Tag Archives: Church of England

‘How The Plowman Learned His Paternoster’ or English Catechism Before the Reformation


What was the Church of England like before the Reformation? A snapshot comes from Eamon Duffy, in his award-winning book The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England 1400-1580 (second edition, 2005):

“Round the fourteenth-century font in the parish church of Bradley, Lincolnshire, is carved an English inscription, which runs

Pater Noster, Ave Maria, Criede,

Leren the childe yt is need.

“That injunction was directed to the godparents and was a formal part of the rite of baptism in late medieval England. Just before the blessing of the font at baptisms the priest was required to admonish the godparents to see that the child’s parents kept it from fire, water, and other perils, and themselves to ‘lerne or se yt be lerned the Pater noster, Aue Maria and Credo after the law of all holy churche’. The Lord’s Prayer, Hail Mary, and Apostles’ Creed were in fact the irreducible core of a more elaborate catechetical programme for the laity which had been decisively formulated for the English Church at Archbishop Pecham’s provincial Council of Lambeth in 1281.”

Duffy’s book won the Longman-History Today Book of the Year Award, for good reason.

Writing in Sixteenth Century Journal, the late Stanford Lehmberg said Duffy’s book “presents a marvelously detailed new picture of traditional religious belief and practice in English during the century prior to the Reformation and it shows exactly when and how the customs of faith and ceremony were stripped away in the sixteenth century. Our interpretation of the Reformation and our understanding of Tudor religion will never be the same.”

In English Historical Review, the late Margaret Aston said Duffy’s book “takes a major step toward better understanding of the English reformation.”

Related:

The story of the Reformation needs reforming

 

Advertisements

Richard Hooker versus the Puritans and the Separatists: Anglicanism versus Puritanism


A new piece of the backdrop to disagreements between The Episcopal Church and the Anglicans Who Left.

The following is from the book Richard Hooker’s Use of History in His Defense of Public Worship : His Anglican Critique of Calvin, Barrow, and the Puritans (2011) by Scott N. Kindred-Barnes, adjunct Faculty in the Historical Department of Toronto School of Theology, and a Lecturer at Trinity College, University of Toronto:

“In 1593 and 1597, Richard Hooker published the first five books of his magnum opus, Of the Lawes of Ecclesiasticall Polity ….

“Richard Hooker’s view of history, in turn, under-girded his criticism of puritans and separatists on many issues concerning public worship. This is particularly evident in Books IV and V of the Lawes, where Hooker engaged puritan and separatist critiques of the Church of England. In Book IV, for instance, Hooker defended the ceremonies of the Church of England from the charge that her public worship lacked ‘ancient Apostolicall simplicitie.’ Such charges were supported by the puritan and separatist interpretations of the past, which Hooker regarded as being founded on erroneous assumptions.

“While Hooker held a deep admiration for the ‘zeale and godliness’ of Biblical times, he nonetheless maintained throughout  the Lawes that the context of Elizabethan ecclesiological debates involved issues that the Scriptures did not directly address. While he held the central Reformation doctrines such as Justification by faith, Hooker was not an apocalyptic thinker in the tradition of John Bale and his subsequent followers. Rather, he rejected the primitivism and the apocalyptic thought running throughout the writings of Thomas Cartwright and Henry Barrow and formulated instead a view of the past more reliant upon reason and extra-Biblical historical circumstances. Hooker’s belief that  reason is a God-given gift that has the potential to aid the best minds of society to determine what is most politically and theologically convenient for a given age, had a profound effect upon his view of public worship.”

Everyone should feel free to critique the Church of England and Anglicanism from any angle he/she chooses. However, to claim Anglicanism for John Calvin or for the Puritans is not historically accurate. I’ve added other pieces (from scholars) to this same backdrop here and here and here.

Richard Hooker versus the Puritan position — more about the Anglican view of Scripture, Reason & Tradition


I think Anglicanism looks most distinctive, at least to Americans, when it is contrasted with Puritanism, in part because America was influenced much more by the Puritans than by the Roman Catholics.

The Puritans and the Roman Catholics are relevant because Anglicanism was designed to be neither Puritan nor Roman Catholic.

Here’s a good witness for my case: Jaroslav Pelikan, the late Yale University historian of Christianity, who was acknowledged in many corners of Christendom as a scholar with a good grasp of the faith’s doctrinal and theological developments and changes.

In his book Reformation of Church and Dogma, which is Volume 4 in his five-book set The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, Pelikan gives the following interpretation of Richard Hooker (1554-1600) and his book Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity.

Hooker acknowledged that there were many doctrines, including the Trinity, that were “in Scripture nowhere to be found by express literal mention, only deduced they are out of Scripture by collection.” Yet that did not detract from “the sufficiency of Scripture unto the end for which it was instituted,” so long as one recognized what that end was — and what it was not. It was the knowledge of salvation, but it was not a detailed “ordinance of Jesus Christ” about the specific arrangements of ecclesiastical polity. These were to be known from the laws of reason and nature; for “when supernatural duties are necessarily exacted, natural are not rejected as needless,” and the law of God included both. Therefore it was a mistake, in the name of “a desire to enlarge the necessary use of the word of God,” to hold that “only one law, the Scripture, must be the rule to direct in all things,” when in fact “God hath left sundry kinds of laws unto men, and by all those laws the actions of men are in some sort directed.” (boldface added)

This should reveal Hooker’s belief in a reasonable exercise of reason, as well as an appreciation for traditional Christian beliefs that were handed down through practice and belief — yet not found spelled-out in Scripture.

When Hooker, within Pelikan’s paraphrase, said Scripture “was not a detailed ‘ordinance of Jesus Christ’,” he took exception to a point of view represented by the Puritans.

As quoted before on this blog, Professor David L. Holmes suggests that in the time of Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556), the Prayer Book author who died two years after Hooker was born, the Puritans were uncomfortable with any exercise of reason or acknowledgement of tradition in church beliefs, practices, and offices:

The Puritan party, which desired biblical warrant for all beliefs, practices, and offices of a Christian church, viewed the Prayer Book as a half-way house to true reform and objected that it retained practices that were unscriptural.

In contrast, Anglicanism and the Church of England were distinct largely because of the English liturgy as found in the Book of Common Prayer. The Puritans, according to Holmes, disliked the Book of the Common Prayer!

Furthermore, Hooker’s Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, as described above by Pelikan, opposes the Puritan premise as described by Holmes. Hooker’s book, according to Pelikan, was “an apologia for the unique features of the Anglican settlement.”

We ought to register a significant difference between Anglicanism and the Puritan point of view.

This significant difference was not unique to Hooker. Professor William C. Placher, as I quoted elsewhere, said of Thomas Cranmer, author of the Book of Common Prayer:

His interests lay less in systematic theology than in church history, especially the history of liturgy, and in writing the Book of Common Prayer he produced the foundation of much English religion and one of the glories of English prose.

Keep in mind that evangelical Christianity in the United States has largely shared the Puritan suspicion of reason and tradition. As Philip J. Lee writes,

The Puritan changes often brought the New England theology perilously close to gnostic Christianity. Of particular concern is the Puritans’ concentration on the self and their tendency to regard humanity from an elitist perspective.

That’s from Lee’s book, Against the Protestant Gnostics.