Why or why not become Anglican?

[HosannaHM]

Hello everyone,

It's been a long time since I've posted anything. But I would love to have a discussion (civil as possible) about why you would or would not join the Anglican church. If you are Anglican, why are you?

I've continued to grow more and more fond of the Anglican vision, and I would love to hear others reasons why you are Anglican or why you would stay away. Thanks!

I'm painting with broad strokes- Apply the question to the Church of England, ACNA, etc.

Moderators, feel free to move this thread if I have misplaced it. I didn't put it specifically in the Anglican thread in hopes of hearing other denominational perspectives.

 

[BobRyan]

I used to think the Anglican church had what some might view as a progressive/liberal view of Marriage and Gender

Five more Anglican bishops back same-sex marriages in church

Church of England bishops say clergy should be able to act according to conscience on issue that has divided Christianity

www.theguardian.com

So I am actually not sure where they are on that today.

Here is a Catholic source who was a former Anglican reviewing different issues in the church

What Catholics Must Understand about Anglicanism

Much of the ecumenical adventure between Anglicans and Catholics over the last 40 years has been fruitful, but its success has been limited because many Catholics do not understand the complexity of the Anglican church.

www.catholic.com

Since I don't now much about it - I found some of that article to be helpful.

" I attended an Anglican seminary of the Evangelical persuasion called Wycliffe Hall, and down the road was the Anglo-Catholic seminary called St. Stephen’s House. The two were totally opposed in theology, liturgical practice, culture, and ethos. In Oxford was an Anglican seminary which was “broad church,” or liberal. This third strand of Anglicanism has always been a kind of worldly, established, urbane type of religion that is at home with the powers that be and always adapts to the culture in which it finds itself.​

​

These three forces co-exist in the Anglican church—united by nothing more than a shared baptism, a patriotic allegiance to the national church, and the need to tolerate each other. Unfortunately the toleration frequently wears thin. The Anglo-Catholics, the Evangelicals, and the liberals are constantly at war. Their theology, their liturgy, their politics, and their spirituality are in basic contradiction to one another."​

Of course I have a lot of other doctrinal issues with the Anglican church but I was looking for something more generally applicable across the board for a review.

 

[bling]

I do not feel a "Christian" is limited to denominations, I find Christians and non-Christians in almost every denomination. I try to go where I can help the most and I have not been part of the Anglican church.

 

[HosannaHM]

I used to think the Anglican church had what some might view as a progressive/liberal view of Marriage and Gender

Five more Anglican bishops back same-sex marriages in church

Church of England bishops say clergy should be able to act according to conscience on issue that has divided Christianity

www.theguardian.com

So I am actually not sure where they are on that today.

Here is a Catholic source who was a former Anglican reviewing different issues in the church

What Catholics Must Understand about Anglicanism

Much of the ecumenical adventure between Anglicans and Catholics over the last 40 years has been fruitful, but its success has been limited because many Catholics do not understand the complexity of the Anglican church.

www.catholic.com

Since I don't now much about it - I found some of that article to be helpful.

" I attended an Anglican seminary of the Evangelical persuasion called Wycliffe Hall, and down the road was the Anglo-Catholic seminary called St. Stephen’s House. The two were totally opposed in theology, liturgical practice, culture, and ethos. In Oxford was an Anglican seminary which was “broad church,” or liberal. This third strand of Anglicanism has always been a kind of worldly, established, urbane type of religion that is at home with the powers that be and always adapts to the culture in which it finds itself.​

​

These three forces co-exist in the Anglican church—united by nothing more than a shared baptism, a patriotic allegiance to the national church, and the need to tolerate each other. Unfortunately the toleration frequently wears thin. The Anglo-Catholics, the Evangelicals, and the liberals are constantly at war. Their theology, their liturgy, their politics, and their spirituality are in basic contradiction to one another."​

Of course I have a lot of other doctrinal issues with the Anglican church but I was looking for something more generally applicable across the board for a review.

Hey Bob,

Thanks for the articles! The marriage and gender debate is certainly an issue for me. It's part of the reason I asked because I'm struggling to understand the divisions within the Anglican Communion. A practicing Anglican could probably answer the question "How Anglican are the sub denominations of Anglicanism?

I like their theological framework. The vision of the denomination seems to be one of unity on the essentials of the Christian faith (although I'm sure what is essential will depend on who you ask).

I'm definitely closer to the approach taken by the ACNA, which seems to have a significantly more conservative take on gender identity. I just wonder how episcopal an ACNA church is compared to the Church of England? Where are we playing "no true Scotsman", or is it a valid point to say that one is more Anglican than the other?

 

[JM]

Hey Bob,

Thanks for the articles! The marriage and gender debate is certainly an issue for me. It's part of the reason I asked because I'm struggling to understand the divisions within the Anglican Communion. A practicing Anglican could probably answer the question "How Anglican are the sub denominations of Anglicanism?

I like their theological framework. The vision of the denomination seems to be one of unity on the essentials of the Christian faith (although I'm sure what is essential will depend on who you ask).

I'm definitely closer to the approach taken by the ACNA, which seems to have a significantly more conservative take on gender identity. I just wonder how episcopal an ACNA church is compared to the Church of England? Where are we playing "no true Scotsman", or is it a valid point to say that one is more Anglican than the other?

I love the Book of Common Prayer liturgy. If you can find a solid congregation go for it.

 

[HosannaHM]

I do not feel a "Christian" is limited to denominations, I find Christians and non-Christians in almost every denomination. I try to go where I can help the most and I have not been part of the Anglican church.

I don't believe a Christian is limited to a denomination either. We're all Christians, though denominations can help us to have unity with other believers. We come together around core doctrines and may have distinctive expressions of the Christian faith, but God is not limited to our denominational frameworks either.

 

[RileyG]

If you consider yourself half Catholic half Protestant, then you can become an Anglican as a middle road

 

[HosannaHM]

I love the Book of Common Prayer liturgy. If you can find a solid congregation go for it.

Yes! I have a copy of the 1662, the 79, and the 2019. I like all of them, but I use the 2019 all the time

 

[HosannaHM]

If you consider yourself half Catholic half Protestant, then you can become an Anglican as a middle road

I'm definitely somewhere on that spectrum! To keep it very brief: More sacramental than my fellow protestants, but not prepared to disavow my Christian experiences to the RCC

 

[PloverWing]

I joined the Episcopal Church in my 20s. Here are some of the most important factors that drew me to this church:

1) Liturgy. I do best in a style of worship that lets me participate, rather than just listening to somebody talk, and liturgy lets me do that. I sing or say prayers and responses, I bow and stand and kneel, I do active things like this to make an offering of worship to God.

2) Using all the senses in worship. This is part of #1, but I'll address it separately. Liturgical worship at its best touches all of the senses: visual imagery like banners and candles and processions; sounds like music and chants and bells -- and silence; the scent of incense; the taste of consecrated Bread and Wine; the kinesthetics of bowing or kneeling.

3) Freedom for intellectual exploration. Because the Anglican tradition finds its unity in common worship rather than unified belief, there's some freedom to explore scholarly study and to hold a variety of beliefs. I need that, in order to be a person of integrity.

4) Rootedness in Christian history and Tradition. Much of our liturgy is an English translation of words that are centuries old. As we do theology, we draw from the wisdom of theologians from centuries past. We maintain a line of bishops that goes back to the earliest days of the church. Every generation adds its own voice to the ancient Tradition, and we're doing that too, but we're part of something big and ancient -- like the little buds on the outer fringes of an enormous, centuries-old oak tree. Note that #4 provides a counterweight to #3. We explore and grow, but Tradition gives us roots.

 

[JM]

Yes! I have a copy of the 1662, the 79, and the 2019. I like all of them, but I use the 2019 all the time

I studied to be a layreader in the Anglican Church of Canada but left due to liberalism and became a Reformed Baptist over 20 years ago. Now I'm moving back to the liturgical tradition and landing in the Lutheran Church (LCMS). The Divine Liturgy in the Lutheran Church is similar to the BCP, I have the 1928 American, 1962 Canadian and the Book of Alternative Services for the ACC. The local congregation is very catholic but maintains a very strong monergism in the preaching.

Here's a litany if you're interested.

 

[HosannaHM]

I joined the Episcopal Church in my 20s. Here are some of the most important factors that drew me to this church:

1) Liturgy. I do best in a style of worship that lets me participate, rather than just listening to somebody talk, and liturgy lets me do that. I sing or say prayers and responses, I bow and stand and kneel, I do active things like this to make an offering of worship to God.

2) Using all the senses in worship. This is part of #1, but I'll address it separately. Liturgical worship at its best touches all of the senses: visual imagery like banners and candles and processions; sounds like music and chants and bells -- and silence; the scent of incense; the taste of consecrated Bread and Wine; the kinesthetics of bowing or kneeling.

3) Freedom for intellectual exploration. Because the Anglican tradition finds its unity in common worship rather than unified belief, there's some freedom to explore scholarly study and to hold a variety of beliefs. I need that, in order to be a person of integrity.

4) Rootedness in Christian history and Tradition. Much of our liturgy is an English translation of words that are centuries old. As we do theology, we draw from the wisdom of theologians from centuries past. We maintain a line of bishops that goes back to the earliest days of the church. Every generation adds its own voice to the ancient Tradition, and we're doing that too, but we're part of something big and ancient -- like the little buds on the outer fringes of an enormous, centuries-old oak tree. Note that #4 provides a counterweight to #3. We explore and grow, but Tradition gives us roots.

This is great- thank you for sharing Ploverwing.

Your 3rd point sounds very liberating, though I haven't heard it put that way yet. Can you elaborate on that? As far as the unity in common worship.

 

[HosannaHM]

I studied to be a layreader in the Anglican Church of Canada but left due to liberalism and became a Reformed Baptist over 20 years ago. Now I'm moving back to the liturgical tradition and landing in the Lutheran Church (LCMS). The Divine Liturgy in the Lutheran Church is similar to the BCP, I have the 1928 American, 1962 Canadian and the Book of Alternative Services for the ACC. The local congregation is very catholic but maintains a very strong monergism in the preaching.

Here's a litany if you're interested.

Thank you for sharing that! I enjoyed the Litany too.

To be honest, before this pursuit of Anglican thought, the Lutheran (LCMS) looked very attractive to me (and still does in many ways). I admire their liturgy, theology, and focus on the sacraments. My biggest struggle with the Lutheran church is the linear nature of it. Closed Communion and what not. Though I'm sure the arguments for that approach are sound.

 

[JM]

Thank you for sharing that! I enjoyed the Litany too.

To be honest, before this pursuit of Anglican thought, the Lutheran (LCMS) looked very attractive to me (and still does in many ways). I admire their liturgy, theology, and focus on the sacraments. My biggest struggle with the Lutheran church is the linear nature of it. Closed Communion and what not. Though I'm sure the arguments for that approach are sound.

Anglicans tend to hold a receptionist view of the Supper while Lutherans, like Rome and Orthodoxy, believe Christ is objectively present in the Bread and Wine and an unbeliever can eat and drink damnation upon themselves.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I think PloverWing had an excellent response that represents much of my thinking and attraction to Anglicanism, too. I will add one more thing about my "why" of becoming Anglican. I wanted a liturgical, sacramental, reverential worship with all the "rootedness" PloverWing spoke about. There are other faith practices that offer that as well, but they do not offer one thing important to me -- making the Eucharist available to all baptized Christians. I reject closed communion practices. Christ wanted his church to be one. I don't think that is a matter of a single organization but of all of Christendom being united at the communion rail. (Yes, I know the counter-arguments; I find them unconvincing.)

 

[d taylor]

-
​

My one condition that would have to be met. Would be they would have to teach that a person receives God's free gift of Eternal Life salvation only by belief/faith in Jesus, with no other action required by the person.

They would also have to teach that once a person becomes at the very moment of belief in Jesus a born again child of God, this person can never lose their born again life and cease to be a child of God. *this second part is really actually part of the first condition i gave, kind of like 1 and 1a

 

[PloverWing]

Anglicans tend to hold a receptionist view of the Supper while Lutherans, like Rome and Orthodoxy, believe Christ is objectively present in the Bread and Wine and an unbeliever can eat and drink damnation upon themselves.

We hold a variety of views, because (as noted above) Anglicans find our unity in common worship, rather than in uniform belief. And "I don't know" is one of the acceptable Anglican beliefs -- that is, a view that "God is present here, and we don't know the exact mechanism by which God becomes present in Bread and Wine, and I'm okay with not knowing how, as long as God is here."

But if you look at how we act, what we do in worship: We act as though Christ is objectively present. All the consecrated Bread is either consumed or reserved for later sacramental use. In our parish, the reserved Sacrament is kept in a place in the wall behind the altar, with a Presence Lamp lit nearby. All the consecrated Wine is consumed. We're not pouring consecrated Wine back into its original bottle, or drinking it as a beverage with dinner. (It's painful to even write that sentence.)

If you want to see what Episcopalians believe, look at how we worship.

(Note: My experience is with the Episcopal Church in the US. I invite non-American Anglicans to add their experiences. I gather that the liturgical renewal movement affected the American church more strongly than some of the other national churches, so others' experiences in their home churches may be different.)

 

[GodLovesCats]

Hello everyone,

It's been a long time since I've posted anything. But I would love to have a discussion (civil as possible) about why you would or would not join the Anglican church. If you are Anglican, why are you?

I've continued to grow more and more fond of the Anglican vision, and I would love to hear others reasons why you are Anglican or why you would stay away. Thanks!

I used to think there were only Catholics and Protestants (being totally unaware of Orthodoxy). Somehow I learned on CF Anglican is between Catholic and Protestant. That makes learning what they believe very difficult to understand.

I am non-denominational beyond being 100% Protestant because no denomination checks off all the boxes of what I believe and I have major issues with the Catholic Church. Any denomination that has Catholic practices and doctrine is a big no-no for me.

 

[PloverWing]

Your 3rd point sounds very liberating, though I haven't heard it put that way yet. Can you elaborate on that? As far as the unity in common worship.

Consider, for example, the cluster of issues surrounding higher criticism of the Bible, archaeological and historical research, biblical inerrancy, and biblical interpretation. Perhaps Anne believes that the early chapters of Genesis are mythological accounts that tell a theological message, while Bob is a young earth creationist and sees those chapters as literal history. Charles thinks that the book of Revelation is a vividly symbolic message of encouragement for early Christians persecuted by the Roman empire, while Diane thinks that those symbols describe 21st-century events.

As long as Anne, Bob, Charles, and Diane are willing to say the prayers together and kneel together at the altar rail, they are all faithful Episcopalians.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Hello everyone,

It's been a long time since I've posted anything. But I would love to have a discussion (civil as possible) about why you would or would not join the Anglican church. If you are Anglican, why are you?

I am Catholic not Anglican. That said, there are reasons for a Baptist to become an Anglican and there are reasons not to become an Anglican.
For:

• Anglicans preserved some of the ancient liturgy and the ancient faith when they separated from the Catholic Church; these were good things to preserve and they help Anglicans to remain within the life and truth held by the ancient churches from apostolic times.
• Anglicans value holy scripture and they value holy tradition; they understand that holy scripture needs a context in which to be interpreted and that the context is the living breathing church and its past decisions (holy tradition).
• Anglican have retained the structure of the ancient church; pastors and priests answer to a bishop who in turn is held accountable by the body of bishops making up the Anglican communion.

Against:

• Anglicans have mixed semi-democratic processes into the ancient monarchical structure of the diocese and also the collegiate structure of the synod and council, mixing laity and clergy into a voting assembly that makes law for the Anglican church in any given jurisdiction.
• Anglicans debate and permit some serious doctrinal deviations that stand in the way of communion with the ancient churches, and practises such as female ordination, same sex individuals in the roles of priest and bishop while they maintain an active and visible same sex relationship, which also stand in the way of communion with the ancient churches.
• Anglicans have abandoned their traditional opposition to divorce and remarriage replacing it with tolerance that matches societal tolerance of these things.

More could be added to the "for" case and also to the "against" case. Yet, in the end, your own conscience must rule in this matter and by it you must be guided.