This Is The Stuff, Right Here
Embryo Parson Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 01:39AM
Renewing the Anglican Tradition from St. Matthew's Church on Vimeo.
In a comment below, ABH writes:
For what it's worth, I have been attending St. Matthew's in Newport Beach (a flagship parish of the ACC) for a few months now, and it doesn't particularly strike me as Anglo-Catholic. There are some liturgical choices made which I suppose are Anglo-Catholic (e.g. the placement of the Gloria), and the Eucharistic real presence plays a central role in the congregation's piety, but the whole tenor of the parish doesn't *feel* Anglo-Catholic. Not that I am an authority on such matters, but I thought I'd throw it out there. And both Calvin and Luther are sold in the bookstore. That says something, I suppose.
By the way, it is a REMARKABLE parish. I hesitate to use the word "anointed," because it's loaded, but seriously, the Holy Ghost's presence is (almost?) palpable. There is a weightiness about the worship — a weightiness that goes beyond the "well, liturgical worship is by nature weighty." The congregation prays with earnest intensity.
The Lord has blessed St. Matthew's. I'm not sure what it is — I've been trying to figure that out. But the Lord's hand is upon it. I hope and pray that St. Matthew's can be a model to the rest of the ACC, and to the rest of Continuing Anglicanism.
THIS is what "reformed Catholicism" really is. What St. Matt's seeks to renew is **classical** Anglicanism, which is an Anglicanism that knows there was a Reformation, and embraces it.
Reader Comments (3)
EP,
I'm new to the Anglican world, so I'm not sure what constitutes classical Anglicanism, but St. Matthew's does seem to be a step above classical Anglicanism, if also a step below Anglo-Catholicism. Fr. Mark Becher made an offhand comment about the 39 Articles "not being doctrine" recently in a conversation, and I didn't press him on what he meant exactly. I probably should at some point. I've learned that Anglo-Catholics are notorious for dismissing the 39 Articles. Also, Would Edward Pusey be considered classically Anglican? Because I went to a Thursday morning service of Holy Communion last month around his feast day and Fr. Stephen Scarlett gave a short homily in praise of Pusey and his efforts in church reform. Is that a very classically Anglican thing to do?
Not that I care all that much. As I said, the parish is remarkable. God is there. I am just thankful to be apart of it.
Also, it may sound trite, but can't we all just get along? I thought one of the virtues of the Anglican tradition was its latitudinarianism. In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity. Right?
ABH, what prompted me to declare this to be representative of classical Anglicanism was Fr. Dcn. Schwendimann's statement about being "Catholic and Reformed" and Fr. Scarlett's statement concerning the centrality of the Bible and the message regarding the necessity of conversion. I am happy as well that Luther and Calvin are being sold in the bookstore.
That being said, St. Matt's IS a parish of the ACC, which does embrace the Anglo-Catholic tradition. However, based on things I heard from Fr. Scarlett and others when I was out there in June, I believe the leadership St. Matt's is somewhat selective, or discerning, about that tradition. Therefore, it's possible for Scarlett to sing the praises of a great Tractarian such as Pusey on the one hand without him necessarily embracing the entire modern Anglo-Catholic outlook on the other. He just doesn't come across as an Anglo-Catholic to me.
I agree with you that St. Matt's is a remarkable church, and I'm glad you're there. If I lived in that area, I would attend there as well. But as is apparent from my posts here, my issue isn't with St. Matt's, but where the ACC as a church body MAY be going. Note the emphasis: I may have it wrong. I hope I do, because, like you, I really do want to see Anglo-Catholics and classical Anglicans "get along." That's precisely why Haverland's dismissal of the idea of comprehensiveness, long an Anglican ideal, troubles me.
Two points concerning the 39 Articles: 1) As Anglicans, we are to believe in the primacy of Scripture. If the Articles are merely a compendium of the teaching of Scripture, then they must be considered doctrinally authoritative; 2) I follow Frs. Hart and Wells on this. Their inclusion in the BCP for all intents and purposes makes them an Anglican formulary. Interestingly enough, I'm having lunch here in Denver with Fr. Becher tomorrow. I intend to broach the subject with him.