It’s interesting that in the discussion of doctrinal incoherency, no one mentioned the Thirty-Nine Articles, perhaps because they’ve proved so inadequate a doctrinal foundation. Or perhaps the problem is that, as a 16th-century confessional statement, they no longer speak to the issues that are really shaking the Anglican Communion to its core today. (Although Reformed and Lutheran Christians would argue that their confessions are more than adequate in the 21st century, despite new and improved denominations popping up on a regular basis, not to mention disputes over how to interpret the confessions themselves: third use of the law, anyone? How about 2K theology?)
It seems to me that there are a couple of ways out of this mess, which undoubtedly have been tried and failed. But this is Anglicanism, so why let that stop us:
1. I don’t know what is demanded precisely of a prospective clergyman/woman in the CofE in regard to the Three Ecumenical Creeds. I doubt they are required to affirm them on all points in their literal sense, such that there is no hedging on the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, Ascension, and coming Judgment. “Born of the Virgin Mary””“yes or no? “On the Third Day, He rose again from the dead, He ascended into Heaven””“yes or no?
Here’s one way forward: If the response begins with ”It all depends on what you mean by””” deny them ordination. I certainly would expect this to be the case in “continuing” Anglican churches.
I would argue that Anglicanism is analogous to Lutheranism but not a variant of it. The mistake of the author is to infer that the key figures associated with Henry VIII’s “reform” — Cranmer, Ridley and the others mentioned — constituted everything Anglicanism is in its faith and practice.
As we know, the next generations of Reformers (in the late 16th and early 17th centuries) contributed as significantly to Anglicanism’s identity as the pre-Elizabethan figures. Of course, many had spent time on the continent in Reformed cities during the reign of Mary Tudor, and they returned to England with advanced ideas that moved the CofE beyond its original conservative Erasmian-Lutheran agenda. Refugees from Europe also came to England in Elizabeth’s long reign and helped lead the church in a more Reformed direction.
After Luther’s death (1546), Lutheranism itself changed and fragmented. Perhaps Anglicanism looks closest to the brand of Lutheranism found in Sweden; but it all depends on what kind of Anglican faith and practice one considers normative. And what kind of Lutheranism one considers normative.
The 39 articles cannot be an instrument of unity because Anglo-Catholics have, for more than a century now, registered deep and principled reservations against many of them. For this reason, I disagree when you advise “to begin at the beginning with Christology.” Really, the beginning is hermeneutics and the doctrine of revelation, I think.