In [another re-post for today], you will find a video from
Seedbed by Dr. Larry Wood where he explains the place of John Wesley in the Protestant Reformation. - In a post on Facebook, my friend and colleague, the Rev'd. Tom Miles, made a post about how he explains to his students (at
Nazarene Theological Seminary) that we really are NOT Protestant.
Below, I will post his comment in its entirety. I will follow that up by a few additional comments. (I would note, here, that I love that he ends his comments by using one of my favorite quotes from the late +Rev'd. Dr. William Greathouse.) - Here is Tom's post:
***
Protestant?
Is the Church of the Nazarene a Protestant denomination? Well, for starters, there is little doubt that the vast majority of pastors and laypersons in our churches would readily affirm that we are indeed Protestants. To the extent that self-identification counts for something, it would seem that we are Protestants.
I would suggest that the answer depends upon one's definition of "Protestant." There is a fairly popular and widespread understanding that "Protestants" are those branches of western Christianity that broke ties with the Roman Catholic Church during the sixteenth century. If one's definition of "Protestant" is "any western Christian church that is not Roman Catholic," then churches in the Wesleyan theological tradition are certainly "Protestant" denominations.
But I would argue that we ought to consider a more carefully nuanced definition of "Protestant." For one thing, the sixteenth-century Protestants split with the Roman Catholic Church because they were "protesting" something. Martin Luther, John Calvin, and the other leading Protestant reformers were protesting what they understood to be theological errors regarding salvation and Christian epistemology within the Roman Catholic Church. The Church of England, on the other hand, broke with Rome because Henry VIII was upset over the pope's refusal to grant him an annulment--hardly the same kind of "protest" that the Protestant reformers were making.
Unlike the continental Protestant traditions, which embarked on a thorough theological revisioning from the outset, articulating careful theological delineations between themselves and the Roman Catholic Church, the Church of England vacillated between Roman Catholic and Protestant sympathies for a few years before eventually settling on a middle course that rejected "extreme" positions of both the Protestants and the Roman Catholics in favor of a via media that is often summarized as "neither Roman Catholic nor Protestant, but both catholic and reformed."
Historically, our heritage lies in the Wesleyan Evangelical Revival that took place in England during the eighteenth century. Both John and Charles Wesley insisted that the Methodist movement was a revival within the Church of England and was to remain in the Church of England. They urged the Methodists to continue to attend worship at their local Church of England parish, where they would also be able to receive the Lord's Supper; in fact, the Wesleys were careful to use "lay preachers" who were not ordained (and therefore could not offer the sacraments) for Methodist society meetings and evangelical preaching--which meant that, by the Wesleys' intentional design, the Methodists had to rely on the Church of England for the sacraments. Furthermore, Methodist society meetings were not to be scheduled at times that would conflict with services in the local Church of England parish. Thus, during the Wesleys' lifetimes, the Methodists were not a "church" because they had no ordained ministers of their own. Unlike the Dissenters and Independent churches that flourished in England as protesters against the established Church of England, both John and Charles Wesley were committed to the Church of England and understood their movement to be thoroughly Anglican--even if their intentions of keeping the Methodist movement within the ecclesiastical boundaries of the Church of England were eventually ignored after their deaths. The Wesleys' emphasis on the interior spiritual life--especially the doctrine of Christian perfection--was influenced by previous Anglican writers, including William Law and Jeremy Taylor.
Theologically, the Articles of Faith of the Church of the Nazarene are based very closely on the Methodists' Articles of Religion, which are in turn an abridgement (by John Wesley himself) of the Church of England's Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. Many of the key theological terms and turns of phrases in our Articles of Faith can be traced back to the Church of England's Thirty-Nine Articles. Some congregations in the Church of the Nazarene base their worship services on the liturgy in the Book of Common Prayer, and a few congregations actually use the Book of Common Prayer in worship. Many of the rites contained in The Church Rituals Handbook (put together in 1997 by Jesse Middendorf, published by Nazarene Publishing House) are adapted from the Book of Common Prayer. Although our Article of Faith on entire sanctification has no parallel in the Thirty-Nine Articles, the Wesleys' understanding of Christian perfection (as noted previously) was deeply influenced by Anglican writers William Law (particularly his books A Practical Treatise Upon Christian Perfection and A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life) and Jeremy Taylor (whose books The Rule and Exercises of Holy Living and The Rule and Exercises of Holy Dying were especially influential). The deep catholicity expressed in the opening paragraph of the Manual's "Historical Statement" likewise reflects the Church of the Nazarene's deep Anglican roots.
Given both our historical roots and our theological roots, the Wesleyan tradition is unquestionably Anglican.
From where Anglicans stand in the "middle way" between Roman Catholics and Protestants, there are "extremes" on both sides that Anglicans wish to avoid. On the Roman Catholic side, for example, we reject the insistence that the Bishop of Rome--the pope--has primacy as the spiritual leader of all of God's Church, and we reject the doctrine that papal teachings ex cathedra are infallible. On the Protestant side, we are best off avoiding the overemphasis on sola scriptura, which dismisses the role of the "tradition of the Church" and, when taken to its ultimate conclusion, seems inevitably to lead to fundamentalistic approaches to Scripture. This, it seems to me, is the fatal flaw of Protestantism.
On the positive side, we have been enriched by both Roman Catholics and Protestants. From the Roman Catholics we get our deep respect for the tradition of the Church (as enunciated in the opening paragraph of the Manual's "Historical Statement"), a high view of the role of sacraments, and an appreciation for our general superintendents as "bishops" in the Church--and not merely political leaders who campaign for election (as is the case in many Protestant denominations). From the Protestants we gain our strong emphasis on the importance of the "new birth" as well as the vital spirituality that the Pietists encouraged.
"It is time the Church of Jesus Christ overcame the disjunctions created by the 16th-century Reformation. What is called for is the 'evangelical catholicism' of John Wesley's 'middle way' in which the two historic Christian traditions were synthesized. In this synthesis the English Reformer not only recovered for the Church a viable doctrine of holiness but also pointed the way to a scriptural view and practice of the sacraments that is both apostolic and catholic." --William M. Greathouse, former General Superintendent, Church of the Nazarene, in "Foreword" to Rob L. Staples, Outward Sign and Inward Grace: The Place of Sacraments in Wesleyan Spirituality.
***
I think that Tom did a great job expressing this position!
A couple of additional considerations came up in our subsequent conversation. - First, Tom pointed out that the
Manual for the Church of the Nazarene nowhere identifies us as Protestants. In fact, that term was replaced by the term
Christian in 2005 (where it was situated in a section in the Appendix). - Nevertheless, it seems that those who handle the denominational website (and perhaps, too, I think in the "Nazarene Essentials" and "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism" editions of
Holiness Today) do identify us as Protestant. Of course, it must be pointed out that the two HT volumes are expected to make changes over time. Perhaps, especially as the latter volume changes when the new
Manual comes out, it could make this change in wording (if, indeed, it is actually referenced in that volume!). It should also be pointed out that neither the website, nor HT carry the authority of the
Manual.Second, Tom points out that the "Historical Statement" in the
Manual starts with the early church and catholicity, and then immediately moves in the second paragraph to the Wesleys and Methodism--without even giving a tip of the hat to the Protestant reformers.
Third, I would like to see the fact that Wesley, himself, in his context, identifies himself (and Anglicanism) as Protestant over against the Church of Rome. I believe that this
could be addressed, but I have not seen it specifically taken up.
Fourth, I pointed out that the World Methodist Council, of which the Church of the Nazarene is a member denomination, uses the terminology of "evangelical, catholic and reformed," which points to the Anglican
via media.
Finally, I want to express my thanks to Rev'd. Miles for graciously agreeing to allow me to post his comments on my blog!
