Dr. Barnett continues with his second element:
'Second, it is protestant. Article 6 states, "...whatsoever is not read therein," that is, in the Bible, "is not required an any man, that it should be believed as an article of faith." The church upholds the right of the individual to read and understand the Bible for his salvation, as opposed to salvation truth being mediated by the church.'I know several people who are considering Roman Catholicism. Personally, I don't understand the appeal to swim the Tiber. But I have tried to listen and speak to those who have. I have written (cheekily) about the appeal of becoming Roman Catholic in a previous post (Click HERE.)
The truth is this: I can grasp that some want the certainty of a centralized and unified interpretation of Scripture; an authority outside of me to determine the meaning of Scripture; something to mitigate against a million individual interpretations.
But I simply cannot see how Rome answers the questions that some are asking. Turning to Rome seems to raise more questions than it answers.
I read the New Testament and it appears that God seems to take a risk on people: God expects that each believer, reading his or her own Bible; accountable to pastors and elders; mindful of the great thinkers of the past, and in faith in Jesus our Lord, will 'work out their own salvation with fear and trembling.' More than that, God promises to 'work in you, to will and to work for his good pleasure.'
The point here is that being Anglican allows for this very activity...
All, it appears, without a Pontiff in Rome!
Pic on Flickr by *Toshio*.