Why I am Anglican

“Traditional,” “conservative” and “a sit, stand and kneel church” are some of the words my friends use to describe the Anglican Church. Why they use such words I cannot be certain. But I will venture to guess here.

They use the label ”traditional” perhaps because they think Anglicans prefer to sing hymns accompanied by the organ rather than choruses accompanied by guitars, keyboards and drums; we use incense and candles rather than curtains and multi-coloured spotlights; and we have bishops and priests in fabulous clerical robes rather than senior pastors and pastors in cool suits. Maybe they use “conservative” or “a sit, stand and kneel church” because they think our Sunday services do not involve spontaneity, shouts of Amen, clapping of hands and speaking in tongues, but instead consist of the same routine week after week with set prayers and actions. So I often wonder if my friends think that I am an Anglican because I prefer to worship with hymns, the organ, incense, candles, robed clergies and set prayers and actions.

Admittedly, I gravitate towards some of those things. But they are not why I am an Anglican. (Incidentally, many Anglicans do sing choruses accompanied by guitars, keyboards and drums; use curtains and multi-coloured spotlights, clap hands, speak in tongues and shout Amen, and deviate from set liturgies.) Rather, I am an Anglican because I believe in the inseparability of the preaching of the Word and the celebration of the Eucharist in Christian worship, and I experienced the significance of this two-fold order and unity preserved and prescribed in the liturgical tradition of the Anglican Church.

But why do I believe that this order and unity significant? It seems to me that for much of the history of the Christian church, the Word and the Eucharist belonged together. The earliest biblical account of this unity is probably Acts 2:42, which is a part of Luke’s picture of the nascent church meeting together: “And they devoted themselves to the apostles teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.” Justin Martyr’s description of church meeting together written in the middle of the second century also reflects such unity: “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things, Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying, Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons.” John Calvin writing in the 16^th century also spoke of the inseparability of the Word and the Eucharist: “no assembly of the church should be held without the word being preached, prayers being offered and the Lord's supper administered and alms given.” Indeed, there is a consensus among scholars that Christian worship took on a basic order and shape of two-fold division of the Word and the Eucharist very early on and remained so for a long time. The separation of the Word and the Eucharist is a relatively recent phenomenon in the history of the church.

 Indeed, the tendency in Christian worship today is to abandon this traditional two-fold order by disentangling the Word and the Eucharist, and this happens not only when one of them is dropped, but also when one is elevated above the other. In some churches, the Eucharist is given such prominence that the preaching of the Word is reduced to a brief talk with little to do with the scriptural texts already read. In others, the singing of Christian choruses or/and the preaching of the Word is/are given such dominance that the Eucharist becomes an appendix relegated to a monthly affair with its infrequency justified on either practical grounds or on the grounds that weekly observance will erode its impact or meaning! However, there are good grounds why the traditional unity, order and balance of the Word and the Eucharist should be recovered and retained in Christian worship, and these grounds are not only historical, as I already briefly alluded to above, but also theological, as I will now consider.

The celebration of the Eucharist is more than a performed illustration or a ritualised recollection of the gospel of Jesus Christ. If the preaching of the Word is God addressing and summoning us, then the celebration of the Eucharist is our response to God’s initiative. If the preaching of the Word is our reflection of God’s self-disclosure, then the celebration of the Eucharist is our participation in His self-disclosure. In the Word, God in Christ is proclaimed and heard; in the Eucharist, God in Christ is received and embraced. In and through the preaching of the Word and the celebration of Eucharist, the holy, life-giving and transformative presence of God in Christ is graciously made available to us by the Spirit. In and through the Word and the Eucharist, believers are drawn into communion with the triune God and with one another. The Word and the Eucharist mutually interpret rather than compete as witnesses to the mystery of God in Christ. Also, the order of the Eucharist subsequent to the reading and preaching of the Word is not without hermeneutical significance. It invites, guides and constrains the interpretation and preaching of Scripture, both the Old and New Testaments, that they be centred and climaxed in life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

I am not claiming here that such pattern of worship is unique to or best enshrined in the liturgical tradition of the Anglican Church. I am also not writing to defend or promote Anglicanism. Neither am I attempting to alter my friend’s perception of why I am Anglican. My point is more personal. I am convinced that when Christians come together to worship, the Word should be faithfully preached and the Eucharist joyfully celebrated after, and I came to appreciate the significance of this two-fold form of worship in two ways: through my theological studies and through my participation and experience in the liturgical tradition of the Anglican Church that nurtured my Christian faith and eventually received me. So I am an Anglican not because the Anglican Church is “traditional,” “conservative,” or “a sit, stand and kneel church” as my friends put it. My reasons are historical, scriptural, theological, hermeneutical, liturgical, spiritual and also personal.