Which of these two texts should we prioritize for publication: Option A: John Casus, “A Mirror into Ethical Questions. Commentary on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics” (1585) Option B: Richard Burn, “Ecclesiastical Law” (1763) ----- Option A: From a description: "His strong prejudice in favor of hierarchical social structures is manifest. This is visible, for example, in his discussion of the honor due to one’s God, sovereign and father and of the possibility of “friendship” of father and son, husband and wife, and sovereign and subject, all of which involve the individual’s “duty and office” in a hierarchical social relationships. Such hierarchical relationships go far towards shaping an individual’s proper ethical behavior and, taken together, they go to make up the smoothly-running “republic” or “commonwealth,” ordained by both God and nature." Option B: From a description: "long deemed a book of authority; for Blackstone one of few works on Ecclesiastical Law that can be relied on with certainty. Diligent and accurate research, and great judgment in the selection and use of materials... Not only gives authorities for positions, but even the authority of the authorities." -alphabetic list of topics, and brief excerpts from statutes & canons pertaining to it -Articles of Religion: oath, types of subscription. Some of the topics covered: -Baptism / Bastardy / Benefice / Bishops (all aspects, even Archbishops authority over Bishops) / Buggery -Calumny / Chancel / Confession, minister may not reveal things made known to him in confession / Convocation / Cope -Degradation, its form and manner / Deposition from ministry, its form and manner / Dissenters / Divorce -Excommunication / Feast Days / Heresy / Jurisdiction / Interdict -Kneeling at the sacrament, significance thereof / Martyrdom of King Charles I / Minister -Parson / Parish / Penance -Sacrilege / Vigil / Vicar General / Usury
With the promotion of societal unrest flagrant among the popular church, in each relationship mentioned above, the push by certain groups to revive the ESS debates, a view into prior thought would be helpful. At the same time, B keeps sounding so encyclopaedically helpful.
B is much less needful. Firstly, it is a topic that is highly specialized and thus of little interest to most. Secondly, Hooker's Laws are generally accepted as the most important text on the subject.
On our Twitter poll, the results right now are neck in neck, 50-50. On our Facebook poll, the results at least at the moment are 100% for Burn's Ecclesiastical Law. Richard Hooker's book (notwithstanding its title) is not a legislative text, and you would not have seen it cited in the ecclesiastical courts. We do not have many Anglican legislative texts on our site at the moment, which is lamentable because that library is rich with manuals for ecclesiastical courts, commentaries and legislative definitions, and other examples of church authority. Perhaps this is why at least some of the people see value in it.
The last two weeks of our polls on Twitter and Facebook have showed a clear preference for the text on Ecclesiastical Law, so look for that in the next batch of works to be uploaded! Burn’s text has more of mundane minutia (inheritance etc), so this will be more apropos to our readers instead: Richard Grey, “A System of English Ecclesiastical Law” (1743) It is a condensed version of the colossal “Codex Iuris Exclesiastici Anglicani”, especially made to be accessible for students “designed for Holy Orders”. Here is how it begins:
One of our contributors has started to work on George Herbert, “A Priest to the Temple” (1633). To make the title page more interesting, he’s suggesting we use the one from “The Collected Works of John Boys” (1629). We’d fuse both into one. Thoughts/ideas/objections?
Indeed, but in a format that is remarkably unappealing. Part of our ethic is the aesthetic (that was not intentional). I don't think the style and the visual layout is optional to the way a work will be perceived. There was some debate on Facebook about taking the frontispiece from one work and giving it to another.