Why I’ll Never Swim the Tiber

12/28/2010

by Carson T. Clark

*For those not up on their ecclesiastical-nerd-lingo–that’s the technical term– “swim the Tiber” means converting to Catholicism.

A bunch of people have recently asked me why I committed to Anglicanism rather than Catholicism. I’d become flustered by the prospect of repeatedly having the same conversation about something I don’t enjoy talking about in the first place, so I’ve decided to write a quick post I can point people toward. Emphasis on the word quick. Again, I don’t like this topic so I’m going to crank this sucker out in no more than 30 minutes. This isn’t a theological treatise. It’s not an assault upon Rome. It’s not even an argument for why others should follow suit. And I’m in no mood to deal with the schmoes who try to sound smart by nitpicking the crap out of everything. Just give me the benefit of the doubt that I’ve thought things through more than I’m writing, OK? Thanks.

I’m stopping wherever I am in 30 minutes:

1. Papacy. I have no problem seeing the bishop of Rome as the Western patriarch and perhaps even the first among equals. But the pope? C’mon. There’s all sorts of geographical, socio-economic, political, cultural, and even linguistic reasons for the ascension of that office. Plus the East has never affirmed it. And how about the Great Western Schism? Three popes? Yeah, that’s a problem that doesn’t square too well with Vatican I’s papal infallibility. That’s the #1 thing I could never swallow, and trust me that I tried.
2. Exclusiveness. I like to refer to myself as “humbly Anglican,” by which I mean that I don’t consider my tradition the “one true church” or necessarily even the best tradition. Not so with Catholics. The Orthodox have the same issue, of course. Either way, I find it pretentious and historically erroneous.
3. Ecclesiastical Authority. Catholics hold to the three-legged stool view of the teaching Magisterium, Scripture, and tradition. I reject the innate authority of the first, have an elevated view of the second (although I don’t hold to Sola Scriptura), and think that onlyapostolic tradition is authoritative. I love the historic Anglican distinction between orthodoxy (essential doctrine) and adiaphora (secondary doctrine).
4. Ecclesiastical Structure. I affirm the bishopric, but have strong reservations about strong top-down governance in any organization. It’s not from Scripture or anything, but I agree with the principle that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Naturally, I have a moderate conception of church polity.
5. Ecclesiology. Protestants and Catholics differ on their point of emphasis. Protestants are bottom-up where believers make up the Church. Catholics are top-down where the Churchmakes up believers. My view is somewhere in between.
6. Priesthood. I disagree with the whole intermediary between God and man idea, including the absolution of sins, etc. I want to say it was Cranmer who decided to keep the nomenclature but fundamentally redefine the nature of the priesthood within the Anglican context. That I can swallow, if reluctantly.
7. Caesaropapism. Not cool. From this we got everything from the Crusades to the Inquisition. Thankfully it’s not nearly as much of a problem these days.
8. Gender Roles. I affirm Discernmentarianism.
9. Councils. According to Trent I’m still considered a heretic. Although, Vatican II “clarified” that I’m actually separated brethren. Gee. I’m sure glad the councils don’t contradict one another
10. Indulgences. I’m not a card-carrying Protestant anymore, but I do think Luther nailed this one… quite literally. And it actually speaks to some much larger issues.
11. Tomistic Theology. I’m not challenging the dude’s sheer brilliance, but I really don’t like Thomas Aquinas’ theology.
12. Sex. I strongly disagree on everything from the nature/purpose of sex and the morality of specific acts within a marital union to mandated clerical celibacy and the ban on contraceptives.
13. Transubstantiation. Creepy.
14. Marian Dogmas. Look, do I think Protestants have swung the pendulum way too far to the other extreme? Yes. But the perpetual virginity of Mary? Seriously?
15. Seminalism. I reject Augustine’s specific mechanism for Original Sin. My view is much closer to that of the Orthodox, though not a perfect fit.
16. Hell. Still working on this one but I’m close to affirming the Orthodox view on this, too.
17. Purgatory. I reject it, although less passionately than many others.
18. Necrology. See above response.
19. Sacraments. I affirm the Thirty-Nine Articles on this one: Baptism and Eucharist are legit, others are “commonly called sacraments…”
20. Differing Sins. Moral vs. venial. In all fairness, I’ve never really looked into this issue so I’m proceeding cautiously.
21. Historical Context. I’m not saying they’re not out there, but I’ve never come across a Catholic theologian who does a good job interpreting the Bible in light of its ANE context. Seems the default mode of Catholic thinking is historical and systematic theology rather than exegesis and biblical theology.

30 minutes is up!