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, " 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, JVvho 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