In response to a question regarding being Evangelical and Anglican, I thought I'd try and discover what this means for me and why I am. In doing so I will probably upset some, confuse others and demonstrate my own confusion in the process. It's fun though.
As a I understand it, the Church of England is a 'reformed AND catholic church'. Now this in itself causes a fair amount of debate because people usually respond by telling me that we're a 'protestant' church and not catholic at all.
So a brief foray into our history as I recall the lectures. The church, under henry VIII, broke away from the Papal authority and control of the church in our land. The issues of divorce, annulment and the price being raised each time Henry wanted one led to Henry being so niggled with Rome that those who wished to see autonomy from Rome (and the introduction of reformation theology which appeared closer to Biblical warrant than Rome's self-serving political practices) caught him at the right time and Rome was gone!
We draw upon our common roots with the RC bods (which manifest in much of liturgical and church structures) and we also rejoice in the reformed theology too (two sacraments 'bath and bread'). Thus we are truly a catholic and reformed church.
I would have to use the much vaunted term 'via media' (Middle way) for the C of E for it is what we laughingly refer to as a 'broad church' and when we examine it, we see this is almost an understatement. Within the C of E four 'traditions'can be found: Evangelical, Catholic, Charismatic and Liberal. There are many flavours and degrees of activity and outworking but they appear to leave us with high, low, charismatic, reformed, syncretic, middle of the road (often gloriously Anglican by habit) and more beside I'm sure as the flavours on the shelf.
I, having come to faith in a baptist church (9th April 1972) I have been brought up in my theology as an evangelical. The emphasis on the evangel (Good News = Bible) and of having a personal faith (which is not earned but comes by faith) and which is sharpened by the hearing and reading of God's Word and by relationship daily with His living Word (Jesus) and the enabling of His Holy Spirit, all seem to have left me an evangelical.
During my journeying thus far I have seem myself come to faith and grow as a baptist. The move to a Christian Union at Uni' saw me engaged first with Anglican churches and then later with an independent charismatic church. Later, after a return to a (boring) baptist church I once more found myself in an Anglican church. Things moved on and after my wife moved to it first, I became a member, and later a pastor, in a pentecostal church. From there I moved into an Anglican church and this is where I have remained, not just an evangelical but also someone who has taken on board, discussed, dialogued and studied the various elements that make on 'Anglican' and am an Anglican by conviction and belief.
I have said this because so many people have no real idea what being Anglican is all about, this is obvious because they can switch from paedobaptism to believer's baptism and not bat and eyelid regarding the great theological leap they have taken in this one area alone. There are many things that make us 'distinctively Anglican' and I am often saddened that people just see 'the best church' as the place to go without considering the underlying theological implications of the place and the statements they make by moving from one to another.
So here's the basis from which I will be trying to answer the question, "Why (or perhaps how?) an evangelical and an Anglican."
My studies have taken me to various theological colleges and I have studied Bible theology, Applied theology, Pastoral theology and have a passion for all things theological (with apologetics and counselling/pastoral/practical theology generally being at the top of the pile).
Colleges were reformed and evangelical, extremely liberal, Anglican (open-evangelical) and now I'm in an ecumenical establishment where there are no strong party or theological lines for the organisation (but lots of differing styles in the people).
Got to go, new lay ministers being licensed today and have to get stuff ready for the cathedral.
Bye for now. . .
2 comments:
I could write an essay, or possibly a book, about why I am Anglican and will probably remain so (never say never) - but this is not the place for that.
For many years I struggled with many aspects of Anglicanism, having come from a non-Anglican background. But (to cut a long story short) I came to realise that many of the classic evangelical positions on a range of issues depended less on the Biblical texts themselves than on where one started in interpreting them. There is value in Catholic and liberal positions, as they reveal aspects of our relationship with God and the world which may be downplayed or ignored by evangelicalism. I have come to dislike (sometimes quite intensely) approaches that try to package and define truth too rigidly. I have come to dislike the use of labels, and where possible try to avoid pinning labels on myself or others.
Nevertheless, as you say, Vic, the church (like any organisation) has to decide what its stance is going to be on a whole range of practical issues and these have theological derivations and consequences. I like the fact that the CofE is a broad church, but we have to have some coherence. So some theologies and approaches will be out (e.g on baptism, ministry, eucharist and presidency) and, however much some (as evangelicals or whatever) may wish it otherwise, others will necessarily be in.
Read the Parker Society set (55-ish volumes) mostly available online through www.books.google.com.
Classical, Reformed, Evangelical and Protestant Churchmanship was the basis and trajectory of the holy, catholic and apostolic Church of England, now so eclipsed by liberalism.
Post a Comment