Diarmaid MacCulloch gets this exactly right, to wit, the Laudian-Arminian-Tractarian revisionistic history writing. What I loathe about TFOs is the willingness to deceive the simple, the pew, those laboring in other areas than history and theology (but who deserve facts, respect, honor and truth...think busy Americans, mothers, fathers, supporting a family and more), the broken, the wounded and injured. They steamroll others. Well, we kneecap those Great Necromancers here. We give to them what they've given to others: and they elbowed, ramrodded, and pushed their way steamrolling others. We're not nice people here, but we're old Marines. TFOs, be advised. We don't tolerate what Prof. MacCulloch calls "radically reinterpreting its history" (see his last sentence below). It goes by other names: lying, deceit, duplicity, hoodwinking and more. TFOs, eat it and own it as liars. Never miss an opportunity to kneecap a TFO. Who can abide liars? (Psalm 15)?
.
Here's the Prof at: http://www.historytoday.com/diarmaid-macculloch/myth-english-reformation
.
Here's the Prof at: http://www.historytoday.com/diarmaid-macculloch/myth-english-reformation
The Myth of the English Reformation
"The ambiguous nature of the Reformation settlement in England has often taxed historians. Diarmaid MacCulloch casts a critical eye over the evidence for a 16th-century half-way house between Catholic and Protestant.
"The myth of the English Reformation is that it did not happen, or that it happened by accident rather than design, or that it was half-hearted and sought a via media between Catholicism and Protestantism; and the point at issue is the identity of the Church of England. The myth was created in two stages, first in the middle years of the seventeenth century, and then from the third decade of the nineteenth century – in either case, by a, 'High Church' party within the Church: first, the Laudians or Arminians, later the Tractarians or Anglo-Catholics. [Ed. we call them TFOs = Tracto-friendly operatives like the ACNA, REC, and Nashotah House.] These parties largely consisted of clergy, with the particular motive of emphasising the structural Catholic continuity of the Church over the break of the Reformation, in order to claim that the true representative of the Catholic Church within the borders of England and Wales was not the minority loyal to the Bishop of Rome, but the Church as by law established in 1559 and 1662. The nineteenth century growth of Anglo-Catholicism amounted to nothing less than an ideological revolution in the Church of England, which involved radically reinterpreting its history."
It's called agenda-driven revisionism. It's called mischaracterization. It will take a generation of serious scholars to rid the "kinks" and "kooks" out of American Anglicanism...for those of stout heart, honest mind, and vigorous wills.
"The ambiguous nature of the Reformation settlement in England has often taxed historians. Diarmaid MacCulloch casts a critical eye over the evidence for a 16th-century half-way house between Catholic and Protestant.
"The myth of the English Reformation is that it did not happen, or that it happened by accident rather than design, or that it was half-hearted and sought a via media between Catholicism and Protestantism; and the point at issue is the identity of the Church of England. The myth was created in two stages, first in the middle years of the seventeenth century, and then from the third decade of the nineteenth century – in either case, by a, 'High Church' party within the Church: first, the Laudians or Arminians, later the Tractarians or Anglo-Catholics. [Ed. we call them TFOs = Tracto-friendly operatives like the ACNA, REC, and Nashotah House.] These parties largely consisted of clergy, with the particular motive of emphasising the structural Catholic continuity of the Church over the break of the Reformation, in order to claim that the true representative of the Catholic Church within the borders of England and Wales was not the minority loyal to the Bishop of Rome, but the Church as by law established in 1559 and 1662. The nineteenth century growth of Anglo-Catholicism amounted to nothing less than an ideological revolution in the Church of England, which involved radically reinterpreting its history."
It's called agenda-driven revisionism. It's called mischaracterization. It will take a generation of serious scholars to rid the "kinks" and "kooks" out of American Anglicanism...for those of stout heart, honest mind, and vigorous wills.
No comments:
Post a Comment