Thanks for this, Sandy. Archbishop Herft has been kind enough to enter into a brief email dialogue with me over this matter. I’m sure I’m not the only one who has written to him.

Perhaps in a few weeks when I receive his final reply we might be in a position to understand more clearly what he thinks about this.

Dear Sandy,

Thanks for your comments brother. However, I suspect it’s better to appeal to the Anglican (and universal) creeds rather than the 39 articles (which many Anglican clergy believe they don’t have to strictly believe depending on their diocesan statutes etc.).

The Apostles’ Creed largely was constructed in light of the Gnostic controversy of the 2nd century. Gnostics, of course, didn’t believe in a resurrection body (because matter was evil). Hence when Scripture spoke of the resurrection they interpreted it to mean a non-bodily spiritual experience.

Thus the early form of the Apostles’ Creed rebutted Gnosticism at this point (as did Irenaeus) by affirming that Christ’s human body was real, that he “suffered death and was buried [...] on the third day he rose again”.

Modern liberals who deny a bodily and physical resurrection have more in common with Gnosticism than historic Christian, as summarised in the most basic Christian creed of all, the Apostles’ Creed, especially written to rebut the idea of non-physical/bodily resurrection.

To deny the bodily and physical resurrection is not only not Anglican, it’s also not Christian.

God bless dear brother,

Marty.

Dear Sandy,

Yes, absolutely. My particular point is that the Apostles Creed was written specifically to address <i>directly</i> the issue of a bodily / physical resurrection. In other words, the Church has debated and resolved that issue as one of the first controversies ever.

God bless brother.

Marty,

the Thirty-nine Articles are still specifically articulated as ruling principles in the constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia.
                       
For an Australian Anglican priests they are still the theological benchmark.

We know not All Australian Anglican priests subscribe to the theology of the Thirty-nine articles. But they are ‘out of communion’ with the Authentic Anglican Church.

Gavin

Marty,

some people are more concerned about unity in the Anglican denomination rather than unity in the Christian faith. The two are quite different.

Cranmer would roll in his grave to hear the Articles undermined in this way.

I think “assent” from 39 Article dissenters is a legal fudge if you had the energy to push it through the ecclesiastical courts. 

Gavin