As an Anglican seminarian from an Evangelical background I was introduced to the concept of the via media or ‘middle way.’ It was explained that the Anglican faith was a ‘middle way’ between the extremes of Protestantism and Catholicism. Anglicans were meant to be open to the truths to which both Protestants and Catholics witnessed. In matters of liturgy, sacred music, spirituality and doctrine the Anglican was meant to be informed by both the Catholic and the Reformed traditions. While this was good in theory, as Cardinal Newman observed, in practice the via media was no more than a good idea.
It was no more than a good idea because no one actually practiced the Anglican via media, or if they did, they did not do so for long. That’s because Christianity is a dogmatic religion. We need to have a firm set of beliefs to undergird our religious practice, and everything else in our religion needs to be an outgrowth of what we believe. Unfortunately for those who wish to follow the Anglican ‘middle way’ Protestant and Catholic beliefs contradict more often then they complement one another.
Therefore, while it may be possible to worship in a way that combines Catholic and Protestant traditions, it is impossible to hold to both Protestant and Catholic beliefs at the same time. Consequently Anglicans end up being either Anglo Catholic or Evangelical. The only stream of Anglicanism which, it might be argued, holds to the via media are the mainstream liberals, but that is not because they hold the Catholic and Protestant beliefs in balance, but because they don’t really believe in either. Their via media is really more of a via negativa–not a middle way, but a negative way.
A case can be made, however, for a new understanding of the Anglican via media.
There are several different ways of addressing the wobbly idea of VIA-MEDIA. I like the way Abp. Michael Ramsey understood evangelical catholicity. He searched the NT for the underlying principles of ‘apostolicity’ and ‘catholicity.’ The former approximates classic modern definitions of ‘evangelical’, so I think it is possible to read Ramsey as an advocate of an ‘evangelical’ and ‘catholic’ via media. At this deeper ‘principled’ level, derived from Scripture, it is possible to see a more positive (even synergistic) relationship.
Basically, Ramsey argues that the New Testament asserts two necessary ‘safeguards’ in the Christian faith: (1) the Gospel message concerning the historical events of the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus in the flesh, and (2) the insistance that the ecclesial Body of Christ existed before one’s conversion and has one continuous historic life in which one is called to share. The first safeguard is termed ‘apostolic,’ and, historically this has been a central (though not exclusive) concern of evangelical faith and practice. The second safeguard demonstrates a ‘high’ view of Church and Tradition–a central concern of the catholic stream.
Here is Ramsey’s description of these two mutually necessary (and determining) principles in his own words:
From Michael Ramsey, The Gospel and the Catholic Church (1936):
[blockquote](1) United with Christ as they are, the Christians will not interpret aright their present union with Him unless they constantly look back to the events whence it has sprung, and remember that these events, wrought once for all, are the source of everything that the Christians are and have and know. They are called upon not to advertise their own ‘experiences’ but to praise God for, and to bear witness to, the historical events wherein the Name and the glory of God were uttered in human flesh. The faithful Christian will not draw attention to himself as an interesting specimen of life in Christ, but dying to all interest in himself and his ‘experiences’ he will focus attention upon the redeeming acts of Christ in history, as the center of man’s prayers and praises for all time. In other words, the Church is Apostolic; it looks back to the deeds of Jesus in the flesh, and through these deeds it has been ‘sent’ into the world.
(2) From the deeds of Jesus in the flesh there springs a society which is one in its continuous life. Many kinds of fellowship in diverse places and manners are created by the Spirit of Jesus, but they all depend upon the one life. Thus each group of Christians will learn its utter dependence upon the whole Body. It will indeed be aware of its own immediate union with Christ, but it will see this experience as a part of the one life of the one family in every age and place. By its dependence upon the Church of history it will die to self-consciousness and self-satisfaction. And as with the group, so with the individual Christian; he will know his dependence upon the other members of the Body, wherein the relation of member to member and of function to function begets humility and love. The gifts that he possesses belong to the Body, and are useful only in the Body’s common life. Thus through membership he dies to self-sufficing, and knows that his life in Christ exists only as a life in which all the members share.[/blockquote]
If evangelicals and catholics could see their charisms as derived from these safeguards/principles they would more likely look to each other as necessary partners in the life and witness of the Church today.