Who holds the definition of Anglican?

Just as there are debates over the definition over who is truly Catholic—and I hold to the view that unless you are officially in communion with the Bishop of Rome you are not Catholic—there are debates about how one defines Anglican.

Thus, those of us who have crossed the jurisdictional boundary—the Tiber—can by definition no longer be Anglican in any way.  We are “Roman Catholics” full stop.

Yet, I bet you that on a given Sunday in most Ordinariate and Anglican Use parishes you’ll see more Anglican patrimony not only preserved in the odd concert accompanying a special Evensong, but displayed all week.

And can Continuing Anglicans really refer to themselves as Anglicans if they are not part of Canterbury?  What is the Anglican in Anglican mean?  Is is an adjective? Is it a noun?

I recall Msgr. Robert Mercer’s wonderful talk to the Anglican Catholic Church of Canada synod of 2010.  

To the end of his life St. Paul said, “I am a Jew.”  He meant of course a completed Jew, a fulfilled Jew, a Jew as he is meant to be, that’s to say, a Jew in Christ, but a Jew all the same.  I hope to be able to say, “I am an Anglican, a completed Anglican, a fulfilled Anglican, an Anglican in full and visible communion with the universal primate of the universal church, but an Anglican all the same.”

Fr. Aidan Nichols, an ex-Anglican now a Dominican theologian, has written: “Anglo-Catholics are beyond a doubt as to doctrine, worship and devotion a displaced part of Catholic Christendom.  And it is as such a part that I shall be now quoting from some of their lay spokesmen.”  The time has come for us to stop being displaced persons.

 

His dream did come true.   We Anglican Use Catholics are completed Anglicans.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Who holds the definition of Anglican?

  1. Pingback: Extra-Mural Anglicans | As the Sun in its Orb & New Goliards

  2. Pingback: Who holds the definition of Anglican? | Catholic Canada

  3. Good morning Deborah,
    I remember the long discussion that we had on Father Smuts’s blogspot sometime ago.It led to a fairly lenghty heated debate.
    When I as a former Dutch Old Catholic in The Hague, Holland first went to the local Anglican Church out of interest, my first impressions were then that I was attending a Protestant
    Church with some RC touches, i.e. kneeling , processions, an altar with burning candles. Bear in mind that the Church of Saint John and Saint Philip was fairly low Church.

    .Anglicanism is the Catholic Faith as expressed through the Church of England. The word Anglican is derived from the word ” Anglo” as in ” Anglo Saxon” and thus means English. The Anglican Church originally was the Church of England and indeed the Anglican Church began in England.
    Many consider the Church as being protestant, but the Church itself indentifies with the Catholic Faith. Could we call it ” reformed Catholism”? Its a hybrid between the Protestant and Catholic Faiths.

    You were questioning whether the word Anglican was a noun or an adjective. Both in fact.
    It is an adjective … as in pertaining to the Church of England or if it is related in origin to and in Communion with the Church of England
    It is a noun if you talk about a member of the Church of England or a Church being part of it .
    Also a noun if you talk about a person who upholds the teaching of the Church of England.

    As the Church of England is not a trade mark , I certainly see no problem calling myself an Anglican Catholic Priest without having an affiliation with the see of Canterbury. Many of us , now going back to the Affiliation of Saint Louis considered that Canterbury had gone of the tracks by
    ordaining females to the Diaconate and the Priesthood. Further isues then became the
    appointment of Homosexual Bishops and other matters of heresy.

    Here in Australia there are still people in the Ordinariate , who consider themselves still
    as Anglicans . I am inclined to agree with you, that when you became a Roman Catholic , you did in fact cease officialy to be an Anglican .

    It is good to have these discussions as long as we respect each other’s point in view.
    Together we are on a Christian pilgrimage, lets not forget that.

    Father Ed Bakker
    ACC/OP

  4. Ioannes says:

    The Catholic Church will take back the word “Anglican” while protestant Anglicanism shrinks into irrelevance as a historical footnote like “Gallicanism”.

    Rest assured, Mrs. Gyapong, you guys are the real deal. The rest are counterfeit schismatics who’d rather take their marbles and go home to play by themselves with their own rules.

  5. Ioannes , I must admit I was starting to enjoy this blog until you popped up again with your insults.
    The way you insult other Christians is proof to me that you are not part of the real deal.
    Father Ed Bakker ACC/OP

    • Indeed Fr. Ed: Nothing changes with stupidity & ignorance! And sadly so-called “Ioannes” is very religious, but as to being ‘In Christ’? It surely “appears” not! (By Christian life and virtue seen at least). But we must leave him to God! Death & dying will flesh-out our real being-spirit! Lets just hope for that Ioannes, the Lord gives him more time, sadly even young people die early oftentimes.

      Btw, I prefer to see some Roman Catholics as “Catholic”-Christians, i.e. those who know and love God In Christ, by HIS grace & glory! And yes, I am one of those old “Protestant” Anglicans, yet too as I see it, both “catholic” & “reformed”! (The Thirty-Nine Anglican Articles, as too the Irish Articles 1615). But let us walk in some sense of humility, we will all stand on that shore of eternity, before God In Christ! (Jude 17-25)…’Keep Yourselves in the Love of God’!

      • victor2378 says:

        It would behoove all of us not to judge anybody else’s faith or being “in Christ”. He who thinks he can define his brother’s faith too often lacks the same himself. Judge not lest you be judged!

      • @victor: It appears YOU did not read nor see the “punctuations” of my post! I have been blog chatting with this fellow for at least a year I believe. And Jesus said, “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves, You will know them by their fruits”… “So then, you will know them by their fruits.” (Matt. 7: 16-20) Indeed all we can see before us, besides peoples theological words and said belief, is their own “fruit” and life! And by the latter, with the widest form of some orthodoxy, is what we are to look at! (See too 1 John 4: 1-6 / And really the whole Letter of 2 John / 3 John 3-4).

        So yes, I believe we are to “judge” and look for Christian “fruit”, both in our own lives (2 Cor. 13: 5-6), and those who claim the name of Christ!

      • Fr Robert ,
        Very much appreciated your comments. I would ask Deborah as the Moderator of the list to stop allowing this man Ioannes to insult other Christians. I made a similar request to Father Smuts some time, but all he could say that he believes in free speech. How ” free ” are our standards as people of God then ?
        Like I said I was just starting to enjoy this blog and now this again. If he keeps on popping up with the same insults and does not apologize I rather not follow this list anymore.
        With every good wish
        Father Ed Bakker ACC/OP

      • Thanks Fr. Ed! As you can no doubt see, I think there’s a time for the priest-presbyter to speak-up honestly as to his Christian conscience – Titus 1: 9 (see Fr. Smuts blog today). Sadly some people think the Christian presbyter is just some guarded voice for the ecclesiastical (visible) church! But again, this is certainly not the “spirit” of the Gospel-Kerygma! To ‘fire that arrow’ is God’s Good News, and God give me my bow! Let us who “preach” – and especially today as Anglicans – be not be ashamed of the Gospel of Christ! (2 Tim. 1:7-8)

      • William Tighe says:

        I would respectfully request the Moderator to ignore the requests to muzzle Ioannes.

      • I have never myself said “muzzle” so-called “Ioannes” (just a “moniker” btw, who is this man really?). But, he should surely take his biblical and theological “lumps”! Indeed this is the give and take of an open blog, which as has been noted Fr. Smuts allows.

      • Dear Father Robert et all,
        The actual term ” muzzle’ was not used. I made a request if the listowner could avoid publishing comments of insults directed at people of different branches of the Catholic Church.
        You cannot give each other a kick on the backside under the cloak of free speech and religion.
        Father Smuts was talking about using the blogs for evangelizing , but if non believers see the insults flying backwards and forward , then they will surely turn the other way. I touched on Priestly blogging on “Anglicanus Catholics” on how we ought to behave as representatives of Christ.
        Offcourse we can disagree with one another , but we should not insult one another.
        I was surprised about the statement made by Dr.William Tighe seeing his qualifications and background.

        Enjoy your day ,

        Father Ed Bakker ACC/OP

      • Based upon the presupposition of both Holy Scripture and theology therein, I would have to disagree with you Fr. Ed, as to the nature of truth in our Christian apology/witness and apologetics, they simply cannot be separate! Note here, Jude 1: 1-4. But, we should always seek as St. Paul did 1 Cor. 13 in the life and body of the Church! 🙂

        And yet, I hope Dr. Tighe’s arguments are biblical and theological, and not just ecclesiastical!

      • Note again, I don’t hold to as positive a position or I should say reality, as perhaps most here as to the nature of the Christian Blog. But then I am an Augustinian and neo-Calvinist, the nature of even Christian man or humanity is still in the tension of Romans 7: 13-25!

  6. Ioannes says:

    Translation of the above posts:

    “I was happier when no one was questioning what I believe no matter how questionable.”

    or:

    “SHUT UP WE ARE TOO FOR REAL CELTIC SARUM ORTHODOX ANGLICAN O.G. ORIGINAL GANGSTA CATHOLICS, REALLY! WE HAVE A CREST! SEE!?”

    Of course, if Our Lord is as thin skinned (and humorless) as these “Continuing Anglicans” we have ourselves some model Christians.

    • Are you going to answer Norm’s comment? I think it puts you in your place.

      • I think really “Ioannes” should reconsider biblically, whether he has experienced by faith the regenerate grace of God? I know some Roman Catholics who actually see themselves as “Evangelical” Catholics, and even believe salvation (in the present tense at least) for themselves in this life. “We have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us, God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, so we also are in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love. We love, because He first loved us.” (1 John 3:16-19) Note really, that gospel salvation presses itself into eternity, again “past, present, and future”!

        And just speaking for myself, Jesus Christ Himself is my “perfect love”, and His death & expiation are my righteousness, as HE sits on the Throne of Grace & Glory, the Mediator! And I hopefully respond in faith in my desire for being sanctified by His grace, in this life (as the next). Indeed THIS is His gift of perseverance also! To God be the glory In Christ!

      • Rev22:17 says:

        Fr. Robert,

        You wrote: I know some Roman Catholics who actually see themselves as “Evangelical” Catholics, and even believe salvation (in the present tense at least) for themselves in this life.

        Indeed.

        As a Catholic Christian, I understand that all three of the following sentences are valid.

        >> 1. I have been saved.

        >> 2. I am being saved.

        >> 3. I will be saved.

        Salvation is past, present, and future — and thus eternal.

        >> I have been saved by the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior, into which I was baptized.

        >> I am being saved as I am being formed by the Word of God and growing in holiness in this life.

        >> I will be saved on the day of judgement when the Lord calls me to my eternal reward.

        Of course, many Evangelical Protestants would sum up all three of these by saying, more simply, “I amsaved.”

        Norm.

      • Norm: Sweet! Yes, many of us Evangelical Protestants (even some Anglican one’s)… as the Wesley brothers (past), would place our salvation in the present tense. This part of that “assurance of salvation” that even again the Wesley’s believed the Holy Scripture and the experience of grace taught and gave. But most of us Reformed Anglicans believe that if you have the reality of the “present” salvation, you also have the teaching of the “past” (God’s choice, i.e. the election of grace), or should have so at least. As the “future” tense also. Of course all three are the work of God’s grace and purpose of God In Christ! (John 17: 2-3) 🙂

      • Rev22:17 says:

        Fr. Robert,

        You wrote: Sweet! Yes, many of us Evangelical Protestants (even some Anglican one’s)… as the Wesley brothers (past), would place our salvation in the present tense. This part of that “assurance of salvation” that even again the Wesley’s believed the Holy Scripture and the experience of grace taught and gave. But most of us Reformed Anglicans believe that if you have the reality of the “present” salvation, you also have the teaching of the “past” (God’s choice, i.e. the election of grace), or should have so at least. As the “future” tense also. Of course all three are the work of God’s grace and purpose of God In Christ! (John 17: 2-3)

        Yes. And of course, the paradox of this is that, in eternity, all time is present. Here, the hymn “O God of the Eternal Now” comes to mind — as does our Lord’s statement in scripture: “Before Abraham came to be, I am.”

        Norm.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s