My thoughts on the ACC

[Jason]

So as I've browsed the ACC website, I've seen a number of things that I really enjoy and appreciate. In fact, I'd say that 90% or better I can theologically agree with or allow without complaint. That in and of itself is probably sufficient for me to find a new church home with the ACC, but there are a few things that may just prevent that from ever happening. Here are my thoughts, which I'd like to share with the board, and I'd like Fr. Michael or another official rep to reply if they would be so kind:

1: The ACC seems like an amaglamation of an Apostolic church mixed with the Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists. To be honest, that makes me a bit uncomfortable. The insistance that Crucifix's are basically "pagan" really turns me off. Not that I have a problem per se with this, but to state that a Crucifix is pratically pagan is pretty unforgiving. Considering that nearly everything done today by Orthodox Christianity has some root in paganism, I feel that to single out the Crucifix while allowing the Rosary to be hypocritical at least.

2: To declare with one sweeping generalization that all of Christian orthodoxy is "heretical and apostate" smacks of prejudice. Considering that it was those same "orthodox" bishops who bestowed apostolic authority upon the heads of the ACC, I find that also very unforgiving.

3: The ACC seems overly legalistic. In my mind, this is the very thing that Jesus taught against. The insistance that you must observe a Saturday Sabbath or you're commiting a "sin" just blows me away. Was man made for the sabbath, or the sabbath made for man? What difference does it honestly make?

Thank you for your patience and understanding.

[dark_knight]

Hi again Jason, and thank you for your sincere contribution!

I have sent my papers to ACC and believe it was the right decision for me, even though I have somewhat same thought on couple of issues with you.
Still, as far as I've seen and understood, ACC gives us space to think and believe, not restricting variety of interpretations.
What becomes to similarities with the JW's and SDA's, I believe we ought to follow their exaple or anyone else's, when they happen to be right :)
I am raised in a "puritan low church style" community and am currently forming my own style, which combines, in the Scriptural spirit, Jewish and Catholic style.
I believe that the "Orthodoxy" of the ACC is only a Style, not the definition of truth and orthodoxy in faith.

Still, these are just my interpretations and feelings:)

May God bless you in whatever path you choose!

-Henrik

[Archbishop Michael-John]

Jason,

I'm sorry to read that there are a few things about the ACC that might prevent you from finding a new Church home with us! Although I'm very pleased that you really enjoy and appreciate most of what you have seen.
Let's see if I can push that 90% figure up a little further! :-)

1: The ACC seems like an amaglamation of an Apostolic church mixed with the Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists. To be honest, that makes me a bit uncomfortable. The insistance that Crucifix's are basically "pagan" really turns me off. Not that I have a problem per se with this, but to state that a Crucifix is pratically pagan is pretty unforgiving. Considering that nearly everything done today by Orthodox Christianity has some root in paganism, I feel that to single out the Crucifix while allowing the Rosary to be hypocritical at least.
NO!

Whilest people from the Jehovah's Witness and Seventh Day Adventist churches are welcome to convert to Arian Catholicism, I assure you that any resemblance to other churches is not deliberate! I have researched the core theology and history of Christianity and my policy is to strive to any length to keep the Church within the bounds of the doctrines laid down by Christ and the Apostles, while at the same time applying Christianity with logic and reason; this invariably requires us to look closely at the Early Church and to accept the truth no matter how bitter it may be! Occasionally I have quoted texts that support my findings in order to explain the beliefs of the early Church, however I have strived to present the facts to you and have not used the theology of the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Seventh Day Adventists as any basis for the Arian Catholic Church.

You have clearly pointed out a confusion here which needs to be resolved urgently and I will revisit the articles on our website to ensure that there is nothing there that is misleading or unclear...

The Rosary

The Rosary comes in many designs and has been in use as a prayer counter for many thousands of years. We accept the Rosary as a useful aid to prayer.

The Cross and the Crucifix

The "Crucifix" is defined as:

1: A cross displaying the figure of the crucified Christ,
2: Any cross viewed as a symbol of Christ's crucifixion.The ACC only recognises the primary definition of Crucifix and refers to the cross without the figure of Christ as only a "Cross"! While the Crucifix is certainly NOT Pagan, the cross does, however, have Pagan origins and the use of any form of graven image was forbidden by the early Church! {By the way the word "Pagan" actually means "country dweller"! As Christianity grew in the towns and cities and spread outwards, the term referred to the country dwellers who had not yet been converted!}


The Cross (+) itself has been in use by different cultures across the world for many thousands of years; in Roman society it is said to have represented the Roman sun god "Sol" and by other cultures as a symbol representing female sexuality, at the same time the Chi-Rho (☧ = Unicode: U+2627) symbol was also in use by the Romans, representing, Chronos, the god of time. Early Christians would not use the cross as it was considered to be insulting to Christ, they also tended not to use any kind of graven Icon for fear of violating the second commandment (so the Roman Catholics decided to pretend the second commandment didn't exist as graven Icons were an integral part of Roman culture!).

However the symbol "Alpha - Chi-Rho - Omega" has been found painted on ancient Christian Ossuaries dating back to the first century AD and is the symbol adopted by Emperor Constantine (“Pontifex Maximus” Pagan High Priest of Rome) in the 4th century as he believed it would give him victory in battle.

Tertullian of Carthage (son of a Roman centurion) first spoke of Christians making the sign of the cross (touching their forehead, chest and shoulders) about the turn of the 3rd century. The first appearance of a cross in Christian art is on a Vatican sarcophagus from the mid - 5th Century and is conspicuous by it absence in Christian art before this time. It was a Greek cross with equal-length arms. Jesus' body was not shown.

Yet many early representations of the cross used the form of a Tau Cross. It was so named because it looked like the letter “tau”, or our letter “T” and was a common design used by the Romans for crucifixion along with the typical cross and stake. The bible itself makes two references to Christ's death on a tree (Acts 5:30 and 1 Peter 2:24) and there is discrepancy over the translation of the Greek word: “stauros” as "cross" in most bibles as this word is often used to refer to a "stake"!

The first crucifixion scenes didn’t appear in Christian art until the 7th century AD and the crucifix only began to come into use by the Roman Catholic church in the latter half of the 6th century. The Crucifix depicting the crucifixion of Christ on the cross was finally authorized by the Council of Constantinople in 692 AD.

The Lore

Strictly speaking the cross was not a symbol used by Christ, his Apostles or the early Church, the evidence we have suggests that Christ could have been crucified on either a Cross, a Tau-cross, a Tree or a Stake! The cross is a later addition and the use of the Crucifix is bordering on the idolatrous! Personally, I like the crucifix, it is a symbol I was brought up with and there is no doubt that it is a very powerful symbol! All things considered I have decreed that the cross and the crucifix are acceptable for use by the Arian Catholic Church but should not be central to worship nor used in an idolatrous manner.

The Crucifix is accepted as symbolism in Arian Catholicism and may be on display during Easter time and during solemn services including the ministration of the Holy Sacraments (although the Chi Rho may be more effective for Exorcisms due to its genuine origin), Funerals and Memorials, BUT must NOT be used as a focal point for worship. The worship of idols and the making of idols for worship are strictly forbidden under the second commandment.

The "Alpha - Chi-Rho - Omega" cross is however accepted as the official cross and symbol of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and is permitted for use in all aspects of Arian Catholicism as are crosses displaying the "Alpha - Chi-Rho - Omega" symbol in the centre.

To declare with one sweeping generalization that all of Christian orthodoxy is "heretical and apostate" smacks of prejudice. Considering that it was those same "orthodox" bishops who bestowed apostolic authority upon the heads of the ACC, I find that also very unforgiving.
Rebuilding the Church from the ruins of Heresy and Apostasy

A Christian church that has deviated from the teachings of Christ and the Apostles is Apostate! The teaching of false doctrine such as the trinity is heresy! Perhaps I am a little prejudiced against the real heretics and apostates who know the truth but continue to teach heresy! However we respect the fact that the mainstream Churches have been the vehicle for carrying the succession of the Holy Spirit Apostolically. It is a dogma of the Church that there has been and will always be a Bishop of the true Church.

The Arian Catholic Church recognises the training and in part the ordination of clergy from the Anglican Catholic, Anglican, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Messianic Jewish churches including branch churches that are recognised by them. Their ordinations are regularised by Ordination Sub Conditione to ensure that they have received the Holy Spirit from all the branches that have merged with the ACC.

There are many good Bishops in the other churches who are either misguided or who are biting their tongues because of their commitments. The latter, I know of several personally and we are offered their quiet support and guidance.

3: The ACC seems overly legalistic. In my mind, this is the very thing that Jesus taught against. The insistance that you must observe a Saturday Sabbath or you're commiting a "sin" just blows me away. Was man made for the sabbath, or the sabbath made for man? What difference does it honestly make?

The Sabbath

In the early Church the Sabbath was held on the Saturday along with the Jewish Christians. The fourth Commandment tells us: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” The fifth Commandment tells us: “Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work” (i.e. rest!). The Roman church merged these two Commandments into one and shifted the Sabbath to the Sunday in line with the Roman day of the Sun god: "Sol"!

Christ was relaxed over the observance of the Sabbath, but he did not ignore it, he attempted to show that the Mosaic Law was never intended to be applied so absolutely that it would take precedence over the necessities of daily life (See Matthew 12:1-14, Mark 2:23-28, 3:1-5 and Luke 6:1-11). The Arian Catholic Church respects this and we make allowances for people who have to work on the Sabbath, for example: Clergy, Medical staff, Engineers, Emergency Rescue personnel etc!

Arian Catholic Church Lore

The Arian Catholic Church differs from the Unitarian-Universalist church, we believe that the Church is Christ's Church, and as such it is irreformable. The devil would have us break all the commandments and insult God, His Son and the Church and all in the name of "god"! Deviation from the teachings of Christ and the Apostles is apostasy and therefore guidelines are in place to keep us from straying from the right path. Otherwise as well as adopting trinitarianism from Greek and Hindu theologies and not observing the Sabbath we could find the Church electing a pompous Pope (Daniel 7:8) who then declares himself infallible, declares the Virgin Mary to be divine and the Queen of Heaven and then what next? Adopting elements of Buddhism?!

I hope I have clarified these points for you and haven't driven you further away! >:-O Essentially the Church must be Orthodox as I do not want it to become another "Anything goes" style sect! Of course we are all constantly learning and evaluating new theories and interpretations and I will always consider someone's point of view.

Blessings in the Grace of our Father, through Immanuel.

[dark_knight]

Thank you +Fr.Michael John for your long reply.
This also cleared my understanding more!
I agree that it's not reasonable to make ACC another Universalist-Syncretist melting pot. Still, I think we ought to have room for each others' consciousness and understanding which is varying - and I feel two of us understand each other in this point, as it seemed in your first reply to my inquiery:)
I hope you will publish a "canon law" about these issues.

Yours,

Henrik

[Danage]

I am currently swaying betwene five religions/denominations: Judaism, Methodist Christianity (as I originally was), Zoroastrianism (very small chance), Messianic Judaism (again, small chance) and the Arian Church. This is because I rejected the Trinity in October last year, using logic and reason. I subsequently rejected Jesus as Messiah in December, after considering Judaism and Islam. Islam is no longer an option.

If I had known that the Arian Church survived the attacks of the Papacy in the late fifth and early sixth centuries, then I would have given Arianism serious consideration.

Now that I have found a church that embraces the teachings and logic of Arius, Arianism seems to be a 40% margin, Judaism 30%, Mathodist 20%, and the remainder make up the rest. Seems all exact, but that is how my mind is currently arguing this way and that.

[dark_knight]

I understand what you are saying and seeking. I was raised as a JW and thus a form of Arian Christology is mine by upbringing.
I have in the past swayed between Buddhism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Unitarian Universalism, 7th day Adventism and Roman Catholism!!! :D quite a mixture, what?

I long for the Living Truth of the Living God!

Now I've found my home here, though I am bit more "low church" and conservative than official ACC in some things.

[Danage]

Are there any 'low church' (Protestant-based) Arian Churches existing today, and worship the Jewish Shabbat, Sabbath. I have never considered Roman Catholicism, for I see it as being wrong in it's doctrines, especially the Pope's infallibility.

I was raised as a Protestant and so I believe that the Protestant churches have a point, but the Trinity is illogical and blasphemous to my view of G-d.

[Archbishop Michael-John]

Henrik,

It is unavoidable that there will be a spectrum of belief within Arian Catholicism and I would not turn someone away because they were Anomoean or Semi-Arian (compare with: Low Church, High Church and Boundary-line!). However I will continue to strive to teach Christianity as it was taught by Christ and the Apostles, and the official doctrine of the Church cannot meander! I will guide my parishioners to the path of Arian Catholicism. One of the reasons why we have a forum is so that we can exercise our views, share ideas and knowledge, and debate anything that is difficult to understand or sensitive.

Articles of Faith / Canon Law
I have been working on such a document of Arian Catholic Canon, it is not a simple document to write, and it is one that needs to be debated over by the Episcopate before it can be published. The Anglican Articles of Faith were greeted with scorn and it was subjected to two major revisions. However a list of Ecumenical Laws would be primarily concerned with the Governance of the Church. Apart from the creed, the Scriptures themselves are the central point of our teaching. Jesus had nothing else!
:reveek:

Thank you +Fr.Michael John for your long reply.
This also cleared my understanding more!
I agree that it's not reasonable to make ACC another Universalist-Syncretist melting pot. Still, I think we ought to have room for each others' consciousness and understanding which is varying - and I feel two of us understand each other in this point, as it seemed in your first reply to my inquiery:)
I hope you will publish a "canon law" about these issues.

Yours,

Henrik

[Jason]

Maybe my issues are not so specific. After thinking about it for a week now, I believe that I concur with the Arian Christology, but I dislike the strict orthodoxy of the rest of the ACC.

Seems I too much of a heretic.

The only other church Im considering is the Liberal Catholic Church, which oddly enough espouses the Trinity concept, but gives the the freedom in the rest of their worship to believe as I will.

Now if I can only find an Arian Liberal Catholic Church....lol.

Peace.

[Archbishop Michael-John]

Jason,

Doctrine is the principle and policy taught and advocated by the Church as indisputable fact! There comes a point, when you follow Christ, that where the doctrines of His Church are concerned you cannot pick and mix different religious beliefs. :-)

If everyone was able to pick and choose ideas from this and that sect or religion then the Church would have no discipline and the teachings of Christ would be lost! :-(

If the word of God is set in stone then what would become of us if we all were to write our own version of the word? Having that foundation stone and someone to teach Christ's doctrines provided the rock on which He built His Church.
:reveek:
Please tell me about your specific concerns and we can discuss them.

Kind regards,
in the Grace of our Father, through Immanuel,

[bupanishad2012]

Maybe my issues are not so specific. After thinking about it for a week now, I believe that I concur with the Arian Christology, but I dislike the strict orthodoxy of the rest of the ACC.

Seems I too much of a heretic.

The only other church Im considering is the Liberal Catholic Church, which oddly enough espouses the Trinity concept, but gives the the freedom in the rest of their worship to believe as I will.

Now if I can only find an Arian Liberal Catholic Church....lol.

Peace.
The Liberal Catholic Church is affiliated with The Theosophical Society started by H. P. Blavatsky, and would not have much in common with Arian Christianity. Been there, done that. Perhaps a look into early "Christian" Ebionitism would make a better "bedfellow" than the LCC.

[bupanishad2012]

There are many "New Age" groups claiming to be "Ebionite" on the Net today. Does Arianism have any kinship to ancient Ebionism, besides the same basic belief of Jesus being subordinate to the Father?

[Danage]

Jason, I don't agree with the Rosary either, so I would not use it, if I had one.

I also don't agree with Christmas, but it is not a requirement of the Arian Catholic Church. I don't agree with Easter either, but that is the only point of doctrine that I have serious doubts about.

I agree with everything in Arian Catholicism apart from:
The Rosary
Praying to the saints to intercede on our behalf (I direct all prayers at G-d directly)
EasterI'm sure there are others, but these are the main areas I have problems with, but, apart from Easter, they are not major ones.

[Danage]

I would like to correct myself here, as I believed that Easter was a required festival, when in fact the only required festivals are the right ones: the Seven Levitical Feasts.