are anglicans protestant?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Andy0099

Newbie
Apr 23, 2012
15
1
✟7,662.00
Faith
Protestant
Hello,

I know that this question might sound dumb to many of you Anglican Christians but do Anglicans have very similar beliefs to Protestants?

The reason I'm asking this question is for school. In History class, I have to study about Henry VIII and his radical reformation of the Church of England.

I thought that Anglicans and Protestants are totally different from each other but the last chapter in the book tells me that I'm wrong about that.

The last chapter was titled, "How Protestant was England by 1540?"

This is NOT a history thread. I know that there's a forum for that...

I just want to know the difference between Anglicans and Protestant and is Anglicism really just a sect in Protestantism like this textbook apparently hints at...?

Sorry if I'm not allowed to be here. I'm new and I've yet to grow accustomed to the site's rules...
Sorry.
 
Last edited:

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Andy0099 said:
Hello,

I know that this question might sound dumb to many of you Anglican Christians but do Anglicans have very similar beliefs to Protestants?

The reason I'm asking this question is for school. In History class, I have to study about Henry VIII and his radical reformation of the Church of England.

I thought that Anglicans and Protestants are totally different from each other but the last chapter in the book tells me that I'm wrong about that.

The last chapter was titled, "How Protestant was England by 1540?"

This is NOT a history thread. I know that there's a forum for that...

I just want to know the difference between Anglicans and Protestant and is Anglicism really just a sect in Protestantism like this textbook apparently hints at...?

Sorry if I'm not allowed to be here. I'm new and I've yet to grow accustomed to the site's rules...
Sorry.

Anglicans tend to think of themselves as Catholic and Protestant.
 
Upvote 0

Dewi Sant

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2015
3,650
298
UK
✟61,194.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Celibate
The English reformation was a very different creature to the European reformation.
The English reformation (of Henry VIII) was one of political independence from the oversight of the Roman pontiff as arbiter of European relations.

I am not aware of any theological changes in the English church till the Continental style reformation of Edward VI.

The Edwardian reforms were not lasting but did give rise to a greater expression of the Christian life in the English church.



I shall stop here because otherwise I'll continue through to the Caroline divines, Civil war, Restoration, Glorious revolution, Georgian establishment, Oxford Movement, to modern day.



Speaking as Church of England, the CofE is the living faith of the English people through the ages since before the 'reformation'. It is a celebration of the wonderful diversity of Christian experience while centered around the singular axiom of "Christ Jesus is Lord". The Church of England is the inheritor of the Catholic [as expressed the Creed] traditions and seeks to maintain the successors of the apostles (bishops) as overseers for the good estate of the Anglican church.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Hello,

I know that this question might sound dumb to many of you Anglican Christians but do Anglicans have very similar beliefs to Protestants?

The reason I'm asking this question is for school. In History class, I have to study about Henry VIII and his radical reformation of the Church of England.

I thought that Anglicans and Protestants are totally different from each other but the last chapter in the book tells me that I'm wrong about that.

The last chapter was titled, "How Protestant was England by 1540?"

This is NOT a history thread. I know that there's a forum for that...

I just want to know the difference between Anglicans and Protestant and is Anglicism really just a sect in Protestantism like this textbook apparently hints at...?

Sorry if I'm not allowed to be here. I'm new and I've yet to grow accustomed to the site's rules...
Sorry.

Most Anglicans are pretty comfortable thinking of our churches as both protestant and catholic. However, several factors account for the fact that there are some of us who would answer one way and some the other way.

1. The word protestant tended in the past, closer to the breakup of the Medieval church, to mean "not Roman Catholic." To that extent, the church is surely protestant. However, the word tends in more recent times, when we take the great number of Christian denominations and communions for granted, to be more a description of the church's beliefs and practices in comparison with other churches. That being the case, we correctly assert the catholic governance, sacramental system, and highly ceremonial worship style retained from before the Reformation.

2. Individual Anglicans (and to some extent, congregations, dioceses, and provinces) can tilt in their emphases more strongly towards protestant or, on the contrary, towards catholic norms. This happens separate from how we assess the nature of Anglicanism overall.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
The history of the Anglican church is complex. It started as politics: the Pope wouldn't give Henry a divorce. But ideas from the continental Reformation got to England, and influenced many people there. Thomas Cranmer was an early associate of the King, and editor of the prayerbook. He was, if not an actual Protestant, at least influenced by Protestant ideas. And later, there was a brief period during which Reformed theology and practice took over, though that was interrupted by a restoration of traditional ideas. During this period, the Westminster Confession and Catechism were written. They are classics of Reformed theology.

The net result is that from the very beginning there have been Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed people in the Church. They have continually jockeyed for leadership, and relative influence has changed over time. In Europe, when the Reformation took place in a territory there was a break with the Catholic Church, with churches becoming fairly completely Lutheran, Reformed, or something else. The Anglican church has been quite unusual, in that a sort of Reformation took place with no break in the Church, and without everyone adopting a new theology. Unlike Europe, where Protestant churches adopted a specific theology, typically either Lutheran or Reformed, the unity of the Anglican church has tended to come from its liturgy and practice, rather than its theology, so many different strains of theology have coexisted.

This continues to this day. There are well-known Reformed writers among the Anglicans, but also Anglicans who are very nearly Catholic.

If you read about the Anglican church or its history, you have to be very careful to understand the purpose of the author. Sometimes authors will be trying to make a case that the Anglican church is "really" Catholic or Protestant. That can lead to an unbalanced treatment of the evidence.
 
Upvote 0
L

LuxMundi

Guest
Seeing this is for history class then in your mind you will need to distinguish between Anglicanism and the Church of England as it would be anachronistic to describe the Church of England during the reformational period as an expression of 'Anglicanism'.

The reformation of the Church of England was carried out under the Archbishopric of Thomas Cranmer who was a Protestant and you can trace this through the Prayer Books of King Edward, the 1549 was revised in 1552 and was a truly Protestant work. Inevitably owing to different monarchs having different views the flavour of the Church officially swung about quite a bit, but the Elizabethan Settlement was a key moment.







Hello,

I know that this question might sound dumb to many of you Anglican Christians but do Anglicans have very similar beliefs to Protestants?

The reason I'm asking this question is for school. In History class, I have to study about Henry VIII and his radical reformation of the Church of England.

I thought that Anglicans and Protestants are totally different from each other but the last chapter in the book tells me that I'm wrong about that.

The last chapter was titled, "How Protestant was England by 1540?"

This is NOT a history thread. I know that there's a forum for that...

I just want to know the difference between Anglicans and Protestant and is Anglicism really just a sect in Protestantism like this textbook apparently hints at...?

Sorry if I'm not allowed to be here. I'm new and I've yet to grow accustomed to the site's rules...
Sorry.
 
Upvote 0

Dewi Sant

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2015
3,650
298
UK
✟61,194.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Celibate
well put Hedrick.

Though there are Anglicans who would argue that there are Anglicans who are Catholic, just not 'Roman Catholic' (of the Roman church).


As it is the Queen's Jubilee year I read through the coronation rite and oaths:
http://www.royal.gov.uk said:
Archbishop. Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?

Queen. All this I promise to do.
(emphasis my own)



It is interesting to add that the title "Fidei Defensor" (Defender of the Faith) was granted to Henry VIII in recognition of his resistance to the continental reformation.
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,582
1,245
42
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Hello,

I know that this question might sound dumb to many of you Anglican Christians but do Anglicans have very similar beliefs to Protestants?

Not really.

The reason I'm asking this question is for school. In History class, I have to study about Henry VIII and his radical reformation of the Church of England.

The Radical Reformation is a real theological title, but it is not ascribe to we Anglicans. Think Zwingli and to a slightly lesser extent, Calvin.

I thought that Anglicans and Protestants are totally different from each other but the last chapter in the book tells me that I'm wrong about that.

The last chapter was titled, "How Protestant was England by 1540?"

This is NOT a history thread. I know that there's a forum for that...

I just want to know the difference between Anglicans and Protestant and is Anglicism really just a sect in Protestantism like this textbook apparently hints at...?

Anglicans hold to the Real Presence of Jesus in Holy Communion. Only Lutherans and Moravians do as well (and in this case, we're all agreed with the Vatican Catholics). Protestants reject this.

Anglicans hold to deacons, priests, and bishops and Apostolic Succession. Protestants reject this.

Anglicans hold to sacramental theology. Asides again from Lutherans and Moravians, Protestants reject this.

Anglicans have a real place for Holy Tradition.
Anglicans have the Deuterocanonical Books and use them in our liturgies and rites.

Anglicans are protestants, not Protestants. Note the capitalization. We protested abuses and additional theologies or extraordinary dogmatizations, not the truly Catholic beliefs. In other words, we didn't take the baby out with the bathwater like Calvin and Zwingli did...and Luther and Hus to a much lesser extent.

Sorry if I'm not allowed to be here. I'm new and I've yet to grow accustomed to the site's rules...
Sorry.

You didn't break any rules by asking Anglicans in the Anglican forum what we believe. :)
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,582
1,245
42
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
In brief, the Anglican Church is a branch of Protestantism.

You are wrong. Please do not express non-Anglican positions in the Anglican/Old Catholic forum, especially those that are inaccurate.

julian the apostate said:
the anglican church is an historic catholic church that is protestant in its soteriology

the roman catholic church is an historic catholic church that allows its priests to date parishoners children

1. First statement isn't all that accurate either.
2. We've had our own abusive clergy problems throughout history too. I wouldn't go about pointing fingers.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Deegie

Priest of the Church
Supporter
Jul 22, 2011
283
167
✟401,665.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The Radical Reformation is a real theological title, but it is not ascribe to we Anglicans. Think Zwingli and to a slightly lesser extent, Calvin.

Umm...not to nitpik...but weren't Zwingli and Calvin part of the Magisterial Reformation? When I hear "Radical Reformation", I think of the Anabaptists.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Umm...not to nitpik...but weren't Zwingli and Calvin part of the Magisterial Reformation? When I hear "Radical Reformation", I think of the Anabaptists.

Yes, that's the normal usage by scholars. Certainly Zwingli and Calvin were more radical than Henry VIII, but the historians I've seen use Magisterial Reformation and Radical Reformation as you do.

Many historians try to avoid calling them "anabaptists" because that was originally a pejorative term. It means "baptizing again," and of course they denied that they were doing a second baptism. Hence "radical reformation" is a typical term. However I've seen modern Mennonites use "anabaptist" of themselves, so it looks like the term stuck.
 
Upvote 0

Dewi Sant

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2015
3,650
298
UK
✟61,194.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Celibate
However I've seen modern Mennonites use "anabaptist" of themselves, so it looks like the term stuck.

It's amusing how these things happen.
Quakers is another pejorative term which stuck. Lutherans also, and I guess Mormons.
 
Upvote 0

RadixLecti

Senior Member
Mar 14, 2006
883
32
✟16,213.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Anglicans hold to the Real Presence of Jesus in Holy Communion. Only Lutherans and Moravians do as well (and in this case, we're all agreed with the Vatican Catholics). Protestants reject this.

Anglicans hold to deacons, priests, and bishops and Apostolic Succession. Protestants reject this.

Anglicans hold to sacramental theology. Asides again from Lutherans and Moravians, Protestants reject this.

Anglicans have a real place for Holy Tradition.
Anglicans have the Deuterocanonical Books and use them in our liturgies and rites.

I agree with these statements (and affirm their doctrinal implications) :thumbsup: but there are also Lutherans that would affirm them as well (even Apostolic Succession). So, could we say that those Lutherans are not Protestants? I'm not opposed to the idea, but it just seems confusing to say that the group that started the reformation isn't Protestant.

I think the problem here is that the word "Protestant" can mean so many things:
-Some may apply the word to groups that retained sacramental theology, and held to the basic structures of the historic Church (like Anglicans and some Lutherans).
- When others use the word they are thinking of the different confessional Calvinist/Reformed groups.
-Others think of Evangelical groups with Anabaptist doctrines.

Oddly enough when you really compare all the doctrines and distinctions side by side, a confessional Presbyterian probably has just as much in common with many Roman Catholics as he might with a non-denominational anabaptist/evangelical.

So in this sense, the word "Protestant" isn't really a helpful description for anything other than to say that an organization is not recognized by the Roman Catholic Church, (and that it isn't Eastern Orthodox).

The only group the word is really useful for is Roman Catholicism, and that is mainly as a broad term to state "not one of us."
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,582
1,245
42
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Umm...not to nitpik...but weren't Zwingli and Calvin part of the Magisterial Reformation? When I hear "Radical Reformation", I think of the Anabaptists.

It really depends. While Calvin himself was Magisterial, much of his theology, particularly his soteriology, was adopted by the Radicals. Calvin and Zwingli were on the "boarder" between Magisterial and Radical; they themselves and those who strictly followed their theologies are Magisterial, but those who merely derived their teachings from them were often Radical.

I agree with these statements (and affirm their doctrinal implications) :thumbsup: but there are also Lutherans that would affirm them as well (even Apostolic Succession). So, could we say that those Lutherans are not Protestants?

Some aren't; that is true. The Scandinavian Lutherans in particular kept a valid episcopate and the Anglican Communion is in a state of Full Communion with them. The ELCA and its sister in Canada had AS reintroduced as per its agreement to enter into Communion with the Anglican Communion in the US and Canada respectfully.

However, there is admittedly a difference between Lutherans/Moravians and Anglicans here. In Lutheranism, it is possible whereas in Anglicanism it is definite.

I'm not opposed to the idea, but it just seems confusing to say that the group that started the reformation isn't Protestant.

Honestly, I really think that Lutheranism/Moravianism is perhaps the best deserving Christian group for the via media title. It is very difficult to pin them down because so many (most?) are either outright Catholic or are so bloody close without quite getting there (mostly due to lack of Apostolic Succession).

I think the problem here is that the word "Protestant" can mean so many things:
-Some may apply the word to groups that retained sacramental theology, and held to the basic structures of the historic Church (like Anglicans and some Lutherans).
- When others use the word they are thinking of the different confessional Calvinist/Reformed groups.
-Others think of Evangelical groups with Anabaptist doctrines.

I don't believe that Evangelicals are Protestants anymore; I think they constitute a new branch of Christianity because they absolutely don't follow one of the most essential aspects of Protestantism: sola scriptura. They are almost always solo scriptura that use the former title falsely and ignorantly. They seem to be Protestants on the surface, but they are a whole new ballgame entirely.

The Radical Reformation/Evangelicalism is not classic Protestantism but a sort of perversion of it. I have a lot of honest sympathy for Presbyterians, Reformed, and etc Protestants; I really, really do. These folks took Protestantism and told its founders "you got it all wrong, even Zwingli".

Luther was right about the peasants. Not about the violent crushing, but of their uneducated take on what he and his contemporaries and Calvin were saying.

Oddly enough when you really compare all the doctrines and distinctions side by side, a confessional Presbyterian probably has just as much in common with many Roman Catholics as he might with a non-denominational anabaptist/evangelical.

I'd almost say the Presbyterian is closer to the Roman Catholics...although you are probably right.

So in this sense, the word "Protestant" isn't really a helpful description for anything other than to say that an organization is not recognized by the Roman Catholic Church, (and that it isn't Eastern Orthodox).

Not sure I agree. There are certain aspects of Protestantism that are truly fundamental that they have and Catholicism doesn't.

The only group the word is really useful for is Roman Catholicism, and that is mainly as a broad term to state "not one of us."

Unfortunately agreed, although their more erudite members are usually better with the term.
 
Upvote 0

RadixLecti

Senior Member
Mar 14, 2006
883
32
✟16,213.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
I don't believe that Evangelicals are Protestants anymore; I think they constitute a new branch of Christianity because they absolutely don't follow one of the most essential aspects of Protestantism: sola scriptura. They are almost always solo scriptura that use the former title falsely and ignorantly. They seem to be Protestants on the surface, but they are a whole new ballgame entirely.
. . . These folks took Protestantism and told its founders "you got it all wrong, even Zwingli".

That's a very good point. It seems like evangelicalism self-identifies with the Protestant Reformers, but they don't actually hold to very many of the doctrines of those figures. Even the doctrine of salvation and justification in Evangelicalism is very different from that of the Reformation.

I'd almost say the Presbyterian is closer to the Roman Catholics...although you are probably right.

I was actually kind of thinking that, but I thought it would be too controversial. ;)
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
To be fair, it's nearly impossible for religion to stay static. You try to keep the spirit of your founder, but the critical issues change and the terms change. Today's evangelicals aren't the descendants of the original Reformers. They are a self-conscious offshoot, formed because they believed the mainline churches had gone astray. This started in colonial times, with the forerunners of the evangelicals wanting to emphasize personal evangelism, being less concerned about an educated clergy, and more Arminian in theology.

But the mainline churches certainly don't repeat the theology of Luther and Calvin. I know the Reformed tradition better. Our tradition was formed in the next couple of generations, over controversies involving predestination and covenant theology. The basis for these are in Calvin, but not the details. And he just wasn't as focused on these issues. Our tradition also lost some of the more interesting features of Calvin's thought, such as his emphasis on the "mystic union" with Christ. His theology of the atonement has a lot of similarities to some very early church theories. I suspect the same is true on the Lutheran side. In that sense there's merit to the claim that Calvin was more radical than his followers. I'd just prefer to use technical terms like "radical reformation" in the way that historians normally use them.

Then there's the whole question of whether you honor the Reformers by believing some version of what they believed, or by following their example and being willing to change your beliefs when the best Scriptural scholarship suggests it. Are you a Calvinist if you believe what Calvin believed or if you follow the methods and priorities that Calvin followed? I assume that's what is behind your claim that evangelicals reject sola scriptura. If it means anything, sola scriptura means that we are willing to reconsider our beliefs as our understanding of Scripture changes. And there's an expectation that it will change. Modern evangelicalism, at least at one point seems to have identified Scripture with their traditional interpretation of it. This is, of course, actually the Catholic approach, not the Reformers'.

Anglicanism is, however a horse of a different color. Maybe even not a horse at all. In some sense it's the closest we're like to get to the Church before the Reformation. The Reformation marks a divide, with both Catholics and Protestants adopting fairly narrow theological positions -- though of course for Protestants there are many groups each with their own. Anglicanism at its healthiest retains the broadness of the pre-Reformation church, before this narrowing occurred. (Of course this is a value judgement, and as a non-Anglican maybe I shouldn't be making it.)

I actually think that's the way the Church should be. The mainline churches in the US are starting to approach that, but of course (like the Anglicans in the US), you can't do it in the 21st Cent the same way you could in the 16th. In the 16th you could, at times, have a single church, with pretty much all the theological branches represented. That may not have been the goal for the Anglican church: many of the leaders wanted to remake the church in their image. But there was too much diversity for that to work, without more theological persecution than English were prepared to use (though of course at various times they did do some of that).

Today, most of the branches of theology are simply unwilling to coexist with each other, so the Episcopal and the traditional mainline are going to be left primarily with moderately liberal folks, who are interested in trying to pick from the best of church history and the major theological traditions, and permit a reasonable range of theological positions. Anglicans still manage to have more dedicated evangelicals, Reformed, and broad Catholics than normally coexist, but I'm afraid we're seeing increasing friction there, so I wonder how long it will last.

As I see it, the 21st cent is ideological. And not just in religion. So not a lot of people are going to tolerate a broad approach, and an approach that changes as our understanding of the world and the Bible change.
 
Upvote 0

VolRaider

Regular Member
Dec 18, 2010
1,052
68
Athens, TN
✟17,538.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
My pastor (UMC) said our church is more Anglican than Protestant. My father, an Anglican (APA), said they are Protestant even though their priest has tried to incorporate many Roman rites into the church.
In short, Anglicanism is very hard to pigeonhole as leaning toward Protestant or Catholic. And that's what I like about it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
My pastor (UMC) said our church is more Anglican than Protestant. My father, an Anglican (APA), said they are Protestant even though their priest has tried to incorporate many Roman rites into the church.
In short, Anglicanism is very hard to pigeonhole as leaning toward Protestant or Catholic. And that's what I like about it.

Probably as good an answer as is possible with a question that has no absolute answer. :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.