Traditionally, the Anglican Church has viewed itself as the “Via Media” or “Middle Way” between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. But I want to suggest that a helpful way of viewing Reformed churches is seeing them, in some sense, as a “Via Media.”
The recent controversy in conservative Reformed circles has generally run along the fault line between High Church Calvinists and those more influenced by a Revivalist tradition coming out of the Great Awakenings. The charge is often leveled against High Church Calvinists that their openness to historic liturgy and a higher regard for and practice of the sacraments leads to people heading to Roman Catholicism and, to a lesser degree, Eastern Orthodoxy. Perhaps this is true but for the sake of clear and honest dialogue, we will assume this is true. But on the other hand, it seems that there is a constant hemorrhage of persons leaving more Revivalist Reformed churches for Baptist churches (this has been my experience) and this should be equally disturbing to us. After all, these folks will be viewed with endless suspicion until they recant their covenant baptisms and submit to re-baptism, something our Puritan forefathers would find outrageous.
But what if we applied a multi-perspectival lens to this situation (a tension which has existed in Reformedom since the beginning) and pulled our vantage point back a little? There is much to unite us as Reformed people. We all love our Reformed tradition and each have our place in its continuum. We need each other if the Reformed tradition is to survive and thrive in the future. So what if we viewed ourselves, as a whole, as a “Via Media” between the older Catholic churches and the dominant Protestant Baptist churches?
I mentioned that on the negative side, parishioners are lost on both ends of the continuum either to Catholicism or Baptists. But on the other hand, growth in our circles seems to hold the same pattern of promise. It has been my experience that converts from Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy have an easier time entering Protestantism through a High Church Calvinist context. The liturgy feels familiar. The regard for historic forms and rites eases the transition. And yet, at the end of the day, they have entered an environment that lives and breathes a Calvinist worldview.
On the other end of the spectrum, a Baptist convert will typically have an easier time making the transition to a Revivalistically-oriented Reformed church and, as a whole, the situation is a win-win. In my experience, generally, more folks are coming into our “Via Media”, on both ends of our continuum, than are going out. This should cause us all to rejoice that Christians are being fed from the uniqueness that Reformedom offers to Christendom. It seems this might be a more helpful way of viewing ourselves at this current impasse.
My PCA church prides itself on being open, thus we see a good bit of hand raising, and lately, quite a few loud “Amens” during the sermon.
Our leaders are happy about being an open church, where Baptist and non-denoms are comfortable and it’s always amusing to see how many John MacArthur, Charles Stanley, and Ryrie Study Bibles you see.
The prevailing wisdom seems to be that we should not major in the minors, remembering that we’re all “one in the body.”
It’s no wonder that middle age men are dropping like flies and I count myself among them. I’ve been careening Eastward for the last two years, and after hearing the same worn-out praise songs week after week in my “Reformed” church, I just can’t take it any more!
It’s sad that really this paradigm seems to be built on the expectation that reformed people won’t ever do evangelism and that basically our only hope is “Calvinizing” Baptists and Roman Caltholics.
Charles,
Actually its not. The sad part is that we have to stop doing other things to address this subject: not fighting among ourselves over who is more “Reformed.” But your point is taken.
I think the biggest problem with heading to either Rome or Constantinople is the false assurance of “unity” or “catholicity” among those branches of the catholic Church. Their claims are over-exaggerated, to say the least. The Orthodox church threatens to deny the very message of the Gospel in its ethnic schisms around the world. There are many “english speaking” EO churches formed of nearly all converts, because the Russian or Greek churches down the street wouldn’t welcome them into their flock. Why? Because you’re not Russian or Greek. My point is this: We all desire to see the reformation played out, and for greater catholicity to abound, but “returning” to either Rome or Constantinople is a step backwards, not forward. It is an attempt to grasp at God’s blessings before they are present, and there is no blessing in that. The Church will not be reformed and re-structured as it should by Protestants joining either Rome or the East. We must remain separate for a time and let our interaction with one another — the give and take — provide the catalyst for both reformation and further unity in the Spirit.
How are you defining the via media? Is it solely in terms of “externals” (i.e. liturgy) or are you including doctrine also?
Further, surely our attitude is not to position ourselves as a via media but as the way that is faithful to Scripture and the orthodox Reformed faith?
I believe the passage in Ephesians about us all reaching unity in the faith prohibits us from taking a bye on a full understanding of Scripture. “Faith” in this passage is doctrine. We just can’t allow ourselves to be satisfied with the situation where our people are in a certain sense rejoicing in their ignorance.
The PCA, my denomination, being of southern roots, has suffered from erronious teaching of Thornwell and Dabney on convenant children before the Civil War. The War solidified this teaching when the split ocurred with the northern Presbyterian church. Through the intervening years, the richness of the Reformed Faith has mostly been lost and in its place is a sort of revivalistic pietism and a love of happy-clappy songs. Oh, and a distaste for doctrine.
rjs,
Doctrine and practice creates a space or position. We have a definite position at this juncture of Christian history in the West. We should exploit it for the glory of God and for the building up of his church. Also, the idea of either being a via media or faithful is, I think, an unhelpful false dichotemy. Why not both? Perhaps you’re conflating via media with the “broad church?”
dan,
Yes, I agree w/ your assessment of Presbyterianism. The Southern PC can be thanked for preserving an orthodox faith while its northern counterpart withered more quickly but the cost was a collapsing of Reformed orthodoxy into a small and, in my opinion, liturgically and sacramentally colorless strand. We should not rejoice in ignorance but neither should we rejoice over the rest of the church in our supposed knowledge…I thing Reformed folk often do.
Garrett,
My concern is simply that, in my experience, basing one’s identity on via media (a concept popularised by Cardinal J H Newman) is unhelpful. Why? Because ultimately one’s idenity is resolved be being neither X or Y and so it is a negative identity as opposed to a possitive one. “We are not … ” as opposed to “we are …”. In the Church of England we are often told that we are not ‘true’ Churchmen because we are ‘Geneva’ whereas the CofE is a via media between Rome and Geneva. When pressed by the question, “well what are you?” their reply is “I am between Rome and Geneva” but what they actually are is still a mystery. Hence I think that by positioning oneself as a via media is counterproductive; rather our attitude ought to be “This is what we believe, this is why we believe it, we hope that you will join us!”
Kind regards,
Richard
Richard,
I note your Nevin pic…you’re among friends. We are visionaries here on BH and so what others think about what a label “should” mean are kind of irrelevant to me. At some point we have to get away from implicational thinking: “Via media” was used by Newman therefore…, Catholics use paraments therefore…EOCers chant therefore…
Also, notice that my use of “via media” was a rhetorical device and not an absolute label, soooo as to your last comment….
“This is what we believe, this is why we believe it, we hope that you will join us!”
That’s what this here blog is all about. Glad you’re here!
Garrett