Hey on Article XIX: Of the Church

1. Before I enter upon another Article, let me say, that it is my intention, in this part of my undertaking, to make a change in my manner of treating the subjects which may come under con- sideration. I mean to treat the remaining articles in a more summary way than I have treated the preceding. For this change it may be natural to ask tome reasons. „The first is, that without some change, our system would be 700 extensive, if it be not so already, considering that, in order to obey the directions of our Founder, I have been obliged to make Bishop Pearson on the Creed occupy every third Lecture. It may indeed be said, that if I had treated the preceding Articles more briefly, I might have treated the following more fully ; and without taking more time: that is true; but

vet

BOOK Iv. 11. 71

yet it seems better to go the bottom of some sub- jects, and give a summary account of others, than to treat all with an intermediate degree of fulness. This might be said though there were no other reasons for the change I am about to make; but it may be added, that the remaining subjects have been already much better treated than those which we have gone through; and are therefore much more easy for the student to consider by himself. Bishop Burnet writes better on the Articles which are to come, than on those which are past: and the refutation of the Popisi errors is now reduced into a small compass, by Archbishop Secker and Bishop Porteus. It seems to me likewise, that the first eighteen of our xxx1x Articles may be con- sidered as more important than the rest, as be- longing more to Mankind in general. Religious Society is indeed a subject of great importance to all men; but that was attentively considered in the third Book of our System.

Nevertheless, though I propose to speak more briefly on each subject than I have done hitherto, or at least than I have done since I entered upon the Articles of our Church, I would keep the fame method in view; as that seems founded in reason. What facts are mentioned, should be mentioned before we use the expressions which allude to them: and the terms of propositions should be explained before their truth be proved. |

11, With regard then to the nineteenth Article, some few Historical remarks may be made. The propagation of the Gospel was treated in our first Book. Here we may observe, that before“ the

Church

2 The History of the begianings of the Church of Rome is, I believe, too obscure for us to dwell much upon: I would not speak positively : the Bishop of Rome must be above neighbour-

E 4 ng

72 BOOK IV. ART. xIx. SECT. 11.

Church of Rome came to be famous in the west, the Churches mentioned in the Article, had ex- isted in great celebrity: so I conceive. The Church of Ferusalem must of course be eminent, as it was planted where our Saviour and his Apostles resided: it might be considered as the source of Christianity, where it was most pure: the first Bishop of it is said to have been St. James.

The Church of Alexandria was the capital of the Churches of Africa, and has been said to be founded by St. Mark. In like manner the Church of Antioch was the capital of the Churches of Asia, and has been said to have had St. Peter for its first Bishop. These became three Patriarchates, and we have in Bingham’s Antiquities®, three maps of theme.

In what these three churches © have erred,” seems but of little moment; because the Article is only against the Romanisis, and they would not deny the fallibility of the Eastern Churches. Yet these three churches might have made as high claims, of any kind, as the Church of Rome; having under them Primates and Metropolitans.

The

ing Bishops; people would have to go to Rome about various concerns; when a precedence was wanted, it would naturally fall to the Bishop of that Church which was in the Capital, —- By the year 325 the Bishop of Rome must have grown great : about the year 250 there were at Rome 1500 Widows and other indigent persons supported or relieved by Christians ; see Lard- ner, Index, Rome.— The Bishop of Rome was not at Nice in 325, only Presbyters; why not Suffragan Bishops, if he had any ? |

Bock ix.

© For the dignity of these Churches see the Canons of the Council of Nice; Canon 6 and j7.— Also Bishop Hallifax on Prophecy, page 335. Heylin, on Episcopacy, mentions Saint James, Saint Mark and Saint Peter as having been the first _ Bishops, |

BOOK IV. ART. XIX. SECT, 111. IV. 73

— The errors alluded to, however, seem to have been, favouring Arianism, and condemning* Origen. Acts for these purposes were passed in Councils“ at these cities; and the decree of a Conncil at any city musl include the opinion of the Church there. (Councils occur again in the twenty-first Article.)

Several subjects relative to our present Article, have been much discussed; but it does not seem necessary for us to enter into them at present ; such are, the marks of a* true Church, the power of the Keyss, the nature of binding” and logsing.— The Romanists, after we had separated from them at the Reformation, held, that we were no true church; and the disputes which took place on that matter, were probably one immediate occasion of our present Article. |

111. Let us next see what may be wanted in the way of Explanation. — Our Article consists of two Paragraphs; the first seems to be definition and theory, the second, fact.

IV. The definition is, of“ ie wijible church of Christ :” now previous to that, we should con- ceive, that Christ formed all his Disciples into one society; the members therefore must live in dif- ferent ages: it is not needful to consider the deceased at present, therefore our views are con- fined to the “ visible church,” that is, to the society of all /iving Christians. But how, you say, do these form a /ociety ? first, we may answer, as all men form a society; God has made good to

tollow

4 Socrates 6. 10.

© Berti’s Compendium, Vol, 1, page 126.

f Hales, G 13 49, Cambr. 8 Matt, xvi. 18, 19.

h Matt. xviil. 18.

i The Trent Creed is called by the Romanists, that Faith « extra quam nemo falvus esse potest. quoted in Bennet’s Essay on the 39 Articles, page 426.

74 BOOK IV. v. VI.

follow from mens acting as a society, and evil from their not acting as a society ; this shews them that they are a lociety. Secondly, we know, that all Christians constitute one society, from the Scriptures *.

v. * Congregation,” cœtus, rather seems to im- ply, as does eu,, that all living Christians can assemble at one time, in one place; this is suitable enough to Theory, and is Dr. Balguy’s first sup- position, when he is describing the nature of a Church: the contrivances which become —_ tary when it 1s found that all cannot make one congregation, are. only mechanical, as it were, and do not affect the nature or essence of the thing which accidentally requires them.

The compilers of our Article would be led to use the word “ congregation” by the language of our Old Testament; the whole body of Israelites, (the Church of God before Cbristianity) being called the Congregation. Sce Numb. xvi. 3.— xxvii. 17.—Josh. xxii. 17.— 1 Chron. xxviii. 8.— Psalm Ixxiv. 2. in all which places we have ewayuyn in the LXX; except 1 Chron. xxviii. 8. which is ExxD,wP In the New Testament the whole Body

of Christians is called the Church of God; but the Greek is always Exxanoiz : Taylor however looks upon this calling the whole body of Christians the Church, as an imitation of the language of the Old Testament, in which the whole Body of Israelites was called the Congregation. Taylor on Romans, Key, par. 52. 133.

Vi. The word © faith/u!” seems technical; fideles used to be opposed to Carechument.

Vii. © The

k Art, XVIII. Sect. X1V — Also Book 111. Chap. XI. SeR. 1v.

Vol. of Sermons, page 39.

BOOK IV. vIII. 75

VII. © The pure word of God“ is also theory 2 |

it is that to which Christians may continually ap- preach, though they may never attain to perfect purity of doctrine. —** The sacraments” are intro- duced as essentials or a Christian Church; and it is at the same time implied, that though they are essential, some circumsiquecs about them are not fo: this 1s more clear in the Latin than in the English. A religious society under natural religion might perhaps have no essentials; I mean, they might pursue the ends in view by such methods as their wisdom should suggest; but that is not the case in a Christian society; they cannot teach any doc- trines but those of scripture, nor set aside the holy Sacraments. We may observe how very little was thought ® necessary, by our English Reformers, to constitute a Christian Church; prayer 1s not men- tioned, though it is in Acts 11. 41, 42. nor any kind of discipline ; this seems to imply, that no Christian church could be suppoled to meet with- out prayer, or that piayer is included in pure dofrine, and that no modes of administering the Sacraments destroy the efence of a Christian Church. VIII, In the second part there is a fort of ambiguity: a doubt 1s left, whether the three churches only erred in general, or erred, like the church of Rome, in morality, (agenda), ceremo- nies, and tenets (credenda) : but either sense may be taken by him who gives his assent.

m P. 8. Sce a passage quoted by Dean Tucker (Letter to Kippis, page 56) from the enlarged confession of Augsburg. « Ad veram uuitatem Ecclesiæ satis eft consentire de Do&rind Evangelii, et administratione Sacramentorum.“ This does not mean a consent about all particulars, as appears from what follows, which answers to the beginning of our 34th Article :

Nec necesse est ubique similes esse ‘Traditiones humanas, seu

ritus ab hominibus institutos.“ Syntagma, page 12.

In

ad — — —

76 _ BOOK iv. ART. xI «k. SECT. IX.

In the English, we have © in 7heir living,” (Church of Rome), but in the Latin, *gquoad agenda.” The Englith seems to regard conduct, the Latin, moral, practical principles taught, or allowed. Hence, in examining the wickedness prevailing in Popilh countries, we should always keep in mind how far it is permitted, or egcouraged.

The Church of Rome is . allowed the essence of a true Church“; it aims at preaching scriptural doctrines, and it does not set aside the Sacra- ments. Archbishop Laud, on his 7ria/* before the inveterate enemies of the Roman church, main- tamed this to be the truth, but did not, I think, refer to this Article, to prove it : that the Church of Rome is here declared erroneozs, as well as fal- lible, needs no remark. The Church of Christ in theory is pure; in practice each part of it is falli- ble and imperfect.

1x. Thus we have looked through the Article; but yet a few things remain to be mentioned: if te the visible Church of Christ” be the society of living Christtans, what is opposed to it? or what Church of Christ is ibu, the Romanists do not allow” of any. There may be, seemingly, a notions

of

n The Puritans did not allow this. — See Neal, 1. 96. 4to.

o Index to Neal’s Hist, Pur. et alibi, When Protestants say, that a Christian may be saved in the Church of Rome, they mean, or ought to mean, supposing the Christian not to think it wrong to be of that Church.—— Therefore Papists cannot use their famous argument to those who do think it wrong.— The argument is, all sides own, that a man may be saved in the Church of Rome; but all sides do act own that a man may be saved in a Protestant Church; therefore it is most /afe to adhere to the Church of Rome.

P „The pretensed invisible Church of the Heretikes.” — Rhemists on Acts 11. 47. the Romanists seem to mear, that the scriptures, when they speak of the Church of Christ, do not mean to speak of those who are true Christians in the sight of God, but of Christians such as we find them. |

BOOK IV. ART. xix. SECT. x. 77

of it; one, that the invisble church contains all Christians; the living, and all who have departed this Life in the Faith of Christ : another, the cal- vinistic, and most common, that it consists of those who in the fight of God are considered as true Christians: and Romanists, I think, make a dif- ference between vera and viva membra of the Church. Perhaps the term * vi//e” might be used in order to prevent Romanists from object- ing; and to satisfy Calvini/s that it was not intended to speak here of the elect or predestinate, as seen by God himself.

x. We often hear of the Catsolic Church.—If we go only by Etymology, it may signify the whole vitible church of Christ, or even invisible ; or all Christians of all ages. When I fay I be- lieve in the Catholic Church, I mean, I believe that Christ intended to form all Christians into one society; though when I speak of the Church at large, I have only in mind the present generation. (Art. v111. Sect. 111.) - And the church of Christ may be © therefore called catholic, or universal, because it consists of all nations ; whereas the Jew- ish Church” consisted “only of one nation: — As words are made for ule, one may often get the right sense of a word by considering for what v/e it might be made; and this is generally to mark out some distinfion ; as just now was the the case. The church might be called Catholic, to distinguish it from a church, or a particular church ; that is a {et of Christians whose minds cannot be satisfied without joining in some peculiar regulations for carrying on social religion amongst themselves, within certain limits. But perhaps the most com- mon use of catholic is to distinguish, in an honour- able manner, a /arge and respectable body of

Christians

4 Bishop Porteus’s brief confutation, page 14.

3 A, x 5

75 BOOK iv. ART, XIX. SECT. XI. XIt. Christians from a small body who affect singularity

in fome doctrine or ceremony : to call the large body the catholic church, or catholics, seems to make the small one fink into nothing ; as if it only made an exception not worth mentioning.

Xi. A particular chirch may be a legitimate Christian Society, but should always regard itself as a constituent part of the catholic church*. In any nation, it may help to promote civil subjection, and may itself receive support and protection or even honour. This has been more fully explained in the third* Book. —The definition of our Ar- tide seems not wholly unsuitable to a particular church *. |

X11. I know not that any other terms need be mentioned except militante, as oppoled to triumph- ant. This distinction supposes men good, popu— larly speaking; then, while they are in this Life warring a good warfare, under the banner of the Captain of their Salvation, while they are fighting the good fight, they are called the church militant, and after death, when they * receive their crown of Glory, the Church 7riu-7phant.

The Scotch church calls those whom we suppose good, the elect; the church, strictly speaking, (in

their

© Dr. Powell, page 26, alludes to him, © who refused to be made a citizen of Athens, because lie was already a citizen of the world.“ 75

s Chap. xiv.

D Wheatly (page 394) observes, that our Church Catechism: was so made as to suit the Catholic Church. Any youth in our articular Church, according to him, is catechized, or grounded,

ia no doarines peculiar to that Church. Vet all Christians do

not allow of water-baptism ; nor that the Death of Christ is a sacrifice, speaking without figure.

u Scotch Confession, 16. de Ecclefia.— Div. Leg. Vol. 4. 8vo. page 470. calls the Church triumphant those who ac-

company Christ at his second coming, * See 2 Tim. iv. 7,—-2 Cor. x, 4.— 1 Tim. i. 18. 1 Pet. v. 4.

their idea) imvi/ble to the eye of man, but the true church in the fight of God“. |

X111. We may now best see the connexion of this Article with the one preceding it. Salvation is not to be hoped for out of the Church, by the eighteenth Article; agreed, says the Romanist, therefore continue Catholics; no, say the Prote- stants, we may, if we think we cannot lawfully communicate with you, form another particular church still conceiving our particular church to make a part of the catholic visible church of Christ: and what we assume to ourlelves, we allow to others.

X1v. But let us come to our Prof. We seem to have at least 27 propositious. |

1. Christ has formed his followers into one Society.

2. The Romish church © hath erred;” in prac- tical principles, or morality, (“ agenda”); in cere- monies; and also in doctrine or tenets, (“ cre- denda.”)

xv. The former proposition has been ve lately * proved. To what was said we might add 1 Cor. xii. 5. 10. 12. 29. which shew, that the miraculous powers given to the Apostles, &c. im- plied religious society : and our Saviour’s various prophecies concerning the fortunes of the Church, imply the fame thing. He foretells its durability, - &c. as one body.— Matt. xvi. 18, 19.

XV1. That the Romish Church hath erred in morality, or © agenda,” need icarcely be proved,

not

Pet. Heylin, in his Divinity-A& at Oxford, put up as a question, ** An Ecclefia unquam fuerit invisibilis ?“ and deter- mined in the negative.— He was an Arminian.

2 Art. xvIII. Sect. x1v.,—Sce allo Book 111, Chap. x1, Sect. 1v.

—— as.

Hh egy

r 22

80 BOOK iv. ART. XI x. SECT. XVII. not only because the Popes and Clergy * have had

amongst them men remarkably immoral and pro- fligate ; but because things have been a/lowed and forbidden wrongly; this, as well as the Popish errors in ceremonies and doctrine?, may be left to be proved by the subsequent Artiicles—Pope Liberius favoured the Arians*, Zozimus the Pela- gians, and Honorius was condemned as a! Mono- thelite.

This direct proof seems easy, but the Romanists quote scripture; the general answer to all texts ex- pressing the perfection of the Church, is the same with that to all scriptural expressions of the per- section of a Christian ; they describe 7heory®, not

fact. — This has been already? hinted in explaining

the word © pure.” |

XVII. The subje& before us has been made so intricate by controverly with the Papists, and by the Calvinistic notion, that the Church means the elect and predestinated, that it may be worth our while, in the way of Application, to conceive a form of assent to our Article.

All Christians constitute a Society, the end of which is to attain perfect purity of manners, and

unerring religious truth: the means of promoting

this end are left to human prudence, so long as the doctrines taught are founded on scripture, and the acraments instituted by Christ, are held to be in- dispensible. Could all Christians agree, they might a

z See Sir Edwin Sandys’s Europæ Speculum, under Life and Conversation : though wickedness does not prove indisputably the inculcating of bad moral principles, yet when it is very prevalent it affords a strong presumption: besides that wicked- ness is destructive of good principles ;” as Comber observes, in his tract against Popery, page 33, from Aristotle, Eth. lib. 6.

b Maclaine’s Mosheim, Vol. 1. 4to. page 278, Note.

© Berti, Vol. 1. page 123, Forbes, B. 5. Chap. 10.

© Art. xv. Sect. xix. f Sc, v11.

act under one ecclesiastical authority; but if any

number are fully persuaded that they cannot law-

fully unite with the rest, they may form a separate

society, still conceiving that society to make part

of the whole society of Christians, till some general eement can be effected.

When we judge from experience, we mult con- dude, that unanimity 1s not at present to be ex- pected; and we must allow, that every particular society of Christians falls far short of perfection.

XVIII. The remarks and distinctions here made, might be the ground of some mutual con- ceffions ; but Dr. Du Pin, in his negociation with Archbishop Fakes, about an union between the English and Gallican Churches, gives up the mat- ter in dispute. * Though all particular churches,” he says, even that of Rome, may err, it is need- Jess to say this in a Confession of Faith.” At is not more to our purpose that this learned man gives up the fallibility of the Roman Church, than that he speaks of it as a particular Church.

xix. In order to promote Improvement, I would recommend an attentive perusal of Dr. Balguy’s two Conlecration-Sermons, and his Charge on «* Subscription to Articles of Religion.”

c Mosheim, octavo, Vol. 5. page 130.— It might be worth while to read Archbishop Wake’s compliment to Dr. Du Pin, page 123.— And what the Archbishop thinks may be Du Pin’s own judgment about the English Articles.

The people amongst the Papists are not taught, I suppose, ac-

cording to Du Pin’s candid notions; he seems to make a great difference between the People and the enlightened,

or. 1. 8 ARTICLE

—ä ů—— rr […] . ⏑—1r«. ,… — JK m Ä