Anglicanism as the true church vs. Rome/Orthodox

Discussion in 'Questions about Anglicanism' started by DouayJamesGeneva, May 2, 2018.

  1. DouayJamesGeneva

    DouayJamesGeneva Active Member

    Posts:
    218
    Likes Received:
    92
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Can you explain why so few people consider Anglicanism as the true church on this subject compared to Roman and Orthodox catholicism? I rarely ever see people in apologetic circles taking Anglicanism seriously at all, and on an apologetics forum I used to go to, which had some of the most competent apologists as far as historical arguments go, neither the Romans, Orthodox or general Protestants took Anglicanism seriously in any regard. They even said, "Their arguments for apostolic succession are very weak". What case can be made for why Anglicanism can be considered on the same level as the Roman and Orthodox heavyweights when making an appeal for the 'true church'?
     
  2. anglican74

    anglican74 Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    812
    Likes Received:
    651
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    I believe that the standard reply is that Anglicanism does not claim to be the exclusive embodiment of the One True Church, but rather the best expression and the chief jewel of the Church Catholic...

    That being said I'm surprised you take the words of anyone else seriously when it comes to the question of Anglicanism, or for that matter when it comes to anyone else among them! The Romans have dismissed the Orthodox as schismatic for centuries... and the Orthodox consider Romans to be outright heretics with whom no communion is allowed... Some desperate chap has found a few purported arguments against Anglicanism as well... The True Faith is not a pissing contest, a fact that some of the Romans and Orthodox often miss
     
    CuriousBeliever likes this.
  3. DouayJamesGeneva

    DouayJamesGeneva Active Member

    Posts:
    218
    Likes Received:
    92
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Please understand that I was not trying to be hostile or mean. There are some gaps in my understanding of how the Anglican branch came about historically, and I would say that I certainly agree more with Anglican doctrine than Roman or Orthodox. I never said I actually took everything the apologists said seriously, simply that they were fairly competent in making their case most of the time, but that community was also lacking in a lot of ways. I was surprised to find Anglicanism adequately defended on this forum, it's just that I still don't understand the full scope of this question.
     
    anglican74 likes this.
  4. JoeLaughon

    JoeLaughon Member Anglican

    Posts:
    97
    Likes Received:
    58
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Reformed High Anglican
    It's probably because compared to the RCC and the EO, the Anglican Communion is very small (even though its the third largest communion of believers) and the cultural image of Anglicans are rich, liberal borderline-agnostics in cardigans.

    Also it's because the Church of England has never claimed to be the entirety of the Catholic Church but instead a branch of the Catholic Church.
     
  5. peter

    peter Active Member

    Posts:
    97
    Likes Received:
    142
    Country:
    England
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Of course, one could if inclined make an argument for Anglicanism as the one true church via the Divine Right of Kings. If a monarch is entrusted with a divine right to rule (which is very biblical and the traditional understanding certainly in England), then the creation of the Church of England, the commissioning of the King James Bible and the approval of the Book of Common Prayer, surely the basis of the Anglican faith, were all acts of this divine authority.

    Personally, I don't believe that there is one human organisation that can be called the one true church, but its at least as strong if not a stronger argument than the idea of papal supremacy.
     
    Lowly Layman and anglican74 like this.
  6. anglican74

    anglican74 Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    812
    Likes Received:
    651
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    An intriguing argument!
    Thanks
     
  7. Peteprint

    Peteprint Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    480
    Likes Received:
    449
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    APA

    I think we must remember that God was against the institution of monarchy, something which many supporters of monarchy seem to overlook. As we read in 1 Samuel 8: 4-21

    4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,

    5 And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.

    6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord.

    7 And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

    8 According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.

    9 Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

    10 And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.

    11 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.

    12 And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

    13 And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.

    14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.

    15 And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

    16 And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.

    17 He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

    18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.

    19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;

    20 That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.

    21 And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the Lord.

    22 And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king.

    Not quite a ringing endorsement of monarchy.
     
  8. Vincent J. Coppola

    Vincent J. Coppola New Member

    Posts:
    6
    Likes Received:
    7
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    The Roman Church doesn't doesn't consider any group outside of The Roman Catholic Church to even be a church. They are "The Church". Outside of themselves there are only Christian associations (not sure on the official phrase). Protestants have allot of issues with Anglicanism. Some object to any kind of church institution or denomination. Some think we are too catholic, some object to the liturgy, or any liturgy. And unfortunately, the provinces of the USA, Canada and England, have done a good job of painting a picture of Anglicanism as ultra liberal, un-scriptural, and heretical. Probably the biggest problem for many protestants is that 200 years of bad theology and lack of historical perspective has created churches that do not understand anything about what has been handed down and apparently there is even a drift toward gnosticism. I don't know how prevalent this is but check out this article: http://virtueonline.org/evangelical-gnosticism
     
    JoeLaughon likes this.
  9. peter

    peter Active Member

    Posts:
    97
    Likes Received:
    142
    Country:
    England
    Religion:
    Anglican
    "I think we must remember that God was against the institution of monarchy, something which many supporters of monarchy seem to overlook."

    God instituted the Monarchy in Israel and sent the prophet Samuel to anoint his chosen king, as monarchs are still anointed today by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
     
  10. Peteprint

    Peteprint Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    480
    Likes Received:
    449
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    APA

    Yes, Peter, but only because the people demanded a king, even against the counsel of Samuel. They were warned about the consequences, but wanted one like the other nations (showing that it already existed) such as Egypt.

    I am not hostile to monarchy, in fact the English model, wherein there are limits placed on the monarch's power, works quite well. I just don't see that the institution itself can be said to be of divine origin.
     
    PotterMcKinney likes this.
  11. anglican74

    anglican74 Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    812
    Likes Received:
    651
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    Well if God offered a democracy and people desired a king and then God gave them a king, then isn't that monarchy by divine origin by definition?
     
  12. Peteprint

    Peteprint Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    480
    Likes Received:
    449
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    APA

    I would question such an interpretation. The Jews wanted what their neighbors had, kings, and I don't think those monarchies were of divine origin necessarily. Also, we see how Moses allowed divorce: "He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so." Matt. 19:8 Does this mean that divorce was really part of the Law (in terms of what God wanted) because Moses allowed it? God, at times, allows people to go their own way in certain matters, but I don't see this as His endorsing their actions. In the Samuel example He was clearly opposed to them having a king, but let them do what they wanted.
     
  13. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    698
    Likes Received:
    896
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    It is interesting that part of Henry VIII's contention was that the anointed monarchy was Biblical whereas the Papacy was without Biblical warrant.
     
    anglican74 likes this.
  14. anglican74

    anglican74 Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    812
    Likes Received:
    651
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    I have not studied this in depth, nor do I want to argue that the monarchy is the only or even the "most" divinely ordained institution... That being said it is hard to argue that it is not among institutions that are divinely ordained

    It seems to me that the case of Moses and divorce was the permission from Moses directly, a fallible human being, whereas in the case of the monarchy and coronation you have the sacred annointing by the priests and prophets, a direct coronation of the monarch By God (via the priests and prophets)

    Thus even if we want to say that monarchy was not God's first choice (and I'm not saying even that), clearly it was not opposed to his will, but in fact a function of sacred Biblical annointing and the priests and prophets of the One True God that elevated monarchy to a divine institution
     
  15. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    972
    Likes Received:
    577
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    What about monarchs who obtain the throne after a murderous act, are they divinely appointed?
     
  16. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    698
    Likes Received:
    896
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Are you intending to leave the English throne without a line?????
     
    Aidan likes this.
  17. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,094
    Likes Received:
    1,866
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    American Anglican
    God works thru providence, right? Nebuchadnezzar was divinely appoint too, wasn't he?
     
  18. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    972
    Likes Received:
    577
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    Was it providence that Richard ascend the throne by murdering his little nephews?
     
  19. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    698
    Likes Received:
    896
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Are you sure?
     
  20. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,094
    Likes Received:
    1,866
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    American Anglican
    A Shakespearean example of Fake News, friend.
     
    Stalwart likes this.

Share This Page