laudable Practice

It is not at all original to read Hooker's exposition of the Sacraments in Book V of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity alongside the Consensus Tigurinus (the Consensus of Zurich), the 1549 agreement between the Churches of Zurich and Geneva on the Sacraments. Torrance Kirby , for example, has said that Hooker's teaching on the Sacraments as 'moral instruments' is "demonstrably in agreement with the Consensus Tigurinus". Similarly, Diarmaid MacCulloch regards Hooker's eucharistic views as being at home in "Bullinger's Zurich".  The purpose of this post, therefore, is not to offer any original commentary but to consider how the Consensus Tigurinus is significantly reflected in Hooker. The focus of this post is V.57.3-5 of the Laws . We begin, however, with a passage from the Laws just prior to V.57, as Hooker considers "The union or mutuall participation which is betweene Christ and the Church of Christ in this present worlde". In...

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...

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 Lutheran Churches do acknowledge reall presence by way of Consubstantiation: it is no wonder therefore, that they approue kneeling. The Reformed Churches, as they damned bodily presence, so haue they reiected the gesture of kneeling in the act of receiuing. For the critics of the Articles of Perth , as the above words indicate, the matter was very straightforward. Of course the Lutherans knelt to receive the Sacrament, for they are Ubiquists. By contrast, the Reformed, who reject "bodily presence", denounce kneeling.  In his 1621 account of the 1618 General Assembly of the Church of Scotland held at Perth , David Lindsay, Bishop of Brechin (1619-34 and Bishop of Edinburgh 1634-38), pointed to a much richer, diverse Protestant landscape. To begin, he invoked a broader understanding of 'Reformed' to include the Lutherans. While obvoiusly rejecting Consubstantation, he emphasises that Lutheran sacramental teaching does share important characteristics with the Reforme...

In the debate with Cranmer, Gardiner turned to the Lord's Words of Institution and the teaching of Cyprian to support the understanding of the Eucharist as "a sacrifice propitiatory", fulfilling the prophecy of Malachi: We read in St. Cyprian how Christ offered himself in his  supper, fulfilling the figure of Melchisedech, who by the offering of  bread and wine, signified that high mystery of Christ's supper, in  which Christ under the form of bread and wine, gave his very  body and blood to be eaten and drunken ...  Now when we have Christ's body thus present in the celebration of the holy Supper, and by Christ's mouth present unto us, saying, This is my body which is betrayed for you; then have we Christ's body recommended unto us as our sacrifice, and a sacrifice propitiatory for all the sins of the world, being the only sacrifice of Christ's Church, the pure and clean sacrifice, whereof the prophet Malachie spake, and whereof the fathers in Christ...

... in reverence of God, and in due regard of so divine a mystery, and in remembrance of so mystical a union as we are made partakers of, the assembly thinketh good, that the blessed Sacrament be celebrated hereafter, meekly and reverently upon their knees. For the Articles of Perth , kneeling to receive the Sacrament was testimony to what Cranmer had termed "our humble and grateful acknowledgement of the benefits of Christ therein, given to all worthy Receivers". In his 1621 account of the 1618 General Assembly of the Church of Scotland held at Perth , David Lindsay, Bishop of Brechin (1619-34 and Bishop of Edinburgh 1634-38), highlighted how opponents of the practice placed themselves outside of the Continental Reformed mainstream by dramatically exaggerating the case against kneeling to receive. Lindsay quotes an opponent who contrasted the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper with signs of God's presence under the Old Covenant, noting how those signs were accompanied by...

Heare us (O merciful father) we besech thee; and with thy holy spirite and worde, vouchsafe to blesse and sanctifie these thy gyftes, and creatures of bread and wyne, that they maie be unto us the bodye and bloude of thy moste derely beloved sonne Jesus Christe. This invocation from BCP 1549 provided another opportunity for Gardiner to mischievously use the text of Cranmer's liturgy to argue against its author's eucharistic theology. According to Gardiner: The body of Christ is by God's omnipotency, who so worketh in his word, made present unto us at such time as the Church prayeth it may please him so to do, which prayer is ordered to be made in the Book of Common Prayer now set forth. Wherein we require of God the creatures of bread and wine to be sanctified, and to be to us the body and blood of Christ, which they cannot be, unless God worketh it, and make them so to be ... by the conversion of the substance of bread into his precious body. One can imagine Cranmer's...

As 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 , continues his defence of the Articles of Perth providing for kneeling to receive the Sacrament, he emphasises that this practice is related to another aspect of the administration of the Sacrament - that is, that communicants receive the Bread and Wine from the minister.  This was contrary to those who opponents of the Articles of Perth who defended sitting to receive the Sacrament as more appropriate, enabling communicants to break the Bread for each other and pass the Cup to each other. In the words of an opponent quoted by Lindsay, "The sacramental Supper should carry the resemblance of a Supper, in the formes and fashions thereof, or else it cannot rightly be called a Supper". Lindsay, however, points out that the means and reality of our partaking of Christ in the Sacrament requires a quite contrary unde...

In his Answer to Gardiner (1551), Cranmer had to address Gardiner's allegation that his view of the Sacraments of the Old and New Covenants, as both being a participation in Christ, was "a novelty of speech". Cranmer, we should note, entirely rejected what we might term 'Scriptural primitivism' - that is, a belief that a thousand years of erroneous teaching within the Churches was of little concern as that was required was to return to Scripture. Instead, Cranmer invoked the genealogy for Reformed eucharistic teachings that he had previously set out in this work , with particular regard to how it also supported the Reformed emphasis on the sacraments of the New Covenant working as did the sacraments of the Old Covenant.  The last post in this series demonstrated how this understanding of the sacraments was " after the mind of St. Augustine ". Cranmer, however, did not stop with the great Augustine. He then turned to the 9th century Frankish divine Ratra...

The sixth breach of the Institution made by kneeling, is the taking away of the distribution that ought to be amongst the Communicants. When Christ sayd, Take yee, eate yee, he insinuates, that they should take and diuide amongst themselues. So said an opponent of the Articles of Perth , which had introduced kneeling to receive the Sacrament in the Church of Scotland: kneeling to receive prevented seated communicants from breaking the Bread among themselves. The response of 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 , is significant because he invoked, in support of kneeling to receive, the continental Reformed tradition's emphasis on the Fraction in the Lord's Supper. In Reformed-Lutheran disputes of the late 16th and early 17th centuries, the Fraction had become a distinctive Reformed act, the characteristic sign of a Reformed eucharistic understanding. As...

Amongst the points of debate between Gardiner and Cranmer, in Answer to Gardiner (1551), was the nature of the sacraments of the Old Covenant: were they a sign of the people of Israel partaking of Christ? While Gardiner's key point is that the sacraments of the Old Covenant were not a means of partaking of Christ, his position is less than clearly stated as he is forced to admit that "in a sense" that those of the Old Covenant did so partake of Christ: Their sacraments were figures of the things, but ours contain the very things. And therefore albeit in a sense to the learned men, it may be verified, that the fathers did eat the body of Christ and drink his blood, yet there is no such form of words in Scripture, and it is more agreeable to the simplicity of Scripture to say, the fathers before Christ's nativity did not eat the body and blood of Christ, which body and blood Christ himself truly took of the body of the Virgin Mary.  A chief difficulty for Gardiner, of ...

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 ...