The Purpose and Function of the Thirty-Nine Articles

Externally the Church of England, and the majority of Anglican Churches, are marked by a clear doctrinal attitude. Ministers accept allegiance to a distinct statement of faith. They declare this allegiance when they are instituted to office. Indeed, in their ordination they undertake to “minister the doctrine of Christ . . . as this Church hath received the same”. In these circumstances it might be expected that, granted a healthy and legitimate divergence in points of interpretation, both Anglicans and non-Anglicans should know without unreasonable ambiguity what is Anglican teaching and what is not, and that the Articles enshrining and attesting this teaching should hold a place of true honour in the life and thinking of the Church.

Instead, modern Anglicanism presents a picture of sorry confusion to the non-Anglican world. Conflicting statements are made, all claiming to represent the genuine Anglican position. Pulpits are centres of the most diverse propaganda. No one but the historian knows what is Anglican doctrine in the official sense, and the historians themselves are capable of reading back modern conflicts and contentions into the canonical documents. For the most part the Articles which are nominally accepted are ignored, evaded, reinterpreted, or dismissed as irrelevant. Pride is even taken in the fact that Anglicans can believe and teach more or less anything or nothing as seems right in their own opinion. The strange suggestion is even made that the framers of the Articles had something of this confusion in view, and consciously worded their statements with such looseness or flexibility as to make it possible. The decay of genuine dogmatics in the Church is a not unexpected consequence. Such basic theology as there is tends for the most part away from the real Anglican tradition, and debases itself by evading rather than confronting the challenge of the confession and the summons to real doctrinal succession. To read more, click here.