I will not go into a long and serious article on this at the moment. However, in brief just let me say that I believe Reformed Anglicans should come out from among them, that is Anglo-Catholics and various other heretics, and start another "province" or "denomination" since geographical boundaries no longer apply. There is no place for Calvinist Anglicans in any of the existing "provinces", including the Anglican Church in North America. Even if the ACNA did accept Protestant and Reformed Anglicans, it still would not work because the Calvinist would be expected to stop trying to convert the lost souls of the Anglo-Papists who insist on muddying the waters and corrupting the Gospel of free grace with semi-pelagianism, prayers to the saints, real presence, baptismal regeneration and other heresies and idolatries.
I have equal objections to the Charismatic Anglicans since they are perfectly willing to whore after the Anglo-Papists and promote their false gospel of fake miracles, Christian Science, gnosticism, mysticism, ecstatic religion, and semi-pelagianism.
By the way, I have removed the Anglicans Ablaze link due to the fact that Robin Jordan insists on promoting the Anglo-Catholics on his blog by advertising for them without criticism. Such confused thinking does not deserve a mention on my part. It's time for Reformed Anglicans to stop sleeping with the enemy and to repent of spiritual adultery. Choose whether you are going to be Protestant, "catholic" and Reformed or you're going to be a Papist or a Charismatic. The choice is clear for me. I will choose to follow Jesus Christ and the Gospel, not heresy and heretics and idolatry. I am done "striving" with unrepentant heretics.
So be it according to thy will, O Lord!
Charlie
And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. (2 Timothy 2:24-26 KJV)
Posts
2 comments:
Interesting post. With this public stand on the issue, I reviewed your profile, and found it kind of reminiscent to my own background.
Although I never graduated from any seminaries, although I have dropped out of Baptist Bible College, Springfield, MO, my journey to Reformed Presbyterianism seems parallel.
As you may have read in my profile, I grew up Independent Baptist--that is, fundamentalistic, revivalistic and technically "moderate Calvinist," which feels more like "Four-Point Arminian." Got exposed to the broadly evangelical world while working at a Christian bookstore and watching lots of TBN (because I'm a couch potato and that held my impressionable and curious spiritual/theological attention). This naturally made me examine my own beliefs, and considered joining an AG church for a short time before resolving that God raised me as a Baptist for a reason, and I'd better learn what they teach and conclude that it really is wrong before running off willy-nilly. So I entered adulthood with this insatiable theological curiosity.
Many in the IFB movement teach what's known as Baptist successionism (maybe you've seen the Facebook page related to it on my blog), which misleads people into thinking that the Baptist tradition is the true church. So learning the truth about the true roots of the Baptist tradition is part of what I was searching for.
Occasionally through the years, I'd encounter and consider the TULIP, but would eventually move on until I got a job in a print shop full of members of a local PCA church. Seeing my Bible College on my resume let them know I'd be a good candidate for lively theological discussion--and they were right! Within 3 years I was finally convinced of the doctrines of grace, and was working on the other issues contained in the Reformed confession (to echo Clark). But one thing that really helped seal the deal for me was the fact that the true origin of the Baptist tradition lies in the Reformed tradition! In other words, I really had found what I was looking for! Now, whether I belong to a Presbyterian church or a continental Reformed church is probably more a matter of pragmatics and accessibility than a real preference, but, hey, I am an Anglo-American myself, so Presbyterian's a pretty good fit, besides the fact that Presby churches admit Baptistic wives on statement of credible profession of faith, unlike the continental Reformed.
Can you see the parallel like I can? You started out Pentecostal, moved to the Methodist root of Pentecostalism, and are now in the ecclesiastical root of Methodism. But you appear to reflect the views of the Puritans who wanted to Presbyterianize the church of England. Is that why Reformed Anglicans are made to feel as unwelcome as you say they do? Perhaps when you're tired of the headache, you'll give up the bishops and go Presby? Just teasing (some)!
:-)
Sad to say, I've got an aunt who was raised mainline Episcopalian, who married my Campbellite uncle and now with the whole homosexual bishop business, has moved on to the Roman Catholic Church. My poor uncle's having to wrestle with the whole thing, and seems to be surrendering.
John, I do not regard Papists as "saved". They are in need of regeneration and conversion. It goes without saying that the Anglican communion is also full of theological liberalism and latitudinarism.
I can assure you that I am not some closed minded fundamentalist. I am, however, consistently Protestant, Reformed and Evangelical. (Evangelical being a mostly useless term these days since everyone claims it, including the Papists).
The reason Anglicanism is going to Rome, as your aunt proves, is that the Tractarian/Anglo-Catholic movement has corrupted the English Reformation and tried to take the CoE back to Rome.
My blog is unapologetically geared to converting the lost. That would include Anglo-Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox, and Roman Catholics. There is only one Gospel and none of those churches have it. They are in serious and mortal error. As the Reformers put it, they are "synagogues of satan".
The Federal Vision error is equally serious. That's why Frank Turk is questionable. It's fairly obvious that he is into theonomy, which is the theological root of the Federal Vision error. Many of the them are ecumenicalists.
Charlie
Post a Comment