In Search of Anglican Comprehensiveness: A Study in the Theologies of Hooker, Maurice, and Gore By Matthew Peter Cadwell A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Divinity in the University of Trinity College and the Theological Department of the Toronto School of Theology In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael’s College © Copyright by Matthew Peter Cadwell 2013 In Search of Anglican Comprehensiveness: A Study in the Theologies of Hooker, Maurice, Gore Matthew Peter Cadwell Theological Department Doctor of Philosophy in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2013 Abstract This thesis undertakes a study of the concept and development of Anglican comprehensiveness in light of recent criticism suggesting that the appeal to it is outdated, theologically unjustified, and ecclesiastically unsustainable, as well as advocacy of the comprehensive ethos by contemporary theologians concerned that it has been misrepresented in recent attempts to limit Anglican theological expression and practice. The thesis responds, also, to efforts at narrowing or defining doctrinal boundaries around acceptable Anglican belief and practice in such proposals as the Anglican Communion Covenant. The development of the concept of comprehensiveness is studied through consideration of the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, Lambeth Conference Resolutions, and in statements of ii Anglican doctrinal commissions over the past century. Beyond these official and semi-official statements, the theological core of the thesis is an in-depth study of the thought and context of three foundational and pre-eminent theologians credited with promoting the comprehensive view in critical eras of the tradition’s development: Richard Hooker in the sixteenth century, F. D. Maurice in the mid-nineteenth century, and Charles Gore in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The thesis does not attempt to evaluate the adequacy of the thought of Hooker, Maurice, and Gore by contemporary standards; rather, it uncovers the theological rationale presented in their thought in support of latitude in belief and practice common within Anglicanism. The thesis argues that for each the emphasis on comprehensiveness is not arbitrary or merely conflict avoiding, but arises from his theology of Incarnation and belief in the ecclesial community as the Body of Christ. The thesis concludes, affirming insights of Hooker, Maurice, and Gore, that Anglican comprehensiveness is both theologically justifiable and ecclesiastically imperative in a mature church community that understands itself as an extension of the Incarnation. iii Acknowledgments In the Episcopal Divinity School’s St. John’s Memorial Chapel in Cambridge, Massachusetts one finds a stained glass window shared by two contrasting nineteenth century Anglican visionaries: the Tractarian leader John Keble and the enigmatic Christian Socialist Frederick Denison Maurice. That window, across from which I sat, prayed, sang, and contemplated while a divinity student, exhibits to me the nature of Anglican comprehensiveness. While not theological allies in life, in their respective and unique ways Keble and Maurice each brought new insights to the church and continue to shape it. We are much the richer for their contributions. Despite their differences, Keble and Maurice were each devoted to Christ and found his deepest being in Christ. In spite of, and perhaps through, our diverse beliefs and practices we discover the reality of God and our comprehensive unity. This unity is not of our making, Anglicans have argued; it is wholly God’s, through the Incarnation. While the impetus for the present work was inspired by light shining through the Keble and Maurice window in Cambridge, several faculty members at the Episcopal Divinity School also deserve thanks and gratitude. First, I am thankful to the Rev. Dr. Carter Heyward, Howard Chandler Robbins Professor of Theology. Having read her works in feminist liberation theology as an undergraduate, I was drawn to study at EDS in large measure to learn from her in person. I had no idea then that she would set me on a course that led back to the Victorian era and beyond. But she did just that when, after reading an essay I wrote for her Christology course, she iv suggested I acquaint myself with the works of F. D. Maurice and especially his controversial Theological Essays. Ever since, Maurice has been my theological companion and inspiration. Two other EDS faculty members also nurtured my interest in classical Anglican theology. Dr. Fredrica Harris Thompsett, Mary Wolfe Professor of Historical Theology, introduced me to Richard Hooker and successive Anglican luminaries in several courses. When she appointed me her research and teaching assistant for her new course in nineteenth and twentieth century Anglican theology I deepened my appreciation and understanding of Maurice and I met Charles Gore and the Lux Mundi school for the first time. I do not think I appreciated the latter fully enough then, but that has been remedied by the present study. Gore’s eloquent incarnational theology and ecclesiology is nothing less than inspiring. I also remember with immense gratitude and affection the late Rev. Dr. Lloyd G. Patterson, William Reed Huntington Professor of Historical Theology. During a directed reading course I was able to engage deeply with Richard Hooker and especially Book V of Of the Lawes of Ecclesiasticall Politie . In other courses we explored the theology and history of the Book of Common Prayer , the Trinity, the church in the patristic age and in the modern world. I will always cherish my time with Professor Patterson: in the classroom, his office, St. John’s Memorial Chapel, the refectory, and Wednesday mornings at the Bethany convent of the Order of St. Anne in Arlington. I am only sorry that our lives overlapped so briefly. He now, more than I, lives in the bright and encompassing light of the Incarnation. v Earlier in life I was set upon the path of theological studies by my undergraduate advisor at Gustavus Adolphus College in St. Peter, Minnesota, the Rev. Dr. Clair E. Johnson. Although a Swedish Lutheran, he was steadfast in encouraging my studies and always interested in my work in Anglican theology, especially F. D. Maurice. Talking with him while I was a student and over subsequent years was always an inspiration and delight. I am sorry that he, too, was taken into the fuller life of the Communion of Saints before this thesis was finished. More recently, this project would not be possible were it not for the support of my dissertation supervisory committee, especially Professor Michael Bourgeois of Emmanuel College. I appreciate his insights in helping the present work come to completion and his support throughout my doctoral studies. The additional thesis examiners, Professors Donald Wiebe of Trinity College, Michael Attridge of the University of St. Michael’s College, and Mark D. Chapman of Ripon College Cuddesdon and the University of Oxford, provided useful insights and challenge in their published works and during the defence that will help to refine and carry the questions inherent in this work further. Most especially and profoundly, I am grateful to my supervisor and thesis director, the Rev. Canon Dr. W. David Neelands, Dean of Divinity and Margaret E. Fleck Professor of Anglican Studies at the University of Trinity College in the University of Toronto. I was attracted to Trinity College and the Toronto School of Theology in order than I might study F. D. Maurice with Dr. Neelands. As readers of the thesis will discover, in addition to interpreting Maurice, Dr. Neelands’ expertise in the area of Hooker studies has been extraordinarily influential. His support and enthusiasm for this thesis project, and his help in defining it, has been steadfast and vi through an exceptionally long program. I have learned tremendously from him and am beyond grateful for his teaching, mentoring, and friendship. Trinity College’s Faculty of Divinity was extraordinarily generous in offering financial support during my five-year residency in Toronto. The John Strachan and Archbishop H. H. Clark Divinity Junior Fellowships, Faculty of Divinity bursaries, several teaching assistantships, and an adjunct appointment in the theological department allowed me to pursue this study. The opportunity to engage with theological students was invaluable and led to a refining of the concepts and issues presented here. I also acknowledge the George and Eileen Carey Bursary for post-graduate studies in Anglican theology awarded by the Anglican Diocese of Toronto and recall with fondness and appreciation the parishes that supported me during my residency in Toronto and in which I began my vocation in ordained ministry: St. Anne’s and St. Hilda’s in Toronto, Trinity Church in Aurora, and most especially Christ Church Deer Park and its then rector, the Rev. Canon Dr. Judy Rois, with whom I also worked at Trinity College. For the past several years I have been fortunate to serve God among the people of Emmanuel Episcopal Church in Wakefield, Massachusetts as their rector. Although the acceptance of this call delayed the completion of the present work, it nonetheless has been a true blessing. I appreciate the parish’s willingness to endure countless sermons and adult education sessions about Anglican theologians. In a real and incarnate way, the Emmanuel congregation exhibits the meaning of Anglican comprehensiveness in its life together. vii Finally, I thank friends, colleagues in the Toronto School of Theology doctoral program, and my family for their support and willingness to listen and engage in what must have seemed like endless conversations about comprehensiveness and the Incarnation. In particular, Jeffrey Seamans (himself a “good Anglican”) has endured over five years of books, piles of papers, and rambling soliloquies about long dead theologians with patience and grace. He, as much as I, is pleased that the present work has come to its successful completion.