Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #174899 in Books
• Published on: 2003-10-28
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 144 pages

Synopsis
This text explores the classical Anglican approaches to worship, doctrine, scripture, prayer and much more. Though acknowledging that Anglicanism is far from perfect, the book celebrates its most attractive and enduring characteristics.

Customer Reviews

How not to be an Anglican
This book is sadly disheartening. Giles' views Anglicans as "pragmatic and unable to take ourselves too seriously", and led by common sense and reason, but his "light hearted" and "common sense" approach is in fact to be scathingly critical of Anglicans who hold to more traditional views on the Bible and morality.

Giles asserts as Anglican what would generally be regarded as a Liberal perspective on most issues. For instance, he writes that "Anglicans are therefore understandably and instinctively suspicious of those who confidently assert "The Bible tells me so". " In addition to stating without qualification that most of the new testament letters were not written by Paul, he describes Paul as autocratic and assumes that his followers "felt it necessary to be economical with the truth by attributing to him letters they themselves had written to crack down on abuses of power."

Of greater concern is his chapter `The Anglican approach to Moral Questions'. Giles relies on three foundational pillars to inform his view of morality - the Bible, tradition, and common sense. "Common sense" however, is defined as "what works and rings true to our day-by-day experience." Giles seems to extrapolate from this that Anglican views of morality are uncertain and relativist, and he hopes that others will "stop playing games and come join us in the muddy waters". Presumably, to have a clear mind about morality is a bad thing, according to Giles' philosophy.

Giles raises some points about how liturgy can be adapted to more relevant language, and
provides a useful summary of the development of the Anglican church, which is favourable to both Evangelical and High Church revivals. However, his opinion is that the Anglican church is not that different from the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches (with just a few changes by radical reformers). He also seems to posit that the Anglican church can lead the way in uniting itself with the Roman and Orthodox churches, and even Sikhs and Hindus (though Baptists are not mentioned). Presumably this would involve taking "less seriously" the Bible, doctrine, church tradition and authority, morality, and pretty much anything else that Christians claim to be distinctive.

This type of book sadly reinforces the stereotypes of Anglicans being woolly thinkers. To say much more would be a waste of ink.