What is Anglo-Catholicism?
Strictly speaking, there is no such thing. But there is a thing called Catholicism, which is a way of loving God. And there are people called Anglo-Catholics; that is, Catholics who are in communion with the Anglican Church in different parts of the world. And as Anglo-Catholics are not in the least ashamed of saying that they believe their way of loving God to be the best possible way in all the circumstances, it is desirable to explain, at least in outline, the principles on which their belief rests.
I just love this.
Most people don’t know what on earth Anglo-Catholicism is. Instead of telling people I’m Anglo-Catholic, I usually just say I’m an Episcopalian, which is kind of a half-truth. Explaining what an Anglo-Catholic is comes across as complicated, or just nutty. Aren’t there enough different Christian sects? Anglo-Catholics don’t even seem to agree among ourselves what we are or should be.
I think most people only notice the word, “Catholic,” which sets their minds right away upon preconceptions of what a Roman Catholic is. So any definition of Anglo-Catholicism usually has to back-pedal from there. Being able to say, light-heartedly, “What’s an Anglo-Catholic? Nothing at all really,” would be really freeing. And to disarm Catholicism of all its baggage, calling it, “A way of loving God,” would be, well, really exciting. I guess the trick is getting people who have a reason to be skeptical about Catholicism (or God in general) to believe that the remark is true.
I don’t know whether or not Anglo-Catholics really say unashamedly that their way of loving God is the best way. Some of us do. But who knows how many of us there are that don’t. Or aren’t sure.
I feel a lot of pressure to avoid regarding any one religion as better than another. Touting one’s religion as “better” and others as “worse” is risky, even belligerent. But the pressure “to believe in something” is just as great. A personality without beliefs is weak and deficient. Simply having a viewpoint in life requires basic beliefs, religious or not. So a person must both possess and deny his or her beliefs at the same time. Is that even possible?
Strictly speaking, there is no such thing. But there is a thing called Catholicism, which is a way of loving God. And there are people called Anglo-Catholics; that is, Catholics who are in communion with the Anglican Church in different parts of the world. And as Anglo-Catholics are not in the least ashamed of saying that they believe their way of loving God to be the best possible way in all the circumstances, it is desirable to explain, at least in outline, the principles on which their belief rests.
I just love this.
Most people don’t know what on earth Anglo-Catholicism is. Instead of telling people I’m Anglo-Catholic, I usually just say I’m an Episcopalian, which is kind of a half-truth. Explaining what an Anglo-Catholic is comes across as complicated, or just nutty. Aren’t there enough different Christian sects? Anglo-Catholics don’t even seem to agree among ourselves what we are or should be.
I think most people only notice the word, “Catholic,” which sets their minds right away upon preconceptions of what a Roman Catholic is. So any definition of Anglo-Catholicism usually has to back-pedal from there. Being able to say, light-heartedly, “What’s an Anglo-Catholic? Nothing at all really,” would be really freeing. And to disarm Catholicism of all its baggage, calling it, “A way of loving God,” would be, well, really exciting. I guess the trick is getting people who have a reason to be skeptical about Catholicism (or God in general) to believe that the remark is true.
I don’t know whether or not Anglo-Catholics really say unashamedly that their way of loving God is the best way. Some of us do. But who knows how many of us there are that don’t. Or aren’t sure.
I feel a lot of pressure to avoid regarding any one religion as better than another. Touting one’s religion as “better” and others as “worse” is risky, even belligerent. But the pressure “to believe in something” is just as great. A personality without beliefs is weak and deficient. Simply having a viewpoint in life requires basic beliefs, religious or not. So a person must both possess and deny his or her beliefs at the same time. Is that even possible?
No comments:
Post a Comment