A stylistic difference

Saturday, 31st October 2009

The key difference between the C of E and Roman Catholicism, it struck me on Thursday, is that the former is deeply marked by liberal guilt. Or, to put it less pejoratively, it is marked by liberal qualms about various aspects of organised religion. Not all of the C of E can be characterised thus, but a major part of it. It is central to Anglican identity. Of course it is closely related to post-imperial liberal guilt. The established church almost has to share in this.

This struck me after listening to Thought for the Day, delivered today by Rhidian Brook, a clever liberal Anglican. He was criticising the Church’s education policy, saying that selection on the basis of parental churchgoing was dubiously related to the teaching of Jesus. (I very much agree by the way: the issue has contributed to my alienation from Anglicanism.)

You wouldn’t get a Catholic God-slotter saying this, I don’t think. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think there have been almost no Catholic voices questioning faith schools.

My point is that the two churches are, in terms of official policy, agreed on faith schools – they see them as very good things. But the C of E has a substantial degree of misgiving, guilt about this. It normally manages to suppress it, but sometimes it surfaces.

The key difference is that Catholics assume it is their duty to speak up strongly for their historically persecuted church. Anglicans have no excuse for such assertiveness – rather the opposite. Yet in recent years they have been trying to imitate Catholic bullishness, including on faith schools. The C of E is interesting caught between this attempt to show Catholic toughness, and Brook’s self-critical spirit.

Previous Back to Faith Based Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Alex Massie | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (3)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Yam Yam

November 2nd, 2009 2:13pm Report this comment

"The key difference between the C of E and Roman Catholicism, it struck me on Thursday, is that the former is deeply marked by liberal guilt."

Not being unkind, Theo, but for you to make that kind of observation rather recalls Jesus' witty and rhetorical question: "why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

David Bouvier

November 5th, 2009 9:48am Report this comment

.... a ball of tumbleweed rolls across the screen ... silence but for the wind ...

hadrian

November 5th, 2009 9:14pm Report this comment

With respect, the key difference is that the CofE historically is a Reformed Church, espousing the key doctrine of the Reformation, Justification by faith alone in Christ alone and the doctrine of the 39 Articles. Having largely abandoned any meaningful attachment to this or conviction in her roots the CofE is now suffering what Christ warned is the fate of all who slide from sound doctrine- to be regarded as salt without savour worth only to be trampled under foot. Bishop J.C.Ryle was warning of this in the late 19th Century. Rome derives her authority from her own bosom in similar fashion but invests it with divine force whereas the liberal CofE prefer a more anarchic approach to humanistic supremacy.
Both share a hearty loathing of the true old fashioned Reformed supremacy of Holy Scripture.

Post comment