Why do Anglicans think they are Catholic?

[VARC]

Would you label St Alban a Catholic of the Catholic church?

I’m asking these questions because it makes sense to know who this missionary was, and what type of christianity he was bringing, was it orthodox or heretical. I need details in order to surmise the situation.

Yes. St Aban was a christian in the catholic church. He was not Roman Catholic. Rome today recognizes St Alban as orthodox as does the Anglican and Orthodox Churches.

 

[GKC]

Thank you. I wish I knew some of the names of the missionaries who brought the faith to St Alban and his contemporaries to satisfy Josie L. They were unknown apostolic missionaries as far as I know. But my point is that apostolic christianity was on the British isle.

It was, at that. Three British bishops (of York, London and Colchester) attended the Council of Arles, in 314, which suggests a certain organization at a diocesan level, and at least three were at Rimini, in 359, where they were notable for their extreme poverty. Not from choice.

But, AFAIK, no names are known, before St. Alban.

So apostolic Christianity was present, from at least around 300 or earlier (there are vague historical references, elsewhere). Not sure I’d press this too far, though.

GKC

 

[VARC]

Edward (Somerset, really, Edward being a child), slammed the Church hard over reformed, Mary slammed it the opposite direction, and Elizabeth, the great centrist, hammered out the Elizabethan Compromise, which kept the whole affair going in some sense of balance, until the Oxford movement and the Tractarians/Ritualists started making things interesting.

Hard to see the parallel with VatII. For one thing, much less blood shed, all around, in 1962.

GKC

Whlie there was no bloodshed surrounding VII, many of the same reforms were enacted including…

Communion under both species
Limiting holy orders to 3 orders
mass in the vernacular
Communion in the hand

VII and its aftermath went beyond the English reformation by…

recognizing religious liberty
allowing women to serve the altar
allowing lay persons to distribute communion

So when Roman Catholics accuse Anglicans of protestantizng the faith, they appear hypocrtical to me.

 

[GKC]

Would you label St Alban a Catholic of the Catholic church?

I’m asking these questions because it makes sense to know who this saint was, and what type of christianity he was practicing, was it orthodox or heretical. I need details in order to surmise the situation.

Little is known. But you can google him. He probably pre-dates much of organised Christianity in Britain. He’s usually dated some where around 209-250+. No one knows.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Whlie there was no bloodshed surrounding VII, many of the same reforms were enacted including…

Communion under both species
Limiting holy orders to 3 orders
mass in the vernacular
Communion in the hand

VII and its aftermath went beyond the English reformation by…

recognizing religious liberty
allowing women to serve the altar
allowing lay persons to distribute communion

So when Roman Catholics accuse Anglicans of protestantizng the faith, they appear hypocrtical to me.

Still, the comparison seems a little strained. Personal opinion.

GKC

 

[josie_L]

Yes. St Aban was a christian in the catholic church. He was not Roman Catholic. Rome today recognizes St Alban as orthodox as does the Anglican and Orthodox Churches.

“It was my first encounter with the eccentric world of Celtic Orthodoxy. Its adherents believe that the church in Britain was founded by Coptic Christians from Egypt before the turn of the first century. This ancient Celtic church existed in sublime isolation from the Roman Church for six hundred years before St. Augustine was sent by Pope St. Gregory the Great to evangelize the Anglo-Saxons in 597 A.D.”

This was written by Dwight Longenecker, he was a convert to the Anglican Church, and now is a Catholic priest.

The title of this article is: Celtic Coptic Anglicans? A Modern Myth to Dodge the Authority of Rome

The article can be found on Catholic Forums.

 

[Peter_J]

Not to mention the “Orthodox Church” implying no other christians are orthodox

How dare they!

 

[Peter_J]

I use the term Roman Catholic. I find it almost universally accepted among my RC friends.

Not quite universal, it would seem (from this thread anyways).

Likewise, I generally expect Lutherans and Methodists to not be offended if I call them “Lutherans” and “Methodists”.

 

[GKC]

Not quite universal, it would seem (from this thread anyways).



Likewise, I generally expect Lutherans and Methodists to not be offended if I call them “Lutherans” and “Methodists”.

Nothing, in my experience is universal. Try to pin Anglicans down to a single species.

GKC

 

[VARC]

“It was my first encounter with the eccentric world of Celtic Orthodoxy. Its adherents believe that the church in Britain was founded by Coptic Christians from Egypt before the turn of the first century. This ancient Celtic church existed in sublime isolation from the Roman Church for six hundred years before St. Augustine was sent by Pope St. Gregory the Great to evangelize the Anglo-Saxons in 597 A.D.”

This was written by Dwight Longenecker, he was a convert to the Anglican Church, and now is a Catholic priest.

The title of this article is: Celtic Coptic Anglicans? A Modern Myth to Dodge the Authority of Rome

The article can be found on Catholic Forums.

What’s your point? Or you saying that christians in Britain were first evangelized by the See of Rome? That is simply not true. Christianity existed in Britain before papal jursidiction ever reached its shores.

Can’t help but notice you haven’t answered my question. Which churches are catholic besides the RCC? Why do you not answer. Instead of behaving like a medieval Dominican inquistor, why don’t you particpate in the discussion by answering questions.

 

[GKC]

“It was my first encounter with the eccentric world of Celtic Orthodoxy. Its adherents believe that the church in Britain was founded by Coptic Christians from Egypt before the turn of the first century. This ancient Celtic church existed in sublime isolation from the Roman Church for six hundred years before St. Augustine was sent by Pope St. Gregory the Great to evangelize the Anglo-Saxons in 597 A.D.”

This was written by Dwight Longenecker, he was a convert to the Anglican Church, and now is a Catholic priest.

The title of this article is: Celtic Coptic Anglicans? A Modern Myth to Dodge the Authority of Rome

The article can be found on Catholic Forums.

I almost mentioned the Celtic Church. It was what I meant by not pushing the issue of apostolic Christianity too hard. It usually takes the form of a case of the Celts.

While there was a distinct Celtic flavor to the early Church in Britain, as seen in the compromises required at the Synod of Whitby, that’s not the point. Little is known of just how the Church reached Britain, but, as Patrick, Columba, Germanus, Lupus, and the bishops I mentioned above show, it certainly predated Augustine.

I’m not a Celtic romantic, myself.

GKC

 

[josie_L]

What’s your point? Or you saying that christians in Britain were first evangelized by the See of Rome? That is simply not true. Christianity existed in Britain before papal jursidiction ever reached its shores.

Can’t help but notice you haven’t answered my question. Which churches are catholic besides the RCC? Why do you not answer. If you don’t want to particpate in the discussion by answering questions, instead of behaving like a medieval Dominican inquistor, then please stop wasting my time.

My point is I don’t believe your version of history:

"But we do have clear evidence that Christianity in Britain was, from the first, Roman Christianity. To pin it down we have to look at what happened in the Roman Empire the first few decades after the death of Christ.

Ten years after the Crucifixion of Christ, Emperor Claudius successfully invaded Britain. Over the next 350 years, the Romans established a thriving colony in virtually the whole of Britain. With the Roman armies came Roman religions, and one of them was the new religion of Christianity. The first Christians in Britain, therefore, were Roman Christians.

Christian inscriptions found on crude Roman pottery in Britain dating from this period suggest that the first Christians were poor people—probably Roman soldiers or slaves. The documentary evidence comes from Tertullian and Origen, both writing in the second century. That they knew of the Church in Britain shows that it was sufficiently well founded, large, and connected with the rest of the Church that Catholics in northern Africa knew of it.

The evidence for Roman Christianity in Britain is overwhelming by the time of the fourth century. The first British martyr, St. Alban, was killed for his faith in 304. There must have been a well-established hierarchy because it is recorded that the bishops of London, York, and Lincoln attended the Council of Arles in 314. The British bishops were also present at the Council of Rimini in 359."

Also I think I made my point clear as to who and what is Catholic and that answer would be, drum roll, the Catholic Church.

I do, however, recognize Anglicans, the Orthodox, and Protestants as in communion with the CC only imperfectly so. However, we do know that there was and is a Church which was and still is called Catholic, which was recognized and still is recognized as Catholic by followers and non-followers alike.

 

[GKC]

What’s your point? Or you saying that christians in Britain were first evangelized by the See of Rome? That is simply not true. Christianity existed in Britain before papal jursidiction ever reached its shores.

Can’t help but notice you haven’t answered my question. Which churches are catholic besides the RCC? Why do you not answer. If you don’t want to particpate in the discussion by answering questions, instead of behaving like a medieval Dominican inquistor, then please stop wasting my time.

Well, it’s likely that some one might mention the 22 other sui juris Churches in communion with Rome, other than the Roman Latin Rite Church. At least.

GKC

 

[VARC]

I think I made my point clear as to who and what is Catholic and that answer would be, drum roll, the Catholic Church.

That’s interesting. The definition of catholic is universal. But you limit catholicity based on whether or not one recognizes the absolute supremacy of a single bishop in a particular city. That is the opposite of catholicity. It is very sectarian.

And there is no “my” version history. History is an objective science. And that science claerly demonstrates that Roman jurisdiction over Britain came wth Augustine in the sixth century, well after the church had already arrived. The idea that Henry XIII started the Anglican church in the 1500s is only parroted by the historically inept followers of drive-by catholic apologetics. No offence to anyone here

 

[VARC]

"But we do have clear evidence that Christianity in Britain was, from the first, Roman Christianity. To pin it down we have to look at what happened in the Roman Empire the first few decades after the death of Christ.

Ten years after the Crucifixion of Christ, Emperor Claudius successfully invaded Britain. Over the next 350 years, the Romans established a thriving colony in virtually the whole of Britain. With the Roman armies came Roman religions, and one of them was the new religion of Christianity. The first Christians in Britain, therefore, were Roman Christians.

Christian inscriptions found on crude Roman pottery in Britain dating from this period suggest that the first Christians were poor people—probably Roman soldiers or slaves. The documentary evidence comes from Tertullian and Origen, both writing in the second century. That they knew of the Church in Britain shows that it was sufficiently well founded, large, and connected with the rest of the Church that Catholics in northern Africa knew of it.

The evidence for Roman Christianity in Britain is overwhelming by the time of the fourth century. The first British martyr, St. Alban, was killed for his faith in 304. There must have been a well-established hierarchy because it is recorded that the bishops of London, York, and Lincoln attended the Council of Arles in 314. The British bishops were also present at the Council of Rimini in 359."

And your point is? I know that many British Christians were ethnically Roman and the christianity may have reached the island by means of the Empire. But it does not follow that those christians were under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome. Your citation expressly mentions bishops in London, York, and Lincoln but we know that Pope Gregory commisioned Augustine to evangelize a nation that already had christian bishops. **What does that tell you?**That those bishops were not under Roman authority!!!

 

[VARC]

Well, it’s likely that some one might mention the 22 other sui juris Churches in communion with Rome, other than the Roman Latin Rite Church. At least.

GKC

True but governance by a single bishop in a particular city as the deciding factor of catholicity (to the exclusion of the other patriarchates of the undivided church) does not bode well for the catholicity of the Roman Communion IMHO.

 

[josie_L]

And your point is? I know that many British Christians were ethnically Roman and the christianity may have reached the island by means of the Empire. But it does not follow that those christians were under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome. Your citation expressly mentions bishops in London, York, and Lincoln but we know that Pope Gregory commisioned Augustine to evangelize a nation that already had christian bishops. **What does that tell you?**That those bishops were not under Roman authority!!!

Where do you get Augustine and Pope Gregory from what was stated in that quote in the article? And did you even read the article I mentioned?

“Around 450, the Saxons started to invade a weakened Britain, and for the next 150 years (until 597) the pagan Saxons persecuted the Christian Britons. The persecuted Christian minority fled west to Cornwall, Wales, and Ireland, and south to Brittany in France. It was only during this period that the Celtic church existed in isolation from the authority structures of Rome.”

I think this is what you may be refering to.

 

[VARC]

Where do you get Augustine and Pope Gregory from what was stated in the article?

My historical frame of reference is not limited to what you post. It is a historical fact that Pope Gregory commisioned Augustine to evangelize Britain despite the presence of a pre-existing christian church already present. Look it up yourself.

 

[josie_L]

My historical frame of reference is not limited to what you post. It is a historical fact that Pope Gregory commisioned Augustine to evangelize Britain despite the presence of a pre-existing christian church already present. Look it up yourself.

Actually, I revised my post go read it again, and here’s the rest:

“It is true that Patrick’s Celtic church developed in relative isolation from Rome for about 150 years, but in Britain it was soon to be reconciled. In 597, St. Augustine arrived in southeast England, sent by Pope St. Gregory the Great. Eventually his missionaries encountered Patrick’s missionaries, who had been evangelizing England from the north and west.”

It might be better for you to read the whole article, instead of me feeding it to you piece-meal.

 

[trinitybeliever]

I use the term Roman Catholic. I find it almost universally accepted among my RC friends. And I know the history of the other terms as presented here. I spent weeks, on another board, years ago, arguing with a 5 point Calvinist, until I had stopped him using them for just the reason listed.

But Roman Catholic has acquired respectability, generally, in my experience, among RCs.

OTOH, I am not offended if you refer to me as a protestant. I disagree, but understand.

GKC

Ever here of the term identity theft?