Why do people in the UK allign themselves with the Anglican Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter newcatholic2010
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

newcatholic2010

Guest
Hi this is a question thats been on my head lately and I really havent found an answer to it which I would like to know about.

Ive been a Catholic for over a year, prior before in my life I never believed on god (you could say I found the light :D) nor was I part of any religion. However over the years in both RE and History lessons I learnt about the various splits churches had with the Catholic Church…in particular the one surrounding Henry VIII which started off due to the Pope refusing to grant him a divorce (hardly a theological reason to break away right?? more like someone who threw up a fuss).

Ive had friends in the past who call themselves English and say their part of the Church of England and whenever I raise this point towards the credibility and the origins of what it stands for they always get edgey with me or often dont answer the question. I often get the impression some of them know how their church originated but they continue to be associated with it. I don’t really see any traditional, historical, biblical reason for their church to be known as a ‘national church’, My opinion is that the establishment stole it from Rome in to continue its Protestant successions and has oppressed and killed millions of Catholic’s in order to do so over the years, wihilst also making it illegal for them to practice their faith. The act of supremacy or the act of settlement are man-made laws to defend a church that has no credibility, isnt the same church that Henry kept (being catholic still without the pope) and has strayed from tradition and biblical principles.

I often think the Church of England itself is the threat to Christianity here in the UK. With its house of Bishops who can influence legislations and being the state religion dare I say, over the years I have never heard them speak out nor have I heard them defend Christian values in this country even when I was an atheist. I often think this is due to their “comfy positions that they hold.” I rarely hear Rowan Williams speaking out nor the Queen…isnt she supposed to be the head of the church in this country?? I dont hear her talking of Christianity at Christmas or in her speech (which she doesnt even write herself!)

Atleast with the Catholic hierarchy and although they get slated by secularists, they still speak out. My main question is knowing all this regarding the Anglican church, why do people still stick with it knowing that it was along with the rest of the reformation the actors who commited apostacy from the church Jesus Christ founded…isn’t it a serious sin to cause division amongst the followers of Christ whcih stayed united for 1500 years?? Some of my friends who are Anglicans I get on well with as friends but I can never understand why they continue to allign themselves with the C o England knowing the history behind it…are they blind to it? Do they treat the C o England in a nationalistic way? (hardly biblical or traditional if that is the case)…family??. Plus dare I say that hardly any of them have what some could say “Christian lifestyles”. I always believe that the teachings of the bible and the church musnt contradict one another and I feel that the church of england has strayed a long way from the bible in its principles. I dont understand why they dont realise this. I knew all about this even before I came to the true church in Rome that christ had founded and entrusted to Peter as in the Bible.

I would like feedback or answers to what I have written as I find Christianity in this country very peculiar with what the establishment has done to it. Thanks 😃
 
One factor is that, for a great many Christians, it is a cultural association only with the Church. They are baptized into it, and so feel a life long association with it, even though they may have seen the church only at their baptism. For the same reason, many Scandinavians are Lutheran, simply because that is their established state religion.
 
Well for starters, the Church of England has hardly persecuted “millions” of Catholics, not even remotely close. It was more in the low thousands and plenty of Catholics persecuted Anglicans and other protestants as well, sadly.

Anglicans don’t view things they way you see them. They don’t see the Church of England as usurpers who “stole” anything from the Catholic Church. Rather, they see the CofE as having existed in the British Isles long before Rome assumed control over her. They don’t see the Anglican Church as having been “created” by Henry and his divorce but rather that unfortunate moment in history as being the opportunity in which England took back their Church and, from their perspective, reformed it.

The greatest problems with the CofE IMO are women’s ordination, too much secular control, and too much Calvinism honestly. They have declining attendance numbers that are catastrophically low. They are hardly a threat to Christianity much less anyone. If anything Catholicism has threatened their very existence as there have been many conversions to Catholicism with ordinariates, etc.

Why do people in the UK align themselves with the Church of England? Probably because it’s been the Church of the UK for the better part of 500 years, most were baptized into it, and it’s the status quo? :confused:
 
Well for starters, the Church of England has hardly persecuted “millions” of Catholics, not even remotely close. It was more in the low thousands and plenty of Catholics persecuted Anglicans and other protestants as well, sadly.
Until the King asserted authority as head of Christendom in England, the entire Island was Catholic. I think the numbers are greater than you imagine them to be.
 
One factor is that, for a great many Christians, it is a cultural association only with the Church. They are baptized into it, and so feel a life long association with it, even though they may have seen the church only at their baptism. For the same reason, many Scandinavians are Lutheran, simply because that is their established state religion.
Well said.
 
Everyone is different, but for me being raised Protestant it never occured to me that Protestantism wasn’t true. I had trouble reconciling free will with faith alone, but we believe what we’re raised in or exposed too. For some it’s a cultural connection, while others are very devout and have simply never considered the possibility that Anglicanism broke away. After all, it’s not like the Anglican Church would publicize it!!! We interpret history to our advantage. That’s a lot of it.
 
in particular the one surrounding Henry VIII which started off due to the Pope refusing to grant him a divorce (hardly a theological reason to break away right?? more like someone who threw up a fuss)

This request for annulment/divorce orbited around the very important problem of Henry wives not producing a heir to the throne. Back in those days it was considered vital to keeping peace in the Kingdom. Not a trivial issue at all for the King and his entire court.
 
Hi this is a question thats been on my head lately and I really havent found an answer to it which I would like to know about.

Ive been a Catholic for over a year, prior before in my life I never believed on god (you could say I found the light :D) nor was I part of any religion. However over the years in both RE and History lessons I learnt about the various splits churches had with the Catholic Church…in particular the one surrounding Henry VIII which started off due to the Pope refusing to grant him a divorce (hardly a theological reason to break away right?? more like someone who threw up a fuss).

Ive had friends in the past who call themselves English and say their part of the Church of England and whenever I raise this point towards the credibility and the origins of what it stands for they always get edgey with me or often dont answer the question. I often get the impression some of them know how their church originated but they continue to be associated with it. I don’t really see any traditional, historical, biblical reason for their church to be known as a ‘national church’, My opinion is that the establishment stole it from Rome in to continue its Protestant successions and has oppressed and killed millions of Catholic’s in order to do so over the years, wihilst also making it illegal for them to practice their faith. The act of supremacy or the act of settlement are man-made laws to defend a church that has no credibility, isnt the same church that Henry kept (being catholic still without the pope) and has strayed from tradition and biblical principles.

I often think the Church of England itself is the threat to Christianity here in the UK. With its house of Bishops who can influence legislations and being the state religion dare I say, over the years I have never heard them speak out nor have I heard them defend Christian values in this country even when I was an atheist. I often think this is due to their “comfy positions that they hold.” I rarely hear Rowan Williams speaking out nor the Queen…isnt she supposed to be the head of the church in this country?? I dont hear her talking of Christianity at Christmas or in her speech (which she doesnt even write herself!)

Atleast with the Catholic hierarchy and although they get slated by secularists, they still speak out. My main question is knowing all this regarding the Anglican church, why do people still stick with it knowing that it was along with the rest of the reformation the actors who commited apostacy from the church Jesus Christ founded…isn’t it a serious sin to cause division amongst the followers of Christ whcih stayed united for 1500 years?? Some of my friends who are Anglicans I get on well with as friends but I can never understand why they continue to allign themselves with the C o England knowing the history behind it…are they blind to it? Do they treat the C o England in a nationalistic way? (hardly biblical or traditional if that is the case)…family??. Plus dare I say that hardly any of them have what some could say “Christian lifestyles”. I always believe that the teachings of the bible and the church musnt contradict one another and I feel that the church of england has strayed a long way from the bible in its principles. I dont understand why they dont realise this. I knew all about this even before I came to the true church in Rome that christ had founded and entrusted to Peter as in the Bible.

I would like feedback or answers to what I have written as I find Christianity in this country very peculiar with what the establishment has done to it. Thanks 😃
I’m English and I’m Catholic.

The biggest threat to our country is the EU.
The biggest threat to Catholicism in our country is atheism.
 
Yeah, about every single Anglican book every written, Mark. Try reading “The Catholic Religion” by Vernon Staley, “Anglicanism” by John Booty, “The Reformation” by Diarmaid MacCulloch, and hundreds of other books written by Catholics and Anglicans alike who cite the fact that Anglicans believe this. This isn’t something that needs to be cited IMO with direct quotes. That’s like hearing “Orthodox believe in iconography” and asking, “got a source?” 🤷
Got a source?
 
I’m English and I’m Catholic.

The biggest threat to our country is the EU.
The biggest threat to Catholicism in our country is atheism.
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

To answer the OP, I agree with the many others. Most people belong to the CofE because it is the state religion. I don’t see them as a threat at all to the Catholic Church. They are baptised into the CofE, and usually that’s the last time they see the Church until it’s time to go for their First Holy Communion, and then their Confirmation, and a slight possibility when they get married. The CofE memberships are slightly, but gradually declining. Not fast, but they are declining, well at least church attendance is. On the other hand, our Church is increasing. More conversions, many more people are returning the the Faith that God intended them to be. If you’re interested,please read the following news story from 2007, printed in The Telegraph.

But we can’t bash some members of the CofE, specifically the supreme governer of it, Her Majesty as she is a good Christian lady, and increasingly kind to the Church!
 
My understanding is that the large increases in Catholic membership in the UK is due mostly to immigration from countries like Poland with large Catholic numbers already?
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

To answer the OP, I agree with the many others. Most people belong to the CofE because it is the state religion. I don’t see them as a threat at all to the Catholic Church. They are baptised into the CofE, and usually that’s the last time they see the Church until it’s time to go for their First Holy Communion, and then their Confirmation, and a slight possibility when they get married. The CofE memberships are slightly, but gradually declining. Not fast, but they are declining, well at least church attendance is. On the other hand, our Church is increasing. More conversions, many more people are returning the the Faith that God intended them to be. If you’re interested,please read the following news story from 2007, printed in The Telegraph.

But we can’t bash some members of the CofE, specifically the supreme governer of it, Her Majesty as she is a good Christian lady, and increasingly kind to the Church!
 
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
But we can’t bash some members of the CofE, specifically the supreme governer of it, Her Majesty as she is a good Christian lady, and increasingly kind to the Church!
Indeed. And let’s not forget that it was a few of the Anglicans (Agatha Christie et al) who petitioned the Pope to preserve the Latin Mass for Catholics and were successful. It seems that the traditional rite has very deep meanings for them as well.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agatha_Christie_indult
 
In the Anglican Church there are two rites: Rite I and Rite II. Rite II is kind of the traditional, classy, “Britishy” edition of the Holy Communion service; it’s lovely. It blows away the English novus ordo Mass verbage. IMO the Rite II is infinitely more beautiful than the novus ordo as well. So I think folks who are Rite I fans have an appreciation for tradition and would be better suited to Latin than modern English if they had to choose! 😛
Indeed. And let’s not forget that it was a few of the Anglicans (Agatha Christie et al) who petitioned the Pope to preserve the Latin Mass for Catholics and were successful. It seems that the traditional rite has very deep meanings for them as well.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agatha_Christie_indult
 
It blows away the English novus ordo Mass verbage. IMO the Rite II is infinitely more beautiful than the novus ordo as well.
But if you look at the new translation coming out in the English novus ordo Mass, you’ll find the Gloria, Credo, Sanctus much closer to the Anglican/Cranmer originals. Even the “hallowed,” “LIFT up your hearts,” “the Lord BE with you” phrases are left intact. Today’s Latinists probably would probably translate a lot of that stuff differently. Except for the "thee"s and "thou"s one could make a case the new translation is closer to the Common Prayer version than the Latin.
 
Ive had friends in the past who call themselves English and say their part of the Church of England and whenever I raise this point towards the credibility and the origins of what it stands for they always get edgey with me or often dont answer the question.
In England the C of E is the established church, so unless your parents, or yourself, decide differently then you will go down as “C of E” on any form where there is a space for ‘Religion’. C of E is the default religion.

Just as a Catholic child is taught that Constantinople split from Rome, while an Orthodox child is taught that Rome split from Constantinople, so what a child is taught in an Anglican school about Church history will differ from what a child is taught in a Catholic school.
I don’t really see any traditional, historical, biblical reason for their church to be known as a ‘national church’, My opinion is that the establishment stole it from Rome in to continue its Protestant successions and has oppressed and killed millions of Catholic’s in order to do so over the years, wihilst also making it illegal for them to practice their faith.
Relatively few were killed, certainly not in the “millions” even if you include the Protestants killed by Mary. “Foxe’s Book of Martyrs” does not contain only Catholic martyrs. Most English of the time followed the course of the Vicar of Bray and conformed to whatever the monarch (or the Lord Protector) of the time demanded.
I would like feedback or answers to what I have written as I find Christianity in this country very peculiar with what the establishment has done to it.
Ever since the Civil War, and with the recent example of Northern Ireland to confirm the lesson, the British establishment has been against ‘enthusiasm’ in religion. Religion is one of the ways to get people to kill other people, and in general the British establishment is against people killing other people. Hence the desire to reduce excessive enthusiasm for religion. If militant muslims approached their religion in the same way as the average C or E vicar then perhaps they wouldn’t kill as many people.

rossum
 
Great post, rossum. It’s all common sense. You spelled it out nicely. Everyone is taught at birth about “the opposition.” Like you said, East is taught west to be schismatic, West is taught East is. Muslims are raised to distrust Jews in the middle east, Jews are taught the reverse. Catholics are raised everywhere to believe “we’re the original Church” and Anglicans are raised straightaway into the CofE…
In England the C of E is the established church, so unless your parents, or yourself, decide differently then you will go down as “C of E” on any form where there is a space for ‘Religion’. C of E is the default religion.

Just as a Catholic child is taught that Constantinople split from Rome, while an Orthodox child is taught that Rome split from Constantinople, so what a child is taught in an Anglican school about Church history will differ from what a child is taught in a Catholic school.

Relatively few were killed, certainly not in the “millions” even if you include the Protestants killed by Mary. “Foxe’s Book of Martyrs” does not contain only Catholic martyrs. Most English of the time followed the course of the Vicar of Bray and conformed to whatever the monarch (or the Lord Protector) of the time demanded.

Ever since the Civil War, and with the recent example of Northern Ireland to confirm the lesson, the British establishment has been against ‘enthusiasm’ in religion. Religion is one of the ways to get people to kill other people, and in general the British establishment is against people killing other people. Hence the desire to reduce excessive enthusiasm for religion. If militant muslims approached their religion in the same way as the average C or E vicar then perhaps they wouldn’t kill as many people.

rossum
 
In the Anglican Church there are two rites: Rite I and Rite II. Rite II is kind of the traditional, classy, “Britishy” edition of the Holy Communion service; it’s lovely. It blows away the English novus ordo Mass verbage. IMO the Rite II is infinitely more beautiful than the novus ordo as well. So I think folks who are Rite I fans have an appreciation for tradition and would be better suited to Latin than modern English if they had to choose! 😛
I like as much Latin as I can get. OTOH, like any Anglican who uses the US 1928 Book of Common Prayer, I know only a single Rite, though I can get it in a variety of flavors.

Hard to pin them Anglicans down.

GKC
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top