Albany Via Media

July 13, 2011

To the Editor:

However reasonable and constructive Dr. Brown's response to Bob Dodd's letter appears, its characterization of the “broad church” is clearly imaginative.

The term itself was coined on the analogy of High Church and Low Church, clearly recognizable liturgical movements within the Church of England in the 19th century. Seeking a middle way between the “long and painful religious disputes” of the time, those who were characterized as broad churchmen “sought to interpret the Anglican formularies in a broad and liberal sense,” according to the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church.

Frederick Denison Maurice was indeed influential in the movement, though he disliked the label. His “philosophical, yet fundamentally orthodox, presentation of theology” was generally misunderstood in his day. He is remembered most for his defense of social reforms in England. Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, another broad churchman, “consistently advocated toleration for both Tractarian and liberal extremes.” He was a leader in advancing the status of Westminster Abbey as a “national shrine for all, irrespective of dogmatic creed.”

Suspicious of what it regards as religious absolutism? That may be a fair characterization. Culturally assimilated and secular? That is going too far, unless a desire for inclusion of all theological perspectives and a concern for social issues is cultural assimilation and secular capitulation. If the moderate and progressive element is in the ascendancy in The Episcopal Church today, it is not a development that I would characterize as “tragic”. Nor would I be offended if Albany Via Media members were linked with the courageous 19th century reformers known to us as “broad church”.

John White