Kinsman On Anglicanism

The section of Reveries of a Hermit most relevant to my purpose is the chapter on Anglicanism. He traces its origin to exclusively secular and political concerns:

Change of religion in Englnd did not arise from a desire for revision such as Luther's, or for rediscovery such as Calvin's. It was the result of the policies of Tudor sovereigns. Four of these successively imposed on their subjects such religious establishment as seemed to them expedient. Henry VIII substituted Royal for Papal supremacy: Edward VI inaugurated changes aiming at English copying of Swiss models: Queen Mary, using Royal Supremacy to replace Papal, brought back Catholicism as far as she could: Queen Elizabeth adopted a series of compromises, intended to reduce to a minimum religious differences within her realm, and her policies have ever since largely prevailed in the English-speaknig world. (pp 122-123)

I simply don't know what's taught now in Eng Lit, but up to the 1970s, this was regarded as a Good Thing, following the Whig Interpretation. Kinsman discusses Elizabeth at greater length:

Elizabeth was a very clever woman, quite capable of insight into theological and ecclesiastical questions: and it is often assumed that she had clear principles. Yet it is probable that all her actions were determined by policy only, by considerations which, for the moment, seemed likely to increase her personal popularity and strengthen her hold on the throne.

. . . Elizabeth wished to please everybody. At her accession, she was twenty-five, accomplished, fascinating. She had Tudor will and effective coquetry. No understanding of her is possible, if there be failure to recognize this latter endowment, and that her statesmanship largely consisted of unique ability to manage men and keep them guessing. She was ready to promise anybody anything, whether she could keep promises or not. When she had to preserve silence, she could give an impression of being in secret sympathy. Her religious policy was an example of her general method.

. . . [T]he Prayer Book had varying details intended to satisfy people with varying views. Everything to which no one objected was authoritatively imposed: in regard to disputed matters, there was no definite decision. . . . The history of Anglicanism is best understood when it is seen that it was always intended to afford basis for three types of thought; that its history has been determined by the interplay of these; and that the distinctive thing about it has been the exercise of the witching wiles of Elizabeth.

. . . There have always been in the Anglican Communion three parties or "schools of thought," each convinced that its interpretation of Anglicanism is right and bound ultimately to prevail. These three types are the Anglo-Catholic, the Anglo-Protestant, and the Anglo-Liberal, "High Church," "Low Church," and "Broad Church."

It is often assumed that Anglo-Catholicism had its origin iin the Oxford Movement a century ago. This, however, was not an innovation, but a revival. From the time of "the Elizabethan Settlement" -- which settled by leaving unsettled -- there have always been Anglicans with Catholic tendencies.

. . . Their watchword was always "Catholic," and their aim the support of Catholic doctrines and practices. Yet, in the party, there was much exercise of private judgment, both in a chronic fastidiousnesss which spent its energy in pointing how everyone else was more or less wrong -- the superciliousness of schism -- and in a wilfulness to follow individual whims. The spirit of Catholicism is obedience. "The Church is all right: and we shalll be, if we submit ourselves and let it form us." Too often the position of Anglo-Catholics has been: "Our Church is all wrong, and we must set it right. It is matter of conscience to show our disapproval by flaunting its constituted authorities, and doing exactly as we please."

. . . Yet, looked at from a purely Anglican environment, Anglo-Catholics have a case. Anglican history and formulas make it clear that, if, in the Church of England, any wish to imagine themselves Catholics, it is intended that they may do so. (pp 127-138)

I went through Anglican confirmation in a Broad Church Episcopalian parish, and what's remarkable to me is that the interpretation the priests gave us of Anglicanism in that class was extremely close to the first several paragraphs of the excerpt from Kinsman here. All of this was not a bug but a feature, and up to recent times, this has been part of the public, and often academic, view of Anglicanism. But there's much more here than I can comment on effectively in this post, so I'll talk more about it in future posts.