The Church of England has been hitting the headlines for all the wrong reasons recently. Last November, the House of Laity in the Church's General Synod voted against allowing women bishops, and the reaction to the result in both the media and Parliament was worthy of the European Union at its worst. Somehow, the democratic process had delivered the "wrong " answer, and therefore all the rules must be bent to ensure that an opportunity to deliver the "right" answer is provided as soon as possible. No sooner had this storm died down when a new proposal to allow gay ministers living in civil partnerships to become bishops as long as they remained celibate was widely criticised by both opponents and supporters of homosexuality as an unhelpful fudge. It seems like our national church is lurching from one crisis to another.
It may be the height of arrogance for me, a convinced nonconformist, to offer my pennyworth on these Anglican woes, but I do have some good friends who are members of the C of E, and therefore wish it well for their sakes. I also hope to highlight one issue which has so far not received much, if any coverage. That issue is doctrine.
WHen I applied to join the church of which I am currently a member, I was given a copy of the church's articles of faith, and requested to read them through, which I duly did, and was quite happy to assent to them. Unconditional assent is not required of ordinary members, but no man applying for the pastorate would be likely to be considered if he did not.
Our church's articles of faith consist of a 17-point statement ,and we also adhere to the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith, which we regard as "a correct summary of the teachings of hte Word of God." This latter document was compiled in 1689, and belongs to the second great period of credal statements which proceeded from the Reformation, and which included the Lutheran Augsburg Confession of 1530, the Helvetic and Belgic Confessions, and in this country, the Westminster Confession, two Baptist Confessions and the Church of England's XXXIX articles. These different credal statments reflect the different views of church order espoused by these different denominations, but nonetheless have a great deal in common - a desire to define the distinctives of Evangelical Protestantism over and against the errors of the Roman Catholic church. The language now seems a bit archaic, and occasionally, you will find a reference to an event or a group of people of limited interest in the early 21st century, except to the historian, such as those 16th century anabaptist groups, whose belief in communal owenrship of goods is condemned by the Church of England's Article XXXVIII. Nonetheless, the truths of these credal statments were meant to stand for all time.
And herein lies the root of the problems of the Church of England. From the mid-19th century onwards, men were ordained to the Anglican ministry who did not accept its doctrinal basis of faith. The strong Calvinism of the aricles offended the high-church Tractarian movement, while the Liberals did not like its insistence on the divinity of Christ, justufucation by faith alone and other fundamental Evangelical doctrines. However, after a few expulsions and trials, such men were eventually allowed to continue as ministers. In the 20th century, bishops, even archbishops, were appointed who could not in all honesty assent to their own church's doctrinal basis of faith.
I wonder how many ministers would be left in the C of E if it was a requirement for all clergy to give their unconditional assent to the XXXIX articles. Probably not many. Certainly not many bishops. However, if all ministers who denied their church's articles of faith were to leave the Anglican Ministry, I think you would find that they would take the church's problems with them.
It may be the height of arrogance for me, a convinced nonconformist, to offer my pennyworth on these Anglican woes, but I do have some good friends who are members of the C of E, and therefore wish it well for their sakes. I also hope to highlight one issue which has so far not received much, if any coverage. That issue is doctrine.
WHen I applied to join the church of which I am currently a member, I was given a copy of the church's articles of faith, and requested to read them through, which I duly did, and was quite happy to assent to them. Unconditional assent is not required of ordinary members, but no man applying for the pastorate would be likely to be considered if he did not.
Our church's articles of faith consist of a 17-point statement ,and we also adhere to the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith, which we regard as "a correct summary of the teachings of hte Word of God." This latter document was compiled in 1689, and belongs to the second great period of credal statements which proceeded from the Reformation, and which included the Lutheran Augsburg Confession of 1530, the Helvetic and Belgic Confessions, and in this country, the Westminster Confession, two Baptist Confessions and the Church of England's XXXIX articles. These different credal statments reflect the different views of church order espoused by these different denominations, but nonetheless have a great deal in common - a desire to define the distinctives of Evangelical Protestantism over and against the errors of the Roman Catholic church. The language now seems a bit archaic, and occasionally, you will find a reference to an event or a group of people of limited interest in the early 21st century, except to the historian, such as those 16th century anabaptist groups, whose belief in communal owenrship of goods is condemned by the Church of England's Article XXXVIII. Nonetheless, the truths of these credal statments were meant to stand for all time.
And herein lies the root of the problems of the Church of England. From the mid-19th century onwards, men were ordained to the Anglican ministry who did not accept its doctrinal basis of faith. The strong Calvinism of the aricles offended the high-church Tractarian movement, while the Liberals did not like its insistence on the divinity of Christ, justufucation by faith alone and other fundamental Evangelical doctrines. However, after a few expulsions and trials, such men were eventually allowed to continue as ministers. In the 20th century, bishops, even archbishops, were appointed who could not in all honesty assent to their own church's doctrinal basis of faith.
I wonder how many ministers would be left in the C of E if it was a requirement for all clergy to give their unconditional assent to the XXXIX articles. Probably not many. Certainly not many bishops. However, if all ministers who denied their church's articles of faith were to leave the Anglican Ministry, I think you would find that they would take the church's problems with them.