could they offer at it in a plain contradiction to such Principles as are consistent with the Christian Religion if the Doctrine of the Roman Church is true Here then we have not only the Scripture but Tradition fully of our side Some pretended Christians it is true did very early Worship Images but those were the Gnosticks held in detestation by all the Orthodox Irenaeus Epiphanius and St. Austin tell us Iren. l. 1. c. 24. Epiph. Haeres 27. August de Haeres cap. 7. that they Worshipped the Images of Christ together with Pythagoras Plato and Aristotle Nor are they only blamed for Worshipping the Images of Christ together with these of the Philosophers but they are particularly blamed for having several sorts of Images and Worshipping these as the Heathens did and that among these there was an Image of Christ which they pretended to have had from Pilate Besides these Corrupters of Christianity there were no others among the Christians of the first Ages that Worshipped Images This was so well known to the Heathens that they bring this among other things as a reproach against the Christians that they had no Images Which the first Apologists are so far from denying that they answered them That it was impossible for him who knew God to Worship Images But as human Nature is inclined to visible Objects of Worship so it seems some began to Paint the Walls of their Churches with Pictures or at least moved for it In the beginning of the Fourth Century this was condemned by the Council of Eliberis Can. 36. It pleases us to have no Pictures in Churches lest that which is Worshipped should be Painted upon the Walls Towards the end of that Century we have an account given us by Epiphanius Epiph. ep ad Joan. Hieros of his Indignation occasioned by a Picture that he saw upon a Veil at Anablatha He did not much consider whose Picture it was whether a Picture of Christ or of some Saint he positively affirms it was against the Authority of the Scriptures and the Christian Religion and therefore he tore it but supplied that Church with another Veil It seems private Persons had Statues of Christ and the Apostles Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 18. Aug. in Psal. 113. de Moribus Eccl. Cath. c. 34. which Eusebius censures where he reports it as a remnant of Heathenism It is plain enough from some passages in St. Austin that he knew of no Images in Churches in the beginning of the Fifth Century It is true they began to be brought before that time into some of the Churches of Pontus and Cappadocia which was done very probably to draw the Heathens by this piece of conformity to them to like the Christian Worship the better For that humour began to work and appeared in many Instances of other kinds as well as in this It was not possible that People could see Pictures in their Churches long without paying some marks of respect to them which grew in a little time to the downright worship of them A famous instance we have of this in the Sixth Century Serenus Bishop of Marseilles finding that he could not restrain his People from the Worship of Images broke them in pieces upon which Pope Gregory writ to him blaming him indeed for breaking the Images Greg. Epist. l. 9. Ep. 9. but commending him for not allowing them to be worshipped This he prosecutes in a variety of very plain Expressions It is one thing to worship an Image and another thing to learn by it what is to be worshipped He says they were set up not to be worshipped but to instruct the Ignorant and cites our Saviour's Words Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve to prove that it was not lawful to worship the work of mens hands We see by a fragment cited in the Second Nicene Council that both Iews and Gentiles took advantages from the Worship of Images to reproach the Christians soon after that time The Iews were scandalized at their Worshipping Images as being expresly against the Command of God The Gentiles had also by it great advantages of turning back upon the Christians all that had been written against their Images in the former Ages At last in the beginning of the Eighth Century the famous Controversy about the having or breaking of Images grew hot The Churches of Italy were so set on the worshipping of them This is owned by all the Historians of that Age Anastasius Zonaras Câ—drenus Glycâ—s Theophanes Sigebert Otho Pris. Urspergensis Sigonius Rubens and Ciaâ—â—nius that Pope Gregory the Second gives this for the reason of their Rebelling against the Emperor because of his opposition to Images And here in little more than an Hundred Years the See of Rome changed its Doctrine Pope Gregory the Second being as positive for the worshipping them as the first of that Name had been against it Violent Contentions arose upon this Head The breakers of Images were charged with Iudaism Samaritanism and Manicheism and the worshippers of them were charged with Gentilism and Idolatry One General Council at Constantinople consisting of about Three hundred and thirty eight Bishops condemned the Worshipping them as Idolatrous but another at Nice of Three hundred and fifty Bishops though others say they were only Three hundred asserted the Worship of them Yet as soon as this was known in the West how active soever the See of Rome was for establishing their Worship a Council of about Three hundred Bishops met at Francfort under Charles the Great which condemned the Nicene Council together with the Worship of Images The Gallican Church insisted long upon this matter Books were published in the Name of Charles the Great against them A Council held at Paris under his Son did also condemn Image-worship as contrary to the Honour that is due to God only and to the Commands that he has given us in Scripture The Nicene Council was rejected here in England as our Historians tell us because it asserted the Adoration of Images which the Church of God abhors Agobard Bishop of Lions and Claud of Turin writ against it the former writ with great vehemence The Learned Men of that Communion do now acknowledge that what he writ was according to the sense of the Gallican Church in that Age And even Ionas of Orleans who studied to moderate the matter and to reconcile the Gallican Bishops to the See of Rome yet does himself declare against the Worship of Images We are not concerned to examine how it came that all this vigorous opposition to Image-worship went off so soon It is enough to us that it was once made so resolutely let those who think it so incredible a thing that Churches should depart from the received Traditions answer this as they can As for the Methods then used and the Arguments that were then brought to infuse this Doctrine into the World Acta Con. Nic. 2. Action 4 5 6
the Scriptures Ibid. The Form of Swearing among the Jews 394 Our Saviour's words and St. James's against all Swearing explained 395 When Oaths may be lawfully taken 396 The End of the Table of the Contents AN EXPOSITION OF THE XXXIX ARTICLES OF THE Church of England TITLE Articles whereupon it was agreed by the Archbishops and Byshops of both Provinces and the whole Cleargie in the Convocation holden at London in the yeare of our Lorde GOD 1562. according to the computation of the Church of Englande for the avoiding of the diversities of opinions and for the stablishing of consent touching true Religion Put forth by the Queens authoritie The INTRODUCTION THE Title of these Articles leads me to consider 1. The Time the Occasion and the Design of Compiling them 2 dly The Authority that is stampt upon them both by Church and State and the Obligation that lies upon all of our Communion to Assent to them and more particularly the Importance of the Subscription to which the Clergy are obliged As to the 1 st It may seem somewhat strange to see such a Collection of Tenets made the Standard of the Doctrine of a Church that is deservedly valued by reason of her Moderation This seems to be a departing from the Simplicity of the First Ages which yet we pretend to set up for a Pattern In those times the owning the Belief of the Creeds then received was thought sufficient And when some Heresies had occasioned great Enlargements to be made in the Creeds the Third General Council thought fit to set a Bar against all further Additions and yet all those Creeds one of which goes far beyond the Ephesine Standard make but One Article of the Thirty nine of which this Book consists Many of these do also relate to subtile and abstruse Points in which it is not easy to form a clear Judgment and much less can it be convenient to Impose so great a Collection of Tenets upon a whole Church to Excommunicate such as affirm any of them to be erroneous and to reject those from the Service of the Church who cannot Assent to every one of them The Negative Articles of No Infallibility No Supremacy in the Pope No Transubstantiation No Purgatory and the like give yet a further Colour to Exceptions since it may seem that it was enough not to have mentioned these which implied a tacit rejecting of them It may therefore appear to be too rigorous to require a positive condemning of those Points for a very high degree of Certainty is required to affirm a Negative Proposition In order to the explaining this matter it is to be confessed that in the beginnings of Christianity the Declaration that was required even of a Bishop's Faith was conceived in very general Terms There was a Form setled very early in most Churches This St. Paul in one place calls The Form of Doctrine that was delivered in another place The Form of Sound Words Rom. 6.17 1 Tim. 4.6 6 3. 2 Tim. 1.13 which those who were fixed by the Apostles in particular Churches had received from them These words of his do import a Standard or fixed Formulary by which all Doctrines were to be examined Some have inferred from them that the Apostles delivered that Creed which goes under their Name every where in the same Form of Words But there is great reason to doubt of this since the first Apologists for Christianity when they deliver a short Abstract of the Christian Faith do all vary from one another both as to the Order and as to the Words themselves which they would not have done if the Churches had all received one setled Form from the Apostles They would all have used the same Words and neither more nor less It is more probable That in every Church there was a Form setled which was delivered to it by some Apostle or Companion of the Apostles with some Variation of which at this distance of time considering how defective the History of the First Ages of Christianity is it is not possible nor very necessary for us to be able to give a clear Account For Instance In the whole Extent or Neighbourhood of the Roman Empire it was at first of great Use to have this in every Christian's mouth That our Saviour suffered under Pontius Pilate because this fixed the Time and carried in it an Appeal to Records and Evidences that might then have been searched for But if this Religion went at first far to the Eastward beyond all Commerce with the Romans there is not that reason to think that this should have been a part of the shortest Form of this Doctrine it being enough that it was related in the Gospel These Forms of the several Churches were preserved with that Sacred Respect that was due to them This was esteemed the Depositum or Trust of a Church which was chiefly committed to the keeping of the Bishop In the First Ages in which the Bishops or Clergy of the several Churches could not meet together in Synods to examine the Doctrine of every new Bishop the Method upon which the Circumstances of those Ages put them was this The New Bishop sent round him and chiefly to the Bishops of the more Eminent Sees the Profession of his Faith according to the Form that was fixed in his Church And when the Neighbouring Bishops were satisfied in this they held Communion with him and not only owned him for a Bishop but maintained such a Commerce with him as the state of that Time did admit of But as some Heresies sprung up there were Enlargements made in several Churches for the condemning those and for excluding such as held them from their Communion The Council of Nice examined many of those Creeds and out of them they put their Creed in a fuller Form The Addition made by the Council of Constantinople was put into the Creeds of some particular Churches several Years before that Council met So that though it received its Authority from that Council yet those Fathers rather confirmed an Article which they found in the Creeds of some Churches than made a New one It had been an unvaluable Blessing if the Christian Religion had been kept in its first Simplicity The Council of Ephesus took care that the Creed by which men profess their Christianity should receive no new Additions but be fixed according to the Constantinoplitan Standard yet they made Decrees in Points of Faith and the following Councils went on in their steps adding still new Decrees with Anathematisms against the contrary Doctrines and declaring the Asserters of them to be under an Anathema that is under a very heavy Curse of being totally excluded from their Communion and even from the Communion of Jesus Christ. And whereas the New Bishops had formerly only declared their Faith they were then required besides that to declare That they received such Councils and rejected such Doctrines together with such as favoured them who were sometimes meâ—tioned by
we do yet a great deal is done both towards that and towards the healing those Wounds in which the Church lies a bleeding when they come to join in the same Communion and in such Acts of Worship as do agree with their different Persuasions For as in the Sacrament of the Eucharist both Lutherans and Calvinists agreeing in the same Devotions and Acts of Worship a mere Point of Speculation concerning the manner in which Christ is present ought not to divide those who agree in every thing else that relates to the Sacrament every one may in that be left to the Freedom of his own Thoughts since neither Opinion has any Influence on Practice or on any part either of Publick Worship or of Secret Devotion Upon the same account it may be also suggested That when all Parties acknowledge that God is the Sovereign Lord of the Universe That he governs it by a Providence from which nothing is hid and to which nothing can resist and that he is likewise Holy and Just True and Faithful Merciful and Gracious in all his ways those who agree about all this should not differ though they cannot fall into the same Methods of reconciling these together And if they do all agree to bless God for all the good that they either do or receive and to accuse themselves for all the ill that they either do or suffer If they agree that they ought to be humble and to mistrust their own strength to pray earnestly to God for assistance and to depend on him to trust to him and likewise to employ their own Faculties with all possible care and diligence in the cleansing their Hearts and governing their Words and Actions here the great Truths of both Sides are safe every thing that has an Influence on Practice is agreed on though neither Side can meet in the same ways of joining all these together In the Church of Rome the difference is really the same between St. Austin's Disciples and the Followers of Molina And yet how much soever they may differ and dispute in the Schools their Worship being the same they do all join in it We of this Church are very happy in this respect we have all along been much divided and once almost broken to pieces while we disputed concerning these matters but now we are much happier for tho we know one anothers Opinions we live not only united in the same Worship but in great Friendship and Love with those of other Persuasions And the Boldness of some among us who have reflected in Sermons or otherwise on those who hold Calvin's System has been much blamed and often censured by those who though they hold the same Opinions with them yet are both more charitable in their Thoughts and more discreet in their Expressions But till the Lutherans abate of their Rigidity in censuring the Opinions of the Calvinists as charging God with all those blasphemous Consequences that they think follow the Doctrine of Absolute Decrees and till the Calvinists in Holland Switzerland and Geneva abate also of theirs in charging the others as Enemies to the Grace of God and as guilty of those Consequences that they think follow the Doctrine of Conditionate Decrees it is not possible to see that much-wish'd-for Agreement come to any good Effect He who believes that an ill Consequence is justly drawn from any Opinion is in the right when he is by that determined against it But because he thinks he sees that the Consequence is clear and cannot be avoided he ought not for that to judge so ill of those who hold the Opinion but declare at the same time that they abhor the Consequence that they prevaricate in that declaration and that they both see the Consequence and own it though for decencies sake they disclaim it He ought rather to think that either they do not see the Consequence but satisfy themselves with some of those distinctions with which it is avoided or that though they do see it yet they look on that only as an Objection which indeed they cannot well answer They may think that a Point of Doctrine may be proved by such convincing Arguments that they may be bound to believe it though there lye Objections against it which they cannot avoid and Consequences seem to follow on it which they abhor and are sure cannot be true though they cannot clear the matter so well as they wish they could do In that case when a man is inclined by strong Arguments to an Opinion against which he sees difficulties which he cannot resolve he ought either to suspend his Assent or if he sees a Superitory of Argument of one side he may be determined by that though he cannot satisfy even himself in the Objections that are against it In that case he ought to reflect on the Weakness and Defects of his Faculties which cannot rise up to full and comprehensive Ideas of things especially in that which relates to the Attributes of God and to his Counsels or Acts. If men can be brought once to apprehend this rightly it may make Propositions for Peace and Union hopeful and practicable and till they are brought to this all such Propositions may well be laid aside for mens minds are not yet prepared for that which can only reconcile this Difference and heal this Breach I shall conclude this Preface with a Reply that a very Eminent Divine among the Lutherans in Germany made to me when I was pressing this matter of Union with the Calvinists upon him with all the Topicks with which I could urge it as necessary upon many accounts and more particularly with relation to the present State of Affairs He said He wonder'd much to see a Divine of the Church of England press that so much on him when We notwithstanding the Dangers we were then in it was in the Year 1686. could not agree our Differences They differed about Important Matters concerning the Attributes of God and his Providence concerning the Guilt of Sin whether it was to be charged on God or on the Sinner and whether men ought to make good use of their Faculties or if they ought to trust entirely to an Irresistible Grace These were matters of great Moment But he said We in England differed only about Forms of Government and Worship and about things that were of their own nature indifferent and yet we had been quarrelling about these for above an Hundred Years and we were not yet grown wiser by all the Mischief that this had done us and by the Imminent Danger we were then in He concluded Let the Church of England heal her own Breaches and then all the rest of the Reformed Churches will with great Respect admit of her Mediation to heal theirs I will not presume to tell how I answered this But I pray God to enlighten and direct all men that they may consider well how it ought to be answered THE Articles of our Church were at the same time
Testament answered 84 Concerning the various Readings 85 The nature and degrees of Inspiration 86 Concerning the Historical parts of Scripture 87 Concerning the Reasonings in Scripture 88 Of the Apocryphal Books 89 ARTICLE VII 91 NO difference between the Old and New Testament Ibid. Proofs in the Old Testament of the Messias 92 In the Prophets chiefly in Daniel 94 The Proofs all summed up 95 Objections of the Jews answered 96 The hopes of anotheâ— Life in the Old Testament 97 Our Saviour proved the Resurrection from the words to Moses 98 Expiation of Sin in the Old Dispensation 99 Sins then expiated by the Blood of Christ Ibid. Of the Rites and Ceremonies among the Jews 100 Of their Iudiciary Laws 101 Of the Moral Law Ibid. The Principles of Morality 102 Of Idolatry 103 Concerning the Sabbath Ibid. Of the Second Table 104 Of not coveting what is our Neighbours 105 ARTICLE VIII 106 COncerning the Creed of Athanasius Ibid. And the condemning Clauses in it Ibid. Of the Apostles Creed 107 ARTICLE IX 108 DIfferent Opinions concerning Original Sin Ibid. All men liable to Death by it 109 A Corruption spread through the whole Race of Adam Ibid. Of the state of Innocence 110 Of the effects of Adam's Fall 111 God's Iustice vindicated 112 Of the Imputation of Adam's Sin 113 St. Austin's Doctrine in this Point 114 This is opposed by many others Ibid. Both sides pretend their Doctrines agree with the Article 116 ARTICLE X. 117 THE true Notion of Liberty Ibid. The Feebleness of our present state 118 Inward Assistances promised in the New Covenant 119 The effect that these have on men 120 Concerning Preventing-Grace Ibid. Of its being efficacious or universal 121 ARTICLE XI 122 COncerning Iustification Ibid. Concerning Faith 123 The differences between the Church of England and the Church of Rome in this Point 124 The conditions upon which men are justified 126 The use to be made of this Doctrine 127 ARTICLE XII 128 THE necessity of Holiness Ibid. Concerning Merit 129 Of the defects of Good Works Ibid. ARTICLE XIII 131 ACTIONS in themselves good yet may be sins in him who does them Ibid. Of the Seventh Chapter to the Romans 132 This is not a total Incapacity Ibid. ARTICLE XIV 133 Oâ— the great extent of our Duty Ibid. No Counsels of Perfection 134 Many Duties which do not bind at all times Ibid. It is not possible for man to supererogate 135 Objections against this answered 136 The steps by which that Doctrine prevailed 137 ARTICLE XV. 138 CHrist's spotless Holiness Ibid. Of the Imperfections of the best men 139 ARTICLE XVI 140 COncerning Mortal and Venial Sin Ibid. Of the Sin against the Holy Ghost Ibid. Of the Pardon of Sin after Baptism 141 That as God forgives the Church ought also to forgive 142 Concerning Apostacy and sin unto Death 143 ARTICLE XVII 145 THE state of the Question 146 The Doctrine of the Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians Ibid. The Doctrine of the Remonstrants and the Socinians 147 This is a Controversy that arises out of Natural Religion Ibid. The History of this Controversy both in ancient and modern times 148 The Arguments of the Supralapsarians 152 The Arguments of the Sublapsarians 158 The Arguments of the Remonstrants 159 They affirm a certain Prescience 161 The Socinians Plea 164 General Reflections on the whole matter 165 The advantages and disadvantages of both sides and the faults of both 166 In what both do agree 167 The sense of the Article 168 The Cautions added to it Ibid. Passages in the Liturgy explained 169 ARTICLE XVIII 171 PHilosophers thought men might be saved in all Religions Ibid. So do the Mahometans Ibid. None are saved but by Christ 172 Whether some may not be saved by him who never heard of him Ibid. None are in Covenant with God but through the knowledge of Christ 173 But for others we cannot judge of the extent of the Mercies of God Ibid. Curiosity is to be restrained 174 ARTICLE XIX 175 WE ought not to believe that any are Infallible without good Authority Ibid. Iust prejudices against some who pretend to it 176 No Miracles brought to prove this Ibid. Proofs brought from Scripture 177 Things to be supposed previous to these Ibid. A Circle is not to be admitted Ibid. The Notes given of the true Church 178 These are examined Ibid. And whether they do agree to the Church of Rome 179 The Truth of Doctrine must be first settled Ibid. A Society that has a true Baptism is a true Church 180 Sacraments are not annulled by every Corruption Ibid. We own the Baptism and Orders given in the Church of Rome 181 And yet justify our separating from them Ibid. Objections against private judging 182 Our Reasons are given us for that end Ibid. Our Minds are free as our Wills are 183 The Church is still Visible but not Infallible Ibid. Of the Popes Infallibility 184 That was not pretended to in the first Ages Ibid. The Dignity of Sees rose from the Cities 185 Popes have fallen into Heresy Ibid. Their Ambition and Forgeries Ibid. Their Cruelty 186 The Power of deposing Princes claimed by them as given them by God Ibid. This was not a Corruption only of Discipline but of Doctrine 187 Arguments for the Popes Infallibility 188 No Foundation for it in the New Testament Ibid. St. Peter never clâ—imed it 189 Christ's words to him explained Ibid. Of the Kâ—ys of the Kingdâ—m of Hâ—â—vâ—n 190 Of binding and loosing Ibid. ARTICLE XX. 192 OF Church Power in Rituals Ibid. The Practice of the Jewish Church 193 Changes in these sometimes necâ—ssary Ibid. The Practice of the Ap stles 194 Sâ—bjâ—cts must obey in lawful things Ibid. But Superiâ—rs must not impose too much 195 The Church has Authority though not Infallible Ibid. Great Respâ—ct due to her Decisions 196 But no absâ—lute Submâ—ssion Ibid. The Church is the Depâ—sitary of the Scriptures 197 The Church of Rome run in a Circle Ibid. ARTICLE XXI 199 COuncils cannot be called but by the Consent of Princes Ibid. Tâ—e first were called by the Roman Emperors Ibid. Afterwards the Popes called them 200 Then some Councils thought on methods to fix their meeting Ibid. What makâ—s a Council to be General Ibid. What numbers are necessary 201 Hâ—w thâ—y must he cited Ibid. Nâ— Rules given in Scripture concerning their Constitution Ibid. Nazianzen's Complaints of Councils 202 Councils have been câ—ntrary to one another Ibid. Disâ—rders and Intriguâ—s in Councils Ibid. They judgâ— not by Inspiration Ibid. The Churches may examine their proceedings and judge of them 203 Concerning the Popes Bull confirming them Ibid. Thâ—y have an Authority but not absolute Ibid. Nâ—r do they need the Popes Bulls 204 The several Churches know their Traditions best Ibid. The Fathers do argue for the truth of the decisions but not from their authority Ibid. No prospect of another General Council 205 Popes are jealous of them Ibid. And the World expects little from them Ibid. Concerning the words
Saviour's words Ibid. The discourse Joh. 6. explained 312 It can only be understood spiritually 313 Bold Figures much used in the East Ibid. A plain thing needs no great proof 314 Of unworthy Receivers and the effect of that sin 315 Of the effects of worthy receiving Ibid. Of Foederal Symbols 316 Of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ Ibid. Of the like Phrases in Scripture 317 Of our Sense of the Phrase Real Presence Ib. Transubstantiation explained 318 Of the words of Consecration 319 Of the Consequences of Transubstantiation Ibid. The grounds upon which it was believed 320 This is contrary to the Testimony of all our Faculties both Sense and Reason Ibid. We can be sure of nothing if our Senses do deceive us 321 The Objection from believing Mysteries answered 322 The end of all Miracles considered Ibid. Our Doctrine of a Mystical Presence is confessed by those of the Church of Rome 323 St. Austin's Rule about Figures Ibid. Presumptions concerning the belief of the Ancients in this matter 324 They had not that Philosophy which this Doctrine has forced on the Church of Rome 325 This was not objected by Heathens 326 No Heresies or Disputes arose upon this as they did on all other Points 327 Many new Rituals unknown to them have sprung out of this Doctrine Ibid. In particular the adoring the Sacrament 328 Prayers in the Masses of the Saints inconsistent with it Ibid. They believed the Elements were Bread and Wine after Consecration Ibid. Many Authorities brought for this 329 Eutychians said Christ's Humanity was swallowed of his Divinity 330 The Fathers argue against this from the Doctrine of the Eucharist Ibid. The Force of that Argument explained 331 The Fathers say our Bodies are nourished by the Sacrament Ibid. They call it the Type Sign and Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ 332 The Prayer of Consecration calls it so 333 That compared with the Prayer in the Missal Ibid. The progress of the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence 334 Reflection on the Ages in which it grew 335 The occasion on which it was advanced in the Eastern Church 336 Paschase Radbert taught it first 337 But many wrote against him Ibid. Afterwards Berengarius opposed it 338 The Schoolmen descanted on it Ibid. Philosophy was corrupted to support it 339 Concerning Consubstantiation Ibid. It is an Opinion that may be born with 340 The Adoration of the Eucharist is Idolatry Ibid. The Plea against that considered Ibid. Christ is not to be worshipped though present 341 Concerning reserving the Sacrament Ibid. Concerning the Elevation of it 342 ARTICLE XXIX 343 THE wicked do not receive Christ Ibid. The Doctrine of the Fathers in this Point Ibid. More particularly St. Austin's 344 ARTICLE XXX 345 THE Chalice was given to all Ibid. Not to the Disciples as Priests Ibid. The breaking of Bread explained 346 Sacraments must be given according to the Institution Ibid. Nâ— Arguments from ill consequences to be admitted unless in cases of necessity 347 Concomitance a new Notion Ibid. Vniversal practice for giving the Chalice Ibid. The case of the Agrarii 348 The first beginning of taking away the Cup Ibid. The Decree of the Council of Constance 349 ARTICLE XXXI 350 THE term Sacrifice of a large signification Ibid. The Primitive Christians denied that they had any Sacrifices Ibid. The Eucharist has no virtue but as it is a Communion 351 Strictly speaking there is only one Priest and one Sacrifice in the Christian Religion 352 The Fathers did not think the Eucharist was a Propitiatory Sacrifice 353 But call it a Sacrafice in a larger sense Ibid. Mâ—sses without a Communion not known then 354 None might be at Mass who did not communicate Ibid. The Importance of the Controversies concerning the Eucharist 355 ARTICLE XXXII 356 NO Divine Law against a Married Clergy Ibid. Neither in the Old or New Testament but the contrary 357 The Church has not Power to make a perpetual Law against it Ibid. The ill consequences of such a Law 358 No such Law in the first Ages Ibid. When the Laws for the Celibate began 359 The practice of the Church not uniform in it Ibid. The progress of these Laws in England 360 The good and the bad of Celibate balanced Ibid. It is not lawful to make Vows in this matter 361 Nor do they bind when made Ibid. Oaths ill made are worse to be kept 362 ARTICLE XXXIII 363 A Temper to be observed in Church Discipline Ibid. The necessity of keeping it up Ibid. Extremes in this to be avoided 364 Concerning the delivering any to Satan Ibid. The Importance of an Anathemea 365 Of the effect of Church-Censures Ibid. What it is when they are wrong applied 366 The causless jealousy of Church-Power Ibid. How the Laity was once taken into the exercise of it 367 The Pastors of the Church have Authority Ibid. Defects in this no just cause of Separation 368 All these brought in by Popery Ibid. A Correction of them intended at the Reformation 369 ARTICLE XXXIV 370 THE Obligation to obey Canons and Laws Ibid. The great Sin of Schism and Disobedience 371 The true Notion of Scandal Ibid. The fear of giving Scandal no warrant to break established Laws 372 Human Laws are not unalterable Ibid. The Respect due to Ancient Canons 373 The Corruptions of the Canon Law Ibid. Great Varieties in Rituals Ibid. Every Church is a compleat Body 374 ARTICLE XXXV 375 THE occasion of compiling the Homilies Ibid. We are not bound to every thing in them Ibid. But only to the Doctrine 376 This illustrated in the Charge of Idolatry Ib. What is meant by their being necessary for those times Ibid. ARTICLE XXXVI 377 THE occasion of this Article Ibid. An Explanation of the words Receive ye the Holy Ghost 378 ARTICLE XXXVII 379 QVeen Elizabeth's Injunction concerning the Supremacy Ibid. The Popes Vniversal Iurisdiction not warranted by any of the Laws of Christ 380 Nor acknowledged in the first Ages 381 Begun on the occasion of the Arian Controversy Ibid. Contested in many places 382 The Progress that it made Ibid. The Patriarchal Authority founded on the division of the Roman Empire sunk with it 383 The Power exercised by the Kings of Judah in Religious Matters Ibid. That is founded on Scriptures 384 Practised in all Ages Ibid. And particularly in England 385 Methods used by Popish Princes to keep the Ecclesiastical Authority under the Civil Ibid. The Temporal Power is over all persons 386 And in all causes Ibid. The Importance of the Term Head 387 The Necâ—ssity of Capital Punishments Ibid. The measure of these 388 The Lawfulness of War Ibid. Our Saviour's words explained Ibid. In what cases War is juâ—t 389 Warranted by the Laws of God 390 How a Subject may serve in an unlawful War Ibid. ARTICLE XXXVIII 391 COncerning Property and Charity Ibid. The Proportion of Charity to the Poor 392 ARTICLE XXXIX 393 THE Lawfulness of Oaths proved Ibid. From Natural Religion and
had certainly put the chief strength of their Cause on this That they adhered to the Apostles Creed in opposition to the Innovations of the Nicene Fathers There is therefore no reason to believe that this Creed was prepared by the Apostles or that it was of any great Antiquity since Ruffin was the first that published it It is true he published it as the Creed of the Church of Aquileia but that was so late that neither this nor the other Creeds have any Authority upon their own account Great Respect is indeed due to things of such Antiquity and that have been so long in the Church but after all we receive those Creeds not for their own sakes nor for the sake of those who prepared them but for the sake of the Doctrine that is contained in them because we believe that the Doctrine which they declare is contained in the Scriptures and chiefly that which is the main Intent of them which is to assert and profess the Trinity therefore we do receive them tho we must acknowledge that the Creed ascribed to Athanasius as it was none of his so it was never established by any General Council 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 or corruption of the nature of every man that naturally is engendred 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 the Flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit and therefore in every Person born into the World it deserveth God's Wrath and Damnation And this Infection of Nature doth remain yea in them that are regenerated whereby the Lust of the Flesh called in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 though there is no Condemnation for them that believe and are baptized yet the Apostle doth confess That Concupiscence and Lust hath of it self the nature of Sin AFter the First Principles of the Christian Religion are stated and the Rule of Faith and Life was setled the next thing that was to be done was to declare the special Doctrines of this Religion and that first with relation to all Christians as they are single Individuals for the directing every one of them in order to the working out his own Salvation which is done from this to the Nineteenth Article And then with relation to them as they compose a Society called the Church which is carried on from the Nineteenth to the End In all that has been hitherto explained the whole Church of England has been all along of one mind In this and in some that follow there has been a greater diversity of Opinion but both sides have studied to prove their Tenets to be at least not contrary to the Articles of the Church These different Parties have disputed concerning the Decrees of God and those Assistances which pursuant to his Decrees are afforded to us But because the Foundation of those Decrees and the Necessity of those Assistances are laid in the Sin of Adam and in the Effects it had on Mankind therefore thâ—se Controversies begin on this Head The Pelagians and the Socinians agree in saying That Adam's Sin was Personal That by it as being the first Sin it is said that Sin entred into the World But that as Adam was made mortal â—om 5 1â— and had died whether he had sinned or not so they think the liberty of Human Nature is still entire and that every man is punished for his own sins and not for the sin of another to do otherwise they say seems contrary to Justice not to say Goodness In opposition to this Iudgment is said to have come upon many to condemnation through one either Man or Sin ver 1â— Death is said to have reigned by one and by one man's offence and many are said to be dead through the offence of one All these Passages do intimate that death is the consequence of Adam's Sin and that in him as well as in all others Death was the Wages of Sin so also that we dye upon the account of his Sin We are said to bear the Image of the first Adam as true Christians bear the Image of the second Now we are sure that there is both a derivation of Righteousness 1 Cor 15.49 and a Communication of Inward Holiness transferred to us through Christ So it seems to follow from thence that there is somewhat both transferred to us and conveyed down throughMankind by the first Adam and particularly that by it we are all made subject to Death from which we should have been freed if Adam had continued in his first state and that by virtue of the Tree of Life Gen. 3.22 in which some think there was a natural Virtue to cure all Diseases and relieve against all Accidents while others do ascribe it to a Divine Blessing of which that Tree was only the Symbol or Sacrament through the words said after Adam's sin as the reason of driving him out of Paradise lest he put forth his hand and take of the Tree of Life and eat and live for ever seem to import that there was a Physical Virtue in the Tree that could so fortify and restore Life as to give Immortality These do also think that the Threatning made to Adam That upon his eating the forbidden Fruit he should surely dye is to be taken literally and is to be carried no further than to a Natural Death This Subjection to Death and to the Fear of it brings men under a slavish Bondage many Terrors and other Passions and Miseries that arise out ofit which they think is a great Punishment and that it is a Condemnation and Sentence of Death passed upon the whole Race and by this they are made sinners that is treated as guilty Persons and severely punished This they think is easily enough reconciled with the Notions of Justice and Goodness in God since this is only a Temporary Punishment relating to mens Persons And we see in the common methods of Providence that Children are in this sort often punished for the sins of their Fathers most men that come under a very ill habit of Body transmit the Seeds of Diseases and Pains to their Children They do also think that the Communication of this liableness to death is easily accounted for and they imagine that as the Tree of Life might be a Plant that furnished men with an Universal Medicine so the forbidden Fruit might derive a slow Poyson into Adam's Body that might have exalted and inflamed his Blood very much and might though by a slower operation certainly brought on death at the last Our being thus adjudged to Death and to all the Miseries that accompany Mortality they think may be well called the wrath of
not true No consequences can be worse than the Corruption that is in the World and the Damnation that follows upon sin and yet God permits it because he has made us free Creatures Nor can any reason be given why we should be less free in the use of our understanding than we are in the use of our Will or why God should make it to be less possible for us to fall into Errors than it is to commit Sins The Wrath of God is as much denounced against Men that hold the Truth in unrighteousness as against other Sins Rom. 1.18 24 26. 2 Thes. 2.11 and it is reckoned among the heaviest of Curses to be given up to strong delusions to believe a lye Upon all these reasons therefore it seems clear that our Understandings are left free to us as well as our Wills and if we observe the Stile and Method of the Scriptures we shall find in them all over a constant Appeal to a Man's Reason and to his Intellectual Faculties If the mere dictates of the Church or of Infallible Men had been the resolution or foundation of Faith there had been no need of such a long Thread of Reasoning and Discourse as both our Saviour used while on Earth and as the Apostles used in their Writings We see the way of Authority is not taken but Explanations are offered Proofs and Illustrations are brought to convince the Mind which shews that God in the clearest Manifestation of his Will would deal with us as with reasonable Creatures who are not to believe but upon Persuasion and are to use our Reasons in order to the attaining that Persuasion And therefore upon the whole matter we ought not to believe Doctrines to be true because the Church teaches them but we ought to search the Scriptures and then according as we find the Doctrine of any Church to be true in the Fundamentals we ought to believe her to be a true Church and if besides this the whole Extent of the Doctrine and Worship together not only with the essential parts of the Sacraments but the whole Administration of them and the other Rituals of any Church are pure and true then we ought to account such a Church true in the largest Extent of the word true and by consequence we ought to hold Communion with it Another question may arise out of the first words of this Article concerning the Visibility of this Church Whether it must be always Visible According to the distinction hitherto made use of the resolution of this will be soon made There seem to be Promises in the Scriptures of a perpetual Duration of the Christian Church I will be with you always Matth. 28.20 Matth. 16.18 even to the end of the world And the gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church The Iewish Religion had a Period perfixed in which it was to come to an end but the Prophecies that are among the Prophets concerning the new Dispensation seem to import not only its Continuance but its being continued still Visible in the World But as the Iewish Dispensation was long continued after they had fallen generally into some very gross Errors so the Christian Church may be Visible still though not Infallible God may preserve the Succession of a true Church as to the Essentials and Fundamentals of Faith in the World even though this Society should fall into Error So a Visible Society of Christians in a true Church as to the Essentials of our Faith is not controverted by us We do only deny the Infallibility of this true Church And therefore we are not afraid of that Question Where was your Church before Henry the Eighth We Answer It was where it is now here in England and in the other Kingdoms of the World only it was then corrupted and it is now pure There is therefore no sort of Inconvenience in owning the constant Visibility of a constant Succession and Church of true Christians true as to the Essentials of the Covenant of Grace though not true in all their Doctrines This seems to be a part of the Glory of the Messias and of his Kingdom That he shall be still visibly worshipped in the World by a Body of Men called by his Name But when Visibility is thus separated from Infallibility and it is made out that a Church may be a true Church though she has a large Allay of Errors and Corruptions mixed in her Constitution and Decisions there will be no manner of Inconvenience in owning a constant Visibility even at the same time that we charge the most eminent part of this Visible Body with many Errors and with much Corruption So far has the first part of this Article been treated of From it we pass to the second which affirms That as the other Patriarchal and Apostolical Churches such as Ierusalem Alexandria and Antioch have erred so the Church of Rome has likewise erred and that not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies but also in matters of Faith It is not questioned but that the other Patriarchal Churches have erred both that where our Saviour himself first taught and which was governed by two of the Apostles successively and those which were founded by St. Peter in Person or by Proxy as Church History represents Alexandria and Antioch to have been Those of the Church of Rome by whom they are at this day condemned both of Heresy and Schism do not dispute this Nor do they dispute that many of their Popes have led bad and flagitious Lives They deny not that the Canons Ceremonies and Government of the Church are very much changed by the Influence and the Authority of their Popes But the whole question turns upon this Whether the See of Rome has erred in matter of Faith or not In this those of that Communion are divided Some by the Church or See of Rome mean the Popes personally so they maintain That they never have and never can fall into Error Whereas others by the See of Rome mean that whole Body that holds Communion with Rome which they say cannot be tainted with Error and these separate this from the Personal Infallibility of Popes for if a Pope should err they think that a General Council has Authority to proceed against him and to deprive him And thus though he should err the See might be kept free from Error I shall upon this Article only consider the first Opinion reserving the Consideration of the second to the Article concerning General Councils As to the Popes their being subject to Error that must be confessed unless it can be proved that by a clear and express Privilege granted them by God they are excepted out of the common condition of Human Nature It is further highly probable that there is no such Privilege since the Church continued for many Ages before it was so much as pretended to and that in a time when that See was not only claiming all the Rights that
says Receive the Holy Ghost And in this sense and with this respect the use of these Words may be well justified ARTICLE XXXVII Of Civil Magistrates The Queen's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any Foreign Iurisdiction Where we attribute to the Queen'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 ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments the which thing 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 Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil-doers The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in this Realm of England The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian Men with Death for heinous and grievous Offences It is lawful for Christian Men at the Commandment of the Magistrate to wear Weapons and serve in the Wars THIS Article was much shorter as it was published in King Edward's time and did run thus The King of England is Supreme Head in Earth next under Christ of the Church of England and Ireland Then followed the Paragraph against the Pope's Jurisdiction worded as it is now To which these Words were subjoined The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God wherefore we must obey him not only for fear of Punishment but also for Conscience sake In Queen Elizabeth's time it was thought fitting to take away those Prejudices that the Papists were generally infusing into the minds of the People against the term Head which seemed to be the more incongruous because a Woman did then reign therefore that was left out and instead of it the words chief Power and chief Government were made use of which do signify the same thing The Queen did also by her Injunctions offer an Explanation of this matter for whereas it was given out by those who had complied with every thing that had been done both in her Father and in her Brother's time but that resolved now to set themselves in opposition to her That she was assuming a much greater Authority than they had pretended to She upon that ordered that Explanation which is referred to in the Article and is in these words For certainly Her Majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any Authority other than that was challenged and lately used by the said Noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth which is and was of antient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over ail manner of Persons born within these her Realms Dominions and Countries of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be so as no other Foreign Power shall or ought to have any Superiority over them And if any Person that hath conceived any other sense of the said Oath shall accept the same Oath with this Interpretation Sense or Meaning Her Majesty is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf as her good and obedient Subjâ—cts and shall acquit them of all manner of Penalties contained in the said Act against such as shall peremptorily and obstinately refuse to take the same Oath Thus this matter is opened as it is both in the Article and in the Injunctions In order to the treating regularly of this Article it is First To be proved That the Pope hath no Jurisdiction in these Kingdoms 2 dly That our Kings or Queens have it And 3 dly The Nature and Measures of this Power and Government are to be stated As for the Pope's Authority though it is now connected with the Infallibility yet it was pretended to and was advanced for many Ages before Infallibility was so much as thought on Nor was the Doctrine of their Infallibility ever so universally received and submitted to in these Western Parts as was that of their Universal Jurisdiction They were in possession of it Appeals were made to them They sent Legates and Bulls every where They granted Exemptions from the ordinary Jurisdiction and took Bishops bound to them by Oaths that were penned in the Form of Oaths of Fealty or Homage This was the first Point that our Reformers did begin with both here and every where else that so they might remove that which was an insuperable Obstruction till it was first taken out of the way to every step that could be made toward a Reformation They laid down therefore this for their Foundation That all Bishops were by their Office and Character equal and that every one of them had the same Authority that any other had over that Flock which was committed to his Care And therefore they said that the Bishops of Rome had no Authority according to the Constitution in which the Churches were settled by the Apostles but over the City of Rome And that any further Jurisdiction that any Antient Popes might have had did arise from the Dignity of the City and the Customs and Laws of the Empire As for their deriving that Authority from St. Peter it is very plain that the Apostles were all made equal to him and that they never understood our Saviour's Words to him as importing any Authority that was given to him over the rest since they continued to the last while our Saviour was among them disputing which of them should be the greatest The Proposition that the Mother of Iames and Iohn made Mat. 20.21 ver 24. ver 26. in which it was evident that they likewise concurred with her shews that they did not apprehend that Christ had made any Declaration in favour of St. Peter as by our Saviour's Answer it appears that he had not done otherwise he would have referred them to what he had already said upon that occasion By the whole History of the Acts of the Apostles it appears that the Apostles acted and consulted in common without considering St. Peter as having any Superiority over them He was called to give an account of his Baptizing Cornelius and he delivered his Opinion in the Council of Ierusalem without any strain of Authority over the rest Acts 11.2 3. Acts 15.7 ver 14 19. Gal. 2 7 8. ver 11. St. Paul does expresly deny that the other Apostles had any Superiority or Jurisdiction over him and he says in plain words that he was the Apostle of the Vncircumcision as St. Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision and in that does rather claim an advantage over him since his was certainly the much wider Province He