An Anglican Seminary, Bp. Grafton and St. Tikhon

I will post some of my thoughts concerning the “Anglican Branch Theory” next week. One of my favorite American Anglican bishops was Bp. Charles Grafton who was very good friends with St. Tikhon. Bp. Grafton was very sympathetic to the Orthodox Church and her teachings. The following link is to a very good article on St. Tikhon’s visit to Nashota House in the early 1900’s. http://anglicanhistory.org/orthodoxy/hatfield.pdf

The Anglican Branch Theory Part 3

Rome and Orthodoxy recognize that the visible expression of catholicity is eucharistic fellowship. If you don’t share eucharistic fellowship, then how can you be in communion? If Anglicanism is catholic and Rome and Orthodoxy refuse to recognize Anglican catholicity then Rome and Orthodoxy are schismatic and not catholic which would leave Anglicanism as the exclusive catholic church which is something she has never claimed. The branch theory claims that the church is in schism but can the catholic church be in schism? Can Christ be divided? The branch theory really is Gnostic in the sense that the theory denies that the church is visibly one as Christ is visibly one. This visible oneness is experienced in the eucharistic fellowship of the one Catholic church. The fact that this visible oneness is not expressed in the branch theory troubled me as an Anglican. I was teaching my parish that we were catholic and yet I had a hard time understanding how that was without explaining it in a Gnostic way. Also, not all Anglicans hold to the branch theory and many evangelical Anglicans still hold that Rome and Orthodoxy practice idolatry and even hold heretical beliefs because of Rome and Orthodoxy’s denial of the sola’s of the reformation. After considering all of this I concluded that Anglicanism does not have a definition of catholicity but many definitions of catholicity. I started to ask what do we mean when we confess that the church is one and catholic in the Nicene Creed? What did the Fathers of the Nicene Creed mean when they said that the church was One and Catholic? I don’t think they meant anything like the Anglican schismatic theories of catholicity. These questions and the lack of Anglican answers really troubled my soul. Orthodoxy understands the Catholic church to be visibly one which seemed to be more consistent with the intent of what is expressed in the Nicene Creed.

The Anglican Branch Theory Part 2

The branch theory is one Anglican attempt at explaining how the Anglican Church is Catholic. (There are other views but they would deny the office of Bishop as part of the essence of catholicity.) This theory kept me in the Anglican Church for years because it was important to me that I was linked to the Church of Jesus Christ and His apostles in a visible way. I also thought it was great that the Anglican definition included Rome and Orthodoxy even though Rome and Orthodoxy excluded all of the other branches. One problem that I encountered when trying to work out this theory was that it simply does not work. The Roman Catholic Church bases her catholicity on the papacy. If a church is in communion with the Pope of Rome then that church is considered Catholic. The Orthodox Church claims that the churches must hold to the fullness of the faith and must be in communion with the Patriarchs in order to be Catholic. According to Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism has added to the apostolic faith and has broken communion with the other patriarchs and is not catholic. A church can have a line of apostolic success from the apostles and still not be Catholic because she would lack apostolic fellowship and faith. So Rome and Orthodoxy claim to be the exclusive Catholic church and they have different criteria for determining who is and who is not Catholic. Rome and Orthodoxy hold that these criteria are essentials of the Catholic faith. The branch theory claims that the criterion for catholicity is simply a faithful apostolic line of succession. According to this theory, since Anglicanism, Orthodoxy and Rome all share apostolic succession then all three make up the one Catholic Church. The Anglican definition is just as exclusive as the Roman Catholic and Orthodox ones. The Anglican criteria exclude Rome’s and Orthodoxy’s essentials of catholicity for her own. When Anglicans, Orthodox, and Rome confess the Nicene Creed during the liturgy they are not confessing the same thing since they do not mean the same thing when they confess Catholic. The Universalist claims to include all religions but really excludes all religions by their denial of the essentials of all religions such as Christianity’s claim that Jesus Christ is the exclusive way of salvation. I came to see the Anglican claim of an inclusive catholicity to be similar to the Universalist claim to include all religions. The problem is that the Anglican Church excludes the Roman Catholic and Orthodox essentials in order to be able to include them. This fact hit me while confessing the Nicene Creed one Sunday morning. Part 3 to come next.

Definition of the Branch Theory

…the theory that, though the Church may have fallen into schism within itself and its several provinces or groups of provinces be out of communion with each other, each may yet be a branch of the one Church of Christ, provided that it continues to hold the faith of the original undivided Church and to maintain the Apostolic Succession of its bishops. Such, it is contended by many Anglican theologians, is the condition of the Church at the present time, there being now three main branches, the Roman, the Eastern, and the Anglican Communions… From the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church

The Anglican Branch Theory

“The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.” (Article 19 “Of the Church”)
The 39 Articles of Religion are held by some Anglicans as containing the boundaries of Anglican theology. Some Anglican theologians have argued that the 39 Articles do not have binding authority and that some of the articles are even contrary to the apostolic faith. As an Anglican priest, I always struggled with the apparent vagueness of the 39 Articles. Article 19 quoted above is one such article. The article basically defines the visable church is where “the pure Word is preached” and “as one that administers the sacraments according to Christ’s ordinance”. Some have said that the “pure Word” includes the doctrine of justification by faith only (article 11) which would exclude the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches from being part of the visible church. Others have said that the “pure Word” simply means the Nicene creed which immediately brings to mind the controversy of the filiouque clause (article 5). Some have said that the article refers to the sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion as the sacraments that define the church as opposed to the 7 sacraments that the council of Trent articulates. Other Anglican commentators on the 39 Articles have said that the 19th article implies Bishops as being necessary for valid sacraments. If this is what the article means then it would exclude the validity of most Protestant sacraments because they do not have an apostolic succession of the episcopate but many Anglicans are just unwilling to affirm that. So the 19th article can include all Protestant churches and exclude Rome and Orthodoxy or it could include Rome and Orthodoxy as sharers in apostolic succession and exclude most Protestant churches. The latter does not seem to fit with the historical context of the 39 Articles since the 39 Articles seem to be in part a response to Roman Catholic errors. In the 19th century the Oxford movement began to explain the catholic church in terms of a tree with branches.They said apostolic succession is what allows a church to claim catholicity. So the three branches on the catholic tree are the Anglican Church, the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. The Anglicans believe apostolic succession to be an episcopal form of government with a proven line of succession from the apostles to present day bishops. I had learned about this theory in seminary but I never grasped the meaning of it until I read Vernon Staley’s book The Catholic Religion. I wanted to be catholic without excluing Rome and Orthodoxy so I thought it was a good way to explain how the Anglican Church is catholic and yet lacks unity with the other two branches. I was comfortable with this theory for a while until one day in the middle of the liturgy it hit me that the church was one which means undivided, yet the branch theory holds that the church is divided. It later occured to me that the branch theory of the church cannot be found as a way the historic apostolic church understood catholicity so that would make the branch theory not catholic but merely a creation of the Oxford Movement. I next want to explore next how the branch theory became unworkable for me.

The Dreaded Declaration of Principles

I always struggled with the Reformed Episcopal Church’s founding document called the “Declaration of Principles”. This document was put forth by the founders of the REC as a document that would protect the church from Anglo-catholic errors and it was not to be changed. However, all the things that this document denied, we taught and practiced. I never even mentioned these founding “Declaration of Principles” to Holy Cross parish in Alpine because I knew they were contrary to what we believed as Biblical and catholic truth. I always felt pulled between the true Apostolic faith and what the REC had as a founding document. This was another instance where the beliefs of the parish were not rooted in the church but instead were dependant on the priest. This is an awful position for a parish and a priest to be in. So I began to think, Holy Cross could stay in the REC and continue to be contrary to the REC’s foundational beliefs or join the Orthodox church where we would share a common foundation.

The Plurality of Anglican Theology

One theologian that explains the theological history of Anglican theology really well is Aidan Nichols who has written,

“The theology of the English Reformers was built on both Lutheran and
Calvinist foundations, yet it was never systematically either Lutheran or
Calvinist. Partly from conviction but mostly from political necessity their
theology was poured into an institutional mould which retained large elements of
a Catholic structure. As a result, when, in the reign of Elizabeth, a reflective
Anglican consciousness emerges, it sees itself not as a straightforward
continuation of the Continental Reformation, but as a ‘via media.’ The history
of Anglican pluralism derives from the intrinsic difficulty of defining such a
via media, and from the resultant need to leave wide open a wide latitude in the
construing of doctrine. Thus the via media idea, intended as a unifiying force
for Anglicanism, tended to be disintegrating in practice. It could be used in a
classically Protestant direction or in a Catholic direction; or yet again in a
Latitudinarian direction—on the grounds that where so much is unclear, little
should be insisted on. Again, Anglicans may despair of via media and take refuge
either in Anglo-Catholicism [giving it a much larger keel of Tradition for a
heaving ship- PMB] or in the idea of Western [Eastern?] Orthodoxy, in each case
accepting that the supreme norm for Anglican faith and practice should be
provided from outside Anglicanism—either from Rome or Constantinople. Finally,
Anglicans may choose to regard the incoherences (yet riches) of their own Church
as simply a microcosm of those of Christianity world-wide. In this case they
will argue that Anglicanism has no distinctive contribution to make to the
coming Great Church [an Anglican ecumenical and eschatological idea of the
Church—PMB]: its destiny is to disappear, its triumph will be its dissolution.”-
From The Panther and the Hind by Aidan Nichols p. xix-xx.

Considering Western Rite Orthodoxy

Our desire at Holy Cross Anglican Church (REC) was to build a church that would be around until the second coming of Jesus Christ. We were convinced theologically that ancient, Biblical Christianity was sacramental at her core and we wanted to pass on to our children and the town of Alpine, TX a sacramental worldview.

As I began to think about the future of Holy Cross and what exactly I was doing there, it occurred to me that this sacramental worldview could be shattered by the next priest that came to Holy Cross after me since Anglicanism is not sacramental at her core. The Anglican church allows room for both sacramental and non-sacramental theologies to exist side by side within the same church. For example, there are priests or ministers that understand Holy Communion to be a mere symbol, like J.C. Ryle, and others who understand it to be the very body and blood of Christ like Edward Pusey. Ryle and Pusey hold two theologies that are totally the opposite of each other and yet they are both Anglican theologians.

I began to see that within the Anglican world there was no way to guarantee a continuation of a sacramental worldview because of the plurality of theologies within Anglicanism which has always been part of the character of Anglican theology from the beginning. About this time I remembered hearing about the Orthodox Church allowing the use of the Western Rite. Western-rite Orthodox Churches use the liturgy of St. Tikhon which is basically the Anglican liturgy (BCP) without the filioque clause in the Nicene Creed and a stronger wording that expresses the change of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Since Orthodoxy is sacramental at her core and the Antiochian Orthodox church allows for the use of the same Anglican liturgy that we used every Sunday with good improvements, then I started thinking that this might be a more stable place for us to build a church that extends into the future for our children and their children.

I also noticed that in our present Anglican situation that the sacramental worldview depended on the priest being sacramental and not the church. In other words, the foundation of each parish in Anglicanism seemed to be the priest and not the church. In Orthodoxy you have a sacramental worldview because the church at her core is sacramental. So I approached two leaders on our church council (Vestry) about looking into the possibilities of Holy Cross moving to the more consistent sacramental place of Orthodox Christianity. There are more reasons that I had for considering Orthodoxy that I will share in later posts.

In Appreciation of High Church Anglicanism

I spent ten years in the Anglican tradition and I thank the triune God for the time I spent in her midst. Looking back, I see that God used my time in Anglicanism as a time of preparation for the Orthodox Church and I do not regret a single moment that I spent in the Anglican Church. God brings individuals along many different paths to Orthodoxy and Anglicanism was a necessary part of my journey. There are some very good things in the Anglican Tradition. The one that sticks out in my mind is Thomas Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer (BCP). The BCP is one of the most beautiful compositions ever written in the English language. One can not help but have a deeper appreciation for beauty and reverence when worshiping the triune God using the BCP. The Anglo-Catholic and High Church Anglican traditions have a great appreciation for the tradition of the Church and the holy fathers that are part of Apostolic tradition. The importance of the church and sacraments are taken seriously and taught in many parts of Anglicanism. It is through the Anglo-Catholic and High Church traditions that I learned the importance of trying to maintain the faith of the church fathers and Holy Scripture and for this I am grateful. (My favorite summary of the Anglican High Church tradition is Vernon Staley’s The Catholic Religion.) What this High Church Anglican tradition gave me was a sacramental worldview which really becomes the very point that drives me to the Orthodox Church. When I left the Anglican Church, I brought the best of the Anglican tradition with me. Now within the Orthodox Way, my sacramental worldview is whole or complete.

Holy Cross REC in Alpine, TX

Holy Cross Anglican Church in Alpine, TX had just joined the REC before I arrived. Holy Cross was a small parish of about 20 people but they were an encouraging and enthusiastic bunch. They did not have a Sunday School program of any kind when I arrived so I started teaching the adults about basic Anglican theology from Fr. Louis Tarsitano’s book An Outline of an Anglican Life. The study was well attended and grew as time went on. We went from an average attendance of 15-20 on Sunday to an average of 50-60 during the five years I was there because the parish was excited about what we were doing. Since the parish was small I had a lot of time to read various books on theology which was a real blessing for me. After about 3 years at Holy Cross, I started looking into various programs that we could use to introduce someone who knew nothing about Christianity to Anglican Christianity. There were programs like “The ALPHA Course” or “Christianity Explored” but none of them did a very good job of teaching the importance of the church and sacraments. I decided to put together my own introductory course that would include the importance of the church and sacraments called “Tov Meod” which is Hebrew for “very good”. It was during my time of preparing this introductory course to Christianity that I started to read Fr. Alexander Schmemann’s book For The Life of The World for a second time. This time what Fr. Alexander Schmemann was saying made a lot more sense. I was so impressed with his biblical worldview that it became the primary text that I used in preparing for this course. I also borrowed a lot from C.S. Lewis and a student of his, Harry Blamires, who wrote a little known book titled The Offering of Man. This book was saying some of the same things that Fr. Alexander Schmemann was saying in his book. “Tov Meod” basically became an introductory course in Orthodox Christianity in an Anglican context. Fr. Alexander Schmemann’s book For the Life of the World impacted me so much that I decided that I needed to start looking a little deeper into Orthodox Christianity.