Anglo-Catholic?

[LewsTherin]

The thread about similarities between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy got me thinking. Is it possible to be an Anglo-Catholic while having Orthodox beliefs about sacraments, sin, the role of Mary etc.? Or is an Anglo-Catholic defined as one who is theologically very close to Rome? Would this hypothetical Anglican be in a different category? Just curious.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

My parish calls itself Anglo-Catholic but so far as I can tell is really just High Church liberalish Anglican that's fond of the Benedictine and Franciscan traditions. We don't tell anybody what beliefs they should have about any specific doctrines, other than the common Christian basics. Nothing about sacramental theology, Marian devotions or anything like that. So, if a member's theology is more Orthodox, more Catholic or more Calvinist, no problem, it's all good.

 

[ebia]

My parish calls itself Anglo-Catholic but so far as I can tell is really just High Church liberalish Anglican that's fond of the Benedictine and Franciscan traditions. We don't tell anybody what beliefs they should have about any specific doctrines, other than the common Christian basics. Nothing about sacramental theology, Marian devotions or anything like that.

"Anglo-catholic" means different things to different people.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

"Anglo-catholic" means different things to different people.

I've noticed that.

 

[Adam Warlock]

The thread about similarities between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy got me thinking. Is it possible to be an Anglo-Catholic while having Orthodox beliefs about sacraments, sin, the role of Mary etc.? Or is an Anglo-Catholic defined as one who is theologically very close to Rome? Would this hypothetical Anglican be in a different category? Just curious.

I'm an AC too. As far as I know, one could absolutely hold Orthodox beliefs about those things. Pretty sure that all of the ACs whom I know believe in Original Sin as Western Christians have defined it, but I can't say if that's "required" or not. To me, an AC is someone who believes that the Anglican Church didn't come into existence at the Reformation. He or she also believes in the the Councils, the Creeds, and the traditional beliefs & practices that were shared by the undivided Church. Those beliefs are expressed in certain forms of Sunday worship, devotional practices, etc. Since that undivided Church included Eastern Christians, some ACs like icons and Eastern devotions. Eastern theology might also be an area of interest.

 

[Sean611]

To me, an AC is someone who believes that the Anglican Church didn't come into existence at the Reformation.

Indeed, many Anglicans only see and have only heard of the 39 Articles of Religion, but many have no idea about the 10 Articles of 1536 and the 6 Articles of 1539 that sought to define the beliefs of the Church of England. The Church of England has not always been the 39 Articles.

 

[Albion]

I'm an AC too. As far as I know, one could absolutely hold Orthodox beliefs about those things. Pretty sure that all of the ACs whom I know believe in Original Sin as Western Christians have defined it, but I can't say if that's "required" or not. To me, an AC is someone who believes that the Anglican Church didn't come into existence at the Reformation. He or she also believes in the the Councils, the Creeds, and the traditional beliefs & practices that were shared by the undivided Church. Those beliefs are expressed in certain forms of Sunday worship, devotional practices, etc. Since that undivided Church included Eastern Christians, some ACs like icons and Eastern devotions. Eastern theology might also be an area of interest.

How about Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Assumption and Immaculate Conception, and the Roman Catholic liturgy? I haven't met a self-professed Anglo-Catholic yet who didn't affirm all of that plus the Papacy (although I know that the original Anglo-Catholics were not crazy about such things and mainly asserted the historic continuity idea).

 

[mark46]

Are you suggesting that these are the teachings of Anglo-Catholic seminaries like Nashotah House (IMHO, one of two "traditional" seminaries within TEC)?

Surely, you are not relying on what the average Anglo-Catholic in the pews believe. That kind of approach has almost always been found to be misleading.

How about Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Assumption and Immaculate Conception, and the Roman Catholic liturgy? I haven't met a self-professed Anglo-Catholic yet who didn't affirm all of that plus the Papacy (although I know that the original Anglo-Catholics were not crazy about such things and mainly asserted the historic continuity idea).

 

[Adam Warlock]

How about Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Assumption and Immaculate Conception, and the Roman Catholic liturgy? I haven't met a self-professed Anglo-Catholic yet who didn't affirm all of that plus the Papacy (although I know that the original Anglo-Catholics were not crazy about such things and mainly asserted the historic continuity idea).

Well, there's obviously variety.

 

[Albion]

Well, there's obviously variety.

That's true of course. What I was mainly getting at was the fact that what Anglo-Catholicism was at the time of the Oxford Movement is no more. You can hardly find any Anglican who thinks like those men did. The embellishments began appearing within only a few years and this has continued to accelerate.

But you can easily find Anglicans who are little more than Roman Catholic wannabees who are calling themselves "Anglo-Catholics." So when anyone asks "Or is an Anglo-Catholic defined as one who is theologically very close to Rome?" this has to be part of the answer.

 

[LewsTherin]

I'm an AC too. As far as I know, one could absolutely hold Orthodox beliefs about those things. Pretty sure that all of the ACs whom I know believe in Original Sin as Western Christians have defined it, but I can't say if that's "required" or not. To me, an AC is someone who believes that the Anglican Church didn't come into existence at the Reformation. He or she also believes in the the Councils, the Creeds, and the traditional beliefs & practices that were shared by the undivided Church. Those beliefs are expressed in certain forms of Sunday worship, devotional practices, etc. Since that undivided Church included Eastern Christians, some ACs like icons and Eastern devotions. Eastern theology might also be an area of interest.

This sounds a lot like what I believe, although I believe in the eastern concept of ancestral sin rather than original sin. I pray the Angelus, and pray for the departed, and for the intercession of the Saints. I also incorporate icons and eastern devotions into my personal worship. I don't believe in the immaculate conception or the assumption of Mary, or in the Papacy. Or in purgatory. Maybe I'm semi AC.

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

Personally I think I'm an "open evangelical" Anglican like N.T. Wright, who just happens to be in an AC parish. I'm fine with that, and I do like all the ceremony.

 

[Albion]

Personally I think I'm an "open evangelical" Anglican like N.T. Wright, who just happens to be in an AC parish.I'm fine with that, and I do like all the ceremony.

I do, too.

To be more precise, I like the ceremony except for the extremes that sometimes appear, but I also appreciate a dignified Low Church ritual. We should, in any case, keep in mind that this isn't what defines Anglo-Catholicism since there are High Church Evangelicals and Low Church Anglo-Catholics.

 

[ebia]

I do, too.

To be more precise, I like the ceremony except for the extremes that sometimes appear, but I also appreciate a dignified Low Church ritual. We should, in any case, keep in mind that this isn't what defines Anglo-Catholicism since there are High Church Evangelicals and Low Church Anglo-Catholics.

In both England and Australia liturgical style and theological outlook are sufficiently heavily correlated that high-church is pretty much synomous with Anglo-Catholic and low-church with Evangelical. The theoretical low-church A/C is as rare as hens teeth.

 

[Albion]

In both England and Australia liturgical style and theological outlook are sufficiently heavily correlated that high-church is pretty much synomous with Anglo-Catholic and low-church with Evangelical.

Yes, I think most of us know that.

 

[ebia]

Yes, I think most of us know that.

So then, for lot of people the liturgy is the largest single part of what denies Anglo-Catholic.

 

[Albion]

So then, for lot of people the liturgy is the largest single part of what denies Anglo-Catholic.

You're talking about popular impressions; I was talking about accuracy.

While we can easily acknowledge the former, it seems to me that we ought to strive for the latter here. That's why I said that ceremony doesn't "define" Anglo-Catholicism (even though it usually accompanies it, and for good reason).

 

[ebia]

You're talking about popular impressions; I was talking about accuracy.

While we can easily acknowledge the former, it seems to me that we ought to strive for the latter here. That's why I said that ceremony doesn't "define" Anglo-Catholicism (even though it usually accompanies it, and for good reason).

I think you are trying to be precise about a term that isn't precise.

And if "we are what we pray"...

 

[mark46]

Since we are what we pray, I would say that the liturgy, and the understanding of the liturgy (including the Eucharist) do indeed define Anglo-Catholic. I would also suggest that IMHO Anglo-Catholics also have a different sense of Church and of Tradition/tradition. They maintain many of the traditions of the ancient church including saints, relics, Mary, the monastic life, lay orders and much more.

For example, I see the ABC as the patriarch of the English speaking Church, with roots that traditionally go back to the ancient Church. For me, it is an accident of history (and a tragic one) that we are not the English Orthodox Church.

And yes, many Anglo-Catholic can understand the idea that the Patriarch of Rome could be considered the first among equal patriarchs of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. For me, it is not critical whether the first among equals is the Patriarch of Constantinople, Jerusalem or Rome.

I have been long winded. I guess, the nature of the Church is also important, in addition to the form of the liturgy. In the end, the nature of the Church is much more important. As in the RCC, there can be much variety in liturgy across cultures and even with cultures. For example, there are charismatic groups in the RCC and in the AC.

So then, for lot of people the liturgy is the largest single part of what denies Anglo-Catholic.

 

[Albion]

Since we are what we pray, I would say that the liturgy, and the understanding of the liturgy (including the Eucharist) do indeed define Anglo-Catholic.

IOW, the exact opposite of the perspective held by the Oxford Divines who gave us Anglo-Catholicism in the first place.