be thankful.

The body and blood of Christ do preserve our body and soul unto everlasting life. But since the body and blood of Christ is on the right hand of the Father in heaven, the ONLY way to partake of it is BY FAITH. Cranmer's position is clear on this point and his theology is the theology of the 1662 BCP AND the 39 Articles of Religion.

The Anglican emphasis here is on worthy receivers and on faith as the means of partaking, NOT consubstantiation OR real presence.

The "black rubric" IS in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer AND the 39 Articles clearly say that the body of Christ is NOT chewed with the teeth. The 1662 BCP is our standard, not the 1552 or 1559 BCP. HELLO!

Again regarding baptism:

Article XXVII

Of Baptism

Baptism is not only a sign of profession and mark of difference whereby Christian men are discerned from other that be not christened, but is also a sign of regeneration or new birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God, by the Holy Ghost are visibly signed and sealed; faith is confirmed, and grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. The baptism of young children is in any wise to be retained in the Church as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.

Odd that all these references to "signs, tokens, remembrance, signed and sealed, confirmed, faith, prayer, etc." are there IF the sacraments in and of themselves are the "direct" instrument of grace rather than merely the "outward sign" of an "invisible grace"!!!

Even Wesley got this and he was an Arminian! Only a Lutheran with an agenda could ignore the obvious here, especially if he or she has read Cranmer's treatise on the Lord's Supper.

Even your own quotes below shoot yourself in the foot: "faith which believes that sins are forgiven, is required".

I think you ought to stick to Lutheranism because you have no knowledge of Anglicanism, Cranmer, or Calvin and insist on reading your own agenda into OUR documents. It's not only dishonest, it's ignorant at best.

I might add that Luther believed in double predestination as his treatise on The Bondage of the Will clearly proves. It is Melanchthon who backs off on the double decrees to predestination and reprobation. Luther clearly saw that there is no free will.

Charlie

----- Original Message -----

From: FCSD2@aol.com

To: cranmer1959@gmail.com

Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 2:20 PM

Subject: Re: Your "article"

Charlie, I don't attempt to "fool" anyone. This paper never pretended to be an Anglican paper. It is a Lutheran paper written and presented at a Lutheran convention last month.

As to baptismal regeneration, it is affirmed in the 39 Articles. No, the opus operatum is not--but Lutherans do not believe the opus operatum, either. The article on Baptism makes clear that the view contrary to baptismal regeneration is rejected, and is, in fact, in complete accord with the Augsburg Confession, which, for its part, rejects the opus operatum.

XXVII. Of Baptism.
Baptism is not only a sign of profession, and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened, but it is also a sign of Regeneration or New-Birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed, Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God.

The Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.

Article IX: Of Baptism.

1] Of Baptism they teach that it is necessary 2] to salvation, and that through Baptism is offered the grace of God, and that children are to be baptized who, being offered to God through Baptism are received into God's grace.

3] They condemn the Anabaptists, who reject the baptism of children, and say that children are saved without Baptism.

Article XIII: Of the Use of the Sacraments.

1] Of the Use of the Sacraments they teach that the Sacraments were ordained, not only to be marks of profession among men, but rather to be signs and testimonies of the will of God 2] toward us, instituted to awaken and confirm faith in those who use them. Wherefore we must so use the Sacraments that faith be added to believe the promises which are offered and set forth through the Sacraments.

3] They therefore condemn those who teach that the Sacraments justify by the outward act, and who do not teach that, in the use of the Sacraments, faith which believes that sins are forgiven, is required.

No question, the articles on the Eucharist (28 and 29) are pre-Tigurine Calvinism. They were toned down from a Zwinglian position expressed in the 42 Articles and the 1552 BCP. The 1559 BCP similarly removed the Black Rubric. The Calvinists having gotten their way on the Eucharist, the Lutherans got an article on predestination that says nothing about reprobation and is effectively a Lutheran statement of that issue.

Ken

In a message dated 7/5/2009 8:25:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time, cranmer1959@gmail.com writes:

You may fool Phil but I see right through you. Your view is Lutheran at best and not Anglican. The 39 Articles of Religion clearly reject baptismal regeneration and any idea of real prensence or consubstantiation. In fact, if you read Cranmer on the Lord's Supper you will understand the 39 Articles because the voice of Cranmer rings through even in the 1662 BCP and the 39 Articles. We interpret the 1662 BCP by way of the 39 Articles and not the other way around.

---