Core Beliefs of the Church of England - Coursework Example

How does contemporary Anglicanism relate to the core beliefs of the Church of England in the 16th and 17th centuries? The one place where liberal theology and popular Christianity are most as odds is in the atoning work of Christ. This is the essence of faith for most evangelical churches. Early Christians believed that the human nature of the dying Jesus had been like a bait placed on a fish hook in order to deceive the devil into swallowing Christ’s divinity, which would then be able to destroy the devil’s power. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, Luther and Calvin, the death of Jesus had been ‘a sacrifice by which God was placated’ As long as one could think in such terms it would indeed be glorious to know that this propitiation had been achieved and God’s wrath averted. 23. Since the mid nineteenth century most thoughtful Christians have rejected such sentiments. Archbishop George Carey, in his otherwise very conservative Canterbury Letters, candidly denies that neither God nor the devil received any payback and describes any such thing as immoral, and out of character with what we know of God.24. Anglican modernism is identified with the “Modern Churchmen’s Union” founded in 1898 to stimulate and defend liberal thought within the Church of England. It has much in common with Liberal Protestantism in Germany, characterized by such thinkers as Friedrich Scheliermacher, the ‘Father of Modern Theology’. Adolf Von Harnack, whose book What is Christianity?, characterizes the point of view of many English Modernists. “Others, on the contrary, assure him that Christianity is an optimistic religion, and that it must be thought of simply and solely as a higher phase of Judaism, and these people also suppose that in saying this they have said something very profound.” Von Harnack, A.1987, What is Christianity? P.2 Anglican Modernism also developed out of the ‘Broad Church Movement’ of the nineteenth century. For them, this began with the acceptance of Biblical criticism and the theory of evolution and their insistence that Christianity must be adapted to accept these. The starting point for them was their acceptance of Biblical criticism and the theory of evolution and their insistence that Christianity must be adapted to accept these. While they rejected nature miracles like the virgin birth and his bodily resurrection, they emphasized the teachings of the historical Christ. Jesus’ death on the cross was not to placate the wrath of God, but to show the way in which God is present in human suffering. This is at variance with traditional Christian doctrine and the beliefs of 16th and 17th century Anglicans as shown in Article one of the thirty-nine articles. Doctrine in the Church of England, (1938), accepts that the modernist interpretations of Christianity doctrine were legitimate positions to hold within the Church. Essentially Modernism takes a middle path between radical skepticism and the revival of fundamentalism. Surveys of what Christians believe propose that Modernist way of thinking have become typical of liberal Christianity. We need to look at the sensibleness of key Christian beliefs. In the minds of many outsiders Christianity is outmoded and reactionary. Kant who argued that there was no reason to postulate a first cause because infinite regress was equally as plausible refuted the claim that God created the Universe out of nothing. This no longer applies because there is now a consensus among scientists that the Universe had a beginning. This does not prove that God created it but it is very compatible with it. Many scientists are happy to speak in terms of a mind behind the Universe, yet they are reluctant to identify themselves with Christianity. According to John Leslie, “Our Universe does look…very much as if created by God” but “not by a God …who interferes with nature’s operation.” The idea of a God who created a Universe in which he does not intervene is the classic modernistic position. Paul Badham identifies this religious interest with the problem of evil. Badham claims that if God can physically intervene within his Universe then God is responsible for all the suffering of the world, which is occasioned by his failure to do so. On the other hand, John Hicks suggests this world is viewed not as a spoilt paradise but as a placed in which our lives can be shaped by the challenges and responsibilities of living in a world that challenges us. If God really is omnipotent he must be able to create an autonomous Universe. This analogy can be compared with the modern design of computers. Most people agree that the greater the skill of the computer designer the more independently the computer will perform. The ultimate goal of computer operators is to design a machine than can think for itself. But is this possible? The same may be true of God and the Universe. Richard Harries wrote in his new book God outside the Box “God makes the Universe make itself. God must be able to create not only authentically free human beings, but an autonomous universe. Perhaps he could not do one without the other. Belief that God does not physically intervene with the world by does not suggest that He doesn’t care. The majority of liberal theologians believe that God shows his love not be transforming the situation from without by miraculous intervention, but by transforming the situation from within by showing his presence. These days, the public at large accepts the fact that God is not responsible for what happens in the world but that He does care infinitely for us. Therefore it is inconsistent that in much ordinary Church life there has been a revival of belief that God intervenes physically in the lives of individuals. The idea that God may intervene to bring healing has been further encourage by the popularity of “Alpha Christianity” This course encourages belief that prayers for healing and material success are likely to be effectual. It is difficult to understand why so many Christians oppose abortion, homosexuality and remarriage in Church since this is almost in total ignorance of the carefully thought out judgment of their own Church’s experts in theological ethics. The unsuitability of determining behavior on the basis of Biblical statements, which were made thousands of years ago are more significant than they were in the 16th or 17th century. Using the Bible to cite the reason for opposing homosexuality is utterly subjective in the selection of text. The truth is that not even the most ardent homophobe wants the biblical law imposed today since that could bring into question whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to become priests, but simply declares that they should be put to death. Biblical law states that no one with any defects may approach the altar of God. Liberal Christians must argue that the Bible does have great authority for Christians, but it must be placed in historical context noting how it reflects the knowledge and understanding of people of its own time. We must ask ourselves what is the most loving response to take towards other human beings as they seek to find fulfillment in their lives. Roman Catholic Modernism came from the work of individual Catholic intellectuals at the start of the 20th century who in different ways wanted to modernize the Catholic Church and Catholic beliefs. Alfred Loisy, who is know as the ‘Father of Catholic Modernism’ sought to meet the challenge posed by critical study of the historical Jesus by concentrating on the development of faith within the life of the church. George Tyrell argued for a close relationship between prayer and believing and argued that a belief in hell was wrong. Others saw a philosophy of actions as key to Christian beliefs and argued for an understanding of God as immanent in the world. Baron Von Hugel unique contribution was in the study of mysticism, which he believed underlay all religion. His book The Mystical Elements of Religion 1908 is still a classic Pope Pius X condemned Catholic Modernism in a papal decree and an encyclical letter in 1907. Three years later this was followed by an Oath against Modernism required by all Catholic clergy. None of the Modernist believed that the Papal decree described their actual position. Because the condemnation went far beyond responding to the views of individual views of Modernists, it made all those who apply such critical methodology to the Gospels suspicious. The consequences of these documents was that for more than a generation Catholic scholars were not allowed to use the findings of historical research concerning the Bible and did not want to engage in conversation that concerned Christian doctrine. In 1943, Pius XII issued an encyclical that declared it ‘absolutely necessary to make proper use of the help given by history, archaeology, ethnology and other sciences to discover literary forms’ used by Biblical authors. The anti-modernists era was brought to an end by the Second Vatican Council, which accepted the value of modern scientific research in the area Biblical studies. Today Catholic Scholarship is often at the forefront of contemporary academic research. Catholic priests are encouraged to combine their faith with scientific research and modern knowledge. Almost all contemporary Christians reject the notion of an everlasting hell. The latest Catholic Catechism teaches “the sad and lamentable reality of eternal death also called hell, and while this is true, it is at once qualified in the next section that ‘it is also true the God desires all men to be saved’ and ‘for God all things are possible’ The Church of England, the Anglican Church, is divided into two provinces, York and Canterbury, with 43 dioceses and approximately 27 million members. The monarch is the head of the church with the archbishops of Canterbury and York next in line. “The exact date when the Christian message first came to England is unknown.” Moorman, J.R.H., 1986, A History of the Church in England, p.1 But the Church does date back to at least the 2nd century when merchants and travelers first brought Christianity to Great Britain. During the middle ages, St. Augustine’s of Canterbury’s mission in 597 was regarded as the formal beginning of the Church under papal authority. The modern day Anglican Church sates from the English Reformation of the 16th century when royal supremacy was established and the authority of the papacy rejected. With the beginning of British colonization, the Church of England established churches on every continent and achieved international status. The founder of the Church of England was Henry V111, who broke with the Roman Catholic Church when the pope refused to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. Henry wanted to displace the pope as the head of the English church—not to remodel it along the lines approved by Protestant reformer. To this day, the Church of England continues to bear a close resemblance to the Roman Catholic Church. Historically, Anglicanism is a liturgically religious tradition, which means that much importance is place on observing an official devotional routine—celebrating saints’ days and holy days, the performance of dramatic ceremonies, the recitation of prayers. This is accompanied by sublime organ music and choral singing and priests wearing vestment in much the same way as the Roman Catholic Church does. The reason for all this outward show is to instill those who worship there with a feeling of piety. The majority of Anglicans reject Calvinism with its emphasis on predestination, conversation and evangelical ethos. In Colonial America there were many diverse groups of Presbyterians, and Dutch Reformed, Baptists as well as Anglicans, Quakers, and Lutherans, to name only the most numerous. In historical terms the most important because they were the largest in number and the most influential were the Anglicans, on the one hand and the heirs of the reformed tradition on the other. The culture of the reformed church—the plainness of their church structures and the emphasis on sermons rather than prayers and rituals contrasts greatly with that of Anglicanism. An even stronger contrast is the fact that many Reformed churches embraced evangelical practices, especially in the mid-eighteenth century as revivals swept Protestant Europe. With the exception of Methodists, Anglicans rejected evangelical influences. Another way of saying this is that, compared to Reformed churches, Anglicans made less stringent demands on the inner resources of individuals. Belonging to the Church of England did not require individuals to testify to a conversion experience or to surrender code of conduct enforced by the clergy or other lay members. Anglicans tolerated differences of opinion on many points of theology. During colonial times, many found great comfort in this form of Protestantism. Anglicans understood that being religious was more a matter of doing rather than feeling, more a matter of godly behavior and faithful ritual observance than a dramatic, inward transformation. This does not mean that Anglicans belittle deep religious emotion, but it is to say that the religious message of these two Protestant groups differ in their stress. In general it is accurate to say that Anglicans mistrusted sudden, strong public expressions of religious emotion, such as weeping, shrieking, and trembling that overcame some participants in evangelical revivals. Most Anglicans considered such behavior disorderly. The thirty-nine articles are the basic summary of the beliefs of the Church of England and have been called the historical doctrinal standard of the Church and the worldwide network of Episcopal churches in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. They were drawn up by the church in 1563 on the basis of the earlier forty-two articles of 1553. Subscription to them by the clergy was ordered by an act of Parliament in 1571. They are planned to exclude Roman Catholics, but not to provide a rigid definition of faith. In many instances the views are ambiguously phrased The articles arose as one of the manifestations of the 16th century English reformation, and more specifically the liturgical genius of Thomas Cramer, who served as Archbishop of Canterbury from 1553 to 1556. During the reign of Henry VIII, whose divorce from Catherine of Aragon provided the political impetus for the English Reformation, Cramer and other like minded colleagues prepared several statements of almost evangelical faith. However, it was not until the reign of Edward VI that England’s reformers were able to precede with more thorough efforts. Not long before Edward’s death, Cramer presented a doctrinal statement consisting or forty-two articles, as the last of the major contributions to Anglicanism. The thirty-nine articles have been praised as a moderate, winsome, biblical, and inclusive statement of Reformation theology. They reject teachings and practices that Protestants generally denounce in the Catholic Church. They concern fundamental Christian truths (articles 1-5, the rule of faith (articles 6-8), individual religion (articles 9-18), corporate religion (articles 19-36) and national religion (articles 37-39). The articles have changed only as circumstances require them. The forty-two articles were suppressed during the Catholic reign of Edward’s successor, Mary Tudor, but became the source of the thirty-nine articles which Elizabeth the Great and her parliament established as the doctrinal position of the Church of England. Since the days of Elizabeth the Great much controversy has swirled over their theological importance. The traditional view of the thirty-nine articles among Anglicans is that they are prior judgments, on specific issues relating to the faith of Christ, as written in the Bible. The Anglican Church of Canada first espoused the authority of the articles. “We are determined to hold and maintain the Doctrine, Sacraments and Disciples of Christ as the Lord has commanded in his Holy Word, and as the Church of England hath received and set forth the same in the Book of Common Prayer…and in the Thirty Nine articles of Religion; and to transmit the same unimpaired to our posterity.” (BCP, 1962, p.8 That somber declaration is part of the fundamental constitution of the Anglican Church, and all clergy are committed to the authority of the thirty-nine articles. Even when the legal authority of the articles is in question there remains a strong moral obligation for all who regard themselves as Anglican to respect the authority of the articles, which shape the identity of Anglicanism as a unique form of Christian life. These days, the shape and identity of Anglicanism is being fundamentally questioned and it seems difficult to focus on the exact authority. The fashionable term to describe this state of confusion is “dispersed authority”. What is meant by “Tradition? Does one mean the tradition of the ancient Church? Or the tradition of the Anglican Church if particular? Or does it mean all of them? If one means to include them all, how does the authority of specifically Anglican traditions relate to ancient or universal traditions, or to other particular traditions? Are all traditions of equal importance? The scriptures are merely one element of dispersion: one of those elements, which check on each other, but the scriptures are given a priority as the word of God. In other words, they are the classical record of the revelation of God in His relation to and dealings with humankind. To some the scriptures are essentially a description of “religious experience.” All this contrasts with the traditional view of the authority of the scripture as the written word of God, actually presenting authoritative teaching to which the church must be a “witness”. According to the doctrine of the articles, the scriptures contain certain theological teachings, to which the church’s teachings must always be subordinate. Article VI, has all things needed for salvation: so that what is not read therein is not required of anyone and should not be considered as an article of faith. Article XX reinforces the same doctrine. It is not lawful for the church to order anything that opposes God’s written word. Some of the Church’s judgments have universal authority, such as the ecumenical creeds. There are also judgments of the Church and not just of particular individuals or groups, it is the Church, which “hath authority in controversies of faith” (as the articles say) and must determine how the bible is to be correctly understood. The authority of the Church is a derivative authority and not absolute in itself, but always relative to its source and not infallible. So, the Thirty-Nine articles are not exempt from revision. Whether they should now be revised is, of course, another question. With the present theological being what it is, one has to wonder what the results might be. The better idea might be to accept the Articles as they are. The bureaucracy of the contemporary church seems to be committed to such policies as these, with all the attendant trappings. Such documents as the Thirty-Nine articles are thought to command only historical interest, and even the texts of the Scriptures, where they conflict with current directions of change might be changed to conform to the sensibilities of the modern community and its progressive causes. Traditional authorities within the church are not regarded as authorities at all. The effective restoration of the Thirty-Nine articles requires things of modern Anglicans. First, we must be liberated from that typical prejudice of modernism, which regards contemporary opinion as the only valid truth. The experiences of the late twentieth century and early twenty first century have administered cruel shocks to that modernist prejudice. Some say that it is only through suffering that we learn the importance of critical evaluation; yet change is a certain thing. If one is to believe in a good creator, it is necessary to understand what kind of behavior leads to human fulfillment and happiness. There are those who believe that one way to do this is to treat others as you would like to be treated yourself. Bibliography Badham, P The Contemporary Challenge of Modernist Theology, Cardiff University of Wales Press, 1998 Bicknell, E.J., A Theological Introduction to the Thirty-Nine articles of the Church of England, Longmans 3rd ed., Jan 1963 Moorman, J.R.H. A History of the Church of England, Morehouse Publishing, June 1986 Reardon, B. Roman Catholic Modernism, London A & C Black, 1970 Robinson, J. The New Quest for the Historical Jesus, London SCM, 1966 Stephenson, A. The Rise and Decline of English Modernism, London. SPCK, 1984 Read More