Af. Z .*0 PRESENTED TO THE LIBRARY OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY Professor Jlenry van Dyke, D.D., Ltli.D. BT 75 . T654 1826 v~2 Tomline, George Pretyman (Sir), 1750-1827. Elements of Christian Theology . * ■* - * . • * ' > < • * SM* ~ ■■ ■ .'■K * • > . .1 1 -r » - -« ■% . ft V. W*~ J * ELEMENTS OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY: CONTAINING PROOFS OF THE AUTHENTICITY AND INSPIRATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES ; A SUMMARY OF THE HISTORY OF THE JEWS; A BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE CONTENTS OK THE SEVERAL BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS ; « A SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE, AND OF THE LITURGY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND; AND A SCRIPTURAL EXPOSITION OF THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF RELIGION. v/ by GEORGE TOMLINE, D.D. F.R.S. LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER. DESIGNED PRINCIPALLY FOR THE USE OF YOUNG STUDENTS IN DIVINITY. IN TWO VOLUMES. — VOL. II. WITH AN INDEX TO THE FIRST VOLUME. By The Rev. C. Dickinson, of Queen’s College, Cambridge SIXTEENTH EDITION OF VOL. I. — TWELFTH EDITION OF VOL. II. LONDON: T. CADELL, IN THE STRAND. 1826 Printed by James & Luke G. Hansard & Sons, near Lineoln’s-Inn Fields, London. PART III. CHAPTER THE FIRST: OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE. That it was the practice, in the early ages of the Gospel, to translate the Scriptures into the language of every country in which they were received, is evident from a variety of testi¬ monies ; but the following passage in Theodoret, who lived in the beginning of the fifth century, may be considered as alone decisive: “ We Christians are enabled to show the powers of apostolic and prophetic doctrines, which have filled all countries under heaven ; for that which was formerly uttered in Hebrew is not only trans¬ lated into the language of the Greeks, but also of the Romans, the Indians, Persians, Armeni¬ ans, Scythians, Samaritans, Egyptians, and, in a word, into all the languages that are used by any nation (a)” — “ For the sacred Writ being the foundation (a) Theod. ad Grsec. Infid. Serm. 5. Vide Euseb. Dem. Evan. lib. 3. cap. ult. and Usser Hist. Dogm. Both the Old and New Testaments were very accu- vol. II. b rately B 2 Of the English [part hi. foundation of tlie Christian religion, upon which they built the whole system of their morality and t doctrine, and which the Christians were obliged to read both in public and private, the several churches of the world could not be long without such translations as might be understood by every body (b j.” It is impossible to ascertain the exact time at which Christianity was introduced into this Island*; nor do we know how soon there was a translation of the Scriptures into the language of its inhabitants. The earliest of which we have any account, is a translation of the Psalms into the Saxon tongue by Adhelm, the first bishop of Sherborne, about the year 706. Egbert, bishop of Landisfern, who died in the year rately translated immediately from the Hebrew and Greek originals into the Syriac language, before the end of the first century. This antient version is held in very high esteem by the Learned, and is still used by many of the Christians in the East. In some of the villages near Mount Libanus, Syriac is still the vulgar tongue. There is another Syriac version of the Old Testament made from Origen’s Hexapla, about 600 years after Christ, but that is not much esteemed. ( b) Johnson’s Hist. Account of the English Trans¬ lations of the Bible. * I desire to refer the Header to a work upon this subject, published by the Bishop of St. David’s since the last edition of this book, in which he states strong- reasons for the opinion that a Christian church was planted in Britain by the Apostle St. Paul. chap, l] Translations of the Bible. 3 year 721, made a Saxon version of the four Gospels ; and not long after, Bede translated the whole Bible into thatlanguage. There were other Saxon versions of the whole or parts of the Bible of a later date (c): and it appears indeed, that new translations were made, from time to time, as the language of the country varied ; but when the popes of Rome had established their spiritual tyranny in this as well as in other countries of Europe, they forbad the reading of these trans¬ lations ; and in the fourteenth century the com¬ mon people had been so long deprived of the use of the Scriptures, that the latest of the transla¬ tions were become unintelligible. Wickliff (cl) therefore, who was a strenuous opposer of the corruptions and usurpations of the church of Rome, and from whom we are to date the dawn of the Reformation in this kingdom, published a translation of the whole Bible in the English language (c) King Alfred, who died A.D. 900, translated the Psalms. This translation was published by Spelman, A.D. 1640, with the Latin interlineary text. ( d) He was born in 1324, and died in 1 384. “ Some writers have conceived that an English translation was made before the time of Wickliff ; and there are some copies of an English translation at Oxford, Cambridge, and at Lambeth, which Usher assigns to an earlier period ; but it is probable that these may be genuine, or corrected copies of Wickliff’s translation.” — Gray B 2 4 Of the Etiglish [part hi. language then spoken ; but not being sufficiently acquainted with the Hebrew and Greek lan¬ guages to translate from the originals, he made his translation from the Latin Bibles, which were at that time read in the churches. “ So offen¬ sive was this translation of the Bible to those who were for taking away the key of knowledge, and means of better information, that a bill, we are told, was brought into the house of lords, 13 Richard the Second, A. D. 1390, for the pur¬ pose of suppressing it ; on which the Duke of Lancaster, the king’s uncle, is reported to have spoken to this effect: ‘ We will not be the dregs of all, seeing other nations have the law of God, which is the law of our faith, written in their own language.’ At the same time he declared in a very solemn manner, ‘ That he would maintain our having this law in our own tongue against those, whoever they should be, who brought in this bill’ ( e •.)** The bill, through the influence of the Duke, was rejected; and this success gave encouragement to some ofWickliff’s followers to publish another, and more correct, translation of the Bible. But in the year 1408, in a convocation held at Oxford by archbishop Arundel, it was decreed by a constitution, “ That no one should thereafter translate any text of holy (e) Lewis’s History of the Translations of the Bible. chap, l.] Translations of the Bible. 5 holy Scripture into English, by way of a book, or little book, or tract ; and that no book of this kind should be read, that was composed lately in the time of John Wickliff, or since his death.” This constitution led the way to great persecu¬ tion, and many persons were punished severely, and some even with death, for reading the Scriptures in Englisji. In the reign of Henry the Eighth, William Tyndal (f), a favourer of the reformed doctrines, which were then making a rapid progress, was compelled by the Romish priests to leave England. After travelling for some time in Germany, where he became acquainted with Luther and other learned men, he settled at Antwerp ; and with the assistance of John Fry or Fryth (g) and William Roye ( h ), he translated the New Testament from the original Greek, and printed it, with some short glosses, or comments, without a name, at Hamburgh, or Antwerp, about the year 1526. This was the first printed edition of any part of the Holy Scriptures in the English language. The impression was sent over to England ; (f) He was educated at Magdalen Hall, Oxford, and became Canon of Christ Church soon after it was founded. (g) He was educated at Cambridge. He was burnt in Smithfield as a heretic, in July 1552. (h) He suffered death in Portugal as a heretic* B 3 6 Of the Etiglish [part hi. England ; and the eagerness which was generally shown by the people, to read the Gospel in the vulgar tongue, quickly excited alarm among those who were devoted to the Romish Church. Sir Thomas More, lord chancellor, and Tonstall, bishop of London, caused all the copies they could purchase or procure, to be burnt (i ) at St. Paul’s Cross ; and the selling or dispersion of them was prohibited under heavy penalties. In the mean time Tyndal, with the assistance of Miles Cover- dale ( k ), undertook the translation of the Old Testament, and published the Pentateuch at Ham¬ burgh, in the year 1 530, with prefaces reflecting upon the English bishops and clergy ; and in the same year he published a more correct translation of the New Testament. In 1531, he published an English version of the prophet Jonah, with a preface full of invective against the church of Rome, proving himself, as Lord Herbert calls him, “ a witty, but violent, and sometimes railing (i) “ A copy of this translation, supposed to be the only one remaining, was purchased for Lord Oxford, who settled 20 1. a year on the person who procured it. Out of Lord Oxford’s collection it was purchased by Mr. Ames for 15/. at whose sale (1760) it was pur¬ chased for 14/. 14 s. 6d.” — Gilpin’s Cranmer. (k) He was made Bishop of Exeter by Edward the Sixth ; but going to Geneva in queen Mary’s reign, he imbibed the principles of Calvin, and refused to return to his bishopric in queen Elizabeth’s reign. chap, i.] Translates of the Bible. 7 railing disputant ( l He was proceeding in the translation of the other books, when he was seized and imprisoned by the emperor, through the influence of King Henry the Eighth and his ministers ; and in the year 1536, he was put to death at Villefont, near Brussels, in consequence of a decree made in an assembly at Augsbourg. In the year 1531, George Joye, an English refugee, published at Strasburg a translation of Isaiah ; and in the year 1 534, he published at Antwerp a translation of the Prophecies of Jeremiah, and of the Psalms, and of the Song of Moses. In the year 1535, Miles Coverdale published in folio, the first English translation of the whole Bible, and dedicated it to King Henry the Eighth. It was probably printed at Zurich ; and though it passed under the name of Coverdale only, it is generally supposed that great part of the work was performed by Tyndal, before he was im¬ prisoned ( m ), and that his name was not men¬ tioned because he was then under confinement. Those who Were adverse to any translation of the Scriptures, not daring openly to avow their principles, (l) Life of Henry the Eighth, page 406. (m) It is said that he had advanced as far as Nehemiah inclusive, when he was apprehended. The rest of the books were probably translated by Coverdale himself. B4 8 Of the English [part hi. principles (n ), complained of the inaccuracy of Wickliff s and Tyndal’s translations ; and on that ground objected to the use of them : but on the other hand it was contended by the friends of the Reformation, that if these translations were erroneous, care should be taken to publish one more faithful. In the year 1535, Cranmer, who had been advanced to the See of Canterbury two years before, and whose endeavours to promote the cause of the Reformation were unremitted, had sufficient interest to procure a petition from both houses of convocation to the King, request¬ ing that he would allow a new translation of the Scriptures to be made. Henry consented ; and Cranmer, dividing an old English translation of the New Testament into nine or ten parts, dis¬ tributed them among the most learned bishops and others, requiring that they should return their respective portions, corrected and amended, by a certain day. Every one sent his part at the time appointed, (n) Even Sir Thomas More acknowledges, “ Holy doctors never meant, as I suppose, the forbidding of the Bible to be read in any vulgar tongue ; for I never yet heard any reason laid, why it were not convenient to have the Bible translated into the English tongue.” Such is the testimony of this great man and professed papist, upon the general question of the right and expediency of a translation of the Scriptures, although he did every thing in his power to suppress the trans¬ lations which were actually made. chap, i.] Translations of the Bible. 9 appointed, except Stokesly, bishop of London, and his positive refusal to have any concern in the business seems to have put a stop to the work for the present. However, early in the year 1 536, Lord Cromwell, keeper of the privy seal, and the king’s vicar-general, and vicegerent in ecclesias¬ tical matters, published injunctions to the clergy, by the King’s authority, of which the seventh was, “ that every parson or proprietary of any parish church within the realm, before August the first, should provide a book of the whole Bible, both in Latin, and also in English, and lay it in the choir, for every man that would to look and read therein; and should discourage no man from reading any part of the Bible, either in Latin of English, but rather comfort, exhort, and admonish every man to read it as the very word of God, and the spiritual food of man’s soul.” In the year 1537, a folio edition of the Bible was printed by Grafton and Whitchurch, at Hamburgh or at Paris, more probably at Ham¬ burgh : it varied but little from Tyndal’s and Coverdale’s translation; and the few emenda¬ tions and additions it contained were supplied by John Rogers (of who superintended the publi- t , cation, ' (0) He was educated at Cambridge, and was the first person who suffered death on account of Religion in queen Mary’s reign. • io Of the English [part hi. cation, and assumed the name of Matthews : hence this is always called Matthews’s Bible. A copy of this book was presented by Cranmer to Lord Cromwell, with a request that he would obtain the King’s permission for the free use of it among his subjects ; and there are two letters of the archbishop preserved by Strype, which show that the royal license was granted through the application of Cromwell. In the year 1538, an injunction was published by the vicar-general, “ ordering the clergy to provide, before a certain festival, one book of the whole Bible of the largest volume in English, and to set it up in some convenient place within their churches, where their parishioners might most commodiously resort, and read it (p ) and in the same year a royal declaration was also pub¬ lished, which the curates were commanded to read in their several churches, informing the people, “ that it had pleased the King’s majesty to permit and command the Bible, being trans¬ lated into their mother tongue, to be sincerely taught by them, and to be openly laid forth in every parish church ( q J.” — “ It was wonderful,” says Strype, “ to see with what joy this book of God was received, not only among the more learned, (p) Lewis. ( q) Appendix to Strype’s Life of Cranmer. chap, i.] Translations of the Bible. 11 learned, and those who were noted lovers of the Reformation, but generally all over England, among all the common people, and with what greediness God’s word was read, and what resort there was to the places appointed for reading it. Every one that could, bought the" book, and busily read it, or heard it read ; and many elderly persons learnt to read on purpose ( 'r).n In 1538, Grafton obtained leave from Francis the First, King of France, through the interces¬ sion of Henry the Eighth, to print an English Bible at Paris, on account of the superior skill of the workmen, and the comparative goodness and cheapness of the paper. But this royal permis¬ sion did not prevent the inquisitors from sum¬ moning before them the French printers, the English employers, and Coverdale, who super¬ intended the work ; and the whole impression, consisting of 2,500 copies, was seized, and con¬ demned to the flames. Some few copies only were saved ; but the English proprietors of this undertaking found means to carry with them to London, the presses, types, and printers. In 1539, Grafton and Whitchurch printed at London, the Bible in large folio, under the di¬ rection of Coverdale and patronage of Cranmer, containing some improvement of Matthews’s translation ; (r) Life of Cranmer. 12 Of the English [part hi. translation ; this is generally called the Great Bible, and it is supposed to be the same which Grafton obtained leave to print at Paris. There were several editions of it, and particularly one in 1540, for which Cranmer wrote a preface showing, that “ Scripture should be had and read of the lay and vulgar people hence this edition of 1540, is called Cranmer ’s Bible. In this year the curates and parishioners of every parish were required, by royal proclamation, to provide themselves with the Bible of the largest size, before the feast of All Saints, under a pe¬ nalty of forty shillings a month ; and all ordina¬ ries were charged to see that this proclamation was obeyed. A brief or declaration was pub¬ lished to the same effect in the year 1541 ; but after that time the influence of the popish party increased both in parliament and with the King, and Cranmer’s exertions were frustrated by the opposition of Gardiner and other popishbishops. In the year 1 542, it was enacted by the authority of parliament, “ That all manner of books of the Old and New Testament, of the crafty, false, and untrue translation of Tyndal, be forthwith abo¬ lished, and forbidden to be used and kept ; and also that all other Bibles, not being of Tyndal’s translation, in which were found any preambles or annotations, other than the quotations or summary chap, i.] Translations of the Bible. 13 summary of the chapters, should be purged of the said preambles or annotations, either by cutting them out, or blotting them in such wise that they might not be perceived or read ; and, finally, that the Bible be not read openly in any church, but by the leave of the King, or of the ordinary of the place ; nor privately by any women, arti¬ ficers, apprentices, journeymen, husbandmen, labourers, or by any of the servants of yeomen or under but through the interest of Cranmer, a clause was inserted, allowing, “ that every no¬ bleman and gentlemen might have the Bible read in their houses, and that noble ladies, gentle¬ women, and merchants, might read it themselves, but no man or woman under those degrees; which was all the archbishop could obtain. In the same year Cranmer proposed in convocation, that there should be a revision of the translations of the Bible ; but so many difficulties were started by Gardiner, and the proposal was so feebly sup¬ ported by the other bishops, that he was unable to accomplish his object, and desisted from the attempt. In the year 1546, the last of his reign, Henry issued a proclamation, prohibiting the having and reading of WicklifFs, Tyndal’s and Coverdale’s translations, and forbidding the use of any other not allowed by parliament. Though in the reign of Edward the Sixth, the reading 14 Of the English [part iii. reading of the Scriptures was encouraged by royal proclamations, acts of parliament, and by every other means, and there were many impressions (s) of the English Bible, it does not appear that there was any new translation of the Bible, or even any considerable correction of the old ones, during the seven years and an half that excellent prince sat upon the throne ; but it was ordered, that the Epistles and Gospels, and the Lessons, both from the Old and New Testament, should be read in English in the Churches, in the manner they now are. The terrors of persecution, in the reign of Queen Mary, drove many of our principal Re¬ formers out of the Kingdom ; several went to Geneva, and there employed themselves in mak¬ ing a new translation of the Bible. The New Testament was published in 1557, and the remainder of the work in 1 560. This is called the Geneva Bible. It was accompanied with annotations, which were, as might be expected, from the place where they were written, of a Calvinistieal cast ; and therefore this translation was held in high esteem by the Puritans (tj. Soon (s) Eleven of the whole Bible, and six of the New Testament. (t) “ Above thirty editions of this were published hy chap, i.] Translations of the Bible. 15 Soon after the accession of Queen Elizabeth, a new translation of the Bible was undertaken by royal command, and under the direction of arch¬ bishop Parker. Distinct portions, fifteen at least, were by the Queen’s and King’s printers between 1560 and 1616, and others were printed at Edinburgh, Geneva, Amsterdam, &c. The New Testament of this is said to have been the first English edition of the Scriptures which was divided into verses. The Greek and Latin Bibles were not antiently divided into chapters or verses, at least not like those now used. Stephen Langton, archbishop of Canterbury, in the reigns of king John and of king Henry the Third, is said to have first contrived the division into chapters ; others ascribe the invention to cardinal Hugo, a dominican monk of the 13th century, who adopted also subdi¬ visions, distinguished by the seven first letters of the alphabet placed in the margin, as convenient for the use of the Concordance, which he first planned for the Vulgate. About 1445, Rabbi Mordecai Nathan, alias Rabbi Isaac Nathan, a western Jew, to facilitate the conduct of a controversy with the Christians, introduced this division of chapters into the Hebrew Bibles, and resumed also the antient division into verses numerically distinguished by marginal letters at every fifth verse, and from him the Christians re¬ ceived and improved the plan ; and Robert Stephens adopted the division into the New Testament, of which he published a Greek edition in 1551. Vide Praefat. Buxtorf. ad Concord. Bibl. Hebraic. Morin. Exercit. Bibl. Praef. ad Concord. Graec. N. Test. Fabricii Bib- liothec. Grec. lib. 4. cap. 5. Prid. vol. 1. book 5.” — Gray. 1 6 Of the English [part hi. were allotted to as many persons, eminent for their learning and abilities ; they all performed the work assigned to them, and the whole was afterwards revised with great care by other critics. This translation was published in 1568, with a preface written by the archbishop ; and it is generally called the Bishops Bible, because eight of the persons originally concerned in it were bishops. The Romanists, finding it impossible to keep the Scriptures out of the hands of the common people, printed at Rheims, in the year 1582, an English New Testament, translated from thev Vulgate, but they retained in it many Eastern, Greek, and Latin words, and contrived to render it unintelligible to common readers ( u ). The Old Testament was afterwards published at Douay, in two volumes, the former in 1609, and the latter in 1610. In the conference held at Hampton Court, in 1603, before King James the First, between the Episcopalians and Puritans, Dr. Reynolds, the speaker of the Puritans, requested his Majesty that a new translation of the Bible might be made ; alleging, that those which had been al¬ lowed (u) Fuller, in the ninth book of his Church History, called it, “ a translation which needed to be translated.” chap, i.] Translations of the Bible . 17 lowed in former reigns were incorrect ; and in 1 604, the King commissioned fifty-four learned men of the universities and other places to make a new and more faithful translation of the Bible, according to rules which he himself prescribed. Seven of those who were appointed either died before the work was begun, or declined to engage in it ; and the other forty-seven were divided into six companies, who met at Cambridge, Oxford, and Westminster, and translated the books, respectively assigned to them. This work was begun in the spring of the year 1607, and at the end of three years it was finished. Two persons selected from the Cambridge translators, two from those of Oxford, and two from those of Westminster, then met at Stationers Hall in London, and read over and corrected the whole. Lastly, it was reviewed by Bilson bishop of Winchester, and Dr. Myles Smith, who prefixed arguments to the several books (x ). Dr. Smith wrote the preface, and the person alluded to in it as “ the chief overseer and task-master,” is sup¬ posed to have been Bancroft bishop of London. This translation was published in 1611 ; and the improvements (x) The chronological index and marginal references were afterwards added by Bishop Lloyd, one of the seven bishops imprisoned in the reign of James the Second. VOL. II. C 18 Of the English [part iii. improvements made in it were such as might have been expected from the judicious care with which it was conducted, and the joint labours of so many distinguished men : — “ It is a most wonderful and incomparable work, equally re¬ markable for the general fidelity of its construc¬ tion, and the magnificent simplicity of its lan¬ guage (y )” This is the translation now in usef z ). Since that time there has been no authorized translation of any part of the sacred volume. “ Happy, thrice happy, hath our English na¬ tion been, since God hath given it learned trans¬ lators, to express in our mother tongue the heavenly mysteries of his holy word, delivered to his (y) Gray. (z) It may, perhaps, be useful to state, under one point of view, the different printed translations which have been noticed, with their dates : Tyndal’s first translation of the New Testament ----- 1526 Tyndal’s more correct translation of D° 1530 Tyndal’s translation of the Pentateuch 1530 Coverdale’s translation of the whole Bible 1 535 Matthews’s Bible The Great Bible Cranmer’s Bible The Geneva Bible The Bishops Bible The Rheims Bible King James’s Bible - 1537 - 1539 - 1540 - 1560 - 1568 - 158®, &c. - 1611 chap, i.] Translations of the Bible. 19 his church in the Hebrew and Greek Languages ; who, although they may have in some matters, of no importance unto salvation, as men, been deceived and mistaken, yet have they faithfully delivered the whole substance of the heavenly doctrine contained in the holy Scriptures, without any heretical translations or wilful corruptions. With what reverence, joy, and gladness, then ought we to receive this blessing ! Let us read the Scriptures with an humble, modest, and teachable disposition ; with a willingness to em¬ brace all truths which are plainly delivered there, how contrary soever to our own opinions and prejudices ; and in matters of difficulty, readily hearken to the judgement of our teachers, and those that are set over us in the Lord ; check every presumptuous thought, or reasoning, which exalts itself against any of those mysterious truths therein revealed ; and if we thus search after the truth in the love of it, we shall not miss of that knowledge which will make us wise unto salvation ( a). (a ) Johnson’s Hist. Acc. If the reader wishes for more minute information upon the subject of this chapter, he may consult Johnson's Historical Account of the several English Translations of the Bible, and an Historical View of the English Biblical Trans¬ lations, by Dr. Newcome, late primate of Ireland. 30 Liturgy of the n f . if?; ?') Irl; 1* ilVtl i PART III. CHAPTER THE SECOND: OF THE LITURGY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. BEFORE the Reformation, the public service of our church was performed only in Latin, and different Liturgies were used in different parts of the kingdom. These liturgies consisted of prayers and offices, some of which had been trans¬ mitted from very antient times, and others were of later origin, accommodated to the Romish reli¬ gion, which was then the established religion of this country. It is well known, that the renun¬ ciation of the Pope’s Supremacy by Henry the Eighth paved the way for introducing the re¬ formed doctrines and discipline into the church of England ; but that great and glorious event was accomplished by slow degrees. Our ances¬ tors did not at once pass from the various errors in belief, and from all the superstitious practices of 21 chap, ii.] Church of England. of the church of Rome, to that purity of faith and simplicity of worship by which the church of England is now distinguished ; and we shall find that it required the labours of the pious and learned of several successive periods to bring our Liturgy to its present state of excellence. Though Henry himself was by no means a sincere and uniform friend to the cause of the Reformation, yet his resentment against the Roman pontiff induced him to authorize many publications ( a ), which were calculated to ex¬ pose the abuses and corruptions that had so long prevailed ; and the several translations of the Bible into English, mentioned in the last chapter, contributed greatly to enlighten the minds of men, and to prepare them for that important change which took place immediately after his death. In the first years of Edward the Sixth, who was firmly attached to the principles of the reformed religion, in which he had been educated, the King and his council nominated Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, Ridley, afterwards bishop of London, and other eminent divines, to draw up a Liturgy (a) The King’s Primer ; the Godly and Pious In¬ stitution of a Christian Man ; a necessary Doctrine and Erudition for Christian Men, &c. 8cc. 22 Liturgy of the [part hi. Liturgy in the English language for the general use of the church, free from those unfounded doctrines and superstitious ceremonies which had disgraced the Latin Liturgies. These commis¬ sioners entered upon the work with the greatest alacrity and zeal ; and when they had finished it, Cranmer presented it to the young King, and in the end of the year 1 548, it was ratified by parliament, under the title of “ The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, after the Use of the Church of England.” It was the principle of Cranmer to proceed in the glorious work of Reform with moderation ; he cautiously avoided the rejection of too much at once of what the people had been accustomed to consider as parts of religion, not merely to prevent public commotions, but in order to pro¬ cure a gradual change in their opinions, rather than give a shock to their faith. It was how¬ ever soon perceived that this first attempt to establish an English Liturgy upon the autho¬ rity of Scripture and the practice of the primi¬ tive church, was imperfect, and in some respects liable to objection ; and we find Cranmer, very soon after its publication, consulting such of the foreign chap, ii.] Church of England. 23 foreign divines (b) as were most celebrated for their learning and discretion, respecting further improvements. The portion of Scripture which was now daily read in the churches, and the zeal and diligence with which the genuine truths of Christianity were disseminated among the peopl e, opened their minds, and operated so strongly upon their understandings, that in about two years a general revision of the Liturgy was thought expedient, and commissioners were appointed for that purpose. The revision was made with the utmost care and judgement : and the book, thus improved, was confirmed by parliament in the beginning of April 1552, and ordered to be used in all churches throughout the kingdom, from the feast of All Saints following. In this “ Second Book,” as it is called, of King Edward, there were many additions and corrections. Among the former were thesentences, exhortation, confession, and absolution, at the beginning of the morning and evening prayer, and the ten command¬ ments in the communion service. The principal omissions were, the use of oil and the sign of the cross in confirmation, extreme unction at the visitation (b ) Particularly Bucer and Martyr, who, through his recommendation, were now divinity professors in Cambridge and Oxford. C 4 24 Liturgy of the [part iii. visitation of the sick, and prayers for the dead, both in the communion and in the burial ser¬ vice, the use of the cross and the invocation of the Holy Ghost, and the mixture of water with wine in the celebration of the holy supper ; and there were also several other alterations in the communion service. By these additions and alterations, our public offices were, in all import¬ ant points of doctrine, brought nearly to their present state. Soon after the publication of this book, King Edward died, and his successor Mary, immedi¬ ately upon her Accession, caused both the statutes to be repealed which had authorized and directed the use of these two books, and restored the Latin Liturgies according to the popish forms of worship. Early in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, com¬ missioners were again appointed to prepare an English Liturgy. Elizabeth had certainly not imbibed the same pure spirit of Christianity, which had directed the pious and enlightened Edward and the venerable Cranmer ; and it was at first debated whether the First or Second Book of King Edward should be made the basis of the Liturgy, which was now to be offered to parliament. It was decided in favour of the second book; chap, ii.] Church of England. 25 book; and the commissioners having entered upon their business in December 1558, finished it in the April following’. This new book was immediately ratified by act of parliament, which took elfect on the day of St. John the Baptist 1559. The follow¬ ing were the most considerable circumstances in which it differed from the second book of King Edward the Sixth : power was given to the ordi¬ nary to appoint the part of the church where morning and evening prayer should be read, the chancel having hitherto been the place commonly used for that purpose ; proper first lessons were appointed for Sundays, no distinction of that sort having been made in former Liturgies ; in the litany, a sentence, praying to be delivered “from the bishop of Rome, and all his detestable enor¬ mities,” was omitted, and prayers were added for the “queen’s majesty,” and “ for the clergy and people;” and several alterations were made in the communion service and in the rubric, with a view to conciliate the Roman Catholics. “This comprehensive plan, added to the Queen’s apparent attachment to usages that had obtained under the ancient establishment, induced many of the Roman Catholics to continue to join in the communion of the established church. Even the Pope was ready to give his sanction to the Liturgy, 2 6 Liturgy of the [paiitJiii. Liturgy, and to assent to the use of the commu¬ nion in both kinds, provided the Queen would acknowledge his supremacy ; and it was not till after a conformity of more than ten years that the Roman Catholics withdrew to separate con¬ gregations ( c ).” This Liturgy continued without any alteration, through the long reign of Queen Elizabeth ; but early in the reign of James the First, when the Puritans, who were now a numerous body, peti¬ tioned for a reform of what they termed abuses, the King appointed a conference to be held at Hampton Court, between a select number of bishops of the establishment, and the principal leaders among the dissenters, before himself as president, to hear what could be alleged for their non-conformity, and to judge whether an accom¬ modation between the parties would be practi¬ cable. The demands of the Puritans were far too unreasonable to be granted, and very soon set aside the idea of agreement ; but their ob¬ jections might contribute to produce some of the following improvements, which were soon after made in the Liturgy. In the morning and even¬ ing prayers, a collect, and in the litany a particular intercession were appointed for the royal family; the* ( c ) Shepherd’s Elucidation* chap, ii.] Church of England. 27 the forms of thanksgiving upon several occasions were then added ; the questions and answers concerning the sacraments were subjoined to the catechism ; and the administration of private baptism was by the rubric expressly confined to the lawful minister. These and some other ad¬ ditions and improvements were made by the authority of James the First, and universally adopted, although they were not ratified by parliament. Charles the First, by his own authority only, made some few unimportant alterations in the Liturgy ; but in ] 66 1, the year after the restora¬ tion of Charles the Second, when the hierarchy had been broken down by the monarchy above fourteen years, and the Liturgy had been en¬ tirely laid aside by puritanical usurpers of the government, twenty-four commissioners, twelve of whom were episcopalians, and twelve presby- terians, with nine assistants on each side, were appointed by patent, and were enjoined “ to meet at the master’s lodging in the Savoy, and to take into consideration the several directions, rules, forms of prayer, and things in the Common Prayer contained ; to revise the same, comparing them with the most antient Liturgies ; to advise upon the exceptions and objections that might be made, and, if occasion should require, to make 28 Liturgy of the [part iii. make such reasonable corrections and amend¬ ments, as they might judge useful and expedient for giving satisfaction to tender consciences, and restoring unity, but avoiding all unnecessary abbreviations of the forms and liturgy so long received in the church of England.” These com¬ missioners had several personal conferences at the Savoy, and severalwritten communicationspassed between them ; but they were unable to come to any agreement concerning the great points in dispute between the two parties ; they therefore resolved to inform his majesty, that “the church’s welfare, unity, and peace, and his majesty’s satis¬ faction, were ends upon which they all agreed, ✓ but as to the means they could not come to any harmony.” When it was found impossible to frame a Liturgy, which should be acceptable to all the persons of different religious persuasions then sub¬ sisting in the kingdom, the Convocation, which met May the 8th, 1661, took into consideration such improvements as were suggested by the epis¬ copalian commissioners, and the following addi¬ tions and alterations were agreed to : the collects for the Ember weeks ; the prayer for the high court of parliament ; the prayer for all sorts and conditions of men; the general thanksgiving; the collect for Easter Eve ; the collect, epistle, and gospel chap, ii.] Church of England. 29 gospel for tlie sixth Sunday after Epiphany ; a new collect for the third Sunday in Advent ; the office of baptism for those of riper years ; the two psalms prefixed to the lesson in the burial service ; the forms of prayer to be used at sea ; for the martyrdom of Charles the First, and for the restoration of the royal family, were all added. There were also several other less material addi¬ tions ; and through the whole service ambigui¬ ties were removed, and various improvements were made ; and in particular the portions of the Epistles and Gospels were taken from the new translation of the Bible ; but the Psalms, according to the translation of Cranmer’s Bible, were retained. The book, in this state, passed both houses of convocation ; it was subscribed by the bishops and clergy ; it was ratified by act of parliament, and received the royal assent, May 19th, 1662. This was the last revisal of the Book of Common Prayer, in which any alteration was made by public authority. I shall conclude this brief account of the origin and gradual improvement of our Liturgy, with the following just commendation of it by Dr. Comber, in the Preface to his “ Companion to the Temple — “ Though all churches in the world have, and ever had, forms of prayer, yet none was ever blessed with so comprehensive, so ® exact, 30 Liturgy of the [part iii. exact, and so inoffensive a composure as ours, which is so judiciously contrived, that the wisest may exercise at once their knowledge and devo¬ tion, and yet so plain that the most ignorant may pray with understanding ; so full that nothing is omitted, which is fit to be asked in public, and so particular that it compriseth most things which we would ask in private, and yet so short as not to tire any that hath true devotion. Its doctrine is pure and primitive ; its ceremonies so few and innocent, that most of the Christian world agree in them ; its method is exact and natural ; its language significant and perspicuous, most of the words and phrases being taken out of the holy Scriptures, and the rest are the expressions of the first and purest ages, so that whoever takes ex¬ ception at these must quarrel with the language of the Holy Ghost, and fall out with the church in her greatest innocence ; and in the opinion of the most impartial and excellent Grotius (who was no member of, nor had any obligation to, this church) the English Liturgy comes so near to the primitive pattern, that none of the reformed churches can compare with it. Whoever desires to worship God with zeal and knowledge, spirit and truth, purity and sincerity, may do it by these devout forms. And to this end may the God of Peace give us all meek hearts, quiet spirits? chap, ii.] Church of England. 31 spirits, and devout affections ; and free us from all sloth and prejudice, that we may have full churches, frequent prayers, and fervent charity ; that, uniting in our prayers here, we may all join in his praises hereafter, for the sake of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.” 32 Introduction to the Exposition PART III. CHAPTER THE THIRD: INTRODUCTION TO THE EXPOSITION OF THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. We learn from the New Testament, that those who first embraced the Gospel declared their faith in Jesus as the promised Messiah, in simple and general terms (a); and there is no ground for supposing that the Apostles required this de¬ claration to be made in any one particular form of words. No such formulary is transmitted to us; and had any ever existed, it would probably have been cited or alluded to in the New Testa¬ ment, or in the early Apologies for Christianity. Every bishop was authorized to prescribe a for¬ mulary for the use of his own church ; and there (a) Acts, c. 8. v. 37. are chap, nr.] of the Thirty -nine Articles . 33 are still extant in writers, who live near to the apostolic age, several abstracts of Christian faith, which, though they agree in substance, vary in expression. But when heresies gained ground, and destroyed uniformity of belief among Chris¬ tians, it became necessary to have a public standard of faith ; and to this case we are to attribute the origin of Creeds. The design of these creeds was to establish the genuine doctrines of the Gospel in opposition to the errors which then prevailed, and to exclude from communion with the orthodox church of Christ all who held heretical opinions. New dissensions and control versies continually arose ; and we have to lament that, in process of time, “ the faith which was once delivered unto the saints,” became cor¬ rupted in the highest degree ; and that those very councils, which were convened, according to the practice of the apostolic age, for the pur¬ pose of declaring <£ the truth, as it is in Jesus,” gave their sanction and authority to the grossest absurdities and most palpable errors. These corruptions, supported by secular power, and favoured by the darkness and ignorance of the times, were almost universally received through a succession of many ages, till at last the glorious light of the Reformation dispelled the clouds which had so long obscured the Christian world. VOL. II. v At 34 Introduction to the Exposition [pArtiii, At that interesting period, the several churches which had separated themselves from the Roman communion, found it expedient to publish con¬ fessions of their faith : and in conformity to this practice, Edward the sixth (b), the first pro- testant king of England, caused to be published by his royal authority, forty-two “ Articles agreed upon by the bishops, and other learned and good men, in the Convocation held at Lon¬ don in the year 1552, to root out the discord of opinions, and establish the agreement of true Religion.” These articles were repealedby Queen Mary, soon after her accession to the throne. But Queen Elizabeth, in the beginning of her reign, gave her royal assent to “ Thirty-nine ar¬ ticles agreed upon by the archbishops and bishops of both provinces, and the whole clergy, in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562, for avoiding diversities of opinion, and for the establishing of consent touching true Religion.” These articles were revised, and some small alterations made in them, in the year 1571, since which time they have continued to be the criterion of the faith of the members of the Church (b) Henry the eighth, in the year 1536, published Articles of Religion, in which some of the popish doctrines are disclaimed, but others are retained. Vide Burnet’s Reformation, book 3d. chap* nr.] of the Thirty-nine Articles. 35 Church of England. The articles of 1 562 were drawn up in Latin only; but in 1571 they were subscribed by the members of the two houses of convocation both in Latin and English, and therefore the Latin and English copies are to be considered as equally authentic. The original manuscripts, subscribed by the houses of con¬ vocation, were burnt in the fire of London ; but Dr, Bennet has collated the oldest copies now extant, and it appears that there are no variations of any importance. It is generally believed that Cranmer and Ridley f c ) were chiefly concerned in framing the forty-two articles, upon which our thirty-nine are founded ; but Burnet says, that “ questions relating to them were given about to many bishops and divines, who gave in their several answers, that were collated and examined very maturely ; all sides had a free and fair hearing before conclusions were made.” Indeed, caution and moderation are no less conspicuous in them than a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures, and of the early opinions and practice of Christians. Bishop Burnet, in his History of the Refor¬ mation, (c) They followed principally the Augsbourg con¬ fession, which was drawn up by Melancthon. D 2 36 Introduction to the Exposition [part hi. mation (d), has preserved the forty-two articles published by King Edward the sixth, and has pointed out in what respect they differ from the thirty-nine articles which are now in force (e). These thirty-nine articles are arranged with great judgement and perspicuity, and may be considered under four general divisions; the first five contain the Christian doctrines concerning the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, in the sixth, seventh, and eighth, the rule of Faith is established ; the next ten relate to Christians as individuals ; and the remaining twenty-one relate to them as they are members of a religious society. But as all confessions of faith have had a reference to existing heresies, we shall here find not only the positive doctrines of the Gospel as¬ serted, but also the principal errors and corrup¬ tions of the Church of Rome, and most of the extravagancies into which certain protestant sects fell at the time of the Reformation, rejected and condemned. The articles in English will appear in the course of the Exposition ; the following is the Latin text : (d) Collections, No. 55, vol. 2. ( e) Whoever wishes to see a full account of every thing which passed relative to these articles, may consult Dr. Bennet’s “ Essay on the Thirty-nine Articles.” chap, in.] Of the Thirty-nine Articles. 37 ARTICULI de quibus convenit inter Archi- episcopos et Episcopos utriusque Provincice, et Clerum Universum in Synodo , Londini , Anno 1 562, secundum computationem Ecclesice Angli- cance , ad tollendam opinionum dissentionem , el consensual in vera Religione firmandum. Editi Authoritate serenissimce Pegince. Londinq apud Joharmem Day, 1571. 1 . De fide in sacro-sanctam Trinit at em . Unus est vivus, et verus Deus, seternus, in- corporeus, impartibilis, impassibilis, immensce potentise, sapientiae, ac bonitatis, creator et con¬ servator omnium, turn visibilium, turn invisibi- lium. Et in unitate hujus divinae naturae, tres sunt personae, ejusdem essentiae, potentiae, ac aeternitatis, Pater, Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus* 2. De Verbo, sive Filio Dei, qui verus homo f actus est. Filius, qui est verbum patris, ab aeterno a patre genitus, verus et aeternus Deus, ac patri consubstantialis, in utero beatae Virgin is, ex illius substantia naturam liumanam assumpsit : ita ut duae naturae, divina, et humana integre atque d 3 perfecte 38 Introduction to the Exposition [part iit. perfecte in unitate personae fuerint inseparabiliter conjunctae, ex quibus est unus Christus, verus Deus et verus homo, qui vere passus est, cru- cifixus, mortuus, et sepultus, ut patrem nobis reconciliaret, essetque hostia, non tantum pro culpa originis, verum etiam pro omnibus actu- alibus hominum peccatis. 3. De descensu Christi ad Inferos. ' Quemadmodum Christus pro nobis mortuus est, et sepultus, ita est etiam credendus ad Inferos descendisse. 4. De resurrectione Christi Christus vere a mortuis resurrexit, suumque corpus cum carne, ossibus, omnibusque ad inte- gritatem humanae naturae pertinentibus, recepit : cum quibus in ccelum ascendit, ibique residet, quoad extremo die ad judicandos homines rever- surus sit. 5. De Spiritu Sancto. Spiritus Sanctus, a Patre et Filio procedens, ejusdem est cum Patre, et Filio essentiae, majes- tatis, et gloriae, verus ac aeternus Deus. 6. De chap, hi.] of the Thirty -nine Articles. 39 6. De divinis Scripturis, quodsufficiant ad salutem . Scriptura sacra continet omnia, quae ad salutem sunt necessaria, ita ut quicquid in ea nec legitur, neque inde probari potest, non sit a quoquam exigendum, ut tanquam articulus fidei credatur, aut ad salutis necessitatem requiri putetur. Sacree Scripturae nomine, eos canonicos libros veteris, et novi Testamenti intelligimus, de quorum authoritate, in Ecclesia nunquam dubi- tatum est. De nominibus et numero librorum sacrce Canonicce Scripturce veteris Testamenti. Genesis. Exodus, Leviticus. Numeri. Deuteron. Josuae. Judicum. Ruth. Prior liber Samuelis. Secundus liber Samu¬ elis. Prior liber Regum. Secundus liber Regum. Prior liber Paralipom. D Secundus liber Parali pom. Primus liber Esdrae. Secundus liber Esdrae. Liber Hester. Liber Job. Psalmi. Proverbia. Ecclesiastes vel Con- cionator. Cantica SolomOnis. IV. Prophetae Majores. XII. Prophetae Mi nores. Alios 40 Introduction to the Exposition [part hi. Alios autern libros (ut ait Hieronymus) legit qui- dem Ecclesia, ad exempla vit(e, et formandos mores : illos tamen ad dogmata conjirmanda non adhibet , tit sunt, Tertius liber Esdree. Quartus liber Esdrae. Liber Tobiae. Liber Judith. Reliquum libri Hes¬ ter. Liber Sapientias. Liber Jesu filii Sirach. Baruch propheta. Novi Testamenti or cepti sunt) recipimus, e Canticum trium puero- rum. Historia Susannas. De Bel et Dracone. Oratio Manassis. Prior '.liber Machabeo rum. Secundus liber Macha- beorum, nes libros (ut vulgo re- habemus pro canonicis. 7. De veteri Testamento. Testamentum vetus novo contrarium non est, quandoquidem tarn in veteri, quam in novo, per Christum, qui unieus est Mediator Dei et hominum, Deus et homo, aeterna vita humano generi est proposita. Quare mala sentiunt, qui veteres tantum in promissiones temporarias spe- rasse confingunt. Quanquam lex a Deo data per Mosen (quoad casremonias et ritus) Christi- anos non astringat, neque civilia ejus praecepta in aliqua republica necessario recipi debeant, nihilominus chap, iii.] of the Thirty-nine Articles. 41 nihilominus tamen ab obedientia mandatorum (quse moralia vocantur) nullus (quantumvis Christianus) est solutus. 8. De tribus Symbolis. Symbol a tria, Nicsenum, Athanasii, et quod vulgo Apostolorum appellatur, omnino recipi- enda sunt, et credenda, nam firmissimis, Scrip- turarum testimoniis probari possunt. 9. De peccato originali. Peccatum originis non est (ut fabulantur Pelagiani) in imitatione Adami situm, sed est vitium, et depravatio naturae, cujuslibet homi- nis ex Adamo naturaliter propagati : qua fit, ut ab originali justitia quam longissime distet, ad malum sua natura propendeat, et caro semper adversus spiritum concupiscat, unde in unoquo- que nascentium, iram Dei atque damnationem meretur. Manet etiam in renatis haec naturae depravatio. Qua fit, ut affectus carnis, Greece (ax coigxof (quod alii sapientiam, alii sensum, alii affectum, alii studium carnis interpretantur) legi Dei non subjiciatur. Et quanquam renatis et credentibus, nulla propter Christum est con- demnatio, peccati tamen in sese rationem habere concupiscentiam, fatetur Apostolus. 10. De 42 Introduction to the Exposition [part hi. 10. De libero arbitrio. Ea esthominis postlapsum Adse conditio, ut sese naturalibus suis viribus, et bonis operibus, ad fidem et invocationem Dei convertere, ac prseparare non possit. Quare absque gratia Dei (quse per Christum est) nos prseveniente, ut ve- limus, et cooperante, dum volumus, ad pietatis opera facienda, quae Deo grata sunt, et accepta, nihil valemus. 1 1 . De hominis justificatione. Tantum propter meritum Domini, ac Ser- vatoris nostri Jesu Christi,per fidem, non propter opera, et merita nostra, justi coram Deo reputa- mur. Quare sola fide nos justificari doctrina est saluberrima, ac consolationis plenissima, ut in homilia de justificatione hominis fusius expli- catur. 12. De bonis operibus. Bona opera, quse sunt fructusfidei, et justi- ficatos sequuntur, quanquam peccata nostra ex- piare, et divini judicii severitatem ferre non pos- sunt; Deo tamen grata sunt, etacceptain Christo, atque ex vera et viva fide necessario profluunt, ut plane ex illis ssque fides viva cognosci posSit, atque arbor ex fructu judieari. 13, De 43 chap, hi.] of the Thirty-nine Articles. 13. De operibus ante justificationem. Opera quae fiunt, ante gratiam Christi, et Spiritus ejus afflatum, cum ex fide Jesu Christi non prodeant, minime Deo grata sunt, neque gratiam (ut multi vocant) de congruo merentur. Immo cum non sunt facta, ut Deus ilia fieri voluit et prascepit, peccati rationem habere non dubitamus. 14. De operibus super erogationis- Opera quae supererogationis appellant, non possunt sine arrogantia et impietate praedicari. Nam illis declarant homines, non tantum se Deo reddere, quae tenentur, sed plus in ejus gratiam facere, quam deberent, cum aperte Christus dicat; Cumfeceritis omnia quaecunqueprsecepta sunt vobis, dicite, servi inutiles sumus, 15. De Christo, qui solus est sine peccato. Christus in nostrae natura? veritate, per om¬ nia similis factus est nobis, excepto peccato, a quo prorsus erat immunis, turn in carne, turn in spiritu. Venit ut agnus, absque macula, qui mundi peccata per immolationem sui semel fac- tam, tolleret, et peccatum (ut inquit Johannes) in eo non erat: sed nos reliqui etiam baptizati, et in Christo regenerate in multis tamen offen- dimus 44 Introduction to the Exposition [part iii. dimus omnes. Et si dixerimus, quod peccatum non habemus, nos ipsos seducimus, et veritas in nobis non est. 16. De peccato post Baptismum. Non omne peccatum mortale post Baptis¬ mum voluntarie perpetratum, est peccatum in Spiritum Sanctum, etirremissibile. Proindelapsis a Baptismo in peccata, locus pcenitentiae non est negandus. Post acceptum Spiritum Sanctum pos- sumus a gratia data recedere, atque peccare, de- nuoque pergratiam Deiresurgere, acresipiscere ; ideoque illi damnandi sunt, qui se quamdiu hie vivant, amplius non posse peccare affirmant, aut vere resipiscentibus Venice locum denegant. 17. De preedestinatione et electione. PryEDEStinatio ad vitam, est seternum Dei proposition, quo ante jacta mundi fundamenta, suo consilio, nobis quidem occulto, constanter decrevit, eos quos in Christo elegit ex hominum genere, a maledicto et exitio liberare, atque (ut vasain honoremefficta) per Christum, ad asternam salutem adducere. Unde qui tam praeclaro Dei beneficio sunt donati, illi spiritu ejus, opportune tempore operante, secundum propositum ejus vocantur, vocationi per gratiam parent, justifi- cantur gratis, adoptantur in filios Dei, unigeniti ejus chap, hi.] of the Thirty-nine Articles. 45 ejus Jesu Christi imagini efficiuntur conformes, in bonis operibus sancte ambulant, et demum ex Dei misericordia pertingunt ad sempiternam felicitatem. Quemadmodum praedestinationis et electionis nostrae in Christo pia consideratio, dulcis, suavis, et ineffabilis consolationis plena est, vere piis, et his qui sentiunt in se vim Spiritus Christi, facta carnis, et membra, quae adhuc sunt super ter- ram, mortificantem, animumque ad ccelestia et superna rapientem ; turn quia fidem nostram de aeterna salute consequenda per Christum pluri- mum stabilit atque confirmat, turn quia amorem nostrum in Deum vehementer accendit: Ita hominibus curiosis, carnalibus, et Spiritu Christi destitutis, ob oculos perpetuo versari praedesti- nationis Dei sententiam, perniciosissimum est praecipitium, unde illos diabolus protrudit, vel in desperationem, vel in aeque perniciosam impu- rissimae vitae securitatem. Deinde promissiones divinas sic amplecti oportet, ut nobis in sacris literis generaliter propositae sunt, et Dei voluntas in nostris actionibus ea sequenda est, quam in verbo Dei habemus, diserte revelatam. 18. De speranda ceterna salute tantum in nomine Christi. Sunt et illi anathematizandi, qui dicere audent unumquemque in lege aut secta quam profitetur 46 Introduction to the Exposition [part hi. profitetur esse servandum, modo juxta illam, et lumen naturae accurate vixerit, cum sacrae literae tantum Jesu Christi nomen praedicent, in quo salvos fieri homines oporteat. 19. De Ecclesia. Ecclesia Christi visibilis est ccetus fidelium, in quo verbum Dei purum praedicatur, et sacra- menta quoad ea quae necessario exigantur, juxta Christi institutum recte administrantur. Sicut erravit Ecclesia Hierosolymitana, Alexandria, et Antiochena ; ita et erravit Ecclesia Romana, non solum quoad agenda, et caeremoniarum ritus, verum in his etiam quae credenda sunt. 20. De Ecclesice authoritate . Ha bet Ecclesia ritus sive caeremonias sta- tuendi jus, et in fidei controversiis authoritatem ; quamvis Ecclesiae non licet quicquam instituere, quod verbo Dei Scripto adversetur, nec unum scripturae locum sic exponere potest, et ulteri contradicat. Quare licet Ecclesia sit divinorum librorum testis, et conservatrix, attamen ut adversus eos nihil decernere, ita praeter illos, nihil credendum de necessitate salutis debet obtrudere. 21, De chap, ni.] of the Thirty -nine Articles. 47 2 1 . De authoritate Conciliorum generalium. Generalia Concilia, sine jussu, et volun- tate Principum congregari non possunt ; et ubi convenerint, quia ex hominibus constant, qui non omnes spiritu, et verbo Dei, reguntur, et errare possunt, et interdum errarunt etiam in bis quae ad Deum pertinent : ideoque quae ab illis constituuntur, at ad salutem necessaria, neque robur habent, neque autboritatem, nisi ostendi possint e sacris literis esse desumpta. 22. De Pur gator io. Doctrina Romanensium de purgatorio, de indulgentiis, de veneratione, et adoratione, turn imaginum, turn reliquiarum, nec non de invoca¬ tion sanctorum, res est futilis, inaniter conficta, et nullis Scripturarum testimoniis innititur ; immo verbo Dei contradicit. 23. De ministrando in Ecclesia. Non licet cuiquam sumere sibi munus publice praedicandi, aut administrandi Sacramenta in Ec¬ clesia, nisi prius fuerit ad haec obeunda legitime vocatus et missus. Atque illos legitime vocatos et missos existimare debemus, qui per homines, quibus potestas vocandi ministros, atque mit- tendi in vineam Domini, publice concessa est in 48 Introduction to the Exposition [part iii. in Ecclesia, cooptati fuerint et adsciti in hoc opus. 24. De loquendo in Ecclesia lingua quam populus intelligit. Lingua populo non intellecta, publicas in Ecclesia preces peragere, aut Sacramenta admi- nistrare, verbo Dei, et primitive Ecclesise con- suetudine plane repugnat. 25. De Sacr amends. Sacramenta a Christo instituta, non tan- tum sunt notse professionis Christianorum, sed certa qusedam potius testimonia et efficacia signa gratise atque bonse in nos voluntatis Dei, per quse invisibiliter ipse in nos operatur, nos- tramque fidem in se non solum excitat, verum etiam confirmat. Duo a Christo Domino nostro in Evangelio instituta sunt Sacramenta : scilicet, Baptismus, et Coena Domini. Quinque ilia vulgo nominata Sacramenta, scilicet, confirmatio, poenitentia, ordo, matrimo- nium, et extrema unctio, pro Sacramentis Evan- gelicis habenda non sunt, ut quse, partim a prava Apostolorum imitatione profluxerunt, partim vitse status sunt in Scripturis quidem probati ; sed sacramentorum eandem cum Baptismo et ® - Ccena chap, hi.] of the Thirty -nine Articles. 49 Coena Domini rationem non habentes, ut qua? signum aliquod visibile, seu caeremoniam, a Deo institutam, non habeant. Sacramenta non in hoc instituta sunt a Christo ut spectarentur, aut circumferrentur, sed ut rite illis uteremur, et in his duntaxat qui digne per- cipiunt salutarem habent effectum. Qui vero indigne percipiunt, damnationem (ut inquit Paulus) sibi ipsis acquirunt. 26. De vi institutionum divinarum, quod earn non tollat malitia Ministrorum. Quamvjs in Ecclesia visibili bonis mali semper sint admixti, atque interdum ministerio verbi, et Sacramentorum administration! praesint, tamen cum non suo, sed Christi nomine agant, ejusque mandato, et authoritate ministrent, il- lorum ministerio uti licet, cum in verbo Dei au- diendo, turn in Sacramentis percipiendis. Neque perillorum malitiam, effectus institutorum Christi toll^tur, aut gratia donorum Dei minuitur, quoad eos qui fide, et rite sibi oblata percipiunt, quae propter institutionem Christi, et promissionem efficacia sunt, licet per malos administrentur. Ad Ecclesiae tamen disciplinam pertinet, ut in malos ministros inquiratur, accusenturque ab his, qui eorum flagitia noverint, atque tandem justo convicti judicio deponantur. VOL, 11. E 27. De 50 Introduction to the Exposition [partiii. 27. De Baptismo. Baptism us non est tantum professionis sig- num, ac discriminis nota, qua Christiani a non Christianis discernantur, sed etiam est signum regeneration^, per quod, tanquam per instru- mentum recte baptismum suscipientes, Ecclesiae inseruntur, promissiones de remissione peccato- rum, atque adoptione nostra in filios Dei per Spiritum Sanctum visibiliter obsignantur, tides confirmatur, et vi divinag invocationis gratia augetur. Baptismus parvulorum omnino in Ecclesia retinendus est, ut qui cum Christi institutione optime congruat. 28. De Ccena Domini. Ccena Domini non est tantum signum mutuas benevolentiae Christianorum inter sese, verum potius est Sacramentum nostrae per mortem Christi redemptionis. Atque adeo, rite, digne, et cum fide sumen- tibus, panis quern frangimus est communicatio corporis Christi : similiter poculum benedictionis est communicatio sanguinis Christi. Panis et vini transubstantiatio in Eucharistia ex sacris literis probari non potest. Sed apertis Scripturae verbis adversatur, Sacramenti naturam evertit, hap. in.] of the Thirty-nine Articles. 51 evertit, et multarum superstitionum dedit occa- sionem. Corpus Christi datur, accipitur, et manducatur in Ccena, tantum coelesti et spirituali ratione. Medium autem quo corpus Christi accipitur, et manducatur in Ccena, fides est. Sacramentum Eucharistic, ex institutione Christi non servabatur, circumferebatur, eleva- batur nec adorabatur. 29. De manclucatione corporis Christi , et impios illucl non manducare. Impii, et fide viva destituti, licet carnaliter, et visibiliter (ut Augustinus loquitur) corporis, et sanguinis Christi Sacramentum, dentibus pre- mant, nullo tamen modo Christi participes efficiuntur. Sed potius tantae rei Sacramentum, seu Symbolum, ad judicium sibi manducant, et bibunt, 30. De utraque specie. Calix Domini laicis non est denegandus, utraque enim pars Dominici Sacramenti, ex Christi institutione, et praecepto, omnibus Chris- tianis ex aequo administrari debet. 31. De unica Christi oblatione in crnce perfecta. Oblatio Christi semel facta perfecta est redemptio, propitiatio, et satisfactio pro omnibus e 2 peccatis 52 Introduction to the Exposition [part hi . peccatis totius mundi, tam originalibus, quam actualibus. Neque prseter illam unicam, est ulla alia pro peccatis expiatio, unde missarum sacri- ficia, quibus,vulgo dicebatur, sacerdotem offerre Christum in remissionem pcense, aut culpas, pro vivis et defunctis, blasphema figmenta sunt, et perniciosas imposturae. 32. De conjugio Sacerdotum . Episcopis, presbyteris, et diaconis nullo mandato divino praeceptum est, ut aut coeli- batum voveant, aut a matrimonio abstineant. Licet igitur etiam illis, ut caeteris omnibus Christianis, ubi hoc ad pietatem magis facere judicaverint, pro suo arbitratu matrimonium contrahere. 33. De excommunicatis vitandis. Qui per publicam Ecclesiae denunciationem rite ab unitate Ecclesias praecisus est, et excom- municatus, is ab universa fidelium multitudine (donee per pcenitentiam publice reconciliatus fuerit arbitrio Judicis competentis) habendus est tanquam ethnicus et publicanus. 34. De Traditionibus Ecclesiasticis. Traditiones atque cairemonias easdem, non omnino necessarium est esseubique, autprorsus consimiles. chap, hi.] of the Thirty-nine Articles. 53 consimiles. Nam ut variae semper fuerunt, et mutari possunt, pro regionum, temporum, et morum diversitate, modo nihil contra verbum Dei instituatur. Traditiones, et casremonias ecclesiasticas, quae cum verbo Dei non pugnant, et sunt authoritate publica institute, atque probat®, quisquis pri- vato consilio volens, et data opera, publice vio- laverit, is ut qui peccat in publicum ordinem Ecclesi®,quique laeditauthoritatem Magistratus, et qui infirmorum fratrum conscientias vulnerat, publice, ut casteri timeant, arguendus est. Quaelibet Ecclesia particularis, sivenationalis, authoritatem habet instituendi, mutandi, aut abrogandi c®remonias, aut ritus ecclesiasticos, humana tantum authoritate institutos, modo omnia ad asdificationem fiant. 35. De Homiliis. Tomus secundus Homiliarum, quarum sin- gulos titulos huic articulo subjunximus, continet piam et salutarem doctrinam, et his temporibus necessariam, non minus quam prior Tomus Homiliarum, qua3 edit® sunt tempore Edward i Sexti : Itaque eas in Ecclesiis per ministros diligenter, et clare, ut populo intelligi possint, recitandas esse judicavimus. e 3 De 54 Introduction to the Exposition [part hi. De Nominibus Homiliarum. Of the right use of the Church. Against peril of Idola¬ try. Of repairingand keeping clean of Churches. Of good Works. First , of Fasting. Against Gluttony and Drunkenness. Against excess in Ap¬ parel. Of Prayer. Of the place and time of Prayer. That common Prayers and Sacraments ought ' to be ministered in a known Tongue. Of the reverend estima¬ tion of God's TVord. Of Alms-doing. Of the Nativity of Christ. Of the Passion of Christ. Of the Resurrection of Christ. Of the worthy receiving of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ. Of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost . Of the Rogation-days. Of the state of Matri - mony. Of Repentance. Against Idleness. Against Rebellion. 36. De Fpiscoporum et Ministrorum consecratione. Libellus de consecrationeArchiepiscoporum, et Episcoporum, et de ordinationePresbyterorum et Diaconorum, editus nuper temporibus Ed- wardi VI. et authoritate Parliamenti illis ipsis temporibus confirmatus, omnia ad ejusmodi con- secrationem, et ordinationem necessaria continet, et nihil habet, quod ex se sit, aut superstitiosum, aut impium ; itaque quicunque juxta ritus illius. * libri chap, in.] of the Thirty -nine Articles. 55 libri consecrati, aut ordinati sunt, ab anno secundo praedicti regis Edwardi, usque ad hoc tempus, aut in posterum juxta eosdem ritus eonsecrabuntur, aut ordinabuntur, rite atque ordine, atque legitime statuimus esse, et fore consecratos et ordinatos. 37. De civilibus Magistratibus. Regia Majestas in hoc Angliae regno, ac caeteris ejus dominiis summam habet potesta- tem, ad quam omnium statu um hujus regni, sive illi ecclesiastici sint, sive civiles, in omnibus causis, suprema gubernatio pertinet, et nulli ex- ternae jurisdictioni est subjecta, nec esse debet. Cum Regiae Majestati summam gubernationem tribuimus, quibus titulis intelligimus animos quorundam calumniatorum offendi, non damus Regibus nostris, aut verbi Dei, aut Sacramen- torum administrationem, quod etiam Injunc- tiones ab Elizabetha Regina nostra, nuper editae, apertissime testantur ; sed earn tantum praero- gativam, quam in sacris Scripturis a Deo ipso, omnibus piis Principibus, videmus, semper fuisse attributam : hoc est, ut omnes status, atque ordines fidei suae a Deo commissos, sive illi ecclesiastici sint, sive civiles, in officio conti- neant, etcontumaces ac delinquentes gladio civili coerceant. e 4 Romanus 56 Introduction to the Exposition [part hi. Romanuspontifexnullamhabetjurisdictionem in hoc regno Anglise. Leges regni possunt Christianos propter capi- talia, et gravia crimina, morte punire. Christianis licet, ex mandato Magistratus, arraa portare et justabella administrare. 38. De illicit a honor am communicatione. Facultates et bona Christianorum, non sunt communia, quoad jus et possessionem (ut quid am Anabaptistas falso j actant) ; debet tamen quisque de his quas possidet, pro facultatum ratione, pauperibus eleemosynas benigne dis- tribuere. 39. De jurejurando. Quemadmodum juramentum vanum et temerarium a Domino nostro Jesu Christo, et Apostolo ejus Jacobo, Christianis hominibus interdictum esse fatemur : Ita Christianorum Religionem minime prohibere censemus, quin jubente magistratu in causa fidei et charitatis jurare liceat, modo id fiat juxta Prophetae doc- trinam, in justitia, in judicio, et veritate. Conjirmatio Articulorum. Hie liber antedictorum Articulorum jam denuo approbatus est, per assensum, et consen- sum chap, in.] of the Thirty-nine Articles. 57 sum Serenissimae Reginae Elizabethae Dominae nostrae, Dei gratia Angliae, Franciae, et Hiberniae, Reginae, defensoris fidei, &c. retinendus, et per totum regnum Angliae exequendus. Qui Ar- ticuli, et lecti sunt, et denuo confirmati, sub- scriptione D. Archiepiscopi et Episcoporum superioris domus, et totiusCleri inferioris domus, in Convocatione Anno Domini, 1571. 58 Exposition of the PART III. AN EXPOSITION OF THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES. ARTICLE THE FIRST : Of Faith in the Holy Trinity. THERE IS BUT ONE LIVING AND TRUE GOD, EVERLASTING, WITHOUT BODY, PARTS, OR PASSIONS, OF INFINITE POWER, WISDOM, AND GOODNESS, THE MAKER AND PRE¬ SERVER OF ALL THINGS BOTH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE ; AND IN THE UNITY OF THIS GODHEAD THERE ARE THREE PERSONS OF ONE SUBSTANCE, POWER, AND ETERNITY, THE FATHER, THE SON, AND THE HOLY GHOST. This first article asserts the Being and Attri¬ butes of God, which are the foundation of all religion ; and it farther declares, that the Godhead consists of three persons, which, though it appears to have made a part of the original revelation art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 59 revelation to mankind, was so far forgotten or obscured, that it may be considered as one of the characteristic doctrines of the Gospel. The universal consent of mankind has ever been admitted as a strong' argument in favour of the existence of a God. We learn from the history of former times, and from the observation of modern travellers, that in every country, and at every period, some idea of a Superior Being, and some species of divine worship, have prevailed. “ This,” says Dr. Nicholls, “ is very good evi¬ dence of the reality of a Supreme Being ; and whether we ground it upon tradition or uni¬ versal principles of reasoning, it is a better foun¬ dation to rest upon than the fanciful speculations of some particular private persons, who are more liable to be mistaken than the most learned and wise men of all nations and all ages of the world, and who probably could not have all fallen into the uniform opinion of a divine Creator and Go¬ vernor of the world, unless he had been pleased, some time or other, in the early ages of the world, to have revealed it to them, which they readily at first embraced, and afterwards tenaciously adhered to, finding it so highly agreeable to their reason. It avails little to say, that there may be a stupid clan or two of barbarous people, who have very little of these notices ; for the observation of 6o Exposition of the [part hi. of such people’s practices and opinions may not have been exactly enough made by those traders who have made these reports, for want of their lingua, and by reason of their short and imper¬ fect conversation with them ; or, however, were the observation true, the contrary opinion of a few stupid people, who are almost degenerated into beasts, is but a sorry pretence to set up against the judgement of so many civilized na¬ tions, in so many successive ages of the world, confirmed by the reason of so many wise and learned men, who have been educated in them ( a ).n — “ Those nations, of which these reports are given out, are so extremely sunk from all that is wise and regular, great and good, in human nature, so rude and untractable, and so incapable of arts and discipline, that if the reports concerning them are to be believed, and if that weakens the argument from the common consent of mankind on the one hand, it strengthens it on another ; while it appears that human na¬ ture, when it wants this impression, wants with it all that is great and orderly in it, and shews a brutality almost as low and base as is that of beasts ( b But though all civilized nations have concurred in the belief of one or more Gods, (a) Nicholls’s Commentary upon Art. (b) Burnet on the Articles. art. i.J Thirty -nine Articles. 61 Gods, there has been an infinite diversity in the modes of divine Worship; and the errors and absurdities, with which all religions, except those of Moses and of Christ, have abounded, fully evince the weakness of the human intellect when unassisted by revelation. Some few individuals, in the different ages of the world, have indeed rejected all belief in the existence of a God ; but we may generally trace the rejection of a Deity to the source of pride or of profligacy; and even the late public avowal of Atheism, by those who have usurped the government in a neighbouring country, originating from a philosophy falsely so called, and accompanied by crimes unparalleled in the annals of mankind, cannot be considered as in any degree affecting the argument arising from general consent, especially when it is re¬ membered that this apostacy from religion is clearly foretold in the holy Scriptures ( c ). But a more direct proof of the being of a God may be derived from the universe itself ; we are not only conscious of our own existence, but we also (c ) Vide Mr. Kett’s “ History the Interpreter of Prophecy;” a very interesting work, written with great elegance and judgment, and which I recom¬ mend to all who are desirous of becoming acquainted with the prophecies of the Old and New Testaments, especially those which relate to the present times. 6 2 Exposition of the [part hi. also know that there exists a great variety of other things, both material and spiritual. It is equally inconceivable that these things should have existed from all eternity in their present state, or that they should have fallen into this state by chance ; and consequently as there was a time when they did not exist, and as it was impossible for them to produce themselves, it follows, that there was some exterior agent or creator to whom the world owed its beginning and form ; that agent or creator we call God. “We read,” says bishop Pearson, “ the Great Artificer of the world in the work of his own hands, and by the existence of any thing we demonstrate the first cause of all things ( d).” And since it is absurd to suppose that there are two prime causes of all things, two supreme governors of the world, or two self- existent and independent Beings of infinite per¬ fections, we are obliged to conclude that God is One. The Supreme Being, however, has not left this important truth to the deduction of human reason only, but has confirmed and established it by Revelation. The unity of God is expressly declared in many passages of Scripture : “ Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord(e)” — “ Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know (d) Pearson on the Creed, Art. 1 . (e) Deut. c. 6. v. 4. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 63 know that the Lord he is God, there is none else beside himf'/’J.” — “ He is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath ; there is none else ( g J.” — “ I am the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no God (h)”- — “ We know that there is none other God but on e (i)” — “ There is one God(jJ.” — We, therefore, cannot but agree to the first assertion in this article, in opposition to the sinful presump¬ tion of atheists, and to the false polytheism of the heathen, that there is one, and but one, living and true god. St. Paul in his First Epistle to the Thessalonians applies the epithet “ living and true” to God; “ Ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God(7r )” And the prophet Jeremiah says, “ The Lord is the true God, he is the living God (l)” He is the living God, that is, “ he hath life in him¬ self f m)f he is self-existent, deriving his being from no exterior cause; “ In him we li ^ve(n).,, — “ He giveth life to all things ( 0 >)” He is the fountain and origin of life to all the animated part of the creation; he is the true God, as distinguished (f) Deut. c. 4. v. 35, ( h ) Is. c. 44. v. 6. (j) 1 Tim. c. 2. v. 5. (1) Jer. c. 10. v. 10- GO Acts, c. 17.V. 28. (g) Deut. c. 4. v. 39. (i) 1 Cor. c. 8. v. 4. (k) 1 Thess. c. 1. v. 9. (m) John, c. 5. v. 26. (0) Acts, c. 17. v. 25. 64 Exposition of the ' [part hi, distinguished from the vain gods of the Gentiles, “ This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God ( p J.” The article next states, that God is ever¬ lasting; that is, that he has existed from all past eternity, and will continue to exist to all future eternity (q). The Supreme Creator of all things must necessarily have existed from all eternity, since he could not have caused his own existence ; and he must continue to exist to all eternity, since a being cannot cease to be, when there is no superior by whom his annihilation, or any alteration in him can be produced, and when there is nothing in his own essence which is sub¬ ject to change or decay. We may rely upon the truth and certainty of these conclusions, hut at the same time we must acknowledge that our capacities can by no means comprehend how a being exists necessarily, independently, and eternally (rj, God is in several passages of Scripture (p John, c. 17. v. 3. (q ) iEternum proprie dicitur, quod neque initium ut esset habuit, neque cessare unquam potest esse. Origen. Or. Periarch. cap. 3. (r) “ It is to be observed,” says Dr. Clarke, €< that the Scripture, as it does not much insist upon proving to us the being of God, but rather always supposes that to be already known by the light of nature, so also, when it mentions any of the natural attributes of art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 65 Scripture styled eternal and everlasting : 11 The eternal God is thy refuge ( s ■).” — “ Hast thou not heard that the everlasting God fainteth not, nei¬ ther is weary ( t ).” — “ Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory, for ever and everf u ).” — “ According to the commandment of the everlasting God (x )” And in the Revelation of St. John, the eternity of God is thus described : “I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the Ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty (y).” To suppose that God is circumscribed by body, consists of material parts, or is liable to passions, would be so utterly inconsistent with our ideas of infinite perfection, with our notion of a Being who is equally present every where, and who is free from every possible defect, that we of the divine essence, it does not usually enlarge upon the proof or explication of them, but generally makes mention of them occasionally only, and as pre¬ supposing them beforehand well known by mens reason.” Vol. 1. Serm. 5. To which may be added, the tradition of the revelations to Adam and the early patriarchs, and the evidence from prophecies and mi¬ racles continually before the people to whom the Old Testament was immediately addressed. (s) Deut. c. 33. v. 27. (t) Is. c. 40. v. 28. (u) 1 Tim. c. 1. v. 17. (x) Rom.c. 16. v. 16. (y) Rev. c. 1. v. 8. VOJL. 11. F 66 Exposition of the [part in. we must without hesitation pronounce that God is WITHOUT BODY, PARTS, OR PASSIONS, “ God is a spirit (z), and a spirit hath not flesh or bones (a ).”■ — u God is not a man that he should lie, neither the son of man that he should repent ( b When, therefore, the Scrip¬ tures speak of the face, eyes, ears, and hands of God, or of his grief, jealousy, anger, and other mental emotions, we are to consider that such language is only accommodated to the under¬ standings of men ; and that those properties and qualities do in fact by no means belong to the Supreme Being. We can form no conception of the agency of a pure spiritual substance, and therefore, in speaking of God, we are under the necessity of using terms derived from ourselves, and which we cannot but know to be in reality inapplicable to him. God having created all things out of nothing, and given to them their various and respective powers, and being able to change, annihilate, and dispose of every thing in the universe, in any manner which hepleases ; and no substance either animate or inanimate, material or immaterial, being capable of resisting or impeding his will ; it follows that the power of God is infinite. “ In (z) John, c. 4. v. 24. (a) Luke, c. 24. v. 39. (b) Numb. c. 23. v. 19. art. I.] Thirty -nine Articles. 67 “ In thy hand, O God, is there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand th ee(c)V’ — “ The Lord of Hosts hath pur¬ posed it, and who shall disannul it? his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it backfdj? ” — 11 He worketh all things after the counsel of his own willfej.” — “ With God all things are possible (f).n — “ With God nothing shall be impossible (g)” — “ He doth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth, and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What dost thou (h)T — “ The Lord appeared unto Abraham, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God (i ).”■ — “ The Lord God omnipotent reigneth fkj.” — But though with the holy patriarch we confess that “ God can do every thing (l)” we must re¬ member that Omnipotence itself does not ex¬ tend to contradictions or impossibilities ; “ God cannot lie ( m J,” inasmuch as that would be contrary (c) 2 Chr. c. 20. v. 6. (d) Is. c. 14. v. 27. (e) Ephes. c. 1. v. 11. (f) Mat. c. 19. v. 26. (g) Luke, c. 1. v. 37. (h) Dan. c. 4. v.35. (i) Gen. c. 17. v. 1. (k) Rev. c. 19. v. 6. ( l ) Job, c. 42. v. 2. (m) Heb. c. 6. v. 18- Impossibile est ei mentiri ; et impossibile istud non infirmitatis est, sed virtu tis et majestatis, quia veritas non recipit mendacium, nec Dei virtus levitatis errorem. Ambrose. 68 Exposition of the [part hi. contrary to his perfect nature ; nor can he recal past events, which is manifestly impossible ( n ). When, therefore, we say that the power of God is infinite, we mean that God is able to perform all things, which do not imply in themselves contradiction or impossibility. The wisdom of God is inferred from the ge¬ neral construction and government of the world, in which an attentive observer cannot but see evident marks of design, and in wdiich all things are admirably adapted to their respective ends and purposes : “ O Lord, how manifold are thy works ! in wisdom hast thou made them all ( o )” We cannot form an idea of wisdom superior to that which is thus displayed ; nor can we con¬ ceive how the wisdom, or any other attribute of the Deity, should be circumscribed by any boundary or limit ; and therefore we conclude with the royal Psalmist, that “ the wisdom of God is infinite (p)'' The infinite wisdom of God may also be con¬ sidered, as including the knowledge of all events, past, present, and future, and of the thoughts, motives, and intentions of all his creatures. This knowledge, C n ) Mova yup uv ra x«» ©so; ?Ayin jra ttohhi oar’ uv irHrpaypim. Agatho apud Aristot. (o) Ps. 104. v. 24. (p) Ps. 147. v.5. art i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 69 knowledge, without restriction or exception, seems necessarily to belong to the Creator of the Universe, from "whom every power, property, and relation is derived : “ Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world ( q ).” — He that planted the ear, shall he not hear ? he that formed the eye, shall he not see ? he that teacheth men knowledge, shall not he know (r) ?” — “ Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight ; but all things are naked, and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to dofsj.” — “ The Lord searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts (t).” — “ The Lord is a God of knowledge ( u).” — “ O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God (x ) ! ” By infinite goodness is meant a disposition to communicate every possible degree of happi¬ ness to all created beings, of which their nature is capable. That this attribute belongs to God is evident from his general government of the world, and particularly from his dealings with mankind. It has pleased God to place men in a state (q) Acts, c. 15. v. 18. (r) Ps. 94. v. 9 and 10. (s) Heb. c. 4. v. 13. (t) 1 Chr. c. 28. v. 9. (u) X Sam. c. 2. v. 3. (x) Rom. c. 11. v. 33. F 3 4 70 Exposition of the [part in. state of probation, and to endue them with free agencv, which is essential to responsibility; he has furnished them with the means of attaining every degree of happiness consistent with the character of free and accountable beings; he has given them laws as rules of their conduct ; he has proposed the most powerful and animating motives to obedience ; and he has promised his assistance to those who sincerely endeavour to perform his will. Since then every thing which God has made is good ; since he has provided for the preservation of all things, for their proper continuance and well being; since he has bestowed many noble endowments, and a great variety of comforts and blessings, upon his rational creatures in this world ; and since he has voluntarily, and upon easy conditions ; offered them everlasting happiness in a future life, to which no human merit could have the remotest claim, surely we may pronounce that the goodness of God is infinite, “ boundless as his universal works, and endless as the ages of eternity (y)” — “ The Lord is good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works ( z ).” — “ O give thanks unto the Lord, for he is good ; for his mercy endureth for ever ( a j” Upon (y) Clarke, vol. l. Sermon 14. (z) Ps. 145. v. 9. (a) Ps. 136. v. 1, art i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 7 1 Upon these grounds we believe that God is or INFINITE POWER, WISDOM, AND GOOD¬ NESS. As the world could not have existed from eternity, or have caused its own existence, it must have derived its being from God; and that God was the maker of all things both visible and invisible, is repeatedly asserted in Scripture : “ In six days the Lord made hea¬ ven and earth ( b — “ In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them isfcj.” — “ Thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created (d).” — “ By him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible ( e ).” — God, having created all things, continues to preserve them in a state suitable to the purposes for which they were designed, and by his superintending providence constantly governs the universe he created. Nothing can happen without the direction or permission of that Being who is the source of all power ; he appointed and supports the general course of nature ; and he interrupts it by his particular interposition, whenever it seems good to his infinite wisdom : “ God giveth to all, life, , and (b) Ex.c.2i.v. 17: (c) Ex.c.20. v. 11. (d) Rev. c, 4, v. 11. ( e ) Col.c 1 v. 16. v 4 72 Exposition of the [part hi. and breath, and all things (f He is before all things, and by him all things consist (g).” — “ How could any thing have endured, if it had not been thy will ; or been preserved, if not called by thee (h)}”- — “ Thou, even thou, art Lord alone ; thou hast made heaven, the hea¬ ven of heavens, with all their host ; the earth, and all things that are therein ; the seas, and all that is therein ; and thou preservest them all (i )” — “Where,” says bishop Pearson, “the continued conservation of the creatures is in equal latitude attributed unto God with their first production ; because there is an absolute necessity of preserving us from returning unto nothing by annihilation, as there was for first bestowing an existence on us by creation. God doth sustain, uphold, and constantly preserve all things in their being which they ha \e(k).” — Thus God is not only the maker, but also the PRESERVER OF ALL THINGS BOTH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE. We now come to the latter part of this article, in which the gospel doctrine of the T rinity, or of three persons (l) in the Divine Essence, is asserted. That (f) Acts, c. 17. v. 25. (g) Col. c. 1. v. 17. (h) Wisdom, c. 11. v, 23. (i) Neh.c. 9. v. 6. (k) Pearson, Art. 1 . (l) Tertullian, the oldest Latin father extant, uses the word Persona as applied to the Trinity. The word used by the Greek fathers is ime-ram and vfomvr. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 73 That nearly all the pagan nations of antiquity, in their various theological systems, acknow¬ ledged a kind of Trinity in the divine nature, has been fully evinced by those learned men who have made the heathen mythology the subject of their elaborate inquiries. The almost universal prevalence of this doctrine in the Gentile king¬ doms must be considered as a strong argument in favour of its truth. The doctrine itself bears such striking internal marks of a divine original, and is so very unlikely to have been the inven¬ tion of mere human reason, that there is no way of accounting for the general adoption of so singular a belief, but by supposing that it was revealed by God to the early patriarchs, and that it was transmitted by them to their posterity. In its progress indeed to remote countries, and to distant generations, this belief became depraved and corrupted in the highest degree; and he alone “ who brought life and immortality to light,” could restore it to its original simplicity and purity. The discovery of the existence of this doctrine in the early ages, among the nations whose records have been the best preserved, has been of great service to the cause of Christianity, and completely refutes the assertion of infidels and sceptics, that the sublime and mysterious doctrine of the Trinity owes its origin to the philosophers 74 Exposition of the [part lii. philosophers of Greece. “ If we extend,” says Mr. Maurice, “ our eye through the remote region of antiquity, we shall find this very doctrine, which the primitive Christians are said to have borrowed from the Platonic school, universally and immemorially flourishing in all those coun¬ tries, where history and tradition have united to fix those virtuous ancestors of the human race, who, for their distinguished attainments in piety, were admitted to a familiar intercourse with Jehovah and the Angels, the divine heralds of his commands.” The same learned author justly considers the two first verses of the Old Testament as con¬ taining very strong, if not decisive, evidence in support of the truth of this doctrine : “ Elohim, a noun substantive of the plural number, by which the Creator is expressed, appears as evi¬ dently to point towards a plurality of persons in the divine nature, as the verb in the singular, with which it is joined, does to the unity of that nature : In principio creavit Deus ; with strict attention to grammatical propriety, the passage should be rendered, In principio creavit Dii, but our belief in the unity of God forbids us thus to translate the word Elohim. Since, there¬ fore, Elohim is plural, and no plural can consist of less than two in number, and since creation can ART. t.] Thirty-nine Articles. 75 can alone be the work of Deity, we are to understand by this term so particularly used in this place, God the Father, and the eternal Logos, or Word of God ; that Logos, whom St. John, supplying us with an excellent comment upon thispassage, says, was in the beginning with God, and who also was God. As the Father and the Son are expressly pointed out in the first verse of this chapter, so is the third person in the blessed Trinity not less decisively revealed to us in the second : ‘ And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.’ Calasio renders this passage, Spiritus Dei motabat ; but as Dr. Patrick rightly observed, this is not the exact meaning of the text, for the original verb trans¬ lated moved should be rendered brooded upon the water, incubavit, as a hen broods over her eggs. Thus we see the Spirit exerted upon this occa¬ sion an active effectual energy, by that energy agitating the vast abyss, and infusing into it a powerful vital principle.” “ Elohim seems to be the general appellation by which the triune Godhead is collectively dis¬ tinguished in Scripture ; and in the concise history of the creation only, the expression Bara Elohim, the Gods created, is used above thirty times. The combining this plural noun with a verb in the singular would not appear so ® - remarkable, 76 Exposition of the [part in. remarkable, if Moses had uniformly adhered to that mode of expression ; for then it would be evident that he adopted the mode used by the Gentiles, in speaking of their false gods in the plural number ; but by joining with it a sin¬ gular verb or adjective, rectified a phrase that might appear to give a direct sanction to the error of polytheism. But in reality the reverse is the fact; for in Deuteronomy, c. 32. v. 15 and 1 7. and other places, he uses the singular number of this very noun to express the Deity, though not employed in the august work of creation; Dereliquit Eloah; sacrificaverunt dasmoniis, non Eloah. But farther, Moses himself uses this very word Elohim with verbs and adjectives in the plural. Of this usage Dr. Allix enumerates two among many other glaring instances that might be brought from the Pentateuch, the former in Genesis, c. 20. v. 13. Quando errare fecerunt me Deus ; the latter in Genesis, c. 35. v. 7. Quia ibi revelati sunt ad eum Deus ; and other inspired writers use it in the same manner in various parts of the Old Testament (m) . It must therefore, to every reader of reflection, appear exceedingly singular, that when Moses was endeavouring to establish a theological system, of which (m) Job, c.35. v. 10. Jos: c. 24. v. 19. Ps. 109. v. 1. Eccl. c. 12. v. 3. 2 Sam. c. 7. v. 23. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 77 which the unity of the Godhead was the leading principle, and in which it differed from all other systems, he should make use of terms directly implicative of a plurality in it ; yet so deeply was the awful truth under consideration im¬ pressed upon the mind of the Hebrew legislator, that this is constantly done by him ; and indeed, as Allix has observed, there is scarcely any me¬ thod of speaking from which a plurality in Deity may be inferred, that is not used either by him¬ self in the Pentateuch, or by the other inspired writers in various parts of the Old Testament. A plural is joined with a verb singular, as in the passage cited before from Genesis, c. ]. v. 1. A plural is joined with a verb plural, as in Genesis, c. 35* v. 7- ‘ And Jacob called the name of the place El-beth-el, because the Gods there ap¬ peared to him.’ A plural is joined with an ad¬ jective plural, Josh. c. 35. v. 19. ‘You cannot serve the Lord for he is the holy Gods' To these passages, if we add that remarkable one from Ecclesiastes, ‘ Remember thy Creators in the days of thy youth,’ and the predominant use of the words, Jehovah Elohim, or, the ‘ Lord thy Gods which occur a hundred times in the law (the word Jehovah implying the unity of the essence, and Elohim a plurality in that unity) we must allow that nothing can be 78 Exposition of the [part iii. be more plainly marked than this doctrine in the antient Scriptures.” “ Though the august name of Jehovah in a more peculiar manner belongs to God the Fa¬ ther, yet is that name, in various parts of Scrip¬ ture, applied to each person in the Holy Trinity. The Hebrews considered that name in such a sacred light, that they never pronounced it, and used the word Adonai instead of it. It was indeed a name that ranked first among their pro- foundest Cabala ; a mystery, sublime, ineffable, incommunicable. It was called Tetragrammaton, or the name of four letters, and these letters are Jod, He, Vau, He, the proper pronunciation of which, from long disuse, is said to be no longer known to the Jews themselves. This awful name was first revealed by God to Moses from the centre of the burning bush ; and Josephus, who, as well as Scripture, relates this circum¬ stance, evinces his veneration for it, by calling it the name which his religion did not permit him to mention ( n ). From this word the pagan title of Iao and Jove is, with the greatest probability, supposed to have been originally formed ; and in the Golden Verses of Pythagoras, there is an oath still extant to this purpose, ‘ by him who has the four letters/ As the name Jehovah, how¬ ever, ( n ) Ant. Jud. lib. 2, cap. 5. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 79 ever, in some instances applied to the Son and the Holy Spirit, was the proper name of God the Father, so is Logos in as peculiar a manner the appropriated name of God the Son. The Chaldee Paraphrasts translate the original He¬ brew text by Mimra da Jehovah, literally, the Word of Jehovah, a term totally different, as bishop Kidder has incontestably proved, in its signification, and in its general application among the Jews, from the Hebrew Dabar, which simply means a discourse or decree, and is properly ren¬ dered by Pithgam ('oj. In the Septuagint trans¬ lation of the Bible, a work supposed by the Jews to have been undertaken by men immediately inspired from above, the former term is uni¬ versally rendered A oyos, and it is so rendered and so understood by Philo and all the more antient Rabbins. The name of the third person in the ever-blessed Trinity has descended unaltered from the days of Moses to our own time ; for, as well in the sacred writings as by the Targumists, and by the modern doctors of the Jewish church, he is styled Ruach Hakhodesh, the Holy Spirit. He is sometimes, however, in the Rabbinical books, denominated by Shechinah, or Glory of Jehovah ; in some places he is called Sephirah, or (0) Demonstration of the Messiah, part 3d, pp. 108, 109. 80 Exposition of the [paut. hi. or Wisdom ; and in others the Binah, or Under¬ standing (p ). From the enumeration of these circumstances, it must be sufficiently evident to the mind which unites piety and reflection, that so far from being silent upon the subject, the antient Scriptures commence with an avowal of this doctrine, and that, in fact, the creation was the result of the joint operations of the Trinity.” “ If the argument above offered should still appear inconclusive, the 26th verse of this chapter (Gen. 1 .) contains so pointed an attestation to the truth of it, that in my opinion, when duly consi¬ dered, it must stagger the most hardened sceptic ; for in that text not only the plurality is unequi¬ vocally expressed, but the act which I have before observed is the peculiar prerogative of Deity, is mentioned together with that plurality, the one circumstance illustrating the other, and both being highly elucidatory of this doctrine; ‘ And God (Elohim) said, Let us (q) make man in ( p ) Dr. Affix’s Judgment, p. 168. (q) The antient Christians looked upon this as a plain intimation of a plurality of persons in the God¬ head : Epiphanius says, “ This is the language of God to his Word and only begotten, as all the faithful be¬ lieve.” Haeres. 23. n. 2, and vide Haeres. 44. n. 4, and Haer. 46. n. 3, where he says, “ Adam was it nar§o{ xai itu xa» ayiu formed by the hand of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Vide Patrick in loc. art. i.] Thirty -nine Articles. 81 in our image, after our likeness.’ Why the Deity should speak of himself in the plural num¬ ber, unless that Deity consisted of more than one person, it is difficult to conceive ; for the answer given by the modern Jews, that this is only a figurative mode of expression, implying the high dignity of the speaker ; and that it is usual for earthly sovereigns to use this language byway of distinction, is futile, for two reasons. In the first place, it is highly degrading to the Supreme Majesty to suppose he would take his model of speaking and thinking from man, though it is highly consistent with the vanity of man, to arrogate to himself (as doubtless was the case in the licentiousness of succeeding ages) the style and imagined conceptions of Deity ; and it will be remembered, that these solemn words were spoken before the creation of that being, whose false notions of greatness and sublimity the Al¬ mighty is thus impiously supposed to adopt. In truth, there does not seem to be any real dignity in an expression, which, when used by a human sovereign in relation to himself, approaches very near to absurdity. The genuine fact, however, appears to be this. When the tyrants of the East first began to assume divine honours, they assumed likewise the majestic language, appro¬ priated to, and highly becoming, the Deity, but vol. ii. o totally G 82 Exposition of the [part iii. totally inapplicable to man. The error was propa¬ gated from age to age through a long succession of despots, and at length Judaic apostacy arrived at such a pitch of profane absurdity, as to affirm that very phraseology to be borrowed from man (r), which was the original and peculiar language of the Divinity. It was, indeed, re¬ markably pertinent when applied to Deity, for, in a succeeding chapter, we have more decisive au¬ thority for what is thus asserted, where the Lord God himself says, ‘ Behold the man is become as one of us ; a very singular expression, which some Jewish commentators, with equal effrontery, contend was spoken by the Deity to the council of angels, that, according to their assertions, at¬ tended him at the creation. From the name of the Lord God being used in so emphatical a manner, it evidently appears to be addressed to those sacred persons to whom it was before said, £ Let us make man for would indeed the omnipotent Jehovah, presiding in a less dignified council, use words that have such an evident tendency (r) It maybe observed, that the language of Pharaoh king of Egypt, as recorded by Moses in the book of Genesis, is always in the singular number, “ I am Pharaoh and, “ See, I have set thee over the land of Lgypt-” Gen. c. 41. v. 41 and 44; and Ezra records, that the king of Persia wrote in the same style long afterwards, “ I Parius make a decree.” Ezra, c, 6. v. 8. . *\ art. I.] Thirty-nine Articles. « 83 endency to place the Deity on a level with created beings ?” Mr. Maurice also proves that the word Elohim was understood exactly in the above sense by Moses himself and the ancient Hebrews, how¬ ever their modern descendants may deny the allusion ; that their own paraphrasts apply the term Logos, in the very same manner we do, to the second, as well as that of Holy Spirit to the third, person in the blessed Trinity ; and that, in fact, they had the fullest belief in that Tri¬ nity expressed in the most emphatic lan¬ guage, and explained by the most significant symbols. It is impossible, upon the present occasion, to follow this ingenious and eloquent writer through these profound disquisitions ; but I desire to take this opportunity, as I shall not, perhaps, have occasion to mention him again in this (s) Galatine has produced two expositions of the following passage in Isaiah, c. 6. v. 3. “ And one cried unto another, and said. Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of Hosts,” which are remarkable proofs of the truths of this assertion ; the one is taken from the illustrious Rabbi Simeon, who thus comments upon the word Holy being repeated three times, “ Holy, this is the Father; Holy, this is the Son; Holy, this is the Holy Spirit;” the other is from the Chaldee para¬ phrase of Jonathan the son of Uzziel, “ Holy, Father; Holy, Son ; Holy, Holy Ghost.” G 2 84 Exposition of the [part hi. this work, of recommending, in the most earnest manner, both his Dissertations and his History to the attention of all those who are desirous of seeing strong additional light thrown upon some of the most important doctrines of the Holy Scriptures. Every friend to revealed religion will consider himself as indebted to the laborious researches of Mr. Maurice, while every admirer of an animated and elegant style will read his works with peculiar satisfaction. The first passage I shall adduce from the New Testament in proof of this important doctrine of the Trinity, is, the charge and commission which our Saviour gave to his apostles, to “ go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ( t )” The Gospel is every where in Scrip¬ ture represented as a Covenant or conditional offer of eternal salvation from God to man, and Baptism was the appointed ordinance by which men were to be admitted into that Covenant, by which that offer was made and accepted. This Covenant being to be made with God himself, the ordinance must of course be performed in his name ; but Christ directed that it should be performed in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; and therefore we conclude (t) Matt. c. 28. v. 19. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 85 conclude that God is the same as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Since Baptism is to be performed in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, they must be all three persons ; and since no superiority or dif¬ ference whatever is mentioned in this solemn form of Baptism, we conclude that these three persons are all of one substance, power, and eter¬ nity (u). Are we to be baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and is it possible that the Father should be self- existent, eternal, the Lord God Omnipotent ; and that the Son, in whose name we are equally baptized, should be a mere man, born of a woman, and subject to all the frailties and imperfections of human nature ? or, is it possible that the Holy Ghost, in whose name also we are equally bap¬ tized, should be a bare energy or operation, a quality or power, without even personal existence ? Our feelings, as well as our reason, revolt from the idea of such disparity. This argument will derive great strength from the practice of the early ages, and from the ob¬ servations (u ) ’E» ovx t (pvaw 5 tno$ y to itxyxyw vrnvpx, oimui/ o,vvyi(>^i/.yio-ocv tw xe^TixoTt Qtti). Theod. 5* contr. User. Tloict yocg xowuvkx tu xTicr/Acm Trgo? xTri^y ; cha r» To wi7roiy(Ai*ov ffWOC^pHTOU T U TTQiriaaVTl l»J T»J1> TUV 7TX>TUV TthHUffW Athan. Or. 3. contr. Ar. G 3 86 Exposition of the [part iii. servations which we meet with in several of the antient fathers relative to it. We learn from Ambrose, that persons at the time of their Bap¬ tism, declared their belief in the three persons of the Holy Trinity, and that they were dipped in the water three times : in his Treatise upon the Sacraments he says, “ Thou wast asked at thy Baptism, Dost thou believe in God the Father Almighty ? and thou didstreply, I believe, and thou wast dipped ; a second time thou wast asked, Dost thou believe in Jesus Christ the Lord ? thou didst answer again, I believe, and thou wast dipped ; a third time the question was repeated, Dost thou believe in the Holy Ghost? and the answer was, I believe, then thou wast dipped a third time ( x ).” It is to be noticed, that the belief, here expressed separately in the three persons of the Trinity, is precisely the same in all. Tertullian, Basil, and Jerome, all mention this practice of trine immersion, as being derived from apostolical tradition ; and Jerome expressly says, “ We are thrice dipped in the water, that the mystery of the Trinity may appear to be but one. We are not baptized in the names of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but in one name , which is God’s ; and therefore, though we be thrice put under water to repre¬ sent ( x) De Sac. lib. 2. cap. 7. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 8? sent the mystery of the Trinity, yet it is re¬ puted but one Baptism (y)T — “ Who,” says Didymus, “ will not hence conclude the equa¬ lity of the sacred Trinity, seeing there is but one Faith in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as Baptism is ministered in the name of all three (z)T Cyprian, after reciting the form of Baptism prescribed by our Saviour, says, “ He intimates a Trinity, by the sacrament of which the nations should be baptized and again, “ Christ himself orders the nations to be bap¬ tized in the full and united Trinity ( a ).” — “ If,” says Athanasius, “ the Holy Ghost be not of the substance of the Father and the Son, why then did the Son of God join him together with them in the symbol of sanctification, when he said to his disciples, Go, teach all nations, bap¬ tizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (b)?’ The heretics, who denied the divinity of Christ, or of the Holy Ghost, introduced alterations into the form of Baptism to suit their own par¬ ticular tenets ; these alterations are reprobated by many of the orthodox fathers, and the council of (y) Ilieron. cont. Luc. cap. 4. lib. 2. inEphes. 14. (z) De Sp. Sanct. lib. 2. inter. Op. Hier. (a) Cyp. ad Jub. ( b) Athanas, JDisp. cont. Ar. G 4 88 Exposition of the [part iii- of Nice decreed, “ If they do not answer to this doctrine of the Trinity, let them not be baptized.” Thus the mysterious union of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, as one God, was, in the opinion of the purest ages of the Christian church, clearly expressed in this form of Bap¬ tism. By it the primitive Christians understood the Father’s gracious acceptance of the atone¬ ment offered by the Messiah ; the peculiar pro¬ tection of the Son, our great high priest and in¬ tercessor ; and the readiness of the Holy Ghost to sanctify, to assist, and to comfort all the obedient followers of Christ, confirmed by the visible gift of tongues, of prophecy, and divers other gifts to the first disciples. And as their great Master's instructions evidently distinguished these persons from each other, without any difference in their authority or power, all standing forth as equally dispensing the benefits of Christianity, as equally the objects of the faith required in converts upon admission into the church, they clearly under¬ stood that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, were likewise equally the objects of their grateful worship : this fully appears from their prayers, doxologies, hymns, and creeds, which are still extant. The second passage to be produced in support of art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 89 of the doctrine now under consideration, is, the doxology at the conclusion of St. Paul’s Second Epistle to the Corinthians : “ The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fel¬ lowship of the Holy Ghost, be with you.” The manner in which Christ and the Holy Ghost are here mentioned, implies that they are persons, for none but persons can confer grace or fellowship; and these three great blessings of grace, love, and fellowship, being respectively prayed for by the inspired apostle from Jesus Christ, God the Father and the Holy Ghost, without any inti¬ mation of disparity, we conclude that these three persons are equal and divine. This solemn bene¬ diction may therefore be considered as another proof of the Trinity, since it acknowledges the divinity of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Ghost. The third and last passage which I shall quote upon this subject, is the following salutation or benediction in the beginning of the Revelation of St. John : “ Grace and peace from Him which is, and which was, and which is to come ; and from the Seven Spirits which are before his throne, and from Jesus Christ.” Here the Fa¬ ther is described by a periphrasis taken from his attribute of eternity, and the seven spirits is a mystical expression for the Holy Ghost, used upon this occasion either because the salutation is po Exposition of the [part ill. is addressed to seven churches, every one of which had partaken of the spirit, or because seven was a sacred number among the Jews, denoting both variety and perfection, and in this case alluding to the various gifts, administrations, and opera¬ tions of the Holy Ghost. Since grace and peace are prayed for from these three persons jointly and without discrimination, w7e infer an equality in their power to dispense those blessings; and we further conclude that these three persons together constitute the Supreme Being, who is alone the object of prayer, and is alone the giver of every good and of every perfect gift. It might be right to remark that the seven spirits cannot mean angels, since prayers are never in Scripture addressed to angels, nor are blessings ever pronounced in their name ( c ). It is unnecessary to quote any of the numerous passages in which the Father is singly called God, (c) I purposely omit the contested passage in the First Epistle of St. John, “ There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.” In any case it would be improper to produce a doubtful text in sup¬ port of so important a doctrine as that of the Trinity ; but I must own, that after an attentive consideration of the controversy relative to that passage, I am con¬ vinced that it is spurious. art. i,] Thirty-nine Articles. 91 God, as some of them must be recollected by every one, and the divinity of the Father is not called in question by any sect of Christians; and those passages which prove the divinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost separately, will be more properly considered under the second and fifth articles. In the mean time we may observe, that if it shall appear, as I trust it will, from Scripture, that Christ is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, it will follow, since we are as¬ sured that there is but one God, that the three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost by a mysterious union, constitute the one God, or as this article expresses it, that There is a Trinity in Unity; and in the unity of this Godhead there be three Persons of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The word Trinity does not occur in Scrip¬ ture, nor do we find it in any of the early con¬ fessions of faith ; but this is no argument against the doctrine itself, since we learn from the fathers of the first three centuries, that the di¬ vinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost was, from the days of the apostles, acknowledged by the Catholic church, and that those who main¬ tained a contrary opinion were considered as heretics ; 92 Exposition of the [part hi. heretics ( cl); and as every oneknows that neither the divinity of the Father, nor the unity of the Godhead, was ever called in question at any period, it follows that the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity has been in substance, in all its consti¬ tuent parts, always known among Christians. In the fourth century it became the subject of eager and general controversy; and it was not till then that this doctrine was particularly discussed. While there was no denial or dispute, proof and defence were unnecessary: “ Nunquid enim perfecte de Trinitate tractatum est, antequam oblatrarent Ariani (e) ?” But this doctrine is positively mentioned as being admitted among catholic Christians, by writers who lived long before that age of controversy. Justin Mar¬ tyr, in refuting the charge of Atheism urged against Christians, because they did not be¬ lieve in the gods of the heathen, expressly says, “ We worship and adore the Father, and the Son, who came from him and taught us these things, and the prophetic Spirit (f) and soon after, in the same Apology, he under¬ takes (d) Vide Letters between Dr. Horsley and Dr. Priestley, Dr. Knowles’s Primitive Christianity, and Wilson’s Illustration of the Method of Explaining the New Testament by the early opinions of Jews and Christians concerning Christ, (e) Augustine, (f) Just. Mart. ed. Par. 1636, p. 56. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 93 takes to show the reasonableness of the honour paid by Christians to the Father in the first place, to the Son in the second, and to the Holy Ghost in the third, and says, that their as¬ signing the second place to a crucified man, was, by unbelievers, denominated madness, because they were ignorant of the mystery, which he then proceeds to explain (g). Athenagoras, in Reply¬ ing to the same charge of Atheism urged against Christians, because they refused to worship the false gods of the heathen, says, “ Who would not wonder, when he knows that we, who call upon God the Father, and God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, showing their power in the unity, and their distinction in order, should be called Atheists (h)V’ Clement of Alexandria, not only mentions three divine persons, but invokes them as one only God. Praxeas, Sabellius (i), and other (g) Page 60. (h) Athenag. ad Colum. Just. Mart. p. 11. edit. Par. 1615. (i) Praxeas and Sabellius taught an unity of persons as well as of substance, supposing that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, were only different terms for the same person, which led to the heresy of the Patri- passians, who affirmed, that the Father was incarnate, and suffered upon the cross. It is curious to observe the contrast which the antient Ebionites and the modern Socinians form to these opinions. Praxeas lived in the second, and Sabellius in the third century. 94 Exposition of the [part iit. other Unitarians, accused the orthodox Christians of tritheism, which is of itself a clear proof that the orthodox worshipped the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ; and though in reality they considered these three persons as constituting the one true God, it is obvious that their enemies might easily represent that worship as an acknowledgment of three Gods. Tertullian, in writing against Praxeas, maintains, that “ A Trinity rationally conceived, is consistent with truth; and that unity irrationally conceived, forms heresy/’ He had before said, in speaking of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, that “ there are three of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, because there is one God and he afterwards adds, “ The connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Com¬ forter, makes three united together, the one with the other; which three are one thing , not one person ; as it is said, I and the Father are one thing, with regard to the unity of substance, not to the singularity of number and he also ex¬ pressly says, “ The Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God ;” and again, “ The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, believed to be three, constitute one God.” And in another part of his works he says, “ There is a Trinity of one Divinity, the Father, and the Son, and art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 95 and the Holy Ghost.” And Tertullian not only maintains these doctrines, but asserts that they were prior to any heresy, and had indeed been the faith of Christians from the first promulga¬ tion of the Gospel (k). To these writers of the second century we may add Origen and Cyprian in the third; the former of whom mentions Baptism (alluding to its appointed form) as the “ source (k ) These passages, from this most antient of the Latin fathers, appear to me so important, that I am tempted to transcribe the words of the original: Duos ettres (deos) jam jactitant a nobis praedicari; se vero unius Dei cultores praesumunt: quasi non et Unitas, irrationaliter collecta, hgeresim faciat; et Trinitas, rationaliter expensa, veritatem constituat. Adv. Prax. cap. 2. — Tres unius substantiae, et unius status et unius potentiae, quia unus Deus. cap. 2. — Connexus Patris in Filio, et Filii in Paracleto, tres afficit cohae- rentes, alterum ex altero: qui tres unum sunt, non unus ; quomodo dictum est. Ego et Pater unum sumus, ad substantiae unitatem, non ad numeri singularitatem, cap. 16. — Pater est Deus omnipotens, Filius est suo jure Deus omnipotens. cap. 12. — Spiritus Deus est. cap. 16. — Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus, tres crediti, unum Deum sistunt. cap. 21. — Trinitas est unius Divinitatis, Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus. De Pud. cap. 20. — Hanc regulam ab initio Evangelii decucurrisse, etiam ante priores quosque haereticos, nedum ante Praxean hesternum, probabit tam ipsa posteritas omnium haereticorum, quam ipsa novellitas Praxese hesterni. Adv. Prax. g6 Exposition of the [part hi. (c source and fountain of graces to him who de¬ dicates himself to the divinity of the adorable Trinity (7J.” And the latter, after reciting the same form of Baptism, says that “ by it Christ delivered the doctrine of the Trinity, unto which mystery or sacrament the nations were to be baptized.” It would be easy to multiply quotations upon this subject ; but these are amply sufficient to show the opinions of the early fathers, and to refute the assertion that the doctrine of the Trinity was an invention of the fourth century. To these positive testimonies I will subjoin a negative argument: those who acknowledged the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost, are never' called heretics by any writer of the first three centuries ; and this circumstance is surely a strong proof that .the doctrine of the Trinity was the doctrine of the primitive church ; more especially, since the names of those, who first denied the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost, are transmitted to us as of persons who dissented from the common faith of Christians. But while we contend that the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity is founded in Scripture, and supported (l) Orig. Tom. 6, in Rom. art. i.] Thirty-nine Articles. 97 supported by the authority of the early Chris¬ tians, we must acknowledge that it is not given to man to understand in what manner the three persons are united, or how, separately and jointly, they are God. It would, perhaps, have been well, if divines, in treating this awful and mysterious subject, had confined themselves to the expressions of Scripture ; for the moment we begin to explain it beyond the written Word of God, we plunge ourselves into inextricable diffi¬ culties. And how can it be otherwise ? Is it to be expected that our finite understandings should be competent to the full comprehension of the nature and properties of an infinite ' Being ? “ Can we find out the Almighty to perfec¬ tion ( m )” or penetrate into the essence of the Most High ? — “ God is a Spirit ( n ),” and our gross conceptions are but ill adapted to the con¬ templation of a pure and spiritual Being. We know not the essence of our own mind, nor the precise distinction of its several faculties ; and why then should we hope to comprehend the personal characters which exist in the Godhead? If I tell you earthly things, and you understand them not, how shall ye understand if I tell you heavenly things ? When we attempt to investigate the nature of the Deity, whose existence iscom- (m) Job, c. li, v. 7, VOL. 11. mensurate ( n ) John, c. 4. v. 24. H 9 8 Exposition of the [part hi. mensurate with eternity, by whose power the universe was created, and by whose wisdom it is governed; whose presence fills all space, and whose knowledge extends to the thoughts of every man in every age, and to the events of all places, past, present, and to come, the mind is quickly lost in the vastness of these ideas, and unable to find any sure guide to direct its progress ; it becomes, at every step, more bewildered and entangled in the endless mazes of metaphysical abstraction. — “ God is a God that hideth him¬ self (o)” — “ We cannot by searching find out God (p).’' — “ Behold, God is great, and we know him not (qj”- — “ Such knowledge is too wonderful and excellent for us : it is high ; we cannot attain unto it (r )” ( o ) Job, c.23. v. 9. (p) Job, c. 11. v. 7. (q) Job, c. 36. v. 26. (r) Psalm 1 39. v. 6, art. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles 99 ARTICLE THE SECOND. Of the Word, or Son of God, which was made very Man. THE SON WHICH IS THE WORD OF THE FATHER, BEGOTTEN FROM EVERLASTING OF THE FATHER, THE VERY AND ETERNAL GOD, OF ONE SUBSTANCE WITH THE FATHER, TOOK MAN’S NATURE IN THE WOMB OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN OF HER SUBSTANCE; SO THAT TWO WHOLE AND PERFECT NATURES, THAT IS TO SAY, THE GODHEAD AND MAN¬ HOOD, WERE JOINED TOGETHER IN ONE PERSON, NEVER TO BE DIVIDED, WHEREOF IS ONE CHRIST, VERY GOD AND VERY MAN ; WHO TRULY SUFFERED, WAS CRUCIFIED, DEAD AND BURIED, TO RECONCILE HIS FATHER TO US, AND TO BE A SACRIFICE, NOT ONLY FOR ORIGINAL GUILT, BUT ALSO FOR ACTUAL SINS OF MEN. The second person in the Holy Trinity is dis¬ tinguished by the name of the Son, that is, “ the Son of God.” It is sometimes said that the phrase “ Son of God,” admits of various sig¬ nifications, and is used metaphorically in Scrip¬ ture ; but this observation cannot affect the h 2 argument ioo Exposition of the [part in. argument which may be derived from it con¬ cerning our Saviour, as it cannot be denied that the Jews, in his time, affixed to this expression a determinate and particular meaning applicable only to the Divine nature, and in this sense we shall find it was claimed by Christ, and under¬ stood to be so both by his disciples and by his enemies : “ Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he had not only broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his (proper) Father, making himself equal with God ( a Upon our Lord’s declaring to the Jews, “ I and my Father are one,” they took up stones to stone him, saying, “ For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God and our Lord’s answer proves this to be only an equiva¬ lent expression with the assertion that he was the Son of God, “ say ye, thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the. Son of God (7^?” But the con¬ demnation of our Lord, immediately upon his answer to the direct question of the high priest, may alone be considered as conclusive : “ And the high priest said to J esus, I adjure thee by the living God (the judicial form of administering an (a) Johu, C. 5* V. 1 8: Oti a pom t'hvi TO auPfiuTo*, UXba wvrriga tAcyt m Qeov. (b) John, c: 10: v. 30. 33. 36. 101 art. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. an oath according to the Jewish law) that thou tell me whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said : nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy, what further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy, what think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death ( c ).” St. Luke’s account of this examination places the argument in a still stronger point of view : he mentions two distinct questions as having been put to Jesus in the council, first, “ Art thou the Christ?” and upon our Saviour’s answering, “ If I tell you, ye will not believe,” and so¬ lemnly declaring “ Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God they further ask, secondly, “ Art thou then the Son of God?” And when he said unto them, “ Ye say that I am f d )” they said, “ What need we any further witness ? for we ourselves (c) Matt. c. 26. v. 63 — 66. (d) This, as well as the expression “ thou hast said,” in the parallel passage just now quoted from St. Matthew, was an eastern mode of answering in the affirmative. Vide Mark, c. 14. v. 62. H 3 102 Exposition of the [part hi* ourselves have heard of his own mouth (e).n And when Pilate would have released Jesus, de¬ claring, “ he found no fault in him,” the Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God (f)r Thus it appears that our Lord suffered death, according to the Jewish law, as a blasphemer , because avowing himself to be the Son of God , he was clearly understood to repre¬ sent himself as equal with God ( g ). This cir¬ cumstance must, I think, be allowed as alone sufficient to prove that the Jews understood the title of “ Son of God,” in the sense of absolute divinity ; but it does not prove that they ex¬ pected the Messiah to be the Son of God. This was the opinion of but those few, who like Simeon and Anna, waited for the promises of God, and adhered to the true and original sense of the Scriptures, unadulterated by the comments and glosses of the scribes, which had produced the general expectation of a tem¬ poral kingdom under a temporal prince ; and we (e) Luke, c. 22. v. 67. 69 — 71. (f) John, c. 19. v. 6 and 7. (g) It should be observed, that the Jews never thought of punishing with death those impostors who pretended to be the Christ. This claim did not include the crime of blasphemy, according to their idea of the Messiah, any more than the pretensions to be a prophet did. ART. ii,] Thirty-nine Articles . 103 we find our Lord and his Apostles constantly appealing to the Scriptures, as testifying to the truth of their assertions respecting his office and dignity, and combating the common opinion con¬ cerning the Christ on many occasions : “ How say the scribes, that Christ is the Son of David ? for David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool; David therefore himself calleth him Lord ; and whence is he then his son (h )V’ — And when the Jews asked him, “ Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead ; and the prophets, which are dead ; whom makest thou thyself? He . answered, Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him ( i ),” for they clearly understood this expression as agreeing with the sense in which he had called God his Father. And we find the converts to the religion of Christ expressly declaring their faith in terms, which not only directly acknowledged their belief, that Jesus “ was the Christ,” but that he was also “ the Son of God.” Nathaniel, that true Israelite, confessed Jesus to be the Messiah in these words : “ Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou (h) Mark, c. 12. v. 35, 36 and 37. (i) John, c. 8, v. 53. 58 and 59. H 4 104 Exposition of the [part hi. thou art the King of Israel (k).” — And Martha said, “ I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God (l)T — “ Then they who were in the ship,” who had seen him walk upon the water and calm the storm, “ came and wor¬ shipped him, saying, of a truth thou art the Son of God (m — ■“ Jesus asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am ? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist; some, Elias, and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saithunto them, But whom say ye that lam? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona ; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church ( n )” — John the Baptist “ bare record that this is the Son of God,” having received this knowledge by a special revelation ( o ). — And God himself bore witness to the truth of Christ’s pretensions by (k) John, c. l. v. 49. (l) John, c. 11. v. 27. (m) Matt. c. 14. v. 33. (n) Matt. c. 16. v. 13 — 18. ( 0) John, c. 1, v. 33 and 34. art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 105 by a voice from heaven, at the time of his baptism in the river, and when he was trans¬ figured upon the mount in the presence of three of his apostles, saying, “ This is my beloved Son : hear him (p ).” To these quotations from the Gospels I shall add one from the Acts : When Philip found the Ethiopian eunuch study¬ ing the prophecies of Isaiah, anxious but unable to understand them, “ he began at the same Scripture, (chap. 53d) and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water ; and the eunuch said, See, here is water, what doth hinder me to be baptized ? and Philip said, If thou be- lievest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the S071 of God(q He does not merely pro¬ fess his faith in Jesus (of whom he probably had never before heard) as a teacher sent from God, or as the Christ expected by the Jews ; but he declares his belief that Jesus Christ, the circum¬ stances of whose life and resurrection Philip had related, is the Soji of God, the Messiah of whom the prophets wrote, and whom Isaiah in parti¬ cular had described in terms appropriate to God alone. And when we reflect further, that this eunuch (p) Matt. c. 3. v. 17. Luke, c. 9. v. 35. ( qJ Acts, c. 8. v. 35, 8tc. io6 Exposition of the [part hi. eunuch was a Jewish proselyte, “ going to wor¬ ship at Jerusalem,” we cannot but conclude that this confession of faith contained an ac¬ knowledgment of the divinity of Christ, since it has been proved that the Jews actually con¬ demned our Lord to death for assuming the title of Son of Gocl , which they imagined to be blas¬ phemy. Now, if it be considered that many of the first converts to the Gospel were Jews, who, when their minds were opened, by either natural or supernatural means, to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, would understand from the ancient Scriptures that the Messiah was to be the Son of God, the belief of the early Christians in the divinity of Christ can hardly be questioned. It resulted immediately from the agreement of his claims (claims for which he was crucified by their blinded nation) and of the circumstances of his life, with the prophecies concerning him ; and accordingly we find little dispute in the first cen¬ tury concerning the divinity of Christ ; it was his humanity that was chiefly denied (r). It (r) After the destruction of Jerusalem we hear of some Jewish Christians, who retaining their depend- ance upon the efficacy of the law for justification, retained also their ancient prejudices respecting the person of the Messiah, but their number was too in¬ considerable to attract much attention till the second century. art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 107 It may further be observed, that the relation of Father and Son, the names by which the first and second persons in the Holy Trinity are dis¬ tinguished, is not only consistent with, but seems to imply, sameness of nature, “ ut praescripsit ipsa century. Alike contemned by Jews and Christians, they formed themselves into a sect, and were called Ebionites. Ebion signifies a beggar, or poor, and whether that name was given them for trusting “ to the beggarly elements of the law,” or from a person of that name, is not certainly known. These men, “ who called themselves Christians,” says Origen, “ denied the divinity of Christ, and the doctrine of the atonement.” According to Epiphanius they re¬ jected the authority of all Scripture, except the Pen¬ tateuch, and received only a spurious Hebrew Gospel, altered from St. Matthew’s to suit their opinions. In the first century the Gnostic heresies were the most prevalent ; but both those who maintained the simple divinity, and those who maintained the simple hu¬ manity of Christ, denied the doctrine of the atone¬ ment, which was evidently considered by the Apostles as the fundamental principle of the Christian religion. St. John, therefore, in many passages of his writings, lays great stress upon the humanity of Christ, from zeal to prove the reality of his sufferings and the cer¬ tainty of the atonement ; but at the same time we find that he cautiously guards against the consequences to which these passages might have led, by asserting the divinity of Christ in more express terms than are to be found in any of the preceding Gospels. io8 Exposition of the [part hi. ipsa natura hominem credendum esse qui ex homine fit, ita eadem natura praescribit et Deum credendum esse, qui ex Deo fit (s)” The angel addressed the Virgin Mary in these words : “ The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee : therefore also, that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God(t)." — “ And the reason,” says bishop Pearson, “ is clear, because that the Holy Ghost is God ; for, were he any creature, and not God himself, by whom our Saviour was thus born of a virgin, he must have been the son of a creature, not of God (u).” Christ is also emphatically called “ the Son” only, in many passages of Scripture : since the creation of the world is in Scripture repeatedly attributed to Christ (f)9 and consequently the Word being made flesh was Jesus Christ. It is also a further proof C b ) Ep ot^XV *s^lv *Te£0V ‘S'*1' i T0 **•’** ftrihuTkxor, x«» «7 reigv( that* Chrys. Hom. 2. in Joan. (c) John, c. 1 0. v. 30. (d) The creation is also attributed to the Word of God in the following passage, 2 Pet. c. 3. v. 5. (e) St. John also calls Christ the Word of God, Rev. c. 19. v. 13. (f) Heb. c. 1. v. 2, and 10. 1 Cor. 8, v. 6. Col. c. i. v. 16. Eph. c. 3. v. 9. AUT. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. m proof of the divinity of Christ, since none but God can create : “ He that built all things is G od (g ).” — W e have before seen thatthe creation of the world is attributed to God the Father, which is an additional proof of an incomprehen¬ sible identity or unity of substance between the Father and the Son. What has been already stated concerning the sense in which we are to understand the title of the Son of God, and the assertion of St. John in the beginning of his Gospel, concerning the Word, may be considered as a sufficient illustra¬ tion and proof of the former part of this article ; “ The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father.” But as the divinity of our Saviour is the main point upon which this article rests, and as it is the prin¬ cipal cause of separation to many who dissent from our established religion, it may be right to adduce some other passages of Scripture in sup¬ port of this doctrine, and also to state some testimonies of the early opinions of Christians upon this subject. St. Paul exhorts the Philippians to the prac« tice of humility from the example of Christ Jesus, (gj Heb, c. 3. v. 5. 1 1 2 Exposition of the [part hi. Jesus, il who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men ; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross ; wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth ; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (h ■).”■ — In this text the divinity of Christ, both before his incarnation and after his ascension, is clearly pointed out : “ Being in the form of God, ’’signifies being really God, just as “ took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men,” signifies that he was really a man in a low and mean con¬ dition : and the following words, “ thought it not robbery to be equal with God,” expressly declare Christ’s equality with God. Indeed this passage, taken in this its obvious sense, so de¬ cisively proves the divinity of Christ, that those who deny that doctrine give a different meaning to one part of it, and assert that another part art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles* 113 is wrongly translated ; they say, that “ being in the form of God,” refers to his bearing the resemblance of God, by his performance of miracles and delivery of a law in the name of God ; but this description would apply to Moses, who is never said to have been “ in the form of God.” And they further say, that the words, “ he thought it not robbery to be equal with God,” should be rendered, “ he did not catch at, or vehemently desire to be equal with God,” or, “ he did not think that he ought to make an ostentatious display of his resemblance to God ( i ).” Even if it be allowed that the words themselves would bear these significations, which I very much doubt, it would be found that the context will not admit of any such inter¬ pretation ; for, in the first place, the verse thus understood would be made to refer to our Saviour when he was upon earth, whereas, whoever reads the whole passage attentively, will perceive that this verse refers to Christ before he appeared in the likeness of men, since he could not make himself of no reputation, unless he had pre-existed in a state of superior dignity and glory. In the next place, according to this inter¬ pretation, (i) Cyprian quotes this passage in exact agreement with our translation, Non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo. VOL. II. 1 H4 Exposition of the [part in. pretation, the Apostle exhorts to humility from the example of Christ, who while he performed miracles, and preached a religion in the name of God, did not aim at or affect equality with God, or make a display of his resemblance to him ; that is, St. Paul calls upon the Philip- pians to have the same mind which was in Christ Jesus, who, being a mere man, did not make himself equal with God, or boast of his resem¬ blance to him ; the bare mention of such a sense of the text is sufficient to expose and refute it. But the reasoning, according to the common in¬ terpretation, is clear and strong ; for the Apostle exhorts the Philippians to imitate the example of Christ’s humility, who though a divine per¬ son, voluntarily condescended to assume the lowest condition of human nature, and to sub¬ mit to a cruel and ignominious death. The latter part of the passage states, that in conse¬ quence, and as a reward, of his humiliation* “God highly exalted him, and gave him a name which is above every name, that at the name of J esus every knee should bow, of things in hea¬ ven, and things in earth, and things under the earth ; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” This exaltation of Christ, after his ascension into heaven, seems to indicate the 0 glorifiedt ^rt. n.} Thirty -nine Articles. 115 glorified state of his human nature, just as his appearance and sufferings upon earth were the humiliation of his divine nature. In the Old Testament the prophets constantly declared, that they had received from God the prophecies which they delivered ; and it is ac¬ knowledged that none but God can enable men to predict future events. St. Peter, in his First Epistle, represents Christ as enabling the pro¬ phets to foretel his own coming, with his suf¬ ferings, and the glory which was to succeed them 5 “ Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophe¬ sied of the grace that should come unto you ; searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them, did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow (k):” this passage, therefore, proves both the pre¬ existence and divinity of Christ. The same Apostle, in his other Epistle, attributes these prophecies to the influence of the Holy Ghost : u Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (l)T And thus the power of prophesying is ascribed indifferently to the (h) l Pet. c. 1. v. 10 and 11. (1) 2 Pet. c. l.v. 21. I 2 1 1 6 Exposition of the [part hi. the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which denotes the incomprehensible union of the three persons of the Godhead, asserted in the former article. The beginning of the Epistle to the Hebrews will furnish another strong argument in favour of the divinity of Christ. We shall there find that Christ is not only preferred to the angels, but is described as a Being of a totally different order : “ Who being the brightness of God’s glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high ; being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee ? or, Sit on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool ? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son ? And again when he bringeth in the first-begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. And of the ngels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire ; but unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast art. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 117 hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands.” It may be observed that St. Paul, in thus contrasting the nature of Christ -with the nature of angels, calls Christ the Son of God, which, as we have already seen, was making him equal with God, according to the interpretation of the Jews, to whom this Epistle was addressed. He also attributes to him the creation and preservation of the world, which is a clear assertion of his divinity ; and indeed he represents God the Father addressing Christ as the creator of the universe, and moreover as ex¬ pressly calling him God. This opposition is carried on through the whole second chapter, one passage of which plainly declares Christ’s existence previous to his incarnation, and that he was not of the order of angels : “ He took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham.” Lest, however, this as¬ sertion of Christ’s being of the seed of Abraham should lead the Hebrews to think him a mere man, the Apostle immediately proceeds to point out, in the third chapter, the marked difference between him and Moses the legislator of the Jews, who was always considered by them as the greatest of their prophets ; he says, that Moses was faithful as a servant , Christ as a Son; and that Christ was counted worthy of more glory i 3 than 1 1 8 Exposition of the [part hi. than Moses, inasmuch as “ he who has builded the house hath more honour than the house that is, the difference between Christ and Moses is that, which is between him who creates, and the thing created ; and then having before ascribed the creation of the world to Christ, he adds, “ he that built all things is God.” ■ ‘ Without controversy,” says St. Paul, “ great is the mystery of Godliness : God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory ( m ).” All these six propositions, of which God is the subject, are true of Christ, and of no other person : he was “ manifest in the flesh Christ appeared upon earth in a human form, with the flesh and all other properties of a man, sin only excepted : — “ Justified in the Spirit the visible descent of the Holy Ghost upon Christ at the time of his baptism ; the extraordinary powers which he then received and afterwards exercised ; and the performance of his promise by sending the Holy Ghost to his apostles, and enabling them to work miracles, proved him to be the true Mes¬ siah, and justified those high pretensions which he asserted during his ministry : “ Seen of angels angels worshipped Christ at his firs appearance (m) l Tim. c. 3. v. 16. art. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. \ i g appearance upon earth, announced his birth to the shepherds, ministered to him in the desert, and strengthened him in his last agony in the garden : — “ Preached unto the Gentiles the doctrines taught by Christ to the Jews only, were by his command afterwards preached by his apostles to the Gentiles also, who were invited to embrace the Gospel, thus declared to be the universal religion of all mankind : — “ Believed on in the world that many believed Jesus to be the true Messiah is a fact admitted by all, and indeed the rapid propagation of the Gospel is always urged by Christians as one of the many evidences by which its divine origin is esta¬ blished : — “ Received up into glory Christ having completed his ministry, and continued upon earth forty days after his resurrection, was received up into glory by visibly ascending into heaven in the presence of his apostles. Since then these six propositions are applicable to Christ, and to Christ alone, and since St. Paul affirms them to be true of God, it follows that Christ is God, “ All these propositions,” says bishop Pearson, “ cannot be understood of any other, which either is, or is called, God ; for though we grant the divine perfections and attri¬ butes to be the same with the divine essence, yet are they never in the Scriptures called God, nor 1 4 can 120 Exposition of the [part hi. can any of them, with the least show of probabi¬ lity, be pretended as the subject of these proposi¬ tions, or afford any tolerable interpretation. When they tell us that God, that is, the Will of God, was manifested in the flesh, that is, was revealed by frail and mortal men, and received up into glory, that is, was received gloriously on earth, they teach us a language which the Scriptures know not, and the Holy Ghost never used ; and as no attribute, so no person but the Son can be here understood under the name of God ; not the Holy Ghost, for he is distinguished from him, as being justified in the Spirit ; not the Father, who was not manifested in the flesh, nor received up into glory. It remaineth therefore, that whereas the Son is the only person to whom all these clearly and undoubtedly belong, which are here jointly attributed unto God, as sure as the name of God is universally ( n ) expressed in the (n) It cannot be strictly said, that the word ©ee; is found in all the MSS. Dr. Whitby says, that there are only two which want it ; and even Wetstein, whose So- cinian principles made him very anxious to controvert this reading, acknowledges that the authority of MSS. is greatly in favour of the word ©«o? : after mentioning a very few MSS. which have o? or 6, instead of ©so?, he says, Reliqui codices nostri (quibus J. Berriman addit ultra quinquaginta alios) magno consensu habent ©to*. With this preponderance of testimony, admitted by a professed art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 121 the copies of the original language, so thus absolutely and subjectively taken must it be understood of Christ/’ Our Saviour did not censure Thomas, when, upon being convinced of his resurrection, he exclaimed, “ My Lord and my God (0);” and therefore by allowing himself to be called God, he admitted that the name was justly applied to him ; and it may be observed, that the answer of our Saviour seems to annex a blessing to this belief of his divinity : “ Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed ; blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” It cannot, I think, be said that this declaration of our Lord referred only to the belief in his resurrection, when we consider the words of Thomas, and the circumstances which passed after Christ’s resurrection. The incredulity of Thomas could not proceed from doubting the possibility of restoration to life, because he had seen professed enemy so well versed in MSS. I cannot consider this as a doubtful text; and whoever will take the trouble of reading Wetstein’s long and la¬ boured note upon this verse, will, I think, be con¬ vinced both of its purity, as it now stands in our Greek Testaments, and of its force in proving the divinity of our Saviour. Vide Mill and Whitby in loc. and Pearson, Art. 2. (0) John, c. 20. v. 28. 122 Exposition of the [part iii. seen the dead raised by the power of Jesus ; but he had been expressly told, that “ as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given the Son to have life in himself (p ) ,” and he might have considered this and similar declarations to be so inconsistent with the death of Christ, as to doubt whether he and the other disciples had not been deceived in their confidence in him. Certain it is that they were not prepared for the event of his crucifixion, although our Lord had repeatedly foretold it. When he was taken before Pilate, “ they all forsook him and fled and after his death we hear them expressing their firm belief that “ Jesus of Nazareth was a mighty prophet in deed and word before God and all the people but adding, with evident marks of the disappointment occasioned by his death, “ But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel ( q Thomas therefore, who seems to have determined ( r), after having received so severe a disappointment, as he thought, of the expectations he had formed con¬ cerning the Son of God, not to yield his faith again but to the most positive evidence, is no sooner convinced of the actual existence of his master Jesus Christ, than all his former confidence in his assertions (p) John, c. 5. v. 26. (q) Luke, c. 24. v. 19 and 21. (r) John, c, 20, v, 25. art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 123 assertions instantly returns, and he exclaims, (( My Lord and my God.” Our Lord does not reply, as when St. Peter made an acknowledg¬ ment of his belief in his divinity before his cru¬ cifixion, “ charging him to tell no man (" s The time of necessary concealment was past; and having since his resurrection reproved his disci¬ ples for the doubts they entertained, “ O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken ! Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory (t J?”and having “ expounded unto them, in all the Scrip¬ tures the things concerning himself,” according to his promise to speak unto them plainly upon a subject about which they had expressed so much eager curiosity, he soon after directs them to publish the truths he had declared, by “ teaching all nations ( u ),” and admitting them into his church by a form of baptism expressive of his Divinity, and ascends into heaven as a demon¬ strative proof of what he had asserted. God frequently describes his own Being in the Old Testament by the appellation of the “ First and the Last,” as a title denoting eternity, and exclusively belonging to himself: “ I am the First, and I am the Last, and beside me there is no God.” (s) Matt. c. 16. v. 20. (t) Luke, c. 24. v. 25, &c. (u) Matt. c. 28. v. 19. 124 Exposition of the [part iii. God ( u )T In the Revelation, Christ describes himself by the same title ; he says to St. John, “ Fear not ; I am the First and the Last (x) — “ These things saith the First and the Last, which was dead and is alive ( yj — “I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last (z) and, “therefore,” says bishop Pearson, “ since Christ has so im¬ mediately, and with so great solemnity and fre¬ quency, taken the same style upon him, by which the Father did express his Godhead, it follows that he has declared himself to be the Supreme, Almighty, and Eternal God (a)? And indeed “ all the names, the operations, and even the attributes of God, are in full and plain words given to Christ; he is called God (A ); his blood is said to be the blood of God (c) ; God is said to have laid down his life for us (d) \ Christ is called the true God (e) ; the great God (f ) ; the Lord of Glory ( g) ; the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords (h); and more particularly the name Jehovah is ascribed to him in the same word in which the seventy interpreters (u) Is. c. 44. v. 6. (x ) Rev. c. 1 . v. 1 7. (y) Rev. c. 2.v. 8. (z) Rev. c. 22. v. 13. fa ) Art. 2, of the Creed. ( b) Rom. c. 9. v. 5. (c ) Acts, c. 20. v. 28. (d) 1 John, c. 3. v. 16. (e) 1 John, c. 5. v. 20. (f) Titus, c. 2. v. 13. (g) James, c. 2. v. 1. (h) Rev. c. 19. v. 16. aiit. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 125 interpreters had translated it throughout the whole Old Testament, so that the constant uniformity of style between the Greek of the New, and that translation of the Old Testament, which was then received, and was of great authority among the Jews, and was yet of more authority among the first Christians, is an argument that carries such a weight with it, that this alone may serve to determine the matter. The creating, the preserving, and the governing of all things, is also ascribed to Christ in a variety of places, but most remarkably when it is said, that by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible ; whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by him, and for him ; and he is before all things, and by him all things consist (i); he is said to have known what was in man (k); to have known mens secret thoughts, and to have known all things; that as the Father was known of none but of the Son, so none knew the Son, but the Father (%); he pardons sin (nt), sends the Spirit ( n ), gives grace and eternal life, and he shall (i) Col. c. i. v. 16 and 17. (k) John, c. 2. v. 25. ( l ) Matt. c. 11. v. 27. (m) Matt. c. 9. v. 6. (n) John, c. 15. v.26. 126 Exposition of the [part nf. shall raise the dead at the last day ( o ). When all these things are laid together, in that variety of expressions in which they lie scattered in the New Testament, it is not possible to retain any reverence for those books, if we imagine that they are written in a style so full of approaches to the deifying of a mere man, that, without a very critical studying of languages and phrases, it is not possible to understand them other¬ wise. Idolatry, and a plurality of gods, seem to be the main things that the Scriptures warn us against ; and yet here is a pursued thread of passages and discourses that do naturally lead a man to think that Christ is the true God, who yet, according to these men, only acted in his name, and has now a high honour conferred on him by QoiL(p)” It will be acknowledged by all who believe in revealed religion, that the one true God is the only proper object of adoration ; and therefore, if we can show that the New Testament autho¬ rizes the worship of Christ, it will be a sufficient proof of his divinity. A woman, whose daugh¬ ter was grievously vexed with a devil, came and worshipped Christ (q) ; and when the eleven Apostles ( o ) John, c, 24. v. 23. c. 5. v. 25 and 26. c. 6. V. 39 and 40. ( p ) Burnet. ( q) Matt, c. 15. v. 25. art. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 1 27 Apostles first saw him after his resurrection, they worshipped himfrj. Upon these, and several other occasions, Christ permitted himself to be worshipped ; but when the same worship was offered to Peter by Cornelius, he forbade it, and assigned as areason,that “he wasaman (s);” and if Christ had been a mere man he would have refused the worship offered him upon the same principle. There is also a passage in the Revelation, which shows that the worship spoken of in the New Testament, was not barely the prostration common in eastern coun¬ tries towards superiors, but a species of ado¬ ration which was due to God alone : “ And I fell at his (that is, the angel’s) feet to worship him : and he said unto me, See thou do it not : I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus ; worship God (X).” And our Saviour himself said to Satan, when he was tempted in the wilderness, “ Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve (u And it is further to be observed, that the Apostles worshipped Christ when he was no longer present with them : “ And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into (r ) Matt. c. 28. v. 16 & 17, (s) Acts, c. 1 0. v. 25 &2 6. (t) Rev. c. 19. v. 10. (u) Matt. c.4. v. 10. 128 Exposition of the [part iii. into heaven ; and they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy ( x )” The worship therefore of Christ is justified by the ex¬ ample of the Apostles themselves, who thus wor¬ shipped him after his ascension. St. Paul declares that, “ at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth (y)f and St. John, in the account of his vision says, “ Every crea¬ ture which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, for ever and ever ( z )” — “ Here the two persons in the Godhead, the Father and the Son, are distinguished from each other, as they have distinct parts in the oeconomy of our salvation ; but the very same degree of religious worship, the same honour and glory, are in the same words ascribed, c unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb,’ the partner of his throne and dignity, to signify that their essence is the same, and that they worshipped and glorified one and the same God, for ever and (x) Luke, c. 24. 51 and 52. (y) Phil. c. 2. v. 10. (z) Rev. c.5. v. 13. art. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 129 and every equally divine and equally eter¬ nal (a). Our blessed Saviour, when expiring upon the cross, cried out, “ Father, into thy hands I com¬ mend my spirit (b)‘” and he had just before prayed for his murderers in these words, ‘‘Father, forgive them ; for they know not what they do (c J.” In like manner the first martyr, St. Stephen, at the moment of his being stoned to death, prayed to Christ, “ Lord Jesus, receive my spirit;” and for his murderers he added, “ Lord, lay not this sin to their charge ( d )T These prayers of Christ, addressed to his Father, and of St. Stephen, addressed to Christ, are in substance the same, and are recorded by the same evangelist, St. Luke. “ It seems very evident, ’’ says bishop Burnet, “ that if Christ was not the true God, and equal to the Father, then this Proto-martyr died in two acts that seem not only idolatrous but also blasphemous, since he worshipped Christ in the same acts in which Christ had worshipped his Father.” But to re¬ move all doubt concerning the lawfulness of St. Stephen’s worship of Christ, and to give decisive authority (a) Knowles’s Primitive Christianity. ( b) Luke, c. 23. v. 46. (c) Luke, c. 23. v. 34. (d) Acts, c, 7. v. 59 and 60. VOL. II. K 130 Exposition of the [parTHI* authority to his example, St. Luke tells us, that “ Stephen was full of the Holy Ghost ( e )” Paul “ besought the Lord (f),” that is, prayed to Christ to remove a heavy affliction under which he laboured ; and that it was the general practice of the primitive Christians to pray to Christ, appears from the First Epistle to the Corinthians, which is addressed “ to all that call upon the name of Christ upon which pas¬ sage Origen observes, that “ by these words the apostle declares Christ to be God (g);” and in the Acts it is said, that Paul had authority from the chief priests to bind all “ that called upon the name of Christ (hj to call upon the name of Christ was therefore the common description of the disciples of Christ in the apostolic age ; and this not only proves that the primitive Christians believed in the divinity of our Saviour, but it also accounts for the charge of blasphemy so frequently urged against them by the Jews in their early persecutions. The worship of Christ would naturally appear in that light to those who did not allow him to be the Messiah, and who were zealous for the worship of the one true God; and we learn from the early apologists for Christianity, that the Heathen objected to the Christians, (e) Acts, c. 7. v. 55. (f) 2 Cor. c. 12. v. 8. ( g ) Orig.inRom. 10. B. 8. (h) Acts, c. 9. v. 14. art. ii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 131 Christians, that they worshipped a crucified man, to which Minutius Felix answers, “ that they were mistaken for that he whom they wor¬ shipped was God, and not a mere mortal man (i)\ and Tertullian, arguing against the same charge, says “ they worshipped Christ, because they knew him to be the true natural Son of God by spiritual generation, and there¬ fore called God ; and the Son of God, because he was of one and the same essence or substance ; he was begotten of God in such a manner as to be God, and the Son of God, and they were both one (k).” We learn from Origen, that Celsus, in his book written against the Christians, ridiculed the idea of the wise men worshipping the infant Christ as God, and represented his flight into Egypt, and other circumstances of his life, as inconsistent with his being a God. “ He objects against us,” says Origen, “ I know not how often, respecting Jesus, that we con¬ sider him as God, with a mortal body (l)T Indeed the principal objection urged by Celsus against Christianity seems to have been the union of the divine and human natures in the person of Christ. In the parts of his work preserved by Origen, he repeatedly speaks of Christ as the God (i) Minut. Dial. p. 88. (k) Tert. Apol. cap. 21. ( l ) Lib. 3. p. 135. k 2 132 Exposition of the [part iii; God of Christians, alludes to the account of his miraculous conception, observes that he is called the Word, says the place is shown where Christ, “ who is worshipped by Chris¬ tians,’’ was born, ridicules their inconsistency in blaming the worshippers of Jupiter, whose tomb was shown in Crete, while they worship as God a man who was buried in Palestine. “ If these men,” says he, “ worshipped but one God, they might perhaps have reason to inveigh against others ; but now they act superstitiously towards him who lately appeared, and yet they think that God is not neglected, if his servant also be worshipped.” He also represents the Christians as censuring the Jews for not admitting that Christ was God ; and he every where speaks of the divinity of Christ as the common doctrine of Christians, and the worship of him as their established practice ( m ) ; and surely such a tes¬ timony, coming from a professed enemy of the Gospel in the second century, and allowed to be a true statement by a Christian writer in the be¬ ginning of the third, must be considered as very valuable. Lucian, who was contemporary with Celsus, mentions also the worship of Christ, and in a manner which shows that it was a thing not recently adopted. “ The Christians still worship (m) Orig. contra Cel*, passim. AiiT. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 133 worship that great man who was crucified in Palestine (n) and we learn from Socrates, the ecclesiastical historian, that “ the orator Libanius praised Porphyry and Julian for confuting the folly of a sect which styled a dead man of Pales¬ tine God, and the Son of God ( 0 >)” Arnobius, in the year 303, represents the Heathen as saying to the Christians, “ The gods are not angry with you because you worship the Almighty God, but because you contend that he was God who was born a man, and, which is infamous even for vile persons, was crucified; and because you believe that he is still living, and worship him with daily prayers and again he says, “ That the Christians do really worship Christ, but that it is from their indubitable knowledge that he is the true God ; and they are bound to worship him as the head of their body. And should a Gentile ask, Is Christ God ? we answer, He is God, and God of the interior powers, that is, the searcher of hearts, which is the sole preroga¬ tive of God (p The objection urged against Christianity from the worship of Christ is fre¬ quently noticed by the writers of the first four centuries ; and the defence uniformly made, is, that they worshipped Christ as God ; and at the same time they constantly assert the unity of God. (n) Luc. de Morte Peregrini. ( 0 ) Soc. Hist. Eccl. (p) Arnob. cont. Gent. lib. 1. K 3 1 34 Exposition of the [part iii. God. There cannot be a more decisive proof that the early Christians believed in the divinity of our Saviour ( q). As the opinion of the primitive church is deservedly considered as carrying great weight with it in this question, I shall add a few other authorities from the antient fathers. There is an Epistle extant which most learned men ascribe to Barnabas ( r), the companion of St. Paul, and all agree that it was written in the apostolic age. In this Epistle we have the following passages, which plainly imply a belief in the divinity of Christ : “ The Lord submitted to suffer for our soul, although he be the Lord of the whole earth, to whom he said before the formation of the world, Let us make man after our image and likeness.” — “ For if he had not come in the flesh, how could we men have been saved?” — “ If then the Son of God, who is Lord, and hereafter to judge the quick and dead, suffered that ( q ) Vide Dr. Knowles’s Primitive Christianity, in which it is shown, in the clearest and most satisfactory manner, by a great variety of quotations from the writers of the first four centuries, that Jesus Christ was worshipped as God from the beginning of the Christian church. Vide also Bingham’s Ant. B. 13. c. 2. (r) This Epistle in the original Greek, and also an antient Latin version of it, which seems to have been made from a purer text than that of our present copy, are both published in the first volume of the Patres Apostolici, by Cotelerius. aht. ii,] Thirty-nine Articles. 135 that he might make us alive, let us believe that the Son of God could not have suffered but through us.” — “ You are informed concerning the majesty of Christ, how all things were made for him and through him.” — Ignatius, another apostolical father, calls Christ “ of the race of David according to the flesh, the Son of God according to divinity and power, truly born of a virgin — our God Jesus Christ — the Son of man, and the Son of God ( s ).” These passages are all quoted by Theodoret, A. D. 449, which was nearly a century before any interpolation is suspected to have been made in the Epistles of Ignatius. “ We are not senseless,” says Tatian, “ nor trifle with you, O Greeks, when we declare that God was born in the form of man (t)T Irenaeus declares, that “ every knee should bow to Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, our Saviour and King, by the will of the invisible Father^ ■).” Eusebius says, that the divinity of Christ was asserted in the writings of Justin, Miltiades, Ta¬ tian, Clement, Irenaeus, and Melito, all of whom lived in the second century, and by many others ; he also says that it was expressly declared in psalms and hymns of the earliest date; and that in (s) Ignat, in Theod. Dial. Immutab. Vide Pearson, Vindic. Part 1. c. 1. p. 10. (t) Page 159. ed. Paris, 1615. (u) Lib. l, cap. 2. 136 Exposition of the [part iii. in fact Theodotus, a tanner, in the second cen¬ tury, was the first person who asserted that Christ was a mere man, for which he was excommuni¬ cated by Victor^ x). I shall conclude this subject with a quotation from Novatian, a writer of the third century; “ Whereas it is the property of none but God to know the secrets of the heart, and yet Christ knows what is in man ; whereas it is in the power of none but God to forgive sins, yet Christ does forgive sins ; whereas it is of no man to come down from heaven, and yet he descended from thence ; whereas no man could utter that saying, I and my Father are one , and Christ alone, from a consciousness of his divinity, said it; and whereas, finally, the apostle Thomas, furnished as he was with every proof of Christ’s divinity, said in an¬ swer to him, my Lord and my God ; whereas the apostle St. Paul writes in his Epistle, Whose are the fathers, and from whom according to the flesh, Christ came , who is over all , God blessed for evermore ; whereas the same apostle declares, that he was made such, not by men , or through yuan, but through Jesus Christ ; whereas he contends that he learned the gospel not of men , but by Jesus Christ: upon all these accounts we must conclude that Christ is God (y)J The (x) Euseb. H. E. lib. 5. cap. 28. (y) Novat. Lib. de Trin. cap. 13. art. ii.] Thirty •nine Articles. 137 The importance of the doctrine of the Divi¬ nity of Christ has induced me to be thus full in the explanation and proof of it. I now proceed with the Article, which in the next place states, that Christ took man’s nature IN THE WOMB OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN, OF her substance. Isaiah foretold that the Messiah should be born of a virgin : “ A virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel f z) and St. Matthew informs us, “ that when Mary was espoused unto Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost;5’ — “ and that Joseph knew not Mary until she had brought forth her first-born son, and he called his name Jesus ( a “ When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law Themiraculous conception of Christ is asserted in the passage just now quoted from Ignatius, and it is also mentioned by the following writers, Justin Martyr ( c ), Ire- nceus (d), Origen (e ), Cyril of Jerusalem f/J, Ambrose (z) Is. C. 7-V. 14. (a) Matt. c. 1 . v. 18 and 25. Luke, c. l . v. 27 — 35. (b) Gal.c. 4. v. 4. (c) Dial. pars. 2. page 354. (d) Lib. 3. cap. 29. page 258. (e) In Matt. V. 1. P.426 & contr. (do. P. 25.) (f) Cat. 12. P. 155 Sc 164. 138 Exposition of the [part iii. Ambrose^ g ), LactantiusfA ), Hilary (i ), Basils ), Augustine ( l), and many others. It appears from the History of Christ’s life and ministry, contained in the Gospels, that except his miraculous conception and his freedom from sin, he was in all things like unto man ; he was born and grew up like other infants ; he increased in wisdom as he increased in stature ; he was sup¬ ported by the usual modes of nutrition, so that his enemies observed he came eating and drinking ; he slept ; he was subject to fatigue, hunger, and thirst ; he was in all things tempted like men ; he wept ; his soul was exceeding sorrowful ; he suffered severe agony of mind, and at length expired upon the cross ; and even after his resur¬ rection he convinced his doubting disciples, that he had flesh and bones. “ Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same (m )” — “ In all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren ( n ).n — “ There is one medi¬ ator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus ( 0 )f The complete nature of man being thus assumed by the Eternal Word of God, it follows fgjV. 2. P.59. (i) De Trin. Lib. 1 6. (1) V. 4- P*536- ( n ) Heb. c. 2. v. 17. (li) Inst. Lib. 4. cap. 12. (lz) Horn. 25. V. 1. p.507. (m ) Heb.c. 2. v. 14. (0) 1 Tim. c. 2, v. 5* art. ii.] Thirty -rime Articles. 139 follows that by this incarnation two whole and PERFECT NATURES, THAT IS, THE GODHEAD AND MANHOOD, WERE JOINED TOGETHER IN one person. — “What a person is,” says bishop Burnet, “that results from a close conjunction of two natures, we can only judge of it by con¬ sidering man, in whom there is a material and spiritual nature joined together (p) ; they are two natures as different as any we can apprehend among all created beings, yet these make but one man. The matter of which the body is com¬ posed does not subsist by itself, is not under all those laws of motion to which it would be subject, if it were unanimated matter ; but by the indwelling and actuation of the soul, it has an¬ other spring within it, and has another course of operations ; according to this then, to subsist by another, is, when a being is acting according to its natural properties, but yet in a constant dependence upon another being, so our bodies subsist by the subsistence of our souls ; this may help us to apprehend how, that as the body is still a body, and operates as a body, though it subsist by the indwelling and actuation of ( p ) This mode of explanation, adopted by bishop Burnet, was also used by antient writers. Sicut in lio- mine aliud caro, aliud anima ; sed unus idemque homo anima et caro. Ita in uno eodemque Christo dua3 sub- stantise sunt, sed una divina, altera humana. Vine. 140 Exposition of the [part hi. of the soul ; so in the person of Jesus Christ the human nature was entire, and still acted according to its own character, yet there was such an union and inhabitation of the Eternal Word in it, that there did arise out of that a communication of names and characters, as we find in the Scriptures. A man is called tall, fair, and healthy, from the state of his body, and learned, wise, and good, from the qualities of his mind ; so Christ is called holy, harmless, and undefiled, is said to have died, risen, and ascended up into heaven with relation to his human nature ; he is also said to be in the form of God, to have created all things, to be the brightness of his Father’s glory, and the express image of his person, with relation to his divine nature. The ideas that we have of what is mate¬ rial, and what is spiritual, lead us to distinguish in a man those descriptions that belong to his body from those that belong to his mind ; so the different apprehensions that we have, of what is created and uncreated, must be our thread to guide us into the resolution of those various ex¬ pressions that occur in the Scriptures concerning Christ.” This consideration, indeed, of the union of the two natures, divine and human, in Christ, can alone enable us to reconcile many passages in ® the 141 art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. the New Testament, which are apparently con¬ tradictory. Christ is said to have existed before Abraham, and yet to have been of the seed of Abraham; he is called the Lord of David, and also his son or descendant ; he is said to know all things, and yet not know when the day of judgment will be ; Christ says, My Father is greater than I ; and again, My Father and I are one ; at one time he is said to have been compassed with infirmity ; and at another he himself declares, All power is given me in heaven and in earth ; upon one occasion he is said to have been made a little lower than the angels ; and upon another, that all the angels of God worship him : these and many other pas¬ sages of a similar kind, become perfectly con¬ sistent and intelligible, by referring them respec¬ tively to the divine and human natures of Christ. The essential properties of one nature were not communicated to the other nature : Christ was at once Son of God, and Son of man ; he was at the same time both mortal and eter¬ nal ; mortal as the Son of man, in respect of his humanity; eternal as the Son of God, in respect of his divinity : each kept his respective properties distinct, without the least confusion in their most intimate union. One person was formed by these two natures, as the council of Chalcedou expresses it, ^o-uy^urw?, «r^7rr «?, OtfoxgiTUf, 142 Exposition of the [part hi. a^a^ETw?, otX'UfHTTidg, without confusion, immuta- bly, inseparably, indivisibly. Christ has ascended up into heaven, and is there to remain “ until the times of restitution of all things (q) — “ he ever liveth to make inter¬ cession for us ( r ) : ” — and is “ ordained of God to judge the quick and dead (s)” at the last day : he is represented as “ highly exalted ( t )f and as “ crowned with glory and honour for the suf¬ ferings of death ( u) ; ” and there is no ground to suppose he will ever be deprived of these rewards, but on the contrary, “ blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, are to be given to the Lamb for ever and ever (x ).” And indeed is it reason¬ able that the personal glory of Christ should cease, when the happiness which he purchased for fallen man by his incarnation and passion is to be eternal ? Upon these grounds the article asserts, that the two natures, the god¬ head AND MANHOOD, WHEREOF IS ONE CHRIST, ARE NEVER TO BE DIVIDED. The Godhead and manhood of Christ having been both proved, it follows that he was very god AND VERY MAN. That the Messiah was to suffer was foretold in a variety of passages in the Old Testament : “ It (q) Acts, c. 3. v. 21. ( r ) Heb. c. 7. v. 25. (sj Acts, c. 10. V. 42. (t) Phil. c. 2. v. 9. (u) Heb. c. 2. v. 9. (x) Rev. c. 5. v. 13. art. II.] Thirty-nine Articles. J43 * “ It was written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things (y );” and “the Spirit of God, which was in the prophets, testified before¬ hand the sufferings of Christ (z)*” he was to be “ a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief ; oppressed and afflicted; wounded and bruised ; brought to the slaughter, and cut off out of the land of the living ( a ).” The suffering of Christ was also typified in the sacrifices of the law, and particularly in the passover. Our Saviour him¬ self forewarned his disciples of his passion, and St, Paul preached to the Thessalonians, that “ Christ must needs have suffered ( b )” — “ If hunger and thirst, if revilings and contempt, if sorrows and agonies, if stripes and buffetings, if condemnation and crucifixion, be sufferings, Jesus suffered ; if the infirmities of our nature, if the weight of our sins, if the malice of man, if the machinations of Satan, if the hand of God, could make him suffer, our Saviour suffered ; if the annals of times, if the writings of his apostles, if the death of his martyrs, if the confession of the Gentiles, if the scoffs of the Jews be testimo¬ nies, Jesus suffered ( c);” — “ and therefore those things which God before had showed by the mouth (%) 1 Pet. c. 1. v. 11. (b) Acts, c. 17. v. 3. (y) Mark, c. g.v. 12. (a) Is. c. 53. (c) Pearson, Art. 4. 144 Exposition of the [part hi. mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath fulfilled ( d And as Christ truly suffered, so likewise he was crucified and dead. The particular mode of Christ’s death was predicted by Zacha- riah, “ They shall look upon me whom they have pierced (e)f and again by David, “ they pierced my hands and my feet (f);” alluding to the practice of nailing to the cross the hands and the feet of the person crucified. Christ himself also intimated by what death he should die, and at the same time referred to a type of it in the Old Testament : “ As Moses lifted up the ser¬ pent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up (g)” The crucifixion of Jesus is related by all the Evangelists ; and the in¬ credulity of Thomas, recorded by St. John, afforded an opportunity of showing that the pro¬ phecies of Zachariah and David were literally fulfilled (h). That Jesus really expired upon the cross was evident both to his faithful friends, who out of regard to their Lord and Master were present at his crucifixion, and also to his implacable enemies, who fancied that they thus saw the accomplishment of their wicked purpose. And even the Roman soldiers, who probably ( d ) Acts, c. 3. v. 18. ( e ) Zach. c. 12. v. 10. (f) Psalm 22. v. 17. (g) John, c. 3. v. 14. ( h) John, c. 20. v. 27. art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 145 probably felt little either of affection, or of malice, seeing him already dead, forbore to break his legs ; but “ one of these soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came thereout blood and water ( n )” which is a known sign of actual death in human bodies. The mention of the grave of the Messiah in the following passage of Isaiah, may be con¬ sidered as a prediction that he was to be buried: “ He was cut off out of the land of the living ; and he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death ( 0 ).” And not only the burial of the Messiah, but the time he was to remain interred, wras typified in the person of Jonas, “ for as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth (p It was the cus¬ tom of the Romans, by whose authority our Saviour was put to death, not to allow the bodies of those who were crucified to be taken from the cross and buried ; they were left to putrefy, or to be devoured by the fowls of the air. But it was in the power of the magistrate to dispense with this custom ; and accordingly we find that “ when the even was come, there came (n) John, c. 19. v. 34. ( 0 ) Is. c. 53. v. 8 8C9. (p) Matt. c. 12. v. 40. VOL. II. L 146 Exposition of the [part hi. came a rich man of Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus’ disciple : he went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be delivered. And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrap¬ ped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock : and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed (q) and thus it appears that Christ was buried. The article concludes with stating, that the object of Christ’s passion was to reconcile THE FATHER TO US, AND TO BE A SACRIFICE NOT ONLY FOR ORIGINAL GUILT, BUT ALSO for actual sins of men. By original guilt is meant that guilt which was incurred by the disobedience of Adam, and transmitted to all his posterity ; and by actual sins of men are meant, those sins which individuals actually commit, “ for there is no man that sinneth not ( rj.” I shall transcribe bishop Burnet’s excellent expla¬ nation and proof of this part of the article, to which it will be unnecessary to make any addi¬ tion : “ The notion of an expiatory sacrifice which was then, when the New Testament was written, well understood all the world over, both by Jew and Gentile, was this, that the sin of one (q) Matt.c.27; v.57 — 60. (r) 1 Kings, c. 8. v. 46. art. iif] Thirty -nine Articles, 147 one person was transferred on a man or beast, who was upon that devoted, and offered up to God, and suffered in the room of the offending- person ; and by this oblation the punishment of the sin being laid on the sacrifice, an expiation was made for sin, and the sinner was believed to be reconciled to God. This, as appears through the whole book of Leviticus, was the design and effect of the sin and trespass offerings among the Jews, and more particularly of the goat that was offered up for the sins of the whole people on the day of atonement. This was a piece of religion well known both to Jew and Gentile, that had a great many phrases belonging to it, such as the sacrifices being offered for, or instead of sin, and in the name, or on the account, of the sinner; its bearing of sin, and becoming sin, or the sin- offering; its being the reconciliation, the atone¬ ment, and the redemption of the sinner, by which the sin was no more imputed, but forgiven, and for which the sinner was accepted. When, there¬ fore, this whole set of phrases in its utmost extent, is very often, and in a great variety, ap¬ plied to the death of Christ, it is not possible for us to preserve any reverence for the New Testa¬ ment, or the writers of it, so far as to think them even honest men, not to say inspired men, if we can imagine that in so sacred and important a l 2 matter I 148 Exposition of the [part iii. matter they could exceed so much as to repre¬ sent that to be our sacrifice which is not truly so : this is a point which will not bear figures and amplifications : it must be treated of strictly and with a just exactness of expression. Christ is called ‘the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world ( s) he is said to have c borne our sins in his own body (t) to have been ‘ made sin for us (u) it is said that ‘ he gave his life a ransom for many (x)\ that c he was the propitiation for the sins of the whole world (y)',' and that ‘we have redemp¬ tion through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins (z) it is said, that ‘ he has reconciled us to his Father in his cross, and in the body of his flesh through death ( a)-J that ‘ he, by his own blood, entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us (b) ; that * once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself (c) ;* that ‘ he was once offered to bear the sins of many (cl) \ that ‘ we are sanctified by the offering of the body of Christ, once for all (e) and (s) John, c. 1. v. 29. (t) 1 Pet.c. 2. v. 24. (u) 2 Cor. c. 5. v. 21. (x) Matt. c. 20. v. 28. (y) 1 John, c. 2. v. 2. ( % ) Col. c. 1 . v. 14. (a) Col. c. 1. v. 20, &<*• (b) Heb. c. 9. v.12. (c) Heb. c. 9. v. 26. ( d ) Heb. c. 9. v. 28. (e) Heb. c. 10. v. 10. art. ir.] Thirty-nine Articles, 149 and that c after he had offered one sacrifice for sin, he sat down for ever on the right hand of God (f)' It is said, that ‘ we enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, that is, the blood of the new covenant, by which we are sancti¬ fied ( g) ; that ‘ he hath sanctified the people with his own blood (h)\ and was ‘ the great shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the everlasting covenant (i);’ that * we are re¬ deemed with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot (k) and that ‘ Christ suffered once for sin, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God (l)' In these, and in a great many more passages that lie spread in all the parts of the New Testament, it is as plain as words can make any thing, that the death of Christ is proposed to us as our sacrifice and reconciliation, our atone¬ ment and redemption. So it is not possible for any man, who considers all this, to imagine that Christ’s death was only a confirmation of his Gospel, a pattern of a holy and patient suffering of death, and a necessary preparation to his re¬ surrection, by which he gave us a clear proof of a resurrection, and by consequence of eternal life, as (f) Heb. c. 10. v. 12. (g) Heb. c. 10. v. 19. (h) Heb. c. 13. v. 12. (i) Heb. c. 13. v. 20. (k) l Pet. c. 1. v. 19. (1) 1 Pet. c. 3. v; 18; 1 3 150 Exposition of the [part hi. as by bis doctrine he had showed us the way to it. By this all the high commendations of his death amount only to this, that he by dying has given a vast credit and authority to his Gospel, which was the powerfulest mean possible to re¬ deem us from sin, and to reconcile us to God : but this is so contrary to the whole design of the New Testament, and to the true import of that great variety of phrases in which this matter is set out, that at this rate of expounding Scrip¬ ture we can never know what we may build upon, especially when the great importance of this thing, and of our having right notions concerning it, is well considered. St. Paul does, in his Epistle to the Romans, state an opposition between the death of Christ and the sin of Adam, the ill effects of the one being removed by the other ; but he plainly carries the death of Christ much farther, than that it had only healed the wound that was given by Adam’s sin ; for as * the judgment was by one to con¬ demnation, the free gift is of many offences to justification ( m But in the other places of the New Testament Christ’s death is set forth so fully as a propitiation for the sins of the whole world, that it is a very false way of arguing to infer, that because in one place that is set [in opposition (m) Rom. c. 5. v. 16. art. u.] Thirty -nine Articles. 151 opposition to Adam's sin, that therefore the virtue of it was to go no farther than to take away that sin ; it has, indeed, removed that, but it has done a great deal more besides. “ Thus it is plain that Christ’s death was our sacrifice ; the meaning of which is this, that God intending to reconcile the world to himself, and to encourage sinners to repent and turn to him, thought fit to offer the pardon of sin, together with the other blessings of his Gospel, in such a way as should demonstrate both the guilt of sin and his hatred of it ; and yet with that, his love of sinners, and his compassion towards therm A free pardon, without a sacrifice, had not been so agreeable either to the majesty of the Great Governor of the world, nor the authority of his laws, nor so proper a method to oblige men to that strictness and holiness of life that he de¬ signed to bring them to ; and therefore he thought fit to offer his pardon, and those other blessings, through a Mediator, who was to deliver to the world this new and holy rule of life, and to confirm it by his own unblemished life : and in conclusion, when the rage of wicked men, who hated him for the holiness both of his life and of his doctrine, did work them up into such a fury as to pursue him to a most violent and ignominious death, he, in compliance with the l 4 secret 152 Exposition of the [part iii. secret design of his Father, did not only go through the dismal series of sufferings, with the most entire resignation to his Father’s will, and with the highest charity possible towards those who were his most unjust and malicious mur¬ derers ; but he at the same time underwent great agonies in his mind, which struck him with such an amazement and sorrow even to the death, that upon it he did sweat great drops of blood, and on the cross he felt a withdrawing of those comforts that till then had ever supported him, when he cried out, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? It is not easy for us to apprehend in what that agony consisted, for we understand only the agonies of pain or of con¬ science, which last arise out of the horrors of guilt, or the apprehension of the wrath of God. It is, indeed, certain, that he who had no sin could have no such horror in him ; and yet it is as certain that he could not be put into such an agony only through the apprehension and fear of that violent death which he was to suffer next day ; therefore we ought to conclude that there was an inward suffering in his mind, as well as an outward visible one in his body : we cannot dis¬ tinctly apprehend what that was, since he was sure of his own spotless innocence, and of his Father’s unchangeable love to him, We can ® only art. ii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 153 only imagine a vast sense of the heinousness of sin, and a deep indignation at the dishonour done to God by it; a melting apprehension at the corruption and miseries of mankind by reason of sin, together with a never-before felt with¬ drawing of those consolations that had always filled his soul; but what might be further in his agony and in his last dereliction, we cannot distinctly apprehend ; only this we perceive, that our minds are capable of great pain as well as our bodies are : deep horror, with an inconsolable sharpness of thought, is a very intolerable thing. Notwithstanding the bodily or substantial in¬ dwelling of the fulness of the Godhead in him, yet he was capable of feeling vast pain in his body ; so that he might become a complete sa¬ crifice, and that we might have from his suffer¬ ings a very full and amazing apprehension of the guilt of sin ; all those emanations of joy with which the indwelling of the Eternal Word had ever till then filled his soul, might then, when he needed them most, be quite withdrawn, and he be left merely to the firmness of his faith, to the patient resignation to the will of his heavenly Father, and to his willing readiness of drinking up that cup which his Father had put in his hand to drink. “ There remains but one thing to be remem¬ bered < 154 Exposition of the [part iii. bered here, though it will cotne to be more specially explained when other articles are to be opened ; which is, that this reconciliation, which is made by the death of Christ between God and man, is not absolute and without conditions. He has established the covenant, and has performed all that was incumbent on him, as both the priest and the sacrifice, to do and to suffer ; and he offers this to the world, that it may be closed with by them on the terms on which it is pro* posed ; and if they do not accept of it upon these conditions, and perform what is enjoined them, they can have no share in itf n ).” (n) Burnet* aut. m.] Thirty-nine Articles . 155 ARTICLE THE THIRD. Of the going down of Christ into Hell. AS CHRIST DIED FOR US, AND WAS BURIED, SO ALSO IS IT TO BE BELIEVED THAT HE WENT DOWN INTO HELL. That Christ descended into Hell is not ex¬ pressly asserted by any of the Evangelists ; but they all relate that he expired upon the cross* and that after three days he again appeared alive; and therefore it maybe inferred that in the inter¬ mediate time his soul went into the common receptacle for departed souls (a). But a more direct proof of this proposition may be found ill St. Peter’s Sermon, after the effusion of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost (b), in which he applies to the resurrection of our Saviour the passage in the Psalms ; “ Thou wilt not leave mv soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy (a ) There is no single word in our language which has this signification ; but we are told that this was formerly the] sense of the Saxon word Hell, though it now always means the place of the punishment of the wicked, after the general judgment, as opposed to heaven, the place of the reward of the righteous. (b) Acts, c. 2. v. 27. 156 Exposition of the [part hi. Holy One to see corruption (c)” Christ’s soul must have been in hell, since God is here re¬ presented as not finally leaving it here, but as re-uniting it to the body of Christ, after a cer¬ tain interval: and, therefore, as Christ died FOR US AND WAS BURIED, SO ALSO IS IT TO BE BELIEVED THAT HE WENT DOWN into hell. It is to be observed that the word rendered “Hell” in the above passage, both in the Septuagint translation of the Psalms, and in the Acts, is 'Afas, Hades. Dr. Campbell has shown that this word, which occurs eleven times in the New Testament, and is very fre¬ quently used in the Septuagint translation of the Old, never signifies in Scripture the place of torment, to which the wicked are to be con¬ signed after the day of judgment, but always the place appropriated for the common reception of departed souls in the intermediate time between death and the general resurrection (d). Though there is this unquestionable authority for the doctrine of this article, Christ’s descent into Hell, or Hades, is not mentioned in the abstracts of Christian ( c ) Ps. 16. V. 10. (d) Homer, Hesiod, Plato, and other antient Greek writers, distinguish 'a^j from T«§rago?, which was the place of punishment for the wicked. Vide Dr. Nicholls’s exposition of this article. art. hi.] Thirty-nine Articles. 1 57 Christian faith which the early fathers have left us ; nor is it in any of those numerous creeds which were composed by the councils of the fourth century, except that which was agreed to at Arimini in the year 359. The word there used is Kxrx^ovix, and it is plain from the context that this word cannot mean, as some have supposed, merely that Christ was buried, It f rx xxrxy^ovix xxte\Qovtx, xxi tx ixehte oixovo- y.v\5? 7rt but never ha. or hu rijn 7 rirw. Vide Rom. c. l . v. 1 7. c. 3. v. 22. 28 and 30. Gal. c. 3. v. 3. Eph. c. 2. v. 8. It is well known that h» when it governs a genitive case signifies per, and when it governs an accusative case it signifies propter ; that is, in the former case it indicates the mean, in the latter the cause. art. xi.] Thirty -nine Articles. 259 righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe ; for there is no difference ; for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; being justi¬ fied freely by his Grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God ; to declare, I say, at this time his righteousness, that he might be just, and the justifier of him who be- lieveth in Jesus ( c ),” By the faith, which in this passage, and also in our article, is said to justify, we are to understand that lively “ faith, which worketh by lovef d )” which purifieth the heart, which keepeth the commandments of God. The doctrine of Justification by faith was maintained by the early Christians: Clement of Rome, after speaking of the Jews, says, “ And we also, being called by the same will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, neither by our own wisdom, or knowledge, or piety, or by works which we have done in the holiness of our hearts, but by that faith by which God Almighty has justified all men from the beginning ( e Upon these grounds our Church declares that the merit of our (c) Rom. c. 3. v. 22 — 26. (d) Gal. c. 5. v. 6. (e) Ep. 1. 260 Exposition of the [part hi. our own works has no share in our justifica¬ tion, in opposition to the papists, who assert, that man’s inherent righteousness is the meritorious cause of his justification, and that good works “ ad vitam aeternam consequendam vere pro- mereri(X).'’ It may be proper, upon this occasion, to explain some passages in the Epistles of St. Paul and St. James, relative to Justification, which at first sight appear to be inconsistent with each other. St. Paul says, that “ A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the lawf^J.” And again, that “A man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ St. James says, “A man is jus¬ tified by works, and not by faith only ( i J” St. Paul and St. James both allude to the case of adult converts to the Gospel : and in order to reconcile these seemingly contradictory asser¬ tions, we must consider the particular object which each had in view, and also distinguish between the first entrance into a state of justifica¬ tion, and the continuance in that state. St. Paul, when he makes the above declarations, is argu¬ ing, as clearly appears from the context, against those judaizing Christians, who contended that circumcision, (f) Cone. Trid. de Bon. Op. cap. 11. (g) Rom. c. 3. v. 28. (A) Gal. c. 2. v. 16. ( i ) Chap. 2. v. 24. a rt. x i .] Th irty-nine A r tides. 261 circumcision, and an* observance of the whole ritual of the Mosaic institution, were required in Gentiles who embraced the Gospel, as essen¬ tial to their justification ; and therefore the jus¬ tification which he means is the first entrance into a state of justification, and the works and deeds of the law, which he excludes and rejects, are the numerous outward ordinances prescribed by the Law of Moses, and abolished by the Gospel of Christ. But this obvious sense of these passages was soon perverted, and they were made to signify, that faith in Christ, without works or deeds of any kind, that is, without the practice of moral virtue, was of itself sufficient to procure salvation. This most unwarrantable in¬ terpretation St. James reprobates and refutes ( k ), by proving that a man is justified by his works, and not by faith only. He does not say by the works of the law , but by ivories, that is, by a man’s own works or actions. When therefore he says, that a man is not justified by faith only, he means that (k ) Several antient authors mention that St. James wrote this Epistle to correct some errors which had arisen from a misapprehension of St. Paul's writings. St. Peter observes, that in St. Paul’s Epistles, there " are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.” — 2 Pet. c. 3. v. 16. 26 2 Exposition of the [part hi. that a man is not preserved in a state of justifi¬ cation by a bare belief in the religion of Christ. “ Faith,” says he repeatedly in the same chapter, “ without works is dead (l)f that is, although a man believes in the divine mission of Christ, and in consequence of that belief has been admit¬ ted into the Gospel covenant, yet if he does not afterward obey its precepts, his faith is ineffec¬ tual ; he will not continue justified ; and if he perseveres in his disobedience he will not in¬ herit eternal life. The Apostles therefore are speaking of different things : St. Paul is showing what it is which places a man in a state of justi¬ fication; St. James is showing what it is which is necessary to continue a person in a state of justi¬ fication: and they were respectively led to discuss these subjects by errors which prevailed among those whom they addressed. St. Paul asserts, that if a man be convinced of the truth of the Gospel, and sincerely intend to obey its precepts, he becomes justified without the observance of the Mosaic ceremonies. St. James asserts, that a man, who has thus been once justified, does not continue in a state of justification unless he actually obeys the moral precepts of the Gospel. Faith will place a man in a state of justification ; but faith and works are both necessary to pre¬ serve (l) James, 2. v. 1 7, 20 and 2 b* AiiT. xi.j Thirty-nine Articles. 263 serve a man in a state of justification. These two doctrines are perfectly consistent with each other. In proof that when St. Paul says, a man is justified by faith, without mentioning any other requisite, he means the first entrance into a state of justification, and that by the works of the law which he rejects, he does not mean the duties of morality, we may observe, that every one of his Epistles, and particularly those in which he treats of justification, abounds with the most earnest exhortations, and strict injunctions to the practice of moral virtue as essentially necessary in persons after they have embraced the Gospel, and as ab¬ solutely indispensable to final salvation. And that St. James, when he says that a man is jus¬ tified by works, is speaking of the continuance in a state of justification, and that by works hemeans the moral duties, is equally evident from his rea¬ soning and the examples which he adduces in the second chapter of his Epistle. St. Paul puts faith for faith in Christ, in contradistinction to the Law of Moses ; and the works which he declares to be unnecessary for justification are the rites and ceremonies of that law. On the other hand, by faith St. James means a bare assent to the truth of the Gospel, without conformity to its precepts ; and the works, which he pronounces to be necessary for justification, are the moral duties s 4 enjoined 264 Exposition of the [part hi. enjoined by the Gospel, and which are produced by a true and lively faith. We now return to the article, which proceeds in this manner; wherefore that we are JUSTIFIED BY FAITH ONLY IS A MOST WHOLE¬ SOME DOCTRINE, AND VERY FULL OF COM¬ FORT ; the word only is here added for the pur¬ pose of again disclaiming the popish doctrine of Human Merit. Justification by faith cannot but be a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort, as it places our hope of justification in this world, and of everlasting happiness in that which is to come, upon the infallible promises of God, and the all-sufficient merits of Christ. As IS MORE LARGELY EXPRESSED IN THE homily of justification. It is remarkable, that there is no homily with this title. The homily intitled “ Of the Salvation of all Man¬ kind,” is generally supposed to be here meant, though some learned men have thought that the four homilies upon “ human misery, salvation, faith, and good works,” were all referred to. The former opinion seems to be the better founded, as the word in the article is Homily , and not Homilies ; and that homily relates more particu¬ larly to the subject of this article. We find in it the following passages : “ This saying, that we be justified by faith only, freely, and without ® works, aiit. xt.] Thirty -nine Articles. 265 works, is spoken for to take away clearly all merit of our works, as being unable to deserve our justification at God’s bands, and thereby most plainly to express the weakness of man, and the goodness of God; the great infirmity of our¬ selves, and the might and power of God ; the imperfection of our own works, and the most abundant grace of our Saviour Christ ; and therefore wholly to ascribe the merit and de¬ serving of our justification unto Christ only and his most precious blood-shedding.’’ . . . “ Our office is not to pass the time of this present life unfruitfully and idly, after that we are baptized or justified, not caring how few7 good works we do to the glory of God, and the profit of our neighbours.” From the expression “ baptized or justified,” and also from the Forms of Baptism in our Liturgy, it is manifest that our Church considers justification as taking place at the time of Baptism, both in the case of infants and also of adults ( in). (m ) I desire to refer to the third chapter of my Refutation of Calvinism, for a more comprehensive view of the doctrines of Justification, Faith, and Works, than the designed brevity of this work will admit ; but I have thought it my duty to insert in this edition some passages from that chapter, which appear to be particularly connected with this article. 266 Exposition of the [part hi, ARTICLE THE TWELFTH. Of Good Works. ALBEIT THAT GOOD WORKS, WHICH ARE THE FRUITS OF FAITH, AND FOLLOW AFTER JUS¬ TIFICATION, CANNOT PUT AWAY OUR SINS AND ENDURE THE SEVERITY OF GOD’S JUDG¬ MENT ; YET ARE .THEY PLEASING AND ACCEPTABLE TO GOD IN CHRIST, AND DO SPRING OUT NECESSARILY OF A TRUE AND LIVELY FAITH, INSOMUCH THAT BY THEM A LIVELY FAITH MAY BE AS EVIDENTLY KNOWN, AS A TREE DISCERNED BY THE FRUIT. This article was not among those of 1552; it was added, in 1562, in opposition to the opinions of certain sects called Antinomians, Solifidians,and Gospellers, who denied theneces- sity of good works. There might also have been a general wish in the compilers of these articles to obviate any mistake which might arise from the expression in the preceding article, in which it is said, that “ we are justified by faith only.” By good works, which are the fruit of FAITH, AND FOLLOW AFTER JUSTIFICATION, are art. xii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 267 are meant those actions which proceed from the principle of a true faith in Christ, and are per¬ formed after we are placed in a state of justifica¬ tion, by being admitted to partake of the privileges and promises of the Gospel. That GOOD WORKS ARE PLEASING AND AC¬ CEPTABLE to god in Christ is evident from the earnest exhortations in almost every page of the New Testament, to the practice of the moral and social duties, and from the frequent and positive declarations of Scripture, that they are indispensably necessary to salvation. It is also expressly said, that “ we are created in Christ Jesus unto good works (a)? and that “ Christ gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works (b).n — “ Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven ( c — “ That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, beingfruitful in every good work ( d)T — “Charge them that are rich in this world, that they do good, that they be rich in good worksfe )."■ — “That the manof God maybe perfect, thoroughly furnished unto (a) Eph. c. 2. v. 10. (b) Tit. c. 2. v. 14. (c) Mat. c. 5. v: 16. ( d ) Coke. l.v. 10. (e) 1 Tim. c. 6. v. 17 and 18. 2 68 Exposition of the [part hi. unto all good works (f)”~ In all things showing thyself a pattern of good works ('gj.” — “ Put them in mind to be ready to every good work (7^.” — “ This is a faithful saying, and these things I will thatthou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works (i)” — “And let us consider one another, to provoke unto love and to good works ( k ).” — “To do good and to communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased (l)” — “ Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work, to do his will, working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ (m)” But though it appears from the whole tenor of the New Testament, and from these texts in par¬ ticular, that good works are pleasing in the sight of God, yet they are not so meritorious as to put away ouu sins, nor so perfect as to endure THE SEVERITY OF GOD’S JUDGMENT. “ If thou, Lord, shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall (f) 2 Tim. c. 3. v. 17. (g) Tit. c. 2. v. 7. (h ) Tit. c. 3. v. 1. ( i ) Tit. c. 3. v. 8. ( k ) Heb. c. 10. v. 24. (1) Heb. c. 13. v. 16. (m) Heb. c. 13. v. 20 and 21. art. xii.] Thirty-nine, Articles. 269 shall stand ( n J Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord, for in thy sight shall no man living be justified (o)T The corruption of human nature causes even the best of our ac¬ tions to be in some respects defective, and conse¬ quently they will not bear the scrutiny of infinite justice ; much less will they expiate those sins, of which every one, in a greater or less degree, is guilty. The imperfection of good works is acknowledged by the antient fathers: Cyril says, “ That which seems to be done well by us, cannot escape reprehension and blame, if it be narrowly searched into by God (pj ;” and Chry¬ sostom says, “ We do nothing right; but by the will of God we find our salvation ( q ).” Good works do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith; for if a man sincerely believes the divine authority of Christ’s religion, and is firmly convinced that his eter¬ nal happiness depends upon his obedience to its precepts, such a faith will naturally produce the practice of those virtues which are enjoined by the Gospel; insomuch that by them a LIVELY FAITH MAY BE AS EVIDENTLY KNOWN AS A TREE DISCERNED BY THE FRUIT. The performance of these good works is indeed the test (n) Psalm 130. v. 3. ( 0 ) Ps. 143. v. 2. ( p ) De Ador. Lib. 4. ( q ) In 1 Cor. c. 1. v. 1. 270 Exposition of the [part iii. test and criterion of genuine faith, just as “ every tree is known by its own fruit (r)f — “ Faith, if it hath not works, is dead (s)” Thus our church considers good works as essential to the character of a true Christian, and as the necessary consequences of sincere faith in Christ; but it does not allow the popish doctrine already mentioned : “ Bona opera ad vitam asternam consequendam vere prome- reri ( t ).” The true Scripture doctrine is, that good works are indispensable, but not sufficient, for the attainment of eternal life. When we have done all those things which are commanded us, we still say, that “ we are unprofitable servants,” and humbly rely upon the merits and mediation of Christ for our salvation. Bishop Burnet, in speaking of the pretended merit of good works, expresses himself in a manner which must be admired by every pious and humble Christian : “ The word merit has a sound that is so daring, so little suitable to the humility of a creature, to be used towards a Being of infinite majesty, and with relation to endless rewards, that on many accounts this word ought not to be made use of. There is somewhat in the nature of man apt to swell and to (r) Luke, c. 6. v. 44. ( s ) James, c. 2, v. 17. (t) Cone. Trid. de Bon. Op. cap. 11. art. xii.] Thirty-nine Articles . 271 to raise itself out of measure ; and to that no indulgence ought to be given in words that may flatter, for we ought to subdue this temper by all means possible, both in ourselves and others. On. the other hand, though we con¬ fess that there is a disorder and weakness that hangs heavy upon us, and that sticks close to us, yet this ought not to make us indulge our¬ selves in our sins, as if they were the effects of an infirmity that is inseparable from us. To consent to any sin, if it were ever so small in itself, is a very great sin ; we ought to go on, still cleansing ourselves more and more from all filthiness, both of the flesh and of the spirit, and perfecting holiness in the fear of God. Our readiness to sin should awaken both our dili¬ gence to watch against it, and our humility under it : for though we grow not up to a pitch of being above all sin, and of absolute perfection, yet there are many degrees both of purity and perfection to which we may arrive, and to which we must constantly aspire; so that we must keep a just temper in this matter, neither to ascribe so much to our own works as to be lifted up by reason of them, or to forget our daily need of a Saviour, both for pardon and intercession ; nor on the other hand so far to neglect them, as to take no care about them. The due temper is to make our calling and election sure, and to work out 272 Exposition of the [part hi. out our own salvation with fear and trembling ; but to do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, ever trusting to him, and giving thanks to God by him.” The following extract from a form of bap. tism, used in the church of Rome before its cor¬ ruption, will show how much that church, in its doctrine of the merit of good works, has de¬ parted from its antient principles : “ Credis non propriis meritis, sed passionis Domini nostri Jesu Christi virtute et merito, ad gloriam per- venire? Credo. — Credis quod Dominus noster Jesus Christus pro salute nostra mortuus sit? et quod ex propriis meritis vel alio modo nul- lus possit salvari, nisi in merito passionis ejus? Credo.” This form of baptism was forbidden by the Indices Expurgatorii, which were drawn up by order of the council of Trent. We also find the following passage in the works of Gre¬ gory the Great, who lived at the end of the sixth century, and was one of the most learned among the popes : “ Quinetiam si habuero quip- piam justum, non respondebo, sed meum ju- dicem deprecabor; ut enim saepe diximus, omnis humana justitia injustitia esse convincitur si districte judicetur. Prece ergo post justitiam indiget; ut, quae succumbere discussa poterat, ex sol& judicis potestate coalescat ( u )? (u) Moral, 8cc. cap. 2. art. xiii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 2 73 ARTICLE THE THIRTEENTH. Of Works before Justification. WORKS DONE BEFORE THE GRACE OF CHRIST, AND THE INSPIRATION OF HIS SPIRIT, ARE NOT PLEASANT TO GOD, FORASMUCH AS THEY SPRING NOT OF FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST, NEITHER DO THEY MAKE MEN MEET TO RECEIVE GRACE, OR (AS THE SCHOOL AUTHORS SAY) DESERVE GRACE OF CONGRUITY : YEA RATHER, FOR THAT THEY ARE NOT DONE AS GOD HATH WILLED AND COMMANDED THEM TO BE DONE, WE DOUBT NOT BUT THEY HAVE THE NATURE OF SIN. EVERY action which men perform by their own unassisted powers must necessarily par¬ take of the general imperfection and corruption of their nature ; and therefore their works done before they are strengthened by the grace of Christ, and guided by the inspira¬ tion of his spirit, cannot be pleasant TO GOD, FORASMUCH AS THEY SPRING NOT OF faith in jesus christ, the only principle which can render them acceptable in the sight of God. “ Without faith it is impossible to vol. il ' 1 t please 274 Exposition of the [part in. please God (a)."- •“ They that are in the flesh (that is, who are not purified by the spiritual re¬ ligion of Christ) cannot please God (b).” Bishop Burnet makes a distinction, which sets the doctrine of this article in a clear point of view : “ A great difference is here to be made between an external action, as it is considered in itself, and the same action as it was done by such a man. An action is called good from the morality and nature of the action itself : so actions of justice and charity are in themselves good, whatsoever the doer of them may be ; but actions are consi¬ dered by God with relation to him that does them in another light; hisprinciples, ends, and motives, with all the other circumstances of the action, come into this account ; for unless all these be good, let the action in its own abstracted nature be ever so good, it cannot render the doer accept¬ able or meritorious in the sight of God.” Nor can these works possess such degree of merit, as of themselves to make men meet, or worthy , to receive grace, or (as the SCHOOL AUTHORS SAY) GRACE OF CONGRUITY. All grace is the free gift of our heavenly Father, for “ the love of God our Saviour towards man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved ( b ) Rom. c. 8. v. 8. (a) Heb. c. 11. v.6. art. xin.] Thirty-nine Articles . 275 saved us by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost (c).” The school divines, or schoolmen, as they are called, speak of two sorts of merit, the merit of condignity and the merit of congruity ; the former they ascribe to works which men doby the assistance of grace, and to which they assert that a reward is injustice due ; the latter they ascribe to such works as men do by mere strength of free will, and which are to be rewarded only out of liberality (cl). We find no such distinction in the Scriptures ; they teach us in general to consider man as inca¬ pable of doing any thing which shall be entitled to reward, except through the mercy of God, and for the sake of Christ. Indeed, so great and universal a depravity is introduced into the dispositions of men in con¬ sequence of the fall of Adam, that they can in no instance of themselves act as their Creator originally commanded ; and therefore, as in all their works performed without divine assistance, there is a departure from the will of God, we doubt (c) Tit. c. 3. v. 4 and 5. (d) Mereri ex condigno, est mereri sic, ut secun¬ dum justitiam sibi debeatur, ita quod injustum esset non reddi mercedem merito ex condigno. Opus cui ex justitia non debetur merces, sed tantum ex con- gruitate quadam, vel ex sola acceptantis liberalitate. -Caietan. 276 Exposition of the [part hi. DOUBT NOT BUT THEY HAVE THE NATURE OF SIN. It is the will of God that we should act upon the motives which Christianity proposes to our actions, and no others ; and every resistance to his will and command hath surely “ the nature of sin.’" It is a principle of morals and legisla¬ tion universally admitted, that actions are as their motives, and upon this principle the article now under consideration chiefly turns. Besides, it is not likely that if our motives be wrong, our actions should continue right, though they may incidentally be so. Actions are of a transitory, motives of a permanent, nature. It is evident that this article, which is founded upon the general doctrine of original sin, ex¬ plained in the ninth article, applies also to all persons who have not lived under the Gospel dispensation. But though their works, as being DONE BEFORE THE GRACE OF CHRIST, AND THE INSPIRATION OF HIS SPIRIT, COuld not have been perfectly pleasing to God, and could not have risen to the standard of merit, yet as men, even in their natural condition, may, in some measure, resist the lusts of the flesh, with¬ stand temptations to evil, and do things good and laudable when compared with their powers and faculties, we may rest assured that such * conduct art. xiii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 277 conduct will be favourably accepted by a just and merciful God, who will judge mankind according to the degrees of instruction, and opportunities of improvement, which have been respectively afforded them; “ If there be a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that a man hath not ( e J.” And, therefore, though all the actions of all per¬ sons, who have not been brought to the know¬ ledge of Christ, are here pronounced to have the nature of sin, it by no means follows that these actions will, in all cases, exclude men from pardon and salvation. Christ offered himself as a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, and not solely for that small portion of it, which has been favoured with the light of his religion. Millions who never heard the name of Jesus, but who have been “ a law unto themselves (f)” will be redeemed and blessed for ever through the merits of his death, while those who have pro¬ fessed themselves his disciples, but “ have held the truth in unrighteousness (g)” will suffer “ in¬ dignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, denounced against every soul of man that doeth evil(7* ■)” whether he be Jew, Gentile, or Chris¬ tian ; (e) 2 Cor. c. 8. v. 12. (f) Rom. c. 2. v. 14. (g) Rom, c. i.v. 18. (h) Rom. c. 2. v. 8. and 9. T 3 278 Exposition of the [part hi. tian ; and all this is consistent with the opinion, that the true Church of Christ will hereafter be rewarded with appropriate blessings. But we must ever bear in mind, that to whom much is given, of him much will be required : a more exalted virtue, and a greater purity of heart, will be expected from Christians, in proportion to the advantages which they have enjoyed. W e are to be “ a peculiar people, zealous of good works;” we are to “ sanctify ourselves as the temples of God;” we are to “ depart from all iniquity;” and to aim at being “ perfect even as our Father which is in heaven is perfect.” And this degree of superiority, which requires incessant watch¬ fulness and constant energy, will be rewarded by “ the prize of our high calling in Christ.” art. xiv.] Thirty -nine Articles. 279 ARTICLE THE FOURTEENTH. Of Works of Supererogation. VOLUNTARY WORKS, BESIDES, OVER AND ABOVE GOD’S COMMANDMENTS, WHICH THEY CALL WORKS OF SUPEREROGATION, CANNOT BE TAUGHT WITHOUT ARROGANCE AND IMPIETY ; FOR BY THEM MEN DO DECLARE THAT THEY DO NOT ONLY RENDER UNTO GOD AS MUCH AS THEY ARE BOUND TO DO, BUT THAT THEY DO MORE FOR HrS SAKE THAN OF BOUNDEN DUTY IS REQUIRED; WHEREAS CHRIST SAITH PLAINLY, WHEN YE HAVE DONE ALL THAT ARE COMMANDED YOU, SAY, WE ARE UN¬ PROFITABLE SERVANTS. The precepts contained in the Gospel for the regulation of our lives are so full and compre¬ hensive, that they includeevery good work which men are capable of performing. It is impossible to imagine any action acceptable to God, which does not fall within the precepts, “ to love God with all our hearts (a) — “ to love our neigh¬ bour as ourselves ( b); ” — and to cleanse our¬ selves from all filthiness both of the flesh and spirit, (a) Matt. c. 22. v. 37. (h) Matt. c. 22. v. 39. T 4 280 Exposition of the [part hi. spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God ( c ).” And besides these general precepts, there are particular ones directed to persons in every con¬ dition and relation of life, and extending to every point and circumstance which can possibly pro¬ mote the honour of God, contribute to the hap¬ piness of our fellow-creatures, or tend to purify our own minds : and all these things are enjoined as duties of perfect and universal obligation; as indispensably necessary wherever they are prac¬ ticable. Since, therefore, God requires of us the entire exertion of all our powers, and not a single good action can be specified which is not com¬ manded in the New Testament, it follows, that no room is left for voluntary works, besides, OVER AND ABOVE GOD\S COMMANDMENTS, WHICH THEY CALL WORKS OF SUPEREROGA¬ TION ; nor can such works be taught with¬ out arrogance and impiety, since they im¬ ply a degree of merit, which man, in his present imperfect and corrupt state, is incapable of attain¬ ing, and are directly opposite to the plain and in¬ fallible word of God; or, as the article expresses it, FOR BY THEM MEN DO DECLARE, THAT THEY DO NOT ONLY RENDER UNTO GOD AS MUCH AS THEY ARE BOUND TO DO, BUT THAT THEY DO MORE FOR HIS SAKE, THAN OF BOUNDEN DUTY (cj. 2 Cor. c. 7. v. 1 . art. xiv.] Thirty -nine Articles. 281 DUTY IS REQUIRED : WHEREAS CHRIST SA1TH PLAINLY, WHEN Y E HAVE DONE ALL THAT ARE COMMANDED YOU, SAY, WE ARE UNPRO¬ FITABLE servants (cl)." These words, which are recorded in St. Luke’s Gospel, are so clear and decisive, that it is unnecessary to explain or enforce them. It is however well known that works of super¬ erogation are admitted by the members of the Romish persuasion ; and it cannot but be matter of surprise that such a doctrine should have pre¬ vailed in any church which calls itself Christian. This doctrine was first known about the twelfth or thirteenth century ; and it seems to have been founded upon what the Papists call “ Counsels of perfection,” that is, rules which do not bind under the penalty of sin, but are only useful in carrying- men to a greater degree of perfection than is necessary to salvation. There is not the slightest authority in Scripture for these Counsels of perfection : all the rules there prescribed for our conduct are given in the form of positive com¬ mands, as absolutely necessary, wherever they are applicable, to the attainment of eternal life ; and the violation of every one of these commands is declared to be sin. We are ordered to be “ per¬ fect, even as our Father which is in heaven is perfect (d) Luke, c. 17. v. 10. 282 Exposition of the [paiit hi. perfect ( e ) — and so far from being able to exceed what is required for our salvation, the Gospel assures us, that after our utmost care and best endeavours we shall still fall short of our whole duty ; and that our deficiencies must be supplied by the abundant merits of our blessed Redeemer. We are directed to trust to the mercy of God, and to the mediation of Christ : “ and to work out our salvation with fear and trembling (f)f that is, with anxiety lest we should not fulfil the conditions upon which it is offered. Upon these grounds we may pronounce that works of supererogation are inconsistent with the nature of man, irreconcileable with the whole tenor and general principles of our reli¬ gion, and contrary to the express declarations of Scripture. ( e) Matt. c. 5. v. 48. (f) Phil. c. 2. v. 12* art xv.] Thirty-nine Articles , 283 ARTICLE THE FIFTEENTH. Of Christ alone without Sin. CHRIST, IN THE TRUTH OF OUR NATURE, WAS MADE LIKE UNTO US IN ALL THINGS (SIN ONLY EXCEPT) FROM WHICH HE WAS CLEARLY VOID, BOTH IN HIS FLESH AND IN HIS SPIRIT. HE CAME TO BE THE LAMB WITHOUT SPOT, WHO, BY SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF ONCE MADE, SHOULD TAKE AWAY THE SINS OF THE WORLD ; AND SIN, AS ST. JOHN SAITH, WAS NOT IN HIM. BUT ALL WE THE REST (ALTHOUGH BAPTIZED AND BORN AGAIN IN CHRIST) YET OFFEND IN MANY THINGS ; AND IF WE SAY WE HAVE NO SIN, WE DECEIVE OURSELVES, AND THE TRUTH IS NOT IN US. This article consists of two parts ; in the former Christ’s freedom from sin is asserted, and in the latter it is declared that all men are guilty of sin. That CHRIST, IN THE TRUTH OF OUR NATURE tVAS MADE LIKE UNTO US IN ALL THINGS, that is, that Christ partook of the ordinary nature of men, was shown under the second article. SlN ONLY EXCEPT, FROM WHICH HE WAS CLEARLY VOID, BOTH IN HIS FLESH AND IN HIS 284 Exposition of the [part hi. his spirit. That Christ was free from sin of every species and denomination appears from the whole course of his life, as recorded in the Gos¬ pels ; and it is expressly asserted in the following passages in the Epistles ; “ Who did no sin, nei¬ ther was guile found in his mouth ( a)." — “ We have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all things temptedlike asweare, yetwithout sin (b ).” — Christ is also called, “ Holy, harmless, unde¬ filed, and separate from sinners ( c :J.” — The So- cinians hold that Christ was peccable, which seems to be a consequence of their considering him as a mere man, and of their denial of the doctrine of the atonement. He came to be a lamb without spot, WHO, BY SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF ONCE MADE, SHOULD TAKE AWAY THE SINS OF THE WORLD,* AND SIN, AS ST. JOHN SAITH, WAS NOT IN HIM. The Jews were commanded, when they celebrated the Passover, in commemoration of their deliver¬ ance from Egyptian bondage, to choose out of their flocks a lamb without spot or blemish, and to offer it as a sacrifice to God. This was a type of Christ, who, being without spot or sin, offered himself to God as a sacrifice for the sins of the whole (a) 1 Pet. c. 2. v. 22. (c ) Heb. c. 7. v. 26. ei 11 ( b ) Heb. c. 4. v. 15. art. xv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 285 whole world; and thence he is called the true Paschal Lamb : “ Christ our Passover is sacri¬ ficed for us(W Behold,” said John the Bap¬ tist, “ the Lamb of God which taketn away the sins of the world (e)T — “ Now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself (f).n — “ Ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin ( g)” But all we the rest (although baptized AND BORN AGAIN IN CHRIST) YET OFFEND in many things. That all men are liable to sin, and actually commit it, has been noticed in the explanation of former articles: and, therefore, if WE SAY WE HAVE NO SIN, WE DECEIVE OUR¬ SELVES, AND THE TRUTH IS NOT IN US (h). This latter part of the article was directed against the Pelagians and others, who asserted that men after baptism might live without sin. But in the an- tient fathers of the church we find a very opposite doctrine; “Let no one/’ says Cyprian, “ flatter himself with the idea of being innocent, since nobody is innocent ; and by extolling himself, a person would only aggravate his punishment. He is instructed and taught that he is guilty of sin every (d) 1 Cor. c. 5. v. 7. (e) John, c. 1. v. 29. (f) Heb. c.9. v. 26. ( g ) 1 John, c. 3. v.5. (h) 1 John, c. 1. v. 8. 2 86 Exposition of the [ p a rt i i i . every day, since lie is commanded to pray every day (i)” Some modern enthusiasts consider themselves as entirely free from sin ; and the Moravian Anabaptists are said to omit this part of the Lord’s Prayer, “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us;” because being regenerated, they are no longer guilty of sin ( k ). While we condemn the presumption of those who think more highly of themselves than they ought to think, we must be careful not to suffer the infirmity of human nature to be abused into an encouragement to sin, or perverted into a cause of gloomy despondence ; it should rather stimu¬ late us to vigilance and exertion, than drive us to negligence or despair. Though we cannot ar¬ rive at sinless purity, it is still our duty to aim at an uniform obedience to all God’s commands ; and to indulge any apprehensions which tend to weaken the energy of our minds, is doubly sin¬ ful, because we thus voluntarily increase the dif¬ ficulty of obedience to the will of God, and in reality doubt his assurance, that our sincere en¬ deavours to persevere in the paths of virtue and religion will be forwarded by the assistance of divine grace. (i) De Orat. Dom. (k) Hey’s Lectures, vol. 3. p.422. art. xvi.] Thirty-nine Articles. 287 ARTICLE THE SIXTEENTH. Of Sin after Baptism. NOT EVERY DEADLY SIN, WILLINGLY COM¬ MITTED AFTER BAPTISM, IS SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST, AND UNPARDONABLE, WHEREFORE THE GRANT OF REPENTANCE IS NOT TO BE DENIED TO SUCH AS FALL INTO SIN AFTER BAPTISM. AFTER WE HAVE RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST, WE MAY DE¬ PART FROM GRACE GIVEN AND FALL INTO SIN; AND BY THE GRACE OF GOD WE MAY RISE AGAIN AND AMEND OUR LIVES ' AND THEREFORE THEY ARE TO BE CONDEMNED, WHICH SAY, THEY CAN NO MORE SIN AS LONG AS THEY LIVE HERE, OR DENY THE PLACE OF FORGIVENESS TO SUCH AS TRULY REPENT. This article is directed against the Mon- tanists, Novatians, Anabaptists, and others, who denied the efficacy of repentance in certain cases ; and also against those who contended that men could not possibly be guilty of sin after they had once received the Holy Ghost, or divine grace. In the preceding article we noticed a sect of Christians who maintain the peccability of Christ, and 288 Exposition of the [i*aut lit. and in this article we have to argue against those who contend for the impeccability of man. But before we proceed to explain the propositions contained in this article, it may be right to in¬ quire into what is meant by the Sin against the Holy Ghost, which occurs in the former part of it. Divines are by no means agreed concern¬ ing this sin. I shall state what appears to me to be intended by it, and refer those, who wish to see the different opinions which have been en¬ tertained upon this difficult and disputed point, to Archbishop Tillotson, Bishop Pearson, and Dr. Whitby. The sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is mentioned in the three first Gospels. We learn from St. Matthew and St. Mark, that the Jews, who had seen Christ cure many dasmoniacs, being unable to deny the reality of these miracles, asserted that he derived his power of casting out devils from Beelzebub the prince of the devils. Our Saviour, after pointing out the absurdity of such an imputation, added, according to St. Matthew, “ All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him ; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, • it art. xvi.] Thirty-nine Articles. 289 it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come ( a J.” St. Mark’s words are, “ All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewithsoever they shall blaspheme ; buthe that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation^ Upon anotheroccasion,whenno imputation of the above kind seems to have been alleged against our Sa¬ viour, St. Luke tells us that Christ declared that, “ Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven him; butunto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven fcj.” It thus appears that all the three Evangelists agree in representing the sin of blas¬ phemy against the Holy Ghost as a crime which would not be forgiven; but no one of them affirms that those, whohad ascribed Christ’s power ofcast- ing out devils to Beelzebub, had been guilty of that sin; and in St. Luke it is not mentioned that any such chargehad been made. Our Saviour, accord¬ ing to the account in St. Matthew and St. Mark, endeavoured to convince the Jews of their error; but so far from accusing them of having com¬ mitted an unpardonable sin in what they had said concerning (a) Matt. c. 12. v. 31 and 32. (h) Mark, c. 3. v. 28 and 29. ( c) Luke, c. 12. v. 10. VOL. II. U Exposition of the [part iji. concerning him, lie declares that, “ Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man it shall be forgiven him that is, whatever reproaches men may utter against the Son of man during his ministry, however they may calumniate the au¬ thority upon which he acts, it is still possible that hereafterthey may repent and believe, and all their sins may be forgiven them; but the reviling of the Holy Ghost is described as an offence of a far more heinous nature : “ The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.” — 1 “ He that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, hath never forgiveness.” — “ Unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven.” — It is plain that this sin against the Holy Ghost could not be com¬ mitted while our Saviour was upon earth, since he always speaks of the Holy Ghost as not being to come till after his ascension into heaven ( d ). A few days after that great event the descent of the Holy Ghost enabled the Apostles to work miracles, and communicated to them a variety of other supernatural gifts. If men should ascribe these powers to Beelzebub, or in any respect reject their authority, they would blaspheme the Holy Ghost from whom they were derived; and that sin would be unpardonable, because this was ( d ) John, c, 7, v, 39. c. 16. vk 7, art. xvi.] Thirty -nine Articles. 291 was the completion of the evidence of the divine authority of Christ and his religion ; and they who rejected these last means of conviction, could have no other opportunity of being brought to faith in Christ, the only appointed condition of pardon and forgiveness. The greater heinous¬ ness of the sin of ‘these men would consist in their rejecting a greater body of testimony; for they are supposed to be acquainted with the resurrection of our Saviour from the dead ; with his ascension into heaven ; with the miraculous descent of the Holy Ghost, and with the super¬ natural powers which it communicated ; circum¬ stances, all of which were enforced by the Apos¬ tles when they preached the Gospel; but none of which could be known to those who refused to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah during his actual ministry. Though this was a great sin, it was not an unpardonable one ; it might be atoned for by subsequent belief, by yielding to subsequent testimony. But, on the other hand, they who finally rejected the accumulated and complete evidence of Jesus being the Messiah, as exhibited by the inspired Apostles, precluded themselves from the possibility of conviction, because no further testimony would be afforded them; and consequently, there being no means of repentance, they would be incapable of for¬ giveness and redemption. u 2 Thus 292 Exposition of the [part iit. Thus it appears that the sin against the Holy Ghost consisted in finally rejecting the Gospel as preached by the Apostles, who confirmed the truth of the doctrine which they taught “by signs and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost (e).” And it was unpardonable, because this was the consummation of the proofs afforded to the men of that generation of the divine mission of Christ. This sin was mani¬ festly distinct from all other sins ; it indicated an invincible obstinacy of mind, an impious and unalterable determination to refuse the offered mercy of God. As a further illustration of this subject, I will transcribe Dr. Doddridge’s paraphrase of the above passages in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark : “I therefore give you the most solemn and compassionate warning of your danger, for you are on the brink of the most dreadful pre¬ cipice. That malignity of heart which leads you to ascribe these works of mine to a confederacy with Satan, may incline you to pass the same impious sentence on the greatest and fullest con¬ firmation which is to be given to my Gospel, by the effusion of the Spirit on my followers ; and therefore to prevent, if possible, such guilt and ruin, verily I say unto you, that all other sins shall be forgiven to the children of men, and (e) Heb. c. 2. v. 4. even art. xvi.] Thirty-nine Articles. 293 even all the other blasphemies with which they shall blaspheme, but the blasphemy against the Spirit of God, in this most glorious dispensation of it, shall not be forgiven to those impious and incorrigible men, who shall dare to impute to diabolical operation those glorious works of di¬ vine power and goodness. And I add, that who¬ soever speaks a contemptuous and impious word, even against the Son of man himself, while here on earth, in this obscure form, he may possibly be brought to repentance for it, and so it shall be forgiven him ; and consequently even your case, bad as it is, is not entirely hopeless ; but whosoever shall maliciously speak any thing of this nature against the Holy Spirit, when the grand dispensation of it shall open in those mi¬ raculous gifts and operations that will be attended with the most evident demonstrations of his mighty power, it shall never be forgiven him at all > either in this world or in that which is to come; but he is obnoxious to eternal damnation, and must irrecoverably sink into it ; nor will all the grace of the Gospel, in its fullest display, afford a remedy for so aggravated a crime, or furnish him with means for his conviction and recovery. ’’ W e now proceed to explain the article itself. St. Paul tells us, that “ the wages of sin is death (f) and therefore, though all sins are by no ( f) Rom. c. 6. v. 23. u 3 294 Exposition of the [part hi. no means equal, every sin may be considered as deadly in its nature. In this article a more heinous sort of sin, seems to be understood, im¬ plying a known and deliberate transgression of the laws of God, and not merely a sin of ignorance or infirmity. But even in that sense, not every DEADLY SIN WILLINGLY COMMITTED AFTER BAPTISM IS SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST, as fully appears from what has been just now said concerning that particular sin ; and there seems to be no ground in Scripture for considering any degree or species of sin as at this time necessarily unpardonable, or beyond the efficacy of sincere repentance. When St. John says, “ that there is a sin unto death (g)f it is supposed that he means the sin against the Holy Ghost, which, if our interpretation be right, was confined to the time of the Apostles, and which is the only sin to which forgiveness is denied in the New Testament. “The doors,” says Clement of Alex¬ andria, “ are open to every one, who in truth, and with his whole heart, returns to God ; and the Father most willingly receives a son, who truly repents.” This is the general tenor of Scripture, in which all men are invited to repentance with¬ out any discrimination or exception. And we are told, even under the Mosaic dispensation, that (g) l John, c. 5. v. 16. art. xvi.] Thirty -nine Articles. 295 that “ though our sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow ; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool ( h )” And the exhortations to amendment and reformation con¬ tained in the Epistles, are all addressed to persons who had been already baptized, and who had been guilty of faults or sins subsequent to their baptism. Wherefore the grant of repentance IS NOT TO BE DENIED TO SUCH AS FALL INTO sin after baptism. It was observed in the beginning of this article, that there have been at different periods of the Christian Church several sects which denied the efficacy of repentance ; but I am not aware that there is now any sect, at least in this country, which maintains that doctrine. Although the Holy Ghost purifies our minds, and assists and co-operates with us in the per¬ formance of our duty, yet he does not entirely take away the corruption and infirmity of our nature, nor does he destroy our free agency; and consequently, after we have received the HOLY GHOST, WE MAY DEPART FROM GRACE GIVEN ('i)f AND FALL INTO SIN. But as we may ( h J Isa. c. 1. v. 18. CO The Puritans, in the beginning of the reign of king James the First, were sensible that this doctrine of the defectibility of grace, was inconsistent with v 4 their 296 Exposition of the [part iii. may relapse from virtue into wickedness, so we MAY RISE AGAIN AND AMEND OUR LIVES J We may return to a sense of our duty, and again yield obedience to the influence of God’s Holy Spirit: and therefore they are to be con¬ demned who say they can no more sin AS LONG AS THEY LIVE HERE, OR DENY THE PLACE OF FORGIVENESS TO SUCII AS TRULY repent. “ As those,” says bishop Pearson, “ who are received into the church by the sa¬ crament of baptism, receive the remission of their sins, of which they were guilty before they were baptized ; so after they are thus made mem¬ bers of the church, they receive remission of their future sins by their repentance. Christ, who hath left us a pattern of prayer hath thereby taught us for ever to implore and beg the forgiveness of our sins ; that as we, through the frailty of our nature, are always subject unto sin, so we should always exercise the acts of repentance, and for ever seek the favour of God. This then is the comfort of the Gospel, that as it discovereth sin within us, so it propoundeth a remedy unto us. While their opinion of absolute predestination, and therefore they desired that these words, " though not finally,” might be added to the words of the article, “ we may depart from grace given but the king and bishops would not allow any such addition. — See the Hampton Court Conference. art. xvi.] Thirty-nine Articles. 297 While we are in this life encompassed with flesh, while the allurements of the world, while the stratagems of Satan, while the infirmities and corruptions of our nature betray us to the trans¬ gression of the law of God, we are always subject to offend : whence, whosoever saith that he has no sin, is a liar (k), contradicting himself and contracting iniquity by pretending innocency : and so long as we can offend, so long we may apply ourselves unto God by repentance, and be renewed by his grace and pardoned by his mercy (l)." (k) 1 John, c. 1 . v. 10, and c. 2. v. 4. ( l) Pearson on the Creed, Art. v. 1 0. 298 Exposition of the [part III ARTICLE THE SEVENTEENTH. Of Predestination and Election. PREDESTINATION TO LIFE 19 THE EVERLAST¬ ING PURPOSE OF GOD, WHEREBY (BEFORE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE WORLD WERE LAID) HE HATH CONSTANTLY DECREED BY HIS COUNSEL, SECRET TO US, TO DELIVER FROM CURSE AND DAMNATION THOSE WHOM HE HATH CHOSEN IN CHRIST OUT OF MANKIND, AND TO BRING THEM BY CHRIST TO EVERLASTING SALVATION, AS VESSELS MADE TO HONOUR. WHEREFORE THEY WHICH BE ENDUED WITH SO EXCEL¬ LENT A BENEFIT OF GOD, BE CALLED AC¬ CORDING TO GOD’S PURPOSE BY HIS SPIRIT, WORKING IN DUE SEASON ! THEY THROUGH GRACE OBEY THE CALLING 1 THEY BE JUS¬ TIFIED FREELY : THEY BE MADE SONS OF GOD BY ADOPTION : THEY BE MADE LIKE THE IMAGE OF HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON JESUS CHRIST : THEY WALK RELIGIOUSLY IN GOOD WORKS ; AND AT LENGTH BY god’s MERCY THEY ATTAIN TO EVERLAST¬ ING FELICITY. AS THE GODLY CONSIDERATION OF PREDESTI¬ NATION, AND OUR ELECTION IN CHRIST, IS FULL OF SWEET, PLEASANT, AND UNSPEAK¬ ABLE COMFORT TO GODLY PERSONS, AND SUCH art. xvii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 299 SUCH AS FEEL IN THEMSELVES THE WORK¬ ING OF THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, MORTIFY¬ ING THE WORKS OF THE FLESH, AND THEIR EARTHLY MEMBERS, AND DRAWING UP THEIR MIND TO HIGH AND HEAVENLY THINGS J AS WELL BECAUSE IT DOTH GREATLY ESTABLISH AND CONFIRM THEIR FAITH OF ETERNAL SALVATION, TO BE ENJOYED THOUGH CHRIST, AS BECAUSE IT DOTH FERVENTLY KINDLE THEIR LOVE TO¬ WARDS GOD *. SO FOR CURIOUS AND CARNAL PERSONS, LACKING THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, TO HAVE CONTINUALLY BEFORE THEIR EYES THE SENTENCE OF GOd’s PREDES¬ TINATION, IS A MOST DANGEROUS DOWN¬ FALL, WHEREBY THE DEVIL DOTH THRUST THEM EITHER INTO DESPERATION, OR INTO WRETCHLESSNESS OF MOST UNCLEAN LIVING, NO LESS PERILOUS THAN DES- PERATION. Furthermore, WE MUST RECEIVE god’s PROMISES IN SUCH WISE AS THEY BE GENERALLY SET FORTH TO US IN HOLY SCRIPTURE I AND IN OUR DOINGS, THAT WILL OF GOD IS TO BE FOLLOWED, WHICH WE HAVE EXPRESSLY DECLARED UNTO US IN THE WORD OF GOD. Predestination is with reason considered as one of the most abstruse doctrines of Theo- 300 Exposition of the [part hi. logy ; and it has in different ages of the Christian Church, been the fruitful source of a great va¬ riety of controversies. These disputes have been chiefly upon points far beyond the capacity of men, and have tended but little to promote the true interests of Christianity. This article is drawn up with great caution and judgment ; in the former part of it, which relates to the mean¬ ing of the terms Predestination and Election, the words of Scripture are chiefly used, and the latter part is obviously designed to guard against the evils and mischiefs which might arise from mistaken ideas upon these intricate subjects. I shall state, with as much perspicuity as I am able, the doctrines of our Church concerning these points, subjoiningthe authorities upon which they rest. God is represented in Scripture as having pre¬ ordained the redemption of mankind, through Christ, before the foundation of the world, and “ when the fulness of the time was come, he sent forth his Son, made of a woman ( a J,5' to execute his gracious purpose. But it has pleased our AlmightyFather, in the inscrutablecounselsofhis wisdom, to confine the knowledge of his merciful dispensation, even to this day, to a portion of the human race ; and by his prescience he foresaw, to (a) Gal. c. 4. v. 4. art. xvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 301 to whom these glad tidings would be communi¬ cated. Those who are blessed with the glorious light of the Gospel, according to this scheme of Divine Providence, may be said to be predesti¬ nated to life, because they enjoy the appointed means of salvation : and therefore, predestina¬ tion TO LIFE IS THE EVERLASTING PURPOSE OF GOD, WHEREBY (BEFORE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE WORLD WERE LAID) HE HATH CONSTANT¬ LY DECREED BY HIS COUNSEL, SECRET TO US, TO DELIVER FROM CURSE AND DAMNATION THOSE WHOM HE HATH CHOSEN IN CHRIST OUT OF MANKIND, AND TO BRING THEM BY CHRIST TO EVERLASTING SALVATION, AS VESSELS made to honour. “ Those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind,” are that part of mankind, to whom God decreed to make known the Gospel ; and it is to be observed, that this expression does not distinguish one set of Christians from another, but Christians in general from the rest of mankind ; and conse¬ quently “ to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation,” does not mean actually saving them, but granting them the means of salvation through Christ. This beginning of the Article is taken from the following passage in St. Paul’s second Epistle to Timothy, “ who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our 3o2 Exposition of the [part hi. our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus, before the world began (b);” here the word “ us ” evidently means Christians, and the words “ hath saved us” do not mean that the salvation of Christians had actually taken place, butthat they were enabled to obtain salvation (c). Salvation will not take place till the day of judgment ; and it can scarcely be supposed, that all, whom God “ hath called with his holy calling,” will then be saved, although every Christian has it in his power to obtain salvation, by complying with the terms upon which it is promised. Those to whom the Gospel was made known, according to the foreseen purpose of God, are said in the New Testament to be predestinated and elect, “ Who are the called according to his purpose : for whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate ( d Elect, according to the foreknowledge of GodfeJ:” Predestination and Election are therefore founded in the foreknow¬ ledge of God. In the latter of the above pas¬ sages St. Peter speaks of all the Christians of Pontus, (b) 2 Tim. c. l. v. 9. (c) Similar expressions with the same meaning occur in several parts of the New Testament, Eph. c. 2. v. 8. Tit. c. 3. v. 5. i Pet. c. 3. v. 21. Rom. c. 8. v. 24. 1 Cor. c. 1. v. 18. (d) Rom. c. 8. v. 29. (e) 1 Pet. c. l.v. 2. aet. xvii.] Thirty-nine Articles . 303 Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, and St. Paul speaks of all the Colossian Chris¬ tians (f)9 as being “ elect;” and both Apostles represent the salvation of these elect persons as depending upon their obedience to the precepts of the Gospel ; and consequently by the word elect they could not mean Christians who were certain of being saved by an absolute decree of God ; and surely no one would contend that all the Christians of those five extensive countries, or of the city of Colosse, who were then ad¬ dressed, will hereafter be saved. The words elect and chosen constantly denote collective bodies of men who were converted to the Gospel, without any restriction to those who will obtain salvation ; and an infallible certainty of eternal happiness in consequence of a divine decree, is not attributed to any number of Christians, or to any single Christian, throughout the New Testa¬ ment. Salvation is uniformly mentioned as con¬ tingent and conditional. St. Peter calls upon Christians by their own “ diligence to make their calling and election sure ( g ),” and consequently the calling and election of Christians imply only the means of salvation, which may or may not be effectual ; to require human diligence to make a divine infallible decree sure, could never be the injunction ( g ) 2 Pet. c. 1. v. 10. ( J ) C. 3* v. 12. 304 Exposition of the [part hi. injunction of an Apostle. St. Paul himself ad¬ mitted the possibility of his being “ a castaway;” that is, rejected at the great day of final retri¬ bution, if he did not “ keep under his body, and bring it into subjection,” that is, resist the evil propensities of his nature, and practise that Gos¬ pel which he “ had preached to others (h)T Thus were our Reformers fully authorized by Scripture to declare, as they have done in this article, that predestination to life is not an irre¬ spective decree of eternal happiness to certain individual Christians exclusively, butthe gracious purpose of God, before the creation of man, to make an indiscriminate offer of salvation in his own good time, to all who shall embrace and obey the Gospel, through the merits ofhis blessed Son. This indeed appears to be the only sense in which predestination is reconcileable with the attributes of God and the free agency of man : for we cannot conceive that a Being of infinite justice and mercy would arbitrarily select out of his rational creatures a determinate number, on whom he would bestow the blessing of eternal happiness, while he consigned all the rest to eternal punishment ( i ), or passed them over as unworthy (h) 1 Cor. c. 9. v. 27. ( i ) This is the doctrine of absolute election and re¬ probation, and was maintained by those who are called ® Supralapsarians. art. -xvii.] Thirty-nine Articles . 305 unworthy of his regard and attention (lc ). Such an idea of election ought surely to be rejected. We are not required to believe that God, from all eternity, absolutely decreed that certain persons only should be saved, or that he gives an irre¬ sistible grace to some men which he denies to others : such a mode of proceeding would be as destructive of human freedom, as it would be repugnant to the perfections of the divine nature. If we believe that God is infinitely just and mer¬ ciful, we must believe that he has equally enabled every man born into the world to work out his salvation, though we know so little of the divine government, that in many cases we cannotdiscern how that impartiality is maintained. This igno- ♦ ranee Supralapsarians. It is to be observed, that reprobation is not mentioned in this article. It cannot be said that our Church favours absolute predestination, as in the last article it is asserted that we may fall from grace given : for if we be not absolutely predestinated to persevere in grace, we cannot be absolutely pre¬ destinated to salvation ; and in the catechism of our Church it is said, that God the Son redeemed all mankind, which is not consistent with the doctrine of absolute election and reprobation; and in the Com¬ munion service it is said, that Christ, by the one oblation of himself once offered, made there a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satis¬ faction, for the sins of the whole world. (k) This was the doctrine of those who were called Sublapsarians. VOJU II. X 306 Exposition of the [part hi, ranee should lead us to be very cautious in what we pronounce concerning the decrees and coun¬ sels of God; it should make us reluctant to spe¬ culate upon these awful and mysterious subjects, and solicitous to avoid the pernicious error of aiming at being “ wise above that which is written (l).” The prescience of God, as extend¬ ing to every instance of human conduct, from the creation of man to the final consummation of all things, is a fit object of our belief; but we are utterly incapable of comprehending how this pre¬ science consists with the other attributes of the Deity and with the free agency of man; nor can we conceive how those future contingencies, which depend upon the determination of the human will, should be certain and infallible : and yet, that they are so, is fully proved by the accurate accomplishment of prophecies. Rather than be¬ wilder ourselves in the inextricable difficulties of such contemplations, to which our limited faculties are by no means competent, we should exclaim with the pious and humble Psalmist, “ Such knowledge is too wonderful and excellent for us; we cannot attain unto it (m Wherefore they which be endued with SO EXCELLENT A BENEFIT OF GOD, BE CALLED ACCORDING TO GODS PURPOSE BY HIS SPIRIT WORKING (l) i Cor. c. 4.-V. 6.. (m) Ps. 139. v. 6. art. xvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 307 WORKING IN DUE SEASON; THEY THROUGH GRACE OBEY THE CALLING; THEY BE JUSTI¬ FIED freely; that is, they who conform to the conditions of the Gospel dispensation are made partakers of its benefits, according to the gracious purpose of God, who planned this scheme of redemption : they are assisted by the influence of his Spirit; and are accepted through his free and voluntary offer of pardon and justification. . And such are the glorious privileges and effects of this state of acceptance, that we are assured in Scripture, thatby it men be made sons of god by adoption; they be made like the image of his only begotten son JESUS chuist; THEY WALK RELIGIOUSLY IN GOOD WORKS, AND AT LENGTH BY GOD’s MERCY THEY ATTAIN TO everlasting felicity. “ That we might re¬ ceive the adoption of sons ( n ).” — “ To be con¬ formed to the image of his Son ( 0 ).” — “ Created in Christ Jesus unto good works ( p ).” — “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who are (n) Gal. c. 4. v. 5. (p) Eph. c. 2. v. 10. X 2 (0) Rom. c. 8. v. 29. 308 Exposition of the [part hi. are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time ( q )'' — “ According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love; having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will ( r).” “ The errors and vain disputes,” says Mr. Pyle, “ that have arisen in the latter ages of Christi¬ anity concerningfaith and works, justification and sanctification, election and reprobation, that have distracted the minds of many Christians, havepro- ceeded from applying particular phrases or pas¬ sages in the Epistles to particular persons, which originally referred to the state and condition not of particular persons, but of whole churches in their collective capacity. Thus the body of heathens, while in their heathen state, are called aliens, strangers, enemies to God, &c.; but such of them as were converted (the churches to whom the Apostles wrote) are styled no longer strangers, but of the household of God, a chosen or elected generation, a royal priesthood, justified, sanctified, saints, See. So the major part of the Jewish nation, who obstinately rejected theGospel of Christ, in¬ stead of being any longer the holy nation, the people . ~ u of (g) i Pet. c. 1 . v. 3, 8tc. ( r ) Eph. c. i . v. 4 81 5. art. xvii.j Thirty-nine Articles. 309 of God, are called the vessels of wrath, fitted (by their own obstinacy) for destruction, reprobate; while the believing Jews became vessels of mercy, fore-ordained, predestinated, to be called into the kingdom or covenant of the Gospel, chosen to eternal life ; which expressions mean no more than their having been offered the means and op¬ portunities of attaining to the future happiness of heaven, by their knowledge and practice of Christ’s religion. Their actual enjoyment of future happiness depended entirely on their vir¬ tuous obedience to the Gospel; on their diligence to make their calling and election sure, that is, effectual to their salvation. No private persons are ever mentioned in these writings as elected to eternal life by any absolute decree of God. Paul was a chosen vessel ; but he was chosen as a proper minister of Christ’s Gospel, to bear his name to the Gentiles ; his being chosen to the crown of life hereafter was the fruit of his earnest endeavours to keep the faith, (his fidelity) to finish his course, and of his labouring abundantly. To take these expressions otherwise is to pervert the design of these writings. It is this mistake that has diverted the minds of many good men from attending to the more excellent parts of these writings, the moral and weighty exhorta¬ tions given to Christians; and by puzzling them about former controversies that do very little, if X 3 at 310 Exposition of the [part hi. at all, concern us now, have turned off their thoughts from the great matters of the Christian law, which are most easy to be understood, and requisite to be put in practice ( s AS THE GODLY CONSIDERATION OF PRE¬ DESTINATION, AND OUR ELECTION IN CHRIST, IS FULL OF SWEET, PLEASANT AND UNSPEAK¬ ABLE COMFORT TO GODLY PERSONS, AND SUCH AS FEEL IN THEMSELVES THE WORK¬ ING OF THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, MORTIFYING THE WORKS OF THE FLESH, AND THEIR EARTHLY MEMBERS: AND DRAWING UP THEIR MINDS TO HIGH AND HEAVENLY THINGS, AS WELL BECAUSE IT DOTH GREATLY ESTABLISH AND CONFIRM THEIR FAITH OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO BE ENJOYED THROUGH CHRIST, AS BECAUSE IT DOTH FREQUENTLY KINDLE THEIR LOVE TOWARDS GOD : SO, FOR CURI¬ OUS AND CARNAL PERSONS, LACKING THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, TO HAVE CONTINUALLY BEFORE THEIR EYES THE SENTENCE OF GOD’S PREDESTINATION, IS A MOST DANGEROUS DOWNFALL (t)} WHEREBY THE DEVIL DOTH THRUST THEM EITHER INTO DESPERATION, OR INTO WRETCHLESS NESS (u) OF MOST UNCLEAN LIVING, (s) Preface to the Epistle to the Romans. (t) The Latin word is prsecipitium, a precipice, which seems better to describe the dangerous si¬ tuation in which such persons are placed. ( k J Wretchlessness signifies carelessness. Duce diabolo, vel in desperationem prsesentem objiciuntur prsecipites, art. xvii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 311 LIVING, NO LESS PERILOUS THAN DESPERA¬ TION; that is, as a due consideration of the divine decree to save all who shall believe and obey the Gospel, is a source of inexpressible consolation to virtuous and godly persons; encourages them to rely upon the promised assistance of the Holy Spirit ; fortifies them against the temptations to fleshly lusts ; teaches them to set their affections on things above ; strengthens their faith ; and animates their love towards God: so the unwar¬ ranted idea of God’s absolute and unconditional predestination is apt to drive the presumptuous and the wicked, who resist the influence of the Spirit of Christ, either into a state of gloomy despondency on the one hand, or into a course of unbridled licentiousness on the other. “If a man thinks that he is under an inevitable decree, as he will have little remorse for all the evil he does, while he imputes it to that inevitable force that constrains him, so he will naturally conclude that it is to no purpose for him to struggle with im¬ possibilities ; and men being inclined both to throw all blame off from themselves, and to in¬ dulge themselves in laziness and sloth, these practices are too natural to mankind to be encou¬ raged by opinions that favour them. All virtue and prsccipites, vel in solutam quandam et niollem vitse securitatem, sine aut pcenitentia, aut scelerum con- scientia, dilabuntur. Reformat. Legum. X 4 312 Exposition of the [part ui and religion, all discipline and industry, must arise from this, as their first principle, that there is a power in us to govern our own thoughts and actions, and to raise and improve our faculties. If this is denied, all endeavours, all education, all pains, either on ourselves or others, are vain and fruitless things. Nor is it possible to make a man believe other than this : for he does so plainly perceive that he is a free agent; he feels himself balance matters in his thoughts, and de¬ liberate about them so evidently, that he certainly knows he is a free being. Though he feels him- self often hurried on so impetuously, that he may seem to have lost his freedom in some turns, and upon some occasions, yet he feels that he might have restrained that heat in its first beginning; he feels he can divert his thoughts, and master himself in most things, when he sets himself to it; he finds thatknowledge and reflection, that good company and good exercises, do tame and soften him, and that bad ones make him wild, loose, and irregular. From all this they conclude that man is free, and not under inevitable fate, or irresistible mo¬ tions either to good or evil. All this they con- firmfrom the whole current ofthe Scripture, which is full of persuasions, exhortations, reproofs, ex¬ postulations, encouragements, and terrors, which are all vain and theatrical things, if there are no free powers in us to which they are addressed : to what art. xvn.] Thirty -nine Article#, 315 what purpose is it to speak to dead men, to per¬ suade the blind to see, or the lame to run? If we are under an impotence till the irresistible grace comes, and if, when it comes, nothing can with¬ stand it, then what occasion is there for all those solemn discourses if they can have no effect on us? They cannot render us inexcusable, unless it were in our power to be bettered by them ; and to imagine that God gives light and blessings to those whom he before intended to damn, only to make them inexcusable, when they could do them no good, and they will serve only to aggravate their condemnation, gives so strange an ideaof that infi¬ nite goodness, that it is not fit to express itby those terms which do naturally arise upon itf ’a?)” Furthermore, we must receive god's PROMISES, IN SUCH WISE AS THEY BE GE¬ NERALLY SET FORTH IN HOLY SCRIPTURE: The promises of God are general and con¬ ditional. The gospel dispensation is described as a covenant between God and man ; and the salvation of every individual is made to depend upon his observance of the proposed conditions. * Men, as free agents, have it in their power to perform or not to perform these conditions ; and God foresaw from all eternity who would and who would not perform them, that is, who will and who will not be saved at the day of judg¬ ment. ( x ) Bumet. 314 Exposition of the [part m. ment. This prescience of voluntary conduct and consequent happiness or misery, is very different from an irreversible decree, directing in what manner each individual shall act in this world, and whether he shall be happy or miserable in that which is to come. “ God’s promises gene^ rally set forth in holy Scripture,” seem here to be opposed to the “ counsel of God secret to us,” spoken of in the former part of this article ; and it is declared that, whatever promises are made to us in Scripture, we are to receive them im¬ plicitly, and not pervert their obvious sense by abstruse inquiries into the hidden mysteries of the divine dispensations. The promises that, “ Whosoever believeth in the only begotten Son of God shall not perish, but have everlasting life (y)f and that the death of Christ will be ac* cepted as “a propitiation for the sins of the whole world ( z are so plain, that we cannot well mis¬ take their meaning as far as they respect ourselves; and they are also so important, that, if we value our own comfort, we shall not suffer our faith in them to be shaken by any difficulties, which spe¬ culative men may raise concerning Election and Predestination, as they relate to mankind at large. And in our doings, that will of god is TO BE FOLLOWED, WHICH WE HAVE EXPRESSLY DECLARED UNTO US IN THE WORD OF GOD. The (y) John, c. 3. v. 1 6* (%) 1 John, c. 2. v. 2. art. xvil.] Thirty -nine Articles. 315 The will of God can be collected from Scripture only ; as it there stands revealed, it is to be obeyed, without any exception or reserve : no rules of action are to be allowed which are not authorized by the declarations of Scripture ; no conduct is to be justified or excused which is contradictory to the written word of God. This last branch of the article seems to have been directed against a set of profligate enthu¬ siasts, who at the time of the Reformation urged the will of God as an excuse for their vices: “ In voluntatem Dei criminum suorum culpam conferuntftf^.” The impiety and the mischief of such a principle (which is a most unjustifiable perversion of the doctrine of predestination) are equally obvious. The will of God, as was just now observed, can only be known from the Scriptures, and his will so revealed ought to be the rule of every one’s conduct. It is sufficiently evident from the above review and exposition of this article, that the doctrines maintained in it are by no means conformable to the principles of Calvin, who contended for absolute unconditional decrees of God, and irre¬ sistible grace, and asserted that God, in predes¬ tinating from all eternity one part of mankind to everlasting happine ss, and another to endless misery, was led to make this distinction solely by (a) Reform. Leg. 3 1 6 Exposition of the [part lm by his own good pleasure and free willf/Q: “ Prsedestinationem vocamus aeternum Dei de- cretum, quo apud se constitution habuit, quid de unoquoque hornine fieri vellet. Non enim pari conditione creantur omnes; sed aliis vita aeterna, aliis damnatio aeterna preeordinatur.” — ■“ Quod ergo Scriptura clare ostendit dicimus, aeterno et immutabiliconsilioDeum semel constituisse,quos olim semel assumere vellet in salutem, quos rur- sum exitio devovere. Hoc consilium quoad elec- tos in gratuita ejus misericord ia fundatum esse asserimus, nullo humana) dignitatis respectu : quosvero damnationi addicit,his justoquidem et irreprehensibili, sed incomprehensibili ipsius ju- dicio vitae aditum praecludif c ')”■ — “The article of predestination,” says Dr. Waterland, “ has been vainly enough urged in favour of the Calvinistical tenets; for, not to mention the saving clause in the (b) Arminius opposed these doctrines, but not till after our articles were compiled. Calvin nearly fol¬ lowed the opinions of Austin and the Latin Church, and Arminius those of Chrysostom and the Greek Church. For an account of this controversy, see Mosheim ; and for a general account of the opinions which have been entertained concerning Predestina- tion, and the arguments by which they have been sup¬ ported, see Burnet upon this article. “ It is agreed by every body that his collection of the arguments made use of by both parties, contains a brief, full, and fair representation of what is found in their re¬ spective writings upon this subject.” Veneer. (c) Calv. Instit. lib: 3. cap. 21. AitT. xvii.] Thirty-nine Articles . 317 the conclusion, or its saying nothing at all of reprobation, and nothing in favour of absolute predestination to life, there seems to be a plain distinction (as Plaifere has well observed) in the article itself, of two kinds of Predestination, one of which is recommended to us, the other con¬ demned. Predestination, rightly and piously considered, that is, considered not irrespectively , not absolutely, but with respect to faith in Christ, faith working by love, and persevering ; such a predestination is a sweet and comfortable doc¬ trine ; but the sentence of God’s predestination (it is not here said in Christ as before) that sen¬ tence simply or absolutely considered (as curious and carnal persons are apt to consider it) is a most dangerous downfall, leading either to security or desperation, as having no respect to foreseen faith and a good life, nor depending upon it, but antecedent in order to it. The ar¬ ticle then seems to speak of two subjects; first of predestination, soberly understood with respect to faith in Christ, which is wholesome doctrine ; secondly, of predestination simply considered, which is a dangerous doctrine. And the latter part seems to be intended against those Gospel¬ lers, whereof Bishop Burnet speaks. Nor is it imaginable that any true and sound doctrine of the Gospel, should of itself have any aptness to become a downfall even to carnal persons ; but carnal 3 1 8 Exposition of the [fart iii. carnal persons are apt to corrupt a sound doc^ trine, and suit it to their own lusts and passions, thereby falsifying the truth. This doctrine, so depraved and mistaken, our Church condemns ; that is, she condemns absolute, irrespective pre¬ destination, not the other.” As archbishop Cranmer was not only the principal compiler of these articles, but by his writings and influence contributed more than any other person to the Reformation in England, it may be right to state the sentiments of that emi¬ nent prelate upon the subject of this article; and as the publication (d) from which the following quotations are taken, was confirmed by act of parliament, they may be considered as containing also the sentiments of our early Reformers in general: “God is naturally good, and willeth all men to be saved, and careth for them, and provideth all things by which they may be saved, except by their own malice they will do evil, and so by righteous judgment of God perish and be lost; for truly men be to themselves the authors of sin and damnation. God is neither author of sin, nor the cause of damnation ; and yet doth he most righteously damn those men, that do with vices corrupt their nature, which he made good, and do abuse the same to evil desires (d) Necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian Man, A RT. xvii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 3 1 9 desires against his most holy will : wherefore men be to be warned, that they do not impute to God their vice, or their damnation, but to them¬ selves, which by free will have abused the grace and benefit of God.’* — “ It is to be considered, that although our Saviour Christ hath offered himself upon the cross, a sufficient redemption and satisfaction for the sins of all the world, and hath made himself an open way and entry unto God the Father for all mankind, only by his worthy merit and deserving, and willing all men to be saved, calleth upon all the world, without respect of persons, to come and be partakers of the righteousness, peace, and glory, which is in him; yet for all this benignity and grace, showed universally to the whole world, none shall have the effect of the benefit of our Saviour Christ, and enjoy everlasting salvation by him, but they that take such ways to attain the same as he hath taught and appointed by his holy word.” — “ And here all fantastical imagination, curious reasoning, and vain trust of predestination, is to be laid apart. And according to the plain manner of speaking and teaching of Scripture in innumerable places, we ought evermore to be in dread of our own frailty, and natural pronity to fall to sin, and not to assure ourselves that we be elected any otherwise than by feeling of spiritual motions in our heart, and by the tokens of good and 320 Exposition of the [part in. and virtuous living, in following the grace of God, and persevering in the same to the end.” It is very clearly proved in “A Dissertation on the Seventeenth Article (ejf printed at Oxford in 1773, that the sentiments of Ridley, Latimer, and Hooper, coincided with those of Cranmer concerning grace and predestination ; and Dean Tucker has shown, in his Letters to Dr. Kippis, that “ at the time just preceding the Reformation, the church of Rome, in respect to predestination, grace, free will, and perseverance, was truly Calvinistical.” “In England, at the time of the Synod ofDort, we were much divided in our opinion concerning the controverted Articles ; but our Divineshaving taken the liberty to think and judge for them¬ selves, and the civil government not interposing, it has come to pass, that from that time to this, almost all persons here, of any note for learning and abilities, have bid adieu to Calvinism ( f ), have sided with the Remonstrants, and have left the Fatalists to follow their own opinions, and to rejoice (since they can rejoice) in a religious system consisting of human creatures without liberty, doctrines without sense, faith without reason, and a God without mercy ( g)” (e) Written by Dr. Winchester. (f) “ Whitby published some tracts on Election, Re¬ probation, and Original Sin, and in these treatises he confuted Calvinism almost to a demonstration/' Jortin. Xg) Jortin, Dissert, 2d, Page 3. art. xviii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 321 ARTICLE THE EIGHTEENTH. Of obtaining eternal Salvation only by tbe Name of Christ. THEY ALSO ARE TO BE HAD ACCURSED THAT PRESUME TO SAY, THAT EVERY MAN SHALL BE SAVED BY THE LAW OR SECT WHICH HE PROFESSETH ; SO THAT HE BE DILIGENT TO FRAME HIS LIFE ACCORDING TO THAT LAW, AND THE LIGHT OF NATURE. FOR HOLY SCRIPTURE DOTH SET OUT UNTO US ONLY THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST, WHEREBY MEN . MUST BE SAVED. This Article is to be considered as directed against those who maintained, that it was a matter of indifference whether men embraced the Gospel, or not; that all religions were equally acceptable to God ; and that all men would obtain salvation, although they rejected the Gospel ; provided they observed the rules of the religion which they professed, and acted in conformity to the dictates of reason. They also are to be had accursed (a) that (a) It was formerly the custom to condemn errors in this form : If any one holds such an error, anathema VOL. II. Y «t. 322 Exposition of the [part xij. (that is, they are to be looked upon as subject to the wrath of God, and unworthy of communion with the church) that presume to say, that EVERY MAN SHALL BE SAVED BY THE LAW OR SECT WHICH HE PROFESSETH ,* SO THAT IIE BE DILIGENT TO FRAME HIS LIFE ACCORDING TO THAT LAW, AND THE LIGHT OF NATURE. It is important to observe the exact words here used, “ that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth,” that is, by virtue of his religion, whatever it may be, without the merits of Christ. Let it not, therefore, be understood, that this article confines salvation to one sect of Christianity, or that it excludes from the benefits of Christ’s incarnation all to whom the Gospel has not been made known. It has no reference whatever to the unhappy divisions which have always subsisted, and still do subsist, among Christians ; it only condemns those who confound all religions, who make revelation useless, and the sit, which we translate, let him be accursed. Many in¬ stances of this kind may be found, not only in the aets of councils, but also in the controversial writings of the antient fathers ; and the practice seems to have been derived from some expressions of Scripture, Rom. c. 9. v. 3. 1 Cor. c. 16. v. 22. Gal. c. 1. v. 8. The persons against whom an anathema was pro¬ nounced, were excluded from communion with the church of Christ Arif. Xvnr.] Thirty-nine Articles. 323 the grace of God of none effect, by denying the necessity of believing the Gospel when it is pro¬ posed, and by assertingthat everlasting happiness Would have been equally attainable if Christ had hot been born into the world. Such principles as these are refuted by the plainest declarations of Scripture; for holy SCRIPTURE DOTH SET OUT UXTO US ONtY THE MaMe Of jesUs Christ, whereby mex must be saved. “ Jesus saith unto them, I am the way, and the truth, and the life ; no man cometh unto the Father, but by me (b )” — “ Neither is there salvation in any other ; for there is none Other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be Saved ( c )” — “ And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, arid this life is in his Son ( d ).” All to whom the Gospel is revealed, are under an indispensable obligation to believe and obey it; and upon those conditions, and those only, Salvation is promised. If God has declared his will, it is impossible that we should be at liberty whether we will obey it or not ; if he has com¬ manded a religion, it can never be a matter of ndifference whether men embrace it, or continue to worship false gods. W ere not even th e J e ws, who (b) John, c . 14. V. 6. (c) Acts, c.4. v. 12. (d) 1 John, c. 5. v. 11. Y 3 324 Exposition of the [part hi. who worshipped the true God, condemned and punished, because they refused to acknowledge Jesus to be the Messiah 1 The severest threats are denounced against all, without any discri¬ mination or exception, who obstinately reject the Gospel : “ He that believeth and is bap¬ tized shall be saved ; but he that believeth not shall be damned (e )." On the other hand we are told, “ that God is no respecter of persons ; but in every nation he that feareth God, and worketh righteous¬ ness, is accepted with him (f )” But such decla¬ rations must be considered as belonging to those only who were never made acquainted with the Gospel, and still their acceptance will be for the sake of Christ Jesus, who died as a propi¬ tiation for the sins of the whole world. The merits of his death are not limited to those who call upon his name, for, “ how shall they call on him in whom they have not believed ? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard ? and how shall they hear with¬ out a preacher (g) ?” St. Paul, by thus show¬ ing that it has been absolutely impossible for a great part of mankind to believe in the Gos¬ pel, intimates that their unbelief will not be imputed (e) Mark, c. 16. v. 16. (f) Acts, c. 10, v. 34. (g) Rom. c. 10. v. 14. art. xviii.] Thirty-nine Articles . 325 imputed to them as a fault. He also says, that “ The Gentiles are a law unto themselves (h);' therefore Gentiles, Jews, and Christians, have all had their respective rules of conduct, equally derived from God, by which they will be judged at the last day ; and the salvation of the Jew and Gentile will be no less owing; to the merits of Christ than that of the Christian, “ for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved (i )” But though Christ is the Redeemer of the whole race of mankind from the guilt and cor- ruption produced by the sin of Adam ; though all are cleansed by his blood, and restored to a pos¬ sibility of happiness; yet a fcederal certainty of salvation, secured to the true believers of the Gospel exclusively, must be esteemed a high and invaluable privilege. None but Christians can enjoy the blessed hope of everlasting life upon the sure ground of promise ; they alone look for- werd for “ the prize of their high calling, an in¬ heritance incorruptible, undefiled, audthatfadeth not away, reserved for them in heaven ( k Nor does it follow, that the benefits which the virtuous heathen will derive from the incarnation of Christ will be equal to those of the sincere Christian. ( h ) Rom. c. 2. v. 14. (i) Acts, c. 4. v. 12. (k) Phil. c. 3. v. 14. 1 Pet. c. 1. v. 4. Y 3 326 Exposition of the [part its. Christian. Christ tells us, that in his Father^ house there are many mansions; and it seems contradictory neither to reason nor Scripture to suppose that different persons will hereafter enjoy differentdegrees of happiness, although they may be all eternal, and certainly all purchased by the precious blood of our blessed Redeemer. Atii. xtx.] Thirty -nine Articles* 327 ARTICLE THE NINETEENTH. Of the Church. THE VISIBLE CHURCH OF CHRIST IS A CONGRE¬ GATION OF FAITHFUL MEN, IN THE WHICH THE PURE WORD OF GOD IS PREACHED, AND THE SACRAMENTS BE DULY MINISTERED ACCORDING TO CHRISTS ORDINANCE, IN ALL THOSE THINGS THAT OF NECESSITY ARE REQUISITE TO THE SAME. AS THE CHURCH OF HIERUSALEM, ALEXANDRIA, AND AN¬ TIOCH, HAVE ERRED, SO ALSO THE CHURCH OF ROME HATH ERRED, NOT ONLY IN THEIR LIVING AND MANNER OF CEREMONIES, BUT ALSO IN MATTERS OF FAITH. We now enter upon the fourth and last di¬ vision of the Articles, namely, those which relate to Christians as members of a religious society ; and the first point to be settled upon this subject is, the meaning of the word Church. The expression of “ the visible Church of Christ,” with which this article begins, seems to be used in contradistinction to the mystical or invisible Church of Christ. The mystical Church consists of those persons who have truly believed v 4 and 328 Exposition of the [part iii. and obeyed the Gospel, and who are conceived, although they have lived at different periods, to be united into one body ( a J, which is called mystical or invisible, not only because they are not now all upon earth, but because the qua¬ lities and properties, which gave them a claim to be members of this blessed society were never the objects of sense, and could not be judged of by men from merely external circumstances. The visible Church, in its most extensive sense, may include all persons who are or have been, by outward profession, Christians, whether they have or have not believed all the doctrines, or obeyed all the precepts, of the Gospel. This may be called the visible catholic Church ; and our Saviour himself alludes to the mixture of real and nominal Christians in his visible Church, when he compares the kingdom of heaven, or the Chris¬ tian religion, to a net which was cast into the sea, and was filled both with good and bad fishes (b) ; and also when he compares it to a field, in which the master sowed only good seed, but his enemy sowed tares, and there sprang up both wheat and tares (c). But in this article the “ VISIBLE (a) ThusTn the creed we profess our belief in the holy catholic Church, that is, that Christ has formed all faithful Christians into one society. (b) Matt. c. 13, v. 47. ( c ) Matt. c. 13. v. 24, &c. I art. xix.] Thirty-nine Articles . 329 “ visible church” is used in a more limited sense, and comprehends only the Christians of one country or city, or of one persuasion ; thus it mentions the church of Hierusalem, of Alex¬ andria, of Antioch, and of Rome ; and in like manner we often speak of the Church of Eng¬ land, of Holland, of Geneva, and of the Lu¬ theran church ; and all these different churches are parts of the visible catholic Church. It is well known that the church of Rome considers itself as the only Christian Church; but on the other hand, we extend the name to any cox- GREGATION OF FAITHFUL MEN, IN THE WHICH THE PURE WORD OF GOD IS PREACHED, AND THE SACRAMENTS BE DULY MINISTERED AC¬ CORDING to Christ’s ordinance, in all THOSE THINGS THAT OF NECESSITY ARE RE¬ QUISITE to the same. The adherence to the fundamental principles of the Gospel is therefore sufficient to constitute a visible Church, although every doctrine it maintains may not be founded in truth, or all the parts of its public worship agreeable to Scripture. We consider all men as Christians, or as members of the visible Church of Christ, who have been baptized, and profess their belief in the divine mission of Christ, even if their faith be in some respects erroneous, and their lives unworthy of their holy vocation. To make 330 Exposition of the [part m. make a discrimination, to draw a line of distinc¬ tion upon these points, would be to deny salva-* tion to those whom we exclude from the Church of Christ, which would be unbecoming and pre¬ sumptuous in the highest degree ; and upon the same principle we forbear to inquire what precise additions or defects in the administration of the sacraments ordained by Christ annul their effi¬ cacy. We contend that we follow Scripture in the performance of the public offices of our re¬ ligion, without passing judgment upon those who appear to us to depart from it. But though we admit, that to call upon the name of Christ, en¬ titles a person to be denominated a Christian, yet we are aware that, “ Not every one that saith Unto him, Lord, Lord,” will partake of the benefits of his death* Though the Church of Christ here on earth be thus numerous, and consist of persons of such various characters and dispositions, we cannot but remember the solemn assurance that Christ will hereafter “ separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats (d) and that a different sentence will be pronounced upon the real and nominal members of the Church at the great day of final retribution. We find the word Church used in the New Testament (d) Matt. c. 25, v. 32. art. xiX.] Thirty-nine Articles . 331 * Testament in a more or less extended sense : Our Saviour said to Peter, “ Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (e).n Here the Church means the whole body or society of faithful Christians throughout the world; and in this sense it is promised that the Church of Christ shall be perpetual, that is, that there shall be always those who will “ continue steadfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers (f)” The word church was, from the first preaching of the Apostles, used to signify believers in the Gospel generally ; thus in the beginning of the Acts it is said, that “ the Lord added to the church daily (g)” And St. Paul, in the same chapter of his Epistle to the Ephesians, calls Christ “ the head of the church,” says that “ the church is ' subject to Christ and that “ Christ loved the church (h };** in which passages the Apostle means Christians in general, who, however dis¬ persed, form one church, having, “ one hope of their calling, one Lord, one faith, one bap¬ tism (i \)” But in a more limited sense St. Paul, (e) Matt. c. 16. v.. 18. (f) Acts, c. 2. v. 42. Cg) Acts, c. 2. v. 47. (h) Eph. c. 5. v. 23, 24 and 25. (i) Eph. c. 4. v. 4 and 5. m 33a Exposition of the [part hi* in addressingtheCorinthianChristians calls them “ the church of God which is at Corinth ( k ).” St. John writes, “ To the seven churches which are in Asia (Ij and St. Luke says, “ that St. Paul went through SyriaandCiliciaconfirming the churches (m)” In these passages the word church is applied to the Christians of particular cities. And even the believers of a single family are by St. Paul called the Church, in the cases of Priscilla and Aquila, Nymphas and Phi¬ lemon: “ Greet Priscilla and Aquila; likewise greet the church that is in their house (n) “ Salute Nymphas, and the church which is in his house (o).” — “ Paul unto Philemon, and to the church in thy house (p).n- And thus Ter- tullian says, “Ubi tres, ecclesiaest, licet laicif q ).” And upon another occasion, “ In uno et altero est ecclesia.” The latter part of this article relates to the pretended claim of Infallibility in the church of Home ; and the compilers of our articles have very wisely taken the first opportunity, which the plan of their arrangement allowed, to deny this (k) 1 Cor. c. 1. v. 2. (m) Acts, c. 1 5. v. 41 . ( 0 ) Col. c. 4. v. 15. (q) Exhort, ad Cast. ( l ) Rev. c. 1. v. 4. ( n) Rom. c. 16. v. 3 and 5. (p) Phil. v. 1 and 2. art. xix.] Thirty-nine Articles. 333 this claim, since, if it were admitted, all the other doctrines of Popery would be at once estab¬ lished ; an infallible church could not maintain an untrue doctrine. As THE CHURCH OF HIERUSALEM, ALEX¬ ANDRIA, AND ANTIOCH, HAVE ERRED, SO ALSO THE CHURCH OF ROME HATH ERRED, NOT ONLY IN THEIR LIVING AND MANNER OF CEREMONIES, BUT ALSO IN MATTERS OF FAITH. The Churches of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, are here mentioned, because they were the most distinguished of the churches founded by the Apostles; and that those churches, in process of time, fell into considerable errors, is universally agreed. That the church of Rome has erred in their manner of living is sufficiently evident from history. Bishop Burnet says, that “ for above 800 years the papacy, as it is represented by their own writers, is perhaps the worst succession of men that is to be found in history and that the church of Rome has erred in its ceremonies, and in matters of faith, will fully appear from the following articles. The church of Rome existed many centuries before any mention was made of Infallibility, although it had, as every one knows, frequent disputes with other churches from a very early ; peiiod, 334 Exposition of the [i*aht m* period* This doctrine was afterwards asserted and received; and itslongand general prevalence is perhaps the strongest instance which can be produced from the annals of the world, df the presumption and artifice of one set of men, and of the blindness and credulity of another. But since Infallibility has been an established tenet of the church of Rome, there has been a differ¬ ence of opinion among Papists, whether it be vested in the popes themselves, when they pro¬ nounce their decrees, ex cathedra, or in General Councils. This very doubt is an argument against the thing itself, since wherever so important and distinguished a privilege as Infallibility resided, it could not but be manifest and apparent; and we may conclude, that if it had pleased God td place such a power in any part of his church, he would have distinctly pointed out the persons in whom it was to be found. General councils will be considered hereafter. In the mean time we may observe, that many popes, in their bulls and other public instruments, have themselves laid claim to their own personal infallibility in the most arrogant and blasphemous manner. This monstrous doctrine is now so universally reprobated, as being repugnant to the nature of man, as unfounded in Scripture* as inconsistent with art. xix.] Thirty-nine Articles. 335 with God’s general government of the world, as unsupported by miracles, or any other authentic sign, and as clearly refuted by the opposite and contrary decisions of different popes, that it is unnecessary to add any thing further upon the subject. * fJtU 336 Exposition of the [part iii ARTICLE THE TWENTIETH. Of the Authority of the Church. THE CHURCH HATH POWER TO DECREE RITES OR CEREMONIES, AND AUTHORITY IN CON¬ TROVERSIES OF FAITH (a): AND YET IT IS NOT LAWFUL FOR THE CHURCH TO ORDAIN ANY THING THAT IS CONTRARY TO GOD*S WORD WRITTEN, NEITHER MAY IT SO EX¬ POUND ONE PLACE OF SCRIPTURE THAT IT BE REPUGNANT TO ANOTHER; WHEREFORE ALTHOUGH THE CHURCH BE A WITNESS, AND A KEEPER OF HOLY WRIT, YET AS IT OUGHT NOT TO DECREE ANY THING AGAINST THE SAME, SO BESIDES THE SAME OUGHT IT NOT TO ENFORCE ANY THING TO BE BELIEVED FOR NECESSITY OF SALVATION. The meaning of the word Church having been settled in the preceding Article, the next thing to (a) The first clause of this Article was not in the Articles of 1552, but it was in the Latin Articles pub¬ lished in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth’s reign. It does not appear either in the Latin or English Articles, dated 1571, preserved in a manuscript volume of Mis¬ cellaneous Papers bequeathed by Archbishop Parker, © with art. xx.] Thirty -nine Articles. 337 to be determined is, What authority belongs to every particular Church ; and this inquiry natu¬ rally divides itself into two parts, namely, external forms and matters of faith, both of which are treated of in this article. It begins with asserting, that the church HATH POWER TO DECREE RITES AND CEREMO¬ NIES. The Church being a society of men united for with his Library, to Ben’et College, Cambridge ; but this manuscript being found among the private papers of the archbishop, is not to be considered as an autho¬ rized transcript of the Articles. The original manu¬ script of the Articles was deposited in the Register Court of the province of Canterbury, where it was examined by order of Archbishop Laud in the following century, as he declared in his speech in the Star Cham¬ ber; and not many years afterwards it was destroyed in the fire of London, as has been already noticed. This clause does not appear in the Latin Articles printed by John Day in 1571 ; but it does appear in some copies of the English Articles printed by Jugge and Cawood in the same year, and not in others. From an accurate collation of different books, it is evident that there are several distinct editions of the English Arti¬ cles, bearing the date of 1571 , all of which were proba bly published in that year, or very soon after it. In thes editions, some of which contain this clause, and some do not, there are several minute variations in the mode of printing ; but they all have the same wooden cuts for the title, and for the device at the end ; and also the words Cum Privilegio Regice Majestatis after the year 1571. In 1579 the English Articles were published by Barker, containing this clause, and it has been in¬ serted in all subsequent editions. VOL, II. « 338 Exposition of the [part m. for the most important purposes, it is necessary that its affairs, like those of every other society, should be conducted by certain rules : Nulla religio, says Augustine, neque vera, neque falsa, sine caeremoniis potest consistere (^). If it be our duty to “assemble ourselves together ( c J/’our as¬ semblies must be regulated by established forms, as the only means of preventing disorder and confusion. Since then rites and ceremonies are essential to the very existence of a church, the first question which occurs is, whether it has pleased the divine Author of our religion, either by himself, or by his Apostles, to give any par¬ ticular directions upon this subject? Upon ex¬ amining the New Testament we do not find that it contains any such directions, although it ap¬ pears that the primitive Christians observed fixed rules, as they necessarily must have done, in their public worship of God. We only meet with some very general precepts in the Epistles, which may be considered as applicable to this subject, such as “ Give none offence (d);” — “ Let all things be done decently and in order (e); ” — “ Let all things be done unto edifying (f) ; ” — and, “ Whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God ( g)” Every Church therefore is left at liberty (b) Cont. Faust, cap. 11. ( c ) Heb. c. 10. v. 25. (d) 1 Cor. c. 10. v. 32. ( e ) 1 Cor. c. 14. v. 40. (f) 1 Cor. c. 14. v. 26. (g) 1 Cor. c. 10. v. 31. art. xx.] Thirty -nine Articles. 339 liberty to prescribe rites and ceremonies to its own members, provided they be consistent with these general precepts, which are so plain and so reason¬ able, that it is unnecessary to enlarge upon them. A great variety of rites and ceremonies was prescribed by the Jewish dispensation ; and yet in the time of our Saviour the Jews had many institutions which were not commanded by Moses, particularly the service of their synagogues, the feast of dedication (k), and that of Purim (i), and likewise several unauthorized practices in the celebration of the Passover. Not one of these things were censured by Christ ; but, on the con¬ trary, he appears to have himself observed all the traditional customs of the Jews which did not tend to encourage superstition, or produce a neglect of “ the weightier matters of the law.” And if such liberty were allowed under so limited a religion as that of Moses, we conclude that it is lawful for a society of Christians, whose reli¬ gion is designed for all ages and all countries, to make any regulations which may tend to promote the great objects for which they have formed themselves into one body. The subject of ex¬ ternal ceremonies will occur again in the 34th article, to which they more particularly belong; and therefore, at present, I shall only observe, that many points of this sort, very unimportant in (h ) John, c. 10. ▼. 22 and 23. ( i) Esther, c. 9. 34° Exposition of the [part Hi, in themselves, were warmly disputed at the time of the Reformation, and were the cause of much disunion among Protestants. The article proceeds to state that the Church has also authority in controversies of faith. When a dispute arose a few years after the ascension of our Saviour, concerning the necessity of circumcising Gentile converts, the apostles and elders met at Jerusalem, and made a decree upon the subject, which they commu¬ nicated to the churches then established in dif¬ ferent parts of Asia, and required their obedience to it : it cannot be denied that this was an in¬ stance of authority exercised by the Church, under the direction of the inspired Apostles, in a controversy of faith. — St. Paul says to Timothy, “ I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine ( l)” — And to Titus he says, “ A man that is an here¬ tic, after the first and second admonition, re¬ ject (m )” It is evident from these two passages, that Timothy and Titus had authority given them to regulate the faith of the churches over which they were appointed to preside ; and Titus is ex¬ pressly directed to exclude from communion with the church any person who persevered in main¬ taining heretical opinions ; and therefore there must ( m ) Tit. c.3. v. 10. (1) 1 Tim. c. 1, v. 3. art. xx.] Thirty-nine Articles. 341 must have been, at that very early period, some fixed test, by which the faith of professed Chris¬ tians was to be judged : the consequence of not conforming to that test was, by apostolical au¬ thority, Excommunication. And we learn from ecclesiastical history, that this practice of the apostolic times has been usual in every period of the Christian church. It appears from the preceding article, that it is not here intended to ascribe to the Church an infallible authority. The words of this article are, controversies of faith, and this ex¬ pression, perhaps, alludes to disputes which may arise between the members of any church ; and it may be designed to assert that the governing part of the Church has authority to take cogni¬ zance of such disputes, and to deliver their judgment concerning the points in controversy. Great weight and deference would be due to such decisions ; and “ every man that fin£s his own thoughts differ from them, ought to examine the matter over again with much attention and care, freeing himself all he can from prejudice and ob¬ stinacy, with a just distrust of his own understand¬ ing, and an humble respect to the judgment of his superiors. This is due to the consideration of peace and union, and to that authority which the Church has to maintain it ; but if, after all pos¬ sible methods of inquiry, a man cannot master his z 3 thoughts 1 342 Exposition of tht [part hi. thoughts, or make them agree with the public decisions, his conscience is notunder bonds, since this authority is not absolute, nor grounded upon a promise of infallibility ( n )” But this, however, we may observe, that, without any pretension to infallibility, and without any infringement, of the right of private judgment, the Church has power to declare articles of faith, provided they be autho¬ rized by Scripture, as guides to truth, and as condi¬ tions upon which it receives persons into its com¬ munion. This is the principle of all creeds, and indeed the only principle upon which the unity of “ the faith once delivered unto the saints (o)” can be preserved. Every church, therefore, must pos¬ sess a right to compose new, or to alter existing Articles, according as the circumstances of the times shall make it necessary to defend the purity of Christian doctrine against prevailing heresies, and to point out to the unlearned part of the com¬ munity the snares which may be laid in their paths; And yet it is not lawful for the CHURCH TO ORDAIN ANY THING THAT IS CONTRARY TO GOlVs WORD WRITTEN. The written word of God is the rule of our faith and practice, and no consideration whatever can jus¬ tify a departure from it. Neither may it so expound one place of scripture, that it be repugnant to ANOTHER. ( o ) Jude, v. 3. (n) Burnet. art« xx. J Thirty -nine Articles* 3*^3 a n oth er. All Scripture being given by inspira¬ tion of God, there must be a perfect consistency and agreement in all its parts, and consequently no church can have a right to interpret one pas¬ sage of Scripture in such a manner as to make it contradictory to another. Wherefore although the church be a WITNESS AND A KEEPER OF HOLY WRIT, YET AS IT OUGHT NOT TO DECREE ANY THING AGAINST THE SAME, SO, BESIDES THE SAME, OUGHT IT NOT TO ENFORCE ANY THING TO BE BELIEVED FOR NECESSITY OF SALVATION. To the Church are “ committed the oracles of God (p)” and by directing the Scriptures to be publicly read, from the earliest times, in the con¬ gregations of Christians, it has been the means of preserving them free from all material errors and corruptions ; from them it is to derive all its doctrines ; upon them, all its decrees, relative to faith, are to be founded ; it is not to add to them, by requiring any thing as necessary to salvation which is not contained in Holy Scripture, as was explained in the sixth article (q)» ( p ) Rom. c. 3. v. 2. (q) Upon the subject of this article. Hooker’s Ec¬ clesiastical Polity, and particularly the 3d and 8th books, and also Warburton’s Alliance of Church and State, may be consulted. Z 4 344 Exposition of the [part hi ARTICLE THE TWENTY-FIRST. Of the Authority of General Councils. GENERAL COUNCILS MAY NOT BE GATHERED TOGETHER WITHOUT THE COMMANDMENT AND WILL OF PRINCES, AND WHEN THEY BE GATHERED TOGETHER (FORASMUCH AS THEY BE AN ASSEMBLY OF MEN, Vr HEREOF ALL EE NOT GOVERNED WITH THE SPIRIT AND WORD OF GOD) THEY MAY ERR, AND SOMETIMES HAVE ERRED, EVEN IN THINGS PERTAINING UNTO GOD. WHEREFORE THINGS ORDAINED BY THEM, AS NECESSARY TO SALVATION, HAVE NEITHER STRENGTH NOR AUTHORITY, UNLESS IT MAY BE DECLARED THAT THEY BE TAKEN OUT OF HOLY SCRIPTURE. IN the last Article, the powder of an individual church was considered ; this relates to the authority of General Councils, which are the aggregate of all particular churches, that is, of persons lawfully appointed to represent them. It may be reasonably supposed that as Chris¬ tianity spread, circumstances would arise which would make consultation necessary among those who had embraced the Gospel, or at least among those art. xxi.] Thirty-nine Articles . 345 those who were employed in its propagation. A memorable instance of this kind, which we no¬ ticed in the preceding article, occurred not long after the ascension of our Saviour. In conse¬ quence of a dispute .which had arisen at Antioch concerning the necessity of circumcising Gentile converts, it was determined that “ Paul and Bar¬ nabas, and certain others of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.” — “ And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter ( a)T — After a consultation, they decided the point in question ; and they sent their decree, which they declared to be made under the direction of the Holy Ghost, to all the churches, and com¬ manded that it should be the rule of their con¬ duct. This is generally considered as the first Council ; but it differed from all others in this circumstance, that its members were under the especial guidance of the Spirit of God. The Gospel was soon after conveyed into many parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa ; but it does not appear that there was any public meeting of Christians for the purpose of discussing any con¬ tested point till the middle of the second cen¬ tury. From that time councils became fre¬ quent ; but as they consisted only of those who belonged (a ) Acts, c. 15. v. 6. 346 Exposition of the [part iii. belonged to particular districts or countries, they were called Provincial or National councils. The first General Council was that of Nice, convened by the emperor Constantine, a. d. 325 ; the se¬ cond G eneral Council was held at Constantinople, in the year 381, by order of Theodosius the Great ; the third, at Ephesus, by order of Theo¬ dosius Junior, a. d. 431; and the fourth, at Chalcedon, by order of the emperor Marcian, a. d. 451. These, as they were the first four General Councils, so they were by far the most eminent. They were caused respectively by the Arian, Apollinarian, Nestorian, and Eutychian controversies (b), and their decrees are in high esteem both among Papists and orthodox Pro¬ testants ; but the deliberations of most councils were disgraced by violence, disorder, and in¬ trigue, and their decisions were usually made under the influence of some ruling party. Au¬ thors are not agreed about the number of Gene- ral Councils ; Papists usually reckon eighteen, but Protestant writers will not allow that nearly so (b ) The Arians denied the Divinity of Christ. The Apollinarians asserted that there was no intelligent soul in Christ, and that the Divine Nature supplied the place of a soul; they denied the Humanity of Christ, and contended that his birth, sufferings, and resurrection, were only in appearance. The Nestorian and Eutychian heresies have been already explained. aut. xxi.] Thirty-nine Articles . 347 so many had a right to that name. The last General Council was that held at Trent, for the purpose of checking the progress of the Reformation. It first met by the command of Pope Paul the Third, a. d. 154 5 J it was sus¬ pended during the latter part of the pontificate of his successor Julius the Third, and the whole of the pontificates of Marcellus the Second and Paul the Fourth, that is, from 1552 to 1562, in which year it met again by the authority of I ope Pius the Fourth, and it ended, while he was pope, in the year 1563. Provincial Councils were very numerous; Baxter enumerates 4b G and Dufresnoy many morefcj. General councils may not be gather¬ ed TOGETHER WITHOUT THE COMMANDMENT AND WILL OF PRINCES. As the Clergy must be always subject to the civil power (d)> it cannot be lawful for them to assemble in General Coun¬ cils without the consent of the government of the countries to which they respectively belong. If the (c) There is a History of Councils, published at Paris in 1644, in 37 vols. folio. Cave gives a concise account of all the considerable Councils, both general and particular, in his Historia Literaria ; and Brough¬ ton, in his dictionary, under the word Synod, states very briefly what passed at the principal General Councils. (d ) This will appear from the thirty-seventh article. 348 Exposition of the [part. hi. the clergy were in this respect bound to obey the command of any foreign bishop or potentate, it would be an infringement of the right and pri¬ vileges which belong to every independent state, and must be productive of many inconveniences. It has been already observed, that the first four General Councils were summoned by the em¬ perors of the East, whose dominions included the whole, or nearly the whole, of Christendom ; and they continued to exercise the same power for several centuries afterwards ; but at length the popesofRome, amongotherusurpations, assumed to themselves the right of summoning General Councils, and the first which met by their autho¬ rity was the first Lateran council in the year 1132. And when they be gathered together (forasmuch as they be an assembly of MEN, WHEREOF ALL BE NOT GOVERNED WITH THE SPIRIT AND WORD OF GOD) THEY MAY ERR, AND SOMETIMES HAVE ERRED EVEN IN things pertaining unto god. A General Council being composed of men, every one of whom is fallible, they must also be liable to error when collected together ; and that they actually have erred is sufficiently evident from hence, that different General Councils have made decrees directly opposite to each other, particularly in the Arian and Eutychian controversies, which were upon subjects immediately “ pertaining unto God.” art. xxi.] Thirty-nine Articles . 349 God.” Indeed, neither the first General Coun¬ cils themselves, nor those who defended their decisions, ever pretended to Infallibility ; this was a claim of a much more recent date, suited to the dark ages in which it was asserted and maintained, but now considered equally ground¬ less and absurd, in the case of General Councils as in that of Popes. The observation which we made upon the pretended claim of Infallibility in the Roman Pontiffs may be extended to General Councils. If God had been pleased to exempt them from a possibility of error, he would have announced that important privilege in his written word; but no such promise or assurance is men¬ tioned in the New Testament. If Infallibility belonged to the whole church collectively, or to any individual part of it, it must be so prominent and conspicuous that no mistake or doubt could exist upon the subject ; and above all, it must have prevented those dissensions, contests, here¬ sies and schisms, which have abounded among Christians from the days of the Apostles to the present times ; and of which that very church, which is the assertor and patron of this doctrine, has had its full share. The Scriptures, as has been often mentioned, being the only source from which we can learn the terms of salvation, it follows that things ORDAINED BY GENERAL COUNCILS AS NE¬ CESSARY Exposition of the [paut iii, CESSARY TO SALVATION, HAVE NEITHER STRENGTH NOR AUTHORITY, UNLESS IT MAY BE DECLARED THAT THEY BE TAKEN OUT OF HOLY scripture. It is upon this ground we receive the decisions of the first four General Councils, in which we find thetruthsfej revealed in the Scriptures, and therefore we believe them. We reverence the Councils for the sake of the doctrines which they declared and maintained, but we do not believe the doctrines upon the authority of the Councils. (e) At Nice it was declared, that the Son is truly God, of the same substance with the Father ; at Con¬ stantinople, that the Holy Ghost is also truly God ; at Ephesus, that the divine nature was truly united to the human in Christ, in one person ; at Chalcedon, that both natures remained distinct, and that the human nature was not lost or absorbed in the divine, art, xxii.] Thirty-nine Articles, 351 article the twenty-second. Of Purgatory. THE ROMISH DOCTRINE CONCERNING PURGA¬ TORY, PARDONS, WORSHIPPING, AND ADO¬ RATION, AS WELL OF IMAGES AS OF RE- LIQUES, AND ALSO INVOCATION OF SAINTS, IS A FOND THING VAINLY INVENTED, AND GROUNDED UPON NO WARRANTY OF SCRIP¬ TURE, BUT RATHER REPUGNANT TO THE WORD OF GOD. This Article is intitled “ Of Purgatory,” but it relates to four other doctrines, as well as Purgatory, all of which were maintained by the church of Rome, and were rejected by our church, and indeed by all Protestants, at the time of the Reformation. The romish doctrine concerning pur¬ gatory, as asserted in the councils of Florence and Trent, is this : That every man is subject both to temporal and eternal punishment for his sins: that God does indeed pardon sin, as to its eternal punish¬ ment, for the sake of the death and merits of Christ, but that the sinner is still liable to tem¬ poral punishment ; that this temporal punish¬ ment 352 Exposition of the [part hi. ment must be expiated by voluntary acts of penance and sorrow, and by such afflictions as he may here endure by the appointment of God ; that this expiation does not fully take place in this life, but that there is an intermediate state, in which departed souls suffer the remaining part of their punishment, and as this state is supposed to purge them from all effects of their sins, and to qualify them for the joys of heaven, it is called Purgatory ; and the church of Rome further maintains, that the pains and sufferings of Pur¬ gatory may be alleviated and shortened by the prayers of men here on earth, by the intercession of the saints in heaven, and, above all, by the sacrifice of the mass offered by the priests in the name of sinners ; and that as soon as souls are released from Purgatory they are immediately admitted to eternal happiness. The practice of praying for the dead began in the third century ; but it was not till long after¬ wards that Purgatory was even mentioned among Christians. It was at first doubtfully received, and was not fully established till the papacy of Gregory the Great, in the beginning of the seventh century. The belief, that the saying of masses would redeem the souls of the dead from the punishment of Purgatory, was the source of great gain to the clergy of the western churches : the endowments, indeed, for that purpose, be^ came art. xxii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 353 came so large and frequent in this country, that it was necessary to restrain them by statutes of mortmain. The doctrine of Purgatory was never admitted into the Greek church; but something of this kind seems to have been believed by. Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans (a). Not only Purgatory itself is not mentioned in Scripture, but there is not the slightest authority for that distinction between temporal and eternal punishment which is the foundation of this doc¬ trine ; nor are we directed to offer prayers or masses for the souls of the dead. It is no where said that there is any species of guilt or punish¬ ment from which the merits of Christ will not deliver us; on the contrary, we are told that “ the blood of Jesus Christ will cleanse us from all sinf£ and that “ now there is no condem¬ nation to them which are in Christ Jesus (c).** Full and complete forgiveness of sins in the world to come, without any reserve or exception, is promised to repentant sinners ; and we have the most positive assurances that they will be eternally happy, without any intimation of suf¬ fering, preparatory to their entrance into those joys which are at God’s right hand for evermore. And, (a) Vide Broughton’s Dictionary, under the word Purgatory ; and Maurice’s History of Hindostan. (b) 1 John, c. 1. v. 7. (c) Rom. c. 8. v. 1. VOL. II. A A 354 Exposition of the [part hi. And, therefore, the doctrine of an intermediate state of pain and torment from which the merits of our Redeemer cannot deliver us, is not only grounded upon no warranty of .scrip¬ ture, but is so far positively repugnant to the word of god, as it is contrary to the ab¬ solute and unreserved offers of mercy, peace, and happiness contained in the Gospel, and as it derogates from the fulness and perfection of the one expiatory sacrifice made by the death of Christ for all the sins of all mankind. It seems also absurd to suppose that considerable sufferings should await, in a future life, those who are to be finally saved, and that there should be effec¬ tual methods of avoiding or shortening those sufferings, without any mention of the evil, or its remedy, in any part of the New Testament. To this argument, from the silence of Scripture, we may add, that the Gospel represents Lazarus as at once conveyed to a state of comfort and joy; that our Saviour promised the thief upon the cross that he should on that day be with him in Paradise ; that St. Paul exults in the prospect of “ a crown of righteousness after death that he represents " to depart and to be with Christ ( e ) — “ to be absent from the body, and present with the Lord (f)f as states which were immediately c y (d) 2 Tim. c< 4. v. 8. ( e ) Phil. c. 1. v. 23. (f j 2 Cor. c. 5. v. 8. art, xxii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 355 immediately to follow each other; and St.John says, “Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord, from henceforth ; yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours (g);” but how do they rest from their labours if they have still the pains of Purgatory to endure? With respect to temporal punishments, it is evident that God sometimes interposes in visible judgments upon the wicked as well as in blessings upon the good ; but, on the other hand, the wicked often appear to prosper, while the good are suffering under adversity. And, indeed, the Gospel warns all men, without any discrimina¬ tion, to expect crosses and afflictions in this pro¬ bationary life, and requires faith and patience under the heaviest pressure of the most unpro¬ voked calamities. These are parts of the divine government of this world, which are ordained for the wisest and most salutary purposes, and have no concern whatever with a state ot punishment in another life previous to a state of happiness. The second doctrine condemned in this article is that of pardons, which took its rise in the following manner : In the primitive church very severe penalties were inflicted upon those who had been guilty of any sins, whether public or private ; and in particular, they were forbidden (g) Rev. c. 14. v. 13- A A 2 356 Exposition of the [part hi. to partake, for a certain time, of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, or to hold communion with the church. General rules were made upon these subjects ; but as it was often found expe¬ dient to make a discrimination in the degrees of punishment, according to the different circum¬ stances of offenders, and especially when they showed marks of contrition and repentance, power was given to bishops, by the Council of Nice, to relax or remit those punishments as they should see reason: every favour of this kind was called a Pardon or Indulgence : such a power was unobjectionable in itself; and it is obvious that if it had been wisely exercised, it might have been productive of great benefit to the cause of religion. After the bishops had enjoyed this privilege for some centuries, and had begun to abuse it, the popes discovered that in their own hands it might be made a powerful instrument both to promote their ambition and to gratify their avarice. They could not but see, that if they could persuade men they had the power of granting pardon for sin, it would give them a complete influence over their consciences; and if they could at the same time prevail upon them to purchase these pardons for money, it must add greatly to the wealth of the Roman see; and therefore, in the eleventh century, when the dominion of the popes was rising to its ® zenith, art. xxii. 3 Thirty -nine Articles. 357 zenith, and. their power was almost irresistible, they took to themselves the exclusive prerogative of dispensing Pardons, and carried it to a most unwarrantable length. Instead of confining them, according to their original institution, to the ordinary purposes of ecclesiastical discipline, they extended them to the punishment of the wicked in the world to come ; instead of shorten¬ ing the duration of earthly penance, they pre¬ tended that they could deliver men from the pains of Purgatory; instead of allowing them, gra¬ tuitously, and upon just grounds, to the penitent offender, they sold them in the most open and corrupt manner to the profligate and abandoned, who still continued in their vices. They did not scruple to call these Indulgences, a plenary re¬ mission of all sins, past, present, and future, and ’ to offer them as a certain and immediate passport from the troubles of this world to the eternal joys of heaven; and to give some sort of colour and support to this infamous traffic, they confidently asserted that the superabundant merits of Christ, and of his faithful servants, formed a fund, of which the pope was the sole manager ; and that he could, at his own discretion, dispense these merits, as the sure means of procuring pardon from God, in any proportion, for any species of wickedness, and to any person he pleased. The bare statement of this doctrine is a suffi- a a 3 c*ent 358 Exposition of the [part tit. cient refutation of it, and it is scarcely necessary to add, that it has no foundation whatever in Scripture. It is an arrogant and impious usur¬ pation of a power, which belongs to God alone; and it has an obvious tendency to promote licen¬ tiousness and sin of every description, by holding out an easy and certain method of absolution : “ Securitas delicti etiam libido est ejus (h).n The popes derived very large sums from the sale of these Indulgences ; and it is well known that the gross abuses practised in granting them were among the immediate and principal causes of bringingabout the Reformation. They continued to the last to be sold at Rome, and were to be purchased by any w7ho were weak enough to buy them, whether Protestants or Papists (*). Thethird thing condemned in this article is the WORSHIPPING AND ADORATION OF IMAGES. Nothing can be more clear, full and distinct, than the expressions of Scripture prohibiting the mak¬ ing and worshipping of images : “ Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any like¬ ness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth ; thou shalt not bow down thyself to (h) Tert. de Pud. * See the form of a “ Solemn Plenary Indulgence” granted in 1809 by a bull of Pope Pius VII, given at Cork, in Ireland, Nov. 2, 1813, by Dr. Francis Moy- jan, titular bishop of the diocese. Art. xxii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 359 to them, nor serve themfij.” — “ Neither slialt thou set up any image, which the Lord thy God hateth (k)T And there is no sin so strongly and repeatedly condemned in the Old Testament as that of idolatry : the Jews, in the early part of their history, were much addicted to it, and were constantly punished. In the Gospels no men¬ tion is made of idolatry, because the Jews, to whom all our Saviour’s instructions were ad¬ dressed, were not once guilty of it after their return from the Babylonian captivity : but in the Acts, St. Paul is represented as greatly affected, when he saw that the city of Athens, the re¬ nowned seat of learning, and the liberal arts, “ was wholly given to idolatry f/J;” and he told the Athenians, that they ought not “ to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man s device (in). In his Epistle to the Romans he condemns those who “ changed the glory of the incorruptible God into (i) Exod. c. 20. v. 4 & 5- The Papists upon the Continent, in writing the ten commandments, leave out the second, and to keep up the number ten, divide the tenth into two. Vide Burnet, Ref. v. 3- P- <2(H* This i» also done in Butler’s “ General Catechism for the King¬ dom,” published by the authority of the “ four R. C. Archbishops of Ireland,” and printed at Dublin in 1 8 1 1 (the eighth edition) by H. Fitzpatrick, printer and book¬ seller to the Roman catholic college, Maynooth. (k) Deut. c. 16. v. 22. (V Acts, c. 17* v* 1 (m) Acts, c. 17. v. 29. A A 4 3^0 Exposition of the [part hi. into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four- footed beasts, and creeping things (n) and he praises the Thessalonians, who “ had turned to God from idols, to serve the living and true God('oJ.” St. John says, “Little children keep yourselves from idols (p).” That the first Christians had no images, is evident from this circumstance, that they were reproached by the heathen because they did not use them; and we find almost every ecclesiastical writer of the first four centuries arguing against the Gentile-practice of image-worship, from the plain declarations of Scripture, and from the pure and spiritual nature of God. In the beginning of thefourth century the Council of Illyberis decreed that pictures ought not to be placed in churches, “ lest that which is worshipped should be painted upon the walls ( q). ” Images seem to have been introduced into churches in the fifth century; and it was probably first done to preserve the remembrance, and do honour to the memory, of departed saints, though some have imagined it originated in a wish to comply with the preju¬ dices of the heathen, and to make them better disposed to embrace the Gospel. It was impos¬ sible to look at these interesting representations, standing in places consecrated to the service of God, (n) Rom c.l.v. 03. (o) , Thess, c.l y (p) 1 John, c. 5. v. 21. Cq) Can. 36. art. xxii.] Thirty-nine Articles • 3^* God, without feeling some degree of respect, that respect was gradually heightened into reve¬ rence, and at last ended in absolute worship : so that Christians, who in the first ages were re¬ proached by the heathen for not having images, were in the seventh century accused by the J ews, and even by Mahometans, of the grossest ido¬ latry. In the following century began the fa¬ mous controversy about breaking of images, which was carried on for more than a hundred years with the greatest eagerness and animosity, both in the East and in the West. Different popes and different councils, notwithstanding their pretensions to infallibility, espoused diffe¬ rent sides of the question : but at length, after much uncertain and fluctuation of opposite in¬ terests, those who contended for the lawfulness of worshipping images prevailed, and from that time image- worship has been an established doc¬ trine of the church of Rome. It was decreed by the Council of Trent, the last general council, that “ due worship should be given to images,” and several regulations were added upon the subject. Among other corruptions of the church of Rome, that of the use of images was rejected by our Reformers, as being contrary to the prac¬ tice of the primitive church, and plainly repug¬ nant TO THE WORD OF GOD. The 362 Exposition of the [part hi. The Papists sometimes pretend that they do not worship the images, but God through the medium of images ; or, that the worship which they pay to images is inferior to that which they pay to the Deity himself. These distinctions would be scarcely understood by the common people, and formerly an enlightened heathen or Jew would probably have urged the same thing: but idolatry, in general, is condemned in Scrip¬ ture; and all use of images in the worship of God, the making or the bowing to any likeness is absolutely forbidden. Celsus, Porphyry, Max¬ imus Tyrius, and Julian, in defending the wor¬ ship of images, expressly acknowledge that they do not consider them as representations of the Godhead, but that they place them before their eyes to assist their imagination, and to enable them to fix their thoughts more strongly upon the real object of their adoration ; but the Chris¬ tian fathers by no means allow this reasoning, and uniformly reprobate the use of images as a part of divine worship, under whatever pretence it is urged, and however explained. The fourth doctrine condemned in this article is the WORSHIPPING AND ADORATION OF reliques. In the early ages of the Gospel, when its professors were exposed to every species of danger and persecution, it was natural for Christians aut. xxii-3 Thirty-nine Articles, 3^3 Christians to show every mark of respect, both to the bodies, and to the memory, of those who had suffered death in its cause. They collected their remains, and buried them, not only with decency, but with all the solemnity and honour which circumstances would allow. A remark¬ able fact of this kind is recorded by Eusebius, which is of itself sufficient to prove the practice of the second century: he tells us that the Christians of Smyrna were very careful to seek for and bury the bones and ashes of their illus¬ trious bishop and martyr, the aged Polycarp, who had been put to death, and his body burnt, by his implacable enemies. It was also the custom for Christians to hold their religious meetings at the places where their martyrs were buried, by which they seemed, as it were, united with them; and to display their attachment to their departed brethren by such rites as were dictated by the fervour of their devout affection, and were consistent with the principles of their religion. It does not appear that this boundary was ever transgressed in the first three centuries, but in the fourth century, when the pure and simple worship of the Gospel began to be de¬ based by superstitious practices, we find strong proofs of an excessive love for every thing had belonged to those who had distinguis ie themselves 3.” And St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, mentions the doctrine of the laying on of hands immediately aftei the doctrine of baptism (u). Upon these authorities was founded the practice, which prevailed in the primitive church, of persons receiving from the bishop immediately after bap¬ tism a solemn benediction, accompanied with imposition of hands, unction upon the forehead with the holy chrism (h), the sign of the cross, and a prayer for the descent of the Holy Ghost. Tertullian says, “ When we come out of the water we are anointed with a blessed ointment, according to that antient rite by which men used to be anointed for the priest’s office, with oil out of a horn, ever since the time that Aaron was (y) Acts, c. 8. v. 14, &c. (z) Acts, c. 19. v. 6. ( a) Heb. c. 6. v. 2. (b) The chrism was made of oil and balsam; art. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 421 was anointed by Moses ; so tliat Christ himself has his name from Chrism. Then we have the imposition of hands on us, which calls down and invites the Holy Ghost (c)” This ceremony was called Confirmation, as it completed the ad¬ mission of the person into the Christian church, and qualified him to partake of the Lord s Supper. It was not confined to adults, but in¬ fants also received Confirmation as soon as they were baptized, and an opportunity offered of presenting them to the bishop. Though it was generally performed by bishops, yet, in some countries, and at some periods, it was performed by presbyters ; but in that case it was necessary that the chrism should have been previously consecrated by the bishop. Jerome tells us, that in his time Confirmation was always per¬ formed in the Latin church by bishops, as it had been in earlier times (d) ; but Hilary says, that in Egypt the presbyters confirmed in the bishop s absence ( e ); and that was also the practice of the Greek church ; but the Greek Christians did not allow Confirmation to be a sacrament. We learn from one of the canons of the council of Illiberis, that in the time both of Cyprian and of Augustine, Confirmation was (c) Tert. de Baptism, cap. 7. ( d) Hieron. ad Lucif. ( e ) Hil. in cap. 4. ad Ephe*. E E 3 42 a Exposition of Me [pa&t it i was performed by bishops (f). The antients did not think this rite of Confirmation so absolutely necessary that the want of it would exclude from the kingdom of heaven those who had already been baptized ; but they attributed to it so much importance that they punished the neglect of it with marks of disgrace and public censure ; and denied the privilege of ecclesiastical promo¬ tion and holy orders to such persons as had voluntarily and carelessly omitted it. After this example of the primitive Christians, our church requires all who have been bap¬ tized to appear publicly in the congregation, and renew their baptismal vow according to the form prescribed in our liturgy. This falls within the authority of the church, and may be considered as included in the general precepts of doing all things “ in order and unto edifying especially since the now universal practice of infant bap¬ tism makes Confirmation more necessary than it was in the primitive times, when chiefly adults ivere baptized. It seems highly reasonable that they, (f) iEtate Cypriani, Ep. 79* Pracpositis Gcclesiae oblati sunt baptizati, utper eorum orationem et marius impositionem spiritum sanctum consequerentur; eun- demque morem in suis prsepositis annis post Cypriani martyrium 150 ecclesiam servassescripsit Augustinus, (De Trin. lib. 15. cap. 26.) Erant secundum canonem ab episcopo consignandi quotquot diebus solemnibus sacro lavacro tingebantur. Cone, lllib. cap. 38 et 77. ART. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 423 they, who at the time of their baptism, were incapable of making any engagement, should, when they arrive at a proper age, ratify and con¬ firm those promises which were made in their name. And to give this ordinance the greater solemnity, it is performed only by the higher or¬ ders of the church, the archbishops and bishops. Thus far our church receives Confirmation, con¬ fining it to prayer and imposition of hands, without the chrism, or the sign of the cross, and believes it to be derived from the practice of the Apostles. But as it is not a regular institution of Christ or his Apostles, like Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, with a written command that it should be continued in future ages, and a pro* mise that it will be attended with inward grace, we reject it as a Sacrament. There is, indeed, not a single precept upon the subject in the New Testament ; nor is there any scriptural authority for the use of the chrism, or the sign of the cross ,‘ and Bingham thinks that the chrism made no part of Confirmation before the latter end of the second century, though other writers attribute an earlier date to it. It must be admitted by all, that imposition of hands was not peculiar to Confirmation (g ) ; and that no separate efficacy is ascribed to it distinct from the prayers which accompanied ( g ) Matt. c. 19. v. 13. Mark, c. 10. v. 16. Luke, c. 4. v. 40. £ £ 4 424 Exposition of the [part hi. accompanied it ; and prayer and imposition of * hands are not sufficient to constitute a sacra¬ ment : we, therefore, consider Confirmation as nothing more than a solemn manner of persons taking upon themselves their baptismal vow; and, as such, it is a ceremony of high importance, calculated to impress youthful minds with a just sense of the great obligations of the Christian profession, and to excite in them an earnest endeavour “ faithfully to observe such things as they, by their own confession, have assented unto (h J.” It is pretended that the Popish sacrament of penance, which is next to be considered, is de¬ rived from the Scripture doctrine of repentance ; but it is in fact a corruption of a practice which prevailed in the primitive church. During the severe persecutions which the Christians suf¬ fered in the early ages of the Gospel, many, through fear of tortures and death, apostatized from the faith. It frequently happened, that these men, after the danger was past, were de¬ sirous of returning to communion with the church ; but they were not allowed, till they had made a public confession of their offence in the presence of the congregation. In this man¬ ner confession began to be a part of ecclesiastical discipline ; and being thus, in the first instance, applied (h) Confirmation Service. art. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. ' 425 applied to a crime of a public nature, it was afterwards extended to private sin. Besides the shame of public confession, the offending party was compelled to submit to public reproof, to acts of penance, to exclusion from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and to a temporary suspen¬ sion of all the privileges of a Christian (i). We learn from the canons of the numerous councils which were held in the fourth and fifth cen¬ turies, that they were chiefly occupied in regu¬ lating the nature and duration of these censures, and in settling the degree of discretionary power to be vested in bishops for the purpose of relax¬ ing or shortening them, according to the cir¬ cumstances of the case. Public confession was soon found to be attended with many incon¬ veniences ; and, therefore, instead of it offenders were permitted to confess their sins privately, either to the bishops themselves, or to peniten¬ tiary priests, appointed by them. Wjhen the punishment, which was still public, though the sins remained secret, was finished, the penitent was formally received into communion with the church by prayer and imposition of hands. The office of penitentiary priest was abolished in the East (i) Whoever wishes to see an account of the rigour of the antient penance, may consult Bingham’s Antiquities, book 18. c. 4; and also Dallseus do Con- fessione, and Morinus de PcenitentifL 426 Exposition of the [pAiit in* East in the reign of Theodosius (k) ; but it was retained much longer in the western church. In the fifth century public penance was submitted to with difficulty and reluctance: and it was V * thought expedient to allow penance, in certain cases, to be performed in monasteries, or in some private place, before a small select number of persons ; this private penance was gradually ex¬ tended to more and more cases ; and before the end of the seventh century the practice of public penance for private sins was entirely abolished. About the end of the eighth century penance began to be commuted ; in the room of the an- tient severities, prayers, masses, and alms, were substituted ; and in process of time the clergy of the church of Rome gained such an ascendancy over the minds of the people as to pursuade them that it was their duty to confess all their sins, however private or heinous, to the priest* who had power to prescribe the conditions of absolution ; and to give a greater sanction to this delusion, they called it a Sacrament, and made it to consist in confession to the priest, and in absolution from him, after or before such acts of devotion, mortification, and charity, as he should think fit to enjoin. By a canon of the council of Lateran, held a.d. 1215, every person ( k) Socrates, lib. 5. cap. 19. Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 16* t Afttf. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 427 person was directed to confess his sins, at least once in every year, to the priest of his parish. A ritual was drawn up for this purpose, which is still used by Papists, and in which the priest absolves without any qualification or reserve; and it was decreed by the Council of Trent that all were to be anathematized who maintained “non requiri confessionem poenitentis ut sacerdos eum absolvere possit;”orwho asserted “absolutionem sacramentalem sacerdotis non esse actum judi- cialem Sed nudum ministerium pronunciandi et declarandi remissa esse peccata.” It is scarcely necessary to observe, that the Penance of the church of Rome is totally different from the Gospel doctrine of repentance, which consists in an inward sorrow for past sins, and a firm resolution of future amendment. This pre¬ tended sacrament has no foundation whatever in Scripture ; we are not commanded to confess our sins to priests, nor are they empowered to dispense absolution upon their own judgment. St. James indeed says, “ Confess your faults one to another (l) but no mention is here made of priests; and the word “faults” seems to con¬ fine the precept to a mutual confession among Christians, of those offences by which they may have injured each other; but, certainly, the necessity of auricular confession, and the power of (l) James> c. 5. v. 16, 428 Exposition of the [part hi. of priestly absolution, cannot be inferred from this passage. And though many of the early ecclesiastical writers earnestly recommend con¬ fession to the clergy, yet they never represent it as essential to the pardon of sin, or as having any connexion with a sacrament ; they only urge it as entitling a person to the prayers of the congre¬ gation ; as useful for supporting the authority of wholesome discipline, and for maintaining the pu¬ rity of the Christian church. But Chrysostom con¬ demns all secret confession to men (m J, as being obviously liable to great abuses ; and Basil ( n ), Hilary ( o and Augustine ( p), all advise con¬ fession of sins to God only. And M. Daill6 has proved, in his elaborate work upon this subject, that private, auricular, sacramental confession of sins, was unknown in the primitive church (q). But though there is not the slightest ground for considering Penance as a Sacrament, nor any authority for requiring auricular confession to priests, yet confession of sins to God is an indis¬ pensable duty, and confession to priests may sometimes be useful, by leading to effectual re¬ pentance, and therefore our church encourages its members to use confidential confession to their priest, or to any other minister of God’s holy word ; ( m) Horn. 31 . in Heb. ( n) In Psalm 37, v. 8. ( 0) In Psalm 51 . (p) Confess, lib. 1 0. cap. 3. ( q) De Aur. Conf. lib. 4. cap. 25. aht. xxv.] Thirty -nine Articles. 429 word (r) ; but this is very different from its being an essential part of a Sacrament instituted by Christ or his Apostles. A contrite sinner may feel relief in unburdening his mind to his spiritual pastor, and may receive advice and consolation, which may soften the pangs of a wounded con¬ science; his scruples may be removed; his good resolutions may be confirmed ; and, instead of falling a victim to religious melancholy, he may be enabled to work out his salvation by a life of active virtue, and by an humble faith in the merits of the blessed Jesus, who, as he himself assures us, came into the world “ to call sinners to repentance.” The only absolution, which our church autho¬ rizes its clergy to pronounce, is ministerial, or de¬ claratory of God s pardon upon the performance of the conditions which he has been pleased to require in the G ospel ; it always supposes faith and sincere repentance, of which God alone is judge. Nor was any absolution, except declaratory and precatory, known among the early Christians, as fully appears from the antient liturgies and rituals, and from the authors who have written upon these subjects ; particularly from the treatise of Morinus de Poenitentid, in which he has proved that the indicative form of absolution, as it is called, (r) Exhortation in Communion Service. 430 Exposition of the [part hi. called, Ego te absolvo, was introduced into the church as late as the twelfth century. Previous to that period only some such prayer as this was used, Absolutionem et remissionem tribuat tibi omnipotens Deus. The right of requiring con¬ fession, and of absolving sins, as exercised in the church of Rome, must necessarily be the source of an undue and dangerous influence to the clergy, and must at the same time operate as a great encouragement to vice and immorality among the people. Our church, in imitation of the primitive church, for certain offences im¬ poses public penance as a part of its discipline; but it by no means considers or represents divine forgiveness as a certain consequence of that out¬ ward and involuntary act. The third of the Popish sacraments rejected in this article is orders. We have shown under a former article, that there has been an uninter¬ rupted succession of ministers since the days of the Apostles. But though it is perfectly comform- able to Scripture, and to the practice of the primitive church, that certain persons should be set apart for the public service of religion, that there should be different ranks of these persons, and that they should be regularly appointed by men who have public authority given them in the congregation for that purpose, yet there is ® no art. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles, 431 no ground for considering ordination as a Sacra¬ ment, Neither Christ nor his apostles prescribed any particular form of ordaining ministers, to be observed in succeeding ages; but they left this, with other things of a similar nature, to be regu¬ lated by the church. Prayer, and imposition of hands, have been always used upon this occasion ; but these are not sufficient, as was before ob* served, to constitute a Sacrament. And, there¬ fore, as ordination wants the essential properties of a sacrament, we esteem it only as a solemn mode of appointing ministers to their sacred office. The Papists make use of many ceremo¬ nies in the ordination of their ministers, which were unknown in the church for at least ten centuries, and during that period Orders were never mentioned by any ecclesiastical writer as a Sacrament. These new ceremonies were probably added, and the name of a Sacrament given to ordination, for the purpose of raising the import¬ ance of the clerical character in the eyes of the common people, and of promoting by those means the influence and authority of the Roman pontiffs. Matrimony is the fourth of the Popish sacra¬ ments rejected in this article. Matrimony is not only “ a state of life allowed by the Scriptures,” but it is an ordinance of God, instituted at the first 432 Exposition of the [part hi. first creation of man, and confirmed by the New Testament. It has not, however, the slightest pretension to be considered as a Sacrament, although it was pronounced to be such by Pope Eugenius, and afterwards by the Council of Trent. It has no visible sign ordained of God, nor any promise of inward grace, which are essential to a sacrament. St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Ephesians ( s), calls the marriage of Christ and his church Mvcrjrgiov, a mystery, which, in the Vulgate, is rendered Sacramentum ; but that expression means, that Christ is not literally married to his church, but only metaphorically or mystically. As matrimony is reckoned a sacra¬ ment by the church of Rome, Papists hold that all marriages are indissoluble, and do not allow of divorces even in cases of adultery, except upon the authority of the Pope's dispensation. The fifth and last of the Popish sacraments rejected in this article is extreme unction, which is practised by the priests of the church of Rome upon the sick, who are supposed to be past recovery; and it is believed to give final pardon for sin, with all necessary assistances in the last agony. The oil, which has been previously blessed by a bishop, is applied to the five senses, with these words, Per hanc sacram unctionem, et (s) C. 5. v. 32, art. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 433 et suam piissimam misericordiam, indulgeat tibi Deus quicquid peccasti per visum, auditum, olfactum, gustum, et tactum ; and as each of the words denoting- the five senses is pronounced, the organ of that sense is anointed. The following are the only two passages of the New Testament urged by the church of Rome to prove that this extreme unction ought to be considered as a sa¬ crament : St. Mark relates that the Apostles, to whom Christ gave a temporary commission to preach in Judaea, “ anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them (t)T— And St. James gives this direction in hisGeneral Epistle, “ Is any sick among you, let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord' and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up (u ).” Among other miraculous gifts communicated by Christ to his Apostles during his ministry, and after- waids by the Holy Ghost to the early preachers of the Gospel, was that of curing diseases; and it is evident, that both the above passages refer to the exercise of that supernatural power, and of course the efficacy of anointing with oil would cease when that power was withdrawn from the church. Moreover, the unction spoken of by these (u) James, c. 5. v. 14. T F (tj Mark, c. 6. v. 13, VOL. II. 434 Exposition of the [part hi. these two Apostles was for the purpose of re¬ storing the sick to health, and not for the good of their souls when life was despaired of, as prac¬ tised by Papists. Indeed the anointing with oil was nothing more than one of those symbolical actions with which miracles were wrought both under the old and new dispensations. Moses divided the waters of the Red Sea by stretching out his hand (x); and Elisha cleansed the leprosy of Naaman by ordering him to wash seven times in the River Jordan (y). Our Saviour cured the deaf and dumb man by putting his fingers into his ears, and by touching his tongue ; and Paul received his sight when Ananias put his hands upon him. Oil was constantly used in the eastern countries, and therefore the Apostles and Elders applied it to the sick whom they were em¬ ployed to heal ; but in neither of these instances is there the slightest intimation of any permanent institution, and therefore our church does not recommend extreme unction, and much less does it esteem it a sacrament Frequent mention is made of persons, who in the primitive ages were cured of their diseases by being anointed with oil ; but this anointing was confined to the cases of miraculous healing, which (x) Exod. c. 14. v. 21. (y) 2 Kings, c. 5. aut. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles, 435 which probably ceased in the third century (z). No general practice of this sort is noticed or alluded to in any of the numerous writers, 01 in the canons of any of the various councils, of the first six centuries, although they abound in minute accounts and rules concerning the sacra¬ ments and other religious offices. Nor is ex¬ treme unction mentioned in the lives of any of the saints of the first eight or nine centuries, al¬ though their deaths are sometimes very particu¬ larly related, and their receiving of the Lords Supper in their last moments is often recorded. In the beginning of the fifth century, the bishop of Eugubium consulted Pope Innocent the first, whether the sick might be anointed with the holy chrism used in Confirmation, and upon other solemn occasions ; and his answer, which is now extant, plainly proves that extreme unction was not then known among Christians (a). In the seventh century they began to anoint their sick, and there was a peculiar office made for it ; but the ( z) “ That such gifts (that is, of healing diseases and expelling daemons) were enjoyed by many Christians in the second, and the beginning of the third century, we are assured by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, and others ; after which time, or, however, after the end of the third century, they were not so common, .f (hey did not quite cease.” Lardner, vol. 2. p. 347. (a) Inn. Ep. j, ad Decent. F F 2 436 Exposition of the [part hi. the prayers which were used show that it was in¬ tended only to promote their recovery (b). This anointing frequently failed, as the means of re¬ storing health ; and in the tenth century the clergy pretended, that though it did not benefit the bodies of the sick, it was of great service to their souls. In those ignorant times the clergy found no great difficulty in inculcating this doc¬ trine, and about the middle of the twelfth cen¬ tury it was generally believed. The schoolmen were great supporters of the spiritual efficacy of extreme unction. Pope Eugenius, in the Council of Florence, decreed it to be a Sacrament ; the Council of Trent confirmed it ; and it is still practised as such by Papists. I have thus endeavoured to trace the rise and establishment of the five Popish Sacraments, and their history is itself a proof that they are NOT TO EE COUNTED FOR SACRAMENTS OF the gospel, in the strict and proper sense of the word ; they were not instituted as such by Christ or his Apostles, nor were they known by that name in the primitive ages of the church. Confirmation and Orders we allow to be holy functions derived from the Apostles, though they want the essential qualities of a Sacrament. Penance, (b) Libr. Sacr. Gregor. Monachii Notse. BedeHi&t. lib. 3. cap. 15 > art. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 437 Penance, as practised by Papists, is a corruption of a part of antient ecclesiastical discipline, and was perverted into its present form of a sacrament, by the management and contrivance of the clergy in the times of darkness and ignorance. Matrimony has no claim whatever to be considered as a Christian sacrament, since it was not instituted by our Saviour, nor was its original character changed by the Gospel. It is indeed a divine institution, and a state of so much importance to the happiness of man¬ kind, that it is very proper to be solemnized by prayer and other acts of religious worship. And lastly, we entirely reject Extreme Unction, as having no other foundation than that of a symbolical rite, incidentally mentioned in Scrip¬ ture, as accompanying the miraculous healing of bodily diseases in the apostolic age. I shall only further observe upon this subject, that as St. Peter commanded his hearers to be baptized/br the remission of sins, so our Saviour, when he instituted the Lord’s Supper, took the cup, and gave it to the Apostles, saying, “ Drink ye all of it, for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remis¬ sion of sinsf thus remission of sins, which was the great object of Christs coming into the world, is pronounced to be clearly connected f f 3 with 43 8 Exposition of the [part m with Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, and with no other rite or ceremony whatever. This cir¬ cumstance clearly points out the importance of these two ordinances to our eternal salvation, and at the same time is an irrefragable proof, that all other ordinances, and consequently the FIVE COMMONLY CALLED SACRAMENTS, HAVE NOT LIKE NATURE OF SACRAMENTS WITH BAPTISM AND THE LORD’S SUPPER. Though the remaining part of this article speaks of sacraments in the plural number, yet it more particularly relates to the Lord’s Supper only. The sacraments were not ordained of CHRIST TO BE GAZED UPON, OR TO BE CARRIED about. There is no authority in Scripture, nor any precedent in the primitive church, for the Romish practice of carrying about the eucharist ; such pompous processions are inconsistent with the simplicity and spiritual nature of Christian ordinances. The institution of the eucharist was, “ Take, eat,” and “ drink ye all of it;” whence it is evident that the elements were consecrated, that the persons who were present might imme¬ diately eat and drink them. But that we should duly use them. It is evidently incumbent upon every Christian to use the Sacraments according to the design { of art. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 439 of their original institution. The Sacrament of Baptism being the admission of a person into the Christian church, is not to be repeated. When any one in the primitive times, on account of persecution, or from any other cause, apostatized from the Christian religion, and afterwards returned to it, he was not re¬ baptized ; on the other hand, the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper being a declaration of a person’s continuance in the Christian relia-ion. O ' no opportunity of receiving it ought to be omitted. It was administered much more fre¬ quently in the primitive ages than it is in the present times; and it is deeply to be lamented that Christians are now much less constant and regular in partaking of it than they formerly were. And in such only as worthily receive THE SAME, THEY HAVE A WHOLESOME EFFECT or operation. We derive no benefits from the receiving of the Sacraments, nor indeed from the performance of any part of our reli¬ gious duty, unless it be done with a proper disposition, and a suitable frame of mind; “ God is a spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth (c)T This sentence ( c ) John, c. 4. v. 24. S' F 4 44 0 Exposition of the [part hi, sentence of the article is also directed against o the Papists, who maintain that the partaking of the Lord’s Supper necessarily promotes our salvation ; that the opus operatum, as they call it, is always attended with real benefit. But they that receive them unwor¬ thily PURCHASE TO themselves damna¬ tion, as st. paul saith. The passage here referred to is the following, and it relates to the Lord’s Supper only : “ For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh dam¬ nation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body (d)” It is material to observe, that the word damnation, at the time the Bible was translated, meant no more than condemnation — any sentence of punishment whatever, without a particular reference to the eternal torments to which the impenitently wicked will be consigned at the last day ; and that St. Paul, in the above passage, does not refer to that dreadful punish¬ ment, appears from the following verse : “ For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep,” that is, are dead. The Corin¬ thians had been guilty of great abuses in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, and the dam¬ nation which they thereby brought upon them¬ selves, (d) 1 Cor. c. li. v. 29, art. xxv.] Thirty-nine Articles. 441 selves, was, as we here learn from St. Paul, weak¬ ness, sickness, and death, that is, temporal punish¬ ments only, and not eternal damnation. This is also evident from the thirty-second verse : “ But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world ; that is, when we are punished in this manner in the present life, we are chastened and corrected by our heavenly Father, that we may be brought to a sense of our duty, and by reforming ourselves may avoid that condemna¬ tion which the impenitent world will suffer in a future state. The word Kfau, used in this p*as- sage by St. Paul, occurs frequently in the New Testament, but in no one instance does it exclu¬ sively signify the sentence of eternal punishment. It is sometimes translated judgment, as, “ the time is come, that judgment must begin at the house of God (e);” and sometimes it is ren¬ dered by the word condemnation, as when one of the malefactors, who were crucified, w ith our blessed Lord, rebukes the other in these words, “ Dost thou not fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation (f).” It is evident, that in these passages eternal damnation could not be meant. When, therefore, it is said, that by unworthily (e) 1 Pet. c. 4. v. 17. (f) Luke, c. 23. v. 40. 448 Exposition of the [part ill. unworthily receiving the Lord’s Supper men purchase to themselves damnation ( gj , the meaning is, that by, so doing they are guilty of a great sin, and are therefore liable to punish¬ ment from God ; but this, like other sins, may be repented of and forgiven, through the merits and for the sake of our blessed Redeemer. ( g ) It is much to be feared, that the expression, " we eat and drink our own damnation,” in our Com¬ munion Service, deters many persons from parti¬ cipating of the Lord’s Supper ; and therefore I re¬ commend it to all clergymen occasionally to explain to their congregations the meaning of the original passage from which it is taken, as well as the sense of the word damnation, when our Bible was trans¬ lated. That the Compilers of our Liturgy did not intend to apply the word damnation, any more than St. Paul the word to eternal punishment, is evident from what follows ; “ We kindle God’s wrath against us, we provoke him to plague us with divers diseases and sundry kinds of death.” The word condemnation is used in the 29th article. 443 'ART, xxvi.j Thirty-nine Articles . * .• f v - . ARTICLE THE TWENTY-SIXTH. Of the Unworthiness of Ministers, which hinders not the Effect of the Sacraments. ALTHOUGH IN THE VISIBLE CHURCH THE EVIL BE EVER MINGLED WITH THE GOOD, AND SOMETIMES THE EVIL HAVE CHIEF AUTHO¬ RITY IN THE MINISTRATION OF THE WORD AND SACRAMENTS ; YET FORASMUCH AS THEY DO NOT THE SAME IN THEIR OWN NAME, BUT IN CHRIST’S, AND DO MINISTER BY HIS COMMISSION AND AUTHORITY, WE MAY USE THEIR MINISTRY, BOTH IN HEAR¬ ING THE WORD OF GOD, AND IN RECEIVING OF THE SACRAMENTS. NEITHER IS THE EFFECT OF CHRIST’S ORDINANCE TAKEN AWAY BY THEIR WICKEDNESS, NOR THE GRACE OF GOD’S GIFTS DIMINISHED FROM SUCH, AS BY FAITH, AND RIGHTLY, DO RECEIVE THE SACRAMENTS MINISTERED UNTO THEM ; WHICH BE EFFECTUAL BE¬ CAUSE of Christ’s institution and pro¬ mise, ALTHOUGH THEY BE MINISTERED BY EVIL MEN. NEVERTHELESS, IT APPERTAINETH TO THE DISCIPLINE OF THE CHURCH, THAT INQUIRY BE MADE OF EVIL MINISTERS, AND THAT THEY BE ACCUSED BY THOSE THAT HAVE KNOWLEDGE 444 Exposition of the [part hi. KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR OFFENCES ,* AND 1 7 FINALLY BEING FOUND GUILTY, BY JUST JUDGMENT BE DEPOSED. X HE enormous and public vices of the Roman clergy, at the time of the Reformation, gave great offence, and caused the revival of the tenet of the antient Donatists, that not only heresy and schism, hut personal sins also, invalidated the sacred functions of Christian ministers. This opinion was maintained by the Anabaptists (a ); but it was by no means general among Pro¬ testants ; it was not adopted by Luther or Calvin ; it was condemned in the Confession of Augsbourg (b), and in that of the Helvetic churches ; and it is rejected by our church in this article. Although it is peculiarly incumbent upon the ministers and dispensers of God’s holy word and sacraments to be virtuous and exemplary in their conduct, yet as they are not exempt from the infirmity of human nature, it will sometimes happen that their lives are not suitable to their holy (a ) Luther says of the Anabaptists, propter homi- num vitia vel indignitatem damnant verum baptisma. (h) Damnant Donatistas, et similes qui negabant licere populo uti ministerio in ecclesia, et sentiebant ministerium malorum inutile et inefficax esse. art. xxvi.] Thirty -nine Articles. 4/]5 holy profession; but in that case, since they are appointed by proper authority, and exercise their functions not in their own name, but in CHRISTS, WE MAY USE THEIR MINISTRY, BOTH IN HEARING THE WORD O F GOD, AND IN RECEIVING OF THE sacraments. Attendance upon the public service of God is the duty of every Christian, and the personal faults of the ministers by no means justify us in absenting ourselves from it. “ The Scribes and Pharisees,” says our Saviour, “ sit in Moses’s seat; all there¬ fore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do ; but do not ye after their Works; for they say, and do not (c).” In the same man¬ ner Christians are bound to observe whatever their ministers shall deliver out of the word of God, and to consider every holy ordinance as valid, which they shall perform agreeable to the institution of Christ, although in their characters, and in the disagreement between their lives and doctiine, they shall resemble the Scribes and Pharisees. Neither is the effect of Christ’s ordi¬ nance TAKEN AWAY BY THEIR WICKEDNESS, NOR THE GRACE OF GODS GIFTS DIMINISHED FROM SUCH AS BY FAITH, AND RIGHTLY, DO RECEIVE THE SACRAMENTS MINISTERED UNTO (4) Matt. C. 23. V. 2 & 3. THEM, 446 Exposition of the [part ni. THEM, WHICH BE EFFECTUAL BECAUSE OF Christ’s institution- and promise, al¬ though THEY BE MINISTERED BY TLVIL MEN. The Sacraments are federal acts which it pleased our Saviour to institute, and to the due receiving of which he has annexed certain benefits; but it is no where said in Scripture, nor is it agreeable to reason, that the efficacy of these holy ordi¬ nances should in any degree depend upon the worthiness of those who administer them. If the faults of ministers vitiate the Sacraments, no one can tell whether he has received the Lord’s Supper, or whether he was baptized or not. Though the church of Rome agrees with us in the doctrine of this article, yet it maintains that the intention of the minister is essential to a Sacrament ; that is, if a minister goes through all the forms of administering Baptism, or the Lord’s Supper, and does not in his own mind intend to administer it, it is in fact no Sacrament. This is expressly asserted both in the councils of Florence and Trent; but it is an opinion so manifestly absurd, that it is unnecessary to say any thing in refutation of it. Nevertheless it appertaineth to the DISCIPLINE OF THE CHURCH, THAT INQUIRY BE MADE OF EVIL MINISTERS, AND THAT THEY BE ACCUSED OF THOSE THAT HAVE KNOW¬ LEDGE art. xxvi.] Thirty-nine Articles, 447 LEDGE OF THEIIl OFFENCES; AND FINALLY BEING FOUND GUILTY, BY JUST JUDGMENT be deposed. When ministers, who ought to be patterns of righteousness, become examples of sin, the church has power to inquire into their conduct ; and it is incumbent on those who are competent to it, to give testimony against them; and if the nature of their offence shall require it, the church may depose them from the sacred office. An authority of this kind has been from the earliest times vested in the church, and it is absolutely necessary for its good government and well-being. There is no one point in which the interest of religion is more deeply concerned than in the morals and conduct of its ministers. 448 Exposition of the [part hi ARTICLE THE TWENTY-SEVENTH. Of Baptism. BAPTISM IS NOT ONLY A SIGN OF PROFESSION AND MARK OF DIFFERENCE, WHEREBY CHRISTIAN MEN ARE DISCERNED FROM OTHERS THAT BE NOT CHRISTENED; BUT IT IS ALSO A SIGN OF REGENERATION OR NEW- BIRTH, WHEREBY, AS BY AN INSTRUMENT, THEY THAT RECEIVE BAPTISM RIGHTLY ARE GRAFTED INTO THE CHURCH; THE PROMISES OF THE FORGIVENESS OF SIN, AND OF OUR ADOPTION TO BE THE SONS OF GOD BY THE HOLY GHOST, ARE VISIBLY SIGNED AND SEALED; FAITH IS CONFIRMED; AND GRACE INCREASED BY VIRTUE OF PRAYER UNTO GOD. THE BAPTISM OF YOUNG CHILDREN IS IN ANY WISE TO BE RETAINED IN THE CHURCH, AS MOST AGREEABLE WITH THE INSTITUTION OF CHRIST. Baptism is derived from the Greek word Bx7ttu, which signifies to wash. Washing, as a religious rite, is not confined to Christianity ; it was in use both among theHeathen and the Jews, and from the universality of the practice we may con- dude that it is founded in the natural principles 9 of art. xxvn.] Thirty-nine Articles. 449 of the human constitution (a).n Bodily cleanliness has ever been in esteem among civilized nations; and the ablutions and lustrations, which have prevailed in the different systems of paganism, are to be considered as emblematical of internal purity. Tertullian says, that the heathen used baptism in the mysteries of Apollo and Ceres, “ in regenerationem et impunitatem perjuriorum suorum (b) and Grotius, from Josephus, men- tions a practice, which was very common among Gentiles, of washing their bodies after they had formed a determination to lead a virtuous life, under a persuasion that such an ablution washed away the effect of their former sins (c). The Jews do not baptize those who are Jews by birth, it being a maxim with them, “ Filium baptizati pro baptizato habere but from the earliest period of their history they have con¬ stantly baptized all who have been converted to their ( a) Dr. Hey. (b) De Baptismo, cap. 5. ( c) Josephus, ut Joannis Baptistse ablutionem a gen¬ tium ablutionibus discerneret, qua; aqua marina, aut etiam vivo flumine, culpas suaselui, animosque purgari adelictorum conscientia existimabant,dequibuspoeta, O nimium faciles, qui tristia crimina ceedis Tolli fluminea posse putatis aqua, ait, 1II0 authore, mentibus primum justae vitae pro- posito purgatis, usurpatam deinde aquam, quae corpora ablueret. Grot. VOL. II. a a 450 Exposition of the [part hi. their religion ( c). Proud of their own distinc¬ tion as the peculiar people of God, they have always believed the rest of mankind to be in an unclean state, and incapable of entering into the covenant of the children of Abraham, without a washing to denote purification from former un¬ cleanness. The Jews represent this baptism as derived from the law of Moses ; and upon the authority of the following passage assert, that the Israelites themselves were baptized in the wilder¬ ness previous to their admission into covenant with God: “ And the Lord said unto Moses, Go unto all the people, and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow ; and let them wash their clothes, and be ready against the third day; for the third day the Lord will come down in the sight of all the people upon Mount Sinai ( d ■).” By the com¬ mand to sanctify the people, the Jews understand that Moses was to cause all the people to be washed ; and their rabbis and commentators (e) produce many passages in the Pentateuch where the ( c ) Hammond on Matt. c. 3. v. 19 and 23. Selden de Jure Nat. et Gent, juxta Hebraeos. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. in Matt. 3, and John 3. ( d ) Exod. c. 19. v. 10 and 11. ( e ) Vide Wall’s Introduction to Infant Baptism, and the Authors quoted by him. Wall has also proved that the antient Christian fathers used the word sanctify for baptize, c. 11 . part 1. art. xxvii.] Thirty -nine Articles. the word sacrifice has that signification ; and as Moses expressly ordered, “ one law and one manner shall be for you and for the stran g’er (f)? they held it to be necessary to baptize pro¬ selytes: “By three things,” says Maimonides, “did Israel enter into covenant; by circumcision, and baptism, and sacrifice : circumcision was in Egypt, as it is written, No uncircumcised person shall eat thereof; baptism was in the wilderness, just before the giving of the law, as it is written, Sanctify them to-day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes ; and sacrifice, as it is said, And he sent young men of the sons of Israel, which offered burnt-offerings ; and so in all ages, when a heathen is willing to be a prose¬ lyte to our religion, he must be circumcised, and be baptized, and bring a sacrifice (g).” When John commanded the Jews to repent, he com¬ manded them also to be baptized, not only as a symbol of sanctification, but as a confession of their being sinners ; and the Jews, accustomed to this practice upon the admission of the heathen into their society, expressed no surprise at the connexion of repentance and purification; they only inquired who he was that assumed to himself (f) Numbers, c. 15. v. 16. (g) Issura. Biah. Perek. 13. Vide also Lightfoot, Harm, in Joan. c. 1. v. 25. G G 2 4f>2 Exposition of the [part hi. himself such an authority (h). Our Saviour gave his sanction to the baptism of John, by requiring John to baptize him (i J. That Christ, duringhis ministry, directed those who declared their belief in his divine mission to be baptized, and that after his resurrection he commanded all nations to be baptized in the name of the blessed Trinity, has been already noticed (k). And we learn from the Acts, that the Apostles preached baptism as the appointed and necessary form of being ad¬ mitted into the religion of Jesus, and that those who embraced the Christian faith were inva¬ riably baptized. St. Peter, after his sermon on the day of Pentecost, which was the very first attempt to propagate the Gospel after the as¬ cension of our Saviour, said to his hearers, “ Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ; and they that gladly received his word were baptized (7 ')” When the Samaritans “believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women ( m )." Again, after Cornelius and (h) John, c. l. v. 19, &c. (i) Matt. c. 3. v. 13. (k) Art. 25. (l) Acts, c, 2. v. 38 and 41. (m) Acts, c. 8. v. 12. art. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles, 453 and his friends had received the Holy Ghost, and so were already baptized in that sense, Peter asked, “ Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we (n)V' and at Ephesus St. Paul baptized several persons in the name of Jesus, who had already been baptized by John the Baptist ( oj. When, therefore, John says “ that he baptized with water, but Christ shall baptize with the Holy Ghost (p)," he does not mean that Christians should not be baptized with water, but that they should have the Holy Ghost poured out upon them in consequence, and as the distinguishing privilege, of Christ s baptism. When St. Paul says, that Christ sent him “ not to baptize, but to preach the Gos¬ pel (^)T he means that preaching was the prin¬ cipal thing he was to do in person ; he might appoint others to baptize under him, and it appears that he generally did. In like manner St. P eter did not baptize Cornelius and his friends himself, but commanded them to be baptized by others ; and we read in St. Johns Gospel, that “ Jesus baptized not, but his disciples C r):' Baptism (n) Acts, c. 10. v. 47. (0) Acts, c. 19. v. 5. (p) Matt. c. 3. v. 11. (q) 1 Cor. c. l. v. 17; (r) John, c. 4. v. 2. G G 3 454 Exposition of the [part in. Baptism, thus instituted by Christ, and prac¬ tised by his Apostles, has been continued in every age of the Christian church. This fact is so universally acknowledged, that it is unnecessary to produce authorities in support of its truth ; but it may be useful to quote from the early ecclesiastical writers a few passages, which may serve to explain the customs formerly used in the performance of this holy ordinance : “ We will relate,” says Justin Martyr, in his Apology pre¬ sented to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, about forty years after the death of St. John the Evan¬ gelist, “ in what manner we dedicate ourselves to our God, being renewed by Christ, lest by omitting this we should appear to act unfairly in this account. Whoever are persuaded, and be¬ lieve that those things are true which are taught and said by us, and promise to live agreeably to them, are instructed to pray and ask of God with fasting, forgiveness of their former sins; and we also pray and fast together with them. Then are they led by us to a place where there is water, and they are regenerated in the same manner we ourselves were regenerated; for they are washed in the name of God the Father and Lord of all, of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Ghost. For Christ said, if ye be not regene¬ rated ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven*” art. xxvn.] Thirty-nine Articles. 455 heaven (s)” And Tertullian, who lived about sixty years afterwards, says, “ They that come to baptism must use the devotions of frequent prayer, fastings, kneelings, and watchings, and the confession of all their past sins, that they may at least do as much as was done in John’s baptism (t).” From these passages it appears, that the persons to be baptized were required to undergo certain preparations, and to make certain promises; and that the whole of this important business might be conducted with the greater regularity and solemnity, it was customary to perform baptism, except in cases of necessity, only twice in the year, namely, at Easter and Whitsuntide. The candidates gave in their names several weeks before the day appointed ; they were in the mean time instructed and examined by the ministers of the church ; and it was indispensably necessary that they should be able to give some account of the grounds of their faith; and besides this previous instruction, they were called upon, at the time of their baptism, by answering certain questions, to declare their belief in the fundamental doc¬ trines of the Gospel, and to promise obedience to its precepts, in a manner similar to our form of baptizing adult persons ; and in case of infants, (t) Tert. de Bap; O G 4 ( 5) Apol. 2. 45^ Exposition of the [part hi. infants, sponsors answered, as they do with us, those questions, and made those promises in their name ; and thus Augustine says, “ Infants do profess repentance by the words of them that bring them, when they do by them renounce the devil and this world ( u )” Baptism was always accompanied with prayers suited to the occasion. The antient mode of baptizing was by immer¬ sion (vj, or by dipping the whole body of the person, whatever was his age, into water ; and in the primitive times they made use of any water which was nearest at hand : “ It is the same thing, ’ says Tertullian, “ whether we be washed in the sea, or in a pond, or in a fountain, or in a river, in a standing or in a running water (xj.” But when churches were built, some part of the church, or a building near it, called the baptistery, was appropriated to this use ; (u) Lib. l. cap. 19. de Pec. Mor.1 (v) Wall, part 2. c. 9. sect. 2. Mersatione enim, non perfusione, agi solitum hunc ritum baptismi per apostolos, implicat et vocis proprietas, et loca ad eum ritum delecta, Joan. c. 3. v. 23; Acta, c. 8. v. 38, et allusiones multae, in eorum scriptis, quse ad asper- sionem referri non possunt, Rom. c. 6. v. 3 et 4. Col. c. 2. v. 12. Serius aliquanto invaluisse videtur mos perfundendi sive aspergendi, in eorum gratiam, qui in gravi morbo cubantes nomen dari Christo expetebant quos cseteri xXmx&; vocabant. Grot. (x) De Bapt. cap. 4. art. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 457 use; and the ministers not only dipped the persons baptized, but they also plunged their heads three times under water, once when they pronounced the name of the Father, a second time when they pronounced the name of the Son, and a third time when they pronounced the name of the Holy Ghost. “ Our Saviour command¬ ed,” says Tertullian, “ that the Apostles should baptize unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost; not unto one person, for we are not plunged once, but three times, once at the naming of each name (y).n And one of the apostolical canons (%) (which are very antient, though they have no right to be called apostolical) orders, that any bishop or presbyter who does not use the trine immersion should be deposed. Jerome ( a), Basil (b), and Chrysos¬ tom ( c ), all mention the three immersions in baptism. Gregory the Great considers it as a matter of no importance whether a person be dipped once or thrice : “ In the same faith different usages of the church do no harm ; thus, whereas there is in the three persons but one substance, (y) Adv. Prax. cap. 26. Vide also de Cor. Mil. cap. i. (z) Can. 50, in Cotelerius’s edit, of Apost. Fathers. (a) Epist. cont. Lucif. (b) De Spir. Sanct. (c) Horn, de Fide. 458 Exposition of the [part hi. substance, there could be no blame in dipping the infant either once or thrice ; for that by three immersions the three persons are represented, as by one the singularity of the substance is signi¬ fied ( d But though trine immersion was the usual mode of baptizing, yet in cases of sickness or weakness, they only sprinkled water upon the face. Both the general practice, and the cases of exception, fully appear from the following pas¬ sage of an epistle of Cyprian : “ You inquire also, dear son, what I think of such as obtain the grace (that is, of baptism) in time of their sickness or infirmity, whether they are to be ac¬ counted lawful Christians, because they are not washed all over with the water of salvation, but have only some of it poured on them (e) and after reasoning at a considerable length, he con¬ cludes, that such baptism is valid ; and that if persons recover it is not necessary that they should be baptized by immersion. However, in the early times they did not allow those who had received this clinic baptism, as it was called, to be admitted to the holy order of priesthood ; and this was among the objections urged against the election of Novatian to the bishopric of Rome, that ( d ) Epist. apud Leand Reg. lib. l,eap. 41. (e) Epist. 69, edit. Oxon. art. xxvir.] Thirty-nine Articles , 459 that he had been baptized when sick in bed (f). Baptism by affusion was also used upon other extraordinary occasions, as probably when three thousand persons were baptized at the same time (g), and when the gaoler and his family were baptized in the night by Paul and Silas (h). The earliest author who mentions baptism by aspersion, as a common practice, is Gennadius of Marseilles (i), in the fifth century, who says, thatbaptism was administered indifferently, either by immersion, or by sprinkling, in his time, in the Gallic church. In the thirteenth century Thomas Aquinas says, “ that baptism may be given not only by immersion, but also by affu¬ sion of water, or sprinkling with it ; but it is the safer way to baptize by immersion, because that is the more common custom (k •)” Erasmus tells us, that in his time, that is in the reign of King Henry the Eighth, it was the custom to sprinkle infants in Holland, and to dip them in England (l). When affusion was first substi¬ tuted in the room of immersion, they poured the water three times upon the face, as appears from the (f) Eus. Hist. Ecc. lib. 6. cap. 43. (g) Acts, c. 2. v. 41. ( h ) Acts, c. 16. v. 33. ( ij Be Eccl. Dogm. cap, 74. (k) 3 In. 66. Art. 7. (1) In Epist. 76. Cyp. 4 6o Exposition of the [part iii. the Council of Angiers, in the thirteenth century, and the same practice continued in Germany as late as the middle of the fifteenth century ( m ). In the Common Prayer Book, printed in 1549, the second year of King Edward the Sixth’s reign, the minister is directed to dip the child in the water thrice ; but in the Prayer Books pub¬ lished at the end of his reign the word thrice is omitted ; and Watson, Bishop of Lincoln, in a sermon published 1558, the last year of Queen Mary’s reign, says, that, “ though the antient tradition of the church has been from the begin¬ ning to dip the child three times, yet that it is not of such necessity, but that if it be but once dip¬ ped in the water it is sufficient; yea, and in time of great peril and necessity, if the water be but poured on the head, it will suffice.” In the reign of Queen Elizabeth immersion came by degrees into disuse; and this alteration was in great measure owing to the principles which some of our divines had imbibed at Geneva, where they had taken refuge during the reign of Queen Mary ; for Calvin ( n ), in his form of baptism, directs that the minister should pour water upon the infant, and this was the first public form of (m) Vide Wall, part. 2. c. 9. (n) Inst. lib. 4. cap. 15. .art. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 451 of baptism which prescribed affusion. Our pre¬ sent rubric directs that the minister, “ if they shall certify him that the child may well endure it, shall dip it in the water; but if they certify that the child is weak, it shall suffice to pour water upon it;” however, no certificate or inquiry has for a long time been made upon this subject; but for these last two hundred years it has been the general practice in this country, perhaps with some exceptions at the beginning of that period, to baptize children by sprinkling them once with water. Immersion was left off in most of the western churches much earlier than in England, but it still continues the universal custom amono* , O the Christians of the East. No particular direction being given in Scripture concerning the manner in which water is to be applied in baptism, we may allow immersion, affusion, or aspersion, and whether itbe performed three times, or once, to be equally valid. Immer¬ sion, that is, burying, as it were, the person bap¬ tized in the water, and raising him out of it again, may be considered as representing the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and our being dead and buried to sin, and rising again to a life of piety and virtue. “ We are buried,” says St. Paul, “ with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory 462 Exposition of the [part iii. glory of the Father, even so vve also should walk in newness of life ( 0 ).” . But pouring, or sprink¬ ling of water, may likewise sufficiently express our purification from the guilt of past sins, and our obligation to keep ourselves in future unspotted by those things which defile the inner man. This mode of baptism, moreover, represents that “ sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ^ /’ to which we owe our salvation ; and the use of it seems not only to be foretold by the prophet Isaiah, who says of our Saviour, that, “ he shall sprinkle many nations^,” that is, many shall receive his baptism ; and by the prophet Ezekiel, “ Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean ( r );” but to be had in view also by the Apostle, where he speaks of our having “ our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water fs J.” Another practice in baptism, common among early Christians, and adopted by our church, is, signing the forehead with the sign of the cross. Indeed the use of the cross was very frequent in the primitive times. “ At every setting out,” says Tertullian, “ or entry upon business, when¬ ever (0) Rom. c. 6. v. 4. cp) \ Pet. c. 1. v. 2. (q) Is. c. 52. v. 15, (r) Ezek. e. 36. v. 25. ($) Heb. c. 10. v. 22. art. xxvil] Thirty-nine Articles. 463 eveywecome into, or go out from, any place, when we dress for a journey, when we go into a bath, when we go to meat, when the candles are brought in, when we lie down or sit down, and whatever business we have, we make on our foreheads the sign of the cross (t)\n and upon another occasion, in speaking of baptism, he says, “ the flesh is signed, that the soul may be fortified ( uj.” The same practice is men¬ tioned by many other writers as invariably used whenever a person was baptized; and it was done, as is expressed in our form of baptism, “ ^ token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, and manfully to fight under his banner against sin, the world, and the devil, and to continue Christs faithful soldier and servant unto his life’s end.” In antient times a mixture of milk and honey was given immediately after baptism, and a white garment was put upon the persons baptized, as emblematical of the purity which they had now acquired ; and from these white garments the day of Pentecost, which was one of the stated times for baptism, was called White-sunday, or Whit-sunday. We now proceed to explain more particularly . the (t) De Cor. Mil. cap. 2. (u) De Bapt 464 Exposition of the [part hi. the different parts of the article which first de¬ clares that BAPTISM IS NOT ONLY A SIGN OF PROFESSION AND MARK OF DIFFERENCE, WHEREBY CHRISTIAN MEN ARE DISCERNED FROM OTHERS THAT BE NOT CHRISTENED, BUT IT IS ALSO A SIGN OF REGENERATION, or NEW-BIRTH. All men being, through the disobedience of our first parents, subject to death, the right of baptism, by which we are admitted into the religion of Jesus, “ who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light (v is with great propriety called “ a sign of regeneration.” The original corruption of our nature is thus washed away, and we are born again to newhopes and new prospects, as is represented in the passage just now quoted from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, in which he says, that “ we are buried with him by baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life (w)” And to Titus he says, “ According to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost (x)” — By baptism we become “ dead unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord (y ).” — “ We (v) 2 Tim. c. 1 . v. 1 0. (to) Rom. c. 6. v. 4. (x) Tit. c.3. v.,5* (y) Rom. c. 6. v. 11. art. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 465 “ We put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man, which is renewed in know¬ ledge after the image of him that created him (z).” — Thus is the inward effect of bap¬ tism constantly asserted in Scripture. We are said to be “ born again of water and the spirit,” which are frequently mentioned together, the one applied externally, and the other operating internally. Baptism, therefore, is not a mere external badge or token of our being Christians; it is a new birth from the death of sin, and a rege¬ neration to a new life in Christ; it is a change and renovation of nature by the spirit and grace of God ; it is an infusion of spiritual life into the soul, by which it is made capable of perform¬ ing spiritual actions, and of living unto God. Whereby they that receive baptism RIGHTLY ARE GRAFTED INTO THE CHURCH. For “ by one spirit we are all baptized into one body ( a ).” Every baptism is tube considered as a right baptism, which is administered with water, by persons duly authorized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; and all they who are so baptized become mem¬ bers of one body in Christ, and are united in one holy Catholic church. The promises of the forgiveness of sin, AND ( z ) Col. c. 3. v. 9 & 10. (a) 1 Cor. c. 12. v. 13. VOL. II. H H 4 66 Exposition of the [part hi. AND OF OUR ADOPTION TO BE THE SONS OF GOD BY THE HOLY GHOST, ARE VISIBLY SIGNED and sealed. Baptism is the sign and seal of the Christian covenant, the great characteristic doctrine of which is the promise of forgiveness of sins : “ Repent, and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the re¬ mission of sins (b) and St. Paul, in the pas¬ sage already quoted from his Epistle to Titus, declares that our salvation is accomplished by baptism, and by the regenerating influence of the Holy Ghost, which is the infallible conse¬ quence of our “ holding fast the profession of our faith ( c)f which we make in baptism. But we must remember what we learn from St. Peter, that the “ baptism which saveth us is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer qf a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ (d )” The answer of a good conscience can be no otherwise secured than by a faithful adherence to those engage¬ ments which we make in baptism ; this it is which really saves us through the merits of Christ, and not the bare performance of the outward ordinance. The adoption to be the sons of god is another (b) Acts, c. 2.v. 38. (c) Heb.c. 10. v. 23. (d) 1 Pet. c. 3. v. 21. art. xxvii.] Thirty -nine, Articles . 467 another effect of baptism : “ For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus; for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ (e).” Faith is confirmed and grace in¬ creased BY VIRTUE OF PRAYER UNTO GOD. This is the natural and constant effect of sincere and devout prayer ; and we may rest assured that God will not fail to hear those who call upon him at the performance of the holy rite of baptism. Baptism therefore is a federal admission into Christianity ; it is the seal of a contract in which all the privileges and blessings of the Gospel are on God’s part conditionally promised to the per¬ sons baptized; and they on the other hand engage by a solemn profession and vow to maintain the doctrines, and observe the precepts of the Christian religion. The spiritual effects of baptism are clearly asserted in the antient ecclesiastical writers ; and nothing can mark more strongly the high idea they entertained of the importance of this Sacra¬ ment, than the names which they applied to it : they call it a divine indulgence ; an absolution from sin ; birth in water ; a regeneration of the soul ; the laver of regeneration ; the water of life; ( e ) Gal. c. 3. v. 26 & 27. H H 2 468 Exposition of the [part hi. life; the unction ; the seal of the Lord; the illumination ; the salvation ; the garment of immortality; the priesthood of the laity; and the signature of the faith (f): The last part of this article asserts the lawful¬ ness of infant-baptism. The command given to Abraham, and repeated by Moses, to circumcise children on the eighth day after their birth, plainly proves, that there is no impropriety in admitting infants into a religious covenant; and this command, when applied to baptism, has the greater weight, as it is generally agreed that cir¬ cumcision was a type of baptism. The practice of the Jews in baptizing proselytes has been already noticed ; and it is further to be observed, that if a proselyte had infant children born to him when he was himself baptized, they were also baptized, though children born after the father had embraced the Jewish religion were not baptized. Baptism was instituted by our Saviour in very general terms, “ Go ye, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (g)” In this form of baptism there is no restriction or exception whatever. Nations consist of persons of all ages, and therefore infants, (f) Wal1 and Bingham, book 1 1 , ch. 1 . (g) Matt, c. 28. v. 19. AHT. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 469 infants, as well as adults, must be included in this command as the objects of baptism; and this inference will be the more evident, when we re¬ flect that the commission was given to Jews, who were accustomed to see infants baptized ; and they would of course consider themselves au¬ thorized to receive converts to Christianity in the same manner as they had received converts to Judaism. Had our Saviour intended any alteration in the Jewish practice of baptizing, or any limitation with respect to age, he would not have failed to specify it. “ If the baptism of infants,” says Dr. Lightfoot, “ had been as unheard of, as unseen, and as new before the coming of John as circumcision was till it pleased God to enjoin it to Abraham, then there is no doubt but God would have either marked his approbation of it by an example, or have enjoined it by command, as we know that circumcision was enjoined. But since, among all the rites of the Jews, there was not a single one more public, or more known, than this very baptism of infants, which was as familiar to them as. their circumcision, whether we regard the time when John appeared, or many ages prior to him, it by no means follows, that an example, or an express command, was as H H 3 necessary 47o Exposition of the [part hi. necessary concerning the baptizing of infants when John came, as it was concerning the cir¬ cumcision of infants or others in the time of Abraham, as being a thing which had been neither heard of, nor seen in all the world, before it was instituted by God (h)f There is nothing in the nature of baptism which renders it improper or unsuitable for children : it is a fcederal rite instituted for the benefit of those who receive it ; and parents, whose duty it is to provide for the eternal as well as for the temporal welfare of their children, are, by the law of nature, empowered to cause them to enter into this engagement, which they may themselves hereafter ratify and confirm ; and the Jewish writers state this as the ground upon which they required the infant children of proselytes to be baptized. If parents be com¬ manded to “ bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (i)” surely it is incumbent upon them to take care that they be made members of that religion, in the precepts and doctrines of which they are to be instructed. If the promise be made to us and to our children, without any limitation of age, why should they not all, since they are to partake (h) Harm, in Joan. c. l. v. 25. (i) Eph. c. 6. v. 4. art. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 471 partake of the promise, partake also of its sign ? especially since the infants of the Jews were all admitted into the religion of Moses by that so¬ lemn sign which was figurative of baptism ; and our Saviour and his Apostles called upon the Jews to relinquish the ordinances of the Mosaic dispensation for those of the Christian. Our Saviour encouraged those who brought little chil¬ dren to him ; he put his hands upon them, and declared that of such is the kingdom of hea¬ ven (k ). As the Apostles baptized whole families at once ( l J, and no mention is made in the Acts or Epistles of adults only being baptized, we conclude that among others they baptized children. There are passages in the remaining works of Clement of Rome and Hermas, both apostolical fathers, which seem to indicate that infant-baptism prevailed when they wrote. Justin Martyr (m) and Irenseus (n) in the second century, and Origen (0) in the beginning of the third, expressly mention infant-baptism as the constant practice of their times ; and the same thing appears from an application of Fidus, an African (70 Mark, c. 10. v. 14. (1) Acts, c. 10. v. 48. c. 16. v. 15 and 33. I Cor. c. 1. v. 16. (m) Apol. 2da. (n) Adv. Hser, lib. 2. cap. 39. (0) Horn. 14, in Lucam. H H 4 472 Exposition of the [part nr. African bishop, to Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, in which he takes for granted the custom and propriety of baptizing infants, and only desires to know whether they may be baptized before the eighth day after their birth, that being the day on which circumcision was performed by the law of Moses. This question was considered in an African synod, held a. d. 254, at which sixty-six bishops were present, and it was unani¬ mously decreed, that “ it was not necessary to defer baptism to that day ; and that the grace of God, or baptism, should be given to all, and especially to infants.” This decision was com¬ municated in a letter from Cyprian to Fidus ( p ). In the fourth century Ambrose says, that in¬ fants, who are baptized, are reformed from wickedness to the primitive state of their na¬ ture q) ; and at the end of that century the famous controversy took place between Augus¬ tine and Pelagius concerning original sin; in which the uniform practice of baptizing infants from the days of the Apostles was admitted by both parties, although they assigned different reasons for it; and Caslestius, a follower of Pelagius, when examined before the Council of Carthage, a. d. 412, acknowledged that infants stand in need of baptism, and that they ought to (p) Cyp. Ep. 59, ( q) Comment, in Lucam, c. 10. art. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 473 to be baptized. Tertullian is the only antient author (r) who objects to infant- baptism ; and his manner of opposing it shows evidently that it was the general practice in his time; but even he contends that infants ought to be baptized if their lives be in danger, which is in fact allow- ing the principle upon which infant-baptism is founded. His opinion was so little regarded, that Augustine says, he never heard of any Christian, catholic or sectary, who taught any other doctrine than that infants are to be bap¬ tized (s). Infant-baptism is not mentioned in the canons of any council, general or provincial, nor is it inserted as an object of faith in any creed ; and thence we infer that it was a point not controverted at any period of the antient church ; and we know that it was the prac¬ tice in all established national churches. Wall says, that Peter Bruis, a Frenchman, who lived about the year 1030 (whose followers were called Petrobrussians) was the first Anti-paedobaptist teacher (rj Gregory Nazianzen gave it as his opinion, that children ought not to be baptized till they were three years old ; but as children of that age are certainly incapable of answering for themselves, we are scarcely to consider him as an enemy to the principles of infant-baptism. (s) De Pecc, Mor. cap. 6* 474 Exposition of the [part hi. teacher who had a regular congregation (t ). The Anabaptists of Germany took their rise in the beginning of the fifteenth century, but it does not appear that there was any congregation of Anabaptists in England till the year 1640. Upon these grounds we conclude that the BAPTISM OF YOUNG CHILDREN IS IN ANYWISE TO BE RETAINED IN THE CHURCH AS MOST AGREEABLE WITH THE INSTITUTION OF Christ. It is to be observed, that it is not here asserted that the baptism of young children is itself commanded in the Gospel, for there cer¬ tainly is no such command ; it is only declared to be MOST AGREEABLE WITH THE INSTITU¬ TION of Christ ; that is, it is more conformable to the general tenor and principles of the Chris¬ tian religion, that infants should be baptized, than that baptism should be deferred till they arrive at an age of maturity. The Papists admit of the baptism of infants by midwives, or any layman, upon the unautho¬ rized principle that no person whatever can be saved who has not been baptized. Lay-bap¬ tism was also allowed in our church for a few years after the Reformation; but in the year 1 575? by which time the Scriptures were more examined, (t) Part 2. c. 7. ART. xxvii.] Thirty-nine Articles . 475 examined, and the nature of Sacraments was better understood, it was unanimously decreed in convocation, that baptism should be administered by none but lawful ministers. The Papists also mix oil and balsam with the water ; but water only is mentioned in the New Testament. 476 Exposition of the [part Hi. r-> r.-; j-|ir .w > t V ! ' / ’ ) ' t / ' !, ' ' ARTICLE THE TWENTY-EIGHTH. Of the Lord’s Suppei\ THE SUPPER OF THE LORD IS NOT ONLY A SIGN OF THE LOVE THAT CHRISTIANS OUGHT TO HAVE AMONG THEMSELVES ONE TO ANOTHER; BUT RATHER IS A SACRAMENT OF OUR REDEMPTION BY CHRIST’S DEATH : INSOMUCH THAT TO SUCH AS RIGHTLY, WORTHILY, AND WITH FAITH RECEIVE THE SAME, THE BREAD WHICH WE BREAK IS A PARTAKING OF THE BODY OF CHRIST, AND LIKEWISE THE CUP OF BLESSING IS A PAR¬ TAKING OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. TRAN SUBSTANTIATION (OR THE CHANGE OF THE SUBSTANCE OF BREAD AND WINE) IN THE SUPPER OF THE LOUD CANNOT BE PROVED BY HOLY WRIT, BUT IS REPUG¬ NANT TO THE PLAIN WORDS OF SCRIPTURE* OVERTHROWETH THE NATURE OF A SACRA¬ MENT, AND HATH GIVEN OCCASION TO MANY SUPERSTITIONS. THE BODY OF CHRIST IS GIVEN, TAKEN, AND EATEN IN THE SUPPER, ONLY AFTER A HEAVENLY AND SPIRITUAL MANNER. AND THE MEAN, WHEREBY THE BODY OF CHRIST IS RECEIVED AND EATEN IN THE SUPPER, IS FAITH. THE art. xxvili.] Thirty-nine Articles. 477 THE SACRAMENT OF THE LORD’S SUPPER WAS not by Christ’s ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or wor¬ shipped. The institution of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper by our Saviour, as has been already ob¬ served, is recorded by the first three Evangelists, and by the Apostle St. Paul, whose words differ very little from those of his companion St. Luke; and the only difference between St. Matthew and St. Mark is, that the latter omits the words “ for the remission of sins.” There is so gene¬ ral an agreement among them all, that it will only be necessary to recite the words of one of them, and I shall select those of St. Matthew : “ Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve” (to eat the Passover which had been prepared by his direction). “ And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat ; this is my body. And he took the cup and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it ; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins (a).” The sacrament of the Lord’s Supper being thus instituted was adopted by all early Christians, with very few exceptions : and no modern sect rejects it except the (a) Matt. c. 26. v. 20, 26, 27, and 28. 47$ Exposition of the [part iii. the Quakers, and some Mystics, who make the whole of religion to consist of contemplative love. In the early times of the Gospel the celebra¬ tion of the Lord’s Supper was both frequent (b), and numerously attended. Voluntary absence was considered as a culpable neglect ; and exclu¬ sion from it, by the sentence of the church, as a severe punishment. Every one brought an offer¬ ing proportioned to his ability ; these offerings were chiefly of bread and wine, and the priests consecrated as much as was necessary for the ad¬ ministration of the eucharist. The clergy had a part of what was left for their maintenance ; and the rest furnished the repast called Ayonw, or love- feast, which immediately followed the celebra¬ tion of the Lord’s Supper, and of which all the communicants, both rich and poor, partook. The A yonr* is always mentioned by the fathers as an apostolical institution, and we have the fol¬ lowing account of it in Chrysostom : “ When all the faithful met together, and had heard the ser¬ mon and prayers, and received the communion, they did not immediately return home upon the breaking up of the assembly, but the rich and wealthy brought meat and food from their own houses, and called the poor and made a com¬ mon table, a common dinner, a common ban¬ quet in the church. And so from the fellowship (b) Ilk some places it was administered every day. art. xxviii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 479 in eating, and from the reverence of the place, they were all strictly united in charity one with another, and much pleasure and profit arose from thence to them all j for the poor were comforted, and the rich reaped the fruits of their benevo¬ lence both from those whom they fed, and from God (c). These feasts were at first conducted with great propriety and decorum ; but they were afterwards found liable to abuses, and were dis¬ continued. Indeed St. Paul saw occasion, in his time, to censure some irregularities which took place at the love-feasts of Corinth. As the Sacrament of Baptism was by no means novel in its kind to the Jews, so the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper greatly resembled the reli¬ gious feasts to which they were accustomed. At those feasts they partook of bread and wine in a serious and devout manner, after a solemn blessing or thanksgiving to God for his manifold mercies. And this was particularly the case at the feast of the Passover, which our Saviour was cele¬ brating with his Apostles when he instituted this holy Sacrament. At that feast they commemorated the deliverance of their own peculiar nation from the bondage of Egpyt ; and there could not be a more suitable opportunity for establishing an ordinance which was to commemorate the infi¬ nitely more important deliverance of all mankind from (c) Horn. ai. 480 Exposition of the [part iii. from the bondage of sin. The former deliverance was typical of the latter; and instead of keeping the Jewish Passover, which was now to be abro¬ gated, they were to commemorate “ Christ, their Passover, who was sacrificed for them the bread broken was to represent his body offered upon the cross, and the wine poured out was to represent his blood, which was shed for the salvation of men. The nourishment which these elements afford to our bodies, is figurative of the salutary effects which the thing signified has upon our souls. And as the celebration of the Passover was not only a constant memorial of the deliverance of the Israelites out of the land of Egypt, but also a symbolical action, by which they had a title to the blessings of the old cove¬ nant, so the celebration of the Lord’s Supper is not only a constant memorial of the death of Christ, but also a pledge or earnest to the com¬ municant of the benefits promised by the new covenant. As the Passover was instituted the nightbefore theactual deliverance ofthelsraelites, so the Lord’s Supper was instituted the night before the redemption of man was accomplished by the crucifixion of the blessed Jesus. It is to be partaken of by all who look for remission of sins by the death of Christ ; we are not only to cherish that hope in our minds, and express it in our devotions, but we are to give an outward • ' . • ) proof A RT* XXVI ri.] Thirty -nine Articles . 48 1 proof of our reliance upon the merits of his passion as the means of our salvation, by eating- that bread and drinking that wine, which are typical representations of the body and blood of Christ, “ who by his one oblation of himself once offered, made a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world ( d J.” The article begins with stating-, that the SUPPER OF THE LORD IS NOT ONLY A SIGN OF THE LOVE THAT CHRISTIANS OUGHT TO HAVE AMONG THEMSELVES ONE TO ANOTHER; BUT RATHER IT IS A SACRAMENT OF OUR REDEMP¬ TION by ciirist s death. The commemora¬ tion of Christ s death, as the ground of our hope of everlasting life, cannot but suggest to our minds a lively sense of Christ’s love to mankind, and our obligation of mutual kindness to each other : “ Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command youdej/’ “ A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another (f).” We are called upon jointly to commemorate (d) Communion Service. (e) John, c. 15, v. 13 & 14. (f) John, c. 13, v. 34 & 35. VOL, II. 1 i 482 Exposition of the [part hi. commemorate the love of Christ, as the servants of one master, and the members of one body ; that while our hearts are warmed with religious gratitude and devout affection to our heavenly Benefactor, thevery act of uniting in the celebra¬ tion of this holy and important rite may produce in us feelings ofkindness and benevolence towards those, whom we see partaking of the same cove¬ nant of grace, and rejoicing in the same hope of everlasting happiness. But the death of Christ was not merely a proof of his love to mankind, it was also an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of the whole world ; and therefore, the Lord’s Supper, which commemorates that sacrifice, may justly be denominated a sacrament of our re¬ demption, and more especially, since our Sa¬ viour, in the institution of the Lord’s Supper, as recorded by St. Matthew, expressly says, that the cup is to be drunk in remembrance, that his blood was shed “ for the remission of sins (g)” Insomuch that to such as rightly, WORTHILY, AND WITH FAITH RECEIVE THE SAME, THE BREAD WHICH WE BREAK IS A PARTAKING OF THE BODY OF CHRIST; AND LIKEWISE THE CUP OF BLESSING IS A PAR¬ TAKING OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST. “ The cup of blessing,” says St. Paul, “ which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? the (g) Matt. c. 26. v. 28. art. xxviii.] Thirty-nine Articles. 483 the bread which we break, is it not the commu¬ nion of the body of Christ (7* )?” The expres¬ sions in the article, partaking of the body and BLOOD of christ, and in St. Paul’s Epis¬ tle, “ The communion of the body and blood of Christ,” are synonymous, and signify that those who worthily receive the Lord’s Supper share in the benefits which were purchased for mankind by the death of Christ, such as, recon¬ ciliation to God, the assistance of his Holy Spirit, the strengthening of faith, and final remission of sins in those who continue to believe and obey the Gospel. The Lord’s Supper, therefore, fully answers the description of “sacraments ordained by Christ,” as given in the twenty-fifth article, that they “ are not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God’s good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in him.” The article next condemns the Popish doc¬ trine of transubstantiation, or the change of the substance of bread and wine into the real sub¬ stance of Christ’s body and blood in the admi¬ nistration of the Lord’s Supper. The (h) 1 Cor. c. 10. v. 16. I I 2 484 Exposition of the [part nr. The idea of Christ’s bodily presence in the eucharist was first started in the beginning of the eighth century, and it owed its rise to the indis¬ cretion of preachers, and writers of warm imagi¬ nations, who, instead of explaining judiciously the lofty figures of Scripture language upon this sub¬ ject, understood and urged them in their literal sense. Thus the true meaning of these expres¬ sions was grossly perverted ; but as this conceit seemed to exalt the nature of the holy Sacrament, it was eagerly received in that ignorant and superstitious age ; and when once introduced, it soon spread, and was by degrees carried farther and farther, by persons still less guarded in their application of these metaphorical phrases, till at length, in the twelfth century, the actual change of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, by the consecration of the priest, was pro nounced to be a Gospel truth, by the pretended authority of the church of Rome. The first writer who maintained this doctrine was Paschase Radbert, in the ninth century, before it was firmly established ; and the first public assertion of it was at the third Lateran Council, in the year 1215, after it had been for some time openly avowed by the popes, and, in obedience to their injunctions, inculcated by the clergy. It is said to have been brought into England about the art. xxvm.j Thirty -nine Articles. 485 the middle of the eleventh century by Lanfranc, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury ; but the term transubstantiation was not known till the thirteenth century, when it was invented by Stephen, bishop of Autun (i ). This has always been a favourite doctrine of the church of Rome, as it impressed the common people with higher notions of the power of the clergy, and therefore served to increase their influence. It met how¬ ever with opposition upon its original introduc¬ tion, particularly from Bertram and John Scotl¬ and again at the first dawn of the Reformation both upon the continent and in this country. It was objected to by the Waldenses: and there are strong expressions against it in some parts of Wickliff’s works. Luther, in contradiction to the other reformers, only changed transubstan¬ tiation into consubstantiation , which means that the substance of Christ’s body and blood is pre¬ sent in the holy sacrament with the substance of bread and wine ; and his perseverance in this opinion was a principal cause of the division among the reformed churches. He was opposed by Zuingle and Calvin, but the confession of Augsburg, which was drawn up by Melancthon, favours consubstantiation. There is however con¬ siderable doubt concerning the real sentiments of (i) De Sacr. Alt. c. 13. i i 3 486 Exposition of the [part hi. of Melancthon upon this subject, especially in the latter part of his life. Some of our early English reformers were Lutherans, and conse¬ quently they were at first disposed to lean towards consubstantiation ; but they seem soon to have discovered their error, for in the articles of 1552 it is expressly said, “ A faithful man ought not either to believe or openly confess the real and bodily presence, as they term it, of Christs flesh and blood in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.” Ihis part of the article was omitted in 1562, piobably with a view to give less offence to those who maintained the corporal presence, and to compiehend as many as possible in the esta¬ blished church. In arguing against this doctrine, we may first observe, that it is contradicted by our senses, since we see and taste that the bread and wine after consecration, and when we actually receive them, still continue to be bread and wine with¬ out any change or alteration whatever. And again, was it possible for Christ, when he insti¬ tuted the Lord’s Supper to take his own body and his own blood into his own hands, and deliver them to every one of his Apostles ? Or was it possible for the Apostles to understand our Saviour’s command to drink his blood literally, when they were forbidden, under the severest penalties, Art. xxviii.] Thirty -nine Articles. 487 penalties, to taste blood by the Law of Moses, of which not only they themselves, but Christ also, had been a strict observer ? They expressed not the slightest surprise or reluctance when Christ delivered to them the bread and wine, which could not have been the case had they conceived themselves commanded to eat the real body and drink the real blood of their Lord and Master. The bread and wine must have been considered by them as symbolical ; and indeed the whole transaction was evidently figurative in all its parts ; it was instituted, as was just now observed, when the Jews, by killing the paschal lamb commemorated their deliver¬ ance from Egyptian bondage by the hand of Moses, which was typical of the deliverance of all mankind from the bondage of sin by the death of Christ, the Lamb slain from the foun¬ dation of the world ; and as the occasion was typical, so likewise were the words used by our Saviour: “ This is my body which is broken, and this is my blood which is shed.” But his body was not yet broken, nor was his blood yet shed; and therefore the breaking of the bread, and the pouring out of the wine, were then figurative of what was about to happen, as they are now figurative of what has actually happened. He also said, “ This cup is the 1 1 4 new 4^8 Exposition of the [part iii. new testament in my blood (k ) which words could not be meant in a literal sense ; the cup could not be changed into a covenant, though it might be a representation or memorial of it. Our Saviour called the wine, after it was conse- ciated, u the fruit of the vine (l)f which im¬ plied that no change had taken place in its real nature. Since then the words, “ This is my body, and this is my blood,” upon which the I apists pretend to support this doctrine, were manifestly used in a figurative sense, and must have been so understood by the Apostles, to whom they were originally addressed, we may safely pronounce that transubstantiation, (or the change of the substance or BREAD AND WINE) IN THE SUPPER OF THE LORD, CANNOT BE PROVED BY HOLY WRIT. That the early Christians understood our Sa- viouis words in a figurative sense, appears from the writings of more than twenty fathers, with¬ out a single authority on the opposite side ; I shall quote only two of the numerous passages which might be adduced upon this subject, the one from a Greek, and the other from a Latin father. Origen says, that “ the under¬ standing our Saviour’s words, of eating his flesh and drinking his blood, according to the letter, is (k) 1 Cor. c, 11, v. 25. (1) Matt. c. 26, v. 2 g. art. xxvin.'J Thirty-nine Articles. 489 is a letter that kills (in ).” Augustine, in laying down rules for judging of the figurative expres¬ sions of Scripture, cites these words, “ Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of man, ye have no life in you, which,” says he, “ seems to command a crime and a horrid action, and therefore it is a figure commanding us to communicate in the passion of our Lord, and to lay up in our memory with delight and profit, that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us ( n).” To these authorities I will add that of Pope Gelasius, who lived at the end of the fifth century ; The Sacraments of the body and blood of Christ,” says he, “ are a divine thing, for which reason we become by them partakers of the divine nature : and yet the substance of bread and wine does not cease to exist, and the image and likeness of the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in holy mysteries ( 0)” As a further proof of the sen¬ timents of the early Christians upon this point, I shall observe that the fathers constantly call the consecrated elements, the figures, the signs, the symbols, the types and antitypes, the com¬ memoration, the representation, the mysteries, and ( m) Horn. 7, in Levit. (n) Lib. 3. cap. 16, de Doct. Christ. ( 0 ) Lib. de Daub, JNat. Christ. 490 Exposition of the [part. iii. and the sacraments of the body and blood of Christ: which expressions plainly show that they did not consider the bread and wine as changed into the very substance of Christ’s body and blood. But it is repugnant to the plain words of scripture ; for St. Paul says, “ As often as ye eat this bread , and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come (p) that therefore which is eaten in the eucharist is still bread. This text may of itself be considered as decisive against the doctrine of transubstam tiation; and the expression, “Ye do show the Lord s death till he come, ’ is another proof that the institution was figurative of the death of Christ. OvERTHROWETH THE NATURE OF A SACRA¬ MENT : for the nature of a sacrament is to be a sign or representation, whereas the doctrine of transubstantiation supposes that the real body and blood of Christ are eaten and drunk in the eucharist. And HATH GIVEN OCCASION TO MANY SU¬ PERSTITIONS : This might be expected; for those who supposed that the bread and wine were by consecration changed into the body and blood of Christ, would naturally fall into superstitious practices (p) 1 Cor. c. 11. v. 26. art. xxviii.] Thirty-nine Articles . 491 practices concerning them ; and accordingly we find that the Papists lift up the host with the most pompous solemnities, and ££ add (as arch¬ bishop Seeker expresses it,) idolatrous practice to erroneous belief, worshipping on their knees a bit of bread 'for the Son of God.” It is the custom of our church to kneel at the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper ; but we do it not to ac¬ knowledge any corporal presence of Christ, but to worship him who is every where present, the invisible God. We consider kneeling as a posture well suited to those prayers and praises which we then offer up to our heavenly Father, and as expressive of that piety and humility which are essential to the worthy receiving of this holy sacrament, In the primitive church it was received by the communicants sometimes standing and sometimes kneeling : but there is no trace in any ancient writer of its having ever been received sitting. The Papists also applied the consecrated wafer to the cure of diseases ; put the wafers into the mouths of the commu¬ nicants, lest a single crumb should fall to the ground ; burnt what remained to ashes for the same reason, and were guilty of several other superstitious practices, which are enumerated in the last member of this article. The body of christ is given, taken, AND 492 Exposition of the [part hi. and eaten in the supper only in a hea¬ venly AND SPIRITUAL MANNER ; AND THE MEAN WHEREBY THE BODY OF CHRIST IS RE¬ CEIVED AND EATEN IN THE SUPPER, IS FAITH. 1 his part of the article is evidently the conse¬ quence of what has been already proved. Since the body of Christ is not actually present in the eucharist, we can only eat it spiritually. Those that come duly prepared to this holy sacrament, and receive it rightly and worthily, are spiritually partakers ol his body and blood ; “ they be¬ come one with Christ, and Christ with them and they really and truly partake of the benefits of his passion, as living members of his body ; as he is the bread of life, they are then nou¬ rished, strengthened, and supported by him; they receive him by faith ; by faith they feed upon him; and the divine life, which is thus begun in their souls, is in a spiritual manner upheld and carried on in them : “ Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life ; and I will raise him up at the last day ; for my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed (q).” Thus, instead of maintaining the groundless doctrine of the corporal pre¬ sence of the body and blood, of the flesh and bones of Christ, which is contradicted by our senses, CqJ John, c. 6, v.54 and 55. art. xxviil] Thirty-nine Articles. 4g3 senses, is equally irreconcileable with reason and Scripture, and was unknown in the Christian church for the first seven centuries, we own a real spiritual presence of Him, who is “ the way, the truth, and the life (rj,” and profess our belief, that while we worthily partake of the appointed emblems of his body and blood, an in¬ ward grace is communicated, which purifies our hearts, fortifies our minds against the temptations of the world, and animates our efforts “ in press¬ ing towards the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus (s).” The sacrament of the lord’s supper was NOT BY Christ’s ordinance reserved, CARRIED ABOUT, LIFTED UP, AND WOR¬ SHIPPED. This last part of the article refers also to the Papists, among whom it is the custom to reserve part of the consecrated bread, for the purpose of giving it to the sick, or other absent persons, at some future time ; they also carry about the host, when consecrated, in solemn pro¬ cession, elevate it with superstitious ceremony, and worship it in the same manner as they would worship Christ himself. None of these practices are warranted by Christ’s ordinance, or any au- thority of Scripture; they are utterly inconsistent with (r) John, c. 14, v. 6. CO Phil. c. 3, v. 14. 494 Exposition of the [part m. with the simplicity and spiritual nature of Christian Sacraments ; they were unknown in the primitive ages of the Gospel, and have evi¬ dently originated from the absurd doctrine of transubstantiation. art. xxix.] Thirty-nine Articles. 495 ARTICLE THE TWENTY-NINTH. Of the Wicked which eat not the Body of Christ in the Use of the Lord’s Supper. THE WICKED, AND SUCH AS BE VOID OF A LIVELY FAITH, ALTHOUGH THEY DO CAR¬ NALLY AND VISIBLY PRESS WITH THEIR TEETH, (AS ST. AUGUSTINE SAITh) THE SACRAMENT OF THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST ,’ YET IN NO WISE ARE THEY PAR¬ TAKERS OF CHRIST, BUT RATHER TO THEIR CONDEMNATION DO EAT AND DRINK THE SIGN OR SACRAMENT OF SO GREAT A THING, ■ HIS article is connected with the preceding, and follows from it ; it was probably directed against the Papists, who contend, that the mere receiving the Lord’s Supper procures remission of sins ex opere operato, as it were mechanically, whatever may be the character and disposition of the communicant. And indeed, if with the church of Rome we believed the actual pre¬ sence of Christ’s body in the eucharist, then all persons, good and bad, who received the Sacra¬ ment, would equally receive the body of Christ. But we have shown, in the preceding article, that he 496 Exposition of the [part iri. he is present only in a spiritual manner, and that “ the mean, whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten, is faith consequently, they who have not faith do not receive Christ, that is, THE WICKED AND SUCH AS BE VOID OF A LIVELY FAITH, ALTHOUGH THEY DO CAR¬ NALLY AND VISIBLY PRESS WITH THEIR TEETH, (AS ST. AUGUSTINE SAITIl) THE SA¬ CRAMENT OF THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST, YET IN NO WISE ARE THEY PARTAKERS OF Christ. The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is a foederal act, and if men neglect to perform the conditions required of them by due prepara¬ tion and suitable disposition of mind, they will derive no benefit from eating and drinking the bread and wine, they will in no wise be PARTAKERS of Christ, that is, they will have no share whatever in those blessings which Christ purchased by his death. But rather to their condemnation DO EAT and drink the sign or sacra¬ ment of so great a thing. The unworthy receiving of this holy Sacrament must neces¬ sarily be a sin ; it is a mark of presumption and insincerity ; it dishonours God, and profanes his institution ; and St. Paul assures us that it will draw down punishment upon us, as has been noticed at the end of the twenty-fifth article ; but 497 art. xxix.] Thirty -nine Articles. but we are not to suffer unfounded scruples upon this subject to deter us from the performance of an essential duty. The doctrine of this article is clearly asserted in the antient fathers ; “ Origen says, “ Christ is the true food : whosoever eats him shall live for ever; of whom no wicked person can eat; for if it were possible that any, who continue wicked, should eat the Word that was made flesh, it had never been written, Whoso eateth this bread shall live for ever (a)” And again, “ The good eat the living bread which came down from heaven; but the wicked eat dead bread, which is death.” Jerome says, “ They that are not holy in body and spirit, do neither eat the flesh of Jesus nor drink his blood ; of which he said, he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life (b).'’ And Augustine, in the pas¬ sage alluded to in the article, after quoting this verse in St. John’s Gospel, “ He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth inme, and I in him ( c)," adds, “ to dwell then in Christ, and to have him dwelling in us, this is to eat that food, and to drink that drink. And he who by these means does not dwell in Christ, and in whom Christ does not dwell, without doubt (a) Comment, in Matt. c. 15. (b) In cap. 66. Isaise. (c) John, c. 6. v. 56. VOL. II. K K 498 Exposition of the [part iii. doubt neither spiritually eats his flesh, nor drinks his blood, though he carnally press with his teeth the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ; but rather to his own condemnation he eats and drinks the sacrament of so great a thing, because he has presumed to come impure to the sacra¬ ment of Christ, which none receive worthily but they who are pure, of whom it is said, blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God (d)r (d) Tractat. 26. in Joan, art. xxx.] Thirty -nine Articles. ARTICLE THE THIRTIETH. 499 Of both Kinds. THE CUP OF THE LORD IS NOT TO BE DENIED TO THE lay-people; FOR BOTH THE PARTS OF THE LORD’S SACRAMENT, BY CHRIST^ ORDINANCE AND COMMANDMENT, OUGHT TO BE MINISTERED TO ALL CHRISTIAN MEN ALIKE. It appears from the unanimous testimony of the fathers, and from all the antient rituals and liturgies, that the Sacrament of the Lord’s Sup¬ per was, in the early ages of the church, admi¬ nistered in both kinds, as well to the laity as to the clergy. It is therefore unnecessary to quote authorities upon a point which has never been called in question ; but I will just state that Pope Gelasius, in the fifth century, whom I mentioned under the twenty-eighth article, having heard that the Manichaeans (a) attended the assemblies of the Christians, and partook of the bread, but not of the wine, in the Lord’s Supper, decreed, that “ all persons should either communicate in the . Sacrament (a) It was a principle of the Manichaeans never to taste wine upon any occasion. K K 2 500 Exposition of the [part hi. Sacrament entirely, or be entirely excluded from it ; for that such a dividing of one and the same sacrament could not be done without a heinous sacrilege.” The practice of denying the cup to the laity arose out of the doctrine of transubstantiation. The belief that the sacramental bread and wine were actually converted into the body and blood of Christ, naturally produced, in a weak and su¬ perstitious age, an anxious fear lest any part of them should be lost or wasted. To prevent any thing of this kind in the bread, small wafers were used, which were put at once into the mouths of the communicants by the officiating ministers ; but no expedient could be devised to guard against the occasional spilling of the wine in administering it to large congregations. The bread was sopped in the wine, and the wine was conveyed by tubes into the mouth ; but all in vain ; accidents still happened, and therefore it was determined that the priests should entirely withhold the cup from the laity. It is to be sup¬ posed that a change of this sort, in so important an ordinance as that of the Lord’s Supper, could not be effected at once. The first attempt seems to have been made in the twelfth century ; it was gradually submitted to, and was at last established by the authority of the Council of Constance, art. xxx.] Thirty-nine Articles. 501 Constance, a. d. 1414; but in their decree they acknowledged that “ Christ did institute this Sa¬ crament in both kinds, and that the faithful, in the primitive church, did receive in both kinds; vet a practice being reasonably introduced to avoid some dangers and scandals, they appoint the custom to continue of consecrating in both kinds, and of giving to the laity only in one kind," thus presuming to depart from the po¬ sitive command of our Lord respecting the manner of administering the sign of the covenant between himself and mankind. From that time it has been the invariable practice of the church of Rome to confine the cup to the priests. And it was again admitted at the Council of Trent, that the Lord’s Supper was formerly administered in both kinds to all the commu¬ nicants, but it was openly contended that the church had power to make the alteration, and that they had done it for weighty and just causes. These causes are not stated in the canons of the council. The reformed churches, even the Lutheran, which maintained the doctrine of eon- substantiation, restored the cup to the laity. In a convocation held in the first year of Edward the Sixth’s reign, it was unanimously voted that the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper should be received in both kinds by the laity as well as the clergy ; KK3 502 Exposition of the [part in. clergy ; and therefore it is very remarkable that there was nothing upon this subject in the articles °f 1552: both this and the preceding article were added in 1562. If we look at the institution of the Lord’s Supper, as recorded by the Evangelists, we shall not only find the same express and positive com¬ mand to the Apostles to partake equally of both kinds, but we may observe a difference with respect to the cup, which must be decisive upon the question in the judgment of all who allow the Scriptures to be the rule of their faith and practice, and which difference is so marked, that it seems as it were a warning to the church against any corruption of this sort. According to St. Matthew, when Christ delivered the bread he said, “ Take, eat, this is my body but when he gave the cup to them, he said, “ Drink ye all of it (a),” And St. Mark, after relating that Christ gave the cup to the Apostles, adds, “ And they all drank of it (b);” but he says nothing of the same kind concerning their eating the bread, although it is implied. Besides this application of the word all, to the wine and not to the bread, in these two instances, we may further observe, that the words used upon giving the bread are not so full as those used upon giving the wine; in the former case Christ says, “ Take, eat, this i (a) Chap. 26. v. 27. (b) Chap. 14: v. 23. is art. xxx.] Thirty-rime Articles. 503 is my body;” but in the latter he says, “ Drink ye all of it, for this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remis¬ sion of sins (a),” It is material to notice the rea¬ son assigned by our Saviour, why all the Apostles were to drink of the cup, “ for this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins all, therefore, who stand in need of remission of sins, are to drink of the cup, that is, all mankind, laity as well as clergy. And St. Paul writes to the Corinthians as being accustomed to receive the Lords Sup¬ per in both kinds : “ As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lords death till he come. Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cupW’ And again, in the same epistle, he says, “ By one spirit we are all baptized into one body, and have been all made to drink into one spirit (c)f whence it is evident that all the Corinthians had partaken of the cup. And whenever Scripture is thus explicit, we hold ourselves bound to obey and follow it, and maintain {a) Matt. c. 26. v. 28. (b) 1 Cor. c. 1 1. v. 26 — 28. (c) 1 Cor. c. 12. v. 13. k k 4 5' •v ! in '• V 01 'h> ) lit ■ ;t.;U ; K '' ‘ ' ’ ' ! 1 i- ■ 'J J . tn .J io . . • ..■/ . /i-K i;? - . . . • . 4 . * . - • ' 1 - ■ * • • .r • ’ f*’1 ■ ' * '*'• ! ■ f . I ■ r l;v ' • 7 . •/ , - Pi (;r A ■ . ■ - f u • | ’ i ■ r ' ' - - ' ’ ' J v ;; ■ , / •,iV-A v.J / j : ; . — ■ - .v - .... ‘ j ! : i