Anglicanism

===Theories===
{{multiple image
| align     = right
| direction = horizontal
| total_width = 330
| header    = Leaders of the [[Tractarian]] movement
| image1    = Edward Bouverie Pusey.jpg
| width1    = 302
| height1 = 355
| caption1  = [[Edward Bouverie Pusey]]
| image2    = John-Henry-Newman.gif
| width2    = 600
| height2 = 811
| caption2  = [[John Henry Newman]]
}}

Anglicanism was seen as a middle way, or ''via media'', between two branches of Protestantism, Lutheranism and Reformed Christianity.<ref name="Anglican and Episcopal History"/> In their rejection of absolute parliamentary authority, the [[Oxford Movement|Tractarians]], especially [[John Henry Newman]], looked back to the writings of 17th-century Anglican divines, finding in these texts the idea of the English church as a ''via media'' between the Protestant and Catholic traditions.{{sfn|Morris|2003}} This view was associated – especially in the writings of [[Edward Bouverie Pusey]] – with the theory of Anglicanism as one of three "[[Branch Theory|branches]]" (alongside the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches) historically arising out of the common tradition of the earliest [[ecumenical councils]]. Newman himself subsequently rejected his theory of the ''via media'', as essentially historicist and static and hence unable to accommodate any dynamic development within the church.{{sfn|Morris|2003}} Nevertheless, the aspiration to ground Anglican identity in the writings of the 17th-century divines and in faithfulness to the traditions of the [[Church Fathers]] reflects a continuing theme of Anglican ecclesiology, most recently in the writings of [[Henry Robert McAdoo]].{{sfn|McAdoo|1991}}

The Tractarian formulation of the theory of the ''via media'' between Protestantism and Catholicism was essentially a party platform, and not acceptable to Anglicans outside the confines of the [[Oxford Movement]]. However, this theory of the via media was reworked in the ecclesiological writings of [[Frederick Denison Maurice]], in a more dynamic form that became widely influential. Both Maurice and Newman saw the Church of England of their day as sorely deficient in faith; but whereas Newman had looked back to a distant past when the light of faith might have appeared to burn brighter, Maurice looked forward to the possibility of a brighter revelation of faith in the future. Maurice saw the Protestant and Catholic strands within the Church of England as contrary but complementary, both maintaining elements of the true church, but incomplete without the other; such that a true catholic and evangelical church might come into being by a union of opposites.{{sfn|Sykes|1978|p=16}}

Central to Maurice's perspective was his belief that the collective elements of family, nation, and church represented a divine order of structures through which God unfolds his continuing work of creation. Hence, for Maurice, the Protestant tradition had maintained the elements of national distinction which were amongst the marks of the true universal church, but which had been lost within contemporary Catholicism in the internationalism of centralised papal authority. Within the coming universal church that Maurice foresaw, national churches would each maintain the six signs of catholicity: baptism, Eucharist, the creeds, Scripture, an episcopal ministry, and a fixed liturgy (which could take a variety of forms in accordance with divinely ordained distinctions in national characteristics).{{sfn|Morris|2003}} This vision of a becoming universal church as a congregation of autonomous national churches proved highly congenial in Anglican circles; and Maurice's six signs were adapted to form the [[Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral]] of 1888.{{sfn|Woodhouse-Hawkins|1988}}

In the latter decades of the 20th century, Maurice's theory, and the various strands of Anglican thought that derived from it, have been criticised by [[Stephen Sykes]],{{sfn|Sykes|1978|p=19}} who argues that the terms ''Protestant'' and ''Catholic'' as used in these approaches are synthetic constructs denoting ecclesiastic identities unacceptable to those to whom the labels are applied. Hence, the Catholic Church does not regard itself as a party or strand within the universal church – but rather identifies itself as the universal church. Moreover, Sykes criticises the proposition, implicit in theories of ''via media'', that there is no distinctive body of Anglican doctrines, other than those of the universal church; accusing this of being an excuse not to undertake systematic doctrine at all.{{sfn|Sykes|1978|p=53}}

Contrariwise, Sykes notes a high degree of commonality in Anglican liturgical forms and in the doctrinal understandings expressed within those liturgies. He proposes that Anglican identity might rather be found within a shared consistent pattern of prescriptive liturgies, established and maintained through [[Canon law of the Anglican Communion|canon law]], and embodying both a historic deposit of formal statements of doctrine, and also framing the regular reading and proclamation of scripture.{{sfn|Sykes|1978|p=44}} Sykes nevertheless agrees with those heirs of Maurice who emphasise the incompleteness of Anglicanism as a positive feature, and quotes with qualified approval the words of [[Michael Ramsey]]:

{{Blockquote|For while the Anglican church is vindicated by its place in history, with a strikingly balanced witness to Gospel and Church and sound learning, its greater vindication lies in its pointing through its own history to something of which it is a fragment. Its credentials are its incompleteness, with the tension and the travail of its soul. It is clumsy and untidy, it baffles neatness and logic. For it is not sent to commend itself as 'the best type of Christianity,' but by its very brokenness to point to the universal Church wherein all have died.{{sfn|Ramsey|1936|p=220}}}}