Stuart Church Research Articles

The Early Stuart Church, 1603–1642

(1994). The Early Stuart Church, 1603–1642. History: Reviews of New Books: Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 70-71.

Sacrifices by Resemblance: The Protestant Doctrine of Eucharistic Sacrifice in Late Elizabethan and Early Stuart Divinity

The more things change the more they remain the same: the most recent Anglican debate on eucharistic sacrifice also concerned 'what the ancient Church understood thereby' .2 Such a focus is unavoidable, even necessary, in an ethos which has so often presented itself as walking right humbly in the paths of Christian antiquity. But it does seem odd that modem Anglican scholars have devoted so little study to the way in which the question of eucharistic sacrifice was handled in their own tradition, particularly during that century between the Armada and the Glorious Revolution which so often passes for the classical age of Anglican divinity. It is as if scholars feel they have exhausted what the Elizabethan and Stuart Church of England understood thereby once they have noted the ceaseless efforts to demonstrate how 'the sacrifices of Masses ... were blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits' . I should like to argue that English doctrine was somewhat more 'obscure, intricate and perplexed' than this flat negation suggests. For even as they repudiated 'the sacrifices of Masses', English divines canvassed sacrifices in the Lord's Supper.

CAREER PROSPECTS AND CLERICAL CONFORMITY IN THE EARLY STUART CHURCH

CAREER PROSPECTS AND CLERICAL CONFORMITY IN THE EARLY STUART CHURCH

The Problem of Social-Political Obligation for the Church of England in the Seventeenth Century

Much has been written on the political behavior of the Stuart Church of England. And much too has been written on its monotonous reiteration of the divine right of kings' doctrine—with its ancillary ideas of passive obedience and non-resistance to the commands of authority. Indeed, for this perspective on the institution there exists abundant evidence: seventeenth century sermons and treatises were filled with “church politics.” Morever, Figgis' study remains indispensable: before, and perhaps even more clearly and vehemently after the Puritan Revolution, insistence on absolute obedience to existing authority—especially to the king—reverberated in the parish churches of England. Thus, at this point in time little doubt exists as to the political attitudes of clerics; and indeed a consensus exists also on the probable motives for those clerical attitudes: they followed unavoidably upon the second great conquest in English history, the conquest of the church by Henry VIII. But the church was not unwillingly conquered: it both bound itself and was bound to the destiny of the monarchy in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries—its newly-granted constitutional legality protected it while it nourished the hope that the Crown would act as sponsor of reform in Christian society. In a word, the institution of the church, keenly aware of both its relative impotence and its relative strength with regard to the monarchy, made the best of circumstances by offering virtually unqualified support to Stuart kingship, with certain unintended consequences for the church. Given this perspective, it is easy to understand why, apart from special problems and issues, the thought of Anglican clerics commands little attention today. But perhaps another view of clerical thought will yield as much or more understanding than the traditional perspective has so far yielded: it is the purpose of this essay to offer another view.