20 March 1563.
On March 20, 1563, an appeal was made to the ecclesiastical commissioners by twenty petitioners to exempt them from the use of vestments. Miles Coverdale was one of them. Later, Miles Coverdale refused to attend Lambeth over the "vestments, fashions and haberdashery" issue as ordered by Mr. (Canterbury) Matthew Parker.
Anglicanism’s adiaphora = “You’ll wear our ecclesiastical uniforms and outfits that we tell ya,’ by God you will.”
Elizabeth's "Adiaphora" = in essence and by another name, was Elizabeth's "divine law."
Miles Coverdale, Godfather at the baptism of one of Knox's children in Geneva, Bible translator, and former Bishop of Exeter, refused mandatory "uniforms and haberdasher" laws. The same for old John Foxe. Willing to use the vast majority of the BCP, they weren't buying the "adiaphora" argument as allegedly adiaphora, but back to old Miles Coverdale--Tyndale's assistant. If truly adiaphora, then the vestments weren't needed but voluntary. But the Crown and Canterbury weren't buying the logical logic.
Old Miles Coverdale, a sensible scholar, Reformed Churchman, Bible translator, comrade of other Marian exiles, who suffered for the faith, never bought into the supremacism nor fashion puerilities of Lambeth and the Royal palace.
By summer of 1566, Coverdale left St. Magnus Martyr by the London Bridge. He was near 80. Mr. Matthew Parker (Canterbury), a pliable tool, had summoned the London clergy to Lambeth for the enforcement of Elizabeth’s vestarian-laws—which Parker did not care about, as a few letters show, but which he supported since Elizabeth had ruled; she was the “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England, after all. Rather than do a “buy-in” for a position, the old scholar, Coverdale, resigned his living at St. Magnus. Several letters from London clerics were sent to Zurich and Geneva about the child-playground-developments. Coverdale discreetly—but visibly—absented himself from Parker’s summons to Lambeth.
Ya’ don’t bulldoze an old, experienced, informed, Biblically-driven, theologically trained and Reformed Churchman long acquainted with suffering, poverty, tyrannies, and exile.
As might be expected, he had a “keen following in Puritan circles” those wicked non-conformists of the lower sort tongue in cheek). But, he accepted poverty over preferment, consistency before compromise, the Scriptures above and ruling tradition, and principles above pandering to a Queen. He genuinely believed in Scriptures, the “supreme” [and final] Judge in all things, matters, opinions, councils and independent thoughts. That’s Reformed theology.
In JAN 1569, he preached his last sermon, about 83 years old, at his former parish, St. Magnus. In other words, he was the former minister in attendance but without the post—having resigned over principle. However, for whatever reason, the presiding minister was not present or available. But Coverdale was in attendance, but not presiding, an indication of his acceptance of the-then-used 1559 Book of Common Prayer (or, at least, in the main, as was the case for Anglo-Puritans). John Hooker (supra) described it:
“…certain men of the parish came unto him, and earnestly entreated that considering the multitude was great, and that it was pity they should be disappointed of their expectation, that it would please him to take the place for that time. But he excused his age and infirmities thereof, and that his memory failed him, his voice scarce could be heard, and he not able to do it, that they would hold him excused. Nevertheless such were their importunate requests that, would he nould [sic] he, he must and did yield unto their requests: and between two men he was carried up into the pulpit, where God did with his spirit so strengthen him, that he made his last and the best and the most godly sermon that ever he did in all his life. And very shortly after he died, being very honourably buried with the presence of the duchess of Suffolk, the earl of Bedford, and many others, honourable and worshipful personages."
Coverdale died on 20 JAN 1569. He was buried in the chancel of St. Bartholomew by the Exchange under the “communion table” [hint, TFOs, the “table” not the Laudian altar…gotta a problem there? Cranmer and Coverdale didn’t.]
The backstory to the childish-playground debate in Anglican adiaphoristic non-adiaphorisms.
Wikipedia gives some background.
“On March 20, 1563, an appeal was made to the ecclesiastical commissioners by twenty petitioners to exempt them from the use of vestments. These included a number of prominent clergy, mainly in the diocese of London, whose bishop, Grindal, had packed his see with former exiles and activists for reform. The petition was approved by all the commissioners except Parker and Guest, who rejected it.
“Sampson and Humphrey were the first nonconformist leaders to be targeted by Parker and whose steadfast refusal to conform led to Sampson's quick deprivation in 1565, as he was directly under the queen's authority. Humphrey, under the jurisdiction of Robert Horne, the bishop of Winchester, was able to return to his position as president of Magdalen College, Oxford, and was later offered by Horne a benefice in Sarum, though with Sarum's bishop, Jewel, opposing this. At this time, Bullinger was counselling Horne with a position more tolerant of vestments, while nonconformist agitation was taking place among students at St John's College, Cambridge.
“Tuesday, March 26, 1566, brought the peak of enforcement against nonconformity, with the diocese of London targeted as an example, despite Parker's expectation that it would leave many churches `destitute for service this Easter, and that many [clergy] will forsake their livings, and live at printing, teaching their children, or otherwise as they can.' The London clergy were assembled at Lambeth Palace. Parker had requested but failed to gain the attendance of William Cecil, Lord Keeper Nicholas Bacon, and the Lord Marquess of Northampton, so it was left to Parker himself, bishop Grindal, the dean of Westminster, and some canonists. One former nonconformist, Robert Cole, stood before the assembly in full canonical habit. There was no discussion. The ultimatum was issued that the clergy would appear as Cole—in a square cap, gown, tippet, and surplice. They would `inviolably observe the rubric of the Book of Common Prayer, and the Queen majesty's injunctions: and the Book of Convocation.' The clergy were ordered to commit themselves on the spot, in writing, with only the words volo or nolo. Sixty-one subscribed; thirty-seven did not and were immediately suspended with their livings sequestered. A three-month grace period was given for these clergy to change their minds before they would be fully deprived.
“The deprivations were to be carried out under the authority of Parker's Advertisements, which he had just published as a revised form of the original articles defining ecclesiastical conformity. (The full title is Advertisements partly for due order in the publique administration of common prayers and usinge the holy sacramentes, and partly for the apparrell of all persons ecclesiasticall, by vertue of the Queenes maiesties letters commaunding the same.) Parker had not obtained the crown's authorisation for this mandate, however, though he increasingly positioned himself toward the nonconformist clergy as acting on and under the authority of the state. Royal authority stood to simplify the problem for him, because disobedience of the monarch was disobedience of God. However, without explicit backing from the queen and council, this assertion lacked force. Thus, the nonconformist reaction to Parker's crackdown was, as he expected, a vociferous assertion of their persecuted status with some serious displays of disobedience. John Stow records in his Memoranda that in most parishes, the sextons did not change the service if they had conducted it without vestments previously: `in some places the ministers themselves did service in their gowns or cloaks with turning collars and hats as they were wont to do, and preached stoutly and against the order taken by the queen and council and the bishops for consenting there unto.' By some lights, these clergy constituted an emerging Puritan faction, and that word was indeed first recorded as being in use at this time as term of abuse for nonconformists.”
Miles Coverdale, as well as old John Foxe, weren’t up for the “abusive,” “elbows-to-the-head,” “boots-to-the-neck,” hubristic and unnecessary authoritarianism of Elizabeth and Parker.
"Adiaphora" = Elizabeth’s and Parker’s "non-adiaphora."
On March 20, 1563, an appeal was made to the ecclesiastical commissioners by twenty petitioners to exempt them from the use of vestments. Miles Coverdale was one of them. Later, Miles Coverdale refused to attend Lambeth over the "vestments, fashions and haberdashery" issue as ordered by Mr. (Canterbury) Matthew Parker.
Anglicanism’s adiaphora = “You’ll wear our ecclesiastical uniforms and outfits that we tell ya,’ by God you will.”
Elizabeth's "Adiaphora" = in essence and by another name, was Elizabeth's "divine law."
Miles Coverdale, Godfather at the baptism of one of Knox's children in Geneva, Bible translator, and former Bishop of Exeter, refused mandatory "uniforms and haberdasher" laws. The same for old John Foxe. Willing to use the vast majority of the BCP, they weren't buying the "adiaphora" argument as allegedly adiaphora, but back to old Miles Coverdale--Tyndale's assistant. If truly adiaphora, then the vestments weren't needed but voluntary. But the Crown and Canterbury weren't buying the logical logic.
Old Miles Coverdale, a sensible scholar, Reformed Churchman, Bible translator, comrade of other Marian exiles, who suffered for the faith, never bought into the supremacism nor fashion puerilities of Lambeth and the Royal palace.
By summer of 1566, Coverdale left St. Magnus Martyr by the London Bridge. He was near 80. Mr. Matthew Parker (Canterbury), a pliable tool, had summoned the London clergy to Lambeth for the enforcement of Elizabeth’s vestarian-laws—which Parker did not care about, as a few letters show, but which he supported since Elizabeth had ruled; she was the “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England, after all. Rather than do a “buy-in” for a position, the old scholar, Coverdale, resigned his living at St. Magnus. Several letters from London clerics were sent to Zurich and Geneva about the child-playground-developments. Coverdale discreetly—but visibly—absented himself from Parker’s summons to Lambeth.
Ya’ don’t bulldoze an old, experienced, informed, Biblically-driven, theologically trained and Reformed Churchman long acquainted with suffering, poverty, tyrannies, and exile.
As might be expected, he had a “keen following in Puritan circles” those wicked non-conformists of the lower sort tongue in cheek). But, he accepted poverty over preferment, consistency before compromise, the Scriptures above and ruling tradition, and principles above pandering to a Queen. He genuinely believed in Scriptures, the “supreme” [and final] Judge in all things, matters, opinions, councils and independent thoughts. That’s Reformed theology.
In JAN 1569, he preached his last sermon, about 83 years old, at his former parish, St. Magnus. In other words, he was the former minister in attendance but without the post—having resigned over principle. However, for whatever reason, the presiding minister was not present or available. But Coverdale was in attendance, but not presiding, an indication of his acceptance of the-then-used 1559 Book of Common Prayer (or, at least, in the main, as was the case for Anglo-Puritans). John Hooker (supra) described it:
“…certain men of the parish came unto him, and earnestly entreated that considering the multitude was great, and that it was pity they should be disappointed of their expectation, that it would please him to take the place for that time. But he excused his age and infirmities thereof, and that his memory failed him, his voice scarce could be heard, and he not able to do it, that they would hold him excused. Nevertheless such were their importunate requests that, would he nould [sic] he, he must and did yield unto their requests: and between two men he was carried up into the pulpit, where God did with his spirit so strengthen him, that he made his last and the best and the most godly sermon that ever he did in all his life. And very shortly after he died, being very honourably buried with the presence of the duchess of Suffolk, the earl of Bedford, and many others, honourable and worshipful personages."
Coverdale died on 20 JAN 1569. He was buried in the chancel of St. Bartholomew by the Exchange under the “communion table” [hint, TFOs, the “table” not the Laudian altar…gotta a problem there? Cranmer and Coverdale didn’t.]
The backstory to the childish-playground debate in Anglican adiaphoristic non-adiaphorisms.
Wikipedia gives some background.
“On March 20, 1563, an appeal was made to the ecclesiastical commissioners by twenty petitioners to exempt them from the use of vestments. These included a number of prominent clergy, mainly in the diocese of London, whose bishop, Grindal, had packed his see with former exiles and activists for reform. The petition was approved by all the commissioners except Parker and Guest, who rejected it.
“Sampson and Humphrey were the first nonconformist leaders to be targeted by Parker and whose steadfast refusal to conform led to Sampson's quick deprivation in 1565, as he was directly under the queen's authority. Humphrey, under the jurisdiction of Robert Horne, the bishop of Winchester, was able to return to his position as president of Magdalen College, Oxford, and was later offered by Horne a benefice in Sarum, though with Sarum's bishop, Jewel, opposing this. At this time, Bullinger was counselling Horne with a position more tolerant of vestments, while nonconformist agitation was taking place among students at St John's College, Cambridge.
“Tuesday, March 26, 1566, brought the peak of enforcement against nonconformity, with the diocese of London targeted as an example, despite Parker's expectation that it would leave many churches `destitute for service this Easter, and that many [clergy] will forsake their livings, and live at printing, teaching their children, or otherwise as they can.' The London clergy were assembled at Lambeth Palace. Parker had requested but failed to gain the attendance of William Cecil, Lord Keeper Nicholas Bacon, and the Lord Marquess of Northampton, so it was left to Parker himself, bishop Grindal, the dean of Westminster, and some canonists. One former nonconformist, Robert Cole, stood before the assembly in full canonical habit. There was no discussion. The ultimatum was issued that the clergy would appear as Cole—in a square cap, gown, tippet, and surplice. They would `inviolably observe the rubric of the Book of Common Prayer, and the Queen majesty's injunctions: and the Book of Convocation.' The clergy were ordered to commit themselves on the spot, in writing, with only the words volo or nolo. Sixty-one subscribed; thirty-seven did not and were immediately suspended with their livings sequestered. A three-month grace period was given for these clergy to change their minds before they would be fully deprived.
“The deprivations were to be carried out under the authority of Parker's Advertisements, which he had just published as a revised form of the original articles defining ecclesiastical conformity. (The full title is Advertisements partly for due order in the publique administration of common prayers and usinge the holy sacramentes, and partly for the apparrell of all persons ecclesiasticall, by vertue of the Queenes maiesties letters commaunding the same.) Parker had not obtained the crown's authorisation for this mandate, however, though he increasingly positioned himself toward the nonconformist clergy as acting on and under the authority of the state. Royal authority stood to simplify the problem for him, because disobedience of the monarch was disobedience of God. However, without explicit backing from the queen and council, this assertion lacked force. Thus, the nonconformist reaction to Parker's crackdown was, as he expected, a vociferous assertion of their persecuted status with some serious displays of disobedience. John Stow records in his Memoranda that in most parishes, the sextons did not change the service if they had conducted it without vestments previously: `in some places the ministers themselves did service in their gowns or cloaks with turning collars and hats as they were wont to do, and preached stoutly and against the order taken by the queen and council and the bishops for consenting there unto.' By some lights, these clergy constituted an emerging Puritan faction, and that word was indeed first recorded as being in use at this time as term of abuse for nonconformists.”
Miles Coverdale, as well as old John Foxe, weren’t up for the “abusive,” “elbows-to-the-head,” “boots-to-the-neck,” hubristic and unnecessary authoritarianism of Elizabeth and Parker.
"Adiaphora" = Elizabeth’s and Parker’s "non-adiaphora."
No comments:
Post a Comment