Anglicanism: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #149

by Mark D. Chapman

What is Anglicanism? How is it different from other forms of Christianity, and how did it come to have so many different versions throughout the world? Although originally united by location and a common belief, Anglicanism has gradually lost its pre-eminence as the English state church due to increasing pluralisation and secularization. While there are distinctive themes and emphases that emerge from its early history and theology, there is little sense of unity in Anglicanism today.

Here, Mark Chapman explores the fascinating history, theology, and structures of Anglicanism, and highlights the diversity of the contemporary church by examining how traditions vary from England and American, from South Africa to Malaysia. Chapman looks at current developments and controversies, such as homosexuality and women priests, and offers thought-provoking suggestions for the future of Anglicanism. Putting the history and development of the religion into context, Chapman reveals what it is that holds Anglicanism together despite the recent crises that threaten to tear it apart.

Genres: Religion, History, Nonfiction, Theology, Christianity, Christian, Philosophy

157 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2006

Reviews

[Heidi · Rating 2 out of 5]

From the blurb, I expected this short book to be about what Anglicans believe and how Anglicanism differs from, say, Catholicism, Presbyterianism, or Calvinism. Instead this is almost entirely a history book, full of dates and names of important people throughout Anglican history. I have no doubt that it was comprehensive, but it wasn't very interesting and wasn't what it claimed to be.

The book also assumes a high level of knowledge before reading, which seems contrary to the spirit of a 'very short introduction.' An example sentence: 'In 1870, the mixed chalice, wafers, the old eucharistic vestments of chasubles and tunicles were declared legal, but this was later overturned on appeal in 1871.' There is never an explanation of what chasubles or tunicles are. Likewise with concepts like 'Sacerdotalism' or 'Barthianism' (a couple of words I highlighted early in the book to look up later, before realising that most of the book was full of unexplained words I would have to look up later).

I don't know who the target audience for the book was, but I wasn't it.

[Nick Imrie]

It was more of a very short history than a very short introduction, and even as a history I think it probably functions best as a reminder for people who are already familiar with the basic plot. It's not so useful as an introduction for people who are quite ignorant. I don't think this book offered me much information about what Anglicans believe, or how they worship, or how they differ from other Christian traditions. As far as I can make out, the main thing seems to be where you put the furniture in the church, which can't be right.

[Zack Clemmons · Rating 3 out of 5]

God save us from "Beauty in the Brokenness" sentimentality, but dear God please bring some beauty out of this mess.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

For [Archbishop E.W.] Benson, "Unity is not the first scene, but the last triumph of Christianity and man. Christ himself could not create unity in His Church. He could pray for it, and his prayer most movingly teaches us to work for it. On earth it is not a gift, but a growth." Like Selwyn, Benson used the term "elasticity" which could allow for different solutions in different places. Commenting on the Japanese Mission, Benson noted that "the great end of our planting a Church in Japan is that there may be a Japanese Church, not an English Church." Benson remained loyal to the principles of national churches against a monolithic Anglicanism.

For Anglicanism: A Very Short Introduction, Mark Chapman provides a concise review of the roots of Anglicanism and a brief overview of current controversies surrounding the Anglican Communion. As usual with this series, it only whets the appetite. Any interested reader must look for definitive sustenance elsewhere. Given his topic, Chapman must examine niche concerns without taking time to formerly introduce these topics. Yes, Chapman doesn't have the space or time to properly introduce his introduction of Anglicanism. If you take up this book without a clue as to what Anglicanism is, you'll likely finish it and still feel clueless about Anglicanism.

But, Gentle Reader, you're thinking: "Is it any good?" If you find you require a better grasp of the history and significance of the Anglican Communion, then start here. If you require a deeper grasp, you may want to allow another author time and space to really examine the concept.

[Rafael Sales · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book delivered what pretended! A consistent apresentation of the main history of Anglicanism in the English Church and through the world. Very good book!

[Tyler Collins · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a helpful guide to Anglican history. Without getting too much in the weeds on any one period or person, Chapman helps the reader to understand the significant movements and figures which shaped the development of Anglican polity and practice over the past 500 years. This was not an apologetic for the Anglican tradition but an honest assessment of its history. A good tool for future reference.

[Gregory Knapp · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent and comprehensive introduction

[Benjamin Stahl · Rating 2 out of 5]

My wife and I, as Catholics, read this together, interested in learning more about other Christian denominations. Of them all, I have decided, if I ever were to be anything other than a Catholic (which would never happen; I say it purely as hypothetical), I think I would have to go with the Eastern Orthodox Church, or if Protestant then probably the Lutherans rather than the Anglicans. If I wasn't to be Christian at all (again, merely hypothetically), then I'd choose Islam over Judaism. But I digress).

Unfortunately I found this book somewhat disappointing, especially in comparison to the other VSI publications I have read. While the writer offers an insight into the historic origins of Anglicanism, he seems to focus too much on that, and not so much on the theological, doctrinal or lifestyle aspects. The whole thing felt more like an unfiltered yet still relatively narrow information dump on the convoluted relationship between the Church of England and the British Monarchy.

Not the best introduction to Anglicanism, in my opinion.

[Kezscribe · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting! But wish it had a little more about Anglicans beliefs, not only its history.

[Linda Trostle · Rating 3 out of 5]

Chapman charges that "with its history of autonomous action and its absence of central authority . . . Anglicanism has always been particularly prone to ever-increasing diversity." The purpose of this book, therefore, is to show "how and why this has come to be and whether Anglicanism has a future" (p. 12).

The book accomplishes its purpose. In doing so, however, the reader is expected to be familiar with general world history, socio-political activities, and notable events and people. Therefore, the segment of the general readership who would typically buy [Anglicanism] for Dummies—if there were such a book—may not find this book a quick or easy read. Bottom line: buyer beware—short does not always mean easy.

[Jeremy Gardiner · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this for my "Introduction to Anglican Theology' class at Wycliffe College.

This is a short book that covers all the essentials. It gives a history of Anglicanism (with a large part focusing on the Reformation period). A chapter each explains Evangelical Anglicanism (Charles Simeon, George Whitefield, etc.) and Anglo-Catholicism (John Henry Newman, John Keble, etc.). Then the book turns its focus to how Anglicanism evolved from being localized in England to becoming a worldwide Communion. The final chapter details some of the debates within the communion (women's ordination, homosexuality) and speaks of the global realignment (GAFCON).

Overall, a fine dispassionate basic introduction to Anglicanism.

[Alonso Perez-Lona · Rating 2 out of 5]

More like A Very (Very) Short Introduction. The book focuses too much on the historical political aspects of the Church of England. Worse, it does not take time to effectively summarize the principal Anglican Divines' main theological contributions. Case in point is the gravely malnourished presentation of Richard Hooker's ideas, where, for instance, the so-called three-legged stool that is so often misinterpreted is not even featured here. As far as I'm concerned, if there is anything that should be highlighted almost ad nauseum in any book about Anglicanism, it is the beautiful way in which it is the via media for more than one pair of opposites. This book does not do enough justice to this concept.

[Angela · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book reads more like a history of Anglicanism than a book on what Anglicanism is. It left me more confused about the religion than I was before. 🤷‍♀️

It had lots of dates, historic events, decrees, and important people, but very little explanation. Nor did any of this historical dump lead to a “bigger picture”. The culminating argument is that Anglicanism is whatever it wants to be because of its history. I’m sorry, but that’s a non-answer.

It was definitely written by an academic for other academics, not for someone wanting to understand the religion.

This isn’t a good introduction, that’s for sure.

[Jason Ray Carney · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting overview of the phenomenon of Anglicanism from the Reformation through postmodernity. The 15th, 16th, and 17th century historical sections are interesting but the 18th amd 19th century sections become confusing due to a large amount of details regarding changing church organization, i.e. nuanced references to forums, councils, and esoteric debates. The contemporary history (or chapter on “The Future of Anglicanism”) is very good. The overarching characterization of Anglicanism—a tradition of intellectual humility married with an awareness of Church history—is compelling.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this up on a whim while reading a Barbara Pym, to get a better handle on the distinctions she makes between Anglican groupuscules.

A tidy whistlestop tour of the history of the church, explaining its intertwined politics and theologies. Chapters 1-7 were an especially good broad view of the main competing ideas.

[Liam · Rating 4 out of 5]

As usual, the "A Very Short Introduction" series offers a wealth and depth of knowledge on the subject, and this one is no exception. I've found myself intrigued by Anglicanism both as a historian and a researcher on religion. And this book offered what I needed to gain a baseline knowledge on Anglicanism.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Leans very much (too much?) into English history and could probably use an update, as the last 15 years have seen plenty of development over issues he only briefly touches on at the end, but a worthy, readable, and often-snarky "very short introduction." Recommended as just that, an introduction, to further study and exploration (especially on the topics of liturgy and post-colonialism).

[Daniel Clemence · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very useful introduction to the history of Anglicanism. It looks over how the Anglican church was formed, the history and traditions that have existed in the Anglican church including evangelicalism (which is different to what has become American evangelicalism) and Anglo Catholicism. It also looks at international communion and modern day debates.

[Caleb · Rating 5 out of 5]

Chapman's introduction to Anglicanism was exactly what I needed in order to get a basic backbone for Anglican history onto which I can sort and dig in deeper as I explore this tradition of my brothers and sisters

[Mihai · Rating 4 out of 5]

Time and again I consider A Very Short Introduction series as being easy. It is not. And Anglicanism is a serious short book both in historical and teological perspectives. I enjoyed it's cerebral account of what Anglicanism was, is, and wants to be.

[Roddy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Dreadfully boring. Reads like a poor PhD submission by somebody who’s not that interested in the subject. Seems to have been written for insiders. Mainly about uninteresting internal politics with very little, if anything about theology etc.

[Joseph Crupper · Rating 4 out of 5]

A mess. Anglicanism, not the book necessarily.
Not for beginning readers or researchers, though. More for people who need a crash course.

[Hunter · Rating 3 out of 5]

As its title promises, this is a good introduction to the Anglican Church. Chapman's tone concerning the future of Anglicanism struck me as a tad bit dour, however.

[Jon R. Jordan · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very, very short *history* of Anglicanism. Perhaps not the best introduction to Anglicanism.

[Kenny · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fulfills its stated purpose well.

[Chloé Bennett · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great way to get a basic understanding of the origins of the Anglican Church and the way it has developed over the years.

[Russrook · Rating 3 out of 5]

Does what it says on the tin. A broad scope and comprehensive survey of the history of Anglicanism. The chapters on the Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic traditions are particularly engaging.

[Books Of The Way · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good historical overview of Anglicanism. A good introduction.

[Alberto Tebaldi · Rating 2 out of 5]

this book covers many points of the topic but in too haphazard of a fashion

[Ronald Schoedel III · Rating 3 out of 5]

Picked this up at St Paul’s Cathedral. A good little volume in the “VSI” series, but left me wondering more about spirituality in the Anglican Communion. After years of visiting historic parish churches and cathedrals in Britain, it was great to read this history of Anglicanism to get a feel for how the church has evolved over the centuries. The author touches on how the split between Rome and Henry VIII may be the obvious origin story for the Church of England as an institution, but that the support for an English church independent of Rome has its roots many centuries earlier. I would love to have read more about the ancient church under the Anglo-Saxons that is only briefly alluded to here.

Heavy on the history, light on religious beliefs, though.