Since the sixteenth century, Anglican Christianity has often struggled with its definition and identity. Certain characteristics have been obvious such as its use of liturgical and sacramental worship rooted in the Books of Common Prayer, its respect for Scripture, and its continuation of the ministry of bishops, presbyters/priests, and deacons. But one disputed question is the position of the Thirsty-Nine Articles of Religion.
Ironically, the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, theological points intended to promote relative harmony in the Elizabethan Church of England (1562,1571), have occasioned (and sometimes still cause) much debate and dissension. Many Anglicans prefer to distance themselves from the Articles. Some view them as an artifact of dead history. Some subordinate them to other documents, such as the ancient Ecumenical Councils, the 17th-century Westminster Standards, or the 19th-century Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral. In reality, many Anglicans just seem to ignore the Articles.
Although the Thirty-Nine Articles are an inescapable fact of Anglican history and are still printed in most Books of Common Prayer (as they have been for about four centuries), their authority and their precise meaning have been debated. Some Anglicans and many non-Anglican observers may view them as a strict definition of Anglican doctrine, but historically, the Crown and Parliament intended that the Articles provide broad and comprehensive boundaries for English Christianity.
The Articles themselves reflect various influences- patristic Catholicism, Renaissance Christian Humanism, the Lutheran Reformation, the Swiss Reformation, and English ecclesiastical traditions. They exclude certain medieval and Counter-Reformation "Catholic" views, "Zwinglian" and Anabaptist sacramental views, and they do not accept strict Calvinist ecclesiology. With these exclusions, they remain susceptible to broad interpretations. During the Elizabethan, Jacobean, and Caroline periods, the Articles were mainly interpreted from "Calvinist" and "Arminian" perspectives, but they were also open to other quietly held interpretations, such as moderate Lutheran preferences. As time passed, the Articles became less strictly applied by most Anglicans. Even those who have strongly defended the Articles have often struggled to apply them in detail.
In conclusion, neither Anglicans nor other Christians can ignore the historical fact that the Thirty-Nine Articles are associated with Anglican heritage and identity. The Articles express some basic Anglican theological tendencies. They emphasize the authority of Scripture, affirm core teachings of the ancient Christian faith and the Creeds, assert the value of the Sacraments, and support three orders of ministry, but the Articles are open to different interpretations on many issues. They do not contain a unified or systematic theology. They are neither strictly Calvinist, Tridentine, nor liberal. Their teachings are simply broad affirmations of certain basic Christian principles from a moderate Reformation perspective.
