The sections on Sunday worship, the sacraments, and the church year are of most interest to me personally. These sections will guide people into a basic, mostly descriptive, understanding of these areas. Very few of us know how to explain worship and sacraments without unintentionally removing the sense of mystery, or accidentally becoming overly theoretical. Thomas shows his pastoral side here, but undergirding it is a broad knowledge of the tradition and of basic Christian sacramental theology. Many new Anglicans reading this will want to do further study, and some will feel that they’ve received enough explanation”“but all will be inspired to actually receive the sacraments reverently as a mystery and to focus on God and his presence in worship.
Some readers will wonder why Thomas doesn’t spend a lot of time on inter-Anglican wars and controversies. He doesn’t have three chapters devoted to the Instruments of Communion or various views on women’s ordination (although they are discussed briefly). Instead, he chooses to focus on what’s really important: our faith in Christ, our worship of God, and our life together. Some will wish he had more material on these arguments, but I think he made the right choice. Its time for us to move forward, not as an opposition group, but as a Christian communion. Thomas doesn’t ignore the reality of a fractured Communion, but he doesn’t unnecessarily focus us on it.
What are my gripes?
First, Anglicanism is not “a protestant denomination” except as a comparative descriptor. Use a sharpie to cross out that phrase on the two pages where it exists. Then write in “a Christian communion” instead. But don’t burn the book over this. We’ll create an online petition to change it for the second edition.
Second, I have to admit that I want the Sunday worship service at the front.
“Anglicanism is not a ‘protestant denomination’ except as a comparative descriptor.” But of course, “protestant” churches were those who mounted a protest against the doctrine and practice of the Roman church, which the English Reformers most certainly did, ergo…
Sorry Greg, I have to agree with Rob Sturdy on this point. Until the advent of the 19th century and the Oxford Movement and its widespread and lingering effects, Anglicanism was always understood itself to be a Protestant Church. In some places it is still that way — East Africa, the Southern Cone, the Diocese of Sydney and the Church of Ireland in Northern Ireland to name but a few.
Actually, even more to the point, The Anglican Church [Anglicanism] is a protestant denomination by legislative fiat. Unlike the Continental Reformation ignited by the religious objections which Luther had for the Roman Catholic Church, the English Reformation was an action in seven parts pushed by Henry VIII [and his very protestant advisors] through Parliament to accomplish the “reformation”. Given that the Roman Catholic heritage never entirely died and was revived through the 19th century Oxford Movement, the Anglican Church is not [i]exclusively[/i] Protestant.
Rob, I have heard it said that etymologically the word Protestant comes from the Latin pro+testare, to give witness, to testify (and via this to protest). Some Protestants (I am RC btw) would therefore say that it is not so much a negative (protesting against) as a positive (bearing witness to a bible-based faith etc).
…he chooses to focus on what’s really important: our faith in Christ, our worship of God, and our life together.
That is the Anglicanism that I knew, and love, to this day. really important, indeed!
Sounds like a very interesting book that could be very helpful to various groups. As to which term, “protestant denomination” or “Christian communion” is the better descriptor how about this a “protestant Communion”. Although, that reads like we may be discussing using grape juice instead of wine…. hmm. Anyway, definitely a book to be considered for my birthday wish list.
Grateful for the interaction. I prefer Christian Communion because I think it best includes our Protestant and catholic history. I don’t feel that it denies our Protestant nature. But “Protestant Denomination” can seem, to me, to deny or exclude our catholic nature. “Christian Communion” encompasses both. Thanks for reading.
Thank you Fr Tee – there’s quite a few protestants who need to listen to the wisdom of the Catholic priest: The word “protestant” is derived from a word meaning “one who testifies”.
And whether Greg Goebel likes it or not, we Anglicans are as protestant as anyone else. In fact more so – much of the “protestant world” has lost touch with the real Protestantism of the 16th century.
No matter what we may call ourselves, the book seems to be a worthy effort to describe Anglicanism to others. That is a good enough reason to check into this book for myself. I would not mind an overview of the Communion in which I was raised.
Sounds like a helpful tool to introduce people to Anglicanism.
RE: “Some readers will wonder why Thomas doesn’t spend a lot of time on inter-Anglican wars and controversies. . . . Instead, he chooses to focus on what’s really important: our faith in Christ, our worship of God, and our life together. Some will wish he had more material on these arguments, but I think he made the right choice. Its time for us to move forward, not as an opposition group, but as a Christian communion.”
The problem is that you can’t teach about “the Anglican Way” without delving into the conflicts between Anglicans who believe the Gospel and Anglicans who don’t. Introducing people to Anglicans while pretending as if the primary Anglican franchise in the US is led by people who believe the Gospel does new converts no service at all — in fact it harms and confuses them. The fact is, a person may become Anglican within the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas and move to New Hampshire and be struck by the lack of “Anglican Way” in Episcopal churches there. The parishes are in no way comparable. In one diocese, clergy in most of the parishes will teach and preach the Gospel. In another, clergy in most of the parishes will teach and preach something that opposes the Gospel.
We are also not able to “move forward” because the vast majority of leaders at the national level, and many of the clergy who call themselves Anglican within the Anglican Communion franchise in the US don’t believe the Gospel and and avidly preach against it.
As it is, I no longer point *seekers and non-Christians* to even good Episcopal churches. Why? Because the good Episcopal churches teach and preach the Gospel — but a seeker or non-Christian cannot understand that many churches in my church teach the direct opposite to the Gospel.
I am able to continue directing strong, discipled Christians to great TEC churches — I know they’re able to navigate and comprehend the stark contrasts.
First, Anglicanism is not “a protestant denomination†except as a comparative descriptor. Use a sharpie to cross out that phrase on the two pages where it exists. Then write in “a Christian communion†instead.
Without getting into the “protestant/catholic” debate, which isn’t my buiness (me being RC and all), I would like to riff off on this business of “Christian Communion” vs. “denomination”. I wonder if ditching the entire conceptualization of denominations might not be helpful beyond just the Anglican world. I wouldn’t use use “Communion”, since that gets into issues of closed/fenced Communion vs. Eucharistic hospitality, not to mention formal ecclesiology. Indeed, some protestant traditions use the term “Fellowship”, so we might find a common identity in “Christian Fellowship”.
The practical outworking of this common identity can, I think, be found in that wonderful phrase:
our faith in Christ, our worship of God, and our life together.
I’m not talking about lowest-common denominator ecumenism, no “mere Christianity”. The things that divide us matter, but the things that unite us – the Person – matters more. I’m talking about sharing what we can share. I think of the pope and the ecumenical patriarch praying together at the tomp of Jesus. Does anyone expect reunion of the Catholics and Orthodox anytime soon? But prayer, then is one thing. Common projects – social and religious – can bring us together. An Episcopal priest who’s name escapes me, after Hurricane Katrina, spearheaded the rebuilding of his neighborhood. I’m thinking that denominational identity didn’t play a defining role in his work, nor the support given to that community.
Hope, this isn’t off-topic, but I think it would be an important move to lose the concept of denominations, and seek Christ in one another. As friends, we can certainly debate theological questions, including ecclesiology. However, as brothers and sisters in Jesus, we can pray and work together, honoring Christ in one another, and honoring Him before the world.