j LIBRARY' } 
 
 UNIVERSITY 9P 
 
 
 SAN' OIEGO
 
 ^ojsitto atttculoruttt 
 angltcanae : 
 
 THE ARTICLES OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH 
 
 PARAPHRASTICALLY CONSIDERED AND EXPLAINED, 
 BY 
 
 FEANCISCUS A. SANCTA CLAKA, S.T.P. 
 
 (DR. CHRISTOPHER DAVENPORT.) 
 
 Reprinted from the Edition in Latin q/1646, with a Translation^ together with Expositions 
 
 and Comments in English from the Theological Problems and Propositions 
 
 of the same writer, and with additional Notes and References. 
 
 TO WHICH ARE PREFIXED 
 
 AN INTKODUCTION AND A SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOK. 
 
 EDITED BY THE REV. 
 
 FEEDEEICK GEOEGE LEE, D.C.L., 
 
 F.S.A. LOXD. AXD SCOT. ; S.C.L. Oxox. ; DOMESTIC CHAPLAIN TO THE EARL OF MOBTOJT. 
 
 llonfcon : 
 
 JOHN T. HAYES, LYALL PLACE, EATON SQUAEE, S.W. 
 
 MDCCCLXV.
 
 ' Such interpretation may be given of the most difficult Articles as will strip them of all contradiction to the 
 decrees of the Tridentine Synod." Cardinal Wiseman. 
 
 ' None can be fairer in theological controversy than SANCTA CLARA ; his Commentary on the " Articles," from a 
 Roman Catholic point of view, being especially interesting. It is believed that this remarkable Treatise formed 
 the basis of Mr. NBWMAH'S Tract No. 90." British Magazine. 
 
 Printed at the Regent Tress, 55, King Street, Regent Street, \V,
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Dedication v 
 
 Introduction vii 
 
 Sketch of the Author's Life . . xix 
 
 Original Dedication xxxi 
 
 Censure et Judicia Doctorum xxxiii 
 
 THE ARTICLES PARAPHRASTICALLY EXPLAINED: 
 
 Article I. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity 1 
 
 II. Of the Word or Son of God, Which was made very Man 1 
 
 III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell * * 2 
 
 IV. Of the Eesurrection of Christ . . . . 2 
 
 V. Of the Holy Ghost ....... 2 
 
 VI. Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation 3 
 
 VII. Of the Old Testament 7 
 
 VIII. Of the Three Creeds 8 
 
 IX. Of Original or Birth-sin 8 
 
 X. OfFree-Will . . 10 
 
 XL Of the Justification of Man 11 
 
 XII. Of Good Works 14 
 
 XIII. Of Works before Justification 14 
 
 XIV. Of Works of Supererogation ..... 16 
 
 XV. Of Christ alone without Sin 17 
 
 XVL Of Sin after Baptism 21
 
 Article XVII. Of Predestination and Election 24 
 
 XVIII. Of obtaining Eternal Salvation only by the Name of 
 
 Christ 26 
 
 XIX. Of the Church 27 
 
 XX. Of the Authority of the Church 29 
 
 XXI. Of the Authority of General Councils .... 82 
 
 XXII. Of Purgatory 39 
 
 XXIII. Of Ministering in the Congregation .... 42 
 XXIV. Of speaking in the Congregation in such a tongue as 
 
 the people understandeth ..... 42 
 
 XXV. Of the Sacraments 49 
 
 XXVI. Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders 
 
 not the effect of the Sacrament .... 63 
 
 XXVII. Of Baptism 54 
 
 XXVIIL Of the Lord's Supper . 55 
 
 XXIX. Of the wicked which eat not the Body of Christ in the 
 
 use of the Lord's Supper ...... 63 
 
 XXX. Of both kinds 68 
 
 XXXI. Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross . 73 
 
 XXXII. Of the Marriage of Priests 79 
 
 XXXIII. Of Excommunicate persons, how they are to be avoided 80 
 
 XXXIV. Of the Traditions of the Church 81 
 
 XXXV. Of the Homilies 83 
 
 XXXVI. Of Consecration of Bishops and Ministers ... 85 
 
 XXXVII. Of the Civil Magistrates 96 
 
 XXXVIII. Of Christian Men's Goods, which are not common . 115 
 
 XXXIX. Of a Christian Man's Oath 115
 
 TO 
 
 AMBEOSE LISLE MAECHE PHILLIPPS DE LISLE, ESQUIEE, 
 
 OF GARENDON PARK AND GRACE DIEU MANOR, LEICESTERSHIRE, 
 ETC., ETC. 
 
 MY DEAR MR. DE LISLE, 
 
 I know no one to whom I can more fittingly inscribe this 
 reprint of Sancta Clara's Treatise than yourself. For more than thirty 
 years past you have laboured for the high and holy object of Re-union; 
 while the rise and expansion in England of what is now something more 
 than a " school," systematically praying and working for this object, is a 
 testimony as well to your charity and farsightedness as to the fact that a 
 common desire for Peace and Unity is the first step towards obtaining 
 them. Therefore, with very sincere respect and regard in spem Unionis 
 Futurce Gregis Christi I dedicate this volume to you. 
 
 And I remain, 
 
 Ever most sincerely yours in our Blessed LORD, 
 
 FREDERICK GEORGE LEE". 

 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 THE true position of the Thirty-Nine Articles in the Church of 
 England is one worthy of especial remark. They are clearly not 
 "Articles of Faith,"* that is, they are not a portion of the 
 unalterable divine deposit delivered at Pentecost, which a man 
 rejects at the peril of salvation, but "Articles of Religion," as 
 they are generally termed, that is, they may be regarded as a 
 collection of propositions concerning Religion and Religious 
 opinions f drawn up in the sixteenth century, a few of which 
 contain articles of faith, some matters of fact or historical 
 assertions, and others certain opinions upon which the post- 
 Reformation clergy have always differed very considerably. J This 
 will be clear from the following : "When it is said that S. Je- 
 rome expresses a particular opinion respecting the Apocrypha ; 
 that a certain Greek term has been expounded in four different 
 manners ; that certain churches have erred ; that the Pelagians 
 hold a particular doctrine ; that S. Augustine holds a particular 
 view respecting the participation of the Holy Eucharist by the 
 
 * Vide Pearson On the Creed, p. 17, et $ Compare, e. g. Bps. Burnet, Beveridge, 
 
 seq. Oxford : 1847. and Harold Browne on those Articles which 
 
 f " They are to the Creeds what the have been explained fully by Sancta Clara* 
 
 bye-laws of a society are to the legal and Their differences of explanation are great 
 
 settled rules of that society." Dr. W. H. and singular. 
 Mill. 
 
 62
 
 ( viii ) 
 
 wicked ; that the Injunctions of Elizabeth do most plainly testify 
 to a certain fact ; that school authors say that the works of the 
 unregenerate deserve grace of congruity ; these are all historical 
 assertions, which may or may not be true, but which we cannot 
 be called upon to hold with a divine faith. Thus, when the 
 Book of Homilies ascribes a real existence to Pope Joan, it 
 makes an historical assertion which is now known to be false. 
 So, again, when we are told that it is impossible for Christ's 
 natural body to be at the same time in more places than one, 
 this is merely a philosophical opinion, which may or may not be 
 true, and which we are neither concerned to defend nor to 
 attack."* 
 
 Not one of these statements, be it remarked, is a matter of 
 faith ; nor is it of faith to receive a particular explanation of a 
 text of Scripture. Nor again, when the eighth Article maintains 
 that the Three Catholic Creeds are to be believed because " they 
 may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture," are 
 we called upon to accept the Creeds on this ground. Still 
 less, when in the twenty-sixth Article it is maintained, "They 
 that receive them [the Sacraments] unworthily, purchase to 
 themselves damnation, as St. Paul saith," are we at all bound to 
 hold that the apostle was referring to Baptism also in the 
 passage to which this Article alludes. 
 
 Again : (I.) To discover how numerous are the propositions, 
 both positive and negative, contained in the Articles which, ex 
 necessitate rei, cannot possibly be of faith ; or (II.), still further, 
 how almost impossible it is for Anglican clergy of the present 
 
 * Neale's Lectures on Church Difficulties, p. 190. London : Cleaver, 1852.
 
 day to estimate accurately the value of other propositions, the 
 following obvious examples may be instanced : 
 
 I. 1. "The Riches and Goods of Christians are not common." 
 
 (Not a matter of faith.) 
 
 2. " General Councils may not be gathered together without 
 
 the commandment and will of princes." (Not a matter 
 of faith.) 
 
 3. " The Bishop of Rome hath * no jurisdiction in this 
 
 realm of England." (Neither a fact, nor a matter of 
 faith.) 
 
 4. " Transubstantiation is repugnant to the plain words of 
 
 Scripture." (Not a matter of faith.) 
 
 II. " The second Book of Homiliesf .... doth contain 
 
 a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for 
 these times." (This is certainly not a matter of faith. 
 As to its accuracy as a mere statement with reference 
 to the needs of the sixteenth century, we are not 
 called upon to enter upon an examination of its 
 truth or in any way to express an opinion on the 
 subject. The book may or may not contain " Godly 
 and wholesome doctrine," and the " Godly and whole- 
 
 * Even before the passing of the Roman as to a Confession of Faith, we must believe 
 
 Catholic Emancipation Bill, Vicars Apos- in the divine right of kings, in the inspira- 
 
 tolic exercised jurisdiction on behalf of the tion of the Apocrypha, in the benefit of a 
 
 Pope in England, and received obedience. fish diet, in the anti-Christianity cf the Pope, 
 
 Since that change, both in England and and in the binding authority of the example 
 
 Ireland the lawful spiritual authority of of the early Church. Does any one man be- 
 
 Roman bishops has been and is allowed, lieve in all these things together?" Xeale's 
 
 and indirectly sanctioned by law. Lectures on Church Difficulties, p. 200. 
 
 t " If we are to be tied to the Homilies
 
 some doctrine " may or may not have been necessary 
 for the times when the Articles were drawn up.) 
 
 Though the Articles are generally supposed to run counter to 
 the doctrines and principles of Latin Christianity, yet it is 
 remarkable how ingeniously perhaps it would be more accurate 
 to say how vaguely they are worded. This policy was no doubt 
 adopted to retain all schools in the National Church, as Bishop 
 Burnet, the Erastian, and Dr. Beveridge both allow. So, not- 
 withstanding the existence of expressions which appear strong at 
 first sight and before they are carefully examined, there can be 
 little doubt, as both Sancta Clara and Tract 90 proved, that 
 there are few propositions which may not be brought into perfect 
 harmony with the current opinions of the rest of Western 
 Christendom. There is nothing against the doctrine of the 
 Sacrifice of the Mass, or, as we commonly term it, the Sacrifice 
 of the Holy Eucharist, there is not a word (if we omit the 
 obvious truisms set forth in the last paragraph of Article 25) 
 against Reservation, nor a sentiment derogatory of Confession. 
 Very frequently we hear statements that the Church of England 
 condemns " the idolatry of Rome." Yet is there a single syllable 
 on this point in the Thirty-Nine Articles from end to end 1 ? The 
 strongest statement in any way bearing on the subject is that 
 the " Romish doctrine " concerning the worshipping of images 
 inter alia "is a fond thing vainly invented" (res est futilis useless 
 
 \ */ 
 
 inaniter conficta),\)'at this is all. 
 
 It was calculated by a painstaking writer of the seventeenth 
 century, Mr. R. Shelton, one of the foremost in the Laudian 
 Revival, that the Articles contained about 670 distinct proposi-
 
 tions, of which about 150 only were of a positive character, the 
 remainder being simply negations.* The Dean of St. Paul's 
 recently repeated this remark, with the object of suggesting 
 the relaxation or abolition of subscription a work of great 
 importance to every school of thought in the Church of England, 
 more especially to those who desire to promote the Visible 
 Re-union of Christendom. " If I venture," writes Dean Milman, 
 " to question the expediency, the wisdom, I will say the 
 righteousness (that word contains in itself and overrides both the 
 former) of retaining subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles 
 as obligatory on all clergymen, I do so, not from any difficulty 
 in reconciling with my own conscience what, during my life, I 
 have done more than once, but from the deep and deliberate 
 conviction that such subscription is altogether unnecessary as a 
 safeguard for the essential doctrines of Christianity, which are 
 more safely and fully protected by other means. It never has 
 been, is not, and never will be a solid security for its professed 
 object, the reconciling or removing religious differences, which 
 it tends rather to create and keep alive ; is embarrassing to 
 many men who might be of the most valuable service in the 
 ministry of the Church; is objectionable as concentrating and 
 enforcing the attention of the youngest clergy on questions, some 
 
 * " The story of Charles V. and the rnorial on an academical examination 
 
 clocks is well known. A recent illustra- What would he have said had he for the 
 
 tion of the same difficulty occurred not first time heard of not 80, but 20,000 
 
 long ago, when a celebrated theologian persons subscribing their assent to at least 
 
 expressed his ' utter amazement ' that 80 600 propositions on the most intricate and 
 
 men of various sentiments could have been complex subjects that can engage the 
 
 able to subscribe their assent to three or human mind ? " Stanley on Subscription, 
 
 four brief propositions contained in a me- p. 15,
 
 abstruse, some antiquated (more of this hereafter), and in them- 
 selves at once so minute and so comprehensive as to harass less 
 instructed and profound thinkers, to perplex and tax the sagacity 
 of the most able lawyers and the most learned divines." Fraser's 
 Magazine, p. 269, March, 1865. Furthermore, it should be 
 remembered that the Articles do not stand in the same relation 
 to the Anglican Church as do the Decrees of the Council of 
 Trent to Roman Catholics, or the Acts of the Synod of Beth- 
 lehem to members of the orthodox Eastern Church. Roman 
 Catholics hold the Council of Trent to have been an (Ecumenical 
 Council, because from their point of view (1) the whole Church 
 was represented at it, and (2) it was amongst them universally 
 received. Consequently they regard the creed of Pope Pius as of 
 equal weight with the other creeds. And the same is practically 
 the case with the Decrees of the Synod of Bethlehem, generally 
 accepted in the East a Synod at which the various anthropo- 
 logical * propositions set forth at Trent were in the main and 
 substantially received by the Oriental communion. But, on our 
 part, no one ever dreamt of regarding the Synods of London in 
 1559 and 1571 as anything more than mere national synods 
 as, therefore, claiming no power to define, declare, or propound 
 Articles of Faith, and consequently incompetent to add a series of 
 theological opinions both negative and positive to the original 
 deposit, to the three ancient and universally-received creeds. 
 This being so, and experience having taught those who have 
 looked for a Future Visible Re-union of the Christian Family that 
 
 * Vide Ffoulkes' Christen dom's Divisions, Oxenham on the Atonement, p. xliv. Lon- 
 in loco. London : Longmans, 1865 ; and don : Longmans, 1865.
 
 the multiplication of religious tests and propositions is the source 
 of untold mischief, the recent manifestos in the Church of 
 England favourable to the quiet removal of the Thirty-Nine 
 Articles deserve the careful attention and proper respect of all 
 theological schools. If to-morrow they were abolished utterly 
 and absolutely with their multifarious propositions and apparent 
 contradictions the faith of the Church of England would remain 
 just as it is. No single iota of the Truth of God would be lost. 
 " I believe in ... the Holy Catholic Church." " I believe One 
 [Holy] Catholic and Apostolic Church." "Whosoever will be 
 saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic 
 Faith," would still be the utterance of the faithful in our ancient 
 sanctuaries, and we should have removed the single great diffi- 
 culty, on our part, in the way of effecting that intercommunion 
 for which so many constantly hope and pray. 
 
 Mr. Ffoulkes, in his recent valuable and masterly work, 
 Christendom's Divisions, has entered at some length upon a con- 
 sideration of certain, of the Thirty-Nine Articles. His opinion 
 of them is all the more important as he himself formerly 
 belonged to the Church of England. Moreover, the singular 
 fairness and impartiality displayed throughout his remarks, and 
 the obvious desire never to overstate his case, give great and 
 unusual weight to the following interesting comments : 
 
 " From which remark I pass straight to the Thirty-nine Articles, because 
 they do not stop there but go some steps further in advance. The Prayer 
 Book condemns rather by implication and by its silence. The Articles 
 attack openly, and with no small virulence, doctrines and practices which, 
 till then, had been current in the English Church and in the West generally. 
 They may not have been framed in overt hostility to the Decrees of Trent,
 
 whose actual promulgation they just anticipated. They may not have been 
 copied from the Confession of Augsburg, which came out so much earlier, or 
 by the Synod of Dort, which followed so much later ; but they established a 
 breach with the past equally grave and premeditated, and which in all 
 English constitutional history, from Egbert to Queen Victoria, can have but 
 one name Treason ! 
 
 " Previously to their publication, or rather previously to that rupture with 
 Rome which led to it, the Church of England had for upwards of 1200 
 years almost twice as long as England had then been a monarchy been 
 associated by federal ties of the closest nature with that world-wide corpora- 
 tion known as the Catholic Church, and had participated to the fullest 
 extent in all its vicissitudes and successive developments. As far back as 
 A.D. 347, bishops from Britain are mentioned as having been present at the 
 Council of Sardica, where they must have been parties to those canons autho- 
 rising appeals in certain cases to the see of Rome ; and where, from the very 
 nature of the case, they could not fail to have heard that earlier canon talked 
 about, of which the historian of the Greek Church, Socrates, speaks, de- 
 claring it unlawful for any local churches to make canons against the will of 
 the bishop of that see. Twelve years from that date they were congratulated 
 by S. Hilary on having preserved their orthodoxy ; two years more, and they 
 were noticed at the Council of Rimini. The century following, aided by two 
 bishops from France, they made common cause with the rest of the Church 
 against Pelagianism.* Before the end of the next century, S. Augustine had 
 founded the see of Canterbury, which in process of time came to be acknow- 
 ledged as the metropolitan church of the whole island, and even of Ireland, 
 as we have seen. The bishops of Scotland for a time went to York, and the 
 bishops of Ireland to Canterbury, for consecration. The archbishops of 
 Canterbury, without one exception, for nine centuries and upwards, among 
 the sixty-three who held that see down to Cranmer inclusive, received their 
 palls from Rome. 
 
 " When East and West separated, it was the Primate of all England who, 
 by command of the Pope, undertook the cause of the whole West, before a 
 synod held in its extreme frontier-town on the Italian coast Bari. When 
 
 * " Collier, E. H., vol. i. pp. 69-112. His remarks on the Sardican Canons are special 
 pleading."
 
 East and West were thought to have been happily reunited once more ? 
 tidings were sent to, and congratulatory letters were received from, and 
 public rejoicings throughout his dominions were decreed by, the youthful 
 King of England, Henry VI. : copies of which exist still in the archiepis- 
 copal archives,* in token that the heart of England beat in active sympathy 
 with the rest of Christendom. It was not merely that the see of Canterbury 
 was mindful of its primeval obligations, or its canonical duties to the see of 
 Rome. No General Council was ever summoned from which the bishops of 
 England were left out : no General Council ever promulgated any decrees, 
 which from the time of their acceptance in England were not made part-and- 
 parcel of the ecclesiastical law of that realm. Now and then there were 
 delays in recognising a pope, or in accepting the decrees of a council as, for 
 instance, of Basle. Now and then there were the usual disputes in connec- 
 tion with both, incidental to the parts of every corporate body. 
 
 " Such had been the prescriptive rights and obligations of the Church of 
 England for upwards of 1200 years, when the Prayer Book was compiled, 
 and the Thirty-nine Articles promulgated as its future doctrinal tests. 
 There had been a quarrel between one king of England, Henry VUL, and 
 one pope, Clement VII., of a personal character, affecting at most the 
 domestic happiness of the former ; just as there must always be when indi- 
 viduals involve themselves in any civil or ecclesiastical suit, and it had 
 proceeded to extremities on both sides. But never had the Pope threatened 
 any encroachments, then, on the abstract rights of the Crown ; still less had 
 there been any attack on the liberties of the Church of England. There had 
 been no new doctrine promulgated, nor any new discipline enjoined for 
 acceptance by it. Because a monarch, so notoriously singular as Henry 
 VIII. in his matrimonial arrangements, had been thwarted in them, the 
 Church of England assented to abjure the supremacy of the Pope in that 
 reign, to burn and destroy all its time-honoured rituals for celebrating 
 Divine sendee in the next ; and then, after a few years of feigned repentance 
 under Mary, reproduced, under Elizabeth, its new ' Service Book' and 
 
 * " Lambeth, 211, Nos. 98, 99. The ing Convent,' Feb. 8, A.D. 1439, and is on 
 
 first is dated ' Our Camp at Windsor,' A.D. the reunion of the Armenians with the 
 
 1439, Oct. 3, and is on the reunion of the Western Church." 
 Greeks ; the second is earlier, ' From Read-
 
 Articles of ' Eeligion :' not only without the smallest reference to the 
 opinions of the rest of Christendom, but in open defiance of the General 
 Council of the West, then actually sitting, and to which its bishops among 
 others had, in conformity with ancient usage, received their summons all 
 which it justified on the ground that it had resolved, for the future, to be 
 quit of the Pope. 
 
 "Now, even at this point it might have halted, without any further 
 outrage upon the constitutional prerogatives of every corporate society. It 
 scorned the idea of any such moderation. Transubstantiation, which for 
 more than three centuries it had held and taught, in conformity with the 
 Fourth Lateran Council, it now condemned as ' repugnant to the plain words 
 of Scripture.' Purgatory, which it had maintained with the Council of 
 Florence against the Greek doctrine on that subject, it now discarded as ' a 
 vain invention.' Kestriction of the cup to the celebrant priest, which it had 
 received from the Council of Constance, it now asserted to be contrary to 
 'Christ's ordinance.' Celibacy of the clergy, which in common with the 
 rest of the West had been its own discipline from time immemorial, it now 
 declared it to be lawful to depart from, though no other Western Church had 
 relaxed that rule. To teach that there were seven sacraments, as all pre- 
 vious archbishops of York and Canterbury must have done more or less, it 
 now regarded as a product of ' the corrupt following of the Apostles.' To 
 ask for the prayers of the Saints in heaven, to venerate their relics and 
 images on earth, as the Church of Home did, it affirmed to be ' repugnant to 
 the Word of God;' though its old office-books alone showed how identical 
 had been its own authorised practice, from the Norman Conquest at latest. 
 Finally, in consenting to abandon appeals to Eome, it repudiated not merely 
 one of the first principles of its own Canon Law, but likewise one of the 
 earliest synodical acts on record of its own primitive bishops, above 1200 
 years previously, who sat and voted at that council which authorised them. 
 All this it did without so much as asking counsel or inviting criticism from 
 any one of the local churches in Europe with all which it had for so long 
 been united as one family on the wisdom or justice of its proceedings. 
 The only foreigners whom it condescended to consult at all were those who 
 had unchurched themselves. In that one respect, that of taking a bold line 
 of its own, it may have acted as England usually does : in all other respects 
 how thoroughly un-English was the course pursued ! The questions which
 
 ( xvii ) 
 
 it reopened and the points which it retracted had no reference to the decrees 
 of any one council that had been held, or to any one dogma that had been 
 put forward, of late years. France was slow to accept the Council of Trent 
 from the first, and has never accepted it wholly to this day. All the Trullan 
 Canons, and even the three last canons of the Council of Chalcedon, were 
 rejected by the Holy See, and have never since been received. The Greeks 
 demurred to the addition of the word ' Filioque ' to the creed at once, and 
 have never really given in. But here was a local church arrogating to set 
 aside doctrines and practices of the collective Church which it had for ages 
 accepted, inculcated, arid enforced itself on the ground principally that they 
 were 'repugnant to the Word of God ;' but only, therefore, as interpreted by 
 its own living authorities of that one period. What must have been the 
 unavoidable inference suggested to the minds of all intelligent thinkers ? If 
 for five, if for ten centuries all the bishops and theologians of the collective 
 Church were proved to have known nothing of the true meaning of the Word 
 of God, how many degrees below nothing might the living authorities of one 
 local church of a single age be supposed to rank in their estimate of the 
 same ? Had each of the English counties taken that view of their con- 
 stitutional obligations in the sixteenth century, what would have been 
 the condition of Old England now ? Had each of the Churches of 
 Europe followed the example of the Church of England, what would have 
 become of the unity of the Catholic Church by this time ?" (Chap. 87, 
 pp. 216-220.) 
 
 We here learn the deliberate opinions of a Roman Catholic 
 thoroughly competent to form a true judgment with refer- 
 ence to the Articles opinions which are no doubt shared by 
 many, and deserve the careful consideration of members of the 
 Church of England. They are most valuable as indicating with 
 exactness the particular reform which is most pressingly required 
 in the first instance, and point out what kind of work must be 
 undertaken in a spirit of boldness and charity to effect that 
 Visible Re-union amongst the separated portions of the Christian 
 Family so earnestly desired. May it please God that all needless
 
 ( xviii ) 
 
 bars and hindrances to this blessed consummation be speedily 
 and completely removed ! 
 
 Since the publication of Tract 90 which was currently re- 
 ported to have been more or less founded upon Sancta Clara's 
 work some desire has existed amongst members of the Church 
 of England to be possessed of this remarkable treatise. It is 
 now re-published, therefore, as it was originally written, in 
 Latin, together with an English translation, in parallel columns. 
 It has been printed from the London edition * (fcp. 8vo), without 
 publisher's name, of 1646, the text of which has been carefully 
 compared with that of the Lyons edition (small 4to), issued by 
 Anthony Chard, both extremely rare. For the gift of the 
 first the editor is indebted to a friend; for the loan of the 
 second to the Eev. J. P. Kane, M.A. The extracts from the 
 explanatory Problems are given in English only : they will be 
 found at length (and most valuable reading they are) in all the 
 editions of Sancta Clara's book, Deus, Natura, Gratia, etc. The 
 editor is especially grateful for, and desires to acknowledge with 
 sincere thanks, the great help afforded him by the Eev. Henry 
 de Romestin, M.A., of St. John's College, Oxford, now of Frei- 
 burg in Breisgau, in the preparation of this reprint ; and also 
 expresses his obligation for assistance rendered by his friends 
 the Eev. Dr. Littledale and the Eev. H. N. Oxenham, M.A., in 
 looking over the proof sheets. 
 
 * This edition is neither in the Bodleian nor British Museum. 
 
 19, COLESHILL STREET, EATON SQUARE, S.W. 
 St. Bernard's Day, August 20$, 1865.
 
 SKETCH OF THE AUTHOR'S LIFE. 
 
 THE AUTHOR of this interesting and remarkable treatise, Christopher 
 Davenport, whose name in religion was Franciscus a Sancta Clara 
 known also as Francis Hunt, Francis Coventrie, or Francis of Coventry 
 is said, by Antony a Wood,* to have been the fifth son of Henry 
 Davenport, alderman of Coventry, the grandson to a younger brother of 
 the Davenports of Cheshire, f He was born at Coventry about the year 
 1598, and "in grammar learning there educated." When about fifteen 
 years of age, in company with a brother, John, he was matriculated at 
 Merton College, Oxford, in the early part of the year 1613 both being 
 pupils of Mr. Samuel Lane, fellow of that society. Sir Henry Savile, 
 then Warden of Merton, is said to have dismissed both the Davenports, 
 because they were poor and unable formally to become commoners of 
 the college the result being that John Davenport went to Magdalen 
 Hall, and afterwards became a noted Puritan; while Christopher, after 
 remaining some time longer (during Sir Henry's sojourn at Eton), a pupil 
 of Mr. Lane, of Merton College, was induced by some Roman Catholic 
 
 * Athente Oxoniensis, ed. Bliss, vol. iii. proper, haltered or. In the Visitation of 
 
 p. 1221. London : 1817. the County Palatine of Chester the name 
 
 t The Davenports of Davenport, Wood- of Christopher Davenport occurs more than 
 
 ford, and Bramhall, co. Chester, were a once : e.g., Christopher Davenport, seventh 
 
 very ancient family. They bore for their son of John Davenport, of Woodford, Esq., 
 
 arms, argent, a chevron sable between and Mary [daughter of Hugh Bromley, of 
 
 three cross-crosslets fitche of the second. Hampton Post, Esq.] was baptized at Prest- 
 
 Crest, on a wreath a felon's head couped bury, co. Lancaster, 20th Sept. 1612.
 
 clergyman, who is believed to have resided in or near Oxford, to join 
 the Roman Church and go to Douay. Having taken this step he 
 remained there for some time, but afterwards went to Ypres, where he 
 was received into the order of the Franciscans on the 7th of October, 
 1617. Returning to Douay, he was as Antony a Wood declares 
 "entered into the English Recollects* there of the same order," on the 
 18th October, 1618. Continuing his course of study in the College of 
 St. Bonaventure, he afterwards went into Spain. At the ancient 
 University of Salamanca he improved himself very much in the supreme 
 faculty, returning some time later to Douay, where he studied philo- 
 sophy, and eventually became chief reader in theology, guardian of the 
 convent, and was created Professor of Sacred Theology (S.T.P.). Some 
 time after this, at the request of certain members of the Franciscan 
 
 * My learned friend, the Provost of 
 Northampton, has kindly given me the 
 following interesting account of the English 
 Franciscan Recollects at Douay, which I 
 gladly print as it reached me: "This 
 establishment originated with the Rev. 
 John Gennings, a Douay priest, in the 
 year 1614. He was desirous to revive the 
 Franciscan Order among the English ; and 
 with that view received the habit from 
 William Stanney, sub-Commissary-General 
 of the Franciscan province in England. He 
 induced several students at Douay and the 
 other English colleges to follow his example ; 
 and these went through their noviceship at 
 Ypres. F. Gennings, in 1616, in quality 
 of vicar and custos of England, assembled 
 about half a dozen brethren, including 
 novices, at Gravelines, and within three 
 years they succeeded in establishing at 
 Douay the Convent of St. Bonaventure, 
 with a noviceship attached. Few in num- 
 ber, destitute of endowment, and depending 
 solely on alms, they still contrived to erect 
 
 a handsome church. In 1624 the number 
 of members resident was fifteen. In the 
 following year F. Francis, of St. Clare 
 (Davenport) was sent to Rome to obtain 
 the restoration of the English province. 
 He was partially successful ; and four years 
 later the restoration was completed, and 
 they were declared by the Minister General 
 of the Order, F. Bernardino de Senis, 
 sufficiently numerous to be entitled to the 
 privileges of a separate province, of which 
 F. Gennings was appointed provincial ; and 
 this restoration was sanctioned and con- 
 firmed by the authority of the Holy See. 
 F. Gennings died at Douay, November 2nd, 
 1660, of his religious profession 46. Their 
 object was to prepare labourers for the En- 
 glish Mission ; they enjoyed the privileges 
 of the university of Douay. In 1700 they had 
 60 members, and continued to flourish till 
 the French Revolution in 1793 ; but all the 
 friars found means to escape out of France 
 in disguise. F. C. H."
 
 order in England,* lie was induced to leave his work in France and to 
 undertake missionary labours in his native country, where he was 
 generally known by his name in religion of Franciscus a Sancta Clara, 
 and rendered very efficient services by his literary works to the cause 
 to which he had devoted himself. He was appointed one of the Chaplains 
 to Her Majesty Queen Henrietta Maria, the royal consort of King Charles 
 the First, and soon became as highly and deservedly honoured for his 
 learning, ability, and devotion by members of the Church of England as 
 he was by the leading authorities of his own communion. During the 
 considerable period of fifty years he was constantly and in many ways 
 devoted to the important work of re-Catholicising those in whom the 
 errors of Wycliffe, Luther and Calvin, together with the unbridled licence 
 of more recent troublous times, had gone far to destroy their faith. 
 He raised money to carry on the work of Christian education at Douay 
 and elsewhere, while the last list of his w r orks testifies both to his 
 unwearied labours and considerable theological knowledge. During the 
 whole period of the Great Rebellion, when both Roman Catholics and 
 members of the Church of England suffered so severely, he laboured 
 continually, from his own point of view, to preserve the ancient faith 
 among those families which had never cast it off; and strove, at the 
 same time, to gain the active support of the most distinguished prelates 
 and theologians of the National Church, for co-operation in promoting 
 a visible corporate Re-union. He was in constant communication with Arch- 
 bishop Laud,f Bishop Montague, Dr. Cosin, and others of that influential 
 school ; and, on one occasion, made application through Dr. Augustus 
 Lindsell, one of the Archbishop's chaplains, to have a book in defence of 
 Episcopacy Apologia Episcoporum seu Sacri Mayistratus propugnatio, etc. 
 f ormally licensed for printing. Sancta Clara was found sometimes in London, 
 
 * The Minister- General of the Fran- formal restoration of the English province, 
 ciscans, by Letters Patent, dated from f Laud's History of His Troubles, p. 
 Madrid 6th of August, 1629, announced the 430. Ed. 1695. London,
 
 ( xxii ) 
 
 but more frequently in Oxford, where he was always received most kindly 
 by Mr. Thomas Barloe, chief librarian of the Bodleian all the services of 
 whom are fully acknowledged in a general way in more than one of his 
 publications. To members of the Church of England his most interesting 
 work is that which is here reprinted an attempt (and a very successful 
 attempt) to reconcile various propositions in the Thirty-nine Articles with the 
 general belief of the rest of Western Christendom. He obviously desired, 
 and laboured for, a corporate Ee-union ; and practically took one of the most 
 important and efficient steps towards effecting it, that could possibly have 
 been chosen, by showing men on both sides, even at that period, that they 
 already agreed more, and differed less, than the prejudice of popular opinion 
 would have them believe ; and, furthermore, that many of those points on 
 which they differed were rather of the accidents than the substance of 
 Divine Truth. His Treatise, which was dedicated to King Charles the 
 First, on its appearance created a great sensation. The Puritans, who ran 
 in the narrowest of narrow grooves, disliked and maligned the great principle 
 of divine charity on which it was founded. The school of Laud and Cosin, 
 of Shelford and Pocklington, appeared unprepared to acccept its line of 
 argument and conclusions, if a true judgment can be formed from the 
 various attitudes taken up by different writers who put themselves forward 
 to reply to it. Amongst his own co-religionists, many were found who 
 questioned the wisdom of his policy, because they were unprepared to allow 
 the Church of England all that he had assumed it still retained and 
 possessed. Others, again, saw in his Christian temper and moderation 
 much to commend ; and for the future were of good courage and hopeful. 
 For the general tone and feeling of the clergy were rapidly changing, as 
 Davenport had long ago discovered at Oxford ; while the dreary Calvinism 
 and mischievous Erastianism under Elizabeth had given place to principles 
 far more nearly approaching those of the ancient system than had ever 
 energized since the evil days of separation and division under Henry the 
 Eighth. Father Leander, a friend and contemporary of Sancta Clara, who 
 had been specially sent to enquire into the true state of the Church of
 
 ( xxiii 
 
 England, fully testifies to tin's change, and especially to her character as 
 entirely distinct from that of foreign Protestant sects. * It is no wonder, 
 therefore, that when a small section of Roman Catholics in England 
 attempted to obtain a formal condemnation of Sancta Clara's book, the 
 King, who had been its patron, whose sympathies were entirely in a 
 Catholic direction, and who longed for lie-union, f gave a special commis- 
 sion to the Queen's agent at Rome to prevent so unfortunate a mistake 
 being committed, f Through the over-zealous partizanship of certain 
 persons who appeared unable to comprehend rightly the great object which 
 its author entertained, and so charitably desired to see accomplished, several 
 attempts to bring it under the censure of the " Holy Office" were made, but 
 failed. Amongst Clarendon's State Papers a Letter from Rome from 
 " John Selbye " to Father Leander who styles himself elsewhere 
 " F. Leander de S. Martino, Congregationis Anglia3 Benedictmoruni 
 
 * "They [i.e., members of the Church 
 of England] agree in all the doctrine of the 
 Trinity, and Incarnation and True Deity 
 of our Blessed Saviour ; in the points of 
 Providence, predestination, justification, ne- 
 cessity of good works, co-operation of free- 
 will with the grace of God : they admit the 
 first four General Councils, the three au- 
 thentic symbols, of the Apostles, Nice or 
 Constantinople, and of St. Athanasius, as 
 they are received in the Roman Church ; 
 they reverence the Primitive Church, and 
 unanimous consent of the ancient fathers, 
 and all traditions and ceremonies which can 
 be sufficiently proved by testimony of anti- 
 quity ; they admit a settled Liturgy, taken 
 out of the Roman Liturgy, distinction of 
 orders, bishops, priests, and deacons, in 
 distinct habits from the laity, and divers 
 other points in which no transmarine Pro- 
 testants do agree." Father Leander's.Repor 
 of the State and Character of the Church of 
 England (A.D. 1634), addressed to Cardinal 
 
 Barberino. Clarendon's State Papers, 
 vol. i., p. 207. 
 
 f From the " Instructions" given by His 
 Majesty King Charles to Captain Arthur 
 Brett, sent to Rome as agent of the Queen 
 (A.D. 1635) : " You may of yourself, as you 
 will find occasion, insinuate that as the 
 Pope is a Temporal Prince, we shall not be 
 unwilling to join with him, as we do with 
 other Catholic Roman Princes, in anything 
 that may conduce to the peace of Christen- 
 dom and to the visible Re-uni<5n of the 
 Church." 
 
 J Letter from to (vol. i. p. 
 
 171, Clarendon's State Papers): "You 
 desired me to do what possibly I could to 
 stop their proceedings at Rome against Mr. 
 W. How and Mr. Francis de Sancta Clara's 
 Books, lest the State should be exasperated 
 in case the Cardinals should pass any censure 
 against them upon your word. I did so." 
 
 Clarendon's State Papers, vol. i., p. 168.
 
 ( xxiv ) 
 
 Praeses generalis," contains the following : " The event of Father 
 Francis Clare's Book will be that it will be forbidden : yet in the 
 inodestest kind, to give His Majesty satisfaction, who is exceedingly 
 beloved and esteemed here, by great and little, for his virtues, of which 
 all sorts give abundant commendations ; and for this same reason they 
 will not proceed against the author's person, as they intended. This ivas 
 their intention, but the prolonging of their prohibiting causes some suspi- 
 cion of alteration in their designs. For me I have always urged that 
 respect be had to His Majesty, and that the book should not be forbid, and 
 this I protest sincerely unto you, upon my salvation." According to Mr. 
 John Selbye, therefore, it was neither the merits nor demerits of the book 
 which were under discussion, but altogether another consideration. In 
 a letter from Rome, which was addressed to Mr. Secretary Windebank, and 
 is endorsed by him, dated Nov. 15, 1634, the writer tells us who John Selbye 
 was : " Our Procurator in Rome is called by his proper name, Richard 
 Reade, and is a northern man, as I take it, of the Bishoprick of Durham ; but, 
 according to our custom in the Order of S. Bennet, changed his name to 
 Brother Wilfred ; and because the Italians can hardly pronounce that name, 
 he took the name of John Wilfred Selbye, they, upon that, calling him still 
 Fra. Juan Selbye." The case of Sancta Clara, at Rome, is the subject of 
 comment in another letter from Mr. Wilfred (Qy.[? Mr. Wilfred, i.e., John 
 Wilfred Selbye) to Father Leander, at p. 250 of the State Papers ; and 
 again, in a second communication from the same to the same, dated " Rome, 
 May 9, 1635." Some, at least, of his brethren of the Franciscan Order, 
 appear to have disliked Sancta Clara's Treatise, for, in another letter, at p. 
 336 of the State Papers, a detailed account of what was being practically 
 attempted in Italy is set forth : " Here (at Rome) is arrived one Morton, 
 an English Franciscan, and is already gone to Naples to find the General. 
 I hear, at his return, that he will urge that F. Francis Clara's book be 
 condemned. If I meet him before he makes this proposition, I will strive 
 to divert him from it ; for I see no reason that if His Majesty desires, it 
 should not be forbid but he should have satisfaction." Thus, we mark how
 
 ( XXV ) 
 
 important and valuable was the indirect approbation passed on the book 
 and on the great principle it embodied. About the same period it received 
 direct and formal approbation from so many independent quarters that it 
 may be almost said to represent the mind of the Roman Catholic com- 
 munion at the period at which its merits were openly canvassed and 
 determined. 
 
 However, in the Rev. Joseph Berington's Memoirs of Gregorio Panzani 
 (London : 1813), a work of the greatest interest to all who see the im- 
 portance of endeavouring to promote the visible Re-union of Christians, 
 this work of Sancta Clara is referred to at length in a passage which gives 
 a somewhat different judgment of its merits, and of the proceedings con- 
 cerning it, than was delivered by others equally competent to form one. If 
 these Memoirs were not actually written by Panzani, he at all events, as 
 Mr. Berington maintains, furnished the materials ; it may, therefore, be con- 
 cluded that the opinion thus placed on record was entertained by some in 
 authority : " I must here notice a contest which happened concerning the 
 book entitled Deus, Natura, Gratia, the author whereof was Mr. Davenport, 
 a Franciscan friar, otherwise called Franciscus a Sancta Clara. This book 
 was highly esteemed by His Majesty, as being full of complaisance for the 
 Protestant* systems in several points, and discovering an inclination of 
 approaching nearer to them by concessions, where the Catholic cause would 
 permit it to be done. But the work was far from being liked at the Roman 
 Court, where it was considered as a very dangerous production, far too 
 condescending to schismatics and heretics. The generality also of the 
 English Catholics were displeased with it. At Rome they proceeded to 
 censure it, though the decree was not made public, the author himself 
 being first summoned to make his appearance, which he declined on 
 account of infirmity, promising to give satisfaction any other way. 
 
 * Protestant, i.e. Church of England. " Protestant faith," meaning of course the 
 
 This term had a different meaning in the faith as taught in the Church of England, 
 
 seventeenth century from that which it Bishops Cosin and Ken used the term in a 
 
 bears now. Abp. Laud said he died in the similar sense.
 
 ( xxvi ) 
 
 " This, indeed, was but a private concern, yet it had a public influence, 
 as things then stood. It was the opinion of many that the king was inclined 
 to hearken to terms of an Union between the Two Churches ; and that ho 
 looked on this book of Davenport as a remote disposition towards it. It 
 was, therefore, deemed an impolitic step in Kome to let their censures loose 
 against it at this juncture. Father Philip was very industrious in ac- 
 quainting the Roman Court with the inconveniences of rigorous proceedings. 
 He advised them to go on slowly ; to wink at the author for a time, alleging 
 that he had submitted himself, and that it would be soon enough to take 
 notice of him when he persisted, or affairs would permit a censure. Soon 
 after, care was taken to inform Windebank that the condemnation was 
 suppressed. But it happening that the author, or some one for him, set 
 forth another edition, in which no submission was expressed, Panzani told 
 the secretary he was afraid the Court of Rome would proceed to a censure, 
 and declare the author contumacious, that the faithful might not be 
 scandalised. The account gave Windebank great concern ; and being 
 acquainted with the author, he conferred with him on the subject. They 
 agreed in opinion that the censure would irritate the king, and divert him 
 from any thoughts of an Union. However, to soften the matter, it was 
 given out, and confidently reported, that Mr. Davenport was still prepared 
 to submit himself, and that he had no hand in the second edition, it being 
 the bookseller's contrivance solely for the sake of gain. Windebank also 
 pressed Panzani to take care that they were very cautious at Rome, for that 
 it would certainly ruin all their projects, if a work of that pacific tendency 
 were condemned. But notwithstanding all the care which the author and 
 his friends could take to stifle the censure (which as yet was only privately 
 whispered at Rome), the Jesuits were very busy in publishing it among 
 their acquaintance in England. Davenport then published an Apology, 
 wherein he amply declares himself as to the work itself, and submits himself 
 both in that, and all other matters, to the Roman see. He was not, how- 
 ever, willing to leave England ; but rather strove to shelter himself under 
 the king's protection, winch to some persons appeared to be a veiy odd
 
 ( xxvii ) 
 
 proceeding, and looked as if ho designed to go on further. Even some 
 suspected the worst of him, from his having once been a member of the 
 English Church. In the meanwhile Panzani omitted not to advise his 
 Court to be cautious, and to compliment the king in favour of Mr. Daven- 
 port, as far as the case would admit." Pp. 165-168. 
 
 At the Restoration of King Charles the Second, when a marriage was 
 celebrated between His Majesty and Catharine of Braganza, Sancta Clara 
 was appointed theologian and one of the Queen's chief chaplains. Five 
 years previously he had been elected, for the third time, Provincial of the 
 English Franciscans,* and at the expiration of his term of office of three 
 years, was again appointed to the same honourable position. Antony & Wood 
 writes that he was " accounted the greatest and chiefest pillar of his order," 
 remarking elsewhere " that he was excellently well versed in school divinity, 
 the Fathers and Councils, philosophers, and in ecclesiastical and profane 
 histories." He is said to have been likewise a person of very pleasing 
 manners, " of free discourse," " of a vivacious and quick countenance," 
 quick of apprehension, and of great accomplishments. His company was 
 greatly sought after by Roman Catholics, and he was held in considerable 
 estimation by members of the Church of England, ever displaying a kindly 
 feeling for those from whom he was separated, and evincing much anxiety 
 to restore to the whole nation that unity of feeling, action, and faith which 
 it had once possessed, having " scarce been broke for a centurie." 
 
 As any sketch of the Author's life would be obviously imperfect without 
 a list of his many works, upon which his reputation is founded, and such 
 accounts of them as would enable the reader to discover them for himself, 
 a list is give:: below, with as much reliable information regarding the par- 
 ticular treatise which is here presented in completeness, as could be 
 obtained : 
 
 * " This truly great man succeeded F. opinion entertained by his brethren of his 
 
 (Jennings, at the third chapter of the order, experience and merits, that they re-elected 
 
 in London, 19th June, 1637 ; was re- him at their twelfth chapter, holden in 
 
 appointed by the seventh chapter at Xew- London, 4th June, 1655." MS. Notes of 
 
 port, 10th July, 1650 ; and such was the the late Canon Oliver, of Exeter.
 
 ( xxviii ) 
 
 1. His first work, published at Douay, in 1626, is entitled, Tract, 
 adversus Judiciarum Astrologiani. 
 
 2. Then follows that to which in its reprint this sketch is prefixed : 
 Paraplirastica Expositio Articulorum Confessionis Anglican This was first 
 printed separately, but afterwards at the end of the Tractatus de Prcedesti- 
 natione, etc. It was much " talked against" by the Jesuits, but having been 
 formally sanctioned and approved at Rome, little was henceforth said about 
 it. Though condemned in Spain f it was distinctly approved by several 
 theologians and schools elsewhere, and was generally recognised by contem- 
 porary theologians. 
 
 3. Tractatus de Prcedestinatione, de Mentis et Peccatorum Remissione, etc. 
 Ludg. Bat. 1634. [Bodleian, A. A. 30. Th. Seld.] In the year follow- 
 ing the said book came out with this title, Deus, Natura, Gratia, sive 
 Tractatus, etc. [Lugduni, 1635. Bodleian, 8vo, C. 252. British Museum, 
 Lugduni, 1634, 4to. 4376. f.] 
 
 4. Sy sterna Fidei, sive Tractatus de Concilia Universali, etc. Leod. 1648. 
 [Bodleian. 4to. T. 79, Th.] 
 
 f " However in Spain it was censur'd, This man (Alonzo) had been a Jesuit, and 
 
 and how and why, let the author tell you was esteemed not only to have left them 
 
 in his own words (Letter dated 6th April, rudely, but to have given himself up to get 
 
 1672), sent to me, thus: 'You told me money, &c. In a letter also from Mr. 
 
 that Mr. Leiburne shew'd you the Index Middleton (then chaplain to Basil, Lord 
 
 Expurgatorms of Spain, wherein was named Fielding, ambassador) to Archbishop Laud, 
 
 the Book of Articles published by me. dated at Venice, in December, 1635, I find 
 
 There was here (in London) a Spanish there passages that the book of Sancta 
 
 ambassador in the time of Oliver [" under Clara, relished not well with the Catholics, 
 
 the rebels." First edition] named Alonzo and that there was a consultation about it, 
 
 de Cardenas, who had great malice to the and some did ' extrema suadere,' and cried 
 
 last King, and being informed by a ' ad ignem.' 1 Father Thomas Talbot, a 
 
 knave that the book was dedicated to, and Jesuit of Paris, told him so by letter, who, 
 
 accepted by, the King [Charles I.] whom talking with the Pope's Nuncio at Paris 
 
 he esteemed his enemy, he surreptitiously about it, he told him it was the best course 
 
 procured in Spain to have it censured. He to let it die of itself, to which the Nuncio, 
 
 endeavoured to have it done so in Rome, a moderate man, was inclinable." Wood's 
 
 but they answered as Pilate, l Non invenio Athenee Oxoniensis. Ed. Bliss. Vol. iii., 
 
 causam, 1 and therefore it passed safe. p. 1224.
 
 ( xxix ) 
 
 5. Opusculum de Defindbilitate Controversial Immaculatce Conceptions Dei 
 Genitricis. [Duaci, 1651, 4to. British Museum, 475, A. 6.] 
 
 6. Tractatus de Schismate speciatim Anglicano. 
 
 7. Fragmenta : seu Historia minor provincial Anglice Fratrum minorum. 
 [British Museum, 4to, 489^.] 
 
 8. Manuale Missionariorum Regularium, prcecipue Anglorum S. Francisci, 
 etc. Printed at Douay, 1658, and again in 1661, in 12mo. [British 
 Museum, 867, Gr. 2, and 866, A. 5.] 
 
 9. Apologia Episcoporum, etc. Colog. Agrip., 1640, 8vo. [Bodl., 8vo., 
 c 4, Th. Seld.] 
 
 10. Liber Dialogorum, seu Summa veteris Theologies Dialogismis tradita. 
 Duac., 1661, 8vo. 
 
 11. Problemata Scholastica et Controversial Speculativa, etc. 
 
 12. Collarium Dialogi de Medio Statu Anirnarum, etc. 
 
 13. Paralipomena Philosophica de Mundo Peripatetico. This was published 
 at Douay, under the name of Franciscus Coven triensis, in 1652, 8vo. 
 [Bodleian, 8vo., c 41, Art. Seld.] ; and at Antwerp, 1652, 8vo. [British 
 Museum, 1135, B. 10.] 
 
 14. Religio Philosophies peripatetici discutienda, etc. Duaci, 1662, 8vo. 
 [British Museum, 1019, D. 8.] 
 
 15. Supplementum Histories provincial Anglice, etc. Duaci, 1671, fol. 
 
 16. Disputatio de antiqua provincial prcecedentia. Duaci, 1671. 
 
 17. Enchiridion of Faith, etc. By Francis Coventrie. Douay, 1655, 
 12mo. [British Museum, 857, A. 22.] 
 
 18. Explanation of the Roman Catholic Belief. Printed 1656 [Bodleian, 
 8vo., c 716, Line.] ; reprinted 1670. 
 
 19. In addition to the above, a collected edition of his works (in two 
 volumes) was issued, in 1665, from Douay Duaci, typis Baltazaris Bel- 
 leri, sub circeno aureo [British Museum, 478, D. 12*] under the following 
 title : Operum Omnium Scholasticorum et Historicorum R. Adm. ac Eximii 
 
 * Contains the author's autograph "S. Angele, ex dono Authoris, 1670."
 
 ( XXX ) 
 
 Pains Magistri F. Francisci a S. Clara. The contents of which are as 
 follows : Vol. I. (1.) Systema Fidd. (2.) Tractatus de Schismate, etc. 
 (3.) Fragmenta seu Historia FF. Minorum, etc. (4.) Manuale Missiona- 
 riorum. Vol. II. (1.) Apologia Episcoporum. (2.) Liber Dialogorum, 
 etc. (3.) Problemata Scholastica. (4.) Opusculum de Medio Statu Animarum. 
 (5.) Paralipomena PhilosophicajGtc. (6.) Religio Philosophice,etc. (7.) Epis- 
 tola adversus Judiciarum Astrologiam. [N.B. All these independent 
 treatises are paged independently, and each is complete in itself, with its 
 own title-page.]* 
 
 Sancta Clara, fortified by the Sacraments of Holy Church, died at the 
 ripe age of eighty-two, at Somerset House, early in the morning, on the 
 31st of May, being Whitsun Monday, 1680, and was buried, not according 
 to a wish expressed before his death, in a vault under the chapel of 
 Somerset House, but in the Church of St. John, belonging to the Savoy 
 Hospital in the Strand.f Antony a Wood remarks that Sancta Clara had 
 previously wished especially to be interred in the Church of St. Ebbe in 
 Oxford, to which an old house of the Franciscans formerly joined, and 
 where several of his brethren of the order had been anciently laid to rest ; 
 but this desire, too, seems not to have been carried out. Thus passed away 
 one, who, amid the trying scenes of a long lifetime, had striven patiently 
 and charitably to bring together his fellow-countrymen into One religious 
 obedience ; and who, in the end, went to his account, doubtless, to receive 
 in its fulness the blessed reward which the Peacemakers shall enjoy here- 
 after. F. G. L. 
 
 * In the Library of the Franciscan Con- children, and a most watchful shepherd and 
 
 vent at Taunton is preserved the MS. of faithful labourer in the English Mission 
 
 Sancta Clara's translation from the Portu- during the space of fifty-seven years, 
 
 guese of the " Chronicles of the Franciscan making himself all to all to gain all to 
 
 Order," which was printed at St. Omer, in Christ." 
 4to, in 1618. [Qy ? as to date. Ed.] The Rev. Henry White, M.A., chap- 
 
 t In the MS. Franciscan Register it is lain of the Savoy Chapel, most courteously 
 
 said that " he accomplished three jubilees wrote to the editor, May 22, 1865, as fol- 
 
 of religion, of the priesthood, and of the lows : "I have looked in vain for the 
 
 mission : that to the end he proved himself register you seek no such name appears at 
 
 a most loving father to his brethren and or about your date,"
 
 SERENISSIMO ATQUE INVICTISS. PRINCIPI 
 
 C A E O L O I. 
 
 MAGN2E BEITANNI^l, &c., EEGI. 
 
 Scite dictum est illud Augustini contra Cresconium : 
 Reges, in quantum Reges sunt, serviunt Deo, jubendo bona, et 
 prohibendo mala, non solum quae pertinent ad humanam socie- 
 tatem, sed etiam qua? ad drvinam Religionem. Non utique 
 putatitio, nedum supposititio, sed plane reali titulo a Deo per 
 Evangelicum Prophetam Isaiam ipsis concessum est ; Erunt 
 Reges nutritii tui, et Reginae nutritiae tuse. Nutritiorum vero, 
 sive tutorum est d/r^mvcToi/i/ew? mala pupillorum propulsare, bona 
 praesertim, quae ad pietatem spectant, viis sibi commodis pro- 
 movere. Hinc Constantinus, animum in omnes, qui suberant 
 imperio, intentum habuit, hortatus pro virili, ut piam omnes 
 vitam excolerent. Ut olim notavit Eusebius in ejus vita lib. 4. 
 Ad quam igitur, Serenissime Rex, in hac mira et misera corporis 
 Christ! dilaceratione recurrendum 1 nisi ad terram provolutus, 
 sacram tuam Majestatem in opportunum Ecclesiae sublevamen 
 (cujus a Deo Nutritius, ab ejus Vicario Defensor constitutus sis) 
 interpellem \ Secundum illud Augustini ad Bonifacium : Cum
 
 ( xxxii ) 
 
 in angustiis affligitur Ecclesia, quisquis existimat, omnia potius 
 sustinenda, quam Dei auxilium, ut per Imperatores Christianos 
 feratur, esse poscendum, parum attendit, non bonam de hac negli- 
 gentia reddi posse rationem. 
 
 Hilarium ergo, Constantinum in hunc modum alloquentem, 
 miserias nostri saeculi (quibus succumbimus,) ipsiusmet verbis 
 deplorans, insequar. Periculosum nobis admodum atque etiam 
 miserabile est, tot nunc fides existere, quot voluntates : et tot 
 nobis doctrinas esse, quot mores. Et postea : Dum aut ita fides 
 scribuntur ut volumus, aut ut volumus intelliguntur. 
 
 Contremiscunt ossa mea dum haec recogito ; morbus, ubi 
 spiritus vitales opprimuntur, nempe ut fides radix vitae corrum- 
 pitur, difficillime sanatur. Hie morbus noster. Remedium 
 tamen, et illud efficax, a Samaritano nostro designatum repe- 
 rimus ; nee aliud nisi illud : Die ECCLESLE. Dico. Ecclesise defini- 
 tiones Majestati vestrae propono ; Sanctorum Patrum et Venerabi- 
 lium Doctorum expositiones, Novatorum ineptiis, praepono ; quas 
 dum modeste retego, in Christo tego, saniem, non scalpendo, sed 
 suaviter lambendo lavo, ut abluam, sacro vestro Imperio opus, 
 quippe ut executioni mandetur, quod ab Ecclesia et Sanctis 
 Patribus sancitum est, secundum illud Justiniani Constit. 42 : 
 Haec decrevimus, Sanctorum Patrum Canones secuti. Hoc tua 
 Maj estate dignum, hoc dignitati causae consonum, hoc saluti 
 animarum prorsus necessarium. Et omnis populus dicet, Amen. 
 
 MAJESTATIS 
 Devotissimus subditus, 
 
 FR. FEAN. A S. CLAEA.
 
 CENSURE ET JUDICIA DOCTORUM. 
 
 Judicium eximii D. ac Magistri nostri Jacobi Dreux, 
 Doctoris Sorbonici. 
 
 "OEVEEENDE Pater. Summa cum animi voluptate, legi atque expend! 
 *-*' partem utramque doctissimi tui Operis, in quo fateor, non modo me 
 nihil deprehendisse a Fide orthodoxa bonisve moribus alienum, sed et 
 laudasse consilium ac propositum tuum, quod in Ecelesiae utilitatem cessurum 
 auguror, ad conciliandos errantium animos, si Deus Opt. Max. cceptis tuis 
 annuat ; quod spero precorque. Ita me amare pergas, uti me ex ammo 
 
 profiteer 
 
 Tibi addictissimum 
 
 DEEUX. 
 Londini pridie Caknd. Augusti, 1633. 
 
 T IBRUM hunc inscriptum, Dcus, Natura, Gratia, &c., vidi, legi, perlegi. 
 J-^ Quid multa ? Electione sententiarum, explicatione sacrarum Scrip- 
 turarum et sanctorum Patrum, soliditate argumentorum, resolutionum 
 pondere, claritate, methodo, stylo Scoto dignissimum reperi. 
 
 THOM. BLACLOUS, 
 
 S. Theol. Professor. 
 
 T IBELLUS qui sic inscribitur, Articuli Confessionis Anglicance para- 
 J-^ plirastice e^onuntur, &c., ex zelo Fidei et animarum scriptus omnibus
 
 ( xxxiv ) 
 
 concordiaB et pacis Christianse ainicis non potest non esse acceptus, cuin 
 Catholico et animo et calamo scriptus sit, et errantibus, ut ad Christ! caulam 
 rediturn. inveniant, facem Catholic veritatis quasi ex propinquo ad alli- 
 ciendos pusillanimes ostentet. Actum die 5 Julii, 1633. 
 
 THOM. BLACLOUS, 
 
 S. Theol. Professor. 
 
 PRO voto vestro amicus ille cujus judicium tanti facis, Librurn hunc cui 
 titulus, Deus t Natura, et Gratia, &c., perlegit, et dignum prselo consult, 
 sperans inter Protestantes saltern moderations, fructui futurum. Actum, 
 
 20 Aprilis. 
 
 FB. GUL. TOMSONUS, 
 
 S. Theol. Doctor. 
 
 A MICUS vester has ultimas chartas revisit, et idem de his quod de 
 *- prioribus fert judicium. Actum, 22 Julii, 1633. 
 
 FR. GUL. TOMSONUS, 
 
 S. Theol. Doctor. 
 
 rpRACTATUM hunc perlegi, et nihil contra Fidem Catholicam vel bonos 
 -L mores aut ex alio titulo reprobandum : e contra vero doctrina Theo* 
 logica et Scholastica subtiliter confertum, reperi. Et vere secundurn 
 calculum meum publicatio operis Protestantibus moderatioribus arridebit 
 (omnibus placere difficillimum) et ad readunationem cum Ecclesia Romana, 
 dum opportunum fuerit, disponet, et interim reverentiorem ejus sestimationem 
 inuret. praesertim reliquos Confessionis Anglicse Articulos (quod optarem) 
 eadem moderatioue exponere vellet, et ad calcem hujus operis (si pro voto 
 successerit) Lectorem spe cseterorum, foveres. Haec opinio mea> melius 
 sententium judicio me subniittens. Actum hac 16 April, 1633. 
 
 T. P. S. Theol. Professor*
 
 ( XXXV ) 
 
 HANG posteriorein tractatus partem diligenter perlegi, et nihil non 
 Catholicae et Eomanae Fidei consentaneum reperi. Inimo ut publicetur 
 cum priori in commune bonum seque necessarium censeo : et quo citius, 
 melius : publicatio enini operi expeditior non erit nociva, sed valde conimoda. 
 Acturn hac 11 Julii, 1633. 
 
 THO. P. S. Theol. Profess. 
 
 rilEXORE hujus testificor me sedulo perlegisse et accurate recensuisse 
 J- Librum inscriptum : Deus, Natura, Gratia, cum tractatu de Mentis et 
 peccatonun remissione, sen de Jmtificatione, denique de Sanctonim Invoca- 
 tionc, &c. In quo nihil nisi Fidei orthodoxss et Romanse Ecclesiae consen- 
 taneum occurrit : opus adeo dignissimuin quod ad conscientise directionem, 
 ingeniorum quantumvis subtilium eruditionem, et ad Reipubl. literarise 
 utilitatem typis conimendetur, et in publicum quamprimum prodeat. Datum 
 die 20 Junii, 1633. 
 
 CHAISSY, extra Mnr. Provinc. PP. Recol. 
 Prov. S. Bernardi, et olim tarn in Italia, quam 
 Gallia, S. Theol. Lector Generalis. 
 
 HABITA ratione tui zeli et eruditionis, attentis etiarn testimoniis horum 
 in Schola Theologica per illustrium worum, Facultatem facio, quatenus, 
 cum salutaris obedientise merito, tractatum de justificatione et problematibus 
 annexis prselo mandare, ut poteris citius, cures* Yale, Deum pro nobis 
 
 oraturus. 
 
 FB. JOAN. GENNINOS, 
 
 Anglise Mnr. 
 
 PLACET, ut hsec Expositio paraphrastica, testimonio tantorum ^arorum 
 approbate preelo mandetui-. Hac 20 Julii, 1633. 
 
 FE. JOAN. GENNINGS.
 
 ( xxxvi ) 
 
 T7TDI et attente perlegi utramque partem hujus operis, cui prior titulus, 
 Dem, Natura, Gratia, &c., posterior, Articuli Confessionis An- 
 glicance paraphrastice exponuntur, &c. In quo universa comperi, non 
 solum verse fidei et orthodoxse religion!, necnon optimis moribus consona, 
 sed etiam mira pietate ac eruditione referta, dignumque censui qui possit 
 typis mandari, in cujus rei fidem hoc propria manu scripsi et subscripsi. 
 
 Actum die 24 Aug. 1633. 
 
 PETRUS MARTINUS, 
 
 Theol. Professor. 
 
 
 
 IMNIA haec superius exscripta exempla vidi, et cum singulis eomm 
 Originalibus contuli, quibuscum ea concordare testor infra scriptus. 
 
 Datum Londini, 30 Calend. Septembr. 1683. 
 
 D.D.M.C. D. DAVID, Monachus et Decanus Congregationis 
 
 Fidelis. Casinensis olim Romse Sereniss. D. N. Urbani 
 
 Papae octavi Poenitentiarius, Notarius Apos- 
 tolicus.
 
 ARTICULI 
 
 CONFESSIONS ANGLICyE, 
 
 PARAPHRASTICE EXPONUNTUR, 
 
 ET IN QUANTUM CUM VEBITATE COMPOSSIBILES 
 BEDDI POSSUNT, PEBLUSTBANTUB. 
 
 ARTICULUS I. De Fide in Sacro- 
 sanctam Trinitatem. 
 
 UNUS est virus et verus Deus, 
 geternus, incorporeus, imparti- 
 bilis, impassibilis, immensa? potential, 
 sapientise, ac bonitatis, Creator atque 
 Conservator omnium, turn visibilium, 
 turn invisibilium. Et in imitate 
 hujus divine naturae, tres sunt per- 
 sona?, ejusdem essentiso, potential, ac 
 asternitatis, Pater, Filius, et Spiritus 
 Sanctus. 
 
 THE ARTICLES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ANGLICAN CONFESSION 
 
 PARAPHRASTICALLY EXPLAINED, 
 
 AND CONSIDERED AS TO HOW FAE THEY 
 
 CAN BE RECONCILED WITH THE 
 
 TBUE FAITH. 
 
 ARTICLE I. Of Faith in the Holy 
 Trinity. 
 
 fTlHEIlE is but one living and 
 JL 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 
 Persons, of one substance, power, 
 and eternity; the Father, the Son, 
 and the Holy Ghost. 
 
 ARTICULUS II. De Verio, sive Filio 
 Dei, qui verus Homo /actus est. 
 
 FILIUS, qui est Verbum Patris, 
 ab seterno a Patre genitus, verus 
 et seternus Deus, ac Patri consub- 
 stantialis, in utero Beata3 Virginis, 
 ex illius substantia, naturam huma- 
 nam assumpsit : ita ut dua? naturse 
 divina et humana, integre atque 
 perfecte in unitate persona) fucrint 
 
 ARTICLE II. Of the Word or Son 
 of God) which u-as made very Man. 
 
 THE Son, which is the Word of 
 the Father, begotten from ever- 
 lasting of the Father, the very and 
 eternal God, and of one substance 
 with the Father, took Man's nature 
 in the womb of the blessed Virgin, 
 of her substance: so that two whole 
 and perfect Natures, that is to say,
 
 inseparabillter conjunct^?, ex quibus 
 est turns Christus, verus Deus et 
 verus homo, qui vere passus est, cruci- 
 fixus, mortuus, et sepultus, ut Patrem 
 nobis reconciliaret, essetque hostia, 
 non tantum pro culpa originis, verum 
 etiam pro omnibus actualibus homi- 
 num peccatis, 
 
 the Godhead and Manhood, were 
 joined together in one Person, never 
 to be divided, whereof is one Christ, 
 very God, and very Man ; who truly 
 suffered, was crucified, dead and 
 buried, to reconcile his Father to us, 
 and to be a sacrifice, not only for 
 original guilt, but also for all actual 
 sins of men. 
 
 ARTICULUS III. De descensu Christi 
 ad Inferos. 
 
 rvUEMADMODUM Christus pro 
 \J nobis mortuus est, et sepultus, 
 ita est etiam credendus ad Inferos 
 descendisse. 
 
 ARTICLE III. Of the going down of 
 Christ into Hell. 
 
 AS Christ died for us, and was 
 buried, so also is it to be be- 
 lieved, that he went down into Hell. 
 
 ARTICULUS IV. De Resurrectiom 
 Christi. 
 
 vere a mortals resur- 
 \J rexit, suumque corpus cum 
 carne, ossibus, omnibusque ad integri- 
 tatem humanoa naturae pertinentibus, 
 recepit ; cum quibus in coelum as- 
 cendit, ibique residet, quoad extremo 
 die ad judicandos homines reversu- 
 rus sit. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. Of the Resurrection 
 of Christ. 
 
 /CHRIST did truly rise again from 
 \J death, and took again his body, 
 with flesh, bones, and all things ap- 
 pertaining to the perfection of Man's 
 nature; wherewith he ascended into 
 Heaven, and there sitteth, until he 
 return to judge all Men at the last 
 day. 
 
 ARTICULUS V. De Spiritu Sancto. 
 
 QPIRITUS Sanctus, a Patre et 
 kJ Filio procedens, ejusdem est 
 cum Patre et Filio essential, majcsta- 
 tis, et gloria 1 , verus ac scternus Deus. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 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.
 
 AimcULUS VI. De divinis Scrip- 
 turis, quod sufficiant ad salutem. 
 
 QCRIPTURA sacra continet om- 
 O nia, quse ad salutem sunt ueces- 
 saria, ita ut quicquid in ea nee 
 legitur, neque inde probari potest, 
 non sit a quoquam exigendum, ut 
 tanquam articulus fidei credatur, ant 
 ad salutis necessitatem requiri pute- 
 tur. Sacrae Scripturte nomine, eos 
 canonicos libros Veteris et Novi 
 Testamenti intelligimus, de quorum 
 auctoritate in Ecclesia nunquam 
 dubitatum est. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Quinque Articuli 
 priores solum Symbolum Apostolo- 
 rum exponunt, nee ministrant mate- 
 riam examinis. Articulus vero sextus 
 quoad priorem paragraplmm exami- 
 nabitur in Articulis 20, 21, et 34. 
 
 ARTICLE VI. Of the Sufficiency of 
 the holy Scriptures for Salvation. 
 
 HOLY Scripture containeth all 
 things necessary to salvation : 
 so that whatsoever is not read there- 
 in, nor may be proved thereby,* is 
 not to be required of any man, that 
 it should be believed as an article of 
 the Faith, or be thought requisite or 
 necessary to salvation. In the name 
 of the Holy Scripture we do under- 
 stand those Canonical Books of the 
 Old and New Testament, of whose 
 authority was never any doubt in 
 the Church.f 
 
 EXPLANATION. The first five 
 Articles merely explain the Apostles' 
 Creed, and afford no matter for ex- 
 amination. The sixth Article, how- 
 ever, as respects the first paragraph, 
 will be examined in treating of Ar- 
 
 * [Vide Article XX., which supplies 
 what is wanting here. " May be proved 
 thereby," z.e., by the (Catholic or Uni- 
 versal) Church. For "the Church .... 
 hath authority in controversies of Faith."] 
 
 f [By the same rule by which this Ar- 
 ticle is made to exclude the so-called 
 "Apocrypha," must be excluded if the rule 
 be faithfully and impartially applied The 
 Book of Revelations, St. Paul's Epistle to 
 the Hebrews, and The Second Epistle of 
 St. Peter, besides important portions of 
 other parts of the New Testament. The 
 Third and Fourth Books of Esdras, and 
 
 The Prayer of Manasses, were not received 
 by the Council of Trent. Baruch the 
 Prophet, The Song of the Three Children 
 (Benedicite), The Story of Susanna, and 
 The Book of Bel and the Dragon, were 
 frequently quoted by the Fathers as por- 
 tions respectively of Jeremiah and Daniel. 
 It should be further remarked that this 
 Article does not declare the " other books" 
 commonly called the "Apocrypha" to be 
 (A) either destitute of inspiration, or (u) 
 simply human ; but only declares that (the 
 Church) " doth not apply them to establish 
 any doctrine."] 
 
 B?
 
 Quod vero subdit de numero Scrip- 
 turarum Canonicarum, hujus loci 
 est. 
 
 De nominilus et numero TJ.brorum 
 Sacrce Scripture? Canonicce veteris 
 TestamentL* 
 
 Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Nu- 
 meri, Deuteron : prior Liber Paralipo- 
 menon, primus Liber Esdrse, secun- 
 dus Liber Esclrse, Liber Esther, 
 Josue, Judicum, Ruth, prior Liber 
 Regum, Secundus Liber Regum, 
 prior Liber Samuelis, Secundus 
 Liber Samuelis, Liber Job, Psalmi, 
 Proverbia, Ecclesiastes vel Conciona- 
 tor, Cantica Solomonis, quatuor 
 Prophets) majores, duodecim Pro- 
 phetae minores. 
 
 Caeteros, authoritate Hieronymi, 
 adducti in Ecclesiis ad mores instru- 
 endos, non ad doctrinam firmandam 
 legi jubent. Cujus generis sunt : 
 
 tides 20, 21, and 34; but the re- 
 mainder, concerning the number of 
 the Books of Canonical Scripture, 
 belongs to this place. 
 
 Of the names and number of the 
 
 Books of Canonical Scripture of 
 
 the Old Testament. 
 
 Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Num- 
 bers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 
 Ruth, The First Book of Samuel, 
 The Second Book of Samuel, The 
 First Book of Kings, The Second 
 Book of Kings, The First Book of 
 Chronicles, The Second Book of 
 Chronicles, The First Book of Es- 
 dras, The Second Book of Esdras, 
 Tim Book of Esther, The Book of 
 Job, The Psalms, The Proverbs, 
 Ecclesiastes or the Preacher, Cantica, 
 or Songs of Solomon, Four Prophets 
 the greater, Twelve Prophets the less. 
 
 The remaining books, on the au- 
 thority of Jerome, they order to be 
 read in Church for instruction of 
 manners, not for the establishing of 
 doctrine, of which kind are: 
 
 * [This part of Article VI., reprinted 
 verbatim from the edition of Sancta Clara, 
 published in London, without any printer's 
 name, A.D. 1646, is not, as far as its actual 
 text is concerned, quite accurate in the 
 order in which the Old Testament Books 
 are placed. The paragraph above, be- 
 ginning "Ca>teros, etc.," stands as follows 
 in the Latin edition of Kay : " Alios 
 autcm Libros (ut ait Hicronymus) legit 
 
 quidem Ecclesia, ad exempla vitse, ct for- 
 mandos mores : illos tamen ad dogmata 
 confirmanda non adhibet, ut sunt : " and 
 thus in the English form of Ihe Article : 
 "And 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 ; 
 such as these following : ."]
 
 Tertius Liber Esdra?, quartus 
 Liber Esdiw, Liber Tobia?, Liber 
 Judith, reliquum Libri Esther, Liber 
 Sapientia^, Liber Jesu filii Sirach, 
 Baruch Propheta?, Canticum trium 
 puerorum, Historian Susanna?, de 
 Bel et Dracone, Oratio Manasses, 
 prior Liber Maccaba?orum, secundus 
 Liber Maccabxorom. 
 
 Novi Testament! omnes Libros 
 (ut vulgo recepti sunt) recipiuius et 
 habemus pro Canonicis. 
 
 PAEAPHRASIS. Liter Catholicos, 
 paucissimos invenio viros eruditos, 
 qui post Florentinum, in dubium 
 vocarunt ullos ex Libris ibi pro 
 Canonicis declaratis, nisi Cajetanum 
 in fine suorum Commentariorum 
 super Libros historiarum Yeteris 
 Testamenti, qui Libros in Articulo 
 exceptos, Canonicos recte appellari 
 fatetur ob authoritatem Conciliorum 
 et aliquorum Patrum, sed in dissimili 
 gradu ; scilicet, ut hie in Articulo : 
 non ad Fidem jirmandam, sed solum 
 ad mores instruendos ; ut olim lo- 
 quutus est Kuffinus in Expositione 
 Symboli. Franciscus etiam Miran- 
 dula " De Fide et ordine Credendi" 
 idem plane assent ex Hieronyino, et 
 
 The Third Book of Esdras, The 
 Fourth Book of Esdras, The Book 
 of Tobias, The Book of Judith, The 
 rest of the Book of Esther, The 
 Book of Wisdom, Jesus the Son of 
 Sirach, Baruch the Prophet, The 
 Song of the Three Children, The 
 Story of Susanna, Of Bel and the 
 Dragon, The Prayer of Manasses, 
 The First Book of Maccabees, The 
 Second Book of Maccabees. 
 
 All the Books of the New Testa- 
 ment, as they are commonly received, 
 we do receive, and account them 
 Canonical. 
 
 EXPLANATION. Among Catho- 
 lics, I find very few learned men 
 who since the Council of Florence 
 have raised a doubt concerning any 
 of the Books there declared Canoni- 
 cal, except Cajetan, at the end of his 
 Commentaries on the Historical Books 
 of the Old Testament. He confesses 
 that the Books excepted in the Arti- 
 cle are rightly called "Canonical,"' 
 on account of the authority of Coun- 
 cils and some Fathers; but in a dif- 
 ferent degree, as here in the Article, 
 not for the establishing of the Faith, 
 lut only for instruction of manners; 
 as was said long since by Ruffinus in 
 his " Exposition of the Creed." Fran- 
 ciscus Mirandula, too, in his treatise
 
 ad cunclem fere seiisum citat S. An- 
 toninum, post Lyranum in praef atione 
 ad libros Tobia?. 
 
 Haec eorum opinio, licet singularis 
 valde et certe haaresi proxima est, 
 prsesertim post Trid. ubi illos in 
 Canonem reponi declarat, secundum 
 quod ante fecerat Florentinuin cum 
 conseusu utriusque Ecclesia3. 
 
 Saltern sic Charanza citat Floren- 
 tinum, et alii ipso seniores. Video 
 tamen ab aliis viris doctis in dubiain 
 verti, an Florentinum libros illos 
 liodie controversos, tit Canonicos de- 
 claraverit : sed de Trid. constat, Quia 
 tamen Articulus non omnino rejicit 
 eos ex Canone, non videtur esse 
 hseresiin simpliciter : sic etiam Mel- 
 chior Cano in locis 1. 2. c. 9. ubi 
 tamen fatetur esse hccresi proximam^ 
 qnta certe veritati Catholiccv fidei ad- 
 rersatur; non manifeste quidem, sed 
 sapientum omnium longe prdbcibili ac 
 ferine necessarian sententia 1 . Facile 
 enim esset hujus modi glossemate, 
 quascunque quorumcunque Coneili- 
 
 "De fide et ordine Credendi," makes 
 the same plain assertion from St. 
 Jerome, and cites St. Antoninus to 
 almost the same purport, after De 
 Lyra in the " Preface to the Books of 
 Tobias." 
 
 Such is their opinion, though it be 
 quite singular and certainly approxi- 
 mating to heresy, especially since the 
 Council of Trent, which places the 
 Books in the Canon in accordance 
 with what the Council of Florence, 
 with the consent of both Churches, 
 Eastern and Western, had previously 
 done. 
 
 At least Charanza and others be- 
 fore him cite the Council of Flo- 
 rence to this purport* I find^ how^ 
 ever, that other learned men raise a 
 a doubt as to whether the Council of 
 Florence declared the Books, which 
 are at present controverted, to be 
 Canonical; but it is agreed that 
 Trent did. Since, however, the 
 Article does not wholly reject them 
 from the Canon, it does not seem to 
 be heresy, absolutely. According to 
 Melchior Cano, in his (t Loci Theo- 
 logici " (bk. ii. c. 9), where, however, 
 he allows it " to approximate to heresy-, 
 because it is certainly repugnant to tlie 
 truth of the Catholic Faith : not openly
 
 orum definitiones eludere et evertere. 
 Scio tamen Waldensem, 1. 2, Doc- 
 trinalis Fidei Antiq. c. 19. tenere quod 
 authoritas declarandi et approbandi 
 sacros libros sit in serie Patrum 
 omnium, et fidelium ab Apostolis 
 succedentium : sic etiam Driedonis 
 1. i. De Eccles. Scriptoria et Dog- 
 matibus, c. i. et hinc minus ausim 
 sententiam prsetactam Cajetani, et 
 hujus Articuli liasreseos insimulare. 
 
 indeed; but by being opposed to the 
 very probable and almost necessary 
 opinion of all learned men" For it 
 would be easy, by a gloss of this 
 kind, to escape from and overthrow 
 any definitions of any Councils. I 
 know however that Waldensis, 
 "Doctr. Fid. Antiq." (bk. ii. c. 19), 
 holds that the authority for declaring 
 and approving the Sacred Books rests 
 with the series of all the Fathers and 
 faithful in succession from the Apos- 
 tles, with whom agrees Driedonis "De 
 Eccles. Script, et Dogm." (bk. i. 
 c. i.) for these reasons, I should the 
 rather shrink from charging heresy 
 upon the above-mentioned opinion of 
 Cajetan and upon this Article. 
 
 ARTICULUS VII. De Veteri Testa- 
 mento. 
 
 FTIESTAMENTUM Vetus Novo 
 J_ contrarium non est, quandoqui- 
 dem tarn in Veteri, quam in Novo per 
 Christum, qui unicus est Mediator, 
 Dei et hominum, Deus et homo, 
 seterna vita humano generi est pro- 
 posita. Quare male sentiunt, qui 
 veteres tantum in proinissiones tem- 
 porarias sperasse confingunt. Quan- 
 quam lex a Deo data per Mosen 
 (quoad cseremonias et ritus) Chris- 
 tianos non astringat, neque civilia 
 
 ARTICLE VII. Of the Old Testa* 
 ment. 
 
 FT1HE Old Testament is not contrary 
 JL 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 Fa- 
 thers did look only for transitory 
 promises. Although the Law given 
 from God by Moses, as touching 
 Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind
 
 ejus prsecepta in aliqua rcpublica 
 necessario recipi debeant; nihilominus 
 tamen ab obeclicntia mandatorum 
 (qua3 moralia vocantur) nullus (quan- 
 tumvis Christianus) est solutus. 
 
 PARAPHRA.SIS. HicArticulusper 
 totum Catholicus est. 
 
 Christian men, nor the Civil precepts 
 thereof ought of necessity to be re- 
 ceived in any common-wealth; yet 
 notwithstanding, no Christian man 
 whatsoever is free from the obedience 
 of the Commandments which are 
 called Moral. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 Catholic throughout. 
 
 ARTICULUS VIII. De trilus Sym- 
 lolis. 
 
 H YMBOLA tria Nicaenum, Atha- 
 k} nasii, et quod vulgo Apostolo- 
 rum appellatur, omnino recipienda 
 sunt et credenda ; iiam firmissimis 
 Scripturaram testimoniis probari 
 possunt. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. D 
 judicium. 
 
 hoc idem est 
 
 ARTICLE VIII. Of the j.hree Creeds. 
 
 mHE Three Creeds, Nicene Creed, 
 -L Athanasius's 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. 
 
 EXPLANATION. The judgment 
 upon this is the same. 
 
 ARTICULUS IX. De Peccato 
 OriginalL 
 
 T)ECCATUM originis non est (nfc 
 -L fabulantur Pelagiani) in imita- 
 tione Adami situm, sed est vitiuin,. 
 et depravatio naturas, cujuslibet ho- 
 minis ex Adamo naturaliter propa- 
 gati : qua fit, ut ab original! justitia. 
 quam longissime distet; ad malum. 
 sua natura propendeat ; et caro sem- 
 per adversus spiritum concupiscat ;, 
 
 ARTICLE IX. Of Original or 
 Birth-sin. 
 
 ORIGINAL Sin standeth not in 
 the following of Adam, as the 
 Pelagians do vainly talk ; but it is 
 the fault and corruption of the Na- 
 ture of every man, that naturally is 
 ingendered of the offspring of Adam ; 
 whereby man is very far gone from 
 original righteousness, and is of his 
 own nature inclined to evil, so that
 
 uncle in unoquoque nascentium, iram 
 Dei atque damnationem meretur. 
 Manet etiam in renatis haec naturae 
 depravatio : qua fit, ut affectus car- 
 nis, Graece $p&vr)pa (rap/cos (quod 
 
 alii sapientiam, alii sensum, alii 
 affectum, alii studium carnis inter- 
 pretantur), legi Dei non subjiciatur. 
 Et quanquam renatis et credentibus 
 nulla propter Christum est condem- 
 natio, peccati tamen in sese rationem 
 liabere concupiscentiam, fatetur 
 Apostolus. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Prior pars sanam 
 continet doctrinam, et tain sanctis 
 Patribus, quam Theologis valde con- 
 formem. Posterior vero, qua3 incipit: 
 manet etiam in renatis f examinatur 
 prope finem Problematis 12. 
 
 the flesh lusteth always contrary to 
 the spirit ; and therefore in every 
 person born into this world, it de- 
 serveth God's wrath and damnation. 
 And this infection of nature doth 
 remain, yea in them that are rege- 
 nerated ; whereby the lust of the 
 flesh, called in Greek, phronema 
 sarkos, 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. And although there is no 
 condemnation for them that believe 
 and are baptized, yet the Apostle 
 doth confess, that concupiscence and 
 lust hath of itself the nature of 
 sin. 
 
 EXPLANATION. The former part 
 of this Article contains sound doc- 
 trine, entirely in agreement both 
 with the holy Fathers and with 
 Theologians. The latter part, how- 
 ever, commencing, "And this in- 
 fection" is examined towards the 
 end of Problem 12. 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XII. With respect to what is said in 
 Article IX., that " concupiscence hath of itself the nature of sin," it would 
 seem somewhat difficult to explain this, unless the Article had said before 
 how this should be understood, in these words, " This sensuality, affection, 
 or desire of the flesh, is not subject to the law of God." It is, therefore, 
 said to have of itself the nature of sin, because it is not subject to the 
 divine law, and no more. It has not, therefore, formally the nature of sin, 
 but only by way of disposition, because in truth it disposes or inclines us
 
 against the law of God : undoubtedly, then, it has no other meaning than 
 that which, in a former quotation, St. Augustine gave to the words of St. 
 Paul that is, that it has the nature of sin, because it is from sin and leads 
 to sin. (S. Aug. " Cont. Ep. Pelag." 1. i., c. 13, explaining Col. iii. 5.) 
 
 It is said, too, in the Article, to be not subject to the divine law; because 
 it raises contests, which are sometimes severe, between the flesh and the 
 spirit, which St. Paul describes in his Ep. to the Galatians (v. 17); and for 
 this cause is called by many of the ancients " the tyrant in our members ;" 
 by others, " the weakness of our nature ;" by St. Paul, " the law of the 
 members," and, by Augustine, " the law of the flesh ;" which epithets, 
 though they do not imply what is formally sin, yet plainly suggest in some 
 manner the nature of sin, or lack of subordination to the divine law, which 
 is quite sufficient to agree with the Article. 
 
 ARTICULUS X. DQ Libero Arlitrio. ARTICLE X. Of Free- Will. 
 
 EA est hominis post lapsum Ada3 
 conditio, ut sese naturalibus 
 suis viribus, et bonis operibus, ad 
 fidem et invocationemDei convertere, 
 ac prgeparare non possit : Quare 
 absque gratia Dei (qua? per Chris- 
 tum est) nos pra3veniente, ut velimus, 
 et cooperante, dum volumus, ad 
 pietatis opera facienda, quse Deo 
 grata sunt et accepta, mini valemus. 
 
 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 : Wherefore we have no power 
 to do good works pleasant and ac- 
 ceptable to God, without the grace 
 of God by Christ preventing us, that 
 we may have a good will, and work- 
 ing with us, when we have that good 
 wiU. 
 
 PARAPIIRASIS. Catholicus est, ct EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 declarator Problematibus 10, 11, 12, Catholic, and is explained in Problems 
 immo a Prob. 5 ad 12. 10, 11, 12; or, indeed, from Problems 
 
 5 to 12. 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XI. This is entirely true throughout, 
 and in conformity with the Councils of Orange, Milevis, and Trent, as is
 
 ( 11 ) 
 
 abundantly clear from former quotations, and others to be considered here- 
 after. 
 
 First is the decision of Orange (ii. 3). " If any man say that grace can 
 be gained by man's own calling upon God, and not that grace itself leads 
 us to call for it, he contradicts the Prophet Isaiah (Ixv. 1), and the Apostle 
 using the same words (Romans x. 21). 'I was found of them that sought 
 me not. I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.' " 
 
 Secondly ( 7). " If any one should say that we, of our own natural 
 strength, think, or choose that is, will, &c., any good thing which pertains 
 to our eternal salvation, without the illumination and inspiration of the 
 Holy Spirit: he is deceived by an heretical spirit, not understanding the 
 word of God in the Gospel ' Without Me ye can do nothing ;' and that 
 saying of the Apostle, 'Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think 
 anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God.' " And in all points 
 the doctrine of the Tridentine Council is the same. 
 
 There is not a word, as may here be seen, against the power of Free Will 
 in order to moral acts. And this can be confirmed by the authority of many 
 Protestant Doctors: for instance, Dr. Whittaker, "Depeccato origin" (ii. 3), 
 says as follows : " If, by a moral act, you mean the Philosophical Virtues, 
 we do not deny that a man, without special grace may act in many things 
 with fortitude, temperance, and justice." These are his words. He used 
 the words "Philosophical Virtues," that he might exclude virtues con- 
 ducing to salvation, which is our very doctrine. Montagu also, " Appellat" 
 (c. x.), at length, both in his own name and in that of others, treats of and 
 defends this truth. 
 
 AKTICULXJS XI. De Hominis Jus- AETICLE XI. Of the Justification 
 
 tificatione. of Man. 
 
 rpANTUMproptermeritum Domini TTJTE are accounted righteous be- 
 
 _L ac Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi V V fore God, only for the merit 
 
 per Fidem, non propter opera et of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 
 merita nostra, justi coram Deo repu- Christ by Faith, and not for our own 
 
 tamur* Quare sola fide nos justi- works or deservings t Wherefore) 
 
 ficari doctrina est saluberrima ac that we are justified by Faith only is 
 
 consolationis pleiiissiinaj ut in Homilia a most wholesome Doctrine, and very
 
 de Justificationc hominis fusius ex- full of comfort, as more largely is 
 plicatur. expressed in the Homily of Justifi- 
 
 cation.* 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Hie Articulus ex- EXPLANATION. This article is 
 aminatur fuse Probl. 22. examined at length in Problem 22. 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XXII. To speak truly, I think that 
 this whole question, between Protestants and ourselves, has fallen through, 
 unless we wish to amuse ourselves with words ; for there never was a ques- 
 tion concerning the efficient cause of justification ; because, as I said, this 
 God alone is according to the belief of all; nor again concerning the 
 meritorious cause, which, as I have also said, is Christ alone, or His passion ; 
 nor concerning the material cause, for to that is subject to that which is 
 said to be justified namely, man ; as a wall in respect of whiteness ; 
 nor concerning the final cause, for the end of all the Predestined is 
 Christ, as in Ephesians I. " Having predestinated us by Jesus Christ to 
 himself." 
 
 If, then, there be any difficulty, it concerns the formal cause ; but neither 
 do Protestants attribute this to faith ; for this is expressly declared in the 
 Book of Homilies (as it is called amongst Anglicans, with whom it is a great 
 authority). 
 
 So, then, it will be plain that, under neither of the heads of causation, is our 
 justification attributed to faith ; and indeed, according to them, we are to no 
 extent justified by faith, unless you would say by faith as a foundation, or 
 as a condition or disposition ; which we, too, have said in treating of merit, 
 and have proved from St. Augustine, and as is defined by the Council of 
 Trent (Sess. vi. c. 7). 
 
 But, if you would say that justification is acquired by faith, as applying 
 or laying hold of the merits or righteousness of Christ, I think that this 
 may bear a sound and Catholic sense ; because, in truth, we by faith 
 (according to the text, " He that cometh to God must believe that He is"), 
 trusting to the promises of God in Christ, or to the merits of Christ's 
 
 * [There is no Homily either in the Book given in Article XXXV., entitled, a " IIo- 
 published in the reign of Edward the Vlth, mily of Justification."] 
 nor in that of which a Table of Contents is
 
 ( 13 ) 
 
 sufferings, by prayer, by charity, &c., at length obtain through Christ our 
 justification. 
 
 This is their doctrine, and ours too ; nor do they attribute more to faith 
 as regards justification, than does the Council of Trent, if they are ex- 
 plained with caution that is, in the manner just mentioned ; but the 
 difference really is as to what is to be understood by " Faith." They think 
 that it means a leaning on, or act of confidence in, the promises of God ; 
 while we think this to be the same thing with that faith of Christ, preached 
 to the nations everywhere, by which we believe all the promises of God ; 
 (unless one may say more correctly, as above, that this rather belongs to 
 hope) : here, then, we might very easily come to an agreement, for in this 
 manner does Montagu rightly explain the article " Defide" 
 
 Indeed, they themselves [the Anglicans] attribute the effect, not to that 
 special faith, but to the faith of Christ, as we do, for in the Articles no 
 faith is specified, but that of which the Apostles always speak. As regards 
 this point then there is no disagreement.* 
 
 NOTE FROM PROBLEM XXVI. God on account of Christ's righteous- 
 ness imputed to us, as if on account of a meritorious cause, grants us our 
 righteousness [i. c. " inherent righteousness "]. All which being duly weighed, 
 in reality no discrepancy can now be found between the Anglican Confes- 
 sion and the Tridentine definition ; nor does anything in the Hampton 
 Court Articles make for the contrary opinion, as is clear from Article IX. on 
 Justification; whence Montagu, in his " Appello Ccesarem" (c. 6), expressly 
 proves that our doctrine at least, with this latitude, is held by them, and in 
 the same passage quotes Dr. White, who asserts that in the justification of 
 the sinner there are two actions on the part of God one whereby He remits 
 the sin ; the other whereby He gives the man power to resist sin, which 
 power is love infused into our hearts by that second act of God ; which is 
 identical with our doctrine. On this point, too, therefore, there is agree- 
 ment. 
 
 * [" A number of means go to effect our by Baptism alone, for Baptism conveys it ; 
 
 justification. We are justified by Christ and by newness of heart alone, for newness 
 
 alone, in that He has purchased the gift ; of heart is the life of it." Tract 90, 3rd 
 
 by Faith alone, in that Faith asks for it ; Edit., p. 13.]
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 ARTICULUS XII. De bonis ARTICLE XII. Of Good 
 
 Operibus. Works. 
 
 BONA opera quae sunt fractus Fidel A LBEIT that Good Works, which 
 
 et justificatos sequuntur, quam- xi are the fruits of Faith, and 
 
 quam peccata nostra expiare et divini follow after Justification, cannot put 
 
 judicii severitatem ferre non possunt ; away our sins, and endure the seve- 
 
 Deo tamen grata sunt, et accepta in rity of God's Judgment ; yet are 
 
 Christo, atque ex vera et viva Fide, they pleasing and acceptable to God 
 
 necessario profluunt, ut plane ex illis in Christ, and do spring out necessa- 
 
 aeque Fides viva cognosci possit, atque rily of a true and lively Faith ; in- 
 
 arbor ex fructu judicari. somuch that by them a lively Faith 
 
 may be as evidently known as a tree 
 discerned by the fruit. 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XXI. With respect to what we have 
 said that, after justification, we can merit an increase of righteousness and 
 glory, the twelfth Article is clearly on our side, wiiich is in the following 
 words " Albeit that good works," &c. 
 
 What is the meaning of "acceptable to God in Christ," except that 
 through Christ they are accepted, so as to be rewarded ; or, that by force of 
 the divine and eternal promise, made to us through Christ, they are meri- 
 torious, &c. ; which is the doctrine of the Subtle Doctor, and that com- 
 monly received at present ? 
 
 But what is said in the previous words, that they " cannot put away our 
 sins, and endure the severity of God's judgment," must be explained by 
 accommodating these statements to what we have just said that is, they 
 cannot do so except in Christ, as is clearly expressed in the latter part of the 
 Article. For nothing is of any value, speaking strictly, if Christ be excluded. 
 In this sense, too, is said above, "nor endure the severity of God's judg- 
 ment ;" not that they will be punished, but that they will not be rewarded, 
 because with respect to reward they have no value without Christ, as we all 
 allow. With respect to this, then, we are in agreement. 
 
 ARTICULUS XIII. De operibus ante ARTICLE XIII. Of Works before 
 Justificationem. Justification. 
 
 OPERA quse fiunt ante gratiam TTTORKS done before the grace of 
 
 Christi, et Spiritus ejus afflatum, VV Christ, and the Inspiration of
 
 ciim ex fide Jesu Christ! non pro- his Spirit, are not pleasant to God, 
 deant, minime Deo grata sunt, neque forasmuch as they spring not of faith 
 gratiam (ut multuin vocant) de in Jesus Christ, neither do they make 
 congruo merentur. Immo, cum non men meet to receive grace, or (as the 
 sunt facta ut Deus ilia fieri voluit et School-authors say) deserve grace of 
 praecepit, peccati rationem habere non congruity : yea, rather, for that they 
 dubitamus, are not done as God hath willed and 
 
 commanded them to be done, we 
 doubt not but they have the nature 
 of sin. 
 
 PABAPHRASIS. Examinatur hie EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 Artie. Problematibus 18, 20, 21. examined in Problems 18, 20, 21. 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XXI. In these words it is evident that 
 the only works excluded from merit of congruity with respect to our justifi- 
 cation, are works done before faith in Christ that is, before the first actual 
 grace, or inspiration of the Holy Spirit (as is said in the same Article). 
 Since, then, " the exception proves the rule" as lawyers say, it follows that 
 other works namely, those done in faith can dispose us in some degree 
 for justification, and deserve, of congruity (de congruo), the grace of justifica- 
 tion, which is the opinion of St. Augustine ; which, perhaps, the compilers had 
 in their mind, and so far most rightly. (See Note from Prob. XXI. inf. p. 16.) 
 
 But, with respect to what is added, that " such works have rather the 
 nature of sin," we must first notice that they are not said absolutely to be 
 sins, but rather to " partake of the nature of sin," which, undoubtedly, is 
 a term of diminution (as the Summulists* say) ; else, they would rather 
 unreservedly have been called sins. The meaning is that, by taking sin in a 
 wide sense, or extending the nature of sin, such works can be brought under 
 it that is, inasmuch as they are not done in conformity with the laws of 
 God ; as is clearly expressed in these words " For that they are not done 
 as God hath willed and commanded them to be done." For that a thing 
 is done not as God has ordered, or not in conformity with the Divine Will 
 as revealed in His laws, is not at once assumed to be sin speaking positively, 
 but only negatively : otherwise, that a work should be done not in con- 
 formity with the law would be the same as if it were in positive disa- 
 
 * [" Ut loquuntur Summulistee." Ed. Lugduni, 1634 ; ed. Loudini, 1646.]
 
 greement with it, which alone is, strictly speaking, sin ; and further, that 
 all indifferent acts would be sins, which is absurd : yet, they are not done 
 in conformity with the law, for then they would be good, not indiffe- 
 rent. The intention then is to call the works in question sins, improperly ; 
 or according to the schools, negatively. And, in truth, this is the very 
 doctrine of the Council of Orange, and of St. Augustine especially (lib. iii., 
 Cont. Ep. Pelag., c. 5) " The just man lives by faith ; for, without it, even 
 what seem to be good works, are turned into sin." And he proves it 
 from St. Paul, "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin." And this is the 
 common doctrine of the schoolmen. 
 
 NOTE FROM PROBLEM XXI. St. Aug., Ep. 105. " Nor does remis- 
 sion of sins itself take place without some merit forsooth, faith obtains 
 this ; for faith is not devoid of merit, by which faith the publican said, 
 ' God be merciful to me a sinner,' and went down to his house justified, 
 being humbled by merit of faith. It remains, then, that we must not 
 attribute faith itself to the human will in which they are puffed up (the 
 Semi-pelagians) ; nor to any preceding merits (for whatever good acts are 
 meritorious have their origin from faith) ; but we must confess it to be the 
 free gift of God, if we think of true grace, that is, without merit." What 
 can be more clear, he says, that, through faith, grace of justification is 
 merited, but not of condignity ; so that it must be of congruity. 
 
 ARTICULUS XIV. De Operibus ARTICLE XIV. Of Works of 
 Super erogationis. Supererogation. 
 
 OPEKA quse supererogationis ap- TTOLUNTAEY Works, besides, 
 pellant, 11011 possunt sine arro- V over and above, God's Com- 
 gantia et impietate praxlicari. Nam mandments, which they call Works 
 illis declarant homines, non tantum of Supererogation, cannot be taught 
 se Deo reddere, qua) tenentur : sed without arrogancy and impiety : for 
 plus in Ejus gratiam facere quam by them men do declare, that they 
 deberent ; cum aperte Christus dicat, do not only render unto God as 
 Cum feceritis omnia quaecunque pra> much as they are bound to do, but 
 cepta sunt vobis, dicite, Servi inutiles that they do more for His sake, than 
 sumus. of bounden duty is required : whereas 
 
 Christ saith plainly, When ye have 
 done all that are commanded to you, 
 say, We are unprofitable servants.
 
 ( 17 ) 
 
 PARAPIIRASIS. Examinatur hie EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 Artie. Problemato 36. examined in Problem 36. 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XXXVI. To speak the truth, the ex- 
 planation of this Article would seem somewhat hard, did not the latter part 
 diminish the difficulty. For Works of Supererogation are so far condemned 
 as, by them, men declare that they render more to God than they are bound 
 to do on any ground. For those words placed without limitation (" They 
 render more than they are bound to do "), according to the rules of the 
 schools, are to be interpreted universally ; and then the sense will be, " They 
 render more than they are bound to do, in any manner, or by any just claim." 
 Such works, then, the Article condemns ; and so, too, do we. Moreover, 
 did God exact all that He might justly claim and we owe, we should be 
 wholly unprofitable and most miserable : we owe everything to Him, for 
 there is nothing which we have not received. We do not, therefore, boast 
 that we render more to God than we are bound to do, if we include every 
 kind of debt. 
 
 Moreover, the Article speaks of the Works of a man in a state of pure 
 nature that is, not prevented nor assisted by God's grace ; which is evident 
 from the fact that it does not once mention grace, while we speak of man in 
 a state of righteousness, that is, furnished with the grace of God. 
 
 In this, then, there is nothing against the doctrine of Works of Super- 
 erogation proved by us from the Fathers, and supported also by their 
 own authorities of most weight. Some Calvinists calumniate us by alleging 
 certain frivolous and untrue statements with respect to this point of 
 Supererogation. May God forgive them for deceitfully ensnaring souls, 
 otherwise well affected towards the truth ! Meanwhile, on our side are both 
 the Anglican Articles, and those who follow them without guile. 
 
 ARTICULUS XV. De Christo, Qni ARTICLE XV. Of Christ alone, 
 solus est sine peccato. without Sin. 
 
 /^HRISTUS in nostrae naturae veri- /CHRIST in the truth of our nature 
 \J tate, per omnia similis factus est \J was made like unto us in all 
 nobis, excepto peccato, a quo prorsus things, sin only except, from which 
 erat immunis, turn in carne, turn in He was clearly void, both in His flesh, 
 spiritu. Venit ut Agnus absquc and in His spirit. He came to be the 
 
 c
 
 macula, Qui mundi peccata per im- 
 molation em Sui semel f actam tolleret ; 
 et peccatum (ut in quit Johannes) in 
 Eo non erat : sed nos reliqui, etiam 
 baptizati, et in Christo regenerati, in 
 multis tamen offendimus omnes. Et 
 si dixerimus, quia peccatum non 
 habemus, nos ipsos seducimus, et 
 veritas in nobis non est. 
 
 PARAPHEASIS. Hie Articulus 
 usque ad haec verba : Sed nos reliqui 
 etiam laptizati, etc. sanctissimus est : 
 ibi vero indiget glossa, non mea, sed 
 magni Augustini in 1. de Natura et 
 Gra. contra Pelagianos : 
 
 " Cum de peccatis agitur, de S. Vir- 
 gine Maria propter honorem Domini 
 nullam prorsus habere volo qua3stio- 
 nem, inde enim scimus, quod ei plus 
 gratise collatum fuerit ad vincendum 
 omni ex parte peccatum, quod con- 
 cipere ac parere meruit eum, quern 
 constat nullum habuisse peccatum. 
 Hsec ergo Virgine excepta, si omnes 
 illos Sanctos et Sanctas, qui in Scrip- 
 turis Sanctis non modo non peccasse, 
 verum etiam juste vixisse referuntur 
 cum hie viverent, congregare posse- 
 mus, et interrogare, utrum essent 
 sine peccato : quid fuisse responsuros 
 putamus? Quantalibet fuerit in 
 hoc corpore excellentia sanctitatis, 
 si intcrrogavi potuissent, una vocc 
 
 Lamb without spot, who, by sacrifice 
 of Himself once made, should take 
 away the sins of the world, and sin, 
 as Saint John saith, was not in Him. 
 But all we the rest, although bap- 
 tized, and born again in Christ, yet 
 offend in many things ; and if we 
 say we have no sin, we deceive our- 
 selves, and the truth is not in us. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article, as 
 far as the words " But all we the 
 rest, although baptized," &c., is most 
 sound. At this point, however, a 
 gloss is required, not one of mine, 
 but of the great St. Augustine (lib. 
 "de Nat. et Grat. cont. Pelag.") 
 " When sins are treated of, for the 
 honour of our Lord, I will have no 
 mention whatever of the B. Virgin 
 Mary ; for we know that to her was 
 given more grace, so as to conquer 
 sin wholly, because she merited to 
 conceive and bear Him, Who all agree 
 was without sin. This Virgin then 
 being excepted, if we could collect 
 together all those saints, who in the 
 Sacred Scriptures are said not only 
 not to have sinned, but also to have 
 lived justly, and were to ask them 
 whether they were sinless, what do 
 we think that they would answer 1 ? 
 However great might have been the 
 excellence of their sanctity in the
 
 clamassent illucl, quod ait Joannes 
 Apostolus : Si dixerimus quia pec- 
 catum noil habemus, ipsi nos seduci- 
 mus, et veritas in nobis non est." 
 
 Ad hunc sensuin explicandum 
 censeo Articulum, et verba ipsa om- 
 nino favere : non enim dicit, Omnes 
 rcliqui laptizati,\do\ obmiiversalitatem 
 illins termini, includi videretur etiam 
 B. Virgo, sed castius dicit : nos 
 reliqui, ubi sine dubio non interponit 
 B. Virginem inter communes faeces 
 peccatorum, propter honorem Domini, 
 praesertim dum earn Angelus ex Dei 
 mandate, gratia 1 plenam et in mulieri- 
 bus benedictam pronunciavit. Si ergo 
 illam includi voluissent Articuli con- 
 ditores, aliquas saltern exceptiones 
 honorarias addidissent, quod dum non 
 fecerint, nee speciatim nominarint, 
 putem illos cum Augustino, Cum de 
 peccatis agitur de S. Virgine Maria, 
 nullam prorsus habere velle quaestio- 
 nem ; immo per ilium terminum 
 restrictivum (nos reliqui) ipsam plane 
 exclusisse charitative sentio. Et eo 
 magis, quia subditur, Nos reliqui 
 BAPTIZATI, de B. Virgine enim sub 
 dubio semper fuit, an fuerit bap- 
 tizata ; forte enim ipsa fuit excepta 
 
 flesh, if they could be asked the 
 question, they would with one voice 
 cry out that which the Apostle John 
 says, l If we say that we have no sin, 
 we deceive ourselves, and the truth 
 is not in us.' " 
 
 I think that the Article must be 
 explained in this sense, and that the 
 words are altogether favourable to 
 the interpretation, for it is not said, 
 " All we the rest :" where from the 
 universal nature of the proposition, 
 even the B. Virgin might seem to be 
 included, but it is more properly 
 " We the rest," in which expression, 
 without doubt, the B. Virgin is not 
 included with the common dregs of 
 sin, " for the honour of our Lord," 
 especially since the Angel by the com- 
 mand of God pronounced her "full of 
 grace," and " blessed among women." 
 If, therefore, the writers of the Ar- 
 ticles had intended her to be included, 
 they would at least have made some 
 exceptions in her honour ; and, since 
 they did not do this, nor specially 
 name her, I think that they, with St. 
 Augustine, "when sins are treated 
 of, will have no mention whatever of 
 the B. Virgin Mary;" and further, by 
 that restrictive expression (" we the 
 rest"), I think that they plainly ex- 
 
 *
 
 ab ilia lege ; nee mirum, quia ut 
 pie Doctor 4. d. 4. q. 6 (le ea fuisset 
 ratio dispensandi : quia forte habuit 
 in conceptione Filii sui illam pleni- 
 tudinem gratis?, ad quam Deus dis- 
 posuit earn pervenire. Illi igitur 
 termini indefiniti in Articulo, non 
 possunt rationabiliter extendi ad 
 casum tarn specialem et dubium. 
 
 eluded her. And I incline the more 
 to this opinion, because there follows 
 " We the rest, though BAPTIZED ;" 
 for there always was a doubt whether 
 the B. Virgin ever was baptized, and 
 perhaps she was excepted from that 
 law. Nor need this be a cause for 
 wonder ; for, as the Doctor piously 
 observes (4, d. 4, q. 6), there would 
 have been a reason for dispensing in 
 her case, because, perhaps, in the 
 conception of her Son, she received 
 that fulness of grace, to which God 
 ordained that she should attain. I 
 conclude, then, that those indefinite 
 terms in the Article cannot reason- 
 ably be extended to a case so special 
 and full of doubt.* 
 
 * [It may not be out of place to put on 
 record what has been said by two English 
 Koman Catholics, Mr. E. S. Ffoulkes and 
 the Bishop of Birmingham, with regard to 
 the dogma of the Immaculate Conception 
 of the Blessed Virgin (which some persons, 
 as they comprehend the doctrine, conceive 
 to stand in direct opposition to certain pro- 
 positions in this Article). Mr. Ffoulkes, 
 who treats the subject most lucidly in his 
 remarkable book, Christendom's Divisions 
 (Longmans, 18G5), thus writes, pp. 104- 
 105 : " All that is really implied by it 
 [i.e., the Immaculate Conception] is, that 
 the Holy Ghost operated in the Blessed 
 Virgin, from the first moment of her Con- 
 ception, and throughout her life, that which 
 He has, ever since the Day of Pentecost, 
 
 operated in every man, woman, and child at 
 the moment of their reception of Christian 
 Baptism. He took away from the act of 
 her Conception all that He takes away 
 from each one of us at the instant of our 
 Baptism ; and that grace which, unfortu- 
 nately, we are too apt to commence de- 
 clining from the next moment afterwards, 
 He by extraordinary privilege preserved 
 ever afterwards intact through life in her 
 alone, for whom alone was preserved the 
 extraordinaiy honour of becoming His 
 Spouse, and Mother of the Incarnate Word. 
 For those who believe thoroughly in the 
 Divine gift bestowed in Baptism, there can 
 be no difficulty in believing in the Imma- 
 culate Conception of the Mother of God. 
 It was but the- anticipation of what is ac-
 
 ARTICULUS XVI. De peccato post 
 Baptisminn. 
 
 NON omnc peccatum mortale post 
 Baptismum voluntarie perpetra- 
 tuni est peccatum in Spiritum Sanc- 
 tum, et irremissibile : proinde lapsis 
 
 ARTICLE XVI. Of Sin after 
 Baptism. 
 
 NOT every deadly sin willingly 
 committed after Baptism is sin 
 against the Holy Ghost, and unpar- 
 donable. Wherefore the grant of 
 
 complished in our own persons by the same 
 Divine Agent, only carried out and perpe- 
 tuated to perfection in her case. There is 
 one instance recorded of a grade which is 
 intermediate between her case and our 
 own, upon indisputable testimony. It is 
 that of S. John the Baptist : ' He shall be 
 tilled with the Holy Ghost,' said the angel 
 Gabriel, ' even from his mother's womb.' 
 Even this distinction has not been lost on 
 the Church. Of all saints, S. John Bap- 
 tist stands alone as commemorated on the 
 day of his birth, as the Mother of God on 
 the day of her Conception both as without 
 sin. I will add, before I quit the subject, 
 that there is no fact more certain, or more 
 unique, in the annals of Church history, 
 than that, amidst the countless discoveries 
 which have been reported of relics of saints 
 in every age, there never has been so much 
 c^s a breath of any discovery of any of that 
 sacred body in which, and out of which, the 
 Word was made Flesh. The Assumption 
 of S. Mary would, at least, be one intelli- 
 gible explanation of that extraordinary 
 fact ; it would be likewise but the natural 
 consequence of her Immaculate Concep- 
 tion." Bishop Ullathorne likewise sets 
 forth several important theological bearings 
 of this doctrine with much clearness in the 
 following passage : " The confusion of two 
 facts, which in their nature as in their 
 causes are distinct and most completely 
 apart, has given occasion to all the difficul- 
 
 ties which have attended as well the com- 
 prehension as the contemplation of the 
 most pure and sublime mystery, which is 
 under our consideration. A child derives 
 not all its creation at one instant and from 
 one source. For each child has two con- 
 ceptions, and it is not of that one, which 
 the word 'conception' commonly suggests, 
 that we are now speaking. The body is 
 transmitted through the parents, the soul is 
 infused by God. The transmission of the 
 body, whereby we are of the one body of 
 Adam, is called by divines the active con- 
 ception ; the infusion of the soul, whereby 
 the body receives its animation, is called 
 the passive conception. The distinction be- 
 tween these two conceptions was not scien- 
 tifically drawn at the period anterior to St. 
 Thomas and St. Bonaventura. And the 
 want of the distinction at an earlier period 
 explains the seeming contradiction, for it is 
 only an apparent one, which is found in 
 some few of the Western fathers and 
 other writers at an earlier period than the 
 thirteenth century. Science has not been 
 able to fix the period of animation ; but, at 
 whatever time it may take place, it is cer- 
 tain that the body is transmitted and or- 
 ganised ere the soul is infused, though the 
 interval were but the least of which cogni- 
 zance can be taken. For the infusion of 
 the soul from God is consequent on the 
 transmission of the body, and cannot be 
 identical with that act or with its causes. 
 
 " We
 
 u Baptismo in peccata, locus pceni- 
 tentiae non est negandus. Post ac- 
 ceptum Spiritum Sanctum possmnus 
 a gratia data recedere, atque peccare, 
 denuoque per gratiam Dei resurgere, 
 ac resipiscere : ideoque illi damnandi 
 sunt, qui se, quamdiu hie vivant, 
 amplius non posse peccare affirmant, 
 aut vere resipiscentibus veniac locum 
 denegant. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Totus Articulus 
 optimam continet doctrinam : illus- 
 tratur tanien Prob. 27, et prsecipuo 
 Probl, 30. 
 
 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 there- 
 fore 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. 
 
 EXPLANATION. The whole Ar- 
 ticle contains excellent doctrine : it 
 is, however, illustrated in Problem 
 27, and especially in Problem 30. 
 
 " We must further observe, as very im- 
 portant for understanding the subject, that 
 the body before it has received the ani- 
 mating soul is not the subject, but only the 
 cause of sin. Deriving from its origin the 
 poison of concupiscence, it has its disor- 
 dered energies awakened into activity by 
 animation ; and the soul, created and in- 
 fused without grace, to which as a child of 
 Adam it has lost all claim, becomes over- 
 whelmed in its disorder, subjected to its 
 blind confusion, and distorted from recti- 
 tude, until by the grace of Christ it is 
 regenerated through baptism. But whilst 
 through that holy sacrament the soul is 
 raised up from injustice to life, the body 
 remains subject to its infirmity, and has to 
 be subdued and kept under, until it yields 
 up the soul in death, for the flesh is only 
 regenerated at the resurrection. 
 
 "Speaking with the strictest degree of 
 accuracy, the transmission of flesh from 
 
 Adam is not the conception of the Blessed 
 Virgin Mary, but the conception of St. 
 Ann. Of several mothers, the Scripture 
 says, site conceived a son. But previous to 
 animation, that flesh is not a human sub- 
 ject, and possesses no moral qualities. In 
 fact, it is not Mary. Mary is truly con- 
 ceived when her soul is created and infused 
 into that body. 
 
 " Separating, then, these two periods of 
 tune, whatever may be the distance be- 
 tween them, the question regards not the 
 embryo, which is not humanity, which has 
 no personality, and which is incapable of 
 spiritual grace : the question regards the 
 moment of rational animation ; of the re- 
 ception, or, more truly, of the conception of 
 the soul ; and the instant of its union with 
 the body." Bishop Ullathorne on the Im- 
 maculate Conception, pp. 58-60. London: 
 1855.]
 
 ( 23 ) 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XXX. The Anglican Confession 
 manifestly agrees in Article XVI. with this universally received truth [that 
 man may fall away after justification]. In Article IX. it was laid down 
 that the regenerate could sin, as also in Article XV. ; but they do not so 
 fully declare the whole matter, because they can be explained to speak of a 
 falling away which is not final, which alone is at this time controverted, but 
 this Article solves the whole difficulty. 
 
 It is said then plainly " After we have received the Holy Ghost ;" which 
 words, undoubtedly, imply a real, not a fictitious or seeming regeneration ; 
 else all the passages in the Acts of the Apostles, and elsewhere frequently 
 in the Gospels, concerning the reception of the Holy Ghost, might be 
 explained away, by saying that they ought to be understood, not of the real, 
 but of a seeming regeneration ; and consequently the whole truth of Holy 
 Writ would be weakened. This, therefore, is not the true interpretation. 
 
 After that it is said in this Article, " May depart from grace given," 
 (which, however, is in no wise true ; for grace cannot be departed from), 
 " and fall into sin " namely, into sins which are properly opposed to grace, 
 being mortal sins ; for such alone by God's law deprive man of grace 
 received. 
 
 But lest we should think that departure from grace, or committal of 
 mortal sin, should be restricted to falling away for a time, it is opportunely 
 added, " By the grace of God we may arise again ;" it is not said that l>y 
 grace we shall certainly rise again; which, however, ought to have been 
 added, if it were meant to speak of final perseverance as a matter of cer- 
 tainty ; but " we may arise " that is, it is open to us by the grace of God 
 to rise again, if we will ; but, if we will not, we can also die in our sins. 
 Nor were the words, " by the grace of God," added without forethought ; 
 because it is certain that, by the unaided powers of nature or of free will, 
 we cannot rise again. The regenerate man then, after falling into sin, 
 cannot of himself rise again ; nor is the grace of God due to him : for then, 
 according to the Apostle, it would be no more grace, as all the Doctors teach 
 after him. 
 
 Whence, then, can there be any certainty of final perseverance ? seeing 
 that there is no law for the infallible efficacious conjunction of grace and 
 nature stained by mortal sin. This is the plainest meaning of this Article, 
 which will appear even more clearly if we refer to the Book of Homilies,
 
 where it is said, after much more on the fall of the regenerate, " They 
 will be giA^en over into the power of the devil, who exercises his power 
 over all reprobates or forsaken of God, as Saul and Judas." They are 
 compared to Saul and Judas, of whose final fall no one doubts; because 
 each of them, being finally impenitent, and dying in the act of mortal sin, 
 in fact was the destrover of himself. 
 
 AllTICULUS XVII. Jk> 
 
 itatione ct Klectwnc. 
 
 PR^EDESTINATIO ad vitam, est 
 aeternuin Dei propositum, quo, 
 ante jacta mundi fundamenta, suo 
 consilio, nobis quidem occulto, con- 
 stanter decrevit, eos, quos in Christo 
 elegit ex hominum genere, a male- 
 dicto et exitio liberare, atque (ut 
 vasa in honorem efficta) per Christum, 
 ad it'ternam salutem adducere. Undo 
 qui tain prax-laro Dei beneficio sunt 
 donati, illi Spiritu Ejus, opportuno 
 tempore operante, secundum propo- 
 situm Ejus, vocantur ; vocationi per 
 gratiam parent ; justih'cantur gratis ; 
 adoptantnr in filios [Dei]*, unigeniti 
 Ejus Filii Jcsu Christi imagini effici- 
 untur confomies ; in bonis operibns 
 sancte ambulant ; et demum ex Dei 
 misericordia pertingunt ad scmpiter- 
 nam felicitatem. 
 
 Quemamodum prtwlestinationis et 
 electionis nostra) in Christo pia con- 
 
 ARTICLE XVII. Of Predertwatwn 
 
 and Election. 
 
 PREDESTINATION to Life is 
 JL the eA'erlasting purpose of God, 
 whereby (before the foundations of 
 the world were laid) he hath con- 
 stantly decreed by his counsel secret 
 to us, to deliver from curse and 
 damnation those whom he hath 
 chosen in Christ out of mankind, 
 and to bring them by Christ to ever- 
 lasting salvation, as vessels made to 
 honour. Wherefore, 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 ever- 
 lasting felicity. 
 
 As the godly consideration of Pre- 
 destination and our Election in 
 
 * [The word " Dei" does not oecur in buine versions of the Latin Article.--.]
 
 sideratio, dulcis, suavis, et ineffabilis 
 consolationis plena est, vere piis, et 
 iis qui sentiunt in se vim Spiritus 
 Christ!, factrt carnis, et membra, qua; 
 adhuc sunt semper terrain, mortiti- 
 cantem animumque ad coelestia et 
 superna rapientem ; turn quia fidem 
 nostrum de teterna salute conse- 
 quenda per Christum plurimum sta- 
 bilit atque conh'rmat, turn quia 
 amorem nostrum in Deum vehe- 
 menter accendit, ita hominibus cu- 
 riosis, carnalibus, et Spiritu Clu'isti 
 destitutis, ob oculos perpetuo versari 
 pnudestinationis Dei sententiam pe- 
 riculosissimum est praecipitium, undo 
 illos Diabolus protrudit impurissinuu 
 vitiu secnritatem. 
 
 Deinde, promissiones divinas sic 
 amplecti oportet, ut nobis in Sacris 
 Literis generaliter propositse sunt ; 
 et Dei voluntas in nostris actionibus 
 ea sequenda est, quain in verbo Dei 
 habemus diserte revelatam. 
 
 Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, 
 and unspeakable comfort to godly 
 persons, and such as feel in them- 
 selves 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 be- 
 cause it doth greatly establish and 
 confirm their faith of eternal Salva- 
 tion to be enjoyed through Christ, 
 as because it doth fervently kindle 
 their love towards God : So, for 
 curious and carnal persons, lacking 
 the Spirit of Christ, to have con- 
 tinually before their eyes the sen- 
 tence of God's Predestination is a 
 most dangerous downfall, whereby 
 the Devil doth thrust them either 
 into desperation, or into wretchless- 
 ness of most unclean living, no less 
 perilous than desperation. 
 
 Furthermore, we must receive 
 God's promises in such Avise, as they 
 be generally set forth to us in holy 
 Scripture : and, in our doings, that 
 Will of God is to be followed, which 
 we have expressly declared unto us 
 in the Word of God. 
 
 PAKAPHRASIS. Catholicus est, et 
 fuse declaratur Problemate 1. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 Catholic, and is explained fully in 
 Problem 1. 
 
 EXPLANATION FPtOM PEOBLEM I. " The Predestination of the Saints is 
 nothing else than the foreknowledge and preparation of the benefits 
 bestowed by God, by which most certainly all who are freed are freed,"
 
 ( 26 ) 
 
 (St. Aug. 1. " de bon. Persev." c. 14). " Predestination is the fore-ordaining 
 of anyone to glory in the first place, and to other tilings in order to glory." 
 (Scot. 3. d. 1. qu. 7.) " Predestination is the order of election by the Divine 
 Will, whereby beings endowed with understanding are elected to grace and 
 glory." (Common definition.) With these three definitions agrees the 
 description of Predestination in Article XVII. Unless I mistake, it rightly 
 and exactly explains the question, for what follows, " those chosen in Christ 
 out of mankind," is no more than St. Paul says, " Having predestinated us 
 by Jesus Christ to himself" (Eph. i. 5) that is, for his honour. The 
 meaning, therefore, is that Christ is the first of all the predestinate, both 
 in excellency of dignity, because predestinated to the highest supernatural 
 gifts, and in excellency of end, because that for His glory all others were 
 predestinated. 
 
 ARTICULUS XVIII. De speranda 
 cdterna salute tantum in Nomine 
 Christi. 
 
 SUNT et illi anathematizandi, qui 
 dicere audent unumquemque in 
 lege aut secta quam profitetur esse ser- 
 Vandutti) modo juxta illam et lumen 
 naturae accurate vixerit ; cum Sacrse 
 Literaa tantum Jesu Christi Nomen 
 prsedicent, in quo salvos fieri homines 
 oporteat. 
 
 ARTICLE XVIII. Of obtainimj 
 eternal salvation only l>y the Name 
 of Christ. 
 
 npHEY also are to be had accursed 
 JL that presume to say, that every 
 man shall be saved by the law or sect 
 which he professeth, so that he be 
 diligent to frame his life according 
 to that law and the light of nature. 
 For Holy Scripture doth set out unto 
 us only the Name of Jesus Christ, 
 whereby men must be saved.* 
 
 * ["This Article," remarks Dr. Xeale, 
 " anathematizes those who say that every 
 man shall be saved by the law or sect that 
 he professeth, so that he be diligent to 
 frame his life according to that law and to 
 the light of nature. The English Church, 
 then, requires us to receive, as of faith, the 
 diametrically opposite opinion, and to hold 
 that ' no man shall be saved by the law or 
 sect that he professeth, so he acts up to the 
 
 light of nature.' That is, that if he bo 
 saved, it will not be on account of his 
 having belonged to it, nor on account of 
 his having acted up to the light of nature. 
 But we are not required to believe in the 
 necessary damnation of heathens and he- 
 retics that not being the proposition rigo- 
 rously opposite to that condemned." " Open 
 Questions :" Nettle's Lectures on Church 
 Difficulties, London : Cleaver, 1852.]
 
 PARAPIIRASIS. Catholicus est. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 Catholic. 
 
 ARTICULUS XIX. De Ecclesia. 
 
 TjlCCLESIA Christi visibilis est 
 .1 J coitus fidelium, in quo verbum 
 Dei purum praedicatur, et Sacra- 
 menta, quoad ea quse necessario 
 exigantur, juxta Christi institutum, 
 recte administrantiu 1 . Sicut erravit 
 Ecclesia Hierosolymitana, Alexan- 
 drina, et Antlochena ; ita et erravit 
 Ecclesia Romana, non solum quoad 
 agenda, et caeremoniaram ritus, 
 verum in his etiam quge credenda 
 stint. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Prior Para- 
 graphus sanus est, nulluin enim ex- 
 clusivuin habet, prorsus tameu inadai- 
 quatus est, sicut homo est animal 
 bipes, est propositio vera, licet non 
 adiequata. Posterior glossandus, ubi 
 etiam dicit Ecclesiam Romanam 
 eiTasse in rebus fidei: advertendum 
 est ibi contradistingui Ecclesiam 
 Romanam a ca3teris particularibus 
 
 ARTICLE XIX. Of the Church. 
 
 FT1HE visible Church of Christ is a 
 _L congregation of faithful men, in 
 the which the pure Word of God is 
 preached, and the Sacraments be 
 duly ministered according to Christ's 
 ordinance in all those things that of 
 necessity are requisite to the same. 
 As the Church of Jerusalem, Alex- 
 andria, and Antioch have erred, so 
 also the Church of Rome hath erred, 
 not only in their living and manner 
 of ceremonies, but also in matters of 
 Faith.* 
 
 EXPLANATION. The first para- 
 graph of this Article is sound, having 
 in it nothing to exclude the truth. 
 It is, however, inadequate as a defi- 
 nition, as it would be to say, " Man 
 is an animal having two feet." The 
 statement is quite true, though in- 
 adequate. The latter part requires 
 explanation. Where, then, it says 
 that the Church of Rome hath erred 
 
 * [Tliis paragraph may be taken to mean 
 no more than that local churches, national 
 communions, or even whole patriarchates 
 if acting independently of the other parts 
 of the Christian Family cannot look to be 
 miraculously preserved from error " in 
 
 matters of faith." This is rendered clearer 
 from the statement in Art. XX., that " the 
 Church (i.e., the Universal Church, not 
 the Church of England, or any particular 
 church) . . . hath authority in controversies 
 of Faith."]
 
 Ecclesiis, quia pariformitei* cle Hiero- 
 solymitana, Alexandrina, in quo 
 sensu si dixeris errasse cle facto, non 
 est contra fidem, licet contra veri- 
 tatem : Ecclesiam autem Romanam 
 sic aliquaudo contradistingui, anti- 
 quitas testatur. Hieronymus enim 
 epist. 85, Episcopum Romse pari 
 gradu condistinguit Episcopo Eu- 
 gubii, id est, prout pracise Episcopus 
 urbis ; secus si etiam ut Episcopus 
 orbis. Innocent. IV. c. ApostolicsB 
 de re indicate^ omnino distinguit 
 Ecclesiam Romanam ab Ecclesia 
 universali etiam representative, sic 
 Trid. sess. 14. frequens est etiam 
 apud Doctores prassertim apud Bellar. 
 de summo Pontif. 1. 4. c. 4. et 
 Mirandulam de fide et ordine cre- 
 dendi, Theoremate 6, . Quapropter 
 etiam advertendum, Ecclesia vero 
 Romana, frequentius aliter sumitur, 
 sicut in Concilio Constant, sess. 8. 
 per Eomanam Ecclesiam, Ecclesiam 
 Universalem intelligi vult ; et earn 
 errasse non assent Articulus, quod 
 solum est de fide. 
 
 in matters of faith, we must notice 
 that the Church of Home is spoken 
 of as distinct from other particular 
 churches ; for the same language is 
 used concerning the churches of Je- 
 rusalem and Alexandria ; in which 
 sense, if a man say that she has in- 
 deed erred, the statement is not con- 
 trary to the faith, though it be con- 
 trary to the truth. At the same time, 
 antiquity testifies that the Roman 
 Church is thus sometimes distin- 
 guished from others ; for St. Jerome 
 (in Ep. 85) speaks of the Bishop of 
 Rome as in the same rank with the. 
 Bishop of Eugubium, so far, that is, 
 as he is simply bishop of the city ; 
 but the case is different when he is 
 considered as bishop of the world. 
 Innocent IV. (c. il Apostolicce de re 
 Judlcatci) wholly distinguishes the 
 Roman Church from the Universal 
 Church even representatively; and 
 so, too, the Council of Trent (Sess. 
 14) ; and this is also a common 
 opinion with the doctors : especially 
 see Bellarmine " De Swwno Pont.'" 
 (1. 4, c. 4) : and Mirandula " De 
 Fid?, ct Ordine Credendi (Theor. 6, 
 Qiiapropter eticun (ufoertendum). But 
 the Roman Church is very often 
 spoken of otherwise, as in the Coun-
 
 cil of Constance (Sess. 8), by the 
 Roman Church is meant the Church 
 Universal, and the Article does not 
 assert her to have erred, which alone 
 is of the faith. 
 
 ARTICULUS XX. DC Ecdcskc 
 auilioritate. 
 
 T1CCLESIA potestatem habet de- 
 J_j cernendi ritus et ceremonias et 
 dirimendi controversias in fide.* Ec- 
 clesiaB non licet quicquam instituere, 
 quod verbo Dei adversetur, nee 
 unum ScriptnrsB locum sic exponere 
 potest, ut alteri contradicat. Quare 
 licet Ecclesia sit divinorum testis et 
 conservatrix, attamen ut adversus eos 
 nihil decernere, ita prater illos mini 
 credendum de necessitate salutis debet 
 obtrudere. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Priora verba clara 
 sunt, et omni antiquitati consona, 
 unde Aug. 1. dc Utilitate Credendi, 
 contra Manichasos, cnlmen authori- 
 
 ARTICLE XX. Of the authority of 
 the Church. 
 
 THE Church hath power to de- 
 cree Rites and 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 en- 
 force anything to be believed for 
 necessity of salvation. 
 
 EXPLANATION. The commence- 
 ment is clear, and in agreement with 
 all antiquity, as Augustine (lib. " de 
 Utilit. Cred.\ against the Manichees, 
 
 * [The first paragraph of this Article 
 neither in the Latin ISIS, signed by Con- 
 vocation in 1562, nor in the English MS. 
 signed in 1571, nor in either of the editions 
 published by Bishop Jewel runs as follows 
 in some versions (c-y-, Wolfe's, 15G3) : 
 
 ' Habet ecclesia ritus (sive cseremonias) 
 statuendi jus, et in fidei controversiis au- 
 thoritatem ; quamvis," etc. After the word 
 "Dei" scripto is inserted; and after "di- 
 vinorum" the word Ulrorum. Vide Editor's 
 Preface.]
 
 tatis quoad prrcdicta in Ecclesia con- 
 sistere declarat. 
 
 Verba subsequentia non minus 
 clara : scriptura enim secundum 
 omnes veteres est regula certa veri- 
 tatisjiinde Aug. 1. de baptismo c. 3 : 
 Quis nesciat Sanctam Scripturam Ca- 
 nonicam, tarn Veteris quam Novi Tes- 
 tamenti, omnibus posteriorum Episco- 
 porum literis ita prci'poni, ut de ilia 
 omnino duUtariet disceptari non possit, 
 utrwn verwn vel utrwn rectum sit, 
 quicquid in ea Scriptura constiterit, 
 etc. 
 
 Quod autem subditur in Articulo, 
 Ecclesiam esse testem et conserva- 
 tricem sacrse Scripturas valde con- 
 forme est D. Paulo, qui earn vocat 
 firmamentum veritatis, et Joanni in 
 Apocalypsi qui earn vocat, Civitatem 
 Jiabentem fundamental duodecim^ et in 
 ipsis duodecim nomina duodecim Apos- 
 tolomm: scilicet qui earn praedicationi- 
 bus et sacris scriptis suis fundaverunt. 
 Valde etiam confinnatur Articulus ex 
 sententia Augustini contra Epis- 
 tolam fundamenti : Evangelw non 
 crederem, nisi me Ecclesm Catlwlicce 
 commoveret authoritas. Unde ipsa 
 semper declaravit veras a pseudo- 
 scripturis, ut patet Garth. 0. can. 46. 
 et in posterioribus, de quo supra ; 
 
 declares the chief authority in all 
 such matters is with the Church. 
 
 The following part is no less clear ; 
 for, according to all the ancients, 
 Scripture is the sure rule of truth, 
 w r hence St. Augustine (lib. " de Bap- 
 tismo" c. 3) says, " Who is ignorant 
 that all Sacred Canonical Scripture, 
 whether of the Old or New Testa- 
 ment, is so to be preferred to all 
 writings of subsequent Bishops, that 
 there never may be doubt or dispute 
 \vhether anything established by that 
 Scripture be true and right." 
 
 And what comes next in the Ar- 
 ticle, that the Church is the witness 
 and keeper of Holy Writ, is quite in 
 agreement with St. Paul, who calls 
 her the " ground of the truth ;" and 
 St. John in the Apocalypse calls her 
 " The city having twelve founda- 
 tions, and in them the names of the 
 twelve Apostles of the Lamb" (Rev. 
 xxi. 14), that is, that they founded 
 her by their preaching and holy 
 Avritings. The Article, too, is strongly 
 confirmed by the saying of St. Au- 
 gustine "I would not believe the 
 Gospel, unless the authority of the 
 Catholic Church induced me." So 
 that she has always distinguished be- 
 tween true and false Scripture, as is
 
 quam veritatem optime declarat Mo- 
 lina i. p. disp. i. art. 2. 
 
 Postrema verba Articuli glossam 
 interlinearem deposcunt : ubi enim 
 dicitur, Ita prceter illos nihil credent! nm 
 de necessitate salutis debet obtrudere. 
 Istucl prceter intelligi debet, quod nee 
 fictu nee Bvvdfj,ei in eis continetur, 
 hoc est, quod nee in terminis nee ut 
 consequential inde deducitur, seu 
 quod inde probari non potest, ut as- 
 truitur Articulo sexto. Quod sanum 
 feiTe sensum aestimo, nempe ilium 
 Augustini contra Cresc. i. c. 33. 
 Quamvis hitjiis rei certe de Scripturis 
 Canonicis non proferatur exemplum, 
 earundem tamen etiam in hoc re a nobis 
 teneretur veritas, cum hoc facimus 
 quod universes placet Ecclesice, quam 
 ipsarum scripturarum- commendat au- 
 thoritas itt quia S. Scriptura fallere 
 non potest, quisquis falli metuit, ean- 
 dem Ecclesiam consulat, quam sine 
 idla ambiguitate S. Scriptura demon- 
 strat. 
 
 Adde etiam, scripturas divinas non 
 de iis solum instruere quae scripta sunt, 
 sed de iis etiam quae non sunt scripta, 
 ut patet i. ad Cor. xi. 2. Ephes. ii. 
 Hujusmodi ergo Ecclesia potest pro- 
 
 clear from the Council of Carthage 
 (6 (7a/2.46); and, subsequently, which 
 truth is most ably shown by Molina 
 (1 p. disp. 1, art. 2). 
 
 The latter parts of the Article re- 
 quire interpretation Hue by line ; 
 where it is said, " Beside them ought 
 nothing," &c. By beside must be 
 understood what is not either ac- 
 tually or virtually in them that is, 
 neither expressed in terms nor can 
 be deduced as a consequence from 
 them ; or which " may not be proved 
 thereby," as is said in the sixth Ar- 
 ticle. And I think that these ex- 
 pressions have a sound meaning, 
 according to St. Augustine (Against 
 CresconiuSj 1, c. 33). 
 
 Moreover, the Scriptures them- 
 selves sometimes refer to ordinances 
 and traditions not contained in Scrip- 
 ture, as 1 Cor. xi. 2. Things of 
 this kind, therefore, the Church has
 
 ponere credenda, et ex Scripturis 
 probari possimt ; nee tidversatur Ar- 
 ticulus. 
 
 Quando etiam dixi, in terminis 
 vel in hac consequentia ; volo dicere, 
 non solum ut con sequential fidei ; 
 sed etiam evident! luinine naturae, 
 verbi gratia, in hac consequentia, 
 Christus homo est, ergo habet cor, 
 sanguinem, cerebrum, etc. Conse- 
 quens enim illud est de fide, ut Doc- 
 tores Theologi communiter asserunt, 
 vel saltern est veritas theologica 
 secundum omnes. 
 
 power to propose to our faith, and 
 they can be proved by Scripture, nor 
 is the Article against this. 
 
 Again : when I said above, " either 
 expressed in terms or deduced as a 
 consequence from them," I mean, not 
 only as a consequence when viewed 
 by the light of faith, but even by the 
 light of nature ; as, for instance, in 
 the following consequences. Christ 
 is a Man : therefore He has a heart, 
 blood, brain, &c. For such conse- 
 quences are of faith, as theologians 
 commonly say ; or at least they aiv 
 theological truths, as all allow. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXI. De Autlioritate 
 Conciliorum General-turn. 
 
 ENERALIA Concilia sine jussu 
 V_T et voluntate Principum congre- 
 gari non possunt : et ubi convenerunt, 
 quia ex hominibus constant, qui non 
 omnes spiritu et verbo Dei reguntur, 
 et errare possunt, et interdum erra- 
 
 ARTICLE XXI. Of the Authority 
 
 of General Council K* 
 
 r\ ENERAL Councils may not be 
 U gathered together without the 
 commandment and will of Princes. 
 And when they be gathered together 
 (forasmuch as they be an assembly 
 of men, whereof all be not governed 
 
 * [In this Article it is to be carefully 
 noted that no exception is taken against 
 the Western Patriarch presiding over or 
 confirming and promulgating the decision 
 and decrees of General Councils only 
 against his exercising the power to call 
 them together. Furthermore, it does not 
 assert that General Councils can err in 
 things pertaining to the Faith or necessary 
 to salvation. " Things pertaining to God," 
 
 is both a quaint expression and an expression 
 of great latitude. Koman Catholics would 
 not deny that they might err in any minor 
 matters brought before them for considera- 
 tion. The Council of Nicaja determined 
 the controversy concerning the keeping of 
 Easter an important but not a funda- 
 mental or essential point. General Councils 
 have often discussed other subjects than 
 the Faith.]
 
 runt, etiam in his qua? ad normam 
 pietatis* pertinent ; ideoque quse ab 
 illis constitnuntur ut ad salutem ne- 
 cessaria, neque robur habent neque 
 authoritatem, nisi ostendi possint e 
 sacris literis esse desumpta. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Priora verba vi- 
 dentur confirmari authoritate Hiero- 
 nymi Apol. 2, contra Rufinum, ubi 
 ex hoc capite quoddam Concilium 
 rejicit, dicens : Quis Imperator hanc 
 Synodum jussit congregari ? Quasi 
 relit, necessariam hac in parte jussi- 
 onem Imperatoris, et sic observatum 
 patet in omnibus fere Conciliis vete- 
 ribus, ut de Nicseno ex jussione 
 Constantini ; Sardicensi, Constantii 
 et Constantis, Constantinop. I. Se- 
 nioris Theodosii ; ut referunt So- 
 crates et Nicephorus. Per se quidem 
 loquendo, id est, spectando solum jus 
 divinum, Concilia possunt cogi sine 
 
 with the Spirit and Word of God) 
 they may err, and sometimes have 
 erred, even in things pertaining unto 
 God. Therefore, things ordained by 
 them as necessary to salvation have 
 neither strength nor authority, until 
 it may be declared that they be 
 taken out of Holy Scripture.f 
 
 EXPLANATION. The commence- 
 ment seems to be confirmed by the 
 authority of St. Jerome (Apol. 2, 
 cont. Rufinuni), where he rejects a 
 Council on this ground, saying, 
 " What Emperor ordered this Synod 
 to be convened?" As though lie 
 meant that the command was neces- 
 sary; and the same remark is ob- 
 vious in respect of almost all the an- 
 cient Councils, as the Nicene sum- 
 moned by Constantine ; the Sardican, 
 by Constantius and Constans; the 
 Constantinopolitan, by Theodosius 
 the elder, as is related by Socrates 
 and Nicephorus. But, speaking of 
 
 * [Some versions have " ad Deum" after 
 " pietatis."] 
 
 f [St. Gregory Nazianzen well illustrates 
 the consistency of this Article with a belief 
 in the infallibility of (Ecumenical Councils, 
 by his own language on the subject on 
 different occasions. In the following pas- 
 sage he anticipates the Article : " My 
 mind is, if I must write the truth, to keep 
 clear of every conference of Bishops, for of 
 
 conference never saw I good come, or a 
 remedy so much as an increase of evils. 
 For there is strife and ambition, and these 
 have the upper hand of reason" (Ep. lv.). 
 Yet, on the other hand, he speaks elsewhere 
 of " the Holy Council in Nicsea, and that 
 band of chosen men whom the Holy Ghost 
 brought together" Orat. xxi. (Tract 90, p. 
 22, 2nd Edit.).]
 
 mterventu potcstatis Prineipum, nt 
 constat de Hierosolymitano ; nee hoc 
 potuit Hieronymus negare ; per ac- 
 ciclens tamen ob circumstautias tem- 
 porum, et locorum, debet omninu 
 consensus, immo et jussio Principmn 
 subinde prannitti. De consensu 
 patet, ob bonum et pacein publicam. 
 De jussione etiaiu jcqui constat, 
 quando verb! gratia Episcopi, vel 
 quorum interest, adesse conciliis, 
 nolint parere citationi Ecclesiastical 
 (vel ob alias causas id genus multas) 
 tune enim Principes authoritate sibi 
 u Deo commissa juste, possunt ad- 
 versus eos edicere ; de hoc lego 
 Durand. de mod. Concil. Gener. 
 celeb, rubr. 71. Unde Martianus 
 ad Leonem, Sij inquit, onerosum est } 
 lit tu ad lias partes venias, hoc ip*<nn 
 iiobis propnis litteris tua sanctitas ma- 
 itifestet, quatenm in omnem Orientem 
 et in omnem Thraciam et 1 lli/finm 
 sacrce nostrce litercv dingantv/r t ut ad 
 aliquem definitum locum qui nolis 
 placuerit omnes Episcopi com'eniant. 
 Sic etiam Givu'orius, Tlieodoricmn 
 Francormn Kegem, Epi.st. 54. 1. I). 
 Registri, liortatur, ut contra Si- 
 moniacos qui per licgmun suuin 
 impune grafisabanttir, Synodum jn/><>tii 
 conreari, sic etiam V. Snodus 
 
 Councils in themselves that is, con- 
 sidering only the Divine law they 
 can be convened without the inter- 
 vention of the power of Princes, as 
 was the case in the Council of Jeru- 
 salem ; nor could St. Jerome deny 
 this. Accidentally, however, owing 
 to circumstances of times and places, 
 the consent and even the command- 
 ment of Princes ought to precede 
 Councils. As far as their consent 
 goes, this is evident for the sake of 
 public good and peace ; nor is there 
 any more difficulty as regards their 
 commandment, when, for instance, 
 Bishops or others, who ought to be 
 present in Councils, refuse to obey 
 the ecclesiastical citation (or for 
 many other causes of that sort) ; for 
 then Princes, by the authority en- 
 trusted to them by God, may justly 
 issue edicts against them. On this 
 point, consult Durandus (" de Mod. 
 Concil. Gen. celeb, rubr. 71"). So 
 that Martian wrote to Leo, " If it be 
 irksome for you to come to these 1 
 parts, let your holiness show this to 
 us by your letters, how far our sacred 
 letters may be directed to all the 
 East, and all Thrace and Illyricum, 
 that all the Bishops should come to- 
 gether to one prescribed place, which
 
 qua* est socuncla Constant, nctione 2. 
 habet. Jlif i'>ro,riini* diebus p)-<<'<-<>- 
 dente pio jussu Christo amantixxtini ac 
 Deo cU&toditi Trtipera&oPfaj iiobis con- 
 renit prawns mine sancta SyilOtku ; 
 et .sic sanctitatum testantui 1 concilia 
 allatcr, nee aliucl in hujus Articnli 
 infertui'. 
 
 Verba sequentia rcque faellis sunt 
 concoctionis, magnani eniin latitudi- 
 nem habet ilia dausula (etiam in 
 rebus ad Deum spectantibn*} Concilia 
 eniin Generalia errare posse in rebus, 
 qua, 1 fidem ant mores ad salutem 
 necessarios non concernunt, coin- 
 mnnis est Doctorum, \\t patet in 
 decreto Innoc. et Panormitanus ibi, 
 sic etiam D. Tho. in Quodlibet, et 
 optime declarat Cano in locis 1. 5. c. 
 f). qu. 4. Bellann. etiam do Rom. 
 Pont if. lib. 2. c. 16. . ubi observan- 
 dum est, maneat ergo dausula ilia 
 
 shall be determined by us. So, too, 
 St. Gregory exhorts Theodoric, King 
 of the Franks (Ep. 54, 1. 9), that 
 he would order a synod to meet 
 against the simoniacal offenders who 
 infested his kingdom with impu- 
 nity. And so, too, the Fifth Synod, 
 which is the second of Constanti- 
 nople (act 2), has as follows : = 
 " Here, within these last few days, 
 the pious command of our most 
 Christ-loving and divinely-guarded 
 Emperor preceding, the present holy 
 synod gathered together to us." And 
 that this was repeatedly done, the 
 acts of other Councils show, nor can 
 anything more be inferred from the 
 tenor of this Article. 
 
 The subsequent words are no less 
 easy to be explained, for that clause 
 ("even in things pertaining unto 
 God") has great latitude. For that 
 General Councils may err in matters 
 which do not concern the faith or 
 morals, in things necessary to salva- 
 tion, is the common opinion of the 
 Doctors, as is plain from the decree 
 of Innocent and Panormitanus ; a.-; 
 well as St. Thomas in " Quodlibet," 
 and as is excellently set forth by 
 (.'anus in the "Loci Theoloyici" (1. 5, 
 c. 5, qii. 4) : and by Bellarmine, " </<'.
 
 (etiam in reins ad Deum spectantibits} 
 moclo non sint necessaria respectu 
 ficlei et bonorum morum; quod nee 
 ibi asseritur. 
 
 Ultima verba sententiam veterum, 
 et omnium fere modernorum de- 
 clarant : non enim possunt de non 
 haeretica, facere propositionem haere- 
 ticum, ut in causis fidei ; nee cudere 
 Artie. Fidei, ut recte Suarez de Trip. 
 Virt. Disp. 2. 6. n. 10. Sed solum 
 ex abditioribus Scripture locis, et 
 Apost. dictis, veritatem eruere, I. ut 
 intelligatur illustrius^ quod antea cre- 
 debatur obscurius ; ut loquitur Leri- 
 nensis c. 17. Cano etiam in locis 1. 
 12. fol. 353. ex D. Th. dicit, fidem 
 nostram non inniti revelationibus aliis 
 prseter eas, quas Apostoli et Pro- 
 phetae, authores videlicet canonico- 
 rum Librorum, ediderunt. Et con- 
 firmat ex D. Paulo, uncle Doct. Subt. 
 4. d. xi. qu. 3. agens de definitione 
 Concilii Lateranensis, dicit non fuisse 
 in potestate Ecclesise facere istud 
 verum aut non verum (scilicet tran- 
 substantiationem) sed Dei institu- 
 entis. Ecclesise quidem est (directa 
 in hoe ut creditur a Spiritu reritatis) 
 
 Rom. Pont. (lib. 2, c. 16, Uli olser- 
 vanduni). The clause ("even in 
 things pertaining to God") may, 
 therefore, stand, provided only they 
 be not matters necessary in respect 
 of faith and morals, which is not as- 
 serted in the Article. 
 
 The last paragraph expresses the 
 opinions of the ancient and of almost 
 all modern authors ; for they cannot 
 make a proposition heretical which is 
 not heretical, as is rightly stated by 
 Gerson in the question " An liceat 
 appellare in causis jidei" nor can 
 they concoct Articles of Faith, as 
 says Suarez rightly, " de Trip. Virt" 
 (disp. 2, 6, n. 10). All that they 
 can do is to extract the truth from 
 the more abstruse parts of Holy 
 Scripture, and the sayings of the 
 Apostles, in order that " that may 
 be more clearly understood which 
 before was more obscurely believed ;" 
 as says Vincent of Lerins (c. 17). 
 Melchior Canus, too, "Loci Theol." (1. 
 12, fol. 353), says, from St. Thomas, 
 that our faith does not rest upon 
 other revelations than those which 
 the Apostles and Prophets the au- 
 thors, that is to say, of the Canonical 
 books have set forth; and he con- 
 firms this from St. Paul. Whence
 
 intellectum a Deo traditum in Scrip- 
 turis explicare, ut recte ipse. Et hoc 
 facit Ecclesia, dum aliquam veritatem 
 definire dicitur : non enim novis 
 revelationibus innititur, sed antiquis, 
 in Scripturis et dictis Apostolorum. 
 Unde Doctor ibidem dicit, quod in 
 symbolo illo sub Innocent. III. in 
 Concil. Lat. c. Firmiter credimus, 
 magis explicite ponitur veritas aliquot 
 credendorum, quam habebatur Sym- 
 bolo Apostolorum, vel Athanasii, vel 
 Nicasni ; non ergo nova fides, sed 
 vetusta magis explicatur, sic etiam 
 Molina I. qusest. i. art. 2. disp. 1. 
 elicit: Quod concursus quo Spiritus 
 Sanctus praesto adest Ecclesia?, non 
 est constituendmn aliquid esse de 
 fide, quod antea non erat de fide; 
 sed solum assistit ad declarandum ea 
 quaa mediate, vel immediate spec- 
 tant ad fide. Et sicut Ecclesiaa non 
 est potestas facere, at solum declarare 
 fidelibus, quid debeat certo teneri de 
 fide ; sic nee etiam est potestas facere 
 sacram Scripturam, vel addere vel 
 diminuere Canonicos libros. Sic 
 etiam TuiTecremata, et Vega supra 
 Trident. 1. I. c. 6. Valentia 2. 2. d. 
 1. queest. I. et alii, et D. Thorn. 2. 
 
 the Subtle Doctor* (4, d. 11, qu. 3), 
 treating of the definition of the La- 
 teran Council, says that to make that 
 point true or not true (he is speaking 
 of transubstantiation) was not in the 
 power of the Church, but of God, 
 who instituted the Sacrament. It is, 
 indeed, the office of the Church (di- 
 rected in this as is believed by the 
 Spirit of Truth) to explain the mind 
 of God as set forth in the Scriptures, 
 as he says rightly ; and the Church 
 does this, when she is said to define 
 any truth ; for she does not trust to 
 new revelations, but to the old ones, 
 hidden in the Scriptures and in the 
 words of the Apostles, as is the con- 
 stant opinion of the Doctors. Whence 
 Scotus says in the same place, that 
 in the Creed set forth by Innocent 
 III. in the Lateran Council (c. Fii'- 
 miter Credimus), the truth of certain 
 matters of faith is asserted more ex- 
 plicitly than it was in the Apostles' 
 Creed, or the Athanasian or the Ni- 
 cene ; but there was not for that 
 reason any new faith, but the old 
 faith more fully explained. And so, 
 too, Molina (1 qu. 1, art. 2, disp. 1) 
 says, " that the presence of the Holy 
 
 [* t. e. Johannes Duns Scotus. J
 
 2. ([. 1. art. 7. cxpresse docet : Arti- 
 culos jidei post tcinpora ApotfotorWf* 
 non crevisse; quod non alium potcst 
 habere sensuin, quam illurn qnciu 
 posuimus, crevissent enim, si Ecclesia 
 sua definitione cfficeret, \\t aliqui 
 Articuli jam essent de fide, qui 
 antea non erant, ut rccte Conink De 
 Actibus Supernaturalibus, di.sp. 12. 
 dub. G. Et ex hoc convincitur. 
 Nam secundum Apostolum, Ephes. 
 2. supcracdificamur supra fundmin'n- 
 tutn Apostolorwn, et Pi-ophetarmn ; 
 non igitur aliud fundamentum, nee 
 alia fides, quam ipsorum. Huic con- 
 forme est illud Cyp, cp. 74. Si in 
 al/'i/Ko natavcrit ct vat'illacei'it 
 ad oriyinein IJovtinicdin, Ec 
 et .\postolicam additioncm re\erta- 
 mur, et inde surgat actus uostri ratio, 
 undc et ordo ct oriyo swwit. 
 
 (ilmst with the Church is not for the 
 purpose of making anything of faith 
 Avhicli was not before of faith, but 
 only for the purpose of declaring 
 those things Avhich directly or indi- 
 rectly affect the faith ; and as in the 
 Church there is no power to make 
 anything of faith which was not so 
 before, but only to declare to the 
 faithful what ought for certain to be- 
 held as of faith, so neither is there 
 any power to make Holy Scripture, 
 nor to add to or diminish from the 
 Canonical Books/' So, too, say Tur- 
 recremata and Vega on the Council 
 of Trent (1. 1, c. G), Valentin (2, 2, 
 d. 1, qu. 1), and others besides St. 
 Thomas, who expressly teaches (2, 
 2, qu. 1, art. 7), " that the Articles 
 of Faith have not increased since the 
 times of the Apostles," which can 
 have no other meaning than the one 
 which we have laid doAVn ; since they 
 would have increased, had the Church 
 by her definitions made any Articles 
 to be of faith now which were not so 
 before, as is rightly said by Conink, 
 " De Actibus Supernat" (disp. 12, 
 dub. 0). And it is proved as follows, 
 according to the Apostle (Eph. ii. 
 20), we "are built upon the founda- 
 tion of the Apostles and Prophets/'
 
 ARTICULUS XXII. De Ptmjatorio. 
 
 DOCTRINA Eomanensiiun de 
 Purgatorio, cle Indulgentiis, de 
 Veneratione et Adoratione turn Ima- 
 ginum, turn Reliquiarum ; necnon 
 de Invocatione Sanctorum, res est 
 futilis, inaniter conficta, et nullis 
 Scripturarum testimonies inmtitur, 
 immo verbo Dei contradicit. 
 
 PAKAPHEASIS. 
 Probl. 37. 
 
 Examinatus est 
 
 There is, therefore, no other founda- 
 tion, nor any other faith, than theirs. 
 With this agrees that passage of St. 
 Cyprian (Ep. 74) If the truth 
 have at all moved or been shaken, 
 let us return to the fountain, to the 
 tradition of our Lord, of the Gospel, 
 and of the Apostles ; and from 
 thence let the method of our acts 
 take its rise, whence the order and 
 the beginning itself arose." 
 
 ARTICLE XXII. Of Pimjatory. 
 
 nnHE Romish Doctrine concerning 
 J. Purgatory, Pardons, Worship- 
 ping and Adoration, as well of 
 Images as of Reliques, and also In- 
 vocation of Saints, is a fond thing 
 vainly invented, and grounded upon 
 no warranty of Scripture, but rather 
 repugnant to the Word of God. 
 
 EXPLANATION. Tin's Article is 
 examined in Problem 37. 
 
 EXPLANATION FROM PROBLEM XXXVII. These words are, without 
 doubt, at first sight most difficult. But it must be observed that, by the 
 terms of this Article, it is not the Invocation of Saints absolutely, or in 
 itself, that is condemnedj but the Romish doctrine. If we would, therefore, 
 see the meaning of this decision or censure of theirs, we must examine the 
 Roman doctrine ; not, however, what the Romans or Catholics (for the 
 wards arc synonymous in their mode of speaking) hold, but what is supposed 
 to be their doctrine. This, then, we must discover, not from the writings of 
 Catholics, but from those of their opponents. 
 
 Dr Andrewes in his Answer to c> 2 of Cardinal Peronmus. (fol. 28),
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 like Calvin, supposes that our prayers are addressed to the Saints ultimately 
 and absolutely, and offered, as it were, to so many deities, as he endeavours 
 to show at length not indeed from the agreement of the Doctors, but from 
 the wording of some of the hymns. This, then, is the doctrine which is 
 condemned in the Article as vain ; which we, too, abjure as impious. What 
 cause is there, then, for wonder if the people, when imbued with such 
 calumnies, are opposed to sound and Catholic doctrine ? 
 
 The controversy, then, is not about words, but about the meaning of 
 words, as Bellarmine rightly remarks. Dr. Andrewes knew quite well that 
 all the Catholic doctors, without exception, when speaking doctrinally, have 
 always condemned that mode of addressing the Saints ; and the Church 
 herself declared the same at Trent. So, why should we refer to the hymns *? 
 The sum of the matter is, that the Anglican Confession has decided nothing 
 against the faith ; but has condemned an impious heathen notion, falsely 
 imputed to the Church. 
 
 In exactly the same manner, and in words of the same purport in the 
 same Article, they reject, not purgatory, indulgences, the worshipping of 
 relics and images in itself, but as before the Romish doctrine on all these 
 points that is, a doctrine falsely imputed to us. Purgatory, they think, is 
 a place invented by us, making the Cross of Christ of none effect, &c. 
 They have many wonderful ideas of this kind. On the subject of indul- 
 gences, they think that they are a kind of merchandize of the Pope's ; as 
 though he, at his own will, freed the living or dead from all punishment due 
 to their sins (I am speaking throughout of the Calvinists). On the worship 
 of images and relics, they think that we pay them the worship properly 
 called latria, and having them for its object, and so make idols of them, like 
 the heathen. These wicked calumnies and fables of wicked men, under 
 the name of Romish doctrine, they reject as absurd; we detest them as 
 supremely injurious to the Spouse of God. 
 
 Very many of them admit purgatory in itself, so far, that is, as the 
 substance of the Church's definition, especially in the Council of Florence, 
 namely, a place of purifying and cleansing, as St. Cyprian says (torn. i. 
 ep. 52), though the manner of purifying and cleansing is not very clearly 
 defined. Indulgences, too, as they are defined by the Council of Trent 
 that is, a certain judicial absolution or relaxation, as in God's stead, of 
 {temporal] penalties on account of sins (as the Schoolmen say) with St.
 
 Cyprian (torn. 1, ep. 14), and Tertullian (torn. 2, 1. ad Martyres, c. 1, and 
 elsewhere), they do not reject ; nor is this only what was due to the Church 
 from the penitential discipline, as the Calvinists say ; for, as St. Cyprian 
 says in that place, " They who have received a writ from the martyrs, can 
 be helped by their intercession before God," not therefore only before the 
 Church. St. Cyprian asks the martyrs, however, " to weigh carefully the 
 requests of those who ask, as the friends of the Lord, and those who will 
 hereafter judge together with Him, both the state and the deeds and the 
 merits of every one" (ep. 11 or 15). He gives them a method how to ask 
 from the prelates of the Church the remission of the penalties, or the satis- 
 faction due to God for the sinners. Indeed, Chemnitz himself, in contro- 
 versy with Bellarmine, owns that Augustine, Cyprian, and Tertullian 
 frequently recognise indulgences, in the sense spoken of, as well as the 
 worship of images and relics, as laid down in the Councils of Nicsea, 
 Florence, and Trent ; and none of these points are denied in the Articles of 
 the Anglican Confession. Indeed, the more learned of my countrymen, with 
 whom I have often conversed, fully receive these matters ; and in our 
 conferences have ingenuously owned that they are all agreeable to primitive 
 antiquity ; but that there is a sacred spiritual treasury made up of the merits 
 of Christ and the Saints, and had in acceptance with God, they do not think 
 is equally clearly set forth in Scripture and the writings of the Fathers. 
 On our side Mayron, with some few others, held the same opinion, and did 
 not think such a belief necessary for establishing the truth of indulgences. 
 
 As respects the veneration of relics and the Cross of Christ, Dr. Andrewes 
 (Respons. ad c. 18 Peronnii), Casaubon (in Exercit. Baronii ad annum, p. 34 
 et alibi), together with some others following. St. Cyril (in Catech. 4), St. 
 Jerome (ad Marcellum), St. Augustine, and others, allow a certain worship, 
 or a certain reverential honour, towards sacred images, in agreement with 
 St. Chrysostom in his liturgy that is, a religious boicing to an image adds 
 after the others Dr. Montagu (Respons. ad Heigham and Appello Csesarem, 
 c. 22), which reverence the Greeks have always paid, as is shown by Curo- 
 palata (De Officialibus). 
 
 Concerning Purgatory, the older writers among them allowed it, as is 
 clear from Fox speaking of Latimer ; nor did Latimer absolutely deny it. 
 I am not, however, engaged in an inquiry into the opinions of individuals, 
 having shown what is defined in the Anglican confession ; where, as I said,
 
 ( 42 ) 
 
 not the use of the Church, but an abuse calumniously Imputed to her, is con- 
 demned. On this point we shall have entire agreement with the Anglican 
 Confession, if only men will weigh its statements, as they ought, in a spirit 
 of zeal, not for party, but for truth. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXIII. De Vocations 
 
 Ministrorum. 
 
 NON licet cuiquam smnere sibi 
 munus publice praxlicandi, aut 
 administrandi Sacramenta in Ecclesia, 
 nisi prius fuerit ad litec obeunda 
 legitime vocatus et missus. Atque 
 illos legitime vocatos et missos exis- 
 timare debemus ? qui per homines, 
 quibus potestas vocandi Ministros 
 atque mittendi in vineam Domini, 
 publice concessa est in Ecclesia, 
 coaptati fuerint, et adsciti in hoc 
 opus. 
 
 PARAPIIRASIS. Est conformis 
 sacrse Scriptura? } doctrinse sanctorum 
 Patrum, et praxi universalis Ecclesia?, 
 
 ARTICLE XXIII. Of Ministering 
 in the Congregation. 
 
 IT is not lawful for any man to 
 take upon him the office of pub- 
 lick preaching, or ministering the 
 Sacraments in the Congregation, be- 
 fore he be lawfully called, and sent 
 to execute the same. And those we 
 ought to judge lawfully called and 
 sent, Avliicli be chosen and called to 
 this work by men who have publick 
 authority given unto them in the 
 Congregation, to call and send Mi- 
 nisters into the Lord's vineyard. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 in agreement with Holy Scripture, 
 the doctrine of the holy Fathers, and 
 the practice of the Universal Church. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXIV, De Precilus 
 Publicis dicendis in lingua vul- 
 fjari. 
 
 LINGUA populo non intellect*!, 
 publicas in Ecclesia Preces pe- 
 ragere, aut Sacramenta administrare, 
 verbo Dei et primitive Eccle.sia) con- 
 suetudini plane repugnat. 
 
 ARTICLE XXIV. Of upeating in 
 the Congregation in such a tongue 
 as the people understandeth. 
 
 IT is a thing plainly repugnant to 
 the Word of God, and the custom 
 of the Primitive Church, to have 
 publick Prayer in the Church, or to 
 minister the Sacraments in a tongue 
 not understunded of the people*
 
 is. Scio plerosquc ex 
 nostratibus existimare hie deccrni, 
 in Scripturi.s csse pra;ceptum publica 
 Ecclesi3 officia in lingui.s vernaculis 
 cclebrari. Quo nihil minus inten- 
 ditur D. Paul us cnim quern huic 
 articulo hoc astruendi fundamentum 
 fecisse credunt, plane aliud vult. 
 Scribit enim ubi ad Corinthios, apud 
 quo.s tune tcmporis et Hebrasos con- 
 stantisisimum fuit in lingua vulgar! 
 communia celebrare : non igitur cre- 
 diderim Paulum Corinthiis imposu- 
 isse, aut illud prax'ipere voluisse, 
 quod jam publice in usu erat, sed 
 vel de privatis eoruin conventibus, 
 vcl saltern dc privatis colloquiis post 
 communia officia peracta habitis, ibi 
 agit, et eos reprehendit, qui dono 
 linguarum praxliti etiam in linguis 
 extraneis tune loquebantnr : sicut si 
 aliquis apud nos in lingua Teutonica, 
 quod ridiculuin viderctur. 
 
 Himc vcro esse scnsmn D. Pauli 
 non potuit latere conditores Articu- 
 
 ExrLAXATiox. I know that many 
 of our countrymen consider it is here 
 affirmed that in the Scriptures it is 
 commanded that the public offices of 
 the Church IDC celebrated in the ver- 
 nacular language. But this is as 
 far as possible from the intention of 
 Scripture. For St. Paul, whom they 
 believe to have given authority for 
 this Article, asserts this plainly means 
 something else. For he is writing to 
 the Corinthians, among whom at that 
 time, as among the Jews, it was the 
 established custom to celebrate the 
 public offices in the vulgar tongue. 
 I cannot, therefore, believe that St. 
 Paul imposed on the Corinthians, or 
 would have meant to order them to 
 do, that which was already in common 
 use publicly ; but that he there speaks 
 either of their private assemblies, or 
 at least of private conferences held 
 after the performance of the public 
 offices ; and that he blames those 
 who, having received the gift of 
 tongues, even at these times, spoke 
 in foreign tongues ; which was the 
 same thing as though any one among 
 us were to speak in German, which 
 would appear ridiculous. 
 
 But it could not have escaped the 
 framiTS of the Articles, that this was
 
 lorum, et consequenter nee contra 
 tarn manifestam veritatem aliquicl 
 potuerunt ordinare. 
 
 Decernit igitur liic Articulus esse 
 repugnans Scripturis, id est, non doc- 
 trinae Scripturae, quasi aliquid in op- 
 positum ordinaretur, quod est f alsum, 
 ut dictum est; sed scriptioni seu 
 traditioni ScripturaB, quse fuit apud 
 Corinthios in lingua communi : ora- 
 tiones etiam et administrationes Sa- 
 cramentorum in Scripturis tradita?, 
 vulgo publica fiebant in lingua com- 
 muni, quia Scriptui'Ee ipsis in vulgari 
 tradebantur, nam Hebr. Hebraeis, 
 Grssce Graecis. Et hoc solum dicit 
 hie Articulus ; testatur utique tradi- 
 tionem Scripturaa et omnium ibi con- 
 tentorum, etiam Sacramentonim, ce- 
 lebratam fuisse in linguis commu- 
 nibus, quod sensu exposito verum est 
 non tamen aliquid hie per modum 
 legis instituitur, vel omnino man- 
 datus, ut in Articulo patet. 
 
 Addo, nullam legem dari posse de 
 accidentibus. Per accidens vero est 
 
 the meaning of St. Paul ; and, con- 
 sequently, they cannot have meant to 
 affirm anything contrary to such a 
 manifest truth. 
 
 This Article, then, asserts that it 
 is repugnant to the Scriptures that 
 is, not to the doctrine of the Scrip- 
 tures as though anything were or- 
 dered different to that, which, as we 
 have said, is false ; but to the writing 
 or tradition of Scripture which ex- 
 isted at Corinth in the vulgar tongue. 
 The prayers, too, and administra- 
 tions of the Sacraments handed down 
 in Scripture, were commonly per- 
 formed in public in the language of 
 the people, because the Scriptures 
 were delivered to them in that lan- 
 guage namely, in Hebrew to the 
 Jews, in Greek to the Greeks, and 
 this alone is asserted by the Article ; 
 for it bears witness that the tradition 
 of Scripture, and of all things con- 
 tained in it, even the Sacraments, 
 was in the vulgar tongue, which in 
 the sense set forth above is true. 
 Nothing, however, here is appointed 
 by way of a law, or at all com- 
 manded, as is plain from the Ar- 
 ticle. 
 
 Moreover, no law can be made 
 concerning accidental matters. Now,
 
 quod h smgulis in hsec occidentall 
 mundi plaga non intelligatur lingua 
 Latina, qiue per se loquendo est 
 lingua communis ecclesiaa Latinae ; et 
 in hoc ex parte distinguitur a Graecis, 
 unde Grasci apud omnes jurisdiction! 
 Patriarchal Constantinopol. subditos, 
 licet Graeci non sint, officia idiomate 
 Graeco celebrant: supponitur enim, 
 tarn apud Graecos quam Latinos, 
 linguas illas respective communiter 
 addisci, sicut de Latina Beda suo 
 tempore diligenter factitatum tes- 
 tatur. Et hinc Trid. praecipit pres- 
 byteris ut parochianos in commu- 
 nibus ecclesiae officiis instruerent, ut 
 patet fess. 22, c. 8. Unde si dixeri- 
 mus Paulum vetuisse preces publicas 
 celebrari lingua non communi, in- 
 telligi deberet, nisi adesset qui inter- 
 pretaretur ; ut recte Articulus V. 
 confessionis Anglicae sub Edwardo 
 VI. Omnibus ergo modis ecclesia3 
 satisfacit huic prascepto (si praecep- 
 tum est), quia interpretem apponunt, 
 in Trident. 
 
 Addo ulterius etiam vi hujus Ar- 
 ticuli probabiliter inferri posse, de- 
 
 it is an accidental matter that some 
 living in the West do not understand 
 the Latin language, which is the com- 
 mon language of the Latin Church, 
 and by this partly is it distinguished 
 from the Greeks ; so that the Greeks 
 wherever subject to the jurisdiction 
 of the Patriarch of Constantinople, 
 though they be not Greeks by nation, 
 say their offices in the Greek lan- 
 guage ; for it is supposed that, among 
 both Greeks and Latins, those lan- 
 guages are respectively learnt by 
 most people, as, in respect of Latin, 
 Bede testifies was sedulously done in 
 his day ; and for this reason the 
 Council of Trent (Sess. 22, c. 8) 
 orders priests to instruct their pa- 
 rishioners in the common offices of 
 religion. If, then, we say that St. 
 Paul forbade that public offices 
 should be celebrated except in the 
 vulgar tongue, we must understand, 
 unless there be some one to interpret ; 
 as was rightly added in the fifth Ar- 
 ticle under Edward VI. In every 
 respect, then, the Church fulfils this 
 precept (if it be a precept) by or- 
 dering interpretation in the Council 
 of Trent. 
 
 I add further that, even on the 
 strength of this Article, it may be
 
 hero ecelesia* officia ct Christ! Sa- 
 cramenta in lingua Latina npud nos 
 hodic celebrari ; quia per so loquendo 
 (ut dixi) est lingua communis, ct 
 eommuniter intellecta, et publice in 
 singulis locis eclocta ; soluin anteni 
 asseritur in Articulo, quod preees 
 pttbllctt fiant in lingua a populo in- 
 tellecta, quod sine dubio intelligi 
 debet do per se, non per accidens 
 loquendo. 
 
 Hoc dico, casu quo intelligi con- 
 tendant Articuluni de pra?senti usu 
 Ecclesiae : et ob bane rationem in 
 Africa, ut testatur Cypr. de Orat. 
 Dom. et Aug. de bono Persev. c. 13, 
 missas et reliqua faciebant Latinc, 
 licet lingua vulgaris erat Punica, et 
 Latina ab inferiori plebc non intel- 
 lecta. De Hispania patet apud Isido- 
 I'um De Divin. Noinin. et in Concil. 
 Tolet. 4, cap. 2, 12, 13, 14, 15, et 
 de Anglia nota est historia Bedic lib. 
 1, c. 1. Feemina3 quidein rarius iu- 
 telligebaut Latinam, nee de illis intel- 
 ligi potest Paulus, sed de idiota, id 
 est, de ilia cui incumbit respondere, 
 quod non est foemmarum, qiuc nee 
 
 probably inferred, that the office 1 ? of 
 the Church and the Sacraments of 
 Christ ought at the present time to 
 be celebrated amongst us in Latin, 
 because it is, speaking generally, as 
 I said above, the common language 
 and commonly understood, and pub- 
 licly taught in every place ; and it is 
 only asserted in the Article that 
 public prayer should be in a lan- 
 guage understood by the people, 
 which ought undoubtedly to be ex- 
 plained of general understanding 
 everywhere, not of accidental varia- 
 tions of language. 
 
 I say this in case they should con- 
 tend that the Article ought to be un- 
 derstood of the present use of the 
 Church. For the reason set forth 
 above, in Africa, as evidenced by 
 St. Cyprian (de Or. JJoin.} and St. 
 Augustine (de Ion. Persev. , c. 13), 
 they used to say masses and other 
 offices in Latin, though the common 
 language was the Punic, and Latin 
 Avas not understood by the lower 
 orders. The same thing is evident 
 as regards Spain from Isidore (dt 
 die. Ao7?.) and the Council of To- 
 ledo (4, cap. 2, 12, 13, 14, 15) ; and 
 .Bode says the same of England 
 (Hist. i. 1). Women very seldom
 
 loqui debent in ecclcsia, ut ibidem 
 Paulas, et in jure canonico cautum 
 est. 
 
 Dices liunc Articulum condemnarc 
 nt Soriptimx? sen vcrbo Dei ivpng- 
 nantem, modnm ecclesiaj Latiiice ce- 
 lebrantis, sicut etiam Cajet. in 1. ad 
 Cor. 14. 
 
 Respondeo me sensum Articuli 
 satis exposnisse ; quia tainen coin- 
 mimitei* sic a Nostratibus intelligi- 
 tur ; referam quid de hoc liabeat 
 Cano, 1. 5, c. 5, q. 5, JV<?/i auderem as- 
 severe esse hcereticum, si aliquis ilicerit 
 allquam ecdesiw consuetmUnem, vel 
 legem esse malam, vel injustam, modo 
 non sint de rebus ad salutem neces- 
 sariin, quia nt Deus iton deficit in iie- 
 cessariis, sle non abundat in superflnis. 
 Sic ille. Conseqnentnr ad hanc doc- 
 trinam, si Nostrates simpliciter dice- 
 rent hanc Ecclesia) legem sen con- 
 snetudinem esse inalam, cum non 
 videatnr salnti necessaria secnndam 
 doctrinain a Cano alibi traditam, ipse 
 non cos hccreseos incnsaret. Ecclesla 
 fnim mores quondam a Christo et Apos- 
 
 understood Latin, nor can St. Paul 
 1)0 supposed to speak of them; but 
 of the t'Sta)T7?9 that is, of him >vho 
 had to respond which could not be 
 the case Avith regard to women, who 
 ought not even to speak in church, 
 as St. Paul says in the same place, 
 and as is declared in the Canon law. 
 
 It may be said that this Article 
 condemns, as repugnant to Scripture 
 or the Word of God, the manner of 
 celebrating of the Latin Church, as 
 also does Cajetan on 1 Cor. 14. 
 
 To which I answer that I have 
 sufficiently set forth the sense of the 
 Article. Since, however, it is thus 
 commonly understood by men of this 
 country, I .will quote what Canns 
 says about this (1. 5, c. 5, qu. 5) u I 
 would not venture to assert that it 
 was heretical, if any one said that 
 any custom of the Church or law 
 was bad or unjust, provided it were 
 not about matters necessary for sal- 
 vation ; because, as God is not want- 
 ing in what is necessary, so He does 
 not superabound in what is more 
 than necessary." Consequently, with 
 reference to this doctrine, if our 
 countrymen simply said that this law 
 or custom of the Church was bad, 
 since it does not seem necessary to
 
 totis traditos retinet, in quilus qui 
 Ecclesiam errare diceret, hie erroris 
 ejus authores Christum et Ajjostolos 
 faceret : alii vero mores sunt post 
 Apostolos inducti, in guibus quamvis 
 Ecclesia ermret, non propterea fides pe- 
 riclitaretur. Haec ille. Cujus sen- 
 tentiam, ego non sum tantus, ut 
 condemnare ausim. Adverte tamen, 
 Dicere quod Missa in lingua vulgari 
 tantum celebrari debeat, eo quod sit 
 contra Christi institutionem in Trid. 
 sess. 22, c. 9, anathemati subjicitur. 
 Hoc autem non dicunt tantum in 
 lingua vulgari, sed pro ratione audi- 
 entium : et hinc in aliquibus col- 
 legiis, nempe ubi omnes callent La- 
 tinem, officium divinum liodie sit 
 Latine ; nee Missa, sed precum pub- 
 licarum (quse aliud sunt a Missa) 
 mentionem faciunt. Quod non est 
 contra Trid. directe, quia Trid. solum 
 loquitur de Missa, et quod tantum 
 fiat in vulgari, eo quod sit contra 
 Christi institutionem : neutrum ta- 
 men horum dicit Articulus, ut ibi 
 patet, sed dum dicit esse repugnans 
 verbo Dei (licet ut ostendi superius, 
 non omnino de hoc agi) intelligi 
 deberent institutioni D. Pauli, non 
 Christi, cujus scripta sub nomine 
 verbi Dei comprehenduntur, omnia 
 
 salvation, according to the doctrine 
 elsewhere laid down by Canus, he 
 would not charge them with heresy : 
 "For the Church retains certain 
 customs delivered to her by Christ 
 and the Apostles, in which any one 
 who said that the Church was in 
 error would make Christ and the 
 Apostles the authors of that error; 
 but there are other customs intro- 
 duced since the Apostles, in which, 
 even if the Church erred, the faitli 
 would not therefore be in jeopardy." 
 This is what he says ; and I have not 
 such an opinion of myself as to pre- 
 sume to condemn his opinion. To 
 say that Mass ought only to be cele- 
 brated in the vulgar tongue, or that 
 the opposite practice is contrary to 
 Christ's institution, is anathematized 
 by the Council of Trent (Sess. 22, 
 c. 9). But this the Article treated of 
 does not say ; for it is not said in 
 the vulgar tongue only, but with 
 respect to the hearers. For this 
 cause in some colleges, where all are 
 skilled in Latin, the divine office is 
 at this day said in Latin. Nor, 
 again, is Mass spoken of ; but public 
 prayer (which is a different thing 
 from the Mass). So that the state- 
 ment is not directly against the
 
 tamcn ab ApostoUa demandatur, non 
 stint mandata Christi, ut ab omnibus 
 concessum est, et consequents!* licet 
 dixissent esse contra institutionem 
 Apostoli, non esset expresse contra 
 fidem. De Cajetano quidem, au- 
 dacter scripsit, sed ante Trid. 
 
 Council of Trent, for that speaks of 
 Mass only, and of the opinion that 
 it must by Christ's institution be 
 always said in the vulgar tongue. 
 Neither, howeA r er, of these is as- 
 serted by the Article, as is plain ; 
 but when it says that the practice 
 is repugnant to the Word of God 
 (though as I have shown above it 
 does not treat of this absolutely), 
 it should be understood to mean 
 repugnant to the institution not 
 of Christ but of St. Paul, whose 
 writings are comprised under the 
 name of the Word of God ; but all 
 things ordered by the Apostles are 
 not commands of Christ, as is al- 
 lowed by all ; and consequently, 
 though they might have called it 
 against the institution of the Apostle, 
 such a statement would not be ex- 
 pressly against the faith. With re- 
 gard to Cajetan, indeed, he wrote 
 rashly, but it was before the Council 
 of Trent. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXV. De Sacramentis. 
 
 QACRAMENTA & Christo insti- 
 O tuta, non tantum stint notae pro- 
 fessionis Christianorum, sed certa 
 qusedam potius testimonia, et effi- 
 cacia signa gratia: atque bonas in nos 
 
 ARTICLE XXV. Of the Sctcraments. 
 
 Q ACR AMENTS ordained of Christ 
 O be not only badges or tokens of 
 Christian men's profession, but rather 
 they be certain sure witnesses, and 
 effectual signs of grace, and God's 
 
 E
 
 voluntatis Dei, per qu?e invisibiliter 
 ipse in nobis operatur, nostramque 
 fidein in se non solum excitat, verum 
 etiam confirmat. 
 
 Duo a Christo Domino nostro in 
 evangelic instituta sunt Sacramenta, 
 scilicet Baptismus, et Coena Domini. 
 
 Quinque ilia vulgo nominata Sa- 
 cramenta, scilicet Confirmatio, Poeni- 
 tentia, Ordo, Matrimonium, et Ex- 
 trema Unctio, pro Sacramentis Evan- 
 gelicis habenda non sunt, ut quae 
 partim a prava Apostolorum imita- 
 tione profluxerunt, partim vita3 status 
 sunt in Scripturis quidem probati : 
 sed Sacramentorum eandem cum 
 Baptismo, et Coena Domini rationem 
 non habentes, ut qua3 signum aliquod 
 visibile sen ceremoniam a Deo insti- 
 tutam non habeant. 
 
 Sacramenta non in hoc instituta 
 sunt a Christo ut spectarentur, aut 
 circumferrentur, sed ut rite illis 
 uteremur, et in iis duntaxat, qui 
 digne percipiunt, salutarem habent 
 effectual : qui vero indigne perci- 
 piunt, damnationem (ut Paulus in- 
 quit) sibi ipsis acquirunt. 
 
 good will towards us, by the which 
 he doth work invisibly in us, and 
 doth not only quicken, but also 
 strengthen and confirm our faith in 
 him. 
 
 There are two Sacraments or- 
 dained of Christ our Lord in the 
 Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and 
 the Supper of the Lord. 
 
 Those five commonly called Sa- 
 craments, that is to say, Confirma- 
 tion, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, 
 and Extreme Unction, are not to be 
 counted for Sacraments of the Gos- 
 pel, being such as have giwvn partly 
 of the corrupt following of the Apos- 
 tles, partly are states of life allowed 
 in the Scriptures ; but yet have not 
 like nature of Sacraments with Bap- 
 tism 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 such only 
 as worthily receive the same they 
 have a wholesome effect or opera- 
 tion : but they that receive them un- 
 worthily purchase to themselves dam- 
 nation, as Saint Paul saith.f 
 
 [* " This definition does not exclude 
 Matrimony, Confirmation, Absolution, and 
 Orders from being in some sense Sacra- 
 ments ; but excludes them from being 
 such Sacraments as Baptism and the Com- 
 
 munion. . . . Four out of five the Church 
 of England admits, at least in a modified 
 form." Bp. Harold Browne On tlie Articles, 
 Gth Edition. London : Longmans, 18G4.] 
 [f Dr. Harold Browne, Bishop of Ely,
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Paragraphus pri- 
 mus et secundus Catholicus cst : 
 tertius exponendus. Ubi sciendum, 
 quod receptissima veritas est, tarn in 
 Occidentali quam Oriental! Ecclesia ; 
 septem esse Sacramenta, in quorum 
 administration e, si ex officio fiat 
 (potest esse difficultas aliqua de 
 ministro matrimonii) necessario re- 
 quiritur homo sacer, nt minister 
 Ecclesia? ; ut conveniunt omnes Doc- 
 tores, et in Florentine cum liberrimo 
 consensu totius Ecclesia; definitum 
 fuit, ilia esse proprie dicta Sacra- 
 menta ; et licet Gra?ci in aliquibus 
 aliis punctis, praesertim de absolute 
 suprematu Papa? vesilierint : in hac 
 tamen veritate usque in liodiernum 
 diem constant; ut testantur eorum 
 Scriptores. Ne igitur hsec nostratium 
 censura videatur toti Ecclesia? repug- 
 nare, glossanda est, liic non negari 
 omnem rationed Sacramentis caeteris 
 
 EXPLANATION. The first and 
 second paragraphs are Catholic, the 
 third requires explanation. On this 
 point it must be first understood, 
 that it is a most received truth, as 
 well in the Eastern as in the Western 
 Church, that there are seven Sacra- 
 ments, in the administration of 
 which, if done by virtue of the ad- 
 ministrator's office (there may be 
 some difficulty as to the minister of 
 matrimony), of necessity is required 
 a consecrated person as a minister 
 of the Church; as all the Doctors 
 agree, and as it was defined at Flo- 
 rence with the most free consent of 
 the whole Church, that they are 
 properly called Sacraments ; and al- 
 though the Greeks have gone back 
 on some other points, especially con- 
 cerning the absolute supremacy of 
 the Pope, they hold to this truth (of 
 the seven Sacraments) up to the 
 
 in his Treatise on tlie Articles (p. 582), thus 
 writes regarding Confirmation : " Con- 
 firmation, in the primitive Church, fol- 
 lowed immediately on Baptism, and, as 
 above noted, was made ordinarily a part of 
 Baptism. Tertullian and Cyril of Jeru- 
 salem both speak of the catechumens as 
 first receiving Baptism, and then immedi- 
 ately on their coming out of the water 
 receiving chrism and imposition of hands," 
 clear proof enough that, whether Con- 
 
 firmation in the Roman Church be either a 
 "corrupt following of the Apostles," or a 
 "state of life allowed in the Scriptures," 
 the present practice of the Church of Eng- 
 land, in which Confirmation is deferred so 
 long, is unquestionably the exact reverse of 
 that "primitive use" of which so much is 
 said. Church-of-England people in this 
 instance, as perhaps in other particulars, 
 need to remember the parable of the mote 
 and the beam.]
 
 quinque, qua> ibi specifieat, sed solum 
 differentiam ponere, tarn in necessi- 
 tate, quam principalitate Baptismi, 
 et Eucharistia?, respectu cscterorum, 
 in quo convenit tota Antiquitas, cum 
 universa Scliola Theologorum, ut 
 omnibus notum est. Hunc vero essc 
 sensum genuinum hu jus articuli, 
 patet, quia subditur (sed non candem 
 habent rationem) non negat ergo 
 simpliciter esse Sacramenta, quod 
 antea dixerat, sed in dissimili gradu, 
 quod ultro concedimus. Fuit qui- 
 dem olim inter Doctores aliqua con- 
 troversia, an omnia Sacramenta fue- 
 rint a Christo instituta immediate; 
 de qua re Sotus 4. d. i. q. 5, a. 2, 
 et Durand. d. 2, q. i. putant non 
 esse haeresim dicere Unctionem et 
 Confirmationem non esse instituta a 
 Christo, Favet Hugo 2, de Sacr. p. 
 15, c. 2, et Bonav. d. 7, a. 1, q. i., 
 sed optime illormn doctrinam op- 
 pugnat Doctor 4, d. 2, q. i. Omnes 
 tamen conveniunt esse de fide septcm 
 esse Sacramenta. 
 
 present day, as their writers bear 
 witness. Lest, however, this cen- 
 sure on the part of our countrymen 
 should seem repugnant to the whole 
 Church, it must be noticed that in 
 this Article some nature of Sacra- 
 ments is not denied to the other five 
 specified, but only a difference is 
 made in the necessity and greater 
 dignity of Baptism and the Eucha- 
 rist in respect of the rest, with which 
 all antiquity agrees, and the whole 
 theology of the schools, as is known 
 to all. But it is clear that this is the 
 the time sense of this Article, because 
 there is added Jiave not the like nature ; 
 it does not deny that they are Sa- 
 craments at all, which it had before 
 called them, but says that they are so 
 in a different degree, which we readily 
 grant. There was of old a question 
 among the Doctors, " Whether all 
 the Sacraments were ordained of 
 Christ ?" On which point Sotus (4 
 d. 1, qu. 5, a. 2) and Durandus (d. 2, 
 q. 1) think it is not heresy to say 
 that Unction and Confirmation were 
 not instituted by Christ. To this 
 opinion incline Hugo (2 de Sctcr. p. 
 15, c. 2) and St. Bonaventure (d. 7, 
 a. 1, qu. 1) ; but the [Subtle] Doctor 
 successfully opposes their doctrine
 
 Alia vcrba intormixta in Articiilo 
 non sunt direct e reeponsiva ad qua> 
 situm, quod erat do numero Sacra- 
 mentorum, unde secundum regulas 
 Doctorum post Caniun 1. 5, q. 4, 
 ctiam in definitionibus Ecclesia?, non 
 ligantur Catholici ad singula verba 
 definition] annexa, nee sequaces hujus 
 censurip, ut etiam jurent in ilia 
 verba per accidens allata. 
 
 Paragraplms ultimus ponderabitur 
 in Articulo XXVIII. 
 
 (4 d. 2, qu. 1). All, however, agree 
 that it is of faith that there are 
 seven Sacraments. 
 
 The remaining words interspersed 
 with the Article have no direct re- 
 ference to the question, which con- 
 cerned the number of the Sacra- 
 ments, so that according to the rules 
 of the Doctors after Canus (1. 5, qu. 
 4), even in the definitions of the 
 Church, Catholics are not bound to 
 every word annexed to the definition, 
 nor are those who accept this censure 
 bound to accept those words acci- 
 dentally introduced. 
 
 The last paragraph will be consi- 
 dered in treating on Article XX VIII. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXVI. De ci iimtitu- 
 tiomun cKoinanmij quod earn non 
 tollat malitia honiinum. 
 
 QUAMVIS in Ecclesia visibili, 
 bonis mali semper sint admixti, 
 atque interdum ministerio verbo et 
 Sacramentorum administrationi pra> 
 sint : tainen cum non suo, sed Christi 
 nomine agant, ej usque mandate et 
 authoritate ministrent, illorum mi- 
 nisterio uti licet, cum in verbo Dei 
 aucliendo, tune in Sacramentis perci- 
 piendis, neque per illorum malitiam 
 effectus institutorum Christo tollitur, 
 aut gratia donorum Dei minuitur, 
 
 ARTICLE XXVI. Of the Unucortld- 
 ness of the MtnisterSj ichich hinders 
 not the effect of the Saoramenf. 
 
 A LTHOUGHin the visible Church 
 1A. the evil be ever mingled with 
 the good, and sometimes the evil 
 have chief authority in the Ministra- 
 tion 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
 
 quoad eos qui fide et rite sibi oblata 
 percipiunt, quse propter institutionem 
 Christ! et promissionem efficacia 
 sunt, licet per malos administrantur. 
 
 Ad Ecclesia} tamen disciplinam 
 ]>ertinet, ut in malos Ministros in- 
 quiratur, accusenturque ab his qui 
 eoruin flagitia noverint, atque tandem 
 justo convicti judicio, deponantur. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Est ipsa doctrina 
 EcclesisL* et omnium Patrum. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXVII. De Baptismo. 
 
 "HAPTISMUS non est tantnm 
 JD professionis signum ac discri- 
 ininis nota, qua Christiani a non 
 Cliristianis discernantur : sed etiam 
 est signum regenerationis, per quod 
 tanquam per iustramentum rectc 
 Baptismum suscipientes, ecclesiaj in- 
 serimtur, promissiones de remissione 
 peccatorum atque adoptionc nostra 
 in filios Dei per Spiritum Sanctum 
 visibiliter obsignantur, Fides confir- 
 matur, et vi divinsc invocationis gra- 
 tia augetur. Baptismus parvulorum 
 omnino in Ecclesia retinendus est, 
 
 is the effect of Christ's ordinance 
 taken away by their wickedness, nor 
 the grace of God's gifts diminished 
 from such as by faith and lightly do 
 receive the Sacraments ministered 
 unto them; which be effectual, be- 
 cause of Christ's institution and pro- 
 mise, although they be ministered by 
 evil men. 
 
 Nevertheless, it appertaineth to 
 the discipline of the Church, that 
 enquiry be made of evil Ministers, 
 and that they be accused by those 
 that have knowledge of their of- 
 fences ; and finally being found 
 guilty, by just judgment be deposed. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This is the very 
 doctrine of the Church, and of all 
 the Fathers. 
 
 ARTICLE XXVII. Of Baptism. 
 
 T)APTISM is not only a sign of 
 JD profession, and mark of differ- 
 ence, whereby Christian men are 
 discerned from others that be not 
 christened, but it is also a sign of 
 Regeneration or new Birth, whereby, 
 as by an instrument, they that re- 
 ceive 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
 
 ut <[iii cum Christ! institutione op- 
 time congruat. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Idem est judi- 
 cium. 
 
 unto God. The Baptism of young 
 Children is in any wise to be re- 
 tained in the Church, as most agree- 
 able with the institution of Christ. 
 
 EXPLANATION. My judgment on 
 this is the same. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXVIII. 
 
 Domini. 
 
 De Ccena 
 
 Domini non est tan turn 
 \J signum inutusc benevolently 
 Christianorum inter sese, vermn po- 
 tius est Sacramentum nostrae per 
 mortem Christi Redemptions. At- 
 que adeo rite digne et cum fide su- 
 mentibus, panis quern frangimus est 
 communicatio Corporis Christi: si- 
 militer poculum benedictionis est 
 communicatio Sanguinis Christi. 
 
 Panis et vini Transubstantiatio in 
 Eucharistia ex sacris literis probari 
 non potest, sed apertis Scriptnrae 
 verbis adversatur, Sacramenti na- 
 
 AETICLE XXVIII. Of the Lord's 
 Supper. 
 
 THE Supper of the Lord is not 
 only a sign of the love that 
 Christians ought to have among 
 themselves one to another ; but rather 
 it is a Sacrament of our Redemption 
 by Christ's death : insomuch that to 
 such as rightly, worthily, and with 
 faith, receive the same, the Bread 
 which we break is a partaking of the 
 Body of Christ; and likewise the 
 Cup of Blessing is a partaking of 
 the Blood of Christ. 
 
 Transubstantiation* (or the change 
 of the substance of Bread and Wine) 
 in the Supper of the Lord, cannot 
 be proved by holy Writ; but it is 
 
 [* " What is here opposed as ' Transub- 
 stantiation,' is the shocking doctrine that 
 ' the Body of Christ,' as the Article goes 
 on to express it, is NOT ' given, taken, and 
 eaten after an heavenly and spiritual 
 manner, but is carnally pressed with the 
 teeth ;' that It is a body or substance of a 
 certain extension or bulk in space, and a 
 certain figure and due disposition of parts ; 
 whereas we hold that the only substance 
 
 [as] such is the bread which we see. This 
 is plain from Article XXIX., which quotes 
 St. Augustine as speaking of the wicked as 
 ' carnally and visibly pressing with their 
 teeth the Sacrament of the Body and Blood 
 of Christ,' not the real substance, a state- 
 ment which even the Breviary introduces 
 into the service for Corpus Christi Day." -- 
 Tract 90, 3rd Edition, p. 47.J
 
 turain evcrtit, et multnrum super- 
 stitionum dat occasionem. 
 
 Corpus Christ! datur, accipitur, et 
 inanducatur in Coena, tantum ca'lesti 
 et spiritual! ratione. Medium auteni 
 quo Corpus Christi accipitur et inan- 
 ducatur in Cocna, fides est. 
 
 Sacramentum Eucharistia? ex iu- 
 stitutione Christi non servabatur, cir- 
 cumferebatur, elevabatur, nee adora- 
 batur. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Primus para- 
 graplms cum omnibus suis cojunc- 
 tivis affirmative solum, sicut ibi, 
 prolatis, Catholicus est, secundus 
 paragraphus examinandus. 
 
 Negare Transubstantiationcin di- 
 \ mam in hoc tremendo mysterio est 
 contra veritatem fidei,prout definitum 
 est in Lateranensi et Trid. Scio 
 aliquos universalitatem prioris licet 
 magni Concilii in dubium vocare : 
 scio alios etiam ex nostris infallibili- 
 
 repugnant to the plain words of 
 Scripture, overthroweth the nature 
 of a Sacrament, and hath given oc- 
 casion to many superstitions. 
 
 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 Sacrament of the Lord's 
 Supper was not by Christ's ordi- 
 nance reserved, carried about, lifted 
 up, or worshipped.* 
 
 EXPLANATION. The first para- 
 graph, with all its clauses stated, as 
 there affirmatively only, is Catholic. 
 The second must be examined. 
 
 To deny divine Transubstantiation 
 in this tremendous mystery is con- 
 trary to the truth of the faith, as it 
 has been defined in the Lateran and 
 Tridentine Councils. I know that 
 some persons have questioned the 
 universality of the former Council, 
 though it was a great one ; and I 
 
 [* This statement is a mere truism. It 
 might be paralleled thus : 
 
 The Sacrament of Baptism was not 
 by Christ's ordinance celebrated in a 
 church, nor by a minister in a surplice, 
 nor at a font (properly so called). 
 
 The Sacrament of Order was not by 
 Christ's ordinance conveyed by a form 
 
 in which the instruments of the Mass arc 
 delivered. 
 
 The Sacrament of Penance was not by 
 Christ's ordinance administered in a con- 
 fessional. 
 
 The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony was 
 not by Christ's ordinance administered with 
 the Use of a rlng.J
 
 tatem Conciliorum Generalium di- 
 minuere, quos frequenter citant nos- 
 trates. Constans autem doctrina 
 Doctorum est utrique opposita ; ut 
 ut est : saltern omnes subscribunt 
 Theoreniati octavo Mirandula?, de 
 fide et ordine credendi : Determina- 
 tionibus qua 1 a Concilio, vel a summo 
 Pontijicejiunt super eis dubitationibus^ 
 quce stibstantiaiii fidei concermint, 
 quoaddum uuiversalis Ecclesia non re- 
 dumaret (id est, prout ipse alibi, tacite 
 vel interpretative consentiret) neces- 
 sario credendum est. 
 
 Patet autem apud omnes Theo- 
 logos, et illorum temporum scriptores, 
 nullibi huic decreto Transubstantia- 
 tione f uisse reclamatum, immo saltern 
 tacite fuisse approbatum ; nee ab 
 ullo dubitatum, lianc resolutionem ad 
 substantiam fidei pertinere. Et ut 
 ipse Scotus qui liberius reliquis de 
 hoc puncto egit 4. dist. ii. fatetur 
 post solemnem declarationem Eccle- 
 siae, tenendmn esse de substantia 
 fidei, Hie igitur vel nusqiiain definitio 
 legitime proclamata est, nos vero in 
 Anglia particulariter actis bujus 
 
 know that others among ourselves, 
 who are frequently cited in this 
 country, disparage the infallibility of 
 General Councils. The constant 
 opinion of the doctors is, however, 
 opposed to both, and, whatever be the 
 truth, at least all subscribe to the 
 eighth Theorem of Mirandula (de 
 Fid. et Ord. Credendi) : We must of 
 necessity believe the decrees which 
 are made by a Council or by the 
 Sovereign Pontiff, upon those ques- 
 tions which concern the substance of 
 the faith, so long that is as the uni- 
 versal Church does not repudiate 
 them" (that is, as he himself says 
 elsewhere, if the Church tacitly or 
 implicitly consents). 
 
 It is, however, clear from all the- 
 ologians and writers of that date, 
 that this decree on Transubstan- 
 tiation was no where repudiated, 
 nay, that it obtained at any rate tacit 
 approval; nor has any one doubted 
 that this decision pertained to the 
 substance of the faith. And as Scotus 
 himself, who has treated this point 
 more freely than others (4 dist. ii.), 
 owns, after the solemn declaration of 
 the Church, it must be held to be 
 of the substance of the faith. On 
 this point, then, or on none what-
 
 Concilii consensimus, ut patet in mul- 
 tis textibus Juris nostri municipalis, 
 ct in Synodis provincialibiis, ut patet 
 apud Lindwoodum. 
 
 Debet igitur glossari hie Arti- 
 culus ; eos scilicet solum condemnare 
 antiquum errorem Capharnai'tarum, 
 sc. carnalem praesentiam Christi, id 
 est, quasi Cluistus modo naturali sen 
 carnali hie existeret, et dentibus 
 nostris masticetur, prout sonare vi- 
 detur Canon, Ego Berangarius, in 
 Concilio Romano sub Nicolao, et 
 refertur de consecr. d. 2. 
 
 Sensus ergo est, quod panis seu 
 substantia panis, cum suo modo 
 existendi naturali, in substantial!! 
 corporis cum suo modo existendi 
 naturali, seu carnali mutaretur, quod 
 omnino repugnat Scriptura?, et de- 
 strueret naturam Sacrament! ; ut 
 recte in Articulo asseritur, Christus 
 enim tune carnaliter, seu sensualiter, 
 non sacramentaliter, et modo spi- 
 ritual! et ineffabili subesset speciebus 
 seu elementis consecratis, ad Sacra- 
 mentum enim ut sic, requiritur im- 
 
 ever, has a decision been lawfully 
 pronounced, and we in England have 
 in particular consented to the acts of 
 this Council, as is clear in many 
 texts of our municipal law, and in 
 our provincial synods, as is clear 
 from Lindwood. 
 
 This Article ought, then, to be 
 explained thus : that the authors 
 only condemn the old error of the 
 Capharnai'tes, namely, the carnal 
 presence of Christ, that is as though 
 Christ was present in the Sacrament 
 in a natural or carnal manner, and 
 were chewed by the teeth, as seems 
 to be implied by the words of the 
 Canon {Ego Berengarius) in the 
 Roman Council under Nicolas I. 
 (Consec. d. 2). 
 
 The sense, then, is that the bread 
 or substance of bread, with its natural 
 mode of existence, would be changed 
 into the substance of a body, with its 
 natural or carnal mode of existence, 
 which is wholly repugnant to Scrip- 
 ture, and would destroy the nature 
 of a Sacrament, as is rightly asserted 
 in the Article. For then Christ 
 would be present under the species 
 or consecrated elements in a carnal 
 or sensible manner, not sacramen- 
 tally. Now for a Sacrament, as
 
 mediation signification! esse aliquid 
 spirituale in re vel saltern in moclo : 
 non enini Sacramenta sunt signa 
 sensibilia, sensibilium vel corporalium 
 significativa, sed effectiva gratia? in- 
 sensibilis : non ergo corporis cum suo 
 moclo quantitative, sed moclo spi- 
 rituali subsistentis : gratia eniin hie 
 significata, est gratia subsistens, sci- 
 licet Corpus Christi primario et for- 
 maliter, ut optime Doctor ubi supra. 
 
 Error igitur iste pertractus, soluni 
 hie condemnatur: iste enim solum ad- 
 versatur ration! Sacramenti, ut osten- 
 suin est; iste etiam solmn adversatur 
 Scriptura?, quia ill am solam intelli- 
 gentiam hujus mysterii ut erro- 
 neani perstrinxit Christus Dominus, 
 Joan. 6. 
 
 Quod autem non negent Transub- 
 stantiationem ab Ecclesia definitam, 
 vel ex hoc patet, quia utraque Eccle- 
 sia scilicet tarn Orientalis, quam 
 Occidentalis, in hoc conveniunt : nee 
 in ullo Concilio fuit de hoc discep- 
 tatio inter eos, ut recte observat 
 Arcudius 1. 3, c. 2, de Eucharistia 
 
 such, is required that the tiling im- 
 mediately signified should be some- 
 thing spiritual, either in itself or at 
 least in the manner of its being, for 
 Sacraments are not sensible signs sig- 
 nifying sensible or corporal things, 
 but effectually conveying insensible 
 grace : so this Sacrament is not the 
 sign of a body in its natural quanti- 
 tative manner, but of a body sub- 
 sisting in a spiritual manner, for the 
 grace here signified is the grace 
 forming its substance, namely, the 
 Body of Christ primarily and for- 
 mally, as the Doctor excellently says 
 (ubi supra). 
 
 The error alluded to above then, 
 and no more, is condemned in this 
 place, for that alone is repugnant to 
 the nature of a Sacrament, as has 
 been shown, because Christ our 
 Lord has condemned that mode 
 alone of understanding this mystery 
 as erroneous (St. John vi.). 
 
 But that Transubstantiation as 
 defined by the Church is not denied, 
 is plain even from this, that both the 
 Eastern and Western Churches are 
 agreed upon the doctrine, nor has 
 there ever in any Council been any 
 dispute between them on this point, 
 as is rightly observed by Arcudius
 
 fol. 130. Fuit quidem qutestio in 
 Florentine, quibus verbis facta sit 
 Transubstantiatio, seel nihil aliud. 
 Etiam Hieremias in cap. 10, suse 
 censurse contra Lutheranos idem 
 fatetur. Nemo vero dubitat puncta 
 ab utraque Ecclesia credita obligare 
 omnes. Nostrates vero mutationem, 
 alterationeni, transmutationem nee so- 
 lum in ejfigie sed natura, id cst, 
 /jiTov(Tiav, fatentur post sanctos 
 Patres ; ut patet apud D. Andrewes 
 contra Perronium, et D. Monta- 
 cutium, fol. 256. Veram quidem 
 est, quod Suarez torn. 3, quaestione 
 75, disp. 50, sect. 1, notat hsec verba 
 maxime accedere ad proprietatem 
 mysterii explicandam, et probabilissi- 
 inum est Patres in illo sensu, lia3C 
 verba usurpasse, sed ad majorem 
 claritatem, Ecclesia elegit verbum 
 transubstantiationis. Transmutatio 
 tamen in natura, ut loquantur eorum 
 Doctores, sen ^erovcria, in omni 
 sensu Philosophico valde premit 
 lnuic Articulum in rigore sennonis 
 sumptum, ubi negat simpliciter inu- 
 tationem substantia) panis et vini, 
 quod directe astruit fierovala Sanc- 
 
 (1. 3, c. 2, de Eacha/ruttO) fol. 130). 
 There was, indeed, a question at 
 Florence at what words of the office 
 the change took place, but no more. 
 Even Hieremias (Censur. contr. Lu- 
 theran., c. 10) allows the same. Now 
 no one doubts but that points be- 
 lieved by both Churches are obliga- 
 tory upon all men. Writers of this 
 country allow a change, an alteration, 
 a transmutation, and that not only in 
 form but in nature; that is, they 
 confess a change of substance,* ac- 
 cording to the holy Fathers, as is 
 clear by Dr. Andrewes against Per- 
 ronius and Dr. Montagu (fol. 256). 
 It is indeed true, as Suarez (torn. 3, 
 qu. 75, disp. 50, I) notes, that 
 these words are the fittest for ex- 
 plaining the nature of the mystery, 
 and it is most probable that the 
 Fathers used them in that sense, but 
 for greater distinctness the Church 
 chose the word Transiibstantiation. 
 But a transmutation in nature, or 
 fMerovcrla, to quote their doctors, ac- 
 cording to all philosophy, presses 
 close upon this Article taken in the 
 rigorous meaning of the words, which 
 
 * ["The term transubstantiation (jte- 
 Tovaiaxris) was adopted by the Synod of 
 Bethlehem." Oxenhain's Catholic Doc- 
 
 trine of the Atonement. Introduction, p. 
 xliv. London : Longmans, 1865.]
 
 torum Patrum, ct iransmutatio in 
 natura eorum. Necessario igitur 
 recurrendum est ad glossam nostram 
 superius insinuatam. 
 
 Paragraphus tertius simul cum 
 primo examinabitur in Articulo se- 
 quent i. 
 
 Paragraphus ultimus videtur ne- 
 gare omnem adorationem venerabili 
 Sacramento : sed melius inspiciendo, 
 put em ipsos solum excludere adora- 
 tionem latria 4 , ut patet apud D. 
 Andrewes contra Perronium, et D. 
 Juellum in Apol. pro Ecclesia An- 
 gliae, et alios eoruin doctores, quod 
 Catholicum sentio ; loquendo pro- 
 prie et per se, sicut Doctor Subt. 
 cum Ovando et omnibus Scotistis, 3, 
 distinctione 9, qusestione 1, negant 
 humanitati Christi latriam per se, 
 immo Doctores communiter ipsis 
 personis divinis practise sumptis, id 
 est, sub ratione formali constitutiva 
 personarum, qua? est relatio, negant 
 subesse terminum formalem adora- 
 tionis latria?, sed lioc Deitati solum 
 
 simply deny the change of the sub- 
 stances of bread and wine, which the 
 /j,Tovaia of the Fathers, and their 
 transmutation in their nature, directly 
 imply. Of necessity, then, recourse 
 must be had to our interpretation 
 suggested above. 
 
 The third paragraph will be ex- 
 amined, together with the first, in 
 the following Article. 
 
 The last paragraph seems to deny 
 all adoration to the venerable Sacra- 
 ment, but on inspecting it more care- 
 fully, I think the authors only 
 exclude the worship of latria, as is 
 clear from Dr. Andrewes against 
 Perronius, and Dr. Jewel in Apol. 
 pro Eccl. Anal., and other of their 
 Doctors, which I think Catholic, 
 speaking strictly and absolutely, as 
 the Subtle Doctor, w r ith Ovandus and 
 all the Scotists (3 dist. 9, qu. 1), 
 deny that latria is due to the human 
 nature of Christ in itself,* nay more, 
 the Doctors commonly deny that the 
 formal worship of latria is due to 
 the Divine Persons themselves, as 
 such ; that is, by reason of what 
 formally constitutes their personality, 
 
 * [On this subject see a valuable article in the number of the Ecclesiastic for 
 September, 1857. London : Masters.]
 
 primo competit ; relationibtis autem, 
 prout identificantur cum essentia ; 
 sic hnmanitati Christ!, non per se 
 prsecise, seel prout suppositatur a 
 Deo, eaclem adoratio debetur, sicut 
 Rex cum purpura. Sic etiam Vas- 
 quez, 3, parte, disp. 96, fuse. Spe- 
 ciebus vero Sacramentalibus, cum 
 non assumantur in identitatem per- 
 sona?, sed solum fiant signa sensibilia 
 prsesentite corporis Christi primario, 
 et per consequentiam Deitatis ejus, 
 non competit latria, nisi dixeris per 
 accidens ; per se vero, et prout sunt 
 terminus formalis adorationis, non 
 nisi dulise, et quidem inferioris, ut 
 facile sequitur ex dictis. Unde 
 Trident, sapienter formavit Canonem 
 sextum de Euchar. in ha?c verba : 
 Si quis direrit in Sacramento Eucha- 
 ristice Christum non esse cultu latrl>, 
 etiam externo adorandum, et ideo nee 
 festiva pecnliari celebritate veneran- 
 dtnn, nee in processionibus secundum 
 laudalilem Ecclesiw consuetudinem so- 
 lemniter circumgestandum, Anathema 
 sit. Nota bene; non dicit Sacra- 
 mentum, sed Christum in Sacra- 
 mento latria, adorandum. 
 
 namely, relation ; but [adoration is 
 due] to the relations, as being iden- 
 tified with [the Divine] substance, 
 and to the humanity of Christ, not 
 strictly in itself, but because it is 
 assumed by God as a royal robe 
 is assumed by a king. So, too, says 
 Vasquez (3 part. disp. 96). But to 
 the sacramental species, since they 
 are not assumed into identity of 
 person, but only are made sensible 
 signs of the presence of the body of 
 Christ primarily, and by consequence 
 of His divinity, latria is not fitting, 
 except accidentally; but in themselves, 
 and so far as they are the formal end 
 of adoration, they ought only to re- 
 ceive dnlia, and indeed the lower 
 kind of dnlia, as clearly follows from 
 Avhat has been said. So that the 
 Council of Trent Avisely drew vip the 
 Sixth Canon on the Eucharist in 
 these words (Sess. 13, Canon 6, on 
 the Holy Eucharist) : " If any one 
 saith that, in the Sacrament of the 
 Eucharist, Christ is not to be adored 
 with the worship, even external, of 
 latria, and is consequently neither 
 to be venerated with a special festive 
 solemnity, nor to be solemnly borne 
 about in processions, according to the 
 laudable custom of the Church, let
 
 Adclitur in Articulo, nee reservari 
 nee circumgestari debet, quantum 
 scilicet est ex Christ! institutione. 
 Glossam quidem poscit, hsec non a 
 Christi formaliter mandari, qute ta- 
 men ab Ecclesia recte institui posset ; 
 quam consuetudinem licet reproba- 
 rent, non tamen ob hoc anathema- 
 tizantur in Tridentino quia non ex 
 errore non credendi prsesentiam Cor- 
 poris Christi hoc asserunt. Sic Cano 
 lib. quinto, ca. 5, qujest. 4. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXIX. De manduca- 
 tione Corporis Christ/, ct impios 
 illnd non manducare. 
 
 IMPII et Fide viva destituti licet 
 carnaliter, et visibiliter (ut Au- 
 gustinus loquitur) Corporis et San- 
 guinis Christi Sacramentum dentibus 
 premunt ; nullo tamen modo Christi 
 participes efficiuntur ; sed potius 
 tantse rei Sacramentum seu symbo- 
 lum ad judicium sibi manducant et 
 bibunt. 
 
 him be Anathema." Observe well 
 that the Canon does not say that the 
 Sacrament, but that Christ in the Sa- 
 crament is to be adored with latria. 
 
 It is added in the Article that the 
 Sacrament is not bound to be reserved 
 nor carried about, so far, that is, as 
 was actually of Christ's institution. 
 This requires the explanation, that 
 those things are not formally com- 
 manded by Christ, which may never- 
 theless be rightly instituted by the 
 Church ; and although men disap- 
 approve this custom, they are not for 
 this anathematised by the Council of 
 Trent, because they do not do this 
 from the error of not believing the 
 presence of the body of Christ-. 
 This is supported by Canus (lib. 5, 
 cap. 5, qu. 4). 
 
 ARTICLE XXIX. Of the Wid-ed 
 lohieli eat not 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 Saint 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 Sacrament of so 
 great a thing.
 
 PARAPHRASIS. In hoc Artlculo 
 non tarn conclusio, quam conclusions 
 causa consideranda est : intellectus 
 enim decreti cujuscunque, etiam 
 universalis Ecclesia?, ex principiis et 
 fundamentis quibus innititur, sicut 
 conclusio ex praemissis, depromendus 
 est, secundum illudHilarii: Intelligen- 
 tia dictorum, ex causis est assnmenda 
 dicendi, quia non sermoni res, sed rei 
 est sermo suljectm. Principium vero 
 unicum hujus eorum determinationis, 
 est authoritas Augustini, ut patet in 
 Articulo, qui subinde insinuat, vel 
 saltern insinuare videtur, impios non 
 realiter participate panem Dominum, 
 licet panem Domini, in Joan. Tract. 
 59, id est, Sacramentum Christi, non 
 ipsum Christum, ut loquitur Arti- 
 culus. Mens igitur Augustini explo- 
 randa est. Illam vero non esse 
 mentem Augustini patet, quia Au- 
 gust, per panem Domini, non intel- 
 liget Eucharistiam, sed panem in- 
 tinctum, quern Dominus pon*exit 
 Judge, ut satis convincitur ex eo 
 quod (lib. 3, de consensu Evang. c. 
 1) expresse docet, Joannem in illo 
 c. 13, nihil de Eucharistia dixisse; 
 idque adhuc fit manifestius ex lec- 
 tione Augustini in Psal. xl. 10, unde 
 sumpsit Evangelista verba, qua) ex- 
 
 ExPLANATTON. In this Article it 
 is not so much the conclusion, as the 
 reasons for the conclusion, which re- 
 quire consideration ; for the meaning 
 of every decree, even of the universal 
 Church, is to be ascertained from the 
 principles and grounds on which it 
 rests, as a conclusion is gathered from 
 its premises, according to the saving 
 of St. Hilary : " The understand- 
 ing of what is said is to be gathered 
 from the reasons for speaking, be- 
 cause the matter does not depend on 
 what is said, but what is said depends 
 on the matter." Now the sole prin- 
 ciple of this determination of theirs 
 is the authority of St. Augustine, 
 who intimates, or at least seems to 
 intimate, that the wicked do not 
 really partake of the bread which is 
 the Lord, though they do of the 
 bread of the Lord (in Joan. Tract. 
 59), that is, the Sacrament of Christ, 
 but not Christ Himself, as the Ar- 
 ticle says. The intention, therefore, 
 of St. Augustine must be sought. 
 Now it is clear that that is not the 
 intention of St. Augustine, because 
 St. Augustine by the bread of the 
 Lord does not mean the Eucharist, 
 but the sop which our Lord gave to 
 Judas, as is satisfactorily proved
 
 ( I 
 
 explicat hie S. Angosturas, qni cdebat 
 panes meos, leralxit contra ine calca- 
 netim ftmim. Nam ibi tradit verba 
 ilia prrcdicta esse de Juda, et impleta, 
 cum Dominus dedit illi buccellam 
 intinctam ; bis enim refert Scriptura 
 Dominum dedisse manu sua disci- 
 pulis comedendum panem, primo cum 
 dedit panem consecratum, seu Eu- 
 charistiam ; secundo cum dedit Judse 
 panem intinctum ; et docet S. Augus- 
 tinus per priorem manducationem 
 non fuisse proplietiam Psalmi im- 
 pletam, quia tune discipuli panein 
 Domini non manducarunt, sed panem 
 Dominum ; at per posterior* fuisse 
 impletam, quia ilia panis non crat 
 panis Dominus, sed panis Domini ; 
 nam infra aperte docet, Judam per- 
 cepisse Sacramentum cum aliis disci- 
 pulis, et ilium panem intinctum non 
 fuisse Corpus Christi, ut putant inquit 
 ipse, qnidam iiegliyenter legentes. 
 Quod autem citat illud Apostoli, qui- 
 cumqne rnanducavent, etc., id non 
 facit, ut insinuet panem intinctum 
 datum Judse a Domino esse Eucha- 
 ristiam, sed argumentatur a minor! 
 ad ma jus, et constat ex eo quod 
 subjungit, si inquit, corripitur qui 
 non dijudicat, hoc est, non discern it 
 a creteris cibis Dominicum corpus, 
 
 .5 ) 
 
 from his showing expressly (lib. 3, de 
 Consem. Evany, c. 1) that St. John, 
 in ch. xiii., does not speak at all of 
 the Eucharist, and this becomes still 
 more clear from reading St. Augus- 
 tine on Psalm xl. (Psalm xl. 10), 
 whence the Evangelist took those 
 words which St. Augustine here ex- 
 plains, " He that eateth bread with 
 Me, hath lifted up his heel against 
 Me :" for there he says that these 
 words were prophesied of Judas, and 
 fulfilled, when our Lord gave to him 
 the sop after He had dipped it ; for 
 the Scripture relates that our Lord 
 twice, with His own hand, gave His 
 disciples bread to eat : first, when 
 He gave them the consecrated bread, 
 or the Holy Eucharist ; secondly, 
 when He gave Judas the sop which 
 He had dipped ; and St. Augustine 
 teaches that the prophecy of the 
 Psalm was not fulfilled by the first 
 eating, because then the disciples 
 had not eaten the bread of the Lord, 
 but the Bread which was the Lord ; 
 but that by the second eating it was 
 fulfilled, for that bread was not the 
 Bread which was the Lord, but the 
 Bread of the Lord : for further on he 
 says that Judas received the Sacra- 
 ment with the other disciples, and that 
 
 F
 
 quomodo non damnatur, qui ad ejus 
 mensam fingens amicum, accedit in- 
 imicus? si reprehensione tangitur 
 negligeiitia conjuvantis, qua, poona 
 percutitur venditor invitantis ? Hacc 
 ille, ut optime tradit Perronius, ut 
 vero do hoc magis const-are possit ; 
 audiamus ipsum alibi frequenter hanc 
 veritatem edocentem, epistol. ad Jul. 
 3, et de Salutaribus Documentis. 
 Unusquisque antequam corpus Do- 
 mini nostri Jesu Christi aceipiat, 
 seipsum probet, et secundum Apostoli 
 prceceptum, sic de pane illo edat, et de 
 calice bibat, quia qui indigne man- 
 ducat et bibit } judicium sibi manducat 
 et bibit. Ecce secundum Apostolum, 
 asserit malos ipsum Christi corpus 
 sumere. Etiam do verbis Domini, 
 secundum Matth. senn. ii. Ad eum 
 modum boni et mall manducant corpus 
 et sanguinem Domini. Ex quibus, et 
 aliis apud eum tarn perspicius locis, 
 non potest dubitari de mente ejus. 
 Ad sensum igitur Augustini expli- 
 candus est hie Articulus, quia ni- 
 titur soli ejus authoritati, secundum 
 regulam quam dedi in initio, vcl di- 
 cendum ad hunc articulum, sicut 
 Bellar. ad August. Scil., impios non 
 Dominum, id est, ut Dominum (quia 
 non gratiam Domini), in perceptione 
 
 that sop was not the Body of Christ, 
 as, says he, some who read carelessly 
 think. Further, in citing that pas- 
 sage of the Apostle, "Whosoever shall 
 eat this bread of the Lord unwor- 
 thily," &c. (1 Cor. xi. 27, 29), he does 
 not imply that the sop given by our 
 Lord to Judas was the Eucharist, 
 but he is arguing from the less to 
 the greater, as is plain from what he 
 adds : If, says he, he is reproved 
 who does not discern, that is, does 
 not distinguish the Lord's Body 
 from other food, how can he escape 
 condemnation, who being an enemy 
 comes to His Table feigning to be a 
 friend ? If the carelessness of the 
 guest is visited with rebuke, with 
 what punishment shall the seller of 
 his host be smitten? Such are his 
 words, as is well set forth by Perro- 
 nius ; but that we may be more 
 certain on this point, let us hear 
 himself elsewhere frequently teach- 
 ing this truth (Epist. ad Jul. 3 et de 
 salutar. docum.) : " Let every man, 
 before he receive the Body of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, examine himself, 
 and, according to the Apostle's pre- 
 cept, let him so eat of that bread 
 and drink of that cup, for he who 
 eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth
 
 Sacrament! sumorc ; alias ipsum Do- 
 minum ibi velatum, secundum Au- 
 gustinum (ut ostencli) et veritatem 
 fidei, omnes recipiunt. Et ratio ipsa 
 hoc convincit. Non enim populus 
 commwiicans, sed sacerdos consecrans, 
 actione divina, inodo quidem ineffa- 
 bili, hue adducit Corpus Domini ; 
 alias la'icis, non Apostolis, tradita 
 fuisset potestas consecrandi, vel sal- 
 tern utrique simul, quod in schola 
 Christi hactenus inauditum est. 
 
 and drinketh judgment to himself." 
 Plainly following the Apostle, he 
 asserts that the wicked receive the 
 very Body of Christ. So, too, on 
 our Lord's words according to St. 
 Matthew (Semi, ii.) : " In that 
 manner the good and bad together 
 eat the Body and Blood of our Lord." 
 From which passages and others no 
 less clear there can be no doubt as 
 to what was St. Augustine's mind. 
 This Article must then be explained 
 according to St. Augustine's mean- 
 ing, as it relies on his authority 
 alone, according to the rule which 
 I laid down at the commencement ; 
 or we must say with respect to this 
 Article, as Bellarmine does upon St. 
 Augustine, that the wicked receive 
 not the Lord, that is, as the Lord 
 (because they receive not the grace 
 of the Lord), in partaking of this 
 Sacrament ; in other respects all 
 receive our Lord there under a 
 veil, according to St. Augustine (as I 
 have shown), and the true faith. And 
 reason itself proves this, for not the 
 people iL'ho communicate but the priest 
 u'lio consecrates, by a divine opera- 
 tion, in an ineffable manner, brings 
 hither the body of our Lord, else 
 would the power of consecrating 
 
 F2
 
 ( 68 ) 
 
 ARTICULUS XXX. De utrague 
 
 specie. 
 
 /"^ALIX Domini lai'cis non est de- 
 vJ negandus, utraque enim pars 
 Dominici Sacramenti ex Christi in- 
 stitutione et praecepto omnibus 
 Christianis ex sequo administrari 
 debet. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Licet non ex ser- 
 mone illo apudJoan. 6, recte colligitur, 
 ntnusque speciei communionem a Do- 
 mino prccceptam esse : utcunque juxta 
 varias sanctorum Patrum et Doctoruui 
 interpretationes inteUlfjatur^ ut recte 
 Trid. sess. 21, can. 5, ponendo tamen 
 fuisse tune de hoc traditum praecep- 
 tum, ut asserit Articulus, solum se- 
 quittir, per se loquendo, debere sin- 
 gulis utramque speciem conf erri ; cum 
 quo bene stat, quod ratione circum- 
 stantiarum, verbi gratia, persona^, 
 loci, vel temporis, possit unica specie 
 sacra sjiiaxis celebrari; nee alia est 
 hodierna praxis Ecclesia). Quod au- 
 tem hoc prseceptum (si omnino prac- 
 ceptum est) intelligi debeat accom- 
 modate ad personas seu circumstan- 
 tias praxlictas, ut ctiam insinuat 
 
 luiA"e l)cen given to lay people, not 
 to the Apostles, or at least to both 
 alike, which has hitherto been un- 
 heard of in the school of Christ. 
 
 ARTICLE XXX. Of both 
 
 kinds. 
 
 rjIHE Cup of the Lord is not to be 
 JL denied to the Lay-people : for 
 both the parts of the Lord's Sacra- 
 ment, by Christ's ordinance and com- 
 mandment, ought to be ministered to 
 all Christian men alike. 
 
 EXPLANATION. Although "it is 
 not rightly gathered from the dis- 
 course in St. John vi. that the com- 
 munion of both species was enjoined 
 by the Lord ; however, according to 
 the various interpretations of Holy 
 Fathers and Doctors it be under- 
 stood," as is rightly said in the 
 Council of Trent (sess. 21, can. 5), 
 yet in laying down that there then 
 was a command given on this point, 
 as the Article asserts, it only follows, 
 speaking strictly, that both kinds 
 ought to be administered to each 
 communicant, with which it is quite 
 consistent that, on account of cir- 
 cumstances, for instance, of persons, 
 place, or time, Holy Communion 
 should be administered under one 
 kind, nor is the present custom of
 
 Maldonatus in G Joan, patet, quia in 
 primis 600 annis, secundum doc- 
 trinam Augustini et Innoc. ministra- 
 batur Eucharistia parvulis recenter 
 baptizatis, non tamen nisi unica 
 specie, scil. Sanguinis, ob difficulta- 
 tem deglutiendi, ut testatur post alios 
 Hugo de S. Viet ore de Sacramentis, 
 1. 1, c. 20. Rationi ergo personae ac- 
 commodabatur prseceptum ; rationi 
 vero temporis, sicut ob persecutio- 
 nem, populus gestabat, et retinebat 
 domi Hostiam consecratam, ut tes- 
 tantur veteres cuin Basilio in ep. 
 ad Caesariam Patritiam ; rationi loci, 
 sicut eremita3 ob nimiam distantiani 
 ab Ecclesiis et publicis conventibus 
 Christianorum, aliquando ad annum 
 reservabant Hostiam consecratam, ut 
 ibidem patet apud Basilium et alios. 
 
 Ex quibus apertissime constat, 
 Ecclesiam p-o re nata frequenter 
 unam vel alteram speciem laicis dis- 
 
 the Church more than this. Further, 
 it is clear that this precept (if it 
 be a precept) ought to be under- 
 stood with accommodation to persons 
 or circumstances as mentioned above 
 (as is suggested by Maldonatus in 
 Joan. A'i.), because for the first six 
 hundred years, according to SS. 
 Augustine and Innocent, the Holy 
 Eucharist was administered to in- 
 fants just baptized, under one kind 
 only, namely the Blood, on account 
 of the difficulty in swallowing, as is 
 witnessed, after others, by Hugh of 
 St. Victor (de Sacr., 1. L, c. 20). 
 The precept, therefore, was modified 
 in regard of the person ; in regard of 
 time, as when on account of perse- 
 cution, the people carried away the 
 consecrated Host, and kept It at 
 home, as the ancients testify with 
 St. Basil (Ep. ad Ca>sariam Patritiam) ; 
 in regard of place, as when the her- 
 mits, on account of their great 
 distance from churches and public 
 assemblies of Christians, sometimes 
 reserved the consecrated Host for a 
 year, as is mentioned in the same 
 place by St. Basil, and by others. 
 
 From which cases it most plainly 
 appears, that the Church upon occa- 
 sion frequently administered one or
 
 tribuissc; nee aliud in Constant. 
 Basilicns. vcl Trid. cautum est, ncc 
 aliud dicit hie Articulus. 
 
 Dices, quicquid sit de rigorc ser- 
 monis in Articulo, saltern frequenter 
 a Nostratibus exponi, quasi redar- 
 gueret modernam praxim Ecclesia?. 
 
 Respondeo, quod Cano, lib. 5, 
 qua3st. 4, excusat ab hajresi eum qui 
 affirmaret Ecclesiam eiTare in more 
 communicandi plebem sub una specie 
 tantum; et quia Constantiense sta- 
 tuit eos hajreticos qui hoc dicunt, 
 respondet Ecclesiam tune fuisse sine 
 capite, nee Martinus quintus appro- 
 bans Concilium, simpliciter approbat 
 ilium Articulum, sed solum definit 
 eos qui docuerint Ecclesiam in hu- 
 jusmodi consuetudine errare, esss vel 
 haereticos, vel ut sapientes ha3resim, 
 condemnandos. Addit: Quod ergo 
 Mart, Concilio pra^sidens non est 
 ausus nomine haereseos condemnare, 
 id ego graviori censura, accusare non 
 audeo, nee debeo. Quod si in more 
 ad salutem necessario, qualis ille vi- 
 detur esse, de quo in Concilio Con- 
 stant, erat controversia ; tanta fuit 
 
 the other kind to the laity, nor was 
 anything else provided for by the 
 Councils of Constance, Basle, or 
 Trent, nor does this Article make 
 any different statement. 
 
 An objection may be made, that 
 whatever may be strictly implied by 
 the force of the words in the Article, 
 at least it is frequently explained in 
 this country, as condemning the 
 present practice of the Church. 
 
 To this I answer that Canus (lib. 
 v., cap. 5, q. 4) excuses from heresy 
 any one who should affirm that 
 the Church erred, in her custom of 
 communicating the people under one 
 kind alone ; and with respect to the 
 Council of Constance having decreed 
 that those who assert this are here- 
 tics, I reply that the Church was 
 then without a head, nor did Martin 
 V., in approving of the Council, ab- 
 solutely approve that Article, but 
 only defines that those who shall 
 teach that the Church errs in this 
 custom, are either heretics, or to be 
 condemned as savouring of heresy. 
 He adds : That, then, which Martin, 
 presiding over the Council, did not 
 venture to condemn under the name 
 of heresy, that I neither venture nor 
 have any right to condemn with a
 
 Martini modestia, quanto nos modes- 
 tiores esse opportet in aliis erroribus 
 condemnandis, qui consuetudini Ec- 
 clesise minime ad salutem necessa- 
 rian repugnantur. Subdit : Atque ha?c 
 eadem fortasse causa Martinum V. 
 impulit, ut qui reprehenderent eccle- 
 siasticam illam consuetudinem im- 
 partiendi Eucharistiam populo sub 
 una specie, eos non ut hasreticos, sed 
 ut sapientes hairesim condemnarit; 
 cum enim sub utraque olim specie, 
 plebs Sacramentum EucharistiaB ac- 
 ceperit, idque Apostoli authoritate, et 
 usu confimiata, non erat ha3i*eticum 
 in dubium vertere, an vetus ille Ec- 
 clesiee mos novo esset prseferendus, 
 sed Wiclefistas idcirco asserebant 
 Ecclesiam errare, quia existimabant 
 necessariam esse plebi ad salutem, 
 utramque Sacramenti speciem sumere, 
 hue detorquentes ilia Domini verb a, 
 Nisi manducaveritis, etc. Prudentis- 
 sime Martinus quintus vituperatio- 
 nem ecclesiastic! novi moris, non 
 dixit esse, sed hseresim sapere. Hasc 
 ille. Et certo non levis est macula?, 
 haeresim sapere. 
 
 heavier censure. But if in a moral 
 question necessary to salvation, such 
 as that seems to be, which was the 
 subject of controversy at the Council 
 of Constance, the moderation of 
 Martin was so great, how much 
 more moderate ought we to be in 
 condemning other errors which oppose 
 a custom of the Church in a matter 
 not at all necessary to salvation. He 
 then adds: And perhaps this same 
 cause moved Martin V. to condemn 
 those who attacked that ecclesiastical 
 custom of administering the Eucha- 
 rist to the people under one kind, 
 not as heretics, but as savouring of 
 heresy ; for, since of old the people 
 used to receive the Sacrament of the 
 Eucharist under both kinds, and this 
 w r as established by the authority of 
 the Apostle and by custom, it was 
 not heretical to raise a doubt whe- 
 ther that ancient custom of the 
 Church was to be preferred to the 
 new; but the Wiclifites asserted 
 that the Church had erred on this 
 point, because they thought that it 
 was necessary for salvation for the 
 people to receive both kinds of the 
 Sacrament, perverting to this mean- 
 ing those words of our Lord : " Ex- 
 cept ye eat the Flesh of the Son of
 
 Sunt quiclem duo Canones de hoc 
 in Tridentino sess. de Communione, 
 c. 1. Si quis diverit ex Dei pr&cepto, 
 vel necessitate salutis omnes et simjulos 
 Christi fideles utramque special n sanc- 
 tissimi Eucharistue Sacramenti sumere 
 debere, Anathema sit. Can. 2. Si quis 
 dixeritj sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam 
 non justis causis, et rationibus adduc- 
 tam fuisse, ut laicos, atque etiam cle- 
 ricos non conficientes, sub panis tantwn 
 modo specie communiearet, aut in eo 
 errasse, Anathema sit. 
 
 Gravissimus Cano non potuit ig- 
 norare hos Canones, qui interfuit 
 Tridentino, et can. 0, de Eucharistia 
 ibidem citat ; tamen resolvit solum 
 sapere haeresim, dicere Ecclesiam in 
 ilia nova consuetudine errare, judi- 
 cium de hac ejus doctrina penes 
 doctiores sit. 
 
 Man, and drink His Blood," &c. 
 Most prudently, then, did Martin V. 
 say that blaming the new ecclesias- 
 tical custom was, not heresy, but 
 savouring of heresy. Such is his 
 statement. And certainly it is no 
 light stain to savour of heresy. 
 
 Now there are two canons of the 
 Council of Trent on this point. 
 (Sess. xxi. de Cornmun., can. 1): "If 
 any one saith, that by precept of 
 God, or necessity of [to] salvation, 
 all and each of the faithful of Christ 
 ought to receive both species of the 
 most holy Sacrament of the Eucha- 
 rist, let him be anathema." Can. ii.: 
 (( If any one saith that the Holy 
 Catholic Church was not induced by 
 just causes and reasons to communi- 
 cate under the species of bread only 
 laymen, and also clerics when not 
 consecrating, let him be anathema." 
 
 The most learned Cairas cannot 
 have been ignorant of these canons, 
 who was present in the Council of 
 Trent, and quotes in the same pas- 
 sage the sixth canon " On the 
 Eucharist;" yet he decides that it 
 only savours of heresy, to say that 
 the Church errs in that new custom : 
 let the decision on this opinion of his 
 rest with more learned men.
 
 Ego tamen quoad casum nostrum, 
 dicerem confessionem Anglicam in 
 neutro Canone percelli; nam quoad 
 primum Canonem, non dicunt esse 
 sic a Deo praeceptum, quod sit de 
 necessitate salutis, vel quod non sit 
 accommodate intelligendum ad cir- 
 cumstantias, et cetera. Quod solum 
 in Trident, rejicitur (ut vel maxime 
 patet). Quoad secundum Canonem 
 nullatenus tangunt. 
 
 I, however, as far as our subject 
 is concerned, should say that the 
 Anglican Confession falls under the 
 censure of neither canon, for as 
 respects the former canon, it does 
 not assert that communion in both 
 kinds was so commanded by God, as 
 that it is necessary to salvation, or 
 that it may not be understood as 
 capable of accommodation to circum- 
 stances, &c., which assertion alone 
 is rejected by the Council (as is 
 most evident). As respects the 
 second canon, it is not in any respect 
 offended against. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXXI. De unica 
 Christ i oblatione in Cruce per- 
 fecta. 
 
 OBLATIO Christ! semel facts, 
 perfecta est redemptio, propitio, 
 et satisfactio pro omnibus peccatis 
 totius mundi tarn originalibus quam 
 actualibus. Neque prater illam uni- 
 cam est ulla alia pro peccatis ex- 
 piatio : uncle Missarum Sacrificia, 
 quibus vulgo dicebatur sacerdotem 
 offerre Christum in remissionem 
 pa-iiEe aut culpai pro vivis et de- 
 functis, blasphema figmenta sunt et 
 perniciosaa impostura?. 
 
 ARTICLE XXXI. Of the one Ob- 
 lation of Christ finished upon the 
 Cross. 
 
 THE Offering of Christ once 
 made is that perfect redemption, 
 propitiation, and satisfaction, for all 
 the sins of the whole world, both 
 original and actual ; and there is 
 none other satisfaction for sin, but 
 that alone. Wherefore the sacrifices 
 of Masses, in the which it was com- 
 monly said, that the Priest did offer 
 Christ for the quick and the dead, 
 to have remission of pain or guilt, 
 were blasphemous fables, and dan- 
 gerous deceits. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Totus hie Arti- EXPLANATION. The whole of
 
 culus durissimus videtur; rectius 
 tamen introspiciendo, non adeo veri- 
 tati discordem juclicem. 
 
 Prima pars quoad affirmativa, 
 indubitata est; ubi vero subdit nega- 
 tionera omnis satisfactione pro reatu 
 peccatorum, excepta Christi oblatione 
 in Cruce : intelligi debet, illud totuin 
 alteri negari quod in prioribus verbis 
 Cluisto attributum est : id est, quod 
 nemo prseter Christum per quam- 
 cumque actionem vel passionem pec- 
 cata diluere potest, scilicet prsescin- 
 dendo Christum. 
 
 In verbis posterioribus, si sobrie 
 intelligantur, nihil agitur contra Sa- 
 crificia Missa in se, sed contra vul- 
 garem vel vulgatam opinionem de 
 ipsis, scilicet quod sacerdotes in Sa- 
 crificiis offerrent Christum pro vivis 
 et defunctis, in remissionem pcense et 
 culpse, adeo ut virtute hujus Sacri- 
 ficii ab eis oblati independenter a 
 Crucis Sacrificio, mererentur populo 
 remissionem, etc, Haec est vulgata 
 opinio, quam hie perstringit Arti- 
 culus. Cseterum dicendo cum sanctis 
 Patribus in Missa esse vere Sacrifi- 
 cium, licet loquendo secundumsensum 
 veterum Sacrificiorurn, non adeo pro- 
 
 this Article seems most difficult, but 
 by looking into it more correctly, I 
 should not consider it very dissonant 
 from the truth. 
 
 The commencement, so far as it 
 is affirmative, is indubitably true; 
 where, however, there follows a 
 denial of all satisfaction for the guilt 
 of our sins, except the oblation of 
 Christ on the Cross, it must be 
 understood, that the whole of what 
 is attributed to Christ in the first 
 words is denied to any one else; that 
 is, that no one besides Christ can by 
 any action or suffering wash away 
 sin. 
 
 In the latter part, if it be under- 
 stood fitly, nothing is said against 
 the Sacrifice of the Mass in itself, 
 but against the vulgar and com- 
 monly-received opinion about it, 
 namely, that priests in this Sacrifice 
 offer Christ for the living and the 
 dead, for remission of pain and 
 guilt, so that by virtue of this Sacri- 
 fice offered for them, independently 
 of the Sacrifice of the Cross, they 
 gain remission for the people, &c. 
 This is the popular opinion which 
 the Article here condemns. But it 
 must be said with the Holy Fathers 
 that in the Mass there is a true
 
 prie quia non immolatur modo cru- 
 ento, sicut in aliis : nam ut habetur 
 in Nicamo Canone, Agnus qui supra 
 sacram Mensam absque immolatione a 
 sacerdotibus immolating id est ipse 
 Christus, sacrijicatur, licet non iterum 
 nmctetur. 
 
 Dicendo etiam (ob liunc Articu- 
 lum) quod non est propitiatorium 
 primo, quia hoc cornpctit Sacrificio in 
 Cruce, licet bene per se, et quasi se- 
 cundo, quia principaliter per applica- 
 tionem Sacrificii cruenti, et per com- 
 memorationem ejus, adeo ut ratio 
 propitiationis originaliter Sacrificio in 
 Cruce competat, et illinc, sen virtute 
 illius, hinc, ut etiam recte notavit 
 Cano in locis, 1. 12, ca. 12, ubi dicit, 
 satis ut vere et proprie sit Sacrifi- 
 cium, quod mors ita nunc ad pec- 
 cati remissionem applicetur, ac si 
 nunc Christus moreretur ; ubi ratio- 
 nem propitiationis application! mortis 
 Christi tribuit : et ad eundem sensum 
 citat Gregorium : In seipso immorta* 
 liter vivens, iterum in hoc mysterio 
 moritur. Mors igitur incruenta in 
 altari, virtutem suam derivat u morte 
 
 Sacrifice, though, if we speak of it 
 in the same sense as the ancient 
 sacrifices, it is not so properly a 
 Sacrifice, for it is not immolated in 
 bloody manner, as in the old ; for, 
 as is said in the Nicene Canon, 
 " The Lamb which without immola- 
 tion is immolated by the priests on 
 the Holy Table, that is Christ Him- 
 self, is sacrificed, though It be not 
 again slain." 
 
 We must say again (on account 
 of this Article) that it is not pri- 
 marily propitiatory, for this pertains 
 to the Sacrifice on the Cross, though 
 it may well be called so in itself, 
 and as it were secondarily, because 
 chiefly by the application of the 
 bloody Sacrifice and by commemora- 
 tion of it ; so that propitiation 
 originally belongs to the Sacrifice 
 on the Cross, and from that, or by 
 virtue of that, to this Sacrifice, as 
 Canus has rightly remarked (Loci 
 TheoL, lib. xii., cap. 12), where he 
 says that it is sufficient to cause it 
 [the Holy Eucharist] to be truly and 
 properly a Sacrifice, that Christ's 
 death should be so applied for the 
 remission of sin, as if Christ were 
 to die again, where he attributes pro- 
 pitiation to the application of Christ's
 
 cruenta in Cruce, nam ut loquitur 
 Tridentinum, sessione 22, can. se- 
 cundo de Sacrificio Missae : Obla- 
 tionis cruentie fructus per hanc uber- 
 rlme percipiuntur. Et in hoc sensu 
 hoc Sacrificium est imago et exemplar 
 alterius in Cruce, unde omnis salus 
 radicaliter emanavit. Nulla prorsus 
 hie erit difficultas cum doctioribus 
 Protestantibus, qui plane hoc totum 
 fatentur; ut videre est apud D. 
 Andreros contra Perronium, et D. 
 Montacutium contra Heigham : et 
 alios frequenter ; denique nee. 
 
 Dicendum tamen (ut dixi) esse 
 etiam per se propitiatorium, quia se- 
 cundum sanctos Patres est idem Sa- 
 crificium, unde Chrysostom, homilia 
 17, in 10, ad Hebra;os : Nos uliad 
 Sacrificium non facimus quotidie sed 
 semper idem. Addit : Immo hujus 
 Sucrijicii memoriam facimus. Non 
 
 death, and cites St. Gregory to the 
 same purpose. " Living in Himself 
 in immortality, He dies again in this 
 mystery." The unbloody death on 
 the altar, then, derives its virtue 
 from the bloody death upon the 
 Cross ; for, as the Council of Trent 
 says (Sess. xxii., cap. 2, de Sacrific. 
 Miss.) : " The fruits of the bloody 
 oblation are received most plentifully 
 through this [unbloody one]. And 
 in this sense this Sacrifice is an 
 image and setting forth of that 
 Sacrifice upon the Cross, whence, as 
 from a root, all salvation sprung. 
 There will be no difficulty whatever 
 on this point with the more learned 
 Protestants, who allow the whole of 
 this, as is to be seen in Dr. Andrewes 
 against Perronius, and Dr. Montagu 
 against Heigham, and in other 
 writers commonly ; nor does this 
 article in any degree gainsay this 
 opinion. 
 
 It must not be said, however (as 
 I said), that this Sacrifice is of itself 
 propitiatory, because, according to 
 the Holy Fathers, it is the same 
 Sacrifice as that on the Cross ; as 
 St. Chrysostom says (horn. 17, inlJeb. 
 x.) : " We do not offer a different 
 Sacrifice every day, but always the
 
 ergo solum memorativum, seel simul 
 memoratum ipsum Sacrificium quod 
 in Cruce, licet in modo et aliis cir- 
 cumstantiis cliff erat. Uncle ibidem : 
 Id ipsum offerimus, ne nunc quidem 
 alium agnum, crastina aliwn, sed 
 semper eundem : ipsum proinde unuin 
 est Sacrificium. Hsec ille. Nee hoc 
 adversatur Articulo, ut patet in glossa, 
 quam opposuimus, nee ipsis Doc- 
 toribus ; cum enim ipsi fateantur in 
 Ecclesia esse sacerdotes, esse etiam 
 Sacrificia propitiatoria, fateantur ne- 
 cesse est. Nam ad Hebr. 5 : Omnis 
 sacerdos constituitur, ut offered dona et 
 Sacrificia pro peccatis. Hie igitur 
 necessario pax. Ad pacem vero lianc 
 altius stabiliendam, examinemus na- 
 turam Sacrificii ut sic. 
 
 Quod a theologis in hunc modum 
 definiri solet. Sacrificium est actio 
 externa, qua res corporea aliqua et 
 sensibilis a legit imo ministro ritu de- 
 
 same." He adds : " In truth we 
 make a memorial of this Sacrifice." 
 It is not, therefore, merely a com- 
 memorative Sacrifice, but the very 
 Sacrifice, too, of the Cross which is 
 commemorated, though it differs 
 in manner and circumstances. 
 " Whence," he says, in the same 
 place, " we offer the very same 
 thing, not at one time one Lamb, at 
 another time another, but always the 
 same; it is entirely one Sacrifice." 
 These are his words. Nor does this 
 contradict the Article, as is plain 
 from the explanation which we have 
 given ; nor the Doctors themselves ; 
 for since they themselves confess that 
 there are priests in the Church, they 
 must necessarily allow that there are 
 also propitiatory Sacrifices. For in 
 Heb. v., it is said that " Every priest 
 is ordained that he may offer both 
 gifts and sacrifices for sins." So that 
 here there must of necessity be 
 reconciliation. But that this peace 
 may be established more firmly, let 
 us examine the nature of sacrifice 
 as such. 
 
 Sacrifice is ordinarily defined 
 among theologians in the following 
 manner : " Sacrifice is an external 
 action, whereby any sensible corporal
 
 bito ac mystico, soli Deo offertur, ct 
 in finem congmentem consecratur ct 
 transmutatur. Origo litis, si qua) 
 est, consistit in duobus posterioribus 
 punctis : scilicet in consecratione et 
 transmutatione ; quid scilicet conse- 
 cretur, et transmutetur. 
 
 Bellar. putat panem consecrari, et 
 Corpus Christi destrui ; alii ut Sua- 
 rez, quod consecratur Corpus Christi, 
 quia offcrtur et Deo dicatur, de- 
 struitur vero, quia vero, licet mystice 
 et incruente, immolatur Christus. 
 
 Tandem addit Suarez non est de 
 ratione Sacrificii destructionem seu 
 immutationem rei oblatse, quod etiam 
 probat ex Levitici vigesimo tertio, ubi 
 erat verum Sacrificium sine muta- 
 tione, et hinc totam rationem for- 
 malem Sacrificii competere huic. 
 
 Ut verum fatear, res est explicatu 
 difficilis: aliquam tamen transmuta- 
 tionem hie fieri, est communius ct 
 verius, et hanc requiri, saltern ad 
 Sacrificium pro peccatis, fere omnes 
 
 matter is offered to God alone, with 
 a proper and mystical rite by a 
 lawful minister, and is consecrated 
 and changed unto a fitting end." 
 The origin of the controversy, if 
 any exists, is in the two latter points, 
 namely, in the consecration and 
 transmutation ; what, that is, is con- 
 secrated, and what is changed. 
 
 Bellarmine thinks that the bread 
 is consecrated, and the Body of 
 Christ destroyed ; others, as Suarez, 
 that the Body of Christ is conse- 
 crated, because it is offered and 
 presented to God ; and is destroyed, 
 because Christ is immolated truly, 
 though in a mystical and unbloody 
 manner. 
 
 Lastly, Suarez adds that the de- 
 struction or change of the thing 
 offered is not essential to the idea of 
 Sacrifice, which, too, he proves from 
 Leviticus xxiii., where was a true 
 Sacrifice, without any change, and 
 hence he thinks that the whole 
 formal idea of a Sacrifice is appli- 
 cable to this. 
 
 To own the truth, the matter is 
 difficult to explain ; but that some 
 change is made in a Sacrifice is 
 more common and more true an 
 opinion ; and that this is required
 
 ( 79 ) 
 
 tenent, quibus etiam conveniunt Pro- 
 testantes. Scd an ilia transmutatio 
 debeat esse cruenta, vel an sufficiat 
 incruenta, videtur esse aliqualis. 
 
 Stricte tamen loquendo propter 
 Sacrificium in Cruce, et csetera Sa- 
 crificia, quae communiter cruenta 
 erant, putant Sacrificium Missse non 
 habere usquequaque eandem ratio- 
 nem Sacrificii : non negant tamen esse 
 Sacrificium (ut dixi) licet non pro- 
 prie, eo scilicet modo quo ilia quia 
 non modo cruento, quod nos ultro 
 dabimus. Est igitur Sacrificium, sed 
 cum termino illo restrictive a Pa- 
 tribus usurpatum, momentum, quod 
 non negant. 
 
 at least in a sacrifice for sin, almost 
 all theologians hold, with whom 
 Protestants, too, agree. But whether 
 that change ought to be bloody, or 
 whether it would suffice if unbloody, 
 seems to be somewhat controverted. 
 
 But to speak strictly, in conse- 
 quence of the Sacrifice on the Cross 
 and the other Sacrifices, which were 
 commonly bloody, they think that 
 the Sacrifice of the Mass has not 
 altogether the same nature of a 
 Sacrifice; they do not, however, deny 
 that it is a Sacrifice (as I said), 
 though not properly so; that is, 
 not in the same manner as those 
 former Sacrifices, because not in a 
 bloody manner, which we readily 
 grant. It is, therefore, a Sacrifice, 
 but with that restrictive term used 
 by the Fathers, i.e., an unbloody 
 sacrifice, which is not denied by 
 them. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXXII. De Conjugio 
 Sacerdotum. 
 
 TjlPISCOPIS, Presbyteris, et Di- 
 ,1 1 aconis nullo mandato clivino 
 prseceptmn, ut aut coelibatum vo- 
 veant, aut a matrimonio abstineant : 
 licet igitur etiam illis, ut csetcris 
 omnibus Christianis, ubi hoc ad pie- 
 
 ARTICLE XXXII. Of the Marriage 
 of Priests. 
 
 BISHOPS, Priests, and Deacons, 
 are not commanded by God's 
 Law, either to vow the estate of 
 single life, or to abstain from mar- 
 riage ; therefore it is lawful also for 
 them, as for all other Christian men,
 
 tatem magis facerc judicaverint, pro 
 sno arbitratu matrimonium contra- 
 here. 
 
 PAEAPHRASIS. Hie Articulus ni- 
 lul superaddit Articulo XXXI. sub 
 Edvardo VI. paulo quiclem explica- 
 tius idem declarat, scilicet Episcopis, 
 Presbyteris, et Diaconis non esse 
 mandatum ut coelibatum voveant : 
 neque jure clivino coguntur matri- 
 monio abstinere, et consequenter 
 quantum ad jus divinum, licite et 
 valide possunt nuptias contrahcrc ; 
 quse est communior opinio scholarum 
 contra nostrum doctissimum Medina, 
 De sacrorum hoininuin continentia ; 
 nee plus hie asseritur, posteriora 
 enim vcrba non aliud specificant. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXXIII, De Excom- 
 municatis vitandis. 
 
 QUI per publicam Ecclesia3 denun- 
 ciationem rite ab unitate Eccle- 
 sise pra3cisus est et excommunicatus, 
 is ab universa fidelium multitudine, 
 donee per poenitentiam publice recon- 
 ciliatus fuerit arbitrio judicis compe- 
 tentis, habendus est tanquam Eth- 
 nicus et Publicanus. 
 
 to many at their own discretion, as 
 they shall judge the same to serve 
 better to godliness. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article adds 
 nothing to Article XXXI. under 
 Edward VI., but declares the same 
 thing somewhat more fully, namely, 
 that there is no command binding 
 Bishops, Priests, and Deacons to 
 make a vow of celibacy ; nor are 
 they by God's law obliged to abstain 
 from matrimony, and, consequently, 
 as far as God's law goes, they can 
 lawfully and validly contract mar- 
 riages, which is the more common 
 opinion of the schools, in opposition 
 to the very learned Medina On the 
 Celibacy of the Clergy ; nor is more 
 asserted here, for the concluding 
 words specify nothing else. 
 
 ARTICLE XXXIII. Of excommu- 
 nicate Persons, hoio they are to le 
 avoided. 
 
 nnHAT person which by open 
 JL 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 recon- 
 ciled by penance, and received into 
 the Church by a Judge that hath 
 authority thereunto.
 
 PARAPHRASES. Hie Articulus Ca- 
 tholicus est, et tain pactis Scripturis 
 quam Antiquitati consonans. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article is 
 Catholic, and agreeable both to 
 Holy Scripture and Antiquity. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXXIV. De Tradi- 
 tionibus Ecclesiasticis. 
 
 FT1EADITIONES atque ceremonias 
 JL easdem non omnino necessarium 
 est esse ubique, ant prorsus consi- 
 miles : nam et varise semper fuerunt, 
 et mutari possunt pro regionum, tem- 
 porum, et morum diversitate, modo 
 nihil contra verbum Dei instituatur. 
 Traditiones et ceremonias Ecclesias- 
 ticas quaj cum verbo Dei non pug- 
 nant, et sunt authoritate publica in- 
 stitute et probatse, quisquis private 
 consilio volens et data opera publice 
 violaverit, is, ut qui peccat in pub- 
 licuin ordinem Ecclesia?, quique laxlit 
 authoritatem magistratus, et qui in- 
 firmorum fratrum conscientias vul- 
 nerat, publice, ut cseteri timeant, 
 arguendus est. 
 
 Quselibet Ecclesia particularis sive 
 nationalis, authoritatem habet insti- 
 tuendi, mutandi aut abrogandi cere- 
 monias, aut ritus Ecclesiasticos, hu- 
 inana tantuin authoritate institutes : 
 modo omnia ad axlificationem fiant. 
 
 ARTICLE XXXIV. Of the Tradi- 
 tions of the Church. 
 
 IT is not necessary that Traditions 
 and Ceremonies be in all places 
 one, and utterly like; for at all 
 times they have been divers, and 
 may be changed according to the 
 diversities of countries, times, and 
 men's manners, so that nothing be 
 ordained against God's Word. Who- 
 soever through his private judgment, 
 willingly and purposely, doth openly 
 break the traditions and ceremonies 
 of the Church, which be not repug- 
 nant to the 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 he that offendeth against 
 the common order of the Church, 
 and hurteth the authority of the 
 Magistrate, and woundeth the con- 
 sciences of the weak brethren. 
 
 
 
 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. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Manifestum est EXPLANATION. It is clear that 
 
 G
 
 hie solum agi de Traditionibus non 
 doctrinalibus : asserit enim hie Ar- 
 ticulus, eas secundum circumstantias 
 tcmporum et locorum, subinde va- 
 riari posse : quod de doctrina certo 
 tradita per Apostolos, Christianorum 
 nemo asseruit. 
 
 Totus igitur hie Articulus mihi 
 verissiinus et praxi Ecclesise con- 
 sonans videtur. 
 
 Fulsse vero aliqua doctrinalia per 
 Apostolos non scripto, seel verbo 
 posteris tradita eleganter declarat 
 Dionys, Areopag. : 'E/c 1/005 619 vovv 
 \6yov cw^ajiKov, a\V 
 ?75 e'/cTo?. Id est, ex animo 
 in aninium sine literis, medio inter- 
 cedente verbo, ait f uisse transfusa. 
 
 August, etiain, lib. 5 de Baptismo 
 contra Donatistas, c. 23, respondens 
 Epistolge Cypriani ad Pompeium. 
 Apostoli, inquit, niliil quidem inde 
 prceceperunt, sed consuetudo illo quce 
 opponebqfur Cypriano, ab eonim tra- 
 ditione exordium sumpsisse credenda 
 est) sicut sunt multa quo) nnirersa 
 tenet Ecclesia, et ob hoc ab Apos- 
 tolis prcccepta bene creduntur, quamvis 
 scripta non reperiantur. 
 
 the Traditions here treated of are 
 not doctrinal, for the Article asserts 
 that they may be changed according 
 to circumstances of times and places, 
 which no Christian ever asserted of 
 doctrine certainly handed down by 
 the Apostles. 
 
 The Avhole Article, therefore, ap- 
 pears to me most true, and agreeable 
 to the practice of the Church. 
 
 That there were certain matters 
 of doctrine delivered by the Apostles, 
 not in writing but orally, to their 
 successors, is elegantly expressed by 
 St. Dionysius, the Areopagite. 
 " From mind to mind, by means of 
 bodily speech, but at the same time 
 without writing," he says that mat- 
 ters were transmitted. 
 
 St. Augustine also (lib. v., de 
 Bapt. Cont. Donat., c. 23), answer- 
 ing the Epistle of St. Cyprian to 
 Pompeius, says : " The Apostles 
 ordered nothing on that point ; but 
 that custom, which was opposed by 
 Cyprian, must be believed to have 
 sprung from their tradition, as are 
 many things which the Universal 
 Church holds, and for this reason 
 they are well believed to be ordered 
 by the Apostles, though they be not 
 found in writing*"
 
 Et superius, lib. 2, c. 9, dixit: 
 Consuetudinis robore tenebatur orbis 
 terrarum, et ha>c solum opponebatur 
 inducere volentibus novitatem. Sect 
 de hujusniodi hie non agitur. Quod 
 autem additur in ultimo articulo, \&- 
 rissimum est, et tradit August, in 
 ep. 86, ad Casulanum, et in epist. 
 119, ad Januarium, et tandem ha- 
 betur, 31 dist. cap. Quoniam, etc. et 
 cap. Aliter, et est omnium Doctorum. 
 
 And in a foiiner passage (lib. ii., 
 c. 9) he said, " The whole world was 
 bound by the force of custom, and 
 this alone was opposed to those who 
 wished to introduce novelties." But 
 in this place matters of this kind are 
 not in question. That, however, 
 which is added at the end of the 
 Article is most true, and St. Augus- 
 tine says the same (ep. 86, ad 
 Casulanum, and ep. 119 ad Janua- 
 riuni) ; and again it is to be found, 
 31 dist. cap. Quoniam, &c., and cap. 
 Aliter, and is the opinion of all the 
 Doctors. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXXV. De Homiliis. 
 
 rjlOMUS secundus Homiliarum, 
 J_ quarum singulos titulos huic 
 Articulo subjunximus, continet piam 
 et salutarem doctrinam, et his tem- 
 poribus necessariam, non minus 
 quam prior tomus Homiliarum ; quae 
 editse sunt tempore Edwardi VI. 
 itaque eas in Ecclesiis per ministros 
 diligenter et clare, ut a populo intel- 
 ligi possint, recitandas esse judica- 
 vimus.* 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Multa quidem 
 emit in Homiliis laude digna, alia 
 
 ARTICLE XXXV. Of the Homilies. 
 
 THE second Book of Homilies, 
 the several titles whereof we 
 have joined under this Article, doth 
 contain a godly and wholesome Doc- 
 trine, and necessary for these times, 
 as doth the former Book of Homilies, 
 which were set forth in the time of 
 Edward the Sixth ; and therefore 
 we judge them to be read in Churches 
 by the Ministers, diligently and dis- 
 tinctly, that they may be under- 
 standed of the people. 
 
 EXPLANATION. There are many 
 things in the Homilies worthy of all 
 
 * The Last of the Titles of the Homilies is omitted in both editions of this treatise; 
 
 G2
 
 nee nobis, vel doctioribus eorum, ar- 
 rident. Nee tenentur Protestantes, 
 ob haBC verba in Articulo, statim in 
 singula verba vel sententias Homilia- 
 rum jurare, nam ut olim Turrecre- 
 mata, cum ipsa Ecclesia Doctorum 
 aliquorum opuscula probat, non ob id 
 intelligendum est, omnia in eis con- 
 tenta probari : sicut in Constitutioni- 
 bus sextae Synodi, aliquorum Docto- 
 rum opera probata sunt, quod etiam in 
 Decretis legitur, dist. 15, non tamen 
 omnia verba et particulas approbat, 
 ut conveniunt Doctores. Hoc etiam 
 exactissime tradunt Doctores Parisi- 
 enses, exponentes Bullam Urbani 
 quinti approbantem doctrinam S. 
 Thoma 1 , in qua scripsit Tholosanis, 
 ejus doctrinam ut lene dictam, et Ca- 
 tholicam teneri delere. Dicunt tamen 
 Parisienses, prcedictam approlationem 
 non esse universalem, sed tanquam doc- 
 trince utilis, et in multis probabilis, 
 prudenter igitur quse sanam doctri- 
 nam sapiunt, populo legenda, alia 
 neglectui habenda. 
 
 praise; other matters neither please 
 us, nor the more learned among 
 them. Nor are Protestants, because 
 of these words in the Article, 
 directly bound to hold every word 
 or sentence in the Homilies ; for, as 
 was said long since by Turrecremata, 
 when the Church herself approves 
 the works of certain Doctors, it is 
 not, therefore, to be understood that 
 everything contained in those works 
 is approved, as in the Constitutions 
 of the Sixth Synod the works of 
 certain Doctors were approved, as is 
 read in the Decrees, dist. 15 ; but 
 the Synod did not approve every 
 word and clause, as the Doctors 
 agree. This opinion, too, the Pari- 
 sian Doctors most exactly set forth 
 in explaining the Bull of Urban V., 
 approving the doctrine of St. 
 Thomas, in which he wrote to those 
 of Toulouse, that " his doctrine 
 ought to be well expressed and 
 Catholic ; but the Parisians say that 
 the approbation aforesaid is not 
 universal, but implies that the doc- 
 trine is useful, and in many things 
 probable." Those things, therefore, 
 which savour of sound doctrine, 
 should prudently be read by the 
 people, the rest should be neglected.
 
 ARTICULUS XXXVI. De Episco- 
 porum, et Ministrorum Consecratione. 
 
 T IBELLUS de consecratione Ar- 
 I ^ chiepiscoporum, et Episcoporam, 
 et ordinatione Presbyterorum, et Di- 
 aconorum editus nuper temporibus 
 Edwardi VI. et authoritate Parlia- 
 ment! illis ipsis temporibus confirma- 
 tus, omnia ad ejusmodi consecratio- 
 nem et ordinationem necessaria con- 
 tinet : et nihil habet quod ex se sit aut 
 superstitiosum, aut impium : itaque 
 quicunque juxta ritus illius libri con- 
 secrati, aut ordinati sunt, ab anno se- 
 cundo pra3clicti Regis Edwardi usque 
 ad hoc tempus, aut in posterum juxta 
 eosdem ritus consecrabuntur, aut or- 
 dinabuntur, rite atque ordinate* atque 
 legitime statuimus esse et fore conse- 
 crates et ordinatos. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Hie Articulus nos 
 remittit ad Pontificale sub Edvardo 
 VI. compactum. 
 
 De ordinatione Episcoporum verba 
 in ceremoniali illo sunt : Accipe Spi- 
 ritum Sanctum, et memento suscitare 
 ymtiam Dei, quce est in te per imposi- 
 tionem manuum, quia Deus non nobis 
 dedit Spiritum timoris, sed potestatis 
 et solrietatis. 
 
 ARTICLE XXXVI. Of Consecra- 
 tion of Bishops and Ministers. 
 
 FTIHE Book of Consecration of 
 JL Archbishops and Bishops, and 
 Ordering of Priests and Deacons, 
 lately set forth in the time of Ed- 
 ward the Sixth, and confirmed at 
 the same time by the authority of 
 Parliament, doth contain all things 
 necessary to such Consecration and 
 Ordering: neither hath it any thing, 
 that of itself is superstitious and 
 ungodly. And therefore whosoever 
 are consecrated or ordered according 
 to the Rites of that Book, since the 
 second year of the forenamed King 
 Edward unto this time, or hereafter 
 shall be consecrated or ordered ac- 
 cording to the same Rites ; we 
 decree all such to be rightly, orderly, 
 and lawfully consecrated and or- 
 dered. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article re- 
 fers us to the Pontifical compiled 
 under Edward VI. 
 
 At the ordination of Bishops, the 
 words in that ceremonial are : " Take 
 the Holy Ghost, and remember that 
 thou stir up the grace of God which 
 is in thee by imposition of hands ; for 
 God hath not given us the spirit of 
 fear, but of power and soberness." 
 
 * In some editions "ordine" for "ordinate."
 
 llscc verba simul cum impositione 
 manuum a pluribus Episcopis facta, 
 pronuntiat Archiepiscopus : quibus 
 peractis tradit in manus consecrandi 
 Biblia, cum verbis accommodatis : 
 adeo ut fonna sit, Accipe Spiritum 
 Sanctum, etc. materia, impositio ma- 
 nuum, judicent doctiores an hanc 
 eorum consecrationem ex hoc capite 
 irritam defineri fas sit, prassertim, 
 cum Vasq. et alii putent impositionem 
 manuum, et ilia verba sufficere quan- 
 tum est de jure divino, ad essentiam 
 ordinationis Episcopalis : ut videre 
 est, p. 3, disp. 240, num. 58. Co- 
 nink de Ordine, disp. 20, dub. 7, 
 num. 58, fuse, et probat ex Trid. ; nee 
 dissentit Arcudius de Sacramento 
 Ordinis, propter authoritatem Scrip- 
 turaa, qusc horum duorum saspius et 
 solum mentionem facit, ubi etiam 
 fuse ostendit in Ecclesia Grteca tra- 
 ditiones instrumentorum non esse 
 necessarias simpliciter, nee fonnas 
 illis applicatas. 
 
 The Archbishop pronounces these 
 words at the same time, with the 
 imposition of hands by several 
 Bishops, which being done, he gives 
 into the hands of the person to be 
 consecrated a Bible with suitable 
 words : so that the form is, " Take 
 the Holy Ghost," &c. The matter 
 is the imposition of hands ; let the 
 more learned judge whether it be 
 right to declare their consecration 
 void on this account, especially since 
 Vasquez and others think that the 
 imposition of hands and those words 
 are sufficient, jure divino, for the 
 essence of the ordination of a Bishop, 
 as may be seen from the writings of 
 Vasquez, p. iii., disp. 240, num. 58. 
 Conink de Ord., disp. xx., dub. 7, 
 num. 58, at length treats of the 
 question, and proves it from the 
 Council of Trent; nor does Arcudius 
 dissent from this opinion (de Sacr. 
 Ord.\ because of the authority of 
 Scripture, which makes mention of 
 these two points alone, and most 
 frequently. He also, in the same 
 place, shows that in the Greek 
 Church the delivery of the instru- 
 ments is not necessary, absolutely, 
 nor the forms connected with 
 them,
 
 Idem judicium facit de unctione 
 physica et material! in Sacramento 
 Ordinis, sive quoad Episcopos vel 
 sacerdotes ; non enim est essentialis, 
 secundum eum : immo in Ecclesia 
 Gra3ca nunquam fuit adhibita, ut 
 contendit Arcudius ; quia Chiys. in 
 Digressione Morali 2, Orat. in 1, ad 
 Timoth., faciens distinctionem inter 
 sacerdotes veteris et novae legis, dicit 
 priores unctos fuisse. Dionys. etiam, 
 licet accuratissimus in ceremoniis 
 describendis, nee verbum habet de 
 unctione, quando vero aliqui Graeci 
 Patres, de unctione mentionem fa- 
 ciunt, de spiritual! eos intelligit. 
 
 De Presbyteris forma est, Accipe 
 Spiritum Sanctum, quorum remiseris 
 peccata, remittuntur eis, et quorum 
 retinueris retenta sunt, et esto fidelis 
 verbi divini, et sanctorum Sacramen- 
 torum ejus dispensator, in Nomine 
 Patris, etc. Postea traduntur Evan- 
 gelia, et dicit : Accipe potestatem 
 prcedicandi Dei Verbum, sanctorumque 
 Sacramentorum administrandi in liac 
 congregations \ 
 
 His judgment is the same respect- 
 ing the physical and material unction 
 in the Sacrament of Order, whether 
 with respect to Bishops or Priests ; 
 for it is not essential, according to 
 him : moreover, in the Greek Church, 
 as Arcudius argues, it never has 
 been used, because St. Chrysostom 
 (Digress. Mor. 2, Orat. in 1 ad 
 Timoth.), distinguishing between the 
 priests of the Old and the New Law, 
 says that the former were anointed. 
 St. Dionysius, again, though most 
 accurate in describing ceremonies, 
 says not a word respecting unction; 
 and when some Greek Fathers men- 
 tion unction, he understands them to 
 mean spiritual unction. 
 
 With respect to Priests the form 
 is, " Receive the Holy Ghost ; whose 
 sins thou dost forgive they are 
 forgiven ; and whose sins thou dost 
 retain they are retained. And be 
 thou a faithful dispenser of the Word 
 of God, and of His Holy Sacra- 
 ments ; in the Name of the Father," 
 &c. Then the Gospels [Bible] are 
 given into the candidate's hand, and 
 the Bishop says : " Take thou 
 authority to preach the Word of 
 God, and to minister the Holy Sacra- 
 ments in this congregation,"
 
 ( 8 
 
 Christus quidem primo potestatem 
 dedit super Corpus Christ! verum, 
 postea super mysticum, ut patet in 
 sacro textu, et optime declarat Doctor 
 4, dist. 24, sic etiam practical Ec- 
 clesia, ut patet in Pontificali. Aliqui 
 Doct. tenent, ut q. 37, dub. 2, in 
 supplementum D. Th. post Bell, no- 
 tavit doctissimus Kellis. (cui multam 
 tribuo, et ex multis titulis debeo) 
 quod in ordinatione sacerdotum, ilia 
 secunda potestas super corpus mysti- 
 cum, per potestatem remittendi et 
 ligandi, solum sit explicativa seu de- 
 clarativa potestatis ante traditae, et 
 non esse aliquam novam potestatem 
 de novo collatam, sic aliqui Tho- 
 mista3, ut patet apud Capreol. 4, d. 
 19, quoest. 1, quod meliori jure alii 
 putant dici in hac Nostratium forma, 
 scilicet in prioribus verbis, solum ex- 
 plicari, quod postea traditur, quia 
 super omnia Sacramenta, potestas con- 
 fertur in verbis sequentibus, ut di- 
 recte ibi astruitur, ergo etiam super 
 Sacramentum Posnitentise, quod in 
 prioribus verbis insinuabatur ; ubi 
 etiam intelligi non dubito, potesta- 
 tem sacrificandi, quia datur potestas 
 super Corpus Christi verum, de jure 
 ver6 divino non fit consecratio nisi in 
 Sacrificio, ut fere unanimis est con- 
 
 Christ, indeed, first gave power 
 over the true Body of Christ, after- 
 wards over His mystical Body, as is 
 plain in Holy Writ; the Doctor well 
 declares (4 dist., 24), and this is the 
 practice of the Church, as is plain in 
 the Pontifical. Some Doctors hold 
 (as in qu. 37, dub. 2, sup.) St. 
 Thomas, after Bellarmine, the very 
 learned Kellison (whose debtor I am 
 on many grounds) that in the Ordi- 
 nation of Priests, that second power 
 over the mystical body, by the power 
 of loosing and binding, is only ex- 
 plicative or declarative of the power 
 given before, and is not any new power 
 given afresh. So say some of the 
 Thomists, as appears from Capreol. 
 4, d. 19, qu. 1, which others with 
 more justice think is said of the form 
 in use in this country, namely, that 
 in the former words that is only ex- 
 plained which is subsequently given, 
 because in the following words 
 power is given in all the Sacraments, 
 as is expressly added in that form, 
 and therefore in the Sacrament of 
 Penance, which was implied by the 
 former words, where, too, I doubt 
 not but that the power of offering 
 sacrifice is understood, because power 
 is given over Christ's true Body; but
 
 sensus Doctorum, et Christus ipse 
 dando potestatem consecrandi, declit 
 insimul sacrificandi, ut patet in ul- 
 tima Ccena. 
 
 Scio Puritanos dicere, in hac eorum 
 fonna ex proposito expungi potesta- 
 tem Sacrificandi ut superstitiosam. 
 Sed non contra illos ago, quia vere 
 destruunt totam formam : benigne 
 solum expono Articulum, et eo plus 
 quo video celebriores Protestantium 
 Doctores, ut superius ostendi, Sacer- 
 dotes et Sacrificia agnoscere. Pec- 
 cant saltern in omni sententia non ob- 
 servando formam ab Ecclesia Latina 
 demandatam, ut cum Soto tenent 
 Doctores ; ut etiam viclere est apud 
 Petigianis in 4, de Baptismo, et Doc- 
 torem, 4, dist. 8, quia est de necessi- 
 tate Ministriy ut loquitur Doctor, id 
 est prsecepti in Ecclesia Latina. Fuse 
 etiam de hoc agit Doctor, d. 3, q. 2. 
 
 Sed an ilia forma sufHciat ad Sa- 
 
 by divine right there is no consecra- 
 tion except in the Sacrifice, as is the 
 almost unanimous consent of the 
 Doctors ; and Christ Himself, by 
 giving the power of consecrating, 
 gave at the same time that of sacri- 
 ficing, as appears in the narrative of 
 the Last Supper. 
 
 I know that the Puritans say that 
 in this form of theirs the power of 
 sacrificing is purposely expunged, as 
 being superstitious. But I am not 
 writing against them, because in 
 truth they destroy the whole form. 
 I merely explain the Article in a 
 favourable sense, and the rather 
 because I find that the more distin- 
 guished Doctors of the Protestants, 
 as I have shown above, acknowledge 
 Priests and a Sacrifice. At least 
 they err according to every opinion 
 by not observing the form com- 
 manded by the Latin Church, as 
 Soto holds with the Doctors, as ap- 
 pears also from Petigianis de Bapt. 4, 
 and from the Doctor, 4, dist. 8, 
 because the form is de necessitate 
 Ministn, as the Doctor says, that is, 
 necessary by precept in the Latin 
 Church. The Doctor treats on this 
 at length, too, d. 3, qu. 2. 
 
 But the question is, Is that form
 
 cerclotium. Vicletur (non asserendo, 
 minus adhserendo) responderi posse 
 secundum aliquos, quod sic, ex In- 
 nocentius IV. in Cap. Presbyt. de 
 Sacramentis non iterandis, ubi dicit : 
 De ritu Apostolico invenitur, quod 
 manus imponebant ordinandis, et quod 
 orationem fundebant super eos. Aliam 
 autem formam non invenimus ab eis 
 servatam. Unde credimus, quod nisi 
 essent formce postea inventa> } sufficeret 
 ordinatori dicere Sis Sacerdos, vel alia 
 cpquipollentia, sed subsequentibus tern- 
 poribus formas, quce servantur, Ec- 
 clesia ordinavit. Ipsius ergo, et con- 
 stans est Doctorum sententia, sub- 
 stantiam formsB in omni ordinatione, 
 non esse prsecise in cortice verborum, 
 sed sensu: modo igitur fiat verbis 
 asquipollentibus, ut loquitur Innoc. 
 non dubito sufficere et valere : Non 
 enim verba, sed rem opinor spectan 
 oportere : ut Arcudius ubi supra. 
 Et Trid. videtur favere, sess. 23, c. 
 4, ubi ait : Sacram ordinationem verbis 
 et siynis exterioribus per/id. Ubi non 
 determinat verba vel signa. Multi 
 utique Doctores non improbabiliter 
 existimant, nee verba, nee symbola 
 externa, id est, nee formam vel ma- 
 teriam a Christo determinate esse 
 assignata, sed ab Ecclesia assig- 
 
 sufficient for conferring the Priest- 
 hood ? It seems (I do not assert it, 
 still less do I hold to the opinion) 
 that, according to some, it might be 
 answered affirmatively from Inno- 
 cent IV. (De Sacra non iter Cap. 
 Presbyt.}, where it is said, " With 
 regard to the Apostolic Ritual, we 
 find that they used to impose hands 
 on those who were to be ordained, 
 and prayed over them. Nor do we 
 find any other form observed by 
 them. Whence we believe, that 
 unless forms had been subse- 
 "quently invented, it would suffice 
 for the ordainer to say, Be thou 
 a Priest, or equivalent words; but, 
 in subsequent times, the Church 
 ordained the forms which are now 
 observed." It is, therefore, his 
 opinion, and a constant one with the 
 Doctors, that the substance of the 
 form in all ordination, is not abso- 
 lutely in the mere husk of the words, 
 but in their sense; if only then it be 
 done in equivalent words, as Inno- 
 cent says, "I have no doubt but 
 that it is sufficient and effectual. 
 For I think that it is needful to look, 
 not at the words, but at the matter;" 
 as says Arcudius, ubi supra, and the 
 Council of Trent seems to favour
 
 nanda. Solum igitur Cliristo ordi- 
 natum est secundum hanc senten- 
 tiam, quod ordinatio fiat aliquibus 
 verbis et symbolis. Et hinc a for- 
 tiori sequitur, verba sequipollentia 
 omnino sufficere, quia multo facilius, 
 verba ab Ecclesia, quam si a Christo 
 assignentur, modo in sensu et re 
 conveniant, aliquantulum mutari pos- 
 sint. Unde Grseci hac forma utun- 
 tur : Divina gratia, qute semper in- 
 firma sanat, et quce decent supplet, creat 
 seu promovet N. venerabilem Subdia- 
 conum in Diaconum, venerabilem Dia- 
 conum in Presbyterum, Deo amabilis- 
 simum Presbyterum in Episcopum. 
 Ubi patet eos rite ordinari, quia 
 substantiam habent. Idem plane 
 aliis videtur, sine assertione esse ju- 
 dicium de forma Nostratium, quia 
 potestatem sacrificandi et absolvendi 
 involvunt, nisi alio detorquere ma- 
 lint, sicut Puritani fecerunt, et a 
 Nostris optime excepti sunt. 
 
 the opinion, sess. 23, cap. 4, where 
 it says that holy order " is performed 
 [peiyicitur'] by words and outward 
 signs," where it does not specify the 
 words or the signs. Many Doctors, 
 too, not improbably think that 
 neither words nor outward symbols, 
 that is, neither the form nor matter, 
 were determinately prescribed by 
 Christ, but were to be prescribed 
 by the Church. According to this 
 opinion, therefore, Christ only ap- 
 pointed that ordination should be 
 conferred with some form of words 
 and symbols, and from this it follows 
 a fortiori, that equivalent words are 
 wholly sufficient, because words pre- 
 scribed by the Church can much 
 more readily be slightly changed 
 than if they had been prescribed by 
 Christ. So that the Greeks use 
 this form: "The grace of God, 
 which always strengthens things 
 that are weak, and supplies what 
 are fitting, makes or promotes N. 
 venerable sub-deacon to be a deacon, 
 venerable deacon to be a priest, 
 priest most beloved by God to be a 
 bishop." Where it is plain that 
 they differ from the form of the 
 Latins; no one, however, denies that 
 they are rightly ordained, because
 
 Quod si hoc durum videatur ali- 
 quibus nostrum, attendant ad illud 
 Doctoris, 4, d. 8, q. 2, . Ex hoc 
 patet : Est dictum minus discretum, 
 asserere, quod necesse est in quolibet 
 Sacramento scire precise, quce verba 
 sunt de forma, ad hoc, ut aliquis con- 
 ferat Sacramentum. Istud enim wa- 
 nifeste falsum est, non solum in Eu- 
 charistia, sed etiam in Baptismo, et 
 P&nitentia et Sacramento Ordinis, 
 forte enim nullus est qui sciat pro 
 certo, nee Episcopus, nee Ordinatus, 
 quce sint prcecise verba ordinationis in 
 Sacerdotem : Et tamen non est dicen- 
 dum, quod nullus est ordinatus in 
 Sacerdotem in Ecclesia. Consimiliter 
 diversi utuntur diversis verbis in con- 
 ferendo Sacramentum Pcenitenticv : nee 
 est cerium de aliquibus verbis prce- 
 cisis, quo3 sint ilia, non tamen di- 
 cendum est, quod nullus absolvatur in 
 Ecclesia. 
 
 they have the substance. The same 
 appears to others to be the right 
 conclusion respecting the form used 
 in this country, because it includes 
 the power of sacrificing and absolv- 
 ing, unless men choose to twist the 
 meaning another way, as the Pu- 
 ritans have done, and have been well 
 censured by writers on our side. 
 
 But if this should seem hard to 
 some on our side, let them consider 
 the opinion of the Doctor, 4, d. 8, 
 qu. 2, Ex hoc patet. "It is an 
 imprudent affirmation, to assert that 
 it is necessary in eveiy Sacrament 
 to know precisely what words con- 
 stitute the form, to the end that any 
 one should confer the Sacrament. 
 For that is manifestly false, not only 
 in the Eucharist, but also in Bap- 
 tism, Penance, and the Sacrament 
 of Order. Possibly there is no one, 
 whether Bishop or Candidate for 
 Orders, who knows for certain, what 
 are precisely the words of ordina- 
 tion for a Priest; and yet it must 
 not be said that no one is ordained 
 for a Priest in the Church. In like 
 manner different persons use dif- 
 ferent words in conferring the Sa- 
 crament of Penance, nor is it certain 
 respecting any precise words, which
 
 Unde illustrissimus Scholiator eli- 
 cit, licet certee essent fonnse in 
 Sacramentis, tamen quaelibet verba 
 earum fonnarum non sunt adeo 
 certa et determinata, quum alia suffi- 
 ciant. 
 
 Quod autem additur in ceremo- 
 niali, quod Presbyteri praesentes 
 etiam imponant manus in capita 
 ordinandorum, fuit expresse ordina- 
 tum in 4, Garth, cap. 3, hoc tamen 
 non observatur a Graecis, licet sem- 
 per in Ecclesia Latina propter au- 
 tlioritatem Pauli ad Tim. 4. Noli 
 neglifjere gratiam qua* data est tibi 
 cum impositlone manuum Preslyterii. 
 Sic etiam loquitur Trid. sess. 14, 
 can. 3, secus vero est in ordinatione 
 Diaconi, ut habetur in Carthag. c. 4. 
 
 De Diaconis forma est : Accipe 
 potestatem, et ojficium Diaconi in 
 Ecclesia Dei tibi commissa exercendi. 
 Tn Nomine Patris, etc. Postea in 
 traditione Bibliorum dicit : Accipe po- 
 testatem legendi Evangelium in Eccle- 
 
 they may be, yet it is not to be said 
 that no one is absolved in the 
 Church. 
 
 Whence the celebrated Schoolman 
 says, Though there be fixed forms in 
 the Sacraments, nevertheless all the 
 words of those forms are not so 
 fixed and determined, since others 
 may suffice. 
 
 The part which is added in the 
 Ceremonial, that the Priests who 
 are present also lay their hands on 
 the heads of those who are to be 
 ordained, was expressly ordered by 
 the fourth Council of Carthage, cap. 
 3; this however, is not observed by 
 the Greeks, though it always is in 
 the Latin Church on the authority 
 of St. Paul, 1 Tim. 4: "Neglect 
 not the gift which was given thee 
 by prophecy, with the laying on of 
 the hands of the presbytery." So 
 too speaks the Council of Trent, 
 sess. 14, can. 3 ; in the ordination 
 of a Deacon however, the rule is 
 different, Cone. Carth. c. 4. 
 
 In ordaining Deacons the form is 
 " Take thou authority to execute the 
 office of a Deacon in the Church of 
 God committed unto thee. In the 
 name of the Father, &c." Then in 
 giving to each of them the Sacred
 
 sia De^ et idem prcvdicandi, si ad 
 illud praistandum ordinaric vocatus 
 fueris. 
 
 Multis videtur nullum essentiale 
 hie prgetermitti, secundum declara- 
 tionem Florentini vel Trident, propter 
 rationes superius assignatas. Im- 
 positio manuum omnium fere con- 
 sensu est essentialis, quse hie recte 
 observatur, quia simul cum proba- 
 tione f ormse traduiit etiam hie Evan- 
 gelium, quod aliqui Theologi putant 
 essentiale : sed ut recte Arcudius 
 de Sacramento Ordinis (qui melius 
 omnibus aliis haec ad fundum ex- 
 aminavit) traditio instrumentorum 
 est potius determinatio material 
 quam ipsa materia, et sic intelligi 
 debet Florent. secundum cum, quando 
 specificat traditionem materise ad 
 singulos ordines. 
 
 Addam hie opportuntj pulcherri- 
 mum dictum Doctoris 4, d 8, qu 
 2, . Quod ergo erit consilium : 
 Non est tutum cdicui se reputare valde 
 peritum de scientia sua } et dicere, volo 
 uti precise istis verlis pro consecra- 
 
 Books the officiant says, " Take thou 
 authority to read the Gospel in the 
 Church of God, and to preach the 
 same, if thou be thereunto ordina- 
 rily commanded." 
 
 To many it seems that nothing 
 essential is here omitted, according 
 to the declaration either of Florence 
 or of Trent, for the reasons assigned 
 before. The imposition of hands is 
 essential, by the consent of nearly 
 all writers, which is in this office 
 duly observed, for together with the 
 pronouncing the form the Gospels 
 too are given in this rite, which some 
 theologians consider essential, but as 
 Arcudius rightly observes, de Sacr. 
 Ordinis (who has examined this 
 matter to the bottom better than all 
 others), the delivery of the instru- 
 ments is rather the determination of 
 the matter than the matter itself, 
 and the Council of Florence should 
 be understood in this sense, according 
 to him, when it specifies the delivery 
 of the matter for each order. 
 
 I will add here a beautiful saying 
 of the Doctors, much to the point, 4, 
 d. 8, qu. 2, Quod ergo erit consi- 
 lium : " It is not safe for anyone to 
 esteem himself highly skilled on ac- 
 count of his knowledge, and to say,
 
 tione, sed securior est simplicitas, volo 
 ista verba proferre sub ea intention?, 
 sub qua Christus instituit ea esse pro- 
 ferenda, et quce ex Christi institutions 
 siutt de forma, dico ut de forma, et 
 quai ad recerentiam, ad reverentiam. 
 Htcc ille : utinain conditores Arti- 
 culorum eadem qua Doctor humili- 
 tate Sacramentorum formas pro rei 
 gravitate perpendissent, non adeo 
 facile formas in Ecclesia usitatas 
 experitice SUCK nimia reputatione ; tdlo 
 modo immutassent, vel detrancassent, 
 licet forte (secundum opiniones tole- 
 ratas) non substautialiter. 
 
 Ergo alia capita non examine de 
 successione Episcoporum vel Minis- 
 trorum (ab aliis fuse et docte pe- 
 ractum est) sed solum ipsa verba 
 Articuli, an scilicet in formae et 
 material (si nihil aliud obstat) valide 
 fiat Ordinatio, 
 
 I choose to use precisely such and 
 such words for the consecration ; but 
 it is more secure to say simply, I 
 wish to utter such and such words 
 with that intention, with which 
 Christ appointed that they should be 
 uttered; and those things which by 
 Christ's institution are essential to 
 the form, I say as essential to the 
 form, and what is instituted for the 
 sake of reverence, I say for the sake 
 of reverence." Such are his words : 
 would that the framers of the Ar- 
 ticles had considered, with the same 
 humility as the Doctor, the forms of 
 the Sacraments as the gravity of the 
 matter deserves, they would not then 
 so easily, from too great opinion of 
 their own skill, in any way, though it 
 may be (according to opinions which 
 are tolerated) not substantially, have 
 changed or mutilated the forms used 
 in the Church. 
 
 I do not then examine the other 
 points respecting the succession of 
 Bishops or Ministers (it has been 
 treated at length and skilfully by 
 others), but only the bare words of 
 the Article, whether that is, in point 
 of form and matter (if nothing else 
 hinder), the Ordination be validly 
 performed,
 
 ARTICULUS XXXVII. De CiciU- 
 bus Magistratibus. 
 
 REGIA Majestas in hoc Anglise 
 Regno ac cseteris ejus Dominiis 
 summam habet potestatem ad quam 
 omnium statuum hujus Regni, sive 
 illi Ecclesiastici suit, sive cities, in 
 omnibus causis suprema gubernatio 
 pertinet, et nulli externa) jurisdic- 
 tioni est subjecta, nee esse debet. 
 
 Cum Regiae Majestati summam 
 gubernationem tribuimus, quibus ti- 
 tulis intelligimus animos quorundam 
 calumniatorum offendi, non damus 
 Regibus nostris, aut verbi Dei, aut 
 Sacramentorum administrationem, 
 quod etiam injunctiones ab Eliza- 
 betha Regina nostra nuper editse, 
 apertissime testantur, sed earn tan- 
 turn prserogativam quam in sacris 
 Scripturis k Deo Ipso, omnibus piis 
 principibus videmus semper fuisse 
 attributam : hoc est, ut omnes status 
 atque ordines fidei sua3 a Deo com- 
 missos, sive illi Ecclesiastici sint, sive 
 civiles in officio contineant, et con- 
 tumaces ac delinquentes gladio civili 
 coerceant. 
 
 Romanus Pont if ex null am habet 
 jurisdictionem in hoc regno Anglian 
 
 Leges regni possunt Christianos 
 propter capitalia et gravia crimina 
 morte punire. 
 
 ARTICLE XXXVII. Of the Cicil 
 Magistrates. 
 
 THE King's Majesty hath the 
 chief power in this Realm of 
 England, and other his 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 King's 
 Majesty the chief government, by 
 which Titles we understand the 
 minds of some slanderous folks to 
 be offended ; we give not to our 
 Princes the ministering either of 
 God's Word, or of the Sacraments, 
 the which things the Injunctions 
 also lately set forth by Elizabeth our 
 Queen do 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 states and degrees 
 committed to their charge by God, 
 whether they be Ecclesiastical or 
 Temporal, and restrain with the civil 
 sword the stubborn and evildoers. 
 
 The Bishop of Home hath no ju- 
 risdiction in this Realm of En<jl<in<l. 
 
 The Laws of the Realm may 
 punish Christian men with death, 
 for heinous and grievous offences.
 
 Christianis licet ex mandato Ma- 
 gistratus anna portare, et justa bella 
 administrare. 
 
 PAEAPHEASIS. Hie Articulus 
 subministrat materiam examinandi 
 qusestionem longe gravissimam. An 
 scilicet, laici sint capaces jurisdic- 
 tionis spiritualis. 
 
 Primo advertendum ex omnium 
 sententia illos 11011 esse capaces cla- 
 vium, quia tune etiam remission is 
 seu absolutionis a peccatis. 
 
 Secunclo advertendiimj jurisdic- 
 tionem spiritualem, seu potestatem 
 jurisdictionis, non esse immediate 
 ipsam potestatem clavium,immo sepa- 
 rabiles, nee actu semper conjungi, 
 vel jure divino, vel positive. 
 
 Tertio supponendum, Summum 
 Pontificem in omni sententia, secun- 
 dum absolutam potentiam suam, posse 
 jurisdictionem talem laicis concedere, 
 quia non expresse contra jus divi- 
 num, ut recte Soto 4, dist. 20, qusest. 
 1, art. 4, sic etiam Miranda in 
 Manual! qugest. 3, art. 2, et hoc non 
 solum respectu virorum, sed foemi- 
 narum. Addit tamen Miranda hoc 
 respectu f oeminarum nusquam adliuc 
 
 It is lawful for Christian men, at 
 the commandment of the Magistrate, 
 to wear weapons, and serve in the 
 wars. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This Article af- 
 fords by far the most weighty sub- 
 ject of examination ; whether, that 
 is, laics are capable of exercising 
 spiritual jurisdiction. 
 
 First, it must be observed, that by 
 consent of all they are not capable 
 of exercising the power of the keys, 
 for then they would be able to confer 
 absolution or remission of sins. 
 
 Secondly, it must be observed, 
 that spiritual jurisdiction, or the 
 power of jurisdiction, is not directly 
 the power of the keys itself ; indeed 
 that they are separable, and are not 
 always actually united, either by 
 divine or positive law. 
 
 Thirdly, it must be supposed, that 
 the Sovereign Pontiff in every 
 matter, in virtue of his absolute 
 power, can confer such jurisdiction 
 on laics, because it is not directly 
 against divine law, as is rightly ob- 
 served by Soto (4, dist. 20, qu. 1, 
 art. 4) and likewise Miranda (Ma- 
 nual, qu. 3, art. 2) ; and this not 
 only in respect of men but also of 
 women. Miranda, however, adds 
 
 H
 
 concessum, quod tamen negat D. 
 Aluin. c. 3, de Episcopis, Abbatibus 
 et Abbatissis c. 22, et citat multa 
 jura, ex quibus actu conceditur 
 Abbatissis potestas jurisdictionis, non 
 quidem excommunicandi per se, sed 
 pra3cipiendi suis subditis Sacerdo- 
 tibus, ut excommunicent rebelles et 
 contumaces moniales; et hoc valere 
 velexjurecommuni,velconsuetudine, 
 vel saltern ex privilegio, vel strictius 
 loquendo, dicendum cum Laimanno 
 lib. i. tract. 5, p. 1, cap. 3, num. 3 
 et 4, quod non habent jurisdictionem 
 spiritualem proprie, sed usuram guan- 
 dam jurisdictionis. Et hinc conferre 
 possunt beneficia, et instituere cleri- 
 cos in Ecclesiis ad Monasterium 
 suum pertinentibus, etc. 
 
 Ut sensum meum in re tam gravi 
 aperiam, dicendum putem, iiullo 
 quidem jure, ut prsetactum est, eis 
 competere potestatem seu jus spi- 
 rituale, ut loquitur Joannes de Pa- 
 rish's De Potestate Papae, c. 21, quo 
 gratia spiritualis causatur, id est, 
 potestas administrandi Sacramenta. 
 Et idem est judicium de potestate 
 quse consequitur ex priori, ut est 
 
 that this has no where yet been con- 
 ceded in respect of women ; which, 
 however, is denied by D. Aluin (c. 3, 
 De Episcopis Abbatibus et Abbatissis, 
 c. 22), who cites many decrees by 
 which the power of jurisdiction is 
 conceded to Abbesses, not indeed the 
 power of excommunication itself, but 
 the power of commanding priests 
 under their jurisdiction to excommu- 
 nicate rebellious and contumacious 
 nuns ; and that this is of force either 
 by common law, or by custom, or at 
 least by privilege ; but to speak more 
 exactly, we must say with Layman 
 (lib. 1, tract. 5, p. 1, cap. 3, num. 3 
 and 4), that they have not spiritual 
 jurisdiction properly, but a certain 
 use of jurisdiction. And by this 
 they are able to confer benefices, and 
 to institute clerks to churches be- 
 longing to their monasteries, &c. 
 
 But to shew my own opinion in 
 a matter of such gravity, I think 
 it should be said, that by no right, 
 as has been said before, are they 
 capable of spiritual power or ju- 
 risdiction (as says John of Paris, 
 De Potestate Papa, c. 21), whereby 
 spiritual grace is procured, that is to 
 say, the power of administering the 
 Sacraments. And my opinion is the
 
 inflictio poenae spiritualis, scriptura- 
 rum expositio, ministrorum Ecclesiae 
 institutio, confirmatio, vel examen, 
 et alia id genus niulta. Quodvis 
 cnim liorum de jure divino restrin- 
 gitur praecise ad homines spirituales 
 seu Deo sacros, ut olim definitum est 
 a Joan. xxii. contra Marsilium de 
 Padua, ut videre est apud Turre- 
 crem. 1. 4. Summee, sub finem. 
 
 Cseterum quoad potestatem seu jus 
 antecedens non de per se et neces- 
 sario annexum spiritualibus officiis, 
 bene potest in laicis subinde residere ; 
 sicut prsesentatio, collatio beneticio- 
 rum, punitio temporalis clericorum, 
 et alia id genus multa, ut dixi de 
 Abbatissis, prsecipue ex concessione 
 Ecclesia?, vel longa consuetudine 
 praescripta, conniventibus prselatis 
 Ecclesise. 
 
 Dixi et merito, etiam ex consue- 
 tudine, quia non solum concessio, 
 sed consuetude ipsa tribuit jurisdic- 
 tionem etiam in spiritualibus, ut 
 docet Innocent, in cap. Novit. de 
 judic. et inulti praesertim, quando 
 
 same respecting the power which 
 flows from the former, such as the 
 infliction of spiritual penalties, the 
 exposition of the Scriptures, the in- 
 stitution, confirmation, or examina- 
 tion of the ministers o"f the Church, 
 and many things of that kind. For 
 everything of this kind is by divine 
 law absolutely restricted to spiritual 
 men, or consecrated to God, as was 
 long ago defined by John xxii. against 
 Marsilius of Padua, as may be seen 
 in Turrecremata (1. 4, Summce, sub 
 finem). 
 
 But as respects the power, or an* 
 tecedent right, not of itself and ne- 
 cessarily annexed to spiritual offices, 
 this may occasionally rest with laics, 
 such as the presentation or collation 
 of benefices, the temporal punishment 
 of clerks, and many other things of 
 that kind, as I said concerning Ab- 
 besses, principally by concession of 
 the Church, or sanctioned by long 
 custom, the prelates of the Church 
 assenting to it. 
 
 And I said with good reason, 
 sanctioned by long custom, because 
 not only concession but custom itself 
 gives jurisdiction, even in spiritual 
 matters, as Innocent teaches (cap. 
 Novit. de judic.'), and many others, 
 
 *
 
 ( ioo ) 
 
 consuetudinis exercitium a tempore 
 immemoriali probatur, ut declarant 
 Juristae, de qua re vide Salgado 
 p. i. c. 1. Prselud. 3, n. 122, et 
 deinceps. 
 
 Dices hie non solum concedi Prin- 
 cipibus nostris potestatem ex con- 
 suetudine, seu concessione, sed su- 
 premam; ut ibi asseritur, quod non 
 potest eis competere in spiritualibus, 
 ut omnes Doctores tenent. 
 
 Respondeo, quod Doctores praedicti 
 asserant Papam non posse auferre 
 jurisdictionem Principum ex consue- 
 tudine vel concessione firma, valide 
 et licite introductam : sicut satis in- 
 sinuat Navar. c. 27, in Enchir. n. 
 70, agens de Gallis. Sic etiam 
 Salzedo in Scholiis ad praxim cri- 
 minalem Bernardi Diaz. c. 55, 
 Apud Gallos, qui hinc putat Bullam 
 C 03H33 non intelligi contra privilegia 
 remuneratoria, vel quae sunt firmata 
 consuetudine immemoriali, prout 
 etiam Nav. Tandem Duvallius de 
 dis. Eccles. p. 3, fol. 405, dicit, quod 
 Papa quando dat privilegimn Prin- 
 cipibus secularibus in materia juris- 
 dictionis liumano jure (id est, non 
 contra jus divinum), iiitroductce, non 
 
 especially when the exercise of the 
 custom is proved to have been from 
 time immemorial, as the Jurists say, 
 on which point see Salgado, p. 1, c. 
 1, Prcelud. 3, n. 122, &c. 
 
 You Avill say that not only is this 
 power derived from custom or from 
 concession granted to our princes, 
 but even the supreme power, as 
 is asserted in the Article, of 
 which they are not capable in spi- 
 ritual matters, as all the Doctors 
 hold. 
 
 I reply that the Doctors just men- 
 tioned assert that the Pope cannot 
 take away the jurisdiction of princes 
 derived from established custom or 
 concession, validly and lawfully in- 
 troduced : as Navar implies (Enchir. 
 n. 70, c. 27), treating of the French, 
 And so too Salzedo in his Scholia on 
 the Grim. prax. of Bernard Diaz. (c. 
 55, Apud Gallos) } who from this 
 considers that the Bull Ccence is not 
 to be understood against the remu- 
 nerative privileges, or those which 
 are confirmed by immemorial custom, 
 as Navar says too. Lastly, Duval 
 (de Disc. Eccl p. 3, fol. 405) says 
 that the Pope when he grants to 
 secular princes privileges in matters 
 of jurisdiction introduced by human
 
 potest revocare, si concessum sit per 
 modum contractus vel concordati vel 
 transitionis. Et sine dubio sufficit 
 ad intentum hujus Articuli, quod 
 ideo dicatur, suprema potestas, non 
 simpliciter, sed quia non per supe- 
 riorem auferibilis. Regibus autem 
 nostris fuisse sic concessum jus 
 norainandi et providendi de benefi- 
 ciis, testatur post alios Harpsf . sseculo 
 14, fuisse etiam aliam consuetudinem 
 immemorialem ex privilegio ortam, 
 causas clericorum cognoscendi patet 
 ex decis. Rota3, 804, ut communiter 
 citatur. Quod si dixeris non con- 
 stare de hoc privilegio, ut etiam 
 Suarez lib. 4, de immunitate Eccles. 
 c. 34, num. 12, responderent quod 
 consuetudo notoria, licet non con- 
 stiterit, est melius, quia in hoc casu 
 inagis operatur taciturn seu prae- 
 sumptum privilegium, quia supponit 
 concessionem irrevocabilem, secus si 
 constaret de privilegio, quia non 
 reciperet interpretationem, sed ob- 
 servandum erat, prout sonat, et plus 
 operatur in hoc, fama privilegii cum 
 immemoriali consuetudine, ut in 
 terminis tradit Fulvius Pacian, Cons, 
 fi. num. 124, ne propter difficultatem 
 probandi rem antiquam, pereat jus 
 partis : sic Camillus Borell. de Pre- 
 
 law, (that is, not against the divine 
 law,) cannot revoke the grant, if it 
 be made by way of contract, or of 
 concordat, or of transition. And 
 without any doubt this is sufficient 
 for the intention of this Article, be- 
 cause it is called the chief (supreme) 
 power, not, that is, in an absolute 
 sense, but because it cannot be taken 
 away by any superior. But that the 
 right of nominating and providing 
 for benefices was thus granted to our 
 kings Harpsfield (Scec. xiv.) testifies, 
 together with others ; and that there 
 was another immemorial custom 
 arising from privilege, of investi- 
 gating the causes of clerks, is clear 
 from the decision of the Itotce, 804, 
 as it is commonly quoted. But if 
 you should say that this privilege 
 was not granted by all, as Suarez 
 (lib. 4, de Immunit. Eccles. c. 34, 
 num. 12), they would reply that a 
 notorious custom, though not granted 
 by all, is better, because in this case 
 a tacit or presumable privilege has 
 more weight, because it presupposes 
 an irrevocable concession; and the 
 matter would be different were it a 
 privilege, of which all granted the 
 existence, for then it would not 
 admit of any explanation, but would
 
 ( 102 ) 
 
 stantia Regis Catholici, c. 503, n. 26 
 et 27. 
 
 Dices non solum in Articulo com- 
 pctere hanc potestatem Principibus 
 nostris ex privilegio vel consuetu- 
 tline, sed jure divino. 
 
 Respondeo, quod valde multi Doc- 
 tores de hoc consulti, tenent, quod 
 Quoad commune bonum Reipubl. 
 principes habent jurisdictionem etiam 
 in multis causis foro Ecclesiastico 
 alias per se subjiciendis. Et hoc 
 non solum de jure divino positive, sed 
 naturali. Sed rectius Dectores in 
 Bullam Coense, ncgant principibus 
 jurisdictionem in clericos et eorum 
 causas ex jure Regio, sed ntidam 
 potestatem civilem et temporalem, ob 
 protectionem et defensionem Reipub- 
 licae, justitise et pacis communis ; et 
 hoc de jure divino et naturali ipsis 
 competit, nee hie Articulus plus 
 exigit : et ratio quam tetigit Suarez 
 
 have had to be observed, according 
 to the very letter ; and in this matter 
 the tradition of a privilege with imme- 
 morial custom has more weight, as is 
 stated expressly by Fulvius Pacian 
 (Cons.fi. num. 124), lest on account 
 of the difficulty of proving an ancient 
 matter the rights of any party should 
 be lost : this is supported too by 
 Camillus Borel (de Prcestantia Regis 
 Cathol c. 503, n. 26 and 27). 
 
 You will say that, according to the 
 Article, this power belongs to our 
 princes not only by privilege or 
 custom, but by divine law. 
 
 I reply that very many Doctors, 
 being consulted on this point, hold 
 that, as far as the common good of the 
 state is concerned, princes have juris- 
 diction even in many causes other- 
 wise in themselves subject to the 
 ecclesiastical tribunal. And this by 
 divine law, not only positive but na- 
 tural. But Doctors, treating of the 
 Bull Cosncv, more rightly deny to 
 princes jurisdiction over clerics and 
 their causes by royal prerogative, 
 beyond a bare civil and temporal 
 authority, for the protection and de- 
 fence of the state of justice and of 
 the public peace ; and this by divine 
 and natural law belongs to them, nor
 
 ( 103 ) 
 
 lib. 3, de Primatu Summi Pontificis 
 c. 1, num. 4, in fine optime hanc 
 partem probat. Quia humana natura 
 non potest esse destitua remediis ad 
 suam conservationem necessariis : 
 accedit etiam Mori, in Empor. jur. 
 1, p. tit. 2, de legibus num. 20, vers. 
 Quia cum Regnum, ubi dicit, quod 
 cui conceditur regnum necessario 
 omnia censentur concessa, sine qui- 
 bus Regnum gubernari non potest : 
 Regnum vero gubernari non posset 
 nisi Principes hoc potestate poteren- 
 tur, etiam in clericos, etc., ergo. Sic 
 illi. 
 
 In hunc igitur finem, et in hoc 
 sensu, magna sine dubio est potestas 
 Regum jure divino et natural! se- 
 cundum illos, in personas et causas 
 Ecclesiasticas in multis casibus per 
 accidens et indirecte, ut loquuntur 
 Doctores ; secundum partem directi- 
 vam, seu imperativam ; verbi gratia 1 , 
 possunt civiliter mandare Clericis 
 etiam Episcopis, ut spiritualia sua ad 
 pacem Reipublicse disponant, ut 
 dyscolos ex officiis amoveant, iinmo 
 
 does this Article require more ; and 
 the line of argument which Suarez 
 has used (lib. 3, de Summo Ponti. c. 
 1, num. 4) towards the end most 
 fully proves this portion, because 
 human nature cannot be destitute of 
 remedies necessary for its own pre- 
 servation. To this may be added 
 the authority of Mori (in Empor. 
 jur. 1, p. tit. 2, de Leyibus, num. 20, 
 vers. Quia cum Regnum\ where he 
 says that to whom a kingdom is 
 given of necessity are supposed to 
 be given all those things without 
 which the kingdom could not be 
 governed. But the kingdom could 
 not be governed unless princes had 
 this power even over clerks, &c. 
 Whence it follows, &c. Such are 
 their arguments. 
 
 For this end, therefore, and in this 
 sense, without doubt the kingly 
 power is great both by divine and 
 natural law, according to them, over 
 ecclesiastical persons and causes in 
 many cases, as the Doctors say, ac- 
 cidentally and indirectly, as respects 
 the directing or commanding part ; 
 for instance, they can in a civil 
 manner order clerks, who are even 
 Bishops, to dispose their spiritual 
 matters so as to conduce to the
 
 ( 104 ) 
 
 innocentes Clericos ab injustis op- 
 pressionibus judicium. Ecclesiasti- 
 corum authoritate Regia defendere 
 possunt. Et alia hujusmodi. Totum 
 hoc confirmatur a Parsonic in Ri- 
 chardo II., Henrico IV., et Edwardo 
 IV. et miratur, si aliquis negaret 
 Regibus in suis regnis. Hie vide 
 modestiam Navarri in Manuali, cap. 
 27, num. 69, ubi non dubitat de hoc 
 dicto, modo sint verse oppressiones 
 et violentise. Vide etiam nu. 27. 
 
 Nee quoad substantiam rei multam 
 discrepat Cajetanus, ubi inferius, nee 
 Victor De Potestate Ecclesiastica. 
 Et ratio convincit : nam clerici omnes, 
 non obstante clericatu, sunt cives 
 Reipublica3 et subditi Regis ratione 
 domicilii, et consequenter ad leges 
 Principum quatenus pertinent ad 
 communem vivendi in Regno socie- 
 tatem, et ad justitiam exequendam 
 quse maxime pacem et tranquillitatem 
 fovet, non possunt non astringi, nee 
 ab illorum obedientia, vel in personis, 
 vel causis prgedictis, modo explicato 
 eximi possunt, quantum ad pacem 
 
 peace of the state, and may remove 
 the stubborn from their offices ; 
 moreover, by the kingly power they 
 can protect innocent clerks from the 
 unjust oppression of the ecclesias- 
 tical judges, and other matters of 
 this kind. All this is confirmed 
 by Parsons as respects Richard II., 
 Henry IV., and Edward IV., and 
 he expresses his surprise that any 
 one should deny this power to kings 
 within their realms. Remark here 
 the moderation of Navar (Manual, 
 cap. 27, num. 69), where he ex- 
 presses no doubt as to this opinion, 
 if only the oppression and violence 
 be undoubted. See too num. 27. 
 
 Nor as respects the substance of 
 the matter does Cajetan disagree with 
 this (see below} nor Victor (De Potes- 
 tate Ecclesiastica). And reason itself 
 proves the same, for all clerks, not- 
 withstanding their orders, are citizens 
 of the state, and subjects of the king 
 by reason of their domicile ; and con- 
 sequently they cannot escape being 
 bound by the laws of princes (so far 
 as they refer to the public manner 
 of living in the kingdom), and to the 
 acting with that justice which chiefly 
 preserves peace and tranquillity ; nor 
 can they be exempted from the obe-
 
 ( 105 ) 
 
 Reipublicao necessarium est : nee 
 
 putem ullum Doctorem Cathol. liuic 
 
 refragari. Uncle Cajet. elicit Apol. cle 
 
 potestate Papae cap. 27, quod Prin- 
 
 cipibus competat ilia tyrannidi re- 
 
 sistendi potestas, quam jure naturali 
 
 et gentium habent, etiam in rebus 
 
 Ecclesiasticis. Et in hoc sensu ubivis 
 
 terrarum Reges Christianissimi et 
 
 Catholici hodie factitant; ut fusis- 
 
 sime ostendere possum ; nee plus hie 
 
 asseritur. Pra3sertim si attendamus 
 
 ad expositiones eorum in hunc Arti- 
 
 culum ; nullam utique jurisdictionem 
 
 spiritualem Regibus nostris conce- 
 
 dunt, sed gubernium civile et tem- 
 
 porale indirecte et per accidens ob 
 
 pacem Reipubl. in personas et causas 
 
 prsedictas Ecclesiasticas extensum. 
 
 Sic D. Raynoldus licet Puritanus, D. 
 
 Montacutius contra Heigham. et alii 
 
 eorum doctissimi, quibuscum de 
 
 hoc egi. Gavisus sum etiam valde de 
 
 illo quod his diebus factum est Can- 
 
 tabrigiae, in Comitiis pro actu doc- 
 
 torali, ab summo Pontifici, ut Maximo 
 
 Patri (sic enim eum appellitabant), 
 
 designata est cura spiritualium, Regi 
 
 temporalium, licet sub finem subji- 
 
 ciebatur, Regum esse omnes regere. 
 
 Quod intelligi debet civiliter, non 
 
 spiritualiter, modo a nobis explicato. 
 
 dience due to them either in their 
 persons, or in the causes above- 
 mentioned in the manner which has 
 been explained, as far as is necessary 
 for the peace of the state ; nor do I 
 think that any Catholic Doctor is 
 opposed to this opinion. Cajetan 
 says (Apol. de Potest. Papce, cap. 27) 
 that "there pertains to princes that 
 power of resisting tyranny which 
 they have by natural law and the 
 law of nations, even in ecclesiastical 
 matters." And in this sense the 
 Most Christian and Catholic kings 
 are accustomed to act all over the 
 world, as I could show at very great 
 length, and no more is asserted by 
 this Article. But especially if we 
 consider the explanations of An- 
 glicans on this Article, we shall see 
 that they grant no spiritual jurisdic- 
 tion whatever to our kings, but the 
 civil and temporal government, indi- 
 rectly and accidentally, for the peace 
 of the state, extended over the above- 
 mentioned ecclesiastical persons and 
 causes. So says Dr. Reynolds, though 
 a Puritan, Dr. Montagu against 
 Heigham, and others of their most 
 learned men with whom I have dis- 
 coursed on this point. I was also 
 extremely delighted at what was
 
 ( 106 ) 
 
 Tandem ut summatim dicam, pu- 
 tem abunde sufficere huic Articulo, 
 quod liodie a Gallis et Parliamcnto 
 Parisiensi salva communione Eccle- 
 siaa usurpatur. 
 
 Non ago partes eorum qui summa 
 violentia trahi volunt hunc Arti- 
 culum in defensionem jurisdictionis 
 pura3 spiritualis in Regibus, quod 
 certissime haereticum est. 
 
 Haec liberius dixi, quia ut optime 
 Cano 1. 5, qu. 5 . Nunc illud 
 breviter : Qui Summi Pontificis omne 
 de re quacuinque, judicium temere 
 ac sine delectu defendant, cos scdis 
 ApostoliccB autJioritatem labefactare, 
 nonfovere, nonfirmare. Quid enim 
 
 done lately at Cambridge, in the 
 exercises for the Doctor's degree, 
 where the care of spiritual matters 
 was assigned to the Sovereign Pontiff 
 as the Chief Fattier (for so they 
 repeatedly called him), the care of 
 temporals to the king, though at the 
 end there was added that it was the 
 office of kings to rule all persons, 
 which ought to be understood civilly, 
 not spiritually, in the manner ex- 
 plained by us. 
 
 Lastly, to sum all up, I think that 
 the practice of the French and the 
 Parliament of Paris at the present 
 day, without prejudice to the com- 
 munion of the Church, is fully 
 enough to satisfy the meaning of 
 this Article. 
 
 I will not act the part of those 
 who, with the greatest violence, wish 
 this Article to be forced into the 
 defence of a purely spiritual juris- 
 diction in kings, which is certainly 
 heretical. 
 
 I have said these things with less 
 hesitation, because of what Canus 
 has so well said (1. 5, qu. 5, Nunc 
 illud breviter} : " They who rashly 
 and without discrimination defend 
 every decision on eveiy matter of 
 the Sovereign Pontiff, undermine
 
 ( 107 ) 
 
 tandem adversum hcereticos dispu- 
 tando ille prqficiet, quern viderint 
 non judicio sed affectu patrocinium 
 authoritatis Pontificice suscipere, nee 
 id agere, ut disputationis suce vi, 
 lucem ac veritatem eliciat, sed ut se 
 ad alterius sensum voluntatemque 
 convertat ? non eget Petrus mendacio 
 nostro, nostra adulatione non eget. 
 Hgec ille. Ego ingenue dico, liben- 
 tissime, ne dicam avidissime, ob jus- 
 tarn defensionem Sedis Apostolicse 
 (divina gratia assistente) mortem 
 snbirem : non enim animam meam 
 me 2^'ctlosiorem facio. Nee tamen 
 quod justum est Principibus dene- 
 gandiun. Eousque solum processi. 
 
 Paragraphus sequens majori indi- 
 get glossa. 
 
 Forte tangit illam pervetustam 
 quasstionem, An Auglia sit feuda- 
 toria Papa?. Joannes, Hex Anglise, 
 ut testantur Mattliseus Paris et 
 Matthajus Westmonast. de rcglone 
 libera per chartam lugubrem ancil- 
 
 the authority of the Apostolic See 
 rather than strengthen or confirm it. 
 For what possible end will he ac- 
 complish in disputing with heretics, 
 whom they shall discover to take 
 shelter under the authority of the 
 Pontiff not from deliberation but 
 from fancy, and to endeavour not by 
 means of his arguments to elicit the 
 truth, but to accommodate himself 
 to the opinions and wishes of his 
 opponent? Peter does not require 
 our subterfuges, nor our adulation." 
 Such are his words. I will say 
 openly, that most willingly, not to say 
 with the greatest eagerness (by the 
 assistance of God's grace), would I 
 undergo death in the just defence of 
 the Apostolic See ; for I do not es- 
 teem my life of more value than 
 myself; but at the same time we 
 must not deny that which is justly 
 due to princes. And so far only have 
 I gone. 
 
 The next paragraph requires a 
 wider explanation. 
 
 Perhaps it touches upon that very 
 ancient question, whether England 
 be a fief of the Pope. John, King 
 of England, as is testified by Mat- 
 thew Paris and Matthew of West- 
 minster, "by a writing made of a
 
 ( 108 ) 
 
 lam fecit et feudatanam Summo Pon- 
 tifici. Henricus tamen ejus filius in 
 Concil. Lugd. huic reclamavit, et 
 praecipue Episcopus Cant, ut testatur 
 Walsing. ad annum 1245, et postea 
 Cancellarius Angliae Episcopus Eli- 
 ensis in publicis Kegni Comitiis, 
 consentientibus tribus Ordinibus 
 Patriae, reclamavit, non obstante 
 privata sponsione Joannis, ut testatur 
 Harps, ad saec. 14, c. 5, immo et 
 armis se a temporali jurisdictione 
 Papas defensuros protestabantur, sed 
 quia hie inanis titulus S. Pontif. (ut 
 eum reputabat olim illust. Tlio. 
 Morus, et hodie omnes Catholici), 
 saepius obtrudebatur ut aliqui di- 
 cunt, prsesertim in principio Eliza- 
 beth83, a Paulo 4, quaa occupabat 
 regnum, non requisite consensu 
 Papae, huic forte hie Articulus con- 
 ditus est. Multum enim inter fortu- 
 nam privatam Principle, et Regale 
 cidmen interest, ut Zeno 1. ult. cap. 
 de quaclr. praescript. 
 
 free country a pitiable slave and 
 vassal of the Sovereign Pontiff." His 
 son Henry, however, at the Council 
 of Lyons, protested against this, and 
 so especially did the Bishop of Can- 
 terbury, as is testified by Walsing- 
 ham, ad ann. 1245 ; and subse- 
 quently the Bishop of Ely, Chan- 
 cellor of England, in the public 
 Council of the kingdom, with the 
 agreement of the three Estates of 
 the Realm,* protested against it, not- 
 withstanding the private agreement 
 of John, as is narrated by Harps- 
 field (ad Saec. 14, c. 5) ; and further, 
 they declared that they would de- 
 fend themselves by arms against the 
 temporal jurisdiction of the Pope; 
 and because this empty title of the 
 Sovereign Pontiff (as it was esteemed 
 by Sir Thomas More long since, and 
 is now by all Catholics), was often 
 put forward, as some say, particu- 
 larly by Paul IV., at the commence- 
 ment of the reign of Elizabeth, who 
 took possession of the throne without 
 obtaining the consent of the Pope, 
 therefore perhaps this Article was 
 
 '* [The three Estates of the Realm, it 
 may be remarked, were the Clergy, the 
 Lords, and the Commons ; not, as is com- 
 
 monly supposed at the present day, King, 
 Lords, and Commons.]
 
 ( 109 ) 
 
 Vel si haec glossa minus placeat, 
 tune potest dici, adhuc lisec verba 
 multiplicem ferre sensum; unus,quod 
 omnimoda negatur subjectio et com- 
 munio cum Sede Apostolica, quod 
 est plane derelinquere Augustinum, 
 Ambrosium, Hieronymum, etiam 
 Cypr. Tertul. Irenaeum et alios Ec- 
 clesige Christi splendores, qui ubique 
 testantur se cum hac Sancta Sede 
 communionem habuisse et subjec- 
 tionem agnovisse. 
 
 De Ambrosio patet in cap. 3, 1 
 ad Tim. ubi vocat Damasum Rec- 
 torem totius Ecclesiae, ergo et ipsius. 
 
 De Hieron. in Epist. ad Damasum, 
 Cathedra Petri communione conso- 
 cior. Quid clarius? pulchra ibi 
 habet ad eundem sensum. 
 
 De August, ep. 157, ad Optatum, 
 fatetur se cum reliquis Episcopis ex 
 Zosimi Papas mandate Csesariam 
 
 compiled. "For there is a great 
 difference between the private estate 
 of princes and the summit of the 
 kingly power." Zeno, 1. ult. cap. 
 de quad. Prescript. 
 
 Or, if this explanation does not 
 seem satisfactory, it may be said, 
 that these words are capable of va- 
 rious meanings; one, that every 
 kind of subjection and communion 
 with the Apostolic See is denied, 
 which is plainly to forsake Augus- 
 tine, Ambrose, Jerome, together 
 with Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, 
 and other bright lights of the Church 
 of Christ, who everywhere testify 
 that they had Communion with this 
 Holy See, and acknowledged their 
 subjection to it. 
 
 Of St. Ambrose this is plain, on 
 1 Tim. 3, where he calls Damasus 
 "Euler" of the w r hole Church, and 
 therefore of himself. 
 
 Of St. Jerome, in his Epistle to 
 Dajnasus : " I am associated in the 
 communion of the Chair of Peter." 
 What can be clearer? The same 
 idea is beautifully expressed in those 
 words. 
 
 Of St. Augustine (in Ep. 157, Ad 
 Optatum}) he states that he with other 
 bishops had come to Caesarea at the
 
 venisse, etc. Altius potuissem con- 
 scendere et Cyprianum interpellare, 
 qui Epist. 52, dicit communicare 
 cum Pontifice Romano idem esse 
 ac communicare cum Ecclesia Catho- 
 lica. 
 
 Tertul. 1. prescript, c. 36, Hales 
 Romam, unde nobis quoqne autho- 
 ritas est. Ecce se subdidi authoritati 
 Romani Pontificis testatur. 
 
 Irenaeus utroque antiquior, 1. 3, 
 c. 3. Ad lianc Ecclesiam, propter 
 potent'wrem principalitatem, neccsse 
 est omnem convenire Ecclesiam. Res 
 notoria est, omnes quotquot sancti 
 fuerunt cum hac Sancta Sede com- 
 munionem habuisse. 
 
 Alms sensus potest esse, quod in- 
 sinuetur substractio ab obedientia, 
 non Sedis Apostolicse, seu authoritatis 
 illi sedi annerae, quantum est ad ac- 
 tum primum seu signatum, sed solum 
 quantum ad actum exercitum (liceat 
 parum extendere hos terminos Scho- 
 larum) id est, in quantum exercetur 
 a tali persona, cui pro tempore com- 
 missa est Sedes ilia* 
 
 command of Pope Zosimus, &c. 
 I could go yet higher and introduce 
 St. Cyprian, who (Ep. 52) says that 
 to communicate with the Roman 
 Pontiff is the same thing as to com- 
 municate with the Catholic Church. 
 
 Tertullian (de Prescript, c. 36) : 
 " You have Rome, whence too 
 authority comes to us." He plainly 
 testifies that he is subject to the 
 authority of the Roman Pontiff. 
 
 St. Irenseus, who is more ancient 
 than either of the others (lib. 3, cap. 
 3) : " With this Church, because of 
 its greater authority, it is necessary 
 that every Church should agree." 
 It is notorious that all the Saints 
 who have ever existed have been in 
 Communion with this Holy See, 
 
 There may be another meaning, 
 that there is implied a departure 
 from the obedience not of the 
 Apostolic See, or of the authority 
 annexed to that See as respects the 
 act primarily, but only as respects 
 the act when exercised (we may be 
 allowed slightly to extend the mean- 
 ing of these terms of the Schools), 
 that is, as respects the exercise of 
 that authority by such a person, to 
 whom for a time that See is en- 
 trusted.
 
 ( 111 ) 
 
 Primus sensus est qusestio juris, 
 an sell. Sedi illi competat jurisdictio, 
 seu dicendi jus in totam Ecclesiam, 
 saltern secundum fonnam a Canoni- 
 bus praescriptam (quod addo propter 
 aliquos recentiores), et vere hoc 
 Sanctas Sedi negare, est plane contra 
 sensum utriusque Ecclesise, nee de 
 hoc uspiam fuit disceptatio in ullo 
 Concilio, si recte ponderetur ; Catho- 
 lici etiam quotquot sunt vel fuerunt, 
 huic subscripserunt ; et satis evin- 
 citur ex ipso Nilo in fine, licet maxi- 
 mus sit adversarius Sedis Apostolicae. 
 Nee hoc dicit Articulus, 
 
 Secundus sensus videtur reduci 
 posse ad duas qusestiones, unam 
 etiam juris, alteram mixtam, scilicet 
 tarn juris, quam facti. Prima an 
 hie et nunc liceat Regno alicui se 
 subtrahere ab obedientia alicujus 
 Pontificis ad tempus : de qua re scio 
 quid resolvat Gerson, quaestione : 
 Quomodo et an liceat in causis field 
 a sitmmo Pontifice appcllare, ct cjus 
 judidiim dcdinare ? (cui multum in- 
 
 The first meaning is a question of 
 right, whether, that is, to that See 
 belongs jurisdiction, or the power of 
 promulgating law through the whole 
 Church, at least according to the 
 form prescribed by the Canons; 
 (this I add in consequence of some 
 modern writers), and in truth to 
 deny this to the Holy See is plainly 
 contrary to the opinion of both the 
 Eastern and Western Churches, nor 
 was there ever any discussion re- 
 specting this point in any Council, 
 if it be rightly considered. All Ca- 
 tholics too both of the present and 
 past time, have agreed upon this, 
 and it is clearly proved from Nilus 
 towards the latter part, though he is 
 a chief opponent of the Apostolic 
 See. Nor does the Article make 
 the above statement. 
 
 The second interpretation seems 
 capable of being reduced to two 
 questions, one likewise of right and 
 one mixed, that is, both of right and 
 of fact. Firstly, whether at a cer- 
 tain point it is lawful for any king- 
 dom to withdraw itself from the 
 obedience of any Pontiff for a time : 
 on which point I know Gerson' s re- 
 solution, in the question, " How and 
 whether it be lawful in causes per-
 
 nituntur nostrates). Verba ejus 
 sunt . Sequeretur sexto ; Hoc ctiam 
 practicatum est per quoscumque Eeges 
 et Principes qui se subtraxerunt db 
 obedientia illorum, quos isti judica- 
 bant esse Summos Pontifices, qua 
 tamen subtractiones approbates sunt 
 per sacrum Constantiense Condi, 
 qii&dam expresse, queeda?n implicite 
 vel cequivalenter. Et sic resolutum 
 dicunt in conventu quodum Episco- 
 porum Turonensi in Gallia, quod 
 etiam vidi in hac forma : Conclusum 
 est per Concilium, Principem posse 
 ab obedientia Papa se subducere ac 
 subtrahere (niniirum ob causas gra- 
 vissimas ibi assignatas) non tamen 
 in totum et indistincte, sed pro 
 tuitione tantum ac defensione jurium 
 suorum temporalium. Quam eorum 
 sententiam, non est ineum con- 
 demnare, dum Ecclesia tolerat. 
 
 Altera est, an f uerint causal suffi- 
 cientes in hoc Regno ? Factum vi- 
 demus, sed novimus illud Hieronynii : 
 
 taining to the faith to appeal from 
 the Sovereign Pontiff, and to refuse 
 his decision ?" (On which Angli- 
 cans rely much.) His words are 
 Sequeretur sexto : " This, too, has 
 been often done by certain kings and 
 princes who have withdrawn them- 
 selves from the obedience of those 
 whom they believed to be Sovereign 
 Pontiffs, which withdrawals never- 
 theless were approved by the holy 
 Council of Constance, some ex- 
 pressly, some implicitly, or in an 
 equivalent manner." And they say 
 that this matter was a resolution at a 
 certain meeting of Bishops at Tours, 
 in France, which I too have seen to 
 the following purport : " It has been 
 decided by the Council, that a prince 
 can withdraw himself and depart 
 from the obedience of the Pope" 
 (namely, for certain very weighty 
 causes there assigned), " not how- 
 ever wholly and absolutely, but 
 only for the protection and defence 
 of his temporal rights." Which 
 opinion of theirs it is not for me 
 to condemn while the Church tole- 
 rates it. 
 
 The second question is, were there 
 sufficient causes in this kingdom? 
 We have seen that it is done, but
 
 Non quceritur anfactum, seel an lene 
 factum fuerit. 
 
 Hoc tamen dato, licet h nullo 
 Catholico concesso: adhuc quaGren- 
 dum esset, An saltern in modo non 
 excesserint ? multa enim cle jure 
 licita sunt, cum moderamine incul- 
 patsD tutelae, ut loquuntur Canones, 
 qua3 alias ex intemperantia actionis 
 et defensionis culpas gravissimas 
 subinde non evadunt. 
 
 Utraque qugestio sine dubio gra- 
 vissima est, et maximam a nostratibus 
 jneretur discussionem. 
 
 Quod si causa sufficiens non fuerit, 
 vel terminos justse subtractionis ex- 
 cesserint, quanta pericula in tarn 
 diuturno schismate ! huic utique 
 omnia quantacunque mala sunt, ori- 
 ginaliter ebullierunt. Catholici ve- 
 riori et tutiori parti adharere vo- 
 lentes, tarn insufficientiam causa?, 
 quam moderaminis excessum agno- 
 verunt ; ponderant utique gravissi- 
 mum illud Augustini, prceciclendce 
 unitatis nulla est justa necessitas, 1. 
 2, contra ep. Par. 
 
 we know that saying of St. Jerome : 
 "The question is not whether the 
 thing be done, but whether it be well 
 done." 
 
 But this being granted, though 
 allowed by no Catholic, we should 
 still have to inquire whether they 
 have not gone too far at least in 
 their manner, for many things are 
 lawful, "cum moderamine inculpates 
 tutelce" as the Canons say, which 
 otherwise by intemperance in carry- 
 ing on or defending them do not 
 escape being great faults. 
 
 Without doubt each question is 
 most weighty, and deserves especial 
 consideration at the hands of An- 
 glicans. 
 
 But if there were not a sufficient 
 cause, or if they exceeded the bounds 
 of a legitimate withdrawal, what 
 peril is there in so long a schism ! 
 Hence, indeed, all the evils, how 
 great soever they are, originally 
 burst forth. Catholics, wishing to 
 cleave to the truer and safer part, 
 have recognised both the insuffi- 
 ciency of the cause, and the excess 
 beyond due moderation, besides 
 which they ponder on that most 
 solemn saying of St. Augustine 
 (1. 2, Cent. ep. Par.): "No ne-
 
 Utinam denuo, authoritate pub- 
 lica res pro dignitate (Puritanis non 
 intermixtis) ex affectu readunationis 
 perpenderetur, et ad hoc singuli 
 evoluerent Augustinum contra Do- 
 natum. Scio illos hoc abhorrere de 
 quibus dicet Cassander (licet haud 
 satis affectus Romanse Ecclesiae) de 
 officio pii viri : Plerique ex eis, qui 
 sibi db Evangelic nomen sumpserunt, 
 earn partem qua vetus Catholicorum 
 et Romance Ecclesice nomen retinet, 
 prorsus aspernantur, omnemque ejus 
 communionem defug'mnt, nee ut mem- 
 bra ejusdem corporis amore et mise- 
 ricordia prosequuntur (quod nos a 
 Puritanis hie experimur) sed ut Sa- 
 tance et Antichristi corpus abomi- 
 nantur. Scio id equidem et doleo, et 
 qui ejtismodi sunt quomodo a schis- 
 matis (rectius dixisset, hsereseos) 
 nota eximi possunt, non video. 
 
 Csetera in articulo sunt indubitata. 
 
 cessity can justify the breach of 
 unity." 
 
 Lastly, would that by public au- 
 thority the matter as its greatness 
 deserves (Puritans being passed 
 over), were weighed with a desire 
 of reunion. And that to this end 
 every one would study St. Augustine 
 against the Donatists. I know that 
 they hate this, of whom Cassander 
 (though not sufficiently friendly to 
 the Roman Church) says, de officio 
 pii viri, "Most of those who 
 have assumed the name Evangelical, 
 wholly despise that portion which 
 retains the ancient name of Ca- 
 tholics and of the Roman Church, 
 and avoid all communion with it, 
 nor do they esteem them with love 
 and gentleness as members of the 
 same body," (which is what we ex- 
 perience here at the hands of the 
 Puritans,) " but eschew them as the 
 body of Satan and of Antichrist. I 
 know that indeed, and grieve over 
 it, nor do I see how persons of that 
 class can be exempted from the 
 charge of schism." (He should more 
 rightly have said heresy.) 
 
 The other statements in the Ar- 
 ticle are irrefragable.
 
 ARTICULUS XXXVIII. De illi- 
 cita bonorum commnnicatione. 
 
 T71ACULTATES et bona Chris- 
 J- tianorum non sunt communia 
 quoad jus et possessionem (ut quidem 
 Anabaptistae falso jactant) ; debet 
 tamen quisque de his quge possidet 
 pro facultatam ration e pauperibus 
 eleemosynas benigne distribuere. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Catholicus est et 
 pius. 
 
 ARTICLE XXX VIH. Of Christian 
 men's Goods, which are not common. 
 
 THE Riches and Goods of Chris- 
 tians are not common, as touch- 
 ing the right, title, and possession 
 of the same, as certain Anabaptists 
 do falsely boast. Notwithstanding, 
 every man ought, of such things as 
 he possesseth, liberally to give alms 
 to the poor, according to his ability. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This is Catholic 
 and pious. 
 
 ARTICULUS XXXIX. De jureju- 
 rando. 
 
 /^UEMAMODUM juramentum 
 w vanum et temerarium a Domino 
 nostro Jesu Christo et Apostolo ejus 
 Jacobo, Christianis hominibus inter- 
 dictum esse fatemur : ita Christiano- 
 rum Religionem minime prohibere 
 censemus, quin jubente Magistrate 
 in causa Fidei et Charitatis jurare 
 liceat, modo id fiat juxta Prophetae 
 doctrinam, in justitia, in judicio et 
 veritate. 
 
 PARAPHRASIS. Catholicus est, in 
 Scripturis fundatus, et praxi totius 
 Ecclesiae stabilitus. 
 
 ARTICLE XXXIX. 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 that a man may swear when the 
 Magistrate requireth, in a cause of 
 faith and charity, so it be done ac- 
 cording to the Prophet's teaching, in 
 justice, judgment, and truth. 
 
 EXPLANATION. This is Catholic, 
 founded on Scripture, and esta- 
 blished by the practice of the whole 
 Church. 
 
 i2
 
 ( 116 ) 
 
 Insudavi, ut vides, pie Lector, 
 reconciliare Articulos Confessionis 
 Anglicae, determinationibus Ecclesise 
 [Rom.] Catholicse ; non Ecclesiam 
 ipsis, ex qua collapsi sunt ; seel ipsos 
 Ecclesise, in qua (Dei opitulante gra- 
 tia) salvandi sunt, reducendos censui. 
 Corticem verborum subinde censura 
 graviori dignum censebis, sensum 
 vero latitantem, quern elicui, non 
 adeo veritati dissonum, nisi alio de- 
 torquere malint, recti judicabis. His 
 tamen verborum novitatibus, Chris- 
 tum lacerum inspexi, tunicam incon- 
 sutilem, dissutam, dissectam, reperi ; 
 quis non condoleret? quis non re- 
 dintegrationem suaderet ? omnibus 
 modis, si posset, persuaderet? hie 
 unicus scopus meus. Ad hoc veni 
 ut vides, non in sublimitate sermonis 
 (volebam enim mentem,* non dictio- 
 nem componere ; rationem, non ora- 
 tionem dirigere) non asperitate ora~ 
 tionis (absinthia enim melle illiniun- 
 tur, ut pellant morbos) seel pietate 
 conciliationis (charitatis scilicet vis- 
 ceribus, non fictis litibus veritas pro- 
 pugnatur) palcestram hanc Thcolo- 
 gicam in Domino fretus conscendi. 
 
 I have laboured, as you see, pious 
 Reader, to reconcile the Articles of 
 the Anglican Confession with the 
 decrees of the R. Catholic Church. I 
 thought that men ought to be brought 
 back to the Church in which (by aid 
 of the grace of God) they must be 
 saved, not the Church whence they 
 have fallen off to them. You will 
 esteem the bare words sometimes de- 
 serving of a severe censure, but the 
 hidden sense, which I have drawn 
 out, you will rightly esteem not very 
 dissonant from the truth, except when 
 men choose to twist it another way. 
 But in these new-fangled expres- 
 sions I beheld Christ divided ; I saw 
 His seamless robe unwoven torn 
 asunder. Who would not mourn at 
 such a sight? Who would not ad- 
 vise Re-union ? Who would not per- 
 suade to it by eveiy means which he 
 could? And this was my only ob- 
 ject. To this work I came, as you 
 see, not in loftiness of speech (for I 
 was more anxious to compose my 
 mind than my sentences to reason 
 than to show eloquence), not in 
 sharpness of speech (for wormwood 
 is disguised in honey that disease 
 may be cured), but in the anxious
 
 Omnia Ecclesite et ejus sub Ghristo 
 capiti qua debeo reverentia submitto, 
 et eo plus, quo dicit Gerson Consid. 
 2, de Protestatione circa materiam 
 Fidei: Nuttum esse rcl fidssc de 
 errore notatum qni sic protcstarctur 
 (aut quod idem est) Ecclesia? sub- 
 niitteret : ultro obtestor Demu et 
 sanctos ejus, ine in hac qualicum- 
 que opella nostra, animarum salutem 
 per fidei redintegrationem, intendere. 
 Quod Deus per viscera Domini Nos- 
 tri Jesu Christi, ad intercessionem 
 omnium Beatorum opportune efficiat ; 
 et serenissimum Eegem nostrum, 
 pro omnium Catholiconun rotis, ad 
 utramque felicitatem perducat. 
 
 Si forte inter sciibendum subinde 
 falsre irrepserint citationes, non mi- 
 random : in multis utique ob tem- 
 poris et loci tenuem commoditatem, 
 non ipsos Authores, quos ad manus 
 non habui, sed exscripta mea, quse 
 
 wish for reconciliation (for the truth 
 is defended by bowels of charity, not 
 by stirring up quarrels) ; relying on 
 the Lord, I approached this task of 
 Theology. 
 
 I submit everything, with that 
 respect which I ought, to the 
 Church, and her head under Christ, 
 and that the more for the reason, 
 which Gerson mentions (Consid. 2, 
 de Protestat. circa mater, fidei) : 
 " No one is or has been charged with 
 error who was willing to make this 
 protestation :" or (which is the same 
 thing) would submit to the Church. 
 And I call God and His Saints to 
 witness, that I intended hi this work 
 of mine to effect the salvation of 
 souls by the restoration of faith. 
 Which may God, through the mercy 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ, grant in 
 His good time to the intercession of 
 all the Blessed, and bring our most 
 gracious King (according to the 
 wishes of all Catholics) to both those 
 blessings. 
 
 It must not be a matter of sur- 
 prise if some false quotations should 
 have crept into this work, since in 
 many cases, from the imperfect con- 
 venience either of time or place, I 
 did not consult the authors them-
 
 ob corruptionem characterem ali- 
 quando vix legere licuit, consului. 
 Huic etiam accedit, me amanuensis 
 subsidio, nempe ut littera praelo ac- 
 commodatior fieret, semper usum, 
 quem ob ignorantiam, errores etiam 
 graviores exiliisse, non raro adverti. 
 De praelo vero quid non timendum 
 ubi ob loci distant! am, nee Authori, 
 ut correction! impressionis libere in- 
 tendat, fas est ? Sancte tamen dico, 
 me nunquam ut a partibus nostris 
 stet ullum authorem pervertisse, vel 
 detruncasse, pro veritate enim non 
 nisi veritate certandum. 
 
 selves, whom I had not at hand, but 
 my own extracts, which from the 
 great illegibility of the writing I 
 sometimes could hardly read. Be- 
 sides this, in order that the manu- 
 script might be more fit for the 
 press, I made use of a writer, from 
 whose ignorance I have perceived 
 that sometimes even grave mistakes 
 have crept in. But what must not 
 be feared for the printing, when on 
 account of distance the Author has 
 been unable to attend to the correc- 
 tion as much as was required? I 
 will say, however, with a good con- 
 science, that I have nowhere per- 
 verted or mutilated any author that 
 he might be on my side, for in 
 striving for the truth we ought not to 
 strive except ivitli truth. 
 
 LONIOH : PSISTED AT THE REGENT PKE8S, 55, KIKO STREET, REGENT STREET,
 
 The following Works, representing the Ee-union 
 School, and bearing on the Be-union Move- 
 ment in England and elsewhere, can be 
 ordered of the Publisher, 
 
 MR. J. T. HAYES, 
 
 LYALL PLACE, EATON SQUARE, LONDON, S.W. 
 
 I. 
 Publishing, in Nos., once in Two Months, price 23. ; by Post 2s. 2d. 
 
 THE UNION REVIEW. 
 
 A MAGAZINE OF CATHOLIC LITEEATUEE AND AET. 
 
 " Marked by considerable ability. The article on ' Re-union ' is very ably written." 
 Guardian. 
 
 " The organ of the Re-unionist school in the Anglican Church, and one which is distinguished 
 for brilliancy, depth, and theological learning." Levant Herald. 
 
 " In length and ability the articles in this Magazine will rival those in the more ambitious 
 and expensive quarterlies." Churchman. 
 
 " This most interesting periodical." Church Review. 
 
 " The force and brilliancy of its political articles (always lively reading) are undoubtedly 
 marked features in this clever serial. British Review. 
 
 " The ' Literary Notices ' strack us as remarkably well done It opens with an 
 
 article of very considerable ability." John Bull. 
 
 "The ' Union Review ' possesses in a high degree all these interesting features. A dis- 
 tinguished literary and theological authority." Jersey Times. 
 
 " A most interesting number It fills up a vacant space in religious literature 
 
 well and successfully." Oxford Journal. 
 
 " The ' Coming Contest at Oxford ' is one of those brilliant political articles for which this 
 Magazine is rapidly gaining a character." Church Times. 
 
 V A few Copies of Vols. I. and II. are still to be had, 13s. 6d. each. Those who are desirous of securing 
 complete sets should apply at once to the Publisher. Vol. III., handsomely bound in cloth, will be 
 ready in November, 1865.
 
 II. 
 
 Price Is. ; by Post Is. Id. 
 
 THE UNION REVIEW ALMANACK. 
 
 AN ECCLESIASTICAL KALENDAR FOR THE YEAR OF GRACE 1866. 
 
 This Almanack, in addition to the usual contents of such a publication, contains full 
 directions for the Celebration of Divine Service, according to the Use of the Church of 
 England, rendering it a perfect vade mecum for the Clergy, while it will be found equally 
 valuable to Sacristans, Cantors, Parish Clerks, Servers, and others assisting in the Service of 
 the Sanctuary. 
 
 <JKITIQUES ON THE FORMER ISSUE. 
 
 ' This is a very valuable addition to our Ecclesiastical almanacks." Church Review. 
 
 ' We recommend this Kalendar for its Notitia Liturgica." Church Times. 
 
 ' The most complete Church of England Calendar issued, and very reasonable in cost. 
 Oxford Herald. 
 
 'A most useful and admirable Kalendar." John Bull. 
 
 ' The Eitual Notices are very elaborate." The Churchman. 
 
 III. 
 In Foolscap, 8vo., price 5s. ; by Post 5s. 4d. 
 
 SERMONS ON THE RE-UNION OF 
 CHRISTENDOM. 
 
 FIEST SEEIES. 
 
 BY MEMBERS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC, ORIENTAL, AND ANGLICAN COMMUNIONS. 
 [LONDON : MASTERS AND Co.] 
 
 " The Sermons are very far above the average of ordinary discourses, and contain 
 thoughts, and food for thought, sufficient to stock preachers on the subject for months. We 
 commend the book very cordially to our readers' attention." The Churchman. 
 
 " The publication of this volume forms an epoch in the Church Eevival of this genera- 
 tion." Ecclesiastic. 
 
 " There are passages, and those not a few, in these Sermons, of the greatest truth and 
 beauty." Bishop Ullathorne's Letter on the A.P.U.C. 
 
 " Eloquent passages, showing forth the evils of schism." Record. 
 
 " There is a devout, and peaceful, and loving temper diffused over the whole." Clerical 
 Journal. 
 
 "A more able volume has not appeared of late." Church Times. 
 
 " Contains little which might not have been written by any earnest Churchman." 
 Guardian. 
 
 " Much of eloquence, much of power and thought, much of loving earnestness as it con- 
 tains, yet it is chiefly attractive in being, from the circumstances under which it was 
 produced and put together, the most remarkable fruit of English origin since the Eeforma- 
 tion." Church Review. 
 
 "In every respect, it may be regarded as a singular success." Union Review * 
 
 " The most remarkable volume of Sermons we have seen for years." Herald. 
 
 " The title of this remarkable book sufficiently explains its character and scope. Much 
 that is said throughout the volume by each writer will commend itself to every Christian 
 man. Without in any way committing ourselves to the line of argument of some of the 
 Sermons, we recommend the book with cordiality." John Bull.
 
 IV. 
 Price 5s. ; by Post 5s. 4d. 
 
 THE SECOND SERIES 
 
 SERMONS ON THE RE-UNION OF 
 CHRISTENDOM. 
 
 BY MEMBERS OF THE ENGLISH, ROMAN, AND GREEK CHURCHES, 
 
 "We recall the first series of these Sermons with feelings of admiration and enjoyment. 
 This second series is a fit continuation of the first. Their eloquence, charity, und argumen- 
 tative ability, are as striking as their object is high and admirable. The Sermons before us, 
 \vhich will, we doubt not, be largely read in the East as well as at home, will conduce to the 
 advance of charity, soundness of doctrine, and Unity. They go far to solve the problem, on 
 the solution of which the future of all Christian communities depends, viz., how to reconcile 
 the two principles of Dogma and Unity, how to make unswerving adherence to truth compa- 
 tible with brotherhood and love. It is only grace that can do this. But the discussion of 
 disputed doctrines in a loving spirit and kind tone will do much to help the work of grace. 
 This method of setting forth their views the writers of these Sermons have fully adopted. 
 They are conceived in the truest spirit of charity, and yet they assert strongly all necessary 
 truths. The names which are appended to some of the Sermons, or are suggested by the 
 initials of others, furnish an a priori ground for expecting that this would be the case. It ia 
 a hard task to select where there is so much that is forcible and so much that is eloquent." 
 The Churchman. 
 
 " This is a volume of great beauty and excellence, and one which is not only worth reading 
 but worth keeping. Many of the sermons in it are of rare order, which makes you put them 
 by to be read again and again, not so much in your hours of energy and activity, as in those 
 hours when you feel the need of that peculiar spiritual and mental stimulus which arises from 
 the contemplation of high thoughts well uttered. Literary Churchman. 
 
 " These sermons seem to us of much more practical value than those which were first 
 published. They each point to some definite effort, which even individuals may make towards 
 the great end in view. The majority of them are above the average in ability." Ecclesiastic. 
 
 " Although one or two of the sermons in the earlier series were fully equal, in point of 
 literary ability, to the best of those in the volume before us, yet if we were to take stock of 
 the contents of both series, as regards general merit, we should award the palm to the contri- 
 butions furnished to the late issue There is a fine sermon of Mr. Carter's, and 
 
 another contributed by Mr. Bennett." Church Times. 
 
 "Let us now regard these Sermons, and we shall find much to instruct and benefit 
 us." Clerical Journal. 
 
 V. 
 Price 3d. ; by Post 4d. 
 
 PRAYERS FOR THE RE-UNION OF 
 CHRISTENDOM. 
 
 COMPILED BY THE SECEETAET OF THE A.P.U.C. 
 
 APPEOYED BY ENGLISH, GKEEK, ROMAN, SCOTTISH, AND COLONIAL BISHOPS.
 
 VI. 
 Price Is. ; by Post Is. Id. 
 
 THE 
 
 FUTUEE UNITY OF THE CHEISTIAN 
 
 FAMILY. 
 
 A SEEMON PEEACHED AT ALL SAINTS, MAEGAEET STEEET, CAVENDISH 
 SQUARE, ON SEPTEMBEE 8, 1865. 
 
 BY KEV. T. T. CAETEE, M.A., HECTOR OF CLEWER. 
 
 WITH 
 
 An Appendix, containing a Report of the A.P.U.C., and its Progress, by the Secretary. 
 
 VII. 
 
 Price Is. ; by Post Is. Id. 
 
 THE 
 
 EXPEKIENCES OF A 'VEET (CONVEET). 
 
 REPRINTED FROM "THE UKION REVIEW." 
 
 " Interesting from the rare power of being honest which the writer shows, and from the 
 fact which he points out and bears witness to." Guardian. 
 
 " Most valuable and interesting : equal in these points to Dr. Newman's Apologia." Daily 
 Mail. 
 
 vni. 
 
 Preparing for Publication, 8vo. 
 
 ESSAYS ON THE EE-UNION OF 
 CHBISTENDOM. 
 
 BY MEMBERS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC, ORIENTAL, AND ANGLICAN COMMUNIONS. 
 EDITED BY THE BEY. F. G. LEE.
 
 NEW WORKS also recently Published by 
 J. T. HAYES. 
 
 I. 
 
 THE BIBLE AND ITS INTERPRETERS. 
 
 I. THE POPULAR THEORY. III. THE LITERARY THEORY. 
 II. THE ROMAN THEORY. IV. THE TRUTH. 
 
 BY EEV. W. J. IKONS, D.D., PREBENDARY OF ST. PAUL'S. 
 
 " This is, on the whole, a very remarkable book. We heartily commend this treatise to 
 the attention especially of our clerical brethren, and of all who take an interest in the deep 
 subjects it so ably grapples with." Church Review. 
 
 II. 
 Price 3s. ; by Post 3s. 4d. 
 
 THE REFORMED MONASTERY ; OR THE 
 LOVE OF JESUS: 
 
 A Sure and Short, Pleasant and Easy Way to Heaven ; in Meditations, Directions, and 
 Besolutions to Love and Obey JESUS unto Death. 
 
 Edited with a PREFACE by the REV. F. G. LEE, D.C.L., F.S.A., Domestic Chaplain 
 
 to the Earl of Morton. 
 
 (Being a Beprint of the said Work by Dr. BOILEAU, Chaplain to Dr. FELL, 
 Bishop of Oxford, 1675.) 
 
 III. 
 c e Is. ; by Post Is. Id. 
 
 HOUSEHOLD PRAYERS: 
 
 With a PREFACE by the EIGHT REV. THE LORD BISHOP OF OXFORD. 
 
 The Profits of this Work to le devoted to the Workwomen in Sickness connected with 
 the London Dressmaking Company,
 
 IV. 
 
 Price Is. 6d. ; by Post Is. 7d. 
 
 DUTIES OF FATHERS AND MOTHERS. 
 
 BY ABVISENET. 
 Edited by REV. G. C. WHITE, S. Barnabas', Pimlico. 
 
 V. 
 
 Sixth. Edition, price 8d. ; by Post 8d. 
 THE 
 
 RHYTHM OF BERNARD OF MORLAIX, 
 
 CONCERNING THE HEAVENLY COUNTRY. 
 Edited and Translated by the KEY. J. M. NEALE, D.D. 
 
 VI. 
 
 Also, a Companion Volume to the above, price Is. 6d. ; by Post Is. 7d. 
 
 HYMNS 
 
 (Chiefly Mediaeval) 
 
 ON THE JOYS AND GLORIES OF PARADISE. 
 
 By the REV. J. M. NEALE, D.D. 
 
 VII. 
 Price 2s. 6d. ; by Post 2s. 7d. 
 
 THE 
 
 HYMNS OF THE EASTERN CHURCH. 
 
 Translated by the REV. J. M. NEALE, D.D. 
 
 J. T. HAYES, LYALL PLACE, EATON SQUAKE.
 
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 
 
 Return this material to the library 
 
 from which It was borrowed. 
 
 iiJANi iaw 
 
 JUNO/IB
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 A 000 677 004 4