Protestants lacks the respect of Christian history compared to Eastern Orthodox and Catholics.

[inthecloud]

I do not see Anglicans as really protestant. They are more like a schismatic Western Catholic Church with many protestant beliefs.
Any Church that said that Scripture, Tradition and Reason as sources of Faith is not really protestant.
For me protestants are the Bible alone crowd. Lutherans while historically the first protestants fail a little in this point too.

 

[Steadfast]

I do not see Anglicans as really protestant. They are more like a schismatic Western Catholic Church with many protestant beliefs.
Any Church that said that Scripture, Tradition and Reason as sources of Faith is not really protestant.
For me protestants are the Bible alone crowd. Lutherans while historically the first protestants fail a little in this point too.

It’s interesting you should say that. I have recently been trying to get across to my Lutherans that the “Evangelical” culture; i.e. Conservative American Protestantism does not trust us.

We believe in Sacraments that actually do something, we believe that the church has the authority in the persons of her ministers to announce the forgiveness of sins as an absolution, we deny the idea that one must necessarily have a radical conversion experience and we are resolutely non-dispensational, etc.

To most American Evangelicals we look like Catholic-lite.

I am sure much the same is true for how they view Anglicanism with the added frisson of a certain puritanical reaction to their current leadership crisis.

 

[East_Anglican]

Many evangelical posters in several forums do not know the earliest church fathers well. While I have seen in evangelical libraries books by the Early Church Fathers, they often skip over the early ones like ST Ignacius of Antiochy and St Justin Martyr.
So when they read them for the first time they are often surprised.
Look, they might disagree on their authority as protestants, but calling Orthodox or Catholics apostates after a good read of the ECF, specially the early ones is them a act of lying in bad faith.
So I think many evangelicals are really ignorant about them.

This is true. A lot of protestants think that The Church died after the first century and got reserected at the time of Martin Luther. Of course the belief is ridiculous.

I looked into pre-reformation Church history because I thought that as an evangelical protestant I wasn’t suposed to.

 

[East_Anglican]

<<When do they investigate history to end up either Catholic or Eastern Orthodox. Does anyone noticed this as well?>>

Some 20-25 years ago, an Orthodox deacon with a PhD (or ThD) was hired to teach Church History at Oral Roberts University.

He did not proselytize. He simply taught church history–ALL of it.

Over 30 of his students converted to Orthodoxy and he was fired.

Brilliant!

2000 years not 500 years!

 

[East_Anglican]

It would appear to me that you could put Anglicans in there with Catholics and Orthodox Christians. They too follow the Gregorian kalender, recognize the Sacrements and the Communion of Saints. They practice most all of those things that most other Protestants sneer at.

Correct!

One caveat is that the American side of the Anglican Union shows far less respect for history and tradition than her non-American counterparts, which is fuel for the current schism.

I would certainly say that Anglicans in general have a deep respect for both, insofar as generalities hold. The Anglican liturgy tends to bear this out.

Correct!

A lot of American Anglicans have totally lost the plot. Not all of them though.

 

[Teflon93]

I do not see Anglicans as really protestant. They are more like a schismatic Western Catholic Church with many protestant beliefs.
Any Church that said that Scripture, Tradition and Reason as sources of Faith is not really protestant.
For me protestants are the Bible alone crowd. Lutherans while historically the first protestants fail a little in this point too.

So you’d call the storm that wiped out the Spanish Armada “The Schismatic Western Catholic Church with Many Protestant Beliefs” Wind?

I’ll take “The Protestant Wind” and save the carpal tunnel syndrome, thanks!

 

[East_Anglican]

So you’d call the storm that wiped out the Spanish Armada “The Schismatic Western Catholic Church with Many Protestant Beliefs” Wind?

I’ll take “The Protestant Wind” and save the carpal tunnel syndrome, thanks!

The Anglican Church calls its self a Reformed Catholic Church not a Protestant Church.

Hence it is permissible to quote Deutro-Canon and Thomas A Kempis in a sermon.

 

[Teflon93]

The Anglican Church calls its self a Reformed Catholic Church not a Protestant Church.

Hence it is permissible to quote Deutro-Canon and Thomas A Kempis in a sermon.

I believe the Spanish of the late 16th century disagreed—thus the Armada.

 

[AllSaints1631]

Point taken they **do respect **history. Henry Newman was Anglican before he was Catholic and was very deep in history. I apologize. Since this isn’t about Holy Orders, I will put that asside. I do think they have respect for history.

The Anglican church has a heck of alot of history and traditon not to mention the all out beauty of some of the Anglican churches that I have been in. It would seem to me that much of the early church practices and worship can be found in Anglicanism as well as Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

So you’d call the storm that wiped out the Spanish Armada “The Schismatic Western Catholic Church with Many Protestant Beliefs” Wind?

I’ll take “The Protestant Wind” and save the carpal tunnel syndrome, thanks!

Anglicanism (the word is new, it seems) is sui generis - it is not Popish, it is not Genevan, it is not Lutheran, it is a lot of things. It is not even represented by any one typical theologian or theology, in the way that some Christianities are.​

It is Protestant in the sense that the Reformers & their ideas have & have had a formative effect on & within it, & that it has given legal effect to certain measures inimical to the Pope’s form of religion - but this is perfectly compatible with its being “Papist” & “un-Protestant” in other respects.

Anglicanism, like other forms of Protestantism, is (it could be argued) a strand in a “rope” of traditions which go back to the beginning of Christianity & before - it, like them, was latent in Catholicism, & the Reformation is when the Protestant parts of the Catholic tradition took organisational form.

Since the Elizabethan Settlement of 1559 (and later), it has been held together as much by common liturgical practice & by a common Biblical mind (IOW, by a shared type of piety) as by doctrine & law. The problems arise when what holds it together is bent out of joint. Its combination of the authority of revelation, reason & tradition has been flexible enough to cushion many of the effects of the stresses it has met with - whether this is going to be possible for much longer, is the unanswered question.

IOW - how far is Anglicanism going to have change the character of Anglicanism, in order to stay Anglican ? That’s the question I would ask. ISTM that is the same kind of question as Catholics have had to deal with.

 

[Frost]

I noticed that most Protestants ((NOT ALL)) lack any respect towards Christian history than Eastern Orthodox and Catholics. While the two ancient Christian Churches honor and preserved Christian history by the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, and Early Church Fathers, Protestants, reject them. It seem to me that Protestants are afraid of history.

When do they investigate history to end up either Catholic or Eastern Orthodox. Does anyone noticed this as well?

Well, Lutheran theologians from Europe are studying these texts. I took a greekcourse where I had to translate Melito of Sardis and 2. Clement, and it was very exciting. In systematic theology and in church history all theologystudents learn about the Christian history through 2000 years. Both Catholics and Protestants take these courses, since the school is ecumenical and educates priests and pastors from many churches.

Apart for the educated group of Christians, I can tell you that Christian bookstores in Scandinavia are selling “easy-read” literature abouth the church fathers, and they are very popular. One such book is 21 kirkefedre (21 chuchfathers) by Swedish Pentecostal (!) writer Peter Halldorf.

Perhaps there is a difference between Protestants in Europe and the US?

 

[East_Anglican]

Anglicanism (the word is new, it seems) is sui generis - it is not Popish, it is not Genevan, it is not Lutheran, it is a lot of things. It is not even represented by any one typical theologian or theology, in the way that some Christianities are.​

It is called the Anglican church because it is Ecclesia Anglia (Church of/in England) as the church in Spain is Ecclesia Espania (Church of Spain) and the church in Rome is Ecclesia Roma (Church of Rome) The Western Church had a system like the western church until Henry VIII decided that he was the sole head of Ecclesia Anglia (Church of/in England)

Anglicans to a degree still adhere to the old system. All Anglicans also disagree with Henry VIII on certian things.

It is Protestant in the sense that the Reformers & their ideas have & have had a formative effect on & within it, & that it has given legal effect to certain measures inimical to the Pope’s form of religion - but this is perfectly compatible with its being “Papist” & “un-Protestant” in other respects.

Anglicanism, like other forms of Protestantism, is (it could be argued) a strand in a “rope” of traditions which go back to the beginning of Christianity & before - it, like them, was latent in Catholicism, & the Reformation is when the Protestant parts of the Catholic tradition took organisational form.

That is a simplified explanation but who would write an essay here?

Since the Elizabethan Settlement of 1559 (and later), it has been held together as much by common liturgical practice & by a common Biblical mind (IOW, by a shared type of piety) as by doctrine & law. The problems arise when what holds it together is bent out of joint. Its combination of the authority of revelation, reason & tradition has been flexible enough to cushion many of the effects of the stresses it has met with - whether this is going to be possible for much longer, is the unanswered question.

IOW - how far is Anglicanism going to have change the character of Anglicanism, in order to stay Anglican ? That’s the question I would ask. ISTM that is the same kind of question as Catholics have had to deal with.

It needs nto state it is catholic more.

 

[East_Anglican]

I believe the Spanish of the late 16th century disagreed—thus the Armada.

Religion mixed with politics.

Don’t mix the two, it’s dangerous.

 

[East_Anglican]

The Anglican church has a heck of alot of history and traditon not to mention the all out beauty of some of the Anglican churches that I have been in. It would seem to me that much of the early church practices and worship can be found in Anglicanism as well as Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

We have 2000 years of Church history like Roman Catholis and Orthodox Christians do.

 

[GKC]

“That is a simplified explanation but who would write an essay here?”

I’ve been guilty, from time to time.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

 

[East_Anglican]

“That is a simplified explanation but who would write an essay here?”

I’ve been guilty, from time to time.

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

I try not to be guilty.

 

[GKC]

I try not to be guilty.

I resolve to do better.

GKC

 

[Harpazo]

We have 2000 years of Church history like Roman Catholis and Orthodox Christians do.

What I have to say on this will probably make many Anglicans/Episcopalians upset, but I’m sorry I won’t water things down.

Not so sure on that one, and here’s why: the Anglicans are not a part of the Catholic or Orthodox Churches. You might have some parts of a common history, but it isn’t your own. Anglicans started their own history when they broke from Rome. I suppose a non-denominational Christian could argue what you are attempting to argue as well.

If your Church was founded by Christ, then you can proceed to make your argument. But your Church is not in union with either of the two Churches that make this claim.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[Teflon93]

Religion mixed with politics.

Don’t mix the two, it’s dangerous.

Isn’t that how the Anglican Church came about in the first place?

You’re several centuries too late to warn Henry VIII on that score.

 

[Teflon93]

What I have to say on this will probably make many Anglicans/Episcopalians upset, but I’m sorry I won’t water things down.

Not so sure on that one, and here’s why: the Anglicans are not a part of the Catholic or Orthodox Churches. You might have some parts of a common history, but it isn’t your own. Anglicans started their own history when they broke from Rome. I suppose a non-denominational Christian could argue what you are attempting to argue as well.

If your Church was founded by Christ, then you can proceed to make your argument. But your Church is not in union with either of the two Churches that make this claim.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

Christianity of course came to England quite some time after Pentecost.