'We will not give her lavish and excessive attributes': Bishop Bull on reverence of the Blessed Virgin

Continuing with extracts from a sermon by Bishop Bull (d.1710) entitled 'The Blessed Virgin's low and exalted condition', on the text Luke 1:48-49, having established the grounds for Reformed reverence of the Blessed Virgin, Bull now turns to examples of "extravagant honour" towards her, refused and rejected by the Church of England:

I will mention some few instances of extravagant honour which the Papists give, but we of the Church of England utterly refuse to yield, to the blessed Virgin , out of a true zeal to the honour of God.

We will not give her lavish and excessive attributes, beyond what the Holy Scriptures allow her, and the holy men of the primitive Church afforded her. We will call her "blessed," as the mother of our Lord, in the sense above explained. But we dare not call her "queen of heaven," "queen of Angels, Patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles," "source of the fountain of grace," "refuge of sinners," "comfort of the afflicted," "advocate of all Christians," as she is called in that Litany of our Lady, still used in their devotions. For we have no instance of such attributes given to the blessed Virgin in the Holy Scriptures, and they are too big for any mere creature.

We will not ascribe those excellencies to her, that she never had nor could have; as, a fulness of habitual grace, more grace than all the angels and archangels of God put together ever had; that she was born without original sin, and never committed any the least actual sin, and, consequently, never needed a Saviour. These are wild things, which very many of the Papists, drunk with superstition, say of her ...

My brethren, let us bless God that we yet breathe in a pure air, free from the noisome and pestilent fogs of those superstitious vanities, where none of those fooleries and impieties are obtruded on our faith or practice; that we live in a Church, wherein no other name is invocated but the Name of God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; nor divine worship given to any but to the one true God, through Jesus Christ, the only Mediator.

Comments

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 ...

laudable Practice

Search This Blog