Green on Article XXXIV: Of the Traditions of the Church

The first paragraph is taken, with a few small changes, from the fifth of the XIII. Articles of i 5 3 S. (The words common to the two are printed in italics in the Latin text.)

In 1563 two additions were made: —

(a) In the first paragraph J:he word “ temporum ” was inserted,

evidently with the view of making the statement of principle more comprehensive.

(b) The last paragraph was added, declaring that a national Church has authority to institute and abolish ceremonies. With the wording of this part of the Article we may com¬ pare the third of the XI. Articles, which had been issued a few years before (1559) : —

“ Every such particular church hath authority to institute, to change, clean to put away ceremonies, and other ecclesiastical rites, as they be superfluous, or be abused, and to constitute other making more to seemliness, to order, or edification.”

§ 2.— OBJECT.

See the note on the object of Article XXXIII.

§ 3.— EXPOSITION.

(1.) Uniformity of Traditions and Ceremonies is not neces¬ sary.

It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly like, for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times, and men’s manners.

This Article is not concerned with the laws and ordi¬ nances of God, which are binding on all men at all times, or with matters of faith which have been once for all delivered (S. Jude v. 3), but with things which are, in themselves, more or less indifferent. It is not necessary that there should be complete uniformity everywhere in such matters.1

1 Cf. with our Article the following extracts from Continental Confessions : —

Augsburg Confession, Part I. Art. VII. :

“Nec necesse est ubique esse similes traditiones humanas, seu ritus aut ceremonias, ab hominibus institntas.”

Bohemian Confession, Art. XV. :

“ Quanquam etiam nostri, non omnium ritus ac mores servant, quod neque fieri potest, neque ut ubiubi in omnibus Ecclesiis idem ritus et ceremoniae serventur necessarium est… .

“Ad haec docent, Humanas traditiones pro inviolabilibus ac aeternis legibus non haberi oportere. Verum quemadmodum certis ac justis causis feruntur, ita etiam aliis causis ac rebus exortis, et diversum monentibus, liceat eas absque peccato violare.”

French Confession, Art. XXXII. :

“ Credimus expedire, ut qui electi sunt, ecclesiae alicujus praefecti, inter se dispiciant, qua ratione totum corpus commode regi possit. Ita tamen, ut

(a) By Traditions are meant customs of the Church produced by the frequent and long-continued usage of the great part of the community.1 Such usages have, as a matter of fact, varied according to the diversities of times, countries, and men’s manners.

We may illustrate this point by reference to the Paschal Controversy in the early ages of the Church. While Anicetus was Pope (a.d. 157—168), S. Polycarp of Smyrna visited Rome and discussed the Paschal question with him, but without arriving at mutual agreement. “ For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe it, because he had always observed it with John the disciple of our Lord, and the rest of the Apostles, with whom he associated ; and neither did Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, who said that he was bound to maintain the practice of the presbyters before him. Which things being so, they com¬ municated together ; and in the church Anicetus yielded to Polycarp, out of respect no doubt, the office of conse¬ crating the Eucharist, and they separated from each other in peace, all the church being at peace ; both those that observed and those that did not observe maintaining peace.” 2

(b) As to Ceremonies, the same principle holds good. Rigid uniformity is not necessary with regard to them, but they

[…]

Second Helvetic Confession, Cap. XXVII. :

“Quod si in ecclesiis dispares inveniuntur ritus, nemo ecclesias existimet ex eo esse dissidentes. Socrates, Impossibile fuerit, inquit, omnes ecclesi- arum, quae per civitates et regiones sunt, ritus conscribere. Nulla religio eosdem ritus custodit, etiamsi eandem de illis doctrinam amplectatur. Etenim qui ejusdem sunt fidei de ritibus inter se dissentiunt… . Semper vero eccle- siae in hujusmodi ritibus, sicut mediis, usae sunt libertate. Id quod nos hodie quoque facimus.”

“ Q. Are all the sayings of the holy men enlightened and led by the Holy Ghost written, or did some remain unwritten ?

“A. There remained some unwritten, which have been kept by tradition in the Church from the time of the Apostles to this day.

“ Q. Give some examples.

“ A. To turn to the East when we pray, to make the sign of the Cross, for the priests to wear a peculiar dress, for us to kindle lamps in the church, and many other things.”

2 Irenmus, quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., V. Cap. xxiv.

2 N

may bo modified by local or temporal circumstances. Thus, to give examples illustrative of the principle of the Article, ceremonies have been affected by —

(i.) Diversities of countries.

Baptism is now generally performed amongst us by affusion, and not by immersion.

(ii.) Diversities of times.

In early days, when the Church was persecuted, the public assemblies of Christians for worship were held in secret places, in caves, or catacombs. At a later time, when Christianity became the acknowledged religion of the Roman Empire, gorgeous churches were built, and Divine worship celebrated with splendid ritual accessories.

(iii). Diversities of men’s manners.

The Kiss of Peace, a ceremony connected with the celebration of the Holy Eucharist in primitive times, has been discontinued.

The Article lays down one all-important limit to the diversity of Traditions and Ceremonies by providing that nothing he ordained against God’s Word.1

(2.) Those who break Church Traditions and Ceremonies on

Whosoever through his private judgment, willingly and purposely doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly.

Traditions and Ceremonies are in themselves matters indifferent, but when established by the authority of the Church 2 they ought to be observed by all, on account of the reverence due to that authority, which is derived from God, Who has commanded us to obey our spiritual rulers (Heb. xiii. 17). The Christian Religion has for its end the raising and purifying of the individual man and the perfection of human society. Now no virtue tends so much

1 Cf. Saxon Confession, Art. XX.

“Est igitur prima regula : Nulli creaturae, non angelis, non hominibus, non regibus, non episcopis licet condere leges aut ritus pugnantes cum verbo Dei.”

2 Cf. the first clause of Article XX. : —

“ The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies.”

to the accomplishment of this twofold purpose as brotherly love, which, besides rendering the individual like God Him¬ self, Who is Love (1 S. John iv. 8), also creates the strongest union and greatest happiness in human society. Christ Himself did most particularly intend and enjoin that His followers should be joined together in one Body by mutual love (cf. S. John xiii. 34, 35 ; xv. 12 ; xvii. 21-23). The dissolving of this union, or the dislocating of this Body by the setting up of an individual private judgment against the common authority, and that, too, upon ground of matters in themselves indifferent, must be most reprehen¬ sible. People guilty of such action are to be rebuked.1

The object of this rebuke is next stated in the Article, viz., that others may fear to do the like (cf. 1 Tim. v. 20).

Further, three evil consequences are traced to the action of those who openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church : —

Whosoever through his private judgment, willingly and pur¬ posely doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church … ought to be rebuked openly …

(a) as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, ( 1 Cor. xi. 16; xiv. 40)

(b) and hurteth the authority of the magistrate,

Of course this effect can only follow when Church and State are closely related and civil sanction is given to Ecclesiastical traditions and ceremonies. The giving of such civil sanction to ordinances of the Church dates from the earliest times of the converted Roman Empire.

( c ) and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren (1 Cor. viii. 12).

It was very necessary for the Church to lay down that those should be rebuked who set up their private judgment against the common order, because considerable confusion was caused by action of this kind in the reign of Edward VI. As an example we might quote the case of Hooper, who, when nominated to the Bishopric of Gloucester (April 7, 1550), refused to be conse¬ crated in what he called the “ Aaronic habits,’’ 2 setting up bis

1 Cf. Queen Elizabeth’s Injunctions, 1559:—

“XXII. That they shall instruct and teach in their cures, that no man ought obstinately and maliciously to break and violate the laudable ceremonies of the Church, commanded by public authority to be observed.”

own judgment in opposition to the “ tradition ” of the Church. Cranmer and Ridley, and even Peter Martyr and Bucer, strongly condemned his obstinacy in the matter.

(3.) The power of particular or national Churches in the

MATTER OF RITES OR CEREMONIES.

Every particular or national Church, hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man’s authority.

In the first place we notice that the wording of the Article is carefully guarded. Those rites alone are referred to which are ordained only by mans authority. No particular Church, therefore, may change or abolish a ceremony which has the sanction of Divine authority, as the Sacraments have. Since the rites and ceremonies referred to in the Article are in themselves indifferent, and depend for their precise form, to a certain extent, upon local or temporal conditions, it follows that they may be changed. This concluding para¬ graph of the Article lays it down that each national Church has the power of changing such ceremonies. During the integrity of the Roman Empire the various parts of Europe under the civil dominion of Rome must be regarded as forming one nation ; hence the summoning of Councils from the whole Empire to deal with ceremonial matters. Even after the Empire had fallen to pieces, the Church, in those countries of Western Europe which had formed part of the Empire, was for many centuries held together by the supremacy of the Roman See. During the Middle Ages, however, the various nations of modern Europe had been continually gaining independent strength, and at the Reformation, when the Papal Supremacy was thrown off, the power of changing rites and ceremonies was claimed for each separate nation.

Cf. the Preface to the Prayer Book, “ Of Ceremonies , why some be abolished , and some retained ” : —

“ And in these our doings we condemn no other Nations, nor prescribe anything but to our own people only : For we think it convenient’ that every Country should use such Ceremonies as they shall think best to the setting forth of God’s honour and glory, and to the reducing of the people to a most perfect and godly living, without error or superstition ; and that they should put

away other things, which from time to time they perceive to he most abused, as in men’s ordinances it often chanceth diversly in divers countries.”

The fact that the Sovereign, as head of the nation, played so prominent a part in the English Reformation, and successfully asserted the supremacy of the Crown in causes Ecclesiastical, also contributed in no small degree to that identification of the Church with the nation, which was an important outcome of the Reformation as it took place in this country.

The Article concludes with a statement of the great principle which should rule all regulations made with respect to rites and ceremonies —

So that all things be done to edifying (Rom. xiv. 19).

Notes

• The use of the word Traditions with this meaning may be illustrated from the Holy Catechism (Orthodox Eastern Church), by Bernadaees (p. 16) : —
• Original Letters, vol. i. p. 87.