The First Day of Lent: "who hatest nothing that thou hast made"

From a sermon by Edward Stillingfleet (Bishop of Worcester 1689-1699), delivered on the first Friday of Lent, 1685, when he was Dean of St. Paul's. This extract from the sermon might be regarded as a meditation on the words of the Lenten collect, "who hatest nothing that thou hast made":

In order to the preventing any false or mean Apprehensions of the Divine Nature, when the Passions of Mankind are attributed to it, we must consider these two things;

(1.) That we must by no means attribute to God any thing that is unreasonable in our Selves; such are all irregular Motions, which we call violent Passions, arising from Surprise, Mistake, Inadvertency, Weakness, or corrupt Inclination. But setting all these aside, the Original Passions of Mankind, which are agreeable to Reason, are no other than what arise from an Inclination to what we judge to be Good, and an Aversion from what we apprehend to be Evil; which holds as to the Divine Nature.

(2.) That there is an observable Difference in the very Nature of some Passions, which imply a Repugnancy in themselves to the Divine Perfections, which others do not. For Love and Kindness, and Joy, and Inward Satisfaction have nothing in them supposing their Object Good, but what agrees with the Divine Nature; but the Passions contrary to these, as Envy, Ill-will and Revenge are not onely Repugnant as Passions, but in their own Nature; for God cannot Envy the Good of his Creatures, nor bear Ill-will to them as such, nor take Pleasure in their Torments. And of this Nature Anger properly taken is, as it doth imply a present Disorder and Disturbance within, from the Apprehension of some Injury done or intended, with a Desire of Revenge on those who doe it; all which is inconsistent with the necessary Perfections of God; for they argue Meanness, Imperfection and Mutability.

We must therefore fix on such a Notion of Anger as becomes the Almighty Wisdom and Goodness; and that lies in,

(1.) A Displeasure against the Sinner on the account of his Sins; For God cannot have any Complacency in those who displease him, as all Sinners do, whether they design it or not.

(2.) A Will to Punish Sinners according to their demerits; which being according to the Rules of Wisdom and Righteous Government, cannot be said to argue an indecent Passion.

(3.) The Actual Execution of his Justice upon great Provocations. And so God is said to be angry when he punishes; especially when he doeth it suddenly and severely; As Men in their Passion are wont to doe. But whatever God doeth in this kind, he doth it with the Wisdom and Temper of a Judge, and not with the Fury or Passion of an Angry Being.

And there is nothing in all this unbecoming the Divine Nature, but very agreeable thereto. And this is all which in strictness of Reason is understood by God's being Angry with Mankind. For we must never imagine that God acts according to sudden heats and Passions; but whatever he doth is according to the Counsels of Infinite Wisdom and Goodness.

I do not deny that the Scripture doth represent Anger in God as if it were a Passion raised upon great Provocation, and capable of being laid by Submission and true Repentance. Thence we read, of God's Wrath waxing hot, of his Anger kindling against his People, and his turning away from his fierce Anger, and many such Expressions; but so we read of the Fire of his Indignation, the Sword of his Wrath, the Stretching forth of his Hand; which all grant are not to be literally understood. If then in these Expressions, the Perfections of the Divine Nature are to be our Rule, according to which we must interpret them, because the literal sense implies an incongruity to the Divine Perfections which are all wholly Spiritual; then from the same Reason we must remove all Perturbations from it which are as inconsistent with the absolute Perfection of it, as Eyes and Ears and Hands and Feet are, although they are all mention'd in Scripture.

Why I support the ordination of women: a High Church reflection

A number of commenters on this blog have asked about my occasional expressions of support for the ordination of women to all three orders. With some hesitation, I have decided to post a summary of my own views on this matter. The hesitation is because I have sought on this blog to focus on issues and themes which can unify those who identify with or have respect (grudging or otherwise!) for what we might term 'classical' Anglicanism (the Anglicanism of the Formularies and - yes - of the Old High Church tradition). Some oppose the ordination of women (and I have friends and colleagues who do so, Anglo-Catholic, High Church, and Reformed Evangelical). Some of us support it (again, friends and colleagues covering a wide range of theological traditions). Below, I have organised my thinking around 5 points (needless to say, no reference to Dort is implied). 1. The Declaration for Subscription required of clergy in the Church of Ireland states: (6) I promise to submit ...

How the Old High tradition continued

Charles Gore's 1914 letter to the clergy of his diocese, ' The Basis of Anglican Fellowship ', can be regarded as a classical expression of the Prayer Book Catholic tradition. A key part of the letter - entitled 'Romanizing in the Church of England' - addressed the "Catholic movement", questioning beliefs and practices within it which tended to "a position which makes it very difficult for its extremer representatives to give an intelligible reason why they are not Roman Catholics". Gore provides the outlines of an alternative account and experience of catholicity within Anglicanism, defined by three characteristics. What is particularly interesting about these characteristics is their continuity with the older High Church tradition. Indeed, the central characteristic as set out by Gore was integral to High Church claims over centuries: To accept the Anglican position as valid, in any sense, is to appeal behind the Pope and the authority of t...

'Whether the Lutheran Churches have right Ordinations and perfect succession of Bishops': Jeremy Taylor, 'Episcopacy Asserted', and Lutheran orders

Amidst the bitter controversies over episcopacy in the Three Kingdoms during the early 1640s, controversies which had become war in Scotland in 1637 and then in England in 1642, Jeremy Taylor wrote his Laudian defence of episcopal order, The Sacred Order and Offices of Episcopacy Asserted and Maintained . He proposed in this work that the non-episcopal Reformed churches could have had episcopally-ordered clergy: Those good people might have had order from the bishops of England or the Lutheran churches, if at least they thought our churches catholic and Christian. Leaving aside the reality that, for example, French Protestants would have been placed in an invidious political position if they had done as Taylor proposed, it is the reference to "the Lutheran churches" which is significant. To begin with, a large portion of the Lutheran churches - those in the German lands - were governed by a system of superintendency. It is almost inconceivable that Taylor was not aware of th...

laudable Practice

Search This Blog