Hey, i am interested in Anglicanism, but had a question. Are there high church Anglicans that aren’t Anglo-catholic? I like the “mass” and its very reverent worship, the vestments etc but I am not sure i fully align with some of the common beliefs of anglo-catholics.

Am i still able to find that kind of high church worship without the doctrine of mary and the saints? Thanks in advance

https://giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/actions/redeem/ded7bc31-ca30-41ea-941b-c7782dfee2bf

Very interesting article. I thought the Anglican angle was interesting here (if a little concerning, at least from my perspective—others may disagree). A sort of Holy Trinity Brompton meets JD Vance/Viktor Orban/Reform UK. Either way, it seems like religion (and more specifically a particular brand of Anglican Christianity) is about to enter UK politics.

“Over the next six weeks, Orr was presented with further signals of God’s existence which he found too compelling to ignore. At home in London, he began to shun many of his old habits, losing the desire to smoke or drink. He became obsessed with the New Testament and the quest for the historical Jesus. He found his way to the evangelistic Alpha course at Holy Trinity Brompton, an Anglican church in a wealthy part of west London, and quit his career in corporate law to study theology. “I’d stumbled on a deep truth about the human condition and about the reality of the divine,” he later said on Surprising Rebirth, a podcast about faith.

Two decades on from that revelation, the impact of what Orr calls his “private experiential journey” has propelled him to the highest levels of academia and politics. Orr is now an associate professor at Cambridge and has risen to prominence in Reform UK, the nationalist party led by Nigel Farage whose groundswell of support has shattered the two main parties’ hold on British politics. He has ties to influential political figures, from the far-right Hungarian politician Viktor Orbán to the US vice-president JD Vance, who has referred to Orr as his “British sherpa”. He is a close associate of tech billionaire Peter Thiel.

This February, he was appointed Reform’s head of policy. His religious sensibilities, such as the idea that married parents should be given priority access to social housing, are firmly imprinted in Reform’s policies: a blueprint for a new British right.”

Rowan Williams’s view:

“Rowan Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, warned against such a co-option of Christianity into politics. “I worry . . . that the Christian ‘brand’ becomes compromised if it’s seen, as so often in the US, as allied to political agendas and ambitions,” he said. “It concerns me greatly that bits of the British right reach for this transatlantic rhetoric and repertoire of Christian nationalist ideas so as to ally themselves with some sort of global movement, even if they don’t fully sign up to the American version.”

Williams, who was master of Magdalene College, Cambridge, and supervised divinity students, also expressed discomfort at politics infiltrating the academic environment. “I’m always concerned if vulnerable young scholars get the message that they need to line up with a specific ideological approach — of any kind — in order to secure their future.”

Hi! I wanted to ask what the anglo-catholic position is on the efficacy of the general confession at mass. I myself am an anglo-catholic and so am confronted by the roman/traditional teaching that one must attend private confession in order to have the forgiveness of sin. Does the general confession and absolution at mass have the same efficacy as individual confession and absolution?

Is this more a spiritual question of my own reception of the general absolution perhaps? I'd be eager to hear the thoughts of people here. Thank you and God bless you all.

Catechesis, which I will begin next month, is the next big step in my journey to becoming Anglican, and I can’t wait to start. I feel so blessed to attend the church I do, as I finally feel like I can worship authentically. My question is: since I am the only catechumen this cycle, making this a one-on-one endeavor with my pastor, how should I approach it—given that my previous theological education took place in a classroom setting with multiple students?

I do not normally care for Anglican Ink's editorializing--I think they became more and more reactionary conservative over the last 10 years, but I appreciate this piece by Fr George Conger, I think it is one of the most reasonable takes I have seen.

Prayers with Bishop Edgar and this whole mess.

The Anglican Church has historically been the vanguard of Christian Zionism worldwide, so why has the situation changed?

Thomas Brightman, Anglican Bishop, wrote in 1607:

"The kings of the East (the Jews) will begin their journey and rise from their dispersion before the darkness is completely lifted from them. Their return to their land will be first, accompanied by great disturbances and upheavals of kingdoms. From the midst of this distress and war, their faith will be revealed, they will accept their Christ , and the thousand-year happy period for the Church and Israel together will begin." (From the book: Apocalypsis Apocalypseos)

Sir Henry Finch, in 1621, is considered one of the most precise proponents of this idea, articulated in strict legal and theological language in his book "The Great Restoration of the World": "When the prophets speak of Israel and Jacob, and by them they mean a nation, they do not mean the Gentile Church, but the physical descendants of Jacob." They (the Jews) will return to their land, they will live in their ancient homeland, and Jerusalem will be rebuilt. They will not return as scattered individuals, but as a sovereign nation, and the surrounding kingdoms will submit to them, and the promises of the land will be fulfilled literally for the true descendants of Abraham.

They will return as a nation and the surrounding kingdoms will submit to them. Joseph Mead, Anglican bishop (d. mid-17th century), in his famous interpretations of the prophecies of the Book of Revelation and the Book of Daniel, the "Father of English Eschatology," wrote, affirming that the Jewish diaspora does not negate their chosen destiny: "The Jewish nation's continued distinctiveness in its diaspora is a divine mystery; the Lord has not rejected his people as a final inheritance. Their geographical return to the land of Canaan is the cornerstone upon which the prophecies of the last days are built. They will first gather in their land while still in their spiritual dispersion, and from there, amidst great political upheavals, the Christ will proclaim his glory and they will be transformed, to begin a true earthly millennium of peace from Jerusalem."

Others, such as Anglican bishops Thomas Newton, Thomas Drax, William Weston, and John Owen, also held this view.

Finally, I conclude with the words of the great Bishop William Hechler, a friend of Herzl, who said, "Thanks to the Zionist movement, we have reached the Christ Age of Israel." If the thousand years are meant literally and Israel must be supported, why did the position change? The situation of Anglicans has changed recently, in the last fifty years.

Anglican rosary guide! Completely free to use!

So I base this rosary guide and its prayers with the “traditional” prayers that are usually kept in the Anglican rosary. The only things that I added to was that I added the daily Hours to be said at the Invidatory bead and the Angelus to the last Crusiform bead. I really, really like Oxford Movement prayers, as they had a very theologically mainline Anglican-applicable form of Marian devotion.

I would also like to say that I have made various guides for prayer beads for various denominations. I make these guides to help people’s journey with God. I actually either just contemplate what would seem good to a person with a form of the rosary or the devotional of it, or I end up creating a guide in which that I practice almost daily. The ladder option is indeed that of this guide. I use this guide to almost every single day to guide me through the Hours (especially before and after a long day of college work). I really thought of this guide to be a very nice relaxing time with your Book of Common Prayer and rosary—with a nice noon teatime. Or morning devotion when you’re going to have a very full day of work and you just need that little extra boost.

Anyhow, I would like to say that I received a lot of hate comments on my last guy that I did give because I basically converted the Anglican rosary into Roman Catholic prayers, which I do not practice that guide, but making that guide was suggested to me. I received lots and lots of backlash and both support, which I am very unsure of both. But anyhow, this rosary guide is that of something I do daily. It is something that I trust, it is something that I believe in, and it is something that I really like. It is simply the daily devotional Hours, repetitive ancient prayers, and a nice bit of concentrated Marian devotion. Perfect thing to come home to.

Anyhow, I hope that this doesn’t receive hate, but if it does… eh I’m just gonna keep making these! I don’t care, it’s Reddit😂✝️🙏

In the past couple of decades it has seemed like we are constantly bombarded by articles suggesting that the Anglican Communion is about to break apart or that North American Anglicans are calling each other schismatic or heritical (thinking of TEC and ACNA in particular), and frankly it can all seem like a tragedy unfolding at times.

This doesn't of course bear witness to the extraordinary ability of those within the Anglican tradition to stay together, often when issues such as churchmanship, theology and sexuality are thrown into the mix. That has to be celebrated.

I really hope that you will pray with me for continued patience and reconciliation within our tradition - surely unity must be a God given goal? This doesn't mean ignoring the concerns of those who have separated or any who have experienced hurt. My own province, the Church of England, has had many of these issues for centuries and had its own share of separations, but I've also been humbled throughout my time as an Anglican (about nine years) and even more so now as an Ordinand, by witnessing things like the traditionalist Anglo-Catholic priest sharing prayer and humour with his charismatic Evangelical colleague, people with different views on women's ordination even being married to one another, along with acts of charity and generosity that will never be newsworthy.

Seeing an ACNA Bishop sharing such warmth with his TEC counterpart just warmed my heart so much. The healing has to start somewhere.

Hello,

Essentially, post title. I would like to continue being Episcopalian. Anglican worship and tradition speak to me perfectly and essentially allow me to hold my Protestant opinions and still maintain Roman Catholic or Orthodox practices. I actually left the Episcopal Church for 3 years and became Roman Catholic, only to return due to certain issues within the Roman Catholic Church (absolute certainty, compulsory confession, mortal sin, etc. this led me to have intense anxiety and got me an OCD diagnosis). But the Episcopal Church is my home, and it's where I became a Christian, and this where my wife and daughter were baptized.

But here is the thing. How do I just... Ignore certain politicized aspects of the Church? I am staunchly pro life and believe homosexuality (as in acting upon it) is sinful. I'm not a hardcore conservative either, I think Republicans do very little to actually help working class families. I think Christians should be above party politics, in all honesty. I am also concerned with the Church having little guardrails for certain things (like some folks not affirming the Creed). Things like this bother me. Surprisingly enough, I do not care if women are priests.

Can I just be Episcopalian/Anglican and just ignore that stuff? It's not terribly present at my local parish beyond a kinda liberal Bible study that I quietly left. I don't just want to become ACNA either because historical continuity is important.

I would appreciate some advice my friends. God bless you!

The joint blessing of a chapel at a historic school by an Episcopal bishop and an Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) bishop has stirred up deep controversy in the ACNA, with an August 26 statement from its acting primate sharply criticizing the service and promising that the church’s College of Bishops would rule on the situation next month.

Bishop Ruth Woodliff-Stanley of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina and Bishop Chip Edgar of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina participated alongside each other at the August 18 blessing of St. Timothy’s Chapel, a 600-seat church on the campus of Charleston’s Porter-Gaud School.

Photos of the event circulating on social media show the two bishops leading prayers together, draping a hanging over the chapel’s altar, laughing, and embracing warmly.

Both bishops are members of the independent Episcopal school’s Board of Trustees, and worked together early in their episcopates to resolve remaining tensions from the 2012 division of the original Diocese of South Carolina

The entire story is worth the read. It appears that the conflict is strictly internecine from the ACNA camp.

Im asking my priest about doing a public reading of The Apocalypse/The Revelation of God to Jesus Christ given to John as we draw near to the Feast of The Reign of Christ or perhaps during Advent and as I was thinking about what it could look like I wondered if it would be ever appropriate to process the Book of The Apocalypse similar to how the Gospels are and if there is any precedence?

Im an organist at an anglican church in maryland and I have been looking at the litany in d minor as a potential liturgical thing sometime this upcoming lent.
Has anyone else done this version of the litany at their church?
If so how hard is it

The converter of the Northumbrians to the Faith and the contemporary of figures like St. Wilfrid and the villain Penda. It's related by Bede that when Penda attempted to burn down Bamburgh, St. Aidan was watching the scene all the way from Lindisfarne and, after saying a prayer, the wind blew the fire right back at Penda's army.

Some readings for the day: https://www.liturgies.net/saints/aidan/readings.htm

Hi everyone,

I joined the LCMS back in 2019 (I was 21 years old at the time) after coming out of a hyper-fundamentalist Holiness Pentecostal background. At first, I really appreciated the liturgical and sacramental focus of Lutheranism, but I’ve been unhappy with the LCMS for a while now. I know I don’t fit in with Rome as I have significant theological disagreements with them, and I’m also not comfortable with a lot of what the ELCA allows socially and theologically. So I’ve found myself in an awkward middle ground.

My biggest struggles with the LCMS are both theological and cultural. The rejection of evolution and insistence on young-earth literalism have become a major barrier for me. I work in Public Health (Health Policy) for the State of Minnesota, and my brother is studying to become a physicist, so I have come to hate sitting through Bible studies where scientific questions are looked down upon (or sometimes even treated as salvation issues) rather than areas where faithful Christians can reasonably disagree.

I’ve also become uncomfortable with how much partisan politics seems to bleed into church life. My local congregation has a lot of anti-vax sentiment, along with people who will go on lengthy rants against things like providing free lunches to kids in public schools. That has created a friction between my values and the church culture around me.

I consider myself very much a “womb to tomb” pro-lifer. I believe strongly in protecting unborn life, but I also believe that conviction should extend to caring about poverty, access to healthcare, children and families, and the economic and social conditions that often contribute to women seeking abortions in the first place. I don’t see those things as being in tension with one another.

From my previous experiences with the ACNA on the East Coast, one thing that really stood out to me was the intellectual diversity I encountered. I met people in academia, medicine, science, and other fields who took historic Christian orthodoxy seriously while also engaging thoughtfully with the modern world. That’s something I’ve really missed. I currently live in the Fargo area where a new ACNA church plant is just getting started. I’m very interested in getting involved, but I wanted to ask this community a couple of questions first…

Does the ACNA generally have room for a “whole-life” ethic, holding orthodox Christian views on things like abortion and church leadership while also caring deeply about public welfare, healthcare, poverty, and the broader civic good?

And for those of you in medicine, public health, the sciences, academia, or similar fields, have you generally felt intellectually respected within ACNA parishes, especially when it comes to things like evolution and the relationship between science and Scripture?

I know individual parishes can vary quite a bit, but I’d really appreciate hearing about your experiences. Thanks!

I was in church this morning and we heard the Matthew gospel reading where Jesus says to St Peter get behind me satan and calls him a form of blockage and that he was focused on human things and not of heaven - massively butchering the paraphrasing but you know the verses.

Ive wrestled and continue to agonise over catholicism vs anglicanism - should I shouldn't I be which one, which is gods true desire for his church etc etc its a real issue for me and I swing around all over the place in my view. But anyway this reading stood out for me.

Reasons being, that papal supremacy is often based on a couple of verses about giving Peter the keys to the kingdom and leading his church etc. These are taken as the strong grounds for papal supremacy from what I can tell. So we are using one or to of Jesus sentences and taking them as having a majorly significant meaning - thats the logic behind this. But we could also apply the same logic to Jesus calling Peter satan and saying he's not focused on spiritual/heavenly things.

I know context is all important but its more a philosophical point of logic and semantics im trying to make here - if Jesus wanted Peter to be pope and meant so so much by his keys to the kingdom and building his church upon him statement - why would we see this as having such grand meaning in a literal way but another statement referring to Peter as satan - or at least being influenced by him as not having such grand literal weight also. if we took just these sentences you'd never believe Jesus would ever want such a person to be someone leading his whole church. It feels a bit selective and could this be an argument from scripture that diminishes papal supremancy?

Im a hypocrite as im just as likely to argue another point on why perhaps it is clear the pope is Jesus chosen head etc so please understand I know my points here are probably ill thought out and I dont want to upset anyone but I was reflecting in church and thought it may be an interesting discussion. Why focus on one statement as absolute in meaning and another statement as being entirely metaphorical and contextual/symblic only.

DISCLAIMER - JUST TO BE 100% CLEAR, MY ACTUAL THOUGHTS ON THIS ARE THAT JESUS WAS INFERRING PETER WAS BEING INFLUENCED BY EVIL AND FLAGGING IT TO HIM IN THIS STRONGLY WORDED WAY - I DONT BELIEVE HE WAS CALLING HIM SATAN - BUT THIS POINT EXTENDS TO KEYS TO KINGDOM AND BUILDING CHURCH ON HIM - ALSO MAYBE MEANING HE SHOULD LEAD IT TO A DEGREE, BUT PERHAPS NOT TO WHAT THE PAPACY HAS BECOME UNDERSTOOD TO BE TODAY WITH ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY.