Being Anglican Before it was Cool

The Venerable Canon Jason M. Constantine 

A few months ago, a dear friend and I were discussing a proposed series of articles highlighting various historical figures in Anglicanism.  The list was filled with Caroline Divines and even modern figures like C. S. Lewis.  To expand the list of figures beyond the generally expected, I proposed an article featuring John Myrk (or Jon Mirk, or John Myrc, etc.. ). 

Fr. Myrk was a late 14^th, early 15^th century priest from Shopshire, near the border with Wales.  He’s known for a rather modest contribution to the Middle English library; Festial, a collection of sermons for various holy days throughout the year, and Instructions for Parish Priests, a relatively short guide written in verse.  Neither work is considered all that groundbreaking.  They contain rather standard stuff really.  However, these works are both written in English and are intended to be resources for the common parish priest.  You know, the guys with very little academic training, who don’t hold prestigious positions in cathedrals or universities, and who are only known by their common English parishioners and, dare I say, peasants.  I find Fr. Myrk’s writings to be quite insightful regarding what most English medieval parish priests did and preached. 

My dear friend responded to my proposal with a simple and concise, “Yes, but he’s not Anglican.”  This response caught me off guard.  I never considered Fr. Myrk to be anything other than Anglican.  Sure, his life predates the English Reformation but I’m a firm believer that before there was the Church of England, there was the Church in England.   

The name Anglican Church has been around for longer than most give it credit.  In modern parlance, we often attribute the Anglican Church to have its roots in the 18^th century to describe the churches around the British Empire who were connected to the Church of England.  This terminology was rather useful, particularly when various British colonies started to become independent or at least less directly managed by England.  Since this connection is with the Church of England, there is general inference that the Anglican Church is only tied as far back to the English Reformation and thus is disconnected with the Church when it was simply the Church in England.   

The Magna Carta begs to differ.  The 13^th Century document declares, “Anglicana ecclesia libera sit,” which means, “the Anglican Church shall be free.”  Now to be fair, that line can also be translated, “the English Church shall be free.”  But that’s the meaning of Anglican; English.  Nonetheless, here we have the connection that the Church in England, before it was the Church of England, was the Anglican Church.  Maybe this is simply a matter of semantics?  Maybe, but words mean things.  Focusing so intently on the words English and Anglican may lead to neglecting serious reflection on another word, Church.  After all, Church is really the most important word in the phrases, the Church in England, the Church of England, and the Anglican Church. 

The word Church in the Church in England, the Church of England, and the Anglican Church is and should be capitalized because it denotes the Church Catholic.  The point of these three phrases is not to identify a different church, but to describe the Church Catholic as it is expressed, at first in a particular geography and then eventually, in a particular heritage.  This is no different than the Church in Rome, the Church of Rome, and the Roman Catholic Church or the Church in Greece, the Church of Greece, and the Greek Orthodox Church.  In all these examples, the word Church is what’s truly important.  In all these examples, the word Church denotes the Faith once delivered.  England, Anglican, Rome, Roman, Greece, and Greek are simply words to describe how the Faith once delivered is enculturated, how it’s expressed, it’s liturgy’s patrimony.  To draw an analogy from Aristotle; Church is the substance, Anglican is the accident. 

So, what constitutes an Anglican?  Must that Christian reside in England?  No more so than a Roman Catholic must reside in Rome or a Greek Orthodox Christian must reside in Greece.  No, an Anglican is simply a member of the Church Catholic who lives out the Faith through an English Patrimony.  Is there an essential difference between a Russian Orthodox Christian and a Greek Orthodox Christian?  No; they’re both members of the Church Catholic despite differences in language, culture, and even liturgy.  The same is true for both Roman Catholic and Anglican Christians.  Roman, Greek, Russian, and Anglican simply describe the different flavors of the same drink! 

The goal of the English Reformation was not to create a new church or to be anything other than the Church Catholic.  The goal of the English Reformation was to lay aside the innovations that deceived and interfered with the practice of the Church Catholic.  The orthopraxy of the Church Catholic is preserved in the Anglican Tradition; it simply has an English ecclesial accent.  It's the orthodoxy and orthopraxy contained in Fr. Myrk’s works that make his writing valuable and worthy of study.  It’s the language in which he wrote and the culture from which he was catechized into the Faith that makes him Anglican.  It’s the same case for Anglicans who happen to have come after the English Reformation as well.  We Anglicans live the Faith once delivered with an English ecclesial accent, so to speak. 

Are Greek, Russian, Roman, and English ecclesial accents all that important?  Yes, since each ecclesial accent offers different cultural ways to engage with and live out the Faith once delivered.  However, these ecclesial accents are really more like packaging; they're used to deliver the real gift; the Way, the Truth and the Life. 

So, was Fr. Myrk an Anglican?  Yes, but that is not nearly as important as him being a member of the Church Catholic.