What Does the Bible Say About the Episcopal Church #2?

We  begin this episode by noting the nature of the Episcopal church and its teachings. It broke away from the Roman Catholic Church, but much of it's organization and teachings are very similar and in some cases identical to those of that Church. They have a clergy-laity distinction which is not found in the NT. We discuss what is found there. Baptism in the Episcopal is done by pouring water on the individual. We again look at baptism as commanded in the New Testament by the Lord. Eric looks at the doctrine of transubstantiation, what it is and why it is erroneous. Arnie notes that they engage in confirmation of children, what this consists of and the two points of error included in it. We look at the differing teaching of the Catholic and Episcopal churches on salvation and note that both are contrary to what the Bible says. We begin a discussion about how liberal the Episcopal priests and church are. We will have to complete this discussion in the next episode. Take about 30-minutes to listen in on our discussion. Have your Bible handy so you can verify what we are saying. There is a transcript of this Buzzsprout episode provided for your convenience.

Transcript

Fred Gosnell: 0:00

This is a presentation of the Woodland church of Christ meeting at 3370 Broad Street in Sumter, South Carolina. We meet for worship on Sunday at ten thirty am and five thirty pm. We meet for Bible study at nine thirty am on Sunday and seven pm on Wednesday. If you have questions or comments on this lesson, you may email them to Arnie Granke at agranke@440718@twc.com or to Glenn Landrum at scbamaboy2003@yahoo.com or to Eric McClam at ericmcclam50@outlook.com or to Fred Gosnell at fgosnell@i.net.

Arnie: 0:55

Good afternoon. This is What Does the Bible Say, brought to you by the church of Christ in Woodland here in Sumter, South Carolina. I'm Arnie, and across the table from me is Glenn and Fred and Eric here beside me, and we want to talk to you about the Bible, and and some things that the Bible teaches, and, and give you a little bit of reason to beware of some things that it doesn't teach that others are teaching and claiming for it. The church of Christ at Woodland is at 3370 Broad Street Extension. We're about two miles east of the Shaw Shaw Air Force Base main gate. We would certainly welcome you to come worship with us, and if you have any questions about anything we've said, or even some other religious topic, give us a holler, let us know. We'll be glad to deal with that. Glenn, where should we start?

Glenn: 2:03

Well, last week we started a lesson on the Episcopal Church, and why the Episcopal Church is is not the church that is mentioned in the New Testament. We were the last thing we were talking about last week was the Episcopal Church in America. Of course, hte Episcopal Church was started by King Henry the Eighth of England to break away from the Catholic Church. And then the church in America began began in 1783 That's the Episcopal Church getting approval to have the American Episcopal Church in the United States. Well, the nature of the Episcopal Church and its teaching, in spite of breaking away from the Roman Catholicism, many of the organization and many teachings of the Anglican Church, and in turn the Episcopal Church, are very similar. Now, the Anglican Church, that was the English name for the church, and then Episcopal was a follow-on name for the Anglican Church, as well, so either one of them would be used appropriately for the Episcopal Church. So they're very similar, if not identical to the Roman Catholic Church in doctrine. First point is a clergy laity distinction. The New Testament knows of no such distinction being drawn between if we want to call preachers the clergy, and that's generally what is referred to as the clergy, is the ones who are doing the preaching. Although the New Testament doesn't make any distinction between those who preach the word of God and those who are just members of the church. The word of God says that all members of the church comprise a holy priesthood whose duty is to offer spiritual sacrifices, and now we'll read them from First Peter, First Peter two five and nine, just about there. First Peter, you know, First Peter two, verse five says, You also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. And I'm going to go ahead and read through verse nine. Therefore, it is also contained in the scriptures. Behold, I lay in Zion a chief stoner, stone cornerstone elect, precious, and he who believes on Him will by no means be but to shame. Now this is referring to Jesus Christ as that chief corner stone. Therefore, to you who I believe He is precious, but to those who are disobedient, the stone which the builders rejected, has become the chief cornerstone and the stone of stumbling and a rock of offense. They stumble, being disobedient to the word to which they also were appointed. And then verse nine, But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. So Peter, through the approval of the Holy Spirit, or the direction of the Holy Spirit is, is teaching that members of Christ's body, members of the church are a royal or a holy priesthood. So each, each person who is a Christian is actually a priest. There's no, there's no differentiation between preachers or clergy and the membership of the church.

Fred Gosnell: 6:31

Yeah, and Paul in Galatians 3, 20 28 made this statement. He says, There is neither Jew nor Greek, there's neither bond or free, there's neither male or female. You're all one in Christ Jesus, and so there's no distinction as far as one is a part of the clergy and the laity is another group. So then one of the other things that there's a problem with in the teaching of the physical church is the fact that they say that baptism is administered by effusion, or effusion is another word for pouring, and of course in the New Testament, of course, the word baptism is a transliteration of baptizo, which means immersion. And so in Acts eight, verse Acts eight, verse 39 there, when Philip was teaching the eunuch, they were, they had stopped the chariot in verse. Let's back up to verse 36 says, As they went on their way, as Philip and the eunuch, they came into a certain water, and the eunuch said, "See, here is water. What doth hinder me be baptized? And Philip said, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. So he commanded the chair to stand still. They went both down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and he properly translated, immersed him. So notice they both went in into the water, so then he immersed in him, and when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip. So in Colossians two verse 12, there baptism is described in verse 12, but Paul writes there, he says that, Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him to the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. So, again, the description of baptism is a burial, of course. It's a burial in water, and to pour water on someone or just sprinkle water on someone doesn't satisfy the means of baptism, as described in the New Testament, of course, Ephesians six says there's one Lord, one faith, one baptism, so there's only one way.

Arnie: 9:09

Let me put in here, if you don't, if you don't mind, for just a moment, it'll, it'll come back to you, Eric, but you know, if, if the word baptism, as, as of course, you correctly defined it. If, if it has to do with immersion, and one has to be a Christian, but he can't be a Christian unless he's been baptized, i.e. immersed, then there are a whole lot of people that think that they're Christians, and they don't meet the Bible definition. To meet the Bible definition is to enable yourself to have a chance to go to heaven. Otherwise, that's pretty dangerous territory to be in, if you haven't been, if you've been sprinkled or poured or water applied in some other way other than baptism, baptizo, immersion, you may not be a prospect for heaven. Just think about that, and just don't justify your preacher because he told you this and that, and it must be accurate because he said it. He has not said what the Bible teaches, and that's a dangerous territory.

Eric: 10:26

The next thing that they talk about is transsubstantiation. This doctrine teaches that the unleavened bread and the fruit of the vine literally became the body and blood of Jesus of Christ in the observance of the Lord's supper, after thanks is given for it. If this doctrine is true, Jesus did not know it, for He still called the cup the fruit of the vine. If we look in Matthew chapter 26 Matthew chapter 26 and I'm going to start with verse 26 And this is when Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper. He says, as And as they were sitting, as they were eating, excuse me, Jesus took bread, he took bread, he blessed it, broke it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat, this is my body. Then he took the cup and gave thanks and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins, but I say to you, I would not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom. They said the Episcopal, the Episcopal, or those of the Episcopal Church, believed that the fruit of the vine was literally Christ's body, and Jesus actually taught that lesson concerning about, a heart, a hard lesson, because they did believe that He was talking about His body, His body as being the bread, and his blood, his literal blood, drinking his literal blood, but that's not what that wasn't so. In Matt, Mark 14, we see, we see it again in verse 22 that Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, and he said they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed, broke it, gave it to them, and said,"Take, eat, this is my body. Then he took the cup, when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank from it, and he said to them, "This is the blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many, but surely I say to you, I will no longer drink the fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of God. Paul did not recognize it. Paul did not recognize it, for he said the substance that was eating during the Lord's Supper was bread. In First Corinthians chapter 11, First Corinthians chapter 11, and I'm gonna start with verse 23 and it says, For I receive the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the same night which He was betrayed, took bread, and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, 'Take, eat, this is My body, which is broken for you. Do this in remembrance of Me. In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do as often as you drink of it in remembrance of me. And verse 26 says, for as often as you eat his bread, drink his cup, you do proclaim the Lord's death until he come. So the bread and the body, the bread and the blood is not Jesus' literal body and literal blood that we are partaking of, it just emblems of recognizing of what what we're partaking of.

Arnie: 14:33

Let's think a little bit more about the aspect of children in, in the church, because children eventually in, in, in the Episcopal Church eventually become, become confirmed, and they go through classes to prepare for that. That regarding the the teaching of the church and and comparing it in some cases with with the Bible and so forth. And the practice of of confirming children was originally necessitated by two points, hate to say it, but two points of error, which this Episcopal denomination teaches. The first of those is the doctrine of original sin, that the children were born already in sin, they apparently inherited that from from their parents, their parents were sinners, and, and therefore the children of sinners were sinners as well there. And that concept necessitated the doctrine of infant baptism. How do we get rid of this problem of having sin in the children? Ah, we baptize them in, and that will, that will purify. Of course, as, as Glenn has already pointed out, that baptism is not sprinkling or pouring, it's immersion, and, and even adults that are sprinkled or poured have not been baptism. If they haven't been fully buried under water, then, then they know baptism has has occurred. So to assure proper indoctrination of children after their baptism, sponsors were appointed to see that each child received proper instruction in the catechism. I would say, you know, sometimes you need to have some sort of a textbook on on things, and I understand that, but when the catechism conflicts with the things that the Bible teaches, I think we'd be doing better to stick with the Bible rather than the catechism there,

Eric: 17:22

but that,

Arnie: 17:23

I'm sure.

Eric: 17:24

When you talk about catechism,

Arnie: 17:25

yeah,

Eric: 17:26

I did look that up, and it's coming from page 403 and that is, and it's talked about the baptism of infants,

Arnie: 17:35

Yeah,

Eric: 17:35

which it says born with a fallen human nature, and train and tainted by original sin, children also have need of a new birth in baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realms of freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called. The sheer gratitudeness of the grace of salvation is particularly maintained in infant baptism that came from page 243 from the catechism.

Arnie: 18:08

Yeah, I'm glad I'm glad you, you brought that up. So here, here they're trying to do away with sin now. Of course, where did they get that sin from? Either their parents were sinners or someone else down the line that they inherited it from. Well, their parents shouldn't be regarded as sinners, I wouldn't think, because they're faithful, presumably being faithful members of of that denomination. but if that denomination isn't able to take away their sin when they were baptized and when they partook of the of the Lord's Supper, how is that denomination going to deal with the children and take their sin away? These things back up, you know, and people lose track of that. They think that their pastor told them that this is what they need to do, and after all, he's the expert on the Bible. You haven't seen a Bible in his hand yet. I wouldn't consider him an expert on the Bible yet. Just a few thoughts to think about the application of some of these errors. They're not just errors in and of themselves, they're errors that have consequences, and the consequences are pretty deep. Thank you for the thoughts that you shared with us a moment ago, Glenn.

Glenn: 19:36

Yeah, still talking about infant baptism and why infants, children who have not come to understand and have knowledge of the scriptures of Christ, what He's done for them, so that they can be saved, these. Is no ones that we're talking about, and this was what has been taught about here, that children in inherited sin, Arnie mentioned from their parents, but I believe what what they really go back to is saying that that all people inherit the sin from Adam, because Adam fell from grace. He was the first sinner. Therefore, everyone following Adam is in sin, regardless of what decision they make, and so they are born into sin. Well, that's just not not true. It takes away free will, for one thing, and we, we will see in a moment how free will, us making a decision, makes a difference. Children are not born into sin. The New Testament does not authorize a baptism of infants. The one to be baptized must first believe, and we'll look at two passages here to show that. Mark 16, 16 reads, He who believes and is baptized will be saved, but he who does not believe will be condemned. Well, before being baptized, one has to believe. It doesn't do any good to be baptized unless one believes. And what do they believe? They believe on Jesus Christ. Believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, that Jesus Christ came to this earth, lived a sinless life, died on the cross for our sins, and was resurrected from the dead, from the grave, and then arose in heaven to sit upon the right hand of God, ruling over His church. Well, that's the first one, and it specifically says he who believes and is baptized, that is making a decision and answering the cause. When Peter in Acts two two was preaching the very first gospel sermon after Christ had had risen from the from the grave and ascended to heaven. This is on the day of Pentecost. You can back up in Acts two to verse 22 as where Peter first starts his sermon, and he preaches and talks about Jesus, what, what had happened to Jesus, and what Jesus did, and where Jesus is at this time. He mentioned that in verse 32 This Jesus, God is raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore, being exalted at the right hand of God, and having received of the Father, the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out on you all that now see and hear. For David did not ascend in the into the heavens. No, David didn't ascend in the heavens. He's still in the grave, but He says to Himself,"The Lord said to my Lord, that's God said to Jesus, Sit on my right hand till I make your enemies your footstool. Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now, when they - that's all these people that preach Peter was preaching to - and were hearing this sermon. Now, when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and they said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, What shall we do? They were asking, What decision do we need to make in order to make things right? Now Peter said to them, he said,'Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Peter told them, said, 'The decision you need to make is first repent, turn away from your sins. They had already believed because they were asking the question about it. They had already believed. So Peter said, "Repent, turn away from your sins, and what, be baptized, that's immersed, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, which is the salvation. So a choice people make to to respond to the gospel, which those people in Acts Acts two goes on the day of Pentecost, they made a decision the New Testament presents infants, as innocent ones who did not need to have sins washed away, Matthew 18 verse three. Now, this, this is, is not a real prominent passage, and I don't believe that most people really take it to mean what it really means, but he, this is Jesus speaking, and say it, Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. Now pay attention to what he said, Unless you become converted. How can one become converted? They have to, they have to believe, they have to make a decision, and then do what, Become as little children. Why would he say become as little children? He was saying become as little children, because children have no sin, and that's exactly what he was telling these people, that they needed to do, they needed to make that decision, that they were going to change their way of life and become as little children. Ezekiel 18 four. Now we're going to the Old Testament. Ezekiel 18 four says, Behold, all souls are mine. The soul of the Father, as well as the soul of the son, is mine. The soul who sins shall die. This applies to everyone. This isn't just the Old Testament, those in the Jews, is talking to. This this statement applies to everyone. The soul who sins shall die. What's he talking about? It's talking about sin. And if you look at Romans 3, 23 or thr 6, 23 The wages of sin is death, and that's what this is.

Fred Gosnell: 27:04

The word inheritance is in none of those passages that you read,

Glenn: 27:07

none.

Fred Gosnell: 27:08

Not one passage said anything about inheriting the sins of somebody else, and that's the problem. The Bible doesn't say it, so if the Bible doesn't say it, it's simply not true. So for the most part the Episcopal Church does differ in some of the doctrines from the Catholic Church. Of course, the most noteworthy one is in the doctrine of salvation. The Catholic Church teaches a system of salvation through meritorious works, in other words, what you do, then God owes you something. The Episcopal Church, that on the other hand, teaches salvation by faith only, and the Book of Common Prayer says this,"That we are justified by faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort." Of course, that was the same thing that Luther believed. So then the New Testament says something different. Its justification is by faith in Romans five verse one. Paul, when he wrote to the Romans, he said, there, we'll get there in a minute. In Romans five verse one, Paul said that, Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Of course, what he does not say, he does not say that we're saved by faith only, and but when, and when we go to James two verse 24 and you need to read the context of this, but we'll just read verse 24 because James specifically says, You see, then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only, of course. James discusses some of those works in, in the context,

Eric: 29:08

For the most part. Excuse me, For the most part, Episcopal preach, thus the Episcopal Church itself are very liberal in their theology, ex episcopal bishop of San Francisco, James A. PiKe, which is deceased, called both the biblical account of the Garden of Eden and that of the virgin birth of Jesus a myth, saying of the account of the Garden of Eden, Eden, yet I do not know a single member of the Anglican community, community, communion, bishops, presbyter, deacon, or layman who believed the story literally, and that's Bill Cruz, The Church, Origins, Origin, page four, in commencing of his book. A church without God that was published in 1967 in which he denied the divinity of Christ, the inspiration of the Bible, and many other fundamental fundamentals. Ernest Harrison, an Anglican clergyman from Toronto, Carrick, Canada, said, Life has shown us that nobody had the final answer for all time that we learned from experience and from each other, and that was the AP news release, may 6. Oh, well, we're running out of time, and I wish that you would take in consideration the things that we said, and we will start back again talking about the Episcopal Church. Until the next time, may God be with you. Have a nice day.