Continuing Anglicanism? The History, Theology, and Contexts of “The Affirmation of St Louis” (1977)*
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In September 1977, following a gathering of just under two thousand conservative North American Anglicans at St Louis, Missouri, emerged “The Affirmation of St Louis” (1977), an articulation of an Anglican vision born out of a conservative Anglo‐Catholic ecclesiology. Claiming to represent the “continuation” of orthodox Anglicanism, contrary to an alleged apostasy by the Anglican Church of Canada and the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America, “Continuing Anglicanism” emerged as an ecclesiology of a number of Anglican jurisdictions who exist to this day outside the Anglican Communion. This paper discusses the ecclesiology and history of this movement — notably, its foundational doctrinal articulation: “The Affirmation of St Louis.” Viewed within the context of the history of Anglican theology, Continuing Anglicanism's conservative articulation is broadly but distinctly from the Anglo‐Catholic tradition. Continuing Anglicanism's claim to continuity is, therefore, accompanied with the problems of discontinuity. Viewed within the context of other Anglican bodies who have left the comprehensive boundaries of the modern Anglican Communion, the challenges of identity and unity have been persistent elements of the Continuing Anglican story since its formal inception in 1977.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it