F
Fidelis
Guest
The visible unity of the Church is every Christian’s business.
Rome tells Anglicans: it's time to decide if you are Protestants or Catholics
- Status
S
SuscipeMeDomine
Guest
How can anyone be fully Catholic if they’re not in union with the Pope?
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
They like to play make believe and pretend that their particular brand of Protestantism wasn’t founded on adultery and selfishness.
I am sorry if that post appears to lack charity but I must make it clear I have no problem with individual Protestants but I cannot accept their belief set.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
**That’s like asking the CC whether it is hierarchical or dogmatic - it’s both; so the alternatives are pseudo-alternatives. And the same applies to Anglicanism: it is both Catholic & Protestant. Even if this may be rather hard for a Christian with a different ecclesiology to understand 
**
Thanks for the links **Some material from the BCP: **
- [The Contents of this Book. (The Contents of this Book.)
- Of [Ceremonies (Of Ceremonies.).
- A [Catechism (A Catechism.).
- [Articles (Articles of Religion.)** of Religion.**
S
Steadfast
Guest
The triumphalism of many of the Catholic participants on this board never ceases to amaze and sadden me.
C
Cajetan
Guest
There is a long Anglican tradition of perceiving the C of E as the Middle Way (“Via Media”) between the “extremes” of the Puritans and Rome. It’s a very conscious distinction/situation, not a case of just not having made up their minds about which side they’re on.
This situation allows some parties in the Anglican Communion to emphasize a Reformed theology and tradition and others to embrace a more Catholic theology and tradition; yet they’re all full members of the C of E, equally Anglican. This autonomy is at the parish level: there are Anglo-Catholic parishes, more Reformed Anglican parishes, and run-of-the-mill liberal Anglican parishes, and which ever side an individual Anglican feels “called” to that’s the kind of parish he or she chooses to become a part of in their faith life. (I can imagine certain Anglicans attending certain Anglican parishes and being horrified at what they saw and heard, like a Catholic showing up at a Calvinist worship service.)
In sum, the Church of England has become kind of its own ball of wax. As much as I’d LOVE to see the C of E reunite with Rome – imagine a distinct, ancient Anglican Rite in full communion with Rome! I might switch over to that myself! – I don’t think they as a Church see a need for making a defining decision between Protestantism and Catholicism/Orthodoxy. Their identity lies in-between.
This situation allows some parties in the Anglican Communion to emphasize a Reformed theology and tradition and others to embrace a more Catholic theology and tradition; yet they’re all full members of the C of E, equally Anglican. This autonomy is at the parish level: there are Anglo-Catholic parishes, more Reformed Anglican parishes, and run-of-the-mill liberal Anglican parishes, and which ever side an individual Anglican feels “called” to that’s the kind of parish he or she chooses to become a part of in their faith life. (I can imagine certain Anglicans attending certain Anglican parishes and being horrified at what they saw and heard, like a Catholic showing up at a Calvinist worship service.)
In sum, the Church of England has become kind of its own ball of wax. As much as I’d LOVE to see the C of E reunite with Rome – imagine a distinct, ancient Anglican Rite in full communion with Rome! I might switch over to that myself! – I don’t think they as a Church see a need for making a defining decision between Protestantism and Catholicism/Orthodoxy. Their identity lies in-between.
T
thirdn6
Guest
think of them as catholic “clones” in protestant churches.
H
Harpazo
Guest
I think you are mistaken on this. One cannot protest the Church and claim to also be a part of the Church it’s protesting. Would not the two cancel out? I’m sorry, but if your position was the orthodox one, the See of Rome by Cardinal Kasper, would not have said what it said.**That’s like asking the CC whether it is hierarchical or dogmatic - it’s both; so the alternatives are pseudo-alternatives. And the same applies to Anglicanism: it is both Catholic & Protestant. Even if this may be rather hard for a Christian with a different ecclesiology to understand
Thanks for the links
Some material from the BCP:
- [The Contents of this Book. (The Contents of this Book.)
- Of [Ceremonies (Of Ceremonies.).
- A [Catechism (A Catechism.).
- [Articles (Articles of Religion.)** of Religion.**
Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew
L
Lepanto
Guest
Although there is nothing wrong with triumphalism per se, what we’re talking about is the Catholic Church’s clear self-identity. Why would that sadden you?
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
**How does anything whatever in my post count as “protest[ing against] the Church” ? I’m not. 
**
- 1. It is not at all clear that the Cardinal was speaking for the Holy See
- 2. That is not my opinion alone - it can be found in the Telegraph weblog (which FWIW is the work of a Catholic)
- **3. As a former Anglican, I have some knowledge of what sort of thing Anglicanism is, & of how it has come to be the sort of Church that it is: much less than some posters here; but more than others. Those links from the BCP give some idea - not much, but some - of its character as a Church which is both Catholic & Protestant, without being either. **
- **4. One can admire, respect & love the Anglican tradition without being any less Catholic. **
- **5. Anglicanism & Catholicism have different ecclesiologies - the Cardinal (if correctly quoted) seems not fully to appreciate this. **
**If so, he will be only the latest Catholic to have that difficulty: as the Malines Conversations in the 1920s (for example) amply demonstrate. There is a history of attempted rapprochements between “Rome” OTOH & “Canterbury” OTO; what they have in common is, that the Church of England’s character as both Catholic and Protestant has been overlooked: it is both - not one or other. This character is not new. **
This:
- [Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology (Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology Title List)
balances this: - [Parker Society Publications (Project Canterbury: The Parker Society)
Both can be found with many more at: - [http://anglicanhistory.org/ (http://anglicanhistory.org/)
**- which includes the: **[Lambeth Conferences (Historical Resources on the Lambeth Conferences)
L
LaMar
Guest
That’s what my friend the rector explained to me. She’s a far better person than the average Catholic who posts here, so I’ll take her word over the consensus here.
Incidentally: Who cares about the pope, or what he thinks? I don’t, and I’m sure no sensible person (and certainly no sensible Anglican) does. The pope needs to take care of the dismal state of affairs which is “universal” (little pun there) in his own church before passing his insolent judgment upon anyone else.
Anglicans, in general, act far better than Catholics do. They’re more virtuous, more tolerant, more realistic.
Nothing personal, by the way, because Anglicans are generally much cooler than Mormons too.
Best,
LaMar
T
thirdn6
Guest
Clones can be better, more virtous, more tolerant, more realistic but fact is a fact- anglicans are not genuine catholics even how much they claim themselves to be as such if they’re not in communion with Rome. Like I’ve said in here that that “media-via” thing is just a big deception.
In its early years, Protestant Anglicanism without the Catholic “topping” was a hard sell to English people.
L
LaMar
Guest
Of course they’re genuine Catholics. If anything, the behavior of both churches, in comparison, suggests to this outsider that Rome has the obvious counterfeit.
T
thirdn6
Guest
Last Roman Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury was Reginald Pole. If Rome is counterfeit, how do say Anglicanism is not?
L
LaMar
Guest
Reginald Pole wasn’t manning an anti-aircraft gun while he watched Jews marched off to mass-rape, slavery and mass-murder.
SNAP (a Catholic organization) estimates that 30,000 innocent little American Catholic children have been horrifically abused and sexually tortured by Catholic clergy, and that this was known and covered up at the highest levels. This suggests that Catholicism is spiritually akin to the FLDS, rather than to any church which Jesus would approve of.
Anglican priests haven’t sexually tortured little children with the help and assistance of their church to avoid prosecution. Islam hasn’t destroyed 30,000 children’s lives. Not even the mafia has. Only the Roman Catholic church has done this.
snapnetwork.org/survivors_voice/survivors_voice_home.htm
By your fruits, I know you. At this point, so does the rest of the world. If you want to remain a Catholic, that’s great, but don’t kid yourself that the organization you grovel for has any claim to spiritual authority. It doesn’t.
T
thirdn6
Guest
Abuses has nothing to do with the holiness and teachings of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. If somehow, although very remote, Her clergy reduces back to twelve good apostles/bishops I will still be a Roman Catholic.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
##** We, on the other hand, have to put up with our clerical monsters unless & until an authority higher than the monsters sees fit to remove them. At least with Bishop Robinson one knows his proclivities - which is not true in the CC: so clergy like that, cannot be avoided. Which means that others are put in danger. Q.E.D.
****It’s bit rich for us to go & on about the scamps in Anglicanism, when we have even “better” specimens of our own.
It is utterly sickening to see the mountains of filth which are slung at other Churches, when we are drowning in the stuff ourselves. Is this what Catholicism is for ? ****Being “conservative” may be the same as being “faithful” - but not necessarily. Just for the record. **
**As for the issue of unity - why can there not be unity without visible union ? Evangelicals manage to belong to different traditions within Protestantism, whether Anglican, Methodist, Calvinistic Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Congregationalist, United Reformed, Brethren etc. while being united in the Holy Spirit: why can’t RCs & Anglicans settle for that ? It may be a different way of being united from the way in which the various Catholic Rites are united: but “different” is not the same as “inferior”. In a sinful Church, that may be the best that is possible - it is certainly not self-evident that Protestantism can’t tell the CC a few things about the nature of the Church. **
**Someone may object: “It wasn’t the way things were at the beginning, in Acts 2” - no, it was not; but it does not follow that because the disciples were united in a certain way then, that Churches are not united unless they are united in that way now. So it is by no means clear that because the disciples were all united in a visible communion then, that they have to be united in that way now. One cannot argue from a fact of history, to a value, such as a duty - facts of history, & values, are incommensurable. **
**Even with theological realities this remains true: otherwise the fact that Peter was Jewish would oblige all his putative successors to be Jewish. No one believes his being Jewish confers such an obligation - so why does the historical unity of the Church after Pentecost confer any obligation on Christians & Churches to be united in that particular way ? Other things have changed, for all sorts of reasons: the forms of the Petrine office, for instance; so why not the forms of the unity of the Church
? **
L
LDNCatholic
Guest
Not that it is in any way relevant to this thread. But he was forced, conscripted, and ran away when he had the chance, that regime killed his cousin and his family were known opponents. He refused to attend Hitler youth meetings.
You are an American, and live in the 21st Century. You enjoy luxuries that few others in the history of the world can afford. One of these is never having been forced to fight against your will. Please, until you have, keep your uninformed opinions to yourself.
Once again sorry if this seems like a personal attack, I sometimes have trouble reigning myself in. It was not intended to be personal. While you are of course entitled to your opinion I have to oppose those I see as erroneous.
T
thirdn6
Guest
But the “bridge” is burning and would soon collapse! Everyone has to swim now
.… the question is also asking if each anglican would remain “dalmatian” or “spotless”, figuratively…
we all know that the bride of Christ is spotless as snow… and that is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
A
angelusm
Guest
You cannot obey two masters, either you obey the pope of the queen. Be hot or cold, never lukewarm, what you are doing is schizofrenic. If you are not in unity with Rome you cannot call yourself Catholic. As Anglican, you have no Eucharist, no confession, etc., so you are far away from Catholicism.
- Status