Reclaiming England for Our Lady: The Concept of Redemption in the Caroline Divines and in the Anglo-Catholic Theologians

Last summer, I had the privilege of presenting a paper to the Ecumenical Society of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the United Kingdom on the most recent Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission's document on Our Lady, entitled Mary: Grace and Hope in Christ. I was very critical of the negative tone that document takes toward Our Lady's mediation, both historically and presently. Tragically, this document even goes so far as to blame the English Reformation on an excess of Marian devotion.

One powerful impulse for the Reformation in the early sixteenth century was a widespread reaction against devotional practices which approached Mary as a Mediatrix alongside  Christ, or sometimes even in his place.¹.

In my paper, I pointed out that recent historical studies on the state of religion and religious devotion in England between 1400 and 1580, by authors such as Eamon Duffy, ² completely overturn the old, exaggerated stereotypes that were part of the propaganda of the past unjust stereotypes that have fueled the divisions between Protestant and Catholic Christians to the point that the Mother of all Christians became a cause of division rather than a principal cause for our unity. Duffy's research shows that devotion to Our Lady in pre-Reformation England was both widespread and balanced. She was both understood and invoked as the Mediatrix of Grace, alongside Her Son, without usurping His place. ³ The rejection of Her rightful role in mediating Her Son's grace to all who populate the British Isles has been not only a national travesty but also a great sacrilege. I am one Anglican who believes that our Communion has fallen into the schismatic and moral chaos we are now in because of our failure to uphold the twin truths of Our Lady's mediation and Her Son's true presence in the Holy Eucharist in the full Catholic sense of transubstantiation. ⁴   Our only hope for being "molded" rather than "chiseled" into the image of Her Son is our safe return to the sure mold of our Mother's Immaculate Heart.

Thus, when Fr. Fehlner asked if I would search for what I am calling the "bread crumb" trail within the post-Reformation understandings of Redemption on the part of both the Caroline Divines and the Anglo-Catholic theologians of the Oxford Movement that might lead Anglicans to embracing the truth of Our Lady's Co-redemption, I was delighted for the opportunity.

THE  CAROLINE DIVINES 

For those of you not familiar with English religious history, the term Caroline Divines generally refers to 17th century Anglican clergy and theologians who were exponents of High Church or Catholic principles in contrast to the theological and ecclesiastical systems of the Continental Reformers, while at the same time continuing to reject any form of ecclesial authority as absolute. They derive the name "Caroline" from the reigns of Charles I (1625-49) and Charles II (1660-85) ⁵ because they lived either during the reign of these two kings or during the Interregnum. Their extensive patristic and scriptural research had, as its primary goal, defense of the continuity of the Church of England with the pre-Reformation Ecclesia Anglicana. Likewise, they were concerned with preserving the historic episcopal form of church government amidst pressures from Presbyterians in 17th century England, who wanted to strip the Church of England of these so-called papal trappings. Additionally, the Caroline Divines also stood firm against the puritanical influences of the late 16th century, which were hostile to the liturgy and wanted to "reduce all religion to a sermon." ⁶ The best-known Caroline Divines were Lancelot Andrewes and Jeremy Taylor.

Even though Lancelot Andrewes (1555-1626) lived only one year after the rise of Charles I to the throne, he was one of the most influential members of the clergy in the first quarter of the17th century. In 1601, he was appointed Dean of Westminster Cathedral, involving him in both the funeral of Elizabeth I and the coronation of James VI of Scotland as James I of England in 1603. He served as Bishop of Chichester, Ely and eventually Winchester. His influence was so great that King Charles I had a special collection of his ninety-six sermons published after his death in 1626. ⁷  Some have tended to describe him as an Anglo-Catholic before his time because his sermons are filled with patristic quotations, especially from the writings of St. Augustine and St. John Chrysostom. ⁸   However, as with all of the Caroline Divines, Andrewes considered himself to be a loyal son of the English Reformation. As noted above, his appeal tithe ancient tradition of the Church was primarily undertaken" to discover what the Church of the first centuries was like" in order "to show the resemblance between it and the contemporary Church" ⁹  of England. In other words, the appeal to antiquity among Andrewes and his fellow churchmen functioned as a type of "apologetic" for Anglicanism.

Consequently, this appeal to antiquity among the 17^th century theologians was not merely a curious interest in the past but, rather, the primary hermeneutical principle that Anglicans claimed differentiated them from both Geneva and Rome. In the words of Lancelot Andrews, the elements that must ground authoritative Christian doctrine for Anglicans are "one canon reduced to writing by God himself, two testaments, three creeds, four general councils, five centuries, and the series of fathers in that period-the centuries, that is, before Constantine, and two after, determine the boundary of our faith." ¹⁰  For Andrew sand the other Caroline Divines, the correct interpretation of Scripture was not to be found in either the Councils or the Fathers, individually speaking, "but in the great swell of sound that came from the undivided Church in those first centuries...The Fathers are not autonomous; they are 'Fathers of the Church.' A council is only authoritative as long as it maintained the truth revealed in Scripture, but more importantly revealed in the Incarnate Word, by the power of the Holy Ghost." ¹¹

Since the doctrine of the Incarnation played such a significant role in the theological discourse of the first five centuries, it isn't surprising that for Andrewes, the Incarnation of the Divine Word is the key to understanding everything else in the Christian Faith, especially the mystery of Redemption. By looking at excerpts from various sermons that he preached on the feast of the Nativity between 1605 and 1622, we are able to discover his views on the redemptive nature of the Incarnation itself.

In line with St. Irenaeus' doctrine of recapitulation, Andrewes understood  that God the Son took flesh from the "seed of a woman" not merely to satisfy the sin-debt owed to the Blessed Trinity because of the fall of Adam and Eve but also, and even more importantly, to sanctify the "seed of Abraham" ¹²   from althea effects of original sin.'

We had been even as Sodom,' and perished in the fire, and the powder there had even blown up all. And may note...present Him unto you not only as our Deliverer betas our Guide too? Our Deliverer, to rid us from him that hath 'power of death,' our Guide to Him that hath 'power of life,' to lead us even by the way of truth to the path of life, by the stations of well-doing to the 'mansions in His Father's House.' ¹³

In addition to echoing St. Irenaeus, we also hear Andrewesechoing St. Athanasius' view that God the Son took on a human body to renew humankind made in His own image and likeness. Through the very act of taking a humanity to Himself, God the Son sanctified all aspects and stages of human existence, beginning with our conception.

Love, not only condescending to take our nature upon Him, but to take it by the same way and after the same manner that we do, by being conceived. That, and no other better beseeming way. The womb of the Virgin is surely no such place, but He might well have abhorred it. He did not... For our conception being the root as it were, the very groundsill of our nature; that He might go to the root and repair of our nature from the very foundation, thither He went; that what had been there defiled and decayed by the first Adam, might by the Second be cleansed and set right again. ¹⁴ 

While we heard Andrewes' speaking of love as the motivation for the Incarnation in the sermon excerpt above, we also hear, in his Nativity sermon of 1605, his upholding the complementary view that the Incarnation was necessary to ransom humankind from sin, Satan, and death after the fall of Adam and Eve.

And the end why He thus took upon Him 'the seed of Abraham' was, because He took upon Him to deliver 'the seed of Abraham.' Deliver them He could not except He destroyed 'death, and the lord of death, the devil.' Them He could not destroy unless He died; die He could not except He were mortal; mortal He could not be except He took our nature on him, that is the 'seed of Abraham.' But taking it He became mortal, died, destroyed death, delivered us; was Himself 'apprehended' that we might be let go. ¹⁵  

His appreciation for the Holy Eucharist, as evidenced in the following excerpts from his Nativity sermon of 1605, gave him sincere appreciation for the truth declared by St. Peter in 2 Peter1:4, namely, that the Word became flesh that we "may come to share in the divine nature," and reiterated by St. Athanasius in the fourth century God became human in order that we might become divine. ¹⁶

...Verbum caro factum est, and so must be 'apprehended' inboth. But specially in His flesh as this day giveth it, as this day would have us. Now 'the bread which we break, is it not the partaking of the body, of the flesh, of Jesus Christ?' It is surely, and by it and by nothing more are we made partakers of this blessed union... It is most kindly to take part with Him in that which He took part in with us, and that, to no other end, but that He might make the receiving of it by us a means whereby He might 'dwell in us, and we in Him'...Verily, it is the most straight and perfect 'taking hold that is. No union so knitteth as it. Not consanguinity; brethren fall out. Not marriage; man and wife are severed. But that which is nourished, and the nourishment wherewith they never are, never can be severed, but remain one for ever.' With this act then of mutual 'taking,' taking of His flesh as He  has taken ours, let us seal our duty to Him this day, for taking not 'Angels,' but 'the seed of Abraham.' ¹⁷

In 1622, Andrewes preached his 16th Nativity sermon. That was three years before his death. He preached on the text of Ephesians 1.10: "...He might gather into one all things..."."In comparing the words of Psalm 40.6, 'but a body thou has ordained me' and Heb. 10.20, 'the new and living way, through the veil, that is his flesh,' Andrew concludes that it is by and through Christ's flesh that the Father will draw all things in heaven and earth to himself. It is the union of the two natures in the Incarnation that achieves this." ¹⁸  Furthermore, using language that is reminiscent of Irenaeus, Andrewes describes even greater benefits flowing from the Incarnation. Before the Fall, God and humanity were at peace, but not united. In thievery act of the Incarnation, Jesus Christ gathers the broken and divided world unto Himself, making it even better than it was in the Garden. Andrewes upholds the patristic claim that the Incarnation does not simply repair the old world, but rather inaugurates an entirely new and better creation. ¹⁹  

All in heaven recapitulate into One, that is God; all in earth recapitulate into one, that is man. Gather these two now, and all are gathered, all the things in either. And now at this last great recollection of God and man, and in them of Heaven and earth, and in them of all in Heaven and earth, are all recapitulated into the unity of One entire Person. And how? ... Now God and man are but one Christ. So the gathering nearer than before, so surer than before, so every way better than before... There is nothing, not anything, in heaven or earth left out... All are in now; all reconciled, as it were, in one mass, all cast into one sum; recapitulated indeed truly and properly...[I]n Christ did dwell the fullness of the Godhead bodily,...when He did so[He] reconciled them in the body of His flesh. ²⁰21

Given Andrewes' appreciation for the redemptive nature of the Incarnation, one of the things I was curious about was whether he had also upheld the patristic sense of Our Lady being the Second Eve. If so, this would put him squarely on the path toward embracing Co-redemption. Sadly, I was unable to locate his mention of this anywhere in his writings. However, I did find the following passage where he mentions the sword piercing Our Lady's heart with a reference to Her compassion. While heroes not elaborate on it and mentions it in relation to the Lord being wounded for love of us, at least he seems to be aware of the tradition about Our Lady's compassion or co-passion, whether or not he understands it or accepts it.

Truly Simeon saith to the blessed Virgin by way of prophecy, that 'the sword should go through her soul' at the time of His Passion. And as the sword through hers, so I make no question but the spear through His. And if through hers which was but animo compatientis, through His much more, which was anima patientis; since compassion is but passion at rebound. ²¹

Turning now to Jeremy Taylor, who lived a mere 54 years, from 1613 to 1667, we encounter a Caroline Divine who was imprisoned for a short while during the English Civil War because he took the side of the King. After the Restoration, he was rewarded for his loyalty by being made a bishop in Ireland where he constantly battled both Presbyterians and Roman Catholics. ²² 23In his own day, there were those who accused him of being apelagian. Samuel Taylor Coleridge claimed that Taylor seemed to" present our own holy life as the grounds of our religious hope, rather than as the fruit of that hope, whose ground is the mercies of Christ." ²³ 24 In response to this criticism, many have pointed out that the primary aim of Taylor's writing is the spiritual growth and sanctification of the believer, not the discussion of the basis of the believer's justification in Christ. ²⁴  Obviously, this is highly problematic, theologically speaking, and would tend to justify the accusation that he is Pelagian  in his view of Redemption. On the other hand, since he spent many years of his life battling Presbyterian ideas, which most surely would have included John Calvin's notion of "total depravity," perhaps Taylor's real objection to the doctrine of original sin was an objection to the presbyterian deterioration of that doctrine and not the doctrine as it is correctly understood from an orthodox Catholic viewpoint. Because of the sad polemics of the times, one wonders if Taylor even correctly understood the Catholic understanding of original sin. Whatever the case, it is important to try and discover the general tenor of his view of Redemption, because he is considered to be a noteworthy representative of the Caroline Divines. This can be primarily ascertained from his work entitled, Jesus Christ-The Great Exemplar, a narrative of the life of Christ in which Taylor dwells entirely upon the imaginative and emotive without any attempt at biblical criticism, even as it was understood in those days. ²⁵ It is interesting to note herein, his familiarity with the tradition about Our Lady's perpetual virginity, which he upholds in greater detail elsewhere in this same work. She was full of grace and excellencies; and God poured upon her a full measure of honor, in making her the mother of the Messias: for the 'angel came to her, and said, Hail, thou art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women...' The holy Virgin knew herself a person very unlikely to be a mother...she was espoused to...a just person...and so might not despair to become a mother...yet...she had not set one step toward the consummation of her marriage, so much as in thought; and possibly had set herself back from it by a vow of chastity and holy celibacy: for 'Mary said unto the angel, "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" ' ²⁶

In mentioning Our Lady's fiat, he shows no understanding obits significance in terms of Her cooperation with the Redeemer....

[A]s the Holy Ghost did descend upon her like rain into a fleece of wool, without any obstreperous noises or violences to nature, but only the extraordinariness of an exaltation; so her spirit received it with the gentleness and tranquility fitted for the entertainment of the spirit of love, and a quietness symbolical to the holy guest of her spotless womb, the Lamb of God; for she meekly replied, 'Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according un to thy word: and the angel departed from her,' having done his message. And at the same time the Holy Spirit of God did make her to conceive in her womb the immaculate Son of God, the Saviour of the world. ²⁷

However, in another work of his, Discourse IX, on Faith and Repentance, he does at least seem to uphold the Catholic doctrine that we must co-operate with the grace of initial justification given by Jesus Christ in Baptism through the choices we make in our daily life in order to be finally redeemed.