Can Anglicans Please Explain This

[Khalid]

Motley crew we are indeed!

My parish is Anglo-Catholic and we do indeed think she’s a real, honest to God bishop. But we’re much more McLaren than Spong.

I think that, by definition, means you’re liturgical middle church or something of the like. If there’s one thing I like about Anglicans, it’s how you can take ten tiles with different terms on them, such as “churchmanship”, “latitudinarian”, “social gospel”, “high”, “low”, “Reformed”, “catholic”, “Catholic”, “null and void”, “valid”, “sacramentarian”, “sacramentalist”, “belief in Pauline vice lists”, “lack thereof”, etc. and pull them out of a hat in any order and get an accurate descriptor of at least one group of them.

Strike that, I’m with Mr Chesterton (I’m assuming that’s what “GKC” means, after all?) on this.

 

[Contarini]

No one knows when Christianity arrived in Great Britain. It was certainly very, very early in the history of the church, and it developed quite independently of Roman Catholicism on the continent.

Loaded language–I wouldn’t use the term “Roman Catholicism” for the pre-Reformation Church myself.

Certainly Celtic Christianity did develop in fairly independent ways, but they were still part of the broader world of Western Catholicism. For a fair and detailed account of the relevant evidence, see Aidan Nichols, “The Roman Primacy in the Ancient Irish and Anglo-Celtic Church,” in Scribe of the Kingdom (Sheed and Ward, 1994), vol. 1, pp. 93ff.

At one point, the English Church surrendered to the Roman way…the Roman haircut style for monks and date of Easter and primitive government, over the earlier Celtic tradition. But to say the church began when it pulled back, again, from Rome is simply a result of simplistic and faulty history. No, it was the same building, priest, sacraments, faith and spirituality. It simply returned to its independence from Rome, as it had been in earlier times.

The 39 Articles do not express the same doctrine as that held previously by the Ecclesia Anglicana, or by the Celtic Church.

The Book of Common Prayer, while it contains a good deal of material that derives from the pre-Reformation tradition, is also shaped in key points by the innovative doctrines of the sixteenth century.

Edwin

 

[GKC]

I think that, by definition, means you’re liturgical middle church or something of the like. If there’s one thing I like about Anglicans, it’s how you can take ten tiles with different terms on them, such as “churchmanship”, “latitudinarian”, “social gospel”, “high”, “low”, “Reformed”, “catholic”, “Catholic”, “null and void”, “valid”, “sacramentarian”, “sacramentalist”, “belief in Pauline vice lists”, “lack thereof”, etc. and pull them out of a hat in any order and get an accurate descriptor of at least one group of them.

Strike that, I’m with Mr Chesterton (I’m assuming that’s what “GKC” means, after all?) on this.

He’s my man, yep.

GKC

Chesterton collector for 48 years

 

[Contarini]

He’s my man, yep.

GKC

Chesterton collector for 48 years

Just reread a bunch of Chesterton (Ball and the Cross, Man Who Was Thursday, and bits of the Ignatius volume containing Heretics, Orthodoxy, and the Blatchford controversies), and fell in love all over again. . . .

Edwin

 

[GKC]

Just reread a bunch of Chesterton (Ball and the Cross, Man Who Was Thursday, and bits of the Ignatius volume containing Heretics, Orthodoxy, and the Blatchford controversies), and fell in love all over again. . . .

Edwin

We are in agreement.

If you ever find the time, I strongly recommend Oddie’s CHESTERTON AND THE ROMANCE OF ORTHODOXY. It draws on the recently cataloged collection of papers, drafts, and other unpublished material long held by Dorothy Collins, GKC’'s longtime secretary and executor. Other scholars have had access to this material, but not the way Oddie has used it. An essential book, one of the 3 most essential, on my man.

Seven Chesterton related titles in the reading list, including Ian Ker’s new bio and Aidan Nichols’ study.

GKC, collector of GKC

 

[liturgyluver]

We are in agreement.

If you ever find the time, I strongly recommend Oddie’s CHESTERTON AND THE ROMANCE OF ORTHODOXY. It draws on the recently cataloged collection of papers, drafts, and other unpublished material long held by Dorothy Collins, GKC’'s longtime secretary and executor. Other scholars have had access to this material, but not the way Oddie has used it. An essential book, one of the 3 most essential, on my man.

Seven Chesterton related titles in the reading list, including Ian Ker’s new bio and Aidan Nichols’ study.

GKC, collector of GKC

GKC - I just found this on Notting Hill Catholic Church website and though you might be interested to see:

2nd Annual GK Chesterton Walking Pilgrimage, Saturday 28th July
9am Meet outside St George’s CofE Church, Aubrey Walk, London, W8 7JG where GKC was Baptised as a baby. Walk to Uxbridge (9 miles approx), stopping for breakfast.
1.30pm Old Rite Mass in thanks giving for Chesterton’s Conversion, which took place 90 years ago this month. Our Lady of Lourdes and St Michael, Osborn Road, Uxbridge, UB8 1UE, you are welcome to attend the Mass even if you are not doing the walk. Walk onto Beaconsfield (13 miles approx) where Chesterton lived, converted, died and is buried. Say the prayer for the Beatification of GK

 

[GKC]

GKC - I just found this on Notting Hill Catholic Church website and though you might be interested to see:

2nd Annual GK Chesterton Walking Pilgrimage, Saturday 28th July
9am Meet outside St George’s CofE Church, Aubrey Walk, London, W8 7JG where GKC was Baptised as a baby. Walk to Uxbridge (9 miles approx), stopping for breakfast.
1.30pm Old Rite Mass in thanks giving for Chesterton’s Conversion, which took place 90 years ago this month. Our Lady of Lourdes and St Michael, Osborn Road, Uxbridge, UB8 1UE, you are welcome to attend the Mass even if you are not doing the walk. Walk onto Beaconsfield (13 miles approx) where Chesterton lived, converted, died and is buried. Say the prayer for the Beatification of GK

Thank you for the details. I had heard of this, vaguely, but it’s too far for me to walk to. Would love to attend, though.

I would suggest that Chesterton’s conversion actually occurred more nearly 100 years ago, around 1909-1910, though he did not submit and join the RRC until 1922, for a couple of reasons.

Among the books stacked up for reading here is THE HOLINESS OF G.K. CHESTERTON/edited by William Oddie. It’s dedicated to furthering Chesterton’s beatification.

GKC

 

[Khalid]

I suppose GK Chesterton is one, like CS Lewis, who crosses confessional lines - we are all in agreement as regards the man.

 

[Izdaari]

Yes, I think we can all agree that we like Lewis and Chesterton.

 

[Kathryn_Ann]

No one knows when Christianity arrived in Great Britain. It was certainly very, very early in the history of the church, and it developed quite independently of Roman Catholicism on the continent. At one point, the English Church surrendered to the Roman way…the Roman haircut style for monks and date of Easter and primitive government, over the earlier Celtic tradition. But to say the church began when it pulled back, again, from Rome is simply a result of simplistic and faulty history. No, it was the same building, priest, sacraments, faith and spirituality. It simply returned to its independence from Rome, as it had been in earlier times.

Here is a bit of history of the Church, in regard to England and Wales. I found this very helpful:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_England_and_Wales

 

[Kathryn_Ann]

No one knows when Christianity arrived in Great Britain. It was certainly very, very early in the history of the church, and it developed quite independently of Roman Catholicism on the continent. At one point, the English Church surrendered to the Roman way…the Roman haircut style for monks and date of Easter and primitive government, over the earlier Celtic tradition. But to say the church began when it pulled back, again, from Rome is simply a result of simplistic and faulty history. No, it was the same building, priest, sacraments, faith and spirituality. It simply returned to its independence from Rome, as it had been in earlier times.

Just pasting this info. here directly from Wikipedia. I have added bold for emphasis:

"The Catholic Church in England and Wales is part of the worldwide Catholic Church in full communion with the Pope. Catholic Christianity was established in what are now England and Wales in the first century AD and in 597, the first authoritative papal mission, establishing a direct link from the Kingdom of Kent to Rome and to the Benedictine form of monasticism, was carried into effect by Augustine of Canterbury.

England adhered to the Catholic Church for almost a thousand years from the time of Augustine of Canterbury but, in 1534, during the reign of King Henry VIII, the greater part of the church, through a series of legislative acts between 1533 and 1536[1][2] aligned itself to Henry’s new official ecclesial entity, the Church of England, with Henry declaring himself Supreme Head.[3][4][5]

Under Henry’s son, Edward VI, the Church of England became more influenced by the European Protestant movement but once again came under papal authority during the reign of Queen Mary I in 1555; however, this reunion was short-lived. Elizabeth I came to the throne in 1558, re-established the Church of England’s independence from Rome in a 1559 settlement and reformulated its teaching and practice in the Act of Uniformity. The Catholic Church (along with other non-established churches) continued in England, although it was at times subject to various forms of persecution.

For example, the act of being a Jesuit or seminarian was treasonable. “It was now treason to belong to a particular category of person, a remarkable extension of the law.”[6] Priests found celebrating Mass were often drawn and quartered rather than burned at the stake.[7] Most recusant members (except those in diaspora on The Continent, in heavily Catholic areas in the north, or part of the aristocracy) practiced their faith in secret for all practical purposes until 1832 when the Catholic Emancipation Act came into force. Dioceses (replacing districts) were re-established by Pope Pius IX in 1850. Apart from the 22 Latin Rite dioceses, there is the Eastern Catholic diocese of the Apostolic Exarchate for Ukrainians.

In the last UK census, in 2001, there were 4.2 million Catholics in England and Wales, some 8 per cent of the population. One hundred years earlier, in 1901, they had represented only 4.8 per cent of the population. The percentage of Catholics was at its highest in the 1981 census, with 8.7 per cent.[8] In 2009 an Ipsos Mori poll found 9.6 percent, or 5.2 million, Catholics in England and Wales.[9] Sizeable Catholic populations include North West England where one in five are Catholic.[10] This includes Liverpool which has the highest proportion of any city in Great Britain at 46 per cent; historically, this is due both to a large influx of Irish migrants after the 1800 Act of Union, in which Ireland became part of the United Kingdom,[11][12] as well as a high concentration of English recusants living in Lancashire".

 

[GKC]

I suppose GK Chesterton is one, like CS Lewis, who crosses confessional lines - we are all in agreement as regards the man.

I agree.

GKC

Lewis collector for 45 years.

 

[Prosmith]

I was looking for my old Episcopal church on the web and the site states that The Church of Our Savior was the first “Protestant” church in the San Gabriel Valley.

If Anglicans claim to be catholic and not protestants, why would this parish call themselves Protestants?

Do some Anglican/Episcopal parishes consider themselves Catholic and others Protestant? It does seem conflicting that there seems to be a division within the Anglican Communion whether they are “catholic” or “protestant”.

If some Anglicans could comment of the difference of opinions within the Anglican Communion on what it actually believed by all it will be helpful.

My brother is Episcopalian and considers himself Protestant. On CAF most Anglicans seem to consider themselves catholic. Also my parents considered themselves Protestants too.

Thanks for any (name removed by moderator)ut as it is truely confusing. I am not posting to create conflict, just found this situation strange.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

We are protestant in the sense that we do not adhere to the Roman Catholic magisterium. We are catholic (small c) in that we are part of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church (large C)

 

[Symphorian]

Just pasting this info. here directly from Wikipedia. I have added bold for emphasis:

"The Catholic Church in England and Wales is part of the worldwide Catholic Church in full communion with the Pope. Catholic Christianity was established in what are now England and Wales in the first century AD and in 597, the first authoritative papal mission, establishing a direct link from the Kingdom of Kent to Rome and to the Benedictine form of monasticism, was carried into effect by Augustine of Canterbury.

Thank you for your link Kathryn Ann.

There is no hard evidence that Christianity came to Britain in the first century as GKC has pointed out.

In Cornwall we venerate many Celtic saints (yes, I’m Anglican) who certainly pre-date the Roman Mission of St Augustine.

As to the British Church being in full communion with the Pope throughout this time, I do not agree. There was certainly acrimony between the British and Romans. There was even a situation, in some ways pre figuring Apostolicae Curae, where Roman Bishops would not accept the validity of British Bishop’s orders, the British having to submit to supplementary rites for validation.

The Church in Cornwall, a Celtic kingdom, did not conform to the See of Canterbury (Rome) until the tenth century with the exception of one period between 833-870. It was much the same in Wales, another Celtic kingdom, where there were still arguments over the date of Easter in the early 9th century.

 

[GKC]

Thank you for your link Kathryn Ann.

There is no hard evidence that Christianity came to Britain in the first century as GKC has pointed out.

In Cornwall we venerate many Celtic saints (yes, I’m Anglican) who certainly pre-date the Roman Mission of St Augustine.

As to the British Church being in full communion with the Pope throughout this time, I do not agree. There was certainly acrimony between the British and Romans. There was even a situation, in some ways pre figuring Apostolicae Curae, where Roman Bishops would not accept the validity of British Bishop’s orders, the British having to submit to supplementary rites for validation.

The Church in Cornwall, a Celtic kingdom, did not conform to the See of Canterbury (Rome) until the tenth century with the exception of one period between 833-870. It was much the same in Wales, another Celtic kingdom, where there were still arguments over the date of Easter in the early 9th century.

Amongst the most vociferous advocates of a first century (often cited as between 36 AD and 65 AD) origin are those Anglicans who advocate the pious legends of St. Joseph of Arimathea/Glastonbury, and similar stories. I’ve done all that here before, do not care to do it again. It is not history.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus

 

[Kathryn_Ann]

We are protestant in the sense that we do not adhere to the Roman Catholic magisterium. We are catholic (small c) in that we are part of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church (large C)

Peace to you in Christ, dear Prosmith. I understand your statement and wish you well.
As a former Episcopalian, and now a Catholic convert of eight years, I have a special place in my heart and a keen understanding of all those longing for real union, and it is found very joyfully in The Catholic Church.

You will, I believe, understand though that there is only One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. It’s faithful followers** do** adhere to the Catholic Magisterium, The Holy Father, and trace the Church’s roots to Christ as our Founder, Who handed the Keys of the Kingdom to St. Peter, giving the Apostolic Succession real meaning.

It is understandable that one may long for a spiritual sense of being (lower case) “catholic,” but one either adheres to the Apostolic Succession or one does not.
One cannot say that one is" part of the (lower case) -“one holy catholic and apostolic Church” if that is preceded by “we do not adhere to the Roman Catholic Magisterium.” One cannot say "I am protestant but I am catholic and apostolic but I don’t adhere to Rome.

The words**, One, Holy, Catholic** and Apostolic Church are not mere, blithe, descriptions, but indicate The historic Catholic Church, the Keys to which our Lord Christ left St. Peter and his successors.

Thus, these words have deep meaning both historically and spiritually. The words cannot be merely adopted as if schism never happened. I too used to believe that there was no difference in thinking of myself as “catholic” and those who used the Upper Case letters of One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. There is a sublime difference. I became aware, little by little, that Christ handed the Keys to Peter, and I began to understand why the Chair of St. Peter, the Magisterium and the Apostolic Succession has very deep meaning to Catholics. All came directly from Christ.

Historic schism, sadly, occurred. Before that, for over 1500 years, there was One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and still it remains so, a Church that welcomes all to inquire.

It’s always lovely to know that people have a sense of universality. I hope you will understand how deeply significant, both historically and spiritually, are those important words describing the Church Christ Founded, and why we do adhere then to this Masgisterium and the Apostolic Succession. From Christ handing the Keys to St. Peter, down through the ages to today, we are faithful to this same Catholic Church, whose present Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, leads the faithful from Rome. This same Catholic Church continues to welcome all who inquire.

In Christ’s great love.
Kathryn Ann

 

[Prosmith]

Peace to you in Christ, dear Prosmith. I understand your statement and wish you well.
As a former Episcopalian, and now a Catholic convert of eight years, I have a special place in my heart and a keen understanding of all those longing for real union, and it is found very joyfully in The Catholic Church.

You will, I believe, understand though that there is only One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. It’s faithful followers** do** adhere to the Catholic Magisterium, The Holy Father, and trace the Church’s roots to Christ as our Founder, Who handed the Keys of the Kingdom to St. Peter, giving the Apostolic Succession real meaning.

It is understandable that one may long for a spiritual sense of being (lower case) “catholic,” but one either adheres to the Apostolic Succession or one does not.
One cannot say that one is" part of the (lower case) -“one holy catholic and apostolic Church” if that is preceded by “we do not adhere to the Roman Catholic Magisterium.” One cannot say "I am protestant but I am catholic and apostolic but I don’t adhere to Rome.

The words**, One, Holy, Catholic** and Apostolic Church are not mere, blithe, descriptions, but indicate The historic Catholic Church, the Keys to which our Lord Christ left St. Peter and his successors.

Thus, these words have deep meaning both historically and spiritually. The words cannot be merely adopted as if schism never happened. I too used to believe that there was no difference in thinking of myself as “catholic” and those who used the Upper Case letters of One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. There is a sublime difference. I became aware, little by little, that Christ handed the Keys to Peter, and I began to understand why the Chair of St. Peter, the Magisterium and the Apostolic Succession has very deep meaning to Catholics. All came directly from Christ.

Historic schism, sadly, occurred. Before that, for over 1500 years, there was One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and still it remains so, a Church that welcomes all to inquire.

It’s always lovely to know that people have a sense of universality. I hope you will understand how deeply significant, both historically and spiritually, are those important words describing the Church Christ Founded, and why we do adhere then to this Masgisterium and the Apostolic Succession. From Christ handing the Keys to St. Peter, down through the ages to today, we are faithful to this same Catholic Church, whose present Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, leads the faithful from Rome. This same Catholic Church continues to welcome all who inquire.

In Christ’s great love.
Kathryn Ann

I was a cradle Roman Catholic who left the church on many grounds, foremost was that in no way does Scripture ever show us that the seat of Peter is SPI. It’s just logic that cannot be supported by the Word. It is historical fact that Church was led by the Apostles and not just Peter alone. We see this today as such things as the Marian Dogmas were born of popes and not of the EC. Too many things cannot be explained in fact by Catholic theology. It’s troubling. I tried to justify those things for decades as a Catholic and could not. I have heard all the arguments and debates and can boldly say that as an Anglican, I am closer and more focused on God than ever before.

 

[Conor7]

Many Anglicans, and people outside Anglicanism, view it as a separate order of Christianity altogether.

There’s Catholic - Orthodox - Protestant - Anglican. It doesn’t fit neatly in any of the other categories. Some Anglicans view themselves as more Protestant, others identify more with Catholicism, and there is even a minority that prefers Orthodoxy. I personally have a bumper sticker on my car that says “Orthoanglocathlican”.

I wholeheartedly agree with your definition. Anglicans are neither Catholic nor Protestant - they are Anglicans. Unfortunately, those who are of an us-vs.-them mentality insist we choose a side.

Further, at the risk of derailing the conversation, I don’t believe one should consider Fundamentalists Protestant either. Protestants are Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, etc.

Just a thought…

 

[JonNC]

I wholeheartedly agree with your definition. Anglicans are neither Catholic nor Protestant - they are Anglicans. Unfortunately, those who are of an us-vs.-them mentality insist we choose a side.

Further, at the risk of derailing the conversation, I don’t believe one should consider Fundamentalists Protestant either. Protestants are Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, etc.

Just a thought…

If Anglicans are not, why are Methodists?

Jon

 

[andrewstx]

Amongst the most vociferous advocates of a first century (often cited as between 36 AD and 65 AD) origin are those Anglicans who advocate the pious legends of St. Joseph of Arimathea/Glastonbury, and similar stories. I’ve done all that here before, do not care to do it again. It is not history.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus

But I just love the legends of the Glastonbury bush, it does not have to be historically, accurate to catch one’s attention.