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

[GingerBeer]

There are myriad reasons because Anglicanism is so broad. Some view Anglicanism as the rightful heir of Celtic Christianity and thus more authentically Catholic than the Roman 'invaders.' Those Anglicans who would identify as Protestants (and even many Anglo-Catholics) have doctrinal issues with Rome. Others have tried the Roman Ordinariates and been burned in the process. Some are freaked out by Pope Francis. A few hope the Orthodox will again warm up to us as they did at the beginning of the 1900s - for them, union with the Orthodox is preferable to union with Rome.

Beware of Orthodoxy, it tends to be highly ethnic and rather inclined to subservience to the civil authorities especially in traditionally Orthodox nations. In the USA that may be different. In Australia it is somewhat different but the ethnic element is very strong. The Greeks, and the Serbs and the Russians and the Ukrainians all differ and sometimes dislike each other. I guess that is no surprise given political differences and national histories. At the moment the Russians and Greeks are at odds over Ukraine Orthodoxy which appears to be divided into two churches one linked to Russian speakers the other is more Ukrainian oriented and takes comfort from the Greeks and the Ecumenical Patriarch of "Constantinople". But Rome frightens many Anglicans for all sorts of reasons. All I can say is that I am glad not to be caught between the two or three ... or more.

 

[dqhall]

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

I am neither Anglican or Roman Catholic, but have attended services in both churches. I did not join the Catholics as I do not believe in praying to saints. I am unaware of purgatory. I read about Catholics of old collecting money said to be indulgences required for the release of their dead relatives from purgatory. Early Protestants left the Roman Catholic Church and did not go back.

 

[redleghunter]

I read about Catholics of old collecting money said to be indulgences required for the release of their dead relatives from purgatory.

Oh it went beyond just that:

Pope Leo X (A.D. 1475-1521) commissioned John Tetzel, a Dominican monk, to travel throughout Germany selling indulgences on behalf of the Church. Tetzel declared that as soon as the coins “clinked” in his money chest, the souls of those for whom the indulgences had been purchased would fly out of purgatory.

These indulgences not only bestowed pardon for sins committed already, they were used to license the commission of future transgressions as well. In the classic volume, The Life and Times of Martin Luther, noted historian Merle D’Aubigne relates an amusing episode relative to this practice.

A certain Saxon nobleman heard John Tetzel proclaiming his doctrine of indulgences, and the gentleman was much aggravated at this perversion of truth. Accordingly, he approached the monk one day and inquired as to whether he might purchase an indulgence for a sin he intended to commit.

“Most assuredly,” replied Tetzel, “I have received full powers from his holiness for that purpose.” After some haggling, a fee of thirty crowns was agreed upon, and the nobleman departed.

Together with some friends, he hid himself in a nearby forest. Presently, as Tetzel journeyed that way, the knight and his mischievous companions fell upon the papal salesman, gave him a light beating, and relieved him of his money, apparently taking no pains to disguise themselves.

Tetzel was enraged by the foul deed and filed suit in the courts. When the nobleman appeared as the defendant, he produced the letter of exemption containing John Tetzel’s personal signature, which absolved the Saxon of any liability. When Duke George (the judge before whom the action was brought) examined the document, exasperated though he was, he ordered the accused to be released.
John Tetzel's Indulgences​

 

[Not David]

Beware of Orthodoxy, it tends to be highly ethnic and rather inclined to subservience to the civil authorities especially in traditionally Orthodox nations. In the USA that may be different. In Australia it is somewhat different but the ethnic element is very strong. The Greeks, and the Serbs and the Russians and the Ukrainians all differ and sometimes dislike each other. I guess that is no surprise given political differences and national histories. At the moment the Russians and Greeks are at odds over Ukraine Orthodoxy which appears to be divided into two churches one linked to Russian speakers the other is more Ukrainian oriented and takes comfort from the Greeks and the Ecumenical Patriarch of "Constantinople". But Rome frightens many Anglicans for all sorts of reasons. All I can say is that I am glad not to be caught between the two or three ... or more.

It's tiring how people exaggerate the issue about "ethnic churches", there are places that are more integrated and there are places that are more homogeneous which is something always happens in places like the US. There was an article how Sunday mornings at church is the most segregated time of the week. Plus, there is stuff like black churches, Japanese churches, etc. Even the Catholics can have ethnic churches consisting mostly of Hispanics or Whites.

 

[Arcangl86]

It's tiring how people exaggerate the issue about "ethnic churches", there are places that are more integrated and there are places that are more homogeneous which is something always happens in places like the US. There was an article how Sunday mornings at church is the most segregated time of the week. Plus, there is stuff like black churches, Japanese churches, etc. Even the Catholics can have ethnic churches consisting mostly of Hispanics or Whites.

To be fair, this is the same person who thinks that Anglicans are Anglican out of English national pride.

ETA: There are also Black Catholic churches in a lot of big cities.

 

[prodromos]

Beware of Orthodoxy, it tends to be highly ethnic and rather inclined to subservience to the civil authorities especially in traditionally Orthodox nations. In the USA that may be different. In Australia it is somewhat different but the ethnic element is very strong. The Greeks, and the Serbs and the Russians and the Ukrainians all differ and sometimes dislike each other. I guess that is no surprise given political differences and national histories. At the moment the Russians and Greeks are at odds over Ukraine Orthodoxy which appears to be divided into two churches one linked to Russian speakers the other is more Ukrainian oriented and takes comfort from the Greeks and the Ecumenical Patriarch of "Constantinople". But Rome frightens many Anglicans for all sorts of reasons. All I can say is that I am glad not to be caught between the two or three ... or more.

LOL
I've seen plenty of ethnic Protestant Churches, and I thought we were supposed to submit to the earthly authorities God had placed us under.
What we do not do is allow those authorities to dictate our faith, and we have millions of martyrs who testify to the Orthodox Church upholding the faith under State persecution

 

[Albion]

If the point is raised, though, this phenomenon is much more common among the various Orthodox jurisdictions than among Protestant or Catholic ones.

And it only matters if someone is looking for one to possibly join; the issue is not presented as a doctrinal problem.

 

[prodromos]

If the point is raised, though, this phenomenon is much more common among the various Orthodox jurisdictions than among Protestant or Catholic ones.

And it only matters if someone is looking for one to possibly join; the issue is not presented as a doctrinal problem.

Says an "Anglican". Isn't your Church predominantly anglo-centric?

 

[Albion]

Says an "Anglican". Isn't your Church predominantly anglo-centric?

If we look around the world, most Anglicans are non-white. In this country, we do use English for the liturgy, yes. What a surprise, huh? But it would be very hard to show that any particular nationality predominates among the members, certainly not anymore than would be reflected in the profile of Americans generally.

 

[Philip_B]

Says an "Anglican". Isn't your Church predominantly anglo-centric?

Interestingly I think that is fair - although not on the absolute sense. When I worked in Papua New Guinea I discovered an Anglican Church that was fairly Papuan. Some were very critical of it being synchronistic, and the challenge question was always being asked, is this part of the faith or part of the culture. Divorcing faith from culture has been an issue for the Christian Church since the Council in Jerusalem (Acts 15).

 

[GingerBeer]

It's tiring how people exaggerate the issue about "ethnic churches", there are places that are more integrated and there are places that are more homogeneous which is something always happens in places like the US. There was an article how Sunday mornings at church is the most segregated time of the week. Plus, there is stuff like black churches, Japanese churches, etc. Even the Catholics can have ethnic churches consisting mostly of Hispanics or Whites.

So sorry to make you tired

 

[GingerBeer]

LOL
I've seen plenty of ethnic Protestant Churches, and I thought we were supposed to submit to the earthly authorities God had placed us under.

Yes, beware of Protestantism too. but for all sorts of different reasons with ethnicity as a minor issue of concern in most protestant churches.

Submitting to government authority in the sphere where government has rightful authority may be a good thing. Expecting government to guide, nurture, and protect the church is questionable. Receiving the government as partner in calling ecumenical councils is a bad move.

What we do not do is allow those authorities to dictate our faith, and we have millions of martyrs who testify to the Orthodox Church upholding the faith under State persecution

It is good to keep doctrine for the church and free from government influence.

Martyrdom for the faith is tragic. Dying for the faith has a good side too.

 

[prodromos]

Receiving the government as partner in calling ecumenical councils is a bad move.

It was used by God when appropriate, and when it was abused the Church prevailed in the end.

 

[GingerBeer]

It was used by God when appropriate, and when it was abused the Church prevailed in the end.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the Russian Orthodox church in Russia very entangled in Russian government plans and purposes. I ask because people that I know who are in the Russian Orthodox church outside Russia deeply distrust the Russian church. Similarly the Greek Orthodox church in Greece appears to be enmeshed in state plans, funding, and maybe some state control. The Serbian Orthodox church in Serbia in the 1990s did appear to be an instrument of the Serbian state in all sorts of things that no Christian ought to be proud of. In Armenia the government and the church also appear to be joined. Romania may be the same.

 

[Paidiske]

I'm not sure that that's significantly different, though, to say, England having an Established church? Or the Lutheran state churches?

I'm not sure that this is a distinctly Orthodox problem so much as something which arose from particular sets of historical conditions, for a variety of traditions.

 

[prodromos]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the Russian Orthodox church in Russia very entangled in Russian government plans and purposes. I ask because people that I know who are in the Russian Orthodox church outside Russia deeply distrust the Russian church. Similarly the Greek Orthodox church in Greece appears to be enmeshed in state plans, funding, and maybe some state control. The Serbian Orthodox church in Serbia in the 1990s did appear to be an instrument of the Serbian state in all sorts of things that no Christian ought to be proud of. In Armenia the government and the church also appear to be joined. Romania may be the same.

I lived in Greece for 12 years and never experienced government meddling in the Church.

 

[GingerBeer]

I'm not sure that that's significantly different, though, to say, England having an Established church? Or the Lutheran state churches?

I'm not sure that this is a distinctly Orthodox problem so much as something which arose from particular sets of historical conditions, for a variety of traditions.

You are correct - it is not a whole lot different from Anglicans and the English throne and Lutherans and the Swedish throne and some other states that adopted Lutheranism as the state religion but it does differ in some ways. Maybe not so much now but time past.

 

[GingerBeer]

I lived in Greece for 12 years and never experienced government meddling in the Church.

Are there laws that enact Church customs and prohibitions in Greece?

 

[Albion]

You are correct - it is not a whole lot different from Anglicans and the English throne and Lutherans and the Swedish throne and some other states that adopted Lutheranism as the state religion but it does differ in some ways. Maybe not so much now but time past.

The bottom line may be somewhat uncertain, but the idea that it amounts to "not a whole lot different" is certainly not true.

 

[thecolorsblend]

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

*whistles innocently while counting pocket change*

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

Anglicans can subscribe to a pretty broad range of beliefs and theology. In the old days, I regularly worshiped at a small Anglo-Catholic parish which believed in a more or less Catholic understanding of the Real Presence.

A few more miles up the street was a Reformed Episcopal parish. Apart from the occasional sign of the cross, it had virtually nothing in common with the Anglo-Catholic parish, doctrinally or otherwise.

This is one of my main critiques of Anglicanism, in fact. There's so little set in stone that their members can believe nearly anything and disagree with each other about almost everything and yet they're somehow both equally Anglican.

That's a big part of why I couldn't stay with them, ultimately.