It\u2019s interesting that in the discussion of doctrinal incoherency, no one mentioned the Thirty-Nine Articles, perhaps because they\u2019ve 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?)<\/p>\n
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:<\/p>\n
1. I don\u2019t 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. \u201cBorn of the Virgin Mary\u201d\u009d\u201d\u201cyes or no? \u201cOn the Third Day, He rose again from the dead, He ascended into Heaven\u201d\u009d\u201d\u201cyes or no?<\/p>\n
Here\u2019s one way forward: If the response begins with \u201d\u009dIt all depends on what you mean by\u201d\u201d\u201d\u009d deny them ordination. I certainly would expect this to be the case in \u201ccontinuing\u201d\u009d Anglican churches.<\/p>\n