How to I respond to this group of Anglicans?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BVMFatima
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BVMFatima

Guest
Hello,

I am in a discussion with anglicans who claim that they are also Catholic but not Roman Catholic. I told them that the whole entire Catholic Church is not of the Roman Rite, but they disagree and claim even the Eastern Catholics are Roman Catholic since they are in communion with Rome. They even quoted from Joseph Ratzingers book " Gods Word " which they claim states that The Holy Father says the whole Church, both East and West, is Roman Catholic since we are in communion with the Pope. I have mentioned that Eastern Catholics get offended by this term, how should I respond to these Anglicans?

God Bless,
BVMFatima
 
BVMFatima said:
Hello,

I am in a discussion with anglicans who claim that they are also Catholic but not Roman Catholic. I told them that the whole entire Catholic Church is not of the Roman Rite, but they disagree and claim even the Eastern Catholics are Roman Catholic since they are in communion with Rome. They even quoted from Joseph Ratzingers book " Gods Word " which they claim states that The Holy Father says the whole Church, both East and West, is Roman Catholic since we are in communion with the Pope. I have mentioned that Eastern Catholics get offended by this term, how should I respond to these Anglicans?

God Bless,
BVMFatima
Click to expand...
While it may bug many Catholics, “Roman Catholic” is a good term to use when you are distinguishing those catholic Christians in communion with Rome from those catholic Christians not.

And many Christians consider themselves part of the universal church and sharers in the apostolic tradition of the church (like Anglicans, Lutherans, and even Reformed Protestants). So they do see themselves as “catholic” just not Roman Catholic.

What exactly are you wanting these Anglicans to do? If you’ve told them that not all Catholics are Roman Catholics and they still insist on using the term and they even tell you that they know more about the issue then you do, then I don’t think there is much more you can do. Either find more polite Anglicans to talk to or just agree to disagree.
 
ltwin said:
While it may bug many Catholics, “Roman Catholic” is a good term to use when you are distinguishing those catholic Christians in communion with Rome from those catholic Christians not.

And many Christians consider themselves part of the universal church and sharers in the apostolic tradition of the church (like Anglicans, Lutherans, and even Reformed Protestants). So they do see themselves as “catholic” just not Roman Catholic.

What exactly are you wanting these Anglicans to do? If you’ve told them that not all Catholics are Roman Catholics and they still insist on using the term and they even tell you that they know more about the issue then you do, then I don’t think there is much more you can do. Either find more polite Anglicans to talk to or just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
Works for me.

GKC

Catholicus-Anglicanus
 
BVMFatima said:
I am in a discussion with anglicans who claim that they are also Catholic but not Roman Catholic. I told them that the whole entire Catholic Church is not of the Roman Rite, but they disagree and claim even the Eastern Catholics are Roman Catholic since they are in communion with Rome. They even quoted from Joseph Ratzingers book " Gods Word " which they claim states that The Holy Father says the whole Church, both East and West, is Roman Catholic since we are in communion with the Pope. I have mentioned that Eastern Catholics get offended by this term, how should I respond to these Anglicans?
Click to expand...
If you want to dispute the Anglicans you’re talking to on the issue of what Mr. Ratzinger did or didn’t say, you should probably read his book. From what little I’ve been able to see on online previews, he makes the point that the word “Catholic” differentiates itself from a Christianity of Scripture alone and confesses “the authority of the living word, that is, the office of apostolic succession.” The word “Roman” in the formula Roman Catholic, distinguishes between "Christianity related to the Roman office of Peter, and Christianity that has separated itself from this. It would seem that the people you’ve spoken with are right about how Ratzinger was using the term in his book, not that of a Roman rite, but that of being in communion with Rome.
 
ltwin said:
While it may bug many Catholics, “Roman Catholic” is a good term to use when you are distinguishing those catholic Christians in communion with Rome from those catholic Christians not.

And many Christians consider themselves part of the universal church and sharers in the apostolic tradition of the church (like Anglicans, Lutherans, and even Reformed Protestants). So they do see themselves as “catholic” just not Roman Catholic.

What exactly are you wanting these Anglicans to do? If you’ve told them that not all Catholics are Roman Catholics and they still insist on using the term and they even tell you that they know more about the issue then you do, then I don’t think there is much more you can do. Either find more polite Anglicans to talk to or just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me.
 
BVMFatima said:
Hello,

I am in a discussion with anglicans who claim that they are also Catholic but not Roman Catholic. I told them that the whole entire Catholic Church is not of the Roman Rite, but they disagree and claim even the Eastern Catholics are Roman Catholic since they are in communion with Rome. They even quoted from Joseph Ratzingers book " Gods Word " which they claim states that The Holy Father says the whole Church, both East and West, is Roman Catholic since we are in communion with the Pope. I have mentioned that Eastern Catholics get offended by this term, how should I respond to these Anglicans?

God Bless,
BVMFatima
Click to expand...
You could ask whether they also call themselves “Orthodox”. (Of course, you’d probably need to clarify – especially if it’s a spoken IRL conversation – that you don’t mean “orthodox”.)
 
Peter_J said:
You could ask whether they also call themselves “Orthodox”. (Of course, you’d probably need to clarify – especially if it’s a spoken IRL conversation – that you don’t mean “orthodox”.)
Click to expand...
If we didn’t think we were Catholics, why would we remain Anglicans? ‘Anglican’ is a 19c coinage, before which Anglicans would have uniformly called themselves Catholics. RCs would have been called Romanists or Papists. Calling them ‘Catholics’ without qualification is merely a result of poor Anglican catechesis. If the Anglican truly believes he is outside the ‘Catholic Church’, then why is he still an Anglican? Of course, he doesn’t think that, he just doesn’t have the tools to properly express himself.
 
Anglican Catholics would seem to be the best term. I am a Latin Rite Catholics, therefore, I always say “I’m Roman Catholic” or catholic on some occasions.

John 17:21
 
You can’t stop people from calling themselves this or that. It doesn’t mean you have to.
 
Ad_Orientem said:
You can’t stop people from calling themselves this or that. It doesn’t mean you have to.
Click to expand...
True, but there are different “levels” (if you will) there. For example, what if some Anglicans weren’t content to call themselves “Catholic” and starting calling themselves “Roman Catholic”?
 
Peter_J said:
True, but there are different “levels” (if you will) there. For example, what if some Anglicans weren’t content to call themselves “Catholic” and starting calling themselves “Roman Catholic”?
Click to expand...
Treason.
 
Peter_J said:
what if some Anglicans weren’t content to call themselves “Catholic” and starting calling themselves “Roman Catholic”?
Click to expand...
There already are “separated brethren” who go by the name “Roman Catholic” (though not, to my knowledge, among the ranks of Anglicans); but why concede the name of Catholic at all? Those who call cubic zirconia “diamonds” may do so in good faith, but wouldn’t you do them a disservice if, knowing they were cubic zirconia, you agreed to call them diamonds to anyone asking what they were?
 
Ad_Orientem said:
You can’t stop people from calling themselves this or that. It doesn’t mean you have to.
Click to expand...
Peter_J said:
True, but there are different “levels” (if you will) there. For example, what if some Anglicans weren’t content to call themselves “Catholic” and starting calling themselves “Roman Catholic”?
Click to expand...
Ad_Orientem said:
There already are “separated brethren” who go by the name “Roman Catholic” (though not, to my knowledge, among the ranks of Anglicans); but why concede the name of Catholic at all? Those who call cubic zirconia “diamonds” may do so in good faith, but wouldn’t you do them a disservice if, knowing they were cubic zirconia, you agreed to call them diamonds to anyone asking what they were?
Click to expand...
But you see my point I guess (perhaps you had no need of hearing it, but others reading this might): that “You can’t stop people from calling themselves this or that” isn’t an absolute.

P.S. When you say ’ “separated brethren” who go by the name “Roman Catholic” ’ do you mean e.g. sedevacantists? I hadn’t thought of that, but you’re right.
 
Peter_J said:
“You can’t stop people from calling themselves this or that” isn’t an absolute.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean. Sure, there are degrees of offense, and degrees of how one might react, if that’s what you mean. I can politely (or impolitely) ask someone not to call himself X, but what if he ignores me? Apart from legal action (in applicable cases) or introducing the offender to my cousin Lenny, what can I do to actually *stop *someone from calling himself X?
Peter_J said:
When you say ’ “separated brethren” who go by the name “Roman Catholic” ’ do you mean e.g. sedevacantists?
Click to expand...
That’s the sort.
 
You are on Wikipedia; I will direct you to the informative article Roman Catholic (term) which explains that the origin of this term was indeed the Anglicans of the 16th century who were unwilling to concede the term “Catholic” to Rome without qualification.

Some Anglicans consider themselves “more Catholic than the Pope”, although the Anglican Communion and Episcopalianism is a wide spectrum of belief that covers all kinds of things. Many Anglicans recently expressed the desire to come home to Rome and thus paved the way for Anglicanorum Coetibus and the Personal Ordinariates with the Anglican Use liturgical rites.

The simple fact of the matter is that different people use the term differently. Some, like me, prefer to use it to refer only to Catholics of the Roman Rite, but even some Eastern Catholics are proud to claim the term as their own name. Holy Church has no official or standardized usage of it, so there is no response to give to these Anglicans other than simply leaving them to their own preferences.
 
Elizium23 said:
You are on Wikipedia; I will direct you to the informative article Roman Catholic (term) which explains that the origin of this term was indeed the Anglicans of the 16th century who were unwilling to concede the term “Catholic” to Rome without qualification.

Some Anglicans consider themselves “more Catholic than the Pope”, although the Anglican Communion and Episcopalianism is a wide spectrum of belief that covers all kinds of things. Many Anglicans recently expressed the desire to come home to Rome and thus paved the way for Anglicanorum Coetibus and the Personal Ordinariates with the Anglican Use liturgical rites.

The simple fact of the matter is that different people use the term differently. Some, like me, prefer to use it to refer only to Catholics of the Roman Rite, but even some Eastern Catholics are proud to claim the term as their own name. Holy Church has no official or standardized usage of it, so there is no response to give to these Anglicans other than simply leaving them to their own preferences.
Click to expand...
This is more or less my position. I used to be able to cite the16th century book and author that is generally given as the origin of the Anglican use of Roman Catholic (though not necessarily the very first such use), and it was intended to distinguish the CoE from Rome, sharply.

I use Catholic refer to all Churches with apostolic succession, whether in communion with Rome or not. Yes I’m very knowledgeable re: Apostolicae Curae.

GKC

Anglicanus-Catholicus
 
The English Reformers referred to themselves as ‘Catholics’ without qualification, since they believed they had restored the Catholic faith from which the Bishop of Rome had erred. This is seen in most of the writing of the period, from Crammed to Jewel and Hooker and Andrewes. Most copies of the KJV contain a letter at the start addressed to King James VI and I which says amongst other things:

“And whereas they urge for their second defence of their vilifying and abusing of the English Bibles, or some pieces thereof which they meet with, for that “heretics,” forsooth, were the authors of the translations (“heretics” they call us by the same right that they call themselves “Catholics,” both being wrong), we marvel what divinity taught them so.”

How nice we all are to one another these days!
 
So even though Eastern Catholics are in communion with Rome, they are not Roman Catholic? 🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top