MASTER NEGA TIVE NO. 93-81506 MICROFILMED 1993 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK as part of the . r. • ^» "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project Funded by the NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United States Code - concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or other reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.*' If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of '*fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of the copyright law. A UTHOR: GIBSON, EDGAR C. TITLE: THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF THE PLACE: LONDON DATE: 1896 i-w. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT PIBUOGR APHIC MfCRn^ oRM TARni?^ Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliographic Record I^^^S^, E^^^t (;hi.Tl«. 5j .wmriev 1848-4 ru L f J*^^ ♦'^7f>(.Wme nTficles of the. bhMTch pf Engrhmd exphmed wilh nr, mlrodMC .1 Lo-ndon 1896- 126302 0. /I Master Negative # •> Restrictions on Use: TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA FILM SIZE: IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA DATE FILMED: (^ UA REDUCTION RATIO: lU IB UB — - E Association for Information and Image Management 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100. Silver Spring. Maryland 20910 301/587-8202 A /, A Centimeter 1 iiiiliiiiliiiiiiiiiliiiiliiiiliiiii 8 10 n 12 13 14 15 I I I Inches U Jimlmjimh^^ mm iiliii 2 3 1.0 1^ M 2.5 |w 1^ IUb Hill ^'7 I.I 9mm ILb L^ u •A u IbUb 1.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.25 / MfiNUFPCTURED TO RUM STPNOPIRDS BY fiPPLIED IMAGE. INC. r 93 7- n (^35 iu the Cita of Si^cw 3ov\i. 1895 (Siuctt ituouvjmoxtsls. • » I i'«l r 1 5i, ' J » >; -i^iisrm^f^wwi J Ml 111 t h* f k M %. V*. THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND \ • .» > > ) • It • • • • • • t } > ) • * • • • > • • • • » • » • ••••• > ,1 • 1 *•* •••••* ■••*l* • • • ••. > • • » • THE • 1 1 • • •• t « • ■ • .• • • > I • • • • * * • > » THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND P' / V EXPLAINED WITH AN INTRODUCTION By EDGAR C. S. GIBSON, D.D. VICAR OF LEEDS AND PREBENDARY OF WELLS SOMETIME PRINCIPAL OF WELLS THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE IN TWO VOLUMES VOL. I ARTICLES I-VIII I \ METHUEN & CO. 36 ESSEX STREET, W.C. LONDON 1896 • • • • at ■ •• • • • • * • • • • •• • » • • • . • • • • . • • • • '.• . • • ••• '• ••• ••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • GO SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS « PAGE Introduction . • 1 The Forty-Two Articles of 1553 12 The Elizabethan Articles 30 The Royal Declaration 47 Puritan Attempts to amend or supplement the Articles . . 51 History of Subscription to the Articles 57 The Chief Divisions of the Articles 69 The Forty-Two Articles of 1553 70 Article I.— Of Faith in the Holy Trinity .... 90 The Grounds on which the Doctrine is accepted ... 92 The History of the Doctrine in the Church, and the Growth of Technical Phraseology in connection with it . . . 103 The Explanation of the Doctrine 112 Article II. — Of the Word or Son op God which was made Very Man 119 The Divinity and Eternal Generation of the Son . . .121 The Incarnation 185 Tlie Atonement 144 Article III. — Of the going down of Christ into Hell . . 159 The Meaning of the word Hell 163 The Scriptural Grounds for the Doctrine, and the Object of the Descent 166 The History of the Doctrine in the Church, and of the Clause in the Creed referring to it , 175 Article IV. — Of the Resurrection of Christ . . . .181 The Resurrection of Christ 183 The Ascension and Session at the Right Hand of the Father . 189 The Return to Judgment 196 V A^ /•.--. t^ CNJ vi CONTENTS PAOK Article V. — Of the Holy Ghost 198 The Divinity of the Holy Ghost 199 The Distinct Personality 201 The Doctrine of the Procession 209 Article VI. — Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures FOR Salvation 230 The Position of Holy Scripture as the Sole Source of Necessary Doctrine 233 The Canon of Holy Scripture 248 ThePositionof" The Other Books" 274 Article VI I. — Of the Old Testament 280 The Old Testament is not contrary to the New . . . 283 The Old Fathers did not look only for Transitory Promises . 287 The Ceremonial and Civil Law of the Jews is not binding on Christians 294 The Moral Law remains of Lasting and Universal Obligation . 294 Article VIII.— Of the Three Creeds 296 Creeds in General 297 The Apostles' Creed 805 The Nicene Creed 316 The Athanasian Creed 829 Index . 857 f .*. .*. » » I > > > • » • « « 9 > • THE THIRTY-IflNE ARTICLES INTEODUCTION 1. Introductory It has been pointed out^ that in the course of the Church's history there are two special eras of what is sometimes called " Symbolism," i.e. Creed-Making, or the composition of formularies of faith, — the fourth and fifth centuries, and the sixteenth. The reason for this is obvious. Each age was emphatically an age of religious controversy. After the victory of Constantine over Maxentius and the publication of the Edict of Milan by the joint Emperors Constantine and Licinius (ad. 313), religious questions and discussions attained a publicity which had hitherto been impossible. There followed, of necessity, a period of definition of the Church's faith. The great Arian controversy had already begun when Constantine found himself sole ruler of the Eoman Empire; and now questions were asked as to the meaning of the Church's creed which, when once formally raised, required a clear answer. Thus the terminology of philosophy was pressed into the service of the Christian faith, in order to interpret to thoughtful minds in their own language the belief t * Church Quarterly Review, vol. vii. p. 134. • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • •' • •••••• • •• • • • • * * • • ... ••• ••• I « ••: ••« •• • ••• *• ••• •••••• ••• ••. • • • • • • 2 .... :T}iE..T^4RTy:NINE ARTICLES • •,*• • •••• ••..«• • • • •• • •• •••*••• •••••• which had been implicitly held by Christians from the beginning. In this way, in the " Nicene " Creed and the doctrinal decisions of the first four General Councils, the fundamental Articles of the faith were once for all de- fined, and since then the Church has never varied in her expression of them. The formularies of faith belonging to the sixteenth century are of a very different character. Instead of the crisp, short summaries of the main articles of Christian belief, drawn up in the form of creeds, we are confronted with verbose and lengthy " Confessions," in the form of Articles, bristling with controversial points, and often negative rather than positive, denouncing and protesting against some supposed error, but failing to set forth in any systematic form the definite positive truth to be held on the subject. The religious upheaval of the time had let loose a spirit of universal questioning. " Authority " was widely discarded ; and while the fundamental articles of the faith were once more passed in review men did not rest content with the consideration of these, but examined afresh the whole circle of Christian doctrine, and threw doubts on matters only remotely bearing upon the faith once for all committed to the saints. Moreover, fresh complications arose from the confusion in which the question of the duties and rights of the civil power was entangled. In an age when the foundations of the system on which society had rested for centuries were seriously shaken, such subjects as the right of the magis- trate to interfere with the belief of the individual, and the limits of his authority over conscience, naturally assumed a prominence hitherto unknown. Thus it became necessary for all bodies of Christians to state their position on topics which might otherwise have re- mained undefined; and there sprang into existence that bewildering mass of elaborate confessions of faith, ex- 1 INTRODUCTORY 3 tending to subjects which belong to the borderland between religion and politics, which forms one of the special characteristics of this century. If the fourth century was the age of Creeds, the sixteenth is the a^e of Articles. ° It will be seen, then, that the Thirty-Nine Articles do not stand alone ; nor can they be rightly interpreted without reference to various other documents belonging to the same age, or without some knowledge of their history. Not only are they the last of a series of formularies of faith, issued with more or less authority by the English Church during the course of the Eefor- mation, but also, in order to be rightly understood they require comparison with other, not altogether dissiinilar forms put forth elsewhere. ' The earUer formularies put forth in the Church of England are the following : — 1. The Ten Articles of 1536. This document IS noteworthy as bemg the first confession issued by the Enghsh Church in this period of transition. As might be expected from a consideration of the date at which it appeared, it " bore the character of a compromise between the old and new learning." ^ It was the work of the Convocation, Cromwell having conveyed to that body the King s wish that controversies should be put an end to " through the determination of you and of his whole parliament." The Articles were ten in number and were divided into two parts, the first five on doctrine • 1. The prmcipal Articles concerning our Faith 11 The Sacrament of Baptism. III. The Sacrament of Penance. IV. The Sacrament of the Altar. V. Justification In the second part there followed five "concerning the laudable ceremonies used in the Church" VI Of Images. VII. Of Honouring of Saints. VIII. Of Pray- ' Dixon's ffistory of the Se/omuUion, voL i. p. 415. 4 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ing to Saints. IX. Of Rites and Ceremonies. X. Of Purgatory.^ As evidence of their transitional character the follow- ing facts may be noted : — (a) Penance is spoken of as a sacrament necessary for man's salvation, but is the only rite to which the name of a sacrament is applied, besides Baptism and the Eucharist. (6) While the doctrine of the Real Presence is strongly asserted no mention is made of Transubstantiation. (c) Images are to be retained as representers of virtue and good example, but superstitious worshipping of them is to be abolished. Saints are to be honoured, and held in reverence, and their prayers are to be asked for by us, " so that it be done without any vain superstition, so as to think that any saint is more merciful or will hear us sooner than Christ, or that any saint doth serve for one thing more than other, or is patron of the same." {d) Many medieval ceremonies are retained as useful, though having no power to remit sins. («) Prayers for the departed are to be continued, but abuses connected with the doctrine of purgatory are abolished. The Articles, when signed by Convocation and approved by the King, were published with the following title : — " Articles devised by the Kinges highness majestic, to stablyshe Christen quietnes and unitie amonge us, and to avoid contentious opinions, which articles be also approved by the consent and determination of the hole clergie of this realm. — Anno mdxxxvi." Thus, although the initiative was claimed for the " supreme head," care was taken to assert the approval of the clergy, as represented in Convocation. 1 The Articles are given in full in Hardwick's History of the Articles, Appendix i., and in Bishop Lloyd's Formularies of Faith in the lUign of Benry FIILy p. 1. INTRODUCTORY 5 2. In the following year, 1537, this formulary was superseded by The Institution of a Christian Man, or, as it is commonly called, " The Bishops' Book." This document contained " the exposition or interpretation of the Common Creed, of the Seven Sacraments, of the Ten Commandments, and of the Pater Noster, and the Ave Maria, Justification, and Purgatory." The articles on Justification and Purgatory are copied verbatim from those in the Ten Articles, and in general the character of the teaching contained in the two documents is very similar. The " Seven Sacraments " are retained, but abuses connected with extreme unction are carefully restrained, and a marked distinction is drawn between Baptism, the Eucharist, and Penance, and all other sacraments. The book was prepared by a Commission, which sat at Lambeth, under the presidency of Cranmer, and it was published in the name of the two archbishops, " and all other the bishops, prelates, and archdeacons of this realm," with the signatures of the archbishops, all the diocesan bishops, and twenty-five doctors. " But as it was neither passed by Convocation nor by Parliament, it had no other authority than could be given by the names of those who had signed it, and being printed at the King's Press." ^ 3. In 1543 there appeared a revised edition of this work, under the title of The Necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian Man. UnUke its predecessor this work received the authority of Con- vocation, although the title-page contained a declaration that it was " set forth by the king's majesty of England," and the preface was from the pen of the " supreme head," whence the volume was commonly known as the King's Book. While much of the earlier is embodied in it, yet * Dixon's History of the Reformation, vol. i. p. 529. The Bishops* Book may be seen in Foi-Tiiularies of Faith, p. 21. 6 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES on a comparison of the two, the reactionary character of the King's Book is very clear. In many points a return to the old system of things is evident, as might be ex- pected from a publication belonging to the later years of Henry's reign, when the Statute of the Six Articles (the " whip with six strings ") was in force. The section exalting the Eucharist and Penance over the other sacra- ments is omitted. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is definitely maintained, although the word itself is avoided.^ The section on extreme unction is rewritten, and the celibacy of the clergy is enforced. Important as these three formularies of faith are, as marking the transitional character of the reign of Henry Vin., and the hesitating, gradual course of the doctrinal changes introduced, yet, for our present purpose, their importance is less than that of another document which was prepared in 1538, but never published nor in any way imposed upon the Church. While the works just considered enable us to see something of the jpractical system which our reformers had before them, and with which they were called upon to deal, yet it must be ^ The Eucharist "among all the sacraments is of incomparable dignity and virtue, forasmuch as in the other sacraments the outward kind of the thing which is used in them remaineth still in their own nature and sub- stance unchanged ; but in this most high sacrament of the altar, the creatures which be taken to the use thereof, as bread and wine, do not remain still in their own substance, but, by the virtue of Christ's word in the consecration, be changed and turned to be the very substance of the body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ. So that, although there appear the form of bread and wine, after the consecration, as did before, and to the outward senses nothing seemeth to be changed, yet must we, forsaking and renouncing the persuasion of our senses in this behalf, give our assent only to faith, and to the plain word of Christ, which affirmeth that substance there offered, exhibited, and received, to be the very precious body and blood of our Lord, as is plainly written by the evan- gelists and also by St. V&wl." —FormulaTnes of Faith, p. 262. The cor- responding passage in the Bishop's Book is very different in tone and character (see p. 100). INTRODUCTORY noticed that no trace of their language can be found in our present series of Articles. For the source of these we must turn to a different quarter. In 1538 a small number of Lutheran divines from Germany were invited to this country by Henry, in order to confer with a committee of Anglican divines, and, if possible, draw up a joint Confession of Faith, with a view to the comprehen- sion of both Anglicans and Lutherans in one communion. The invitation was accepted. A mixed committee met, imder the presidency of Cranmer, to consider the subject. So long as the discussion was confined to matters of faith, agreement was arrived at with comparative ease. By the use of general terms, and (in some cases) designedly ambiguous formularies, it was found possible to com- pile a number of propositions which proved satisfactory to both parties. Thirteen Articles were thus prepared on the following subjects : — I. De unitate Dei et Trinitate Personarum. II. De Peccato Originali. III. De duabus Christi Naturis. IV. De Justificatione. V. De Ecclesia. VI. De Baptismo. VII. De Eucharistia. VIII. De Poenitentia. IX. De Sacramentorum usu. X. De Ministris Ecclesiae. XL De Ritibus Ecclesise. XII. De Rebus Civilibus. XIII. De Corporum resurrectione et judicio extremo. Of these the first three are taken almost word for word from the Confession of Augsburg, the influence of which may be traced in other parts of the articles as well. But it is noteworthy that the sections on Baptism, the Eucharist, and Penance are either entirely new or largely rewritten, while in that on the Use of Sacraments the language of the Lutheran Con- fession has been considerably strengthened, in order to emphasise the character of sacraments as channels of grace — apparently in order to satisfy the Anglican divines. But, while agreement on the subjects mentioned was 8 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES secured with comparative ease, divergence of opinion was at once manifested when the committee passed from the consideration of doctrine to the discussion of questions connected with discipline. The summer was wasted in fruitless negotiations. The approach of winter led to the return of the Germans to their own land. Although a second mission was sent by them in the following year, nothing was done, and the scheme for a joint Confession of Faith seems to have been quietly allowed to drop. The Articles were not made public. They were not even submitted to Convocation, nor did they ever receive any sanction or authority whatever. Their importance how- ever, historically, is very great, for they form the link between the Confession of Augsburg and our own Articles. A comparison of the three documents makes it perfectly clear that it was only through the medium of the Book of the Thirteen Articles that the Lutheran formulary in- fluenced the Forty-Two Articles of 15 53, from which our own are descended. "The expressions in Edward vi.'8 formulary, usually adduced to prove its connection with the Confession of Augsburg, are also found in the Book of Articles, while it contains others which can be traced as far as the Book of Articles, but which will be sought for in vain in the Confession of Augsburg.'^ Before proceeding to the consideration of the Edwardian Series of Articles (the immediate predecessor of our own), it will be well to give a very brief notice of some of the doctrinal formularies issued on the Continent, a comparison with which may sometimes tend to throw light on the meaning of the Anglican statements. The position of the Lutherans is shown by the Con- ^ Jenkyns' Cranmer^ i. xxiv., quoted in Hardwick's History of the Articles, p. 61. The Thirteen Articles may be seen in Hardwick, Appendix ii. V INTRODUCTORY 9 fession of Augsburg. This document contains an apologetic statement of their position, as distinct from that of both Romans and Zwinglians, on the special points of doctrine and practice at that time actually in controversy. It was originally drawn up by Melancthon, revised by Luther and others, and presented to the Emperor Charles v. at the Diet of Augsburg, 1530. It contains twenty-eight articles, and is divided into two parts: (1) On doctrine, comprising twenty-one articles; and (2) on ecclesiastical abuses, seven articles. As we have just seen, it was used by the framers of the Thirteen Articles of 1538, and has through them influenced the English Articles. But since its influence on the Anglican formulary was only indirect, there is no necessity to give a fuller account of it here.^ A second Lutheran document to be noticed is the Confession of Wtirtemberg. This contains thirty- five articles. It was framed on the model of the Confession of Augsburg, and presented to the Council of Trent by the ambassadors of the State of Wtirtemberg, in 1552. It is mentioned here, because, as will be shown further on, it proved of considerable use to Archbishop Parker in the preparation of the Elizabethan Articles of 1563.2 Meanwhile, while the Lutherans were thus formulating their views, the Swiss and French reformers, who sym- pathised with the teaching of Zwingli and Calvin, were busy with the preparation of a number of documents expressing their views. Of these, it will be sufiicient to mention the following: — The Confessio BasiUensis ^ The Confession of Augsburg is contained in Sylloge Confessionum. For some account of it, see Schaff's History of the {Lutheran) Hc/onnation, vol. ii. p. 706. * For the Confession of Wiirtemberg (which is not given in the Sylloge Confessionum), see Le Plat, Monumenta, iv. 420. 10 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES INTRODUCTORY 11 !! i I (1534) and the Confessio HelYetica I. (1536), both of which are Zwinglian. The Confessio HelYOtica II. (1564), which is largely influenced by Calvin. Still more^ strongly Calvinistic is the Gonfessio Fidei Gallicana, containing forty articles. This was ap- parently drawn up in 1559, and presented in the following year to Francis ii. of France, and in 1561 to Charles ix. On the same lines is the Gonfessio Belgica of 1562 (containing thirty -seven articles), which obtained wide acceptance among the congregations of the " Eeformed " in the Netherlands.^ These docu- ments, just enumerated, closely resemble each other, and are of a somewhat ambitious character, for they appear to be intended as complete schemes of theology, embrac- ing the whole circle of Christian doctrine. It is needless to say that none of these compilations have the slightest connection with our own Articles. They are only men- tioned here, because a comparison with them not seldom serves to bring out the marked contrast that there is between the unguarded and extravagant positions taken up by some of the foreign reformers, and the judicious moderation and wise avoidance of dogmatic assertions on points of small practical importance which may be observed in the English Articles. The formal positions to which the Church of Rome committed herself at this period will be found in the Ganons and Decrees of the Gouncil of Trent. The Council first met in December 1545 in the pontificate of Paul iii. By July 1547 ten sessions had been held. Shortly afterwards the CouncU was 1 These Zwinglian and Calvinistic Confessions will all be found in Niemeyer's Collectio Confessionuni in Ecdcsiis Reformatis Puhlicatarum. For some account of the Swiss formularies, see Schaff's History of the Swiss He/oi^ation, vol. i., p. 217 seq. No mention is made in the text of the Westminster Confession (1643), as it belongs to a somewhat different period. i'- i suspended for some years. Its sittings were resumed by order of Julius iir. in 1551, and between September 1551 and April 1553 six more sessions (xi.— xvi.) were held. The Council was then once more suspended, nor did it meet again until the Papacy of Pius iv. ; sessions xviL-xxv. being held in the course of the years 1562, 1563, and the final confirmation of the Council being dated January 26, 1564. It will appear from this enumeration of dates that Rome was stereotyping her doctrine just at the same time that the Church of England was revising her expression of it. Many of the same subjects were considered at Trent as in Eng- land. In some cases priority of treatment belongs to Rome, in others to England. It becomes, therefore, a matter of importance to ascertain in each case whether our reformers were confronted with the authoritative statements to which Rome was formally committed by her representatives at Trent, or whether they had before them merely the popular doctrine and the current practices. Thus, in regard to the number and authority of the canonical books, the subject was dis- cussed at Trent during the fourth session of the Council in 1546. So also, in the earlier sessions held during 1546 and 1547, such subjects as original sin, justifica- tion, and the sacraments generally were considered, and canons concerning them were drawn up. On all these matters, therefore, it is obvious that the compilers of the Edwardian as well as of the Elizabethan Articles had the formal decisions of the Council before them. The Eucharist, Penance, and extreme unction were discussed in sessions xiii. and xiv., held in October and November 1551; thus, in this case, the decrees were issued while the Forty-Two Articles were in course of preparation but before their actual publication in 1553. The question of com- munion in both kinds was not considered by the Council till 12 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES session xxi. (July 1562), the sacrifice of the Mass in session xxii. (September 1562), and the doctrine of Purgatory, invocation of saints, adoration of images and relics not till the very last session of the Council held in December 1563, some months after the publication of the Elizabethan Articles. On all these matters, there- fore, priority of treatment belongs to the Anglican formulary, and it is impossible to take its statements as intended to refer directly to the formal decrees of the Council of Trent. The so-called " Creed of Pope Pius IV. " is of still later date, as it was only published in a bull dated November 13, 1564. 2. The Forty- Two Articles of 1553. The subjects to be considered in this section may be divided thus : (a) The history and authority of the Forty-Two Articles. (h) Their object and contents, (c) Their sources. (a) The history and authority of the Forty- Two Articles, The first draft of these was certainly the work of Archbishop Cranmer, the impress of whose mind they bear throughout. Edward vi. had come to the throne in 1547, but, though the liturgical reforms moved rapidly, ^ some time was suffered to elapse before the publication of any doctrinal as distinct from liturgical or homileticaP formulary. According to Strype,^ in the year 1553 the King and his Privy Council ordered the archbishop to 1 In 1548 was published the ** Order of the Communion," an English form for communicating the people in both kinds. The first complete English Prayer Book followed in 1549, the English Ordinal was published in 1550, and in 1552 the first Prayer Book was superseded by " the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI." -The first Book of the Homilies was published in 1547. ^ Cranmer, bk. ii. ch. xxvii. m THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 13 frame a book of articles of religion for the preserving and maintaining peace and unity of doctrine in this Church, that being finished they might be set forth by public authority. But at a still earlier date we find indications that a series of Articles had been framed by the archbishop and used by him as a test of orthodoxy. ^ This was in all probability " an early draft of the great formulary afterwards issued as the Forty-Two Articles." ^ By Cranmer they were submitted to other bishops for their revision and approval. In May 1552 they were laid before the Council. In September of the same year they were returned to the archbishop, who added the titles upon every matter, and sent them to Sir William Cecil and Sir John Cheke, the King's secretary and tutor. Shortly after this they were submitted to the six royal chaplains, " to make report of their opinions touching the same."^ The MS. signed by the chaplains is happily 1 On December 27, 1549, Hooper writes to.Bullinger as follows :— " The Archbishop of Canterbury entertains right views as to the nature of Christ's presence in the Supper, and is now very friendly towards myself. He has some articles of religion, to which all preachers and lecturers in divinity are required to subscribe, or else a licence for teaching is not granted them ; and in these his sentiments respecting the eucharist are pure and religious, and similar to yours in Switzerland. "—See Original Letters (Parker Society), p. 71. The letter is wrongly dated "February 27 " in Hardwick's History of the Articles, p. 72. Again, on February 5, 1550, Hooper writes to the same correspondent in almost identical terms : «* The Archbishop of Canterbury, who is at the head of the King's Council, gives to all lecturers and preachers their licence to read and preach ; every one of them, however, must previously subscribe to certain Articles, which if possible I wUl send you ; one of which respecting the Eucharist is plainly the true one, and that which you maintain in Switzerland."— (^ri^^Tia/ Letters, p. 76. , , * ^. 1 j ri. a Hardwick, p. 72. Hooper apparently took theee Articles, and after modifying them in an arbitrary fashion to bring them more into harmony with his own opinions, offered them as a test to the clergy of his diocese at his visitations in 1551 and 1552.— See Dixon's History 0/ th^ Jte/ormation, vol. iii. p. 463. 8 See Strype's Crawner, bk. ii ch. xxvii., and Hardwick, p. 73 seq. 14 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES stni in existence, and enables us to see exactly the form which the documents had by this time reached.^ The Articles are forty-five in number, that on the Eucharist, which afterwards appeared as XXIX., being broken up into four separate articles ; and besides this difference of enumeration and division they differ in various other not unimportant particulars from the series as finally published. In November they were remitted to the archbishop, for "the last corrections of his pen and judgment." A few days later the document was re- turned to the Council, and on June 19, 1553, a mandate was issued in the King's name to the officials of the province of Canterbury, requiring subscription from all clergy, schoolmasters, and members of the university on admission to degrees.2 This is really all that is known, for certain, of their history. But we find that the Articles thus offered for subscription in June 1553 had been issued to the public in English in the previous month. They were published at the press of R. Grafton, and bore the following title : — " Articles agreed on by the bishops and other learned men in the Synod at London, in the year of our Lord God mdlii., for the avoiding of controversy in opinions, and the estab- lishment of a Godly concord in certain matters of religion." ^ See Lemon's Calendar of State Papers, '* Domestic," 1647-1580, p. 46. The Articles signed by the chaplains are printed in the last edition of Hardwick, Appendix iii. Mr. Dixon {Beforrnation, iii. p. 481 seq.) shows (after Dr Lorimer) that the article on "The Book of Prayers and Ceremonies of the Church of Eugland " (No. XXXV. in the published series, XXXVIII. in the original draft) was considerably modified after the Articles had been submitted to the chaplains, probably owing to the remonstrances of John Knox. •* All that had appeared in the first draft on the subject of the ceremonies of the Prayer Book was cancelled, and nothing remained save what referred to the doctHri^ of the book, to which Knox had token no exception."— Lorimer's Knoxin England, p. 126. 2 The mandate is given in Wilkins' CovcUia, vol. iv. p. 79 ; cf. Strype, Ecclesiastical Memorials, bk. ii. ch. xxii. THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF ,553 15 Two other editions were published shortly afterwards in which the Articles were appended to a catechism that had previously been prepared. 1. An English edition, published by Day: "A short catechism or plain instruction, containing the sum of Chnstian learnmg, set forth by the king's majesty's authonty, for all schoolmasters to teache. To this catechism are adjoined the articles agreed upon by the bishops and other learned and godly men, in the last convocation at London, in the year of our Lord mdui for to root out the discord of opinions and establish the agreement of true religion. Hkewise published by the king 8 majesty's authority, 1553." 2. A Latin edition, published by Wolfe: "Cate- chismus Brevis Christian* discipline summam continens ommbus ludimagistris authoritate regia commendatus. Hmc Catechismo adjuncti sunt articuli, de quibus in ultima Synodo Londinensi Anno Domini mdui. ad tollen- dam opmionum dissensionem et consensum vere religionis firmandum inter Episcopos et alios eruditos atque pios v^os^c^nvenerat : Eegia similiter authoritate promulgati, bv wHrrv. 'T !^. ^'^^ considemtion of the autJu,rity by which these Articles were imposed upon the Church Had they really received the sanction of Convocation I^e records of Convocation unfortunately perished in the great fire of London, and it is therefore impossible t^ appea to them; but, even were they forthcom ng t h doubtful whether a reference to them would decide the question for Fuller, who had the opportunit^ of x amining them before their destruction, tells us t'hat th^ were but one degree above blanks, scarce affording the names of the clerks assembled therein." » To th^same effect Heylin writes: "The Acts of this GoZ^Zl ' Church History, vol. ii. p. 400 (Ed. Nichols). 16 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I were so ill kept that there remains nothing on record touching their proceedings, except it be the names of such of the bishops as came thither to adjourn the house." ^ In the face of these statements it would appear that the acts of the Synod must either have been kept with culpable negligence, or that there was deliberate mutilation in the following reign. Whichever be the true explanation of the blank character of the records, it would appear that no help would be obtained from them were they still existing, for the solution of the question before us. We are left, then, to search for any evi- dence from other quarters which may throw light upon it. On the one hand, it will be noticed that the authority of Convocation was claimed for the Articles in each of the three editions published, and that, where they are appended to the catechism, this authority is claimed for them alone, and not for the catechism. This latter is said, in the King's injunction prefixed to it, to have been " written by a certain godly and learned man," and committed to the examination of " certain bishops and other learned men, whose judgments we have in great estimation " ; ^ but not a word is said concerning its submission to the Synod, whereas, in each edition of the Articles, they are said to have been agreed upon in the Synod of 1552 (i.e. according to modern reckoning, 1553, as the year was then considered to begin on 25th March). At first sight, this fact might seem to be conclusive. But, on the other hand, there is no mention of the authority of Convocation in the royal letter requiring subscription, and grave doubts are thrown on the truth of the statement made in the title by what happened in the following reign. Early in the reign of ^ History of tJie Reformation^ vol. i. p. 256. 2 See the Liturgies of Edward VI. (Parker Society), p. 485, where the Catechism and Articles will be found, both in Latin and in English. H \ I THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 17 Mary (October 1553), complaints were raised in Con- vocation, that the Catechism " bore the name of the honourable Synod, although put forth without their consent." The explanation given by Philpot, Archdeacon of Winchester, was that, though the house had no notice of " the articles of the Catechism, yet they might well bear the title of the Synod of London, since the house had given authority to certain persons to make ecclesias- tical laws, and what was done by their authority was done by them." This must refer to the Commission which drew up the Reformatio Legum JEcclesiasticarum (on which see below, § 2, c), and, as Mr. Dixon says, ** Certainly the appointing of that Commission had been asked for several times by Convocation, and it is probable that it was the working part of that Commission that made the Articles. But it was a stretch to argue from this as Philpot did." ^ Still more startling is the explanation offered by Cranmer, at his disputation at Oxford in April 1554, when the charge was brought up against him, that he had " set forth a Catechism, in the name of the Synod of London, and yet there be fifty which, witnessing that they were of the number of the Convocation, never heard of this Catechism." In his reply to this, Cranmer dis- claimed all responsibility for the title. " 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 complained thereof to the Council, it was answered me that the book was so entitled, because it was set forth in the time of the Convocation." ^ A more unsatisfactory explanation it is hard to conceive. But what makes it more remarkable is that, as we have seen, the Catechism, as distinct from the Articles, had never claimed the * Reformaiion, vol. iii. p. 514. * Cranrrur's Works, vol. iv. pj). 64, 65 (Ed. Jenkyns). 18 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 19 authority of Convocation at all. And yet, in each case in which complaint is made in the reign of Mary, the terms of the complaint mention the Catechism, not the Articles ; and the defenders of the title never deny, as we might have expected them to do, that the Catechism claimed synodal authority. The only possible explana- tion of this appears to be, that the whole book, contain- ing the Articles as well as the Catechism, was known as "The Catechism,"^ and that the objection really had reference to the Articles rather than the Catechism proper. If so, Philpot's expression, the Articles of the Catechism, was strictly accurate, and was intended to describe the Articles contained in the publication called and known as " The Catechism." If Cranmer's language may also be taken as referring to the Articles, then we are driven to the conclusion that, in spite of their title, they had never been submitted to Convocation at all, and that the title prefixed to them rested solely on the authority of the Privy Council, who must bear the blame of having set them forth with ' a deceitful title to impose upon the unwary vulgar.' ^ This appears to be the most probable solution of the difficulty. But, at the same time, it cannot be denied that there is a certain amount of counter-evidence in support of the claim raised by the title, which prevents us from acquiescing in the explanation just given as certain. ^ This view obtains some slight confirmation from the fact that the colophon at the close of the book, after the Articles and a few prayers, says ^' These Catechisms are to be sold, etc." It is also worth noticing that, in Elizabeth's reign, the Puritans were anxious to have a Catechism united to the Articles, "joined in one book, and by common consent to be authorised."— Strype, Annals, ii. p. 317 (Ed. 1725). 2 Burnet, History of the Reformation, vol. iii. p. 370. Mr. Dixon throws doubt on the statement that the book had been set forth in the time of the Convocation, and thinks that even this was untrue. — Reformation, vol. iii. p. 517. ' 1. "They are publicly recited as possessing such authority on their subsequent revival and enactment in the Convocation of 1563, and it appears almost incredible that these assumptions should have been allowed to pass unchallenged, more especially by prelates like Archbishop Parker,^ in a critical Synod, if the document had not really been invested with the sanction which it claims." ^ 2. In a communication from the visitors to the Vice-Chancellor and Senate of Cambridge, dated 1st June 1553, the Articles are spoken of as having been pre- pared by good and learned men, and agreed upon in the Synod of London. 3. A letter from Sir John Cheke to Bullinger (June 7, 1553), mentions that the Articles of the Synod at London were published by royal mandate. 4. During the controversy on vestments, in the reign of Elizabeth, it was, says Archdeacon Hardwick, urged against the recalcitrant clergy, by an advocate of the party of order, that " many of their party had actually subscribed to the Edwardian formulary in the Convocation of 1553, and were accordingly bent on violating their own pledge, by breaking the traditions and ceremonies of the Church. The answer of the Puritan makes no attempt to throw discredit on this statement. He concedes that many of the disaffected clergy set their hands to the thirty-third of the Forty- Two Articles in common with the rest, but argued that they did so with the reservation that nothing was or ought to be commanded by the Church in contradiction to the word of God." ^ * Parker had been appointed Dean of Lincoln in 1552, and was therefore himself a member of the Convocation of 1552-3. • HardiDick, p. 109. ^ Ihid. loc. dt. It does not appear quite certain that the subscription admitted is supposed to have taken place in the Synod. Subscription 20 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES The reader has now the evidence of both sides before him, and will see that the question is really a puzzling one, and cannot be decided offhand. On the whole, it appears to the present writer that the balance of evidence is against the correctness of the assertion made in the title. But he is free to confess that he cannot speak without some hesitation. It is possible that further evidence may yet be discovered, which will set the question at rest. In the meantime, we must be content with the statement that the Articles, as pub- lished in 1553, claimed the authority of Convocation, but that it is highly probable that the claim was not justified by facts. (b) The object and contents of the Forty- Two Articles. It is perfectly clear that these Articles — unlike some of the foreign Confessions — were never meant to form a complete system of theology, but were merely intended to treat of such points as were actually in dispute at the time. The title prefixed to the English edition speaks of them as agreed upon, "for the avoiding of controversy in opinions, and the establishment of a godly concord in certain matters of religion," and the title is so far entirely justified by their contents.^ Their limita- tions and omissions are fatal to the view that they were designed to cover the whole field of Christian doctrine. Beyond the general statement of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in Article L, there is nothing in them on the Divinity of our Lord, nor is there any Article on was required from all the clergy by royal mandate, and it is possible that the reference is to this. If so, although the passage would still testify to a belief, common to both parties in the controversy, that the Articles had actually passed Convocation, the value of its evidence would be considerably lessened, as there would be no admission by the disaffected clergy that they had actually subscribed in the Convocation of 1553. ^ The Articles are printed in Latin and English at the close of this Introduction (see p. 70). I THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 21 the Holy Spirit.^ While the sufficiency of Holy Scrip- ture is asserted in Article V., there is no account of the Canon of Holy Scripture, nor any enumeration of the canonical books.^ Not a word is said of Confirma- tion or of Penance ; and in many other matters there is a reticence which would be inexplicable, on any view except that which regards their range and extent as conditioned by present emergencies. They may be regarded as a two-edged sword, intended to smite with equal impartiality the errors to be found in two different directions — (1) those of the Medievalists, and (2) those of the Anabaptists. 1. Roman or medieval errors are expressly con- demned in Article XII. (The teaching of the " school authors " on congruous merit), XIII. (Works of superero- gation), XXIII. (" The doctrine of school-authors concern- ing purgatory, etc."), XXVI. (The doctrine of grace ex opere operato), XXIX. (Tran substantiation), XXX. (The sacrifices of masses) ; while Roman claims are rejected, or the position of the English Church in claiming liberty of independent action is defended, in such articles as XX. (" The Church of Rome hath erred, etc. "), XXI. (It ought not to enforce anything beside Holy Scripture to be believed as an article of faith, cf. also Art. V.), XXII. (General Councils may err and have erred), XXV. (" It is most seemly and most agreeable to the word of God that in the congregation nothing be openly read or spoken in a tongue unknown to the people"), XXXI. (" Bishops, priests, and deacons are not commanded to vow the state of single life without marriage, neither by * These omissions were supplied in 1563. * Remedied in 1563. The omission in the Edwardian series of any account of the Canon, or of the position of the Apocrypha, is all the more remarkable as the Tridentine Decree on the Canon had been already drawn up. 22 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES God's law are they compelled to abstain from matri- mony"), XXXIII. (On " Traditions of the Church"), XXXV. (" Of the Book of Prayers and ceremonies of the Church of England "), XXXVI. (" The Bishop of Kome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England"). 2. On the other hand it is probable that to a still greater extent the Articles were conditioned by the errors of the Anabaptists, who were rapidly bringing the whole Eeformation movement into serious discredit by their wild extravagances and the utter defiance and repudia- tion of all authority, whether civil or ecclesiastical, of which they were guilty. These fanatics took their name from their practice of re-haptizing those who joined them, having been previously baptized in infancy. But their errors were far from being confined to the single point of the rejection of infant baptism. Indeed, it is hard to find a heresy or erroneous opinion which may not be laid to the charge of some among them. How serious was the danger, and what was the character of the false teaching which they were propagating in this country, may be seen from a letter written by Bishop Hooper shortly before the preparation of the Forty-Two Articles : — " The Anabaptists flock to the place, and give me much trouble with their opinions respecting the incarnation of our Lord; for they deny altogether that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, according to the flesh. They contend that a man who is reconciled to God is without sin, and free from all stain of concupiscence, and that nothing of the old Adam remains in his nature; and a man, they say, who is thus regenerate cannot sin. They add that all hope of pardon is taken away from those who, after having received the Holy Ghost, fall into sin. They maintain a fatal necessity, and that beyond and beside that will of His, which He has re- vealed to us in the Scriptures, God hath another will, by i ■ THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 23 which he altogether acts under some kind of necessity. Although I am unable to satisfy their obstinacy, yet the Lord by His word shuts their mouths, and their heresies are more and more detested by the people. How dangerously our England is afflicted by heresies of this kind, God only knows ; I am unable indeed from sorrow of heart to express to your piety. There are some who deny that man is endued with a soul different from that of a beast, and subject to decay. Alas, not only are these heresies reviving among us, which were formerly dead and buried, but new ones are springing up every day. There are such libertines and wretches, who are daring enough in their conventicles not only to deny that Christ is the Messiah and Saviour of the world, but also to call that blessed seed a mischievous fellow, and deceiver of the world. On the other hand, a great portion of the kingdom so adheres to the popish faction, as altogether to set at nought God and the lawful authority of the magistrates; so that I am greatly afraid of a rebellion and civil discord."^ To the same effect another of Bullinger's correspond- ents, Martin Micronius, writes on August 14, 1551 : — " We have not only to contend with the Papists, who are almost everywhere ashamed of their errors, but much more with the Sectaries and Epicureans and pseudo-Evangelicals. In addition to the ancient errors respecting psedo-baptism, the incarnation of Christ, the authority of the magistrate, the lawfulness of an oath, the property and community of goods, and the like, new ones are rising up every day, with which we have to contend. The chief opponents, however, of Christ's divinity are the Arians, who are now beginning to shake our churches with greater violence than ever, * Original letters (Parker Society), p. 65. The letter is dated June 25, 1549. 24 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES as they deny the conception of Christ by the Virgin."^ As a safeguard against the errors of fanatics, such as those thus described, even more perhaps than against the errors of medievalists, it was found necessary to issue the Articles. Although the Anabaptists are actually men- tioned by name in but two of the Articles, namely, VIII. (On original sin), and XXXVII. (" Christian men's goods are not common "), they are undoubtedly the persons alluded to in Article VI (" They are not to be heard which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises"), XIV., XV. (" They are to be condemned which say they can no more sin as long as they live here, etc."), XVIII. (" They also are to be had accursed and abhorred that presume to say that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth, etc. "), XIX. (" They are not to be hearkened unto, who affirm that Holy Scripture is given only to the weak, etc."). In each of these articles there is evidently a definite set of persons contemplated who were propagating the views condemned ; and in each case we find that the objectionable tenet was one which was maintained by some among the Anabaptists. Further, Anabaptist opinions account for the language of Article XXIV. (" It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public preaching, or ministering in the con- gregation, before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same,"), XXVII. (" The wickedness of the ministers doeth not away the effectual operation of God's ordinances "), XXVIII. (" The custom of the Church to christen young children is to be commended, and in any wise to be retained in the Church "), XXXII. (" Excommunicate persons are to be avoided "), XXXIII. (" Whosoever through his private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the traditions and cere- monies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the ^ Ibid, p. 574. Both letters are quoted in Hardwick, p. 88 seq. I THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 25 word of God, and be ordained, and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly (that others may fear to do the like), as one that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of weak brethren "), XXXVI. ("The civil magistrate is ordained and allowed of God ; wherefore we must obey him, not only for fear of punishment, but also for conscience sake. The civil laws may punish Christian men with death, for heinous and grievous offences. It is lawful for Christians, at the commandment of the magistrate, to wear weapons, and to serve in lawful wars "), XXXVIII. (" Christian men may take an oath "), XXXIX. (" The resurrection of the dead is not yet brought to pass "), XL. (" The souls of them that depart this life do neither die with their bodies, nor sleep idly "), XLL (" Heretics called Millenarii ") XLII. (" All men shall not be saved at the length "). And even in those articles which might be thought to be less directly polemical, such as I. to IV., and VII. (On the Creeds), there can really be no doubt that the danger of Anabaptism was present to the compilers. It was owing to the spread of the errors of these fanatics that it became absolutely necessary to re-state the funda- mental articles of the faith, and the Church's adherence to the traditional Creeds of Christendom, for many of the Anabaptists "abandoned every semblance of belief in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and so passed over to the Arian and Socinian schools, then rising up in Switzerland, in Italy, and in Poland." ^ This brief review of the object and contents of the Forty-Two Articles will be sufficient to show that in the first instance the document must have been merely intended to be a provisional and temporary one. Every line of it bears witness to this. The idea that ^Hardwick, p. 86. i i 26 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 27 it would be maintained as a permanent test of or- thodoxy cannot have ever occurred to its authors. For such a purpose it is singularly ill-suited. Many of the articles are purely negative, condemning in trenchant terms some existing error, but not attempting to define the positive truth opposed to it. Our review will also indicate how utterly mistaken is the notion that the Articles were mainly, if not exclusively, designed as a safeguard against Rome, for we have seen that, although a considerable number of the articles do condemn Roman and medieval errors, yet a far larger number are directed against the teaching of the Anabaptists, and denounce false doctrines in terms to which the most ardent Romanist could not take exception. (c.) The Sources of the Forty-hvo Articles. When the Anglican formulary of 1553 is compared with the Confession of Augsburg (1530), it is immedi- ately apparent that the later document is indebted to the earlier one. The similarity between some of the articles is so marked that the Lutheran Confession may be un- hesitatingly set down as their ultimate source. But it is tolerably certain that the debt is only indirect, nor is there any reason to think that the Augsburg Confession itself was actually used by Cranmer and his colleagues in the preparation of the English Articles. The clauses common to both are all found also in the Thirteen Articles of 1538, and other language in the Forty-Two Articles is also traced to this document, and not to Augsburg. Even so, the debt to Lutheranism is but a limited one. The correspondence of language is confined almost entirely to Articles I., IL, XXIII., XXVI., XXVIL, XXXIL, i,e. to the articles on the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, the Ministry, the Sacraments, and Traditions of the Church. On the burning question of justification and all kindred subjects, where correspondence might well be looked for, (♦ it is remarkable that it is sought in vain. On all these topics, which were among the principal subjects of debate in the early days of the Reformation — questions which concern the condition of man, and the means of his salva- tion — our reformers took an independent line of their own, which differs in a very marked way from the line taken at Augsburg. Nor should it be forgotten that in some of the matters in which indebtedness to the Lutheran formulary cannot be denied, the Anglican statements are far stronger and more precise than those to which the Lutherans were called on to subscribe, e.g. on the Sacra- ments, the Confession of Augsburg said that they were instituted, " not only to be marks of profession among men, but rather to be signs and witnesses of God's good- will towards us, offered to quicken and confirm faith in those who use them." In the Thirteen Articles of 1538 this was altered into the statement " that sacraments insti- tuted by the word of God are not only marks of profession among Christians, but rather certain sure loitnesses and effectual signs of grace and God's goodwill towards us, ly which God works invisibly m ws .... and through them faith is quickened and confirmed in those who use them." ^ * "De usu Sacramentorum decent quod Sacramenta institute sint, non modo ut sint notae professionis inter homines, sed magis ut sint signa et testimonia voluntatis Dei erga nos ad excitandam et confirmandam fidem in his qui utuntur proposita." — Conf. August, xiii. "Docemus quod Sacramenta quae per verbum Dei institute sunt, non tentum sint notae professionis inter Christianos, sed magis certa quaedam testimonia et eflficacia signa gratiae et bonae voluntetis Dei erga nos, i)er quae Deus invisibiliter operatur in nobis et suam gratiam in nos invisibiliter diffundit, siquidem ea rite susceperimus ; quodque per ea excitetur et confirmatur fides in his qui eis utuntur." — Thirteen Articles of 1538, No. IX. "Sacramente per verbum Dei instituta non tentum sunt notae profes- sionis Christianorum, sed certe quaedam potius testimonia et efficacia signa gratiae atque bonae in nos voluntetis Dei, per quae invisibiliter ipse in nobis operatur, nostramque fidem in se non solum excitet, verum etiam con- firmat."— Forty-Two Articles of 1553, No. XXV. 28 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 29 This is much more emphatic than the language of Augs- burg, and it is remarkable that it was retained by Cranmer in 1553, when his views on the sacraments had consider- ably changed from what they were fifteen years previ- ously. The result of the retention of these words is to bring Article XXVI., in which they occur, into rather startling contrast with Article XXIX. The two articles really belong to different dates, and harmonise ill to- gether, for whereas the earlier passage taken from the Thirteen Articles of 1538 describes the position of sacra- ments of the gospel as channels of grace in terms which leave nothing to be desired, the Twenty-Ninth Article of 1553 reflects the opinion to which Cranmer was com- mitted at a later date when he had fallen under the influence of John a Lasco, and its teaching on the pres- ence in the Eucharist, if not actually Zwinglianism, is perilously near to it. Happily, as will be pointed out further on in the introduction, the changes made in this article in Elizabeth's reign have altered its character, and by the removal of the objectionable clause, and the sub- stitution of another for it, have brought it into harmony with the teaching of Article XXV. ( = XXVL of 1553). During the years in which the Forty-Two Articles were being shaped, another work was also in course of preparation (probably by the very same men to whom the Articles are due), viz. the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum. The exact relation of this to the Articles is hard to determine. That a relation of some sort exists is perfectly clear, the wording of many passages being identical, or nearly so. But it is not easy to decide which document can claim priority. As early as 1532 mention is made of a design for the reform of the ecclesi- astical laws, but it is uncertain whether anything was actually done before the reign of Edward vi. In 1549 an Act of Parliament was passed empowering the King, by the advice of his Council, to appoint thirty-two per- sons " to compile such ecclesiastical laws as should be thought by him, his Council, and them, convenient to be practised in all the spiritual courts of the realm." Two years elapsed before any such persons were nominated. But in 1551 two commissions were issued, the one to thirty-two persons, as provided in the Act of 1549, the other to a smaller number of divines, by whom the actual work was to be done, as the full commission of thirty- two was apparently considered too large. The authors of the code, as it finally appeared, were Cranmer, Good- rich, Cox, Peter Martyr, May, Eowland Taylor, John Lucas, and Richard Goodrick. The work was completed early in 1553. Cranmer was, however, unable to obtain the sanction of Parliament for it before the death of the King in the summer of the same year. Thus the scheme fell to the ground, and although the volume was subse- quently printed during the reign of Elizabeth, the revised code of ecclesiastical law was never imposed upon the Church by any authority whatsoever. Its interest, then, is purely historical. But, regarded as a contemporary ex- position of the Articles, and as either furnishing one of the sources from which they were drawn, or as containing an expanded version of some of them, parts of the work are of the highest value. The first two sections are headed, " De summa Trinitate et Fide Catholica," and " De Haeresibus." In these the passages corresponding with the Articles occur, and it will frequently be found that, being in a fuller and more amplified form, they supply exactly what is wanting to enable us to determine the exact drift of the more condensed statements of the Articles, or they indicate precisely the quarter from which the errors condemned in the Articles were proceeding. ^ * For the history of the Ecfomiatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum^ see Dixon, vol. iii. 350 seq. 30 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES i THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 31 3. The Elizabethan Articles. It will be convenient once more to subdivide the subject before us, and distribute it under the following headings : — (a) The history of the revision of 1563. (h) The character of the revision, and comparison of the Elizabethan with the Edwardian Articles. (c) The final revision in 1571. (a) The history of the revision of 1563. — It would appear that during the reign of Mary (155 3-1 5 5 8) no notice whatever was taken of the Forty-Two Articles. As they had never been enjoined by Parliament, there was no necessity for an Act to repeal them. Consequently they were quietly dropped. Nor were they immediately revived on the accession of Elizabeth. For some time after this Archbishop Parker provided, on his own authority, an independent test, consisting of eleven articles, which all the clergy were required to read publicly, not only on entry into any cure, but also twice in the course of every year.^ But when Convocation met, at the beginning of 1563, one of the first works undertaken by it was a revision of the Edwardian Articles, with a view to their revival in a modified form. This resulted in the publication of the Thirty-Eight Articles of 1563. Even before the meeting of the Synod, Archbishop Parker, aided probably by Guest, Bishop of Kochester, had been at work on the Articles ; and there still exists among the MSS. of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, a copy of the Latin Articles as presented by him to the Synod, with the signatures of the bishops who subscribed this document on January 29, after further alterations had been introduced by them.^ By the ' See Strype, Eccl. AnnalSj vol. i. p. 218. ^ A copy of this, with a facsimile of the signatures, is printed in Lamb's Historical Account of the Thirty-Nine Articles. Among those whose sig- help of this paper it is possible to discover exactly which of the changes were made by Parker in his preparatory revision, and which are to be assigned to the bishops during the passage of the Articles through Convocation. From the Upper House they passed on February 5 to the Lower, and were signed by the members of that house. They were then laid before the Queen in Council, and published in Latin by Wolfe, the royal printer, under the direct authority of the Queen herself. But it is remark- able that this published copy differs in two important particulars from the MS. as signed by the bishops on January 29 th. (1) It prefixes to Article XX. the affirmative clause; " Habet ecclesia ritus statuendi jus et in fidei controversiis autoritatem," which now makes its appearance for the first time. (2) It omits Article XXIX.: "De manducatione Corporis Christi, et impios illud non mandu- care." This article, to which there is nothing corresponding in the Edwardian series, had been added by Parker, and apparently accepted by the Synod, as it is in the MS. copy to which the signatures of the bishops are attached. The detailed examination of the questions that arise in connection with these changes is reserved for the commentary on the Articles in question. It will be sufficient to say here that both alterations were probably due to the Queen herself, and that they were made after natures are attached to this document are the Archbishop of York and the Bishops of Durham and Chester. *' Though the Northern Convocation as a body had no direct influence in the compiling of the Articles, its con- currence was, to some extent, implied in the signature of the Archbishop of York and his two suffragans. In 1605 all doubts and scruples on this question were set at rest by the formal acceptance of the Articles in the Convocation of York."— Hard wick, p. 140. 30 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 31 3. The Elizabethan Articles. It will be convenient once more to subdivide the subject before us, and distribute it under the following headings : — (a) The history of the revision of 1563. (h) The character of the revision, and comparison of the Elizabethan with the Edwardian Articles. (c) The final revision in 1571. (a) The history of the revision of 1563. — It would appear that during the reign of Mary (1553-1558) no notice whatever was taken of the Forty-Two Articles. Am they had never been enjoined by Parliament, there was no necessity for an Act to repeal them. Consequently they were quietly dropped. Nor were they immediately revived on the accession of Elizabeth. For some time after this Archbishop Parker provided, on his own authority, an independent test, consisting of eleven articles, which all the clergy were required to read publicly, not only on entry into any cure, but also twice in the course of every year.^ But when Convocation met, at the beginning of 1563, one of the first works undertaken by it was a revision of the Edwardian Articles, with a view to their revival in a modified form. This resulted in the publication of the Thirty-Eight Articles of 1563. Even before the meeting of the Synod, Archbishop Parker, aided probably by Guest, Bishop of Eochester, had been at work on the Articles ; and there still exists among the MSS. of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, a copy of the Latin Articles as presented by him to the Synod, with the signatures of the bishops who subscribed this document on January 29, after further alterations had been introduced by them.^ By the * See Strype, Eccl. Annals, vol. i. p. 218. 2 A copy of this, with a facsimile of the signatures, is printed in Lamb's historical Account of the Thirty-Niru Articles. Among those whose si| i ^S' help of this paper it is possible to discover exactly which of the changes were made by Parker in his preparatory revision, and which are to be assigned to the bishops during the passage of the Articles through Convocation. From the Upper House they passed on February 5 to the Lower, and were signed by the members of that house. They were then laid before the Queen in Council, and published in Latin by Wolfe, the royal printer, under the direct authority of the Queen herself. But it is remark- able that this published copy differs in two important particulars from the MS. as signed by the bishops on January 29 th. (1) It prefixes to Article XX. the affirmative clause ; " Habet ecclesia ritus statuendi jus et in fidei controversiis autoritatem," which now makes its appearance for the first time. (2) It omits Article XXIX.: "De manducatione Corporis Christi, et impios illud non mandu- care." This article, to which there is nothing corresponding in the Edwardian series, had been added by Parker, and apparently accepted by the Synod, as it is in the MS. copy to which the signatures of the bishops are attached. The detailed examination of the questions that arise in connection with these changes is reserved for the commentary on the Articles in question. It will be sufficient to say here that both alterations were probably due to the Queen herself, and that they were made after natures are attached to this document are the Archbishop of York and the Bishops of Durham and Chester. "Though the Northern Convocation as a body had no direct influence in the compiling of the Articles, its con- curreuce was, to some extent, implied in the signature of the Archbishop of York and his two suffragans. In 1605 all doubts and scruples on this question were set at rest by the formal acceptance of the Articles in the Convocationof York."— Hard wick, p. 140. 32 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES the Articles had passed the Lower as well as the Upper House of Convocation. They were therefore wanting in synodical authority, and rested simply on the authority of the Sovereign, as " supreme governor." The object of the addition of the affirmative clause to Article XX. was to assert in strong terms the rights and powers of the Church, with an eye to the position taken up by the Puritan party, who were denying to her the power to decree any rites and ceremonies, save such as could claim direct support from Holy Scripture. The omission of Article XXIX. was probably due to tenderness to the Koman party, and a desire, if possible, to embrace them within the limits of the National Church. (b) The character of the revision and comparison of tJic Articles (t/* 1563 with those of 1553. The following conspectus of the principal changes in- troduced in 1563 will enable the reader to see without difficulty the importance of the revision, and the very real difference in tone and character that exists between the Elizabethan Articles and those of Edward's reign. Italics are used to denote the alterations made by Arch- bishop Parker in his preliminary work before he submitted the Articles to the Synod. Those made by the bishops are indicated by ordinary roman type ; thick black letters being used for the two subsequent changes mentioned above as probably due to the Queen herself. 1. Additions. A. Four New Articles, viz. — Art. V. Of the Holy Ghost XII. Of good works, XXIX. Of the wickedy which do not eat the body of Christ in the use of the Lord's Supper. [Omitted before publication ; restored in 1571.] XXX. Of both kinds. >» » THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 33 B. Clauses in other Articles. Art. 11. " Begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and etem^al Gody of on^ substance with the Father," n VT. The clauses on the Canon of Scripture with the list of the canonical books of the Old Testament, and specimens of the Apocrypha, a, VII. The clause on the Ceremonial and the Moral Law, (" Although the law given from God by Moses .... the command- ments which are called moral." This clause was drawn from the Nineteenth Article of 1553.) » VIII. " And believed," » X. " ITie condition of man after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare him- self by his oum natural strength and good works to faith and calling upon God. „ XVIL « In Christ," XX. "The Church hath power to decree rites or cere* monies and authority in controYersies of faith." „ XXV. The two clauses on the number of the sacraments, and the five rites, commonly called Sacraments. „ XXVII. " Overthroweth the nature of a sacrament." 34 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES " The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and spiritual manner : and the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the supper is faith" Art. XXXIII. ''Every particular or National Church hath authority to or- dain, change, and abolish cere- monies or rites of the Church, ordained only by man*s autho- rity, so that all things be done to edifying" XXXVII. The explanation of the royal supremacy. (" Where we at- tribute to the Queen's majesty .... restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil- doers.") 2. Omissions. A. Seven complete Articles, viz. : — Art. X. Ofgra^e, XVI. Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost XIX. All men are bound to keep the commandments of the Moral Law. (Though this was omitted as a separate article, part of it was embodied in Article VII. of the revised series. See above.) XXXIX. The resurrection of the dead is not yet brought to pass. XL. The souls of them that depart this life do not die with the bodies nor sleep idly. I. THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 35 Art XLI. Heretics called Millenarii. „ XLI I. All men shall not be saved at length. B. Clauses in other Articles. Art. III. " For the body lay in the sepul- chre until the resurrection, but his ghost departing from him was with the ghosts that were in prison, or in hell, and did preach to the same, as the place of St. Peter doth testify. „ VI. " Although it be sometimes received of the faithful as godly and profitdble for an order and come- Unless." „ IX. " Which also the Ancibaptists do nowadays renew." „ XVIL " Though the decrees of pre- destination are unknoum to vs. XXV. " Our Lord Jesus Christ hath knit together a company of new people with sa/^raments, most few in number, most easy to be kept, most excellent in signification, as is Baptism and the Lord's Supper." " And yet tJiat nx)t of the work wrought [ex opere operato], as some men speak, which word, as it is strange and unknown to Holy Scripture, so it engen- dereth no godly but a very superstitious sense." 36 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 87 Art. XXVIIL " Forasmtcch as the truth of man's nature requireth that the hody of one and the self-same man cannot he at one time in diverse places, hut must n^eeds he in some one certain pktce : there- fore the hody of Christ cannot he present at one time in many and diverse places. And hecatise (as Holy Scripture doth teach) Christ was taken uv into heaven, and there shall continue unto the end of the world, a faithful TTian ought not either to helieve or openly to confess the real and hodily presence (as they term it) of Christ's flesh and hlood in the Sa/^rament of the Lord's Supper"^ The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God : wherefore we must ohey him, not only for fear of punishment, hut also for conscience' sake" 1 Parker, in his preliminary revision, omitted this clause, but substituted for it the following, which was rejected by the Synod : " Christus in ccelum ascendens, corpori suo imraortalitatem dedit, Naturam non abstulit ; humanse enim naturce veritatem (juxta Scripturas) perpetuo retinet* quam uno et definito loco esse, et non in multo, vel omnia simul loca diffundi oportet. Quum igitur Christus in ccelum sublatus, ibi usque ad finem seculi sit permansurus, atque inde, non aliunde (ut loquitur Augustinus) venturus sit, ad judicandum vivos et mortuos, non debet quisquam fidelium, carnis ejus, et sanguinis, realem et corporalem (ut loquuntur) presentiam in Eucharistia vel credere, vel profiteri." XXXVIL 3. Substitutions and Other Changes. A, Articles rewritten. Art. XL Of the justification of man. XXIV. Of speaking in the congregation in such a tongue as the people understandeth. XXXII. Of the marriage of priests. XXXV. Of homilies. XXXVI. Of consecration of lishops and ministers. >i M »> }f 91 B, other Changes. Art. XXII. " The Romish doctrine " (doctrina Komanensium) was substituted for "the doctrine of school authors." XXV. The order of the clauses was reversed. XXVII. The clause on Infant Baptism was rewritten, XXXVIL The first -paragraph was rewritten. ("The Queen's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England, and other her Dominions, and unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes, doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign juris- diction," was substituted for "The King of England is supreme head in earth, next under Christ, of the Church of England and Ireland.") \ MMB 38 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 39 Of several of the additions made by Parker the source is to be found in the Confession of Wiirtemberg. From this is taken verbatim the clause in Article II. concern- ing the Divine Nature of the Son ; the Fifth Article (" Of the Holy Ghost "), and the statement concerning the canonical books of the Old and New Testament in Article VI. ; while the additional clause in Article X., the re-written Article XI., and the new Article XII. (" On good works "), as well as the affirmative clause in Article XX., are obviously suggested by it. We are now in a position to consider the significance and object of the changes thus introduced. 1. A character of greater completeness y as regards "fundamentals" was given to the formulary^ and some changes were iniroduced^ seemingly in order to make the docuTTient suitable for a permanent test of doctrinal orthodoxy. It was probably for this reason that the clause on the Divinity of the Son in Article II. was introduced, as well as the new Fifth Article on the Holy Spirit. To the same cause we may trace the excision of the reference to the Ajiabaptists in Article IX., and the total omission of Articles XXXIX.-XLII., on speculative points which had been raised by some among the Anabaptists. Apparently, the erroneous teaching had either disappeared or was re- garded as less formidable, and therefore, in a document designed for permanent use, it was thought well to remove the reference to it. Under the same head notice may be taken of the omission of the reference to 1 Pet. iii. 1 8 in Article III., and of the Sixteenth Article, defining the nature of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. These omissions may have been due to the desire for compre- hension, and willingness to allow room for divergence of opinion in regard to difficult and disputed texts. But, although the Elizabethan Articles were thus rendered 1 more complete than those issued in 1553, it remains true that even so they cannot be regarded as a complete scheme of doctrine. Many important matters of faith are omitted in them ; and, in order to arrive at the mature judgment of the Church of England it is frequently necessary to have recourse to the Prayer-Book, and to supplement the partial and fragmentary teaching of the Articles by it. The statement already made in reference to the Edwardian Articles holds good of these also. Many of them are purely negative, condemning some erroneous view, and telling us what not to hold, but stopping short without any expression of the true doctrine on the subject, as opposed to the error rejected. Bishop Pearson's words, quoted in this connection by Archdeacon Hardwick, are substantially true. The Book of the Articles " is not, nor is pretended to be, a complete body of divinity, or a comprehension and explication of all Christian doctrines necessary to be taught, but an enu- meration of some truths, which upon and since the Kefor- mation have been denied by some persons ; who upon their denial are thought unfit to have any cure of souls in this Church or realm, because they might, by their opinions, infect their flock with error, or else disturb the Church with schism, or the realm with sedition." ^ 2. The Catholic position of the Church of England, and her determination to adhere to the general teaching of the Church was made clearer. This is seen in the alterations made in Article XI., and the introduction of Article XII. (" On good works "), which render the teaching on the justification of man less open to objection. Still more is it evidenced by the alterations introduced into the sacramental articles. Especially noteworthy is the omission of the clause m Article XXVIIL, which denied the " real and bodily 1 Minor Tl'orks, vol. ii. p. 215, quoted in Kardwick, p. 158. 40 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES presence (as they term it) of Christ's iflesh and blood in the sacrament." In place of this was introduced the clause stating that the body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and spiritual manner, intended, according to Bishop Guest who says that it was " of mine own penning," " not to deny the reality of the presence of the body of Christ in the Supper, but only the grossness and sensibleness in the receiving thereof." ^ It will also be noticed that the clause denying the theory of grace ex opere operato, was omitted from Article XXV., and that the language on infant baptism in Article XXVII. was strengthened, while that in XXXVII. (" On the royal supremacy ") is of a much more sober and guarded character than the bald statement of the corresponding Article in the Edwardian series. 3. On the other hand, the independent line taken by the Church of England in the matters of dispute with Rome was adhered to, and in some rejects more sharply defined than had been the case in the earlier Articles. As instances of this, reference may be made to the additions to Article VI. (On the canonical books, and the position of the Apocrypha), the addition to XXV. (On the number of sacraments ordained of Christ, and the rejec- tion of the claim of the " five rites " to be regarded as having the like nature of sacraments with Baptism and the Eucharist), the addition of XXX. (On the denial of the cup to the laity), the vindication of the rights of National Churches in XXXIIL, and of the character of the English ordinal in XXXVI. The substitution of " Komanensium " ^ See further in the commentary on Article XXVIII. It will not be forgotten that a few years earlier (in 1559) the Elizabethan divines had struck out from the Prayer-Book the "black rubric " which appears to deny the "real and spiritual presence" of Christ's blood, and had restored the use of the first clause ("the body of our Lord Jesus Christ, etc.") in the administration of the elements, as well as of the eucharistic vestments. THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 41 ',< ^ for ** Scholasticorum " in XXII. marked the intention of the Article to condemn a present current form of teaching rather than the more formal statements of scholastic divines. And while the withdrawal of Article XXIX. before publication, as well as the excision of the clause referred to above on grace ex opere operato, betrays a desire not to create unnecessary differences with Kome on matters of doctrine, where there might be room for difference of opinion, the rewriting of Articles XXIV. and XXXII. manifested a determination to speak out plainly on practical matters, where it was considered that plain speaking was necessary. 4. Changes affecting the position of the Puritan ^ party. There is no doubt that the change in Article XXVIII., involving the omission of the clause denying the real presence was most distasteful to them,^ nor can the addition of the affirmative clause to Article XX. have been altogether agreeable, though their objections to it were not raised till later. They were not altogether satisfied with Article XXXIIL, as a considerable number of members of the Lower House of Convocation were anxious that these words in it might be mitigated. " Is * The name of Puritan may well be given to them, though, as a matter of history, it was not used till the following year. Fuller {Ch. Hist. ii. p. 540) notes, under the year 1564, that the name first began in this year, and characteristically adds that "the grief had not been great, if it had ended in the same." ^ Humphrey and Sampson sent to Bullinger in July 1566 a list of "some blemishes which still attach to the Church of England," and among them they note the following : — " The free liberty of preaching is taken away from the ministers of Christ, those who now are willing to preach are forbidden to recommend any innovation with regard to rites, but all are obliged to give their assent to ceremonies by subscribing their hands. Lastly, the article composed in the time of Edward the Sixth respecting the spiritual eating, which expressly oppugned and took away the real presence in the Eucharist, and contained a most clear explanation of the tnith, is now set forth among us mutilated and imperfect." — Zurich Letters (Parker Society), vol. i. p. 166. \ \ 42 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 43 ut qui peccat in publicum ordinem ecclesiae, quique laedit authoritatem magistratus, et qui infirmorum fratrum con- scientias vulnerat, publice, ut cseteri timeantur, arguendus est." ^ The clause had stood without question in the Ed- wardian Articles, and, in spite of the request of the Puritan party, was left intact. On the other hand it is possible that the tenth of the series of 1553 was omitted out of tender- ness to the rising Calvinism of the party, and that for the same reason the first clause was added to our present Article X. 5. There remain a limited number of changes which cannot well be classified under any of the foregoing heads. Of these some were made in order to bring the English into closer conformity with the Latin.* For others it is not easy to state the precise reason which called for them. None of them, however, are of any great importance. (c) The final revision of 1571. — The Articles passed by Convocation and approved by the Crown in 1563 underwent a further revision in 1571. Up till this date, although the Articles had been signed by members of Convocation, subscription was not re- quired from the clergy of the Church in general ; and the Queen steadily resisted every attempt made to submit them to Parliament. When, however, the Anglo-Roman schism had been brought about by the publication of the papal bull, excommunicating the Queen in 1570, it would seem that her reluctance to call in the aid of Parliament in enforcing subscription ^ Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 336. ' The Parker MS., signed by the bishops, is, it will be remembered, in Latin, as is also the authoritative edition published by Wolfe. But English MSS. of the Articles dating from 1563 still remain among the Elizabethan State Papers ("Domestic," vol. xxvii. §§ 40, 41), one of which is endorsed "Articles of Religion agreed on, 1562, in the Convocation House," and at least two English editions of the Articles were printed by Jugge and Cawood. 'I was somewhat relaxed, and in the session of 1571 an Act was passed requiring all clergy, who had been ordained by any form except that in the English Prayer- Book of Edward vi. or Elizabeth, to subscribe to " all the Articles of religion which only concern the confession of the true Christian faith and the doctrine of the Sacra- ments, comprised in a book imprinted, entituled, Articles whereupon it was agreed hy the Archbishops and Bishops of both provinces, and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord God 1562, according to the computation of the Church of England, for the avoiding the diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true religixm ; put forth by the Queen's authority." The Act was evidently due to the Anglo-Koman schism, and was intended primarily to enforce subscription on those who had been ordained during the reign of Mary. But it also provided that, for the future, " the said Articles " were to be subscribed by all candidates for ordmation, and by every person admitted to any benefice with cure of souls.^ Thus, for the first time, subscription to the Articles was required by statute law, and until quite recent times this Act of the 13th of Elizabeth was the only one that could be quoted as enforcing it on all the clergy.2 This is the more remarkable when it is con- sidered (1) that the edition of the Articles contemplated in the Act was the English edition, printed in 1563, by Jugge and Cawood, which contained neither the »13 Elizab. c. xii., "An Act to reform certain disorders touching ministers of the Church." See Strype, Annals, vol. ii. p. 71, and Prothero s Statutes and Constitutional Documenis, p. 64. « The Act of Uniformity of 1662 was concerned with the Prayer-boofe and not the Articles-only incidentally requiring subscription to the latter from all lecturers. The Articles, it must be remembered, form no l»art of the Book of Common Prayer, though in modem times generally bound u[) with it. ^^1' 44 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Twenty-ninth Article nor the affirmative clause of Article XX ; (2) that the terms of the Act were in- geniously drawn, so as to enforce subscription to some only of the Articles, for it is clear that the restrictive word, " only," was inserted in the interests of the Puritan party, and intended to relieve them from the necessity of subscribing those Articles which were con- cerned with discipline as distinct from doctrine; and (3) that, without any reference whatever to the action of Parliament, the Articles were revised by Convocation, and that, from that day to this, subscription has been required on the authority of the Church to all the Articles, and to that form of them which was finally accepted by Convocation. Such facts are very signi- ficant, and those who maintain that the Church of England is an "Act of Parliament Church" would do well to ponder them. The Bill referred to above was introduced into the Commons on 7 th April, transmitted to the Lords on 3rd May, passed its third reading on the 21st, and obtained the royal assent on the 29 th of the same month. On the very day on which it was read the first time in the House of Commons, we find Parker requiring subscription from all members of the Lower House of Con- vocation, who had not formerly subscribed ; and early in May there are signs that a revision of the Articles was taken in hand, and that some alterations and emenda- tions were in contemplation. On 4th May the bishops were secretly considering the Articles, and came to the conclusion "that when the Book of Articles touching doctrine shall be fully agreed upon, that then the same shall be put in print by the appointment of my Lord of Sarum [Jewel], and a price rated for the same to be sold." On 11th May the bishops were again de- liberating, and on that day Parker and ten other bishops THE ELIZABETHAN ARTICLES 45 I ^ (including Guest of Rochester) signed an English MS. containing the Twenty-ninth Article, but omitting the affirmative clause of Article XX.^ After this, further deliberation must have taken place, although no record of them is now forthcoming. We only know that the bishops gave up the Book of the Articles to the Queen's Majesty " to peruse them and judge them," 2 and that the Thirty-Nine Articles were finally published in Latin and English with the royal ratification attached to them, which plainly declared the assent of Convocation to them. " This Book of the Articles before rehearsed is again approved and allowed to be holden and executed within the realm, by the assent and consent of our Sovereign Lady Elizabeth, by the grace of God, of England, France, and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, etc. Which Articles were deliberately read and confirmed * See Hardwick, p. 150 seq, « Among the State Papers (" Domestic," Elizabeth, vol. Ixxviu. No. 37) is an (unsigned) document addressed to Cecil, in Bishop Guest's hand- writing, suggesting the introduction of various alterations in the Articles before their final ratification. The Articles which he wished to have modified were the seventeenth, in which he suggests the omission of the words "by His counsel secret to us," on the ground that Ephesians i. really reveals God's counsel. Further, he would have the last paragraph of this article altered, because part of it is not clearly expressed, and part might be thought to countenance the notion of a secret will of God opposed to His revealed one. In Article XXV. he criticises the paragraph on the "five rites commonly called Sacraments," which he wishes to have altered. In XXVIII. he suggests— (1) the omission of the word "only" in the clause, "the body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the supper only after an heavenly and spiritual manner," and (2) the addition of "profitably" to the follomng clause, "the mean whereby the body of Christ is received, etc." ; while he urges very strongly that Ari:icle XXIX. should not be confirmed and authorised. The paper was quite ineflfectual, as none of the changes suggested by him were made. The latter part of the document is quoted in Mr. G. F. Hodge's Bishop Quest— Articles XXVIII. and XXIX. where, however, a wrong reference to the volume of StcUe Papers is given. It should be not Ixxv. 36, but (as above) Ixxviii. 37. 46 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES again by the subscription of the hands of the arch- bishops and bishops of the Upper House, and by the subscription of the whole clergy of the Nether House in their Convocation, in the year of our Lord 1671."^ The changes introduced before the Articles were thus ratified and published include the restoration of Article XXIX., and the addition of the complete list of the books of the Apocrypha in Article VI. The affirmative clause of Article XX. was apparently ratified by the Synod, and various other minor alterations were introduced. " They are either emendations in the wording of thirteen titles, or corrections introduced into the English form of the older Latin copy, or occasional explanations of phraseology believed to have been capable of miscon- struction," but they " left the character impressed upon the Articles of 1563 entirely unafiected."^ The fact that the Articles, as thus revised, were published in both Latin and English, with the royal ratification attached to them, suggests the inquiry, which of the two versions is to be considered the most authoritative ; and in answer to this we cannot do better than follow the example of Archdeacon Hardwick in quoting some words of Daniel Waterland, which sum up in a con- venient form all that there is to be said on the subject. " As to the Articles, English and Latin, I may just observe, for the sake of such readers as are less ac- quainted with these things — First, That the Articles were passed, recorded, and ratified in the year 1562, and in Latin only. Secondly, That those Latin Articles were revised and corrected by the Convocation of 1571. Thirdly, That an authentic English translation was then made of the Latin Articles by the same Convocation, ^ The ratification still stands at the close of the Articles as they are printed in modem Prayer- Books. * Hardwick, p. 155. THE ROYAL DECLARATION 47 and the Latin and English adjusted as nearly as possible. Fourthly, That the Articles thus prepared in loth languages were published the same year, and by the royal authority. Fifthly, Subscription was required the same year to the English Articles, called the Articles of 1562, by the famous Act of the 13th of Elizabeth. These things considered, I might justly say, with Bishop Burnet, that the Latin and English are both equally authenticaL Thus much, however, I may cer- tainly infer, that if in any places the English version be ambiguous, where the Latin original is clear and deter- minate, the Latin ought to fix the more doubtful sense of the other (as also vixie verm), it being evident that the Convocation, Queen, and Parliament, intended the same sense in both." ^ 4. The Eoyal Declaration. Since 1571 no change whatever has been made in the text of the Thirty-Nine Articles. But, as they stand in modern prayer-books, there is prefixed to them a document entitled " His Majesty's Declaration," of which some account must now be given. By the time of the accession of Charles the First (1625), the school of churchmen, of which Bishop Andrews is the best and most famous representative,^ had begun to rise into power. The publication of the Ecclesiastical Polity of Richard Hooker ^ may be * "Supplement to the Case of Arian Subscription Considered," Wcn-ks, vol. ii. p. 316 ; quoted in Hardwick, p. 156. ' On the position of Andrews and his school, see Dean Church's essay on Andrews, in Masters in English Theology, p. 88, aeq. * The first four books of the Ecclesiastical Polity were published in 1693, and the fifth came out by itself in 1597 ; the three remaining books were published posthumously, as they were incomplete when Hooker died in 1600. 48 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES said to mark the beginnings of the reaction against the dominant Calvinism of the latter part of Elizabeth's reign. Since then the position of the " Arminian " ^ party had become much more definite. Instead of merely standing upon the defensive, they were beginning to carry the war into the enemy's country, and attack the interpretation which the Calvinistic party, with an entire disregard of history, had fastened upon the Articles and formularies of the Church. The attention of the country in general was called to the subject by the appearance of Richard Montague's New Gag for an Old Goose in 1622. Montague was at this time a simple parish priest, and his work was intended as a reply to a Roman attack upon the Church of England, entitled The Ga^ for the New Gospel, which assumed that the popular Calvinistic theology of the day truly repre- sented the accepted doctrine of the Church of England. To this position Montague offered an uncompromising opposition, and, " as far as the matter of his volume is concerned," it may be described as " a temperate exposi- tion of the reasons which were leading an increasing body of scholars to reject the doctrines of Rome and Geneva alike." ^ Complaints of the book were raised in the House of Commons, and the matter was referred to Abbot, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Montague was summoned to Lambeth, and admonished ; but instead of yielding to the primate's advice, returned home to follow up his first work by a second, the famous Appello Cocsarem, in which he "indicated more fiercely than before his claim to be the true exponent of the doctrine ^ It is diflScult to know by what term to describe the party. "High Churchmen " is an anachronism, as the word had not yet come into use. "Arminian" was the term (most unfairly) applied to them by their opponents. It is therefore employed in the text. * S. R. Gardiner, History of England, vol. v. p. 352. THE ROYAL DECLARATION 49 of the Church."^ The book was scarcely completed before James i. died, and thus it appeared in 1625 with a dedication to his successor. Once more complaints were raised in the House of Commons, and for a time Montague was committed to custody. Shortly after his release, however, he was appointed Bishop of Chichester (August 1628), and now, though the Puritan Abbot was still AjTchbishop of Canterbury, yet with Laud already Bishop of London, and daily rising in the royal favour, it was manifest to all that the supremacy of the Calvinistic party was seriously endangered. While the storm raised by the publication of the Appello Coesarem was still raging, Cosin, the Dean (and afterwards Bishop) of Durham, had in 1627 published his Devotions. This was a manual of prayer, containing offices for the Hours, which had been prepared, probably at the request of the King himself, for the use of members of the English Church. It was at once made the subject of a violent attack by William Prynne, who boldly demanded that, for the future, no man should be allowed to speak or write against the Calvinistic doctrines, and that the conclusions of the (Calvinistic) Synod of Dort should be offered as a test to every clergyman in England. Those who refused to subscribe were to be at once excluded from holding any ecclesiastical office. This was a definite challenge to the Church party, and was immediately accepted by them as such. Two years before, in 1626, a royal proclamation for the peace of the Church had been drawn up, in the hope of putting an end to the imseemly controversies which were raging. In some of the towns where this was distributed, it seems to have had some efifect.^ Accordingly Laud now advised Charles to follow it up by a second proclamation, which should ^ S. R. Gardiner, History of England, vol. v, p. 354. * Cf. Hardwick, p. 200. / t^^m^-^^mm 50 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE ROYAL DECLARATION 51 be prefixed to a reprint of the Thirty-Nine Articles. This was at once done,^ and the document thus issued, which is probably from the pen of Laud himself, has kept its place prefixed to the Article to the present day. Its object was to allay the violent disputes by which the Church was torn asunder. And in order to effect this, his majesty was made to express his will, that " in these both curious and unhappy differences, which have for so many hundred years, in different times and places, exercised the Church of Christ .... all further curious search be laid aside, and these disputes shut up in God's promises, as they be generally set forth to us in the Holy Scripture, and the general meaning of the Articles of the Church of England according to them. And that no man hereafter shall either print or preach to draw the article aside any way, but shall submit to it in the plain and full meaning thereof ; and shall not put his own sense or comment to be the meaning of the article, but shall take it in the literal and grammatical sense." Simultaneously with the publication of this declara- tion a proclamation was issued, calling in Montague's Appello Ccesarem, in order that men might "no more trouble themselves with these unnecessary questions, the first occasion being taken away." But, in spite of this proof of earnestness and good faith, the indignation of the Puritan and Calvinistic party among the clergy and in the House of Commons knew no bounds. Some of the clergy at once addressed a petition to the King, complaining that he had placed them in a grave dilemma, for they must either disobey him by attacking the Pelagian and Arminian heresies, or else, on the other hand, " provoke the heavier indignation of the King of kings Himself by failing to make known the whole coimsel ^ Sec the history in Gardiner, vol. vii. p. 21 seq. of God," while the House of Commons, turned for the time into a theological debating society, solemnly adopted the following resolution : — " We, the Commons now in Parliament assembled, do claim, profess, and avow for truth, the sense of the Articles of religion which were established in Parlia- ment in the reign of our late Queen Elizabeth, which by public acts of the Church of England, and by the general and concurrent exposition of the writers of our Church, have been delivered to us ; and we do reject the sense of the Jesuits and Arminians. " ^ Into the later history of the controversy there is no necessity to enter here. It is sufficient to point out how true is the remark of Archdeacon Hardwick that such protestations are utterly inconsistent with the pre- text that the Articles were framed on a Calvinistic hypothesis, " for as the ' Declaration ' aimed at nothing more than to confine the teaching of the clergy to those points which were suggested by a plain and literal ex- position of the public formulary, the wild outcry raised against such principles of exegesis seemed to justify the argument which Montague and others were adopting, when they urged that * Calvinism ' is not accordant with the letter of the Articles, and cannot be deduced from them by any of the rules which judges commonly apply to the interpretation of a legal document." ^ 6. PuEiTAN Attempts to Amend or Supplement THE Articles. The observation just quoted is very just, and, in order to confirm it, it will be well to pass briefly in review the attempts to supplement or amend the Articles which at various times proceeded from the Calvinistic party, who * Gardiner, vol. vii. p. 41, Hardwick, p. 203. 1 52 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES thus by their own acts have again and again testified to their conviction that the natural interpretation of the authoritative formularies of the Church of England is not favourable to their tenets. Pitt's saying that the Church of England has a popish liturgy and a Calvin- istic set of Articles is well known, and probably represents an opinion which is widely held. It is, however, seriously inaccurate. It must be admitted that there is a differ- ence between the Articles and the Prayer-Book. The Articles, dating as they do from the early years of Elizabeth's reign, are, as has been already implied, the product of a time when churchmen were still standing on the defensive, and had not yet fully worked out their true position. For example, exposed as they were to the violent attacks of the party of the exiles on the whole system of Church government, they were concerned mainly to defend Episcopacy as an allowable form of Church government rather than as a system of divine origin. In other matters, too, their position was more or less tentative, and often negative rather than positive. The Articles naturally reflect the character of the time to which they belong, and speak at times in hesitating and indecisive tones. The Prayer-Book has twice undergone revision since the Articles assumed their present form. The revision of 1604 gave us the latter part of the Catechism with its clear teaching on the sacraments, and the presence in the Eucharist; while the impress of the Caroline divines was stamped upon the book in 1662; and the numerous changes then introduced bear witness to the determination of those who were responsible for them to make the book more adequate to express the mind of the Church catholic. In order, therefore, to arrive at the full teaching and mature judgment of the Church of England, the Articles must be supplemented by the Prayer-Book. Thus much ^ > j.i- if^mramnm PURITAN ATTEMPTS TO AMEND ARTICLES 53 is frankly admitted. What is not admitted is that the Articles were framed on a definite Calvinistic hypothesis, and that the interpretation fastened upon them by Calvinists is true. On such an hypothesis they are, to say the least, seriously defective ; and so much was admitted by the party, even as early as 1571. We have already seen that the Parliament of that year hesitated to enforce subscription to those Articles which concern the discipline and polity of the Church. In spite of this it would appear that some of the Puritans were unable to subscribe, and consequently suffered deprivation, under the terms of the Act ; i and that the doctrinal articles were not altogether satisfactory to them is proved by the Admonitions to Parliament which emanated from the Puritan party shortly afterwards. In the first of these (1572) the Puritans ingenuously admit that some re- servation was requisite on their part, if they were to accept the Articles, for they write as follows : — " For the articles concerning the substance of doctrine, using a godly interpretation in a point or two, which are either too sparely or else too darkly set down, we were and are ready, according to duty, to subscribe unto them." In the "Second Admonition" some months later they say boldly, " The Book of the Articles of Christian Religion speaketh very dangerously of falling from grace, which is to be reformed, because it too much inclineth to error. Again, the whole controversy, which resulted in the preparation of the Lambeth Articles in 1595, is a witness to the same fact. This is not the place to enter into the history of that controversy. ^ The Articles themselves *See the complaint raised in the "first admonition," quoted in Prothero's Statutes and ConstitiUional Docuvunts, p. 198. * On the controversy, see Perry's English Church History ^ vol. ii. p. 351 seq. and Hard wick p. 159 aeg. I 54 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES will be given in the commentary on Article XVII. It will be sufficient to point out here that in order to crush at the outset the revolt against the dominant Cahdnism at Cambridge Archbishop Whitgift was per- suaded to send down to the university a series of nine articles prepared by Whitaker, the Eegius Professor of Divinity, and revised and approved by the archbishop himself and a few other divines assembled at Lambeth. These Articles set forth, in the harshest and narrowest fashion, the main points of the Calvinistic system, and we have only to place them side by side with our own Seventeenth Article to feel convinced that, whatever it means, it does not mean to teach the doctrine of Calvin. Happily the Queen intervened, and the attempt to force the Lambeth Articles upon the Church was dropped. They were not even presented to Convocation, nor have they ever received any authority of any kind in this country. Once more, at the beginning of the reign of James L, the Puritans confessed that from their point of view the Articles were defective and inadequate. At the Hamp- ton Court Conference, in 1604, various objections were raised to them by Keynolds, the Puritan spokesman, who " moved his majesty that the Book of Articles of Religion, concluded 1562, might be explained in places obscure,' and enlarged where some things were defective. For example, whereas Article 16, the words are these: "After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace"; notwithstanding the meaning be sound, yet he desired that, because they may seem to be contrary to the doctrine of God's predestination and election in the Seventeenth Article, both those words might be explained with this, or the like addition, " yet neither totally nor finally"; and also that the nine assertions orthodoxal, as he termed them, concluded upon at ►<^^ mmm ■ 'i l l*' n PURITAN ATTEMPTS TO AMEND ARTICLES 55 Lambeth, might be inserted into that Book of Articles. ^ Towards the close of the same year an "apology for those ministers who are troubled for refusing of sub- scription and conformity" was drawn up by the Lin- colnshire Nonconformists and presented to the King (December 1, 1604), in which complaint is made that they are unable to subscribe, because they are ** persuaded that both the Book of Common Prayer and the other book (i.e. the Articles) contain in them sundry things which are not agreeable but contrary to the word of God."^ Again, when, during the Civil War, the Puritan party had obtained the upper hand, one of the first things undertaken by them was a revision of the Articles, "in order to render their sense more express and determinate in favour of Calvinism." Acting under directions received from the Parliament the West- minster Assembly of Divines, in 1643, appointed a committee, " to consider what amendments were proper to be made in the doctrinal articles of the Church of England, and report them to the assembly, who were ten weeks in debating upon the first fifteen." At a later date the divines were "very busy upon Article XVI. and upon that clause of it which mentioneth de- parting from grace," when their work was altogether suspended, by order of the Parliament. The first fifteen articles, as amended by this body, have been printed by Neal the Puritan historian,^ and a singular composition it is. The first article is the only one that was allowed to remain untouched. The changes in Articles IV., V., XIV., and XV. are of little or no consequence. Very significant, however, is the change in Article II., where 1 '* The Sum and Substance of the Conference, etc." in Cardwell's History of Conferences, p. 178. 3 Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. ii. p. 56. * Op. cU. vol. iii. Appendix i. 56 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES in the clause on the atonement, which states that Christ died " to be a sacrifice not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men," the word " all " is deliberately expunged, in order to bring the article into harmony with the tenet of "particular redemption." The eighth (" On the creeds") was at first omitted altogether, but the divines were content to let it remain, on condi- tion that the creeds were re-translated and annotated. In the remaining articles changes of more or less importance will be found, which are duly noted in the commentary,^ and which give in some cases an entirely different complexion to the teaching of the Articles. But even so we learn from the report of divines to the House of Commons that they were not com- pletely satisfied with the result of their labours, for they felt themselves constrained to acknowledge that, in spite of their efforts, very many things continued to be "defective," and " other expressions also were fit to be changed." 2 Still later, we find that the Puritan objections to the Articles were repeated after the Eestoration, and so late as 1689 Kichard Baxter, in his English Nonccmformity, admits that " the words of the Articles in their obvious sense are many times liable to exception, and that there are many things in them that good men may scruple." * The facts here collected together are suggestive. Of themselves they are sufficient to show how utterly false is the popular misconception to which Pitt gave expres- sion in the remark quoted above ; and when contrasted Avith the readiness of Laud and his party to appeal to the " literal and grammatical sense of the Articles," they in- dicate not obscurely that the interpretation placed upon the Articles by the Laudian school of divines and their successors is historically correct. * See especially the note's on Article IX. 2 See Hardwick, p. 212. » Ch. xxiv. ••«• HISTORY OF SUBSCRIPTION TO ARTICLES 57 6. History of Subscription to the Articles. When the Forty-Two Articles of 1553 were first issued, the intention of the authorities was that they should be offered for signature to all the clergy of the Church of England, and a royal mandate to this effect was accord- ingly issued in June 1553. The death of the King in the following month prevented it from being enforced, and when the Articles were revived and revised in 1563, no attempt to require general subscription was made by the Church. The Act of 1571, as has been already shown, was so drawn as to require the acceptance of the doctrinal Articles alone, as distinct from those which concern discipline. But the Convocation that met at the same time proceeded boldly to insist in its canons that every minister before entering on his duties should subscribe to all the Articles agreed upon in the Synod,^ and that all public preachers should signify their assent in the same way ,2 and although these canons were not subscribed by the Lower House, and were left without any formal ratification by the Sovereign, the Court of High Commission proceeded to enforce subscription to all the Articles without distinction. This rigour was con- siderably relaxed during the later years of Grindal's ^ " Quivis minister ecclesise, antequam in sacram functionem ingrediatur, subscribet omnilyus articulis de religione Christiana, in quos consensum est in Synodo ; et publico ad populum, ubicunque episcopus jusserit, patefaciet conscientiam suam, quid de illis articulis, et uni versa doctrina sentiat." — Card well's Synodalia^ vol. i. p. 120. 2 Quoniam articuli illi religionis Christianas, in quos consensum est ab episcopis inlegitiraa et sancta Synodo, jussu atque auctoritate serenissimae principis Elizabethae convocata et celebrata, hand dubie collecti sunt ex sacris libris Veteris et Novi Testamenti, et cum caelesti doctrina, quae in illis continetur, per omnia congruunt ; quoniam etiam liber publicarum precum, et liber de inauguratione archiepiscoporum, episcoporum, presbyterorum et diaconorum nihil continent ab ilia ipsa doctrina alienum ; quicunque mit- tentur ad docendum populum, illorum articulorum auctoritatem et fidem, non tan turn concionibus suis, sed etiam subscriptione confirmabunt." — Synodalia, vol. i. p. 127. lA,^"'-" »gi— 60 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES .' " III. That he alloweth the Book of Articles of Religion agreed upon by the archbishops and bishops of both pro- vinces, and by the whole clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord God 1562; and that he acknowledgeth all and every the Articles therein contained, being in number nine and thirty, besides the ratification, to be agreeable to the word of God. " To these three Articles, whosoever will subscribe he shall, for the avoiding of all ambiguities, subscribe in this order and form of words, setting down both his Christian and surname, viz. : — " /, N. N., do icilliingly and ex animo subscribe to these three articles above mentioned^ and to all things that are contained in them. And if any bishop shall ordain, admit, or license any, as is aforesaid, except he first have subscribed in manner and form as here we have appointed, he shall be sus- pended from giving of orders and licences to preach for the space of twelve months. But if either of the uni- versities shall offend therein, we leave them to the danger of the law, and His Majesty's censure." ^ The Act of Uniformity of 1662 required a still more stringent declaration of assent to the Book of Common Prayer, to be read publicly in church, by every person instituted or collated to a benefice with cure,^ but the ^ Cardwell's Syjiodalia^ vol. i. p. 267. The canons were passed by both Houses, and ratified by letters patent, in Latin, but an English translation was at once made, and printed by "Robert Barker, printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, anno 1604." ^ "I, A. B.J do hereby declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the book intituled, * The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the United Church of England and Ireland : together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches ; and the Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons' (13 & 14 Chas. II., eh. 4, § 6)." HISTORY OF SUBSCRIPTION TO ARTICLES 61 subject of subscription to the Articles did not come within its province,^ and, therefore, the form ordered by the Thirty-sixth Canon remained in force. After the revolution of 1688 an attempt was made to get rid of the various forms of subscriptions and declara- tions required from the clergy, and the abortive Compre- hension Bill of 1689 proposed that "No other subscriptions or declarations shall from henceforward be required of any person, but only the declaration mentioned in a statute made in the thirtieth year of the reign of the late King Charles the Second, intituled, *An Act for the more effectual preserving the King's person and government by disabling Papists from sitting in either House of Parlia- ment,' " and also this declaration following : — " I, A. B., do submit to the present constitution of the Church of England. I acknowledge that the doctrine of it contains in it all things necessary to salvation, and that I will conform myself to the worship and the government thereof, as established by law. And I solemnly promise, in the exercise of my ministry, to preach and practice according thereunto." ^ The Bill was introduced into the House of Lords, with- out any reference whatever to Convocation, and though it passed the Lords the House of Commons declined altogether to discuss it. " They were much offended with the Bill of Comprehension, as containing matters relating to the Church, in which the representative body of the clergy had not been so much as advised with."^ Accord- ingly, the somewhat ambitious scheme " for uniting their * Except 80 far as Zec/urcr* were concerned (13 & 14 Chas. II., c. 4, § 19), * See the report of Her Majesty's Commissioners appointed to consider the subscriptions, declarations, and oaths required to be made and taken by the clergy of the United Church of England and Ireland, 1865 (p. 53), where the form finally agreed upon by the House of Lords is given. ^ For the history of the bill see Perry, vol. ii. p. 543 scq., and Macaulay History of England, ch. xi. 62 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Majesties* Protestant subjects " was hastily dropped, and the agitation in favour of a change in the forms of subscription died away. In practice, the subscriptions required by the terms of the 13 th Act of Elizabeth and the Thirty -sixth Canon were combined, the form generally used being as follows : — " I, A. B.y do willingly and from my heart subscribe to the Thirty-Nine Articles of Keligion of the United Church of England and Ireland, and to the three Articles in the Thirty-sixth Canon, and to all things therein contained." In spite of the stringency of the tests required it was found early in the last century that a considerable number of clergy of Arian and Socinian opinions had crept into the ministry of the Church. These men, when confronted with the terms of the declaration to which they had set their hands, boldly declared that it was " an avowed prin- ciple among them that these Articles (viz. the Thirty -Nine) may lawfully and conscientiously be subscribed in any sense in which they themselves, by their own interpre- tation, can reconcile them to Scripture, without regard to the meaning and intention, either of the persons who first compiled them, or who now impose them."^ They were thus ready to evade their plain meaning and make short work of their "literal and grammatical sense." This dishonest and disingenuous manner of subscribing was denounced with great energy by Daniel Waterland in his " Case of Arian Subscription Considered," ^ and other works, and its advocates soon found that their position was an ^ SeeWaterland's "Case of Arian Subscription Considered," WorkSy vol. ii. p. 264. Dr. S. Clarke in his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, published in 1712, had laid it down as a maxim that ** every person may reasonably agree to such forms, whenever he can, in any sense at all^ reconcile them with Scripture." 2 Published in 1726. ■<» ■ > ». HISTORY OF SUBSCRIPTION TO ARTICLES 63 utterly untenable one. Then began an agitation for the removal of all tests, headed by Archdeacon Blackbume, the author of the notorious Confessional, a work in which " he denies that churches have any right to make confessions of faith, and asserts that the inalienable privilege of every one to believe as he pleases ought not to be interfered with. That these objectionable con- fessions, every one of which, according to Blackburne, contains "very material decisions from which an in- telligent Christian may reasonably dissent," should be imposed as terms of qualification for office, and formal subscription required to them, is contended to be an abominable injustice and tyranny."^ A petition was, accordingly, prepared, setting forth the views of the Latitudinarian party, and introduced into the House of Commons on February 6th, 1772. Its rejection was moved by the member for Oxford, Sir Roger Newdigate. Edmund Burke spoke strongly against it, and in the end the proposal to receive and consider the petition was re- jected by ?1 7 to 71. After this decisive defeat a con- siderable time elapsed before any further attempt was made to alter the terms of the declaration required from the clergy, and the forms of assent given above remained unchanged until the year 1865. A few years previously an abortive bill had been introduced into the House of Lords, for the purpose of abolishing the oaths and declara- tions required. Shortly after this a royal commission was appointed to consider the whole subject. Their re- port showed that the forms in use were unnecessarily numerous and complicated, and the commissioners were unanimous in recommending the substitution of a single declaration of assent to the Prayer-Book and Articles together, in place of the cumbrous forms till then in use. An Act of Parliament was passed in 1865 to give legal * Ferry' s English Church History, vol. iii. p. 101. 64 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES HISTORY OF SUBSCRIPTION TO ARTICLES 65 effect to their recommendations, and, at the same time, Convocation obtained leave from the Crown to revise the Canons so far as was necessary. An amended version of Canon XXXVI. was made and published by the Con- vocations of Canterbury and York, and confirmed by royal letters patent,^ and since that time the declaration of assent made by all candidates for orders, as well as by all persons admitted to any benefice or licensed to preach has run as follows : — *' I, A. B., do solemnly make the following declaration. I assent to the Thirty-Nine Articles of Keligion, and to the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons ; I believe the doctrine of the [United] Church of England [and Ireland], as therein set forth, to be agreeable to the word of God : and in public prayer and administration of the Sacraments, I will use the form in the said book prescribed, and none other, except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority." 2 Thus it is from the clergy and the clergy only that the Church demands subscription to the Thirty-Nine Aj-ticles. It is, of course, well known that at one time laymen were also required to subscribe them in the universities, — at the time of matriculation at Oxford, and before proceeding to a degree at both Oxford and Cam- bridge. This was first required at Oxford by the Puritan Chancellor Leicester, in the sixteenth century, in order to exclude Romanists from the university. Cambridge followed during the reign of James I. But the legisla- tion of 1854 and 1871 has entirely removed any such ^ The history of the agitation that led to the appointment of the com- mission is told in the Life of Archbishop Tail, vol. i. p. 487 scq. See also the report of the Commissioners themselves. ^ The words in brackets were of course disused after the Irish Church was disestablished in 1869. requirement. Nor can the Church fairly be held respon- sible for it while it lasted. It was really due to the authorities of the universities as such, and to the Crown.^ The Thirty-sixth Canon of 1604, it is true, stated that no person should be suffered to preach, to catechise, or to be a lecturer or reader of divinity in either university without subscribing the "Three Articles." But as if those who were responsible for it were conscious that in making this demand they were exceeding the rightful limits of their jurisdiction, they added that " if either of the universities shall offend therein, we leave them to the danger of the law and His Majesty's censure." But though the Church of England has never asked for any formal act of subscription to the Articles from the lay members of her communion, it cannot be denied that the Fifth Canon of 1604 makes some approach towards regarding them as terms of communion. ^ The following are the material facts in the history of subscription to the Articles at the universities. It was first required from candidates for degrees at Oxford by authority of the university in Convocation assembled, in October 1576. A few years later (Nov. 1581) in consequence of a suggestion from the Chancellor, Leicester, it was also required by the university from all persons at matriculation. In 1587, during the Chancellorship of Hatton, a declaration of assent to the Prayer-Book, as well as subscription to the Articles, was demanded from candidates for degrees ; and in the reign of James I., in consequence of an edict of the King (dated Jan. 18, 1616), a decree of the university (March 31, 1617) required from all candidates for degrees (except in music) subscription to the ThirtyNine Articles, the ''Three Articles " of the Thirty-sixth Canon, and the Oath of Supremacy. At Cambridge subscription to the " Three Articles " was for the first time required from candidates for all degrees by edict of James i., dated December 4, 1616, confirmed by decree of the heads of houses in 1623. In 1772 for the degree of B.A., and in 1779 for B.C.L., M.B., and M.D., there was substituted by a grace of the senate a simple declaration of membership of the Church of England : " I, A. B., do declare that I am, bond fide, a member of the Church of England, as by law established." But at Oxford the old forms of subscription were still required, though we learn from the report of the Oxford University Commission of 1852 that difierent interpretations were usually given, though without authority, by 66 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES " Impugners of the Articles of Beligion, estaUished in the Church of England^ censured. "Whosoever shall hereafter affirm, That any of the Nine-and-Thirty Articles agreed upon by the archbishops and bishops of both provinces, and the whole clergy, in the Convocation holden at London, in the year of our Lord God one thousand five hundred sixty-two, for avoiding diversities of opinions, and for the estab- lishing of consent touching true religion, are in any part superstitious or erroneous, or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe to, let him be excommuni- cated ijyso factOy and not restored, but only by the arch- bishop, after his repentance, and public revocation of such his wicked errors." The Canon, however, strong as its language is, was apparently intended to prohibit the laity from impugning and attacking the Articles rather than to require a different vice-chancellors or pro-vice-chancellors at the time of subscrip- tion for matriculation. " Sometimes the yterson matriculated is told that * he hereby expresses his assent to the Thirty-Nine Articles, so far as he knows them ' ; sometimes that * he probably has not read them, but that he has no objection to them ' ; sometimes that * he thereby declares himself to be a member of the Church of England.' Sometimes, however, no observation is ma.de.''— Heport, p. 55. Further, there was much justice in the following remark of the commissioners : " It certainly is singidar that a lay corporation should require from laymen, sim}>ly as a condition of membership, that which the Church of England does not require for participation in its most sacred ordinance. "—i2c/?or/, p. 55. Accordingly, the Oxford University Act of 1854 (17 & 18 Viet. c. Ixxxi.) made unnecessary any declaration or oath in regard to religion at matriculation. It also enjoined that it should be unnecessary for any person taking the degrees of B.A., B.C.L., B.M., or B.Mus., to make or subscribe any declaration or take any oath. But such degree was not to constitute a qualification for holding any office formerly held by members of the Church of England, unless the person had taken the oaths and declarations required. Finally, the Universities Test Act of 1871 (34 Vict. c. xxvi.) laid down definitely that no person on taking any degree other than a degree in divinity, or holding lay, academical, or collegiate oflBces should be required to subscribe any formulary of faith. HISTORY OF SUBSCRIPTION TO ARTICLES 67 definite and formal assent to them. Certainly it was so regarded by Archbishop Laud, who in his conference with Fisher the Jesuit, writes of it as follows : " A. C. will prove ' the Church of England a shrew, and such a shrew. For in her Book of Canons, shJ excommunicates every man, who shall hold anything con- trary to any part of the said Articles.' So A. C.^ But surely these are not the very words of the Canon, nor perhaps the sense. Not the words, for they are : 'Whoso- ever shall affirm that the Articles are in any part super- stitious or erroneous, etc' ; and perhaps not the sense. For It IS one thing for a man to hold an opinion privately withm himself, and another thing boldly and publicly to affirm it. And, again, it is one thing to hold contrary to some part of an Article, which perhaps may be but in the manner of expression ; and another thing positively to affirm, that the Articles in any part of them are super- stitious and erroneous. But this is not the main of the business ; for though the Church of England denounce excommunication, as is before expressed, yet she comes far short of the Church of Rome's severity, whose anathemas are not only for Thirty-Nine Articles, but for very many more, above one hundred in matter of doctrine, and that in many points as far remote from the foundation; though, to the far greater rack of men's consciences, they must be all made fundamental, if that Church have once determined them ; whereas the Church of England never declared that every one of her Articles are fundamental in the faith. For it is one thing to say, no one of them is superstitious or erroneous ; and quite another to say, every one of them is fundamental, and that in every part of it, to all men's belief. Besides, the Church of England prescribes only to her own children, and by those Articles provides but for her own peaceable consent in those doctrines of truth. But the Church of 68 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Eome severely imposes her doctrine upon the whole world, under pain of damnation." ^ Moreover, it must not be forgotten that the only formulary to which a layman is directly required to assent is the Apostles' Creed. It is this which is set before him at his baptism, and again in the visitation of the sick, as containing the Articles of the faith. The position which the Nicene Creed occupies in the Church's eucharistic office, where it is appointed to be simg or said before the worshippers are invited to join in the greatest act of fellowship and communion possible, practically interprets for us the sense in which the briefer form is to be understood. But it remains true of the Apostles' Creed that for the layman, " that, and that alone, is required at his baptismal admission within the Church; that, and that alone, is asked for at the deathbed, as a sufficient proof that the man retains what he orginally began with — the Christian's confession of a true faith." ^ The Articles, on the other hand, are at least primarily for the clergy. The loyal and faithful laity of the Church will naturally regard them with respect, and will in accordance with the terms of the Fifth Canon abstain from impugning them. But the Church never requires from them a formal act of assent to them. " Their proper usage is as a tutto? 8tSa;^^9, a sketch or frame- work of sound doctrine, by which the Church takes engagements from her clergy and other teaching officers, that — while occupying her pulpits and teaching in her name — they will not be disloyal ; but will teach in her spirit, and present her time-honoured doctrine, albeit in sundry forms and divers manners to her people." ^ ^ WorTcs (Anglo-Catholic Library), vol. ii. p. 60. 2 Curteis, Bampton Lectures^ p. 309 (Ed. 1). * Und. The whole passage is worth consulting, but it is not entirely firee from exaggeration, as there is no reference in it either to thQ THE CHIEF DIVISIONS OF ARTICLES 69 7. The Chief Divisions of the Ajiticles. It only remains to mark out the chief groups or divi- sions into which the Articles fall, before proceeding to the commentary upon them. The most natural and convenient division of them, in accordance with their subject-matter, appears to be the following : — I. The Catholic Faith and where it may be found (Articles I.-VIII.). (a) The Faith (Articles I.-V.). {h) Scripture and the Creeds (Articles VL-VIIL). II. Personal Religion, or Man and his Salvation (Articles IX.-XVIIL). III. Corporate Religion, or the Church, the Ministry, and the Sacraments (Articles XIX.-XXXI.). IV. Miscellaneous Articles, relating to the discipline of the Church of England, its relation to the civil power, etc. (Article XXXII.-XXXIX.). Fifth Canon, or to the position of the Nicene Creed in the Communion Service. fi THE FOETY-TWO AETICLES OF 1553. 1553. Artieuli de quibus in Synodo Lon- dinensi, Anno Dom. MDLII. ad tollendam opinionum dissen- sionem et consensum verse religionis firmandum, inter Epis- copos et alios Erudites Viros convenerat. I. De fde in Sacrosanctam TrinitcUem. Unus est vivus et verus Deus, seternus, incorporeus, impartibilis, impassibilis, immensfe potentine, sapientise, ac bonitatis, creator et conservator omnium, turn visibi- lium, tum invisibilium. Et in uni- tate hujus divinse naturae tres sunt personse, ejusdem essentiae, poten- tise, ac seternitatis, Pater, Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus. II. Verhum Dei verum Jiominem esse facttim. Filius qui est verbum patris in utero beatse Virginis, ex illius sub- stantia naturam humanam assump- sit, ita ut duffi naturae, divina et humana, integre atque perfecte in unitate personse, fuerint insepara- biliter conjunctse, ex quibus est unus Christus, verus Deus et verus homo, qui vera passus est, crucifixus, mor- 1553. Articles agreed on by the Bishoppes, and other learned menne in the Synode at London, in the yere of our Lorde Godde, MDLII., for the auoiding of controuersie in opinions, and the establishe- ment of a godlie concorde, in certeine matiers of religion. I. O/failh in the holie Trinitie. There is but one lining and true God, and he is euerlasting, with out bodie, partes, or passions, of infinite power, wisedonie, and good- nesse, the maker, and preseruer of all thinges bothe visible and inui- sible, and in vnitie of this Godhead there bee three persones of one sub- staunce, ix)wer, and eternitie, the Father, the Soone, and the holie Ghoste. n. That the icorde, or Sonne of God, teas made a very man. The Sonne whiche is the woorde of the father tooke mannes nature in the wombe of the blessed virgine Marie, of her Substaunce, so that two hole and perfeicte natures, that is to saie, the Godhead, and man- hode were ioigned together into one persone, neuer to be diuided, where- of is one Christe very God, and very 70 THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 71 tuus et sepultus, ut patrem nobis reconciliaret, essetque hostia non tantum pro culpa originis, verum etiam pro omnibus actualibus hom- inum peccntis. manne, who truely suffred, was crucified, dead, and buried, to re- concile his father to vs, and to be a sacrifice for all sinne of manne, bothe originall, and actuall. in. De descensu Christi ad Inferos. Quemadmodum C/i?'w/hs pro nobis mortuus est et sepultus, ita est etiam credendus ad inferos descendisse. Nam corpus usque ad resurrectionem in sepulchro jacuit, Spiritus ab illo emissus, cum spiritibus qui in car- cere sive in inferno detinebantur, fuit, illisque praedicavit, quem- admodum testatur Petri locus. III. Of the goyng dounc of Christe into Helle. As Christ died and was buried for vs : so also it is to be beleued, that he went doune into hell. For the bodie laie in the Sepulchre, until the resurrection : but his Ghoste departing from him, was with the Ghostes that were in prison, or in helle, and didde preache to the same, as the place of S. Peter doeth testifie. IV. Besurrectio Christi. Christus vere a mortuis resurrexit, suumque corpus cum came, ossibus, omnibusque ad integritatem hu- manae naturae pertinentibus, rccepit, cum quibus in coelumascendit, ibique residet, quoad extremo die ad judi- candos homines revertatur. IV. The Resurrection of Christ, Christe didde truelie rise againe from deathe and tooke again his bodie with flesh, bones, and all things apperteining to the perfec- tion of mannes nature, wherewith he ascended into Heauen, and there sitteth, untill he retourne to iudge men at the last daie. V. Dwinx ScHptursR doctrina sufUcit ad sahUein. Scriptura sacra continet omnia quai sunt ad salutem necessaria, ita ut quicquid in ea nee lej^itur neque inde probari potest, licet interdum a fidelibus, ut pium et conducibile ad ordinem et decorum admittatur, attamen a quoquam non exigendum V. The doctrine of holie Scripture is sufficient to Saluation. Holie Scripture conteineth all thinges necessarie to Saluation : So that whatsoeuer is neither read therein, nor male be proved there- by, although it be somtime receuied of the faithful, as Godlie, and pro- fitable for an ordre, and comeli- 72 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 73 est ut tanquam articulus fidei creda- tur, et adsalutis necessitatem requiri putetur. VL Fetus Testamentum non est rejiciendum. Testamentum Vetus, quasi Novo contrarium sit, non est repudi- andum, sed retinendum, quando- quidera tam in veteri quam in novo perChristumqui unicus estMediator Dei et hominum, Deus et homo, seterna vita humano generi est pro- posita. Quare non sunt audiendi, qui veteres tantum in promissiones temporarias sperasse confingunt. VII. Symbola tria, Symbola tria, Niceni, Athanasii, et quod vulgo Apostolicum appella- tur, omnino recipienda sunt. Nam firmissimis divinarum scripturarum testimoniis probari possunt. VIIL Peccatum Originale. Peccatum originis non est (ut fabulantur Pelagiani, et hodie Ana- baptistae repetunt) in imitatione Adami situm, sed est vitium et depravatio naturas cujuslibet homi- nis ex Adamo naturaliter propagati : qua fit ut ab originali justitia quam nesse: Yeat no manne ought to bee constreigned to beleue it, as an article of faith, or repute it requisite to the necessitie of Saluation. VL Tlie olde Testament is not to he re/used. The olde Testamente is not to bee put awaie as though it were contrarie to the newe, but to be kept still : for bothe in the olde, and newe Testamentes, everlasting life is offered to mankinde by Christ, who is the onelie mediatour betwene Godde and manne, being bothe Godde and manne. Wherefore thei are not to be hearde, whiche feigne that the olde Fathers didde looke onely for transitorie promises. VIL The three Credes, The three credes, Nicene Credo, Athanasius Crede, and that whiche is comnionlie called the Apostles Crede, ought thoroughly to be re- ceived : for thei maie be proued by most certeine warrauntes of holie Scripture. VIII. Of originali or Urthe sinne, Originali sinne standeth not in the folowing of Adam, as the Pellagianes doe vainlie talke, whiche also the Anabaptistes doe now a dales renue, but it is the fault, and comiption of the nature of every manne, that naturallie is longissime distet, ad malum sua natura propendeat et caro semper adversus spiritum concupiscat : un- de in unoquoque nascentium, iram Dei atque damnationem meretur. Manet etiam in rcnatis haec naturae depravatio, qua fit ut affectus camis, graece p6vr}fia (rap/c6s, quod alii sapientiam, alii sensum, alii affectum, alii studium vocant, legi Dei non subjiciatur. Etquamquam renatis et credentibus nulla propter Christum est condemnatio, peccati tamen in sese rationem habere con- cupiscentiam fatetur Apostolus. IX. De libero arbitrio. Absque gratia Dei, quae per Christum est, nos prevcniente ut velimus, et cooperante dum volumus, ad pietatis opera faci- enda, quae Deo grata sint et ac- cepta, nihil valemus. Z. De graiia. Gratia Christi, sen spiritus sanctus qui per eundem datur, cor lapideum aufert, et dat cor carneum. Atque licet ex nolentibus quae recta sunt volentes faciat, et ex volentibus prava, nolentes reddat, voluntati engendred of the ofspring of Adam, whereby manne is very farre gone from his former righteousnesse, whiche he had at his creation and is of his owne nature geuen to euill, so that the fleshe de- sireth alwaies contrarie to the spirit, and therefore in euery per- sone borne into this worlde, it deserueth Goddes wrath and dam- nation : And this infection of nature doeth remaine, yea in theim that are baptized, wherby the lust of the fleshe called in Greke iritum sanctum pos- sumus a gratia data recedere atque peccare, denuoque per gratiam Dei without arrogancie, and iniquitie. For by theim menne dooe declare, that thei dooe not onely rendre to God, as moche as thei are bounde to dooe, but that thei dooe more for his sake, then of bounden duetie is required : Whereas Christe saieth plainlie : when you haue dooen al that are commaunded you, saie, We be unprofitable seruauntes. XIV. No man is loitliout sinne, hut Christe alone, Christe in the trueth of our nature was made like unto us in al thinges, sinne onely except, from whiche He was clearelie uoide both in His fleshe, and in His spirite. He came to be the lambe without spotte, who by sacrifice of himself made ones for euer, should take away the sinnes of the worlde : and sinne (as Saint Jhon saieth) was not in him. But the rest, yea, althoughe we be baptized, and borne againe in Christe, yeat we all offende in many thinges : and if we saie, we have no sinne, wee deceive our selues, and the trueth is not in us. XV. Of sinne against the holie Ghoste. Euery deadlie sinne willinglie committed after Baptisme, is not sinne against the holie Ghoste, and unpardonable: wherefore the place for penitentes, is not to bee denied to soche as fall into sinne after Baptisme. After we have receiued the holie Ghoste, we maie departe from grace geuen, and fall 76 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES resurgere ac resipiscere. Ideoque illi damnandi sunt, qui se quamdiu hie vivant, amplius non posse peccare affirmant, aut vere resipi- scentibus pcenitentire locum de- negant. into sinne, and by the grace of God wee maie rise again, and amende our lines. And therefore thei are to be condemned, whiche saie, thei can no more sinne as long as thei live here, or denie the place for penitentes to soche as trulie repent, and amende their lives. XVI. Blasphcmia in Spiritum Sanctum, Blasphemia in Spiritum Sanctum, est cum quis Verborum Dei mani- fest^ perceptam veritatem, ex malitia et obfirmatione animi, con- vitiis insectatur, et hostiliter insequitur. Atque hujusmodi, quia maledicto sunt ob noxii, gravissimo sese astringunt sceleri. Unde peccati hoc genus irremissibile a Domino appellatur, et affirmatur. XVI. Blasphemic against (he holic Ghoste. Blasphemie against the holie Ghost is, when a man of malice and stubburnesse of minde, doeth raile upon the trueth of goddes word manifestlie perceiucd, and being enemie thereunto persecuteth the same. And because soche be guilty of Goddes curse, thei en- tangle themselues with a moste grieuous, and hainous crime, where- upon this kinde of sinne is called and affirmed of the Lorde, un- pardonable. XVII. Be Pra^estinatione et Elections, Prsedestinatio ad vitam est ffitemum Dei propositum, quo ante jacta mundi fundamenta suo con- silio, nobis quidem occulto, con- stanter decrevit eos quos elegit ex hominum genere, a maledicto et exitio liberare, atque ut vasa in honorem efficta, per Christum ad ffitemam salutem adducere ; unde qui tam praeclaro Dei beneficio sunt donati, illi, spiritu ejus op- portuno tempore operante, secundum propositum ejus vocantur, vocationi per gratiam parent, justificantur gratis, adoptantur in filios ni- XVII. Of predestination and election. Predestination to life, is the euerlasting purpose of God, where- by (before the foundacions of the worlde were laied) he hath con- stantlie decreed by his owne judge- mente secrete to vs, to deliuer from curse, and damnation those whom he hath chosen out of mankinde, and to bring them to euerlasting saluation by Christ, as vesselles made to honour : whereui)on, soche as haue so excellent a benefite of God geuen unto theim be called, according to Goddes purpose, by his spirite, woorking in due THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 77 geuiti Jesu Christi imagini effici- untur conformes, in bonis operibus sancte ambulant, et demum ex Dei misericorJia pertingunt ad sempi- ternam felicitatem. Quemadmodum prjedestinationis et electionis nostrse in Christo pia consideratio, dulcis, suavis, et ineffabilis consolationis plena est vere piis, et his qui sentiunt in se vim spiritus Christi, facta carnis, et membra quae adhuc sunt super terram mortificantem, animumque ad coelestia et superna rapientem, turn quia fidem nostram de seterna salute consequenda per Christum, plurimum stabilit atque confirmat ; tum quia amorcm nostrum in Deum vehementer accendit : Ita liomiui- bus curiosis, carnalibus, et spiritu Christi destitutis, ob oculos per- petuo versari prredestinationis Dei sententiam, perniciosissinmm est praecipitium, unde illos diabolus pertrudit vel in desperationem, vel in aeque perniciosam impurissimae vitaj securitatem. Deinde licet prredcstinationis decreta sunt nobis ignota, proniis- siones tamen divinas sic amplecti oportet, ut nobis in sacris Uteris generaliter propositae sunt : et Dei voluntas in nostris actionibus ea sequenda est, quam in Verbo Dei habemus diserte revelatam. seasone, thei through grace obeie the calling, thei be justified frely, thei be made sounes by adoptione, thei bee made like the image of Goddes onely begotten sonne Jesu Christe, thei walke religiouslie in goode woorkes, and at length by Goddes mercie, thei atteine to everlasting felicitie. As the Godlie consideration of predestination, and our election in Christe is ful of swete, pleasaunte, and vnspeakable coumfort to godlie persones, and soche as feele in themselves the woorking of the spirite of Christe, mortifying the woorkes of the flesh, and their earthlie membres, and drawing up their minde to high and heauenly thinges, aswel because it doeth greatly stablish and confirme their faith of eternal saluation to bee enioied through Christe, as because it doeth feruentlie kindle their love towardes Godde : So for curious, and caruall persones lacking the Spirite of Christ, to have con- tinuallie before their yies the sentence of Goddes predestination, is a moste daungerous dounefall, whereby the Deuill maie thrust them either into desperation, or into a rechielesnesse of most un- cleane lining, no lesse perilous than desperation. Furthermore, although the Decrees of predestination are vn- knowen unto us, yeat we must receiue Goddes promises, in soche- wise as thei bee generallie set foorth to vs in holie Scripture, and in our doings that wille of Godde is to be folowed, whiche we haue expresselie declared vnto us in the woorde of Godde. 78 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES XVIII. Tantum in nomine Christi spcranda est a'tcma salus. Sunt et illi anatheniatizandi qui dicere audent, unumquenuiue in lege aut secta quani prnfitetur esse serv- andum, niodo juxta illam et lumen naturte accurate vixerit : cum sacr« liters tantum Jesu Christi nomen prfedieent in quo salvos fieri hom- ines oporteat. XVIII. Wee must trustc to obteine eternal Saluation oncly by the name of Christe. Thei also are to be had accursed, and abhorred that presume to saie, that cuery man slialbe saued by the Lawe, or secte whiche he professeth, so that he bee diligente to frame his life according to tliat Lawe, and the lighte of Nature : For holie Scrip- ture doeth sette out vnto vs onely the name of Jesu Christ, whereby menne must be saued. XIX. Omnes obligantur ad moralia legis praicepta servanda. Lex a Deo data per Mosen, licet quoad cceremonias et ritus Christi- anos non astringat, neque civil ia ejus prsecepta in aliqua Repub. ne- cessario recipi debeant, nihilominus ab obedientia niandatorum quae Moralia vocantur, nuUus quantum- vis Christianas est solutus. Quare illi non sunt audiendi, qui .sacras literas tantum infirmis datas ease perhibent, et spiritum perpetuo jactant, a quo sibi qvae praedicant suggeri asserunt, quanquam cum sacris Uteris apertissime pugnent. XIX. All men are bounde to kepe the moral commandemcntes of the Laive. The Lawe, whiche was geuen of God by Moses, although it binde not Christian menne, as concerning the Ceremonies, and Rites of the same : Neither is it required, that the Civile Preceptes and Ordres of it should of necessitie bee received in any commune weale : Yet no manne (bee he neuer so i>erfeicte a Christian), is exempte and lose from the Obedience of those Commaunde- nientes, whiche are called Moral. Wherfore thei are not to be bark- ened vnto, who aftiiine that holie Scripture is geuen onlie to th weake, and do boaste theimselues continually of the spirit, of whom (thei sai) thei haue learned soche things as thei teache, although the same be most euidently repug- naunt to the holie Scripture. THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 79 XX. De Ecclesia. Ecclesia Christi visibilisest contus fidelium, in quo verbum Dei purum prnedicatur, et Sacramenta quoad ea quae necessario exiguntur, juxta Christi institutum recte adminis- trantur. Sicut erravit Ecclesia Hyeroso- lymitana, Alexandrina et Antio- chena, ita et erravit Ecclesia Ro- mana, non solum quoad agenda et caeremoniarura ritus, verum in his etiam quae credenda sunt. XX. Of the Church. The visible Churche of Christe is a congregation of faiethfull Menne, in the whiche the pure worde of God is preached, and the Sacra- mentes be duelie niinistred, accord- ing to Christes ordinaunce, in all those thinges that of necessitie are requisite to the same. As the Churche of Jerusalem, of Alexandria, and of Antioche hath erred : So also the Churche of Rome hath erred, not onely in their liuing, but also in matiers of their faith. XXI. De Ecclesia authoritate. Ecclesije non licet quicquam in- stituere, quod verbo Dei scripto adversetur : neque unum Scripture locum sic exponere potest, ut alteri contradicat. Quare licet Ecclesia sit divinorum librorum testis et conservatrix, attamen nt adversus eos nihil decernere, ita jirseter illos nihil credendum de necessitate salu- tis debet obtrudere. XXL Of the aucihoritie of the Cliurche. It is not lawfulle for the Churche to ordein anything, that is contrarie to Goddes worde writen, neither maie it so expoune one place of Scripture, that it be repugnaunt to an other. Wherefore although the Churche be a witnesse and a keper of holie writte, yet as it ought not to decree any thing againste the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thinge to bee be- leued for necessitie of saluation. XXIL De authoritate Conciliorum Qeneralium. Generalia Concilia sine jussu et voluntate Principum congregari non possunt ; et ubi convenerint, quia ex hominibus constant qui non omnes spiritu et verbis Dei reguntur, et errare possunt et interdum erra- runt, etiam in his quae ad uormam XXIL Of the aucthoritie of general Couv^ailes. Generall counsailes maie not be gathered together, without the cora- maundemente, and will of Princes : and when thei be gathered (foras- muche as thei be an assemblie of men whereof all be not gouemed with the spirite, and worde of God) 80 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES pietatis pertinent : ideo qnae ab illis constituuntur, ut ad salutera neces- saria, neque robur habent neque authoritatem, nisi ostendi possunt e sacris literis esse desumpta. XXIII. De Purgatorio. Scholasticorum doctrina de Pur- gatorio, de Indulgentiis, de venera- tione et adoratione turn imaginum turn reliqiiiarura, nee non de invo- catione sanctorum, res est futilis, inaniter conticta, et nullis Scriptur- arum testimoniis innititur, imo Verbo Dei perniciose contradicit. tbei mai erre, and sometime have erred, not onely in worldlie matiers, but also in thinges perteining vnto God. Wherefore thinges ordeined by theim, as necessarie to saluation, haue neither strength, nor auctoritie, onleese it maie be declared, that thei be taken out of holie Scripture. XXIII. Of Purgatorie. The doctrine of Scholeaucthoures concerning Purgatorie, Pardones, worshipping, and adoration as well of images, as of reliques, and also inuocation of sainctes, is a fonde thing vainlie feigned, and grounded vpon no warraunt of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the woorde of God. XXIV. NeTno in Ucclesia ministret nisi vocatus. Non licet cuiquam sumere sibi munus publico pnedieandi, aut ad- ministraudi sacraraenta in Ecclesia, nisi prius fuerit ad hfec obeunda legitime vocatus et missus. Atque illos legitime vocatos et missos ex- istimare debemus, qui jier homines, quibus potestas vocandi ministros atque mittendi in vineam Domini publico concessa est in Ecclesia, cooptati fuerint et asciti in hoc opus. XXIV. JVb manne maie minister in the Con- gregaHon^ except he he called. It is not lawful for any man to take vpon him the office of Publique preaching, or ministring the sacra- mentes in the congregation, before he be lawfullie called, and sent to execute the same. And those we ought to iudge lawfullie called, and sent, whiche be chosen, and called to this woorke by menne, who haue publique auctoritie geuen vnto them in the congregation, to cal, and sende ministres into the Lordes vineyarde. XXV. Agendum est in Ecclesia lingua quce sit populi nota. Decentissimura est et Verbo Dei XXV. Menne must speakt in the Core, prsesens esse non potest. Et quoniam, ut tradunt Sacraj literae, Christus in Ccelum fuit sublatus et ibi usque ad finem seculi est i>er- mansurus, non debet quisquam fidelium camis ejus et sanguinis Realem et Cori)oralem(utloquuntiir) praesentiam in Eucharistia vel credere vel profiteri. Sacramentum Eucliaristije ex institutione Christi non servabatur, circumferebatur, elevabatur, nee adorabatur. fore the bodie of Christe cannot bee preseute at one time in many, and diuerse places. And because (as liolie Scripture doeth teache) Christe was taken vp into heauen, and there shall continue unto thende of the worlde, a faithful man ought not, either to beleue, or openlie to con- fesse the reall, and bodilie presence (as thei term it) of Christes fleshe and blonde, in the Sacramente of the Lordes Supper. The Sacramente of the Lordes Supper was not commaunded by Christes ordinaunce to be kepte, caried about, lifted up, nor wor- shipped. XXX. JDc unica Christi ohlatione in cruce 2)crfccta. Oblatio Christi semel facta, per- fecta est redemptio, propitiatio et satisfactio pro omnibus peccatis totius mundi, tarn originalibus quam actualibus : neque pneter illam unicam est ulla alia pro pec- catis expiatio. Unde Missarum sacrificia, quibus vulgo dicebatur, Sacerdotem offere Christum in re- missionem pcente aut culpse pro vivis et defunctis, iSgmenta sunt, et perniciosse imposturse. XXX. Of the pcrfcictc oblacion of Christe made vpon the crosse. The offring of Christe made ones for euer, is the perfeicte redemption, the pacifiyng of goddes displeasure, and satisfaction for al the sinnes of the whole world, bo the original and actuall : and there is none other satisfaction for sinne, but that alone. Wherefore the sacri- fices of masses, in the whiche, it was commonlie saied, that the Prieste did ofTre Christe for the quicke and the dead, to have re- mission of peine or sinne, were forged fables, and daungerouse deceiptes. XXXI. Cxlibatvs ex rerbo Dti prsccipitur nemini, Episcopis, Presbyteris et Dia- oonis non est mandatum ut c^eli- XXXI. 77ie state of single life is com- maundcd to no man by the worde of God, Bishoppes, Piiestes, and Deacons THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 85 batum voveant : neque jure divino coguntur matrimonio abstinere. are not commaunded to vowe the state of single life without mar- riage, neither by Goddes lawe are thei compelled to absteine from matrimonie. XXXIL Excommunicati vitandi sunt. Qui per publicam Ecclesioe de- nunciationem rite ab unitate Ec- clesiae praecisus et excommunicatus, is ab universa fidelium multitu- dine, donee per pcenitentiam publico reconciliatus fuerit arbitrio Judicis competentis, habendus est tanquam Ethnicus et Publicanus. XXXII. Excommunicate persones are to bee avoided. That persone, whiche by open denunciacion of the Churche, is rightlie cut of from the vnitie of the Churche, and excommunicate, ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the faiethful, as an Heathen and publicaine, until he bee openlie reconciled by penaunce, and receiued into the Churche by a Judge that hath aucthoritie thereto. XXXIIL TradUiones Ecclesiasticss. Traditiones atque caeremonias easdem non omnino necessarium est esse ubique, aut prorsus con- similea, nam varise et semper fuerunt et mutari possunt pro regionum et morum diversitate ; modo nihil contra Dei verbum instituatur. Traditiones et crereraonias Ec- clesiasticas, quae cum Verbo Dei non pugnant et sunt authoritate publica institutae atque probatae, quisquis privato consilio volens et data opera publice violaverit, is, ut qui peccat in publicum ordinem Ecclesiae, quique laedit authorita- tem Magistratus, et qui infirmorum fratrum conscientias vulnerat, pub- xxxin. Tradicions of the Churche, It is not necessarie that tradicions and ceremonies bee in all places one, or vtterlie like. For at al times thei haue been diners, and male bee chaunged, according to the diversitie of countries and mennes maners, so that nothing bee ordeined against goddes worde. Whosoever through his priuate iudgement willinglie, and pur- poselie doeth openlie breake the tradicions and ceremonies of the Churche, whiche bee not repug- naunte to the worde of God, and bee ordeined, and approved by common aucthoritie, ought to be rebuked openlie (that other maie feare to doe the like) as one that 86 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES lice, nt caeteri timeant, argnendus est. offendeth against the common ordre of the churche, and hurteth thaucthoiitie of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weake brethren. XXXIV. Homilias. Homiliae nuper Ecclesiae Angli- canae per injunctiones Regias tra- ditae atque commendatse, piae sunt atque salutares, doctrinamque ab omnibus amplectendam continent : quare populo diligenter, expedite, clareque recitandse sunt. XXXIV. Homilies. Thomelies of late geuen, and set out by the kinges auchoritie, be godlie and holsome, conteining doctrine to be receiued of all menne, and therefore are to be readde to the people diligentlie, distinctlie, and plainlie. XXXV. De Libro Prceationum et esBrc- mmiarum Ecclesiee Anglicante, Liber qui nuperrime authoritate Regis & Parliamenti Ecclesi» Anglicanae traditus est, continens modum & formam orandi, & Sacra- menta administrandi in Ecclesia Anglieana : similiter & libellus eadem authoritate editus de ordina- tione ministrorum Ecclesiae, quoad doctrinae veritatem, pii sunt, & salutari doctrin.-© Evangelii in nullo repugnant sed congruunt, & ean- dem non panim promovent & illustrant, atque ideo ab omnibus Ecclesiae Anglicanae fidelibus mem- bris, & maxime a ministris verbi cum omni promptitudine animo- rum k gratiarum actione, recipiendi, approbandi, & populo Dei commen- dandi sunt. XXXV. 0/ the looJce of Praiers, and Cere- monies of the Church of Englande. The Booke whiche of very late time was geuen to the Churche of Englande by the kinges auc- thoritie, and the Pariamente, con- teining the maner and fourme of praiying, and ministring the Sacra- mentes in the Churche of Englande, likewise also the book of ordring Ministers of the Churche, set foorth by the forsaied aucthoritie, are godlie, and in no poincte repug- naunt to the holsome doctrine of the Gospel but agreable thereunto, ferthering and beautifiying the same not a litle, and therfore of al faith full membres of the Churche of Englande, and chieflie of the ministers of the worde, thei ought to be receiued, and allowed with all readinesse of minde, and thankes geving, and to bee commended to the people of God. THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 87 XXXVI. Be dvilihus Magistratibus. Rex Angliae est supremum caput in terris, post Christum, Ecclesiae Anglicanae & Hibernicae. Romanus Pontifex nuUani habet jurisdictionem in hoc Regno Angliae. Magistratus civilis est a Deo or- dinatus atque probatus, quamo- brem illi, non solum propter iram sed etiam, propter conscientiam, obediendum est. Leges civiles possunt Christianos propter capitalia & gravia crimina morte punire. Christianis licet ex mandato Magistratus arma portare & justa bella administrare. XXXVI. Of Civile magistrates. The king of Englande is Supreme head in earth, nexte vnder Christe, of the Churche of Englande, and Jrelande. The Bishoppe of Rome hath not iurisdiction in this Realme of Englande. The ciuile Magistrate is ordeined, and allowed of God : wherefore we must obeie him, not onely for feare of punishment, but also for con- science sake. The civile lawes male punishe Christien men with death, for heinous, and grieuous offences. It is lawefull for Christians, at the commaundement of the Magis- trate, to weare weapons, and to serve in laweful wares. XXXVII. Cliristianorum bona non sunt commitnia. Facultates et bona Christian- orum non sunt communia, quoad jus et possessionem, ut quidam Anabaptistae falso jactant; debet tamen quisque de his quae possidet pro facultatum ratione, pauperibus eleeraosynas benigne distribuere. XXXVII. CJiristien mennes gooddes are not commune. The richesse and gooddes of Christians are not commune, as touching the right title and pos- session of the same (as certain Ana- baptistes dooe falslie boaste) ; not- withstanding euery man ought of such thinges as he possesseth, liber- allie to geue almes to the pore, according to his habilitie. XXXVIII. Licet Christianis jurare. Quemadmodum juramentum vanum & temerarium a Domino XXXVIII. Christien menne maie take an Othe. As we confesse that vaine, and rashe swearing is forbed Christien 88 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES nostro Jesu Christo & ab Apostolo ejus Jacobo, Christianis hominibiis interdictum esse fatemur, ita Chris- tianum religionem mininie prohi- bere censenius, quin jubente Magis- tratii, in causa fidei & charitatis jurare liceat, modo id fiat juxta Prophetfle doctiinam, in Justitia, in Judicio et veritate. men by our Lorde Jesu Clirist, and his Apostle James : so we iudge that christien religion doeth not prohibite, but that a man maie sweare, whon the magistrate re- quireth in a cause of faith, and charitie, so it bee doen (according to the Prophetes teaching) in iustice, iudgemente, and trueth. XXXIX. Ressurrectio mortuorum noiidum est facta, Resurrectio mortuorum non ad- huc facta est, quasi tantum ad animum pertineat qui per Christi gratiam a morte peccatorum exci- tetur, sed extremo die quoad omnes qui obierunt, expectauda est ; tunc enim vita defuuctis (ut Scripturae manifestissime testantur) propria corpora, carnes & ossa restitu- entur, ut homo integer, prout vel recte vel perdite vixerit, juxta sua opera, sive pitemia sive pcenas reportet. XL. Defunetorum animm neque cum corporibus intereunt, neque otiose dormiunt. Qui animas defunetorum pnedi- cant usque ad diem judicii absque omni sensu dorm ire, aut illas asse- runt una cum corporibus mori, k extrema die cum illis excitandas, ab (trthodoxa fide, qufe nobis in sacris littris traditur, proraus dis- sentiunt. XXXIX. Tlie Eesurrcetion of the dead is not yeat brought to passe. The Resurrection of the dead is not as yet brought to ])asse, as though it only belonged to the soulle, whiche by the grace of Christe is raised from the death of sinne, but it is to 1)6 loked for at the last daie : for then (as Scripture doeth moste manifestlie testifie) to all that bee dead their awne bodies, fleshe, and bone shall be restored, that the whole man maie (accord- ing to his workes) haue other rewarde, or punishment, as he hath lived vertuouslie, or wickedlie. XL. TVie soulles of them that departe this life doe neither die with the bodies^ nor sleep idlie. Thei whiche saie, that the soulles of suche as depart hens doe sleepe, being without al sence, foaling or perceiuing vntil the day of iudge- ment, or affirme that the soulles die with the bodies, and at the laste daie shalbe raised vp with the same, doe vtterlie dissent from the right beliefe declared to vs in holie Scripture. THE FORTY-TWO ARTICLES OF 1553 89 XLI. MUlenarii. Qui Millenariorum fabulam re- vocare conantur, sacris Uteris ad- versantur, & in Judaica delira- menta sesc praecipitant. XLI. Heretics called MUlenarii. Thei that goe about to renewe the fable of hereticks called Millenarii, be repugnant to holie Scripture, and caste them selues headlong into a Juishe dotage. XLII. Kon omnes tandem servandi sunt. Hi quoque damnatione digni sunt, qui conantur hodie perni- ciosam opinionem instaurare, quod omnes, quantumvis impii, servandi sunt tandem, cum definito tempore a justitia divina cunas de admissis flagitiis luerunt. XLII. All men shall not bee saued at the length. Thei also are worth ie of con- demnaciou, who indeuoure at this time to restore the dangerouse opinion, that al menne be thei neuer so vngodly, shall at length bee saved, when thei have suffered paines for their sinnes a certain time appoincted by Goddes iustice. ARTICLE I 91 I I AETICLE I De Fide in Saerosanctam Trinitatem, Unus est vivus et verus Deus, letemus, incorporeus, impartibilis, irapassibilis, inimenssB potentise, sapientiae, ac bonitatis : Creator et conservator omnium turn visi- bilium tum invisibilium. Et in unitate hujus divinae naturae tres sunt Personae, ejusdem essentiae, potentise, ac aeternitatis, Pater, Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus. 0/ Faith in the Holy Trinity, There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts or passions, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness, the maker and preserver of all things both visible and invisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be three per- sons of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. This first Article has remained without any alteration since the publication of the Forty-Two Articles of Edward VI. in 1553, in which series it occupied the same position as it does in our own set. Its language may be traced ultimately to the Confession of Augsburg,^ the terms of which on this subject were adopted almost verbatim in the Thirteen Articles of 1538, agreed upon by a joint- committee of Anglican and Lutheran Divines. The same language re-appears also in the Reformatio Legum Ucclesiasticarum, De Summa Trinitate et Fide Catholica, cap. 2. ^ Art. 1. **2)c Deo. — Ecclesiae magno consensu apud nos docent decretum Nicense Synodi, de unitate essenti.T, et de tribus personis, verum et sine ulla dubitatione credendum esse. Videlicet, quod sit una essentia divina, quae appellatur et est Deus setemus, incorporeus, impartibilis, immensa poteniia, sapientia, bonitate, Creator et Conservator omnium rerum visibi- Hum et invisibilium, et tamen tres sint personoe ejusdem essentice potentice, et cocetemce, Pater, Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus : et nomine personae utuntur ea significatione qui usi sunt in hac causa scriptores ecclesiastici, ut signi- ficet non partem aut qualitatem in alio, sed quod proprie subsistit." The words in italics are repeated almost verbatim in our own article. 90 The need of such an Article as this is shown by the formidable spread of Anabaptism in this country as well as on the Continent. Contemporary documents show how very many of the Anabaptists had lost all faith in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Some were reviving the Sabellian heresy, and denying that there was more than one Person in the Godhead ; others were teaching a form of Arianism, denying the Divinity of the Second Person, while others again maintained that Christ was " a mere man."^ The article falls into two main divisions. The first part treats of the existence of God, and the " necessary "^ doctrine of the divine imity. The second speaks of the mode of God's existence, and the distinctions within the divine nature. The statement in the first part, that there is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness, the maker and pre- server of all things, both visible and invisible, expresses a belief which is not peculiar to Christianity, but is common to both natural and revealed religion, and is held by every serious Theist, as well as every believer in the Christian revelation. It is not therefore a doctrine » The reality of the danger and the character of the heresies prevalent is shown by the closing words of the Article in the Confession of Augsburg : " Damnant omnes haereses, contra hunc Articulum exortas, ut Manichseos, qui duo principia ponebant, bonum et malum. Item Valentinianos, Arianos, Eunomianos, Mahometistas, et omnes horum similes. Damnant et Samosateuos, veteres et neotericos, qui, cum tantum unam personam esse contendant, de verbo et de Spiritu Sancto astute et impie rhetoricantur, quod non sit personai distinctae, sed quod Verbum significat verbum vocale, et Spiritus motum in rebus creatum." 2 By saying that the unity of God is ** necessary" it is meant that the contrary is inconceivable. '' Two prime causes are unimaginable, and for all things to depend of one, and to be more independent beings than one is a clear contradiction." — Pearson On the Creed, Article 1, ch. ii. § 13. 92 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES for which " Scripture proof " will be sought. The exis- tence and unity of God is assumed and taken for granted throughout Scripture. Indeed, Scripture will have no force or weight to anyone who has not first on other grounds accepted this truth. Thus the consideration of the several " proofs " of God's existence belongs to the study of "evidences," and would be out of place in a commentary on the Thirty-Nine Articles. It is therefore not considered necessary to enter into it here, but the reader will find in the foot-note reference to a few recent works in which the whole subject is discussed.^ The second part of the Article, And in unity of this Godhead there be three persons of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, states in the briefest possible terms the great truth taught us by Revelation concerning the nature of God, the acceptance of which distinguishes Christianity from Judaism, Mohammedanism, Unitarianism, and all other forms of religious belief. The subject will be best considered under the follow- ing heads :— 1. The grounds on which the doctrine is accepted. 2. The history of the doctrine in the Church, and the growth of technical phraseology in connection with it. 3. The explanation of the doctrine. I. The Grounds on tvhich the Doctrine is accepted. Our belief in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity rests entirely on the revelation made by God in Holy Scripture. Flint's Theism and Anii-Theistic Tlieories. Bishop EUicott's Being of God. See also Mozley's Essays, Historical and Theological, vol. ii. ; Essays on The Argument of Design and The Principle of Causation ; and Illing- worth's Bampton Lectures^ Lect. iv. ARTICLE I 93 Intimations that distinctions of some sort exist in the divine nature may be discerned in the Old Testament, but the proof of the doctrine can only be sought in the teaching of the Gospels. Without a direct revelation from God man could never by his reason have discovered that in the unity of the Godhead there are three persons, but when once this is disclosed man can see that it is not merely not contrary to reason, but rather that it satisfies the demands of his reason, and fits in with his deepest thoughts on the nature of God. Though " not discoverable by reason," it is yet " agreeable to reason."^ (a) The preparation for the revelation of the mystery under the Old Covenant — To guard the truth of the unity of God, and to bear a never-failing witness to it in the midst of idolatry and polytheism, was the special function of the Jewish Church. " Hear, Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord" (Deut. vi. 4) forms the central declaration of the Old Covenant, standing to it in much the same relation that the com- mand to baptize into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost stands in to the Christian Church. It is, therefore, not to be expected that the doctrine of Personal distinctions within the Godhead will be prominently brought forward in the Old Testament. The unity must first be established and firmly fixed in the minds of God's chosen people before the further revelation can be safely made and the existence of dis- tinct persons within the Godhead be disclosed without fear of leading men to polytheism. And yet throughout the Old Testament the thoughtful reader will from time to time discern the presence of hints, suggestions, and anticipations of the truth subsequently made known in its fulness through the incarnate Son. There are three verses in the early chapters of Genesis in which devout ^ Gore's Bampton Lectures, p. 134. 94 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES minds have often found an adumbration of the doctrine of the Trinity, namely, Gen. L 26, " And God said. Let us make man in our image, after our likeness"; iii. 22, " And the Lord God said. Behold the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil " ; xi. 7, " And the Lord said ... go to, let us go down, and there confound their language." So also in Isaiah vi. 8, we read, " I heard the voice of the Lord, saying. Whom shall I send, and who will go for us." Various interpretations of these passages have been proposed. Some have explained the plural as that used by monarchs in speaking of themselves in decrees, etc., but this explanation is now generally rejected, as not in accordance with Hebrew usage. The majority of modern commentators prefer the view which refers the plural to the angels, as if God announced to them His resolve to create man. It is, however, difficult to hold this view without supposing that a co-ordinate share in the act of creation is granted to the angels, which is quite inadmissible,^ and it is by no means clear that the patristic interpretation of these passages which sees in them an adumbration of the doctrine of the Trinity is incorrect. Again, the believer, who reads the Old Testament in the light of the New, may well see a foreshadowing of the doctrine in the threefold repetition of the divine name in Aaron's bless- ing. Num. vi. 24-26, "The Lord bless thee and keep thee ; the Lord make His face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee ; the Lord lift up His countenance upon thee and give thee peace " ; as well as in the song of the seraphim in Isaiah vi. 3, "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of Hosts " — an utterance which has become the " Tersanctus " of the Christian Church (cf. Eev. iv. S).^ 1 See, however, SpmreU's Notes on the Hebrew Text ofCknesis, p. 14. 2 Cf. the thrice-repeated refrain in Ps. xcix. 3, 5, 9, which is really an echo of the song of the seraphim. "Holy is He . . . Holy is He . . . Holy is the Lord our God." See the B.V. Nothing is said in the ARTICLE I 95 All these passages, however, though they may appeal forcibly to those who have already accepted the doctrine can scarcely serve for proof of the doctrine to the un- believer. For pm-poses of controversy no high value can be attached to them. The real line of preparation for the disclosure of the mystery must be sought elsewhere. It will be found in a study of those passages in which God is spoken of in His covenant relation to man, acting upon him, and revealing Himself to him, in a twofold manner. There is first that which may be called the " external " manifestation, by means of the messenger or " angel of the Lord," who speaks now as God, and now as one sent by God, so that the angel is in part identified with Jehovah, and in part distinguished from Him. Thus we read that " the Lord appeared " to Abraham, and " lo, three men stood over against him." Then follows the account of the manifestation, and then we read that " the men turned from thence, and went towards Sodom ; and Abraham stood yet before the Lord . . . And the Lord went His way, as soon as He had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned to his place. And the two angels came to Sodom " (Gen. xviiL 1 ; xix. 1). Plainly, then, one of the three was a more exalted Being than "the two angels," and represented " the Lord." Again in Joshua v. 14, a mysterious being text of the name Elohim, a plural form in which some would see a reference to the doctrine, because it is now generally agreed that it is simply the plural of majesty or intensity. It has been truly pointed out that "those who adduce it as an anticipation of the doctrine of the Trinity appear to forget that this use of the plural does not stand cUone in Hebrew ; the words jnK and Vya meaning lord, master, are often used in the plural with reference to a single human superior {e.g. Ex. xxi. 4, 6, 8, 29) ; and Isaiah (xix. 4) describes the conqueror of Egypt as ntfp d'jhk, where the adjective is singular, but the substantive is plural."— S. E. Driver, in the Expositor, Srd series, vol iil p. 42. 96 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES appears to Joshua, and announces himself as " Captain of the Lord's host," and immediately afterwards we read of Him as " the Lord " ; for " the Lord said to Joshua, See, I have given into thine hand Jericho, etc." (See also Gen. xvL 7 seg.\ xxu. 11, 14; xxiv. 7, 40; xxxi. 11-13; Ex. iii. 2 seq,\ xiii. 21 ; xiv. 19 ; xxxii., xxxiii.) There is no need to consider here the oft-discussed question which of the two views of the " Angel of the Lord " is correct — (1) That which has the support of most of the Greek Fathers, from Justin Martyr onwards, and of some of the Latins, namely, that the angel is actually the Logos, or Second Person of the Holy Trinity, thus manifesting Himself before the Incarnation; or (2) that which was advocated by St. Augustine, and is adopted by most moderns, namely, that he is a created angel, acting as the direct representative of Jehovah. In either case God's presence is specially manifested through him, and thus there is a real preparation for the revela- tion of God in Christ, and the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity.^ In this connection refer- ence must also be made to those numerous passages from which the Jews of Palestine constructed their doctrine of the Logos, the Word, or " Memra," which represents the personal action of God, and which is found in the Targums in many places where the communion of God and man has to be expressed. For instance, in the oldest Targum, that of Onkelos, Adam is represented as hearing the voice of the word of the Lord in the garden (Gen. iii. 8) ; the Lord protects Noah by His word when he enters the ark (vii. 16), and at Sinai, Moses brings forth the people to meet the word of God (Ex. xix. 17). In all such passages we can see that " the Palestinian instinct seized upon the concrete idea of "the word 1 On the "Angel of the Lord," see Oehler's Tluology of tJi£ Old Testa- merU, vol. i. p. 188 aeq., and Medd's Bampton Lectures, Note vii. p. 426. ARTICLE I 97 of God,' as representing His personal action, and un- consciously prepared the way for a gospel of the In- carnation.^ " But, further, there was, under the Old Covenant, yet another mode in which God disclosed Himself to man, through what may be termed an " internal " revelation! God is frequently spoken of as acting or working in man by means of His Spirit, a power proceeding from Him, not yet revealed as a distinct person, though in some passages there is an approximation to this, which must have led men's minds in the direction of the revelation afterwards made. Thus, throughout the Old Testament, the Spirit of God, or the Spirit of Jehovah, is represented as the principle of the life of man's soul, and every natural and intellectual gift in man is traced back to it. (See Job xxvii 3, xxxiii 4; Gen. xli. 38; Ex. xxxi. 3, XXXV. 31.) It is the Spirit which is the source of inspiration (Numb, xi 25 ; Isa. Ixi. 1), and the prin- ciple of sanctification (Ps. li. 10-12, cxliii. 10). Even the special title given to the Third Person of the blessed Trinity under the New Dispensation is prepared for under the Old Covenant, for in two passages the Spirit of God is spoken of under the name of God's Holy Spirit. " Cast me not away from Thy presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit (LXX. to irvevfia to S,yc6p aov) from me" (Ps. li. 11). "But they rebelled, and grieved Eis holy Spirit (to wvevfjua to aycov avTov) : therefore He was turned to be their enemy, and Himself fought against them. Then He remembered the days of old, Moses, and His people, saying, Where is He that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of His flock ? where is He that put His holy Spirit (ri Trvevfia to dycop) in the midst of them" (Isa. IxiiL 10, 11).2 * Westcott on S. John, p. xvii. ' Outside the canonical books the title occurs again in AVisdom ix. 17. 98 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE I 99 Thus, although it would be an error to read the com- plete doctrine of the New Testament into the Old, yet it is undeniable that the way was prepared for it under the Old Covenant, and that the teaching of Holy Scripture on the Angel of the Lord and God's Holy Spirit foreshadows distinctions within the Godhead, which were subsequently revealed as Personal, (h) The revelation of the mystery in the New Testament. — When we pass from the Old Testament to the New we find that we no longer have to content ourselves with faint adumbrations of the doctrine, but that it is clearly indicated that the distinctions within the Godhead are personal. And yet, as it has been truly said, " there is no moment when Jesus Christ expressly reveals this doctrine. It was overheard rather than heard. It was simply that in the gradual process of intercourse with Him, His disciples came to recognise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as included in their deepening and enlarging thought of God." ^ Almost the earliest intimation was that made at our Lord's baptism, when there came from heaven the voice of the Father, testifying to the beloved Son, upon whom the Spirit descended like a dove (S. Matt. iii. 13-17). And from this time onwards we can trace the gradual disclosure of the truth throughout our Lord's teaching. All through His ministry He taught His disciples to regard His relation to His heavenly Father as unique, showing that His Sonship was something peculiar, different from the sonship which they themselves could claim. His language implied that, though person- ally distinct from the Father, He was yet one with Him, and so Himself divine. So with increasing clearness, "And Thy counsel who hath known, except Thou give wisdom, and send Thy Holy Spirit from above." See also Wisdom i. 5 and Ecclus. xlviii. 12, where Codex A reads, 'EXt6t, p. 17. ARTICLE I 105 Greek Tpid<; is found for the first time in the works of Theophilus of Antioch (a.d. 180), who speaks of the first three days of creation as " Types of the Trinity, of God, and of His word, and of His wisdom." ^ The Latin word Trinitas occurs a few years later in the writings of Tertullian, himself the first Latin writer of the Church, ^ and from his days onwards it is used as a well-known term. ^ Athenagoras, one of the Greek apologists who wrote about 176, uses language which shows that the relation of the three Persons of the Godhead was beginning to attract attention. " Who would not marvel to hear men call us atheists, although we speak of God the Father, and God the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and set forth at once their power in unity {rrjv iv t^ ivaxret hvvafiiv), and their distinction in order " {rrjv iv tj} rd^ev BLalpeaiv).^ But it was not till the rise of false teaching forced the orthodox to say what they meant by their belief that the terms Person and Substance came into use. During the last quarter of the second century two formidable heresies arose, in meeting which the Church was com- pelled to enlarge her vocabulary, and make use of more precise and definite language with regard to the Godhead than she had hitherto done. When Theodotus and Artemon ^ taught that Christ was " a mere man " (yfrcXov av6payrrov)f it became necessary to bring into even greater ' Ad AtUobjcum. ii. sec. 15, ryirot t^s Tpiddos, tov Oeov Kal roO A6yov avTOv Kal rijs ^. 198-217). 106 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES prominence than before the truth which had been held all along that He is essentially divine. When, on the other hand, Praxeas ^ taught that Christ was personally one with the Father, so that it was actually the Father who suffered on the cross in the character of the Son, the Church in denying this was compelled to say %vhat she held the distinctions within the Godhead to be. The particular form of heresy of which Praxeas appears to have been the originator is sometimes called Patripassi- anism, from the fact that its advocates asserted that the person of the Father suffered in Christ; and sometimes Sabellianism, from a teacher who refined somewhat on the teaching of Praxeas. Its essential feature consists in the denial that the distinctions in the Godhead are per- sonal, and the assertion that they are merely distinctions of character, phenomenal rather than real. It is only after the rise of these two heresies that the terms Person and Substance begin to come into promin- ence. The teaching of Artemon was characterised as a "God-denying apostasy." It was met by a threefold appeal, to Holy Scripture, to the traditional teaching, and to the worship of the Church ; and it was shown that the essential divinity of Christ had been believed in by the Church from the beginning.2 But then, as the orthodox thus met the teaching of Artemon, they were confronted with the assertions of the Sabellians, who, accepting the truth of Christ's Divinity, erred in denying His personal distinction from the Father, and charged those who maintained it with Tritheism, or belief in three Gods. To meet this charge it became necessary not only to dwell on the unity, but also to explain of what kind the distinction between Father, Son, and Holy Ghost was ^ Our knowledge of Praxeas is chiefly due to TertuUian's work against him. For the character of his teaching see esiKicially ch. i. - Sec EuseUus, V. xxviii. ARTICLE I 107 held to be. So, in order to defend himself from anything like Tritheism, Tertullian lays down that the Son is of one substance (univ^ substantias) with the Father.^ By early Greek Fathers the nature or essence of the Godhead which is communicated to the Son and Holy Spirit from all eternity was expressed by two words — ousia {ovala)^ and hypostasis (uiroaraa-c^;). Some among the Alexan- drians especially have employed the former word to denote the " essence " or " substance " of the Godhead, while elsewhere among the Greeks hypostasis was sometimes used with the same meaning.^ But while the unity was thus established, it was also necessary to define more closely in what the distinctions within the Godhead con- sist. The Sabellians taught that they were merely dis- tinctions of character. In opposition to this erroneous teaching the Church was driven to enlarge her termino- logy. She was compelled to explain what she meant by her Creed, and forced to say what was to be under- stood by her assertion that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were " three." Three what ? This question was persistently asked, though it is clear that the Church at first shrank from answering, feeling that no one human term was adequate to express exactly what she under- ^ Adv Praxcam, ch. ii.: "Nihilominus custodiatur oiKovofilas sacra- mentum, quae unitatem in trinitatem disponit, tres dirigens, Patreni et Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, tres autem non statu sed gradu, nee sub- stantia sed forma, nee potestate sed specie, unius autem substanticc et imius status et unius jwtcstatis, quia unus Deus, ex quo et gradus isti et formae et species in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti deputantur." - Clement of Alexandria has ovala, Strovi, ii. 2, 5 ; iv. 25, 163 ; v. 10, 66. Still earlier, Justin lilartyr had spoken of the Son as not being separ- ated from the ovtrla. of the Father, Dial. ch. 128. Origen also has oUia. In Joann. x. 21, Dc Oral. 23, and so have the Alexandrian Diony- sius, and Alexander, uxia-rao-ts is used by Dionysius of Rome (Routh, RdiquuB Sacroc, iii. p. 373), as well as by Gregory Thaumaturgus (cf. Basil, Ep. 210, 5). It is also the term generally employed by Athanasius himself for "substance," though in one of his earlier works he si)eaks of "three Hypostases." — See Robertson's Athanasius, p. 90. 108 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES stood the language of Scripture to teach. She would have preferred to remain content with expressing the unity by the neuter of the pronoun, saying that the Father and the Son were 7inwn, not units, and the dis- tinction by the masculine; yet Tertullian, in writing against Praxeas, is at last compelled to use the word Persons, Personcc} Hippoly tus, a little later, uses irpoatiiTa, its true Greek equivalent.2 Origen, however, employing hypostasis in a different sense from that in which it had been generally used by the Church, speaks of there being more hypostases than one in the Godhead,^ thus making it the equivalent of Person, and using it to express the distinction. It will be seen from what has now been said that a door was opened to confusion of thought, the word hypostasis being taken in two different senses, in one of which it expressed an entirely different conception from the Liitin siibstantia, its true etymological equi- valent. Hence, in the fourth century, two questions arose with regard to vTroarafTL^. (a) Ls there one, or are there three in the Godhead ? {h) What is its Liitiu equivalent ? {a) The use of the word Ouda for " Substance " was naturally brought more into prominence by the language formally adopted at Nicsea (325) against the Arian \Adv Praxeam, ch. vii. ; cf. ch. xii. : "Alium autem quomodo accipere debeas jam professus sum, jfcrsona^, non substantice, nomine, ad distmctionem non ad divisionem. Ceterum ubique teneam tcnam sub- starUiam in tribus cohrerentibus, etc." ' Contra Eceresini Noeti, ch. vii. xiv. ; Philosoph. ix. 12. In Joann, ii. 6, rj/xeU /jl^vtoi ye TpeTs vfroardffets Trciddfifvot Tvyxdpew. Contra Cdsum, viii. 12. Cf. Bigg's Christian Plaionists of Alexandria, p. 163. "The word for Person in Origen is commonly Hypostasis, that for the divine nature is less determinate, but is frequently oiLsia" Yet Origen also uses ouV/a to express the distinctions : Dc Orat. 15, trcpos Kar oifflav koL imoKdfievbv ivriv 6 'Ti6$ tov xarpoi, as also did Pierius of Alexandria (see Photius, Codex 119). ARTICLE I 109 heresy, which denied the eternal Divinity of the Son. In the Creed which was there promulgated, it was stated that the Son was " Only-Begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father" (fxovor/evrj Tovriariv ck t^9 ov(ria<; tov waTpos:), and again that He is " of one substance with the Father " (ofioova-iov tc3 irarpi). But in the ana- themas appended to the Creed, the use of vTroa-Taai^ as an equivalent for ovala was recognised, for those were condemned who said that the Son was of "a different substance or essence " from the Father (i^ €T€pa<; vno- ^ffiv rr^ Qei&nrros, and yroo-rdiretj expressing raj rG>v rpiQy ididnjras.—GTeg. Nazianz. Oral. xxi. 46, with which cf. Hooker, V. li. § 1. terminology to that of the Eastern Church, and spoke of " tres svhstantice" ^ but such language never found favour in the west. It could not safely be used without a great deal of explanation, and to most minds would be im- mediately suggestive of Arianism. Consequently it soon dropped out of use. It is vehemently rejected by Jerome ^ and Augustine, the latter of whom speaks as if the phraseology was firmly fixed as una essentia or sub- stantia, and tres personWy by the time when he wrote his great work on the Trinity (a.d. 416).^ And in the use of these terms the Western Church since then has never varied. There is no need to pursue the history of the doctrine further. There have, it is true, from time to time been serious controversies within the Church as to its exact meaning, and incautious language has sometimes been used, that was perilously near to Tri theism on the one hand and Sabellianism on the other.* But there has been no change or wavering on the part of the Church * Hilary, De Synodis. He is, however, very careful to explain his language. ** Idcirco tres substantias esse dixerunt, subsistentium personas per substantias edocentes, non substantiam Patris et Filii diversitate dis- similis essentiai separantes." — Vol. ii. p. 480. ^ Ep. ad Damasum, xv., where he gives an account of the trouble in which he was involved in Syria, because of his refusal to speak of *' three Hypostases," a refusal which he bases on the ground that, " in the whole range of secular learning, hypostasis never means anything but essence." ' S. Aug. De Trinitate, V. ix. * For the later history of the doctrine reference may be made to Hagen- bach's History of Doctrines, vol. ii. p. 209, and vol. iii. p. 327. In the eleventh century the nominalism of Roscellinus exposed him to the charge of Tritheism, while Abelard's teaching drew upon him the charge of Sabellianism. For the controversy in the seventeenth century between Dr. South and Dean Sherlock, in which charges of Sabellianism were again raised, see Perry's English Church History, pt. ii. p. 564 ; and on Waterland's masterly vindication of the doctrine of the Trinity, in oppo- sition to the Arianism of Dr. Clarke and others, see Abbey and Overton's English Church in the Eighteenth Century, ch. viii. 112 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES as to the terms to be used in the expression of her faith. We pass therefore to the last subject to be considered in connection with this article. III. The Explanation of the Doctrine, In considering what is to be said in explanation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity it must ever be borne in mind that the terms used by the Church, ^iCa ovaia rpel^ viroaTaaetf;, una substantia tres persona;, " one sub- stance, three persons," are simply chosen by her in order to express as accurately as possible what she believes to be the real meaning of the statements of the Holy Scripture, in which our Lord revealed all that can be known by man of the divine nature. As we study the language in which our Lord speaks of Himself, and His relation to the Father and the Holy Spirit, it becomes clear that there are two principal dangers to be guarded against — (1) that of exaggerating the distinctions and so separating the " Persons," and (2) that of explaining away the distinctions, so as ultimately to deny their reality. In other words, we are exposed on the one hand to the danger of * confounding the Persons," as the Sabellians did; on the other to that of " dividing the substance," as did the Arians and Socinians of a later day. The sketch given above of the growth of technical phraseology will have shown that the term Persons was only fixed upon to express the doctrine after much hesitation ; because it became absolutely necessary, in the face of heresy, to use some term to describe what the Church meant by her teaching on " the Three in the Godhead " ; and this term, though not altogether satisfactory, came nearer than any other to express what she understood Holy Scripture to teach. The matter is well put by Augustine in the following passage in his work on the Trinity : — ARTICLE I 113 "Many writers in Latin who treat of these things, and are of authority, have said that they could not find any other more suitable way by which to enunciate in words that which they understood without words. For, in truth, as the Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Father, and that Holy Spirit, who is also called the gift of God, is neither the Father nor the Son, cer- tainly they are three. And so it is said in the plural, ' I and the Father are one.' For He did not say, ' is one,' as the Sabellians say, but ' are one.' Yet, when the question is asked, ivhat are the three ? human lan- guage labours altogether under great poverty of speech. The answer, however, is given, ' three Persons; not that that might be spoken, but lest nothing should be said." ^ It is clear, then, from this confession that the term '* cannot be employed without considerable intellectual caution." 2 We must guard against taking it in the sense of cliaracter^ and also against thinking of three separate existences, such as we think of when the ex- ' " Non audcnms dieeie unam esseutiam, tres substantias; sed unam (jssentiam vel substantiam ; tres autem personas, quemadmodum multi Latini ista tractantes et digni auctoritate dixerunt, cum alium modum apti- orem noii invenirent quo enunciarent verbis quod sine verbis intelligebant. Re vera enini cum Pater nou sit Filius, et Filius nonsit Pater, et Spiritus Sanctus ille qui etiam donum Dei vocatur, nee Pater sit nee Filius, tres utique sunt. Ideoque pluraliter dictum est, Ego U Pater unum minus, Nou enim dixit, unum est, quod Sabelliani dicunt ; sed, unum sumus. Tamen cum quaeritur quid tres, magna prorsus inopia humanum laborat eloquium. Dictum est tamen tres personae non ut illud diceretur, sed ne taceretur."-.Z)« TrirUtate, V. ix. ; of. VII. vi. And S. Tliomas Aquinas, Summa, la, Q. 29 a, 3, " Conveniens est ut hoc nomen {persona) de Deo dicatur ; non tamen eodem niodo quo dicitur de creaturis, sed excellentiori modo." - Liddon's Bampton Lectures, p. 32. ' It was probably for this reason that the Greek Church discouraged and finally altogether discarded the use of the term irpbauirov as the equivalent oi persona. 8 114 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE I 115 pression is applied to three men. "The word Person, used in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, would on first hearing suggest Tritheism to one who made the word synonymous with individual ; and Unitarianism to another, who accepted it in the classical sense of a mask or character" ^ The Church, it is needless to say, means neither of these. All that she intends to express by the use of the term " three Persons " is that which she understands Holy Scripture to teach, namely, that there are three eternal distinctions in the divine naiure, anterior tOf and independent of any relation to created life} 1. That the distinctions are eternal is clearly taught in such a passage as S. John i. 1. "The Word," which was in the beginning with God " (7rpo9 rov Seov) must have been distinct from God (6 Oeo?), and yet " the Word was God" {Qeo^). And were there no other passages bearing on the subject the saying of our Lord recorded in S. John xvii. 5 (" the glory which I had with Thee before the world was") would of itself be sufficient to show that the Trinity is not merely " economic " — i.e. God did not become a Trinity when He manifested Himself to mankind as Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier — but that it is " immanent," i.e. an eternal fact in the divine nature, altogether independent of relation to creation. The Sou must have been a distinct Person " before the world was," if He then possessed a " glory " of His own " with the Father." 2. But while it is thus taught in Scripture that the Persons are eternally distinct, it is implied with equal clearness that though distinct they are not " separate." Our Lord's own deliberate utterance maintained His unity with the Father. " I and the Father are one." '£70) Kal 6 iraTTjp ev ea^ev (S. John x. 30). "Every ' Newman's ArianSy p. 442. - See Liddon's Bamptoii Lectures, ubi supra. word," says Bishop Westcott, " in this pregnant clause is full of meaning. It is /, not the Son ; the Father, not my Father \ one essence (ei/, Vulgate unum), not one person (el?, unus)\ are, not am . . . It seems clear that the unity here spoken of cannot fall short of unity of essence. The thought springs from the equality of power {My hand, the Father's Jiand [see vers. 28, 29]); but infinite power is an essential attribute of God ; and it is impossible to suppose that two beings distinct in essence could be equal in power." ^ Here then, in the compass of this brief utterance, we find a full and satis- factory refutation of both Arianism and Sabellianism. "Per unum Arius, per sumus Sabellius refutatur."^ The plural verb emphasises the distinction of Persons, while the neuter, €v (unum), brings out the truth which the Church has expressed in saying that the Son is " of one substance with the Father," that is, partaker of His eternal and essential nature. 3. But, further, while Holy Scripture in this way reveals to us the unity of the divine nature, there is another truth also taught in it which requires to be carefully kept before the mind, if the full teaching of the Church is to be realised. This is the truth that the Father is alone unoriginate, the fount of Deity in the eternal life of the Trinity. There is perhaps a danger lest we should represent to ourselves a sort of abstract " God- head," behind the three Persons, and think that of it all three equally partake, so that in it is to be found their source and origin. Against any such erroneous notion the Church has guarded by the doctrine of the Monarchia, which teaches that the Father is the only source or ap')(ri, the sole Fount of Deity (irrjyrj OeoTrjTo^;) from which the Son and Holy Ghost from all eternity derive their divine * Commentary on S. John's Gospel, in loe. ' Bengel. 116 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES being.i « As the Father hath Kfe iu Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself " (S. John, V. 26). "The living Father hath sent Me, and I live because of the Father" (Bca rov iraripa, eh. vl 57). In virtue of this the Father is rightly said to be the First Person of the Holy Trinity, by a priority, not of time, but of order. To quote Bishop Pearson on this subject : " As there is a number in the Trinity by which tlie Persons are neither more nor less than Three, so there is also an order by which of these Persons the Father is the Fii-st, the Son the Second, and the Holy Ghost the Third. Nor is this order arbitrary or external, but in- ternal and necessary, by virtue of a subordination of the Second unto the First, and of the Third unto the First and Second. The Godhead was communicated from the Father to the Son, not from the Son unto the Father ; though, therefore, this were done from all eternity, and so there can be no priority of time, yet there must be acknowledged a priority of order, by which the Father is First, and the Son Second. Again the same Godhead was communicated by the Father and the Son unto the Holy Ghost, not by the Holy Ghost to the Father or the Son ; though, therefore, this was also done from all eternity, and therefore can admit of no priority in reference to time, yet that of order must be here ob- served ; so that the Spirit receiving the Godhead from the Father, who is the First Person, cannot be the First ; receiving the same from the Son, who is the Second,' cannot be the Second, but, being from the First and Second, must be of the Three the Third." ^ 1 Cf. Athanasius, Orat. C(mir. Arian. iv. ch. i. iiio. d/>xij e^hT-qro^ koX ov Svb apxai Sdev Kvplus «rai fiovapxia itrriv. - Pearson, Expo-nlim of the Creed, Article VIII. § 22 : cf. Article I ch, iii. § 11. ARTICLE I 117 To this divine " subordination " it is probable that our Lord referred when He said to His disciples, " The Father is greater than I" (S. John, xiv. 28). In one sense it is, of course, true that if the Father is God, the Son God, and the Holy Ghost God, " none is greater or less than another," for the Godhead does not admit of degrees, and of " more " or " less." And accordingly many divines have understood the words of our Lord just cited to refer to Him as incarnate, as they are apparently taken in the Athanasian Creed : " Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood." But it is also true that there is a sense in which the Father, as the Source of all the Divinity of both Son and Spirit, is " greater " than either. " The Son is the Father s equal, as partaker of His nature. He is His * Subordinate ' in that this equality is eternally derived." ^ 4. There is one other truth taught in Holy Scripture, which the Church has summarised in a definite theologi- cal term, in order to guard fully the unity of the Holy Trinity. It is the doctrine of the nepLywpV^^'^^y or Oo- inherence, the mutual indwelling of the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. The doctrine is based on the words of our Lord in S. John xiv. 10, 11, "The Father abiding in Me (o irarrjp iv ifiol fiivwv) ... I am in the Father and the Father in Me " ; with which should be compared S. Paul's words of the Holy Spirit in 1 Cor. ii 11, " Who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in him ? Even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God." The meaning of the doctrine is well stated by Bishop Bull, from whose words it will be clearly seen that it ^ Liddon's Bampton Lectures, p. 234. See Westcott, Commentary on S. John's Gospel, detached note on ch. xiv. 28, for a full summary of Patristic references to this text. 118 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES effectually guards the faith of the Church from any approach to Tritheism, and secures her belief in the unity of the Godhead : — " The Father is the principle of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and both are propagated from Him * by an internal, not by an external, production,' from which it results that they are not only of the Father, but in the Father, and the Father in them ; and that in the Holy Trinity one Person cannot be separated from the other, as three human persons are divided from one another ; for they who hold that the three Hypostases of the Godhead are in this way separate are rightly called Tritheists ... The Father and the Son are in such sense One, as that the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son ; and that the one cannot be separated from the other. This mode of union the Greek theo- logians call 'TrepLx<»)p'n iXeye rbv Ge6j/, and Rom. viii. 32 : ToO l8lov viod oix i'^ 126 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE II 127 well to emphasise the fact that it was not adopted at Nicaea without anxious consideration. It was open to several objections, which the Arians were not slow to urge. The following were the principal ones : — 1. It was said to be a novelty, and not found in Scripture. 2. It was a philosophical term ; as such it had been used by heretics, and it implied a divine substance distinct from God, of which the persons partook. 3. It had been rejected at the Council of Antioch against Paul of Samosata, a.d. 268. 4. It was of a Sabellian tendency. Of these objections the first was met by pointing out that, even if the term were novel, its meaning was not ; and though it was not actually found in Scripture, yet it did but sum up the doctrine of Scripture on the nature of the Son of God. "In it," says Athanasius, "the Bishops concentrated the sense of the Scriptures" ^ As a matter of fact, however, the term was not such a novelty as the Arians tried to make out, and precedents for its use were quoted from early writers, notably Dionysius of Rome and his namesake of Alexandria in the third century.^ With regard to the second objection, it was made abundantly clear that the Church was not using the term in the sense in which it had been used by philo- sophers. She did not intend to imply that there was any substance distinct from God. She only used the term " to express the real Divinity of Christ, and that as being derived from and one with the Father's." ^ ^ Athanasius, Def, Nie. defin. ch. v. § 20. 2 Athanasius, uhi supra. Eusebiiis of Caesarea himself confesses the antiquity of the word ("Epistola Eusebii in Socrates," IT. E. I. viii.). Origan apparently had made use of the word {Pamphili Apol. 6), and so had Theognostus, while so early a writer as Tertullian has ita Latin equivalent *' unius mhdaMicR" (see above, p. 107). 3 Newman's Arians^ p. 191. The third objection was disposed of by showing that if the Fathers at Antioch rejected the word it was because Paul of Samosata had attempted sophistry, and taking the word in its philosophical sense had argued that it implied that there were three substances, one the previous substance, and the other two derived from it. Its rejection, if a fact, was due to the desire to guard against this. At Nicaea, on the contrary, its adoption was necessitated by the evasions of the Arians. At Antioch it would have obscured the truth and led to misconception, wliereas at Nicaea it was required to protect the faith from error of a different character.^ The fourth and last objection was removed by a care- ful explanation of the sense in which the word was really used, and by the gradual adoption of the word Hypostasis, to express the real distinctions within the Godhead, in which the Church believed. In this manner all the objections raised to the use of the term were met, and it was insisted upon and clung to by the orthodox party, not from any feeling of obstinacy or prejudice, but simply because experience taught them that it was the one term which the subtlety and ingenuity of the Arians was unable to pervert or explain away, and which expressed without ambiguity the truth that needed to be so jealously guarded, the truth, that is, of the absolute and essential Divinity of the Son of God. We have now considered separately each expression in the first part of the article. Before, however, proceeding to our second subject it is necessary to give a brief sum- mary of the scriptural evidence of the Divinity of tJie Son. 1. In the first place, it may be shown that our Lord's own claims are such that it is impossible to think of Him except as one who is God. At first, no doubt, this ' See Athan. De Synodis, 48, and cf. Liddon's Bampton LcetureSt p. 480. 128 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE II 129 would not have been realised by those around Him ; but as they listened to His teaching, heard Him set His claims above those of the nearest and dearest of personal relations/ assume as of right a power to extend or even to abrogate the provisions of the Mosaic law,^ assert Himself as "greater than Jonah," "greater than Solomon,"^ "greater than the temple,"* claim Himself to give rest to the weary and heavy-laden, speak of a knowledge of the Father possessed by none other,^ declare that He would come again "in His glory and the glory of the holy angels," and sit on the throne of judgment,^ they must have wondered with an increasing wonder who it was who could make such tremendous claims. Nor was this all. They saw Him work His miracles, and as He healed the sick, or cast out devils, they heard Him in His own name bid the sick arise or the devils depart.^ Miracles had been wrought by others before. They were wrought by the apostles themselves. But it was in their Master's name that the devils were subject unto them.8 And when they bade the sick arise it was again in His name, "^neas, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole" (Acts Lx. 34). Very striking is it to contrast tlie Turd's words to the evil spirit, " Thou deaf and dumb spirit, I command thee (iyco aoc einTda-crQ)) come out of him" (S. Mark ix. 25), with St. Peter's disclaimer in Acts iii. 12, " Why marvel ye at this ? or why look ye on us as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk." So again, they saw that He accejjted icorship, by whomsoever it was offered to Him ; » ' ^- ?[*"• '^' 37. 2 s. Matt. V. 22 s^q., xix. 8 seq. S. Matt. xii. 41, 42. 4 g, ^att. xii. 6. 5 S. Matt. xi. 27-30. « S. Matt. xxv. 31. J S. Mark ix. 25 ; S. Luke vii. 14. » S. Luke x. 17. » S. Matt viii. 2 (the lei)er) ; ix. 18 (the ruler of the synagogue) ; xiv. though "worship" as every Jew was taught from his childhood was the prerogative of God alone, and must be rejected not only by men (see Acts x. 25, xiv. 15), but even by angels (see Rev. xix. 10, xxii. 9). Again, when He spoke of His relation to the Father, they heard Him distinctly assert His union with Him ("I and the Father are one," S. John x. 30), and speak of the " glory which " He " had with " Him " before the world was " (S. John xvii. 5). They heard Him claim a timeless pre-existence before Abraham had come into being, and in so doing appropriate as His own the special title of Jehovah under the Old Covenant " I am " (irplp ^A^paafi yeviaOai, eyco el/jLc, S. John, viii. 58). Very instructive also is the discourse in S. John v., in connection with which the Jews sought to kill Him, " because He not only brake the Sabbath, but also called God His own Father, making Himself equal with God" Thus His opponents understood Him to claim Divinity, and He did not utter a single word that would lead them or His own disciples to suppose that their inference was wrong. " Intelligunt Judaei quod non intelligunt Ariani " is the striking and suggestive comment of Augustine on the passage. Thus, as the apostles listened to such language, and heard such claims advanced as those which have been very briefly summarised here, it must gradually have dawned upon them that their Master was not only as one of the prophets of old ; they realised at last that He was the Messiah for whom all Jews were looking, and that He was in a unique and special sense the Son of God. Peter was but the mouthpiece of them all when 33 (those with Him in the boat) ; xv. 25 (the Syro-Phoenician woman) ; XX. 20 (the mother of Zebedee's children) ; xxviii. 9. 17 (the women and disciples after the resurrection) ; St. Mark v. 6 (the Gadarene demoniac). The force of the argument is best seen by contrasting these passages with those referred to in the text where apostles and angels refuse with horror the "worship " offered to them. 130 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE II 131 li ,ii He confessed, " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (S. Matt. xvi. 16). Even this confession, how- ever, great as it is, falls short of the full acknowledgment of His eternal Godhead, for in spite of indications which may to us appear not obscure,^ it does not seem that the Jews were looking for a divine Messiah.^ But when the crowning proof of divine power was given by the resur- rection from the dead, then there came the conviction, never afterwards lost, expressed in the words of Thomas, which were accepted by our Lord as the true expres- sion of faith in Him, " Thomas saith unto Him, My Lord and my God" (S. John xx. 28).* 2. In considering the evidence for the Divinity of our Lord the first place must always be given to His own words and claims. Although, as Bishop Westcott says, " He never speaks of Himself directly as God," yet " the aim of His revelation was to lead men to see God in Him." * That the apostles did thus finally apprehend the aim of His revelation is shown by the words of Thomas quoted above ; but the full proof that they had grasped the bearing of His teaching and recognised His Eternal Godhead must be sought in their teaching and language concerning Him, preserved in the Acts and Epistles, as well ^ £.g., not only are such names as "Immanuer* (Isa. vii. 14), and '* Jehovah is our righteousness" (Jer. xxiii. 6) given to Him. These need not denote more than the fact that through Hira Jehovah would manifest Himself, but in Isa. ix. 6 He is spoken of as "the mighty God," El Gibbor, a title given to Jehovah Himself, in the very next chapter (x. 21), and in Micah v. 2 it is said that "His goings forth are from of old, from everlasting." 2 See Ryle and James on the Paalins of Solomon, p. Iv. * The argument from the claims of our Lord and His "self-assertion " is sometimes put in the form of the dilemma, "Aut Deusaut homo non bonus," a dilemma from which there appears no way of escaping. See Liddon's Bampton Lectures, Lect. iv. ; cf. Gore's Bampton Lectures, pp. 9-17 ; and for a good popular statement of the position, The Great Dilemma, by the Rev. H. B. Ottley. * Commentary on S. JohrCs Gospel, note on St, John xx. 28, as in the Gospels. The summary of the evidence for this will be best presented under separate heads, as follows : (a) The great dogmatic passages in the Pauline Epistles in which the person and nature of Christ are fully dwelt upon. Three such are of special importance. Phil. ii. 6-8 : " Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God : but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of man : and being found in fashion as a man. He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, yea the death of the cross." The main subject of this passage is the Incarnation ; but the apostle states very clearly who He was who became incarnate. He was One who was, to begin with, in the form of God (eV tiopfi Qeov virdpx»>v), and yet such was His humility, that He did not consider His equality with God (to elvac laa Sew), a thing to be grasped at, to be claimed at all hazards, but he " emptied Himself." etc. The /xo/3^ Qeov, as Bishop Lightfoot points out, denotes the reality, the characteristic attributes of the Godhead, exactly as the " form of a servant " {iiop(\ynv BovXov), which he "took," indicates the reality of the human nature. And the whole passage implies very clearly that He who was incarnate in time, existed before the worlds in the eternal Godhead. Col. i. 15-18: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation ; for in Him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, . . . all things have been created through Him ( Bl clvtov) and unto Him ; and He is (avro? eVrt) before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the Church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead ; that in all things He might have the pre-eminence." Here the apostle is claiming for the ^ See Lightfoot on PhUiiipiaiis, p. 108 scq. • I 132 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE II 133 ;l! \\n Son absolute supremacy in relation to the universe (vers. 15-17), and the Church (ver. 18), and He starts by speaking of His relation to the invisible God, of whom He is the " image " (eUcov)^ a term which implies not mere likeness, but actual representation and manifestation. He then attributes to Him the work of creation of all things, both visible and invisible, and finally claims for Him a pre-existence before all time. " He is before all things." ^ Such claims could not, without blasphemy, be made on behalf of any creature, however glorious. He, of whom the apostle makes such assertions, can only be Himself God. A similar passage, the witness of which is not less clear, is found in Hebrews L 2 seq., where the work of creation is again attributed to the Son, who is also said to be " the effulgence of the Father's glory and the very image of His substance" {airavyaafia t^? ho^^ koX j(apO'fCTrjp T^? v7ro<7Tae Fel. Virg, 1 ; Adv. Prax. 2 ; De Prmcript. 13), but also to Justin Martyr {Apol. I. xxi. xxii. xxxii. xxxiii. Ixiii. ; Dial, xliil xlviii. c), Aristides, and Ignatius {Eph. 19, Trail. 9, Smym. 1). That the humanity thus taken was real and complete is shown by numerous passages in the Gospels. He hungered and thirsted (S. Matt. xxi. 18; S. John xix. 28) ; He was weary (S. John iv. 6) ; He slept (S. Mark iv. 38); He was grieved (S. Mark iii. 5); He wept (S. Luke xix. 41 ; S. John xL 35); He "increased in wisdom " as well as " in stature " (S. Luke ii. 52) ; His soul (^yxn) was exceeding sorrowful even unto death (S. Matt. XX vi. 38); He "sighed deeply in His spirit" (to) TTvevfiaTL avTov, S. Mark viii. 12); He "groaned in spirit" (S. John xL 33); He was troubled in spirit (S. John xiii. 21); and at the moment of death He com- mended His spirit into the Father's hands (S. Luke xxiii 46 ; cf. S. John xix. 30, wapiBaKe to irvevfia). He, of whom such terms as these are used, must have possessed a true and proper human nature, consisting of body, soul, and spirit, nor can the properties of Deity have been trans- fered to that nature of which these expressions are used. It is this union of the two whole and perfect natures in the one Person, which alone enables us to explain and do justice to all the features in the representation of Christ in the Gospel narratives. On the one hand, we have to account for the fact that He acts with powers far beyond those of ordinary men, and is endowed with knowledge far exceeding that of others. In His human body He was able to walk on the water. He could turn the water into wine, multiply the loaves and fishes so as to feed the hungry crowds that followed Him, heal the sick, give sight to the blind, cast out devils, and raise the dead. He saw Nathanael under the fig-tree (S. John i 50), read the hearts of His disciples, and knew their thoughts before they were expressed (S. Matt. xvii. 25); " needed not that any should bear witness concerning man : for He Himself knew what was in man " (S. John ii 25); He "knows the Father as the Father knows" A 142 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Him (S. John x. 15 ; cf. S. Matt. xi. 27). Tliis is one side of the truth concerning the Person of Christ, as disclosed in the Gospel narrative. It is explained by the fact that though the essential properties of Deity are not communicable to man's nature, yet the super- natural gifts, graces, and effects thereof are," ^ and by what Hooker calls " the gift of unction," ^ as a conse- quence of the close union of the two natures in a single Personality, supernatural gifts and graces flowed in from the higher upon the lower nature united to it, infinitely ennobling and exalting it, but not in any way destrojdng its true and perfect human character, nor endowing it with the properties of Deity. Thus the body of Christ was a true human body, enabled by a divine gift to walk upon the water, but not able to be in two places at once, which would be contrary to the properties of human nature. The power of working miracles was, in the same way, a supernatural effect of Deity, as was also the enlightenment of the human soul with the knowledge of " what was in man." But there is another side as well to the portrait drawn in the Gospels, and from many passages we can see that, though for all purposes of His divine mission and work our Lord's manhood was thus supernaturally enlightened and endowed with divine powers, yet in ordinary matters, outside the sphere of the special work He had come to do. He accepted the limitations common to men in general, and natural to His position as born in a particular spot, at a particular time in the world's history. Though He miraculously > Ecclcsiastieal PolUy, bk. V. ch. liv. * The expression is justified by S. Peter's words in Acts x. 38 : " How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power ; who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with Hira." Cf. also S. Luke iv. 18. "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed me, etc," ARTICLE II 143 fed the five thousand in the wilderness, yet when He was Himself an hungered, He was content to wait while His disciples went into the city to buy food to supply His needs (S. John iv. 8). In reference to His human intellect, it is said that He " increased in wisdom " (S. Luke ii. 52). Of the day and hour of the last judgment He Himself tells us that He did not know. " Of that day or that hour knoweth no one, not even the angels in heaven, neither the SoUj but the Father" (S. Mark xiii 32). He raised the dead to life, but when His hour was come. Himself submitted to the power of death. Both classes of passages to which attention has been drawn refer to one and the same Person, and that Person the Eternal Son of God. That which explains them is the fact that in taking upon Him our nature He voluntarily limited Himself. In S. Paul's phrase, ifcivaxrev kaxnov (Phil. iL 7), He " emptied Himself " — not of His Godhead, for that were an impossibility, but of the exercise of His divine pre- rogatives. He condescended " in all things to be made like unto His brethren" (Heb. ii. 17), sin only excepted (Heb. iv. 15 ; 2 Cor. v. 21 ; 1 Pet. il 22).^ * Since peculiar difficulty is sometimes felt with regard to the question of the limitation of knowledge in the human soul of Christ, it may be well to add a brief note on the subject. Infinite knowledge, in the strictest sense of the word, can only belong to an infinite mind. It is, therefore, a '* pro- perty" of the Godhead (cf. Hooker, EcclesiasticcU Polity, V. liii. § 1), and to say that the knowledge possessed by Christ's soul was infinite is practically to fall into the heresy of Apollinaris. Though, however, the finite human soul could not be possessed of infinite knowledge, yet, short of this, there is nothing of which we should be justified in saying that Christ "could not have known it" Each ** piece of information" is finite, and, as a supernatural gift, not a property of the Godhead, might therefore have been communicated to the manhood. Had He so willed, He might have known it. Of one fact we have the express warrant of His own word for saying that He did not know it (S. Mark xiii. 32), What further limitations of knowledge there may have been beyond this can only be a matter of reasonable inference from the Gospel narrative. 144 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES III. The Atonement Who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile His Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men. Whatever they were, they were purely voluntary. If there were matters which He did not know, it was not because He could not have known them, but because He condescended not to know. Theologically, there is no greater difficulty in believing that He was ignorant of a hundred things than in believing that He was ignorant of one. If otu fact was hidden from His human intellect we are forced to admit the co-existence of ignorance and infinite knowledge in a single Personality. But this, as the late Dr. Liddon has pointed out in his Bamptcm Lectures^ is but one of the many contrasts which, in accepting the Incarnation at all, we are bound to admit ; nor is it really more mysterious than many " other and undisputed contrasts between the divine and human natures of the incarnate Son — e.g. the co-existence of local presence and omnipresence of absolute blessedness, and intense suffering " (see Liddon's Bampton Lectures, p. 463). Dr. Liddon urges that we have no right to infer from St Mark xiii. 32 ignorance on Christ's part on any other subject. It is true that we are never directly told of anything else that He did not know. But there are various expressions in the Gospels which appear to indicate that there were limitations of knowledge beyond this, and that on ordinary matters He willed to be dependent on ordinary means of information. He "increased in wisdom." Seeing the fig-tree with leaves— the usual sign of fruit— He came to it, " if haply He might find anything thereon " (S. Mark xi. 13). Again and again we read that He "marvelled" at something. Moreover, His questions, though doubtless often asked to " prove " His disciples, yet sometimes appear to have been called forth by a desire for information, e.g., " Where have ye laid him ?" (S. John xi. 34). "How many loaves have ye?" (S. Mark vi. 38, yiii. 5). " How long time is it since this hath come unto him ? " (S. Mark ix. 21). See further. Gore's Bampton Lectures, Lect. vi., and "An Inquiry into the Nature of our Lord's knowledge as Man," by W. S. Swayne. It may be added (in order to avoid misconception) that no argument can justly be drawn from limited knowledge to error or fallibility on the part of our blessed Lord, for, as the late Bishop Harold Browne pointed out, " Ignorance does not of necessity involve error. Of course in our present state of being, with our propensity to lean on our wisdom, ignorance is extremely likely to lead to error. But ignorance is not error ; and there is not one word in the Bible which could lead us to sup- pose that our blessed Lord was liable to error in any sense of the word, or in any department of knowledge."— Pen/o/ewc^ and Elohistic Psalms, p. 13. ARTICLE II 145 In the wording of this portion of the article four expressions are worthy of especial notice. 1. "Who truly suffered."— So in Article IV. we read, " Christ did truly arise again from death." There is evidently a special emphasis upon the word " truly " in each case. And there can be no doubt that it was designedly added to guard against a Docebic view of the Incarnation, which had recently been revived by some among the Anabaptists. The heresy of the Docetse {Aoicnral) appeared in very early days. Its advocates mamtamed that our blessed Lord's body was like ours only in appearance, and not in reality. According to S. Jerome, "while the apostles were still surviving while Christ's blood was still fresh, in Jud^, the Lord's' body was asserted to be but a phantasm." i This view which it is almost needless to say, contradicts the whole tenor of Scripture, was very prevalent among the Anabaptists of the sixteenth century, many of whom demed altogether that Christ really took flesh in the womb of the blessed Virgin,^ and thus were led on to deny the realUy of both His passion and His resurrec- tion. Hence the insertion of the word " truly " here and also in Article IV. J * 2. To reconcile His Father to us. — Exception is sometimes taken to this phrase, on the ground that It 18 unscriptural; for the Bible speaks of the need for men to be reconciled to God, but says nothing of God bemg reconcHed to man. As far as the mere form of expression is concerned it must be admitted tliat the objection can be sustained. The following are * Adv. Lueif. 23. it 'if n*^ ^IvT.^ ^'"'"'P ^°"'^'''' ^""^ "/'*« IncarruUion, where ■UttTn . <.t, *?"' ' T* P"^"'""' -""^ dangerous" doctrine hw lO 146 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES the only passages in the canonical books of Scripture in which the word " reconcile " occurs in this connection, and in none of them does the phrase used in the article occur. Kom. V. 10, 11 : For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God (KaTrjXKdy7)iJL€v tw Bew), through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled (/caTa\\a7€i/T€9), shall we be saved by His life. And not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation" {KaraWayi]), 2 Cor. v. 18-20: "But all things are of God, who reconciled us to Himself (rov KaraXKd^avTo^ r)fjLd<: iavTw) through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation (t?)9 KardXXayrjf;) ; to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses, and having committed unto us the word of reconciliation. We are ambassadors, therefore, on behalf of Christ, as though God were intreating by us : we beseech you, on behalf of Christ, be ye reconciled to God." Eph. ii. 1 6 : " That He might reconcile them (diroKaTaWdfy) both in one body unto God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby." CoL i. 19-22 : "For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in Him should all the ful- ness dwell; and through Him to reconcile {airoKa- raXKa^ai) all things unto Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things upton the earth, or things in the heavens. And you, being in time past alienated and enemies in your mind in your evil works, yet now hath He recon- ciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy and without blemish and unreproveable before Him." The Socinians, and those who with them object to the language of our article point to the form of expression ARTICLE II 147 in all these passages, as indicating that the need for reconciliation was all on man's side, and hence they infer that there was no need for Christ "to reconcile His Father to us." The atonement revealed God's love, and so influenced men, but it had no "objective" value. Such an objection at first sight may appear to be plaus- ible. But it is beheved that a careful examination of the teaching of Scripture wUl show that it is quite untenable, and that the language of the article is perfectly justifiable. Though undoubtedly the prominent thought in all the passages quoted above is that of the removal of the enmity on man's part, yet the clause in 2 Cor. V. 19, "not reckoning unto them then- trespasses," is sufficient to show that there is another aspect under which the atonement may be viewed. As Bengel ex- ceUently says, "/caTaX\a7^' est B^irXevpo^, et tollit (a) indignationem Dei adversus nos (2 Cor. v. 19; (h) nostramque abalienationem a Deo (2 Cor. v. 20)." ^ This is bonie out by an examination of other passages in Scrip- ture, in which the same word, fcaraXXdaao) (or the kindred BiaXKdaao)) is used. The word merely means « the re- establishment of friendly relations between persons who have been at variance : on which side the antagonism exists 18 not to be determined by the word itself, or by Its grammatical construction." 2 So in S. Matt v 24 our Lord says : " If thou art off"ering thy gift at the altar! and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and ofifer thy gift." The brother, who has some cause of complaint, is, according to our idiom, the one who needs reconcUiation. But our Lord puts it the J Bengel on Rom. iiL 24. ^h^""^^ ""V^^ -^^TT"^' ^""^ ^* "^^^'^ ^^ * ^^^ful discussion of the whole question. Cf. also Pearson On the Creed, Art. X. § 6. >l 1 148 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE II 149 «i f n other way. Not " first reconcile thy brother," but " first he reconciled to thy brother." ^ But the real justification of the language of the article lies deeper than this. Even if the particular passages in which the word " reconcile " occurs could all be shown to refer entirely to the removal of man's alienation from God, yet that the atonement effected something which may truly be described as the reconciliation of God to man would seem to follow from those other passages in which the death of Christ is regarded as a " propitiation " and a sacri- fice. Such passages are Eom. iii. 25: "Whom God set forth to be a propitiation (IXaanjpiov) through faith, by His blood " ; 2 1 John ii 2 : " He is the propitiation (t\a Notably Albertus Magnus. " Secunda causa institutionis hujus sacra- menti est sacrificium altaris, contra quandam quotidianam delictorum nostrorum rapinam. Ut sicut corpus Domini semel oblatum est in cruce pro debito originali : sic offeratur jugiter pro nostris quotidianis delictis in altan et habeat in hoc ecclesia munus ad placandum sibi Deum super omnia legis sacramenta vcl sacrificia pretiosum et s^ce^tum." -De SS, £uch Sacr. Serm. i. » Confessio August, pt. ii. art. iii. -^ \i\ m 150 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES omission is found as early as 1630. It appears also in the article as revised by the Assembly of Divines in 1643, the whole clause being there rewritten in the interests of Calvinism, and standing as follows : " Who for our sakes truly suffered most grievous torments in His smil from God, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile His Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men. The special phrases of the article which appear to require some explanation have now been noticed. But nothing has yet been said on the general subject of the atonement. The subject is too vast to receive anything like adequate treatment in the narrow limits within which it must be confined in such a work as this. All that can be attempted here is to give in briefest form a summary of the teaching of Scripture on the sacrifice of Christ; and in connection with it to suggest a few considerations which may be found helpful in removing the objections which are sometimes raised against the doctrine. (a) That the article is only following the language of Scripture when it says that Christ suffered " to be a sacrifice " for sin, may be shown from numerous passages, such as the following : — 1 Cor. v. 7 : " Our passover also hath been sacrificed (irvdrj), even Christ." Eph. V. 2 : " Walk in love, even as Christ also loved you, and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacri- fice ('!rpo(Topav Kal Ovalav) to God for an odour of a sweet smelL" Heb. vii 26, 27: "For such an high priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens ; who needeth not daily like those high priests to offer up sacrifice, first for his ARTICLE II 151 own sins and then for the sins of the people : for this He did once for all, when He offered up Himself {kavrov dv€P€yKa<;)." Heb. ix. 26 : " Now once at the end of the world hath He been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (3ta t?}? Ovalaf; axnov)" Compare also Heb. x. 10 seq., and the passages quoted above, concerning pro- pitiation (Rom. iii. 25 ; 1 John ii. 2, iv. 10). Again (6) the vicarious character of His suffering seems to be plainly implied in such passages as these : S. Matt. XX. 28 : " The Son of Man came ... to give His life a ransom for many (Kvrpov avrl ttoW&v)" S.John X. 11-18: See especially ver. 15, "I lay down my life for (inrep) the sheep." 1 Tim. iL 6 : " Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all {amtKvrpov inrep ttclvtodv)" See also 1 Pet. iL 21-25, iii 18 1 John iii. 16, and Rom. viii. 3, where the Revised Version renders irepl cLfiapTia^ by the words " as an offering for sin." Elsewhere we read of the Church as purchased with the blood of Christ (Acts xx. 28, r)v 'jrepieTroiija'aTo) ; of " redemption {a7ro\vTpa)aL<:) through the blood " (Eph. L 7 and 1 Pet. 118 (iXvrpcoerjre). (c) For the universal character of redemption and the fact that it was for all men that Christ died, appeal may be made to S. John iii 16: "God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have eternal life." The breadth of such language is quite inconsistent with narrower theories that would limit the saving work of Christ to " the elect." So in 1 John ii. 2 we read " He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world," while in the words of S. Paul quoted above we are expressly told that He gave himself a ransom for all " (1 Tim. ii. 6), as elsewhere the I li 152 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES t M n\ same apostle states that He is " the Saviour of all men, especially of them that believe" (1 Tim. iv. 10).^ Language such as that quoted under the two former heads (a and h) is surely incompatible with any theory that denies the objective value of the atonement. To maintain that the whole value of the death of Christ lies in its effect upon the minds and hearts of men by the supreme revelation which it makes of the love of God is to evacuate the words of Scripture of their plain meaning, and to introduce a method of interpretation which, if permitted, will enable men to evade the force of the clearest declarations. That grave difficulties can be raised with regard to the doctrine of vicarious sacrifice cannot be denied. But they are largely due, not to the doctrine itself as set forth in Scripture, but to the way in which it has been presented by divines. It is a fact to which everyday experience bears wit- ness that mediation is a law of this life, that repentance and amendment are of themselves often wholly insufficient to prevent the penal consequences of misconduct, and that vicarious suffering does contribute largely to the relief of others. The argument, as stated by Butler in the fifth chapter of the second part of the Analogy is un- answerable; and therefore to a theist, who accepts the order of nature and the existing constitution of things as coming from the hand of God, there will be no difficulty in admitting that the same method holds good in regard to man's salvation, which he finds to obtain in regard to his temporal welfare. Difficulties concerning details may fairly be raised ; but to the general principle no exception can fairly be taken. Nor must it be forgotten that while vicarious suffering in the natural order of things is often compulsory and involuntary, the sacrifice of Christ was purely voluntary. » Cf. 1 Tim. ii. 4. I I ARTICLE II 153 He gave Himself, Ohlatus est quia ipse voluit} This does away altogether with any "injustice" as against the victim. There can be no injustice in laying on one that which He Himself wills to undertake. And, on the other hand, it must be carefully borne in mind that Holy Scripture is in no way responsible for those coarse and crude forms of presenting the doctrine, which give colour to the notion that it was an act of arbitrary substitution, the innocent suffering, and the guilty being let off scot-free. Throughout, Holy Scripture ever insists on the need of repentance on the part of the sinner, if he is to obtain the benefit of Christ's redemptive work. It teaches also that it was not merely " a man " who suffered. Had this been the case there might have been some ground for the notion that it was a purely arbitrary substi- tution of the innocent for the guilty. But the sufferer was " the man," the " Second Adam," the Head and Representa- tive of the whole race, for which He is thereby quali- fied to become the sponsor (€yyvo<;). In the words of S. Irenseus: "As a man caused the fall, so a man must cause the restoration. He must be a man able to sum up (recapitulare) all the human species in Himself, so as to bear the punishment of all, and to render an obedience that will compensate for their innumerable acts of disobedience." ^ * Isa. liii. 7, in the Vulgate. As a translation the words cannot be defended, but they give grand expression to a truth of Scripture. '^IreniEUS, v. i. 1 ; cf. Norris, liudimcnts of Theology, p. 59 : ** When the mystery of the Redeemer's Person is borne in mind, it almost ceases to be a mystery that His death should affect the whole human race. Every act of Christ miLst vibrate through humanity ! If, in a plant, an injury to the root is felt in every branch ; if in an army, it is not the captain only who conquers or is conquered, but every soldier with him ; if in all organic societies, when one member suffers, all the members suffer with it ; if in the great family of mankind, the fall of one entailed the fall of all—then is it a strange thing that S. Paul thus judged, that if Christ died for all, then all died in Him ? " See also Wilberforce on the Incamationf ch. ii. 154 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE II 155 Again, objections of another kind, which are frequently raised, are only valid against an entire perversion of the scriptural doctrine. The atonement has sometimes been represented as if it involved a discordance of will between the First and Second Persons of the blessed Trinity. Christian preachers have not always been careful in their language, and their teaching has sometimes given countenance to the idea that the Father was vengeful and longing to punish, while the Son was all mercy and tenderness; whereas Holy Scripture consistently re- presents the atonement as an act of love on the part of the Father equally with the Son. " God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have eternal life " (S. John iiL 1 6). God " spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all" (Rom. viii. 32). And while we read of the " wrath " of God, we read also of " the wrath of the Lamb " (Rev. vi 16). These considerations may prove helpful in meeting some of the most obvious objections which are brought against the doctrine. It may not be possible out of the various notices of the atonement in Scripture to form a complete and consistent theory that shall be entirely free from all difficulty. Nor is it necessary that the attempt to form such a theory should be made. From time to time various " schemes " have been advanced, and explanations offered which have been more or less widely accepted by divines. But none of them can claim the formal sanction of the Church as a whole. That which perhaps has been the most widely held of all is the patristic theory that by the fall Satan gained a " right " over man, and that man could therefore only be released by a satisfaction of Satan's just claim. According to this view the death of Christ was regarded as the " price " or "ransom" paid to Satan to satisfy his claim. It has been said that S. Irenaeus was the first to suggest this view, which is further developed by Origen, and that it is the common explanation of the necessity for the death of Christ, which prevailed for nearly a thousand years in the Church, till the days of S. Anselm, in whose work Cur JDeus Homo, it is for the first time expressly and unreservedly rejected. ^ There is, perhaps, some exaggera- tion in this statement, ^ but there can be no doubt that at one time the theory was very widely held. It rests, however, on an entire misunderstanding of the scriptural use of such figurative expressions as " ransom " and " pur- chase." It is quite certain from numerous passages in the Old Testament that to the Jew these terms would never have suggested the question " To whom was the the ransom paid ? " as they suggested it in later days to Greek and Latin writers. The great event in their national history, which fixed for the Jews once for all their conception of redemption or ransom, was the exodus from Egypt. Then it was that God redeemed His people, delivered them from the house of bondage, purchased them, ransomed them. All these terms are freely used in Holy Scripture of the event. So in the Song of Moses we read : " Thou in Thy mercy hast led forth Thy people whom Thou hast redeemed ^)^\ ; LXX., iXvrpcoao), ... All the inhabitants of Canaan shall melt away. Fear and dread shall fall upon them ; by the greatness of Thine arm they shall be still as a stone ; till Thy people pass over, Lord ; till the people pass over which Thou hast purchased, m^); LXX., e/cTifcro) (Ex. xv. 13-16).^ * See Oxeiiham's Catholic Doctrine of tfic Atonement, p. 126, and cf. p 167. 2 See Norris's Hudivieyits of Theology, p. 274 seq, ' In the LXX. Xvrpbu occurs about seventy times of God's redemption of His people collectively or individually, occurring first in Ex. vi. 6. *' I will redeem you with a stretched-out ami " ; and representing the two Hebrew words ^tt6o-w) it is used of God in Ps. Ixxiii. (Ixxiv.) 2, and Ixxvii. (Ixxviii.) 54 = .1^15. ^ On the Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 296. to construct a complete theory of the atonement. The subject is best left where Scripture leaves it. While, on the one hand, we refuse to explain it away, or to do violence to the passages quoted above which attribute an atoning value to the suffering of Christ, and regard it as a " sacrifice " and " propitiation," on the other hand we may well decline to speculate too closely on the precise manner in which it was efficacious. The fact that it was efficacious is clearly taught in Scripture, and that is enough for us. The conclusion which forced itself on the mind of Bishop Butler in the eighteenth century is one which we shall do well to make our own. " How and in what particular way it had this efficacy, there are not wanting persons who have endeavoured to explain, but T do not find that the Scripture has ex- plained it. . . . And if the Scripture has, as surely it has, left this matter of the satisfaction of Christ mys- terious, left somewhat in it unrevealed, all conjectures about it must be, if not evidently absurd, yet at least uncertain. Nor has anyone reason to complain for want of farther information, unless he can show his claim to it. " Some have endeavoured to explain the efficacy of what Christ has done and suffered for us, beyond what the Scripture has authorised; others, probably because they could not explain it, have been for taking it away, and confining His office as Eedeemer of the world to His instruction, example, and government of the Church. Whereas the doctrine of the gospel appears to be, not only that He taught the efficacy of repentance, but rendered it of the efficacy which it is by what He did and suffered for us ; that He obtained for us the benefit of having our repentance accepted unto eternal life ; not only that He revealed to sinners that they were in a capacity of salvation, and how they might obtain it, but, 158 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES moreover, that He put them into this capacity of salvation by what He did and suffered for them, put us into a capacity of escaping future punishment and obtaining future happiness. And it is our wisdom thankfully to accept the benefit, by performing the conditions upon which it is offered on our part, without disputing how it was procured on His." ^ ^ Analogy ^ pt. ii. cli. v. I ARTICLE III Dc desccnsu Christi ad inferos, Quemadmodum Christiis pro nobis mortiius est, et sepultus, ita est etiani credendus ad inferos descendisse. Of the going down of Christ into hell. As Christ died for us, and was buried ; so also it is to be believed that He went down into hell. In the Confession of Augsburg there was merely a single clause on the descent into hell in the article, De Filio Dei, " Item, descendit ad inferos." Our own article, as it now stands, is considerably shorter than the corres- ponding one in the series of 1553. As originally drawn up by Cranmer it went more fully into the explanation of what was meant by the descent into hell, and con- tained these words: "Nam corpus usque ad resurrec- tionem in sepulchro jacuit, spiritus ab illo emissus, cum spiritibus qui in carcere sive in inferno detinebantur, fuit, illisque praedicavit, quemadmodem testatur Petri locus. At suo ad inferos descensu nullos a carceribus aut tormentis liberavit Christus Dominus." In this form the article was signed by the six royal chaplains, but prior to publication the last clause (At suo . . . Dominus) was omitted, and the article, as published in 1553, stands in the English copy as follows: — " As Christ died, and was buried for us : so also it is to be believed that He went down into hell. For the body lay in the sepulchre until the resurrection : but His ghost departing from Him was with the ghosts that were in prison or in hell, and did preach to the same, as the place of St. Peter doth testify." 159 Wii|«i 160 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE III 161 At the revision in Elizabeth's reign the bishops in Convocation struck out the last clause which refers to St. Peter's language,^ and the article was thus brought into its present form, in which it simply states the fad of the descent, but attempts no explanation of it, and brings forward no scriptural proof of it. The reason for the alteration is probably to be sought for in the controversies which were agitating the country at the time. The subject is one which has always had a special attraction for many minds, and in the sixteenth century there were many and various theories held concernins it ; and the violent controversies which had been raised in some parts of the country are quite sufiBcient to account for the excision of the allusion to S. Peter's language. The following extract from a paper of Bishop Alley of Exeter, drawn up in prepara- tion for the Convocation of 1553, admirably illustrates the wisdom of the Elizabethan divines in their treatment of this article : " First, for matters of Scripture, namely, for this place which is written in the Epistle of S. Peter, that Christ in Spirit went doivn to Hell, and preached to the souls that were in Prison. There have been in my diocese great invectives between the preachers, one against the other, and also partakers with them ; some holding that the going down of Christ, His soul to Hell, was nothing else but the virtue and strength of Christ, His death, to be made manifest and known to them that were dead before. Others say that Desandit ad inferna is nothing else but that Christ did sustain upon the ^ The clause was untouched by Parker in his preliminary revision, and is therefore found in the MS. which the archbishop submitted to the bishops (now in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge). It is, however, marked in this for excision, a line being drawn through it with the archbishop's red i^encil. cross the infernal pains of hell, when He called Pater, quare me dereliquisti, i.e. Father, why hast Thou forsaken nu? Finally, others preach that this article is not contained in other symbols, neither in the symbol of Cyprian, or rather Bufine. And all these sayings they grouDd upon Erasmus and the Germans, and especially upon the authority of Mr. Calvin and Mr. Bullinger, The contrary side bring for them the universal consent, and all the Fathers of both churches, both of the Greeks and the Latines. For of the Latine Fathers, they bring in S. Aitstin, S. Ambrose, S. Jerom, Gregory the Great, Cassiodore, Sedulius, Virgilius, Prim- asius, Leo, with others, as it may appear in the places by them alledged. Of the Greek Fathers, they alledge Chrysostom, Eusebius, Emissenus, Damascen, Basil the Great, Gregory Nyssen, Epiphanius, Athanasius, with others. Which all, both Latines and Grecians, do plainly affirm, Quod anima Christi fuit vere per se in inferno, i.e, that the soul of Christ was truly of itself in hell ; which they all with one universal consent have assertively written from time to time, by the space of 1100 years, not one of them varying from another. " Thus, my Right Honourable good Lords, your wisdoms may perceive what tragedies and dissensions may arise for consenting to, or dissenting from this article. Wherefore, your grave, wise, and godly learning might do well and charitably, to set some certainty concerning this doctrine; and chiefly because all dis- sensions, contentions, and strifes may be removed from the godly affected preachers." ^ » Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 348. At an earlier date the subject was causmg trouble, for in May 1550 Micronius writes to BuUinger, and tells him that "they are disputing about the descent of Christ into hell" {Original Letters, vol. ii. p. 561). It is also worth noticing that among Parker's books there exists a volume with the following title, A Treatise concerning the immediate Going to Heaven of the souls of the faithful II 11 ! \1 162 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE III 163 We shall probably not be far wrong if we attribute to this appeal from the Bishop of Exeter the alteration introduced into the article.^ Three subjects require to be considered in connection with this article. 1. The meaning of the word Hell. fathers lefore Christ; and that Christ did not descend irUo Hell, by Christopher Carlile. Appended to this is a memorandum : "This book exhibited and delivered the 20th day of August 1563, to the most Reverend Father in God, the Lord Matthu, Archbishop of Cant., by nie, Thomas Tailor, etc. ... the doctrine whereof I neither allow nor approve." See Hook's Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury , vol. ix. p. 510. Was the dispute, referred to by Micronius, caused by Bishop Hooper's Brief and Clear Confession of the Christian Faith, which was published in the year 1550 ? The following extraordinary passage may well have «iven rise to any amount of discussion : — " I believe also that while He was upon the said cross dying, and giving up His spirit unto God His Father, He descended into hell ; that is to say, He did verily taste and feel the great distress and heaviness of death, and likewise the pains and torments of hell, that is to say, the great wrath and severe judgment of God upon Him, even as if God had utterly forsaken Him, yea, as though God had been His extreme enemy ; so that He was constrained with loud voice to cry, ' My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me ? ' This is simply my understanding of Christ, His descending into hell. And besides, I know well that this article hath not from the beginning been in the creed, and that many others have otherwise both understanded and interpreted it ; which esteem that Christ verily and indeed descended into hell, to the place of the damned, alleging the text of S. Peter ; the which I confess is yet covered and hid from me. The Lord vouchsafe to open the gate unto us, and to give us an entrance into such mysteries." — Later Writings of Bishop Hooper (P.S.), p. 30. ^ Even so the article remained a subject of bitter controversy in some quarters. See Strype's Parker , bk. iii. ch. xviii. , where there is a notice of a controversy which arose at Cambridge in 1567, "what the tnie sense of Christ's descent into hell was ; whether it were a local descent, as it was then commonly taken, or to be understood in some other meaning. This dispute was managed \nth so much heat, that it came to the secretary, who was that universities' Chancellor. And he sent unto the archbishop for his advice in this matter ; who gave him his thoughts for the better stilling, and composing this difference. But what that was, I find not." i 2. The scriptural grounds for the doctrine, and the object of the descent. 3. The history of the doctrine in the Church and of the clause in the creed referring to it. I. The Meaning of the word Hell. The word used in the Latin of the article is In/en, which is also used in the Athanasian Creed, and in most' of the later copies of the Apostles' Greed. The older ones usually have Inferm} a few the singular Infemwm ^ The difference in meaning is but slight. If the distinction of genders is to be pressed, we should have to say that while the neuter referred only to the place, the masculine was suggestive of the persons to whom He descended • and we actually find that in an Anglo-Saxon Psalter the clause 18 rendered, " He nither astah to hel-warum " ^— i.e. to the inhabitants of hell. But it is not clear that any such distinction is intended to be drawn, for the words In/eri, In/emvs, and In/enia are apparently used mdiscrimmately in the Vulgate, as the equivalents of the Hebrew Sheol (At(f) and the Greek Hades f^tS,,?) while they are never used to represent Gehenna or the place of torment. In order, therefore, to see the meaning of the word Hell in this article it is nece^ary to examine the belief of the Hebrews concern- ing the invisible world. Sheol occurs more than sixty times in the Old Testament, being in almost every instance rendered in the LXX. by "AiBv^. The word Itself IS a " neutral " word." meaning the under-world or state of the departed in general— the " meeting-place for •So the Creed of Aquileia as given by Eufinus. There is some evince that this was also the original reading in the AthlniiTn I r* tTl"J' '''"""' '" "" '^*^ °f Venantius Fortunatos. ' Lambeth Library, No. 427, of the ninth century The word V is softened from W, a root meaning to be hollow 164 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES all living (Job xxx. 23), where were the souls of the righteous, Jacob (Gen. xxxviL 35), Samuel (1 Sam. xxviii. 15),^ David (2 Sam. xii. 23), as well as tyrants such as the King of Babylon (Isa. xiii. 9). In course of time, as Jewish belief developed, and the hope of a future life became clearer, it was recognised that there was a difference in the condition of the souls of the departed in the under-world, though there are but the faintest traces of this in the canonical books of the Old Testament. Our " main pre-Christian authority " for the belief of the Jews, shortly before the days of our Lord's ministry, is the Book of Enoch, dating from the first and second centuries, b.c. In this we read of a vision shown to Enoch by an angel, who showed him " beautiful places intended for this, that upon these may be assembled the spirits, the souls of the dead." ^ These are the resting- places of the souls of the just, and elsewhere we read of a Garden of Kighteousness and Garden of Life,' which " appears to be the prototype of what was after- wards known as the Garden of Eden, or Paradise," though its " relation to the abodes just described is not distinctly indicated." * Enoch is also shown other places not far from the abodes of the righteous, where the souls of the wicked are separated in great affliction until the great day of judgment. ^ While later on he is granted a vision of a " cursed valley " which " is for those who will be cursed to eternity," ^ namely, the valley of Hinnom, better known in this connection in the Graecised form of the word, Gehenna ( = D^an ^X3).7 ^ hSHV is not actually mentioned in this passage, but Josephus definitely speaks of At^iys as the place from which the soul of Samuel was evoked. —ArUiq. VI. xiv. § 2. 2 Book of Enoch, ch. xxii. ' Ch. xxxii. Ix. Ixi. IxxviL * Driver's Sermons on the Old Testament, p. 79. ' Ch. xxii. " Ch. xxvii. ■^ oVan'i is used frequently in the Targums and the Talmud, e.g. Pirqc ARTICLE III 165 Sheol, then, according to the belief of the Jews, is the place where the souls of the departed await their final judgment, and is divided into two parts, in one of which are the souls of the faithful in peace and rest, in the other the souls of sinners, already in torment, though apparently not yet in Gehenna. And this is the belief which seems to have the direct sanction of the New Testament. Thus our Lord promises to the penitent thief that he shall be with Him " to-day in Paradise " ( = the garden of Eden, S. Luke xxiii. 43) ; and in the parable of Dives and Lazarus, Lazarus is carried by the angels to " Abraham's bosom," seemingly another name for Paradise,^ while Dives is described as being "in Hades," and "in torments" (S. Luke xvi. 22, 23). To Sheol or Hades, then, the English word Hell ^ in this article corresponds, and like the Hebrew word it is a "neutral" term, in itself conveying no notion of the condition of the spirits detained in it, whether it be one of blessedness or the reverse. Both the Greek and Latin terms. Hades and Inferi, are entirely free from the associations which have unfortunately grown up round our English word Hell, owing to the unfortunate accident that it has been adopted as the translation for Gehenna ^ Aboth V. 29, where jiy || also occurs. See Schurer, Jewish People in tlie Time 0/ Christ, div. ii. vol. ii. p. 183. ^ See Lightfoot, Horoi Hebraiccs, on S. Luke xvi., where instances are quoted of the use of this term by Jewish writers. 2 Hell comes from the Anglo-Saxon ffelan (German, Hullen), to cover. It is, therefore, the unseen and covered place. " It is properly used both in the Old and New Testament to render the Hebrew word in the one and the Greek word in the other, which describe the invisible mansions of the disembodied souls, without any reference to sufferings. "—Bishop Horslcy's Works, vol. ii. Serm. 20. ^ Hell is in the Authorised Version used as the translation of yicvva in S. Matt. V. 22, 29, 30, x. 28, xviii. 9, xxiii. 15, 33, S. Mark ix. 43, 45, 47 ; S. Luke xii. 5 ; S. James iii. 6. It represents "Aid-n^ in S. Matt, xi. 23, xvi. 18 ; S. Luke x. 15, xvi. 23 ; Acts ii. 27, 31 ; 1 Cor. xv. 55 ; Rev. i. 18, iii. 7, vi. 8, xx. 13, 14. 166 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES as well as Hades, and thus denotes definitely the place of torments, as well as the intermediate state. II. The Scriptural Grounds for the Doctrine and the Object of the Descent, The passages of Scripture which require to be con- sidered in connection with the subject of our Lord's descent into hell are four in number: (a) St. Luke xxiii. 43 ; {h) Acts ii. 24-31, including the quotation of Ps. xvi. 10 ; (c) Eph. iv. 9 ; and (d) 1 Pet. iii. 18, iv. 6. (a) St. Luke xxiii. 43. This verse gives us our Lord's promise to the penitent thief, " Verily, I say unto thee. To-day shalt thou be with Me in paradise." The words assume and sanction the current belief that Paradise, or the Garden of Eden, was the part of that unseen region to which the name of Sheol was given, in which the souls of the faithful departed were preserved. And thus the passage appeals to us with the weight of a direct statement from our Lord Himself that after His death He would pass into the region of departed souls, i.e. would "descend into hell." It would seem, then, that on scriptural grounds, and apart from all historical considerations, we are justified in referring to these words in connection with the descent into hell. But it does not appear that they were ever appealed to by the Fathers as proof or illustration of the fact of the descent, and those who first inserted the article into the creed can hardly be supposed to have had in view the promise to the penitent thief. Although it would seem that Jewish belief inclined to the inclusion of Paradise in Sheol, or Hades, yet some of the Christian Fathers, as Tertullian,^ expressly distinguish between the ^ Tertullian {Dt Anima, 55) mentions a treatise that lie had written, De Paradisoy in which he says that he had proved "omnem aniuiani apud inferos sequestrari in diem Domini." He carefully distinguishes between ARTICLE III 167 two ; and the general opinion among them, to which the article in the creed must have been intended to give expression, most certainly was that Christ descended into some region which they never speak of as Paradise, where were the souls of the faithful who had died under the Old Covenant, that He announced to them the accomplishment of His work of redemption, and then transferred them to Paradise. Something more will have to be said on this subject later on. For the present we pass on to the consideration of the next passage of Scripture alleged as proof of the doctrine. (h) Acts ii. 24—31. In these verses S. Peter quotes and applies the language of David in Psalm xvi. : " I beheld the Lord always before my face, for He is on my right hand, that I should not be moved : Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced ; moreover my flesh also shall dwell in hope : because Thou wilt not Paradise and Inferi, holding that the martyrs, and they alone, go direct to Paradise. All others, including the souls of the faithful gener- ally, arc apud inferos. But this region is divided into two jiarts, ** Sinus Abrahic" (which is thus distinguished from Paradise), and the place assigned to the wicked. The patriarchs and prophets were apiid in/eroSf and to them Christ descended to make them coinpotes sui, Cf. Adv. Mareion. iv. 34. In Apol. 47, Paradise is the place of heavenly bliss, appointed to receive the spirits of the saints, apparently after the last judgment. IrenjEus (V. xxxi.) has much about the "place where the souls of the dead were," the "invisible place allotted by God," where souls '* remain till the resurrection," but nowhere identifies it mth Paradise. According to Origen there is an upper and a lower Paradise. To the lower one ( = Abraham's bosom) go the souls of the righteous, and thither Christ transferred the souls of the patriarchs and prophets. See horn, in Num. xxvi. 4, and horn. ii. in 1 Reg. In Augustine, Dc Gcncsi ad Literam, bk. xii. ch. xxxiii, the reader will find a very interesting discussion of the meaning of the terms Inferi, Sinus Abrahse, and Paradise. Augustine admits that the place where the souls of the just are is some- times called Inferi, but points out that Lazarus is not said to be apicd inferos, whereas Dives is. Cf. also Ep. ad Dardanum^ clxxxvii., where Augustine admits that the explanation of our Lord's saying to the penitent thief, which refers it to the descent into hell, is a possible one, though, as he thinks, involving considerable difficulties. jl 166 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES as well as Hades, and thus denotes definitely the place of torments, as well as the intermediate state. II. The Scriptural Grounds for the Doctrine and the Object of the Descent. The passages of Scripture which require to be con- sidered in connection with the subject of our Lord's descent into hell are four in number: (a) St. Luke xxiii. 43 ; (h) Acts vl 24-31, including the quotation of Ps. xvi. 10 ; (c) Eph. iv. 9 ; and {d) 1 Pet. iii. 18, iv. 6. (a) St. Luke xxiii. 43. This verse gives us our Lord's promise to the penitent thief, " Verily, I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with Me in paradise." The words assume and sanction the current belief that Paradise, or the Garden of Eden, was the part of that unseen region to which the name of Sheol was given, in which the souls of the faithful departed were preserved. And thus the passage appeals to us with the weight of a direct statement from our Lord Himself that after His death He would pass into the region of departed souls, i.e. would " descend into hell." It would seem, then, that on scriptural grounds, and apart from all historical considerations, we are justified in referring to these words in connection with the descent into hell. But it does not appear that they were ever appealed to by the Fathers as proof or illustration of the fact of the descent, and those who first inserted the article into the creed can hardly be supposed to have had in view the promise to the penitent thief. Although it would seem that Jewish belief inclined to the inclusion of Paradise in Sheol, or Hades, yet some of the Christian Fathers, as Tertullian,^ expressly distinguish between the ^ Tertullian (J9e Animay 55) mentions a treatise that he had written, De Paradiso, in which he says that he had proved " oiuneni animam apud inferos sequestrari in diem Domini." He carefully distinguishes l^etwecn ARTICLE III 167 two ; and the general opinion among them, to which the article in the creed must have been intended to give expression, most certainly was that Christ descended into some region which they never speak of as Paradise, where were the souls of the faithful who had died under the Old Covenant, that He announced to them the accomplishment of His work of redemption, and then transferred them to Paradise. Something more will have to be said on this subject later on. For the present we pass on to the consideration of the next passage of Scripture alleged as proof of the doctrine. (6) Acts ii. 24-31. In these verses S. Peter quotes and applies the language of David in Psalm xvi. : " I beheld the Lord always before my face, for He is on my right hand, that I should not be moved : Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced ; moreover my flesh also shall dwell in hope : because Thou wilt not Paradise and Inferi, holding that the martyrs, and they alone, go direct to Paradise. All others, including the souls of the faithful gener- ally, are aptid inferos. But this region is divided into two parts, "Sinus Abrahic" (which is thus distinguished from Paradise), and the place assigned to the wicked. The patriarchs and prophets were apud inferos^ and to them Christ descended to make them compotes sui. Cf. Adv. Marcion. iv. 34. In Apol. 47, Paradise is the place of heavenly bliss, appointed to receive the spirits of the saints, apparently after the last judgment. Irenoeus (V. xxxi.) has much about the "place where the souls of the dead were," the "invisible place allotted by God," where souls ** remain till the resurrection," but nowhere identifies it vnth Paradise. According to Origen there is an upper and a lower Paradise. To the lower one ( = Abraham's bosom) go the souls of the righteous, and thither Christ transferred the souls of the patriai-chs and prophets. See horn, in Num. xxvi. 4, and horn. ii. in 1 Reg. In Augustine, Dc Gencsi ad Litcram, bk. xii. ch. xxxiii, the reader will find a very interesting discussion of the meaning of the terms Inferi, Sinus Abrahje, and Paradise. Augustine admits that the place where the souls of the just are is some- times called Inferi, but points out that Lazarus is not said to be apud inferos, whereas Dives is. Cf. also Ep. ad Dardanum, clxxxvii., where Augustine admits that the explanation of our Lord's saying to the penitent thief, which refers it to the descent into hell, is a possible one, though, as he thinks, involving considerable difficulties. 168 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES leave my soul in Hades (ek aSijv\ neither wilt Thou give Thy Holy One to see corruption. Thou madest known unto me the ways of life ; Thou shalt make me full of gladness with Thy countenance." These words, the apostle proceeds to show, received no adequate fulfilment in the person of David. They could not, therefore, find their ultimate realisation in his experi- ence. " He both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us unto this day." They look forward beyond the life and death of the patriarch, and find their complete realisation in the person of the Messiah. David, " being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins He would set one upon his throne, he foreseeing this spake of the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was He left in Hades (eh aSrjv) nor did His flesh see corruption." The witness of this passage to the fact of the descent is equally clear with that of the one previously cited, though it says nothing of the object of the descent, or of the nature of the region visited. (c) Eph. iv. 9 : " Now that He ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth (e/9 to, KardiTepa fiiprj t^? 7^9, Vulg. in in/eriores partes terrce) ? He that descended is the same also that ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things." This passage cannot be appealed to without some hesitation, for the interpretation of it is not absolutely certain. Two different views have been taken of its meaning. First, that which takes it of the descent into hell; a view which finds large support among both ancient and modern commentators, and which can claim in its favour the use of the term ra xaTcorara rfj^ 7^9 in the LXX. rendering of Psalm Lxii. (Ixiii) 10, and of the kindred phrase iv roif; KaTtorara) (/caTODTaroA?, k art) t^9 ARTICLE III 169 7^9 in cxxxviii. (cxxxix.) 15. Indeed, as Bishop Pearson says, " This exposition must be confessed so probable, that there can be no argument to disprove it." But though it is the most probable, yet it is not the only possible interpretation of the apostle's words ; for, secondly y they may be taken as contrasting the earth beneath with the heaven above, and thus allude not to the descensus in inferna, but simply to the fact of the Incarnation, when Christ "came down" or "descended into" the earth beneath.^ {d) The last passage to be considered brings us face to face with the whole question of the object of the descent. Were it not for the language of S. Peter in his First Epistle (1 Pet. iii. 18-iv. 6) there would be no grounds for looking for any further object of the descent into hell than this : that Christ might fulfil the conditions of death as really and truly as of life. If Hell or Hades merely means the unseen world of departed spirits, then death in the case of every human being, consisting as it does of the separation of the soul and body, ipso facto involves a " descent into hell " on the part of everyone who is subject to it. If, then, our Lord really died upon the cross, it was a necessity that His human soul should pass into the world of spirits, and " descend into hell." " Christ in dying shared to the full our lot. His body was laid in the tomb. • His soul passed into that state on which we conceive that our souls shall enter. He has won for God, and hallowed every condition of human existence. We cannot be where He has not been. He bore our nature as living : he bore our nature as dead." ^ This, then, namely, to fulfil the conditions of death, may ' For a full discussion of this passage see the Commentaries of Meyer and Ellicott, in loc. Both these writers decide in favour of its reference to the descent into hell. ••» Westcott's Historic Faith, p. 76. 170 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES unhesitatingly be set down as one object of the descent It remains to consider whether the language of S. Peter compels us to maintain that there was a yet further object of it, namely, the preaching of the gospel to them who were sometime disobedient. 1 Pet. iii. 18 seq.: "Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened in the Spirit {SavaTCDdei^ fiep aapxl, ^(oottoit) OeU Be TTvevfiarc) : in which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison (iv w kuI toI<; iv <}>v\aK7j TTvevfiaai iropevOeU iicrjpv^ev), which aforetime were disobedient when the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah. . . . [ch. iv. 6] For unto this end was the gospel preached even to the dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit {ek tovto yap koX veKpol^ evrmeXurS'n, ha KpiOoyai fiev fcaTa avOpa^Trovi aapxi, ^coal Be Kara Seop TTvevfiaTL)" It has been already mentioned that the direct reference to this passage was struck out of the article in its passage through Convocation in 1563, owing to the controversies which were then agitating the country. But although there was manifested an unwillingness to bind a particular interpretation of what is confessedly a very difficult passage upon the consciences of tlie clergy, yet the judgment of the English Church as to the meaning of S. Peter's woids is not obscurely indicated by the reten- tion of the passage as the epistle for Easter Eve, an occasion for which it is obviously appropriate only if it be taken as referring to the descent into hell. In the early Church it would appear that there was no doubt whatever concerning the reference of the apostle's words. The first writer who directly connects the passage with the descent is believed to be Clement of ARTICLE III 171 Alexandria. In this he is followed by Origen.^ Nor is there a trace of any other interpretation till the days of Augustine. He, however, in a letter to Evodius, Bishop of Uzala, enters fully into the exegesis of the words, and concludes his discussion by deciding that they have nothing whatever to do with the descent into hell, but refer to the teaching of Christ — in the spirit not in the flesh — to the unbelieving in the days of Noah.^ Augus- tine's authority was naturally of great weight in the Western Church. His view on this subject is adopted by Bede, by S. Thomas Aquinas,^ and, as might be expected, found favour with many of the Eeformers ; and it must be admitted that "the dominant exegesis of 1 Pet. iii. 19, among the English theologians of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, has been that which disconnects it altogether from the descent into Hades.^ In spite, however, of this, there is little doubt that Augustine and those who followed his lead in this matter are wrong. They have often failed to see clearly the dis- tinction between Hades and Gehenna, and have sometimes been misled by the erroneous reading, rw Trvevfiari, as, for instance, was Bishop Pearson, who interprets the clause not of the human soul of Christ, but of the power of His Divinity ; an explanation which can hardly be maintained when the definite article is deleted, for the phrase OavaroiBeU fiev aapxl, ^cooTroirjOeU Be irvevfiarc can point ' Clement of Alexandria, StroinaUis, VI. vi. ; Origcn, In Matt. 132. 2 The whole letter (No. clxiv. ) is worth careful study. '* The spirits in prison" are explained by Augustine as "souls which were at the time still in the bodies of men, and which being shut up in the darkness of ignorance were, so to speak, *iu prison'— a prison such as that from which the Psalmist sought deliverance in the prayer, * Bring my soul out of prison that I may praise Thy name.'" ^ Summa, 3a Q. 52, 2, 3m, * Plumptre's Spirits in Prison, p. 97. 172 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES to nothing but the contrast between flesh and spirit,^ or (as the terms are popularly used) body and soul. Taking the words of the apostle, then, as they stand, it would appear that they speak directly of what happened after the death of Christ. " Being put to death in the flesh, but quickened (i.e, endowed with a new power of life) in the spirit " He " went and preached to the spirits in prison." The spirits to whom the announcement was made are further described as those " which aforetime were dis- obedient, when the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing." If the interpretation here given be correct, these words definitely teach us that the or at any rate an object of the descent was the proclamation of the gospel to that generation which had been cut off by the flood. Two questions immediately present themselves: (1) What was the effect of the preaching, i.e. did it bring about any altera- tion in the condition of those to whom it was made ? and (2) Was it confined to the generation actually specified by S. Peter, or were its benefits (if any) extended to others also ? 1. With regard to the first of these questions, it has been pointed out that the word used by the apostle is iK7]pv^€^ proclaimed as a herald. Hence it has been inferred that the preaching was " a mere proclamation of blessedness to men who had already repented when on earth, and had no need of repentance after death, when it never comes, and could not avail even if it did come." * This view is unsatisfactory for two reasons — first, the words of Scripture cannot be said to imply that the recipients of the preaching had " already repented when on earth." S. Peter speaks of them as having been " aforetime disobedient," but says not one word of any ^ Cf. Rom. i. 4 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16. - Bishop Browne on The Articles, p. 96. m ARTICLE III 173 subsequent repentance ; secondly, 1 Pet. iii 1 9 does not stand alone. It cannot be fairly isolated or considered apart from ch. iv. 6, which speaks of the gospel being preached — using the word evayyeXl^eiv nx)t /crjpvaaeLv — to the dead (vcKpoU), and states further the object of the preaching : " that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.^ These words are admittedly difficult, but they certainly seem to imply that the preaching was attended with some beneficial result. On the whole, the best interpretation of them appears to be that which takes the first clause immediately following Lva (that they might be judged, etc.) as a subordinate one, of the state which the €vrjyy€\Lhaw Soc.) ARTICLE III 179 perhaps for the first time in the form descendit ad in- feros ; and after this it is generally met with in one or other of its forms. Note. — It has not been thought necessary in con- sidering this article to say anything of the various inter- pretations which have sometimes been put upon the words, but which really evacuate them of their plain meaning, e.g. that of Durandus, which explains them of a " virtual motion and efficacious presence," or that of Calvin, that the descent into hell consisted in suffering the torments of Gehenna. A refutation of these and some other strange and fanciful interpretations may be found in Pearson's work 07i the Creed. But at the same time it may be well to warn the readers that in his section on this article of the creed Pearson has written " less lucidly than is his wont." (1) He begins with an erroneous statement concerning the Creed of Aquileia, in which he asserts (contrary to fact) that the word scpultus was wanting. Rufinus clearly shows that it contained both sejptdtns and descendit in inferna. (2) He mistakes the meaning of Rufinus, from whose language he infers that " the fii*st intention of putting these words in the creed was only to express the burial of our Saviour," whereas all that Rufinus intends to say is that the clause scpultus in the Roman and Oriental Creeds includes the notion of the descent of the soul into Hades, as well as the com- mittal of the body to the grave. (3) He is misled by the erroneous reading, tc3 irvevfiariy in 1 Pet. iii. 18, and gives what can only be called a forced and non-natural interpretation of the whole passage, denying its reference to the descent into hell at all. (4) He nowhere distin- guishes clearly between Hades and Gehenna, and ends by confusing the two, and directly asserting that Christ descended into Gehenna. " By the descent into hell, all 180 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES those which believe in Him are secured from descending thither. He went into those regions of darkness that our souls might never come into those torments which are there." An excellent study of the whole subject of this article may be found in Dean Plumptre's Spirits in Prison, No. iii. ARTICLE IV De Resurrectione Christi. Christus vere a mortuis re- surrexit, suumque corpus cum carne, ossibus, omnibusque ad integritatem humanae naturae per- tinentibus, recepit, cum quibus in coelura ascendit, ibique residet, quoad extremo die ad judicandos homines reversurus est. 0/thc Resurrection of Christ. Christ did truly arise again from death, and took again His body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of man's nature, wherewith He as- cended into heaven, and there sitteth until He return to judge all men at the last day. This article has remained practically imchanged since the publication of the Edwardian series in 1553.^ Its language differs considerably from that of the correspond- ing article in the Confession of Augsburg, as well as from that in the Thirteen Articles of 1538, which was taken almost word for word from the Third Article of that formulary.* The emphatic assertion of the truth of the resurrection and of the reality of the human nature of the risen Lord indicates that the special object of the article was to guard against the Docetic views adopted ^ In 1553 and 1563 the title in the Latin was "Resurrectio Christi," for which " De resurrectione Christi " was substituted in 1571 as harmonising better with the English. In the last clause the word ''all" appears for the first time in the English edition published in 1563. The correspond- ing word omnes in the Latin found in modern texts is wanting not only in the published editions of 1553 and 1563, but also in that of 1571 by John Dayes, auctorUate sercnissimm reginx. 2 "Item descendit ad inferos et vere resurrexit tertia die, deinde ascendit ad cceIos, ut sedeat ad dexteram Patris, et perpetuo regnet et dominetur omnibus creaturis, sanctificet credentes in ipsum, misso in corde eorum Spiritu Sancto, qui regat, consoletur, ac vivificet eos, ac defendat adversus Diabolum et vim peccati. Item Christus palam est rediturus ut judicet vivos et mortuos etc. juxta symbolum apostolorum. Article III. of 1638. Cf. Con/. August. Art. iii. " De Filio Dei." 181 182 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES by some of the Anabaptists, which was associated with a further error as to the nature of the risen body, practi- cally amountmg to a denial of the existence of the humanity of Christ since the resurrection. This error is described and condemned in the following passage from the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum which illus- trates the meaning and shows the intention of this article. "Circa duplicem Christi naturam perniciosus est et varius error: ex quibus alii sunt ex Arianorum secta, Christum ita ponentes hominem ut Deum negent. Alii eum sic Deum judicant ut hominem non agnoscant, et de corpore nugantur de coelo divinitus assumpto, et in virginis uterum lapso, quod tanquam in transitu per Mariam quasi per canalem aut iistulam prteterfluxerit. Quidam verhuvi in carnis naturam conversum asserunt, quam, quamprimiim a morte in caelum fuit recepta, mirsus volunt in naturam divinam reversam et absorptam esse. Quorum illi delirium imitantur, qui corpori Christi tarn latos fines dant, ut illo credant aut omnes locos simul, aut innumeros obsiderL Quod si confiteremur, humanam e Christo naturam eximeremus. Quemadmodum enim Dei natura sibi hoc assumit, ut per omnia permeet, sic humanae semper illud attributum est, ut certis locorum finibus circumscripta sit. Quidam corpus ipsum s«pe dicunt, et subinde factum esse. Qui errores omnes Sacrarum Scripturarum authoritate sic corrigendi sunt, ut Christus meliore natura Deus sempiternus accipiatur, et quidem sequalis sit Dei Patris; humana vero corpus habeat extempore factum, neque saepius quam semel, neque ex alia materia quam ex Maria? virginis vera et sola subsistantia ac quemadmodum reliqua humana corpora suis loci finibus circumscriptum."^ This extract — and particularly the portion of it in italics — makes it quite clear that when this article was * Befoi'matio Legum Ecclesiasiicarum, " De Hares." eh. 6. ARTICLE IV 183 first drawn up there was much erroneous teaching on the nature of our Lord's humanity, and that there was in some quarters an inclination to deny that after the resurrection it continued to be in any sense true human nature. Hence the need for this article asserting not only that Christ trtdy arose, but also that He took again His body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of man's nature, wherewith He a8cended,etc." The three principal subjects which require considera- tion are the following : — 1. The resurrection of Christ. 2. The ascension and session (at the right hand of the lather). 3. The return to judgment. I. TJie Resurrection of Christ The article is concerned with this simply as an histori- cal fact. Questions, therefore, of its significance, its bear- ing upon our Lord's claims, its position as the central fact round which other doctrines group themselves, its witness to our acceptance with God, its revelation of the unseen world and our relation to it — important as all these are — do not directly come before us here.^ The points to be con- sidered in connection with the statements of the article are two — (a) The evidence for the fact of the resurrection ; and (5) The nature of the resurrection body. (a) The evidence for the fact of the resurrection. In the forefront must always be placed the witness of S. Paul His epistles were all — or nearly all — written some time before the gospel narratives were committed to writing. Doubts have, it is true, been freely cast * Reference may be made on all these subjects to "Westcott's Gospel of the Resurrection^ or Milligan's Lectures on the Resurrection, 184 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES on the genuineness of some of them. But all except the most sceptical of critics will admit that First and Second Corinthians, Romans and Galatians, were written between the years a.d. 52 and 60, by the apostle whose name they bear. And these epistles alone are amply sufficient to prove not merely that the fact of the resurrection was believed in by the whole Church at the time when they were written, but that the belief in it grew up at the time of the alleged event, on the spot, and that the Church was immediately reconstructed on the basis of the resurrection. The most striking passage of all is that in 1 Cor. XV., where S. Paul enumerates the appearances of the risen Jesus, and stakes everything on the truth of the resurrection. "If Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ." But apart from this the belief is bound up with the apostle's whole life, and underlies his whole teaching. There is scarcely an epistle in which he does not allude to it. " The literal fact of the resurrection is the implied and acknowledged groundwork of the apostle's teaching." i S. Paul's conver- sion is generally dated a.d. 35 or 36. The crucifixion probably took place in a.d. 28. Thus we see from the witness of S. Paul that, within eight years of the alleged event, the belief in it was universally held by Christians, for the witness of his epistles is of such a character as entirely to exclude the notion that the belief can have grown up or come to be widely accepted after his con- version. The belief is thus pushed back to an earlier date, which leaves no time for the gradual growth of legend or myth. ^Westcott, The Gospel of the Resurrection, p. 105, The only epistles of S. Paul in which there is no direct reference to the resurrection are Second Thessalonians, Titus, and Philemon. ARTICLE IV 185 Next to the witness of the Apostle of the Gentiles may be placed that of the Apostle of the Circumcision. S. Peter's First Epistle begins with the doctrine of " the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Pet. i. 3), which is referred to as a known and acknowledged fact again in ch. i. 21 and iii. 21. Reference may also be made to the early preaching of the apostles as preserved in the Acts of the Apostles. The tendency of modern criticism is on the whole to confirm more and more S. Luke's accuracy as an historian, and we cannot doubt that in these early chapters we have a faithful representation of the history of the first days of the Christian Church, and of the character of the apostolic preaching. We find, then, not only that Matthias was elected at S. Peter's suggestion, in the place of the traitor Judas, to be "a witness of the resurrection" (Acts i. 22), but that the hteral fact of the resurrection occupies the foremost position in S. Peter's own speeches on the day of Pentecost (ii. 24- 36) ; in Solomon's Porch (iii. 15 ; cf. iv. 33) ; before the Council (v. 30) ; and in the house of Cornelius (x. 40). The evidence, thus summarised, is independent of that in the Gospels. Much, if not all of it, would still remain, even if they could be shown to be comparatively late compilations. But the fact that there is such a wealth of testimony to the truth of the resurrection affords a striking confirmation of the veracity of the evangelists' accounts of it. The fact is, of course, stated by all four evangelists. On some details their narratives may be hard to harmonise, but on the main fact their witness is clear and precise, and leaves no room for doubt that they at least believed the resurrection as a true and literal fact. " Indeed." says Bishop Westcott, " taking all the evidence together, it is not too much to say that there is no single historic incident better or more variously 186 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES supported than the resurrection of Christ. Nothing but the antecedent assumption that it must be false could have suggested the idea of deficiency in the proof ofit."i One minor point deserves a brief notice before leaving the subject of the witness of Scripture to the resurrec- tion. It will be observed that the article asserts that " Christ did truly arise** It is sometimes stated that this is not the way in which the fact is represented in Scripture, as there the action is ascribed to the Father, who is said to have raised Christ from the dead. Certainly, it is true that in the vast majority of instances the Father is spoken of as the agent, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ is regarded as an awakening effected by His power (see Acts iii 15, iv. 10, v. 30, x. 40; Rom. iv. 24, viii. 11, etc.). But there are other passages in which it is spoken of definitely as a rising again on the part of the Son.^ In S. John ii. 19 our Lord Himself says distinctly "of the temple of His body " " I will raise it up," while in x. 1 8 He expressly asserts His right not only to " lay down " His life, but to "take it again." And if He could thus claim the action as His own, it will surely be felt that no further justification is required for the use of the active voice " arise " in this article as in the creeds of the Church.^ Q)) The nature of tJie resurrection body. — The state- ^ The Gospel of the Resurrection^ p. 133. Fuller consideration of the evidence of the resurrection is not attempted here, because it seems to belong more properly to the subject of Christian evidences. For a care- ful statement of it, and a criticism of the theory of visions, reference may be made to Row's Bampton Lectures, vi. and vii. 2 Cf. Westcott on S. John ii. 22. ^ In the Western Creeds the word used is always resurrcxit. In those of the East it is as regularly avaaTivra. 'EyeipeaBaif the |)assive, is the word more commonly used in Scripture, but ivacrijvai and avlar-q occur in S. Mark viii. 31, ix. 9, xvi. 9 ; S. Luke xxiv. 7, 46 ; S. John XX. 9 ; Acts x. 41, xvii. 3 ; 1 Thess. iv. 14. ARTICLE IV 187 ment of the article that Christ . . . took again His body with flesh, bones, and all things apper- taining to the perfection of man's nature, is one which very closely follows the language of Holy Scripture. That it was the crucified body which our Lord took again is plainly taught by the evangelists. It still bore the marks of the passion, for " He showed unto them His hands and His side " (S. John xx. 20). The reality of His body is evidenced by the fact that He ate before the disciples (S. Luke xxiv. 43; cf. Acts x. 41). When " they were affrighted and supposed that they had seen a spirit," He reassures them with the words, " Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself : handle Me and see ; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have" (St. Luke xxiv. 36-40). All these passages mark very clearly the reality and identity of the resur- rection body. Yet there are other passages which indi- cate with equal clearness that a change has passed over it. It was the same, and yet different. The body has not been left in the grave, but it has been transfigured and endowed with new powers. He appears in their midst when "the doors were shut" (S. John xx. 19). He vanishes out of the sight of the two at Emmaus as suddenly and mysteriously as He appears in the midst of the ten (S. Luke xxiv. 31). And finally, in the last scene on the Mount of Olives, " as they were looking He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight" (Acts i. 10). Thus are taught the two lessons of the reality of the resurrection body, and its glorification, " There is sown a natural body ; there is raised a spiritual body" (1 Cor. xv. 44). Of the actual nature of the resurrection body we know but little, and that little is drawn entirely from the statements of Scripture. It is perhaps impossible for us in our present condition to form any distinct conception of it, or to understand the 188 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES laws which regulate its presence and action. We can do little more than note the indications of its nature to be found in Holy Scripture. And the passages referred to above make it perfectly clear that while personal identity is preserved and bodily structure remains, yet its presence and appearance is governed by laws which are entirely different from those to which the " natural body " is subject. It is a glorified, and a " spiritual " body. Further, S. Paul expressly tells us that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven" (1 Cor. XV. 50), in connection with which statement we cannot fail to see a deep significance in the fact that when our Lord would describe His risen body to the disciples He speaks of it not in the familiar phrase " flesh and blood," but makes use of the unique expres- sion "flesh and bones" (S. Luke xxiv. 39). This lan- guage is carefully repeated in our own article (" took again His body with flesh, bones, and all things apper- taining to the perfection of man's nature), and without venturing to assert that the resurrection body was bloodless, we may safely say that the unique phrase employed by our Lord was designedly chosen to convey a different idea from the ordinary term " flesh and blood." This latter expression occurs in S. Matthew xvi. 1 7 ; 1 Cor. XV. 50; Gal. i. 16; Epli. vi. 12; Heb. ii. 14. In the last of these passages it is used of our Lord's incarnate life before the crucifixion. "Since the children are sharers in flesh and blood. He also Himself in Like manner partook of the same." It is here used to denote that He took upon Him man's nature itnder its present conditions,^ "flesh and blood" being, as will be ^ See Bishop Westcott's notes on the passage, Commentary on the Epistle to the ffebrews, p. 52, where it is pointed out that by the use of the phrase aT^ Kal ffdp^ "stress is laid on the element which is the symbol of life as subject to corruption." ARTICLE IV 189 seen from the other passages where it occurs, a term with earthly associations connected with it, suggestive rather of the lower animal life than of the higher spiritual existence. " Flesh and bones " is altogether a nobler expression. Its meaning may be gathered from such passages as Gen. ii. 23, xxix. 14; Judges ix. 2; 2 Sam. V. 1, xix. 12, 13. These may suggest that it denotes " community, kinship, close personal union and relationship"; and thus it is indicative of the change that has passed over the body of the risen Saviour, that though in His incarnate life before the crucifixion He " partook " of " flesh and blood," yet after the resurrec- tion He claims not this, but "flesh and bones." He would teach His disciples that He was not formless spirit. But to have said that He was " flesh and blood " would have misled them into the idea that He was ex- actly what He had been. He therefore says that He has " flesh and bones," in proof that, while He had under- gone a change, that change still left Him truly human.^ II. Tlie Ascension and Session (at the Right Hand of the Father), (a) The fact of the ascension, though clearly stated, has comparatively little stress laid upon it in Holy Scripture. Of the four evangelists, neither S. Matthew nor S. John relate it, although the latter has pre- served words of our Lord which directly refer to it, and so may be said to assume it as a well-known fact (See S. John iii. 13, vi 62; xx. 17). It is just men- tioned — but nothing more — at the close of S. Mark's Gospel, in the section the authorship of which is dis- puted (S. Mark xvi. 19). In St. Luke's Gospel, accord- * Milligan On the Resurrection, p. 242. The whole note is suggestive, and on the nature of the resurrection body reference may be further made to the first lecture in the same volume. u X 190 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ing to the received text, a brief notice of it is given, but the words referring to it are marked in Westcott and Hort's Greek Testament as a "western non-interpola- tion," being omitted in an important group of early authorities.^ S. Luke has, however, preserved a full account of it in the Acts of the Apostles (L 9-11), to which it forms the proper introduction as the prepara- tion for the day of Pentecost. In S. Paul's Epistles there are but two direct refer- ences to it, namely, in Eph. iv. 8-1 :" Wherefore He saith, when He ascended on high. He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. Now this, He ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth ? He that descended is the same also that ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things." 1 Tim. iiL 1 6 : " Eeceived up in glory " {avekri^Ori iv 3o^). S. Peter in his First Epistle (iiL 22), speaks of Christ as having "gone into heaven." But though direct notices of the actual ascension are but few, the fact is implied and assumed not only in all those passages referred to below, which speak of the session at the right hand of the Father, but also in the whole conception of the priestly work of Christ as de- scribed in the Epistle to the Hebrews, as well as in the representation of the glorified Christ in the Apocalypse. The mystery of the ascension is one which it is peculiarly difficult for finite minds such as ours to grasp. We have to guard against thinking of it as a mere change of position from one place to another. As heaven is a state rather than a place, so the ascension involves a change of the mode of existence rather than ^ The words Kai av€(p4p€To ets rbv ovpavbv, S. Luke xxiv. 51, are omitted in K D, a 6 cjf rhe. The recently discovered Old Syriac Version, how- ever, which generally agrees with the ** Western" group reads the verse as follows : " And while He blessed them. He was lifted up from them." ARTICLE IV 191 a change of position. And yet we are not to think of it as if it brought about the destruction of our Lord's manhood or its absorption into Deity. The Mediator between God and man is still " Himself man " (1 Tim. ii. 5). By the ascension He "has entered upon the completeness of spiritual being, without lessening in any degree the completeness of His humanity. . . . We cannot indeed unite the two sides [of the thought] in one conception, but we can hold both firmly without allowing the one truth to infringe upon the other." ^ This we can do, and with this we must rest content. And so with regard to that "heaven" into which He passed when " a cloud received Him out of their sight " ; the following words of a thoughtful and devout theologian seem to state very exactly the two sides of the truth which, if we are loyal to scriptural truth, we find our- selves compelled to maintain concerning it : " We cannot conceive of heaven as any distinct place — some sphere, some distant world, or the like — some distinct * where,' according to the ideas of our present sensible perceptions ; because heaven is everywhere that God is. Yet we must persuade ourselves of some more definite place in heaven where the cosmical, the created life, is perfectly realised ; where God Himself is all in all, where the fragmentary, the imperfect, inseparable from existence in time, is lifted up into the fulness of eternity." ^ (Jb) As in the Apostles* Creed, the words, " He ascended into heaven," are immediately followed by the clause, "And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty," so in the article after, wherewith He ascended into heaven, we read, and there sitteth. The phrase employed once more is entirely scriptural. * Westcott*s Hvitoric Faith, p. 81. - Martensen, Christian DogmcUics (E. T.), p. 321. \, 192 THE THIRTY.NINE ARTICLES In the Old Testament it is used of tlie Messianic King in Ps. ex. 1 : " The Lord said unto My Lord, sit thou on My right hand until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool." Its occurrence in this passage evidently suggested its use in the New Testament, in wliich it may be fairly said to be the regular plirase employed to describe the condition of the risen and glorified Saviour. So in [S. Mark] xvi. 1 9 we read that " the Lord Jesus . . . was received up into heaven, and sat down at tlie right hand of God." In Eom. viii. 32 it is said that " Christ Jesus," who was raised from the dead, " is at the right hand of God." In Col. iii. 1, He is spoken of as "seated on the right hand of God." Heb. x. 12: "He, when He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God." ^ In all these passages, wherever the position is indicated, it is that of sittinrf. One exception to this there is in the New Testament. In Acts vii. 55 S. Stephen says : " Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standinrj on the right hand of God."' It is remarkable that the phrase should occur here and here only ; and there can be little doubt that S. Chrysostom is right in the interpretation which he puts upon the unusual expression. " Why standing, and not sitting ? To show that He is ready to succour His martyr. For thus it is said also of the Father, * Stand up, O God,' and ' now will I up, saith the Lord, I will set him in safety.* " 2 It is, perhaps, scarcely necessary to point out tliat the expression, " Sittcth at the right hand of God," is to be taken metaphorically, and that, as ]]ishop Pearson says, " we must not look upon it as determining any posture ^ III Acts ii. 33, it is doubtful wlictlicr the words should be remlcred, *' Being hy the right hand of God exalted," or " Being at the richt hand of God exalted." ^ Horn. vi. iu Asccns. ARTICLE IV 193 of His body in the lieavens, correspondent to the inclina- tion and curvation of our limbs." ^ Both parts of the expression are valuable for the ideas and thouglits which they are intended to bring before uh. Sitliiuj is sng- gcstive of continuance, of rest after labour, of the king upon liis throne, and the judge upon the judgment-seat. The rvjht liand is the symbol of strength and power. It is the position of honour and dignity ; and, as Pearson adds, " the right hand of God is the place of celestial happiness and perfect felicity ; according to that of the psalmist, *In Thy presence is fulness of joy, at Thy right hand pleasures for evermore.' " (c) Before leaving the subject of the ascension and session at the right hand of God, there is one question arising in connection with it which demands a brief consideration: How far can the risen and ascended Lord be said to be present everywhere as man ? At the time when the Articles were drawn up the subject had been brought prominently forward on the continent, owing to the unfortunate teaching of some of the Lutheran divines, following Luther himself who, in the course of the controversy on the Lord's Supper, en- deavoured to support his doctrine on the presence of Christ in the Eucharist by a theory of the ubiquity or omnipresence of the human nature of the Lord, of which theory it can only be said that it is altogether destructive of the reality of the manhood, and endows it with some, at least, of the essential properties of Deity, namely, omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience. That the subject was definitely present to the minds of those who compiled our Articles is plainly indicated by the passage from the Reformatio Lcfjum JtJccksiasiicarum, which has been already quoted as illustrative of this article. And the terms used in the article itself are » On the Creed, Art. VI. rli. ii. '3 194 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES quite sufficient to show that those who drew it up had no sympathy with " Ubiquitarianism," ^ but intended to attribute what can only be called a " local " presence to the body of Christ in heaven. Ho " took again His body . . . whcrcimth He ascended into heaven, and there sitteth until He return, etc." But while it is necessary to repudiate any teaching which would destroy the perfection of our Lord's humanity, and practically involve us in Eutychianism, it is at the same time equally needful to guard against imagining that there are in Christ two centres of personality, and that the two natures are in any way separated from each other, a view which would implicate us in something like Nestorianism. The subject is carefully discussed by Hooker, whose guidance we may thankfully follow. In the fifty-fifth chapter of the fifth book of the Ecclesi- astical Polity he points out — (1) That "the substance of the body of Christ hath no presence, neither can have but only local " ; (2) That " there is no proof in the world strong enough to enforce that Christ had a true body, but by the true and natural properties of His body, amongst which properties definite or local presence is chief"; (3) That "if his majestical body have now any such new property, by force whereof it may everywhere really, even in siihstance, present itself, or may at once be in many places, then hath the majesty of his estate extinguished the verity of His nature." Consequently he holds it " a most infallible truth that Christ as man is not everywhere present." But, having said this, he proceeds at once to add that in some sense it may be granted that even as man He is everywhere present. " His human substance in itself is naturally absent from * The " Ubiquitarians " arc frequently alluded to by Bishop Jewel in his letters. See his IForks (Parker Soc.) vol. iv. pp. 1258, 1261, 1264. ARTICLE IV 195 n the earth. His soul and body not on earth but in heaven only. Yet because the substance is inseparably joined to that personal Word which, hy His very divine essence 18 present with all things, tho nature which cannot liave in Itself universal presence hath it after a sort, by being nowhere severed from that which everywhere is present Wheresoever the Word is, it hath with it manhood, else should the Word be in part or somewhere God only and not man, which is impossible." Thus there results (a) a sort of presence of the manhood hj conjunction. Again, there is a second way in which a kind of universal presence may be attributed to the manhood. It has (h) a j^rescnce of co-oj^eration, for " that Deity of Christ which, before our Lord's Incarnation wrought all things without man, doth now work nothing wherein the nature which it hatli assumed is either absent from it or idle." " Touching the manner how He worketh as man in all things, the principal powers of the soul of man are tlie will and the understanding, the one of which two in Christ asscntetli unto all things, and from the other nothing which Deity doth work is hid ; ^ so that by knowledge and assent tlie soul of Christ is present with all tilings which the Deity of Christ worketh." Further of the body of Christ it may be said, that " although the definite limitation thereof be most sensible," yet in some sort it, too, admits of a " kind of infinite and unlimited presence." It is an integral part of that human nature which IS nowhere severed from Deity, and thus a ' Lest it should be said that this gives to the manhood an essential property of Doity, namely. - omniscience," it will be well for the reader to refer back to what Hook-r l.as said in a ].rovious chapter on the illumina- tion of the human soul of Christ, "which beincj so inward unto God cannot choose but be privy unto all things which God worketh and must therefore of necessity be endued with knowledge so far Vorth universal, though not with infinite knowledge peculiar to Deity itself" Eccl. Polity, bk. v. ch. liv. § 7. 196 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE IV 197 " presence of conjunction " may be ascribed to it " And forasmuch as it is by virtue of that conjunction made the body of the Son of God, by whom also it was made a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, this giveth it a xn-esence of force and efficacy throughout all generations of men. Albeit, therefore, nothing be actually infinite in substance but God only in that He is God, nevertheless as every number is infinite by possibility of addition, and every line by possibility of extension infinite, so there is no stint which can be set to the value or merit of the sacrificed body of Christ ; it hath no measured certainty of Umits, bounds of efficacy unto life it knoweth none, but is also itself infinite in possibility of application^ ^ III. The Return to Judgment. The concluding words of the article. Until He return to judge all men at the last day, merely repeat the substance of the corresponding article in the Creed, " from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead," without in any way explaining or elaborating it. It does not appear that there was any special form of false teaching on this subject, which the statement was intended to combat. Errors with regard to eschatology are plainly and directly condemned in Articles XXXIX. to XLII. of the series of 1553, but in the article before us the mention of the judgment is probably introduced incidentally rather than polemically, as being the natural close of the dispensation referred to in the previous clause, " On the session at the right hand of the Father." It will, then, be sufficient to notice here how the article accurately follows Scripture — (a) in pointing to the Kedeemer as also the Judge, and 1 The subject of the presence of Christ as Man is fully considered in Augustine's JEpistola ad Dardanum, '* De PrKsentia Dei," Ep. clxxxvu. U (h) in connecting this judgment with His second advent, and not with the moment of each man's death. (a) It is the teaching of Scripture that the second Person of the Holy Trinity, who has come as the Saviour of the world, shall also " come to be our Judge." See S. Matt. xvL 27, xxiv. 37, xxv. 31 j Acts L 11, x. 42 ; 2 Cor. V. 10 ; 2 Thess. ii. 2, etc. (b) The time of the judgment is not the moment of each man's death, but what Scripture terms " the last day."^ See S. Matt. xiii. 39 seq., xxv. 31-33 ; Acts xvii. 31 ; Rom. ii 5, 16 ; 1 Cor. iv. 5 ; 2 Pet. ii 9, 10, etc. ' See S. John vi. 39 scq. ; xi. 24 ; xii. 48. AKTICLE V De SpirUu Sando. Spiritus Sanctus, a Patre et Filio procedens, ejusdem est cum Patre et Filio essentise, majestatis et glorise, verus ac aeternus Deus. Of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one substance, majesty and glory, with the Father and the Son, very and eternal God. There was no article corresponding to this in the series pubUshed in 1553. Ten years later (1563) this was added by Archbishop Parker, being taken by him sub- stantially from the Confession of Wlirtemburg. The reason for its insertion was possibly twofold — (1) The spread of false teaching concerning the distinct Person- ality and Divinity of the Holy Spirit That these truths were impugned by some at the time of the Eeformation is shown by the first of the Thirteen Articles of 1538, which ends with a condemnation of "Samosa tenos veteres ct neotericos, qui cum tantum unam per- sonam esse contendant, de Verbo et Spiritu Sancto astute et impie rhetoricantur, quod non sint personse distinctae, sed quod verbum significet verbum vocale, et Spiritus motum in rebus creatum " ; while the Eeformatio Legum Hcclesiasticarum supplies further proof how necessary it was to guard against error on this subject, for after language referring to other heresies it proceeds as follows : " Sic illorum etiam est execrabilis impudentia, qui cum Macedonio contra Spiritum Sanctum con- 186 ARTICLE V 199 spiraverunt, ilium pro Deo non agnoscentes." ^ But while these quotations witness to the prevalence of error, a recollection of the date to which the documents from which they are drawn belong, shows that they describe the state of things that obtained before the pubUcation of the Articles of Edward's reign ; and it may fairly be asked why there was no article repudiating these errors in that series. The answer may perhaps be found m the supposition that it was considered that they were sufficiently condemned by the terms of Article I. (" Of the Holy Trinity "), the language of which our present Fifth Article partially repeats, adding only a statement on the procession of the Holy Spirit. Since, however the same would hold good also of the Elizabethan article, it appears probable that Archbishop Parker's addition was due, not so much to the felt need of more precise and definite language, as (2) to the desire to give the docu- ment the character of greater completeness. If there was an article on the Son of God it may well have been felt that the lack of a corresponding article on the Third Per- son of the Holy Trinity was a deficiency which it would be wise to supply, for the sake of symmetry and proper balance, even though there was no positive necessity for it aris- ing from heresy, which without it would not be excluded. The subjects which caU for attention in connection with this article are three in number : 1. The Divinity of the Holy Ghost. 2. The distinct Personality. 3. The doctrine of the Procession. I. The Divinity of the Holy Ghost. It is hard to understand how this can ever have been 1 Ref, Leg. Eccl. " De h«res." ch. 6. Even so late as the middle of the seventeenth century. Bishop Pearson speaks of -the ancient but newly- revived heresy of the Arians and Macedonians. -On the Creed, Art. viu. 200 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES doubted ; and it is probable that but few persons will be found in the present day to question it. The evidence of Scripture upon it is full and complete, and leaves no room whatever for doubt as to its teaching. Not only are divine actions and attributes ascribed to the Spirit, but also He is directly termed God. (a) Divine actions and attributes are ascribed to the Spirit. — In the Old Testament the references to the action of the Spirit of God in creation (Gen. i. 2 ; Ps. xxxiii. 6), and in inspiring the prophets (Isa. Ixi. 1), whatever may be thought of their bearing on the doctrine of His distinct Personality, are manifestly inconsistent with the notion that He is a Krlaiia. His work in bringing about the Incarnation can only belong to one who is in the highest sense divine. " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee ; wherefore also that which is to be bom shall be called holy, the Son of God " (S. Luke L 35). The Spirit dwells in the bodies of men as in a temple. See 1 Cor. iii. 16: " Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you ? " Compare 1 Cor. vi. 19: " Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you ? " " Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost " is an offence of so heinous a character that it is spoken of as a sin which "hath never forgiveness" (S. Mark iii. 29), whereas all other blasphemies may be forgiven — a fact which it is impossible to reconcile with any other sup- position but that of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit. (6) But, besides this, the Spirit is directly termed God. In Acts V. 3, 4, Peter says to Ananias, ** Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost ? . . , thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God," Thus to lie to the Holy Ghost is to lie to God. 2 Cor. iii. 15-18 : " Unto this day, whensoever Moses ARTICLE V 201 is read, a veil lieth upon their hearts. But whensoever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit : and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord, are trans- formed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit" **The Spirit is here so plainly said to be the Lord, that is Jehovah, the one eternal God, that the adversaries of this truth must either deny that the Lord is here to be taken for God, or that the Spirit is to be taken for the Spirit of God : either of which denials must seem very strange to any person which considereth the force and plainness of the apostle's discourse." ^ Again, whereas in one Gospel we read : "If I by the finger of God cast out devils" (S. Luke xL 20), in the parallel passage in another we read, " If I by the Spirit of God cast out devils" (S. Matt. xiL 28), and whereas Isaiah describes a divine utterance that came to him, and says, " I heard the voice of the Lord " (Isa. vi. 8), St. Paul quotes the words as an utterance of the Holy Spirit (Acts xxviii. 25 seq.), thereby identifying Him with the Jehovah of the Old Covenant. II. The Distinct Personality. If it is difficult to understand how the doctrine of the Spirit's Divinity could ever be doubted, with the doctrine of His distinct personality the case is very different. It is not hard to see how error would be likely to grow up on this subject. The same term, irv€vfia, is used in Holy Scripture both for the Person, and for the spiritual gifts. It is largely owing to this that men have sometimes failed to see the truth of the distinct PersonaUty, and have imagined that where- ^ Pearson On Uie Creed Art. viii. I 202 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE V 203 ever the "Spirit of God" is mentioned, it is an im- personal attribute or quality, or an endowment granted to man as a divine gift. Careful consideration, however, of the language used in Holy Scripture makes it quite clear that such a view is wholly inadequate. It will be seen that, throughout the New Testament, personal actions are ascribed to the Spirit, and such actions as cannot be predicated of the Father or the Son. Our Lord's discourses in the upper chamber on the eve of His passion (S. John xiiL-xvi) deal largely with the subject of the Holy Spirit, whom He would send from the Father, or whom the Father would send in His name (xiv. 26, XV. 26), as "another Comforter" or "Advocate" (aXXov TrapaKXTfTov). The use of this term seems of itself decisive. Whatever be the exact translation of wapd- /c\t)to^ the title is certainly a personal one. It is applied to our Lord in 1 John ii. 1, and if the Spirit is to be " another Paraclete,'* He must not only be distinct from the Son, and from the Father, by whom He is "sent," but must equally be a Person. Further, the masculine pronoim is used, " He (eVelvo?) shall teach you all things" (S. John xiv. 26), and such personal actions are ascribed to Him as teaching, reminding, bearing witness, convicting of sin, guiding into truth, declaring things to come, glorifying Christ, taking of the things of Christ, and declaring them to the disciples (xiv. 26, XV. 26, xvi. 8-14). But the proof of the distinct person- ality of the Holy Ghost is not confined to these chapters of S. John's Gospel. The apostolic epistles are full of passages which testify to the same truth. " The Spirit also helpeth our infirmity : for we know not how to pray as we ought ; but the Spirit Himself (avro t6 irvevfia) maketh intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered ; and He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because He maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God " (Rom. viiL 26, 27). The Spirit here can only be thought of as distinct from the Father with whom He intercedes, nor can there be any personification of, or confusion with, the human spirit, since the Spirit "helpeth our infirmities," and "maketh intercession for us." And though, undoubtedly, such attributes as love are personi- fied in Scripture, and personal actions ascribed to them, which are really done by the men in whom they reside (see e.g. 1 Cor. xiii.), yet such a passage as 1 Cor. xii 4: seq. is decisive against the notion that the language of the apostle concerning the Spirit may be explained in the same way. Here the Spirit of God is spoken of as apportioning the gifts of grace. He is expressly dis- tinguished from the gifts which He assigns to men, and personal action is markedly attributed to Him. " There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit . . . But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit to profit withaL For to one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom ; and to another the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit; to another faith, in the same Spirit; to another gifts of healings, in the one Spirit; and to another workings of miracles; and to another prophecy ; and to another discernings of spirits ; to another divers kinds of tongues ; and to another the interpretation of tongues : but all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as He will." The Personality of the Holy Spirit is evident throughout this passage. "Even as He will" could be said of no influence or attribute. Many other passages to the same effect might be quoted. Elsewhere we read of the Spirit being "grieved" (Eph. iv. 30), of men being "led by the Spirit" (Gal. v. 18). It is possible to " lie to the Holy Ghost " (Acts v. 4), and to "blaspheme against Him" (S. Matt. xiL 31). Language 204 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE V 205 ) such as this is surely conclusive. It would be inexplic- able and misleading if the Spirit were only an attribute, influence, gift, or operation. He is plainly revealed in the Holy Spirit as a divine Hypostasis, distinct from both the Father and the Son — the Third Person in the Blessed Trinity. It may be added, with reference to the use of the same term, irvev^a, both for the Person and the gift, that a comparison of passages will show that as a rule where the gift, operation, or communication of the Spirit is spoken of in Scripture, the word irvevfia is without the article. Where the word is definite, to irvev^ia, it will generally, if not always, be found that the divine Person is designated.^ Before passing on to the subject of the procession, it will be well to notice briefly the history of the doctrine of the Divinity and Personality of the Holy Spirit in the Church. In the earliest ages comparatively little attention was paid to the subject. The doctrine was held, so to speak, in an informal manner. The witness of hymns, doxologies, and professions of faith, as well as the incidental statements of early Fathers, all combine to convince us that the Church had no real doubts on the Divinity or Personality of the Holy Ghost, although the doctrine was not formally and dogmatically stated, and occasionally there are traces of a confusion of thought and language, so that not only are acts and operations ascribed to the Son which would be properly assigned to the Spirit, but the Spirit is actually identified with the Son.2 Such passages are, however, rare; and against ^ See Dean Vaughan, Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans^ p. 103, and cf. Pearson On the Creed, Art. viii. ' See Ps. Clement, 2 Cor. ix. and xiv. Hernias, Pastor. Sim. v. ix. ; Theoph. ad AiUolyc. ii. 23; Justin Martyr, Apol, i. 33, where the Incarnation is said to have been wrought by the Word Himself, though them may be set the witness of many others, which show that the doctrine was recognised from the begin- ning.^ " The Catholic doctrine of the Deity of the Holy Ghost," it has been truly said, " found a place from the first in the life and worship of the Church ; in her worship because in her life. Yet the dogmatic expression of this truth will be sought in vain among the out- pourings of Christian devotion. Until heresy attacked one by one the treasures of the traditional creed, they were held firmly indeed, yet with a scarcely conscious grasp: the faithful were content to believe and to adore." ^ The first recognition in any form of the fact that the doctrine had not hitherto received the attention due to it may be found in the outbreak of Montanism in the latter half of the second century. It has been said that Montanus claimed himself to be the Paraclete, but this assertion probably arises from a misunderstanding of his claim to be the inspired organ of the Spirit. According to the express statement of Epiphanius,^ his views were sound on the subject of the Holy Trinity, and therefore the prominence which he gave to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit may be taken as " the first expression of a need already beginning to make itself felt — the need of a fuller recognition of the Person and work of the Holy Ghost" * In the early days of the Sabellian heresy the subject elsewhere Justin clearly distinguishes the Spirit from the Word, placing *'in the third order" {iv rpL-rtj rd^n) the Spirit of prophecy "for we honour Him with the Word," Apol. i. 13. ^ See Clement of Rome, 1 Cor. ii. xlv. xlvii. Iviii. ; Ignatius, Ad Magti. xiii. ; Philad. vii. ; Eph. ix. xviii. ; Mart. Polyc. xiv. xxii. ; Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 15 ; Athenagoras, Legat. x. ; Irenaeus, IV. xiv.; xxxiv. etc. * Swete, On the Early History of the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, p. 8. 3 Uasr. xlviii * Swete, op. cit. p. 12. V 206 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES of the Holy Spirit was not prominently brought forward, but as the controversy proceeded there were indications that the Sabellians were prepared to extend to the Third Person of the Trinity the principle of explana- tion which they applied to the second, and to regard the Spirit merely as a manifestation or character of the one Person whom they admitted as God. The subject, however, still remained in the background, nor was the attention of churchmen specially directed to it for some time yet. Indeed, it is not till a considerable time after the outbreak of the Arian heresy in the fourth century that it receives due considera- tion. The creed which received the sanction of the Fathers assembled at Nicaea (a.d. 325), being drawn up expressly to guard against Arianism, ended abruptly with the clause, "And in the Holy Ghost." All the clauses which follow this in our present (so-called) Nicene Creed were wanting, and the reason why this article of the faith was so brief and free from all elaboration was, if we may believe the express state- ment of S. Basil of Caesarea, "because no question had as yet arisen on this subject."^ At the same time, it is necessary to remember that the denial of the Divmity of the Holy Spirit was logically involved in the position of the Arians. If the Son is not " very and eternal God," but a " creature " (Krlafjui), what can be thought of the nature of the Spirit who is " sent " by Him, and is actually called in Scripture " the Spirit of Christ ? " It is clear that on the Arian hypothesis the Spirit cannot be truly divine, or else He would be superior to the Son who " sends " Him. For a while, however, this inference remained in the background. The main question at stake was that * Atd rb fiTjSiirbj rvrt rwro KivttffBai rh fi^Aia, Ep. Ixxviii. (oZ. cxxv., cf. cccxxv.; a/, cclviii.). ARTICLE V 207 of the Divinity of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. It required time for the full issues and results that flowed from the Arian position to become manifest. Not till about the middle of the fourth century does the question of the nature and position of the Holy Spirit begin to assume importance in the controversy. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril of Jerusalem were delivered in the year 347 or 348. In the creed on which S. Cyril commented, the article on the Holy Spirit, though slightly fuller than that in the Nicene Creed, was still lacking in crucial and decisive terms. It simply consisted of the words, "And in the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, who spake by the prophets " ; and S. Cyril's lecture upon it^ makes it perfectly clear that he was aware of no recent development of heretical speculation upon the subject, for the only heresies against which he thinks it necessary to caution the catechumens whom he is instructing, are those of older days and of long standing, such as those of the Gnostics and the Montanists. But a very few years later, among the anathemas appended to the first Sirmian Creed (A.D. 351) are several which mark the rise of controversy on the Person of the Spirit. Those are condemned who speak of Him as the " ingenerate God," or as " one Person " with the Father and the Son, or as " a part of the Father or of the Son." ^ From this time onwards the battle rages round the subject, and the heresy associated with the name of Macedonius is developed by some among the semi-Arians, who shrank from the blasphemy of attributing a created nature to the Eternal Son. " Unable to grasp the Catholic conception of the Holy Trinity, unwilling to accept the Arian position as a whole, they fall back upon the middle course of giving up the Deity of the Spirit, while they confessed the Son * S. Cyril, Cat. Led. xvi. * Athan, J)e Synodis, 27. 208 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES to be of like essence with the Father." ^ In this way there arose the heresy of the Pneumatomachi (in/evfiaTO' fidxoi)t or Macedonians,^ as they were also called, after Macedonius, the deposed Patriarch of Constantinople (a.d. 360). Its essence consists in the denial of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit. For a time it must have been most formidable. One Council after another condemns it,^ and creeds are enlarged with fuller state- ments in order to exclude it. So in the (so-called) Nicene Creed we find the brief statement of the original creed expanded in the following manner : — ** I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life (to Kvpiov Kot TO ffi)o7rop. cit. p. 64. ^ See Swete, History, etc. p. 183. 2 See Baeda, ff. E. IV. xvii.: " Glorificantes Deum Patrem sine initio et Filium ejus unigenitum et Patre generatum ante sjBcula, et Spiritum Sanctum procedentern ex Patre et Filio inenarrabiliter, sicut pnedicaverunt hi quos memoravimus supra, sancti apostoli et prophette et doctores." Whether the interpolated creed was already accepted in this coimtry is a matter on which we have no evidence whatever. ARTICLE V 221 century, and even then the question is only with regard to the doctrine, and no notice is taken of the interpolation of the creed. In A.D. 767 a Council (of which the records have perished) was held at Gentilly, near Paris ; and at this, according to a writer of the following century. Ado of Vienne (t874), the question was discussed between the Greeks and Romans concerning the Trinity, and whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son in the same way as He proceeds from the Father (utrum Spiritus Sanctus sicut procedit a Patre ita procedit a Filio). This notice, however, stands by itself, and of the details of the discussion we have no knowledge. Twenty years later (a.d. 787) was held a great Council at Nicaea in connection with the Iconoclastic Controversy. At the third session of the Council a letter was read from Tarasius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, containing the words, " I believe .... in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father through the Son." ^ This, which had been previously approved by the Pope Hadrian, was formally accepted by the Council, which was closed by the recitation of the uninterpolated Constantinopolitan Creed. The proceedings of the Council were then communicated to the West. With Rome there was no difficulty. Not so with Gaul, and under the influence of Charlemagne, a capitular was sent to Rome objecting strongly to various statements made or permitted by the Council, and among other matters callmg attention to the doctrine of Tarasius upon the procession, and pointing out that it was not in agreement with the Nieene Creed,^ by which is ' Ti Contra Apion. 1, § 8. The thirteen prophets must be Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra with Nehemiah, Esther, Job, 254 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES efifect,^ while Philo supplies indirect evidence that the Jews of the dispersion agreed with their brethren in Palestine in this matter.^ In the New Testament, though there are occasionally striking coincidences of language and thought with some of the books of the Apo- crypha, yet there is not a single direct and acknowledged quotation from any one of them, while quotations from, and references to, almost all the books of the Hebrew canon abound.^ Against this there is nothing to be set on the other side, and so we may conclude that there can be no reasonable doubt that at the beginnmg of the Christian era the Jewish canon contained the same books which it does at the present day, namely, those enumerated as canonical in our Articles, and none others.* In the Christian Church our earliest witnesses all point to this list, and to this alone, as formally and distinctly recognised. But at the same time it needs very little Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and the minor prophets. The four others are Psalms, Proverbs, Canticles, and Ecclesiastes. Other Jewish authorities generally reckon those in italics not among the prophets, but among the " Hagiographa," the third class of Josephus. ^ Baba Bathra, fol. 146. * " His language shows that he was acquainted with the Apocryphal books, and yet he does not make a single quotation from them, though they offered much that was favourable to his views. On the other hand, in addition to the law, he quotes all the books of ' the prophets,' and the Psalms and Proverbs from the Hagiographa, and several of them with clear assertions of their * prophetic ' or inspired character. Of the remain- ing Hagiographa (Nehemiah, Ruth, Lamentations, First and Second Chronicles, Daniel, Ecclesiastes, Canticles) he makes no mention, but the first three may have been attached, as often in Hebrew usage, to other books (Ezra, Judges, Jeremiah), so that four writings alone are unattested by him. "—Smith's Dictumary of the Bible, vol. i. p. 504 (Ed. 2). ^ 3 The only books of the Old Testament to which the New gives no direct attestation are Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Esther, Ezra, and Nehemiah. * For the history of the gradual growth of the Jewish canon, and of the doubts which existed in early days among Jewish doctors as to the canon- icity of a few of the books, namely, Esther, Canticles, and Ecclesiastes, re- ference may be made to Professor Ryle's History of tht Canon of the Old Testament. Cf. also the Dictionary of the Bible, vol. i. p. 608. ARTICLE VI 255 research to discover that quotations from the Apocrypha are abundant in the writings of the Fathers, from the earliest days. This, however, is easily accounted for. The Fathers were, with scarcely an exception, ignorant of Hebrew, and dependent on the Septuagint Version for their knowledge of the Scriptures of the Old Covenant. In this version, as we have seen, the books of the Apoc- rypha found a place. It was, therefore, only natural that the Fathers should fall into the habit of employing and quoting all the books in the collection with which they were familiar, and thus should gradually lose their sense of the distinction between the books of the Hebrew canon and the additions of the Septuagint. The " old Latin version " was made from the Septuagint, and con- sequently included the additional books. Hence the confusion passed over into the Western Church. But in spite of this growing recognition of the books of the Apocrypha, and the popular use of them, it remains that during the first four centuries every Father who gives a deliberate judgment on the subject, and has the slightest claim to occupy a representative position, accepts the Hebrew canon alone. In its behalf may be quoted the testimony of the Syriac (Peschito) version which is limited to the books of the Hebrew canon; the witness of Melito of Sardis (a.d. 180), who made the number of the books of the canon a subject of special inquiry;! Origen (220) ;« Cyril of Jerusalem (348) ;» * See Eusebius, ff. E. IV. xxvi. Melito does not mention Esther separately, but the suggestion has been made that it may have been reckoned with Ezra, as Nehemiah almost certainly was. See Routh, Reliquiae Sacroe, vol. i. p. 136. * See Eusebius, H. E. IV. xxv. Origen gives the Hebrew canon exactly as we have it. ' Catech. iv. § 35. Cyril includes Baruch in the canon, taking it as an appendix to Jeremiah ; otherwise his list of the Old Testament coin- cides exactly with our own. 256 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Athanasius (367);^ Gregory Nazianzen (390)^ in the East; and of Hilary of Poictiers (368) ;3 Rufinus (390)* and Jerome (430) ^ in the West. Especially important is the testimony of the last-mentioned writer. He gives a com- plete and accurate list exactly coinciding with our own, and ends by saying, " Whatever is without the number of these must be placedamong the Apocrypha."^ Contemporary with Jerome was Augustine, and it is to his varying and uncertain language that the claim of the Apocrypha to be ranked as canonical must be traced. Not only does he freely quote (as others had done before him) books of the Apocrypha as Scripture, but (as others had not done before him) when formally enumerating the books contained in the canon of Scripture he includes these books among them without drawing any clear distinction between them,*^ although else- 1 Festal Epistles, No. xxxix. Like Cyril, Athanasius includes Baruch, but he expressly excludes Esther from a place among the canonical books. 2 Carmina, xii. 13. Esther is not mentioned in this list. 3 Prologus in Psalmos, § 15. Hilary's list is identical with our own, though he mentions that some added to it the books of Tobit and Judith. * In Symbolum Apostolorum, § 37. The li«t is exactly the same as ours, and expressly says that Tobit, Judith, etc., are " not canonical, but ecclesiastical." 5 Prologus Galeatus. « No reference is made in the text to the Fifty-ninth canon of the Council of Laodicaia (a.d. 363), which is often quoted as determining the canon of Scripture ; because there appear to be very strong grounds for question- ing the genuineness of that part of the decree which contains the list of the books. See Westcott (hi the Canon, p. 498. Hefele, however, accepts it as genuine {History of the Councils, vol. ii. p. 322 seq., English transla- tion). The list given in it is, however, exactly the same as our own. It ought to be added that many of the authorities quoted in the previous notes as accepting the Hebrew canon rather than the enlarged one of the Septuagint as authoritotive, yet make use of the other books, and cite them from time to time as Scripture. This was under the circumstances only natural, and the same thing is equally true of our reformers. Habit and custom were often too strong for them. Hence the Apocrypha is freely quoted as " Scripture " and " the word of God " in the Homilies, and yet distinctly separated off from the canonical books of Scripture in the article. 7 J)e Doctrina Christiana II. viu. ; Totus autem Canon Scripturarum ARTICLE VI 257 where he seems occasionally to use language which implies that he recognised a distinction ; ^ from which it has been inferred that possibly he really differed from Jerome only in language. Be this as it may, there is no doubt that the Council of Carthage (a.d. 397), at which Augustine himself is thought to have been present, recognised and adopted the enlarged canon of the Septuagint, including ... his libris continetur; quinque Moyseos, id est Genesi, Exodo, Levitico, Numeris, Deuteronomio ; et uno libro Jesu Nave, uno Judicum, uno libello qui adpellatur Ruth, qui magis ad Regnorum principium videtur per- tinere ; deinde quatuor Regnorum, et duobus Paralipomenon, non conse- quentibus sed quasi a latere adjunctis, simulque pergentibus. Hsec est historia quae sibimet adnexa tempora continet atque ordinem rerum. Sunt aliae tanquam ex diverso ordine, quae neque huic ordini neque inter se connectuntur, sicut est Job et Tobias, et Esther, et Judith et Macha- hxorum libri duo, et Esdrae duo, qui magis subsequi videntur ordinatam illam historiam usque ad Regnorum vel Paralipomenom terminatam. Deinde Prophetae, in quibus David unus liber Psalmorum, et Salomonis tres : Proverbiorum, Cantica Canticorum, et Ecclesiastes. Nam illi duo libri, unus qui Sapientia, et alius qui Ecclesiasticus inscribitur, de quadam similitudine Salomonis esse dicuntur ; nam Jesus Sirach eos conscripsisse constantissime perhibetur ; qui tamen, quoniam in auctoritatem recipi meruerunt, inter propheticos numerandi sunt. Reliqui sunt eorum libri qui proprie prophetae adpellantur duodecim prophetarum libri singuli, qui connexi sibimet, quoniam nunquam sejuncti sunt, pro uno habentur, quorum prophetarum nomina sunt haec : Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michaeas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachi; deinde quatuor prophetae sunt majorum voluminum : I^aias, Jeremias, Daniel, Ezekiel. His quadraginta quatuor libris testamenti veteris terminatur auctoritas." The books of the Apocrypha are italicised in this list. It will be noticed that there is no mention of Baruch. This probably does not in- dicate rejection, but may be accounted for by supposing that it was reckoned along with Jeremiah. Cf. Be Civitate Dei, xviii. 33, c. Faustum, xii. 43. ^ In Contra Gaudentium, i. 38, Augustine speaks of the books of the Maccabees " as received by the Church not without profit, if they be read with sobriety." In the De Civitate Dei, xviii. 36, he says that a reckoning is found "not in the Holy Scriptures which are called canonical, but in others, among which are also the books of the Maccabees — which the Church and not the Jews account canonical, on account of the wonderful suffer- ings of the martyrs, etc." He thus draws a distinction between the books recognised by both the Jewish and the Christian Church, and those held in honour by the Christians only. Cf. Dictionary of the Bible, vol. i. p. 606. 17 258 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES the books of the Apocrypha.^ The same is true of the decretals which bear the names of Innocent, Damasus, and Gelasius, and of many later writers, so that it may fairly be said that from the fifth century onwards, at least in the Western Church, the distinction between the two classes of books was generally obliterated. Nevertheless it has been pointed out with truth that in spite of this wide recognition of the Apocrypha as canonical " a con- tinuous succession of the more learned fathers in the West maintained the distinctive authority of the Hebrew canon up to the period of the Reformation," and " repeat with approval the decision of Jerome, and draw a clear line between the canonical and apocryphal books."^ It was thus reserved for the Council of Trent in 1546 to decide finally against this continuous stream of testimony, and, in giving its verdict against all the more critical of the Fathers, to stereotype the confusion which could never have arisen except in an age devoid of the first principles of criticism.* It is remarkable that notwithstanding the decision of the Council of Trent taken so early to include the Apo- crypha among the canonical books, Cranmer was content 1 C \xr 3 The Docinne of tJie liussian ChurcJi, translated by the Rev. K. W. Blackmore, p. 38. ARTICLE VI 261 books, with a note to the effect that they are taken from the Greek version or are not found in the Hebrew text." ^ (d.) The canon of the New Testament. — It is obvious that in the very limited space which alone can be devoted to the subject in a work of this character, it is impossible to do more than give the briefest summary of the evid- ence which has led the Church to accept the canon of the New Testament as it has come down to us. Fuller details must be sought in such works as Bishop West- cott's History of the Carton of the New Testament, or Dr. Salmon's Introduction to the Neio Testament. All that can be attempted here is to indicate the main outlines of the evidence, which may be summed up under four differ- ent heads, namely, the witness of (1) MSS., (2) Versions, (3) formal catalogues of the books, and (4) citations in early ecclesiastical writers. These four distinct branches of evidence all combine to establish the fact that the books of the New Testament, which we receive to-day, have come down to us from the days of the apostles ; that, with the partial exceptions noted below, they have been recognised as sacred by the Church from the beginning ; and that in very early days they were formed into a definite collection, so as to constitute a "New Testament " corresponding to the " Old." 1. Manuscripts. — The total number of manu- scripts of the Greek Testament that are known to exist and have been examined with more or less care, amounts to something like twelve hundred. They are divided into two classes, known respectively as "uncial" and " cursives." The former class, written in capital letters, comprises all the more ancient among them, ranging from the fourth to the tenth century. The " cursives " are written in a small running hand, which began to come into use about the ninth century, and include the great * JXctionary of the Bihle^ vol. i. p. 510. 262 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES bulk of the existing MSS. from that date to the six- teenth. The oldest MSS. are the four great Bibles of the fourth and fifth centuries, containing the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, as well as the original Greek of the New. These are known to scholars under the following titles : — L Codex Vaticanus (B), in the Vatican Library at Rome, containing all the books of the New Testament except the later chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Pas- toral Epistles, Philemon, and the Revelation of S. John. iL Codex Sinaiticus (k), discovered by Tischendorf in the convent of S. Catherine at Mount Sinai in 1859, now at St. Petersburg. This contains all the books of the New Testament without exception. Both of these MSS. are unhesitatingly assigned to the middle of the fourth century. iii. Codex Alexandrimis (A), in the British Museum. This, like the Sinaitic MS., contains every book of the New Testament, though several leaves are wanting at the beginning of S. Matthew's Gospel, as well as two or three in other parts of the volume. iv. Codex Ephraemi (C), at Paris. This MS., in which the works of an eastern Father, Ephraem the Syrian, have been written over the Greek text of the Scriptures, is in a very fragmentary condition ; but sufficient remains to show us that it also originally contained the whole New Testament. Together with Codex Alexandrinus it is set down as belonging to the fifth century. Of later MSS. there is no need to give any account here. While to the textual critic many of them are of the highest value, they can scarcely be said to add materially to the evidence for the point that is here under consideration. But the existence of these four MSS. just enumerated is of itself sufidcient to establish the existence ARTICLE VI 263 of the New Testament as a collected whole — a definite Canon — placed on a footing of equal authority with the Old Testament, some time before the date to which the earliest of them is assigned. And it may be added that the fact that there are such a number of MSS. remaining, many of them belonging to an early date, enables us to place far greater reliance on the correct- ness of the text of the New Testament than we can do on the text of any of the great classical writers of antiquity, whose works often rest on the evidence of one or two MSS., and those of a comparatively recent date. 2. Versions.— While the MSS. of the Greek Testa- ment thus testify to the existence of the collection before the middle of the fourth century, we are enabled, by the aid of the versions, to prove its acceptance by the Church some two centuries earlier stiU. For we find that before the second century had come to a close the books of the New Testament had been already translated into the vernacular in more than one country. The two oldest and most important versions or translations known to us are the Old Latin and the Syriac. Of these the former was in use in North Africa, probably in the days of TertuUian (A.U. 200), and certainly a considerable time before the days of S. Cyprian, by whom it is frequently quoted some fifty years later. It is, perhaps, scarcely correct to speak of the Old Latin as a single version. The MSS. of it which remain fall into distinct groups, from which scholars have concluded that besides the African text, used by Cyprian and others, there was another current, generally known as the European, which may have been originally an independent version.^ Should iFrom the European was probably formed the Italic, the third form in which the Old Latin is known to us. On these versions and their relation to each other see Scrivener's IiUrodudion to the Cntuiam of the New Testament, vol. ii. ch. iii. (Ed. 4). 264 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES this prove to be correct it will supply us with a fresh evidence to the existence and widespread use of the books of the New Testament in early days. No complete Old Latin version remains to us. It has come down in a partial and fragmentary form in the existing MSS. ; but enough remains to enable us to state with certainty that the version contained all the books of our present canon, except the Epistle of S. James, the Second Epistle of S. Peter, and (at least in the first instance) the Epistle to the Hebrews. Still older, perhaps, than the Old Latin is the original Syriac translation. The Peshito or Simple version is the Vulgate of the Syriac Church, and of itself can claim a high antiquity, although its actual date in the revised form in which it has come down to us is hard to determine. It has been placed by some scholars as early as the end of the second century ; by others some time later. But portions of a still more ancient Syriac version have lately come to light. In 1842 a few fragments of a MS. of the fifth century were brought to England, and found to contain a limited number of passages from each of the four Gospels in a Syriac translation, different from that previously known. These were edited by Dr. Cureton, from whom the version is known as the Curetonian Syriac. It is thought to contain an older unrevised text, and to be not later than the middle of the second century. Since Cureton's day a second MS. of a recension of the same version has been discovered at Mount Sinai.^ which, happily, contains the whole of the Gospels. Whether this oldest Syriac version ever contained more than this it is impossible at present to determine. But in its revised form in the Peshito the canon of the Syriac Church comprises the ^ In 1892 by Mrs. Lewis, by whom an English translation of the Gospels has been published (1894). ARTICLE VI 265 whole of the New Testament except 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse. A third group of versions must also be mentioned, namely, the Egyptian. Of these there are various forms known to us, now generally termed " Boharic," " Sahidic " (or " Thebaic "), and " Bashmuric," as well as fragments in other dialects. The early history of these is very obscure, but it has been said by a competent authority that we " should probably not be exaggerating if we placed one or both the Egyptian versions, the Boharic and Sahidic, or at least parts of them before the close of the second century."^ Nor is there room for doubt that these versions contained the whole of the books of our present canon with the exception of the Apocalypse. 3. Catalogues. — Besides MSS. and versions, a third important branch of evidence is furnished by the formal lists of the books of Scripture drawn up in the early centuries. Of these several have come down to us from the fourth century, when the canon of Scripture was made a special subject of inquiry and was finally settled in the Church. The list of the books of the New Testament, exactly as we have them at present, was definitely ratified at the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397).^ The catalogues given by Eufinus ^ (390) in Italy, by Gregory Nazianzen * (389) and Amphilochius ^ (circa 380) in Asia Minor, by Athanasius ^ (367) in Alexandria, and Cyril of Jerusalem^ (348) in Palestine supply further evidence reaching back to the first half of the same century. In these the only book concerning the accept- ance of which there is any hesitation expressed is the Apocalypse. While it is definitely recognised as canon- 1 Scrivener, op. cU. vol. ii. p. 98. * C(mc. Carth. Canon xxxix. * Carm,ina, § 1, xii. 5. ^ Ep. Fesl. xxxix. » In Symh. § 37. ^ Ad ScleiLch. ■^ CaUch, iv. 36. 266 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE VI 267 1 ical by Rufinus and Athanasius, it is passed over in silence by Cyril,^ and expressly rejected by Gregory Nazianzen and Amphilochius. For the earlier part of the fourth century we have a still more important witness in the list of the books given by Eusebius in the third book of his Ecclesiastiml History? in which he sums up the results of his investigation on the subject of the canon. In this he tells us that all the books for which any claim to divine authority has been made may broadly be divided into two classes — (1) the acknowledged books (ofioXoyovfieva), and (2) those which were disputed (avriXeyofieva). In the first class (which he elsewhere describes as " canoni- cal and acknowledged ") ^ he places the Four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of S. Paul, the First Epistle of S. Peter, and the First of S. John, and (with some hesitation) the Apocalypse. In the second class he finds it necessary to make a subdivision, (a) Some of the disputed books, or Antilegomena, were nevertheless "recognised by most," and these form a separate class, including the Epistles of S. James and S. Jude, 2 and 3 John, and 2 Peter. (6) The remain- ing Antilegomena are set aside as spurious (voda), e.g, the Acts of Paul, the Pastor of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, the so-called " Teach- ing of the Apostles," and the Revelation of S. John, " which some reject, but others class with the acknow- ledged books." Nothing is said expressly in this passage concerning the Epistle to the Hebrews. But as there is no mention of it among the disputed books it may be supposed to be included among the Epistles of S. Paul, 1 As it is also in the list appended to the fifty -ninth canon of the Council of Laodicea. 2 Eusebius, ff. E. III. xxv. ' III. iii. rcpi Tutv ivbukQiiKUiv Ka.\ bfioKoyovfUvuv, as it apparently is in an earlier chapter of the same book,^ although elsewhere it is spoken of as one of the Antilegomena.* The importance of this passage of Eusebius can hardly be exaggerated. Eusebius had made the recep- tion of the various books of the New Testament a subject of special inquiry ; and the outcome of his researches was that he was aware of no doubts whatever as to the genuineness and authenticity of the great bulk of the books which have come down to us. Concerning seven books only, were doubts expressed by some of the authors whom he consulted. But for all these he was able to quote testimonies from earlier writers, and his deliberate judgment concerning them was that they were generally known and recognised. There appear to be no formal catalogues of the Scriptures belonging to the third century. But of a second century list one precious fragment remains. It is commonly known as the " Muratorian Fragment on the Canon," from its discoverer and first editor, MuratorL* Its date, which is fixed by internal evidence, must be placed in the latter part of the second century.* The beginning of the document is unfortunately lost, and in other parts it appears to be mutilated. But that if we possessed it entire we should find that the Gospels according to S. Matthew and S. Mark were recognised, 1 III. iii. "Paul's fourteen epistles are well-known and undisputed {TpddrjXoi Kal €ls). It is not, indeed, right to ignore the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that it was disputed {dyTiKiyeadai) by the Church of Rome, on the ground that it was not written by Paul." « H. E. VI. xiii. ' The fragment is printed in Westcott's History of the Canon ^ Appendix C, and in Routh's RelinuuB Sturce^ vol. i. p. 393. * Dr. Salmon seems to stand alone in assigning it to the third century, see the Dictionary of Christian Biography ^ vol. iii. p. 1002. 268 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES there can be no reasonable doubt — for the opening sentences of what remains assign the third place to the Gospel of S. Luke, and the fourth to that of S. John. Besides these the fragment mentions the Acts of the Apostles; thirteen Epistles of S. Paul; the Epistle of S. Jude; two (or three) ^ Epistles of S. John; the Apocalypses of John and Peter, " which last some will not have read in the Church." There is no mention in the fragment of the Epistles of S. Peter, the Epistle of S. James, or (apparently) of that to the Hebrews.^ But as the MS is only a fragment, no great stress can be laid on these omissions, and we may feel sure that in its original form it must at least have included the first Epistle of S. Peter, as we never hear of doubts expressed elsewhere concerning the reception of this. This is the earliest catalogue of the Scriptures that has come down to us. It proves conclusively two things— ^rs^, that before the close of the second century a definite canon of the New Testament had been formed ; and, secondly, that this was substantially the same as our own, although, as we have seen, so late as the fourth century, some hesitation was felt in various quarters concerning the canonicity of a limited number of the books. 4. Citations in early writers— In order (1) to bridge over the interval between the latter part of the 1 "Though only two Epistles of John are here mentioned, the oi>euing sentence of the First Epistle has been quoted in the paragraph treating the Gospel ; and it is possible that our writer may have read that epistle as a kind of appendix to the Gospel, and is here speaking of the other ty^o."— Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. iii. p. 1001. It is cer- tainly hard to think that anyone could have accepted either the Second or Third Epistle without the other. « It has been suggested that the Epistle to the Hebrews may be referred to as the Epistle to the Alexandrians, which the ^vriter speaks of as "forged under the name of Paul, bearing on" (or "in the interest of") *' the heresy of Marcion." ARTICLE VI 269 second century and the apostolic age, and also (2) to establish the genuineness of the " Antilegomena " recourse must be had to the fourth branch of evidence. To the same age as the writer of the Muratorian fragment belong Tertullian and Irenaeus ; both of whom bear witness to the acceptance by the Church of a definite *' canon " of Scripture.^ But earlier than about the year A.D. 170, although there is ample evidence of the exist- ence of all or almost all the books, the indications of a definite collection of them are but slight. In this period the canon of the New Testament was only being gradually formed by the separation of the genuine and authentic writings of apostles and apostolic men from all others. That a "fourfold gospel" was acknowledged at a comparatively early date is shown by the Diatessaron of Tatian (a.d. 150-160), the recent discovery of which has placed beyond dispute the fact that it was a harmony of our four canonical Gospels.^ Nor can there now be reasonable grounds for doubt that these four were known and used by Tatian's master, Justin Martyr (140), by whom they are spoken of as the " Memoirs of the Apostles," and said to have been written by " apostles and apostolic men."^ To a still earlier date (circa 130) we are taken by the fragments which remain of the work of Fapias of HierapoliSy one of which, preserved by Eusebius, describes the origin of Gospels attributed to Matthew and Mark, which it is only natural to identify with those which ' On the evidence of Tertullian and Irenaeus see Sanday's Gospels in the Second Century, ch. xiii. 2 See The Earliest Life of our Lwd, by H. Hill ; and Hemphill's Tatian's Diatessaron. » Apol. I. Ixvi. Ixvii. ; cf. ch. xxxiii. ; Dial. Ixxxviii. c. etc. See on the evidence of Justin Martjrr Westcott's Canon of the New TestamerU, p. 86, and for proof that Justin was acquainted with the Gospel of S. John, reference may be made especially to Ezra Abbot's Authorship of the Fourth Chapel, 270 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES certainly passed under these names a few years later.^ This brings us very near to the date at which the Gospels were written, and when it is added that in the writings of the apostolic Fathers and the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles* there are many striking coinci- dences of language with passages found in all the four Gospels, we need not hesitate to set these down as proofs of their existence and acceptance by the Church, from the days of those who were themselves the pupils and companions of the apostles. Equally clear is the witness of citations from early writers for the remainder of the books which Euscbius ranked as " acknowledged," ^ and although it is clear that 1 Eusebius, H, E. III. xxxix. ; cf. Lightfoot, Essays on Supernatural Religion^ p. 142 seq. 2 S. Matt. XX. 6 is actually quoted in the Epistle of Barnabas, ch. iv., as Scripture, being quoted with the formula ws y^ypaxrai. There is a possible allusion to the Four Gospels in the Faster of Hernias, vis. iii. 13. With S. Matt. vii. 1, 2, and S. Luke, vi. 36-38, cf. Clement of Rome, Ad Car. I. xiii., Ep, Polyc. ch. ii.; with S. Matt. xxvi. 24, and S. Mark xiv. 21, cf. Clement of Rome, Ad Cor. ch. xlvi.; with S. Matt. xxvi. 44, and S. Mark xiv. 38, cf. Polycarp, ch. vii. ; with S. John vi. 32, 51, 53, vii. 38, cf. Ignatius, Ad Roin, vii.; with S. John x. 7, Ad Philad. ix. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles appears to borrow freely from S. Matthew's Gospel. It also has coincidences with S. Luke (see ch. i., ix.), and S. John. 3 From the Acts of the Apostles we have a clear quotation in Polycarp i., cf. Acts ii. 24 ; and coincidences ^vith Clement of Rome, ch. ii. (cf. Acts XX. 35), and Ignatius, Ad Smym. iii.; cf. Acts x. 41. The First Epistle to the CoriiUhians is expressly quoted as St. Paul's by Clement of Rome (ch. xlvii.), that to the Fhilippiaiis by Polycarp, ch. iii. In Ignatius, Ad Ephes. ch. xii., there is a reference to "every epistle " of S. Paul's, which seems to imply a collection of them. Besides these there are numerous verbal coincidences so close as to be marked by Bishop Lightfoot as quotations. Thus for Jtoinans see Ignatius, Ad Ephes. xix. ; Polycarp, Ad Fhilip. vi. x. 1 CarinthiaiiSy Clement of Rome, xxxiv. Ignatius, Ad EpJies. xvi. xviii.; Ad Earn, v.; Ad Philad. iii.; Polycarp, Ad Philip, iv. v. x. xi. 2 CarirUhianSt Polycarp, Ad Philip, ii. vi. Oalatians, Ignatius, Ad Ephes. xvi. Polycarp, Ad Philip, iii. v. ARTICLE VI 271 the " disputed " books only gradually won their way to universal recognition, yet it is believed that the final judgment of the Church in each case was correct, and that their genuineness can be satisfactorily established both from external and from internal evidence. ^ The brief sketch which has here been given, slight as it is, will be sufficient to show the nature of the grounds on which the Church has accepted the Canon of the New Testament. It will have made it clear that the great majority of the books must have been received from the days of the apostles without question, but that seven were not universally received imtil the latter part of the fourth century. Turning now to the text of the article to see what is said on the canon of the New Testament, we are met by a difficulty. No list of the books is given, as in the case of the Old Testament. But two distinct statements are made which it is not Ephesians, Ignatius, Ad Polyc. v. Polycarp, Ad Fhilip. i. xii. Philippians, Polycarp, Ad Philip, ix. xii. Colossiaiis, Ignatius, Ad Ephes. x. 2 Thessalonians, Polycarp, Ad Philip, xi. 1 Timothy, Polycarp, Ad Philip, iv. xiL 2 Timothy, ibid. v. ix. Titus, Clement of Rome, ii. 1 FeUr, Clement of Rome, xxx. (?) Ignatius, Ad EpJies. v. (?) Poly- carp, Ad Fhilip. i. ii. v. vii. viii. x. 1 John, Polycarp, Ad Fhilip. vii. 1 Of the disputed books there is strong attestation to both the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of S. James in Clement of Rome. See ch. xxx. xxxvi. xliii. xlix. There are doubtful allusions to 2 Peter in the same epistle. For 2 and 3 John and S. Jude nothing earlier than the Muratorian Fragment can be quoted. But for the AiXKjalypse there is ample evidence in Justin Martyr {Dial. Ixxxi. ; cf. Apol. xxviii.), Hermas (Vis. ii. 4 ; iv. 2), and Papias (see Lightfoot, SupernMural Religion, p. 214). For 2 Peter the external evidence is weaker than for any other book of the New Testament. The ''clear evidence begins with Origen, who, however, mentions that the epistle was doubted." See Sanday, Inspiration, p. 382, and on the whole subject of the Genesis of the New Testament, see ibid. Lectures, vi. vii. 272 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES altogether easy to reconcile with each other. It is first stated that in the name of Holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church ; and finally, at the close of the article, there is another statement on the subject, saying that all the books of the New Testament as they are commonly received we do receive and account canonical. Now there is no question that at the date at which the article was drawn up all the Antilegomena were "commonly received," and therefore to judge by the last paragraph of the article they ought to be received now, whereas if the terms of the earlier statement be interpreted strictly they should be excluded, for most certainly doubts have been expressed concerning their authority in the Church. It is hard to find a satisfactory explanation of this ambiguity. A suggestion has been made that it was of set purpose that the terms of the article were not made more precise. There certainly was at that time an inclination in some quarters to form a " canon within a canon," or even to reject one or two of the books of the New Testament altogether. Luther, for instance, finding that S. James' language on justification by works was scarcely in harmony with his own theory on the subject was at one time disposed to reject this epistle,^ while 1 "With bold self-reliance he created a purely subjective standard for the canonicity of the Scriptures, in the character of their "teaching of Christ," and while he placed the Gospel and First Epistle of S. John, the Epistles of S. Paul to the Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, and the First Epistle of S. Peter, in the first rank, as containing the "kernel of Christianity," he set aside the Epistles to the Hebrews, S. Jude, S. James, and the Apocalypse at the end of his version, and spoke of them, and of the remaining Antilegomena with varying degrees of disrespect, though he did not separate 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John from the other Epistles."— Z>io^ is used in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament and m the New Testament m its ordi- nary classical sense of " hidden " or " secret (see S. Luke viii 17 Col. ii. 3, and cf. Ecclus. xxui. 19). From this meaning it was employed even in pre-Christian tunes by teachers who claimed a higher " esoteric wisdom which they embodied in secret, i.e. apocryphal writings. The plan of embodying teaching in such " secret books which might not be openly read and used was one against which the Church set her face from the begm- nine. But it was the plan adopted by many of the heretical sects, and hence the word « apocryphal as applied to their writings rapidly came to be a word of reproach, and to denote the ideas of spurious and heretimL It has been thought that this reference of the word was facilitated by an analogous use of a Hebrew word with about them in the Church Catholic ; that is. at the very first time that thrCalhoUc or whole Church had the opportunity of fonmng a judgmen on the subject, it pronounced in favour of the canonical books. The Epi^le to the kebr!ws was doubted by the West, and the Apocalypse by r>f«Ct only while those portions of the Church investigated separately t^^:^:X^y till Zy compared notes, interchanged^sentiments. and formed a united 3udgment.''--J. H Newma^ in TradjaV- 6. Beprint of 1865. ' Cf. 2 Esdras xu. 37, 88, xiv. 44. ARTICLE VI 275 much the same meaning. The late Hebrew or Aramaic term Genuzim ( = hidden) was applied by the Jews originally to the worn-out copies of the Scripture rolls, which were no longer suitable for use in the synagogue, and were therefore withdrawn and consigned to a special chamber, known as the Genizah. It thus came to denote that a book was for some cause or other unfit for public reading.! How far it was as a translation of Genuzim that Apocryphal came into familiar use in the Chris- tian Church it is hard to say, but it is certain that durmg the second century it was employed as a term of reproach, as described above. In this way it is used by such early writers as Irenaeus,2 Tertullian,^ and Clement of Alexandria;* and this sense has attached to the adjective « apocryphal " ever since, so that by the term Apocryphal Gospels are denoted the spurious Gospels forged by heretics, and rejected by the Church. This appears to be the invariable use of the word till well on in the fourth century. Before this time it was never applied to those books which were " read in the Church for example of life and instruction of manners." These were ordinarily termed Ecclesiastical, and were carefully distinguished from the discredited Apocryphal works. Eufinus writing towards the close of the fourth century describes very clearly the practice of an earlier age. After enumerating the books of the Hebrew Bible and of the New Testament, he says : « These are the books which the Fathers included in the canon, and from which they wished the assertions of our faith to be established." He then adds the following : « But you must know that » See Sanday, Irufpiratimi, p. 105, and cf. Wildeboer, Th^ Origin of the Canon 0/ the Old TestamaU, p. 91. Buhl, Canon and Text of tJie Old TestameTit, p. 66. "^ 2 Adv, ffcer. bk. I. ch. xiii. * De Pudic, ch. x. xx ; De Anima, ch. ii. * Strom. I. xix. 69. 276 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE Vi 277 there are other books which were called by our ancestors not Canonical but Ecclesiastical ; that is, that which is called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another which is called the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, which book is called among the Latins by the descriptive name Ecclesi- asticus, by which term not the author of the book but the kind of the writing is designated. And of the same order is the Book of Tobit, and Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees. And in the New Testament, the Shep- herd of Hermas, the Two Ways, and the Judgment of Peter, all of which they wished to be read indeed in Church, but not to be brought forward for confirming the authority of the faith from them. But the rest of the writings they termed Apocryphal, which they would not have read in Church." ^ In the fourth century, how- ever, a wider meaning was given to the word " apocry- phal." S. Cyril of Jerusalem in his Catechetkal Lectures contents himself with a twofold division of the books — (1) the canonical ones, which alone he would have read in Church, and (2) the apocryphal ones, against which he urgently warns his hearers.^ Since the canonical books, of which he gives a list, embrace only those of the Hebrew canon, it is manifest that " apocry- phal " is used by him in the sense of " withdrawn from public reading," and indicates nothing as to the character of the books to which it was applied. Practically it be- comes the equivalent of " non-canonical." In this use of the word Cyril is followed by S. Jerome at the end of the century. In his famous " Prologus Galeatus," the pre- face to his new translation of the Scriptures, he gives a list of the books of the Hebrew Canon, after which he says: " Quicquid extra hos est, inter Apocrypha esse ponendum. Igitur Sapientia, quae vulgo Salomonis inscribitur, et Jesu filii Syrach liber, et Judith, et Tobias, I I I et Pastor non sunt in Canone" ^ Here, exactly as in S. Cyril, the word means nothing more than non-canonical, and includes the books which had been usually termed Ecclesiastical, as well as those spurious and rejected ones to which the term had commonly been applied. It is probably from this passage of S. Jerome that the substantive Apocrypha has been formed, as the title of that collection of books which the Church of England declines to regard as canonical, but reads in the Church for example of life and instruction of manners. The following table will serve to illustrate what has been said, and will help to make clear the varying sense of the word : — Hebrew Books re- garded by the Jews as Authorita- tive. Greek Books, not regarded by the Jews as Sacred, but read publicly by the Church. Spurious and Rejected Books. The Early Church Canonical Ecclesiastical Apocryphal S. Jerome (after S. Cyril) Canonical Apocryphal The Church of England Canonical The Apocrypha 1 Apocryphal The Church of Rome Canonical Apocryphal InSymb, §38. « St. Cyril, CaUch, iv. 35, (b) The position assigned by tJie Church of England to the Apocrypha, and tlie arguments by ivhich it may be supported. — It will be evident from what has been * There is this difference between the use of the word in Jerome and Cjrril. Jerome distinctly applies it to books which were publicly read in church, while Cyril would apparently have none but the canonical books read, and therefore with him the term "apocryphal" very fairly corres- ponds to the Hebrew Genuzim. Cf. also the use of the word in Origen's "Letter to Africanus," Opera, vol. i. p. 12 scq. «• -•-•—• - ^ - ff ' 278 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE Vf 279 already said that the position assigned to these books by the Church of England is precisely that given to them by the early Church. " The other books (as Hierome saith), the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners ; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine. The state- ment of Jerome upon which this is based has been already quoted, as also the very similar language of Eufinus. The practice of the Church of England has been objected to on two opposite grounds. Romanists, who have obliterated the distinction between these books and those of the Hebrew canon, maintain that we do not assign proper honour to them. Protestants have com- plained that we show them too much respect. The sketch of the history of the canon of the Old Testament given in an earlier section will show the grounds upon which the practice of the Church of England may be justified as against Roman objections. Our contention is that the position which we assign to these books is identical with that given to them in the primitive Church. In reply to the objection brought from the opposite quarter we cannot do better than follow the guidance of Richard Hooker, who was called on to defend the practice of the Church against the Puritans, who wished to do away with the use of these books altogether. He meets the objection — (1) by the appeal to the practice of antiquity ; (2) by showing that since we make clear that there is a real distinction between these books and the canonical ones, no confusion between the two can arise ; (3) by pointing out " the divine excellency of some things in all, and of all things in certain of those Apocrypha " ; and (4) by the pertinent question : " If in that which we are to read there happen by the way any clause, sentence, or speech that soundeth towards error, should the mix- ture of a little dross constrain the Church to deprive hei-self of so much gold, rather than learn how by art and judgment to make separation of the one from the other ? " 1 ' Hooker, Eccl. Polity^ bk. v. ch. xx. It may be added that in Hooker's day the defence of the practice of the Church was harder than it is in our own. Bel and the Dragon, and Susanna and the Elders, were scarcely edifying, nor was all of Tobit suitable for public reading in Church. That there was some ground for the Puritan objections was ad- mitted shortly after Hooker wrote, for in the revision of the Prayer Book made after the Hampton Court Conference in 1604, Bel and the Dragon and Tobit v. vi. and viii. were omitted from the daily lessons. Most unwisely, as it seems, they were restored after the Savoy Conference in 1662, and remained in use among the daily lessous until the revision of the Lectionary in 1871. This revision materially reduced the number of lessons from the Apocrypha, and at the present day nothing is read except from Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and Barueh. ARTICLE VII 281 ARTICLE VII De VeUri Testamento, Testamentum vetus Novo con- trarium non est, quandoquidem tam in veteri quam novo, per Christum, qui unicus est mediator Dei et hominum, Deus et Homo, aetema vita humane generi est proposita. Quare male sentiunt, qui veteres tantum in promissiones temporarias sperasse coniingunt. Quauquam lex a Deo data per Mosen, quoad Cseremonias et ritus, Christianos non astringat, neque civilia ejus praecepta in aliqua Republica neces- sario recipi debeant ; nihilominus tamen ab obedientia mandatorum quae Moralia vocantur, nullus quan- tum vis Christianus est solutus. 0/the Old Testament, The Old Testament is not con- trary to the New, for both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man, being both God and man. Wherefore they are not to be heard which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises. Although the law given from God by Moses, as touching ceremonies and rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the civil pre- cepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth, yet, notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the commandments which are called moral. This article was brought into its present form by Archbishop Parker in 1563, being formed out of two separate articles of the Edwardian series. Article VI. of that set was entitled, " The Old Testament is not to be refused." It ran as follows : — " The Old Testament is not to be put away as though it were contrary to the New, but to be kept still, for both in the Old and New Testaments everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man, being both God and man. Where- fore they are not to be heard which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises." 280 Article XIX. of the same series was this : " All men are bound to keep the moral law." " The law which was given of God by Moses, although it bind not Christian men as concerning the ceremonies and rites of the same ; neither is it required that the civil precepts and orders of it should of necessity be re- ceived in any commonwealth : yet no man (be he never 80 perfect a Christian) is exempt and lose from the obedience of those commandments which are called moral Wherefore they are not to be hearkened unto, who affirm that Holy Scripture is given only to the weak, and do boast themselves continually of the Spirit, of whom (they say) they have learnt such things as they teach, although the same be most evidently repugnant to the Holy Scripture." The object of the article is evidently to condemn two opposite errors, which were current in the sixteenth century among some of the Anabaptist sects. 1. The opinions of those who rejected the Old Tes- tament entirely, and claimed to be themselves superior to the demands of the moral law, as laid down in it. Of these Anabaptists there is a notice in a work of Alley, Bishop of Exeter, at the beginning of Elizabeth's reign, which aptly illustrates the language of the article. " Here I note only one thing, which is the temerity, ignorance, and blasphemy of certain phantastical heads, which hold that the prophets do write only to the people of the Old Testament, and that their doctrine did pertain only to their time ; and would seclude all the Fathers that lived under the law from the hope of eternal salva- tion. And here is also a note to be gathered against them which utterly reject the Old Testament, as a book nothing necessary to the Christians which live under the gospel." ^ 1 Alley's Poore Afan's Librark, ii. 97, quoted in Hardwick On the Articles, p. 395. 282 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 2. While some of the Anabaptists thus set aside the Old Testament as unnecessary, others adopted an error of a different character, and insisted that the whole civil and ceremonial law was still a matter of divine obligation for Christians. The outcome of this was seen in the extraordinary scenes that took place soon after 1533 at Mlinster in Westphalia, where the Anabaptists, under John of Leyden, set up what can only be described as a parody of the Jewish commonwealth, which they termed the " New Jerusalem." ^ That the error was causing trouble in England also appears from the ReforTnatio Legum Fcclesidsticarum, in which it is expressly con- demned, together with the entire rejection of the Old Testament. " De iis, qui vetus Testamentum aut totum rejiciunt, aut totum exigunt. Deinde quomodo priscis temporibus Marcionitarum sordes, Valentinianorum et Manichseorum fluxerunt, et aliae similes earum multae faeces, a quibus vetus Testamentum ut absurdum malumque, et cum novo dissidens, repudiabatur, sic multi nostris temporibus in- veniuntur, inter quos Anabaptistae prsecipue sunt coUo- candi, ad quos si quis vetus Testamentum alleget, illud pro abrogato jam et obsoleto penitus habent, omnia quae in illo posita sunt ad prisca majorum nostrorum tempora referentes. Itaque nihil eorum ad nos statuunt pervenire debere. Aliorum autem contrarius est, sed ejusdem im- pietatis error, qui usque adeo vetus ad Testamentum adhaerescunt, ut ad circumcisionem et a Mose quondam institutas ceremonias necessario nos revocent."* The principal subjects to be considered in connection with this article are the following : — 1. The Old Testament is not contrary to the New. ^ See Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History ^ vol. iii. p. 143 (Ed. Stubbs). - BefornuUio Legum Ecclcaiasticarum^ De Hxrcsibus, ch. 4. ARTICLE VII 283 2. The old fathers did not look only for transitory promises. 3. The ceremonial and civil law of the Jews is not binding on Christians. 4. The moral law remains of lasting and universal obligation. I. The Old Testament is not contrary to the New. The statement of the Article on this subject is as follows: The Old Testament is not contrary to the New, for both in the Old and New Testa- ment everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man, being both God and man. In the present day there is perhaps no probability of a revival of the view of many among the early Gnostics that the Old Testament is positively contrary to the New. Such a position could scarcely be taken up by anyone who started from the acceptance of the canon of the New Testament without mutilation. The several books of it are so interpenetrated with references and allusions to the Scriptures of the Jews, and the gospel is so mani- festly built up upon the Old Dispensation that an actual contradiction between the two is almost inconceivable. But modern criticism has insisted so strongly on the inferiority of the Old Testament to the New, and has brought out into such strong relief the imperfection of the old system, that it may be well to point out that there is nothing in the article which calls us to deny this imperfection, or to maintain that the Old Testament is not inferior to the New. The general statements made in the article were clearly never intended to decide details of criticism or to bind the clergy who sign them to a particular view of the religious development of Israel 284 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE VII 285 The principle which our Lord Himself has taught us that some things were permitted under the Old Covenant " for the hardness of men's hearts " ^ admits of a wide range of application. But if the two dispensations are both from the same God they cannot be contrary the one to the other. That is the main point which the article is con- cerned to maintain, and room is left for whatever views the discoveries of criticism may establish or render pro- bable as to the condition of Israel in early days, the origin of its sacred rites, and the course of its religious development. Further, it will be noticed that the article bases the unity of the two Testaments on the hope of redemption through the Messiah, which is common to them both. The same position is maintained in the homilies. In the " second part of the homily of faith," the writer says of the " old fathers " that " although they were not named Christian men, yet it was a Christian faith that they had ; for they looked for all benefits of God the Father through the merits of His Son Jesus Christ, as we now do. This difference is between them and us ; for they looked when Christ should come, and we be in the time when He is come. Therefore saith S. Augustine, * The time is altered and changed, but not the faith. For we have both one faith in one Christ.* "^ It is impossible that this can have been intended to suggest that all the " old fathers " had a clear knowledge of the " merits of Jesus Christ." Such an assertion would be quite unwarrantable. But it is a simple fact of history that, under the Old Covenant, there did in time grow up a very clear and definite expectation of a Messiah to come. In early days, no doubt, the hope 1 S. Matt. xix. 8. 2 The Homilies, p. 39 (Ed. S.P.C.K.). The reference to Augustine is to In Joan, Tract, xlv. was but of an indefinite character, and there was little, if any, expectation of a persQ7ial deliverer. But as we follow out the course of the history we are able to see how the hope was gradually narrowed down to a race, a tribe, a family, and how it tended more and more to centre in a single person. To trace out the growth of this hope, and to mark its increasing definiteness, belongs to the province of the interpreter of the Old Testament rather than to that of the commentator on the Articles. The briefest outline must suffice here. The earliest indication of the hope is found in the Protevangelium, immediately after the fall, when the promise was made that the " seed of the woman " should bruise the serpent's head.^ After the flood it was not obscurely hinted that the blessing should come in the line of Shem,^ The call of Abraham y^ the choice of Isauc rather than Ishmael,* of Jacob rather than Esau,^ narrowed down the line still more ; while, whatever be the true interpretation of the words rendered in the English Bible * till Shiloh come,* the exalted language used in the blessing of Judah^ at the very least marks out this tribe for pre-eminence, and points to it as the one from which the promised blessings should be looked for.« * Gen. iii. 15 " The Protevangelium is a faithful miniature of the entire history of humanity, a struggling seed ever battling for the ultimate victory. Here is the germinal idea which unfolds in the suflferings and sorrows, the ho|>es and joys of our race, until it is realised in the sublime victories of redemption." — C. A. Briggs' Messianic Prophecy ^ p. 77. * Gen. ix. 26, 27. All the commentators call attention to the signi- ficant fact that the name of the covenant God Jehovah occurs alone in the blessing of Shem. 3 Gen. xii. 1-3. * Gen. xiii. 15, xv. 4, xvii. 1-21, * Gen. XXV. 23, cf. ch. xxvii. •Gen. xlix. 9-12. The margin of the R.V. will show the English reader how doubtful is the rendering "till Shiloh come." There is really no support whatever for it from antiquity, and it probably rests on an 284 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES The principle which our Lord Himself has taught us that some things were permitted under the Old Covenant " for the hardness of men's hearts " ^ admits of a wide range of application. But if the two dispensations are both from the same God they cannot be contrary the one to the other. That is the main point which the article is con- cerned to maintain, and room is left for whatever views the discoveries of criticism may establish or render pro- bable as to the condition of Israel in early days, the origin of its sacred rites, and the course of its religious development. Further, it will be noticed that the article bases the unity of the two Testaments on the hope of redemption through the Messiah, which is common to them both. The same position is maintained in the homilies. Li the " second part of the homily of faith," the writer says of the " old fathers " that " although they were not named Christian men, yet it was a Christian faith that they had ; for they looked for all benefits of God the Father through the merits of His Son Jesus Christ, as we now do. This difference is between them and us ; for they looked when Christ should come, and we be in the time when He is come. Therefore saith S. Augustine, * The time is altered and changed, but not the faith. For we have both one faith in one Christ.*"^ It is impossible that this can have been intended to suggest that all the " old fathers " had a clear knowledge of the " merios of Jesus Christ." Such an assertion would be quite unwarrantable. But it is a simple fact of history that, under the Old Covenant, there did in time grow up a very clear and definite expectation of a Messiah to come. In early days, no doubt, the hope 1 S. Matt. xix. 8. 2 The Homilies, p. 39 (Ed. S.P.C.K.). The reference to Augustine is to In Joan, Tract, xlv. ARTICLE VII 285 was but of an indefinite character, and there was little, if any, expectation of a personal deliverer. But as we follow out the course of the history we are able to see how the hope was gradually narrowed down to a race, a tribe, a family, and how it tended more and more to centre in a single person. To trace out the growth of this hope, and to mark its increasing definiteness, belongs to the province of the interpreter of the Old Testament rather than to that of the commentator on the Articles. The briefest outline must suffice here. The earliest indication of the hope is found in the Protevangelium, immediately after the fall, when the promise was made that the " seed of the woman " should bruise the serpent's head.^ After the flood it was not obscurely hinted that the blessing should come in the line of Shem? The call of Abraham? the choice of Isaac rather than Ishmael,* of Jax^oh rather than Esau,^ narrowed down the line still more ; while, whatever be the true interpretation of the words rendered in the English Bible * till Shiloh come,* the exalted language used in the blessing of Judah, at the very least marks out this tribe for pre-eminence, and points to it as the one from which the promised blessings should be looked for.« ^ Gen. iii. 15 "The Protevangelium is a faithful miniature of the entire history of humanity, a struggling seed ever battling for the ultimate victory. Here is the germinal idea which unfolds in the sufferings and sorrows, the hoj)es and joys of our race, until it is realised in the sublime victories of redemption." — C. A. Briggs' Messianic Prophecy ^ p. 77. ^ Gen. ix. 26, 27. All the commentators call attention to the signi- ficant fact that the name of the covenant God Jehovah occurs alone in the blessing of Shem. 3 Gen. xii. 1-3. * Gen. xiii. 15, xv. 4, xviL 1-21. * Gen. XXV. 23, cf. ch. xxvii. • Gen. xlix. 9-12. The margin of the R.V. will show the English reader how doubtful is the rendering "till Shiloh come." There is really no support whatever for it from antiquity, and it probably rests on an 286 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES The choice of the house of David marks a fresh stage in the development of the hope. From the time of the great promise made to him in 2 Sam. vii., the consum- mation of the kingdom of God is connected with a king of the line of David, to whom God will be in a special way a " Father," and who shall be in a special way God's " Son." But even so, for some considerable period, the thought is rather of a line of kings than of one individual;^ and not till the crisis of the Assyrian invasion in the eighth century do we find that the hope is definitely connected with the thought of a personal Messiah. In the prophecies of Isaiah and Micah we meet for the first time with detailed predictions, which point forward with unmistakeable clearness to a child who should be born, whose name should be called " Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace," and who should reign on the throne of David.2 From this time onward, the evidence of the expectation of a personal Messiah is clear and decisive, and may be traced in the writings of the later prophets, both before and after the Captivity,^ as well as in later erroneous reading, mh'V for nhv. The latter reading is implied in most of the ancient versions, and would give one or other of the following renderings : (1) "Till there come that which is his," or (2) *' Till He come whose [it is]." In the latter case there is reference to a personal Messiah, whereas, if the former rendering be adopted, the clause must be regarded as an indeterminate expression of the Messianic hope. See, on the whole passage, S. R. Driver in the Cambridge Journal of Philology, vol. xiv. No. 27, and Spurrell's Notes on Genesis, p. 335 seq. ^ That the thought is primarily of the line in the original promise in 2 Sam. vii. is shown by ver. 14. "I will be his father, and he shall be my son ; if he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men. " It is impossible to apply these last words to the personal Messiah. 2 See especially Isa. vii. 14, ix. 6, 7 and xL 1-10 ; Micah iv. 8, v. 2-7. 3 In Jeremiah there are the great prophecies of " the Branch " in xxiii. 5-8, and xxxiii. 14-26, and in Ezekiel there is the promise of "one Shepherd, even my servant David," ch. xxxiv. 23, xxxvii. 24; of. ch. ARTICLE VII 287 Jewish writings, such as the Book of Enoch and the Psalms of Solomon,^ which never obtained admission within the canon. Modern criticism may affect the interpretation of particular passages. It may show us that texts which were relied on by the older expositors as prophecies of the Messiah can no longer be appealed to with the same confidence as formerly. It may even involve a re- writing of the whole history of the Messianic hope. But the broad truth stated in the article will remain untouched by this, for the undeniable fact that, before the Incarnation, the fathers who lived under the Old Covenant had come to look for the "redemption of Israel," and were expecting a personal Messiah of the house of David is sufficient to justify the general state- ment that " both in the Old and New Testament ever- lasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man, being both God and man." 11. Tlie Old Fathers did not look only for Transitory Promises. Here again it can scarcely be thought that the article is designed to close the door to criticism on a subject on which widely different views have been held by devout scholars within the Church, namely, the belief of the Jews, under the Old Dispensation, in a future life beyond the grave. The statement that they are not to be heard which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises can never have xxi. 27, where there is a probable allusion to Gen. xlix. 10. In the prophets of the return from the Captivity, the clearest Messianic prophecies are those in Zech. iii. 8, vi. 12, of " the Branch," which rest on the previous ones of Jeremiah. In Haggai ii. 6-9 the thought of a personal Messiah is not prominent. See the R.V. "the desirable things of all nations shall come," for "the desire" of the A.V. * See the Book of Enoch, ch. xlv-lvii., which describes the coming of 288 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE VII 289 been intended to compel us to maintain that the doctrine of a future life was clearly taught by Moses. We are expressly told in the New Testament that "life and immortality are brought to light by the gospel," ^ and the whole tendency of modern criticism is to emphasise this by denying that there are sure and certain traces of a belief in a state of future bliss till a comparatively late period in the history of the Jews. It is patent to every- one that the promises of the Mosaic law, as a rule, refer exclusively to this life (see Ex. xx. 12, xxiii. 25—31 ; Levit. xxvi. etc.), and that length of days and temporal prosperity are the rewards contemplated in it. Moreover, it would seem that throughout the Old Testament, attention is for the most part concentrated on this life. It is " the land of the living " (see Ps. lii. 5 ; Isa. liiL 8 ; Jer. xi. 19, etc.). Death is regarded as an evil, and the dread of it is evident even among the best of the Hebrews, so that it has been said with some show of truth that they never spoke of death without a shudder (see Ps. Ixxxviii and Isa. xxxviiL in illustration of this). Nevertheless, while all this is admitted, it must not be forgotten that there is another side to it as well. Death is never regarded as annihilation. An existence of some sort after death is everywhere assumed in the Old Testament. Dathan and Abiram go down "alive" into Sheol (Num. xvi. 30). Jacob's anticipation that he will go down to Sheol to Joseph (Gen. XXX vii. 35), and the familiar expression that a man was " gathered to his fathers," are evidences of a belief in a "something" beyond this life even in the the chosen ruler of God, and ch. xc, where the Messiah is introduced under the figure of a white bullock. In the Psalms of Solomon, the Messiah of the house of David is spoken of in xvii. 23 seq. and XTiii. 1-9, and is for the first time definitely called xp^arbi K^ipioi, 1 2 Tim. i 10. earliest days. But the state of the deceased, or the "shades,"^ in Sheol or Hades, was in itself a state of unblessedness, not worthy to be called " life " ; and only very gradually did the conception of a resurrection make its way among the Jews. What the pious Jew really looked for was life in and with God ; that is the " eternal life " which is offered to mankind in both the Old and New Testaments alike. It has been truly said that " the antithesis in the psalmist's mind is not between life here and life hereafter (as we speak), but between life with and life without God ; and for the moment, in the consciousness of the blessedness of fellowship with God, death fades from his view." ^ So by degrees the Jew who had come to believe in " the living God " and his own communion with Him, came at last to see that there was involved in this the doctrine of a future life, for the communion could not be broken by death. It is, however, often hard to say whether the union of the soul with God, after which the psalmists were feeling, was contemplated by them as consummated in tiis life or the next. Such Psalms as xvi, xviL, xlix., and Ixxiii, which contain the most exalted language on this subject, have been variously interpreted. But even if we put it at the lowest, they contain " the germ and principle of the doctrine of the resurrection." Still, however we may interpret them, it is clear that the doctrine was no article of faith to the Jews. It formed no part of the creed of the Jewish Church. There could not be a better instance of the manner in which it was worked out by the individual than that given by the Book of * D^K^*!, the word is used for the etSuXa Ka/iSprwp in Job xxvi. 5 ; Ps. Ixxxviii. 11 ; Prov. ii. 18, ix. 18, xxi. 16 ; Isa. xiv. 9, xxvi. 14, 19. It signifies properly "relaxed" or "weak." 2 Professor Kirkpatrick on the Psalms (Cambridge Bible), vol. ii. p. 274. '9 290 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Job, which modern critics are inclined to regard as a late work, not earlier than the time of the Babylonish captivity. Had the doctrine of the resurrection formed a part of the traditional creed of the writer, it would not have been represented as only gradually dawning upon the mind of Job. Three distinct stages are ap- parent in his apprehension of it. In chapter vii. there is utter disbelief in anything of the kind. ** Oh remember that my life is vnnd : Mine eye shall no more see good. The eye of him that seeth me shall behold me no more : Thine eyes shall be upon me, but I shall not be. As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away, So he that goeth down to Sheol shall come up no more. He shall no more return to his house, Neither shall his place know him any more" (vers. 7-10). In chapter xiv. the longing for a resurrection has arisen in Job's heart. He sees that nature points to one, and feels that if he could only look forward to one for him- self, he could endure his present sufferings with greater calmness ; but he is still very far from believing in one. *' There is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, And that the tender branch thereof will not cease. Though the root thereof wax old in the earth, And the stock thereof die in the ground ; Yet through the scent of water it will bud, And put forth boughs like a plant. But man dicth, and wasteth away: Yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? As the waters fail from the sea, And the river decayeth and drieth up; So man lieth down and riseth not : Till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake. Nor be roused out of their sleep. Oh that Thou wouldst hide me in Sheol, That Thou wouldst keep me secret, until Thy wratli be past, ARTICLE VII 291 That thou wouldest appoint mo a set time, and remember me ! If a man die, shall he live again ? All the days of my warfare would I wait, Till my release should come. Thou shouldest call, and I would answer Thee : Thou wouldest have a desire to the work of Thine hands " (Vers. 7-16). Finally, in chapter xix., he rises to the certainty that God will appear as his " vindicator," and that he shall be granted a vision of God after death. " But I know that my redeemer liveth. And that He shall stand up at the last upon the earth : And after my skin hath been thus destroyed. Yet from my flesh shall I see God : Whom I shall see for myself. And mine eyes shall behold, and not another" (Vers. 25-27).^ There are other late passages in which the hope of a resurrection appears with unmistakeable clearness, such as Isaiah xxvi. 19:" Thy dead shall live ; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust ; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast forth the dead." ^ In the vision of " the dry bones " in Ezekiel xxxvii., though it is a national restoration that is primarily con- templated, yet some knowledge of the resurrection is pre- supposed, as otherwise the passage would be almost meaningless. Clearer still is Daniel xii. 2, which in- ^ On this passage see A. B. Davidson's commentary in the Cambridge BiblCj and cf. Driver's IrUrodudion to the Literature of the Old Testament^ p. 393. Both the English and the Scotch professor agree in seeing in the passage distinct intimation of a belief in a life beyond the grave. The translation given above is that of the R. V., but "redeemer" would be more properly "vindicator," and "from my flesh" probably signifies " apart from" or "deprived of" my flesh, not as it is understood in the A. v., "in my flesh." - Modern critics generally assign this passage to a post-exilic date. »■-' -«M 292 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES troduces most distinctly the idea of future retribution, and shows the highest point reached by the faithful under the old covenant : " Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament ; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. ^ That there was only some such gradual development of the belief, as has been thus briefly indicated, appears to be a most certain result of criticism. But, from what has been said, it will be evident that even from early days the way was prepared for the future doctrine, and in germ and principle it was there from the earliest day on which the Jew recognised God as his God, and felt that life in and with him was the supreme object of desire. When once he had grasped this, it could not be said that he " looked only for transitory promises." ^ Nor should it be for- gotten that our Lord and His apostles teach us to see in the sayings of the Old Testament deeper tind fuller mean- ings, unrecognised probably by those who first uttered or heard them. " That the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the place concerning the Bush, when he called the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Now He is not the God of the dead, but of the living ; for all live unto Him " (S. Luke xx. 37, 38). "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them, and greeted them from afar, and having confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things ^ See on all these passages Driver's Sermons on the Old Testament, Semi. 4, •* Growth of Belief in a Future State." * On this point see a remarkable letter in the Life of F. D. Maurice, Yol. i. p. 396, ARTICLE VII 293 make it manifest that they are seeking after a country of their own. And if, indeed, they had been mindful of that country from which they went out, they would have had the opportunity to return. But now they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly : wherefore God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God ; for He hath prepared for them a city" (Heb. xi. 13—16). It has never been seriously maintained that these passages decide once for all the question of the actual amount of knowledge concerning a future state possessed by the Jews, and since the article certainly says no more than they do, we may rest assured that it leaves us free to decide the critical question on critical grounds. And it may be added that it is a remarkable fact that when the reformers put forth the first book of the Homilies containing a sermon " On the Dread of Death," they could apparently find no passage to quote from the Old Testa- ment for the belief of the Jews in a life of bliss after death earlier than the Book of Wisdom, on which, there- fore, they fell back, appealing to it as " Scripture," and citing it as establishing the point in question. " Now, the holy fathers of the old law, and all faithful and righteous men which departed before our Saviour Christ's ascension into heaven, did by death depart from troubles into rest ; from the hands of their enemies into the hands of God ; from sorrows and sicknesses unto joyful refreshing, into Abraham's bosom, a place of all comfort and consolation, as Scriptures do plainly by manifest words testify. The Book of Wisdom saith. That the righteoiLS men's souls he in tlie hand of God, and no torment shall touch tliem. TJiey seemed to the eyes of foolish men to die ; and their death was counted miserable, and their departing out of this world wretcJied ; hut they he in rest. And another place saith. Thai the righteous shall live for ever, and their reward is with the Lord, and 294 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES tlieir minds he vnth God, who is above all ; therefore tliey shall receive a glorious kingdom, and a beautiful crovm at the Lord's hand. And in another place the same book saith, The righteous, though he be prevented ivith sudden death, nevertheless he shall be there, where he shall be refreshed'* ^ The remaining subjects in connection with this article admit of the briefest possible treatment. III, The Ceremmiial and Civil Law of the Jews is not binding on Christians, In proof of the assertion that the law given from God by Hoses, as touching ceremonies and rites, do not bind Christian men, it is sufficient to refer to the account of the Apostolic Council held at Jerusalem to settle this very subject, when it was once for all decided that circumcision was not to be enforced on Gentile converts (Acts xv.), and to the whole line of argument in S. Paul's Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, in which he vindicates the liberty of Christians from the burden of the law; while since the civil precepts of the Mosaic code were never imposed on any nation but the Jews, it cannot be supposed that they ought of neces- sity to be received in any commonwealth. IV. The Moral Law remains of Universal and Lasting Obligation. If proof is wanted for the statement that no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the commandments which are called moral, it may be found in our Lord's assertion that he came " not 1 The third part of the Homily of the "Fear of Death," p. 103 (Ed. S.P.C.K.). The references are to Wisdom, iii. 1-3, v. 15, 16, and iv. 7. ARTICLE VII 295 to destroy the law, but to fulfil " (S. Matt. v. 17) ; in the special teaching of the sermon on the mount, in which the moral law is enforced, explained, and expanded (S. Matt. V. 21—48); in the reply to the question concerning " the great commandment " (S. Matt, xxil 37—40); and in the frequent insistence on the duties of the moral law in S. Paul's Epistles (see especially Kom. xiii. 8-10). AKTICLE VIII De Tribus Symbolis. Symbola tria, Nicanum, Atha- nasii, et quod vulgo Apostolorum appellatur omnino recipienda sunt et credenda. Nam firmissimis scripturarum testimoniis probari possunt. Of the Three Creeds, The three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius' Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, ought thoroughly to be re- ceived and believed : for they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture. There has been but little alteration in this article since 1553. At the revision of 1563 the words "and be- lieved " {et credenda) were inserted ; and in 1571 in Latin the word Apostolorum was substituted for the adjective Apostolicum, which had stood there pre- viously. With the languuge of the article may be compared that of the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum : — "Et quoniam omnia ferme, quse ad fidem spectant Catholicam, tum quoad beatissimam Trinitatem, tum quoad mysteria nostrae redemptionis, tribus Symbolis, hoc est, Apostolico, Niceno, et Athanasii, breviter con- tinentur ; idcirco ista tria Sjrmbola, ut fidei nostrae compendia quaedam, recipimus et amplectimus, quod firmissimis divinarum et canonicarum scripturarum testimoniis facile probari possint."^ An article on this subject asserting definitely the adherence of the Church of England to the ancient creeds of the Church Catholic was rendered necessary * Jtef, Leffum, Eccl. " De Summa Trinitate et Fide Catholica," oh. 5. S86 ARTICLE VIII 297 by the spread of Anabaptism, the leaders of which utterly ignored and set aside these summaries of the faith, together with the faith itself contained in them. The subjects to be considered in connection with this article are four in number : — 1. Creeds in general. 2. The Apostles' Creed. 3. The Nicene Creed. 4. The Athanasian Creed. I. Of Creeds in General, The origin of creeds must be sought in the baptismal service of the Church. Our Lord's command to His apostles had been to make disciples of all nations by baptizing them into the name (1) Of the Father; (2) Of the Son ; (3) Of the Holy Ghost. Hence comes the threefold division of all the ancient creeds,^ referring to the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity, and their work. In consequence of this command we find that from the earliest times some profession of faith was required from candidates for baptism, and that for this purpose short summaries of the main doctrines of Christianity were drawn up. It is possible to see in some passages of the New Testament indications of regular formularies in use even in apostolic days. Thus the statement in 1 Cor. viiL 6 looks very much like a reminiscence of one such : — " To us there is one God the Father ^ of whom are all things, and we unto Him ; and one Lord Jesus ^ The Athanasian Creed is, of course, an exception, but it is scarcely a creed. It should be regarded rather as an ExposUio Fidei, or oven as a Canticle. M**l 298 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE VIII 299 Christ, through whom are all things, and we through Him." 1 So the summary in 1 Tim. iii. 16 is commonly thought to contain a fragment of an early creed or hymn — *' He who was manifested in the flesh. Justified in the Spirit, Seen of angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory." Again, according to the received text of Acts viii. 37, when the Ethiopian eunuch says, " See, here is water ; what doth hinder me to be baptized ? " PhiHp's answer is, " If thou behevest with all thine heart, thou mayest." Whereupon the eunuch makes his profession of faith: " I beUeve that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." These words are, however, universally regarded as an interpola- tion. They were probably inserted in order to bring the account into harmony with the requirements of the bap- tismal service. They cannot, therefore, be appealed to as a witness of the apostolic age, but as the interpolation was made before the days of Irenaeus (a.d. 180), who quotes the whole passage with the inserted words,^ it may fairly be taken as a witness to the practice of the Church somewhere about the middle of the second century. About the close of this century we meet with a definite statement in the writings of Tertullian, that the profession of faith required at baptism was somewhat amplified from the simple form of belief in the threefold name enjoined in the Gospel.^ And since, even earher than this, several writers,"* when summing up the faith of the Church, give it in a form closely corresponding to the creeds used later > Cf. 1 Cor. XV. 3, 4. ^ irenaeus, Bk. III. xii. 10 ; cf. IV. xxxvii. 2. 3 De Ciyrcma MUitis, ch. iii.: " Dehinc ter mergitamur, amplius aliquid respondentes quam Dominus in evangelic determinavit." * E.g, Ignatius, Ep. ad Trail, ch. ix. on, and appear to be alluding to something like a fixed formulary, it is more natural to suppose that they are definitely alluding to the creed, than to think that the creed was subsequently developed from the summaries of the rule of faith as given by them. Thus it is now generally acknowledged that traces of, and allusions to, the creed may be found in such early writers as Aris- tides and Justin Martyr {circa 140),as weU as in Irenaeus and Tertullian. The creed of the first-mentioned writer as collected from his Apology, and restored by Professor Rendel Harris, runs as follows : — "We believe in one God, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth ; And in Jesus Christ His Son Born of the Virgin Mary ; He was pierced by the Jews : He died and was buried ; The third day He rose again : He ascended into heaven ; He is about to come to judge." ^ Even if we cannot feel quite certain of the details in all cases there is no longer room for doubt that formal creeds were in use by the middle of the second century, •varying to some extent in different churches, but all following the same general outline, and all alike based on the baptismal formula, with its threefold reference to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.^ In the fourth century our knowledge of creeds became much fuller. At 1 Teods and Studies, vol. i. p. 25 (Ed. J. A. Robinson). •- The " rules of faith " as given by Tertullian, Irenaeus, and others may be found in Hahn's Bibliothek der Symhole. One from Tertullian is added here as a specimen. De Virg. Vel. 1. - Regula quidem fidei una omnino est, sola immobUis et irreformabQis, credendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem, mundi conditorem, et Filium ejus Jesum Chnstum, natum ox Virgine Maria, cnicifixum sub Pontio Pilato, tertia dia resusci- Utum a movtuis, receptuiii in coelis, sedentem nunc ad dexteram Patns, 300 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES that time the practice of the Church was for the candi- dates for baptism to be carefully prepared beforehand and instructed in the main doctrines of the Church by one of the presbyters especially appointed for the pur- pose. A few days before the actual baptism the formal creed of the Church into which they were to be baptized was taught to them, and an exposition of it in the form of a sermon on it delivered before them. This was called the " delivery of the Creed," Traditio Symboli. At the time of the actual baptism they were interrogated as to their belief,^ and required to return answer to the priest's question in the form of the creed which they had received, and which they were now to " give back " at this Redditio Symboli'^ After baptism the creed was preserved in the memory as a convenient summary, written on the heart, but not committed to paper ;2 nor was it till a somewhat later period used in any other service of the Church.* ventunim judicare vivos et mortuos per camis etiam resurrectionera." Other passages such as Adv. Prax. 2, and De Prssseript. 13, show that Tertullian's Creed contained also the article on the Holy Spirit. * In this way there grew up the interrogative creeds of the Church, such as that found in the Gelasian Sacramtntary, p. 86, 116 (Ed. Wilson). Other forms are given in Heurtley's Harmonia Symbolka, p. 106 seq. It would appear that sometimes a shorter form was used at the Redditio SyTTiboU than had been rehearsed to the catechumens at the Traditio. ' Cf. Lumby's Hvitory of the Creeds, p. 11 seq. The famous Cateclietical Lectures of S. Cyril of Jerusalem were delivered to candidates for baptism in the year 347 or 348. Cyril nowhere gives the creed continuously, but it can easily be collected from Lectures vi.-xviii. See Hahn, op. cit. p. 62. ' See Augustine's Sermo ad Catechumenos, which was delivered at the Traditio Symboli, and begins as follows : " Accipite, filii, regulam fidei, quod symbolum dicitur. Et cum acceperitis, in corde scribite, et quotidic dicite apud vos : antequam dormiatis, antequam procedatis, vestro symbolo vos munite. Symbolum nemo scribit ut legi possit, sed ad recensendum, ne forte deleat oblivio quod tradidit diligentia, sit vobis codex vestra memoria. Quod audituri estis, hoc credituri ; et quod credideritis, hoc etiam lingua reddituri. "—Opera, tom. vi. col. 547. "* The first to introduce the creed into the Liturgy was Peter the Fuller, Patriarch of Antioch soon after 470. Constantinople followed about 510. ARTICLE VIII 301 Another use of creeds comes prominently before us in connection with the controversies of the fourth century. From the date of the Council of Nicaea onwards we meet with them as tests of orthodoxy, accepted by Councils, and offered for signature to those members of the Church, the correctness of whose faith was called in question ; and as time went on, and new heresies arose, amplified and enlarged with the express purpose of guarding against fresh errors. Hence we get two different kinds of creeds — (1) the bap- tismal profession, which, as made by the individual, runs in the first person singular, / believe; and (2) Conciliar creeds, which, as containing the faith of the assembled fathers, were naturally couched in the first person plural, We believe. In course of time, however, when the creeds were introduced into the public services of the Church, we find that the East for the most part adopted the plural, and the West the singular, whether the creed was conciliar or baptismal in its origin,^ and thus the distinction was almost obliterated, although it can be clearly traced in all the earlier forms.^ In the West, Spain led the way in 589. The Gallican and Anglican Churches adopted it in the seventh or eighth century ; Rome not till the eleventh. There is no certain indication of the use of the creed in the hour services of the Church before the ninth century, when it is ordered to be used at Prime. ^ Thus the Western Church has altered the Constantinopolitan Creed, and uses the singular in it **1 believe," whereas the original Greek text has naturally enough the plural iri€s dvOpwirovs Kal bid tt\v ijfieripav aurrjplav Kare\$byra Kal aapKudivra, ivavOpwrHicavra, iradbvra, Kal dva$ b^ \iyovrat, fpf Tvrk bre ovk ^v, ^ ovk Jjv vplv yevvT}drivai, ^ i^ ovk bvrtav iyivero, i) i^ hripat bvoardffeus ^ ovfflas dcrKOvras clvai, ^ Kriarbv ij rpexrbv fj dWoiurby rbv \Abv rov GcoO, ro^ovt dvadep/xrl^eu ^ KaBoXiK^ Kal diro4vTa, Kal dyaaravra ry Tplrri ijfi^pq. icard Td$ ypa6.r Kal dv^Xdbvra eU rods ovpavoir koI KaOej^d- fievoy iK de^iuv roO Trarpbr Kal irdXiv ipx6fievov fierci. Sd^-rjs Kpivai. fwi'roj Kal v€KpoTL>v oO T^s ^affiXeias ovk icrai rfXoi. Kal els t6 rveOyica rb Ayioy, Kvpiow Kal l^dxrrroidv, t6 ^k toO rarpbs iKvopevbfiivov, rb aiiv warpl Kal vu^ avpirporrru>v. els niav dylav KadoXLK^v Kal djroffToXiKriv iKKXTjaidy. bfJLoXoyovfiev fv ^dirTia/ia els dipeffiv dfMpriQy, vpoaboKufiey dydaraaiy veKpQy koI ^onjy tov ^fXXoyros aluiyos. dfiTjy. Epiphanius, Ancoratus, % 118. Epiphanius appends to this the anathemas of the Nicene Creed. ^The Syriac Creed of Mesopotamia now used by the Nestoiian Churches, and the Cappadocian Creed now used by the Armenian Churches, both claim to be '•Nicene," though differing widely from the original creed. See Hort's Two Disserlatiom, p. 110, and cf. p. 149 seq., where these two creeds are given in full. ARTICLE VIII 321 graph of the Ancoratm} gives another enlarged form of the same creed, expanded in order to meet more fully the heresies of the Apollinarians and Macedonians, which he tells us had sprung up from the time of the Em- perors Valentinian and Valens. This enables us to fix the date of the additional clauses in our own creed with some degree of certainty. The version is evidently given by Epiphanius, as that which was current before the date of Valentinian and Valens, who succeeded to the Empire in 364. (2) Another consideration also points to the middle of the fourth century as the date of the additions. The expansion of the article on the Holy Ghost by the addition of the words, " the Lord and the life-giver ; who proceedeth from the Father ; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified ; who spake by the prophets," indicates that the Macedonian heresy had already begun to attract attention ; while the addition of the clause " whose kingdom shall have no end," must have been due to the heresy of Marcellus of Ancyra, who, in opposing Arianism, had become practically involved in a form of Sabellianism, and had been led to the denial of the eternity of Christ's kingdom. Now S. Cyril of Jerusalem read the last mentioned clause in the creed, which he expounded in his Catechetical Lectures in the year 347 or 348, and insisted on its importance, because of the heresy " lately sprung up in Galatia," for " a certain one has dared to affirm that after the end of the world Christ shall reign no longer ; and he has dared to say that the Word which came forth from the Father shall be again absorbed into the Father, and shall be no more." ^ Thus ^ Aneorattts, § 119. « Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat. xv. § 27; cf. iv. 15: "Be sure to settle your belief in this point also, since there are many who say that Christ's kingdom has an end." 21 f 322 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES the existence of these clauses against Marcellus and the Macedonians points to a date not much earlier than 350, while the lack of additions, expressly directed against Apollinarianism, makes it tolerably certain that the form dates from a period prior to that in which Apollinaris had formulated the heresy associated with his name.^ It cannot, therefore, be much later than the middle of the century. Thus all the evidence points to 350, or thereabouts, as the date of the enlarged Creed, which we now term Nicene. The place at which the development of the Creed first took place must be a matter of conjecture. No positive evidence is forthcoming. But from the great similarity which the enlarged creed bears to the Creed of S. Cyril's Catechetical Lectures, it has been conjectured with much probability that the expansion must be traced to the Church of Jerusalem. S. Cyril's Creed, as collected from his lectures, runs as follows : — " We beUeve in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. "And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-Begotten Son of God, who was begotten of the Father, Very God, before all worlds ; by whom all things were made ; who ^ This is very clearly seen by a comparison with the second of the Epiphanian Creeds, where the clauses on the Incarnation are expanded so as to insist on the perfect humanity of our Lord. Tbv 8i Tifxas roifs dvSpdyjTovi Kal dih ttjv Tjfuripav aurrfplav KaT€\66vTa Kal aapKtaOivra, Tovriari yevvTidivra reXeitas iK ttjs 07^0$ Maplas ttjs i-ntrapdivov 3(A irvciOfMTOt aylov, €vavdpv re irdi'rwi' koI dopdruv. Kal els l^va Kijpiov 'IrjaoOv xp^arbv rbv vibv rov OeoO rbv /xoyoyevij' rbv iK rod xarpbs yevv-qdevra Qeov dXijdivbv irpb xdrruv tQ)v al(i)vu)v, 5t* oC rd irAvra iyivero- aapKUjOivra Kal ivavSptaTriiffavTa, CTavpufOitn-a Kal Tas oCfpavoifS, Kal Ka0laavTa iK de^iwy toO Trarpos Kal ipxbfievov iv U^tj KpTvai fwKraj Kal veKpo6s- oO rijs ^aeaiv afMpriujv, Kal els tdav dylav KadoXiK^v iKKXr}S)<; ck <}xot6<;, Oeov aXrfOivov Ik Seov aXrjOivov, yevvr)devTa ov TroLrjOivra, Ofioovaov rat irarpi' hC ov Ta irdvra iyevero' tov 8t' ij/ia? Toif^ avOpwTrov^ KaX hva rrjv ruierepav €vov Kal avvBo^a^6p£VOV, to \a\rjaav hui t&v 7rpo(j>i]T(ov' €t9 fiiav dylav Ka6o\iKr]v Kal dTroaroXiKrjv CKKXTjaiav. ofioXor/ovp^ev tv ^dirriapxi €i9 aipeaiv ^ /.«., from the time of the Emperor Justin, see Zaccaria, Bibliotheca RUualis, vol. II. civ. Previously to this the true Nicene Oeed had been used in some parts of the East. * Spain adopting it first in 589. ' lie enlarged creed was carefully distinguished from the Nicene at Toledo (see above, p. 216), but is confused with it and definitely termed Nicene in Charlemagne's CapUulare of 787 (quoted above, p. 221). ARTICLE VIII 327 dfiapTL&v, 7rpoaZoKa>fJL€V dvdaTaacv veKpa>v Kal ^(orjv tov fieXKovTO<; altavo^, dfirjv." "Credo in unum Deum Patrem Omnipotentem,Factorem coeli et terrae, atque visibilium omnium et invisibilium : Et in unum Dominum Jesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, et ex patre natum ante omnia saecula, Deum de Deo, Lumen de lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, genitum non factum, consubstantialem Patri : Per quem omnia facta sunt. Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de coelis, et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est, crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato : passus et sepultus e^t, et resurrexit tertia die secundum Scripturas, et ascendit in coelum, sedet ad dexteram Patris. Et iterum venturus est cum gloria judicare vivos et mortuos : cujus regni non erit finis. Et in Spiritum Sanctum, Dominum et vivificantem, qui ex Patre Filioque procedit, qui cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et conglori- ficatur, qui locutus est per prophetas. Et unam sanctam Catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam. Con- fiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum, et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam venturi saeculL Amen." In comparing the English translation with this, three points deserve attention. 1. "By whom all things were made." As Bishop Lightfoot has pointed out, the expression in the English "fails to suggest any idea dififerent from the other expression in the creed, * Maker of heaven and earth,* which has before been applied to the Father." ^ In the original, however, a distinction is accurately marked, and the preposition used (Bid, not utto, Latin per) describes the Son as the mediate agent of creation, throiigh whom all things were made. The creed thus faithfully repro- * Lightfoot, On a Fresh Bevuion of the New Testament^ p. 122. 328 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES duces the teaching of Scripture, in which this preposition Sik is specially used of the divine Word. U.g. S. John i 3: "All things were made by (Sid) Him"; ver. 10, " the world was made by Him " (Si axnov)} 2. "The Lord and Giver of Ufe." Again to the English reader the phrase is ambiguous, and might be taken to mean the Lord of life and the Giver of the life ; whereas in the original it is quite clear, " The Lord (to Kvpiov used absolutely, expressing the Divinity of the Spirit), and the Life-giver {to ^woiroiov). 3. "One CathoHc and Apostolic Church." In this clause there is no English equivalent to the word dyiav, or sanctam. It is generally thought that the omission of the word " holy " in the translation first made for the English Prayer-Book of 1549 was simply due to a printer's error. But if so, it is strange that the blunder was never corrected in any of the subsequent editions of the Prayer-Book. And it has been plausibly argued that the omission was deliberate, not because the Eeformers made light of holiness as a note of the Church, for the word " holy " is retained in the corres- ponding article in the Apostles* Creed, "the holy Catholic Church " — but because they imagined on critical grounds that it had no place in the true text of the creed. It is certainly the case that the word was wanting in the creed as given in some of the early editions of the Councils which were accessible to them, and they may have thought that they were restoring a truer text than that which had been previously in usa* However this may be, whether the omission was inten- tional or due to inadvertence, there is no doubt that it is wrong, and that we ought to read this article with the 1 Cf. 1 Cor. viii. 6 ; Col. i. 16 ; Heb. i. 2. *See an article on "The Anglican Version of the Nicene Creed," Church Quarterly Review, vol. viii. p. 372. if ARTICLE Vin 329 four notes of the Church plainly expressed : " One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church." IV. The Athanasian Creed. As the Apostles' Creed was not composed by the apostles, and the Nicene Creed is not the Creed of Nicaea, so the Athanasian Creed is not the work of Athanasiua Not only is the creed indebted (as will presently be shown) for much of its language to the works of Augustine written some years after the death of Athanasius, but also there can be no question that the original language of the creed is Latin, whereas Athanasius wrote in Greek. " It is certain," says Dr. Lumby, "that whoever peruses the various Greek versions of the creed which are extant cannot fail to abandon the notion that the original language of this composition was Greek. The unusual words and strange constructions betray the hand of translators, and those not of great skill. That this may be apparent from dififerent versions, the first two verses are sub- joined. . . . They vary widely from one another, as will be seen, and bear no trace whatever of a common Greek original. It is, therefore, impossible to believe that any such original ever existed." ^ " Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam fidem ; quam nisi quisque integrara inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in setemum peribit." " (1) Et T^9 0€\€i (TGyOrjvai, irpo ttuvtcov yprj avrrn rrjv Ka6o\cKT)v Kparrjaac irianv rjv el fii] rt? vytrj kol dfKOfjLov Trjprja€i€f irdarj^ dfjLtfio\ia^ e/cT09 eh rov aia>i/a diroXeiTai. " (2) T^ OeKovTi (reoOrjvai irpo irdvTcov dvdyKrj rrji ^ The History of the Creeds, p. 189. 330 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Ka6o\iKTjv iriariv KarixeiV rjv el ftij t^? uKepauiv koI airapdQ pavarov avvrrfp'qaeLev dvafii>fio\(i)^ et9 top a^cova dTToXelrai. " (3) "OcTTt? av fiov\r}TaL (r(o0rjvai irpo irdvrcov XPV Kparelv rrjv Ka6o\LKr)v Trlariv rjv el firj eU €Ka' " 354 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 9. Immensiis Pater immensus Tilius: immensus Spiritus Sanctus. 10. iEternus Pater oeternus Filius: aetemus Spiritus Sanctus. 11. Et tamen non tres seterni: sed unus aitemus. 12. Sicut non tres increati nee tres immensi: sed unus inereatus et unus immensus. 13. Similiter omnipotens Pater omnipotens Filius: omnipotens Spiritus Sanctus. 14. Et tamen non tres Omnipotentes : sed unus Omnipotens. 15. Ita Deus Pater Deus Filius: Deus Spiritus Sanctus. 16. Et tamen non tres Dii : sed unus est Deus. 17. Ita Dominus Pater Dominus Filius: Dominus Spiritus Sanctus. 1 8. Et tamen non tres Domini : sed unus est Dominus. 1 9. Quia sicut sigillatim unamquamque personam Deum ac Dominem confiteri, Christiana veritate compellimur : Ita tres Deos aut Dominos dicere, Catholica religione prohibemur. 20. Pater a nullo est factus : nee creatus nee genitus. 21. Filius a Patre solo est: non factus nee creatus sed genitus. 22. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio: non factus nee creatus nee genitus, sed procedens. 23. Unus ergo Pater non tres Patres : unus Filius non tres Filii, unus Spiritus Sanctus non tres Spiritus Sancti. 2'4. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius: nihil majus aut minus. Sed totse tres personse : coa3ternae sibi sunt et coa^quales. 25. Ita ut per omnia sicut jam supradictum est: et Unitas in Trinitate, et Trinitas in Unitate veneranda sit. 26. Qui vult ergo salvus esse : ita de Trinitate sentiat. 27. Sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem : ut ARTICLE VIII 355 incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Jesu Christi fide- liter credat. 28. Est ergo fides recta ut credamus et confiteamur: quia Dominus noster Jesus Christus Dei Filius Deus et homo est. 29. Deus est ex substantia Patris ante ssecula genitus : et homo est ex substantia matris in saeculo natus. 30. Perfectus Deus perfectus homo: ex anima rationali et humana carne subsistens. 31. iEqualis Patri secundum Divinitatem: minor Patre secundum humanitatem. 32. Qui licet Deus sit et homo: non duo tamen sed unus est Christus. 33. Unus autem non conversione Divinitatis in camem : sed assumptione humanitatis in Deum.^ 34. Unus omnino non confusione substantise: sed unitate personae. 35. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo : ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. 36. Qui passus est pro salute nostra descendit ad in- feros : tertia die resurrexit a mortuis. 37. Ascendit ad coelos sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris Omnipotentis : inde venturus est judicare vivos et mortuos. 38. Ad cujus adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis : et reddituri sunt de factis propiis rationem. 39. Et qui bona egerunt ibunt in vitam aeternam: qui vero mala in ignem aeternum. 40. Haec est fides Catholica, quam nisi quisque fide- liter firmiterque crediderit : salvus esse non poterit. * In tliis verse the majority of the older MSS. read in Came and in Deo» INDEX Aachen, Council of, 222. Abbot, Archbishop, 48. Abelard, 111. Admonition to Parliament, 53. A Lasco, John, 28. Albertus Magnus, 149. Alexandria, Council of, 109. Alley, Bishop, on the descent into hell, 160 ; on the Old Testament, 281. Ambrose, 219, 314. Amphilochius, 249, 265. Anabaptists, 22, 24, 125, 282. Andrewes, Bishop, 47. Anselm, 155. Ai>ocrypha, 274 ; Jerome on, 276 ; Hooker on, 278. Apollinaris, heresy of, 135. Apostles' Creed, history of, 305 ; origin of name, 313 ; text of, 815. Aquinas, 171. Aristides, 140, 299. Artemon, heresy of, 105. Ascension of Christ, 189. Athanasian Creed, not the work of Athanasius, 329; a Latin Creed, 329 ; origin of name, 330 ; con- troversy on date, 331 ; internal evidence of date, 332 ; external evidence, 333; MSS. of, 33C ; contained in early collections of canons, 338 ; commentaries on, 339 ; used by early writers, 340 ; probable date of, 343 ; use made of by the Church of England, 344 ; contents of, 345 ; objections to, 346 ; mistranslations in, 347 ; text of, 353. Athanasius, use of ffypostasis, 107 : on the Monarchiat 116 ; S57 on Hormousios, 126 ; on Sabell- ianism, 206 ; on the sufficiency of Scripture, 242; on the Canon of Scripture, 256. Athenagoras, 105, 205. Atonement, doctrine of, 150 ; theories of, 154 ; reveals the Father's love, 154 ; a mystery, 157. Au^burg, confession of. See Con- fcssion. Augustine on the Trinity, 101, 111, 112; on eternal genera- tion, 123 ; on the divinity of Christ, 129 ; on the descent into hell, 167, 171 ; on the presence of Christ as man, 196 ; on the Macedonians, 208 ; on the pro- cession of the Holy Spirit, 219 ; on the sufficiency of Scripture, 242 ; on the Canon of Scripture, 250, 256; on the Creed, 300; coincidences with Athanasian Creed, 332, 345. Autun, Council of, 333. Barnabas, Epistle of, 270. Basil, 206. Baxter, R., 56. Bede, 171. Bengel, 115, 147. Bigg, Rev. C, 108. Blackburne, Archdeacon, 63. Browne, Bishop H., on the Articles, 144, 172, 242, 244, 330. Burke, Edmund, 63. Burnet, Bishop, 18, 47. Butler, Bishop, on the Atonement, 157. CiESAREA, Baptismal Creed of, 316. ■««■». 358 INDEX INDEX 359 Caesarius of Aries, 309, 342. Canon of Scripture, meaning of the term,248 ; method ofdeterniining, 250 ; difference between England and Rome on, 252 ; evidence on which the Canon of the New Testament rests, 261. Cassian, 304. Carthage, Council of, 257. Ceremonial Law of Moses not bind- ing on Christians, 294. Charisms of Philadclpliia, 225. Charlemagne, 221, 313, 337. Charles the Bald, 337. Cheke, Sir J., 13, 19. Chrysostom, 192, 214. Clarke, Dr. S., 111. Clement of Alexandria, 171, 248, 275. Clement of Rome, 104, 205, 248, 270. Communicatio idiomatum, 138. Communion of Saints, 311. Confession of Augsburg, 8, 90, 120, 159, 180. Confession of Wiirtemburg, 9, 120, 198, 232. Con/essio BasiliejisiSt 9. Con/essio Helvetica i. and ll., 10. Con/essio Fidei OallicaTuif 10. Con/essio Belgica, 10. Constantinople, Council of, 215 ; creed of, 324. Convocation, were the Forty -Two Articles submitted to it ? 15. Cosin, Bishop, 49. Cranmer, Archbishop, prepares the Forty-Two Articles, 12 ; his account of the title to them, 17. See also 5, 7, 28, 258. Creeds, origin of, 297; indications of in New Testament, 297 ; early forms of, 298 ; interrogative forms of, 300 ; introduced into the liturgy, 300 ; used as tests of orthodoxy, 301 ; difference be- tween Eastern and Western, 302. Curteis, Canon, 68. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, 105. 307. Cyprian, Bishop of Toulon, 309, C^ril of Alexandria, 216. Cyril of Jerusalem, catechetical lectures of, 207, 300 ; on the Canon, 255, 265; on the term Apocryphal, 276; creed of, 321. Cyril Lucar, confession of, 259, Dale, R. W., 147, 148. Deity, properties of, 139. Denebert, Bishop, profession of, 341. Descent into hell, change in the Article on, 160. See also Hdl, descent iiito. DicUessaron of Tatian, 269. Diogenes of Cyzicus, 322. Dionysius of Alexandria, 107. Dionysius of Rome, 107. Divinity of the Son, proved from Scripture, 127 ; of the Spirit, 199. Dixon, Canon R. W., 3, 6, 12, 13, 14, 17, 29. Docetism, 145. Double procession, the doctrine of, 211 ; objections to, 224. Driver, Professor, 164, 286, 291,292. Enoch, Book of, 164, 287. Ephesus, seventh canon of the Council of, 225; ratifies the Creed of Nicsea, 324. Epiphanius, Bishop of Salarais, on Montanism, 205 ; creeds given by, 319 ; cf. -^08, 215, 324. Eternal generation of the Son, 123. Eusebius of Cresarea on the Canon of the New Testament, 266 ; on the creed of Nictea, 316. Eutyches, heresy of, 136. Faustus of Riez, 307. Filioquef addition of the clause to the creed, 215. Flesh and blood, meaning of the term, 188. Flesh and bones, meaning of the term, 188. Fortunatus, commentary of on the Athanasian Creed, 334. Forty -Two Articles, history of their preparation, 12 ; had they the authuritv of Convocation, 15 ; their substance and object, 20 ; not intended to be a per- manent test, 25 ; their sources, 26 ; how far dependent on the Confession of Augsburg, 26 ; their text, 70. i Frankfort, Council of, 222. Freeman, Archdeacon, 203. Fuller, Church History, 15. Future life, doctrine of in the Old TesUment, 287. Gallican additions to the creed, 309. Gardiner, S. R., 48. Gore, C, 98, 103, 125, 130, 144. Gregory Nazianzen, 210, 256, 265. Guest, Bishop, share in the pre- paration of the Articles, 30 ; on Article XXIX., 45 ; suggests further changes, 45. Hades, 163. See also JTcU. Hadrian i.. Bishop of Rome, 221, 837. Hadrian ii., 337. Hamant, Matthew, 120. Hampton Court Conference, 54. Hardwick on the Articles, 19, 25, 31, 39, 46, 51, 281. Hatfield, Council of, 220. Hefele, Bishop, 256, 258. Hell, meaning of the word, 163. Hell, descent into, Scriptural grounds of doctrine, 166 ; object of, 169 ; early belief in, 175 ; history of the article of the creed on, 177 ; criticism of Pearson on, 179. Hermas, 205, 270. Heurtley, Professor, 177, 310, 322. Hevlin, 15. Hilary of Aries, 332, Hilary of Poictiers, 110, 218, 256. Hippolytus, 108. Holy Ghost, addition of article on, 198 ; Divinity of, 199 ; dis- tinct personality of, 201 ; history of the doctrine of, 204 ; pro- cession of, 209. Holy Scripture, changes in the article on, 231 ; sufficient for salvation, 234 ; decree of the Council of Trent on, 235; the Fathers on, 242 ; the Canon of, 248. Homilies, Book of, on the doctrine of a future life, 293. HomootLsios^ meaning of the term, 126 ; adopted at Nicaea, 125 ; objections to, 126. Hooker, R., Ecclesiastical Polity of, 47 ; on the Incarnation, 136, 143; on the communicatio idiom- aium, 138; on the gift of unction, 142 ; on the presence of Christ as man, 194 ; on the sufficiency of Scripture, 251 ; on the Apocrypha, 278. Hooper, Bishop, on the Articles, 13 ; on the Anabaptists, 22, 145 ; on the descent into hell, 16?. Horsley, Bishop, 165, 173. Humanity of Christ perfect, 141. Humphreys, 41. Hypostatic union, the, 137. Hypostasis, history of the word. 107. Ignatius, 104, 140, 175, 205, 210, 270. Illinjovorth's Bampton Lectures, 103. Incarnation, Doctrine of, 137 seq. In/eri and In/erna, 163. Institution of a Christian man, 5. Irenseus, 140, 153, 175, 241, 269, 275, 298, 303. Jerome on the word hypostasis, 111 ; on the Apocrypha, 232, 256 ; on the term Canonical^ 250, 275 ; on the Creed, 307, 314. Jesus Christ See Son o/ God. Jewel, Bishop, 44, 195. Josephus, 253. Judgment, the last, 196. Justin Martyr, 104, 140, 175, 204, 269, 271, 299. Kaye, Bishop, 246. Kirkpatrick, Professor, 289. Knox, John, 14. Lambeth Articles, 53. Laodicaea, Council of, 256. Laud, Archbishop, advises charter to prefix declaration to the Articles, 49 ; on Canon V., 67. Leicester, Earl of, 64. Leo III. on the procession of tlie Holy Spirit, 223. Liddou's Bampton Lectures, 113, 117, 123, 125, 130, 144. Lightfoot, Bishop, 270, 327. Logos, doctrine of the, 122. 360 INDEX If INDEX Lumby, Professor, on the Athan- asian Creed, 335 seq. Luther on the Canon of the New Testament, 272. Macedonius, heresy of, 207. Marcellus of Ancyra, heresy of, 321 ; creed of, 306. Martensen, Bishop, 191. Maurice, Rev. F. D., 292. Medd, Rev. P. G., 96. Mediation of Christ, 152. Medieval errors condemned in the Forty-Two Articles, 21. Melito of Sardis, 255. Messianic hope in the Old Testa- ment, 285. Micronius, Martin, 23, 161. Mill, Rev. W. H., 246. Milligan, Professor, 189. Moehler, 237. Manarchia, doctrine of the, 115. Montague, Bishop, 48, 49. Montanisni, 205. Moral law binding on Christians, 294. Muratori, 333. Muratorian fragment on the Canon, 267. Neal, D., 55. Necessary doctrine and erudition for any Christian man, 5. Nestorius, heresy of, 136. Newdigate, Sir R., 63. New Testament, Canon of, 261 ; MSS. of, 261 ; versions of, 263 ; catalogues of, 265 ; citations of, 268 ; language of Article VI. on, 271 Newman, J. H., 114, 237, 274. Nicaea, Council of, 124. Nicene Creed, original form of, 316 ; enlarged form of, 318 ; date and object of the enlargement, 321 ; possibly sanctioned at Constanti- nople, 324; not noticed at Ephesus, 324; sanctioned at Chalcedon, 324 ; additions at Toledo, 215; Latin version of, 327 ; English translation of, 327. Nicholas i.. Pope, 224. Nicholas iir.. Pope, 228. Norris, Archdeacon, 163, 155, 348. Old Testament, Canon of the, 252 ; Ransom, Christ's death a, 155. changes in the Article on, 280 ; not contrary to the New, 283. Ommanney, Rev. Prebendary, 339. Origen, his use of Ousia and Hy- postasis, 107, 108 ; on eternal generation, 123; uses the term Homomisios, 126 ; on 1 Pet iii. 18, 171 ; on the term Canonical, 249 ; on the Canon of Scripture, 255. OusiA, history of the term, 107. Oxenham, H. N., 155. Palmer, Sir W., 241, 242, 244. Papias, 269. Paradise, 166. Parker, Archbishop, prepares the Thirty- Eight Articles, 30, 324 sug- gests clause in Article XXVIII., 36 ; changes made by him, 120, 160, 198, 259 ; on the descent into hell, 161. Paul of Samosata, 127. Pearson, Bishop, on the position of the Articles, 39 ; on the unity of God, 91 ; on the Trinity, 116 ; on the Son of God, 121 ; on the descent into hell, 169, 171, 189 ; on the Macedonian heresy, 199 ; on the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, 201 ; on the procession of the Holy Ghost, 211. Perichoresis, doctrine of the, 117. Perrone, 237. Person, history of the term, 106 ; explanation of, 112. Peter, Gospel of, 176. Philpot, Archdeacon, his explana- tion of the title of the Articles, 17. Philo, 254. Photius, 224. Pirminius on the Creed, 310. Pius IV., Pope, 11, 12. Plumptre, Dean, 171, 180. Pneumatomachi, the, 208. Polycarp, 270. Praxeas, 106. Presence of Christ as man, nature of the, 193. Procession of the Holy Ghost, doc- trine of the, 209. Prynne, W., 49. Pusey, E. B., 218, 219, 234. JT 361 Reccared, 215. Reconciliation of God to man, 146. Redditio Symholi, 300. Reformatio Legum Ecclesiastiearum, 28, 90, 120, 182, 198, 232, 259. licgula Jldei, 305. Resurrection of Christ, evidence for the, 183. Resurrection body, nature of the, 186. Resurrection of the flesh, 311. Reynolds, Dr., 54. Roman Creed, early, 306. Roscellinus, 111. Row, Prebendary, 186. Royal declaration prefixed to the Articles, 47. Rufinus, on the Creed, 178, 304 «e^., 314 ; on the Canon of Scriptui*e, 249, 256, 265, 275. Sabellianlsm, 106, 206. Sacrifice, Christ's death a, 148. Salvus, meaning of the word, 347. Sampson, 41. Santlay, Professor, 148, 269, 271. Scarapsus, 310. Session at the right-hand of God, meaning of the expression^ 192 ; evidence for, 192. Sheol, Hebrew conception of, 163. Sherlock, Dean, 111, Socrates, 177, 324, Son, meaning of the term, 122. Son of God, eternal generation of, 122 seq.; incarnation of, 135 seq.; union of two natures in one person, 187 ; atonement of, 145 seq. South, Dr., 111. Subscription to the Articles, required bv Parliament, 43; required by Couvocatioii,57; form of, modified, 63 ; not required from the laity, 64 ; history of, at the univer- sities, 64. Substance, history of the term, 107. Swainson, Professor, 335. Swete, Professor, 104, 177, 205, 208. 213, 310 seq. Symbolum, meaning of the term 304. Tarakius, Patriarch of Constanti- nople, 221. 24 Taylor, Bishop Jeremy, 242. Ten Articles of 1536, the, 3. Tertullian, 105, 107, 108, 140, 166. 176, 213, 241, 248, 269, 275, 298 303, 311. Theodore of Mopsuestia, 216, 225. Theodore of Tarsus, 220. Theodoret, 216, 324. Theodotus, 105. Theophilus of Antioch, 105, 204. Theotocos, title of, 136. Thirteen Articles of 1538, 7. Thirty-Eight Articles of 1563, his- tory of the, 30 ; compared with the Forty-Two Articles, 38 ; in- debtcd to the Confession of Wiir- temburg, 38 ; submitted to Con- vocation, 30 ; changes introduced by the Queen, 31. Thirty -Nine Articles, revision of 1571, 42 ; their true cliaracter, 38, 52; Latin and English both authoritative, 46; royal declaration prefixed to, 50 ; Puritan objections to, 51 seq.; subscription to, see Subscrip- tion. Toledo, third council of, 215. Traditio Symholi, 300. Tradition and Scripture, 236 seq. Trent, Council of, 10, 235, 252. Trinity, the Holy, preparation for the doctrine in the Old Testa- ment, 93 ; revelation of in the New Testament, 98; the doc- trine agreeable to reason, 101 ; first occurrence of the word, 104 ; meaning of the doctrine, 114; priority of order in the, 116. Unction, gift of, ] 42. Usher, Archbishop, 333. Utrecht Psalter, the, 334. Vaughan, Dean, 134, 204. Venantius Fortunatus, 178, 334. Vincent of Lerins, 243, 343. A'irgin, Christ born of a, 140. Waterland, D., on the Articles, 46; on subscription, 62; vindication of the doctrine of the Trinity, 111 ; on the Athanasian Creed. 331 seq. 362 INDEX Westcott, Bishop, 97, 117, 122, 130, 134, 156, 169, 184, 185, 186, 188, 191, 211, 250, 256, 258, 302. Westminster assembly of divines. 55. Whitaker, Professor, 54. Whitgi ft, Archbishop, Three Articlen of, 58,; subscription to them re- quired by the Canons of 1604, 59. Wiseman, Cardinal, 237. Wiirtemburg, Confession of, J^sec Confession, MORHISON A.MD OIBB, rillNTERi^, U>Un)URaU. f COLUMB A UNIVERSITY 0032217536 NOT f \ ) lf^^-*\».»mimmtM»»m»>m^ -*'*,» BIBLIOGRAPHIC IRREGULARITIES MAIN E^f^RY! <^lt?Son^ Bd(^a^ CV)a>i)trs Bibliographic Irregula rities in the Original Documpnt List volumes and pages affected; include name of institution if filming borrowed text. Page(s) missing/not available: .Volumes(s) missing/not available:. Illegible and /or damaged page(s):. Page(s) or volumes(s) misnumbered: Bound out of sequence: .Page(s) or illustration(s) filmed from copy borrowed from: Uniyg Ys i+a (2f Ohio. hY)]\ie. Volov^f. FILMED IN WHOLE OR PART FROM A COPY BORROWED FROM UNIVERSITY OF OHIO Ashland Th-'-V-n! Library r For Reference Not to be taken from this room HILDA & MICHAEL BROOKE BAILY4WC00S, CI ' i THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF I HK CHURCH OF ENGLAND THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF THE I CHURCH OF ENGLAND i EXPLAINED WITH AN INTRODUCTION By EDGAR C. S. GIBSON, D.D. VICAR OK LEEDS AND PREBENDARY OF WELLS SOMETIME PRINCIPAL OF WELLS THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE IN TWO VOLUMES VOL. II ARTICLES IX-XXXIX i METHUEN & CO. 36 ESSEX STREET, W.C. LONDON 1897 f K^A^ m- PREFACE For some years there has been a widely-spread feeling, among those whose work called them to lecture on the XXXIX. Articles, that there is room for another treatise on the subject. Archdeacon Hardwick's invaluable work is purely historical, and attempts no interpretation or Scriptural proof of the Articles themselves. Bishop Forbes* Exrplanation is excellent as a theological treatise, but, in spite of its title, it is scarcely an " explanation " of the Articlea Dr. Boulbee's Theology of the Church of England is clear and business-like, but it is written from a party point of view. Of Bishop Harold Browne*s well-known Exposition it is sufficient to say that the first edition was published in 1850, and that a good deal of fresh light has been thrown upon the Articles during the last forty-six years. But since the Bishop was content to issue edition after edition without making any change in it, or subjecting it to a much- needed revision, the book, which has in the past been of so much service to the Church, has become in many parts {e.g. in all that concerns the history of the Creeds) antiquated and out of date. Since the present work was sent to the press, two other volumes on the same subject have appeared, namely, an Introduction to the XXXIX. Articles, by Dr. Maclear and Mr. Williams, and The Thirty-nine Articles and the Age of the Reforma- \ Ashlund I hcclcclco! Library AshtuHd, Ohio v--* VI PREFACE tim by the Eev. E. Tyrrell Green.— a fact which aflords striking evidence of the feeling aUuded to above, that the text-books at present in use are not altogether adequate. Mr. Green's work contains much illustrative matter from contemporary documents, and that by Dr. Maclear and Mr. Williams is excellent as a short text- book. My own work is on a somewhat larger scale, and may perhaps appear to be more ambitious, in aiming at completeness as a commentary upon the Articles ; and I trust that it may be found that there is room for it as well as for these others. My object throughout has been to make the work correspond as closely as possible to the title. It is not in any way intended to be » complete system of theology. The subjects discussed are strictly limited to those which are fairly suggested by the text of the Articles. Nor is it a history of doctrine. I have simply endeavoured to explain the teaching of the Articles, assuming a general knowledge of ecclesiastical history on the part of the reader, and only tracing out the history of doctrine where it seemed to be absolutely necessary in order to enable him to understand the meaning of the text of the Articles and the expressions used in it. My aim has always been to discover and elucidate the "plain, literal, and gram- matical sense" of the document on which I have underUken to comment. I can honestly say that I have striven to be perfectly fair, and to avoid the temptation to "read in" to the Articles meanmgs which I am not convinced to be really there. How far I have succeeded my readers must judge for IjIiGIIISGI V68. One possible criticism I should like to meet before- hand It may perhaps be said that there is a lack of proportion in the treatment of the Articles, smce far more space has been devoted to the first eight than to PREFACE Vll the remaining thirty-one. My reply must be that the fault, if it be a fault, has been deliberately committed, — and for this reason. The first eight Articles practically re-state, in an enlarged form, the rule of faith as con- tained in the Church's Creed, and therefore stand on a any it The Practical Effect of the Doctrine Two Considerations calculated to guard the Doctrine from Abuses Article XYIIL— Of obtaining Eternal Salvation only by THE Name of Christ Article XIX.— Of the Church The Description of the Visible Church The Statement that the Church of Rome hath erred in Matters of Faith Article XX.— Of the Authority of the Church . The Legislative Power of the Church with regard to Rites or Ceremonies The Judicial Authority of the Church with regard to Doctrine . The Office of the Church with regard to Holy Scripture . Alticle XXL— Of the Authority of General Councils They may not be gathered together without the Consent of Princes • They are liable to En- As a Matter of History they actually have Erred Article XXII.— Of Purgatory Purgatory .... Pardons Adoration of Images and Reliques Invocation of Saints Article XXIII.— Of Ministering in the Congregation Tlie Need of an External Call and Mission The Description of those through whom the Call comes Akticle XXIV. — Of Spkakino in the Congregation in A Tongue as the People understandeth . The Evidence of Scripture on this Subject The Custom of the Primitive Church PAOE 459 465 481 482 485 488 493 496 506 .'»11 514 520 526 529 532 534 53;'. 537 542 554 557 .^^64 573 575 578 SUCH 581 582 583 CONTENTS XI PAOE Article XXV.— Of the Sacraments 585 The Description of Sacraments oi-dained of Christ . . . 588 The Number of such Sacraments 593 The Five Rites *' commonly called Sacraments" . . . 602 The Use of Sacraments 610 Article XXVI. — Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the Effect of the Sacraments 615 Article XXVII.— Of Baptism 620 The Description of Baptism and its Effects .... 621 Infant Baptism 634 Article XXVIII.— Of the Lord's Supper . . . .641 The Description of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper . . 647 The Doctrine of Transubstantiation 649^ The Nature of the Presence, and the " Mean whereby it is received" 660 Certain Practices in connection with the Eucharist . . . 664 Article XXIX. — Of the Wicked which do not Eat the Body of Christ in the use of the Lord's Supper . 668 Article XXX.— Of both Kinds 676 The History of the Practice condemned in it . . . . 676 The Arguments by which it has been justified .... 683 Article XXXI. — Of the One Oblation of Christ finished UPON THE Cross 687 The Sufficiency of the Sacrifice of the Cross .... 688 The Condemnation of the "Sacrifices of Masses" . . . 691 Article XXXII. — Of the Marriage of Priests . . . 695 Tliere is no Prohibition of the Marriage of the Clergy in Scripture 696 It is lawful for the Clergy to Marry if they think it advisable . 697 Article XXXIII. — Of Excommunicate Persons: How they are to be avoided 705 Article XXXIV.— Of the Traditions of the Church . . 716 Article XXXV.— Of Homilies 722 The History of the Homilies 723 The Nature of the Assent demanded to them .... 725 i xii CONTENTS FAOE Article XXXVL— Of Consecration op Bishops and Ministers 729 The Objections of the Puritans 731 The Objections of the Romanists 748 Article XXXVII.— Of the Civil Magistrates . .759 The Royal Supremacy 76I The Papal Claims 772 The Lawfulness of Capital Punishment 780 The Lawfulness of War 781 Article XXXVIII. — Of Christian Men's Goods which are NOT Common 783 The Community of Goods 734 The Duty of Almsgiving 786 Article XXXIX.— Of a Christian Man's Oath .788 Index 793 It I i! r ARTICLE IX De Pcccato Originali, Peccatum originis non est (ut fabulantur Pelagiani) in imita- tione Adami situm, sed est vitium ct depravatio naturae cujuslibet hominis ex Adamo naturaliter pro- l»agati, qua fit ut ab originali justitia quam longissime distet, ad malum sua natura propendeat, et caro semper adversus spiritum con- cupiscat. Unde in unoquoque nascentium iram Dei atque damna- tionem meretur. Manet etiam in renatis h«c naturae depravatio, qua fit ut afi'ectus carnis, Graece p6tfrifia See Wisd. ii. 23 seq. ; Ecclus. xxv. 24 [33] ; 4 Ezra ill. 7, 21 seq, ; Apoc. Banich xvii. 3, xxiii. 4 ; and cf. Edersheira, Jesiis the Messiah^ vol. i. p. 165 seq.f and Sanday and Headlam On the Eomans, p. 136 seq. 2 The question may be raised how far is the Church's doctrine on this subject, and S. Paul's teaching in particular, affected by "critical" views of the Old Testament, and the belief that in Gen. i.-iii. we have a symbolical representation of spiritual truths rather than a literal history. On this subject a valuable letter will be found in the Life and Letters of F. J. A. HopfiTj» TpoKOTijs 6tus av^dvuy Kal riXeios yeydfievoSj ir.T.X., Ad AiUolyc. ii. 24 ; while Clement of Alexandria directly raises the question whether Adam was formed perfect or incomplete {riXeioi ij dreXiJs), and answers that he "was not made perfect in respect to his constitution, but in a fit condition to receive virtue" {Stromata, VI, xii. 96), "where," as Bishop Bull says, "he plainly enough teacheth that ARTICLE IX 367 (d) The effect of the Fall. — If the condition of man in his primitive condition before he had actually sinned was as it has been described above, what, it will be asked, was the effect of the Fall? Concerning this there have been various views held, differing in regard to the extent of the depravity actually inherited by all men. (i.) The Greek Fathers generally, and the earlier Latin ones as well, laid no great stress on the Fall, and the most that can be said is that — so far as they have any definite teaching on the subject at all — they hold that it involved the loss of the supernatural bias of the will towards good, but nothing more. Man was left with a fundamentally sound nature, with no direct bias in one direction or the other. Thus on this view "original 8in " is nothing more than a loss of higher goodness ; a state of defect rather than of positive sin; a privatio rather than a depravatio natures. (ii.) Augustine and his followers in the controversy with the Pelagians dealt fully with the subject, and drew out more thoroughly than had yet been done the teaching of Scripture, showing therefrom that the Fall involved something more than only the withdrawal of the supernatural gifts, and left man with a corrupt nature, a direct bias towards evil. " The will," says Mozley, " according to the earlier school was not substan- tially affected by the Fall. . . . But in Augustine's scheme the will itself was disabled at the Fall ; and not only certain impulses to it withdrawn, its power of Adam >\as from the beginning not indeed made perfect, but yet endowed with the capacity whereby he might arrive to perfect virtue. " See the whole passage {IFarks, ii. p. 72), and cf. Lux MuTidi, p. 535: "All that we are led to believe is that the historical development of man has not been the development simply as God meant it. It has been tainted throughout its whole fabric by an element of moral disorder, of human vrilfulness. " f f 368 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES choice was gone, and man was unable not only to rise above a defective goodness, but to avoid positive sin. He was thenceforth, prior to the operation of grace, in a state of necessity on the side of evil, a slave to the devil and to his own inordinate lusts." ^ (iii.) In later days, many of the schoolmen, and after them the Koman divines of the sixteenth century, were content to regard original sin in a somewhat milder light than this, and to view it rather as a " privatio " than as a state of positive defect. Aquinas, however, after speaking of it as "qusedam privatio," "carentia originalis justitiae," terms it " inordinata dispositio, languor naturae," and freely admits that it is more than a mere " privatio." 2 But the Council of Trent, following Scotus, regards it mainly as " the loss of holiness and righteous- ness ";3 and Bellarmine distinctly teaches that it is only the result of the withdrawal of the supernatural gift.* (iv.) On the other hand, both Lutherans and Calvinists have generally maintained an entire depravation of human nature, so that man is only inclined to evil ; and they have sometimes used such strong and exaggerated language on the corruption of man*s nature, as to sug- gest that since the Fall the image of God is wholly * Op. dt. p. 125. For Augustine's teaching reference may be made to the Enchiridion, § 10 ; De NcUura et giatia, c. iii. ; and the treatise De Oratia Christi et de Peccato ariginali. 2 '*Habetprivationem originalis justitia et cum hoc inordinatam dis- positionem partium animae, unde non est privatio pura sed et qusedam habitus corruptus," Summa, l"''^ 2'« Q. Ixxxi. =» Decree concerning original sin, Session V. (June 17, 1546). * "Corruptio naturae non ex alicujus doni carentia, neque ex alicujus malae qualitatis accessu, sed ex sola doni supematuralis ob Ad« peccatum amissione profluxit," De gratia primi hominis, c. v.; cf. c. i. ; and Amiss, gratia:, iii. 1. Modern Roman teaching is on just the same lines. See Moehler's SymholUm, p. 43 seq. ; and Terrone, Pralectimes, vol. iii. p. 122 seq. i ARTICLE IX 369 obliterated, and the nature of man no better than that of the evil spirits. Thus the " Westminster Confession " says of our first parents : " By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature con- veyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions." ^ To which of these views thus briefly enumerated, it may be fairly asked, does the Anglican Article incline ? It clearly takes a darker view than that of the Greek Fathers, and of the Koman Church as represented by the Council of Trent. Original sin is more than a " privatio." It is a "depravatio naturae." It <' deserves God's wrath and damnation." Such language can only he used of something positive, not simply of a withdrawal of supernatural grace. But, on the other hand, strong as the language of the Article is, it falls very far short of that of the " Westminster Confession," and of Calvinists in general. " Quam longissime " in the Latin Article, if pressed, might perhaps be taken to indicate agreement with the Calvinist notion of a total loss of original ^ West. Conf. c. vi. So the Formula Concordice (1577) says that original sin *'is so deep a corruption of human nature, that nothing healthy or incorrupt in a man's soul or body, in inner or outward powers," is left. Similar but even stronger language is used in the Ccmfessio Helvetica II. c. 8 : *' Peccatum autem intelligimus esse nativam illam hominis corruptionem ex primis illis nostris parentibus in nos omnes derivatam vel propagatam, qua concupiscentiis pravis immersi et a bono aversi, ad omne vero malum propensi, pleni omni nequitia, diffi- dentia, contemtu et odio Dei, nihil boui ex nobis ipsis facere, imo ne cogitare quidem possumus." I 1 ^1 i 370 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES i f righteousness ; but if so, the English " very far gone " would appear strangely inadequate. Moreover, there is a significjant silence about any imputation of Adam's sin (a prominent feature in later Calvinistic teaching) ; and that the Article is seriously defective from a Calvinistic point of view, is conclusively shown by the suggested emendations of the Assembly of Divines in 1643. They were not satisfied with it as it stood, but wished to insert a reference to the imputation of Adam's sin, and to materially strengthen the language of the Article, substi- tuting " wholly deprived of " for " very far gone from," and insisting that man "is of his own nature only inclined to evil."^ This being so, we need have no hesitation in inter- preting the Latin by the English, and may rest content with the statement that man is " very far gone from original righteousness." So much is clearly taught in Holy Scripture. Not to lay too much stress on the language of the Psalmist, " Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Ps. li. 5), or on the question of Job, " Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ? " (Job xiv. 4), we notice that all through Scripture man is regarded as by nature corrupt. " The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Gen. viii. 21); "every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is only evil continually " (vi 6) ; " The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick" (Jer. xvii. 9). So also in the New Testament: " I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing" (Rom. vii. 18). "The mind of the flesh is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be ; and they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. viii. 7). But, on the ^ See Neal's History of the Puritans^ vol. iii. p. 659, where the Article is given as amended by the Divines. ARTICLE IX 371 other hand, there are passages which no less clearly indicate that, in spite of this universal depravity, the " image of God," in which man was originally created, still remains since the Fall, and therefore it cannot be true to say that he is " wholly deprived of " his original righteousness. Thus in Gen. ix. 6 the law, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed," is based on the fact that " in the image of God made He man." In 1 Cor. xi. 7, S. Paul speaks of man as " the image and glory of God," while S. James says that men are " made after the likeness of God " (iii. 9). It may then be fairly concluded that on this subject the Church of England is in the main content to follow the teaching of Augustine : only, however, in the main, for there are statements which Augustine was led to make in the course of the controversy with the Pelagians to which we are most certainly not called upon to sub- scribe. To mention one point only. Augustine asserted that as a fact infants and others dying unbaptized meet with the punishment of hell.^ Article IX. is careful only to state that original sin " deserves God's wrath and damnation," — a statement which follows naturally from the view taken of it as something positive, involving a real taint and disorder of the nature, but which falls short of expressing any opinion on the further question whether it actually meets with that which it deserves.^ * De pecccUorum mentis et remissione, I. xxi., II. c. iv. ; of. Bright'i AtUi- Pelagian TrecUiseSy p. xiv, note 4. 2 See on this point a striking letter of the late Dean Church, Life and Letters f p. 248. '* The /ac< of what is meant by original sin is as mysteri- ous and inexplicable as the origin of evil, but it is obviously as much a fact. There is a fault and vice in the race, which, given time, as surely develops into actual sin as our physical constitution, given at birth, does into sickness and physical death. It is of this inherited sin in our nature, looked upon in the abstract and without reference to concrete cases, that I suppose the Article speaks. How can we suppose that such a nature looks in God's eyes according to the standard of perfect right- 111 M 370 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I \ * righteousness ; but if so, the English " very far gone " would appear strangely inadequate. Moreover, there is a significant silence about any imputation of Adam's sin (a prominent feature in later Calvinistic teaching) ; and that the Article is seriously defective from a Calvinistic point of view, is conclusively shown by the suggested emendations of the Assembly of Divines in 1643. They were not satisfied with it as it stood, but wished to insert a reference to the imputation of Adam's sin, and to materially strengthen the language of the Article, substi- tuting " wholly deprived of " for " very far gone from," and insisting that man "is of his own nature only inclined to evil." ^ This being so, we need have no hesitation in inter- preting the Latin by the English, and may rest content with the statement that man is " very far gone from original righteousness." So much is clearly taught in Holy Scripture. Not to lay too much stress on the language of the Psalmist, " Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Ps. li. 5), or on the question of Job, " Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ? " (Job xiv. 4), we notice that all through Scripture man is regarded as by nature corrupt. " The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Gen. viii 21); "every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is only evil continually " (vi 5) ; " The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick" (Jer. xvii. 9). So also in the New Testament: " I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing" (Rom. vii. 18). "The mind of the flesh is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be ; and they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. viii. 7). But, on the * See Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. iii. p. 559, where the Article is given as amended by the Divines. ARTICLE IX 371 other hand, there are passages which no less clearly indicate that, in spite of this universal depravity, the " image of God," in which man was originally created, still remains since the Fall, and therefore it cannot be true to say that he is " wholly deprived of " his original righteousness. Thus in Gen. ix. 6 the law, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed," is based on the fact that " in the image of God made He man." In 1 Cor. xi. 7, S. Paul speaks of man as " the image and glory of God," while S. James says that men are " made after the likeness of God " (iii. 9). It may then be fairly concluded that on this subject the Church of England is in tlie main content to follow the teaching of Augustine : only, however, in the main, for there are statements which Augustine was led to make in the course of the controversy with the Pelagians to which we are most certainly not called upon to sub- scribe. To mention one point only. Augustine asserted that as a fact infants and others dying unbaptized meet with the punishment of hell.^ Article IX. is careful only to state that original sin "deserves God's wrath and damnation," — a statement which follows naturally from the view taken of it as something positive, involving a real taint and disorder of the nature, but which falls short of expressing any opinion on the further question whether it actually meets with that which it deserves.^ ' De peceatorum meritis et remisswnef I. xxi., II. c, iv. ; cf. Bright'i Anti-Peloffian Treatises, p. xiv, note 4. 2 See on this point a striking letter of the late Dean Church, Life and Letters^ p. 248. '* The /ac< of what is meant by original sin is as mysteri- ous and inexplicable as the origin of evil, but it is obviously as much a fact. There is a fault and vice in the race, which, given time, as surely develops into actual sin as our physical constitution, given at birth, does into sickness and physical death. It is of this inherited sin in our nature, looked upon in the abstract and without reference to concrete cases, that I suppose the Article speaks. How can we suppose that such a nature looks in God's eyes according to the standard of perfect right- I M \ 372 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I * it As an illustration of this, reference may be made to the careful reticence of the note at the end of the Baptismal Service in the Book of Common Prayer. " It is certain by God's word that children which are baptized, p6vrjtia aapKo^:, which some do expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire of the flesh is not subject to the law of God. This is un- happily a truth of universal experience, for which scrip- tural proof is scarcely needed. All history and the facts of each man's own experience combine in testifying to the existence of the old nature even after baptism and the reception of Divine grace. The phrase />oi^/4a vick, p. 125. » De Haren. c. vii. ' Cf. Forbes On the Articles, p. 152. i Ashland Theclocica! Library As)'i!c:n>j, Chio 380 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ♦ naturally and directly from the view of " original sin " maintained in Article IX. It was there shown that the Church of England regards original sin as no mere " privatio " or loss of higher goodness only ; but rather as a "depravatio naturae," a real corruption of our nature, "whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil." If this is true, it follows as a necessary consequence that the condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to faith and calling upon God. The position, then, taken up in the Article is that, though the will may be left free by God, yet there is in unaided man a lack of power. This is the teaching of the " Necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian Man" (1543), with which the Article is in substantial agreement. " Though there remain a certain freedom of the will in those things that do pertain to the desires and works of this present life, yet to perform spiritual and heavenly things, freewill is of itself insufficient; and therefore the power of man's freewill, being thus wounded and decayed, hath need of a physician to heal it, and an help to repair it." ^ I II. The need of Grace, While the Article thus neither affirms nor denies the freedom of the will in the abstract, its teaching on the absolute necessity of Divine grace for the performance of works that are "grata Deo" is clear and decisive. * See Formularies of Faith, p. 360. Cf. also the Tridentine statement on the subject (Sess. VI. c. i.) : " Freewill, attenuated and bent down as it was in its i>owers, was by no means extinguished." h ARTICLE X 381 We have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good will It is especially needful to remember, in studying this Article and those which immediately follow (XL— XIII.), that they are concerned with God's method of dealing with those who are brought into covenant with Him through Christianity, and that what is said in them has little or no bearing on the case of those who live and die without ever having heard the gospel of Christ. Their case is not contemplated. Such terms as " faith and calling upon God," " good works, pleasant and acceptable to God," "grace of God by Christ preventing us . . . and working with us," etc., are expressions which properly refer to Christians ; and therefore nothing that is said in these Articles need necessarily raise questions as to the " good works " of the heathen, and the light in which they are regarded by God. All that need be said is that they are not what the Articles call " good works, pleasant and acceptable to God " (Deo grata et accepta). This phrase, which we meet with here for the first time, is almost a technical one, used for the works of Chris- tians done in a Christian spirit and from Christian motives. Thus it is used in Article XII. of those good works which " are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification." These are said to be "grata Deo et accepta in Christo " ; whereas, according to Article XIIL, " works done before the grace of Christ and inspiration of His Spirit " are " minime Deo grata." More will be said on this subject when these Articles are reached. But so much it seemed necessary to say at the outset in connection with the first occurrence of the phrase. To return now to the teaching of the Article before us : It < f 382 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES i| I states that twofold grace is needed — (1) preventive yrcuie (gratia praeveniens), inclining the will to choose the good ; * and (2) co-operating grace (gratia co-operans), assisting man to act, when the will has already been inclined to choose the good. The technical phrase "gratia prae- veniens " is apparently due to Augustine, who makes use of it several times,^ and it seems to have been suggested to him by the Latin of Ps. lix. (IviiL) 10 : " Deus mens misericordia ejus praeveniet me," a text which he quotes frequently. The term " gratia co-operans " is also his,^ and, like " preventing grace," is based on Scripture. See PhiL ii. 13: " For it is God that tvorketh (qui operatur) in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure"; and compare [S. Mark] xvi. 20 : " The Lord also working with them " (Domino co-operante). On the necessity of both kinds of grace, the teaching of Scripture, which is faith- fully reflected in the Book of Conmion Prayer,* as well as the Articles, is clear and definite. The beginning, the middle, and end of man's salvation is influenced by God. For the need of preventing grace, besides the passage just cited from Phil. ii. 13, it is sufficient to refer to our Lord's own words in S. John vi. 44 : " No man can come to Me, except the Father which sent Me, draw him," ' For scholastic teaching on grace and the divisions into gratia operans and co-operans, as well as into gratia prseveniens and subsequens, see Aquinas, Summa 1""^ 2* Q. cxi. 2 Serm. 176, § 5 ; 2)« Nat. et Gratia, § 35 ; Cmtra duos Epist. II. § 21. Cf. Bright's ArUi- Pelagian Treatises, p. xix. ' De Gratia et Libera Arhitrio, c. xvii. * See the Collect for Easter Day: "Almighty God ... we humbly beseech Thee, that, as hy Thy special grace prevcTiting us Thou dost put into our minds good desires, so by Thy continual help we may bring the same to good effect." The Seventeenth Sunday after Trinity: "Lord, we pray Thee that Thy grace may always prevent and follow %ts, and make us continually to be given to all good works " ; and the fourth Collect at the end of the Order of Holy Communion : ** Prevent us, Lord, in all our doings with Thy most gracious favour and further vs with Thy continual help." ARTICLE X 383 and to such a phrase as that used in Acts xvi. 14, where the Lord is said to have " opened the heart " of Lydia, "to give heed unto the things which were spoken hy God." While for co-operating grace reference may be made to S. Paul's attribution of all that he did, not to himself, but to " the grace of God which was with " him (1 Cor. XV. 10; cf. Gal. ii 20); and to our Lord's teaching in S. John xv. 4, 5 : " Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine ; so neither can ye, except ye abide in Me. I am the vine, ye are the branches : he that abideth in Me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit ; for apart from Me ye can do nothing." But while we thus, on the one hand, in dependence on the teaching of Scripture, assert the absolute need of grace, and trace everything good in man to the action of Him from whom alone cometh " every good gift, and every perfect boon" (S. James i. 17); yet, on the other hand, it is equally necessary to insist, still in fullest harmony with the teaching of Scripture, — which every- where assumes man's responsibility and power of responding to God's claim, — upon the freewill of man ; for so only can any sense of human responsibility be developed.^ We cannot, indeed, reconcile and harmonise the two counter-truths of freewill and the need of grace ; but we can hold them both,^ and place them side by side, as S. Paul himself does in the passage already quoted. " Work out your own salvation with fear and » ** There can be no question that S. Paul fully recognises the freedom of the human will. The large part which exhortation plays in his letters is conclusive proof of this."— Sanday and Headlam On the Romans, p. 216. 2 Cf. Augustine, De peccatorum fnerUis et remissione, II. c. xviii. : " [Nature] forbids us so to maintain God's grace as to seem to take away freewill ; and, on the other hand, so to assert its liberty as to lay our- selves open to the censure of being ungrateful to the grace of God in the arrogance of our impiety." 1^ i\ 384 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 1 1^ ! || trembling " (there is man's freedom, for it is idle to tell him to " work " unless he is free to work or not to work), " for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure " (there is the need of grace, both preventing and co-operating). The teaching of S. Paul in Rom. viL shows more clearly perhaps than any other passage, the state of the case as regards the freedom of the will, and makes it apparent that, though left free by God, the will of man has since the Fall been warped in the direction of evil, and thus man finds himself, as it were, under two different and incompatible laws. On the one hand, he approves of the law of God, and acknowledges himself bound to obey it. On the other, he feels that he is under the dominion of another law which continually leads him to sin. " To will (to OiXciv) ^ is present with me ; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would (o OiXo)) I do not : but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now, if I do that which I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good (tg) Oi\oim ifiol iroielv rh Ka\ov)y evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man : but I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members " (vers. 18-23). This double state or condition in which man finds himself is recognised by heathen poets and moralists.2 It has in its favour the testimony of facts, * It must be noticed that S. Paul does not use the word /3ot;Xo/iat, which 'Mays the greater stress on the idea of purpose and deliberation," but only ^Aeiv, the more emotional word. Sec Sanday and Headlam in loc. - The lines of Ovid are well known — "Video meliora proboque, Deteriora sequor." So Seneca asks : " What is it which, while we are going one way, drags i» ARTICLE X 385 and our natural instincts which lead us while recognising our freedom and moral responsibility to refer everything that is good in us to God. But Scripture alone throws any light on its origin. Man's greatness is fallen great- ness. This is the only explanation of the perpetual contrast between man's aspirations and man's achieve- ments, the greatness and nobility of the one, and the lamentable failure of the other. The doctrine of the Fall is the key to the riddle of human nature.^ It only remains to point out how this Tenth Article avoids opposite errors in connection with the difficult subject of Grace and Freewill. (a) By its guarded reference to Freewill, which it neither asserts nor denies, it escapes the error into which Luther fell, of using such extreme language on the slavery of the will as practically to amount to a denial of human responsibility.^ (6) By its direct assertion of the absolute need of grace preventing and co-operating, it avoids the Pelagian heresy revived by the Anabaptists, which denied the necessity of grace and supernatural assistance. (c) The terms in which the need of grace is spoken of are so worded as to avoid altogether the unscriptural views of the Anabaptists, and the exaggerations of the Calvinists, who maintained a theory of "irresistible us another, and impels us thither, from whence we are longing to recede ? What is it that struggles with our soul and never permits us to do any- thing ? We vacillate between two opinions : We will nothing freely, nothing perfectly, nothing always." — Ep. lii. * Cf. Pascal, Pens6eSy arts, xviii.-xxii. ' See the language from his treatise De Servo Arbitrio, quoted in Bishop Browne On the Articles, p. 259 : "In his actings towards God, in things pertaining to salvation or damnation, man has no freewill, but is the captive, the subject, and the servant, either of the will of God or of Satan." "If we believe that God foreknows and predestinates everything . . . then it follows that there can be no such thing as freewill in man or angel or any other creature." \ I 386 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES i I '< /■ t k grace." ^ Such views were still more effectually excluded by the Tenth Article of 1553, which was headed "Of Grace," and followed the one before us. De GfrcUia, Gratia Christi, seu Spiritus Sanctus qui per eundera datur, cor lapideum aufert, et dat cor carneum. Atque licet ex nolentibus quse recta sunt volentes faciat, et ex volenti- bus prava, nolentes reddat, volun- tati nihilominus violeutiam nuUam infert. Et nemo hac de causa cum peccaverit, seipsum excusare potest, quasi nolens aut coactus peccaverit, ut eam ob causam accusari non mereatur aut damnari. Of Grace, The grace of Christ, or the Holy Ghost by Him given doth take away the stony heart, and giveth an heart of flesh. And although, those that have no will to good things, He maketh them to will, and those that would evil things. He maketh them not to will the same : yet nevertheless He en- forceth not the will. And therefore no man when he sinneth can excuse himself, as not worthy to be blamed or condemned, by alleging that he sinned unwillingly or by compulsion. This was certainly primarily aimed at some among the Anabaptists who " seem to have been pushing their belief in absolute predestination to such frightful lengths that human actions were esteemed involuntary, and the evil choice of man ascribed to a necessitating fiat of his Maker."* Its omission by Archbishop Parker in the revision of 1563 is probably due to the less formidable character of the danger of Anabaptism at that time. But it is possible that Parker was influenced by the fact that the Article was likely to be displeasing to some of the Marian exiles, who had returned to England with strong predilections in favour of Calvinism, and whom it 1 This is closely connected with Calvin's teaching on Predestination, which will be considered below under Article XVII. 2 Hardwick, p. 99. Cf. the letter of Bishop Hooper (quoted in vol. i. p. 22), where it is said of the Anabaptists that "they maintain a fatal necessity, and that beyond and beside that will of His, which He has revealed to us in the Scriptures, God hath another will, by which He altogether acts under some kind of necessity." ARTICLE X 387 was desired to retain in the Church. The excision of the Article would remove a stumbling-block from their path, as there is nothing in our present Article to which they could take exception, though from their point of view they might consider that its statements required supplementing. '\ AKTICLE XI De Hominis Justificaliom. Tantum propter meritum Domini ac servatoris nostri Jesu Christi, per fidem, non propter opera et merita nostra, justi coram Deo reputamnr : quare sola fide nos justificari, doctrina est saluberrima, ac consolationis plenissima : ut in Homilia de justificatione hominis fusius explicatur. Of the Justification of Man, We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or de- servings : Wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is ex- pressed in the Homily of Justi- fication. In its present form this Article dates from the Eliza- bethan revision in 1563. The Edwardian Article on the same subject was much less explicit : " Justification by only faith in Jesus Christ in that sense, as it is declared in the Homily of Justification, is a most certain and wholesome doctrine for Christian men." The Article, as finally drawn up by Parker, is indebted for some of its phrases to the Confessions of Augsburg and Wiirtemberg. In the latter of these documents we find these words: "Homo enim fit Deo acceptus, et reputatur coram eo Justus propter solum Filium Dei, Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum^ per fidem " ; ^ while in the former we read as follows: "Item docent quod homines non possunt justificari coram Deo propriis virihus, Tneritis aut operihus, sed gratis justificentur propter Christum, per fidem, cum credunt se in gratiam recipi, et peccata remitti propter Christum, qui sua morte pro nostris peccatis satisfecit. Hanc fidem imputat Deus ^ De JustificatioTie. See Hardwick, p. 125. 388 I ARTICLE XI 389 pro justitia coram ipso, Rom. iii et iv." ^ And again : " Ut hanc fidem consequamur, institutum est ministerium docendi Evangelii et porrigendi sacramenta. Nam per verbum et sacramenta, tanquam per instrumenta, donatur Spiritus Sanctus, qui fidem efficit, ubi et quando visum est Deo, in iis qui audiunt evangelium, scilicet, quod Deus non propter nostra merita, sed propter Christum justificet hos, qui credunt se propter Christum in gratiam recipL"^ The expressions placed in italics in these extracts will show how far the Article is indebted to Lutheran sources. But while it is undeniable that Parker did to some extent borrow from these documents, yet it is significant that he stopped short, and did not transfer to the Anglican formulary what has been aptly termed " the peculiar symbol of Lutheranism," ^ viz. the statement that a man is justified when he believes himself to be justified, — an expression which occurs in these or almost identical words no fewer than seven times in the Confession of Augsburg. The object of the Article is to state the mind of the Church of England on the subject of man's justification, which was regarded in some quarters as the " articulus stantis aut cadentis ecclesise," and which had unhappily given occasion for some of the worst excesses and extravagances of teaching which marked the course of the Eeformation. The subjects which call for consideration in order to a right understanding of the Article are these — 1. Justification, its meaning and relation to Sancti- fication. * Conf. Auguslaiia, art. iv. Sylloge Confessionum, p. 124. - Jb. art. V. ' Forbes On the Articles, p. 182. What makes the omission the more remarkable is the fact that the expression is actually contained in the fourth Article *'De Justificatione" agreed upon by the Conference of Anglicans and Lutherans in 1538. See Hardwick, p. 263. 26 •ii 390 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 2. The meritorious cause of Justification. 3. The instrument or formal cause of Justification. 4. The " Homily of Justification." H i ii I. Justification, its meaning and relation to Sanctifi^ation. The Article treats as convertible terms the expressions " to be accounted righteous " (Justus reputari) and " to be justified" G^stificari). We are accounted righteous ... by faith. . . . Wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine. Both phrases are founded on the language of Holy Scripture. The former is based on Gen. xv. 6 : " Abraham believed God, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness " (LXX. iiriarevae Tft) Sew KaX iXoyMr) avrm ek hiKaioavvrtv \ Vulg. Credidit Deo et repiitattim est illi ad pistitiam). From this passage the phrase is adopted by S. Paul in the Epistle to the Eomans, c. iv., and throughout this chapter the Greek XoyLaOfjvat ek BtKaiocrvvrjv is always rendered by the Vulgate " ad justitiam reputari" (see ver. 3, 5, 9, 11, 22, 23 ; and cf. Gal. iii. 6 ; S. James ii. 23). Justifimri, " to be justified," is also the invariable Latin equivalent for ZiKaiovaOai, — a verb which (in the active or passive) occurs nearly thirty times in S. Paul's Epistles, although used but rarely elsewhere in the New Testament. To discover the meaning of justification it is therefore necessary to examine and determine the sense in which hiKaiovv and SiKaiovaOai are used in Scripture. (a) In the Old Testament the active voice is used by the LXX. as the translation of the Hebrew P'^^^k^ in a judicial or " forensic " sense : to " do right to a person," i.e. to do justice to his cause, and so to acquit (see Ex. xxiii. 7 ; Deut. xxv. 1 ; 2 Sam. xv. 4 ; 1 Kings viii. 32; 2 Chr. vi. 23; Ps. Ixxxii. (Ixxxi.) 3; Is. « ^1 ARTICLE XI 391 V. 23, 1. 8, liii. 11 ; Jcr. iii. 11 ; Ezek. xvi. 51, 52); in other words, its meaning is not to " make a person righteous," but to "make him out righteous," or to "treat him as righteous." i But in itself the word indicates nothing as to whether he is or is not righteous. So in the passive, a person is said to be "justified " when he is regarded as righteous, held "not guilty," or acquitted (see Gen. xliv. 16; Job xxxiii. 32; Ps. Ii. (1.) 5, cxliii (cxHi.) 2 ; Is. xliii. 9, 26, xlv. 25). (h) In the New Testament outside the Epistles of S. Paul the word is not of frequent occurrence, but wherever it is found (eleven times in all 2) its meaning is just the same. " Wisdom is justified by her works " (S. Matt. XL 19; cf. S. Luke vil 35), i.e. not "made righteous," but vindimted, proved to be righteous. In S. Matt. xii. 37 it is opposed to "condemned," and thus is equivalent to " acquitted." " By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." The lawyer, wilUng to Justify himseK, says : " And who is my neighbour ? " where the meaning evidently is to vindicate himself, or make himself out to be righteous (S. Luke X. 29 ; cf. xvL 15). The pubUcan " went down to his house justified rather than " the Pharisee (S. Luke xviii. 14). These are representative instances, and » This is quite in accordance with the classical use of the word, and with what might be expected from the formation of the word. " How can diKaiovy possibly signify to make righteous'^ Verbs, indeed, of this ending from adjectives of physical meaning may have this use, e.g. TV(p\ovu, " to make blind." But when such woi-ds are derived from adjectives of irwral meaning, as d^tovu, b « With me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment ; yea, I judge not mme own self. For I know nothing against myself ; yet am I not hereby jvstifi^d: but He that judgeth me is the Lord" (1 Cor. iv. 3, 4). In 1 Tim. iil 16 the word is used of Christ, who was " manifested in the ^e^h, jitstified in the spirit." , , , From these examples the meaning of the word maybe ascertained without difficulty. It is regularly employed of the sentence or verdict pronounced on a man by Uod, and does not in itself tell us whether the person over whom the sentence is pronounced is really righteous or not. When a man is justified he is "accounted righteous, or regarded as righteous. ^r i " 9 This leads to the inquiry, wJien is a man justihed i I Rom. ii. 13, iii. 4, 20, 23, 24, 26 28, 30 iv. 2. 5 v. 1,J. vi. 7, viii. 30, 33 ; 1 Cor. iv. 4. vi. 11 ; Gal. ii. 16, 17, ui. 8, 11, 24, v. 4 , 1 Tim. ui. 16 ; Titus iii. 7. '<^ ARTICLE XI 393 And this raises the whole question of the relation of justification to sanctification. Sandi/ico and sanctificatio are in the Vulgate the regular equivalent of cuyid^ecu and dyvl^eiVy and of afytaa-fio^ and dfyiaxrvvrj^ words which are all directly connected with the idea of making Iwly, Thus sancti- fication is a gradual work, the being really made holy in ourselves by the working of God's Holy Spirit in us. To " grow in grace " is to be sanctified. The question, then, to be decided is not whether obedience and good works are necessary for salvation, not whether sanctifica- tion is required, but at what point in the Christian life is the act of justification to be placed ? in other words, the question is whether a man is first made righteous (sanctified) by God, and then declared to be so (justified) ; or whether God as it were anticipates what the man will become, and on his repentance accepts him, and for Christ's sake pronounces him " not guilty," the Divine verdict of acquittal running (as it has been said) in advance of the actual practice of righteousness. In the early Church the question was not raised, as the subject of man's justification never came into con- troversy. But after the rise of Pelagianism it acquired a fresh importance, and assumed a new prominence, owing to the Pelagian assertion of human merit apart from grace ; and in the writings of Augustine, while against Pelagianism the absolute need of grace, and the freeness of God's gift of salvation, is fully vindicated, the notion that justifico means to make righteous, and that justifica- tion is therefore an infusion of grace, can clearly be traced.^ This thought was further developed by the » In Dt Sjnritu et Litera, § 45, Augustine admits that justifico may mean "reckon just," but practically his whole theory is that of an infusion of the grace of faith by which men are made just." Sanday and Headlam On the Itomajis, p. 150, where these quotations are given ; De ■I 394 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XI 395 schoolmen in the Middle Ages, and justification was defined us not only forgiveness of sins, but also an infusion of grace ; and thus it was practically made to include sanctification,^ — a view which was finally endorsed by the Council of Trent. The subject was considered at the sixth session of the Council held in January 1547, and justification was decreed to be " not merely the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inner man, through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts, whereby man from unjust becomes just, from an enemy a friend, that so he may be an heir according to the hope of eternal life." It was also stated that (1) the final cause of justification is tlie glory of God and of Christ and eternal life; (2) the ejikient cause is the merciful God ; (3) the meritorious cause is the Lord Jesus Christ, Who merited justification for us by His Passion ; (4) the instncmental cause is the sacrament of baptism, "which is the sacrament of faith, without which justification never befell any man"; (5) the fornial cause is the righteousness (justitia) of God with which we are endowed by Him.^ Further, the Spiritu et LUera, § 18 : ** H.nec est justitia Dei qure in Testamento Veteri velata, in Novo revelatur : qu.T ideo justitia Dei dicitnr quod imjx^iendo eamjufUos/aeit.'* Enarratio, % 6 : "Credenti inquit in eum qui justificat impium, deputatur fides ejus ad justitiam si justificatur inipius ex impio Jit Justus." 1 See the Summa of Aquinas, 1™ 2^ Q. cxiii. 2. '- "Justificatio . . . non est sola peccatorum remissio, sed et sanctificatio et renovatio interioris hominis per voluntariam susceptioneni gratine et donorum. Unde homo ex injusto fit Justus, et ex inimico amicus, ut sit hferes secundum spem vitae seternie. Hujus justificationis causre sunt, finalis quidem, gloria Dei et Christi, ac vita ceterna : efficiens vero misericorda Deus, . . . meritoria autem dilectissimus unigenitus suus, Dominus noster Jesus Christus, qui cum essemus inimici proper nimiam charitatem, qua dilexit nos, sua sanctissima passione in ligno crucis nobis justificationem memit, et pro nobis Deo satlsfecit : instrumentalis item, sacramentum Baptismi, quod est sacramentum fidei, sine qua ulli nunquam contigit justificatio : demum unica foi-malis causa est justitia eleventh Canon passed at the same session anathematizes " any who shall say that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the righteousness of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and charity which is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghost and is inherent in them." ^ Thus according to the Roman view justification includes sanctification. On the other hand, as is well known, Luther and the Reformers generally insisted very strongly and even vehemently on the distinction between justification and sanctification, and on the forensic mean- ing to be given to the former. According to them, justification is the initial blessing, when God receives the repentant sinner, pardons, and accepts him. And on this point an examination of S. Paul's usage of the word makes it clear that they were right. The Apostle certainly does distinguish between justification and sanctification, and uses the former word, not for final salvation, nor for infused holiness, but, as the Reformers insisted, for the initial blessing, when God accepts a man and, pardoning him, or " not imputing his sins to him," at the outset, treats him as " not guilty." " All have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God ; being justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. iii. 23, 24 ; cf. iv. 5, where God is said to justify top aaefirj). To be justified, according to him, is to be pardoned and accepted ; to be taken into Dei, non qua Ipse Justus est, sed qua nos justos facit, qua videlicet ab eo donati, renovamur Spiritu mentis nostras, et non modo reputamur, sed vere justi nominamur, et sumus, justitiam in nobis recipientes." — Cone. Trid., Sess. VI. c. vii. * "Si quis dixerit homines justificari, vel sola imputatione justitise Christi, vel sola peccatorum remissione, exclusa gratia et charitate, quae in cordibus eorum per Spiritum Sanctum diff'undatur, atque illis inhaereat ; aut etiam gratiam qua justificamur esse tantum favorem Dei ; anathema sit." — lb. canon xi. II r ij n 396 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES II 1 I! M God's favour all sinful and unworthy as we are : and justification, according to this view, contains these two ideas, (1) pardon for sin, and (2) a right and title to eternal life founded upon promise ; but the idea of an infused righteousness is not contained in the term. "Being made free from sin" — there is justification — " ye have your fruit unto holiness " — there is sanctifica- tion, distinct from justification, but not independent of it. On the whole, then, it may be safely said that if we are to follow the teaching and language of S. Paul we must at least in thought distinguish between these two blessings, the one (justification) the work of the Son of God /or us, the other (sanctification) the work of the Holy Spirit within us ; and so distinguishing them, must hold that in the order of the Christian life justification precedes sanctification. In the words of S. Chrysostom, God " crowns us at the outset, making the contest light to us."^ And if it be said that this introduces into God's dealings with us an element of unreality, man being regarded as righteous when he is not really so, and Christ's merits being "imputed" to him by a sort of legal fiction, it may be replied that there is no more unreality or fiction necessarily involved than is implied in all pardon, since the forgiveness of any wrong implies the treating of the doer of it as "not guilty."* But * JTom. in Bom, xiii. * "There is something suflBciently startling in this. The Christian life is made to have its beginning in a fiction. No wonder that the fact is questioned, and that another sense is given to the words — that Si/caiowrtfat is taken to imply, not the attribution of righteousness in idea, but an imparting of actual righteousness. The facts of language, how- ever, are inexorable : we have seen that fftJcaioOi', Jtirotowrtfot have the first sense and not the second ; that they are rightly said to be " forensic " ; that they have reference to a judicial verdict, and to nothing beyond. To this conclusion we feel bound to adhere, even though it should follow that the state described is (if we are pressed) a fiction, that God is # ARTICLE XI 397 when so much has been said, and the two blessings have been thus distinguished in thought and assigned definite theological names, it must never be forgotten that in actual life they are inseparable. In the order of thought justification precedes sanctification. But together the blessings stand or fall. If a man is justified we may be sure that he is being sanctified, however imperfect his condition may be. If he is not being sanctified, he has fallen from his state of grace, and can no longer be regarded as "justified." II. The Tneritoricnis Cause of Justification, On this point the teaching of the Article is clear and distinct. The meritorious cause of our justification is the atoning work of Christ. We are accounted Pight- eoas before God only for the merits of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (propter meritum Domini, etc.), . . . and not for our own works or deservings (non propter opera et merita nostra). It will be observed that the same preposition, "for" (propter), is used in both clauses, whereas when faith is mentioned in connection with justification an entirely different preposition, "by" (per), is employed. It is regarded as dealing with men rather by the ideal standard of what they may be than by the actual standard of what they are. What this means is, that when a man makes a great change, such as that which the first Christiana made when they embraced Christianity, he is allowed to start on his career with a clean record ; his sin-stained past is not reckoned against him. The change is the great thing ; it is that at which God looks. As with the prodigal son in the parable, the breakdown of his pride and rebellion in the one cry, ** Father, I have sinned," is enough. The father does not wait to be gracious. He does not put him upon a long term of probation, but reinstates him at once in the full privilege of sonship. The justifying verdict is nothing more than the "best robe" and the " ring" and the " fatted calf" of the parable (Luke xv. 22 f.)." — Sanday and Headlam On the Homans, p. 36. :i 398 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES FK , important to dwell on this, because it shows that the real antithesis in the Article (as in Scripture) is not between faith and works, but between the merit and work of our Saviour and human merit and work, i.e. between receiving salvation as God's free gift, and earning it by our own efforts. That the meritorious cause of justification is the merit and atoning work of our Saviour, is recognised as fully and frankly by the Church of Kome as it is by the Church of England ; and indeed it is hard to see how it can be questioned theoretically by any except those who would deny altogether the need of the atonement. And yet there can be no doubt that p-actically the medieval system did tend to make men rely on their own merits as the cause of their justifi- cation,^ and led to the notion that they could earn it by what they did ; while in the opposite quarter there are traces of the same error among some of the Anabaptists.2 This error, it is to be hoped, has entirely passed away at the present day; and we may there- fore proceed at once to the next subject that demands consideration. f ITT. The Instrument or formal Cause of Justification, This the Article asserts to be faith. We are ^ So in the Article " Of Rites and Ceremonies," in the Ten Articles of 1536 after an enumeration of a number of "laudable customs, rites, and ceremonies not to be condemned and cast away, but to be used and continued," it was felt to be necessary to add the reminder, that "none of these ceremonies have power to remit sin, but only to stir and lift up our minds unto God, by whom only our sins are forgiven." — Formularies of Faith, p. 16. « "They [the Anabaptists] boste themselues to be ryghtuous and to please God, not purely and absolutely for Christes sake, but for theyr owne mortification of themselues, for theyr owne good workes and persecucion, if they suffre any." — Hermann's Consultation, fol. cxlii. (English translation of 1548), quoted in Hardwick, p. 99. ARTICLE XI 399 accounted righteous . • • by^ faith (per fidem). • . • Wherefore that we are justified by faith only (sola fide) is a most wholesome doctrine, and Yery full of comfort. There are several matters here which require elucida- tion — (a) The meaning of " faith." (b) The meaning of the expression " we are justified by faith only" (c) The reason why faith is the instrument of justifi- cation. (a) The meaning of ''faith" — There is no Hebrew word exactly answering to our term " faith." The verb signifying to believe, to trust, is TP^^!!, which the LXX. habitually render by 'jrurreveLv, from the important passage. Gen. xv. 6, onwards: "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness " (LXX. Kal eTriarevaev *Afipaa^ to) Geo) Kal ikoyiaOT) avr^ 6*9 ^iKaioavvTfv). This is one of the two great passages on which S. Paul bases his doctrine of justifica- tion by faith. But there is in Hebrew no substantive meaning faith as an active principle, i.e. trustfulness, or the frame of mind which relies upon another. The nearest approach is found in n^^DN, firmness or con- stancy, which is variously rendered by the LXX. dXrjOeia, irioTi^, or by an adjective, aXrjOivo^, iriaTOf;, d^coTnaTo^:. The word, however, is rather passive than active, signi- fying trustworthiness, or the frame of mind that can be relied on; although in Hab. ii. 4 (S. Paul's other great text) it seems to have a double or " transitional " W * "By" in old English is ordinarily equivalent to "through." Cf. Lightfoot Oil Revision, p. 119 : "Where in common language we now say *by' and 'through' [i.e. by means of) respectively, our translators, following the diction of their age, generally use ' of and ' by ' respectively ; *of' denoting the agent (1*^6), and 'by' the instrument or means (5id)." k r .^f 400 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES sense. " The just shall live by faith " (LXX. o Se hUam fiov €/e irldTem ^v See Bishop Lightfoot On Oalatians, p. 152 seq., "Excursus on the Words denoting Faith," from which the above is mainly taken ; and cf. Sanday and Headlam On the Romans, p. 31 seq, 2 '*The centre and mainspring of this higher fonn of faith is defined more exactly as ' faith in Jesus Christ,* Rom. iii. 22, 26. This is the crowning and characteristic sense with S. Paul ; and it is really this which he has in view wherever he ascribes to faith the decisive signifi- cance which he does ascribe to it, even though the object is not expressed (as in i. 17, iii. 27 tf., v. 1, 2). We have seen that it is not merely assent or adhesion, but mthusiastic adhesion, personal adhesion: the highest and most effective motive power of which human character is capable."— Sanday and Headlam, uhi supra. ARTICLE XI 401 We are accounted righteous ... by faith (per fidem). The expression is strictly Biblical, and is drawn from Kom. iii. 28-30: "We reckon that a man is justified by faith (irurrei, Vulg. per fickm) apart from the works of the law. ... He shall justify the circumcision by faith (eV irlarem) and the uncircumcision through faith " {Bih, rrj^ irlarem, Vulg. per fidem) ; cf. Gal. ii. 16. Thus the Article keeps close to the actual language of the Apostle, and assigns to faith no other position than that of an instrument. Luther unhappily was not always so careful, and actually used language which would imply that faith was the meritorious cause of justification; asserting — what Holy Scripture never gays — that we are justified on account of (propter) faith.^ In such language, it is perhaps needless to say, the Church of England has never followed him. But the Article is not content with assigning to faith the position of an instrument ; it speaks of it as if it were the soU instrument. "We are justified by faith only " (sola fide). This expression, it must be admitted, is not contained directly in Scripture. But that faith is (in some sense) the sole instrument may be fairly inferred from the passage quoted above from Rom. iii 28, where S. Paul speaks of men being "justified by faith apart from the works of the law" Compare also Rom. iv. 2-5, ix. 30 ; GaL ii. 16, iii. 5 seq. In these passages the Apostle does not merely speak of faith as instrumental in justification, but expressly excludes "works." On the other hand, S. James in his Epistle expressly includes "works," and denies that man is justified by " faith only " (e/c irLcnem tiovov, Vulg. ex fide tantum), c. ii 14-26: "What doth it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but have not works? can ^ See his Commeut. ou Gal. ii. 16, iii. 6. *l w 402 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XI 403 i I , that faith save him ? If a brother or a sister be naked, and in lack of daily food, and one of you say unto them, Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled ; and yet ye give them not the things needful to the body, what doth it profit ? Even so faith, if it have not works, is dead in itself. Yea, a man will say. Thou hast faith, and I have works ; show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith. Thou believest that God is one ; thou doest well : the devils also believe and shudder. But wilt thou know, vain man, that faith apart from works is barren ? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar ? Thou seest that faith wrought with his works, and by works was his faith made perfect ; and the scripture was fulfilled which saith. And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteous- ness : and he was called the friend of God. Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith. And in like manner, was not Kahab the harlot justified by works, in that she received the messengers, and sent them out another way ? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead." This passage, as far as words are concerned^ is certainly contrary to the teaching of S. Paul in the passages referred to above, especially Rom. iv., where the case of Abraham is considered, and his justification ascribed to faith and not works ; and compare Heb. xi. 17, 31, where the faith of Eahab as well as of Abraham is praised. But though the words are difierent, yet the teaching of the two Apostles is identical. Their reconciliation may be established by pointing out — 1. The different senses which they give to Triari^. — In S. James it is merely intellectual assent, an affair of the heady not of the heart The devils " believe " (iria-Tevovai). In S. Paul, on the contrary, it is Trto-rt? 8t' dyairi]^ €V€pyovfiivf), a " faith that worketh by love " (Gal. v. 6) ; and according to him, "with the heart man believeth (7naT€V€Tai,) unto righteousness" (Rom. x. 10). 2. The different senses which they give to epya. — In S. Paul's writings this word, standing without any quali- fying adjective, is always used in a depreciatory sense. When he would speak of works which are intrinsically good, he adds the qualifying adjective KaXd or dyaOd (see Rom. ii 7, xiii. 3; 2 Cor. ix. 8; Eph. iL 10, etc.). It is, however, of such good loorks that S. James is speaking, — works which are really included in that faith which is defined as one which " worJceth by love." 3. The different errors hefore the Apostles. — S. Paul, in contending against a self-righteous Pharisaism, which boasted of its " works," vehemently denies that such " works " can aid in man's justification. S. James, on the contrary, has before him the case of those who thought that a barren orthodoxy was sufficient, and looked for justification from the correctness of their creed. To them he therefore says that such a faith, apart from works, is dead. There is, then, no real contradiction between the teaching of the two Apostles ; and it is providential that both sides of the truth are thus stated in Scripture. The Epistle of S. James forms a valuable safeguard against the errors of the " Solifidians," who, resting on faith only (sola fides), denied altogether the need of good works ; while the teaching of S. Paul breaks down, once for all, all human claim to a reward.^ Returning now to the subject of faith as the instru- ment of justification, the question has to be asked : In * See, further, Lightfoot On the ChZaiiaiis, p. 162 ; Sanday and Headlam On the Romans, p. 102 seq. ; and Mayor On 8. James, p. Ixxxvii seq., and 204. 1*^ k ^^ k t I t 404 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES what sense is it the sole instrument of justification ? i.e. does it exclude good works, or the sacraments of the gospel ? With regard to the latter, if the description of justifi- cation given above is correct, and it includes (1) pardon of sin, and (2) a right and title to eternal life grounded on promise, then beyond all question it is granted in baptism: accordingly divines have frequently spoken of " first justification " as granted in it It would perhaps be better to say that the exclusive term " alone," when we say that we are justified by faith alone, is only meant to exclude any other instrument on man's part for receiving, and is not intended to exclude God's instru- ments for hestowiwj justification. Thus faith is as it were the hand, and the only hand, which man can stretch forth to receive the blessing ; while the sacraments of the gospel may be regarded as the channels through which God conveys the blessing to the faithful soul that is able to receive it With regard to good works the statement of the Article, that we are justified by faith only, is not meant in any way to exclude the necessity of good works, but only to shut them out /rom the office of justifying. That this is all that is intended is made perfectly clear by the statements of the Homily, to which the Article expressly refers us, as may be seen from the extracts quoted below in the next section. Repentance and obedience are necessary conditions or qualifications, but they are not the instruments for obtaining justification. Similarly, for a beneficial reception of the Holy Eucharist, charity is a necessary qualification ; but " the means whereby the Body of Christ is received is faith." (c) The reason why faith is the instrument of justifi- cation. — It may be said without irreverence that the reason why, in God's method of salvation, faith is selected ARTICLE XI 405 for this office is not because there is any special virtue in it, or because it is the greatest of all Christian graces, for charity is greater (1 Cor. xiii. 2, 13), but because faith is peculiarly fit for this particular office, since there is in it that element of self-surrender, of trust, confidence, and reliance on another, which necessarily excludes all reliance on self and our own merits. Had we been justified by something else, as love, there would have been the possibility of reliance on self, and the notion of earning salvation would not have been in the same way shut out Further, it is faith which enables us to realise the unseen. It is "the assurance of things hoped for, the proving of things not seen " (Heb. xi. 1) ; and thus it makes things distant become near, and admits them to close embraces. Before passing on to the next section, it may be well to call attention to the fact that the Article maintains a wise silence on more than one subject connected with the doctrine of justification by faith, which was keenly disputed between the Romans and Lutherans in the sixteenth century. It has already been mentioned that the Article, seemingly of set purpose, ignores the Lutheran statement (condemned by the Council of Trent ^) that a man is justified if he believes himself to be justified; but besides this there are two important matters on which the Article is markedly silent, (1) the question of the presence or absence of charity in justifying faith, and (2) the theory of an "imputed" righteousness. The first of these subjects was keenly debated at the time of the Reformation. The school- * '• If anyone shall say that a man is absolved from his sins and justified because he assuredly believes himself to be absolved and justified ; or that no one is truly justified save he who believes himself to be justified ; and that by this faith alone absolution and justification are perfected : let him be anathema." — Sess. VI. canon xiv. a; '1 T'1 I :( ft 406 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES men in their teaching on justification had drawn a distinction between « fides informis," a bare faith, and •' fides formate," a faith informed by charity,» and had maintained that the latter alone is instrumental m iustifying In this they are naturally foUowed by the Tridentine divines.* Luther, on the other hand, while accepting the distinction thus drawn, insisted that it is " fides informis " which justifies, and argues that to say the contrary is to maintain justification by works.* The whole question is wisely ignored in the Article, though the Homily says pointedly that love is not excluded, but is " joined with faith in every man that is justified." . ., > The second subject mentioned above, the theory of an « imputed " righteousness, is developed by Luther in his commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians. According to it the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, and our sins are imputed to Him. It is in connection with this that the notion of a "legal fiction" comes mto most prominence, and it is difficult to free the theory as it is maintained by Protestant divines from the charge of unreaUty. But as (like the points just noticed) there is not a word concerning it in our own Article, there is no need to consider the subject further here. • See Aqmn«. Summa, III. Q. xlix. art. 1: " Fides autem. per quam a peccato mandator, non est fides informis, qua> potest esse etiam cum ^to. sed est fides formata per charitatem, ut sic pass.s Chnst. nob.. !pplicatur. non solum quantum ad intellectum, jed f^^^J^^f'T^ eff«>tum. Et per banc etiam modum peccata dunittuntur et Tirtate pa«.ionis Cbristi." Cf. 1- 2» Q. «iii. art 4; and see Neander. Church HUtory, vol. yiU. pp. 220, 221, and Moehler, SyvMttm, p. 118. ' Sess. VI. canon xi. » Oommentary an Oalatians, li. 17. I ARTICLE XI 407 IV. T/ie Homily of Justijication, It only remains fco say a word or two on the Homily of Justification, to which the Article refers us for fuller treatment of the subject. On turning to the Books of the Homilies, however, we find that there exists no homily with this title ! That which is evidently referred to is the " Homily of Salvation," contained in the first book ; together with which should be read the two following ones " Of the True and lively Faith " and "Of Good Works." In reading these the student is especially recommended to notice the emphatic way in which the writer insists (1) that faith alone has the office of justifying, (2) that good works are necessary, and (3) that faith has no merit any more than any other graces or good works. A few quotations shall be added by way of specimens. " Faith doth not shut out repentance, hope, love, dread, and the fear of God, to be joined with faith in every man that is justified ; but it shutteth them out from the office of justifying. So that, although they be all present together in him that is justified, yet they justify not all together. Nor that faith also doth not shut out the justice of our good works, necessarily to be done afterward of duty towards God (for we are most bounded to serve God in doing good deeds commanded by him in his holy Scripture all the days of our life) ; but it excludeth them so that we may not do them to this intent, to be made good by doing of them. For all the good works that we can do be imperfect, and there- fore not able to deserve our justification; but our justification doth come freely, by the mere mercy of God ; and of so great and free mercy that, whereas all the world was not able of theirselves to pay any part towards their ransom, it pleased our heavenly Father, of / 3 I 408 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES his infinite mercy, without any our desert or deserving, to prepare for us the most precious jewels of Christ's body and blood, whereby our ransom might be fully paid, the law fulfilled, and his justice fully satisfied." Again : " This sentence, that we be justified by faith only is not so meant of them [namely, the ancient writers, Greek and Latin] that the said justifying faith is alone in man, without true repentance, hope, chanty, dread, and fear of God, at any time or season. Nor when they say that we be justified freely, they mean not that we should or might afterward be idle, and that nothing should be required on our parts afterward; neither they mean not so to be justified without our (Tood works that we should do no good works at all, hke as shall be more expressed at large hereafter. But this saying, that we be justified by faith only, freely, and without works, is spoken for to take away clearly all merit of our works, as being unable to deserve our justification at God's hands ; and thereby most plainly to express the weakness of man and the goodness of God the imperfectness of our own works, and the most abundant grace of our Saviour Christ; and thereby wholly for to ascribe the merit and deserving of our justification unto Christ only and his most precious bloodshedding." And once more : " The true understanding of this doctrme— We be justified freely by faith without works, or that we be justified by faith in Christ only— is not that this our own act, to believe in Christ, or this our faith in Christ, which is within us, doth justify us and deserve our justification unto us; for that were to count ourselves to be justified by some act or virtue that is within ourselves. But the true understanding and meaning thereof is, that, although we hear God's word and believe it, although we have faith, hope, t ARTICLE XI 409 charity, repentance, dread, and fear of God within us, and do never so many good works thereunto, yet we must renounce the merit of all our said virtues of faith, hope, charity, and all our other virtues and good deeds, which we either have done, shall do, or can do, as things that be far too weak and insufficient and imperfect to deserve remission of our sins and our justification ; and therefore we must trust only in God's mercy, and in that sacrifice which our High Priest and Saviour Christ Jesus, the Son of God, once offered for us upon the cross, to obtain thereby God's grace, and remission, as well of our original sin in baptism as of all actual sin committed by us after our baptism if we truly repent and turn unfeignedly to him again. So that, as S. John Baptist, although he were never so virtuous and godly a man, yet in this matter of forgiving of sin he did put the people from him, and appointed them unto Christ, saying thus unto them, Behold, yonder is the Larrvb of God which takcth away the sins of the world ; even so, as great and as godly a virtue the lively faith is, yet it putteth us from itself, and remitteth or appointeth us unto Christ, for to have only by him remission of our sins or justification. So that our faith in Christ, as it were, saith unto us thus : It is not I that take away your sins, but it is Christ only ; and to him only I send you for that purpose, forsaking therein all your good virtues, words, thoughts, and works, and only putting your trust in Christ." / \' 1 ARTICLE XII II. I De Bonis Operibtts. Bona opera quae sunt fructus fidei et jostiflcatos seqmintur, quanquam peccata nostra expiare et divini judiciiseveritatem ferrenon possunt, Deo tamen grata sunt et accepta in Christo, atque ex vera et viva fide necessario profluunt, ut plane ex illis, eeque fides viva cognosci possit, atque arbor ex fructu indicari. CfGood Works, Albeit that good works, which are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity of God's judgment; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith, in so much that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit. There is nothing corresponding to this Article in the series of 1553. It is one of the four new Articles added by Parker at the revision in the early years of Elizabeth, a portion of the first clause being taken by him (like others of his addition) from the Confession of Wiirtemberg,^ while the phrase " foUow after justification " (jwstifi- catos sequuntur) is due to S. Augustine, who uses it in his treatise, De fde et operibusy c. xiv. The object of the Article is obviously to state the mind of the Church of England on the position of "good works," with reference, perhaps, to the Roman teaching on the one hand, and the exaggerations of Luther and of some who professed to be his followers on the other. *"Non est autem sentiendum quod iis bonis operibus, qua per nos facimus, in judicio Dei ubi agitur de expiatione peccatorum et placationc divinse irae ac merito Aternse salutis confitendum est. Omnia enim bona opera quae nos facimus sunt imperfecta, 7\ec possunt aevtritcUem divini judici%ferre"—D€. bonis operibus. See Hardwick, p. 126. 410 »|. ARTICLE XII 411 (a) The Tridentine statements occur in the de- crees and canons of the sixth session (held in January 1647). They follow naturally from the view of justifica- tion held by the Roman Church, and are very emphatic in their assertion of the " merit " of good works ; e.g, " We must needs believe that to the justified nothing further is wanting, but that they may be accounted to have, by those very works which have been done in God, fully satisfied the Divine law according to the state of this life, and truly to have merited eternal life, to be obtained also in its due time if they shall have departed in grace." ^ Again : ** If anyone shall say that the good works of a man that is justified are in such wise the gift of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified, or that the said justified, by the good works which are performed by him through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life, if so be, however, that he depart in grace, and, moreover, an increase of glory : let him be anathema."* (6) On the other hand, Luther used strong expressions on the sinful character of all man's efforts. " Even the best work is a venial sin " ; and yet more strongly, ** Omne opus justi damnabile est et peccatum mortale, si judicio * " Nihil ipsis justificatis amplius deesse credendum est, quo minus plene illis quidem operibus qu« in Deo sunt facta, divin» legi pro hujus vitce statu satisfecisse, et vitam setemam suo etiam tempore, si tamen in gratia decesserint, consequendam, vere promeruissecenseantur." — Cone. Trident, Sessio Sexta, c. xvi. • •* Si quis dixerit hominis justificati bona opera ita esse dona Deo ut non sint etiam bona ipsius justificati merita; aut ipsum justificatum bonis operibus quae ab eo per Dei gratiam et Jesu Christi meritum, cujus vivum membrum est, fiunt, non vere mereri augmentum gratia, vitam setemam, et ipsius vitse eetemse, si tamen in gratia decesserit, consecu- tionem, atque etiam gloriae augmentum : anathema sit." — lb. canon xxxii. / I In n 11 ii 412 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Dei judicetur."^ No wonder, then, that among his followers a depreciation of the need of good works of any kind was prevalent, and that Antinomianism and Solifidianism were widely spread. It is probable that it was even more in order to protect the Church against these errors than to protest against the Koman teaching that the Article was inserted,^ though it is so worded as to guard against false views on either side. The main statements of the Article may be summed up as follows : — 1. Good works are the fruits and result of faith, and the evidence of it. 2. They " follow after justification." 3. They have no merit in themselves, and cannot endure the severity of God's judgment. 4. Yet they are acceptable to God in Christ. The Koman and Lutheran divines looked at good works from opposite sides, and were consequently led into exaggerated statements in different directions. The Anglican Article by its balanced statements endeavours to do justice to both sides of the whole truth on the subject of which it treats, and seems to recognise that in every " good work " there are two factors, a human and a Divine. In so far as the doer of the work is following the leadings of grace, it is good ; in so far as he is not, there is an element of sinfulness in the work. The main points laid down in the Article seem to follow so natur- ^ Assert, omn. art. Opera^ torn. ii. fol. 3256, quoted in Moehler's Symbolism^ p. 158. The Council of Trent met these assertions by the twenty-fifth canon of the Sixth Session: "Si quis in quolibet bono opere justum saltern venialiter peccare dixerit, aut quod intolerabilius est, mortaliter, atque ideo pcenas seternas mereri, tantumque ob id non damnari, quia Deus ea opera non imputet ad damnationen : anathema sit." 2 Parker \vrites in 1559, "They say that the realm is full of Anabaptists, Arians, Libertines, Freewill men," etc. Parker's Correspondence (Parker Society), p. 61. ARTICLE XII 413 ally from the teaching of Article XI. on justification by faith, that they require but little explanation and no formal Scriptural proof. It may, however, be well to point out that in the statement that gOOd WOrks • • • foUow after jastiflcation, the " good works " of which this Article is speaking are clearly external works, or that actual obedience which produces a course of actions. Repentance, which from one point of view might certainly be termed a " good work," cannot possibly be referred to, because it precedes and does not " follow after justi- fication."^ The phrase, as we have seen, is due to S. Augustine, and, as Waterland says, by it Augustine " meant no more than that men must be incorporated in Christ, must be Christians, and good Christians (for such only are justified), before they could practise Christian works or righteousness, strictly so called : for such works only have an eminent right and title to the name of good works, as they only are salutary within the covenant, and have a claim upon the promise. Works before justification, i.e. before salutary baptism, are not, in his account, within the promise." ^ The expression in the Article must be understood in the same way, and not pressed so as to make it imply that nothing good can * " Bona opera " had apparently come to have almost a technical sense for definite Christian works. Gardiner in his Declaration (fol. xxxviii.) distinguishes carefully between " bona opera " which follow after justifica- tion, and " opera poenitentise " which precede it. See Hardwick, p. 401 ; and the Tridentine decrees seem carefully to avoid speaking of "good works " as done before justification, while anathematising the view that "a// works which are done before justification are tnily sins." — Sess. VI. canon vii. ' Summary View of tJu Doclri'iu of Justification, Works, vol. vi. p. 21 ; cf. Bp. Bull, Harmony of Justification, p. 55. " Augustine is certainly not to be understood of every work, but of a long continuance of works, so that his meaning may be this : the works which precede justification are less and fewer than those which follow it. Without some explanation of this kind, that maxim, so often used, will with difficulty be freed from an evident falsehood." \ I tl 414 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES possibly precede justification, — a position which, as will be shown under the following article, could not be established from Scripture, and one to which the Church of England is certainly not committed. That, then, to which this Article is intended to bind us is this, namely, that, as justification comes at the beginning of the Christian life, " good works " properly so called must be subsequent to it, and that they are the natural and necessary outcome of that faith by which a man is justified. Waterland's conclusion on the whole subject which has been considered in these two Articles (XI. and XII.) is worth quoting : " Take we due care so to maintain the doctrine of faith as not to exclude the necessity of good works, and so to maintain good works as not to exclude the necessity of Christ's atonement, or the free grace of God. Take we care to perform all evangelical duties to the utmost of our power, aided by God's Spirit ; and when we have so done, say that we are unprofitable servants, having no strict claim to a reward, but yet looking for one and accepting it as a favour, not challenging it as due in any right of our own: due only upon free promise, and that promise made, not in consideration of any deserts of ours, but in and through the alone merits, active and passive, of Jesus Christ our Lord."^ ^Summary VieWf etc., p. 38. i|. i ARTICLE XIII Opera ante Jusiijicationem, Opera qu» fiunt ante gratiam Christi, et Spiritus ejus afflatum, cum ex fide Jesu Christi non pro- deant, minime Deo grata sunt: neque gratiam (ut multi vocant) de congruo merentur: Imo cum non sint facta ut Deus ilia fieri voluit et pr^ecepit, peccati rationem habere non dubitamus. Of IVorks be/ore Justification, Works done before the grace of Christ, and the inspiration of His Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesu Christ, neither do they make men meet to receive grace, or (as the school authors say) deserve grace of congruity : yea, rather, for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but that they have the nature of sin. This Article has remained unchanged since the publica- tion of the Edwardian Series in 1553. There is nothing corresponding to it in the Augsburg Confession, nor has its language been traced to any earlier source. Its object is evidently to condemn the scholastic theory of con- gruous merit. The subjects which require consideration in connection with it are these — 1. The title as compared with the Article itself. 2. The scholastic theory of congruous merit. 3. The teaching of the Article upon the subject. I. Tlie Title as compared with the Article itself. It will be noticed that whereas the title speaks of works before jastiflcation, in the body of the Article 415 \ 416 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIII 417 <4 ( i VmI ^< the phrase is not repeated, but a different one takes its place. Works done before the grace of Christ and the inspiration of His Spirit. The question then at once arises, Are these two expressions strictly convertible terms? The answer to this must depend on the reply given to another question, Is grace ever given before justification ? If 7iot, the two expressions, "works before justification," and "works before grace," may be regarded as convertible ; but if it should appear that grace is sometimes given before justification, then it will be evident that the title of the Article is too wide, and must be limited by the expression actually used in the Article itself. The question as to the relation of grace to justification is one which must be decided strictly by the testimony of Holy Scripture, and it is believed that there is ample evidence to establish the fact that grace may be given before justification. As Bishop Bull says : " The truth is that no work really good can pre- cede the grace of God, since without that grace it cannot be performed. But good works may precede justifica- tion, and actually do precede it ; for grace is given before justification, that we may perform those things by which we arrive at justification." ^ For proof of this it is sufficient to refer to two representative instances : (a) On the day of Pentecost, after the address of the Apostle Peter to the multitude, we read, " They were pricked in their heart {Karevvyrjaav rrjv KapBlav), and said unto Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do "(Acts ii. 37)? Here, without doubt, was the grace of God at work. The grace of comjninctimi was granted ; but the reply of S. Peter shows equally clearly that even so those who had thus received grace were not yet justified. " Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your * Harmony of Justification^ p. 162. sins ; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (6) Again, it will scarcely be doubted that S. Paul received grace at the moment of his conversion. " Be- hold, he prayeth," was the message which came to Ananias (Acts ix. 11), and that prayer can only have been offered up and rendered acceptable by the action of the Holy Spirit upon his heart. But, strictly speaking, he was not justified for three days after his " conversion "; for when Ananias came to him his words were these, " And now, why tarriest thou ? Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins" (Acts xxii. 16). There is, then, a real discrepancy between the title of this Thirteenth Article and the substance of it, and so much was practically confessed by the Westminster Assembly of Divines, who suggested as an emendation that the Article itself should run as follows: "Works done before justification hy Christ and regeneraiion by His Spirit, are not pleasing unto God," etc.^ This emenda- tion, of course, brings the Article into conformity with the title, but at the expense of truth ; and, as things actually are, there can be no question that the title must be interpreted by the Article, which speaks not of all, but only of soTne " works before justification," viz. those which precede the action of God's grace in the heart of man. The origin of the discrepancy which thus exists has been traced by Archdeacon Hardwick to an earlier draft of the Article. As was mentioned in the Introduction,^ there still exists in the Kecord Office a MS. copy of the Articles, signed by the six royal chaplains, to whom they were submitted before their final revision and publication, and * See Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. iii. p. 561. The Assembly also suggested a change in the closing words of the Article, substituting ''thty are sinful" for the far milder phrase, "We doubt not that they have the nature of sin." 2 See vol. i. p. 13. \' I 418 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES in this we find that in the Article itself we have the expression : " Opera quae fiunt ante justificationem cum ex fide Jesu Christi non prodeant," etc.^ It is evident that Cranmer and those working with him afterwards felt that this was inaccurate, and therefore modified the wording of the Article before publication, introducing the phrase which we now read in it, " Works before the grace of Christ," etc., although the old title was still allowed to remain, inexact though it was. II. The Scholastic Theory of Congruous Merit, The object of the Article, as has been already stated, is to repudiate the erroneous teaching of some of the school-authors ^ on the subject of grace. The school- authors, or schoolmen here referred to, are the divines of the centuries immediately preceding the Reformation : S. Bernard (1115) being generally reckoned as the "last of the Fathers," and S. Anselm (1109) or Peter Lombard, the "Master of the Sentences" (1164), the first of the schoolmen.' We are here concerned, how- * See Hardwick, p. 281. 2 The Latin of the Article has merely *' ut muUi vocant." The regular name for the schoolmen in Latin is "scholastici" (cf. Art. XXIIL of 1553, doctrina Soholasticorum), a name which tells us nothing about the men themselves, except that they belonged to the "schools," either as teachers or learners. ' The change of name is significant. The Fathers, "Patres,'* as Arch- bishop Trench points out, were productive, bringing out of their treasure things new and old. The schoolmen, on the contrary, were content simply to vindicate and establish the old. "The more illustrious teachers of earlier periods of the Church had found each his own s])ecial and peculiar work to perform, his own position to make good. Occupied with this, they had not found the inclination or the leisure for a deliberate oversight of the whole field of theology; they had not mapped it out as it demanded to be mapped out. It was to this that the schoolmen addressed themselves — to the organising after a true scientific method the rude undigested mass which lay before ARTICLE XIII 419 ever, not with the men, nor with the scholastic system as a whole, but simply with one particular portion of it, namely, its teaching on grace. In reasoning on this subject, some among the schoolmen had come to teach a doctrine which is, to say the least, seriously tainted with semi-Pelagianism ; for they maintained that man might be entitled to receive initial grace as the reward of actions done in his own strength without the aid of God's Holy Spirit. Starting from the view that the Fall only involved the loss of the donum supematurcde^ and left man with moral and religious faculties belonging to him by nature, they taught that the exercise of these faculties was the natural transition to grace, and that a good use of them was the medium of grace, or, in their phraseology, merited it of congruity (de congruo). God, they said, was not bound to reward such actions, but it was congruous or fitting that He should. But after grace was received, the work done in dependence on the aid of the Holy Spirit was really good, and this God was bound to reward, crowning His own gifts in man. Such actions deserved grace de condigno, and for them God was a debtor. The stock instance to which they made their appeal was the case of Cornelius (Acts x.), whose " prayers and alms came up for a memorial before God," and drew down God's grace upon him. The true explana- tion of such a case as this will be given in the next section. For the present, it is sufficient to notice that the theory, as popularly represented, opens the door to Pelagianism, and makes (at least in some cases) the beginning of man's them." Thus their work was to adjust the relations of the various parts of theological learning, and to draw up in "Sums of Theology " the com- plete doctrine of the Church to which they professed implicit obedience. And further, they set themselves to "justify to the reason that which had first been received by faith," explaining the " how " and the " why" of the Church's teaching, and vindicating the rational character of supernatural truth. See Trench's Medieval Church History^ Lect. xiv. (J f .1 i tj I f/> 1^ 420 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES salvation his own act. Moreover, it brought back into the Church the conception of earning a reward, against which S. Paul's whole teaching on grace was directed.^ The scholastic opinions and distinctions, however, on this subject have never been formally adopted by the Church of Rome. The idea of congruous merit was rightly con- demned as bordering on Pelagianism by some of the Tridentine divines, and the decrees of the Council avoided altogether the phrases ineritum de congruo and de condigno ; and while, on the one hand, they guarded against Pelagianism by anathematising anyone who should say " that without the preventing inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and His help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent, as he ought, so that the grace of justification may be conferred upon him," * on the other hand they condemned the assertion that " all works done before justification, in what manner soever they be done, are truly sins, or deserve the hatred of God." ' III. The Teaching of the Article upon the Suhfect. In considering what the teaching of the Article really is, it is important to remember the exact phrase to which attention has been previously drawn, "Works done before the grace of Christ and the inspiration of His Spirit," and also to bear in mind the fact already ^ The illustration commonly given to explain the scholastic distinction brings this out very clearly. A servant, it is said, deserves his wages de condigno : he may deserve support in sickness or old age de congruo. 2 "Si quis dixerit, sine pneveniente Spiritus Sancti inspiratione, atque ejus adjntorio, hominem credere, sperare, diligere, aut pcenitere posse, sicut oportet, ut ei jusiificationis gratia conferatur : anathema sit." — Cone. Trid. Sess. VI. canon iii. ^ " Si quis dixerit opera omnia quae ante justificationem fiunt, qua- cumque ratione facta sint, vere esse peccata, vel odium Dei mereri, aut quanto vehementius quis nititur se disponere ad gratiam, tanto cum gravius peccare : anathema sit." — Canon vii. k . > 4- >) ARTICLE XIII 421 established, that grace may be and sometimes is given before justification. When due weight is given to these two considerations, it will be seen that there is reaUy nothing in the Article which in any way depreciates the good works of those who, born in an inferior system, make such use of the opportunities granted to them as to draw down further blessings upon them. Article X. has asserted that " the condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to faith and calHng upon God." The Article before us supplements this by maintaining that works done before the grace of Christ, and the inspiration of His Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ, neither do they make men meet to receiYe grace, or . . . deserve grace of congruity : yea rather, for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but that they have the nature of sin. What it is intended to deny in each case is the semi- Pelagian notion, revived by some of the schoolmen, that in certain cases the initiative in the work of salvation rests with man. But we are not called upon by sub- scribing these Articles either to deny that God looks with favour upon the good deeds of men who are outside His covenant, or to maintain that the virtues of the heathen are really sins. All we deny is that they "deserve grace of congruity " ; for if grace be a supernatural gift freely bestowed by God on men in order that they may attain eternal life, then certainly grace is found working outside the Christian covenant, and influencing men before they are (in theological language) " justified." ^ Wherever, then, a work that is really good can be found • "They who acknowledge no grace of God, save that one only which is infused in justification, or who contend that at least that one goes before 28 : I' I ^ 422 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES done by men trained in any system, it is to be ascribed to the action of God's grace, and not to the man's own unaided efforts.^ Thus in the case of Cornelius, to which the upholders of the doctrine of congruous merit made their appeal, we may fearlessly assert that his " prayers and alms" were "pleasant and acceptable to God" (grata Deo), for so much is involved in the statement that they " came up for a memorial before God " (Acts X. 4). But we deny that they were due to " his own natural strength." We deny also that they " deserved all others, greatly err ; since they cannot deny that faith at least precedes justification in nature, which faith we certainly have not from ourselves, but from the preventing gi-ace of Christ. More rightly, therefore, do other Piotestants, who arc more sound and moderate, willingly concede that various disposing and preparing acts, produced in us through the Holy Ghost assisting, and not by the sole X)Owers of our freewill, are required before justification, though most of them deny to these acts any power of justifying."— Bp. W. Forbes, Comiderationes Modesto;, vol. i. p. 25. 1 Hard wick {Articles, p. 402) quotes in illustration of this the following from Bishop Woolton's Christian Manual, p. 43 (Ed. Parker Society); •' Albeit the works of heathen men are not to be compared with the good works of faithful men cngraflFed in the Church of Christ ; yet for many causes, and principally for that without all controversy, all good gifts and endowments even in the paynims, are God's good gifts, they have the title and name of good works in some respects given unto them." Cf. The Life and Letters of F. J. A. Hort, vol. ii. p. 337 : " The principle underlying Article XIII. seems to mc to be this, that there are not two totally different modes of access to God for men, faith for Christians, meritorious performance for non- Christians. There is but one mode of access, faith ; and but one perfect, and, as it were, normal faith, that which rests on the revelation in the i>erson of Jesus Christ But faith itself, not being an intellectual assent to proiK)sitious, but an attitude of heart and mind, is present in a more or less rudimentary state in evei7 upward effort and aspiration of men. Doubtless the faith of non- Christians (and much of the faith of Christians for that matter) is not in the strict sense "faith in Jesus Christ"; and therefore I wish the Article were otherwise worded. But such faith, when ripened, grows into the faith of Jesus Christ ; as also it finds its rational justification in the revelation made through Him. Practically the principle of the Article teaches us to regard all the good there is in the world as what one may call imperfect Christianity, not as something essentially different, requir- ing, so to speak, to be dealt with by God in a wholly different manner." ARTICLE XIII 423 grace of congruity," for we maintain that they were actually done by the aid of Divine grace, and that thus, although they were done " before justification," they can- not truly be described as " works done before the grace of Christ and the inspiration of His Spirit"; for, as Augustine says, "Whatever of good works Cornelius performed as well before he believed in Christ as when he believed, and after he had believed, are all to he ascribed to God." ^ ^ De Pr(P(lf.Ht. SavHorvm, c. vii. ' \ I \ i «\ ,1 I ARTICLE XIV 425 AKTICLE XIV De Operihus Supererogatimiis. Opera quae supererogationia ap- pellant, non possunt sine arrogantia et inipietate praedicari. Nam illis declarant homines non tantum se Deo rcddere quae tenentur, sed plus in ejus gratiam facere quam de- berent: cum aperte Christus dicat: Cum feceritis omnia qujecunque pi*aecepta sunt vobis, dicite : Servi inutiles sumus. Of IVorks of Supererogation, Voluntary works besides, over and above God's commandments, which they call works of superero- gation, cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety. For by them men do declare that they do not only render unto God as much as they are bound to do, but that they do more for His sake than of bounden duty is required : whereas Christ saith plainly, When ye have done all that are commanded to you, say, We be unprofitable ser- vants. Tins Article dates from 1553, the only change made m it in Elizabeth's reign being the substitution of " impiety " for " iniquity," as more accurately represent- ing the Latin " impietate." ^ Its object is, of course, to condemn the Romish teach- ing on " works of supererogation." The same teaching is also condemned in the Reformatio Legum Ecdesiasti' carum, in a passage which admirably illustrates the article: "Tum et illorum arrogantia comprimenda est, et authoritate legum domanda, qui supererogationis opera qusedam importaverunt, quibus existimant non solum cumulate Dei legibus, et explete satisfieri, sed aliquid etiam in illis amplius superesse quam Dei mandata Mn 1553 and 1563 the title was "Opera Supererogationis." The change to its present form was made in 1571. 424 postulent, unde et sibi mereri et aliis merita applicari possint." ^ The subjects which requiie consideration in explana- tion of the Article are these — 1. The name " works of supererogation." 2. The history of the growth of the system of indulgences. 3. The theological defence offered for them, involving works of supererogation, and the teaching of Scripture on the subject. I. The Nmne " Works of Supcrerogatio7i" The word supererogation comes directly from the Latin. Starting with the simple verb "rogare," we note that in classical writers it is used, sometimes with " legem " or " populum " after it, sometimes absolutely, in a technical sense, meaning " to ask the people about a law," and so simply to " propose a bill," or " introduce a law." Hence the compound verb "erogare" was used in connection with a money bill, and came to mean " to pay out money from the public treasury, after asking the consent of the people," and so more generally, beyond the sphere of public law, to " expend " or " dis- burse money." ^ From this the double compound " super- erogare " was formed with the meaning, to " pay over and above," equivalent to the Greek 'rrpoaZairavav, As such its earliest occurrence is in the Latin versions of the New Testament, where it appears in S. Luke x. 35 in the parable of the Good Samaritan, " Whatsoever thou spendest more " : Qiiodcunqiie supererogaveris. This rendering was current before the days of S. Jerome, ^ De Hatres. c. 8 : " De perfectione justiEcatorum, et de operibus super- erogationis." - Thus in the Latin of Codex Bezie " erogasset " stands for davavrjcrdyros in S. Luke xv. 14. ii< t 426 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIV 427 1'- fM L^l' 'k being found in the writings of S. Ambrose,^ as well as in some MSS. of the " Old Latin " ; ^ but it was its adop- tion in the Vulgate that made it the common property of Western Christendom.^ From it in later times the substantive " supererogatio " was formed, and the phrase " opera supererogationis " was adopted by ecclesiastical writers as the technical name for the "excess of merit" attributed to the saints, and for what the Article calls Yoluntary works besides, over and above God's commandments, in this sense it was used not infrequently by writers of the thirteenth century, such as Alexander of Hales, Albertus Magnus, and Thomas Aquinas; but until this period it is doubtful whether the phrase is ever found, or whether the verb occurs except in direct connection with S. Luke X. 35. IL The History of the Growth of the System of Indulgences. It was the open sale of indulgences, which was closely connected with the doctrine of works of supererogation, that first roused the indignation of Luther, and led to the revolt from the Papacy. But the doctrine and the practice only grew up very gradually, step by step, with no perception on the part of anyone of what the ulti- mate outcome of it all would be. The starting-point, in tracing out its history, may be found in very early days, * S. Ambrose, Horn. vii. in Lueavi. - Sabatier gives it as found in CodJ. Veiva. and BrLc. Vod. Ve.rcclleiiaiH has "amplius erogaveiis," whicli is the rendering found iu Augustine, Eaarr. in Ps. cxxv. 15, although in Qiuest. Ecangel. II. xix. he has siij^er- erogare. 5 The " Rhemish New Testament" (1st ed. 1582) attempted to Anglicise the verb, and rendered S. Luke x. 35 : *• Whatsoever thou dost superero- gate"; but it was found impossible to naturalise the clumsy Latinisni, and it was withdrawn in the Douay version (1609), which is content with the natural renend over and above." in the regard for (1) martyrdom, and (2) virginity, felt by the primitive Church. 1. It was only natural that the memory of those who had laid down their lives for the faith of Christ should be held in the greatest honour, and that their intercessions should be regarded as especially efficacious, and should be eagerly sought after. And as there were many " Confessors " who had suffered mutilation or ban- ishment for the same cause, without being called upon to seal their testimony with their lives, it was equally natural that the same feelings of regard and admiration should be extended to them also. From this sprang, during the persecution of Decius, what we can only call the first form of indulgences. During this persecution, which raged so fiercely at Carthage in the middle of the third century, while there were many noble instances of men confessing their faith bravely, and enduring whatever was inflicted upon them rather than deny their Master, yet there were also many cases of grievous apostasy. Some Christians under the stress of persecution went so far as to deny Christ altogether, and to sacrifice to the gods of the heathen (sacrificati) ; others offered incense (thurificati) \ others obtained tickets {lihelli)^ declaring that they had thus cleared themselves from the crime of Christianity (libellatici). With these different cases the Church was called upon to deal; and under the wise guidance of S. Cyprian she determined that the peace of the Church might be granted to those who through weakness had lapsed, but that a time of peni- tential discipline must first be passed by them to test and prove their sorrow. Some, however, of the lapsed were impatient, and could ill brook the delay of com- munion. They therefore persuaded the Confessors to intercede for them, and ask for their readmission to the sacraments of the Church. It will easily be seen that it was difficult for the authorities to refuse the request i 426 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIV 427 being found in the writings of S. Ambrose,^ as well as in some MSS. of the " Old Latin " ; ^ but it was its adop- tion in the Vulgate that made it the common property of Western Christendom.^ From it in later times the substantive " supererogatio " was formed, and the phrase " opera supererogationis " was adopted by ecclesiastical writers as the technical name for the "excess of merit" attributed to the saints, and for what the Article calls voluntary works besides, over and above God's commandments. In this sense it was used not infrequently by writers of the thirteenth century, such as Alexander of Hales, Aibertus Magnus, and Thomas Aquinas; but until this period it is doubtful whether the phrase is ever found, or whether the verb occurs except in direct connection with S. Luke X. 35. 11. The History of the Growth of the System of Indulgences. It was the open sale of indulgences, which was closely connected with the doctrine of works of supererogation, that first roused the indignation of Luther, and led to the revolt from the Papacy. But the doctrine and the practice only grew up very gradually, step by step, with no perception on the part of anyone of what the ulti- mate outcome of it all would be. The starting-point, in tracing out its history, may be found in very early days, * S. Ambrose, Horn. vii. in Lucam. - Sabatier gives it as found in Codd. Veroa. and Biix. Cod. VercellensiH has "amplius erogaveris," which is the rendering found in Augustine, EiMTi-. in Ps. cxxv. 15, although in Quast. Ecanyel. II. xix. he has suptr- erogare. 3 The " Rhemish New Testament " (1st ed. 1582) attempted to Anglicise the verb, and rendered S. Luke x. 35 : "Whatsoever thou dost superero- gate"; ))ut it was found impossible to naturalise the clumsy Latinisni, and it was withdrawn in the Douay version (1609), which is content with the natural reny his Bull of December 9, 1854. ARTICLE XV 441 among the Anabaptists. On this liypothesis every word in it tells, for among these fanatics were some who revived docetic notions of our Lord's humanity, some who denied His atonement and asserted His sinfulness, and others who had the hardihood to maintain that the regenerate could not sin. Nowhere do we find a clearer statement of their errors, or a better commentary on this and the following Article, than in the letter of Bishop Hooper, which has been already quoted in the first volume of this work.^ Similarly, in the Reformatio Legum Ucclesiasticarum we meet with a condemnation of the very same errors.^ And in the light of these passages we may safely conclude that the real object of the Article was to condemn in plain and direct terms the heresies of those who denied our Lord's true humanity, sinlessness, and atonement, while maintaining their own entire freedom from sin. Since the doctrines of our Lord's human nature and of His atonement were considered under Article II., and that of human depravity came before us in connection * See vol. i. p. 22. *De Hatrea. cap. 6. **De duabus naturis Christi. . . . Alii eum sic Deum judicant ut hominem non agnoscant, et de corpore nugantur de coelo divinitus assumpto, et in virginis uterum lapso, quod tanquam in transitu per Mariam quasi per Canalem aut fistulam prseterfluxerit. "Cap. 8. De pcrfectione justificatorum, et de operibus supererogationis. Illorum etiam superbia legibus nostris est frangenda, qui tantam vitfe perfectionem hominibus justificatis attribuunt, quantam nee imbecillitas nostra natune fert, nee quisquam sibi prieter Christum sumere potest ; nimirum ut omnis jieccati sint exi;)ertes, si mentem ad recte piequc vivcndum instituerint Et banc volunt absolutam morum perfectionem in banc praesentem vitam cadere, cum debilis ipsa sit, et fragilis, et ad omues virtutis et officii ruinas pr«ceps, etc. '*Cap. 9. De casu justificatorum et peceato in Spiritum Sanctum, Etiam illi de justificatis perverse sentiunt, qui credunt illos, postquam juKti semel facti sunt, in peccatum non posse incidere, aut si forte quic- quam eorum faciunt, qua Dei legibus prohibentur, ea Deum pro peccatis non accipere." 442 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I with Article IX., and will require to be noticed under Article XVI.. it is unnecessary to say more upon them here. The only point touched on in this Article on which nothing has so far been said directly, is that of our Lord's sinlessness. On this matter the evidence of Scripture is clear and precise, (a) Not only is there no hint or indication of sin in any word or action attributed to Him, but His challenge to the Jews, " Which of you convinceth Me of sin?" (S. John viii. 46), and His declaration on the eve of His Passion, " the prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in Me " (S. John xiv. 30), are clearly the utterances of one who was absolutely free from all taint of sin.^ (6) Reference should also be made to the definite statements of the apostles. S. Peter, S. Paul, S. John, and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews all agree in directly assert- ing His sinlessness. " Who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth," 1 Pet. ii. 22. "Him who knew no sin. He made to be sm on our behalf," 2 Cor. v. 21.^ " He was manifested to take away sins, and in Him is no sin," 1 John iii 5. "One that hath been in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin," Heb. iv. 15. " Such an high priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens ; who needeth not daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people : for this He did once for all, when He offered up Himself," Heb. vii. 26, 27. Such passages as these are amply sufficient to justify 1 Cf. liiddon's Bampton Lectures^ p. 28. ' Cf. Rom. viii. 3 : iv 6fionI)fuiri aapxbt (LfuipTlat. " Tlie flesh of Christ is 'like 'ours inasmuch as it is flesh ; 'like,' and only 'like,' because it is not sinful : Ostendit nos quidem habere eaniem pcccatiy Filiiim vero Dei similitudinem habuisse camis peccatiy non camrm ])eccati (Orig.-lat.).'* — Samlay an«l Headlam in loc. ARTICLE XV 443 the statement of the Article that Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only except, from which He was clearly 1 void, both in His flesh and in His spirit . . . and sin (as S. John saith) was not in Him.' * lAt.prorsus. Clearly = thoroughly, completely, unreservedly. It is so used in Piers the Plowman^ "Theishul be clensed clereliche and wasshen of her sinnes in ray prisoun purgatorie " (B. xviii. 389), and later in Fitzherbert's 'Surveyinge' (a.d. 1525): ''Lette a man make a castell, towre, or any maner of newe buildings and finysshe it clerely.'* Other instances of a similar use of the word are given in Murray's New English Dietionart/t s.v. ^ On the subject of our Lord's absolute sinlessness (the "non posse peccare" as well as "posse non peccare"), and its compatibility with liability to real temptation, see an article on "Our Lord's Human Example " in the Church Quarterly Review, vol. xvi. p. 282 ; Gore's Bampton Lectures^ p. 165 ; Liddon's Bampton Lectures, Appendix ; Mill's Sermons on the Temptation, p. 24 ; and R. L. Ottley's Doctrine of the Incarnation vol. ii. p. 293. %' ARTICLE XVI 445 ARTICLE XVI De peccaio post Baptismum. Non omnc i>eccatum mortale iwst baptismum voluntarie per- X)etratum, est peccatum in Spiritum Sanctum et irremissibile. Proinde lapsis a baptismo in peccata locus poenitentise non est negandus. Post acceptum Spiritum Sanctum possumus a gratia data recedere atque peccare, denuoque per gratiam Dei resurgere ae resipiscere. Ideoque illi damnandi sunt qui se quamdiu hie vivant, amplius non posse peccare affirmant, aut vere resipis- centibus veniae locum denegant. Of Sin after Baptism. Not every deadly sin willingly committed after baptism is sin against the Holy Ghost, and un- l)ardonable. Wherefore the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after baptism. After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin, and by the grace of God we may arise again, and amend our lives. And therefore they are to be condemned, which say they can no more sin as long as they live here, or deny the place of forgiveness to such as truly repent. The title of this Article in the first edition of 1553 was De peccato in Spiritum Sanctum (" Of Sin against the Holy Ghost"). This was altered in 1563 into De lapsis post Baptismum (" Of Sin after Baptism ") ; and at the final revision of 1571 the Latin was made to correspond more closely with the English by the sub- stitution of the present phrase, "De peccato post Baptismum." In two other expressions in the body of the Article slight changes have also been made. " Locus pcenitentiaj " was in 1553 translated in the English version by "place for penitentes," and "place for penitence" in 1563; "grant of repentance" being inserted in 1571 ; at which time "locus venice" in the last sentence was substituted for "locus pcenitentice" 444 (In 1553 this had been rendered, as at its first occurrence in the Article," place for penitentes," for which " place of forgiveness" had been inserted in 1563.) There is a general resemblance between this Article and the twelfth of the Confession of Augsburg, but the verbal similarity is not sufficiently close to justify us in saying that the last-mentioned document was the source of our own Article.^ The two are aimed against the same errors, which consisted in a revival of the views of some in early days concerning blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, the impossibility of falling from grace, and the refusal of pardon to those who fall into deadly sin after baptism. These errors are also noticed in the letter of Bishop Hooper, referred to in the last Article. " A man, they say, who is thus regenerate cannot sin. They add that all hope of pardon is taken away from those who, after having received the Holy Ghost, fall into sin " ; ^ and further evidence of their existence at the time when the Article was drawn up may be found in the Refommtio Legum Ecclesicisticarum? as well as in the following passage from Calvin's Institutes. * ** De poenitentia. De ixpnitentia decent quod lapsis post baptismum contingere possit rcmissio peccatonmi, quocunque tempore cum conver- tuntur. Et quod ecclesia talibus redeuntibus ad poenitentiam absolutionem impertiri debeat. Constat autem poenitentia proprie his duabus partibus : altera est contritio seu terrores incussi conscientiae agnito jieccato. Altera est fides, qu* concipitur ex evangelio seu absolutione, et credit propter Christum remitti peccata, ct consolatur conscientiam ct ex tcrroribus liberat. Deiude sequi debeut bona opera, qu» sunt fructus poDnitentiae. Damnant Anabaptistas qui negant scmcl justificatos posse amittere Spiritum Sanctum. Item, qui contendunt quibusdam tantam pcrfectionem in hac vita contingere ut peccare non possint. Damnautur et Novatiani qui nolebant absolvere lapsos post baptismum redeuntes ad pccnitentiam. Rejiciuntur et isti qui non docent remissionem peccatorum per fidem contingere, sed jubent nos mereri gratiam per satisfactiones nostras." ^ See vol. i. p. 22. ' R^f. Leg. EccL^ De Hctres. cap. 9 : *• Etiam illi de justificatis perverse i -i 446 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XVI 447 '* Our age also has some of the Anabaptists not very unlike the Novatians. For they pretend that the people of God are regenerated in baptism into a pure and angelical life. . . . But if any man fail after baptism, they leave nothing to him but the inexorable judgment of God." 1 Two main subjects appear to require consideration in this Article. 1. The fact that deadly sin is not unpardonable. 2. The possibility of falling from grace. I. The fad that deadly Sin is not Unpardonable. (a) Not every deadly sin willingly committed after baptism is sin against the Holy Ghost, and unpardonable. The view of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which is here rejected, appears to have been first propounded by Origen in the third century ,2 and was revived in the sixteenth by some among the Anabaptists. A brief examination of the passages of the New Testament which speak of the sin which " hath never forgiveness " will sentiunt, qui credunt illos postquam justi semel facti sunt, in pecca* turn non posse incidere, ant si forte quicquam eorum faciunt, qwe Dei legibus prohibentur, ea Deum pro pcccatis non accipere. Quibus opinione contrarii, sed impietate pares sunt, qui quodcunque peccatum mortale, quod post baptismum a nobis susceptum voluntate nostra committitur, illud omne contra Spiritum Sanctum affirmant gestum esse et remitti non posse." 1 Institutes, IV. i. 23. ^ See Athanasius, Ep. ad, Serap. iv. § 10, where this view (which he also attributes to Theognostus) is considered and rejected. The view of Athanasius himself appears to be that whereas "blasphemy against the Sou of Man " was to blaspheme against Him before the full revelation of His Divinity was made, "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost" is to "ascribe the deeds of the Word to the devil," i.e. to blaspheme against Him after His eternal Godhead has been manifested. Cf. OrcUiones cmtra Ariaiws, I. § 50. show that whatever may be the precise nature of the irremissible sin, there is certainly no ground for main- taining that all deadly sin willingly committed after baptism should be regarded as unpardonable. ^ The passages to be considered fall into two groups : (1) those in the Gospel in which our Lord speaks of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost; (2) certain pas- sages in the Epistle to the Hebrews and the First Epistle of S. John. 1. In regard to the first class of passages (S. Matt. xii 31-37; S. Mark iil 28-30; S. Luke xii. 10), it must be noticed that our Lord never speaks in general terms of " sin against the Holy Ghost " as unpardonable. Of one sin, which He terms " the blasphemy against the Spirit," He says, "it shall not be forgiven," and that the man who commits it " is guilty of an eternal sin " {evo^o^ ia-Tiv aloDvlov dfiapTijfiaTOf;).^ Now the fact that this sin is thus spoken of as " blasphemy " at once marks it out as a sin of a particular class, belonging to sins of the tongue, involving outward expression ; while the occasion on which our Lord warned His hearers against it (" because they said He had an imclean spirit") throws light on its character. Whether the Pharisees had been actually guilty of it our Lord does not say, but they were clearly in danger of committing it ; and what they were doing was to ascribe manifestly Divine works to Satanic agency. To do this was in a very real sense to " blaspheme against the Holy Spirit," by whose agency the works were done. And it is quite clear that, whatever be the precise nature of the irre- ^ That this is the true reading in S. Mark iii. 30 is undoubted. The textus receptua has KplwTij'eii' and ^wTtop^v riji iK\oyijs d^la yevofi^vrj \//vxiji aXpeaU re Kod ffvudffKifais TCToiT/zcev, ib. V. xiv. 141 ; cf. Kaye's Clement of Alex- andria, p. 434. ^ See especially Philocalia, xxv. p. 227 (ed. Robinson) : *Avovs TTJi eUdvos rod vioO a&roO' irpo€PaT€vi rjfiiv tQvS^ rtvuv iirl evff^^eiav Kal 6p/j.T)v ^irl Ta&rriv fura r^v potrriv, Kal ws 6\oi iavrovi iiri5d)(rovi I 478 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XVII 479 i Be Dono FerseveraniUe and De Proedestinatione Sanctorum, In these he takes up the position (1) that predestination is to life, and not merely to privilege; (2) that it is " arbitrary," i,e. that the reason why one is predestinated to life and another is not, is unknown to us ; and thus (3) the reason is not foreseen faith ; (4) only those endowed with the gift of final perseverance can be saved ; but why this gift is granted to one and withheld from another, lies in the inscrutable will of God. His teaching has been made the subject of an admirable study by Professor Mozley, and the conclusion at which he arrives is, that while Augustine is ripht in recognising fully that Scripture does speak of predestination to life, yet he is tvrong in ignoring the fact that Scripture is twosided on this great question. " If one set of passages, taken in their natural meaning, conveys the doctrine of predestina- tion, another conveys the reverse. The Bible in speaking of mankind, and addressing them on their duties and responsibilities, certainly speaks as if all had the power to do their duty or not, when laid before them ; nor would any plain man receive any other impression from its language than that the moral being had freewill, and could determine his acts one way or another. So that sometimes speaking one way and sometimes another, Holy Scripture as a whole makes no assertion, or has no definite doctrine on this subject." ^ " The characteristic of S. Augustine's doctrine compared with the scriptural one is, that it is a definite and absolute doctrine. Scrip- ture, as a whole, as has been said, only informs us of a mystery on the subject ; that is to say, while it informs us that there is a truth on the subject it makes no consistent statement of it, but asserts contrary truths, counterbalancing those passages which convey the pre- destinarian doctrine by passages as plain the other way : * Aug^istinian TJicory of FredestinatioTif p. 38. but S. Augustine makes predestinarian statements, and does not balance them by contrary ones. Rather he endeavours to explain away those contrary statements of Scripture. Thus he evades the natural force of the text that God would have all men to be saved, by supposing that it only means that no man is saved except through the will of God, or that " all men " means not all men, but some out of all classes and ranks of men." ^ The criticism then to be offered upon the Augustinian scheme is, that it is a onesided development of scriptural truth. What it gains in consistency it loses in truth. It is right to a great extent in its affirmations, and wrong to a great extent in its denials. It is right in asserting that predestination is to life, and that the ground of it is inscrutable by us ; wrong in denying that sufficient grace is given to all, and that salvation lies in the power of all men. The four principal theories of predestination have now been stated, and reasons have been given for not deeming any one of them entirely satisfactory. How then, if all these are rejected, is the Seventeenth Article to be under- stood ? In exactly the same way as these passages of Scrip- ture which speaJc of predestination , i.e. " as containing one side of the whole truth respecting grace and freewill, the side, namely, of grace or the Divine power ; but not at all as interfering with anyone's belief in a counter truth of man's freewill and originality as an agent. And in this sense it only excludes a Pelagian, and not such as are content to hold a mystery on the subject, and maintain the Divine power in conjunction with man's freewill." ^ The fact is, that the Bible lays down apparently contrary truths, both of which have yet to be held by one who would hold the whole truth. Freewill and predestina- tion are both taught in the Bible ; and though we cannot * Augustinian Theory of Predestination, p. 155. ^ Mozley, op, cit. p. 333. 480 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES see at present how they are compatible with each other, yet if, in the interests of logical consistency, we are led to deny either one of them, we shall find ourselves involved in errors and difficulties from which there is no escape. For the present we must be content to hold both as parts of the truth, remembering that we know but "in part," and leaving their complete reconciliation to the time when we " shall know, even as we are known." Some words of Dr. Liddon's may serve to conclude this section. In speaking of the " old controversy between the defenders of the sovereignty of God on the one side, and the advocates of the freewill of man on the other," he says — "The very idea of God as it occurs to the human mind, and the distinct statements of revelation, alike represent the Divine will as exerting sovereign and resistless sway. If it were otherwise, God would not be Almighty, that is, He would not be God. On the other hand, our daily experience and the language of Scripture both assure us that man is literally a free agent; his freedom is the very ground of his moral and religious responsibility. Are these two truths hopelessly incompatible with each other ? So it may seem at first sight; and if we escape the danger of denying the one in the supposed interests of the other, if we shrink from sacrificing God's sovereignty to man's freewill, with Arminius, and from sacrificing man's freedom to God's sovereignty, with Calvin, we can only express a wise ignorance by saying, that to us they seem like parallel lines which must meet at a point in eternity, far beyond our present range of view. We do know, however, that being both true, they cannot really contradict each other ; and that in some manner, which we cannot formulate, the Divine sovereignty must ARTICLE XVII 481 not merely be compatible with, but must even imply, the perfect freedom of created wills." ^ II. The Steps which accompany Predestination, After having described in scriptural terms what is meant by predestination to life, the Article proceeds, still in close dependence upon Scripture, to describe the several steps or processes which accompany it. They which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to God's purpose by His Spirit working in due season : they through grace obey the calling: they be justified freely : they be made sons of God by adoption : they be made like the image of His only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to CYcrlasting felicity. These several processes, thus described, have been summed up as follows : — (1) Vocation, (2) obedience to vocation through grace, (3) free justification, (4) son- ship by adoption, (5) conformity to the image of oiu: Lord, (6) a religious life, and (7) eternal felicity.^ It is right that these various steps by which God's eternal decree is carried out should be thus enumerated in the Article, because they form a most important safeguard against Antinomian perversions of the doctrine, showing how much is really involved in predestination to life. Though we cannot, with Arminius, say that foreseen good works are the grou7id of such predestina- tion, yet we can siiy that they are involved in it ; and that where there is predestination to eternal felicity. ^ Liddou's Elements of Jieligum, p. 191. 071 the Romans^ p. 348. - Bishop Forbes On UiC AdideSy p. 252. Cf. Sanday and Headlam " [ *f. 482 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES there is also predestination to obedience and to con- formity to the image of our Lord. This was fully brought out by Bishop Bancroft at the Hampton Court Conference, as the subjoined extract will show. " The Bishop of London took occasion to signifie to His Majesty, how very many in these daies, neglecting holinesse of life, presumed too much of persisting of grace, laying all their religion upon predestination. If I shall be saved, I shall be saved ; which he termed a desperate doctrine, showing it to be contrary to good divinity and the true doctrine of predestination, wherein we should reason rather dsceiideiido than descendendo, thus, 'I live in obedience to God, in love with my neighbour, I follow my vocation, etc. ; therefore I trust that God hath elected me, and predestinated me to salvation'; not thus, which is the usual course of argument, *God hath predestinated and chosen me to life, therefore though I sin never so grievously, yet I shall not be damned ; for whom He once loveth. He loveth to the end.' " ^ III. The practical Effect of tlic Doctrine, As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation to be enjoyed through Christ, as * Dean Barlow's account of "the sum and substance of the Cod- forence " at Hampton Ck>urt. Canl well's Cmtfercnces^ p. IbO. ARTICLE XVII 483 because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God : so, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Pre- destination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most un- clean living (impurissimae vitae securitatem), no less perilous than desperation. Briefly, this rather wordy paragraph amounts to this — (a) For " godly persons " the doctrine is full of comfort, as tending to establish and confirm their faith, as well as to kindle their love towards God. It acts upon them as the sense of a lofty destiny often acts upon men, encouraging them to do and dare all things, secure that the difficulties and dangers which lie before them cannot really hinder the accomplishment of their designs. In this lay the real strength of the Calvinistic creed, and of the Puritan character which it trained and developed. On the other hand, in systems where there is little or no sense of God's power carrying out His purposes with resistless force through His chosen instruments, there the character trained under them is likely to be deficient in fibre and tenacity of purpose. So Dean Milman has, in a striking passage, pointed out the weakness of Pelagianism : " No Pelagian ever has, or ever will, work a religious revolution. He who is destined for such a work must have a full conviction that God is acting directly, immediately, consciously, and therefore with iiTcsistible power, upon him and through him. It is because he believes himself, and others believe him to be, thus acted upon, that he has the burning courage to undertake, the indomitable perseverance to maintain, the inflexible resolution to I I 484 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES . k l'> die for his religion; so soon as that conviction is deadened his power is gone. ... He who is not pre- destined, who does not declare, who does not believe, himself predestined as the author of a great religious movement, he in whom God is not manifestly, sensibly, avowedly, working out His pre-established designs, will never be saint or reformer." ^ (b) For those whom the Article calls "curious (ie. inquisitive) and carnal persons " it is most dangerous and perilous to dwell on the mystery, as it exposes them to a twofold danger, since (1) if they believe that they are not predestined to life it urges them to despair, while (2) if they believe that they are so predestined it leads them into recklessness and Anti- nomianism. Both dangers were terribly apparent during the period of the Reformation, when this subject exercised so strong a fascination over men's minds. Many were taking up the " desperate " doctrine referred to by Bancroft, and saying, " If I shall be saved, I shall be saved," and thus became utterly reckless of their actions and conduct ; while others were driven to despair by the conviction that they were " reprobate."^ Of this Foxe, the martyrologist, gives a remarkable instance, in his account of the death of John Randall, of Christ's College, Cambridge, who destroyed himself in a fit of religious desperation: "He was found in his study hanging by his girdle, before an open Bible, with his dead arm and finger stretched pitifully towards a ^ Milman's Latin Christianiiy, vol. i. p. 150. - It was evidently because of this danger that the clergy were exhorted in the " Iiy unctions " of 1559 to " have always in a readiness such com- fortable places and sentences of Scripture as do set forth the mercy, benefits, and goodness of Almighty God towards all penitent and believ- ing persons," in order that ** the vice of damnable despair may be clearly taken away." Cardwell's DocumetUiiry Annals, vol. ii. p. 218. ARTICLE XVII 485 passage on predestination " ; ^ and both the dangers are alluded to in a passage in one of Luther's letters, which bears a striking resemblance to the language of our own Article. " Men should not turn their eyes on the secret sentence of election, foreknowledge, and predestination, as they are called; for such speeches lead to doubt, security, or despair, — are you elected ? no fall can hurt you, and you cannot perish, — are you not elected? there is no remedy for it. These are shocking speeches, and men ought not to fix their hearts on such thoughts ; but the gospel refers us to the proclaimed word of God, wherein He has revealed His will, and through which He will be known and will work." ^ IV. Two Considerations calculated to guard the Doctrine from Abtcses, The last paragraph of the Article gives two rules which seem more particularly intended to guard against the Calvinistic tenet of particular redemption. They are the following : — (a) We must receive God's promises in such wise as they be generally (generaliter) set forth to us in Holy Scripture. (h) In our doings that will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared to us in the word of God. * Froude, History of England, vol. ii. p. 81 ; cf. Foxe, iv. p. 694. * Luther's Letters, No. 1753. There are two expressions in the English of this second paragraph of our Article on which a note may be useful — (1) ** curious " in the phrase ** curious and carnal persons" simply means inquisitive (cf. Ecclus. iii. 23 : " Be not curious in unnecessary matters"), (2) ** WTetchlessness" (Latin, securitas) is only another form of the word "recklessness." It occurs with various forms of spelling. In modem editions it invariably appears as "wretchlessness," but in the cilition of 1553 it is spelt "rechielesnesse " ; in 1571, " rechelessnesse." 32 \h \'f l> t t 486 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES In the first of these rules the English sounds some- what ambiguous, but there can be no doubt that " generally " here means " universally," i.e, of God's promises as applying to all men, and not, as the Calvinistic party asserted, only to a particular class consisting of a few favourites of Heaven. This inter- pretation is rendered certain by the corresponding passage in the Reformatio Legitm, which has been already quoted, where God's promises to the good, and threats to the evil, are spoken of as generaliter propositce in Holy Scripture. The same interpretation was pointed out by Baro in his Concio ad Clerum in 1595, in the con- troversy when the Lambeth Articles were first pro- jected ; ^ and was also asserted against the Puritans by Bishop Bancroft at the Hampton Court Conference.* Thus the clause directly condemns the theory of particular redemption.^ The second rule seems equally clear against the doctrine of reprobation. " In our doings that will of God is to be followed which we have expressly declared to us in the word of God"; and that will certainly is that " all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth " (1 Tim. ii. 4). The clause is perhaps still more directly aimed against a tenet not unknown to the Calvinists, but finding special favour with the » Strype's WhUgift, p. 466. - Cardwell's History of Confermces, j). 181. For this meaning of the word, cf. the Catechism, which speaks of two sacraments ordained by Christ "as generally necessary to salvation," i.c, necessary /or all men ; and cf. the use of the word "generally " in the Authorised Version, in 2 Sam. xvii. 11 ; Jer. xlvii. 48. ^With the expression "generaliter propositT" cf. the language of Article VII., which says that in Scripture "tetema vita humaiw yeneri est jn-oposita" ; cf. Latimer's Sermons, p. 182, cd. 1584. "The promises of Christ our Saviour be general ; they pertain to all Viankiiid, . . . The promises of Christ which be general and jYcrtain to the whole world,'' ARTICLE XVII 487 Anabaptists, which spoke of a secret will of God opposed to His revealed will; so Hooper, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester, writes in 1549 of the Anabaptists: "They maintain a fatal necessity, and that beyond and besides that will of His, which He has revealed to us in the Scriptures, God hath another will by which He altogether acts under some kind of necessity." ^ Such teaching as this is at once condemned in our Article, which refers us exclusively to the revealed will of God.^ It only remains, for the sake of completeness of treat- ment, to point out — (1) that there was no Article on the subject of predestination in the Confession of Augsburg ; and (2) that at the Council of Trent much perplexity was felt on the subject, and finally a decree was drawn up in most guarded terms so that everyone might agree to it : " No one, so long as he exists in this mortal state, ought so far to presume concerning the secret mystery of Divine predestination as to determine for certain that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinated ; as if it were true that he who is justified either cannot sin any more, or if he do sin, that he ought to promise himself a certain repent- ance ; for except by a special revelation it cannot be known whom God hath chosen to Himself."^ ' Original Letters, Parker Society, j). 66. - It must be admitted that the wording of this particular sentence is not particularly happy, and that Guest had some reason for his desire that it should be altered, because it might be thought to countenance the notion of a secret will of God opposed to 'Hhat will . . . which we have expressly declared to us in the woi*d of God." See his letter to Cecil among the State Papers ("Domestic" Elizabeth, vol. Ixxviii. No. 37) referred to in vol. i. p. 4.5, ^Sess. VI. e. xii. 01 ARTICLE XVIII 489 ARTICLE XVIII De ifpcraiida cetema salute tantum in nomine Christ, Sunt et illi auathematizandi qui dicere audent, unumquemque in lege aut secta quam profitetur, esse scrrandum, modo juxta illam et lumen natune accurate vixerit : cum sacrae literae tantum Jesu Cliristi nomen praedicent, in quo salvos fieri homines oporteat. Of obtaining eternal Salvation, unly by the Name of Christ, They also are to be had accursed, that presume to say, that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law, and the light of nature. For Holy Scrip- ture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved. This Article now stands as it was originally published in 1553.^ The copula with which it begins is difficult to account for. " They also are to be had accursed " : The "et" of the Latin was omitted in 1563, but restored again in 1571, and was perhaps intended to link this Article on to the last clause of Article XVI. : " They are to be condemned (illi damnandi sunt) which say they can no more sin here," etc. The language of the Article has not been traced to any earlier source, but there is a section in the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum which affords a close parallel to it. * In 1553 and 1563 the title was as follows: "Tantum in nomine Christi speranda est jetema salus": "We must trust to obtain eternal salvation only by the name of Christ." The change of construction in 1571 brought it into harmony with the titles of the other Articles, almost all of which now begin in tlie same way. 488 " Horribilis est et immanis illorum audacia, qui coutendunt in omni religione vel secta, quam homines professi fuerint, salutem illis esse sperandam, si tantum ad innocentiam et integritatem vitae pro viribus enitantur juxta lumen quod illis praelucet a natura infusum. Authoritate vero sacrarum literarum confixa^ sunt hujusmodi pestes. Solum enim et unicum ibi Jesu Christi nomen nobis commendatum est, ut omnis ex eo salus ad nos perveniat." ^ This section and the Article before us are evidently intended to rebuke the same error; and it has some- times been thought that the opinion condemned is that which maintains a possibility of salvation for the heathen, and those who have never heard the name of Christ. On a careless reading of the Article such a view may seem probable. But there are two considera- tions which make strongly against it : (1) The title in the Latin is " De speranda aeterna salute," etc. ; strictly, " of hoping for eternal salvation." Such a phrase could only be used if the case contemplated was that of those within sound of the gospel, knowing "the name of Christ " and able to " trust to obtain salvation by it." (2) From the fact that the Article begins with a definite anathema of certain people, and couples the opinion denounced with that condemned in Article XVI., it is clear that it is no vague opinion that is intended to be here rejected, but the positive teaching of a particular set of persons. Now it does not appear that the question of the salvability of the heathen was formally raised by any of the sects of the day; but when we discover that one of the many schools of Anabaptists was teaching, not only that religion was a matter of indifference, but also that the deliberate rejection of the Saviour of the world would not be attended with loss, it * Ileformatio Legum Eccl.t De If ceres, c. xi. ti 490 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XVIII 491 '■ f II is almost certain that it is against them that this Article is directed.^ "There are such libertines and wretches," writes Hooper, " who are daring enough in their conventicles not only to deny that Christ is the Messiah and Saviour of the world, but also to call that blessed Seed a mischievous fellow, and deceiver of the world." 2 So at a somewhat later date (1579) one Matthew Hamant was burnt at Norwich for maintaininc^ that " Christ is not God nor the Saviour of the world^ but a mere man, a sinful man, and an abominable idol." There are other indications in the Articles— such as the emphatic language used in Article XV. on Christ who " came to be the Lamb without spot, Who, by sacrifice of Himself once made, should take away the sins of the world," and Who was " clearly void " from sin " both in His flesh and in His spirit "—of the necessity there was to guard against teaching of this character; and it certainly was not without cause that the compilers of the Articles introduced into them this strong assertion, that eternal salvation is only to be looked for throu<^h the name of Christ. ^ The Article, then, means neither more nor less than S. Peter's words in Acts iv. 12, which are referred to in It : " In none other is salvation : for neither is there any other name under heaven that is given amona men wherein we must be saved." If this text be, as it%urely 18, reconcilable with a belief in the salvability of the heathen, then so also is this Article, which proclaims that Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved, for the one says no more than the other. With regard to the heathen who live and die out of reach of the gospel. Scripture says but little;^ but »^''ir'l'f^.'f\^-'°'' = See vol. i. p. 23. 1 hold It to be a most certain rule of interpreting Srrii.ture that it sufficient is revealed, not only to make us shrink from pronouncing their condemnation, because we are taught not to judge " them that are without" (1 Cor. v. 12, 13), but even to enable us to have a good hope concerning them. God is " the Saviour of all men" but " especially of believers " (1 Tim. iv. 10), — an expression which can only mean that others besides Christians or *' believers " can be saved. S. Paul also speaks of the "Gentiles which have no law," and yet " do by nature the things of the law," showing " the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith " (Rom. ii. 14, 15); and it is probable that our Lord's parable of the Sheep and the Goats in S. Matt. xxv. is intended to refer primarily to their case.^ Conse- quently, whatever individual teachers may have main- teined, the Church as a whole has never committed herself to the assertion that the heathen must be lost, nor denied to them the possibility of salvation. Though never brought into covenant with God here, they may be brought to know Him hereafter. But if so, whatever never speaks of persons when there is a physical impossibility of its ai>eaking to them. ... So the heathen, who died before the word was spoken, and in whose land it was never preached, are dead to the word ; it concerns them not at all : but the moment it can reach them it is theirs, and for them."— Dr. Arnold's Life and Correspondence, Letter LXV. quoted in Browne On the Articles, p. 443. » In this chapter (S. Matt, xxv.) there are three parables: the first two, the Ten Virgins and the Talents, refer directly to the kingdom of heaven, i.e. the Church. With the third, the Sheep and the Goats, the i-ase is different. (1) It is spoken of irdvra tA mij, all the nations, a phrase which most naturally refers to the heathen world ; (2) neither those on the right hand nor those on the left recognise that they have ever seen Christ or ministered to Him on earth. Apparently, then, they had not known Him in this life ; and (3) the test by which their lives are judged is the test of works of mercy and kindness, just those " things of the law" which the Gentiles might "do by nature," if they had "the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith.'* 492 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I grace may be theirs here, or glory be granted to them hereafter, they will not have been SEYed by the law (in lege) or sect which they professed, but only by Christ, the one Mediator, Who is " the light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world " (S. John i. 9), and to whom, although they knew it not, they ministered' m doing works of mercy to their fellow-men. If these considerations are carefully borne in mind, it appears to the present writer that there need be no' hesitation concerning the acceptance of this Article. It certainly condemns a lax and latitudinarian view which would treat religion as a matter of indifference, and hold that the rejection of Christ mattered not. But Scripture equally condemns this, and speaks in the strongest terms of those who reject the truth, and let it go after they have received it (see [S. Mark] xvL 16; S. John iii 18 19, xii. 48, etc.). But this letting go of the true faith was exactly the sin of which so many of the Anabaptists of the sixteenth century were guUty, looking on our Lord sometimes as a mere man, and denying Him to be the Saviour of the world; affirming that Holy Scripture was given " only to the weak," and claiming the inner light of the Spirit, and licence therefrom for every kmd of profanity.^ Not without good reason was this Article inserted to condemn them. > See the Nineteenth Article of 1553, which immediately followed If it w-n r f T' """"i ^"""' ^^onsidered in the original series. The text of It will be found m vol. i. p. 78, and cf. p. 233. AKTICLE XIX De Eeclesia, Ecclesia Christi visibilis est coetus fidelium, in quo verbum Dei purum prsedicatur et sacramenta, quoad ea quse neeessario exiguntur, juxta Christi institutum recte ad- ministrantur. Sicut erravit ecclesia Hierosolymitana, Alexandrina et Antiochena : ita et erravit Ecclesia Romana, non solum quoad agenda et cffiremoniarum ritus, verum in his etiam quse credenda sunt. 0/ the Church. The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached and the sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's oi"dinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. As the Church of Hierusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have erred : so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith. This Article has remained practically ^ unchanged since the original edition of 1553. It was possibly suggested by the words in the corresponding Article in the Con- fession of Augsburg: "Est autem ecclesia congregatio sanctorum, in qua evangelium recte docetur, et recte administrantur sacramenta." But the Anglican Article is more precise and guarded, and has nothing answer- ing to the next words found in the Lutheran Confession: " Et ad veram unitatem Ecclesise satis est consentire de doctrina evangelii et administratione sacramentorum." ^ * Slight verbal changes were introduced into the English Article in Elizabeth's reign in order to bring it into more exact accordance with the Latin, in which there has been no alteration whatever. "And manner of ceremonies " was added in 1563 ; and " their " before " faith " omitted in 1571. * Confesmo Aiigustana, c. vii., De ecclesia. 493 494 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIX 495 I The object of the Article appears to be twofold : (1) to give such a definition or description of the visible Church as shall exclude the claim of the Koman Church to be the only true Church, while not embracing under the terms of the definition the various sects of Anabaptists and others then springing up ; and (2) to deny the claim of the Roman Church to infallibility. That some such polemical object was intended by those who framed the description in the first part of the Article appears from the following passage in the Ee/ormatio Legum Fcclesiasticarum, between which and the Article there is evidently a very close connection : — "Etiam illorum insania legum vinculis est constrin- genda, qui Romanam Ecclesiam in hujusmodi petra fundatam esse existimant, ut nee erraverit, nee errare possit; cum et multi possint ejus errores ex superiore majorum memoria repeti, et etiam ex hac nostra proferri, partim in his quibus vita nostra debet informari, partim etiam in his quibus fides debet institui. Quapropter illorum etiam intolerabilis est error, qui totius Christiani orbis universam ecclesiam solius episcopi Romani principatu contineri volunt. Nos enim eam quoe cemi potest ecclesiam sic definimus ut omnium ccetus sit fidelium hominum, in quo sacra Scriptura sincere docetur, et sacramenta (saltem his eorum partibus quae necessarige sunt) juxta Christi prtescriptum administrantur." ^ To a later date belongs the 'Homily for Whitsunday, first published in 1563, and ascribed to the authorship of Bishop Jewell. But it is interesting to notice that it introduces a description of the Church which is evidently suggested by that in the Article into a similar polemical passage combating the claims of the Church of Rome. " But now herein standeth the controversy, whether * De Hares, o. xxi. , De Roniana Ec«'lesia et intestate Romani iK)ntificiH. all men do justly arrogate to themselves the Holy Ghost, or no. The Bishops of Rome have for a long time made a sore challenge thereunto, reasoning for themselves after this sort. The Holy Ghost, say they, was promised to the Church, and never forsaketh the Church : but we are the chief heads and the principal part of the Church : therefore we have the Holy Ghost for ever ; and whatsoever things we decree are undoubted verities and oracles of the Holy Ghost. That ye may perceive the weakness of this argument, it is needful to teach you first what the true Church of Christ is, and then to confer the Church of Rome therewith, to discern how well they agree together. "The true Church is an universal congregation or fel- lowship of God's faithful and elect people, halt upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the head comer-stone. And it hath always three notes or marks whereby it is known : pure and sound doctrine, the sacraments ministered according to Christ's holy institution, and the right use of ecclesiastical discipline. This description of the Church is agreeable both to the Scriptures of God and also to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers, so that none may justly find fault therewith."^ The connection between the description here given and that in the Article is obvious. That in the Homily is little more than a rhetorical amplification of that given in the Article. The chief difference is that the Homily adds a third note to the two given in the Article, namely, "the right use of ecclesiastical dis- cipline." ^ It may, however, fairly be argued that even » "The second part of the sermon for Whitsunday." The Homilies, 1>. 494 (ed. S.P.C.K.). 3 This "note or mark " is also added in the " Short Catechism " issued together with the Articles in 1553 (see Dixon's History of the Church of 49G THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIX 497 I this is no substantial addition, because it is really included in the right administration of the sacraments, which must involve their administration by properly qualified persons, and to those only who are properly qualified to receive them.* The main subjects to be considered in connection with this Article are the following : — 1. The description of the visible Church. 2. The statement that the Church of Rome hath erred in matters of faith. I. The Description of the visible Church, The visible Church of Christ is a congrega- tion of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached, and the sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordi- nance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. It will be convenient to consider separately each term in this description. England, vol. iii. p. 528), where it is said that '* the marks of this Church are : first, pure preaching of the gospel ; then, brotherly love, out of which, as members of all one body, springeth goodwill of each to other ; thirdly, upright and uncorrupted use of the Lord's sacraments, according to the ordinance of the gosi)el ; last of all, brotherly correction and ex- communication, or banishing those out of the Church that will not amend their lives. This mark the holy Fathers termed discipline." See Liturgies of King Edward VI. (Parker Society) p. 513. Somewhat to the same effect we read in Nowell's Cateehi^, published in 1570, that the " marks of the visible Church are the sincere preaching of the gospel, that IS to say, of the benefits of Christ, invocation and administration of the sacraments," and it is added that "in the same Church, if it be well ordered, there shall be seen to be observed a certain order and manner of government, and such a form of ecclesiastical discipline," etc. See Nowell's CaUchism (Parker Society), pp. 56, 175 ; cf. also Ridley's Works (Parker Society), p. 123. » Cf. Rp. Browne, Exposition of the Iliirty-Nine Artielat, p. 452. (a) The visible Church. The word " Church "^ is the English equivalent for the Greek eKKKrjala, which has passed through three stages of meaning. (1) In its classical sense it is not a religious word at all, but simply stands for the assembly of the citizens of Athens and (later) of other free Greek cities, called together for the discussion of public business. In this sense it occurs once in the New Testament of the " lawful assembly " (17 €vvo/io^ iKKXfjala) at Ephesus, Acts xix. 39. (2) It obtains a religious connotation first in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, where it is frequently used as the translation of the Hebrew ^[}?, for the assembly of the Israelites, especially when gathered for sacred purposes.^ In this sense it is found twice in the New Testament, viz. in Acts vii. 38, where S. Stephen speaks of " the Church in the wilderness," and in Heb. ii. 1 2 in a quotation from the LXX. of Ps. xxii. 22. (3) This Old Testament use of the term prepared the way for the third stage in its usage, in which it is adopted by our Lord as the name of the Society which He came to found on earth. It is so used on two occasions by Him in the Gospels, namely in S. Matt. xvi. 18 (to be noted as its earliest occurrence), " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church " (oUoSofiijaa) fiov rrjv iKKXrja-lav), and S. Matt, xviii. 18, where it is said of the erring brother, " If he refuse to hear thee, tell it to the Church ; and if he refuse to hear the Church also, *The English word "Church "is ordinarily said to come from the Greek KvpiaK-^. But see the Dictionary of the Bible, vol. i. p. 694 (ed. ii.), where reasons are given for doubting this derivation, - It is never used for the Hebrew TMV for which ffvvayuyyfi is the regular equivalent. This word is also used regularly in the first four books of the Pentateuch for ^Hp; but from Deuteronomy onwards, though ffwayuiyri is still occasionally used for it, iKKKijala is more usually employed. See Deut. iv. 10, ix. 10, xviii. 16, etc. ; and on the history of the word in general, see Trench's Sguonyms of the Xecj Testament, p. 1. 498 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIX 499 i' let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican." Owing probably to its use in this sense by our Lord Himself, we find on turning to the Acts and Epistles that it is the familiar designation of the Christian Society, used sometimes for the Society as a whole, throughout the world, 1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph. i. 22 ;i Phil. iii. 6, etc.; sometimes for the Church in a particular place, as " the Church which was in Jerusalem," Acts viii. 1 ; " the Church of God which is at Corinth," 1 Cor. i. 2 ; " the Church of the Thessalonians," 1 Thess. i. 1 ; or " the Church in Ephesus," Kev. il 1 ; sometimes even for a particular congregation gathered together in some house. So we read of Prisca and Aquila, and "the Church that is in their house " (Rom. xvi 5 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 19), and of Philemon, and the Church in his house (Philem. 2, and cf. Col. iv. lb)} This varying usage of the word in its Christian sense is faithfully reflected in the language of our own Articles, which speak sometimes of " the Church " (Art. XX.), or " the visible Church " (Art. XIX.) as a whole, sometimes of " every particular or national Church" (Art. XXXIV.), such as "the Church of Jerusalem," of "Alexandria and Antioch," as well as " the Church of Rome " (Art. XIX.). The phrase employed in the Article before us, " the visihle Church," is important. It obviously indicates that the Church is a definite ascertainable body, which can be pointed out to men, and distinguished from any other bodies or societies claiming identity or similarity with it. ^ This usage is especially characteristic of the Epistle to the Ephesians, in which the conception of one Catholic Church stands out with peculiar clearness. See Eph. i. 22, iii. 10, v. 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 32. 2 It may be noted that the word can also be used for *' any gathering " of men assembled by chance or tumultuously, as it is by the "town clerk " in his speech at Ephesus, Acts xix. 32, 41. Its use for the build- ing in which Christians meet together for worship is post- biblical, and apparently not found before the third century at the earlieat. What the distinguishing marks of the Church are the Article proceeds to state, and these will presently be explained. But before this can be done, the phrase before us requires further consideration. At the time when the Articles were drawn up there was in some quarters a tendency to attach little import- ance to the notion of a " visible Church," and to speak much of an "invisible Church," consisting of true believers known only to God, wherever they might be found, outside and independent of all external organisa- tion.^ That God does know who are really His, in whatever society or body they may be found, is of course perfectly true, and what no Christian can deny. But when this is said, there is really nothing more that can be said of an "invisible Church." Its existence ^ See a startling exposition of this view in Hooper's Brief and Clear Confeasion of the Christian Faith : ** I believe and confess one only Catholic and Universal Church, which is an holy congiegation and assembly of all faithful believers, which are chosen and predestinate unto everlasting life, before the foundations of the world were laid : of whose number I count myself, and believe that I am, through the only grace and mercy of the Father, and by the merits of my good Lord and Master Jesus Christ, and not by means of my good works and merits, which indeed are none. " I believe that this Church is invisible to the eye of man, 'and is only to God known ; and that the same Church is not set, compassed, and limited within a certain place or bounds, but is scattered and spread abroad throughout all the world ; but yet coupled together in heart, will, and spirit by the bond of faith and charity, having and altogether acknowledging one only God, one only head and mediator Jesus Christ, one faith, one law, one baptism, one spiritual table, wherein one meal, and one spiritual drink, is ministered to them unto the end of the world. This Church containeth in it all the righteous and chosen people, from the first righteous man unto the last that shall be found righteous in the end of the world : and therefore I do call it universal. For as touching the visible Church, which is the congregation of the good and of the wicked, of the chosen and of the reprobate, and generally of all those which say they believe in Christ, I do not believe that to be the Church, because that Church is seen of the eye, and the faith thereof is in visible things." — Later writings of Bishop Hooper (Parker Society), p. 40. 500 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIX 501 I does not practically concern us; for to say of any particular individuals that they belong to the true (invisible) Church, and of others that they belong only to the visible body, involves a serious confusion of thought, since the very act of pointing out any members of this " invisible Church " makes it at once a " visible " one ; and for man to say who does or who does not belong to it is to claim the prerogatives of God, and to assume the power to see into the hearts of men. Thus the phrase " the invisible Church " was mischievous and misleading, and led men to attach little importance to the Divinely appointed external organisation of the historical Church founded by our Lord ; and we may be thankful that those who are responsible for the Article ignored it altogether and spoke only of that body or society of which Scripture speaks, namely, " the visible Church of Christ." ^ That our Lord intended to found a Church, and that this Church was to be " visible," must now be shown. The passage already quoted from S. Matt. xvL 18 is conclusive evidence that it was our Lord's purpose to found a Church ; and though, as has been previously mentioned, the word iKKXrja-ia only occurs on two occasions in the Gospels, yet in the former of the two passages it is closely connected, if not expressly identified with " the kingdom of heaven," which is the ordinary title by which our Lord refers to the new order of things which He came to inaugurate, 1 This silence about any " invisible Church " is all the more noteworthy because the Thirteen Articles drafted in 1538 had distinctly recognised two senses of the word Church: "unam, qua Ecclesia acciptur pro congregatione omnium sanctorum et vere fidelium, qui Christo capiti vere credunt et sanctificantur Spiritu ejus. Haeo autem vivum est et vere sanctum Christi corpus mysticum, sed soli Deo cognitum, qui hominum corda solus intuetur. Altera acceptio est qua Ecclesia acciptur pro congregatione omnium homiimm qui baptizati sunt in Christi," etc. — Art. \. See Hardwick, p. 263. and the Society which was to be established on earth. That this "kingdom," though "not of this world" (S. John xviiL 36), was nevertheless intended to be a « visible " one, embracing good and bad alike, is indicated in more than one parable; e.g. that of the Tares (S. Matt. xiii. 24-30), the Draw-net (vers. 47-50), and the Wedding Garment (xxii. 1-14). It is intended to embrace all nations of the earth (xxviii. 19). The rite of baptism is appointed as the method of admission to it (lb., cf. S. John iil 3-5) ; a visible rite is instituted as the means of supporting the life of its members (S. Matt. XX vi. 26 ; S. John vi. 51), and men are commissioned and " sent " with power to remit and retain sins (S. John XX. 21-23). All this implies a definite, ascertainable body with an outward organisation, a body, or society, which can be described as a " visible " one. And when we turn to the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles we find abundant evidence that the actual existing iKK\r)(Tla was such. Throughout the Acts baptism is the rite of admission to it (Acts ii. 38, 41, viii. 12, xvi. 15, etc.); "continuing steadfastly in the breaking of the bread" is one of the characteristics of believers (ii 42, cf. ii. 46 and xx. 7); and "elders" are "appointed in every Church" (xiv. 23); and it may be safely said that wherever the " Church " is mentioned, the language used is only capable of being appHed to a visible body. Thus a "persecution arose against the Church" (viii. 1), the Church was "gathered together" (xiv. 27), "saluted" (xviii. 22), "confirmed" (xvi. 5). The same is true in regard to the Epistles. In every case S. Paul writes to members of a definite society, consisting, as his letters only too plainly show, of professed believers, some of whom were guilty of grievous sins, — a mixed body, in which the evil are mingled with the good ; and if further proof be required that this is 33 tm ■ 502 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIX 503 h I the character of the iKK\rja(a as described in Holy Scripture, it may be found in the Epistles to the seven Churches of Asia (Rev. ii., iii.), which are clearly addressed to visible organised societies, and which similarly recognise the existence of the evil as well as the good in those societies. Thus everywhere throughout Scripture it is " the visible Church " which is spoken of, to which the promises are made, and in which the hope of salvation is held out. (b) This " visible Church " is described as a Congre- gation of faithful men (coetus fidelium). Stress may fairly be laid on the word " congregation " as implying that the Church is in some way united so as to be a definite body with an organism and a life of its own, for, as has been truly pointed out, a congregation is more than an aggregation. It means a body or society. " There is a great difference between an aggregation and a body. A body is not merely a heap of members, . . . but it is a system of members knit together into one organism and pervaded by one life. ... So the Church is a living organism deriving from Christ, who is its Head, the Hfe of the Holy Ghost." ^ "Faithful" in this connection signifies "professed believers." It cannot be taken as implying anything as to the character of the faith in the members of the Church, or as if it indicated the presence of a true and lively faith in all who belong to the body ; but it refers simply to those who "profess and call themselves Christians." That this is so is shown by the fact that a later Article (XXVI.) expressly states (in full accord- ance, as has been already proved, with the teaching of Scripture) that " in the visible Church the evil are ever mingled with the good." Thus the Church consists of bad as well as good, and therefore the word " faithful " must be understood in the sense explained above. ^ Goulbourn's Holy Catholic Churchy p. 9. (c) We now come to the " notes " of the Church, of which the Article gives two. The first is this : that in the Church the pure word of God is preaohed. That we are right in regarding this as one of the neces- sary notes or marks of the Church may fairly be inferred from many passages of Scripture. Our Lord's charge to His Apostles after the resurrection was to " make dis- ciples of all nations," not only "baptizing them," but also " teaching them to observe all things " that He had commanded (S. Matt, xxviii. 19). The Church of the first days is described by S. Luke as continuing " stead- fast in the apostles' teaching," as well as in " the fellow- ship, the breaking of bread, and the prayers " (Acts ii. 42). S. Paul was sent to "preach the gospel" (1 Cor. i. 17). He charges Timothy to " preach the word " (2 Tim. iv. 2), to " hold fast the form of sound words " which he has heard (2 Tim. L 13); and generally, throughout the Apostolic Epistles, it is assumed that there is a definite body of teaching to be handed on by the Church and her ministers.^ That definite body of teaching, so far as necessary doctrine is concerned, we believe (as was shown under Article VI.) to be contained in Holy Scripture. " Preaching," as Hooker reminds us, is the " open publi- cation of heavenly mysteries." ^ Thus the " pure word of God is preached " wherever the main doctrines of the gospel are openly taught and proclaimed. And since the main doctrines are summarised in those Creeds to which the Church of England expressly adheres, and which she declares " ought thoroughly to be received and believed, for they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture," ^ it may reasonably be concluded that all who are in possession of the Creeds of the Church, and proclaim the doctrine contained in them, are so far forth » See, e,g., 2 Tim. ii. 2 ; 1 Tim. iv. 13-16 ; S. Jiule 3. - Ecclesiadical Polity, Bk. V. c. xviii. » Article VIII. t ,;i.j ii B^ >w I I M>. fi fl 'J 504 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES in possession of " the pure word of God," and fulfilling their duty of preaching it, as to satisfy the requirements of this note of the Church. (d) A second note of the Church is given in the following words: The sacraments be duly minis- tered, according to Christ's ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. It has already been shown that our Lord appointed baptism as the rite of admission to His Church, and that the Eucharist was instituted with the charge, " Do this in remembrance of Me." By it, as S. Paul says, we are to "show forth the Lord's death till He come" (1 Cor. xi. 26). It is therefore a rite for all time, and in the face of these declarations it can scarcely be doubted that the due administration of the sacraments must be a necessary mark of the Church, and that any body of Christians not possessing sacraments thereby forfeits all claim to be regarded as a branch of Christ's visible Church. A further question may be raised as to what constitutes a dice administration of the sacraments. And to this it may be replied that all the conditions necessary for the validity of sacraments must be fulfilled. There must be the proper " matter," le. in the one case water, in the other " bread and wine, which the Lord hath commanded to be received " ; as well as the proper form of words. It would seem also that a regularly constituted ministry is implied in this note of the Church ; ^ for though the prevailing opinion in the Church has ever been that baptism (1) with water, and (2) in the name of the Holy Trinity, is valid by whomsoever it may be administered, these being, as the Prayer Book says, " essentials of baptism," yet for the consecration and administration of the Holy Communion it has ever J The question of the Episcopal ministry and its necessity is considered elsewhere, and is therefore not touched upon here. ARTICLE XIX 505 been held that the action of a rightly ordained minister is required.^ Unless these various conditions were satis- fied, it would be impossible to maintain that the sacra- ments were " duly (recte) ^ ministered according to Christ's ^ This is not the place to enter fully into the question of the validity of lay haptism, which is carefully vindicated by Hooker {Ecclesiastical Polity, Bk. V. c. Ixii.). But in view of the distinction drawn in the text between the two sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist as far as the action of an ordained minister is concerned, it may be well to explain the scriptural grounds on which the Church is justified in maintaining that lay baptism is valid, while she never permits a lay consecration of the Eucharist. Briefly, then, it may be said that there are various indications in the New Testament that no importance is attached to the minister of baptism. In the Gospels we are expressly told that during our Lord's earthly ministry "Jesus baptized not Himself, but His disciples" (S. John iv. 2). In the Acts of the Apostles we read that when the Holy Ghost had come on the household of Cornelius, Peter, though apparently the only apostle or Christian minister present, "commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord " (Acts x. 48). The Samaritans were baptized by Philip the deacon, though the Holy Ghost was not given till the hands of the ajK)stles were laid on them (Acts viii. 12-17). Of the men at Ephesus it is said that "they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, and when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them " (Acts xix. 5, 6) ; the natural inference from these words being that the act of baptism was not performed by the apostle himself; an inference which is raised almost to a certainty by S. Paul's own woi-ds in the Fii-st Epistle to the Corinthians, which show that his usual custom was not to baptize himself, "for God sent" him "not to baptize, but to preach the gospel" (1 Cor. i. 14-17). These passages seem amply sufficient to warrant the Church in relaxing the rule that a regularly ordained minister is required for the ministerial act. But no such series of passages can be cited with regard to the Eucharist, and therefore the Church has never felt justified in sanctioning any relaxation of her rule that the Society should act through her regularly commissioned officers. ' The difference between "recte" and "rite" as used in the Articles is not very great, both words being capable of being rendered by the same English word "duly." But "rite" includes a wider reference to due ecclesiastical order than "recte" does, as may be seen by a comparison of the following passag«'S : Art. XIX. "Sacraments be duly (recte) minis- tered." XXV. Sacraments were ordained "that we should diUy (rite) use them." XXVII. "They that receive baptism rightly (recte) are giafted into the Chui-ch." XXVIII. "To such as righUy (rite), If i u ii ' 'I iVSI ^r»wiHT w 506 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XIX 507 ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same." ^ II. The Statement that the Church of Rmm hath eiired in Matters of Faith, As the Church of Hiernsalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have erred: so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith. The object of this clause is not to condemn the Roman Church as apostate, but simply to deny her claim to in- fallibility. Whatever may be said about the infallibility of the Church as a whole, it is clear from history that no one branch of the Church can claim for herself infallibility apart from other branches. So the Article points to the historical fact that in the past the prin- cipal Churches of the East have erred, mentioning the three great patriarchates, Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, and maintains that similarly the Eoman Church worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread," etc. XXXII. ' • That i)er8on which is rigUly (rite) cut off," etc. XXXVI. " We decree all such to be rightly (rite) and orderly consecrated." Tlius the sacra- ments may be dxUy ministered (recte), i.e. they may be vaZid, and yet something wanting for what Hooker calls their "ecclesiastical perfection" (Bk. V. Ixii. 15). * A question is sometimes raised here concerning the Church of Rome, in conse. cU. p. 247. fl 510 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES If h I I soundly religious by renouncing idolatry and supersti- tion. . . . The indisposition, therefore, of the Church of Rome to reform herself must be no stay unto us for performing our duty to God ; even as desire of retaining conformity with them would be no excuse if we did not perform that duty. "Notwithstanding, so far as lawfully we may, we have held and do hold fellowship with them. For even as the Apostle doth say of Israel that they are in one respect enemies, but in another beloved of God, in like sort with Kome we dare not communicate concerning sundry her gross and grievous abominations, yet touch- ing those main parts of Christian truth wherein they constantly still persist, we gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Jesus Christ ; and our hearty prayer unto God Almighty is, that being conjoined so far forth with them, they may at the length (if it be His will) so yield to frame and reform themselves, that no distrac- tion remain in anything, but that we * all may with one heart and one mouth glorify Grod, the Father of our Lord and Saviour,' whose Church we are." ^ > EccL Polity, Bk. III. ch. i. § 10. ARTICLE XX JJe Kcclesioi Aviorilale, Habct Ecclusia ritus statucudi jus et in fidei controversiis autori- tatem, quamvis Ecclesiae nou licet quicquam instituere, quod verbo Dei scripto adversetur, nee ununi Scriptune locum sic exponere potest, ut alteri contradicat. Quare licet Ecclesia sit divinonun librorum testis et conservatrix, attamen ut adversus eos nihil decemere, ita praeter illos nihil credendum de necessitate salutis debet obtrudere. Of the Authority of the Church. The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith : and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of salvation. This Article, with the exception of the first or affirmative clause (The Church . . . controversies of faith), dates from 1553, and is almost identical with a passage in the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum} It has not been traced to any earlier source, and there is nothing corresponding to it in the Confession of Augsburg. The affirmative clause first makes its appearance in 1563, and some doubt has been felt with regard to its source * Ref. Leg. Eccl., De Summa Trinitate et Fide Catholica, c. xi. : •' Quam- obrem non licet ecclesia? quicquam constituere, quod verbo Dei scripto adversetur, neque potest sic unum locum exponere ut alteri contradicat. Quanquam ergo divinorum librorum testis sit et 'custos et conservatrix Ecclesia, hsec tamen prerogativa ei minime concedi debet, ut contra hos libros vel quicquam decernat. vel absque horum librorum testimoniis ullos fidei articulos condat, eosque populo Christiano credendos obtrudat." 511 i I /f 512 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ^'1 and authority. It is not found in the Parker MS. signed by tlie members of the Upper House of Convocation on Jan. 29, 1563. Nor is it contained in an English " minute " of the Articles among the Elizabethan State Papers, dated January 31, 1563.^ On the other hand, it is found in an undated Latin MS. in the State Papers, in which it has evidently been introduced after the original draft was made? This is probably the earliest document to contain it, and Hardwick's theory ^ is likely to be true, that this is the actual MS. from which the first edition of the Elizabethan Articles was printed, viz. that published by Wolfe, the royal printer, under the direct authority of the Queen herself. Anyhow, this edition contains the clause in question ; * and though it is just possible that it was added by the Lower House of Convocation, to which the Articles were submitted after acceptance by the Upper House, yet there is a strong probability that it was inserted by the Queen herself in the exercise of her royal prerogative. However, it was undoubtedly deficient in full sy nodical authority, and, consequently, some MS. copies of the Articles, as well as some printed editions, omit it.^ Of these the most important is the English edition printed by Jugge and Cawood in 1563, to which the Act of Parliament of 1571, requiring subscription to the Articles, made * "Domestic," vol. xxvii. 40. - Ih. 41 A. "The disputed clause in Article XX., filling just one line and somewhat overcrowding the page, was clearly introduced in the same hand after the first draft was made." — Hardwick, p. 140. s Articles, p. 140. * Cf. vol. i. p. 31. * E.g. it is omitted (1) in an English draft of the Articles among the State Papers {*^ Domestic," 41), endorsed, *' Articles of Religion agreed on, 1562, in the Convocation hous " ; (2) in an English MS. signed by the bishops in the Convocation of 1571 ; (3) in the English edition of Jugge and Cawood of 1563 alluded to in the text ; and (4) in one Latin and one English edition of Jugge and Cawood in 1571. S«e Hardwick, p. 142. ^,1 r^ ARTICLE XX 513 reference.^ It would appear certain, however, that at the final revision of 1571, if not earlier, the clause was ratified by Convocation ; 2 for when the charge was raised against Archbishop Laud at his trial, that he had himself added the clause to the Articles without the slightest authority, a transcript attested by a notary public from the original records of Convocation was produced cmitainin^ the words in question.^ The records of Con- vocation unfortunately perished in the great fire of London in 1 6 6 6 ; but there is no possible room for doubting that this Article as found in them did contain the clause. As Hardwick says, " the testimony of that record was produced upon the trial of Archbishop Laud, in the most open and explicit manner, at a time when it was perfectly accessible to his accusers, or was rather in the hands of his infuriated enemies, and yet ' not one of them ever ventured to question the truth of the asser- tion, or attempted to invalidate the proofs on which his defence had rested.* " * The words of the disputed clause, it might be added, are (like so many of the additions of 1563) probably suggested by similar language used in the Confession of Wiirtemberg : " Credimus et confitemur quod . . . hjee ecclesia habeat jus judicandi de omnibus doctrinis."^ The object of the clause, and indeed of the whole Article, is to state definitely the powers and offices of the Church, with special reference to (a) the errors of » Cf. vol. i. p. 43. =* At his trial Archbishop Laud stated publicly that "'tis plain that after the stir about subscription in the year 1571 the Articles were settled and subscribed unto at last, as in the year 1562, with this clause in them for the Church : for looking further into the records which are in mine own hands, I have found the book of 1563 subscribed by all the Lower House of Convocation in this very year of contradiction, 1571."— Laud's JVorks, vol. vi. p. 68 (A. C. Lib.). ^ Laud, op. eU. p. 66. -» Articles, p. 144, * Dt Ecclesia. I 514 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES the Puritan party, who were inclined to deny to the Church any right to enforce rites or ceremonies beyond those for which " Scripture proof " might be alleged ; and (h) the exaggerated view of the authority of the Church in doctrinal matters held by the Romanists, who denied that in the promulgation of necessary doctrine the Church was limited to what was contained in Scripture, or might be proved thereby. Three main subjects are brought before us in the Article, and require separate consideration — 1. The legislative power of the Church with regard to rites or ceremonies. 2. The judicial authority of the Church with regard to doctrine. 3. The office of the Church with regard to Holy Scripture. » 1. The Legislative Power of the Church with regard to Rites or Ceremonies. The Chnroh hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, that is, she may from time to time make new ones, if she deem it expedient, or she may decree to retain old ones in the face of opposition, or change and abolish existing ones. This power may fairly be called " legislative," and it is analogous to the power exercised in the State by Crown and Parliament, which make new laws and abolish old ones. It was noticed under the last Article that the word "Church" was somewhat ambiguous, being sometimes used for the Church universal and sometimes for any particular or national Church; and the question may be raised in which of these two senses is it here employed. The answer is found by a reference to the last clause of Article XXXIV., which (like the clause before us) was added ARTICLE XX 515 in 1563: "Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying." This merely amplifies the clause now under consideration, and makes it clear that we are to understand it as referring to the power of national or particular Churches, and vindicating the right of the Church of England to such action as was taken from time to time in the revision of the services of the Church. As historical instances, then, of the exercise of this power, we may point to (a) the renewal of the baptismal vow prefixed to Confirmation, a new rite decreed for the first time in 1662; (6) the retention of the sign of the Cross, in face of much opposition, in 1604; and (c) the abolition of the " chrisom," or white vesture, given to the newly baptized in token of the innocency granted to them in baptism. This was retained in the first English Prayer Book in 1549, but dropped at the next revision in 1552. In each of these cases the local or national Church exercised the power inherently belonging to it. But the power is not unlimited ; and after stating what the power is, the Article proceeds to add two restraining clauses, keeping it within certain well-defined limits. (a) It is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's word written. (5) It ought not to decree anything against the same. It will be noticed that the rites or ceremonies decreed need not receive any positive support from Scripture. All that is required is that there should be nothing in them that is opposed to or condemned by Scripture. An illustration may make this clear ; and a convenient one is furnished by Dean Goulbourn. The Church, in the exercise of her legislative power, might add to the .* «. t ti i I 4 516 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Book of Common Prayer a new office of thanksgiving on the occasion of the harvest. No scriptural authority need be asked for. But if into such an office " it were proposed to insert some words of adoration to the holy angels as being very possibly the ministers of natural blessings to mankind, this would be a flagrant stretch of the Church's prerogative, since S. Paul condemns the worshipping of angels ; and when S. John fell down to worship at the feet of an angel, the being to whom the homage was offered replied, * See thou do it not : for I am thy fellow-servant.' " ^ It was here that the Puritans went wrong, as they objected to many of the ceremonies of the Church, not because they were contrary to Scrip- ture, but simply because they were not based upon Scripture. To demand " Scripture proof," however, in such matters is seriously to mistake the purpose and object of the Scriptures. They were given " for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness" (2 Tim. iii 16), t.e. for moral and doctrinal purposes, not as a guide or directory in matters of ritual. In these the Church possesses the power which is conceded to every society to make rules for the guidance of its own members. The existence of such a power is assumed throughout Scripture. It obviously belonged to the Jewish Church. Although there was an elaborate ritual and ceremonial law with stated feasts ordained by God Himself, yet the Jewish Church claimed and exercised the power to add other feasts, such as Purim and Dedication, to those of Divine appointment. Our Lord's words, " The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses' seat: all things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe " (S. Matt, xxiii. 2, 3), imply that power to make regulations still remained with the authorities ; and we see from the Acts and the Epistles ^ Goulbourn's Holy Catholic Church, p. 212. ARTICLE XX 517 that when the Christian Church was established, such powers were exercised from the first in it as occasion re- quired. Thus we find S. Paul incidentally laying down definite regulations in his Epistles on various details, e.g, that men are to worship with the head uncovered, women with the head covered (1 Cor. xL); on the conduct of public worship by the prophets (1 Cor. xiv. 27); that women are to keep silence in the churches (1 Cor. xiv. 34 ; cf . 1 Tim. ii 12). He lays down the general principle, "Let all things be done decently and in order" (1 Cor. xiv. 40), and appeals to the " custom " of the Churches as if it were final and decisive, and individuals ought to conform to it. " If any man seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God" (1 Cor. xL 16). These passages are sufficient to prove that it was understood from the first that such legislative power was vested in the Church ; and it would be superfluous to prove at length that it has in all ages been exercised by national Churches, and that different customs have been followed in different places. Three quotations may, how- ever, be appended in order to show how the matter was regarded in early times. In his famous " letter to Januarius," Augustine, after speaking of the sacraments, and some things " which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture, but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world," e.g. Good Friday, Easter Day, etc., proceeds as follows :— " There are other things, however, which are different in diff'erent places and countries, e.g. some fast on Satur- day, others do not ; some partake daily of the Body and Blood of Christ, others receive it on stated days ; in some places no day passes without the sacrifice being offered, in others it is only on Saturday and Sunday, or it may be only on Sunday. In regard to these and all other variable observances which may be met anywhere, one is 34 II 518 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 1 « at liberty to comply with them or not as he chooses ; and there is no better rule for the wise and serious Christian in this matter than to conform to the practice which he finds prevailing in the Church to which it may be his lot to come. For such a custom, if it is clearly not contrary to the faith nor to sound morality, is to be held as a thing indifferent, and ought to be observed for the sake of fellow- ship with those among whom we live/* He then goes on to describe his mother's perplexity when she first came to Milan and found that the Church there did not fast on Saturday ; and gives the advice of S. Ambrose, which, he says, " I have always esteemed, as if I had received it by an oracle from heaven " : " When I visit Rome I fast on Saturday ; when I am here I do not fast. On the same principle, do you observe the custom prevailing in whatever Church you come to, if you desire neither to give offence by your conduct nor to find cause of offence in another's." ^ Rather later than this the ecclesiastical historian Socrates set himself to catalogue as far as possible " the diversity of customs in the Churches," with regard not only to the Lenten fast, but also to the great " variation in the services performed in church," and other matters ; remarking in conclusion that " it would be difiBcult, if not impossible, to give a complete catalogue of all the various customs and ceremonial observances in use throughout every city and country." ^ Lastly, in answer to the question of Augustine of Canterbury, " Whereas the faith is one and the same, are there different customs in different Churches, and is one custom of Masses observed in the holy Roman Church and another in the Gallican Church ? " Pope Gregory the Great replied as follows : " You know, my brother, the custom of the Roman Church, in which you remember you * Ad inquisltioiies Januariit Ep. liv, - Socrates, H, E, V. c, xxii. ARTICLE XX 519 were bred up. But it pleases me, that if you have found anything either in the Roman or in the Gallican or in any other Church, which may be more acceptable to Almighty God, you carefully make choice of the same, and sedulously teach the Church of the English, which is as yet new in the faith, whatsoever you can gather from the several Churches. For things are not to be loved for the sake of places, but places for the sake of good things. Choose, therefore, from each Church those things that are pious, religious, and correct, and when you have, as it were, made them up into one body, let the minds of the English be accustomed thereto." ^ It is clear from these citations that the English Church is in complete harmony with the Church of earlier days when she not only asserts that " the Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies," but further maintains that "every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying." ^ ^ Baeda, H. E. I. c. xxvii. ^ The theory, as stated in the Article, is perfectly clear, and represents the position from which the Church has never swerved. It is to the Church, not to the civil power, Parliament or Crown, that this "power" belongs. But in a Church by law established, it cannot be denied that there are grave practical difficulties in the way of exercising it. The Book of Common Prayer having been actually attached to an Act of Parliament, of which it forms a part, it is plain that, as a matter of fact, it cannot be in any way altered without the consent of that authority which gave coercive power to enforce its use. But it is equally clear that this authority, viz. Parliament, has no sort of moral right to attempt to alter it, except at the wish of the Church which first preimred and accepted it, and then presented it to Parliament to be attached to the Act of Uniformity ; and the constitutional method of proceeding in the case of any "rites or ceremonies" to be decreed, is very clearly laid down in '* the Royal Declaration " still prefixed to the Articles. *' If any differ- ence arise about the external policy concerning the Injunctions, Canons, and other Constitutions whatsoever thereto belonging, the clergy in their Convocation ia to order and settle them, having first obtained leave under I 520 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XX 521 IL Tlic judicial Authority of the Church with regard to Doctrine, The Church . . . hath authority in contro- versies of faith. {a) This "authority" is altogether distinct in kind from the " power " which luis just been considered. The " power " is legislcUive, and includes the right to make new ceremonies, to change and abolish old ones. The " authority " is judicial. It is the right not to make a single new Article of faith, but simply authority in a doctrinal controversy to pronounce what the true doctrine is} And since, in the words of Article VI., " Holy Scripture contains all things necessary to salvation ; so that what- soever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be be- lieved as an Article of the faith, or be thought requisite necessary to salvation," it is clear that the words mean that to the Church belongs the function of interpreting the Scripture, and deciding what the true meaning of it may be. This is strictly " judicial " authority, analogous to the power vested in the judges of interpreting the laws of the coimtry. While the laws are made by the Crown with assent of Parliament, yet, when once a law has been placed on the Statute Book, Parliament has no power whatever to say what it means. Indeed, the legislators may have intended one thing, but if they have our Broad Seal so to do ; and we approving thoir said Ordinances and Constitutions, providing that none be made conti*ary to the laws and customs of the laud." » Cf. Hooker, Ecclesiastical Polity, Bk. V. c. viii. § 2: "The Church hath authority to establisli that for an order at one time which at another time it may abolish, and in both may do well. But that which in doctrine the Church doth now deliver as a truth, no man will say that it may hereafter recall, and as rightly avouch the contrary. Laws touch- ing matter of order are changeable by the power of the Church ; Articles concerning doctrine not so.' expressed their meaning badly, it may turn out that they have passed something quite different, for to the judges alone belongs the power of interpreting the words of the statute and saying what they really involve. Just so, in the matter of necessary doctrine, the laws, so to speak, are contained in the written Scriptures ; but, as human language is never quite free from ambiguity, an inter- preter of them is required, and this is provided for us in " the Church," which " hath authority in controversies of faith." Instances of the exercise of this judicial authority are to be found in the dogmatic decisions of the General Councils defining the faith of the Church ; and no better example can be given to illustrate how the autliority differs from the legislative power than what occurred at Nicaea. Two questions came before the assembled Fathers for decision: (1) the faith of the Church in our Lord's Divinity, and (2) tlie time for the celebration of the Easter festival. In regard to the former they simply claimed to lay down what the faith as contained in the Scriptures really was. They did not make a new doctrine. In regard to the latter, they laid down a new rule to govern the Church for the future. The distinction is pointed out by Athanasius himself in a well-known passage. " Without prefixing consulate, month, and day, they wrote concerning Easter : * It seemed good as fol- lows ' ; for it did then seem good that there should be a geneml compliance in this matter. But concerning the faitli they wrote not ' It seemed good,' but ' Thus the Catholic Church believes ' ; and thereupon they confessed how they believed, in order to show that their own senti- ments were not novel but apostolical ; and what they wrote down was no discovery of theirs, but the same as was taught by the apostles."^ (6) That this authority belongs to the Church would ^ Athanasius, De Synodits, § 5. \' 522 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XX 523 seem to follow of necessity from many passages of Scripture. Unless the Church possesses it, it would be impossible for her to exercise properly the function of teaching which is distinctly laid upon her. She is " the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. iii 15). The power of " binding and loosing " ^ was granted to her by the Lord Himself (S. Matt, xviii. 18). It was exercised at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts xv.), when the question was raised whether circumcision was to be enforced upon Gentile converts, and the decision was arrived at under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (" it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us," ver. 28) that there was no necessity for it. S. Paul charges Timothy to " hold the pattern of sound words" which he had received from him (2 Tim. I 13); to "present himself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, hand- ling aright the word of truth" (ii. 15); to "shun vain babblings " ; to " charge others that they strive not about words, to no profit, to the subverting of them that hear them " (ih.) ; to " refuse ignorant and foolish questions " (ver. 23) ; to " reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffer- ing and teaching, for the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine " (iv. 2). To Titus he writes that the bishop is to " hold the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in the sound doctrine, and to convince the gain- sayers " (L 9) ; vain talkers are to be " reproved sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men " (ver. 13); he is to "shun foolish questionings and genealogies" (iii. ^ J. Lightfoot {HorcB Ilehraicce on S. Matt. xvi. 19) shows very fully that to "bind" and "loose" were familiar Jewish expressions for to for- bid and allow. It is perhaps scarcely necessary to add that this power, given first to S. Peter in xvi. 19, but extended to the Church generally in xviii. 18, is entirely different from the power of retaining and remitting sins given in S. John xx. 23. 10), and to " reject a man that is heretical after the first and second admonition " (ib.). All such language as this plainly implies a power of discrimination, and authority to judge and decide between the truth and falsehood. Unless the Church and her representatives possess such authority, who is to say what is " the sound doctrine " which is to be taught ? or who can tell which is " the man that is heretical," and which the man that is orthodox ? (c) It was shown above that the "power to decree rites or ceremonies " might be exercised by national Churches, and that it is not necessary that ceremonies should be everywhere the same. With regard to this " authority in controversies of faith," the case is obviously different. Although " particular and national Churches " have frequently exercised this authority, yet it has always been subject to the judgment of the whole Church, and liable to revision by this. To the whole Church it is that the presence of Christ is pledged (S. Matt, xxviii. 19); and to this alone is the promise made that " the gates of hell shall not prevail against it " (S. Matt. xvi. 18). Thus, while on various matters of doctrine the decision was made by local or provincial Councils, before ever the whole Church had an oppor- tunity of expressing her mind,^ yet only so far as these local decisions have subsequently been found to be in accordance with the mind of the universal Church have * Thus the Council of Constantinople (381), which condemned Apol- linarianism and Macedonianism, was not apparently summoned as a Oeneral one, but has only come to be so regarded in consequence of its subsequent acceptance by the whole Church. Local Councils were naturally summoned to condemn Montauism (Eusebius, //. K V. xvi.); for in the second century no others were possible. But even after the iige of General Councils had begun, local ones frequently considered and decided on doctrinal questions, e.(/., in the case of Pelagianism, it was at once condemned by the Council of Carthage, 412. ^Mi»^l^l^— > !■ 524 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XX 525 they been regarded as binding. In the present unhappy and abnormal state of a divided Christendom it is, of course, impossible to obtain a judgment from the whole Church on any matter in dispute ; but it must always be remembered that while the English Reformers in the sixteenth century claimed and exercised this " authority," as is shown by the promulgation of the Articles, yet they did this suhject to their appeal to a free General Council, which Cranmer and his colleagues never entirely lost sight of.i {d) But this "authority in controversies of faith" which belongs to the Church is not unlimited ; and just as the Article stated two constitutional checks on the legislative power, so also it lays down two definite limitations to the judicial power.^ (1) The Church may not so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another, (2) Besides the same (Holy Scripture), ought it ^ See Cranmer's ''Remains " (Parker Society), i. pp. 224 and 455. 2 The following arrangement of the Article ^iU show the bearing of the several clauses, the exact force of which is often missed, and (so far as I am aware) not noticed in any of the commentaries on the Articles :— Tht Leuislative Power. The Judicial AiUhonty, The Church hath (1) iK)wer to decree rites and cere- (2) authority in controversies of monies, and faith. And yet it is not lawful for the Church (la) to ordain anything contrary (2a) neither may it so exi)ound one to God's word written ; place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet as (li) it ought not to decree any- {2b) besides the same ought it not thing against the same, so to enforce anything to be be- lieved for necessity of salvation. not to enforce anything to be believed for neces- sity of salvation. These limitations follow naturally from the position claimed for Holy Scripture in Article VI., and would seem to require no further comment or illustration here. (e) But there are difficult questions which it is pos- sible to raise concerning the exercise of the authority thus limited, which it may be well briefly to consider. Who is to decide whether the Church has exceeded the powers thus conceded to her ? And what is to be done if it should appear that as a matter of fact she has exceeded them ? On these points the Article is silent. They raise the whole subject of the relation of Church authority to private judgment. Obviously there is no other body or society on earth with the right of review- ing the judgments of the Church and pronouncing upon them. But still the case may occur when it appears to some individuals, perhaps only to a very few, that the judgment of the Church is wrong. To say that it is an impossibility that God would allow His Church thus to err, is to be untrue to the whole teaching of history. There was a time when " the world groaned and found itself Arian," and when Athanasius stood contra mundum ; and what has occurred once may occur again. With our eyes, then, open to the teaching of history, we cannot insist that a man must bow to the judgment of the Church. He is not called on to accept as truth that which his deliberate conviction tells him is false. While he will rightly and naturally give the greatest weight to the judgment thus expressed, feeling that it is far more probable that he should be mistaken than that the whole Church should be wrong, yet in the last resort he himself must be the judge. He must be true to his conscientious and candid convictions. The right of 526 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XX 527 private judgment is inalienable. He cannot divest him- self of it.^ " To his own master he standeth or falleth." He will feel in his inmost heart with Liberius before his fall, when taunted with the fact that he was the sole Western champion of the Catholic faith, that " the cause of the faith is none the worse because he happens to be left alone," ^ and " with a sorrowful heart " will " refer all to God."* And, if the future may be prophesied from the past, it will always be found that the error is of no long duration, and that the truth which has been kept alive by the few faithful ones in a period of general falling away, will presently be accepted by the Church at large, and recognised as " the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints." III. The Office of the Church with regard to Holy /Scripture, There is one clause of the Article on which nothing has yet been said, viz. that which states that the Church is a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ. A twofold office is here assigned to her. She is (a) a witnesSy as testifying to us what books are to be regarded as Scripture, for " in the name of Holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical books of the Old Testament of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church " (Article VI.), and also as declaring to us what is the meaning of Scripture ; for, as we have already seen, she " hath authority in controversies of faith." Besides this, she is {b) a keeper of holy writ ; for just as to the Jews of * Cf. Salmon's Infallibility of the Church, p. 46 seq. ^ Theodoret, Eccleftlastical History, Bk. II. c. xvi. =* Cf. William of Occam, Dial, Bk. V. i>ar. i. c. 28. I owe this and the previous reference to The Church lliMorical Socitty Lecturtn, Series ii. }). 78, a valuable lecture on the "Teaching Power of the Church," by Professor W. E. Collins. old " were committed the oracles of God " (Rom. iii. 2), so now that there is a " New Testament " as well as an " Old," the completed Canon is to be regarded as a treasure committed to the custody of the Church, who is respon- sible for preserving it entire, and free from admixture with other books, as well as for transmitting it and proclaiming it to each generation in turn. It is in these ways that the Church fulfils her office as " a witness and a keeper of holy writ," and from what has now been said the respective offices of the Church and Holy Scripture may be clearly seen. The Church is the ordained teacher of truth ; Holy Scripture is the criterion of truth by which the doctrines of the Church are proved and tested. To make Scripture, in the first instance, the teacher, is entirely to mistake its true office and function. The Gospels were written, not to convert unbelievers, but that those who had been already orally instructed (i,e. who had received the teaching of the Church) might know the certainty of those things which they had been taught.^ So also the Epistles were addressed to regularly organised Churches, and were written to confirm those who had previously received apostolic teaching. Indeed, it is everywhere the case that " the Bible assumes the existence of a living instructor in the truth, who will indoctrinate us into the rudiments of it, and refer us to the Scriptures themselves for the proof of what he teaches. If the instructor is dispensed with, and the disciple thrown back merely on the Bible and his natural faculties, he will be very liable to stumble, and almost certain to do so as regards those more recondite definitions of doctrine which the Church's experience of heresies has shown her to be necessary, and has taught her to make." ^ These offices of " the » See S. Luke i. 1-4. =* Goulbourn's Holy Catfujlic Ch'urch, p. 294. I 528 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Church to teach, the Bible to prove," may be illustrated from the incident recorded in Acts viii. 26-40. The Ethiopian eunuch was " sitting in his chariot, and was reading the prophet Isaiah/' He was, then, in posses- sion of the Scriptures, and, according to the rather foolish saying, " the Bible, and the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants," these ought to have been sufficient for him. But plainly they were not; for in answer to Philip's question, " Understandest thou what thou readest ? " the answer is returned, " How can I, except someone should guide me ? " and this is followed by the further question, " Of whom speaketh the prophet this ? Of himself, or of some other ? " Something more was needed than the possession of the Scriptures, and that something was supplied by Philip, the representative of the ecclesici docens, who " opened his mouth, and beginning from this scripture preached unto him Jesus." Here we see the Church at work, and the right method to be followed, as it is seen throughout the Acts of the Apostles, where we everywhere find them stating the facts, and teaching with authority, while they prove their statements from the Scriptures, and refer their hearers to these as confirming them.^ And if this method was employed when only tlie Old Testament was in existence, it seems natural to suppose that much more should it be followed now, when the fuller revelation is also committed to writinjx.^ J See Acts ii. 14-36, iii. 12-26, xiii. 16-42, xvii. 2, 3, 11, xviii. 28. - See on tliis subje<;t Gore's Rohian Catholic Claims^ c. iii. and iv. AKTICLE XXI De auluritate ConcU iorvm (lenei^alimn, fieneralia Concilia sine jiissu et voluntate principum congregari non ]»os.sunt, et ubi convenerint, quia ex honiinibus constant, qui non onincs spiritu et verbo Dei reguntur, et errarc i>os8unt, et interduni eiTanmt, etiani in liis qua? ad normam pietatis pertinent : ideo qua? ab illis constituuntur, ut ad salutein necessaria, neque robur liabent, neque autoritatem, nisi ostendi possint e saciis literis esse desumpta. Of the aiUhority of General Cmtncih, General Councils may not be gathered together without the eoniniandnient and will of princes. And when they be gathered to- gether (forasnnich as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the spirit and word of God) they may err, and sometime have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor autho- rity, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scri[»ture. Since the Forty-two Articles were first published in 1553 this Article has remained practically unchanged.^ But before puUication a clause had been wisely omitted from the close of it, which, as we find from the MS. signed by the six royal chaplains,^ had stood in the original draft : " Possunt reges et pii magistratus, non expectata conciliorum generalium sententia aut convocatione, in * In the Eiujllsh edition of 1553 ** not only in worldly nwattei-s, but also " stood before " in things pertaining unto God." There was nothing corre- siwnding to these wonls in the Latin, and they were accordingly omitted in 1563. In the Latin " verbis Dei " stood in 1553 and 1563, being altered to the singular " verbo " in 1571. *■» State Papers, ♦'Domestic," Edward VI. vol. xv. No. 28. Cf. vol. i. p. 14, and Hard wick, p. 283. 629 530 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXI 531 republica sua juxta Dei verbum de rebus religionis constituere." The gravest objection might have been taken to such a clause, and we may be thankful that it was withdrawn before the Articles were published. Perhaps no Article gains more than this from being read in the light of the history of the time when it was drawn up, and from being illustrated by contemporary documents. Had we nothing but the bare letter of the Article itself to consider, it might be plausibly maintained that by saying that " General Councils have erred," it condemns those Councils which the whole Church has ever reverenced as truly general, and expressing her mind, such as Nicaea (325), Constantinople (381), Ephesus (431), and Chalcedon (451). Nothing, however, is more certain than the fact that no such sweeping condemnation is intended, for contemporary with the Forty-two Articles, and drawn up to a great extent by the very same men who are responsible for them, is the Reformatio Legum Ecclesi- asticarum ;^ and in this there is a remarkable section which runs parallel with the Article, amplifying its statements, and affording a practical exposition of it, and commentary upon its meaning. It runs as follows : — " Be conciliis quid sentiendum. "Jam vero conciliis, potissimum generalibus, tametsi ingentem honorem libenter deferimus, ea tamen longe omnia infra Scripturarum canonicarum dignitatem ponenda judicamus : sed et inter ipsa concilia magnum discrimen ponimus. Nam qusedam illorum, qualia sunt praecipua ilia quatuor, Nicenum, Constantinopolitanum primum, Ephesinum, et Chalcedonense, magna cum reverentia amplectimur et suscipimus. Quod quidem judicium de * See vol. i. p. 28 seq. multis aliis qua3 postea celebrata sunt ferimus, in quibus videmus et confitemur sanctissimos patres de beata et summa Trinitate, de Jesu Christo Domino et servatore nostro, et humana redemptione per eum procurata, juxta Scripturas divinas multa gravissime et perquam sancte constituisse. Quibus tamen non aliter fidem nostram obligandam esse censemus, nisi quatenus ex Scripturis Sanctis confirmari possint. Nam concilia nonnuUa interdum errasse, et contraria inter sese definivisse, partim in actionibus juris, partim etiam in Me] manifestum est. Itaque legantur concilia quidem cum' honore atque Christiana reverentia, sed interim ad Scripturarum piam certam rectamque regulam examin- entur."! The Article must beyond question be interpreted by this longer statement. It is certain, therefore, that it does not intend to cast any slur upon those Councils which are received " magna cum reverentia," but that it uses the term "General Councils" in a loose and popular way, of Councils which claimed to be " general," as well as of those which are truly representative of the mind of the whole Church. The necessity for such an Article is seen in the circumstances of the time. From the early days of Luther, the Eeformers, both on the Continent and in England, had persistently appealed to a free General Council, and finally the Pope (Paul III.) had been driven, in 1545, to summon a "General Council." But (1) it was called by the Pope alone, who claimed the right to cite to it, in person or by proxy, the king of England among other Christian princes ;2 and (2) it consisted only of bishops of the Koman obedience. It was therefore not such a Council as the Eeformers could regard as truly " general," or feel themselves compelled ' lief. Legum Eccles., De Summa Trinitate et Fide Catholica, c. xiv. - Cf. Dixon's History of (he Church of England, vol. i. p. 425. 532 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXI 533 to accept. But in view of the fact that it was actually being held when the Articles were drawn up, and that its decrees were certain to be appealed to as authorita- tive by the opponents of the Reformation, it was import- ant that in the Anglican formulary a statement should be found, asserting, in terms such as would justify a refusal to be bound by the decisions of Trent, the abstract position maintained with regard to " the authority of General Councils." Three principal statements are made concerning them — 1. They may not be gathered together without the consent of princes. 2. They are liable to err. 3. As a matter of history they actually have erred. I. They may not he gathered together without the consent of Princes. General Councils may not (non possunt) be gathered together without the commandment and will of princes. It is sometimes inferred fron^ the I-.atin " non possunt " that what is here meant is that as a matter of fact they cannot be so gathered together. This appears doubtful, for it is more probable that " non possunt " means " cannot lawfully," i.e. " may not."^ But, however this may be, either statement is true, for princes alone have it in their power to compel or to prohibit the attendance of their subjects, and therefore obviously have the right not only to be consulted as a matter of courtesy, but also to say ^ Cf. Article XX., where '* nee exponere potest*^ is equivalent to "neither may it so expound," and XXXVIL, where "Leges civiles possunt,'^ etc. can only mean as the English renders it, ** the laws of the realm may punish," etc. whether a CouncU shall or shall not be held » A« a matter of history there is no question that all th early General Couneils were summoned by the Emperor and not by the Pope.^ Indeed, the idea of a Gefera Councd seems to have originated, not with the Chu ch but^th the Emperor ; « and although, after the decline of the Empire and the division of Europe into several kmgdoms, smce there was no longer any one supreme Z7TrT o^ commanding and enforcfng the lend- that thl r'°P\''°'° ^«™"« ^o'^'^tries, it was natural that the Pope, whose power was steadily growing should not only preside at the Council when 'summoned bt? rel Vr '^' '°"''^"°°^ "" **; y«t it BtandB to rea«,n that even so this could only be properly done with " the consent of princes." * f ^ y "one Manning, vol. ii. c. xvi. rarcell s Life of ArcMmlwp Fn J*"** 1^ S,'™^ ^^ Constantine I. ; Constantinople by Theodosius I • 1 ope Leo I., I y Marcian. So the iKcond Council of Constantin„T,I» <«•« "• So early as 1533 the question was raispH in f«^i„,,^ • Henrv VTTF '« ar.r^«i <• xi. i " England m consequence of tttS-H that many pnnces have absolute power in their own realms, and a whole ent.e monarchy, no other prince may by his authority oil a Gel^erll 35 .> \ 534 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES II. General Councils are liable to err. When they be gathered together (forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the spirit and word of God) they may err. On this matter the verdict of history is conclusive. Had we not the experience of the past to teach us, it might have seemed, a priori, probable that God would not have allowed a body that is summoned as representative of the whole Church to err. But as it is, there can be no question on the subject The record of Councils, summoned as " General " ones and con- ducted with proper forms, is often a painful one to read; and the exhibitions of human passion and pre- judice sometimes exhibited in them have certainly shown that all their members are not necessarily " governed by the spirit of God." Moreover, they have always been treated by the Church as liable to err,^ for many of them have been reviewed by later Councils, and sometimes their verdicts have been reversed.- Coiincil " (Collier, Records, xxxviii.). Tliree years later a more authorita- tive "judgment concerning General Councils " was put forth by Convoca- tion, in which the divines of both houses gave their opinion that " neither the Bishop of Rome ne any one prince, of what estate, degi-ee, or pre- eminence soever he bo, may, by his own authority, call, indict, or summon any General Council, without the express consent, assent, and agi*ecment of the residue of Christian princes, and especially such as have within their own realms and seignories imperium menim, that is to say, of such as have the whole, entire, and supreme government and authority over all their subjects, without kuowledging or recognising of any other supremo power or authority," Burnet, I. ii. p. 301 sce reviewed by others, referring to the Council of Nic^ea as having decided that this should be done (see Robertson's note, in loc. and p. Ixxvi.). ^ Thus the ** Latrocinium " was summoned as a General Council, but its decisions were reversed by the Council of Chalcedon, 451. So also in ARTICLE XXI 535 Thus the Article is perfectly justified, not only in its second statement, but also in its third. III. As a viaiter of ffistmy, General Councils have erred. That they sometime have erred, eYen in things pertaining unto God (etiam in his quie ad normam pietatis pertinent), is a matter which can easily be shown when it is remembered that the Article is referring to any CoimcUs which claimed to be General. Thus Ariminum and Seleucia were summoned as General Councils representative of the whole Christian world, but they went fatally wrong " even in things pertaining to God." The same is true of many later Councils; and if the position taken up in Articles VI. and XX. with regard to Holy Scripture is sound, there can be no doubt that the closing words of the Article now under consideration are justified, and that things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scripture. The language of the Article itself and all that has here been said in the commentary upon it, is, of course, only one side of the whole truth about Councils, and that the least pleasant to dwell upon. It must never be forgotten that there is another side, and that the Church owes very much to the work of Councils which were truly " General " and representative. Nor has the Church of England been slow to acknowledge this. The language of the Reformaiio Legum Ecdcsiasticarum has the Iconoclastic Controversy, the seventh Council of Constantinople (754) condemned image-worship ; but its decrees were reversed by the second Council of Nicica, which sanctioned the practice in 787. Frankfort (794) condemned the practice, but the eighth of Constentinoi)le (869) sanctioned it. 536 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES been already cited. The Homily " Against peril of Idolatry " speaks of the six Councils which were allowed and received of all men ; and it may be added that by an Act of Parliament passed in the first year of Elizabeth's reign it was determined that " nothing is to be adjudged heresy, but that which heretofore has been so adjudged by the authority of the Canonical Scriptures, or the first four General Councils, or some other General Council, wherein the same has been declared heresy by the express word of Scripture." ^ The question remains, How is it to be known whether a Council is truly " General " and representative of the mind of the whole Church ? To this it is believed that no answer can be returned at the moment. However large may be the number of the bishops present, no guarantee is thereby afforded that they faithfully represent the mind of the universal Church. That which alone can show this, is the after-reception of the decisions of the Council hy the different parts of the Church, "Where the decisions win their way to uni- versal acceptance, there we have the needful guarantee that the Council has faithfully reflected the mind of the universal Church, and we may well be content to believe that the Council has not erred. But " the inerrancy of a Council can never be guaranteed at the moment. The test of the value of a Council is its after-reception by the Church." 2 ^ 1 Eliz. cap. 1. Some Anglican divines, as Hooker and Andrews, seem to recognise but four General Councils ; others, as Field and Hammond, recognise six. See Palmer's Treatise mi (he Churchy part IV. c. ix. * Bishop Forbes On the Ariieles, p. 298. On this, which is some- times called the Gallican theory of the test of the authority of General Councils, see Sir W. Palmer's Treatise on the Churchy j>art IV. c. vii. ; R. L. Ottley, Doctrine of the Incarnation, vol. i. p. 321 seq. ; and Cliurch HUtorical Society Lectures, series 2, p. 147 scq. AETICLE XXII De Purgatorio, Doctrina Romanensium de Pur- gatorio, do indulgentiis, de venera- tione et adoratione turn imaginum turn reliquiarum, nee noa de invo- catione sanctorum, res est futilis, inanitcr conficta, et nullis Scrip- turarum testimoniis innititur, imo verbo Dei ^ contradicit. Of Purgatory, The Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping, and Adoration, as well of Images as of Reliques, and also invocation of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scrij)ture, but rather repugnant to the word of God. This Article differs in one important point from the original one as first published in 1553, for in that the teaching condemned was termed " the doctrine of school- authors" (doctrina scholasticorum). The effect of the substitution of " the Eomish doctrine " (doctrina Roman- ensium) for this is to make the Article condemn a present current form of teaching rather than the formal system of doctors whose day was past.^ There is another matter in the history of the Article which deserves to be noticed, viz. that in the Article as originally drafted was included a condemnation of the scholastic doctrine de precatione pro defunctis. These words are found in the MS. signed by the six royal chaplains,^ * The edition of 1553 has " perniciose contradicit" ; but the adverb was struck out in 1563, there being nothing corresponding to it in the English Article. * "The words 'Romanenses' and * Romanistas* were already used as far back as 1520 by Luther and Ulrich von Hutten, to designate the extreme mediaeval party."— Hard wick, p. 410. ' See above, p. 629, and vol. i. p. 13. 537 538 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXII 539 but they disappeared before tlie Article was published, — a fact which is highly significant, as it shows that the Church of England deliberately abstained from seeming to express any condemnation of the practice of praying for the departed, and that it is impossible to strain the words of this Article on Purgatory to indicate such a condemnation.^ With regard to the doctrines here condemned, it is important to bear in mind that when the Article was originally drawn up, and even when it was revised and republished in 1563, none of them liad been considered by the Council of Trent. The Article cannot, then, have been deliberately aimed at the formal decrees of that Council ; and, as a matter of fact, the decrees on these particular subjects, which were published during the last session of the Council in December 1563, were drawn up with studied moderation, and some of the strong language of our Article could hardly be truthfully said to apply to the doctrine as stated in them, though it certainly was not one whit too strong in its condemnation of the current practice and teaching which the Eeformers had before them. It will be convenient at this point to quote so much of the Tridentine decree as bears on the subject before us, as the language used in it bears striking testimony to the existence of the errors which called forth the vigorous protest of our own Eeformers. On Furgcdory the decree simply lays down that " there is a Purgatory, and that the souls there retained are relieved by the suffrages of the faithful, but chiefly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar." It then proceeds : "Among the uneducated vulgar, let the more difficult and subtle questions, and those which tend not to edifi- ^ It follows from this that the subject of pi-ayer for the departed docs not come l)efore us for consideration here. Reference may, however, l)e made to an article on "the Church of England and Prayers for the Dejuirtpd" in the Church Quarterly RevieAr, vol. x. p. 1. cation, and seldom contribute aught towards piety, be kept back from popular discouraes. Neither let them suffer the public mention and treatment of uncertain points, or such as look like falsehood. But those things which tend to a certain kind of curiosity or superstition, or which savour of filthy lucre, let them prohibit as scandals and stumbling-blocks of the faithful." ^ With regard to Pardons, it was stated that as the power of granting indulgences was granted by Christ to His Church, the use of them was to be retained ; and those were to be anathematised who either assert that they are useless, or who deny that there is in the Church the power of granting them. " In granting them, how- ever, it desires that, according to the ancient and approved custom in the Church, moderation be observed, lest by excessive facility ecclesiastical discipline be enervated. And desiring the amendment and correction of the abuses which have crept into these matters, and by occasion of which this excellent name of indulgences is blasphemed by heretics, it ordains generally by this decree, that all evil gains for the obtaining of them, whence a most abundant cause of abuses among Christian people has been derived, be utterly abolished. But as regards other matters which have proceeded from super- stition, ignorance, irreverence, or from any other cause, * "Cum Catholica Ecclesia . . . docuerit Purgatorium esse, animasque ibi detentas, fidelium suffragiis, potissimum vero acceptabili altaris sacri- ficio juvari ; praecipit sancta Synodus Episcopis ut sanam de Purgatorio doctrinam, a Sanctis Patribus et sacris Conciliis traditam, a Christi fidelibus credi, teneri, doceri, et ubique praedicari, diligenter studeant. Apud rudem vero plebeni difficiliores ac subtiliores quaestiones, quaeque ad aedifi- cationem non faciunt, et ex quibus plerumque nulla fit pietatis accessio, a popularibus concionibus secludantur. Incerta item, vel quae specie falsi laborant, evulgari, ac tractari non pemiittant. Ea vero, quae ad curiosi- tatem quamdam, aut superstitionem spectant, vel turpe lucrum sapiant, tanquani scandala, et fidelium oftendicula prohibeant."— Cowc. Trid., Sess. XXV., Deeretum de Purgatorio. 540 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXII 541 r since, by reason of the manifold corruptions in the places and provinces where the said abuses are com- mitted, they cannot conveniently be specially prohibited ; it commands all bishops diligently to collect all abuses of this nature, and report them in the first provincial synod," etc.^ On the adoration of images aiid relics it says that due honour and veneration is to be awarded to the images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and the sixints, " not that any virtue or divinity is believed to be in them, on account of which they are to be worshipped ; or that anything is to be asked of them ; or that confidence is to be reposed in images, as was done of old by the heathen, who placed their hope in idols; but because the honour which is shown to them is referred to the prototypes which they represent; so that by the images which we kiss, and before which we uncover the head and prostrate our- selves, we adore Christ, and venerate the saints whose similitude they bear. . . . And if any abuses have crept in amongst these holy and salutary observances, the holy * "Cum potestas confercndi Indulgentias a Christo ecclesiaj coiiccssa sit, atque hujusmodi potestate, divinitus sibi tradita, autiquissiiiiis etiara teniporibus ilia usa fuerit ; sacrosancta Synodus indulgentiarum usum, Christiano populo maxime salutarem et sacrorum Concilionim auctoritatc probatum, in ecclesia retinendum esse docet, et praecipit, eosque anatlie- mate daninat, qui aut inutiles esse asserunt, vel cas concedeudi in ecclesia potestatem esse negaut. In his tamen concedendis moderationem juxta veterem et probatam in ecclesia consuetudinem adhiberi cupit ; ne niniia facilitate ecclesiastica disciplina enervetur. Abusus vero, qui in his irrep- serunt, quorum occasione insigne hoc Indulgentiarum nomen ab haereticis blasphematur, emendates et correctos cujaens, praesenti decreto generaliter statuit pravos qusestus omnes pro his consequendis, unde plurima in Christiano populo abusuum causa fluxit, omnino obolendos esse. Cseteroe vero, qui ex superstitione, ignorantia, irrevereutia, aut aliunde quomodo- curaque proveneruut, cum ob multiplices locorum et provinciarum, apud quas hi committuntur, corruptelas commode nequeaut 8i)ecialiter prohiberi ; mandat omnibus Episcopis, ut diligenter quisque hujusmodi abusus eccle- siae suae colligat, eosque in prima synodo i)rovinciali referat," etc.— Cow- tinucUio Sessionis xxv., Decretum de IndiUgentiis. Synod earnestly desires that they be utterly abolished ; in such wise that no images conducive to false doctrine, and furnishing occasion of dangerous error to the unedu- cated, be set up. . . . Moreover, in the invocation of saints, the veneration of relics, and the sacred use of images, every superstition shall be removed, all filthy lucre be abolished, finally all lasciviousness be avoided ; in such wise that figures shall not be painted or adorned with a wantonness of beauty, nor shall men pervert the celebration of the saints and the visitation of relics into revellings and drunkenness; as if festivals were cele- brated to the honour of saints by luxury and wanton- ness." 1 So on the subject of invocation of saints the Council enjoins that the people be taught " that the saints reign- ing with Christ offer their prayers for men to God, and that it is good and useful to invoke them as suppliants, and to resort to their prayers, aid, and help for obtain- ing benefits from God through His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who alone is our Kedeemer and Saviour ; and that * "Imaginibus Christi, Deii^anc Virginis, et aliorum sanctorum in templis pnesertim habcndas et retinendas, cisquo debitum honorem et venerationem imiKjrtiendam, non quod credatur inessc aliqna in iis Divinitas, vel virtus, propter quani sint colendae ; vel quod ab eis sit aliquid i>etenduni ; vel quod liducia in imaginibus sit Agenda, veluti olim tiebat a gentibus, quae in idolis spem suam coUocabant; sed (juoniam honos qui eis exhibetur, refertur ad prototypa, quae illae repraeseutant : ita ut per imagines quae osculamur, et coram quibus caput aperimus et procum- bimus, Christum adoremus, et sanctos, quorum illae similitudinem gerunt vcneremur. ... In has autem sanctas et salutares observationes, si qui abusus irrepserint, eos prorsus aboleri sancta Synodus vehementer cupit, ita ut nullae falsi dogmatis imagines, et rudibus periculosi erroris occa- sionem praebentes, statuantur. . . . Onmis porro superstitio in sanctorum invocatione, Reliquiarum veneratione, et imaginum sacro usu tollatur, omnis turpis quaestus eliminetur, omnis denique lascivia vitetur, ita ut procaci venustate imagines non pingantur, nee ornentur, et sanctorum celebratione, et reliquiarum visitatione homines ad comessationes atque ebrietates non abutantur, quasi festi dies in honorem sanctorum per luxum, ac lasciviam agantur." — Sess. xxv. De InvocatioTie, etc. 542 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXII 54?, ! I they thiuk impiously who deny that the saints, who enjoy eternal happiness in heaven, are to be invoked ; or who assert either that they do not pray for men, or that the invocation of them to pray for each of us in particular is idolatry ; or that it is repugnant to the word of God, and is opposed to the honour of the one Mediator between God and men, Christ Jesus ; or that it is a fond thing to supplicate orally or inwardly those who reign in heaven."^ It is impossible to read these extracts without feeling how gross must have been the abuses which called forth such language, and it would be unfair to neglect to take into account the fact that our own Article was drawn up prior to these definitions and the practical reforms which the Council of Trent endeavoured to bring about. We proceed now to the consideration of the "Romish doctrines " condemned in the Article. Four of them are specified. 1. Purgatory. 2. Pardons. 3. Adoration of images and relics. 4. Invocation of saints. I. Purgatory, The Romish doctrine of Purgatory ... is a * . . . *' Docentes eos, sanctos tma cum Christo regnantes, orationes suas pro hominibus Deo offerre : bonuni atoranas jMi-nas alii in lia<; vita tantuin, alii |)ost iuort4;ni, alii et nniu; et tunc, vonuntanieu nnlc Jutliciuni illnd seveiissin nun novis- sinnniique i>atiuntur. Non auteni omnes veniunt in senipiterna.s pn-nas, 4111^ post illiid jiidioiuni sunt liitni-.t', ([ui iKJst mortem su.stint*ni temiKjrales. Nam quibusdam, quodin isto non remittitur, remitti in tiituro sieculo, id est, ne futuri sseculi aitemo supplicio puuiantur, jam supra diximus." — De Civitate Dei, XXI. u. xiii. ARTICLE XXII 547 only, or here and hereafter both, or here that it may not be hereafter, I do not argue against it, for perhaps it is true." * Plainly there was no formal doctrine of the Church on the subject when a Father of the weight and learning of Augustine could write in this way; and not till a century and a half after his death do we find anything approaching to an assertion with any claim to authority. At the close of the sixth century Gregory the Great, in his " Dialogues," lays down distinctly that " a purgatorial fire before the judgment for lighter faults is to be believed." 2 But even so this is only a passing statement by a single writer, however great his authority, and it would seem that there is nothing which can be regarded as in any way a judgment of the Church upon the subject till we come to the Council of Florence in 1439. At this Council the representatives of the Greeks were persuaded to admit that " the middle sort of souls were in a place of torment, but whether that were fire or darkness and tempest, or something else, they would not contend," ^ and accordingly, when the decree of union was drawn up, it was asserted in it that " if such as be truly penitent die in the grace of God before they have made satisfaction for their sins by * "Post istius sane corporis mortem, donee ad ilium veniatur, qui post i-esurrectionem corporum futurus est damnationis et remunerationis ultimus dies, si hoc temjioris intervallo spiritus defunctorum ejusmodi igncm dicuntur i)eri)cti, quem non sentiant illi qui non habuerunt tales mores et amores in liujus corporis vita, ut eonmi ligna, ftcnum, stipula consumatur, alii vero sentiant qui ejusmodi secum a;dificia portaverunt, sive ibi tantum, sive et hie et ibi, sive ideo hie ut non ibi, sfccularia, quam- yis a damnatione venalia, concremantem ignem transitoriae tribulationis inveniant, non redarguo, quia forsitan verum est."— 0/?. clt. c. xxvi. -" Sed t44men de quibusdam levibus rulpis esse ante judicium purga- torius ignis credendus est. Sed tamen hoe de parvis minimisqu*- peccatis lieri posse credenduni est ; sicut est assiduus otiosus sermo, immoderatus risus," etc.— Z>ta/. IV. e. xxxix. * **Ai 5^ tUffai i/irdpxovffi fiiv ev (SacravKXTrjp'Kt) Kai etre vvp iarlv, el're i^6rayers, and alms of the living, and are thereby freed from the bonds of Hades. See Plumptre, I.e., and Winer, Confesnons of ChristeTuJUym, p. 312. 2 Bp. Forbes On the Articles, p. 309. there is but little in Holy Scripture which can be quoted as bearing directly upon the doctrine. Of the " twenty passages " of which Bellarmine boasts,^ there are very few which any controversialist would venture to cite at the present day. Indeed, some of them are so weak {e.g. "We went through fire and water, and Thou broughtest out into a wealthy place ") that they only indicate into what desperate straits the man who could urge them as serious arguments was driven in order to find any scriptural proof whatever. It is not too much to say that, when once it is recognised that prayer for the departed does not necessarily involve any belief in purgatory ,2 there are not more than three or four passages which require any consideration whatever. The following are perhaps the most important, and are sometimes quoted at the present day, as implying a terminable punishment, which is said to be purgatorial only, after death : — S. Matt. V. 26: " Thou shalt by no means come out thence till thou hast paid the last farthing." Cf. S. Luke xii. 59. S. Matt, xviii 34: "His lord delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due. So like- wise shall also my heavenly Father do unto you," etc. S. Matt. xii. 32 : " It shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which is to come." * De Purgaiorio, I. c. xv. The twenty passages are these,— ten from the Old Testament and ten from the New Testament,— 2 Mace. xii. 44 ; Tobit iv. 17 ; 1 Sam. xxxi. 13 ; Ps. xxxviii. 1, Ixvi. 12 ; Is. iv. 4,' ix. 18; Mic. vii. 8, 9 ; Zech. ix. 11 ; Mai. iii. 3 ; S. Matt. xii. 32 ; 1 Cor. iii! 12-15, XV. 29 ; S. Matt. v. 25, 26, v. 22 ; S. Luke xvi. 9, xxiii. 43 ; Acte ii. 24 ; Phil. ii. 10 ; Rev. v. 3. See the discussion of them in op. cU. c. ui.-vm. * 2 Mace, xii 44 certainly shows the belief of the ancient Jews in the efficacy of prayer for the depaited in the first or second century B.C. 36 550 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXII 551 i In the case of the first two passages cited, it is urged that they place a term to the punishment, and therefore imply a purgatory from which men will at some time be delivered. But such an inference is extremely precarious, and those who rely on it would probably be the last to apply a similar method of arguing to the parallel phrase in S. Matt. i. 25. The exegesis of S. Chrysostom is surely sound, which takes it as a form of expression intended to indicate the perpetual duration of the penalty, Tovreari SiijviKco^, ovhiirto yap diroBaxreL^ While in the case of the third passage, the form of expression is evidently intended as an emphatic way of stating the irremediableness of the condition, and there is nothing in it to warrant the inference that some sins are forgiven in the world to come which are not forgiven in this world.^ There remains the passage in 1 Cor. iii. 10-15 ; and this, if carefully considered, will be seen to have no bearing whatever on the doctrine. It stands as follows in the Eevised Version : — " According to the grace of God which was given unto me, as a wise master-builder I laid a foundation ; and another buildeth thereon. But let each man take heed how he buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. But if any man buildeth on this foundation gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble, each man's work shall be made manifest ; for the day shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire ; and the fire itself shall prove each man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work shall abide, which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward. * Horn, in loe. Cf. Augustine, ' * Miror si non earn significat poenam quae vocaturaeterna."— Z)e Sermone Domini in Monte, I. xi. * See Salmond's Christian Doctrine of Immortality, p. 380, for a good statement of this. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss : but he himself shall be saved ; yet so as through fire." It is probable that it is from this passage, more than from any other, that the idea of a purgatorial fire has arisen. But, as a matter of fact, whatever the passage may mean, — and there are different interpretations of it which are possible, — the one thing it cannot refer to is a purgatory between death and judgment. According to the Apostle, it is " the day " which " is to be revealed in fire " (eV irvpl aTroKaXvirreTai), and such an expression is never used of the intermediate state. It can only refer to the judgment day, or to the day of persecution in this life. It appears to signify the former here ; and if so, the Apostle is here regarding the day of judgment as a fiery ordeal which wQl test the work of Christian ministers. If the structure they have reared be durable, *'it shall abide." If, however, through weakness and incompetence, they have buQt one of perishable material, it shall be burnt, and the careless builder shall " suffer loss," even though (since he built on the right foundation) "he himself shall be saved ; yet so as by fire."i This appears to be the general drift of the passage ; and, as was said above, it cannot fairly be used in support ^ Cf. Bp. Lightfoot, Notes on the Epistles of S. Paul, p. 193 : '* That the Apostle does not intend any purgatorial fire by this expression will appear from the following considerations :—(l) Fire is here simply regarded as a destructive agency ; there is no trace here of the idea of refining or purging, an attribute elsewhere given to it, as in Mai. iii. 3, though even there the prophet seems to speak of purging the whole nation by destroying the wicked, not of purging sin in the individual man. (2) The whole image implies a momentary effect, and not a slow, continuous process. The Lord shall appear in a flash of light and a flame of fire. The light shall dart its rays into the innermost recesses of the moral world. The flame shall reduce to ashes the superstructure raised by the careless or unskilful buUder. The builder himself shall flee for bis life. He shall escape, but scorched, and with the marks of the flames about him." n: t il 552 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXII 553 . ( of the doctrine we are now considering. The fire is probatory^ not purgatorial ; and it is placed at the last day, not in the interval between death and judgment Since, then, these passages, which have sometimes been urged in favour of the doctrine, have broken down, it is now generally acknowledged that there is little or nothing directly bearing on the subject in Scripture. The question must, therefore, be decided by broad con- siderations, and by reference to the general tenor of Scriptural teaching on the state after death, and man's relation to God. In this the following points, which bear on the matter before us, seem to stand out clearly : — 1. This life is the time of man's probation; and no countenance is given to the view that a " second chance," or time of probation, is to be looked for after death.^ " We must all be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ ; that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad " (2 Cor. v. 10). The award will, then, be made for things done in the body, i.e. in this life. 2. The " dead which die in the Lord " are in a state of peace; "they rest from their labours" (Rev. xiv. 13). So for S. Paul " to depart " is " to be with Christ " (Phil. i. 23). But the dead are not yet made perfect. The souls of the martyrs are represented as " under the altar," and crying unto God — "and there was given them to each one a white robe ; and it was said unto them that they should rest yet for a little time, until their fellow-servants also, and their brethren, which should be killed even as they were, should be fulfilled" (Rev. vi. 9-11 ; cf. Heb. xi. 40). The teaching summed up under this last head seems * On 1 Pet. iii. 18, which is sometimes referred to in this connection, see vol. i. p. 170 seq. entirely inconsistent with any notice of a purgatory of pain, to be endured by the great majority of those who die in grace, before they are admitted to the rest of Paradise. But we are told that " without holiness no man shall see the Lord" (Heb. xii. 14); and since the vast mass of the faithful pass out of this life in a state of very imperfect holiness, it is inferred that there is " a place in which souls who depart this life in the grace of God suffer for a time because they still need to be cleansed from venial, or have still to pay the temporal punishment due to mortal, sins, the guilt and the eternal punishment of which have been remitted." ^ In this form the doctrine is stated by modern Romanists. But even in this form (which is very different from the current medieval teaching) it must be rejected as wanting in Scriptural and Patristic authority, as well as because it involves a purgatory of imin. That there is progress after death would seem to be implied in Scripture ; - and it is probable that this may involve a process of gradual jDurification, only it cannot be said that so much is actually revealed. The possibility remains, that the stains of sin, which cling even to the best, may be removed in the moment of death, so that the sanctification may be complete, " without which no man shall see the Lord." But to many minds it will appear far more probable, and far more in accordance with what we know of God's dealings with men, that as the stains were gradually acquired, and were gradually being removed during this life, so still after death their removal should be gradual. Such a view is certamly not con- demned by the terras of the Article before us.^ But * Addis and Arnold, A Catlwlic Dictionary, p. 706. - See Phil. i. 6 : ** Being confident of this very thing, that He which began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Jesus Christ," " Cf. The Life and Letters of F. J. A. Hort, vol. ii. p. 336 : " Nothing, ■'I m. 554 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXII 555 I even though it should appear to be highly probable, it cannot be regarded as revealed doctrine. It is but a " pious opinion," and not a matter which ought to be taught as part of God's certain truth. We may fairly conclude, with Bishop Andrews : " Whatever has not a stronger basis in Holy Scripture may have a place among the opinions of the school, which are not without fear of the contrary being true ; but among Articles of faith it cannot. Let it therefore occupy its own place ; let it be an opinion ... but let it not pertain to the faith, nay, let it not even be accounted an ecclesiastical doctrine." ^ IL Pardons (Lidulgentice). The Romish doctrine of pardons is so closely connected with the theory of " works of supererogation," that in discussing the fourteenth Article it was necessary to anticipate much that would naturally have found a place here. There is no need to repeat the sketch there given of the growth of the system of granting indul- gences; or of the Scriptural arguments against the practice. All that seems to be required here is (a) to give an explanation of the word " indulgences," and (h) I think, can be clearer than that the Article does 7wt condemn all doctrine that may be called a doctrine of purgatory. ... * Purgatory * is not a word that I should myself spontaneously adopt, because it is associated with Ronaan theories about the future state for which I see no foundation. But the idea of purgation, of cleansing as by fire, seems to me insei^arable from what the Bible teaches us of the Divine chastisements ; and though littlo is said directiy respecting the future state, it seems to me incredible tliat the Divine chastisements should in this respect change their chai-acter when this visible life is ended. Neither now nor hereafter is there reason to suppose that they act mechanically as by an irresistible natural process, irrespectively of human will and acceptance." Reference may also be made to Plumptre's Spirits in Prison, p. 307 scq. * Jiesponsio ad Bellamiinum, c. viii. p. 287 (A. C. Lib.). to add a brief description of the "Komish doctrine" against which the terms of the Article are directed. (a) The word " Indulgences" — The word " indulgentia," which was originally used of gentleness and tenderness, had come in the language of the Latin jurisconsults to signify definitely a remission of taxation or of punish- ment;^ and in all probability this suggested the technical use of the word which grew up in course of time within the Christian Church. But for centuries before any such technical use can be traced, the word had been a familiar one in Christian circles, in the sense of God's pardon and forgiveness. It is used in the Vulgate in Is. IxL 1, "to proclaim liberty to the captives " (et prsedicarem captivis indidgentiam), as well as in a few other passages ; ^ and is a common word in the writings of the Christian Fathers from the earliest times : ^ indulgentia, relaxatio, remissio, and venia, all being used generally of the pardon and forgiveness of God, sometimes in connection with the penitential system, and sometimes not. It was shown under Article XIV. that all these words were employed of the formal grants of " pardon " or " indulgence " dispensed by the Pope from the eleventh century onwards; and (probably for the reason stated above) the word "in- dulgentise " became in course of time the technical name by which they were known. In England we find both words, " pardon " and ^ Aramianus Marcellinus, XVI. v. 16; Cod. Theod. IX. xxxiv., De indiUge^Uiis criminum. ^ Viz. Judith viii. 14 ; Is. Ixiii. 7, 9 ; 1 Cor. vii. 6. ' TertuUian has it more than once : Dc Exhort. Cast. iii. ; Adv. FalerU. xxix. ; Adv. Marc. IV. xxix. ; and Cyprian uses it, not only of " favour" and "goodness," but definitely of "forgiveness." Be bono patierUicef viii. (indulgentia criminis) ; De lapsis, xvi. (remittere aut donare indul- gentia sua) ; £p. Iv. § 7. See Stadia Biblica et Ecdesiastica, vol. iv. p. 248. fe 556 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXII 557 V "indulgence," freely used from the days of Langland downwards. (b) The Romish doctrine of pardons conderaned in the Article. — The sketch which has been already given of the growth of the system will have shown pretty clearly what the claims made for the indulgences granted by Tetzel and the preachers were.^ Luther in his famous theses (1517) was prepared to admit them as a relaxation of canonical penance, but no further.^ But, as is well known, this was totally insufficient for the ecclesiastical authorities. The decree of Leo x. (1518) reasserted the medieval doctrine, and the papal Bull of excommunica- tion (Uxsurge Domine, 1520) condemned as pestiferous, pernicious, and scandalous the assertions of Luther on this subject.^ The Council of Trent (1563), as we have seen, retained the custom, though frankly acknow- ledging the abuses. But unhappily the Roman Church still stands committed to the view that they can avail to help the souls in purgatory, though, as formally held, only per modum sitffragii ; and though the worst scandals have disappeared since the Tridentine decrees were issued, yet it is clear that Rome has retained only too much of the medieval system, and that the indulgences still granted are far more than a mere remission of ecclesi- astical penance imposed by the Church. They differ, then, entirely from their original form, having practically little or nothing to do with ecclesiastical censures on the living, but being mainly concerned with God's chastise- ment in the intermediate state. And while we frankly admit the power of " binding and loosing " which belongs * Cf. also Creighton's History of tJte Papticy, vol. v. p. 68 seq., for an admirable sketch of the development of practice and teaching concerning indulgences. - The theses are given in full in SchaflTs Histanj of the {Lutheran) Reformation^ vol. i. p. IttO seq, - See the Bull itself in Sohaff, op. cit. p. 235. to the Church, we are compelled to reject altogether the theological defence for indulgences constructed by the schoolmen, and with it the whole practical system of granting them which it was constructed to support. III. The Jdoration of Images and Belies, In considering the Romish doctrine ... of the worshipping and adoration, as well of images as of reliques, it will once more be convenient to make a further division, and to consider separately (a) the history of the practice, and (b) the Scriptural arguments concerning it. (a) The history of the practice. — In the earliest ages of the Church there was some not unnatural hesitation as to the use of art in connection with Christian worship.^ It had been so steeped in the spirit of an impure heathenism, that the Church was shy of consecrating it for religious purposes. The Catacombs, however, reveal to us the beginnings of a Christian art ; and we find from Tertullian that, by the end of the second century, it was customary to paint the figure of the Good Shepherd on the Eucharistic chalice.^ In the fourth century, pictures began to be more freely introduced into the churches, though not without protest from various Fathers ; ^ and ^ The language of Irenaeus on the followers of Carjwcrates does not look as if he approved of religious images and pictures, or as if such were usual among Christians: "Etiam imagines, quasdem quidem depictas, quasdam auteni et de reliqua materia fabricatas habent, dicens formam Christi factam a Pilato, illo in tempore quo fuit Jesus cum hominibus. Kt has ooronant, et proponunt eas cum imaginibus mundi philosophorum, videlicet cum imagine Pythagorae, et Platonis, et Aristotelis, et reli- quorum ; et reliquam observationem circa eas similiter ut gentes faciunt." — Adv. Hcer. I. xx. -"Pastor quern in chalice depingis. "— 2?c pudic. c. x.; of. c. vii. "pictui-ae calicura." ' E.g. Epiphanius (390) describes how he found a painting of Christ or it « 558 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I V i 1 from this time forward the cultus of both images and relics seems steadily to have increased. A great impetus was given to the latter by S. Helena's discovery of the remains of the true cross in 326. By the close of the fourth century it was believed that miracles were wrought by the relics of the saints and martyrs ; ^ and by the eighth century, in spite of protests raised from time to time,- the practice of paying " worship " and " adoration " to images and relics had reached such a height that a reaction set in, and a vigorous protest was made against it Whereas originally pictures and images had been but the " books of the unlearned," by this time they had come to be regarded with such superstitious reverence, and such acts of homage and " worship " were paid to them, that the Church could with difficulty be cleared from the charge of idolatry. Hence the great " icono- clastic controversy " of the eighth century, in which for the most part the Emperors at Constantinople (e.g. Leo the Isaurian and Con stan tine Copronymus) took the lead in destroying the images, and the Popes at Rome con- stituted themselves the champions of the cultus. Into the dreary history of the controversy there is no need to enter here.^ It will be sufficient to mention that the ¥ some saint on a curtain in a church at Anablatha in Palestine, and tore it down because it was contrary to the authority of the Scriptures, in S. ffieronymi EpistolcB, li. 9. So the Council of Elvira (a.d. 305) forbade pictures to be placed in churches: "Placuit picturas in Ecclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur et adoratur in parietibus dcpingatur." — Canon xxxvi. This was "evidently not directed against a prospective or imaginary danger, but against an actual and proba>)ly a growing practice." — Westcott, Epp. of S. John^ p. 329. ^ See Augustine, Ik Civitate Dei, XXII. viii., and ConfemUms, IX. vii., for notices of some of these. 2 See the letters of Gregory the Great to Serenus, Epp. VII. ii. 3, and IX. iv. 9. * See Milman's LcUin Christianity y vol. ii. p. 339 seq., and the excellent lecture in Archbp. Trench's Medieval Church Histarty entirely coUapsed, and the " feast of orthodoxy " was established to commemorate the triumph of their ^ 'Opli'ofiep odv iKptpelt/. irdari Kal ififieXel^ wapairXriffLoji r<^ rvn^ tov Ti/ilov Kal ^(ooxoiov aravpov dvarldeffdai rds ff^irras Kai dylas eUdvas, rAt ^te "xjHaijArijav koI yl/riidos Kal er^pai vXrjs iiriTTjdelws ix^^^V^ ^v rah dylai% TOV GeoO iKKXrfalais, iv Upoh ffKcijeai Kal iffd^ai, rolxois re Kal aavlaip, (HKoii re Kal oSois' rrji re roO Kvplov Kal Qeov Kal aorrijpos rjfiQv ^Irjaov X/Jtorow eU6vos, Kal rrjs dxpdvTov SeffTrolvrjs ti/xCov t^j dyias QeordKov, ri/iluv re iyyiXuv, Kal irdvruiv dyluv Kal baltav dvdpQv . . . Kal raiVats dairafffidv Kal rifiijriKrjv TrpoffKiivtjffiv diroviixeiv oO fiTjv rrjp Kard trlariv tj/jluv dXijdipijv \arpeiav, ^ irpiTei pJivrj r^ delq. (p6aei. — Labbe and Cossart, vol. iv. p. 456. The translation given above is in Milman's Latin ClwislianUyy vol. iu p. 391. Ii (f 560 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES opponents. From this time forward we hear but little of any opposition to image worship,^ and the practice was generally accepted without question in both East ^ and West, until S. Thomas Aquinas lays down definitely that " the same reverence should be displayed towards an image of Christ and towards Christ Himself; and seeing that Christ is adored with the adoration of latria, it follows that His image is to be adored with the adora- tion of l€U7'ia " ; and again, " the Cross is adored with the same adoration as Christ, that is, with the adoration of latria, and for that reason we address and supplicate the Cross just as we do the Crucified Himself." ^ In accord- ance with this we find in the Roman Missal an office for the adoration of the Cross on Good Friday, in which full directions are given for the adoration of the Cross, and an antiphon is sung, beginning, " Crucem tuam adoramus ^ The Council of Frankfort (794), however, rejected the second Council of Niciea, and the Caroline books absolutely condemned any adoration or worship of images. See Palmer, Treatise v Kal iin-€V^iv Kal cvxapiffriav ovk irorov Kal Ayloii vpwr- "seems to have been quite unjustly claimed in favour of addressing petitions to departed saints. It is next to certain, as the whole context shows, that he had in his mind none but living saints." ^ And this explanation is confirmed by words which he uses elsewhere, saying of the " ten thousand sacred powers " which men " have on their side when they pray to God," that uninvoked (aKXrjroi), these pray with them and bring help to our perishable race, and, if I may so speak, take up arms alongside of it." ^ It is, then, only in the latter part of the fourth century that the evidence for direct invocation really begins.^ The Fathers of this age who have been cited in favour of the practice are these : in the East, S. Basil the Great (370), Gregory Nazianzen (370) and Gregory Nyssen (370), Ephraem the Syrian (370) and S. Chrysostom (390). In the West, S. Ambrose (380) and S. Augustine (400). Their testimony has been carefully examined by Dean Luckock in his volume After DecUh, and the conclusion at which he arrives is that "S. Chrysostom's contradictions are such as to invalidate his evidence, that S. Gregory Nazianzen speaks doubtfully, that S. Ambrose, in the little which he has said upon the subject, is inconsistent with himself ; but that the testimony of SS. Basil, Gregory Nyssen, Ephraem, and Augustine remains so far unshaken." * Some of the €v(yK€iv dXXA ri fUv S^o, Xiyu dij ivrev^iv koI ei/xapiaHav oO /xSpov aylois dXX4 dif Kal dvdpiairois, ttjv Si dirjaiv fiovhv ayiois, et ny eCfpcdclrj UaOXoi ^ Uirpos tya (tHftcXi^auxriv ijfids d^lovs iroioOtrrei toG rvx'tiv t^5 dedofiivrjs airoU i^owrlai Tpbi rd a/xapri^fiara dfpUvat. — De Oratione, 14. * After Death, p. 187. ' "Oare roKfji^v ij/idi \4yetv, 8ti dvBpilyiroii, /xerh Tpoaip^eretas irpcyriSefjJvoit tA Kpelrrova, evxofUvois r^ Gey fivpiai Saai SlkKtitoi avveiJXOPTai dvvdfieis iepai, av/xrapixovaai ti^ diriK-upi^ ijfiQy yivei, Kal tv' oOrws elvu, ertinet. Sicut enim angelis, ita ct Sanctis qui Deo assistunt, petitiones nostrse innotescunt in Verbo Dei quod conteniplantur."— ^m^cTi^. IV. dist. xlv. 6. 572 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 11 I hear our prayers, though it is prohahle that God reveals them to them";^ and even so late as the sixteenth century Cardinal Cajetan is forced to admit that " we have no certain knowledge as to whether the saints are aware of our prayers, though we piously believe it" ^ In the absence, therefore, of any distinct revelation, and in the face of so much doubt and uncertainty, it would appear that the Church of England is amply justified (1) in removing from the public services of the Church all traces of such direct invocations, including the " Ave Maria" as well as the " Ora pro nobis";* and (2) in condemning in round terms in the Article before us the current teaching and practice, which can be abundantly shown to be a fond^ thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of God. ^"Non esse ex ratione beatitudinia, quod beati audiant orationes nostras, probabile tamen esse quod Deus ipse revelat."— /n Sent IV. dist. xlv. q. 4, quoted in Forbes, Gonsid. Modest, vol. ii. p. 178. • " Certa ratione nescimus an sancti nostra cognoscant, quamvis pie hoc credamus."— /ti 2a 2*, q. Ixxxviii. art. 5, quoted in Forbes, op. eit. p. 176. ' When the English Litany was first published in 1544, all the invo- cations of saints (which had formed so prominent a feature in this service) were deleted, except three clauses, namely — " Saint Mary, mother of God our Saviour Jesu Christ, pi-ay for us. "All holy angels and archangels, and all holy orders of blessed spirits, pray for us. "All holy patriarchs and prophets, apostles, martyrs, confessors and virgins, and all the blessed company of heaven, pray for us." On the publication of the first Prayer Book of Edward vi. in 1549 these three clauses were omitted, and all trace of the direct invocation of the saints was removed from the public offices of the English Church. * Fond {inanis)f i.e. foolish. Shakespeare uses the word in the same sense — *' Thou fond mad man, hear me but speak a word." Jiomeo and, Juliet, III. iii. 62. " And for his dreams, I wonder he is ao fond To trust the mockery of unquiet slumber." Hichnrd III. III. ii. 26. ARTICLE XXIII Dc vocatione Ministrontm. Non licet cuiquam sumere sibi munus publico praedicandi, aut ad- ministrandi sacramenta in ecclesia, nisi prius fuerit ad hsec obeunda legitime vocatus et missus. Atque illos legitime vocatos et missos existimare debemus, qui per hom- ines, quibus poteetas vocandi min- istros atque mittendi in vineam Domini publico concessa est in ecclesia, cooptati fuerint et asciti in hoc opus. Of Ministering in tlie CongregcUion, It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public preaching or ministering the sacra- ments in the congregation before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same. And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent which be chosen and called to this work by men who have public authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and send min- isters into the Lord's vineyard. There has been no change in the substance of this Article since it was first published in 1553. In that edition, however, and also in that of 1563, the title ran: "Nemo in ecclesia ministret nisi vocatus" ("No man may minister in the congregation except he be called "). The present title was substituted for this at the final revision in 1571. The ultimate source of this Article is the fourteenth, " De ordine ecclesiastico," of the Confession of Augsburg : " De ordine ecclesiastico decent quod nemo debeat in ecclesia publice docere aut sacramenta administrare, nisi rite vocatus." Its debt to this Confession is, however, only indirect; for there can be little doubt that its immediate origin was the corresponding Article in the unfinished series of 1538, agreed upon by a joint- •*! I i\ 673 574 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES committee of Anglican and Lutheran divines.^ This document adopts the language of the Augsburg Confes- sion, but adds additional matter to it, which suggested the latter part of our own Article : " De rainistris ecclesiae docemus, quod nemo debeat publice docere, aut sacramenta ministrare, nisi rite vocatus, et quidem ab his, penes quos in ecclesia, juxta verbum Dei, et leges ac consuetudines uniuscujusque regionis, jus est vocandi et admittendi." 2 Since the Lutherans were lacking in episcopal government, it is obvious that in any common formula to be agreeable to both parties refuge must be taken in language of a vague and general character. Hence the reference to " the laws and customs of each country," which was omitted when the Article was remodelled for the use of the Anglican Church alone. The object of the Article is to condemn the theory held by many of the Anabaptists of the sixteenth century, that " anyone believing himself to be called to the ministry, was bound to exercise his functions as a preacher in defiance of all Church authority."^ The same error is condemned in the Befcn'matio Legum JEcclesiasticamcm, in which, after the mention of various Anabaptist errors, we come to the following passage : — " Similis est eorum amentia qui institutionem minis- trorum ab ecclesia disjungunt, negantes in certis locis certos doctores, pastores atque ministros collocari debere ; nee admit tun t legitimos vocationes, nee solemnem manuum impositionem, sed per omnes publice docendi potestatem divulgant, qui sacris Uteris uteunque sunt aspersi, et Spiritum sibi vendicant; nee illos solum adhibent ad docendum, sed etiam ad moderandam ecclesiam, et distribuenda sacramenta ; quae sane uni versa cum Scriptis Apostolorum manifesto pugnant.'** * See vol. i. p. 6. ' Hard wick, p. 102. 2 See Hardwick, p. 270. "* lUf. Leg. Eecles.f De Hcn'ex. c. xvi. ARTICLE XXIII 575 So in Hermann's Consultation it is said of some of the Anabaptists, that they " dispise the outwarde minis terie and doctrine of the Church, they denie that God worketh by the same. They teache that we muste loke for private illuminations and visions. Wherefore thei avoyed the common sermons of the Church, and holye assembles of the people of Christe, they wyth- drawe from the sacraments," etc.^ Such a view as that here condemned can only lead to confusion and disorder, for according to it anyone who claims for himself the Spirit may set himself up as a minister of the word and sacraments, with no commis- sion whatever from any external authority. In opposi- tion to this the statement of the Article is clear and decisive. It falls into two parts, each of which requires some little consideration — 1. The need of an external call and mission. 2. The description of those through whom the call comes. I. 57^ Need of an external Call and Mission. It is not lawful ^ for any man to take upon him the office of public preaching or minister- ing the sacraments in the congregation (in ecclesia),^ before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same. '' Called and sent." The two words (which are repeated in the second part of the Article) should be carefully noticed. They refer to distinct things: the call, to the original ^ English translation of 1548, fol. cxlii. - Evidently, though this is not stated, hy the law of God. ' It is not clear why throughout this Article, in the heading as well as in the body of the Article, ecclesia is rendered by congregation and not by Church. ^ 576 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES summons to enter the ministry: the mission^ to the commission to execute it in a particular sphere. Unless the need of each of these is recognised there can only arise confusion, as if only the call were necessary different ministers properly ordained might assert rival claims to execute their office in the same place, and the whole principle of Church order would be destroyed. To obviate this they must be " sent to execute the same," as well as " called " to the office. Thus the requirement of " mission " follows from the general principle that " God is not a God of confusion, but of peace " ; and from the necessity that " all things " should " be done decently and in order." ^ With regard to the " call " to the ministry, all Christians are agreed that a call from God is necessary before a man can presume to teach and minister in His name. " No man taketh the honour unto himself, but when he is called of God, even as was Aaron," and " how shall they preach except they be sent " ? * So much is admitted by alL The question really is whether the "inward call" requires to be supplemented by an external one. And here all the evidence from Scripture and antiquity is in favour of insisting upon one from properly constituted authorities. While it cannot be doubted that under the Old Covenant in addition to the regularly constituted priesthood and Levitical ministry, God did from time to time raise up the prophets as His messengers, and send them forth with no commission from men, as he did afterward at the beginning of the gospel in the case of S. Paul, who always claimed to hold his apostolate " not from {airo) men, neither through {hid) men, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father," ^ yet in these cases the call was authenticated by signs which could be recognised and ^ 1 Cor. xiv. 33, 40. ^ Gal. i. 1. * Heb. V. 4 ; Rom. x. 15. i ARTICLE XXIII 577 known by men.^ The gift of prophecy and the power of working miracles no longer remaining with the Church, it can easily be seen that unless the necessity of an external call were insisted on, the Church would be at the mercy of any religious fanatic who might be pleased to claim to be taught by the Spirit of God.^ And so we find that, as a matter of fact, from the very first men were set apart by the properly constituted authorities of the Church, and did not take upon themselves the ministerial office without such a call. Thus the seven were " ap- pointed " {obs KaTaaTi]ao)fjL€p) to the ministry by the Apostles, after they had been " chosen " (efeXefai/ro) by the whole multitude.^ Paul and Barnabas " appointed " elders in every church (^eipoTovrjaavTe^ Se avrol^ irpea^vripov^ Kar iKKKrjciav)} Timothy received the gift " through (Sta) the laying on of " S. Paul's hands, or, as it is elsewhere said, " through (8ta) prophecy, with {fieTo) the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." ^ Titus is commissioned to " appoint elders in every city," ^ and Timothy receives full instructions as to the character and qualifications of those who are to be admitted into the ministry.^ These facts seem quite decisive, and it is a simple fact of history that from the Apostles' day to the present time the Church has always required an * See Deut. xviii. 20-22. - It will be remembered that the Church of England is equally emphatic in insisting on the need of an " inward " call, the first question addressed to candidates for the ministry being this — '* Do you tnist that you are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon you this office and ministration to serve God for the promoting of His glory and the edifying of His jieople ? " Not till this has been satisfactorily answered is the further question put concerning the external call — "Do you think that you are truly called, according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the due order of this realm, to the ministry of the Church ? " * Acts vi. 1-6. ^ Acts xiv. 23. ^ Cf. 2 Tim. i. 6 with 1 Tim. iv. 14. « Titus i. 5. M Tim. iii. 1 M i\ i v\\ I 578 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ♦ r external call in the case of all those whom she has recognised as Christian ministers. There is no necessity to prove this at length ; but a single passage may be quoted from the first of the Christian Fathers to indicate how the matter was regarded in the very early times, and the principle of succession laid down — " Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife over the name of the bishop's office. For this cause therefore, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons, and afterwards they provided a continuance, that if these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed to their ministration. Those, therefore, who were appointed by them, or afterward by other men of repute with the consent of the whole Church, and have ministered unblanieably to the flock of Christ . . . these men we consider to be unjustly thrust out from their ministra- tion." 1 II. The Description of tlwse through ivJixnn the Call comes. While the Article is perfectly clear in asserting the need of an external call, it cannot be maintained that it ^ Ot airbaToKoi tj/jlQv i-yvtoaav dtd rov Kvplov iifiQy *Iij6T€S TeXelav KariffTriaav toi>j irpoetprjfUvovi, xal fieraid irifiovti^ dedJjKaffiv 6T(as, id.v KOifirjOCjiriv, diaSi^utrrai frepoi deSoKtfjuiafx^voi dySpes T^v XetTovpyiav ai)rii)y. tovs oOv Karaaradivrai vt iKfLvtav ij fiera^v v iripiav iWoyifiuv dydpu>Vy ffvvevdoKtjffdaTji rijs iKK\r)aias xdarji, Kal XeiTovpyiffffavrai dfiifXTTTCJi T(^ xoifivitfi rov Xpiarov . . . ro&rovt w SiKalus vofili^ofieif dTopdWcffdai TTjs Xeirovpyias. — Ad Cor. I. xliv. On the reading and difficult word ^Tt/iom^v see Lightfoot's note, ad loe. The old Latin published by Dom Morin {Anecdota Maredsolana, vol. ii.) seems to have had iirivoixlv^ which it rendered by "legem." Whichever be right, and whether KoifjLrjdQ I Originally the Roman Church was Greek-speaking ; and so long as this was the ease the Liturgy there used was, not Latin, but Greek} But by degrees, as Latin became universal in the West among all classes, so the use of Latin in public worship spread, although it was never adopted in the East. Its retention throughout the Western Church, after the dialects spoken in different quarters had diverged so greatly as to become different languages, as French, Spanish, and Italian, and after the conversion of the Teutonic races and the growth of their several languages, was for a time a real convenience, as Latin was the one language that was generally under- stood in all parts, and formed the medium of intercourse among educated people. But, as the old order changed, the disadvantages became greater than the advantages, though by a not unnatural conservatism the Church clung tenaciously to what was customary. Then, when the inconveniences were complained of, it was found necessary to justify the existent practice, and arguments were urged in its favour which are clearly afterthoughts, and if seriously pressed would be fatal to the use of Latin, and compel us to revert to the original language in which the Scriptures were written and the Eucharist instituted. But there is no need to enter into these here. Sufficient has been said to justify the position taken up in the Article, and that is all that is required from us.* > A trace of this still remains in the Kjrrie Eleison, which has never been translated into Latin, but is still used in its Greek form. * The formal statement of the Roman Church is, "If anyone shall say that ... the Mass ought only to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue . . . let him be anathema."— 2)ecreM of the Council of Trent, Session XXII. canon ix. This session was held in Sept. 1562, shortly before the revision of the Articles in Elizabeth's reign. It is therefore possible that the alteration then made in the terms of the Article was in consequence of the promulgation of this canon. ARTICLE XXV .1 Dt Sacraynentis, Sacramenta a Christo instituta non tantum sunt notae professionis Christianorum, sed certa qusedam testimonia, et efficacia signa gratiae atque bonw in nos voluntatis Dei, per quae invisibiliter ipse in nobis operatur nostramque fidem in se, non solum excitat, verum etiam confirmat. Duo a Christo Domino nostro in Evangelio instituta sunt Sacra- menta, scilicet Baptismus et Coena Domini. Quinque ilia vulgo noniinata Sacramenta, scilicet, Confirmatio, Pccnitentia, Ordo, Matrimonium, et Extrema Unctio, pro Sacramentis Evangelicis habenda non sunt, ut quae partim a prava apostolorum imitatione profluxerunt, partim vitae status sunt in Scripturis quidem probati, sed Sacramentonim eandem cum Baptismo et Ccena Domini rationem non liabentes : * ut quae signum aliquod visibile seu caerenioniam a Deo institutam non habeant. Sacramenta non in hoc instituta sunt a Christo, ut spcotarentur aut circumferrentur, sed ut rite illis uteremur: et in his duntaxat qui digne percipiunt, salutarem habent Of the Sacravients, Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain sure wit- nesses, and effectual signs of grace and God's goodwill towards us, by the which He doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in Him. There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Those five, commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Con- firmation, Penance, Orders, Matri- mony, and Extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt follow- ing of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scrip- tures ; but yet have not the like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God. The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about, but that we should duly use them. And in i * The edition of 1563 adds here : "quomodo uec pccnitentia." 585 586 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES cffectura : qui vero indigne per- cipiunt, damnationem (ut inquit Paalus) sibi ipsis acqnirunt. such only as worthily receive the same, have they a wholesome effect or oi>eration. But they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves damnation, as S. Paul saith. ♦ This Article has undergone considerable alteration since the publication of the series of 1553. In that year it began with a quotation from S. Augustine: " Our Lord Jesus Christ hath knit together a company of new people, with sacraments most few in number, most easy to be kept, most excellent in signification, as is Baptism, and the Lord's Supper."^ Then followed the last paragraph of our present Article, with the insertion (after the words " wholesome effect or opera- tion ") of the following words : " and yet not that of the work wrought, as some men speak, which word, as it is strange and unknown to Holy Scripture : so it engendereth no godly, but a very superstitious sense." ^ After this paragraph there stood what is now the Jirst clause, with which the whole Article was concluded. In 1563 it was brought into the form in which it now stands by means of the following alterations : ( 1 ) The quotation from S. Augustine and the clause condemning the theory of grace ex opere operato were omitted ; (2) the order of the two main paragraphs was reversed ; and (3) between them two fresh paragraphs were inserted on (a) the number of sacraments ordained * Cf. Augustine, Epist. liv.: "Saeramentis numero paucissimis, obser- vatione facillimis, significatione pnestantissimis, societatem novi populi colligavit, sicuti est Baptismus Trinitatis nomine consecratus, oom- municatio Corporis et Sanguinis Ipsius ; et si quid aliud in Schpturii* Canonicis commendatur." Cf. also De Doctr. Christiarmf III. c. ix. ' * ' Idque non ex opere (ut quidam loquuntur) operato ; qua; vox ut peregrina est et sacris literis ignota, sic parit sensum minima pium, sed admodum superstitiosum. " ARTICLE XXV 587 by Christ, and (b) the five rites " commonly called Sacraments." ^ The origin of what now stands as the first clause may be found in the Confession of Augsburg,^ from which it was taken through the medium of the thirteen Articles of 1538, where we read: "Docemus, quod Sacramenta quae per verbum Dei instituta sunt, non tantum sint notae professionis inter Christianos, sed magis certa quaedam testimonia et efficacia signa gratiae et bonae voluntatis Dei erga nos, per quae Deus invisibiliter operatur in nobis, et suam gratiam in nos invisibiliter diffundit, siquidem ea rite susceperimus ; quodque per ea excitatur et confirmatur fides in his qui eis utuntur. Porro docemus, quod ita utendum sit sacramentis, ut in adultis, praeter veram contri- tionem, necessario etiam debeat accedere fides, quae credat praesentibus promissionibus, quae per sacramenta ostenduntur, exhibentur, et praestantur. Neque enim in illis verum est, quod quidem dicunt, sacramenta conferre gratiam ex opere operato sine bono motu utentis, nam in ratione utentibus necessarium est, ut fides etiam utentis accedat, per quam credat illis promissionibus, et accipiat res promissas, quae per sacramenta conferuntur." ^ A comparison of this with the corresponding passage in the Confession of Augsburg shows the stronger position on the reality of sacramental grace which the Anglican ^ The addition may perhaps have been suggested by the fact that the Confession of Wiirtemberg contained a long section on the subject. ^ Con/, Augustana, art. xiii. : " De usu Sacramentorum. De usu Sacra- mentorum docent, quod sacramenta instituta sint, non modo ut sint notae professionis inter homines, sed magis ut sint signa et testimonia voluntatis Dei erga nos, ad excitandam et confirmandam fidem in his qui utuntnr proposita. Itaque utendum est sacramentis, ita ut fides accedat, quae credat promissionibus, quse per sacramenta exhibentur et ostenduntur. Danmant igitur illos, qui docent, quod sacramenta ex opere ojjerato justificent, nee docent fidem requiri in usu sacramentorum, quae credat remitti peccata." ^ See Hardwick, p. 270. iJl I u 4 MMMiMM 588 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I ♦ divines maintained. There is nothing in the purely Lutheran document answering to the " efficacia signa gratiae," which has been transferred from this unfinished series to our own Article. The object of the Article is (1) to condemn the inadequate views of sacraments held by the Anabaptists, and to state their true position ; (2) to distinguish between the two " Sacraments of the Gospel " and the other five " commonly called Sacraments " ; and (3) to insist upon the necessity of a right disposition on the part of the recipients of them. It consists of four paragraphs, treating respectively of the following sub- jects, which shall be here considered separately : 1. The description of sacraments ordained of Christ. 2. The number of such sacraments. 3. The five rites " commonly called Sacraments." 4. The use of sacraments. I. The Description of Sacraments ordained of Christ. Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, bat rather they be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace and God's goodwill towards us, by the which He doth work iuYisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in Him. Each phrase in this description requires careful con- sideration. Sacraments ordained of Christ are — (a) Badges or tokens of Christian men's pro- fession (notfie professionis Christianorum). This was the regular phrase descriptive of sacraments among the Zwinglians,^ and adopted also by the Anabaptists, ^ The language of Zwingli himself sometimes gave to sacraments the lowest i)osition possible. In the Itatio Jidci he says boldly : '* Credo, ill ARTICLE XXV 589 who regarded the Eucharist and baptism as nothing more than such tokens. So we read in Archbishop Hermann's Simplex ac pia deliheratio (which was translated into English in 1547), that they " withdrawe from the sacramentes, which they wil to he nothyng els than outward sygnes of our profession and felowship, as the badges of capitaines be in warre ; thei deni that they be workes and ceremonies instituted of God for this purpose ; that in them we shulde acknowledge, embrace, and receyve thorough fayth the mercie of God and the merite and communion of Christ; and that God worketh by these signes and exhihiteth unto vs the gyftes in dede, which He offereth wyth these signes" ^ Similarly, the same view is condemned in the Eeformatio Legum JEcclesiasticarum, in the following words : " Magna quoque temeritas illorum est, qui sacramenta sic extenuant ut ea pro nudis signis, et extemis tantum indiciis capi velint, quibus tanquam notis hominum Christianorum religio possit a caeteris intemosci, nee animadvertunt quantum sit scelus, hfec sancta Dei instituta inania et vacua credere." ^ Accord- ing to this Anabaptist theory, baptism was merely a " mark of difference whereby Christian men are discerned from other that be not christened," and the Eucharist was nothing more than "a sign of the love that imo scio, omnia sacramenta tam abesse ut gratiam conferant, ut ne adferant quidem aut dispensent " (see Niemeyer, Collectio ConfesHonum, p. 24), and elsewhere {De peccato originali declaratio) : ** Symbola igitur sunt externa ista rerum spiritualium et ipsa minime sunt spiritualia, nee quidquam spirituale in nobis perficiunt : sed sunt eorum qui spirituales sunt, quasi tesserae." But his followers were to a great extent influenced by Calvin's teaching, and in the Consensus Tigurinus (1549) they admit that they are more than "marks or badges of profession." "Sunt quidem et hi sacramentorum fines ut notae sint ac tesserae Christianse professionis et societatis sive fraternitatis, ut sint ad gratiarum actionem incitamenta et exercitia fidei ac pise vitae, denique syngraphae ad id obligantes. Sic hie unus inter alia praecipuus ut per ea nobis gratiam suam testetur Deus, reprjesentat atque obsignet." — Niemeyer, p. 193. * English translation (ed. 1548), fol. cxlii. ^ De Hceres. c. xvii. [ ^1 590 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I i Christians ought to have among themselves one to another." Our Article condemns this view of sacra- ments as " notse professionis " (not only in the Article before us, but also in XXVII. and XXVIII.), as not in itself untrue, but simply as inadequate. As Hooker says, they are " marks of distinction to separate God's own from strangers." But they are not only this. Far more important is it to remember that they are — (h) Certain sure witnesses • • • of grace and God's goodwill towards us. This view of sacra- ments as " witnesses " (testimonia) is one to which special prominence was given by both Lutheran and Calvinistic divines upon the Continent. Sometimes they spoke as if they were witnesses chiefly of past mercies, outward acts testifying to God's redeeming love, and assuring us of it in order to excite and confirm our faith in Him.^ Sometimes, however, they regarded them also as witnesses of present blessings, testifying by out- ward ceremonies to that blessing which the grace annexed to the sacrament confers.* So also our own Hooker speaks of them as " marks whereby to know when GxkI doth impart the vital or saving grace of Christ unto all that are capable thereof";^ and, in the Order for * " Baptism testifies that we have been cleansed au^ washed ; the Encharistic Supper that we have been redeemed." — Calvin's Institutes, IV. xiv. 22. " Circumcision is nothing ; so is baptism nothing ; the communion of the Lord's Supper is nothing : they are rather testimonies and seals of the Divine will towards thee ; through them is thy conscience assured, if it ever doubted, of the graciousness and the goodwill of God in thy regard." — Melancthon, quoted by Moehler, Sipribolism, p. 202 (Eng. Tr.). Cf. the 13th Article of the Confession of Augsburg, quoted above, p. 587. -So the Apology for the Confession of Augsburg: " Sacramentuni est cerenionia vel opus, in quo Deus nobis exhibet hoc, quod ofTert anncxa cereraonise gratia." 3 Eccl. Polity, Bk. V. c. Ivii. ARTICLE XXV 591 I Holy Communion we are reminded that the holy mysteries are " pledges of His love," and that by them God " assures us of His favour and goodness towards us." But this is not all. They are also to be regarded as — (c) Effectual signs of grace (efficacia signa). An " effectual sign " is a sign that carries its effect with it. As the Church Catechism teaches us, it is something more than a mere " pledge." It is also " a means whereby we receive the same" spiritual grace, of which it is " an outward visible sign." A sacrament, then, is " not only a picture of grace, but a channel of grace." ^ It " not only typifies, but conveys." ^ As Hooker puts it, the sacraments are " means effectual whereby God, when we take the sacraments, delivereth into our hands that grace available unto eternal life, which grace the sacraments represent or signify." ^ This phrase, " effec- tual signs of grace," first makes its appearance, as we have already seen, in the incomplete formulary of 1538, and it marks out very clearly the determination of the Anglican Divines to insist upon the truth that the sacraments are real means of grace} (d) By means of these effectual signs God doth work invisibly in us. In them " it pleaseth God to communicate by sensible means those blessings which are incomprehensible." * Once more the words seem to have been inserted with the express purpose of laying stress on the reality of the Divine gifts which man * Bp. Alexander. ^ Bp. A. Forbes. ^ Hooker, I. c. * The phrase is one which had not commended itself to Luther, and he was only willing to accept it with some qualification. ** Nee verum esse potest, sacramentis inesse vim efficacem justificationis, sen esse signa efficacia gratiae. Haec enim omnia dicuntur in jacturam fidei, ex ignorantia promissionis divinee. Nisi hoc modo efficacia dixeris, quod si adsit fides indubitata, certissime et efficacissime gratiam conferunt." — De Capt, BabyL Eec. 0pp. vol. ii. fol. 272 (Jenae, 1600). * Hooker, I.e. I ^mmm 1 i 592 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES receives from God in and through the sacraments/ in which He " embraceth us, and offereth Himself to be embraced by us."^ (e) Lastly, by them God doth not only qiiioken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in Him. In this phrase it appears to be natural to refer the first expression " quicken " (eoccitat) to the action of God's grace in Holy Baptism, and the second, " strengthen and confirm " (confirmat), to the action of the same grace in the Eucharist. We have now gone through the description of sacra- ments ordained of Christ point by point. But before passing on to consider the next paragraph of the Article, it will be well to cite the definitions given in the Church Catechism and in the Homily on Common Prayer and the Sacraments, and to compare them with that in the Article before us. If we take the most familiar of them, viz. that in the Catechism, as the standard, and refer the other two to it, it will easily be seen that, though the forms are different, and belong to different dates,^ yet in each case the savie five points are brought out. According to the Church Catechism a sacrament is "(1) an outward visible sign of (2) an inward spiritual grace given unto us, (3) ordained by Christ Himself as * These words, as well as "efficacia signa," have nothing corresponding to them in the Confession of Augsburg, being first inserted in the joint Confession of 1538. It is curious, liowever, to find something very similar to them in the Catifessio Bdgiea (1562). " Sunt enim sacramenta signa ac symbola visibilia renim intemarum et invisibilium, per qutp, ceu per media, Deus ipse virtute Spiritus Sancti in nobis operatnr." — Art. XXXIII. (On this Confession see vol. i. p. 10.) - Homily on Common Prayer avd the Sacramenls^ p. 376 seq. (S.P.C.K.). ^ The Article to 1553 (or indeed to 1538) ; the Homily in question to the early years of Elizabeth*s reign ; the part of the Catechism treating of the sacraments to 1604. ARTICLE XXV 593 (4) a means whereby we receive the same, and (5) a pledge to assure us thereof." According to the Homily, sacraments, " according to the exact signification," are "(1) visible signs (3) expressly commanded in the New Testament, (4 and 5) whereunto is annexed the promise of (2) free forgiveness of our sins, and of our holiness and joining with Christ." ^ To the same effect the Article says that sacraments (3) "ordained of Christ are . . . (5) certain sure witnesses, and (4) effectual (1) signs of (2) grace and God's goodwill towards us, (4) by the which He doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in Him." There are, of course, differences of detail, e,g. the Homily leaves us free to look for the outward sign anywhere "in the New Testament," whereas the Catechism, with which agrees the Article,^ requires it to be ordained " by Christ Himself." The Catechism leaves the nature of the inward spiritual grace undefined. The Homily accurately makes it include, not only pardon, but sanctification and incorporation in Christ. Thus the different descriptions may be regarded as supplementing each other, and for teaching purposes none should be lost sight of. II. The Number of SacrarMnts ordained of Christ There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. * Homily on Common Prayer and the SacranierUs, p. 376 (S.P.C.K.). •* Though tlie first paragraph does not mention the outward sign as "ordained by Christ Himself," yet the phrases used in the second and third paragraphs, "ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel," and "any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God," indicate agreement with the Catechism on this point. %i^ mm 594 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES In considering this statement it will be convenient (a) to trace out the history of the word sacrament, and (b) to endeavour to set forth the precise difference between England and Rome on the number of the sacraments. (a) The history of live word sacrament. — The word Scvcrainentttm is a familiar classical one, with two well- defined uses. It means either (1) a gage of money laid down by parties who went to law, or (2) the military oath taken by soldiers to be true to their country and general. The idea which is common to both these meanings is that of a sacred pledge. The earliest occur- rence of the word in connection with Christianity and Christian associations is in Pliny's famous letter to the Emperor Trajan, in which he says that the Christians of Bithynia bound themselves sacramento not to commit any wrong.i It may be a matter of doubt to what precisely Pliny was referring, but there can be no doubt that his use of the word " sacrament " is little more than an accident. It can scarcely have been the word which the Bithynian Christians used. In a letter at the beginning of the second century from a Roman governor to a Roman emperor the word can only be interpreted in its classical sense of an oath or obligation. Ecclesiastical Latin was not yet in existence: indeed, it is almost certain that there was as yet no Latin-speaking Church ; and thus, though it is interesting to find the word employed in connection with a Christian rite, yet later associations which have grown up round it must not be suffered to influence our interpretation of it. As an ecclesiastical term, its true home is North Afrim, which > Pliny, Epist. xcvi. : "Affirmabant autem banc fuisse summam vel culp» SU8B vel erroris quod essent soliti sUto die ante lucem convenire cannenque Christo quasi deo dicere secum invicem, seque sacraiMtUo non in scelus aliquod obstringere, sed ne furta, ne latrocinia, ne adulteria committerent, ne fidem fallerent, ne depositura appellati abnegarent." See Ligbtfoot, Apostolic Fathers, pt. II. vol. i. p. 51. ARTICLE XXV 595 was the first Latin-speaking Church. Here we find it used from the first as the equivalent of the Greek fivarijpiop, and as such it is employed with a wide latitude of meaning, for either a religious rite or a religious truth ; generally, however, with the idea that some sacred meaning lies under a visible sign. So Tertullian (200) uses the word again and again, some- times of the military oath,i sometimes of a sacred truth, or a mystery, sometimes of a sacred rite, and even of the rite of infanticide with which the Christians were charged.2 Similarly with Cyprian (250) it means a sacred symbol, a sacred bond, or a sacred truth.^ From North Africa the word passed into the common language and familiar speech of Western Christendom through the Latin versions of the Scripture, in which it appears in several passages always as the rendering of fivarijpiov^ In Patristic writers the same latitude in the use of the term, which has been already noticed, may constantly be ' De Specta4Mii8, xxiv. Scorpiaee, iv. 2 See Apol. vii. {Sacranuntum infaiUiddix) ; xv. {Saeramenti nostH) ; xix. {Judaici Sacrammti) ; xlvii. (riostris Sacramentis) ; Adv. Mare. V. viii. {pants et ealicis Sacramento) ; De Bapt. i. {aquae Sacramentum), etc. ^Cyprian uses it twice of tbe military oath: De lapsis, xiii.; Ep. Ixxiy. Elsewhere with wide latitude of meaning. Of Baptism, Up, Ixxiii. ; of the Eucharist, De zelo et livore, xvii., De lapsis, xxv. ; of the Passover, De unitate, viii. ; of a sacred bond, Fp. lix., De unitate, vi. etc. ; of doctrines, De Dominica Oratione, ix., Testim. Free/, etc. See the very careful note on his use of the word, which was "in many instances used with intentional vagueness," in Studia Biblica et Ecclesi- astica, vol. iv. p. 253. * "Sacramentum " appears in the Vulgate (1) in the Old Testament in Dan. ii. 18, 30, 47, iv. 6 (A.V. 9), each time as the equivalent of Np, a secret (Greek fivirHifnov) ; and also in Tobit xU. 7 ; Wisd. ii. 22, vi. V* (A.V. 22); in all of which places it represents the same Greek word, fiwrriipioy, as it does also (2) in the eight passages in which it is found in the New Testament, viz. Eph. i. 9, iii. 3, 9, v. 32 ; Col. i. 27 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16 ; Eev. i. 20, xvii. 7. It is also found occasionally in other passages in the " Old Latin," e.g. in Rom. xvi. 25. 4 « t. ' I '.', 1 \^ 596 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES observed. It is used frequently of sacred truths, as well as of sacred rites of mystic meaning. Even as late as the eleventh century it is applied by S. Bernard to the rite of feet washing.^ But in comparatively early times there had been a tendency to contrast the sacraments or sacred rites of the Jews with those of the Christian Church, and to point to the former as numerous and burdensome, and the latter as few in number. Thus Augustine, in the passage quoted in the ordinal Article of 1553, says that " under the new dispensation our Lord Jesus Christ has knit together His people in fellowship, by sacraments which are very few in number, most easy in observance, and most exceUent in significance, as baptism solemnised in the name of the Trinity, the Communion of His Body and Blood, and also whatever else is commended to us in Canonical Scripture, apart from those enactments which were a yoke of bondage to God's ancient people, suited to their state of heart and to the times of the prophets, and which are found in the books of Moses." ^ Elsewhere in his book on Christian Doctrine he draws a similar contrast, pointing out how " our Lord Himself and apostolic practice have handed down to us a few significant rites (s^/na) in place of many, and these at once very easy to perform, most majestic in their significance, and most sacred in their observance. Such as the Sacrament of Baptism, and the Celebration of the Body and Blood of the Lord." ' From this contrast between the multipUcity of sacred rites imposed upon the Jews and the fewness of those enjoined in the gospel to Christians, there grew up m time a disposition to use the word scuyrarMntum more particularly of those rites which could claim the authority of the New Testament, and to speak of the " Sacraments * Sermo in Ccsna Domini, § 24. =* Jk Doctrimi Christiana, III. ix. ' See above, p. 580. *i I ARTICLE XXV 597 of the Church " as limited in number. So in the East, "Dionysius the Areopagite " (c. 500), who is followed by later writers, describes in his book on the Ecclesi- astical Hierarchies six Christian fjLvarijpui, Baptism, the Eucharist, Unction, Orders, Monastic Profession, and the Rites for the Dead. In the West, Paschasius Eadbert ^ and Rhabanus Maurus,^ in the ninth century, both speak of four sacraments. Baptism, Unction, the Body, and the Blood of the Lord. Not till the eleventh century is the number fixed at the mystic number seve7i, to correspond with the sevenfold gifts of the Spirit. The earliest writer to speak of this number (so far as is known) is Gregory of Bergamo,^ in his book, De Etwharistia. In this he says definitely that the sacra- ments of the Church instituted by our Saviour were seven-,*' but in the next chapter he speaks of three, Baptism, Unction, and the Eucharist, as more worthy, and contradicts what he has said before, by maintaining that of these three, only the first and third were instituted by the Redeemer Himself, for unction has only apostolic authority.* A few years later than Gregory was Peter Lombard,^ to whom it is generally stated that * Dc Corpore et Sanguine Domini^ iii. 2. - De Clericorum Inatitutione, I. xxiv, ^ Gregory became Bishop of Bergamo in 1133, and died in 1146. His book, De Eucharistia, was first published in 1877, and since then has been included in Hurter's Sanctorum Patrum Opuscula Seleda, vol. xxxix. * De Euch, c. xiii. : " Verum ne quis occasione dictoruni existimet tot esse sacramenta ecclesiae, quot sunt quibus congruit sacramenti vocabuluni, scire debemus ea solum esse ecclesiae sacramenta a servatore nostro Jesu instituta quae in medicinam nobis tributa fuere, et haec numero adimplentur septenario." ^ De Euch. c. xiv. : "Tria siquidem in ecclesia gerimus sacramenta quffi sacramentis aliis putantur non immerito digniora, scilicet baptisraum, chrisma, corpus et sanguis Domini. Quorum trium primum et ultimum ex ipsius Redemptoris institutione percepimus, ex apostolica vero traditioue illud quod medium posuimus." * Peter Lombard became Bishop of Paris in 1159, and died in 1164. 39 r«i ■^a 4 *■■ 598 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I II the limitation of the number to seven is due. It is found in his writings/ and it was probably through his influence that it became generally accepted. From him it passed into the writings of the schoolmen, Aquinas ^ and others. It was laid down in the " decree to the Armenians" sent in the name of Pope Eugenius iv. from the Council of Florence (1439) ;» and was definitely adopted by the Council of Trent at the seventh session of the Council (1547), when the following canon was passed : " If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the new law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord ; or that they are more or less than seven, viz. Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, or Matrimony; or even that any one of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament : let him be anathema." * It will be seen from this brief sketch that our Reformers had a double use of the word before them. On the one hand, there was the wider sense given to it by the Fathers ; on the other, the more restricted scholastic use. They » SetUent. IV. dist. ii. § 1. ' Summa, III. Q. Ixv. 8 Decretum Eugenii Papce IV. ad Armenios, Labbe and Cossart, vol. ix. pp. 434 and 437. * Gone. Trid. Sess. VII. canon 1 : "Si quia dixerit sacramenta novne legis non fuisse omnia a Jesu Christo Domino nostro instituta ; aut esse plura vel pauciora quam septem, videlicet Baptismum, Confirmationem, Eucharistiam, PtEnitentiam, extremam Unctionera, Ordinem, et Matri- monium, aut etiam aliquod honim septem, non esse vere, et proprie sacramentiim, anathema sit." It should be mentioned that the Greek Church agrees with the Roman in reckoning the sacraments of the Church as seven in number ; for though the Confession of Cyril Lucar says that only two sacraments were ordained of Christ (c. xv., see Kimmel's Lihri Symbolici, p. 34), the "Orthodox Confession recognises the iirrd. fiv<; Sacram/mtis, c. ii. Similarly in the Catechism published with the Articles in 1553, only two sacraments are expressly recognised. \i 1 11 II- I' \v. ■ I 600 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I -I were perfectly willing to extend it to other rites also— indeed, to " anything whereby an holy thing is signified " provided that it was made clear that the word was only used in a general sense. Thus the Article before us, after speaking of the five rites, "commonly called Sacraments," ^ proceeds, not to deny the name to them altogether, but only to assert that they " have not the liJce nature of sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper," i.e. they are not to be put on a level with them. Still clearer, perhaps, is the teaching of the Homily on Common Prayer and the Sacraments, which puts the matter so admirably that the passage must be quoted here in full. "As for the number of them, if they should be considered according to the exact signification of a sacrament, namely for visible signs, expressly com- manded in the New Testament, whereunto is annexed the promise of free forgiveness of our sin, and of our holiness and joining in Christ, there be but two, namely. Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. For although Absolution hath the promise of forgiveness of sin, yet by the express word of the New Testament it hath not this promise annexed and tied to the visible sign, which is imposition of hands. For this visible sign' (I mean laying on of hands) is not expressly commanded in the New Testament to be used in Absolution, as the visible signs in Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ; and therefore Absolution is no such sacrament as Baptism and the Communion are. And though the ordering of ministers hath His visible » It cannot be said that this expression discourages the application of the name to them, any more than it can be maintained that the parallel form of expression in the Prayer Book, "The Nativity of our Lord, or the Birthday of Christ, cmmwidy called Christmas Day," discourages the use of the popular name for the festival. ARTICLE XXV 601 sign and promise, yet it lacks the promise of remission of sin, as all other sacraments except the two above named do. Therefore neither it, nor any other sacrament else, be such sacraments as Baptism and the Communion are. But in a general acceptation the name of a sacrament may be attributed to anything whereby an holy thing is signified. In which understanding of the word the ancient writers have given this name, not only to the other fi\Qy commonly of late years taken and used for supplying the number of the seven sacraments ; but also to divers and sundry other ceremonies, as to oil, washing of feet, and such like ; not meaning thereby to repute them as sacraments in the same signification that the two forenamed Sacraments are. Dionysius ; Bernard, De Cosna Domini, et Ablut pedum" ^ It is perfectly clear from this that in some sense other sacraments are recognised by those who are responsible for the Homilies besides the two great ones, Baptism and the Communion. We are now in a position to pass to the consideration of the next point : (b) The precise difference between England and Borne on the number of the sa/yraments, — It is largely but not entirely a question of definition — not entirely, for, even admitting the Eoman description of sacraments, we could not accept the Tridentine statement upon them. The real difference appears to be this : Rome says that the sacraments of the new law are neither more nor less than seven, and that they were all instituted by Christ. The Anglican Church maintains that the word should either be restricted to two rites with outward visible signs ordained by Christ Himself,^ or else that sacraments are * Homily on Common Prayer and the Sacraments, p. 376 scq, (S.P.C.K.). ^ It must be remembered that the statement of the Catechism, "Two fi\ -a I k1 I 602 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES not seven, but innumerable. Two points in the Roman position may be added, as they are sometimes overlooked. First, though the Tridentine divines have committed the Roman Church to the position that all the seven sacra- ments were instituted by Christ Himself,^ yet they have never asserted that in every case the outward visible sign is of His institution; secondly, they asserted definitely that all the seven are not to be regarded as exactly on the same level of equality. "If anyone shall say that these seven sacraments are equal to each other in such wise as that one is not in any way more worthy than another: let him be anathema."* When these two points are remembered, it will be found that the difference between the two branches of the Church on this matter is comparatively small. f/ III. The Jive Rites " commonly called Sacram^nis" Those flYe oommonly oalled Sacraments, that only as generally necessary to salvation," is not made in answer to the question, "How many sacraments are there?" but "How many sacra- ments hath Christ (/rdained in His Church ? " Moreover it is not said absolutely that these are "two only," but "two only as generally necessary for salvation," i.«. as necessary for all men. Cf. Taylor's Dis^uisive /rata Popery, p. 240. "It is none of the doctrine of the Church of England that there are two sacraments only; but that of those rituals commanded in Scripture, which the ecclesiastical use calls sacraments (by a word of art), two only are generally necessary to salvation." So Archbp. Seeker in his Lectures (xxxv.), "Our Catechism doth not require it to be said absolutely that the sacraments are Uco only, but two only necessary to salvation, leaving persons at liberty to comprehend more things under the name if they please, provided that they insist not on the necessity of them, and of dignifying them with this title." 1 Before the Council of Trent it was regarded as an open question whether they were all instituted by Christ; and some divines, as Bonaventura, Hugo, and Durandus, have questioned whether Confirma- tion and Unction were instituted by Him. ' (Jow. TiideiU, Seas. VII. canon iii. I ARTICLE XXV 603 is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matri- mony, and Extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the apostles (a prava apostolorum imitatione), partly are states of life allowed (probati) in the Scriptures: but yet have not the like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God. It cannot be said that the account given in this paragraph of the five rites is quite exact. It is said that they are (1) such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the apostles, ie. from a bad imitation of them, a prava apostolorum imitaiione. This would well apply, as will be shown below, to Extreme Unction, and perhaps also is intended to refer to Penance in its medieval form, in view of the super- stitions connected with it. (2) They are partly states of life allowed in the Scriptures. ''Allowed," it must be remembered, meant a good deal more in the sixteenth century than it does now. It did not stand for " permitted," but was equivalent to " approved of " (Latin, prohati)} Thus " states of life allowed in the Scriptures " involves no lack of appreciation of the rites so described. The phrase may be taken to refer to Matrimony and Holy Orders, both of which can be spoken of as " states of life." But it cannot include Confirmation, which is .1 ^(1 * So in Art. XXXV. of 1553 it is said that the ** Book of prayers and ceremonies of the Church of England " ought to be received and allowed " (approbandi). In XXXVI. of the same series, that ' ' the civil magistrate is ordained and allowed (probatus) of God." A similar use of the word is found in the Baptismal Service in the Book of Common Prayer: "He favourably alloweth this charitable work of ours" ; and cf. Ps. xi. 6 (P.B.V. "the Lord alloweth the righteous"), and S. Luke xi. 48, 1 Thess. ii. 4 in the A.V. 604 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES A% l»l not a " state of life " at all. Nor does it seem probable that this apostolic ordinance, which the Church of England has always maintained and insisted upon, can be included under the first head.^ It remains, then, that the description is somewhat carelessly drawn, and that one of the five rites is not really included in it This, however, is not a matter of great importance, for Confirmation, equally with the others, fails to answer to the description of " Sacraments of the Gospel " ; for although it is an apostolic rite, with its " outward visible sign " and its " inward spiritual grace," yet as it is only traceable to the Acts of the Apostles (see Acts viii. 17, xix. 6, and cf. Heb. vi. 2), we cannot positively say that it was " ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel," or that it has an " outward visible sign ordained by Christ Himself." It will also be found that each of the other rites fails to answer to the restricted definition. Penance, of which absolution is the " form in which its chief force consists," 2 most certainly was " ordained by Christ Him- self" (see S. John xx. 23), but it cannot honestly be said to have " any visible sign or ceremony ordained of 1 It is possible^ however, as Dr. Mason thinks, that Confirmation is intended to be described as having grown out of '* the cormpt following of the apostles," since '* in the oflScial language of the time, Confinna- tion meant distinctly the rite of unction, after a certain form, with a chrism elaborately compounded." See " The relation of Confirmation to Baptism," p. 426. I cannot, however, think that this view is probable, since "Confirmation" had been deliberately retained as the official title of the rite of laying on of hands in the Prayer Books of 1549, 1562, and 1559. It is curious to notice that at the Hampton Court Conference in 1604, the Puritans complained that this phrase in the Articles involved a contradiction with the teaching of the Prayer Book, and that their com- plaint was dismissed as a "mere cavil." Cardwell's History of Con- ferences, p. 182. ^C(ytic. Trid. Sess. XIV. cap. iii. : "Docet prseterea sancto synodus sacramenti poenitentiae formam, in qua praecipue ipsius vis sita est, in iUis ministri verbis positam esse : Ego te absolvo," etc. ! ■It I ARTICLE XXV 605 God." Orders, again, was "ordained by Christ Him- self" on the same occasion (S. John xx. 21-23). It has its " inward spiritual grace," and from the days of the Apostles has had as its " outward visible sign " the laying on of hands. But once more the outward visible sign cannot be traced back to the Gospel, or to our Lord's own ordinance. Moreover, the grace given in it is official, rather than for the personal sanctification of the recipient. Matrimony is "an honourable estate, instituted of God in the time of man's innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and His Church " ; and though " Christ adorned and beautified " it " with His Presence," ^ it cannot be said that it was ordained of Him in the Gospel, nor has it any " outward visible sign " of Divine appointment.^ Extreme Unction may seem to require further con- sideration ; for whereas the other four rites are retained and " had in reverend estimation " by the Church of Eng- land, this one has been entirely disused, and no authority whatever is given for the application of oil to the sick by the formularies of this branch of the Church. The Scriptural authority that is pleaded for the rite is, of course, the injunction of S. James in his Epistle. " Is any among you sick ? let him call for the elders * Tlie Book of Common Prayer. The Order for the Solemnization of Holy Matrimony. ^ In Eph. V. 32, after speaking of the union in marriage, S. Paul says t6 fjLwrrfipioy rovro fjJya iarlv, which is rendered by the Vulgate *' Sacra- mentom hoc magnum est," and consequently by the Douay version, '* This is a great sacrament." It is, however, perfectly obvious that the Apostle's use of the word fivanfipiov in this connection ("This mystery is great," R.V.) has no real bearing on the question whether marriage is a "sacrament" in the later technical sense of the word, though, as Bishop EUicott notes (in loe.), the very fact of the comparison which the Apostle makes ("but I am speaking in reference to Christ and His Church") "does place marriage on a far holier and higher basis than modem theories are disposed to admit" A I I t I 1 b \ 606 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES of the Church ; and let them pray over him, auointing him with oil in the name of the Lord : and the prayer of faith shall save him that is sick, and the Lord shall raise him up ; and if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him" (v. 14, 15).^ It may be granted that this looks very much like an injunction to the Church for all time; but even so, if this were allowed, it would not give the imction a right to be regarded as a Sacrament of the Gospel, for it is not ** ordained by Christ Himself." We find, however, in the writings of early Fathers so remarkable and complete a silence upon the subject that we can only conclude that it was not regarded by them as enjoining a rite to be continued after the 'xapio-fmra lafidrcov (1 Cor. xiL 9) had disappeared from the Church. There is, indeed, a constant stream of testimony to the use of oil for healing purposes by Christians in early ages ; ^ but there is no evidence for its application as a religious rite until we come to the well-known letter of Innocent i. to Decentius, bishop of Eugubium, early in the fifth century. Decentius had written to ask whether the bishop might anoint the sick. Innocent replies, and, referring to the passage in S. James, tells him that he might do so, that the oil should be blessed by the bishop and used by all Christians in their hour of need, and that it is " a kind of sacrament." ^ Now, even if it be * The only other passage in the New Testament where such unction can possibly be referred to is S. Mark vi. 13, where it is said that the Apostles •'anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them" ; but this is so definitely for hecUitig, that it is not generally regarded by Roman divines as '* the sacrament of Unction." ^ E.g. Tertullian, Ad Scapulam^ c iv. ; Vita Eugenia^ c. xi. (Rosweyd, 343). ^ Ep. ad DeceiU. §8: "Sane quoniam de hoc, sicuti de cieteris, con- sulere voluit dilectio tua . . . quod in beati apostolis Jacobi epistola conscriptum est : Si infiimvA aiiquis in vobis est^ etc. : quod non est dubium de fidelibus segrotantibus aecipi vel intelligi debere, qui sancta oleo chrismatis perungi possunt, quod ab epis(!opo confectum, non solum 4 I ARTICLE XXV 607 admitted that the letter is genuine, it is clear that it is fatal to any claim for this religious unction to be regarded as jnimUive ; for, as Bishop Harold Browne truly says, "If extreme unction were then a sacrament of the Church, it is impossible that one bishop should have asked this question of another ; or if he did, that the other should not at once have reminded him that it was a well-known sacrament of immemorial usage." ^ Further, it appears from the letter that even when the blessing of the oil was restricted to the bishop, it was still regarded as immaterial by whom the unction was administered ; ^ nor do we meet with any injunction to the priest to administer it himself before the ninth century. Again, whereas the original intention of the unction had been primarily for the saving of the sick person's life, by degrees this dropped out of sight, and the rite came to be regarded as part of the preparation for death, and was only administered when all hope of recovery seemed to have passed away; and thus that sacerdotibus, sed et omnibus uti Christianis licet, in sua aut in suorum necessitate ungendum. Caeterum illud superfluum esse videmus adjectum, ut de episcopo ambigatur, quod presbyteris licere non dubium est. Nam ideirco presbyteris dictum est, quia episcopi occupationibus aliis impediti, ad omnes languidos ire non possunt. Cffiterum si episcopus aut potest aut dignum ducit, aliquem a se visitandum, et benedicere et tangere chrismate, sine cunctatione potest, cujus est chrisma conficere. Nam poenitentibus istud infundi non potest, quia genus est sacramenti. Nam quibus reliqua sacramenta negantur, quomodo unum genus putatur posse concedi ? " * Exposition of the ThiHy-Nine Articles, p. 588. ^ Even after the days of Innocent i. the oil was frequently blessed by laymen, and even women. Thus S. Monegund (570) on her deathbed "blessed oil and salt," which were afterwards given to the sick; see Greg. Turon. Viicc Patrum, c. xix. In 813 the Council of Chalons lays down that the sick ought to be anointed by the presbyters with oil which is blessed by the bishop (canon xlviii.). To the same effect, Hincmar (852), Capit. 5, and others about the same time. See the Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, vol. ii. p. 2004. t i 608 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES which had been originally simply " the last unction " (extrema unctio), as being (presumably) applied after the unctions in Baptism and Confirmation, came to be looked upon as nothing but "unctio in extremis," and was deferred imtil death seemed imminent. The subject was considered by the Council of Trent at its fourteenth Session, in 1551, when it was laid down that "this sacred unction of the sick was instituted by Christ our Lord, as truly and properly a sacrament of the new law, hinted at, indeed, in Mark, but recommended and pro- mulgated to the faithful by James the apostle and brother of the Lord." The unction was said to " repre- sent the grace of the Holy Ghost with which the soul of the sick person is invisibly anointed." The " effect of this sacrament" was further said to be "the grace of the Holy Ghost, whose anointing cleanses away sins, if there be any still to be expiated, and the remains of sin; relieves and strengthens the soul of the sick, by excit- ing in him a great confidence in the Divine mercy, whereby the sick being relieved, bears more easily the inconveniences and pain of sickness; and more readily resists the temptations of the devil, who lies in wait for his heel ; ^ and sometimes obtains bodily health, when it is expedient for the welfare of his soul." It is also said that "this unction is to be applied to the sick, but especially to those who lie in such danger as to seem placed at their departure from this life : whence also it is called the sacrament of the dying." But it is added that " if the sick should recover, after having received this unction, they may again be aided by the succour of this sacrament when they fall into another like danger of death." 2 These quotations show how far the Roman * The reference is to the Vulgate of Gen. iii. 15. - Cone. Trid, Sess. XIV., Doctrina de sacramento extremte unctionis, cap. i.-iiL ARTICLE XXV 609 use has departed from the intention of the rite described by S. James, and how what was originally a practice enjoined for life has become a " sacrament of the dying," only administered at the present day after the Viaticum has been received.^ Turning now to the consideration of the practice in the Church of England, it may be noticed that the "Bishops' Book" of 1537 contains a section devoted to the subject in which various abuses and superstitions connected with the rite are noticed,^ though the practice is retained, and men are to be taught to repute it " among the other sacraments of the Church." But it is clearly stated that " the grace con- ferred in this sacrament is the relief and recovery of the disease and sickness wherewith the sick person is then diseased and troubled, and also the remission of his sins if he be then in sin." » All this passage was considerably modified in the "King's Book'' of 1543, which refers far less to the prospect of restoration to bodily health, and is, as might be expected, decidedly more medieval in tone.* When the first English Prayer Book was pub- » It is clear from the language of S. Thomas that in the thirteenth century extreme unction was administered hef(yre the Eucharist was given to the sick, for he says: "Per jKcnitentiam et extremam unctionem prae- paratur homo ad digne sumendum corpus Ch.i\&t\."—Sunwm, III. Q. Ixv. art. 3. 2 *'No man ought to think that by receiving of this sacrament of anointing the sick man's life shall be made shorter, but rather that the same shall be prolonged thereby,— considering the same is instituted for the recovery of health both of the soul and body. Second, that it is an evU custom to defer the administration of this sacrament unto such time as the sick persons be brought by sickness unto extreme peril and jeopardy of life, and be in manner in despair to live any longer. Thirdly, that it is lawful and expedient to administer this said sacrament unt^ every good Christian man in the manner and form before rehearsed, so oft and whensoever any great and perilous sickness and malady shall fortune unto them."— ^ormWan«« of Faith, p. 127 3 76. p. 125. * See Formularks of Faith, pp. 123-128 and 290-293. '« 610 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXV 611 I lished in 1549, a simple form of anointing was provided to be used " if the sick person desire it." It was, how- ever, entirely omitted in the Second Prayer Book in 1552, and has never been restored. If any justification be needed for this complete disuse of the practice, it may reasonably be found in the absence of any early authority for it, and the entire lack of evidence from early writers that the words of S. James were regarded as enjoining a rite to be of lasting obligation in the Church. IV. The use of Sacraments. The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about ; but that we should duly (rite) use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same have they a wholesome effect or operation. But they that receive them unworthily, purchase to themselves damnation, as S. Paul saith. There is a slight difficulty concerning the first words used here, because Baptism cannot possibly be " carried about," nor does there appear ever to have been any superstitious practice of " gazing upon " it. The custom of carrying about the Eucharist is referred to again in Article XXVIII., and it is easy to see that, in view of the superstitions of the day, it may well have been thought necessary to point out that this holy sacrament was not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about ; and the probability is that the words are intended to refer specially to it.^ This inter- * Britton {ITmw SaeraineiitaleSj p. 97 seq.) argues that the plural "sacraments" may have been intended to refer to the two parts of the Eucharist which are spoken of in the Prayer Books of 1552 and 15f»9 as the Sacraments of His Blessed Body and Blood " (second exhortation to come to the Holy Communion). The word is altered into the singular in the edition of 1604. pretation is confirmed by the fact that S. Paul's words in 1 Cor. XI. 29, to which allusion is made in the following sentence, are spoken only of the Eucharist It will scarcely be denied that the medieval system was exposed to serious danger of leading men to rest content with the mechanical act of receiving the sacra- ments, and of encouraging them to look on them almost Z ?T> , ™!- .u^'°°^ ^* ^^« ^«11 that it should be definitely stated that we should duly use them, »«ii i! '° T^ °°^y ** worthily receiire the S,n «T .^'''^f wholesome effect or opera- won. But It would seem superfluous to add proof of these statements here, for no Christian will be found to cieny them. With regard to the last words of the Article, which nnr«l„« f ^tl *''**. '*''«''« *'»«™ Unworthily purchase to themselves damnation, as S. Paul Saitn, It will be sufficient to remind the reader that the damnation spoken of here and in the Authorised Version of 1 Cor. xi. 29 (the passage alluded to), is not necessarily final condemnation. It is rather that "judg- ment with which « we are chastened of the Lord, t£t wemaynot be condemned with the wwld" (ver 32)- ie the Apostle is speaking of a temporal chastisement,' the object of which was to wean the unworthy communicant from his sm. and lead him to repentance, so that he might escape what is commonly called "damnation." Ihe mistranslation, which is found in the Book of Common Prayer, as well as in the Articles and the Authorised Version, has happily been altered in the Eevis^ Version of 1881. It may be said in extenua- tion of It that "damnation " was by no means so strong a term m the sixteenth century as it is now ; » but all the same the rendering of «^t>a as "judicium" by the • See Wright's BihU Word Book, p. 181. (il 612 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Vulgate in the passage in question ought to have pre- vented the mistranslation, the practical consequences of which have certainly been serious. A few words may be added in conclusion concerning the doctrine of grace ex opere operato, for it will be remembered that the phrase was expressly condemned in the clause corresponding to that now under considera- tion, in the Article of 1553. It may therefore be fairly asked, why was the condemnation of it removed in 1563 ? Does the Church of England hold the doctrine, or does it not ? In answer to this it may be pointed out that the phrase was an ambiguous one, capable of a perfectly innocent sense, and of expressing a real truth, but capable also of a meaning which was grossly superstitious. It was originally used by medieval Theologians, and after them by the Council of Trent (Session VII. canon viii.), to describe the nature of the effects which the " seven sacraments " produce. In the technical language of the schools, man can by his perversity and wilful hardness " put a bar " (ponere obicem) against their effect,^ and certain dispositions, as faith and repentance, are required on the part of the recipient. But the grace comes not from them, but from Christ Himself through the sacra- ments of His institution ; for, as our own Article XXVI. points out, the sacraments are " effectual because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be administered by evil men." It was to guard this truth that the phrase that grace comes ex opere operato was invented ; and it was intended to indicate that " grace * Cf. the answer of the bishops at the Savoy Conference in 1661 to the objection of the Puritans to the statement that every child is regenerate in Baptism. '* Seeing that God's sacraments have their effects where the receiver doth not ' ponere obicem,' put any bar against them (which children cannot do) ; we may say in faith of every child that is baptized, that it is regenerated by God's Holy Spirit." — Cardwell's History of Conferences, p. 356. ARTICLE XXV 613 18 conferred by virtue of the sacramental act instituted by God for this end, not by the merits of the minister or the recipient." i But while, as employed by careful and instructed Theologians, the phrase meant nothing more than this, yet in the mouths of ignorant and ill- instructed persons it was easily capable of " no godly but a very superstitious sense," and might be taken to imply that the grace was so tied to the sacraments that the sacramental act became almost of the nature of a magical charm, bringing grace to the recipient ex opere operato, whatever his spiritual condition might be.^ It was this* which led to the condemnation of the phrase in 1553. But by the time of the revision of 1563 it had been made abundantly clear that this superstitious use was not the only one which the phrase conveyed. Con- sequently there was a danger lest the language of the ' So Bellarmine {De Sacram. ii. 1) explains it : " Id quod active et proxime atque instrumentaliter efficit gratiam justificationis est sola actio Ilia externa, quae sacraraentu.u dicitur, et hfec vocatur opus opercUum, accipiendo passive (operatum), ita ut idem sit sacramentum conferre gratiam ex opere operato, quod conferre gratiam ex vi ipsius actionis sacramentelis a Deo ad hoc institute, non ex merito agentis vel suscipientis Voluntas, fides, et pcenitentia in suscipiente adulto necessano requiruntur ut dispositiones ex parte subjecti, non ut causae activ^e, non enim fides et pcenitentia efficiunt gratiam sacramentalem neque dant efficaciam sacramenti, sed solum toUunt obstacula, qu« impedirent ne Sacramento suani efficiam exercere possent, unde in pueris, ubi non requiritur dispositio, sine his rebus fit justificatio." And, among modems, see the careful stotement of Moehler, Syvibolism, p. 198. 2 This superstitious sense is indicated in the language of the Thirteen Articles of 1.538, where the phrase is condemned (Art. IX.): "Neque enim in illis verum est, quod quidam dicunt, sacramento conferre gratiam ex opere operato sine bono motu vierUis, nam in ratione utentibus neces- sarium est ut fides etiam utentis accedat, per quam credat illis promis- sionibus et accipiat res promissas quae per sacramento conferantur." So in tlie "Apology for the Confession of Augsburg": "Damnamus totum populum scholasticorum doctorum qui docent quod sacramento non ponenti obicem conferant gratiam ex opere operato sine bono motu utentis." Winer's Confessions of Christendom, p. 246. 40 614 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Article might appear to condemn a real truth. Hence the clause was wisely omitted by Archbishop Parker,^ and nothing whatever was said either to sanction or to condemn the phrase. The superstition which it was desired to guard against was efifectually excluded by the statement that "in such only as duly receive" the sacraments " have they a wholesome effect or operation " ; while the truth which the phrase had been originally intended to express was secured by the language of the following Article, which states " that they are effectual because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be administered by evil men." » Cf. Hardwick, pp. 129, 130. I ARTICLE XXVI De vi InMUiUiwhum Divinarum, quod eavi non (ollit malUia MiniUroruvi. Quamvis in ecclesia visibili bonis mali semper sint admixti, atque interduro ministerio verbi et sacra- mentorum administrationi pnesint, tamen cum non suo sed Christi nomine agant, ejusque mandato ct autoritate ministrent, illorum ministerio uti licet, cum in verbo Dei audiendo, tum in sacramentis percipiendis. Neque per illorum malitiam effectus institutorum Christi tollitur, aut gratia do- norum Dei minuitur, quoad eos qui fide et rite sibi oblata per- cipiunt, quae propter institutionem Christi et promissionem efficacia sunt, licet per malos admini- strentur. Ad ecclesiie tomen disciplinam pertinet, ut in malos ministros inquiratur, accusenturque ab his, qui eorum flagitia noverint, atque tandem justo convicti judicio deponantur. Of the UnwoHhiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect, of the Sdcranicnts. Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometime the evil have chief authority in the ministration of the word and sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by His commission and authority, we may use their ministry, both in hearing the word of God, and in the re- ceiving of the sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God's gifts dimin- ished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the sacraments ministered unto them ; which be effectual, because of Christ's insti- tution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men. Nevertheless, it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences ; and finally, being found guilty by just judgment, be deposed. This Article has remained practically unchanged > since ' "Malos ministros " w«s substituted for "mk" ir, f».„ i..t U. 156, „U i,. l.n the English ^-^^X^Z^l^.^ZTt 016 616 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES its first issue in 1553. It is drawn substantially from the fifth of the " Thirteen Articles of 1538 "^ which in its turn rested to some extent on the eighth of the Con- fession of Augsburg.'^ Its object is to condemn the view maintained by the Anabaptists, that the ministry of evil ministers is necessarily inefficacious and ought to be rejected. The same view is expressly condemned in the Confession of Augsburg in the following words: " Damnant Donatistas et similes, qui negabant licere uti ministerio malorum in ecclesia, et sentiebant ministerium malorum inutile et inefficax esse."^ Similarly the RefoTTYiatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum says that some of the Anabaptists " ab ecclesise corpore seipsos segregant, et ad sacrosanctam Domini mensam cum aliis recusant accedere, seque dicunt detineri vel ministrorum impro- bitate vel aliorum fratrum." * ^ Latin by the alteration of ** such " into " evil ministers." The title also in its i)resent form only dates from 1571. In 1553 and 1563 it was "the wickedness of the ministers doth not take away the ett'ectual operation of God's ordinances." "Ministrorum malitia non tollit efficaciam institutionum divinarum." ^ "Quamvis in ecclesia secundum posteriorem acceptionem mali sint bonis admixti atque etiam ministeriis verbi et sacramentorum non nunquam prsesint ; tamen cum ministrent non suo sed Christi nomine, maudato, et auctoritate, licet eorum ministerio uti, tam in verbo audiendo quam in recipiendis sacramentis juxta illud : 'Qui vos audit me audit.' Nee per eorum malitiam minuitur effectus, aut gi-atia donorum Christi rite accipientibus ; sunt enim efficacia propter promissionem et ordina- tionem Christi, etiamsi per malos exhibeantur." - " Quanquam ecclesia proprie sit congregatio sanctorum et verc credentium ; tamen cum in hac vita multi hypocrite et mali admixti sint, licet uti sacramentis, quae per malos admin istrantur, juxta vocem Christi : SedeiU ScHba et Pharisa-i in Cathedra Jfaisis, etc. Et sacra- menta et verbum propter ordinationem et mandatum Christi sunt efficacia, etiamsi per malos exhibeantur." 2 Con/essio Auffustana, Art. VIII. subjiiie. * Hef. Legam Ecdesiast., De Hceres. c. xv. Cf. Rogers (hi the AHieles (published in 1586). "The Anabaptists will not have the people to use the ministry of evil ministers, and think the service of wicked ministers s ARTICLE XXVI 617 It has been sometimes thought that the Article may have also been aimed at the doctrine of " Intention." ^ This, however, is unquestionably a mistake. The language of the Article in no way bears on the doctrine, and it is difficult to see how it could ever have been thought to do so. Certainly when the Puritans at the Hampton Court Conference in 1604 asked that a condemnation of the doctrine might be inserted in the Articles, it cannot have occurred either to them or to the Bishops who answered them that a condemnation of it was there already.^ Moreover, when in 1633 Francis a Sancta Clara (Davenport) wrote his Com- mentary on the Thirty-Nine Articles, endeavouring to reconcile them with the Tridentine decrees, while some of the statements in the Articles were evidently stubborn facts which it was hard to manipulate, the Article before us gave him no trouble whatever. It appeared to him entirely satisfactory, and the only comment which he deemed necessary upon it was this : " This is the very doctrine of the Church and of all the Fathers." ^ Taking, then, the Article as aimed solely against the notions of the Anabaptists, it needs but little comment unprofitable and not effectual ; affirming that no man who is himself faulty can preach the truth to others. ... The disciplinary Puritans do bring all ministers who cannot preach, and their services, into detestation. For their doctrine is that where there is no preacher, there ought to be no minister of the sacraments. None must minister the sacraments which do not preach, etc. ... So the Brownists : no man is to communicate (say they) where there is a blind or dumb ministry." Rogers (hi tJie ThiHyNine Articles (Parker Societv) p. 271. ^ ' * See Bishop Harold Browne On the Articles, p. 607. - Cf. Cardwell's History of Cmiferetvces, p. 185. * Davenport's book, which is more remarkable for ingenuity than for anything else, has been republished by the Rev. F. 0. Lee (J T Hayes, 1872). i 618 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES > or explanation.^ The opinions condemned in it, which have found favour with Puritan sects fi-om the days of the Donatists onward, would, if admitted, make all ministerial and sacramental acts utterly uncertain, for no man can see into the hearts of the ministers, and say who are in the sight of God " evil " and who are not. Besides this, there is ample support in Holy Scripture for the position maintained in the Article. The principle underlying our Lord's words, " The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat : all things, therefore, whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe ; but do not ye after their works" (S. Matt, xxiii. 2, 3), may fairly be applied to the case of "evil ministers" in the Christian Church. When the Twelve were sent forth two and two, and given " power against unclean spirits to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness, and all manner of disease," the ministry of Judas must have been effectual like that of the rest of the Apostles, or suspicion would have been directed towards him. Again, our Lord lays down the rule with regard to " the Seventy " which must apply to Christian ministers also : " He that heareth you heareth Me ; and he that rejecteth you, rejecteth Me ; and he that rejecteth Me, rejecteth Him that sent Me " (S. Luke X. 16); and S. Paul teaches that the minister is nothing. "What then is Apollos ? and what is Paul ? ministers through whom ye believed ; and each as the Lord gave to him. I planted, Apollos watered ; but God gave the increase " (1 Cor. iii. 5,6). Such passages when fairly considered seem sufficient to establish the position taken up in the Article, and to lead us to believe that even in an extreme case, when the eYil have chief authority in the ministration of ^The doctrine of "Intention" is noticed in connection with the question of the validity of Anglican Orrlers in the Commentary on Article XXXVI. See below, p. 755. ARTICLE XXVI 619 the word and sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by His commission and authority, we may use their ministry, both in hearing the word of God, and in the receiving of the sacraments. At the same time, important as it is that this principle should be established, it is no less necessary that the Church should guard herself with the utmost care from any suspicion of indifference to the character of the lives of her ministers, whom she charges before their ordina- tion to the priesthood to "endeavour themselves to sanctify their lives, and to fashion them after the rule and doctrine of Christ, that they may be wholesome and godly examples and patterns for the people to follow " ; and, therefore, it is well that the statement already considered should be followed by that in the last para- graph of the Article, which must commend itself to everyone, and seems to require no formal proof. It appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that inquiry be made of evil ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences ; and finally, being found guilty by just judgment, be deposed. .; ARTICLE XXVII til De, Baptismo, Baptismus non est tan turn pro- fessionis signum ac discriminis nota, qua Christiani a non Christianis discemantur, sed etiam est signum Regenerationis, per quod tanquam per instrumentum recte baptlsmum suscipientes, ecclesiae inseruntur, promissiones de remissione pecca- torum atquc adoptione nostra in filios Dei, per Spiritum sanctum visibiliter obsignantur, fides con- firmatur, et vi divinae invocationis, gratia augetur. Baptismus parvulorum omnino in ecclesia retinendus est, ut qui cum Christi institutione optime con- gruat. 0/£apti9vi, Baptism is not only a sign of profession, and mark of diflference, whereby Christian men are dis- cemed from other that be not christened, but is also a sign of regeneration or new birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive baptism rightly are grafted into the Church ; the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed : faith is confirmed : and grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. The baptism of young children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ. This Article dates from 1553; but in the revision of Elizabeth's reign, ten years later, the last paragraph was rewritten, and the language on Infant Baptism was con- siderably strengthened. The earlier clause had simply stated that " the custom of the Church to christen young children is to be commended, and in any wise to be retained in the Church." ^ The language of the Article ^t should be mentioned that though the words "per Spiritum Sanctum" stand in the Latiii edition of 1553, there is nothing to corre- spond to them in the English. The omission was rectified in the English edition of Jugge and Cawood in 1563. 620 ARTICLE XXVII 621 has not been traced to any earlier source. There is nothing in the Confession of Augsburg ^ or in the Thir- teen Articles of 1538 suggesting its phraseology; nor is there any resemblance between its language and that of the Eeforinatio Leyxim Ecclesiasticarum on the same subject.^ The object of the Article is to state the Church's teaching on Holy Baptism, in view of the errors of the Anabaptists, who (1) maintained an utterly unspiritual view of the sacrament, and (2) denied that Baptism ought to be administered to infants and young children.^ There are two main subjects which come before us for consideration — (1) The description of Baptism and its effects. (2) Infant Baptism. i: I. The Descri;ption of Baptism and its Effects. Each phrase in the description requires separate con- sideration. (a) Baptism is ... a sign of profession. So much was admitted by Zwingli and the Anabaptists, who regarded Baptism as little more than this. The expression used in the Article may be illustrated by the language of the closing exhortation in the Office for the Public Baptism of Infants in the Book of Common Prayer, where it is said that " Baptism doth represent unto us our profession ; which > The Article in the Confession of Augsburg (IX.) is this; "De Bap- tismo docent, quod sit necessarius ad salutem, quodque per baptismum offeratur gratia Dei ; et quod puerl sint baptizandi, qui per baptismum oblati Deo recipiantur in gratiam Dei. Damnant Anabaptistas, qui im- probant baptismum puerorum, et affirmant pueros sine baptismo salvos fieri." ^ Ref. Ltgum Ecdtsiast. , De Sacramentis, cap. 3. ^ » This, together with other errors on Baptism, is condemned in the Jie/ormatio Lc.gum Ecclcsiastxcani.m, De Hc^es. cap. 18 ; and cf. Hermann's "Consultation," fol. cxlii. 622 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXVII 623 '. is to follow the example of our Saviour Christ, and to be made like unto Him : that as He died and rose again for us, so should we who are baptized, die from sin and rise again unto righteousness ; continually mortifying all our evil and corrupt affections, and daily proceeding in all virtue and godliness of living." ^ This view of Bap- tism is based directly on the language of S. Paul in Eom. vi. 4, " We were buried with Him through baptism into death : that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life " (cf. also Col. ii. 1 2, " Having been buried with Him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with Him through faith in the working of God, Who raised Him from the dead "). (h) It is a mark of difference whereby Christian men are discerned from other that be not christened (a non Christianis). Just as circumcision was a mark distinguishing the Jews from all others, so also Baptism distinguishes Christians from non-Christians. It is the initial rite by which a man is, so to speak, made a Christian. But Baptism is much more than this. It it is to be regarded not only as a badge or mark, for, * Cf. also the Collect for Easter Even (1662), "Grant, Lord, that as we are baptized into the death of thy blessed Son our Saviour Jesus Christy so by continually mortifying our corrupt affections we may be buried with him ; and that through the grave and gate of death we may pass to our joyful resurrection ; for His merits," etc. Expression is also given to the same thought in the Jte/onnatio Legum Ecclesiast., De Saeramentis, cap. 3 : "Dum autem in aqua demergimur et rursus ex ilia eraergimus, Christi mors nobis primum et sepultura commendantur, deinde suscitatio quidem illius, et reditus ad vitam," etc. See also Bishop Lightfoot on Col. ii. 12: "Baptism is the grave of the old man, and the birth of the new. As he sinks beneath the baptismal waters the believer buries there all his corrupt affections and past sins ; as he emerges thence, he rises regenerate, quickened to new hopes and a new life. . . . Thus Baptism is an image of his i>articipation both in the death and in the resurrection of Christ." It is obvious how much the dramatic impressiveness of Baptism and its representative force is increased where immersion is the method employe ijfiQv (vda fjdwp irrif Koi Tpbwo¥ dvayevvififfeuSt ^v kolI rj/ieh airrol dpeyevv-^eTjfxcv, dva- yevuQyrai). (Cf. Irenseus, Adv. Hcer. I. xiv. 1 : els i^dpvrion Goromissiones de ... adoptione nostra in filios Dei per Spiritum Sanctum visibiliter obsignantur," etc. In the English the words " per Spiritum Sartum ' are not rejvresented at all. (2) In 1563 in thl^Latrp'ker M^^^ inT: TJ ^;f "^«\*^- - no stop till after obsignantur bu v,-«l 1 . I . ^°P*^o^« "o«t^* ^n filios Dei, per Spiritum Sanctum ^sibihter obsignantur " This is also the case in the English USsZ the State Paper Office belonging to the same year (Elizabeth, " Domestic " 2i f. ^ iv ?rf ^^r'^^"'^ ""^ ^^"^^^"' ^«^^il *« in the English ^ition published by Jugge and Cawood. The Latin MS. among%he S^t^ Papers (ubt supra, No. 41a) has no stop till after obsignantur but the arrangement of the words in the lines looks as if the words -per Spiritum Sanctum " were intended to be read with what follows rather than with what precedes. (3) In 1571 the English MS. signed by some of the Bishops, now in the Library of Corpus College, Cambridge has the comma after - sons of God." " our adoption to be^the sons of God b; th Holy Ghost are visibly signed and sealed. " Of the published editions in this year the Latin (Daye) has no stop till after obsignantur ; the English (Jugge and Cawood) punctuates as follows : - our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed." (4) The English reprint of 1628 with the Royal Declaration prefixed to it adopts the same punctuation as in the edition of 1571 by Jugge and Cawood But (5) in a repnnt of 1662 we find the modern punctuation "Our adoption to be sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed. I cannot say whether it ever occurs earlier than this, but this IS the earliest edition in which I have discovered it. 41 •'/' 630 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES » « in the edition of 1571 there stands a comma be/mr as well as after the words, thus : " the promises ... of our adoption to be the sons of God, by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed," which does not look as if the translators intended them to be taken closely with the preceding words. Further, whatever may be the case elsewhere, in the instance before us the Latin is unquestionably the original, and in this there is nothing unnatural in the order of the words " per Spiritum Sanctum visibiliter obsignantur." The words, then, should apparently be taken as a definite recognition of the action of the Holy Spirit in Baptism. By Him the promises are visibly signed and sealed. The " new birth," as our Lord Himself teaches us, is one of " water and the Spirit " (S. John iii 5) ; and as S. Paul says, " By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body " (1 Cor. xii. 13).^ It is clear, then, from the teaching of Holy Scripture that a new relation is formed between the baptized person and the Holy Spirit who is the instrument of his regeneration, and that in some sense the Holy Spirit is " given " in Baptism. As Hooker puts it with his usual accuracy, " Baptism was instituted that they which receive the same might thereby be incorporated into Christ, and so through His most precious merit obtain as well that saving grace of imputation which taketh away all former guiltiness, as also that infused divine virtue of the Holy Ghost, which giveth to the powers of the soul their first disposi- tion towards future newness of life."* But it is a further question whether it is right to say precisely that the gift of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is given in Baptism apart from Confirmation. On the one * 'Ev M Tf€iiiaTi denotes the means, and the <c Baptismo, xviii. * "Pro hoc et ecclesia ab Apostolis traditionem susccpit, etiam parvulis baptismam dare. Sciebant enim illi quibiis mysteriorum secreta com- missa sunt divinorum quod essent in omnibus genuinse sordcs peccati, quae per aquam et Spiritum ablui deberent."— CVww. in Ep. ad Rmn, Bk. V. c. ix. ''"Parvuli baptizantur in reiiiissionem peccatorum. Quomm pecca- \ ARTICLE XXVII 639 The last witness who need be cited is S. Cyprian (260). In his day we find that the analogy of circum- cision was so rigidly pressed, that it was questioned whether it was lawful to administer Baptism before the eighth day after birth. The question is considered by him, and decided in the affirmative.^ From this time onwards there can be no question as to the custom of the Church permitting Infant Baptism, although in many cases it was dehberately deferred owing to the dread of post-baptismal sin. This, however, has no real bearing on the question before us ; and the passages quoted are sufficient to justify the statement made above, that from the second century onwards the Church was famHiar with the idea and practice of Infant Baptism. torum ? vel quo tempore peccaverunt ? aut quomodo potest ulla lavacri in parvulis ratio subsistere, nisi juxta ilium sensum de quo paulo ante diximus : Nullus mundus a sorde, nee si unius diei quidem fuerit vita ejus super terram ? Et quia per baptismi sacramentum nativitatis sordes deponuutur, propterea baptizantur et parvuli. Nisi enim quis renatus fuent ex aqua et Spiritu non potuerit intrare in regnum ccclorum."— /w Ltieam ffomilia XV. ; cf. H(m. in Lcmt. viii. § 3. ^ % Ixiv. (ed. Hartel). I \l I^W '«^' ARTICLE XXVIII 641 , i-i ki *^ ARTICLE XXVIII De Cctna Domini, CccDa Domiui non est tan turn signum mutuee beuevolcDtise Chris- tianorum inter sese, veruni potius est sacrament um nostra* per mortem Christi redemptionis. Atque ideo rite, digne et cum fide sumentibus, panis quem frangimus, est com- municatio corporis Christi : simili- ter poculum benedictionis est com- municatio sanguinis Christi. Panis et vini transubstantiatio in Eucharistia, ex sacris Uteris pro- bari non potest, sed apertii Scrip- turse verbis adversatur, sacramenti naturam evertit, et multarum superstitionum dedit occasionem. Corpus Christi datur, accipitur, et manducatur in coena, tantum ccclesti et spiritual! rationc. Me- dium autem quo Corpus Christi accipitur et manducatur in ccena, fides est. Sacramentum Eucharistiic ex in- stitutione Christi non servabatur, circumferebatur, elevabatur, nee adorabatur. Of the Loi-(Vs Supper. The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Chris- rians ought to have among them- selves one to another ; but rather it is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death : insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the bread which we break is a par- taking of the body of Christ ; and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ. Transubstantiatiou ( or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy AVrit; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many supersti- tions. Tlie body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordi- nance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped. In no Article are the changes introduced at the revision of 1563 of greater importance than in this. It is not GIO too much to say that they completely transform it and alter its character. In order to make this clear, it will be necessary to remind the reader briefly of the course of thought on the subject of the Eucharist in the Church of England during the sixteenth century. In all the formularies put forth in the reign of Henry viii. the doctrine of the real presence is strongly asserted,^ as also in the abortive series of Articles agreed > (1) The Ten Articles of 1536. "As touching the Sacrament of the Altar, we will that all bishops and preachers shall instruct and teach our people committed by us unto their spiritual charge, that they ought and must constantly believe, that under the form and figure of bread and wine, which we there presently do see and perceive by outward senses, is verily, substantially, and really contained and comprehended the very self-same body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which was born of the Virgin Mary, and suffered upon the cross for our redemption ; and that under the same form and figure of bread and wine the very self-same body and blood of Christ is corporally, really, and in the very substence exhibited, distributed, and received of all them which receive the said sacrament. "—^<7rmt*/aritf« of Faith, p. 11. (2) "The Institution of a Christian man" (the "Bishops' Book") of 1537 repeats this almost word for word.— Op. cU, p. 100. (3) The "Necessary Doctrine and Erudition for any Christian man" (the King's Book) of 1543, not content with this, substitutes a passage which clearly teaches the doctrine of transubstantiatiou. " In the other sacra- ments the outward kind of the thing which is used in them remaineth still in their own nature and substance unchanged. But in this most high Sacrament of the Altar, the creatures which be taken to the use thereof as bread and wine, do not remain still in their own substance, but by the virtue of Christ's word in the consecration be changed and turned to the very substance of the body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ. So that although there appear the form of bread and wine, after the con- secration, as did before, and to the outward senses nothing seemeth to be changed, yet must we, forsaking and renouncing the persuasion of our senses in this behalf, give our assent only to faith and to the plain word of Christ, which affirmeth that substance there offered, exhibited, and received, to be the very precious body and blood of our Lord. ... By these words it is plain and evident to all them with meek, humble, and sincere heart will believe Christ's words, and be obedient unto faith,' that in the sacrament, the things that be therein be the very body and blood of Chiist in very substance." — Op. cit. p. 262. i IJ 642 ^' I I THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES upon by the Anglican and Lutheran divines in 1538.^ But about the year 1545 Ridley came across the book of " Bertram," or rather Ratramn of Corbie (840), Dt Corpore et Sanguine Domini} By this he was greatly impressed. " This Bertram," he said, " was the first that pulled me by the ear, and that brought me from the common error of the Romish Church, and caused me to search more diligently and exactly both the Scriptures and the writings of the old ecclesiastical Fathers in this matter." ^ Nor did the influence of Ratramn's book end here ; for Ridley, having been convinced by it himself, never rested till he had won over Cranmer also, and under his influence Cranmer was led definitely to abandon the medieval theory of transubstantiation.* Even so, however, he wavered and hesitated as to what his positive belief was, and for a considerable time appears to have inclined to something like the Lutheran tenet of con- substantiation ; 5 though finally, after the death of Bucer * Art. VIL De Eucharistia: "De Eucharistia constanter credimus et docemus, quod in sacramento corporis et sanguinis Domini, vere, snb- stantialiter, et realiter adsint corpus et sanguis Christi sub speciebus panis et vini. Et quod sub eisdem speciebus vere et realiter exhibentur et distribuuntur illis qui sacramentum accipiunt, sive bonis sive malis." This is decidedly stronger than the Article in the Confession of Augsburg, which in the original edition of 1530 runs as follows : "De ccena Domini docent, quod corpus et sanguis Christi vera adsint, et distribuantur vescentibus in ccena Domini, et improbant secus docentes." This was altered in the edition of 1540 to " De coena Domini docent, quod cum pane et vino vere exhibeantur corpus et sanguis Christi vescentibus in ccena Domini"— See Sylloge Confessionum, pp. 126 and 172. 2 Ratramn's book was written in answer to questions addressed to him by Charles the Bald, in consequence of the work of Paschasius Radbert, in which a theory of transubstantiation had been plainly put forward. As against this, Ratramn strongly asserts that there is no change in the elements. See below, p. 650. ^ See Moule's Bishop Ridley on the Lords Supper ^ p. 11. * lb. p. 13. ^ In 1548 he issued an English translation of a Lutheran Catechism, and great was the dissatisfaction and disappointment among the more ARTICLE XXVIII 643 early in 1551, he seems to have fallen completely under the influence of the Polish refugee John a Lasco, who sympathised entirely with the Swiss or Zwinglian school on the subject of the Eucharist. The result is seen in some of the changes introduced into the Book of Common Prayer in 1552, and in the publication of the Twenty- ninth Article, De coena Domini, in 1553. It will be remembered that in the Prayer Book of 1552, among other changes, the words of administration were altered, ardent spirits at the position which he took up. "The Archbishop of Canterbury, moved, no doubt, by the advice of Peter Martyr and other Lutherans, has ordered a Catechism of some Lutheran opinions to be translated and published in our language. This little book has occa- sioned no httle discord ; so that fightings have frequently taken place among the common people, on account of their diversity of opinion, even dunng the sermons. "-Burcher to BuUinger, Oct. 29, 1548 (Oriqi'nal Letters, p. 642). "This Thomas," ^Tote John ab Ulmis to the same correspondent (Aug. 18, 1548), "has fallen into so heavy a slumber that we entertain but a very cold hope that he will be aroused even by your most learned letter. For he has lately published a Catechism, in which he has not only approved that foul and sacrilegious transubstantiation of the Papists in the Holy Supper of our Saviour, but all the dreams of Luther seem to him sufficiently well grounded, perspicuous, and lucid " {ib. p. 380). Towards the end of the year a change was noticed for in November the same correspondent wites: '*Even that Thomas himself about whom I wrote to you when I was in London, by the goodness of God and the instrumentality of that most upright and judicious man Master John a Lasco, is in a great measure recovered from his dangerous lethargy" (p. 383). In 1549 he was apparently again inclined to higher views than were acceptable to the extreme men. Bucer had "very great influence with him"; he was with him "like another Scipio, and an mseparable companion " (pp. 64, 67). But by the end of the year he had taken a decided step. "The Archbishop of Canterbury" wrote Hooper to Bullinger on December 27, "entertains right views L to the nature of Christ's presence in the Supjier, and is now very friendly towards myself. He has some Articles of religion, to which all preachers and lecturers in divinity are required to subscribe, or else a licence for teach- ing is not granted them, and in these his sentiments respecting the Eucharist are pure and religious, and similar to yours in Switzeriand" (p. 71). In the following year no room for doubt was left, as Cranmer's own Defence of the True and Catholic Doctrine of tlie Sacrament was pub- lished. V< '< . 644 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXVIII 645 " Take and eat (drink) this in remembrance," etc., being substituted for " the body (blood) of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given (shed) for thee," etc., and that there appeared at the end of the Communion Office the " black rubric " or declaration concerning kneeling, which asserted that " thereby no adoration is intended or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or unto any real and essential Presence of Christ's natural Flesh and Blood. For the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural substances, and therefore may not be adored (for that were Idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians); and the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in heaven, and not here, — it being against the truth of Christ's natural Body to be at one time in more places than one." ^ In the Article as pub- lished in the following year, 1553, the first, second, and fourth paragraphs were the same as those in our present one (save that the words " overthroweth the nature of a sacrament" were added in 1563). But the third para- graph was widely different from that which the Article now contains. It stood thus : " Forasmuch as the truth of man's nature requireth, that the body of one and the self-same man cannot be at one time in diverse places, but must needs be in some one certain place: therefore the body of Christ cannot be present at one time in many and diverse places. And because (as Holy Scripture doth teach) Christ was taken up into heaven, and there shall continue unto the end of the world, a faithful man ought not either to believe or openly to confess the real and bodily presence (as they term it) of Christ's flesh and blood, in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper." ^ On the history of this rubric, which was added at the last moment, see Dixon, iii. 475 seq. Exactly in accord with this teaching is the language of the BeformcUio Legum JScdesiasticarum, which, it will be remembered, dates from the same period. In this a violent and rather coarse attack is made on both tran- substantiation and consubstantiation, or " impanation," as it is called; and the "real presence" is positively denied.1 On a review of these and other facts, there can be little doubt that in 1552 and 1553 the formularies of the Church in this country were (to say the least) intended to be acceptable to those who sympathised with the Swiss School of Reformers in regard to the Eucharist, and who held that the Presence was merely figurative. But happily the accession of Elizabeth, after the Marian reaction, brought with it a return to wiser counsels, and a great and marked change in the language of our formularies. In the Prayer Book (1559) the words of administration used in the first Prayer Book of Edward vi. were restored, in addition to the formula of the second book, so that there might be once more a definite recognition of the Presence at the moment of administration to each individual; and the "black rubric" was altogether omitted.^ In the Article, when it was republished a few years later (1563), the third paragraph, denying the "real and » He/ornuUio Legum Ecclts., De Hocres. c. 19 ; cf. De SacraTrventis, c. 4: "Cumautem ad haec omnia nee transubstantiatione opus sit, nee lUa quam fingere solebant reali praesentia corporis Cbristi, sed potius hsec cimosa hominum inventa primum contra naturam humanam sint a Filio Dei nostra causa sumptara, deinde cum Scripturis divinis pugnent, et pneterea cum universa sacramentorum ratione confligant, ista tanquam fnvola quaedam somnia merito desecanda curavimus, et oblivione obruenda, praesertim cum magnum ex illis et pemiciosum agmen super- stitionum in ecclesia Dei importatum fuerit." This may well be con- trasted with the much more sober condemnation of transubsUntiation in the Articles. 2 The rubric was restored in 1662 with the very important substitution of •* corporal " for "real and essential." 42 i. V .I 646 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXVIII 647 bodily presence (as they term it) of Christ's flesh and blood," was also deleted,* and in its place was inserted our present third paragraph, asserting in careful and accurate language that " the body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and spiritual manner ; and the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith." The author of this paragraph was Edmund Guest, Bishop of Rochester, who says in a letter to Cecil that is still preserved, that it was of " mine own penning," and that it was not intended to " exclude the Presence of Christ's Body from the Sacrament, but only the grossness and sensibleness in the receiving thereof." ^ Naturally these changes were not agreeable to the Puritan party in the Church,* for they amounted to a complete change. Whereas in the latter years of Edward VI. 's reign the formularies had seemed to exclude the doctrine of the real Presence and to incline to Zwing- lianism, they were now (at the lowest estimate) patient of a Catholic interpretation, and contained nothing under cover of which the Zwinglianizing party could honestly ^ What makes the omission more noteworthy is that the following clause was presented to the Synod and rejected by it: "Christus in coelum ascendens, corpori suo Immortalitatem dedit, naturam non abstulit, humanae enim naturae veritatem (juxta Scripturas) perpetuo retinet, quam uno et definite loco esse, et non in multa, vel omnia simul loca difFundi oportet, quum igitur Christus in calum sublatus, ibi usque ad finem seculi sit permansurus, atque inde non aliunde (ut loquitur Augustinus) venturus sit, ad judicandum vivos et mortuos, non debet quisquam fidelium, camis ejus et sanguinis, realem et corporalem (ut loquuntur) presentiam in Eucharistia vel credere vel profiteri." See Lamb's Historical Account of the XXXIX. ArticlM^ p. 12. > The letter quoted in full in G. F. Hodge's Bishop Oucsi Articles XXVIII. and XXIX. p. 22. 3 See the letter of Humphrey and Sampson to Bullinger, quoted in vol. i. p. 41, and the notice in Strype of the controversies concerning the Real Presence, and of Parker's supposed " Lutheranism," Annals^ vol. i. p. 334 ; cf. Zurich Letters, p. 177. shelter themselves. Moreover, they have since been supplemented by the clear teaching of the Church Catechism (1604). It follows from all this that the opinions of the Edwardian Reformers, such as Cranmer and Ridley, on the subject of the Holy Communion, have nothing more than an historical interest for us. Destruc- tively they performed a task for which we owe them a great debt, in courageously attacking the medieval teaching on transubstantiation. But the positive charac- ter impressed upon the Articles in regard to Eucharistic doctrine is not theirs ; nor have their writings any claim to be regarded even as an expositio contemporanea of for- mularies, which, in their present form, belong to a later date, and to a time when much greater respect was shown to the ancient teaching of the Church. We are now in a position to consider the substance of the Article as it stood unchanged since 1663. It contains four paragraphs dealing with the following subjects : 1. The description of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. 2. The doctrine of Transubstantiation. 3. The nature of the Presence, and the " mean whereby it is received." 4. Certain practices in connection with the Eucharist. I The Description of the Sacrament of the lord's Supper. (a) It is a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another. So much was admitted by the Anabaptists, who regarded it as an outward sign of our profession and fellowship, but nothing more. The Article admits that it is this,' but it is not only this. Far more important is it to remember that it is rather {b) A Sacrament of our Redemption by I 1 I \ 4 648 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Christ's death. It was instituted " for the continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the death of Christ, and of the benefits which we receive thereby," and by it we " proclaim the Lord's death till He come " (1 Cor. xi. 26). (c) To such as rightly (rite), worthily, and with faith reoeive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking (communicatio) of the Body of Christ, and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ. This clause is entirely founded on S. Paul's words in 1 Cor. x. 16, the words of which it follows very closely : " The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion (Kotpavla, Vulg. communicatio) of the Blood of Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion with the Body of Christ ? " This passage forms an inspired commentary upon the account of the institution, when (to follow S. Paul's own narrative of it) our Lord " took bread ; and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said. This is My body, which is for you : this do in remembrance of Me. In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying. This cup is the new covenant in My blood : this do, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me." The value of the words of the Apostle cannot be over- estimated as interpreting the meaning of our Lord's words: "This is My body." They seem conclusive against transubstantiation on the one hand, and against a merely figurative presence on the other. The bread, he says, which we break,^ is it not a Koivcovla with the body of Christ ? ie, that which coming between unites us with and makes us partakers of the body; for so we *It is noteworthy that S. Paul's words are "the bread which we break" and " the cup of blessing which we bless,'' not simply "which we ecu and driiik.** Thus he seems to lay the stress on the breaking of the bread and the blessing of the cup, i.e. on the consecration with which the Church has always connected the fact of the Presence. ARTICLE XXVIII 649 may paraphrase the word. Thus the heavenly part of the Sacrament is conveyed to us through the earthly symbol consecrated by Christ's word of power ; and the " inward part or thing signified " is, in the emphatic words of the Catechism (rightly emphatic, because the Presence had been explained away by some), " the Body and Blood of Christ, which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper." Thus the Eucharist is, as Article XXV. maintains, an ** effectual sign." It not only typifies, but also conveys ; for all who " duly receive these holy mysteries " are fed " with the spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood " of our Saviour Jesus Christ. So far the Article has spoken only of the fact of the Presence of Christ's Body and Blood, teaching us that it is conveyed to us through " the bread which we break," and " the cup of blessing which we bless." But ques- tions had been raised, and much controversy had taken place with regard to the manner and nature of the Presence ; and these could not be altogether passed by without notice. To them, therefore, the next two para- graphs are devoted. * :|' ^ II. TransubstaTvtiation, In considering this it will be well to treat separately — (a) The history of the doctrine, and (6) The grounds on which it is condemned. (a) Hie history of the doctrine. — During the first eight centuries there are singularly few traces of con- troversy on the subject of the Eucharist, and as a consequence the teaching of the Fathers concerning the Presence is informal and imsystematic. It is, however, quite clear from the language used by them, as well as I! 1 650 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES from the expressions employed in the Liturgies of the Church, (1) that they believed in the Real Presence, and yet (2) that they were not committed to any formal theory of the manner of it such as that which was afterwards elaborated, and (3) that they held the permanence and reaKty of the elements even after consecration. The ninth century made a change, as the doctrine then became a matter of controversy. The first, so far as we know, to write a formal treatise on the subject was Paschasius Radbert of Corbie, in 831. In his work, De Corjpore et Sangicine Domini, a carnal theory, involv- ing practically the destruction and annihilation of the elements, was boldly taught. Again and again he asserts that after consecration there is " nihil aliud quam corpus et sanguis Domini" ^ The work of Paschasius was answered among others by Ratramn, whose treatise, denying the carnal presence, and maintaining a spiritual view, had such an influence on Ridley, and through him on Cranmer.^ Others, however, as Hincmar (c. 850) and Haimo of Halberstadt (c. 850), wrote in favour of the teaching of Paschasius; Haimo, indeed, expressly teaching that "the invisible priest changes His visible creatures into the substance of His flesh and blood," and that " though the taste and figure of bread and wine remain, yet the nature of the substances is altogether changed into the body and blood of Christ." ^ After this, however, the controversy died down, till the days of Lanfranc and Berengar, Archdeacon of Angers, ^ See ec. ii. viii. xi. xii. xvi. xx., and cf. Gore's Dissertatums, p. 2S68eq. The work of Paschasius is given in Migne, Patrologia, vol. cxx. 2 On the teaching of Ratraran, see Gore, op. cit. p. 240 seq. ^ Migne, Patrol, vol. cxviii. p. 817. It is generally stated that John Scotus Erigena joined in this controversy and wrote a work on the Eucharist. But this does not appear to have been the case, for the work ascribed to him by later writers has been shown by Cauuu Gore to be really the work of Ratramn. DisscrtcUimis, p. 240. ARTICLE XXVIII 651 in the eleventh century. Berengar, who had attacked the popular doctrine with great vigour, was forced to recant at the Council of Eome under Nicholas ii. (1059), and the form of recantation to which he was compelled to assent will show more clearly than any- thing else what was now the belief of the dominant party in the Church. " Ego Berengarius indignus Sancti Mauritii Ande- gavensis ecclesiae Diaconus cognoscens veram, Catholi- cam, et apostolicam fidem, anathematizo omnem hseresim, praecipue eam, de qua hactenus infamatus sum : quae astruere conatur panem et vinum, quae in altari ponuntur, post consecrationem solummodo sacramentum, et non verum corpus et sanguinem Domini nostii Jesu Christi esse, nee posse sensualiter, nisi in solo sacramento, manibus sacerdotum tractari, vel frangi, aut fidelium dentibus atteri. Consentio autem sanctae Komanae et apostolicae sedi ; et ore et corde profiteor de sacramento Dominicae mensae eandem fidem me tenere, quam dominus et venerabilis Papa Nicolaus et haec sancta Synodus auctoritate evangelica et apostolica tenendam tradidit, mihique firmavit: scilicet panem et vinum, quae in altari ponuntur, post consecrationem non solum sacramentum, sed etiam verum corpus et sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi esse, et sensualiter, non solum sacramento, sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari, frangi, et fidelium dentibus atteri: jurans per sanctam et homoousion Trinitatem, per haec sacrosancta Christi evangelia. Eos vero, qui contra banc fidem venerint, cum dogmatibus et sectatoribus suis aeterno anathemate dignos esse pronuntio. Quod si ego ipsse aliquando contra haec aliquid sentire aut praedicare praesumpsero, subjaceam canonum severitati. Lectio et perlecto sponte subscripsL" ^ * Mansi, vol. xix. p. 900, if 652 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES This asserts definitely that after consecration the bread and wine are the true Body and Blood of Christ in such a way that they are " sensibly," not only sacramentally, but really handled by the priest, broken, and ground by the teeth of the faithful. Practically this amounts to saying that the Body and Blood have taken the place of the elements ; and it is very difficult to think that the expressions used can have been intended to be taken in any but a material sense of a sort of physical carnal presence.^ But an obvious difficulty occurs here. If this is so, how is it that the appearances of bread and wine are there still ? It was said that these were allowed to remain in order to test our faith, and to prevent the horror which would result were the Body and Blood to be openly mani- fested.2 And further, advantage was taken by the schoolmen of the distinction drawn by the philosophy of the day between " substance " and " accidents." It was taught that the " accidents " remain, and that therefore taste, appearance, smell, etc. are unchanged, but that the " substance " of bread and wine had been annihilated and replaced by the "substance" of the Body and Blood, i.e. that the bread and wine had been tran- substantiated into the Body and the Blood. The actual word by which this theory is commonly known, " transubstantiatio," appears to have been first used during the eleventh century ,3 and was definitely adopted by Innocent m. at the Fourth Lateran Council in ^ See the summary of the conclusions of Witmund, De Corporis tt Sanguinis Christi VerUate, in Gore, DisstrUUionSf p. 259. * So Paschasius, x. xi. « It has been generally stated that the first known occurrence of the word is in the work of Stephen, bishop of Autun, De Sacramento Altaris (c. 1100). It appears, however, before this in the Exposition of the Canon of the Mass, by Peter Damien (who died in 1072), first published by Cardinal Mai, Script, vet. nova CoUeetio, vol. vi. p. 211 seq.; see c. vii. I ARTICLE XXVIII 653 1215, when a decree was promulgated, laying down that the Body and Blood are truly contained in the Sacrament of the Altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread being transubstantiated into the Body, and the wine into the Blood, by Divine power.^ From this time onward the word was commonly employed in the Western Church.^ But it is no more free from ambiguity than is the word "substance" itself. This, taken in its philosophical sense, is nothing that is tangible, or that the senses are cognizant of; these can only come in contact with the " accidents " or qualities. The " substance " is the underlying something which constitutes the thing, which makes it what it is, in which the " accidents " cohere. But, taken in its ordinary popular sense, " substance " suggests to plain, untrained, and unphilosophical minds something material and tangible, something which they can see, and with which the senses can come in contact. Hence it will be seen that even after it had been laid down that the elements were " transubstantiated " into the Body and Blood, there was still room for wide difference of opinion as to the nature of the change involved. By instructed Theologians it was understood of a change ^ "In qua [ecclesia] idem ipse sacerdos et sacrificium Jesus Christus, ctgus corpus et sanguis in sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis et vini veraciter continentur, transubstantiatis pane in corpus, et vino in sanguincm potestate divina." — Labbe and Cossart, vol. vii. p. 18. ^ The Eastern Church accepts the corresponding term fierowrluxris. It is doubtful, however, whether any instance of its use occurs earlier than the sixteenth century. The older words used for the change effected by consecration were /ieraostolical Church of Rome, and professed with mouth and heart to hold the same faith touching the sacrament of the Lord's Mass, which Pope Nicholas with his Synod at Rome, anno 1058, did hold, and commanded to be held by his evangelical and apostolical authority ; that is, that the bread and wine upon the altar, after consecration, are not only a sacrament, but also are ARTICLE XXVIII 655 In spite, however, of the popular superstitions encouraged by the use of the term, it was authorita- tively reasserted at the Council of Trent. The whole question of the Eucharist was there considered at the thirteenth session in October 1551, more than a year before the promulgation of the English Articles of 1553. At this session it was laid down — (1) that "in the august sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, after the con- secration of the bread and wine, our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and man, is truly, really, and substantially contained under the form of those sensible things " ; ^ and (2) that "because Christ our Eedeemer declared that which He offered under the form of bread to be verily His own Body, therefore it has ever been a firm belief in the Church of God, and this holy Synod doth now declare it anew, that by the consecration of the bread and wine, a conversion takes place of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the Body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His Blood : which con- version is, by the holy Catholic Church, conveniently and properly called Transubstantiation.^ Further, the the very true and self-same Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, felt and broken with hands, and chewed with teeth : swearing by the holy Evangelists that whosoever should hold or say to the contrary, he should hold them perpetually accursed ; and that if he himself should hereafter presume to teach against the same, he should be content to abide the severity and rigour of the Canons," etc. ^ "Principio docet sancta Synodus et aperte ac simpliciter profitetur in almo sanctae Eucharistiae Sacramento, post panis et vini consecra- tionem, Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum verum Deum atque hominem, vere, realiter, ac substantialiter sub specie illanim rerum sensibilium contineri." — Cone. Trid. Sess. xiii. cap. 1. ^ " Quoniam autem Christus redemptor noster, corpus suum id quod sub specie {)anis offerebat, vere esse dixit ; ideo persuasum semper in ecclesia Dei fuit, idque nunc denuo sancta haec Synodus declarat, per consecrationem ^mnis et vini conversionem fieri totius substantias ]>auis in substautiam Corporis Christi Domini nostri, et totius substantias vini I 41 656 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 4V first two Canons passed at this session were the following : — " If any one shall deny that in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist are verily, really, and substantially contained the Body and Blood, together with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently whole Christ ; but shall say that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure or virtue : let him be anathema. " If any one shall say that in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood, the form only of the bread and wine remaining, which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation : let him be anathema." ^ Thus the scholastic theory was formally sanctioned by the Roman Church, and is regarded as an Article of faith in that communion to this day. (h) The grounds on which the doctrine is coTidemned. The Article gives fo2ir grounds for rejecting the m in substantiain Sanguinis Ejus ; quae conversio convenienter et proprie a sancta Catholica Ecclesia Transubstantiatio est appellata." — lb. cap. 4. 1 *' Si quis negaverit in sanctissimo Eucharistiae Sacramento contineri vere realiter et snbstantialiter Corpus et Sanguinem, una cum anima et Divinitate Domini nostii Jesu Christi, ac proinde totum Christum : sed dixerit tantummodo esse in eo, ut in signo, vel figura, aut virtute, anathema sit. "Si quis dixerit in sacrosancto Eucharistise Sacramento remanere sub- stantiam panis et vini, una cum Corpore et Sanguine Domini nostri Jesu Christi ; negaveritque mirabilem illam et singularem conversionem totius substantiie panis in Corpus, et totius substantiee vini in Sanguinem, manentibus dumtaxat speciebiis panis et vini, quam quidem conversionem Catholica Ecclesia aptissime Transubstantiationem appellat : anathema sit." — lb. Canons 1 and 2. ARTICLE XXVIII 657 doctrine. It says that Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord — (1) Cannot be proved by Holy Writ. It is hard to see how a philosophical theory such as Transub- stantiation confessedly is, can ever be " proved by Holy Writ." Romanists point to the words of institution, Tovto ioTi TO (r&fid fiov. But though they can certainly be claimed in favour of the real Presence, yet to bring into them a theory of " accidents " remaining while the "substance'* is changed, is to read into the text that which is certainly not contained in it, and what we deny can reasonably be inferred from it.^ (2) It is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture. According to the theory now under con- sideration, what remains after consecration is no longer " bread," and has no claim to be so called. But Scripture freely speaks of that which is received as " bread," e.g. " As often as ye eat this bread and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till He come. • . . Let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup" (1 Cor. xi. 26, 28). (3) It oYerthroweth the nature of a Sacra- ment. It is of the essence of a sacrament that there should be in it two parts — the " outward visible sign " and the " inward spiritual grace." But if " bread," the outward visible sign in the Eucharist, no longer remains after consecration, one of the two essential parts has been destroyed, and the "nature of a sacrament" is " overthrown." I\ ij ' Both Scotus and Bellarmine hare allowed that there is no passage of Scripture so plain as to compel belief in Transubstantiation, apart from the decree of the Lateran Council. See Bellarmine, De Eucharistiae IIL xxiii., where Scotus is referred to [In IV. (list. xi. q. 3]. Cf. Forbes, Considerationts ModesUXy vol. ii. p. 446. 658 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES (4) It hath given occasion to many supersti- tions. These words are only too painfully true, and in support of them reference may be made to the medieval stories of alleged miracles, such as those freely instanced by Paschasius Eadbert,^ in which the Host has dis- appeared, and the Infant Christ Himself been seen, or where drops of blood have been seen to flow from the consecrated wafer. Of these none is more to the point than the so-called miracle of Bolsena, which led to the institution of the Festival of Corpus Christi in 1264. According to one account, the miracle, in which the corporal was suddenly covered with red spots in the shape of a Host, actually happened to remove the priest's doubts concerning Transubstantiation. These four arguments brought forward in the Article appear to be perfectly satisfactory, as directed against the coarse and carnal form of the doctrine which was present to the minds of those who compiled the Article. But it must be admitted that they scarcely touch the subtle and more refined and spiritual form in which it is held by thoughtful and well-instructed Romanists. With regard to the first two arguments, they may fairly point to the fact that the consecrated Host is actually termed " panis " in the Missal, and therefore may claim that they recognise it as in some sense " bread," and give it the same term as does S. Paul.^ As to the third, they reply that " what we see, feel, or taste in the Blessed Sacrament is real, for the accidents are real entities, and the accidents are all that the senses ever do perceive. ... It is, moreover, because the accidents remain that the Eucharist is a sacrament. They con- stitute the outward part — they are the sensible sign of 1 A considerable number of such ** miracles" are related in his work, De Corpore et Sariguine Domini, c. xiv. *-* Cf. Bellarmine, De Eucharistia, I. c. xi. ARTICLE XXVIII 659 that refreshment of the soul which follows from a worthy reception of the Blessed Sacrament." ^ The fourth argument is obviously inconclusive as an argument. If everything that " hath given occasion to many supersti- tions " is to be rejected, then Christianity itself must go, for there is scarcely a doctrine which has not been so perverted and abused. But even with regard to the more refined and spiritual form in which the doctrine is capable of being presented, we cannot but feel com- pelled to resist it when it is pressed as an Article of faith, and our assent to it is required as a condition of communion. At best it is but a theory of the schools, a philosophical opinion which is " destitute and incapable of proof," 2 as well as "involved in tremendous meta- physical difficulties." ^ As such we decline to be bound by it. But as an "opinion," hard as it is to free it altogether from materialistic conceptions,* it has been conceded by Anglican divines, representing very different schools of thought, that it need be no bar to communion, provided no assent to it were demanded from us.^ ^ Addis and Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, p. 347. 3 Bp. Thirlwall, Charge, 1866, Appendix B. • Gore, Dissertations, p. 269. * Cf. Gore, op. cit. p. 271, where it is pointed out that the accepted teaching of the Roman Church holds that the real Presence is withdrawn as soon as the process of digestion commences ; and the following is quoted from Perrone, PraUectiones Theologicce: **Etenim cum species eo devenerint ut corpus sive materia dissolvi seu corrumpi deberet, cessante reali corporis Christi praesentia, Deus omnipotentia sua iterum producit materialem panis aut vini substantiam in eo statu quo naturaliter inreniretur, si conversio nulla praecessisset, ut fides locum habent." De Eucharistia, § 151. » So Hooker, E. P. V. Ixvii. 6 : " * This is My body,' and * This is My blood,' being words of promise, sith we all agree that by the sacrament Christ doth really and truly in us perform His promise, why do we vainly trouble ourselves with so fierce contentions, whether by consubstantia- tion or else by transubstantiation the sacrament itself be first possessed with Christ or no ?— a thing which no way can either further or hinder us however it stand, because our participation of Christ in this sacra- I i 660 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES r III. The Nature of the Presence and the " Mean whereby it is received" On the nature of the Presence the teaching of the Article is this. The Body and Blood are in no way carnally and corporeally present, ie, after the manner of a body, physically, and according to the laws which govern a local and material presence, for the body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and spiritual manner; that is, it is present in a manner above sense and nature, by the power and working of God's Holy Spirit, and for the highest spiritual ends. It has been noticed by a thoughtful writer that in this clause "the body of Christ is not said in a general way to be * received,' but to be * given, taken, and eaten'; as if there were a solicitude, in correcting the abuses of the sacrament, explicitly to maintain the union between the heavenly and spiritual blessing ment dependeth on the co-operation of His omnipotent power which maketh it His body and blood to us, whether with change or without alteration of the elements such as they imagine, we need not greatly to care nor inquire." Cf. the MS. note in which Hooker defends these words, quoted by Mr. Keble (Hooker's Works, vol. ii. p. 363). Bp. Andrewes : '* 2)« Hoc est, fide firma tenenms, quod sit : De, Hoc modoest (nempe, Transubstantiato in corpus pane), de modo quo fiat ut sit, per, sive (/», sive Con, sive Sub, sive Trans) nullum inibi verbum est. Et quia verbum nullum, merito a fide ablegamus procul : inter Scita Sehola fortasse, inter Fides Artieulos non ponimus. "—i2««p. ad Bellarm, p. 13 (A. C. Lib.). So Archbp. Bramhall places Transubstantiation " among the opinions of the schools, not among the Articles of our (Aith."— Answer to MilUiere, p. 1. Burnet also says : ** We think that neither consubstantia- tion nor transubstantiation, however iU-grounded we think them to be, ought to dissolve the union and communion of Churches."— On Art. XXVIII. And Bp. Harold Browne, in speaking of the teaching of Roman divines, admits that **by the more learned and liberal, stote- ments have been made perpetually in acknowledgment of a spiritual rather than a carnal presence ; and such as no enlightened ProtesUnt would cavU at or refuse."— JEcpo«7io» of the XXXIX. Artides, p. 701. ARTICLE XXVIII 661 and the outward and visible sign. ... To use these precise expressions, therefore, respecting the Body of Christ is, by clearest implication, to combine that 'heavenly and spiritual' blessing with the given and taken symbol." > The words of the whole paragraph imply that the Presence is what is now commonly called " objective," i.e. that it is there, in virtue of consecration, as something external to ourselves, in no way dependent on our feeling or perception of it. It is " given, taken, and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and spiritual manner." But the mean whereby the body of Christ is receiYed and eaten in the Sapper is faith. It is " given, taken, and eaten " (datur, accipitur, et manducatur). It is " received and eaten" (accipitur et manducatur). Three words are employed in the first sentence ; only two in the second ; and this designedly, for the Presence is not due to faith! Faith receives. It cannot crecUe or hestow. The Presence must be there first, or it cannot be received. As Thomdike said, " the eating and drinking of it in the sacrament presupposes the being of it in the sacrament . . . unless a man can spiritually eat the Flesh and Blood of Christ in and by the sacrament, which is not in the sacrament lohen he eats and drinks it, but by his eating and drinking of it comes to be there." ^ If, however, it is clearly implied that the Presence is there first, before it is " received," it seems to be no less clearly taught in the last part of the clause that faith is a necessary condition to the reception of it, for " the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith." So much is practically confessed by Bishop Guest, the author of the clause, in a remarkable letter addressed to Cecil in 1571. Guest was very anxious * A. Knox, Essays, vol. ii. p. 173. * Laws of the Church, c. ii. § 12. 3 I 43 I I I I 662 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES that Article XXIX. " Impii non manducant," which had been withdrawn before publication in 1563, should not now be restored, or receive any sanction "because it is quite contrary to the Scripture and the Fathers " ; and in order to make the Twenty-eighth Article harmonise with the view that the wicked do partake of the body, though not fruitfully, he suggested that the word " only " should be removed, and that the word "profitably" should be inserted, and that the words should run, "the mean whereby the body of Christ is profitably received and eaten in the Supper is faith." i The Article was, however, left untouched, and the Twenty-ninth was, against his wish, inserted ; and, if the words of the Articles are to be taken in their plain literal and grammatical sense, the whole paragraph would seem to indicate, (1) that the Presence is there independent of us, and thus that it is offered to all ; but (2) that the faithful, and the faithful only, are able to receive it. The subject will require some further consideration under the next Article, but so much it seemed necessary to say here, for the right understanding of the words before us. All the positive statements of the Article with regard to the Presence in the Eucharist have now been dis- cussed (for the fourth paragraph which still remains is concerned only with certain practices in connection with the sacrament), and if the exposition that has been given is a fair one, the result of it will be this : that while the doctrine of the real Presence is distinctly taught, and the theory of Transubstantiation is condemned, there is an entire absence of any counter theory of the manner of the Presenca And in this lies the real strength of the position taken up by the Church of England. She 1 State Papers, " Domestic," Elizabeth, vol. Ixxviii. No. 37. Cf. vol. i. p. 45. ARTICLE XXVIII 663 devoutly accepts her Lord's words. She does not attempt to explain them away or to resolve them into a mere figure. But, on the other hand, she is content to hold them as a mystery. Her Lord has not explained them. He has nowhere revealed " how " His Body and Blood are present ; and therefore she declines to specu- late on the manner, and rejects as no part of the Church's faith all theories on the subject presented to her, whether that of Transubstantiation, or the Lutheran tenet of Consubstantiation, or that associated with the name of Calvin, the theory of a " virtual " presence only in the heart of the faithful recipient.^ To the present writer it appears that on this mysterious subject we may well be content to make our own the words of Bishop Andrewes in the sixteenth century, and of Bishop Moberly in the nineteenth — " Prsesentiam credimus non minus quam vos veram : de modo praesentiae nihil temere definimus, addo, nee anxie inquirimus." * " The Body and Blood of Christ are present, not corporeally (for that we know from our Lord's words 1 This, it must be remembered, is a distinct " theory " quite as much as Transubstantiation. It is probably largely owing to the belief that it was the view of R. Hooker that it has obtained such ^vide acceptance in this country. It cannot, however, be fairly said that it represents the w}u)le of Hooker's teaching on the subject. See Book V. c. Ixxvii. § 1, where very strong language is used on "the power of the ministry of God," which " by blessing visible elements maketh them invisible grace " (a phrase which is scarcely reconcileable mth a merely "receptionist" theory), and '* hath to dispose of that flesh which was given for the life of the world, and that blood which was poured out to redeem souls." The arguments in c. Ixvii. by which Hooker seeks to justify his conclusion that " the real Presence of Christ's most blessed body and blood is not to be sought for in the sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of the sacra- ment," cannot be deemed convincing, and the reader will find an able criticism of them in Freeman's Principles of Divine Service, vol. ii. Introd. p. 202 seq. - Jiesponsio ad Btllami. p. 13. II I I n n 1 " " 664 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES II' in John vi. 63), but spiritually, in and with the elements. We know no more . . . Consubstantiation, like Transub- stantiation, is a theory of the manner of the Presence, whereas the Church only knows the Presence as a fact, respecting the manner and mode and extent of which she is not informed." ^ IV. Certain Practices in connection vnth the Eucharist, The sacrament of the Lord's Sapper was not by Christ's ordinance reser¥ed, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped. Of the practices here spoken of, at least three are directly enjoined by the Council of Trent, and it is possible that to the pro- mulgation of the decrees of the thirteenth session of that Council (October 1551) the paragraph before us is due. The decrees in question lay down, (1) that " there is no room left for doubt that all the faithful of Christ, according to the custom ever received in the Catholic Church, exhibit in veneration the worship of latria, which is due to the true God, to this most holy sacrament " ; (2) that " very piously and religiously was this custom introduced into the Church, that this most sublime and venerable sacrament should be, with special veneration and solemnity, celebrated every year on a certain day, and that a festival ; and that it should be borne reverently and with honour in processions through the streets and public places " ; ^ and (3) that 1 Bampton Lectures^ p. 172 (ed. 1). 2 " Nullus iteque dubitandi locus relinquitur, quia omnes Christi fideles pro more in CathoUca Ecclesia semper recepto latrise cultum, qui vero Deo debetur, huic sanctissimo sacramento in veneratione exhibeant. . . . Declarat praterea sancU Synodus pie et religiose admodum in Dei ecclesiam inductum fuisse hunc morem, nt singulis annis peculiari quodam et festo die pracelsum hoc et venerabile sacramentum singular! veneratione ac solemnitate celebraretur, utque in processionibua rever- ARTICLE XXVIII 665 "the custom of reserving the Holy Eucharist in the * sacrarium * is so ancient that even the age of the Council of Nicoea recognised it. Moreover, as to the carrying of the sacred Eucharist itself to the sick, and carefully reserving it to this purpose in churches, besides that it is conformable with the highest practice, equity, and reason, it is also found enjoined in numerous Councils, and observed according to the most ancient custom of the Catholic Church. Wherefore this holy Synod ordains that this salutary and necessary custom be by all means retained." ^ These chapters are followed as usual by canons condemning with an anathema those who deny the lawfulness of these practices. The statement made in the Article is worded with the utmost care, and with studied moderation. It cannot be said that any one of the practices is condemned or prohibited by it. It only amounts to this: that none of them can claim to be part of the original Divine institution. The Sacrament • . • was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped. That is all that is said; and in a formulary, such as the Articles, that was sufficient. The four practices in question, belonging mainly to the ritual use of the Church, came more directly into consideration in connection with the arrangements for public worship in the Book of Common Prayer. enter et honorifice illud per vias et loca publica circumferretur." — Cone. Trid. Sessio xiii. cap. 5. * "Consuetude asservandi in Sacrario sanctam Eucharistiam adeo antiqua est ut eam saeculum etiam Nicaeni Concilii agnoverit. Porro deferri ipsam sacram Eucharistiam ad infirmos, et hunc usum diligenter in ecclesiis conservari, prasterquam quod cum summa aequitate et ratione conjunctum est ; tum nmltis in Conciliis praeceptum invenitur et vetus- tissimo Catholicae Ecclesiae more est observatum. Quare sancta haec Synodus retinendum omnino salutarem hunc et necessarium morem statuit."— 76. cap. vi. r 11 666 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXVIII 667 I }i^^ J 1. Reservation for the sick, undoubtedly a primitive practice,^ was permitted, under certain restrictions, in the First Prayer Book of Edward vi.^ In the Second Book (1552), in view of the danger of superstitious reservation,' the provision for it was omitted altogether. At the last revision in 1662 an express direction was inserted in one of the rubrics at the end of the Order for Holy Communion, that " if any remain of [the bread and wine] which was consecrated, it shall not be carried out of the church, but the priest and such other of the communicants as he shall then call unto him, shall, immediately after the blessing, reverently eat and drink the same." 2. The festival of Corpus Christi was removed from the Calendar in 1549, and the "carrying about "lof the Eucharist in procession through the streets and public places is forbidden by the rubric that has just been quoted. 3. The Elevation of the East for purposes of adora- tion is said to have been introduced about the year 1 See Justin Martyr, Apol. I. c. Ixvii. : roU ov irapovci 5td twv 8iaK6f(a¥ TifAirerat. - The sick were communicated with the reserved sacrament if there was a celebration of the Holy Communion on the same day ; but if the day was " not appointed for the open Communion in the church," provision was made for a special consecration. See the rubrics before "the Communion of the Sick " in the book of 1549. ^ The danger of such superstitious reservation is very clearly indicated by the last rubric at the close of the Order of the Holy Communion in the Prayer Book of 1549 : " Although it be read in ancient writers that the people many years passed received at the priest's hands the sacrament of the body of Christ in their own hands, and no commandment of Christ to the contrary : Yet forasmuch as they many times conveyed the same secretly away^ kept it with thtin^ arid diversely abused it to sicperstition and wickedness : lest any such thing hereafter should be attempted, and that an uniformity might be used throughout the whole Realm, it is thought convenient the people commonly receive the sacrament of Christ's body, in their mouths, at the priest's hand." 1100,^ and (like the institution of the festival of Corpus Christi) was a direct consequence of the growth of a belief in Transubstantiation. It was distinctly prohibited in the First Prayer Book of Edward vi., though the prohibition is not repeated in the Second Book.^ 4. Adoration of Christ present in the sacrament is not and cannot be prohibited. But it is one thing to worship Christ there present, and quite another to find in the sacrament a distinct localised object of worship ; and the "Declaration concerning Kneeling," restored (with the important modification previously mentioned) in 1662, expressly says that by the posture of kneeling " no adoration is intended or ought to be done, either unto the sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or unto any Corporal Presence of Christ's natural Flesh and Blood." * 1 See Scudamore's Notitia JBueharistiea, p. 546 seq. (ed. 1). And on the earlier elevation connected with the proclamation t4 dyia rots aylois, which was certainly not for purposes of adoration, see the Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, vol. i. p. 605. * "These words before rehearsed [i.e, the words of consecration] are to be said, turning still to the altar, without any elevation, or showing the sacrament to the people." — Rubric after Consecration in the Prayer Book of 1549. • Reference may be made in general on this subject to Mozley's Lectures and other Theological Papers, p. 210 seq. I $ il 1 AKTICLE XXIX M De manducatione Corporis Christie et impios illiid non rrumducare, Impii, et fide viva destituti, licet carnaliter et visibiliter (ut Augustinus loquitur) corporis et sanguinis Christi sacramentum dentibiis premant, nullo tamen modo Christi participes efficiuntur. Sed potius tantae rei sacramen- tum, seu symbolum, ad judicium sibi manducant et bibunt. 0/the Wicked wldeh do not eat the Body of Christ in the Use of the LorcCs Supper. The wicked and such as be void of a lively faith, although they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as S. Augustine saith) the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ ; yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ, but rather to their condemnation do eat and drink the sign or sacra- ment of so great a thing. The first appearance of this Article (to which there is nothing corresponding in the series ofl553)i8in Parker's MS., which was signed by the bishops on January 29, 1563.^ It is also found in two English MSS. of almost the same date, now in the Eecord Office, in one of which there is a marginal note : " This is the original, but not passed." * In a Latin MS. in the same office it is altogether wanting,^ as it is in the published edition issued a few months later by Wolfe, the royal printer, under the direct authority of the Queen. It must, therefore, have been omitted either in the passage of the Articles through the Lower House of Convocation, or else at an even later stage by the direct interposition ^ See vol. i. p. 30. 2 Stale Papers, "Domestic," Elizabeth, vol. xxvii. Nos. 40 and 41. 3 Ih. No. 4lA. 668 ARTICLE XXIX 669 of the Queen herself, the reason for its omission evidently being a desire to avoid needlessly offending some of those who sympathised with medieval belief and feeling, whom it was desked, if possible, to retain within the limits of the Church. Since it lacked all authority it is naturally wanting in the printed copies up to 1571, when we meet with it again. On May 11th of that year the Articles were considered by the Upper House of Con- vocation, and a copy was subscribed by Parker and ten other bishops. In this the Twenty-ninth Article is con- tained.^ A few days later we find Bishop Guest, by an appeal to Cecil, making a determined effort to prevent the ratification of it on the ground that it " will cause much business." ^ His efforts were, however, unavailing, as it is contained in the copy which was ratified by the Sovereign,* and from this time forward it finds its place in all printed copies, both Latin and English. It will be remembered that by this date (1571) the Anglo- Roman schism was complete, and therefore there was not the same reason as there had been eight years earlier for withholding the Article. The language of the Article has been traced to no earlier formulary ; but it is throughout suggested by a 1 A copy of this is given in Lamb's Historical Account of the Thirty- Nine Articles, No. iv, 2 See above, p. 662, and G. F. Hodge's ^w/m^p auest, Articles XX Fill, and XXIX. p. 24. * Guest's letter in May 1571 had, however, apparently led to the interview between Cecil and Parker on June 4, referred to in Strype's Parker, pp. 331, 332, when Cecil questioned the reference to S. Augustine. The interview was followed by a letter from Parker on the same day, in which he told the Treasurer that he was ** advisedly " still in the same opinion concerning the authority of S. Augustine, "and for further truth of the words, besides S. Austen, both he in other places and Prosper in his 'Sentences wrote of Austen' (Senten. 338 and 339), doth plainly afhrm our opinion in the Article to be most true, howsoever some men vary from it." (Parker's CorresponcUnce, p. 381.) 670 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES It. .( I passage in the works of Augustine on S. John's Gospel. In the printed editions the text stands as follows : " Qui non manet in Christo et in quo non manet Christus procul dubio nee manducat [spiritualiter] carnem ejus, nee bibit ejus sanguinem [licet carnaliter et visibiliter premat dentibus sacramentum corporis et sanguinis Christi] : sed magis tantae rei sacramentum ad judicium sibi manducat et bibit." ^ It is thought, however, that the text has been interpolated, and that the words placed in brackets are due, not to Augustine, but to Bede, in whose Commentary they are also found. Coming now to the consideration of the substance of the Article, it may be noticed that the phrase employed in the title is not repeated in the Article itself. In the former, it is said of the wicked that they do not eat the body of Christ in the use of the Lord's Sapper. In the latter, the phrase used is that in no wise are they partakers of Christ. It has been thought that the heading is in itself inexact, and must be interpreted by the phrase in the Article itself, as many have held that though the wicked do actually receive the Body and Blood, and therefore in some sense " eat " it, yet since they receive it not to their soul's health, but to their condemnation, they are "in no wise partakers of Christ." ^ There can be no doubt that the medieval Church did thus teach that what the wicked receive in the Eucharist is the Body and Blood, Christ being present in the sacrament in their case to judge, as in the case of the faithful He is present to bless.^ But it may be doubted whether so * In Joann. Trad. xxvi. § 18. * See Pusey, JReal Presence, p. 261 seq. ^ It is suflacient to refer to S. Thomas, Summa, iii. 80. 3 : " Cum corpus Christi in sacramento semper pormanet donee species sacra- men tales corrumpantur, etiam injustos homines Christi corpus manducare consequitur." For the Tridentine teaching, see Sess. xiii. cap. viii. ARTICLE XXIX 671 much would have been allowed in the early Church,^ or whether it can be proved from Scripture. Two passages of the New Testament directly bear upon the question, (1) S. Paul's words in 1 Cor. xL 27-29, and (2) S. John vi 51-59. In the former passage the Apostle says: " Whosoever shall eat the bread or drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and the 1 On tlie teachin<^Mf»'o*- — Stromateis, III. xii. 90. 2 Apost. Can. vi. : 'EtIct/coto* ^) irpeffpvTfpos ij didKOvos rrjy iavroO ywaiKa fi^ iK^\\4TU) Tpodff€i, €v\ap€las' i^v 5^ iK^dWri^ dopil:4©r publicam Ecclesise de- nunciationem rite ab unitate Ec- clesise pnecisus est et excommuni- catus, is ab universa fidelium multitudine, donee per poeniten- tiam publice reconciliatus fuerit, arbitrio judicis competcntis, haben- dus est tanquam Ethnicus et Publicanus. Of excommunicate Persons y how they are to he avoided. That person which by open denunciation of the Church is rightly cut off from the unity of the Church, and excommunicated, ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the faithful, as an heathen and publican, until he be openly reconciled unto the Church by a judge that hath authority thereto. Except for a slight alteration in the form of the title,^ there has been no change in this Article since it was first published in 1553. There is nothing to suggest this Article in the Confession of Augsburg, and though the Reformatio Legum Ecdesiasticarum contains a long section of sixteen chapters — " De Excommunicatione " — there is nothing in it corresponding to the language of the Article before us, and its provisions are only of historical interest, as they never obtained any legal force. The object of the Article is to assert the right of the Church to exercise discipline, and to exclude unworthy members from the body. Such a right is inherent in a visible society such as the Church claims to be. Indeed the very notion of a definite society, with its rules and officers, implies the existence of a * Excommunicati vitandi sunt. Excommunicate persons are to be avoided. 1553 and 1563. 7W i' 706 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXIII 707 power to decide upon the terms of membership, and to expel disloyal and improper persons. This power we find was exercised by the Jewish Church. It is fore- shadowed in the words used when first circumcision is established as the sign of the covenant : " The un- circumcised man-child . . . shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken My covenant" (Gen. xviL 14). The same threat is repeated in connection with the command to observe the Sabbath in Ex. xxxL 14, and there is coupled with a command to inflict capital punishment on the transgressor.^ As might be expected, a more definite reference to something like a formal sentence of excommunication is found after the return from the Captivity, when Ezra made proclamation " that whosoever would not come within three days, according to the counsel of the princes and elders, all his substance should be forfeited (DIITJ, ava6€fiaTia6j]a€Tai), and him- self separated from the congregation of those that had been carried away" (Ezra x. 8). And from this time onwards exclusion from the congregation (iKKXijaia) took its place among the Jews as a recognised method of enforcing discipline. As such it is frequently referred to in the New Testament. See S. Luke vi 22 {a Both stories are told in Irenaeus, Adv. ffcer. III. iii. ' De Oratione Dominica^ c. xviii. 3 Thus the Councils of Neo-Caesarea (a.d. 314) and Ancyra (314) refer to the paOfioL of penance as if they were well known, and allude to the stages by name (see Neo-Caes. 5, Ancyr. 4, etc.). The four stages, accord- ing to the complete system, which was, however, seldom enforced, are these — (1) Mourners, jUvUeSy irpoaKXaLovres \ (2) hearers, avdientes^ dKf>oibfi€»oi ; (3) kneelers, substrcUi, inrorlTTovTes ; (4) bystanders, con- sistentes, For the Puritan objections to the reading of HomUies in church see Rogers On the XXX2X. Jrtides, p. 326 (Parker Society). 47 f h. 726 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXV 727 i^ ■t \ t actually provided do not correspond exactly to the list of those promised at the close of the first book. Thus there are no Homilies expressly treating of Covetousness, Envy, Ire, and Malice; while there are several which were seemingly not contemplated when the first book was issued. The writer who is supposed to have had the chief hand in the preparation of the book is Bishop Jewel, but a considerable number of the Homilies were only translations or adaptations of works that had pre- viously been issued. Thus those on the Passion and Eesurrection are taken from Taverner's Postils, which had appeared so early as 1540. That on Matrimony is taken half from Veit Dietrick, of Nuremberg, half from S. Chrysostom ; and two-thirds of the first part of that on Kepentance are translated from Randolph Gualther. The Preface, or " Admonition to all ministers ecclesiastical," was from the pen of Bishop Cox. It should be added that the last Homily, viz. that against Disobedience and wilful Rebellion, was only added in 1571 ; the occa- sion which called it forth being the rebellion of the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland, which had taken place shortly before (1569), and to which the Homily itself clearly alludes. IL The Nature of the Assent demanded to the Homilies, The statement of the Article is that the Book of HomUies doth contain a godly and wholesome doctrine, and necessary for these times. It is obvious from this that the assent demanded to them is of a very general character, and cannot be held to bind us to the acceptance of every statement made in them. Nothing whatever is said about the historwcd statements contained in them, some of which are highly questionable, or even demonstrably false. And as to the doctrine, all that is asserted is that they " contain a godly and whole- some doctrine." On one subject certainly their teaching appears to be invested with a peculiar authority, viz. that of justification, owing to the express reference to them in Article XL But on other matters a wide dis- cretion is left to the individual, and he cannot fairly be eaUed upon to maintain any particular view simply be- cause it is taught in the Homilies. The formal doctrinal teaching of the Church of England is found in the Articles and the Book of Common Prayer ; and so far as the Homilies agree with these, and bring out the sense of their teaching, they are authoritative. But that is alL So much is confessed by all parties, and it has been frequently pointed out that it is impossible to tie persons down rigidly to the acceptance of every doctrinal pro- position contained in these thirty-three sermons.^ The matter is well put by Bishop Montague in his Appello Coesarem, published in 1625 " I willingly admit the Homilies as containing certain godly and wholesome exhortations to move the people to honour and worship Almighty God ; but not as the public dogmatical resolutions confirmed of the Church of England. The XXXVth Article giveth them to contain godly and wholesome Doctrine, and necessary for these times : which they may do, though they have not dogmatical positions, OT doctrine to be propugned and subscribed in all and every point, as the Books of Articles and of Common Prayer have. They may seem, secondly, to speak somewhat too hardly, and stretch some sayings beyond the use and practice of the Church of England, both then and now; and yet what they speak may receive a fair, or at least a tolerable construction and mitigation enough." ^ Still more important, as being of the nature of a > See especially Trwisfor tht Times, Nos. Ixxxii. and xc. - Appello Cxsarem, p. 260. 728 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES judicial decision upon this very poiiit, is the statement of Sir Herbert Jenner Fust in his judgment in the Arches Court of Canterbury on Nov. 19, 1838. The question before him was whether the Church of England regarded praying for the dead as an illegal practice ; and the authority of the Homilies had been quoted against it.^ The judge entered fully into the matter, and decided that ** it seemed clearly to have been the intention of the composer of the Homily to discourage the practice of praying for the dead; but it does not appear that in any part of the Homily he declares the practice to be an unlawful one." And then he adds the following important statement : " But supposing he had been of opinion that such prayers were unlawful, it is not to be necessarily inferred that the Church of England adopted every part of the doctrines contained in the Homilies." ^ 1 See the third part of the Homily Concerning Prayer, p. 355 (S.P.C.K. ed.). ^ The judgment is given in full in Lee's Christian Doctrine of Prayer far the Departed, Appendix XII. AKTICLE XXXVI De Epiacoporum ct Ministrorum Consecrationie. Libellus de Consecratione Archi- episcoporum et Episcoporum et de ordinatione Presbyterorum et Dia- cononim sditus nuper temporibus Edwardi sexti, et autoritate Parla- menti illis ipsis temporibus con- firmatus, omnia ad ejusmodi consecrationem et ordinationem necessaria continet, et nihil habet quod ex se sit aut superstitiosum aut impium. Itaque quicumque juxta ritus illius libri consecrati aut ordinati sunt ab anno secundo prsedicti Regis Edwardi, usque ad hoc tern pus, aut in posterum juxta eosdem ritus consecrabuntur aut ordinabuntur rite, ordine, atque legitime, statuimus esse et fore consecratos et ordinatos. Of Consecration of Bishops and Ministers. The Book of Consecration of Arch- bishops and Bishops, and ordering of Priests and Deacons, lately set forth in the time of Edward the Sixth, and confirmed at the same time by authority of Parliament, doth contain all things necessary to such consecration and ordering : neither hath it anything, that of itself is superstitious or ungodly. And therefore, whosoever are con- secrate or ordered according to the rites of that book, since the second year of the aforenamed King Edward, unto this time, or hereafter shall be consecrated or ordered according to the same rites ; we decree all such to be rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated and ordered. V In its present form this Article dates from 1563, when it was entirely rewritten. The corresponding Article in the Edwardian Series was of a much more general character, referring to the Book of Common Prayer as a whole, and not only to the Ordinal. Of the Book of Prayers and Ceremonies of the Church of England, " The Book which of very late time was given to the Church of England by the King's authority and the 729 730 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXVI 731 Parliament, containing the manner and form of praying, and ministering the sacraments in the Church of England, likewise also the book of Ordering Ministers of the Church, set forth by the foresaid authority, are godly, and in no point repugnant to the wholesome doctrine of the Gospel, but agreeable thereunto, furthering and beautifying the same not a little ; and therefore of all faithful members of the Church of England, and chiefly of the ministers of the word, they ought to be received, and allowed with all readiness of mind, and thanksgiving, and to be com- mended to the people of God." ^ As originally drafted and signed by the royal chap- lains, it had contained some words referring expressly to the ceremonies of the book as in no way repugnant to the liberty of the Gospel, but rather agreeable to it, and tending to promote it. To this serious objection was taken by John Knox, whose dislike of the ceremonies ordered in the book was perhaps not unnatural ; and it is probable that it was in consequence of his remon- strances that all that part which referred especially to the ceremonies was omitted before publication.^ ' ** De libro precationum et cJBreraoniarum Ecclesiae Anglicanae. Liber qui nupemrae authoritate Regis et Parliameuti Ecclesiie Anglicanae traditos est, continens modum et formam orandi, et sacrameuta admin i> strandi in Ecelesia Anglicana: Similiter et libellus eadem authoritate editiis de ordinatione ministonim ecclesiae, quoad doctrinee veritatem, pii sunt, et salutari doctrinse Evangelii in nullo repugnant sed congruunt, et eandem non parum promovent et illustrant, atque ideo ab omnibus Ecclesiae Anglicanae fidelibus membris, et maxime a ministris verbi cum omni promptitudine auimorum et giatiarum actione, recipiendi, appro* bandi, et populo Dei commendandi sunt." - The clause in question appears in this form in the MS. signed by the royal chaplains: ** Et quoad eeremoniarnm rationem saliUaH Evangelii libertati, si ex stta TuUura eej'emonia; illce cestimentur^ in nullo repugnant, sed probe congruunt, et eandem in eomplurimis inprimis promovent, atque ideo," etc. The words in italics were altogether omitted or modified in the published Article. For the part taken by Knox in securing the change, see vol. i. p. 14, with the references there given. As it now stands, the object of the Article is to assert emphatically the validity of Anglican Orders, and this against objections raised from two opposite quarters. On the one hand, the "Nonconformist" and Puritan party denounced the Ordinal as containing in it things that were of themselves superstitious or ungodly; on the other hand, the disaffected Romanists might deny that the form used could be said to contain all things necessary to such consecration and ordering. And thus, as against both parties, it was deemed advisable to assert definitely that whosoever are consecrate or ordered according to the rites of that book, since the second year of the aforenamed King Edward unto this time, or hereafter shall be consecrated or ordered according to the same rites ; we decree all such to be rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated and ordered. The principal subjects, then, to be treated of here are these — 1. The objections of the Puritans. 2. The objections of the Romanists. I. TIlc Objections of the Puritans. Since many of those who objected to the Ordinal, as containing that which was "superstitious and ungodly," objected not only to the special formula, " Receive the Holy Ghost," etc., used in conferring orders on the priesthood (which they denounced as "manifest blasphemy"), but also to Episcopacy itself, it seems desirable to consider here — (a) The question of the threefold ministry. (b) The formula of Ordination. (a) The question of the threefold ministry. — The Preface to the " Form and manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons according i 732 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXVI 733 to the order of the Church of England" (1550), begins with the statement that "it is evident unto all men diligently reading the Holy Scripture, and ancient authors, that from the Apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's Church ; Bishops, Priests, and Deacons." The evidence for the existence of the threefold ministry, /rom the second century onwards, is so full and complete, that it is not likely to be questioned, and need not be summarised here. All that the opponents of Episcopacy can do is to endeavour to show that there are in later times a few possible exceptions to the rule,^ and to deny that it is found in the New Testament, and can be traced back to " the Apostles' time." It will be well, therefore, to examine the evidence of the New Testament, and for this purpose it will be convenient to break up the Apostolic age into three distinct periods, each of which requires to be discussed separately. (L) The foundation of the Church. In this S. Peter is the most prominent figure, and the period is closed by his imprisonment and departure from Jerusalem in the year 44. Even at this early time we can discern the germs and beginnings of what afterwards grew into the threefold ministry. The Apostles are naturally the leaders and rulers of the Church, and at first its only ministers. But as the work grows under their hands some portion of it is delegated to the seven, who, though never called " deacons " in the Acts, are plainly the first representatives of that order, selected by the whole multitude of the faithful, but receiving their appoint- ments from the Apostles {o{><; KaraaTijaofiev, " whom we may appoint," Acts vi. 3), and set apart for their office ^ Of these the most important is tlie supposed exceptional constitution of the Alexandrian Church, on which see Gore, The Church and the Ministry, p. 134 seq, ; and for supposed ordinations by presbyters in East and West, ib. p. 374. with the imposition of hands and prayer (ver. 6).^ Of the origin of what we term the second order of the ministry no account is given us, but by the end of this period we find it already in existence, for in Acts xi 30 (just about the time of Peter's imprisonment or release) we read that the Christians at Antioch " determined to send relief unto the brethren that dwelt in Judaea ; which also they did, sending it to the elders (tt/jo? rov^ Trpeafivripov^) by the hand of Barnabas and Saul." This is the earliest mention of an order of ministers which we shall find appointed everywhere during the next period. Since its origin is nowhere related in the Acts (our sole authority for this period), it can only be a matter of conjecture. Possibly it was suggested to the Christian Church by the organisation of the Jewish communities, in which " the elders " occupied a recog- nised position.2 However this may be, the fact remains that in this first period we find something fairly corresponding to our three orders of ministers, viz. Apostles, with the oversight of the whole Church, and, ^ The reasons for maintaining that the appointment of the "seven" gives the origin of the diaconate are briefly these : (1) Although the title diiKoyos does not occur, yet the corresponding verb and substantive (StaKoyeiv and diaKovLa) are both used (vers. 1, 2). (2) The functions are substantially those exercised by the later deacons (cf. Lightfoot On Philipp. p. 186). (3) From the position of the narrative in the Acts and the emphasis laid on it by the writer, it is clear that he regarded it "not as an isolated incident, but as the establishment of a new order of things in the Church " (Lightfoot, ubi mpra). (4) Tradition is unanimous as to the identity of the two offices, and that from the earliest times. See lurther. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible (ed. 2), vol. i. p. 739. - So Lightfoot On Philipp. p. 189, and cf. Gore, p. 399. But it is important to remember that, though the Tianu was certainly borrowed from the synagogue, yet the functions of the Christian presbyters, as found in the writings of the New Testament and the earliest Fathers, mark out the office as really a new one of a spiritual character. For these functions see 1 Pet. v. 2 ; 1 Tim. iii. 2, v. 17 ; Titus i. 9 ; S. James V. 14 ; Clem. Rom. ad Cor. xliv. I 734 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXVI 735 locally, elders and deacons. Indeed, we may go a step further, and maintain that something approaching to the local Episcopate already obtained in Jerusalem ; for the message of S. Peter after his release from prison, when read in the light of later notices, is highly significant, " Tell these things unto James, and to the brethren " (Acts xii. 17). Why "unto Janus" 1 The only explanation is that he already occupied the position which we find him holding at a later period, of 'president of the local Church (see Acts xv. 13-21, xxi. 18; Gal. ii. 9, 12), or, as the tradition of the Church has ever regarded him, first bishop of Jerusalem. (ii.) The second period is that of the organisation and extension of the Church. In it the prominent figure is the Apostle Paul, whose missionary labours formed the main instrument for planting the Church in various regions. The period is perhaps best closed, not by the Apostle's death, but by the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70. Our authorities for it are the narrative in Acts xiii.-xxviii. and the apostolic Epistles. In it we trace the extension of the different orders of ministers as new Churches are founded. For the diaconate we have the evidence of the Epistle to the Philippians (a.d. 60), which shows us two orders of resident ministers existing at Philippi, iiriaKoiroi Kal BidKovoL (c. i. ver. 1). Still earlier (during S. PauFs second missionary journey), Rom. xvi. 1 shows us a woman deacon at Cenchrese ; and at a later period, after the Apostle 8 first imprisonment, 1 Tim. iiL 8 seq., bears evidence of the extension of this order to the Church of Ephesus, though it is interesting to note that in the almost contemporary Epistle to Titus there is no mention of hiuKovou It may, perhaps, be inferred from this that they were only appointed as the work grew, and the need for them was felt. In Ephesus, a Church which had existed for some years (cf. Acts xx. 17), they were required. In the newly-founded Church in Crete the necessity for their help would not exist. For the second order of the ministry as well the evidence during this period is full and complete. A representative passage is Acts xiv. 23: "When they had appointed for them elders in every Church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they had believed." This refers to S. Paul's first missionary journey, but it clearly indicates a custom which he followed everywhere. Only, having once stated it, S. Luke does not concern himself with recording it in other cases. In view, however, of such passages as Acts xv. 6 (Jerusalem), xx. 17 (Ephesus), Titus i. 5 (Crete), S. James v. 14, 1 Pet. v. 1, we are justified in assum- ing the existence of Trpeafivrepoi everywhere as a permanent feature of ecclesiastical organisation, and Acts XX. 17 compared with ver. 28 ("he called to him the elders of the Church " . . . " the flock in the which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops, iirldKOTroi), and Titus i. 5, 7 (" appoint elders in every city ... if any man is blameless ... for the bishop, eiricrKoiro^, must be blameless "), enable us to identify the irpeafivrepoc with the iiriaKOTroi, whom we find mentioned, evidently as resident officers of the Church, in Phil. L 1 and 1 Tim. iii 1} ^ There has recently been a tendency in some quarters to deny this identity, and maintain that the offices were distinct (So R^ville, Les Origines de V Episcopal), but on quite insufficient grounds. It has not been thought necessary to enter into the questions which have been raised of late years with regard to the origin of the name iirlaKoiros, and the original character of the office, because throughout this work tJie genuine- 7USS of the whole of the New Testament is assumed, and if we admit as genuine the First Epistle of S. Peter, and the Pastoral Epistles, together with the discourse to the Ephesian cldei-s in Acts xx., it appeal's to me simply impossible to deny that (whatever may have suggested the name, which is really of a very general and indefinite character) the office was ! it] 736 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXVI 737 With regard to the first order of the ministry, it is evident that a general superintendence of the affairs of the Church was exercised by the Apostles themselves. S. Paul " went through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches" (Acts xv. 41). The "apostles and elders" were gathered together to consider the question of circumcision (Acts xv. 6). Letters of apostolic counsel and direction are written by them with superior authority, and by their hands ministers are set apart. But as the years passed Churches multiplied, and the original company of the Apostles became fewer in number, it became necessary to make provision for the future. Con- sequently, towards the close of this period we meet with men like Timothy and Titus exercising apostolic powers, commissioned to take the general oversight of Churches, to " set in order the things that are wanting, and appoint elders in every city" (Titus 15; cf. 1 Tim. i. 3). These men are plainly superior to the iirlaKOTroi or irpeafivrepoi over whom they exercise authority, and they are empowered to ordain others, whereas we never read of any such power being given to the elders.^ But it would seem to be inaccurate to speak of Timothy and Titus as bishops of Ephesus and Crete, for in each case the Apostle directs them to return to him when they have accomplished the work for which he left them in these places (see 2 Tim. iv. 9 ; Titus iii. 12, with which cf. 2 Tim. iv. 10, which shows that after Titus rejoined a spiritual one from the first. The use of the name in 1 Pet. ii. 25, as applied to Christ, •* the shepherd and bishop of your souls," is surely decisive as to this. On the theories in question reference may be made to Gore, as above. ^ It is instructive to compare the address to the Ephesian elders in Acts XX. with the apostolic charges to Timothy in the two Epistles addressed to him. While to Timothy is given the power to ordain others, together with instructions concerning the qualifications of those on whom he shall *' lay hands," there is no indication in the address to the elders that any such power had l)een intrusted to them. the Apostle, instead of returning to Crete he was sent elsewhere, to Dalmatia). All that can be claimed for them is a " moveable Episcopate " ; ^ nor need we at this early period expect to find more. Time was required for the full ecclesiastical system to grow up into its present form ; and the diocesan system, with its territorial bishops with definite regions assigned to each, was a later growth. In the period now under consideration we find no trace of it outside Jerusalem, where, as we have seen, it existed from the beginning. But the order of bishops as chief ministers of the Church may be distinctly traced to the Apostles. Men like Timothy and Titus form the link between the later regionary bishops and the Apostles themselves. It is probable also that with them we should include the " prophets " of the New Testa- ment as exercising similar powers, for not only are they mentioned in various places as occupying positions of importance, and sometimes joined very closely with the Apostles (see Acts xi. 27, xiii. 1, xv. 32, xxi. 10 ; 1 Cor. xii 28 ; Eph. ii. 20, iiL 5, iv. 11) ; but also in the Ac^axh T(ji)v ZdiheKa airoaToKoiVy while the iirlaKOTroi koX BcaKOPoi are the two orders of resident ministers (exactly as in the New Testament), aTroaroXoi, koI irpo^rfraL appear as itinerant ministers, exercising a general superintend- ence, and superseding the local officers from time to time. We may, then, sum up the results of our investiga- tions so far. At the close of the second period two orders of resident ministers (eV/o-zcoTrot or- irpea-fivrepoi and hiaKovoi) are found in fully organised Churches; and superior to them are Apostles and apostolic men, who visit their Churches from time to time, set in order things that are wanting, and appoint local officers as they are needed. But so far the precedent set at * The phrase Is due to Bishop Lightfoot. I 738 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXVI 739 Jerusalem has not been followed elsewhere, and beyond this Church the diocesan system is not yet in existence, (iii.) The third period lasts from the fall of Jerusalem (a.d. 70) to the close of the century and the death of the last surviving Apostle, S. John (a.d. 100). For this period our authorities are much less full than for the period immediately preceding it. But sufficient remains to enable us without any hesitation to assign to this time the change from the general to the local ministry, with the introduction of an approximation to the diocesan system, if not everywhere, at least in some of the Gentile Churches ; and since the change falls in the lifetime of S. John, there can be no doubt that it was made under his guiding influence. The proof that the change was made during these years may be put in this way. We have seen that in A.D. 70 there was no such thing as the diocesan system except in Jerusalem. At the beginning of the second century we find from the Epistles of Ignatius that this system is already in existence, and firmly planted in the Churches to which he writes.^ This necessarily throws back its origination to the first century, and to the period subsequent to the fall of Jerusalem in 70. There are other slight indications which confirm this, and show us the change in progress.^ * Nothing can be stronger than the language of Ignatius on the position of the bishop as superior to the presbyters, and the necessity of doing nothing without him. There is scarcely one of his Epistles in which this is not insisted on. See £^h. i. ii. iv.; Magn, ii. iiL iT. yi. yii. xiii. ; Troll, i. ii. iii. vii. ; Philad. i. iii. iv. vii. viii. ; Smym, viii. ix. - No reference is made in the text to the '* angels " of the seven Churches of Asia (Rev. i.-iii.), because of the uncertainty which there is concerning the meaning of the term. If the ea/rly date of the Apocalypse be accepted, it is scarcely possible to identify the "angels" with the "bishops." If, however, the later date be adopted, the objection against the identification falls to the ground. Cf. Lightfoot On Philipp. p. 197. (a) The Aihaxh ratv BoiBeKa airoarokmv, which has been previously referred to, may perhaps belong to the early part of this period.^ As has been already mentioned, it bears witness to the existence of the earlier state of things with two orders of resident ministers, iirlaKoirot and BiuKovoi, and superior to them the diroa-ToXoi Kal 7rpo(f>rJTaL^ (h) The Epistle of S. Clement to the Corinthians was written about the year 96. It contains an important passage on the Christian ministry, c. xL- xliv. The passage requires to be quoted at some length. Clement starts by saying that " we ought to do all things in order, as many as the Master hath commanded us to perform at their appointed seasons. Now the ofierings and ministrations He commanded to be performed with care, and not to be done rashly or in disorder, but at fixed times and seasons. And where and by whom He would have them performed He Himself fixed by His supreme will: that all things being done with piety according to His good pleasure, might be acceptable to His will They, therefore, that make their offerings at the appointed seasons are acceptable and blessed: for while they follow the institutions of the Master they cannot go wrong. For unto the high priest his proper services have been assigned, and to the priests their proper office is appointed, and upon the Levites their proper ministra- tions are laid. The layman is bound by the layman's ordinance." ' It would be impossible to state the general principle of ecclesiastical order more strongly * The exact date is quite uncertain, but it would probably be correct to place it sometime between 70 and 120. ' See c. xi. xiii. xv., and cf. Gore, The Church and the Ministry, p. 276 seq. ' C. xl. The translation is Bishop Lightfoot's, Apost. Fathers, Part I. vol. ii. p. 292. The original Greek may be seen on p. 121. t^ I 8- 740 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES than is here done by Clement ; and even if (with Bishop Lightfoot ^) we decline to press the analogy of the threefold ministry, yet still it remains true that a general comparison of the Christian ministry with that of the Jews is made, and that Clement regards the ministry as a necessary and Divine institution. Further, in the following passage, a portion of which has been already quoted under Article XXIII.,* he proceeds to state with equal clearness the principle of the succession: " The Apostles received the gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both, therefore, came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having, therefore, received a charge, and having been fully assured through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and confirmed in the word of God with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should come. So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their first-fruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto them that should believe.^ . . . And our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife over the name of the bishop's office. For this cause, therefore, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons, and afterwards they provided a continuance,* that if these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed to their ministrations. Those, therefore, who were appointed by them, or afterward by other men of repute with the consent of the whole Church, and have ministered unblameably to the flock of Christ . . . these men we consider to be unjustly thrust out » Op. eU. p. 123. » C. xlii. " See above, p. 678. ^ 'Eiri/AOKi^y, see the note on p. 578. ARTICLE XXXVl 741 from the^ ministrations. For it wiU be no light sin fifeld arf thnl °^ vT*'' unblameably and holily. Wessed are those presbyters who have gone before/' thefcTarrtsif '?.""'' "" ^'^ "^ --">-*' -- iney clearly insist on the importance of the succession with an appointment from the Apostles in the S instance, and afterwards from others in a^Z. S their airangement. The nnlv r^.o-ki • whethpr PW. / ^ possible question is Whether Clement recognises what is caUed monarchial episcopacy as existing at Corinth TTi.. . ™°°f'cniax " bishon " Cm fv,. i ^°"°'^"- -Hie own position as b^hop ( n the modern sense) of the Church of Eome .8 thoroughly well established, but the passage rsfc cited shows that .W..0.0. and -.p.^fi^n^^l S hLXstir^^^^^^ '^'^'' ^"-^ ^^^'' ^« no'refeTLT n of Corinl h'°^r P'''"" ^' '""^^^ '"'' '^' Church l;?r , ""^ *^' presbyters. It is possible then that the local and diocesan system had nol as ye; been adopted at Corinth.^ But on the principles of eelst su cli:n S' cf '':- "^i °^ ^ ^'""^ eommissirtd succession, S. Clement's evidence is perfectly clear. treatie i?;^' . ^!°T ^^ ^^^°^^°^ "^ Alexandria's treatise, Quts Bives Scdvetur (c. 180). But it may here be mentioned, because the narrative conta n^d "^in t STrefle'?" ?.' ^'^ ''''''' '^'^ such mal apoZli^^ days V it 'T*^' '''"^ °1*'^^ ^ ^'^^ a estai convertible terms; but the position of 'the bX ^ presiding over the Church seems to be implied anT moreover the organisation of the Churches i! expressly attributed to S. John, who is said to have come Zl Patmos to Ephesus, and to have gone also « when caiie" to the neighbouring regions of the Gentiles ; in some to i i I. 742 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXVI 743 appoint bishops, in some to institute entire new Churches, in others to appoint to the ministry some one of those indicated by the Holy Ghost." ^ This exactly fits in with what we find elsewhere; and taken together we may say that the JtSax??, the Epistle of S. Clement of Kome, and the narrative preserved by Clement of Alexandria, give us glimpses of the change that was passing over the system of the Church during the last quarter of the first century, — the change, that is, whereby the chief pastor became permanently resident as the highest officer in each Church, and the name of bishop or €7riV/co7ro9 was attached exclusively to him. The Epistles of Ignatius, as referred to above, show us the change complete : and there is no necessity to pursue the history further here. Against the view which has here been taken, that to the Apostles and thek successors alone belonged the right of ordaining others, transmitted by them to the iirlaKOTTOL of the later Church, two passages of Scripture have sometimes been urged.^ (i.) The incident in Acts xiii. 1-3, where Paul and Barnabas are "separated for the work" by some who were not Apostles. The answer to this is twofold : first, it may be urged that if this is to be regarded as their actual ordination, it is still not an instance of Presbyterian any more than of Episc(ypal ordination ; for if bishops are not mentioned, no more are presbyters. Those who are spoken of are called " prophets and teachers," and, as has already been shown, the position of the prophets seems 1 Quoted in Eusebius, H. E. III. xxiii. 2 It seems unnecessary to refer further to the view sometimes urged, that as iiriaKoiroi and TrpeffPurepoi are convertible terras in the New Testa- ment, their subsequent distinction is an invention of a later date, for the facts already summarised go to show that the "bishops" of the second century and later are the successors of the Apostles and of men like Timothy, rather than of the New Testament ixlffKoroi. irrhTATi""*'^^ ""''^ '^^^ "* '^' !**«' bishops than with that of the second order of the ministry But r^ '' 'i H T^,,'"'^^"'^^ -h^tber it was an ordination at all. Indeed, the arguments against regarding it as one s^m overwhelming. To begin with both Pau and Barnabaa are included among the "prophets and teache,^, and Barnabas actually heads the list There- fore whatever ministerial authority those who laid theL hands on them possessed, Paul and Barnabas already possessed the same. Moreover, S. Paul always claimed that his apostolic commission came to him direct from CW Himself and "not from men, neither through men (Gal. l 1); and though on this view there is no actual mention of the ordination of S. Barnabas, yet it is worthy of note that on a previous occasion he appl^ as the delegate and representative of the Church of Jerusalem, invested with powers which it may fairly be said presuppose a formal commission from the Church see Acts xi. 22, ^f«.eVr«Xa. Bap.dfiau). It app^^ then, to be practically certain that the incident narrated in Acts xiii. was no ordination, but only a setting apart of the two Apostles to the Gentiles for their special work, done according to ancient custom, with prayer and imposition of hands. ^ (ii) It is said that Timothy is spoken of as having been ordained " with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery "(1 Tim. iv. 14). Yes; but if the text is referred to it will be seen that the expression employed 18 thiB, "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy (8.a ,r^o.^r«'a9), with the laying onof the hands of the presbytery " (/^er^ eVt^eWw Ta.!/ x^cp Apostles themselves. In witness to this, appeal may be made to the Preface, which since 1550 has stood m the forefront of the Ordinal.* It is there stated that It IS evident unto all men diligently reading holy Scnp ure, and ancient authors, that from the Apostles' time there hath been these orders of ministers in Christ's Church— bishops, priests, and deacons, which offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation, that no man by his own private authority might presume to execute any of them except he were first caUed, tried, examined and known to have such qualities as were requisite for the same ; and also by public prayer, with imposition of hands, approved and admitted thereunto. And therefore to th^ inient these orders should he contimied, and reverentlv used and esteemed in the Church of England, it is requis- ite that no man (not being at this present bishop, priest nor deacon) shall execute any of them, except he be called tried, examined, and admitted, according to the form hereafter following." It is hard to concdve what more could be asked for. since it would be difficult to rame words which should express with greater clearness that the mtention of the Church was not to make a new ministry but to continue that which already existed. But If further proof of the mind of the Church be demanded, it may be found not only in the form of ' A few VCTbal changes were introduced in 1662, as mar be seen bv companng the Preface as it stMids in a modem Player Book ^th the form here given in the text. ® 49 ■I' « I \i III! I 758 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES service used which throughout speaks of " priests " and " bishops," but also in the fact that the Church of Eng- land recognises the priesthood of the Church of Rome ; and while she takes the utmost care to guard her altars from unauthorised ministrations, yet whenever a Roman priest joins the Anglican Communion, he is recognised as a priest at once, and is in virtue of his ordination in the Church of Rome admitted to celebrate the sacra- ments. This could not be, unless the office were intended to be the same as that which he had already received. We conclude, then, that the objection on the score of defect of intention fails, as the other objections previously enumerated have failed; and that there is nothing to make us feel a shadow of doubt as to the validity of our orders, or as to the statement of the Article, that the Book of Consecration of Archbishops and Bishops, and ordering of priests and deacons . . . doth contain all things necessary to such consecration and ordering . . . and therefore whosoever are consecrate or ordered according to the rites of that book ... all such [are] rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated and ordered.^ * It has been impossible in the space available to give more than the briefest outline of the objections that have been raised against the validity of Anglican Orders, and of the answers returned to them. Fuller information must be sought in some of the many excellent treatises which exist upon the subject. Among older books, A. W. Haddan's Apostolical Siteeession in the Church of Bngland may be mentioned ; and reference should also be made to Denny and Lacey, De Hierarchia Anglicana^ which brings the subject fully up to date, and considers the objections in the latest form in which they have been presented. See also TIu Bull Apostolica Curse and the Edwardine Ordinal, by F. W. Puller ; and for the practice of the Roman Church as to the reordination in Mary's reign of those who had been ordained according to the Edwardian Ordinal, see W. H. Frere, The Marian Reaction in its relation to the English Clergy, AETICLE XXXVII J>e eivUihus Magistratihus. Regia Majestas in hoc Anglire regno ac ceteris ejus dominiis sum- mam habet potestatem, ad quam omnmm statuum hujus regni sive illi ecclesiastici sunt sive non, in omnibus causis suprema gubem'atio pertmet, et nulli extemae jurisdic- tioni est subjecta, nee esse debet Cum Regiae Majestati summam gul)ernationem tribuimus, quibus titulis intelligimus animos quorun- dam calumniatorum offendi: non damns Regibus nostris aut verbi Dei aut sacramentorum adminis- trationem, quod etiam Injunc- tiones ab Elizabetha Regina nostra nuper aeditae, assertissime testantur : sed earn tantum praerogativam, quam in sacris Scripturis a Deo ipso omnibus piis principibus, vide- mus semper fuisse attributam, hoc est, ut omnes status atque ordines fidei suae a Deo commissos, sive illi ecclesiastici sint, sive civiles, in officio contineant, et contumace^ ac deUnquentes. gladio civili co- erceant. Romanus Pontifex uullam habet jurisdictionem in hoc regno Angli®. Wes civiles possunt Christianos propter capitalia et gravia crimina morte punire. Christiauia licet et ex mandato 769 Of the Civil Magistrates. The Queen's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of Eng- land, and other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign jurisdiction. Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief govern- ment, by which titles we under- stand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended : we give not to our princes the ministerinff either of God's words or of sacra! nients, the which thing the Injunc tions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen doth most plamly testify : But that only pre- rogative, which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in holy Scriptures by God Himself ; that IS, that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers. The Bishop of Kome hath no Jurisdiction in this realm of En^ land. ^ The laws of the realm may i 'S\ i 760 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES Magistratus anna portare et jusU^ bella administrare. punish Christian men with death, for heinous and grievous offences. It is lawful for Christian men, at the commandment of the Magis- trate, to wear weapons and serve in the wars. :il :! \iii\ Veky important alterations were made in this Article m 1563, when the first paragraph was entirely rewritten, and the second, referring to Elizabeth's Injunctions intro- duced for the first time. Instead of the very careful and guarded statement of the Royal supremacy now contemed L these two paragraphs, the Edwardian Article had bluntly stated that « the King of England is supreme head in earth, next under Christ, of the Church oi ff-^^ J^jf Ireland" It also contained a clause (omitted in 15 b 3) after that referring to the Bishop of Rome, statmg in Scriptural language that "the civil magistrate is ordained and allowed of God : wherefore we must obey him. not only for fear of pimishment. but also for conscience' sake" (cf. Kom. xiii. 1, 5). The object of the Article is (1) to explain and justify the tenet of the Royal supremacy, (2) to assert formally the repudiation of the jurisdiction of the Pope, and (3) to condemn the attitude of the Anabaptists with regard to the obedience due to the magistrate, and the lawfulness of capital punishment and of serving in war. With regard to this last point it may be noted that so formidable was the spread of the Anabaptists, that they were expressly excluded from the pardon granted by Henry viii. in 1540; and among their errors the following are particularly mentioned : " That it is not lawful for a Christian man to bear office or rule in the Common- • It is not euy to say why there is nothing corresponding to this word in ^ll^^ish. In the series of 1553 "jusU belU" was represented by "lawful wars." I ARTICLE XXXVII 761 no man's laws ought to be wealth," 1 and "that obeyed." ' The subjects brought before us in this Article may best be treated of under the following heads : — 1. The Royal supremacy. 2. The Papal claims. 3. The lawfulness of capital punishment. 4. The lawfulness of war. L The Royal Sujrremacy. The Queen's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England, and other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign jurisdiction. * Cf. the Refonnaiio Legum Ecdesiastiearuin, Dc Hxres. c. 13. '32 Henr. viii. c. 49, § 11. See WUkins, C Jewel makes good use of this fact as against the Romanists more than once. See his Wcrrks (Parker Society ed.), vol. i. p. 61, and iv. p. 974. . . > Henry Vlii. actually claimed to delegate the exercise of this spintnal jurisdiction to whomsoever he would, and in 1535 appointed Thomas Cromwell to be his vicegerent in ecclesiastical matters. » Wakeman, IrUroductum to the History of the Church of England, pp. 318, 320, where there is an admirable sketch of the whole subject. ARTICLE XXXVII 765 The Church, it must be admitted, after her first protest, acquiesced in and submitted to this tyranny, and during this period many utterly irregular and un- constitutional things were done. Happily the period of the supreme headship was of no long duration, and there is no need to enter further into the history of it here. (b) On the accession of Elizabeth in 1558, Mary's Act abolishing the old Act of Supremacy remained unrepealed ; but a new Act was passed, claiming for the Crown the title of " supreme governor " instead of " supreme head." ^ And although the Act of Parliament conceded to the Crown large powers, and claimed for it, as Henry's Act did, spiritual jurisdiction, yet, when some of the clergy scrupled to take the oath enjoined by the Act, the sovereign put forth an explanation of it in " an Admonition to simple men deceived by malicious," which was appended to the Injunctions of 1559. This ex- planation is not altogether consistent with itself, for it claims the authority challenged and used by Henry viii., but then proceeds at once to define and very materially limit its meaning, describing it as " of ancient time due to the Imperial Crown of this realm, that is, under God, to have the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons born within these her realms, dominions and countries, of what estate, either ecclesiastical or temporal, soever they be, so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them." And it is added that " if any person, that hath conceived any other sense of the form of the said oath, shall accept the same oath with this interpretation, sense, or meaning ; Her Majesty is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf as her good and obedient subjects, and shall acquit them of all manner of penalties contained in the * Eliz. c. 1. See EccL Courts Commission, p. 73. r f 766 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES said Act against such as shall peremptorily or obstinately refuse to take the same oath." ^ The explanation thus given is of the utmost import- ance. It forms an authoritative commentary upon and interpretation of the Act of Parliament, and, taken in connection with the alteration of style and the adoption of the title of " supreme governor " in place of that of " supreme head," * it indicates a real and substantial change in the conception of the Royal supremacy. It reduces it within reasonable limits, and gives it a far more constitutional character, and one more in accord- ance with ancient precedents, than could be claimed for the form it had assumed under Henry viil. Further, it should be noted that Elizabeth's acts entirely bore out the interpretation which she gave in her Injunctions. Her government of the Church was a very real thing, but she was most careful to maintain that it is " the Church," and not the Crown, which " hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, and hath authority in controversies of faith ; " and the powers which she claimed and exercised were visitorial and corrective, a right of supervision rather than of ordinary administration such as Henry VIII. and Edward vi. with his Council had exercised. It is, then, in this limited and qualified sense that the Royal supremacy was accepted by the Church at the accession of Elizabeth, and all subsequent documents that can claim to speak with any authority whatever upon the subject concur in regarding it in this light. Ignorant people have often spoken of the sovereign as '' head " of the Church, but entirely without warrant. ^ See Cardweir.s Documentary Annals, vol. i. p. 232. - "The Queen is unwilling to be addressed, either byword of mouth or in writing, as the head of the Church of England. For she seriously maintains that this honour is due to Christ alone, and cannot belong to ;uiy human being soever," — Jewel to Bullinger, Zurich Letters^ vol. i. p. 33. ARTICLE XXXVII 767 " Concerning the title of ' supreme head of the Church,' we need not to search for Scripture to excuse it. For, iirst, we devised it not; secondly, we use it not; thirdly, our princes at this present claim it not." So wrote Jewel in 1567,^ and his words remain true still. The interpretation given in the Injunctions was expressly referred to in the Articles of 1563, so that, after claiming for the sovereign the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, the Article proceeds to explain with great care in what this consists. Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief gOYernment, by which titles we under- stand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended : we give not to our princes the minis- tering either of God's word or of sacraments, the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen doth most plainly testify : But that only prerogative, which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in holy Scriptures by God Himself; that is, that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers. To the same effect in the proclamation issued on the occasion of the northern rebellion in 1569, Elizabeth expressly declared that she pretended "no right to define Articles of faith, to change ancient ceremonies formerly adopted by the Catholic and Apostolic Church, or to minister the word or the sacraments of God ; but that she conceived it her duty to take care that all estates under her rule should live in the faith and obedience ^ Defence of tlie Apologj, f^orks, vol. iv. jj. 974. i: i r « 768 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I of the Christian religion ; to see all laws ordained for that end duly observed ; and to provide that the Church be governed and taught by archbishops, bishops, and ministers." * Once more, in the " Royal Declaration " prefixed to the Articles in 1628, the sovereign is made to say that — " Being at God's ordinance, according to our just title, Defender of the Faith, and Supreme Governor of the Church, within these our Dominions, we hold it most agreeable to this our kingly office, and our own religious zeal, to con- serve and maintain the Church committed to our charge in unity of true religion, and in the bond of peace ; and not to suffer unnecessary disputations, altercations, or questions to be raised, which may nourish faction both in the Church and Commonwealth. We have therefore, upon mature deliberation, and with the advice of so many of our bishops as might conveniently be called together, thought fit to make this declaration following : "That we are Supreme Governor of the Church of England: and that if any difference arise about the external policy, concerning the Injunctions, Canons, and other Constitutions whatsoever thereto belonging, the clergy in their Convocations is to order and settle them, having first obtained leave under our broad seal so to do : and we approving their said ordinances and consti- tutions, providing that none be made contrary to the laws and customs of the land." These documents are all-important ones, as showing how the supremacy was explained to and accepted by the Church. Something more, however, may here be added in justification of it. The Article claims that it is only the "prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly * Quoted in Hook's Lives of tht Archbishops, vol. ri. p. 55. ARTICLE XXXVII 769 princes in holy Scriptures by God Himself." This is the view of it which was strongly pressed in the six- teenth century, when an appeal was frequently made to the position occupied by the head of the State in the system of the Jews under the Old Covenant. So Jewel writes that " Queen Elizabeth doth as did Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, Josias, Jehoshaphat." ^ But the position of the Jewish Commonwealth was so peculiar that it may be doubted whether the appeal was altogether a fair one, or whether the position of the sovereign is per- fectly analogous to that occupied by the Hebrew monarchs. It is better to refer rather to those passages of the New Testament which support the claims of established authority to loyal obedience, as Kom. xiii. and 1 Pet. ii. 13-17. The Church, it must be remem- bered, exists as a spiritual society under the conditions of civil life. Its members must therefore be sub- ject to the law of the State as to conduct and the enjoyment of the civil rights. Thus in very early days appeals were made even to heathen emperors by the Church where cases of property and civil rights were concerned.^ And if Cranmer was right in asserting that no more is given to the sovereign by the assertion of the Royal supremacy than was conceded to Nero, who was " head " of the Church in S. Paul's day, or might be con- ceded to the Grand Turk, who in the same way is "head" of the Church in his dominions,^ certainly ' Jewel, Works, vol. iv. p, 1145. ' E.g. in the case of Paul of Samosata, who refused to give up the bishop's house after his deposition by the Council of Antioch in 269. After the defeat of Zenobia, the aid of Aurelian was invoked to give effect to the sentence of the Synod, and in 272, by the help of the civil power, Paul was ejected. See Eusebius, H. E. VII. xxx. ' "Every king in his own realm and dominion is supreme head. . . . Nero was head of the Church, that is, in worldly respect of the temporal bodies of men, of whom the Church consisteth ; for so he beheaded Peter * \ 770 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES I.' nothing more than a general reference to the language of the Apostles on the obedience due to constituted authority is required to justify it. It cannot, however, be seriously maintained that this is all that is intended by it. The conversion of the empire introduced a new state of things, and put the emperor into a new relation towards the Church. From this time forward a vague authority in the affairs of the Church was considered to be vested in him over and above his ordinary jurisdic- tion over all men. He was supposed to be in perfect harmony with the Church. His duty was to see its laws carried out; and to him it appertained to summon General Councils.^ In later days, under the "Holy Roman Empire," the same thing is seen. It may be seen in the laws of Charles the Great, which " illustrate the action of a strong monarch. When a case could not be settled before the bishop or the metropolitan, he directed that it should be brought finally before him- self. The Synods referred their decisions to him that they might be supplemented, amended, and confirmed. He claimed for himself the right and the duty of follow- ing the example of Josiah in endeavouring to bring back to God the kingdom committed to him, by visitation, correction, admonition, in virtue of his royal office." ^ It is something of the same position and power which has been conceded to the sovereign in the Church of England; and the formal documents of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which claim it as the " ancient jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical," ^ are perfectly and the Apostles. And the Turk, too, is head of the Church of Turkey." —Examination at Oxford, 1555 ; Bemains, p. 219. ^ Cf. Ecclesiastical Courts C(ymmisai(m, p. xv. ^ 76. p. xvi., where see references. ^ Canon 1 of 1604. In the third Canon it is maintained that the sore- reign has ** the same authority in causes ecclesiastical that the godly kings had amongst the Jews, and Christian emperors of the primitive Church." > I ARTICLE XXXVII 771 justified in their claim. « The early English laws prove that simUar powers [to those claimed by Charles the Great] were exerted by the sovereigns before the Con- quest ; and throughout the medieval period the English king never surrendered his supreme visitorial power, the power of determining finally, on his own responsibility and at his own discretion, the ecclesiastical relations of his subjects." 1 Or, as Mr. Wakeman puts it, " the con- stitutional character of the supremacy of the Crown . does not differ in principle from that exercised by William i. or Edward i., being in its essence the right of supervision over the administration of the Church, vested in the Crown as the champion of the Church, in order that the religious welfare of its subjects may be duly provided for." 2 Thus we maintain that, while its formal assertion in the sixteenth century grew out of the neces- sity for national resistance to foreign claims, yet the supremacy itself was no new thing. Questions of the utmost importance and delicacy may, of course, arise in connection with it ; and in the present day, when the powers formerly exercised by the Crown have so largely passed from the personal control of the sovereign to the Parliament, a wholly new state of things has arisen. This has been greatly complicated by the unfortunate Act of 1833 (to say nothing of later legislation), which abol- ished the ancient Court of Delegates, in which the Crown appointed the members of the final Court of appeal in ecclesiastical causes, and transferred its powers to the Judicial Committee of the Privy CouncU. But into the vexed question of the Ecclesiastical Courts there is no necessity to enter here. All that we are at present concerned with is this, viz. that since the Royal supremacy as explained to and accepted by the Church * Ecclesiastical Courts Cominissum, ttbi supra. * LUroduction to the History of the Church of Enrjland, p. 321. ill i \ 772 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES 10W ^1 is for all practical purposes identical with that anciently enjoyed by the Crown in this country, there is no sort of reason why its formal assertion in and since the six- teenth century should be thought to cause a difficulty to loyal Churchmen. The " supreme headship " is not claimed. The extraordinary powers exercised by Henry vni. and Edward vi. are no longer in force. These the Church repudiates as arbitrary and unconstitutional. The supreme governorship, as defined and limited in the formal documents cited above, she loyally accepts.^ II. The Papal Claims. The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England. The statement of the Article sums up as briefly as possible the position taken up by the Church of England in the sixteenth century. It is, of course, well known that during the previous centuries, although a Papal jurisdiction was freely admitted, yet resistance to the claims of Rome was not infrequent, and various Acts were passed to limit the powers of the Pope in this country. But the summary rejection of Papal jurisdic- tion, as a whole, belongs to the sixteenth century. The account of the steps taken by the Church and State, including the formal declaration by Convocation in 1534, that "the Pope of Rome hath no greater jurisdiction conferred on him by God in holy Scripture, in this > It has been impossible to do more than give the briefest outline in regard to the very important subject discussed in this section. Refer- ence has been frequently made in the notes to the Report of tJu EceUti- astical Courts Ce communitatc bonorum et uxorum. Excludatur etiam ab eisdem Anabaptistis inducta bonorum et possessionum com- munitas, quam tantopere urgent, ut nemini quicquam relinquant proprium et suum. In quo mirabiliter loquuntur, cum furta prohiberi divina Scriptura oernant, et eleemosynas in utroque Testamento laudari videant, quas ex propriis facultatibus nostris elargimur ; quorum sane neutrum consistere posset, nisi Christianis proprietas bonorum et possessionum suarum relinqueretur. Emergunt etiam ex Anabaptistarum lacunis quidam Nicolait«, inquinatissimi sane homines, qui fceminarum, imo et uxorum disputant usum per omnes promiscue pervagari debere. 788 i \ 784 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXVIII 785 i| The two subjects of which the Article speaks are these — 1. The community of goods. 2. The duty of almsgiving. I. The Community of Goods. The riches and goods of Christians are not common, as touching the right, title, and pos- session of the same, as certain Anabaptists do falsely boast. The notion of the Anabaptists here condemned probably originated in a misunderstanding of S. Luke's words in the Acts of the Apostles. Two passages have often been cited in proof of the assertion that Com- munism proper was the system that originally prevailed in the Apostolic Church, and from them it has been concluded that the same system ought to be practised now, and that consequently the possession of private property by individuals is contrary to the spirit of Christianity. The passages in question are the following : — Acts ii. 44, 45 : " All that believed were together, and had all things common ; and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need." C. iv. 32 : "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and soul ; and not one of them said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own ; but they had all things common " {^v avroh airavra Koivd). Qu» fceda illonim et conscelerata libido primuiu pietati contraria est et sacris Uteris, deinde cum universa civili honestate, et natural] ilia incorruptaque in mentibus nostris accensa luce vehementur piignat." Cf. also the quotations given above on p. 761 ; and see Hermann's Con- sultation (Eng. tr.), fol. cxl. These passages, however, do not stand alone ; and a careful consideration of the whole account given by S. Luke of the early Church in Jerusalem, shows conclus- ively that what he is here describing is not so much an institution as a temper and spirit. Most certainly the rights of private property were not superseded. Mary the mother of John Mark still retained her own house (Acts xii. 12); while the words of S. Peter to Ananias prove that no necessity was laid upon him to sell his property, " Whilst it remained, did it not remain thine own ? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power?" Moreover, as will be shown below, there are various injunctions to liberality in almsgiving in the Apostolic Epistles which are incompatible with Communism, for where a strict system of this kind is practised, and the rights of property are superseded, personal almsgiving becomes an impossibility. There are no ** rich " to be charged to be " ready to give and glad to distribute." It may be added, that while there there is no trace elsewhere of any system of Communism adopted by the Church, yet expressions are used by later writers^ which afford striking parallels to those employed by S. Luke, and show us that no violence is done to his words if they are understood of the eager, enthusiastic spirit of love which so prevailed among the early Christians as to lead them to regard whatever they possessed as at the disposal ^ Thus in the Aidaxv tQv ddiSeKa diroardXojv we read : " If thou have in thine hands, thou shalt give for ransom of thy sins. Thou shalt not hesitate to give, neither shalt thou grudge when thou givest : for thou shalt know who is the recompenser of the reward. Thou shalt not turn aside from him that needeth, but sfuilt share all things with thy brother ^ and shut not say thai they are thine own ; for if ye are fellow-sharers in that which is imperishable, how much more in the things that are perish- able," c. iv. TertuUian also writes as follows : "One in mind and soul, we do not hesitate to share our earthly goods with one another. All things are coinnwn among tcs, btU our wives" Kyiol. xxxix. 786 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES of their brethren ; and not of any formal or systematic plan of Communism.^ II. The Duty of Ahisgiving. Every man ought of such things as he pos- sesseth, liberally to give alms to the poor, according to his ability. That almsgiving is a Christian duty scarcely needs formal proof. It is sufficient to refer to — (1) Our Lord*s words in the Sermon on the Mount, where He does not command it, but rather takes for granted that His followers will practise it, and gives directions concerning the manner of doing it, as He does also with regard to the two other duties of prayer and fasting (S. Matthew vi 1 seq. ; cf. also S. Luke xiL 33). (2) The directions concerning it in the Apostolic Epistles,^ e.g. " Charge them that are rich in this present world . . . that they do good, that they be rich in good works, that they be ready to distribute, willing to com- municate; laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on the life which is life indeed," 1 Tim. vi. 17-19. ^ On the position of some modern Communists, who affirm that Com- munism was the natural outcome of the Law of Equality implied in Christ's teaching, and maintain that "Jesus Christ Himself not only proclaimed, preached, and prescribed Communism as a consequence of fraternity, but practised it with His Apostles " (Cabet, F&yage en Icarie, p. 567) ; see Kaufmann's Socialism ajid Communism, c. i. ; and on the relation between Religion and Socialism, see Flint's Socialism, c. xi. - The Second Book of the Homilies contains a plain Homily on the subject of "almsdeeds and mercifulness towards the poor and needy," in which the Scriptural directions on the subject from the Old Testament (including the Apocrypha), as well as from the New, are collected to- gether, p. 406 (S.P.C.K.). ARTICLE XXXVIII 787 "To do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased," Heb. xiii. 16. Cf. also Rom. xiL 13; 1 Cor. xvi. 2 ; 2 Cor. ix. 7; 1 John iiL 17, eta ^ ARTICLE XXXIX L ^ Dc Jurejurando. Quemadmodum juramentum va- num et tenierariuni a Domino nostro Jesu Christo et Apostolo ejus Jacobo Christiauis hominibus indictum esse fatemur : ita Christianam religi- onem ininiiiie prohibere censeraus, quia jubente Magistratu, in causa fidei et charitatis, jurare liceat, modo id fiat juxta Prophetae doc- trinam, in justitia, in judicio, et veritate. Of a Christian Man*s Oath. As we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ, and James His Apostle : so we judge that Christian religion doth not prohibit, but a man may swear when the magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to the prophet's teaching, in justice, judgment, and truth. Like the one just considered, this Article, which has remained without change since 1553, is aimed against a tenet of the Anabaptists, which is also condemned in the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum. "Prseterea nee juramentorum Anabaptistse legitimum relinquunt usum, in quo contra Scripturarum sententiam et veteris Testamenti patrum exempla, Pauli etiam apos- toli, imo Christi, imo Dei Patris procedimt; quorum juramenta saepe sunt in sacris Uteris repetita," etc.^ There are two passages of the New Testament which have appeared to others besides the Anabaptists to forbid the taking of an oath m any case.^ They are (a) our Lord's teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, and (b) the very similar words of S. James. ^ De ffceres. c. 15. De juravuntis et participatione domhiiece CcmcCt and cf. the quotations given above under Art. XXXVII. p 761. 2 Not only the Quakers of later days, but some among the Christian lathers took this view. 788 ■■■«• ARTICLE XXXIX 789 (a) S. Matt. V. 33-37: « Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time. Thou ahalt not forswear thy- self, but Shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths : but I say unto you, Swear not at aU ; neither by the heaven, for It is the throne of God ; nor by the earth, for it 18 the footstool of His feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, for thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your speech be, Yea, yea ; Nay, nay ; and whatsoever is more than these is of the evil one." Q)) S. James v. 12: "Above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by the heaven, nor by the earth, nor by any other oath ; but let your yea be yea, and your nay,^ nay {or, * let yours be the yea, yea, and the nay, nay,' R V. rmrg.) ; that ye fall not under judgment." These are evidently the passages to which the Article alludes, when it says that we confess that vain and rash swearing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ, and James His Apostle. And It is tolerably clear that in neither passage is the formal tendering of oaths in a law court under considera- tion. Such a solemn act is referred to in the Epistle to the Hebrews in terms which conclusively indicate that the writer of the Epistle saw nothing wrong in it. " Men swear by the greater : and in every dispute of theirs the oath is final for confirmation " (Heb. vi 1 6). So S. Paul, several times in the course of his Epistles, makes a solemn appeal to God, which is a form of oath (2 Cor. L 23, xi 10, 31, xii 19; Gal. i 20; Phil, i 8), and in one instance uses the expression vrj rrjv viierepav KaxrxnQiv^ 1 Cor. XV. 31. And there are references to God as swearing by Himself, which it would be difficult to recon- cile with the idea that there is anything essentially wrong in a solemn asseveration or oath, in order to gain credence for a statement (Heb. iiL 11, vi 16, 17). But, SI 790 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARTICLE XXXIX 791 I further, what seems quite decisive is the fact that when our Lord was solemnly adjured by the high priest, t.«. put on His oath. He did not refuse to answer. See S. Matt xxvi. 62-64, "And the high priest stood up, and said unto Him, Answerest Thou nothing ? What is it which these witness against Thee ? But Jesus held His peace. And the high priest said unto Him, I adjure Thee by the living God (i^opKi^a> ae Karh rod Geov tow fwin-o?) that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God ? Jesus said unto him. Thou hast said : nevertheless I say unto you. Henceforth ye shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." In this case, as in others, our Lord's actions form the best commentary upon the meaning of His words, and prove decisively that the reference in the Sermon on the Mount is, as the Article takes it, to " vain and rash swearing." S. James* words are apparently directly founded on our Lord's,^ and there is nothing in them to lead us to think that he is contemplating anything more than ordinary conversa- tion and the use of oaths in it. We conclude, therefore, that there is nothing in Holy Scripture which need raise any scruple in the minds of Christians as to the lawful- ness of acquiescing when solemnly put upon their oath. Whether the use of oaths by the Legislature is advisable is another matter, on which we are not called upon to offer an opinion. A man may regret the custom, and feel that it brings with it grave dangers of the profanation of sacred things, and encourages the false idea of a double standard of truthfulness, and yet hold that Christian religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done according to * This is made very plain if the marginal rendering of the Revised Version be adopted. the prophet's teaching, in justice, judgment, and truth. The " prophet," whose " teaching " is here referred to, is the prophet Jeremiah, who says (iv. 2), "Thou Shalt swear. As the Lord liveth, in truth, in judgment, and in righteousness ";i and if judicial oaths are permissible at all, it can only be on these conditions. 1 '* Et jurabis : Vivit Dominus in veritate, et in judicio, et in jus- titia" (Vulgate). The passage is quoted in the Homilj "Against Swearing and Perjury" (p. 73, S.P.C.K.), where the whole question of the lawfulness of oaths is also argued. r ?^ I* I' r INDEX Aachen, Coimcil of, 222. Abbot, Archbishop, 48. Abelard, 111. Addis and Arnold, 472, 553, 659. Admonition to Parliament, 53, 458, 747. Adoration, Encharistic, 667. A Lasco, John, 28, 643. Albertus Magnus, 149, 435, 692. Alexander, Archbishop, 591. Alexander of Hales, 435. Alexandria, Church of, 507. Alexandria, Council of, 109. Alley, Bishop, on the descent into hell, 160 ; on the Old Testament, 281. Almsgiving, teaching of Scripture on, 786. Ambrose, 219, 314, 360, 426. Amphilochius, 249, 265. Anabaptists, 22, 24, 125. 282, 358, 386, 398, 441, 455, 574, 588, 616, 760, 783, 788. Ancyra, Council of, 700, 711. Andrewes, Bishop, 47, 554, 660, 663. Anselm, 155, 701. Antioch, Church of, 507 ; Council of, 769. Apiarius, the case of, 779. Apocrypha, 274 ; Jerome on, 276 ; Hooker on, 278. Apollinaris, heresy of, 135. Apostles' Creed, history of, 305 ; origin of name, 313 ; text of, 315. Apostolical succession, 577, 740. ApostoliccB CurcBf the Papal Bull, 752. Aquinas, 171, 406, 435, 560, 598, 609, 670, 678. 79S Aristides, 140, 299. Arminianism, 470. Arnold, T., 490. Artemon, heresy of, 105. Arundel, Archbishop, Constitutions of, 561. Ascension of Christ, 189. Assembly of Divines, 370, 376. Athanasian Creed, not the work of Athanasius, 329 ; a Latin Creed, 329 ; origin of name, 330 ; con- troversy on date, 331 ; internal evidence of date, 332 ; external evidence, 333; MSS. of, 336; contained in early collections of canons, 338 ; commentaries on, 339 ; used by early writers, 340 ; probable date of, 343 ; use made of, by the Church of England, 344 ; contents of, 345 ; objections to, 346 ; mistranslations in, 347 ; text of, 353. Athanasius, use of Hypostasis^ 107 ; on the Monarchia, 116 ; on Homo(msioSy 126 ; on Sabell- ianism, 206 ; on the sufficiency of Scripture, 242 ; on the Canon of Scripture, 256 ; on blasphemy against the Holv Ghost, 446 ; on the powers of the Church, 521 ; on Councils, 534. Athenagoras, 105, 205. Atonement, doctrine of, 150 ; theories of, 154 ; reveals the Father's love, 154 ; a mystery, 157 ; complete and sufficient^ 688. Cf. 439. Augsburg, Confession of. See C' written in the spirit of scientific precision so worthily represented by Dr. Petrie and his school cannot but promote sound and accurate study, and supply a vacant place in the English literature of Egyptology.'— r/ww. J. WELLS A SHORT HISTORY OF ROME. By J. Wells, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Wadham CoU., Oxford. With 4 Maps. Crown Zvo. Ss.6d. 350 /A This book is intended for the Middle and Upper Forms of Public Schools and for Pass Students at the Universities. It contains copious Tables, etc. H. D£ B. 6IBBINS THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH INDUSTRY. By H. DE B. Gibbins, M.A. With 5 Maps. Demy Svo. 10s. 6d. Pp. 450. This book is written with the view of affording a clear view of the main facts of English Social and Industrial History placed in due perspective. Beginning with prehistoric times, it passes in review the growth and advance of industry up to the nineteenth century, showing its gradual development and progress. The author has endeavoured to place before his readers the history- of industry as a connected whole in which all these developments have their proper place. The book is illustraied by Maps, Diagrams, and Tables, and aided by copious Footnotes. MRS. OLIPHANT THOMAS CHALMERS. By Mrs. Oliph.\nt. Second Edition. Crvwn Svo. 3s. 6d, [Leaders of Religion. Naval and Military DAVID HANNAY SHORT HISTORY OF THE ROYAL NAVY, FROM Early Times to the Present Day. By David Hannay. Illustrated. Demy Svo. i^s. lliis book aims at giving an account not only of the fighting we have done at sea, but of the growth of the service, of the part the Navy has played in the develop- ment of the Empire, and of its inner life. The author has endeavoured to avoid the mistake of sacrificing the earlier periods of naval history— the very interesting wars with Holland in the seventeenth century, for instance, or the American War of 1779-1783— to the later struggle with Revolutionary and Imperial France. MESSRS. Methuen's Announcements 5 COL. COOPER KINO A SHORT HISTORY OF THE BRITISH ARMY. By Lieut.- Colonel Cooper King, of the Staff College, Camberley. Illustrated. Demy Svo. js. 6d. This volume aims at describing the nature of the different armies that have been formed in Great Britain, and how from the early and feudal levies the present standing army came to be. The changes in tactics, uniform, and armament are briefly touched upon, and, the campaigns in which the army has shared have been so far followed as to explain the part played by British regiments in them. O. W. STEEVENS NAVAL POLICY: With a Description of English and Foreign Navies. By G. W. Steevens. Demy Svo. 6s. . ... really detailed but non-technical account is given of the instruments of modern warfare guns, armour, engines, and the like— with a view to determine how far we are abreast of modern invention and modern requirements. An ideal policy is then sketched for the building and manning of our fleet ; and the last chapter is devoted to docks, coaling-stations, and especially colonial defence. Theology F. B. JEVONS AN INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF RELIGION. By F. B. Jevons, M.A., Litt.D., Fellow of the University of Durham. Demy Svo. 12s. 6d. This is the third number of the series of 'Theological Handbooks' edited by Dr. Robertson of Durham, in which have already appeared Dr. Gibson's 'XXXIX. Articles' and Mr. Ottley's * Incarnation.' Mr. F. B. Jevons* ' Introduction to the History of Religion' treats of early religion, from the point of view of Anthropology and Folk-lore ; and is the first attempt that has been made in any language to weave together the results of recent investigations into such topics as Sympathetic Magic, Taboo, Totemism, Fetishism, etc., so as to present a systematic account of the growth of primitive religion and the development of early religious institutions. W. TOREE FAUSSETT THE DE CATECHIZANDIS RUDIBUS OF ST. AUGUS- TINE. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, etc., by W. Yorke Faussett, M.A., late Scholar of Balliol ColJ. Crown Svo. y. 6d. An edition of a Treatise on the Essentials of Christian Doctrine, and the best methods of impressing them on candidates for baptism. The editor bestows upon this patristic work the same care which a treatise of Cicero might claim. There is a general Introduction, a careful Analysis, a full Commentary, and other useful matter. No better introduction to the study of the Latin Fathers, their style and diction, could be found than this treatise, which also has no lack of modern interest. I ^ Messrs. Methuen's Announcements General Literature C. F. ANDREWS CHRISTIANITY AND THE LABOUR QUESTION. By C. F. Andrews, B.A. Croiun %vo. 2s. 6d. B. £. STEEL MAGNETISM AND ELECTRICITY. By R. Elliott Steel, M.A., F.C.S. With Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 4?. 6d. O. LOWES DICKINSON THE GREEK VIEW OF LIFE. By G. L. DICKINSON, Fellow of King's College, Cambridge. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. [ University Extension Series. J. A. HOBSON THE PROBLEM OF THE UNEMPLOYED. By J. A. HOBSON, B.A., Author of *The Problems of Poverty.' Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. [Social Questions Series. S. E. BALL7 GERMAN COMMERCIAL CORRESPONDENCE. By S. E. Bally, Assistant Master at the Manchester Grammar School. Crown Svo. 2s. [ Commercial Series. L. F. PRICE ECONOMIC ESSAYS. By L. F. Price, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. Crown Svo. 6s. This book consists of a number of Studies in Economics and Industrial and Social Problems. Fiction MARIE CORELLFS ROMANCES FIRST COMPLETE AND UNIFORM EDITION Large crown Svo. 6s. Messrs. Methuen beg to announce that they have commenced the pub- lication of a New and Uniform Edition of Marie Corelli's Romances. This Edition is revised by the Author, and contains new Prefaces. The volumes are being issued at short intervals in the following order : — I. A ROMANCE OF TWO WORLDS. 2. VENDETTA. 3. THELMA. 4. ARDATH. 5. THE SOUL OF LILITH. 6. WORMWOOD. 7. BARABBAS. 8. THE SORROWS OF SATAN. Messrs. Methuen's Announcements 7 BARING GOULD DARTMOOR IDYLLS. By S. Baring Gould. Cr. Svo. 6s. GUAVAS THE TINNER. By S. Baring Gould, Author of * Mehalah,' * The Broom Squire,' etc. Illustrated. Crown Svo. 6s. THE PENNYCOMEQUICKS. By S. Baring Gould. New Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. A new edition, uniform with the Author's other novels. LUCAS MALET THE CARISSIMA. By Lucas Malet, Author of ' The Wages of Sin,' etc. Crown Svo. 6s. This is the first novel which Lucas Malet has written since her very powerful ' The Wages of Sin.' AETHUR MORRISON A CHILD OF THE JAGO. By Arthur Morrison. Author of * Tales of Mean Streets. ' Crown Svo. 6s. This, the first long story which Mr. Morrison has written, is like his remarkable 'Tales of Mean Streets,' a realistic study of East End life. W. E. NORRIS CLARISSA FURIOSA. By W. E. NORRis, * Author of 'The Rogue,' etc. Crown Svo, 6s. L. COPE CORNFORD CAPTAIN JACOBUS : A ROMANCE OF HIGHWAYMEN. By L. Cope Corn ford. Illustrated. Crown Svo. 6s. J. BLOUNDELLE BURTON DENOUNCED. By J. Bloundelle Burton, Author of ' In the Day of Adversity,' etc. Crown Svo. 6s. J. KACLAREN COBBAN WILT THOU HAVE THIS WOMAN? By J. M. COBBAN, Author of ' The King of Andaman.' Crown Svo. 6s. J. F. BREWER THE SPECULATORS. By J. F. Brewer. Crown Svo. 6s. A. BALFOUR BY STROKE OF SWORD. By Andrew Balfour. Crown Svo. 6s. I M 8 Messrs. Methuen's Announcements M. A. OWEN THE DAUGHTER OF ALOUETTE. By Mary A. OwEN. Crmvn %vo. 6j. A story of life among the American Indians. RONALD BOSS THE SPIRIT OF STORM. By Ronald Ross, Author of ' The Child of Ocean. ' Crown Svo. 6s. A romance of the Sea. J. A. BARR7 IN THE GREAT DEEP : Tales of the Sea. By J. A. Barry. Author of * Steve Brown's Bunyip.' Crown Svo. 6s. JAMES GORDON THE VILLAGE AND THE DOCTOR. By James Gordon. Crown Svo. 6s. BERTRAM MITFORD THE SIGN OF THE SPIDER. By Bertram Mitford. Crown Svo. 3^. 6d. A story of South Africa. A. SHIELD THE SQUIRE OF WANDALES. By A. Shield. CrownSvo. 3^. 6d. O. W. STEEVENS MONOLOGUES OF THE DEAD. By G. W. Steevens. Foolscap Svo. y. 6d. A series of Soliloquies in which famous men of antiquity — Julius Ca:sar, Nero, Alcibiades, etc., attempt to express themselves in the modes of thought and language of to-day. S. GORDON A HANDFUL OF EXOTICS. By S. GORDON. Crown Svo. 3^. 6d. A volume of stones of Jewish life in Russia. P. NEUMANN THE SUPPLANTER. By P. Neumann. Crown Svo. y. 6d. EVELYN DICKINSON THE SIN OF ANGELS. By Evelyn DICKINSON. CrownSvo. 3^. 6d. H. A. KENNEDY A MAN WITH BLACK EYELASHES. By H. A. Kennedy. Crown Svo. ^s. 6d. A LIST OF Messrs. Methuen^s PUBLICATIONS Poetrv Rudyard Kipling. BARRACK-ROOM BALLADS; And Other Verses. By Rudyard Kipling. Ninth Edition. Crown OVO. OS. [yn^t:.%''l^\««. * It is edited by the most original and most accomplished of modern Irish ooets anrf against his editing but a single objection can be brought, n^ie^y. that irSccl'udes from the collection his own delicate lyrics.' Saiurdaj^ ket'iew. ««ciuaes E. Mackay. A SONG OF THE SEA : My Lady of Dreams AND OTHER PoEMS. By Eric Mackay, Author of *The Love Letters of a Violinist. ' Second Edition. Fcap. Svo, gilt top. Cj • Everywhere Mr. Mackay displays himself the master of a style marked bv all the Srj?"'"K-'" °^ '^^- ^"' ""^f '°t- "' ^" * ''«" ^*"^<= °f rhythm and of «ne.^1 balance; his verse is excellently sonorous.'— C/^^. 'uui general Ihroughout the book the poetic workmanship is ^nc'—Scots/fuw. A 2 lO Messrs. Methuen's List Ibsen. BRAND. A Drama by Henrik Ibsen. Translated by William Wilson. Second Edition. Crown Svo. ss. 6d. •The ereatest world-poem of the nineteenth century next to "Faust." It is in the fame set with "Agamemnon," with " Lear." with the Uterature that we now instinctively regard as high and holy.'— Daily Chronic U. "A.G." VERSES TO ORDER. By"A. G." Cr. Svo. 2s.6d. net. A small volume of verse by a writer whose initials are well known to O'^'ord men. • ITapital specimen of light academic poetry. These verses are very bright and engaging, easy and sufficiently witty. —St. James s Gazette. T. Langbridge. BALLADS OF THE BRAVE : Poems of Chivalry, Enterprise, Courage, and Constancy, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day. Edited, with Notes, by Rev. F. Lang- bridge. Crown Svo. Buckram. 3s. 6d. School Edition. 2s. 6d. •A very happy conception happily carried out. ..These " Ballads of the Brave" are intended ?o suit the real tites of boys, and will suit the U^te of the great majority. —Spectator. ' The book is full of splendid things. —IVorld- Lang and Oraigie. THE POEMS OF ROBERT BURNS. Edited by Andrew Lang and W. A. Craigie. With Portrait. Demy SvOy gilt top. 6s. . . , ^ 1 This edition contains a carefully collated Text numerous Notes, critical and textual, a critical and biographicallntroduction, and a Glossary. „i,^. «f •Among the editions In one volume, Mr. Andrew Lang's will take the place of ' Trthe°gen;rll^u'bl£ the beauty of its type, and the fair proportions of its pages as well L the excellent chronological arrangement of the poems, should make ,t acceptable enough. Mr. Lang and his publishers have certainly , succeeded in prSudng an attractive popula? edition of the poet, m which the brightly written EJographfcal introductioris not the least notable fcature.'-C/a^^^e; Herald. English Classics Edited by W. E. Henley. •Very dainty volumes are these; the paper type, and light-green binding are all very agreeable to the eye. Simplex munditiis is the phrase that might be applied to lYv^m.'— Globe. , • • j •The volumes are strongly bound in green buckram, are of a convenient s>ze, and ple^t to look upon, so that whether on the shelf, or on the table, or m the hand the possessor is thoroughly content with them. —GttardiaH. •The paper, type, and binding of this edition are in excellent taste, and leave nothing to be desired by lovers of literature. —Standard. THE LIFE AND OPINIONS OF TRISTRAM SHANDY. By Lawrence Sterne. With an Introduction by Charles Whibley, and a Portrait. 2 vols. ys. THE COMEDIES OF WILLIAM CONGREVE. With an Introduction by G. S. Street, and a Portrait. 2 vols. 7^- MESSRS. Methuen's List h THE ADVENTURES OF HAJJI BABA OF ISPAHAN By James Morier. With an Introduction by E. G. Browne, M A * and a Portrait. 2 vols. ys. ' '' THE LIVES OF DONNE, WOTTON, HOOKER HER BERT, AND SANDERSON. By Izaak Walton. With an Introduction by Vernon Blackburn, and a Portrait. 3s. 6d. THE LIVES OF THE ENGLISH POETS. By Samuel Johnson, LL.D. With an Introduction by J. H. Millar, and a Portrait. 3 vols, 10s. 6d. > « ^ Illustrated Books Jane Barlow. THE BATTLE OF THE FROGS AND MICE translated by Jane Barlow, Author of * Irish Idylls,' and pictured by F. D. Bedford. Small ^to. 6s. net, S. Baring Gould. A BOOK OF FAIRY TALES retold by S Baring Gould. With numerous illustrations and initial letters bv Arthur J. Gaskin. Second Edition. Crown Svo. Buckram. 6s. Mr. Baring Gould has done a good deed, and is deservini- of trr^t:*,,^^ • SiJTaidS^i'^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the sfories that are comnJonly "egarieS as ^!rT^lliZ^L^''I ^^^T'^^ u^^^^^' of the book, and the printing. whS. Is W Messrs C^^r?hl^^^ ^^ '3-4^ ^^"""^ commend overmuch. -Saturday Revi^. '''* ^^"^^^'^'e. '^ ^^re difficult lo S. Baring Gould. OLD ENGLISH FAIRY TALES Col lected and edited by S. Baring Gould. With Numerous'lllustra- •Ari^L ? rr^,f''"^^^^^'^«- ^-ownSvo. Buckram. 6s. \e^n^l^?terwTh%^e'af int '^^^^^ VL^'t^ZVll^Trr' A^^if '^^ ^^^ having been somewhat aUe^eHnd readjusted now 1^%^^ ^1^ folk-tales, and, ^' ^^^v^%.^A°2\ °^ NURSERY SONGS AND RHYMES. Edited by S. Baring Gould, and Illustrated by the Birmingham Art School. Buckram, gilt top. CroTvnSvo. 6s. 12 Messrs. Methuen*s List H. C. BeecMng. A BOOK OF CHRISTMAS VERSE. Edited by H. C. Beeching, M.A., and Illustrated by Walter Crane. Crown 8f ^, gilt top, $5. A collection of the best verse inspired by the birth of Christ from the Middle Ages to the present day. A distinction of the book is the large number of poems it contains by modern authors, a few of which are here printed for the first time. 'An anthology which, from its unity of aim and high poetic excellence, has a better right to exist than most of its fellows.' — Guardian. History Gibbon. THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. By Edward Gibbon. A New Edition, Edited with Notes, Appendices, and Maps, by J. B. Bury, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin. In Seven Volumes. Demy Svo, Gilt top, %s. dd. each. Also crown Svo. 6s. each. Vol. I. ' The time has certainly arrived for a new edition of Gibbon's great work. . . . Pro- fessor Bury is the right man to undertake this task. His learning is amazing, both in extent and accuracy. The book is issued in a handy form, and at a moderate price, and it is admirably printed.' — Titnes. ' The edition is edited as a classic should be edited, removing nothing, yet indicating the value of the text, and bringing it up to date. It promises to be of the utmost value, and will be a welcome addition to many libraries.' — Scotsman. 'This edition, so far as one may judge from the first instalment, is a marvel of erudition and critical skill, and it is the very minimum of praise to predict that the seven volumes of it will supersede Dean Milman's as the standard edition of our great historical classic' — Glasgow Herald. ' The beau-ideal Gibbon has arrived at last.' — Sketch. ' At last there is an adequate modern edition of Gibbon. . . . The best edition the nineteenth century could produce.' — Manchester Guardian. Flinders Petrie. A HISTORYOF EGYPT, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day. Edited by \V. M. Flinders Petrie, D.C.L., LL.D., Professor of Egyptology at University College. Fully Illustrated. In Six Volumes. Crown Svo. 6s. each. VoL I. Prehistoric Times to XVI. Dynasty. W. M. F. Petrie. Second Edition. • A history written in the spirit of scientific precision so worthily represented by Dr. Petrie and his school cannot but promote sound and accurate study, and supply a vacant place in the English literature of Egyptology.' — Times. Flinders Petrie. EGYPTIAN TALES. Edited by W. M. Flinders Petrie. Illustrated by Tristram Ellis. In Two Volumes. Crown Svo. "^s. 6d. each, • A valuable addition to the literature of comparative folk-lore. The drawings are really illustrations in the literal sense of the vt or d.'— Globe. ' It has a scientific value to the student of history and archeology.' — Scotsman. • Invaluable as a picture of life in Palestine and Egypt.' — Daily News. Messrs. Methuen's List 13 Flinders Petrie. EGYPTIAN DECORATIVE ART. By W. M. Flinders Petrie, D.C.L. With 120 Illustrations. Crown Svo. 3^. 6d. • Professor Flinders Petrie is not only a profound Egyptologist, but an accomplished student of comparative archaeology. In these lectures, delivered at the Royal Institution, he displays both qualifications with rare skill in elucidating the development of decorative art in Egypt, and in tracing its influence on the art of other countries. Few experts can speak with higher authority and wider knowledge than the Professor himself, and in any case his treatment of his sub- ject is full of learning and msXght..'— Times. S. Baring Gould. THE TRAGEDY OF THE CAESARS. The Emperors of the Julian and Claudian Lines. With numerous Illustrations from Busts, Gems, Cameos, etc. By S. Baring Gould, Author of * Mehalah,' etc. Third Edition. Royal Svo. i$s. * A most splendid and fascinating book on a subject of undying interest. The great feature of the book is the use the author has made of the existing portraits of the Caesars, and the admirable critical subtlety he has exhibited in dealing with this line of research. It is brilliantly written, and the illustrations are supplied on a scale of profuse magnificence.'— Z>az7j/ Chronicle. ' The volumes will in no sense disappoint the general reader. Indeed, in their way, there is nothing in any sense so good in English. ... Mr. Baring Gould has presented his narrative m such a way as not to make one dull paige.'—A t/iemeum. A. Clark. THE COLLEGES OF OXFORD : Their History, their Traditions. By Members of the University. Edited by A. Clark, M. A., Fellow and Tutor of Lincoln College. Svo. 12s. 6d. •A work which will certainly be appealed to for many years as the standard book on the Colleges ofOxford.'—Athenaum. Perrens. THE HISTORY OF FLORENCE FROM 1434 TO 1492. By F. T. Perrens. Translated by Hannah Lynch. Svo. 12s. 6d. A history of Florence under the domination of Cosimo, Piero, and Lorenzo de Medicis. • This is a standard book by an honest and intelligent historian, who has deserved well of all who are interested in Italian history.'— Manchester Guardian. E. L. S. Horsburgh. THE CAMPAIGN OF WATERLOO. By E. L. S. HORSBURGH, B.A. With Plans. Crown Svo. 5^. 'A brilliant essay— simple, sound, and thorough.'— Z>ar7v Chronicle. A study, the most concise, the most lucid, the most critical that has been produced.' ^Birmingham Mercury, ' A careful and precise study, a fair and impartial criticism, and an eminently read- able book. — Admiralty and Horse Guards Gazette. H.B. George. BATTLES OF ENGLISH HISTORY. ByH.B. George, M.A., Fellow of New College, Oxford. With numerous Plans. Third Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. ' ^I*"- George has undertaken a very useful task— that of making military affairs in- telligible and instructive to non-military readers— and has executed it with laud- ,-,*^^* intelligence and industry, and with a large measure of success.'— r/ww. This book is almost a revelation ; and we heartily congratulate the author on his work and on the prospect of the reward he has well deserved for so much con- scientious and sustained labour.' — Daify Chronicle. i h 14 Messrs. Methuen's List 0. Browning. A SHORT HISTORY OF MEDIEVAL ITALY, A.D. 1 250- 1 530. By Oscar Browning, Fellow and Tutor of Kings College, Cambridge. Second Edition. In Two Voluvus. Crown Sz'o. $s. each. Vol. I. 1250-1409.— Guelphs and Ghibellines. Vol. h. 1409-1530.— The Age of the Condottieri. 'A vivid picture of mediaeval Italy.' — Standard. ' Mr. Browning is to be congratulated on the production of a work of immense labour and learning.' — Westminster Gazette. O'Grady. THE STORY OF IRELAND. By Standish O'Grady, Author of * Finn and his Companions.' Cr. Svo. 2s. 6d. ' Most delightful, most stimulating. Its racy humour, its original imaginings, make it one of the freshest, breeziest volumes.' — Methodist Times. 'A survey at once graphic, acute, and quaintly written.' — Times. Biography R. L. Stevenson. VAILIMA LETTERS. By Robert Louis Stevenson. With an Etched Portrait by William Strang, and other Illustrations. Second Edition. Crown Svo. Buckram, ys. 6d. ♦ The Vailima Letters are rich in all the varieties of that charm which have secured for Stevenson the affection of many others besides "journalists, fellow-novelists. and hoys." '—The Times. ' Few publications have in our time been more eagerly awaited than these " Vailima Letters," giving the first fruits of the correspondence of Robert Louis Stevenson. But, high as the tide of expectation has run, no reader can possibly be disappointed in the result.' — St. Jameses Gazette. ' For the student of English literature these letters indeed arc a treasure. They are more like " Scott's Journal " in kind than any other literary autobiography.' — National Observer. F. W. Joyce. THE LIFE OF SIR FREDERICK GORE OUSELEY. By F. W. Joyce, M.A. With Portraits and Illustra- tions. Crown Svo. ys. 6d. ' All the materials have been well digested, and the book gives us a complete picture of the life of one who will ever be held in loving remembrance by his personal friends, and who In the history of music In this country will always occupy a prominent position on account of the many services he rendered to the art.' — Musical News. ' This book has been undertaken In quite the right spirit, and written with sympathy, insight, and considerable literary skill.'— 7/>«^j. W. G. Collingwood. THE LIFE OF JOHN RUSKIN. By W. G. Collingwood, M.A., Editor of Mr. Ruskin's Poems. With numerous Portraits, and 13 Drawings by Mr. Ruskin. Second Edition. 2 vols. Svo. 32^. ' No more magnificent volumes have been published for a long time.'— 7Vw«. • It Is long since we had a biography with such delights of substance and of form. Such a book is a pleasure for the day, and a joy for ever.'— ZJa/Vy Chronicle. ' A noble monument of a noble subject. One of the most beautiful books about one of the noblest lives of our century.' — Glasgow Herald. Messrs. Methuen's List 15 0. Waldstein. JOHN RUSKIN: a Study. By Charles Waldstein, M.A., Fellow of King's College, Cambridge. With a Photogravure Portrait after Professor Herkomer. Post Svo. $s. ' A thoughtful, impartial, well-written criticism of Ruskin's teaching, intended to separate what the author regards as valuable and permanent from what is transient and erroneous in the great master's writing.'— Z>wf. A MAN OF MARK. Third Edition. ' ^ ^iu^D .^°P*^'^ books, " A Man of Mark " is the one which best compares with The Prisoner of Zenda." The two romances are unmistakably the work of the same writer, and he possesses a style of narrative peculiarly seductive, piquant, comprehensive, and— his Qytn.'— National Observer. THE CHRONICLES OF COUNT ANTONIO. Third Edition. • It is a perfectly enchanting story of love and chivalry, and pure romance. The outlawed Count is the most constant, desperate, and withal modest and tender of lovers, a peerless gentleman, an intrepid fighter, a very faithful friend, and a most magnanimous foe. In short, he is an altogether admirable, lovable, and delight- ful hero. There is not a word in the volume that can give offence to the most fastidious taste of man or woman, and there is not, either, a dull paragraph in it. The book is everywhere instinct with the most exhilarating spirit of adventure, and delicately perfumed with the sentiment of all heroic and honourable deeds of history and tomamc^.'— Guardian. S. Baring Gould's Novels Crown Svo. 6s. each. •To say that a book is by the author of " Mehalah" is to imply that it contains a story cast on strong lines, containing dramatic possibilities, vivid and sympathetic descriptions of Nature, and a wealth of ingenious mmg^ry.' —Speaker. •That whatever Mr. Baring Gould writes is well worth reading, is a conclusion that may be verjr generally accepted. His views of life are fresh and vigorous, his language pointed and characteristic, the incidents of which he makes use are striking and original, his characters are life-like, and though somewhat excep- tional people, are drawn and coloured with artistic force. Add to this that his descriptions of scenes and scenery are painted with the loving eyes and skilled hands of a master of his art, that he is always fresh and never dull, and under such conditions it is no wonder that readers have gained confidence both in his power of amusing and satisfying them, and that year by year his popularity widens.'— Court Circular. ARM I NELL : A Social Romance. Fourth Edition. URITH : A Story of Dartmoor. Fourth Edition. * The author is at his best.'— TVm^j. • He has nearly reached the high water-mark of " Mehalah." '—National Observer. t J w 24 Messrs. Methuen's List IN THE ROAR OF THE SEA. FtftA Edition, 'One of the best imagined and most enthralling stories the author has produced.' — Saturday Review. MRS. CURGENVEN OF CURGENVEN. Fourth Edition, ' A novel of vigorous humour and sustained power.' — Graphic. ' The swing of the narrative is splendid.' — Sussex Daily News CHEAP JACK ZITA. Third EdiHon, * A powerful drama of human passion.' — Westminster Gazeitt. * A story worthy the author.' — National Observer. THE QUEEN OF LOVE. Fourth Edition, 'The scenery is admirable, and the dramatic incidents are most striking.' — Glasgow Herald. ' Strong, interesting, and clever.' — Westminster Gazette. ' You cannot put it down until you have finished it.' — Punch. ' Can be heartily recommended to all who care for cleanly, energetic, and interesting fiction.' — Sussex Daily News. KITTY ALONE. Fourth Edition. ' A strong and original story, teeming with graphic description, stirring incident, and, above all, with vivid and enthralling human interest. — Daily Telegraph. ' Brisk, clever, keen, healthy, humorous, and interesting.' — National Observer. * Full of quaint and delightful studies of character.' — Bristol Mercury. NOlfeMI : A Romance of the Cave- Dwellers. Illustrated by R. Caton Woodville. Third Edition. ' " No^mi " is as excellent a tale of fighting and adventure as one may wish to meet. All the characters that interfere in this exciting tale are marked with properties of their own. The narrative also runs clear and sharp as the Loire itself.' — Pail Mall Gazette. * Mr. Baring Gould's powerful story is full of the strong lights and shadows and vivid colouring to which he has accustomed us.' — Standard. THE BROOM-SQUIRE. Illustrated by Frank Dadd. Third Edition, ' A strain of tenderness is woven through the web of his tragic tale, and its atmosphere is sweetened by the nobility and sweetness of the heroine's character.' — Daily News. ' A story of exceptional interest that seems to us to be better than anything he has written of late.' — Speaker. ' A powerful and striking story.'— Guardian. ' A powerful piece of work.' — Black and White. Gilbert Parker's Novels Crown Svo. 6s, each. PIERRE AND HIS PEOPLE. Third Edition, ' Stories happily conceived and finely executed. There is strength and genias in Mr. Parker s style.' — Daily Telegraph, Messrs. Methuen's List 25 MRS. FALCHION. Third Edition, ' A splendid study of character.' — Athenerum. * But little behind anything that has been done by any writer of our time.' — Pall Mall Gazette. * A very striking and admirable novel.' — St. James's Gazette. THE TRANSLATION OF A SAVAGE. • The plot is original and one difficult to work out ; but Mr. Parker has done it with great skill and delicacy. The reader who is not interested in this original, fresh, and well-told tale must be a dull person indeed.' — Daily Chronicle. * A strong and successful piece of workmanship. The portrait of Lali, strong, dignified, and pure, is exceptionally well drawn. ' — Manchester Guardian. Fourth Edition. 'The Trail of the THE TRAIL OF THE SWORD. ' Everybody with a soul for romance will thoroughly enjoy Sword." ' — St. James's Gazette. ' A rousing and dramatic tale. A book like this, in which swords flash, great sur- f>rises are undertaken, and daring deeds done, in which men and women live and ove in the old straightforward passionate way, is a joy inexpressible to the re- viewer, brain-weary of the domestic tragedies and psychological puzzles of every- day fiction ; and we cannot but believe that to the reader it will bring refreshment as welcome and as keen.' — Daily Chronicle. WHEN VALMOND CAME TO PONTIAC : The Story of a Lost Napoleon. Third Edition. * Here we find romance — real, breathing, living romance, but it runs flush with our own times, level with our own feelings. Not here can we complain of lack of inevitableness or homogeneity. The character of Valmond is drawn unerringly ; his career, brief as it is, is placed before us as convincingly as history itself. The book must be read, we may say re-read, for any one thoroughly to appreciate Mr. Parker's delicate touch and innate sympathy with humanity.'— Pa// Mall Gazette. 'The one work of genius which 1895 has as yet produced.'— iVirri' Age. AN ADVENTURER OF THE NORTH: The Last Adven- tures of * Pretty Pierre.' *The present book is full of fine and moving stories cf the great North, and it will add to Mr. Parker's already high reputation.'— G/rtj^^t and IVhite. ' One of the strongest stories of historical interest and adventure that we have read for many a day. . . . Through all Mr. Parker moves with an assured step, whilst in his treatment of his subject there is that happy blending of the poetical with the prosaic which has characterised all his writings. A notable and successful book.' — speaker. 'The story is very finely and dramatically told. ... In none of his books has his imaginative faculty appeared to such splendid purpose as here. Captain Moray, Alixe, Gabord, Vauban— above all, Doltaire— and, indeed, every person who takes part in the action of the story are clearly conceived and finely drawn and indivi- dualised. — Scotsman. ' An admirable romance. The glory of a romance is its plot, and this plot is crowded with fine sensations, which have no rest until the fall of the famous old city and the final restitution oi\o\e.'— Pall Mall Gazette. Conan Doyle. ROUND THE RED LAMP. By A. Con.\n Doyle, Author of *The White Company,' *The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes,' etc. Fourth Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 'The book is, indeed, composed of leaves from life, and is far and away the best view that has been vouchsafed us behind the scenes of the consulting-room. It is very superior to ** The Diary of a late Physician." '—Illustrated London News. Stanley Weyman. UNDER THE RED ROBE. By Stanley Weyman, Author of * A Gentleman of France.' With Twelve Illus- trations by R. Caton Woodville. Eighth Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. • A book of which we have read every word for the sheer pleasure of reading, and which we put down with a pang that we cannot forget it all and start again.'— Westminster Gazette. • Every one who reads books at all must read this thrilling romance, from the first page of which to the last the breathless reader is haled along. An inspiration of 'manliness and courage." — Daily Chronicle. 'A delightful tale of chivalry and adventure, vivid and dramatic, with a wholesome modesty and reverence for the highest.' — Globe. Mrs. Clifford. A FLASH OF SUMMER. By Mrs. W. K. Clifford, Author of * Aunt Anne,' etc. Second Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. • The story is a very sad and a very beautiful one, exquisitely told, and enriched with many subtle touches of wise and tender insight. It will, undoubtedly, add to its author's reputation— already high— in the ranks of novelists.'— JS>^a>{r^r. We must congratulate Mrs. Clifford upon a very successful and interesting story, told throughout with finish and a delicate sense of proportion, qualities which, indeed, have always distinguished the best work of this very able writer.'— Manchester Guardian. Emily Lawless. HURRISH. By the Honble. Emily Law- less, Author of * Maelcho,' etc. Ft/th Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. A reissue of Miss Lawless' most popular novel, uniform with ' Maelcho.' Emily Lawless. MAELCHO : a Sixteenth Century Romance. By the Honble. Emily Lawless, Author of 'Crania,' *Hurrish,' etc. Second Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. ' A really great hook.'— S/ectator. • There is no keener pleasure in life than the recognition of genius. Good work is commoner than it used to be, but the best is as rare as ever. All the more gladly, therefore, do we welcome in " Maelcho " a piece of work of the first order, which we do not hesitate to describe as one of the most remarkable literary achievements of this generation. Miss Lawless is possessed of the very essence of historical genius.'— Manchester Guardian. Messrs. Methuen's List 27 J. H. Findlater. THE GREEN GRAVES OF BALGOWRIE. By Jane H. Findlater. Third Edition. Cro^un Svo. 6s. 'A powerful and vivid story.' — Standard. ' A oeautiful story, sad and strange as truth itself.' — Vanity Fair. ' A work of remarkable interest and originality.' — National Observer. ' A really original novel.' — Journal o/ Education. ' A very charming and pathetic tale.' — Pall Mall Gazette. ' A singularly original, clever, and beautiful story.' — Guardian. * " The Green Graves of Balgowrie" reveals to us a new Scotch writer of undoubted faculty and reserve force.' — Spectator. ' An exquisite idyll, delicate, afi^cting, and beautiful.' — Black and White. ' Permeated with high and noble purpose. It is one ©f the most wholesome stories we have met with, and cannot fail to leave a deep and lasting impression.' — Ne^vsagent. E. F. Benson, DODO : A DETAIL OF THE DAY. By E. F. Benson. Sixteenth Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. ' A delightfully witty sketch of society.' — Spectator. * A perpetual feast of epigram and paradox.' — Speaker. * By a writer of quite exceptional ability.' — Atheuceum. * Brilliantly wr'iXXcn.'— World. E. F. Benson. THE RUBICON. By E. F. Benson, Author of * Dodo.' Fifth Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. * Well written, stimulating, unconventional, and, in a word, characteristic' — BirmingJiam Post. ' An exceptional achievement ; a notable advance on his previous \ioxV.'— National Observer. M. M. Dowie. GALLIA. By Mj^nie Muriel Dowie, Author of * A Girl in the Carpathians.' Third Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. * The style is generally admirable, the dialogue not seldom brilliant, the situations surprising in their freshness and originality, while the subsidiary as well as the principal characters live and move, and the story itself is readable from title-page to colophon.' — Saturday Review. * A very notable book ; a very sympathetically, at times delightfully written book. — Daily Graphic. Mrs. Oliphajit. SIR ROBERT'S FORTUNE. By Mrs. Oliphant. Crown Svo. 6s. * Full of her own peculiar charm of style and simple, subtle character-painting come her new gift, the delightful story before us. The scene mostly lies in the moors, and at the touch of the authoress a Scotch moor becomes a living thing, strong tender, beautiful, and changeful.' — Pall Mall Gazette. Mrs. Oliphant. THE TWO MARYS. By Mrs. Oliphant. Second Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. W.E.Norris. MATTHEW AUSTIN. By W. E. N orris, Author of * Mademoiselle de Mersac,' etc. Fourth Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. * "Matthew Austin" may safely be pronounced one of the most intellectually satis- factory and morally bracing novels of the current year.' — Daily Telegraph. W. E. Norris. HIS GRACE. By W. E. NORRis. Third Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. * Mr. Norris has drawn a really fine character in the Duke of Hurstboume, at once unconventional and very true to the conventionalities of life, weak and strong in a breath, capable of inane follies and heroic decisions, yet not so definitely por- trayed as to relieve a reader of the necessity of study.' — Athenceum. 28 Messrs. Methuen's List W. E. Norris. THE DESPOTIC LADY AND OTHERS. By W. E. Norris. Crown Svo. 6s. 'A budget of good fiction of which no one will tlrc'—Scofsman. A" "^"'"f^y entertaining volume— the sprightliest of holiday companions.'— Dai/y Telegraph *^ H. G. Wells. THE STOLEN BACILLUS, and other Stories. By H. G. Wells, Author of »The Time Machine.' Crown %vo. 6s. ♦ The ordinary reader of fiction may be glad to know that these stories are eminently readable from one cover to the other, but they are more than that ; they are the impressions of a very striking imagination, which, it would seem, has a great deal within Its reach. — Saturday Revieiv. Arthur Morrison. TALES OF MEAN STREETS. By Arthur Morrison. Fourth Edition. CroxcmSvo. 6s. • Told with consummate art and extraordinary detail. He tells a plain, unvarnished tale, and the very truth of it makes for beauty. In the true humanity of the book lies Its justification, the permanence of its interest, and its indubitable triumph.'— A tiitnceiitn. ' A great book. The author's method is amazingly effective, and produces a thrilling sense of reality. The writer lays upon us a master hand. The book is simply appalling and irresistible in its interest. It is humorous also ; without humour It would not make the mark it is certain to make.'— /r<>r/ Extension Journal ■m, Messrs. Methuen's List 33 A HISTORY OF ENGLISH POLITICAL ECONOMY. By L. L. Price, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxon. Second Edition. PROBLEMS OF POVERTY : An Inquiry into the Industrial Conditions of the Poor. By J. A. HoBSON, M.A. Third Edition, VICTORIAN POETS. By A. Sharp. THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. By J. E. Symes, M.A. PSYCHOLOGY. By F. S. Granger, M.A., Lecturer in Philo- sophy at University College, Nottingham. THE EVOLUTION OF PLANT LIFE : Lower Forms. By G. Massee, Kew Gardens. With Illustrations. AIR AND WATER. Professor V. B. Lewes, M.A. Illustrated, THE CHEMISTRY OF LIFE AND HEALTH. By C. W. KiMMiNS, M.A. Camb. Illustrated. THE MECHANICS OF DAILY LIFE. By V. P. Sells, M.A. Illustrated, ENGLISH SOCIAL REFORMERS. H. de B. Gibbins, M.A. ENGLISH TRADE AND FINANCE IN THE SEVEN- TEENTH CENTURY. By W. A. S. Hewins, B.A. THE CHEMISTRY OF FIRE. The Elementary Principles of Chemistry. By M. M. Pattison Muir, M.A. Illustrated. A TEXT-BOOK OF AGRICULTURAL BOTANY. ByM.C. Potter, M.A., F.L.S. Illustrated, ^s. 6d. THE VAULT OF HEAVEN. A Popular Introduction to Astronomy. By R. A. Gregory. With numerous Illustrations. METEOROLOGY. The Elements of Weather and Climate. By H. N. Dickson, F.R.S.E., F.R. Met. Soc. Illustrated. A MANUAL OF ELECTRICAL SCIENCE. By GEORGE J. BURCH, M.A. With numerous Illustrations. 3J. THE EARTH. An Introduction [to Physiography. By Evan Small, M.A. Illustrated, INSECT LIFE. By F. W. Theobald, M.A. Illustrated. ENGLISH POETRY FROM BLAKE TO BROWNING. By W. M. DixoN, M.A. ENGLISH LOCAL GOVERNMENT. By E. JENKS, M.A., Professor of Law at University College, Liverpool. > I « 2|6 34 Messrs. Methuen's List Social Questions of To-day Edited by H. de B. GIBBINS, M.A. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d, A series of volumes upon those topics of social, economic, and industrial interest that are at the present moment fore- most in the public mind. Each volume of the series is written by an author who is an acknowledged authority upon the subject with which he deals. The following Volumes of the Series are ready : — TRADE UNIONISM— NEW AND OLD. By G. Howell, Author of * The Conflicts of Capital and Labour. ' Second Edition. THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT TO-DAY. By G. J. HOLYOAKE, Author of *The History of Co-operation.' Second Edition. MUTUAL THRIFT. By Rev. J. Frome Wilkinson, M.A., Author of * The Friendly Society Movement. ' PROBLEMS OF POVERTY : An Inquiry into the Industrial Conditions of the Poor. By J. A. Hobson, M.A. Third Edition. THE COMMERCE OF NATIONS. By C. F. Bastable, M.A., Professor of Economics at Trinity College, Dublin. THE ALIEN INVASION. By W. H. WiLKiNS, B.A., Secretary to the Society for Preventing the Immigration of Destitute Aliens. THE RURAL EXODUS. By P. Anderson Graham. LAND NATIONALIZATION. By Harold Cox, B.A. A SHORTER WORKING DAY. By H. DE B. GiBBiNS and R. A. Hadfield, of the Ilecla Works, Sheffield. BACK TO THE LAND : An Inquiry into the Cure for Rural Depopulation. By H. E. Moore. TRUSTS, POOLS AND CORNERS : As affecting Commerce and Industry. By J- Stephen Jeans, M.R.I., F.S.S. THE FACTORY SYSTEM. By R. CooKE Taylor. THE STATE AND ITS CHILDREN. By Gertrude Tuckwell. WOMEN'S WORK. By Lady Dilke, Miss Bulley, and Miss Whitley. Messrs. Methuen's List 35 municipalities at work. The Municipal Policy of Six Great Towns, and its Influence on their Social Welfare. By Frederick Dolman. SOCIALISM AND MODERN THOUGHT. By M. Kauf- MANN. THE HOUSING OF THE WORKING CLASSES. By R. F. Bowmaker. MODERN CIVILISATION IN SOME OF ITS ECONOMIC ASPECTS. By W. Cunningham, D. D. , Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. I I Classical Translations Edited by H. F. FOX, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Brasenose College, Oxford. Messrs. Methuen are issuing a New Series of Translations from the Greek and Latin Classics. They have enlisted the services of some of the best Oxford and Cambridge Scholars, and it is their intention that the Series shall be distinguished by literary excellence as well as by scholarly accuracy. iESCHYLUS — Agamemnon, Choephoroe, Eumenides. Trans- lated by Lewis Campbell, LL.D., late Professor of Greek at Sl Andrews. 5^. CICERO— De Oratore I. Translated by E. N. P. MoOR, M.A., Assistant Master at Clifton. 3^. 6d. CICERO — Select Orations (Pro Milone, Pro Murena, Philippic IL, In Catilinam). Translated by H. E. D. Blakiston, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Trinity College, Oxford. $s. CICERO— De Natura Deorum. Translated by F. Brooks, M. A., late Scholar of Balliol College, Oxford. 3J. 6d. LUCIAN — Six Dialogues (Nigrinus, Icaro-Menippus, The Cock, The Ship, The Parasite, The Lover of Falsehood). Translated by S. T. Irwin, M.A., Assistant Master at Clifton; late Scholar of Exeter College, Oxford. 3J. 6d. SOPHOCLES— Electra and Ajax. Translated by E. D. A. MoRSHEAD, M.A., late Scholar of New College, Oxford ; Assistant Master at Winchester. 2s. 6d, TACITUS — Agricola and Germania. Translated by R. B. TowNSHEND, late Scholar of Trinity College, Cambridge. 2s. 6d. 36 Messrs. Methuen's List Educational Books CLASSICAL TACITI AGRICOLA. With Introduction, Notes, Map, etc. By R. F. Davis, M.A., Assistant Master at Weymouth College. Crown Svo. 2s, TACITI GERMANIA. By the same Editor. Crown Svo. 2s. HERODOTUS: EASY SELECTIONS. With Vocabulary. By A. C. LiDDELL, M.A., Assistant Master at Nottingham High School. Fcap. Svo, is, 6d. SELECTIONS FROM THE ODYSSEY. By E. D. Stonf, M.A., late Assistant Master at Eton. Fca^. Svo, is, 6d, PLAUTUS : THE CAPTIVI. Adapted for Lower Forms by J. H. Freese, M. a., late Fellow of St. John's, Cambridge, is, (hL DEMOSTHENES AGAINST CONON AND CALLICLES. Edited with Notes, and Vocabulary, by F. Darwin Swift, M.i\.. formerly Scholar of Queen's College, Oxford ; Assistant Master at Denstone College. Fcap, Svo, 2s, GERMAN A COMPANION GERMAN GRAMMAR. By H. de B. GiBBiNS, M.A., Assistant Master at Nottingham High School. Crown Svo. \s. 6d, GERMAN PASSAGES FOR UNSEEN TRANSLATION. By E. M*QuEEN Gray. Crown Svo, 2s, 6d. SCIENCE THE WORLD OF SCIENCE. Including Chemistry, Heat. Light, Sound, Magnetism, Electricity, Botany, Zoology, Physiology, Astronomy, and Geology. By R. Elliot Steel, M.A., F.CS. 147 Illustrations. Second Edition. Crown Svo, 2s. 6d. ' Mr. Steel's Manual is admirable in many ways. The book is well calculated to attract and retain the attention of the yonnz.' Saturday Review. ' If^^r- Steel is to be placed second to any for this quality of lucidity, it is only to Huxley himself; and to be named in the same breath with this master of the craft of teaching is to be accredited with the clearness of style and simplicity of arrangement that belong to thorough mastery of a SMh^tct:— Parents' Review. ELEMENTARY LIGHT. By R. E. Steel. With numerous Illustrations. Crown Svo. 4^. 6d. Messrs. Methuen's List ENGLISH 37 ENGLISH RECORDS. A Companion to the History of England. By H. E. Malden, M.A. Crown Svo. 31. 6d. A book which aims at concentrating information upon dates, genealo^', officials, constitutional documents, etc., which is usually found scattered in different volumes. THE ENGLISH CITIZEN : HIS RIGHTS AND DUTIES. By H. E. Malden, M.A. is. 6d» • The book goes over the same ground as is traversed in the school books on this subject written to satisfy the requirements of the Education code. It would serve admirably the purposes of a text-book, as it is wellj based in historical facts, and keeps quite clear of party m^itUrs.'— Scotsman. METHUEN'S COMMERCIAL SERIES. Edited by H. DE B. GIBBINS, M.A. BRITISH COMMERCE AND COLONIES FROM ELIZA- BETH TO VICTORIA. By H. de B. Gibbins, M.A., Author of * The Industrial History of England,' etc. etc. 2s, COMMERCIAL EXAMINATION PAPERS. By H. DE B. Gibbins, M.A. is, 6d. THE ECONOMICS OF COMMERCE. By H. de B. Gibbins, M.A. IS. 6d. A MANUAL ' OF FRENCH COMMERCIAL CORRE- SPONDENCE. By S. E. Bally, Modern Language Master at the Manchester Grammar School. 2s. A FRENCH COMMERCIAL READER. By S. E. Bally. 2S. COMMERCIAL GEOGRAPHY, with special reference to Trade Routes, New Markets, and Manufacturing Districts. By L. W. Lyde, M.A., of the Academy, Glasgow. 2s. A PRIMER OF BUSINESS. By S. JACKSON, M.A. is, 6d. COMMERCIAL ARITHMETIC. By F. G. Taylor, M.A. is, 6d. ♦ 38 Messrs. Methuen's List works by a, m. m. 8tedman, m.a, INITIA LATIN A : Easy Lessons on Elementary Accidence. Second Edition, Fcap, Svo. is. FIRST LATIN LESSONS. Fourth Edition, Crown Svo. 2s. FIRST LATIN READER. With Notes adapted to the Shorter^ Latin Primer and Vocabulary. Second Edition, Crown Svo. IS, 6d, EASY SELECTIONS FROM CAESAR. Part I. The Hel- vetian War. iSmo, is, EASY SELECTIONS FROM LIVY. Part I. The Kings of Rome. iSmo. is. 6d. EASY LATIN PASSAGES FOR UNSEEN TRANSLA- TION. Third Edition. Fcap. Svo. is. 6d. EXEMPLA LATINA. First Lessons in Latin Accidence. With Vocabulary. Crown Svo. is. EASY LATIN EXERCISES ON THE SYNTAX OF THE SHORTER AND REVISED LATIN PRIMER. With Vocabu- lary. Fourth Edition. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. Issued with the con- sent of Dr. Kennedy. THE LATIN COMPOUND SENTENCE : Rules and Exercises. Crown Svo. is. 6d, With Vocabulary. 2s, NOTANDA QUAEDAM : Miscellaneous Latin Exercises on Common Rules and Idioms. Second Edition, Fcap. Svo. is. 6d. With Vocabulary, 2s. LATIN VOCABULARIES FOR REPETITION : Arranged according to Subjects. Fourth Edition. Fcap. Svo. is. 6d. A VOCABULARY OF LATIN IDIOMS AND PHRASES. iSmo. is. STEPS TO GREEK. iSfno, is, EASY GREEK PASSAGES FOR UNSEEN TRANSLA- TION. Fcap, Svo, is, 6d, GREEK VOCABULARIES FOR REPETITION. Arranged accorchng to Subjects. Second Edition. Fcap. Svo, is, 6d. GREEK TESTAMENT SELECTIONS. For the use of Schools. Third Edition, With Introduction, Notes, and Vocabu- lary. Fcap, Svo. 2s. 6d. MESSRS. Methuen's List 39 STEPS TO FRENCH. iSim. Sd. FIRST FRENCH LESSONS. Crown Svo. is. EASY FRENCH PASSAGES FOR UNSEEN TRANSLA- TION. Second Edition. Fcap. Svo. is. 6d, EASY FRENCH EXERCISES ON ELEMENTARY SYNTAX. With Vocabulary. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. FRENCH VOCABULARIES FOR REPETITION : Arranged according to Subjects. Third Edition. Fcap. Svo. is. SCHOOL EXAMINATION SERIES, Edited by A. M. M. STEDMAN, M.A. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. FRENCH EXAMINATION PAPERS IN MISCELLANE- OUS GRAMMAR AND IDIOMS. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. Sixth Edition. A Key, issued to Tutors and Private Students only, to be had on application to the Publishers. Second Edition. Crown Svo. ds. tiet. LATIN EXAMINATION PAPERS IN MISCELLANEOUS GRAMMAR AND IDIOMS. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. Fourth Edition. Key issued as above. 6^. net. GREEK EXAMINATION PAPERS IN MISCELLANEOUS GRAMMAR AND IDIOMS. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. Third Edition. Key issued as above. 6s. net. GERMAN EXAMINATION PAPERS IN MISCELLANE- OUS GRAMMAR AND IDIOMS. By R. J. Morich, Man- chester. Third Edition. Key issued as above. 6s. net. HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY EXAMINATION PAPERS. By C. H. Spence, M.A., CHfton Coll. SCIENCE EXAMINATION PAPERS. ByR. E. Steel, M.A., F.C.S., Chief Natural Science Master, Bradford Grammar School. In two vols. Part i. Chemistry ; Part ii. Physics. GENERAL KNOWLEDGE EXAMINATION PAPERS. By A. M. M. Stedman, M.A. Second Edition. Key issued as above. 7^'. net. Printed by T. and A. Constable, Printers to Her Majesty at the Edinburgh Universitj' Press »