No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2009
It is argued that the Windsor Report is a new Anglican ecclesiology that attempts to answer problems within more classical and historically induced and offered Anglican ecclesiologies. In order to reflect this new direction, the authors borrowed ideas from several offsetting loci—including Roman Catholic receptio theology of communion and a more classic magisterial Protestant theology of Scripture—and as such has morphed the understanding of how Anglican authority, in all its forms, might look without opting for a Roman or the, as perceived by many as problematic, Protestant Liberal model. It is asked whether there is a polarity in the above theologies and which theme, if any, must assume the central role in articulating Anglican ecclesiology. I offer that it is the tacit theology of Scripture that is the true strength of the Windsor Report and which needs to be clarified in future discussions on Anglican ecclesiology.
1. de Lubac, Henri, Catholicism: A Study in Dogma in Relation to the Corporate Destiny of Mankind (trans. Sheppard, L.; London: Burns and Oates, 1950), p. 17.Google Scholar
2. See, for example, Avis, Paul, Anglicanism and the Christian Church: Theological Resources in Historical Perspective (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1989)Google Scholar; Authority and Leadership and Conflict in the Church (Philadelphia: Trinity Press, 1992)Google Scholar; Evans, Gillian, Authority in the Church (Norwich: Canterbury Press, 1990)Google Scholar; and Sykes, Stephen W. (ed.), Authority in the Anglican Communion (Toronto: Anglican Book Centre, 1987).Google Scholar
3. See, for example, the following works by De Lubac, Henri: Catholicism (see n. 1 above); The Church: Paradox and Mystery (trans. Dunne, J.; New York: Alba House, 1969)Google Scholar; The Splendour of the Church (trans. Mason, M.; San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986).Google Scholar
4. See on this point, MacIntyre, Alasdair, A Short History of Ethics (New York: MacMillan, 1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Möhler, J.A., Unity in the Church or the Principle of Catholicism (trans. Erb, P.; (Washington DC: Catholic University Press, 1996 [1825]).Google Scholar
6. Kasper, Walter, Theology and the Church (trans. Kohl, M.; New York: Crossroads, 1989).Google Scholar
7. Newman, John Henry, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 1989 [1825])Google Scholar; On Consulting the Faithful (London: Chapman, 1961 [1859])Google Scholar; and Church of the Fathers (London: Burns and Oates, 1868).Google Scholar
8. Blondel, Maurice, The Letter on Apologetics and History and Dogma (trans. Dru, A.; New York: Holt, 1964).Google Scholar
9. Webster, John, Holy Scripture: A Dogmatic Sketch (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar