What is the Church of England

  • Thread starter Thread starter JillianRose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mystophilus said:
👋

anglicancommunion.org/

To Catholics, we look like Protestants; to other Protestants, we look like Catholics.

We tend to be much more traditionalist than other Protestants: we have sacraments, we have bishops and priests (although some of them are women), we follow a liturgy, and we even have monks and nuns. However, we are a confederacy of independent provinces, not under the Catholic Magisterium, and so we disagree on quite a few points of doctrine.

Those of our people who are closest to Catholicism are called Anglo-Catholics, because it can sometimes be very hard to see where exactly they sit. Meanwhile, we also have people who firmly stick to C16th beliefs about Catholicism being evil, and we have everything between.
Click to expand...
My church is Anglo-Catholic Episcopal-Lutheran (both affiliations). We are Catholic mainly in being “high church” and in embracing the “new monasticism”, particularly the Benedictine and Franciscan traditions. We are also “emerging church” (fans of McLaren, etc.) and very socially liberal and inclusive, though creedally orthodox.
 
The monarch is head of the Church of England as a protector of it rather than a leader of the flock. fidel defensor
 
Her title is ‘Supreme Governor’, She is not the head of the Church of England. The Archbishop of Canterbury is.
 
I think sometimes because the Press use Head of the Church of England (and now understand this is a faulty loose way of calling Supreme Governor) for the Queen. I fell for that. 😊

MJ
 
MartinJordan said:
I’d like to ask, how is the Queen of England become Head of the Church Of England? Surely not because she is a theologian of some sort right? :confused:

MJ
Click to expand...
It mustbe said that in terms of the actual running of the Church, the Queen actually does not participate a great deal, if at all. The Archbishop of Canterbury is the most powerful in the Church today and makes many critical decisions with regard to doctrine and Church running.
 
Izdaari said:
Right. Much the same way that the Queen doesn’t rule England. The Prime Minister does.
Click to expand...
It must be said that in law the Queen does actually have some, limited, powers, which include the sole ability to declare war. She can also technically refuse to sign in a Bill into law as an Act, as any legislation requires her signature before becoming law, but whether an action to refuse a Bill would actually stand in legal terms is an issue raised time and time again. In all likelihood it would not stand, but in recent history this power has never been exercised.
 
paperwight66 said:
Her title is ‘Supreme Governor’, She is not the head of the Church of England. The Archbishop of Canterbury is.
Click to expand...
He’s the “first among equals”–the word “head” isn’t one we would normally use for him, I think.

To answer the OP’s question in a more distinctively Anglican way than has been done hitherto, the Church of England is the historic Catholic Church in the realm of England, which became independent from Rome in the sixteenth century. It did not “begin” in the sixteenth century, except as an independent body. But for Anglicans, membership in the Catholic Church (which Anglicans claim not to have renounced) is more important than the incidental fact of being independent.

Now I should add, as a caveat, that I have huge problems with the above account, and that it would be endorsed only by certain Anglicans. But I think Catholics need to grapple with it and often fail to do so. The obvious problems with the above are:
  1. The Church of England (and the associated provinces around the world, such as the Episcopal Church, making up the Anglican Communion) is in fact independent and this can’t simply be treated as an unimportant detail. It’s not clear how you can be fully part of the Catholic Church without being in full communion with the Catholic Church as a whole.
  2. Major doctrinal changes took place at the Reformation, and the historic formularies of Anglicanism were drawn up then–so in that sense it is accurate to say that Anglicanism began with the Reformation.
But unless Catholics understand why many Anglicans see things the way I described in the second paragraph–and understand why there is some plausibility to this account–they will not really be able to address Anglicanism effectively.

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
He’s the “first among equals”–the word “head” isn’t one we would normally use for him, I think.

To answer the OP’s question in a more distinctively Anglican way than has been done hitherto, the Church of England is the historic Catholic Church in the realm of England, which became independent from Rome in the sixteenth century. It did not “begin” in the sixteenth century, except as an independent body. But for Anglicans, membership in the Catholic Church (which Anglicans claim not to have renounced) is more important than the incidental fact of being independent.

Now I should add, as a caveat, that I have huge problems with the above account, and that it would be endorsed only by certain Anglicans. But I think Catholics need to grapple with it and often fail to do so. The obvious problems with the above are:
  1. The Church of England (and the associated provinces around the world, such as the Episcopal Church, making up the Anglican Communion) is in fact independent and this can’t simply be treated as an unimportant detail. It’s not clear how you can be fully part of the Catholic Church without being in full communion with the Catholic Church as a whole.
  2. Major doctrinal changes took place at the Reformation, and the historic formularies of Anglicanism were drawn up then–so in that sense it is accurate to say that Anglicanism began with the Reformation.
But unless Catholics understand why many Anglicans see things the way I described in the second paragraph–and understand why there is some plausibility to this account–they will not really be able to address Anglicanism effectively.

Edwin
Click to expand...
GKC

Certain Anglican
 
Kouyate42 said:
…The Archbishop of Canterbury is the most powerful in the Church today and makes many critical decisions with regard to doctrine and Church running.
Click to expand...
Actually NOBODY in the Anglican communion has the authority to make “critical decisions with regard to doctrine and Church running.” That’s one of the major structural problems that has Anglicanism splintering in a world that looks rather different than the world of the 16th century.

In fairness, catholicism actually DOES have an entity given that authority and we’re a pretty fractious and rowdy lot too. Maybe the church’s problem is that God let too many humans in…
 
Contarini said:
But for Anglicans, membership in the Catholic Church (which Anglicans claim not to have renounced) is more important than the incidental fact of being independent.
Click to expand...
If membership in the Catholic Church is more important to Anglicans than independence, then why do they not simply become Catholic? I have never understood this.
JonNC said:
It’s not clear how you can be fully part of the Catholic Church without being in full communion with the Catholic Church as a whole.
Click to expand...
Exactly!
 
SO the Chruch of England is a name of the Chruch and the Religion can be changed?
 
JillianRose said:
SO the Chruch of England is a name of the Chruch and the Religion can be changed?
Click to expand...
The Church of England is the name of the established (or state church) of England. Because of its status as a state church, the Queen of England must be Anglican. She is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, but her role is largely ceremonial now. Important church officials, like the Archbishop of Canterbury, are selected in her name but are actually selected by a complex internal system within the church. Because of its role as the state church, the Church of England has the privilege of sitting some of its bishops in the House of Lords, the upper house of the British Parliament. Also, any baptized English person (unless divorced) has a legal right to be married in his or her Anglican parish church. In addition, any English person has a legal right to have their child baptized in the parish church.

Because it is a state church, the laws of the Church of England are part of the legal system of England. This also means that the Church of England’s ecclesiastical courts are part of the English court system. In the past, this meant that changes to church law had to go through the British Parliament first. But since 1919, the Church of England has had its own legislative body (today known as the General Synod) that can handle church business and make canon law. However, it is still possible for the British Parliament to block action of the General Synod. This happened in 1929 when Parliament blocked the implementation of a new Prayer Book.

The General Synod is made up of bishops, representatives of the clergy and representatives of the laity. It makes the decisions for the Church of England. I’m not really sure what you mean by “the Religion can be changed?” The basics of Anglican doctrine stay the same I guess and can be gleaned by reading the Book of Common Prayer. However, Anglicanism generally allows for more theological diversity than the Catholic Church does.

The Church of England’s website gives a short description of what it means to be Anglican:
The Scriptures and the Gospels, the Apostolic Church and the early Church Fathers, are the foundation of Anglican faith and worship in the 44 self-governing churches that make up the Anglican Communion.
Click to expand...
The Church of England is part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. It worships the one true God, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
It professes the faith that is uniquely revealed in the Bible and set forth in the Catholic Creeds (the statements of faith developed in the Early Church that are still used in the Church’s worship today). The Church is called to proclaim that faith afresh in each generation. Led by the Holy Spirit, the Church of England bore witness to Christian truth in historic texts that were developed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal (services for ordaining bishops, priests and deacons).
Click to expand...
The bishops, priests and deacons of the Church of England and also some laypeople (Readers and certain lay officers) are required to declare their loyalty to this inheritance of faith as their ‘inspiration and guidance under God in bringing the grace and truth of Christ to this generaion and making Him known to those in [their] care’. They do so by making a Declaration of Assent. The version for bishops, priests and deacons reads:
Click to expand...
“I, [name], do so affirm, and accordingly declare my belief in the faith
which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic
creeds and to which the historic formularies of the Church of
England bear witness; and in public prayer and administration of the
sacraments, I will use only the forms of service which are authorized
or allowed by Canon.”
Click to expand...
However, if you really want to know about the Church of England, just go to your local Episcopal Church and watch the liturgy. The Episcopal Church is an Anglican Church. When the 13 American colonies declared independence from England, it became unpatriotic to attend the “Church of England” so Anglicans started calling themselves the Protestant Episcopal Church. Later, they dropped the “Protestant” label and now just refer to themselves as The Episcopal Church. However, both the Episcopal Church and the Church of England are Anglican.
 
JillianRose said:
SO the Chruch of England is a name of the Chruch and the Religion can be changed?
Click to expand...
The Anglican argument, particularly if you talk to “Anglo-Catholics” (the wing of Anglicanism that would consider Anglicanism Catholic as opposed to Protestant), is that the religion didn’t change.

But “Church of England” does basically designate the Church in England–the established, historic Church. In England, the C of E has the medieval buildings and has institutional continuity with the medieval Catholic Church. Of course, English Catholics would say that the Anglicans “stole” the buildings. . . so it depends on how you look at it.

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
The Anglican argument, particularly if you talk to “Anglo-Catholics” (the wing of Anglicanism that would consider Anglicanism Catholic as opposed to Protestant), is that the religion didn’t change.

But “Church of England” does basically designate the Church in England–the established, historic Church. In England, the C of E has the medieval buildings and has institutional continuity with the medieval Catholic Church. Of course, English Catholics would say that the Anglicans “stole” the buildings. . . so it depends on how you look at it.

Edwin
Click to expand...
So they could not have a Catholic Queen or King? I am sorry if I opened new door. I can’t even get American Government right. Sorry!! LOL 😃
 
JillianRose said:
So they could not have a Catholic Queen or King? I am sorry if I opened new door. I can’t even get American Government right. Sorry!! LOL 😃
Click to expand...
Yes. Only Protestants may inherit the crown. Roman Catholics and spouses of Roman Catholics cannot succeed to the throne.
 
JillianRose said:
So they could not have a Catholic Queen or King? I am sorry if I opened new door. I can’t even get American Government right. Sorry!! LOL 😃
Click to expand...
There’s been talk about changing this rule, but at present no they couldn’t. The last Catholic monarch was James II in the late 17th century–he was overthrown by his Protestant daughter and son-in-law in the so-called “Glorious Revolution” of 1688, and Parliament passed a law banning Catholics from ever succeeding to the throne.

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top