Notice: You have been identified as a bot, so no internal UID will be assigned to you. If you are a real person messing with your useragent, you should change it back to something normal.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 hours ago, 35 minutes later[^][v]#1,426,395
I think you’re a bit confused. The Anglican Church is Protestant, and Protestants are called Protestant because they protest Catholicism and broke away from the original church. The Catholic Church views the Catholic Church as the original Christian church founded by Jesus. The Catholic Church’s thing about "Anglican heritage" has to do with the Catholic Church reintegrating non-Catholic churches back into the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church doesn’t accept Anglican Christianity as correct, instead they merely have created a process where an Anglican Church can de-reform itself back into a Catholic Church while still retaining “Anglican heritage" in terms of asserting that it is culturally British but still under the authority of the pope.
Liberal Anglo Catholics are not in communion with the Catholic Church and are not considered to be Catholic. They simply retain a few more of the traditions from before the Anglican Church broke off from the Roman Catholic Church.
This can be confusing because since the Anglican Church originally was nothing more than a branch of the Catholic Church, the structure of the Anglican Church was originally exactly the same as that of the Catholic Church in England and everyone held exactly the same titles, making it easy to get them confused with each other. But fundamentally, Anglicans are not Catholic and they hold views that are incompatible with Catholicism and considered heretical by the Roman church.
The structure of an ordinariate enables Anglicans to enter into full communion with the Pope while preserving some degree of corporate identity and autonomy from the geographical dioceses for other Catholics of the Latin Church and maintaining distinctive elements of their Anglican "theological, spiritual and liturgical patrimony".[57] The ordinariates integrate these groups in such ways as "to maintain the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion within the Catholic Church, as a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared",[31][58][59] while also being members of the Latin Church and fully accepting the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Can you explain this to me simply, as the article as simply left me more confused
Sounds like it's a process where a church can do the mass however they did it before, but they're Catholic?
Anonymous C replied with this 2 hours ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,426,404
@previous (Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU)
So you can sort of think of the situation this way:
Black in the day, long long time ago, you could think of the Catholic Church as a giant tree, and you can think of the pope as the root of that tree. What king Henry VIII did, is he cut the English branch off of that tree. And now the pope is still trying to glue that branch back on. But it’s a big branch and it’s heavy so it doesn’t want to stay on, so instead he’s trying to glue individual twigs back on.
Anonymous C double-posted this 2 hours ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,426,405
It’s confusing because the church isn’t stupid, they won’t just come out and be like, "the Church of England is wrong you’re all going to burn in hell!" They use the carrot and the stick. They want to affirm the fact that Anglicans are English and have English heritage, but they also don’t really want more than one church to exist at the same time. So if you ask a Catholic if Anglicans are Catholic, the answer is definitely not. The issue is Catholic priests tend to be polite old men, and you really have to imagine very polite old men having a disagreement over religion. Not which religion is true, but details like does Rome have primacy, is there a purgatory, was Mary born without sin, etc. The boring details most people don’t really care about. There’s naturally going to be a lot of doublespeak.
Anonymous C triple-posted this 2 hours ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,426,407
Now the Catholic position on orthodoxy is even more confusing because the Catholic Church and the orthodox churches were originally one church. They were both founded by Jesu, but the disagreement is that the Catholic Church believes that Rome has primacy over the entire Christian church while the orthodox churches believe that primacy means Rome was supposed to be "first among equals." So about a thousand years ago they split apart into two churches, but the Catholic Church at various points in history has expressed a desire to resolve this schism, but the only way they want to resolve it is with Rome retaining full primacy over the church, so they have a system where orthodox Christians can basically accept the primacy of Rome and remain "orthodox" but are in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. They’re referred to as "Eastern Catholics" which differentiates them from Roman Catholics. But the end goal with that is they want to create one Christian church underneath the pope. Of course, they aren’t that direct, but that’s literally what the Catholic Church believes and what they want, they believe in one church, only one church, led by Rome.