On the Articles: Article XXVII

The Twelfth Sunday after Trinity

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who art always more ready to hear than we to pray, and art wont to give more than either we desire or deserve: Pour down upon us the abundance of thy mercy; forgiving us those things whereof our conscience is afraid, and giving us those good things which we are not worthy to ask, but through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, thy Son, our Lord. Amen.

XXVII. Of Baptism
BAPTISM is not only a sign of profession, and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened, but it is also a sign of Regeneration or new Birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed; Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. The Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.

After addressing the general nature of the sacraments and their administration, the Articles highlight the importance placed on Holy Baptism by describing it next, before going on to elaborate on the Holy Eucharist. This Article’s formulation again shows its opposition to protestant doctrines adopted, somewhat ironically, by the Baptists which argued that Holy Baptism was merely symbolic and unnecessary to adoption in Christ, and that rather than acting through the Sacrament’s God simply works through an individual’s belief.

This Article affirms the traditional view held by the Patristic Church and maintained also in Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, as well as some protestant traditions to lesser and varying degrees, that God acts through Baptism. In addition to being a sign of membership into the Christian fellowship, “it is also a sign of Regeneration or new Birth.” It is interesting that on the heels of Article XXVI, this Article also specifies that this applies to those who “receive Baptism rightly.” By rightly, it refers to the use of water and receiving the Baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit according to the formula provided by Christ in the Great Commission (St Mt 28. 19).

The Article continues to discuss important features of Baptism. The Article states that those who receive it, do so for, “the promises of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost.” This makes explicit the meaning of the previous statement of what Regeneration and grafting into the Church means. In Baptism our sins are washed away. As St Paul puts it, our old selves are crucified with Christ, put to death, and we put on our new selves, adopted into Christ’s relationship with the Father.

The Article continues by mentioning the visible action of chrismation, being signed and sealed by the Spirit. This section conveys a two-fold meaning. First, much like earlier when it referred to the formula of the Great Commission, here it refers to another visible part of the ceremonial that occurs in Baptism: we are visibly signed by oil as a sign of the Spiritual sealing which occurs as we are sealed as Christ’s own forever. The second point made here relates to permanency. There are some sacraments, for instance the Holy Eucharist, which may be received repeatedly. Indeed, with the Eucharist and Reconciliation it is encouraged! Others, however, such as Holy Baptism, are permanent and only to be received once.

The Article concludes by addressing another controversy of the Reformation era, and one which continues today, that of infant Baptism. Many different Protestant denominations felt that infant Baptism was illegitimate, because of their altered conception of Baptism itself. Yet the Article here claims that nothing in the Gospels with Christ’s institution of Holy Baptism, nor indeed in the Acts of the Apostles where Baptism is first demonstrated or anywhere else in the New Testament where Baptism is sometimes referred to does it ever suggest that children are not to receive Baptism. In fact, some argue that the witness of the Apostles in the Acts of the Apostles includes infant Baptism when it makes reference to whole households, which would have included infants, as well as references to how every single person in a crowd comes forward to be Baptised after accepting the Gospel.

While this controversy is specifically mentioned in the Article, there are numerous other controversies surrounding Baptism. Whether or not, for instance, Baptism requires full immersion or if it is sufficient to have water poured or sprinkled on the candidate. While these matters aren’t addressed explicitly here, the previous phrase which refers to rightly receiving Baptism does suggest that the Article is recognizing that there are certain requirements which must be met for Baptism to be effective. These requirements, however, by the Anglican tradition, would be matters explicitly referred to in the Scriptures. As nature of the use of water in Baptism is not referred to, it would generally be considered acceptable simply to use water in some manner. The Didache notes that the preference is for full immersion but where that is not possible, for instance in the Early Church as they went further north the water became too cold for immersion Baptism during long parts of the year.

The majority of the controversies surrounding Baptism are of a similar nature, being ones that deal with form and manner of the Baptism. Those issues have been addressed throughout the history of the Church from the earliest ages of the Church. This Article omits them because they had already been resolved, and instead focuses only on those new controversies that had largely arisen as a result of the Protestant Reformation which had developed new understandings and doctrines of what Baptism itself meant.

In staying true to the received understanding of Baptism, the Article highlights the antiquity of Anglicanism’s sacramental theology.

On the Articles: Article XIV

The Day of Pentecost commonly called Whitsunday

GOD, who as at this time didst teach the hearts of thy faithful people, by the sending to them the light of thy Holy Spirit: Grant us by the same Spirit to have a right judgement in all things, and evermore to rejoice in his holy comfort; through the merits of Christ Jesus our Saviour, who liveth and reigneth with thee, in the unity of the same Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.

XIV. Of Works of Supererogation
Voluntary Works besides, over and above, God’s Commandments, which they call Works of Supererogation, cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety: for by them men do declare, that they do not only render unto God as much as they are bound to do, but that they do more for his sake, than of bounden duty is required: whereas Christ saith plainly, When ye have done all that are commanded to you, say, We are unprofitable servants.

Rounding out the discussion of works in the Articles of Religion is Article XIV discussing works of superogation. This seems at first, particularly to modern eyes, a somewhat complicated and confusing article, however ultimately its message is quite simple. Thinking back to ideas of merit in the medieval Church, and particularly to the abuses related to that concept, acts of superogation were works that were above and beyond what was required, for instance beyond acts of contrition done to demonstrate true repentance, that would then in fact earn some form of credit with God.

Ultimately there are many problems with this concept. It suggests then that God would owe us something. In some cases, that the grace we receive from God has somehow been earned, and indeed one of the worst abuses of this concept involved transferring this credit with God to others, often through the system of indulgences.

The article itself becomes clearer in these circumstances. It says plainly that voluntary works, the definition of works of superogation, which are done beyond what is commanded, cannot be taught [as earning merit or grace] without impiety or arrogance. It is arrogant, the article continues, because such a teaching requires the individual to say that they can do more for God than he asks for. This takes it upon the individual to, in a way, do more than is called for, and further seems to go against Christ’s own teaching from St Luke’s gospel, 17. 7-10, which is partly quoted. In this, the parable of the unworthy servants, Christ instructs that when you have done your duty, acknowledge it. To do more would be to assume to know the will of your master. In that same way, the article suggests, that these works of superogation take on the individual the assumption to know what God desires of them beyond what has been proclaimed.

To further link Christ’s teachings, he says in St Matthew’s gospel that, “You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect,” (St Mt 5. 48). How can there be anything beyond our duty to God when we are called to be perfect in all things? Similarly, as St Paul teaches, “whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him,” (Col 3. 17). Again, this makes clear the pattern that our duty to God is in all things. It is arrogant to believe that there is a possibility of doing more than what God commands us to do, because he tells us to do all things for him!

To get a clearer picture of Christian duty, we can look to the Catechism in the Book of Common Prayer, which says:

My duty towards God is,
To believe in him, to fear him, and to love him, with all my heart, with all my mind, with all my soul, and with all my strength:
To worship him, to give him thanks, to put my whole trust in him, to pray to him:
To honour his holy Name and his Word:
And to serve him truly all the days of my life. (BCP, 548)

Again by this definition, even were we not to fall short, it would be impossible to do more than God requires of us, as he asks for all that we are and all that we have.

There is a clear link to Article XV as well, which discusses the fact that Christ alone is without sin. If it is Christ alone that is without sin, then all fall short. If all fall short, then it suggests we do not even fully complete our duty to God, then again how can we possibly be expected to do more than is asked of us?

God has an absolute claim on us, and as Christ says in the parable recorded in St Luke’s gospel and quoted in Article XIV, when we have done all that is commanded of us, all that is left to do is recognize that we can do no more!

Thinking back to Article XI, which proclaimed that it is not by merit of personal works but by the merit of Christ himself that we are justified before God, so there is also a clear link between this article claiming that it is impiety and arrogant to teach that works of superogation somehow gain one merit. It is this link that also ties this section of the Articles of Religion together, with Articles XI – XIV broadly defining salvation, through faith and apart from works, but with works being counted as evidence which proceeds from a saving faith.

At the time when the Articles were initially published there was a great need to demystify conceptions of merit, something ultimately done also by the Roman Catholic Church over time as it has moved to recognize many of the medieval superstitions and abuses that led to the continental Reformation and which were addressed by England as well when the Book of Common Prayer and Articles of Religion were compiled.

Today, while individual articles such as this one may hold less importance than they did when doctrines on Works of Superogation remained popular and common, it still helps to create a clear picture of what the Church teaches regarding the role of works and the role of faith in God’s plan of salvation, with particular emphasis on ensuring Biblical grounding for these teachings.

On the Articles: Article I

The First Sunday in Lent

O LORD, who for our sake didst fast forty days and forty nights: Give us grace to use such abstinence, that, our flesh being subdued to the Spirit, we may ever obey thy godly motions in righteousness and true holiness, to thy honour and glory; who livest and reignest with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.

Lent

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who hatest nothing that thou hast made, and dost forgive the sins of all them that are penitent: Create and make in us new and contrite hearts, that we worthily lamenting our sins, and acknowledging our wretchedness, may obtain of thee, the God of all mercy, perfect remission and forgiveness; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

I. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity
THERE is but one living and true God, ever- lasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the Maker, and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

For those who consider Anglicanism to be a protestant tradition, they can look to something like Article I. For those unfamiliar with Protestantism, this would seem to be a simple statement of Nicene, Trinitarian orthodoxy, but it is also clear that it is a near word for word copy of the first article of the Augsberg Confessions. Luther’s influence there is undeniable in the fashioning of the clause, but the reality is that no Catholic Christian would deny anything presented in this Article. While it expresses the truth of the Nicene Creed, its format, exploring the threeness and oneness of the Godhead is somewhat more reminiscent of the Athanasian Creed.

Its arrangement is poetic, but also provides a logical progression to cover fourdifferent aspects of our understanding of God.

First, “there is but one living and true God, ever-lasting, without body, parts, or passions.” We believe in only one God. This is the story of revelations. From the henotheistic origins in the early time of the Jews to the ultimate monotheistic revelation, God has revealed himself as the sole deity in existence.  God is also revealed as being transcendent: he is before time and will exist after the end of time; he is without created form. The form “body, parts, or passions” is one of the repeated literary choices made to maintain threes, but again emphasises that in no way are we as created beings like God: he is well beyond us.

Next, “of infinite power, wisdom and goodness.” Again three, always emphasizing the trinitarian formula. God is without limits, wisdom not simply beyond comprehension but infinite. And his goodness is similarly not simply beyond our understanding but is perfect and complete.

Then, “the Maker and Preserver of all things both visible and indivisble.” It is worth noting that in the Latin, the word rendered Maker would today more accurately be rendered as creator. God made everything from nothing, not just that he made everything. It is through and by him that all things—seen and unseen—have their being. God created the angels and all things spiritual that lie outside of this created world.

Finally, “and in unity of this Godhead there be three Persons, of one substance, power and eternity; The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost” This section articulates two very important realities. First, that God is trinity. Three persons in one substance, power and eternity. This is an interesting formulation in that not only does it articulate the traditional “three persons in one essence, but furthermore reinforces that there was never a time when God existed without the Son or Holy Ghost, because they share one eternity, and further suggests that the Son and Holy Ghost are not subordinate to the Father as they share one power. The second critical point of this section is that it affirms that God has revealed himself: he is not just the “Triune God” of three persons, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost.

These are all simple statements, but the reality is that they addressed particular heresies of the early Church, and today show the relevance of the Articles more and more, given the fact that many of these heresies are finding renewed vigour. The observation that today’s theological innovations are just a reformulation of yesterday’s heresies is quite accurate. There are today attempts to redefine who God is, rejecting his identification as the Father because it’s not politically correct. There are those who deny Christ’s divinity because it is superstitious. There are those who need to be reminded what it means to be a Christian, and Article I states some of the most profound truths about Christianity. In some ways, Article I is perhaps more relevant to Anglicans today than it would have been when it was originally published, as the truths professed here were not systematically under attack in the 16th century in the way they are today.

Anyone who says that the Articles are merely a historical document and of no value today needs only to open their eyes and see that they speak to eternal truth that is being challenged. It is by affirming the Articles and recognizing that the fullness of the Trinity is found in our Anglican heritage, as it is in all orthodox Christian traditions, that we see that there is nothing historic about the Articles, but that instead they are timeless in their truth.

On Via Media

The Twentieth Sunday after Trinity

O ALMIGHTY and most merciful God, of thy bountiful goodness keep us, we beseech thee, from all things that may hurt us; that we, being ready both in body and soul, may cheerfully accomplish those things that thou wouldest have done; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Feast of All Saints in the Octave

O ALMIGHTY God, who hast knit together thine elect in one communion and fellowship, in the mystical body of thy Son Christ our Lord: Grant us grace so to follow thy blessed Saints in all virtuous and godly living, that we may come to those unspeakable joys, which thou hast prepared for them that unfeignedly love thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Commemoration of the Faithful Departed

MOST merciful Father, who hast been pleased to take unto thyself our brethren departed: Grant to us who are still in our pilgrimage, and who walk as yet by faith, that having served thee faithfully in this world, we may, with all faithful Christian souls, be joined hereafter to the company of thy blessed Saints in glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who with thee and the Holy Spirit liveth and reigneth, one God, world without end. Amen.

Last week’s blog concluded with a brief discussion of the Catholicity of the Anglican Communion after discussing the nature of the term Catholic, as used in the Nicene Creed. This week seeks to explore further that concept while discussing the Anglican concept of via media.

Via media, is a Latin phrase which means, “the middle way,” and is a term that is commonly applied to Anglicanism. Like many things about Anglicanism, there is not one universally accepted definition to how the term applies to Anglicanism. The Oxford Movement made an effort to define it as a compromise position, reflected in the Elizabethan Settlement, between the extremes of Roman Catholicism  on one side and the Puritans and other extremist reformers on the other. In particular, in Tracts 38 and 41 of Tracts for the Times, John Henry Newman attributed this concept the Richard Hooker in his Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie.

While Newman was not the first to attribute this concept to Hooker, he did again popularize it in the modern context, despite the fact that Hooker himself never used the term. There is, however, is a problem with viewing via media through the lens of compromise. When the Church is dealing with doctrine, it is dealing with God’s truth; not merely some form of public policy like the Elizabethan Settlement where there is no absolute truth and compromise can help to serve the peace.

A more accurate description of via media sees it not as a policy of compromise, but as a description of the results of the English Reformation being directed by a policy of restoring the Catholic Church in the realm of England to the faith, order and practice of the patristic Catholic Church, under the authority of Holy Scripture. In doing so, the Church of England had to avoid the excessive deletions of the reformers, while seeking to themselves remove the superstitious additions of the medieval Roman Catholic Church. That is not to suggest that there were not elements of compromise involved—particularly in terms of language—but it should never be confused with the actual goal of the English Reformation.

Put another way, via media doesn’t describe the policy of the English Reformation, it was not a compromise between the extremes; but rather the result of the policy of the English Reformation, its policy created a specific course which ultimately led it between the two extremes. This policy can be seen quite clearly in the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion.

St Paul tells the Romans in Rom 1. 16, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” This forms the Scriptural basis for the principle of Prima Scriptura and sufficiency of Scripture for salvation which was expounded in the Article VI for Anglicanism, and which was held to be true by the patristic Catholic Church. According to St Cyril of Jerusalem:

For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell thee these things, give not absolute credence, unless thou receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures.

This doctrine was held to be untrue by the Roman Catholics, dogmatically defined in the Council of Trent in response to the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century. In modern times, the papal document Dei Verbum defines the equality of authority for Tradition and Scripture when it says, in Article 9, “both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence.” This understanding clearly contradicts the primacy of Scripture understood by the fathers. Indeed, as was discussed last week, the authority and primacy of Scripture as God’s word was one of the defining characteristics of the Catholic Church. It was therefore held as essential to re-establish it in the Anglican practice.

As a whole, the Articles spell out in several places, a desire to maintain the characteristic four values of the patristic Catholic Church. Articles VI  and VII provide for the primacy of Scripture exactly as articulated by St Cyril, and then notes the full Canon of Scripture and the application of the Old and New Testaments. Article VIII affirms the value of the Creeds as an articulation of faith, while again confirming that they remain subject to Scripture by noting that everything expressed in the Creeds is in accordance with Scripture. Articles XXV, XXVII, XXVIII and XXX speak to the sacramental life of the Church, affirming Baptism and the Supper of the Lord effectual sacraments of the Gospel, commanded by Christ and administered in accordance with his words of institution. Articles XXIII and XXXVI speak to the one order of ministry of deacons, priests and bishops to administer the Church. These were the distinctives of the patristic Catholic Church!

This desire to return to a patristic understanding of Christianity ensured that the Church of England would reject some of the extreme deletions of the Protestants. For instance, some denominations rejected the validity of the Sacraments, suggesting that the Supper of the Lord was nothing more than a memorial, and rejecting the Real Presence. Whereas Article XXII of the Articles of Religion condemned Roman Catholic excesses, Article XXV condemned the Protestant view that the sacraments were mere pageantry. In the same manner, Article XXIII rejected the Protestant doctrine of the universal priesthood, noting that there remained an ordained priesthood of those called and commissioned by God, given the charism of teaching authority.

The Articles of Religion fairly clearly articulate a policy of seeking to navigate the excesses of religion that were occurring in the era, using language meant to sooth extremists on both sides, while directing a course towards a return to the understanding and practice of the fathers.

This understanding of via media is essential in avoiding criticisms of Anglican via media as an appeal to moderation, a logical fallacy which says that a compromise between extremes is always correct. Via media should not be viewed as a compromise, nor should the Anglican Church, for instance, be viewed as a compromise between the Roman Catholic Church and Protestantism. When the term via media is used, rather than seeing it as meaning the compromise or middle road, it should  be viewed for what it was: the patristic road.

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.