Skip to main content

Contours of Conformity 1662-1832: 'the excellency of our Church'

In his sermon 'Steadfastness to the Established Church Recommended', William Beveridge (received episcopal orders in 1661, made Bishop of Asaph in 1704, died in 1708), exemplified a significant characteristic of the contours of Conformity, 1662-1832 - the conviction that the ecclesia Anglicana was the best embodiment of what Beveridge elsewhere terms "primitive piety". 

Central to this belief was the understanding that the faith and order of the Church of England was apostolical and primitive. Thus, it taught neither more nor less than the Apostolic faith, as set forth in the Scriptures and confirmed in the consensus of the wider Church catholic; and it ordered its common life after the "the pattern of the Primitive and Apostolical Church":

And hence appears the excellency of our Church, in that it requires nothing to be believed, as an article of faith, or as necessary to Salvation, but what the Apostles first taught, and what the Church of Christ in all ages hath believed to be consonant to the doctrine contained in their writings; but whatsoever opinion hath no ground or foundation in the said Apostolical writings, that ours together with the Catholic Church, rejecteth, as either utterly false, or at best not necessary to be believed; and therefore in order to your continuing steadfast as the first Christians did, in the Apostles' doctrine, the surest way is to keep close to the doctrine of our Church, which is plainly the same with that of the Apostles in all points, without any addition, diminution, or alteration whatsoever; which is the great glory of our Church, and should make us not only to continue firm and dutiful to it, but likewise to thank God, that we live in such a Church, wherein we are duly instructed in all the great truths which our Saviour and His Apostles taught, and are not required to believe any thing else, as necessary to our being saved; by which means as our minds may be enlightened, and our hearts purified by that faith which was once delivered to the Saints; so we are secure from falling into any damnable heresy, and from being corrupted or perplexed with any of those new and dangerous opinions which the ignorance and superstition of after ages have brought into the Church.

... lay aside all prejudices, and impartially consider the constitution of our Church, as it is now reformed, they might clearly see, that as there is nothing defective, so neither is there any thing superfluous in it, but that it exactly answers the pattern of the Primitive and Apostolical Church itself, as near as it is possible for a national Church to do it; insomuch, that they who truly believe all that she teaches, and practise all that she requireth, may be as pure and holy as any of the first Christians, or the Apostles themselves were, or can be, so long as they continue in the Church Militant here on earth.

It might appear to be counter-intuitive to describe a claim for "the excellency of our Church" as modest, but modesty is central to it: no distinctive doctrines or teachings, no claims for exclusive salvation, no order but that which has been received, no authority to proclaim any doctrine essential to salvation beyond what is set forth in the Scriptures, and an ecclesial life centred around "the great truths which our Saviour and His Apostles taught" rather than distinctive doctrinal insights or formulations. Here, in other words, is that combination of catholicity and generosity, confidence and modesty which should shape and characterise Anglicanism at its best.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why I support the ordination of women: a High Church reflection

A number of commenters on this blog have asked about my occasional expressions of support for the ordination of women to all three orders.  With some hesitation, I have decided to post a summary of my own views on this matter.  The hesitation is because I have sought on this blog to focus on issues and themes which can unify those who identify with or have respect (grudging or otherwise!) for what we might term 'classical' Anglicanism (the Anglicanism of the Formularies and - yes - of the Old High Church tradition).  Some oppose the ordination of women (and I have friends and colleagues who do so, Anglo-Catholic, High Church, and Reformed Evangelical).  Some of us support it (again, friends and colleagues covering a wide range of theological traditions). Below, I have organised my thinking around 5 points (needless to say, no reference to Dort is implied). 1. The Declaration for Subscription required of clergy in the Church of Ireland states: (6) I promise to submit ...

How the Old High tradition continued

Charles Gore's 1914 letter to the clergy of his diocese, ' The Basis of Anglican Fellowship ', can be regarded as a classical expression of the Prayer Book Catholic tradition.  A key part of the letter - entitled 'Romanizing in the Church of England' - addressed the "Catholic movement", questioning beliefs and practices within it which tended to "a position which makes it very difficult for its extremer representatives to give an intelligible reason why they are not Roman Catholics".  Gore provides the outlines of an alternative account and experience of catholicity within Anglicanism, defined by three characteristics.  What is particularly interesting about these characteristics is their continuity with the older High Church tradition.  Indeed, the central characteristic as set out by Gore was integral to High Church claims over centuries: To accept the Anglican position as valid, in any sense, is to appeal behind the Pope and the authority of t...

1928 practices and the 1979 book: unthinking conservatism or popular piety?

Those responsible for Earth & Altar - a new blog emanating from a group within TEC - are to be congratulated for an excellent contribution to wider Anglican discussion and debate. The commitment to "an expansively conceived credal orthodoxy as fully compatible with LGBTQ inclusion, gender equality, and racial justice" is an important part of a wider retrieval of creedal orthodoxy within what we might call the post-liberal generation. It is in this spirit that I want to respond to a recent post on the site by Andrew McGowan , Dean of the Berkeley Divinity School at Yale and Professor of Anglican Studies at Yale Divinity School.  Against the background of another round of "ill-defined" liturgical revision in TEC, he understandably urges that a fuller reception of the 1979 BCP should occur before further reforms. In doing so, however, he takes aim at what he describes as "clinging to the ritual structures of 1928" while using the text of 1979.  We ...