In a post, below, 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!
11 comments:
Thanks for this article for both historical and contemporary application. Especially this week of celebration of the reformation. Richard Waller
Good read! Thanks!
Thanks, Richard Waller & Ken Bushey for your comments!
Joseph Zheng, I will see if I can get Tom to respond to your comments. I do not have the historical knowledge off the top of my head to respond intelligently (though I have plenty of resources in my library).
However, I do know that the concept of Wesley drawing on Protestant and Catholic thought (and Eastern thought) for his theology is well known. Obviously, Wesley was not Calvinist, nor was he Lutheran. His thoughts really can be understood to be catholic and reformed.
Further, I know plenty of Anglicans who lay claim to the concept as presented in the blog. - But, as I said, a response from Tom would be much better than from me.
Good stuff. I like that you acknowledge the complexity of the issues.
Tom
Joseph Zheng, upon a little further reflection, I recall that the term, via media, was used in reference to the Elizabethan Settlement. After Mary's reign, when Elizabeth took the throne, she reinstituted the Book of Common Prayer and took a moderating position bringing together catholic and protestant ideas. "In other words, the Church had the ceremonial, sacraments, and hierarchy of Catholicism combined with a more Protestant approach to the Scriptures and justification as something that comes by faith" (Ryan Danker, Holiness Today. Sept./Oct. 2017).
Here is another blog that addresses the issue:
http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/2009/04/via-media-refined.html
Thanks, Tom Oord!
Joseph, what follows (in two comments due to length!)is Tom Miles thorough response, which he emailed to me:
Joseph,
Thank you for your response.
I am using the term via media as a descriptor of the shape of the Anglican tradition in the wake of the Elizabethan Settlement and in light of Richard Hooker's thought. The term via media came along much later, but it was meant to describe the enduring shape of the English Church as it took form in the Elizabethan Settlement and in the ideals of Hooker.
In the previous post in this blog, Dr. Stepp linked to a video from Dr. Larry Wood of Asbury Theological Seminary. Dr. Wood talks about how the primary debate in the English Church was with the Puritans, who represented a strong Calvinist perspective. The immediate context in which the Elizabethan Settlement was forged was that many of the Protestant sympathizers who had fled England during the reign of Bloody Mary had gone to France or the Netherlands, where they had been part of Calvinist communities. They returned to England with strong Calvinist opinions, and the Scottish reformer John Knox likewise brought strong Calvinist opinions to the table.
The immediate context of the Elizabethan Settlement (and Hooker's thought) was geared towards forging a middle ground between the extremes of Reformed Protestants and the Roman church. That this middle ground was not satisfactory to many of the Marian Exiles who returned to England led to the rise of Puritans as a protest to the Church of England, as the Puritans sought to "purify" the church of remaining Catholic influences, seeking a more thorough reformation than what the Elizabethan Settlement set forth.
So the via media of Anglicanism is, in my judgment, in its original context, between Rome and Reformed (Calvinist) Protestants.
None of this happened in a vacuum, though. Although to a lesser extent than the immediate context of the Elizabethan Settlement, Lutherans had also influenced the English church along the way. Certainly Thomas Cranmer had been in conversation with Lutherans early in the English reformation and been influenced in certain areas by Lutheran thought.
I would like to point out that what I wrote above is an interpretive overview of this material. It is not meant to be a standalone piece. My students do the work of reading through the various sixteenth-century reformations, and thus already have in place the data of names, places, doctrines, etc., before I offer this piece as a way of thinking through the implications and consequences of the more detailed material they have been engaging, and, in particular, how we ought to think about the place of the Wesleyan tradition. So this piece assumes the reader already has a more detailed knowledge of the sixteenth-century reformations.
In thinking about the relationship between Wesleyans and Protestantism in general, my piece is intended to address the place of the Anglican tradition vis-à-vis all of the reformation movements we have examined--the Lutheran Reformation, the Swiss Reformation, the Catholic Reformation, the English Reformation, and the Anabaptist Reformation. In my view, and I think this view is widely accepted, the Lutheran, Swiss (Reformed), and Anabaptist reformations are collectively the "Protestant" traditions of Christianity. So this is an overview of the place of Anglicans between the collective Protestants and the Tridentine Roman church.
(Tom's reply, part 2)
In some ways Lutherans might also represent a middle ground between Roman Catholicism and some of the extremes of the Reformed Tradition. Like Anglicans, Luther did retain more of the liturgy than did the Calvinists or anabaptists. But Luther was more vehement about sola scriptura and rejection of the Tradition of the Church as a source of our knowledge of God than Anglicans have been. Luther rejected the deuterocanonical books, and although he continued to print them in a separate section of the Bible, it wasn't long before Lutherans quit printing them in Bibles and quit reading them. In this regard, Anglicans represent a middle ground between Lutherans and Roman Catholics--the Thirty-Nine Articles give the deuterocanonical books a lesser place than the other 66 books "of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church," but Anglicans have continued to use the deuterocanonical books "for example of life and instruction of manners," and the deuterocanonical books still appear in the Anglican lectionary (and John Wesley has a few references to deuterocanonical texts sprinkled throughout his writings).
Furthermore, Luther tore away at the role of priests as standing between the people and God, particularly with regard to penance. The concept of the priesthood of all believers is another area where Anglicans and Lutherans are not on the same page, and Anglicans find a middle ground between Lutherans and Roman Catholics. The common Anglican aphorism regarding confession to a priest ("All may, none must, some should") reflects this middle ground. Furthermore, Anglicanism has continued to emphasize the role of an ordained priest as a vicar of Christ who can, by the grace of God in ordination, speak in persona christi. The rite for the Reconciliation of a Penitent in the 1979 U.S. Episcopal Book of Common Prayer makes a careful and clear distinction between a priest or bishop, who can pronounce absolution in persona christi ("Our Lord Jesus Christ, who has left power to his Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive you all your offenses; and by his authority committed to me, I absolve you from all your sins...."), and any other Christian who might hear a confession, who may provide only a declaration of forgiveness ("Our Lord Jesus Christ, who offered himself to be sacrificed for us to the Father, forgives your sins by the grace of the Holy Spirit") but may not pronounce absolution [1979 BCP, pp. 446ff]. On a related note, Anglicans have been more careful to emphasize the continuity of the apostolic succession--another middle ground between Rome and the Protestants. So the understanding of the priesthood and, in particular, a higher emphasis on the importance of ordination for priestly ministry, is another area where Anglicans find a middle ground between Lutheran Protestants and Roman Catholics.
The anabaptist reformation was even more radical, and most anabaptist positions are sufficiently on the fringe (at least as far as Anglicans are concerned) that I assume it's unnecessary to go into much further detail. But many churches in the Wesleyan tradition have indeed embraced the anabaptist concept of a Believers Church, one area where the Wesleyan wing of Anglicanism has found a Protestant influence in the via media between Protestants and Roman Catholics. But anabaptist notions have been destructive as well. Anabaptist ideas foreign, even antithetical, to Wesleyan theology have exerted other, much more corrosive, influences on some Wesleyan churches, particularly with regard to baptismal theology and practices.
These are the reasons I believe that, as a generalization and interpretive overview, the Anglican tradition as it emerged from the Elizabethan Settlement does indeed represent a via media between, on the one hand, the three major Protestant reformation movements collectively, and, on the other hand, the Tridentine Roman Catholic Church.
Post a Comment