Anglicanism has a curious makeup! It comprises three main groupings of 'churchmanship'. (This 'churchmanship' can also occur in other denominations such as the Lutheran Church but is prominent in Anglicanism.)
However, it must be emphasised that individual Anglicans often resist being categorised. Furthermore, Anglicans who seem to belong to one of the three groups will display both beliefs and behaviour that may not fit with the typical characteristics of their supposed group.
Despite these facts knowledge of these three groups is still helpful for navigating Anglican Church opinion on various matters; moreover, it is particularly helpful for understanding why certain Anglican Churches worship the way they do and use/don't use the Prayer Book the way they do.
Like most things Anglican the terms have history but I don't intend to follow all the twists and turns along that pathway but to concentrate more on present day meanings with occasional reference to the past.
For the High Church/Anglo-Catholics, tradition, scripture and reason would be their order of authority; while for Liberal churchmen, reason is viewed above scripture and tradition. For evangelicals, the Scriptures are the supreme authority with tradition and reason viewed as supplementary authorities. However, it should be said that all branches of the Church use all three authorities but the way the three are employed among themselves can vary profoundly.
Of course, the situation is far more nuanced than portrayed above but this is a rough approximation. (See here for a more detailed paper on this question.)
The High Church is associated with great emphasis on ritual in worship. Colour, ceremony, procession, bowing or genuflecting to the altar, vestments, bells, using the sign of the Cross and incense. These practices are derived from its understanding that church militant on earth is joined to the church victorious in heaven; and this unity is to be shown through elements of ritual worship found throughout the book of Revelation.
The Anglo-Catholic emphasis came into its own after 1833 in England with the preaching of a famous sermon by John Keble entitled National Apostasy which argued that the state was interfering too much in the life of the English church. From this movement a number defected to the Church of Rome (e.g, the famous Bishop John Henry Newman who became a Roman Cardinal). Anglo-Catholicism aped many practices and beliefs reminiscent of Roman Catholicism but maintained the idea that that was because it too stemmed from the apostolic and catholic tradition.
(An excellent glossary of terms used within this branch of the Church is found here.)
Interestingly, the High Church/Anglo-Catholic segment of Anglicanism is more likely to be tolerant towards the charismatic renewal but exceptions to this general rule exist. The Renewal first entered the Episcopalian Church in the US via a High Church vicar in 1959.
Schleiermacher tried to reconcile the Enlightenment tenet about the supremacy of reason, and 'religion within the bounds of reason' (Immanuel Kant's phrase) with the Christian faith. Liberalism doubted the doctrine of creation, the fall's effects on mankind, the atonement of Christ as an offering for mankind's sin, the divinity of Christ, the need for evangelism since God loves everyone, and the bible's authority. Being like any other book the Bible was subject to the human-created instruments of historical criticism.
Elements of Liberal Anglican are sometimes found within the High Church/Anglo-Catholic wing. Rarely would the doubts mentioned above be entertained within Evangelical Anglicanism. At a personal level, I find Liberal Christianity and therefore Liberal Anglicanism to be the strand for which I have the least tolerance because it can so easily destroy the faith of others. Moreover, although it is quick to doubt the essentials of the faith it doesn't question the right of reason itself to be beyond doubt.
However, to be an Evangelical Anglican is to give greater definition to the term Evangelical for these are derived not only from the Wesleys of the 18th century but further back from the Puritans during Elizabeth I's reign. They are Protestant rather than 'Catholic' and would adopt the Protestant elements of the BCP in content if not always in form. That is, while they wouldn't believe that a strict adherence to the BCP, AAPB, or APBA be followed, they would use the vital elements of the Prayer Book Services, particularly the reading of Holy Scripture and the expository preaching of the Word of God which would be emphasised over the Lord's Supper.
Evangelical Anglicans tend not to be charismatic (e.g., the Sydney Diocese, the largest Evangelical Diocese in the world is decidedly non-charismatic) but some Evangelical Anglicans are charismatic.
Although I identify most with the evangelical wing of the church I don't have any great objection to the use of the sign of the Cross. Its use is an ancient practice (AD 3rd century) so it was used before the rise of the Roman Catholic Church. However many Protestant of Puritan lineage would demur and say that if it is not in the Scriptures then it is not sanctioned. With others, I would rather say that if it is specifically forbidden by Scripture we should not do it and if it is not forbidden then we may be able to use it.
*The term, 'low church' was a pejorative term and emphasised that Evangelicals placed a low estimation on ritual and ceremony.
Such nicknames for various styles of worship will continue to exist probably until the end of time as we know it but this shouldn't lull us into thinking that only our branch of the Church is the one true form of the church. Holding such an attitude is to lurch into sectarianism.
However, it must be emphasised that individual Anglicans often resist being categorised. Furthermore, Anglicans who seem to belong to one of the three groups will display both beliefs and behaviour that may not fit with the typical characteristics of their supposed group.
Despite these facts knowledge of these three groups is still helpful for navigating Anglican Church opinion on various matters; moreover, it is particularly helpful for understanding why certain Anglican Churches worship the way they do and use/don't use the Prayer Book the way they do.
Like most things Anglican the terms have history but I don't intend to follow all the twists and turns along that pathway but to concentrate more on present day meanings with occasional reference to the past.
Authority in Anglicanism
The issue of authority is one that all churches face. Classically, in Anglicanism, the major authorities are scripture, tradition, and reason. (To these three some would also add 'experience'.) All branches of the Church appeal to these. However, each branch appeals to them differently.For the High Church/Anglo-Catholics, tradition, scripture and reason would be their order of authority; while for Liberal churchmen, reason is viewed above scripture and tradition. For evangelicals, the Scriptures are the supreme authority with tradition and reason viewed as supplementary authorities. However, it should be said that all branches of the Church use all three authorities but the way the three are employed among themselves can vary profoundly.
Of course, the situation is far more nuanced than portrayed above but this is a rough approximation. (See here for a more detailed paper on this question.)
High Church/Anglo-Catholic
Sometimes the High Church stream is called 'Anglo-Catholic' which is problematic because the two should probably be distinguished. The term 'High Church' was in existence before 'Anglo-Catholic' and named that part of the Church of England that was ultra-conservative in terms of the Prayer Book of 1662 for example. In matters of sexual morality it would be close to Roman Catholicism but also accepting of women's ordination and openly homosexual priests (issues not tolerated in the Roman church).The High Church is associated with great emphasis on ritual in worship. Colour, ceremony, procession, bowing or genuflecting to the altar, vestments, bells, using the sign of the Cross and incense. These practices are derived from its understanding that church militant on earth is joined to the church victorious in heaven; and this unity is to be shown through elements of ritual worship found throughout the book of Revelation.
The Anglo-Catholic emphasis came into its own after 1833 in England with the preaching of a famous sermon by John Keble entitled National Apostasy which argued that the state was interfering too much in the life of the English church. From this movement a number defected to the Church of Rome (e.g, the famous Bishop John Henry Newman who became a Roman Cardinal). Anglo-Catholicism aped many practices and beliefs reminiscent of Roman Catholicism but maintained the idea that that was because it too stemmed from the apostolic and catholic tradition.
(An excellent glossary of terms used within this branch of the Church is found here.)
Interestingly, the High Church/Anglo-Catholic segment of Anglicanism is more likely to be tolerant towards the charismatic renewal but exceptions to this general rule exist. The Renewal first entered the Episcopalian Church in the US via a High Church vicar in 1959.
Liberal
Liberal Anglicanism stems ultimately from the Enlightenment which came into Christianity through Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834), the so-called father of Liberal Christianity.Schleiermacher tried to reconcile the Enlightenment tenet about the supremacy of reason, and 'religion within the bounds of reason' (Immanuel Kant's phrase) with the Christian faith. Liberalism doubted the doctrine of creation, the fall's effects on mankind, the atonement of Christ as an offering for mankind's sin, the divinity of Christ, the need for evangelism since God loves everyone, and the bible's authority. Being like any other book the Bible was subject to the human-created instruments of historical criticism.
Elements of Liberal Anglican are sometimes found within the High Church/Anglo-Catholic wing. Rarely would the doubts mentioned above be entertained within Evangelical Anglicanism. At a personal level, I find Liberal Christianity and therefore Liberal Anglicanism to be the strand for which I have the least tolerance because it can so easily destroy the faith of others. Moreover, although it is quick to doubt the essentials of the faith it doesn't question the right of reason itself to be beyond doubt.
Evangelical/Low* Church
Evangelical is derived from the word for gospel (evangel). Evangelicals were considered 'enthusiasts' in John Wesley's time by those who decried his preaching which called for hearers to become active disciples of Christ rather than rest on the fact that they were baptised into the church as infants.However, to be an Evangelical Anglican is to give greater definition to the term Evangelical for these are derived not only from the Wesleys of the 18th century but further back from the Puritans during Elizabeth I's reign. They are Protestant rather than 'Catholic' and would adopt the Protestant elements of the BCP in content if not always in form. That is, while they wouldn't believe that a strict adherence to the BCP, AAPB, or APBA be followed, they would use the vital elements of the Prayer Book Services, particularly the reading of Holy Scripture and the expository preaching of the Word of God which would be emphasised over the Lord's Supper.
Evangelical Anglicans tend not to be charismatic (e.g., the Sydney Diocese, the largest Evangelical Diocese in the world is decidedly non-charismatic) but some Evangelical Anglicans are charismatic.
Although I identify most with the evangelical wing of the church I don't have any great objection to the use of the sign of the Cross. Its use is an ancient practice (AD 3rd century) so it was used before the rise of the Roman Catholic Church. However many Protestant of Puritan lineage would demur and say that if it is not in the Scriptures then it is not sanctioned. With others, I would rather say that if it is specifically forbidden by Scripture we should not do it and if it is not forbidden then we may be able to use it.
*The term, 'low church' was a pejorative term and emphasised that Evangelicals placed a low estimation on ritual and ceremony.
The Importance of the Preaching of the Gospel
Although I would identify most with the evangelical wing of the Church I must also acknowledge that wherever the Gospel of Jesus' saving work for sinners is preached and the sacraments rightly administered, the Church of the Lord Jesus can be said to truly exist.Such nicknames for various styles of worship will continue to exist probably until the end of time as we know it but this shouldn't lull us into thinking that only our branch of the Church is the one true form of the church. Holding such an attitude is to lurch into sectarianism.
No comments:
Post a Comment