Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The Word Within The Word: A Literary Examination Of Lancelot Andrewes' Presentation Of The Life Of Christ
(USC Thesis Other)
The Word Within The Word: A Literary Examination Of Lancelot Andrewes' Presentation Of The Life Of Christ
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
THE WORD WITHIN THE WORD: A LITERARY EXAMINATION OF LANCELOT ANDREWES' PRESENTATION OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST by William Andrew Geiger, Jr. A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (English) June 1973 INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While ^ the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality o f the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which mpy appear on this reproduction. 1.T he sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) o r section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent . pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again - beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Z eeb Road . ■ Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 GEIGER, Jr., William Andrew, 1941- 1HB WORD WITHIN THE WORD: A LITERARY EXAMINATION OFLANCMflT ANDREWES1 PRESENTATION OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1973 Language and Literature, general | I University Microfilms, A X E R O X C om pany, Ann Arbor, Michigan ©Copyright by WILLIAM ANDREW GEIGER, JR. 1973 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9 0 0 0 7 \ This dissertation, written by William Andrew Geiger, Jr. under the direction of h .^ 3... Dissertation C o m mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of requirements of the degree of D O C T O R OF P H IL O S O P H Y 2 Dean Date...C^JU.,..lhllX3.. DISSERTATION COMMITTEE * / a Chairman ... ... PREFACE With the exception of the long "s," I have not modernized the seventeenth century texts used in this dissertation. Following Kate Turabian's advice, I have not strewn the text with sic's. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ............................... 1 II. HUGH LATIMER AND JEREMY TAYLOR ON THE LIFE OF CHRIST...............................24 III. ANDREWES' DISCUSSION OF THE NATIVITY.......... 56 IV. ANDREWES1 DISCUSSION OF THE WILDERNESS TEMPTATIONS................................137 V. ANDREWES' DISCUSSION OF THE PASSION......... 167 VI. ANDREWES' DISCUSSION OF THE RESURRECTION . . . 203 VII. CONCLUSION.................................. 286 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................... 294 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Disposition of Andrewes' Nativity Sermons ... 58 2. Disposition of Andrewes1 Resurrection Sermons . 204 iv CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to examine from a literary viewpoint the following forty-five sermons of Lancelot Andrewes which plumb his understanding of Christ's Person and significance: Sermons on the Nativity preached upon Christmas Day (17 sermons); Seven Sermons upon the Temptation of Christ in the Wilderness; Sermons preached upon Good-Friday (3 sermons); and Sermons of the Resurrection preached upon Easter-Day (18 sermons). I do not plan to examine Andrewes' political sermons, his occasional sermons on the Lord's Prayer, his sermons on the Holy Spirit, his sermons of repentance and fasting, nor his sermons preached in Lent. The political sermons are not directly relevant to my topic; the sermons on the Lord's Prayer deal with the First Person of the Trinity; the sermons on the Holy Spirit treat the Third Person of the Trinity; the sermons on repentance and fasting and the sermons preached in Lent are not directly relevant to my topic. In order to see Andrewes' ideas in a clearer light, his sermons will be analyzed in connection with selected sermons by Hugh Latimer and with Jeremy Taylor's devotional work Antiquitates Christianae. Two secondary purposes are: (1) to describe each writer's stylistic characteristics; and (2) to examine the characteristic form followed by each writer. Andrewes1 sermons are not widely read today, nor have they been since his eclipse by the Puritans and changing sermon patterns in the eighteenth century. His sermons have been praised and decried, and because such criticism is ultimately a matter of taste, an examination of his sermons falls within the province of literary criticism. What I take issue with is the contention that his witty style presents an unsurmountable obstacle to understanding his theological insights. Such disparage ments are best expressed by Felix Arnott, Hugh Trevor- Roper, and Maurice Reidy. Arnott judges Andrewes in the light of his contemporary reputation and his disfavor in the twentieth century. He writes: "Of the older style Lancelot Andrewes was called by his contemporaries the Stella Praedicantium. To us his sermons seem fastidious in the extreme."^ Trevor-Roper, who writes judiciously about the life and thought of Archbishop Laud, is more severe than Arnott in his judgment of Andrewes. "From his iFelix Arnott, "Anglicanism in the Seventeenth Century," in Anglicanism, the Thought and Practice of the Church of England, eds. Paul E. More and Frank L. Cross (Milwaukee, 1935), pp. lxii-lxiii. 3 [Andrewes'] episcopal throne he defined the doctrine of the apostolic English Church in controversy with the Jesuit Cardinal Bellarmine, preached sermons of unreadable preciosity, assisted in the translation of the Bible, and instilled into the faithful the necessity of good works as well as faith."2 Maurice Reidy writes the most negative evaluation of Andrewes1 sermons. Lancelot Andrewes has not lived in his sermons. They died almost with the man himself. Their style, atrocious by modern standards, has entombed a great body of edifying doctrine so deeply in a 'dreary cemetery of literature' that it remains, not a vital force in religious thought, but a cold memorial to the . early struggles and growth of the Anglican Church. If men will not read him today for inspiration, they can yet discover in Bishop Andrewes a splendid witness to the tremendous spiritual and intellectual struggle through which the English Church labored to establish itself with a personality and character entirely its own, in separation from Rome.3 These negative remarks underline the problems that occur when competent historians attempt to evaluate a writer whose prose tradition is not presently in vogue. To their charges of unreadability I advance the opinion of T. S. Eliot that Andrewes' style forces us to come to terms with his subject and my own experience that reading Andrewes' sermons both delights and instructs. As Florence Higham comments in her excellent short biography of Andrewes, 2Hugh Trevor-Roper, Archbishop Laud (London, 1940), pp. 29-30. 3Maurice Reidy, Lancelot Andrewes: Jacobean Court Preacher (Chicago, 1955) , p. 218. 4 He did not lift up his listeners on great waves of oratory or stir their hearts with uneasy emotion, as .John Donne, tormented mystic, played upon the feelings of those who heard him. In the immediate future, when the theological treatises of Puritan divines and the balanced phrases of Latitudinarian bishops had changed the taste in sermons, his reputation suffered for a while, but to the age of Shakespeare and the Euphuists, as today T. S. Eliot, Andrewes' respect for words made an immediate appeal, while his burning sincerity, the liveliness of his attack and deep tenderness of feeling give the sermons value for every age.4 For the purposes of this study, then, we shall examine, from a literary viewpoint, Lancelot Andrewes' representa tion of the Person of Christ. The chief texts used are as follows: Hugh Latimer, Frvitfvll Sermons: Preached by the right Reverend Father, and constant Martyr of IESUS Christ, Master Hvgh Latimer, newly imprinted with others not heretofore set forth in print, to the edifying of all which will dispose them selves to the reading of the same . . . , printed at London by Thomas Cotes, for the Companie of STATIONERS. 1635; Lancelot Andrewes, XCVI Sermons . . ., London, 1635, published by Richard Badger; Lancelot Andrewes, .The;wonderful1 Combat . . . betweene Christ and Satan, opened in seven most excellent, learned and zealous Sermons, upon the Temptation of Christ in the Wilderness, London, 1642: Jeremy Taylor, Antiquitates Christianae: or, The History of the Life and Death of the Holy Jesus: 4Florence Higham, Lancelot Andrewes (London, 1952) , p. 75. As Also the Lives, Acts and Martyrdoms of His Apostles . . ., London, 1694. The works by each writer will follow a chronological account of Christ's life, of which there are four stages about which all three writers have written: the Nativity, the Wilderness Temptations, the Passion, and the Resurrec tion. Within each stage, I will analyze Latimer's sermons according to his comments upon the topic, Taylor's work on a section-by-section basis, and Andrewes' sermons on a sermon-by-sermon basis. There are basically two kinds of sermons: homiletic and thematic. (There is a third type, the anecdotal, although it is not as serious and does not figure in the discussion of Latimer, Andrewes, or Taylor.) The homiletic sermon has as its end the spiritual and moral edification of the audience, and is a relatively simple, straight forward exposition of a Scriptural text, moral considera tion, or a seasonal liturgical topic. In this type there are generally no levels of allegory or formal divisions; C its main flaw is that it can ramble. The thematic sermon is intimately associated with the universities. Great emphasis is placed upon form and explicit organization. Demonstrating an encyclopedic treatment, its major flaw is found in extravagant scriptural interpretation and 5G. P. Owst, Preaching in Medieval England (Cambridge, 1926) , pp. 310-312-.• elaborate allegories.® The thematic type is the one which Andrewes characteristically follows. There were several modes of sermon delivery in the seventeenth century. Extempore was the most familiar form. The sermon was delivered with or without notes in the pulpit. In any case, it was not a memoriter discourse, the type favored by the Nonconformists, who criticized the extempore mode as either a read sermon (if notes were used) or a superficial one because it was struck off in the heat of the moment.? A memoriter sermon was first composed and then committed to memory. Donne sometimes practiced this method of delivery.8 Few sermons were published in the same form in which they were first delivered. In editing them, several practices were followed: (1) "pirated" editions were printed from auditors' notes; (2) editions might be expanded or embellished by the preacher himself; (3) sermons might never have been delivered but were instead sent to the printer by the author, or they might be published posthumously; and (4) sermon notes might be sent to the printer after the death of the author or by the ®Owst, pp. 312-313. 7w. Fraser Mitchell, English Pulpit Oratory (New York* 1962), p. 25. ^Mitchell, p. 26. preacher himself.^ Alan F. Herr lists three sorts of sermon styles in the Renaissance: the plain, the florid, and the witty. The plain style was "sober, simple in expression, or direct as possible, and free from ornamentation of either fantastic ideas or verbiage."^® Apparently a spontaneous outgrowth of the Reformation, it "has closer affinities with the pungent style of Latimer than with the rhetorical style of Fisher, which . . . foreshadows the florid style of the Elizabethan preachers. This style was the dominant one at the beginning of Elizabeth's reign, be cause of the influence of Calvinist preachers and because rhetorical elegance was a gradual process in the Renais sance. The florid style is essentially Ciceronian in character. With the exception of Hooker, English preachers could not easily reproduce Ciceronian periodicity; however, "the verbal elegance and figurative richness of the Ciceronian style" was used in English.^ Indeed, this "ornate tendency is visible in the great mass of Elizabethan sermons, in virtually all, indeed, except ^Mitchell, pp. 14-15. ■^Alan F. Herr, The Elizabethan Sermon (Philadel phia, 1940), p. 89. ll-Herr, p. 89. ■^Herr, p. 92. those preached by the strictest Calvinists. Although there is no evidence of direct causation, this practice coincided with the publication of Thomas Wilson's The Arte of Rhetorique (1553) . Characteristics of this style are the use of allegory, beast fables, "contraritie," repetitions of words and opening phrases, balanced sentences or "egall numbers," a combination of balanced sentences using antithesis and other figures, apostrophes or "outcryings," and "reasoning a matter with ourselves."-1 -^ The witty style emerged in the late sixteenth century and is usually associated with Andrewes and Donne. It is "as artificial as the florid [style] and at some points much like it, for the witty preachers also employ verbal figures, and sometimes employ them most extravagantly."15 Differing from the florid style in several particulars, it contains: (1) minute analyses and subtle reasonings; (2) allusions drawn from the Bible, the Church Fathers, and from classical secular literature, frequently quoting them in the original language; (3) verbal figures, especially metaphor; (4) Senecan sentence structure, "made up of short and disjointed members through which the 1 6 thought progresses as a series of sharp flashes"; (5) frequently puns; and (6) the rhyming of ideas as used in _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ V •^Herr, p. 92. ^Herr, pp. 93-96. 15Herr, p. 102. 16Herr, p. 102. Hebrew poetry. The structure of Renaissance sermons shows affini ties with Corax of Syracuse's structure of an oration, and the practice of the Church Fathers and the medieval sermonists. Corax of Syracuse, in his Art of Rhetoric, delineates the five-fold division of an oration as follows Proem (or introductory matter) Narrative (text to be discussed) Argument (major points) Subsidiary remarks (minor points) Peroration (recapitulation and application). In the Patristic period, Isocratean prose, as changed and developed by Cicero, became the chief model. The most famous Father, St. Augustine, was a teacher of rhetoric, and his sermons and treatises demonstrate his rhetorical knowledge and training. The conversational style used by Jesus and His disciples no longer sufficed to persuade a sophisticated audience grounded upon the Greek and Latin , + classics. Indeed, Chrysostom complained that the "force of eloquence is more demanded in a church than in a school * 1 q of rhetoric." No longer was xt simple enough to teach; the sermonist should also, according to St. Augustine, delight and move.^ A significant development in the Patristic period was introduced by Origen when he began writing verse-by-verse commentaries, a method which •^Mitchell, p. 49. ^Mitchell, p. 51. ■^Mitchell, p. 51. 10 Andrewes was to follow. It is important to note that the seventeenth-century sermonists did not derive their rhetoric from the Fathers; instead, they read them to confirm their own practice, a practice based upon classical rhetoric.20 Such importance of the classical models was learned in the writing of school themes and the preparation of university disputations. In a marginal note, Peter Baro indicates the chief structure of a sermon: Exordium de loci amplitudine, utilitateque; licet a“"muTtis obscurati. Divisio. 1. Questionis PROPOSITIO. 2. Q. Repetitio atque illustratio. 3. Q. Explicatio & Definitio. epilogustzi Mitchell continues: "A number of subdivisions occur under each main head, Objectio and Solutio being noted against each."22 John Donne used the scheme suggested by Kecker- mann in many of his sermons: Praecocfnitio textus (substituted for the old exordium) Partitio et propositio (division and statement of the themel Explicatio verborum (sometimes an ornate and compli- cated presentation of the meaning) Amplification (sometimes expatiation, sometimes confirmation and confutation) Application (a peroration rather than a mere conclusion).23 20Mitchell, p. 54. 22Mitchell, p. 62. 2lMitchell, p. 62. 23Mitchell, p. 96. 11 Although used by dissenters as well as by orthodox preachers, a manual of sermon writing by William Perkins ( Art of Prophecying) attained a considerable vogue. In the concluding section of this work, Perkins delineates the order and substance of a sermon: 1. To reade the Text distinctly out of the Canonicall Scriptures. 2. To give the sense and vnderstanding of it being read, by the Scripture it selfe. 3. To collect a few and profitable points of doctrine out of the natvrall sense. 4. To apply (if he have the gift) the doctrines rightly collected, to the life and manners of men in a simple and plaine speech.24 Except for the lack of a specific divisio section, this structure concurs with Keckermann's arrangement. There are three reasons why this study of Andrewes1 representation of the Person of Christ is appropriate for an English dissertation. First, the study contributes to the history of ideas. Just as Arthur 0. Lovejoy's study of the scope and influence of the Great Chain of Being, his article "Milton and the Paradox of the Fortunate Fall," Douglas Bush's The Renaissance and English Humanism, C. S. Lewis' The Allegory of Love and A Preface to Paradise Lost, and Don Cameron Allen's The Harmonious Vision: Studies in Milton's Poetry, are works of great influence and importance to students of literature, philosophy, and religion, so also is a study of Andrewes' ^Mitchell, pp. 99-100. 12 representation of Christ's Person. Second, Andrewes, as a representative of the witty style of oratory, is as important, to stylistic study as is his contemporary, John Donne. Third, sermons were as important to Renaissance thinkers as prose fiction is to us. The essential difference between these two types of literary work is that sermons are concerned with religious ideas and atti tudes exclusively. As W. Fraser Mitchell aptly phrases the importance of sermons to the Renaissance, . . . the sermon [in the seventeenth century], besides its strictly religious function, took in large measure the place of the journalistic press at the present day, and enjoyed the enormous influence, reinforced by a tremendous sanctity of authority, of a modern broad casting company.25 Joan Webber, in her article "Celebration of Word and World in Lancelot Andrewes1 Style," presents a comprehensive analysis of Andrewes' stylistic character istics by comparing and contrasting his style with that of John Donne. The essential difference between the two is that Andrewes habitually uses "small, compact" sentences, whereas Donne prefers "long and oceanic" ones.2® This difference points up a difference in viewpoint. Donne's nature is to try to embrace the universe, infinity, and eternity, whereas Andrewes is more concerned with the world of human time and space. It 25Mitchell, p. 3. 2®Joan We-ber, JEPG (April, 1965), p. 265. 13 is significant that they develop their sermon texts in quite different ways. Donne begins with something actually or imaginatively before him— a couple whom he is about to marry, or a symbol of his own making. But whatever he begins with, he spirals outward and upward until from the couple before him he has arrived at the marriage of Christ and the church, or until from the present moment he has arrived at a celebration of eternity. His method is expansive, and he ends upon an 0 altitudo. With Andrewes, there is no such emotionar, temporal, or spatial progression: his scenes remain earthly and immediate, often becoming more and more intimate as the sermon progresses. He is more likely to choose a Bible scene than to invent or use a symbol. He is less likely than Donne to relate explicitly his theme to local occurrences . . . He keeps himself within a small compass, and when he refers to things outside it, the reference seems rather to have the effect of pulling them in, than of expanding it out.27 Let us now consider each writer's characteristics, with primary emphasis upon Andrewes. Word Choices 1. Andrewes uses a significant number of mono syllables in his sermons. Webber comments that frequently entire sentences are composed entirely of them, as witness his description of the crucified Christ: Our very eye will soone tell us, no place was left in His Body, where He might be smitten, and was not. His skin and flesh rent with the whips and scourges, His hands and feet' wounded with the nailes, His head with the thornes, His very heart with the speare-point; all His senses, all his parts loden with whatsoever wit or malice could invent.28 27webber, pp. 265-266. 2®Lancelot Andrewes, XCVI Sermons •''»'» , (London, 1635), p. 60. All further references to Andrewes' sermons in this chapter will be noted parenthetically in the text. 14 Donne also uses monosyllables, as in his description of Christ's shedding of tears: We take knowledge that he wept thrice. Hee wept here, when he mourned with them that mourned for Lazarus; He wept againe, when he drew neare to Jerusalem, and looked upon that City; And he wept a third time in his Passion. . . . [And in the exercise of his priestly sacrifice,] the Crosse was the Altar; and therefore to the Crosse we fixe these third teares. The first were Humane teares, the second were Propheticall, the third were Pontificall, appertaining to the Sacrifice. . . . His very giving of himselfe for sin, was to become to a great many ineffectuall; and then Jesus wept; He declared how indelible the naturall staine of sin is, that not such sweat as his, such teares, such blood as his could absolutely wash it out of mans nature.29 2. Although Andrewes uses monosyllables for telling effect, he also, as evidence of his linguistic knowledge, uses Hebrew, Latin, and Greek words, but translates them at once, as in his description of Christ as the Verbum Dei: Author and Finisher are two titles, wherein the HOLY GHOST oft setteth him forth, and wherein He seemeth to take speciall delight. In the very letters, He taketh to Him the name of Alpha the Author, and againe of Omega, the Finisher of the Alphabet. From letters goe to words: there is he Verbum in prihCipio the word at the beginning: And he is Amen too, the word at the end. From words to bookes: In capite libri scriptum est de me, In the very front of the book he is: and he is . . . the recapitulation, or conclusion of it too. (Andrewes, p. 88) Donne also likes to mix Latin and English; similarly, he uses English to translate the Latin, as in: 29John Donne, The Sermons of John Donne, ed. by Evelyn Simpson and George Potter (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1962, 10 vols.), VIII, p. 52. All further references to Donne's sermons in this chapter will be noted parentheti cally in the text. 15 He that cannot define Repentance, he that cannot spell it, may have it; and he that hath written whole books, great volumes of it, may be without it. In one word, ... it is Aversio, and Conversio; it is a turning from our sins, and a returning to our God. (Donne, VII, p. 162) 3. Despite the usual notion of Andrewes as a cerebral writer, he will occasionally mix colloquial language with high diction, as in: It was no summer progresse. A cold comming they had of it, at this time of the yeare; just the worst time of the yeare, to take a journey, and specially a long journey, in. The waies deep, the weather sharp, the daies short, the sun furthest off in solstitio brumali; the very dead of Winter. (Andrewes, pp. 143- TWj Although Donne mixes levels of diction, he generally writes on a higher level of abstraction than Andrewes when mixing levels, as in his delineation of man's place in the Great Chain of Being as contrasted with a fly and the sun: But what glory can God receive from man, that he should be so carefull of his propagation? what glory more from man, then from the Sunne, and Moon, and Stars, which have no propagation? Why this, that S. Augustine observes; Musca Soli praeferenda, quia vivit, A Fly is a nobler creature then the Sunne, because a fly hath life, and the Sunne hath not; for the degrees of dignity in the creature, are esse, vivere, and intelligere: to have a beeing, to have life, and to have understanding: and therefore man, who hath all three, is much more able to glorify God, then any other creature is, because he onely can chuse whether he will glorify God or no. . . . (Donne, II, p. 341) 4. Andrewes is particularly fond of puns; indeed, his penchant for punning was particularly offensive to the Puritans. One of the best examples is to be found in the opening section of the ninth Nativity sermon in which he 16 considers the text "Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, &c." After having put the text into a framework, he remarks "We may well thinke, Saint Matthew would be carefull, to make choise of a verie prime and pregnant place, to set it (as it were) in the front of his Gospel!" (Andrewes, p. 72) .Donne's puns are less outrageous. In one sermon, he considers Christ's calling men to His service within the figure of military service. "Christ beats his Drum, but he does not Press men; Christ is serv'd with Voluntaries" (Donne, VII, p. 156). 'Voluntaries' here is purposefully ambiguous: it means both that men serve Him freely and that their service is like a trumpet voluntary. 5. Both men enjoy using alliteration, as in Andrewes' use of 'p,' 's,' 'h,' and 'd' sounds: "... our Saviour CHRIST is compared ... to the morning Hart: that is, a Hart roused early in the morning (as from His very birth He was by Herod) hunted and chased all his life long, and this day brought to His end, and . . . stricken and pierced thorow side, and heart and all: which is it, we are here willed to behold" (Andrewes, p. 334). Note also Donne's alliterated 'h' and 's' sounds: "Howling is the noyse of hell, singing the voyce of heaven; Sadnesse the damp of Hell, Rejoycing the serenity of Heaven" (Donne, VII, p. 70) . 6. Both use repetitio, but whereas Andrewes ' imagination moves from the extremes of eternity and time to the appearance of God on earth, Donne expands from our earthly life to eternal life. Note how Andrewes repeats 'we' and 'God' and their inclusion in the Incarnate Christ. . . . no remedie then, but to get a Cum, by whose meanes, Nobis and Deus may come together againe. . . . The parties are, GOD, and We: And, now, this day, He is both. GOD, before, eternally; and, now to day, MAN: and so, both, and takes hold of both, and brings both together againe. (Andrewes, p. 78) In contrast, note how Donne takes the word 'resurrection' and expands it from time to eternity. We consider ordinarily three Resurrections: A spirituall Resurrection, a Resurrection from sinne, by Grace in the Church; A temporall Resurrection, a Resurrection from trouble, and calamity in the world; And an eternall Resurrection, a Resurrection after which no part of man shall die, or suffer againe, the Resurrection into Glory. (Donne, VIII, p. Ill)- Sentences Both use extensive parallelism, as in Andrewes' paralleling various Old and New Testament fasts: The manner of the Church hath alwayes beene, that at the first institution, or undertaking of any great and weighty matter, there hath beene extraordinary Fasting. So Moses, Deut. 9. 9. when he entred into his calling at the receiving of the Law, fasted forty dayes. So Elias, I King. 19. 18. at the restoring of the same Law, did the like. And so when they went about the re-edifying of the Temple, as appeareth Esdras 8. 49. So in the New Testament, as the separation of Paul and Barnabas, Act. 13. 3. And (as Jerome reporteth)Saint~John would not undertake to write the divine worke of his Gospell, untill the 181 i whole Church (by Fasting) had recommended the same J unto G o d .30 | and Donne's paralleling the various saving acts and prac~ “ tices of the Church Catholic: But if I come to pray or preach without this kind of Idea, if I come to extemporall prayer, and extemporall preaching, I shall come to an extemporall faith and extemporall religion; and then I must looke for an extemporall Heaven, a Heaven to be made for me; for to that Heaven which belongs to the Catholique Church, I shall never come, except I go by way of the Catholique Church. . . . (Donne, VII, p. 61) 2. A characteristic which is rarely found in Donne but is characteristic of Andrewes is ellipsis, as in his description of the world under the effects of sin: Things in heaven, from things in earth; Angells, with drawne swords at men: Things on earth, from tilings in heaven, Men, at but the sight of an Angel1, ready to fall down dead. The members, from the head; the head, from the members: The members one from another: Neither union with the head, nor among themselves. (Andrewes, p. 152) 3. Andrewes also likes to mix a series of short clauses followed by a long sentence. Then is it, of necessity, to be His Birth day. That• was a Day; the Angell calls it To day: To day is borne: And His day it was: for every man claimes a kind of propertie, in his birth day. Men, in the day of the beginning of their life: As Kings, in the day of the beginning of their Reignes: As Cities, their Palilia, when the trench is first cast: As Churches, their Encoenia when they are first dedicate: So Men . . . when they first come into the world. It is too plaine, this. His Day then: And sure, a Day of Ioy, 30;Lancelot Andrewes, Seven Sermons on the Wonderfvllj Combate . . . Betweene Christ and Satan (London, 1642), p. 9. 19! i withall. Ioy, in Heaven; Ioy, in Earth. In Heaven: for, a day of Glorie to GOD on higET Tn Earth: for, a day of Peacelvere below, anc? for good will towards men? as ever, nay more than ever, was any. The Angel so proclaimed it, Gaudium omni' populo, A day, of Ioy to all people: And proclaimed, why? Quia hodie natus est. And, this omni populo (as appeares now, by this text) was not only all people, then, in being, or after to be: but, (as Leo well expresseth it) in praeteritas se refudit aetates, the Ioy of it went back, up to tKe Ages past? up, even to Abraham1 s time, two thousand yeares and more, before ever it came. (Andrewes, p. 64) 4. Another technique used more by Andrewes than Donne is the rhetorical question. Good LORD I Why should any love to be contentious? Why? It is the way to be some body. In time of peace, what reckoning is there of Wat Tiler, or Iacke Straw? (Andrewes, p. 519) Figures 1. Donne prefers to develop his thought in individual metaphors, as in his analogy between a book and a conscience. Yea, here God opens another book to him, his manuall, his bosome, his pocket book, his Vade Mecum, the Abridgement of all Nature, and all Law, his owne heart, and conscience: And this booke, though he shut it up, and clasp it never so hard, yet it will some times burst open of it selfe? though he interline it with other studies, and knowledges, yet the Text it selfe, in the book it selfe, the testimonies of the conscience, will shine through and appeare. ... (Donne, IX, p. 237) Andrewes' metaphors are less obvious? he prefers instead to develop a metaphor quietly and unobtrusively throughout an entire sermon, as in his use of an astrological metaphor throughout the entire eleventh Nativity sermon. 2. Both like paradox, but whereas Andrewes' iparadoxes are a mixture of homely majesty, Donne's are i i usually more eccentric and dramatic. Donne chooses to describe Christ's dual natures with an unusual paradox of ; embalming: ... 'tis true that this was a most powerfull embalming, to be embalmd with the divine nature it selfe, to bee embalmd with eternity, was able to preserve him from corruption and incineration for ever.I (Donne, X, p. 236) Andrewes describes the Christ Child as the speechless Word of God, thus placing us in the paradoxical center of Christ's two natures: Indeed, every word (here) is a wonder: . . . an infant, Verbum infans, the Word without a word, the aeternail Word not hable to speake a word; A wonder sure. . . . There lieth He; the Lord of giorie, without all giorie. Instead of a Palace, a poore stable; of a cradle of state, a beasts cratch; No pillow, but a lock of hay; No hangings, but dust and cobwebs; No attendants, but in medio animalium. ... (Andrewes, pp. 112-113) These similarities and differences between Donne and Andrewes in their choice of words, sentences, and figures mark the difference between an expansive and an inclusive viewpoint, respectively. That there could be such variety shows the essential flexibility possible within the witty style of preaching.. Three doctoral dissertations have been written about Andrewes. Alan F. Herr's The Elizabethan Sermon: A | ;Survey and Bibliography (University pf Pennsylvania, 1940) i is second only to W. Fraser Mitchell's English Pulpit ; Oratory as a guide to the structure and style of English jsermons. Herr’s definition of the three styles of : Elizabethan sermons is a useful critical tool. Elizabeth ; McCutcheon' s Lancelot Andrewes and the Theme of Time in the Early Seventeenth Century (University of Wisconsin, 1961) discusses the relationship between time and eternity. Although she surveys selected sermons, her attention is primarily directed upon Andrewes' Private Devotions. Of particular interest is her excellent survey of the theme of time in English and Continental sources. Maurice Reidy's Lancelot Andrewes: Jacobean Court Preacher (Harvard University, 1952) has been published and will be discussed in the next section. Five published books about Andrewes deserve mention. R. L. Ottley's Lancelot Andrewes (London, 1894) was, up to the publication of Paul Welsby's biography, the best full- length discussion of Andrewes. Written from a High Church Anglican viewpoint, the book discusses the major events in Andrewes1 life, his friendships and literary connec tions, his role as a prelate and preacher, his theological position, and his Devotions. It was issued as part of the Methuen "Leaders of Religion" series. Douglas MacLeane's ,Lancelot Andrewes and the Reaction (London, 1910) is written from a High Church viewpoint. He emphasizes the i "sweet, holy and patristic character of the man" as "the presentment of a truly apostolic bishop of the Catholic : Church, one who might . . . have seemed in place among the fathers of Nicaea or Ephesus. . . ."31 it is a biogra phical account which is appreciative, but ‘ which adds nothing new to our knowledge of Andrewes. Florence Higham's Lancelot Andrewes (London, 1955) is the best short biography available for the interested general reader. Accurate, but without critical apparatus, her study amply meets the needs of the Student Christian Movement (SCM), the book's publishers. Unlike other popular sectarian biographers, she achieves a balanced view of her subject; she is aware of Andrewes1 virtues and deficiencies. She surveys his early life and univer sity career, his service under Elizabeth and James, his work on the authorized version of the Bible and his encounters with the Puritans, his part in the Essex divorce, his character as preacher, his friendships, his declining years, and his Private Devotions. Maurice Reidy's Lancelot Andrewes: Jacobean Court Preacher (Chicago, 1955), is particularly interesting because it is a Roman Catholic interpretation of Andrewes and his place in the Anglican Church. His analysis of Andrewes as political theorist and as preacher is useful (although I disagree with his depiction of Andrewes' sermon style); of particular interest is his discussion of Andrewes' 3i]Douglas MacLeane, Lancelot Andrewes and the Reaction (London, 1910), p. vi. controversy with Cardinal Bellarmine. Paul Welsby's Lancelot Andrewes: 1555-1626 (London, 1958), carefully researched and judiciously written, is the most valuable Andrewes biography yet published. CHAPTER II HUGH LATIMER AND JEREMY TAYLOR ON THE LIFE OF CHRIST Two things and a relation between them are necessary for the emergence of meaning. To see Lancelot Andrewes1 conception of Christ’s life in clearer focus, we shall study selected sermons by Hugh Latimer and Antiquates Christianae by Jeremy Taylor because these two writers' lives overlapped Andrewes' life.-*- Hugh Latimer, even tually Bishop of Worcester, was probably born in 1485 at Thrucaston and was martyred on 16 October 1955 at O x f o r d . ^ Jeremy Taylor, eventually Bishop of Down and Conner, was born at Cambridge, and baptized in Trinity Church on 15 August 16133 an< j died at Lisburn on 13 August 1667.4 •^Hugh Latimer, Frvitfvll Sermons: Preached by the right Reverend Father, and constant Martyr of IESUS Christ, Master Hugh Latimer, newly imprinted with others not heretofore set forth in print, to the edifying of all which will dispose themselves to the reading of the same. . . T Printed at London by Thomas Cotes, for the Companie of STATIONERS. 1635. Jeremy Taylor, Antiquitates Christ ianae: or, The History of the Life and Death of the Holy Jesus: As Also the Lives, Acts and Martyrdoms of His Apostles. . . 7 London, 1694. In this chapter, allrefer ences noted parenthetically will be to these editions. ^Dictionary of National Biography, XXXII, p. 171. 3D.N.B., LV, p. 422. 4D.N.B., LV, p. 426. 24 25 ! Lancelot Andrewes, eventually Bishop of Winchester, Ely, and Chichester, was born in 1&55 "in the parish of All C Hollows', Barking, to the west of the Tower of London." He died on 25 September 1626. Clearly, between Latimer's birth in 1485 and Taylor's death in 1667, we pass from the establishment of the Church of England under Henry VIII, through the Elizabethan compromise, the unavoidable encounter with Puritanism on the part of James I and Charles I, the Puritan Interregnum, and the Restoration. Throughout this period we see the Anglican Church striving, not always successfully, to reach a middle position between Rome and Geneva: to keep catholicity in the sacraments and in apostolic succession, but to reform internally; to have an episcopate, but to practice collegiality; and to follow the Scriptures, but to admit tradition as well. Of these three religious writers, Latimer is the least thorough in'his treatment of the life of Christ. Unlike Taylor and Andrewes, he never composed a series of sermons upon the life of Christ.® Aside from the series of; SPaul Welsby, Lancelot Andrewes: 1555-1626 (London, 1958), p. 8. Prof. Welsby, citing Tanner-1 * MSS, clvii, from a document entitled "The Masters and Fellows of Pembroke Hall before [and since] they were Lords of Framlingham," notes that according to this document Andrewes' birthdate was 25 September. Welsby maintains that this date is due to a misunderstanding of a funeral sermon for Andrewes. Gone exception is his series of seven sermons upon the Lord's Prayer. 26 !eight sermons Latimer preached before King Edward VI between 1549 and 1550 and seven on the Lord's Prayer, Latimer's general practice was to compose sermons weekly according to. the assigned Scriptural passages for each Sunday in the Book of Common Prayer. For Latimer, Christ was a unique being with two natures: He was both God and man. The Arian notion that Christ "... was not a very man, nor suffered very paines upon the crosse but had a fantasticall body ..." seems to have been a matter of some consternation for this orthodox priest.^ In another sermon he restates his belief that Christ was "very man of very man" as well as "very God." To combat the heretical contention of one Joane of Kent that Christ did not receive our flesh from the Virgin Mary, but instead "The Son of God . . . penetrated through her, as through a Glasse taking no substance of her ..." (282A), Latimer asserts that ". . . this foolish woman denyed the common Creede ..." (282A). In Latimer's view, perhaps the virginal nature of Mary has led the Arians astray. Yet he cautions us that her virginity does not conflict with Christ's receiving our flesh. Once gestation has occurred whether naturally or miraculously, the normal process of maternity obtains. ^Latimer, p. 275A. In this section, "A" will stand for the verso side of the page and "B" for the recto. 27 And though Mary had a prerogative . . . namely that she knew no man, that she was a virgin, yet her prerogative tooke not away the very humanity of Christ. Shee alone above all other women had this prerogative to bee a virgin and yet to bring forth a child: the holy Ghost did supply the office of a father. She was filled with the holy Ghost, but he was her naturall sonne in all other points, but yet this his humanity was preserved from all sinne and wickednesse. (282A) Thus having rejected the Arian heresyLatimer rejects the opposite view, the Nestorian or Adoptionist heresy: the belief that "Christ the man was in some way divinized, taken up into union with the Deity. . .".8 Christ had always been God's Son throughout all eternity, yet He chose to take upon Himself our flesh or human nature. In addition, Christ, by choosing to be born as a man, demon strated His perfect humility rather than in any sense to be elevated, the necessary consequence of the Nestorian position. As Latimer cautions his audience: Againe, we must beleeve that he was Dos Son, not by adoption, as we be, for we al [sic] be adopted and taken for the children of God. But he was before the world began with God, the very naturall Son of God, and God himselfe, very Gods Son without a mother, like as he was very man without a Father. (275A) These two natures are, in addition, united in one compositum. Christ was not God and man, but God-man. As for the hylomorphic view of man which held that the body and soul are joined in one human substance, Latimer maintained that "... the manhood and the Godhead are 8Dom Aelred Graham, The Christ of Catholicism (New York, 1957), p. 31. 28| I joyned so together, they make but one Christ, and yet they | are not confounded, so that the Godhead is not turned into ; the manhood, neither the manhood into the Godhead" (277A).9; Latimer contends that, although as God Christ's knowledge is absolute and perfect, His human knowledge was limited to day by day experience. As God, His knowledge is infinite; as a man, His knowledge is finite. ... as God he knoweth all things, nothing can bee hid! from him, as hee saith himselfe, Pater commonstrat nihi omnia, The Father Sheweth me all things. Therefore his knowledge is infinite, else hee were not ; very God. But as concerning his manhood, he knew not that time, for he was a verie naturall man (sin excepted:) therefore like as he was content to suffer heate and cold, and to be weary and hungry, like as hee was content to suffer such things, so he was content, as concerning his manhood to be ignorant of that day. He had perfect knowledge to doe his Fathers commission, to instruct us, and to teach us in the way to heaven, but it was not his commission to tell us the houre of this day. (246A) The purpose of Christ's Incarnation is to save men. Latimer once analyzed the meaning of the name 'Jesus.' Properly translated, it means "... a Saviour and redeemer of all mankind borne into the World" (295B) . "This title and name, to save, pertaineth properly and principally unto him: for he saveth us, else we had beene lost for ever" (295B) . Continuing his analysis of the title 'Saviour, ' Latimer makes a sharp distinction between ; the many sorts of secular saviours and the one eternal ^See Etienne Gilson, The Elements of Christian Philosophy (New York, I960), pp. 222, 229, and 248. 29; saviour. People such as judges, kings, doctors, and parents, and things such as bridges and ships are all terms 1 saviours1: But all this is not a perfect saving: For what avayleth it to be saved from sicknesse, calamites and oppression, when we shall bee condemned after our death both body and soule for ever, to remaine with the devill and his Angels?. We must therefore come to Iesus, which is the right and true Saviour. And he it is that hath saved us from sinne. (296A) The operation of salvation itself has four stages. The first stage imputes grace to individual men obtained by Christ's perfect sacrifice. Christ is, in Latimer's view, ". . .a justifier, a giver of salvation through his painefull death, and we receive the same through beleeving in him. ..." (297A) Everlasting life is the free gift of God "... given freely unto men through Christ" (246A). The second stage occurs when we perform good works. Countering what he claims is the Roman Catholic view that good works alone will get a man to heaven, Latimer holds that good works are only valid if they are outward ex pressions of a spirit of charity generated by faith in Christ. Christ is our only saviour, contrary to the Roman Catholic view, which holds Him ... a Iudge, having power ever heaven and earth: and all those that have done well in this world, and have stedfastly prayed upon their beades, and have gone a pilgrimage, &c. and so with their good workes have deserved heaven and everlasting life: Those (say 1 they) that have merited with their owne good workes, shall be received of Christ, and admitted to ever- lafting salvation: As for the other . . . [they] shall be cast into everlasting darknesse. . . . (297A) 30! Good works, together with religious exercises, then, are | I insufficient of themselves to gain eternal life for us. Only good works which are an effluence of grace-inspired charity are acceptable and are necessary expressions of a state of grace.-1 - 0 Using a courtly clothes metaphor, Latimer sees charity as Christ's livery. Like as every Lord most commonly giveth a certaine Livery to his servants, whereby they may be knowne that they pertaine unto him, and so we say yonder is this Lords servants, because they werre his Livery. ... [Therefore,] love is the token whereby you know such a servant that pertaineth to Christ, so that charity may be called the very livery of Christ: He that hath charity is Christs Servant: He that hath not charity, is the servant of the devill. (265A) Christ's servants must share Christ's livery as well, and they serve Him best if they do what is required of them in the station to which they are assigned by birth. Although Latimer lived during the period during which the agrarian order was being replaced by a capitalist order, his social and economic views were more closely aligned with those of the Middle Ages than with those of his own time. According to C. M. Gray, he held that not only did each man have a divine calling, but that each person's calling was determined by "the particular position •^See C. M. Gray, Hugh Latimer and the Sixteenth- Century (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1950), where Gray contends that Latimer took a more liberal view towards "minor" good works than did most Protestants. which he occupies in the social hierarchy. The model for this static, hierarchial conception of society Latimer sees as justified by Christ's returning, after the disputation with the doctors in the Temple, to his obscure village to pursue the modest and anonymous life as a carpenter. This is a wonderfull thing, that the Saviour of the World, and the King above all Kings, was not ashamed to labour, yea and to use so simple an occupation. Here he did santifie all manner of occupations, exhorting and teaching us with this example every man to follow and keepe the state whereunto God hath called him, and then we shall have living inough [sic] in this world, doing well and after his pleasure, and in the world to come life everlasting, which Christ by his death and passion hath deserved for us. (303A) Another expression of humility of place in Christ's life is in his Nativity. In two sermons preached on 25 December 1552, Latimer discusses the personae present at the stable. Mary and Joseph were obedient to the secular rulers by going to Bethlehem to register for taxation. While there, the Saviour of the world "... was borne in a stable among beasts, lacking all manner of necessary things which appertained to young children: InsomUch that he had neither cradle nor clouts" (268B). The angels were the first preachers of the Gospel, and their message of salvation was first given to the lowly shepherds, not to the bishops (note Latimer's anachronism), great lords, or 11Gray, p. 29. 32! • l i "jolly damsels" (284A). That the shepherds left their flocks and came to render thanks to God demonstrates, in Latimer's eyes, their great faith in God's ability to take | i care of a man's possessions in order that he might direct- ; ly worship God. Their recompense was to obtain restored "souls, and bodies, and everlasting life" (271A). What they expected to find was a great person "... keeping a state after his name [Saviour] . . . : but they found a poore Child, which after mans reason was not able to helpe i himselfe. ..." (271B) In addition to Christ's helpless ness, Latimer sees in His nativity the acceptance, through love, of poverty of place. He endured poverty and misery in order to correct the evil of the world and to save mankind. Heere [in the conditions of His birth] began the misery of the Lord over all lords, even at his first comming into this World, when he was layd in a manger, as sobne as hee was home, to taste poverty and miseries, to make amends for our sinnes and wickednesse, and so to take away from us the wrath of God our heavenly Father. . . . (278B) In addition to Christ's endurance of adversity for man kind's sake, Latimer stresses Christ's quality of contentedness (278B). As a moral preacher, he immediately moves to criticize his listeners: it is our natural proclivity to avoid suffering and to serve ourselves rather than others. If Christ himself suffered greatly for our sake, then we ought not to shirk our more modest privations. The visit to the infant Christ by the Magi figures in two sermons delivered in January, 1552: on the first Sunday after Epiphany, and on Twelfth-day. Unlike other interpreters, Latimer does not discuss the meaning of the Three Kings; instead, he devotes, after considering their sincerity (299b) and their liberality (290AB), most of his attention to the meaning of their gifts. For the sake of comparison, the chart below summarizes Latimer's several views of the meaning of the three gifts: Sermon preached on Twelfth-day "They bring gold, which signified him to be the right King above al [sic] Kings . . .and that the doctrine of him, is the very true doctrine." (29OB) ". . . signifieth the prayer of the faithfull, which maketh a good favour before God. . . ." (290B) "... signified afflictions of those which confesseth Christ." (290B) Note that in the Twelfth-day sermon that Latimer shifts the meaning of frankincence and myrre from qualities and roles of Christ to the faithful, a shift which violates unity of interpretation because his interpretation of gold is focused upon the person and doctrine of Christ. Sermon on the First Sunday after the Epiphany Gold "... they gave him to signifie his kingdome. ..." (300B) Frankin- "... [they gave him] sence to signifie his mortality. ..." (300B) Myrre "... [they gave him] to signifie his Priesthood." (300B) 34l Unlike Taylor and Andrewes, Latimer did not preach j sermons about the Wilderness Temptations; we now move to his interpretation of the Passion and of eschatology. In Latimer's eyes the Passion and Second Coming are inex tricably joined. The purpose of Christ's earthly mission is clear: "For what other cause did Christ come, but onely to take away our sins by his passion, and so deliver us from the power of the Devill?" (209A) The chief sacrament Christ instituted is the Eucharist, the mirror of the Passion. Latimer discusses the meaning and benefits of the Passion and the Eucharist in a sermon elucidating the parable of the marriage of the king's son recounted in Matthew 22: 1-14. The food at the wedding banquet consisted of the king's son, the bridegroom. But the Almightie God, which prepared this feast for all the world, for all those that will come unto it, he offereth his onely sonne to be eaten, and his blood to be drunke: belike he loved his guests well, because he did feede them with so costly a dish. (179B) The Eucharistic elements Latimer interprets spiritually. For him, transubstantiation was untrue and led to the excesses of what he called "massemonging": the incorrect belief that each mass is a fresh sacrifice rather than a memorial (209B). Instead, the bread and wine are symbolic : only; the species in themselves are only themselves. When j a faithful communicant partakes of the elements, ". . .he receiveth surely the very Body and Blood of 35 ! Christ spiritually, as it shall be most comfortable unto I his soule" (179B). There are, however, several benefits : gained by receiving the Eucharist; (1) the remission of ! sins through the imputed merits obtained by Christ through : His Passion, and (2) the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. Now lest it seem contradictory to hold that the Eucharist is symbolic and yet that by means of its reception our sins are remitted and the Holy Ghost dwells within us, Latimer stipulates that Christ ordained the Sacrament because of our "weakenes [sic] and forgetfulnes [sic]" (18OB) . It is "an outward Sacrament . . . [designed for] the augmentation of our faith, and to put us in remem brance of his benefits" (180B) . In short, when we partake of the Eucharist, we do not receive grace directly from it; instead, grace comes from the single and sufficient Passion of Christ, the Sacrament serving only to focus our attention upon Christ. Christ's earthly life had a tworfold purpose; "His first comming into this World, was to suffer his painefull Passion, and to deliver mankind out of the bondage and dominion of the devill" (245B). The Second Coming will be sterner. Before, Christ lived in great poverty and suffered much; then, he will come as the judge of mankind. Unlike the elaborate sermons on the terrors of the Latter Day common in the Middle A g e s ,12 Latimer, with sharp brush strokes, quickly sketches the outlines of that day: . . . his second comming . . . shall be a glorious comming, a beautifull comming, for he shall come accompanied with all his Angels, he shall come with such cleerenes, that the Sun and the Moone shall be darkened at his comming, not that the Sunne it selfe of his substance shall be darkned, no not So, for it shall give his light, but it shall not be seene for this great light and cleerenesse, wherein our Saviour shall appeare. (274B) One sees Latimer looking with great interest and eagerness towards the time when he will be able to see Christ the Judge with his panoply of angels. Surely faith, not fear, is the ruling virtue in Latimer's soul. Jeremy Taylor's method of writing in his Antiquitates Christianae: or, The History of the Life and Death of the Holy Jesus: As Also the Lives, Acts and Martyrdoms of His Apostles is to paraphrase the Scriptural accounts of each phase of Christ's life in the first part of each section and then to provide a commentary upon the meaning of each phase in the second part. Because Taylor faithfully recounts the Scriptural bases for each phase, it is unnecessary to report his transcription here; instead, I shall closely analyze his interpretation of each phase. In a complex sentence, Taylor holds that Christ's purpose in being incarnated was nine-fold. He became incarnate, obviously not to add perfection to his already 12see.6. R. Owst, Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England (Cambridge, 1933), pp. 511-541. perfect nature, but in order to remedy . . . humane miseries, to ennoble our Nature by an union with Divinity, to sanctifie it with his Justice, to inrich it with his Grace, to instruct it with his Doctrine, to fortifie it with his Example, to rescue it from servitude, to assert it into the liberty of the sons of God, and at last to make it partaker of a beatifical Resurrection, (p. 3) Taylor grandly asserts that God could have redeemed mankind by other means than through the Incarnation, but he gives no description of such means; instead, arguing by connaturality, Taylor holds that any other mode would urge violence to our nature. Not only would we be more likely to respond by kind, but our nature would be elevated by the assumption by God of man's nature. Taylor does not discuss, as did Latimer and Andrewes, the elevation of our nature beyond the angels; in contrast, he stresses the example of Gabriel's swift obedience as a model of alacrity for us to emulate. That Christ was born of a virgin is important to us because: (1) He thereby showed that we must be blameless in reputation before the world; and (2) He sanctified the honorable estates of virginity and marriage for us. Taylor emphasizes the conflict Joseph underwent with regard to appearance and reality. Being just and charitable, he intended to have Mary put away to avoid scandal; but the conflict was resolved by a special heavenly revelation. The lesson to^be gained by studying Joseph is that of prudence: "If we consider warily, God ; will guide us in the determination: But a hasty person out-runs his guide, prevaricates his rule, and very often engages upon errour" (p. 11). Taylor dwells with loving attention upon the relationship between Mary and her Son. He stresses the joys of Mary's first suckling Jesus and wrapping Him in rough swaddling cloths, placing Him in the manger for His first nap, and then the reciprocal joy of rocking Him in her arms after rest (p. 15). Of greater importance than the tender bond which obtained between Mary and her Son is the complex nature of Christ: He was the eternal God enfleshed. Taylor expresses, through his syntax, the dual nature of Christ's identity: For he that cried in the manger, that suck'd the paps of a woman, that hath exposed Himself to poverty and a world of inconveniences, is the Son of the living God- , of the same substance with his Father, begotten before all ages, before the morning-stars; he is GOD eternal, (pp. 15-16) Delving into the mysteries of the Trinity, Taylor rejects the Nestorian or Adoptionist position, firmly asserting that Christ was born by miraculous generation and was not adopted by God the Father after His birth. Because He was equal to the other two Persons, He is heir to the Father's "glories and possessions" by "an equality of communica tion" rather than "by succession" (p. 16) . Because of Christ's unique combination of divinity and humanity, Taylor expounds the several paradoxes: As he is God, his Throne is in the Heaven, and he fills all' things by his immensity: as he is Man, he is circumscribed by an uneasie Cradle, and cries in a Stable. As he is God, he is seated upon a super exalted Throne; as Man, exposed to the lowest estate of uneasiness and need. As God, cloathed in a robe of Glory, at the same instant when you may behold and wonder at his Humanity wrapped in cheap' and unworthy Cradle-bands. As God, he is incircled [sic] with millions of Angels; as Man, in the company of Beasts. As God, he is the Eternal Word of the Father, Eternal, sustained by himself, all-sufficient, and without need: and yet he submitted himself to a condition imperfect, inglorious, indigent and necessitous. (p. 16) These contrasts between infiniteness and finiteness, power and dependency, glory and poverty, rational and irrational creatures, and Logos and contingent being lead Taylor to a set series of meditative thoughts about the parts of the Person of Christ as He lay in the manger. Using the traditional division between body and soul, Taylor devotes most of his thought to a discussion of Christ's feet, hands, and breast. In his examination of these, Taylor reads later events into the inexperienced person of Christ. Although Christ's feet are unable to support His body as a child, they later will convey Him throughout Judea performing His ministry, they will allow Him to walk upon water "as upon firm pavement," they will be worshipped by lepers and by Mary Magdalene, they will be pierced by the nails at the Crucifixion, and finally, they will allow Christ to ascend to heaven. By example, the faithful are counselled to follow metaphorically the paths of Christ. With respect to His hands, Taylor emphasizes how they were often "lifted up to God in Prayer," they were used to cure lepers and the blind, to raise up the dead, and to restore "perishing limbs," to feed the five thousand, to overturn the tables of the money-changers, to initiate the first Eucharist, to suffer crucifixion nails, and finally, after the Resurrection, to be "so many transparencies and glorious Instruments of solemn, spiritual, and efficacious benediction" (pp. 16- 17). The faithful are urged to use their hands in prayer with the intention that Christ's acts of salvation be appropriated to them as well. Within the breast dwelt the » Sacred Heart, the house of "both the Sacraments, running out in the two holy streams of Blood and Water. . ." (p. 17). Like St. John, the faithful are urged to lay their heads there symbolically, signifying the recognition that God must be the end of all our acts and that all burdens should be transferred to God. In his consideration of the nature of Christ's soul, Taylor faithfully observes the dual nature of Christ and of man's place in the Great Scale of Being. Taylor views Christ's body in a Platonic mode, seeing it as the "upper Garment" (p. 17).or exterior manifestation of Christ's soul. Avoiding Nestorianism, Taylor cleaves to the hylomorphic union between Christ's two natures. Avoiding a definition of soul as a heavenly essence, Taylor defines 41 lit in this context as the mind. Christ's soul, having a human mode of understanding, is discursive rather than intuitive, human rather than angelic. Avoiding Arianism, Taylor re-emphasizes the orthodox view that Christ's being iwas divine as well. This union has four effects: (1) because Christ was personally united to the rest of the Divine Persons, grave "was dispensed to it without measure" (p. 17), (2) that Christ's memory "is indeter minable and unalterable, ever remembring to do us good" (p. 17), and to intercede for us with the Father; (3) "That his Vnderstanding is without ignorance. . ." (p. 17); and (4) "That his Will is impeccable, entertained with an uninterrupted act of Love to God. . ." (p. 17). Unlike most of the other opening sections, Taylor, in his recounting of the events surrounding Christ's Nativity, also provides a symbolic interpretation of the gifts of the Magi. Like Milton in his "On the Morning of Christ's Nativity," the birth of Christ meant to Taylor that all conflicts stopped, that "... there was an universal Peace through all the World" (p. 25). This peace in the secular world was continued on the next level of being with the angels' Christmas song "Gloria in Excelsis" delivered to the Shepherds. Just as Christ's Person consisted of two natures, so also the Angels' song had two parts to it: (1) glory to God through His Incarnation; and (2) peace to be given to men of good will by God's grace. To Taylor, the visit of Magi demonstrated that God's love extended to all men and not just to the Jews. Because the Magi came from without the Law, they also represented reason rather than revelation, as is seen in their having been "great Philosophers and Astrono-'^ mers. . ." (p. 32). Their quest, having begun with natural reason, ended in revelation in the order of grace. And God blessed them in following the Star, to which their innocent Curiosity and national Customes were apt to lead them; that their Custom was changed to Grace, and their Learning heightened with Inspiration, and God crowned all with a spiritual and glorious event, (p. 32) Taylor's interpretation of the three gifts of the Magi to the infant Christ deserves special mention. The following chart presents the sorts of interpretation Taylor sees: 1. Identity 2. Moral acts 3. Remedial significance (p. 28) 4. Interior virtues (p. 34) Gold 1. acknowledges Christ a king 2. acts of mercy 3. "a good Antidote against the present indigencies of his Poverty" 4. represents "Love to God and our neighbours, the Contempt of Riches, poverty of Spirit, and all the eminencies and spiritual riches of the Unitive life." Frankincense or "Incense" 1. acknowledges Christ God 2. our prayers to give to the new King in "honour and service." 3. necessary to counteract the smells of a stable, "the first throne of his Humility." 4. represents "Hope, Prayer, Obedience, good Inten tion, and all the actions and devotions of the Illuminative" state. Myrrh 1. acknowledges Christ a man 2. Chastity of minds and purity of our bodies 3. "medicinal to his tender body" 4. represents "Faith, Mortification, Chastity, Compunction, and all the actions of the Purgative way of Spiritual life ..." In the main, Taylor's classifications are useful and mutually exclusive; the only flaw falls between categories one and two under frankincense. If gold means acknow ledging Christ as a king, then Taylor should have chosen another means of signifying Christ's divinity than to capitalize "King"; perhaps he could have chosen Logos, as he does at the end of the paragraph on page twenty-eight in which he first discusses the significance of the three gifts. Of particular interest is Taylor's identification of the three gifts with the three theological virtues and their corresponding moral acts and stages of the mystical life. In his analysis of the Angels' carol and the signs given to the shepherds, Taylor, like Andrewes, notes that even though mankind was elevated byond the angels because of Christ's having become man, the angels, by glorifying God in their hymn, serve as a model of great charity, thus showing us that we should exterminate in us "all the intimations and beginnings of Envy. . ." (p. 29). Continuing with the Pauline dichotomy between Adam and 44 ! Christ (I Cor. 15:22), Taylor affirms that because of Christ's incarnation we need no longer hide ourselves from I ; i God. The signs that the angels gave to the shepherds were | : three. In tabular form, here is how Taylor interprets them: 1. What each condition testified 2. What each condition was opposed to (p. 71) A Babe 1. A "testimony of his Humility" 2. Christ's "hard and uneasie Lodging" was opposed to "the Lusts of the flesh" swaddled 1. was a sign of his poverty 2. against "the Lust of the eyes" he opposed "the poorness of his Swaddling-bands and Mantle" lying in a manger 1. signified "his Incommodity and uneasiness" 2. against "the Pride of life" he opposed "the great dignation [condescension] and descent of Christ from a Throne of Majesty to the state of a sucking ; Babe" Not only is Christ a gift to all men irrespective of their : stations in life, but He is also a gift for all men whether* or not they are Jews or Gentiles. Proof of this is illustrated by both the shepherds and the Magi who came to adore Him. "For the Gospel is of universal dissemination, not confined within the limits of a national Prerogative, but Catholock and dispersed" (p. 31). With great imaginative economy, Taylor sees in the adoration that all : , « t * N sorts and conditions of men are there to worship Christ: V . . . the Shepherds and the Arabian Magi, Jews and Gentiles, Learned and Unlearned, Rich and Poor, Noble and Ignoble? that in him all Nations, and all Condi- tions, and all Families, and all persons might be blessed; having called all by one Star or other, by natural Reason or by the secrets of Philosophy, by the Revelations of the Gospel, or by the ministery of Angels, by the Illuminations of the Spirit, or by the Sermons and Dictates of spiritual Fathers. . .. (p. 34) Taylor's presentation of Christ's Wilderness Temptations clearly affirms that God permitted His Son to be tempted and that Christ went into the Wilderness of His own free will. He went, not by force or "unnatural violence, but by the efficacies of Inspiration, and a supernatural inclination and activity of resolution: for it was the Holy Spirit that bare him thither; he was led by the good Spirit to be tempted by the evil1 1 (p. 94) . While in the desert, Christ practiced total abstinence, not even eating bread or drinking water, two substances which are allowed the faithful during fast days or periods. He was constantly "assaulted" by evil spirits and surrounded by wild beasts. Because there is no Scriptural basis for the devil's appearance, Taylor, following a commonplace of Renaissance thought, conjectures that Satan assumed a false good appearance out of deference! to Christ's "great Sanctity and high designation. . ." (p. 95). The devil tried to "appear more Angelical and immaterial" than he ordinarily would. Taylor scrupulously ! follows the Biblical accounts of the three temptations. The first temptation, the temptation in which Christ was bidden to turn stones into bread, is a sin I against faith in the sufficiency of "the ordinary I ! ' ! I providence of God" (p. 99). Christ's rejoinder to Satan (as paraphrased by Taylor) clearly shows the point: in "every word of God, whether the Commandment be general or ! special, a promise is either expressed or implied of the supply of all provisions necessary for him that is doing the work of Gbd" (p. 95). Implicit in this rejoinder is the belief that original sin damaged the combined orders of nature and grace. Beneficence of the created order on the level of nature alone since the fall could not be 'depended upon; however, someone divinely led could depend upon God's supplying his physical needs. Instead of giving in to our concupiscent bent, we should rely upon God's help in His own good time, and to practice patience and thankfulness, because the devil constantly tries to prompt "us to change our Stones into Bread, our sadnesses into sensual comfort, our drinesses into inundations of fancy and exteriour sweetnesses. . ." (p. 99). The second temptation, the temptation in which Christ was bidden to throw Himself off the pinnacle of the Temple, is a temptation to presumption or "indiscreet confidence." Resting secure in God's beneficient care towards Him, Christ well understood that such an act would have been a "dereliction": God would have had to provide an "unnecessary conservation" (p. 95). This sin is more serious than the first because it appeals to those who 47 suffer from spiritual pride rather than mere physical desire. The devil frequently causes such people to be successfully tempted by "opinions of their own Sanctity, and make their first escaping prove their second and greater dangers [sic]" (p. 100). Shrewdly, Taylor demon strates to his readers that this temptation is a matter of our wills directly. Alluding to a statement of .this point as advocated by St. Jerome, Taylor notes that the devil "may persuade us to a fall, but cannot precipitate us without our own act" (p. 100). The third temptation, that of inciting Christ to gain control of all the kingdoms of the earth, is the sin of ambition. Because by this time Satan had come "to perceive that this was the Son of God, and designed to be the King of all the World," the choice of temptation reveals the inadequacy of Satan. Going about His Father's business, Christ had little desire to be a mere secular ruler. After this final trial, the devil left Christ, and God the Father sent angels to minister to His needs. Now Taylor delineates the three principles and the three cures of temptations. The first principle is that we assume that habitual sins are engrained in nature and cannot thereby be changed or cured. Pithily he comments that: "These people convert a sin of nature into a state of grace" (p. 104). The second principle is to sin with a good intention, believing somehow that a good intention 48 | j "shall be sufficient to sanctifie their actions, and to ! 1 hallow their sin" (p. 100). Such sins are found in religious justifications for war, abusing charity for the sake of preserving faith, professing zeal for God as an excuse for disobeying man, committing sacrilege while ; claiming hatred of idolatry, being profane yet professing to deny superstition, promoting schism and terming it Reformation, cleaving to heresy under the guise of liberty of conscience (p. 107). These examples point to the excesses of the Protestant Reformers. The third principle is to act in the civil order by compromising in the moral and spiritual orders; or, as Taylor puts it, by "prosecuting actions .. . to the luxation of a point of Piety and stricter Duty. . ." (p. 108). The remedies or cures for temptations are also three in number. First, one should constantly observe what Brother Laurence terms the practice of the presence of God, for, as Taylor phrases it, God is the "witness of all our actions, and [He is the] revenger of all Impiety" (p. 112) . Second.,"'one should! meditate upon death, for such meditations will lead us to I understand the true condition of all men without God's grace. Third, and most importantly, we should pray . . . as a remedy against Temptations. . . . For . . . ! Prayer is the great instrument of obtaining victory by the grace of God, as a fruit of our desires and of God's natural and essential goodness; the very praying against a Temptation, if it be hearty, fervent and devout, is a denying of it, and part of the victory. ... (p. 115) Taylor's discussion of the Crucifixion opens with i i conjectures about whether or not Christ's punishments prior to the death on the cross were more than those I recounted in the Gospel accounts. Two examples Taylor cites are: (1) Christ's having been nailed to the Cross prior to carrying it; and (2) Christ's having an iron pointed tablet‘ appended to the bottom of His robe with which to gall Him.-^ Another event which precedes the Passion itself is Simon the Cyrenian's being forced to carry Christ's Cross. The significance Taylor sees in this act is that all men may be forced into serving Christ. Virtually everyone has a cross to bear, although some are aware of the significance of their burdens while others reluctantly accept what seems to be necessity. And we may consider, that every man in this world shall in some sense or other bear a Cross, few men escape it, and it is not well with them that do: but they only bear it well that follow Christ, and tread in his steps, and bear it for his sake, and walk as he walked; and he that follows his own desires, when he meets with a cross there . . . bears the Cross of his Concupiscence, and that hath no fellowship with the Cross of Christ. By the Precept of bearing the Cross we are not tied to pull evil upon our selves ... or to personate the primitive exercises of Mortification and severe abstinencies which were eminent in some ^•^in support of these non-scriptural views, Taylor quotes from "Plaut. in Mostel" and "S. Cypr. de Pass." A search of the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, the Catholic Encyclopedia, and J. P. Migne's Patroiogiae Graccae and Patroiogiae Latihae sheds no light upon the existence and authenticity of the Cyprian work and no mention of the Plaut [us] citation. Saints . . . : but it is required that wo bear our ownj Cross; so said our dearest Lord. For when the Cross j of Christ is laid upon us, and we are called to Martyrdom, then it is our own, because God made it to be our portion. ... (p. 412) ;A cross is not a matter of deserved justice, it is some thing borne out of charity towards others; it is not some- i 'thing which we can obtain by our own choice, it is rather : something which God permits and wills us to have for the sake of expressing His love for mankind. In voluntarily accepting divinely willed crosses, we are only following Christ's example. But Jesus took all his Passion with a voluntary susception, God heightening it to great degrees of torment supernaturally; and he laid down his life voluntarily, when his Father's wrath was totally appeased towards mankind, (p. 412) Turning to his discussion of the Passion itself, Taylor puns, despite the exceedingly serious nature of the subject, when he comments that: "For Crucifixion, it was an exquisite pain, sharp and passionate. . ." (p. 412). More importantly, Christ's Passion was a humble and charitable suffering of all that natural man seeks to avoid: He suffered disgrace to nullify our pride, poverty and nakedness for our covetousness, pains to chastise "the Delicacies of our flesh, and broke in pieces the fetters of Concupiscence" (p. 142) . Of greatest interest in Taylor's interpretation of the Passion is his wrestling with the problems stemming from the two natures of Christ. He argues that although there is a mysterious union between the two, yet each ; retains the properties or qualities that make each nature; what it is. Taylor solves the problem of unity between these two natures by arguing for a paradoxical rather than an essential union. As Etienne Gilson has reminded us in Reason and Revelation in the Middle Ages, things which are not the same are not necessarily opposed if they are seen for what they are and are ordered according to their proper place relative to one another and to reality as a whole.^ During the Passion, the Divine nature of Christ did not suffer pains or contingency. Christ as God is not subject to sufferings, as a Man he is the subject of miseries; as God he is eternal, as Man, most humble and obedient to the Law: and therefore that the Humane nature was united to the Divine, it does not inferr [sic] that it must in all instances partake of the Divine felicities, which in God are essential, to Man communicated without necessity, and by an arbitrary dispensation, (p. 413) Taylor also emphasizes that Christ's human nature had to will itself to constant union with the divine nature. That: Christ as man was ultimately raised to immortality, that He was "made the Lord of all the Creatures, the First- fruits of the Resurrection, the Exemplar of Glory, and the Prince and Head of the Catholick Church" came as a reward to Christ for His striving, rather than as a "necessary consequence and a natural efflux of the personal union •^Etienne Gilson, Reason and Revelation in the Middle Ages (New York, 1938), p. 78. 52l : i of the Godhead with the Humanity" (pp. 413-414). j Also stemming from the dual nature of Christ's person are Taylor's views upon the subject of whether or not Christ suffered despair, and by consequence, separation! from God while on the Cross. Taylor's conclusion is that although Christ appeared to despair, essentially He did not. What saved Him from complete despair was: (1) towards God, hope in divine efficacy: For the Hope that was the support of the Soul of Jesus,; as it confesses an imperfection that is not Consistent : with the state of Glory, so it excludes the Despair that is the torment proper to accursed souls, (p. 414) and (2) towards man, regard for the salvation of all who would share in His sacrifice (p. 415). Christ indeed "complained as if [my italics] God had forsaken him. But this was the pillar of cloud which conducted Israel into Canaan" (p. 415). The purpose of the Passion was to satisfy the onus of sin and guilt begun with Adam's defection and continued by all consequent sins by having a perfectly innocent person suffer great agony for the sake of all culpable men.! Although Deuteronomy 24:16 and Ezekiel 18:2 and 3 hold that. no one shall perish for the sake of another, Taylor argues that these passages apply only to instances of involuntary ; suffering, but when this shall be desired by a person that cannot finally perish, and does a mercy to the exempt persons, and is a voluntary act of the suscipient, and shall in the event also redound to an infinite good, it is no deflexion from the Divine Justice to excuse many by j the affliction of one, who also for that every suffering shall have infinite compensation, (pp. 414- 415) Christ voluntarily chose to be man's redeemer by sacri ficing Himself, and in so doing, satisfying and reconciling; justice and mercy. The events which happened to Christ and His Church after the Passion receive from Taylor a more general discussion than most of the other events we have surveyed. The rending of the veil of the Temple and the accompanying earthquake signified the destruction of the Old Testament faith as it is supplanted by the Christian faith. The piercing of Christ's side with the resultant outpouring of water and blood signified the "... streaming forth [of the] two Sacraments to refresh the Church, and opening a gate that all his brethren might enter in, and dwell in the Heart of God" (p. 425). Instead of viewing the water as part of the Eucharist, Taylor sees it as emblematic of the sacrament of Baptism. Christ's being placed in a rock sepulchre in a garden signified that man has been returned through sacrifice to the Edenic garden of innocence, while i the stone sepulchre signified that Christ's death and Passion should remain as an eternal memorial. ‘ On the third day after the Crucifixion, Christ's soul returnedr from heaven and again re-entered and re-animated His entire being. The coming to the sepulchre by the three 54 j Marys signified the blending of obedience and love. Had they come earlier, they would have violated obedience; going early in the morning showed their love and obedience. Indeed, they came so early that they "prevented the rising of the Sun. . ." (p. 427). Mary Magdalene's being forbidden to touch the risen Christ and being bidden to tell the disciples of Christ's rising from the dead is interpreted by Taylor to signify God's preference for the active sense of community rather than the solitary life of contemplation. 1 1 . . . God ministers to us comforts and revelations, not that we may dwell in the sensible fruition of them our selves alone, but that we communicate the grace to others" (p. 427). That there were women rather than men who first went to the tomb Taylor interprets as showing the supremacy of faith over reason. Indeed, he notes, because women tend to love more than men, that there will probably be more women than men in heaven. Peter's having been the next person and the first man to seek out the risen Christ, Taylor sees as a demonstration of the truth that sinful people are more keenly aware of their necessity to have a saviour to deliver them from their sins (p. 428) . The appearance of Christ between the two people journeying to Emmaus shows that God must always be permitted to "chuse the way; it being sufficient that he is our guide, and our support, and our exceeding great reward" (p. 428) . The Resurrection itself means that God, jacting on the level of grace, joins together the body and soul which natural death separates. The last earthly work Christ performed prior to His Ascension was to establish the sacrament of Baptism. Taylor's discussion of the significance of Baptism sums up his understanding of God's wish for mankind on earth and in eternity. By Baptism, Christ promised that' if we perform our undertaking, and remain in the state in which he now puts us, he will continually assist us with his Spirit, prevent and attend us with his Grace, he will deliver us from the power of the Devil, he will keep our Souls in mercifull, joyfull and safe custody till the great day of the Lord, he will then raise our Bodies from the Grave, he will make them to be spiritual and immortal, he will reunite them to our Souls, and beatifie both Bodies and Souls in his own Kingdom, admitting them into eternal and unspeakable glories, (pp. 431.-432) CHAPTER III ANDREWES' DISCUSSION OF THE NATIVITY Lancelot Andrewes1 seventeen sermons on the Nativity were delivered over a period of twenty years, beginning in 1605, before King James at Whitehall on Christmas morning. In 1608, Andrewes did not deliver a sermon because of illness;1 why he did not preach in 1617 or 1621 is unknown. Speaking of the matter and manner of this series of sermons, Reidy observes that: Nowhere does he better reveal versatility and ability in handling the same subject with great freshness each time he approached it than in this series. Of a truly lofty tone, these sermons penetrate deeply into the mystery of the Incarnation and into the nature of the virtue he considered most peculiar to it, humility. Free of querulousness, they are positive, restrained, heavily exegetical, and follow a rough pattern which is characteristically Andrean. An introductory section briefly reviews the chosen Scripture text, the division follows the natural divisions of the text, and the body of the sermon, adhering strictly to the division, discourses on the mystery. The mystery is considered in the light of a gift to man, while his reciprocal duty to God, specified to some extent ^■Careton to Chamberlain, 10 January 1618: "The bishop of Ely . . . hath been kept at home all this Christmas, and preached not at Court, being surprised by a sodain surfet of porke, that had almost carried him away. ..." McClure, II, p. 130, quoted in Paul A. Welsby, Lancelot Andrewes, 1555-1626 (London, 1958), p. 192. 56 57 according to a particular sermon's treatment of the Nativity, is ultimately, and in all but one instance, reduced to the reception of the Eucharist.2 Reidy also notes an underlying theme to the series aside from the theme of the birth of Christ. Central to these sermons, he observes, is the dual nature of Christ. The Nativity sermons concentrate, of course, on the fact of the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity and on the story of Christ's birth together with all its attendant circumstances: the shepherds, the angelic choirs, the coming of the Magi. Figuratively speaking, Andrewes keeps his eye on the two natures of Christ, never letting either completely out of sight. He plunges deep into the mystery to talk of the eternal generation of the Son of God, of His glory with God the Father in heaven, of His coeternity, coequality, and consubstantiality; of the union of the two natures in one Person, of the necessity for such a union, of the purpose for which, the Second Person became incarnate, and of man's consequent obligations, (p. 101) The arrangement of the series falls into six parts. Table 1, in tabular form, shows the disposition of the sermons. The text for the first Nativity sermon is Hebrews 2: 16 ("For, He in no .wise tooke the ANGELS: But, the seed of ABRAHAM Hee tooke."). As the first sermon 1 in this series, Andrewes establishes some of the basic concepts for the series, chief among these being the position of mankind in the Great Chain of Being and the idea of the Chosen People. Although angels are superior to man, they are not 2Maurice F. Reidy, S. J., Bishop Lancelot Andrewes, Jacobean Court Preacher (Chicago, 1955), p. 21. TABLE 1 DISPOSITION OF ANDREWES' NATIVITY SERMONS NO. Divisions and their subject Date of delivery Scriptural source Subject of each individual sermon 1 The fact of Incarnation 1605 Hebr. 2: 16 Christ took human, not angelic, nature. 2 1606 Isaiah 9: 6 The Christ Child is born to all men, together with His future titles. 3 1607 I Timothy 3: 16 An examination of Christ's entire career. 4 1609 Gal. 3: 45 Christ came at the proper time to adopt us. 5 1610 Luke 2: 10-11 The angels told the shepherds not to be afraid because Christ is born in Bethlehem. 6 1611 John 1: 14 Christ revealed the glory of God in human flesh. 7 Old Testament prophecies and their fulfillment 1612 Hebr. 1: 1-3 Christ, Who was prophesied, has come and has fulfilled the prophecies, and has returned to God the Father. 8 1613 John 8: 56 Abraham, who anticipated the coming of Christ, has seen Him and is glad. 9 1614 Isaiah 8: 14 A virgin shall conceive the Saviour, and she will name Him "God with us." 10 1615 Micah 5: 2 Christ will be born in Bethlehem Ephrata. 11 1616 Psalm 85: 10-11 At Christ's birth Mercy, Truth, Righteousness, and Peace will be united. 12 Angels' words 1618 Luke 2: 12-13 The angels told the shepherds where to look for Christ and then they praised Him. < ji co TABLE 1— Continued ;n o . Divisions and their subject Date of delivery Scriptural source Subject of each individual sermon 13 1619 Luke 2: 14 The examination of the angels' praise is continued. 14 The journey of the Magi 1620 Matthew 2: 1-2 The Wise Men journey to find Christ. 15 1622 Matthew 2: 1-2 The Wise Men ask: "Where is Jesus?" 16 The ultimate action of Christ 1623 Eph. Is 10 Christ will bring all things together in Himself at the proper time. 17 Hodie 1624 Psalm 2: 7 The Psalmist preached: "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." ■ in need of redemption, despite the fact of the apostate ! I angels. (Andrewes discusses why these angels cannot be redeemed in a later section.) Further, the good angels will not be jealous about God's having chosen to be made man because: (1) although they are superior, they are not like the elder brother in the parable of the prodigal son; and (2) they also served mankind by delivering the Annunciation and by singing the Gloria Excelsus to the Shepherds.3 Like the Trinity, which they symbolize, the angels have three distinguishing characteristics: (1) their quality or property is to be glorious; (2) their place of abode is in heaven; and (3) their durance or continuance is as immortal spirits (p. 2). In contrast, mankind, as represented by Abraham, has three qualities: (1) corrup tion; (2) rottenness; and (3) worms (p. 3). As Abraham puts it in Genesis 18: 27: "I am dust and ashes"; as Job phrases it, he is "Dicens putredini" (Job 17: 14). To delineate further our quality as contrasted with the angels, Andrewes uses a metaphor of metal casting. We are made up of an unclean substance, and our mold, the womb, is "vile base, filthy, and uncleane" (p. 3). Secondly, whereas the angels live in heaven, we live "... here ^Lancelot Andrewes, XCVI Sermons (London, 1635), p. 2. In this chapter all references noted parentheti cally will be to this edition. below, in the dust; inter pulices, & culices, tineas, j araneas, & vermes; Our place is here among fleas, and flies, moths and spiders, and crawling wormes" (p. 3). Thirdly, our durance is to be, as the Psalmist puts it, altogether lighter than vanity itself (Psalm 62: 9). Continuing the metal image in the light of this Psalm, Andrewes sees our being lighter than vanity as our weight; that if we are to be valued, then we are a thing of nought. Or as Isaiah expresses the thought: all flesh is grass, and the glory of it is as the flower of the field, to flourish from April to June (Isaiah 40: 6). These differ ences between angels and man being so distinct and dis parate, it is inconceivable that God should choose to become man. Paradoxically, because it is the nature of reason to choose the higher, it is "surely [a] matter of astonishment" and beyond reason that God chose to become incarnate (p. 4). Because this is beyond reason, Andrewes holds that this is cause for us to accept this deed with faith, echoing I Samuel 3: 18 (It is the Lord, let Him doe what seemeth good in His own eyes" (p. 4). In the second part of this sermon, Andrewes dis cusses the meaning of apprehendit and apprehendit semen. There are two parties and two actions in any act of apprehendit: ". . .a flight of the one, and a hot pursuit of the other" (p. 4) . Again, man is different from the angels. When some angels revolted against God, He did not chase them; but with man, He chased Adam and Eve after the fall, He sent the Prophets, and He sent Himself to ! i catch or to apprehend man. Not every 'taking,' he informs ; his audience, is suscipere or assumere; "But, manum injicere, arripere, apprehendere; to seaze upon it with great vehemency, to lay hold on it with both hands, as upon a thing, wee are glad we have got, and will be loth to let goe againe" (p. 4). Andrewes next carefully defines^ semen or seed. There is a difference between assuming the person of another and assuming the nature of something. The former is what actors do; they assume a role or a part. The latter means to become "... the very internall essence of [a] nature. . ." (p. 5).^ Further confirmation of this definition is found in Hebrews 2: 14 ("Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same. ..."). Using a legal metaphor, Andrewes notes that this apprehen sion once accomplished, cannot be broken again. For, in all other apprehensions, we may let goe, and lay downe, when we will; but, this, this taking on the seed, the nature of man, can never be put off. It ! is an assumption, without a deposition. One we are, He and we, and so we must be; One, as this Day, so for ; ever. (p. 5) ' v * Using the Divine apprehension as the archetype, Andrewes surveys other ectypal Biblical apprehensions; Abraham when 4See Richard Hooker, The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity (Oxford, 1836), 5: 52-53. I he rejected the Chaldean's idol worship, St. Paul on the i road to Damascus, St. Peter in an act of sin thereby suffering remorse, and all men whenever deflected from a sinful path and put in’ the right way (p. 5.). The chief purpose of God's becoming incarnate was to; destroy death, which could only be done if He would assume our mortality. The distinction drawn earlier between assuming a role and assuming a nature becomes important here: the former touches our love alone; the latter touches our danger. Andrewes likens God's saving action to being saved from drowning (St. Peter in Matthew 14: 31) and to being saved from burning (Lot and his daughers in . Genesis 19: 16). The latter allusion has topical significance for James I and his court, because Andrewes alludes to the Gunpowder Plot.^ The Bishop views Christ in a two-fold light as both a deliverer and a guide. He delivers man from the "power of death" and guides man "to Him, that hath power of life" (p. 6) . Why did Christ choose to deliver and guide 50f the Gunpowder Plot, Andrewes writes: "... even our temporall delivery, from the dangers, that daily compasse us about; even from this last, so great, and so fearfull, as the like was never imagined before; all have their ground, from this Great apprehension: are fruits of this Seed . . . that we . . . prof esse, we were by Him caught hold of, and so plucked out of it: And, but ■ for which Seed, factT essemus sicut Sodoma, We had beene even as Sodome, and perished in the fire; ancT"the powder thereTaid had even blowen up us all1 " fp. 6) . creatures who are lower than the angels? First, because man had a tempter, whereas the angels who fell did not (p. 6). Secondly, all men fell because of the transmis sion of original sin to all posterity; only some of the angels fell, and their falling did not corrupt the angelic nature as a whole (p. 6). Finally, because this was an opportunity for God to reveal His tender mercies (p. 7). The final section of the sermon proper is devoted to a multiple definition of "Abraham's seed." The first meaning involves a legal interpretation. Christ, who took upon Himself "Abrahams seed, must withall take on Him the signature of Abrahams Seed, and be, as He was circumcised" (p. 7). By being circumcised, He became ". . .a debtor, to keepe the whole law of God: which bond we had broken, and forfeited, and incurred the curse annexed, and were ready to be apprehended, and committed for it" (p. 7). To say that Christ took upon Himself Abraham's seed necessarily implies being born of a woman as well having become subject to the Law. There is therefore linguistic economy in this phrase. Secondly, "Abraham's seed," by extension, represents the entire Hebrew nation or people. They were the most "untoward" people, but were adopted by God, not because of any "... vertue of theirs, or for any pure naturals in them, that He tooke them to Him for they were, that way, the worst of the whole earth" (p. 7). Thirdly, by further extension, "Abraham's seed" means all :to whom God's word is directed and who must accept by an act of faith the salvation offered by God. This act of faith, with its consequent requirement that those who are chosen must themselves be conscious cooperators in the Divine salvific plan, are now co-workers w'ith the angels. Thus is resolved, through charity, the discrepency in order ' between men and angels postulated in the opening section of this sermon: ", . . the case is altered, now; and no more superiority, but all fellow servants" (p. 8). To conclude the sermon, Andrewes alludes to John 8: 56, in which Abraham saw the Nativity day from afar and rejoiced at it. So likewise should we on it, if we be His true seed. It brought forth a Benedictus, and a Magnificat, from the true seed of Abraham; If it doe not the like, from us, certainly it but floates in our braines; we but warble about it: But, we beleeve it not, and therefore, neither doe we rightly understand it. Sure I am, if the Angels had such a feast to keepe, if He had done the like for them, they would hold it with all joy and jubilee. (p. 8) Therefore, we should not merely understand what Christ's birth means to mankind, but we should also do God's will; we should live the life of charity. We should "... not onely thus to frame meditations and resolutions, but even some practice too, out of this act of apprehension" (p. 9). And what more fitting mutual apprehension but by participating in the Eucharist? Verily, it is the most streight and perfect taking hold that is. No union so Knitteth, as it. Not consan guinity; Brethren fall out: Not mariage [sic]; Man and wife are severed. But, that which is nourished, and the nourishment, wherewith, they never are, never can be severed; but remaine one for ever. With this Act then of mutual! taking, taking of His flesh, as He hath taken ours, let us seale our dutie to Him, this day, for taking not Angels, but the seed of ABRAHAM, (p. 9) The text for the second Nativity sermon is drawn i from Isaiah 9: 6 ("For, unto us a Childe is borne, and I unto us a Sonne is given; and the Government is upon His shoulder; and He shall call His name WONDERFULL, COUNSELLER; THE MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, THE PRINCE OF PEACE."). In this sermon, Andrewes makes a simple i division between Christ's birth and the benefits accruing thereby. The Bishop begins his analysis of the text by noting the prophetic contemporaneity of the passage: it seems to have been written at the time of the Nativity rather than six hundred years before. Such accurate foretelling, Andrewes comments, is a great comfort to Christians. In addition, it is a mutually exclusive prophecy, because in no other religion is there a prophecy about the coming of the true prophet. Taken together with all prophecies, i Christ is best thought of as a geometrical center towards Whom all prophecies point and from Whom all achieve their validity. "All are, as lines drawn from this center; all in Him, yea and Amen" (p. 11). Central to a proper understanding of Christ's identity is His dual nature. "To begin with the natures, of GOD and Man; They be super hanc petram; upon them lyeth the weight of all the rest; they are the two ' shoulders wheron this Government doth rest" (p. 11) . Andrewes draws a distinction between the Child considered as in humanis or "among men" and "in divinis, . from Heaven ( or the Son of God" (p. 11). Similarly, there is a difference between the former which is born, and the latter; which is given. The former, "That, which is borne, beginneth then (first) to have his being" (p. 11). The latter, "That, which is given presupposeth a former being; : for, be it must, that it may be given" (p. 11). Using a spatial figure drawn from Isaiah 7; 11, the Child is from beneath, from earth, and the Son derives from above, from heaven (p. 12). All along His life, you shall see these two. At His birth; A Cratch for the Childe; a Starre for the Sonne; A company of Shepheards viewing the Child; a Quire of Angels celebrating the Son. In his life; Hungry Himselfe, to shew the nature of the Child: yet feeding five thousand, to shew the power of the Sonne. ; At His death; dying on the Crosse, as the Son of j Adam; at the same time disposing of Paradise, as the Sonne of God, (p. 12) A dual nature is necessary for Christ to redeem mankind i from its sins. In the bearing of the burden of sin, the Child is incapable of sustaining such a weight; the Son ; could, but ought not (p. 12). Therefore, either alone would not serve; they must be joyned, Childe and Sonne. But that He was a Childe, He could not have suffered. But that He was a Sonne, He had sunke in His suffering, and not gone through with it. God had no Shoulders; Man had; but, too 68 weake, to susteine such a weight. Therefore, that He might by lyable, He was a Childe ; that He might be able, He was the Son: that He might be both, He was both. (p. 12) Andrewes continues his discussion of Christ's dual nature by noting that the cause of our ruin came from man's desire to be self-elevated into the Word, to be as wise by eating the forbidden fruit as the Word Himself. It is therefore fitting that the Word assume our fleshly nature: ". . . that so, our ruine repaired" (p. 12). Because we desired knowledge, so is it appropriate that a person of knowledge should redeem us; hence, the title 'Counsellor.' Christ is also called 'Emmanuel,' "... not Elimanu; not Deus Nobiscum; but, Nobiscum Deus" (p. 12). This name shows that we have been given proper pride of position before God (Child, then Son) to show "... how deare He holdeth us, that He preferreth, and setteth us before Him selfe. . (p. 12). Christ corrected the division between justice and power: had He been a man only, He would have lacked the shoulder of power; had He been God only, He would have lacked the shoulder of justice. Mankind, having given in to sin, lacks the power proper to the Godhead; God, not being incarnate, could not satisfy the demands of justice. But Christ, being both God and man, can carry the government of mankind of His two ' shoulders or natures. By combining justice and power in a life of charity towards man, He becomes properly the 69 Prince of Peace. Christ's office was to bear the government of the world upon His shoulders, which bearing signifies both the responsibility and the burden. There seems to be a contradiction here. Because wisdom governs, and because the seat of wisdom is in the head, in what sense is it accurate to hold that Christ's shoulders bear the govern ment of the world? It is so because the shoulders are used to bear heavy burdens, and government is a heavy burden. Christ, though, is unlike other governors for two reasons: (1) He suffered our faults as well as the burden of the Law, together with the punishment due us by the Law, unlike other governors who let others bear the nation's faults; and (2) He took upon Himself all our burdens; He did not delegate this responsibility to others. The benefit of Christ's Nativity is likewise two fold: (1) what it means to us, and (2) what we are to do. Christ's Incarnation was for the sake of all mankind. For the Jews He was exclusive; for all men He was inclusive. That he was for all men is seen in His name. The angel told the shepherds that joy should be for all people. . . . Not the people of the Iewes; or the people of the Gentiles; but simply to all people. His name is IESUS CHRIST,~~halfe Hebrew, ""Hal fe Greeke: Iesus Hebrew; Christ, Greeke: So sorted, of purpose, to shew, Iewes and Greekes have equall interest in Him. (pp. 14-15) That Christ is given to all men and is born of our nature I Andrewes interprets in an extended legal metaphor. We I i should meditate upon His dual nature, "... for, thereby, : our tenure and interest groweth" (p. 15). We have in common with Him His humanity; His divinity is not ours by right; but is conveyed to us "by a deed of gift" (p. 15) . By His dual nature, we become the 1 1 he ires of promise" (p. 15) . This being so, we should render tanks by: (1) |singing with Zacharias a Benedictus to the Father; (2) singing the Magnificat with Mary; and (3) singing with the angelic choir the Gloria in excelsis, "To the Prince with His government on his shoulders" (p. 15) . Secondly, we should use Him for the ends for which He was given to us. First, we should use Him as an example to follow with humility. Secondly, because He was a ransom for our sins who purchased through His obedience even unto death the Kingdom of heaven for us, we should offer ourselves to Him while receiving the Eucharist. Thirdly, as He gave Himself to us as the living bread from heaven, so should we unite with Him in the Holy Sacrifice. Finally, we should remember that He came as a foretaste of an eternal union in; heaven. Andrewes closes the sermon with an apt joining of the First and Second Comings of Christ. At His first comming, you see, what He had on His shoulders. At His second, He shall not come emptie, Ecce penTo, & c. Loe I come, and my reward with me; that is, a Kingdome on His shoulders. And it is no light matter; but . . . an. everlasting weight of Glory. Glory, not (like ours here)" Teather-glory; But, true; that hath weight, and substance in it: And that not transitory, and soone gone; but everlasting, to continue to all eternity, never to have end. This is our state in expectancie. Saint Augustine put all foure together, so wil1 I, and conclude: Se^uamur iexemplum; offeramus 2pretium; sumamus 3viaticum; expectemus 4praemium: let us follow Him for our paterne, offer Him for our price, receive Him for our sacramentall food, and wait forHim as our endlesse and exceeding great reward, & c. (p. 16) The text for the third Nativity sermon is drawn from I Timothy 3: 16 ("And without great controversie, great is the Mysterie of Godlinesse, which is, GOD is manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seene of Angels, preached unto the Gentiles, beleeved on in the world, and received up in glorie."). Despite the synoptic nature of this text, Andrewes1 central purpose is to define the nature of a mystery and how Christ's Nativity is a mystery. Andrewes first draws a distinction between a mystery and a story. His approach is interesting, because he does not see the differentia between the two lodging in the fictionality of the one and the truth of the other, but rather the distinction lies in the receiver. The one, the story, does not require that the hearer be holy and virtuous; the other, the mystery, requires holiness and moral probity. As he phrases it using synecdoche: ". . .a man may heare a Story, and never wash his hands; but a Mysterie requireth both the hands and heart to be i cleane, that shall deale with it" (p. 17). The former is secular, the latter is religious in its mode of appre hension. Having made this basic distinction, Andrewes next delineates degrees of mysteries. In the first place, a mystery is a matter of knowledge, and as such it appeals to the truth that Aristotle expresses in the beginning of his Metaphysics: that all men "... even by nature, love to be knowing. . ." (p. 17). Andrewes sees this natural bent towards inquisitiveness as a tendency which is not necessarily good, for since fall of man, Eve's children have a desire to eat of the tree of knowledge. But not any knowledge is desired: Not, such things as every one knoweth, that goeth by the way; vulgar, and trivialli Tush, those are nothing. But, metayhysickes, that are the Arcana of Philosophie; Mysteries, tha“ t are the Secrets of Divinitie; sucn, as few besides are admitted to: Those be the things we desire to know. (p. 17) Second, just as each art and trade has its secrets, so also does religion: there are mysteries of godliness; there are even mysteries of Satan or profunda Satanae. Third, there are great mysteries. Well aware of the ambiguity of words, Andrewes carefully delineates three senses of 'great': (1) something is great in the physical realm if it is large; (2) something is great qualitatively if it is more precious than other things; and (3) a mystery is great if it is major, if it has other mysteries which ; are implied or dependent upon it. Finally, the most important religious mysteries are plain and without con troversy. Such a mystery is the one mentioned in the text,; that in Jesus God was manifested in our flesh; that God has become incarnate in Christ. This mystery is therefore a great mystery without controversy. What makes it great is that God had the chief part in it. Prior to the Incarnation, the Jews came to understand through revelation that power, wisdom, and providence were qualities of the Godhead; but to see God manifested was mystery that only God Himself could accomplish. Second, God's self-manifestation is a great mystery because of an inherent paradox. Isaiah (45: 15) affirms the hidden mysterious quality of God when he states! that "Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, 0 God of Israel the Saviour." Yet ". . .a hidden God our nature did not endure. . . . Mysticall, invisible Gods we cannot skill of. This we would have; God is to be manifested. Why then, God is manifested" (p. 19). God is, by His preeminence, far beyond the comprehension of any created being, yet He must be manifested in order that we may see what He is like. Third, any manifestation of God is a disparagement, and to be manifested in our flesh is a mystery of the highest order and surprise. What say you to flesh? is it meet GOD be manifested therein? Without Controversie it is not. Why, what is flesh? It is no Mysterie to tell what it is; It is dust. ... It is grasse. .. . It is corruption, not corruptible , but even corruption it selfe. . 7~. There being then ... so great a gulfe, so huge a space/ so infinite a distance betweene those two, betweene GOD, and dust; GOD, and Hay; GOD, and Corrup tion; as no comming of one at the other. . . . (p. 19) As in the first sermon, Andrewes uses a metaphor drawn firom metalurgy to show this disparagement. If gold, he I argues, when it is mixed with silver is thereby abased, ". . . what if it be mixed with, the rust of Iron or drosse of Leade" (p. 20)? Following St. Augustine, Andrewes succinctly concludes: "God: what more glorious? flesh: what more base? Then, GOD In the flesh; what more mar vellous" (p. 49)? It is bad enough for God to disparage Himself by becoming human, but notice, Andrewes reminds his audience, that He became the lowest of the low. When born, he was found "In clouts, in a stable, in a manger" (p. 20). Andrewes dwells upon the paradoxical diminishment of God: "The GOD, whom the heavens, and the heaven of heavens cannot containe, in a little Childs flesh not a spanne long. . ." (p. 20). Following the synoptic lead of St. Paul, the Bishop compresses the Nativity and the Passion into a single sentence: To day, in the flesh of a poore Babe crying in the Cratch, in medio animalium: After,, in the rent and torn flesE of a condemned person, hanging on the Crosse, in medio iatronum, in the midst of other manner persons, than Moses and Elias. . . . ( p . ' 20) The consequences of this shameful manifestation are that God became man, He was not a shadowy illusion, and that He has thereby forever grafted Himself to us. God's motive was to save mankind? He revealed concretely His all- encompassing love towards mankind. Indeed, the heart of this mystery is to see God's humility combined with His great love (p. 21). Since the Incarnation, it is no longer true that all flesh shall come to a God in heaven, but to Christ, the Incarnate God Who lived on this earth. Andrewes' concluding section is practical: he discusses how the faithful can annex or incorporate them selves into this great mystery. It is not enough merely to hear the sermon? each person, in order to share in the benefits of the mystery, must enter into companionship with Christ. Andrewes draws a clear distinction between a ceremony and a mystery. "A Ceremonie represents and signifies? but, workes nothing: A Mysterie doth both" (pp. 21-22) . As every effect participates in its cause, so also does participation in the mystery of godliness cause or beget holiness or godliness in the participant (p. 22) . The effects of the mystery of godliness are both internal and external. Internally, mystical or spiritual experience is the result. But Andrewes reminds his listeners that the text stated that the mystery was manifested. Therefore, pietism or mystical experience is not enough, there must be acts of love from us towards others. Humorously, he notes that "... in our godlinesse, now adayes, we goe very mystically to worke indeed? we keepe it under a veile? and ; nothing manifest, but opera Carnis" (p. 22) . He continues j i his humor by noting that "... if Faith worke by Love, the Mysterie will be so manifest in us, as we shall need noi prospective glasses, or other optique instruments, to make j it visible; all men shall take notice of it" (p. 22). But to participate in the mystery of godliness, we must be : initiated into it. Andrewes closes this sermon by remind- i ing his audience that the Holy Eucharist is both the mode i of initiation as well as the mode of communication between God and man. Paradoxically, it is 1 1 . . . the Dispensation of a Mysterie, with the Mysterie of Dispensation. It doth manifestly represent; it doth mystically impart, what it representeth" (p. 22) . It is a manifestation of Christ; it! likewise allows us to communicate with God. It is an initiatory vehicle in another sense as well, for by it we are directed towards the ultimate communication with God ini heaven (p. 23). . The text for the fourth Nativity sermon is drawn from Galatians 4: 4-5 ("When the fulnesse of time was come,: God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law. That, He might redeeme them that were under the Law, that we might receive the Adoption of Sons."). Although in it Andrewes discusses the concepts of the relationship between Christ and man and Divine Law, redemption, and adoption, the chief theme is that of plenitude and its relationship to time or temporality. He singles out the day of this 77! ! ! sermon's delivery, Christmas Day, as an example of the ; "yearely representation of the fulnesse of time" (p. 23). Andrewes sees a dual action stated and implied in 1 this sermon: that God sends us His fullness, grace without! end or satiety, in the Person of His Son? and that we, in return, should give back to God the duty towards Him proper to us. There are, in this text, seven sorts of fullness: the first five concern God; the last two affect us. (1) God sent? (2) He sent His Son; (3) His Son who was made? (4) He was made of a woman? and (5) He was made under the Law. (6) By this sending, we are redeemed? and (7) we are translated into adopted children of God. "All which we may reduce to a double fulnesse. Gods, as much as He can send. Ours, as much as we can desire" (p. 24). The Incarnation quickens the intercourse and interchange between God and man. That, as it is the time [the Nativity season], when we from GOD, receive the fulnesse of His Bounty: so it might be the time also, when He from us, may likewise receive the fulnesse of our Dutie. The time of His bounty-fulnesse, ancT the time, of our Thankfulnesse: That it may be Plenitudo temporis, qua ad ilium, qua ad nos? downeward, and upward? from Him to us, and from; us to Him againe: and so be, both waies, The fulnesse oF time. (24). But before discussing the seven sorts of fullness relevant to,the text, Andrewes discusses the meaning of the initial relative clause "When in the fulness of time." He first argues that there is such a thing as fullness of time. God created all things according to measure including time. Fullness of time occurs when time has ! reached its measure, when it is filled to capacity. Andrewes here seems to hold an Aristotelian notion of time : as a process oriented towards its term or end; that time is qualitative as well as quantitative; that time also has an entelechy. Secondly, as it follows from the process of becoming just discussed, time reaches its fulfillment by degrees rather than all at once or always. In this light, time is therefore natural in that it exhibits a development from beginning to maturity, and from maturity to decline and end. Thirdly, time, although it is natural, is direc ted, as are all things, by God. When 'when' comes depends upon God's judgment, and it comes when He sends it because "Of it selfe, time is but an emptie measure, hath nothing in it. . ." (p. 25). Finally, "That which filleth time, is some memorable thing of Gods powring into it, or . . . of His sending, to fill it withall" (p. 25). The Incarna tion of His Son was the apogee of time. That this is correct is demonstrated: first, by citations from Colossians 2: 9, John 3: 34, John 1: 14, and John 1: 16, citations which assert the complete indwelling of the Godhead in Christ; second, by the prophetic statements made in the Old Testament, all of which were "shadows, and figures" (p. 25); and third, by analogy with human life: with Moses and the Prophets men had only their alphabet; we were "Children in their minority, little (differing from servants" (p. 25). Why God chose this point; ” ~ t in time for its fulfillment can never be known by us; it is up to God and His divine wisdom. Andrewes puns with this agnostic point: "This is for us to know, that with His appointment, we must come to a full point" (p. 26). Then Andrewes moves into the central point of this sermon, the consideration of the seven degrees or aspects of the text. The first degree is Miset Deus, God sent. He interprets this with a metaphor drawn from court relationships, in which we petitioned God for aid and He responded by sending us His Son for the redress of our faults and grievances (p. 26). Second, Misit Filium, in which God ". . .In sending Him, He sent the greatest, the best, the fullest thing He had" (p. 26). Such a gift reveals the fullest expression of God's love towards sinful humanity. The chief metaphor of this section is a sick ness-healing one: God sent His Son in order to relieve us of the burden of sin. Third, Filium factum, His Son was made. This making is a disparagement of His perfect uncreated divine nature, for "To make Him any thing, is to marre Him, be it what it will be" (p. 26). This disparage ment, when considered with the dual nature of Christ's Person, leads to several paradoxes. "The fulnesse of time is His emptinesse; The exalting of that, his abasing" (p. 27). And "... this very . . . emptying Himselfe, for our sake, is a pressing downe the measure: and so, even by that, still the measure is more full" (p. 27). Christ's! submitting Himself to the order of becoming or making leads to the next two considerations. Fourth, He was made of a woman. Andrewes argues that Christ should, in the order of excellence of created beings, have been made of an angel, because they are the highest creatures, yet He chose instead to be made of a woman. "In this then was the fulnesse of His Love, as before of His Fathers, that He would be made, and was made, not what was fittest for Him, but what was best for U£: not, what was most for His ; glory, but what was most for our benefit and behoofe" (p. 27). Not only did Christ not abhor the Virgin's womb, but He was made of her very seed. He did not pass 1 1 . . . thorow her, as water throw a Conduit Pipe," but combined His divine nature with her human nature to become God made flesh (p. 27). Just as God could say "This day have I begotten thee," so also could Mary say "Thou art my Sonne, this day have I brought thee into the world" (p. 27). Fifth, Christ was made under the Law in an; attempt to be as close as possible to all men. The dominant metaphor in this section is drawn from the uni verse of debts. We were debtors because of original sin, and thereby we had forfeited our bond. Christ, however, ". . . entred bond anew, tooke on Him, not onely our iNature, but our Debt; our Nature, and Condition both" (p. 28). Christ's official act of being made under the Law 81 was His submitting to circumcision. At His Circumcision then, He entred Bond anew with us; and in signe that so He did, He shed then a few drops of His bloud, whereby He signed the Bond (as it were) and gave those few drops then < . . . as a pledge or earnest, that when the fulnesse of time came, He would be readie to shed all the rest, as He did. (p. 28) This debt, Andrewes emphasizes, is not merely a monetary one; rather, it is a capital debt, and the debt of a capital law is death. Christ discharged this debt on the Cross, "So that upon the matter, factus sub lege, and factus in Cruce, come both to one; one amounts to as much as the other" (p. 28). In addition, Christ, through His perfect obedience to the requirements of the Law during His life, satisfied the principal of the debt; therefore, He should not have been liable to the forfeiture and penalty of the bond, yet He chose to lose the pledge of His life for our adoption and redemption. Sixth, redemption, seen within the frame of the preceding metaphor, is "a second buying, or buying backe of a thing, before aliened or sold" (p. 29). The original selling was occasioned by Adam's sin, and when discussing this grave subject, Andrewes cannot resist making a pun: "A kinde of aliena tion had formerly beene, whereby we had made away our selves (for, a sale I cannot call it, it was for such a trifle:) Our Nature aliened in Adam, for the forbidden fruit;<a matter of no moment" (p. 29). To relieve us from our execution, Christ could not merely plead for us after I 821 ;the manner of a barrister; rather, He had to substitute ! Himself for us. Seventh, although Christ through His ! Passion had saved us from death, still, we were not members of God' s estate until He caused us to ". . . bee translated into the estate of Children Adopted" (p. 30) . This adoption marks the fullest degree of action: it is impossible to go beyond this act. Turning to our duty to God in consideration of the preceding seven points, Andrewes centers upon Eucharistic participation as the best means of fulfilling our duty. Because Christ has acted for us, we should joyfully receive the Blessed Sacrament, with "Our mindes, first, and then our mouthes, to be filled with blessing, and praise, and thanks to Him, that hath made our times not to fall into those emptie ages of the world, but to fall within this fulnesse of time. . ." (p. 31). Finally, taking the Elements completes the legal process of redemption and adoption for us. By participating in this sign of the fulness of time, we will be led by grace to the "fulnesse of eternity, when time shall be run out, and his glasse emptie . . ."at the Second Coming (p. 32). After the Apocalypse, we shall be with God in heaven where ". . . the. measure shall be so full, as it cannot enter into us, we cannot hold it: We must enter into it Infra' in gaudium Domini tui" (p. 32). Luke 2: 10-11 is the text for the fifth Nativity ! 83! sermon ("The Angell said-unto them, Be no afraid, for behold, I bring you good tydings, of great joy, which shall! be to all people. That, there is borne, unto you, this day' a SAVIOUR, which is CHRIST, the LORD, in the Citie of David."). Andrewes begins by noting the propriety of the angel in telling the assembled shepherds of Christ's birth, because it is ". . . well agreed, to tell Shepheards of the yearning of a strange Lambe: such a Lambe, as should take away the sins of the world. ... Or (if ye will) to tell Shepheards, of the birth of a Shepheard; Ezekiels Shepheard. . ." (pp. 33-34). Also the manner of delivery is important, and as Andrewes is delivering a sermon, so also did the angel. That the shepherds were afraid, Andrewes interprets as a sign of our fallen nature rather than that of guilt (p. 35). (A third alternative reason might be that, since angels do not regularly appear to people, that the shepherds might simply be afraid of him without considera tions of guilt or sinfulness!) Andrewes interprets this fear as a characteristic response: Zachary and Mary were also afraid when encountered by an angel. A second interpretation of the shepherds' fear is that it is a sign that relations between heaven and earth are infirm and disjointed, that we fear (i.e., expect evil from) any heavenly message. Yet, the angel announces that he brings good tidings, not news of good hope only, but of joy; indeed, great joy. This joy is not be restricted to the shepherds alone, but is for all men. Andrewes sees the iplace of Christ's birth (the inn) as indicative of this scope, for an inn is "open to all Passengers that will take it up. . .1 1 (p. 36). Not only is Christ to be found in an inn, but also in the most common place in it. "And as the Place publike, so is the Benefit, and so is the Ioy publike of His Birth; Christmas ioy right? All fare better for this day" (p. 36). Andrewes develops further implications of the place of Christ's birth: in an inn all who stay there enjoy the house's feast? likewise, at the. end of Christ's iife He will initiate the Sacrament of Eucharist: certainly this is a careful and subtle way of foreshadowing the close of this sermon. He then continues the image of Christ as the center of a circle towards which all lines necessarily point, an image he introduced in the second Nativity sermon. Here Andrewes affirms that "... all recapitulate in Himselfe, and from Him as a Center, lines of joy drawne to all, and every part of the Circle" (p. 37). The final implication of this Gospel is that the joy will extend to all people in all times. As long as people shall have feasts, this day will be a feast of joy through all ages. Andrewes uses an image of lights to illuminate the relationship between past Old Testament anticipations and this announcement. They were beacons 85 that continued, much as an Olympic torch is passed from hand to hand, to this "Ecce hatus est' hodie ..." the last and highest beacon (p. 37) . The cause of this great joy is the birth of the Christ Child. To discuss the nature of Christ, Andrewes makes a three-fold analysis. First, He is a Saviour. Simply put, "There is joy in the name of a Saviour" (p. 38). And Christ has come to save our bodies and souls from sin. Second, He is called Christ. There are many saviours reported in the Old Testament: Moses, who saved the Jews from the Egyptians; Joshua, the deliverer from the Canaanites; Jephtha, deliverer from the Ammonites; Gideon, deliverer from the Madianites; and Samson, who saved the Jews from the Philistines. "And indeed, the whole story of the Bible is nothing else, but a Calendar of Saviours; that GOD from time to time still stirred them up" (p. 39) . The word "Christ1 itself means three acts: (1) Purgare, the office of priests to purge or expiate sin; (2) Illuminae, the office of prophets to illuminate or direct; and (3) Persicere, the office of kings, to establish order (p. 39) . In the Old Testament, three anointed figures represent separately these three offices which were unified in Christ: Aaron, the Priest; Elisha, the Prophet; and Saul, the King (p. 39) . In the Saviour which is Christ, His [God's] will was, all should meet, that nothing in Him might want, to the perfecting of this worke. That He might be a perfect Saviour of all, He was all. "Tp. 39) Andrewes sees five causes of joy in the name 'Christ1: (1) we no longer have to wait for the Christ to appear; (2) He is now a Saviour to Whom all may come; (3) He : brings the consent and good-will of the Trinity to effect man's salvation; (4) that He will save by oil (that is, by virtue of having been annointed) rather than vinegar; and (5) that we will be saved by the oil of gladness. Third, this Christ, unlike the preceding christs, is the Lord. Previous christs could save the body only; Jesus the body and soul. Previous christs could save from wordly calamities only, they "... could but prune and take off the twigs (as it were:), He, from sin it self, and so plucketh it up by the roots" (p. 41). The former christs could grant men only a temporary salvation; Christ grants eternal salvation. Finally, all previous saviours needed a Saviour themselves, ". . . and of this Saviour: He needs none, receives of none, imparts to all; as being not a Saviour only, but . . . Salvation it selfe. . ." (p. 41).: Christ being the Saviour Who has brought mankind the great joy of salvation, Andrewes leads directly into his final section, the bidding to Jiis congregation to hear the message of salvation and to receive Christ in the Holy Eucharist. This Sacrament is both a pledge of eternal salvation and is, in one of his most striking metaphysical 871 ; I conceits, . .as Conduit-pipes [i.e., the Body and Blood! I of Christ] to conveigh into us, this, and all the other benefits, that come by this our Saviour" (p. 43). Spiritually placing his congregation under the original shepherds, Andrewes asks his audience to honor the announcement of good news by praising God and by accepting faithfully the Eucharistic pledge of salvation. John 1: 14 provides the text for the sixth Nativity sermon ("And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us (and we saw the Glorie thereof, as the Glory of the Onely begotten SONNE of the FATHER) full of Grace and Truth."). This sermon, the last of the first set in this series, has : as its central theme the revelation of the Trinity to mankind. Having discussed the relationship of the several orders of being and the nature of time in previous sermons, Andrewes completes his initial section in this sermon by emphasizing the divine nature of Christ. Andrewes begins by analyzing the appropriateness of the eagle image in Revelation 4: 6-7 as a fit image for Christ Himself as well as for the fourth Gospel. Christ in heaven is represented by tfre apogee of the eagle's flight, for ". . .no fowle under heaven towreth so high," and as such, Christ in His divinity is far above all other prophets; the Incarnation of Christ is represented by the swift descent of the eagle: "None so soone or so suddenly ;downe upon the bodie, as he" (p. 44). j It was St. John's particular virtue to have seen the glory of the Word made flesh. As is Andrewes' custom, he subjects the word 'Word' to a process of multiple definition. First, Christ was foretold by the Old Testament prophets, and His Incarnation makes their words jobjective. Second, Christ in His "effective” ministry reveals to us God's counsel of His words. Third, I". . . He commeth, not onely as IESUS, to save us; but, as the Word, to teach us: We, as to honour Him; so learne His Word, as the way to our Salvation. So, the word, Praeceptive" (p. 45) . Fourth, as the utterance or Word of the Gather, Christ, in His proceeding, ". . . is, to the Father; so is the Word to the Minde. The Son, Proles Parentis; the Word, Proles mentis: They proceed, both: the Sonne, from the Father; the Word from the minde. . ." (p. 45) . Similarly, Andrewes analyzes the implications of "made flesh." In the first place, Christ's having assumed our manhood signifies that because He took the lowest part : of the human compositum, that the spirit, the highest part, ; was necessarily included. Second, that Christ became flesh is cause for great hope, as it was with the flesh that Eve's transgression began. Third, by specialization, if John had stated that Christ had become man alone, then this might have been interpreted to mean that Christ took our ; person rather than our nature. "He tooke no Person, but our Nature He' tooke; flesh, is no Person, but Nature onely; and so best expresseth it” (p. 46). Finally, in Hebrew the same word for ’flesh’ also means ’good things' or 'gospel1; therefore, that Christ was made flesh signifies ". . . good newes for the whole world" (p. 46) . Having brooded upon 'flesh,' Andrewes next considers the conjunction of the verb and noun. That verbum caro are joined is a great remedy to our condition, because Caro Verbum "was our bane" (p. 46). That Christ became flesh means that God has actively brought about divine recon ciliation between divine perfection and human sinfulness. It is also appropriate that Christ repair the ruin occasioned to man's nature: ". . .He that first made them [all things], should restore them; He that built, repaire; So is best, ever" (p. 46). There is also a matter of justice involved: because it was flesh that led to our first transgression, therefore, the suffering of a perfect and sinless person will satisfy the demands of justice. In discussing Factum est caro, the Bishop is both orthodox and Aristotelian in his approach. Following Aristotle's idea that the end of making is being, Andrewes turns a witty phrase as he states that ". . . nativitie is the way to nature" (p. 47). To be made flesh, Christ had to have a true body. Using alliterative wit, he mocks this heretical view: ". . .as if, factum had beene 90 ] ! fictum, or making were mocking" (p. 47). The view of j Cerinthus that the Word was converted into flesh, and that j of Valentinus that flesh was converted into the Word are both incorrect, because "... the Deitie cannot be changed into any thing; nor any thing, into it" (p. 47). The Nestorian view that the Divine and human natures of Christ existed in tandem without any union, that when Christ suffered on the Cross, His flesh suffered while His detached Word "stood by and looked on," is likewise false, for such a view is ". . . cum carne, not caro; made with flesh, not flesh. . ." (p. 47). No, the correct view is expressed in the word assumendo, that Christ assumed the flesh or seed of Abraham; He was made flesh. To explain his meaning, the Bishop uses two analogies drawn from human experience. The first is drawn from human speech. When we speak, our thoughts are made vocal by articulating air. The thought is still a thought, yet it is made manifest materially. "The inward motion of the minde taketh unto it a naturall body of ayre, and so becometh vocall; It is not changed into it, the Word remaineth still, as it was; yet they two become one voice" (p. 47). The second analogy is drawn from the hylomorphic constitution of man, the idea that man is composed of two parts, the soul and the body. In the human compositurn, both are distinct in nature, yet both "grow into one man. . ." (p. 47). From these two analogies, Andrewes concludes that "So, into the I God-head, was the man-hood taken; the Natures preserved, without confusion; the Person entire, without division1 1 (p. 47). As support for this assumptionist conclusion, the! Bishop cites the formula enunciated at the Council of Chalcedon: He was so made flesh, that He ceased not to be the Word; never changing that He was, but taking that He was not: We were the better, He was never the worse; the Mystery of Godlinesse was no detriment to the God-head, nor the honour of the Creature wrong to the CREATOR, (p. 47) To conclude his discussion of 'made flesh,' Andrewes dwells upon the paradoxical nature of the Incarnate Word as a mute child in a passage T. S. Eliot would use in Ash- Wednesday.6 What, Verbum Infans, the Word an Infant? The Word, and; not able to speake a word? How evill agreeth this? This He put up. How borne, how entertained? In a stately Palace, Cradle of Ivory, Robes of estate? No: but a stable for His Palace; a manger for His Cradle; poore clouts for His array. This was His beginning. (p. 487 “ Christ's end reveals the suffering to which His having become flesh led Him. Cujus livore sanati; blacke and blew; bloudy and swolne; rent and torne; the thornes, and nayles sticking in His flesh: And such flesh He was made. (p. 48) Although Andrewes discusses the friendly nature of Christ towards mankind in his discussion of Habitavit or :'and dwelt,' of particular interest in this section in his 6T. S. Eliot, "Ash Wednesday," in The' Complete Poems and Plays (New York, 1962), Sec. V, 11,1-9-*;. 92 : discussion of Christ as the warrior against sin. His dwelling with us is likened to a warrior's setting up his tent or pavillion in the middle of the camp. His Circum- ! cision is seen as a military initiation ceremony; His Passion is the grand battle with the enemy. Although He died in battle, He was resurrected, and this victory over sin led to our captivity being led captive. Andrewes next turns to an analysis of the second half of the verse, beginning with the affidavit, Vidimus, we saw. The first object of sight was synoptic: we, knowing the course and end of Christ's earthly life, see in the Nativity, as in a theatrical metaphor, "... inten- tively, all the acts and scenes of His life" (p. 49). Second, we see God's glory rather than the Eternal Word. Using the pun-image of Son-sun, he notes that "Thorow the veile of his flesh, such beames He cast, as behind those clouds, they might know, there was a Sun. . ." (p. 49). Third, we see Truth. Glory, as was the case with the angel and the shepherds, terrifies man, it holds us aloof; grace is more delectable, it draws us to it. This is altogether fitting, for because human nature was without redeeming grace, God, through His Son, brings us into a state of grace again. And grace brings us to Truth. Glory also mollifies the severity of the Law. "The Law full of rigour, many threats, and curses in it: Christ bringeth the word of Grace, opposeth to that" (p. 50). Finally, though the Virgin Mary and St. Stephen are described as i t | being full of grace, yet their grace is limited and measured. Bfeing. infinite, though, God's grace is limit less: His grace is likened to a limitless fountain. "Our case is to be, to make our selves fit Vessels, and there is all" (p. 51). (This vessel and water image, here introduced, will play an important part in Andrewes' concluding section.) There are three consequences of Christ's having been made flesh: (1) before Christ, all men fled from God; now we can readily approach Him; (2) God will now not allow us to perish, but will repair our ruins; and (3) flesh and blood can now inherit God's Kingdom through adoption. Such momentous conclusions demand a response from us. We are first to preserve and cleanse our flesh; we are to attain higher levels of moral behavior. We are, secondly, to incarnate in our own lives the words (Holy Writ) that we hear; we are to ". . . turne the vocall Word into a reall Worke" (p. 52). We are, thirdly, to let the Word, through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, find a habitation in ourselves. We are, finally, ". . .to draw [continuing the water image introduced earlier] from Him that, whereof He hath such plenty, grace and truth" (p. 52). We should not compartmentalize the spoken Word (the Bible) and Himself, but rather receive Him in His Sacrament. Continuing the conduit pipes image continued in the fifth Nativity sermon, Andrewes sees the Eucharist as a direct means of filling us with God's grace and truth. By receiving the Eucharist, we partake of these the Conduit pipes of His Grace, and scales of His Truth unto us. Grace and Truth (now) proceeding not from the Word alone, but even from the flesh thereunto united; the fountaine of the Word flowing into the cisterne of His flesh, and from thence de riving downe, to us, this Grace and Truth, to them that partake Him aright, (p. 52) We should, Andrewes concludes, receive the Eucharist, that the joining of Word and flesh accomplished at the Nativity might replenish us with God's Grace and Truth: ". . . Grace, to enable us; Truth, to guide us, to the hope of glory” (p. 52). The function of the seventh Nativity sermon is to introduce and discuss the relationship between Old Testament prophecies of Christ and descriptions of God's nature and to show how Christ fulfilled the prophesies according to this divine nature. The text is drawn from Hebrews 1: 1-3 ("At sundrie times and in diverse manners, God spake in the old time to our Fathers, by the Prophets: In these last dayes, He hath spoken to us by His Sonne, whom He hath made heire of all things; by whom also He made the worlds; Who being the brightnesse of His glory, and the ingraved forme of His Person, and bearing up all things by his mighty word, hath by Himselfe purged our sins, and sitteth at the right hand of the Majestie in the highest places."). Central to his discussion of the Old Testament I prophecies is the idea of economy: that Christians can I know in a matter of hours what the Jews before Christ learned piecemeal over a period of centuries. At different times God allowed His prophets to reveal that a Saviour ; would be born of a particular nation, trive, and of a particular family.. The prophets also revealed Christ's several offices as prophet, priest, King, and as "Iehova" (p. 54) . Finally, the prophets foretold the time and place of Christ's birth. These prophecies were also delivered by several means: (1) as "dreames in the night" (Job 33); (2) by visions to the outward sense (Isaiah 6) , as well as to the inner sense (Daniel 10) ; (3) by "Vrim, in the brest of your Priest"; (4) by the still small voice (I Kings 19); (5) by an angel (Zachariah 1) ; (6) by the Holy Spirit; and (7) through the use of tropes or figures (as, for example, the Paschal lamb (Exodus 12) , the Scapegoat (Leviticus 16) , and the Red cow (Numbers 19)) . In addition, there is a radical difference between the earlier prophets and Christ Himself, for, despite the fact that the prophets were faithful servants, yet, they were still men only; Christ, as the Son of God, is God Himself as well as the Son of Man. Raising the question why God chose not to reveal Himself at the beginning of the Hebrew experience, Andrewes uses the metaphor of a prince's progress to answer the question. As a member of the audience, certainly James I was not displeased with the analogyI) A Decorum was to be kept, and some kind of corres pondence with State. That as, at the proceeding of a great Prince, before He Himself commeth in sight, many there be, that goe before Him, and those, of divers degrees; and at last, Himselfe doth appeare: So, this Prince, that Sits in the Throne, should not start out at the first, and-shew Himselfe; but be allowed His Traine of Patriarkes, and Prophets, to be His Anteambulones; and, in the fulnesse of time, Himselfe should come, with the fulness'e olT grace and truth, and establish one entire uniforme way, to continue for ever. (p. 55) Andrewes then contrasts the prophets and Christ in a larger consideration of the Jewish and Christian objects of belief. The Jews rested in the Mosaic Law, and the Law brings awareness of. guilt and imperfection; Christians believe in Christ Who brings us to the saving experience of God. Look for no more peeces, no phansie no more fashions; Consummaturn est, there are no more, to look for. He is the truth; and, he that hath found the truth, and seekes further, no remedie, he must needs finde a ly; he can find nothing else. To get us therefore to Christ; and never be got from Him; but, there, hold us. . . . ( p . ' 55) . The second' consideration of this sermon is the identification of God the Father with God the Son, and the Son's relationship to man. Using the two metaphors in the text, Andrewes discusses Christ as a piece of stamped metal and as the light of the world. Just as we know what the stamp looks like when we see the stamped piece, so also do we know about God the Father by examining His Son. The relationship between the Two is exact: "For, that, |is (ever) just equall [the stamp and the stamped piece]; j i . I neither bigger, nor lesser, than the type, or stampe, that | made it. . . . Why He that sees the Character, never de sires to see the stampe; if ye see the one, ye see the other. . ." (p. 57). About the consideration of Christ's ; i having revealed the Father's brightness, Andrewes jocularly, but seriously, notes that Christ was a good Son-sun: ". . .He was such a sonne, as did no way eclipse His Father's glory; but (as a beame) made it shine more bright" (p. 57). As for revealing Divine Truth, Christ, as the Word, is the source of all light or truth known by man: ". . .no cleere light of knowledge, nothing but mists and darknesse, but by Him. And, as the Character: no true soundnesse, or sound truth, but figures and flitting shadowes, without Him" (p. 57). Not only is Christ the Truth from which all human truths are derived, but He is also a loving God who became incarnate in order to bring man to His inheritance as Son of God, His Glory from the Father, and to His divine nature itself by the salvific action of His suffering and Resurrection. Drawing from the medical universe of discourse, Andrewes describes our sins as foul spots or humors which can only be removed by purging them from our system. Earlier, he had described Christ as a great prince on a progress, now he discusses the object of this progress: Christ came to visit us in our wretched estate much ". . . as if a great Prince should ; 98 : I goe into an Hospitall,, to visit and looke on a lothsome j ! i diseased creature" (p. 58). Continuing the medical metaphor, he notes that, unlike earthly physicians who ' stand beside a patient and prescribe medicines for him, Christ Himself not only compounded the medicine, but He made it from Himself; He made the medicine and was the medicine (pp. 58-59). The medicine was compounded from Lamb's blood? not from a vein, but from the very heart of the physician. By Him selfe, His owne selfe; and by Himselfe slaine: by His death, and by His bloud-shedding, and by no other meanes. . . . The Physitian slaine? and of His flesh and bloud, a receipt made, that the patient might recover! (p. 59) Quite expectedly, Andrewes asks his audience to receive the Eucharist that they might be purged of their ills and spots. The object of this purging is to bring us to God's eternal glory after the purging. He concludes the sermon by reminding his audience that they should honor Christ in : His three-fold identity as Prophet, Priest, and King. Continuing his analysis of the prophetic anticipa tion of Christ's Nativity as recounted in the Bible, Andrewes, in the eighth Nativity sermon, analyzes Christ's comment in John 8: 56 ("Your Father Abraham rejoyced, to see my Day: and he saw it and was joyous."). Abraham is singled out for commendation because he was an exemplary figure for both Christians and Jews. Christ's comment is significant for two reasons: (1) because Abraham rejoiced I at the Day, not just for Christ apart from His temporal ! i ; context, and (2) because his rejoicing was a means for ; Christ to reprove the Jews because, although they claimed to be Abraham's children, they did not rejoice upon the Day. Andrewes phrases the polarity in a balanced sentence: "They, Iewes; but, not Abraham1s Children: Wee, Abrahams Children; but not Iewes" (p. 63). There are Andrewes : notes, three stages to the experience of joy: "I Desire first, that, is the way, to see. 2 Seeing next; that, brings Ioy. 3 And Ioy is the end; and, a good end it is, to end in Ioy" (p. 64). A distinction must be drawn between the two natures of Christ when explaining the meaning of "My Day." Clearly, the phrase does not apply to Christ as the Eternal Son of God, because the eternal order is above the natural temporal order. Yet, because we can only see God the Son through our mortal eyes, ". . .He was to be seene, as the Son of Man" (p. 64). There are two possible days to which the verse might apply, Christ's Nativity and His Passion. That the former is the correct interpreta tion follows when we consider that the Passion was a day of sorrow rather than of joy; ". . . without all question, [it was] no Day of Ioy" (p. 64). Andrewes amplifies the joyful nature of the beginnings of human enterprises by citing the examples of everyone's birthday, a King's ascension to the throne, the foundation digging of cities, 100 I ; i and the dedication of churches (P. 64). The central portion of this sermon is devoted to what he terms Abraham's three major acts. His first act was his desire, as expressed in the phrase exultavit ut. The cause of this desire is his hope that his Redeemer should rise again one day. The world, subject to sin (or put in darkness, as Andrewes phrases it), is subject to God's righteous judgment. Andrewes sees a parallel between Abraham's anticipatory joy at the day of Resurrec tion and John the Baptist's springing in his mother's womb at the sound of the Virgin Mary's voice. "So that we see, both old and young, Abraham and John Baptist, from the eldest in yeares to the child unborne; it concernes all; All need it: All are bound to be glad of it: All is for the joy and honour of this day" (p. 66). Desire, though, must precede seeing. Both Abraham and John the Baptist could not see the day of the birth of the Redeemer: Abraham because of the gap in time; John because of his being lodged in his mother!s womb: but both rejoiced * v because of the quality of their desire, their hope. Abraham's second act is expressed in Et Vidit. Abraham not only desired to see this day, but he did see it. His manner of seeing, however, was spiritual. Not being a contemporary of Christ, he saw this day with the inward eyes of understanding, as is the case with Christians after the first century. He saw with ". . . the light of 101 I ; i ;faith, which faith is the clearnesse or evidence of things j not seene" (p. 67). Abraham's third act was to be glad, Et gavisus est. He was elated to see that his body would be delivered from the dust, from the grave; but his supreme1 source of happiness was to know that his spirit would be redeemed: that it would be saved from "the furnace" (p. 69) . A further source of joy for Abraham came from the promise that ". . . His bosome should be the receptacle! of all that should enter into blisse: Whosoever there entertained, in sinu Abrahae it is to be" (p. 69). But in order to get to Abraham's bosom, passing from there to heaven, it is necessary that we be adopted into the seed of Abraham; "... that Semen Abrahae shall bring us to sinus Abrahae, and make us partakers of his heavenly joyes there. But, we must begin with in Semine, to day; that after, in his good time, in sinu may follow" (p. 69) . This sequence of acts on our part leads Andrewes to the final part of his sermon: that our desire must be expressed in a choice between "... the lewes, or in with ; Abraham, in the fellowship of this dayes joy" (p. 69) . - Abraham saw this day with prophetic faith; we see it in retrospect by historical faith: yet both parties look t forwards and backwards to the central point in time, Christ's Nativity. Not only do we have the advantage of the knowledge of the fact of Christ's Incarnation, but, in the liturgical calendar we have twelve days in which to 102 j ■ 1 rejoice, whereas Abraham had only one. There are three : j rules for us to follow, though, in giving expression to ourj joy. First, as with Abraham, the joy of the spirit should i exceed the joy of the physical senses (p. 69). Second, we j should celebrate this Day because it is Christ's birthday; we should not celebrate with feasting and revelling apart from Him. Finally, just as Abraham set a table for the three angels who came to visit him (Genesis 18: 1-8), so Christians should partake of the Sacrament Christ instituted for.His followers. By receiving the Eucharist, we shall be prepared for the Latter Day and for eternal life in heaven, where we shall see God and enjoy His perfect joy: "And it shall not indure for twelve daies, or be a feast of a fortnight; but shall be from moneth to moneth, from Iubilee to Iubilee, for ever and ever" (p. 71). The text for the ninth Nativity sermon is drawn from Isaiah 8: 14 ("Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, and beare a Sonne; and She shall call His name, Immanuel."). With respect to both position and content, this is a most important sermon: It is in the middle of the Nativity set, and it states both the virginal prophecy and the dual ; nature of Christ's Person. One of the most frequently mentioned sermons, it is usually considered in the light of Andrewes' witty handling of the title 'Immanuel.' Andrewes cannot resist punning in the first paragraph. Noting that St. Matthew gave primacy to ! 103 | , Isaiah's prophecy, Andrewes asserts that St. Matthew was ! j i \ I careful ". . .to make choice of a verie prime and preg- nant place, to set it (as it were) in the front of his I Gospell" (p. 72). Isaiah is the first Old Testament book alluded to in the New Testmanet, and in Isaiah we find ithat God will be with us, that therefore we shall have all (p. 73). The first subject of Andrewes' analysis is the fact that a virgin shall conceive. He begins by noting that the Jews could not believe that Mary was a physical virgin when she conceived Christ because of malice, choosing instead to interpret 'virgin' to mean a young woman only. This interpretation, in Andrewes' view, is invalid for two reasons. First, because Rebecca (Genesis 24) and Miriam (Exodus 2) are termed 'virgins' because they had not had intimate experience. Second, because it would destroy the miraculous sign promised by Isaiah. Countering pos sible pagan objections to the Virgin- Birth, Andrewes observes that Pagans, in their religions, believed in Minerva's birth and Pyrrha's children. To explain the fact that Christ's birth in no way changed Mary's virginal nature, he uses a metaphor drawn from the behavior of light. Just as light, when it passes through a window, does not destroy the glass, so Christ, emerging from His mother, in no way affected her virginity. 104 The light commeth throw the glasse, yet the glasse is not perished. No more, than the light of Heaven, passing thorow, breaketh the glasse; no more, did the GOD of Heaven, by His passage, violate any whit, the Virginity of His Mother. . . . (p. 74) Having established the fact of the virginal character of Mary, Andrewes next proceeds to the central portion of this sermon: the examination of Christ in the womb and His Person. Christ did not merely pass through Mary's body, but He assumed His human nature from her. In a nice distinction, he notes that "To conceive, is more than to receive" (p. 75). As Charles Williams,, the friend of T. S. Eliot, would put it, Mary, in bearing Christ, experienced coinherence and exchange. According to Andrewes, she gave, ". . .of her owne substance, whereof His bodie was framed: and . . . [took or received] power, from the HOLY GHOST, whereby was supplyed the office and the efficacie. . ." (p. 75). Not only did Mary gain by consenting to the Divine Will, but all mankind gained as well. Using the metaphor of a decayed plant, the preacher demonstrates that Christ began restoring fal len human nature to its original virtue during the entire term He developed in His Mother's womb. For, our conception being the root (as it were) the very grounsill of our nature; that He might goe to the root, and repaire our nature from the very foundation, thither He went: that what had beene there defiled and decayed, by the first Adam; might, by the second, be cleansed and set right agaxne. ... He was not idle, all the time Hee was an Embrio; all the nine moneths, Hee was in the wombe; but then, and there, 105 Hee even eat out the core of corruption, that cleft to our nature and us, and made both us and it, an unpleasing object, in the sight of GOD. (p. 75) Because the Son of God also became the Son of Man, God the Father could no longer set Himself against mankind; instead, He looked at us lovingly. Christ's name is the next object of discussion. It was necessary for Christ to have a name, "For, CHRISTUS anonymus will not serve" (p. 76). Christ's name, Immanuel, was given to Him by God, and therefore we must pay attention to it. Although it appears last, Andrewes first analyzes 'el,' noting that it means God. 'Anu,J the second word, means 'us,' and 'Im' means 'with' or 'cum.' 'Cum,' the connective, is important, because it comes "betweene nobis and Deus, GOD and Vs; to couple GOD and us. . ." (p. 77). Christ is not only with us here on earth, but He is with us in the world to come. In one of the most frequently quoted passages in all of his sermons, the Bishop wittily rings the changes upon 'Immanuel': ". . . And, if Without Him there, if it be not Immanu-el, it will be Immanuhel. . ." (p. 78). If God is with us, we thereby lack nothing, for with Him ". . .we need no more: Immanu-el, and Immanu-all" (p. 78). Christ the Divine Physician has come to us to cure our sick nature, and without Him we cannot be cured: .. . no remedie than, but to get a Cum, by whose meanes, Nobis and Deus may come together againe. . . . The parties are, GOD, and We: And, now, this day, He 106 is both. GOD, before, eternally; and, now to day, MAN: and so, both, and takes hold of both, and brings both together againe. (p. 78) Although Christ's Person consisted of two natures, His human nature was sinless. In order to redeem mankind, it was necessary that Christ be innocent. Christ assumed human nature when He was conceived; He assumed the full burden of the Law when He was circumcised and received His name. Using a contract metaphor, Andrewes affirms that when circumcised He legally "... became debtor of the whole Law; Principall, Forfeiture, and all. To the hand writing He then signed, with the first fruits of His bloud" (p. 79). Just as Christ came to earth to redeem mankind, so also do we have a responsibility towards God. That Christ came to be with us can be complemented by consciously being with God through prayer and by participating in the Eucharist. By so doing, we affirm God's being with us, both here on earth, and eternally in the life to come. The text for the tenth Nativity sermon is drawn from Micah 5: 2 ("And thou Bethlehem Ephrata art little to be among the 1000's of Ivda; yet, out of thee shall He i come forth unto me, that shall be the Ruler in Israel: where goings forth have been from the beginning, and from ; everlasting."). In this sermon Andrewes shifts from the person of Christ to His prophesied birthplace. As in the previous sermon, Andrewes notes the fact 1 0 7 j : that this prophecy is the second one to be mentioned in I j i : the New Testament. Whereas Isaiah foretold Christ's birth,! Micah foretold the place of His birth. Moreover, Micah j prophesied that the Messiah would be both our earthly and our heavenly guide. ! The central point which Andrewes develops out of the :small size of Bethlehem Ephrata is that in many significant human beginnings there is no direct relationship between the size of the place and the significance of the event begun there. Examples include the hidden birth of Moses in the bulrushes, the Persian King Cyrus born in a sheep- cote, and the Christian Church from a fishing boat. He next sees three additional symbolic and significant reasons why Christ should be born in this small and insignificant city: (1) because it was "the Towne of David1 1 (p. 87); (2) because it was at Ephrata where, according to Psalm 132: 6, the Jews heard that the Temple or Tabernacle of the Lord should be established (p. 87); and (3) because Bethlehem means the House of Bread, and because Christ is the Bread of Heaven sent to man, it is appropriate that He > be born there. Finally Christ's humility is seen in His having been born in this seemingly insignificant place; indeed, He was born even in a stable at an inn. It is obvious that Christ, if He is to fulfill the duality of His nature, must be born in a place. Andrewes comments that "Nativitie is but the way that leads to 108 j : Nature” (p. 88) . By being born, Christ manifested Himself to mankind as both the Son of Man (by having been born of a woman in a particular place) and as the Son of God (by having been conceived, not by man's agency, but by ; the operation of the Holy Ghost) . Andrewes develops his analysis of Christ's dual nature in. the third section of this sermon ("His Natures") His human nature necessarily had to come from a place (Ex); His divine nature did not originate in temporality, because it was eternal, above time. "Root, branch, bios some, and fruit, all of the earth, earthly. But there came forth, at the same time, a Starre; too: to shew, He had another more high and heavenly being" (p. 89) . The root was the root of Jesse (Isaiah 11: 1); the branch came from the tree established by David (Jeremiah 23: 5); the blossom is the seed of this branch (Zechariah 6: 12; in the Authorized Bible the word 'blossom' is not found, but instead 'branch.'); and the fruit of Ephrata refers to Christ as the fruit of Mary's womb (Luke 1: 42). The star is, of course, the star which guided the Magi and which appeared to the shepherds in the fields. Andrewes cleverly combines the action of the two natures by center ing upon the key phrase "out of thee." Christ's temporal, human nature came out of Bethlehem; He was born there. Christ's eternal nature eternally proceeds from the Father. Yet both are joined: Christ's being born in 109 ! i Bethlehem was designed to lead us to participate in His eternal proceeding from the Father: "Even, that out of Bethlehem He should come; be the Son of man? the Saviour of mankinde, and their Guide, to eternitie1 1 (p. 89) . Christ as our guide to heaven becomes the fourth subject of discussion; and as guide Andrewes sees Christ guiding us in three ways and in three roles: as a guide, as a captain, and as a guide who provides for His follow ers. The chief function of a guide is to bring those being guided to their appointed destination by means of superior knowledge and experience. Eternity is our divinely ordained goal, yet left to our own devices we would quickly come to quicksand or marshes. Using the Biblical metaphor of life as a journey to God, the preacher: observes that "By-wayes there be diverse; many crosse paths, and turnings in and out; and we like enough to misse it, if we venture on it, without a guide. . ." (p. 90). He sees Moses as representative of the guide's office: it was he who gathered the scattered and oppressed Jews together and guided them to the Holy Land. Christ as a military captain functions chiefly as a protector. On our way to heaven, we meet many enemies and we need the salvific help of Christ to keep us safe. David, by slaying Goliath, is the Old Testament example of a military man who dispatched the Chosen People's enemy. Christ Himself will conquer Satan: "And againe, out of it, this day, He, that shall tread downe Satan under our feet: dux Messias; Captaine Messias. . (p. 91). Third, Christ as Shepherd not only guides and protects, He also feeds His sheep. The place name, as noted earlier, directly states this office: "Beth, is a house; Tehem, bread; and Ephrata, is plentie: Bread, plentie" (p. 91). Christ, unlike earthly shepherds, not only feeds His sheep, but He Himself is the bread; He is ". . . the feeder and the food, both" (p~: 91). As with Moses, who showed the Jews manna and got water from the rock, Christ is Himself ". . . the true Manna; Christ; the spirituall rocke; whom He leads, He feeds: carries Bethlehem about Him" (p. 92) . But it was no easy and painless task for Him to provide bread from Himself; He had to endure many pains in His Passion. Just as wheat must be threshed to extract the inner kernels and just as grapes must be pressed in order to extract their juice, so also did Christ have to suffer in order to prepare the two elements of bread and wine for us. Christ, in preparing the Elements "... went under the Sickle, Flaile, Milstone, and Oven, even to be made this bread: Trode (or was troden) in the winepresse alone, to prepare this cup for us" (p. 92). Just as the Shepherds (symbolically the Jews) and the Magi (the Gentiles) had to go forth, by divine leading,; to find the Christ Child, so also must the faithful come to the Church in order to receive and worship Christ in Ill I I i iHis Eucharist. If we come to Christ there and receive ! ' | and worship Him sacramentally, Christ, unlike Adam, will lead us to the tree of eternal life. Where Christ's I Eucharist is, there is Heavenly Bread or Bethlehem also. For, as our dutie to Dux, is to bee led: So, our dutiei to qui pascet, is to bee fed by Him. To end. And thus, ducendo pascit; and pascendo ducit? leading Hee feeds us, and feeding Hee leads us, till He bring us, whither? Even to A principio, back againe to where we were at the beginning: and at the beginning, we were in Paradise. That our beginning shall be our end. Thither He will bring us: Nay, to a better estate then so: to that whereunto, even from Paradise, we should have been translated, to the State of eternitie, to the joyes and 'joyful! dayes there: even, to glory7 joy, and blisse eternall. To which He bring us, even our blessed guide, that, this day, was in Bethlehem, borne to that end, Iesus Christ the Righteous. (p. 95) The eleventh Nativity sermon is the last of the second series, the five sermons in which Andrewes examines the various Old Testament prophecies and their fulfillment in the birth of Christ. The text, an allegorical one, is drawn from Psalm 85: 10-11 ("Mercie and Truth shall meet: Righteousnesse and Peace shall kisse one another. Truth shall budde out of the earth; and Righteousness shall looke; downe from Heaven."). These two verses in the Hebrew experience were used to refer to their deliverance from the Babylonian Captivi ty. Andrewes, as a Christian, sees them as incomplete in that attribution because they, in his opinion, point towards the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of His Church. He sees two sets of fours in the text. First, ; there are four parts to this birth: (1) the birth of ; Truth; (2) the birth of Truth from the earth; (3) this birth is not Christ's eternal proceeding; and (4) the effects of this brith: righteousness has left heaven and has come to look at the birth. Second, there are four honors to this day: (1) Truth is born; (2) it is the "day of occursus misericordiae"; (3) the "Kisse" of peace; and (4) "Righteousnesses gratious respect of us" (p. 97). The meeting between these entities was not casual; it did not happen by chance but by purpose (p. 97). The meeting was important because of the parties, the occasion, and the end. The occasion was the birth of Christ, and at a momentous birth great personages customarily meet; the end of the meeting is that Righteousness, ". . . who is to be our Iudge, and to give the last sentence upon us, beholds us with an aspect, that promises favour" (p. 98). Andrewes comments that the sorting is significant (that Mercy and Truth go with one another; likewise with Righteousness and Peace): surely all men desire Mercy and Peace; but God must persuade us to accept the more severe Righteousness and Truth. At their meeting, Mercy does not go to Righteousness; therefore, Andrewes adds, punningly, this is "A kinde of crosse meeting. . ." (p. 98). Since Adam's fall, however, the four had not met in one place on earth before; therefore, it is reasonable that at this time i they should meet in opposition. When Mercy pleads for mercy for all men, a debate begins. Truth answers her by holding that since Adam's fall, God has justly condemned all people to death, and God would not be God if He were to : change His decree, for by so doing God would make Truth false and wrong right. Righteousness asks what would happen to him if God will not be just; Mercy counters by asking what use he would be if God will not spare man. ". . . And if those terms brake up the meeting.... Truth went into exile, as a stranger upon earth . . . she confined herselfe in Heaven” (p. 99). Mercy, being partial to mankind, stayed on earth. The fate of mankind, therefore, depends upon the success of a second meeting. The key figure is Truth, for unless justice can be satisfied, no reconciliation can occur. The meeting and union of these four Andrewes interprets with a musical metaphor; "... how to set a song of these foure parts, in good harmony; how to make these meet, at a love- day. . ." (p. 100). In his eyes, only in the Christian religion can the four be joined. The Moslem can only offer mercy by Muhammad; he cannot offer justice as well. The Heathen sees more than the follower of Islam, because he sees that only a sacrifice can expiate sin. The Jew only sacrificed lambs, not the Lamb of God. In Christianity the first cross-meeting will end in recon ciliation through the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. By the satisfaction of man's sins through the sacrifice j of the innocent Word of God, Mercy, Truth, Righteousness, and Peace are united. The eleventh verse, as might be expected, Andrewes applies to Christ's birth. The chief glory of Christianity Andrewes sees in the bringing together of these four for the sake of satisfying man's debt before God. Christ is indeed Truth incarnate; ". . . He is the adequation of the Word and the Worke, the Promise and the Performance" (p. 102). He is, in addition, the "truth of all Types, the truth of all Prophecies. . ." (p. 102). Following Zechariah's prophecy (discussed in the analysis of the tenth sermon), Christ is: (1) the branch of Truth, (2) the book which springs out of the earth "of_ it selfe, . . . without any seed cast in by the hand of man. . ." (p. 102), and (3) Truth on earth is raised from potenty to actuality by Christ's birth. The effect of His birth is, in the light of the two verses, to end the dissention between the two groups. In Christ, Truth, Righteousness, Mercy, and Peace are combined. Using a balance metaphor, the Bishop holds that if we ". . . Lay judgement to the rule and righteousnesse in the ballance, nothing oblique, will be found in Him, nothing, but straight for the rule; nothing minus habens, but full weight for the ballance" (p. 103). Now that the estranged parties meet and kiss in Christ, Righteousness is now as forward as the others. Christ as Word is also Christ the book-binder. Christ, in ! i His life as peace-maker, will reconcile the Law and the Gospel, so that they will be ". . . bound together (now) both in one volume" (p. 104). Applied to individual Christians, the same meeting of these entities is to occur within them. Mercy and Truth meet in Christians when they paradoxically confess that there is no truth in them? having done so, God pities them and sends them His Mercy accompanied by imputed Righteousness. Andrewes makes a clear distinction between Truth and Righteousness. "Truth is but the light, to guide us; Righteousnesse is the way, to bring us thither. A light is to see by: A way is to goe in: So is righteousnesse" (p. 105). If we forsake evil and do good or righteous acts, then, and only then, will peace come forth and kiss righteousness. Now marke the order, how they stand. Mercy leads to Truth, and the knowledge of it; and Truth to Right eousnesse, and the practice of it? and Righteousnesse to Peace, and the wayes of it, Guides our feet (first) into the way of Peace. . . . Even the way here chalked j out before us: To shew mercy, and speake truth; doe righteousnesse, and follow peace. (p. 105) That through grace these four can meet, Andrewes sees operative in the natural world in the operation of the four elements in the macrocosm and in the operation of the four humours in the microcosm. They [the qualities of the four humours] will make the better refraction? the coole of one, allay the heat; the moist of one, temper the drought of the other. The soft; vertues need to be quickned; the more forward, to | be kept from Aitum sapere. So are the Elements, of | which our bodie: So are the foure Winds, of which our ; breath doth consist, which gives us life. And these ; 1 \ T”have an analogie, or correspondence, with the Elements, observed by the Ancients. 1Truth as the Earth, which is not moved at any time: 2Quasi fluvius : Pax (saith Esay,) Peace as a _ water-streame, the~~qui 1 1 s j whereof make glad the CitTe of GOD. ^Mercie, wee breathe and live by, no lesse than we doe by aire: and I ^Righteousnesse, the ventura est judicare saeculum per ! ignem, by thatelement! (p.166) That these four aspects have met in Christ on His Nativity day evokes a Eucharistic invitation from Andrewes. The Church, following the establishment of the Sacrament by Christ, meets the faithful on each Christmas with divine bread and wine, wherein: ... Truth from the earth may looke up to Heaven and . confesse; and Righteousnesse from Heaven, may looke down to earth and pardon: where we may shew Mercy, in giving where need is; and offer Peace, in forgiving where cause is; that so, then may be an obviaverunt, a meeting, of all hands, (p. 107) The twelfth Nativity sermon is the first of two sequential sermons in which Andrewes plumbs the meaning of the Angel's words to the shepherds. The text used for the first sermon is Luke 2: 12-13 ("And this shall be a Signe unto you: yee shall finde the Childe swaddled, and laid in a cratch. And straightway there was with the Angell, a multitude of heavenly souldiers, praising GOD, and saying, Glorie be to GOD on high, & c."). Andrewes introduces the opening of verse 14 only to indicate that although it is part of the total thought, it will be discussed in the next sermon. He sees verses 12 and 13 as one unit (the Sign) and verse 14 (the Song) as necessarily j balanced: "The Signe, very poore and meane? the Song, j exceeding high and heavenly" (p. 109). Not only are these three verses balanced in themselves, but they also mirror the poor estate of the Christ Child, a little babe in a cratch, Who is also great because of His identity. The concept of the Christ Child as a sign is the subject of his first major section. All men desire to see God, a point which was stressed by the Fathers, especially St. Augustine, and by the Scholastics, especially St. Thomas Aquinas, yet He cannot be seen without a sign. Momentarily becoming what we would call a semanticist, the : Bishop instructs his audience that there must be a propor tion between a Signum and a Signatum, between a sign and the thing signified. Without an explicit indication from God, we would either look for Christ in the wrong place or else we would not recognize Him. Christ's low estate he views as indicative of His great humility, in contrast to the usual human tendency to look for an important person in a great place. Ironically, Andrewes notes that The meaning is, we would find CHRIST (faign;) but we would finde Him, in some better place. Halfe Iewes wee are all in this point; wee would have a Messias in state. . . . Why, this shall be the Signe? ye shall find the Child, not in those clouts or cratch, but in a crimsin mantle y in a cradle of ivorie... ... (p. lib) Having established the necessity for a divine sign because of the ignorance and pride of human nature, Andrewes next ; discusses seven reasons why this particular sign is j appropriate. First, had Christ come in all power and external majesty, this would not be a sign of humility. i ;Andrewes illustrates this point by using a Sun (Son) metaphor. The Sun eclipsed; the Sun in Sackcloth: that is Signum in sole, the Signe indeed: And that is the Signe here, the Sun of righteousnesse entring into his eclipse, begins to be darkened, in his first point, the point of his Nativities (p. Ill) Second, weak human flesh (as represented by the shepherds) would not have dared come near Him.had He appeared in great estate. But Christ was Christ for all men, high and ! low. "He is not the Saviour of Great states only; but, even of poore shepheards. The poorest of the earth may repaire to Him. . ." (p. 111). Third, by coming to earth in great poverty, we may exercise our faith in Him; had the converse been true, no faith would be shown. Fourth, Christ's poor beginning was consonant with the course of His entire life. "We may well begin with CHRIST in the Cratch: We must end with CHRIST on the crosse. The Cratch is a Signe of the Crosse. . . . The Scandal of the Cratch is a good preparative, to the Scandal of the Crosse" (p. Ill). Fifth, there is an inverse proportion between appearance and reality. The poor circumstances of Jesus' birth acted as a foil by means of which the precious stone of His Passion could be revealed, which shows that ". . . God at the weakest, is stronger than men in all i their strength. . (p. 111). Sixth, the Signum itself is less important than the S ighaturn; "Though the Cratch be not worth the going to, CHRIST is worth the going for" (p. 112). Finally, because the angels are not ashamed of the Sign, why therefore should any human be ashamed of it? ■ The entire Sign is paradoxical: in a famous passage (which T. S. Eliot used in "Gerontion" and Ash Wednesday), j Andrewes comments that "... every word (here) is a wonder: . . . an infant; Verbum infans, the Word without a word; the aeternall Word not hable to speake a word; A wonder fine" (p. 112).7 Having analyzed the Sign, the Bishop now directs his attention to the Angels and their song. As a witty music critic, he begins this section by evaluating their song: "... the first [quality] I pitch on, is the word Heavenly" (p. 116). He notes the several paradoxes of the heavenly choir: they are dressed as soldiers, not in choir robes; they come dressed as men of war, yet they sing of peace (p. 116). Although they are a multitude, yet they are arranged in order towards Christ, their chief.; By praising Him, they demonstrate their heavenly knowledge: ] to praise Him while yet a child in the manger argues their great faith and obedience. Their song is born of charity, j 7See "Gerontion," 11. 17-20 and Ash Wednesday, Sec. i V in T. S. Eliot, The Complete Poems and Plays (New ifork, 1962). j 120: ; for they sing not for themselves, but for their joy at j i j man's salvation to be accomplished by Him. They sang the first hymn of praise to Him; it is our obligation to continue the song throughout history. "They but took it up? we to keepe it up? and never to let it goe downe, or dye on our hands, but from yeare to yeare, as we have occasion, still to renew it" (p. 117). So much for the Sign and the Song; for contemporary Christians, the Bishop reminds them that they also have a divine Sign in the Eucharist. Like Christ in the manger, the Elements appear mean and insignificant, but their reality is ens realissimum Himself. Outwardly, it [the Sacrament] seemes little worth, but is rich of contents? as was the Crib, this day, with CHRIST in it. For, what are they, but infirma and egena elementa, weak and poore elements of themselves: yet, in them find we CHRIST, (p. 118) The Christmas Eucharist is doubly significant, "For the Sacrament, that comes at other times? the day, but once a yeare, On this Day, they both meet? and never but in this" , (p. 118). He concludes the sermon affirming that by participating in the Eucharistic celebration on earth, we imay, after death, join the Angels in heaven in their joyful praise of the Almighty. This circularity is indeed skill- : fully accomplished. The thirteenth Nativity sermon treats the Gloria in Excelsis of the angels to the shepherds and is taken from Luke 2: 14 ("Glorie to God in the high Heavens, and peace upon earth, and towards men good will") . Although we i should praise God daily, Christmas Day, being Christ's i birthday, is the worthiest day of all, and is thus especially deserving of praise. Echoing Milton's "At a Solumn Musick," Andrewes comments that the angels' anthem, | following as it does the angel's brief sermon about the Nativity and the "Invention of Christ, makes a full ser vice for the Day" (p. 119). Just as Christ combines heaven and earth in one Person, so also are the shepherds (earth) and the angels (heaven) ". . .to joyne in one consort" (p. 119). There are, he notes, three parts to the Gloria, and each of these parts corresponds to a Person of the Trinity: (1) God on high is the Father; (2) Peace to His Son, the peacemaker; and (3) Good will to ; the Holy Spirit. Similarly, there is a triune aspect to the anthem: (1) to God, glory; (2) to the Earth, peace; and (3) to men, favor, grace, or good will (p. 120). Andrewes uses grammatical and semantic analysis in order to interpret the meaning of the text. The Greeks see three "rests" (continuing the musical metaphor) in it: ; (1) God on high; (2) earth; and (3) men. To these three parts, they add glory, peace, and good will "... as it were three streames having their head or spring in CHRISTS cratch, and spreading themselves thence, three sundry wayes, having their influence into the three former..." (p. 120). Glory goes upward to God; God returns His peace j 122; | downward to earth, with men ". . .in the middest between I both, compound of both” (p. 120). Christ, being both man and God, is in the very middle of God and earth, recon ciling heaven and earth. The Latins, Andrewes maintains, see only two "rests": God and man, heaven and earth, glory on high and peace on earth. Apparently good will is not included in their analysis as a gift to all men, but only to the Elect; peace only goes to all men. The distinction between the Greek and Latin interpretations is ultimately grammatical: the Greek interpretation sees good will in the nominative case which therefore allows it to apply to all men; the Latin interpretation favors the genitive case, therefore it applies only to the Elect. Andrewes next examines the three parts in greater detail. The Angels give glory to God on high because ". . . CHRIST left His glory, by being thus in the cratch. We tooke some from Him: to wish Him some for it againe" (p. 122). Christ suffered some loss of glory by becoming man. In recognition of this, the Angels vocally return God glory. He does not mean that Christ, by becoming man, somehow suffered a loss of essential being; rather, he means that Christ, by choosing to be born as a creature, became a perfect creature in addition to remaining a member of the eternal self-;creating Trinity. Peace on earth was extended to all men, as evidenced by peace in the Roman empire at the time of His Nativity. There was also peace 123l i ibetween Jew and Gentile, because Christ extended God's | love beyond the circle of the Chosen People. There was ' also peace between heaven and earth because of His birth; ! Jacob's ladder was re-established. By His healing the i conflict between the Law and our sense of sin, peace was made ". . .at home with our selves, and with out owne consciences" (p. 123). Finally, there was peace at the j parting of the Angels from the Shepherds; a sort of Nunc Dimittis (p. 123). With respect to good will towards men, Andrewes maintains that just as Christ gave good will to men, so also should men give good will to all fellow men. It is necessary, though, that glory and peace be joined. "If we sing Glory without Peace, we sing but to halves, No Glory on high will be admitted, without Peace upon earth" (p. 123) . Not only must they be joined, but glory must precede peace. Continuing the essential musical; metaphor, glory must be first because it is the key or . . . cleft sign. The Angels observe bhe correct order; we ¥ • likewise must emulate them: "Heavens part ever to be first" (p. 124) . But both are ultimately dependent upon God's will, although, as noted, peace necessarily follows God's glory. "In very deed, Peace upon earth, as it stands after it, so it hath a dependance upon GODS glory; comes (as it were) in exchange for it" (p. 125) . In addition, the Angels, dressed as they are in solders' | 124 | garb, give testimony that they will remove any peace we think we have established if we do not first give glory to God. Having given glory to Him and received His peace, iwe are charged to render good will to all men "... for this Childes sake" (p. 126). Just as Christ accepted all despite their imperfections (examples cited include Mary Magdalene, Nehemiah, Ezekiel, and David), provided that they were contrite in their hearts, so also are we to accept all men in a spirit of good will. Having heard all the parts of this song, Andrewes raises a practical question and immediately answers it: "What shall we doe with this Song? Sing it" (p. 128) . Men, obviously, are not angels, but we come closest to them when we participate in the Holy Eucharist. Fitting the Day with the Sacrament, he concludes this sermon with a musical metaphor: Time in Musike is much. And, if wee will keep time with the Angels, doe it when they doe it, this day they did it: And what fitter time to sing it, than the day, it was first sung. ... (p. 128) Sermon fourteen is the first of two sermons in which! Andrewes considers the journey of the Magi. Here he considers their trip and their question to Herod about where Christ could be found as reported in Matthew 2: 1-2 ("When IESUS then was borne in Bethlehem in Judaea, in the ! dayes of Herod the King, Behold, there came Wise men, from the East to Jerusalem, saying, Where is the King of the Jewes that is borne? For we have seene His starre in the East, and are come to worship Him."). As Christ is the Alpha and Omega, so also are there : several beginnings and endings in this sermon: the appear ance of the star and the beginning of the journey? the appearance of the Christ Child and the end of the journey. The first star leads the Magi to a second star, Christ, the bright morning star. Also, the heavenly star kindles another star on earth, the star of faith: the "... Day- star which riseth in the heart. . ." (p. 131). That the Magi went on their quest and found their object also shows that Christ, is intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews. Andrewes next notes the accomplishment of several prophecies: that Christ would be born in "Bethlehem Iuda" (Micah 5: 2)? that the time of birth would be in the reign of a king (Genesis 49: 10); and that the Messiah would be visited by the Kings of Arabia and Saba bearing gifts (Psalm 72: 10) of gold, incense, and myrrh (Isaiah 60: 6). ! Anticipating the next sermon, he refers to the desolation of Israel as seen in the slaughter of the innocents and the hostile weather (". . . in the sharpest season, in the deepe of Winter" (p. 132).). That Christ was meant for the Gentiles as well as the Jews is confirmed by several events and prophecies in the Old Testament. Abraham prophesied that the Saviour would be for all men (Genesis 9: 27; 22: 18; and 49: 10). j The Law itself was given to Moses on heathen soil (Hebrews ! i 16: 1 and Galatians 4: 25); his own wife was a heathen. The jewels for the Tabernacle came from Egypt (Exodus 12: i 36 and 25: 2). The Temple was built on the threshing floor of Oman the heathen (I Chronicles 21: 18) . Balaam and Jonas both prophesied to the heathen. Finally, Isaiah noted that the Root of Jesse would be a Standard to which all nations would be gathered (Isaiah 11: 10) . That the Magi came from the East is morally important, for the East, with the Tower of Babel, tyrannous governments, and false prophets, represented moral wickedness. The Magi were also eminent persons, being princes in their own country in addition to being intelligent or learned men. That they were knowledgeable about all eastern lore indicated that truth was to be found in its entirety only in Christ. The application of this sermon to Andrewes1 listen ers is that they also must journey to Christ. That the Magi went through dangerous places and endured hardships means that contemporary Christians should not balk at having to leave their chambers and go to Church to worship Christ as revealed in the Eucharist. The fifteenth Nativity sermon is the second of two sermons T. S. Eliot drew upon in this series. Its subject is the question the Magi asked King Herod as recounted in Matthew 2: 1-2 ("Behold there came WISE MEN, from the 127! | East to Hierusalem; Saying Where is'the KING of the IEWES, j that is borne? For wee have seene His starre in the East, : and are come to worship Him."). In this sermon Andrewes dwells upon the Wise Men's faith, their question, and their end. That they assume that Christ has already been born implies that they have faith that the birth has been accomplished. That they directly ask Herod where He is shows that their faith is no ". . . bosome-faith, kept to themselves1 . . ." (p. 141). Unlike many who call them selves Christians, the Magi are "... neither afraid of Herod [the civil authority], nor ashamed of CHRIST: but [they] professed their Errand, and cared not who knew it. This for their confessing Him boldly" (p. 141). The ground of their faith was the star. Using a physical metaphor, Andrewes terms the star a ' Load-star' because it drew the Magi to the center of power, the Christ Child. When the Magi saw it, they did not merely observe it, but they ' f acted upon it; they were interested in attaining the Beatific Vision, not in mere scientes alone. "Their Vidimus begat Verimus; their seeing made them come; come a great journey" (p. 143). Their way was not easy, as they had bad weather, rough terrain, and robbers to endure and overcome. The measure of their faith is evident in confronting these very obstacles, or as Andrewes describes their faith (in a passage T. S. Eliot drew upon in his "Journey of the Magi"):8 It was no summer progresse. A cold comming they had of it, at this time of the yeare; just the worst time of the yeare, to take a journey, and specially a long journey, in . The waies deep, the weather sharp, the daies short, the sun furthest off in solstitio brumali7 the very dead of Winter. (pp. 143-144) Andrewes next proceeds to criticize his congregation for their unwillingness to undergo hardships in demonstrating their faith: Our fashion is, to see and see againe, before we stirre a foot: Specially, if it be to the worship of CHRIST. Come such a Iourney, at such a time. No: but fairely have put it off to the Spring of the yeare, till the dayes longer, and the wayes fairer, and the weather warmer; till better travelling to CHRIST. Our Epiphanie would (sure) have fallen in Easter-weeke at the soonest. . . . To Christ we cannot travel!, but weather and way and all must be faire. If not, no journey, but sit still and see further. As indeed, all our Religion is rather Vidimus, a Contemplation, than Venimus, a Motion, or stirring to doe ought. T . . Why should wee: CHRIST, is no Wild-Cat. (p. 144) In addition to their having acted by faith, the Magi's first act upon seeing the Christ Child was to worship Him. This is the end of faith, and if we do not intend to worship God, there will be no end to our seeking. ". . . The Scripture and Word are but to this end, that He, that created the one, and inspired the other, might be but worshipped" (p. 146). And there are three ways in which we can worship Him: with our souls, with our bodies, and with our earthly goods. The star which guided the Magi has long 8see "Journey of the Magi," 11. 1-5 in T. S. Eliot, The Complete Poems and Plays (New York, 1962). ; since past, but God, through faith, will put a star within ; us to guide us to Christ here and in eternity. Such is the conclusion of this sermon, and it is one of the few which does not directly conclude with an invitation to . receive the Holy Eucharist. Perhaps because of the emphasis placed upon offering our souls, bodies, and world ly goods in its conclusion, this sermon was intended for delivery immediately before the Offertory. The theme of the sixteenth Nativity sermon is the recapitulation of all things in Christ, and its text comes from Ephesians Is 10 ("That in the dispensation of the fulnesse of the times, Hee might gather together into one all things, both which are in heaven, and which are in earth, even in CHRIST."). To gather together many things may mean one or all of three things: (1) to conclude an account; (2) to summarize what has already been said; and (3) to reduce all things to a head or single point. In Andrewes1 view, Christ fulfills these three possible meanings. As usual, he analyzes the text on a point-by- point basis. Time is his first topic. Andrewes draws a distinc tion between the passage of time or ordinary time, and good time or the fulness of time. The former is sequential and qualitative; the latter is qualitative. Second, since all things have an "Autumne of maturity" or ripeness, time also should have this. Third, God, the dispenser of all 13 Oj ! created things, is the one who decides when time shall reach its term in the divine oeconomia. ' The recapitulation of all earthly and heavenly things into Christ is the second topic of the main body of ; this sermon. That God intends to gather all things of heaven and earth in Christ means that God intends to elevate earth rather than to denigrate heaven. In addi tion, God's intention demonstrates His love towards the world, because one gathers only what one loves, whereas one scatters or discards what one dislikes or abhors. Third, God's gathering together is a recollection rather than a collection. In human history, Andrewes sees three stages: (1) the collection of all in Adam; (2) the scattering of all by the fall of man; and (3) the re collection of all things by Christ. Using a pun, he notes that because of man's fall, "There was a former Capitu lation. . ." (p. 151). Having lost the original head, all things will come together in Christ, the new head. Fourth,; this recapitulation is a system rather than a conglomera tion. Drawing an analogy from faculty psychology, Andrewes comments that all the arts of a human being (sense, motion, speech, and understanding) are recapitu lated and directed by1 the head or mind (p. 152) . The condition of the world under sin without Christ bears some 131 resemblance to Hobbes' description of the state of nature.9 ; Things in heaven, from things in earth; Angells, with drawne swords at men; Things on earth, from tilings in ; heaven; Men, atHbut the sight of an Angel1, ready to fall down dead. The members, from the head; the head, ; from the members; The members one from another: Neither union with the head, nor among themselves. Peccata vestra, it was sinne, that divided betweene GOD and them;and, divided once and divided ever, divided in semper divisibilia, till they were quite past all”3‘ ivisionsl No longer divided (now) but even scattered. The case of the world, then. (p. 152) Morality was multiple rather than single; the Jews and the Gentiles were separated; the Jews themselves were broken into factions (p. 152). "In a word: the whole world then was but a masse of errours, a Chaos of confusion, Tohu, Bohu: empty and voide of all saving grace or truth" (p. 152) . The first stage of recapitulation is to classify things either as heavenly (God's things) or earthly (man's domain). The second stage is to have Christ combine both heaven and earth into one person with two natures: "When things were at the best, GOD and Man were two in number: ^"In such condition, there is no place for industry;! because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving, and removing, such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Thomas Hobbes, Hobbes Selections, ed. F. J. E. Woodbridge (New York, 1958) , p. 233. 132 NOW, GOD and Man are but one CHRIST" (p. 154). The time of recapitulation was when Christ was born and could be ( found in the manger. The application of the text to his listeners is accomplished through the use of an accounting metaphor. When men consider their moral accomplishments, they will see that sin has caused each to conclude in the debit column. Each, therefore, to balance his account must confess sinfulness and plead for the imputation of merit from Christ. Only His Sacrifice is sufficient to remove the onus of debt and to render accounts true. A second application of the text is for the congregation to join with itself and with all other members of the Church Universal in a re-collection centered around the Holy Eucharist. To be gathered together by Christ is: . . . the highest perfection, we can in this life aspire unto. We (then) are at the highest pitch; at the very best we shal ever attaine to on earth; what time we newly come from it: Gathered to Christ; and, by Christ, to God; stated in all whatsoever He hath gathered, and layd up against His next comming. (p. 158) At the Latter Day, the elect will be finally gathered to Eternal Life, the reprobate will be scattered, and there will be no more seasons: all shall be eternity, "... the fulnesse of eternitie, and in it the fulnesse of all joy" (p. 158). The seventeenth Nativity sermon is the final one in the series. Andrewes1 choice of text is significant: considering the conflict between the Law and the Gospel, we would expect to have as a concluding sermon one treating the Gospel of love; instead, the sermon's subject is the preaching of the Law by the Messiah. The text is drawn from Psalm 2: 7 ("I will preach the Law, whereof the LORD said to me: Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."). Andrewes begins the sermon by anticipating and meeting the audience's expectation: "We had well hoped, CHRIST would have preached no law; all Gospell. . . .We see, it is otherwise, A Law He hath to preach, and preach it He will. . ." (p. 161). Indeed, the Law is an integral part of the structure of the Christian Church: "If we love not to heare of a law, we must goe to some other Church. . ." (p. 161). Andrewes points out a behavioral flaw on the part of many who vainly desire to have the Gospel preached without reference to the Law: they become immoral because of the denial of the necessity for right action. In addition, without the structure of revealed moral law, Christianity itself becomes sentimental and soft. Gospell it how we will: if the Gospell hath not the legal ia‘ of it acknowledged, allowed, and preserved to it: 'if once it lose the force, and vigor of a law; it is a Signe it declines, it growes weake and un- f rofitable: and, that is a signe, it will not Tong ast. (p. 162) As with Hooker, Andrewes believed that law was at the core 134 ! of the universe; that law reveals God's providential ordering of His creation.^0 Making a distinction between faith and reason, he notes that there are two sorts of law: there is the Law of Nature, implicit in the "hearts of all men. . ." (p. 162); there is also the Law of God which cannot be discovered by reason, but only through revelation to the prophets and priests, and thereby preached to those under their pastoral care. This latter law ". . . is not written in the heart; it must be preached to the eare. No light of Nature could reveale it, from within. . ." (p. 163). Having described the nature and source of Eternal Law, Andrewes next delineates five particulars as they relate to the new Lawgiver. First, the new law is given to mankind by a Son or Filius. The distinction between a servant (the Prophets) and a son is important here. Second, this son is Filius meus, the Son of God. Third, Christ is a begotten rather than an adopted Son, thus avoiding the Adoptionist heresy. Fourth, by analyzing the phrase Hodie Genui, Andrewes emphasizes Christ's eternal 10"wherefore that here we may briefly end: of Law there can be no less acknowledged, than that her seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world: all things in heaven and earth do her homage, the very least as ; feeling her care, and the greatest as not exempted from her power: both Angels and men and creatures of what condition soever, though each in different sort and manner, yet all with uniform consent, admiring her as the mother of their peace and joy." Richard Hooker, Of the Laws of Ecclesias tical Polity (London, 1965) , Book I, p. 232. 135; begetting; that He is not an adopted, but an eternally begotten Son. Finally, God begets His Son Dixit genuiy His begetting is instantly accomplished. In human affairs, there is an interval between the formation of an idea and the enactment of it, but with God creation and enactment are immediate. The Son also has two offices: He is a priest and a king. The choice of the title 'King of Sion' is thus doubly appropriate: for the Temple and the King's Palace were both located there. Acts appropriate to both offices are carried out by the Son: "The one for Praedicabo: the other for Legem. In the one (as King) he makes a law: in the other (as Priest) preacheth it. First, Posui Regem; and then Praedicabo Legum" (p. 166). The Son also has the earth as His domain for both offices. He "Hath a Kingdome to rule: Hath a Diocese to preach in. His Kingdome, the Heathen, to the uttermost parts of the earth: His Diocese, as large. His Auditorie, all States, even the highest, Kings, and Iudges: for Praedicabo Legum concerneth them all" (p. 166). Although Christ was the only eternally begotten Son of God, His begetting has effects for all mankind, because Christ was empowered by His Father to regenerate all mankind by raising them to Eternal Life through His adoption of them as sharers in His infinite glory. In response to this great gift, what are we to do for Him? 136 We are to follow the Law out of respect and love for His Father. "We lack nothing now, but the time" (p. 168). The Bishop's conclusion answers this challenge simply and seriously: "And as legem, is the condition; so, Hodie, is the time" (p. 168). CHAPTER IV ANDREWES' DISCUSSION OP THE WILDERNESS TEMPTATIONS i This series of seven sermons was first issued in 1592 with the title The wonderfull Combat . . . betweene Christ and Satan, opened in seven most excellent, learned and zealous Sermons, upon the Temptation of Christ in the Wilderness.3 - It was reprinted in 1627, and reissued in 1642 combined with Scala Coeli and the Moral! Law Expounded.2 The printed editions make no mention of when and where the Wilderness Temptation sermons were first delivered. The possibilities are as follows: (1) they were delivered when Andrewes was Catechist at Pembroke (he was appointed to this office in 15783), a view propounded by James Bliss, the nineteenth-century editor of Andrewes' works(2) they were delivered when Andrewes preached at Ipaul Welsby, Lancelot Andrewes: 1555-1626 (London, 1958), p. 36. The edition of the sermons used in this chapter is the 1642 London edition published by Richard Cotes. In this chapter, all references noted parenthe tically will be to this edition. 2Welsby, p. 36. 3Welsby, p. 22. ^Welsby, pp. 36-37. 137 138! i | St. Giles, Cripplegate (Andrewes was appointed vicar there j in 15895) , a view held by A. T. Russell;® and (3) they were delivered by Andrewes at St. Paul's Cathedral (a possibility suggested by Welsby^). ! The Scriptural text for this series of seven sermons; is found in James 1: 12: "Blessed is the man that endureth Temptation: for when he is tryed, he shall receive the crowne of life, which the Lord hath promised them that love him." Andrewes1 method is to explicate the signifi cance of each of the texts on a sentence by sentence basis. Sermon one is based on Matthew 4: 1 ("Then was Jesus led aside of the Spirit into the Wildernesse to be tempted of the devill.") (p. 1). Unlike Latimer's or Taylor's mode of explication, Andrewes uses the metaphor of a chivalric battle as a frame with which to interpret the spiritual conflict. In the preliminary section, Andrewes sees the Wilderness Temptations as the first crucial test for Christ. Having chosen to become man, Christ endured birth and ritual circumcision in order to "restore the worke of God [i.e., man] to his originall perfection" (p. 1). This statement implies the loss of perfection, and such an implication Andrewes uses in a Pauline way by polarizing Christ and Adam against their 5Welsby, p. 40. ^Welsby, p. 37. ^Welsby, p. 37. 139 adversary, Satan. Just as Satan's first work after his fall was to tempt and to corrupt Adam and Eve, so Satan's first work after Christ's baptism was to tempt and to corrupt Him. Satan moved with alacrity, for immediately -ter the baptism, "... hee [Satan] with like envy setteth on him" (p. 1). Andrewes sees Christ as the Archduke and Satan as the grand enemy as both enter the lists against each other. Using traditional Biblical and chivalric imagery, Andrewes describes both as lions: Satan being the roaring lion (I Peter 5: 8) and Christ as the lion of Judah (Revelation 5: 5). An additional image is that of serpents: Christ is the "new Serpent" and Satan as the "old serpent" (Revelation 12: 9). The choice of a chivalric metaphor to describe the conflict is not fanciful, because there is Biblical support for viewing the spiritual life as a battle, as witness II Timothy 2: 4, I Peter 4: 1, and Ephesians 6: llff. To discuss the combat in chivalric terms, Andrewes proposes seven headings: First, the two Champions, first, Christ, and Secondly, Sathan: Thirdly, the leader of Jesus into the lists, who is said to be the Holy Ghost: Fourthly, the end, which was the conflict it selfe, that is, to be tempted: Fifthly, the day of the batteli, expressed under the word Then: Sixthly, the lists themselves, that is, the Wilderness: Seventhly, Christ his preparation of it, that is, his fasting, (p. 2) Andrewes discusses the first six of these considerations in the first sermon, reserving the seventh for the second 140 sermon (based upon the third verse of Matthew 4). Christ the champion is termed "the party defendant" (p. 2) . He is the champion because He is the benefactor of all living things, as Andrewes supports by several Biblical citations: (1) according to Psalms 136:25, God gives food to all living creatures; (2) in Matthew 14: 21, He is the special friend of man, having fed the five thousand by the miracle of the loaves and fishes; (3) in John 6, He speaks of Himself as being the'bread of eternal life. He to Whom thousands of angels minister in heaven is here in the desert, "the companion of beasts" (p. 3) , suffering hunger and consenting to meet the temptations. All of these adverse conditions and privations Andrewes sees as signs of "his great love towards us" (p. 3). Echoing Romans 8: 35, Andrewes has Christ ask: What is it that shall separate me from the love of men? Shall temptation? shall solitarinesse? shall hunger? shall wearisome labour and travel!? shall watching? shall any wish of minde, and bloody sweat? shall workes? shall whippes? shall nayles? shall speares? shall principalities? (p. 3) Being synoptic, Andrewes, in the preceding catalogue of questions, sees Christ's earthly end in His entrance into maturity. Such is the character and condition of the "party defendant." Satan, Christ's adversary in the lists, Andrewes terms the "party assaylant" (p. 3). Out of all possible characteristics, Andrewes emphasizes the quality of lying or "reason of his foule mouth in defaming" (p. 3). Just as Christ is the benefactor of all living things, so Satan,! ! by opposition, has as his "occupation to defame us first with God. . (p. 3). The devil defames us to God, and God to Christ, and Andrewes sees in these two defamations the source of all evil. Continuing with the lion and serpent imagery discussed earlier, Andrewes notes that Satan tempts in two ways: (1) by "inticement" as a serpent, and (2) by "violence" as a lion (p. 4). It is through the Holy Ghost that Christ was led "into the lists" (p. 4). Generalizing from Christ's example to the experience of all Christians, Andrewes notes five characteristics of providential leading. First, after baptism, we cannot remain still or unmoved; instead, we must have "a quickning and stirring spirit . . . which will move us, and cause us to proceed. . ." (p. 4). To move is to act, and an act must consist of carrying out an intention or design if it is to be complete. "We must walke forwards, for the Kingdome of God consists not in words, but in power. . ." (p. 4). Second, we must go to where we are led; we must not try to choose the place and the action. Faithful humility towards God rather than spiritual selfishness must be the rule of action. Third, using the metaphor of the Holy Ghost as a pneuma or divine afflatus, Andrewes compares our being led by the Holy Spirit to the behavior of a sailing ship on its journey. 142! i Our being moved by the Holy Spirit is likened to a j "launching forth. . . . The Holy Ghost driving us, is compared to a gale of winde . . . which tea.cheth us, that as when the winde bloweth, we must be ready to hoyst up saile. . (p. 5). Andrewes develops this metaphor into a moral allegory: Our hope is compared to an anchor . . . and our Faith to the Saile, we are to beare as great a saile as we can. We must also looke to the closenesse of the Vessell, which is our Conscience: for, if we have not a good conscience, we may make shipwracke of Faith, Religion, and all. . . . And thus are we to proceed in our journey towards our country (the spirituall Jerusalem) as it were sea-faring men. (p. 5) Basing this allegory upon Hebrews 6: 19, Andrewes judi ciously develops it with skill and accuracy, emphasizing the necessity of combining faith with good works. Our faith is to be as large as possible according to our capacity, and we must skillfully adjust our consciences to the wind. "Close” sense A15C of the Oxford English 8 Dictionary applies here. In Smyth's Sailor's Word Book (1867, as quoted in the OED) , to sail close to the wind means to direct the head or bow of the ship so near the wind that the sails are filled with wind without shaking them. Faith alone without good works (and vice versa) will put a ship out of balance with the consequent danger of shipwreck. A good pilot and/or captain knows the 80xford English Dictionary (Oxford, 1893), II, p. 516. 143| f limitations of his vessel and the way to take advantage of ! natural conditions; analogically, a Christian knows his limits and how to follow supernatural promptings. The third point, therefore, is an expansion of the second point rather than a new concept. Fourth, that Christ was led to : be tempted meant that design, not chance, was operative. Applied to all Christians, Andrewes notes that the Holy Spirit is a helper and an ever-present guide. In short, "... the devill hath not the rod or chaine in his hands, i but the Holy Ghost, to order them [i.e., temptations], as they may best serve for his glory and our good: and as for the devill, he bindeth him fast. . ." (p. 6). Finally, Andrewes draws a distinction between the temptations of the "Saints" and the "Reprobates." In the Saints' temptations, God is present with them with the intention of bringing them back unscathed; the Reprobates, however, suffer the withdrawing of God's "grace and holy Spirit. . ." (p. 6). The result of the Wilderness Temptations was that - Christ changed the nature and quality of all succeeding temptations. Prior to Christ's experiences, temptations were thought (rightly enough) to be like curses; after Christ, they are "no longer signes and pledges of Gods wrath, but favours" (p. 6). Hence, Christians, when presented with temptations, should not feel discouraged. A second effect of the Wilderness Temptations is that Christ's conflict has abated their strength, "... for inow the Serpents head is bruised, so that he is now nothing so strong (as he was) to cast his darts. Also the head of his darts are blunted. . ." (p. 6). (Notice in : the last sentence the continuation of the warfare meta phor.) Finally, Christ's victory means that Christians are assured of God's compassion and Christ's friendship towards mankind. Christ, Who also suffered temptations touching His manhood, ". . .is moved thereby to lay away severity, and to put on the bowels of compassion" (p. 6). Countering the view of Christ as the terrible judge at the Last Day, with the consequent rise in the importance of Mary as merciful mediatrix, a view which gained prominence in the Middle Ages, Andrewes puts our under standing of Christ into proper perspective: Christ is the judge, but more importantly, He is an understanding and compassionate advocate as well. Christians therefore, should look at others' defects and faults with greater compassion. And Christ is now man's friend. Because He has suffered as well, He has become our fellow helper. Andrewes notes that 1 1 . . .we have not onely an example, kut a comfort too" (p. 7). Andrewes broadens the day and time of the battle to include Christ's entire life, not just the immediate ^Esme Wingfield-Stratford, The History of British Civilization (London, 1948), pp. 188-189. present. Christ's early years were latent; the devil did not tempt Him until He entered His mature career. Only after Christ had been baptised and the Holy Spirit des cended to earth in the form of a dove, did the devil set upon Him. In explaining the relationship between tempta tions and grace, Andrewes develops a legal pun: And it is Gods [sic] property to looke for much at his hands, to whom he hath given much. When he gives a man a large measure of grace, he gives the devill withall a large patent. Our Saviour had great gifts, and the devill is like a theefe, that will venter [sic] most for the greatest booty, (p. 7) The last consideration in the first Wilderness sermon is the place of the "lists themselves, that is, the Wildernesse" (p. 2) . That a desolate place was provi dentially chosen is appropriate for two reasons. First, Christ was tempted in the desert in order that He might work out the salvation of mankind alone, that "there might be no fellow-worker with him in the matter of our salva tion . . . ," (p. 8) a fact which parallels Christ's isolation on the Mount of Olives. Second, that Christ's temptations occurred in a desolate place signifies that there is no earthly place where we can escape temptations. And there be some that thinke there be certaine places tbi be exempt from Gods presence, .. . so the Monkes and Hermites thought, that by avoyding company, they should be free from temptations; which is not so. (p. 8) Lest he be misunderstood, Andrewes hastens to add that one should not be careless of places and company: all pious 146! j people should ". . . shunne the company of the wicked. . ." i (p. 8). Finally, he cautions his listeners, when they pray! to be delivered from temptation, that they be delivered "not onely from the devill, but from our selves: we carry : fire within us" (p. 8). The subject of Andrewes' second Wilderness Tempta tion sermon is what he termed the "seventh circumstance" in the first sermon. In the present sermon Andrewes considers the subject of fasting and the devil's initial reply. The text for the first part of this sermon is drawn from Matthew 4:2 ("And when he had fasted forty dayes, and forty nights, hee was afterward hungry."). Consider ing his close dependence upon the reigning sovereign, Andrewes' opening comparison is indeed forceful. He questions Christ's mode of entry into His trial as Prince of Peace and of men. "It may seeme strange," Andrewes . begins, that Christ, Who was "to present himselfe to the world, as Prince, Priest, and Prophet" would "make his progresse into the Wildernesse, and begin with a Fast: for this was cleane contrary to the course and fashion of the world. . ." (p. 9). Most princes would have called a solemn assembly and would have delivered a grand speech setting forth their intention. Christ, however, was no ordinary secular ruler: as God-man, His ways are not our ways. He did the opposite: He fasted, then went into the wilderness to be proven. Depending upon one's point of {view, Christ's fast is considered either: (a) "the entrance into his calling"? or (b) "the entrance into his conflict." Recent writers held to the former view? { "ancient writers" or the Church Fathers held the latter view. But both groups agreed that fasting before "under taking . . . any great and weighty matter" was consonant with Church practice then as well as now (p. 9). Surveying both Testaments, Andrewes cites, in support of this thesis, the examples of Moses, Elias, Paul, Barnabas, and John (p. 9). Fasting was also common to those who were beginning a conflict, as for example Jehoshaphat, Hester, and Peter (pp. 9-10). Andrewes next considers the significance of the forty days period. He sees the duration as consonant with two great issues in Old Testament history: (1) Moses' fast prior to receiving the Law? and (2) Elias' fast after the Law's restoration. Not only was Christ's fast a long one, but it was also complete. Drawing a critical comparison between medieval and contemporary fasting practices and Christ's, Andrewes terms the former as "but a provocation of meates. . ." (p. 10). Such cessations of eating meat were due to the Roman Catholic Church: for that Church's leaders increased the period of fasting while not curtailing the consumption of food to be a means of giving a "counterfeit shew of holinesse" (p. 10) . Reviewing what selected Fathers had to say about fasting, f.......................... '.. ’ ...... 148! : ! t i Andrewes cites St. Augustine's and St. Chrysostom's view j that fasting was a matter of positive rather than eternal law, and not an "exercise of godlinesse" (p. 10). Andrewes looked with severity at the accepted practice of substituting fish for meat, holding that such a practice was ". . .no Fast, but a change of meate" only (p. 11). In his analysis of verse 3 ("Then came to him the Tempter, & c."), Andrewes considers four general points before beginning his analysis of the first temptation. First, Andrewes stresses that Matthew has changed the devil's name from 'devil' to 'tempter,' signifying that a distinction must be drawn between God's tempting (in which God tries a man's mettle and faith) and the devil's temp ting. God's intention is two-fold: (1) to commend men, and (2) to bring forth in men patience and hope (p. 11) . On the human side of the relationship, the outcome of God's temptations is for men to realize that they are naturally weak and are dependent upon God's grace. The devil's temptation is designed to change man's will from potential to actual corruption (p. 11). Andrewes uses comparisons to show the difference: Gods [temptation] is like the tryall of gold, ... • which the oftner it is tryed, the purer it waxeth: the devils, like that of manna, which stinketh and corrupteth by tryall. Gods is like the tryall of the fanne, . . . the devils like that of the scrive, . . . : which lets goe the flower, and keepes the branne. (pp. 11-12) 149| i j ; Second, in his analysis of Satan's mode of coming to Christ, Andrewes distinguishes two ways of encounter: (1) softly (for tempting hypocrites), and (2) violently, j Just as there are two ways of approach, so also there are two ways in which a person may be tempted: "either by doubts arising in our hearts out of us, . . . or by a sop entring into us. . ." (p. 12). Because of Christ's innocence, Satan had to set violently upon Him to cause Him to consider the temptation. Not so with most men, for as Andrewes knowingly tells his audience: "To us the devill needs bring but a paire of bellowes, for he shall finds fire within us: but to Christ he was faine to bring fire too" (p. 12). Third, Satan came while Christ was fasting. In Andrewes' eyes, that the devil came at this time reveals his "desperate boldnesse, as also his craftinesse. . ." (p. 12). Satan's desperate boldnesse" > is seen in his attempting to tempt Christ even though He ( had been newly baptised and was still full of the Holy Spirit; his "craftinesse" is seen in his attempt to tempt Christ at a time when most spirits would have refused the chance. Applied to his listeners, Andrewes comments that Satan assults us even after having just left Church, after having finished praying or confessing, or even after having just received Holy Eucharist. Fourth, Andrewes considers the representative quality of the three temptations Christ endured, noting that they were an 15 Oi i epitome or a "briefe Abridgement of all his temptations" j i i (p. 13). The Bishop aptly compares and contrasts Christ and Adam under these three enticements: For they both were tempted with concupiscence of the flesh, concupiscence of the eye, and pride of life. . . . In Adam the devill first brought him into a conceite, that God envyed his good. As we see Faulconers put hoods over Hawks eyes, to make them more quiet and ready. Secondly, he lulles him on to a proud conceit of him selfe, by perswading him that by eating he should be like God. Thirdly, he sheweth the fruit, which was pleasant. So in Christs temptation: First, he would have brought him to murmure against God: Secondly, to presume: and thirdly, to commit Idolatry. . . . And under these three heads come all temptations. . . . (pp. 13-14) After having surveyed these general points concern ing temptations, Andrewes next confronts the first tempta tion, that of turning stones into bread. Termed "The hungry Temptation," Andrewes takes issue with the majority of Church Doctors who view it as an instance of gluttony, preferring instead to view it as a temptation towards "distrust and despaire" (p. 14). Andrewes argues that had the temptation been ordered towards gluttony, then it should have been "answered by a Text willing sobriety: whereas this Text which Christ answereth by, containeth rather an assertion of Gods providence. . ." (p. 14). By extension, Andrewes considers the ways in which we are tempted to turn stones into bread: by extortion, usury, taking advantage of other's oversights, and trickery (p. 16). But, as in Proverbs 20: 17, that which tasted good will turn to gravel, "After which will consequently 151 j : follow, gnashing of teeth" (p. 16) . j i | Andrewes devotes the entire third sermon to Christ's! reply to Satan's first temptation. The text is found in ; Matthew 4: 4 ("But he answering, said; It is written, Man shall not live by bread onely, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.") . There are two major sections to the sermon: (1) an analysis of the temptation and God's weapons for combatting it; and (2) an analysis of the meaning of God's word. Andrewes, citing the support of the Fathers, maintains that the first part of the temptation is dis trust, and that the second part consists in trying to achieve an end by "unlawfull meanes" (p. 17). The devil, being crafty (as noted in the preceding sermon), seeks to circumvent our faith and obedience, and seeks to cause us to doubt God's promise of providential care towards us, and to satisfy our needs by our own efforts rather than to depend upon God's beneficence. In view of Christ's exam ple, the proper action towards a temptation oriented towards distrust is to answer the temptation by an apt Scriptural passage (pp. 18-19). Continuing the military metaphor (which is the basic image of this sequence of sermons), Andrewes terms Christ "our Captaine" who has "gone before us, and shewed us how to behave our selves in 1 fight. . ." (pp. 18-19). Andrewes then considers the weapons lodged in the Church's armory, of which he 1521 : i i i | mentions five: (1) the preparation of the faithful by the j 1 i sanctifying use of the ordained Sacraments; (2) the with- ! ' < i drawal by the faithful into the desert or some other "solitary place, there (by Meditation) to kindle good thoughts . . . (p. 19); (3) the practice of fasting; (4) the practice of "watchfull prayer . . (p. 19); and (5) "the perfecting our selves in the Scriptures" (p. 19). Instead of trying to turn our "stones" into "bread," Andrewes counsels us to go instead to the Scriptures and to get bread and the water of life from them. "The Scripture is the broad plate that is to beare off the darts: our faith is the braces or handle whereby we take hold. . ." (p. 19). As a reformer, Andrewes sees the personal study of the Scriptures as a most efficacious weapon against temptation; indeed, he is critical of the.medieval Roman Catholic Church for withholding the Scriptures from the laity. No wonder many of the laity lived sinful lives, for the clergy, by withholding the Scriptures, locked "... the storehouse and Armory of the people" (p. 20). Clearly distinguishing between the orders of nature and grace, Andrewes asserts, by way of introducing the second topic, that, although natural philosophers maintain • that all nature is compounded of the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water, religion.or divinity has access to a fifth essence or quintessence: the Word of God (pp. 21-22). Nature, being a creation of God, is also ; 153 I a 'word': it issues "from the mouth of Gods providence, ; i ; creating and governing. . (p. 23). The Word of God, however, "... proceedeth out of the mouth of Gods iProphets, who are (as it were) his mouth. . ." (p. 23). ; About this second Word, Andrewes delineates four "special prerogatives" of it: (1) that mere food alone will not help us? only inner grace derived from God will satisfy us; (2) that God makes no distinction between "course meates and fine" (p. 23) : provided that it is God's will, either will suffice? (3) that God "without meanes . . . worketh sometimes" (p. 23): that God will provide whether or not the usual order of nature obtains or not? as when the earth was originally fertile despite the lack of rain? and (4) that God "... can bring his purpose to passe, even by those meanes, whose natures tend to contrary effects? as to preserve by stones" (p. 23): that God can cure blind ness by dust or use colloquintida as food. Although God can sometimes circumvent the usual order of nature, we should not disturb the two orders by acquiring anything unlawfully, because if we get not our goods by the one word, we shall want the blessing of the other word, and then wee were as good eate stones: it will be but gravell in our mouthes, or Quailes. We are then to use the meanes, according to the second word. (p. 23) Those who try to turn "stones" into "bread" will find at the Latter Day that they "shall feele a gnashing in their teeth, and then they will know it was made of stones" ; (p. 25). Although the orders of nature and grace are distinct, both are subordinate to the unifying will of God,: and any attempt to separate the two by us will end in disaster: if not while we are on earth, then certainly after death. The subject of the fourth sermon is the proposal by Satan of the second temptation: that of taking Christ to the pinnacle of the temple and asking Him to throw Himself i down, depending on God's sending angels to save Him. The passages are derived from Matthew 4: 5-6 ("Then the devill tooke him up into the holy City, and set him on a pinacle of the Temple, and saide unto him, If thou be the Sonne of God, cast thyselfe downe: for it is written, that he will give his Angels charge over thee, and with their hands they shall lift thee up, lest at any time thou shouldst dash thy foote against a stone."). The first temptation was a temptation towards distrust; the second is a temptation of "presidence" or "The wanton Temptation" (p. 27). It is fitting that there be a change of place for this temptation, for a temptation towards "presidence" or presumption is best broached in a public area. "So here the Wildernesse was no fit place, but the Pinacle is a very fit place for one to be presumptious on. It is as good as a stage to shew himselfe upon, to see and to be seene" (p. 28). Delving more deeply, Andrewes describes an order of excellence in the devil's choice of this place: the movement is from the wilderness to the city, not just any city but the Holy City, more appropriately to the temple ' of the Holy City, and finally, to the pinnacle of the temple. Ranging throughout the New Testament, Andrewes cites significant temple temptations: Ananias (who rent his clothes when hearing what seemed to him to be glas- phemy, yet who also bought "his Bishoprick for money") (p. 28); Hedor (who heard John the Baptist preach and yet who committed adultery there) ; and the Pharisee (who made much of tithing mint and cummin, yet who also devoured "Widowes houses, bringing in by extortion, and sending out by excesse") (p. 28) . From this place of temptation, Andrewes the Bishop notes that no place is priviledged from temptation, no Desert so solitary, but the devill will seeke it out: No Pinacle so high, ! but the devill is a Bishop over it, to visit and over- looke it. (p. 29) Note how Andrewes ironically comments upon the Devil as Bishop over even the most sacred of places, even going so far as to pun with the etymological root of Bishop as overseer. In his analysis of this temptation, Andrewes confines his observations to three points: (1) the devil's changed manner; (2) the devil's manner in detail; and (3) the devil's use of Scripture. First, the devil in this temptation presented himself to Christ as a flatterer rather than setting upon Him by violence. 156 The devill (in the former temptation) came out like a malecontent, or a mummer: here he comes like a flat tering parasite, he will yinguare caput ejus oleo, makes his head even swim In the oyle of ostention. (p. 31) In the first temptation, Satan wanted to see if pouring water on the fire of faith would put out the fire; here he pours "the very oyle it selfe to put it out, even that very thing whereby it was to be maintained. . ." (p. 31). Second, continuing the military metaphor, Andrewes terms the temptation a 'dart'; punningly he remarks that this dart "consisteth of two points" (p. 31). In describing the devil's manner, Andrewes compares and contrasts the devil's and God's mode of exaltation. The devil "brings a man up by little and little to some high place, that so he may send him at once with his head downward" (p. 31). God acts in the opposite way, for when "he meaneth to exalt a man, he will first humble him, and make him low ..." (p. 32) and then raise him up through grace. Either act requires a response from us, and the devil knows that although he may tempt us, ". . . unlesse we our selves be consenting, and cast our selves downe, there can be no down-fall to hurt us" (p. 32). Third, the devil can cite Scripture with the intention of convincing us that the quick and easy way of doing something is acceptable in God's eyes. With great irony, the Bishop informs his listeners that they, 157- being such sweete children of God [that], they may j venture whether, and upon what they will; for the i Angels attend them, at an inch. He bids them put the matter in adventure, and then but whistle for an v Angell, and they will come at first. ... (p. 34) All the way up the devil misapplies the Scripture promise that God's mercy endures forever. This mercy, however, lacks justice and judgment. He takes one to the top, and if one should say that it is a long way down, the devil asserts that one "need but a jumpe from [one's] . . . baptisme into heaven [that one], . . . need[s] no staires at all" (p. 34). Closing with this irony, Andrewes has prepared his listeners for his analysis of Christ's answer. The fifth sermon examines Christ's reply to Satan as recorded in Matthew 4: 7 ("Jesus said unto him; It is written againe, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord the God."), anatomizing this response into six parts. Summarizing the object of the first two temptations, the Bishop i contends that one of Christ's ends during His earthly ministry was. to establish faith. The first two sermons, the first being a temptation ordered towards distrust and the second towards presumption, represent the Scylla and Charybdis between which Christ must pilot his vessel in order to reach the port. Continuing the metaphor of fire, Andrewes clearly summarizes the two extremes and the saving golden mean: Faith, is the fire which Christ came to put on the earth, and it is seated betweene two extreames, Distrust, and Presumption. Distrust is as water to it, 158 which, if it be powred on in abundance, it will make it to be smoaking flaxe, or utterly quench it. Presumption (on the other side) is as Gunpowder to it, which being throwne into it, it will blow it up, and make it flye all about the house. Christ was to take heed of over-hearing his Faith, (p. 37) The central point to the ensuing six-part analysis rises from the critical extremes and from Christ’s intention just affirmed. First, in most cases, Christians should use the "ordinary meanes as God hath appointed. . ." (p. 37) . There is a "humour" or eccentric bent inherent in fallen nature "to try conclusions in matters that are rare and unknowne unto them; contemning things common, and to be fond after strange novelties" (p. 37). One should (in most cases) depend upon the ordained system of creation rather than try extraordinary means. However, "where neede is . . . there a man may commit himselfe to the providence of God, and rely upon him" (p. 38) . Because nature is God's creation and is sustained and ordered by Him, Andrewes here means the special providence of God. Citing the examples of Elias, Hagar, Ishmael, and the Israelites in the desert, together with Shadrack, Meshack, Abednego, Daniel, and Job, Andrewes notes that Christ in the desert also trusted God for miraculous food. Next, Andrewes reaffirms the first two points in the light of faith's duty to accept whatever means God offers: "When these are [the ordinary means] , we must use them; but when he offereth as a strange figure, it is scrupulous and foolish nicenesse to refuse it" (p. 38). Christians are to ask forj signs only in important or extraordinary matters, not for every commonplace event, and thus avoiding the presumptious lack of faith characteristic of the Scribes and Pharisees. I Fourth, we ourselves must do all we can in order to achieve: results, not to tempt God to supply what we have failed to store. Fifth, we are obviously supposed to avoid tempting God by presuming an over-familiarity with Him. "It is not to be advocated upon every vaine trifle, for that were to use God as we are wont to use our Juglers" (p. 41). In an oft-quoted pithy sentence, the Bishop warns his listeners not to ". . . make a dung-cart of Gods mercy, let us forbeare him that service of all other" (p. 41). Finally, Andrewes urges faithful humility as the means of avoiding destroying ourselves on either of the two extremes of despair and presumption. Betweene two such Rockes lyeth our way, that is, Presumption, and Desperation; therefore blessed is he that so loveth God, that he can be content to creepe on hands and feete to him. (p. 43) The sixth Wilderness Temptation sermon presents Satan's third temptation, that of offering to Christ the kingdoms of the world if only Christ will worship Satan, and it is based upon Matthew 4: 8-9 ("Againe, the devill taketh him up into an exceeding high Mountaine, and sheweth him all the Kingdomes of the world, and the glory of them. And saith unto him: All these things will I give thee, if 160 thou wilt fall downe and worship me."). Of all the Wilderness Temptation sermons, this one is the most witty and penetrating one relative to Andrewes' knowledge of fallen human nature. With the third temptation, Andrewes indicates that it shows how we are allowed to suffer repeated temptations from the devil. Indeed, "It is the greatest temptation to be without temptation" (p. 44). Despite repeated sallies, we must be on our guard not to succumb in even the smallest matter. Humorously and knowingly Andrewes contends that we must not "Give but an inch [because the devil],,... . will take an Ell: if he can get in but an arme, he will make shift to shove to his whole body" (p. 45). With grotesque punning humor, Andrewes plays with the meaning of Belzebub, another name for the devil. It means ". . .a great flesh Fly, or a master Fly, flap him away never so often, he will still flye thither again" (p. 45). The devil's method of encounter is significantly different than in either of the two preceding temptations. "The devill before came disguised in the shape of a male- content, as that Christ should be in such hunger. Next, he came in the habit of a Divine, and that very demurely, with his Psalter in his hand, how he comes in all his Royalty, like the Prince of this world. . ." (p. 46). This temptation Andrewes calls, following St. Paul in Galatians 3: 1-3, the "bewitching temptation" (p. 46), for where the devil cannot succeed either with sensuality or corrupt spirituality, he hopes to succeed with the pomp and glory of this world. Andrewes thus finds it necessary to con sider the devil's strategy and attendent characteristics of human nature, then to consider the temptation itself, and finally to point out the universal application of this temptation. The chief point in the Bishop's analysis of the devil's strategy is the evil spirit's crafty use of his knowledge about fallen human nature in an attempt to corrupt Christ. "Craftinesse and deceit" are the two "instruments" the devil employs (p. 46) . Andrewes sees a careful removal from the wilderness to the temple, and from thence to the mountain. If Christ were to have fallen in the third temptation, all that had been gained would have been lost. The assumption that Satan made about man in this instance was that the prideful sense of security after having successfully met adversity could be depended upon for success in this temptation. Second, the Bishop sees a fitting parallel between Moses on the mountain from which he could view "the whole Land of Canaan" (p. 46). and Christ's being given the prospect of all the kingdoms of the earth. Third, Satan made a direct appeal to the weakest of our senses. As Andrewes frames it: "There is nothing so soone enticed and led away, as the eye: it is the Broker between the heart, and all the wicked lusts 162 ( j that be in the world" (p. 47). Finally, Satan appealed to the two-fold sense of pride common to natural man. (A) It is the natural desire of natural man to amass as much of the world's riches as he can. Using a fishing metaphor, Andrewes aptly comments that if the devil "... can get them [those men whom Satan tempts] once to swallow his hooke that is within, it will hold them sure enough, and by his line he will draw them to him when he list" (p. 48). (B) No one desires superiors, because all men think that they are above everyone else. "Every one hath this conceit of himselfe, that he is worthier to beare rule than they which are in authority. . ." (p. 48). This conception of mankind certainly bears upon the Tudor and Jacobean concern with the providential choice of rulers and the belief that all nature is purposefully ordered towards gradations and a hierarchial conception of nature, which order must be maintained or else chaos would result.^-0 Having considered the devil's method as based upon his understanding of the springs of action in natural man, Andrewes next turns to an analysis of the temptation itself. What Christ would gain by succumbing to this temptation would be.power over all things and people on earth. Power to command all people, all the greatest •^An excellent example of this belief is found in Ulysses' speech in Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida, I, iii, lines 87-138. 163 :clothes and "smels of the finest scent," all delights of ;the flesh, Why, then to have all mens [sic] hands, feet, bodies~> faces, tongues, and pens: this may be well said All, to have not onely one Kingdome, but all: to have ail the power and glory of those Kingdomes: here is even all the kingdome, the power, and the glory. He [the devil] comes not after a pelting manner, he shews himselfe a franke chapman. . . . (p. 49) The devil becomes a kind of demonic middle-class salesman or merchant, attempting to buy and sell in the most important business transaction ever attempted. The devil appeals to the senses, he comes prepared with "ready money," and he is ready to close the deal on the spot. What the devil offers is termed by the lawyers an Excambium or exchange: for the seemingly simple act of bowing the knee ("a little externall reverence") (p. 50), the devil is prepared to offer Christ all the world. Well, we may thinke there was somewhat in it, that the devill offered so much for so little, and yet Christ refused it. Indeed Christ had great reason to refuse it: for he should have beene a loser by the bargaine. (p. 50) What is at stake is "the glory of God, and the redemption o‘ £ man" (p. 50) . To show how this temptation applies to his listen ers, Andrewes compares and contrasts how all men but Christ would have acted if presented with this temptation. We are by nature incredibly lesser than Christ, so the devil does ! not have to visit us personally, choosing frequently to use 164; j i secondary instruments, as when the devil used Balah' s ■ messengers to tempt Balaam, and when Simon Magus tempted the apostles with simony (p. 51). We have never been tempted with all the kingdomes of the world. Speaking ironically, yet touchingly, the Bishop notes that ... with us it is nothing so; we esteeme farre more basely of ourselves: wee set our wares at a very easie price, he may buy us even dagger-cheape, as we say: he need never carry us so high as the Mount, the Pinacle is high enough; yea, the lowest steeple in all the Towne would serve the turne. Or let him carry us to the Leads or gutters of our owne houses, nay, let us but stand in our window, or in our doores; if he will give us but so much as we can there see, he will tempt us thoroughly, we will accept it, and thanke him too. He shall not need to come to us with Kingdomes, one Kingdome is too much, what say ye to halfe a one? (p. 51) Many will fall for even less than one half of a kingdom: ". . . a . . . halfe a crowne or ten groats, a paire of shooes, or some such trifle, will bring us on our knees to the devil. . ." (p. 51). The devil is sometimes spoken of as a good husbandman; it is rather the case that he rarely has to offer us much before we will fall (p. 51). Coun selling his auditors to have Abraham's "heroicall minde," Andrewes holds that we should spurn the devil's tempta tion (s) and instead hold fast to faith in God's providen tial largesse, serving Him who gives freely, "exacting nothing backe againe. . .1 1 (p. 52). The seventh and last sermon in this series is i devoted to an analysis of Matthew 4: 10-11 ("Then Jesus saith unto him; Get thee hence behinde me Satan: for it 165 is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God & him only shalt thou serve. Then the devill leaveth Aim, and behold the Angels came, and ministered unto him."). In matters j of preferment, Andrewes argues, we will suffer nothing and no one to stand in our way. This being so, either Christ made a bad decision, or else the World (seen in a contemporary light) ". . . is in a wrong byas" (p. 54). Andrewes' answer is properly spiritual. There are things, -he argues, which are far more precious than mere material things. The Kingdoms of the world can be viewed by Christ and Satan ". . .in the twinckling of an eye" (p. 56), whereas God's Kingdom, which is far more to be valued, cannot be seen by natural vision alone. To make the moral decision clearer, Andrewes draws a distinction between worship and service versus covetousness and idolatry. Covetousness leads to idolatry; it means to desire things in an inordinate degree and to become enslaved to either things and/or the devil (p. 56). To worship means to offer our full devoted attention to God; to serve Him means 1 1 . . .to bow the soule, as the other [idolatry] is to bow the body" (p. 57). Granted that God must be served before all other things or beings, yet care must be exercised about the nature of this service. In two pithy sentences, ; Andrewes warns his listeners that We must serve God with our sacrifices, but not with our sinnes, nor weary him with our iniquities. ... We may not make a dung cart of him, to load him with our 166! i sinne and filth, . . . and when he comes againe to havej as much more for him. (p. 57) After Christ affirmed to Satan that God only is to be served and worshipped, Satan left Him. That the devil comes is not unusual, but that he leaves defeated is unusual. "To have the devil not to come to us is a great favour, but to have him come, and goe away conquered, is exceeding mercy" (p. 59). After leaving Him, God's angels came and ministered to Christ. Concluding this sermon, Andrewes, alluding to Judges 4: 18-24, characterizes the way of the world: The world is like Jael, who meetes Sisera . . . and entertaines him at first very friendly, shee allures him to her, and gives him drinke, and layes him downe: but so soone as he was asleep, she smites a naile into his temples: The world beginnes with milke, and ends with a hammer, (p. 59) God's method, as seen in these three temptations, is the opposite. It is God's method ". . .to give bitter first, and sweet afterward. Wherefore we are to wish, that here we may suffer affliction, that we may after be crowned by him" (p. 59). CHAPTER V ANDREWES1 DISCUSSION OF THE PASSION Andrewes delivered the three sermons which comprise the group "Sermons Preached upon Good Friday" before Queen Elizabeth I and King James I and their courts over a period of several years. Sermon one was delivered "AT THE COURT ON THE XXV OF March, A.D. MDXCVII"?1 sermon two was delivered "BEFORE THE KINS [sic] MAIESTIE [sic] AT WHITE HALL, ON the VI of April, A.D. MDCIIII" (p. 249); sermon three was preached "BEFORE THE KINGS MAIESTIE [sic] AT GREENEWICH ON the XXIX of March A.D. MDCV" (p. 365) . Andrewes delivered the first sermon while holding the office of Chaplain to the Queen?2 the second and third sermons were preached before King James I. These three sermons, although separated in time, are unified by the formal meditative exercise of holding a mental picture of Christ's Passion in the auditor's mind's eye and by •^Lancelot Andrewes, XCVI Sermons . . . (London, 1635), p. 333. In this chapter, all references noted parenthetically will be to this edition? in addition, Passion sermon(s) and Good-Friday sermon (s) are inter changeable terms. 2Paul A. Welsby, Lancelot Andrewes, 1555-1626 (London, 1958) , p. 67. 167 168 I meditating upon the personal meaning of Christ's sacrifice Andrewes bases his first Passion sermon upon i Zechariah 12: 10: "And they shall looke upon mee, whom they have pierced" (p. 333). Andrewes begins the sermon proper with a synthetic act: by focusing upon the eunuch's query to St. Philip about the person referred to in Isaiah 53: 7 as found in Acts 8: 34. Andrewes asserts that Christ is the person Isaiah prophecied, thus inter preting the Old Testament in light of the New. By extension, as a critical principle, all parts of the Old Testament point to their fulfillment in the New Testament. Now, if the Eunuch had beene reading this of Zacharie (as then he was, that of Esay) and had aked [sic] the same question of Saint Philip, hee would have made the same answer. And as he, out of those words tooke occasion; so may we, out of these, take the like, to preach Iesus, unto them. For neither of himselfe, nor of any other, but of Iesus, speaketh the Prophet this: and the testimonie of Iesus is the Spirit of this Prophecii~I (p. 333) Seeking further Old Testament parallels, Andrewes next manifests his wit when he connects Psalm 22: 16 with the piercing of Christ's heart. Making a serious point with the play upon 'deer-dear,' 'hart-heart,' and 'morning- mourning,1 Andrewes establishes the duty of the meditating Christian to obey the dictate of the Prophet to look at the subject. Which terme of piercing we shall the more clearely conceive, if with the beginning of Psalme 22. the Psalme of the Passion. For, in the very Front or Inscription of this Psalme, our Saviour CHRIST is compared Cervomatutino, to the morning Hart: that is, 169 I a Hart roused early in the morning (as from His very birth He was by Herod) hunted and chased all his life long, and this day brought to His end, and (as the ! poore Deere) stricken and pierced thorow side, and heart and alls which is it, we are here willed to behold, (p. 334) All stages and phases of Christ's life are worthy of meditation, Andrewes argues, but the Passion is particular ly important because in it we see in small compass the manifestation of the whole. The Passion occupies a central position between two famous elevations: the lifting of the serpent in the wilderness by Moses, and Christ's and the Church's elevation of the Holy Sacrament (p. 334). By looking at Christ's Passion we see the oblative and redemptive act of God towards man, and we receive the special redemptive grace mediated towards us by Christ. This day (I say) which is dedicated to none other end, but even to lift up the Son of Man; as Moses did the serpent in the wilaernesse, tEat we may looTce upon Him and live. . . . (p. 334) To conclude the Introduction, Andrewes uses as the basis of his division the epistemological distinction between the object of vision and the act of seeing; between "I The sight it selfe, that is, the thing tio be seene:^ and the sight of it; that is, the act of seeing or looking" (p. 334). The object of sight, whether found in the Old Testament or the New Testament, is Christ, as Andrewes interprets John 3: 14. Although mentioned only generally in the Old Testament references, Andrewes interprets the jprophets' object as Christ. Because Daniel termed the Jews' saviour Occiditur Messias (Daniel 9: 26), Andrewes asserts that Zachariah could also have written the sermon's text as "Respite in Christum" (p. 335) . Andrewes holds that Zachariah did not do this because of a special leading by the Holy Spirit, there being two reasons for this particular omission. First, "... the better to specifie and particularize the Person of Christ, by the kinde, and most peculiar circumstance of His death" (p. 335) . As support, the Bishop weaves into one cloth several strands drawn from Old Testament sources seen in the light of Christ's particular punishment, beginning with the most general background and concluding with the most particular threads in the figure. Isaiah 53: 10 reads that the Lord "hath put him to griefe: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed. . More particularly, Daniel 9: 26 tells us the mode of Christ's death, that it will be violent, not natural. But there are many sorts of violent deaths, so turning to Psalm 22: 16, Andrewes contends that by inference Christ will die by crucifixion, for there we read "They pierced my hands and my feet" (p. 335) . Finally, the Bishop finishes the pattern by interpreting the sermon's text to mean pierced to the heart, thus by mutual exclu sion referring only to Christ. 171 But, sundry else were crucified; and therefore, the Prophet (here) to make up all, addeth, that He should not only be crucifixus, but transfixus; not only have his hands and His feet, but even his heart pierced too. Which very note severs Him from all the rest, with as great particularity as may be: for that, though many besides at other times, and some at the same time (with him) were crucified? yet, the side and the heart of none was opened, but His, and His only. (p. 335) Assuming that the Holy Bible is in all parts the inspired word of God, and that all parts of the Old Testament anticipate and find their fulfillment in the New Testa ment, it is interesting to see Andrewes1 profound synthetic knowledge of the Bible demonstrated. Second, Andrewes contends that the Holy Spirit suppressed the particular name of Christ in the Old Testament in order that when the fulfillment of the Scriptures occurred in Christ's Passion, that we would then know that it was Christ Himself, and no other, Who is the object of our sight. Secondly, as to specifie CHRIST Himselfe in Person, and to sever Him from the rest, so in Christ Himselfe and in His Person to sever from the rest of His doings and sufferings, what that i£, that chiefly concerneth us, and we specially are to looke to: and that, is this dayes worke, CHRIST Pierced. (p. 335) Just as Christ, being the Word Incarnate, is the end of all our knowing, so the end of all our knowledge of Christ is knowing that He was pierced. Following the lead of St. Paul in I Corinthians 2: 2, Andrewes asserts that . . . the perfection of our knowledge, is CHRIST: The j perfection of our knowledge in, or touching CHRIST, is the knowledge of Christ's piercing. This, is the chiefe Sight; Nay (as it shall after appeare) in this 172 sight, are all sights: So that, know this and know all. (p. 335) It is difficult to single out any one event from a perfect life and say: "Here, look at this and you shall see all." Andrewes does not intend that his hearers pay special attention to this one sight and disregard or minimize all other events in Christ's life; indeed, what he wants his listeners to do is to see how the piercing of Christ's side fulfils the Old Testament, and to cause them to realize what happens when sin meets absolute Love. Christ's life, that is, was a continual passion; what happened on Calvary was an outward expression of Christ's inner, experience throughout His life. The subject of the second part of the first section is "The Object specially" (p. 336), and is divided into the Passion itself and the agents causing the Passion. In his examination of the Passion, Andrewes considers its degree and extent. Andrewes compares trans- fixerunt with other similar Latin words (fixerunt, suffixerunt, and confixerunt) and concludes that the word under examination conveys a greater sense of physical damage than any or all of the three other words. The spearing calls to Andrewes' mind all the other physical punishment rendered to Christ by His tormentors. In a splendid passage based upon opposition, Andrewes emphasizes that despite all of Christ's previous suffering, 173 it is His spearing to which Zechariah alludes. Expressing unto us the piercing, not with whips and scourges? not of the nailes and thornes, but, of the speare-point. Not, the whips and scourges, wherewith His skin and flesh were pierced; nor the nailes and thornes, wherewith His feet, hands and head were pierced; but the Speare-point, which pierced and went through His very heart it selfe; for, of that wound, of the wound in His heart, is this spoken, (p. 336) Notice especially the superb emphasis upon the specific instruments of torture emphasized by the syntactic pattern of parallel opposition. The balancing of the many previous tortures and the present single spearing, the repeated terminal emphasis placed on heart, and the use of repeated prepositional phrases, combined with the specific words whips, scourges, nailes, thornes, speare-point, heart, and wound blend formality and immediacy, manner and matter in superb balance. Andrewes concludes his examination of transfixerunt by using specific English words within’the rhetorical pattern of parallel phrasing to define the Latin word. Therefore trans, is here a transcendent; through and through: through skinne and flesh; through hands and feet, through side and heart and all: the deadliest and deepest wound, and of highest gradation, (p. 336) Just as trans has a graded series of meanings, so also, Andrewes asserts, does the pronoun me. Andrewes agrees with St. Thomas in his definition of the human person.^ Man's being is composite: he is neither body nor soul alone; he is rather body and soul combined in a union which is greater than the parts. This univocal conception of man is particularly important when consider ing the parts of Christ's person. Because He is both God and man, Jesus undergoes suffering that is greater than it would be in the crucifixion of a mere human being. Speaking in Christ's person, Andrewes demonstrates the total involvement of Christ in His suffering when He proclaims: Vpon Me: not, upon my body and soule: Vpon Me, whose Person, not whose parts, either body without, or soule within: but Vpon Me, whom wholly, body and soule, quicke and dead, tEey have pierced, (p. 336) Having established the scope of Christ’s suffering, Andrewes then anatomizes the parts of it. There is no doubt concerning Christ's bodily suffering: all parts of His body were pierced. Andrewes declines to discuss Christ's bodily suffering when he states: "Our senses certifie us of that, what need we further witnesse" (p. 336)? Because the human person is composed of a body and a soul, Andrewes has to consider how it is possible that a soul could be pierced. 3st. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qq. 75 (aa. 1, 2, 4, and 6). See also Frederick Copleston, Aquinas (Harmondsworth, 1961), pp. 87n., 155, and 199, and Etienne Gilson, The Elements of Christian Philosophy (New York, 1963), pp. 222, 229, and 248. 175 Of the Soules [piercing] too, it is as certaine; and there can be no doubt of it neither: that we truly may affirme, CHRIST, not in part but wholly was pierced. For, we should do injury to the sufferings of our Saviour, if we should conceive by this piercing, none other but that of the Speare. (p. 336) To prepare us for the metaphorical nature of Christ's spiritual suffering, Andrewes alludes to Simeon's prophecy to Mary (Luke 2: 35) that "... the sword should goe i through her soule, at the time of His Passion" (p. 336). If such was the case for Mary, it follows that the sword shall pierce Christ's soul also. Andrewes distinguishes between Mary's suffering, which was according to the mode of anima compatientis, and Christ's, which was anima patientis (p. 336). It is obvious that the spear in this case is neither metallic nor single; instead, Christ's soul was pierced by sorrow and by reproach. The scriptural basis for the former is I Timothy 6: 10; for the latter Psalm 64: 3-4. These passages serve only to identify the twin causes of spiritual pain; they obviously do not refer to Christ in particular. That Christ suffered with sorrow is recorded by all | four Evangelists: Matthew 26: 30, Mark 14: 33-34, Luke 22: 44, and John 12: 27. Combined with this adduction'of the four Evangelists' accounts is the earlier incident on the Mount of Olives where Christ sweated blood in His agony. Of particular interest is the handling of Matthew 27: 46 in the light of Christ's sorrow. Andrewes does not . . . . . i 176| try to explain its Christological meaning: for him it is a sign of great agony ("It is the Soules complaint") (p. 337) , yet he hesitates to interpret it to mean that i Christ was at that point not in unity with the Father (". . . His Soule within him was pierced, and suffered, though not that, which (except charity be allowed to expound it) cannot be spoken without blasphemy. . .") (p. 337). Andrewes’ conclusion indicates anxiety: it is a cry which is "dangerous to define" (p. 337). The other piercing of Christ's soul came from reproach. Reproach takes the form of immediacy and eternality. Immediately Christ was reviled by those who spat upon Him, by the beating, the pressing down of the Crown of Thorns, the jeering of those who mockingly termed Him King of the Jews, and finally, by those who said to Him: "Stay, let alone, let us see, if ELIAS will now come and take Him downe" (p. 337). Eternally, Christ was aware i of all men who continued to remain in their sins and who rejected God's Incarnate love for man. Our "... unces- sant sinning, and that without remorse, doe most unkindly requite those His bitter Paines, and as much as in us lies, even crucifie afresh.the SON of GOD. . ." (p. 338). By emphasizing Christ's ability to see all men before Him in the eternal present, Andrewes carefully prepares a means of moving from the Passion itself to 177 ; "The Persons, a quibus" (p. 338). Andrewes is definite : about the complicity of all men in Christ's death. We are all responsible; we cannot place the blame upon the Jews, the soldiers, Pilate, or the Jewish leaders. Although he obviously cannot absolve any of the afore mentioned parties, Andrewes argues, with an analogy from legal proceedings, that these parties are the enforcers of a system. In the course of Iustice, we say and say truly; when a party is put to death, that the Executioners cannot bee sayd to be the cause of his death; nor the Sheriffe, by whose commandement he doth it; neither yet the Iudge by whose sentence; nor the Twelve men, by whose verdict, nor the Law it selfe, by whose authority it is proceeded in. . . . (p. 338) Through personification, he holds that "Sin, and Sin only is the murtherer" (p. 338). Following Isaiah 53: 3-4, Andrewes restates the central Christian idea that Christ was the atoning sacrificial victim for all mankind. Therefore, when we meditate upon Christ's Passion, we should realize that it is we who have caused His grievous suffering. So that it was the sinne of our polluted hands, that pierced his hands: the swiftnesse of our feet to doe evili, that nailed His feet: the wicked devises of our Heads, that gored his head: and the wretched desires of our hearts, that pierced his heart. We that looke upon, it is we that pierced Him: and it is we that pierced him, that are willed to looke upon Him. ; Which bringeth it home to us; to me my selfe that speake, and to you your selves that heare; and applieth it most effectually to every one of us, who evidently seeing, that we were the cause of. this his piercing, if our hearts be not too too hard, ought to have remorse, to be pierced with it. (p. 339) The second part of the sermon proper naturally I follows. The sight is Christ; the act is to look upon Him. We are to look at Christ for several reasons. First, it is a natural act to look; Andrewes cites the examples of the Priest and the Levite in the account of the prodigal son and the army's looking at the slain Amasa (as found in 2 Samuel 20; 12; the marginal notes incorrectly refer- to 2 Samuel 22: 12 as support). Second, grace inclines us to consider the operation of Providence in the world. More specifically, Christ, through the Old Testament prophets, has enjoined us to contemplate Him, as witness the sermon's text and Lamentations 1; 12. With knowledge of selfish human nature, Andrewes appeals to self-interest as a motive for contemplating Christ's Passion. If we do not meditate upon His Passion while living, He will repudiate us at the Last Judgment. "... God shall not looke upon him, at ours whom we would not looke upon, at his request" (p. 340). We must not casually consider Christ; instead, we must contemplate Him in His suffering with attention. First then, not slightly, superficially or perfunc torily, but stedfastly, and with due attention, to looke upon Him. And, not to looke upon the out-side alone; but, to looke into the very entrailes; and with ; our eye to pierce him that was pierced. (p. 341) Looking with attention, we would see; (1) that He is a man, thus deserving of pity; (2) that He was innocent; (3) that He, as Pilate saw, was "GOD himselfe, and no man that here speaketh. . ." (p. 341); and (4) that we would : f gain comfort from the recognition that Christ suffered for man's sake; we would see "Even the bowels of compas sion and tender love, whereby hee would and was content to suffer all this for our sakes" (p. 341). We are not only to look with attention, we are also to look with iteration. Repeated meditation will correct our former inattentiveness and will yield new insights into the degree and depth of God's mercy. The effects of such iterative contemplation will be sevenfold. First, "Respice & transfigere" (p. 342) . By looking at Christ, we will be pierced with compunction; we will be "pricked in our hearts. . ." (p. 342) . Second, 1 1 Re spice & transfige" (p. 343) . "Look upon Him, and pierce: and pierce that in thee, that was the cause of CHRIST'S piercing: (that is) sinne and the lusts thereof" (p. 343). Third, "Respice & dilige" (p. 343) . In a clever passage, Andrewes plays upon the identification of Christ as Logos in an expanded metaphor of book reading. Which love we may read in the palmes of His hands. . . . For, in the Palmes of His hancTs, He hath graven us, that he might not forget us. And tKe print of ” • peiies in them, are as Capitall letters to record his love toward us. For, CHRIST pierced on the Crosse is liber charitatis, the very booke of love laid open before us. (pp. 343-344) It is through Christ's lancing that the meaning of this divine book is expressed. 180! | The point of the Speare serves us instead of a key f letting us, through his wounds, see his very bowels, the bowels of tender love and most kind compassion, that would lor us endure to be so entreated, (p. 344) Fourth, "Respice & crede" (p. 344).’ . Using alliteration, Andrewes sees an intimate connection "... betweene their beholding [the Jews looking at the raised brazen serpent in the Wilderness] and our beleeving. . ." (p. 344). Fifth, "Respice & spara" (p. 344). Christ's death delivered us from our present evil and restored us to "... the good of our primitive felicitie" (p. 344). Let us look with hope, then, for the perfect life of heaven. Sixth, "Respice & Recipe" (p. 345). We should contemplate the out-poured water and blood, and thereby be moved to partake of the Eucharist. Finally, "Respice & Retribue" (p. 345). Our relationship with Christ requires mutual acts; as we receive God's salvific grace, we must give humble thanks for our unmerited gift of grace. In addition to looking with attention and iteration,: we must force ourselves to contemplate Christ's Passion. Not a pleasant sight, we must perforce contemplate Him: ". . . Doe it, I say; for, done it must be" (p. 346). If we fail to contemplate the Passion while living, then when we appear before Christ on the Latter Day we will be rejected by Him. Andrewes' second Good-Friday sermon is based upon Lamentations 1: 12 ("Have yee no regard, o all ye that 181’ i passe by the way? Consider, and behold, If ever there were sorrow, like my Sorrow, which was done unto me, wherewith ! the Lord did afflict me in the day of the fiercenesse of His wrath."). This passage, although similar to the text of the first sermon in its use of the theme of looking, is somewhat different in emphasis from the first sermon's text. In the first, the guilt of the observers is paramount: they are bidden to look at the One they have pierced? in the second sermon's text, the on-lookers are indifferent or apathetic in the first sentence, and in the second sentence they are asked to meditate upon the fact that the sufferer's pain is caused by God. The scope of this sermon is clearly being expanded by Andrewes: although the viewers may have been responsible for pierc ing the Sufferer, they are only instruments of Providence: it is God who directs the show. In the Introduction to the sermon proper, Andrewes again interprets the Old Testament in the light of the fulfillment of the many into the one; of the various Old Testament sufferings as prefigurations of the perfect suffering of Christ. The sufferings of the Israelites caused by the devastation of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans (Jeremiah 37-39), the rescuing of the Israelites from Egypt by God (Hosea 11: 1), David's cry of despair (Psalm 22: 1), the attempted sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham (Genesis 22: 7 ff.), and the selling of Joseph by his 182 brothers (Genesis 37: 28). In the light of Christ's life, j all of these acts and people are unified. : Of all which the ground is, that correspondence 1 which is betweene CHRIST and the Patriarchs, Prophets, and people before CHRIST, of of [sic] whom the Apostles i[sic] rule is Omnia in figura contingebant illis. That they were themselves Types, and their sufferings, forerunning figures of the great suffering ! of the SONNE of GOD. (p. 350) Andrewes concludes the Introduction with a statement of the division: "The Quality and the Cause of His suffer ing . ” In the first section of the main discussion, the Bishop examines the parties to whom the verse is addressed.! This day is no ordinary day, because ”. . .a generall stay is made of all passengers, this day" (p. 351). No matter what anyone is going to do, ". . .Be they never so great, your occasions; they are not, they cannot bee so great as this. . ." (p. 352). Andrewes next makes a fine distinction between beholding and considering. To behold ". . .is but to gaze ..." (p. 352), and gazing is expressly condemned (Acts 1: 11); it is to look without thinking about the object of sight. To consider means to think about the meaning of what one is observing. But because, to Behold, and not to consider, is but to gaze; and gazing the Angel blameth in the Apostles themselves, we must do both: Both behold, and consider: looke upon, with the eye of the body, that is, behold; and looke into, with the eye of the mind, that is, Consider, (p. 352) What we are to consider is the nature and causes of J 183 | the sorrow. To consider the quality of the suffering, as expressed in "If ever the like," Andrewes delineates three Hebrew words as ways of describing the three parts of Christ's sorrow. The first is . . . Mac-ob (which wee read Sorrow) , taken from a wound or stripe, as all doe agree. The second is . . . Gholel; we read Done to me, taken from a word that signifieth Melting in a fornace [sic]; as St. Hierome noteth out of the Chaldee (who so translateth it). The third is . . . Hogay where wee read Afflicted, from a Word which importeth Renting off, or Bereaving. The old Latine turneth it Vindemiavit me, as a Vine whose fruit is all plucked off. The Greeke (with Theodoret) . . . as a Vine or Tree, whose leaves are all beaten off, and is left naked and bare. In those three, are comprized His Sufferings, Wounded, Melted, and Bereft, leafe and fruit (that is), all manner of comfort! (p. 353) Andrewes then examines these three parts of Christ's sorrow within the legal distinction between poena sensus and poena damniy between felt grief and forgone grief. Mac-ob or Wounded and Gholel or Melted are classed under poena sensus, and Hoga or Bereft is classed under poena damni. Of all that is penall, or can be suffered, the common division is, Sensus & Damni, Griefe for that we feele, or for that we forgoe. For that we feele, in the two former, Wounded in body, Melted in soule: for that we forgoe, in the last; Bereft of all, left neither fruit, nor so much as a leafe to hang on him. (p. 353) In his examination of Christ's bodily wounds, Andrewes surveys the course of punishments Christ with- 184 j stood from the scourging after the trial to the piercing of His side and heart while on the Cross. Our very eye will soone tell us, no place was left in His Body, where He might be smitten, and was not. His skin and flesh rent with the whips and •scourges, His hands and feet* wounded with the nailes, His head with the thornes, His very heart with the speare-point; all His senses, all his parts loden with whatsoever wit1 or malice could invent, (p. 353) The parallelism of phrases, combined with simplicity of diction and the lack of modifying words, effectively conveys the horror of Christ's physical sufferings. By contrast in the next sentence, however, Andrewes meta- : i phorically discusses Christ's body as the anvil of violent blacksmiths. "His blessed body given as an Anvile to be beaten upon, with the violent hands of those barbarous miscreants, till they brought. Him -into this case. . ." (p. 353). Hard and cruel as these tortures are, however, it might be possible to find a comparable account of penal bodily suffering. But Christ's agony in the soul is incomparable. A gauge of Christ's sufferings in the soul is seen in His sweating blood in the Garden of Gestheme. Concen trating upon the etymological source of Gholel, Andrewes continues the blacksmith metaphor when he notes that in the Garden ". . .a fire was sent into His bones which melted Him, and made that bloudy sweat to distill from Him" (p. 354). 1 8 5 | I As Andrewes begins his discussion of poena damni, ' i he changes his figure from blacksmithing to trees. The comparison is between the desolate Christ and trees from which "... whose leaves and whose fruit are all beaten off quite, and it selfe left bare and naked both of the one and of the other" (p. 355). Andrewes continues the figure as he considers how others related to Christ. Comforts and people are spoken of as leaves: "... as what is left the meanest of the sonnes of men, was not left Him: Not a leafe. Not a leafe! Leaves I may well call all humane comforts and regards, whereof He was then left cleane desolate" (p. 355) . Andrewes considers the Jewish people as withered leaves. These people were those with whom Christ spent His ministry, those whom Christ taught, saved, and fed, and who rejected Him out of hand. His owne, they among whom Hee had gone about all His life long, healing them, teaching them, feeding them, doing them all the good He could, it is they that cry, not Him, no, but Barabbas rather; away with Him, His bibud bee upon us and our children" (p. 355) Andrewes speaks of Christ's disciples as green leaves. Withered leaves easily fall from trees; but green leaves are supposed to remain attached* But even those closest to Christ fell away from Him. They then that on earth were nearest Him of all, the greenest leaves and likest [sic] to hang on, and to give Him some shade: even of them, some bought and sould Him; others denied and forswore Him, but all fell away, and forsook Him. (p. 355) 186 ; Both withered and green leaves are natural, and it is natural for natural things to fail in the order of grace. ! But according to the chosen text, even the order of grace was denied Christ in His agony. Andrewes shifts his metaphor from the universe of trees to that of vines. The fruit of the vine he identifies with divine consola tion . But leaves are but leaves, and so are all earthly stayes. The fruit then, the true fruit of the Vine indeed, the true comfort in all heavinesse, is Desuper, from above, is divine consolation. But Vindemiavit me, . . . even that was, in this His sorrow, this day bereft Him too. (p. 355) Changing back to the tree metaphor, Andrewes expresses Christ's natural and supernatural desolation with a wasteland image: ”... between the passioned powers of His soule, and whatsoever might any wayes refresh Him, there was a Traverse drawne, and He left in the state of a weather beaten tree, all desolate and forlorne" (p. 355). In the first sermon, Andrewes was reluctant to confront the problem bi the momentary dissolution of the Trinitarian relationship between the Father and Son at the time of Christ's lament (Matthew 27: 46). In the second sermon, Andrewes, following Leo the Great, maintains that at that point the Trinitarian relationship was not broken, but was rather restrained. The purpose of this restraining was to show man the extent of God's love,- that never had there been a sorrow like Christ's, and in recognizing how far 187 i j God would go for man, would thus . . kindle our love and loving Regard. . ." (p. 356). In discussing this changed Trinitarian relationship, Andrewes continues using ; wasteland and desolate tree imagery in a sentence composed of a series of sequential clauses. The union [between the three persons of the Trinity! was not dissolved; True, but the beames, the influence was restrained; and, for any comfort from thence, His soule was, even as a scorched heath-ground without so much as any drop of dew of divine comfort; as a naked tree, no fruit to refresh Him within, no leafe to give Him shadow without; The power of dark- nesse let loose to afflict Him; The influence of comfort, restrained to relieve Him. (p. 356) Andrewes' next consideration is the quality of Christ's Person. In this section, Andrewes concerns himself with four points; (1) that Christ shared our humanity; (2) that He was just and innocent; (3) that Christ was the noblest of all men; and (4) that He was the Son of God. The order of progression here is important: he proceeds in scalar order, beginning with the lowest common denomin ator of the basic humanity of Christ, proceeding to increasingly finer and higher distinctions, concluding with the highest distinction: that Christ was not only man, He was also God. By concluding his discussion of the quality of Christ's suffering with the dual nature of His identity, Andrewes easily moves to his second main point: the causes of His desolation: (1) that it was God's doing; (2) that it was due to sin; and (3) that it occurred for jour benefit. ; In his consideration of the first cause, he establishes his point within the ruling metaphor of a trial, an appropriate metaphor because of its echo of Christ’s trial and because of the moral and legal implica tions of the squaring of God's love and divine justice. ’ ’ Let there now be a quest of Inquiry to finde, who was the doer of it" (p. 358), Andrewes begins. Echoing the popular and obvious view, he states "Who? who, but the Power of darknesse, wicked Pilate, bloudy Caiaphas, the envious Priests, the barbarous Souldiers" (p. 358)? The judge agrees with none of these accusations: "none of these are returned here. We are too low, by a great deale, if wee thinke to finde it among men" (p. 358). Only one hour on Good Friday was an hour of darkness, "... but, the whole day it selfe, is said here plainely, was the day of the wrath of GOD" (p. 358). Andrewes draws a distinc tion between two sorts of divine affliction: between the gentle and mild affliction of mercy, and between the i affliction of fierce wrath. Clearly, Christ's great I sufferings, manifested in His "Sweat and Crie," show that they come "... from a wrath, Si fuerit sicut. . ." (p. 358). God, however, only acts with cause; in Andrewes we 1 do not find a possibly capricious God such as Scotus conjectured.4 The cause of God's wrath is sin. Yet, as j j was established in point two of the last section, Christ was guilty of no sin, but was wholly innocent and pure. j Yet the Biblical text admits of no other interpretation than that God in His fierce wrath afflicted Christ. God is not like Annas (John 18) , to have someone struck with out cause. "GOD forbid . . . the Judge of the World should; doe wrong to any. To any but specially, to his owne Sonne. . (p. 358). The reason for God's afflicting His only Son was to punish Him for the sake of others, thus satisfying God's demand for justice and Christ's innocence. By assuming the sinful nature of all other men, justice is satisfied and perfect innocence is maintained. To express Christ's role as the sacrificial lamb slain for mankind's sins, Andrewes continues his court metaphor by speaking of Him as a surety offered to settle a debt. Pitie it is, to see a man pay that, he never tooke: but if he will become a Surety, if he will take on him the person of the Debtor, so he must. Pitie to see a silly poore Lambe lie bleeding to death; but, if it must be a sacrifice . . . so it must. And so CHRIST, though without sin in Himselfe, yet as a Surety, as a Sacrifice, may justly suffer for others, if He will take upon Him their persons; and so, GOD may justly give way to His wrath against Him. (p. 358) 4John Duns Scotus, Opus Oxoniese, 1, 17, 3, no. 18 and 1, 8, 5, nos. 23f., Quaestiones Quodlibetales, 16, and Reportata Parisiensia, 1, 45, 2, no. 7. See also Frederick Copleston, A History of Philosophy (New York, 1962), vol. 2, part 2, pp. 253-255. 19°: Andrewes now directs his sermon to his^listeners. We | i j , cannot shift the epithet "murderer" onto Pilate and ; ' j Caiaphas and all the others, for they are but "instru mental causes only" (p. 359). Just as in the first Good- Friday sermon, Andrewes distinguishes between the guilt due a private murderer and the absolution from particular guilt due a judge or public executioner. To returne then a true verdict. It is we (we, wretched: sinners that we are) that are to be found the princi pals in this act; and those, on whom we seeke to shift ; it, to derive it from our selves, Pilate and Caiaphas and the rest, but instrumental! causes only. And it is not the executioner that killeth the man properly (that is, They:), No, the Iudge (which is GOD, in this case:) Only sin, Solum peccatum homicida est, Sin only is the murtherer, to say the truth; and our sinnes, the murtherers of the SON of GOD: and the Non sicut of them, the true cause of the Non sicut both of GODS (sic] wrath, and of His sorrowful 1 sufferings, (p. 359T The reason why Christ became our surety, why He was murdered for our debts, was because of His pure choice to act out of love for us; Christ acted out of regard for us. Andrewes then moves to his concluding section by playing with the word 'regard.' If Christ regarded us worthy of His sacrificial love, "... shall this Regard finde no regard at our hands" (p. 360)? All things point towards our accepting Christ's salvific benefit. At the time of Christ's death, nature had regard for Him: the sun darkened, the earth trembled, and the stones split. Second, if we do not accept Christ here on earth, we shall suffer God's wrath at the Latter 191 Day. If we do not accept the benefit freely and lovingly offered us while on earth, then we must accept the peril of God's eternal wrath after death. Therefore, let us have some regard for Christ in His Passion. If we do, we will doubtless: feele our hearts pricked with sorrow, by consideration of the cause in us, our Sinne: And againe, warme within us, by consideration of the cause in him, his Love; till by some motion of Grace he answere us, and shew that our regard is accepted of Him. (p. 363) Hebrews 12: 2 ("Looking unto IESUS the Author and finisher of our Faith; who for the joy that was set before Him, endured the Crosse and despised the shame; and is set at the right hand of the Throne of GOD":) is the Scriptural basis for Andrewes1 third Good-Friday sermon. This sermon, because of its more hopeful subject, is the wittiest of the three sermons. In the two earlier sermons Andrewes takes up the key word 'regard' and analyzes the Scriptural texts with a meditative emphasis. To justify this text as visual, Andrewes refers to Luke 23: 48 (mislabelled in the ; gloss as Luke 13: 48) in which Luke refers to the Passion as a "Theorie or Sight, which Sight is it, the Apostle here calleth us to looke unto" (p. 365). Although one consistent meaning of 'theory' in the first two paragraphs is a viewing, sight, or spectacle, Andrewes includes in the second paragraph the meaning of 'theory' in which it becomes the keystone in the arch of human knowledge. Christ is doubtless to "bee looked on . . . at all times, 191 Day. If we do not accept the benefit freely and lovingly offered us while on earth, then we must accept the peril of God's eternal wrath after death. Therefore, let us have some regard for Christ in His Passion. If we do, we will doubtless: feele our hearts pricked with sorrow, by consideration of the cause ’ in""us, our Sinne: And againe, warme within us, by consideration of the cause in him, his Love; till by some motion of Grace he answere us, and shew• that our regard is accepted of Him. (p. 363) Hebrews 12: 2 ("Looking unto IESUS the Author and finisher of our Faith; who for the joy that was set before Him, endured the Crosse and despised the shame; and is set at the right hand of the Throne of GOD":) is the Scriptural basis for Andrewes' third Good-Friday sermon. This sermon, because of its more hopeful subject, is the wittiest of the three sermons. In the two earlier sermons Andrewes takes up the key word 'regard' and analyzes the Scriptural texts with a meditative emphasis. To justify this text as visual, Andrewes refers to Luke 23: 48 (mislabelled in the ; gloss as Luke 13: 48) in which Luke refers to the Passion i as a "Theorie or Sight, which Sight is it, the Apostle here calleth us to looke unto" (p. 365) . Although one consistent meaning of 'theory' in the first two paragraphs ! is a viewing, sight, or spectacle, Andrewes includes in the second paragraph the meaning of 'theory' in which it becomes the keystone in the arch of human knowledge. Christ is doubtless to "bee looked on . . . at all times, 192 and in all acts; but, then, and in that act, specially" when He endured the Cross (pp. 365-366) . In support of this view, Andrewes cites St. Paul's comment to the Corinthians: "For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified" (I Corinthians 2: 2). Christ, being the Logos, is the chief object of the knowledge, and His Passion is the chief fact of His life: "... the perfection of our knowledge, in, or touching CHRIST, is the knowledge of His Crosse, and Passion. That, the chief Theorie: Nay in this, all; so that, see this, and see all" (p. 366). Wittily, Andrewes adds: if Christ's Passion is the chief theory, "Let us then turne aside to see this great Sight" (p. 367). The division of this sermon consists of: (1) the analysis of the sight; and (2) what we are to do with our knowledge. To restate the distinction, Andrewes distin guishes between theory and praxis. "In the one is the Theorie or sight we shall see, thus looking. In the other the praxis of this theorie; What this sight is to worke in us: and that is a motion, a swift motion Running: So to looke on it, that we run; and so to runne, that we faint not" (pp. 367-368). In this opposition, Andrewes cleverly opposes theory (in this context meaning sight) with praxis (meaning the practice of something as distinguished from theory). What Andrewes has done is to make praxis be opposed to an unstated meaning of theory, and he has ......... 193] combined it with St. Paul's famous advice to the Hebrews j (the second verse of which forms the basis of this sermon): j Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the Cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12: 1-2) Andrewes begins his analysis of "The Object, The Author, & Finisher of our faith, IESUS," the first part of ; the sermon proper, with an extended analysis of the implications of "author and finisher" as stated in the Pauline epistle just quoted. The first interpretation of this polarity is to restate in it the light of John the Divine's description of Christ as the beginning and the end, the Alpha and Omega (Revelation 1: 8, 11; 21: 6; and 22: 13), combined with John's description of Christ as the Divine Word or Logos (John 1: 1-5). Worthy of note is Andrewes' wit as manifested in his marshalling various Biblical texts into the metaphor of Christ as the Word of i God in a word's various combinations. Author and Finisher are two titles, wherein the HOLY GHOST oft setteth him forth, and wherein He seemeth to take speciall delight. In the very letters, He taketh to Him the name of Alpha the Author, and againe of Omega, the Finisher of the Alphabet. From letters goe to words: there is he Verbum in principio i the Word at the beginning: And he is Amen too, the word at tEe end. From words to bookes: In' capite libri scriptum est de me, In the very front of the book he is: and he~Ts . . . the recapitulation, or conclusion of it too. And so, goe to Persons: there 194 He is Primus and novissimus, the first and the last. And from Persons to Things: and there He is, the Beginning and the encT 77 . The ‘ first’ beginning, a quo, He; b£ whom ail things are made: and the last end He; Per or proptes quern, by, tor, or through whom ail things are made perfect, (p. 368) The Biblical sources for the progressive titles in this extended metaphor are as follows: (1) for Alpha and Omega Andrewes drew from Revelation 1: 8 and 11; (2) for the idea of Christ as the Word, John 1: 1; (3) the idea for Christ as the Amen or end of the book, Revelation 3: 14; (4) Christ as book, Psalm 40: 7; (5) Christ as recapitula tion, Ephesians 1: 10; (6) Christ as a person Who is first and last is an obvious repetition of Christ as Alpha and Omega, Revelation 1: 17; (7) joining words, persons, and things together is the idea of Christ as the make and final cause of all that is, Colossians 1: 16. Aside from Scriptural accuracy, this quoted passage from the third Good-Friday sermon is a precise and compressed expression of wit: Andrewes' enumeration of Christ as the basic element out of which utterances are made, to books, the most complex system of words, and concluding with Christ as the pattern by which and towards which all things are oriented, is an original synthesis of Him by Whom and in Whom all creation has its being. A variation upon Christ as author and finisher of our faith, finds expression in Andrewes' development that our faith was authored by Christ in His Passion and was 195! | finished when Christ ascended into heaven, assuming His j throne by the right hand of the Father. Andrewes broadens 1 :the original word and author metaphor. Christ was: Author, on the Crosse: then he paid the price of our admitting. Finisher, on the Throne: there he is the prize to us o£ our course well performed, of the wel [sic] finishing our race, the race of our faith. (p. 369) At first glance this metaphorical development may seem to be mixed; hence, Andrewes has violated the rhetorical principle of unity. Not so, however: by generalization, Andrewes shifts his sense of 'author' from the writer of a book to a "person who originates or gives existence to anything."5 of all human actions being fulfilled on the Cross. These motives are love and hope: "The Love He hath to us, in His Passion on the Crosse. The hope we have of Him, in His Session on the Throne" (p. 370). Only in Christ's Passion are these two motives joined. In all secular acts,; by contrast, either love or hope is the single motive. Love Andrewes sees exemplified in a mother's care for her child: What moveth the Mother to all the travell and toyle she taketh with h€ *" " “ - - - ’ ' g, Andrewes' next tack is to see the two chief motives she is in yeares 1964), vol. 1, p. 125. ^The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford 196 receive any benefit by it: It is love and love onely. (p. 370) i Men likewise suffer cares in their secular acts. Mer chants, farmers and ranchers, and military men all act with the hope of making a profit. What moveth the Merchant and so the Husbandman, and so the Military-man, and so the rest? All the sharpe showres and stormes they endure, they love them not: It is hope and hope onely of a rich returne. (p. 370) i Separate in secular affairs, Christ's salvific suffering on the Cross marries love and hope for mankind and ! inspires reciprocal love and hope from us. In a passage of syntactic excellence, Andrewes, through the use of alliteration, repetitio of clauses, prepositional phrases, and words, and linked short phrases and clauses, reveals both human insufficiency and divine plenitude, and salvation freely offered to man. If either of these will serve us, will prevaile to move us, here it is. Here is Love; love in the Crosse: Who loved us and gave Himselfe for us, a sacrifice on the Crosse. Here is hopeT hope in the Throne: To~him that ov'ercommeth will I give, to sit with me, In m^ Throne. If our eye be a Mothers~Tsic) eye, here""Ts Love worth the looking on. If our eye be a Merchants (sic] eye, here is hope worth the looking after. I know, it is true, that verus amor vires non sumit de spe. (It is Bernard): Love if it be true indeed, as in the Mother, receiveth no manner strength from hope. Ours is not such; but faint and feeble and full of imperfection: Here is hope there fore, to strengthen our weake knees, that we may runne the more readily, to the high price of our calling. (p. 370) In order to satisfy our hope through the expression of His love for us on the Cross, Christ had to overcome loss of life and to endure shame. Continuing the Pauline race metaphor, Andrewes notes that: In the race, which before U£ and for us our blessed SAVIOUR ran, these two great blocks, Death, and Disgrace were in his way. Neither stayed him: to testifie his Love, over both he passed, (p. 370) In his profound knowledge of the selfishness of the human heart, Andrewes scornfully comments upon how we would expect to be praised for sacrificing either our life or our honor for another. O, if we should hazard but one of these two, for any creature living, how much adoe would we make of it, and reckon the party eternally obliged to us! Or if any should venture them for us, we should be the better, every time we saw him. (pp. 370-371) Christ did not hesitate, He did not count the cost: He acted for us. "Life is sweet: The Crosse cost him his life. Honor is deare: Shame berest him his honor. . . . Neither one nor other, life or honour, held he deare, to doe us good" (p. 370) . By sacrificing Himself for us, Christ repaired the damage done to human nature occasioned by the first or original sin committed by Adamrand Eve. It is through the perfect satisfaction for their and for all succeeding sin by Christ's perfect sacrifice that we are once more put into a state of grace. Andrewes continues his analysis of human nature as he compares and contrasts Adam and Eve with Christ. In a pithy sentence, characterized also by parallelism and alliteration, Andrewes summarizes the relationship between man's 198 | I sinfulness and Christ's love. "It [Andrewes' analysis of original sin and of Christ's sacrifice] will shew a good congruitie betweene our sickhesse and his salve, betweene our debt and His discharge" (p. 371) . Adam and Eve were motivated to sin by pleasure and pride. Pleasure, because the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was "pleasant to the eyes" (Genesis 3: 6); pride, because they thought that by eating they could become like gods in their knowledge. Counter ing and redressing Adam and Eve's pride and pleasure is the Passion of Christ. Behold him, in his patience, enduring pain, for our wicked lust? in his humility, having shame powred on him, for our Wretched prideT . . . Thus may we, under one behold our selves, and oui: wretched demerits, in the mirror of His Passion, (p. 371) Andrewes lavishes some of his finest wit upon his contemplation of Christ preceding His suffering on the Cross. He singles out for particular discussion Christ's scourging in Gabbatha, speaking of it as if Christ were a field which had to be prepared for sowing, and Golgotha, where the piercing of His hands and feet is spoken of as ditch-digging: In Gabbatha, they [the soldiers] did not whip Him . . .; [,] they ploughed his backe, and made (not stripes, butj long furrowes) upon itT They did not put on Hxs wreath of thornes, ancT presse it downe with their hands, but beat it on hard with batts, to make it enter through skinne, flesh, skill, and all. They did not (in Golgotha) pierce his hands and feet, but made wide holes (like that of a spade) as if they had been digging m some ditch, (p. 374) As in the first two sermons, Andrewes notes the i shame suffered by Christ: (1) His being whipped reduced ! Him to the level of a slave; (2) He knew human dishonesty j when Barrabas was freed by the crowd; (3) He suffered the humiliation occassioned by the levity with which the people treated the Passion ("A Passion it was: yet by their behaviour it might seem a may-game" (p» 376); and (4) He suffered the paines of the damned, for "... this death was cursed by GOD Himselfe [out of] , His owne mouth. . . . When all is said wee can say, this this is the hardest point of His shame, and the highest point of His love in bearing it" (p. 377). Yet, despite all the shame Christ suffered, He never lost His composure; but instead, suffered all with equanimity: He maintained a "good heart, the free forward minde, the chearefull affection, wherewith He did all this" (p. 378). Such is Andrewes' third analysis of the signifi cance of Christ's Passion, an act of freely chosen repara tive love enacted for our eternal benefit. If Christ so acted for our benefit, what should we do for Him? Andrewes sees two acts towards which we are enjoined: to look at Christ, and to run from sin to Him, fainting not. As with the two preceding Passion sermons, Andrewes ; bids us to contemplate the fact and the significance of the Passion. We are to look at His mutilated body first, from thence passing into the internal heart of Him. A 200 I . i ; crucified body is an unnatural, and hence repugnant, sight,| ; t but, as in the first sermon, we must force ourselves to I ; view Him. Andrewes continues to play with the several : meanings of 'theorie': unless we force ourselves to contemplate Christ's agony, we shall never have a "true theorie" (p. 380). Looking at Christ's body is only the first stage of our contemplation, however. We are to move to the second stage of contemplation: that of looking into Christ. The Passion, Andrewes argues, "... is a peece of Perspectivey and, that we must set our selves to see it, if we will see it well; and not looke super ficially on it. . .", but penetrate "... into the inward workemanship of it; even of His internal! Crosse which He suffered, and of His intire [sic] affection wherewith He suffered it" (p. 381). In a grotesque extended metaphor, Andrewes portrays Christ's wounded body as a window through which we are to look. And we may well looke into Him; . . . His body is full of stripes, and they are as lattices: . . . His wounds they are as windowes, through which we may well see all that is within Him. . . . The nailes and speare-head serve as keys to let us ini (p. 381) The grotesquerie is purposeful: Christ as the condemned innocent prisoner assumed our sins. In so doing, He became a prisoner to Whom our deserved condemnation was transferred and, through sacrifice, was expiated. A second important image is that of Christ as the Word, an image which was discussed earlier. As the Logos, in 201 S Christ we see the end of all knowledge. Thus affirmed, all! other knowledge (the works of ancient Greece and Rome, i together with even the Mosaic Law) could be dispensed with ; without any loss of what is essential for man to know. As we contemplate the mutilated Christ, we observe that: "Every stripe as a letter, every naile as a Capital1 letter, His livores, as blacke letters; His bleeding wounds, as so many rubrikes, to shew upon record His Love toward us" (p. 382) . As in the first part of this sermon, Andrewes moves from 'theorie' to 'praxis.' We must enter the divinely ordained race, turning from our sins, and pressing on towards the heavenly promise of seeing the resurrected Christ sitting in glory seated by the right hand of the Father. Unlike the Lutheran position, faith is not enough for salvation; rather, our faith must be expressed in specific good works. For Andrewes, "... every vertue is a stadium, and every act, a step toward the end of our race. . . . And so proceeding from vertue to vertue, till we come to patience and perseverance, that keep the gole end" (p. 384) . Andrewes concludes this third sermon with a complex sentence in which he masterfully combines the race and word metaphors. Let us now turne to Him, and beseech Him [that He might awaken our love and quicken our hope] . . . that : wee may . .. looke up to them [the Cross and the Heavenly Throne] both: so looke that wee may love the one, and wait arid hope for trie other: so love and 2021 so hope, that by them both we may move, and that | swiftly, even runne to Him; and running not faint, but i so constantly runne, that wee faile not finally' to attaine the happy fruition of Himselfe, and of the joy ; and Glory of His blessed throne! that so we may finde i and feele Him as this day here, the Authour; so, in that day, there, the Finisher of our Faith, by the same our Lord Iesus Christ. Amen. Tp.“3F57“^ CHAPTER VI ANDREWES ON THE RESURRECTION | Lancelot Andrewes' eighteen Resurrection or Easter Day sermons were prepared annually between 1606 and 1623.1 The sermon for 1619 was not preserved, although John Chamberlain mentions it;2 and sermon eighteen was prepared i for delivery, but was, for no known reason, never delivered. Sermons one through eleven and thirteen through seventeen were delivered in King James' presence at Whitehall; sermon twelve was delivered in the King's presence at Durham Cathedral. The longest series of sermons in the XCVI folio, it, according to Maurice Reidy, "constitutes a complete treatise on the Resurrection, and contains several thoroughly touching homilies on the human-mterest aspects of this central Christian mystery." : The topical arrangement of this series is shown in Table 2. ^Lancelot Andrewes, XCVI Sermons (London, 1635), pp. 383-590. In this chapter, all references noted parenthetically will be to this edition. 2paul Welsby, Lancelot Andrewes, 1555-1626 (London, 1958), pp. 236-237. ^Maurice Reidy, Lancelot Andrewes: Jacobean Court Preacher (Chicago, 1955), p. 23. TABLE 2 DISPOSITION OF ANDREWES' RESURRECTION SERMONS Divisions and Date of Scriptural No. their subject delivery source Subj ect 1 Introduction 1606 Rom. 6: 9-11 Establishment of the fact of the Resurrection 2 1607 I Cor. 15: 20 3 Easter Day events 1608 Mark 16: 1-7 Events on Easter Day and the appearance of Christ in the midst of the 4 1609 John 20: 19 Disciples 5 Prophecies and 1610 Job 19: 23-27 Old Testament prophecies interpretations 6 1611 Psalm 118: 22 7 1612 I Cor. 3: 1^2 Pauline interpretation of the Resurrection 8 1613 Col. 3: 1-2 9 1614 Phil. 2: 8-11 10 1615 John 2: 19 Jesus' own prophecy 11 1616 I Peter 1: 3-4 Peter's interpretation 12 1617 Matt. 12: Jesus' foretelling 39-40 13 Incidental matter 1618 I Cor. 11: 16 The problem of contentions and faithful mysteries 204 TABLE 2— Continued Divisions and Date of Scriptural No. their subject delivery Source Subject 14 Easter Day 1620 John 20: 11-17 Events on Easter Day with Mary Magdalene 15 1621 John 20: 17 16 1622 John 20: 17 17 Concluding matter 1623 Isaiah 63: 1-3 Isaiah's vision of the return of the just sacrificial lamb 18 1624 Hebr. 13: Paul's benediction 20-21 to o u i The text for the first sermon is drawn from Romans j j 1 ; 6: 9-11 ("Knowing that CHRIST, beeing raised from the dead,; ; dyeth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For, j i in that he died, He died once to sin: but, in that he liveth, He liveth to God. Likewise thinke (or accompt) yee also, that yee are dead to sin, but are alive to GOD, in JESUS CHRIST our LORD."). Drawing a division from this text, Andrewes distinguishes two kinds of knowing (cogni tive and moral, or, as Andrewes terms them, "Knowing, and Compting") so that he can unite them in his listeners' understanding and acts. He sees an imbalance between the two: most Christians know what Christ accomplished on Easter Day, but they fail to apply this knowledge in their moral life: "... what we are then to doe, we give no great regard: our Scientes is without a Reputantes" (p. 384). This imbalance is not what God desires: "Now the Summe of our accompt is set downe in these words [Similiter and vos]: that we fashion our selves like to CHRIST, dying and rising: cast our selves in the same moulds; expresse Him, in both, as neere as we can" (p. 384) . Although Andrewes is quite serious in this matter, he does not lack wit. Taking as his starting point the word 'accompt,' he plays with it and the related word 'auditor': (1) his auditors are supposed to hear what he says (that is, receive his message); and (2) his 207 auditors are supposed to audit their books (they are to examine their spiritual condition) (p. 384). Having audited, the "' Summe of our accompt1 is to fashion our selves like to CHRIST. . (p. 384). Having made clear the distinction between knowing and doing, he then proceeds to analyze both terras in greater detail. At the basis of our knowledge of Christ's Resur rection are the twin problems of historicity and the meaning of the event. As support for the facticity of the event, Andrewes cites several Scriptural accounts of various encounters with the risen Christ. When something is disputed, an inquest is the best mode of resolving disputes about matters of fact. He wittily, therefore, terms Christ's appearance before the disciples (John 21: 1-14) and their record of it as a verdict delivered by a full Jury (p. 385). If skeptical about this, then "a greater Enquest [by] far," was His appearance to the five hundred (I Cor. 15: 6) (p. 385). For those who still doubt, Andrewes, following the paradox of St. Augustine, refers to St. Thomas' doubts and their dispersion as proof that "All this doubting was by them made, that we might be out of doubt, and know, that Christ is risen" (p. 385) . Having resolved the problem of doubt, the Bishop next takes up the second point: that of determining what he calls "The Particulars" of the Resurrection (p. 386). First, Christ rose from the dead. Rising is one half of 208 • v . a semantic pair: falling is the second half. Christ "fell" and "rose" again in order to redeem the wounding of human nature occasioned by Adam's original sin. Para doxically, ". . .by CHRISTS rising, it falls out to be fall, that we may a fall, and yet get up againe" (p. 386) . We may rise because of the corporate nature of mankind. Andrewes boldly propounds the view that Christ's Resurrection is an incomplete act which is only completed when those who accept Him are finally redeemed. "He is but risen in part: and that He may rise all, we must rise from death also" (p. 386) . This view is not the universalist view propounded by Origen, but is restricted to those who know and accept Christ's act. Andrewes sees man's fall as a temporary, not an eternal, act which is intended by God to be redeemed. It is not a fall like the Pharaoh and his followers into the Red Sea, nor like the fall of the Apostate Angels, but it is like Jonas' descent into the whale, or, more naturally, like the daily act of going to bed with the intention of getting up again in the morning or like the fall of "Wheat-corne, into the ground, which is quickned and springeth up againe" (p. 386), or like the annual cycle of death and rebirth in nature. Combining these latter two analogies, Andrewes sees it fitting therefore that Christ should be mistaken by Mary Magdalene as a gardener, for "this Gardiner will looke to it, that man shall have his spring" (p. 386) . Second, ! 209 i j Christ's having died once, He will die no more. Unlike j , i Lazarus, who, having been resurrected by Christ, had to ! die a natural death again, Christ died once and no more ; (p. 386) . Third, death no longer has dominion over Him. Using a political metaphor, Andrewes portrays death as a grand seigneur who has many subjects and ministers and who rules two countries (earth and hell). Christ's vic tory over death meant that Christ, because of His dual nature, by dying and rising discharged any claim death might have upon Him arid His followers. Christ's death and Resurrection demonstrates His dual nature; these two acts also show His dual offices as priest (in the Sacrifice) and ruler (the glory of His Resurrection). His dual nature is demonstrated as well in the cause of His dying and His rising to life. He died in order to satisfy divine justice. Only a perfectly innocent person, voluntarily suffering, could perfectly satisfy God's righteous demand for justice. That He did this for all men is forcefully I enunciated by Andrewes in a characteristically enjamed and I parallel sentence: His dying once was enough "To take away: To abolish: To draw dry, and utterly to exhaust all the sins, of all the sinners, of all the world" (p. 388). The cause of Christ's rising again was God the Father, Who was perfectly satisfied that the full and pain-; ful demands of divine justice had been met. "And not only | rose Himselfe; But, in one concurrent action, GOD, who had I by His death, received full satisfaction, reached Him (as it were) His hand, and raised Him to life" (p. 389). Such considerations mark the extent of Andrewes' conception of the word 'Knowing.' Our "Accompt," like a business ledger, involves a two-fold response: (a) to appropriate Christ's already achieved benefits, and (b) to perform our various duties. Our duties are three. First, we are to become like Christ. Second, we are to fulfill the general commandment by dying to sin. Andrewes describes Christians as being like men crucified; that they should not be able to move hands or feet toward sin because both "are nayled down, fast" (p. 390). Continuing his political metaphor, he admits that such a requirement is ideal, because we can never, until free from death, escape the dominion of sin; how ever, we should go this far, "that sinne reigne not, we are not a crowne, sit not in a throne, hold no Parliaments within us, give us no lawes, in a word . . . that we serve it not" (p. 390) . Third, we are to live towards God. Even though we cannot totally escape sin in this life, we can perform two acts: (1) we can participate in a kind of resurrection by repentance; and (2) we can appropriate the fruits of Christ's sacrifice by partaking faithfully Christ's ordained Eucharist, by prayer, and by considera tion of the Scriptures. "Thus, using His owne ordinance of Prayer, of the Word, and Sacrament, for our better 211 enabling to discharge this dayes duty, we shall (trust) yeeld up a good accompt, and celebrate a good Feast of his Resurrection" (p. 393) . The second subject of the first sermon's text is h that of duty; the subject of the second sermon's text (I Cor. 15: 20: "But, now is CHRIST risen from the dead, and was made the first fruits of them that sleepe.") is hope. He relates the two texts with a musical metaphor: labor and hope together produce harmonious music; apart, they do not. These two, Labour and Hope, the Church joyneth in one Antheme to day, her first Anthemed TKey sort well; and being sung together, make a good harmony. But, that without this; labour without hope, is no good musike. (p. 394) Having joined the two texts, he next proceeds to analyze the second text. Harmonious union is the chief unifying theme of this sermon: not only in combining labor and hope, but also between fallen mankind and the saving Christ. The Resurrection itself is the ground of our hope, because Christ was, in His human aspect, a totally innocent man who "... foiled a common enemy, for amities sake," and His rising after His fall into death wiped "away the ignominie of His fall" (p. 397). Christ acted for our sake: He was a "Man, one of our owne flesh and bloud [who] hath gotten such a victory, even for humanities sake. . ." (p. 397). 212 Building upon the corporate nature of mankind, Andrewes notes that although Christ arose as a "body naturall" to Himself first, considered as part of the "body Politike," He arose for the sake of mankind, a "corporation, or body, of which body we are the members" (p. 397). Alluding to Revelation 22: 16, as well as to the present text, Andrewes expresses the part to whole relationship of Christ to mankind with the metaphor of fruit to the parent tree. The fruit are not the tree, yet they are representative of the whole by virtue of the contained seeds. "The first fruits is not every part; but such a part, as representeth the whole, and hath an operative force over the whole" (p. 398). The nature and mechanics of a representative part which was "an operative force over the whole" is the next point he discusses. To clarify this operative relationship, Andrewes discusses the concept of Adam's original sin and its transmission to and Christ's redemption of mankind. Ques tioning whether or not’one man's death and resurrection can influence all mankind, Andrewes, following St. Paul's lead in Romans 5, answers in the affirmative. Because sin and death came into the world through one man's trans gression, it follows that one man could restore mankind to a renewed nature. Citing the example of Mithridates, Andrewes reminds us that it was by tasting the viper's poison of death that Christ rendered mankind immune to 213 ! i death through His suffering and consequent Resurrection. i i Viewing Adam and Christ as the framers of the charters of the two corporations or states of man, Andrewes terms them the two great Authors, of the two great matters in this world, life and death. . . . And of these two, hold the two great Corporations: of them that die, they are Adams: of them that sleepe and shall rise? that is CHRISTS, (p. 399) Echoing Deuteronomy 30: 15, he bids his congregation to "Looke to the things, Death and life: Weaknesse is the cause of death: Raising to life commeth of Power" (p. 400). But life comes from keeping God's commandments, and since natural man, because of his damaged nature, his proclivity towards wickedness, and his complicity in general evil, is unable to keep these commandments, only the imputation of merit granted by a totally innocent and virtuous person can allow man to choose life successfully. Because according to Leviticus 18: 5 he who follows the Law shall not be seized upon by death, and because only Christ was totally obedient to the Law, death was for feited for Him and for those to whom He imputes His grace. . Christ in His Passion acted for us, He did represent us, and so, we vertually in Him, by His restoring we also were restored: By the rule, ... as the First fruits goe, so goeth the whole lumpe: as the Roote, the branches. And thus we have gotten life againe of mankind, by passing this Act of Resti tution, whereby We have hope to be restored to life. TpTTUO)------------------------------------------------------ Andrewes masterfully combines the metaphors of 214 1 \ j fruit and corporate authorship by inviting his congregation! to receive the Eucharist. Just as it was by eating the forbidden fruit that Adam (and all men) forfeited man's original nature, so it is that by partaking of the ave verum corpus that we receive Christ, "the first fruits of life" (p. 402). By so partaking, we obtain "the first fruits of His Spirit, . . . [which] shall here begin to initiate in us, the first fruits of our restitution in this life, whereof the fulnesse we shall also be restored unto, in the life to come. . (p. 400). He ends with a paradox: "... This is the end of the Text, and of our life, to come to a life, whereof there is no end" (p. 402). The text for the third sermon is drawn from Mark 16: 1-7. Andrewes' rendering of it follows: 1. And, when the Sabbath day was past, Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought sweet ointments, that they might come, and embalme Him. 2. Therefore, early in the morning, the first day of the weeke, they came unto the Sepulcher, when the Sunne was yet rising. 3. And they said one to another, Who shall role us away this stone from the doore of the Sepulcher? 4. And when they looked, they saw, that the stone was rolled away (for, it was a very great one). 5. So they went into the Sepulcher, and saw a young man sitting at the right side; clothed in a long white robe: And they were afraid. 6. But, he said unto them, Be not afraid: Yee seeke IESUS OF NAZARET, which hath beene crucified. He is risen, He is not here: Behold the place, where they put Him. 7. But, goe your way and tell His Disciples, and PETER, that He will goe before you into Galilee: there shall yee see Him, as He said unto you. (p. 405) Andrewes begins this sermon with a witty sense change (by generalization) upon 'Gospel1: "The Summe of this Gospell is, a Gospell: that is, a message of good tidings1 1 (p. 403) . He uses as the basis of his division the three parts of any message: the audience (verses 1-4), the utterer (verse 5), and the message (verses 6-7). About the audience, Andrewes emphasizes the fact that three women rather than men were the first ones to go to the Tomb on Easter Sunday. Why did not the men go first? Wittily, he comments that the women went because they 'became men'; conversely, the men 'became women' and were afraid to go. Fittingly, ". . . these Women (we see) were last at His Passion, and first at His Resurrection: staid longest at that, came soonest to this. . ." (p. 404). Their order of appearance is likewise significant. Mary Magdalen, the most impure and notorious, was not only with the others, but was first as well. He compares her with St. Peter: she was first ". . .in the list of Women: and Saint Peter, in that of men. These two: the two chiefe Sinners, either of their sex" (p. 404). Andrewes sees a valid religious truth in their precedence: sinners, he notes, are more fervent than self-righteous people in seeking God; the latter are tepid or dissident. Because 216 | : of their zeal, the sinners find more favor with God: "And ! with GOD, it is a Rule: .. . An hower of fervor, more worth than a month of tepor1 1 (p. 404) . Moreover, by going i to the Tomb at this early hour, the quality of their zeal is revealed. Andrewes finds four manifestations of love in evidence: amor, charitas, dilectio, and zelus. Amor, or love to the dead, is the first. Love that will endure even past the grave is true love indeed. Although ". . . He be dead; to their love, He liveth still: Death may take His body from their eyes, but shall never take His remembrance, from their hearts1 1 (p. 405) . Andrewes is strikingly realistic as he compares their love with our probable love. "All [will seek] after CHRIST living: But, goe to His Sepulcher who will, not we. The love that goeth thither, that burieth not the memory of Him that is buried, is Love indeed" (p. 405) . Amor or lamenting love is the first sort; charitas, love that takes pains, is the second sort. To express their charity towards Christ, these three women bought precious perfumes with which to annoint His body. They did not shark up some old scents; they manifested a sacrificial love by buying new scents. Andrewes puns upon the term 'annoint': their going forth ". . .is kindly: It is to make Him CHRIST, that is, Annointed" (p. 405). Dilectio or diligent love is the third type. He discusses this point with genial irony: they could have waited until later, for, being dead, 217 I i Christ will wait for them. With a mocking oath, he begins:] Why good Lord, what need all this haste? CHRIST is fast enough under His stone. He will not run away (yee may be sure): ye need never breake your sleepe, and yet come to the Sepulcher time enough. No; if they doe it not, as soone as it may be done, it is nothing worth, (p. 406) Although they came early, they still arrived at the proper time; they struck a balance between haste and lethargy. Zelus, or "Love that wrestles with impediments" (p. 407) is the fourth sort of love the women manifest. Andrewes likens zeal to fire. Their love, he tells us, was not only diligent, but zealous "... (as fire) to burne a hole and eat it selfe a way, thorow whatsoever shall oppose it" (p. 407). Their zealous love stands in contrast to our own, for "Ours is not so: we must have (not great stones (GOD wot) but) every scruple removed out of our way, or we will not stirre" (p. 407) . From their diligence we learn that every good work "hath some impediment" or "some great stone1 1 which must be overcome (p. 407). Altogether surpassing their love is the love, of God towards them and towards anyone who seeke to overcome hinderances: "... none shall seeke ever to annoint Him, but they shall be annointed by Him againe, one way or other: and finde, though not alwayes what they seeke, yet , some supply, that shall be worth the while" (p. 408) . The second part of Andrewes' exegesis of the text is devoted to an analysis of the utterer. That an angel announces the fact of Christ's Resurrection to the women ; is a fitting paradoxical parallel to the angelic annuncia- i tion of His birth, because His rising from death is a j birth as well. Citing the striking reapplication of "This | day have I begotten thee" as used in Acts 13: 33 to refer to God's Resurrection of His Son, Andrewes makes bold to say that: "Even this day, when He was borne anew Tanquem ex utero Sepulchri, from the wombe of the grave" (p. 408). (The use of the implied rhyming word 'tomb' is a most appropriate rhetorical device here.) In addition, that an angel is the instrument of annunciation here gives us hope j (following the theological virtue which was the theme of the second sermon) that our bodies may also be resurrected into heaven, the place of the angels (p. 408). The appearance is a clue to the form that the saved humans will assume in heaven we shall appear with "All age, • > sicknesse, infirmitie removed cleane away" (p. 408). Second, that the angel was sitting shows that in heaven ". . . all labour shall cease, all motions rest, all troubles come utterly to an end for ever. . ." (p. 408). Third, that the angel was sitting on the right side has a two-fold significance: (a) that in heaven we shall enjoy pre-eminence and honour; and (b) that although ". . .we may fall on the left side [i.e., that we shall ! die], ... we shall rise on the right. . ." (p. 408). Finally, that the angel was clothed in white signifies that in heaven we shall be clothed in gladness, just as although we were in sadness on Good Friday, we are joyful on Easter Day. The message, the third part of Andrewes' rhetorical analysis, has four parts to it. Preceding this analysis, however, Andrewes observes that just as the stone had been an obstacle to entering the grave, so also the women's fear had to be removed or rolled away by the angel. Hence, the intention of his opening remark "Feare not." Not without humor, the Bishop terms this remark "A meet text for him, that maketh a Sermon at a Sepulcher" (p. 409). The angel applauds their having come to the Sepulcher, and Andrewes' interpretation of verse six is that the women came to Christ out of unselfish love, for neither the poverty of His birthplace (Nazareth) nor the reproach of death could keep them from coming to serve Him. Now let us move to the message. First, as with Samson at Gaza and Jonah and the whale, confinement could not keep Him: triumphantly, "He is risen." Second, "he is gone before" to Galilee where He is known. Symboli- . cally, just as Christ's first miracle was performed there, so it is fitting that He should there accomplish His last. Galilee is also "in the confines of the Gentiles"; thus His going there shows that His Resurrection is intended to benefit Jews and Gentiles alike. Galilee is also a place of derided reputation: in answer to the jeer "What good 220 thing could come of it," Christ chose to show the best possible thing, that He had been Resurrected. Finally, that the women had to turn around and reseek Him represents the revolution or metanoia that all the faithful must perform. If we are to seek Him, we must turn around and go to where He is, not where we think He might be. Third, just as their eyes had approved that the grave was empty, so also did they receive the promise that they would perceive Him with their own eyes. Finally, Christ in His charity will allow His disciples, those chosen few who had shamefully rejected Him three days before, to see Him also. Punningly, Andrewes remarks that "... all the deadly wounds of His Passion have not killed His compassion over sinners" (p. 411). From this last part of the angel's message follows their special commission: they are to announce the Gospel to the disciples; just as they came with the intention of anointing Christ's physical body, so now they are to go and spiritually anoint with their good news Christ's Church or Mystical Body. Earlier Andrewes spoke of the women as having become 'men' by their courage and love. He continues this figure as he notes that the angel "... maketh these Women Apostolos Apostolorum. . ." (p. 411). What is the lesson or personal application to be learned from this scriptural text and analysis? First, Christ was resurrected, so also shall His followers be. Second, as Christ has gone before us to Galilee, so also shall we follow Him to the spiritual Galilee (heaven). ! Using logical terms, he wittily remarks that ”... He is but the antecedent; we, as the consequent, to be inferred after" (p. 412). Third, we also have received the promise : that we shall see the Risen Christ. Finally, we also must make a revolution and reaffirm our connection with the Risen Christ. Andrewes holds that this connection may best be accomplished by participation in the Eucharist. In a sentence of great complexity and synthetic economy, he affirms the need for conversion by asking his listeners to reunite ourselves to His body and bloud, in this time of His rising; of the dissolving and renting whereof our sms were the cause; The time of His suffering, keeping the Feast, of CHRIST our new Passeover offered for us; Leaving whatsoever formerly hath been amisse, in CHRIST'S grave, as the weeds of our dead estate, and rising to newnesse of life, that so we may have our parts in the first resurrection; Which they are happie and“Eiessed that shall have; for, by it they are sure of the second. (p. 412) Sermon four is based upon John 20; 19 ("The same day then, at night, which was the first day of the weeke, and when the doores were shut, where the Disciples were assembled for feare of the Jewes, came IESUS and stood in the middest, and said to them, Peace be unto you."-). By selecting, as his Easter Day event sermon texts, the visitation of the three women at the tomb and the appearance of Christ in the midst of His Disciples, Andrewes is able to compress by 222 summary all the other events of that day (the appearance to Mary Magdalene, the women coming from the Sepulcher, the two people journeying from Emmaus, to St. Peter, and the Eleven Disciples and their companions) into one paragraph and to draw the conclusion that Christ, because He appeared to all sorts and conditions of men, truly died and was raised to redeem all mankind. Analyzing the sorts of people and the places before whom and where Christ appeared, he observes that He appeared to both men and women, to the obvious sinners (St. Peter and Mary Magdalene) of both sexes, to the clergy (the disciples) and the laity (their companions), abroad and at home, and at morning and at evening. Therefore, 1 1 . . .no Sex, Sort, Estate, Place or Time [was] excepted: but, as Visitavit nos oriens ab alto; so Visitavit, occidens ab imo: Rising from above, at His birth; Rising, from beneath, at His resurrection, He visited all" (p. 413). Having established the universality of His appear ances, Andrewes proceeds to the division of the sermon proper: (a) an examination of what he terms the "personall part of Christ's Salutation"; and (b) the analysis of "Peace" or "The reall part." Although the second part is devoted to an extended examination of peace, Andrewes begins his sermon proper with the psychological effect His utterance had upon the disciples and their companions, emphasizing Christ's office 223 las reconciler. Pax and Vobis are reconciled through Christ's appearance and His statement. Andrewes senses a contradiction between what Christ says and the receivers of His message: all the disciples ran from Him when He was captured prior to the trial and Crucifixion, yet Christ appears in their midst and salutes them afterwards. "This [statement] is His first goodnesse: His making a peace betweene Pax and Vobis" (p. 415). In addition, He appeared to them on Easter Day, the very day when they would feel the most shame for their offenses and disloyalty towards Him. Most importantly, He took the initiative, He first spoke to them, thus showing the supremacy of grace over reason: He might well have stayed till then; and reason would, they should first have sued for it. Yet [i.e., Before] they aske it, He giveth it: and prevents [i.e., precedes] them with the blessing of peace* They first, in falling out, He first, at making friends. (p. 415) Thus is shown the operation of prevenient grace. God initiates the repair of the breach occasioned by sin, sin arising whenever man enacts his own disordered desires. Man's sin is centrifugal in its effect; God's redeeming action is centripetal. Having demonstrated Christ's love towards His followers, Andrewes next moves to an examination of them. He emphasizes their tarnished qualities. Although they have failed their Lord, yet they retain their identity and 224: vocation. They are paradoxically termed ”... Vnprofit- j able servants, yet Servants: Lost sonnes, yet Sonnes: forgetfull Disciples, yet Disciples” (p. 415) . That they were afraid of the Jews he sees as a positive sign, because| it shows that, although they had failed Christ, yet they were unwilling to be traitors; they did not intend ". . .to give over [their faith in] CHRIST" (p. 416). Finally, in contrast to their scattering at the Passion, they were at this time assembled. Certainly Christ approved their having assembled, for "... His comming was, as to take away their fearey so, to contrive their gathering, still" (p. 416) . From their meeting together despite their earlier dispersal, Andrewes draws the relevant conclusions that: (1) the Church must learn to maintain discipleship even though the members sin; (2) that the Church should not settle for peace of a lower oder (i.e., to accept the peace of the Jews-by rejecting Christ); and (3) that Churchmen should stay together, and thus be nearer to Christ's peace. What is meant by 'peace" forms the subject of the second part of the division. It is, of all desires, the chief one. With a play upon Breviarium, Andrewes asserts that "It [peace] is, all wishes, in one; Nothing more to be wished. For, in brevi voce Breviarium, this little word is a Breviary of all, that good is" (p. 416). As the chief good, peace is pleasant, profitable, and wished 225 | for by all (p. 416). That the Word was consonant with His j j | word, Andrewes demonstrates by observing that His entire life was crucified by His acts of peace. Going, He did it, Pacem meam do vobis: And now comming,; He doth it. Sitting, He did It . . . and now, standing. Living, when He was borne, Pax in terris, Xenium Christi, It was CHRISTS New-Yeares-glft; Dying, when He was to suffer, Pacem meam relinqu'o vobis, it was Legatum Christi, CHRISTS Legacie. And now (here) rising agame, it is His wish, still. To shew, not only the good of this life, but of the next, to be in peace. Prayed for it. . . . Payed for it. . . . Wept for it? 0 ifthou hadst knowne the things that pertaine to thy peace] Wept iror it; and bled for it: therefore, immediately (the very next words) Hee sheweth them His hands and his side: As much to say; See, what I have suffered to procure your peace: Your ; peace cost me this: Pax vobis, cost Crux mihi; See, you hold it deare. (p. 417") "It is meet," Andrewes adds, "for Him, to give peace, that made peace. . ." (p. 417). It is also fitting that He give His disciples peace, because they were gathered together and were enclosed, and because peace is the fruit of victory over death, the last enemy. Peace is also welcome within each person to resolve the war between the spirit and the flesh, and within and between all men. There is a j fit parallel between the universal peace at His Nativity and His desire for universal peace after His Resurrection. After establishing the goodness and divine sanction i for peace, Andrewes begins the second section of part two of the division. In it he skillfully uses chronological comparison and contrast, juxtaposing the behavior of contemporary Christians with Christ Himself, concluding ; 2261 ! j Iwith an examination of the desire of all creatures to find I : i j ! ipeace and with an invitation for the congregation to ! receive the Holy Sacrament. Like the disciples, contempoary Christians stand in ; sharp contrast to Christ. "That which was first with j CHRIST, is last with Christians: and, I would it were so (last): for, then, it were some: Now, scarce any at all, as it seemeth” (p. 419). That His disciples might enjoy peace and establish it abroad was Christ's wish: ". . . And what is become of it? If we looke upon the Christian world, wee see it not; it is gone, as if CHRIST had never wished it" (p. 419). Not only was peace Christ's first word to His followers, but He said it three times. All that Christ said is important, but that which is repeated is of greatest importance. We act as if what was said was not worth pursuing: Once, we doe it (it may be:) but, upon any repulse, we give over: if it come not at first, we goe not to it Secundo & tertio, repetitis vicibus. We must not leave at once, that CHRIST did so oft. Tp. 419) A second fault of contemporary Christians is that they are passive and half-hearted rather than active and whole hearted. Christians sit, whereas Christ stood. "So say we: peace we would: but, standing is painefull. Our wish hath lips, but no leggs" (p. 419). Andrewes cannot resist punning as he adds: "If we should be put to doe the like [to stand and to sacrifice as did Christ], I doubt, 227 | our wish hath never a good legge, to stand on" (p. 420). ! How to reconcile the imbalance between God's desire ; and our need? Only by God's action of bringing redeeming grace to all mankind and asserting His rightful place as mediator of all things. Echoing Aristotle's view that all things are in action as they change from potency to actu ality and St. Augustine's view that all things ceaselessly ; move until they find their peace in God, Andrewes asserts that by nature "All bodies naturall never leave moving, are never quiet, till they recover their proper places: and, there, they finde peace. The midst is CHRISTS place, by nature: He, is the second Person in divinis; and so, the middle-most of the other two" (p. 420). By office also Christ is in the middle. He is the "... Medius betweene GOD and man, where should a mediatour stand, but in medio" (p. 420)? Christ as Word is the balance point of all creation. He was the agent of creation and for Him everything was created (John 1: 1-5). Andrewes sees this mediating or balancing characteristic of Christ as the source of all analogy, symmetry, and harmony in the ; world; he agrees with Hooker, that peace, order, and law are at the foundation of all that is, and all that.is is created by and modeled after the eternal Logos.4 Therefore, ^Richard Hooker, Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity (London, 1965), I, p. 232. ! 228 j ; j ijust as Christ stood in the midst of His disciples and j wished them peace, so also in the present, Christ, through ; i the Eucharist, stands in the middle of the Church and asks ! all to receive Him and His peace. Even now, when we have the peace-offering in our hands, then, then to remember, alwayes (but then, specially) to joyne with CHRIST, in His wish; to put into our hearts, and the hearts of all, that professe His name .. . i that CHRIST may have His wish, and there may be peace thorow the Christian world: That we may once all partake together, of one Peace-offering; and with one mouth, and one minde, glorifie GbD, the Father of our LORD IESUS CHRIST, (p. 421) Need we add that times have not changed, nor is ecumenism a new phenomenon? Catholic rather than parochial, Andrewes' definition of the Church is not limited to Rome, Canterbury, or Geneva, but is rather an organic body established by Christ and is unlimited by man-made definitions devised according to national boundaries or parties. The subject of sermon five is Job's anticipation of Christ's Resurrection as established in Job 19 ("23oh that my words were now written! Oh that they were written even in a booke! 2^And graven with an iron; pen, in leade, or in stone for ever! 25For I am sure, that my Redeemer liveth, and He shall stand the last on the earth (or, and I shall rise againe in the last day from the earth.) 2^And though, after my skinne wormes destroy this body: I shall see GOD in my flesh. 2 < 7whom I my selfe shall see, and mine eyes shall be hold, and none other for me, though my reines are consumed within me. (Or, and this hope is laid up in my bosome.).) Andrewes' method, as usual, is to analyze point-by-point the meaning of Job's impassioned affirmation and to fit it into the context of Easter Day. Showing the unity of the Old and New Testaments, Andrewes asserts, in the light of St. Jerome's authority, that Job's desire for an incarnate resurrected Saviour shows that faith in the Resurrection is no new Christian belief, but is instead imbedded in the highest vision of the Old Testament. By way of interpreting Job's wish in the Parascene or preparatory section, Andrewes informs his listeners that Job was close to death, and that his statement reveals the profound anchor of Job's credo. This credo also has three degrees of wish in it. First, Job desires that it be written, because what he said was oral, and words are but wind. Because of their importance, Job wanted to give them permanence. Second, he desires that his faith be written in a book. Because the words were uncommon, he wanted them permanently recorded, or ". . . registred in a booke," or "enrolled upon record, as publike instruments, mens deeds, judiciall proceeding; or . . . Acts of Parliament, or whatsoever is most authenticall" (p. 425). Third, he wanted them written in "stone, with a pen of iron for ever" (p. 425). As stated earlier, he wanted his words to last forever, and to have them engraved in stone with lead put into them would give the words the permanence he idesired. Andrewes poses the question, "Why in stone?", and his answer is four-fold: (1) because the Law of Moses was 230! ! j written in stone; (2) because Christ is spoken of as being ! like a rock; (3) because Christ's death deserves, at the very least, a memorial or burial stone; and (4) because i i ; through inner transformation, Job's wish should be inscribed and engraved upon our hard hearts. In describing Job's intention, the Bishop uses an architectural metaphor to delineate the content of his faith: these verses, Andrewes notes, "begin with Scio the pillar of his faith, and end with Haec mihispes the arch of his hope; ever, hope giving the assumption to faiths proposition" (p. 426) . The phrase Quod Redemptor shows that despite Job's innocence he was yet by nature a sinner who needed a Redeemer. The phrase Quod vivit shows that Job's Redeemer must be nothing less than a person who is both God and man. He must be God because neither a saint nor an angel is capable of redeeming a man. Only God, because of His uncreated essence, can do this. Yet Job's Redeemer must also be a man, because otherwise, there would be a sheer inequality of essence between God and sinful man. Not only must the Saviour be both God and man, it is also necessary (because of quod resurget) that the God-man must die. To rise is part of a semantic pair, because one cannot rise unless he has first fallen. As Andrewes puts it Rise He cannot except first He fall: Fall therefore He must and be layd up in the earth, before He can rise from thence againe. Specially seeing, we find Him first 2311 ) i alive (in the fore-part of the verse?) and then rise j againe (in the latter.) For how can that be, unlesse death come betweene? (p. 428) Having established the necessity for His Saviour to be composed of two natures and to have suffered, the Bishop advances the argument that if the Saviour has died and was reborn for Job's (and man's) sake, then Job himself, participating in Christ's salvific act, will also rise from the dead. Christ is a vicar? what He does in His death and rebirth is to represent the person to be redeemed. Andrewes uses a chain image to clarify Job's meaning. "One chaine they are linked with, His and ours: you cannot stir one end, but the other moveth with it. The sinews of which reason are in this? that the Redeemer doth represent the person of the redeemed" (p. 428). The results of Job's (and man's) resurrection are four in number. First, Videbo Deum: Job shall see God. This concept of the Beautific Vision Andrewes asserts is the chief good towards which all men strive. The loss of this vision was the chief effect occasioned by Job's sense , of alienation from God. Second, Job shall see his Redeemer in human form ( Videbo in Carne), because man is a hylomor- phic creature. "For, the soule is but halfe? though the better halfe, yet but halfe; and the redeeming it, is but halfe redemption? and if but halfe, then imperfect" (p. 429). Because God only does that which is perfect, it necessarily follows that He would redeem man's entire inature. We want as our deepest desire to behold God in .heaven with redeemed bodies as well as souls. According to Hebrews 6: 10, God will reward those who have done God's will while living, and because we have bodies while on earth, then they will also share in our redemption. Third, examining the phrase " carne mea & c," the Bishop contends that the eyes which have suffered while part of ;our earthly frame should be the ones to be redeemed. Fourth, Andrewes interprets Videbo mihi in judgmental eschatological terms. "I my selfe shall &c" is interpreted in the light of "All flesh shall see God." All shall see Him, but there will be a final division into the saved and the damned. Job, Andrewes maintains, is to be one of those who will be saved. The final section of the fifth sermon is devoted to an analysis of Job's two acts: his knowledge and his hope. Job's knowledge is certain. His faith was based upon direct revelation, not Scripture; and it was a certainty, not an imagined guess. Mens illustrates the property of his knowledge: he wanted to be saved by a personal Saviour, not by a general redeemer. Job's well known patience is i seen in the third quality of his knowledge: he did not expect his redeemer to come posthaste, but he would come in his own good time at the end of all things. Finally, ; Tametsi or courage, "... the resolute courage, or valour of his faith. .." is the final quality of his knowledge (p. 431). About Job's spero or hope, Andrewes contends that his hope reveals that his knowledge was not of the mind alone, but consisted of knowledge placed into his very heart and vitals. First, his hope was "layd up," and its object was "to expell peace" (p. 431). The greatest human fear is the fear of death, and Job's knowledge of his saviour's acts expelled this fear from his consciousness. Second, the depth of Job's hope is seen in its being hope of the kidneys or reins. Because Renaissance people believed that the kidneys or reins were the source of life or generation, Andrewes can assert that Job's hope was a living hope, anchored upon the rock of Christ. From the kidneys comes "... the same generativus humor, whereby we propagate our kinde, and live there (in a sort) after we be dead: In like manner, by this hope ... we are begotten anew. . ." (p. 431). Job's hope is also "Reposita in Sinu: In m^ bo some" (p. 432) . There is a human side to this positioning: Job will always have his hope ready there, so he will not have to look for it? it will be cherished and kept warm there. Again, this shows that his knowledge is not of the mind alone, but is knowledge cherished in the heart (p. 432) . Just as Job's hope was a living hope, Andrewes closes with an invitation to participate in the Eucharist. The Sacrament is a divine pledge of Christ: so with Job, let us, Andrewes pleads, draw life from Christ. Having 234 | ; I received the Elements, they, as in Job's heart, kidneys, j land reins, will "mundifie the place where [they] lyeth" ! and will uproot in us the old "conversation" and will establish in us "newnesse of life," eventually allowing us to enjoy the eternal fruit of Christ's sacrifice (pp. 432- 433). The subject of the sixth Resurrection sermon is another Old Testament prophecy of Christ's coming, this time coming from Psalm 118: 2 ("The Stone, which the Builders refused, the same Stone is become (or made) the Head of the Corner."). There is also a political implica tion as well, because this sermon was delivered on 24 March I 1611, the eighth anniversary of James I's accession to the throne. This sermon, therefore, has a two-fold significance in Andrewes' eyes: (1) "rejected" means Good-Friday and "is become the Head" means the Easter Day Resurrection; and (2) being a Davidic Psalm, the text can be reinter preted to refer to James' accession. Unlike the majority of Andrewes' sermons, this one lacks a formal division; instead, he discusses three levels of kingly application: to Christ, David, and James I. Before beginning his discussion, however, Andrewes discusses the importance of Biblical metaphors, holding that there are two dominant Biblical metaphors used to describe the estate of mankind in Church and State: (1) flocks and husbandry in general; and (2) buildings. The latter pattern is the applicable one for this sermon's text. Speaking within the traditional Renaissance concept of the organic or holistic relationship of individuals and society, he maintains that "Of this Spirituall Building, we are all Stones: and . .. we all are Builders too. . (p. 437). No matter what one's position within society, we are all to construct a house of prayer within ourselves. The short is: This is to be our study, all: if we be, but our selves, every one in himselfe, and of himselfe, to build GOD an Oratory. If he have an Household, of them, to build Him a Chappell. If a larger circuit, then a Church. If a country or Kingdome, then a Basilica, or Metropolitan Church: which is properly, the Princes Building. (p. 4'37) Andrewes extends the building metaphor from Church buildings to dramatic theaters, for, although the Temple "was the frame of the lews Governement," it applies to "all States in generall. For, Iewry was the Scene or Stage whereon the errors or vertues of all Governments, were represented to all posterity" (p. 437). Andrewes' next move is to discuss the four key words in the text. First, Aedificantes, signifying that the builders are not to construct impermanent tents which would be taken down and moved from place to place, but buildings "to stand steddy and fixed" (p. 437). Second, Lapis, meaning that the walls were not to be made of clay or wood, but of stone which could suffer "concussion, or combustion" and remain standing. Third, Angulus, that the building would consist ". . .of divers sides: those sides meete in one Angle: where if they meete, and knit well, all the better will the building be" (p. 437) . (Andrewes will make a pun out of this word later on.) Fourth, Caput, ; that the head of the building, being made of stone rather ; than plaster, wood, or lead, would offer protection, would ; icover the building, and would have superior beauty. The examination of the three senses of 'King' (the major section of this sermon) follows next. The first sense of 'stone' is Christ. This designation is appropriate, because Christ is variously spoken of in the New Tefetament as a stone, a building stone, the cornerstone, and the headstone. In addition, He is properly the stone of the Christian faith and sacra ments. Despite this, He was rejected by the builders (the Jewish priests); indeed, they engraved Him with spite, scorn, and malice. Yet He endured all this, was executed, and was covered by a large stone or boulder. God the Father, the chief builder, however, took this rejected stone and made Him the chief stone of His Church, making Him "... caput Anguli, The Head of the Corner" (p. 440) . The corner of a building is where two walls meet, and ingeniously, the Bishop lists the several dualities which meet in Christ: Jews and Gentiles, bond and free, male and female, the quick and the dead, and Heaven and earth (p. 440). That Christ, brings to one point disparate elements Andrewes interprets politically to mean that in a 237 jChristian commonwealth the Church and State are joined in Christ (p. 440). King David is the subject of the second interpre tation of 'stone.' "But, Lapis erat David, is likewise true" (p. 442). The application of 'stpne' to David has both positive and negative aspects. David as a stone is a scornful label, because it originated in David's slaying Goliath with a stone: "The Iewes say, it was his nic-name, or name of disgrace. . ." (p. 442). Yet, the label has positive meaning as well: (1) he had staying power like that of a stone; (2) his tenure as king was hard or difficult; (3) as Christ was rejected by the Jewish lea ders, so also was David by Saul, Abner, and Samuel; and (4) despite official opposition, David became king. Church and State are best joined, for "... the happie combining of these two, is the strength of the Head, and the strength of the whole Building" (pp. 442-443). Third, Andrewes uses the text to discuss the merits and dangers of King James' reign. Specifically, he sees the Roman Church as James' (and England's) chief adversary. The devices the Papists used to dislodge this stone were "Breves, and Bulls," and even violence and regicide in the form of the Gunpowder Conspiracy. This latter plot (which Andrewes punningly alluded to in the first Resurrection sermon, p. 391, as well as the ten sermons preached on November 5, pp. 889-1008) Andrewes alludes to within the 238 framework of Absalom, Achitophel, and Amasa, when he states That, since Your setting in the Seat of this Kingdome, Some there were, Builders one would have taken them to be, if hee had seene them, with their tooles in their hands, as if they had beene to have laid some founda tion; where their meaning was, to undermine, and to cast downe foundations and all: Yea, to have made a right Stone of You, and blowne You up among the Stones, You, and Yours without any more adoe. (p. 444) Not only was James like David, but he was also like Christ: James' delivery from death was like a resurrection. That Day, that Hee brought You backe (if not from death it selfe, yet) from deaths door e, from the very gates of destruction, That Day, was a very Easter-day to You, though it were in Noveinber. And . . . after a sort, a very Resurrection.~ Cp. 444) Not only was James a Caput Anguli, king over one Kingdom; „ but he was also a "Caput Trianguli, Head now of three [England, Scotland, and Ireland], even of a whole Triangle" (p. 444). James has an obligation to unify the faith of the Church, to bring (the pun is intended) the "sides and walls" of the Church into "one Angle. . (p. 445). Now James has the crowns of England and Scot land; by God's further grace he will "crowne You also with the third, of Glory and Immortalitie, in His Heavenly Kingdome" (p. 445). To close, just as all the corners of the building meet in Christ the stone, so also should all Christians join in the Eucharistic Sacrifice; that as Christ joined the Old and New Testaments in the first Mass, so also let 239 i |the Church celebrate the joining of the Law and the Gospel (pp. 445-446). Sermon seven is the first of the next set of three I sermons devoted to various Pauline interpretations of the Resurrection, and it is based on I Corinthians 5: ("7Purge out therefore the old leven, that ye may be a new lumpe, ias yet are unlevened: For, CHRIST our Passe over is Sacrificed for us. ^Therefore, let us keepe the Feast, not with old leven, neither with the level of malicious- nesse and wickednesse; but, with the unlevened bread of Sinceritie and Truth.1 1 ). As usual, Andrewes uses a simple division: (1) Christ, the Sacrificiand or "Antecedent"; and (2) the Church, the Sacrificient or "Consequent." A pascha or passover can be either a benefit or a detriment: the former if we pass from worse to better; vice versa for the latter. To illustrate the former, Andrewes cites three examples in the life of Moses and his people: (1) when the plagues passed over them; (2) when they passed over the Red Sea; and (3) when they passed over into Canaan. He sees Egypt as symbolic: the soul is the first born; death is like the Red Sea through which all must pass. In between, our stay on earth is as dangerous as life in Egypt was for the Jews. We also need a pascha because we are endangered by 'crocodiles' as well. More over, we fear God's wrath. There are negative passovers as well. The world, being contingent, is constantly passing 240 ; or changing, thus demonstrating that there is no permanent ; ;home here. We ourselves "... passe as a shadow, as a jdreame. . ." (p. 450). The world passes, but we pass even | faster than it. We fear the passover of the nocturnal terror, daily calamity, and disease (Psalm 91: 5-6). Finally, we all fear death. But the Christian hope is that : Christ, by offering Himself sacrificially for us, can pass us over and through these fears. But beyond death for the saved is the summum bonum, the Bonum pascha." Tbtattain ultimate felicity, we must be conveyed to that glorious estate by the sacrificial exchange of Christ the sacrifi cial Paschal lamb. It is in the redeitiptive act of Christ that the center of divine passing over is best seen: "And here now, we are come to the point of the Passe-over indeed: the quitting us, and the manner of quitting us from our sinnes" (p. 451). To explain man's need and God's redemptive act, Andrewes makes a seven-fold analysis of 'passover.' First, sin itself is a "transgression, or passing over the lines and limits of our Dutie, set us, in the Law of GOD" (p. 451). All systems have laws by necessity; we are always subject to natural and eternal law, but this is not his meaning. Instead, he means that by sinning we become subject to various punishments. Second, the destroying angel hovers over us in our trans gressions in order to notify us that we need to have our sins removed or passed over. Third, God's solution is to exchange our evil through the redemptive sacrificial act of an innocent being; God removes our sins by having them "passe from [us] upon some other. . (p. 451). Fourth, ithis exchange occurred "when He was offered, made a sacrifice for us" (p. 451). Fifth, in the sacrifice of the Pascal lamb, "... the death of the first borne was translated over upon the poore lambe. The lambe died, the first borne was saved; his death passed over unto the lambe. . ." (p. 451). Sixth, reviewing Christ's life, Andrewes sees four passovers besides the Passion: (a) His birth was a passover "from the bosome of His Father, to the wombe of His Mother, to take our nature" (p. 451); (b) His circumcision was a passover "from the state of one free, to the condition of one bond, to undertake our debt" (pp. 451-452); (c) His Resurrection was "a passage from death to life" (p. 452); and (d) His Ascension was a passover "from the world to His Father" (p. 452). Seventh, in His death, death the destroyer passed over us and Christ "passed over into the estate of us wretched sinners. . ." (p. 452). Showing his wit, Andrewes provides a transi tional sentence from the first to the second part of his division by stating: "And so let us passe over from the Antecedent, to the Consequent. . ." (p. 452). The subject of the Consequent section is the relationship obtaining between Christ's Sacrifice and the Eucharist, together with our duties regarding its 242 reception. Our chief duty is to receive it and to participate thereby in the effects of His Sacrifice. There; is a double relationship here: Christ is slain for our sins; we are to remember His Sacrifice by celebrating the j Eucharist. "Immolatus is His part, to be slaine; Cele- bremus is ours, to hold a ; Feast: Good-friday, His; Easter-day Ours” (p. 452). Even though our sins are the occasion of His charitable Sacrifice, we are commanded to celebrate, to have a memorial feast. It is not enough to stay at home and think about the Sacrifice; we are comman ded to receive the Elements. "It is not mental 1 thinking, or verbal! speaking: there must be actually somewhat done, to celebrate this Memory" (p. 453). Each Eucharist, however, is not a repetition of the original Sacrifice. Christ, the Book of Common Prayer tells us, was "once offered" as a Sacrifice; each Eucharist is a commemoration of something already accomplished. Andrewes makes it clear, though, that the Eucharist is no mere act, because although the original act was the original efficacious act, it was a general act performed for the benefit of all ; mankind; each Eucharist is the means by which the fruits or benefits of the Sacrifice are conveyed to each person. Just as the Mosaic laws and natural law guide the universe, so there are laws or rules respecting our "keeping the Feast." We are to keep it, not with the old leaven, but with the new leaven of sincerity and truth. |The old leaven is "our former vitious course of life, sowred with the leaven of the Old Adam"; whereas the new leaven is "newnesse of life" (p. 455). Andrewes sees leaven as a fitting analogy for sin, because both grow sour and need vinegar to purge out the sourness, the vinegar consisting of sincerity and truth (Andrewes terms them the "two leven-less vertues" (p. 455). Specifically, he delineates three sorts of old leaven in the New Testa ment: (1) the leaven of doctrine, as represented by the Pharisees (superstition), the Sadduces (profaneness), and • Herod (using religion for personal and secular ends); (2) the leaven of earthly life or hypocrisy; and (3) the leaven of "company corrupt in Life" (p. 456). In human life, "Naughtinesse and Malice" are the two bad leavens (p. 455) . Having delineated the nature and mode of receiving the Eucharist, Andrewes concludes this sermon by asking his listeners to pass over from the old leaven to the new by receiving the Elements. By so doing, they will purge the old from their systems and will establish the new life within them. The results are of eternal importance, because the Eucharist is a ". . . Passe-over, that will never be passed-over, but last and continue a Feast to all Eternitie" (p. 458) . Drawing upon the concept of elevation achieved through the reception of the chief Sacrament of grace, Andrewes uses Colossians 3 (^"If yee bee risen with CHRIST, 244! i i o ^ sitteth at the right hand of GOD. ^Set your affections (or! j minds) on things which are above; and not on things which ' are on the earth.") as the text for the eighth Resurrection! sermon. Central to this sermon is the idea that every person will be resurrected: but some will pass to heaven, ! while others will be consigned to hell. To jolt his audience, he notes that most people think of Easter in terms of clothes or food; true Christians, however, seek to participate in Christ's Resurrection through the Church, the Body of Christ. There are two suppositions in the text, Christ's and our rising. Christ's rising is absolute, whereas ours is conditional. Although Christ died for all men, and though all shall rise with Him on the Latter Day, only those who have sought Him in their lives with their minds shall be admitted to heaven. "The Resurrection reacheth to all: This resurrection, to such only as Seeke, and . set their minds" will attain the Visio Dei (p. 461). To define "Si consunexistis," Andrewes uses a magnet metaphor. Christ's virtue is so forceful a magnet that He will draw all things to Himself according to their nature. Once our souls have been elevated by His power, the body also shall rise, because man is a unified being consisting of the two ! parts of body and soul (p. 461). Andrewes anatomizes the text into two actions: seeking Christ, and setting one's mind upon Him. Seeking, he asserts, is not a matter of chance, for "We shall not ! stumble on it, or hit upon it unawares; there needs a seeking" (p. 462) . Similarly in the mind's quest, we are ito seek with purpose, not with fancies and conceits (p. 463). Punning, he adds: . . so, our minde, not only to know it, but to minde it" (p. 463). The mind's action is not purely intellectual in its end; setting minds on Christ is not a purely contemplative act, but involves active wisdom as well (p. 463). He illustrates this with a medical analogy: we must not have a rheumatic head which (spoyles the stomacke with distillations; and a distempered stomacke fills the head with raw vapours; and soone mars the other:) So is it here: our mincHT mistaking, mis-leads the affection: and a wrong set affection puts the minde out of frame. That, in sunder they would not be, but joyned ever. (p. 462) Our greatest danger, however, is inaction. "For, though we see, yet we sit still and seeke not" (p. 464) . What we seek is above the order of nature. Arguing from nature, Andrewes analogizes: just as the head, the seat of the mind, is above, so it follows that what we seek t should be from above rather than on earth. Humorously using the Great Chain of Being, he adds: "And, if Nature would have us no moules, Grace would have us Eagles, to mount, where the body is" (p. 465) . There are two things we desire that are above: rest and glory. The world, being contingent and changing, contains no staying rest; 246 we should, therefore, fly from this world to God, where all things are at rest. Similarly, we cannot find glory here; instead, "It [the world] is, the place of fleas and gnats, this" (p. 467) . Lest any should seek glory in some natural paradise, he shall find "In the garden, the place of our delight, we meet with wormes; and there be Spiders, call ye this the place of glory, in dust and Cobwebs" (pp. 465-466). Only in heaven can rest and glory be found, and found united. And what better place to begin setting our minds and affections into the way of rest and glory than by participating in an Easter Eucharist? The Sacrament is ordained from above and whenever offered it is the place on earth where Christ is nearest to us. "And truly, here, if there be an ubi CHRISTUS, there it is" (p. 467). Christ "was found in the breaking of bread; that bread Shee [the Church] breaketh, that there we may finde Him. He was found by them, that had their mindes on Him . . . [therefore] Set your minds, have your hearts, where CHRIST is" (p. 467) . He closes this sermon with a sentence- paragraph of typical Andrean style: • ' . ' T h a t so, at this last [latest] and great Easter, of all (the Resurrection day) what we now seeke, we may then finde; where we now set our minds, our bodies may then be set; what we now but test, wee may then have the full fruition of: Even of His glorious God-head, in rest, and glory, joy, and bli'sse, never to have an end. (p. 467) The ninth Resurrection sermon is the last of the first set of Pauline interpretations of the Resurrection, « and is based on Philipians 2: ("®Hee humbled Himselfe, made obedient, unto death, even the death of the Crosse. 9For this cause, hath GOD also highly exalted Him; and given Him a Name, above every name. 10That, at the Name of IESUS, every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and in earth, and under the earth. And that every Tongue should con- fesse, that IESUS CHRIST is the LORD, to the glory of GOD the Father."). Andrewes1 sermon is arranged according to a verse-by-verse analysis of the text. Although not one of his best sermons, yet it is not without interest because in it he considers Christ's perfect humility and the degree of ceremony which is appropriate without being superstitious. He sees the exaltation of Christ as the chief or cardinal point of the text; cardinal because it is "... the very point, whereupon the whole Text turneth" (p. 470). Men sometimes exalt someone or something with out cause; God always acts purposefully. Indeed, exalting Christ because of His great humility is a paradox which is presumptious according to the world's lights. His humility was expressed in His complete obedience to the Father's orders. He became man, washed the feet of His disciples, and even suffered the worst death, the death of a male factor. Truly, this is humility which is not the world's. Centering upon His death, Andrewes linguistically and semantically analyzes "super-exaitavit." "His exalting hath an Ex, whence or out of what. His exalting hath a super, wither or whereunto" (p. 472). Christ came from death. With wit, Andrewes puns: "His humiliavit, had beene ad humum, to the ground; Nay further, into the ground: Nay further yet, . . . into the very lowest parts of it" (p. 472). Showing the consonance obtaining between the Old and New Testaments, he shows that like Joseph, Christ came from the stone dungeon; with Daniel from the bottom of the den; and with Jonah from from the whale's belly. Christ came from death to life: not merely to be born again as was the case with Lazarus, but to the glory of immortal life (p. 472) . Christ came from "the lowest parts of the earth, to the highest place in Heaven, even to the right hand of GOD. And higher, we cannot goe" { (p. 473). When men try to exalt themselves, they also try to make a name for themselves that they might be remembered by all men. Christ did not seek to establish His name, but God the Father gave Him one. Paradoxically thereby, "His Resurrection, is a very Nativity" (p. 473). The giving of a name parallels the Epiphany. Even though others had the name 'Jesus,' none had it given to them by God. Even though He had it prior to the Resurrection, this: act raised its meaning from potency to actuality. Finally,' by His Resurrection, He merited the name (pp. 473-474). Andrewes, in his analysis of the tenth verse, I discusses the degree to which knees should be bent. Paradoxically, we benefit by such service, for by bending knees and assenting vocally, we are exalted because of our humility. Andrewes never loses his sense of humor even in this seemingly minor point. "And verily, He [God] will not have us worship Him like Elephants, as if we had no joynts in our knees. ... He will have us bow the knees. . ." (pp. 475-476). Such full bending has precedents: it was the practice of the early Church, and it is enjoined upon the Jews according to the rules governing the daily recitation of the Canticles. About the question of "How do angels worship the Holy name of Jesus?" Andrewes dismisses it as unimportant and distracting. "They doe it [worship Jesus' name], their way: we to doe it, ours. And this is ours: let us look to our owne then, and not busie our braines about theirs" (p. 476). A more important consideration is whether or not bending the knees is superstitious. Andrewes answers in the affirmative, maintaining that the text under analysis enjoins it. About possible superstitious practices, he advises scrupulosity, holding as a corrective that one must be ; careful not to ". . . drive all reverent regard and decencie away with it also" (p. 477) . Aware that what ;separates men from all other earthly creatures is our 250 : ! j rational linguistic capacity, he holds that animals 1 1 . . . will be taught to bow, and bend their joynts: We have Tongues besides, to doe something more, than they. And indeed, the Knee is but a dumbe acknowledgement; doth but signifie implicite; but a vocal1 confession, that doth utter our minde plainly" (p. 477) . Although our rational capacity is our differentia, still, we must bend our knees first, as this will put us "in minde of due regard of Him in feare and reverence; we are then the fitter to speake of Him. . ." (p. 477). What animals can be conditioned to do he will not reject for man, but the physical act must be transformed into a preparatory spiritual act at the service of a higher form of spiritual communion with God. Every knee and every tongue will, at the Last Day, have to confess obedience and worship of Christ, because He is the Lord of heaven, earth, and hell'/ Now, in' this life, let us begin bending and confessing, for "So, we see our lot: One way, or other, we shall come to it, all: if not now, in die illo. . ." (p. 478). Therefore, let faithful Christians do what this passage recommends, let us do it in honor of Christ, as a good work, and, in the best sense, for the spiritual and eternal rewards which shall be given to us in recompense for these acts. More particularly, Andrewes invites his audience to receive the Eucharist as a means of fulfilling every part of the : 251 j practices advocated in the Pauline text. | The text for the tenth sermon is drawn from John 2: 19 ("IESUS answered and said, Dissolve (or, destroy) this Temple, and within three dayes I will raise it up againe."). This sermon is of special importance, for in ; it he: (1) reminds his auditors that the Church consists of people, not of buildings in which the Church meets? and (2) criticizes religious reformers, particularly the Puritans. Andrewes' procedure in this sermon is to analyze each of the key word or phrases. There are, in Andrewes1 eyes, two possible senses of "Templum hoc1 1 : the right and the wrong. The Pharisees, hoping to trap Jesus, read His utterance incorrectly: they interpreted it as the building (p. 483) . The true sense refers to Christ's body. The body, properly, is like a Temple because it is a structure in which God can dwell. In all other men, even when God dwells in a person through grace, there is still an admixture of divinity and sinful ness. In Christ, God dwelt therein with the entire God head in a completely sinless body. Comparing human sinful ness with Christ's innocence, Andrewes colorfully remarks that: "Alas, ours but Tabernacles under goat skins? His, the true, the marble, the Cedar-Temple indeed" (p. 483). Countering the charge of equivocation, he conjectures that Christ may have pointed to His body, thus removing the ambiguity (p. 483). As further support for his interpre- 252 tation, he asserts that Christ was no Puritan reformer: he sought to correct abuses, not to effect revolutions by pulling down buildings. Speaking also about his own age, Andrewes concludes: To reforme Churches, and then seeke to dissolve them, will be counted among the errours of our Age. CHRIST was farre from it. He that would not see it abused, would never endure to have it destroyed; specially, not, when He had reformed the abuses. .. . (p. 483) Further, Christ's body was the model upon which the Temple was built. Here Andrewes alludes to the rabbinical belief that the Temple was a model of the entire universe; that it contained representations of all the heavenly spheres as well as the four elements. Christ's body, though,.was the archetype, as is shown by the Fathers' contention that the "... Temple and all that was in it, was nothing else, but a compendious representation of CHRIST, for whom, and in whose honour, was that and all other true Temples" (p. 484). Andrewes continues the point by holding that the Temple's furniture (in several senses) was best understood in the light of Christ's death and rebirth: the two tables of the Law which had been broken and renewed in the Ark were copies of Christ's "Wisdome and Knowledge" within Him; the pot of manna which was kept from putrifying and Aaron' s; renewed rod were foretellers of Christ's resurrected and eternal life; and finally, the animal sacrifices signified Christ's dying for man's sins. Solvite is the next key word to be analyzed. 253 Andrewes begins by enumerating and discussing the qualities of the destroying. Using an architectural metaphor, he terms death a dissolution, a "loosing the cement" that binds together body and soul (p. 485). Death is the universal dissolver: it destroys soul and .body , man -and wife, friends, and rulers and their people. Second, destroying is by nature violent. Christ's death was not natural; hence, He had to be violently destroyed. Third, Christ's destruction was a voluntary act; He had to give His consent to be destroyed. "And Solvite He must have said; He must have said it, or they could not have done it. It had passed all this cunning and strength, to have undone this knot ever, but that He gave way to it" (p. 485). In the second part of his analysis of Solvite, Andrewes emphasizes that Christ offered a choice to the Pharisees; He did not command them to destroy His Temple. Had He commanded them to kill Him, He would have been guilty of "the most horrible foule murther that ever was"; indeed, He would have been guilty of the most heinous possible sin, and this, of course, would be impossible. Instead, Christ permits and predicts what will ultimately happen. God allowed Himself to be destroyed in order that He might destroy the sin of mankind. About the Passion itself, Andrewes notes that the destruction of the Temple's veil, the eclipse, rent stones, and opened graves all demonstrat ted that there was a universal "dissolution . . . either of the frame of Nature, or the GOD of Nature1 1 (p. 488) . ’ • 1 The semantic opposite of Solvite is excitabo, the next discussed word. That God the Son would rise from the I grave on the third day showed how He had tamed death; it showed "... what a strange metamorphosis He would make in death; turne it, but into a requiescet, and a requiescet in spe, and there is all" (p. 489). Continuing the theme of how easy Christ made overcoming death appear, Andrewes likens the Resurrection to the retying of a knot. Secondarily, His Resurrection demonstrated and overcame the Pharisees' purpose. "They reckoned indeed, to destroy Him; they were deceived; they made Him but ready for a nights rest or two" (p. 489). The question of the agent figures next. Christ's divinity was revealed in His Resurrection, for He (as the full Trinitarian God) raised Himself. That God the Son was also necessarily involved in the excitabo, Andrewes asserts wittily: "And let it not stumble any, that else-where, the Father is said to raise and exalt Him: That is all one. Both will stand well" (p. 489) . Next, Andrewes discusses the three day period. The interval was chosen so that no one could doubt that Christ j had truly died. Secondly, He specified the period that He might parallel Jonah's term within the whale. He was "Content to keepe time with His Prophets before Him" (p. 490). Christ was no romantic; He respected tradition when it was valid. 255 Finally, Andrewes discusses the application of this text to his audience. It shows the duty of the Christian to rejoice, and to be loosed from his sins and raised to eternal life. Morally, it signifies that Christians, together with redeeming grace, are to make their bodies temples of the Holy Spirit as well. As a moralist, he shows that his parishioners are far from this. "Our bodies . . . are farre from Temples; rather Prostibula than Tempula; brothel-houses, brokers shops, wine-caskes . . .rather than Temples, Or, if Temples, Temples the wrong way, of Ceres, Bacchus, Venus. . ." (p. 491). He closes this sermon by reminding his audience that they are in Christ's Temple now; therefore, it is fitting that they receive Him by receiving the Eucharist, the divinely ordained transmitter of grace. The text for the eleventh Resurrection sermon comes from I Peter 1: 3-4 ("Blessed bee GOD, and the FATHER of our Lord Iesus Christ, which according to His abundant, mercie, hath begotten us againe unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Iesus Christ from the dead. To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you."). The key word for the entire sermon is "Benedictus." We are asked, in the first part of the text, to give ipraise to God by blessing Him. Andrewes, being properly humble, sees this as a reversal of the usual order. How 256 lean creatures in any sense bless their Creator, he asks. "But thereby hangs a Scruple: For, what are we that we should take upon us to blesse GOD" (p. 495)? Certainly the relationship between God and man is asymmetrical; certainly God's blessing has the power of being "... re- all : ours, but verball. His, cum effectu, ever: Ours, ifj it be but cum affectu, that is all. His, Operative; ours, but Optative" (p. 495). Yet, we are bidden several times in Scripture to give blessing to God; what can be the reason, seeing that we give nothing to God in so doing? "We can adde nothing to Him by our Benedictus: Say we it, say we it not, He is blessed alike" (p. 495). There are some minor reasons and directions Andrewes notes before discussing the two chief reasons why we should give God our blessing. First, obviously, it is better for us to bless than to swear. Second, our spirituality is thereby deepened, because we change from hearing witty sayings to hearing devout words. Third, we bless God not individually, but corporately, as part of the Church. Fourth, by blessing the one God we sever or separate Him from all false gods. Fifth, we recognize God by His best name, the Blessed God who has delivered His people from their sins. Finally, by blessing God we necessarily involve the Second Person of the Trinity. The two chief reasons why we should bless God are: (1) a recognition that He has regenerated mankind. 257 Andrewes makes several puns with the word 'according* when discussing God's mercy. Certainly mercy befits a father's relationship towards his children: "... Mercie accords well with a Father. . ." (p. 497). God's mercy is described as being abundant or great and manifold. Using a musical pun, Andrewes notes that "According is well said. For, that indeed is the chord, to which this and all our Benedictusses are to be tuned" (p. 497). He next uses a geometric image to indicate that God's mercy is the central point from which all lines (benedictions) are drawn, singling out Zacharias' benediction at Christ's birth (Luke 1: 64-79) and Peter's benediction after Christ's Resurrection (I Peter 1: 3). God's act towards man was to regenerate his nature. The original act of man's creation was the first generation; that God regenerated mankind implies a fall from man's original state. In addition to regeneration, God gave us hope of attaining eternal life or spem vivam. "This is Viva indeed. Nay, this is Vita; for the hope of that life Immortall, is the very life of this life Mortall" (p. 499). By an act of divine substitution and exchange, we gain life immortal through the Passion and Resurrection. "Vivam, Per Resurrectionem Iesu Christi" (p. 499). By placing our hope in Christ, not upon any earthly thing, we shall have a hope that is "No reed, no cobweb-hope then; but helmet, anchor-hope; hope, that will never confound" us (p. 499). The hope, by God's 258 adoption of us as His sons, will lead us to the Visio Dei throughout eternity. There is a gradual transformation here. "So, from the state of hope, by the resurrection (as by a bridge) passe we over, to the enjoying our Inheri tance" (p. 500). This inheritance has three distinguishing qualities. It is incorruptible, unlike any earthly inheritance which can be escheated, confiscated, or wasted. It is undefiled, whereas earthly things are sullied; punningly, he notes that earthly things "soile us; their soile wee brush off, wipe, rub, wash off daily. . ." (p. 502). It does not fade. Plants on earth suffer the cycle of seasons; they are stricken in their roots, they wither, they lose their flowers and leaves. Contrast this with God's things in heaven, where all is "A perpetuall spring; no other Season, there, but that" (p. 502). In heaven all things "... keepe and continue .. . in their first estate, the originall beauty, they ever had" (p. 502) . As God has given us a triple blessing (our regenera tion, hope, and inheritance), so we in return can render back to God a triple blessing: ^Benedictus of the voice and instrument, 2genedictus of the Signe. and Sacrament, -^and Benedictus, of some blessed deed done, for which, many blessings upon earth, and the blessing of GOD from heaven shall come upon us. So, as wee say, Benedicti (here) Benedictus Deus, Blessed He: He shall say, Benedicti vos, Blessed Yee. The hearing of which words, in the end, shall make us blessed without end, in heavens blisse. (p. 504) What better way to say Benedictus, but by a two-fold v . ; r .s-V’ ; action: 1 1 Benedictus in our mouth, and the Holy Eucharist in our hands" (p. 503). Sermon twelve, unlike most of the Resurrection sermons, was delivered at Durham Cathedral rather than at Whitehall. It is based upon Matthew 12: 39-40 ("But Hee answered and said unto them; An evill and adulterous generation seeketh a signe, but no signe shall bee given unto it, save the signe of the Prophet Ionas. For, as Ionas was three daies and three nights in the Whales belly; so shall the Sonne of Man be, three dayes and three nights, in the heart of the earth.'1) ' . In this sermon, Andrewes considers first the nature of Christ's denial, and second His statement's applicability to the events of Easter Day. Why did Christ withhold a sign from the Scribes and Pharisees? This seems strange, for it is unlike Christ to withhold any good thing. The reason is in Eis, the men who have asked Him for a sign. He withheld it first because they were evil men; even "maliciously" and "absurdly" evil. Prior to their question Andrewes comments that "no lesse than a dozen signes" has been given them had they the eyes to see them. Earlier in Matthew 12 Christ gave His reason why His disciples could have food on the Sabbath, He healed the man with the withered hand, He healed the man possessed of the devil and who was blind and dumb, and He warned the Pharisees of the sin against the 260 | Holy Spirit. Earlier chapters reveal even more signs. ;Second, He withheld a sign because the Scribes and Pharisees were adulterous. Using multiple definition, Andrewes explains that the questioners were not children born of adulterous parents (because "CHRIST upbraideth no man, but with his owne faults" (p. 508) , nor were they guilty of spiritual adultery (such as idolatry, even though they may have been guilty of adulterating God's truth "by devices of their owne taking up" (p. 508); instead, he holds that they were probably guilty of sexual adultery (he has taken "the word in the native sense, without figure" (p. 508)). His reasoning is as follows: because they did not stay to stone the woman taken in adultery after Christ's rebuke, they thereby must have been guilty of adultery. Instead of giving in to their demands, Christ maintains control of the situation by turning their demand around; His purpose being to satisfy "their want, not . . . their wanton desires" (p. 508). That Christ chose the sign and example of Jonah is just, because: (1) Jonah was the Propheta peccator, one who was known as the "Sinning Prophet"; hence, a fit figure for the questioners; (2) he was the Propheta gentium, the first Prophet sent to the Gentiles, thereby showing that Christ was the Saviour of all men; (3) he was known as the Propheta Prophetarum, he was the first prophet recorded in the Old Testament; and (4) he: was the Propheta redivivus, "the onely Prophet, that went 261 downe into the deepe into the whales be Hie, and came forth againe alive" (p. 510). This last point Andrewes develops in some detail. Jonah's descent into the whale's stomach was a sign that Christ would also be a sacrifice for the sins of the world; the crucial difference between the two being that Christ was innocent, whereas Jonah was a sinner. Jonah's descent is thereby linked with two other Old Testament prefiguring people: Joseph into the dungeon and Daniel into the lion's den. Andrewes sees a difference though, because Joseph was in the dungeon longer than three days and Daniel for a lesser time; only Jonah was in captivity for three days: "Onely Ionas time, just" (p. 510) . Andrewes now considers the meaning of the three day descent as it applies to both Jonah and Christ. His first parallel is to expand metaphorically Jonah' s ship into a paradigm for the Church, any political commonwealth, and the world itself. The ship is apt, for it was "not a small Barke of Ioppe, but . . . a Great Arke or Argosie, wherein were imbarked [the pun is intentional] all Mankinde, having their course through the Maine Ocean of the world, bound for the Port of Eternal! blisse" (pp. 511-512). Second, Andrewes notes the parallels be tween Jonah and Christ. Both suffered great storms. What parallels Jonah's storm at sea is the shaking of the Temple, the tearing of the veil, and the storms which 262 occurred at the time of Christ's Crucifixion. In both i cases, the "whole masse of Mankinde [was] like to perish" i (p. 512). Similarly, both were sacrificed for the well |being of the whole. Jonah was the chief sinner by virtue of his own acts; Christ, however, was innocent, but was made sin for man's sake. Jonah suffered for his own sins; Christ for man's sins. Andrewes next demonstrates the parallel chronologi cal events in each person's three-day experience. Jonah's experience in the whale's stomach showed paradoxically that where he seemed to be in the greatest danger that he was, by God's governance, in the greatest safety. In the whale's stomach he could not be troubled by the storm; that he was carried to his destination showed that "he did but change his vehiculum" (p. 513). Christ, however, went into the earth, the place of the buried dead that has swallowed all men. He comments on the strangeness of both swallowings: "For, though to see a Whale tumble with a Prophet in the belly, were a strange sight: yet, more strange, to see the SONNE of GOD, lye dead in the earth: and, as strange againe, to see the Sonne of Man, to rise from the grave againe, alone" (p. 513). Each's Easter Day is likewise different. Andrewes, using internal rhyme and ironic metaphor, treats Jonah's release wittily: the r. . . Whales belly, that seemed his tombe, proved his | wombe, or second birth-place. There hee was: not, as meat in the stomach; but, as an Embrio, in the matrix of his mother. Strange! the Whale to be as his mother, to be delivered of him, and bring him forth into the world againe" (p. 513). Jonah got out of the whale when it disgorged him; Christ, however, saved Himself from death. When Jonah was released, he still was subject to death; Christ altered death in three ways: (1) He changed the "pit of perdition" to a "harbour of rest. . ." (p. 514); (2) Christ made the grave ". . .a convoy, or passing boat, to a better Port, than any is in our Tharsis here; even, to the haven of happinesse, and heavens blisse without end" (p. 514); and (3) He showed that there would be a bodily resurrection. By way of showing the applicability of the passage to his audience, Andrewes remarks that there are three whales: (1) Jonah's whale of danger, not death; (2) Christ's, which was death; and (3) the "red dragon, that great spirituall Leviathan, Satan" (p. 515). The closing point is the usual one of inviting the faithful to participate in Christ's Resurrection by receiving the Eucharist. There is no apparent relationship between the text chosen for the thirteenth sermon (I Corinthians 11: 16: "But if any man seeme to be contentious, we have no such custome, neither the Churches of GOD.") and Resurrection- tide. Andrewes' intention is to answer Puritan objections towards non-scriptural Easter communions and related practices. It is therefore a High Church criticism of Puritanism. He begins by directly confronting the apparent lack of relationship between the text and Easter, as he plainly utters: "This is no Easter Text, as we are wont to have: Nothing of the Resurrection in it. It is not for the day" (p. 517) . Andrewes admits that if there had ever been a contention about Easter, then it applies; however, "I say not, any such contention there is. . ." (p. 517). If anyone doubts a Scriptural basis for keeping Easter, see his earlier sermons on Psalm 118 and I Corinthians 5: 7—8. Because many Puritans were humorless, Andrewes is deliberately witty in this sermon, as when he maintains that "Wee doe but make ourselves to be pitied otherwhile, when we stand wringing the Scriptures, to straine that out of them, that is not in them, and so can never come liquidi from them: when yet we have the same point, the Churches Custome cleare enough" (p. 518) . The chief point of this sermon is that there is a basis for keeping the Easter feast. Andrewes begins the sermon proper by reminding his ! audience that there were indeed contentions in the very beginning of the Church. He cannot resist punning: "In the very prime of the Primitive Church, then were there Contentions" (p. 519). And these contentions were not merely with external enemies (the Jews versus the Gentiles), 265 ibut with those in the Church. Andrewes sees in the I recurrence of contentions and heresies a useful point? they are the means by which the value of orthodoxy is tried. "As true it is of the last, as of the first Church: : l _ proved thee also at the waters of strife. Those waters, the waters of Meriba, will hardly be dreined ever" (p. 519). In the primitive Church people contended about petty things: merely about matters of rite. For a Hat and a Veile, was all this adoe. It was not about any the high Mysteries, any of the vitall parts of Religion, Preaching, Prayer, the Sacraments: Onely, about the manner, how? the gesture and behaviour, wherewith? in what sort, to carry themselves, at Preaching, Prayer, the Sacraments: about matter of circumstance merely, and nothing else. (p. 519) Andrewes sees contentious people as prideful and super ficial: they think that they can see truth better than their fellows and superiors? they pick about matters of ceremony rather than substance. But, despite their petti ness, they are troublesome and damaging. "And to picke a quarrell with a ceremony is easie. A plausible theme, not to burthen the Church with ceremonies: the Church to be free: which hath almost freed the Church of all decencie" (p. 519). Andrewes, respecting order, intelligence, and tradition, has harsh words for these busy, prideful people. Wee see it daily, in persons but meanely qualified (GOD wot) yet so premptory, as if the Word of GOD had come, if not from them, yet to tKem only, and- none besides. Good"LORD] Why should any love to be contentious? Why? It is the way to be some body. In time of peace, what reckoning is there of Wat Tiler* or Iacke Straw? Make a sedition, and they will beare ; a braine with the best. Primianus and Maximianus ! were the heads of the two factions of Donatists in Saint Augustines time. Hee saith, it was well for them, that faction fell out: Else, Primianus might have beene Postremianus, and Maximianus be Minimianus, well enough. But now, in schlsme, either of them was a jolly fellow, head of a party. This makes, wee shall never want contentious persons, and they will take order, wee shallnever want contentions. (pp. 519-520) ” Such contentions, centered as they are upon secondary matters, are not, despite their seeming unimportance, to be neglected. If one allows contentions to continue, there will eventually be a schism, and finally a heresy. "If it [a contention] be not taken at the first, within a while ... ye shall heare of a schlsme. . . . And within a little after that .. . ye shall have a flat heresie of it" (p. 520). Satan's method of corrupting the Church is through contentions, for if he "win ground in the Ceremonies, then [he shall] have at the Sacrament. . (p. 520). Andrewes1 attitude towards apparent triviality is best expressed in a paradox: "... Count it no small matter, not to neglect small matters" (p. 520). The Church's weapon against contentions is custom. Andrewes sees an analogy between positive law in society, in which the statute books and customs form the chief part, and the positive law of the Church as expressed in Her customs. Clearly, however, no custom is valid if it is countered by the Bible. Yet customs, and among them Easter customs, were established early in the Church's history. If they have endured until today, then they have validity. The Church also has a responsibility: She must maintain valid ancient customs and oppose new and invalid ones. But what are the signs of a valid custom? He delineates two signs: (1) it must be found throughout the Church; it must be catholic and not parochial; and (2) it is generally found to have been practiced by the Apostles. Andrewes will admit, however, that some prac tices may be begun in indivqdual Churches if they are not offensive to the other Churches; however, because of their parochiality, they are not binding upon all. Andrewes is vague about this exception; he does not cite any examples. He spends several pages discussing certain Easter practices which have been contended (the proper date of Easter and the number of days for Easter observances), but they are not as important as the chief point: the keeping of the feast on Easter Day. His conclusion is that all Churchmen should celebrate Easter properly by receiving the Eucharist, thus signifying their consonance with I custom. Sermon fourteen is the first of three sermons in which Andrewes delves into the visit by Mary Magdalene to Christ's tomb on Easter morning and is based upon John 22: ("But Mary, stood by the Sepulcher, weeping; and as shee wept, she stopped, and looked into the Sepul cher , 12 And saw two Angels, in white, sitting, the one at the head, the other at the feet, where the Body of IESUS had lyen. 13And they said to her, Woman, why weepest thou? Shee said to them, They have taken away my LORD, and I know not where they have laid Him. 14When she had thus said, she turned her selfe about, and saw IESUS standing, and knew not, that it was IESUS. ISjESUS saith to her, Woman, why weepest thou? Whom seekest thou? Shee (supposing He had beene the gardiner) said to Him, Sir, if thou have borne Him hence, tell me where thou hast laid Him, and I will take Him thence. 16iesus saith to her, Mary: She turned herselfe, and said to Him, Rabboni; that is to say, Master. 17iesus said to her, Touch Me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father: But, goe to my brethren, and say to them, I ascend to my Father and to your Father, and to my GOD and your GOD.) Andrewes examines each verse separately. About verse eleven, Andrewes singles out Mary's deep love rather than her faith. She had great love for Christ because she was the last person at the Cross and the first at His grave. That she did not have as great a degree of faith is seen in her failure to recognize the risen Christ. He then contrasts Mary's great love with ours: "We find not Christ, no mervaile: but, seeke Him as she sought Him, and we shall speed, as she sped" (p. 534) . Andrewes' love of dramatic contrast is used to great advantage in his analysis of verse twelve. The angels were wearing their white Easter colors in contrast to the blackness of the eclipse and the pain and blackness of Good Friday. As a Renaissance thinker, Andrewes sees the angels in the Sepulchre as a particular instance of the |highest and lowest in the Great Chain of Being as he notes ; that "That which was the place for wormes, is become a place for Angells" (p. 534). That there is an angel at ieach end of the pallet perhaps signifies that Christ is the Ark situated between the two Cherubim. A second interpretation he advances about the position of the two angels is that they thereby honored the dual nature of Christ. In principio erat verbum, His God-head; there, an Angell: Verbum caro factum, His man-Kood; there, another. And let all"~the Angels of GOD worship Him in both. Even in His man-hood, at His cradli (the head of it) a queere of Angels? at His grave (the feet of it) Angels likewise, (p. 535) The scene applies to Andrewes1 audience: if God so wills it, the faithful shall die enjoying the fruits of the Resurrection between two angels. In addition, we learn that there should be no striving for position: we should be content to worship at either Christ's head or feet. Alluding to dumb show pageants, Andrewes comments about verse thirteen that the angels presented "... not a dumbe shew, this, a bare appirition, and so vanished ' ! away. It was visio and vox, a vocall vision. Here is a dialogue too. . ." (p.'536). About Mary, Andrewes notes that she was not offended by the scandalous appearance of Christ's death? rather, she acknowledged Him as her Lord. The central theme of the analysis of verse fourteen : is that Christ is a gardener who brings to life the 270 restored Garden of Eden. Christ is the gardener of ". . . the fairest Garden that ever was (Paradise). . ." (p. 538). He' sends us each year the green spring ". . . and all the herbs and flowers we then gather. . ." ! (p. 528). He waters our souls as well, and He weeds out of them whatsoever is noysome or unsavoury, sowes and plants them with true roots and seeds of righteousnesse, waters them with the dew of His grace, and makes them bring forth fruit to eternall life. (p. 538) But His having conquered death makes Him a new sort of gardener, because by His Resurrection He *. . . made such an herbe grow out of the ground this day, as the like was never seene before, a dead body, to shoot forth alive out of the grave1 1 (p. 53 8.) . By this act, He will turne all our graves into garden-plots: Yea, shall one day turne land and sea, and all into a great garden, and so husband them, as they shall in due time bring forth live bodies, even all our bodies alive againe. (p. 539) Andrewes dwells upon the quality of Mary's love in his examination of verse fifteen. Significantly, Christ's question is the first record of His speech to man after His rising. Its meaning is that no longer need we stand by graves and weep for the dead as the heathens do, because Christ has conquered death. Mary's question uncovers a level of meaning she did not intend. That this gardener must have taken Christ's body away signifies unconsciously that only Christ could raise His own body from the grave. Mary, as is the case with lovers, does not refer to Christ by name? instead, she calls Him 'Him.1 Beyond this, her love is expressed by her tone. Her great love would give her the strength to lift up the, as she supposes, dead Christ and transport Him back to the Sepulchre. Her speech betrays this, for it seemes rather the speech of a Porter, or of some lusty strong fellow at least, than of a silly weake woman. But love makes women more than women, at least it makes them have . . . the courage above the strength, farre. (p. 540) Andrewes' analysis of verse sixteen is centered around a light-dark polarity, with Christ the Son-Sun's ability to disperse darkness-heaviness or ignorance by the power of His word. Mary's inner clouds of darkness were immediately dispersed by the power of the Verbum Dei. It is strange, a thicke cloud of heavinesse had so covered her, as, see Him she could not, thorow it: this one word, these two syllables [Mary] from His mouth, scatters it, all. No sooner had His voice sounded in her eares, but it drives away all the mist, dries up her teares, lightens her eyes, that she knew Him straight. . . . (p. 541) Andrewes sees this sequence of questions and statements as bearing upon the polarity of faith and appearances. She had faith in Christ, but she did not recognize Him until He revealed Himself to her. By extension, Andrewes moves to Christ's self-revelation to the two on the journey to Emmaus. "Her eyes opened by speaking a word: their eyes opened by the breaking of bread. There is the one and the other way, and so now you have both" (p. 542) . Christ's 272 self-revelation by the Word and by the sacramental frac turing leads directly to Andrewes' closing point, that just as the Bishop's listeners have heard a sermon, so now are they to witness the sacramental act. By these two means, the audience is asked to participate in the symbolic act of Christ's death and Resurrection as a pledge of their being likewise raised to the Visio Dei through grace after their death. The subject of sermon fifteen is the meaning of the first part of the seventeenth verse of the passage quoted in sermon fourteen ("Iesus saith unto her, Touch me not."). This sermon is one of the wittiest ones Andrewes ever wrote; it is also one of the most serious. Andrewes focuses directly upon the seeming unkind ness of the remark following the tenderness just exhibited. "Make the best of it, a repulse it is: but a cold saluta tion for an Easter-day morning" (p. 543). Andrewes humorously dwells upon the incongruity between Christ's first question and His present repulse. A little before He asked, Why she wept. This is enough to set her On weeping afresh. For ifshee wept for sustulerunt Dominum, that others had taken away her LORD": Much more, now, when her LORD takes away Himselfe from her, that she may not so much as touch Him. (p. 543) Andrewes speculates about whether or not Christ should have revealed Himself to her, because when she did not recognize Him He spoke kindly to her. The subject of the 2731 : ! I second part of the text is to be discussed in the next | sermon. (Indeed, Mary's message to the disciples is "The i very Gospell of the Gospell it selfe, and a Compendium of all the same" (p. 544).) The sermon's division is between the restraint proper and the reason for the command. Andrewes raises the question of motive. Mary's desire was selfless; she wanted to touch Christ out of love rather than in the hope of getting something from Him. In addition, she had obviously touched Him before, because she had annointed His body before it was placed in the Sepulchre. For all she had done or had intended to d o , . . one poore touch had beene but an easie recompense" (p. 545). On Christ's side, He commanded her not to touch Him not simply to avoid physical contact, for "CHRIST was not wont to be so dainty of it" (p. 544). What, then, could the reason for Christ's command ment? Surely, the time is opportune. "If standing on earth by Him, He is not to be touched, when He is taken up ; into heaven, no onne will then reach Him: past touching, ithen. That if not till then, never. The reason makes it yet further from reason" (p. 545). The reason cannot be derived from God's original commandment to Adam and Eve not to touch the forbidden fruit. "But CHRIST is not the forbidden tree: the tree of life rather; to be touched and tasted, that we may live by Him" (p. 545). In order to I 2741 jexplain the probable reason, Andrewes next surveys three I ! > Patristic opinions for Mary's being forbidden to touch Christ. St. Chrysostom's contention that perhaps Mary was ". . .a little too forward" and lacked the "due respect that was meet" is the first speculation (p. 546). Andrewes makes several witty remarks in his discussion of this opinion. Perhaps Christ disliked her salutation 'Rabboni,' because ". . .it was no EASTER-day salutation, it would have been" better to have chosen a more reverent term (pp. 546-547). Punning, Andrewes considers the quality of her touch in the light of her sins: "... her touch [was] no Easter-day touch: her tangere had a tang in it (as we say). The touch-stone of our touching CHRIST, is, with all regard and reverence that may be. . ." (p. 547). Perhaps also, the commandment was given because she was defective in judgment and excessive in affection. She apparently had not recognized that Christ was to ascend; she thought instead that He would remain on earth. Andrewes generalizes, using a pun, from Mary's instance to all who desire to touch Christ. "They that so prease [sic] to touch Him, and He somewhat too homely with Him, they are| in Mary Magdalen's case. Her noli me tangere, touches them home" (p. 547). Love must have decorum and respect. Further, she has also immediately changed from sorrow to joy; she should be calmer before touching Him. What, then, 275 jabout St. Thomas and his desire to touch Christ? Andrewes sees the two cases as different. Stp Thomas' problem was a lack of faith which touching Christ solved? Mary's problem was misdirected faith: she had not fully consi dered His new state. St. Thomas, having touched Christ, termed Him his Lord and God; Mary only called Him 'Rabboni.'i St. Gregory's interpretation was that Christ's message to His Apostles would be more quickly given if Mary would not tarry, but hasten to deliver the message. Andrewes shows some of his best wit as he humorously has Christ say "Let us have no touching now? there is a matter in hand, would bee done out of hand, and therefore for this time hands off, Touch me not" (p. 530). Because Christ has not yet ascended, go and deliver my message; there will be time to touch me later. Go to the disciples: "... Get you to them, the first thing you doe: It will doe them more good to heare of my rising, than it will doe you, to stand and touch me" (p. 530). To wean her from sensual touching is St. Augustine's t interpretation. Mary (as well as the disciples) were too accustomed to physical touching. By forbidding her to touch Him, Christ was increasing her faith and lessening her dependence upon mere touching. "So, doe we then: Send| I up our faith, and that shall touch Him, and then will :vertue come from Him. . ." (p. 552). 27 6 ; Andrewes merely discusses these three possible j Patristic interpretations; he does not state his own views ' (until the next sermon) about the reason for the prohibi tion. Significantly, he does not close this sermon with an invitation to receive the Holy Sacrament. j Sermon sixteen is a four-part discussion of the second half of John 20: 27. For not allowing her to touch Him, Christ gave her a special duty in recompense for her great love towards Him, that of informing His disciples of j His Resurrection. Andrewes sees her delivery of the mes sage as a parallel action to her earlier breaking the "box I of pretious ointment. . ." (p. 554). About not touching Christ, Andrewes holds the following views: (1) she was too familiar or eager (p. 553); (2) there would still be time before the Ascension for her to touch Him (p. 553); and (3) it was more important for her to tell the disciples: than it was for her to tarry and touch Him (p. 554). It is significant that Christ refers to His disci ples as brothers. Despite the fact that they had forsaken Him, He forgave them. Second, there has not only been forgiveness, there has also been an elevation. Prior to the Crucifixion, Christ spoke of His disciples as His i friends; now they are His brothers (p. 556). Finally, the statement shows that there is still an "Identitie of mature" (p. 556); that Christ's human nature was resurrected as well as His divine nature. 277! . i That Mary Magdalene was given a commission by Christ;, ; ■ | shows that she has been elevated into an apostle, a person I sent forth. In addition, she will, through her message, resurrect the feelings of the disciples. The message itself is likewise significant. Mary is to tell them that Christ will ascend to their heavenly Father; not merely that He had risen from the grave. One reason for this form of the message is that resurrection is necessarily implied in ascension. "Ascendo then, puts His resurrection past all peradventure: He needs say no more of that, of His rising1 1 (p. 557) . Secondly, resur rection is not an end in itself; rather, it is a means towards an end. For, to rise from the bottome of the grave to the brinke of it, to stand upon our feet againe, and tread on the grave-stone, and no more, is but half a rising; ; is but Lazarus1s rising. To rise up, up as high as heaven, that is to rise indeed; that is Christs rising; and that to be ours” (pp. 557-558) Andrewes then takes St. Paul's statement ("As all have died in Adam, so shall all rise in Christ") one step further; that all men shall rise with Christ is no comfort, but that Christians will ascend into heaven and not to condemnation is good news indeed (p. 558). Andrewes sees natural analogies here; at night the stars ascend until they reach their apogee; plants in the spring insistently rise until they reach their term. The final section of this sermon is devoted to an analysis of Ad patrem meum et patrem vestrum. That Christ | would ascend to His Father means that His followers would ascend as well; hence, Christians are no longer servants, but are members of God's family. First, though, it is necessary to distinguish the fatherhood of God from earthly fathers. Fathers to ascend to., such Fathers there are none: such here. Our fathers here, we descend to, goe downe to them; downe to the grave. Him, and Him onely, wee goe up to, up to heaven. . . . (p. 561) Prior to Christ's Resurrection, there was a sheer differ ence between human fathers and God the Father. After the rising, though, Christ brought men into His family; He erased the distinction between meum and vestrum. "A blessed change may we say: His great meum for our little vestrum: Little ours for great His" (p. 561). The second pair of terms is Deum meum et Deum vestrum. Using Elijah's ascending chariot as the key image, Andrewes sees the adoption of man and the identification of His and our God as the four wheels needed for our Chariot with which we may ascend. "Our GOD, CHRIST'S GOD, CHRIST'S Father, our Father. There is ascendo your chariot, and these are the foure wheeles on which it moveth, and is carried up to Heaven" (p. 563). With all these adoptions, Andrewes queries whether or not Easter is not a second Christmas. For, meethinkes, all the time, wee are thus about Father and Sonne, and taking our nature and becomming 279 one of us, it should be Christmas by this, and not Easter . . . that this a meeter Text . . . for that Feast; and that ... it comes out of season, (p. 563) Not so, for Christ never spoke out of season. Indeed, lEaster is now a second Christmas. "There was a new begetting, this day. And if a new begetting, a new Paternitie, and fraternitie, both" (p. 564). Explaining this further, Andrewes proclaims To shut all up in a word: That of Christmas, was the fraternitie rising out of Deum meum, Deum vestrum; So, then, brethren. This of Easter, adopting us to His Father was the fraternitie of Patrem meum, Patrem vestrum: So, brethren, now, (p. 564) Therefore, just as Christ took our flesh, so we also should participate in the Eucharist by ascending into His Tabernacle now on earth as a pledge of our ascension into heaven after death. The subject of the seventeenth Resurrection sermon is Isaiah's vision of the return of the just sacrificial lamb, and it is based upon Isaiah 63: 1-3. ("Who is this that commeth from Edom, with red garments from Bozra? He is glorious in His apparell and walketh in great strength: I speake in righteousnesse, and am mightie to save. Wherefore is thine apparell red, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine- presse? I have troden the wine-presse alone, and of all the people there was none with me: for, I will tread them in mine anger, and tread them under foot in my wrath, and their bloud shall bee sprinkled upon my garments, and I will staine all my rayment.) The division of the sermon is based upon two questions: Who is it? and, Why is his-apparel red? Andrewes interprets the relevant passages by way of 280 answering the first question in a symbolic mode; that is, ;he is not interested in where the places mentioned are per se, but rather in what they represent spiritually, or, as Andrewes describes his method: "Goe we then to the kernell, and let the husk lye: let goe the dead letter, and take we to us the spirituall meaning that hath some life in it" (p. 568). Edom to the Jews was the worst place on earth. The Edomites came from Esau, Jacob's elder brother, whereas the Jews descended from the younger Jacob (pp. 568-569). The Edomites were the wickedest people and they were situated geographically next to the Jews (p. 568). Edom represents, finally, the "region of death" (p. 569). Bozra represents hell, because it was encircled with stones, so that once one got into it he could not get out again. Christ, in His sacrifice, saved us from sin, and thus from death and hell. Two things there are that undoe us: Errour, and Sinne. From His Speaking, we receive knowledge of His truth, against errour. From His Saving, we receive the power grace, against Sinne, and so, are saved from Sinnes i sequelle, Edom and Bozra, both. (p. 57T) Christ's Resurrection, then, means that He has triumphed over death and hell, Edom and Bozra. That no one recog nized Him at first fits the opening question of the text. Using a military metaphor, Andrewes notes that Christ, having won the battle against death and eternal condemna tion, comes back from the field dressed in bloody clothes and walks with a conqueror's firm step. This, then, leads 281 r ' j Andrewes to his second question, "Why is he dressed in j red?" Clearly the red came not from having pressed grapes,; 'for this is not the harvest season. "We know well, our reason leads us, there could be no vintage, at this time of the yeare, the season sewes not: Bloud it was" (p. 571). Christ, by His Passion and Resurrection, had been in a double 'winepress.1 In the former [the Passion], Hee was Himselfe troden and pressed: Hee was the grapes and clusters Himself. In this latter here [walking after the Resurrection], He that was troden on before, gets up againe, and doth here tread upon, and tread downe. . . . The Presse He was troden in, was His Crosse and PassionT This, which He came out of, this day, was in His descent and resurrection: Both, proper to this Feast; One to Good- friday; the other, to Easter-day. (p. 572) Andrewes continues the figure of the winepress, noting that Christ suffered three "steines" in the first pressing. One in Gethsemane, that made Him sweat bloud: The wine, or bloud . . . came forth at all parts of Him. Another, in the Judgement Hall, Gabbatha; which made the bloud runne forth at His head, withthe thornes; out of His whole body, with the Scourges; out of His hands and feet, with the nailes. The last steine, at Golgotha: where, He was so pressed, that they pressed ; the very soule out of His body, and out ran bloud and water both. [From His body] . . . came both Sacraments, the twin Sacraments of the Church, (p. 572) Andrewes compares Christ with Adam. Adam was also the true vine; but through sin, this true vine became a "wilde strange vine," which brought forth bitter wine of ; which all men had to drink (p. 572). The cup was passed around, and when it came to Christ, He chose to drink it, 282 ; although, being innocent, He did not have to. This cup contained vinegar and gall, yet He drank it all. This cup, the one "... due to us, and no way to Him, He dranke for us, that it might passe from us, and we not drink it. Ours did He drinke, that we might drinke of His" (p. 573). About the color red, Andrewes sees this as fitting for two reasons. First, because red is the color of a doctor's robe. Following John 7: 46, Andrewes maintains that only Christ merits a doctor's robe because only He completely tells us about God's righteousness. Second, because it is the proper color for the robe of a victorious soldier emerging from battle (p. 575). Andrewes, in this regard, terms Christ "Captaine MESSIAS" (p. 575). Andrewes concludes this sermon with the familiar invitation to celebrate Holy Eucharist. Just as Christ drank our cup of vinegar and gall, so we are asked to share His cup of salvation, that we might partake of the fruits of His redemption and, by so doing, escape the day of vengeance "... and may feele the fulnesse of His saving power in the Word engrafted, which is able to save our soules; and in the cup of salvation which is joyned with it; and that to our endlesse joy" (p. 576). Sermon eighteen was prepared for delivery in 1624, but, as noted on the second page of this chapter, it was never delivered. The text (Hebrews 13) is an appropriate one to close the sequence: it contains St. Paul's Ibenediction to the Hebrews ("2°The GOD of peace, that brought againe from the dead, our LORD IESUS CHRIST, the great Shepherd of the Sheepe, through the bloud of the everlasting Testament, 2lMake you perfect in all good workes, to do His will, working in you that which is pleasant in His sight, through IESUS CHRIST, to whom be praise for ever and ever, Amen."). The reference to Christ's sacrificial blood provides an obvious link to the preceding sermon: the emphasis upon right action as achieved through the faithful acting out of God's will is appropriate for final instruction. There are three parts to this sermon: the thing done and by whom it was done; the thing to be done by us; and the combining of parts one and two. In the first part of this sermon, Andrewes pays particular attention to Christ's titles. In the Old Testament the Messiah is called, among other titles, the Lord of Hosts; in the New Testament He is called the Prince of Peace. Andrewes sees this shift as an advance, not a mere change of names, because the latter title is implied in the former. "For, if the Lord of Hosts came to be at peace with us, His hosts shall be all for us, which were against us, while it was no peace" (p. 580) . Second, Christ is spoken of. as "Our Lord Iesus Pastorem, The Shepheard" (p. 580). This title is also implied in the name 'Prince of Peace,' because shepherds are peaceful men who will go far into 284 dangerous places to save their sheep. All titles are realized in the freely willed sacrifice of Christ for men's sins, ". . . through the bloud of the everlasting ITestmanet. . (p. 577). We, under the figure of sheep, ". . . fell to straying, and light into the Wolves donne: and thither He must goe, to fetch them, if He will have them" (p. 581). In addition, we were also, because of our sins, "appointed to the slaughter" (p. 581). Christ came to us to save us, and the wolves did to Him what they would have done to us. In recognition of Christ's negating our sins, we have the responsibility to be made perfect. We are bidden to do God's will in everything, not just in some areas of human experience. "It is not safe, to doe otherwise; nor to serve God by Synechdoche: but . . . to take all before us" (p. 587). Yet Andrewes realizes that perfection can only be found in Heaven, not on earth. But our good works, done through preventing and aiding grace, are best thought of as steps which lead us away "... from iniquity, the nearer still to approach unto GOD in the Land of the living: whither to attaine, is the totall, or Consummation est of our perfection" (p. 586). The conclusion of the sermon, and the union of the first and second parts, is that without applying the merit achieved through Christ's sacrifice, our good works are profitless. If we do any good, if we mortify our sins, it 285 is done through "... the vertue of CHRIST'S Resurrec tion" (p. 589). This victory over sin and death was achieved once for all in all times and places. Perhaps indirectly criticizing the Roman Catholic view that each Mass is a fresh sacrifice, Andrewes concurs with the Book of Common Prayer view that Christ's Sacrifice was once offered for the sins of the whole world (p. 589). The blood shed by Christ ran, according to Andrewes, into two vessels: (1) the laver of our new birth applied in Baptism, and (2) the Eucharistic cup (p. 589). Andrewes closes the sermon and the sequence by reminding the listeners that Easter Day is the best time to receive the Eucharistic peace offering, that as Christ arose from the dead, so we, through grace, may bring forth good works so as not to be "... found fruitlesse, at our bringing back from the dead, in the great Resurrection. . ." (p. 590). CHAPTER VII CONCLUSION By examining Lancelot Andrewes1 literary portrayal of the Person of Christ in relationship to selected sermons by Hugh Latimer and Antiquitates Christianae by Jeremy Taylor, we have seen how these three men, with their differing temperaments and emphases, have yet presented an orthodox view of Christ's Person and sig nificance. Although each writer's portrayal of Christ's Person is orthodox, the crucial differences between the three are stylistic. Using Alan Herr's three categories of Renaissance sermon style, we see that Latimer exemplifies the plain style and Andrewes the witty.1 Taylor is baroque according to Tucker Brooke.2 Latimer is the most direct of the three writers. Because he wrote during the first stage of the Reformation, he necessarily emphasized the differences between the ; Reformed English Church and certain of the practices and beliefs of the medieval Roman Church, deploring ■^•Alan F. Herr, The Elizabethan Sermon (Philadelphia, 1940), pp. 89, 102. 2In Albert C. Baugh, ed., A Literary History of England (New York, 1948), p. 619. 286 287 j"massemongering" and the lack of an English translation of the Bible. His view of Christ is direct and vigorous. His approach towards Christ was evangelical rather than learned or witty, emphasizing the sorry nature of unre deemed and unrepentant natural man, the significance for man's salvation of God made man, and the joyous and necessary acceptance of salvation freely offered by Christ to man. Latimer's. plain style is described by Herr as "sober, simple in expression, . . . direct as possible, and free from ornamentation of either fantastic ideas or verbiage. . ." ,3 Not only did Latimer criticize the medieval Church, but he also, as bishop and priest, criticized heretical views, as witness his condemnation of the Arianism of Joane of Kent as well as Nestorianism or Adoptionism. Finally, Latimer never composed a systematic series of sermons upon any aspect of Christ's life and teachings; instead, he dwelled only upon those aspects of His life and significance that were relevant to the Scriptural passages appointed weekly. Of the three writers, Andrewes was the most perceptive, witty, and learned theologian. Writing after the Church of England had successfully been established as the Catholic Church in England, he did not have to fight battles with the Roman Church in his sermons. Although 3Herr, p. 89. 288! ! ! educated at Puritan-influenced Cambridge, he rarely alludes! to the Puritans in his sermons, nor does he discuss such | i essential Puritan doctrines as depravity, justification, faith over good works, and the criticism of the episco- jpacy. Instead, writing for highly sophisticated court audiences, he wrote as a conscious member of the historic and traditional Church, with wit, extended metaphors, parallelism, detailed and subtle analyses of his chosen texts, an occasional use of internal rhyme, puns, allu sions drawn from the Old and New Testaments, the Fathers, and occasionally from classical literature, and a sentence structure which was essentially Senecan, defined by Herr as "made up of short and disjointed members through which the thought progresses as a series of sharp flashes. . Not having to compose sermons on a weekly basis as did Latimer, Andrewes had the scope, learning, and audience to deliver extended analyses of the major events in the Church year (the Nativity, Ash Wednesday, the Passion, and the _ Resurrection) over a period of several years, sometimes running to the length of nineteen years as in the case of the seventeen Nativity sermons. Such a fortunate position allowed him to discuss whatever he considered essential for a proper understanding of the subject under analysis. In the Resurrection series, Andrewes discussed the fact ^Herr, p. 102. i and significance of Christ's Resurrection, Old Testament anticipations, the events of Easter Day, St. Paul's interpretations, Christ's own anticipation and challenge, and Church tradition and practices. Although an exemplar of the witty style, Andrewes never exhibits a casual or slighting attitude towards Christ. For him, Christ was to be served with all the talents one had; hence, Andrewes brought to bear upon his Lord the full measure of his not inconsiderable intellect. Occasionally Andrewes will jolt the listener with a telling sentence, as in the fifteenth Nativity sermon. Speaking about lax contemporary practices and contrasting his audience with the Magi, he writes: But when wee doe it, wee must be allowed leasure. Even, Veniemus; never Venimus: Ever comming; never, come. We love to make no very great haste. To other things, perhaps: Not to Adorare, the Place of the worship of GOD. Why sould wee? CHRIST, is no Wild cat. What talke you of twelve dayes? And it be fortie dayes hence, yee shall be sure to find His Mother and Him; She cannot be Churched till then: What needs such haste?5 More frequently, however, Andrewes invites rather than shocks; it is a great joy to love and serve Christ, and he expresses this joy invitingly, as in the conclusion of the same sermon: God is to be worshipped. Glorifie GOD with your • bodies, for they are GOD'S (saiththe ApostleT) Honour GOD with your substance, for He nath~~5lessed your store (saith SALOMON.} It is tEe Precept of a Wise King; of one, there: It is the Practice of more 5Lancelot Andrewes, XCVI Sermons (London, 1635), p. 44. than one, of these three, here. Specially, now: For, CHRIST hath now a body for which, to doe Him worship with our bodies. And, now, He was made poore, to make us rich; and so, offerentes will doe weTT comes very fit'.® Jeremy Taylor, as represented by his devotional work Antiquitates Christianae, wrote not to be heard (although he did compose sermons), but to be read and meditated upon by individual Christians. Aware of membership in the historic Church, he was yet influenced by the Protestant idea of individualism: he assumes an educated audience that is able to comprehend the events and significance of Christ's life by individual study without the need for special instruction. His prose style, characterized by parallelism, periodicity, some wit, and appropriate images and metaphors, is designed to focus his readers' attention upon the subject rather than to call attention to itself. His style is complex without being artificial, and clear and elegant but not plain as is Latimer's. His view of Christ is essentially orthodox, and although he lacks the vigor of Latimer's evangelism and the conscious artifice of Andrewes, his interpretation reveals a deep devotion to Christ stated elegantly yet lovingly. Stylistically, Latimer exemplified the usual characteristics of the popular preacher. He used casual and personal anecdotes and a direct carping critical tone j ' / ^Andrewes, p. 147. 291! t o w a r d s h e r e t i c s a n d w o r l d l y p r e l a t e s . C . S . L e w is j describes him as being ; • { one of the purest examples in English of the 'popular' preacher in the fullest— if you will, the lowest— sense of that word. . .. He is full of anecdotes, jibes, digression, and simple vituperation; he takes his hearers into his confidence, explains how this or that illustration came into his head, forgets himself and recalls himself: all sounds as if it were extempor aneous .' Being a popular preacher, he had no influence upon either Andrewes or Taylor. Lewis claims that although his sermons; do not deserve to be called literature, the "mere strength and pith and urgency of his sentences ... is a literary virtue."8 Andrewes' stylistic characteristics are the cause of his glory and his consequent disfavor. A witty preacher writing for a select and educated audience, he intended to delight and please the Court's taste. His use of learned quotations, puns, ellipsis, and parallelism was designed not to please for its own sake, but to bring the truth of the Christian religion to the minds of his audience by first delighting them. As Mitchell describes the intent of the witty preachers: Not mere quotation, but quotation leading up to an unexpected 'point,' and a 'point,' which, while it was verbal, conveyed something of much greater import; not 7c. S. Lewis, English Literature of the Sixteenth Century (Oxford, 1968), p. 153. 8 L e w i s , p . 1 9 4 . 292 punning and quibbling merely for their own sakes, but because amid the jingle of human phrases might be caught the accents of a divine message— these were the things that counted.9 As Puritanism, with its emphasis upon sobriety and plain ness, became a major tendency in English religious thought, and as the influence of the natural sciences became greater there was a reaction against witty preaching which caused Andrewes' sermons to fall into disrepute and relative obscurity. The central point of this study, however, is that the judgment that Andrewes' style presents an unsurmount- able obstacle to understanding his theological insights as expressed by Felix Arnott, Hugh Trevor-Roper, and Maurice Reidy, is untrue. Once we understand the characteristics of witty preaching, we must agree with T. S. Eliot's estimates of Andrewes. Eliot contends that Andrewes' sermons must be considered as organic units. His sermons are too well built to be readily quotable; they stick too closely to the point to be entertaining. Yet they rank with the finest English prose of their time, of any time.-**0 Contrasting Andrewes' sermons with Donne's, Eliot notes that 9w. Fraser Mitchell, English Pulpit Oratory (New York, 1962), p. 149. 10T. S. Eliot, "Lancelot Andrewes," in Selected Essays (New York, 1950), p. 299. 293 Donne will certainly have always more readers than Andrewes, for the reason that his sermons can be read in detached passages and for the reason that they can be read by those who have no interest in the subject. He has many means of appeal, and appeals to many temperaments and minds, and, among others, to those capable of a certain wantonness of spirit. Andrewes will never have many readers in any one generation, and his will never be the immortality of anthologies. Yet his prose is not inferior to that of any sermons in the language, unless it be some of Newman's. And even the larger public which does not read him may do well to remember his greatness in history— a place second to none in the history of the formation of the English Church.H l l E l i o t , p . 3 1 0 . BIBLIOGRAPHY 294 BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Andrewes, Lancelot. A Patterne of Catechisticall Doctrine. London, 1630. ________. Institutiones Piae. London, 1630. Ninety-six Sermons, ed. J. H. Parker. Oxford, 1843-1860. ________. Scala Coeli. London, 1611. _______ . The wonderful1 Combat . . . betweene Christ and Satan . . . upon the Temptation of Christ in the Wilderness. London, 1642. ________. XCVI Sermons. London, 1635. Donne, John. The Sermons of John Donne, ed. Evelyn Simpson and George Potter. 10 vols. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California, 1962. Latimer, Hugh. Frvitfvll Sermons: Preached by the right Reverend Father, and constant Martyr of IESUS Christ, Master Hvgh Latimer, I I I London, 1635. Taylor, Jeremy. Anti^uitates Christianae: or, The History of the Life and Death of the Holy Jesus: As also the Lives, Acts and Martyrdoms of His 1 ’ Apostles . . . London, 1694. Secondary Works Andrewes, Gerard Thomas. Bishop Lancelot Andrewes and His Influence on the Church, winchester, 1906. Arnott, Felix R. "Anglicanism in the Seventeenth Century," Anglicanism . . ., ed. P. E. More and F. L. Cross. Milwaukee: Morehouse, 1935. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica. 3 vols. New York: Benziger, 19477 295 296 : Ashley, Maurice. England in the Seventeenth Century. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1958. Aubrey, John. Lives, ed. O. L. Dick. London: Seeker and Warburg, 1949. Bateson, P. W. A Guide to English Literature, 2nd ed. New York: Anchor, 1968. Baugh, Albert C., ed. A Literary History of England. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1948. Bindoff, S. T. Tudor England. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1966. Bishop, John Graham. Lancelot Andrewes, Bishop of Chichester. Chichester: Chichester City Council, T O ----- Blackstone, Bernard. Some Notes on Lancelot Andrewes. London: SPCK, 1957)1 Brightman, F. E. Introduction, The Preces Privatae of Lancelot Andrewes. London: Methuen, 1903. Brinton, Crane. The Shaping of the Modern Mind. New York Mentor, 1959. Brown, W. J. Jeremy Taylor. London: Macmillan, 1904. Bush, Douglas. English Literature in the Earlier Seven teenth Century. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1945. _______ . Prefaces to Renaissance Literature. New York: Norton, 1966. _______. The Renaissance and English Humanism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 19^2. Carlyle, R. M. and A. J. Latimer. London, 1899. Caspari, Fritz. Humanism and the Social Order in Tudor England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954. Cassirer, Ernst, P. O. Kristeller, and J. H. Randall, Jr., eds. The Renaissance Philosophy of Man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961. i ....................................... ' .297"] Church, R. W. "Lancelot Andrewes,1 1 Masters in English Theology, ed. A. Barry. London, 1877. Clark, G. N. The Seventeenth Century. Oxford: Clarendon j Press, 19577“ Copleston, Frederick. A History of Philosophy. 8 vols. New York: Image, 1962. _____ • Aquinas. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1961. Croll, Morris W. Style, Rhetoric, and Rhythm, ed. J. Max Patrick and others. Princeton: Priceton University Press, 1966. Curtius, Ernst Robert. European Literature and the Late Middle Ages, trans. Willard R. Trask. New York: Pantheon, 1953. Daiches, David. A Critical History of English Literature, 2d ed. 4 voIs7 London: Seeker and Warburg, 1969. Dargan, E. C. A History of Preaching. 2 vols. New York: George Doran, 1912. Dictionary of National Biography, ed. Leslie Stephen. 49 vols. London, 1885. Dowdell, V. L. Aristotle and Anglican Religious Thought. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1949. Eliot, T. S. The Complete Poems and Plays, 1909-1950. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1962. Selected Essays. New York: Harcourt, Brace, M 0 ( ---------------- Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings. New York: Scribner's, 1925. Fox, R. W. A Book Of Bachelors. London, 1899. Frere, W. H. Lancelot Andrewes as a Representative of Anglican Principles. London, 1899. Fuller, Thomas. The History of the Worthies of England. London, 1662. Gilson, Etienne. The Elements of_Christian Philosophy. New York: Mentor-Omega, 1&"<>0^ ;_______ . Reason and Revelation in the Middle Ages. New i York: Scribner's, 1^38. : The Spirit of Medieval Philosophy. New York: Scribner's, 194 0. Gosse, Edmund. Jeremy Taylor. London: Macmillan, 1904. Graham, Dorn Aelred. The Christ of Catholicism. New York: Image, 1957. Gray, C. M. Hugh Latimer and the Sixteenth Century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1950. Grierson, Herbert J. C. Cross-Currents in Seventeenth- Century English Literature. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1956. Haller, William. The Rise of Puritanism. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957. Haydn, Hiram. The Counter-Renaissance. New York: Grove Press, 196fi"I Herr, Alan F. The Elizabethan Sermon. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1940. Higham, Florence. Lancelot Andrewes. London: SCM Press, 1952. Hobbes, Thomas. Hobbes Selections, ed. F. J. E. Woodbridge New York: Scribner's, 1958. Hooker, Richard. Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. 2 vols. London: Dent, 19(15. Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. Oxford, i Isaacson, Henry. An Exact Narration of the Life and Death of . . . Lancelot Andrewes. London, 1650. . Kempe, John E. The Classic Preachers of the English Church. London, 1877. Knappen, M. M. Tudor Puritanism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1939. Kristeller, P. O. The Classics and Renaissance Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955. 2 9 9 Lewis, C. S. English Literature of the Sixteenth-Century Excluding Drama. Oxford: clarendon Press, 1968. Lloyd, David. State Worthies . . . from the Reformation to the Revolution. London, 1766. Lovejoy, A. 0. The Great Chain of Being. New York: Harper arid Brothers, 1960. McAdoo, H. R. The Structure of Caroline Moral Theology. London: Longmans, Green, 1949. MacGregor, Geddes. Aesthetic Experience in Religion. London: Macmillan, 1947. MacLeane, Douglas. Lancelot Andrewes and the Reaction. London: George Allen and Sons, 1910. Mahl, Mary. Seventeenth Century English Prose. New York: Lippincott, 1968. Martz, Louis. The Poetry of Meditation. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954. Mathew, David. The Jacobean Age. London: Longmans, Green, 1938. Migne, J. P. Patrologia Graeca. 162 vols. Paris, n.d. _______ . Patrologia Latinae. 219 vols. Paris, 1879. Mitchell, W. Fraser. English Pulpit Oratory. New York: Russell and Russell, 1962. Ness, W. H. Lancelot Andrewes and the English Church. London: SPCK, 1926. New Catholic Encyclopedia. 15 vols. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1967. North, J. H. "Andrewes, the Catholic Preacher," The Classic Preachers of the English Church. Series 2 . London, 1878. Ottley, R. L. Lancelot Andrewes. London, 1894. Owst, G. P. Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England. Cambridge! Cambridge University Press, 1933. _______ . Preaching in Medieval England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1926. 300 j i The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. F. L. Cross. London: Oxford University Press, 1957. j The Oxford English Dictionary ( O.E.D. or N.E.D.). 10 j vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 189TI Pollard, Arthur. English Sermons. London: Longmans, Green, 19 63., Randall, John Herman, Jr. The Making of the Modern Mind. Cambridge: Houghton Mifflin, 1954. Reidy, Maurice. Lancelot Andrewes: Jacobin Court Preacher. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1955. Richards, I. A. How to Read a Page. Boston: Beacon Press, 1965. Russell, A. T. Memoirs of the Life and Works of . . . Lancelot Andrewes . . . London, 186b. Scotus, John Duns. Opera Omnia. 2d ed. 26 vols. Paris, 1891-5. Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works, ed. G. B. Harrison. New York! Hareourt, Brace, 1952. The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. 3d ed. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964. Smyth, C. The Art of Preaching: A Practical Survey of Preaching in the Church of England 747-1939. London: SPCK, 1940. Sonnino, L. A. A Handbook to Sixteenth-Century Rhetoric. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1968. Stranks, C. J. The Life and Writings of Jeremy Taylor. London, SPCK, 1952. Swete, H. B. Two Cambridge Divines of the Seventeenth Century. London: Christian Knowledge Society, 1913. Taylor, H. 0. The Medieval Mind. 3d ed. 2 vols. New York: Macmillan, 1919. . Thought and Expression in the Sixteenth Century. 2d ed. 2 vols. New York: Ungar, 19$9. 301 Teale, W. H. Lives of English Divines. London, 1898. Tillyard, E. M. W. The Elizabethan World Picture. New York: Vintage, n.d. Trevor-Hughes, H. The Piety of Jeremy Taylor. London: Macmillan, 196IH Trevor-Roper, H. R. Archbishop Laud 1573-1645. London: Macmillan, 1940. Tuve, Rosemond. Elizabethan and Metaphysical Imagery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968. Upton, Albert. Design for Thinking. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1961. Webber, Joan. Contrary Music: Tho Prose Style of John Donne. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, TWT7 Welsby, Paul A. Bishop Lancelot Andrewes and the Public Worship of the Church~I London: SPCK, 1955. _______ . Great Preachers— XVIII. Lancelot Andrewes. London: SPCK, 1952. Lancelot Andrewes 1555-1626. London: SPCK, 1964. White, Helen C. The Tudor Books of Private Devotion. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1951. Wingfield-Stratford, Esme. The History of British Civilization. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1948". Willey, Basil. The Seventeenth Century Background. New York: Anchor, 1953. Williamson, George. The Senecan Amble. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951. Williamson, H. R. Four Stuart Portraits. London: Evans Bros., 1949. ________. Jeremy Taylor. London: Dennis Dobson, 1952. Wolfson, H. A. The Philosophy of the Church Fathers. Vol. I. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970. 302 Periodicals [Anonymous]. "Russell's Review of Bishop Andrewes." Christian Observer/ LX (I860), 846-856. [Anonymous]. "Some Brief Notices Respecting Bishop Andrewes." Christian Observer, XV (1816), 133-138. Bayfield-Roberts, G. "Lancelot Andrewes." Revue Anglo- Romaine, III (1896), 677-688; 731-745. Coats, R. H. "Lancelot Andrewes and John Bunyan. A Study in Devotion." Hibbert Journal, IX (July, 1911), 838-850. Davies, Godfrey. "English Political Sermons." HLQ, III (1939-40), 1-22. Knappen, M. M. "The Early Puritanism of Lancelot Andrewes." Church History, II (1933), 95-104. Lancia, Mariella. "II lingnazzio die sermoni de Lancelot Andrewes." English Miscellany, XVI (1965), 87-115. McCutcheon, Elizabeth. "Lancelot Andrewes1 Preces Privatae: A Journey through Time." SP, LXV (April, 1968), 223-241. Mozley, J. B. "Sermons of Lancelot Andrewes, Sometime Lord Bishop of Winchester." British Critic, and Quarterly Theological Review, XXXI (1842), 169-205. Nairne, A. "Lancelot Andrewes," Review Internationale de Theologie, XXVI (April-June, 1899) , 327-347. Webber, Joan. "Colebration of Word and World in Lancelot Andrewes' Style." JEGP, LXIV (April, 1965), 255-269. Willson, D. H. "James I and His Literary Assistants." HLQ, VIII (1944-5)> i >35—37. Unpublished Dissertation McCutcheon, Elizabeth. Lancelot Andrewes and the Theme of Time in the Early Seventeenth Century" Madison: University o£ Wisconsin, 1961.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
The influence of Kant's moral argument on three British personal idealists: A. S. Pringle-Pattison, W. R. Sorley, C. C. J. Webb
PDF
Chaucer'S 'Tale Of Melibee': Its Tradition And Its Function In Fragment Vii Of The 'Canterbury Tales'
PDF
Variant Forms Of English And Scottish Popular Ballads In America
PDF
The Phenomenon Of Literature: Prolegomena To A Literary History
PDF
Structure And Imagery Patterns In The Poetry Of Emily Dickinson
PDF
Versions Of Pastoral In Henry Fielding'S Prose Fiction
PDF
A Critical Edition Of Thomas Heywood'S 'The Wise Woman Of Hogsdon' With Introduction And Notes
PDF
A William Temple Word-Book: A Comprehensive Philosophical And Theologicalindex To His Major Published Writings
PDF
William Faulkner: From Past To Self-Discovery; A Study Of His Life And Work Through 'Sartoris' (1929)
PDF
The Evolution Of The Humours Character In Seventeenth-Century English Comedy
PDF
The Proteges Of Lancelot: A Study Of Malory'S Characterization Of Lancelot In The 'Morte Darthur'
PDF
The Dramatic Function Of Comic Elements In Three Shakespearean Love Tragedies
PDF
William Blake'S Apocalypse: A Theo-Psychological Interpretation
PDF
Cynewulf: The Ascension Of Christ
PDF
A Structural Analysis Of Shakespeare'S Early Comedies
PDF
Some Implications For The Doctrine Of God Of Hegel'S Concept Of Thought As Mediation
PDF
Double-Entendres In 'The Canterbury Tales'
PDF
A Critical Examination Of Heidegger'S And Jasper'S Interpretations Of Nietzsche
PDF
The Feminine World View Of Elizabeth Cleghorn Gaskell
PDF
An Inquiry Into The Problem Of Style: A Negative Experiment
Asset Metadata
Creator
Geiger, William Andrew, Jr.
(author)
Core Title
The Word Within The Word: A Literary Examination Of Lancelot Andrewes' Presentation Of The Life Of Christ
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
English
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
literature, English,Literature, General,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Mahl, Mary R. (
committee chair
), Arnold, Aerol (
committee member
), Macgregor, Geddes (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-884262
Unique identifier
UC11363527
Identifier
7331345.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-884262 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
7331345
Dmrecord
884262
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Geiger, William Andrew, Jr.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
literature, English
Literature, General