Boultbee on Article XIX: Of the Church

The Seventh Article of the Confession of Augsburg was manifestly the origin of the first clause, now before us. * The Church is a congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly (recte) taught, and the Sacraments are rightly ad- ministered.’

[…]

1. The word ‘visible,’ as it is used here, necessarily implies the existence of its opposite, * invisible.’ Otherwise the word * Church,’ xmqualified by an epithet, would have sufficed. Hence the student must consider in accordance with well- airanged Scripture proofs —

A. The nature and privileges of the Church visible.

B. The nature and privileges of the Church invisible.

2. An assertion historically demonstrable is made that certain ancient Churches have erred. The general Scripture mode of dealing with this will be a consideration of the ques- tion whether a promise of inerrancy was left by the Saviour to the Church under any definition of that term. And whether, in point of &ct, any Church in New Testament times, and the Homan Church in particular, proved itself in- errant.

The Definition and Notes of the Church visible.

The early Christian Fathers often urged the name and authority of the Church Catholic against heretics. The thoughtful student will, however, perceive a very important distinction between our position and theirs, which may mate- rially affect, not the truth and point of their assertions, but their application to the changed circumstances of the Church. We have arrayed against us the bulk of the Western Church, which has overlaid, added to, and corrupted the ancient Faith, and abandoned the rule of Faith in Scripture. We are severed by almost as serious differences from the varied sec- tions of the Eastern Church. And there have grown up amongst us communities of Christians, differently organised, and oflen opposing our action, and yet for the most part readily acknowledging the same creeds and doctrinal articles. There is no parallel to this state of things in antiquity. Hence, in many things the voice of antiquity fails practically to teach us. The dictum of some ancient sage and Father of the Church, wise and true in its first application to the Church,

NOTES OF THE CHURCrf. 161

ns it vras, may fail in point, or even in truth, if applied to the Cliurcji as it is, Ignatius might truly say,^ speaking of the three’ orders of bishop, presbyters, and deacons, * Apart from these there is no Church.’ It was, doubtless, an unquestion- able fact in that age. Apart from them there might be Jew, Heathen, or Gnostic, but not the Church. But to take these sayings of old, and to force their application dogmatically to a condition of the Church of which the venerable martyr had not the faintest glimpse, must surely be imjust to his memory and untrue to the facts.

Bishop Browne on this Article has collected a series of definitions of the Church from the writers of the first four centuries. They will be foimd to be very closely in accord- ance with our present Article, and to have little in tibem that is hierarchical and sacerdotal. But it was not xmtil the great disniption of the Western Church at the Eeformation that the question of the true definition of the Church acquired great importance. The claims of the popes, on the one hand, to universal dominion; and of the reforming bodies, on the other, to an independent constitution of their Churches, raised the question of the true nature of the Church.

The technical phrase in use among divines to express the essential qualities which mark the true Church is Notes of the Church,

Hence these Notes of the Church have been hotly debated between Romish and Protestant controversialists, and again between the Church of England and rival sects.

In the definition before us in the present Article we have the following notes : —

1. The Church is a society of believers.

2. In it the pure word of God is preached.

3. In it the sacraments are duly ministered in all essentLols of Christ’s institution. The confession of Augsburgh in the clause quoted above contains precisely the same definition.

In pursuance of the plan of this work to introduce the student to recognised English theology, in further illustration of this Article we shall refer to the works of three writers who stand in

” Ep. ad Trail. 3. M

the foremost rank — Bishop Pearson’s* Exposition of the Creed/ Hooker’s ‘Ecclesiastical Polity,’ Field’s * Of the Church.’

I. As Pearson’s great work on the Creed will always be minutely studied, it is not necessary in this place to notice it at much length. The first part of Article IX. in that work contains an exposition of the words, * The Holy Catholic Church.’ The general method and results of that exposition may be thus set forth. There is first a full discussion of the use of tlie word Church in the New Testament, which is obviously the prime essential in dealing with this subject, and ought thoroughly to be mastered. Next the unity of the Church visible is considered, and shown (from Actsii. 41, 42, 44, 47) to consist in believing and baptized persons professing the same faith, receiving the same sacraments, performing the same devotions. The following six particulars are noted as belonging to this imity : Christ as the one foundation, the unity of faith, the reception of the same sacraments, the par- taking of one hope, the bond of love, the unity of discipline and government, through which Christ rules over all. Bi4»op Pearson does not further define what he deems essential to such imity of government. But the following remark may be permitted. The divisions among Christians, not separated essentially on any of the five previous points, will be found to lie, not in their repudiation of this last note of unity ; but in their opinion as to what is, or is not, essential to the unity of discipline and government under Christ — whether a uni- versal organisation of the whole Church, whether episcopacy or presbytery, or some less organised and uniform constitution. In the midst of the great dissensions which prevail, and which are so great a stumbling-block to many, it is most desirable thus to define and limit the degree in which unity, as defined by this great divine, has been broken.

The holiness of the Church comes next for consideration. Bishop Pearson shows in what respects it may be attributed to the Church, whether considered in its visible aspect, or with respect to those in it who * are eflicaciously called, justi- fied, and sanctified.’ But this, not belonging to our present Article, need not be further noticed here.

A dissertation follows on the origin and early uses of the word Catholic; and it is concluded that Catholicity is an attribute of the Church in regard of these four particulars- its diffusiveness, as being spread through the whole world ; because it holds the whole truth ; because it requires the obe- dience of all men to all its precepts ; and lastly, by reason of all saving graces being given in it. The studious moderation of this great divine in dealing with a subject round which ^> much heat of party zeal has gathered, cannot escape notice.

II. Tlie third book of Hooker’s ‘Ecclesiastical Polity’ discusses the nature of the Church, and how &r Church polity ^ as distinguished from matters of faith and salvation, is to be found in Scripture. Some portions, which seem most directly to illustrate the present Article, are here epitomised.

The Church invisible, or mystical body of Christ, is partly in heaven and partly on earth. * They who are of this society have such marks and notes of distinction from all others as are not objects unto our sense ; only unto God, who seeth their hearts ; unto Him they are clear and manifest.’

The everlasting promises belong to tlie mystical Church : the duties belong to a visible body. This also is one from the beginning of the world to the end ; but the moiety since the coming of Christ is more properly the Church of Christ.

The unity of this body consists in these three things. Its members own one Lord, profess one faith, and are initiated by one baptism.

• In whomsoever these things are, the Church doth acknow- ledge them for her children : them only she holdeth for aliens and strangers in whom these things are not found.’

Hooker proceeds further to insist on the importance of dis- tinguishing between the Church visible and invisible, and the manifold errors arising from confusing them. Among other things, he answers the taunting queiy, where our Church was before Luther, by the consideration that the Church visible may be overlaid with corruptions. This Church is * divided into a number of distinct societies, every one of which is termed a Church within itself.’ A Christian assembly may be called a Church, but the Church * is not an assembly, but a

K 2

society,’ and remains when all assemblies are dispersed. The communion its members enjoy consists in the public exercise of such duties as those mentioned in Acts ii. 42 : * Instruction, breaking of bread, and prayer.’

In the subsequent sections of this book Hooker passes to the controversy with his Piudtan opponent, who contended that no form of church polity was lawful unless it were derived from Holy Scripture. This discussion would seem to lie outside our present Article. The question of Episcopacy will arise mider Article XXIIL, and, is therefore omitted for the present.

III. A work second only to Hooker’s, as in many respects representing English theology on such questions as that before us, is that of Field, * Of the Church.’ The author was Dean of Gloucester in the time of James I. From this learned work some selections are here presented which seem most directly to illustrate the Article now before us.

In book i. chap. 10, the distinction between the visible and invisible Church implied in this Article is thus explained. * Hence it cometh that we say there is a visible and an invisible Church, not meaning to make two distinct Churches, as our adversaries falsely and maliciously charge us, though the form of words may serve to insinuate some such thing, but to distinguish the divers considerations of the same Church; which, though it be visible in respect of the profes- sion of supernatural verities revealed in Christ, use of holy sacraments, order of ministry, and due obedience yielded thereunto, and they discernible that do communicate therein ; yet, in respect of those most precious effects, and happy bene- fits of saving grace, wherein only the elect do communicate, it is invisible ; and they that in so happy, gracious, and desirable things have communion among themselves, are not discern- ible from others to whom this fellowship is denied, but are known only to God,’

The second book bears more directly on this Article. It is a discussion of the * notes of the Church ’ which Field states, and maintains in opposition to the Eoman controversialists,

Stapleton and Bellarmine. It is therefore controversially very valuable on this iimdamental question.

Book ii. chap. 2 : * The proper and peculiar * notes which absolutely * distinguish the true Catholic Church ’ are stated to be these three : —

1. • The entire profession of those supernatural verities, which God hath revealed in Christ His Son.

2. ’ The use of such holy ceremonies and sacraments as He hath instituted and appointed to serve as provocations to godliness, ‘preservations from sin, memorials of the bene- fits of Christ, warrants for the greater security of our belief, and marks of distinction, to separate His own from strangers.

3. ’ An union or conne:s:ion of men in this profession and use of these sacraments, under lawful pastors and guides, ap- pointed, authorised, and sanctified, to direct and lead them in the happy ways of eternal salvation.’

Having stated these noteSj he proceeds in subsequent chap- ters to examine the objections of Bellarmine and Stapleton to them.

Book ii. chap 5 : We have these five notes of the Church propounded by Bellarmine, ‘antiquity, succession, unity, universality, and the very name and title of Catholic ex- pressing the universality.’ Field proceeds to show the un- certainty of these, and their failure as true notes of the Church.

We are now in a position to gather together briefly the statements of these writers, and to show their substantial agreement, and the unity of true English theology on the point now before us. Where it is requisite, the order of the notes, as arranged by the authors, is transposed, to bring them all into the same arrangement which is used in the Article.

XoUs of He Ckmixk.

\jcrxxM, XIX. r BcsHOfP Peabsckt.

[…]

t unalgaides.

2, The prcadDOg of the pme ; 2. The unity of Chzut the Word of God. ; foomiation — the one faith, the

I one lore, the cme hope.

[…]

Field.

[…]

2. • One Lord and futh.’ ! 2. The profession of all the re-

[…]

hfeaking of bread, and prayers.’ \ 3. The use of the sacraments.

Before leaying the sabject it may be needful to observe that bj notes of the Church is intended not simply things desirable finr the completeness of the Chnrch — gifts, graces, organisations, which may be nsefnl, nsoal, or even apostolical, but, as Field words it, ’ notes which are inseparable, perpetual, and absolutely proper and peculiar, which perpetually distin- guish the true Catholic Church firom all other societies of men, and professions of religion in the world.’

The absence from these notes of any special mode of organising the Church, or apostolical and necessary form of government, must already have struck the attention. It is obvious that such a necessity may lurk imexpressed in the Article under the words * those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.’ It may equally be supposed to lie concealed in the other authorities under the words, ’ lawful pastors,’ &c. How far this may be so in recognised English theology wiU be investigated under the Twenty-third and Thirty-sixth Articles.

The last clause of this Article asserts historically the fact that the Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, as well as Rome, have erred not only as to the agenda, but also the credenda. It is obvious why these are selected. Rome,

Antioch, and Alexandria were the three great patriarchates recognised in the sixth canon of the Council of Nice. The seventh canon reserves the next place of precedence to the Bishop of Jerusalem. The patriarchate of Constantinople -was not recognised until the second General Council, We need not particularly specify the errors of the Church of Rome. And without going back to the controversies of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries, in which Arian, Nestorian, and Monophysite errors in various degrees affected the Oriental Churches, it is well known that they now have many of the corruptions of the Roman Church, such as the worship of saints, transubstantiation, and other erroneous doctrines