Anglican books?

[blakesto]

What would be a good summer read to get a good understanding of the Anglican/Episcopal Church? I was looking around on amazon.com and the following sounded pretty good, but I decided I should get the suggestions of some of yall. The ones that sounded best were:

Introduction to the Episcopal Church by Joseph Bernardin
and
Welcome to the Episcopal Church by Christopher Webber

[PaladinValer]

I have the second one, and it is excellent. :)

I would also suggest:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0819219150/qid=1114043777/br=1-5/ref=br_lf_b_5//002-9019581-1314461?v=glance&s=books&n=297487

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1561011789/qid=1114043777/br=1-4/ref=br_lf_b_4//002-9019581-1314461?v=glance&s=books&n=297487

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0819219665/qid=1114043848/br=1-4/ref=br_lf_b_4//002-9019581-1314461?v=glance&s=books&n=297487

[gtsecc]

KJV is our most famous work.

[PaladinValer]

And one of our most regretable...

The Book of Common Prayer, on the other hand...

[Qoheleth]

Anglican Breviary :)


Q

[TomUK]

The Book of Common Prayer, on the other hand...

I think i could argue that the BofCP has been a more detrimental work- perhaps not regrettable but certainly not beneficial in the grand scheme of things. However that is getting off topic.

For Anglican books i'd say your best bet is find a collection of sermons by Michael Ramsey- the 100th Archbishop of Canterbury (and he baptised my Mum!)

[gtsecc]

TomUK, BofCP is really amazing.
Who would have thought to publish it in English?
That was brilliant. Before it we had nothing or some Latin.

[pmcleanj]

I think i could argue that the BofCP has been a more detrimental work- perhaps not regrettable but certainly not beneficial in the grand scheme of things. However that is getting off topic.


Sput! -- no, wrong language
Is Outrage! -- no, wrong culture
Holy Mary and Joseph! :crossrc: -- no, too florid

My, what an interesting idea. Yes, that will do.

Could you perhaps start a new thread to expand on this concept? It's come as rather a shock to me, and I would love to hear your reasoning.

[PaladinValer]

I think I understand what he means: the 39 Articles, which really have very little/no place in the Anglican Communion anymore.

[gtsecc]

I think I understand what he means: the 39 Articles, which really have very little/no place in the Anglican Communion anymore.

/Triumph the Insult Dog They are great! Really great... For me to poop on!

[gtsecc]

The Chronicles of Narnia Boxed Set
by C. S. Lewis (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author=C.%20S.%20Lewis/002-1445405-3421616)

A Wrinkle in Time - the whole series
by Madeleine L'Engle (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author=Madeleine%20L%27Engle/002-1445405-3421616)

[Fish and Bread]

Personally, I find the Book of Common Prayer to be a brilliant book. What other Christian tradition has a combination breviary, missal, lectionary, ordinal, and psaltar in the venacular which is commonly owned by lay people? If we're no longer the only tradition to have that, we were at least the first. The first BCP also marks the first formal attempt at an English language liturgy. Many of the liturgies practiced by Christian churches in English actually come to a certain extent from the BCP. I was flipping through an Evangelical Lutheran hymnal and it even acknowledges in the forward that it's partly based on the Book of Common Prayer. There are also just the obvious things that everyone lifts, for example "Dear the beloved" was first used as part of a marriage ceremony in a Book of Common Prayer.

I also, for one, find the historical documents section of the 1979 BCP helpful and would even like to see it expanded if we update the prayer book someday. I know a lot of folks take issue with the 39 Articles, but they're only there as a historical document, and in my view they're an important historical document. It's commonly said, and very true in my view, that we can best figure out who were are and where we're going by knowing who we've been. I disagree with a handful of articles out of the 39, but that isn't really the point, as it shows us a snapshot of what Anglicanism was in a certain Post-Reformation period. That snapshot isn't binding anymore, but it is very explanatory. It sort of provides a basic view of what Anglicanism has been and then we can go from there and very conciously decide where our modern faith or the faith of the ancient church differs and make reforms on that basis. I also really hesistate to throw anything out the door -- we're a traditional church, let's preserve our traditions -- particularly something that has been historically been held in such high esteem by the Anglican members of the communion of saints who have now moved beyond this earthly realm.

John

[gitlance]

Well, I really like "Those Episokopals," though you may have to go to a local Episcopal bookstore to find it.

Also, the book that ultimately led to my conversion was "Whole Christianity" by the Rev. Hugh Edsall. Brilliant, brilliant book. If you can find it, I completely recommend it!

[St.Augustine]

I think I understand what he means: the 39 Articles, which really have very little/no place in the Anglican Communion anymore.

The 39 articles to me is the cherry on top of the cake :)

[gtsecc]

The 39 articles to me is the cherry on top of the cake :)
Red Dye # 3 is only legal in a few foods; maraschino cherries are one of them. It causes thyroid cancer in rats.

[PaladinValer]

The problem with the 39 Articles is this:

1. Calvinists always read them to be exactly as they believe (which isn't true)
2. Non-Calvinists (ie: Arminians and Theosics) often read them as if they are completely Calvinistic (which is equally untrue).

Take for example the Article on Predestination. A close reading of it declares not double predestination (which is what Calvinism believes) but single predestination (which is agreeable to Arminians and Theosics). It neither declares double predestination true or false, which both shows how the Calvinists misread it and shows how Arminian/Theosic that Article really is.

Another example is the Article on the Real Presence. It says only a "spiritual presence," yet in Eucharistic Rites, the BCP implies a truly "physical presence." There is obviously a contradiction. Historically, it was only due to Calvinistic influence that the article even reads just a simple spiritual presence. In reality, most of the English Church, even when Calvinism had a stronghold, was still arminian/catholic in its theology and belief. That is one reason why it is hard to find Anglicans who do not recognize the physical presence of Christ in Holy Communion (not to mention, as proved in an earlier thread, that it emphasizes only one nature of Jesus and therefore, it is monophysitism).

Then again, there is the role of the Historic Episcopate. According to the works of Calvin, it is impossible for an orthodox Calvinist to truly operate under the historical definition of Apostolic Succession. They have no such role of bishop in their denominations; simply those of deacon or elder (which really translates to "priest," much to the shagrin of many Calvinists). In other words, a Calvinist who believes in the historic belief of Apostolic Succession isn't really an orthodox Calvinist according to Calvin; it is impossible. Evidence can easily be found in the fact that Cromwell forced the Anglican Church into hiding and that those like him were not really "Anglicans" but "Puritans" or "Separatists," both of which were orthodox Calvinists who were essentially kicked out of the Church and/or left due to the fact that Anglicanism wasn't sufficiently Calvinist enough.

So there are three examples that the Articles are 1) misread often by both, 2) of no true warrant, and 3) of full/partial warrant.

[IowaLutheran]

The New Church's Teaching Series is a 12 volume set which you can pick up for about $10 per book on amazon. I have read the first two volumes, which were both good. The first volume - "The Anglican Vision" is here:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1561011436/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/102-3341956-0383357

[Colabomb]

What would be a good summer read to get a good understanding of the Anglican/Episcopal Church? I was looking around on amazon.com and the following sounded pretty good, but I decided I should get the suggestions of some of yall. The ones that sounded best were:

Introduction to the Episcopal Church by Joseph Bernardin
and
Welcome to the Episcopal Church by Christopher Webber
Just make sure you get a broad look at a broad group.