What is the Anglican via media?
The Anglican via media is often understood as a middle way between Catholicism and Protestantism, but that’s not true. Anglicanism is via media, a middle way, but it’s between different Protestant traditions, notably the Continental Reformation in cities like Zurich, Strasbourg, and Geneva (i.e., Bullinger, Bucer, and Calvin) in juxtaposition with the German Reformation in Wittenberg (i.e., Luther). In other words, Anglicanism is the attempt to pave a way between different ways of being Protestant. That’s what the Anglican via media was really about!
Let me begin by saying that Anglicanism is the attempt to retain the catholic heritage of the past, it is definitely not burning down everything before 1517. But Anglicanism is also the attempt to retrieve the apostolic message, which could then be leveraged over and against the corruption of the catholic church’s institutions and used to refute some of its more dubious teachings. Note, the effort to recover apostolicity and repair institutions is a Protestant project, and Anglicanism was about finding a way to do that appropriate to the English context.
It is also important to remember that the Anglican tradition does not simply seek a compromise for the sake of a compromise. It’s not like, “I want Italian for dinner and you want Greek, so let’s have a Spaghetti Souvlaki!” Rather, Anglicanism strives to hold in creative tension the insights of different theological streams, recognizing that truth may be found beside or between different contentious ideas.
From the Lutheran tradition, Anglicanism imbibed an emphasis on the authority of the Scripture, the retention of bishops, and an emphasis on the universal grace of God as the foundation of salvation. Anglicanism inherited from the Reformed tradition an appreciation for the sovereignty of God, an emphasis on union with Christ, and a more comprehensive Trinitarian theology.
You see something of the intra-Protestant tension in Anglicanism played out in worship and the understanding of the Eucharist.
On worship, Anglicanism maintains a liturgical and sacramental tradition that balances continuity with the past (which was more Lutheran) and innovation (which was more Reformed). This is why the various prayer books from 1549 to 1662 attempted to resource ancient tradition, while making Scripture foremost, with a view to creating rhythms and habits of piety that brought the worshipper into a fresh experience of divine grace.
On the Eucharist, while Anglicanism rejected a transformationist view where the elements were transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ (held varyingly by Catholics and Lutherans), Anglicanism also distanced itself from the purely symbolic understanding of the Lord's Supper found in some strands of Protestantism (such as Zwingli). Instead, Anglicanism opted for a flexible "middle way" by affirming that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist in a way that is spiritual and mysterious, yet with a degree of freedom granted in how persons can articulate that mystery!
What about Anglo-Catholics?
Anglo-Catholics are a flavour of Anglicanism that loves the sacraments, vestments, hierarchy, and they have a soft spot for the Pope. Surely they are a via media between Protestantism and Catholicism. Well, yes … but no. True, during the English Reformation, there was a Catholic resurgence under Mary, but eventually the Elizabethan Settlement was reinstated, which ensured the Protestant nature of Anglicanism.
To be fair, Anglo-Catholicism is Anglicanism deliberately migrating closer towards Catholicism, and sometimes they even do become Catholic (e.g., John Henry Newman). The Catholics have even created an ordinariate to receive Anglicans so they can be in communion with the Pope even as the worship using Anglican rites and liturgy.
I have to point out, however, that Anglo-Catholicism emerged in the 19th century based on a kind of romantic infatuation with the medieval past and a belief that Protestantism had become a populist corruption of true religion. So Anglo-Catholicism was an innovation within Anglicanism, not its original formula. Plus, theologically speaking, many Ango-Catholics often ended up going in a liberal or progressive direction, which is far from Catholicism.
To be cynical, Anglo-Catholicism, especially the liberal variety is not really a via media, it is more like a via negativa, a way to be neither Anglican nor Catholic. More sympathetically, Anglico-Catholics comprise Anglicans who have a bigger emphasis on the visible church, sacramental life, more emphasis on tradition, and regard the Reformation as a political problem rather than a theological one.
But back to our main point! The Anglican via media is about how to be Protestant in an English way. Anglicanism seeks to avoid the extremes of theological rigidity on one hand and theological minimalism on the other. The Anglican via media is a middle way between different Protestant options. It is not a convenient middle ground between Catholicism and Protestantism. That is because Anglicanism's via media represents a deliberate attempt to integrate insights from different Protestant traditions, offering a rich and complex vision of Christian faith, worship, and liturgical life together.
I have been a priest of the Episcopal church for more than 40 years after attending one of our finest seminaries. I have never heard or read anything even vaguely resembling the confusion of your piece and it’s misinterpretation of history. One must wonder what axe you are grinding?
I tell people that I'm Presbyterian in church membership but, overall, tend to lean Anglican. I would have joined an Anglican church but Anglicanism here in the US (and in TX where I live) is a toss up between Anglo-Catholics and charismatics. The number of Reformed Anglican churches are far and few between.
I'm curious to hear your thoughts on Bray's Anglicanism book. Personally, I've never seen Anglicanism to be a via media between Rome and Geneva. I love that Cranmer took the best of Lutheranism and Continental Reformed as the basis for the BCP (particularly the 1662). I find that a lot of Anglo-Catholics practice historical revisionism to justify their view of Anglicanism. I never understood how the Oxford movement found the evidence they needed to have the CofE return to an "ancient tradition"? I've come across a many Baptists wanting to become Anglicans and go down this route of Anglo-Catholicism. Their history goes back to the 19th century and circumvents Cranmer altogether.
This article is a needed reminder that the Anglican church whose liturgy and theology I loved so much had its roots in the Reformation, is thoroughly Protestant, and enjoys living with the tension of Geneva and Wittenburg. I've found that some of the best theologians I've learned from were Anglican (Christ Wright, Holmes, Sanders, you). As a Presbyterian now I find doing theology, at times, difficult because of the over-emphasis on being a subcriptionist. One day, I'll find a nice Anglican church somewhere and find myself "going home" with the tradition I ended up loving.