UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 SCHOOL OF LAW 
 LIBRARY
 
 ^iy 
 
 
 
 n ^mmmmtmm. *?• / 
 
 in 
 
 „>o \ § V c y\l 
 
 Kg^ 
 
 o d \t 
 
 •>
 
 SUMMARY VIEW 
 
 OF THE 
 
 . L A W S 
 
 RELATING TO 
 
 SUBSCRIPTIONS,^. 
 
 WITH 
 
 REMARKS, 
 
 HUMBLY OFFERED 
 
 to the CONSIDERATION of the 
 
 BRITISH PARLIAMENT. 
 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRIKTED IN THE YEAR M DCC LXXfc
 
 Sju, £37 
 nil 
 
 V 
 
 -/£-£
 
 in A 
 
 i 
 
 i SUMMARY VIEW 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Laws relating to Subscriptions, &c. 
 
 with REMARKS, 
 
 Humbly offered to the Confideration of the 
 British Parliament. 
 
 [A] TNtheYear i ^53,werepublimedbythe 
 J_ King's Majefty's authority, "Articles 
 " agreed upon by the Bifhops andother learn - 
 " edand godly men in the laft Convocation 
 " at London, in the year of our Lord 1552, 
 " to root out difcord of opinions, and efta- 
 " blifh the agreement of true religion." 
 Bifliop Sparrow's Collection of Articles, &c. 
 
 Remark. — It is however certain, that thefe 
 Articles were not agreed upon in Convocation. 
 Archbifhop Cr owner's account of the matter 
 was this. " I was ignorant of the fetting to of 
 ** that title, and as foon as I had knowledge 
 •« thereof, I did not like it ; and when I com- 
 c< plained thereof to the Council, it was an- 
 " fwered by them, That the Book was fo en- 
 " titled, becaufe it was fet forth in the time of 
 " the Convocation." Burnet's Hift. Reform. 
 Vol. III. p. 210, 211. And Fox's Martyrolo- 
 
 gy. Bifhop Burnet fays, " It feemed to be a 
 
 u great want, that this" [the publication of thefe 
 A 2 Articles]
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 Articles] " had been fo long delayed, as the 
 tc old Doctrine had ftill the legal authority of 
 " its fide." What legal authority the old Doc- 
 trine had, except in the decifions of foreign 
 Canons which were received in this Kingdom 
 with great refervation of municipal Rights, &c. 
 is not clear. The danger of dogmatizing was 
 not unknown in thofe days, and it would'' have 
 anfwered the end of the new Eftabiifhment juit 
 as well to have enjoined Subfcription to the 
 Article cited below in the Remark upon D 
 only. 
 
 [B] A Mandate bearing date June 19, in 
 the feventh year of the King's reign [1553] 
 was ifTued, addreffed to the Officers of the 
 Archbifhop of Canterbury [Cranmer] (refer- 
 ring to a previous Mandate addreffed to the 
 Archbifhop himfelf, and giving him autho- 
 rity to expound, publifh, denounce, and 
 fignify the faid Articles to the King's clergy 
 and people within his jurifdiclion) to fum- 
 rcon or peremptorily admonifh all and fin* 
 gular Rectors, Vicars, Prtfbyters, Stipendia- 
 ries, Curates, Rural Deans, Minillers, M af- 
 ters of Grammar Schools, public and pri- 
 vate Preachers of the Word of God, Lec- 
 turers and all who exercifed any Eccleiiaflical 
 function of whatever denomination, includ- 
 ing even Churchwardens, to appear at Lam- 
 beth, on Friday the 23d day of June:, be- 
 tween the hours cf feveri and nine, to do 
 
 and
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 and receive what mav be farther agreeable 
 to reafbn, and becometh their duty to the 
 royal dignity. Burnet's Hilt. Reform, vol. 
 III. Collection, p. 202, 
 
 Rem. - This Mandate was iflfued purfuant to a 
 Letter of the Archbifhop's to the King and Coun- 
 cil, " defiring that all Bilhops might have au- 
 thority from the King to caufe all Preachers, 
 Archdeacons, Deans, Prebendaries, Parfons, 
 Vicars, Curapes, with all their Clergy, to fub- 
 fcribe the faid Articles."— f he reafon given by 
 the Archbifhop for fuch his defire was, " that 
 U he trufted fuch a Concorde and quietnefs in 
 " Religion ihould fiiortly follow thereof, as elle 
 " was not to be looked for of many Years." 
 Probably the good man found this expedient did 
 not anfwer his expectation. For tho 5 his Pow- 
 ers by this Mandate were very full, we find 
 him declaring at his Examination before JVeJton y 
 that he compelled no man to fubfcribe. A Declara- 
 tion that fufficiently fhews, he had met with 
 opposition to this meafure of Peace and Quiet- 
 nefs. And moft probably it was not only the 
 gentlenefs of his own difpofition, but the con- 
 lcioufneis of the incongruity of fuch compulfi- 
 on, with the original principles of the Proteftant 
 Reformation, which occasioned his Forbearance. 
 This is one inttance of thofe difficulties the firft 
 Reformers found in accommodating the new 
 Eftablifhment to the temper of the times con- 
 fidently with their own Profeffions of being 
 determined in matters of Faith and Doctrine, by 
 the Scriptures only. It is hardly neceffary to 
 
 .obferve,
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 obferve, that fuch Expedients are not only ufe- 
 lefs now, but highly difparaging to the improve- 
 ments we pretend to in the prefent times. 
 
 [C] A particular Mandate to the Bi/hop 
 of Norwich, bearing date June 9, directing 
 him to caufe the faid Articles to be fub- 
 fcribed by every manner of perfon prefent- 
 ed unto him to be admitted to any Eccle- 
 fkftical Order, Miniftry, Office, or Cure 
 within his Diocefe, and if any man in that 
 cafe mall refufe to confent to any of the 
 faid Articles, and to fubfcribe the fame, 
 then his Majeftv willeth and commandeth 
 him the faid Biihop, that neither he, nor 
 any for him, or by his procurement in any 
 wife, (hall admit fuch recufant or allow him 
 as fufficient or meet to take any Order, Mi- 
 niftry, or Ecclefiaftical Cure. For which 
 his fo doing, his Majefty promiies to dif- 
 charge the Bimop from all manner of pe- 
 nalties or dangers of actions, fuits, or pleas 
 of Premimire, ^uare impedit, or fuch like. 
 Burnet , Ibid. p. 203, 
 
 Rem. — Here was a flretch of the Royal Pre- 
 rogative which the end propofed would hardly 
 jutlify. It was depriving the lubjecTt of the be- 
 nefit of the Law by an arbitrary Non objlante. 
 A writ of Quare imp edit is a writ of Rights 
 and, without the Royal interpofition, would 
 have compelled the Bifhop to give the Clerk 
 
 inllitution,
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 institution, without fome better Reafon for de- 
 nying it, than that the Clerk refufed to fub- 
 fcribe thefe Articles. 
 
 [D] A Mandatorial letter from the Bifhop 
 of Ely (Goodricke) Chancellor, and three 
 more appointed vilitors of the Univerfitv of 
 Cambridge y dated 'June t, 1553, addreiTed 
 to Dr. Sands (probably Vicechancellor) and 
 to the Regents and Non- Regents of the faid 
 Univerfity, enjoining an oath to be taken 
 and fubferibed by every Candidate for' a de- 
 gree in Divinity, or in Arts, containing, 
 among others, the following engagement, 
 Deinde me Articulos de quibus in Sinodo Lcn- 
 dinenfi Anno Domini 1553.^ tollendam opini- 
 onum dilfenjionem, et confenfum vera? Religionis 
 firmandum inter Epifcopos et alios eruditos vi- 
 ros convener at et Regia Author it ate in lucem 
 editos, pro veris et certis habiturum, et omni 
 in loco tanquam confenti elites cum verba Dei 
 defenfurum, et contrarios Articulos in Scholis 
 et Pulpitis vel refpondendo vel co?icio?2ando op-* 
 pugnaturum. Burnet, ubi fupra, p. 205. 
 
 Rem. — In the former part of this oath the 
 Candidate fwore, fe veram Chrijli religionem om^ 
 ni ammo complexurum y Scripture aathoritatem 
 Hominum judicio prapofiturum, regulam vita et 
 fummam fidei ex verbo Dei petiturum. Cetera 
 qua ex verbo Dei non probantur, pro humanis et 
 non necejfariis habiturum. It was utterly incon- 
 
 fiftent
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 ftftjent v.idi the man's profeffing thefe things, tc* 
 aflfer^ that he would efteem thefe Articles for 
 true and certain, and to defend them as fuck 
 againft all mankind, upon the mere prefump- 
 tion that they were agreeable to the word of 
 God, 
 
 [E] Upon Queen Elizabeth's aCceffion, 
 an Ait of Uniformity palled, wherein is no 
 mention made of Subfcription either to the 
 Liturgy eitablimed by that Act or to any 
 Articles of Religion, nor in the vifitatorial 
 Articles of Inquiry of the fame year, is 
 there any one intimating that fuch Sub- 
 fcription was required. See Sparrow's Col- 
 lection. 
 
 Rem, — It is remarkable that by this Statute,; 
 the Clergyman offending againft it, is to be 
 lawfully convicted according to the Laws of 
 this Realm, by verdict of twelve men, or by 
 his own confeffion; or by the notorious evidence 
 of the fact •, and was not left folely to the 
 Bifhop or Ordinary either for his trial or his pu- 
 niihment •, and as the words " and be thereof 
 44 in form aforelaid lawfully convict," or words 
 equivalent, run through the whole Act, it was' 
 mamfeitly the intention of the Parliament to- 
 put the inferior Clergy on the footing of the 
 reft of the free Subjects of the Realm, and not 
 leave them to the arbitrary cenfures of their re- 
 spective Ordinaries, as thefe were too apt to en- 
 croach upon the civil powers, by exercifing 
 
 their 
 
 4?
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 their jurifdiction, where the laws of the Realm 
 ihould have reitrained them, complaints of 
 which were frequently made in Parliament, dur- 
 ing this reign, and particularly with refpect 
 to Sublcription, as will be i'cen by and by. 
 N. B. There is one inllance of a trial by Jury 
 upon this Statute, before Lord Chief Jultice 
 Catlin, Biihop Sandys^ &c. preferved in a Book, 
 called Part of a Regifter, &c. p. 105. The Cul- 
 prit was one Robert Johnfon, Preacher at Nor- 
 thampton. He was indicted for administering 
 the wine at the Communion without the words 
 of Confecration, for marrying without the Ring, 
 and baptizing without making the Sign of the 
 Crofs. He was convicted of the nrit offence, 
 fentenced to fuffer a year's imprifonment, and 
 died in the Gate-houfe before the end of the 
 year, viz. 1573. In the courfe of the Trial, 
 and from the circumftances of Johnfon's De- 
 fence, fome points of Doctrine were difcufTed, 
 and John/on was faid to defend a horrible Here- 
 fy, which was probably the chief inducement 
 with the Jury to find him Guilty. For the 
 Fact, as Johnfon fhewed, was not a gain ft the 
 Order of the Book. Sublcription was hotly 
 urged this year. But Johnfon's notion of the 
 words of Inltitution, was not provided againit 
 in the Articles. 
 
 [F] In the year 1562. King Edward's 
 Articles were revifed, and altered, fome 
 things added, others taken away, and the 
 number reduced to thirty-nine. At the 
 end of which, is the following Ratifica- 
 
 B ticn.
 
 ( io ) 
 
 tion. " This Book of Articles before re- 
 hearfed, is again approved, and allowed to 
 be holden and executed within the realm, 
 by the afTent and confent of our Sove- 
 reign Lady Elizabeth, by the Grace of God 
 of England, France and Ireland Queen, De- 
 fender of the Faith, &c. Which Articles 
 were deliberately read, and confirmed again 
 by the Subfcription of the hands of the 
 Archbifhop and Bifhops of the upper 
 Houfe, and by the Subfcription of the 
 whole Clergy of the nether Houfe in their 
 Convocation in the year of our Lord 1571 /' 
 
 Rem. — The Latin Articles of 1562, differ 
 very much from thofe [Latin] Articles pub- 
 limed by Convocation in 157 1. It is probable 
 there was the like difference between the Englifh 
 copies, nor is it poflible now to know which of 
 them is authentic. The Bilhops and Clergy in 
 1562, fubfcribed Archbifhop Parker's Latin co- 
 py, and it is likely they fubfcribed a Latin co- 
 py revifed, in the Convocation of 157 1 . But the 
 Act of Parliament of that year refers to an Eng- 
 lifh book, and how that copy agreed with that 
 now in ufe, is totally unknown. It may be 
 faid however with great truth, that, on account 
 of the abovementioned differences, the articles 
 now fubfcribed, are not the Articles agreed 
 upon in the Convocation of 1562. There is 
 likewife a fallacy in the Ratification as it ftands 
 at prefent, with refpecl to the Queen's content, 
 as if both books of Articles were precifely the 
 
 fame,
 
 ( II ) 
 
 fame, and equally approved by her Majefty ; 
 whereas the words fubjoined to the Latin Arti- 
 cles of if, 62, fo far as the Queen's authority is 
 concerned, are thefe, Quibus omnibus Artuulis 
 ferenijjima Princeps Elizabeth, Dei gratia Anglice y 
 Fram i<g et Hibernix Regina, fidei Defenfor, &c. 
 per feipfam diligeuter prius leclis et examinatis, fuum 
 ajjenfum piwbuit', which her Majefty might do 
 without: impofing Subfcription to them on her 
 iubjects. 
 
 [G] In the year J 564 were publimed, 
 Advertifements partly for due order in the 
 public adminiftration of the Sacraments, 
 and partly for the Apparel of all perfons 
 Eccleliaftical. The Title of the laft fec- 
 tion is, * J Proteftations to be made, pro^ 
 u mifed and fubfcribed by them that mail 
 " hereafter be admitted to any office, room 
 " or cure in any church, or other place 
 ' c EcclefiafticaL" Under this Title are the 
 following Proteftations; " I mall not preach 
 or publicly interpret, but only read what 
 is appointed by public authority, without 
 fpecial licence of the Bimop under his 
 Seal. I do alfo faithfully promife in my 
 perfon — to obferve, keep and maintain fuch 
 order and uniformity in all external Policy, 
 Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, as by 
 the Laws, good Ufages and Orders, are al- 
 ready well provided and efhbliihed." Spar* 
 y ?w's Collection. 
 
 B 2 Rem.—-
 
 ( 12 ) 
 
 Rem.- — What is here provided againft, by 
 this Proteftation and Subfcription, was in a 
 great meafure fecured by the A£t of Uniformi- 
 ty, fave in the Article of preaching and inter- 
 preting, concerning which there feems to have 
 been no Law or Ordinance in being at that 
 time, except the Queen's Injunctions of 1559 ; 
 which were not underftood then to have the 
 force, or to make a part of the Laws of this 
 Realm. Thefe advertifements feem to have been 
 calculated by Archbimop Parker to take the 
 Clergy intirely into the hands of the Bifhops. 
 What oppofition thefe Advertifements met with 
 in the Queen's Council and elfewhere, and how 
 diftafteful they were to many confiderable men 
 in different departments, may be fcen in Slrype's 
 Life of Archbimop Parker, Book 2. chap. xx. 
 
 [H] In the year 1571, An Adl of Par- 
 liament pafTed injoyning Subfcription in 
 thefe words ; " Every perfon under the de- 
 gree of a Bifhop which doth or fhall pre-* 
 tend to be a Priefl or Minifter of God's 
 Holy Word and Sacraments, by reafon of 
 any other form of inftitution, confecration 
 or ordering, than the form fet forth by 
 Parliament in the time of the late King 
 of moft worthy memory, King Edward the 
 fixth, or now ufed in the reign of our 
 moft gracious Sovereign Lady, before the 
 feaft of the Nativity of Chrijl next fol- 
 lowing, mall in the prefence of the Bifhop 
 
 or
 
 ( 13 ) 
 
 or the Guardian of the Spiritualities of 
 ibme one Diocefe, where he hath or (hall 
 have EccleliafHcal living, declare his af- 
 fent, and fubfcribe to all the -Articles of 
 Religion, which only concern the Confef- 
 iion of the true ChrifHan Faith, and the 
 Doctrine of the Sacraments, comprifed in 
 a Book imprinted, intitled, Articles where- 
 upon it was agreed, &c. and mall bring 
 from fuch Bimop or Guardian of Spiri- 
 tualities in writing, under his Seal au- 
 thentic, a Teftimonial of fuch his A/Tent 
 and Subfcription, and openly on fome Sun- 
 day in the time of the public fervice afore- 
 noon in every Church, where, by reafon 
 of any Eccleliaftical living he ought to 
 attend, read both the faid Teftimonial and 
 the faid Articles, upon pain that every fuch 
 perfon, which mall not before the faid 
 feafr, do as is above appointed, mail be 
 ipfo faofo deprived, and all his Ecclefiafti- 
 cal promotions mall be void, as if he then 
 were naturally dead." Statutes 13 Eliz. 
 c. 12. 
 
 Rem. — The noble fland made by the Houfe 
 of Commons in the reign of Queen Elizabeth 
 on divers occafions againft Ecclefiaftical en- 
 croachments, and in favour of Religious liber- 
 ty, plainly fliews, that the limiting the Sub- 
 scription of the Clergy to fuch Articles . <£ as 
 only concern the Confeffion of the true Chriflian 
 B 3 faith,
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 faith, and the doctrine of the Sacraments," in 
 this Aft, was no idle provifion, or words with- 
 out meaning. Much has been faid concerning 
 the uncertainty, what Articles were not to be 
 fubfcribed under 'this reftriction, and an argu- 
 ment has been drawn from thence for an unlimit- 
 ed Subfcription. It appears however from the 
 Converfarion between Archbiihop Parker and 
 Mr. Peter IVentworth in 1571, that the Articles 
 for the Homilies, Confecrating of Bifnops and 
 fuch like, were put out of the book, and were 
 doubtlefs flruck out in the copy annexed to the 
 Bill. And as that copy is now irrecoverable, 
 and as it hath been faid, feparated by fome un- 
 fair practice from the Act which refers to it. 
 the Clergy muft be left to their own judgement, 
 which of the Articles are or are not excepted in 
 the Statute. Some learned and worthy perfons 
 have thought that Subfcription to the 6th and 
 25th Articles is fufficient to fatisfy the intention 
 of the Legislature, the rather as the article 
 which concerns the Homilies was certainly in- 
 tended to be left out ; and therefore as moil of 
 the doctrinal articles are but abridgements of 
 what the Homilies treat of at more length, the 
 Houfe of Commons had no more time to exa- 
 mine thofe Articles how they agreed with the 
 word of God, than they had to examine the 
 Homilies., as both muft have been examined to- 
 gether. It is only neceffary to obferve farther^ 
 that whatever Articles were enjoined by this Act 
 to be fubfcribed, the fame and no other were to 
 be read and aliened to, as prescribed by the 
 
 fubfequen,t
 
 ( H ) 
 
 fubfequent Sections of this Statute. See D'czves's 
 Journal, p. 239. 
 
 [I] In the fame year (1571.) the Bi- 
 Ihops put forth a Collection, intituled, Li- 
 ber quorundam Canonum Difciplince Ecclefic? 
 Anglic ame , Anno 1 571. in which, under the 
 Title de Epifcopis, it is ordained, that per- 
 fons approved for public preachers, fhould 
 have their Licences renewed, ita tamen ut 
 prius fubfcribant articulis chrijliance reli- 
 giotjis publice in Synodo approbatis, fidemque 
 dent fe velle tueri et defender e doffirinam earn 
 quce in Hits continetur ut confentientiffimam 
 veritati verbi divini. And under the Title 
 Concionatores, there is the following injunc- 
 tion. Et quoniam articuli illi religionis chri- 
 jliance in quos confenfwn eft ab Epifcopis in 
 legitima et fancla Jynodo, jujfu et autho- 
 ritate ferenijfimce principis Elizabeths con- 
 vocata et celeb rat a' baud dubie col/ecJi funt 
 ex facris Uteris ceteris et novi 1'ejtamenti, et 
 rum ctflejii doBrind qua in 'illis continetur , 
 per omnia congruunt; quoniam etiam liber 
 publicarum prccum, et liber de inaugura- 
 tion archiepifcoporum, epi/coporum, prefbyte- 
 rorum et diaco?ioru t n i nihil continent ab ilia 
 ipfa doolrina alienum, quicunque mittentur ad 
 docendum populum, illorum articulorum, au+ 
 thoritatem et fidem, non tantum concionibus 
 Jills, fed etiam fubfcriptione confrmabunt. Qui 
 
 B 4 fecus
 
 ( i6 ) 
 
 ft'cus fecerit, et contrarid doblrina popidum 
 turbaverit , excommunicabit ur. S p ar ro w ' s 
 Collection. 
 
 Rem. — The intention of thefe Injunctions 
 for Subfcription to the Articles, was to fupply, 
 what the Biihops thought the Parliament had 
 left fhort, namely, to require a Subfcription to 
 all the Articles, as appears by their making the 
 Subfcriber aiTert their agreement with the word 
 of God, and particularly mentioning the Book 
 of Confecrating of Bifhops, &c. It is however 
 certain, that the Queen never gave her Sanction 
 to thefe Canons, and Grip da I then Archbifhop of 
 York " doubted whether they had vigorem legis" 
 [which out of all doubt they had not] " and 
 '? thought the Queen's verbal alien t would not 
 " ferve them, if they mould be impleaded in 
 cc a Cafe of Premunire," in which he was very 
 much in the right. 
 
 [K] In the year 15S4. the Biiliops and 
 Clergy of the Province of Canterbury ai- 
 fembled in Convocation, put forth a Col- 
 lection intituled, Articuli pro Clero, in 
 which it was injoyned, that no Biihop 
 fhould thereafter admit any perfon to Holy 
 Orders, except be was of his own Diocefe, 
 f-zc. vet fa It em, nip rat ion cm jidei Jhcr juxta 
 articuhs. illos Religioiris in Synodo Epifcoporum 
 cf clcri appro bat os latino fermone redderc pofjit, 
 adeo ut facramm litcrarum tcJli?nonia quibm 
 
 eofundem
 
 ( '7 ) 
 
 eorundem Articuhrum Veritas innititur red" 
 tare etiam valeat. Sparrow's Colle&ion. 
 
 Rem. — Archbiihop Whitgift was now pro- 
 moted to Canterbury. His predeceflbr Grindal 
 had complained greatly of the ignorance of the 
 Clergy, and had ufed his utmoft endeavours to 
 fupply the Church with abler men ; but gene- 
 rally without effect. By this time, it is likely, 
 the Bifhops began to fee the impropriety of re- 
 quiring Subicription of poor Curates and Can- 
 didates for Orders to a fet of Articles of which 
 they knew fo little \ and to obviate any reproach 
 that might arife from this practice, enjoined the 
 examination mentioned in thefe Canons. And 
 had they ftuck to this expedient, it may eafily 
 be imagined they muft not have ordained a 
 Tithe of the Candidates who afpired to the 
 Friefthood. Perhaps very few at this day 
 would undertake to recite the testimonies of 
 Holy writ, on which the truth of thefe Arti- 
 cles depends. The Spirited Commons, how- 
 ever, became fenfible of this arbitrary impofiti- 
 on, and in the Parliament of 1585 petitioned 
 the Houfe of Lords, among other matters re- 
 lating to the Church, " That for the encourage- 
 " ment of many to enter into the Minifhy 
 " which are kept back by fome conditions of 
 " Oaths and Subfcriptions whereof they make 
 f\ fcruple, it may be confidered, whether this 
 f c favour may be fhewed them, that hereafter 
 f* no Oath or Subfcription be tendered to any 
 e i that is to enter into the Miniftry, or to any 
 '* Benefice with Cure, or to any place of preach- 
 
 ing,
 
 ( 18 ) 
 
 " ihg, but fuch only as be exprefly prefcribed 
 " by the Statutes of this Realm •, lave only that 
 " it fhall be lawful for every Ordinary to try 
 tc any Minifters prefented to any Benefice 
 * s within his Diocefe by his Oath, whether he 
 < c is to enter corruptly or ihcorruptly into the 
 " fame." D y ewes'* Journal, p. 358. It is hum- 
 bly prefnmed, that the Anfwer of the Arch- 
 bifhop of York to this reafonable Petition, is far 
 from being fatisfactory upon Proteftant princi- 
 ples. 
 
 [L] In the year 1 ^97 were put forth, 
 Capitida five Conjiitutiones Ecckfiajiicce, by 
 the Archbifhop, Bifhops, and Clergy of the 
 Province of Canterbury affembled in Con- 
 vocation, faid in the Title-page to be con- 
 firmed under the Great Seal of England* 
 In this colle6tion, the requifite qualifica- 
 tion of Minifters, fo far as relates to the 
 Articles, is prefcribed in the fame words. 
 Sparrow's Collection. 
 
 Rem.— By this time Archbifhop Whitgift had 
 fo far eftablilhed his power that all oppofition 
 w his fyftem of Difcipline became frnitlefs even 
 in Parliament. Sirype relates that, " a great 
 t£ heap of Grievances in the Church were thrown 
 *l into the Parliament [of 1597] by Bills put in 
 " by divers perfons •, but were not read, by 
 " means, no doubt, of fome higher influence.'* 
 Among others, cc A grievance no way inferior 
 " to the former the ungodly ufe of the Statute 
 
 " of
 
 ( 19 ) 
 
 ** of 1 3 Eliz. concerning Faith and Sacraments, 
 i' by which men are forced to Subfcription, 
 " and forced to accufe themfelves," i. e. by de- 
 claring their difient from fuch Articles as did not 
 concern Faith and Sacraments. N. B. Thefe 
 Canons were confirmed under the Great Seal, 
 and they feem chiefly to aim at reforming fome 
 abufes in the Eccleliaftical courts ; by way, one 
 may fuppoie, of precluding enquiries into fuch 
 matters, in Parliament. Strype's Life of Whit- 
 gift, p. 509. 
 
 [M] In the year 1603, the Convocation 
 compofed the Book of Canons now in ufe, 
 the thirty-fixth of which injoyns Subfcrip- 
 tion, 1. To the King's Supremacy. 2. To 
 the Book of Common Prayer, as containing 
 in it nothing contrary to the word of God. 
 ^. To the thirty-nine Articles, acknow- 
 ledging all and every the faid Articles to be 
 agreeable to the word of God. Which 
 Subfcription is to be made in this form of 
 words. s f I A T . N. do willingly and ex 
 animo fubferibe to thefe three Articles above- 
 mentioned, and to all that are contained in 
 them." The Royal afTent to thefe Canons 
 is attefted under the GreatSeal oiEnzland** 
 
 ^' 
 
 Rem. — It is queflionable how far thefe Canons 
 are binding. Some great authorities fay, they have 
 no force with refped to the Laity, and that they 
 bind the Clergy only by virtue of their Oath of 
 
 * Sse the Grace annexed. 
 
 Canonical
 
 ( 2° ) 
 
 Canonical obedience, which however is limited 
 to things lawful and honejl, and what is lawful 
 and honefi in Canonical commands or injunctions 
 cannot in equity be determined before the Perfon 
 againft whom the crime of difobedience is com- 
 mitted. It is againft the principles of juftice, 
 and the genius of the Britifh conftitution, that 
 the fame man fhould be both judge and party. 
 Prohibitions from the temporal Courts lye 
 againft the Courts ecclefiaftical, in cafes which 
 concern the Clergy as well as the laity. Why 
 fhould not the cafe of this Canonical Subfcrip- 
 tion (as- the temporalities of beneficed Clerks are 
 tiow made to depend upon a compliance with 
 it) be. fubje<5t to the verdict of twelve men, as 
 other cafes of lefs importance are made to be, 
 by the Act i. Eliz. cap. 2 ? Very many of thefe 
 Canons are totally fallen into difufe, on account 
 of the impracticability of carrying them into 
 execution. Others, which might be executed, 
 are wholly neglected, poffibly becaufe the exe- 
 cution of them might fet the exercife of Cano- 
 nical diicipline in fo many trifling matters, in 
 too odious a light. But can any thing be more 
 odious than to compel a learned and Proteftant 
 clergy to fubfcribe implicitly to all thefe anti- 
 quated propofitions, on the pain of being ex- 
 cluded from the benefit of any temporal emo- 
 lument in the Church, where they might be of 
 the greateft ufe to the people ? 
 
 [N] In the year 16 13. A Grace was 
 parted by the Univerfity of Cambridge, in. 
 confequence of Letters from King James I. 
 
 pre-
 
 ( 21 ) 
 
 prescribing Subfcription to the three Articles 
 in the 36th Canon to the Candidates for the 
 Degree of Batchelor of Divinity> and of 
 Doctor in each faculty *. 
 
 [O] In the year 161 6, the King {James 
 I.)*fent directions to Dr. "John Hill, then 
 Vice Chancellor, and the Heads of Houfes 
 in the Univerlity of Cambridge, fignifying 
 his pleafure that he would have all who 
 take any degree in the Schools, to fub- 
 fcribe to thefe Articles. 
 
 Rem. — Remarks on thefe Royal Directions, 
 will be found under the Letter [S]. 
 
 [P] In the year 1628 King Charles I. 
 caufed the 39 Articles to be republished, 
 prefixing thereto a Declaration, prohibiting 
 the lean: difference from the faid Articles, 
 and configning thofe who mould affix any 
 new fenfe to any Article to the Church's 
 cenfure in his Majefty's Commiffion Eccle- 
 fiaftical, declaring that his Majefly would 
 fee due execution done upon them. 
 
 Rem. — Nothing can be more inconfiftent than 
 to continue this Declaration at the head of the 39 
 Articles, while every Subfcriber is, by Canon 36, 
 confined to a particular invariable form of 
 words, in expreffing his affent and confent to 
 
 * See the Grace annexed. 
 
 them ; 
 
 s
 
 ( 22 ) 
 
 them-, nor can any judgment be made, whefe- 
 ah article is ambiguoufly expreffed, which of th<? 
 fenfes given to it by different interpreters, may 
 be called drawing it afide from the plain and full 
 meaning thereof: Nor is thepunilhmcnt threatened, 
 for offences againfl this declaration, now poffible 
 to be executed, as, thanks be to God and a virtu- 
 ous Legiflature, the Commiffion ecclefiafticah to 
 which the Offender is configned for his cenfure, 
 is no longer in being. 
 
 [Q^ | In the year 1640 were framed by 
 the Archbiihops* Bifhops, and Clergy in 
 Convocation, Constitutions and Canons 
 Ecclefiaftical, in the fixth of which an Oath 
 is injoyned to be taken by all Archbifhops 
 and Bifhops and all other Priefts arid Dea- 
 cons, all Mailers of Arts (the Sons of 
 Noblemen only excepted) all Batchelors 
 and Doctors in Divinity, Law or Phyfic, 
 all that are licenfed to praclife Phyfic, all 
 Regiflers, Actuaries and Proctors, all School - 
 matters, all fuch as being Natives or natu- 
 ralized, do come to be incorporated into 
 the Univerfities here, having taken a degree 
 in any foreign Univerlity, " that they ap- 
 prove the Doctrine and Discipline or Go- 
 vernment eftablifhed in the Church of Engr 
 land, as containing all things neceifary to 
 Salvation." Sparrow's Collection. 
 
 Rem. — For the objections made to this arbi- 
 trary
 
 ( 23 ) 
 
 trary oath, See Fuller*?, Church Hift. xi. Book, p. 
 170, 171. And Heylin's Life of Arch bp. Laud, 
 P- 443- 
 
 [R] December 16 : 1640. Upon a de- 
 bate in the Houfe of Commons concerning 
 thefe Canons, it was refolved, nemine Con- 
 tradicente, " that the Clergy of England 
 convened in a Convocation or Synod, or 
 otherwife, have no power to make any Con- 
 ftitutions, Canons or Act whatfoever in 
 matter of Doctrine, Difcipline or other- 
 wife, to bind the Clergy or Laity of the 
 land, without common confent of Parlia- 
 ment." And at the fame time it was un- 
 animoufly refolved " that thefe particular 
 Canons do contain in them matter contrary 
 to the King's Prerogative, the fundamental 
 Laws and Statutes of the Realm, to the 
 Rights of Parliament, to the property and 
 liberty of the Subjects, and matters tend- 
 ing to fedition, and of dangerous confe- 
 quence." Rufiwortb, Vol. IV. p. 112. 
 
 Rein. — This Refohuion mofl certainly repro- 
 bated the Canons of 1603, as well as thofe of 
 1640. The former, any more than the latter, 
 never had any common confent of Parliament. 
 It is in vain to pretend that this vote was paiTed 
 in times of irregularity. The forms of Parliament 
 were never more folemnly or religioufly obferv- 
 ed : and, as it fens, this refolution is not at ail 
 
 5 different
 
 ( 24. ) 
 
 different from the language of the Statute 13 
 Car. 1. chap. xii. wherein it is faid, that nothing 
 in that Statute fhall be conttrued " to confirm 
 " the Canons made in the Year 1640, nor any 
 » e of them, nor any other Ecclefiaftical laws or 
 " canons not formerly confirmed, allowed or 
 " enacted by Parliament, or by the eftablifhed 
 " Laws of the Land, as they flood in the year 
 cc of our Lord 1639." The Canons of 1603, 
 had no ejlabli/hment but King James's Licenfe 
 and Ratification : and no lels had the Canons 
 of 1640, the Licenfe and Ratification of King 
 Charles I. And if ever the matter fhould come 
 to a fair Trial, King James's Canons could no 
 more ftand before the eftablifhed Law of the 
 Land, than thofe of King Charles. And what- 
 ever authority one of theie Princes derived from 
 the 25th of Hen. 8. the other had equally the 
 fame. 
 
 [S] January 19 : 1640-41. " Upon Mr. 
 Whites report from the Grand Committee 
 for Religion, it was refolved upon the quef- 
 tion, that the Statute made about twenty- 
 {evtn years ago in the Univerfity of Cam- 
 bridge, impofing upon young Students a 
 Subfcription according to the 36th Article 
 of the Canons, made in the Year 1603, is 
 againft the Law and Liberty of the Subject, 
 and ought not to be preffed upon any Stu- 
 dent or Graduates whatsoever." Ibid, p. 149. 
 
 Rem. — From the manner in which this Refo- 
 
 Lution
 
 ( *5 ) 
 
 lution is expreffed, it is probable the Cafe 
 flood thus. King James's Letters to the Uni- 
 verfity required Subscription of Batchelors in 
 Divinity and Doctovs iri each Faculty. This 
 became a Statute, but was probably extended to 
 other graduates pro arbitrio, and this being ob- 
 jected to, the Univerfity might apply in 1616 
 to the King for his farther pleafure in this mat- 
 ter, and the affair coming before the Parliament 
 in 1640, they feem to have taken both orders to- 
 gether. Otherwile it is certain that the Statute 
 of 161 3 extends to no younger ftudents than 
 Batchelors in Divinity, and Doctors in each Fa- 
 culty. But this is wholly conjectural. The ma- 
 terial oblervation is, that the whole Practice is 
 juftly and feverely condemned in a moft wife and 
 righteous Parliament. 
 
 [T] In the year 1662. 13 & 14 Car. XL 
 Was patted the lait Act of Uniformity, by 
 which Subfcription to the Declaration of 
 Conformity to the Liturgy of the Church of 
 England, as by Law eftablifhed, is required 
 of every Dean, Canon, Prebendary of every 
 Cathedra] or Collegiate Church, and of all 
 Matters and other Heads, Felloes, Chap 7 
 lains and Tutors, of or in any College, Hall, 
 Houfe of learning or Hofpital, and of every 
 public ProfefTor and Reader in either of the 
 Univeriities, and in every College elfewhere, 
 and of every Parfon, Vicar, Curate, Lec- 
 turer, and of every other perfon in holy Or- 
 ders, and every Schoolmafter keeping any 
 
 C public
 
 ( 26 ) 
 
 public or private School, and of every per- 
 fon intruding or teaching any Youth in 
 any houfe or private family as a Tutor or 
 School matter. And by the fame Statute 
 Subfcription unto the nine-and-thirty Ar- 
 ticles mentioned in the Statute made in the 
 13th year of the reign of the late Queen 
 Elizabeth, is required of the Governor or 
 Head of every College or Hall in either of 
 the Univeriities, and of the Colleges of 
 Wejlminfier, Winchejler and 'Eaton, and all 
 upon the pain of forfeiting their refpe&ive 
 offices or preferments, from the Dean down 
 to the petty Schoolmafter. 
 
 Rem. — This vindictive Statute, having now 
 compleatly done its work, ar.d occafioned fuch 
 a variety of diflrefs from the Reftoration to this 
 prefent hour, to fuch of the clergy as could not 
 afTent to the principles of King Charles the fe- 
 cond's Biihops, may now, we hope, be foftened 
 and qualified, without any detriment to the 
 Church of England. Neither King, Lords nor 
 Commons have any thing to fear from the mu- 
 tinous fpirit of a peevifh, irritated and obitinate 
 generation of Nonconformifts. The Toleration 
 laws have rendered Proteflant Diflenters of all 
 Denominations, peaceable, rational and valuable 
 Subjects to the Civil Government ; and the 
 Clergy of the eflablifhed Church, who iolicit a 
 relaxation of their prefent bonds, derive their 
 pretenfions only from the original principles of 
 the Proteflant reformation, and thole generous 
 4. maxims
 
 ( *7 ) 
 
 maxims of Civil and Ecclefmftical policy which 
 give a fanction to the Revolution of 1688, apd 
 to the Settlement of the Crown in the lineage of 
 our moft gracious Sovereign, to whom and his 
 Royal Houie they profefs the moft fincere and 
 cordial attachment. They fly for afilftance on 
 the prefent occafibn to that auguft Body, who 
 have ever been the Protectors of the Rights and 
 Privileges of the Britijh Subject, and who have 
 in many periods of our Hiftory, from the firft 
 dawn of Reformation, fliewn their care and con- 
 cern to deliver the pious -and confcientious 
 Clergy, not only from the oppreffions of the Ro- 
 man Pontiff, but from the attempts and en- 
 croachments of many in high places, whofe am- 
 bition difpoied them to eftablifh the like ufur- 
 pations, under a more plaufible pretext. The 
 time is now come, they hope, when a candid 
 hearing will be given to their reafonable and 
 modeft Remonftrances, and all obftructions to 
 their relief removed, which are founded in no- 
 thing, but a defire of exercifing a defpotic Rule 
 over the Confciences, or in pretended fears and 
 apprehenfions of Confequences, which can have 
 no place, where the freedom folicited has no 
 other object than the promotion of peace and 
 unity, virtue and true piety among Clergy and 
 People in the prefent ftate of things, and the 
 everlafting Salvation of all in the world to come. 
 
 Upon the whole, the feveral Statutes enjoin- 
 ing Subfcription to the thirty-nine Articles are, 
 in their prefent ftate, liable to different conftruc- 
 tions, particularly with refpect to the limitation 
 in the Statute, 13 Eliz. c 12. And the Sta- 
 tute,
 
 ( 28 ) 
 
 tfute, 13 & 1 4. Car. II. commonly called the Act 
 of Uniformity, referring where Subfcription to 
 the Articles is by that Act enjoined, to the Sta- 
 tute of Queen Elizabeth before-mentioned ; it is 
 now become uncertain to which, or to how many 
 of the faid Articles, the Clergy are bound, by 
 the faid Statutes, to fubfcribe : And with refpect 
 to their Obligation to fubfcribe the faid Articles, 
 as a condition of holding their Temporalties, the 
 faid Uncertainty is not removed by the requisi- 
 tion of the 36th Canon to fubfcribe to all and 
 every the faid Articles, inafmuch as the faid Ca- 
 non hath never been authorifed or confirmed by 
 Parliament •, and as by the Conftitution of this 
 Realm no Freehold can be paffed or legally held 
 by Virtue of the Canon Law only, as that would 
 give the Canon Law a paramount authority over 
 the common and ftatute Law of thefe Kingdoms, 
 and would be moreover an infringement of his 
 Majcfty's Supremacy. 
 
 P 1 N i s.
 
 [ *9 ] 
 
 APPENDIX; 
 
 Since the foregoing fummary View 
 was printed off, we have been favoured 
 with the following account of the Ori- 
 gin of Subfcript ions to the 39 Articles 
 and the i^th Catton, in the Univer- 
 Jity of Oxford. 
 
 AFTER Queen Elizabeth had vifit- 
 ed Oxford, feveral Regulations, re- 
 " fpecting Drefs and Difcipline, were by her 
 " recommended to the Univeriity. Ac- 
 ** cordingly, in the year 1573, among 
 " many other Acts to put her Majefty's 
 " Reformation in execution, it was decreed 
 ** in Convocation, That each Candidate for 
 " the future, previous to his taking his De- 
 " gree, mould fubfcribe the Articles, as the 
 " form requires at prefent. 
 
 " Afterwards, in the year 1576, it was 
 *' farther decreed, That every perfon above 
 •' the age of fixteen, who entered his name 
 <c in any College or Hall, mould, before 
 f* the Friday fe'nnight after his entrance, be 
 " matriculated, and then fubfcribe the Ar- 
 *' tides of the Church; and that the Vice- 
 D " chan-
 
 L 3° J 
 
 " chancellor or Proctors mould give him a 
 " certificate of having done fo. 
 
 " Anthony Wood fays, that the Puritans 
 " of thofe days complained fidly of this 
 " itnchrijlian rejlraint-, that many of them 
 " refufed to comply with it, and abfolutely 
 cc fufTered themfelves to be deprived of their 
 " emoluments in the Univerfity. 
 
 (t But whether it was owing to the oppo- 
 *' fitioii of the Puritans, or becaufe thefe 
 " Decrees of Convocation were not armed 
 " with fuflicient authority, this Subfcrip- 
 " tion foon came into difufe. 
 
 st In the year 1616 the Univerfity ap- 
 " plied to King James, for powers to make 
 " new Decrees to enforce Subfcription. The 
 " account which Wood gives of it, is as fol- 
 " lows: 
 
 " Having mentioned the founding of 
 " J ejus and Wadham Colleges, he adds, that 
 " this additional number of Colleges, con- 
 " tributed to the fpreading of Calvinifm ; 
 " it was therefore intimated to the King, 
 " that there was danger that Prefbyterian- 
 *' ifm would overrun the whole kingdom, 
 " if Students mould imbibe the Principles 
 " of it along with the rudiments of acade- 
 * c micai learning; and that this was the ra- 
 " ther to be apprehended, in that fo very 
 " few fubfcribed their affent to the three 
 " Articles contained in the 36th canon ; 
 
 whence
 
 [ 3' ] 
 
 " whence it would happen, that they who 
 " were difarYected to the ecclefiaftical go- 
 " vernment of the Church, and the Liturgy, 
 " and made no account of the other facred 
 " offices, would give their whole attention to 
 " Sermons; by which means thofe filly fel- 
 " lows, called Lecturers, would have an op- 
 " portunity of fpreading opinions directly 
 " contrary to the doctrine of the Church of 
 " England. Thefe things being infinuated 
 " to the King, he held a confultation with 
 " his Bifhops, and fome other Churchmen 
 " about him, on the 1 8th of 'January, and, 
 " after mature deliberation, tranfmitted cer- 
 (< tain orders to the Vice-chancellor, fome 
 " Heads of Houfes, the Doctors of Divi- 
 f< nity, and the two Proctors, requiring 
 (t them to affiil in the execution of them. 
 " The firft of them was, That every one ad- 
 " mitted to a Degree in the Univerfity 
 " mould fubfcribe to the three Articles 
 M abovementioned. The execution of thefe 
 " orders was committed by the Earl of Pern- 
 (i broke, newly made Chancellor of the 
 " Univerfity, to the Vice-chancellor, Heads 
 t( of Houfes, and fome others, whom his 
 * c lordfhip exhorted to put them in prac- 
 " tice with all diligence. And that thefe 
 " orders might not want the authority of 
 *' Statutes, or rather might be reduced into 
 *' the form qf Statutes, certain Delegates 
 P % <( out
 
 [ 3* 3 
 
 Cf out of the Heads of Colleges were ap- 
 tc pointed, who, by their joint labours and 
 " counfels, finished and iflued, on the laft 
 " day of March, the following Decrees. — 
 " With refpedt to the Articles of faith, it 
 " was decreed, that Subfcription mould be 
 " made in this form: 
 
 " Ego A. (vel nos, A. B.) perlectis pri- 
 " us, vel ab alio coram me (vel nobis) 
 '* recitatis Orthodoxy fidei et Religionis 
 " Articulis xxxix, et in Sacra Synodo 
 " Londini habita A. D. 1562, conftabi- 
 " litis, fimulque tribus capitibus in alia 
 " Synodo Londinenfi fub annum 1604 de- 
 " cretis, et in Canonem 36to. redactis, 
 " fciens volenfque (feu fcientes et volen- 
 *' tes) ex animo fubfcribo (vel fubfcribi- 
 " mus.") 
 
 " The prefent form of prefenting people 
 " to their degrees was alfo at the fame time 
 " appointed, to be faid by their refpeclive 
 " Deans,ending — .Quern infuper fciolegiife, 
 *' vel ledlos audiviffe omnes articulos fidei 
 " quibus coram Procuratoribus fubfcripfit." 
 " Wood fays, that when thefe Statutes 
 " came to be publifhed, they gave great of- 
 " fence to, and were considered as grievances 
 " by, the Puritans, and occafioned not a few 
 " invidious reflections upon Doctor Laud, 
 " as he was not only the advifer of thefe 
 *' Articles" (meaning the particulars com- 
 q prehended
 
 [ 33 ] 
 
 prehended in thefe new Statutes) " but 
 " one of the delegates who framed the faid 
 " Statutes; to which however the Puritans 
 " conformed, though with reluctance, left, 
 " by (lighting what was enjoined by the 
 * c King's authority, they mould expofe them- 
 " felves not only to expulfion, but to fome 
 " more grievous punimment." 
 
 REMARKS. 
 
 All this, in the opinion of Wood, was ex- 
 tremely right, and as it Ihould be. Pafling 
 by, however, the practifing in this manner upon 
 the King, and the views of diftrefling thofe who 
 were diftinguifhed by the name of Puritans 
 (views, worthy only of the wretched Policy of 
 thofe days) we may be allowed to examine what 
 legal authority thefe injunctions may be fuppofed 
 to have in the prefent times. It does not ap- 
 pear that Queen Elizabeth gave any particular 
 directions concerning Subfcription to the 39 Ar- 
 ticles. This was merely the effect of a Decree 
 of the Univerfity affembled in Convocation. 
 The difufe of Subfcription, notwithstanding this 
 Decree, and the fubfequent application to King 
 James, difcover a confcioufnefs in the Governors 
 of Oxford, that a Decree of their Convocation 
 was void of authority to inforce Subfcription. 
 With refpect to King James's, Orders or Man- 
 dates, it does not appear, whether, by the word, 
 Edixit, we are to underftand a formal Edifl in 
 writing, authenticated by the King's fign ma- 
 nual ; or fome general directions, to put in exe- 
 cution what his Majefly would have decreed by 
 
 the
 
 [ 34 ] 
 
 the Univerfity •, or laftly, fome verbal Orders 
 given to their Chancellor, the Earl of Pembroke. 
 It may be questioned, whether the Delegates, in 
 reducing thefe Orders into the form of Statutes, 
 did not exceed their Commiffion ; or indeed, whe- 
 ther the Univerfity had any fuch authority to de- 
 legate. For to whatever the Royal Mandate 
 might amount, previouQy to the coinpofing new 
 Statutes, the academical doctrine has been, if I 
 miftake not, that no Statutes are binding upon 
 them, which have not the Royal AiTent or Ra- 
 tification ; and nothing of that fort appears from 
 IVocd's account, which, indeed, is very confuted, 
 and wants explanation in many particulars. If, 
 on the other hand, our Universities have autho- 
 rity to make valid Statutes, without the Royal Ra- 
 tification, they muil have authority to repeal them. 
 And yet this is what the Cambridge men lately- 
 denied, and thought moreover, that recourfe mult 
 be had to the LegiJIature to have fuch Statute 
 repealed or altered, tho' it has only the fanct ion 
 of a Grace pafied in the Senate. Which fuggefts 
 a quefiion, By what authority their predecefibrs 
 abol:fned the practice of requiring Subfcription 
 from the Students at the time of their matricula- 
 tion ? It mould be mentioned, to the honour of 
 Cambridge, that there was no Subfcription re-^ 
 quired of the Students, or Candidates for Degrees, 
 in that Univerfity, in the days of Queen Elizabeth^ 
 which 1 think amounts to a proof, that the Queen 
 did not give any particular directions concerning 
 that matter at cither of the Univerfities, and that 
 without fuch directions, Cambridge did wifely in 
 not taking the Decree of Oxford for a precedent 
 lit for them to follow. The authority, given by 
 
 Kins
 
 r 3s ] 
 
 King James to the Univeriity of Cambridge, in 
 1616) to require Subfcription of young Students, 
 feems to be* very weak. It is only the fignification 
 of his Majeftfs pleafure, feconded by a letter from 
 the Bifhop of Wiv.chefier, to the Vice-chancellor, 
 which feems to leave much to the option of the 
 University, the Heads of which did not, that I 
 can find, follicit his Majefly's directions on this 
 behalf, after the example of Oxford. But, fince 
 the practice of inquiring Subfcription of young 
 Students, obtains at both Univenitie.% it had been 
 well if Cambridge had followed the example of 
 Oxford, in taking care that the young Subfcribers 
 mould either read the Articles, or hear them- 
 read, previous to their figning their affent to 
 them. The formality with which this circum- 
 flance is attefted, by the perfon who prefents the 
 Candidates at Oxford, mould feem to imply 
 more than a bare reading ; fomething, perhaps, 
 like an explanatory Lecture upon thefe Articles. 
 But this is conjecture ; and, by an eafy figure, 
 reading may include under/landing them. Indeed, 
 as reading the Articles before taking the firft 
 Degree, would be a novelty at Cambridge, fome 
 of the young fophifters might be pert enough to 
 afk queftions, or form fyllogifms upon particu- 
 lar paffages, which it might take more time to 
 anfwer than could well be fpared at the bufy fea- 
 fon of conferring Degrees. And probably they 
 who have the ordering of fuch things, may think 
 it fufficient to fay, They may read the Articles if 
 they will. No-body hinders them. If they do not, it 
 is their own fault. This is eafily laid ; but fome 
 people may be of opinion, that, be the /^/ob- 
 ligation to fubferibe what it may, there is a point 
 
 of
 
 [ 36 ] 
 
 of equity inseparable from fuch cafes as this, 
 namely, That they who undertake the education 
 of thefe young men, mould not content them- 
 felves with knowing that they have read thefe 
 Articles. If they will have Degrees, it is not 
 at their option whether they will fubfcribe them 
 or not. Mull not honed and confcientious Tutors 
 and Governors be fenfible,that it pertaineth to the 
 faithful difcharge of their offices, to inftruct thefe 
 young men in the Doctrines of thefe Articles, 
 to apprize them of the nature and tendency of 
 Subfcription, and to give fatisfactory anfwers to 
 fuch doubts or difficulties as the fenfe and appre- 
 henfion of the Candidates may fugged to them ? 
 The whole affair is too melancholy to be farther 
 dwelt upon. Let us blufh for what is pad, and 
 unite our endeavours, that thefe fhameful ble- 
 mifhes in our difcipline, may be no longer our 
 opprobrium. 
 
 FINIS,

 
 
 
 £ /^*>r 
 
 
 ■Y/ 
 
 J=r 
 
 
 
 mnm
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000 834 228 9