What's the difference Between ACNA and RCC?

[Rammy42]

Hi, I’m new here and this question has probably already been covered billions and billions of times but this site is really daunting and I didn’t have much luck with the search tools. I was just wandering, what specifically are the differences between the “Catholic Church” and the “Anglican Church in North America.” I am aware that the Anglicans don’t recognize the authority of the pope etc but I’m wondering more about the actual belief system. (Infant Baptism, Purgatory, Saints, Mary, Confession etc…) I am also aware that there are major differences with the main Anglican (episcopalian) church concerning homosexuality, ordaining women and so on but my question is focused only on the ACNA. Help?

 

[Nita]

Have you tried the following website? I did not read thru all the links provided so don’t know if it touches on the various areas you’re interested in.
anglicanchurch.net/?/main/page/about-acna

From what I did read, I don’t think you’re going to get any firm answers to your questions.

 

[Rammy42]

no it was one of the first places I checked. If it does cover the subjects I’m talking about or provided contrast between itself and RCC then it’s over my head and I need someone to dumb it down a little for me lol.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

The ACNA is an umbrella organization under which many Anglican jurisdictions place themselves. It began when 3 diocese left the Episcopal Church in the US. Along with them, the Reformed Episcopal Church (which left the Episcopal Church in the late 1800’s), a couple of African organizations (Convocation of Anglicans in North America {Nigerian Church} and PEAR {Anglican Church of Rwanda}, and an affiliation of Anglo-Catholics called Forward in Faith - headquartered in the UK).

I say this only as an introduction to the answer of - The ACNA believes all of the above depending on which jurisdiction you ask. Just like the rest of the Anglican Communion. The ACNA is recognized by the majority of the Anglican Communion as a North American Jurisdiction (Basically the UK and USA are the only ones who do not formally acknowledge it).

Generally speaking, they all believe in Apostolic Succession, Baptism, The Lord’s Supper and Communion of Saint’s (ie Nicene / Apostles Creeds) as major distinctives upon which all agree. Depending on which group you speak to they will believe in praying to Saint’s, Adoration of Mary, Eucharistic Adoration, Sacrament of Reconcilliation.

On Ordination, the ACNA is currently conducting a study to determine where they will fall. Most jurisdictions practice the Biblical model of ordaining men to the priesthood and Episcopacy. The Diaconate is open to men and women. There is a movement to set women apart for ministry as Deaconesses and keeping the traditional model of Holy orders for men.

Hope this helps.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Anglican Church North America is a splinter group from the Anglican/Episcopal church although they seem very vague about the issues that led to the break. It seems that they are offended by the liberalism of the Anglican/Episcopal church but are perhaps afraid to say so. They have links to African Anglicans who are also upset with the liberalism of the UK/US Anglicans.

Like the entire Episcopal/Anglican Church/Church of England, they lack apostolic succession, so they have only two valid sacraments, baptism and matrimony. They say that the Bible is their authority but they take a liberal, i.e. non-Christian, approach to interpretation of the Bible. There is simply no comparison to the Catholic Church.

As Cole Porter would say, in schismatic churches, anything goes.

Times have changed
And we’ve often rewound the clock
Since the Puritans got a shock
When they landed on Plymouth Rock.
If today
Any shock they should try to stem
'Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock,
Plymouth Rock would land on them.

Refrain 1

In olden days, a glimpse of stocking
Was looked on as something shocking.
But now, God knows,
Anything goes.
Good authors too who once knew better words
Now only use four-letter words
Writing prose.
Anything goes.
If driving fast cars you like,
If low bars you like,
If old hymns you like,
If bare limbs you like,
If Mae West you like,
Or me undressed you like,
Why, nobody will oppose.
When ev’ry night the set that’s smart is in-
Truding in nudist parties in
Studios.
Anything goes.

Refrain 2

When Missus Ned McLean (God bless her)
Can get Russian reds to “yes” her,
Then I suppose
Anything goes.
When Rockefeller still can hoard en-
Ough money to let Max Gordon
Produce his shows,
Anything goes.
The world has gone mad today
And good’s bad today,
And black’s white today,
And day’s night today,
And that gent today
You gave a cent today
Once had several chateaux.
When folks who still can ride in jitneys
Find out Vanderbilts and Whitneys
Lack baby clo’es,
Anything goes.

Refrain 3

If Sam Goldwyn can with great conviction
Instruct Anna Sten in diction,
Then Anna shows
Anything goes.
When you hear that Lady Mendl standing up
Now turns a handspring landing up-
On her toes,
Anything goes.
Just think of those shocks you’ve got
And those knocks you’ve got
And those blues you’ve got
From that news you’ve got
And those pains you’ve got
(If any brains you’ve got)
From those little radios.
So Missus R., with all her trimmin’s,
Can broadcast a bed from Simmons
'Cause Franklin knows
Anything goes.

 

[Rammy42]

Thank you very much for the info!

 

[DavidFilmer]

Like the entire Episcopal/Anglican Church/Church of England, they lack apostolic succession, so they have only two valid sacraments, baptism and matrimony.

That might not be true. I was a member of the (now defunct) Anglican Catholic Church. All ACC founding Bishops were “conditionally” ordained by Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) Bishops, whose Apostolic validity has been recognized by Rome.

The PNCC has been very supportive of Anglicans, and the ACNA may have recovered valid Apostolic succession in a similar way (perhaps by way of former ACC Bishops).

But the OP asked,

What’s the difference Between ACNA and RCC?

I would not answer the question with the question of Apostolic validity. I would say that the RCC has actual doctrine. The RCC has beliefs that are to be held by all the Faithful. The RCC has authority to teach, and that authority is centered in one particular individual (the Pope).

No Anglican Church recognizes any absolute authority above its own Bishop (whether he has Apostolic succession or not). The Episcopal Book of Common Prayer (both the 1928 and 1979 editions) include the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Anglican Faith. These are now considered “historical documents” which modern Anglicans are free to accept or reject. There is no such freedom in Catholic Doctrine. THAT is the difference between traditional Anglicanism and the Catholic Church.

 

[Rammy42]

To be totally frank (not my real name) I’m not Catholic or Anglican just a very curious person and confused by what from the outside seems to be very subtle differences in the practice of these faiths. I understand there was a schism and that there are still definitely hard feelings. I’m honestly just curious as to whether Anglicans (ACNA in particular) Believe in:
Purgatory/Infant Baptism/Intersession of Mary and the saints/Confession.
Everything I try to read is really super vague. Does anybody have this information?

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Again it depends who you ask. When Anglicanism first acknowledged the separation from Rome, they kept the Sacraments of Baptism, the Eucharist and Reconciliation. The other beliefs did not change and therefore would have been what is seen as Catholic but reformed.

As the new power structure became aligned with the Protestant Reformation in Europe, they removed anything remotely Catholic from the faith to include vestments, most candles, bells, incense and anything that mentioned or mimic’d Catholicism.

These 2 schools have continued to exist within Anglicanism. Some are very Protestant and are revolted by the concept of purgatory or Marian devotion; others cannot think of the faith without those things. Most lie in the middle.

At this point and time in Anglicanism the Anglo-Catholics, who hold fast to the Catholic beliefs are in the minority and tend to use the 1928 BCP and King James Bible which is beautiful but hinders the growth of the church.

The more Evangelical wing which tends to mimic more contemporary worship is drawing the younger clergy and resources.

Most lie in between and have modern language and beautiful liturgy. The average Anglican would not have discussed any of the topics about which you ask. It just doesn’t come up on their radar screen. As for the average congregant in the ACNA Specifically:

Purgatory (No)
Infant Baptism (Yes)
Intersession of Mary and the saints (No)
Confession (Not in the Catholic sense - unfortunately)

It is kind of messy. Always has been and probably always will be. There is a forum member GKC who is well studied in Anglicanism who can probably point you to many resources.

 

[Rammy42]

Perfect! That was exactly what I was looking for. Thank you very much!

 

[DavidFilmer]

TI’m honestly just curious as to whether Anglicans (ACNA in particular) Believe in

There is no authoritative statement of Anglican belief beyond the Nicene Creed.

The Anglican Church was, for a while, Catholic (with valid Orders and everything). But it became heavily influenced by Calvanism. They published the Thirty Nine Articles, which were binding upon all Anglicans under English law. The Articles were an attempt to differentiate Anglicanism from its Catholic roots through Calvanist theology. Today, these Articles are binding (in a very weak sense) only upon clergymen of the Church of England.

You will find Anglicans (including those in the American Episcopal Church) with a wide range of beliefs and practices, and nobody can claim to be more correct than another. There is no authority in the Anglican Church beyond the local bishop. In this respect, they are similar to Eastern Catholics (Orthodox, etc).

Traditional Anglicans respect the writings of the theologian Francis Hall (the Anglican version of Ludwig Ott). This is as close as you can get to a formal statement of traditional (pre-Calvanist) Anglican doctrine. But Hall (like Ott) was merely a priest and theologian - he has no authority, and his writings are his own opinions (though I happen to think his opinions are very good).