D275 YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY I^arapl^taistica Cjcpogiitio ^rticuiorum Confe^^iontjs anslicatrae : THE ARTICLES OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH PARAPHRASTICALLY CONSIDEEED AND EXPLAINED, BY FRANCISCUS A. SANCTA CLAEA, S.T.P. (Dr. Christopher Davenport.) Reprinterl from the Edition in Latin of 1646, with a Translation, together with Expositions arid Coinmetiit in English f mm the Theological Problems and Propositions of the same vjriter, and loith additional Notes and References. TO WHICH ARE PREFIXED AN INTEODUCTION AND A SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF THE AUTHOE. EDITED El THE BEV. FREDERICK GEORGE LEE, D.O.L., F.S.A. LoND. AND Soot. ; S.G.L. Oxon. ; Vicar cs- Alt. Saints', Lambeto. 31 0 n b 0 u : J. T. HAYES, LYALL PLACE, EATON SQUAEE, S.Y/. ; AND 4, HENRIETTA STEEET, COVENT GARDEN. MDCCCLXXII. 'Such interpretation may \>9 given of the moat diflicult Articles aa will atrip them of all cont-radiction to tho decrees of tho Tridentine Synod."— Card inai Wisenmn. ' JS'onrt can be fairer in theological caatroversy thnn Sapcta Clara ; his Coromentfiry on tho " Articles," from a KoDi.ir. Caf.linlic iwint of vlow, bein^ t-apecially interebting. It is beliere'l that ihia remarkable Tiea,Uso fnrmorl the basis of ifr, I^'ewman's Tract No. 90." — B'nilih Magazine. londou : Swipi ,t Co., Regent Press, 55, Kiiij Street. Rctent Pre-a W CONTENTS. PASS Dedication v Introduction ........... vii Sketch of the Author's Life . . . . . " . _ . . xix Original Dedication xxxi Censtu'ffl et Judicia Doctonim , . . . xsxiii Salvation The Aeticles paeaphr.4.stically explained : — • Article I. — Of Faith in the Holy Trinity II. — Of the Word or Son of God, Which was made ybvj Man in. — Of the going down of Christ into Hell . rV. — Of the Resurrection of Cln-ist , v.— Of the Holy Ghost .... VI. — Of the Snfiicitfncy of the Holy Scriptiu'cs for VII.— Of the Old Testament . VIII.— Of the Tlnee Creeds . IX. — Of Original or Birth-sin X.— Of Pree-Wm XL — Of the Justification of Man Xn.— Of Good Works . XTTT. — Of Works before Justification XIV. — Of Works of Supererogation XV. — Of Christ alone without Sin XVl. — Of Sin after Baptism . 1 12 223788 10 11 U 14 1617 21 ( iv ) 7AGB Article XVH.— Of Predestination and Election 24 XVni.— Of obtaming Eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ 26 XIX.— Of the Church 27 XX.— Of the Authority of the Chmch 29 XXI.— Of the Authority of General Councils .... 32 XXn.— Of Pm-gatory 89 XXni.— 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 Jlinisters, which hinders not the effect of the Sacrament .... 63 XXVIL— Of Baptism 54 XXVin.— 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 6S XXX.— Of both kinds 63 XXXI.— Of the one Oblation of Chiist finished upon the Cress . 73 XXXn.— Of the Man-iage of Priests 79 XXXTTT. — Of Excommunicate persons, how they are to be avoided 80 XXXrV.- Of the Traditions of the Chiu-ch 81 XXXV.— Of the HomHies 83 XXXVI. — Of Consecration of Bishops and Ministers ... 85 XXXVn.— Of the Ci^il Magistrates 96 XXXVni. — 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 GAEENDON PAKE AND GEACE DIEU JIANOR, 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 youi'self. For more than thirty years past you have laboiu'ed for the high and holy object of Ee-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 desu-e for Peace and Unity is the fii-st step towards obtaining them. Therefore, with veiy sincere respect and regard — i« sj^em Unionis Fiitane Gregis Christi — I dedicate this volume to you. And I remam, Ever most sincerely yoiu-s in our Blessed Lord, FREDERICK GEORGE LEE. INTEODUCTION. Tee 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 "Ai-ticles of Pwliijion," as they are generally termed, — that is, they may be regarded as a collection of propositions concendng Eeligion and Eeligious opinionsf di-awn up in the sixteenth centiuy, a few of which contain articles of faith, some matters of fact or historical assertions, and others certain opinions upon which the post- Eeformation clergy have always differed very considerably. J This will be clear from the follo-\ving : — " When it is said that S. Je-^ rome expresses a particular opinion respecting the Apocrypha ; that a certain Greek term has been expoimded in four- different manners; that certain churches have erred; that the Pelagians hold a particular doctrhre ; that S. Augustine holds a particular view respecting the participation of the Holy Eucharist by the * Vide Pearson On. t%e Creed, p. 17, et t Compare, e. g. Eps. Burnet, Beveridgej seq. Oxford : 1847. and Harold Browne on those Articles which t " They are to the Creeds what the have been explained fully by Sancta Clarai bye-laws of a society are to the legal and Their differences of explanation are great settled rules of that society."— Dr. ^Y. H. and singular. aim. 12 ( -v-iii ) Avicked ; that the Injunctions of Elizabeth do most plainly testify to a certam 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 Ploly Scriptui'e," are we called upon to accept the Creeds on this gi'ound. Still less, when in the twenty-sixth Ai'ticle 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 Ai'ticle 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. ( ix ) day to estimate accui-ately the value of other propositions, the following obvious examples may be instanced : — I. 1. " The Eiches 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 Scriptui'e." (Not a matter of faith.) II. " The second Book of Homiliesf .... doth contam a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for these times." (This is certainly not a matter of faith. As to its accui'acy 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 Cathoho Emancipation BOl, Vicars Apos- in the diviae 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, fishdiet, in the an ti- Christianity of the Pope, Since that change, both in England and and in the biading 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, Keve in all these things together 'i' " — ^Neale's and indirectly sanctioned by law. Lectures on Church Difficidties, 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 Bumet, 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 idolatrj^ of Eome." Yet is -there a single syllable on this point in the Thii'ty-Nine Articles from end to end 1 The strongest statement in any way bearing on the subject is that the " Eoniish doctrine " concei-ning the worshipping of images inter alia "is a fond thing vainly invented" (res est futilis — useless — inaniter conficta), but this is all. It was calculated by a painstaking -writer of the seventeenth centui'y, ]\Ir. E. Shelton, one of the foremost in the Laudian Eenval, that the Articles contained about 670 distinct proposi- ( ^i ) tions, of which about 150 only were of a positive chai"acter, 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 Ee-union of Christendom. " If I venture," -writes Dean Mihnan, " 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 con-vdction 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 wiU be a solid security for its professed object, the reconciling or removing religious difierences, which it tends rather to create and keep alive; is embarrassing to many men who might be of the most valuable service ur the ministi'y 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 morial on an academical examination clocks is well kno-sra. A recent illustra- 'What would he have said had he for the tioa of the same difficulty occurred not first time heard of not 80, but 20,000 lone a<'o, 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 mmil "Stanley on Sulscripticn, four brief propositions contained in a me- p. 15. ( ^ii ) 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 la-wyers 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 Anghcan Church as do the Decrees of the Council of Trent to Eoman Catholics, or the Acts of the Synod of Beth lehem to members of the orthodox Eastern Church. Eoman Catholics hold the Council of Trent to have been an CEcumenical Council, because — firom 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 SjTiod 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 di'eamt of regarding the Sj-nods 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 bemg so, and experience having taught those who have looked for a Future Visible Ee-union of the Christian Family that • Vide Ffoulkes' Christendom's Divisions, Oxenham on the Atonement, p. xliv. Lon- in loco. London : Longmans, 1865 ; and don : Longmans, 1865. ( xiii ) 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 woidd be lost. " I believe in . . . the Holy Catholic Chui'ch." " I believe One [Holy] Catholic, and Apostolic Church." "Whosoever wiU be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith," woidd 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 foi-merly belonged to the Church of England. IMoreover, the singular fah-ness and impartiality displayed throughout his remarks, and the obvious desire never to overstate his ca^e, give great and unusual weight to the followmg interesting comments : — ^D " From which remark I pass straight to the Thhiy-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 sHenee. The Articles attack openly, and with no small virulence, doctrines and practices which, till then, had been cun-ent in the English Chui'ch and in the West generally. They may not have been framed in overt hostility to the Decrees of Trent, ( xi^ ) whose actual promulgation they just anticipated. They may not have been copied from the Confession of Augsbm-g, which came out so much earlier, or by the SjTiod 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, fi'om Egbert to Queen Victoria, can have but one name — Treason ! " Pre-viously to their publication, or rather pre-viously to that rupture -with Eome which led to it, the Chm-ch 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 -svith that world-mde corpora tion known as the Catholic Church, and had participated to the fullest extent in all its -^-icissitudes and successive developments. As far back as A.D. 847, 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 Pi,ome ;. 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- clai-ing it unla^-ful 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 ha-^ing preseived their orthodoxy ; two years more, and they were noticed at the Coimcil of Rimini. The centmy folio-wing, aided by two bishops fi'om France, they made common cause with the rest of the Chrirch against Pelagianism.* Before the end of the next centui'y, S. Augr.stine had foimded the see of Canterbury, which in process of time came to be acknow ledged as the metropolitan chmch of the ^vhole 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 Canlerb-aiT, without one exception, for nine centiuies and up-\^'ards, among the sixty-three who held that see doivn to Cranmer inclusive, received their palls from Eome. " TVhen 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, Heni-y VI. : copies of which exist still in the arehiepia- 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 mindfiil of its primeval obligations, or its canonical duties to the see of Eome. 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 then- acceptance in England were not made paii-and- parcel of the ecclesiastical law of that realm. Now and then there wero 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 rig-hts 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 futm-e doctrinal tests. There had been a quan'el between one king of England, Henry VEII., 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 ci-vil or ecclesiastical suit, and it had proceeded to extremities on both sides. But never had the Pope thi-eatened any encroachments, then, on the abstract rights of the Crown ; still less had there been any attack on the liberties of the Chm-ch of England. There, had been no new doeh'ine promulgated, nor any new discipline enjoined for acceptance by it. Because a monarch, so notoriously singular as Hemy Vni. in his matrimonial ai-rangements, had been thwarted in them, tha Church of England assented to abjm'e the supreinacy of the Pope iu that reig'n, to bmii and destroy all its time-honoiued rituals for celebrating Divine service in the next ; and then, after a few years of feigned repentance imder 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 ' Oiu- Camp at Windsor,' a.d. the reunion of the Armenians -srith the 1439, Oct. 3, and is on the reunion of the Western Church." Greeks ; the second is earlier, ' From Read- ( ^-^ ) Articles of 'EeHgion:' not only -mthout the smallest reference to the opinions of the rest of Chiistendom, but in open defiance of the General CouncU of the West, then actually sittmg, and to which its bishops among others had, in confoi-mity -\vith ancient usage, received thefr 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 evei'y coi'porate 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 Fom-th Lateran Coimcil, 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.' Eestriction of the cup to the celebrant priest, which it had received from the Coimcil of Constance, it now asserted to be contraiy to ' Christ's ordinance.' Celibacy of the clergy, which in common with the rest of the West had been its o-wn discipline from time immemorial, it now declared it to be la^\-ful to depart from, though no other Westei-n Chmch had relaxed that nde. 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 coiTupt foUowing of the Apostles.' To ask for the prayers of the Saints in heaven, to venerate their relics and images on eai-th, as the Chmch of Rome did, it aifirmed to be ' rep-jgnant to the Word of God;' though its old office-books alone showed how identical had been its o-wn authorised practice, from the Noi'man Conquest at latest. Finally, in consenting to abandon appeals to Eome, it repudiated not merely one of the first principles of its o^^^l Canon Law, but likewise one of the earliest synodical acts on record of its own primitive bishops, above 1200 years pre-^-iously, who sat and voted at that council which authorised them. AH this it did T^ithout so much as asking counsel or inriting criticism fr-om any one of the local chiu'ches in Europe — vsith all which it had for so long been united as one family — on the -svisdom or justice of its proceedings. The only foreigners whom it condescended to consult at aU were those who had unchm'ched 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-Enghsh was the com'se pm'sued ! 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 ' Fihoque ' to the creed at once, and have never really given in. But here was a local chm-ch an'ogating to set aside doctrines and practices of the collective Chmch — which it had for ages accepted, inculcated, and enforced itself — on the ground pmicipally that they were 'repugnant to the Word of God ;' but only, therefore, as inteipreted by its own h-ving 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 kno"wn nothing of the true meaning of the Word of God, how many degrees below nothing might the h-ring authorities of one local chmch of a single age be supposed to rank in their estimate of the same ? Had each of the EugHsh counties taken that -\-iew of their con stitutional obligations in the sixteenth centmy, 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 w-ould have become of the unity of the CathpHc Chm'ch by this time?" — (Chap. 87, pp. 216-220.) We here learn the deliberate opuiions of a Eoman Catholic thoroughly competent to form a true judgment with refer ence to the Ai'ticles — 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 Ee-union amongst the separated portions of the Christian Family so earnestly desued. May it please God that aU 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 Chm-ch of England to be possessed of this remarkable treatise. It is now re-published, therefore, as it was originally Avritten, in Latin, together -with an English translation, in parallel columns. It has been printed from the London edition * (fcp. 8vo), without pubHsher'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 fi'iend; for the loan of the second to the Eev. J. P. Kane, M.A. The extracts from the explanatory Problems ai'e given in English only : they -will be formd at length (and most valuable reading they are) in aU the editions of Sancta Clara's boolc, Dcus, Natura, Gratia, etc. The editor is especially gratefid for, and desires to acltnowledge with sincere thanks, the great help afforded him by the Eev. Henry de Eome.stm, 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. SqU-vee, S.W. St. Bernardi's Day, August 20th, 1865. SKETCH OF THE AUTHOR'S LIFE, The Atjthoe of this Interesting and remarkable treatise, Christopher Davenport, whose name in religion was Franclscus a Sancta Clara — kno-wn 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 Coventiy, the gi-andson to a younger brother of the Davenports of Cheshire,! He was bom at Coventiy about the year 1598, and "in gi-ammar learning there educated." '^Vhen 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 ^ix. 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 fonnally to become commoners of the college — the res alt being that John Davenport went to Magdalen Hall, and afterwards became a noted Pmitan: while Christopher, after remaining some time longer (diu-ing Sir Heiu';y's .sojourn at Eton), a pupil of M', Lane, of IMej'ton CoUege, was Induced by some Eoman Catholic * Alhenx Oxonknsls, ed. Bliss, vol. iii. proper, haltered or. In the Visitation of p. 1221. London : 1817. the County Palatine of Chester the name ¦(• The Davenports of Davenport, Wood- of Christopher Davenport occurs more than ford, and Bramhall, co. Chester, were a once: e.jf., 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 -nTeath a felon's head couped ¦ bury, co. Lancaster, 20th Sept. 1612. ( XX ) clergyman, who is believed to have resided iu or near Oxford, to join the Eoman Church and go to Douay. Hav-ing 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. Eetm-ning to Douay, he was — as Antony a "Wood declares — "entered into the English EecoUects* there of the same order," on the 18th October, 1618. Continuing his course of study in the College of St. Bonaventui-e, he aftenvards 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 161-1:. 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 tlu-ough their no-\iceship at Ypres. F. Gennings, in 1G16, in quality of vicar and custos of England, assembled about half a dozen brethren, including no-vices, 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 pro-vince. He was partially sucoessfid ; and four years later the restoration was completed, and they were declaied by the ilinister General of the Order, F. Bernardine de Senis, sufficiently niunerous to be entitled to the privileges of a separate province, of which F. Genning-s was appointed provincial ; and this restoration was sanctioned and con firmed by the authority of the Holy See. F. Genning-s died at Douay, Kovember 2ud, 1660, of his religious profession 46. Their object was to prepare labourers for the En glish Mission ; they enjoyed the privileges of the imivemty of Douay. In 1700 they had 60 members, and continued -to flourish till the French Revolution in 1793 ; but all the friars found me-ans to escape out of France in disguise.— F. C. H." ( sxi ) order in England,* he was induced to" leave lils work in France and to undertake missionary labours in lils native country, where he was generally known by his name In religion of Franclscus a Sancta Clara, and rendered veiy 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 Eling Charles the First, and soon became as highly and deservedly honom-ed for his learning, ability, and devotion by members of the Church of England as he was by the leading authorities of his own commimlon. 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 works testifies both to his unwearied labours and considerable theological knowledge. During the whole period of the Great Eebelllon, when both Eoman 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 dlstlngailshed prelates and theologians of the National Church, for co-operation in promoting a visible coi^orate Ee-iuilon. He was in constant communication with Arch bishop Laud,t Bishop Montague, Dr. Cosin, and others of that Influential school ; and, on one occasion, made application through Dr. Augustus LInclsell, one of the Ai'chbishop's cha^^laliis, to have a book In defence of Episcopacy — Apologia JEpiscopomm seu Sacri Magistratus propugnatio, etc. — formally licensed for printing. Sancta Clara was found sometimes in London, * The Minister- General of the Fran- foi-mal restoration of the English pro-raice. ciscans, by Letters Patent, dated from f Laud's History of His Troulles, p. Madrid 6th of August, 16^9, 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— aD the services of whom are fully acknowledged in a general way in more than one of his pubhcations. To membei-s of the Church of England his most urteresting 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 ob-viously desu'ed, and laboiu-ed for, a coi-porate Ee-unlon ; and practically took one of the most important and efficient steps towarcb effecting it, that could possibly have been chosen, by sho-\ving men on both sides, even at that period, that they aheady agreed more, and differed less, than the prejudice of popvdar opinion would have them belieye ; and, furthermore, that many of those points on which they differed were i-ather of the accidents than the substance of Di-vine 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 di\-ine charity on which it was founded. The school of Laud and Cosin, of Shelford and Pocklington, appeared imprepared to acccept its line of argument and conclusions, if, a true judgment can be formed from the vaiious attitudes taken up by different writers who put themselves forward to reply to It, Amongst his own co-religionists, many were foimd who questiojied the -wisdom of his poUcy, because they were miprepared to allow the Church of England all that he had assumed it stUl retained and possessed. Others, again, saw in his Christian temper and moderation much to commend ; and for the futm-e were of good courage and hopeful. For the general tone and feeling of the clergy Avere rapldlj"- changing, as Davenport had long ago discovered at Oxford ; while the dreary Cal-vinlsm and mischievous Erastlanism under Elizabeth had given place to principles far more nearly approaching those of the ancient system than had ever energized since the e\-il days of separation and dhision under Hemy the Eighth. Father Leander, a friend and contemporary of Sancta Clara, who had been specially sent to enquire into the true state of the Chiirch of ( xxiii ) England, fuUy testifies to this 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 Eoman Catholics In England attempted to obtain a formal condemnation of Sancta Clara's book, the King, who had been its patron, whose sympathies were entu-ely in a Catholic direction, and who longed for Ee-union,t — ^gave a special commis sion to the Queen's agent at Eome to prevent so mifortunate a mistake bemg committed. I Thi'ough the over-zealous partlzanship of certain persons who appeared imable to comprehend rightly the great object which its author entertamed, and so charitably desired to see accompHshed, several attempts to bring it under the censm-e of the " Holy Office" were made, but failed. Amongst Clarendon's State Papers § a Letter from Eome from " John Selbye " to Father Leander-— who styles himself elsewhere "' F. Leander de S. Martino, Congregatlonis Anghce Benedictinorum * "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 -srith the grace of God : they admit the first four General Councils, the three au thentic symbols, of the Apostles, Kice or Constantinople, and of St. Athanasius, as they are received in the Roman Church ; they reverence the Primitive Church, ami imanimous 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."— FatherLeander'siJeport 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 un-wiUing 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 -union of the Church." % 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 exa-sperated 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 ) Preeses generalis," — contains the foUo-wing : — " The event . of Father Francis Clare's Book wiU be that it will be forbidden: yet in the modestest kind, to give His Majesty satisfaction, who is exceedingly beloved and esteemed here, by great and little, for his A-Irtues, of which all sorts give abundant commendations; and for this same reason they •will not proceed agamst the author's person, as they intended. This tvas then- intention, but the prolonging of then- prohibiting causes some suspi cion of alteration in theu- 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 smcerely unto you, upon my salvation." According to Mi", 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 Winclebank, and is endorsed by him, dated Nov, 15, 1634, the -writer teUs us who John Selbye was : — " Our Procurator in Eome is called by his proper name, Richard Eeade, 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 Clai'a, at Eome, is tha subject of comment In another letter from Mi', Wilfred (Qy,|,? Mr. Wilfied, 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 Eoman 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-unlon of Chi'istlans, this work of Sancta Clara is refeired 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 I^Ir. Berington maintains, fm-nlshed 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 w-as Mr, Davenport, a Franciscan frlai', otherwise called Franclscus a Sancta Clara, This book was highly esteemed by His Majesty, as beuig full of complaisance for the Protestant* systems in several points, and discovering an inclination of approaching nearer to them by concessions, where the CathoHc cause would permit it to be done. But the work was far from being liked at the Eoman Com-t, where it was considered as a very dangerous production, far too condescending to schismatics and heretics. The generaUty also of the English Catholics w-ere 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 dechned 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 he looked on tliis book of Davenport as a remote disposition towards It. It was, therefore, deemed an ImpoHtic step in Eome to let then- censures loose against it at this juncture. Father Philip was very industrious in ac- quaintuig the Eoman 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 woidd 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 faithfid might not be scandalised. The account gave Winclebank 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 ako pressed Panzani to take care that they were very cautious at Rome, for that it w-ould certainly ruin all their projects, if a work of that pacific tendency were condemned. But not-nithstanding 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, wilhng to leave England ; but rather strove to shelter himself under the king's protection, which to some persons appeared to be a very odd ( XXN^i ) proceeding, and looked as if he designed to go on further. Even some suspected the worst of him, from his haAang once been a member of the English Church. In the meanwhile Panzani omitted not to advise his Court to be cautious, and to comphment the king In favour of Mx, Daven port, as far as the case woidd 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 prcA^ously he had been elected, for the third time. Provincial of the English Franciscans,* and at the expiration of his term of office of tliree years, was again appointed to the same honourable position, Antony h, Wood -writes that he was " accounted the greatest and chiefest pillar of his order," reraarldng elsewhere " that he was excellently well versed in school dl-vlnlty, 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 Cathohcs, 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 e-vincing much anxiety to restore to the whole nation that unity of feeling, action, and faith w-hlch it had once possessed, having " scarce been broke for a centurie." As any sketch of the Author's life would be ob-\"Iously imperfect without a list of his many works, upon which his reputation is founded, and such accounts of them as woidd enable the reader to discover them for himself, a list is give. I below, with as much reliable Infonnation 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 Gennings, 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 N&w- 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 iu its reprmt this sketch is prefixed : — Paraphrastica Expositio Articulorum Confessionis Anglicce. 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. — ^Briti-sh Museum, Lugdimi, 1634,, 4to. 4376. f,] 4, Systema Fidei, sive Tractatus de Concilio Universali, etc, Leod. 1648. [Bodleian, 4to. T. 79, Th,j t "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 Gth 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. th.at Sir. Leibrffne shew'd you the Index Middleton (then chaplain to Basil, Lord Expurgatorius of Spain, wherein was named Fielding, ambassador) to Archbishop Laud, the Book of Articles published by me. dated at Venice, in December, 1635, 1 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 -srith the Catholics, the rebels." First edition] named Alonzo and that there was a consultation about it, de Cardenas, who had great mahce to the and some did ' extrema svadere,' and cried last lung, and being informed by a '«lie3 -what is wanting here. " May be pi-o\ od thereby," — i.e., by the (Catholic or ITni- vei-sal) Chiu-ch. For "the Church .... hath authority in contro\'ei-sies of Faith."] f [By the same ride by -wMch 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 ISTew Testament. The Third and Fourth Books of Esdras, and The Prayer of JMiiuasses, were not received by the Council of Trent. Baruch the Prophet, Tlie Song cf the Three Children {Bcnedicitc), Tlie Stoiy of Susanna, and Tlie 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 (b) simply human ; but only declares that (the Church) " doth not apply them to establish any doctrine."] b3 ( 4 ) Quod vero subdit de niimero Scrlp- tm'ariim Canonicarum, hujus loci est.De nominihus et numero Librorum SacrcB Scripturce Canonical veteiis Testamenti.* Genesis, E.xodus, Le%'iticus, Nu- niei'i, Deuteron : prior Liber Pai'alipo- menun, primus Liber Esdrii', secun- dus Lil)er Esch'a?, Liber Esther, Josue, Judicum, Ruth, prior Liber Regiim, Secimdus Liber Regum, prior Liber Samuelis, Securidus Liber Saniuehs, Liber Job, Psalnii, Provei'bia, Ecclesiastes vel Conciona- tor, Canticj, Soloraonis, quatuor Pi'ophet?3 majores, duodecim Pro- phetio minoi'es. Cffitero-s, authoritate Hieronynii, adduetl in Ecclesiis ad mores instrii- cndos, non ad doctrlnam firmcindam legi jubent. Cujus generis .sunt : — tides 20, 21, and 34; but the re mainder, concerning the number of the Books of Canonical Scrlptmv, belongs to this place. Of the names and number of the Boohs of Canonical Scripture of the Old Testament. Genesis, Exodus, LeA-Iticus, Num bers, Deuteronomy, Jcshua, Judges, Ruth, The First Book of Samuel, The Second Book of Samuel, The First Book of Kings, The Second Book of Kings, The Fu-st Book of Chi'onicles, The Second Book of Chronicles, The First Book of Es dras, The Second Book of Esdras, The Book of Esther, The BooR of Job, The Psalms, The Proverbs, Ecclesiastes or the Preacher, Cantica, or Songs of Solomon, Four Prophets the greater, TNvelve 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: — * [Tliis part of Article VI., reprinted verhatim from the edition of Sancta Clara, pubhshed iu London, without any printer's name, a.d. 1646, is not, aa 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 " CjEteros, etc.,", stands as foUo-ws in the Latin edition of Kay : — " Alios autem Libros (ut ait Hieronymuis) legit quidem Ecclesia, ad exempla vitre, et for- mandos mores : Hies tamen ad dogmata confirmanda non adhibet, ut sunt : — " and thus in the English form of the 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 : — ."] ( 5 ) v, c^uartus Tertlus Liber Esdr Liber Esch'a), Liber Tobue, Liber Judith, reliquum LIbrI Esther, Liber Saplentuo, Liber Jesu filii SIrach, Baruch Propheta?, Cantlcum triuin puerorimi. Historian Susanna;, de Bel et Dracone, Oratio Manasses, prior Liber Maccabaorum, secundas Liber Maccabjeorum. Novl Testamenti omnes Libros (ut -vulgo recepti sunt) reclpunus et habemus pro Canonlcis, The Third Book of Esdras, The- Fourth Book of Esdras, The Book of Tol^ias, The Book of Judith, The rest of the Book of Esther, The Book of Wisdom, Je.siis the Son of Sirach, Baruch the Prophet, The Song of the Three Childi-en, The Story of Susanna, Of Bel and the Dragon, The Prayer of ilauasse.s. The First Book of ]Maccabee.s, The Second Book of Maccalices. All the Books of the New Testa ment, as they are commonly receh'ed, we do receive, and account them CanonicaL Parapheasis. — winter Catholicos, paucisslmos invenio vu'os eniditos, qui post Florentlnum, in .dubium vocaiTint iillos ex Llbris ibi pro Canonlcis declaratis, nisi Cajetanum In fine suoriim Commeutarioi-um super Libros historianim Veteris Testamenti, qui Libros In Articulo exceptos, Canonicos recte appellarl fatetiu' ob authoritateni Conclliorum et aliquomm Patrum, sed In dissimill gradu ; scilicet, ut hie in Articulo : lion ad Fidem fnnandam, sed solum ad mores instiitendos ; ut olim lo- quutus est Rufiinus in Exposltione Symboli, Franclscus etiam JSIu-au- dida " De Fide et ordine Credeuch" idem plane asserit ex Hieronymo, et Explanation. — Amona Catho- lies, I find very few learned men who since the CouncU of Florence have raised a doubt concerning any of the Books there declared Cauoiii- ca], except Cajetan, at the end of his Coinmentanes on tho HistoricalBooks of the Old Test:mient. 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 e-ftablishing of the Faithy but only for instruction of manna's; as was said Iouq- since b\" Rufiinus In Ids "Exposition of the Creed." Fran clscus IMii'andiJa, too, iu his ti-eatlse ( 6 ) ad eundem fere sensum citat S, An- toniniun, post L}Tanum in pnef atlone ad Hbros Tobia;, Htec eoriun opinio, Heel slngidtu'Is valde et certc hferesl proxima est, priesci'tim post Trid, ubi Illos In Canonem reponi declarat, secundum quod ante fecerat Florentlnum ciun consensu utrlusque Eccleslie. Saltenl sic Chai'anza citat Floren tlnum, et alii Ipso seniores. Video tamen ab aliis viiis cloctls in dublani verti, an Florentlnum libros illos hodle controversos, ut Canonicos de- claraverit : sed de Trid. constat. Quia tamen Ai'ticulus non onniino rejicit eos ex Canoiie, non videtiu' esse hasrcsun simpllcitcr: sic etiam Mel- chior Cano In locis 1, 2, c. 9. ubi tamen fatetiu' esse ha'resi proximam, quia certe ventati Catholicce fidei ad- versatur; non manifeste quidem, sed sapientum omnium longe probabili ac ferme necessarice sententice. Facile enun es.set hujus modi glossemate, quasciuique qudiiuuciuique Conclli- "De fide et ordine Credendi," makes the same plain assertion from St, Jerome, and cites St, Antonuius to almost the same piuiiort, after De Lj-i'a In the " Preface to the Boolis of Tobias." Such is their opinion, thougli it be quite slngTilar and certainly approxi mating to heresy, especially since the Council of Trent, w-hlcli places the Books in the Canon in accordance with what the Council of Florence, with the consent of both Chiu'ches, Eastern and Western, had previously done. At least Charanza and others be fore hun cite the Council of Flo rence to this pui'port. 1 find, how-' ever, that other learned men raise a a doubt as to wdiether the Council of Florence declared the Eoolcs, wliieh are at present controverted, to be Canonical; but It is agreed that Trent did. Since, how-ever, the Aiiicle does not Avholly reject them from the Canon, it does not seem to be heresy, absolutely. According to !Melchior Cano, In his " Loci Theo- loglcl" (bk, li, c, 9), Avhere, however, he allows it " to approximate to heresy, because it is certainly repugnant to the truth of the Catholic Faith : not openly ( 7 ) oriim definltloues eludere et evertere. Sclo tamen Waldensem, 1, 2, Doc- trlnalls Fidei Antlq. c. 19, tenere quod aiithoritas declarandl et approbandi sacros hbros sit In serie Patiiun omnium, et fideliiun ab Apostolis succedentium : sic etiam Driedonis 1, I, De Eccles, Sciipturis et Dog- matlbus, c, I, et hInc minus ausim sententlam pnetactam CajetanI, et hujus Ai-tlculi htereseos inslmidare. indeed; but by being opposed to the very probable and almost necessary opinion of all learned men." For It w-ould be easy, by a gloss of this kind, to escape from and OA-erthrow any definitions of any CoimcHs, I know- ho-R-ever that Waldensls, "Doctr, Fid, Antlq." (bk. il. c, 19\ holds that the authority for declaring and approring the Sacred Books rests Avith the series of all the Fathers and faithful In succession from the Apos tles, Avith Avhom agrees Driedonis "De Eccles. Script, et Dogm." (bk. I. c. I.)— -for these reasons, I should the rather shraik from charging heresy upon the above-mentioned opimon of Cajetan and upon this Aiticle, Articull'S VII. — De Vetcn Testa- mento. TESTAMENTUM Vetus Novo contrarium non est, quandoqul- dem tain in Vcteri, quam in Noa'o per Christum, qui iinlcus est jMediator, Dei et homlnum, Deus et homo, seterna A'lta huniano generl est pro- poslta, Quare male sentlunt, qui veteres tantum In promlssiones tem- poi'arias sperasse confingiuit, Quan- quam lex a Deo data per Mosen (cjuoad ca^remonlas et ritus) Chris tianos non astringat, neque civilia Article \Ii.~Of the Old Testa ment. THE Old Testament Is not contrai-y to tho NcAv: for both Iu tlie Old and Ncav Testament eA-erlastina; life Is offered to ilankind by Christ, AA-lio Is the only Mechator betAA-een God and Man, being both God and Man, Wherefore they are not to be heard, which feign that the old Fa thers cUd look only for transltoi-y promises. Although the LaAV glA-en from God by Moses, as touchuig Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind ( 8 ) ejus pra?cepta In aliqua republlca necessario recipl debeant; nlhilominus tamen ab obechentia mandatonim (qute moral ia vocantiu') null us (quan- tnmAls Cluistlanus) est solutus/ Clmstian men, nor the ClA-il precepts thereof oudit of necessity to be re- ceh-ed in any common-AA-ealth; yet iiotwithstaiichng, no Christian man AA-luitsoeA-er is free from the obedience of the Commandments Avhich are called Moral, Pailvphrasis. — Hie Ai'ticulus per Explanation, — Tliis Ai'ticle Is totuni Catholicus est. Cathohc thi-oughout.- Articulvs VIH. — De tribus Sym- bolis. SY^IBOLA tria Nlctenum, Atha- nasii, et quod vulgo Apostolo- rum appellatm", omnino recipienda sunt et credenda ; nam fii-misslmis Scriptiu'arum testimonlis prob.iri possmit. PAR-VPUr.-VSI3.- judicium. -De hoc Idem est Article VHI, — OftJie xhree Creeds. THE Three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athana.fiuss Creed, and that AA-liIch is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, ought thoroughly to be re ceived and beHoA-ed ; for they may be proA-ed by most certain Avarrants of holy Scripture, Explanation. — The judgment upon this Is tho same. Articulus IX. — De Peccato Originali. PECCATUM orlglnis non est (ut fabulantur PelagianI) in iinita- lioue Adanil situm, sed est Aitium, et depraA'atio naturai, cujuslibet ho- mlnis ex Adamo naturaUter propa- gati : qua fit, ut ab originali justitia quam longisslme distet; ad malum sua natura propendeat ; et caro sem per adversus spirltmn coucuplscat; Article IX. — Of Original or Birth-sin. ORIGINAL Sin standeth not In the foUo^ring 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 ( 9 ) unde In unoquoque nascentlum, Irani Del atque damnatlonem meretiu*, Planet etiam in renatis luec natura; depravatio : qua fit, ut affectus car- nis, Grsece (ppovrjfia crapKO'i (quod alii saplentiam, alii sensum, alii affectum, alii studlum carnis inter- pretantur), legi Del non subjiciatar, Et quanquam renatis et credentibus nulla propter Christum est condem- natlo, peccati tamen in sese rationem habere concupiscentlam, fatetiu* Apostolus, Paraphkasis. — Prior pars sanam contlnet doctrlnam, et tam Sanctis Patribus, quam Tlieologis A'alde coii- formem. Posterior vero, qu^ Incipit: manet etiam in renatis, examinatur prope fincm Problematis 12. the flesh lusteth ahvays contrary to the spirit ; and therefore In every person born into this world, it de- serveth God's Avrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are rege nerated ; Avhereby the lust of the flesh, called in Greek, phronema sarhos, AA-hich some do expound the Avisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desu'e, of the flesh, is not subject to the LaAv of God, And although there is no condemnation for them that belicA-e 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 soiuid doc trine, entirely iu agreement both Avith the holy Fathers aud Avith Theologians. The latter part, Iioaa-- CA-er, commencing, "And this In fection" Is examined towards the end of Problem 12, Explanation froji Prop.leai XII. — With respect to what is said in Ai'ticle IX., that " concupiscence hath of itself the nature of sin," it w-ould seem somewhat difficult to explain this, unless the Article had. said before liOAV this should be understood, in these Avords, " This sensuality, affection, or desire of the flesh, is not subject to the laAv of God." It is, therefore, said to have of itself the nature of sin, because it is not subject to the divine laAv, and no more. It has not, therefore, formally the natiu'e of sin, but only by Avay of disposition, because In truth it disposes or Inclines us ( 10 ) against the law of God : undoubtedly, then, it has no other meaning than that AAhich, ui a former quotation, St. Augustine gave to the Avords of St, Paul — that is, that It has the natiu'e of sui, 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 Ai'ticle, to be not subject to the diA-iiie law; because It raises contests, which are sometimes severe, betAveen the flesh and the spu'it, AvhIch St. Paul describes iu liis Ep, to the Galatians (v. 17); and for this cause is called by many of the ancients " the t^xant in our members ;" by others, " the Aveakness of our nature ;" by St. Paul, " the laAV of the members," and, by Augustine, " the law of the flesh ;" Avhicli epithets, though they do not imply Avhat is formally sin, yet plainly suggest in some manner the nature of sin, or lack of subordination to the divine hiAv, which is quite sufficient to agree with the Article. Artigulus X. — De Libero Arbitno. EA est homlnis post lapsum Adre conchtio, ut sese natm'alibus sills Alribus, et bonis operibus, ad fidem et InvocationemDei conA-ertere, " ac prseparare non possit : Quare absque gi'atia Dei (quje per Chrls' tum est) nos pravenieiite, ut vellnius, et coopcrante, dum volumus, ad pietatis opera facienda, quce Deo grata simt et accepta, nihU valemus. Article X. — Of Free- Will. THE condition of Man after the fall of Adam Is such, that he cannot tum and prepare himself, by hls own natural strength and good Avoi'ks, to faith, and calling upon God : Wherefore w-e have no power to do good Avoiks pleasant and ac ceptable to God, Avithout the grace of God by Christ preA-enting us, that Ave may have a good Anil, and AA-ork- ing AvIth us, AA-hen Ave haA-e that good will. Paraphrasis.— Catholicus est, et JExplanation. — This Ai'ticle is declaratm- Problematibus 10, 11, 12, ' Catholic, and is explained in Problems immo a Prob. 5 ad 12, 10, 11, 12; or, mdeed, from Problems 5 to 12. Explanation from Proble3i XI,— This Is entirely true throughout, andui conformity with the Comicds of Orange, Milevis, and Trent, as is ( 11 ) abmidantly clear from fomier quotations, and othei-s to be considered here after. First is the decision of Orange (II, § 3), — " If any man say that gi'ace can be gained by man's oaa-u calling upon God, and not that gi-ace itself leads us to call for It, he contradicts the Prophet Isaiah (Ixa-, 1), and the Apostle using the same AVords (Romans x, 21). *I Avas foiuidof them that sought me not. I AA-as made manifest unto them that asked not after me.' " Secondly (§7). — "If any one shoidd say that we, of oiu' OAvn natiu'al strength, think, or choose — that Is, aa-UI, &c., any good thing AvhIch pertains to OIU" eternal sah-atlon, AA'ithout the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit: he Is deceiA-ed by an heretical spirit, not luidei-standlng the Avord of God in the Gospel — ' Without Me ye can do nothing ;' and that sa;)-ing of the Apostle, 'Not that Ave are sufficient of ourseh-es to think anything as of oui-selves, but our sufficiency is of God.' " And m aU ponits the doctrine of the Tridentine Council is the same. There is not a AVord, as may here be seen, against the poAver of Free Will in order to moral acts. And this can be confirmed by the authority of many Protestant Doctors : for mstance, Dr, Whittaker, "De peccato origin." (II. 3), says as f oUoaa's : — " If, by a moral act, you mean the Plillosophlcal Virtues, Ave do not deny that a man, AA'ithout special grace may act in many things AA-ith fortitude, temperance, and justice." These are his AA-ords. He used the Avords "Philosophical Virtues"" that he might exclude virtues con ducing to salvation, aa-IiIcIi is our A-ery doctriue, IMontagu also, " Appellat." (c. X.), at length, both in his O'lA-ii name and in that of others, treats of and defends this tnith. Artigulus XI. — De Hominis Jus- Article XL — Of the Justification tificatione. of Man. TANTUM proptermerituniDomluI lllE are accoimted righteous be^ ac Salvatorls nostri Jesu Christi VY fore God, only for the merit per Fidem, non propter opera et of oiu* Lord and Saviour Jesus merita nostra, jiisti coram Deo repu=- Chii.st by Faith, and not for our oAvn tamm'. Quare sola fide nos justi- Avorks or desei-vings : Wlierefore^ ficari doctmia est saluberrinia ac that Ave are justified by Fiuth only is consolatlonls plenlsshna, ut In Homllia a most Avholesome Docti'uie, and A-eiy ( 12 ) de Justificatione hominis fuslus ex- full of comfort, as more largely is phcatiu'. expressed In the Homily of Justifi cation,* PARiU'HRASis. — Hie Ai'ticulus ex- Explanation. — This article Is amlnatiu- fuse Probl, 22, examined at length In Problem 22, Explanation from Probleji XXH. — To speak truly, I think that this Avhole question, betAA'een Protestants and ourseh-es, has fallen through, imless Ave Avish. to amuse ourselves AAith Avords ; for there iiCA-er Avas a ques tion concerning the efficient cause of justification ; because, as I said, this God alone is according to the behef of all; nor again concerning the meritorious cause, Avhich, as I hav-e also said, is Christ alone, or. His passion ;'' nor concerning the material cause, for to that is subject to that Avliich is said to be justified — namely, man ; as a Avail In respect of Avhiteness ; nor conceiiung the final cause, for the end of all the Predestined is Chi-Ist, as In Epheslans I. — " Having predestinated us by Jesus Clnist to himself," If, then, there be any difficulty, it concerns the fonnal cause ; but neither do Protestants attribute this to faith ; for this Is expressly declared In the Book of Homilies (as It is called amongst Anghcaus, AA-ith Avhom it is a gi'eat authority). So, then, it will be plain that, luider neither of the heads of causation. Is oiu* justification attributed to faith; aud indeed, according to them, Ave are to no extent justified by faith, unless you Avoidd say by faith as a foundation, or as a condition or dlsptisitlon ; Avhich Ave, too, have said in treating of merit, and ha\-e proAcd from St. Augustine, and as Is defined by the Council of Trent (Sess. vi. c. 7). But, if you Avould say that justification is acquired by faith, as applying or laying hold of the merits or righteousness of Christ, I think that this rnay bear a sound and Cathohc sense ; because, m tnith, Ave by faith (according to the text, " He that cometh to God must believe that He is"), tnistmg 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- pubhshed in the reign of Edward the Vlth, mily of Justification."] nor in that of Avhich a Table of Contents ia ( 13 ) sufferings, by prayer, by charity, &c., at leng-th obtain through Christ our justification. This is their doctrine, and oiu's too ; nor do they attribute more to faith as regards justification, than does the Council of Trent, if they are ex plained Avith caution — that is, in the manner just mentioned ; but the difference really is as to Avhat is to be understood by " Faith," They think that it means a leaning on, or act of confidence In, the promises of God ; Avhile Ave think this to be the same thing Avith that faith of Christ, preached to the nations evei'}-Avhere, by Avhicli Ave belieA'e all the promises of God ; (luiless one may say more concctly, as aboA-e, that this rather belongs to hope) : here, then, Ave might verj' easily come to an agreement, for In this manner does Montagu rightly explain the article ^^ De fide." Indeed, they themselves [the Anglicans] attribute the effect, not to that special faith, but to the faith of Christ, as aa-c do, for in the Ai'ticles no faith is specified,, liut that of Avhich the Apostles always speak. As regards this point then there Is no disagi'eemeut.* Note from Problem XXVI. — God on account of Christ's righteous- ness imputed to us, as if on account of a meritorious cause, gi'ants us oim righteousness p. e. " Inherent righteousness "]. All AA-hich bemg duly weighed, in reality no discrepancy can noAV be found between the Anglican Confes sion and the Tridentine definition ; nor does anything In the Hampton Coiu't Ai-tlcles make for the contrary opinion, as Is clear from Article IX. on Justification ; AA-heuce Montagu, In his " Apj^ello Ca'sarem" (c. 6), expres.sly proves that our doctrine at least, Avith this latitude, is held by them, and in the same passage quotes Dr. "White, Avho asserts that In the justification of the sinner there are two actions on the part of God — one Avhcreby He remits the sin ; the other Avhereby He gives the man poAver to resist sin, A\-hlch poAver is loAe luf used Into our hearts by that second act of God ; Avliich is identical Avith our doctrine. On this point, too, therefore, tliere is agi'ec- 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 lie 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 ) Artigulus XH. — De bonis Article XH, — Of Good ' Operibus. Worlis. BONA opera quce smit fmctiis Fidel A LBEIT that Good Works, AvhIch et justlficatos sequimtiu', quam- IX. are the fmlts of Falt^, and qiiam peccata nostra explare et diA-Ini folloAv after Justification, cannot put juchcii scA-eritatem fene non possimt ; aAvay our shis, and endiu'e the scA-e- Deo tamen gi'ata sunt, et accepta in rity of God's Judg-nient ; yet are Christo, atque ex A-era et viva Fide, they pleasing and acceptable to God necessario profluunt, ut plane ex illis In Chi'ist, and do spring out necessa- requi Fides A-i\-a cognosci pos.sit, atcpie rily of a tiiie and lively Faith ; in- arbor ex friictu judicari, somiich that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fniit. Explanation from Problejm XXI. — With respect to Avhat we haA-e said that, after justification, w-e can merit an mcrease of righteousness and glory, the tAA-elfth Article is clearly on oiu: side, Avhich is in the foUoAving AVords — " Albeit that good works," &c. What Is the meanmg of ^'acceptable to God in Clu'ist," except that through Christ they are accepted, so as to be rewarded ; or, that by force of the dhine and eternal promise, made to us through Christ, they are meri torious, &c. ; AA-hich is the doctrine of the Subtle Doctor, and that com monly receh-ed at present 1 But Avhat is said in the preA-ious words, that they " cannot put aAA-ay our sins, aud endiu'e the scA-erity of God's judgment," must be explamed by accommodating these statements to AA'liat Ave have just said — that is, they cannot do so except in Chist, as Is clearly expressed in the latter part of the Article. For ncithing Is of any value, speaking strictly, if CInid be excluded. In this sense, too, is said above, "nor eiidva'c the severity of God's judg ment ;" not that they \rill be punished, but that they avUI not be rewarded, because AA-ith respect to reward they have no vcdue Avithoiit Christ, as Ave all alloAV. With respect to this, then, Ave are in agreement, Artigulus XIH, — De operibus ante Article XHI. — Of Works before Justificationem. Justification. PEEA qiise fiimt ante gi'atiam TT70RKS done before the grace of Christi, et Spiritus ejus afflatum, VY Christ, and the Inspiration of 0 ( 15 ) cum ex fide Jesu Christi non pro- his Spuit, are not pleasant to God, deant, minime Deo grata sunt, lieque forasmuch as they spring not of faith gratiam (ut multiim A'ocant) de In Jesus Christ, neither do they make congnio merentur, Immo, cum non men meet to receiA'e grace, or (as the simt facta ut Deus ilia fieri A-ohiit et School-authors say) clesen-e grace of prfficeplt, peccati rationem habere non congnuty: yea, rather, for that they dubltamus. are not done as God hath Avilled and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but they haA'e the natm'e of sin. Pae-VphPlAsis, — Examinatur hie Explanation. — This Ai'ticle Is Artie, Problematibus 18, 20, 21. examined m Problems 18, 20, 21. Explanation froji Probleji XXI. — ^Li these Avords It Is evident that the only works excluded from merit of congniity with respect to oiu- justifi cation, are works done before faith in Christ-^that Is, before the fii'st actual gi'ace, or inspiration of the Holy Spu'lt (as Is said in the same Article). Since, then, "the exception proves the nile" as laAvyers say. It foUows that other Avorks — namely, those done In faith — can ch.spose us in some degree for justification, and deserve, of congniity (de congnio), the grace of justifica tion, wlilch 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 AA-hat is added, that " such AVorks haA-e rather the natm'e of sin," Ave must first notice that they are not said absolutely to be sins, b-iit rather to " partake of the nature of sin," AvliIch, undoubtedly, is a term of chmiuution (as the Summulists* say) ; else, they Avould rather unresei-vedly have been called sins. The meaning Is that, by taking sin In a w-ide sense, or extending tlie nature of sin, such Avorks can be brought under it — that is, inasmuch as they are not done in conformity with the laAvs of God ; as Is clearly expressed In these Avords — " 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 confomuty AvIth the Divine Will as revealed in His laws, is not at once assumed to be sin speaking positively, but only negativel}" : otherwise, that a work should be done not in con formity w-ith the law AA'ould be the same as if It were in poslth-e disa- ^ * [" Ut loqiumtur Siunmulistte." Ed. Lugduni, 1G31 ; ed, Londini, 1646.] ( 16 ) gi'eement Avith it, which alone is, strictly speaking, sin ; and further, that all Indifferent acts Avould be sins, Avhich 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 Avorks 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. ill., Cont. Ep. Pelag., c. 5) — " The just man lives by faith ; for, Avithout It, even AA-hat seem to be good Avorks, are tiu'iied into sin." Aid he proves it from St. Paid, " "WliatsoeA'cr is not of faith is sin." And this Is the common doctrine of the schoolmen. Note from Probleji XXI. — St, Aug., Ep. 105. — " Nor does remis sion of suis Itself t.ake place AA'ithout some merit — forsooth, faith obtains this ; for faith Is not deA'oid of merit, by which faith the publican said, ' God be merciful to me a sinner,' and Avent doAvn to his house justified, being humbled by merit of faith. It remains, then, that Ave must not attribute faith itself to the human avIU in Avhich they are puffed up (the Seml-pelag-ians) ; nor to any preceding merits (for Avhatever good acts ai'e meritorious haA-e their origin from faith) ; but Ave must confess it to be the free gift of God, if aa'C think of tnie gi'ace, that is, Avithout merit." Wluit can be more clear, he says, that, through faith, grace of justification is merited, but not of condlgnity ; so that it must be of congruity, Ar.TicuLUS XrV. — De Operibus Article XIV. — Of Worh of Supererogationis. Supererogation . OPERA quce supererogationis ap- TTOLUNTARY "Works, besides, pellaut, non possunt sine ano- V OA'er and aboA'e, God's Coni- gantia et impietate praedicai-i. Nam mandments, AA-hich they call Works illis declarant homines, non tantum of Supererogation, cannot be taught sc Deo rcddere, c[u£e tenentiu' : sed Avithout arroganc}- and impiety : for plus in Ejus gratiam facere quam by them men do declare, that they deberent ; cum aperte Christus cheat, do not only render unto God as Cum feceritis omnia qusecunque prse- much as they are bound to do, but cepta smit vobis, dicite, SerA-i inutiles that they do more for His sake, than sumus. of bounden duty Is required : whereas Chi'ist saith plainly, ^Vhen ye haA'e done all that are commanded to you, say. We are unprofitable seiwants. ( 17 ) Paraphrasis, — Examinatur hie Explanation. — Thlsv Article Is Artie, Problemate 36. examined in Problem 36. Explanation froji Problem XXX'ST;. — To speak the truth, the ex planation of this Ai'ticle would seem someAvhat hard, did not the latter part diminish the cUtficulty. 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 Avords jdaced AA-Ithout limitation ("They render more than they are bound to do "), according to the rules of the schools, are to be interpreted unlvei'sally ; and then the sense avIU be, " They render more than they are bo'iind to do, in any manner, or by any just claim." Such AA-orks, then, the Article condemns ; aud so, too, do Ave. Moreover, did God exact all that He might justly claim and Ave oaa-c, Ave should be AA'holly unprofitable and most miserable : Ave owe eAerything to Him, for there is nothing Avhicli Ave have not receh-ed. We do not, therefore, boast that AA'e render more to God than Ave are bound to do, if Ave include eA'ery kind of debt. MoreoA'er, the Article speaks of the Works of a man in a state of pure nature — that Is, not preAented nor assisted by God's grace ; AA-hich is evident from the fact that it does not once mention grace, AAhlle Ave speak of man In a state of righteousness, that Is, furnished AA-ith the grace of God. In this, then, there Is nothing against the doctnne of Works of Super erogation proved by us from the Fathers, and supported also by their OAvn authorities of most Aveight. Some Cahiuists calumniate us by alleging certain frivolous and untrue statements Avith respect to this point of Saperei'O'-'-atioii. ilay God forghe them for deceitfully ensnaring souls, othei'Avise Avell affected toAvards the truth ! ileanAvliile, on our side arc Ijotli the Anglican Articles, and those Avho follow them Avithout gallo. Artigulus XV. — De Chnsto, Qui Article XV. — Of Christ alone solus est sine peccato. vnthont Sin. CHRISTUS in nostrse natursc A-eri- /^HRIST in the truth of our natiu'c tate, per omnia simllls factus est \J AA-as made 'like unto us in all nobis, excepto peccato, a Cjuo prorsus things, sin only except, from Avhich erat immunis, tum in carne, tum in He was clearly void, both in His flesh, spiritu. Venit ut Agnus absque and in His .spirit. He came to be the ( 18 ) macul.1. Qui miindi peccata per Im- molatlonem Sui semel factam tolleret; et peccatum (ut inqnit Johannes) In Eo non erat : sed nos rellqui, etiam baptlzati, et In Christo regenerati, in multis tamen offendlmus omnes, Et si dixei'imus, quia peccatum non habemus, nos ipsos seducimus, et A'eritas iu nobis non est. PAP..VPIIRASIS, — Hlc Artlculus usque ad hoDc A'erba : Sed nos reliqui etiam baptlzati, etc, sanctlsslmiis est : ibi A'ero indlget glossa, non mea, sed magnl Augustini in 1. de Natura et Gra, contra Pelagianos : — " Cum de peccatis agltur, de S. Yir- glne Mai'la propter honorem Domini nullam proreus habere volo qusestio- nem, Inde enim scimiis, cpiod el plus gi'atife collatum fuerit ad A-Incendiun omni ex parte peccatum, cpiod con- clpere ac parere meniit eiun, quem constat nullum habulsse peccatum. Hrec ergo Virgine excepta, si omnes illos Sauctos et Sanctas, qui hi Scrip- turis Sanctis non modo non peccasse, A-enun etiam juste A'lxisse rcfenmtiu' cum hie viA'erent, congregare posse- miis, et Inten'ogare, utnim essent sine peccato : quid fuisse responsm'os putamus? Quantahbet fuerit in hoc coi'pore excellentia sanctltatis, si interrogari potuissent, una voce Lamb without spot, who, by sacrifice of Huhself once made, should take aAvay the sins of the world, and sin, as Saint John saith, A\-as not in Him, But all AA-e the rest, although bap tized, and born again in Christ, yet offend in many things ; and if AA-e say AA-e haAe no sin, Ave deceiA-e our selves, and the truth' Is not in us. Explanation. — This Ai-tlcle, as far as the Avords " But all Ave the rest, although baptized," &c,, is most sound. At this point, howcA-er, a gloss is required, not one of mine, but of the great St, Augustine (hb. "de Nat. et Grat. cont. Pelag.")— " ^Vhen sins ai'e treated of, for the honom" of oiu" Lord, I \n\[ have no mention whatever of the B. Virgin Mai'y ; for we loiOAv that to her was given more grace, so as to conquer sin Avholly, because she merited to conceive and bear Him, Who all agree Avas Avithout sin. This Virg-in then being exceptefl, If Ave could collect together aU those saints, A\-ho in the Sacred Scriptures are said not only not to haA'e sinned, but also to haA'e lived justly, and were to ask them whether they .were sinless, what do Ave think that they AA'oidd ansAA-er? HoweA-er great might haA-e been the excellence of their sanctltv in the ( 19 ) clamasseut illud, quod ait Joannes Apostolus : Si cUxerimus qiua pec catum non habemus, Ipsi nos seduci mus, et Veritas in nobis non est," Ad hunc sensum expllcandum censeo Artlculum, et A'erba ipsa om nino favere : non enim dicit, Omnes rellqui baptlzati, \\hi obimlA-ersalltatem illius termini, Includl Adderetim etiam B. Virgo, sed castlus dicit : nos reliq'il, ubi sine dubio non interponit B, Virginem inter commimes fseces peccatonim, propter honorem Domini, prfesertlm dum eam Angelus ex Dei mandato, gr'atla' plenum et in nmllerl- bus beneclictam pronimcIaA-It. Si ergo illam includl volulssent Artlculi con- dltores, ahquas saltem except'ones honorarias addidissent, quod dum non fecerint, nee speciatim nominarlnt, putem Illos cum Aiigustlno, Cum. de peccatis agltur de S. Virgine Matia, nullam prorsus habere vclle quosstio- ncm ; unmo per illmn termlnum restricth-um (710s rellqui) ipsam plane excluslsse charitatlve sentio, Et eo magis, quia subditur, Nos reliqui Baptizati, de B, Virgine enim sub dubio semper fuit, an fuerit bap- tlzata; forte enlin ips.a fuit excepta flesh, if they could be asked the question, they would with one voice ci"y out that AA'hlch the Apostle John says, ' If AA-e say that Ave haA'e no sin, AA'e deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.' " I think that the Article must be explained In this sense, and that the AA'ords are altogether faA-ourable to the Interpretation, for it is not said, " All Ave the rest :" Avhere from the unlA-ei'sal nature of the proposition, even the B, Virgin might seem to be included, but it Is more properly "We the rest," in Avhich expression, Avithout doubt, the B. Vu'gin is not included Avitli the common dregs of sin, " for the honour of our Lord," especially since the Angel by the com mand of God pronoiuiced her "fuU of grace," and " blessed among women." If, therefoi'e, the AA'rlters of the Ar ticles had Intended her to be included, they AVoidd at least have made some exceptions in her lionoiu' ; and, since they did not do this, nor specially name her, I think that they, Avith St. Augustine, "when sins are treated of, Avill have no mention whatever of the B. Virgin Mary;" and further, by that restrictive expression (" Ave the rest"), I think that they plainly ex- " c2 ( 20 ) ab ilia lege ; nee mInun, quia ut pie Doctor 4. d. 4, q, 6 de ea fuisset ratio cUspensandi : quia fort^ habuit In conceptlone Filii siu Illam plenl- tiuUnem grathe, ad quam Deus cUs- posuit eam pen'onu'e, Ilh Igltoi' termini indefinltl in Ai'tlculo, non possunt rationabillter extendi ad casum tam speclalem 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 Avhether the B. Virgin CA-er Avas baptized, and perhaps she Avas excepted from that law. Nor need this be a cause for Avonder ; for, as the Doctor piously obserA'es (4, d. 4, q. 6), there Avould have been a reason for dispensing in her case, because, perhaps, in the conception of her Son, she receh-ed that fulness of giiice, to Avhich God ordained that she should attain. I conclude, then, that those indefinite teiins 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 -^vhat has been s;xid by t-svo English Roman Catholics, Mr. E. S. Ffoulkes aud the Bishop of Birmingham, Avith reg-ard to the dog-ma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin (-w-hioh some persons, as they comprehend the doctrine, conceive to stand iu direct opposition to certain pro positions in this Article). Mr. Ffoulkes, who treats the subject most lucidly in his j-emarkable book, Christendom's Divisions (Long-mans, 1865), thus writes, pp. 101- 105: — "All that is really impHed by it [/. 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 eveiy man, woman, and child at the moment of theix- 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 om- Baptism ; and that grace wliich, unfortu nately, we are too apt to commence de clining from the ne.vt moment afterAV-ards, He by extraordinary privilege preserved ever afterwards intact through life in her alone, for whom alone Avas preserved the extraordinary honour of becoming His Sponse, and Mother of the Incarnate "Word. For those who believe thoroughly in the Divine gift bestowed in Baptism, there can be no difficulty in beheving in the Imma culate Conception. of the Mother of God. It was but the, anticipation of what is ac- ( 21 ) Artigulus XVI. — De peccato post ' Baptlsmum. Article XVI. — Of Sin after Baptiim. NON omne peccatum mortale post "VTOT every deadly sui AviUuigly Baptlsmum voluntarie neroetra- IA Baptlsmum voluntarie perpetr tum est peccatum In Spirltmn Sanc tum, et IiTemlssIblle : prolnde lapsls committed after Baptism Is sin against the Holy Ghost, and impar- donable. Wherefore the grant of complished in our ovra. pei-sons by the same Divine Agent, only carried out and pei-pe- tuated to perfection in her case. Tliere is one instance recorded of a grade which is intermediate between her case and our o-vvn, .upon indisputable testimony. It is that of S. John the Baptist : ' He shall be filled with the Holy Ghost,' said the angel Giibriel, ¦ even from his mother's womb.' Even this distinction has not been lost on the Church. Of all saints, S. John Bap- tisf 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 coimtless disco-'eries which have been reported of relics of saints ill every age, there never has been so much - in good AA'orks, 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 occur iu some vei-sions of the Latin Articles.] ( i'^ ) sidcratio, didcls, suavis, et meffabilis consolatlonls plena est, vere piis, et ils qui sentlunt in se Aim Spiritus Christi, facta carnis, et membra, qiue adhiic sunt semper tenam, mortlfi- cautem anlmumque ad ccelestla et superna rapientem ; turn quia fidem nostrain de osteriia salute conse- quenda per Christum plurlmum sta- blllt atque confirmat, tum quia amorein nostrum iu Deum Ache- menter accendit, ita homlnibus cu- riosis, carnalibus, et Spiritu Christi destitutis, ob ociilos pei-petuo A-ersari pra'destiiudionis Del .seuteutiam pe- I'iculosisslmum est priccipltimn, unde illos Diabolus protrudit impurlssinue Aitoj seciiritatein. Delnde, promlssiones divlnas sic aniplecti oportet, ut nobis in Sacris Literis generallter proposlta^ sunt ; ct Del voluntas iu uostris actluiiibus ea scquenda est, qiuuu in A'crbo Dei habemus discrte revelatam. Paraphrasis, — Cathohcus est, et fuse declaratiu' Problemate 1, Explanation fro3i Problem L- Chrlst, is full of SAveet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in tliem- seh-es the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the Avorks of the flesh, and their eartldy members, and dra^A^ng up their mind to liigh and lieaA-enly things, as Avell be cause It doth greatly estabhsh and confirm their faith of eternal Salva tion to be enjoyed through Clu'ist, as because it doth fenently kindle their love toAvards 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 doAAiifall, AA-hereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or Into A\Tetchless- ness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation. Fm'thermore, Ave iiiiist receive God's promises in such an-Isc, as they be i'-eiierully set forth to us In liolv Scripture : and, In our doings, that "Will of God io to be follo-^ved, Avhicli Ave have expressly declared luito us in the Word of (jod. Explanation. — This Article Is Catholic, and is explained fully In Problem 1. -" The Predestination of the Saints Is nothing else than the forcknoAvledge and preparation of the benefits bestowed by God, by Avhicli most certainly all Avho are freed are freed." ( -26 ) (St. Aug. I. "de bon. Persev." c. 14), — "Predestination Is the fore-ordalnmg of anyone to gloiy In the first place, aud to other things in order to gloi'j-." (Scot. 3, d. 7. qu. 7.) " Predestination is the order of election by the Divine "Will, Avhereby beings endoAved AA-ith miderstanding are elected to grace and gloiy," (Common definition.) With these thi'ee definitions agi'ces the description of Predestuiatlon in Article XVII. Unless I mistake, it rightly and exactly explains the question, for AA-hat follows, " those chosen in Christ out of mankind," is no more than St. Paid says, " Having predestinated us by Jesus Christ to himself" (Eph. i. 5) — that Is, for his honom-. The meaning, therefore, is that Chiist is the first of all the predestinate, both in excellency of dignity, because predestinated to the highest supernatiu'al gifts, aud in excellency of end, because that for His gloiy all others Avere predestinated. Artigulus XVIH. — De speranda atenia salute tantum in Nomine Christi. SUNT et Illi anathematlzandi, qui cllcere audeiit imumquemque m lege aut secta quam profitetiu* esse ser- A-andum, modo juxta illam et lumen natiu'te acciu'ate vixerit ; cum Sacra} LIteras tantimi Jesu Christi Nomeii jjrffichcent, in quo sah-os fieri homines oporteat. Article XVIH. — Of obtaining etenud salvation only by the Name of Christ. THEY also are to be had acciu'sed that presume to say, that eveiy man shall be saved by the hiAv or sect AvhIch he professeth, so that he be dilio'ent to frame his life accordinn; to that hiAv and the llghc of nature. For Holy Scrlptiu'e doth set out luito us only the Name of Jesus Christ, AA-hereb}- men must be saved.* *¦ ["Tliis Article," remarks Dr. Xealc, " anathematizes those Avho say that every man sliall 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 Enghsh 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 natme.' That is, that if he bo saved, it Avill 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 :" NeaWs Lectures on Church Difficulties. London : Cleaver, 1852.] ( 27 ) P^uiAPHRASis. — Cathohcus est. Explanation. Catholic. -This Ai'ticle is Artigulus XIX. — De Ecclesia. ECCLESIA Christi visiblhs est ccetus fideHmn, in quo A'erbum Dei pmiun priedlcatiu', et Sacra- menta, quoad ea qua; necessario exigantiu-, juxta Chi'IstI Institutiun, recte administrantiir. Siciit enaAit Ecclesia Hlerosolymltana, Alexan- drina, et Antlochena ; Ita et eiravit Ecclesia Romaiia, non solum quoad agenda, et cieremouianmi ritus, verum In his etiam quae credenda sunt. PaRx\jphrasis. — Prior Para- graphus sanus est, nidlmii enim ex- cl'dshiim liabet, prorsus tamen inada3- qiuitus est, sicut homo e-jt animal bij)es, est propositio A-era, licet non adiequata. Posterior glossniidus, ubi etiam dicit Ecclesi-am Roniaiiam crrasse in rebus fidei : adA-ertendimi est ibi coiiti'adistin"ui Ecclesiain Romanam a caeteris particularibus Article XIX.— O/^/w Church. THE A-isible Church of Christ is a congregation of faltlrful men, in the Avhicli the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be didy ministered accorcUng to Christ's ordinance In all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. As the Chiu'ch of Jerusalem, Alex- anch'ia, and Antioch haA-e ened, so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only m then' hving and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith.* Explanation. — The fii-st para graph of tills Article is soiuid, having In it notliing to exclude the tnith. It is, howcA-er, Inadequate as a defi nition, as it Avoidd be to say, " Man is an animal having two feet." The statement Is quite tnie, though in adequate. The latter part requu-es explanation. Where, then, it says that the Chiu'ch of Rome hath erred * [This 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 Cliristian FaniUy — cannot look to be miraculously preserved from error " in mattei-s 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 particidar church) . . . hath authority in controversies of Faith."] ( 28 ) Ecclesiis, quia parifomilter de Hlero- sol}-mItaua, Alexanch-ina, in quo sensu si dixeris enasse de facto, non est contra fidem, hcet contra A-erl- tatem : Ecclesiam autem Romanam sic aliquando contrachstlngiil, anti- qiiitas testatiu', HleroiiATiius enim epist. 85, Eplscopum Roui.e pari gradu condistlngiut Eplscopo Eii- gubil, id est, prout praecisc Episcopus m'bis ; secus si etiam ut Episcopus orbis. Innocent, IV. c. Apostollcae de re indicata, omnino distlng^uit Ecclesiam Romanam ab Ecclesia universali etiam representativa, sic Trid. sess. 14. frequeus est etiam apiid Doctores priesertim apud Bellar. de simimo Pontlf. 1. 4. c, 4, et jMu'aiidulam de fide et ordine cre dendi, Theoremate 6, §. Qiiapropter ctlani ad\'erteiidLun, Ecclesia A'ero Romana, frequeiitius aliter suniltur, sicut in Concilio Constant, sess. 8. per Romanam Ecclesiam, Ecclesiam L^nh-ersalem intelligi Ault ; et eam eiTasse non asserit Artlculus, quod solum est de fide. in matters of faith, Ave must notice that the Chiu'ch of Rome is spoken of as distinct from other particular chiu'ches ; for the same language is used concerning the chm'ches of Je rusalem and Alexandria ; In Avhich sense, if a man say that she has in deed ened, 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 cUstin- giushed from others ; for St. Jerome (in Ep. So) spealis of the Bishop of Rome as In the same rank A-ritli the Bishop of Eugubium, so far, that I.-^, as he Is simply bishop of the city ; but the case Is different Avhen he is considered as bishop of the Avorld. Innocent IV. (c. " Apostollcce de re Judicata) Avholly distinguishes the Roman Church from the Universal Church eA-en representatiA'eh- ; and so, too, the Council of Trent (Sess. 14) ; and this is also a common opinion AAlth the doctors : especially see Bellarmlue " De Summo PwitP (I. 4, c, 4) : and Mrandida " De Fide et Ordine Credendi (Theoi\ 6, § Quapjvpter etiam advertendum). But the Roman Cluu'ch is A-cry often spoken of otherwise, as In the Coun- ( 29 ) ell of Constance (Sess. 8), by the Roman Church is meant the Church Uuh-ei-sal, aud the Article does not assert her to liai-e eixed, Avhich alone is of the faith. Artigulus XX, — De Ecclesiw authoritate. ECCLESIA potestatem habet de- cemendi ritus et ceremonias et dli'Imendi controA'ersIas in fide.* Ec- cleslfe non licet quicquam instituere, cpiud A'erbo Del advei'setur, nee unum Scriptm'as locum sic exponere potest, lit alterl contradlcat. Quare licet Ecclesia sit dlvlnorum testis et consei-A-atrix, attamen ut ad\-ersiis eos nihil decernere, ita praeter illos nihil credendum de necessitate salutis debet obtrudere. . Article XX. — Of the authority of the Church. THE Church hath power to de cree Rites and Ceremonies, and authority in controA-ersIes of Faith ; and yet It Is not laAvful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word Avi'Itten ; neither may It so expound one place of Scriptui'e that it be repugnant to another, "Wherefore, although the Church be a Avitness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ouoht It not to en- force anytlilug to be believed for necessity of sidvation. Par.vphrasis. — Priora A-ei'ba clara Expl.vnation.— The commeucc- .sunt, et omul antlqultatl consona, ment is clear, and in agreement Avith unde Aug. 1. de LTtllitate Credendi, all antiquity, as Augustine (lib. '¦'•Jp contra Maiiicha;os, cidmen author!- Utlllt. Cred.), agamst the Manichec.s, * [The first paragraph of this Article — neither in the Latin MS. signed by Con vocation in 1562, nor in the Enghsh MS. signed in 1571, nor in either of the editions pubhshed by Bishop Jewel — runs as foUows in some A-ersions (f-g-, A^^olfe's, 15C3) : — " Habet ecclesia ritus (sive cseremonias) statuendi jus, et in fidei controversiis au thoritateni ; quani-vis," etc. After the word "Dei" scripto is inserted; and after "di- vinorura" the word Uhrorum. — VideEditor's Preface.] ( 30 ) talis cpioad prtedlcta in Ecclesia coii- sistere declarat. Verba siibsequentia non minus clara : scriptiu'a enim secundiun omnes Aeteres est regida certa veri tatis, unde Aug. 1, de baptismo c. 3 : — Quis nesclat Sanctum Sciipturam Ca- nonicam, tam Veteris quam Novi Tes tamenti, omnibus posterionim Episco- jyorum Uteris ita pruponi, nt de ilia omnino dubltari et disceptari nonpos.nt, utnim venim vel utnim rectum sit, qxncq)iid in ea Scriptura constiterit, etc. Quod autem subditur ui Articulo, Ecclesiam esse testem et coiiseiwa- tricem sacrre Scrlpturaj valde con- forme est D, Paulo, qui earn A-ocat firmamentum veritatis, et Joannl In Apocal>qisi qui eam A-ocat, Civltatem habentem fundamenta duodecim, et in ipsis duodecim nomina duodecim xipos- tolorum : scilicet qui earn prEedicatioui- biis ct sacris scrlptls suls f undaA-enuit. Valde etiam confinnatur Ai'ticulus ex sententia Augustini contra Epls- tolam f undamenti : Evangelio non a^edej'em, nisi me Ecclesice Catholicce commoveret authoritas. Uncle ipsa. semper declaraA-it veras a pseiido- scripturis, ut patet Carth. 6. can. 46, et In posterioribus, de quo supra ; declares the chief authority in all such matters Is Avith the Chiu'ch, The f oUoAving part is no less clear ; for, accorduig to all the ancients, Scriptiu'e Is the siu'e ride of truth, whence St, Augustine (lib. " de Bap tismo," c. 3) says, " "Wlio is ignorant that aU Sacred Canonical Scrlptiu'e, AA'hether of the Old or Ncav Testa ment, is so to be preferred to all AAi'Ithigs of subsequent Bishops, that there never may be doubt or dispute Avhether anything established by that Scripture be true and right." And what comes next in the Ai'-.. tide, that the Chiu'ch is the Avitness and keeper of Holy Writ, is quite ui agi'eement Avitli St, Paul, who calls her the " gi'oimd of the truth ;" and St. John in the Apocalypse cfdls her " The city liaA-Ing tAA-eh-e founda tions, and ui them the names of the tAveh-e Apostles of the Lamb" (Rev. xxl. 14), — that is, that they founded her by their preaching and liolj- Avritlngs. The Ai'ticle, too, is strongly confirmed by the saying of St. Au gustine — "I would not beUeA-e the Gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic Church induced me." So that she has ahA-ays distinguished be- tAA-een tnie and false Scriptm-e, as is ¦ ( 31 ) quam A'eritatem optime declai'at Mo lina I. p. disp. I. art. 2, Postrema verba Ai'tlcull glossam interlinearem deposcunt : ubi enim dicltiu', Ita prceter illos nihil credendum de necessitate salutis debet obtrudere. Istiid prceter Intelligi debet, quod nee actu nee Bwd/xei In els contliietur, hoc est, c[uod nee m terminis nee ut consequentiae inde deducitur, seu qiiod i7uJe pi-obari non potest, ut as- tniltur Articulo sexto. Quod sanum fene sensum Eestlmo, nempe ilium Augustini contra Cresc. I. c. 33. Quamvis hujus m certe de Scripturis Canonlcis non proferatur exemplmn, eanindem tamen etiam in hac re a nobis teneretur Veritas, cum hoc fanmus quod unirersce p)lacet Ecclesice, quam ip>sa7'um scrlpturamm commeiuJcd au- thoritas 7tt qida S. Scriptura fallerc non p)0test, cptlsquis falll 7netmt, ean- dem Ecclesican consulaf, quam sine ulla amhiguitate S. Scriptura demon- strat. Adde etiam, scripturas dlA-inas non de iis solum Instniere quae scripta sunt, sed de iis etiam qu£e non smit scripta, lit patet I. ad Cor, xi. 2. Ephes. ii, Hujusmodi ergo Ecclesia potest pro- clear from the Coimcd of Carthage (6 Can, 46); and, subsequently, which tnith Is most ably shoAvn by Molina (1 p. (lisp. 1, art. 2), The latter parts of the Ai'ticle re quire Intei'pretatlon Hue by line ; Avhere It Is said, " Beside them ought nothing," &c. By beside must be- understood Avhat Is not either ac tually or A-h-tually In them — ^that is, neither expressed in tenns nor can be deduced as a consequence from them ; or which " may not be proA'ed thereby," as is said in the sixth Ar ticle, And "I think that these ex pressions haA-e a sound meaning, according to St, Augustine (Against Cresconius, 1, c, 33). Moreover, the Scriptui'es them selves sometimes refer to orduiances and traditions not contained in Scrip ture, as 1 Cor. xi. 2. Things of this kind, dierefore, the Chiu'ch has ( 32 ) ponere credenda, et ex Scripturis probarl possunt ; noc adversatiu' Ar tlculus. Quaiido etiam dlxi. In terminis A'el in hac consequentia ; aoIo dlcere, non solum ut consequentue fidei ; sed etiam eA'identi liimine natm'ae, verb! gi'atia, in hac consequentia, Christus homo est, ergo habet cor, sangulnem, cerebrum, etc. Conse- quens enim illud est de fide, ut Doc- toi'es Theolog'i commuuiter assenint, A'el saltem est A-entas theologica secundiun omnes. poAA'cr to propose to our faith, and they can be proved by Scripture, nor Is the Ai'ticle against this. Again : Avhen I said aboA-e, " either expressed In terms or deduced as a consequence from them," I mean, not only as a consequence Avhen vIcAved by the light of faith, but even by the light of nature ; as, for instance, iu the folloAvIng 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 are theological truths, as all allow. Artigulus XXI. — De Authoritate Concilionim Generalhim. GENERxVLIA Concilia sine jussu et A-oluntate Principum congre- gari non possimt : et ubi couA-enoniut, cpiia ex hominibus constant, qui non omnes spiritu et A-erbo Dei rcgiintiu', et errare possunt, et Interdum erra- Article XXL — Of the Authority of General Councils.* GENERAL Councils may not lie gathered together Avithout tho commandment and avIU of Princes. And Avheu they be gathered together (forasmuch as thoy be an assembly of men, Avhereof all be not governed * [In this Article it i.? to bo carefully noted that no exception is taken against the AVestern Patriai-cli presiding over or confiniiing and promulgating the decision and decrees of General Coimcils — only against his exercising the power to call them together. Furthei-more, 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 quamt expression and an expression of great latitude. Roman Catholics would not deny that they might eiT in any minor matters brought before them for considera tion. The Council of Xicsea determined the controversy concerning the keeping of Easter — an importa,nt but not a funda mental or essential point. General Council.s have often discussed other subjects than the Faith.] ( 33 ) runt, etiam In his quce ad normam pietatis* pertinent ; ideoque quoa ab nils constituuntur ut ad salutem ne- cessai'Ia, necjiie robur liabent neque authoritateni, nisi ostendi possint e sacris literis esse desiunpta. PAPaPHRASis. — Priora verba vl- dentiu' confirniari authoritate Hiero nynii Apol. 2, contra Rufinum, ubi ex hoc capite quoddam Concilium rejicit, dicens : Quis Impei-afor hanc Synochi-m jasslt congregari ? Quasi velit, necessariam hac in parte jussl- oiiem Imperatorls, et sic obsei'A-atuni patet in omnibus fere Concillis A-ete- ribus, lit de Nica;no ex jussione Constaiitini ; Sardlcensi, Constantii et Constantis, Constantinop. I. Se- nloris Theodosil ; ut refenuit So crates et Nicephorus. Per se quidem locpendo, id est, spectaudo solum jus divinum, Concilia possunt cogi sine Avitli the Spirit and Word of God) they may err, and sometimes luiA-e erred, CA-en in things pertaining unto God, Therefore, things ordained by them as necessary to salvation luiA-e neither strength nor authority, mitil it may be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scrlptiu'e.f Explanation. — The commence ment seems to be confirmed bj' the authority of St, Jerome (Apol. 2, cont. Rufinum), AA-here he rejects a Council on this ground, saying, " What Emperor ordered this Sviiod to be coiiA-ened?" As though he meant that the command ivas neces sary; and the same remark Is ob vious ill respect of almost all the an cient Councils, as the Nicene sum moned by Constantine ; the Sardican, by Constantius and Con.stans; the Constantiuopolitau, by Theodoslus the elder, as is related by b^orrates and Nicephorus. But, speaking of ¦*' [Some vei-aions have "ad Demn" after " pietatis."] t [St. Gregory Nazianzen Avelt illustrates the consistency of this Article Avith a belief in the infaUibiUty of CEcumenical Councils, by his own language on the subject on different occasions. In the foUo-wing pas sage he anticipates the Article : — " My mind is, if I must Avrite the truth, to keep clear of every conference of Bishops, for of conference never saAV I good come, or a remedy so much as an increase of cvila. For there is strife and ambition, and these have the upper hand of reason" (^Ej). Iv.). 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.).] D ( 34 } mterventu potestatis Principum, ut constat de Hierosolj-mitano ; nee hoc potult Hleronj-mus iiegare ; per ac- cidens tamen ob clrcimistantlas teni- porum, et loconim, debet omnino consensus, Immo et jiissio Principum subinde pracmltti, De consensu patet, ob bonimi et pacem publicam. De jussione etiam a>qiie constat, quando A-eibl gi'atia Episcopi, vel quorum interest, adesse concillis, noluit parere citatloni Eccleslasticae (vel oh alias caiisas id genus multas) tunc enim Principes authoritate sibi a, Deo commissa just^ possunt ad- A'ersus eos edicere ; de hoc lege Dm-and. de mod, Concll. Gener. celeb, nibr. 71. Unde ilartlanus ad Leonem, SI, mqult, onerosum est, nt tu ad has partes venias, hoc ipsxtm nobis piroprils lltteris tua sanctitas ma- 7iifcstet, quatenus in omnem Orlentem rt in omnem Thraclam et Illyrium sacra? 7wstra' liierce dlrigantur, ut ad cdlqucm difinltum locum qui nobis pilacuerlt omnes Epnscopi conveniant. Sic etiam Gregorius, Theodorlcum Francorum Regem, Epist. 54. 1, 9, Reg-istrl, hortatm*, ut contra SI- monlacos qui per Regnum siiiim impiuie grassabantur, Hynodiaxixjubeat congregari, sic etiam V. Synodus Coimcils In themseh'es — that Is, con sidering only the DiA-Ine law — they can be coiiA-ened Avithout the Inter- A'ention of the poA\-er of Princes, as Avas the case In the Coimcd of Jeru salem; nor could St. Jerome deny this. Accidentally, hoAA'CA'er, OAvIng to cu'cumstances of times and places, the consent and CAeii the command ment of Princes ought to precede Councils, As far as then' consent goes, this Is ei'ident for the sake of public good and peace ; nor Is there any more difficidty as regards their commanchiient, w-hen, 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 ("(?e MoJ. Concll. Gen. celeb, nibr. 71"). So that ISIartlan AArote to Leo, " If it be irksome for you to come to these parts, let your holmess shoAv tills to us by your letters, Iioav far our sacred letters may be directed to all the East, and all Thrace and lUyi'Icum, that all the Bishops shoidd come to gether to one prescribed place, Avliich ( 35 ) quae est secunda Constaiit. actlone 2. habet. Hie 2>roximis diebus prcece- dente plo jussu Christo amantissi7ni ac Deo custodlti Imperatorls, 7iobls con- venit prcesens nunc sancta Synodus ; et sic sanctltatum testantiu* concilia allater, nee aliud in hujus Artlculi infertur. Verba sequentla Eec[iit; facdis sunt concoctionis, magnam enim latltudl- nem habet ilia clausula (etiam in 7'ehus ad Deum spcctantlbus) Concilia enim Generalia errare posse In rebu.s, qua3 fidem aut mores ad salutem necessarlos non conccrnimt, com munis est Doctonmi, ut patet in decreto Innoc. et Panormitanus Ibi, sic etiam D, Tho. In Quodhbet, et optime declarat Cano m locis 1, 5. c, 5, qu, 4, Bellai-m, etiam de Rom, Pontlf. lib, 2. c, 16. §. ubi observan- dimi est, maneat ergo clausula ilia shall be determined by us. So, too, St, Gregoiy exhorts Theodoric, ICing of the Franks (Ep. 54, 1, 9), that he AA'oidd order a synod to meet against the simonlacal offenders Avho infested his Idiigdom AA-ith impu nity. And so, too, the Fifth S}-nod, Avhich is the second of Constantl- nojDle (act 2), lias as follows : — "Here, Avithin these last few days, the pious command of our most Chiist-loving and divinely-guarded Emperor preceding, the present holy synod gathered together to us." And that this Avas repeatedly done, the acts of other Conncds shoAV, nor can anything more be inferred from the tenor of this Article, The subsequent Avords are no less easy to be explained, for that clause ("eA-en In things pertalnmg unto God") has great latitude. For that General Councils may eir m matters Avhicli do not concern the faith or morals, In things necessary to salva tion. Is the coimnoii ojimion of the Doctors, as is plain from the decree of Innocent and Panormitanus ; as Avell as St. Tliomas In " Quodhbet," and as is excellently set forth by Caiiiis in the " Loci Theologici" (1. 5, c. 5, qu. 4) ; and by Bellarmdne, " de D2 ( 36 ) (etiam in rebus ad Deum .ipecta7itibus) modo non sint necessaria respectn fidei et bononim morum; quod nee ibi asseritiu'. Ultima A'erba sententlam A'eterum, et omnium fere niodernorum de clarant : non enim possunt de non hjeretica, facere proposltionem htere- ticiun, lit in caiisis fidei ; nee ciidere Artie. Fidel, ut rect^ Siiarez de Trip. Viit. Disp. 2. § 6. n.lO. Sed solum ex abditioribus Scripturae locis, et Apost. dlctis, veritatem eriiere, I, ut intelllgatur illustrlus, quod ctntea cre- debatur obscurius ; ut loquitur Leri- nensls c. 17, Cano etiam in locis I. 12. fol. 353. ex D, Th. chcit, fidem nostrain non Inniti revelationibiis aliis praeter eas, quas Apostoll et Pro- pheta^, authores A-Idelicet canonlco- rum Librorum, ediderunt, Et con firmat ex D. Paido, unde Doct. Subt. 4. d. xi. qu. 3. agens de defimtlone Concihi Lateranensls, dicit non fuisse in potestate Ecclesia facere istiid venim aut non venim (scihcet tran- substantlatlonem) sed Dei Institu- entis. Ecclesiaa quidem est (directa in hoc 7it C7'editur a Spiritu veritatis) Rom. Pont, (lib, 2, c, 16, § l^bi obser- vandum). The clause ("cA'cn in tilings pertaliung to God") may, therefore, stand, proidded only they be not matters necessary In respect of faith and morals, Avhich Is not as serted In the Article, The last paragraph expresses the opinions of the ancient and of almost all modern authors ; for they cannot make a proposition heretical Avhicli is not heretical, as Is rightly stated by Gei-son in the question "An liceat appMare in causes fidei;" nor can they concoct Articles of Faith, as says Siiarez rightly, " de Trlq). Vni." (disp. 2, § 6, n. 10). All that they can do is to extract the tnith from the more ab.struse parts of Holy Scriptiu'e, and the sayin.gs of the Apostles, In order that " that may be more clearly understood AvhIch before was more obsciu'cly bellcA-ed ;" as says Vincent of Lerins (c. 17), ]\IelchIor Canus, too, "Loci TheoW (1. 12, fol. 353), says, from St. Thomas, that our faith does not rest upon other revelations than those which the Apostles and Prophets — the au thors, that Is to say, of the Canonical books — ^have set forth; and he con firms this from St. Paid. Whence ( 37 ) Intellectimi a Deo traditum in Scrip- tiu'Is explicare, ut recte ipse, Et hoc f acit Ecclesia, dum aliquam veritatem definlre chcltiu' : non enim noA'is reA-elationlbus innltitiu', sed antiquis, in Scriptims et chctis Apostolorum, Unde Doctor ibidem dicit, quod In symbolo Ulo sub Iiuiocent. HI. in Coned. Lati c, Fii-miter credimus, magis expliclte ponltiu' A-erltas aliquot credendomni, cjiiam habebatm* Sym bolo Apostolonim, vel Athanasii, A'el Nicseni ; non ergo nova fides, sed vetusta magis e-xplicatur, sic etiam Molina I, qiiaest. I. art. 2, disp, 1. dicit: Quod concm'sus quo Spidtus Sanctus praesto adest Ecclesiaj, non est constituendum aliquid esse de fide, quod antea iioii erat de fide; sed solum assistit ad declarandum ea qua3 mediate, A'el Iimnechate spec tant ad fide, Et sicut Eccleslaj non est potestas facere, at .solum declarare fidelibus, quid debeat certo teneri de fide ; sic nee etiam est potestas facere sacram Scriptiuam, acI addere a-cI tUminuere Canonicos libros. Sic etiam Timrecremata, et Vega supra Trident, I, I, c, 6, Valentia 2, 2, d, 1, qutest, I, et alii, et D, Thom. 2. the Subde Doctor* (4, d. 11, qu, 3), treating of the definition of the La teran Council, says that to make that point true or not tnie (he is spealdng of transubstantiation) was not m the poAver of the Chiu'ch, but of God, AA'ho Instituted the Sacrament. It Is, Indeed, the office of the Chiu'ch (di rected In this as is beUeved by the Spirit of Truth) to explain the mind of God as set forth in the Scriptiu'es, as he says rightly ; and the Chm'ch does this, Avhen she Is said to define any truth ; for she does not trust to new revelations, but to the old ones, hidden in the Scriptiu'es and in the AA'ords of the Apostles, as is the con stant opiiiioh of the Doctors. AVlience Scotus says in the same place, that in the Creed set forth by Innocent in. in the Lateran Coimcd (c. Fir- mlter Credimus), the tnith of certain matters of faith is asserted more ex plicitly than It Avas in the Apostles' Creed, or the Atlianasiau or the Ni cene ; but there A^-as not for that reason any ncAV faith, but the old faith more fully explained. And so, too, Mohna (1 qu. 1, art. 2, disp. 1) says, " that the presence of the Holy" [* i.e. Johannes Duns Scotus. J ( 38 ) 2. q. 1, art, 7, expresse docet : Arti culos fidei post tempora Apostolorum non crevisse; quod non alinm potest habere sensum, quam lUum quem posuimus, crcAdssent enim, si Ecclesia sua definltlone efficeret, ut allqiu Articidi jam essent de fide, qui antea non erant, ut recte Conink De Actibus Supernaturahbus, cli.sp. 12, dub, 6, Et ex hoc couA-IiicItiu', Nam seciuidum Apostolum, Ephes, 2, superEetllficamur supra fundamen- tnm Apostolo7iim et Prophetamm ; non igitiu' ahud fimdamentum, nee allii fides, quam Ipsonun, Hide con- forme est illud C}^. cp. 74. Si in aliquo juttaverit et vacillaverit Veritas, ad orlglncm Domlnicam, Evangellcam, et Apostolicam addltionem rev-erta- miu', ct Inde siu'gat actus nostri 7-atlo, 7inde et ordo et orlgo surrexlt. Ghost AvIth the Chiu'ch is not for the pmiiose of making anj-thmg of fiuth AvhIch AA-as not before of faith, but only for the piu'pose of declai'Ing those things Avhich du'ectly or mcU- rectly affect the faith ; and as ui the Chiu'ch there is no poAver to make anything of faith Avhich Avas not so before, but only to declare to the faithful Avhat ought for certain to be held as of faith, so neither is there any poAver to make Holy Scriptiu'e, nor to add to or cUminlsh from the Canonical Books." So, too, say Tiu'- recremata and Vega on the Coimcd of Trent (1, 1, c, 6), Valentia (2, 2, d, 1, qu. 1), and others besides St, Thomas, Avho exqn-essly teaches (2, 2, qu, 1, art, 7), " that the Ai'ticles of Faith haA-e not increased since the times of the Apostles," Avhlcli can have no other nieanuig than the one AvhIch Ave haA-e laid clow-n ; since they AA-oidd have increased, had the Chiu'ch by her definitions made any Articles to be of faith iioav which Avere not so before, as Is rightly said by Coiiuik, "De Actibus Stq^emat." (disp, 12, dub. 6). And It is proved as foUowsj according to the Apostle (Eph, ii, 20), AA'e " ai'e biult upon the founda tion of the Apostles and Prophets," ( 39 ) Artigulus XXH. — De Purgatorio. DOCTRINA RoraaneiisiLmi . de, Pui'gatorio, de Indidgentlis, de Veiieratione et Adoratione tiun Ima- giiium, tum' Relic[iilanim ; necnon de Invocatione Sanctorum, res est futdis, maniter conficta, et nidlis Scriptiu'arum testimonlis innltltiu', immo verbo Dei contradlcit. Paraphiuvsis, Probl. 37. • Examinatus est There is, therefore, no other foiuida- tion, nor any other faith, than theirs. With tins agrees that passage of St. C}-prian (Ej). 74)— "If the tmth have at all moved or been shaken, let us retiu'ii to the fountain, to the tradition of oiu* Lord, of the Gospel, and of the Apostles ; and from thence let the method of oiu' acts take its rise, Avhence the order and the beginning itself arose." Article XXII. — Of Purgatory. THE Romish Doctrine concoi'iung Piu'gatory, Pardons, Worslup- ping and Adoration, as Avell of Images as of Reliques, and also Li- vocation of Saints, is a fond thing A'alnly uiA-ented, and groiuided upon no Avarranty of Scriptiu'e, but rather repugnant to the "Word of God. Expl.\nation, — This Ai-ticle is examined in Problem 37, ExpL.;^'ATiON FR03I Probleai XXXVII. — These wonls are, AA-Ithout doubt, at first sight most difficult. But It must be obsciA-ed that, by the terms of this Article, it is not the IiiA-ocation of Saints absolutely, or in itself, that is condemned, but the Romi-ih doctrine. If Ave Avoidd, therefore, see the meamng of this decision or censiu'e of theu's, aac must examine the Roman doctrine ; not, hoAvever, what the Romans or Catholics (for the Av*i'ds are synonymous in then' mode of speaking) hold, but Avhat Is supposed to be their doctrine. This, then, Ave must discover, not from the Avi'itlngs of Cathohcs, but from those of theu' opponents. Dr. AndrcAves in his Answer to c. 2 of Cardinal Pcromiius (fol. 28), ( 40 ) hke Calvin, supposes that our prayers are addressed to the Saints ultimately and absolutely, and offered, as It Avere, to so many deities, as he eudeavom-s to show at length — ^not Indeed from the agreement of the Doctors, but from the AAoi'chng of some of the hymns. This, then, is the doctrine Avhicli is condemned In the Ai'ticle as vain ; Avhich A\-e, too, abjure as impious. "Wliat cause is there, then, for Avonder if the people, Avhen imbued Avith such calumnies, are opposed to soimd and Catholic doctrine ? The controA-ersy, then. Is not about AVords, but about the 7neaning of Avords, as Bellai-mlne rightly remarks. Dr, AndrcAves knew qiute Avell that aU the Cathohc doctors, AAithout exception, Avheii speaking doctrlnally, liaAC always condeimied that mode of addressing the Saints ; and the Chiu'ch herself declared the same at Trent. So, Avhy shoidd Ave refer to the hj-mns ? The sum of the matter is, that the Anghcan Confession has decided nothing against the faith ; but has condemned an impious heathen notion, falsely imputed to the Church. Iu exactly the same manner, aud in AA-ords of the same piu'port ui the same Ai'ticle, they reject, not purgatory, mdulgences, the Avorshlpping 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 AA-onderful ideas of this kind. On the subject of indul gences, tlicy think that they are a kind of merchandize of the Pope's ; as though he, at his oa-\-ii avIII, freed the liA'ing or dead from all punlshmeiit due to their sins (I am spealdng throughout of the Cahiuists). On the Avorship of images aud relics, they think that Ave pay them the Avorship properly called latrla, and luiA-ing them for its object, and so make idols of them, like the heathen. These Avicked calumnies and fables of Avicked men, under the name of Romish doctrine, they reject as absurd; aa-c detest them as siqiremely injurious to the Spouse of God. Vei-j- many of them admit purgatory in itself, so far, that Is, as the substance of the Church's definition, especially in the Comicll of Florence, namely, a place of pmifylng and cleansing, as St. Cj-prian says (tom. i. ep. 52), though the manner of purifying and cleansuig is not A'eiy clearly defined. Indulgences, too, as they are defined by the Conned 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) AvIth St. ' ( H ) Cjinian (tom. 1, cp. 14), and Tertulllan (tom. 2, 1, ad Martn'es, c, 1, and elseivhere), they do not reject ; nor is this only Avhat Avas due to the Chiu'ch from the penitential discipline, as the Cahiuists say; for, as St. Cj-prian says in that place, " They Avho haA'e recelAed a Avrit from the martys, can be helped by their intercession before God," not therefore only before the Church, St. CAiu'Iau a.sks the martyrs, hoAA'CA-er, " to AA-eigh carefully the requests of those aa-Iio ask, as the friends of the Lord, and those Avho avIII hereafter judge togedier AvIth Him, both the state and the deeds and the merits of eA-eiy one" (ep. 11 or 15). He gives them a method hoAV to ask from the prelates of the Chm-ch the remission of the penalties, or the satis faction due to God for the sinners. Indeed, Chemnitz himself, m contro A-ersy AA-ith Bellarmlue, oaa-iis that Augustine, C}i)riau, and Tertulllan frequently recognise indulgences, in the sense spoken of, as AveU as the Avoi'ship of images and relics, as laid cIoaa-ii in the Coimcils of Nlcaea, Florence, aud Trent ; and none of these points are denied in the Articles of the Anghcan Confession. Indeed, the more learned of my coimtrymeii, with Avhom I haA'e often coiiA-ersed, fully receh'e these matters ; and in our conferences haA-e ingeuuously oAviied that they are all agreeable to primlth-e antlc[uity; but that there is a sacred spiritual treasury made up of the merits of Christ and the Saints, and had in acceptance AvIth God, they do not think is equally clearly set forth in Scripture aud the A^¦rItIugs of the Fathers. On om' side Matron, AA-ith some fcAv others, held the same opmlon, and chd not think such a belief necessary for esttiblishing the tnith of indulgences. As respects the veneration of relics and tho Cross of Christ, Dr, Anch'cwes (Respous. ad c. 18 Poronuii), Casaubon (in Exercit. Baronli ad annum, p. 34 ct alibi), together Avith some others folloAA-iiig. St, CA'rll (iu Catech. 4), St. Jerome (ad jSIarcellum), St. Augustine, and others, allow a certain Avorship, or a certain reverential honour, towards sacred images, iji agreement Avith St. Clu'ysostom in his llturg-A- — that is, a I'ellglous bowing to an image — adds after the others Dr. Montag-u (Respous. ad Helgluini aud Appello Cffisarem, c, 22), which roA-erence the Greeks have always paid, as is shoAvn by Ciu'o- palata (De Officialibus), Concernmg Purgatoiy, the older iviiters among them alloAved it, as is clear from Fox speaking of Latimer ; nor chd Latimer absolutely deny it. I am not, hoAA-ever, engaged in an Inquiiy Into the opinions of inchviduals, haA-ing slioAvn Avhat is defined in the Anglican confession ; vA-herc, as I stdd, ( 42 ) not the use of the Chiu'ch, but an abuse calumniously imputed to her, is con demned. On this point Ave shall liaA-e eiitu'e agreement Avldi the Anglican Confession, if only men A\-iU AA-eigh its statements, as they ought, in a spu'it of zeal, not for party, but for tnith. Artigulus XXHT. — De Vocatione Ministrontm. NON Hcet ciuquam siimere sibi niiuius publice praichcanch, aut admuiIstrancU Sacramenta iu Ecclesia, nisi prills fuerit ad luec obemida legitime vocatus et missus. Atque illos legitime vocatos et missos exis- tlmare debemus, qui per homines, quibus potestas A-ocaudi iluiistros atque mittendl in A-ineam Domini, publice concessa est in Ecclesia, coaptati fuerint, et adsciti In hoc opus. Article XXIH. — Of Ministering in the Congregation. T Is not laAvful for any man to take upon him the office of pub- lick preaching, or ministering the Sacraments In the Congregation, be fore he be hiAvfully CaUecl, and sent to execute the same. And those Ave ought to judge laivfully called and sent, which be chosen aud called to this Avork by men who have publick authority giA-eii imto them in the Coiigi'egation, to call and send M- nlsters Into the Lord's A'ineyard, Par^vphrasis. — Est conformis Explanation. — This Article Is sacne Scrlptiu'ie, doctrinal sanctorum in agreement AA-ith Holy Scripture, Patriun, ct priixi luilversalis Ecclesla\ the doctrine of the holy Fathers, and the practice of the Unh-ersal Chm'ch. Artigulus XXIV.- Ptiblicls dlcendls i -De Precibus lingua vul- gari. LINGUA popldo non intellect^ pubUcas in Ecclesia Preces pe- ragere, aut Sacramenta admlnistrare, verbo Dei et primltlvaj Eccleslte con- suetucUni plane repugnat. A.RTICLE XXIV. — Of speaking in the Congregation in such a tongue as the people 7tnderstandeth. IT is a thmg plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of the Primitive Chiu'ch, to have pubhck Prayer in the Chimch, or to minister the Sacraments In a tongue not imderstanded of the people. ( 43 ) Pajiaphr^^is. — Sclo plerosque ex nostratlbus existlmare hie decenii, in Scriptmis esse pra;ceptiim publlca Ecclesiae officia in lingrus vernaculls celebraii. Quo nihil nuniis uiten- clltiu' D, Paiilus enim quem hide articulo hoc astinendi fundamentum feclsse credunt, plane ahud vult. Scrlbit enim ubi ad Corintluos, apud quos tunc temporis et Hebraeos coii- stantisslmum fuit in hngiia vidgai'I commmua celebrare : non Igitiu' cre- dlderim Paiilum Corlnthils imposii- isse, aut idud pneclpere vokusse, quod jam pubhce in iisu erat, sed vel de priA'atis eorum conventlbus, vel saltem de prlvatis colloqnils post coimnmda officia peracta habltis, Ibi agit, et eos reprehencht, cpil done hnguamm pnoditi ctlani in lingrus extruneis tunc loquebantiu' : sicut si ahquls.apudnos in lingua Teutonica, quod ricllcidum Aideretm-. Hunc vero esse sensum D, Paiill non potiut latere condltores Artlcii^ EXPL.VNATI0N. — I laiOAV that many of oiu' countrj-men consider it is here affirmed that in the Scriptiu'es it is commanded that the public offices of the Chiu'ch be celebrated in the A'er- nacidar lano-uao'e. But this Is as O O far as possible from the intention of Scriptiu'e. For St, Paul, Avhom they believe to haA-e given authority for this Article, asserts this plamly means something else. For he is AA-ritmg to the Corinthians, among Avhom at that tune, as among the Jcaa's, it Avas the estabhslied custom to celebrate the public offices in the vulgar tongue. I cannot, therefore, believe that St. Paul imposed on the Corinthians, or Avoiild have meant to order them to do, that AA-hich Avas ah'eady m common use pubHcly ; but that he there speaks either of their private assemblies, or at least of private conferences held after the peiforinaiice of the piibHc offices ; and that he blames those Avho, having receh'ed the gift of tongues, even at these times, spoke In foreign tongues ; which w-as the same thing as though any one among lis Avere to speak in Geiman, which woidd appear ridiculous. But It could not haA'e escaped the f ramers of the Articles, that tlus Avas ( 44 ) lomm, et consequenter nee contra tam manifestam A-eritatem aliqiud potuerunt orclinare. Decernit igitiu' hie Artlcidus esse repugnans Scripturis, id est, non doc- trinae Scrlpturae, quasi aliquid iu op- posltum ordlnaretiu', quod est falsiim, ut dictiun est ; sed sciiptloni sou traditioni Scrlpturae, quce fuit apud Corintluos m hngiia commmii : ora- tiones etiam et admlnlstratlones Sa- cramentonma in Scripturis tracUtce, Aidgo publica fiebant in lingua com-^ mimi, qiua Scriptiu'te ipsis in Aidgari tradebautm', nam Hebr. Hebraels, Gr^ec^ Gra;cls. Et hoc solum chcit luc Artlcidus ; testatiu' utlqiie tradi- tioiiem Scriptrn'OB et omnium Ibi coii- tentonun, etiam Sacramentonmi, ce- lebratam fiusse iu luiguis commii- nibus, quod sensu exposlto A-enun est 11011 tamen alicjuld hie per modiun legis ulstituitm', Ael omnino inan- datus, lit In Articulo patet. Addo, nullam legem' daii posse de accidcntibus. Per accldeus A'ero est the meaning of St. Paul ; and, con sequently, they cannot haA'e meant to affinn anj-thing contrary to such a manifest tnith. This Article, then, asserts that It is repugnant to the Scriptm'es — that is, not to the doctrine of the Scrip tiu'es — as though anything Avere or dered different to that, AvhIch, as Ave haA-e said. Is false ; but to the AAritIng or tradlrion of Scripture which ex isted at Coiinth In the Andsi;ar tongue. The prayers, too, and administra tions of the Sacraments handed doAvii in Scriptiu'e, were commonly per formed ill pubhc In the language of the people, because the Scriptures AA'ere dehvered to them iu that lan guage — namely, In Hebreiv to the Jews, In Greek to the Greeks, and tliis alone is asserted by the Article ; for it bears Avitness that the trachtion of Scriptiu'e, and of all things con tained in it, even the Sacraments, Avas In the vulgar tongue, AA'hich In the sense set forth above is true. Nothing, hoAVCA-er, here is appointed by way of a law, or at aU com manded, as Is plain from the Ar ticle, MoreoA-er, no hiAV can be made concerning accidental matters. Noav, ( 45 ) quod h singulis In liaec occldentali mundi plaga noii Intelllgatur lingua Latiiia, qure per se loquendo est hngua communis ecclesiae Latlnaj ; et in hoc ex parte dlstlnguitur a Graecls, unde Graeci apud omnes juiischctloni PatrlarchjB Constantlnopol. subihtos, licet Graeci non sint, officia idiomate Graeco celebrant : supponltiir enim, tam apud Graecos quam Latinos, lingTias dlas respecth-e conmiiuuter adchsci, sicut de Latlua Beda suo tempore diligenter f actitatum tes- tatiir, Et hinc Trid, prieclpit pres- byteiis ut parochianos in commii- nibiis eccleslte officiis instnierent, ut patet fess, 22, c, 8, Unde si dixeri- mus Paidiim A-etuIsse preces publicas celebrari lingua non commimi, In telligi deberet, 7dsi adesset qui inter- p>retaretitr ; ut recte Ai'ticulus V. confessionis Anglicce sub Edwardo VI. Omnibus ei'go modis ecclesice satisfacit liiilc prcecejito (si pi'a3cep- tum est), qma Interpretem appoiiunt. In Trident. Addo idterius etiam vi hujus Ar tlculi probabiliter infcrri posse, de- It Is an accidental matter that some living in the West do not understand the Latin language, Avhich is the com mon language of the Latin Chm'ch, and by this partly is it chstlngrdshed from the Greeks ; so that the Greeks AvhereA'cr subject to the jmisdictlon 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 lA'as sedidously done In his day ; and for this reason the Councd of Trent (Sess. 2-2, c. 8) orders priests to instinct their pa rishioners iu the common offices of religion. If, then, ive say that St. Paul forbade that public offices should be celebrated except In the Aiilgar tongue, Ave must luiderstaud, unless there be some one to interpret ; as AA'as lightly added in the fifth Ar ticle under EdAvard VL In ei-ery respect, then, the Ciiiu'ch fidfils this precept (If it be a precept) by or dering interpretation in the Coimcd of Trent. ' - I add further that, eA'en on the strength of this Article, it may be ( 46 ) here ecclesiae officia et Cluistl Sa cramenta in luigua Latina apud nos liocUe celebrari ; quia per se loquendo (ut dixi) est lingua commimis, et conunmilter Intellecta, et publice iu singulis locis edocta; solum autem asseritur In Ai-ticido, quod preces publicae fiaiit In hngua a popido in tellecta, quod sine dubio intelligi debet do per se, non per accidens loquendo. Hoc dico, casu quo intelligi con- tendant Ai'ticidum de prccsentl iisii Ecclesice : et ob hanc rationem in Africa, ut testatur Cypr. de Orat. Dom. et Aug. de bono Persev, c, 13, missas et relicpia faciebant Latiiie, licet lingua A'ulgaiis erat Puuica, et Latina ab infeiiorl plebe non intel lecta. De Hispanla patet apud Isldo- rum De DiAin. JNomin. et in Coiicll. Tolet. 4, cap. 2, 12, 13, 14, 15, et de Anglla iiota est historia Bedse hb. 1, c. 1. Foemlnae quidem rarius In- telligebant Latlnam, uec de Ilhs intel- hgi potest Paidus, sed de idiota, id est, de ilia cui incumbit respondere, quod non est foemlnarum, quce nee probably infeired, that the offices of the Chiu'ch and the Sacraments of Chiist ought at the present time to be celebrated amongst us in Latui, because it is, speaking generally, as I said above, the common language and commonly understood, and pub licly taught In eA'ery place ; and it Is only asserted in the Ai'ticle that public prayer shoidd be in a lan guage understood by the people, which ought undoubtedly to be ex plained of general understanding evei-yivhere, 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. CA-piiau (de Or. Dom.) and St, Augustine (de bon. Persev., c, 13), they used to say masses and other offices in Latin, though the common language Avas the Punic, aud Latin Avas not understood by the lower orders. The same thing Is evident as regards Spain from Isidore (de div. Nom.) and the Council of To ledo (4, cap, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15) ; and Bede says the same of England (Hist. i. 1). Women yeiy seldom ( 47 ) loqid debent in ecclesia, ut ibidem Paulus, et in jiu'c canonico cautimi est. Dices hunc Ai-ticuluni condemuare lit Scriptura; seu A-erbo Dei repug- iiantem, modiim ecclesice Latlnce ce leb ran tis, sicut etiam Cajet. iu 1. ad Cor. 14. Respondeo me sensum Articidi satis exposulsse ; quia tamen com- muniter sic h Nostratlbus InteUIgl- tur; referam quid do hoc habeat Cano, I. 5, c. 5, q. 5, Non aude7'em as- sere7'e esse hcereticum, si aliquls dixerit aliquam ecclesue consuetudlnem, vel legem esse malam, vel injustom, modo 71071 slid de rebus ad salutem 7iece-^- sai'lis, quia nt Deus 7ion deficit in 7ie- cessai lis, sic non ahundcd in superfluls. Sic ille. Consequentur ad hanc doc trinam, si Nostrates simpliciter dice- rent hanc Ecclesice legem sen con- suetuchnem esse malam, cum non Addeatur saluti necessaria secundam doctrlnam a Cano alibi tracUtam, ipse non eos hcereseos Incusaret. Ecclesia eiiimonoi'es quosdam ct Christo et Apos- understood Latin, nor can St. Paul be supposed to speak of them; but of the ISiaTTj'; — that Is, of him Avho had to respond — ^AvRich could "not be the case ivltli regard to Avomen, avIio ought not even to speak in church, as St, Paid says In the same place, and as is declared in the Canon huv. It may be said that this iVrticle condemns, as repugnant to Scripture or the Word of God, the manner of celebrating of the Latin Chm-ch, as also does Cajetan on 1 Cor. 14. To Avliich I answer that I have sufficiently set forth the sense of the Ai'ticle. Since, lioAveA-er, it is thus commonly understood by men of this country, I Avill quote what Canus says about this (1, 5, c. 5, qu. 5)— "I would not venture to assert that It Avas heretical, if any one said that any custom of the Church or law Avas bad or unjust, provided it Avcre not about matters nccessai-y for sal vation ; because, as God is not ivaut- ing in AvIuit is necessary, so He does not siiperabound in what Is more than necessary." Consequently, with reference to this doctrine, if our counti'ymen simply said that this laiv or custom of the Chiu'ch Avas bad, since It does not seem necesscu'y to ( 48 ) tolls tradltos 7'etinet, in quibus qui Ecclesiam eiTcire dice7'et, hie e7Toris ejus authores Christum et Apostolos faceret : alii vei'o 7nores sunt post Apostolos inducti, in quibus quamvis Ecclesia en-a7-et, non p7-of>te7'ea fides pe- onclltaretur. Hcec Ille, Cujus sen tentlam, ego non sum tantus, ut condemuare ausim. AdA-crte tamen, Dlcere quod Missa m ling-ua Aulgaii tantum celebrari debeat, eo quod sit contra Chiisti instltutionem in Trid. sess. 22, c. 9, anathemati subjicltm'. PIoc autem non diciint tantum in lingua Arilgaii, sed pro ratione auch- entiam : et lunc in ahquibus col- legils, nempe ubi omnes callent La- tlnem, officlum chAinum hoche sit Latliie ; nee IMIssa, sed precum pub- licariun (quce ahud sunt a ilissa) meutiouem faclunt. Quod non est contra Trid. chrecte, quia Trid. solum loquitur de Jllssa, et quod tantum fiat in Aiilgari, eo quod sit contra Cluistl instltutionem : neiitnim ta men liorum dicit Ai'ticulus, ut ibi patet, sed dum dicit esse repugnans verbo Dei (Hcet ut ostendi superius, non omidno de hoc agi) inteUigi deberent InstitiitionI D. Paidl, non Chiisti, cujus scrq^ta sub nomine verb! Dei comprehenduntiu', omnia salvation, according to the doctrine elseAA'here laid down by Canus, he would not charge them Avitli heresy : "For the Cluu'ch retains certain customs dellA'cred to her by Christ aud the Apostles, In Avhich any one Avho said that the Chm'cli Avas in error Avoiild make Christ and the Apostles the authors of that error; but there are other customs intro duced since the Apostles, in Avhicli, even if the Chui'ch erred, the faith Avoidd not therefore be in jeopardy." This is Avliat he says ; luid 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 Avith respect to the hearers. For this cause In some colleges, ivliere all are sldlled in Latin, the divine office Is at this day said in Latin, Nor, again. Is Mass spoken of ; but public prayer (Avhich is a different thing from the Mass). So that the state ment Is not du'ectly against the ( 49 ) tamen ab A]-)ostolIs demandatur, non sunt mandata Christi, ut ab omnibus concessum est, et consequenter licet dixissent esse contiu instltutionem Apostoll, non esset expresse contra fidem, De Cajetano quidem, aii- dacter sciipsit, sed ante Trid, Council of Trent, for that speaks of ]SIass only, and of the opinion that it must by Christ's institution be always said In the vrdgar tongue. Neither, however, of these Is as serted by the Ai'ticle, as Is plain ; but Avhen It says that the practice is repugnant to tho 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, AA'hose Avritlngs arc comprised under the name of the Word of God; but all things ordered l)y the Apostles are not commands of Christ, as is al- loAved by all ; and consequently, though they might have called it against the institution of the Apostle, such a statement Avould not be ex pressly against the faith. With re gard to Cajetan, indeed, he Avrote rashly, but it AA'as before the Council of Trent. Artigulus XXV. — De Sac7'amentis. SACRAMENTA k Christo insti- tiita, non tantum sunt notae pro- fessionis Christianonim, sed certa qusedam potius testimonia, et effi- cacia slgna gratlac atque bonce in nos Article XXV. — Of the Sac7'aments. SACRAJMENTS ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain sure Avitnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God's E ( 50 ) voluntatis Dei, per quce InAisiblllter ipse in nobis operatur, nostramque fidem in se non solum excitat, A-erum etiam confirmat. Duo a Christo .Domino nostro in CA-augeho instituta sunt Sacramenta, scilicet Baptlsmus, et Coena Domini. Quinque ilia Aidgo nominata Sa cramenta, scilicet Confirmatio, Poeni- tentia, Ordo, Llatrimonium, et Ex trema Unctio, pro Sacramentis Evaii- gehcis habenda non siuit, ut quae partim a, prava Apostolonim imlta- tlone profluxermit, partim Aitae status sunt iu Scripturis quidem probati : sed Sacramentonmi eandeni cum Baptismo, et Coena Domini rationem non habentes, ut qua3 signimi allquod Aislbde seu ceremouiam a Deo instl- tutam non habeant. Sacramenta non in hoc instituta smit a Christo ut spectareiitur, aut cu'ciimferrentiu', sed ut rite illis uteremur, et In lis duntaxat, qui chgne perclpiunt, salutai'em habent effectum : C|iil A'ero indigne percl piunt, damnatlonem (ut Paidus in- qiut) sibi ipsis acquinuit. good vnU. tOAvards us, by the which he doth AA'ork luAisIbly in us, aud doth not only quicken, but also strengthen aud confirm our faith in him. There are two Sacraments or dained of Christ om' Lord In the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Those fiA'e 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- j)el, being such as have gi'OAvn partly of the cornipt following of the Apos tles, partly are states of life alloAved in the Scriptures ; but yet have not like natm'e of Sacraments with Bap tism aud the Lord's Supper, for that they hai'e not any Aislble sign or ceremony ordained of God.* The Sacraments were not ordained of Chiist to be gazed upon, or to be caiiied about, but that A',-e should didy use them. And in such only as Avorthily receive the same they haA'e a wholesome effect or opera tion : but they that receive them un- wortlnly pm'chase to themselves dam nation, as Sauit Paid salth.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. HaroldBroAvne On the Articles, 6th Edition. London : Longmans, 186-1.] [t Dr. Harold Bro-mie, Bishop of Ely, ( 51 ) Paraphrasis. — Paragraphus pri mus et secimdus Catholicus est : tertlus exponendus. LTbi sciendum, quod receptlsslma A-eritas est, tam in Occldentali quam Oiientali Ecclesia ; septem esse Sacramenta, in quorum admlnlstratlone, si e.x officio fiat (potest esse difficidtas aliqua de minlstro matrimonii) necessario re- quuitur homo sacer, ut minister Ecclesiae ; ut coiiA'cnlunt omnes Doc tores, et m Florentino cum llbeirlmo consensu totliis Ecclesice definltum fuit, iUa esse propiie dicta Sacra menta ; et licet Grsci in aliqulbus aliis pimctls, prcesertim de absoluto suprematu Papce reslherint: in hac tamen veritate usque In hocliernum diem constant; ut testantur eomm Scrlptores. Ne Igltiu' hcec nostr atiiim censm'a videatur toti Ecclesice repiig- nare, glossanda est, hie non negaii omiiem rationem Sacramentis cceterls 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 receh'ed tmth, as AA'cU In the Eastern as m the Westeiii Church, that there are seven Sacra ments, in the adimnlstration of Avlilch, 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 Ohiu'ch; as all the Doctors agree, and as it was defined at Flo rence Avith the most free consent of the Avhole Church, that they are properly called Sacraments ; and al though the Greeks liai'e gone back on some other points, especially con cerning the absolute supremacy of the Pope, they hold to this truth (of the seA'en Sacraments) up to the in his Treatise on the Articles (p. 682), thus AiTites regarding Confirmation : — " Con firmation, in the primitive Church, fol lowed immediately on Baptism, and, as above noted, was made ordinarily a part of Baptism. TertuUian and Cyril of Jeru salem both speak of the catechumens as first receiving Baptism, and then immedi ately on their coining out of the Avater receiAdng chrism and imposition of hands, .^clear proof enough that, whether Con firmation in the Roman Church be either a "corrupt follo^ving• of the Apostles," or a "state of life allowed m the Scriptures," the present practice of the Church of Eng land, in which Confirmation is deferred so long, is imquestionably the exact reverse of that "primitive iKe" 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.] e2 ( 0-2 ) quinque, quce ibi speclficat, sed solum chfferentlam ponere, tam in necessi tate, f[uam piincipalitate Baptism!, et Eucharistla?, respectu cajteronmi, in quo coiiA-enit tota Antlquitas, cum imiversa Schola Theologonun, ut omnibus iiotuni est, Hunc A-ero esse sensimi genulnuni hujus artlculi, patet, quia subchtiu' (sed 7i07i eandem habent 7'atlo7iem) non uegat ergo simpliciter esse Sacramenta, quod antea chxerat, sed in disslmih gi'adu, quod idtro concedlmus. Fuit qui dem olim inter Doctores aliqua cou- ti-ovei'sia, 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 hau'esim dlcere Unctionem et Confirmatlonem non esse instituta a Cluisto, Favet Hugo 2, de Sacr. p. 15, c. 2, et Bonav. d. 7, a. 1, q. i., sed optime illonim doctrlnam op- . pugnat Doctor 4, d. 2, q. i. Omnes tamen couA-eniunt esse de fide septem esse Sacramenta. present day, as their AAiitei-s bear AAitness. Lest, lioAA-eA-er, this cen- siu'e on the part of our countrymen should seem repugnant to the AAdiole Chiu'ch, 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 Avliich all antiquity agi'ces, and the Avhole theology of the schools, as Is known to all. But it is clear that this is the the tnie sense of this Ai'ticle, because there is added have not the like 7iatu7'e ; It does not deny that they are Sa craments at all, Avhich it had before called them, but says that they are so in a different degree, Avhich we readily gi'ant. There was of old a question among the Doctors, "^Vliether all the Sacraments AA'cre ordained of Christ ?" On Avhich point Sotus (4 d. 1, cpi. 5, a. 2) aud Durandus (d. 2, q. 1) think It is not heresy to say that Unction and Confirmation Avere not instituted by Christ. To this opinion inchne Hugo (2 de ISacr. p. 15, c. 2) and St. BonaA-enture (d. 7, a. 1, cju. 1) ; but the [Subtle] Doctor successfully opposes their doctrine ( 53 ) Alia Aerba uiteiinixta Iu Articulo non simt du'ecte responslva ad qua:- sltum, qiigd erat de numero Sacra mentonmi, imde secundum regidas Doctonim post Canum 1. 5, q, 4, etiam In definitionlbus Ecclesice, non ligantiir Catholici ad singula vcvha definitioni annexa, iiec sequaces hujus censurce, ut etiam jiu'ent m dla verba per accidens allata. Paragi'aphus idtlmus ponderabltiu* in Articido XXVHI, (4 d. 2, qu. 1). All, hoAvever, agree that it Is of faith that there ai'e seven Sacraments. The remaining AVords interspersed Avith the Article have no chrect re ference to the question, avIucIi con cerned the numlier of the Sacra ments, so that according to the rules of the Doctors after Canus (1. 5, qu. 4), eA'cn in the definitions of the Chiu'ch, Catholics are not boimd to every Avord anne-xed to the definition, nor are those Avho accept this censure bound to accept those ivords acci- dentaUy Introduced. The last paragraph avIII be consi dered iu treating on Article XXVHI. Artigulus XXVI, — De vl i7istltu- tlo7ium clicirumMi, quod ea77i non tollat 7nalitia hominum. QUAJMVIS in Ecclesia visibili, bonis mali semper suit adniixti, atque interdum ministeiio A-erbo et Sacramentorum administrationi ju'ce- slnt : tamen cum non suo, sed Christi nomine agant, ejusque mandato et authoritate minlstrent, dlorum mi- nisterlo utI licet, cum in verbo Dei auchendo, tunc in Sacramentis perci- piendis, neque per Illorum malitlam effectus institutorum Christo tollltur, aut gi'atia dononim Dei minuitur, Article XXVI. — Of the Unwo>-thi- 7iess of the ]\[uusters, ivldch hiiulers 7iot the effect of the Suc7-a7nent. A LTHOUGHhi the visible Church Xi the evil be e\'er mingled Avitli the good, and sometimes the evil ha\-e chief authority in tlie Ministra tion of the Word and iSacraineiits, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their OAvn name, but In Christ's, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both iu hearing the Word of God, and In the re- celAing of the Sacraments. Neither ( 54 ) quoad eos qui fide et rite sibi oblata perclpiiiiit, quce propter mstltutionem Christi ct pi'omlssloiicm cfficacia simt, licet per malos admlnistrantur. Ad Ecclesice tamen chsclphuam pcrtir.et, ut in malos jSIinlstros in- qulratur, accusentiu'que ab his cpii eoriun flagltla noA-erint, atque tandem justo coiiAictl judieio, deponantiu'. Paraphrasis. — Est ipsa doctrina Ecclesice et omnium Patrum, i, is the effect of Christ's orcUnance taken aAvay by them Avickechiess, nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do recelA-e the Sacraments ministered mito them; Avhicli be effectual, be cause of Christ's Institution and pro mise, although they be ministered by eAil men. Never theles.s. It appertaineth to the cUscIplIne of the Chiu'ch, that cnquliy be made of eiil Miiisters, and that they be accused by those that haA'e kuoAA'ledge of their of fences ; aud finally being found giulty, by just judgment be deposed. Explanation, — This Is the i-ery doctrine of the ChiU'ch, and of all the Fathers. Artigulus XX"VH, — De Baptis7)io. BAPTIS:^mS non est tantum pi'ofesslonis slgnimi ac chscii- minls nota, qua Christlani a. non Christianis chscernantur : sed etiam est signimi regenerationis, per quod tanquam per Instnimentum recte Baptlsmum susclpientcs, ecclesice in- seruntur, promlssiones de remissione peccatorum atque adoptione nostra in fdios Dei per Spuitum Sanctum visiblllter obslgnantur. Fides confir- inatur, et vi dlvinae InA-ocatlonls gi'a tia augetiu'. Baptlsmus parvidorum onuiino hi Ecclesia retinendiis e.->t. Article XX"VTI — Of Baptism. ' BAPTISM is not only a sign of profession, and mark of dlffer- eiice, Avhereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened, but it Is also a sign of Regeneration or new Birth, AAiierebv, as by an instrum.eut, they that re ceive Baptism rightly are gi'afted into the Church ; the promises of ¦ the forglA-encss 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 A'irtue of prayer ( 55 ) ut qui cmn Clu'Isti Instltutlone op time congruat. Paraphrasis, —Idem est cliim. judl- unto God. The Baptism of young Chlklren is in any Avise to be re tained in the Chiu'ch, as most agi'ce- able A-\ith the Institution of Chiist. ExpL^VNATiON, — My judgment on this Is the same. Artigulus XXVIH. — De Ca/ia Donwii. COENA Domini non est tantum signiim mutucB benevolentice Christianonim inter sese, venim po tius est Sacramentum nostrae per mortem Christi Redemptionis. At que adeo lite chgne et cum fide sii- mentlbus, paiiis quem franglmus est communicatio Corporis Chiisti: si militer poculuin benechctionis est communicatio Sangidnis Christi, Pauls et villi Transubstaiiclatio In Eucharistla e.x sacris literis probarl non potest, sed apertls Scrlptiu'se verbis aclA-ersatur, SacramentI na- Article Y^XYin.—Of the Loixts s Snjypter. THE Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among thcmseh-es one to another ; but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death : insomuch that to such as rightly, Avorthily, and AAitli faith, receh'e the same, the Bread Avhicli A'l'c break Is a partaldng of the Body of Clu'lst; and hkeAvise the Cup of Blessing is a partaldng of the Blood of Christ. Trausubstantiatlon* (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be ]jroved by holy AViit; but it is [•* " AVhat is here opposed as ' Transub stantiation,' is the shocking doctrine that ' the Body of Chi-ist,' as the Article goes on to express it, is not ' given, taken, and eaten after an heavenly and spiritual manner, but is carnally pressed Avith 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 Ave hold that the only substance [.is] such is the lircad which we see. Tliis is plain from Article XXIX., -wliich quotes St. Augustine as speaking of the Avicked as ' carnally and visibly . pressing vrith their teeth the Sacrameiit 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.] ( 56 ) turam cvertit, et multanun super- stltionum dat occaslonem. Coi-pus Olnisti datiu", accqiltim, et manducatm' m Coena, tantum cailestl et splrituali ratione. Medium autem quo Coipus Chiisti acclpltiu' et man- ducatiir In Coena, fides est. Sacramentinn Eucharlstlcc ex in stltutlone Chiisti non servabatur, cir- cumferebatur, elevabatim, nee adora- batur, PARAPHR.i.si3. — Primus para gi'aphus cum omnibus suis cojunc- tlAis affii-math-e solum, sicut Ibi, prolatis, Catholicus est, secundus paragi'aphus examlnaudus. Negare Trausubstantlatlonem di- Ainam iu hoc tremendo mysteiio est contra A'eritatem fidei, ^u'out definltum est in LateranensI ct Trid. Sclo tdlquos imh-ersalltatem piioiis licet niagni Concilll in dubium Aocare : .sclo alios etiam ex nostiis Infalllbili- [* 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 Avas not by Christ's ordinance conveyed by a foi-m repugnant to the plain Avords of Scripture, overthroAveth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given oc casion to many superstitions. The Body of Chiist is gh-en, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heciA-enly and spiritual manner. Aud the meiui AA-hereby the Body of Christ is receh-ed aud eaten in the Supper is Faith, The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Avas not by Chiist's ordi nance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or Avorshipped.* Explanation. — The first pai-a- gi'aph, Avith all its clauses stated, as there affirmatively only, is Catholic. The second must be examined. To deny dlArne Transubstantiation in this tremendous mystei'y is con trary to the tnith of the faith, as it has been defined in the Lateran and Tridentine Councils, I know that some persons have cjuestloned the unh-ersallty of the fonner Council, and I though It Avas a great one in wliich the instruments of the Mass ai'e dehvered. 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 ring.] ( 57 ) tatem Conclliorum Generahmn ch- muiuere, quos frequenter citant nos trates, Constans autem doctmia Doctorum est iitrique opposita ; ut ut est : saltem omnes subscribmit Theorematl octaA'o Mrandulae, de fide et ordine credendi : Dete7t/ii7ia- tioinbus quce a Concilio, vel a sitm77io Po7vtifice fiu7it super eis dubltatloinbus, quw substantlam field co/ice/munt, quoaddu7n universalis Ecclesia 7ion re- cla/tua-et (id est, prout ipse alibi, taclte vel Interpretative consentiret) neces- . saiio credendum est. Patet autem apud omnes Tlieo- logos, et illorum temponim scriptores, nidlibi hide decreto Transubstautia- tioiie fiusse reclamatum, immo saltern tacite fuisse approbatum ; nee ab idlo dubltatum, hanc resolutioucin ad substantlam fidei pertinere. Et ut ipse Scotus qiu libeiius rellquls de hoc piincto eglt 4. dist. u. fatetiu' post solemnem declaratlonem Eccle sice, tenendum esse de substantia fidei. Hie Igitur vel nusquam definltio legitime proclamata est, nos A-ero in AngUa pai'ticulaiiter actis hujus know that others among om'selves, Avho are frequently cited in this countiy, disparage the infalhbdity of General Councils. The constant opinion of the doctors is, hoAA-ever, opposed to both, and, whatever be the truth, at least all subscribe to the eighth Theorem of IMirandida (de Fid. et Ord. C7-edendl) : "We must of necessity believe the decrees which ai'e made by a Councd or by the Sovereign Pontiff, upon those ques tions Avhich concern the substance of the faith, so long that is as the uni versal Church does not repuchate them" (that is, as he himself says elscAvhere, if the Church tacitly or implicitly consents). It is, hoAA'CA-er, clear from all the ologians and writers of that date, that this decree on Transubstan tiation Aias no Avliere repiuhated, na)-, that It obtained at any rate tacit approval ; nor has any one doubted that this decision }>ei'talned to the substance of the faith. And as Scotus himself, AA'ho has treated this point more freely than others (4 dist, ii.), OAvns, 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 Avhat- ( 58 ) Concilu consenslmus, ut patet in mul tis textibus Jiuis nostri mimicipahs, et in Synochs proAincIahbus, ut patet apud LiiidAA-oodum. Debet Igitm' glossaii hie Ai'tl- cidiis ; eos scihcet solum condemuare antiquum enorem Caphania-itarum, sc. carnalem prajsentlam Chiisti, id est, quasi Christus modo naturali seu camali hlc exlsteret, - et dentibus uostris masticetur, prout soncu-e vl- detiu" Canon, Ego Bei-angarius, in Conclho Romano sub Nicolao, et refertiu' de consecr, d, 2, Sensus ergo est, quod panis sen substantia panis, cum suo modo exlstendi natiu'ah, in substantlam coipoiis cum suo modo existendi natiu'cili, seu ccu'nall mutaretiu', quod omnino repug-nat Sciiptiu'ro, et de- stnieret natiu'am Sacramenti ; ut recte in Articido asseritur, Christus enim tunc caiiiahter, seu sensualiter, non sacramentahter, et modo spl-* rltuali et ineffablll siibesset speclebus seu elementib consecratis, ad Sacra- mentiun enim ut sic, rec^nu'Itm* hn- ever, has a decision been laivfidly pronounced, and we In England haA-e in particidar consented to the acts of this Councd, as is clear in many texts of our municipal laAV, and in our provincial synods, as Is clear from Lindwood, This Ai'ticle ought, then, to be explained thus : that the authors only condemn the old eiror of the Capharnaites, namely, the carnal presence of Christ, that Is as though Christ was present In the Sacrament in a natural or canial manner, and Avere cheAved by the teeth, as seems to be implied by the AA-ords of the Canon (Ego Bere/igarlus) in the Roman Councd under Nicolas I. (Co7isec. d. 2), Tlie sense, then. Is that the bread or substance of bread, Avith its natiU'al mode of existence, avouIcI be changed into the substance of a body, with its natural or carnal mode of existence, AA-hich is AAdioUy repugnant to Scrip tiu'e, and Avoidd destroy the nature of a Sacrament, as Is rightly asserted in the Article, For then Chiist would be present under the species or consecrated elements in a carnal or sensible manner, not sacramsn- taUy. Now for a Sacrament, as ( 59 ) mediatum signlficatimi esse aliquid spiiituale In re vel saltem in modo ; non enim Sacramenta simt signa sensibdla, senslbiliimi A'el coiporahum significatlva, sed effectii-a gratiaj in- sensibUis : non ergo coi-poris cum suo modo quantitatlA'o, sed modo spl- ritucdl subsistentis : gratia enim hie signlficata, est gratia subslstens, sci licet Corpus Cluistl piiraaiio et for- maUter, ut optime Doctor ubi supra. Error Igitiu' Iste pertractus, solum hlc condemnatiu': Iste enim solum ad- A-ersatur ratloni SacramentI, ut osten- smu est; Iste etiam solum adA-e-i'satur Scripturce, qiua dlam solam inteUi- geutiam hujus mysterii ut eiro- neam perstiinxlt Christus Dondniis, Joan. 6, Quod autem non negent Transub- stantlatlonem ab Ecclesia defiuitam, vel ex hoc patet, cjula utraque Eccle sia scihcet tam' Orleiitalis, quam Occidentalls, In hoc convenlunt : nee in uUo Concilio fuit de hoc discep- tatlo inter eos, ut recte observat Ai'cudlus 1, 3, c, 2, de Eucharistla such, is recpured that the thing im mediately signified shoidd be some- tlung spiritual, either in itself or at least in the manner of its being, for Sacraments are not sensible sig'ns sig nifying sensible or coi'poral things, but effectually conveying insensible gi'ace : so this Sacrament Is not the sign of a body in its natural quanti tative manner, but of a body sub sisting in a spnitual manner, for the grace here signified is the grace forming Its substance, namely, the Body of Cln-ist primarily and for mally, as the Doctor exceUently says (ubi sup7'a). The error alluded to above then, and no more, Is condemned m this place, for that alone Is repugnant to the nature of a Sacrament, as has been shoAvn, because Christ oiu' Lord has condeimied that mode alone of miderstanding this mysteiy as erroneous (St. Jolm \i.). But that Ti'aiisubstantiatlon 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 ei'er in any Council been any chspute betAveen them on this point, as is rightly observed by i\j'cuthus ( 60 ) fol, 130. Fuit quidem quaestio in Florentino, quibus verbis facta sit Transubstantiatlo, sed nihd aliud, Etiam Hleremicis in cap. 10, suae censiu'ce contra Lutheranos Idem fatetiu'. Nemo vero dubltat puncta ab utraque Ecclesia credita obllgare omnes, Nostrates A-ero 7mitatio7xe7n, aUe7'atlo7ie/n, t7-a7ism7itatlo7ie7n nee so lum in efiigle sed 7iatura, Id est, fieTova-iav, fatentm' post sanctos Patres ; ut patet apud D, Anch'eAA-es contra PeiTonium, et D. Monta- cutium, fol. 256. Vemm qiudem est, quod Suarez tom, 3, qucestlone 75, chsp, 50, sect. 1, notat haec A-erba maxiine accedere ad propiietatem mysteiil cxplicandam, et probabilissl- iiium est Patres iu illo sensu, ha'C A'crba usurpasse, sed ad majorem clarltatcm, Ecclesia elegit A-erbum t/rmsubsfa7diatlonls. Trcms77iutatlo tamen hi 7iatura, ut loquantur coruin Doctores, seu fierovcria, in omni sensu Phdosophico A'cdde premit hmic Artlculum iu ligore sermonls sumptuin, ubi negat simpliciter inu- tatlonem substantice panis et v-ini, quod dlrecte astruit fierova-la Sanc- (l, 3, c. 2, de Euchaiistia, fol. 130), There Avas, indeed, a question at Florence at Avliat Avords of the office the change took place, but no more. Even Hiercmlas (Censur. contr. Lu- thei'an., c, 10) allows the same. Noav no one doubts but that points be lieved by both Churches are obhga- tory upon aU men. Writers of this comitiy alloAv a clia7\ge, an alte7-atlon, a tra7ismuttttion, and that not only in form but in natiu'e; that is, they confess a change of substance,* ac corduig to the holy Fathers, as is clear by Dr, Aiidrewes against Per- ronius and Dr, Montagu (fol, 256), It Is indeed tnie, as Suarez (tom. 3, qu. 75, disp. 50, § 1) notes, that these words are the fittest for e.x- plainlng the nature of tho mystery, aud It Is most probable that the Fathers used them in that sense, but for gi'eater distinctness the Church chose the Avorcl 7)xi7isubsta7dlatlon. But a transmufatlo7i in 7iatu7'e, or fieTovcria, to quote their doctors, ac- corthng to aU plulosophy, presses close upon this Article taken in the rigorous meaning of the Avords, AvhIch * ["Tlie term transubstantiation (^e- trine of the Atonement. Introduction, p. T-oua-iaais) was adopted by the Synod of xliv. Londou : Longmans, 1865.] Bethlehem." — Oxenham's Catholic Doc- ( 61 ) torum Patiiim, et ti'ansmutatio in tiatu7-a eonim. Necessario igitim recuirendiim est ad glossam nostrain superius inslnuatam. Paragraphus tertlus slmid cum piimo examinabltiu' In Ai'tlculo se- qiientl, Paragraphus idtlmus videtm* ne gare omnem adorationem venerablli Sacramento : sed melius insplclendo, putem ipsos solum e.xcludere adora tionem latiice, ut patet apud D. AndreAA-es contra Peironliun, et D, Juellum in Apol. pro Ecclesia An glice, et ahos eorum doctores, quod Catholicum sentio ; loquendo pro- prie et per se, sicut Doctor Subt. cum Ovando et omnibus Scotistis, 3, distlnctlone 9, qua;stIone 1, negant humanltati Chiisti latrlam per se, Immo Doctores commuuiter ipsis personis divinis prascise sumptis, id est, sub ratione formali constltutiva personarum, quae est relatio, negant subesse terminmn foi-malem adora- tlonis latriae, sed hoc DeltatI soliun simply deny tlie change of the sub stances of bread and AvIne, Avhicli the fieTovaia of the Fathers, and them traiismutation in their 7iature, du'ectly imply. Of necessity, then, recom'se must be had to our interpretation suggested above. The third paragraph Anil be ex amined, together with the first, iu the folIoAving Ai'ticle, The last paragraph seems to deny- all adoration to the A'enerable Sacra ment, but on inspecting it more care fully, I think the authors only exclude the Avorshlji of latiia, as Is clear from Dr. AndreAves against PeiToiiius, and Dr. JevA-el m Apol. p7'0 Eccl. Angl., and other of their Doctoi-s, AA-hich I think Catholic, speaking strictly aud absolutely, as the Subtle Doctor, irith OA-andus and all the Scotlsts (3 dist, 9, qu, 1), deny that lutr-ia is due to the human nature of Christ In itself,* nay more, the Doctors commonly deny that the formal Avorship of Icdria is due to the Divine Pei-sons themselves, as such ; that is, by reason of what formally constitutes their personality, * [On this subject see a valuable article iu the nmnber of the Ecclesiastic for September, 1857. London : Masters.] ( C2 ) primo competit ; relatlonibiis autem, prout idontlficantur cum essentia; sic humanltati Christi, non per se praeclse, sed prout supposltatiu" h Deo, eadem adoratio debetiu-, sicut Rex ciun purpura. Sic etiam Vas- quez, .3, parte, chsp, 90, fiis^. Spe clebus vero Sacramentalibus, cum non assumantur in identitatem per sona?, sed solum fiant slgna sensibllla praesentla; coi'poris Christi primario, et per consequentiam Deitatis ejus, non competit latria, nisi dixeris per accidens; per se vero, et prout sunt tei'mlnus formahs adorationis, non nisi didlae, et quidem infeiioris, ut facile sequitm* ex dlctis, Unde Trident, sapienter formaAdt Canonem sextum de Euchar. in hsec verba : SI quis dixerit in Sacramento Eucha- i'istice Ch7istu7)i 7ion esse cultu latrice etla/?i exteino adorandum, et ideo nee festlva jMcidlari celeb7itcde venej-aii- dum, 7iec in p7'ocessio7iibus secujidum laudabile7n Ecclesice co7isuetudlnem so- lemnlter clrcu)7igesta7idu7n, Anathema sit. Nota bene; non elicit Sacra mentum, sed Christum iii Sacra mento latria adorandum. namely, relation; but [adoration Is due] to the relations, as being iden tified with [the Divine] substance, aiid to the humanity of Christ, not strictly In itself, but because It is assumed by God as a royal robe Is assumed by a Idng, 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 dulict, and indeed the loAA'er kind of dulia, as clearly folloAVs from what has been said. So that the Council of Trent Avisely drew up the Sixth Canon on the Eucharist in these Avords (Sess. 13, Ccuion 6, 07i the Holy Euchct7'ist) : " If any one saith that, in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, Chiist 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 processioijis, according to the laudable custom of the Church, let ( G3 ) Addltm' in Articulo, nee reserA'ari nee circumgestari debet, quantum scihcet est ex Chiisti instltutlone. Glossam quidem poscit, haec non ci Christi formaliter mandari, quae ta men ab Ecclesia recte institiu posset ; quam consuetudlnem licet reproba- rent, non tamen ob hoc anathema- tizantur In Tridentino quia non ex errore non credendi praesentiam Cor poris Christi hoc assenint. Sic Cano lib. quinto, ca. 5, quaest, 4. Artigulus XXIX. — De 7ncmduca- tlo7ie Co7porls Christi, et impios illud 71071 7na7uluca7'e. IIMPH et Fide vlA'a destitutl hcet carnahter, et visiblllter (ut Au- gustlnus loquitur) Corporis et San guinis Christi Sacramentum dentibus premimt ; niillo tamen modo Clrrlsti partlcipes efficluntur; sed potius tantse rei Sacramentum seu symbo lum ad judicium sibi manducant et bibiint, him be Anathema." Obsen-e well that the Canon does not say that the Sacrament, but that Clu'Ist 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 Avas actually of Christ's Instltuiion, This requires the explanation, that those dungs are not foi-mally 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 Councd of Trent, because they do not do tliis from the error of not beheving the presence of the body of Chiist. This is supported by Canus (hb. 5, cap. 5, qu. 4). Article XXIX.— C>/ the Wichd zvhlch eat 7iot the Body of Christ in the use of the Lo7xVs Supper. THE Wicked, and such as be A-oid of a Ih-ely faith, although they do cfu'nally and visibly press irith then' teeth (as Saint Augustine saith) the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, yet in no Avise are they partakers of Christ ; but rather, to then' condemnation, do eat and drink the sign or Sacrament of so gi'eat a thing. ( 64 ) Paraphrasis. — In hoc Articulo non tam concluslo, quam concluslonis causa conslderanda est : intellectus enim decreti cujuscimque, etiam unlA-ersalls Ecclesice, ex principiis et fundamentis quibus innltitur, sicut concluslo ex prsemlssls, depromendus est, secundum illud Hilarii : I/itelllgen- tla dlctonmi, ex causis est assumeiula dlce7idi, quia non sewnoni res, sed m esi ser7no s^dijectus. Prlnclplum vero iinicum hujus eomm detennlnatlonis, est authoritas Augustini, nt patet in Allien' 1 1, qui submde iusinuat, A-el saltem Insinuare Aidetm', impios non realiter particlpare paneni Domlnum, licet panem Domini, in Joan. Tract. 59, id est, Sacramentmn Christi, non ipsuiii Christum, ut loqiutur Arti- ciiliis. Mens igitim Augustini explo- randa est. Illam A'cro non esse menteni Augustini patet, qiua Au gust, per panem Domini, non iutel- liget Euchaiistlam, sed panem In- tinctum, quem Domlnus poirexit Judce, ut satis convlncitiu' ex eo quod (lib, 3, de consensu Evang. c, 1) expresse docet, Joannem In illo c, 13, nihil de Eucharistla dixisse; idqiie adhiic fit mcmifestlus ex lec- tlone Augustini in Psal. xl, 10, mide sumpsit Evangehsta verba, quae ex- ExPLANATION, — In this Article it Is not so much the conclusion, as the reasons for the conclusion, which re- quhe consideration ; for the meaning of eA'eiy decree, CA'en of the unlvei"sal Chiu'ch, Is to be ascertained from the principles and grounds on Avhich it rests, as a conclusion is gathered from its premises, according to the saying of St. Hilary : " The understand ing of Avhat Is said is to be gathered from the reasons for speaking, be cause the matter does not depend on Avliat is said, but Avhat is said depends on the matter." Noav the sole prin ciple of this determination of theirs Is the authority of St, Augustine, Avho 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. Noav 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 gai'e to Judas, as Is satisfactorily proved ( 05 ) explicat hlc S, Augustinus, qin edebat pa7ies 7neos, levabat contra 7/7e calca- neu7n suum. Nam ibi tracht A'erba IUa praedicta esse de Jiida, et Impleta, cum Domlnus dedit lUi buccellam intinctam ; bis enim refert Scriptura Domlnum dedisse manu sua discl- pidis comedendum panem, primo cum dedit panem consecratimi, seu Eu chaiistlam ; secundo cum dedit Jiidae panem intinctum ; et docet S, Augus tinus per priorem manducationem non fuisse prophetiam Psalmi im- pletam, qiua time discipidi panem Domini non manducanint, sed panem Domlnum; at per posteiiora fuisse Impletam, quia ilia panis non erat panis Domlnus, sed panis Domini ; nam Infra aperte docet, Judam per- ceplsse Sacramentum cum aliis (hscl- pidis, et ilium panem intinctum non fuisse Coi'pus Clu'Isti, ut putant Incpilt ipse, qidda/n neglige7iter legentes. Quod autem citat illud Apostoll, cpii- cmnque manducaveiit, etc., id non facit, ut inslnuet panem intinctum datum Judae a Domino esse Eucha iistlam, sed argumentatur a mlnoii ad majus, et constat ex eo quod subjungit, si inqnit, conipltur qui non dijudicat, hoc est, non chscernit a cceteris clbis Domuiicum corpus. from his shoAving expressly (lib, 3, de Co7isens. Evang. c. 1) that St, John, In cli. xlil., does not speak at all of the Eucharist, and this becomes still more clear from reading St. Autnis- tine on Psalm xl. (Psalm xl. 10), whence the Evangelist took those Avords AA-hlch St. Augustme here ex plains, " He that eateth bread with Me, hath lifted up his heel against Me :" for there he says that these Avords Avere prophesied of Judas, and fulfilled, when our Lord g'ave to him the sop after He had dipped it ; for the Scripture relates that our Lord tAvice, Avitli His OAvii hand, gai-e His disciples bread to eat : first, Avhen He gave them the consecrated bread, or the Holy Eucharist ; secondly, Avhen He gave Judas the sop which He had dipped ; and St. Augustine teaches that the prophecy of the Psalm Avas not fulfilled by the first eating, because then the disciples had not eaten the bread of the Lord, but the Bread ivhich was the Lord ; but that by the second eating it Avas fulfilled, for that bread was not the Bread Avhich Avas the Lord, but the Bread of the Lord : for further on he says that Judas recelA'ed the Sacra ment Avith the other disciples, and that ( 66 ) quomodo non damnatm*, qid ad ejus mensam fingens amicum, accedit in- Imlcus ? si reprehenslone tangitur negligentia conjuvantis, c[ua poencl percutitur A'enchtor iuAitantls ? Hcec iUe, lit optime tracht Perronius, ut vero do hoc magis constare possit ; audlamus Ipsiim alibi frequenter hanc veritatem edocentem, epistol. ad Jul, 3, et de Saliitaribus Docmneutls, U7msquisque antequam corpus Do mini nostri Jesu Clirlsti accipiat, seipsvm pirobet, et secundum Apostoll prceceptum, sic de pane illo edat, et de callce bibat, quia qui indigne man- ducat et bibit, judicium sibi ma7iducat et bibit. Ecce secundum Apostolum, asserit malos ipsiim Chiisti corpus sumere, Etiam de 'verbis Domini, secundum Matth, seirn. ii. Ad eum i7iodum boni et 7nali ma7iducant coopus et sangulnem Domi7n. Ex quibus, et aliis apud eum tam perspiciiis locis, non potest dubltari de mciitc ejus. Ad sensum igitim Augustini expll- candus est hie Artlculus, quia ni- tltiir soh ejus authoiitati, secundum regidam quam dedi in initio, A'el cU- cendum ad hunc artlculum, sicut BeUar, ad August. Sed., impios non Domlnum, Id est, ut Domlnum (quia non gratiam Domini), in perceptlone that sop Avas not the Body of Christ, as, says he, so7ne u'ho read carelessly think, Fiu'ther, in citing that pas sage of the Apostle, ""Whosoever shall eat this bread of the Lord unwor- thdy," TATiON. — ^Although "It is not rightly gathered from the chs- com'se in St. John vl, that the com- mmiion of both species Avas enjoined by the Lord ; hoAvever, according to the various interpretations of Holy Fathers and Doctors it be mider- stood," as Is lightly sa'ld in the Councd of Trent (sess, 21, can. 5), yet in lajing doAvn that there then Avas a command glA-en on this point, as the Article asserts. It only f oUoaa-s, speaking strictly, that both kinds ought to be administered to each commiudcant, AvIth Avhich It is quite consistent that, on accomit of cir cumstances, for instance, of pei"sons, place, or time, Holy Communion shoidd be administered mider one kind, nor Is the present custom of ( 69 ) Maldonatus In 6 Joan, patet, quia Iu piimls 600 aunis, secundum doc trinam Augustini et Innoc. minlstra- batiu' Euchtuistia pari-ulis recenter baptizatis, non tamen nisi unica specie, sell. Sanguinis, ob dlfficidta- tem deglutlendl, ut testatm' post alios Hugo de S. Victore de Sacramentis, 1, 1, c. 20. Ratloni ergo persome ac- commodcibatiu' prteceptiun ; ratloni vero temporis, sicut ob persecutlo- nem, populus gestabat, et retinebat domi Hostlam consecratam, ut tes- tantiu' veteres cmn Basiho in ep, ad Caesariam Patiitlam ; ratloni loci, sicut eremitae ob iilmlam distantlam ab Ecclesus et publicis coiiA-entlbus Cliristlanorum, alicjuaudo ad annum reservabant Hostlam consecratam, ut ibidem patet apud Baslllum et ahos. Ex quibus apertisslme constat, Ecclesiam piv re 7iata frequenter unam vel alteram speciem laicis dis- tlie Chiu'ch more than this. Fiu'tlier, It is clear that tins precept (if it be a precept) ought to be under stood Avitli accommodation to persons or circumstances as mentioned above (as is suggested by Maldonatus in Jou7i. \\), because for the first six hundred years, according to SS. Augustine and Innocent, the Holy Eucharist AA-as administered to in fants just baptized, imder one kind only, namely the Blood, on account of the difficulty iu SAvallo\ving, as Is Avitnessed, after others, by Hugh of St. Victor (de Sacr., 1. I., c. 20), The precept, therefore, Avas modified In regard of the person; In regard of time, as A\lieu on account of perse cution, the people carried aivay the consecrated Host, and kept It at home, as the ancients testify Avitli St. Basil (Ep. ad Cwsa7ia77i Patiitlam) ; m regard of place, as Avlien the her mits, on account of their great chstancc from cluu'ches and public assemblies of Christians, sometimes resen-ed the consecrated Host for a year, as is mentioned in the same place by St. Basd, and by others. From AA-liich cases it most plainly appears, that the Church upon occa sion frequently admuiistered one or ( 70 ) tribidsse; nee aliud in Constant, Basihens, vel Trid, caiitum est, nee ahud dicit luc Artlculus. . Dices, qiucquld sit de rlgore ser monls In Articulo, saltem frequenter k Nostratlbus exponi, quasi rcdar- guei'ct moderuam praxtni Ecclesla». Respondeo, quod Cano, lib. 5, qucest. 4, c.xcnsat ab hceresl eum qui affirmaret Ecclesiam eirare in more commuuicandi plebem sub una specie tantum; et quia Constantlense sta- tult eos hcereticos qui hoc dicunt, respondet Ecclesiam time fiusse sine capite, nee Martinus qiuntus appro- bans Concdiiun, simpliciter approbat illimi Ai'tlculum, szH solum defiidt eos qui docuciint Ecclesiam m hii- jusinodi consuetudlne errare, esse vel hareticos, vel ut sapientes ha;i'eslm, condemnaiidos. Addit: Quod ergo Mart, Conclho pr^sidens non est ausus nomine hcereseos condemuare, id ego graAiori censm'a, accusare non audeo, nee debeo. Quod si m more ad salutem necessario, qiialis die vi- detur esse, de quo in Conclho Con- Btant. erat controA'ersIa ; 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 chfferent statement. All objection may be made, that Avhatever may be strictly Implied by the force of the Avords hi the Article, at least it Is frequently explained iu this coiuitiy, as coudemidng the present practice of the Chm'ch. To this I answer that Canus (lib. v., cap. 5, q. 4) excuses from heresy any one who shoidd affirm that the Chm'ch eired, in her custom of communicating the people under one kind alone ; and ivitli respect to the Comicll of Constance liaAing decreed that those Avho assert this are here tics, . I reply that the Chiu'ch Avas then Avithout a head, nor chd IMartin v.. In approAing of the Council, ab solutely approve that Article, but only defines that those Avho shall teach that the Church eirs In this custom, are either heretics, or to be condemned as saA'ouiing of heresy. He adds : That, then, AvhIch Martin, presiding ov-er the Comicll, did not venture to condemn under the iicune of heresy, that I neither A'enture nor have any right to condemn Avitli a ( 71 ) Martmi rhodestla, qiianto nos modes- tiores esse opportet In aids errorlbus coudemnanchs, qui consuetudim Ec clesiae minime ad salutem necessa- rla3 repugnantur, Subdit: Atque hoac eadem fortasse causa Martinmn V. impidit, ut qid repreheiiderent eccle- slastlcam Illam consuetuchnem im- pai'tlendi Euchaiistlam popido sub una specie, eos non ut hcereticos, sed ut sapientes hareslm condemnaiit; cum emm sub utraque olim specie, plebs Sacramentum Eucharistiae ac- ceperit, Idque Apostoh authoritate, et usu confu'mata, non erat hajretlcum in dubium vertere, an vetus ille Ec clesiae mos novo esset praeferendus, sed WiclefistcB Idcirco asserebant Ecclesiam eirare, qiua existimabant necessariam esse plebl ad salutem, utramque Sacramenti sjiecicm sumere, hue detorquentes Ilia Domini verba. Nisi 77ianducave7itls, etc, Pnideutis- slme Martinus quintus Aitupcratio- nem cccleslastici novi moris, non dixit esse, sed hccreslm sapere, Ha'c iUe, Et certo non Icais est macidce, haeresim sapere. heavier censime. But if in a moral question necessary to salvation, such as that seems to be, which Avas the subject of controAersy at the Councd of Constance, the moderation of Martin Avas so great, hoAv much more moderate ought v,-q to be In condemning other errors AA'luch oppose a custom of the Ohiu'ch In a matter not at aU necessary to salvation. He then adds: And perhaps this same cause moved Martin V, to condemn those Avho attacked that ecclesiastical custom of admlnlstemig 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 imder both kinds, and this Avas established by the authority of the Aj^ostlo and by custom, it ivas not heretical to raise a doubt AA'he ther that ancient custom of the Church was to be preferred to the ueAv; but the Vv'iclifites asserted that the Church had eired on tills point, because they thought that it was necessary for salA'atlon for the people to receive both Muds of the Sacrament, pen-ertlug to this mean ing those Avords of oiu' Lord : " Ex es cept ye eat the Flesh of the Sou of ( 72 ) Sunt qiddem duo Canones de hoc in Tiidentiuo sess. de Communioue, c, 1. SI quis dlxe7it ex Del p)7-wcepto, vel 7iecessltate salutis omnes et smgulos Christi fideles utiximque speciain sanc- tissiml Encharistire Sacramenti sumere debere. Anathema sit. Can, 2. Si quis dixe7it, saxictam Ecclesiam Catholicam 71071 jusHs causis, et 7-atio7iibus adduc- ia/n fuisse, ut lalcos, atque etia7n cle- 7icos 71011 C07ficle7ites, sub panis tantum 77iodo specie C07nmu)dca7-et, aut i/i eo errasse, A7mtlie7)ia sit. Gravlssimus Cano non potult ig- norare hos Canones, qui interfuit Tridentino, et can. 0, de Eucharistla ibidem citat ; tamen resolvit solum sapere hccreslm, chcere Ecclesiam hi Ida noA-a cousuetudiue errare, judi cium de hac ejus doctrina penes doctlores sit; Man, and chink His Blood," &c. Most prudently, then, did Martin V. say that blaming the neiv ecclesias tical custom was, not heresy, but savouring of heresy. Such Is his statement. And certainly It is no light stain to sai-oiu' of heresy. Noav there are tAA'o canons of the Council of Trent on this point, (Sess, xxl, de Commu7i., 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 recei\'e 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 Avas not Induced by just causes and reasons to commimi- cate under the species of bread only laymen, and al»o clerics Avlien not consecrating, let him be anathema." The most learned Canus cannot haA'e been ignorant of these canons, Avho was present in the Council of Trent, and cpiotes in the same pas sage the sixth canon " On the Euchaiist;" yet he decides that it only savours of heresy, to say that the Church en's in that new custom : let the decision on tliis opinion of his rest Avith more learned men. ( 73 ) Ego tamen quoad casum nostnmi, dicerem confesslonem Angllcam iu neiitro Canoiie percelh; nam quoad prlmiim Canonem, non dicunt esse sic k Deo praeceptum, quod sit de necessitate salutis, vel quod non sit accommodate inteUIgendum ad clr- cumstantias, et cetera. Quod solum in Trident, rejlcitm' (ut lel maxinie patet). Quoad secundum Canonem iiidlatenus tangunt. I, hoAVCver, as far as om' subject Is concerned, shoidd say that the Anglican Confession falls under the censiu'e of neither canon, for as respects the foi-mer canon, it does not assert that commimlon in both kinds Avas so commanded by God, as that it Is necessary to salvation, or that it may not be undei'stood as capable of accommodation to circiun- stauces, &c,, Avhich assertion alone is rejected by the Councd (as is most evident). As respects the second canon, it is not in any respect offended against. Articl'LUS XXXI. — De U7nca Cluistl oblatlo7ie in C7'uce pei-- fecta. OBLATIO Christi semel facta, perfecta est redemptio, propltio, et satisfactio pro omnibus peccatis totius miiiidi tam originalibus quam actualibiis, Neque prceter illam uni- cam est ulla alia pro peccatis cx- piatlo : unde jNIissarum Saciificia, quibus vulgo chcebatur sacerdotem offeire Christum in remissionem poeiiae aut cidpte pro vhis et de- functis, blasphema figmenta sunt et pernlclosce Impostiu'a^, Paraphrasis, — Totus hie Arti- Artigle XXXI.— 0/ the 07ie Ob lation of Cluist fi/ushed upon the Civss. THE Offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation, aud satisfaction, for ad the sins of the Avhole Avorld, both original and actual ; aud there is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone. Wh.ercfore the sacrifices of ilasses, In the AvhIch It Avas com monly said, that the Priest did offer Chiist for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or gidlt, were blasphemous fables, aud dan gerous deceits. Expl.vnation. — The ivhole of ( 74 ) cuius dm'isslmus videtiu* ; rectius tamen Introsplciendo, non adeo veii- tati discordem judicem. Prima pal's quoad affirmatl\-a, indubltata est; ubi A-ero subdit nega- tloiiem omnis satisfactlone pro reatu peccatorum, excepta Christi oblatione in Cruce : mtelllgi debet, illud totuni alteii negaii quod in prioribus A'erbis Cluisto attributum est : id est, quod nemo praeter Christum per qiiam- cumqiie actionem vel passionem pec cata diluere potest, scihcet pnesciu- deiido Christum. In verbis posterioribus, si sobiie intelligantur, nihil agitur contra Sa ciificia ^lissa in se, sed contra vid- garem Ael A'ldgatam opiniouem de ip&ls, scilicet quod sacerdotes m Sa- crificiis offeirent Christum pro livls ct defimctis, in remissionem poDiia; et cul[)ce, adeo ut virtute hujus Sacrl- ficii ab eis oblati independenter a Crucis Sacrificio, mererentur popido remissionem, etc, Haec est Aidgata opiido, quam hie perstrmgit Aiti- cidus, Ccetenim dicendo cum Sanctis Patribus ui Mssa esse vere Sacrifi- ciiim, licet loquendo secmidum sensum veterum Sacrificlorron, non adeo pro- thls Article seems most difficult, but by looldng into it more coirectly, I should not consider It very dissonant from the truth. The commencement, so far as it is affirmatlA-e, is Indubitably true; Avhere, however, there folloAvs a denial of all satisfaction for the guilt of our sins, except the oblation of Cluist on the Cross, it must be understood, that the Avhole of Avhat is attributed to Chiist In the first Avords Is denied to any one else; that is, that no one besides Clu'ist can by any action or suffering Avasli away sin. In the latter part, if It be under stood fitly, nothing is said agamst the Sacrifice of the Mass in itself, but against the vidgar and com monly-received opinion about It, namely, that priests iu this Sacrifice offer Christ for the living aud the dead, for remission of pain aud gidlt, so that by \irtue of this Sacri fice offered for them, indepe;identiy of the Sacrifice of the Cross, they gain remission for the people, &c. This is the popular opinion Avhich the Article here condemns. But it must be said AvIth the Holy Fathers that iu the ]\Ias3 there is a tine ( 75 ) prie qiua non immolatm* modo cra- ento, sicut in alus : nam ut habetur in Nicaeno Canoiie, Ag/ius qui supra sacram Mensam absque imxnolatioiie a sacerdotlbus imxnolatur, id est ipse Christus, sacrificatur, licet 7ion iterum mactetur. Dicendo etiam (ob hunc Artlcu lum) quod non est propltiatorlum >prhno, quia hoc competit Sacrificio in Cruce, hcet bene per se, et quasi se cundo, quia principaliter per applica- tionem Sacrificli cruentl, ct per com- memoratlonem ejus, adeo ut ratio propitiationis originahter Saciificio In Cruce competat, et dlinc, sen -.irtiite idiiis, hinc, ut etiaiii recte notavit Cano in locis, 1. 12, ca. 12, ubi dicit, satis lit vere et proprie sit Sacrifi- cium, quod mors Ita nunc ad pec cati remissionem ajiplicetur, ac si nunc Chiistus moreretiu' ; ubi ratio nem propitiationis applicatloni mortis Christi tiibult : et ad eundem sensum citat Grcgorium : In seipso immorta- liter vivens, itexmm in hoc mysterio moritur. Mors Igitur Incnieuta in altari, Airtutem suam derivat a, morte Saciifice, 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 maimer, as in the old ; for, as is said in the Nicene Canon, " The Lamb AAhich Avithout inmiola- tlon is unmolatcd by the priests on the Holy Table, that is Cluist Him self, is sacrificed, though It be not again slain." We must say again (on account of tlds Article) that it is not pri marily propitiatory, for this pertains to the Saciifice on the Cross, though it may Avell be called so in itself, and as it Avere secondaiily, 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 A'irtue of that, to this Sacrifice, as Canus has rightly remai'ked (Loci Theol., lib. xii., cap, 12), AAiiere he says that it is sufficient to cause It [the Holy Eucharist] to be tndy and properly a Saciifice, that Clu'Ist's death shoidd be so applied for the remission of sm, as if Christ were to die again, AA-here he attributes pro pitiation to the application of Christ's ( 76 ) crueuta In Cruce, nam ut loqultiu* Tridentlnnm, sessione 22, can, se- cmido de Sacrificio ^Ilssae : Obla- tio7us cruentce fructus per hanc uber- ?'»He percipiuntur. Et in hoc sensu hoc Saciificiiun est Imago et exemplar alterius in Crace, unde omnis salus rachcaliter emanaAit, Nulla prorsus hic erit chfficidtas cum doctloribus Protestantibus, qui plane hoc totiim fateutur; ut videre est apud D. Anch'eros contra Perronlum, et D, Montacutlum contra Helgham : et alios frequenter ; denique uec. Dicendum tainen (ut cUxi) esse etiam per se propitlatoriiun, quia se ciuidum sanctos Patres est idem Sa- crificlum, unde Chrysostom, homdia 17, in 10, ad Hebraeos : Nos aliud Sac7ificium non facimus quotidie sed se77iper idem. Addit : Lnmo hujus Saciificii nwnoriam facimus, Non death, and cites St, Gregoi-y to the same pm-jiose, " Living in Himself in immortality. He ches again in tlus mysteiy," The imbloody death on the altar, then, cleriA-es its virtue from the bloody death upon the Cross ; for, as the Council of Trent says (Sess. xxii., cap, 2, de Sac7ific. Miss.) : " The fnuts of the bloody oblation are receh-ed most plentif idly 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, aU salvation spnmg. There Avill be no difficulty AA-hatever on this point with the more learned Protestants, Avho alloAV the Avhole of this, as is to be seen in Dr. Anch'eAves against Peironius, and Dr. Montagu against Helgham, and in other writers commonly ; nor does this article in any degree gainsay tlds opinion. It must not be said, hoAA-ever (as I said), that this Saciifice is of itself propitiatory, because, accorchng to the Holy Fathers, it is the same Sacrifice as that on the Cross ; as St, Chrysostom says (liom. 17, inHeb. X.) : " We do not offer a different Sacrifice every day, but always the ( 77 ) ergo solum memorathiim, sed slmid memoratum Ipsum Saciificinm quod iu Cruce, hcet in modo et ahis clr- ciimstantlls differat. Unde Ibidem : Id ipsu7n offe7imus, 7ie nu7ic quidem alium agnum, C7xistlna alium, sed semper eu7idem : ipsum proinde ii7mm est Sacrificium. Haec ille. Nee hoc acU-ersatm' Ai'tlculo, ut patet In glossa, quam opposulmus, nee Ipsis Doc- toribus ; cum enim ipsi fateantur m Ecclesia esse sacerdotes, esse etiam Sacrificia propitlatorin, fateantur ne- cesse est. Nam ad Hebr, 5 : Omnis saeerdos constituitur, 7tt off'erat do7ia et Sac7ificia pro peccatis. Hic igitiu* necessario pax. Ad pacem vero hanc altlus stablllendam, examinemus na turam Sacrificli ut sic. Quod a theologis in hunc modum definiri solet, Sacrificium est actio externa, qua res corporea aliqua et sensibilis a leqitimo minist7-o oitu de- same." He adds : " Li truth we make a memorial of this Sacrifice," It is not, therefore, merely a com memorative Saciifice, but the very Saciifice, too, of the Cross AA'hlch is commemorated, though It differs in maimer and circumstances, ""Whence," he says, in the same place, " we oft'er the very same thing, not at one time one Lamb, at another time another, but abvays the same; It is entirely one Sacrifice," These are his words. Nor does this contrachct the Article, as is plain from the explanation AvhIch we have given; nor the Doctors themselves; for since they themselves confess that there ai'e priests In the Church, they must necessarily aUoAv that there are also propitiatory Sacrifices. For iu 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 finnly, let us exandne the natui'e of sacrifice as such. Sacrifice Is ordinarily defined among theologians In the foUoAving manner : — " Sacrifice is an external action, Avhereby any sensible corporal ( 78 ) bito ac mystico, soli Deo offertu)', et in finem congnientem consecratur et transmutatur. Orlgo litis, si quae est, conslstit in duobiis posterioribus pimctls: scihcet in consecratione et transmutatlone ; quid scdicet conse- cretur, et transmutetm*. Bellar, piitat panem consecrcui, et Corpus Clu'Isti desti'ui ; ahi ut Sua rez, quod consecratur Corpus Christi, quia offertiir et Deo dlcatur, de- stnutm- vero, quia v-ero, licet mystlce et Incruente, immolatur Christus. Tandem adcht Suarez non est de ratione Saciificu destnictionem seu immutatlonem rei oblatce, quod etiam probat ex LeAitlci vigeslmo tertio, ubi erat A'erum Sacrificium sine miita- tlone, et hinc totam rationem for- malcm Saciificu competere hide. Ut verum fatear, res est expllcatu difficdis: ahqiiam tamen transmuta- tlonem hie fieri, est commimlus et A'erius, ct hanc requiri, saltem 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 fittmg end," The origin of the controversy, if any exists, is m the two latter points, namely, in the consecration and transmutation ; Avhat, that is, is con secrated, and Avhat Is changed, Bellai'mine 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 tndy, though In a mystical and unbloody manner. Lastly, Suarez adds that the de- stnictlon or change of the thing offered Is not essential to the Idea of Saciifice, which, too, he proves from Leviticus xxlil., AA-here Avas a true Saciifice, Avithout any change, and hence he thinks that tho Avliole formal idea of a Saciifice is appli cable to tins. To OAvn 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 re(julred ( 79 ) tenent, quibus etiam convenlunt Pro testantes, Sed an ilia transmutatio debeat esse cnienta, A'el an sufficiat incnienta, videtur esse allqucilis. Stiicte tamen loquendo propter Sacrificium in Cincc, et caetera Sa crificia, qua) commuuiter cnicnta erant, putant Sacrificium Mssae non habere iisquequacjue eandem ratio nem Sacrificli : non negant tamen esse Sacrificium (ut dixi) licet non pro prie, eo scihcet modo quo ilia cpua non modo cniento, quod nos ultro dablmus. Est Igitur Sacrificium, sed cum termino illo restiictivo a Pa tribus usiu'patum, Incnientum, quod non negant. at least in a saciifice for siu, almost all theologians hold, with whom Protestants, too, agree. But Avhether that change ought to be bloody, or whether it Avould suffice if unbloody, seems to be someivhat controverted. But to speak strictly, In conse quence of the Sacrifice on the Cross and the other Sacrifices, which ivere commonly bloody, they think that the Saciifice 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, Avhicli Ave reachly grant. It is, therefore, a Sacrifice, but Avitli that restrictive term used by the Fathers, i.e., an unbloody saciifice, aa-IiIcIi Is not denied bv them. Artigulus XXXII. — De Co77Jugio Sace7xlotu7i7. EPISCOPIS, Presbyteris, et DI- aconis nullo mandato divino praeceptum, ut aut coehbatum vo- veant, aut a matrlmonio abstiueant : Hcet Igitur etiam dlls, ut ceteris omnibus Christianis, ubi hoc ad pie- Article xxxii. — Of theMariiage 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 laivfid also for them, as for aU other Christian men. ( 80 ) tatem magis facere judlcaverint, pro suo arbitratu matrimonium contra- here. Paraphrasis,— Hic Ai'ticulus ni hil superadcht Articulo XXXI, sub Edvardo VI. paulo quidem expllca- tius idem declarat, scilicet EpIscopIs, Presbj-teiis, et Dlaconls non esse man datum ut coehbatum A'OA'eant : neque jure cllAino cogmitur matrl monio abstinere, et consequenter quantum ad jus divinum, Hcite et valide possmit nuptlas contrahere ; quce est communior opinio scholanun contra nostnim doctissimum Medina, De sacrorum hominum continentia ; nee plus hic asseritur, posteiiora enim verba non aliud speclficant. Artigulus XXXIH. — De Excom- ??! 7 m icatis vita n dls. QVTL per publicam Ecclesice deiiiin- clatloucm rite ab imitate Eccle siae prcecisus est et excommunicatus, is ab imiversa fidelium multltudlne, donee per pcenltentlam pubhce recon- cUIatus fuerit arbitrio juchcis compe- tentls, habendus est tanquam Eth- nicus et Publlcaniis. to many at their own discretion, as they shall judge the same to seive better to godliness. Explanation. — This Article adds nothing to Ai'ticle XXXI, under Edward VI,, but declares the same • thing somewhat more fully, namely, that there is no command binchng Bishops, Priests, and Deacons to make a vow of celibacy ; nor are they by God's Iciav obhged to abstain from matrimony, and, consequently, as far as God's law goes, they can laAvfuUy aud vahcdy contract mar riages, which is the more common opinion of the schools, in opposition to the very learned Mechna On the CeUbacy of the Clergy ; nor is more asserted here, for the conclucUng words specify nothing else. Article XXXIH. — Cf excoinmu- nicate Persons, hoiu they are to be a7)olded. THAT person Avliich by open denunciation of the Church is rightly cut off from the unity of the Chm'ch, and excommunicated, ought to be taken of the whole multitude of the faithful, as an Heathen and Pubhcan, iintd he be openly recon- cded by penance, and received into the Church by a Judge that hath authority thereunto. ( 81 ) Paraphrasis, — Hic Ai'ticulus Ca thohcus est, et tam pactis Sciipturis quam Antlqultatl consonans. ExPL^VNATiON. — ^This Article is Catholic, and agreeable both to Holy Scripture and Antiquity, Artigulus XXXIV,~De Tradi- tionibus Ecclesiasticis. TRADITIONES atque ceremonias easdem non omnino necessarium est esse ubique, aut prorsus consi- miles : nam et A'cuiae semper f uenint, et mutaii possunt pro regionum, tem- porum, et morum diversitate, modo nihil contra verbum Dei instltuatur. Trachtiones et ceremonias Ecclesias- ticas quae cum verbo Dei non pug- nant, et sunt authoritate publica in- stitutse et probatae, quisquis priA'ato consdio volens et data opera publice violaverit, is, ut qui peccat In piib- liciun orchuem Ecclesiae, quique ItecUt authoritatem magistratus, et qid In- firmonun fratrum conscleiitlas Aid- nerat, publice, ut cceteii tinieant, arguendus est. Qucehbet Ecclesia jDartlcularis sive natlonalls, authoritateni habet Instl- tuench, mutanch aut abrogandi cere monias, aut ritus Ecclesiasticos, hn mana tantum authoritate institutes : modo omnia ad aedificatlonem fiant. Paraphrasis, — Jilanlf estum est Article XXXIV,— 0/ the Tradi tions of the Chu7'ch. T is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, and utterly like; for at all times they haA'e been dlA'crs, and may be changed accorchng to the diversities of countries, times, and men's manners, so that nothmg be ordained against God's Word. ^"VTio- soever through his private judgment, wlUIngly 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 approA-ecl by common authority, ought to be rebuked opeul}-, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that offendeth against the common order of the Chmch, aud hurtcth the authority of the Magistrate, and Avoundeth the con sciences of the Aveak brethren. EA-ery partic-iilar or national Chui'ch hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church ordauied only by man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying. Explanation. — It is clear that G ( 82 ) hlc solum agi de Traditionlbus non doctrlnahbus : asserit enim hic Ar tlculus, eas secmidum circumstantias temponim et loconim, subinde va- riaii posse : quod de doctrina certo tradita per Apostolos, Chiisticmorum nemo asseruit, Totus igltiu' hlc Ai'ticulus mihl A'eiisslmus et praxi Ecclesiae con sonans videtur. Fidsse vei'O aUqua doctrinaKa per Apostolos non scripto, sed verbo posteris trachta eleganter declarat Dlonjs, Areopag, : 'E/c 11009 et? vovv Sia /j,e(Tov \6yov- o-co/MaTiKov, aXK' ofici}<; 'Ypacprj'i eKTcr;, Id'est, ex ammo m animum sine hteris, mecho inter- cedcnte verbo, alt fuisse transfusa. • August, etiam, hb. 5 de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 23, respondens Epistolce Cj-piiani ad Pompeium, Apostoll, inqnit, 7iihll quidem inde p7'CEcepe/'unt, sed consuetudo illo quce opiponcbatur Cypxiano, ab eonim tra- ditlo7ie exordiu7n su77ipslsse credenda est, sicut sunt multa quce imiversa tenet Fcclesia, et ob hoc ab Apos tolis prcBcepta bene creduntur, qiuxmvis scripta non reperiantur. the Traditions here treated of ai*e not doctrinal, for the Article asserts that they may be changed according to cu'cmnstances of times and places, Avhich no Christian ever asserted of doctrine certainly handed doAvn by the Apostles, The AA'hole Article, therefore, ap pears to me most tine, and agreeable to the practice of the Church, That there were certain matters of doctrine dehvered by the Apostles, not In writing but orally, to theu* successors, is elegantly expressed by St, Dionysius, the Areopagite, " From mind to mind, by means of bochly speech, but at the same time without Avriting," he says that mat ters were transmitted, St. Augustine also (lib. v., de Bapt. Cont. Do7icd., c. 23), answer ing the Epistle of St, Cyprian to Pompelus, says : " The Apostles ordered nothhig on that point ; but that custom, AvhIch was opposed by Cyprian, must be believed to have spnmg from their tradition, as are many things which the Universal Church holds, and for this reason they are weU beheved to be ordered by the Apostles, though they be not found ia -writing," ( 83 ) Et superius, hb. 2, c. 9, dixit: Consuetudinis robore tenebatur orbis terrarum, et hcec solum opponebatur inducere volentlbus iiovitatem, Sed de hujusmodi hie non agitur. Quod autem adchtur in ultimo articulo, ve- risslmum 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. AHter, et est omnium Doctorum. And in a fonner passage (hb. Ii., c. 9) he said, " The Avhole Avorld AA'as boimd by the force of custom, and this alone Avas opposed to those Avho wished to Introduce novelties." But in this place matters of this kind are not in question. That, hoAvever, AvhIch Is added at the end of the Ai'ticle is most ti'ue, and St. Augus tine says the same (ep. 86, ctd Casulanum, and ep. 119 ad Ja7ma- rium) ; and again it is to be found, 31 clist. cap. Qnmnam, &c., and cap. Aider, and Is the opinion of ad the Doctors. Artigulus XXXV. — De HomiUis. Article XXXV, TOMUS secundus Homlhainm, qiiarum singulos titulos hulc Articulo subjunximus, contlnet piam et salutarem doctrinam, et his tem- poiibus necessariam, non minus quam prior tomus Homiliarum ; quce editce smit tempore EdwarcH VI. itaqiie eas in Ecclesiis per minlstros chllgenter et clare, ut a popido intel- hgi possint, recltandas esse jiidlca- -vimus.* Paraphrasis. — Midta sunt in Homilus laiide digna, quidem alia Of the Homilies. THE second Book of Homdies, the several titles Avhereof Ave haA'e joined under this Ai'ticle, doth contain a godly and Avholesome Doc trine, and necessary for these tune.?, as doth the former Book of Homihes, AA'hich AA'cre set forth In the time of Edivard the Sixth ; and therefore AA-e judge them to be read in Cluu'ches by the Ministers, dihgently and dis tinctly, that they may be imder standed of the people. Explanation. — There are many things In the Homilies Avorthy of all * The List of the Titles of the Homilies is omitted in both editions of this treatise. g2 ( 84 ) nee nobis, vel doctloribus eorum, ar- rident. Nee tenentur Protestantes, ob haec verba In Articulo, statim In singula verba vel sententlas Homdla- rum jurau'e, nam ut olim Turrecre- mata, cum ipsa Ecclesia Doctorum ahquonun opuscula probat, non ob id InteUIgendum est, omnia Iu eis con- tenta probarl : sicut in Constltutionl- bus sextae SynocU, allquonim Docto rum opera probata sunt, quod etiam in Decretis legltur, dist, 15, non tamen omnia verba et partlculas approbat, ut coiiA-enlunt Doctores, Hoc etiam exactlsslm^ tradunt Doctores Parlsi- enses, exponentes BuUam Urbani quinti approbantem doctrinam S, Thomae, in qua scripsit Tholosanis, ejus doctiinam ut bene dictam, et Ca tholicam teneri debere. Dicunt tamen Pa>isie/ises, prcedlctam approbationexn 1X071 esse unlvei'salem, sed taiiquam doc- t7i7xce utills, et in mxtltis probabilis, prudenter Igitur quce sanam doctri nam saplunt, popido legenda, aha neglectid 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 Homdies ; for, as was said long since by Turrecremata, Avhen the Chm*ch herself approA'es the AA'orks of certain Doctors, It is not, therefore, to be understood that everything contained in those Avorks Is approved, as in the Constitutions of the Sixth Synod the works of cert-aln Doctors were approved, as Is read in the Decrees, dist. 15; but the Synod chd 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., approA'uig the doctrina of St, Thomas, In which he wrote to those of Toulouse, that " his doctrine ought to be AA'cU expressed and Catholic ; but the Parisians say that the approbation aforesaid is not miiversal, but Imphes 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 shoidd be neglected. ( 85 ) Artigulus XXX"VI, — De Episco- ponim, et Mmisti-onim Consecratione. LIBELLUS de consecratione Ar- chieplscoporum, et Eplscopoinm, et orduiatione Presbyterorum, et DI- acononim echtus nuper temporibus Edwarcd "VI. et authoritate Parlla- mentl ilhs ipsis temporibus confirma- tus, omnia ad ejusmodi consecratlo- nem et ordinatiouem necessaria con tlnet : et nihil habet quod ex se sit aut superstitlosum, aut impium : itaque quicmique juxta ritus ilhus libii con- secratl, aut ordinatl sunt, ab anno se- cmiclo prschcti Regis EdwarcU usque ad hoc tempiis, aut In posterum juxta eosdem ritus consecrabuntur, aut or- dlnabmitur, rite atque ordinate* atque legitime statulmus esse et fore conse crates et orcUnatos, Paraphrasis. — Hic Ai'ticulus nos remittit ad Pontlficale sub Edvardo VI. compactum. De ordlnatlone Episcoporum verba in ceremoniali dlo sunt : Acclpe Spl- ritu7n Sa7ictum, et 7neme7ito suscitai-e gratiam Dei, quce est in te per imposi- tlonem manuum, quia Deus non nobis dedit Spiritxim timoris, sed potestatis et sob7ietatis. Article XXXVI.— 0/ Consecra tion of Bishops and Ministers. THE Book of Consecration of Archbishops and Bishops, and Ordering of Priests and Deacons, lately set forth in the time of Ed- loard the Sixth, and coiifii'med 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 migodly. And therefore whosoever are consecrated or ordered accordincr to the Rites of that Book, since the second year of the forenamed King Edivard unto this time, or hereafter shaU be consecrated or ordered ac cording to the same Rites ; we decree all such to be rightly, orderly, and lawf uUy consecrated , and or dered. EXPL.4N-ATION. — This Article re fers us to the Pontifical compiled under Echvard VI. At the ordination of Bishops, the AA'ords In that ceremonial arc : " Take the Holy Ghost, aud remember that thou stir up the gi'ace of God Avhlch is In thee by imposition of hands ; for God hath not given us the spirit of feai', but of poAver and soberness," * In some editions "ordine" for "ordinate." ( 86 )' Haec verba simul cum impositlone manuum a pluribus EpIscopIs facta, pi'onuntlat Archlepiscopus : qiubus peractis tradit in manus consecrandl BIbha, cum verbis accommodatis : adeo ut forma sit, Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, etc, materia, imposltio ma nuum, juchcent doctlores an hanc eorum consecratlonem ex hoc capite h'ritam defineri fas sit, praesertim, cum Vasq, et aid putent Imposltionem manuum, et Ida verba sufficere quan tum est de jure dlAdno, ad essentiam orclinatlonis Episcopalis : ut Aridere est, p, 3, disp, 240, num, 58. Co nink de Ordine, disp. 20, dub. 7, num. 58, fuse, et probat ex Trid, ; nee chssentit Arcudius de Sacramento Orchids, propter authoritatem Scrip- tm'os, quce horum duoram sceplus et solum mentlonem facit, ubi etiam fuse ostencht In Ecclesia Graeca tra chtiones instrumentonim non esse necessarias simphclter, nee foi^mas illis apphcatas. 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 Avhether 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. ul,, disp, 240, num, 58. Conink de Ord., disp. xx., club. 7, num, 58, at length treats of the question, and proves It from the Council of Trent; nor does Arcuchus dissent from this opinion (de Sacr. Ord.), because of the authority of Scripture, Avhlch makes mention of these two pomts alone, and most frequently. He also, in the same place, shows that in the Greek Church the dehveiy of the instru ments is not necessary, absolutely, nor the forms connected with them. ( 87 ) Idem judicium facit de unctlone physica et materlali In Sacramento Ordinis, sive quoad Episcopos vel sacerdotes ; non enim est essentialis, secundum eum: immo in Ecclesia Graeca nunquam fuit adhibita, ut contendit Ai'cudlus ; qiua Chi"ys. in Digresslone Morali 2, Orat. In 1, ad Timoth., faciens dlstinctionem inter sacerdotes veteris et novae legis, chcit priores unctos fuisse, Dionys, etiam, licet accuratissimus in ceremoidis describendls, nee yerbum habet de unctlone, quando vero aliqul Graeci Patres, de unctlone mentlonem fa clunt, de splrituali eos iateUigit. De Presbyteris forma est, Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, qxiontm remiseris peccata, remittuntur eis, et quoni7n retinuetis retenta sunt, et esto fidells ve/'bl dlvinl, et sanctorwii Sacramexi- torum ejus dlspe7isator, ixi Noi7tine Patris, etc. Postea traduntiu: Evan- gella, et dicit : Accipe potestatem pradlcandl Dei Verbum, sanctommque Sacramentorum administrandi in hac congregatione. His judgment Is the same respect ing the physical and material imctlon in the Sacrament of Order, whether with respect to Bishops or Priests ; for it is not essential, accorcUng to him : moreover. In the Greek Church, as Arcudius argues. It nei-er has been used, because St. Chrysostom (Digress. Mo?: 2, Ch'at. in 1 ad Ti7noth.), chstingnlshing betAveen the priests of the Old and the New Law, says that the former were anointed. St. Dionysius, again, though most accurate m describing ceremoides, says not a word respecting unction; and when some Greek Fathers men tion unction, he understands them to mean spnitual unction. With respect to Priests the foi*m is, " Receive the Holy Ghost ; whose sins thou dost forgive thay are forgh-en ; 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 cancUdate'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." ( 88 ) Christus quidem primo potestatem decht super Coi'pus Cluistl venim, postea super mystlcum, ut patet in sacro texlii, et optime declarat Doctor 4, dist. 24, sic etiam practicat Ec clesia, ut patet in Pontificall, Aliqul Doct. tenent, ut q. 37, dub, 2, iu supplementum D, Th. post Bell, no- taA-it doctisslmus Kellis. (cui midtam tiibiio, et ex midtis tltidls debeo) quod in orchnatlone sacerdotum, dla secunda potestas super corpus mystl cum, per potestatem remlttendi et hganch, solum sit explicativa sen de- clarativa potestatis ante tradita?, et non esse aliquam noA-am potestatem de novo collatam, sic ahqui Tho- mlstac, ut patet apud Capreol. 4, d. 19, quaest. 1, quod melloii jure alii putant dici in hac Nostratium forma, scilicet in prioribus verbis, solum ex- pllcaii, quod postea traditur, quia sxipc7' omnia Sac7'a77xe7itn, potestas con- fertiir in verbis sequentibus, ut ch recte ibi astndtur, ergo etiam super Sacramentum Poenltentlae, c[uod in prioribus verbis insinuabatur ; ubi etiam intedlgi non dubito, potesta tem sacrificandl, quia datur potestas super Corpus Christi venim, de jure A'ero chAiiio non fit consecratio nisi In Samficio, ut fere unanimis est con- Christ, indeed, fii*st gave power over the true Body of Christ, after wards over His mystical Body, as is plain In Holy Writ; the Doctor Avell declai*es (4 dist., 24), and tins is the practice of the Chiu'ch, as Is plain in the Pontifical, Some Doctors hold (as in qu, 37, dub, 2, sup,) St. Thomas, after BeUarmlne, the very learned Kelhson (whose debtor I am on many grounds) that in the Ordi nation of Priests, that second power over the mystical body, by the poAver of loosing and binding, is only ex- phcatlve or declarative of the power given before, and Is not any iiewpower given afresh. So say some of the Thomlsts, as appears from Capreol, 4, d. 19, qu. 1, which others with more justice think is said rf the form in use in this country, namely, that in the foi'mer Avords that is only ex- pliuned which is subsequently given, because in the following Avords power is given in cdl the Sacraxnexits, as is expressly added in that fonn, and therefore iu the Sacrament of Penance, which was implied by the former words, where, too, I doubt not but that the power of offering saciifice is understood, because power is ^ven over Chi'ist's true Body; but ( 89 ) sensus Doctonim, et Chiistus Ipse dando potestatem consecrandl, dedit insimul saciificancU, ut patet in ul tima Coena, Sclo Puiitanos chcere. In hac eorum forma ex proposlto expungi potesta tem Sacrificanch ut superstitlosam. Sed non contra iUos ago, qiua vere destniuut totam formam : benigne solum expono Ai'ticulmu, et eo plus quo video celebrlores Protestantlum Doctores, ut superius ostench, Sacer dotes et Sacrificia agnoscere. Pec cant saltem In omni sententia non ob- serA'ando formam ab Ecclesia Latina demandatam, ut cum Soto tenent Doctores; ut etiam videre est apud Petiglanis In 4, de Baptismo, et Doc- torem, 4, dist. 8, c|ula est de necessi tate Mlnist7i, ut loquitur Doctor, id est proBceptl in Ecclesia Latina. Fuse etiam de hoc agIt Doctor, d. 3, q. 2. Sed an dla forma sufficiat ad Sa- by cUvIne right there is no consecra tion except In the Sacrifice, as is the almost unanimous consent of the Doctors ; and Cluist Himself, by giving the poAver of consecrating, gave at the same time that of sacri ficing, as appears In the narrative of the Last Supper. I knoAv that the Puritans say that In this form of theirs the poAver of sacrificing is purposely expunged, as being supei'stitious. But I am not writing against them, because In truth they destroy the Avhole form, I merely explain the Ai'ticle in a favoimable sense, and the rather because I find that the more distin guished Doctors of the Protestants, as I have shown aboA-e, acknowledge Priests and a Saciifice, At least they err accorchng to CA-eiy opinion by not observing the foi'm com manded by the Latin Church, as Soto holds AvIth the Doctors, as ap pears also from Petlguvxis de Bapt. 4, and from the Doctor, 4, dist. 8, because the foiin Is de 7iecessltate Mhiistrl, as the Doctor says, that is, necessary by precept m the Latin Church, The Doctor treats on this at length, too, d. 3, qu. 2, But the question is, Is that form ( 90 ) cerdotlum. Videtur (non asserendo, minus adhaerendo) responderi posse secundum ahquos, quod sic, ex In- noceiitlus IV, in Cap. Presbyt, de Sacramentis non Iterandis, ubi dicit : De ritu Apostolico invenitur, quod manus imponebant ordinandis, et quod oratlonem fundebant super eos. Allam autem formam non invenimus ab els servatam. Unde credimus, quod 7iisi essent formes postea inventce, sufficeret ordinatori dlcere Sis Saeerdos, vel alia cepiipoUentia, sed S7d>sep'.entilnis tem poribus formas, quce servantur, Ec clesia ordinavit. Ipslus ergo, et con stans est Doctorum sententia, sub stantlam formae m omni ordinatlone, non esse praeclse in cortlce verborum, sed sensu: modo igitur fiat verbis aequIpoUentlbus, ut loquitur Innoc. non dubito sufficere et A'alere: Non enim vei'ba, sed rem oplnor spectari oportcre : ut Arcuchus ubi supra. Et Trid. Aidetur faA'ere, sess, 23, c, 4, ubi ait : Sicram ordinatiouem verbis et slgnis exte7ioribus perfici. Ubi non determinat verba vel signa. Multi ntique Doctores non improbablhter existlmant, nee verba, nee symbola externa, id est, nee formam vel ma- teriam k Christo determinate esse assignata, sed ab Ecclesia assig- sufficlent for conferring the Priest hood ? It seems (I do not assert it, stIU 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 scud, "With regard to the Apostohc Ritual, aa'O find that they used to impose hands on those w-lio were to be ordained, and prayed over them. Nor do we find any other form observed by them. Whence we beheve, that unless forms had been subse quently invented, It woidd suffice for the ordalner to say. Be thou a Priest, or equh-alent AVords; but, in subsequent times, the Church ordained the forms which are iioav obserA'ed," It is, therefore, his opimon, and a constant one Avith the Doctors, that the substance of the form in ad ordination. Is not abso lutely in the mere husk of the words, but iu their sense; If only then it be done in equivalent Avords, as Inno cent says, "I haA-e 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 Conned of Trent seems to favour ( 91 ) nanda. Solum Igitm* Christo ordi- natum est seciuidum hanc senten tlam, quod ordinatio fiat ahqiubus verbis et symbolis, Et hinc a for tiori sequitiu*, verba ajqidpoUentia omnino sufficere, quia midto facdius, verba ab Ecclesia, quam si a Christo asslgnentur, modo In sensu et re conveniant, allqnantuliim mutari pos sint, Unde Graeci hac forma iitun- tur : Divina gratia, qitce semper in- firma sanat, et qxjm decent sxipplet, creat seu promovet N. venerabilem Subdla- conum in Diaconum, venerabilem Dior conum 171 Presbytenim, Deo amabilis- simum Presbyte7iim in Episcopum. Ubi patet eos rite orcUnari, quia substautiam habent. Idem plane aids Aridetm*, sine assertione esse ju- chcium de forma Nostratiiun, quia potestatem sacrificanch et absolvencU InA'olvunt, nisi alio detorquere ma- lint, sicut PuiitanI fecerunt, et a Nostris optime except! sunt. the opinion, sess. 23, cap, 4, where it says that holy order " is performed \p)e7ficritur^ by Avords and outward signs," where it does not specify the words or the signs. Many Doctors, too, not improbably think that neither words nor outward s;ymbols, that is, neither the form nor matter, were determlnately prescribed by Christ, but Avere to be prescribed by the Church. AccorcUng to this opinion, therefore, Christ only ap pointed that ordination should be conferred Avitli some foi'm of Avords and symbols, and from this it follows h fortlmi, that equivalent Avords are wholly sufficient, because words pre scribed by the Church can much more readdy be shghtly changed than If they had been prescribed by Christ. So that the Greeks use this form : " The grace of God, AvhIch always strengthens thing.s that are Aveak, aud supplies -AA-hat 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, hoAvever, denies that they are rightly ordained, because ( 92 ) Quod si hoc durum videatur ali qulbus nostrum, attendant ad dliid Doctoris, 4, d, 8, q. 2, §, Ex hoc patet : Est dictum minus discretum, asserere, quod necesse est in quollbet Sacramento scire prcscisi, quce verba sunt de fo7-ma, ad hoc, ut allquis con- ferat Sac7'ame7itum. Istud enim ma nifest^ falsu7n est, non solum in Eu charistla, sed etiam in Baptismo, et Pos7xlte7xtla et Sacramento Ordbiis, fo7-te exxixn nxillus est qui sciat pro certo, 7xec Episcopus, nee Ordlnatus, quw shit prcecise verba orclinatlonis in Saceixlotem : Et tamen non est dicexi- dum, quod nullus est ordlnatus in Sacei'dotem in Ecclesia. Consiniillter diversi utuntur dlve7'sls verbis in con- ferendo Sacramentum Posnitentice : nee est cerium de aliquibus verbis prce- cisis, quce 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, mdess men choose to twist the meaning another way, as the Pu ritans haA'e done, and have been well censured by writers on om* side. But If this shoidd 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 every Sacrament to know precisely Avhat 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, AA'hether Bishop or Canchdate for Orders, who knoAvs for certain, what are j^reclsely the Avords 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 ( 93 ) Unde lUustrlssImus Schohator di cit, licet certae essent formae in Sacramentis, tamen quollbet verba earum formainm non sunt adeo certa et determinata, qiium alia siiffi- clant. Quod autem adcUtiu* in ceremo- nlah, quod Presbyteri prcesentes etiam imponant manus in capita ordinandorum, fuit expresse ordina- tum in 4, Canh, cap, 3, hoc tamen non observatur a Graecls, licet sem per In Ecclesia Latina propter au thoritatem Paidi ad Tim. 4. Noli 7iegligere gratiain quce data est tlbi cum imposltione manuum Presbyterii. Sic etiam loquitur Trid, sess, 14, can, 3, secus vero est in orchnatlone Diaconi, ut habetm- in Carthag. c, 4, De Dlaconls forma est : Accipe potestatem., et ofiicium Diaconi in Ecclesia Dei tlbi commissa exercendi. In Nomine Patris, etc. Postea in tracUtione Bibhoriun dicit : Accipe po testatem legeiuli Evangeliu7n 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 f onus In the Sacraments, nevertheless all the words of those forms are not so fixed and determined, since othei's may suffice. The part ivhlch is added in the Ceremonial, that the Priests Avho are present also lay then* hands on the heads of those who are to be ordained, Avas expressly ordered by the fourth Councd of Carthage, cap. 3; this hoAvever, is not observed by the Greeks, though it alw-ays is in the Latin Church on the authority of St, Paul, 1 Tim. 4: "Neglect not the gift which Avas glv-en thee by prophecy, AvIth the laj-uig on of the hands of the presbytery," So too speaks the Comicll of Trent, sess, 14, can, 3 ; in the ordination of a Deacon hoAvever, the rule is different, Co7ic. Cai'th. c, 4. In ordaining Deacons the form is " Take thou authority to execute the office of a Deacon in the Chm'ch of God committed unto thee. In the name of the Father, &c." Then in giving to each of them the Sacred ( 94 ) sia Dei, et idem prcedicayidi, si ad illud prcestandum ordlntirih vocatus fueris. Multis vicletm* nudum essentials hic praetermltti, secundum declara tlonem Florentini v-el Trident, propter rationes superius asslgnatas. Im posltio manuum omnium fere con sensu est essentialis, quae luc recte observatur, quia simul cum proba- tioiie f ormcB tradunt etiam hic Evan- gellum, quod ahqui Theologi putant essentiale : sed ut recte Arcuchus de Sacramento Ordinis (qui melius omnibus ahis hsBC ad fundum ex- aminavit) tradltio Instnimentorum est potius determhiatlo materias quam ipsa materia, et sic Intelligi debet Florent. secundum eum, quando speclficat trachtlonem materlse ad singulos orcllnes. Addam hlc opportune pulcherri- mum dictum Doctoris 4, d. 8, qu, 2, §, Quod ergo erit consihum : Non est tiitum alicui se reputare valde peritum de scientia sua, et dicere, volo uti praicisi istis verbis pro C07isec7'a- 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, accorcUng 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 aU Aviiters, 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 aa Arcuchus rightly observes, de Sacr. Ordinis (who has examined this matter to the bottom better than all others), the delivery of the instni- ments is rather the determination of the matter than the matter itself, and the Councd of Florence should be miderstood in this senscj accorcUng to him, when It specifies the clehAery of the matter for each order. I AAill add here a beautiful saying of the Doctor's, much to the point, 4, d. 8, qu. 2, § Quod ergo erit consi lium t " It Is not safe for anyone to esteem himself highly skiUed on ac count of Ids knowledge, and to say^ ( 95 ) tio7ie, sed seeuiior est simplicitas, volo ista verba proferre sub ea intentione, sub qua Christus institult ea esse pro- ferenda, et quce ex Chiisti instltutlone sunt de forma, dico ut de foi-ma, et quce ad reverentiam, ad reverentiam. Hcec IUe : utmam concUtores Ai'tl- cidorum eadem qua Doctor liiimlh- tate Sacramentorum formas pro rei gravitate peipencUssent, non adeo facde formas in Ecclesia usitatas experiticB suce nimia 7-eputatione ; idlo modo immutassent, vel detnincassent, hcet forte (secundum opiniones tole-- ratas) non substantlahter. Ergo aha capita non examine de successlone Episcoporum vel Minls- trorum (ab ahis fiis^ et docte pe- ractum est) sed solum Ipsa verba Articuh, an scihcet In formce et materiae (si nihd ahud obstat) vahde fiat OrcUnatloj 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 ivorcls with that intention, with which Chiist appointed that they shoidd 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 humdity as the Doctor, the forms of the Sacrainents as the gravity of the matter deserves, they would not then so easily, from too gi'eat opinion of their own skill, in any way, though it may be (according to opinions which ai*e tolerated) not substantially, have changed or mutdated 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 skdfudy 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. ( 96 ) Artigulus XXX"VII. — De Clvili- bus Magistratibus. REGIA Majestas in hoc Angllae Regno ac cceteris ejus Dominns summam habet potestatem ad quam omnium statuum hujus Regni, sive ilh Ecclcsiastici sint, sIa-c chiles. In omnibus causis suprema gubernatlo pertlnet, et nuUI externa) jurisdic- tionl est subjecta, nee esse debet. Cum Regiae Majestati summam gubemationem tribulmus, quibus tl tidls Intelhglmus animos quomndam calumniatorum offencU, non damns Reglbus nostris, aut verb! Dei, aut Sacramentorum adminlstratlonem, cjuocl etiam injunctlones ab Ellza- betha Regina nostra nuper echtae, apertisslme testantm', sed eam tan tum praerogativam quam in sacris Scriptmis k Deo Ipso, omnibus pils piinciplbus Aidemus semper fuisse attributam : hoc est, ut omnes status atque orchnes fidei suaj a Deo com- missos, sh-e ilh Ecclesiastici sint, sive chiles In officio contineant, et con- tumaces ac dehnquentes giacho chill coerceant, Romanus Pontlfex nullam habet jurlschctionem in hoc regno i\jighae. Leges regni possunt Christianos propter capltaha et gravia crimina morte pmiire. Article XXX\TI.— 0/ the Civil Magistrates. THE lung's Majesty hath the chief poAver in this Realm of England, and other his Dominions, unto AA-hom 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 JuriscUction. "WTiere we attribute to the King's Majesty the chief gOA'ernmeut, 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 AAdilch things the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify; but that only prerogath-e, Avlnch Ave see to have been giv-en always to all godly Princes In Holy Scriptm'es by God Himself ; that is, that they should nde all states and degrees committed to their charge by God, Avhether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal, and restrain Avitli the clAil SAA'ord the stubboi'u and eAildoers, The Bishop of Rome hath no ju- rischction in this Realm of Engla7id. The LaAvs of th© Realm may punish Christian men Avith death, for heinous and grievous offences. ( 97 ) Christianis licet ex mandato Ma gistratus anna portare, et justa beUa admlnistrare, Paraphrasis. — Hic Artlculus subndnlstrat materiam examlnandl quiBstlonem longe graArssimam, An scihcet, laid sint capaces jiuiscUc- tlonis sphituahs, Primo adA-ertendum ex omnium sententia iUos non esse capaces cla- vium, quia tunc etiam remisslonis seu absolutlonis k peccatis, ' Secundo adA'ertendum, jurlsdlc- tionem splritualem, sen potestatem juriscUctlonis, non esse immecUate ipsam potestatem claAium,immo sepa- rabiles, nee actu semper conjimgl, A-el jiu'e dlArno, A-el positlA-o. Tertio supponendum, Summiim Pontlficem in omni sententia, secmi dum absolutam potentlam suam, posse jiuisdictlonem talem la'icls concedere, quia non expresse contra jus divi num, ut recte Soto 4, dist, 20, quaest. 1, art. 4, sic etiam Miranda in Manuali quaest, 3, art, 2, et hoc non solum respectu viroinm, sed fcemi- nanim. Adcht tamen Miranda hoc respectu f oeminarum nusquam adhuc It is laAvful for Christian men, at the commandment of the Magistrate, to Avear weapons, and sei-ve In the wars. Explanation.— This Article af fords by far the most weighty sub ject of examination ; whether, that is, laics are capable of exercising spiritual jurisdiction. Fu'st, it must be observed, that by consent of all they are not capable of exercising the power of the keys, for then they would be able to confer absolution or remission of sins. Secondly, it must be observed, that spiritual jurisdiction, or the power of jmisdictlon. Is not directly the jiOAA'er of the keys itself ; indeed that they are separable, and are not ahvays actually united, either by chAine or poslth-e law. Thu'diy, It must be supposed, that the Sovereign Pontdf m eveiy matter, in vu'tiie of his absolute poAver, can confer such jurisdiction on laics, because it is not directly against dhine law, as is rightly ob served by Soto (4, dist, 20, qu, 1, art, 4) and hkcAvise Miranda (Ma nual, qu. 3, art. 2) ; and this not only in respect of men but also of women. Mu'anda, hoAA'ever, adds ( 98 ) concessum, quod tamen negat D. Alulu, c, 3, de EpIscopIs, Abbatlbus et Abbatlssis c. 22, et citat multa jm*a, ex quibus actu concecUtiu*, Abbatlssis potestas juriscUctlonis, non quidem excommunlcandi per se, sed praecipIencU suis subcUtis Sacerdo tlbus, lit excommunicent rebelles et contumaces monlcdes; et hoc A-alere A'el ex jm'e communi,A"elconsuetiichne, vel saltem ex privileglo, vel strictius loquendo, cUcendum cum Lalmanno hb. I. tract. 5, p'. 1, cap. 3, num, 3 et 4, quod non habent jurlschctionem sphitualem proprie, sed xisuram qxian- dam juriscUctionls, Et hinc conf ene possimt beneficia, et uistltuere cleii- cos In Ecclesiis ad Monasteiium suum pertmentlbus, etc. Ut sensum meum in re tam gravi apeiiam, dicendum putem, nidlo quidem jure, ut praetactum est, els competere potestatem seu jus spi- ritucde, lit loquitur Joannes de Pa- risus De Potestate Papce, c. 21, quo gratia splritualls causatur, id est, potestas administrandi Sacramenta. Et idem est jucUcium de potestate quae consequitur ex priori, ut est that this has no where yet been con ceded In respect of AA'omen ; which, howcA-er, is denied by D, Aluln (c, 3, De Eplscopis Abbatibus et Abbatlssis, c. 22), Avho cites many decrees by which the power of jurisdiction is conceded to Abbesses, not indeed the poAver of excommunication itself, but the power of commanding priests mider their jurischction to excommu nicate rebeUious and contumacious nmis ; and that this is of force either by common laiv, or by custom, or at least by prh-dege ; but to speak more exactly, aa-o must say Avith Layman (lib. 1, tract. 5, p, 1, cap. 3, num. 3 and 4), that they have not spiritual jurisdiction properly, but a certain use of jurisdiction. And by tins they are able to confer benefices, and to institute clerks to chm'ches be longing to their monasteries, &c. But to shew my oAvn opuilon in a matter of such gravity, I tliink It should be said, that by no right, ais has been said before, are they capable of spu'Itual power or ju risdiction (as says John of Paiis, De Potestate Papce, c, 21), whereby spiritual grace Is procured, that is to 'say, the power of administering the Sacraments. And my opinion is the ( 99 ) infllctio pcenae spiritualls, scrlptm'a- rum expositio, ministroinm Ecclesloa mstitutio, confirmatio, vel examen, et alia id genus multa. Quodvis enim horum de jure divino restrln- gitur prcecise ad homines spliituales seu Deo sacros, ut olim definltum est a Joan. xxll. contra Marsilium de Padua, ut videre est apud Tiu're- crem, 1. 4, Siunmce, sub finem. Caetenim quoad potestatem sen jus antecedens non de per se et neces sario annexum spIrituaUbus officiis, bene potest in laicis subinde residere ; sicut prcesentatio, coUatIo beneficlo- rum, punitio temporalis clerlcoiiim, et alia id genus multa, ut d'xi de Abbatlssis, praeclpue ex concessloue Ecclesice, A-el longa consuetuchne pra?scripta, connlventlbus prailatis Ecclesice. Dixi et merito, etiam ex consiie- tucUne, quia non solum concesslo, sed consuetudo ipsa tribult jurlsdic- ¦ tlonem etiam in spiritualibus, ut docet Innocent, in cap. Novit, de judic, et multi pr^sertim, quando same respecting the poAA'er which flows from the foi'mer, such as the infliction of spiritual penalties, the exposition of the Scriptures, the in stitution, confirmation, or examina tion of the ministers of the Church, and many things of that kind. For everything of this kind is by cUvine laAV absolutely restricted to spiritual men, or consecrated to God, as ivas long ago defined by John xxu, agamst Marsllius of Padua, as may be seen in Turrecremata (1. 4, Summce, sub finem). But as respects the power, or an tecedent right, not of itself and ne cessarily annexed to spiritual offices, this may occasIonaUy rest with laics, such as the presentation or coUation of benefices, the temporal punishment of clerks, and many other things of that kind, as I said concerning Ab besses, principally by concession of the Church, or sanctioned by long custom, the prelates of the Chiu'ch assenting to it. And I said AAitli good reason, sanctioned by long custom, because not only concession but custom itself gives juiiscUction, even in spiritual matters, as Innocent teaches (cap. Novit. de judlc.)^ and many others, h2 ( 100 ) consuetudinis exercitium a tempore immemorlaU probatur, ut declarant Juristae, de qua re vide Salgado p. i, c. 1, Prselud, 3, n, 122, et deinceps. Dices hic non solum concedi Prin- clplbus nostris potestatem ex con suetudlne, seu concessione, sed su- premam; ut ibi asseritur, quod non potest eis competere in spiritualibus, ut omnes Doctores tenent. Respondeo, quod Doctores prsecUcti asserant Papam non posse aufene jmisdictionem Principum ex consue tudlne Ael concessione firma, valide et hcite introductam : sicut satis in- slnuat Navar, c. 27, in Enchir, n. 70, agens de Gallls. Sic etiam Salzedo m Schollis ad praxim crl- minalem BernarcU Diaz. c. 55, § Apud Gallos, qui hinc piitat BuUam CcencB non intelhgi contra priAulegla remuneratoria, vel quae smit firmata consuetudlne ImmemorlaU, prout etiam Nav. Tandem DuvaUIus de dis, Eccles, p. 3, fol, 405, dicit, quod Papa quando dat privdegium Prin- clplbus secularibus in materia juris cUctlonis hiimano jm*e (Id est, non ¦contra jus cUvinum), introductae, non especially when the exercise of the custom Is proved to have been from time immemorial, as the Jurists say, on Avhicli point see Salgado, p, 1, c, 1, Prcelud. 3, n, 122, &c. You Avill say that not only is this power derived from custom or from concession granted to our princes, but CA'en the supreme power, as is asserted in the Article, of which they are not capable in spi ritual matters, as aU the Doctors hold, I reply that the Doctors just men tioned assert that the Pope cannot take away the jurisdiction of princes derived from estabhshed custom or concession, validly and laAvfuUy In troduced : as Navar imphes (Enchir. n. 70, c. 27), treating of the French. And so too Salzedo in his Scholia on the Crim, prax. of Bernard Diaz, (c, 55, § Apud Gallos), who from this considers that the Bull Ccence is not to be imderstood against the remu nerative priA'ileges, or those Avhich are confirmed by immemorial custom, as Navar says too. Lastly, Duval (de Disc. Eccl. p. 3, fol. 405) says that the Pope when he grants to secular princes privileges in matters of jmisdictlon introduced by human ( 101 ) potest revocare, si concessuin sit per modum contractxts vel concoixlati vel transitionis. Et sine dubio sufficlt ad intentum hujus Articidi, qiiocl ideo dicatur, suprema potestas, non simpliciter, sed quia non per supe- rlorem auferlbllls. Reglbus autem nostris fuisse sic concessum jus nominandi et proAidendi de benefi- cus, testatiu* post alios Harpsf . scecido 14, fuisse etiam aham consuetudlnem immemorialem ex privileglo ortam, ¦ caiisas clericorum cognoscendl patet ex decis, Rotce, 804, ut communlter citatur. Quod si dixeris non con- stare de hoc privileglo, ut etiam Suarez lib, 4, de Immunltate Eccles, c. 34, num. 12, responderent quod consuetudo notorla,^ licet non con stiterit, est melius, quia In hoc casu niagis operatur tacltum seu prce- sumptum privilegium, quia supponit concesslonem iireA'ocabilem, secus si constaret de privllegio, quia non recljieret Intei-pretatlonem, sed ob- servanclum erat, prout sonat, et plus operatur in hoc, f ama priAilegll cum immemorlaU consuetudlne, ut in terminis tradit Fulvius Pacian, Cons. fi. num. 124, ne propter difficultatem probandl rem antlquam, pereat jus partis : sic CamiUus Bored, de Prce- law, (that Is, not against the divine laAV,) cannot revoke the grant, if it be made by way of contract, or of concordat, or of transition. And without any doubt this Is sufficient for the Intention of this Article, be cause it is caUed the chief (supreme) power, not, that Is, in an absolute sense, but because It cannot be taken away by any superior. But that the right of nominating and provichng for benefices was thus granted to our kings Harpsfield (Scec. xiv.) testifies,- together Avith others ; and that there was another immemorial custom arising from privdege, of investi gating the causes of clerks, is clear from the decision of the Rotce, 804, as it is commonly quoted. But if you shoidd say that this privilege was not granted by all, as Suarez (lib. 4, de Immunlt. Eccles. c. 34, num. 12), they Avould reply that a notorious custom, though not granted by all, is better, because in this case a tacit or presumable privdege has more weight, because it presupposes an inevocable concession; and the matter would be different were it a priAilege, of which aU granted the existence, for then it Avoidd not admit of any explanation, but would ( 102 ) stantia Regis Catholic!, c, 503, n. 26 et27. Dices non solum In Articulo com petere hanc potestatem Prlncipibus nostris ex privdegio vel consuetu dlne, sed jure divino, Respondeo, quod valde multi Doc tores de hoc consult!, tenent, quod Quoad commune bonum Reipubl. principes habent juriscUctlonem etiam in multis causis foro Ecclesiastico alias per se subjlclendls. Et hoc non solum de jure divino 270sitivo, sed naturali. Sed rectius Doctores Iu Eullam Ccence, negant piinciplbus jurlschctionem in cleiicos et eonim causas ex jm*e Regie, sed niidam potestatem civdem et temporalem, ob protectionem et defenslonem Relpub- Ucce, justltlae et pads communis ; et hoc de jure divino et natm'ah ipsis competit, nee hic Artlculus plus exigit : et ratio quam tetigit Suarez have had to be observed, according to the vei*y letter ; and in this matter the tradition of a privilege with imme morial custom has more weight, as is stated expressly by Fulvius Pacian (Cons.fi. num, 124), lest on account of the difficulty of proving an ancient matter the rights of any party should be lost : this is supported too by CamiUus Borel (de Prcvstantia Regis Cathol. c, 503, n. 26 and 27). You wdl say that, according to the Article, this power belongs to our princes not only by privdege or custom, but by cUvine laiv, I reply that very many Doctors, being consulted on this point, hold that, as far as the common good of the state is concerned, princes have juris- thctlon even in many causes other wise in themseh'es subject to the ecclesiastical tribunal. And this by divine law, not only positive but na- t'lral. But Doctors, treating of the Bud Ccenw, more rightly deny to princes jm'isdlctlon over clerics and their causes by royal prerogative, beyond a bare civil and temporal authority, for the protection and de fence of the state of justice and of the public peace ; and this by divine and natural laAV belongs to them, nor ( 103 ) lib, 3, de Prlmatu Siimml Pontlficis c. 1, num. 4, In fine optime hanc partem probat. Quia liumana natiu'a non potest esse destltua remedils ad suam conservationem necessariis : accedit etiam Mori, in Empor, jur. 1, p, tit. 2, de legibus num. 20, vers. Quia cum Regnum, ubi elicit, quod cii! concedltm* regnum necessario omnia censeutm* concessa, sine cpi- biis Regnum gubernarl non potest: Regnum vero gnbernarl non posset nisi Principes hoc potestcite poteren- tur, etiam in clericos, etc, ergo. Sic iUi, In hunc igitur finem, et In hoc sensu, magna sine dubio est potestas Regum jure dhino et natiircdi se cundum illos. In personas et causas Eccleslastlcas In multis casibus per accidens et incUrecte, ut loquuntur Doctores ; secundum partem dmectl- vam, sen imperatlvam ; verb! gratia, possunt civlliter mandare Clericis etiam EpIscopIs, ut splritualia sua ad pacem RelpubUcae cUsponant, nt dyscolos ex officiis amoveant, Immo does this Article require more ; and the line of argument which Suarez has used (hb. 3, de Summo Ponti. c, 1, num, 4) towards the end most fully proves this portion, because human nature cannot be destitute of remedies necessary for its own pre servation. To this may be added the authority of Mori (in Empor. jur. 1, p. tit, 2, de Legibus, num. 20, vers. Quia cum Regnum), where he says that to whom a kingdom is given of necessity are supposed to be given all those things without Avhich the kingdom could not be governed. But the kingdom could not be governed unless princes had this poAver even over clerks, &c. Whence it follows, &c. Such are their arguments. For tlus end, therefore, and In this sense, v^ithout doubt the kingly poAA-er Is great both by divine and natiu'cd law, according to them, over ecclesiastical persons and causes in many cases, as the Doctors sav-, ac cidentally aud Indirectly, as respects the directing or commandhig part ; for distance, they can in a civil manner order clerks, who are even Bishops, to dispose their spiritual matters so as to conduce to the ( 104 ) innocentes Clericos ab injustis op- presslonlbus judicium, Ecclesiastl- conun authoritate RegIa defendere possunt, Et aha hujusmocU. Totum hoc confirmatur a Parsonio in Ri- chai'do H., Henrico IV., et Edwardo IV. et miratur, si cdiquis negaret Regibus in suis regnis, Hic vide moclestiam Navani in Manuali, cap. 27, num. 69, ubi non dubltat de hoc dicto, modo sint verse oppresslones et violentlse. Vide etiam nu. 27. Nee quoad substantlam re! multam discrepat Cajetanus, ubi Inferlus, nee Victor De Potestate Eccleslastica. Et ratio conA'incit : nam clericl omnes, non obstante clericatu, sunt clA'es Relpublicao et subdltl Regis ratione douiicllll, et consequenter ad leges Principum quatenus pertinent ad communem vivencU in Regno socle- tatem, et ad justitiam exequendam quae maxime pacem et tranquiUitatem fovet, non possunt non astringi, nee ab iUorum obedientia, vel In personis, vel causis praedlctls, modo explicate eximi possunt, quantum ad pacem peace of the state, and may remove the stubborn from their offices ; moreover, by the kingly power they can protect innocent clerks from the unjust oppression of the ecclesias tical judges, and other matters of this kind. All this is confirmed by Parsons as respects Richard H,, Hemy IV,, and Edward IV,, and he expresses his siu'piise that any one should deny this power to kings within their realms. Remai'k here the moderation of Navar (Manual, cap. 27, num. 69), where he ex presses no doubt as to this opinion, if only the oppression and violence be undoubted. See too num, 27. Nor as respects the substance of the matter does Cajetan disagi'ee vvith this (see beloio) nor Victor (De Potes tate Eccleslastica). And reason Itself proA'es the same, for all clerks, not- Avlthstanding their orders, are citizens of the state, and subjects of the king by reason of their domicile ; and con sequently they cannot escape being bound by the laAVS of princes (so far as they refer to the pubhc manner of livmg in the kingdom), and to the -acting Avith that justice Avhich chiefly preserves peace and tranc[iuUIty ; nor can they be exempted from the obe- > ( 105 ) RelpubUcce necessarium est : nee putem uUum Doctorem Cathol. hide refragaii. Uncle Cajet, dicit Apol. de potestate Papa3 cap, 27, quod Prln cipibus competat ilia tyrannidi re- sistendi potestas, quam jure 77aturali et gentium habent, etiam in rebus Ecclesiasticis. Et In hoc sensu iiblvis tenarum Reges Chrlstlanlssimi et Catholici hodie factltant; ut fiisis- slme ostendere possum ; nee plus hic asseritur, Prcesertim si attendamus ad expositiones eomm m hunc Artl- cidum ; nidlam utique jurischctlonem splritualem Reglbus nostris conce- diint, sed gubernium civile et tem- porale indlrecte et per accidens ob pacem Reipubl. in personas et causas praecUctas Eccleslastlcas extensum. Sic D. Rayioldus licet Puritan us, D, Montacutius contra Helgham. et alii eorum doctissimi, quibuscum de hoc egi. Gavisus sum etiam valde de Illo quod his diebus factum est Can- tabrlgios, in Comitlls pro actu doc- torali, ab siunmo Poutifici, ut Maximo Pat7i (sic enim eum appeUitabant), designata est cura spirituahum, Regl temporahum, Hcet sub finem subji- ciebatur, Regum esse omnes regere. Quod Intelligi debet civlhter, non splrltuahter, modo k nobis exphcato. dience due to them either in their persons, or in the causes above- mentioned m the manner vvluch has been explained, as far as Is necessary for the peace of the state ; nor do I think that any Cathohc Doctor is opposed to this opinion, Cajetan says (Apol. de Potest. Papce, cap. 27) that "there pertains to princes that power of resisting tyranny which they have by natural law and the law of nations, ev-en In ecclesiastical matters." And in this sense the Most Christian and Cathohc kings are accustomed to act all over the world, as I coidd show at very gi'eat leng-th, and no more is asserted by this Article. But especially if Ave consider the explanations of An glicans on this Article, avc shall see that they grant no spiritual jmisdic tlon AvliateA-er to om* kings, but the clAil and temporal gOA-ernment, indi rectly and accidentally, for the peace of the state, extended oA'er the above- mentioned ecclesiastical persons and causes. So says Dr,Reynolds, though a Puritan, Dr. Montagu against Helgham, and others of their most learned men Avith whom I have cUs- coiu'sed on this point, I was also extremely delighted at what was ( 106 ) Tandem ut siimmatim dicam, pu tem abiinde sufficere hulc Articulo,. quod hodle a Gallis et Parllamento Parlsiensi salva communlone Eccle sice usurpatur. Non ago partes eorum qui summa violentia trahi volunt hunc Artl culum in defenslonem juriscUctionls puree splritualls in Reglbus, cjiiod certlssime hac;retlciim est. Haec Uberius dixi, quia ut optime Cano 1, 5, qu, 5 §, Nunc illud breviter : Qui S7immi Pontlficis omne de re q7iaeumq7ie, judicium temere ac sine delectii defenda7it, eos sedis ApostoUcce authoiitatem labefactare, nonfovere, nonfirmare. Quid enim done lately at Cambridge, in the exercises for the Doctor's degreei, where the care of spiritual mcitters was assigned to the Sovereign Pontiff as the Chief Father (for so they repeatedly called him), the care of temporals to the king, though at the end there was added that it was the office of Idngs to nde all persons, Avhicli ought to be understood civilly, not spirituaUy, in the manner ex plamed by us. Lastly, to sum all up, I think that the practice of the French and the Parliament of Paris at the present day, without prejucUce to the com munion of the Church, is fully enough to satisfy the meaning of this Article. I Avill not act the part of those who, with the greatest violence, wish this Article to be forced into the defence of a pm'ely spu'itiial jiuis- cUctlon in kings, which is certainly heretical. I haA'e said these things with less hesitation, because of Avhat Canus has so well said (1, 5, qu, 5, § Nunc illud breviter) : " They who rashly and without discrimination defend every decision on evei-y matter of the Sovereign Pontiff, undermine ( 107 ) tandem adversum hcereticos dispu-' tando ille proficiet, quem vidermt 11071 judieio sed affectii patrocinium authoritatis Pontificice suscipere, nee id agere, %it disputatlonis suce vi, lucem ac veiitatem eliciat, sed nt se ad alterius sensitm vohintatemque convertat ? non eget Petrus mendacio nostro, nostra adulatione non eget. Haec ille. Ego ingenii^ dico, llben- tlsslme, ne dIcam avidisslme, ob jus- tam defenslonem Sedis ApostoUcce (divina gratia assistente) mortem subirem : non enim animam ineam me pretiosiorem facio. Nee tamen quod jiistum est Prlncipibus dene- gandiim. Eousque solum processl. Paragi'aphus sequeus majorl indl get glossa. Forte tangit illam pervetustam quaestlonem, — ^An Anglia sit feuda- toria Papffi. Joannes, Rex Anglice, ut testantur Matthceus Paris et Matthajus Westmonast. de regione libera per chartam luguhrem ancil- the authority of the Apostohc See rather than strengthen or confirm it. For what possible end wdl he ac- comphsh in cUsputIng vrith heretics, whom they shaU discover to take shelter under the authority of the Pontiff not from deliberation but from fancy, and to endeavour not by means of his arguments to eUcit the truth, but to accommodate himself to the opinions and wishes of his opponent? Peter does not require our subterfuges, nor our adulation." Such are his words. I wid say openly, that most willingly, not to say vvith the greatest eagerness (by the assistance of God's grace), woidd I undergo death In the just defence of the Apostolic See ; for I do not es- teon niy life of more value tlian 77iyself; but at the same time we must not deny that which is justly clue to princes. And so far only have I gone. The next paragraph requires a wider explanation. Perhaps It touches upon that very ancient question, whether England be a fief of the Pope, John, King of England, as is testified by Mat thew Paris and MatthcAV of West minster, "by a Avriting made of a ( 108 ) lam fecit et feudataiiam Summo Pon- tifici. Heniicus tamen ejus filius in Coned. Lugd. hide reclamavit, et praeclpu6 Episcopus Cant, ut testatur Walslng. ad annum 1245, et postea Cancellaiius Angllae Episcopus EU- ensis in publicis Regni Condtils, consentlcntibus tribus Ordlnibus Patriae, reclamavit, non obstante privata sponsione Joannls, ut testatur Harps, ad ssec, 14, c. 5, immo et armis se a temporal! jnrlscUctlone Papae defensuros protestabautur, sed quia hic inaiiis titulus S. Pontd'. (ut eum reputabat olim Illust. Tho, Morns, et hoche omnes Catholici), saeplus obtnidebatur ut aliqul ch- cunt, praesertim in princlpio Eliza- bethce, a Paulo 4, quae occupabat regnum, non requisite consensu Papce, liuic forte hic Artlculus coii- clitiis est. Multxnn e7ii7n inter foiiii- na7n privatam Princxjjis, et Regale culmen interest, ut Zono 1, iilt. cap. de quadr. praisciipt. free country a pitiable slave and vassal of the Sovereign Pontiff." His sou Heni'y, however, at the Council of Lyons, protested against this, aud so especIaUy did the Bishop of Cau- terbm'y, as is testified by Walslng- ham, ad ann. 1245 ; and subse quently the Bishop of Ely, Chan cellor of England, in the public Councd of the kuigdom, with the agreement of the three Estates of the Realm,* protested against it, not withstanding the private agreement of John, as is narrated by Hai'ps- field (ad Scec. 14, c, 5) ; and further, they declared that they would de fend themselves by arms against the temporal jmisdictlon of the Pope; and because tlus empty title of the Sovereign Pontiff (as it Avas esteemed by Sir Thomas More long since, and is now by all Catholics), was often put fonvard, as some say, particu larly by Paul IV,, at the commence ment of the reign of Elizabeth, Avho took possession of the throne Avithout obtaining the consent of the Pope, — therefore perhaps this Article Avas -• [Tlie three Estates of the Eealm, it may be remarked, were the Clergy, the Lords, and the Commons ; not, as is com monly supposed at the present day, King, Lords, and Commons.] ( 109 ) Vel si h»c glossa mmus placeat, tunc potest (del, adhuc hcec verba multlpllcem f erre sensum; mius,quod omnlmoda negatur subjectio et com- munlo cum Sede Apostolica, quod est plane dereUnquere Augustinum, Ambroslum, Hieronymum, etiam Cypr. Tertid, Irensum et alios Ec cleslte Christi splendores, qui ubique testantur se cum hac Sancta Sede commmiionem habulsse et subjec- tlonem agnovlsse. De Ambroslo patet in cap. 3, 1 ad Tim. ubi vocat Damasum Rec- to7'ei7i totius Ecclesice, ergo et Ipsius. De HIeroii, in Epist. ad Damasum, Cathedrce Petri conununione co)iso- CLor. Quid clarius? pidckra ibi habet ad eundem sensum. De August, ep. 157, ad Optatum, fatetiu* se cum rellquls Episcopis ex Zosind Papae inandato C^sariam compded. "For there is a great difference between the private estate of princes and the summit of the kingly power," Zeno, 1, ult. cap. de quad. Prescript. Or, if this explanation does not- seem satisfactoiy, it may be said, that these words are capable of va rious meanings; one, that every kind of subjection and communion Avith the Apostohc See is denied, which is plainly to forsake Augus tine, Ambrose, .Terome, together with Ii'ensBus, TertulUan, Cyprian, and other bright Ughts of the Chm*ch of Christ, who everywhere testify that they had Communion with this Holy See, and acknowledged then- subjection to it. Of St, Ambrose tins is plain, on 1 Tim, 3, where he calls Damasus "Ruler" of the whole Chiu'ch, aud therefore of himself. Of St. Jerome, In his Epistle to Dama amasus : a T , am associated iu the commimlon of the Chair of Peter," AVhat can be clearer? The same idea Is beautifully expressed In those words. ^ Of St, Augustine (In Ep. 157, Ad Optatum), he states that he Avith other bishops had come to Caesarea at the ( no ) venisse, etc. Altlus potulssera coii- scendere et Cyprianiun interpellare, qui Epist. 52, cUcit commmilcare cum Pontifice Romano idem esse ac communiccu'e cum Ecclesia Catho- hca, Tertid, 1, praescript, c, 36, Habes Ronia7n, unde nobis quoque autho ritas est. Ecce se subdich authoiitati Romaiii Pontlficis testatm', IrencEUS utroque antlqulor, 1. 3, c. 3, Ad hanc Ecclesiam, propter potentiorem piincipalitatem, necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam. Res notoria est, omnes quotquot saiicti fuerunt cum hac Sancta Sede com- muidonem habulsse. Alius sensus potest esse, quod in- slnuetur substractio ab obedientia, non Sedis Apostohcae, sen authoritatis iUI sedi aimerce, quantum est ad ac tum piiniiim seu signatum, sed solum quautimi ad actum exercltum (liceat parum cxteuclere hos termmos Scho- larum) Id est, in quantum exercetiu* a tall persona, cui pro tempore com missa est Sedes dla. conunand of Pope Zoslmus, &c. I could go yet higher aud introduce St. Cyprian, who (Ep. 52) says that to communicate Avith the Roman Pontiff is the same thing as to com municate with the Catholic Chm'ch, TertidUan (de Prcescript. c. 36) : "You have Rome, whence too authority comes to us." He plainly testifies that he Is subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff. St, Irenaeus, who is more ancient than either of the others (Ub. 3, cap. 3) : " With this Church, because of its greater authority, it is necessary that eveiy Chm'ch should agree." It is notorious that aU the Saints who have- ever existed have been in Communion with this Holy See. There may be another meaning, that there is implied a departure from the obedience — not of the Apostohc See, or of the authority annexed to that See as respects the act primarily, but only as respects the act when exercised (avc may be aUowed slightly to extend the mean mg of these terms of the Schools), that Is, as respects the exercise of that authority by such a person, to whom for a time that See is en trusted. ( 111 ) Primus sensus est quaestio juris, an sed, SecU IUI competat juriscUctIo, sell dicendl jus In totam Ecclesiam, saltem secmidum formam a Canoni- bus praescriptam (quod addo propter aliquos recentiores), et vere hoc Sanctae Sedi negare, est plane contra sensum utrlusque Ecclesiae, nee de hoc usplam fuit disceptatlo In uUo Concdlo, si recte ponderetur ; Catho lici etiam quotquot smit vel fuerunt, hide subscripserimt ; et satis evin- cltui* ex Ipso Nilo In fine, hcet maxi- miis sit adversarius Seeds Apostohcae. Nee hoc cUcIt Artlculus, Secmidus sensus videtiu" reduci posse ad duas qiiffistlones, unam etiam juris, alteram mixtam, scilicet tam jiu'Is, quam factl. Prima an hic et nmic liceat Regno alicui se subtrahere ab obechentia ahcujus Pontlficis ad tempiis : de qua re sclo quid resolvat Gerson, quaestlone : Quomodo et aw liceat in causis fidei ci siinvno Pontifice appellare, et ejus judicium decl'mare ? (cui multiim m- The first meaning Is a question of right, whether, that is, to that See belongs jurischction, or the power of promulgating laAV through the whole Church, at least accorcUng to the form prescribed by the Canons; (this I add In consequence of some modern writers), and In tinth to deny this to the Holy See Is plainly contrary to the oj)InIon of both the Eastern and Western Churches, nor Avas there ever any discussion re specting this point in any Councd, if it be rightly considered. Ad Ca- ¦ tholics too both of the present and past time, have agreed upon this, and it Is clearly proved from Niliis towards the latter piu't, though he is a chief opponent of the Apostohc See, Nor does the Article make the above statement. The second Interpretation seems capable of being reduced to two questions, one likewise of right and one mixed, that Is, both of light and of fact. Fu'stly, whether at a cer tam point It is lawful for any king dom to Avithch'aAV itself from the obedience of any Pontiff for a time : on Avhich point I know Gerson's re solution, m the question, " How and whether it be lawfid in causes per- ( 112 ) nitmitur nostrates). Verba ejus sunt §, Sequeretur sexto; Hoc etiam practicatum est per quoscumque Reges et Principes qui se subtraxenint ab obedientia illorum, quos isti judica- hant esse Summos Pontifices, quce tamen subtfactiones approbatce sunt per sa.c/-U77i Constantlense Concll. qucedam expresse, qucedam impllclte vel ccquivalenter. Et sic resolutum dicunt in conventu quodum Episco porum Turonensi in GaUia, quod etiam vIcU in hac forma : Conclusum est per Concilium, Principem posse ab obedientia Papce se subducere ac subt)-ahe7'e (nimirum ob causas gra- vlssimas ibi asslgnatas) non tamen in totmn et Inchstlncte, sed pro tultloiie tantum ac defensione jiuium suonim temporahum. Quam eorum sententlam, non est meum con- deinnare, dum Ecclesia tolerat. Altera est, an fuerint causae siiffi- clentes in hoc Regno ? Factum \i- demus, sed novimus idud Hieronyml : taining to the faith to appeal from the Sovereign Pontiff, and to refuse his decision?" (On which Angli cans rely much.) His Avords are § Sequei-etur sexto: "This, too, has been often done by certain kings and princes who have withdraAvn them- seh'es from the obecheuce of those Avhom they believed to be Sovereign Pontiffs, which withch'awals never theless were approved by the holy Council of Constance, some ex pressly, some implicitly, or in an equivalent manner." And they say that this matter was a resolution at a certain meeting of Bishops at Tours, in France, which I too have seen to the foUowing puqiort : " It has been decided by the Council, that a prince can withdraw himself and depart from the obecheuce of the Pope" (namely, for certain A-ery AA-eighty causes there assigned), " not hovA-- CA'er AvhoUy and absolutely, but only for the protection and defence of his temporal rights," Which opinion of theirs it is not for me to condemn Avlide the Church tole rates it. The second question Is, were there sufficient causes in this Idngdom? We have seen that It is done, but ( 113 ) Non qilceritiir an factum, sed an bene factum fuerit. Hoc tamen dato, licet k nullo CathoUco concesso : adhuc qnceren- dum esset. An saltem in modo non excesserint ? multa enim de jm-e delta sunt, cum moderamlne Incul- patce tutelae, ut locjiiimtur Canones, quce alias ex intemperantia actlonis et defenslonis culpas gravisslmas submde non evadunt. Utraque qucestlo suie dubio gi'a- visslma est, et maximam a nostratlbus meretur cUscussIonem. Quod si causa sufficlens non fuerit, vel terminos jiistae subtractlonls ex cesserint, quanta pericida in tam cUuturno schismate ! hulc utique omnia cj^uantacuncjue mala smit, orl- ^aUter ebuUIenmt. Catholici ve- riori et tutloii parti adluerere vo- lentes, tam uisufficlentiam caiisce, quam moderandnls excessum agiio- venuit; ponderant utique gravissi- mnm dlud Augustini, prcecidendce unitatis nidla est justa necessitas, 1. 2, contra ep. Par, ~ we know that saying of St, Jerome : "The question is not AA'hether the thing be done, but Avhether it be weU done." But this bemg granted, though alloAA'ed by no Catholic, we should stdl have to inquire whether they have not gone too far at least in their mamier, for many things arc lawful, "cum modercumlne i7icul]}atce tutelce" as the Canons say, which otherwise by intemperance In can*y- ing on or defending them do not escape being great faidts. Without doubt each question is most weighty, and deserves especial consideration at the hancb of An ghcaus, But if there were not a sufficient cause, or if they exceeded the bounds of a legitimate withdrawal, what peril is there In so long a schism ! Hence, Indeed, all the evds, how great soeA'er the}- m-e, originally bm'st forth. Catholics, wishing to cleaA'e to the truer and safer part, have recognised both the insuffi ciency of the cause, and the excess beyond due moderation, besides which they ponder on that most solemn sa}ing of St. Augustme (1, 2, Cont. ep. Par.): "No ne- I ( 114 ) Utinam denuo, authoritate pub lica res pro chgnltate (Puritanis non intermixtis) ex affectii readimatlonis pei'peuderetnr, et ad hoc singiih evoluerent Augustinum contra Do- natiim. Sclo dlos hoc abhoirere de quibus dicet Cassander (hcet baud satis affectus Romance Ecclesice) de officio pli liri : — Plerlque ex eis, qui sibi ab Evangelio nomen sinixpsei'unt, eam paiictn qnre vetus Cathnlicon'.ir, et Romance Ecclesice nomen retinet, p7-oi'sus aspemantur, 07nnemqxie ejus com77iunione7n defugiunt, nec7itme7n- bxrt ejusdcmi corporis amore ct onise- rlcordia proseqiixnxtur (quod nos a Piuitanis hic ex-perimiir) sed ut Sa- tance ct Antichristi coipus abomi- nantur. Scio id equidem et doJeo, ct qui ejusmodi sunt quomodo a schis- 7nntis (rectius dixisset, hcereseos) nota c'vimi 2)ossu7it, non video. Ccetera in articulo sunt mdubltata. cesslty can justify the breach of unity." Lastly, woidd that by public au thority the matter as its gi*eatness cleserA-es (Puritans being passed over), were weighed with a desire of reunion. And that to this end every one woidd study St. Augustine against the Donatists. I know that they hate this, of whom Cassander (though not sufficiently friendly to the Roman Chm*ch) says, de officio ji'i vir'', "^lost of those who have assumed the name Evangehcal, ' Avholly despise that portion vv-hich retains the ancient name of Ca tholics and of the Roman Chm'ch, and avoid aU cominunlon Avith it, nor do they esteem them Avith loA'e and gentleness as members of the same body," (which is what we ex perience here at the hands of the Puritans,) " but eschcAV them as the body of Satan and of Antlchiist, I liiiow that indeed, and giieve over It, nor do I see hoAv persons of that class can be exempted from- the charge of schism." (He should more rightly have said heresy,) The other statements In the- Ar ticle au'e irrefragable. ( 115 ) Artigulus XXXVHL — De illi- cita bonorum communicatione. FACULTATES et bona Chris tianonim non sunt commimla quoad jus et possessionem (ut quidem Anabaptlstae false jactant) ; debet tamen quisque de his quas possldet pro facidtatam ratione pauperlbus eleemosynas benigne clistribuere. Article XXXVm..—Of Chiistian 7nen's Goods, iuhich are not common. THE Riches and Goods of Chris tians are not common, as touch ing the right, title, and possession of the same, as certain Anabaptists do falsely boast. Notwithstanding, ei'ery man ought, of such things as he possesseth, liberally to give alms to the poor, accorduig to his abiUty. Par.\phrasis. — Cathohcus est et Explanation. — ^Thls is Cathohc pills. and pious. Artigulus XXXIX. — De jureju- I'ando. QUEMAJyiODUM juramentum vanum et temerarium a Domino nostro Jesu Christo et Apostolo ejus Jacobo, Christianis hominibus Inter- dictum esse fatemiu' : ita Cliristlano rum Rellglonem minime prohibere censemus, quin jubente Maglstratu in causa Fidel et Charltatis jiu-are Uceat, modo Id fiat juxta ProphetoB doctrinam, in justitia, iu jucUcio et veritate. Paraphrasis. — Cathohcus est, in Scripturis fundatus, et praxi totius Ecclesiae stabditus. Article XXXIX. — Of a Christian 7naii's oath. AS Ave confess that vain and rash SAveaiing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord Jesus Christ, and James his Apostle, so -we judge, that Chi'lstian Religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the Magistrate reqidreth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be done ac corduig to the Prophet's teaching, in justice, judg-ment, and tmth. Explanation, — This Is Cathohc, founded on Scripture, and esta bhshed by the practice of the whole Chiu'ch, i2 ( 116 ) Insudavi, ut 'vides, pie Lector, reconcihare Artlcidos Confessionis AngUcas, determinationibus Ecclesiae [Rom,] Cathohcae ; non Ecclesiam ipsis, ex qua coUapsi sunt ; sed ipsos Ecclesiae, in c^ua (Dei opitulante gra tia) salvandi sunt, reducendos consul, Cortlcem verbomm subinde censur a graviori cUgnum censebis, sensum vero latltantem, quem eUcuI, non adeo veritati dissonum, nisi alio de torquere mahnt, recti jucUcabls. His tamen verbomm iiovitatibus, Chris tum lacenim inspexi, tmilcam incon- sutdem, cUssutcun, dissectam, reperi ; quis non condoleret? quis non re- cUntegrationem suaderet ? omnibus mochs, si posset, persuaderet? hic imiciis scopus mens. Ad hoc veni ut vides, non in sublimitate sennonis (volebam enim meutem, non cllctlo- nein componere ; rationem, non ora tlonem duigere) 7ion asperitate ora- tioiiis (abslntlua enim meUe iUiniim- tm*, lit peUant morbos) sed pietate conciliationis (charitatis scihcet vis- ceribus, non fictis htlbiis Veritas pro- pugnatur) palcestram hanc Theolo- gleam in Domino fretus conscendi. I have laboured, as you see, pious Reader, to reconcile the Articles of the Anglican Confession with the decrees of the R. Catholic Church. I thought that men ought to be brought back to the Chiu'ch in which (by aid of the grace of God) they must be saved, not the Chiurch whence they have fallen off to them. You avIU esteem the bare words sometimes de serving of a severe censure, but the hidden sense, which I have drawll out, you will righdy esteem not very dissonant from the truth, except Avhen men choose to twist it another way. But in these new-fangled expres sions I beheld Christ cUvided ; I saw His seamless robe unwoven — ^torn asunder. Who would not mourn at such a sight? Who would not ad vise Re-union ? WTio would not per suade to it by every means which he could ? And this was my only ob ject. To this work I came, as you see, 7iot in loftiness of speech (for I w-as more anxious to compose my mind than my sentences — to reason than to show eloquence), not~4n sharpness of speech (for wormwood is disguised in honey that disease may be cured), but in the anxious ( 117 ) Omnia Ecclesiae et ejus sub Christo capltl qua debeo reverentia submltto, et eo plus, quo cUcit Gerson Consid, 2, de Protestatlone cu'ca materiam Fidei : Nulliun esse vel fuisse de erroi'e notatum qui sic protestaretur (aut quod Idem est) Ecclesice sub- mltteret : ultro obtestor Deum et sanctos ejus, me in hac quahcum- que opeUa nostra, animarum salutem per fidei recUntegratlonem, mtendere. Quod Deus per viscera Domini Nos tri Jesu Christi, ad Intercessionem omnium Beatonun opportmie efficlat ; et serenlssimum Regem nostnim, pi'o omnixun Catholicox-utn rolls, ad utramque felicitatem perducat. Si forte inter scrlbendum subinde falsae irrepserint citatlones, non mi- ranclum : in multis utique ob tem- . poris et loci teniiem commoditatem, non Ipsos Authores, quos ad manus non habui, sed exscripta mea, quae tvish for reconciliation (for the trath is defended by bowels of charity, not by stirring up qiiairels) ; relying on the Lord, I approached this task of Theology. I submit evei*ythlng, with that respect AvhIch I ought, to the Chm'ch, and her head imder Christ, aiid that the more for the reason, which Gerson mentions (Consid. 2, de Protestat. circa, mater, fidei) : " No one Is or has been charged with eiTor who was Avdhng to make this protestation :" or (ivhlch is the same thing) Avoiild submit to the Church. And I caU God and His Saints to witness, that I intended in this work of ndne to effect the salvation of soids by the restoration of faith. Which may God, through the mercy of om' Lord Jesus Christ, grant In His good time to the intercession of aU the Blessed, and bring oiu* most gi'aclous King (according to the ivishes of all Catholics) to both those blessings. It must not be a matter of sur prise if some false quotations should have crept Into this work, since ui many cases, from the imperfect con venience either of time or place, I did not consult the authors them- ( 118 ) ob conuptionem characterem ah- quando vix legere llcidt, considui. Hide etiam accecht, me amanuensis subsidio, nempe ut littera prcelo ac- commodatior fieret, semper usum, quem ob ignorantiam, errores etiam gi'avlores exIUisse, non rare adverti, De prajlo vero quid non tlmendum ubi ob loci chstantiam, uec Authoii, ut conectioni impresslonis hbere iii- tendat, fas est? Sancte tamen dico, me nunquam ut a partibus nostris stet r.Uum authorem pervertlsse, vel detruncasse, pro veritate enim non 7iisi veritate certcmdum. seh-es, whom I had not at hand, but my OAvn extracts, which from the great iUegibllity of the writing I sometimes could harcUy read. Be sides this. In order that the manu script might be more fit for the press, I made use of a writer, from whose ignorance I have perceived that sometimes even grave mistakes have crept in. But what must not be feared for the printing, when on account of cUstance the Author has been unable to attend to the correc tion as much as was required? I' will say, however, with a good con science, that I have nowhere per verted or mutdated any author that he might be on my side, for in striving for the tnith tve ought 7iot to strive except 7vith t7'uth. lOXEO:! : Pai.-ilED AI the BICKSI PBESS, Sii, KISO STEEBT, BZGEJT STBEIT, TH. 02495 6600 is