On Churchmanship

The Eleventh Sunday after Trinity

O GOD, who declarest thy almighty power most chiefly in showing mercy and pity: Mercifully grant unto us such a measure of thy grace, that we, running the way of thy commandments, may obtain thy gracious promises, and be made partakers of thy heavenly treasure; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

When speaking of Anglicanism, there is broad diversity in style of worship, and even shockingly to some outsiders, of doctrine and theology. Often times, the understanding of Anglicanism is rooted in Churchmanship, a broad summation of that style of worship which itself is usually, but not always, a reflection of the doctrine and theological perspective of the Anglican in question.

There is an oversimplification here, but it can be traced back to the reality that originally there did tend to be a strong association between High and Low Churchmanship and the Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic understandings of Anglicanism.

Prior to the 19th century, the practice of Anglicanism had become what today would be viewed as very Low Church. Altars were bare, priests wore very plain vestments. This reflected the Puritan influences from the 17th century wherein there was a stress on the personal relationship between parishioner and God. Ritual was viewed as something that separated the individual from God. At the same time that Anglicanism’s Catholicity was being highlighted by the Oxford Movement in the early 19th century, the ritualist movement appeared in response, giving liturgical expression to the theologies being developed that emphasized more corporate worship.

Straddling between the two extremes of High and Low Churchmanship were a myriad of groupings. Central Churchmanship involved a conservative and sometimes evangelical theology, but a much higher level of ritual than in standard Low Churchmanship. Latitudinarianism gave birth to Broad Churchmanship which today, sadly, encompasses many Anglicans.

Latitudinarianism was a pejorative term used to describe a movement that arose in the 17th century that stressed the idea of the Church of England as a civic expression of spirituality. The Church had a necessary role in the expression of spirituality, the cultivation of morality and so on, thus subscription to the Church of England itself was essential, however the doctrines, liturgy and practices were far less important as there could be, for the Latitudinarians, other sources. This was the source of the name: adherents argued that greater latitude be given to the practice of the Church in order to promote unity at a time following the English civil wars through to the Glorious Revolution of Parliament in 1688—an extremely unstable and turbulent time in English history.

There was often an association between Latitudinarianism and heterodoxy, as one might suppose given there often times rejection of orthodox doctrines and the supremacy of Scripture, and over the centuries the term Broad has tended to supplant Latitudinarianism to describe this form of Churchmanship. Unlike Low or High Churchmanship, Broad Churchmanship does not subscribe to a particular style of worship, but is generally associated at the very least with Liberal theology and often modernism.

In modern Broad Churchmanship, this has tended towards a revival of the view of the Church as merely the ‘nation at prayer’ and thus the doctrines of the Church can be informed by the philosophical values of the nation. In a more technical sense, modern philosophy, scientific understanding and hermeneutics are applies to the understanding of Scripture, which again holds less authoritative value, rather than the opposite which would generally be expected in more conservative theologies.

Because of this theological underpinning, which can see even a rejection of the statements of the Creeds, it is not difficult to see how both low and high practices can be incorporated. While there is a tendency towards High Church liturgical practices, due to the inherent beauty in the liturgy itself, Broad Churchmanship can also find expression in lower liturgical practices.

Discounting the heterodoxy of Broad Churchmanship, and recognizing that while less institutionally prone it can occur anywhere, each form of Churchmanship holds merit. The fact that each does hold merit does not mean, however, that one is not superior to another.

The question then becomes one of examining the purposes and suppositions of each form of Churchmanship, and the purposes of Holy Communion (and other gatherings) where the liturgy becomes an expression of that Churchmanship and thus that theology.

Worship is about ascribing worth to something or someone. According to JI Packer:

Worship is looking Godward and celebrating the worth—that is the praiseworthiness—of what we see. The Bible calls this activity glorifying God, or giving glory to God. “Glory” means, first, divinity on display, (the glory God shows us) and then, the response we make to God for this honour.

So when Christians gather on Sundays and in context Anglicans in particular, we do so first and foremost to ascribe worth to God by glorifying him. Anglican Churchmanship then is the response to the question of, “how do we glorify God and show his immeasurable worth?”

The Psalmists tell us all creation worships the Lord. “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” (Ps 19. 1) If all creation worships God, how can it in and of itself become a barrier to worshipping Him? We are called to worship God with all that we are (Mk 12. 30), and through the use of ritual we are able to reflect that. Forms of worship that engage the full senses and which worship God not merely in raised voices, but with smells and sights and even our very posture, recognizing that all creation worships God with us.

It is also worth noting that Church, the House of Prayer of the Lord, is a place for corporate worship. We come before God not simply as individuals, but as adopted sons and daughters in His family, members of a community of faith and the communion of saints.

The theology expressed in High Churchmanship is one that emphasizes a high view of God and his created world, and offers it all back to Him in due worship.

On the Three-Legged Stool

The Feast of St Bartholomew the Apostle

O ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who didst give to thine Apostle Bartholomew grace truly to believe and to preach thy Word: Grant, we beseech thee, unto thy Church, to love that Word which he believed, and both to preach and receive the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Tenth Sunday after Trinity

LET thy merciful ears, O Lord, be open to the prayers of thy humble servants; and that they may obtain their petitions make them to ask such things as shall please thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

In the 16th century, Richard Hooker was a priest of the Church of England and an influential theologian whose works continue to influence Anglicans today. His famous Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie was a response to emerging Puritanism and a defence of the organization and governance of the Church of England. His work had long-lasting influence on the development of coherent Anglican theology over the next centuries.

Of particular note was Hooker’s emphasis on the importance of Scripture, reason and Tradition. While he never expressed it as such, this has been commonly termed the “three-legged stool” which underpins Anglican theology and doctrine. As he did describe it,

Be it in matter of the one kind or of the other, what Scripture doth plainly deliver, to that the first place both of credit and obedience is due; the next whereunto is whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason; after this the Church succeedeth that which the Church by her ecclesiastical authority shall probably think and define to be true or good, must in congruity of reason overrule all other inferior judgments whatsoever. (Book V, 8:2)

Richard Hooker’s writing established a classical understanding of the hierarchy of Scripture, reason and Tradition with Scripture as the ultimate authority on God’s revelation and reason and Tradition as tools we use to help understand Scripture.

This understanding of authority on doctrine provides for a balanced approach that rejects the Protestant sola scriptura practice of Holy Scripture as the sole authority as much as it rejects the notion of Papal Infallibility in teaching. Scripture, reason and Tradition are held together and against one another as a method of balanced discernment of the will of God towards true understanding and doctrine.

It is not, however, an approach which is always understood in its classical sense, particularly by those who know it on the basis of the “three-legged stool” which itself implies an equality between the three ‘legs’ which does not exist.

In Hooker’s words, “to [Holy Scripture] the first place both of credit and obedience is due.” The doctrine of the Anglican Church rejects sola scriptura of the Protestant Reformation in favour of prima scriptura. The primacy of Holy Scripture is the fundamental principle of Anglican doctrine. While not the only source of doctrine, it is the standard by which other doctrines are measured. Interestingly, prima scriptura is also the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church, and although the Roman Catholic Church officially holds Tradition in equality with Holy Scripture, in practice Tradition is still measured against Holy Scripture as the ultimate revealed Truth.

After the primacy of Scripture, Hooker follows with, “whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason.” Reason is a God-gifted faculty granted to man, and is useful for the understanding of Holy Scripture and the application of it in a modern context. The Bible was written to be understood by the people in the time it was written; the further we are from that time the more difficult it is for us to fully understand a simple reading of it. William of St-Thierry argued this in his The Golden Epistle, saying, “The Scriptures need to be read and understood in the same spirit in which they were created. You will never enter into Paul’s meaning until, by good intention in reading and diligent zeal in meditating, you drink of his spirit.” This is even made even clearer in Scripture itself:

So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” (Acts 8. 30-31)

In this passage, the Ethiopian is able to read the Book of Isaiah, but is not able to interpret it because his cultural and historical context is too far removed from the time and culture of Isaiah. While we have long traditions of Biblical exegesis dating back to the Church Fathers to help us understand much of the meaning of Scripture, reason is what allows us to further interpret and apply the revealed Truth of Scripture in our modern lives.

Reason, along with Tradition, helps to interpret Holy Scripture, however there are limits to the ability of reason to produce theologically sound interpretation. Reason can, for instance, be used to explain the nature of God on the basis of revealed Truth in Holy Scripture. Where reason causes theological error is when it is used to extrapolate, rather than simply interpret, the nature of God on the basis of Holy Scripture. While reason comes from God, it is shaped by our human natures, human logic and human understanding. If there is one thing shown repeatedly in the Bible, it is that God’s nature constantly confounds human expectations (viz. Mt 20. 1-16, Lk 15. 11-32) and therefore to apply human logic and understanding to extrapolate on the nature of God would doubtless lead to theological error and would be unprovable, lacking the standard of Holy Scripture to be properly measured against.

In Hooker’s age, the word Tradition had so many negative connotations but in its current use we deem to mean what Hooker was referring to when he said, “that which the Church by her ecclesiastical authority shall probably think and define to be true or good.” While Holy Scripture was the full standard by which all doctrine must be measured, unlike sola scriptura, prima scriptura leaves room for the Church to discern doctrine in areas where Scripture provides no clear doctrine, by applying the lessons of Scripture to new situations, after discernment and prayer, and with the aid of the Holy Spirit. According to the Articles of Religion, the Church has no authority to promulgate doctrine in conflict with Holy Scripture, supporting Hooker’s hierarchy.

The problem with the notion of a three-legged stool is that it implies equality between its legs while, in reality, Holy Scripture is the standard by which reason and Tradition are judged. To place them on an equal footing denies the supremacy of Scripture, which is laid out in Article VI of the Thirty-Nine Articles, and muddles the importance of God’s revealed Truth to us. While the concept of a three-legged stool sounds Anglican on its face--striking a middle way through the supreme authority of Scripture and Tradition in the Protestant and Roman Catholic traditions, classical Anglicanism demands a hierarchical approach to the understanding of Scripture, reason and Tradition.

The Wisdom of Saints: St Bernard of Clairvaux

The Feast of Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, France, Doctor and Poet, 1153

O GOD, who by thy Holy Spirit hast given unto one man a word of wisdom, and to another a word of knowledge, and to another the gift of tongues: We praise thy Name for the gifts of grace manifested in thy servant Bernard, and we pray that thy Church may never be destitute of the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

St Bernard of Clairvaux was a 12th century French abbot. Born to a noble family in 1090, he received an excellent quality education during which he developed a love of reading Holy Scripture. Still at a young age, he became concerned with avoiding the snares and temptations of worldly life, and felt drawn to an ascetic and monastic lifestyle that would help him avoid that. Upon the death of his mother, he joined a relatively newly formed monastic order. It followed a reformed version of the Benedictine rules, and the Order became known as the Cistercians due to their founding at Cîteaux Abbey. In his early years at Cîteaux he impressed his monastic superiors with his devotion and spiritual growth, and was soon sent, with a dozen other monks, to Clairvaux Abbey where he was soon appointed Abbot.

In his career as Abbot of Clairvaux, he founded a number of other Cistercian monasteries and wrote a number of works which survive to this day. While he is perhaps today most famous for his writings, in the 12th century he was a well-known figure throughout the Church and in particular in France where he resided and was involved in defending the Church against the state and becoming involved in some of the political struggles of the Church, as well becoming a standard bearer for the Second Crusade throughout France and Germany at the request of Pope Eugene III, a fellow Cistercian. The failure of the Second Crusade led to a decline in Bernard’s reputation, and he died soon after in 1153. His reputation recovered after his death, however, and he was canonized in 1174 and made a Doctor of the Church, recognized as a Teacher of the Faith in the Anglican tradition, in 1830.

One of his key works was De diligendo Dei (On Loving God) which discussed the nature of love, God’s love for man, the debt of love owed to God and why we ought to love Him, and is perhaps best remembered for his introduction of the concept of the four degrees of love, which describes the pilgrimage which all Christians proceed through in their growing love for God.

In the first degree of love, man loves oneself for self’s sake. St Bernard summarizes this love thusly:

because love is natural, it is only right to love the Author of nature first of all. Hence comes the first and great commandment, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God.' But nature is so frail and weak that necessity compels her to love herself first; and this is carnal love, wherewith man loves himself first and selfishly, as it is written, 'That was not first which is spiritual but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual,' (I Cor. 15. 46).

In this natural order, man does not truly know God, and therefore is stuck at the base level of loving himself before being able progress towards loving the Author of love, as St Bernard puts it. St Bernard goes even further, suggesting that this stage is not only natural but almost required. He argues that when in times of trouble we call upon the Lord for strength, we ultimately come to glorify him for answering our call. “loving only himself, begins to love God by reason of that very self-love; since he learns that in God he can accomplish all things that are good, and that without God he can do nothing.”

As is alluded to, this leads to the second degree of love, love of God for self’s sake. Even the hardest heart, contends St Bernard, would become “softened by the goodness of such a Savior, so that he would love God not altogether selfishly, but because He is God?” Put otherwise, the distinction between the first and second degrees of love is always for self’s sake, but during the first degree one has not yet begun to shift love of self to love of God for what he has done.

It is the third degree of love in which love becomes love of God for God’s sake, rather than our own. As St Bernard puts it, “Whosoever praises God for His essential goodness, and not merely because of the benefits He has bestowed, does really love God for God's sake, and not selfishly.” More simply, the third degree of love comes when we love God for who He is and not merely because of what He has done for us.

The fourth, and final, degree of love is loving oneself for God’s sake. This is a simple and contemporary translation of St Bernard’s four degrees, but interestingly a more direct translation taken straight from the chapter title would read, “the fourth degree of love: wherein man does not even love self save for God's sake.” This degree of love is perhaps the most difficult to understand when just viewing the summary, but St Bernard’s meaning is clear in his own explanation:

In Him should all our affections centre, so that in all things we should seek only to do His will, not to please ourselves. And real happiness will come, not in gratifying our desires or in gaining transient pleasures, but in accomplishing God's will for us: even as we pray every day: 'Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven' (Mt. 6. 10)

The fourth degree of love comes when we truly turn our lives to God such that we love Him unconditionally and, “trampling down,” as St John Chrysostom’s Divine Liturgy says, “all carnal desires, we may enter upon a spiritual manner of living, thinking and doing such things as are well pleasing to [God].” The love of oneself comes not for any remotely selfish purpose, but rather it is a reflection of God’s unconditional love for us which is reflected through our imperfect attempt at unconditional love for Him.

Through his four degrees of love, St Bernard of Clairvaux displays both his insights into the nature of love and human nature itself. He provides us with a standard and roadmap by which we can judge our own degree of love for God and guide ourselves to a deeper love of Him.

On Anglicanism

The Ninth Sunday after Trinity

GRANT to us, Lord, we beseech thee, the spirit to think and do always such things as be rightful; that we, who cannot do any thing that is good without thee, may by thee be enabled to live according to thy will; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Anglicanism, in its modern form, did not appear as an identity immediately upon the independence of the English Church from Rome under Henry VIII. Henry VIII remained staunchly Catholic in doctrine, as evidenced by the Act of Six Articles which professed decidedly Roman Catholic views on a number of issues being addressed in the Reformation. While the monarch was decidedly Catholic in view, many of the clergy in the Church of England welcomed the reformation theologies, notably Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury. It would take over a century of religious strife between different groups of Protestants and Roman Catholics before we would see the emergency of an identifiable Anglicanism by the latter half of the 17th century which could be associated with modern Anglicanism.

The Church of England remained officially Roman Catholic in doctrine until the death of Henry VIII in 1547. He was succeeded by his son Edward VI who took the throne at the age of nine and died at the age of fifteen. His entire reign was controlled by a regency, which allowed for church leaders like Thomas Cranmer to implement reformation theology in the Church of England. Though he was not of the age of majority, Edward VI had an interest in religion, and having been raised as a protestant (having been born after the Act of Supremacy and his father’s excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church) and largely supported Cranmer and the other reformers. It was during Edward VI’s reign that the first Book of Common Prayer was published in 1549.

Upon his death, Mary I took the throne. A staunch Roman Catholic, she initiated a persecution of Protestants in England, repealed protestant laws and initiated a reconciliation with Pope Julius III. Some 280 protestant reformers were executed under the Marian persecution, including Archbishop Thomas Cranmer. Another 800 Protestants escaped the persecution by entering into exile on the continent in primarily protestant countries in the north.

After only four years on the throne, Mary I died of influenza and was succeeded by her half-sister Elizabeth I. Elizabeth, like Edward VI, was a protestant reformer who established a religious settlement that managed to appease both Roman Catholics and puritan Protestants. The settlement lasted throughout Elizabeth’s reign, though it did not appease Rome itself. In 1570, Pope St Pius V issued a papal bull declaring Elizabeth a pretender to the throne (in favour of Mary Queen of Scots), a heretic and excommunicated any Britons who followed her. The bull provoked greater suspicion towards Catholics on the part of Protestants. It did not help that the bull called on Elizabeth to be overthrown, leading to plots to kill her and install Mary, Queen of Scots in her place. Elizabeth had previously allowed private Roman Catholic worship under the Settlement however the bull caused a crackdown on Catholics in England.

At the time of Queen Elizabeth’s death, the Church of England was the only official church in England. Roman Catholics were at different points allowed to worship in private, though there were no public Roman Catholic churches. Within the Church of England, however, there were numerous emerging identifications. A number of Protestants who had fled to the continent during the Marian persecutions adopted more radical continental Protestantism. Upon their return to England under the reign of Elizabeth, they became identified as Puritans, and advocated further reform within the Church of England, though their direct influence in the Church was legally limited. The middle way between those who either secretly or privately maintained allegiance to Rome and the Puritans had come to identify themselves as Anglicans by the time of Elizabeth’s death. They maintained some Catholic practices along-side the reformed theology embodied in the 1559 Book of Common Prayer.

The remainder of the 17th century would largely be characterised by a theological conflict between the Anglicans, who were satisfied with the Elizabethan Settlement, and the Puritans who sought to enforce further reforms. This tension would be one of the leading causes of the English Civil War which led to the establishment of the English Commonwealth during the Interregnum and the Restoration, which saw the publication of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, and the Glorious Revolution of Parliament. While these events would see continued struggles between the three groups, but the end of the 17th century, a form of religious toleration was put in place whereby Catholics were banned from numerous public positions, but otherwise allowed to continue the private practice of their religion. Anglicans gained completely control of the Church of England and their ‘middle way’ values became the established doctrine of the Church to the exclusion of the Puritans and other protestant groups. While Anglicans controlled the Church of England, it came at the expense of a religious plurality in England. Presbyterians, Anabaptists and other protestant groups continued to exist outside of the Church of England.

For the 17th and 18th centuries, there remained a strong Protestant and anti-Roman Catholic influence on the Church of England, in particular in relation to its practices and forms of worship, but the formularies and doctrines of the Church had been established. The Book of Common Prayer and Ordinal of 1662 and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion bear witness to the Anglican interpretation of Christian truth, alongside the ecumenical creeds, revealed through Holy Scripture.

These formularies would be exported abroad, for instance to the Church of England in Canada which was renamed the Anglican Church of Canada in 1955, and would thus form the core doctrine of the entire worldwide Anglican Communion.

Today, Anglicanism encompasses a wide variety of theological and liturgical perspectives, of which Anglo-Catholicism is one. Commonly, the Church is divided along three lines: High Churchmanship, Low Churchmanship and Broad Churchmanship. These perspectives, and the theological perspectives held by significant numbers of Anglicans can often trace their roots to influences from the time of Elizabeth through to the restoration. Anglicanism sits aside a broad religious plurality that includes all forms for Protestantism and Roman Catholicism, while the Church of England itself remains the established church of England.

On the Church of England

The Eighth Sunday after Trinity

O GOD, whose never-failing providence ordereth all things both in heaven and earth: We humbly beseech thee to put away from us all hurtful things, and to give us those things which be profitable for us; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Whereas last week’s entry spoke to the origins of the Ecclesia Anglicana, the English Church, this week’s entry takes place in the 16th century, discussing the ending of communion between the English Church and Rome and the origin of the modern Church of England.

While the history of the English Church is relatively unknown in popular terms, particularly among non-Anglicans who focus purely on the idea of King Henry VIII replacing the pope as the head of the church in order to grant himself a divorce, it is at least relatively straight forward. The same cannot be said for the true history behind the English Church’s break with Rome and subsequent development into the modern Church of England and Anglican Communion. One of the reasons for this is that this portion of the Church of England’s history mixes together influences of both theology and politics.

The history of Christianity is replete with politics interfering with the governance of the Church, dating back to the early 4th century when the legalization of Christianity allowed early Christians, and their leaders, to focus on more than merely their own survival. Emperor Constantine the Great himself called the Council of Nicaea as a way of hopefully resolving some of the debates which had sprung up among the bishops throughout the Empire, and in doing so established the beginning of a precedent of civil interference in religious matters, a precedent which was not lost on many of the bishops who attended the council. In following years, the pro-Arian Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia used his influence with Emperor Constantine to attack various anti-Arian bishops including Saint Athanasius and have them exiled. He further exerted influence with the Emperor to appoint Arian clergy and promote Arian doctrines in the Church in opposition to the Nicene Creed and Trinitarian formula that had been adopted by the Council of Nicaea.

The political influence of the Pope has a long history that dates back to the 4th century when the Roman Empire began to be split. Rome, Antioch and Alexandria were among the foremost cities in the Empire (to which was later added Constantinople). While Rome was originally the capital, under Constantine and subsequent Emperors, the capital was moved and the Empire often split between the leadership of a number of co-leaders. For many years, then, the Bishop of Rome was the senior most authority in Rome, and the Roman people looked to him not simply for spiritual leadership, but civic leadership as well. With the fall of the Roman Empire, the Bishop’s authority grew even greater as civic authority was disbanded. The powerful Roman Bishop easily moved into the vacuum created by the fall of the Western Empire, and over the centuries the religious and civic authority of the Pope was solidified to the point where in the 16th century the Pope was not just the leader of Western Christianity, but his own state and quite often a well-heeded advisor of numerous European monarchs.

Other examples are found of political influence in every era of the church. By the 16th century, however, perhaps the best example of this confluence of religion and politics was the Pope himself, who was not merely the head of the Catholic Church, but also the Head of State of the Papal States and an important political player in European statecraft. Pope Leo X had allied himself with King Henry and his allies a number of times over the years. Notably, perhaps, in exchange for a sum of money to support Leo’s ambitions of obtaining political authority for his relatives in the tumultuous Italian peninsula, Leo joined the Papal forces in an alliance with Spain and England against France. Ultimately, with Henry’s financial support for a military campaign, Leo’s nephew was confirmed as the Duke of Urbino.

It was under Pope Leo X that Martin Luther initiated what would become the Protestant Reformation. While the Reformation is perhaps best remembered today for opening the way to major theological expansion, Luther’s original goals were more limited to the reform of abuses being perpetrated by the Roman Church and by various clerics under Roman authority, most notably concerning the practice of indulgences. Indulgences were a form of remission of temporal punishment associated with an already forgiven sin. It was associated with alms during the early church, but as the practice grew in popularity during the medieval period, it became little more than a tax used to support various projects including the rebuilding of St Peter’s Basilica by Pope Leo X, which ultimately prompted Luther’s opposition.

Luther published his famous Ninety-Five Theses protesting various abuses of the Roman Church, sparking the Protestant Reformation. Pope Leo X’s response was to reject Luther’s demands for reform, and in this he was supported by his political ally King Henry VIII who, for his support of the Pope, was awarded the title Fidei Defensor (Defender of the Faith) by Pope Leo X just prior to his death in December 1521.

It was under Pope Clement VII that communion between Rome and England ended. By 1527 Henry was becoming so concerned with the failure of his wife, Catherine of Aragon, to bear him a male heir that he took the matter to Pope Clement VII asking for an annulment on the basis of Leviticus 20. 21. At the time, however, Rome was besieged by Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor and nephew of Catherine of Aragon. Faced with the political pressure of Charles’ sacking of Rome in May 1527, Clement VII refused Henry’s request and a number of subsequent requests for an annulment. Over the course of the next three years it became clear to Henry and his advisors that no annulment would be forthcoming.

The politics of Pope Clement VII were making him an unreliable ally to the still staunchly Catholic Henry VIII. Papal supremacy was looking less like the spiritual primacy of the Bishop of Rome, and more like the political supremacy of a foreign and not necessarily friendly or reliable European state leader. In 1532, with the political support of King Francis I of France, Henry married Anne Boleyn and by the next year had his marriage and annulment of his marriage Catherine of Aragon recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer. When news of the marriage reached Pope Clement VII, he excommunicated both Henry VIII and Thomas Cranmer from the Roman Catholic Church. Over the next few years and with Henry’s support, the English Parliament passed a number of laws that redefined the relationship between the Pope and the English crown and state, curbing the Pope’s political authority in England.

The 1534 Act of Supremacy marks the full break of the English Church with Rome, declaring the King to be the supreme head of the Church of England. Supremacists argued that the Pope’s actions were being dictated by civil and political considerations rather than religion, and thus if the Church of England was to have a civil authority over it, it should rightly be an English, and not foreign, one. It should be noted that while there had been a political divorce from Roman authority, Henry VIII remained dogmatically inclined to Rome and following a visit by a number of Lutheran theologians in 1538, Henry had Parliament pass the Act of Six Articles, a precursor to the current Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, which maintained complete orthodoxy with Roman Catholic belief.

The Church of England’s independence from Rome stemmed from Reformation issues, but rather than being based in theology, it dealt primarily with abuses of political authority rather than religious authority. The Roman Catholic Church, in its counter-reformation Council of Trent in the mid-16th century, recognized these issues explicitly with respect to indulgences, defending the theological value of indulgences while condemning the temporal abuses through the sale of indulgences. The Act of Supremacy is often cited as the start of the English Reformation, a period of significant instability in England. Not everyone accepted the King’s actions, and not everyone supported Henry’s retention of Roman Catholic doctrine. To this day, Henry VIII is not commemorated in the Anglican Communion. It would take until the Restoration in the 1660s before the issues of doctrine had been finally settled to the point where they would be able to remain intact to the present day and the current formulation of the Church of England would become recognizable with the 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion published therein.

On the English Church

The Seventh Sunday after Trinity

LORD of all power and might, who art the author and giver of all good things: Graft in our hearts the love of thy Name, increase in us true religion, nourish us with all goodness, and of thy great mercy keep us in the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Where should a blog like this begin? There are so many issues in Anglicanism that are in the news, either in the Anglican Journal or even in secular newspapers, that it's difficult to know what to comment on first. The reality is that this blog is not simply a mouthpiece for commentary on topical controversies. Any opinion that could be expressed here has probably been expressed elsewhere, and in a more eloquent and theologically grounded way to boot.

Rather, this blog will seek to express something of a journey of understanding of the Anglican tradition from the perspective of a Calgarian of the Anglo-Catholic persuasion. In that sense, the best place to start is not with what is in the news, but rather with the beginning. What is the English Church?

To many an outsider, the Church of England was formed by Henry VIII who wanted to make himself an English Pope so he could divorce and remarry (a few times). The reality of the English Church is much more complex, and far older. The entire history of the Church of England cannot be detailed in one post, so in this first part, the history of the English Church from the 3rd century through to the start of the 16th century will be detailed. The 16th century and the formation of the modern Church of England will be dealt with next week.

The origin of the English Church dates much further back than the early 16th century, and is fact noted to have existed in the 3rd and 4th centuries. St Alban's martyrdom in the 3rd century is recorded in St Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People. Records of the Council of Arles in 314 held in France list the names of the Bishop of York, the Bishop of London and the Bishop of Cærleon-on-Usk all in attendance from the British Province. Three more British bishops were also noted to have attended the Council of Ariminum in 360, and although they didn't attend the Council of Nicaea, the Nicene Creed's anti-Arian position was accepted by the British bishops, speaking to reasonably strong organization and contact with the rest of Western Christianity. A number of Celtic missionaries, notably St Patrick in Ireland and St Ninian in Scotland, were also active in the 4th and 5th centuries, establishing what would become the Celtic Christian tradition in Ireland, Scotland and Wales, which itself would have a significant influence on the English Church. It wasn't until 597 that a missionary arrived from Rome under the authority of the Pope.

As a Roman province, Britain was not exempt from the political turmoil unfolding on the continent. The Roman armies were withdrawn from Britain in the late 4th and early 5th centuries in order to defend the Empire on the continent from increasing barbarian activity. This had the effect of leaving the Roman province defenceless to barbarians arriving from northern Germany. Britain faced attacks from the Germanic Angles, Saxons and Jutes who largely destroyed the organization of the early Roman-English church in England as these three tribes carved out their own kingdoms in England. Contact between Britain and the continental church was largely lost during this period of strife and was not re-established until the arrival of St Augustine of Canterbury in 597.

As a result of the invasions, generally in south-eastern and central England, Roman Britons fled west to Wales and the Celtic lands where a distinctive brand of Christianity formed as British Christian traditions were fused with pagan Welsh practices, creating its own distinctive Welsh Christianity. While there was initially no effort to evangelize the Germanic invaders, that would change under evangelical monastic influence. Born to British parents, St Patrick eventually studied the monastic life in France before coming to Ireland where he evangelized the Irish people, establishing a number of monasteries and bishoprics throughout Ireland. Because of St Patrick's own monastic origins and due to the lack of previous contact with the continent where civil organization was strongly related to ecclesiastical organization of bishoprics, monasteries and abbots where the fundamental units of Celtic Christianity in Ireland. The evangelical nature of the monasteries led eventually to waves of missions to the mainland. St Columba arrived in Scotland in 563, and began a wave of conversions starting in the north of Britain and working south, such that when St Augustine arrived in 597 and began a second wave of conversions, there existed already many Christians in Britain.

St Augustine had been sent by the Pope, St Gregory the Great, to re-establish contact with Britain and convert the locals, particularly the Jute King of Kent, to Christianity. When St Augustine met with King Æthelbert, he found that the Queen was already Christian, and the King welcomed and supported St Augustine after his own conversion. In addition to his missional work, St Gregory is remembered for his liturgical revisions and standardizations. In acknowledgement of the existing status of Christianity in Britain, however, St Augustine was allowed to simply maintain a modified local liturgy, which was based primarily on the liturgy of St John, rather than of St Peter which was used in Rome. St Augustine founded a monastery at Canterbury which would become the eventual seat of British Christianity. Over the next century the waves of Christianizing influence would largely cover all of Britain to the point that conflicts between Christians and pagans soon began to be supplanted by conflicts between the northern Celtic Christians and the southern Roman Christians.

In 664 the Synod of Whitby was held in Northumbria to resolve some of the local differences between the Celtic and Roman traditions. A major consequence of the Synod was the establishment of the secondary seat of power of the Archbishop of York. While the Roman tradition had essentially won out at the Synod, the Celtic monastic tradition was allowed to continue.

The three streams of Christian history in England (the early Romano-British Church, preserved to a degree in Welsh Christianity, the Celtic monastic tradition and the later Roman tradition) had been fused to create what became termed the Ecclesia Anglicana, the English Church.

While the Church remained in full communion with the Pope and recognized his authority up until the 16th century, the English Church never lost its unique identity. Following the Great Schism in 1054, it would be common for English Christians to identify, as did other Western Christians, as being Catholic or Roman as opposed to Eastern Orthodox, but at no point did this change the reality of a distinctive English Church in communion with Rome, as opposed to what one might today think of as the Roman Catholic Church in England.