I had an Anglican friend set me straight on what they actually believe as opposed to what is actually portrayed.He said that the AC considers itself Apostolic but doesn't understand that word in the same fashion as EO or RCC. He also said that while the office of bishop was decided to be kept because of it historic use that it is not necessary. He also said that while they call their minister a priest and the table an altar in everyday parlance that they in fact do not believe that he is a priest since there is no sacrifice going on in their service...also it is a holy table not an altar again due to their being no sacrifice. I have looked at the 39 articles and while some seem fine I have real issues with others. Any comments observations?
I understand that the Anglican Church has a wide spectrum of believers, anywhere from calvinism to anglo catholic. But each group claims they are the genuine group or represent "Classical Anglicanism". Needless to say that my friend showed me I believe it was article 31 that states their is no sacrifice of the mass and i believe he was qouting the Book of common prayer when he said it calls the priest a presbyter (yes i know we understand our presbyters as priests) and it only refers to a holy table and not to an altar. I am not questioning the sincere desire of its members to follow Jesus Christ I am just trying to figure out if their is a real anglican church or is it more of a philosophy made up of the smaller parties. hope that makes sense.
The Holy Spirit binds us together with all believers, living and dead, including the Apostles. That makes us Apostolic.
In the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral the Episcopate is listed as one of the essential components of Christianity.
Our Eucharistic liturgy states in no uncertain terms that we are "offering" to God a "sacrifice" of praise and thanksgiving.
In the Church consecration rite we are invited to pray for "the setting apart of the Altar." The Bishop goes on to pray,
Lord God, hear us. Sanctify this Table dedicated to you. Let it be to us a sign of the heavenly Altar where your saints and angels praise you forever.
The following rubric directs
Members of the congreation vest the Altar, place the vessels on it, and light the candles.
In the Lamplighting rite the Holy Table is used as an altar of light and incense, for the rubric directs
The candles at the Altar are now lighted, as are other candles and lamps as may be convenient.
Throughout the Book of Common Prayer "Priest" and "Presbyter" are used for the most part interchangeably.
Article XXXI states
XXXI. Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross.
The Offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone. Wherefore the sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits.
This clearly refers to a specific doctrine, according to which Jesus was destroyed afresh in every Eucharist for the remission of sins that his death on Calvary had somehow failed to reach. I'm not sure that even the Latin church teaches this anymore. If your lot teach it, it's the first I've heard of it. From the reformers' standpoint, Christ died "once for all." The "sacrifices of Masses" taught that Jesus died once for some, then again for some more, then again for some more, and so on, being killed afresh in each Eucharist for sins he hadn't gotten to yet. One may regret that the reformers had a somewhat constrained theological context to work in, but within those constraints I think they made the right choice.