Why don’t most Anglicans join the Roman Catholic Church?

[redleghunter]

I’ve often wondered about this. Notice I did not say all.

 

[Arcangl86]

Because we have different beliefs then Catholics. I'm not sure what the specific question is.

 

[redleghunter]

Because we have different beliefs then Catholics. I'm not sure what the specific question is.

Aren’t there more similarities as in the sacraments?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I’ve often wondered about this. Notice I did not say all.

Anglicans are mostly Protestant Reformed in theology. But there are different types of Anglican churches, from the "Low" ones that are more like Presbyterian in their doctrines (although use the liturgy); the "Middle" ones who are very traditional, and the "High" ones (also called "Anglo-Catholic"), who have all the bells and whistles similar to Catholic churches.

The big differences are:
They don't believe in the actual body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist.
I may be wrong but they might be similar to the Lutherans who believe that the real presence of Christ is in the Eucharist without the Host and wine being actually changed.
They don't worship Mary or the saints, or pray to them.
Although they don't have Calvinistic doctrine as the Westminster Confession states, but they have their own Articles of Faith which are Reformed and Evangelical.
They have priests, but they act more as ministers, rather than mediators, and therefore don't have confessionals where folks come and confess their sins and receive absolution.
They allow the members to drink the communion wine as well as eating the wafer.
They have the Archbishop of Canterbury as their head, and not the Pope.

For Anglicans to merge with the Catholic church, there would need to be fundamental changes in doctrine and practice and to accept traditions and doctrines that would be totally foreign to their way of faith and worship, and the majority of Anglicans would quit the church if there was any serious moves toward union. We would then have breakaway churches like "The Evangelical Anglican Church", or "The Free Anglican Church".

 

[PloverWing]

I won't presume to speak for most Anglicans, but for me, there are two deal-breakers: 1) the Catholic view of the church, and 2) the Catholic view of church authority.

1) The Catholic view of the church, as I understand it, is that the Catholic church is the one that Jesus founded, and all other Christian bodies have broken away from that one church. That is not how I see the church. I see the church as something like a family torn apart by divorce, or a vase that has fallen to the ground and broken into pieces. God who made us is able to scoop up the pieces of the vase and still do something with us, but there's no point having the various broken pieces of pottery each claiming that they're the entire vase, or husband and wife each claiming that they alone are the entire family.

2) The Catholic view of church authority, as I understand it, is that it is infallible under certain particular circumstances, and that it ought to be obeyed under most circumstances. I do not believe that infallibility is to be found anywhere, outside of God's own self, and I am very careful about agreeing to obey anyone. I respect and listen to sacred Tradition, the teachings of theologians both past and present, but I hold onto the right to dissent from what I believe to be false, and I consider it always possible that church leaders may make mistakes, even the Pope when speaking ex cathedra.

I agree with a great many of the beliefs and practices of the Catholic church -- perhaps 90% or more of their beliefs, at a guess. But I have a small handful of disagreements, with the above two being the most significant ones.

 

[PloverWing]

In reply to @Oscarr : We're actually a little closer to Rome than your post suggests, at least in the Episcopal Church in the U.S. (Your description of the range of Anglican beliefs from "low" to "high" is correct, and I've come to understand that the Episcopal Church tends to be "higher" than many of the other Anglican churches. I don't know where the New Zealand church falls on the spectrum.)

You're correct about our belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. We don't specify further how that Presence happens. A person who believes in transubtantiation wouldn't be disagreeing with us, exactly, but would just have a more specific belief than our church holds.

We don't worship Mary or the saints, and neither do Catholics. A high-church Episcopalian might ask the saints to pray for us, however.

Reconciliation of a penitent is one of our sacramental rites. However, it is entirely voluntary in our church, and it is practiced much less often in the Episcopal church than it is in the Catholic church.

The Archbishop of Canterbury plays a different role for us than the Pope does for Catholics. Both have a kind of "chief pastor" role, and a certain ceremonial role, but the Archbishop of Canterbury isn't seen as having the same kind of governing authority that the Pope does.

I hope I'm not being too nitpicky. You have indeed pointed to some places where the two churches tend to have different flavors of things.

 

[Peter J Barban]

Obviously, they are waiting for a signing bonus.

 

[Peter J Barban]

True story: A foreigner from Ireland, now living in Taiwan asked me for a ride. As I drove him home to his wife and family, he told me that he was a Catholic priest. I asked how that was possible. He told me that used to be an Anglican minister. In Taiwan, he got married first and then switched to Catholicism.

(Many Catholic nuns and priests in Taiwan are foreigners because of strong pressure to get married, have kids and take care of one's parents.)

pss. In the Chinese language, Catholics are not considered Christian. Christian basically means "Protestant" in Chinese. It really ticks off my Catholic friends to explain that they are Christians too.

 

[Albion]

I’ve often wondered about this. Notice I did not say all.

Why would they? It is not as though the two are identical.

Aren’t there more similarities as in the sacraments?

Well, yes, but there are substantial differences, too--more than exist between the Roman Church and the Eastern Orthodox, for instance. Take a look at the Thirty-Nine Articles (online), and you will get a feel for that.

 

[Albion]

Anglicans are mostly Protestant Reformed in theology. But there are different types of Anglican churches, from the "Low" ones that are more like Presbyterian in their doctrines (although use the liturgy); the "Middle" ones who are very traditional, and the "High" ones (also called "Anglo-Catholic"), who have all the bells and whistles similar to Catholic churches.

The big differences are:

There are quite a few errors in that post (including the part not quoted here), so maybe we should approach this slowly.

 

[Tigger45]

Anglicans being monergistic and Catholics being synergistic is the fundamental theological difference. The 5 Solas come into mind when speaking of Anglicanism.

 

[Paidiske]

For me the absolute line was infallibility. I couldn't believe in it, nor acquiesce to attempting to govern my conscience as if I believed in it.

 

[Albion]

I’ve often wondered about this. Notice I did not say all.

Redleghunter, I have been thinking about this and how to offer some explanation that doesn't get all tangled up with "ifs" and "sometimeses" and such. Here's one approach to giving a quick overview.

The primary doctrinal statement of Anglicanism is the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, which date from the 16th century. Check them out for a more specific answer.

Anglicans who consider the Articles to be normative are the more Protestant in orientation. But those Anglicans who consider the Articles to be an historical document but not definitive today are more Catholic in orientation.

However, all Anglicans should recognize that the church is both Catholic and Protestant since it retains of Catholicism that which is not or was not in need of reform, while also rejecting the corruptions and innovations that had crept into the Roman church during the centuries leading up to the Reformation. Consequently, Anglicanism is probably rightly recognized as the denomination which is least identified with any doctrines "of its own."

 

[redleghunter]

Redleghunter, I have been thinking about this and how to offer some explanation that doesn't get all tangled up with "ifs" and "sometimeses" and such. Here's one approach to giving a quick overview.

The primary doctrinal statement of Anglicanism is the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, which date from the 16th century. Check them out for a more specific answer.

Anglicans who consider the Articles to be normative are the more Protestant in orientation. But those Anglicans who consider the Articles to be an historical document but not definitive today are more Catholic in orientation.

However, all Anglicans should recognize that the church is both Catholic and Protestant since it retains of Catholicism that which is not or was not in need of reform, while also rejecting the corruptions and innovations that had crept into the Roman church during the centuries leading up to the Reformation. Consequently, Anglicanism is probably rightly recognized as the denomination which is least identified with any doctrines "of its own."

Thank you Albion this is great information.

 

[redleghunter]

For me the absolute line was infallibility. I couldn't believe in it, nor acquiesce to attempting to govern my conscience as if I believed in it.

Were you raised Roman Catholic or Anglican?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

When I joined an Anglican church for a short while (around 3 years), the vicar told us that the Scriptures were all we needed for salvation and Christian living. This is different to the Catholic church which relies on Scripture and Tradition. I think (and I can be corrected), that a Council of Trent canon stated that anyone who rejected Tradition was anathema. I think that would be a big hindrance to church union.

 

[Albion]

When I joined an Anglican church for a short while (around 3 years), the vicar told us that the Scriptures were all we needed for salvation and Christian living. This is different to the Catholic church which relies on Scripture and Tradition.

That's right...and a good point for you to have made.

 

[Arcangl86]

Even those of us who identify as Anglo-Catholic have different understandings of certain dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church, and from my understanding of Catholicism, it's all or nothing. I disagree with several dogmas of the RCC, but the biggest one, if I had to choose, has to be the idea of papal supremacy. I can't accept that only one person is the supreme authority on doctrine. Especially when the popes are selected out of a small body of people selected by previous popes. It's not just that obviously or I would be Orthodox, but it's a big one.

 

[redleghunter]

Even those of us who identify as Anglo-Catholic have different understandings of certain dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church, and from my understanding of Catholicism, it's all or nothing. I disagree with several dogmas of the RCC, but the biggest one, if I had to choose, has to be the idea of papal supremacy. I can't accept that only one person is the supreme authority on doctrine. Especially when the popes are selected out of a small body of people selected by previous popes. It's not just that obviously or I would be Orthodox, but it's a big one.

Papal primacy seems to be the largest objection thus far in the thread.

 

[Albion]

It is probably as you say, yes.

Here's a way of looking at it...

If we consider the Anglicans who are the most like Roman Catholics--Anglo-Catholics or Anglo-Papalists are terms that have been used--it has been said that they are not all peas in a pod, just as Evangelical Anglicans are not all carbon copies of each other. However, it is said also that there are four RC doctrines which cause all of them to draw the line.

1. Papal Supremacy (and Infallibility)
2. Transubstantiation
3. Purgatory
4. The Marian dogmas of the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception.

That rule of thumb not withstanding, I do know some Anglo-Catholics who believe one or more of points #2, 3, and 4. None accept #1 on the list. The closest that some of them might come would be to accept some sort of primacy of honor (only) for the bishop of Rome, probably also including the historic title, Patriarch of the West.