laudable Practice

An enduring theme of these posts on the defence of the Articles of Perth given by David Lindsay, Bishop of Brechin (1619-34 and Bishop of Edinburgh 1634-38) - in his 1621 account of the 1618 General Assembly of the Church of Scotland held at Perth - has been how he interprets the Articles as standing fully within the mainstream of the continental Reformed tradition. This is also particularly evident in his approach to the Articles restoring to the Church of Scotland the five principal festivals - Our Lord's "birth, passion, resurrection, ascension, and sending down of the Holy Ghost".  Referring to his opponent who sought to invoke "the iudgement of the reformed Churches", Lindsay declares "he reiects the doctrine and practise of the reformed Church, which stands wholly in his contrarie". Lindsay, therefore, points to the practice of both continental Reformed and Lutheran churches:  They in Geneua who obserue the day of Natiuitie, and Easter, approue ...

These weekly readings from Cranmer's Answer to Gardiner commenced at the beginning of September 2025 . We are now over one-third of our way through the work. This being so, it seems like an appropriate time to take a break from the Answer to Gardiner , before returning later this year. We end this section of readings with Cranmer saying of Gardiner's teaching, "in the sacrament mak[ing] so many divisions": For you divide the substances of bread and wine from their proper accidences, the substances also of Christ's flesh and blood from their own accidences, and Christ's very flesh sacramentally from his very blood, although you join them again, per concomitantiam; and you divide the sacrament so, that the priest receiveth both the sacrament of Christ's body and of his blood; and the laypeople, as you call them, receive no more but the sacrament of his body, as though the sacrament of his blood and of our redemption pertained only to the priests. And the ca...

Our least reading from Nelson's 1713 Life of Dr. George Bull considered how Bull's 1694 Judicium Ecclesia Catholicae was a response to the use put by English non-Trinitarians of Episcopius' view that the Apostles' Creed did not require the faith of Nicaea. Nelson notes how Bull's work drew on a wider theological tradition to affirm that the Nicene faith was inherent to the Apostles' Creed: he hath given such an Account of the ancient Creeds, and more particularly, of the first and most ancient Creed of all, and the Explications thereof, which are found in Ireneus and Tertullian; as it will be very hard after him to add any further Light to that Matter. For all what the Elder Vossius, with so much Pains and Judgment, had collected up on this Subject, with what our most learned and pious Archbishop Usher had also written hereupon, after mature deliberation upon the whole, will be found applied with great Skill, and set in a very advantageous Light, for removing...

In a number of posts on Peter Lake's On Laudianism: Piety, Polemic and Politics During the Personal Rule of Charles I (2023), I have been deeply critical of Lake's depiction of the pre-Caroline Church of England , his failure to account for the continuities in Elizabethan, Jacobean, and Caroline ceremonial conformity , and his entirely unconvincing depiction of 'Laudianism' as an 'Arminian' movement.  All this said, I do have to credit Lake's book with deeply influencing my thought about the Church of England in the 1630s. Having read and reflected upon Lake's 600 pages, I am now convinced that 'Laudianism' should cease to be used as a meaningful term. Put bluntly, Lakes's work - contrary, of course, to his intention - has led me to the view that there was no such thing as 'Laudianism'.  To begin with, Lake offers a profoundly weak case for describing those who supported the ecclesiastical policies of the Personal Rule as 'Laudi...

I noticed a recent exchange on X between the commentator Peter Hitchens and an Anglo-catholic cleric on the subject of priesthood. It began as a debate on the ordination of women as priests but - perhaps not unsurprisingly - turned to the issue of the nature of this office.  Hitchens stated: my bit of the CofE has ministers, not priests, and tables rather than altars.  As we might expect, the Anglo-catholic cleric responded with this statement: the Church of England has priests, which are a type of minister. The 1662 refers to priests several times and contains a form for ordaining them. The vicar of your parish is, legally, a priest. Hitchens came back: The Prayer Book, which is famously ambiguous on many matters, also uses the term 'minister'. So do some Anglicans, of which I am one ... The exchange demonstrates what I have previously described as the historic Anglican difference between the language of order and the language of pastoral ministry. The language of order - bi...

Our previous reading from the defence given by David Lindsay, Bishop of Brechin (1619-34 and Bishop of Edinburgh 1634-38) - in his 1621 account of the 1618 General Assembly of the Church of Scotland held at Perth - of the provision in the Articles of Perth regarding Confirmation explored how superintendency and episcopacy were a Scottish practice, dependent on a Scottish ecclesiastical order, and an ecclesiastical order found in many Churches throughout Protestant Europe. Today we turn to to the specific issue of the rite of Confirmation, as provided by the fourth Article of Perth: it is thought good, that the minister in every parish, should catechise all young children of eight years of age, and see that they have the knowledge, and be able to make rehearsal of the Lord's Prayer, Belief, and Ten Commandments, with answers to the questions of the small catechism, used in our church, and that every bishop in his visitation, shall censure the minister who shall be found remiss th...

In the exchange between Gardiner and Cranmer, set forth in Cranmer's Answer to Gardiner (1551), there appears to be the possibility of concord as Gardiner accepts that 'corporal' presence has not the meaning often assumed, as Christ is spiritually present in the Sacrament: The word corporally may have an ambiguity and doubleness in respect and relation. One is to the truth of the body present, and so it maybe said, Christ is corporally present in the sacrament; but if the word corporally be referred to the manner of the presence, then we should say, Christ's body were present after a corporal manner, which we say not, but in a spiritual manner, and therefore not locally nor by manner of quantity. Cranmer - rather mischievously - welcomes this agreement, while yet knowing a crucial difference of understanding remains, as pointed to at the conclusion of this extract:  In this comparison I am glad that at the last we be come so near together, for you be almost right hear...

The services were decently and demurely read in their parish churches, chanting was confined to the cathedral, and the science of intoning was unknown. One young man who had come direct from Oxford as a curate to Plumstead had, after the lapse of two or three Sundays, made a faint attempt, much to the bewilderment of the poorer part of the congregation. Dr. Grantly had not been present on the occasion, but Mrs. Grantly, who had her own opinion on the subject, immediately after the service expressed a hope that the young gentleman had not been taken ill, and offered to send him all kinds of condiments supposed to be good for a sore throat. After that there had been no more intoning at Plumstead Episcopi. It is an amusing incident from Barchester Towers , Trollope's 1857 novel. Amusing as it is, it also reflects mid-19th century Anglican experience. We hear something of Mrs. Grantly in the 1862 edition of Reading the Liturgy , a work which originally had the subtitle "addressed ...

At Parish Communion & Holy Baptism on Low Sunday, 12.4.26 John 20:31 “But these are written so that you may continue to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name.” [1] Today is a day of two celebrations in our parish church.  It is the Sunday after Easter Day, when - as seen in our readings, hymns, and the decoration of the church - we continue to celebrate Easter, the Resurrection of Jesus. It is also a day when we are celebrating three baptisms - N, N, and N will shortly be receiving the Sacrament of Baptism.  If we are lucky, we might just hear three babies decide to loudly join in our Easter praises and remind us of their presence with us this morning. If that does happen, parents - relax. We are delighted to have N, N, and N with us for their baptisms this morning. These two celebrations - of Easter and of Holy Baptism - are not separate. They do not stand apart from each other. Both these celebrations j...

From Francis Atterbury's sermon for Easter Day 1718, ' Some Reasons assigned for our Saviour's appearing chiefly to his Apostles after his Resurrection ', preached at Westminster Abbey. Here Atterbury sets forth how the Church's ministry, doctrine, and sacraments both flow from the Lord's Resurrection and proclaim the Resurrection. Particularly significant is how this understanding of the Church in the post-Resurrection accounts in the Scriptures - "these short Accounts" - is, for Atterbury, sufficient, requiring nothing to be added for our salvation. But as our Saviour, during his forty Days Stay on Earth, fully enabled his Apostles to attest his Resurrection, so did he qualify them duly to preach his Doctrine; for he taught them the Things pertaining to the Kingdom of God, i.e. to the Gospel Dispensation, of which they were to be the Ministers, and to his Church, which they were to gather, constitute, and govern ... This Promise he had made them the ...

At Ante-Communion on Good Friday, 3.4.26 Hebrews 4:14-16, 5:7-10 [1] “Since, then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our confession.” [2] It was a day of sharp contrasts in Jerusalem on that first Good Friday. In the heart of the city was the ancient Temple. It had stood for half a millennium, a sacred place of prayer and sacrifice unto the God of Israel. Because of its holiness, Gentiles were not permitted to enter the Temple. Outside the city walls, however, at the Place of the Skull [3], there was nothing sacred. This was the place of bloody execution. Here the Gentiles reigned; here the pagan empire of Rome imposed its will by brute force. In the Temple, prayers were reverently uttered to Adonai, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  At the Place of the Skull, it was the voice of mockery which was heard from bystanders. And when the Crucified One speaks, it is to say ‘I am thirsty’ - an echo of the desper...