Lutheran movement in england during the reigns of henry VIII. And edward VI

CHAPTER XXVI. THE HOMILIES OF 1547.

Taverner’s Postils, a temporary Expedient. Preparation of an authorized Book. Reasons for its Unpopularity. Merits and Defects. Permanent Results. Symbolical Authority. Homily on “The Salvation of Mankind “ examined. Sources whence it was compiled. Indebtedness of other Homilies. Homilies of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth.

The line of the liturgical development of the English Church, has led us some years beyond the period of the English Homilies Taverner, as we have seen, had already made a temporary effort to supply the lack of preaching, by the preparation of “Postils,” to be used for this purpose. A more formal and complete work was to appear later. Ordered by Convocation in 1542, it seems to have been completed in 1543, and, then, after awaiting revision for several years, finally appeared in the summer of 1547. A second edition was issued the same year. One of the Homilies was to be read “every Sunday at high mass,” “except a sermon be preached,” and, then, the Homily had to be read the succeeding Sunday. When the Homilies had all been read, the clergyman was to begin the volume anew, and read and re-read it, until he received further instructions. The book, though highly commended by Bucer, from Strassburg, did not prove popular. Sometimes when read, “there would be such talking and babbling in the church, that nothing could be heard. And if the parish were better affected, and the priest not so, he would ‘so hauk and chop it,’ that it were as good for them to be without it, as for any word that could be understood.”³³⁶ No [[@Page:334]]wonder. For, first, the book reflected the inconsistent position of the English Church, the advocates of the various tendencies having taken part in its preparation, and the evangelical position of Cranmer being balanced by the hierarchical position of Bonner. Even though there be few direct antagonisms, the very mode of treatment was affected. Secondly, the Homilies are not popular, but largely didactic in their character. The doctrinal Homilies are essays in Dogmatic Theology, burdened with technical terms and abounding in arguments from the Fathers: and even those of a more practical nature show the hand of the student cloistered among books, rather than that of one who had much experience in the care of souls. There is, in this respect, a great contrast between them, and the expositions of doctrine for plain pastors which are found in the introduction to so many of our Lutheran Church Orders. Thirdly, they entirely ignored the Church Year, and caused an interruption of the true idea of the Service, which, even though it may be borne occasionally, nevertheless, when occurring as a rule becomes awkward and tedious. They exhibit no progressive unfolding of the life of Christ. Compared with the earlier effort of Taverner, there was here by no means an improvement.

Although, the Homilies did not long serve the purpose for which they were composed, and as sermons were failures; yet their importance as theological treatises, must not be overlooked. [[Art. XXXIV >> 39art:34]], of the Church of England and of the Protestant Episcopal Church of America, gives them, with the later Homilies of Queen Elizabeth, symbolical authority; and [[Art. XI >> 39art:11]]. gives still more emphasis to one particular Homily. To the study of this Homily, thus officially endorsed, which was constructed from Lutheran material, John Wesley ascribed the origin of the Methodistic movement. Cranmer seems to have endeavored in those which he prepared, to clearly explain and defend at length the cardinal doctrines of Sin and Grace, and especially that of Justification by Faith alone without works. No document that has come into our hands, shows that he has merely [[@Page:335]]translated. Yet his close dependence not only in order of treatment, and of thought, but also in language, cannot be questioned. The order with which the opening Homilies are arranged, shows that Osiander’s influence has wrought here, as elsewhere, upon his relative. If the Homilies begin: I. The Reading and Knowledge of Holy Scripture; II. the Misery of all Mankind; III. the Salvation of all Mankind; IV. True and Living Faith; the Brandenburg-Nürnberg Instruction proceeds: I. Of Doctrine; the Old and New Testaments. II. Penitence, the Law; III. the Gospel, etc. In many of the Homilies, we do not claim any Lutheran elements. Patristic and scholastic learning, rather than the “New Learning,” are frequently manifested. But examining especially that on the “Salvation of Mankind by only Christ our Saviour,” we at once find that we are treading the same ground as that traversed when the “Common Prayer” was examined.

The opening sentence of the Homily is taken directly or indirectly from the Schwabach Articles of Luther and Melanchthon of October 15th, 1529.

Schwabach Articles. (Art. V.)

Homily.

Because all men be sinners, subject to sin and to death, besides to the devil, therefore can no man by his own strength or good works, deliver himself thence, so that he may again be made righteous or godly; yea, he cannot even prepare or dispose himself for righteousness, but the more he attempts to deliver himself, the worse it is for him. But that the only way to righteousness and deliverance from sin and death is, if, without all merits or works, we believe in the Son of God who suffered for us… For God regards as righteous and godly all those who have this faith in his Son, that, for his Son’s sake, they are received into grace.

Because all men be sinners and offenders against God, and breakers of his Law and commandments, therefore can no man by his own works, acts and deeds (seem they never so good) be justified, and made righteous before God; but every man of necessity is constrained to seek for another righteousness or justification, to be received at God’s own hands, in such things as he hath offended. And this justification or righteousness, which we so receive of God’s mercy and Christ’s merit, embraced by faith, is taken, accepted and allowed of God, for our perfect and full justification.

Cf. also [[Apology of Augsburg Confession, p. 90: 40 >> BookOfConcord:AP:3, 40]]. The close of the paragraph introduces the very language of [[Art. III >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:3]]. [[@Page:336]]of the Augsburg Confession, supplementing it, however, by a clause referring to the “Active Obedience” of Christ. This is a matter of much interest, since the doctrine of the “Active Obedience” has generally been traced to Flacius in 1552, who is said to have formulated it, in order to counteract the error of Osiander on Justification.³³⁷ This Homily of 1547, however, says that God sent his only Son “to fulfil the Law for us and to make a sacrifice,” and a few pages later: “Christ is now the righteousness of them that truly do believe in him. He for them paid their ransom by his death. He for them fulfilled the Law in his life. So that now in him, and by him, every true Christian man may be called a fulfiller of the Law; forasmuch as that which their infirmity lacked, Christ’s justice hath supplied.” But the doctrine of the “Active Obedience,” was derived from the Reformation of Cologne, which, in turn, had taken it from Brandenburg- Nürnberg of 1533, where even Osiander had assisted in formulating the following: “First, he directed all his life according to the will of the Father, did for us what we were obliged, and yet were unable, to do, and fulfilled the Law and all righteousness for our good, as He himself says, Matth. 5: 17, and Paul says, Gal. 4: 4; 1 Cor. 1: 30; Phil. 3: 9. Secondly, he took upon himself all our sins, and bore and suffered all that was due us, John 1: 29; [[Is. 53; 4-6 >> Is 53.4-6]]; Rom. 8: 32; Gal. 3: 13.”

The statement of the Augsburg Confession that Christ was “a sacrifice not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins,” carries Cranmer at once, in thought, to Art. IX. of the Confession.

Aug. Conf., [[Art. IX >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:9]].	Homily.
Children are to be baptized, who by baptism, being offered to God, are received into God’s favor.	Infants being baptized . . are, by this sacrifice washed from their sins, brought to God’s favor.

And then to Art. XII. [[@Page:337]]

Aug. Conf., [[Art. XII >> BookOfConcord:AC:I:12]].	Homily.
Such as have fallen after baptism, may find remission of sins at what time they are converted.	They which in act or deed do sin after baptism, when they turn again to God unfeignedly, they are likewise washed by this sacrifice from their sins.^338

Then after two passages of Scripture are cited, another of Melanchthon’s statements appears.

Melanchthon’s Loci Comm. (De Evangelio).	Homily.
Justification is given freely, that is, not on account of our worth, yet there must be a ransom for us.	Although this justification be free unto us, yet it cometh not so freely unto us, that there is no ransom paid therefor.

After proving and illustrating this statement, Cranmer continues:

“The Apostle toucheth specially three things, which must go together in our Justification; upon God’s part, his great mercy and grace; upon Christ’s part, justice, i. e. the satisfaction of God’s justice or the price of our redemption by the offering of his Body, and shedding of his Blood . .; and upon our part, true and lively faith.”

The Apology (1531) had said:

“As often as we speak of Justifying Faith, we must keep in mind that these three objects concur: the promise and that too gratuitous, and the merits of Christ, as the price and propitiation. This promise is received by faith” ([[p. 92: §53 >> BookOfConcord:AP:3, 53]]). “Which” [faith] “yet is not ours, but by God’s working in us.” continues the Homily. “It is not my doing, not my presenting or giving, not my work or preparation,” says the Apology ([[p. 91: §48 >> BookOfConcord:AP:3, 48]]). “Faith doth not shut out repentance, hope, love,” says the Homily. “Love and works ought to follow faith. Wherefore, they are not excluded,” says the Apology. “It excludeth them,” says the Homily, “so we may not do them, to this intent, to be made good by doing of them.” “Confidence in the merit of love or of works,” says the Apology, “is excluded in Justification.” [[@Page:338]]

It is unnecessary to illustrate further. The Homilies “Of our Salvation” and “Of Faith,” are almost mosaics of passages from approved Lutheran authorities. We would not infer that they were mechanically joined together; but that they were deeply fixed in the mind of the writer, were thoroughly assimilated and flowed forth almost spontaneously from his pen Nevertheless this, in no way diminishes the extent of the indebtedness.

We recognize also many corresponding similarities in the Homily “Of Good Works,” and, to a less extent, in that “Of Christian Love and Charity.” Those first mentioned, are worthy of far wider study than has been accorded them. They are among the most valuable memorials which the struggle of the Gospel for the English Church, has left to succeeding generations, and, as models of a pure and eloquent English style, are scarcely to be surpassed. Among those added in the next reign, were the two of Taverner on the Death and Resurrection of Christ. The great devotion of the author to Lutheranism has been previously shown, in connection with what has been said concerning his translation of the Augsburg Confession and the Apology. [[@Page:339]]