Monksthorpe Baptist Chapel in
Lincolnshire England |
Well, back to our overview of the history of the Church of
England. My last posting about the
tension over the consecration of women bishops that led the Archbishop of York
to recuse himself from consecrating the Rt. Rev. Philip North as the Bishop of
Burnley out of (what I think is a misguided) respect for North’s objection to
the ordination of women in favor of consecrators who have so far refused to
participate in the consecration of the (to date) sole woman Bishop in the
Church of England, demonstrates the sort of ecclesial breakdown that the
English and other Protestant Reformations led to. Once the unity of the Church is no longer an
absolute value, differences of theological opinion will inevitably open fissures
in the Body of Christ. And the breakdown
of unity in the Church is quite literally the devil’s work.
Our word “devil” comes from the French diable from the Latin diabolus
from the Greek διαβολειν comes from the Greek to divide or to scatter. The
Devil is the one who divides, sets people against one another. The Kingdom of God gathers all creation into
One in Christ; the kingdom of the Evil One is set upon shattering that unity.
We left off the saga of the Church of England with the abolition
of the episcopacy and the emergence of Separatist groups that began to erode
the unity of the Church in the mid-seventeenth century. With the abolition of
Bishops and the adoption of a Presbyterian form of Church governance, the
Congregationalist faction became dominant in the Church of England, but even
this development did not satisfy more radical believers. We saw how the Baptists emerged from the
Puritan movement. Baptists rejected any
liturgical forms whatever, even the very Calvinist forms of worship suggested
by the Directory for Public Worship. There had to be an explicit warrant found
in the New Testament for any thing done in worship. Some did not even permit
the reading of scripture since the scriptures were translations of the received
texts and thus of human origin. Sacraments were replaced by “ordinances” (those
things mandated or “ordered” by Christ
in the New Testament, namely baptism [“go baptize all nations”] and holy
communion [“do this in memory of me”]). Baptism
was performed by full immersion and only to those able to make their own
confession of faith.
But even the Baptists didn’t satisfy the desire of many for a
more radical approach to Christianity.
Among many of the adherents of the more radical sects emerging
from the various Reformations that continued to divide and subdivide
Christianity in Western and Central Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth
century there was a strain of anti-clericalism.
The Reformation ideal of the priesthood of all believers made the idea
of an ordained clergy seem somewhat a frivolous excess that was an unnecessary
encumbrance on the right of each believer to interpret the scriptures for him
or her self. This was certainly true
in England where while the Congregationalist/Presbyterian establishment
retained clergy and even the Baptists normally had recognized preachers, among
the various dissenting sects the option was to allow each believer to have his
(and sometimes her) own say about what was true Christian faith and
practice. Any sort of sacramental
practice usually fell away in such priest-less assemblies and congregations
pretty much focused on Bible Study and discussion. Without a theologically
trained clergy religion most usually became an intellectual free-for-all with
opinions and beliefs ranging from pure rationalism to illuminist mysticism shot
through with unbridled psychosis. Often
these groups, unfamiliar with or rejecting of the historic Creeds devolved into
an anti-Trinitarianism or at least a practical Arianism which demoted Christ
from the Divine Nature and led to theological unitarianism (not to be confused
with modern Unitarian/Universalism) that remained Christocentric but not
Christotheistic. Dissenters also often
embraced the idea of an immanent return of Christ to establish his Kingdom on
earth in a radical and egalitarian social upheaval. The doctrine of Original Sin also faded from
belief among the various dissenter groups along with the doctrine of pre-destination
so essential to the Calvinist Anglicans of Elizabeth’s and James’ reigns. In place of an anthropology of fallen
humanity was a certain quasi-Pelagiaism that emphasized the essential natural
goodness of human nature. There also was
a certain ambiguity about the afterlife with a collapse of the traditional
ideas of heaven and hell. All this was
sometimes complicated by a fascination with the theories attributed to Hermes
Trismegistus, a mystical writer of the Graeco-Egyptian culture of late
antiquity whose writings paralleled the development both of Christianity and
Gnosticism and have elements in common with each. As can be imagined,
Dissenters devolved from orthodox Christianity into a variety of confusing and
often mutually contradictory beliefs. It
was a theological Woodstock—electric, creative, free of rules and structure,
and off the flipping wall.
One of the groups that emerged out of this theological chaos
were the Seekers. They really weren’t a
sect in as that you could be a Seeker and belong to another sect. There were no defining creeds, no sacraments.
They saw “The Church” as a voluntary association of believers, without a fixed
creed, free of State coercion or supervision, and anxious to evangelize. They expected Christ to return to earth and
their spirituality was to prepare themselves for his Second Coming. Their worship was to meet and to sit in
silent expectation of God to reveal himself to the individual soul. Quakerism, which we will talk about in our
next posting on this subject, grew out of the Seekers.
Thank you for bringing into relief the prevailing ideas or philosophies that have supported the many faceted divisions through out the post Reformation society. It begins to call into question a more serious reflection on unbridled free speech on anything that may enter a person's mind. It appears that the evolution of thought along the lines: each man his own pope, to each man his own king, to each man his own god, to where many find themselves as each man is own nothing. Where does one go from here?
ReplyDelete