Lost In the Turns of the Labyrinth: A Further Look at the “Three Streams-One River” View of Anglicanism

By Robin G. Jordan

The “three steams, one river” is a phrase used to describe a view of Anglicanism that has gained popularity in the United States. Among the basic premises of this view of Anglicanism is the idea that Anglicanism as a system of beliefs and practices is not static but is evolving. The original concept of evolving doctrine is traceable to the nineteenth century Tractarian theologian and later Roman Catholic cardinal John Henry Newman and his theory of doctrinal development. It is an idea that proponents of this view of Anglicanism share with the proponents of the liberal view of Anglicanism that influences thinking in the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church. The proponents of both views of Anglicanism attribute this doctrinal evolution to the Holy Spirit.

The broader concept of a church that embodies an evolving system of beliefs and practices is traceable to the nineteenth century Anglican theologian  Fredrick Dennison Maurice who envisioned the evolution of a divided Christianity into a united body that rose above the "diversities and partialities of its individual members, factions, and sects" and was characterized by six marks, or signs--"baptism, creeds, set forms of worship, the eucharist, an ordained ministry, and the Bible."*

Maurice was an interesting character. He was denied matriculation from Cambridge due to his rejection of the Thirty-Nine Articles. He later reversed his position in 1830 and was permitted to graduate from Oxford. His ecumenical views expressed in  The Kingdom of Christ (1838) aroused the suspicions of orthodox Anglicans who were alarmed by the Romeward movement that was gaining traction in some quarters of the Church of England. Maurice was an early proponent of the Christian Socialist movement. The publication of his Theological Essays in 1853 caused a furor. In these essays he expressed his disbelief in the eternity of hell. His views would cost him his teaching post at King’s College, Cambridge. Maurice’s contemporaries were divided in their opinion of him. Some described him as brilliant; others as scattered-brained and incomprehensible. Later critics have described his most of his writings as obscure.

Maurice has influenced the thinking of the proponents of the liberal view of Anglicanism as well as that of the proponents of the “three streams, one river” view.

Based upon its acceptance of the foregoing premise and a number of other premises, the “three streams, one river” view of Anglicanism may be described as a form of syncretism. The following definition of syncretism is taken from a Wikipedia article on the topic.

Syncretism is the combining of different beliefs, while blending practices of various schools of thought. Syncretism involves the merging or assimilation of several originally discrete traditions, especially in the theology and mythology of religion, thus asserting an underlying unity and allowing for an inclusive approach to other faiths.

The “three streams, one river” view of Anglicanism endeavors to unite three disparate theological traditions—Catholicism, evangelicalism, and Pentecostalism—into a single theological system. It also attempts to blend their distinct practices into a single ecclesial praxis. The underlying unity that it asserts is a common faith defined by the Nicene Creed. On this basis it adopts an inclusive approach to these theological traditions. Such an approach assumes that all three traditions are to some extent true and therefore represent valid ways by which salvation may be obtained.

Leonardo De Chirico draws attention to three flaws in this thinking. First, different theological traditions have different theological understandings of the words of the Nicene Creed. While they may give the appearance of saying the same things, they are in actuality saying different things. Second, “the theology of the various traditions is today characterized by a doctrinal and spiritual stratification that is irreversible and no longer that of Nicaea.” The Nicene Creed does not unite Catholicism, evangelicalism, and Pentecostalism because these theological traditions “have developed different dogmas and practices in their histories in all key areas of the Christian faith.” It is not a common denominator. Third, these theological traditions ascribe a different role to the profession of a creed. Reciting the same words is not synonymous with believing the same doctrine. It does not foster unity of belief. See “Is the Nicene Faith the Basis for Ecumenism?”

Theological inclusivism is a form of religious pluralism and represents the influence of our post-modern, post Christian culture upon the church. Theological inclusivism has been described as a capitulation to contemporary culture on the basis that it adopts individualistic notions of being non-judgmental and tolerant, which are prevalent in the West. It embraces the idea of multiple, equally-valid interpretations of Scripture. No one tradition has a monopoly upon the truth.

While Richard Hooker took the position that a Roman Catholic might obtain salvation, he rejected the notion that a Roman Catholic could obtain salvation through adherence to the beliefs and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. He was not advocating theological inclusivism. What he was essentially saying is that God is sovereign in all matters. The Scriptures teach that God has mercy on those he would have mercy. It is presumptuous to assume that all members of a particular theological tradition are utterly beyond redemption. Unfortunately Hooker’s position has been misinterpreted and misused as an argument for supporting the retention of doctrine and practices that conflict with the Scriptures or are incongruent with them.

Syncretic systems of beliefs and practices are seldom if ever an equal balance of the beliefs and practices of the theological traditions from which they were formed. The beliefs and practices of one or more of these traditions will dominate. Syncretism often occurs when a new religion officially replaces an older religion but the population retains a measure of loyalty to the older beliefs and practices. These beliefs and practices may be assimilated into the new religion in which they may acquire new forms.

For example, the contemporary practice of labyrinth walking was inspired by the labyrinth of the cathedral at Chartes. While some claim that walking that labyrinth was a substitute for taking the arduous pilgrimage to the Jerusalem and the Holy Land, we really do not know the purpose of the labyrinth. Chartres, however, is located in a region of France that was historically known for its devotion to the Blessed Virgin in the Middles Ages and for its devotion to the mother-goddess in an earlier age.

The labyrinth is an icon of the mother-goddess. Engravings of the labyrinth adorn the entrance of ancient tombs, showing that those interred in these tombs were under her protection. The passage to the entrance of a number of sites dedicated to her worship took the form of a labyrinth and found within its winding ways numerous stone axes, votive offerings to the goddess. The cross at the center of the Chartres cathedral labyrinth was a labyris, or ax, another icon of the goddess, in depictions of these earlier labyrinths.

The cathedral at Chartres was built on the site of an ancient Roman temple, which was built on the site of an even older Celtic temple.

In evaluating a syncretic system of beliefs and practices one must first identify the dominant tradition or traditions and the secondary traditions, which have been assimilated or merged in the system. Then one must determine how they have been integrated into the whole.

In the case of the Anglican Church in North America one must take a look at the existing and proposed formularies of the province and the particular emphases of each diocese and congregation. The constitution and canons of the ACNA, which have been adopted by the Provincial Council and approved by the Provincial Assembly and are therefore binding upon all the province’s dioceses, clergy, and congregations, favor the Catholic theological tradition. The proposed catechism, rites, and services of the ACNA, which do not presently have official standing according to a strict interpretation of the provisions of the ACNA’s governing documents but only enjoy the endorsement of the College of Bishops give a large place to the Catholic theological tradition. Where they do not prescribe Catholic doctrine and practices, they permit them. The syncretic system of beliefs and practices that these existing and proposed formularies establish has a strong Catholic flavor. The evangelical and Pentecostal theological traditions are secondary and in a number of key areas are overshadowed by the Catholic theological tradition or are not discernible at all.

At the diocesan and local levels we find some variation. Some embrace the official and unofficial positions of the province while others display a measure of independence from those positions and adopt their own emphases, judging by diocesan and church websites.

The Catholic theological tradition so dominates the system of beliefs and practices established by the Anglican Church in North America’s existing and proposed formularies that one is forced to question whether it is truly a syncretic system. From a Catholic perspective it may not be. Historically the Catholic theological tradition is not tolerant of the beliefs and practices of other theological traditions. From a Catholic viewpoint it may be more of a transitional system—a system intended to facilitate a transition to a far more Catholic system. Once non-Catholic clergy and congregations have come to accept this system of beliefs and practices, they will become more open to Catholic distinctives—invocation of the saints, Mariolatry, eucharistic adoration, and the like. The system does not prevent Catholic clergy and congregations from engaging in such practices. It does not impose them on clergy and congregations who are unaccustomed to them. What it does do is expose non-Catholic clergy and congregations to Catholic views of episcopacy, apostolic succession, the priesthood, the order of salvation, and the sacraments. It accommodates the evangelical and Pentecostal theological traditions on issues on which the proponents of the Catholic theological tradition could not wring concessions from their proponents or on matters that the proponents of the Catholic theological tradition considers relatively unimportant. It is a system that is intended to appeal to more theologically inclusivist of the non-Catholic clergy and congregations in the Anglican Church in North America, what may be described as its liberal element—the element within the ACNA, which shares the Catholic element’s penchant for ritualism and which is most open to Catholic beliefs and practices and most willing to discard its evangelical or Pentecostal views on the assumption that it is contributing to greater unity in the church.

Anglo-Catholicism and liberalism have a strange relationship. They have a number of things in common. While they have different consensuses regarding the meaning of Scripture, they both view Scripture as too complicated for ordinary laypeople to understand and are insistent that the church must interpret Scripture for them. They both have strong proclivity for ritualism. They both have contributed to the erosion of the Anglican Church’s doctrinal foundation—the Holy Scriptures and the historic Anglican formularies. The Tractarian movement which gave birth to the Anglo-Catholic movement was opposed to liberalism. However, it benefitted from liberal attitudes in the Church of England and her daughter churches. So did the Anglo-Catholic movement. Liberalism provided a ladder up which the Anglo-Catholic movement was able to climb to acceptance and ascendency. Anglo-Catholicism would in turn provide a ladder up which liberalism was able to climb to acceptance and ascendency. Conservative Anglo-Catholics will adamantly deny this relationship. However, if one looks around the Anglican Communion, one cannot help but notice that liberalism is flourishing in the provinces where Anglo-Catholicism took root.

While the syncreticism of the Anglican Church in North America is of a different order than that of the Episcopal Church, the ACNA, like the Episcopal Church is lost in the turns of the labyrith.  Just as every Episcopal church does not smudge its worship space with burning sage and rub Tibetan singing bowls after each Scripture reading, every ACNA church does not embrace this syncreticm with the same degree of willingness and enthusiasm. Some do not welcome it at all. As long as ACNA leaders do not repudiate it, this syncretism will be a part of the ACNA for the foreseeable future. Where it will take the ACNA, only time will tell.

*The reformed Church of England during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth century exhibited these six marks. Except where Anglo-Catholicism and liberalism have muddied the water, the Anglican Church retains them. These six marks are not the product of a merging of disparate theological traditions. They resulted from adherence to the teaching of Scripture and the doctrine and principles of the historic Anglican formularies and the central Anglican theological tradition. This would have been evident to Maurice’s nineteenth century critics.