Why would someone join the Anglican( Episcopalian Church)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In fact the Pope was effectively the prisoner of the Emperor — indeed for a time the actual prisoner.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
Where they really lost me is when I realized there was a group of them called “Anglo-Catholic” who apparently try to do things like the Catholic Church but stay Anglican. Why not just become Catholics, sheesh, ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Well, this is exactly the issue–the via media–that converted John Henry Newman. You can’t perpetually be “in the middle” of two distinct things. His writings are really powerful refutations of the Anglo-Catholic positions, which he came to see as untenable, and well worth reading.
 
Don_Ruggero said:
40.png
po18guy:
Which Pope sent King Henry VIII?
Click to expand...
That question does not make any sense.
Click to expand...
The original sentence included “was sent to the British Isles by”, so that later post asks:
  • King Henry VIII was sent to the British Isles by which Pope?
 
Last edited:
Don_Ruggero said:
40.png
ComplineSanFran:
The Church in England has been around since Augustine of Canterbury was sent to the British Isles by Gregory the Great in 595.
Click to expand...
Even earlier…remember Saint Alban
Click to expand...
The Church in England has been around since St Alban. The “Church of England” is a denomination, around about 5 centuries. It was established by the government, not any apostle. It seized property from the Catholic Church, and has at various times banned the Catholic Faith, as well as various Protestant communions. It has nothing to do with St. Alban or St. Augustine, they were before its time.
 
Last edited:
Good, in general. Don’t think you can make Henry the originator of Anglo-Catholic, but point is correct.

Not so much Elizabeth, but Edward VI (or, given his tender age, his protectors and those in charge). Elizabeth centered the Church, mid-way (via media), to calm things down.
 
Padres1969 said:
Anglican’s don’t believe they are the “true church” in the sense you’re using the term at the exclusion of all other denominations. Rather Anglicans believe they are part of Christ’s Universal Church, as would Catholics so be considered.
Click to expand...
Yep. That’s because they are truly ecumenical and we just pretend to be.
 
Last edited:
No, far earlier than that. Best guess is around 200AD, give or take.
 
In the long run, all instances of “Via Media” tend to interfere with conversion. You might think it is the “best of both worlds” but in reality human nature tends to always choose the path of least resistance. None of us really wants to change, even if the gospel calls us to.

Anglicanism allows for the “smells and bells” without the dogma, if you are not “into” that, if it would be inconvenient for your lifestyle. Likewise, it allows one to appreciate the beauty of scripture, without being bound by it.
 
Blessed John Henry Newman and the others in the Oxford Movement who converted were wise men.
I hope Newman becomes a saint sooner and not later.
 
Let it be noted that Anglican Churches not in TEC, such as those in the Continuum, still use the 1928 Prayer Book.

Except for those who don’t.
 
Last edited:
jas84173 said:
I am so confused. How on earth do Anglicans believe they are the true Church? England wasn’t Christian for 200 years after Christ. And why would anyone say that it is true but the Catholic Church is not? As in if I talked to an Episcopalian priest how would he tell me the Anglican church is the true Church? Seeing it was basically founded over a denied divorce I can’t see how anyone can stay with that church. Not intending to be rude but the history of King Henry Vlll is almost comical is it not?
Click to expand...
Henry’s divorce was the trigger for the separation, but that was not all there was to it. The Church in England was starting to rival the monarchy in secular wealth and power and by extension, the Pope was starting to have unprecedented secular power in England, something that angered a lot of British people of all classes. The Church was definitely crossing the line of separation of church and state.
 
Yeah. But you know those Anglicans are going to say otherwise. Motley and recalcitrant.
 
The tension between the throne and Rome in England had been on-going, in spurts, at least as far back as the first Statute of Westminster, and culminated in the Herician Acts of 1533-34. It was indeed a power thing. And as the nascent age of nationalism grew, stirrings occurred all around Europe. Henry was one example.

Decree of nullity.When Henry got his Church, he got his decree.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top