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*<>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