'To better learn by love than by inquiry': a Protestant Episcopalian defence of Anglo-Catholicism

Yes, you read the title right. But fear not, you stalwart devotees of the 'High and Dry' way, you staunch 'Two Bottle Orthodox' sort. Let me assure you that laudable Practice has not been hijacked by dastardly Puseyites. The old English surplice will continue to be worn, and there will be absolutely no lace on this site.

So what is today's post about? It has its origin in two quite different moments. One was Maundy Thursday this year, when I was preaching for a dear friend, an Anglo-catholic. For a brief moment in the eucharistic prayer, I became aware of our different traditions: he was vested in a chasuble and elevated the consecrated elements. What immediately popped into my head was the phrase "how Lutheran". Much more of which shortly. I then returned to my prayers and received from my friend the holy Sacrament of the Lord's Body and Blood.

The second moment was reading an aggressive, and dislikeable, Roman Catholic commentator respond to a post on 'X' from an organisation of young Anglo-catholics - the post showed them joyfully gathering - by asking why Anglo-catholics, upon the election of Leo XIV, did not become Roman Catholics. This occurred after a week in which many other Christians had been praying for our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, as they awaited a new chief pastor. The fact that the commentator in question could not simply rejoice in the faith of a group of young Anglo-catholics was very revealing: a condescending sectarian triumphalism was clearly of greater significance than sharing joy in a common confession of Christ Crucified and Risen.

What both these moments - one joyful, the other distasteful - have led me to consider is an Old High or Protestant Episcopalian case for the place of Anglo-catholics in contemporary Anglicanism. There is, of course, a pragmatic aspect to this: Anglo-catholics are a significant part of the Anglican landscape and will continue to be so.  There is nothing to be gained - in ecclesial, theological, or (crucially) spiritual terms - from insisting that a tradition that for now two centuries has been a part of Anglicanism should somehow shut-up-shop and simply disappear. It is not going to happen. The spiritual consequences of pursuing this are often dangerous: the anger, bitterness, and rancour produced by such a debate often undermine the Christian life, individually and corporately.

How, therefore, should the Old High or Protestant Episcopalian tradition understand Anglo-catholicism? I am going to reflect on this question via five Anglo-catholic practices and then, in conclusion, offer a suggestion for wider interpretations of this tradition.

I begin with the Mass. The most obvious point of reference for Protestant Episcopalians regarding their Anglo-catholic brethren celebrating the holy Sacrament as Mass is - as hinted at above - Lutheranism. The term 'Mass', eucharistic vestments, elevation of the consecrated elements (addressed more directly below) are all found in the Lutheran tradition. During the Elizabethan Settlement, at the Synod of Dort, at the Restoration, and throughout the 18th century, the Church of England consistently insisted upon a generous definition of the 'Reformed Churches' which included the Lutherans. When Anglo-catholics celebrate Mass, wear eucharistic vestments, and elevate the consecrated elements, they are doing what Lutherans - belonging to the Churches of the Reformation - have always done. In the words of the Defence of the Augsburg Confession:

we do not abolish the Mass, but religiously maintain and defend it. For among us masses are celebrated every Lord’s Day and on the other festival.

Recent ecumenical agreements between Anglicans and Lutherans have only confirmed what 18th century Anglicans frequently stated: there should be no barrier to Anglicans and Lutherans receiving the sacrament in churches of the other tradition and according to the rites of the other tradition. In this context, Anglo-catholics celebrating the holy Sacrament as 'Mass', wearing the chasuble, and elevating the consecrated elements can be understood as Lutheran practice: historically not how the Reformed Church of England celebrated the Sacrament, but clearly within the bounds of Reformation teaching and no obstacle at all to eucharistic fellowship.

On the particular matter of the elevation of the consecrated elements, we can heed the words of Luther himself:

The elevation we desire not to abolish but to retain, for it fits in well with the Sanctus in German, and means that Christ has bidden us to think of Him. Just as the sacrament is bodily elevated and yet Christ's body and blood therein are invisible, so through the word of the preacher He is commemorated and uplifted, and in the reception of the sacrament recognized and worshipped: and yet it is all a matter of faith and not of sight, how Christ gave His body and blood for us and still daily intercedes with God to bestow His grace upon us.

If it is objected, quite rightly, that Lutheran eucharistic teaching differs from that of the Reformed Church of England, we might point to Jewel in his Apology addressing the differences between "Lutherans and Zwinglians" on eucharistic doctrine:

they vary not betwixt themselves upon the principles and foundations of our religion, nor as touching God, nor Christ, nor the Holy Ghost, nor of the means of justification, nor yet everlasting life, but upon one only question, which is neither weighty nor great.

According to the great apologist for the Elizabethan Settlement, the difference between Lutherans and the Swiss Reformed churches on articulating the Lord's presence in the Sacrament was "neither weighty nor great". It is not, therefore, stretching matters to say that this includes the Lutheran practice of elevating the consecrated elements. 

When it comes to imagery in churches, we can likewise point to Lutheran practice, oft-remarked upon by 17th and 18th century Church of England commentators, but with no sense that this was an obstacle to fellowship and co-operation. Indeed, Church of England divines, while noting that English churches were less ornate than those of Lutherans, nevertheless pointed to similarities. Donne, for example, defended the use of decoration and images in English churches by invoking the Lutherans:

For a reverent adorning of the place, they may be retained here, as they are in the greatest part of the Reformed Church, and in all that, that is properly Protestant.

As I have written elsewhere:

The practice and theology of imagery established by the Elizabethan Settlement and found in the Jacobean and Caroline Church was, therefore, another similarity between the reformed ecclesia Anglicana and the Lutheran Churches of the Northern Kingdoms.

Alongside aside Lutheran practice, we can also point to the average contemporary Anglican parish church, in which the image of the Cross and stained glass images of Our Lord and the saints surround us in our worship. While there may be - to invoke the well-known online meme - literally dozens of us who appreciate the plain 18th century Anglican church building, with its white-washed walls and plain glass, this is not the context in what the vast majority of Anglicans now worship. I certainly encourage a theological and devotional appreciation for the older, much plainer Georgian church: this, however, is no quixotic crusade to restore such Anglican architecture. Imagery is now a well-established and settled aspect of Anglican churches.

This means that the difference between imagery in the average Anglican parish church and that in an Anglo-catholic parish is one of degree, not substance. For example, there is little, if any, meaningful difference between a stained glass image of the Blessed Virgin and a statue of her. Likewise between an altar cross and a crucifix. When considering imagery, therefore, not only does Lutheran practice indicate that Anglo-catholic norms can be understood as acceptable within the Churches of the Reformation, well-established Anglican practice likewise points to this.

If imagery - in stained glass and altar cross - is a conventional Anglican practice which shares obvious common ground with Anglo-catholics, this cannot be easily said about private confession and absolution. It is rarely a feature of 'ordinary Anglican' life, and certainly not as a regular practice. That being so, I think it is fair to say that contemporary Anglo-catholic understanding does not view this ministry as required or necessary but, rather, as helpful medicine for those who desire it. This practice (but not, I accept, Anglo-catholic statements regarding the 'Sacrament of Reconciliation') can be generously viewed as close to the Prayer Book provision in the Visitation of the Sick and the Exhortation in the Holy Communion.

It is also close, of course, to the Lutheran practice. In the words of 1522 sermon by Luther:

we have private confession, when I go and receive a sure absolution as if God himself spoke it, so that I may be assured that my sins are forgiven. 

Likewise, the Augsburg Confession:

the people are most carefully taught concerning faith in the absolution ... Our people are taught that they should highly prize the absolution, as being the voice of God, and pronounced by God’s command. The power of the Keys is set forth in its beauty and they are reminded what great consolation it brings to anxious consciences, also, that God requires faith to believe such absolution as a voice sounding from heaven, and that such faith in Christ truly obtains and receives the forgiveness of sins.

When Lutheran belief and practice is set alongside the Prayer Book's provision for the ministry of private confession and absolution, there is a way of interpreting Anglo-catholic practice as cohereing with historic practices found amongst Churches of the Reformation. 

Mass, elevation, imagery, private confession and absolution: that Anglo-catholics do not regard themselves as following Lutheran practice on these matters should not concern us. The key Old High and Protestant Episcopalian concern is reading practices so that they cohere with the doctrinal context established by the Prayer Book and Articles of Religion. The long history of Anglican-Lutheran engagement, eucharistic fellowship, and co-operation indicates that such Lutheran practices can be so interpreted.

This being so, Anglo-catholicism can be most productively regarded from an Old High and Protestant Episcopalian perspective as a grafting on to Anglicanism of Lutheran practices. My own view is that something like this would have probably happened even without the Movement of 1833. This might also help explain why aspects of Anglo-catholic practice - for example, eucharistic vestments, wafers, imagery, candles on the altar, aspects of church architecture - have often become embedded in wider Anglicanism: the 'grafting on' of such aspects has been organic and not incompatible with the root. The very fact that these practices were known from Lutheranism - another episcopal, liturgical, sacramental tradition of the Reformation - helps explain how the 'grafting on' was, after a few decades, experienced as organic.

One criticism of this Old High and Protestant Episcopalian reading of Anglo-catholicism could justifiably be that I have chosen relatively 'soft' aspects of Anglo-catholic practice - indeed that I seem to be talking about Prayer Book Catholicism rather than 'full fat' Anglo-catholicism. This, it might be said, makes Lutheran comparisons easy. So let me conclude with a practice that is more commonly associated with a relatively advanced Anglo-Catholicism: Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament. As Rowan Williams noted in his superb exploration of the Prayer Book Catholic tradition, Benediction has not been part of that noble tradition (in line with Gore's critique of the practice). For the Old High and Protestant Episcopalian traditions, it is entirely foreign, clearly contrary to Article 28, and having no antecedents whatsoever in the Prayer Book. 

That said, promoting heated controversy about Benediction, where it is found in Anglo-catholic parishes, achieves nothing of value. Such controversy too easily leads to a deep offense being caused to those Anglo-catholics for whom it is a significant part of their eucharistic devotion. Alongside this, and no less important, attacks on Benediction can lead some Anglo-catholics to believe that Anglican critics of the practice are encouraging a lack of reverence and adoration in approach to the holy Sacrament. As a result, intra-Anglican relationships are damaged and misleading perceptions of our respective traditions can be encouraged. 

How should the Old High and Protestant Episcopalian tradition approach Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament in Anglo-catholic parishes? I think some beautiful words from Jeremy Taylor can be helpful on this matter:

He that desires to enter furthest into the secrets of this mystery, and to understand more than others, can better learn by love than by inquiry. "He that keepeth the law of the Lord, getteth the understanding thereof," saith the wise Bensirach; if he will prepare himself diligently, and carefully observe the dispensations of the Spirit, and receive it humbly, and treat it with great reverence, and dwell in the communion of saints, and pass through the mystery with great devotion and purest simplicity, and converse with the purities of the sacrament frequently, and with holy intention, this man shall understand more by his experience, than the greatest clerks can by all their subtilties, the commentaries of the doctors, and the glosses of inquisitive men.

If Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament aids Anglo-catholic congregations in fostering such a loving approach to reception of the Holy Communion, those of us who are Old High and Protestant Episcopalian should let it be. Rather than attack Anglo-catholics for this practice, we should be asking ourselves what we do to encourage in our congregations a prayerful, loving, reverent approach to "these holy mysteries".

I am ending this post with, as readers of this blog will know, one of my favourite paintings, 'Sacrament Sunday', by William Teulon Blandford Fletcher (1897). For some Anglo-catholics, the painting portrays that which they think made the Oxford Movement necessary. For me, as an Old High Protestant Episcopalian, it speaks of the prayerful, loving, reverent devotion with which we are to approach the holy Sacrament of the Lord's Body and Body. What is required from us both, Protestant Episcopalian and Anglo-catholic, is to regard the piety of both 'Sacrament Sunday' and Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament in an Anglo-catholic parish as holy ground, an encounter with "the riches of the glory of this mystery ... which is Christ in you, the hope of glory". In words well known to us all as Anglicans:

All things considered and compared with that success which truth hath hitherto had, by so bitter conflicts with errors in this point, shall I wish that men would more give themselves to meditate with silence what we have by this sacrament, and less to dispute of the how manner how? ... Curious and intricate speculations do hinder, they do abate, they quench such inflamed motions of delight and joy as divine graces use to raise when extraordinarily they are present (LEP V.67.3).

(The first picture is of High Mass in All Saints', Margaret Street. The second is a Reformation-era depiction of Lutheran Mass, with Luther preaching. The third is the statue of Virgin and Child in St. Mark's Lutheran Church, Baltimore.)