Role of Anglican Supreme Governor?

[Albion]

My understanding is that they are basically Roman Catholic inside the Anglican Church, but how is it possible to have such a big tent without the essential beliefs of the denomination becoming meaningless?

It's because that characterization is inaccurate. But, in a bigger sense, the church does have standards; it simply is less willing than other denominations are to ferret out those who may dissent on some non-essential issue (such as the primacy of the bishop of Rome) and sanction or expel them.

 

[Duvduv]

Is it possible that ministers might preach contradictory teachings from each other?
What would be a list of the unifying beliefs and practices for all Anglicans, whether High church, Anglo-Catholic, or Low church?
Would it be conceivable that a person could be in the Anglican Church and be Orthodox, Methodist or Baptist?

 

[seeking.IAM]

...
Would it be conceivable that a person could be in the Anglican Church and be Orthodox, Methodist or Baptist?

Well sort of. I call myself a Methodist in exile to the Anglican church.

But then there is that thing about "one faith, one Lord, one Baptism." So there's that.

 

[Albion]

Is it possible that ministers might preach contradictory teachings from each other?

Sure, but that applies to almost all denominations.

Would it be conceivable that a person could be in the Anglican Church and be Orthodox, Methodist or Baptist?

No doubt. I know people who have for years attended a church whose doctrines were significantly at odds with what that church said were its beliefs. In that vein, a study conducted a few years ago in the USA found that 2/3 of the members of the Catholic Church held a Baptist view of the of nature of the Eucharist.

 

[Duvduv]

Seeking, what does it mean to be a Methodist in exile in the Anglican Church? Albion, what does it mean that 2/3 of Catholics don't even accept a fundamental doctrine of the Catholic religion??

 

[Albion]

Albion, what does it mean that 2/3 of Catholics don't even accept a fundamental doctrine of the Catholic religion??

It means that churches have standards, but that they do not police their members when it comes to what is in their thoughts, nor can they very well do that. However, I think that most people would agree that what is more important is the teaching (for example Transubstantiation) that the church offers to the world and, of course, the correctness of its practices.

 

[seeking.IAM]

Seeking, what does it mean to be a Methodist in exile in the Anglican Church? Albion, what does it mean that 2/3 of Catholics don't even accept a fundamental doctrine of the Catholic religion??

My sarcasm, I suppose. I was a 50 year Methodist before becoming Anglican. I fit in quite nicely and it was an easy transition to make with some changes in practice but not theology.

 

[mark46]

Over 50% of the members of local Anglican Church (now ACNA) came from the Roman Catholic Church.

When someone becomes a "member" that is for convenience purposes. By being a member, one is on mailing lists and can serve in ministries (not as leaders).

Are those who think that Christ is not present in the eucharist (in direct opposition to the teaching of the Church)? Sure. Are those who accept the Bishop Of Rome as the leader of the Christian Church (in direct opposition to the teaching of Anglican churches)? Of course.

But we don't kick anyone out. We welcome all baptized Christians to worship with us and to receive communion.

As an aside, lapsed Catholics are on the Catholic roles, even though some might consider tham automatically excommunicated (the current pope surely doesn't take that position).

 

[Duvduv]

My sarcasm, I suppose. I was a 50 year Methodist before becoming Anglican. I fit in quite nicely and it was an easy transition to make with some changes in practice but not theology.

Could there be a basis for the Methodist movements to reunite with the Anglican church??
Albion, I meant to ask what is the significance of the fact that so many Catholics don't even identify with essentials doctrines of their religion which they are taught is the true religion??

 

[Albion]

Albion, I meant to ask what is the significance of the fact that so many Catholics don't even identify with essentials doctrines of their religion which they are taught is the true religion??

That owes to the fact that many, if not most, Catholics have ingested the claims about the church being the one true church, the only real church, that all Christians of whatever denomination are still answerable to the RCC...

that the people you are asking about have come to believe, consciously or not, that salvation is a matter of MEMBERSHIP in the visible organization rather than their standing with God.

To be sure, the RCCs manipulation of the events of Christian Church history to make it appear that there always was a Pope, that the original church founded by Christ was their own denomination and none other, etc etc helps a great deal in planting the notion that I referred to above. Since most people are not otherwise knowledgeable of more than a superficial rendering of the facts of history, this false history is persuasive to them.

Another way of putting the answer is to say that fear of losing salvation by leaving the Catholic Church exerts a powerful pull in keeping many members on the rolls even when they do not believe the teachings of the church. And their own testimony proves it.

 

[Duvduv]

Albion, are you referring to educated Roman Catholics who are able to think and examine all the relevant issues of religion, or just to the millions of people in the world who unfortunately are either illiterate or semi-literate?

 

[Albion]

Albion, are you referring to educated Roman Catholics who are able to think and examine all the relevant issues of religion, or just to the millions of people in the world who unfortunately are either illiterate or semi-literate?

Both, although I think that among those in the first group who choose to leave the RCC despite the pressures to stay, it is an awareness of how the facts or the theology have been twisted that makes the difference for many of them, whereas the second group is more likely to leave because they are motivated by more mundane factors--a kindly representative of another church, a different but equally manipulated version of history, or socio-economic factors (acceptance by church members, a Prosperity Gospel being preached, the reassuring and tangible feeling of being endowed with charismatic gifts or etc).

 

[Paidiske]

I believe you mean to say that this very small faction is made up of people who say that they could accept the bishop of Rome under circumstances that do not exist.

Oh, I don't know. I remember at one point in the arguments about the ordination of women, the then-Anglican bishop of Ballarat said he would only be willing to ordain women when Rome did.

 

[Philip_B]

then-Anglican

Lol

 

[Paidiske]

No, I meant...

Originally I typed then-bishop and realised people might have thought I meant the Catholic bishop of Ballarat. So I clarified.

Oh... I didn't realise David Silk had become a Catholic.

Lol indeed!

 

[Albion]

Oh, I don't know. I remember at one point in the arguments about the ordination of women, the then-Anglican bishop of Ballarat said he would only be willing to ordain women when Rome did.

That's quite a different matter, however, if I understand the bishop correctly and also the Anglo-Catholics referred to previously. Of course we have only a few words to go on in both cases.

 

[Duvduv]

Do Anglicans feel uneasy about the fact that their tent is so large and that it could simply be meaningless? That's why I wondered first what essential doctrines are shared by EVERYONE ("more or less") who identifies as Anglican/Episcopalian, and second, whether this big tent could accommodate the Baptists, Methodists, etc.

And why is it that the movement of "American Anglicans" broke with the Anglican Communion (which includes the Episcopal Church in the USA) over ordaining gay bishops when the tent seems to allow for everybody?

 

[seeking.IAM]

Do Anglicans feel uneasy about the fact that their tent is so large and that it could simply be meaningless? That's why I wondered first what essential doctrines are shared by EVERYONE ("more or less") who identifies as Anglican/Episcopalian, and second, whether this big tent could accommodate the Baptists, Methodists, etc.

And why is it that the movement of "American Anglicans" broke with the Anglican Communion (which includes the Episcopal Church in the USA) over ordaining gay bishops when the tent seems to allow for everybody?

The tent could accommodate those opposed to gay marriage and ordination and ordaining women, but some no longer wanted to stay in the tent. However, some have stayed. It would be a mistake to think that all those opposed to ordination of gays & women or gay marriage left the tent. They did not. My church is very diverse in members' views on these subjects and we all worship together just fine.

 

[Albion]

And why is it that the movement of "American Anglicans" broke with the Anglican Communion (which includes the Episcopal Church in the USA) over ordaining gay bishops when the tent seems to allow for everybody?

As for the question about the "American Anglicans," AKA the Continuing Anglicans, they felt that their hand had been forced when The Episcopal Church chose to change its practice with regard to Apostolic Succession and also to abandon the historic Book of Common Prayer in favor of a worship service in which general references to the loving nature of God replaced references to our sinful nature, mans need for God, contrition, and so forth.

Naturally, Episcopal loyalists considered the contentions of the Continuing Anglicans to be in error, while the latter considered the changes that were made to be departures from essentials.

It probably is important to note also that the Continuing Anglicans, before the split, were promised tolerance in their own parishes and dioceses with respect to both of those points...but the leadership of TEC later went back on those promises. The big tent cannot work that way.

Gay issues and the Gay Agenda were not part of the original split, although it was the only real issue involved with the formation of the Anglican Church in North America thirty or so years later.

 

[Paidiske]

Do Anglicans feel uneasy about the fact that their tent is so large and that it could simply be meaningless?

I'd dispute that it is or could be meaningless. On the contrary, I think it is a strength.

I do get grumpy sometimes because I think we have some clear boundaries, and there are people who cheerfully ignore those boundaries, and it's the lack of integrity, as much as anything, that I then struggle to respect.

I wrote this some years ago, as a very personal reflection on this, and it might give you some insight into my take on it: Why I love my diocese

And also - speaking out of my background having studied population genetics - diversity is incredibly important in a population under challenge. If you have a population (for the moment, let's think of that as a collection of parishes) which are all very alike, then if a time of difficulty comes to which that particular, narrow tradition doesn't respond well, your community of faith can easily become extinct. But if you have a population which has great diversity, then when times of difficulty come, it is more likely that, in that diversity, one or more of the strands of that tradition will be able to adapt and respond well and continue to grow and thrive, carrying the life and mission of the church forward.

In God-given and hallowed diversity lie the seeds of the continuing mission of the church, as societies and cultures change. Wisdom is vindicated by all her children, and we would be wise to honour that.