[markomalley]

FOR THE RECORD, neither the article nor the Vatican said that the Anglicans had to choose between Protestantism and Catholicism...

Rather, it said...

"Does it belong more to the churches of the first millennium -Catholic and Orthodox - or does it belong more to the Protestant churches of the 16th century?"

[markomalley]

Ping to your lists!

[mnehring]

I'm glad the article actually didn't say that because I love the balance the Anglican church has with tradition and Protestant theology.

[VanDeKoik]

So the Anglicans want back in?

[ModelBreaker]

"Does it belong more to the churches of the first millennium -Catholic and Orthodox - or does it belong more to the Protestant churches of the 16th century?

That's just ridiculous. The churches of the first century did not have multi-multi-multi billions in assets and income, a government all to itself, a church every couple of miles in most cities all over the world, and a bureaucracy that rivals the US Government. Nor is the most powerful government in the world hunting down Catholics and killing them. Nor were the Churches negotiating with Rome to be good little Churches in exchange for official recognition.

With all due respect, the Churches of the first century far more closely resembled today's house churches in China than they do the Catholic Church.

[Petronski]

I really wish he’d said “ought” rather than “must.”

[proxy_user]

The Church of England does not make any sense without England, with Queen Anne as the head of the churh, and the bishops sitting in the House of Lords voting for the government.

[sionnsar]

On the other side of the spectrum, rebel conservative bishops, headed by Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria,

No bias here... as a member of the "rebellion" that preceded these late-comer slackers by more than a quarter-century, I cry "foul." Though not seriously; may God bless their ministries -- there are a lot of good Christian folk among and in the care of these "rebel conservative bishops."

Thanks to markomalley for the ping.

Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.

FReepmail Huber or sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (sometimes 3-9 pings/day).
This list is pinged by Huber and sionnsar.

Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
Humor: The Anglican Blue

Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15

[The_Reader_David]

"Does it belong more to the churches of the first millennium -Catholic and Orthodox - or does it belong more to the Protestant churches of the 16th century?"

From the sixteenth century until the 1960's, or maybe 70's that was a lively question. From Elizabeth I prefering to hear Latin mass even after cementing Anglicanism as the state church of England, to Thomas Ken's dying profession of faith, to the Oxford Movement, Anglicanism always had a pole that tried to be a sort of Western Orthodox, as well as a very protestant pole.

Alas, around the 1960's the trend that began with the Latitudinarians reached its logical conclusion and 'Anglican inclusiveness' started including apostates and pagans. Heresy ceased to be a 'relevant category' (in the words of the Episcopalian House of Bishops at the time of their failure to judge Bishop Pike as a heretic for denying the Trinity). (And with it truth evidently ceased to be a 'relevant category' as another ex-Anglican, the senior priest of the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese is fond of noting).

Now, it's a dead question. The vast majority of Anglicans who upheld the Catholic pole of Anglicanism have swum the Bosphorus or the Tiber, or decamped for one of the Continuing Anglican Churches. All that's left is the fight between the still-Christian, but most assuredly protestant 'Southern Global South' and the paganized Anglicans of the US and white Commonwealth.

[lastchance]

I think it very telling that the Cardinal mentions the Orthodox church as a contrast to the Protestant one in this context. Obviously then he is not telling Anglicans they must choose whether to embrace Catholic doctrine. Instead I believe, in light of Pope Benedict’s remarks regarding “prophetic actions”, he is saying that the Anglican Communion must decide if it is going to be true to its own teachings and traditions or sway which everway the cultural winds blow.

Is the Anglican Communion going to be anchored by Scripture and their articles of faith or is doctrine going to up for a vote every few years?

[Cookie123]

At some point in time the British Parliament will rescind The Act of Settlement and the C. of E. will cease to be a state church. When that happens,the C. of E. will for all intents and purposes cease to exist. Without the backing of the British govt and the prestige that the attachment to the monarchy gives it, the C. of E. will be revealed for what it actually in fact is - a state-run, hyper-Protestant, and numerically very weak, denomination that long ago ceased to have any real impact on British life. At this point, the so-called Anglican Communion will also cease to exist, and the various Anglican Churches around the world will simply have to make it on their own. Many are more-than-prepared to do so right now, and most of them are far more successful, both in numbers of members and in effective mission, than either the C. of E. or the American Episcopalians are.

[NYer]

Ping!

[Aquinasfan]

I can imagine “high church” Anglicans coming into the fold individually, or even by individual church. But it would take nothing short of a miracle to bring the entire church in. Henry VIII’s decision has had inevitable consequences, as his church has strayed further and further from Rome, orthodoxy, and Orthodoxy.