Skip to main content

'The very being and Oeconomy of Christianity is destroyed by these prayers': Jeremy Taylor echoing Calvin against the invocation of Saints

From Jeremy Taylor's A dissuasive from Popery (1664 & 1667) - which George Rust in the sermon at Taylor's funeral particularly highlighted as among his "several excellent Discourses", this one "receiv'd by a general approbation" - a critique of the invocation of saints:

Now therefore we desire it may be considered, That there are as the effects of Christ's death for us, three great products, which are the rule and measure of our prayers, and our confidence; 1. Christ's merits. 2. His Satisfaction. 3. His Intercession. By these three we come boldly to the Throne of Grace, and pray to God through Jesus Christ. But if we pray to God through the Saints too, and rely upon their 1. Merit. 2. Satisfaction. 3. And Intercession; Is it not plain that we make them equal with Christ, in kind, though not in degree? ...

And therefore the very being and Oeconomy of Christianity, is destroyed by these prayers; and the people are not, cannot be good Christians in these devotions; and what hopes are laid up for them, who repent to no purpose, and pray with derogation to Christ's honour, is a matter of deepest consideration. And therefore we desire our charges not to be seduc'd by little tricks and artifices of useless and laborious distinctions, and protestations against evidence of fact, and with fear and trembling to consider, what God said by the Prophet, My people have done two great evils, they have forsaken me, fortem vivum, the strong and the living God; fontem vivum, so some copies read it, the living fountain, and have digged for themselves cisterns, that is, little phantastick helps, that hold no water, that give no refreshment.

The point of this extract is certainly not to encourage the use of uncharitable language against those who practise the invocation of saints. It is, rather, to highlight the very robust nature of Taylor's critique of the practice. To put the matter rather bluntly, this is an example of how Taylor can in no meaningful, serious way be presented as a forerunner of advanced Anglo-catholic thought and piety. This becomes especially evident when we compare Taylor's words in the Dissuasive with those of Calvin on this matter in the Institutes.

Taylor's emphasis on how the invocation of saints necessarily obscures the mediation of Christ also echoes Calvin's declaration:

To procure the favour of God, human merits are ever and anon obtruded, and very frequently while Christ is passed by, God is supplicated in their name. I ask if this is not to transfer to them that office of sole intercession which we have above claimed for Christ? (III.20.21).

Taylor's solemn exhortation that by the invocation of saints "the very being and Oeconomy of Christianity is destroyed" follows Calvin's warning regarding the practice:

while the human mind thus seeks help for itself in which it is not sanctioned by the word of God, it plainly manifests its distrust ... they obscure the glory of his nativity and make void his cross; in short, divest and defraud of due praise everything which he did or suffered, since all which he did and suffered goes to show that he is and ought to be deemed sole Mediator.

Also noteworthy is how Taylor's reference to the living fountain and cisterns - from Jeremiah 2 - is similarly found in Calvin's discussion:

It is strange that these delightful promises affect us coldly, or scarcely at all, so that the generality of men prefer to wander up and down, forsaking the fountain of living waters, and hewing out to themselves broken cisterns, rather than embrace the divine liberality voluntarily offered to them (III.20.14).

That he echoes Calvin in rejecting the invocation of saints on these grounds is indicative of how Taylor - despite his obvious and significant disagreements with aspects of Reformed theology and order - stands within a broader, eirenic, cosmopolitan Reformed tradition. As such, for Taylor, no less than Calvin and for the same reasons as Calvin, the invocation of saints was destructive of saving trust in the mediation of Christ.

Calvin: What does Paul mean when he declares that he “is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us”? But when in another passage he declares that he is the only Mediator between God and man, is he not referring to the supplications which he had mentioned a little before? Having previously said that prayers were to be offered up for all men, he immediately adds, in confirmation of that statement, that there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man.

Taylor: We conclude this with those words of S. Paul, How shall we call on him on whom we have not believed? Christ said, Ye believe in God, believe also in me. But he never said, Ye have believed in me, believe also in my Saints. No: For there is but one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. And therefore we must come to God, not by Saints, but only by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...

1928 practices and the 1979 book: unthinking conservatism or popular piety?

Those responsible for Earth & Altar - a new blog emanating from a group within TEC - are to be congratulated for an excellent contribution to wider Anglican discussion and debate. The commitment to "an expansively conceived credal orthodoxy as fully compatible with LGBTQ inclusion, gender equality, and racial justice" is an important part of a wider retrieval of creedal orthodoxy within what we might call the post-liberal generation. It is in this spirit that I want to respond to a recent post on the site by Andrew McGowan , Dean of the Berkeley Divinity School at Yale and Professor of Anglican Studies at Yale Divinity School.  Against the background of another round of "ill-defined" liturgical revision in TEC, he understandably urges that a fuller reception of the 1979 BCP should occur before further reforms. In doing so, however, he takes aim at what he describes as "clinging to the ritual structures of 1928" while using the text of 1979.  We ...