Anglicanism employs a distinctive theological methodology that emphasizes contextual reading of historical documents (like the 39 Articles) rather than systematic literal interpretation, allowing for appreciation of truth across different Christian traditions while maintaining core convictions about the Eucharist, apostolic succession, and the mystical body of Christ. This approach enables Anglicans to recognize the fullness of the Catholic faith in other traditions while still calling people to the visible church, embodying a 'broken mirror' ecclesiology that values unity over triumphalism.
Deep Dive
Prerequisite Knowledge
- No data available.
Where to go next
- No data available.
Deep Dive
Why this Evangelical became ANGLICAN?! w/ @ChristianityUnited
Added:And that was about like a three-year journey of really wrestling with like Catholicism, the claims of it, the Roman the Roman Pontiff, all that stuff.
And Anglicanism wasn't really on my radar to be honest. It got written off really, really early on of like, "Oh, that's just like that's the church that started because a king wanted a divorce." Like, "Why would I ever [laughter] join?"
You know, that's that's that's the common talking point.
>> [music] [music] >> All right, everybody, what's happening?
Okay, so I'm super stoked. I feel like I've had a really amazing lineup of guests just in the last, you know, while. And anyways, I'm super excited today to say that I have my friend Joey joining us from the amazing YouTube channel. If you haven't checked it out, you have to check it out called Christianity United.
It's a channel that I can very much so put my backing and support behind in so many ways. Joey, how you doing today, brother?
>> I'm doing great. That was a great intro, by the way. I feel honored to be here. I love your channel. I love what you do.
>> Well, I appreciate it. The feeling's mutual, man. So anyways, well, I'm super stoked to have you on, Joey. Just a quick housekeeping thing and then we'll get right into this. If you know my channel, likely you're familiar with Joey's, but I would just say do keep in mind the subscriptions and a like of this video. A subscription to both of our channels can really help keep pushing just some of the flavor of Christian unity that both of our channels try to promote. It can keep pushing that reality and message forward. So I just want to give a plug for that.
Definitely, definitely check out Joey's channel. Seriously, it's amazing. And we have all sorts of stuff from it that we're going to get into today.
But anyways, Joey, so I thought maybe we could start with just kind of I thought if if you would, I know recently I kind of well, I'll spill the beans here a little bit. I know recently you just moved into the Anglican world and I thought that perhaps you could start with giving us just a little bit, however long you want to go, um a little bit of insight into your journey and where you came from, where you are now, and where you see just kind of the your own theological development moving as you spent time just wrestling with uh with deep things theologically in the mind and the heart and elsewhere.
So, I thought maybe that'd be a good place for us to start, brother.
>> Yeah, totally. I So, I was raised evangelical in like just this drunk your way of I grew up in like Pentecostal churches, Calvary Chapel, Baptist churches, like low church Baptist evangelical churches. And um it was really around um my first year as a my first year as a youth pastor that I began to start looking into church history and I realized it didn't look like the non-denominational church that I was working for.
Um and so that led to like a lot of people are doing right now, a lot of searching into the fathers, into um councils and creeds and and realizing there was this whole theological um this whole ocean of theology that I was totally missing out on and I loved theology already. So, to find out there was all this history to study that I've been missing out on was just amazing.
And so naturally a lot of those conversations led to um led to Roman Catholicism and a lot of study there and a lot of experiences there.
Um And that was about like a three-year journey of really wrestling with like Catholicism, the claims of it, the Roman the Roman Pontiff, all that stuff. Um And Anglicanism wasn't really on my radar to be honest. Or I it got written off really really early on of like, "Oh, that's just like that's the church that started because a king wanted a divorce." Like why would I ever [laughter] join?
Yeah.
>> You know, the that that's the common talking point. Um and then funny enough, yeah, somebody as I was actually um studying Eastern Orthodoxy because I was like, "Okay, I've been looking into Catholicism, what about Eastern Orthodoxy?"
Um it was like coupled with like that and a conversation I had with somebody.
So, I was like reading about Eastern Orthodoxy and the conciliar model, a synodal model of church governance really resonated.
Um you know, as opposed to like the Bishop of Rome kind of being the the supreme head of the church.
Um and so, I really like the council of bishops kind of that's what I always seen in church history.
Um and then it was a conversation with a friend who as we were talking theology, he goes, "Are you Anglican?" I He didn't know my theology was. He was like, "Are you an Anglican?" And I was like, "No, I'm not. Why would you ask?" He said, "Oh, you just sound Anglican."
>> [laughter] >> And I was like, "Okay, I guess. Like, why would I don't like that? That's the church that started because of a divorce. What's that about?" And so, looking more and more into Anglicanism, I realized there's a lot of a lot of theological convictions I was coming to that were keeping me from Rome were um present in Anglicanism. Uh you know, conciliar, um it's respective like the the Roman Pontiff, but it's not you know, Britain the British Isles always had a complicated relationship with with Rome.
Um and so, all of that kind of just came to a head of like I just need to attend a church. I need to attend a church and see what I think cuz I've been praying actually the the liturgy of the hours in the in the prayer book for a few years at that point. So, I'd already I already kind of had the the liturgy of Anglicanism in my mind. So, going to an Anglican service for the first time I was like, "Oh my gosh, I love this. This is so great." I'd already been kind of like prepared for it. Um so, I don't know, after that um I was just kind of this is where I want to go to church. And so, my wife and I went for for this past year to um just try it out. Just to see if we enjoyed it or not. If she would enjoy it, if I enjoy it. And not only enjoy, but if it if it seemed true. Like, let's let's test the claims. I met with the priest tons of times to really push him on like, "Hey, I was evangelical and I'm really interested in Catholicism and I want to attack you from both sides, basically." And he was really generous in asking and asking me questions and answering mine. And then we were like, "All right, this is great. Let's do catechisis and see if that if this still seems true to us." And that was another opportunity for both of us then to really dialogue with our with our classmates and with our priest. And yeah, by the end of it we were like, "We do definitely feel like Anglicanism is what it where we're supposed to be." And that's like a summary. There's like all kinds of different moments with God, too, where I just feel like I was getting confirmation from him. Like, "Yeah, go for it. This is where I'm putting you." So, yeah, got confirmed on Pentecost and yeah, I entered into the It's not clean.
The Anglicanism's messy, but I'm excited to be here.
>> [laughter] >> It's definitely messy, man. Well, we're excited I said we're We're all excited to have you, brother.
You I can tell you as one who has recently started engaging on these circles online. So, you can see the flies flying around me.
Um I can say I'm extremely blessed to find brothers who I don't know if I don't know if this is ever comforting to you, Joey, but to some In some level, people might say, "Oh, I don't need that." But when you find other people who have had a similar kind of theological trajectory to yourself, there's something very comforting in that because you're like, "Okay, it wasn't only me who thought this way." Do you know what I Cuz sometimes it can be And so, the more I know like for myself, when I find young men who I think like really really think through things, and then their thinking through that led them in a similar place to where it's led me, it's like, "Okay, that's very comforting." Cuz I'm not I'm not on an island by myself.
Right. I think it would be really scary if my story was the most unique story out there cuz then it's like, "Okay, I think I definitely went off base somewhere."
>> Yeah. Yeah, I feel like that all the time, man. Um yeah, Anyway, so I'm always looking for people who it's like, okay, yes, I'm happy that I'm not the only one who has come to this sort of reasoning because, like you said, that's actually a place you really don't want to be. That's when you know it's erroneous.
Um, >> Yeah.
>> But Joey, so well, that's that's a it's a beautiful story, man. I mean, I don't know if you know my story. I grew up, I mentioned it to you a little bit, but I grew up in the United Methodist Church.
And due to like, uh, actually I was midway through seminary. I went to Asbury Theological Seminary. Um, and just graduated about a year or so ago with an MDiv. But, uh, in the middle of my journey there, certain things I I was still I was definitely high church within within Methodism, even though these are Anglican terms explicitly. But there were certain things when it came to the sacraments and to ecclesiology, really those two things. I mean, there's also the mess Methodism has mess in it, too. But I'd say more theologically, um, it's more it was more theologically grounded around ecclesiology and the sacraments. And that led me up the candlestick because since Methodism's an English tradition, I felt like I just kind of like went up, up, up. And so that's what led me there, but it's actually not all that different. I know you get different shades of evangelicalism, but actually a lot of evangelicalism, in my experience anyways, kind of has some it has the same instincts that Wesley had. Like the the old the original evangelical movement basically kind of trickles down into the modern evangelical world in a sense. So I know there's reformed camps there, but I also would I would say actually I sometimes relate more to those coming out of the evangelical tradition than that of the reformed tradition.
>> I agree with you. The fun thing is that uh Sorry, I mean to cut you off. The fun thing is that uh >> as I'm reading uh more and learning more about Anglicanism and realizing yeah, like Wesley was an Anglican, you know, Methodism wasn't intended to be a separate church. It was just a movement within the Anglican And like how many of the scholars and theologians and writers that I was reading and really connecting with in my evangelical era were either inspired by Methodism or were Methodists and realizing like oh wow like Anglicanism no wonder it's familiar and feels just like natural is cuz like it's already kind of been I've been spoon-fed it without even realizing it.
>> It is. The way I like to say it bro is Anglicanism's like the granddaddy and then Methodism's like the son and then the grandson is like Evangelicalism coming out of like the 1920s kind of.
And so you've kind of got Anglicanism like the grandpa of the Evangelical the modern American Evangelical world and this is the father of Methodism. That's kind of the way I think about it.
>> Well as the Apostolic Churches would say exactly that's the problem. Like we were just saying that's kind of cool to us.
>> Well yeah I mean it's and again I think I and I think tell me if you disagree with this I I would still say I would like for those people in those situations I want to continue calling them to the fullness of the Apostolic faith. Yet because of the notion of how like my vision of Anglicanism I would parse out esse and plene esse and say like well through baptism you can still participate in the esse and even their ecclesial bodies to some degree can participate in the mysterion or the mystical body of Christ. But the fullness of it is had like the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral says when you have the the full episcopate right when you have the historic episcopate decrees the sacraments the the liturgy of the church the scriptures.
>> Totally otherwise we're Anglican.
>> Yeah yeah cuz we cuz we cuz we retain all of those things from you know the early church. And so uh yeah I mean so there's still that call there but it's but it's done in we we still see lots of charity there and I actually think so we can get here later but I talk about this every video but basically this is where I would say that Anglicanism actually had an enormous impact on the Roman Catholic Church from the time of Vatican II forward because the resource mob movement and figures like Henri de Lubac who really drove Vatican II they thought in the in the very similar pattern to how our 17th century minds thought how the Carolingian divines thought, um which is a very Augustinian way of thinking that um the institution like when it comes to the church, the sign or the institutional church is not exactly the same thing as the res or the reality, which is the mystical body. The sign is the inculcation of the reality, but they're not directly synonymous.
And so what that does is this allows us to call people to the sign, but it still leaves a theoretical possibility they can participate in the reality even if they're not fully engaged in the sign in a way we'd like them to be. We we there's still that kind of recognition. And I think that that's um that's I think that's the way we have to move forward, but anyways, I don't know if you have any thoughts there before we move on, but >> Yeah, I mean that's what I was talking about. I was talking about that in Heavenly Participation. I don't know if you've read that book, but >> I have not read it, but I know yes, Hans Boersma talks about this all the time.
Um it's definitely Hans Boersma is a great Henri de Lubac scholar, and I know of that book very well. Uh but he he you know, he his so much of his theology is based off of I'd say I'd be really interested to know if he disagrees with Henri de Lubac really on anything. Uh because just the way he speaks about Henri de Lubac, but he's responding this is coming directly from Hans Boersma.
Henri de Lubac's responding to the Neo-Thomist movement at the end of the 19th century and the early 20th century, which did have a tendency sometimes to collapse. Now, I don't think they were doing that dogmatically, but I think that I I use the same analogy, but maybe that's that's fine. I'll just keep using it till the cows come home. But it's it's a layer of the onion. Do you know what I mean? The core of the onion is is the mysterion, um but the layers of the onion were Neo-Thomism kind of built on top of certain Roman Catholic ways of thinking. And so sometimes that need to be whittled away. And this is that that's a very Anglican way of thinking I want to contend, Joey. I don't know if you have any reflections on this, if this is one of the things that attracted you to Anglicanism.
But, for me Anglicanism has a different way of approaching uh truth that I think is really, really essential to move towards Christian unity.
So, I'll just say this briefly and then I'd really like your reflections on it.
So, I always contend that the English method of doing theology is historical or it's based in the narrative and it's based in the contextual period in which it was given.
And we think we we really, really hone in on that reality over and above just a systematic reading of theology.
And the way this comes into play, like I'll just give a couple specific examples. Like if I just crack open my 39 Articles and I'm not I'm not a ride or die 39 Articles guy. But, if I just crack it open and start reading and I'm like, "Oh, it says this about transubstantiation. Oh, it says this about Purgatory. Oh, it says this about uh you know, um Eucharistic adoration." Like, if you read that systematically, then you just take that one-to-one, plop it in the modern world and say like, "Okay, we can never get past any of this language or any of these concepts." But, if you read it contextually, you go, "Okay, they were rejecting a form of what is labeled as transubstantiation, but that doesn't ipso facto mean that that's what's dogmatized as transubstantiation is what's being rejected." And and that that's a contextual response. And that would also be true of something like Eucharistic adoration. It might be like, "Okay, it's it's rejecting something, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the way that Eucharistic adoration is viewed and practiced today, the core the core level of the dogma of the onion." Um and the same can be true about Purgatory. Like Jimmy Akin just did an amazing dialogue with Austin Suggs about Purgatory. And it's saying a very Anglican thing, actually.
What what kind of the conclusion they come to. But, again, that's a contextual reading that leads to that conclusion.
But, if you have the systematic way, you can never get past the 16th century, in a sense. I don't I don't any reflections there. That's kind of my brief reasoning.
>> That rings true to to me and I think that's maybe also yeah, like you that I think that is maybe another thing that's that's drawn me to Anglicanism is in some ways that's kind of how all I do believe that God has already kind of like had my brain working where I mean we do those two instances come to mind. One is the scripture. When I read the creation narrative of Genesis, I know this is contextual. They're using contextual narrative motifs and images to teach about God created the world and he's the most high of gods and I don't have to get into the science and the and and all of that on on Genesis. And it's the same with like councils like the seventh ecumenical council like saying you know, anathema to those who speak to those who reject images and icons. And it's like Okay, like contextually that made sense.
Iconoclasm was really violent. So it wasn't just kind of like a disagreement you know, you have your opinion and I have mine. It was violent. So it's that's the context within which it's written. So I can take that and go, okay, I think the church made a right decision in using icons for veneration and for the purposes of liturgy. But I also don't have to read that and go, okay, I guess I have to anathematize anybody who doesn't use icons or doesn't kiss an icon. It was it's yeah, I and that is the same with the 39 articles for me is like um Yeah, adoration is I've actually My priest and I have talked about adoration a lot and he's even he's he's allowed me to say like I want to be I want to be sensitive cuz I'm trying to submit to to my leadership.
He's acknowledged like his his position on the 39 articles and and adoration is more reformed position. But he also has said I've shared like moments in adoration I've had that been really great and he's like I believe Jesus used that to use that moment to speak to you in that moment.
He's like I still don't like he's even said like I still don't think adoration is something I would practice or that the church would practice, but like I'm not going to say that Jesus didn't meet you in that moment. Um and so yeah, I like that Anglicanism is a narrative driven, it's contextual, and it's it's it's it allows room for people to you don't have to look at your past experience and go, "Okay, all of that was bogus, I guess, cuz I'm now I now think this or do this or whatever, you know?"
>> Exactly.
Well, and that's what that's what that notion of And anybody who's watching and you hear me say these things over and over and over and over again, I guess there's two ways to look at it.
It can either just become repetitive, or maybe it's because I think that these are the points that really remain problems for people, and I see this whether it's in the comments I receive or just where I see people are at, or how I see other people approaching these questions. In some ways, Joey, I'd be like I feel like it's the same kind of stuff that comes up over and over again.
And it's it's our epistemological approach to things will it's like if you start off if you start off on a long journey and you start off 1° off, you're going to end up in a like if I start in California and I'm trying to get to New York, if I start 1° off, I'm going to end up in North Carolina, right? Or something like this. You know what I mean? So, if you take 1° off, you're going to end up way off. So, so starting with the proper premises and the proper epistemological framework is like necessary.
And so, what I want to say is like so with Eucharistic adoration, I'll just say this real quick, and I am comfortable with Eucharistic adoration. So, in um in 1971 and and you may I'm sure you're probably familiar with this, but the ARCIC document that was officially adopted later by Lambeth on the Eucharist, where it concludes we have substantial agreement. Then from there, 20 more years of reflection came about, and in 1994, so this is pre-GAFCON, it's pre, you know, Lambeth 1998 and Lambeth 110 and all that stuff. So, this would still, I would say, be fully authoritative for the ACNA. In 1994, um there was further reflection between the United States Council of Catholic Bishops and the Episcopal Church. And there were five guiding principles they put forward to continue agreement on the Eucharist. And this is the the Episcopal Church clarifying, we believe these things. Well, one of them one of them's on masses to the dead, one of them's on propitiatory sacrifice. Um one of them is on Eucharistic adoration. And the way it talks about it is they've said it's not neither side isn't necessitating the other side to do it.
The question is simply Okay, you've got the core of the onion here, which is objective change through in through the in persona Christi reality of the priest, right? So, the way I say this is when the priest speaks the words of of institution. So, the anaphora, this is my body, this is my blood. What's going on is it's actually reflecting Adam naming the animals. And what's going on is the priest standing in the place of Christ is speaking and through his speech, because the Holy Spirit is speaking through him, what was old creation on the altar is becoming new creation through the speech of God working through the priest.
Bro, and so think about that, dude. So, so that was the Roman Catholic emphasis on transubstantiation always. Is it has it can't be half bread and half new half body, because then it would be like half old creation and half new creation. So, it's saying from the Roman Catholic perspective, it has to be a 100 100% change.
And yet the Anglican um emphasis was always, but Jesus still like in his resurrected body, he still takes old creation and he renews it into the new.
And so, in the great Arctic document, it says this. It uses Aquinas Aquinas's language, grace doesn't destroy nature, it perfects it.
So, in this reality, old creation's brought into the new, the Anglican emphasis, but it's also a 100% change because of the new creation. So, anyway, so so when the priest is doing this, the the core of the onion, getting back to Eucharistic adoration, is that it has undergone substantial change and now is new creation on the altar. So when I look at it, I can say that's new creation. That's not old creation at all. It's new creation. The old creation was transferred into the new, but it's still fully new. And so that's the core of the onion. But then the the layers of the onion would be like Eucharistic adoration would be a layer for that because it's saying if it's an objective change, then this follows, you know what I mean? Just just via knowledge, via intellectual discernment. But that's very similar to an Anglicanism when we like reserve sacraments for the sick, right? Or when you reserve it in a tabernacle, which many many Anglicans practice. Or even like let's say you need it let's say you need to do like a deacon's mass because a church out in the rural plains doesn't have a priest.
Well, what do you do? The priest consecrates it and then they give it to the deacon and then they take it to their church and they do the mass they don't do they don't do a full mass there. They do what's called a deacon's mass which doesn't include the words of institution.
They even do that in the Roman Catholic Church. And so but that that that what it's saying is that there's been an objective change. My whole point is saying that but you don't have to practice Eucharistic adoration to affirm that reality. So other traditions can still have layers that only some people practice, but does that I don't I don't know if that resonates with you at all that but that's an Anglican way of thinking where we can kind of get there.
And I'd say icons is similar when you brought up Nicaea too.
>> Yeah. Yeah, my my even my reform uh cuz I'm the church I'm at is more in the reformed category of Anglicanism and even we still like when we have leftover Eucharistic bread, like the I remember the first time I received like the priest after the mass, he he wrapped up the bread in like a cloth and handed it to me and said, "Hey, here. This is for you and Kenzie to take and have it together." And I like he he didn't just say, "Hey, here's some extra bread." You know, like that we do that at my Pentecostal church. We'd be like, "Hey, let's give the kids the extra communion bread." But like no, he He wrapped it up. He cared for it. He gave it to us.
Or like if there's leftover wine, they'll go into the you know we'll be in like the fellowship hall and they'll be like, "Hey, like you know, we need a few people to finish uh you know, they'll say [clears throat] wine, but finish the wine." Um and we all do so like reverently. We're not just like, "Oh, sweet wine." We're like, "Oh, yeah, totally." Like and we take it and we we cross ourselves after we're done. Um so yeah, like even though there is they're you know, they're reformed, they're not Anglo-Catholic, they still I think they're they're still treating they have that basic core epistemology that you're talking about that kind of undergirds every decision they make around the Eucharist.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Well, and and here's the deal, man. I mean, so again, I told you I attend um an ACNA church full-time. I also attend a conservative Episcopal church and there is different churchmanship, although both of the priests are very high churchmen um just in their core, but the the the church themselves one would be definitely labeled more low church and one would be labeled high church. That might shock people online for me. But so I understand that world, too, you know.
But the theology is still the theology.
And that's one thing I'd say this is true, too. This is another thing about Anglicanism that when you have apostolic succession, it holds the line with this in a way that other traditions don't. So and this is I'm not trying to show throw shade, I'll use a kids' word, throw shade on people or dunk on people here.
But I will say you lose the sense of these things if you don't have that apostolic succession or you can lose them. So for example, even in the most low church Anglican churches I know, they still have a deeper reverence for like the liturgical right. They still practice the liturgical right. There are certain things that are still always always always said. And those things are because the liturgy themselves transcends even the knowledge of the priest of what they're doing. So the liturgy itself is actually of jure divino, I want to argue. And and I would argue it's directly from the Book of Revelation, actually, and from the days of creation, which is interesting. But uh but I would say it's so it's Juridivino.
And so, in the movement of the mass, what's going on is God is bringing things ex operate. He's He's working in categories beyond the priest's understanding at times. And that's actually That's actually really important because then it doesn't become about what does my individual priest think. It's Do they follow the liturgy?
Do they do Do they follow the rubrics, right? Do they say the right words? Do they, you know, cuz the right words really matter. Um Do they Do they do the action? And then the liturgy itself is what forms the theology.
Like in the epiclesis, when we say when the priest says, um become for May May this become for us the body and blood of Christ, it's not talking about the people receiving it. It's talking about the elements themselves. That alone should make us go, okay, the liturgy says this ontologically becomes the body and blood of Christ. Um Do you If that If you know what I mean by that kind of The liturgy shapes it beyond the priest.
Yeah.
>> Yeah, lex orandi, lex credendi something I love about Anglicanism. Uh And And even if Yeah, even if it's not fully shaping a priest's or a parishioner's theology, like yeah, it's still I I I I guess it's kind of like um to me my mind goes to the Donatist heresy of like um it would be it would feel like it's infringing into it's fringing into Donatism if it's like, oh, like my priest did everything right, but they have a more um uh They have They have less of like a high churchman view of the of the Eucharist. That doesn't change what's happening.
>> Yeah. See, and that's That is so important. But, see, that's what having a solid liturgy That's what having the historic liturgy of the church does.
It's It's a It's a heavenly eschatological reality that transcends any person's theology or any place and time's theology to be real.
Um So, yeah, I want to I just I think that's really important, man. That's something that's been really important to me as I've continued developing is to go, this is This is the The liturgy itself is not just like a structured way of living.
Like is it beautiful? Yes. Is it historic? Yes. But it's actually directly biblical and it's directly eschatological. So, what's happening is Well, anyways, I could I could go off there.
>> [laughter] >> I won't go too much further there. I would just say it it's drawing us all into the one.
And I and I think that's something that would probably resonate with you. I know it has with me, but it's it's a oneness reality. So, it when the liturgy is one and the liturgy is the future coming into the present, then what's going on is we're being drawn into the one.
Beyond what anybody might think about it, it's still what it is what it is, you know. It's just a fact.
>> And I think that to me really speaks.
Speaking of which, I'd really like to get to this, man. I'd be really interested on your reflections on this, Joey.
So, I mentioned a little bit of my kind of background in Wesleyanism and I I want to be careful sometimes with labels because what happens with labels, bro? I don't know if you see this, too. But people just kind of pigeonhole you.
They're like, "Oh, that's that's the Anglo-Catholic view or that's the Wesleyan view." Or something like this and you just get pigeonholed and then they can easily discard you. I'm not saying people even do this consciously.
God's peace to them. But I think it happens subconsciously.
Uh but I want to contend that the kind of there's this great stream of thinking of how space and time work. And you mentioned earlier um Genesis and uh in creation. That's something I don't talk about on this channel nearly as much as I'd like to.
I'm I'm actually a very big pro-modern science guy. I think modern science is unimaginably fascinating and I think it's thinking the thoughts of God after he already thought them.
But anyways, uh Yeah. Yeah, isn't that good? I think it's kind of sometimes a quote um attributed to Einstein, but I don't know if that's actually authentic.
But I wanted to see what How do you view I'd be curious how you viewed it when you were in the evangelical world. And then how have you grown to view space and time?
And how does that affect your view of theology in any way or does it affect it in any way? And I think that even gets This will get into typology, bro. This gets into biblical patterns, right? It It gets into deeper readings of scripture.
But anyways, I think space and time are like at the very heartbeat of so many people's hang-ups or if they can get beyond that, it's like the whole Bible unlocks like a like a set of dominoes like ding ding ding ding ding like when you start understanding these things.
But anyways, I'll let you take the floor here, bro.
>> That's so such a good question cuz yeah, I mean I probably won't phrase it as eloquently as you would, but that's been huge honestly, massively. Like yeah, I guess like so as an evangelical time space time I was really bought into like a post-enlightenment linear view of the world and of time where almost even in my spirituality where like God was almost kind of working in tandem with time, you know? Like oh, they're doing this now. I got to intervene here and oh, now this is happening. I got to intervene here. And with scripture it was the same way. I mean I was dispensationalist which is all it's totally [clears throat] baked into that. Like God acts in dispensations with different in different points in time.
So the point where yeah, like I mean like dispensationalists believe like there's two different almost two different churches, church the Christian church and then the nation of Israel, two covenant peoples of God doing their own things and God's just kind of like you know, kind of refereeing between the two.
Um And as I started reading I Yeah, I don't want to I don't want to say this in a way to yeah, like dunk on anybody or shame anybody. But for me what's what is seemed to be deeper theology to go deeper into the tradition of the church and to just get more good biblical exegesis, the more it's seemed um Again, I don't know if I have all the right philosophical words, but like the idea that God is he's he's alpha and and omega.
He's beginning and end. He's just as present at the creation of the world as the fulfillment of the creation of the world. He's just as present in this moment as he is at the crucifixion. And therefore, if God is present in all of that, that means that that kind of just changes everything. We're like now I can read um I can read uh yeah, like the the story of Melchizedek and Melchizedek is offering bread and wine. And I can be like, "Oh, wow, that's like God is bringing >> theophany. Yeah.
>> Yeah, right. The present the like God is bringing the the pinnacle of creation, the pinnacle of humanity, the the cross, the passion of Christ back into this moment with Melchizedek.
And again, this is uh um faulty language, I'm sure. I'm I'm botching it a little bit. But yeah, it's just like >> bro.
>> Yeah, like even in the way I'm viewing the Eucharist, where like I'm I'm approaching the Eucharist and my eyes see bread and wine, but I know like I'm now at the foot of the cross.
And that's just yeah, it's so I don't know. It it makes theology way more robust. I I have way more fun reading the Bible, engaging in theology because of it.
>> It opens up everything, bro. You know what? I literally this came to me two days ago from my buddy at our theology group. My buddy the other day just started dropping some knowledge bombs, bro. And I was like, "Are you kidding me?" Like that's one of the most intelligent things I've ever heard in my life. He started getting into um Leviticus. I don't know if you've ever actually read Leviticus, bro. I'll be honest, I read it for the first time in full not that long ago to my son. And I was like, "This is so complicated."
Like this is so hard to read. But the when you under Like so my buddy was talking about how what do you do with the sacrifice? So you So you kill the unblood I realize there's different types of sacrifices. But let's just say the standard kind. You kill the lamb, but then you put it on the But then you offer up the incense of the lamb. It goes up to Yahweh. Well, my buddy was saying, "What's going on here?" Is it's a it's a type for Jesus is crucified, obviously. But then the incense is the ascension.
So it's ascending to the Father. But then get this, the sacrifice is never complete until the priests eat the sacrifice.
>> Right.
>> so that's Eucharistic theology right there. You have to eat the sacrifice.
And so, it's like but I was just like, "Wow, that makes so much sense of Leviticus." Like like what's going on here? When you're reading it and you're like, "Why?" Like this is so detailed and laid out. But, and my point is is when you see it, you can't unsee it, right? Like when you see these types of things, you can't unsee them.
Um and this is just in so many different ways. I could I could riff forever about this. We'll probably get into some more of this. But, just like like just things that once you the image I always give Joey is like, you know those pictures where you got like an older woman and a younger woman on the same picture? And at first you're like, "Oh, I see the young woman." And that's like that's all you see. But, then when you finally start orienting your vision a different way, you can also see the old woman overlaid with the younger woman.
And once you see both, you can never unsee them.
That's basically what happens when exegetical views of scripture also become deeply layered with Christological reading and and the and also the deeper levels tropological and anagogical. But, like contemplative reading, um that comes about. And so, like one example I would give for here, I'd be interested in your reflections here cuz I know you've spent a lot of time investigating Roman Catholicism. I know you've been to Fatima, which is really cool. I'd love to talk about that. We don't have to get into the depths of Fatima. But, I you know, just like the your good experiences there. Um but like here's one example of this. The general Protestant way of looking at scripture is exegetical. So, let's say that's like the young woman, which Protestants see from the get-go, the exegetical reading.
And so, the question is always like, "Well, let's read back about what the author meant and what's the context."
And I think that's a valid important thing to do. I mean, at my seminary that you do that all the time.
Whereas the Roman Catholic way of reading it is kind of in in a in a sense reading it philosophically and typologically.
And so like if we were to look at Mary, for example, is she the mother of Jesus during the time of the 1st century in Judea? Of course, yes, and we should see that. But is she also a perpetual mother given to the church who's actually a type for the Christian life? I would say yes to that as well. And so what we can do as Anglicans, and I think other Christians can do this too, but I think we do this well, is we see both images at the same time for the best for the best of Anglicanism. And that's one thing that I it's not again it's not solely our tradition, but that way of kind of holding different viewpoints in tension, I think is really powerful.
Anyways, I don't know if you have any reflections there.
>> That's um yeah, like Anglicanism in general I feel like is really good at like let's not just shut one side down and the other side and give the other side all the space. Like let's kind of hear from both and kind of find okay, what's true in all of this? And I've I when I was really looking into Catholicism at first, what really what I loved about it was and maybe this is because of like some of the retrieval of Anglican theology that you were mentioning is it felt more nuanced than the evangelical upbringing I was given.
Where I'm it's okay to say like um it's okay to say like yeah, like you know, I'm trying to think of some nuance. That it was it just in general yeah, it to say like I can venerate saints and that isn't take away from the adoration and worship that I give God. Both they can coexist.
Um and then then as the further I got into Catholicism, the more I started to notice like that it felt like um it some Catholics you talk to have that more nuanced view on theology and other Catholics are honestly more evangelical in some of the ways they approach things. I was like this is it. This is the way you think. It's you know, like more neo-Thomist is a good way to put it.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> And Anglicanism, even in the reformed world and even in the Anglo-Catholic world, like cuz I personally more Anglo-Catholic although I'm around reformed Anglicans. And yet for the most part we agree more more we disagree.
Even though like a Catholic and a reformed Christian, you know, and the Roman Catholic and like maybe a Dutch reformed Christian, they would have a way harder time agreeing. Whereas Anglicans can be like, "I'm reformed.
I'm Anglo-Catholic." Cool, that's sick.
Nice to meet you.
>> [laughter] >> Like, and we can dialogue and have similar conversations. Like, yeah, I'm Yeah, I love that about Anglicanism. For me, that's been huge.
>> Yeah.
Well, and I think I think that >> [sighs] >> I want to be careful. It's almost I have a tendency, Joey, and forgive me. I I just have a tendency to want to say everything at once. And I've heard N.T.
Wright talk about this. You can't do that. Because if you try to do that, you just end up just like you just end up spilling everything and it and it and it's messy and it doesn't make any sense then.
But I I think I guess just one thing I would add to what I, you know, to make sure I'm clarifying what I was saying.
I do still think though that part of part of my reason for being Anglican is because I don't necessarily have to want everybody else to be Anglican.
Um my my friend Jonas Salter said this yesterday, which I thought was so interesting. He said, "The more I sit in Anglican Anglicanism, sometimes the more I become less interested in just only being Anglican.
But yet, that also makes me fall deeper in love with Anglicanism. So, like in a sense, it becomes being less about being Anglican, but actually that makes you more Anglican."
And that's a really interesting concept.
Because what I want to do, and so we talked most I talked mostly about the Roman Catholic Church. I love the the Eastern Orthodox Church as well. I'm just more familiar with the Roman Catholic Church.
But I don't my goal of Anglicanism is not to say why I think we're a better tradition.
Because I don't actually really think that. I mean, I think that we got certain things right.
And I think that they've learned from us. But I also think we've learned from them. I think the Oxford Movement was us learning from them. And I think we needed to for various reasons I've said elsewhere. I don't need to go into that now. But I think in the 20th century in Vatican II and the resource mom movement is them learning from us. And really we're all learning from St. Augustine from other fathers. But we know it's it's being re-brought out.
And so So I want to contend that part of what makes Anglicanism great is that we don't see ourselves as the whole shebang.
That's a very technical Latin word. Not not really.
But it's we don't see ourselves as the whole deal, right? We're not the whole show. We're a broken piece of a larger mirror and we remain jagged because I don't know if you've heard me give this image before, but we remain a jagged So Vernon Staley of blessed memory talks about the the apostolic church being one mirror that shattered. Some pieces have taken and re-rounded their edges of their own shard. Whereas we've always remained a jagged shard, which inherently in our life Well, for one, what is jag- What do jagged shards do?
They'll poke you and they'll make you uncomfortable.
But they're also a testament to that the mirror once was whole. And so our vocation is actually not to be the best the best the best. It's actually to be broken and to be willing to die for our brethren, even die to ourselves.
And that doesn't mean capitulate on everything that was important to us, but it means take on to ourselves all the good, the truth, the beauty, and the pains of world Christendom.
Um but to me that's partially what's attractive in Anglicanism. It's not about winning.
It's about serving. Um So yeah, I don't know if that's something that also attracted you uh before we move on to some other interesting things I want to get to, but >> Like looking I mentioned like a lot of my readers uh like the guys I was reading were um were like more Wesleyan and Methodist inspired, but what was even more surprising was realizing how many people I loved that were actually Anglican. Uh and you didn't know they were Anglican, right? Like I didn't know J.I. Packer or or um uh or Stott were Anglicans, but I read them in my in my theology classes and stuff at my Baptist college.
Um and it's cuz yeah, they aren't They're Christians first and foremost and they're a Christian within the church the the Anglican church. Um And I think that's um for me what apostolic Christianity uh apostolic Christian unity would benefit from is is um >> [snorts] >> we we should be first and foremost uh prioritizing like the the good of the whole church, not just like our branch needs to succeed for and others need to fail for that to happen, you know?
Whereas like um yeah, like with people people were like excited when I became Anglican, but it wasn't as triumphalistic as when some people become and this isn't to bash Catholics or Orthodox, but when people convert to Orthodox or Catholicism, some voices in those circles are more triumphalistic.
Whereas people in Anglicanism were mostly just reaching out privately.
There weren't like a bunch of posts like, "Oh, look, he's Anglican." But I got a lot of people reaching out privately saying like, "We're so stoked you're here. That's awesome."
And uh even my post on like my confirmation wasn't a big like, "Aha, I've decided this you know, I I wasn't trying to make a big point." It was more just like, "I got confirmed. I want to update you guys and just share what my experience was." And that's why I've refrained from making a video about like, "Here are all the theological and personal reasons I became Anglican because that's not what it's about for me.
>> Yeah. That's it. But see, that very character, that very response is Anglican. Because it intuits it intuits like what you said that you you can bring all the good of your past and still want to bring it into this full reality. But it's it's it's a way of doing it. Now, I realize other traditions can do that too at their best. Um I'd say the best of Rome points this way, but largely it's been a point of convergence since Vatican II. I think it's in the past it's been different. Um But I still think it's different in in many circles too, though. I I think Anglicanism's view of branch theory, which is kind of encapsulated in the mirror analogy I just gave, but also uh my friend Jonas Eller kept calling it ecclesial realism.
All that kind of play even if we can't articulate it, Joey, I feel like we intuit that kind of uh Anglicanism in essence is just trying to be real and say like of course these good things are occurring in the evangelical world and the Methodist world and the Presbyterian world and all these other worlds. Now, we still think apostolic succession's true, so we want to call people there, but we can do that and affirm all this.
And then at the same time we look at these other groups and we go like I know for me I can't look at Rome and just think like oh, they're just in gross error or something. Like that to me is just incomprehensible. Even because of the experiences I've had. And I can't think that about Orthodoxy either.
Um and what's also interesting is the online conversation didn't doesn't always help because so often there's shade in the very very traditionalist groups. I don't know exactly why that is. That's a sociological question. But like real life Roman Catholics are usually different from what your in general um kind of apologist online looks like and there's a lot of good online apologists. Or your general Eastern Orthodox person looks very different from what sometimes it's perceived as online.
Uh this is true with Anglicanism, too.
Your general Anglican I usually is very ecumenical, very pro-Rome. Like that's my experience, but then online sometimes it's very different. And so I feel for people trying to sort all this out.
Sorry, I'm rambling right now, bro, but >> Not at all. This is great. I couldn't agree more with any everything you're saying.
>> Yeah.
What's it's I think sometimes we just it just needs to keep being said and I I think at some point, you know, hopefully these words reach people.
I wanted to if I could, Joey, I wanted to get back to two things um or one thing we talked about and then one new thing. Uh I know one thing that we've both been blessed to do is to travel a lot. And I'd really like to talk about how that has helped shape your personal like journey and experience. But before we get there, there was one thing I we started talking about earlier and I kind of skipped over it. But the view of space and time and how this even ties in with science. We kind of got into that a little bit. So I guess I'll just I'll just say this for myself and I'd be really interested in your reflection. Especially even as an evangelical. I By the way, and I don't want to denigrate this at all. God's God bless him. I used to teach at an evangelical school. So that whole like dispensationalist world, I really understand it. And I I you know, I understand that world uh to some degree, not fully, but to some degree.
And and usually I'd say it's lumped in with six-day creationism. And again, I don't want to dunk on that either. But, you know what I mean, but it's kind of lumped in usually as like one category.
I don't know exactly what your views are there. You you shared a little bit, but but I guess in my view, the way that I kind of look at these things is when Boethius, if you know that name, the ancient church father Boethius, >> Mhm.
>> in the constellation in the constellation of philosophy, when he's wrestling with space and time, and I want to say this has consequences for the problem of evil. It has consequence consequences for God's omniscience, but it also has consequences for Christian doctrine, like other Christian dogmas, like the Eucharist, like Mary, like justification, like the full ga- the full gamut, like the whole thing.
Um when he's wrestling with this, he's asking the question he's saying to himself, he cannot conceive of a possibility that God would ever be the author of evil. Like for Boethius, that's completely off the table, and I completely agree with that.
No matter how many how much argumentation is given for double predestination or these kind of things, I just I cannot wrap my mind around that cuz I just I I don't think that that's how God really operates.
But, then he even goes into but, even if something like what's traditionally considered Arminianism or Molinism is true, Arminianism, I don't think I said that correctly. Um if those are true, then doesn't that on some degree still necessitate that God made it to be because if he knows all things like this and he sees what will happen, then he's still allowing it to happen, then is he still causing it? And >> I'm sorry.
>> Oh, no. No, you're good. So, this is the question that um I heard a long time ago, and I sorry, I'll just try to be brief here, but I think then I really want to hear a if you have a long reflection on this, I think it'd be fascinating.
Um I heard a long time ago in a dialogue between Frank Turek and an atheist, if you know the name Frank Turek.
>> Yeah.
>> He was responding to a question that the atheist asked. And the question he was the question the atheist was asking is, if God knew with 100% certainty that Adam and Eve were going to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and that sin was going to enter the world, if God knew that with 100% certainty before he created them, then who really made that choice?
>> Mhm.
>> And the way that um you know, Frank Turek gives his answer, um I actually watched a reflection video by James White on this engagement. And James White goes, "See, Frank Turek's a Molinist." And and James White goes like, "See, we have to say that God decreed that to happen for it to make sense."
But I'm sitting here going, all of these things are so steeped in something you just brought up earlier, Newtonian physics. Time was, time is, time will be. And so the way Boethius works through this is he basically says, "The answer is is that God is synonymously present in all time at the same time."
So God is in the past, he's in the present, and he's in the future all at once. So that's how he truly knows. It's not open theism. Yet at the same time because of the nature of God, he also allows each time to be real to the people there and time's real to God as well. So so each moment of time can also have its own integrity as a real moment with real choice of cooperation with grace or of uh now it's still cooperation with grace, but you know, or of choosing your own path. And to me, that's like the only coherent like that to me So even like when Wesley speaks of God foreknowing or when Molinism speaks of God foreknowing, I would say it's anachronistic. It's so we can get our minds around it. But it's still distinct. I don't know if you have any reflections on that, but I think that's See, as an evangelical, it's like how do you answer that question when it's when time is just zoop? And there might be some evangelicals who have a different view of time. But I anyways, I'd be interested on just your reflections there, bro, if if have any.
>> Well, most of those evangelicals are borrowing from apostolic churches in their theology as well. If they did If they don't believe in a more linear or dispensationalist view.
Um yeah, I feel like I I I feel like I think what's been really It does answer all these large questions. And I think what also is really I I I've worked through some of this in like my own just personal life. Like looking back at like hard moments in life, knowing that like where I where it felt like God was most absent, he was actually just as present as in the moments where he feels the most present, you know? Like God Um I I I naturally get really nostalgic. So like I'm always super nostalgic and nobody Like I I just don't get people who don't long for the past and like sometimes I just look back and like, "Oh, that was like the greatest moment ever. It's sad that it's gone." And it's actually kind of comforting to know that like God cares about that moment even more than I do to the point where he's fully present in the And uh It's helped me Yes, helped me deal with nostalgia in a healthy way where I can move on knowing God's got that moment. I don't have to like look back and preserve it.
God's in that moment fully. He loves that moment more than I ever could.
Um even a even the really hard moments.
There's like um I've heard you talk about Boethius a little bit and it's made me think like, "Yeah, what about like some really horrific traumatic moments for people?"
It's helpful I think to maybe heal from those and recognize God is fully present in that moment. And that In some ways it kind of hurts and in other ways it's kind of cool to be like, "He is fully present in that moment and he's never going to move on from that. He's in all of it. He's in the pain, he's in the joy, he's in all of it." And he We move on You know, we're in a culture that moves on all the time. And uh sometimes nostalgia feels like kind of like um kind of just like for old people. But uh but God is just like he's obsessed with every moment.
Um and that's maybe that even that framing is anachronistic, but um I think another thing I was thinking, too, was like, as I've read scripture, I use cuz I also was Calvinist. And as I was reading scripture, I was like, I was given, you know, Calvinism and Arminianism are kind of the two basic options are given as an evangelical.
It's almost like red pill, blue pill.
And as I was reading scripture, I was like, okay, I can't be Calvinist and I can't be Arminian, either. So, I need to find something. And then I I labels have escaped me. I need to read Boethius more because he sounds like kind of where I've naturally fallen, but um, I feel like a really robust reading of scripture and church history, you kind of for me to hold to strict Calvinism and double predestination or to a strict Arminianism or almost um, you can kind of Arminianism can lead into um uh, Pelagianism at its worst, like um, neither work for me. Neither work for me. Like, I just don't see that in scripture. I don't see that in history.
I don't see that in my conception of God. And again, I could be wrong, but I I'm I don't think I am.
>> Mhm.
Yeah, that's so interesting, man. Oh, dude, I could have so many things I could say about that. Yeah, I think for me, um, now, obviously, I come with my biases. I come from the Methodist world, and so I come with a deeply Wesleyan mind. I get leery of the word Arminianism sometimes because Arminianism actually was a label Wesley kind of took, but it's because it was a word from his era.
Arminianism is really a form of being reformed as well.
So, I I prefer the more Catholic ways of articulating it. I want to contend, now this is really complicated, but I want to contend that you can kind of trace the line from Boethius to Thomas Aquinas to the Carolingian Divines to Wesley.
And I think that actually all of them are within them in my view are the mainstream of Catholicism.
Uh, when they're properly understood.
Now, there's all sorts of misunderstandings.
So, like Aquinas was indebted to Boethius, too. And so, he would talk about God as like being on a watchtower looking down at the army processing. And it's kind of like he sees time like a glance, like bang. He saw everything.
Um, you know, in a sense that's that's Aquinas' kind of So, so things will be used and concepts will be used, but those concepts are uh something's more complicated than sometimes people realize. And then I want to say the Carolingians pick up off of the best of Boethius. And then Wesley is goes to Oxford in a school in a Carolingian way. And so Wesley's really a Carolingian with low church ecclesial methods, but he's still a high churchman theologically.
So anyways, it's just interesting, you know, but I guess for me um and I think this concept of sometimes when we're speaking of things, we're speaking anachronistically. That helps me. Because we we obviously live in a in a uh and I I I do want to get in this a little bit how science actually affects this our view of this. But uh but we live in a place where we obviously experience time linearly, right? Like where it was yesterday, we have this planned for today, bro, and then tomorrow, you know what I mean, we'll have something else planned. Like we have we live in that form of time.
Yet uh so so when we're speaking of God, we speak in a way that makes sense to us, but that doesn't necessarily mean we think that's how God actually experiences time. And that I think can, you know, it it we can't fully wrap our minds around it, but it at least gives us conceptual space. So for me, if I could just say this real quick and then I'd be interested on your reflections here. I know you're a if you don't mind me saying you're a camp counselor, too.
So I know you can spend a lot of time in God's not counselor, director.
Uh but I spend a lot of time in God's creation.
Um that uh you know, this notion of when I said science is thinking the thoughts of God after he already thought them.
You know what's so interesting from the time of of the kind of scientific revolution in the 16th century, I want to contend that the early scientists really saw science as simply a movement of the Holy Spirit. Again, it's thinking the thoughts of God after he already thought them.
And so the major movements of science, there's kind of always this fear that like, oh, is this going to displace scripture? People have the same fear with archaeology, you know what I mean?
Or historical study. Like oh, is this going to displace what we know? We should never be afraid of capital T truth cuz capital D truth speaks to a coherent reality. Right? So, all truth needs to cohere. We're not just like um That's That's actually one of the one of the biggest apologetics for Christianity is that we just believe in true things.
You know, it's not like we're not just like one option on a big platter of religion. We're just we're the only option for capital T truth. And so, when I think of things like Copernicus saying that the sun actually The sun doesn't revolve around the earth. The earth revolves around the sun. There was fear like is this going to displace the special place of the earth? And I want to argue via just basic astrophysics that actually the way that the solar bo- the way that the the um the way that the heavenly bodies move and orbit around one another actually points to this profound central place for the earth. And all of the things, all the constants that would have had to take place if you take a big bang cosmological view, for the earth to be in its unique place now, absolutely speaks to the extraordinary specialness of earth.
Then from there, think of something like Big Bang cosmology. Well, before that, the the the view the general view of the universe was steady state from Aristotle. And Big Bang cosmology speaks of an expanding universe which philosophically necessitates a beginning. Well, that's definitely Christian, right? Creation ex nihilo.
And then what I really want to talk about is um Einsteinian physics and the theory of relativity showing that time and space actually bend with gravity. It gives us conceptual space to go does do do um realities in our plane of time actually bend around um profound moments around the mysterium of God? So, this is the Eucharist, right? The past The past and the future and all the altars of all the saints are all one.
Right? This can be baptismal grace. When we're baptized, we are united with Christ's baptism.
We don't need to get into this now, but I've also argued this also deals with the Marian stuff, with the Marian dogmas, not stuff, forgive me. Um but but the Marian dogmas The Marian dogmas really are just all that they're trying to say is that baptism like the Immaculate Conception is that baptismal grace went back in time to touch Mary.
Well, again, if your view of space and time is that time is real to God, it becomes more intelligible.
Um this is true about with justification, too. How This is NT Wright or like I I would say this reflects somebody like St. Richard Hooker, but I'll speak for NT Wright here. How does the future come back into the present, but yet you still have to get to the future by doing things? Like this this way of thinking requires this view of time. So, anyways, I'll stop there and see if you have any reflections, but I'm convinced that natural revelation has so much to teach us and it actually enlightens our reading of divine revelation, but you have to start with divine revelation for natural revelation to make sense.
You can't start like You have to believe to understand. You can't and then believe. You have to believe first, but anyways, I don't know if you have reflections there, bro.
>> Oh, yeah. It's like Lewis saying I believe I believe in the sun not because I see the sun but because by the sun I see everything.
And I feel like that's kind of the that's the topic at hand. You know, Anglican, I mean, it's it's there.
I feel like what I've really benefited from as well as um I've I've been doing I'm still doing more reading on like um Eastern the Eastern mysticism just Eastern Orthodox theology in general.
And what I've loved is the I'm reading a book by Vladimir Lossky. And what he talks about is how cataphatic theology is unavoidable in the life of a Christian. But like it needs to be Cataphatic theology needs to be looked at within the lens of of apophatic, right? So, like when we say like you know uh yeah, like God is God the Father. We call God the Father God the Father.
That's uh a cataphatic statement like God is a father. Um and that's helpful.
It gives us an idea of what God is, and yet we need to also hold the apophatic route, that like God transcends any idea of father we ever have or ever will have. He He's conceptually beyond all of that. Um and yet, yeah, also holding in tandem the cataphatic reality that like God's revealed himself to us as a father. And so from there we can kind of work out the rest of our theology about God and the Trinity and whatnot. Um yeah, I I I It's helpful because um I think sometimes we have this temptation to like treat theology like we're dissecting a frog. And the problem with dissecting a frog is you kill it in the process. Like you It needs to be dead to be able to dissect it. And there needs to be a level of theology that is just um experience. It's experiential. Um again, Lewis says like um you you need to both have a map of the ocean to navigate it, and you need to experience the ocean as well. If you're just looking at the map, you haven't experienced the realness of the ocean. But if you go to the ocean without a map, you're going to be really lost when you get out there on a boat.
Um you need both. Theology needs to be It needs to be conceptual. It needs to be cataphatic in positive statements.
And we need to take that map, and all right, let's go sailing, and let's figure it out.
Um and as we as we sail the ocean, you know, it's happened with like uh with uh the discovery of the United States by the by Europe Europeans was like um oh, shoot, we thought the world was a lot different than it is now. There's this whole continent here.
Uh like we got to redraw the map, you know? They this And we do that with theology, where yeah, like as science debunks certain things, you know, we're we're I feel like a lot of people are wrestling like with this stuff with like aliens, you know, cuz the government's like dropping more and more like hints about aliens and like, you know, this could change everybody's faith. And it's like, not really. It just means we need to reevaluate a portion of the map we haven't really explored yet. Um and like that's I I've actually been encouraged to see most Christians in the apostolic world already thinking that way. Like, I feel like the the two views with aliens of in the apostolic world is either, oh, they're they're made in the image of God, too, and we either need to convert them, or they're going to also have this concept of God that we'll be able to like connect on.
Or it's like, no, they're like, you know, they're demons or whatever that we need to we need to slay. But we're already thinking through these things, these bigger questions that are coming up as we're learning more about and our I feel like the the Christian response is all right, just toss everything out that I knew before. It's like, okay, let's just re-look at the map, see where I was right, see where I was wrong, based upon the experience of God.
>> Yeah. That's fascinating, man. So, I I guess like a reflection I'd give and then I actually think it's a beautiful transition for where I wanted to go next.
Um is that sometimes and again, I know you work out in God's creation.
Sometimes when we really have an an observant eye and I I want to be careful what I say because some people would say like when I when I speak of natural revelation, I'm talking about things we can observe.
This is philosophy, so this is to be like Aquinas's five ways how we can This is by the way, this is exactly what St. Paul does in the book in the Acts of the Apostles on the Areopagus. He uses natural revelation, aka philosophical reasoning, to try and speak to the Stoics and the Epicureans or the ancient pantheists and deists and try to argue for the Judeo-Christian concept of God existing outside of space and time, but still caring about it. So, St. Paul does the same thing. He uses their statue to an unknown God. So, like the the God that can be reasoned to via philosophy, and he says, yeah, this is Yahweh. This is the Holy Trinity. I know he doesn't use that, but this is this is our Lord. This is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Is is what he's saying. Um and so uh so he's using philosophical reasoning to get there. So, we shouldn't be afraid of that. So, that's natural revelation, what we can know through philosophy and then also through the natural world and the natural order. But, I would still say with St. Anselm that in general, it's going to be we believe, so we understand divine revelation will show us certain things like the trine that God is triune.
But, then once you believe that and then you start observing natural revelation with that knowledge and with that belief, then everything starts making sense, everything. So, like the Trinity to me, it's it's incomprehensible to not think about the Trinity now because I think about even what we're doing right now, Joey. I want to contend this is a Trinitarian reflecting action. That if we're image-bearers, yeah. Then, why is it so why is it so built into the fabric of humanity our need to like communicate and that when we communicate, we always have the opportunity like sacrifice for the other and love and care for the other and do good towards the other?
Like that inherently reflects God. And so, for image-bearers, it's because like when we interact with other people, we're inherently reflecting the Trinity.
It's built into the fabric of reality.
Or like the family unit is an icon of the Trinity. I think this is so obvious once you see it. You've got father and mother and they come together and forth comes a child. This is the father and the son have an eternal love relationship and the Holy Spirit's the love relationship between them, right?
Like that's the Augustinian view of the Trinity. Um and so, anyways, my point is just once you see you can't unsee it. And so, but what I want to say is like I think about like um when we start uh like here's one specific example that comes to mind for me that's just interesting.
So, when you think about like how our solar system works, okay? You've got the sun as the main gravitational like the all the gravitational pull in all our solar system is revolving around the sun, okay? So, you've got the sun in the middle. Now, the sun in so many ways reflects God. Um it it's a reflection of who God is. I'm not I obviously God is not I'm not a pantheist, you know, God is not the same as creation, but I'm saying it's a it's an analogical reflection of who God is.
Because the sun in a sense it it's radiating holiness. You can't get too close to it or it would annihilate you, right? It's like it's like Moses on the mountain needing to veil. But from it comes all life and heat, okay? Then around it you've got these planetary bodies.
But then beyond the planetary bodies you've got the Oort Cloud which like holds thousands of things in orbit around the sun. Well, I when I think of that, I think of the realities presented not only in the Old Testament, but this is also the New Testament reality where you've got like the tabernacle or the microcosm of heaven at the center, then you've got the 12 tribes spreading out around it, and then ultimately all of creation is being drawn around this central heavenly reality. That's the vision of like Revelation and all this kind of stuff. And I just I observe our universe and I go look, it actually reflects >> [laughter] >> reflects the Bible.
You know, or I think of like >> Totally.
>> you walk you walk out in creation and you just see all these different elements that have been held in tension over thousands of years and they seem chaotic, but God brings order out of that chaos. It's reflected of God. It reflects God. So anyways, I don't know if you have any reflections and then we'll move into the next section, but just as one who spends a lot of time in God's creation, do you have these same sort of epiphanies where you see stuff and you're like that directly reflects this profoundly Christian thought that or Christian reality, you know.
>> Yeah, that's why I love getting to live in the forest is because I think about this all the time like just off the dome like, you know, it's kids brain straight into heresy, but like like God is so multifaceted just like a forest. Like when you say the word forest, you know exactly what I mean.
But then when you really get into the weeds of what's in a forest, there's all kinds of stuff like earthworms, roots, trees, what kind of trees, there's all kinds of different trees, there's bushes, there's foxes, there's you know, raccoons. There's all kinds of different things that comprise a forest and yet it all creates forest. And like, that's kind of like God. Like God in his divine simplicity is simply God. And yet, um, he's love, he's joy, he's peace, he's kindness. Like Yeah, there's all the there's an you could use an eternity trying to say as many words as you could to describe God and you would never be enough. And it's kind of the same with a forest. Like a forest is beautiful because it comprises a whole and it's distinct at the same time. It has distinct parts to it. And that's God. Like God is one divine being, three divine persons. He is unity and distinction at the same time.
>> Mhm.
It's It's beautiful to think, um, like like God does not have parts, but there's still all these different multifaceted realities that speak to his simplicity. Yeah, no, no, I know you believe that, bro. I just want to I just want to be clear about that that um, it's I think that image of a forest is really interesting. He's It's It's one whole reality and yet there's so many different things that ways we can look at it and say all these different realities are, um, like you said, it's it's an it's an analogical, to use Aquinas's language, it's an analogical example. It's not a one-to-one example. No nothing's a one-to-one example with God and of God himself.
But it gives reflections of kind of what we're touching on here or what I think you're trying to get at.
Yeah.
>> Yeah, I was going to say even, um, like um, the fact like an analogy in and of themselves can work this way. The fact that the analogy breaks down is proof that there's something higher out there, right? Like Yeah, like there's something more real that I'm trying to get at, right? Otherwise, I would just we we would arrive there if it existed and yeah, I don't know.
It's fascinating.
>> It is. It's beautiful, man. I think spending time in creation actually really does open your mind. I'm actually a member at the local museum where I live and I love going there, man. And sometimes I'll I'll be doing something there and I'm just like, this is like it just enlightens my brain. Like I was watching a video a while back on bird migration and I was just thinking of the fact that like all these different birds Now, don't miss here what I'm saying everybody. You know what I mean? Again, this is an analogical example. It's not an It's not a univocal example. It's not a one-to-one, but it's an example.
All these different birds coming from all these different areas end up in the same place with certain species when they will migrate from like Canada down to Central America or wherever You know, and I was just I just found myself watching this going, this is so reflecting of how God draws the church unto himself. His mystical body is drawn unto his own himself.
Um and I'm not again, I'm not there. I'm not saying I'm not a strict universalist. I mean, I'm hopeful for what God can do, but I'm not speaking strict universalism here. But I am speaking I I think of there's this uh If you if you know the I don't know I actually don't know exactly how old you are, Joey. Uh but I don't know if you're familiar with the the DreamWorks movie Joseph, King of Dreams.
But there's that amazing song in there where he's saying, you know better than I.
>> Yeah, yeah, yeah.
>> And at the end he says he says, I saw a cloud and thought it was the sky.
He says, I saw a bird and thought that I could follow.
But it was you who taught that bird to fly.
If I let you reach me, will you teach me? For you know better than I.
And when I hear that, those songs are so profound. That's so often people live in this world where like the only thing they see in front of their eyeballs is the cloud. And sometimes you need to hit the zoom out function on the lens so you start seeing the sky and you go, wow.
Now, this is not lead us to pluralism, okay? And I know that's that's immediate fear people have and I understand it.
I'm talking about for here for one. I'm talking about regenerated Christians who have been regenerate through baptism, okay? So I'm talking about people in the body of Christ here. I do believe other people can still experience prevening grace or grace that goes before, but I'm talking here about people in the mystical body.
But But And I'm again, I'm not saying universalism, but but sometimes we have to realize that the cloud is bigger so the sky is bigger sometimes than the cloud that we see.
And I think you see this all the time where people think they've got it all figured out. And then eventually they go, "Oh, wait, this is bigger than I thought." And creation can show us that.
Or the bird example where he says like, "God teaches all the birds to fly, you know that. It's not just the It's not just the quail, right? It's not It's not just the pigeon. Like he teaches all the birds to fly."
And And I think just even just ruminating on that opens our brains a little bit. And again, I went into it again, my point whenever I speak of Anglicanism is not to be triumphalist or say, "Look, we're the best." I also need I don't even want to I'm being real with you, Joey. If it comes to non-apostolic Christians, I do want to move them into the fullness of the Catholic faith.
Well, when it comes to like Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox, I literally have zero intention in my soul to want to convert anybody. I don't think that's really the right term. But I don't want to I don't My goal is not to make people Anglican. Um my goal is to draw people to the fullness of the Catholic faith and and where God's calling them to within the fullness of the Catholic faith.
But so So But my point is here, I think that this is a very Anglican way of thinking. I think it's it's it's a realism way of thinking. So Anyways, I don't know if you have reflections there before we move into the next part.
>> Mhm.
>> If you have any final last words you want to say? Uh I know you're dying for another question. So let's Yeah, yeah. Sorry, man. Again, I could I could riff here forever. Well, I think this actually leads like perfectly naturally into this next question I wanted to touch on.
And so I know that yourself um and your channel again, anybody who doesn't know Joey's channel, you have to check it out. It's off the chain. And it's something you can just You can watch to really learn and you can also watch just cuz it's like extremely cool. Uh but all of your world travels, I just find them fascinating. And not only are they fascinating, but it it gives such a different reflection. Like I can sit down here, bro, and I'm in my basement right now, and you and I can just sit here and talk about Coptic Orthodoxy all we want, but it's never ever never never never going to be the same as actually going to a Coptic Orthodox monastery and sitting there and praying with the monks and playing with the praying with the chokti and like you know like it's not going to be the same. Um and uh just like you can't experience Anglicanism on the internet. You actually have to go to You have to go to mass and go to evensong and pray the prayer book and live in the liturgical life of the church. If you want to experience Roman Catholicism, you actually have to go to Roman Catholic things and you have to experience Roman Catholic realities.
Um And so anyways, my point here is that travel really opens up your brain. And sometimes this can be local travel, like going to different parishes and different types of Christian Christianity and looking for the good, the beauty, the truth that is within them.
And then also traveling the world. And so I'd be really interested to just know like what are some of the experiences you've had recently or even in the past that have really shaped you. And how does this inform not only the the movement of the mind, but also the movement of the heart? Because we're not heads on sticks. We're whole persons. So I'm I'm really curious how this has formed you, Joey, cuz I know it's formed me and I thought we could have a really interesting back and forth here.
>> Yeah, good question, Colin. I feel like um I could think of like a new uh an old experience and a new experience. And so like I really travel in a sense was kind of like a huge piece in me really opening my eyes to the broader faith of like um especially apostolic Christianity. I remember going to Ireland for uh my father-in-law's wedding. Um it was uh yeah, he's like he's got Irish heritage. So in his when he was getting um uh married again, he wanted to like go go to like his roots and it was a really cool experience to get to go and do that. Um and it was my first time leaving the I I was like I was born in Canada and lived in the US like I traveled back and forth between them, but like to leave cross the pond was it was the first time.
And I was still very evangelical. I just just got in my job as a youth pastor. So I was like fresh and I was still really hyped up on just the evangelical expression of Christianity. And I remember seeing St. Patrick's Cathedral off in the distance in Dublin and I was like I need to go there cuz I've always liked the story of St. Patrick. Um so I was like I need to go there. Like I love that guy. He's he's super cool. Um and I remember looking at St. Patrick's Cathedral and feeling so torn. Like on one hand intellectually I've been taught that like putting that much money and effort into a grandiose cathedral like that it's like wrong, it's idolatrous, it's a waste of resources, whatever critique you want to use. I just had all those rumbling around my brain. And at the same time there was something moving in my heart where I was like man, what kind of faith would inspire people to build something like that cuz I think I think St. Patrick's is Catholic. I don't think it's Anglican.
Um at least the one in Dublin. Um and so to look at that and go like what would inspire them to build that? That really that was like a that was a worm in my brain that it was hard to get out after that of like yeah, like why do we just do church in a warehouse? Like what does that say about what we believe about God? Um and I mean like that's just like I feel like in that moment looking at St. Patrick's Cathedral the Holy Spirit was getting a foot in the door and saying like yeah, there's a lot more that you're not experiencing.
Um and then recently it's the same with um going to Egypt. I got to go to Egypt with the Coptic Orthodox Answers crew and do a documentary with them.
Um and um it's one thing to like um yeah, kind of have this like concept of Orthodoxy and Coptic Orthodoxy especially it's kind of a unique branch.
Um and then actually get to talk to like yeah, talk to monks, talk to a lay person to see where St. Anthony slept in a cave to see um people in poverty who are really passionate about their faith.
And to realize um yeah, like uh Christ is moving everywhere and he's definitely moving in the in the Coptic Church in Egypt and like um I think especially what was really eye-opening was just how much suffering is really baked into the Christian life and how much I've been isolated and kind of um um I've been uh infantilized a little bit. Like I'm not able to suffer to the extent that these people are.
Um and I think because of that I was so humbled by their faith. Um yeah, travel's huge because it does um it's the same reason like going out in nature is really helpful. It broadens your horizons and it makes you see God in a way that you wouldn't just on your computer.
>> Yeah.
That's that's so beautiful, man. I I honestly I couldn't agree more.
I think I think it too it uh it really becomes again it it becomes a movement of the heart. My friend said this to me from the church that I attend cuz I I'll share sometimes like I do wrestle sometimes and again this is not towards any I'm not trying to talk to anybody in particular here about anybody in particular. But I do wrestle sometimes with why sometimes other people don't seem to they don't necessarily approach it the same way. And I don't want to talk about their motives or those kind of things. I think it's very complicated. There's psychological things, there's family history things, there's all sort I'm sure there's theological reasoning behind it too, but and sometimes but I do wrestle with like I just I struggle with sometimes why the form of rhetoric online doesn't seem to be different than it is.
And my friend said to me this is so basic, right? But sometimes the basic answers are the really true ones and they need to hit you. Like the weight of it needs to hit you. It's just like Cole, for you it's a matter of the heart, bro.
Like it's not just a matter of the mind and the intellect. It's like you've been to these places and you have all these experience and you have this profound love and affinity this way. And it's like you can't just ignore that. Like so to me in a sense it's like it's not even comprehensible to think of like the whole Latin Church just being you know what I mean, off the rails, off the rocker. Like, I just can't. It's not even possible. Or or like I've been to like I've actually been to Egypt, too, bro. I did Did you go to Sinai or did you just go off the Nile?
>> Just off the Nile, yeah. The furthest we went was out into the Red Sea area.
>> Okay. Okay.
>> but like we say Anthony's Monastery and St. Paul's Monastery.
>> That's so fast. So, I would I I didn't I have not been to that part of Egypt, but I did go down from Eilat in Israel down into the Sinai. I've been to St. Catherine's Monastery in the Sinai, which is at the base of Mount Sinai.
Um and so I've had experiences in Egypt, too. And it's like you go there and it's like you can't just discount this place. You just can't, man. Like, it's >> [laughter] >> I don't know. I don't I don't know how to I can't even I mean, intellectually I think I can back it up, but just your your general intuition is like it would be a very erroneous to discount this as truly a faithful participant in Christ's Church. Not just like a participant that's in gross error, but like an actual real participant in Christ's Church.
And I think about my experiences, bro. I go like, okay, I have those experiences in Egypt. I have tons of experiences in Israel. I personally have lots of experiences in the Roman Catholic world.
I've been to I don't need to name-drop every place, but I've been to Italy, I've been to Rome, Venice, I've been to Bavaria, Southern Germany, which I think maybe has the most beautiful church architecture on the planet, in my opinion.
>> confirm that. I've gotten to go and oh my gosh, Bavaria is amazing.
>> Bro, have you been Did you go to Wieskirche in >> Uh yes.
>> So, we got there actually like right when it closed, which I was so sad about. I saw the But I've been to some of the the great Rococo churches in Bavaria. Bavaria, man, is like off the chain. Anyways, but any And then I've been blessed to go to um to England and to um into France and to uh to Scotland.
And then so you've got all these experiences and I'm just like for one that makes me inherently ecumenical.
Like you go to a Canterbury Cathedral and you're like, okay, this is definitely real. And then you go to St. Peter's and you're like, okay, this is definitely real. Then you go to St. Catherine's and you're like, okay, this is definitely real. You're like, okay, so what ecclesiology holds that?
And it's not to flatten out all the questions, but it it it it shows how it's not only a matter of the mind.
But then at the same time, I also think of like I grew up in the Methodist Church. My family like this church behind me right here is actually the Lutheran church where my great grandfather ministered. Over here off camera, I have another I have the Lutheran here. I'll show it. I have the cross that sat on my great grand Oh, no, it's on this side. This sat That cross sat on my great grandfather's desk in his in in his Lutheran church in Pennsylvania. And I think this icon I actually took a picture of this. That's Christ Pantocrator in the Holy Sepulchre. Um >> Yeah.
>> And I just go like so I have those experiences and then I have all my youth ministry experiences where I've like gone to Evangelical Church and I go, okay, all of this somehow has to have some participation in Christ.
Um now, where my intellect parses it out is I'm able to differentiate like, okay, there's a difference though between the Evangelical experience I had in the Eastern Orthodox monastery, the Greek Orthodox monastery. Like I can I have come to the place where I can go, okay, this one's the fullness and this one participates, but it's it's you know what I mean, but it's not it's not the fullness. It's not part of the visible church. And I've come to a place where I can parse that out. But it's still that traveling gives you a different reflection point even start with. So I don't know if Has that been your experience too, bro? Like I know you recently went to Fatima. I know there's all sorts of stuff online about Fatima.
But for me it's like how could you No, I haven't been to Portugal, but how could you go to Fatima and just wholesale just discount like Anyways, to me that's and I'm not saying I'm not talking about anybody particular here, but just how that like Most people online haven't discounted it wholesale, but even like it begins intellectually rather than experientially or in the heart. And I'm curious on your reflection there.
>> Yeah, I think that yeah, travel in general has it needs to make you more ecumenical and I also appreciate you saying like local travel too. Like just go to a like maybe there's no Catholic or Orthodox church near you, but if it's a 3-hour drive, make the drive if you can.
Because like actually experiencing it is it's it's completely different ball game. Like it was really easy for me to be anti-Catholic until I went to a mass.
And then I was like, well, they read more scripture than I do at my church and I thought I like the Bible.
>> Yeah.
>> That's crazy.
And that made me want to go, why do they read so much Bible? It must be because they like it at the very least and what And you know, it's like experiencing all these things it does. Like same with Fatima. Like Fatima, I got a little flak for this. I wasn't saying I mentioned in my video that like Fatima in some ways felt a little bit overly grandiose and I still hold to that position. I'm not against cathedrals and basilicas cuz I love them.
But regardless of my own opinions on like how the layout It was really more just like the layout of it. There's just a lot of concrete and like it was made It was made to be a massive pavilion for people.
So whether whether I like like that or not, to see the faith of the people there makes you go this is crazy. Like to hear to hear stories of people like walking on their knees and praying a rosary and they receive healing. It's like okay, whether you think you should pray to Mary or not, God is using prayers to Mary. Like whether you think it's okay that people are praying to Mary, God whether you think it's in spite of the prayers to Mary or because of the prayers to Mary, God is using people's people requesting intercession for Mary to change lives, transform, to to perform miracles.
And so that does that makes you you have to think about it. Whereas it's really easy when I was growing up and I was kind of anti-Catholic to just hear about the rosary and go, what a bunch of baloney. That's dumb. Why would they ever do that? And then I mean yeah, even to experience it in my own life and to experience the fruit of it. Like it makes it way different. And then likewise, you can also experience things and go, "I don't like that. I don't like that at all. That does not smack of the Holy Spirit." Um and I've been in places like that, too, where like um I've traveled to a lot of LDS hubs, and I've tried to enter I mean, like my my in-laws are all in Utah, so I go to Salt Lake City all the time.
And I've tried to engage with Mormons and their theology on a really on on the same openness I do with other Christians. Um I've, you know, in their temples and their wards that I've gotten to visit, same thing. I try to go in with an open mind, and every time it just doesn't have the same um same level of truth, beauty, and goodness that's present in like an Orthodox church or Catholic church. Um it's just not the same. And I think the open it people are scared of this openness because they're scared you'll get whisked away.
>> Yeah.
>> If you're anchored in the gospel, that openness is actually really helpful to parse out what's right and what's wrong.
I can go to a Catholic church, and I can talk to a priest and experience like, "Okay, he's he's solid. That guy knows like gospel. He knows the Holy He's got the Holy Spirit. This is amazing." And I can go and speak to a a Mormon uh bishop or whatever.
And uh I can ex- I can experience and and acknowledge like, "This is a good guy. The Holy Spirit's not here. The the Holy Spirit is not in what this guy is saying." Um and I think people discount the experience the experiential aspect of the Christian life. Um that you do get when you travel and when you try things out, when you get to visit different churches. Um yeah.
>> That's really interesting, man. I think that uh >> [sighs and gasps] >> Where do I want to go with this? I think that um So, I think for me, I try to parse this out, bro, because anybody who knows me in my personal life, like the one thing that I'm definitely not is a pluralist.
And I'm trying to even figure out in my mind like how you parse this out. So, in my mind, I almost live like most people in my life think I'm like really, really rigid.
>> [laughter] >> Which is so funny. Yeah, yeah, they feel like they're so rigid, bro.
But then on the flip side, in some of these other circles, it's like, "Oh, that guy's just a liberal. He's a pluralist."
>> Yeah, people on the internet think I'm just like a subjectivist. I'm like, "Not at all." I get where you're like, >> No. So, like So, like when it comes to like Christology and the doctrine of God, like I can tell you, bro, there is a zero chance that I will alter my view on the triune nature of the triune God or on the discern on on the >> Mhm.
>> that I would basically put this in the infallible camp. Like the discernments of Nicaea and Chalcedon. Like Like the core level of what's going on in Christology and the doctrine of God.
Um when it Even something I would say something like that the Eucharist is an objective reality. Like there's a 0% chance of me changing my mind on that.
And so, we have to in some level have a posture that we know what we know what we know, and we walk with peace. But then there are other things even if they are extremely important and even if we feel really settled about them, that we still go with a posture that is at least open to what God could be doing there. Is there maybe something we're not understanding? Now, see, I almost get flak for this. I actually have like I have many Well, here, I'll go into the deep waters here, bro.
Just for fun. I'm starting to get more bold as I'm on YouTube longer.
But uh I I definitely am a male-only holy orders guy. Like I believe in male holy orders. I just do. And that's something that actually was a change for me in the last few years. Um and now I hold that with like real veracity. Like I would never go to my Sunday mass obligation a place where it was where I didn't feel there was 100% valid scholastic apostolic succession. Even if it was like I'll look I'll literally do the research. Like I want to make sure this person wasn't ordained by a female bishop. Like I'll go to that length, you know, where I'm researching and I'm doing all this stuff. Um so, I believe that.
Yet that's a one that I still go, is it even possible that I'm missing something here? And I think it's possible that there's something I'm missing. But I still hold that with settled conviction. I don't feel like up in the air about it. And so we have to have And then there's other things. So that's like a second category. So there's one category it's like I know I I know what I know. This will never change because it's just the Holy Spirit has testified with my spirit that this is reality. The try The Trinity, the hypostatic union. Then there's this middle category where it's like, "Well, I feel really settled about this and I hold this with veracity even to the point where I'll teach about it online."
Now, if you're teaching about something online, I would say you better be sure that you believe what you're saying cuz the teachers will be judged harshly, right? If you're just spitting whatever.
So then there's a middle category though where it's like, "I could possibly be wrong."
I could I could conceive of a theoretical reality where I didn't understand something. But I still hold feel this settled about this. And then there's a third category where it's like, you know, I'm open to seeing how God works here and I'm and I'm and I'm I'm trying to understand and I may feel somewhat settled about some things, but I'm open to it.
And I feel like to me, one thing I do love about our tradition, again, my whole point is not to say how wonderful Anglicanism is. Anglicanism in a sense has its beautiful elements and it has its elements that make you want to hit your head against the wall. But one of the good things is is I would just say See, I don't even I I I I am a Catholic and I'm Anglican so you could say Anglo-Catholic, but I I kind of prefer the word like eclectic Anglican because to me it's like I could go to a Roman Catholic church and I'm like, "Bro, this is amazing. Look at all this wisdom they have to teach us. Like Anglicanism needs this."
And I go to an Eastern Orthodox church.
I'm like, "Bro, this is incredible. Give me the Theotokos. Like like teach me about Wait, you've got like You've got the Theotokos in the middle and Christ Pantocrator in the top and the lady down here. Okay, there's the incarnation, right? Like through the Theotokos. Like like there's this profound stuff going on." And so I'm like, "Give me that."
But we can do that across the board and still hold principles. That's a very like Anglican spirituality. It's an Anglican reflection. Anyways, so that's kind of where I'm at. Do you find that some of that type of reasoning is partially what made Anglicanism attractive to you? It's just like And it doesn't even have to be about Anglicanism, but do you do you find that way of thinking attractive where it's like I'm some things I'm settled, some things I'm kind of like I'm some things I know for certain, some things I'm settled on, but I'm still like open to like a theoretical possibility I might think something. And then other things I'm just I'm open to and let's see where God leads. To me, that's a very attractive way of living a Christian life.
>> Yeah, I couldn't agree more because as I've as I was reading the 39 articles, that was like one of the first things that stuck out to me.
Was like like predestination is mentioned, right? It's like a concept in scripture, so it's mentioned in the articles. But like it doesn't get so into the weeds that you can't have your own theological opinion on it. It's I would actually argue it's the same with like I would argue it's the same with like some of the some of the more like Romanist doctrines.
>> [music] >> No, you're good, bro.
>> It happens with some of the more maybe like more controversial Romanist doctrines that it that it addresses.
Like there's still a lot more room than like like the Westminster Confession which originally said it. They changed it, but originally said like the Pope is the Antichrist. You have to believe the Pope's the Antichrist. Whereas Anglicanism has never really held that position. They've held nuance of like um I think it's maybe it's Hooker. I'm learning I'm learning the Anglican names, but like Hooker was I think saying like yeah, the church is a the Roman church is a true church. It's a church in error, but it's a true church. Most of the reformers believed that at the time. And then Hooker's a little bit later than that, but that's something that I think has been really comforting is Anglicanism is by no means just a it's not pluralistic Christianity where you can take whatever you know, like going to take a little bit of Catholicism here and a little bit of Orthodoxy there and maybe a little bit of Pentecostalism.
Uh there's there is um there is like it's settled on things that it's settled on.
Um but also at the same time it leaves a lot of room for us to yeah, recognize like um uh at its at its best it's there's a lot of room to recognize like we can appreciate what our Roman brothers are doing here, what our Coptic brothers are doing there, and we can learn from each other. Um because yeah, I think I think what maybe is I hear this from some Anglicans who are a little bit hesitant to kind of have that approach because they kind of want like a core Anglican identity. And what I would also say is the other churches have done the same with us. Like you said, like um Rome has learned a lot from Anglicanism.
I think um especially in terms of like uh uh mass in the the common tongue of the people in the area that you're that you're going in uh you're doing the mass in. Like that's an Anglican idea that like we're going to give people the same liturgy with their language.
Um and so they can actually like really really chew into what's going on. Um same with like taking idea taking um scripture. You know, I I I love that Catholics are doing personal Bible study more and also doing personal like day like daily offices in their own personal life because for a long time that was just reserved for the the monastics until the Anglicans uh decided that um this needs to be something that every everybody's doing. Um not I actually maybe threw the baby out with the bathwater and said like, you know, get rid of monasticism wholesale. At least in some forms of Anglicanism and Protestantism. I think there's a place for monasticism in Anglicanism still. Um but at the same time I really appreciate um this idea that like yeah, it doesn't all need to be in a monastery. The the office the the prayer the scripture it needs to be in the home as well.
All that to say yeah, for me it's been really comforting and enticing to to realize I can I can have my own personal theological convictions.
And I also don't have to worry about like um falling away into heresy just by accident. Whereas like I actually feel like in Evangelicalism, that's not the case. Um in Evangelicalism, there aren't any guardrails. Um and so you either have to go to an extreme where every issue is a primary salvific issue, or every issue is a tertiary issue that has no meaning or basis whatsoever. Um and Anglicanism, I feel like is constantly towing the line. And that's just also how reality works out. Reality is really messy. It's it's almost never black and white entirely. Uh and in in a sense, it's also not completely gray, either.
There are things that are true, and there are things that are not. And then there's a lot of middle uh that we got to work in. And uh Anglicanism, I feel like does that the best. And I yeah, I don't say that triumphalistically. I just think that they we've really held that approach um for better or worse. I think that's why we can Most Anglicans will look at all the splits within Anglicanism, the in-person Anglicans, and go, "Yep, we're a mess. Yeah, there there's the continuum, there's the PCA, there's the Episcopals, and we're kind of a mess. And uh that's all right.
We're we're okay with it, you know, we're going to figure it out. We're not like we're going to we're not just going to leave the mess, you know, our house a mess. We're going to clean up. But for now, it's going to Yeah, houses get messy sometimes. We got to sort it out.
And that doesn't shake our faith at all."
>> Yeah, that's really interesting, man.
Yeah, I mean, the way the way that I the language that's coming to mind for me is just like as Christians, we have to believe we basically just have to believe in capital T truth. Like that's that's what really matters. So, to me, it's not so much um I and I understand why people get leery of that kind of thing of like, "Are we just cherry-picking? Like, oh, I could be a little Pentecostal and a little Catholic and a little Orthodox, and I'm good to go." You know, um it's much more complicated than that. To me, it's really about Anglicanism in its very life is inculcating the best of world Christendom, and we kind of stand at the center of this I'm not saying we're the central tradition, but we kind of stand at like this cruciform spot in between east and west. We stand at this cruciform spot between the reformation and the great Latin church. We stand at this cruciform spot between liturgical Christianity and evangelical flare, religion of the heart. And so we kind of stand at the crux of these various places and we try to hold them in in tension.
And sometimes what that means is sometimes we do need to take on new insights all the time from different groups. Because NT Wright has this great line. He says, "It's not that Anglicans have any doctrine of their own, it's just that if something is true that Anglicans happen to believe it." And to me that's like That to me that's that's like that's the only thing that is coherent to to kind of move like But at the same time, again, that doesn't come that can either lead to triumphalism or it can lead to so a drum that I've been beating a lot which it can also lead to death.
And I want to contend here that death is actually the right path to take cuz it's the way that Jesus goes.
When Jesus goes riding into Jerusalem, right? They're all cheering, "Jesus!"
And I know you got to go here, bro, but they're riding "Jesus!"
>> No, it's all right. It's fine. It's all good.
>> Oh, yeah. No, no, you're good. But so Jesus rides into Jerusalem and all the people are here cheering, "Jesus, overthrow the Romans for us." Right?
Double entendre there.
And I feel like a lot of Anglicans online are like going overthrow the Romans, bro. Tell them how they were wrong at the 16th Let's fight out I I don't want to but let's fight out some of these old things. And and again, I'm not trying to belittle or you know, I think it's important to do historical work and I don't want to demean, you know, the good work people do in any way. That's not my goal.
I do sometimes sense though, I think it's subconscious. I'm not even sure it's conscience and I think it's based in a lot of different things.
But I sense this kind of notion of like there is somewhat of a sense of let's overthrow the Romans. And Jesus' response is actually the real way to win is to die.
And it's when you die that you're actually serving your brother. It's not about who sits at Jesus' right hand and his left, right? It's not James and John who's going to win.
It's It's who's actually going to wash the feet of their brother and die.
Because death is how you lead to new life. And so in my view it's like Anglicanism and dying doesn't mean you lose all the good from the past. Grace doesn't destroy nature, it perfects it. It actually takes our nature and brings it into an eschatological future.
And when we think this sort of way it allows us to die to ourselves and to say, I can take in all truth around me.
And still part of our And we don't lose our ethos. It actually perfects it. Um and I guess to me that's the vision of Anglicanism that's coherent. But not even Forget if you People aren't Anglican, you can still believe this.
It's not you don't have to be Anglican to believe this. It's more so about when we're talking about the traditions of the church, it's about taking in all truth. It's like It's like you know when a camera lens how it works in the dark?
Is it takes in all the light that it can and so good lenses soak in tons of light. That's what we're trying to do.
We're trying to adjust our camera lens and so when we take it, it might take a second and go shh and it's sucking in all this light, right? That's what we're trying to do and then it takes a coherent picture.
But anyways, I'll let you end with the final word here, bro. But that's kind of my plea for how all I know this is we've we've gone all sorts of places in this conversation. But it all kind of comes back into focus around it's a spirituality based around looking for the unity of the church which is at the core of the gospel and I think we would both say that. I don't want to speak for you, but just what I know from your channel and from this conversation. The unity of the church is at is so much so at this God wants to set us right so we can be right setters and part of being a right setter is the unity of the people of God.
And so we need to have an orientation towards this and that's going to intuit It's going to it's going to necessitate dealing with all these questions in such a way and with such an orientation that allows for, yes, we still need to work out truth and this and this and this, but it's still trusting that God will do the seed that goes forth from my mouth will not return to me empty, but will accomplish that for which I sent it. We need to trust that God's doing that in our midst. So, anyways, I'll let you end with the final word, bro. Whatever reflections you want to give there, uh but that's kind of how I would parse out these various things.
>> Yeah, thanks, Colin. I feel like um I've I've been starting that way every single time I say something.
>> Oh, you're good, man.
>> Unity is um often mischaracterized as subjectivism or relativism. That, oh, let's just ignore all the things that divide us, all these like doctrinal issues, and just like we all love Jesus, and that's all that matters. And I'm not interested in that kind of unity. Like I I There's a lot of Eastern Orthodox online who are like, "Ecumenism is a heresy." And when I ask them, "What do you mean by ecumenism?"
They mean, "Yeah, like giving up on doctrine for the sake of like just being friends with other you know, other people." I'm like, "Yeah, I'm not interested in that kind of unity, either. Like that's not real unity at all. That's like saying like, yeah, who cares if mom and dad got divorced? Let's all just live in the same under the same roof, anyway."
Um not helpful. Like you need to address the issues that led to the family breakup in the first place so you can really be one again.
Um and also acknowledge that the family's going to look different now.
After the after the divorce, the family's going to look different even if mom and dad get back together. It's going to be different. And um I'm interested in the unity that wants to really look at these issues and acknowledge them, and then see um yeah, what's the core of the onion that to use your analogy that we're all sharing. Um when we look at the Immaculate Conception, I try to speak to on one hand the Catholics and say like, "Look, evangelicals are rightly concerned about this because when you say this, it sounds like you're saying she didn't, you know, like by her own volition she's didn't sin. And like no, not at all. And then I get to go to the evangelicals and say like, look, uh you also believe that the effects of the cross were retroactively applied to patriarchs in the Old Testament.
Um why couldn't it be done a little bit differently, but why couldn't it be done to Mary, you know?
Um and like uh by actually looking at the issue instead of going, "Ah, Immaculate Conception, let's just not talk about it. Let's just ignore that that topic."
Um or whatever, fill in the blank.
That's not true unity and I think um >> [clears throat] >> my hope is that we will continue to have I'm not against debates, I'm not against disagreement, but we continue to have them with the hopes that we can find, okay, wait, we're starting to say the same thing. The more we work this out, the more we start saying the same thing, the more we we take in the light of Christ and we realize, oh wait, wait, he's had us on the same path the whole time and now we actually get to see the final project. Um and really at the end of the day that's what it's all about is God wants us to be one, so we're going to be one. Um and how that looks will probably disappoint almost everybody including myself, but we're going to be really stoked when we see God's final project.
>> Mhm.
>> Yeah, God's in the business of bringing order out of chaos.
I guess I I know I said last word, but just I I I'd just add the divine logos is at work bringing healing. And I want to say we need to just like in the Bible we're told that the disciples are told to read the weather patterns.
>> Mhm.
>> And what he's saying there is, you understand the weather patterns, but don't you understand what God's doing?
Well, we need to ask ourselves the same question. I can look up in the sky and say it's going to rain today, but am I really observing what God's doing?
And so this is where we need to recognize again the the work done between the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church is probably the best at this in my mind, but regardless, there's good work across the board. Like when you brought up Mary, Mary is uh we we can view it that the baptismal grace is going back in time and touching her. So, it's still the work of Christ and yet through her fiat she's still saying yes to God. And so, she's sinless. She it's through her cooperation with the grace of God. And so, and so it it it But but all the concerns of different people can actually come together in one if we understand it the right way. That one's very complicated, but but just different things we we look for convergence. Um and I think that this has occurred in so many ways and I think uh you know when we have an eye to look for that, we can see it in so many ways. So, Well, Joey, this has been an absolute pleasure for me, bro. Again, major respect for you and your channel. I want to encourage anybody check out Joey's work and his channel. Um even just the way you do your um what's the proper word? Filmography is fascinating to me.
I want to pick your brain about that.
But uh it's really high quality. But uh but God bless you, brother. In all this, whatever the Holy Spirit says is good is good. May God bring us all to the fullness of his will. I love Pope Leo's um motto "Il e lo uno unum" which is from St. Augustine. In the one we are one. And may that be the the prayer of the church. So, Joey, God bless you, my brother. Appreciate you joining and uh hope we get to chat again sometime soon.
>> Thanks, Colin. Appreciate it, man.
>> All right, man. God's peace, bro.
Appreciate you.
>> [music]
Related Videos
Communist manifesto was written by Marks and ?
ApnaHistoryOfficial
1K views•2026-06-16
Churches Were Preaching To Make Money | Michael Jones Inspiring Philosophy Speakers corner
LilLaaHilHamd
140 views•2026-06-14
Mandukya Upanishad | Day 52 | Swami Nikhilananda Saraswati
swami.nikhilananda.saraswati
119 views•2026-06-17
The Moral Ethics of Hamsterdam - The Wire
TheShowiest
1K views•2026-06-19
Discovering Better Logics in a Binary World | Dr. Tamice Spencer-Helms | TNE Podcasts
thenewevangelicalspodcast
148 views•2026-06-15
The Person You Protect Does Not Exist
TheChopraWell
1K views•2026-06-16
The Most Honest Lucid Dreaming Video I've Ever Made
luciddreamingteacher
153 views•2026-06-20
June 16, 2026
nickcbarr
1K views•2026-06-16











