laudable Practice

As this is the week in which Lent begins, laudable Practice will pause the readings from Nelson, Cranmer, and Lindsay until next week. This will allow for some hopefully appropriate seasonal reflections as we enter into the season of penitence and fasting. Today and tomorrow, there will be extracts from Ussher. Ussher has been on my mind recently as I have pondered the possibility of a revisionist reading of the Irish Articles of 1615 - that is, seeing them as something more than simply a 'Calvinist' statement (a simplistic term which Ussher would certainly not have regarded as praise). Ussher, in his own terms, was not a 'Calvinist'. Rather, he understood himself to be an orthodox catholic: the way which they call heresy is not new, but hath been trodden in long since by such as in their times were accounted good and catholic teachers in the Church. These words are taken from his Answers to a Jesuit (1622). In this work, Ussher addresses 'the Priest's power ...

In his sermon ' The Faith and Patience of the Saints; Or, the Righteous Cause Oppressed ' - part of the second volume of the Golden Grove series - Jeremy Taylor addressed the dissolution of the monasteries: We know that when, in Henry the Eighth, or Edward the Sixth's days, some great men pulled down churches and built palaces, and robbed religion of its just encouragements, and advantages; the men that did it were sacrilegious; and we find also that God hath been punishing that great sin, ever since; and hath displayed to so many generations of men, to three or four descents of children, that those men could not be esteemed happy in their great fortunes, against whom God was so angry, that he would show his displeasure for a hundred years together. This is the type of comment that might be taken as an example of - to use Peter Lake's terminology - 'maximalist' Laudianism. Here, after all, was a critique of a not insignificant aspect of the English Reformation. ...

In the debates surrounding the Articles of Perth introducing kneeling to receive the Sacrament in the Church of Scotland, 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 , reflected on how this was also a debate about liturgy.  Quoting his opponent, Lindsay noted how he alleged that because kneeling to receive the Sacrament was accompanied by words of administration, this replaced the Words of Institution: The fift breach of the institution made by kneeling is, the altering of the enunciatiue words of Christ, This is my body which is broken for you: This is my bloud which is shed for you, in a prayer, To blesse our body and soule, saying, The body of our Lord Iesus Christ, &c. This was no new debate. Hooker had responded to a similar criticism of the liturgy and practice of the Church of England by Cartwright, offering a robust defence of the words of administrat...

One of the consistent themes in Gardiner's critique of Cranmer is the accusation of inconsistency - that Cranmer is denying his previous writings in order to further radicalize his eucharistic doctrine. In this extract, Gardiner draws attention to Cranmer using the word "there" - in the sacrament - with reference to the gift of the Lord's Body and Blood: This is here worthy a special note, how by the manner of the speech in the latter part of this difference, the teaching seemeth to be, that Christ is spiritually present in the sacrament, because of the word "there," which thou, reader, mayest compare how it agreeth with the rest of this author's doctrine.  Cranmer's response, in his Answer to Gardiner (1551), is not to deny that the Lord's Body and Blood is present "there". Christ is indeed truly present "there" - in the faithful eating of the Bread and Wine: And where of  this word "there," you would conclude rep...

... a Storm being there upon raised in the Church. This is how Robert Nelson, in his 1713 Life of Dr. George Bull , describes the context in the Church of England in the aftermath of the publication of Bull's Defensio Fidei Nicaenae (1685). The storm had not been caused by Bull's work but, rather, by a clumsy attempt by the orthodox divine William Sherlock to defend Trinitarian doctrine. As Nelson puts it, Sherlock applied "the principles of the Cartesian Metaphysicks" to the Holy Trinity, with the result that his work was seen "false, heretical, and impious" by "a great many" (not least because he depicted the Trinity as, again quoting Nelson, "three infinite distinct Minds and Substances"). In the heated debates over the Trinity which followed, "some Drops fell upon the Head of Mr. Bull also", his view of the Son's subordination being a particular target - as we have seen - of criticism by the divines of Reformed Orthodox...

In his discussion of a Laudian defence of ceremonies, Lake's On Laudianism distinguishes between what he terms "the minimum and maximum positions". The minimum position - "the more conservative view" - invoked the Elizabethan Settlement. What, then, of the 'maximalists'? Their view, Lake insists, was radically different: The maximum position went further, deriving that Anglican essence not solely from the prayer book [sic], or the Thirty-nine Articles, but rather from the primitive, apostolic and now the later Catholic churches, whose practices provided the Laudians with a prism through which to read the foundation documents of the church of England, thus rendering them more compatible with their religious sensibilities and ecclesiological priorities (p.349). The idea that invoking patristic authority somehow stood apart from - indeed, seemingly contradicted - the formularies of the Elizabethan Settlement runs entirely contrary to how the Elizabethan a...