This is a real curate’s egg of a book. It aims to present ‘modern Anglican theology’ through a ‘unique gallery’ of ‘portraits or sketches’ of individual churchmen (mostly) and theologians. The rationale for this is that ‘Anglicanism is classically expressed through people living out their faith in particular contexts’. The book begins, after a foreword from Martin Percy, with a brief preface – ‘Anglicanism: A Balanced and Practical Faith’ – which is the author’s succinct account of the nature of Anglicanism. Slocum identifies as key characteristics of Anglicanism: its balanced Benedictine roots; Hooker and the balance of Scripture, reason and tradition; pragmatism rather than speculative theology and ‘dogmatism’ (a particular ‘boo’ word) seen mostly clearly in the ‘local adaption of theological principles’; a similarity to the ‘English common law tradition in the sense that it favors a case-by-case application of a large body of understanding’. Slocum stresses the pastoral, even parochial, setting of much Anglican theology and its ‘personal’ character, in that it is mediated through a person. Fascinatingly he cites the Prayer Book(s) as the ‘first and definitive place to look’ for what Anglicans believe. I wonder if this is really the case. He then seems to contradict himself by stating that ‘Anglicanism is not a confessional faith’, is focused on the Incarnation and ‘is not sin-centered in outlook’. This does not sound like the Prayer Book! Slocum goes on to make the classic modern Liberal Anglican assertions about Anglicanism: that it makes ‘no claims for infallibility at any time in theological pronouncements or biblical interpretations’; that its approach to error is to ‘allow time for the sorting out of disagreement’; that it is ‘messy’; that it is currently under pressure with some ‘wanting the Communion [to] “take a stand”’ and so is anxious about whether Anglicans will still be able to ‘walk together’. In other words, the book is an attempt to speak into this debate by exploring a range of ‘Anglican’ theologians in a ‘case study’ method, thereby presenting ‘modern Anglican theology’.

This is quite an ambition and we might expect some discussion then of the reasons for the choice of the particular persons. There is none. That said, the people explored are fascinating: William Porcher DuBose, Austin Farrer, William Stringfellow, Phillips Brooks, Jackson Kemper, James DeKoven, Marilyn McCord, John Polkinghorne, Charles Gore, John Macquarrie. As an under-informed English Anglican I was especially grateful to be introduced to some nineteenth- and twentieth-century American Episcopalians and the book is valuable just for this facet alone. But I suspect readers of this review will, like me, scratch their heads at this selection. Apart from Kemper, who was clearly an early nineteenth-century missionary bishop of a rugged frontier kind who longed for the conversion of the American Indians – ‘They have immortal souls, precious in the sight of the Redeemer’ – none are from the Evangelical Anglican tradition. Most were (are) theological educators. The chapters mostly do not include a closing evaluation which might explore why they are significant as representative ‘Modern Anglican Theologians’ and there is no closing chapter which reflects on the whole. There is not even a sense of them being used as exemplars of particular aspects of Slocum’s vision of ‘modern Anglican theology’. Without this academic superstructure it is left to the reader to do the work of reflection on how far these individuals deserve this accolade or whether the book as a whole succeeds in delineating modern Anglican theology. From that perspective, frankly the book feels eclectic and under-edited.

As I noted, individual chapters contain much fascinating material, not least because the individuals are mostly allowed to ‘speak’ for themselves through the medium of extensive quotation. The chapter on DuBose is especially dense in this regard. While I particularly enjoyed the chapter on Farrer, I read all of them with profit and interest. Most are really studies of some of the writings of each individual. There is not enough biography or history to allow the reader to locate their work in context. For example, DuBose was a Confederate officer, wounded and imprisoned before ordination. I would have loved to have heard his views about why he fought for the Confederacy and whether his liberal and inclusive views on the breadth of Anglican theology and ecclesiology stretched to include (anti-)slavery. The chapters vary in style. Some are mostly discussions of original material with Slocum’s commentary. Others include some dialogue with other scholars. Some chapters are full-length articles, others brief reflections on one or two books. Strangely the chapters are not in chronological order. The book is very varied and the chapters are not really comparable.

Overall, I think the book needed much more careful editing. I noted some typos which surprised me: preeentations not presentations (p. xii); Chruch not Church (p. 3); presiding not presided (p. 34). There are some Americanisms which grated slightly: ‘he wrote his brother’ (p. 95), ‘he wrote his daughter’ (p. 106). But my major concern is the overall intention of the book. It is trying to speak into the current conflict in the Communion by celebrating a selection of (mostly) progressive Anglican theologians to make a case for diversity, tolerance, theological innovation and brave social action as being central to Anglicanism. But arguing this on the basis of an eclectic collection of theologians, itself based on a very particular take on the nature of Anglicanism, will only make matters worse. The absence of any engagement with Evangelical Anglicanism, and a foreword and preface that are full of unacknowledged theological assertions that make sweeping claims for Anglicanism in the cause of diversity (for example, that it began post 1660 – p. viii – why then is Hooker cited so approvingly?), simply reveals an inability to understand other important perspectives. To my eyes it explains why Anglicans in the USA are at such loggerheads. And within the terms of the book itself there is what Stephen Sykes called ‘incoherence’. Slocum introduces us to Phillips Brooks, author of ‘O Little Town of Bethlehem’ and Bishop of Massachusetts who was condemned at his election as a liberal because he consorted with Unitarians (p. 96) and also James DeKoven who was a leading figure in the Oxford Movement in America and fought for toleration of Anglo-Catholic liturgical practices but who, if he was indeed ‘the Pusey of the American Church’ (p. 115) would not at all have approved of Brooks. How are they both Anglicans in the same church? And how are we to evaluate Gore who began as a denounced liberal because of Lux Mundi but ended exasperated with post-World War I Anglican Modernism, especially about the Incarnation? Slocum seems to see this as a consequence of Gore’s role as a bishop (pp. 148-49) though it may rather reflect Gore’s understanding of the relationship of intellectual enquiry to the authority of the Church and Creed. All this simply exposes the tension for Modern Anglicans about how we are to think and live with theological and ethical challenges. If, as Slocum asserts frequently, the Incarnation is the dominant Anglican theological principle how do we arrive at this view and how then is the Church to manage those of its members who appear to deny this reality? Toleration or slow lengthy debate may not be coherent enough. I fear this book will not help us to find our way forward as Anglicans despite its initial hopes.