Anglicans: Why don't you come home to Rome?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dempsey1919
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dempsey1919

Guest
I have great respect for many Anglicans I have met through the years, but I often wonder what is preventing them from becoming Roman Catholic?

I am aware of the many different factions within the Anglican Communion, and I would never expect an Evangelical Anglican to become Catholic, but Anglo-catholics are so similar to us that reunion seems to be the only logical conclusion.

Afterall, Anglo-Catholics believe in many of our doctrines and identify themselves as “catholic” rather than Protestant. I also know that the Anglo-Catholics are not happy with the way things are going in the Anglican Communion.

What prevents you from becoming Roman Catholic?

I pray that you will become Catholic one day.

Let’s use this thread to discuss our differences and see if we can work towards an agreement. Hopefully, this thread will be the catalyst that causes many of our Anglican friends to become Catholic in communion with the Pope.
 
Dempsey1919 said:
I have great respect for many Anglicans I have met through the years, but I often wonder what is preventing them from becoming Roman Catholic?

I am aware of the many different factions within the Anglican Communion, and I would never expect an Evangelical Anglican to become Catholic, but Anglo-catholics are so similar to us that reunion seems to be the only logical conclusion.

Afterall, Anglo-Catholics believe in many of our doctrines and identify themselves as “catholic” rather than Protestant. I also know that the Anglo-Catholics are not happy with the way things are going in the Anglican Communion.

What prevents you from becoming Roman Catholic?

I pray that you will become Catholic one day.

Let’s use this thread to discuss our differences and see if we can work towards an agreement. Hopefully, this thread will be the catalyst that causes many of our Anglican friends to become Catholic in communion with the Pope.
Click to expand...
Hmm. No one’s responding…
I hope they’re all “in the water” now.😃
 
cathopologist said:
Perhaps they feel Rome is too far away and Buckingham Palace is only a stone’s throw away? 😃
Click to expand...
You will find various Anglo-Catholics who have various reasons for not moving across the river. Papal issues often lead the way.

Lambeth would be a better analogy than Buck House, but both are far from me.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
 
You will find various Anglo-Catholics who have various reasons for not moving across the river. Papal issues often lead the way.
Click to expand...
What are the issues that are preventing you from becoming Roman Catholic? You seem to be very well informed about the issues surrounding Anglicanism and I would label you as the type of Anglican who would be most suited as a Roman Catholic.
 
Dempsey1919 said:
What are the issues that are preventing you from becoming Roman Catholic? You seem to be very well informed about the issues surrounding Anglicanism and I would label you as the type of Anglican who would be most suited as a Roman Catholic.
Click to expand...
That’s a kind thought.

Papal issues. I do not believe the Pope possesses the charism of personal infallibility, for example. Yes, you can assume I know what that means.

GKC
 
GKC said:
Lambeth would be a better analogy than Buck House, but both are far from me.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
Click to expand...
Actually i was referring to the “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England vs the Bishop of Rome. Lambeth? You mean the “Council” that decided how gay clergy or women bishops should tend their flock?
 
cathopologist said:
Actually i was referring to the “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England vs the Bishop of Rome. Lambeth? You mean the “Council” that decided how gay clergy or women bishops should tend their flock?
Click to expand...
No, I meant Lambeth Palace as a better analogy than Buckingham Palace.

I have no relationship to the currently ongoing silliness at the meeting of bishops in communion with +Cantuar.

GKC

posterus traditus Anglicanus
 
Papal issues. I do not believe the Pope possesses the charism of personal infallibility, for example. Yes, you can assume I know what that means.
Click to expand...
What Papal issues? Do you reject the Pope outright, or do you have issues with the modern developments such as Papal Infallability as defined at Vatican I?
 
I would venture to guess it is the modern developments such as those at Vatican I that even caused a split from Rome by the “Old Catholics” on the same issue.
 
Grace & Peace!
jesusluv said:
I would venture to guess it is the modern developments such as those at Vatican I that even caused a split from Rome by the “Old Catholics” on the same issue.
Click to expand...
Personally, this is my issue as well. (And just by way of an FYI–I am familiar with the conciliar definition of infallibility. In some ways, the simple fact that the council decided to officially define it at all is the problem.) Universal ordinary authority for the Pope is problematic. Add to all that a culture of legalism and a practical tendency to see the hierarchy as the Church, and swimming the Tiber loses any appeal whatsoever. The Orthodox East holds much more interest. For the time being, however, I remain Anglo-Catholic.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!
 
Dempsey1919 said:
What Papal issues? Do you reject the Pope outright, or do you have issues with the modern developments such as Papal Infallability as defined at Vatican I?
Click to expand...
As I said in the post you quoted, yes, (inter alia) papal infallibility, per Vat I. Though the definition, as finally worded, was much less than the ultramontanists such as Ward or Manning wanted, it’s still too strong for a sort of semi-conciliarist such as I’m.

No, of course I don’t reject the Pope out right, or in any fashion at all. Benedict (and Bartholomew, for that matter) are often mentioned at our Mass, when we pray for all faithful bishops. And why not. He’s the Primate of the West (even if Benedict doesn’t use the title) primus inter pares. And, it seems, a good guy.

GKC
 
jesusluv said:
I would venture to guess it is the modern developments such as those at Vatican I that even caused a split from Rome by the “Old Catholics” on the same issue.
Click to expand...
Had I been in attendance in Rome in 1870, I’d have been treking for Utrecht.

GKC
 
Deo_Volente said:
Grace & Peace!

Personally, this is my issue as well. (And just by way of an FYI–I am familiar with the conciliar definition of infallibility. In some ways, the simple fact that the council decided to officially define it at all is the problem.) Universal ordinary authority for the Pope is problematic. Add to all that a culture of legalism and a practical tendency to see the hierarchy as the Church, and swimming the Tiber loses any appeal whatsoever. The Orthodox East holds much more interest. For the time being, however, I remain Anglo-Catholic.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!
Click to expand...
On most points, we are in accord on this, frater..

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus
 
Dempsey1919 said:
I have great respect for many Anglicans I have met through the years, but I often wonder what is preventing them from becoming Roman Catholic?

I am aware of the many different factions within the Anglican Communion, and I would never expect an Evangelical Anglican to become Catholic, but Anglo-catholics are so similar to us that reunion seems to be the only logical conclusion.
Click to expand...
It’s not that simple, particularly in the U.S. Most of us are somewhere in between. (I think that in England the parties are probably more sharply defined.)

As for why more of us don’t convert–have you ever visited an Anglican liturgy? It’s not just the aesthetics of the liturgy, but the quality of community as well. Catholicism seems very impersonal by comparison. To convert to Catholicism, an Anglican who is disposed to agree with Catholic doctrine has to put abstract belief over concrete ties of affection and the experiential means of grace. (By this I mean that while your sacraments may be valid and ours invalid, in terms of what we can experience it is easier for me at least to feel spiritually nourished in most Anglican liturgies than in most Catholic liturgies I’ve been to.)

And of course many Anglicans are not so disposed. Many Anglicans don’t find any merit in the papal claims, and more broadly most of us have problems with what seems to be the unduly (by the standards not only of contemporary society but also of Scripture and Tradition) authoritarian structure of your Communion. Many Anglicans also have problems with what seems to them to be the unnecessarily and harshly conservative stance of Catholicism on a number of moral and social questions. And even those of us who are disposed to agree with the Catholic Church on many of the most significant of such questions (abortion, for instance) find the “squishiness” of Anglicanism hard to renounce. For instance, I agree with the general tenor of JPII’s “theology of the body.” I’m disposed to agree that sexuality shouldn’t be separated from procreation. I’m on the fence with regards to (non-abortifacient) artificial birth control. But when I see folks on this forum get all tied up in knots about just what sort of marital intimacy is legitimate if potentially procreative intercourse is not intended, or when I hear of impotent men being denied the right to marry, or when I see the posts from young people tortured by the belief that they are in danger of damnation for masturbating–at such times I say to myself, “You know, there’s something to be said for teaching general principles and leaving some gray areas.”

I’m putting a case. This is one side of my attitude to the Anglican/Catholic divide. The other side comes around every time the issue of abortion comes up. I’m free to believe abortion is murder as an Anglican. But my church not only doesn’t teach this, but devotes all its public efforts to the other side. This is an abomination. And if the price of taking a clear stand on abortion is submitting to a bit of legalism with regard to less important matters, I suppose it’s a price that I ought to be willing to pay. But it’s not easy.

Edwin
 
Deo_Volente said:
Grace & Peace!

Personally, this is my issue as well. (And just by way of an FYI–I am familiar with the conciliar definition of infallibility. In some ways, the simple fact that the council decided to officially define it at all is the problem.) Universal ordinary authority for the Pope is problematic. Add to all that a culture of legalism and a practical tendency to see the hierarchy as the Church, and swimming the Tiber loses any appeal whatsoever. The Orthodox East holds much more interest. For the time being, however, I remain Anglo-Catholic.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!
Click to expand...
Shouldn’t the Orthodox West (Western Rite Orthodox) hold more interest?
 
jesusluv said:
I would venture to guess it is the modern developments such as those at Vatican I that even caused a split from Rome by the “Old Catholics” on the same issue.
Click to expand...
This was also a contributing factor in the return of many Eastern Catholics to the Orthodox church. For them, fortunately, there was an established ancient church structure to go back to and they seem to have flourished.

The percentage of Byzantine Catholics in relation to the total Catholic population in the church has continued to slip since then. So they may have passed the tipping point a long time ago.

The western Catholics who objected to Vatican I had to attempt to forge a new church, and the Old Catholic churches were the result. Mostly unsatisfactory, all that they had was the Little Church of Utrecht to turn to. They do not seem to have fared well in the years since. Some of these later went on to approach the ancient Orthodox Patriarchates for help.

Vatican Council of 1870AD created a lot of totally unnecessary problems and a significant barrier to unity that never existed before.
 
Isa_Almisry said:
Shouldn’t the Orthodox West (Western Rite Orthodox) hold more interest?
Click to expand...
No, because of the anti-filioque, anti-Augustinianism and anti-westernism in all its manifestations by so many (especially the posters here and the Athonites) Orthodox. Like it or not, Anglicanism is largely in the western tradition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top