• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Churches back plan to unite under Pope

Rrose Selavy

Stranded in Sub-Atomica
Rrose Selavy
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
3,395
Seems a corporate merger is proposed...

Radical proposals to reunite Anglicans with the Roman Catholic Church under the leadership of the Pope are to be published this year, The Times has learnt.
The proposals have been agreed by senior bishops of both churches.
In a 42-page statement prepared by an international commission of both churches, Anglicans and Roman Catholics are urged to explore how they might reunite under the Pope.
The statement, leaked to The Times, is being considered by the Vatican, where Catholic bishops are preparing a formal response.
Click to expand...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article1403702.ece
 
I find it highly unlikely, if the Orthodox and the Romanists can't get back together, I highly doubt the Anglicans are any more likely to engage in Popery.
 
Were the orthodox ever part of the Roman church?
 
Beerina said:
Were the orthodox ever part of the Roman church?
Click to expand...

Not as such....originally, the church was organized more regionally. Then there emerged 5 patriarchies that claimed certain primacy over doctrine and practices -- Constantinople, Rome, Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem (I think). Anyway, as some of these centers were increasingly under pressure and than control from the growth of Islam, the Roman Bishop -- as the spiritiual heir of St. Peter ("upon this rock..." ) claimed primacy over all others. Needless to say, The other patriarchs had some issues.

Indeed, for a time when the Byzantine Empire was far stronger than the remnant of the Western Roman empire, Popes were even arrested and broght to Constantinople for challenging the Church and Emperor.

The final schism...both doctrinal and proceedural (steming from differences over the Nicean creed)...resulted in a total break by about the 11th Century -- each side essentially excommunicating the other.

The Byzantine empire faded and the Pope become a much more powerful temporal power allowing the papacy to claim even greater precidence and, to an extent, enforce it.

It is difficult to see how Orthodox and Roman Catholics could mend their breach at this point...at least so long as the pope claims primacy and infalibility. It is simillary difficult to see how Anglicans breach their own gap with the papacy. Hey, but if this is the end of time, than anything is possible.

I wonder how the Queen, titular head of the Anglican church feels about a possible "merger"?
 
Isn't the Church of England part of the Anglican Church?

The reason I ask is because where would the merger leave the monarchy in the scheme of things? As I understand it, the Queen of England is also the head of the Church -- if not in the religious sense than in the governing sense. I imagine she and her family aren't too pleased about this movement.

ETA: I see headscratcher beat me to this while I was double checking my understanding of the relationship between the C of E and the Anglican Church...

Drat! :mad: :)
 
Last edited:
Even in the extremely slim chance that the English Anglican church reunited with Catholicism, I see no possible way the Episcopalians in the US would ever go along. They've grown fairly protestant in their views and practices over here.
 
Shera said:
Isn't the Church of England part of the Anglican Church?
Click to expand...

RationalReverend said:
It is the same thing. Anglican comes from Anglo meaning English.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the Anglican Church also include other churches like the Episcopalian Church (as Loss Leader implied I believe), Church of Scotland and etc.? I'm not sure why the C of S broke off, but I think the Episcopalian Church broke off because the American Bishops couldn't recognize the British Monarchy as the head of their church -- but except for that they still regard themselves as being part of the overall larger church ... or something?

Hey, I'm Jewish. They don't cover this stuff in our Sunday School. ;) :)
 
If the Anglican Church pops apart over the homosexual issue (which has a fair chance of happening) the conservative side might not be a viable international body. In that circumstance, I could see a merger.

What does that scenario look like from that side of the pond?
 
Shera said:
Doesn't the Anglican Church also include other churches like the Episcopalian Church (as Loss Leader implied I believe), Church of Scotland and etc.? I'm not sure why the C of S broke off, but I think the Episcopalian Church broke off because the American Bishops couldn't recognize the British Monarchy as the head of their church -- but except for that they still regard themselves as being part of the overall larger church ... or something?

Hey, I'm Jewish. They don't cover this stuff in our Sunday School. ;) :)
Click to expand...

The Episcopals are simply the American branch of the Anglican Church. They have some independence, but they are under the guidance and direction of the main church. If for example the Church of England declared that ordaining gay bishops was wrong, the Episcopal churches must either accept that stance or schism. I guess technically, you could say that the Church of England and the Church of Scotland are individual branches, but they aren't really. Scotland is kind of hard to explain because of how the Reformation happened there. For a good book on the subject, I'd recommend The History of the Reformation of Religion in the Realm of Scotland by John Knox.
 
SezMe said:
If the Anglican Church pops apart over the homosexual issue (which has a fair chance of happening) the conservative side might not be a viable international body. In that circumstance, I could see a merger.

What does that scenario look like from that side of the pond?
Click to expand...

That I could see happening - however even that I think is ultimately unlikely because of the celibacy and marriage thing for priests. (Although when it decides it is in its best interest the RCC can be flexible with this "doctrinal" point it is unlikely it would allow the practice to continue.)
 
As with many things originating in the UK the "Anglican Church" is quite a complex organisation, this page gives a good quick overview of how the Anglican Church is organised: http://anglicansonline.org/communion/index.html

AN ANGLICAN CHURCH IS categorised by its relationship to the See of Canterbury. There are four kinds of relationships that a church can have to that See, and hence to the rest of the Anglican Communion. The differences between them are not entirely crisp, but the concepts in the abstract are clear enough:
  • The Anglican communion itself - Those churches that are listed by the Secretariat of the Anglican Communion Office as being part of it. All of these churches are in full communion with the See of Canterbury, and recognize the Archbishop of Canterbury as being the focal point of the church. We list these churches geographically: see Australia, New Zealand, Canada, UK Ireland and Europe, USA, and World. The ANGLICAN.ORG web site has links to all administrative components of the entire Anglican church, here.
    The Archbishop of Canterbury is generally considered the honorary head of the Anglican Communion or primus inter pares (first amongst equals). You can find the official website of Dr Rowan Willliams, the 104th Archbishop of Canterbury, here.
  • Churches that are "in full communion" with the See of Canterbury - Churches in full communion, as defined by the 1958 Lambeth Conference, but which are not culturally or denominationally Anglican. We list those churches on our In Full Communion page.
  • Churches that "have intercommunion" with the Anglican church - The 1958 Lambeth Conference recommended "that where between two Churches not of the same denominational or confessional family, there is unrestricted communio in sacris, including mutual recognition and acceptance of ministries, the appropriate term to use is 'full communion,' and that where varying degrees of relation other than 'full communion' are established by agreement between two such churches, the appropriate term is 'intercommunion.' " We do not list these churches at Anglicans Online.
  • Churches that are, by policy, not in communion with the See of Canterbury - Paradoxically, these are the denominations liturgically and culturally most similar to the member churches of the Anglican Communion. In general the not-in-communion Anglican churches have broken away from the Anglican church because of disagreement over some doctrinal issue, and the property of not being in communion with Canterbury is part of their identity. We list these churches on our Not in the Communion page.
Click to expand...

(See the actual page for working links.)
 
It seems that there is always a part of the CofE that wants to be under Rome, lots who like the theoretical idea (unity, not squabbling is good after all), but until there are Catholic women priests and lots of movement (so to speak) on gays then it won't happen.

I iend to think that if the worldwide Anglican Church hasn't split yet over homosexuality then it might not.
 
My father's an Anglican minister, so I can speak on this with some degree of authority.

First, this is hardly a 'new' thing. Similar rumors and reports were common 20 years ago (and came to nothing). I suspect it is one of those cyclical things.

However, it has some grounding in fact. No, most Anglicans have no interest in merging with the RC church. However, Anglicans are actually split into several groups. Primarily, you have "High Anglican" and "Low Anglican". The split is due to the history of the Anglican church.

As most people know, the Anglican church (or Church of England) was formed originally for the simple reason that the king wanted a divorce, and the RC church wouldn't support it. The protestant movement was popular at that time, so the king used it as an opportunity to create a church over which he had control (instead of being controlled by Rome).

Some people welcomed this, and formed Anglican churches that followed the protestant model, rejecting much of the ritualism of the RC church. These are the "Low Anglican". However, others considered themselves still Catholic, or valued the rituals and ceremony of the RC church; so while they changed in name, they still retained many close similarities to the RC church, in fact they are more similar to RC than they are to protestant.

There have been rumors ever since the Church of England was formed of High Anglicans seeking to 'return' to the RC fold. More recently, the issue of ordination of homosexuals has further split the Anglican church, and created a crisis of leadership as churches splinter and split.

So now, essentially, you have three groups. The majority are middle-of-the-road Low Anglicans; those who go to church on Sunday, and listen politely and nod their heads to whatever their leaders say, without questioning it or even bothering about it much. Then you have the 'evangelical' Anglicans, who are splitting off because they feel the main church has become too liberal (allowing ordination of homosexuals, etc.), and want to get back to more fundamental Christian roots. And on the other side, you have the High Anglican conservatives, who never much identified with the rest of the Anglicans anyway, and who crave an authoritative power structure (one that is lacking in the current Anglican church) and it attendant ritualism. For these people, the RC church is a very attractive option.

So yes, there are Anglicans who are at least discussing merging with the RC church -- but they've been talking about doing this almost since the Anglican church was first formed. And if it ever does happen, it will in fact apply only to a very small minority of Anglicans; not to the church as a whole.
 
Should be interesting -- presumably priests of the Anglicans would simply step into the role of priest without any "re-ordination" needed (and further, no re-baptisms of yokels*.)


* I use the term "yokel" with all the love a power hungry leader would have for their useful subservient underlings.
 
From the article Lothian links to:

...The statement was recently completed by IARCCUM, and is scheduled to be published by the Commission as soon as a Catholic commentary to accompany the document has been completed; an Anglican commentary has already been prepared for publication...

Perhaps as I'm collecting my pension they may have a first draft ready?


"...Both of these texts address the theology of the Church, and given that the Anglican Primates are currently discussing the nature of the Church,..."

Yep like - where the wheelchair access ramps should be placed or as Lothian says which brand of tea to use and should they charge extra if someone wants an additional teaspoon of tea.

"...The first part of the document, which treats doctrinal matters, is an attempt to synthesize the work of ARCIC (the Anglican - Roman Catholic International Commission) over the past 35 years. It identifies the level of agreement which has been reached by ARCIC, but is also very clear in identifying ongoing areas of disagreement, and in raising questions which still need to be addressed in dialogue...."

Points of agreement: Those Muslims are doing really well

Points of disagreement

RC side: "You're a bunch of heathens that will spend eternity in hell"
CofE side: "The Pope"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom