O PRINCETON, N. J. 33* Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. BX 5137 .B862 Britton, Thomas Hopkins. Horae sacramentales Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/horaesacramentalOObrit HORiE SACRAMEN TALES. ^orae ^acramentales. THE SACRAMENTAL ARTICLES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND VINDICATED FROM RECENT MISREPRESENTATIONS, AND ILLUSTRATED BY THE ffiHritings of ttyiv ffiomprterss anti last ISIittor, AND BY OTHER DOCUMENTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE SANCTION OF THE CHURCH BETWEEN THE YEARS 1536 AND 1571. BY THOMAS HOPKINS BRITTON, M.A., CURATE OF HOCK WORTHY, DEVON; AND LATE PUSEY AND ELLERTON HEBREW SCHOLAR, OXFORD. "VlNCANT SEMPER VERITAS, GLORIA DEI, ET SALUS ECCLESI.B, NON PRIVATI AFFECTUS ULLI." — MELANCTHON. LONDON : JOSEPH MASTERS, ALDERSGATE STREET, AND NEW BOND STREET. MDCCCLI. LONDON : PRINTED BY JOSEPH MASTERS, AT.DERSGATE STREET. PREFACE. The object of the present volume is to correct some of the erroneous statements which have been put forth relative to the compilation and design of the Thirty-nine Articles, and to ascertain the doc- trine which the Church of England has enunciated in them respecting the nature of the Sacraments of the Gospel, espe- cially Baptism. It seems particularly desirable, at the present moment, to make the forms of expression, carefully selected by the Church, easy and familiar to the understanding of a nu- merous class of Churchmen, who have neither leisure nor oppor- tunity for searching after the truth on this important subject, nor of procuring sufficient authentic information to enable them satisfactorily to explain the obscurities and disentangle the com- plicated webs of error, in which these mysteries have been industriously veiled. It has been thought necessary to correct the errors alluded to, first, because their natural tendency is to frustrate the very purpose for which the Articles were drawn up, which was professedly to " contain the principal grounds of Christian Religion, in which also is to be determined the truth of those things which in that age were called into controversy ;" 1 secondly, because subscription to them as a test of religious 1 From a notable paper in the Petyt Collection, Cardwell's Synodalia, vol. ii. p. 496. VI PREFACE. opinion and security for orthodoxy would be useless ; and thirdly, because the Church is now suffering severely from the encouragement given to them. The Romanizing and Puritanical parties each congratulate themselves on the admission that the Articles are designedly ambiguous, and the Prayer Book teaches no doctrine, and consider themselves respectively justified in re- sorting to the non-natural (now miscalled charitable) construction, which is so far from being agreeable to the old established rules of construction and those principles of interpretation which are applied to laws, covenants, and oaths, that it is a direct violation of them, and a specious guise for substituting a something in the place of the Church's words, not equivalent in meaning, but which will make them capable of a sense consistent with the private views of the interpreter. Considerable pains have been taken to ascertain what the Church has pronounced essential to the nature of a true and proper Sacrament of the Gospel. And upon examination it ap- pears that the following particulars must meet together to con- stitute such a sacrament as Baptism and the Lord's Supper. First. There must be a visible sign or ceremony ordained by God the Son. Secondly. There must be a promise of grace annexed to the sign by Christ, and that not of spiritual grace generally, but a promise of remission of sins. Thirdly. There must be a form of words appointed by Christ to apply the promised grace to the duly qualified receiver. Fourthly. There must be a Divine command to use it. If then the Church had held that Baptism had not the pro- mise of remission of sins, she must have excluded it from the category of Sacraments of the Gospel, as well as Orders, Confir- mation, Matrimony, and Extreme unction. I must here take the opportunity of introducing an important chapter from the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, which should have appeared in the table of the definitions of the PREFACE. vii Sacraments. It is entitled " Quid in Sacramento quserendum sit." Cap. II. Ad sacramenti perfcctionem tria concurrere debent. Primum evidens est et illustris nota, quss manifeste decerni possit. Secun- dum est Dei promissum, quod externo signo nobis reprsesentatur, et plane confirmatur. Tertium est Dei prseceptum, quo neces- sitas nobis imponitur ista partim faciendi, partim commemo- randi : quse tria cum autboritate Scripturarum in Baptismo solum occurrant, et Eucharistia, nos hsec duo sola pro veris et propriis Novi Testamenti Sacramentis ponimus. 1 It is hoped the present undertaking will prove acceptable to Churchmen generally, but especially to the Clergy and candi- dates for Holy Orders. It lays before them in a few pages, not the opinions of some private individuals, but tbe accredited doc- trine of the Church herself, collected together with much pains, and no inconsiderable expense, from records which have been unexamined, or at least unused, by all previous expositors. To those persons who are called upon to subscribe their names to the Articles in evidence of their approbation of them, and in acknowledgment of their truth and agreement with the word of God, it must be satisfactory to know what is the judgment of the Church on any matter of dispute. For their own credifs sake also they would avail themselves of all means within their reach of acquiring accurate information. For " a clearer and fuller comprehension of the several truths of the Gospel may be expected from the clergy than from mere laymen. And when it is considered, that the clergy are intrusted with explaining, and instructing men, in the truths of Christianity, too much care cannot be taken to prevent the ill effects either of their ignorance or error. For, however these may be pardonable in common 1 Pp. 28, 29, edition 1540. Vlll PREFACE. Christians, whose business it is to learn ; they can admit much less, excuse in clergymen, whose employment it is to teach." 1 Neither do I doubt but that every man of an ingenuous dispo- sition will feel it his conscientious duty to receive the Articles, not in any sense of which the words are capable, but in that pre- cise and determinate sense alone in which the Church of England wills and expects them to be understood. 1 Bishop Conybeare, on subscription ; Enchiridion Theologicum, vol. iii. p. 238. ERRATA. Page 7, note 3 and elsewhere, for Lawrence read Laureuce. ,, 11, line '21, for Article read Articles. „ 12, note, line 3, for wantonly read not only. ,, 1", line 1", for adapted read adopted. ,, 29, ,, 12, expunge so. „ 30, „ 23, for fears read fences. ,, 31, ,, 33, for customs and read custom is. ,, 37, ,, 13, for our read one. ,, 42, ,, 14, for or debarred read and is increased or diminished by. „ 43, ,, 23, for 1536 read 1538. ,, 46, „ 27, enclose the words from "a remark" to "disciples" in brackets. „ 59, ,, 3, for Goode read Goode's letter. >• 68, ,, 7, for there read then. ,, 90, ,, 1 8, for and read as. ,, 91, expunge marginal note, Extreme unction, &c. ,, 164, ,, 26, for and read as. ,, 193, ,, 2, for pertaining read pertains. „ 195, „ 21, for them read then. A ^mtitratum of t&e Sacramental article*, & tlie P r i v y Council 1 sent for these Articles, in- agaYrfre and qu^'ing at the same time whether they were " set forth by any cranrae y r public authority." On the 19th 2 of September, the Archbishop forwarded them to Sir John Cheke after he had revised them, arranged them in a different order and prefixed titles to them. They were then communicated to some other Divines by the King's order about the beginning of October, and on the 23rd of November the Council again forwarded them to him with orders to examine them further and give them the last improve- ment of his judgment and pen. With this command the Arch- bishop immediately complied, and returned them on the following day, 3 " beseeching their Lordships to be the means unto the 1 Strype's Cranmer, p. 272. Cranmer's Works, i. pref. p. cvii. Archbishop Lawrence's Bampton Lectures, p. 29. 2 Archbishop Cranmer in a letter to Cecil, dated from Croydon, the 19th of September, 1552, writes, " I have sent the Book of Articles for Religion unto Mr. Cheke, set in a better order than it was, and the titles upon every matter, add- ing thereto that which lacked. I pray you consider well the Articles with Mr. Cheke, and whether you think best to move the King's Majesty therein before my coming. I refer that unto your two wisdoms." Cranmer, i. p. 355. 3 Cranmer in his letter to the very good Lords of the King's Majesty his most honourable council, dated from his house at Forde, the 24th of November, [ 1 552] , 7 King's Majesty, that all the Bishops may have authority from him to cause all their Preachers, Archdeacons, Deans, Prebendaries, Parsons, Vicars, Curates, with all their Clergy to subscribe the said Articles ; and then he trusted that such a concord and quiet- ness in religion would shortly follow thereof as else is not to be looked for many years ; God shall thereby be glorified, His truth shall be advanced, and your Lordships shall be rewarded of Him as the setters forth of His true Word and Gospel." The Royal authority, though tardily given, was granted on published by the 19th day of the following June, 1 but before the publication datefand" i ■ ii o l , -11 l subscription of this mandate letters from the King were issued to the several required. Prelates, 2 informing them that " certain Articles were sent de- vised and gathered with great study and by counsel and good advice of the greatest learned part of the Bishops and sundry others of the Clergy," and exhorting them both to subscribe themselves and also to cause them to be subscribed by all others who do or hereafter shall preach or read within their Dioceses. The Articles were printed in Latin and English, and prefixed jjisnop to them was " A short catechisme 3 or playne instruction con- catechism 1 * prefixed. says, " after my very humble recommendations unto your good Lordships; I have sent unto the same, the book of Articles which yesterday I received from your Lordships. I have sent also a cedule enclosed, declaring briefly my mind upon the said book, beseeching your Lordships to be the means unto the King's Majesty, &c.'' Cranmer, i. p. 257. Collier, ii. p. 41 1. Wake, in Cardwell's Synodalia, p. 2, note. 1 Cranmer's works, ii. 357, note. 2 The King's mandate to the Bishop of Norwich sent with the Articles, bears date June 9th, 1552. Cranmer, iv. 389. On the 19th of June a mandate was also issued to the Dean of Arches, commanding him to publish some Ar- ticles concerning true Religion, and other things " rectam Christi fidem spi- rantia," and to require subscription on the 23rd of June. Cranmer's works, iv. p. 392. s The composition of this Catechism has been ascribed to Cranmer, Ridley, and Dean Nowel. It is now however certainly known that Bishop Poinet was the author. In a letter which Sir John Cheke wrote to Bullinger, on June 7, 1553, published by the Parker Society, he says, "that Edward VI. has lately recommended to the Schools by his authority the Catechism of John, Bishop of Winchester, and has published the Articles of the Synod in London, which, if you will compare with those of Trent, you will understand how the spirit of the one exceeds that of the other." Original Letters, portion i. p. 142. Two Litur- gies of Edward VI. Parker Society, pref. p. xii. Cranmer's Works, i. pref. cviii. note. Lawrence's Bampton Lectures, p. 219. It may be as well to remark, the Catechism being prefixed to the Articles gave its name to the whole Book, and consequently the Articles themselves are frequently spoken of under the title of taynynge the sumrae of Christian learning, set fourth by the King's Majestie's authorities, for all Schoolmaisters to teache." This Catechism was also printed in Latin in 1552, and English in 1553, and was composed by Poinet, Bishop of Winchester. cranmer From the above account of what passed between the Privy supposed to 1 * be the au- Council and the Archbishop, it is evident that he had the chief thor of the . ' Articles by hand in the compilation of the Articles, and that nothing was his contem- . . . . ° poraries. inserted into tbem without his approbation. And a question put to Cranmer in his examination before Brokes, Bishop of Glou- cester, proves that the Papists attributed the authorship of them to him, and held him responsible for their contents. He was charged with having "compiled and caused to be set abroad divers books/' and in the catalogue we find the " Catechismus Brevis Christianas Discipline, etc." and the " Articuli de quibus in Sinodo Londonien. a.d. 1552," specially named. And we are told that in reply " he denied not such books which he was author of. As for the Catechism, the book of Articles, with the other book against Winchester, he granted the same to be his doings." 1 This acknowledgment of Archbishop Cranmer's satisfactorily establishes the fact of his having had so large a share in the compilation of the Articles as to justify him in call- ing them his own. It has however been supposed that Bishops He probably Ridley and Latimer were consulted by Cranmer, and contributed consulted p • p t • • Bishops their valuable aid towards the framing of this important confes- Latimer. sion. It is very probable that such was the fact, for these two Divines were greatly beloved by the Archbishop, who admired the powerful and highly cultivated mind of the one, and the good sense and manly honesty of the other. 2 the Catechism or the Articles of the Catechism. Ridley is accused of compelling the Papists to subscribe to the Catechism. This Catechism must also be distin- guished from that of Justus Jonas, translated by Cranmer, or at his command, in 1548, and from tbe Catechism prefixed to the Order of Confirmation in Edward VI. 's first Book of Common Prayer, and which (the questions and answers on the Sacraments being added after the Hampton Court Conference in 1604) now passes under the name of the Church Catechism. 1 Cranmer, iv. 102. Cranmer's answer is reported in Latin in the following terms : " Et quoad Catechismum et Articulos in eodem ; fatetur se adhibuisse ejus consilium circa ediiionem ejusdem." — lb. p. 106, art. 7. 2 The following exlract from Strype shows what deference was paid to Cran- mer's judgment. The Archbishop's " authority was now very great, so that there was undoubtedly great deference paid to it, as also to bis wisdom and learn- 9 These are the circumstances under which historians represent p/gj^red'nor the Articles to have been compiled, and the reader will notice that jjy^o^sub- they were not the result of any public discussion in Convocation. £0"^° They were prepared by Archbishop Crannier at his leisure, and tlou ' probably in his own study, then submitted by him to the King, to the Privy Council and to such Divines whose judgments they prized, and after receiving the Archbishop's last corrections were made public by Royal Authority. Their title, says Dr. Lamb, is indeed " so ambiguously worded as to lead to the notion that the Articles had been prepared, or at least sanctioned by the Convocation of 1552, but this was not the case they were neither submitted to Convocation nor confirmed by Act of Par- liament." This statement is coiToborated by the objection which Dr. Weston took to the title of the Catechism on the first day of Convocation, being October 16, 1553. He then stated that " there is a book 2 of late set forth called the Catechism, which he showed forth, bearing the name of this honourable Synod, and yet put forth without their consent as he had learned ; being a book very pestiferous and full of heresies," and then proposed beginning the disputation with the Articles of the Catechism con- cerning the Sacrament of the Altar. To this charge Archdeacon Philpot made the following reply : — " Concerning the Articles of the Catechism, he thought they were deceived in the Title of the Catechism, in that it beareth the title of the Synod of London last before this, although many of them which then were present were never made privy thereof in setting it forth, for that this house had granted the authority to make Ecclesiastical laws unto certain persons to be appointed by the King's Majesty ; and whatsoever Ecclesiastical laws they, or the most part of them did set forth according to the statute 3 in that behalf provided, it might ing, by the rest of the Divines appointed to that work ; so that as nothing was by them inserted in the Liturgy, but by his good allowance and approbation, so neither would they reject or oppose what he thought fit should be put in or altered.'' — Strype's Cranmer, p. 266. 1 Dr. Lamb's Hist. Acct. p. 4. 2 Philpot, pp. 179 — 181. Neal, in his history of the Puritans, observes, " This was another high act of the Supremacy ; the Articles not being brought into Parliament , or agreed upon in Convocation, as they ought to have been, and as the title seems to express," &c. Vol. i. p. 50. 3 The statute to which Philpot alluded is the last passed in 1549, and entitled, " An Act that the King's Majesty may nominate and appoint two-and-thirty per- sons to peruse and make Ecclesiastical Laws." 10 be well said to be done in the Synod of London, although such as be of this house have had no notice thereof before the promul- gation ; and in this point he thought the setting forth thereof nothing to have slandered the house, as they, by their subscription 1 went about to persuade the world, since they had our Synodal authority unto them committed, to make such spiritual laws as they thought convenient and necessary. 2 I have thought it proper to call attention to this fact because the Judicial Committee appear to be of opinion that the subject matter of the Articles was warmly debated at the time of their being framed ; that there was great difficulty in arriving at any conclusion, and that that conclusion, in order to meet the views of the contending parties, was drawn up in general and am- biguous language capable of a variety of interpretations. 1 The subscription here alluded to was that given by the Convocation then chiefly composed of Papists, to certain propositions condemnatory of the whole code of doctrine published in King Edward VI. 's reign. 2 This account differs from that given by Cranmer in reply to Weston's ques- tions on the same subject. " I was ignorant of the setting to of that title ; and as soon as I had knowledge thereof, I did not like it, therefore, when I com- plained thereof to the Council, it was answered thus by them, that the book was so entitled, because it was set forth in the time of Convocation." Cranmer's Works, vol. iv. pp. 64, 65. Fox, vol. iii. p. 50, edit. 1684. It seems, the title was prefixed by the Council, and most likely upon the grounds mentioned by Phil- pot. For further information the reader is referred to Cardwell's Synodalia, vol. i. pp. 4 and 5, note. CHAPTER II. Did the Framers of the Thirty-nine Articles design them to be ambiguous ? The next point to which I shall invite attention is the principles upon which the Thirty-nine Articles were compiled. Are we to look upon them as an accurate, explicit, and unequivocal declara- tion of the chief heads of Christian Doctrine, and to accept them as a precise rule of faith and the matured judgment of the Church of England on points then disputed, as drawn up with great prudence and caution, and in which the very forms of ex- pression were well weighed in order that no future misconception or difference of opinion might arise respecting the subjects treated of in them among those who subscribed to the truth of them ? Or, are we to consider them to exhibit no one clear and determinate view of any doctrine, as drawn up in vague, gene- ral, and ambiguous language — to which, of course, no fixed meaning is known to have been attached by their compilers, and which therefore may be interpreted in as many different ways as the wit and ingenuity of different expositors may invent mean- ings, with a view rather of reconciling contending parties than of setting forth the true doctrine of the Church of England on the subjects handled in them? This latter theory we believe to be at variance with the avowed object of framing the Article ; to derive no support from the Articles themselves, and to be capable of being disproved by evi- dence which yet exists relative to their compilation. Let us only refer to the Titles of the several editions of the The Articles Articles, and we shall there find that the Articles were originally to be anibi- composed and at last agreed upon by the Archbishops and not iiave° ul< Bishops of both provinces, and the whole Clergy in Convocation diversities of 12 port. opinions or for the express purpose of " avoiding of the diversities of opi- cons b e l Mt hed nions, and of the establishing of consent touching true religion." true religion The titles of the Articles then establish thus much ; that in the trties^m- reigns of Edward VI. and Elizabeth the Clergy of the Church of England took different views of some important doctrines which brought reproach and dishonour on the Church, and that under these circumstances it appeared expedient to the chief authorities in Church and State to compose and publish an authoritative exposition of the Orthodox Faith, to the truth of which all the Clergy should be required to express their assent by subscription. They were also bound to understand them in the sense intended by the compilers and imposers under a penalty of forfeiting any pre- ferments they then held, or of refusal of institution to any bene- fice. 1 Nothing can be more certain than that the establishment of an universal consent touching true religion (i.e. the religion of 1 King Edward VI. 's mandate to the Bishop of Norwich. — Cranmer, iv. p. 390. " And if any person or persons having benefice within your diocese shall from henceforth wantonly refuse wilfully to set their hands to these Articles, but also obstinately exhort their parochians to withstand the same, and teach the people in a contrary way ; our pleasure is, that being duly proved, ye shall advertise us, or our Councils, of the whole matter fully, to the intent such further order may by direction from us, or our said Council, be taken, as the case shall require, and shall stand with justice and the order of our laws. And further, that wheu as often as ye shall have any manner of person presented unto you to be admitted by you as the ordinary to any ecclesiastical order, ministry, office, or cure, within your diocese, that ye shall, before you admit him, confer with him in every these Articles. And finding him thereto consenting, to cause him to subscribe the same in one ledger book to be formed for that purpose, which may remain as a register for a concord, and to let him have a copy of the same Articles. And if any man in that case shall refuse to consent to any of the said Articles, and to subscribe the same, then we will and command you, that neither ye, nor any for you, or by your procurement in any wise shall admit him, or allow him as suffi- cient and meet to take any order, ministry, or ecclesiastical cure. For which your so doing, we shall discharge you from all manner of penalties, or dangers of actions, suits, or jileas of praemunire, quare impedit, or, such like. And yet our meaning is, that if any party refuse to subscribe any of these Articles for lack of learning and knowledge of the truth, ye shall in that case by teaching, conference, and proof of the same by Scriptures reasonably and discreetly move and persuade him thereto, before you shall peremptorily judge him as unable and a recusant. And for the trial of his conformity, ye shall, according to your discretion, pre- fix a time and space convenient to deliberate and give his consent, so that be betwixt three weeks and six weeks from the time of the first access unto you. And if after six weeks he will not consent and agree willingly to subscribe, then ye may lawfully, and shall in any wise refuse to admit or enable him." L3 the Articles), and unity of doctrine amongst the Clergy was the end which Edward VI. and Elizabeth, Archbishops Cranmcr and Parker proposed and hoped to effect by the Book of Articles. Even the Judicial Committee acknowledge that this was the object of the Church in framing Articles of Faith, and presume her to have desired to accomplish that object as far as she could, and to have decided the questions then under discussion, as it was thought proper, prudent, and practicable to decide." But the method by which they suppose it was attempted to be effected is most novel and singular. The case stands thus : — Doubts The snppo.. . i • i /-i ■ sition highly arise respecting some doctrines ; Archbishop Cranmer is com- improbable, manded to resolve those doubts and deliver his judgment in writing. He complies with the Royal mandate, but instead of recording his judgment in plain, perspicuous, and determinate language, so as to mark distinctly the one sense which he decided to be agreeable with the word of truth, and which being accepted by the Clergy, would certainly establish consent and unity of doc- trine, he is represented as having framed his decision in terms which he designed to admit of a latitude of interpretation and consequently of a diversity of opinion. He is said to have dealt only in generalities, to have considered expediency more than truth, and to have been the author of a system of Divinity which by its indefiniteness might be subscribed in different senses and by persons of opposite opinions. Now, is such a theory agreeable with common sense, and with the strict regard for truth which adorns the character of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley ? Is it possible to believe that honest men, gifted with great abilities, well versed in theological controversies, sincerely lamenting the evils arising to the Church from discord, and who must be pre- sumed to have desired to put a stop to diversities of opinions, and to establish consent touching true religion, would have delibe- rately so framed the Articles they were commissioned to compile, as to countenance, nay give encouragement to the very evils which this new confession of Faith was professedly intended to remedy and extinguish ? It is surely paying no compliment to the common sense of those great men to exhibit them as avow- edly devising Articles to " root out diversities of opinion," and at the same time designedly wording them so as to leave every man as much at liberty to exercise his private judgment, as if there were no Articles as tests of theological opinion, and no subscription as security for the Clergyman's consent to the truth of their doctrine. Can we conceive the possibility of diversities of opinion being extinguished by a code which admits of a lati- tude and differences of interpretation ? Can there be a concord established touching true Religion by a confession intended to be understood in a variety of senses ? Ambiguous expressions admit not only of two meanings, but of an indeterminate latitude of interpretation. If then Cranmer foresaw this obvious result, could he have possibly felt sanguine and confident that " such a concord and quietness would shortly follow" subscription to such Articles, "as else is not to be looked for many years?" 1 Would any of those learned Lords if called upon to decide the meaning of a disputed section of an Act of Parliament, proceed upon the principles which they attribute to Cranmer? Would their de- cision be so worded that one Lawyer might construe in one way and another in another ? And would they flatter themselves that they had done their duty to their country and established consent touching the true interpretation of the section by de- signedly framing their judgment so as to encourage a possible or probable difference of interpretation ? Should they so act, — which is not probable, — few persons would put much value upon a decision which left the true sense of the disputed section as un- certain and doubtful as it found it. It must however be owned that the Judicial Committee have set some bounds to the latitude of interpretation. They say, "it must be confined within such limits as might be allowed without injury to any doctrine necessary to salvation," i.e. no Article of the Creeds must be denied. But surely this could not be the whole object contemplated by the compilers of the Articles. Had 1 Bishop Hooper too expected the same peaceable results from the Subscription of the Clergy to the Articles. In a letter to Cecil, dated July 6, 1552, be writes in this earnest manner : — " For the love of God cause the Articles that the King's Majesty spoke of, when we took our oaths, to be set forth by his authority." — Strype's Cranmer, Appendix, p. 135. It is not easy to see how Articles drawn up in vague and ambiguous language would settle any differences of opinion in the Diocese of Worcester. Surely Bishop Hooper must have formed a different opinion of the Articles from the learned Judicial Committee, and have thought that if he was authorized to require subscription on pain of deprivation he would have been able to quiet his refractory Clergy. 15 it been so, it would have been sufficient to have required sub- scription to the Eighth Article, which contains the three Creeds, number I ~ ' 'of Articles and declares they ought to be thoroughly received and believed, p™™^' The addition therefore of Thirty-eight Articles to this one, argues ^i*^* 0 that their compilers designed something more than requiring the aIId J to U state acceptation of the letter of these Creeds. It proves that the SS^? urch ' 8 Church in carrying out her design of establishing consent touch- ™° d r pr e uly ing true religion, thought it necessary to publish a more full, clear, Screeds and particular declaration of her doctrine than previously existed. had done " She found what she considered the true sense of some Articles of those Creeds misconceived, perverted, and evaded ; she therefore gave her own interpretation of such portions of them ; she also felt herself called upon to declare her judgment on other chief sub- jects of Church Doctrine not embraced in the Creeds ; this too, she pronounced, and requires every subscriber to acknowledge to be agreeable to the Word of God, as interpreted by herself. 1 We are surely then no more at liberty to explain away or deviate from the sense of the compilers in Thirty-eight of the Articles than we are by our latitude of interpretation, to endanger the doctrine contained in the Eighth alone. And we must also observe, that this authoritative exposition of the Articles of Faith contained in the Creeds, and these additional Articles of Doctrine are a sufficient evidence that the Church designed her Book of Articles to be a more exact and precise yet comprehensive enun- ciation of true Christian Doctrine than the Creeds themselves contain. The foregoing considerations have, we hope, shown the great 1 Dr. Waterland's case of Arian Subscription, vol. ii. p. 292. "The Church requires men to comply with her forms, merely on account of their being agree able to Scripture : and for that very reason, must require subscription in her own sense, because, that only sense is (according to her) agreeable to Scripture. It is a contradiction to suppose that any Church requiring subscription to her own explanations (as every Church does) should at the same time permit the sub- scriber to run counter to those explanations. For since she looks upon her own explanations as the only true sense of Scripture, and requires subscription to the true sense of Scripture, she can never be presumed to allow other explanations which are (in her judgment) not agreeable to Scripture : it being her principle to admit nothing but what is agreeable to Scripture. Whoever therefore does violence to the public forms must be supposed (by that Church whose forms they are) to do as much violence to Scripture itself, and consequently such a Church cannot admit of it." 16 improbability of the Articles being designedly ambiguous; we will now therefore advance a step further and endeavour to prove History dig- from documentary evidence that Cranmer repudiated such a dan- charge of gerous and unprincipled scheme, and that in compiling the Articles it was his avowed wish to lay aside all carnal and pru- dential motives, and to set forth in the Church of England a true and explicit form of Doctrine agreeable to the rule of the Sacred Scriptures, after carefully weighing not only the subject matter itself, but also the forms of expression that all ambiguities and variety of interpretations might in future be effectually avoided. It must be borne in mind, that in 1548, Charles the Fifth, the Emperor of Germany, not being able to prevail upon Pope Paul the Third to reassemble the Council of Popish Bishops at Trent without delay, authorized three persons, Julius Pflugius, (Bishop of Naumburg), Michael Sidonius, and John Agricola Isleburg, to draw up a rule of Faith and Discipline for the joint use of the Papists and Lutherans until the Council should be summoned and finally determine the several questions at issue. The interim, These Divines produced a Formulary called the Interim, which a system of . . , . compreiien- was composed not with a view to settle the Faith and Discipline sion, sifr- na'iy failed, of the Churches agreeably to the Word of God, but upon a prin- ciple of reconciliation and expediency, similar to that upon which the Judicial Committee have assumed our Articles to have been compiled. But having no regard for God's honour nor for the word of His Truth " it came to nought," or I should rather say it aggravated all the evils which short-sighted expediency hoped to cure. " This temporary rule of Faith and Discipline/' says Mosheim, " though it was extremely favourable to the interests and pretensions of the court of Rome, had yet the fate to which schemes of reconciliation are often exposed ; it pleased .neither of the contending parties, but was equally offensive to the followers of Luther and to the Roman Pontiff." It was imposed " by the force of arms, and hence arose deplorable scenes of violence and bloodshed, which involved the Empire in the greatest calamities." Maurice Elector of Saxony, allowed the Clergy to deliberate to- gether at this fearful crisis, and Melancthon " pronounced a sort of reconciling sentence which he hoped would be offensive to no party." But "its decision instead of pacifying matters produced on the contrary new divisions, and formed a schism among the 17 followers of Luther which placed the cause of the Reformation in the most perilous and critical circumstances." 1 Such were the evils, found by experience to result from a sys- tem which aims at no higher object than reconciling religious disputants by mutual concessions and abandonment of truth, and which, in consequence of its ambiguity admits of a latitude of interpretation, sanctions diversities of opinion within the pale of the Church, and allows private judgment and expo- sitions to have equal authority with the public decisions of the Church. The miserable plight of the German Churches soon convinced Melancthon that the course which his love of peace Mki.anc- prompted him to take, was fatal to their best interests. He ediy averse complained that the golden age which Islebius promised had not ambiguous yet arrived, and in the following letter written to Archbishop confessions Cranmer, on May 1, 1548, he expressed his strong disapprobation of ambiguities in Confessions of Faith, and his dissatisfaction with the schemes of comprehension adapted by Charles V. " Reverend Sir, — The letter which Jonas's son wrote to me at your dictation, I answered a month ago. But the longer I reflect on your design, than which none can be devised of greater importance and more necessary for mankind, the more I both wish and think you ought to be advised to publish a true and ex- plicit Confession of the whole body of Doctrine, after the judgments of learned men have been compared together, whose names also should be subscribed so that there may be set forth among all nations an illustrious testimony respecting your doctrine, and posterity also may have a rule of faith to follow. Nor indeed will that confession be much unlike my own (the Augsburgh), but I wish some few Articles to be set forth to posterity with a little further explanation, — that am- biguities may not hereafter give occasion to new differences of opinion. Now too, the Emperor Charles has proposed a scheme for moderating controversies, which perhaps he will publish, but because he attempts to unite dissenting par- ties, and thinks he can effect his purpose by laying down some general opinion which no man can reject by reason of its vagueness ; he makes Articles which each party may interpret according to their own tenets? which will stir up new strife 1 Mosheim, by Maclaine, vol. iv. pp. 115, 116. Edward VI. 's aversion to ambiguity in Confessions of Faith is evidenced by the following extract from his Journal, which relates to the war produced by the Interim :—" Nov. 14, [1550] answer was given to the Germans which did re- quire 400,000 dollars, if need so required, for maintenance of religion." " Thirdly, I would have the matter of religion made more plain, lest when war should be made for other quarrels, they should say it were religion." Burnet's Records, part ii. book ii. p. 40. 2 The original is " cothumos facit,'' an expression afterwards adopted by Cran- mer in his letters to John a Lasco and llardenberg, and by Dr. Robinson trans- C 18 and conceal some things that trill confirm abuses. In the Church it is more pro- per^ to speak distinctly and not to offer to posterity ambiguous expressions, as the fable tells us the apple of discord vas offered to the goddesses at their feasts. If in Germany the agreement of our Churches had been entire and honest, we should not have fallen into these present misgivings. I therefore earnestly exhort you to turn your chief care and thoughts towards consulting the true interest of the Churches. If you shall also require my judgment and vote, I will willingly listen to other learned men, and I will deliver my own opinion in my place, and assign my reasons, sometimes persuading others and at others being persuaded by them, as befits the pure in speech. But let truth, let the glory of God and the welfare of the Church always be victorious and not any private affection and partiality. 1 The excellent advice contained in this letter was most closely craxmkr followed by Cranjier. He adopted, as we shall presently prove, face against the Augsbnrg confession, as modestly recommended by Melanc- trifling with . _ r i «» i • ii • i ambiguities thon. He made our Articles more precise and determinate than their original ; he spared no pains to render them a true and per- spicuous confession of the chief heads of doctrine ; and he re- quired the names of the Clergy to be subscribed. But in order to manifest the deep impression which this communication made upon Cranmer's mind, I shall cite portions of two letters written by him in the following month of July, wherein he adopts not only the ideas but the very phraseology of his highly esteemed and singular friend. The following extract is made from his letter to John a law. Lasco, of July 4, 1548 : " AYe are desirous of setting forth in lated, " adapt it to all tastes." The literal translation is, " he makes buskins," which might be worn on either foot. Hence 6 noBopvos was a nickname for Thera- menes, because of his changeable time-serving politics — Passow's Lexicon. The application of the proverb to such Articles of Faith as each party might interpret according to his own tenets will be understood from the following explanation of Erasmus: — " Versatilior cothurno dictum est in hominem parum constantem lubricaque fide, quive incertae et ancipitis esset factionis, similitudine ducla acal- raento, quod Graeci, niOopvav, Latini mutata literula, cothurnum vocant. Erat autem quadrangulum et utrique conveniens pedi quodque vel dextro vel sinistro potuit accommodari." Erasmus, Adag. cent. i. 94. Cranmer's Works, i. p. 332, note. 1 To speak distinctly, " Scapham scapham dicere." Schleusner in his Lexicon on the Greek Testament has this note under OKatyn. " Grascis, inquit Erasmus, aK&ip tj ddo significat ligonem et navigii levioris genus, a verbo aKaitroi, fodio : nam ligo fossorium est instrumentum et scaphae fiunt e trunco excavato." 2 Melancthon's Epistles, book i. ep. 66. Archbishop Lawrence's Bampton Lectures, third edition, pp. 224, 225. 19 our Churches/' he says, "the true doctrine of God, and have NO WISH TO ADAPT IT TO ALL TASTES, AND TO TRIFLE WITH ambiguities, but laying aside all carnal and prudential motives, to transmit to posterity a true and explicit form of doctrine agree- able to the rule of the sacred writings ; so that there may not only be set forth among all nations an illustrious testimony re- specting our doctrine delivered by the grave authority of learned and godly men, but that all posterity may have a 1 rule [of faith] to follow. For the purpose of carrying this important design into execution, we have thought it necessary to have the assist- ance of learned men, who, having compared their opinions to- gether with us, may do away with all doctrinal controversies and build up an entire system of true doctrine." 2 The other letter to which I allude, was addressed to Albert Hardenberg, from Cambridge, on July 28th, 1548, the language of which is pre- cisely the same with the foregoing extract. We will therefore pass on to a letter which the Archbishop wrote to Melanctiion from London, on February 10th, 1549. After urging him to ,5 49 . come to England, he added, " I am aware that you have often desired that wise and godly men should take counsel together, and having compared their opinions, compose under the sanction of their authority some work that should embrace the chief sub- jects of ecclesiastical doctrine, and transmit the truth uncorrupted to posterity. This object we are anxiously endeavouring to ac- complish to the utmost of our power." 3 In a letter to Calvin, dated March 20, 1552, the Archbishop 1552, the wrote in the following terms : 4 — "As nothing tends more injuri- which the oushi to the separation of the Churches than heresies and disnutes were com- . Piled. respecting the doctrines of religion,%o nothing tends more effectually to unite the Churches of God and more powerfully to defend the fold of Christ than the pure teaching of the Gospel and harmony 1 I have ventured to deviate from the translation given by Dr. Robinson in the first portion of Original Letters, published by the Parker Society. Above, he rendered " norma," " rule," but here he translates " Nurmam se/jui," " a pat- tern to imitate," which 1 think does not so well express the intention of the author. Original Letters, published by the Parker Society, portion i. p. 17. Cranmer, vol. i. pp. 329, 330. 2 Original Letters, portion i. p. 18, note 2. Cranmer's Works, vol. i. p. 331. 3 Cranmer, vol. i. pp. 337, 338. Original Letters, portion, i. p. 1!). 4 Original Letters, portion i. pp. 24, 25. Cranmer, vol. i. p. 346. c 2 20 of doctrine. Wherefore I have often wished and still continue to do so, that learned and godly men who are eminent for erudition and judgment might meet together in some place of safety, where by taking counsel together, and comparing their respective opinions, they might handle all the heads of Ecclesiastical doc- trine, and hand down to postei'ity under the weight of their autho- rity, some work not only upon the subjects themselves but upon the FORMS OF EXPRESSING THEM."' Calvin Calvin in his reply highly approved of Craumer's endeavours also disap. , , . . proves of to purify the sound doctrine in the Church from all false tcachinq, ambiguous ■ TI , language, and transmit it whole and entire to posterity. He then expresses his best wishes for the Archbishop's success in convening a Synod for discussing each head of the Faith with all diligence, and then handing down to posterity the sure doctrine on which they had unanimously decided. He appears to have received soon afterwards an announcement from Cranmer that the scheme was relinquished, and that it was now resolved to draw up a separate Confession of Faith for the Church of England ; for he com- mences another letter thus : — " Since at present there is very little hope of effecting what was so ardently desired, viz., that the principal doctors of the different Churches, which have em- braced the pure doctrine of the Gospel, should meet together, and publish out of the pure word of God a certain and clear Confession, for the use of posterity, of each head of doctrine at this day con- troverted. I highly praise the counsel you have taken, Reverend sir, that the English may perfectly establish religion amongst themselves ; that the public mind may no longer be in suspense on matters hitherto doubtful, and arranged with less order than was fitting." 2 Once more I will quote a passage from a letter written by 1 Original Letters, portion i. p. 24. Cranmer, vol. i. 346. Cranmer, a little below, speaking of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, says, that though the dissension and variety of opinions respecting it be somewhat removed, yet he " could wish for an agreement in this doctrine, not only as regards the subject itself, but also with respect to the words and the forms of expression." 2 Cranmer, i. p. 347. Archbishop Lawrence's Bampton Lectures, 226 — 9. On the 29th of October, 1548, Calvin wrote to the Protector Somerset to this effect : " He had heard that the reason they went no further was, because the times could not bear it ; but this was to do the work of God by political maxims ; which though they ought to take place iu other things, yet should not be fol- lowed hi matters in which the salralion of souls was concerned." Burnet, part ii. 21 Cranmer to Philip Melanctiion, dated Lambeth, March 27, cranmbr ' desires to 1552, "We read in the Acts of the Apostles, that when a dis- follow the ' ' ' example of pute had arisen as to whether those who from among the Gen- [ h f. a p° s - tiles had beeu turned to God, should be compelled to be circum- cation - cised and keep the law of Moses, the Apostles and Elders came together to consider of this matter; and having compared their opinions, delivered the judgment of their council in a written epistle. This example I wish we ourselves could imitate, in whose Churches the doctrine of the Gospel has been restored and purified. But although all controversies cannot be removed in this world (because the party which is hostile to the truth, will not assent to the judgment of the Church) it is nevertheless to be desired that the members of the true Church should agree among themselves upon the chief heads of Ecclesiastical doctrine. But it cannot escape your notice how greatly religious dissensions, especially in the matter of the Lord's Supper, have rent the Churches asunder ; had they been settled before, the Emperor, I think, would never have made war against you. And it is truly grievous that the sacrament of unity is made by the malice of the devil food for disagreement, and as it were, the apple of contention. I could wish therefore, that those who excel others in erudition and judgment should be assembled together after the example of the Apostles, and declare their judgment as well respecting other subjects of dispute as likewise especially re- specting this controversy, and attest their agreement by some pub- lished document." With this quotation I shall close the evidence which I wish Brief state- to offer in proof of Melancthon's and Cranmer's strong and, objects decided disapprobation of the use of general and ambiguous lan- lancthon guage in Confessions oj raith. Let me briefly recapitulate the mer had in i _ 1 1 . viewincom- substance ot what is scattered over their correspondence. Tliey piling these ■l • i /» -l -I'll Articles, and had experienced the signal failure and miserable results of the how they r • n • proposed to Interim, a scheme professedly vague and ambiguous and designed a « ain them - to admit of a latitude of interpretation. They therefore took warning from this experiment and determined to lay aside all carnal prudence and worldly policy, all private affection and par- book i. p. 88. It is much to be regretted that the distinction here drawn between the principles that should influence us in dealing with worldly and spiritual mat- ters, was not known to, or at least acted upon by the Judicial Committee. 22 tiality and to set forth the uncorrupted truth of the Gospel in still more certain and perspicuous language than had hitherto been used, and in such form of expression as had been agreed upon. Their avowed object was to decide, and put an end to all doctrinal controversies, and to establish, not a nominal and tem- porary, but a real and lasting unity of sentiment and harmony of doctrine, and they hoped to effect this desirable end not by adapt- ing their confession to all tastes, but by teaching the truth, not by trifling with ambiguities, but by using precise and definite terms jealously guarded against all misconception and perver- it was not sion. It is also material to notice that in their plan they did their inteu- . - - , tion to give not purpose to treat 01 every doctrine of the liible, but only to sition of handle, and record their matured judgment, on the chief heads of every doc- trine. Ecclesiastical doctrine. On these principal points of our Chris- tian religion they laboured ; and we think it will by-and-by appear very successfully, to leave no doubt as to the sense in which they (the compilers) understood these Articles, and in this sense they required the Clergy to subscribe them in a book, as a register of concord. Thus the Articles would serve as a test of the faith and opinions of the Clergy, and as a security for their teaching none otherwise than the Church herself declared to be agreeable with the Word of God. Of such articles of religion as these Cranmer entertained very high expectations. He hoped they would not only promote the present interest of the Church and bring about " such a concord and quietness in religion as else was not to be looked for many years/' but also be "an illus- trious testimony of the doctrine" of the Church of England "among all nations," and "a rule of Faith for posterity to follow." It has pleased God to realize this good man's expec- tations in a remarkable manner. On the revival of the Refor- mation in Elizabeth's reign, Archbishop Parker, instead of bring- Cranmer's ing forward a new Confession of Faith, revised Cranmer's Articles basis of of 1552, making such omissions and additions as in his judg- teTb/co!)- ment the altered circumstances of the Church required, but 1S62. leaving the doctrine untouched and unchanged. This copy he submitted to Convocation, by whom it was very favourably received, 1 and after some slight corrections they unanimously 1 Archbishop Parker presented the copy he had prepared to the Upper House of Convocation, on January 20th, 1562, and on the 29th they agreed to them and 23 subscribed it. Archbishop Lawrence speaks of the good sense, moderation, and prudence which the Convocation discovered in revising the Articles in the following terms. " Instead of increas- ing the number of the Articles they diminished them, instead of extending their sense so as to make them embrace a greater proportion of speculative tenets, they contracted them and ap- peared in every case more disposed to extinguish difference of opinion than to augment it by adding fuel to a flame already ris- ing above control. In one or two instances indeed additions or rather additional elucidations were admitted. Of the tendency however of these we cannot doubt, when we learn that with the exception of one obvious topic alone, 1 they were not original, that they were neither the productions of Parker nor the Con- vocation, and that they were not borrowed from any Calvinistical or Zuinglian, but from a Lutheran Creed. The Creed to which I allude is the Confession of Wirtemberg, which was ex- hibited in the Council of Trent the very year when our Articles were completely arranged by Cranmer." 2 Thus revised, they have been an illustrious testimony of our doctrine, and of the wisdom of our Clergy among all nations. For wherever the altar of the Church of England has been raised, there have her Articles been hitherto received as a plain, accurate, and scriptural Rule of Faith. subscribed them as Articles of the true and orthodox Faith. And between the 5th and 10th day of February, certain others of the Lower House had sub- scribed their names ; and an order was made that all whose names were not sub- scribed should be presented at the next session. This took place on the 12th ; and as no report was then made of any who had not signed, it may fairly be con- cluded that by this day all had signed, either " propriis manibus," or " per pro- curators. '' — Lamb' s Historical Account , pp. 19, 20. In this work an exact copy is printed of the Latin manuscript which Archbishop Parker presented to Convocation. 1 The Doctrine of the Eucharist. 2 Archbishop Lawrence, Bampton Lectures, pp. 41, 233 — 236. CHAPTER III. The Articles not designed to be the sole Standard of the Church's Faith, nor like a system or Body of Divinity to treat of all Christian Doctrine, but to guard the principal points of our holy religion from misconception and perversion. cranmer care- fully guarded the sacraments against the heresy of the Anabaptists, etc. The sources from which ma- terials WILL BE DERIVED FOR ILLUSTRATING THE ARTI- CLES. But whilst I am thus contending against the unfounded and The Articles injurious assumption that our Articles are designedly ambiguous, are free from „ . . -„ . „ anydesigned and consequently worthless, as a test of opinion or a Rule of ambiguity, , i yet they Faith, let me not be supposed to countenance another error on were never intended to the opposite side, that they are the sole as well as an accurate be accepted 11 . as the we Standard of the Doctrines of our Church. Cranmer designed rule of the _ _ " Anglican them to embrace the chief heads of Christian Doctrine, and he Faith. .... has laid down the truth on these subjects with brevity indeed, but yet with such precision that I believe it impossible to reconcile any heresy or any serious heterodoxy with their language, if understood in the sense in which their compilers imposed them. I am however ready to concede that there are many particulars connected with the doctrines handled in the Articles, which the Church never designed to settle there. And this she did, not because she considered them of such trifling importance that it was immaterial whether they were determined at all or not, but because she had already disposed of these questions elsewhere, in another part of her code of doctrine, previously put forth by the same men who compiled the Articles, framed with equal care 25 and the most scrupulous regard for truth, and " commended to the people of God" by the same grave authority. The reader must be reminded that the Forty-two Articles formed but a small, though a very important part of what Archbishop Cran- mer purposed to be the whole Rule of Faith and Discipline of the Church of England. There was the Book of Common Prayer, likewise also the Book of Ordering Ministers of the Church, set forth by the King's authority and the Parliament, both declared to be " godly and in no point repugnant to the wholesome doctrine of the Gospel, but agreeable thereunto, furthering and beautifying the same not a little." 1 And there was the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, drawn up by a commission of thirty-two indi- viduals, 8 Bishops, 8 Divines, 8 Civilians, and 8 Lawyers ; and last of all there were the Articles respecting "uniformity inRites." 2 All these were compiled at the command of a monarch who was anxious beyond all things to establish true Religion, and was decidedly averse to ambiguities and generalities, and under the immediate superintendence and chiefly by the hand of an Arch- bishop, who having " come to the last end of his life whereupon hung all his life past and all his life to come, either to live with his Master, Christ, for ever in joy, or else to be in pain for ever with wicked devils in hell," and when it was " no time to dissem- ble," declared in the presence of his murderers, " always since I 1 See Article XXXV. of 1552. As a new and most unjust charge of ambiguity and comparative inaccuracy in doctrine, unfitting it to be a Rule of Faith, is now brought against the Prayer Book, and sanctioned by the Judicial Committee, all good Churchmen will, I am sure, excuse me for calling their attention to the following passage which appeared in the preface of the two Books of Edward VI. and the Prayer Book of Elizabeth, written and published by the very person who composed and revised our Articles : " Here you have an order of prayer (as touching the reading of holy Scripture) much agreeable to the mind and purpose of the old fathers, and a great deal more profitable and commodious than that which of late was used. It is more profit- able because here are left out many things whereof some be untrue, some uncer- tain, some vain and superstitious, and is ordained nothing to be read but the very pure Word of God and the Holy Scriptures, or that which is evidently grounded upon the same, and that in such a language or order, as is most easy and plain for the understanding both of the readers and hearers." And after- wards, they speak of the profit and knowledge which persons shall obtain by daily reading upon the book. Cardwell's Two Liturgies, p. 2. Liturgy of Elizabeth, p. 34. 2 Lamb's Historical Account, p. 8, note. 26 Distinction between Ar ticles of Re- ligion and a Body of Divinity. If the Arti- cles do not decide all questions, they surely determine lived hitherto, I have been a hater of falsehood and a lover of sim- plicity." 1 As however the Judicial Committee lay great stress on the cir- cumstance of the Church not having- " intended to attempt the determination of all the questions which had arisen or might arise, or to include in the Articles an authoritative statement of all Christian Doctrine," and esteem it a serious defect; it is worth while to consider the importance and consequences of this ad- mission. In the first place they have forgotten the design of the Articles, and have overlooked the distinction between Articles of Religion, such as our own, and a system or body of divinity, and hence they have entertained and published opinions calcu- lated to lessen the value of the Articles. The following observa- tions by Dr. Hey will, it is hoped, set this matter in its true light : — " The end or design of a body of doctrine is to maintain unity of doctrine ; the intention of each particular Article is to find a remedy for some actual error, which occasions some dis- turbance, so as to frustrate some end of social religion or which seems very likely to do so. This it is which distinguishes a set of Articles from a system of theology or a sermon, and a very im- portant distinction I take it to be. The design of a system and a sermon is to explain and enforce all doctrines, whereas Articles only those by which one society is kept separate from another. A set of Articles is, as it were, a partition wall ; not intended for war, so much as to keep all things quiet ; like the walls of one's house, to let the domestic society within pursue its proper busi- ness in security." 2 But upon other grounds we humbly think that it has no important bearing on the case which they were called upon to decide. Of what moment could it be whether the Church treated of all Christian doctrine or not in the Articles, so long as she treated fully and distinctly, and expressed herself with unexampled caution on the doctrine of the Sacraments, which doctrine Mr. Gorham was charged with perverting, explaining away, and contradicting ? We willingly grant that the Church did not intend to include in the Articles an authoritative state- ment of all Christian doctrine. 3 But what then ? Does it fol- 1 Cranmer's declaration before his death. Works, vol. iv. pp. 139, 140. Fox's Acts and Monuments, vol. iii. pp. 561, 2. 2 Hey's Lectures, vol. ii. , p. 83. 3 We have above observed that there is a remarkable resemblance between the 27 low that she teaches none authoritatively ? or that she has not determined the true doctrine of the Sacraments and guarded them against the designs of those un-catholic persons who would rob them of the promise of grace annexed to them by the Word of Christ, and reduce them to a level with a mere ceremony ordained by man for admitting members into any merely human society or brotherhood ? And with respect to the nature and number of questions which she intended to determine, we pre- sume that may best be learnt from the writings and correspond- ence of their principal compiler, and from the Articles themselves. If Cranmer's letters, written to men with whom he was taking- counsel respecting the compilation of the Articles, may be re- ceived as evidence of his real desire and intentions ; there can be view taken of our Articles by the Judicial Committee and that put forth and de- fended by Mr. Sykes in his Defence of Arian Subscription. His object was to prove that the Articles were general, comprehensive, and indefinite — just such as they are now described. But Dr. Waterland disproved this statement and made it clear and manifest " that the expressions of our public forms (so far as concerns the points in dispute) are fixed, special, and determinate as possible, nor could the wit of man invent any more particular or stronger expressions against the new scheme, than are already in our Creeds, Liturgy, and Articles.'' 1 Another objection which Mr. Sykes urged is precisely the same with the doctrine of the Judgment. " The Articles are so composed that some of them are on all hands allowed to be left at large; the composers intending a latitude," &c. p. 8. To this Dr. Waterland replied, " I admitted this in my papers before and sufficiently showed how impertinent the plea is to the point in hand. Undoubtedly it never was the intent of our Church to determine all questions relating to every subject whereof it treats. Yet she intended to determine and has determined many ques- tions ; particularly the main questions between Protestants and Papists, between Catholics and Arians, (and we may add, between Catholics and Anabaptists, Zuinglians, and Socinians.) When Franciscus a Sancta Clara took upon him to reconcile our Articles to Popery, what did he else but play the Jesuit and render himself ridiculous ? The like has been since done by our Arian reconcilers, with as much wresting and straining and with as little success. It might be diverting enough (were not the thing too serious and full of sad reflections), to compare the Papist and the Arian together, and to observe which of them has been the greater master in this exercise, and has found out the most ingenious and svy- prising comment upon an Article. Our Articles however will stand in their own native light, in defiance to both, so long as gravity, sobriety, and manly thought shall be esteemed and valued above the little arts of equivocating and playing upon words. The Articles are not general, so far as concerns our present debate, and we need not inquire further. There is a medium I suppose between deter- mining all questions and determining none; one might justly wonder how this writer could be insensible of it and fall into so unaccountable way of reasoning." Waterland's Works, ii., pp. 361 — 3. 28 cranmcr no doubt that Cranmcr did intend to embrace in the Articles all proposed handling the t] ie chief heads of Ecclesiastical doctrine, and to attempt the deter- cliiel heads . . of Ecciusias- ruination of all questions and controversies relatinq to them ; and tical Doc- j 1 trine. [ n compiling his Rule of Faith he had an eye not only to heresies then taught in England, but to very many of those which had disturbed the peace of the Church Catholic in former days, and were at that time working grievous injury to the Continental Such were Churches. Among these heads Cranmer would certainly class nients of the the Sacraments of the Gospel. For, however lightly the new school, who affect to tread with severe exactness in the steps of the faith of this ever-to-be-revered Father of the English Church, — may speak of the Holy Sacraments, this great man always as- serted his high esteem and reverence for them, and, in his speech, delivered in Convocation in 1536, he called attention first to them declaring them to be "no light matters, but even the principal points of our Christian Religion/' 1 Indeed, if there was one point which more than any other Cranmer laboured to clear from all the superstitious additions of Popery on the one hand and to protect from the irreverence and unholy detraction of the Soci- nians, Zuinglians, and Anabaptists on the other, it is the doc- trine of the Sacraments. 2 In 1540 he sent nine questions on the Sacraments to the Archbishop of York, and six Bishops, one Bishop elect, and thirteen Divines, that each might record his opinion in writing, and that by comparing them, he might him- self be assisted in arriving at the truth. " By these," says Bishop Burnet, " it will appear with what maturity and care they pro- ceeded in the Reformation," and he considers it as " perhaps as 1 Fox's Acts and Monuments of Martyrs, vol. ii. p. 424 £. edit. 1684. Cranmer's Works, vol. ii. p. 16, 17. 2 The Archbishop thus commences : " The First Book of the True and Catholic Doctrine and Use of theSacrament of theBody and Blood of ourSaviourCHRiST." " The Supper of the Lord, otherwise called the Holy Communion or Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ, hath been of many men and by sundry ways very much abused, but specially within these four or five hundred years. Of some it hath been used as a sacrifice propitiatory for sin, and others superstitiously, far from the intent that Christ did first ordain the same at the beginning ; doing therein great wrong to His death and passion. And of other some it hath been very lightly esteemed, or rather contemned and despised as a thing of small or of none effect. And thus between both the parties hath been much variance and contention in divers places of Christendom." Cranmer's Works, vol. ii. p. 292. See also Jewel, portion ii., p. 1 117. 29 great an evidence of the ripeness of their proceedings, as can be showed in any Church or in any age of it." And if we turn to the Articles themselves we discover ample evidence of Cranmer's anxiety and care not only to deliver the true doctrine of the which were . guarded Sacraments of the Gospel, but to guard the forms of expression against the against all perversion by the llomanists or Latitudinarians. 1 It Komauists . . . . . a '" 1 Latitu- is however clearly the opinion of the Judicial Committee that diuarians, Mr. Gorham's doctrine of the grant of remission of sins, regene- ration, and adoption by a prevenient act of grace instead of by the Sacrament of Baptism, was not contemplated by the com- pilers of our Articles, and that therefore they did not so fence the true doctrine of Baptism, so as to render such teaching con- trary to that of the Articles. But they labour under a misap- prehension—doctrine very similar if not quite identical with that, which is now put forth with a new name and in a new dress, and adorned and beautified at the expense of Holy Baptism, was held by the Socinians, Zuinglians, and Anabaptists, and their disciples, at the time our Articles were drawn up. These low heretical views were known to and rejected by Cranmer, and as win he we find words designedly added to the Augsburg Confessions by uuurg con- disinterested and candid person. Augsburg Confession. Articles of 1552. De usu sacramentorum do- Sacramenta per verbum Dei cent, quod sacramenta insti- instituta non tantum not?e pro- tuta sint, non modo ut sint fessionis Christianorum scd notaj professionis inter homines, certa qucedam potius testimo- sed magis ut sint signa ct tes- niaet efficacia signa gratis timonia voluntatis Dei crga atque bonce in nos voluntatis nos, ad excitandam et confir- Dei, per qu/e invisibiliter ipse mandam fidem in his qui utun- in nobis operatur nostramque tur proposita. fidem in se non solum excitat verum etiam confirmat. 1 Cranmer's Works, vol. ii. pp. 98, 99. Burnet's History, vol. i. p. 289. Records, Book iii. No. xxi. p. 201. Collier's Eccles. Hist, part ii. Book iii. p. 188. Records, No. 49. 30 Now I would ask why the words I have marked were added to the Augsburg Confession, if it was not to guard against the very- heresy which is now vexing the English Church ? Do these addi- tions countenance the theory that the Articles were drawn up with designed ambiguity and with an intention of sanctioning a latitude of interpretation ? Or do they not rather supply incontrovertible evidence that this Article at the least, was designed to be a more precise and definite llule of Faith than its original ? Is it not obvious and undeniable that here as elsewhere the excellent Cranmer laboured to express himself " so sincerely and plainly, ivitliout doubts, ambiguities or vain questions, that the very simple and unlearned people may easily understand the same and be edified thereby." 1 Let me recall to the reader's recollection the good advice which Melancthon gave Cranmer when recommending the Crsn trior made the Augsburg Confession as the groundwork of the English Articles, Article more ° ° 11,-111,. • preche in and I feel sure there will be no doubt left upon his mind as to compliance Jancth 4 "' Archbishop's intentions in making these important additions, request. Melancthon, it will be remembered, wished some few of the Articles to be set out to posterity more fully explained, that am- biguities might not afterwards give occasion to new disagreements. We here perceive this request to have been most scrupulously regarded and carried into effect. And if again we inquire against whom these additional fears were raised, the answer must be, certainly not against the Romanists who attributed too much to the Sacraments. They never doubted of the efficacy of either of the Sacraments, nor that they were true and certain witnesses and effectual signs of grace conveyed by them to all infants and properly qualified adults. The words " certa," " efficacia," "gratia," " per qua' (signa) ipse (Deus) "in nobis operatur" must have been inserted therefore to exclude from the pale of the Church of England the heresies of that other party who con- temned or lightly esteemed the Sacraments and denied their virtue and efficacy. I have endeavoured with as much brevity as possible to prove by facts that the view which the Judicial Committee have taken for luustrat- °f the Articles is not supported either by external or internal cramentai evidence, and it only now remains for me to explain in few words history^ the method by which I propose to arrive at the true sense of the terms and subject matter of the Sacramental Articles. 1 Cranmer's Works, vol. ii. p. 297. Defence of the Lord's Supper. The sources whence ma- terials will 31 One source of information is undoubtedly History. This will generally give us an insight into the times in which the Articles were compiled ; it will acquaint us with the causes which led to these compositions — with the state of religious opinion — with the view of their compilers and composers — with the heresies and false doctrine which they were designed " to root out/' with the interpretation put upon them as soon as they were made and whilst they were most clearly understood, and with a variety of other circumstances which will assist us in ascertaining the original and true sense of the Articles, and in illustrating any portion which may seem to need explanation. As regards the interpretation of the forms of expression, History must be of great use in giving us the primitive sense and a right idea of the new and acquired meaning of words, when any change has taken place ; it must be History which must show us the nature of each tacit reformation its causes and effects ; and on these must the new and acquired sense of words always depend. 1 "There is one way by which words acquire, or more strictly seem to acquire new senses, by readers attending to gram- mar and etymology and (modern) custom while they neglect history. Etymology may make a sense seem to be a right one which really was not the sense of the writer, and modern customs may make us affix modern meanings to old words, when those mean- ings were not really in the minds of the persons who used those words." " All expressions contain references to circumstances which History only can point out. Indeed History can only point them out imperfectly, but it can approximate nearer to a right conception of them than any thing else. The word " ac- cursed" (for instance) occurs in one of our Articles ; if we de- pend upon etymology to teach us its meaning we shall be misled, but if we apply to History, we may get a competent notion of it. This will teach us the customary manner of condemning errors and customs and the "jus et norma loquendi.'" Of the value of History in interpreting the Articles it is impossible to form too high an opinion. "I would engage," 2 says Dr. Hey, " if I was possessed of a perfect historical knowledge, to make every thing in our Articles clear, intelligible, and familiar ; not to make every duel / ine so, but every manner of stating a doctrine. But then, 1 Dr. Hey's Lectures, vol. ii., pp. 78, 7'J. - lb. p. 82. 32 by historical knowledge I must be understood to mean not only a knowledge of facts, but of opinions and feelings. Indeed it may be deemed a knowledge of facts, if we know that sucb an opinion had in fact or reality many favourers at such a time ; that such an affection or sentiment, as zeal, disgust, &c, was actually prevalent in such a set or party of men. If any one finds any expression obscure or uncouth in our Articles he may ven- ture to ascribe the obscurity to the imperfection of his historical knowledge. The writings Another source, whence we shall derive materials for the illus- anthors, tration of the Articles, will be the writings of their authors, and last ' Luther and Melancthon, and of their English compilers, Cran- mer, Ridley, and Latimer. To these we shall add the testimony of one of the greatest Divines, which the Reformation, which boasted of giants, produced, — I mean that of Bishop Jewel, their last editor. For next to the persons who actually compiled our Articles there is no man whose opinions are deserving of so much weight and reverence as his. He must have been well ac- quainted with the theological opinions of Cranmer and Ridley, and his attachment to them was so deep and sincere, that de- spite the personal risk he incurred, he acted as notary to them both in their several disputations at Oxford. In consequence of his eminent talents, profound learning, and well-known vene- ration for the Church, he was selected before any other Bishop for the important task of editing the Articles at the last revision. With the advantages which he possessed he could not have failed of knowing the meaning of every word in the Articles and the sense in which they were understood by their compilers as well as by the Convocation, who last revised them. We know also, that in discharging the duty assigned to him, he bestowed great care upon the Articles, he corrected the translation, he endea- voured to remove every semblance of ambiguity from the Sacra- mental Articles by adding in the translation a word more familiar than the one previously used, and he altered the titles to render them a more sure index to the subject matter of the Articles. Indeed Bishop Burnet says, "he had so great share in all that was done then that he had reason to look on his works as a very sure commentary on our Articles." We shall also call into our aid such works, injunctions, and 33 other documents as were published by the authority of the And such Church of England, between the years 1536 and 1571. By mentsas • i-i -T1 1 /-i » 1 1 • were pub • carrying this plan into execution, 1 hope, by God s blessing, lisiicd by to do some service to the Church of England, and to allay the between fears and remove the doubts of many a faithful son. By making 1571. the framers of the Articles the commentators upon them we shall have the surest guide to the truth in any case of doubt or diffi- culty. Churchmen will then also be able to judge for themselves of the opinions of our revered Reformers. They will then see how much truth there is in this proud boast that "for a long period after the Reformation" the Bishop of Exeter " has not a single witness that he can lean upon in our Church." I believe a great deal of misconception exists as to the views of the com- pilers of our Articles respecting the nature and efficacy of the Sacraments. Indeed it can hardly be otherwise — for the new school have sadly misrepresented their meaning. Whilst these erroneous impressions remain on people's minds, the memory of our Reformers and the cause of truth must suffer. It is due therefore to both, that those misapprehensions should be re- moved, and that what they have really written and taught on the important doctrines now unhappily called in question should be generally known. It will then appear, that " the persons who The com - h compiled our Articles were men of the first ability — as scholars Articles pos- « . . . . sessed such (if we except a few, though mere linguists ought not to be reck- quaiifica- v r -1 ii- tiODS as ren ~ oned) we are mere children to them : the Scriptures they were dered them ' . . most fit per- conversant in to a degree, of which few have now any conception, sons for exe- . . . . cutinp; so (so at least I believe :) Ecclesiastical History of facts and opinions important * ' • 1 an under- lay open before them ; yet, they were not mere scholars, nor taking. monks, nor monkish men, but skilled in government, knowing men and manners, liberal in behaviour, free from all fanaticism ; full of probity yet guided in their measures by prudence. Con- ceive all these roused, animated, by the grandeur and impor- tance of the occasion ; all their powers exerted to the utmost, with diligence and ardour ; and you will agree, well might Dr. Balguy say, " the age of Ridley, Jewel, and Hooker, will be re- verenced by the latest posterity." " No set of men could be chosen more likely to form a good set of Articles. They would fall short of nothing attainable, through indolence or cowardice they would set down nothing carelessly, on the presumption of D 34 its passing unexamined — they would overshoot nothing, in hopes of catching a few. They had nothing for it but to fix on that, which right reason and good feelings would embrace." 1 If there- fore we entertain mean and unworthy sentiments of them, or find their language occasionally obscure, the fault is not in them but in ourselves ; — it arises from our own ignorance. 1 Dr. Hey's Lectures, vol. ii. p. 204. CHAPTER IV. Division I. On the Twenty-fifth Article of 1562: "Of the Sa- craments." Having now disposed of several questions relating to the Arti- cles in general, we will enter upon the consideration of the Twenty-fifth Article in particular. And first, we will endeavour History of tt- <• i t\ i • p i ci i> i the Church's to trace the History ot the Doctrine ot the bacraments trom the doctrine of earliest Reformation of the Church's doctrine in 1536 to its final ments. settlement in 1571. In the former year Henry VIII. devoted much attention to the state of Religion. With the Reformation there sprang up a great variety of wild and heretical opinions, and the peace of the Church was disturbed by religious contro- versies whereby the consciences of the unlearned were in doubt what they might believe. On the 23rd of June, 1536, the proceedings Lower House of Convocation sent a Catalogue of Sixty-seven he- vocation of terodoxies (being the tenets of the Old Lollards or New Reform- ers, together with the Anabaptists' opinions 1 ) to the UpperHouse, with a protest, requesting that some active steps might be im- mediately taken to check the progress of these opinions ; and among the last Articles are found some severe animadversions on certain Bishops (viz., Archbishop Cranmer, and Bishops Latimer and Shaxton, as is conjectured) for conniving at the circulation of some books which the Convocation had declared heretical and heterodox. His Majesty therefore appointed "an assembly of learned men and Bishops which should soberly and modestly entreat and determine those things which pertained to 1 Burnet, vol. i. pp. 213, 214. D 2 36 " Stokesly defendeth the seven Sacra- ments." " All be not Snrrnmejits of the New Testament which have the name of Sacra- ments " lleligion." Cromwell also thought proper to be present himself with the Bishops, and by chance meeting with Alexander Alesius by the way, a Scotchman, and Cranmer's guest, he brought him with him to the Convocation House. The Vicar General,in the name of the King, delivered an address to the Bishops, declaring that his Majesty " studied day and night to set a quietness in the Church, and he could not rest until all such controversies were fully de- bated and ended, and exhorted them to set and conclude a godly and perfect unity by determining all things by the Scripture." Stokesly, Bishop of London, defended " the unwritten verities," and endeavoured out of the old school glosses to maintain the seven Sacraments of the Church, and was supported by Lee, Archbishop of York ; Longland, Bishop of Lincoln ; Tonstal, of Durham ; Sherburn of Chichester ; Nix, of Norwich ; and seve- ral others. On the contrary part was the Archbishop of Can- terbury ; Shaxton, Bishop of Salisbury ; Goodrich, Bishop of Ely ; Fox, Bishop of Hereford ; Latimer, Bishop of Worcester : with many others. After much debating, Archbishop Cranmer addressed the Bishops, exhorting them not to brawl about words but to study for the unity and quietness of the Church. He also reminded them that the controversies they were called upon to decide were not of ceremonies and light things; but, among other weighty matters, of the manner and way how sins be forgiven, of the true use of the Sacraments ; whether the outward work of them doth justify man, or whether we receive our justification by faith ; and whether the ceremony of confirmation, of orders, and of anointing, and such other [which cannot be proved to be institute of Christ, nor have any word in them to certify us of remission of sins) ought to be called Sacraments and to be compared with Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, or no ? And he concluded with these words : " In this disputation we must first agree of the number of the Sacraments, and what a Sacrament doth signify in the Holy Scripture, and when we call Baptism and the Supper of Z/ieLoRD, Sacraments of the Gospel — what we mean thereby. I know right well that S. Ambrose and other authors call the washing of the Disciples' feet and other things, Sacraments, which I am sure you yourselves would not suffer to be numbered among the other Sacraments." Alesius was then commanded by Cromwell to speak, and ad- 37 dressing himself to the Bishops, said, " I think that my Lord Archbishop hath given you a profitable exhortation, that ye should first agree of the signification of a Sacrament, whether ye will call a Sacrament a ceremony institute of Christ in the Gospel, to sig- "The name nify a special or a singular virtue of the Gospel and of Godliness meat, how (as S. Paul nameth remission of sins to be), or whether ye mean tendetn. every ceremony generally, which may be a token or signification of an holy thing to be a Sacrament ? For after this latter signifi- cation I will not stick to grant you that there be seven Sacra- ments, or more too if ye will. But yet S. Paul seemeth to describe a Sacrament after the just signification; whereas he saith, ' That Circumcision is a token and seal of the righteousness of Faith.' This definition of our particular Sacrament must " what is a 11 n 11 i Sacrament be understood to appertain to all Sacraments generally, for the properly? Jews had but one Sacrament only, as all the sophistical writers v." do grant. And he describeth Baptism after the same manner in the Fifth to the Ephesians, whereas he saith, ' that Christ doth sanctify the Church/ that is to say, all that be baptized through the bath of water in the Word of Life. For here also he addeth the Word and promise of God unto the ceremony ; and Christ also requireth Faith where He saith, 'whosoever believeth and is baptized shall be saved.' " And S. Augustine describeth a Sacrament thus : ' The Word Gon . s Word of God coming unto the element maketh the Sacrament.' And in gofngwith e another place he saith, ' A Sacrament is a thing wherein the reremony power of God, under the form of visible things, doth work secretly Sacrament. salvation.' And the Master of the sentences doth describe a a definition Sacrament no otherwise : 'A Sacrament' (saith he) 'is an invi- ment. acra sible grace, and hath a visible form ; and by this invisible grace I mean' (saith he) ' remission of sins.' Finally S. Thomas tie- no man • i i ii l . . . _ hath power nieth that any man hath authority to institute a Sacrament, to make any ~, Sacrament. Now if you agree unto this definition of a Sacrament, it is an easy thing to judge of the number of those Sacraments which have the manifest Word of Gon, and be institute of Christ, to signify unto us the remission of our sins. " S. Augustine saith that there be but two such Sacraments, in Aug. a .3. Man, he saith : ' The Scripture hath taught us but few signs, as be the Sacrament of Baptism and the solemn celebration and re- membrance of the Body and Blood of the Lord, he.' " Stokesly replied against Alesius, and said : " where you allege that all the Sacraments which are in the Church instituted by Christ Himself, have either some manifest ground in the Scrip- tures, or ought to show forth some signification of remission of sins, it is false and not to be allowed." Fox, Bishop of Hereford, then arose and spoke in favour of an appeal to God's Word rather than to the schoolmen : — " Through whose oration Alesius being encouraged, proceeded further, to urge the Bishop [of London] with this argument. " The Argument in Form. sacraments "Ba. Sacraments be seals ascertaining us of God's good Will. ti^taeaTaf ro. Without the Word there is no certainty of God's cood Gon'sgood wm co. Ergo. Without the Word there be no Sacraments. " The first part of this reason is S. Paul's own saying, the fourth to the Romans, where he saith : 1 that circumcision is a token and a seal of the righteousness of Faith.' Ergo : it requireth Faith to certify man's heart of the Will of God. But the Word of God is the foundation of Faith, as S. Paul witnessetb. 1 Faith The word is come ^ hearing, and hearing comet h by the Word of God/ the ground p or t h e mind must be taueht and instructed to the Will of God of faith. c Rom. x. by Word, like as the eye is taught and instructed by the outward ceremony. And so S. Paul by that saying confuteth this opinion, that the Sacraments should make men righteous operito e aD -d j ust De f° re God, for the very outward work without faith of them that receive them. 39 " And after this manner doth S. Paul speak unto the Ephe- Ephes. v. sians, that Christ doth sanctify His Church through the bath of Water in the Word of Life. And forasmuch as he joineth the word unto the ceremony, and declareth the virtue and power of the Word of God, that it bringeth with itself he doth manifestly teach that Word of God is a principal thing and even Sacraments AS IT WERE THE VERY SUBSTANCE AND BODY OF THE Sa- g^he^dout crament, and the outward ceremony to be in very deed nothing Goj^° rd else but a token of that lively inflammation which we receive through Faith in the Word and Promise. S. Paul also in ministering the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper doth mani- festly add the Words of Christ. He took bread, saith he, and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take ye this and eat ye this, for it is My Body. Item. ' Do ye this in My remem- brance.' Besides this he teacheth evidently that only Christ, and none but He had power to institute a Sacrament ; and that The institu- neither the Apostles nor the Church hath any authority to alter Christ •7- _ ' ought not to or to add any thing unto His ordinance, whereas he saith, ' For t>e altered. / have received of the Lord that which I delivered unto you, fyc' To what purpose should he go about to move the people to be- lieve him, and to win their hearts with this protestation, if it had been lawful for him to have made any Sacraments, or to have altered the form and manner of ministering the Sacrament, as some men both wickedly and shamefully do affirm, that the Apostles did alter the form of Baptism V n Such were the proceedings of the Upper House of Convoca- tion in 1536, as recorded by Fox, himself a Puritan. 2 The whole dispute between the Bishops arose from Cranmer and those Prelates who were favourable to the Reformation contending for such a definition of a Sacrament as would exclude all signs of holy things from the dignity of " Sacraments of the Gospel," except Baptism and the Lord's Supper. They defined a Sacra- The i; j er . ment to be a ceremony, instituted of Christ in the Gospel, to sacrament signify a special or a singular virtue of the Gospel and of Godli- gospel, ness, as S. Paul nameth remission of sins to be. They also main- tained that this virtue and power was derived from the Word and Promise of God being added to the ceremony, and was brought 1 Fox's Acts and Monuments, vol. ii. pp. 421 — 42G. Burnet gives an abridged account, vol. i. pp. 214, 215. 2 Neal's Puritans, vol. i. p. 124. 40 with it aud made certain by it ; and that it is conferred by God at the time of the administration of the Sacrament and by means of it. This they proved by a quotation from St, Augustin : " A Sacrament is a thing wherein the power of God doth 1 work secretly Salvation." And as the Sacraments are the means by which God works invisibly in us, so faith in the Word and Pro- mise joined to the ceremony and certifying a man's heart of God's good will towards him individually, is the means whereby adults receive the invisible grace — remission of sins. The debates of this Convocation resulted in the compilation of the Articles of 1536, in which the points above insisted on against the Papists 2 are most clearly and distinctly laid down under the Articles of " the Sacrament of Baptism," and " the Sacrament of the Altar." I am not however aware that our Reformers compiled any dis- tinct Article on the Sacraments generally until the year 1 538, when the English and German Divines drew up Thirteen Arti- cles on the basis of the Augsburg Confession. This Article with its original, and those published by the authority of the Church until 1571, I shall place before the reader in parallel columns that he may satisfy himself what the teaching of the Church has really been at the different periods of her History, and whether she has expressed herself in more general and ambiguous or in more precise and particular terms than had previously been done. 1 It is now contended that the Sacrament of Baptism, ordained of Christ, does not convey grace, instrumentally, to every Infant ; but is a sign of grace already bestowed upon only a part of those babes who conceive it. It is there- fore worth noticing that the ancient learned fathers, and after them our own Church, speak of the Sacraments as signs, seals, and pledges, of the grace which God doth work by them, as His instruments, at the time of their being received. The verb " operatur'' is in the present tense, and cannot, without a violation of the rules of grammar, be rendered " hath wrought.'' Again, if the Sacraments be signs of grace bestowed before their reception, and this grace is not bestowed on all persons, it is clear that they cannot be effectual signs, for what they signify has been effected before they are used, and so it cannot be effected by them ; neither are they sure witnesses of grace received ; for it is contended that some persons have not had this grace given to them. According to the new theory, therefore, they are occasionally false witnesses and always ineffectual signs, for they never can effect what they are said to signify. 2 Either from ignorance or malicious wickedness our present neologians are constantly »«/*representing the doctrine of one Baptism for conveying remission of sins as a Popish error; whereas Fox declares that Stokesly, the leader of the Papists, pronounced it false that Sacraments ought to show forth some significa- tion of remission of sins. The Com hmhos or Acgsmtio, 1530. Irfi ill > XIII. Ut Urn Sarramrntorum De utu sacramcntorum doccnt, q u <-M tainiuienla nitiituta tint, non modo ul suit nolic profcationis inter hominot, scd magU ut lint tigna ol lo«timonia voluntatis Dei crga not ad oicilandaiu at con firm an dam fidem in hit qui uluntur propatita. Itaquc utendum C«t lacnUDcntU, it* Ut fida accodat, quit rreduf promiinonibua, quir per mcramrnta eihibcntui et otlen- duntur. Dsmnuut igitur illot qui docent, quod tncramenla ct nporc uperjin juttificcnt, n. t dm cut lideui rcquiri in uiu Mcramen- torum. quu- ere Jot rcmitli peccatn. N.B. — The reader will ""t forget Aletiut' Definition given in ibe Convocation of 1630. Art. it, De Sacramentoiium Use, 1838. jan-nmrrKo ostenduntur cihibentur ct prawtaulur. Nequc cnira in illit vcrum eft, quod quidnm dicunt, tacramcnt*. eonferre grntiam « o/xre operalo sine bono niolu mentis, imni in raliont ulrnlibui uecc&sum eat, utjfdri cliam utentis accednt, per quam eredat i/lu promutiumbm, tt acci/ii'Jf rti iirvmitiat quir rfcll xciumima CfPi/rrurif ur. De I M ami Dug voro CUD tomcmrium tit cot a misericordia Dei CMluderc, pitrscrtim cum Christut in Evangclio dical, " Smite pnrvulot nd me venire, tedium est cnim regoum crclorum ;" ft alibi " Nini quit remit u* fucrit ci uqui'i et Bpiritu Suneto BOB potctt inlrarc in regnunj cmlnrum ;" cumque perpituo ectlesue ("ullinliue outnui tudiric, juni inde ah ipiis Apmlolorum lemporibui, rrceptum sit in- fantes dehorn JepliMri in ™mi» Mra peeratonm el iitfiifrm, dicimut quad Spiritui Saneliu efiicax nt in Mil tl eui in Bap- litmo mundet, qucmndmodum supra in ArUculo de Hiiplismo dictum ctt. non modo ut iml notir prnfcuionii niter honiine), led tnullo maeis, ut tint signa et Utlimonia voluntatis Dei ergo not, proposita ad cieitandarn ct confirmandani fidem in his qui uttintur tit. I to que utendum est lacramenlis ila ut acccdat fillet piomitsionibui, quir per lacmmtnla cihibcntur ct ottenduntur. Hoc fidt uccipimut p romuiam r/rnhntn, quam lacrnmenta wjnificant rl Spintum Sanctum. Damnant iyitur Ph;iri*uic;iiu ujiinioiu-m quir .'bruit d>>c(rinaiD de fide, occ doccl fidem in utu tacramcntorum requiri, qua; credat projiiit t'lifi^iuin imlu, ^Tiitiniiwlfiri. Sdlin^'it bonjinci juitos cttc propter mum tncramciiiorum ex opere operalo et quidem lino bono motu utcntium. Catechism or 1563, Written by Bitbop Poinet for all tchool mailer* to leneli the unskilful and children, set forth by tho King's Majesty's authorily, and ]>rrli\i Die mibi quid tu vocnt tacramcnta ? They are CERTAIN* cuitomablt rtvtmi doiiigt and ceremo- Sunt «r(* solemnes actioncs et ccremonin- a Christo biili- nict 1 ordained by CrJRlSr ; tbll DT IBXU He might pat us in tula?, ut I'KR EAS btntfinaram norm erga not admonertt fcasion that we be of the number of them vktek km, partaken timut numcro, qui talium benefiriorum st'M participti, et qui of the same bene fiU and which fatten oil their olfianrc in in illi fiduciom cmiiem c>1l.u;int. qmnlque not non pudet Himj that we are not athamed of the name of CllUttl or lo nominis Cbriitiani out ippeuttl ) Dtidpulorutn Ciirisii. f. K i v .'- Mui -iv, knit top-tin r ri cnrnpniiy ioiI few in number, must ii^nihtali'in, ii s it itnptiim 26. H Of the Our Lord Jesus Christ ha euty to be kept, moil excellent and tbe Lord's Supper. 1 The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ lo be gazed upon or to be carried about, but Ibut we iliculd rightly me them. And in such only a* hiphIiiI) nuivt the tame they bate a wholesome effect and operation, and yet not that of the work wrought, as some man tpeakt. Which word n* it it ttrvngc and unknow n lo Holy Scripture ; to it cngcndcrctb no Godly, but u very superstitious irnse. But tliey ihnt re- ceire the SncramcntA unworthily, [luichnse lo themselves damnation, as S. Paul Mitb, Sacraments ordained by the Word of Oou be nol only budget and tokens of Chrittian men'* prof Ml! OH ; but rather they be certain sure wilnum-t ami ttfi itunl >i«ns of grace »nd (i.ili'- i: I mil Lownnli ut, tin "Im li ll>- ilulli m.rk invisibly in ut and doth not only quicken but iltO strengthen and confirm our fail I, in Him. Houily oe Common Praycr and Sacraments, whitii:n a ,m nrioat 1362. " lu ihe due use of the Sacrament*"—" He {Gun] ctnbreceth ut and offeicUi Ilimielf to be embraced of ut." p 321. "And as for the namely, for Ihr riril Ttrtnmnt, if Wen " In ihe tecond bnuk m;iiiiiit tin adversary of the Lav the Prophets, he (S. Augmtiu) callcth Sacraments signs. And writing to Hi>iiiLi<.iut of the Uaplitui of In he taith, ' If Sacramcnu bad nol b certain umililude of 1 tilings whereof they hi Snrnuiiviitt, lin y should be no S Sacramenla aCbristo imtituta. noli tnntum Sunt noln faswlonis Christianorum, ted certa qua-dam poliui letliti •t cfKcacia tigna gratiir. alquo bona- in not voluntatn per qua; invitibiliicr ipse in not opcrelur, notiraniquo ' 1SC2— 1371. Of the Saer Sacramrnts ordained of Clin tokens of Chriilian men's profession ; but rather they be et lain sure witnesses and sfcctU*] ngfit of grace and God's good will towards us, by the whieh He doth work invisibly in il only quicken but also iticoglheD and con- o*1; t Inn, ■ nHin ImU r..l,i ii i sunt, ul quir, ptftiin i pturit quidem probali candem cum haptitmo el cctiui Domini raliniiem non habeii- tcs, 1 ut quo? lignum aliqumt tiiib.le, ieu uer, ni.iuiam a Di u inttitulum. 1 non hsbeanL Stcnmeiita non in hoe bulimia aunl a Christo ut tpMla- rentur, tut circumfcrrenlur, ted ul rite ilht utfirmur,' tt in hi* duntuat qui digne pcrcipiuul uluUtvln babent offec- tum : qui vero EBtUgH pi iripiunt, danuiaUoncm (ut tnquil Paulus) tibi ipal* aoqiiinint. 1 H, Aod ' ■- Qnomwli} ocv I' i iu btri iuertnl la ' l,J "'■ ' "hotesome effect There arc two Sornimetiit oidoined of Christ our Loud in the Gospel, thai is In say, Daptisnt and tho Supper of the Those five, t.-uitiiniilj o:,H, ,1 Siicrnnicnls, tliat it lo tay, lion, are not to be counted for Sacniioenl* of the Gospel, being tueh as hate grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apotllrt. partly an- ttal, t of lift allow.d in the Scrip- tures ; but yet hair not like nature of baenmenu willi ltap- Uirn and the Lord's Supper,' for that thry have not any visible ngn or ceremony ordained of God. The Sacraments were noi ordained of I'll BUT to he gasrd upon, or to be earned about : but that we should duly ut* ' lot ,. lM-'i. ■1" r, 1 L irrcotur, Arrabuhop Ptrke In 136?. ' Hiibop Jewel's tut tad i>eac • Cop j. ufaed tit Con toe 4U0D tits bten adopted. 41 The foregoing are the principal definitions of the Sacraments Remarks on ° . 1 1 . the several of the Gospel which have been published by the authority of the editions of 1 1 * ... the Article Church of England before the year 1571. Upon instituting a *xv. comparison between the several editions of the present Twenty- fifth Article, the reader will not fail to observe the remarkable similarity which exists between the definition of the Sacraments in the Augsburg Confession and in the English Articles of 1538, JJ}?,''^ the 1552, and 1562. He will notice that our present Twenty-fifth „7 e ° ts s ^ ra - Article is derived, through the Ninth Article of 1538, from the gEf*5? Augsburg Confession, and that in compliance with the advice of fe^fon°bnt Melancthon some important words were added to it to prevent muchmore any doubts as to the efficacy of the Sacraments, and to guard precise - against the Anabaptistical and Socinian heresy, which reduced the Sacraments to mere cold ceremonies and fruitless signs. The addition of the words "sure," "effectual" and "of grace" is of great importance, and at once refutes the charge which has been brought against the Church of designed ambiguity respecting the doctrine of the Sacraments, and shows how jealous she has been of the honour and dignity of Baptism and the LoitD'sSupper. 2ndly. Be it observed, that in the Articles of 1538, that which whythedis- » * ' tinction Mr. Gorham takes upon himself to say "we are not at liberty madein 1538 1 J between the to sever," the Church, having authority in controversies of Faith, ^f t of d has taken the liberty to distinguish, viz., the cases of Adult and J?*"* 1!a P- * ° ' ' tism was Infant Baptism. And if it be asked, why this distinction was not T" nti " 1 ' J nuedinl55>. not retained in the Articles of 1552 and 1562 ? I answer, be- cause before their publication, every thing relating to the right administration of Infant Baptism was, in these years respectively, definitively laid down in the office for the public administra- tion of Infant Baptism in the Book of Common Prayer ; and as regards Adult Baptism, it was not practised in the English Church. But of this, more hereafter. 3rdly. The order of the paragraphs in 1552 and 1562 is va- whyti.r * . . order of the ried. In 1552 the Article commenced with a quotation from paragraphs 1 was altered S. Augustine (which it is worthy of observation, was made use of by Alesius in the Convocation of 1536) and first settled the number of the Sacraments. Then followed the condemnation of sonic evil and superstitious practices of the Popish Church which are at variance witli Christ's institution, and a declara- tion of the effect and operation of the Sacraments both in the 42 case of those who receive them worthily and of those who receive them unworthily, accompanied with a caution against adopting the views of the Church of Rome as to the mode of the operation of the Sacrament. The Article then concluded with the defi- nition of the Sacraments with which the Twenty-fifth now com- mences. From the circumstance of the worthy reception being named in 1552, before the definition, in which the Sacraments are called " effectual signs," Mr. Gorham fancies he derives some support for his miserable doctrine that the Sacraments have no invisible grace invariably annexed to them. We grant that their effect and operation is mentioned in the same sentence and in immediate connection with the word " worthily ;" but we deny we are taught that their virtue, power, and effect is derived from, or debarred by the worthiness or unworthiness of man. No ; the Sacraments are expressly asserted in the Twenty-sixth Article, to be "effectual because of Christ's institution and "pro- mise" although they be ministered by or to evil men." 1 On the worthy recipient they have a wholesome effect and operation ; on the unworthy they bring the displeasure and judgments of God, so that in all cases the Sacraments operate and take some effect. Without having recourse to any of Mr. Gorham's fan- ciful solutions, we can discover the reasons of Cranmer's adopt- ing the arrangements he did in 1552, and of its alteration in 1562. Having declared what the Sacraments are not, and the method by which the spiritual grace annexed to them is not conveyed, Cranmer found himself prepared to state positively and distinctly what they are, and to describe the method by which the grace annexed to them actually is conveyed by Gon and received by man. But in 1562 Archbishop Parker and the Convocation placed the definition at the head of the Articles ; thus following the order observed in the Augsburg Confession and in the Articles of 1538, and beginning, as was most natural, with a general description of the two Sacraments. 1 " True it is that the Sacrament dependeth not neither of the minister nor of the receiver nor of any other ; for though they be all the children of sin, yet is Baptism the Sacrament of Remission of Sins.'' S. Augustine saith : " Securum me fecit Magister metis, de quo Spiritus ejus dicit, Hie est qui lap. tizat.'" " Christ my Master hath assured me, of Whom His own Spirit saith, ' This is He that baptizeth.' " Jewel, portion iii. p. 461. Defence of the Apo- logy, chap. xi. division 3. 43 In 1562 we observe a paragraph is inserted between Reasons as- * sitrnert for the first and second paragraphs of the Twenty-sixth Article of withholding r o r J the title of 1552, treating of the five Ordinances of Confirmation, Penance, true sacra- 7 o merits from Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, and declaring that || ve the Lord's Supper." " In which sort neither is penance, for that it hath not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God." The words, " in which sort neither is penance," were struck out in the Articles of 1571, and possibly by Archbishop Parker him- self; for the words in his copy of 1562, are underlined with his red lead pencil, as if for erasure. Some persons may be curious to know why they were inserted at all. I submit the following as the reason: — In the Articles of 1536 the four Romish Sacra- ments of matrimony, confirmation, orders, and extreme unction were omitted, 1 being considered of inferior dignity and necessity to Baptism and the Sacrament of the Altar, but the Sacrament of Penance 2 was retained and placed between these two. In 1562 however our Church entertained different sentiments re- specting penance, and named the particular grounds of its rejec- tion from a place among " the Sacraments of the Gospel." Lastly. We may notice that the doctrine of the " Opus ope- why the . . . Opus opera- ratum ," which was treated of in the Articles of 1536 and 1552, tum was not is not mentioned in the Article of 1562. If any weight is to be " 5 a 6 ™ edin given to Mr. Turner s argument 3, against the Book of Common 1 For the reasons, see Cranmer's works, vol. i. Jenkyn's pref. p. xv. 2 The Sacrament of Penance is called the Sacrament of absolution or the autho- rity of the keys, wherehy we be absolved from such sins as we befallen into after our baptism, and is numbered with Baptism and the Lord's Supper as a Sacra- ment in Justus Jonas, or what is commonly known by the name of Archbishop Cranmer's Catechism, p. 283. It is called absolution in the Homily of Common Prayer and Sacraments, p. 324. 3 In the second edition of " the Gorham Case," published by Painter, at p. 30, Mr. Turner is reported to have said : "In the Forty-two Articles which existed in 1552, the Book of Common Prayer was designated as in no wise repugnant to wholesome doctrine ; while it is remarkable that in the Articles of 1562, all reference to it was omitted, and only the Book of Ordination alluded to. These Articles however were made part of the law of the land," (and so are the Book of Common Prayer and Rubric). " Did not that amount to a declaration on the part of the Legislature, that the Book of Common Prayer was not a book of doctrine, but of devotion, ordination, and administration ?" When and where has the Legis- lature so declared its judgment ? The conclusion from Mr. Turner's premises is specially 44 Prayer, containing a code of doctrine in consequence of no refer- ence being made to it in the Articles of 1562, the omission in our present Articles of the clause contained in the Articles of 1552 against the opus operatum must also prove that the Church in 1562 withdrew her objections to the opus operatum, and adopted the Romish views of the method by which God con- veyed the grace of the Sacraments to all who received them rightly. It will hardly be pretended that, in the latter case, this is a necessary or the only consequence, and we must be excused for rejecting Mr. Turner's conclusion in the former case. At this time it is hardly possible to assign reasons for the omission of all the whole Articles and paragraphs and words contained in the Articles of 1552, on their revision in 1562 ; but, as regards the opus operatum, we can account for the condemnatory para- graph being withdrawn. The doctrine, which was somewhat better understood then than now-a-days, was virtually rejected in the definition of the Sacraments, placed in 1 562 at the head of the Articles, and it was therefore considered unnecessary to add a distinct denial of it. For says Bishop Burnet, " In all the diversity there is no real difference, for the virtue of the Sacra- ments being put in the worthy receiving excludes the doctrine of the opus operatum as formally as if it had expressly been con- demned; and the naming of the two Sacraments instituted by Christ is upon the matter the rejecting of all the rest/' 1 rather this, that the opposition to the Prayer Book which proceeded from the Clergy in Edward VI. 's reign had so far ceased, and the diversity of opinion had so far died away as to render it unnecessary to repeat in the Articles and require the Clergy to subscribe, what had been already said in the preface to the Prayer Book and the Acts of Parliament. But as regards the ordinal, we know it was considered by the Papists inefficient and schismatical, and by the ultra-Reformers superstitious, and it was therefore most important, to require from the Clergy an acknowledgment that the orders given by it were right, orderly, lawful, and valid. See' the Thirty sixth Article itself, and Burnet's Record, part ii. book ii. p. 255, item 15. Ibid, p. 264, article 29, and Hooper's Works, by Parker Society, p. 479. Even so lately as 1604, it was thought necessary to make a Canon against the impugners of the ordinal. The unlearned reader should be informed that seven whole Articles contained in the Book of 1552 were omitted in 1562, not because they were untrue, but because it was considered unnecessary then to retain them. A paragraph against the bodily presence in the Lord's Supper is also omitted, but surely this does not prove that the Church in 1562 acknow- ledged this doctrine to be true. 1 Burnet's Exposition of the Twenty-fifth Article, p. 314. 45 Division II. Having collected together and commented upon the principal definitions of the Sacraments which have been published by authority, we will now endeavour to ascertain what are the essen- tials of a Sacrament in the judgment of the English Church. It appears then, that in the first place, there must be a visible what are sign or element ; secondly, this sign must be ordained of God, ^ e e s e ™ hic t h or expresslv commanded in the New Testament ; and thirdly, gether in r ' . . J ' the twoSa- the express words of Christ must be joined to it, which words cramentsof * J „ . the gospel annex to it a promise of grace. This third essential we gather {^jj'f™^ 1 from these words of the Homily : " Whereunto (i.e. unto which auotherem- ■' x bleraatical signs) is annexed the promise of free forgiveness of our sin and actions - of our holiness and joining in Christ." And from the following extract from the Twenty-fifth Article : " Sacraments Ordained of Christ — rather be certain sure witnesses and effectual signs of grace and God's good-will towards us, by which (signs) He doth work (not hath worked by prevenient grace) invisibly in us." And if we are in any doubt whence the Sacraments derive their power, efficacy, and virtue, we find it resolved in the Twenty-sixth Article, which declares the Sacraments to be "effec- tual, because of Christ's institution and promise," — " propter institutionem Christi et promissionem efficacia sunt." By all these marks Baptism and the Lord's Supper, which, by way of eminence, are called " Sacraments of the Gospel," are distinguished from all other emblematical ceremonies to which the name of Sacraments, in its general acceptation, is given in the writings of the Fathers. If we could take away cither one of these marks, Baptism and the Lord's Supper would be no Sacraments. They would be degraded to a level with the five Ordinances to which our Church refuses the name and honour of Sacraments in the proper and exact signification of the words. These marks are, in short, the differentia of the Sacraments of the Gospel, and they are all insisted on by Bishop Ridley in his disputation at Oxford, in April, 1555. Watson. I ask then whether the Eucharist be a Sacrament ? Ridley. The Eucharist, taken for a sign or symbol [of and not for Christ's natural body and blood] is a Sacrament. 46 Watson. Is it instituted of God ? Ridley. It is instituted of God. Watson. Where ? Ridley. In the Supper. Watson. With what words is it made a Sacrament ? Ridley. By the words and deeds which Christ said and did and commanded us to say and do the same. Watson. It is a thing commonly received of all that the Sacraments of the new law give grace to them that worthily receive. Ridley. True it is, that grace is given by the Sacrament, but as by an instrument. The inward virtue and Christ give the grace through the Sacraments. 1 A little below, Ridley again affirms Watson's proposition to be true, that every Sacrament hath a promise of grace annexed unto it instrument ally. Archbishop Cranmer also writes as follows : " These elements of water, bread and wine, joined to God's Word, do after a Sa- cramental manner put Christ into our eyes, mouths, hands, and all our senses." 2 Bishop Jewel too in his controversy with Dr. Harding, a Papist, brings forward the same three marks to vindicate his rejection of a pretended Sacrament. " The objection," says he, " of washing of feet is common, and hath been often answered. S. Bernard calleth it f a Sacrament,' I grant. But S. Bernard is a doctor but of late years ; and therefore his authority herein must weigh the lighter, a remark worthy the consideration of our new masters and their disciples. Neither doth he so call it according to the nature and common definition of a Sacra- ment. For neither was there any certain element, namely, (i.e. what is a by name) chosen, nor any special words appointed to make it a propedy so Sacrament, nor any promise of grace thereto annexed — only he calleth it a Sacrament by a general kind of taking ; and in that meaning S. Hilary saith ' the Sacrament of Prayer,' 1 the Sacrament of Fasting/ ! the Sacrament of Fulness,' ' the Sa- crament of Thirst,' ' the Sacrament of Weeping/ And S. Bernard in another place in like sort saith, ' the Sacrament of a Painted Cross / and in this place he saith that the washing of 1 Ridley, p. 239. * Cranmer, vol. ii. p. 302. 47 feet betokeneth the washing and purging of venial sins, which signification he calleth a Sacrament." 1 It is clear, then, that the word Sacrament is used in more than one sense, and so much depends upon a right understanding of the exact sense in which it is received by the Church of England, that I shall be excused for giving another extract from the writ- ings of Bishop Jewel, especially as he there delivers the judgment of the Church. " A Sacrament, in the manner of speaking which the Church useth, and in the writings of the Holy Scripture and of ancient fathers, sometimes signifieth properly even such Sacrament which Christ hath ordained in the New Testament, A sacra- ' ment in tin for which He hath chosen some certain element and spoken special prop" ste- ■* J nification of words to make it (the element) a Sacrament, and hath annexed the word. thereto (to the element) the promise of grace; sometimes it is used in a general kind of taking, and so every mystery set down to teach the people, and many things that indeed and by special property be no Sacraments, may nevertheless pass under the general name of a sacrament." 2 Now it must be apparent to any person who is acquainted with the writings of Messrs. Gorham and Goode, that they use the word sacrament in the " general kind of taking" not " in the manner of speaking which the Church useth" for they deny a part of the differentia of the true sacraments, and stigmatize the annexation of the promise of grace to the elements as a Popish figment ; thus overthrow- ing the nature of a " Sacrament of the Gospel," as it is uni- formly defined by the Church. Amidst this turmoil of opinion it will be no little satisfaction to the faithful Churchman to know that his Spiritual Mother is not singular in her doctrine on the Sacraments, but is supported by the principal foreign Reformed Churches. Let me invite the reader's attention to the descrip- tion of the sacraments given in the Helvetic Confession. Sunt autem sacramenta, symbola mystica, vel ritus sancti, aut a.d. 1536. sacrse actiones a Deo ipso institute, constantes verbo suo conpbs- . . . SION. signis et rebus significatis, quibus in Ecclesia summa sua beneficia homini exhibita, retinet in memoria, et subinde renovat, quibus item promissiones suas obsignat, et qua ipse nobis interius prastat, exterius reprasentat veluti ac oculis contemplanda sub- jicit, adeoque fidem nostram, Spiritu Dei in cordibus nostris ope- 1 Jewel, portion i. p. 225. Ibid. ii. 1 102. 48 A.U. 1551. S AXON CONFES- SION. A.l). 1561. Bei gic Confes- sion. Luther's Definition in C'aptiv. Babylon. rante, roborat et auget ; quibus denique nos ab omnibus aliis populis ct rcligionibus scparat, sibique soli consccrat et obligat, et quid a nobis requirat, significat." " Prattcrea habent symbola promissiones adjunctas, qua requirunt fidem.'' 11 The description given in the Saxon Confession is as follows : Discernunt ecclesiam a ceteris gentibus et ritus quidam divinitus instituti qui nominantur usitate sacramenta; ut Baptismus et ccena Domini : quse tamen non sunt tantum signa professionis sed multo magis (ut vetustas dixit) signa gratia, id est, sunt CEREMO- NY ADDIT^l PROMISSIONI EvANGELU DE GRATIA id est de gratuita remissione peccatorum, et de reconciliatione, et de toto beneficio redemptionis, quse ita instituta, ut singuli eis utantur, quia sunt pignora et testimonia qua? ostendunt ad singulos per- tinere beneficia in Evangelio promissa. Nam vox evangelii gene- ralis est. Hanc testatur hie usus pertinere ad singulos qui sacramentis utuntur." 2 Lastly, the Belgic Confession describes the sacraments in few words thus : " Sunt enim sacramenta signa, ac symbola visibilia rerum internarum et invisibilium, per quae ceu per media Deus ipse virtute Spiritus Sancti in nobis agit. Itaque signa ilia mi- nime vana sunt aut vacua : nec ad nos decipiendos aut frustrandos instituta. Ipsorum enim Veritas est ipse Jesus Christus, sine quo nullius essent prorsus momenti." 3 To the above I will only add the description of sacraments, precisely and strictly so called, and owned to be truly such by the Church, which was given by Luther and quoted with approbation by Bishop Jewel : " But ye say (i.e. Harding the Papist) Luther and the Germans admit three sacraments ; Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and Penance ; and Philip Melancthon after wai'ds found out the fourth. Oh, M. Harding, what is it that thus inflameth your tongue to speak untruth ? If it had pleased you to have seen it, Luther and Melancthon plainly expressed their own meaning, and utterly removed all manner of occasion of such cavils. Luther writeth thus ; Proprie ea visum est vocare sacra- menta, qua; annexis signis promissa sunt ; cetera, quia signis alli- gata non sunt, nuda promissa sunt. Quo fit ut, si rigide loqui velimus, tantum duo sint in ecclesia Dei sacramenta, baptismus et panis; cum in his solis et institutum divinitus signum 1 Sylloge Confessionum, p. 75. 2 Ibid. p. 277. 3 Ibid. p. 348. 49 ET PROMISSIONEM REMISSIONIS PECCATORUM VIDEAMUS. In proper speech, those we call sacraments which are promised with signs annexed. The rest, that have no signs, are bare promises. Wherefore speaking hereof precisely and strictly, there are only two Sacraments in the Church of God, baptism and the bread ; forasmuch as in these only we find both the sign ordained by God, and also the promise of remission of sins." 1 Thus much, then, respecting the distinguishing qualities of a Sacrament of the Gospel. The Church of England, from 1536 to the present hour, has uniformly maintained the three marks above named to be indispensably necessary to the making of a Sacrament properly so called — such as Baptism and the Lord's Supper. An attempt has, however, been made, and received countenance in quarters whence it might least have been ex- pected, to induce the unlearned in ecclesiastical language to be- lieve that the Church by sacraments means no more than the Neither the ,. . , . . . Church of outward forms or siqns distinct from the hidden and Divine thinq England nor ... any old of the Sacrament. Happily we have Bishop Jewel's oft repeated learned Fa- ~ . . rr j t i ther eaU the denial of this heresy. The Papist Hardin";, to serve his own outward • * . sign alone purpose, broached this erroneous and then novel distinction, and (winch is but 1 1 ' a part) the as oft as he produced it he was met by the Bishop with a charge sacrament, of falsehood. Harding's words are these : " The word ' sacra- ment' is taken so as it is distinct from that hidden and Divine thing of the Sacrament ; 2 that is to say, for the outward forms only, which are the holy signs of Christ's very Body present under them contained. Whereof we must gather that whenso- ever the fathers do call this most excellent Sacrament a figure or a sign (187), they would be understanded to mean none otherwise than of those outward forms and not of Christ's Body itself, which is there present, not typically or figuratively, but really and substantially." Upon these words, Bishop Jewel 1 The translation is Bishop Jewel's. — Portion iii. p. 460. 2 Mr. Gorham has said, that Bishop Jewel and others " have marked the dis- tinction and the separability of the sacraments or signs," [making the Sacrament of the Gospel no more than a bare sign] " from the grace or the thing signified, in precise and unmistakable language." After such an assertion from a man who by profession has derived his knowledge from, and pre-eminently conforms to, the teaching of our greatest Reformers, and would dictate the doctrine of the Church of England to his Bishop and the Church at large, the reader will be somewhat surprised on reading the extracts I have made from Bishop Jewel's writings. E 50 made the following note : " The hundred and eighty-seventh untruth. For none of the learned fathers ever called the outward form a sacrament. Christ's Body itself is a figure." 1 Again, under the Article of calling the Sacrament " Lord and God," Harding wrote " This word ' sacrament ' (as is declared before) is of the fathers taken two ways (239), either for the only outward forms of bread and wine, &c. ;" and Bishop Jewel's note is " The two hundred and thirty-ninth untruth. For the only outward forms were never called the Sacrament or Christ's Body by any of all the ancient fathers." 2 Once more, Harding at the commencement of the Twenty-sixth Article had said, " That the outward form of bread is properly the Sacra- ment." Whereupon Bishop Jewel puts the following note in the margin : " The two hundred and fifty-fifth untruth. For the outward form was never by any old father called the Sacrament." And in the text he makes these additional observations : " ' The outward form of bread,' saith he, f is the Sacrament.' But withal, he should have added, that this form and manner of speech is only his own, peculiar only to himself and certain his fellows of that side ; never used by any of the old doctors and fathers of the Church, either Greek or Latin, or learned or unlearned, or Catholic or heretic, or one or other." 3 So then, Messrs. Gorham and Goode have not the merit even of origina- lity, but these good Protestants have, unconsciously perhaps, revived the untruths of Dr. Harding the Papist. The reader will now be able to get a little insight into the measure of the support which Messrs. Gorham and Goode derive for this heresy from the writings of Bishop Jewel. The next point we shall do well to investigate is, how the ele- ments of water, bread, and wine be made Sacraments ? and whence they derive their power and efficacy ? or in the words of How is a Jewel, " How is the sacrament formed ? Of what parts is it Sacrament ' . J i t, formed? made? Augustine saith; ' Accedat verbum ad elementum, et fit sacramentum.' ' Join the word of Christ's institution ivith the sensible creature and thereof is made a sacrament,' ' that is to say, another thing.' " 4 " Join the word to the creature of water, and thereof is made the sacrament of baptism : take away the word, 1 Jewel, Portion ii. p. 592. 2 Ibid. ii. p. 758. 3 Ibid. ii. p. 796. 4 Ibid. iii. p. 500. 5) then what is water other than water? The Word of God and the Creature make a Sacrament." 1 If it is asked when this union of the element with the word when docs the union of takes place, I answer, at Consecration ; when the elements the word cease to be common and become sanctified, spiritual, ana hea- take place? venly, and ordained by God to regenerate the soul and to feed, refresh, and nourish it. Cranmer in his "Defence/' &c. gives - the following account of Consecration and its effects : " Conse- conskcra- ° tion de- oration is the separation of any thing from a profane and worldly scribed. use unto a spiritual and godly use." And therefore, when usual and common water is taken from other uses and^w^ to the use of Baptism, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, then it may rightly be called consecrated water, that is to say, water put to a holy use. Even so when common bread and wine be taken and severed from other bread and wine, to the use of the Holy Com- munion, that portion of bread and wine, although it be of the same substance that the other is from the which it is severed, yet it is now called consecrated or holy bread and holy wine. Not that the bread and wine have or can have any holiness in Elements them, but that they be used to a holy work and represent holy tion, and godly things. And therefore S. Dionyse calleth the bread holy bread and the cup a holy cup, as soon as they be set upon the altar to the use of the Holy Communion. But specially they (the bread and wine) may be called hohi specially so ■* *^ ' * ' ' J J by consecra- and consecrated, when they be separated to that holy tion - use by Christ's own words, which He spake for that purpose, saying of the bread, This is My body ; and of the wine, This is My blood. So that commonly the authors, before those words be spoken, do take the bread and wine, but as other common bread and wine ; but after those words be pronounced over them, then they take them for consecrated and holy bread and wine; 2 but no cor- poral presence is required. Such is Cranmer's account of the signification of Consecra- tion, which he said he would prove to be "according to the mind of the old authors it bears a remarkable resemblance to 1 Jewel, Portion ii. p. 1100 ; also iii. p, 458. - Cranmer, vol. ii. p. 413. 52 the description given of the same reverend ceremony in the Helvetic Confession. Consecra- " Sicut autcin quondam sacramenta constahant verbo siqno et Hon des- . . , ,, , . cribed by re siqnificata, ita nunc quoque eisdem veluti partibus absolvuntur. the Helvetic 11 r Confession. Nam VERBO DeI FIUNT, QUOD ANTEA NON FUERUNT, SACRA- MENTA. Consecrantur enim verbo, et sanctificata esse ostenduntur ab eo, qui instituit. Et sanctificare vel consccrare, est rem aliquam Deo sacrisque usibus dedicare, hoc est, a communi vel prophano usu segregare, et sacro usui destinare. Sunt enim in sacrainentis signa petita ex usu vulgaris res externse et visibiles. In baptismo enim signum est elementum aqua?, ablutioque ilia visibilis, quae fit per ministrum. Res autem significata est regeneratio vel ablutio a peccatis. In Ccena vero Domini, signum est panis et vinum, sumptus ex communi usu cibi et potus. Res autem significata, est ipsum traditum Domini corpus, et sanguis ejus effusus pro nobis, vel communio corporis et sanguinis Domini. Proinde, aqua, panis et vinum sua natura, et extra instituiionem Divinum ac usum sanctum, duntaxat id sunt, quod esse dicuntur et experimur. Cceterum, si accedat Domini verbum, cum invo- cation Divini nominis, et renovatione prima; institutions et sanc- tificationis, signa ista consecrantur, et sanctificata a Christo esse ostenduntur. Manet enim semper efficax in ecclesia Dei prima Christi institutio, et consecratio sacramentorum, adeo ut qui non aliter celebrent sacramenta, quam ipse Dominus ab initio instituit, fruantur etiam nunc prima ilia consecratione omnium prcestantissima. Et ideo recitantur in celebratione sacramen- torum ipsa verba Christi. Et quoiiiam verbo Dei discimus, quod signa hsec in alium finem sint instituta a Domino, quam usurpentur vulgo, ideo docemus signa nunc in usu sacro, usur- pare rerum signatarum vocabula, nec appellari amplius aquam tantum, panem et vinum, sed etiam regenerationem vel lavacrum renovationis, item corpus et sanguineus Domini vel symbola aut sacramenta corporis et sanguinis Domini. Non quod symbola mutentur in res significatas, et desinant esse id quod sunt sua natura ; alioqui enim sacramenta non essent, quae re significata duntaxat constarent, signa non essent ; sed ideo usurpant signa rerum nomina, quod rerum sacrarum sunt symbola mystica, et signa et res significata inter se sacramentaliter conjungantur, conjungantur inquam, vel uniantur per significationem myslicam 53 ET VOLUNTATEM VEL CONSILIUM EJUS, QUI SACRAMENTA in- stituit. Non enim aqua, panis et vinum, signa vulgaria sed sacra. Et qui instituit aquam Baptismi, non ea voluntate con- silioque instituit, ut fideles aqua duntaxat Baptismi perfun- dantur ; et qui jussit in Coena panem edere, et vinum bibere non hoc voluit, ut fideles panem et vinum tautum percipiant, sine mysterio, sicut, domi suae panem manducant, sed ut rebus quoque significatis spiritualiter communicent, et vere per fidem abluantur a peccatis, et Christo participent ." 1 The importance and amount of sound Catholic doctrine con- tained in the foregoing extracts will be a sufficient apology for their length. The establishment, however, of the truth enun- ciated in them is of so much consequence, that I am induced to make a few brief extracts from the writings of Ridley, Latimer, and Jewel. We have already seen that Ridley held that a sacrament is Ridley on ^ Consecra- made by the word and deed, which Christ said and did, and com- tion - manded us to do. He also says, " these words, ' This is My body/ are the words of consecration of the sacrament of the body/' and " that Christ's words spoken upon the cup were as mighty in work, and as effectual in signification, to all intents, constructions, and purposes (as our parliament men do speak), as they were, spoken upon the bread." And elsewhere he writes, " although for the change of the use, office, and dig- nity of the bread, the bread indeed sacrameutally is changed into the body of Christ, as the water in baptism is sacrameutally changed into the fountain of regeneration, and yet the material substance remaineth all one, as was before." 2 In his disputa- tion he says, " I grant also there is no promise made to bread and wine (i.e. common and unconsecrated). But inasmuch as they are sanctified and made the sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord, they have a promise of grace annexed unto them, namely, of spiritual partaking of the body of Christ to be communicated and given, not to the bread and wine, but to them which worthily do receive the sacrament." 3 Bishop Latimer also says, " We must find Him (Christ) by Baptism. There we begin (not by a prevenient act of grace) ; we are washed with water, and then the words are added ; for we are baptized in the 1 Sylloge Confessionum, pp. 77, 78. 2 Ridley, pp. 18, 19, 12. 3 Page 240. 54 Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, whereby the baptism receiveth His strength." 1 I will only add to the above authorities one passage from the works of Bishop Jewel. Writing against Harding, he says, " First you say, ' The sacra- ment, by the judgment of Damascene, is called a figure before the consecration :' that is to say, before the sacrament be a sacra- ment ; for before consecration it is no sacrament."' 1 We have now seen how a sacrament is formed in the judg- ment of those learned divines by whom our articles were com- piled and edited ; and that their judgment is confirmed by the testimony of some foreign Churches. The word of Christ, which Himself declared to be " Spirit and Life," is no sooner united, according to our Lord's own institution, to the divinely appointed elements by the agency of His lawful priest than that which before was common, and bare no grace to the soul of man, is changed in use, office, dignity, and quality, but not in substance, and becomes a holy thing, sanctified by the Holy Ghost and the instrumental cause of spiritual life, refreshment, nourish- ment, and strength. " The omnipotent power of the word, wherewith God made heaven and earth, the same omnipotent power of the same word He useth now in the consecration of the sacrament." 3 It is His promised blessing, His setting them apart for that merciful purpose, that makes His creatures avail- able for the support of either soul or body. The soul of the faithful Churchman is stayed on this belief. She looks upon the consecrated elements as signs truly, but as signs which by God's appointment effect what they signify, as the sign of the Lord her God, " the faithful God which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love Him, and keep His commandments to a thousand generations." 4 She regards them as pledges of God's love to her individually, and as an earnest and security for the fulfilment of His promises, and she becomes joyful in the Lord, ay, she rejoices in His salvation. Then lifting up her eyes from the sanctified creatures to Him out of whose fulness all their efficacy is derived, she sees her Saviour at the right hand of God, offering to her by His sacraments as by His holy hands the blessings He has promised but she is unworthy to ask, the 1 Latimer, vol. ii. 127. 3 Jewel, portion iii. p. 498. 2 Jewel, portion iii. 527. 4 Deut. vii. 9. 55 graces she needs, the Divine life she ardently craves and expects to receive by the extended hand of a lively unquestioning faith. I feel a right understanding of this point, how, and when, and itisimpor. i 7 ■ /» 1 * /> 1 1 i* tant to as- by whom a sacrament is formed, is or the last consequence, for certain who i 11 iii ii" ill i unites the the new school would have us believe that the elements were made sign ami the 7 7" "i f i grace. sacraments, i. e,, holy signs, with a promise or grace annexed to them instrumentally by the worthy recipient, and not by Christ, through the agency of His priest in and by the act of consecra- tion. Mr. Gorharn says, " the sign and the grace are happily united by the worthy receiver." In plain terms, each worthy re- ceiver, at the moment of partaking, consecrates the elements for himself; for consecration, as we have seen, is the uniting the signs and the grace, which is the thing signified sacramentally or mystically, according to the will and counsel of Him who or- dained the Sacraments. According to this new doctrine, the consecration of the priest is accounted nothing, or there is re- consecration, and we can only know when or by whom the ele- ments are consecrated, when we can discriminate between the worthy and unworthy receivers of the sacraments. Let us turn it is not the from this wretched and heretofore unheard-of doctrine to the ceiverfbut pages of Ridley and Jewel, where we shall find a sufficient who P ™nse- answer to it. The former divine, in the genuine spirit of Catho- obedience to licity, writes, " In the sacrament is a certain change, in that that commands, bread which was before common bread is now made a lively presentation of Christ's body, and not only a figure, but effec- tuously representeth His body; that even as the mortal body was nourished by that visible bread, so is the internal soul with the heavenly food of Christ's body, which the eyes of faith see, as the bodily eyes see only bread. Such a sacramental mutation I grant to be in the bread and wine, which truly is no small change, but such a change as no mortal man can make, but only that omnipotency of Christ's word." 1 Likewise Bishop Jewel writes, " To appoint a corruptible creature to this use (a sacramental use), and make it an effectual instrument of such high and hidden mysteries ; it is not the work of any mortal man, but only the power and working of the Holy Ghost." Beda saith this, " The creature of bread and wine by the un- speakable sanctification of the Holy Ghost (not by the worthi- 1 Ridley, pp. 274—5. Jewel, Portion iii. p. 497. 56 ness of the receiver) is changed (not into the very real body and blood, but) into the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ." The worthi- Once more ; be admits, " True it is that the sacrament de- receiver pendeth not neither of (the worthiness of) the minister nor of does not ?i»77 give effect (the worthiness of) the receiver, nor of any other, tor, though we to the Sa- » e • craments. be all children of sin, yet is Baptism the sacrament of remission of sin." S. Augustine saith, Securum me fecit Magister meus, de quo Spiritus ejus dicit, Hie est qui baptizat ; " Christ my Master, hath assured me, of whom His own Spirit saith, ' This is He that baptizeth.' " l Neitherdoes And as the worthy receiver does not consecrate or unite the thiness of element and the Word, the sign and the grace, so neither does the receiver . ° , , deprive the the umvorthy receiver unconsecrate or alter the quality ot the Sacraments . , - . of their vir- elements or deprive the Sacraments of their power and virtue. trie and t effect. This will be allowed by every one who acknowledges the Catho- lic doctrine of Consecration. What God hath joined together no man can put asunder. What God hath cleansed and sanctified no pious Christian will presume to call common. Nevertheless as this impiety seems to lurk in the new divinity, it may be satisfactory to know the opinion of learned and orthodox Divines on this subject. Let us then begin with Cranmer. — In his answer to Gardiner, he says : " S. Augustine saith, not, as you feign him, that the substance of this Sacrament is the body and blood of Christ ; but the substance of this Sacrament is bread and wine, as water is in the Sacrament of Baptism, and the same be all one, not altered by the unworthiness of the receivers." 2 The Helvetic Confession is also express upon this point. " Interim sicut a dignitate vel indignitate ministrorum, non cestimamus integritatem Sacramentorum, itaque neque a conditions Stj- mentium. Agnoscimus enim Sacramentorum integritatem, ex fide vel veritate meraque bonitate Dei dependere. Sicut enim Ver- bum Dei manet verum verbum Dei, quo non tantum verba nuda God ALWAYS offers the r ecitantur, dum prpedicatur, sed simul a Deo offeruntur res things pro- 71 3 stenmedV verD i s significata?, vel annunciata?, tamctsi impii vel increduli verba His Word and Sacra- audiant et intellig ant, rebus tamen significatis non peifruantur ; 3" mat'dot eo ( l u °d vera fide non re.cipiant : Ita Sacr amenta verbo, signis, et the'bume 6 ' rebus significatis constantia, manent vera et Integra Sacramento, to t Go h D S fo n r° t non tantum significantia res sacras, sed Deo offerente 1 Jewel, portion iii. p. 401. 3 Cranmer's Works, vol. iii. p. 339. 57 etiam res significatas, tametsi increduli res oblatas non per- failing to , , . ™ .-r-... i i • offer, but to cipant. bit hoc non dantis aut ojjerenhs Dei vitio, sed hominum manforrc- n , .„ ... . . cciving the sine tide uleintimcque accipientiurn culpa : quorum increduhtas signs with- jy n ■ ■ ■ e • m -ft ... out faith in jidem Dei irritam non facit. Rom. in. 1 the pro- mises. To my own mind the reasoning oi' the Helvetic Confession is The sacra- sound and satisfactory, and if so, we may safely conclude that ^"affected the Sacraments neither derive virtue and efficacy from the wor- nesTor'u'n- i • P . ™ . - / ■ i * worthiness ttnuess ot receivers, nor suiter any diminution or the loss ot their of the red- p tents. power and perfectness by their un worthiness. The truth appears to be, that like the Word of God (which itself forms a principal part, nay, makes the Sacrament) the Sacraments always take effect ; to some they are the savour of life unto life, and to others of death unto death. How comes it then to pass that the ad- dition of an element, by Christ's express command, to His om- nipotent word, should make that same word less effectual than when it is preached alone? Sacraments are justly said to be "visible words ;" and in the language of the Homily, " to administer a Sacrament is by the outward word and element to preach to the receiver the inward and invisible grace of God." They exhibit to the eyes what the Word itself alone otherwise conveys to the ears, and it has ever been believed by the orthodox that they preach it more effectually to the soul of man while clothed with its earthly tabernacle. Christ is generally supposed to have ordained the Sacraments "to move, instruct, and teach our dull and heavy hearts by sensible creatures." "If we were no- thing else but soul, He would give us His grace barely and alone, without joining it to any creature, as He doth to His Angels ; but seeing our spirit is drowned in our body, and our flesh doth make our understanding dull, therefore we receive His grace by sensible signs." 2 I said above, the Sacraments in all cases retain their power and virtue because Christ their author is ever present with them. It would be easy to adduce much additional evidence in support Christ of this assertion, but I shall content myself with citing Bishop sistantto" Ridley's opinion as declared in his Disputation against the Pa- teries. 5 * pists. " We behold with the eyes of Faith Him (the true Lord and Saviour of the world) present after grace and spiritually set upon the table, and we worship Him which sitteth above and is worshipped of the Angels. For Christ is always assistant 1 Sylloge Coufessionum, p. 79. 2 Jewel, portion ii. 1101. 58 Their effect however is to His mysteries, as the said Augustine saith. And the Divine Majesty, as saith Cyprian, doth never absent itself from the Divine mysteries ; but this assistance and presence of Christ as in Baptism it is wholly spiritual and by grace, not by any cor- poral substance of the flesh, even so it is here in the Lord's Supper, being rightly and according to the Word of God duly ministered." 1 But notwithstanding Christ is always present and assistant Theybring a * ; tne administration of His Holy Sacraments, and consequently either hfeor tnev always take some effect upon the recipients, I would by deatl1 ' no means be supposed to hold or teach that they always have the same effect. Some ancient, heretics maintained that the Sacraments do neither harm nor good, and if the doctrines which have lately been published should be generally embraced, it is very probable that the heresy will be revived. It appears to me an inevitable consequence of holding the new views. The abettors of them appear to teach at any rate that the Sacraments take either a wholesome effect or none at all — it is certain that they carefully avoid expressing any opinion or leading Churchmen to reflect on the consequence of receiving either Baptism or the Lord's Supper unworthily. But the Scriptures, the old Fathers, our orthodox Reformers, our Prayer Book, and our Articles, are not silent on this solemn matter. They teach us that in such only as worthily receive the Sacraments they have a wholesome effect or operation. But their instruction ends not here : they do not leave us to indulge the fatal opinion that receiving un- worthily entails only the privation of a benefit we might other- wise have received and enjoyed. This awful sentence follows, " but they that receive them unworthily purchase to themselves damnation, as S. Paul saith." I could produce several passages from the writings of Cranmer, Ridley, Jewel, &c. insisting upon this solemn truth that the Sacraments convey either life or death, but at present I shall content myself with instancing the doc- trine of the Archbishop. "As of some the Scriptures saith, that their riches is their redemption, and to some it is their damnation ; and as God's Word to some is life, to some it is death and a snare, as the prophet saith ; and Christ Himself to some is a stone to stumble at, to some is a raising from death ; not by conversion of substances (i.e. it is one and the same word 1 Ridley, 251. 59 and one and the same Christ whatever the effect may be) but by good or evil use, that thing which to the Godly is salvation, to the ungodly is damnation ; so is the water in Baptism and the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Sapper, to the worthy receivers Christ Himself and eternal life, and to the unworthy receivers everlasting death and damnation ; not by conversion of one sub- stance into another (the Sacraments are the same in both cases), but by godly or ungodly use thereof. And therefore, in the Book of the Holy Communion we do not pray absolutely that the Bread and Wine may be made the Body and Blood of Christ, but that unto us 1 in that holy mystery they may be so : that is to say, that we may so worthily receive the same, that we may be partakers of Christ's Body and Blood, and that therewith in spirit and in truth, we may be spiritually nourished." 2 This being then the doctrine of the Scriptures and the com- Application pilers of the Articles, let us see how it .bears upon the case of gmng s m . .. . x ti and posses, for it ; it is the inheritance which I sought for. In like manner siim of His ' ... grace by the when Christ our Lord drew nigh to His passion, He thouqht visible sign _ ° r ... of His si- nood to qive seisin and possession of His grace to His disciples ; craments. * * .... ... so that they might receive His invisible grace by some visible sign. " Chrysostom saith, ' In nobis non simplex aqua operatur ; sed cum accepit gratiam Spiritus abluit omnia peccata.'' Plain or bare water worketh not in us, but when it hath received the grace of the Holy Ghost it washeth away all our sins. 1 This is the Romish error, which was above reproved by Bishop Ridley. 1 I.e. not by any natural virtue or charm contained in the elements. Bishop Jewel assigns to each part of the Sacraments its proper office, but he does not dismember them. 3 Not before enjoyed, but received with it. G9 "So saith Ambrose also, ' Spiritus sanctus descendit et consecrat aquam.' * The Holy Ghost cometh down and halloweth the water.'' And again, ' Prasentia Trinitatis adest.' ' There is the presence of the Trinity.' So saith Cyril, ' Quemadmo- dum viribus ignis aqua, &c.' ' As water thoroughly heated with fire burneth as well as the fire, so the waters which wash the body of him that is baptized are changed into divine power by the working of the Holy Ghost.' So said Leo, sometime a Bishop of Rome. ' Dedit aquae quod dedit matri. Virtus enim Altissimi, et obumbratio Spiritus Sancti, quae fecit ut Maria pareret Salvatorem, eadem fecit ut regeneret unda creden- tem. , 'Christ hath given like pre-eminence to the water of Baptism as He gave to His Mother. For that Power of the High- est and that overshadowing of the Holy Ghost which brought to pass that Mary should bring forth the Saviour of the world, hath also brought to pass that the water should bear anew and regenerate him that believeth.' 1 " Such opinion had the ancient learned fathers, and such reve- rend words they used when they entreated of the Sacraments. For it is not man but God that worketh by them; yet is it not god work, the creature of bread and water, but the soul of man that re- sacranicnts ceiveth the grace of God. These corruptible creatures need it not, ^m^V"" 1 but we have need of God's grace. But this is a phrase of speak- grace" 1 w ing. For the power of God, the grace of God, the presence of the Trinity, the Holy Ghost, the gift of God, are not in the water, but in us. And we were not made because of the Sacra- ments ; but the Sacraments were ordained for our sake." Such is the "precise and unmistakable language''' of Bishop Jewel, whose "writings Mr. Gorham asserts, abound with pas- sages which confirm the view he has taken of the Sacraments." Mr. Gorham either has not an intimate acquaintance with the Bishop's works, or he thinks him very inconsistent with himself. For in the quotation which I have made at some length, Bishop Jewel declares it blasphemy to maintain that the Sacraments are bare, signs, conveying no grace instrumcntally to the soul of the recipient. He asserts that " the grace of God doth always work with His Sacraments," and that by these visible 1 This proves that neither the ancient Church nor Bishop Jewel held that a believer is ordinarily regenerated without Baptism. Faith is not the instrument of Regeneration, hut Baptism, 70 signs we receive His invisible grace. He says the Holy Ghost comcth down and halloiveth the water of Baptism, and changes it into Divine Power, so that it (" the water) should bear anew and regenerate him that bclieveth." So it appears in the opinion of Bishop Jewel, a man may be a true believer and yet not regenerate. Let Mr. Gorham produce a passage equally strong in favour of prevenient grace and its holy concomitants, but till then we fear- lessly assert that Bishop Jewel gives none, not even the slightest, countenance to his views, but pronounces them blasphemy. Is it not somewhat extraordinary that as prevenient grace is of so much higher importance than Baptism, that doctrine is not handled or mentioned by one of our great and orthodox Reformers ? We will now consider the meaning of the several parts of the positive definition, and endeavour to illustrate the most impor- tant words in it. ist. sacra- 1st. The Sacraments are declared to be "certain sure ments be . . certain .sure witnesses," that is to say, such witnesses of God's grace and witnesses. , . good will towards us, as we may feel confident will never deceive us. The word " certa" "sure" is peculiar to the English Arti- cles. But the ancient fathers applied the word " testimonium" " witness" to the Sacraments. " S. Ambrose speaketh thus of Baptism, ' Sacri fontis unda nos abluit ; sanguis Domini nos redemit. Alterum igitur invisibile, alterum visibile testimo- nium Sacramento consequimur spirituali.' The water of the holy font hath washed us; Christ's blood hath redeemed us. Therefore by a spiritual Sacrament we obtain two testimonies, the one invisible, the other visible." 1 What then do these sure witnesses teach us ? The Saxon Confession, as the reader will remember, declares them to show that the blessings promised in the gospel belong and are offered to each one of us. 2 Dr. Becon, Archbishop Cranmer's chaplain, says, Sacraments were ordained " that they should be testimonials unto us to tes- tify and witness how nigh Christ joins Himself unto us, that He gives Himself whole unto us, and that He will dwell in us and endow us with all His benefits and riches, so that whatsoever is Christ's the same is ours. For in taking upon us baptism, we take Christ upon us with all His holiness and righteousness, as S. Paul saith ; ' All ye that are baptized have put on Christ.' Likewise in receiving the Sacrament of the body and blood of 1 Jewel, portion ii. p. 595. ■ Sylloge Confessiouum, p. 277. 71 Christ we receive not only the Sacrament, but Christ Himself, with all the fruits, benefits, and merits of His glorious passion, and healthful death, as Christ Himself saith, 'This is My body which is betrayed or broken for you ' This is My blood which is shed for you unto the remission of your sins.' >n Elsewhere he speaks of Baptism being unto the conscience a " sure testimony and witness of God's favour towards the baptized through His Son Christ." 2 2nd. They are "effectual siffns." The word "effectual" here 2nd. "Effec imports that the signs effect what they signify. Now they signify " a Slsns ' the virtue of the body and blood of Christ which was broken and shed for the remission of our sins, and that as the outward and visible signs touch the body, so surely does the inward and spiritual grace regenerate, cleanse, and nourish the soul of every duly qualified recipient. This word "effectual''' is not found in the Augsburg Confession. It was added to repudiate the heresy of the Anabaptists, &c. and to vindicate the Church of England from the charge so frequently brought against Craumer and his associates by the Papists, of making the Sacraments only signs and figures. The following passage from Cranmer's answer to Gardiner will illustrate the meaning of this part of the Article : " Although they (the consecrated elements) have no holiness in them, 3 yet be they signs and tokens of the marvellous works and holy effects which God worketh in us by His omnipotent power; and they be no vain nor bare tokens, as you would per- a a*™ token suade (for a bare token is that which betokeneth only and giveth de " e nothing, as a painted fire which giveth neither light nor heat) but in the due ministration of the Sacraments, God is present, working with His word and Sacraments."* Effectual signs then give some grace. God is present in their ministration and works loith them. Having observed that the word " sign" is much abused by An inquiry Mr. Gorham, and brought forward to countenance his false doc- meaning of trine, that the Sacrament ot .Baptism is only what Cranmer has sign. defined a bare token to be, I will lay before the reader some passages which will acquaint him with the sense in which it is employed by our Churchmen. I have already shown that in 1 Becon's Catechism, p. 201. - Ibid. p. 203. 3 See above, p. 51, under " Consecration." 4 Cranmer, vol. iii. p. 38. 72 using the word the compilers of the Articles never intended to cast a doubt on the universal presence of Christ in the due ministration of the Sacraments working life in those who receive them worthily, and death in those who presume to receive them unworthily. The word was applied by all the old learned Fathers to the Sacraments, and its primitive use and sense was revived by our Reformers to disprove the monstrous doctrine of it is used in the Church of Rome, transubstantiation. The Papists held and distinction r to the Popish tausht not only that the elements were changed in qualitu bv doctrine of D J . .. the sacra- consecration, but in substance also. Thev stoutly maintained racnts in- J * eluding or that the substance of the bread, for instance, is "one after con- coiitaimng " » o grace- secration, and its place supplied by the real sensible body of Christ which is covered by and contained or included in the form or appearance of the bread which they sometimes term the accidents. To use the words of Ridley, "the Papists believed that the Sacrament was not the Sacrament, but the thing itself whereof it is a Sacrament ; that the creature was the Creator, and that the thing which hath neither life nor sense (alas! such was the horrible blindness) was the Lord Himself, which made the eye to see, and hath given all senses and understanding unto man." 1 It is requisite the reader should know what object the compilers of the Articles had in view when using this word, or he may fall into sad mistakes and be greatly deceived by a few garbled extracts from their writings. Siffn is rqui- Iu ecclesiastical usage the word " sign" is equivalent to " Sa- crament in crament" in its generic and extensive signification. Thus S. sense ol that Augustine saith, " Signs when applied unto Divine things are called Sacraments." 2 Agreeably to this use of the term we find "Sacrament" in the Twenty-eighth Article corresponding to the word "sign" in the Twenty-seventh. " Baptism is not only . . but is also a sign of regeneration, &c. " The Supper of the Lord is not only . . but is rather a Sa- crament of our redemption, &c." It is worth observing that Bishop Jewel calls Baptism " the Sacrament of our Regeneration," 1 Ridley, p. 51. 2 Jewel, portion ii. p. 591. " Sacramentum — est sacrum signum.'' A Sacra- ment is a holy token ; " which definition is common and agreeth indifferently to alt Sacraments." 73 Moreover, the elements arc not signs until after consecration. Elements not I'll ■ P T> - 1 Tl s iS ns an( l Let me support this remark with the testimony ol Bishop Jewel, figures l>cforc con- " Sooner than they (the Papists) will confess, as the ancient Ca- secration. tholic Fathers do, that the Sacrament is a figure of Christ's body, they are content to say, it is a Sacrament before it is a Sacrament, and so a figure before it be a figure. For how can the Sacrament be a Sacrament, or what can the bare bread signify before consecration ? or who commanded it or appointed it so to signify ? S. Ambrose in his time thought it no heresy to write thus : ' Before consecration it is called another kind; after consecration the body of Christ is signified.' ' Thus the old Fathers called the Sacrament a sign or a figure of Christ's body after it was consecrate. But before consecration neither did they ever call it so, fyc." 1 Thus we see in the judgment of Catholic men the elements must be consecrate before they become signs of inward and invisible grace, and we perceive that signs are not such graceless and unprofitable things as they are sometimes mis- represented. A figure must be a material and visible substance 2 what is a . . . . figure 1 and presupposeth the verity of a thing whereof it is a figure, for of a show or fantasy there can be no figure. 3 It must also be like the thing itself of which it is a figure, just as an image must be made after a true pattern, and so resemble its pattern that one can immediately discover the likeness, 4 and recal the original to our recollection, for if we take a sign in the sense of the old Fathers, to be " a thing that, besides the sight it offer- eth unto the eyes, causeth another thing to come into our mind/' 5 we shall find our hearts very much moved and affected by the use of it, especially if the person whom it recals to our remem- brance is beloved by us. Christ certainly left unto us His Sacraments as signs and remembrances of Himself, " as if a man going a far journey, leave a token with his friend, to the end that he, seeing the same may remember his benefits and his friendship ; which token that friend if he love unfeignedly, can- 1 Jewel, portion ii. pp. 596, 7 ; also Cranmer, ii. 383, 394. 2 Jewel, portion i. p. 449. 3 Jewel, portion ii. pp. GO I — 609. 4 Cramner, vol. ii. pp. 391, 2. 5 Jewel, portion i. p. 458. Signum est res prseter speciem quam ingerit sen- sibus, aliud quoddam faciens in cogitationem venire." Aug. De Doctr. Christ. Lib. ii. cap. i. 74 not see without great motion of his mind or without tears." 1 In consideration of these natural effects of signs, rightly under- stood and valued, and by reason of this strong resemblance, the signs take the names of the things signified. And we find Theophylact calling " the bread not only a figure but also the tokens b that body of Christ, giving us by those words to understand that in we receive the Sacrament we do not only eat corporally the bread, which not only the J 1 » mcilts but * s a Sacrament and figure of Christ's body, but spiritually we visible grace ea ^ a ^ so ^ s veri J body an d drink His very blood. ' And this doc- them Xedt ° trine of Theophylact/ says Cranmer, 'is both true, Godly, and comfortable.' " 2 Since then, signs in ecclesiastical language are sanctified, and consecrated by, and mystically united to the all-powerful Word of God ; it is no matter of wonder that our Orthodox Reformers on all occasions contend earnestly for their efficacy. " The Sacraments of Christ," says Bishop Jewel, " notwithstanding they be signs and figures, as they be com- monly called of the old Fathers, yet are they not therefore bare For by these and naked. For God, by them, like as also by His holy word, consccrstcii signs Gon worket/i miqhtilii and effectualhi in the hearts of the faithful." 3 works effec- i • i i tuaiiyinthe The word signum also means " seal," but of that we will speak hearts of the D . ' r faithful. under the Twenty-seventh Article. It is curious to observe how closely the Papists and our would-be new masters resemble each other in their reasoning on the Sacraments. They both conclude that if the Sacraments are "signs" of a Holy Thing, even of the body and blood of Christ, and not actually changed in substance into the real fleshly body and blood of Christ, they can convey no spiritual grace to the soul of man. Mr. Gorham, like the Papists, ac- counts every Sacrament bare, if Christ's body is not realty, i.e. substantially present. Bishop Jewel often complains of the untrue and unjust defamation of the Papists, and says the Church of England does not make " the Sacraments of Christ nothing else but bare tokens," but " thinks and speaks soberly and reverently of them as knowing them to be testimonies of The fact of . J . J the inward God's promises, and the instruments of the Holy Ghost." 4 He and spiritual 1 grace of the a l s o says "the absence of the bodily and fleshly presence does not 1 Jewel, portion ii. p. 591 ; also portion i. p. 467. 2 Cranmer, vol. ii. p. 419. 3 Jewel, portion ii. p. 570. 4 Jewel, portion i. p. 515. 75 in any wise hinder either the substance of the holy mystery or Sacrament the truth of our receiving 1 the inward grace, but Ciiiust is pre- contained in sent among us, verily, effectually, and substantially, and for ever, no wisehin- even unto the consummation of the world." 2 In the following truth of our receiving the passage he strikes at the root of those errors, which is infidelity, inward that refuses to believe more than it sees and looks only on the surface and not on the hidden meaning of God's ordinances. " If," says he, " we conceive none otherwise of the Sacraments than they be of themselves (by which he means in their matter bread, wine, and water) then all our Sacraments be in vain." Therefore the Godly Fathers labour evermore to draw us from the outward visible creatures to the meaning and substance of the Sacraments. And to that end S.Augustine saith, ' In Sacra- In Sacra - 11. merits we rnents we must consider not what they be indeed, but what then must beIed » / •'by the visible siqnifii.'' So it is written in the council of Nice, ' Seest thou things to the » considera- ble water of Baptism fit is not what it was before) ? Consider £ on of * he r ' heavenly thou that heavenly power that lieth hidden in the water.' SoJJ}^ 8 *^- Chrysostom saith, ' The bread before it is sanctified is called bread, but being sanctified by the heavenly grace, by means of the Priest, it is delivered from the name of bread, and thought worthy of the name of the Lord's body notwithstanding the nature of bread remain in it still.' " Then after quoting S. Au- gustine and Bertram he continues, " Thus are the elements of manna, of the bread, of the wine, and of the water, changed, and are not as they were before and therefore in every of the same we honour the body of Christ invisible, not as really and fleshly present, but as being in heaven. This whole matter and the causes thereof S. Augustine seemeth to open in this wise, 'Let the new-christened man be taught that Sacraments be visible signs of heavenly things, and that the things themselves that he seeth not must be honoured in them, and that the same kind and elements (bread, wine, or water) is not so to be taken as it is in daily use. Let him also be taught, what the words mean that and be he hath heard, and what is hidden (and to be believed) in whose image Christ, whose image or likeness that thing (that is that Sacra- ment bear, ment) beareth.' " 3 This is very unlike the language either of Mr. Gorham or Mr. Goode, the latter of whom speaks of the ministration of Baptism in a most unbecoming and irreverent 1 Jewel, portion i. p. 476. - Ibid. p. 500. 3 Ibid. pp. 545, 6. 76 manner, and seems either ignorant or forgetful of the holiness of the water after consecration, of Christ's spiritual presence in His own Divine mysteries, and of the grace of God alway work- ing with His Sacraments. " You have only to sprinkle the child with water and utter a few words and the thing is done. 5 ' 1 This is the light manner in which he mentions the sacramental water, the solemn words of Christ's institution invoking the Holy Trinity, and the investing a child with all the graces and privi- leges of a Christian ; one would think he were speaking of some feat of a juggler instead of the ministration of Baptism by a Christian Bishop. 3rd. -of 3rd. " Of grace." What is this grace? And when is it grace." , " . . given ? The Saxon Confession declares it to be " the gratuitous remission of sins, reconciliation with God, and the whole benefit of redemption." 2 Bishop Ridley tells us what it is and when it is given. " The society or conjunction with Christ through the Holy Ghost is grace ; and by the Sacrament (not by a preve- nient act of grace) we are made the members of the mystical body of Christ, for that by the Sacrament the part of the body is grafted in the Head/' 3 It is here too evident for denial or evasion that Bishop Ridley maintained we are not made members of Christ before we receive the Sacrament (can we then be said to be regenerated and to be Christians ?) and that by the Sacra- ment we are grafted into His head and made part of His body. This doctrine, when maintained by the Bishop of Exeter, Mr. Goode is pleased falsely to call the " opus operatum" virtue of Baptism, hoping to induce the unlearned to turn away their eyes from the truth by creating a suspicion of latent Popery. As this part of the Article will be fully illustrated when we treat of the Twenty-seventh Article, I shall only add one passage from Bishop Jewel's apology. It is this, "We affirm that Christ doth truly and presently (sese prsesentem) give Himself wholly in (not before) His Sacraments ; in Baptism, that we may put Him on, and in His Supper that we may eat Him by faith and spirit, and may have everlasting life by His cross and blood. Not given And we say not this is done slightly or coldly but effectually and cokiiy or/or- truly. ,>i But Messrs. Gorham and Goode declare that the bless- 1 Mr. Goode's Letter, p. 36. 2 Sylloge Confessionum, p. 277. 3 Ridley, p. 239. 4 Jewel, portion iii. p. 13, 523. 77 fogs of regeneration and adoption {supposed by them, but by no mallj/, b"t ancient Divine, to be bestowed by a prevenient act of grace) " are, udtraiy' in suitable cases, formally made over, and in that sense ' (after being long ago, it may be, given, bestowed, and possessed, are again)' given in and by Baptism." 1 This formal giving means, I presume, a fantasy of giving in outward appearance, and by ostentatious ceremony, and is in fact no giving at all, but pub- licly reminding the " suitable cases" of favours already received. If it be a giving it is certainly not an effectual and true giving (such as all ancient Divines and our own Church mean) ; it is not a real giving of blessings which were not before enjoyed, but conveyed by the instrumentality of the Sacraments. 4th. "By which He doth work invisibly in us. 5 ' In these 4th - " »y J . J which He words the Church teaches us three important truths: 1st, that doHl work 1 _ _ invisibly in God is the efficient cause of all the benefits which mankind re- us -" ceive in the use of the Sacraments. 2nd. That the Sacraments are God's instruments by which in His wisdom He sees fit to work, and to convey His grace. And 3rd, that by these instru- ments He works invisibly in us. 1st. God is the efficient cause, &c. This truth is opposed Gon is the to the erroneous teaching of the Church of Rome, that Sacra- cause" 4 ments contain and confer 2 grace by their own natural or super- natural virtue " after such manner of speaking as we say potions and drinks contain health." But as Bishop Jewel remarks, this illustration disproves the doctrine the Papists wish to establish — for drinks and potions verily and indeed contain not the health of the patient, therefore Sacraments verily and indeed contain not the grace of God. In a certain sense however we may use the expression, for "the special grace of the passion of Christ is contained in the Sacraments of the Church, as the power of the worker is contained in the instrument wherewith he viorketh." 3 The Sacraments then though not efficient are yet The sacra- instrumental causes of graces, &c. which is the second truth as- £|trumenta serted and to be established. The antecedent to " by which" causes " or "per quse" is "signs" or "signa;" and as the agreement be- tween this relative and its antecedent is in gender, number, and ' Mr. Goode's Letter, pp. 25, 26. s See Canon vi. of the seventh session of Council of Trent, held March 3, 1547. 1 Jewel, portion iii. p. 445. 78 person according to the strict rules of grammar, we conclude this relative is absolutely connected with its antecedent. The Belgic Confession is a little more explicit than our own Article, and asserts that " Sacraments are signs," &c. " by which, as by a medium, God Himself, by virtue of the Holy Spirit, works in us." I shall now therefore bring forward proof that the doctrine of the Articles, that God works by means of His Sacraments, is the uniform doctrine of the compilers of the Articles. Cran- crammer mer says in his answer to Gardiner, " You gather of my say- Gon uscth at ings unjustly, that Christ is indeed absent, for I say according mentsa^His to God's Word and the doctrine of the old writers, that Christ t'o S workby! is present in His Sacraments, as they teach also that He is pre- sent in His Word, when He worketh mightily by the same in the hearts of the hearers. By which manner of speech it is not meant that Christ is corporally present in the voice or sound of the speaker, which sound pcrisheth as soon as the words be spoken, but this speech meaneth, that He worketh with His Word, using the voice of the speaker as His instrument to work by, as He useth also His Sacraments, whereby (i.e. by which Sacraments) He worketh and therefore is said to be present in them." 1 ridlkt af- Ridley, as we have seen, expressly declares it to be true that GoD S gives grace is given by the Sacraments but as by an instrument. The the Tacrt hy inward virtue and Christ give the grace through the Sacrament. HiT^nstru/ Again he says, " by the Sacrament we are made the members of the mystical body of Christ, for that by the Sacrament the part of the body is grafted in the head." Once more, "This Sa- crament hath a promise of grace, made to those who receive it worthily, because grace is given by it as by an instrument ; not that Christ hath transfused grace into the bread and wine." 2 Is this giving & formal or an actual giving? The new school also assert that the grace of spiritual regeneration "is never given by virtue of Baptism." 3 Ridley asserts that " grace is given by the Sacraments, and that the inward virtue and Christ give the grace through the Sacraments, 1 " and this he main- tains when stoutly arguing for the truth against Papists, and at the peril of his life. If to teach that grace is given by virtue of the 1 Cranmer's Works, vol. iii. p. 38. 2 Ridley, pp. 239, 241. 3 Mr. (-node's Letter, p. 43. 7!) Sacraments is teaching the opus operatum virtue of the Sacra- ments, Ridley must have so taught. We will next adduce the evidence of Bishop Jewel, first advertising the reader that the Bishop Papists taught that the presence in Baptism was different from