r/Anglicanism

A Roman Catholic asked me this. I’m not so sure how to eloquently respond.

“Of course, Canterbury isn't necessary for Anglicanism, but I suppose then my question is, what makes someone Anglican? Holding to the 39 Articles? You don't do that. Perhaps it’s using the BCP? But not all Anglicans do, some indeed use the Roman Missal, and others in the low church do not use any strict liturgy at all.

What binds these different theologies, liturgical life's, and beliefs into all being Anglican? Is being Anglican merely something one asks to put on the sign out front, and all else is subjective?

You say you do not support woman's ordination, yet you are in a church that does (not your parish, but nevertheless your church). How can you square the two realities? Where do you draw the line before one must realise that they cannot in good conscience remain in communion with those you so utterly disagree with? If they start restricting Anglo-Catholic worship? If they make you affirm only 2 Sacraments? If they start to deny the Divinity of Christ? If they promote pro-choice content?

I hope this doesn't sound too hostile, most of these aren't rhetorical questions, I just genuinely cannot understand how conservative Anglicans do it.”

Did anyone else have the reading from Bel and the Dragon today? I had never heard of it. Now that I'm going to an Anglo-Catholic church, I run into all sorts of whimsical surprises.

All of my childhood and teenager years I went to Church of England schools and I attended Church of England churches. I’m in my 20s now and want to come back to church, but I suppose I’m just worried or questioning things. Last week I went to Catholic mass and the week before I went to a non denominational church. The non denominational church felt like a bit of a party and I like more traditional services and I really did like the Catholic mass but idk. It’s just I feel like I rlly like Anglican churches but I’m also worried about theology and teaching. I haven’t read the entire Bible so I’m not clued up on verses of what says certain things. Can women be priests? That’s the one thing that’s rlly keeping me on the fence between Catholicism and Anglicanism. I don’t understand why some people agree and some people don’t. People say the Catholic Church is the one true church founded from Jesus and I know Anglicanism came out of the reformation and I’m jut confused as to what’s right to follow as I’m worried about attending the wrong church as I just want to do what Jesus says. Church of England feels warm and welcoming and I rlly feel at home there but I’m just worried about the Eucharist transubstantiation and female priests and what Church of England says about them and why.

Hi all,

I'm sorry if this is a bit of a silly question but I've just received communion today l, which for the first time was nlu half a communion waver, the priest was running out so she snapped it in half. I've always thought they would quickly go bless a few more. I'm 99% sure it's full communion but just wanted to ask how others felt about this?

I was raised in a traditional High-Church Anglican family. I have always considered myself Anglican and have been part of the Anglican communion since I was 13. I attend services weekly and my Anglican faith is very important to me.

However, recently I have come to question if I, after going to Catholic school, have crossed the line between High-Church Anglicanism into Roman Catholicism.

I recite the Ava Maria, pray to Mary and other saints for intercession, use the rosary, fast meatless on Fridays, believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and affirm all 7 sacraments.

However, I also do not subscribe to immaculate conception, papal infallibility or papal supremacy, clerical celibacy, and only venerate Anglican saints.

Because faith is so important to me, I’ve started fearing if I’ve moved too far away from Anglicanism. Do you think I need to rework my faith to align more with Anglicanism? Some people have told me to convert to Roman Catholicism, but I simply disagree too much with it to do so. Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this.

I've been always prone since my youth and University Days to binge drink on the weekends, while never really drinking during the week, so no Addiction.

And sometimes drinking days/nights/events went well but sometimes too far with Blackouts and weird or a little reckless behavio on my behalf.

But since becoming Christian (again) 3 years ago, it was really on my heart to Change it for me and others, have less hangxiety and a more productive and positive life. So I prayed about it and wrestled with it for some months but now do more Sports, have less urge to drink and when drinking, I stick to not drinking more than 5 drinks a day/night as a rule. Really felt that calling to make that change and also move towards healthier habits in other parts of my life.

I am a Catholic who is thinking of converting and I'm trying to understand.

I’m studying for my exam today for world history and got a question. What is the theological reasoning for the king being your pope?

I was spontaneously inspired to read the "Forms of Prayer to be Used at Sea" in my 1662 BCP today for no apparent reason other than to share this post. I've never been in the navy, only time in my life I was even on a boat was for a field trip in grade school. But it occurred to me that sometimes depression and other mental illnesses have been described as being like having to tread on a turbulent ocean, with periods of calm and chaos changing at seeming random, and extreme despair seeming like the abyss of an insurmountably deep ocean, so these prayers could be said analogously for people in mental distress. e.g.:

• O MOST blessed and glorious Lord God, who art of infinite goodness and mercy: We thy poor creatures, whom thou hast made and preserved, holding our souls in life and now rescuing us out of the jaws of death, humbly present ourselves again before thy Divine Majesty, to offer a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, because thou heardest us when we called in our trouble, and didst not cast out our prayer which we made before thee in our great distress. Even when we gave all for lost – our ship, our goods, our lives – then didst thou mercifully look upon us, and wonderfully command a deliverance, for which we, now being in safety, do give all praise and glory to thy holy name, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Hi, looking into different denominations right now and it seems Anglicanism does have a good case. I was wondering what gives Anglicanism an edge over other denominations like Lutheran, Catholicism, orthodoxy, etc.

Historical speaking many say church history and the early church fathers back up Catholicism and orthodoxy and I was wondering if that is true or not?

Also what sets Anglicanism apart from Lutherans as it seems they are very similar?

Edit: Thank you for your responses guys

Maybe a few verses grouped together from gospels then psalms to Acts. Does everyone receive a copy of the verses they have to read during the service?

I had joined the Episcopal Church as a teenager, through an Anglo-Catholic parish, and my catechesis consisted entirely of Patristics and liturgics — the Thirty-Nine Articles and Thirty-Three Homilies were simply not mentioned. After college I attended the ACNA for a while, where the Thirty-Nine Articles were not only binding, but actively used in instruction.

Over time I have gotten to know more about the views of Reformed Anglicans such as J. I. Packer which are quite markedly in contrast to the Tractarians. What has been more fascinating to me however is the presence of another faction, namely the Caroline Divines and the later continuators of their worldview. These 17th century theologians were the authors of the original via media, having forged a sort of "third position" apart from Puritanism and Romanism. They accepted the Thirty-Nine Articles and were fine with using Reformed theology as a base, but with, based on my reading, five reservations: (1) no double predestination; (2) episcopal governance and apostolic succession; (3) high liturgy; (4) a quasi-Orthodox belief in the authority of church-history; (5) they seemed to believe in baptismal regeneration, but were content to have it implied within the liturgy rather than openly confronting the Reformed over this matter. Thus the Caroline Divines staked out a position which was simultaneously Catholic and Reformed in character, but which neither the Puritans nor the Roman Catholics appreciated.

1. Is there anything that should be added or corrected regarding this summary?
2. What was their position regarding the perseverance of saints? Was it possible to lose one's salvation?
3. Was it possible, as among Catholics and Lutherans, for a portion of one's sins to be forgiven through absolution, but for him still to be damned because of subsequent sinning? This is similar to the preceding question but not identical.
4. Are the Caroline Divines viewed as "crypto-Arminians" or is the allegation of Arminianism aimed mainly at the later Latitudinarians?

Thanks a lot for your help.

My Nan attended my local Church for the first time after going to a more “happy clappy American/Evangelical church” and she says that my Church is a High Church I never noticed or knew that my Church is High always thought that it was a normal/traditional Church she says that High Churches are a step below Catholic

The Church has a stoup at the entrance which my Nan said she has never seen that on a church before and also every Sunday they have the Eucharist no hymns or music just prayers collects sermons and gospel and bible readings then finally communion where you go up to the high altar kneel and receive the body and blood of Christ.

The other church I attended is totally different no stoup there’s hymns and less traditional service no going up to the high altar to receive communion but take it at the low altar no knelling the priest also wears less elaborate clothes just more simple vestments that you would normally see like on tv shows or movies
They are both part of the Diocese Of Lichfield and Church Of England

So is the difference just Tradition/Ceremony and different styles of services

Hey greetings, I have a question, if someone privately held the idea that paedobaptism isn’t valid(or less preferable), but like had no problem with the rest of the Anglican world affirming it, would you call that person Anglican(assuming he believes in the scripture, affirms the same ecclesiology, have the same liturgical practices) and also, what exactly defines the Anglican beliefs? Is it the 39-articles text? And what if someone disagreed with one of the articles?