By Chuck Collins
January 14, 2025
Anglicans can’t avoid the 16th century Reformation. It’s more than the elephant in the room; it’s the room! Ashley Null wrote this about the man who composed the Book of Common Prayer, the confession for the Church of England (The Articles of Religion), and the compiler of the Homilies library: “Thomas Cranmer devoted the full powers of his position as Primate of All England to inculcating the Protestant faith into every fibre of English life.” Whether or not he was successful is the question that literally colors our view of English church history, and quite literally determines Anglican worship and the way we think about God and his church. Anglican identity, the perennial crisis facing us, hinges on how we see the elephant room. There are three big-picture ways Anglicans have dealt with the Protestant Reformation.
The most prevalent group today sees the Reformation as a mistake, an unfortunate distraction from the true catholic church. They see it as a temporary historical deviation from some amorphous “great tradition.” The great tradition, or some sense of common consensual Christianity (usually described as the church fathers, creeds and councils), took a leave-of-absence in the period from Archbishop Cranmer to Archbishop William Laud to clean up a few obvious Medieval mistakes, so that the Caroline divines could pick up where the church left off before King Edward VI.
This group views Scripture as the birth-child of the church and therefore it is a co-equal authority with tradition, they prefer the altar to the pulpit, see salvation as a cooperative venture between God and man, and they consider the sacraments (they usually identify seven in number) as automatic purveyors of God’s grace whether or not faith is present. Some will hang out the banner of “catholic and reformed” borrowing the phrase from William Perkins, without any reference to Perkins, and as a euphemism for “catholic.” Many in this group identify with the Anglo-catholic preferences for high church ceremonial and “the beauty of holiness.” They almost always introduce themselves as “father,” and they are unusually fond of putting a “+” before or after their names when writing emails. This group will eventually consider Roman Catholicism, and they would convert if it wasn’t for the pope and the pesky sex abuse scandals.
A second group speaks of a long Reformation: beginning with Wycliffe, Tyndale and Cranmer, but continues along the road of history picking up the Caroline divines and anyone else they fancy, up to our own day. They reference the English reformers who spoke of the church always reforming herself (ecclesia semper reformanda est), but in a completely different context from what the reformers intended. These folks see Scripture as a co-equal authority with reason, a Schleirmacherian marriage of convenience between the Enlightenment and traditional Protestantism. They consider Anglican theology as a buffet of attractive choices to pick and choose from: theologians, movements, sweet pickle relish from the state of Washington, and whatever else tickles their fancy. These folks emphasize the generosity of our Anglican heritage over any particularities or distinctives. This second group makes plenty of room for such aberrations as the three-legged stool (Scripture, tradition and reason), Instruments of Unity over biblical and theological definitions of identity, and three-streams (catholic, protestant and pentecostal). In this way, the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) has in some places become its parent, the Episcopal Church, without a few of the nastier sins which where adopted as the cause of the Episcopal Church.
The last group considers the English Reformation as determinative for our Anglican identity. They see the reigns of King Edward VI and Queen Elizabeth as critical for what is called “the Settlement” or “the Elizabethan Settlement.” The Settlement is based on the supreme authority of Holy Scripture as understood and explicated in the Book of Common Prayer (1662), the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion (1571), and the Edwardian and Elizabethan collections of Homilies. These came to be known as Anglican formularies because they have served to varying degrees as place markers for the elephant room. The formularies unambiguously value the Bible as uniquely inspired and the norming norm for all other authorities (over tradition, reason and experience). They value its perspicuity: the Bible is clear enough for the simplest person to live by, deep enough for readers of the highest intellectual ability, and clear in all essential matters of faith and practice. Reformation Anglicans value both word and sacrament, and they see the communion table as an extension and explication of God’s written word; what is experienced by one human sense in preaching (hearing), is experienced by all senses in the two sacraments of the gospel, baptism and holy communion.
Reformation Anglicans are passionate about proclaiming Christ in all matters of church life, and they abhor moralistic sermons that end with advice for trying harder and doing more. They believe that salvation is a loving gift for undeserving sinners, and that we we are reconciled to God by grace alone through faith alone, and that this is the logic of Cranmer’s liturgy that is heard Sunday by Sunday. These folks believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, not in the bread and wine, but in the hearts and affections of those who receive the grace of the sacrament by faith with thanksgiving. Reformation Anglicans view ordained ministry in the light of 1 Corinthians 12 and the universal priesthood of all believers.
They largely value the principle of simplicity; Anglican worship is to be dignified and orderly as an offering to a completely worthy God, but paired down of all words, actions and ceremonial that distracts from the the goal of pointing people to Christ, rather than to fancy-dressed priests prancing around an altar and lifting up the sacrament. Queen Elizabeth’s favorite advisor, Sir Christopher Hatton, writing three decades after she became queen, spoke of the static and settled theology of the Church of England: “The queen had at the beginning of her reign placed her reformation as upon a stone to remain constant.” And the 1571 (and final) version of the Thirty-nine Articles succinctly states their lasting purpose: “For the avoiding of diversities of opinions and for the establishing of Consent touching true religion.”
Every priest, bishop and layperson has one or both feet in one of these camps. But in a day when we are tempted to close a blind eye to our Anglican theological distinctives for conciliar solutions to our indisposition, it couldn’t be more important to find again the ancient landmark of our fathers to anchor our faith and practice. A Reformation Anglican church that sees its authority in Holy Scripture as understood and explained in the traditional formularies is our only way forward. All other ways are place markers for individual pet peeves. At its heart, this is a church that is thoroughly biblical, theologically confessional and reformed, pastorally generous, and liturgically beautiful.
Dean Chuck Collins is a Reformed Anglican theologian
Put simply, there is no scripture without a tradition that first recognizes it as scripture.
Divergent traditions of what is or isn't scripture lead to most of the divisions Collins delineates between "reformation Anglicans" and what Collins describes as "those who see the Reformation as a mistake." Whether those are an accurate descriptions is another matter I'll address briefly in a moment.
A basic example: if you believe the Deuterocanonical books belong in your Bible, you're probably fine with the ideas that the dead continue to pray for us, and that prayers for the dead are efficacious. If you don't, you probably aren't fine with those ideas.
The Authorized Version of the Bible includes the Deuterocanonical books. If your KJV…